| April 13, 2009 Meeting Minutes |
|
City Council Meeting
Minutes
April 13, 2009
City Council Chambers
7:00 p.m.
Action: Councilor Lemieux moved approval of the March 9, 2009 meeting minutes. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Action: Mayor Bouley explained that Council is required each April under Section 21(b) of the City Charter to conduct an evaluation of the City Manager’s performance. He noted that Council has met on several occasions to perform this task. He explained that Council needs to conduct an overall vote on the Manager’s performance in which the charter gives two choices; satisfactory or unsatisfactory.
Councilor St. Hilaire moved that Council state that they find the performance to be satisfactory. The motion was duly seconded.
Councilor Bouchard stated that the memo expresses Council’s feelings and noted that she feels that the City Manager has been exemplary and has gone over and above for the city. She thanked the manager for his services.
Councilor Blanchard noted her agreement with Councilor Bouchard’s comments.
Councilor Nyhan indicated that he was pleased with the City Manager’s performance. He further noted that he hopes the relationship and the same kind of service continue for years to come.
Mayor Bouley noted that he feels that the City Manager has done an outstanding job and this Council, in all its deliberations, has been satisfied far more than what is reflected. He added that the manager has done an outstanding job with the budget, with the many requests of Council and the timeliness of those.
Councilor St. Hilaire’s motion passed with no dissenting votes.
Councilor St. Hilaire moved to approve the revised contract for the upcoming year. The motion was duly seconded.
Mayor Bouley explained that the contract between the city and the City Manager outlines his compensation, retirement and terms of employment.
Councilor St. Hilaire explained that there are some minor changes to the compensation package in which certain items were shifted and noted that the only additional expense on this contract is for a cell phone which adds an additional $960 per year to the contract. He pointed out that everything else, from a budgetary standpoint, remains relatively the same.
Councilor McClure stated that she will be voting against the agreement because she feels strongly that the City Manager has performed in an exceptional manner and feels that Council should be giving him a salary increase. In light of these economic times, she noted that she feels that it is more important to compensate the city’s most important employees in a manner that is consistent with the city’s compensation philosophy.
Councilor Shurtleff noted that he understands Councilor McClure’s position and if the country wasn’t facing these tough economic times he would like to see him receive the compensation he deserves.
Councilor Blanchard noted that she will be voting for the agreement noting that she agrees with Councilor Shurtleff’s comments.
Mayor Bouley noted that he would like to increase the manager’s salary as well pointing out that this contract reflects a zero percent increase to his base salary noting that Mr. Aspell will be the only city employee to not receive a raise next year. He further noted that the agreement is reflective as to where the city is and not reflective of the City Manager’s performance.
Councilor St. Hilaire’s motion to approve the contract passed with one dissenting vote.
- Consent Agenda
Items –
Note: Items
listed as pulled from the consent agenda will be discussed at the end of the
meeting following unfinished business.
Action: Councilor Lemieux moved approval the consent agenda, as amended, with items 10, 23, 28, 30, 36 and 46 removed for discussion at the end of the agenda. The motion was duly seconded. Councilor McClure indicated that she had removed item 23 because she was looking for more of an overall performance based on what the projections were and the City Manager had explained that all this information would be coming out in the budget in May. She asked that item 23 be placed back on the consent agenda. There being no objection, item 23 was placed back on the consent agenda. City Manager Tom Aspell pointed out that item 47 had not been submitted explaining that the Fiscal Policy Advisory Committee did not get to this item on their agenda at their last meeting. He indicated that the Fiscal Policy Advisory Committee will discuss the budget review schedule and process at a future meeting to be held on April 27th. The consent agenda, as amended, passed with no dissenting votes.
Referral to the Traffic Operations Committee
Referral to the Transportation Policy Advisory Committee
Referral to Community Development and the City Solicitor
Action: This item removed for discussion at the end of the agenda.
Items Tabled for a May 2009 Public Hearing
11. Ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances, Title IV, Zoning Code; Chapter 28, Zoning Ordinance, Buffer Requirements for Residential District Boundaries; together with report from the Planning Board. (3-15) (Tabled for a May 2009 Public Hearing at the March 9, 2009 Council Meeting)
From the City Manager
Consent Reports
Action: This item placed back on the consent agenda.
Action: This item removed for discussion at the end of the agenda.
Action: This item removed for discussion at the end of the agenda.
Action: This item removed for discussion at the end of the agenda.
Action: This item removed for discussion at the end of the agenda.
Consent Resolutions
Consent Communications
Appointments
61. Mayor Bouley’s proposed appointment to the Economic Development Advisory Committee. Maura Carroll
Cecile Blakeslee Hartigan
John M. Sullivan
**End of Consent Agenda**
A. Ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances, Title I, General Code; Chapter 1, Government Organization, by amending Schedule I and II of Article 1-5, Fees, Fines and Penalties; together with report from the Deputy City Manager – Finance. (3-12)
Action: There being no objection, items A and B were read together.
Jim Howard, Deputy City Manager – Finance, provided a detailed overview explaining that departments are asked to look at their fees every year and to make adjustments that are more reflective of their cost of doing business. He noted that departments are asked to survey the market using five communities that are recommended to ensure they are somewhere within the realm of that market place. He added that they are also given a percent increase that has something to do with the increase in the budget and the rate of inflation explaining that this year they were asked to look at a four percent increase as long as it was within the market and placed the city within the range of communities that provide these services.
Councilor McClure asked for more detail as to how the 4 percent came about. Mr. Howard responded that at the time the recommendation was put out, they were looking at a rate of inflation that was going to be at that level or higher for the year. He explained that at this time it would appear that 3.3 percent would be the more appropriate level of inflation as far as the CPI is concerned but the services that the city provides exceed the rate of inflation for a normal household so in order to recover a larger component to the cost that the city incurs, he still feels that the 4 percent target overall is justifiable. Councilor McClure asked if anything over or less than the 4 percent was a result of the market review. Mr. Howard indicated that some of the fees are small enough that 4 percent may be ten cents and it is easier to round something up to the closest nickel or dime rather than having a breakage at for example $3.16.
Referencing page four of spreadsheet, Councilor Lemieux indicated that the page contains fees that are being decreased by a hundred percent. He noted that the only explanation he finds is that water sales and sewer fees will be addressed in the 2010 budget. Mr. Howard indicated that to be correct. Councilor Lemieux questioned that if Council passes this tonight does it mean that these fees are zero until Council passes the budget. Mr. Howard responded no explaining that those fees are not listed in the actual legal document so this informational schedule providing Council with the information to know that those fees would be set in connection with the budget.
Councilor Blanchard asked how some of the rather large increases are justified. Mr. Howard responded that departments were asked to look at the cost of the service that they are providing and the survey as well. He indicated that if there are any questions that Councilors have staff would take a look at those. Referencing the Ski and Skate sale, Councilor Blanchard pointed out that this is up 36.8 percent. Mr. Howard explained that the Ski and Skate sale is an entity that uses the Green Street Community Center every year and that there has been an organization-wide effort involving the Recreation and Parks Advisory Committee to ensure that the users of the Green Street Community Center assist in paying more of the costs associated with this. Councilor Blanchard inquired as to why swimming lessons would go up 33 percent. Mr. Howard responded that, in all cases relating to recreation, the cost of providing the facilities throughout the city is one in which it is generally felt that if the city is going to be able to maintain and sustain those facilities, they are going to need to pay more of the cost associated with providing those facilities and services. He added that there has been concentration over the last few years on ensuring that recreation programs and facilities generate more revenues to cover the costs to take the burden off of the taxpayers who subsidizes those services and facilities.
Mayor Bouley declared the hearings opened for items A and B. There being no public testimony, the Mayor closed the hearings for items A and B.
B. Non-ordinance fees. (3-13)
Action: Public hearing on this item
held with item A.
C.
Request by Capital
Commons LLC for a waiver of certain Downtown Solid Waste District Charges;
outlined within a report from the Assistant for Special Projects and the General
Services Director. (3-14)
Action: City Manager Tom Aspell provided a brief overview explaining that $4,336.50 was incurred during July, August and September 2007 and that the Solid Waste Advisory Committee has recommended not waiving these fees and the appeal of the committee is to the City Council. He indicated that Capital Commons LLC, represented by Michael Simchik, asked to come before Council and ask that they waiver those fees.
Mayor Bouley declared the hearing open.
Michael Simchik, Capital Commons, noted that this is an issue that he wanted to bring to the Council on the basis of fairness. He explained that in October 2007 he received a bill from the City of Concord and called immediately to inquire as to what the bill was for. He indicated that the response was that it was for solid waste disposal noting that the initial response was that he was quite surprised and quite happy because they started using the service immediately and effective with this bill and any other bill received since then, they have been paid on a current basis. Mr. Simchik noted that prior to this, not knowing there was a service, they were making their own arrangements for the trash for the offices in the building, most of which was taken back to Portsmouth and disposed of there. He noted that he wished they had known of the service back in July, August and September because it would have been easier and a lot less expensive. He asked that Council not charge for these services since they were not aware of the service and were not making use of it. Mr. Simchik noted something else that came to their attention is when David Hamilton was making the inquiry about the large bill for July, August and September, an employee of the department had told Mr. Hamilton that it had been an accounting error not to have sent these out on a monthly basis and that is why they received one invoice for $4,336.50. He added that this is nothing that would ever change his attitude about working with the City of Concord but is a service they didn’t use until October.
Referencing the invoice received in October, Councilor Lemieux asked if this covered the period from July through October. Mr. Simchik responded that it did not explaining that the first invoice received for $1,445.50 was dated September 28, 2007 and was charges for the month of October. He explained that shortly thereafter he received an invoice for July, August and September for $4,336.50. Councilor Lemieux asked whether invoices have been sent monthly since then. Mr. Simchik indicated that to be correct.
Councilor McClure inquired whether the first bill was received in September. Mr. Simchik responded that the invoice was dated September 28th. Councilor McClure asked if the invoice that was called about was for the $4,336.50 invoice and not the $1,445.50 invoice. Mr. Simchik explained that they had called the city in regards to the $1,445.50 invoice because they were unsure as to what it represented and when it was explained that this was for the service on a monthly basis they immediately had their facility people start utilizing the service in the month of October. He explained that shortly thereafter they received the invoice for the $4,336.50 for July, August and September.
Councilor Blanchard asked if the only invoice Mr. Simchik is taking issue with is the $4,336.50. Mr. Simchik indicated that to be correct.
Mr. Simchik announced that he has a signed lease in his office for a restaurant for the first floor.
Councilor Black inquired whether there is space available on the second and third floors. Mr. Simchik indicated that to be correct explaining that they are both technically available in full and the potential tenant that he has spoken to could take anywhere from three quarters of one floor to a full floor.
Councilor McClure referenced the October 7, 2004 meeting minutes of the Capital Commons Redevelopment Project and pointed out that there is a section contained within the minutes that talks about solid waste disposal and that it’s either private or provided by the city through the solid waste district. She inquired whether Mr. Simchik received copies of these minutes. Mr. Simchik indicated that he is certain that he had received them and is sure that it came up at some point in time but there were a number of issues in October 2004 that he was more concerned about so they could get to the point in which they needed the solid waste.
There being no further public testimony, the Mayor closed the hearing.
D. Ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances, Title I, General Code; Chapter 16, City Planning; Article 16-2, Numbering Houses; Section 16-2-4, Numbers on Houses; together with report from the Fire Department. (3-16)
Action: City Manager Tom Aspell provided a brief overview explaining that the Code of Ordinances requires that address numbering be 2 ½ inches on buildings while the International Fire Code of 2006 Edition requires a 4 inch high address numbering for better visibility. He indicated that staff would like to change the ordinance to correspond with the International Fire Code of 4 inches. He added that these numberings are available from local merchants without a significant increase in cost.
Councilor Coen inquired whether there is a time schedule requirement to replace the 2 ½ inch numbers. Tim McGinley, Fire Department, explained that the department has been enforcing the 4 inches for some time and that this item is a housekeeping measure that aligns the city ordinance with the fire prevention code that is in effect. He indicated that homeowners are compelled to do this twice: once they get their certificate of occupancy when the home is built or rehabbed or upon receiving a letter from the City Manager, the Fire Chief or the Police Chief. He added that it is self policed and that staff does its best to publicize it but if there happens to be an incidence at a house and there is a delay in arriving there, the homeowner will receive a very polite letter requiring them to put 4 inch numbers on their homes.
Councilor Lemieux pointed out that the suggestion is that the property owner is only required to replace the numbers if they receive a notice to do so. He questioned why it isn’t across the board, applying to every property owner. Mr. McGinley responded that they would hope everybody does but the city does not have an active inspection program undertaken at this point that would address this problem. Councilor Lemieux pointed out that it is indicated that there is no additional cost to the property owner inquiring whether there would be a nominal additional cost to purchase the 4 inch numbers. Mr. McGinley responded that the cost would be very minimal.
Councilor Blanchard asked whether staff intended to notify every property owner with a letter. Mr. McGinley responded that only if they are found to be non-compliant due to a delay of the fire department to a call because they could not read the numbers.
Mayor Bouley noted that if a house is not visible from the road these numbers could be placed upon a mailbox or by some other means.
Councilor Bouchard questioned whether there would be a fine if a property owner refuses to replace the old numbers with 4 inch numbers after they receive a letter. Mr. McGinley responded that there is a fine explaining that the first two site visits are free but the third one does start a penalty phase which is $100 per re-inspection.
Mayor Bouley inquired whether this is a bigger issue with residential homes or with businesses. Chief Andrus responded that his experience with this issue has been residences. Mayor Bouley asked what is the best thing that a resident can do to make their home more visible for an emergency call that occurs during the evening. Chief Andrus indicated that the 911 operators will inform people to turn their porch lights on to help find houses easier.
Mayor Bouley declared the hearing open. There being no public testimony, the Mayor closed the hearing.
E. Ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances, Title I, General Code; Chapter 9, Water, by amending Article 9-6, Sewers and Drains; together with report from General Services. (3-17)
Action: City Manager Tom Aspell provided a brief overview explaining that federal regulations require municipalities to adopt regulations for the use of publicly owned wastewater systems by certain types of industrial users. He indicated that these rules relate to a pretreatment program related to those uses at the source. He added that during an audit in May 2008 performed on Concord’s industrial pretreatment program, the EPA suggested several changes to the ordinances which are before Council this evening.
Mayor Bouley declared the hearing open. There being no public testimony, the Mayor closed the hearing.
F. Resolution rescinding the sum of $75,000 from resolution #8147 for demolition of the Penacook Mill as well as other activities pertaining to redevelopment of the former Allied Leather Tannery Complex; together with report from the Assistant for Special Projects. (3-18)
Action: City Manager Tom Aspell provided a brief overview explaining that through the diligent hard work of Matt Walsh and Paul Cavanaugh they have been able to extract from Primex $75,000 in insurance payments for dealing with the collapse of the Penacook Tannery. He explained that in 2008 staff brought forward a bond resolution in the amount of $375,000 and because of the $75,000 insurance settlement, staff is asking that Council reduce or rescind that bond authority by $75,000.
Mayor Bouley declared the hearing open. There being no public testimony, the Mayor closed the hearing.
G. Ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances, Title III, Building and Housing Codes, Chapter 26, Building Regulations, Article 26-16, Fire Prevention Code; Section 26-16-4; together with report from the Fire Department. (3-19)
Action: City Manager Tom Aspell provided a brief overview explaining that RSA 153:14-II (b) requires the city fire department to annually inspect all school buildings. He added that there is a small nominal fee of $100 to help cover some of costs related to those inspections.
Councilor Keach questioned whether a school would have to go through the same procedures as a business to become compliant if it is found not to be in compliance. Mr. Aspell responded that they would explaining that the idea is to make the school districts aware of any issues related to the buildings in which they would then evacuate the students and make the necessary improvements so classes can continue.
Councilor Black inquired whether there are other buildings that need to have required inspections other than schools. Mr. McGinley responded that by state RSA the two inspections that he is most familiar with are: places of assemblies and schools. Councilor Black asked why a fee is charged if it is a required inspection. He inquired as to what would happen if they decided not to pay. Mr. McGinley indicated that he did send a letter to all of the schools within the city making them aware of this public hearing. He added that he is not expecting any type of backlash such as that. Referencing places of assemblies, Chief Andrus pointed out that the compliance rate for paying the fee is well in excess of 90 percent and probably closer to 98 percent and has never been challenged.
Councilor Blanchard inquired whether a letter had been sent to the Merrimack Valley School District. Mr. McGinley indicated that to be correct. Councilor Blanchard asked whether the high school and middle school would be inspected this year since they just had inspections as a result of their renovations. Mr. McGinley responded that they had not been done within the last twelve months and pointed out that one of the items that this RSA is very specific about is that they are to be inspected while school is in session adding the construction inspections did not occur while the schools were in session.
Mayor Bouley declared the hearing open. There being no public testimony, the Mayor closed the hearing.
April 13, 2009 Public Hearing Action
Action:
Councilor Nyhan moved approval. The motion was
duly seconded and passed on a voice vote.
Action: Councilor Nyhan moved approval. The motion was duly seconded and passed on a voice vote.
Action: Councilor Nyhan moved not to waive the fee. The motion was duly seconded.
Councilor St. Hilaire inquired as to who sends out the invoices. General Services Director Chip Chesley responded that the General Services Department sends out the invoices monthly. Councilor St. Hilaire asked what company is contracted to do this service. Mr. Chesley indicated that the invoices are done internally. Councilor St. Hilaire asked what company shows up to remove the solid waste. Mr. Chesley responded that the contract is with BestWay.
Councilor Werner asked whether there is a point in time in which one would be advised of this service before opening a business within the solid waste district. Mr. Chesley responded that it is his understanding that this issue was discussed while the project was going through the development phase. Councilor Werner asked whether it is fair to say that in those cases people are duly notified. Mr. Chesley indicated that he believes that the city would advise people of that.
Referencing this case, Councilor Coen asked whether it is unusual not to send out invoices in a timely manner. Mr. Chesley responded that he cannot recall why there was a delay in the invoice on this particular case.
Councilor Blanchard indicated that it appears in the Capital Commons Redevelopment Project minutes that Mr. Simchik was aware of the downtown solid waste requirement.
Councilor Keach inquired whether the city failed to send out only Capital Commons invoices for this three month period or was it a glitch that occurred for all members of the downtown district. Mr. Chesley responded that it is his understanding that it was for this one particular case.
Councilor Lemieux asked whether staff would commonly have an invoice to the property owner on the first month for which they are being billed. Mr. Chesley indicated that to be correct.
The motion not to waive the fee passed on a voice vote.
Action: Councilor Coen moved approval. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Action: Councilor Nyhan moved approval. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Action: Councilor Blanchard moved approval. The motion was duly seconded.
Councilor Keach asked what the total amount of the policy was and as to what percent $75,000 was. Mr. Aspell responded that the policy covers the entire city and all city property. Councilor Keach clarified asking what the amount would be if they had been able to get a hundred percent of the policy covered. Assistant for Special Projects Matt Walsh explained that as a condition of the Chinburg development agreement the city paid Primex approximately $300,000 to list this property in which they listed for a total value of approximately $2.9 million. He noted that the complications with the policy includes: it does not cover buildings that were vacant for more than sixty days and this building has been vacant since 1987; it doesn’t cover collapses stemming from damages related to water damage and this building failed because of water damage. He added that he feels the city ended up doing better than it normally would have.
Councilor Blanchard’s motion passed with no dissenting votes.
Action: Councilor Nyhan moved approval. The motion was duly seconded and passed with one dissenting vote.
Comments, Requests by Mayor, City Councilors
Councilor Werner informed Council and residents of the launch of the City of Concord Carbon Challenge to begin next week on Earth Day. He explained that it involves a web based program in which people can figure out their energy costs and that the website provides alternatives to reduce that cost and shows how many pounds of carbon dioxide you are currently producing. He explained that this is the first challenge within a city that will be conducted by ward. He encouraged residents and Councilors to take advantage of this challenge.
Councilor Shurtleff noted that Rivington Winant donated 85 acres of land to the City of Concord for a park near the hospital. He indicated that this land once belonged to his father and therefore will be in the memory of John Winant. He pointed out that John Winant had been a republican state representative from Concord, State Senator from Concord and Governor of the State of New Hampshire. He noted that he feels that the new parking area on Fiske Road would make a nice location for a historical marker in the memory of Governor Winant so that future generations can know how much he did for our city, our state and our country. He added that a historical marker costs $1,600 and will be willing to work with any individual or any group that would like to try to raise that money.
Councilor Keach referenced the new Concord Crew Barn that was constructed near the Everett Arena, totally funded by donations, encouraging anyone that hasn’t seen it to check it out.
Referencing the report from the Public Transportation Committee on Concord Area Transit, Councilor Bouchard requested that CAT be able to submit a written response to that report to be submitted to Council. Mayor Bouley asked if those comments would be sent to the Council and to the committee. Councilor Bouchard indicated that to be correct.
Councilor Blanchard apprised Council of the annual fundraiser of Families in Transition to be held on May 16th at CR Sparks in Manchester.
Comments, Requests by the City Manager
City Manager Tom Aspell announced that this year’s firework’s celebration will be held as usual at Memorial Field on Saturday, July 4th (rain date of July 5th). He noted that community support for this effort has been tremendous and the entire cost of the program has been covered by private donations. He extended sincere thanks to this year’s sponsors: The Duprey Companies, Lincoln Financial, Nassau Broadcasting and Telstar Fireworks Company. He extended a special thanks to Councilor Patten who helped to facilitate an agreement with Nassau Broadcasting and Telstar Fireworks Company. He added that Recreation Director David Gill worked tirelessly to secure the needed private commitments. He finished by indicating that complete July 4th information will be available in the Recreation Department’s Summer Brochure available the first week of May.
Consideration of items pulled from the consent agenda for discussion
Items 10, 23, 28, 30, 36 and 46 were pulled from the consent agenda to be discussed following unfinished business items on the agenda. (Item 23 was placed back on the consent agenda and adopted with the consent agenda items)
Referral to Community Development and the City Solicitor
Action: Councilor Patten indicated that he is looking for the information as to where this is going. Mr. Aspell responded that this is a landmark case that the city ended up winning in court. He explained that at this point right now the Council has suggested that staff try to work with several of the owners who have these signs to try to come up with an ordinance that may work.
Councilor McClure asked whether it was the Council that had directed staff to look into creating an ordinance that would work. Mr. Aspell responded that Council had directed that staff work with some of the owners and take a look to see if it is possible to create a revised ordinance underneath the zoning. He added that the Council did not say they wanted this done but did want staff to work with these owners.
Councilor Bennett stated that it is his recollection that Council came to a decision to have staff look into giving owners some kind of help with being able to use their signs.
Councilor Nyhan indicated that he had asked city staff at a previous Council meeting to reach out to the business community and open up the dialogue now that the lawsuit is over.
Councilor Keach indicated that he had raised the issue a year ago and had been advised that it wouldn’t have been appropriate to pursue it while the case is being litigated. He added that now that the litigation is resolved, he is interested in further exploring what kind of ordinance could be drafted.
Councilor McClure asked whether the referral to Community Development and the City Solicitor would provide Council with a thorough background of this issue starting from the beginning. Mr. Aspell responded that this has gone over a number of years. He indicated that it will provide the history of this and to see if there is an avenue to move forward with.
Councilor Lemieux moved to refer this correspondence to Community Development and the City Solicitor. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Action: Councilor Patten noted that trying to cross between Jensen’s Park and the Dunkin Donuts continues to be a hazard. Noting the economic times, he indicated that there could be possible consideration of a painted crosswalk to help with crossing this area.
Councilor Lemieux moved to adopt the report. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
30. Report from the City Engineer in response to a request from the Jensen’s Crestwood Community to license a sign and school bus waiting shed within the public right-of-way along Manchester Street in the vicinity of their access drive. (3-10) (Pulled from consent by Councilor Patten)
Action: Councilor Patten inquired as to the history as to when this all had started. Mayor Bouley questioned whether Councilor Patten was looking for something further beyond the background information provided in the report. Councilor Patten responded no. Mr. Aspell added that there are records of the Planning Board’s review in the Planning office if he would like to review them.
Councilor Lemieux moved approval of the report. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Action: Councilor Nyhan indicated that he had pulled this item to bring to the attention the very generous gift from American Legion Post 21.
Councilor Nyhan moved approval of the report. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Action: Councilor Patten noted that he pulled this item to show his support for summer crossing guards on Loudon Road because of the heavy traffic.
Councilor Patten moved to accept the report. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Councilor McClure pointed out that the city had received over $41,000 in gifts in the last month from generous individuals and organizations. Mr. Aspell added that the fireworks include an additional $15,000 more to that figure.
Consideration of Suspense Items
Councilor Nyhan moved to suspend the rules to consider items not previously advertised. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
4 Sus1 Referral to the Recreation and Parks Advisory Committee and the Parking Committee
Communication from Franklin Pierce Law Center asking the City of Concord to consider selling parking passes that would allow their students to use the lot at White Park from August through May each year; together with communication from Tony D’Amato suggesting the same.
Action: Councilor Lemieux moved to refer the communications to the Recreation and Parks Advisory Committee and the Parking Committee. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
4 Sus2 Referral to the Public Safety Board
Communication from Councilor Keach requesting the Public Safety Board explore the possible formation of a Police Civilian Review Board.
Action: Councilor Keach moved to refer this communication to the Public Safety Board. The motion was duly seconded.
Councilor Keach explained that he feels that this is the beginning of a process in which anyone concerned has the opportunity to come forward to discuss whether this is a good idea or a bad idea.
Councilor Stetson questioned whether this would be allowed within the City Charter. Mr. Aspell responded that he feels that this is a good question and is something that would be explored. Councilor Stetson indicated that if there is an investigation within the Police Department it is reported to the City Manager and if the manager wanted to review this it’s within his purview to further investigate. Mr. Aspell indicated that to be correct. He explained that he could either request an investigation on any department or an investigation is brought forward to him conducted internally within any department noting that he can review it and make a determination on that.
Councilor Keach explained that his thinking is to involve an entity or a group of people outside the city so that there is an absolute objective evaluation. He added that this is not to suggest that there is anything other than honesty going on but just to present a perception to the public that there is somebody outside the city that concurs with the conclusion.
Councilor Keach amended his original motion to also refer this communication to the City Solicitor. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
4 Sus3 Referral to the Parking Committee
Communication from Paula McLaughlin, Thorndike Street, in regards to overnight parking in the neighborhood.
Action: Councilor Lemieux moved to refer this communication to the Parking Committee. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
4 Sus4 Mayor Bouley’s proposed appointment to the Solid Waste Advisory Committee. Arthur Aznive and Terry Clarkson
Action: Mayor Bouley explained that this item was brought to his attention by the Chair of the Solid Waste Advisory Committee. He indicated that the committee is asking Council to waive the fifteen days and appoint these two individuals. He added that these proposed appointments are for the downtown members of the committee.
Councilor McClure asked if these are reappointments to the committee pointing out that Council usually receives resumes on proposed appointments. Councilor Nyhan responded that in the interest of moving this forward quickly, there wasn’t time to provide that information readily. He explained that Terry Clarkson represents Merrimack County Savings Bank which is one of the properties in the downtown solid waste district and Arthur Aznive is the second largest property owner in the downtown district. He added that he feels that these two individuals are very representative of the downtown group. Councilor Nyhan noted that he feels that resumes may not necessarily be appropriate in this case because they are not looking for resume credentials other than being members of the downtown solid waste district.
Councilor Stetson moved approval of the appointments. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
4 Sus5 FY2010 Budget Gap Update; together with communication from Kassandra Ardinger, President, Concord School Board.
Action: City Manager Tom Aspell explained that the original gap model was $5.2 million. He noted that based on the Governor’s budget and the House’s budget suspending revenue sharing in the amount of $1.2 million; a state retirement increase in Group II which is going to cost the city an anticipated cost of $140,000; and the loss of tax interest based on House Bill 351, if approved, will cost the city another $180,000. He pointed out that this brings the new gap in the budget to $6.72 million. If $900,000 that is anticipated from the pay as you throw is deducted from this and the $1 million that is believed could be removed from the capital budget is also deducted, this would reduce the gap to $4.82 million. He indicated that based on the discussion that the Fiscal Policy Advisory Committee had with the Concord School District Finance Committee there is a potential for an $800,000 credit which would drop the post-school credit gap to $4.02 million. Mr. Aspell indicated that at the Fiscal Policy Advisory Committee meeting the committee unanimously recommended that the tax rate target that was set earlier by the City Council at zero percent be adjusted to 2.7 percent with the thought to take advantage of the School Board District’s tentative offer of $800,000 reduction in their budget. He noted that this would leave the community with a zero percent tax rate increase clarifying that the committee recommends changing the zero percent tax rate target go to 2.7 percent with the net impact to the community being zero percent.
Mayor Bouley explained that the action before Council this evening is based on the recommendation of the Fiscal Policy Advisory Committee at the request of the City Manager is to move off the zero percent tax rate target to 2.7 percent tax rate target based on the letter provided to Council by the Chairman of the School Board stating that the School Board has agreed that it stands ready to further reduce its preliminary budget by $800,000. He added that the $800,000 equals the 2.7 percent.
City Manager Aspell added that this will all be influx through at least the end of June and will be discussed on a regular basis. He noted that the Senate, the House, and the Governor could change the budget which would all impact both the school district and the city.
Referencing the communication from Kassandra Ardinger, President, Concord School Board, Councilor McClure pointed out that there is not a signature on the letter. Mayor Bouley explained that this communication was received via email at approximately 5:00 p.m. this evening. Councilor McClure commended the City Manager, Jim Howard and the Mayor for all their efforts over at the State House and keeping Council up to date through this very difficult preliminary process to the budget.
Mr. Aspell added that the members of Concord’s delegation has done a great job keeping the city up to date.
Mayor Bouley recognized and thanked the School Board for coming forth and offering the $800,000 to the city. He noted that the city is still looking at an over $4 million gap between revenues/expenditures. Mayor Bouley noted that he has been receiving many calls in regards to an article that was published in the local paper on the library and has posed the question to each as to whether they had contacted their state representative or state senator. He indicated that 100 percent of the time, the response was no. He noted that he has been explaining to people that the city would not be dealing with having discussions, at least to the extent they are, about all the city services and indicated that the state not funding revenue sharing which is $1.2 million in which the state is not providing to the city. He urged residents to contact their state representative or state senator to ask that they restore those dollars.
Councilor Nyhan made the motion to move off the zero percent tax rate target to 2.7 percent tax rate target based on the letter provided to Council by the Chairman of the School Board stating that the School Board has agreed that it stands ready to further reduce its preliminary budget by $800,000. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Adjournment
A true copy; I attest:
Michelle Tiffany
Deputy City Clerk