2026-09-22 - Board of Aldermen

00:20meeting was duly noticed in two places

00:22including the city's website in

00:23according with the requirements of RSA

00:2591-

00:27colon 2 Roman numeral 2. Uh the prayer

00:32will be offered tonight by Dan Healey

00:34and Alder Dow will lead us in the pledge

00:36to the flag.

00:37Almighty God, we have the high honor and

00:40the serious duty to manage the affairs

00:42of our beloved city. Fill us, oh God,

00:45with a spirit of unity and

00:47understanding, which enables us to face

00:49our multiple problems with a serene mind

00:52with justice and charity for all so that

00:55any and all decisions made by us will

00:58always be for the betterment and greater

01:00happiness of all our fellow citizens. So

01:03help us God. Amen.

01:04>> Amen.

01:06I pledge allegiance to the flag of the

01:08United States of America and to the

01:11republic for which it stands, one nation

01:14under God, indivisible, with liberty and

01:17justice for all.

01:22>> Before we get started, I am presiding

01:24this evening because President

01:26Wilshshire had an emergency.

01:29Uh we'll start the meeting by taking a

01:31roll call. Could the clerk please call

01:32the role? Alderman Cle

01:35>> here.

01:36>> Alderman Rean

01:37>> here.

01:39Aldwoman Smith

01:40>> here.

01:42>> Alderman to

01:43>> here.

01:44>> Alderman O'Brien

01:45>> present.

01:47>> Alderman Greg.

01:51>> Alderman Dow

01:52>> present.

01:54>> Alderman Sullivan

01:55>> here.

01:56>> Alderman Senate.

02:00>> Alderman Johnson

02:01>> present.

02:03Aldwoman Kelly,

02:05>> I'm here. I'm attending remotely because

02:07I'm feeling unwell. I can hear everyone

02:10and there's no one in the room with me.

02:12>> Alderman Morgan

02:13>> here.

02:15>> Alderman Lopez

02:16>> here.

02:18>> Baldwin Wilshshire.

02:21>> Alderman Clemens

02:22>> here.

02:24>> 12 present, three absent.

02:26>> Thank you. Also in attendance this

02:28evening is Mayor Donis and Corporation

02:30council Steve Bolton. Um does the mayor

02:34have any remarks this evening?

02:35>> Uh yes, Mr. Vice President. Uh first I

02:39wanted to uh address to some extent the

02:43issues uh pertaining to the Elm Street

02:46Middle School and the Keefe Auditorium.

02:49Um my priority and I think the priority

02:52of the city is to get housing

02:54established there. I mean, you just

02:56heard a presentation of the various

02:59projects that are going on uh throughout

03:01the city. Uh we the administration uh

03:05Mr. Sullivan and everyone else is giving

03:07this a priority because we know there's

03:10still a critical need uh for new

03:12housing. Demand remains high. Rents uh

03:16well, the vacancy rate is still very

03:19very low. Uh prices continue to go up

03:22because demand exceeds supply.

03:25So at le So my priority uh is for

03:29>> uh there to be housing at Elm Street and

03:31when we took public input regarding that

03:34site uh over the years I think it

03:37started in 2020 or 21 during COVID

03:41because initially it was uh via Zoom

03:48um

03:49the community expressed the desire to

03:52have medium density ing density housing

03:55there. But we have been unable to move

03:58forward uh because there's no clear

04:02consent. There has been no clear

04:04consensus regarding how to uh deal with

04:08the uh KEF auditorium which is a you

04:11know long-standing facility in the city.

04:14Um, and I think it's fair to say that on

04:17the board of alderman, there has not

04:19been a consensus to raise Elm Street in

04:23order to provide housing, you know,

04:25where it is, excuse me, raise KEF in

04:28order to provide housing uh where it

04:30where it is in addition to the rest of

04:32the site. And there is not the

04:36uh consensus to

04:39uh do the improvements which are

04:41required or necessary to keep uh to

04:45improve Elm Street to the point where it

04:46can function after uh the housing

04:49project begins. Now the auditorium

04:52commission and you're going to hear from

04:53Mr. Schneider u the chair of the

04:56commission later has done a lot of work

04:58on this and I'd like to thank them for

05:00that. Uh it's the work suggests that

05:03there's going to be you know significant

05:06improvements required there to keep Elm

05:08Street operational. You know 16 20 18 20

05:11million something in that range.

05:14So we have talked about uh a compromise

05:19approach

05:20uh towards this site uh in order to move

05:23forward with the housing and yet retain

05:25the at least the possibility that Elm

05:27Street could be improved.

05:30And what we've talked about is

05:34uh preserving Elm starting the housing

05:36and preserving Elm Street, excuse me,

05:39preserving the Keefe uh in a in a um not

05:44to be used but to be retained. Uh and

05:46this is kind of the approach that the

05:49fire department wants us to follow. Uh

05:52and uh the the um elements of this

05:55compromise are uh first that we would

05:59create a tiff for the

06:02if the board of alderman adopts this

06:04approach. I mean, this is something that

06:06the board would have to do. Create a

06:08tiff uh around the site uh and dedicate

06:13at least uh potentially the revenue that

06:18ultimately will come from the from the

06:21housing to the KEF restoration. Number

06:25two, that um initially the purchase

06:28price for the sale of the Elm Street

06:31parcel would also be retained in the

06:32tiff in the event that

06:36the KEF improvements do go forward.

06:39At the same time, no bonding would take

06:41place in the short term.

06:43uh and the

06:45uh the auditorium commission and others

06:48would seek to uh raise funds to help

06:52supplement the revenue that would be

06:54generated uh by the by the

06:58property taxes from the housing as well

07:00as the purchase price of the site. And

07:03you're going to hear from Mr. Schneider

07:06that it is their the auditorium

07:08commissions and his plan to try to raise

07:11sufficient money in addition to those

07:14revenue sources that I just mentioned

07:17that th that being the sale price and

07:20the uh revenue from the housing uh the

07:24property taxes from the housing raise

07:26enough money in addition to those

07:28sources to pay for the Elm Street

07:32renovation. So the Elm Elm Street would

07:35be closed and not used for a period of

07:38time. Uh giving uh the auditorium

07:41commission and others in the community

07:42that feel this project should go ahead

07:44and should be given priority the time to

07:47develop a plan and to try to uh meet the

07:51fundraising goals which Mr. Schneider is

07:54going to point out. So again, I stress

07:58that this is a compromise. Uh we

08:02would retain the Elm Street Auditorium

08:05not to be used unless the the um uh the

08:08improvements were ultimately to be made.

08:11A future board of alderman would have to

08:12decide that issue based upon uh you know

08:16the what happens what transpires between

08:19now and then. But it from what I can see

08:22it's the only way to get the housing off

08:25the ground uh rather than to just stay

08:28in a kind of a uh the the status that

08:33it's in now. I mean it's been two years

08:35since the McCarthy school opened. It's

08:37probably been four years since we've

08:39been talking about what to do with the

08:40site. and rather than to just leave it

08:43and continue to wait for there to be a

08:46consensus. This is a way forward that I

08:48think

08:50uh can be broadly accepted. Uh it does

08:53not involve bonding money now and uh it

08:56involves a big community effort if if

08:59that takes place but it allow and it

09:02retains the keep auditorium. No no um

09:04destruction of that would occur.

09:08So you'll hear from Mr. um uh Schneider

09:11and the issues that I've sketched out

09:14would be will be um certainly presented

09:17and discussed I'm sure at length later.

09:20I did miss Mr. Vice President want to

09:23address R2620.

09:25I see on the which is the uh resolution

09:29to bond money to buy and renovate uh the

09:34Malberry Street building which I'm sure

09:35you're all familiar with as a resource

09:38center. Uh the

09:41script here indicates that there may be

09:43a motion to take that off the table and

09:45to indefinitely postpone the resolution.

09:50I don't think that is a good idea for

09:52the following reason. Uh the board of

09:55alderman has made it very clear that uh

09:58you um the city wishes to establish a

10:02resource center. Uh we certainly have a

10:04temporary plan over at Harborare for a

10:08period of one year, but after that there

10:10is no specific site and we've been

10:13although the the

10:16um idea of proceeding on on Malbury

10:18Street was uh defeated in I believe in

10:22April about five months ago. There is

10:25still no clear

10:28decision or clear approach as to where

10:31this resource center can be. Now, I'm

10:34not saying you should move forward with

10:36this right now, but I'm saying you

10:37should retain it uh in the sense because

10:41the building is still for sale.

10:45Uh at least it's still listed and

10:47there's still a for sale sign. Um, and

10:52if a superior location is not identified

10:56at some point, it might be advisable to

10:59go back to Malbury Street and consider

11:01it again.

11:03So, um, I believe the best thing to do

11:06would be to leave this on the table. Uh,

11:10not indefinitely postpone it, not act on

11:12it, but, uh, leave it in obeyance in

11:15case it's needed in the future for the

11:17remainder of the term.

11:19Third, another item on the agenda is all

11:23the bonding that you see. Uh there's

11:25certainly a lot here. It's a lot of

11:27money, many different projects. Um

11:31but this does would be would fit within

11:34the the priority scheme that uh the uh

11:38ad hoc priorities committee has sketched

11:40out. uh which suggests bonding 25 to $30

11:45million every year uh and also paying

11:49off bonds as well. Uh but I'm sure

11:52you'll hear more details about all this

11:54when the public hearings are held.

11:57And finally, Mr. Vice President, I want

11:59to mention that this Saturday in

12:01Renaissance Park at noon, uh we are

12:03holding the annual multicultural

12:06festival. Again, that's at noon in

12:09Renaissance Park. It's been always a

12:11really fun event in the past and I'm

12:13sure this year, first time in

12:15Renaissance Park, it will uh it will be

12:18a really fun event to attend.

12:21And that's all I have. Uh Mr. Vice

12:23President.

12:23>> Okay. Responses to the remarks of the

12:26mayor. Aler Johnson.

12:28>> Thank you very much. Last night I

12:30attended the human affairs committee.

12:33Um, and I'll tell you, listening to

12:36Revive is a very interesting nonprofit.

12:40And you know, my question was last

12:42night, is the city going to be

12:44duplicating

12:46services that they're offering?

12:49If this um if R-2620

12:53gets taken off the table to vote for

12:55indefinite postponement, I will support

12:58that because I didn't feel that building

12:59was the right building at the beginning

13:01and I don't feel it's the right building

13:03now for $900,000 or even less because

13:06I'm not going to put in $4.5 million in

13:09renovations when I could build a brand

13:10new building from scratch for less. And

13:13I think this is a shame. But I think

13:15what's going to happen, we're going to

13:16start duplicating efforts with the

13:18nonprofits that can do it better than

13:20the city can do it. Thank you.

13:23>> Well, Revive is certainly a um a great

13:27organization and they did hold a rally

13:29at Gley Park last last Saturday. Um

13:34Jessica Carter is in charge and has been

13:37with that organization since it's since

13:40a couple of months after its uh

13:42founding. They've made unbelievable

13:45progress. I mean, from a little place on

13:48Main Street, they now in Derry, Milford,

13:52um Manchester, they're talking about

13:54trying to do some housing. Um

13:58I'm not saying we should do the the

14:00Malbury Street. I'm just saying

14:03the next alternative may be more

14:05expensive. I mean, you say it'll be

14:06cheaper to build up from scratch, maybe.

14:09But every time I hear that it turn, you

14:12know, uh, regarding any project, oh,

14:15it's not going to be less, you know,

14:17whatever. It always turns out to be far

14:19more than anybody expects. So, I'm just

14:23saying retain it as a retain it as a as

14:26a an alternative

14:29possibly. Maybe we'll never go to that.

14:32Maybe the board of alderman will never

14:33return to that. But why foreclose it as

14:37an option?

14:39Alderman Johnson.

14:40>> Thank you. You know, Mayor, if I was

14:42building a property with my own money,

14:44I'd be very cautious about how I spend

14:47the money. But when government spends

14:48money, it doesn't matter because it's

14:50taxpayers money. We're going to have to

14:52pay our taxes. So, there's a difference

14:54on government spending than a than you

14:56buying and building your own personal

14:58unit. Thank you.

15:01>> Uh, Alderman Sullivan.

15:02>> Thank you. I did want to address that

15:03because I uh was planning on asking that

15:07the board to take it off the table and I

15:09wanted to respond

15:11and at that point when it's when I ask

15:13it to table we can't debate it. It's a

15:15non non-debatable motion. I wanted to do

15:18it because it's been on the agenda now

15:21for five months. We had vigorous debate

15:25about the property. We went back and

15:27forth. We decided as a board not to move

15:30forward with it. Yet the B the bonding

15:32resolution stayed there. Now if this

15:36comes off the table, if it's

15:38indefinitely postponed, we could

15:42once we get a better view of what's

15:45going on, what what what's happening

15:46with the building, we could issue

15:51another resolution with a more exact

15:53bonding amount that we need in order to

15:55move forward with it. All I'm saying is

15:58the resolution that sits there now

16:00addresses an issue that we discussed

16:02five months ago. I'm looking simply to

16:04clear up the agenda, move forward, and

16:08um and and and move on to uh you know,

16:10something better.

16:14>> Alderman Tibo.

16:15>> Thank you, uh Mr. Chair. Um yeah, I mean

16:18I I think what the mayor is saying is is

16:20is a good idea. I mean it doesn't hurt

16:22anything to have something still on the

16:23table. like it it there's no rule that

16:26we have to clean up the agenda for

16:27housekeeping rules like it's our own

16:29agenda. So, um I was one that voted

16:32against the resource center.

16:34I regret that now, but I voted against

16:36the resource center. Um and but I yet I

16:39voted to keep this on the table at the

16:40time. So, um because we don't know

16:43what's going to happen in the future. We

16:44don't have a resource center yet. So, it

16:46it doesn't hurt. It's not like it's

16:48going to magically all a sudden 900, you

16:50know, million dollars going to be taken

16:51out. the 900,000 is going to be taken

16:53out of uh the account and bonded like so

16:56if it just sits there on the table I

16:58think it's it's fine until we figure out

17:00what we're going to do with this

17:00resource center and once we do once we

17:03figure that out then we simply can if

17:06it's not doesn't involve Malbury Street

17:07at all and doesn't involve this we just

17:09get rid of this legislation at that time

17:11there's no need to work it

17:14>> Morgan

17:15>> um thank you I had a question a

17:19follow-up question to it perhaps to

17:21legal

17:22Um, so if we were to indefinitely

17:25postpone as written, is there anything

17:28that prevents us, should we decide in

17:30one, two, four months, if the building

17:32is still available, um, to look at it

17:35again?

17:38>> Yeah. Corporation council, please.

17:40>> The rule is that you cannot introduce

17:43substantially the same measure during

17:47the same term.

17:50what is substantially the same. You

17:53know, if you've got the same piece of

17:55property, but for a different price as

17:58part of a different overall project,

18:03it would be up to a member of the board

18:06who objected to it being uh brought

18:10forward again in in

18:14some member of the board's opinion in

18:16violation of that rule. the board would

18:18have to vote whether they thought it was

18:21in violation or not in violation because

18:24it was not substantially the same. So

18:28ultimately the

18:30ability to reintroduce something or

18:34something similar is a decision that the

18:37board as a whole makes.

18:39>> Thank you.

18:40>> U may I just address that a little?

18:42>> Um yes, Mr. Mayor. Um, one one thing

18:46that um I mean I think we have to be

18:48aware of is that we had a PNS on that

18:51and then we walked away from it. So

18:55this is a big if if we're ever to return

18:57to that site as a as a possibility.

19:01Um I think we would need to act be able

19:04to act quickly because are they going to

19:06wait again for a couple of months for us

19:08to go through the public hearing and all

19:10this kind of stuff? um uh given that we

19:15didn't complete the sale last time and I

19:17think we would really if we wanted to do

19:20it, we would need to be able to act

19:22pretty quickly and uh therefore going

19:26through starting all over again could be

19:29an obstacle again if the decision

19:33were that in the end that is the best

19:36alternative.

19:38>> All right. Any other remarks to the

19:41mayor?

19:43All right. Um

19:45>> U Alderman Clemens.

19:46>> Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't see you. Uh

19:48Alderoman Kelly.

19:50>> Um I I I

19:53think that a lot has been covered, but I

19:56always get to go last. It's fun. Um I

19:58think that a lot has changed since we

20:00talked about this property. I know that

20:02a lot of other things have come around.

20:04We're doing a gaps needs analysis. for

20:06having um a study done so that before we

20:09make a decision we can look at what a

20:11actual buildout might look like. Um so I

20:14just don't see why we would you know

20:16kneecap ourselves um and put an option

20:20that could potentially be on a table um

20:23you know to bed completely. So I will

20:26not be supporting endeavor post.

20:30>> Okay. Thank you. Um recognition period

20:34>> none.

20:35>> All right. discussions and

20:36presentations. We have the KEF

20:38Auditorium Commission update. And so I'm

20:41going to recognize uh the chairman of

20:43the Keefe Auditorium Commission, Dennis

20:45Schneider, who will pro provide the

20:48presentation and then uh Director

20:50Cummings will have something to say a

20:53little bit after that.

20:55>> Uh thank you. Uh good evening. My name

20:58is Dennis Schneider. Uh just to get a

21:00little bit about me, my father and I

21:02were moved up here in 1982 by digital

21:05equipment. Uh my kids went through the

21:07public schools. Uh and u I am not a

21:11theatrical or auditorium person by

21:13career, but I was appointed to the

21:16commission in 2002. I started chairing

21:18the commission in 2004.

21:20Uh and so I have probably spent as many

21:22hours in the Keith auditorium as any

21:25employee of the city or probably any

21:27student. Uh so that's kind of my my bit

21:30of background. Um where are we and why?

21:33Uh first thing I would tell you is uh

21:36there are a short list of reasons to

21:38keep the KEF. One, it it has historical

21:42value to many people in the city. Uh

21:44two, it's a valuable city asset. One of

21:47the things we discovered was the real

21:49cost of trying to build another one of

21:50these. It's about hund00 million at a

21:53minimum. So we have a valuable asset at

21:57that level. And the question is, can we

21:58preserve it, leverage it at reasonable

22:00prices uh for the city and make it

22:02actually effective. Uh and three, it's

22:05an opportunity. It's an opportunity to

22:07make our city more vi more vibrant and

22:09more attractive. It's an opportunity to

22:11bring more performers, more community

22:13performers, which we don't really have a

22:15place to to run them. Don't be confused.

22:17The pack is a commercial activity. Uh

22:20and I think it's an opportunity for all

22:21of the performing arts as well. Uh and

22:24so there are plenty of headwinds to to

22:26all of that, but ultimately the package

22:29before you is the work of the commission

22:31from roughly a year. Uh gain odd,

22:35director Smith

22:38and

22:40I, I'm sorry,

22:43director. Yeah. Are are are here this

22:45evening. They have all been assets to

22:47the commission. One of the things I

22:49would say is there's a tremendous amount

22:50of data about the actual estimates for

22:53costs of the reconstruction in many many

22:55options and I you know blessed the day

22:58that Commissioner Smith and Carl Devois

23:00got involved with the commission because

23:01it is a mind-boggling set of numbers but

23:04they have basically vetted them all. Uh

23:06so what have we been doing and why are

23:08we here? We're at a point where uh we

23:11need the insights and advice and counsel

23:14of the board. What we need to know is is

23:17there a funding path that is not zero

23:21from the city uh and then what that

23:24might be and how that might look

23:26forward. Uh there's no legislation being

23:28presented this evening. This is strictly

23:30for your information and all of the

23:32information I'll talk about is in the

23:33package in front of you. Uh the

23:35commission started out with exactly the

23:38same charge that the mayor points out.

23:40How do we get to the point of saying

23:42this much of this parcel would be used

23:44by the auditorium and how do we get that

23:48developed? What does that look like? And

23:50so there are two balancing acts here.

23:54There are many possible levels of

23:55renovation and on the flip side there

23:58are many possible levels of utilization.

24:00If we want utilization by more than

24:03community groups, the minimum won't be

24:05enough because we won't have enough

24:07facility, lobbies, concession area,

24:09backstage area, uh new seating, things

24:12like that to enable that. So, if we want

24:14to only a lower utilization, we get a

24:17lower investment. A lot of time spent

24:19balancing what that what all that meant.

24:22Uh thank you for funding the work done

24:24by ICON. Mark for Likon is is here in

24:28case you have a question about any of

24:30the numbers they wrote them. Uh so

24:33they're they're here and they can

24:34represent. Uh so the next conversation

24:38is utilization the other side of it. Um

24:41one of the things that is always a

24:43challenge in administrations is who

24:45understands how to run theaters not city

24:47administration. So we recruited a set of

24:49expert panels their names were later on

24:51in the material from local theaters. uh

24:54Peter Ramsey who's the retiring CEO of

24:57the Palace Theater. Uh Troy Sebles who's

25:00retiring CEO of Hanover Theater uh and

25:03Pete Lolly from Spectacle Entertainment.

25:06Uh those three have been part of the

25:08conversation about how we could get

25:10utilization. I got to say that all of

25:12them have been creative, positive and

25:14helpful. So what comes out of this then

25:18is uh what's the renovation

25:20recommendation that matches the

25:22utilization?

25:23How is it get funded?

25:25How fundraising will work? And then

25:27what's the next set of things to do? So,

25:30I'm gonna take a pause there. Is it okay

25:32if I take questions in line or should I

25:35>> We should We should go through the

25:36>> Okay.

25:37>> presentation and then

25:39>> we'll take questions after.

25:40>> I I I'll do it any way you choose. Uh so

25:43based on the study, the commission

25:46believes that there is a a midpoint. So

25:50I mean there's an option one and there's

25:52set of option twos and there are options

25:54above that. Uh in order to get

25:56utilization to a level which I think the

25:58city would like uh we believe it'll

26:01require somewhere between 29 and $34

26:04million.

26:05>> Are you um going to move the slides

26:07along?

26:07>> Oh I'm sorry.

26:09>> Thank you.

26:11>> Uh thank you for reminding me. So but

26:14but there is a lower level available to

26:16us. We just don't think that's the best

26:17thing for the city. This is in $208 by

26:21the way and so timing is everything. Uh

26:24and I'll cover what that looks like at

26:26some level of detail a bit later. Uh how

26:29to fund this activity. Funding has to

26:32come in two parts. Uh we we've had a

26:35good faith estimate. Thank you Director

26:36Cummings and director LS for producing

26:38that. That said that the TIF would fund

26:41in the area and I believe this is let's

26:44call it ballpark of $18 million. above

26:46that would have to be raised externally.

26:49Uh and so uh you've heard the mayor talk

26:52about the allocation of the tiff funds.

26:54Uh if the board is in support then the

26:58conversation would turn to legislation

26:59to actually make that happen. But that's

27:02amongst you all. Um and then we kind of

27:05say look well let's assume for the

27:07moment that's the end of the city

27:08funding and the rest of it has to come

27:10from fundraising proceeds etc. Now there

27:13are several ways I I talked to the uh

27:17office of Senator Shaheen. There's a

27:19possibility of million2 million dollars

27:22in earmark money but those have to be

27:24shovel ready. So the timing for that is

27:26not now. Uh so then fundraising will be

27:30needed to fund the fund the shortfall

27:32and fund the future operating expenses.

27:35So for that we actually need an

27:36operating model. So that's kind of the

27:41right now

27:44to give you a sense of time. What we're

27:46talking about is if we said we fired the

27:48gun today and we were all rocking and

27:50rolling and ready to go, uh the the the

27:53new renovated reimagined KEF would open

27:56sometime between the the end of 2032 and

28:01the end of in the middle of 2033.

28:05So that's that bottom right hand corner

28:07of the timeline.

28:08Uh now there's some there's some play in

28:11that. If we're able to raise some money,

28:12we can bring that in by perhaps two

28:15years. And we have perhaps two years to

28:18figure that out. So if we're able to

28:20raise more money, we can move the the

28:22construction work and the planning work

28:24earlier, but none of that is is is

28:27assumable today. And so the whole idea

28:30here is that this is the operating plan

28:32until we know it isn't the operating

28:34plan.

28:37And the timeline above talks about the

28:41development of the housing

28:43around the Keith Auditorium as well as

28:46then the Kee auditorium renovation.

28:53Assuming that is all acceptable and the

28:56guidance of the board is let's continue.

28:58The commission ends up with the

29:00following to do. One is uh create a

29:03phase development program that allows us

29:05to to properly use the money from the

29:07tiff and determine how how we can break

29:10the money up so we can raise some do

29:12some work raise some do some work. Uh

29:15there will be a considerable amount of

29:18of energy have to be applied here. The

29:20board does not have fundraising skills

29:22in the in this level and we're going to

29:23have to figure out how to make that

29:24work. So the board will have to come

29:26forward with how we're plan to do that.

29:28Uh and so there's a a more refined

29:32operating development program number one

29:35fundraising recommendation number two

29:37and the final one is a recommendation on

29:39operating model. There are two operating

29:41models and I'll talk about those in a

29:43little bit but both of those are viable

29:45and possible and the only question is to

29:48what extent we want the community on

29:49charge going forward and we'll talk

29:52about that in a moment. The commission

29:54has there's a there's up to four-year

29:56period when the hall is not available.

29:58We have a transition program to plan.

30:00Can't do that until we know a bit more

30:02of this. And then the other the other

30:04pieces of it are just really being doing

30:06the proper job of of seeing overseeing

30:08how the users are involved in the user

30:10operation

30:14operating models.

30:16So there are two that we have

30:18identified. one is an independent

30:20nonprofit and that is the same structure

30:22as the Palace Theater, the Hanover

30:24Theater, the conquered uh uh the Capital

30:26Center for the Arts. It's pretty much

30:28all of the significant uh facilities are

30:30run by community-based nonprofits, and

30:33they're community focused. So, yes, they

30:36uh they do marketing, they do

30:37programming, but the programming

30:39includes things like let's do a local

30:41benefit. Let's let's let's run programs

30:44of our own. Let's encourage more

30:45community involvement because it's a

30:47community- centered activity. The

30:49alternative is is is to use the model at

30:51the pack which is a for-profit uh

30:54contracted model. Uh the best

30:57indications I can get is that we can get

31:00a contractor

31:02uh to to operate the building we're

31:04talking about and their inputs have been

31:05part of the at least one possible

31:07contractor's inputs have been taken in

31:09as part of our expert panel. So those

31:12are our choices. the the sense of the

31:15commission is we'd rather do what all of

31:17the other successful theaters now

31:19success needs to be measured. So the

31:21Peter Ramsey is has spent 25 years at

31:24the palace and uh he started out with

31:27three years of not taking a salary

31:28because the building was in terrible

31:30shape. Uh and so this is a long-term

31:33plan. So we will not be operating you

31:37know cash flow positive with 100 nights

31:38of activity in year one. And that

31:41expectation is something we all need to

31:43have. It takes years to do this.

31:48So what are the next steps? Uh next

31:52steps are your feedback and support

31:55conversation

31:56that then once we get that uh the

32:00commission needs to bring a

32:01recommendation package on the final

32:03target level of renovation and how we

32:05might phase it. uh and city

32:08administration then needs to estimate

32:10the funding generated diff and then we

32:13have to recommend an operating model uh

32:16and initial recommendation on

32:18fundraising.

32:20So that's the plan that the commission

32:22has created. That's the and the next

32:25parts of it are the detail. Uh and so uh

32:30I guess I should go through the detail.

32:33Uh

32:35let me ask the pleasure of the board. Do

32:37you want do we want to continue on the

32:39presentation and then ask questions? I

32:41think that might be better to get some

32:43of the details from the Let's do that.

32:46>> Sure, no problem. Uh so the the

32:52probably the most important thing on the

32:54whole thing here is this yellow box or

32:57golden box. That's the box that of the

33:01footprint of any of the options we might

33:03pursue. It's a it's a planning outline

33:07that can be used in the conversation

33:08with any developer. It's it reserves the

33:12the uh the options to have a phased

33:14approach. If we have a benefactor that

33:17comes in and gives us the 55 million

33:19bucks at the top one in, it'll fit in

33:20that. If we only get the first phase at

33:23the level of tiff funding, it also fits

33:25in that. And so fond hope of the

33:28commission was that this would uh uh un

33:31unencumber the process to go discuss

33:34developer selection, developer terms and

33:36conditions. Uh and in here you can kind

33:39of see where

33:41the outlines fall. uh you know the the I

33:44guess

33:46it it it draws a line between what would

33:48not be kept if the build if the rest of

33:50the building were raised or what would

33:53and and what would be the line between

33:55us and the development side of things.

33:58Okay.

33:59Um looking at the top three development

34:03options. Option one which is no again

34:072028 no addition. Uh it's uh a uh

34:13renovation within the footprint.

34:14Everything's up to code, separate from

34:16existing code minimum scope. Uh

34:18basically no added lobby. And the issue

34:20here is no concessions. Uh but it would

34:23have bathrooms, it would have HVAC, it

34:24would have new plumbing, it would have

34:26new electric, it would have all of the

34:28things one would expect. Uh in that

34:31option, there are not new seats for the

34:33audience or any new AV. Um I'll show you

34:37an option that does include that. uh

34:39takes it to about $18 million to do that

34:42set of work. Uh then these next three

34:46options are different variations of the

34:47footprint. Uh a singlestory edition with

34:50an expanded lobby, a larger renovation

34:53with a larger backstage build and more

34:56demolition

34:58uh and and a smaller level of rena. So

35:01that gives us a range of about 29 to $34

35:04million for variations of option two.

35:08The big difference between option one

35:09and option two, option one does not

35:12erect any new structure. Option two

35:15builds a small addition on the uh lake

35:19street side uh to be lobby, bathrooms,

35:23HVAC, MVP and so on. Uh so it's the sort

35:26of the minimum viable for that activity

35:29does provide enough lobby that we could

35:31start getting greater utilization.

35:34Uh,

35:36so

35:38this is a more detailed statement of

35:40exactly the same set of stuff. I'm not

35:43going to it's it's more for your

35:44edification than not. There are

35:47footprints of each one. So I'm going to

35:51So option one

35:53uh

35:54calls for tearing down the classrooms at

35:57the uh at the west side, the side on the

35:59traffic circle. Um uh and then keeping

36:03the band rooms, what are now classrooms

36:05on the north side uh and building

36:08bathrooms there and using existing space

36:10that's already structured as part of the

36:12building. And that was the way option

36:14one was structured to minimize the

36:16investment in it. And to this one, to

36:18get to that, if we can get the $18

36:20million from the TIFF, we would add some

36:23uh light and sound and new seating in

36:24the auditorium. that without those

36:27funds, a million dollars is roughly the

36:29cost of the seating in the auditorium.

36:30We would have the existing seating,

36:32which is sub-optimal. But option one is

36:35generally sub-optimal because it doesn't

36:37give us enough room to operate uh many

36:40of the acts we would like to. It doesn't

36:41give us enough room. Theaters right now

36:43are living on, you know, $9 glasses of

36:45Chardonnay. And so, uh, there's there's

36:48a strong need to have that concession

36:50space to make the commercial side of

36:51this more profitable,

36:54uh, and really pay the bills. Uh,

36:58the details from Icon are here. I'm not

37:00going to cover them unless we we have

37:02questions later. Mark is here for that.

37:05Uh, but this is the detail underneath

37:07it.

37:10So this is that option to add uh uh uh

37:14AV sound and light uh and new seating to

37:17that same option. Again takes us to just

37:18about uh 181 which is in that ballpark

37:22of the estimate that director Cumins

37:23provided for uh the uh the tiff funding.

37:28So we could get that much improvement

37:32without additional fundraising.

37:37Option two,

37:39uh, adds 6,000 square feet on the, uh,

37:42south side, so the the link sheet side

37:45of the building. Um, and, uh, would

37:48provide a an addition to put the MEP,

37:51the air conditioning, so on, on the

37:52roof. There would still be bathrooms on

37:55the other side and bathrooms here. Uh,

37:58we get we would get a a reasonable lobby

38:00out of it. Um, and so option two has

38:03several variations. I'm not going to

38:05cover each one of them. The footprint

38:06details are somewhat complicated. You

38:09can kind of see there's some gray

38:10renovation in the bottom left. There's a

38:12mix of renovation and development.

38:15Uh again, I'm not going to cover all of

38:17this stuff.

38:19Uh it's

38:21option 2A.

38:23uh gives us more backstage renovation,

38:27utilizes those classrooms on the uh west

38:30side and provides a a much more

38:34functional capability for touring acts,

38:37touring performers

38:39uh than any of the other options that we

38:41can look at through there. But it also

38:43costs more. We have to raise that much

38:44more money.

38:46So, uh, same, by the way, uh, option 2A

38:50has same southside building for all the

38:53MEP bathrooms and so on.

38:56Again, I'm going to skip the detail.

38:57It's there if you want to poke at it

39:00later. Uh, 2B is a little a little bit

39:03less. I'm sorry. Uh, it it it does not

39:08renovate that backstage area.

39:11And uh you know I'd still if we went

39:14this way I'd still want to gut that area

39:16and keep it so that eventually we could

39:17renovate it. This is a question of

39:19what's affordable. So this could be

39:21phased.

39:28Okay. And because option three is $55

39:31million and option four was 100. I did

39:34not include those in your packet. I will

39:36happily include those if you'd like to

39:38see them, but the commission could not

39:40in good conscience recommend them. Uh,

39:42yes, they'd be lovely and if somebody

39:44wanted to write the check, we would

39:45certainly do it, but it fits in the same

39:46footprint. Uh, and one of the things

39:50that we don't yet have is what I would

39:51call a phasable plan where we could

39:53start at call it $18 million, raise

39:56money, and then do the next phase and

39:57the phase after that and the phase after

39:59that. That is how conquered the capital

40:02and the handover have all developed.

40:03They've all developed from doing that.

40:06The last piece that I want to cover with

40:09you is utilization.

40:12Uh, so this is an eye chart on the

40:16screen, but you have copies. Peter

40:17Ramsey, Pete Wally, Troy Seable, three

40:19Peter experts. I'm trying to recruit one

40:21more from the capital center. He's new,

40:24but he is uh the capital center is a

40:26great example of one of these. Uh, the

40:30utilization estimates were made

40:32fundamentally by these people. We had a

40:35conversation. We built it out. Uh and so

40:38what we learned was that the target for

40:42uh a good a good solid break even

40:44operation perhaps make make a nickel is

40:46100 nights a year. And so we were

40:48targeting how do we get to 100 nights a

40:50year? Uh and it won't happen year one.

40:53And option one makes it pretty

40:54challenging because there are some acts

40:56you can't get. So, the acts that really

40:58rely on more backstage capability, the

41:01acts that require uh more concession

41:04spaces, they want to sell lots and lots

41:06of other stuff, but there are acts we

41:08could get. And so

41:11uh this is the best estimate the

41:15commission could come up with for what

41:18we could get in terms of performance

41:21nights per year from our community

41:23theater symphony or ensembles and then

41:26local Reynolds co-productions, tribute

41:28acts. Uh one of the things that came up

41:31that came up loud and clear was uh there

41:33are many call them tribute bands that

41:35have very little tech requirements that

41:37can easily exceed the capacity of the

41:40pack. The pack maxes out at 750. Uh the

41:43Keith is the largest auditorium in the

41:45state at 1530.

41:47Post renovation is probably 1300. It's

41:50still bigger than conquered in that

41:52regard. And so the axe that can't fit in

41:54our city would have a place to go. And

41:57according to all three there are takes

42:00time to get them to come takes time when

42:02when they happen to be in the

42:03neighborhood but there are many acts

42:05that need more than the pack in support.

42:08Uh the other southern competitor is LOL

42:10Memorial which is 2300 seats too big for

42:13many of these and so this is uh a these

42:16are too big and these are too small and

42:18so uh we believe it's a and our expert

42:21panel agrees there's a clear opportunity

42:23to bring more and more performances to

42:26that space. Uh we have to get to be

42:29known have to be effective has to

42:31operate properly. Uh so just to give you

42:35a sense we also characterized what what

42:38we're calling the touring technical

42:40theaters the tiers these are the booked

42:42acts the acts that you have to do the so

42:46the operation of these things is

42:47marketing fundraising booking theater

42:50operations four key things and so the

42:52whole idea here would be where can we

42:55get what acts from and how would we find

42:58them how would we book them who would do

43:00the work so if it's contracted we can

43:03have a contract either or or a company

43:05that books it if it's our own staff

43:08which is a recommendation of at least a

43:09couple of our panel experts is to build

43:11that skill set but use helpers that are

43:15around and both of the u uh both Troy

43:19and Pete Ramsey said they'd they'd be

43:20glad to help us figure out how to how to

43:22operate that uh and how to make it

43:24successful.

43:28So with that I'll take questions. Okay,

43:33Kibo.

43:33>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, thank you so

43:36much for putting this together. This was

43:37quite the presentation. It's very

43:39detailed and it looks like the committee

43:41and yourself did a uh remarkable job

43:44really putting the effort into it and

43:45and giving us a really great

43:47presentation. Um, you know, one thing I

43:50always have to explain to people when

43:51they say we don't need the KE is that

43:53it's not Court Street, it's not the

43:54pack, right? There's three different

43:56uses for three different theaters and

43:58they're all important in their own

43:59different ways. uh even despite the

44:02nostalgia part of it, which is one thing

44:04that is important to me along with the

44:06fact that it's used differently than the

44:08other two. Um I've always been a

44:11supporter of trying to keep it in some

44:12form without going, you know, without

44:15bonding 40 million. Um are we concerned

44:18that it's not going to be in use for a

44:20certain amount of time? There sounds

44:21like at least a couple of years. Would

44:23that be concerning to us as far as um

44:26you know acts going away, symphony going

44:28away and not coming back to here?

44:30>> Well, so part of the fourth work stream

44:34is what I would call transition

44:35management. I think it's up to us to

44:37figure out where those performing groups

44:39can perform, how they can do it on an

44:41economic basis that makes some sense. Uh

44:44you know I I think that the the sort of

44:46the natural place for that is the pack.

44:49It's smaller. Uh the stage is smaller.

44:52there are, you know, all kinds of issues

44:54around getting a significant amount of

44:56time out of that calendar. Uh but um I

44:59think that's uh let's just say an

45:01opportunity for the the city and the

45:03commission to negotiate to get that

45:05done. The other side of it becomes you

45:08know what do the groups want to really

45:09do. I I think that um you know the the

45:13groups would love to have the KEF but

45:15the minimum closure time is really two

45:18two seasons. It might if the timing were

45:21wrong, it'd be three seasons. This plan

45:23says four seasons. So, I don't know that

45:25there's maybe there's a year we could

45:27squeeze it if we if we raise the funds,

45:30but we're also looking at a fairly

45:32optimistic schedule for the construction

45:34on the site. So, all of these, you know,

45:38anytime you forecast, you know you're

45:39wrong, but you don't know by how much or

45:41in what direction. So, I think the

45:42answer is yes, there's a concern. The

45:44commission needs to manage that

45:46transition plan and we've had

45:48discussions with the administration. We

45:50all recognize it won't be simple or

45:53free. Uh but those will all be part of

45:55what we have to come in back in and

45:56recommend. But it's absolutely an issue.

45:58The other key thing is not losing the

46:00audience that would normally be with

46:02those groups. So having those groups

46:04have a place to perform even if it's in

46:06a reduced way is critical to their

46:08audiences because when when you lose

46:10them it's hard to get them back. COVID

46:12taught all of the performing arts groups

46:14in in the state or in the country a very

46:16tough lesson for what what coming back

46:18meant.

46:19>> Thank you.

46:20>> Thank you.

46:22>> Alderman Sullivan.

46:25>> May you call me?

46:27>> Yes.

46:27>> Oh, thank you. I didn't hear you. Sorry.

46:29Um, thank you for putting this together.

46:32Great presentation.

46:33>> Appreciate that.

46:34>> My questions are around funding

46:36>> and timeline.

46:37>> Sure.

46:39Uh,

46:40I didn't do percentages, so I'm just

46:42going to say maybe it's uh 6040. 60%

46:46comes from the city, 40% from nonprofit

46:49fundraising.

46:50>> Correct.

46:52From where you stand, what comes first?

46:58How do we how do we know if um you know,

47:01so if we need uh let's call it uh 35

47:05million to do this?

47:06>> Yep.

47:08uh how when does fundraising start and

47:10and how how will we know if if this is a

47:13go?

47:14>> So uh the first the first thing becomes

47:17this phaseable plan that lets us go at

47:19many different levels of funding and

47:21still get enough utilization for it to

47:23make sense. So let's assume that the

47:25ultimate plan costs pick a number $35

47:28million. is entirely possible. We can do

47:31$20 million worth of renovation while we

47:33raise the rest to finish a different

47:36part of the space. That work has not

47:38been done. So, the phasing is important.

47:41Part two is right now, I mean, I know

47:43how to run a lot of things, but I do not

47:44know how to do do nonprofit fundraising.

47:46We're going to have to go go acquire

47:48some skills. We're probably going to

47:50have to hire a consulting company. I

47:52think we talked I talked with Peter

47:54Ramsey. I've known him 25 years. And so

47:56he's sort of willing to help us

47:58understand what it takes and they've

47:59been very successful in their capital

48:01raise. I'm trying to get help from the

48:02capital center of the art. They have

48:04been also very successful in their

48:05capital raise. There will be a perpetual

48:07capital program affiliated with this no

48:09matter what we do because ultimately

48:11it's going to need uptakes and

48:14improvements over time assuming it's

48:16successful. On the other side, we have

48:18to make uh what we can get work as soon

48:21as we can. So there's going to I think

48:23this idea of a phasable plan that gets

48:25us to a level we can actually start

48:27using it with a capital program after

48:29that is my kind of you know initial if

48:32we can raise more money sooner that's

48:33great. We have to start fundraising as

48:35soon as we have a sense of two things.

48:37one is is the city in support of doing

48:41it this way because the city is putting

48:43a floor

48:44underneath that that capital and second

48:47what's it going to kind of look like

48:48from a standpoint of I don't think the

48:51whole you know what's that space going

48:52to look like what are its specs from

48:54there we can we can start raising funds

48:56>> does that answer your question

48:57>> I think so could I have a follow-up

48:59>> yep

49:01>> um on the timeline because I'm trying to

49:03figure out when this money will flow in

49:05I mean uh the mayor spoke spoke about

49:08the purchase price for the property

49:10would flow into the tiff and then that

49:12would flow into

49:14some capital to fund this. But

49:19the property tax that's going to be

49:20realized on this property will not

49:22happen until those

49:25>> basically until the So that's

49:27>> that's in there.

49:27>> That's 2030.

49:29>> Yep.

49:31>> Okay. So, uh, my question, maybe this is

49:34to Director Cummings, but in 2030, are

49:36the houses built by then or is that when

49:38we start to build?

49:45>> Director Cummings,

49:46>> that Thank you. Well, that's a that's a

49:48great question and it depends on how

49:50quickly we move forward with with the

49:52project, but essentially housing

49:55construction for the type of

49:57construction we're talking about is 18

49:59to 24 months approximately. So say

50:01safely two-ish years from when you start

50:03the project to when you complete the

50:05housing construction.

50:07>> Okay.

50:08>> Y

50:10if you look on my timeline there's

50:11actually a milestone for when that

50:13funding shows up and we don't begin

50:15construction until then towards the

50:17bottom

50:18>> and we've sort of we're holding off

50:20which is at the way bottom there's a

50:22double-headed arrow. That's the

50:23opportunity fundraising can close. But

50:26the bottom of that arrow, right hand

50:27side, that's assuming we got not one

50:30cent until the the the tax money is

50:33available. The left side of the arrow

50:36assumes we're successful at fund raise

50:38so we can proceed a whole lot sooner.

50:40The goal would be the left arrow. The

50:42constraint would be the right arrow.

50:44Does that make sense?

50:45>> Yes. Just a

50:46>> Yep. I'd like to make a comment if I

50:48might on this and and this is no

50:52reflection on on what's happened, but my

50:54concern around

50:56the public funding and and and the uh

50:59the fundraising that needs to happen in

51:01order for this project to to come to

51:03fruition. My concern is the sunk cost

51:06fallacy because what could happen is we

51:08could put it's easy to get the public

51:10money. You convince 15 of us and you

51:13know there we go, we're off and running.

51:16However, that could happen before we

51:18even select a nonprofit. We build, we

51:21build, we build. Oh, it's not going the

51:24way we want. Well, we've already put

51:27$10 million into this. We might as well

51:30keep it going. And and and so that's my

51:32concern that if we don't have the

51:34fundraising to make up the other piece,

51:39then this project then costs the city

51:41the entire amount. And and that's my

51:44concern. So let me let me try to reply

51:46the way the plan timeline is built right

51:50uh other than you know whatever small

51:52amount of money we have to do for the

51:54planning side until the money is

51:56available the project doesn't go forward

51:58which is why it's so far out in the

52:00future and so uh you know the challenge

52:04we would have is if it takes us so long

52:06that here's this thing in the middle of

52:08a development and we then decide not to

52:10do it but the option to not do it is

52:12still there uh you But the at the end of

52:15the day, if we don't raise enough money

52:17to have one of the minimal levels of of

52:19of uh of development, uh I would fully

52:22expect the board to say, "Well, let's

52:24not let's let's decide to do something

52:25else with the building." I think that

52:27option needs to stay on the table. Uh

52:30and I think that, you know, the the the

52:32city and the taxpayers are owed that.

52:33So, I I totally agree with you.

52:35>> Okay.

52:37>> I'm going to take a little privilege

52:38here, Alderman Sullivan. the

52:42that that is that is truly why this is a

52:45compromise the um

52:50because we can back out of it without

52:52having spend a dime.

52:54So if if the commission is the

52:57commission will be charged with raising

52:59a significant sum coming up with a way

53:02to you know a nonprofit to run it as

53:04well and if by the time we get down to

53:07the to the end there where we have to

53:09you know make a decision

53:11you know because construction on the

53:13rest of the site is moving forward. if

53:15they've not done that part or we believe

53:17that they're not at a point where the

53:20community is behind it where there is no

53:23fundraising to be shown for it. This

53:26board could make the decision that we

53:28have done everything we could possibly

53:30do right and it's just not going to work

53:34>> now. I am more optimistic that it will,

53:38but

53:39we leave that on the table and that's

53:41and that's the beauty of of of the

53:43compromise that the mayor was talking

53:45about.

53:45>> Okay.

53:46>> Uh Alderman Johnson,

53:48>> thank you very much. Um maybe I can ask

53:51a question to you. Um, vice president,

53:55when the um the performing arts center

53:58was put on the ballot, we were told that

54:01nothing was going to be done until we

54:03raised x amount of dollars. How much

54:06money did we actually raise towards a

54:08performing arts center before we

54:10started? I believe with all this

54:12bonding, did we ever raise any money,

54:14any funding, any not, you know,

54:17>> to my to my knowledge, we raised four

54:19million, but I

54:20>> we raised four million.

54:22I believe so. I can have director

54:24Cummings correct me if that's

54:27>> more than four million.

54:28>> More than okay.

54:29>> It's raised more than $4 million.

54:31>> Okay. Because I just want to make sure

54:33that you know I think this is a

54:35worthwhile building to save because it's

54:38got history behind it. But I can't on

54:41the other hand as we see all this

54:43bonding coming through and there's a lot

54:45I think people going to fall over when

54:48they hear all of this that's coming

54:49through that even if it's in the future

54:52we have to be very cautious because

54:55we're bonding for the future of my

54:59grandchildren you know 20 years from now

55:01I don't want to leave them all this debt

55:03and I want is bonding always the right

55:05way but I also have concerns that if you

55:08hire a consulting company, they're going

55:10to take a percentage of the fundraising

55:13and what is going to be the percentage

55:15that they're going to take that you're

55:16not going to get for towards the

55:19fundraising. And I just do have a little

55:21bit of concerns here. I you know and I

55:23really would like to see a full plan

55:26laid out as you're getting further into

55:27this

55:28>> so I can make a decision a reasonable

55:32decision to see is this really going to

55:34work for the city because I don't want

55:36to hear that we're going to raise you

55:37know we're figuring raising

55:40>> 15 million but we only come back with

55:41five and then that's a lot of money that

55:44the city's going to have to make up and

55:45I'm not into these tiffs very much so

55:48thank you

55:49>> uh director would you I mean Cummings.

55:53>> Director Cummings, would you like to

55:54respond?

55:54>> I I would. That's a great segue to uh my

55:57slide deck. So, if we could

55:59>> possibly switch and then I can actually

56:03address uh Alderman uh Johnson's

56:05comments.

56:07>> Um Yep, there you go. Um because the

56:10point is well taken. I think before this

56:13conversation continues, we really need

56:15to have a better defined financing plan

56:18and and tiff uh developed and put before

56:21you. so you can actually understand what

56:23we're talking about in those details.

56:24But this is this is the continuation of

56:27a conversation. And what I would

56:28anticipate is upcoming legislation to be

56:31laid before you that would have some of

56:32these details thought out. Um and so um

56:36one of the things that I just want to

56:37note is, and I'm going to say this for

56:39conversation purposes, we would need to

56:41designate LMG as the preferred

56:44developer. Why? Because they are

56:46providing the most density in their

56:48proposal. This is subject to

56:50conversation. Well, it's 215 market rate

56:53units, 22 town houses, 59 uh affordable

56:58housing units. Um we would and I and we

57:01would create a tiff at the onset. We

57:04would create an ETF to capture any

57:07monies that come in. As I alluded to,

57:09we're talking about a financing plan.

57:11This financing plan could have grants,

57:13could have tax credits, uh could could

57:16have fundraising, all kind of associated

57:18towards what we believe and what I

57:21should say uh affirmatively is the tiff

57:24could cover somewhere between 15 and 20

57:26million and that is basically option

57:29one. Anything higher of an option

57:32wouldn't necessarily be uh covered

57:35completely by the tiff as uh as

57:39explained earlier. a higher option we

57:42would need to know a higher dollar

57:43amount option we would need to know to

57:45possibly look at reconfiguring how this

57:48tiff gets set up. So that's one of the

57:50reasons why I wanted to start I wanted

57:52to continue this conversation because

57:54it's a little bit of an iterative type

57:55type process. I'll also note some of

57:57these numbers that we are bantering

57:59around. We have not started design yet.

58:02So you know I would to the mayor said it

58:04at the start of the conversation tonight

58:05these numbers are only going to go up

58:07but that's okay. we understand that this

58:10isn't the first time we've done building

58:11projects. We just need to know that

58:13we're in that type of mindset. Um and

58:16then again we would have to begin

58:18negotiating

58:19uh the the purchase and sale of the land

58:22disposition agreement and we would

58:23predicated all of the work that was done

58:25by the KEF auditorium commission um in

58:28terms of making sure uh whatever

58:31development comes forward fits the

58:34constraints uh that that that's laid

58:37before us relative to the preserving of

58:39of the ke uh audi auditorium. I'll close

58:44my comments by saying um there's going

58:47to be some real tradeoffs here along the

58:50way. So having a good dialogue to

58:52understand what is acceptable and what

58:55is not acceptable is going to be

58:56crucially important.

58:58Um Alderman uh Sullivan raised this

59:00question just a few seconds ago and I

59:02think it's worth kind of noting a little

59:04bit more. Um

59:07phase two and phase three outlined in

59:09the slides could be combined together.

59:12Right now it's thought of to being

59:14separate, but that means the design

59:16would start much later. That's okay. But

59:19that just delays the project. One of the

59:21things that um we may want to do is fund

59:26a little bit of that design upfront so

59:29we can help with fundraising. These are

59:31some of the nuances. So of course that

59:33means there wouldn't be quote unquote

59:34zero dollars spent. That may be private

59:37fundraising that comes in. That may be

59:39grants that come in. But we really need

59:41to kind of understand that maybe that's

59:42some of TIF money coming in. We don't

59:45know. But we need to kind of have these

59:46conversations to be able to keep moving

59:48this compromise forward. As the mayor

59:50said at the start of this uh

59:52conversation this evening, this was our

59:54attempt to align the dials to unlock the

59:56potential of this 9 acres. We know we

59:59need housing uh in this city. We can

1:00:02gain a couple hundred units if we start

1:00:04moving this project forward. And

1:00:05essentially that's what we're looking to

1:00:07do here by offering this uh this

1:00:09solution up before you. Thank you.

1:00:11>> Y Alderman Johnson, you can continue.

1:00:14>> Thank you. Um some questions to director

1:00:17Cummings.

1:00:19>> Um

1:00:19>> y

1:00:22>> LMG, which firm was that? Was that the

1:00:24one that they didn't preserve Elk

1:00:26Street?

1:00:27>> Correct. So there was essentially two

1:00:29proposals. One proposal M LMG was to

1:00:31level the site. The other proposal was

1:00:33Pen Rose and they preserved uh the

1:00:35middle school.

1:00:36>> So was that the board that chose LMG?

1:00:39>> I'm sorry.

1:00:40>> Did the board choose LMG or

1:00:42>> The board has not chosen anything yet.

1:00:44And and what I'm suggesting to you is to

1:00:46make this work. Um LMG because of the

1:00:49amount of density is the uh is what

1:00:52would need to be selected as the

1:00:53preferred developer. that this would all

1:00:54be legislation that would come before

1:00:56you that you would need to vote on

1:00:58before we could even proceed in entering

1:01:00into any type of uh contracts.

1:01:03>> Okay. So you the board hasn't chosen a

1:01:06developer. So it's going to come before

1:01:07us to choose LMG. So we're not going to

1:01:10really have the choice. You're going to

1:01:11tell us basically who to choose. Almost

1:01:14>> the legis the legislation's going to be

1:01:15written as LMG is the preferred.

1:01:18>> So you're Yeah. So you're going to tell

1:01:19us who we should choose. Um, so let's

1:01:22just call it the way it is. Um, and on

1:01:26the design when you have to start the

1:01:28design phase. So I'm sure that's going

1:01:30to be a couple million bucks, right?

1:01:33>> Because it always comes in a couple

1:01:35million dollars for the design phase,

1:01:37doesn't it?

1:01:37>> Well, which project are we talking

1:01:39about? Option one or option 2, 2 A, 2B?

1:01:42I mean, essentially to your point

1:01:43though, yes, I think you should could

1:01:45say soft costs are going to be a, you

1:01:48know, a couple million dollars. That

1:01:50doesn't necessarily mean that you need

1:01:52to design the project completely. But

1:01:55yes, there's going to need to be someone

1:01:57just a simple design, just clean it up

1:01:59and just get it open to to have people

1:02:02use it. You know, do we have the

1:02:04performing arts center?

1:02:07Do we need another center that's going

1:02:10to have all the bells and whistles? Not

1:02:12unless we're going to try to get big

1:02:13performers in there. You know, I I guess

1:02:16that's the question that has to be

1:02:18asked. Are we what are we designing

1:02:20here? Do we want to preserve this

1:02:23building and use it for like the girls

1:02:25to have competition out there and things

1:02:27like that or are we looking to have

1:02:29another performing arts center in the

1:02:31middle of a neighborhood

1:02:33that we're going to redesign? So, I

1:02:36mean, I keep hearing all this and you

1:02:39know, some of my colleagues might think

1:02:40that this I'm crazy on what I'm saying

1:02:42here, but I mean, this is something that

1:02:44you have to really think about because

1:02:46here's a whole neighborhood and you're

1:02:48going to put an auditorium around this

1:02:50neighborhood, but you already spent how

1:02:53many millions of dollars on the

1:02:54performing arts center that we don't use

1:02:57as much and it's smaller, the performing

1:02:59arts center, than this is going to be.

1:03:01So, I mean, so are we going to make the

1:03:03performing art center maybe a lesser one

1:03:06and we're going to use this for all the

1:03:07big performances? I I

1:03:09>> I I'm just kind of blown. So,

1:03:12>> you know, I may I guess I I don't have

1:03:14words to say on this note because this

1:03:16gets to be ridiculous now.

1:03:18>> If I may, Mr. Vice President, um

1:03:21>> there's a lot to unpack with those

1:03:23comments. Um

1:03:24>> no, there is. Uh I think first I should

1:03:26say that there already is uh the Keefe

1:03:29auditorium there. So it's not like we're

1:03:31putting anything in the middle of a

1:03:33neighborhood. What we're talking about

1:03:34is preserving

1:03:35>> a neighborhood around that though.

1:03:36>> And and certainly we are trying to put a

1:03:38neighborhood around that. Um but that

1:03:40that is the thought process. Two thought

1:03:42process is is to try to keep uh this

1:03:45project as self-contained as possible.

1:03:47So, we're having this TIFF created in a

1:03:50way to support the KE Auditorium uh

1:03:54renovation. So, it uh it

1:03:57uses the future tax dollars for a

1:04:00community amenity which if the community

1:04:02so desires to preserve, we've created a

1:04:05solution for that. I think that this is

1:04:07a good solution that unlocks the

1:04:10compromise and potential of the 9-ish

1:04:12acres for housing development.

1:04:15Um it is um something that we will

1:04:19continue to work on. It's iterative and

1:04:21and I do think we're going to need to

1:04:23spend some money up front to be able to

1:04:26move this project along. But I I know

1:04:28Dennis and his team are committed to to

1:04:30to to being part of that solution. And

1:04:33so we'll have some of these details

1:04:35worked out with you for you for for the

1:04:37legislation as as it gets um put

1:04:40together and and essentially laid before

1:04:42you in the next couple next couple of

1:04:44weeks.

1:04:46>> Okay. I saw uh Alderman Dow.

1:04:49>> Yeah. First of all, the the KEF

1:04:52auditorium group has done a lot of work

1:04:55um as you can see by the presentation

1:04:58and what they hear tonight is asking

1:05:03should they continue to to develop this

1:05:05plan. They're not asking for any money

1:05:08right now. Then they want to go and

1:05:10develop the detailed plan before they

1:05:13come back and ask us anything else. So,

1:05:18um,

1:05:20this is not to have shows that perform

1:05:24at the performing arts center. I've

1:05:26listened to the three people that were

1:05:28mentioned in the presentation that are

1:05:30developers that uh of bigger theaters

1:05:34and the groups that they would have come

1:05:36in to eventually into this Keefe

1:05:41auditorium would be groups that would

1:05:44detract significant people from

1:05:46Nashville and the surrounding area then

1:05:48not groups that would go into the

1:05:49performing arts center. they're larger

1:05:52and they need bigger audiences and and

1:05:55have higher entertainment value. Um,

1:05:59so the other thing is as was mentioned

1:06:02by the mayor and I've had discussions

1:06:04with him, you know, we have this housing

1:06:07need.

1:06:09We we have to make a decision on the

1:06:11housing as well and and we need to get

1:06:16the housing going because

1:06:18if we suggest when we select the

1:06:22developer

1:06:23it it's not like the shovel in the

1:06:25ground the next day.

1:06:28Um I've been involved with a lot of

1:06:29construction projects. You're at least

1:06:31two years out. You have to have first of

1:06:34all you have to go through all the

1:06:35negotiations

1:06:37associated with getting them on board.

1:06:40Then you get a conceptual design which

1:06:43will have to go through numerous reviews

1:06:45including this board. Once the

1:06:47conceptual design is is formalized then

1:06:51you go into um uh a second set of

1:06:55drawings that go out and get priced and

1:06:58that gets modifications and that takes

1:07:00time. before you de develop construction

1:07:04drawings, which you need before you

1:07:06start putting a shovel in the ground.

1:07:10That's at least two years. There's no

1:07:12way you can shorten that. Um, and in

1:07:16fact, it could lengthen. So, you've got

1:07:18time for the Keefe group to continue

1:07:22their work and come up with with a more

1:07:24detailed plan and a to come up with a

1:07:27see if they have a solution that we'll

1:07:29agree to.

1:07:31But right now, tonight, they're asking

1:07:33us, should they continue?

1:07:35And I think they should.

1:07:37Um, and

1:07:40you know, the the optimism of those big

1:07:43developers that say, "Yes, I think this

1:07:45will work is what convinced me to go

1:07:48forth with this." Um, they've had huge

1:07:51success with other venues.

1:07:54The Capitol Theater in Manchester has

1:07:57has added so much to the downtown as far

1:07:59as businesses and and restaurants and

1:08:03and bringing people into town that and

1:08:07they're book solid and they have youth

1:08:10groups that are associated with that as

1:08:12well.

1:08:14So

1:08:16I think we should say yes, go ahead,

1:08:19continue your work and as it gets more

1:08:22refined, you can come back to us and

1:08:24talk to us again

1:08:26to see if all of these things will work

1:08:28and how much money the city wants to

1:08:32spend to keep it. Uh

1:08:36they are correct. If if you had to build

1:08:38a facility that size

1:08:41today, you're talking I think I heard a

1:08:44number of aundred million. It's probably

1:08:46more than that.

1:08:48So, you know, uh it cost 10 million to

1:08:51build a fire station. So, you know, it

1:08:56it's and this is a venue that has been

1:09:01around for a long time, the city of

1:09:02Nashville.

1:09:04Uh I was conservatively estimating if

1:09:06you had 500 students a year over the

1:09:08last h 100red years, how many people

1:09:11have an interest in that auditorium?

1:09:14A lot. So let's see. Let's give them the

1:09:18opportunity to proceed and see where

1:09:21they come back.

1:09:23I saw Alderman Kleenex.

1:09:25>> Uh thank you u Mr. Vice Chair. Um I'm

1:09:28sorry, Vice President. Um I I have a

1:09:30couple comments and I don't know so much

1:09:32about having questions, but um the one

1:09:35thing that I did learn from the um

1:09:37performing arts which I think we raised

1:09:39over $6 million. I think it was like

1:09:42$6.5 million. Um um and you know, it

1:09:46wasn't always someone writing a check.

1:09:47You know, there were grants. There were

1:09:48different things that that kind of came

1:09:50through. But putting that aside, um the

1:09:53one thing that I did learn more than

1:09:54anything was you can't really do

1:09:56fundraising until you have a design.

1:10:00Uh whether it be a full-fledged complete

1:10:03design or you have a design because no

1:10:05one's going to hand you over $50,000,

1:10:08$100,000, or even a million dollars

1:10:11unless they know what you're going to

1:10:13have there. So, for us to put our head

1:10:16in the sand and say we're not going to

1:10:18put any money up front um for this,

1:10:21whether it be $2 million or or so on, is

1:10:24just saying let's not have the project

1:10:26because you have to have a design. I'm

1:10:27not writing a check to someone until I

1:10:29know what it's going to look like um or

1:10:32what the plan is, what the operating

1:10:33plan is, and so on. And I think they've

1:10:35been working really hard for that. Um,

1:10:38the thing that I liked about the LMG

1:10:40plan over the other plan was that it

1:10:43created a community that brought the

1:10:46outside community into this community by

1:10:49having a little storefronts, having a

1:10:51little park, so on. It brought people

1:10:53into the community. And it's not just

1:10:56low-income housing. Um, it's saying,

1:10:58"Let's kind of uh build up. I would like

1:11:01to have seen more affordable housing."

1:11:02Um, but I like the idea of the town

1:11:04houses around it kind of creates um

1:11:07almost a fence line on it. But in the

1:11:10very beginning, this was referred to as

1:11:11a compromise. And I think it is a

1:11:13compromise. I'm not big on creating more

1:11:16tiffs. I will I will be right upfront

1:11:19with that. You know, um, Director

1:11:21Cummings is smiling because he's heard

1:11:22me say this over and over again. Enough

1:11:24with the tiffs. But they do I you know,

1:11:27I've I've gone in and I've started

1:11:28looking more and more communities that

1:11:30are doing this and they do serve a

1:11:31purpose. It helps to build up certain

1:11:33areas of your of your city or your town

1:11:36or or whatever. And more and more

1:11:38communities within New Hampshire are

1:11:40starting to use them more. I didn't like

1:11:43TIFFs because I do feel like it does

1:11:44kind of divert monies um from the

1:11:47general fund into a um earmarked fund

1:11:50for lack of a better term. Um so I I

1:11:53will be very honest about that. But we

1:11:55need to admit here if we say no to this,

1:11:58the KEF is gone. we can't decide in

1:12:01three years, oh, we could have done this

1:12:03or we could have done that because it's

1:12:04gone. So, it this is a oneshot deal. And

1:12:08the fact that we don't other than the

1:12:10design money, um, we're not committing

1:12:12to anything until we see a plan by the

1:12:15KE commission and so on. And your three

1:12:18experts that you brought up, I know I do

1:12:20not know Troy, but I I do know the

1:12:22others. Um, and I worked very closely

1:12:25with Mr. Ramsey when we were developing

1:12:27ours. I I went there. there. I had

1:12:28meetings with them. I went to the um um

1:12:32con um yeah conquered as well, the

1:12:34capital center there in conquered.

1:12:36>> And the one thing that I I learned

1:12:38through all that was each of them were

1:12:40developing other theaters that were kind

1:12:44of offshoots of this. And yes, we have

1:12:46the um the Streeter Theater, but that's

1:12:50a small community. They they built other

1:12:52ones. The Capital Center actually built

1:12:54a little theater um cafe. I think they

1:12:56call it the spotlight cafe within their

1:12:58own theater. So the idea that you're

1:13:01going to be able to bring in different

1:13:02groups, different sizes, different

1:13:04people, that's exactly what these

1:13:06communities have done. Portsmith has

1:13:07done it, Manchester has done it,

1:13:08conquered has done it. So we would not

1:13:10be unique in this. We're not reinventing

1:13:12the wheel or um something to that to

1:13:15that nature. Um

1:13:17so I will leave it at that and I don't

1:13:19feel like the LMG is being thrown down

1:13:22our throats because we can always say

1:13:24no. So just because that's brought to

1:13:26us, the board still has the right to

1:13:28say, "Nope, we don't like this and we're

1:13:30going to vote it down." Um, so nothing

1:13:32is a done deal. I personally do like the

1:13:35LMG plan and I've liked it from the

1:13:37beginning. Thank you, Mr. Vice

1:13:39President.

1:13:39>> I saw Alderman Morgan next.

1:13:41>> Um, thank you.

1:13:44>> I really appreciate the work in the

1:13:46intense detail and more specifically the

1:13:49um experts that you that you did have

1:13:52come in. um they all deserve a lot of

1:13:55respect for uh their expertise and what

1:13:58they have built over their life. Um

1:14:01here's what I didn't see.

1:14:03I didn't see a market analysis. I didn't

1:14:06see a letter of interest from a

1:14:08commercial, let's say like Spectacle

1:14:11Live for example, something like that.

1:14:14Um or even what their thought was on

1:14:17whether or not that this is something

1:14:18that this area could sustain. Um, I

1:14:21didn't see a letter of interest from a

1:14:24nonprofit. Our arts organizations, I'm

1:14:27sure you know, are under significant

1:14:30financial strain. Um, the state reduced

1:14:32their budget to $1.

1:14:35>> And so, I don't know of an arts

1:14:38organization currently that could wait

1:14:41three years to not pay an executive

1:14:44director to run a facility like you had

1:14:46mentioned, Mr. Ramsey did um or even be

1:14:49able to take on the amount of additional

1:14:52overhead it would take before they

1:14:53started to to be profitable. Um with

1:14:57that being said, the priority I don't

1:15:00like nostalgia for nostalgia's sake. I

1:15:03think that um that's that's a museum and

1:15:07that's not what we want this to be. So

1:15:10it has to pencil. It has to make sense

1:15:12for the developer. It has to make sense

1:15:15for the city and for our constituents.

1:15:18Uh has

1:15:20LMG or the other developer, what are

1:15:23their opinions on it on this facility?

1:15:32>> Generically, both groups like the

1:15:35facility. They understood when the RFP

1:15:37was issued that preserving this facility

1:15:39was a priority for the community.

1:15:43We have not had any direct engagement

1:15:45yet uh because we really wanted to get

1:15:47past this conversation. I think um

1:15:51Alderman Dow mentioned it a second ago.

1:15:54Once we understand if this is something

1:15:56of interest, we would have an obligation

1:15:58to forward this information along and

1:16:01then the concept plan would get revised

1:16:04and then and we would need to evaluate

1:16:07that and see where we are and that would

1:16:10be the very next step of the process.

1:16:12Everyone to date has been very open

1:16:15about the idea of preserving uh the

1:16:18Keith.

1:16:21>> Okay, let me be more specific. I didn't

1:16:24ask if they liked it or didn't like it.

1:16:26I asked what they thought about it. Now,

1:16:28they're in the they're in the role to

1:16:30make money obviously, or else they're

1:16:31not going to offer to develop this

1:16:33property.

1:16:35saving this facility, does that prevent

1:16:39them

1:16:41from being able to develop the way that

1:16:43they need to?

1:16:44>> If I may,

1:16:45>> you may.

1:16:46>> Yeah, thank you. Uh, the answer to that

1:16:47very simply is no. If I'm going to be

1:16:49very cynical about this, all of them,

1:16:52and any wise developer would look at

1:16:54this in a phased approach and say phase

1:16:56one is going to be seven acres. How do I

1:16:58get when when I do get the other two

1:17:00acres because the what the city wants to

1:17:02do fails,

1:17:04>> we can then move forward with phase two

1:17:06with the other two acres. I think every

1:17:09developer has that in the back of their

1:17:10mind.

1:17:11>> One more followup. Sorry I didn't ask

1:17:12before if I may. Um okay, so let's

1:17:17devil's advocate. Let's say that that's

1:17:18the case.

1:17:21it. This board has made it crystal clear

1:17:22our number one priority is housing and

1:17:24housing as quickly as we can.

1:17:27So, how do we move forward with that as

1:17:30our number one priority while you know

1:17:34the the eyes are being dotted and tees

1:17:35are crossed on this?

1:17:38>> Go ahead.

1:17:39>> Thank you. This body needs to come to

1:17:41consensus on what it is that they can

1:17:43get a majority vote on to be able to

1:17:45move forward. Once that direction is

1:17:47given to staff, we can proceed. But we

1:17:50are in a holding pattern. We were

1:17:52understandably in a holding pattern

1:17:54because we got direction from this body

1:17:57a year, a little less than a year ago

1:17:59that that it was really uh uh a the KEF

1:18:03auditorium was a community asset that

1:18:05needed to be further studied and

1:18:07understood before there was a comfort

1:18:09level in proceeding with the disposition

1:18:11of the 9 acres. We've done that work

1:18:13now. So that's why we're here. Once we

1:18:16hear from you what the consensus is,

1:18:18we'll be able to move forward and and

1:18:20move forward as quickly as possible.

1:18:25>> Yes, Mr. Schneider.

1:18:26>> So, let me respond to some of the things

1:18:27you didn't see. First of all, uh, at

1:18:31this stage,

1:18:34we we work backwards in building our

1:18:37plan to say that the facility when we're

1:18:40done needs to operate on a rational

1:18:43self-funding level, whether it's run by

1:18:46a commercial contractor. Uh, and

1:18:49commercial contractors have said they

1:18:52would be interested. And by the way,

1:18:53there was interest back when KEF was

1:18:55part of a school possibly doing that.

1:18:57So, I don't know that there'd be an

1:18:58issue with that part of it. But

1:19:00moreover, this model of doing a a a

1:19:02community nonprofit is not that some

1:19:04nonprofit thing that's existing would

1:19:07somehow take over and operate this. Uh

1:19:10those structures aren't out there.

1:19:13Theaters don't run that way. And so,

1:19:15what we would need to do is build such a

1:19:17thing. The same way that the Palace

1:19:19Trust built the Palace team, the same

1:19:21way that the Cap Center did what they

1:19:23did, and the same way that Worester did

1:19:25what they did. And it starts

1:19:26fundamentally from a a small team that

1:19:29constructs it on a volunteer basis and

1:19:32then builds a plan to go beyond that. Uh

1:19:35that's all a whole bunch of work with a

1:19:37whole bunch of people who have to go get

1:19:38committed to it. And without some sense

1:19:41that this is something that's worth the

1:19:44energy from this board, uh it's hard for

1:19:46me to go, well, okay, let's dive right

1:19:49into it. Uh, so to respond to you, all

1:19:53of the things you asked for are frankly

1:19:55relatively easy to get. I'm also a life

1:19:57member of actor singers and a former

1:19:58board member, so I have a sense of what

1:20:00they would want to do. Uh, I've talked

1:20:02with the the symphony and people like

1:20:04that and I have a sense what they would

1:20:05want to do. Now, it's a chicken or the

1:20:07egg problem. Okay, when can we do what

1:20:10for whom becomes a problem? And as we

1:20:12talked earlier, there's the transition

1:20:13period that has to get managed. And

1:20:15frankly, that's more of their concern

1:20:18right now because they need to know what

1:20:20what they can plan on because they plan

1:20:22two and a half seasons ahead. And so

1:20:24part of it is getting some stable ground

1:20:27that we can all stand on and move

1:20:28forward. And by the way, the answer may

1:20:30be there's not going to be stable ground

1:20:31and that's okay. We just need to know.

1:20:34So, you know, in in the broader sense,

1:20:36by the way, the other piece about having

1:20:37a plan, the Keith exists. You can take

1:20:40pictures of the facade. You can go

1:20:42inside of it. You can look around. It's

1:20:44relatively easy to talk about and see

1:20:46where you might go, what where it might

1:20:47be. To get a architect's concept of what

1:20:50the front would be with a lobby is

1:20:52relatively straightforward. It's not

1:20:54millions of dollars. If you want the

1:20:55detailed plan of where the toilets are

1:20:57going, that's another story. But the

1:20:59pack was a shoe store. And so, you know,

1:21:03so it's a whole different world. And by

1:21:04the way, one of the things I've learned

1:21:06in this process in looking at these

1:21:07things is guess what the most expensive

1:21:10public works project is to build. It's

1:21:14an art center. That's why it's 100

1:21:15million bucks. It's the most per square

1:21:17foot. And so part of what we're getting

1:21:19here is our ability to minimize it. The

1:21:21final comment I would make is I can't

1:21:23overemphasize the the opportunity to

1:21:25phase this in implementation. So we may

1:21:29want the $35 million option, but we

1:21:32can't afford it. How do we move

1:21:35initially with something I'm dreaming

1:21:37this up at $20 million where the raise

1:21:40is rather small and then phase from here

1:21:43to there. And one of the things that the

1:21:45team of brilliant people in in

1:21:47construction we have on the commission

1:21:48can help do is build that phased plan

1:21:50and price it out so we don't have to

1:21:52raise if we want the $35 million thing.

1:21:55It doesn't come in one swell. Now,

1:21:57frankly, conquered is on its fourth

1:22:00capital raise. You go up there, it

1:22:02started as a pretty small theater in the

1:22:04middle of a residential area. The palace

1:22:06is on its sixth capital campaign and it

1:22:09started as a rundown theater in the

1:22:11middle of a mixed residential retail

1:22:13site. And so these things all take time.

1:22:16>> We're trying to build a plan that lets

1:22:18the city minimize its risk, but also see

1:22:20that the result is this level of

1:22:22utilization, this level of of support,

1:22:24and the fundraising to go with it has to

1:22:26be part of that endgame.

1:22:30Thank you. Uh, next I had Alderman

1:22:33Lopez.

1:22:34>> Um, so to Director Cummings, um, it was

1:22:38my my recollection or understanding of

1:22:41the meetings that we had with the two

1:22:43presentations that we had been pretty

1:22:45consistent that we wanted a plan to

1:22:47include the KEF. Um, I don't recall

1:22:50whether we put the legislation requiring

1:22:52that before or after, but I thought it

1:22:53was before. So it was my impression that

1:22:56we were clear in that meeting that we

1:22:58were expecting followup on those

1:22:59proposals

1:23:01including the kef as as present. It

1:23:03sounds like you're presenting tonight

1:23:05that you have not done that and you are

1:23:09saying that that's because we didn't

1:23:11give you clear direction.

1:23:13So you did advocate for one of the

1:23:15proposals but am I correct that you have

1:23:18not given the other housing proposal any

1:23:22any chance to redesign their thing come

1:23:25up with a new proposal

1:23:26>> if if if I may mad chair thank you so um

1:23:32haven't spoken to either development yet

1:23:34either propos either proposals yet what

1:23:37we did do was to your point make it

1:23:39explicitly clear to everyone that

1:23:41preserving the

1:23:43was absolutely a priority and every

1:23:46proposer knows that. What they didn't

1:23:48know until more recently, and this needs

1:23:52to be communicated, is basically the

1:23:54line, the golden line that you saw a

1:23:57couple slides ago uh under uh uh Mr.

1:24:00Schneider's presentation. Basically that

1:24:03box is what we would want to give um the

1:24:08um selected developer to re de

1:24:12reconceptualize

1:24:13their proposal to ensure everything

1:24:15still works and no matter who is

1:24:17selected that would have to occur. I

1:24:19would then suggest that there would be a

1:24:22couple other iterations after that as

1:24:24well ultimately before we got to a final

1:24:28product that you would all would have to

1:24:29approve as part of the uh development

1:24:32agreement.

1:24:33>> Can I follow up?

1:24:34>> Yes.

1:24:36So, would I be fair in interpreting

1:24:39what's happened tonight as you didn't

1:24:41tell either of the developers that you'd

1:24:44be endorsing

1:24:47Melbourne MLG like tonight as the

1:24:50preferred option based on their numbers

1:24:52and so maybe one of them didn't have a

1:24:54chance to modify their presentation at

1:24:55all.

1:24:56Neither one of them have had an

1:24:58opportunity to modify any presentation.

1:25:00Neither developer was notified by

1:25:02>> one of them was the one that was found

1:25:04suitable by your your department and was

1:25:06presented to us that way.

1:25:07>> And I explained that was only because of

1:25:08the number of density that was provided

1:25:12to help make the tiff numbers work.

1:25:14>> That's why

1:25:15>> so it's a math problem

1:25:16>> because because it's a math problem that

1:25:19we're trying to solve.

1:25:21and and so I just I and and there's

1:25:23going to be many issues like this that

1:25:25we're going to need to work through to

1:25:27be able to have a successful uh

1:25:30community vision for this area

1:25:33preserving the KEF. The other one is

1:25:36limiting the amount of green space. I

1:25:38have heard over the years there's

1:25:41affection for preserving some green

1:25:42space. There's some appetite to develop

1:25:45on some of the green space. I think to

1:25:47be able to move forward, you need to

1:25:49understand that the more density that

1:25:52you have on the site, the easier it will

1:25:55be to preserve the KEF auditorium. And

1:25:58that's ultimately the message that I'm

1:26:00trying to convey.

1:26:02>> Everything is a trade-off.

1:26:04>> May I respond?

1:26:05>> Yes.

1:26:06>> So, the density is understood. And as

1:26:08alderman, I am very much aware as

1:26:12alderman of ward four of the the

1:26:14neighborhood you're talking about of the

1:26:15housing crisis that has been presented

1:26:17and is experienced by many. And I'm also

1:26:19very much aware that the housing crisis

1:26:21as we call it is experienced very

1:26:24differently by many. So the needs of

1:26:26people who are elderly and may need to

1:26:28phase down but want to stay in the town

1:26:30that they have spent their lives in

1:26:32suddenly find it unaffordable on a fixed

1:26:34income with depreciating you know

1:26:37assets. People on a uh a fixed income

1:26:40because of medical issues or mental

1:26:41health issues or you know stipens any

1:26:44any number of of combinations also have

1:26:48different challenges and needs. And

1:26:50finally, we have people who are young

1:26:52professionals and they like to move to

1:26:54Nasha so they can work for a large

1:26:56corporation, so that they can experience

1:26:57the amenities that we we present. That's

1:27:00a it's a crisis for them because they

1:27:01can't move out of where they are now to

1:27:04over here. But all of those different

1:27:06crises bring different people with

1:27:07different resources. And I find that

1:27:10over the years we've used housing as and

1:27:12particularly density as the

1:27:14justification for a lot of programs

1:27:16where it's a bait and switch in my

1:27:18opinion. We say we need density. We need

1:27:19to get housing units. We need to do

1:27:21these kind of things without any

1:27:22consideration for what it does to the

1:27:24neighborhood. We had a public housing

1:27:26program that was renovated by by our

1:27:30housing authority because we needed

1:27:31density. And we were assured at the time

1:27:34that parking would be considered and

1:27:36accounted for. And not only is parking

1:27:38not accounted for in that housing

1:27:39program, but we're not willing to move

1:27:41forward with on-ree overnight parking to

1:27:43give the people who live there any

1:27:45option or to give the neighbors in the

1:27:47surrounding area who had nothing to do

1:27:48with any of this and have their own

1:27:49housing programs, have their own housing

1:27:52and houses and driveways some

1:27:54alternative to having their streets

1:27:56clogged with people who are just looking

1:27:58for a way to park nearby. So while it

1:28:01was commented earlier that we like the

1:28:02density, we like the community within

1:28:04the community and wrapping the community

1:28:06around the the housing center, any plan

1:28:08that moves forward that would get any

1:28:09support from me needs to really be clear

1:28:12as to what the density is relative to

1:28:14who the population is. Because if it's

1:28:16going to be aimed at a demographic that

1:28:18has two to three cars because they have

1:28:20adult or teenage children who need cars

1:28:22versus a population that's walkable,

1:28:24then we need parking that actually meets

1:28:26that rather than building it for density

1:28:28sake. using the money from the people

1:28:30who are forced to live there to pay a

1:28:32tiff and allow us to go to the theater,

1:28:35but then also doing nothing for the

1:28:36parking or the actual conditions that

1:28:39people are going to experience. Those

1:28:41are going to be my concerns. So, I hope

1:28:42you address those in those presentations

1:28:44if I may.

1:28:44>> So, so if I if I may, yeah, Alderman

1:28:47Lopez, that that will come up, I'm sure,

1:28:50when we discuss the legislation for who

1:28:53the preferred developer is. And also

1:28:56even beyond that, all of that's going to

1:28:58have to be negotiated later on down the

1:29:00road once we do choose a developer. So I

1:29:02I have confidence that that those

1:29:05conversations will happen and will

1:29:06continue.

1:29:08>> That's that's essentially what I was

1:29:09just going to say. We will we will I

1:29:10commit to you we will work through those

1:29:12issues are all great points that you've

1:29:14made. All all points that we have an

1:29:17obligation to work through and we will

1:29:19work through those issues. I

1:29:20particularly know that uh director

1:29:22Sullivan and his team um are very

1:29:25cognizant of of these of these issues

1:29:27and and will certainly be be in the

1:29:29front of his mind as we as we bring it

1:29:31through the various regulatory and

1:29:33approval process if we if we so decide

1:29:35to go down this path.

1:29:37>> I have one final thought.

1:29:38>> Yes.

1:29:39>> So my intention is not to throw down a

1:29:41gauntlet. It's to show you my cards so

1:29:42you know exactly what I'm looking for.

1:29:44So, as long as we have solutions for

1:29:46those things when the time comes, then I

1:29:48I would love a KEF auditorium, but I

1:29:50think the neighborhoods really need to

1:29:52be taken into consideration.

1:29:53>> Yeah.

1:29:54>> Yep. Hear you loud and clear. Thank you.

1:29:56>> All right. Next, I had Alderwoman Smith.

1:30:00>> Thank you. I'm going try and put mine

1:30:02into question form instead of um so one

1:30:06question I have has to do with the

1:30:08footprint. Um, and I'm concerned about

1:30:11us potentially losing space based on us

1:30:14trying to satisfy um, two needs. Um, one

1:30:19having to do with the historical

1:30:20preservation and sort of, you know, re

1:30:25reimagining or creating another option

1:30:28so that

1:30:30thus that the um, kef can be used by the

1:30:34community. and really would like to know

1:30:36um if there's been some thought to that

1:30:39like potentially could we lose some of

1:30:42the footprint for the performance part

1:30:45and and I asked this basically on beh

1:30:47not on behalf of them but I'm concerned

1:30:50that we don't have a home for our

1:30:51symphony and I would like to think that

1:30:53this has been the home and that that

1:30:55could continue uh and that's what we did

1:30:57not get from the National Center for the

1:31:00Arts. Um, and and that's a I would like

1:31:03for that to be a part of the vision that

1:31:05that there is a place and that we don't

1:31:08lose the footprint and that it's large

1:31:09enough to still to continue and maintain

1:31:12the not just the symphony but a larger

1:31:15place for graduations and things of this

1:31:18nature.

1:31:19>> Um, so is that part of this plan or is

1:31:22that another option that we haven't

1:31:23seen? No, I think it would be fair to

1:31:25say that option one essentially covers

1:31:28what you're what you're asking for. Um

1:31:31certainly the use and the optimization

1:31:34of the site will go up as we continue to

1:31:36invest in the site, but prioritizing the

1:31:39community groups uh here is is number

1:31:43one and that was in the forefront of

1:31:45Dennis's mind. This is why he's been

1:31:46such a huge advocate um over the years.

1:31:49Um certainly that's in the back of

1:31:51everyone's mind and wanting to ensure

1:31:53that we prioritize the homebased group

1:31:56so there is a venue for them.

1:32:00>> Question thank you. Um and then my

1:32:02follow-up question once again also

1:32:04thinking about our community. Um and I'm

1:32:07glad you pointed that out that that was

1:32:09an optional one because I wasn't seeing

1:32:10that. My concern is that um an

1:32:14independent well well an independent

1:32:17nonprofit might be the way to go. Um but

1:32:20I just want to make sure that the

1:32:22community is considered and that places

1:32:25like actor singers and etc are able to

1:32:28not only utilize the facility but

1:32:31perhaps be you know be given whatever

1:32:33discounts or whatever because it's the

1:32:36other places are not affordable. Uh and

1:32:38that's what I'm concerned also that you

1:32:40know there's the footprint and then

1:32:42that's doing something where the

1:32:43community is priced right out of

1:32:46location.

1:32:47>> So let me try to respond to so first of

1:32:49all I've been in practice since 1984

1:32:52>> and I've been on the board for five

1:32:53years so I know the the economic

1:32:55travails of operating a group that does

1:32:58six shows a year two of which are the

1:32:59largest shows in the area. Uh so the

1:33:03footprint question goes to that which is

1:33:06we need the footprint to be able to

1:33:07support productions of that scale.

1:33:09>> The operating model question goes to do

1:33:12we have to negotiate upfront. So when a

1:33:15commercial entity takes charge of a

1:33:17theater, the community would typically

1:33:20go and say but we need you to do this

1:33:22many weeks of this many things and so

1:33:23on. Because at the time the pack was

1:33:26studied, the study around moving to the

1:33:29McCarthy Middle School hadn't been

1:33:31completed. That study relied on both

1:33:33Keith and Court Street and never

1:33:35forecasted that this would happen. So

1:33:38let's assume for the moment that the end

1:33:39of the conversation is we can't uh

1:33:43there's going to have to be a very

1:33:44serious conversation about the pack and

1:33:45how it gets used. Uh and that's it has

1:33:48not been built into the conversation

1:33:50because the assumptions were that it

1:33:52didn't need to be. And in the transition

1:33:54period, we have exactly the same

1:33:55question, which is the cost for the the

1:33:59revenue loss for the pack is serious

1:34:01money every week. When it was a school,

1:34:05uh you know, basically it was an

1:34:06overhead item. Additional custodians,

1:34:08the building was already closed. So, I

1:34:10think we need to manage those business

1:34:12models with care.

1:34:13>> Uh I think that the operating model is

1:34:15easier to manage for it's not just the

1:34:19community groups like the symphony and

1:34:20actor singers. It's anybody that has.

1:34:22So, for example, dance recital.

1:34:24>> Okay. So, it's very difficult to run a

1:34:26dance recital at a place that has rental

1:34:27fees as high as the pack.

1:34:29>> But if there's no other place to go,

1:34:30they'll, for example, try to go

1:34:32somewhere else. But at the end of the

1:34:33day, uh we we house seven or eight dance

1:34:36recital every year for years and years

1:34:39uh in the city. And so, I think that all

1:34:41of those need space

1:34:42>> and our you know, having a a nonprofit

1:34:45whose real center is the community and

1:34:47they fill the hall for the purposes of

1:34:49paying the bills. uh with other

1:34:51performances. That's a very manageable

1:34:53balance. Uh and so you look at either

1:34:57the the pl the handover and Worester or

1:34:59the Palace uh they have large youth

1:35:02groups that

1:35:02>> that spend time. So I think that the

1:35:05operating model needs to be built so

1:35:07that it does that one way or the other

1:35:09and makes it makes it fiscally

1:35:12responsible to operate the building. So

1:35:14having it just be a couple of community

1:35:17groups isn't going to work. you're never

1:35:19going to cover the bills. So, where do

1:35:21you get the rest of it? And the rest of

1:35:23it are are booked performers. That

1:35:25requires a management structure and that

1:35:27can be managed either way. But I I

1:35:29absolutely agree with you. It's got to

1:35:30be part of part of the calculus.

1:35:33>> Thank you.

1:35:34>> All right. So, I have three more

1:35:36speakers and I do want to just be

1:35:37conscious of the time. It's 9:00 um and

1:35:40we do have the rest of the agenda to get

1:35:42through. So, um but I will call on the

1:35:45next uh person I had or alderman. It was

1:35:48Alderman KBO.

1:35:50>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, so

1:35:55um, you know,

1:35:58I think what I think some of the

1:36:00comments have been unfair to you guys. I

1:36:02I think, uh, Mr. Schneider has been

1:36:03doing a really good job trying to put

1:36:05this together. Nothing's set in stone.

1:36:06We can always say no to things. So, it's

1:36:09not there's no legislation in front of

1:36:11us that says we have to shut anything

1:36:12down. Um, the first thing is to get the

1:36:15housing before us. um you know, LMG is

1:36:18not being pushed on us. It's being

1:36:20pushed on us, but we don't have to

1:36:21accept it. Um and when we do get that

1:36:25legislation, whether or not we have to

1:36:27go forward with LMG, hopefully we'll

1:36:30have more of a plan vetted out for that

1:36:32proposal and then we can decide what we

1:36:34want to do on that. So, I don't think

1:36:35it's any bait and switch. I don't think

1:36:37we're trying to keep the key for whether

1:36:39it's nostalgia or historical purposes,

1:36:41although we keep things in the city for

1:36:42historical purposes all the time. I love

1:36:45keeping things for historical. I

1:36:46wouldn't do it for 15 16 million, right?

1:36:48It has to have some use. And I think um

1:36:52you know, I think you guys and I maybe

1:36:53director Cummings, you have to really

1:36:55put out like a an AI generated meme of

1:36:58the three types of theaters we have in

1:36:59the city and why this one is important

1:37:02is not the same thing. And we keep

1:37:03hearing it over and over again. We have

1:37:05the pack and we're going to hear this

1:37:06now for the next I

1:37:082032. We're going to hear this for the

1:37:10next seven years, right? We already have

1:37:11the pack. Pack doesn't have flyws. PAC

1:37:14doesn't have orchestra space. Pack

1:37:16doesn't put on things. A Christmas Carol

1:37:17doesn't come here and play for a week,

1:37:19right? We get Mr. Dickens has come

1:37:21before and done a couple nights. We

1:37:23don't have a whole pageant of a

1:37:25Christmas Carol come. Go to the Palace

1:37:26Theater that plays for a week, right?

1:37:28And you can go and get people can go

1:37:29different days and whatever. Um we don't

1:37:32have that at the pack. A a band or

1:37:34something usually comes for one night,

1:37:36they're gone. This does that. This this

1:37:38is the vision that Mr. Schneider has.

1:37:41And I know it's because we want to keep

1:37:43the keep doing the things the keep does

1:37:44well and add other things to it, right?

1:37:47We're looking for the symphony to be

1:37:49there. We're looking for actor singers

1:37:50to be there. We're looking for the

1:37:52things that are there now or were there

1:37:53before to still be there or to come

1:37:56back. That's the goal. It's not to to uh

1:37:58turn it into a pack-like facility.

1:38:01That's exactly not what we want it to

1:38:03be. Otherwise, as people have said, we

1:38:05have a pack, right? This is completely

1:38:07different. And it's different than Court

1:38:09Street cuz that's so much smaller and so

1:38:12much on a smaller level, right? So there

1:38:14is a need for it. There is a use for it.

1:38:16You had people that that do this stuff

1:38:18on this commission or on this that you

1:38:20talked to obviously they think it's

1:38:22viable or they would have told us you

1:38:23would not be coming forward to us,

1:38:24right? Um so I believe they believe it's

1:38:27viable. So I really do think uh you know

1:38:30we go forward. Nobody's spending any

1:38:33money yet. We're not doing anything yet.

1:38:35All that stuff's got to come through us.

1:38:37So we go forward, everybody looks into

1:38:39it. We start to look at the housing.

1:38:42Let's get that going. We need the

1:38:44affordable housing. We need density.

1:38:46We'll look at that. We can decide on

1:38:48that one way or the other. And if we

1:38:49decide to go forward, not go forward

1:38:51with that, that will determine what our

1:38:53next steps is with the this theater. So

1:38:55that that's that's my thoughts on it.

1:38:57>> Thank you. Uh Alderwoman Kelly.

1:39:03>> Thank you. Uh just a point of

1:39:06clarification, perhaps this question is

1:39:08for director Cummings,

1:39:10is the plan,

1:39:12if the board so directs you to do so, to

1:39:16go back to both developers and ask them

1:39:18to put this into their plan or could

1:39:21this be a separate bid that we put out

1:39:24for just the key?

1:39:29Uh

1:39:29>> Director Cummings.

1:39:35So that is a great question. Um, and I'm

1:39:39going to answer it two ways. I think

1:39:44my recommendation if you are someone who

1:39:47wants to preserve the KEE then the um

1:39:52knocking down of the um Elm Street

1:39:56Middle School and developing with new

1:39:57construction with the most density

1:40:00possible is the direction that will get

1:40:02you to preserving the KEF. If you are

1:40:06someone who wants to preserve the

1:40:08existing structure for whatever reason,

1:40:11you'll be limited on your density um

1:40:13that you can achieve and you won't be

1:40:15able to um maximize the density on site

1:40:20and therefore not be able to preserve

1:40:23the kee without a larger public subsidy.

1:40:27And so that is what you need to

1:40:29evaluate. My suggestion was trying is

1:40:31done was done in a way through a lens of

1:40:34trying to minimize any type of uh public

1:40:37subsidy trying to make it really a

1:40:39project specific tiff. Um and that's and

1:40:43that was what I was endeavoring to do.

1:40:46To conclude my comments, what I would

1:40:47say is there would be a piece of

1:40:49legislation that's going to be laid

1:40:50before you that that's going to be

1:40:52written to say uh LMG's the preferred

1:40:55developer and then I hope that this is

1:40:57the conversation that unfolds. Once that

1:41:00is adopted, then we can proceed with the

1:41:02tiff and the negotiations of everything

1:41:05that would follow suit based on the

1:41:07prior slide that that that that I had

1:41:09up. So everything is very s sequential

1:41:12but everything takes time and in the

1:41:14back of my mind I hear the community I

1:41:17hear this body in particular keep

1:41:19reminding me that housing is a priority.

1:41:21So you know inevitably the more process

1:41:25we put into place the longer it's going

1:41:27to take to get that housing. And as I

1:41:29said at the start of the conversation

1:41:31this evening everything is a tradeoff.

1:41:33Thank you.

1:41:34>> Alderwoman Kelly. Did you have any

1:41:36followup?

1:41:38>> No. Thank you.

1:41:39>> Okay. Next, I had uh Alderman Sullivan.

1:41:42>> Thank you. I'll be very brief.

1:41:46What's preventing us from taking the

1:41:49KEF, breaking it off, putting an RFQ out

1:41:52to a nonprofit that says, "Here you go.

1:41:56For the next 50 years, you get to lease

1:41:58this auditorium for a dollar a year.

1:42:02>> You raise all the money. You book it.

1:42:04Whatever you keep is yours, whatever you

1:42:06do." What's preventing us from doing

1:42:08that? Um, I'm sorry, but the answer is

1:42:10reality. Those those nonprofits do not

1:42:13exist. They're not out there. They're

1:42:14not out there waiting. This isn't a

1:42:16private equity conversation. Theaters,

1:42:19first of all, theaters survive on

1:42:21donations, fundraising, oes, and ticket

1:42:24prices, unless they're the wang. Uh,

1:42:26where, you know, but but at the end of

1:42:27the day, you know, I think we actually

1:42:30did put out an RFP at some point to have

1:42:32somebody come and do some stuff like

1:42:33that, and we got like crickets.

1:42:35>> And so, the reality here is those folks

1:42:36aren't out there. They don't exist.

1:42:37There aren't a whole lot of people who

1:42:39are going to invest their energy. It

1:42:41will be work to build our own structure.

1:42:43It will be less work to build a

1:42:45commercial capital contract, but the

1:42:48community part of it will have to be in

1:42:51in my mind far less central to the

1:42:53operation of the site. If it's turned to

1:42:56a corporate contract, still a viable

1:42:58option. They know they know what they're

1:43:00doing. Part of the viability answer is

1:43:02that's a backup. Worst worst that

1:43:04happens, we can contract it out. It'll

1:43:07it'll get paid for, it'll get handled,

1:43:08and it'll get booked. Community

1:43:10involvement will then be squeezed in as

1:43:12opposed to being central. That's a

1:43:14conversation about operating models. We

1:43:15haven't been we haven't brought forward

1:43:18yet. Conversations going, you're getting

1:43:19a little a little bit of it tonight. The

1:43:21reality here is there are not groups

1:43:22like that yearning to operate uh 1500

1:43:26seat theaters.

1:43:28>> Um

1:43:28>> Alderman,

1:43:29>> I have additional answer to that.

1:43:31>> Sure, Mayor. Um

1:43:34the reason we sort of have been

1:43:38um stuck is

1:43:41that the code, fire code and building

1:43:45code require that once the change of use

1:43:48occurs from school or what it what it is

1:43:52now to housing, once the construction

1:43:55begins, the KEF has to be brought up to

1:43:58code if it's going to remain open.

1:44:03code is, you know, code compliance is

1:44:07really plan number one,

1:44:09>> you know, new HVAC, all this bathrooms,

1:44:12all this other stuff. So,

1:44:15um, at first we were confronted because

1:44:19the fire department was saying, you

1:44:20know, they would give us no leeway.

1:44:23You got to do one of the, you know, you

1:44:25got to do it immediately.

1:44:27You got to bring it up to code

1:44:29immediately or tear it down.

1:44:32Um because they they've now decided that

1:44:35they could live with you know two or

1:44:38three years of simply holding the

1:44:41building

1:44:43uh without making code compliant

1:44:46without achieving code compliance

1:44:49while some plan is developed has enabled

1:44:53the approach we're suggesting to be

1:44:57considered. But um this the the the

1:45:00problem with just putting it out is well

1:45:02once the use change is we still have to

1:45:05you know in order to keep it operational

1:45:07we still have to um reach code

1:45:09compliance.

1:45:10>> Okay.

1:45:11>> Just to follow up on that.

1:45:13>> Yep. So if there is not an entity that

1:45:16exists for the for the full nut and

1:45:18operation of it, what is your confidence

1:45:21level based on how I understand the plan

1:45:24that there needs to be a nonprofit

1:45:25that's going to come in here raise 11 to

1:45:2916 million which would be double what we

1:45:32got for the pack

1:45:34uh based on what we've heard.

1:45:37What do you feel the the market is out

1:45:39there for that entity to to take that

1:45:42on? So the operating model first of all

1:45:45uh all of these things are grassroots

1:45:48activities. We are years from that that

1:45:50nonprofit needing to operate a theater.

1:45:53The fundraising part of it is the

1:45:55frankly the scariest part of it. Now the

1:45:57good news frankly is that you know you

1:45:59look around and things like charitable

1:46:00gaming is a good example. uh

1:46:02congressional earmarks, all of those

1:46:04things and and the grants that people ex

1:46:07the grants and funding sources that are

1:46:09accessible can I think raise quite a bit

1:46:11of that. Uh I mean Terrell Gaming is a

1:46:14brand new activity in the state.

1:46:16Actress, singers, theater guild, all

1:46:18these groups have gotten, you know,

1:46:19annual sixf figureure numbers. Well, you

1:46:21put a few six figure numbers together

1:46:23and you've got a million dollars of

1:46:25those things. And so I think that that

1:46:27there are places we didn't have back in

1:46:29looking at the pack days. And also I

1:46:31think that the the the pack had its own

1:46:34set of fundraising challenges. largely

1:46:37the downtown business group was was sort

1:46:39of p pulled into it with a consultant. I

1:46:42think this one is going to need a a a

1:46:46different structure. It certainly needs

1:46:47a a a separate entity just to hold the

1:46:50building and hold all of its stuff. I

1:46:52think the operating model is still the

1:46:54we would have to actually build that

1:46:56team. Uh and again part of why why we

1:46:59have people on that expert panel is

1:47:02they're they they're very willing to

1:47:04help us figure out how to build that

1:47:05team and recruit that team and they have

1:47:07deep rolodexes of people who might well

1:47:09want to do it.

1:47:10>> So I've given if we had to do it

1:47:12tomorrow my confidence level is not

1:47:14particularly great but we're talking

1:47:15about a couple of years like could be

1:47:18five or six years before they have to

1:47:19operate a theater or book a theater. My

1:47:21my confidence is pretty high. We have

1:47:22the right people. They know the

1:47:24geography. They know the market. They

1:47:26know this business and they have made it

1:47:27happen before.

1:47:28>> Okay. Thank you.

1:47:31>> Last but not least, Alderman Clay.

1:47:33>> Uh thank you. Um Mr. Vice uh President,

1:47:36I really appreciate the opportunity to

1:47:38speak. Um I just want to kind of make a

1:47:40comment about um parking. I'm on the

1:47:42planning board and one of the things

1:47:44that I think drives my colleagues on

1:47:46that is I'm always talking about

1:47:49parking, parking, parking. Um the hard

1:47:52thing is in high density areas like

1:47:54downtown and certain things um the state

1:47:56has said there's zero parking

1:47:59requirements which is the most

1:48:00frustrating thing in the world and now

1:48:02the state has come through and said only

1:48:03one parking space per unit is is

1:48:06basically what we can force people to

1:48:08do. I've learned from developers that um

1:48:12they can't make their business plan work

1:48:13unless they have x number of parking.

1:48:15So, um, I feel confident that we will

1:48:18build this into it. And I I want to

1:48:20reiterate what my colleague from, um,

1:48:23excuse me, W four stated that that is

1:48:25something that's really important

1:48:26because literally when it gets to the

1:48:29planning board, if I'm still here and

1:48:30still on that board, that will be

1:48:32something I will herang about on and on

1:48:35and on. Um the I want to also comment

1:48:38about when we had those the the two um

1:48:42companies the two businesses come we

1:48:44specifically asked them would you be

1:48:46willing to assist with the um the

1:48:49performing not I'm sorry with the uh

1:48:52maintaining the KEF and so on. One said

1:48:55hey I'm I'm building a dog park. I can

1:48:58help build a theater. Um so you know

1:49:01they were willing to to bend. the other

1:49:03one was more dear in the headlights and

1:49:05said we weren't asked to do that. It's

1:49:07not in our plan. So just moving forward,

1:49:10I just kind of want to remind everybody

1:49:12that that's kind of what what was said.

1:49:14I also want to reiterate something that

1:49:16u Mr. Snyder had said about um that the

1:49:19theaters in conquered and in Manchester

1:49:22kind of started small. I remember when I

1:49:24used to go to the Manchester theater,

1:49:26you know, the uh the palace, all the

1:49:29seats were ripped. They had big cracks

1:49:31in it. I used to bring my own pillow to

1:49:33sit on them because they were very

1:49:35uncomfortable. I wanted to go to the

1:49:36shows, but they were uncomfortable. Um,

1:49:39I've gone to the Keefe, I bring my own

1:49:41pillow there as well because there's no

1:49:43padding left in those in those seats.

1:49:45So, um, that's kind of some of the

1:49:47things that have to be done and that is

1:49:48something that can happen in another

1:49:50phase. Um, when actually and I spoke to

1:49:53Peter Ramsey, one of the things he was

1:49:54so proud of was when they redid their

1:49:56seats, they actually made them a little

1:49:57wider and he had less seats in his

1:49:59theater. So, they're constantly

1:50:01changing, constantly moving. And I also

1:50:03want to talk about the nonprofit, the um

1:50:06being on the board of trustees, as I

1:50:07know one of my colleagues here is as

1:50:09well, um for the um the National Center

1:50:12for the Arts, is that

1:50:14we have a nonprofit that is was created

1:50:17for this. We didn't go out and seek a

1:50:20nonprofit to to help us. They actually

1:50:22created the nonprofit as part of it,

1:50:25which works on their capital funding and

1:50:27and so on. And Mr. Mr. Steiner, that's

1:50:30why I brought that up. Is that what your

1:50:31plan is? Is that that KEFE would have

1:50:33their own, not go hire a nonprofit?

1:50:36>> No, no. Ultimately, you you rent

1:50:38resources when you don't have the bodies

1:50:40on staff to do the work. And so, how do

1:50:42you bootstrap a multi-million dollar

1:50:44capital campaign, you get a couple of

1:50:46people who can manage it, and you might

1:50:47well spend some money on consultants for

1:50:49a short period of time until you develop

1:50:51that muscle on your own. Uh, but all of

1:50:53those nonprofits spend a tremendous

1:50:55amount of their energy on marketing,

1:50:57either marketing their productions or

1:50:59marketing their capital campaigns. And

1:51:01so I spent a lot of time with all of

1:51:02them. And certainly part of this new

1:51:04nonprofit structure would be a team that

1:51:07has to do fundamentally the marketing

1:51:11undoubtedly if we want to get money

1:51:12quickly have to we'd have to look at at

1:51:15some rented resources. But it's a in my

1:51:17mind it's a short term. What once the

1:51:19muscle is there it can be done by the

1:51:21group itself. And so, yes, you're going

1:51:22to spend something uh on on having that

1:51:25muscle, but you're paying to get that

1:51:26muscle in place soon. And

1:51:29>> may I Thank you. I just want to remind

1:51:32um my colleagues here, especially those

1:51:34that weren't on the board while this was

1:51:35all happening, was that um the then it

1:51:39was the called the pack. Um they hired a

1:51:42consultant to help them with their uh

1:51:44fundraising and so on. And the biggest

1:51:46thing that came out of there was you

1:51:48people made a mistake when you were

1:51:50planning this in that you should be

1:51:52putting money away um for for a a good

1:51:57upfront design. Um so again, the fact

1:52:00that we talk about a $2 million design

1:52:02for this is just business as usual. It's

1:52:05not something new to this one. It's

1:52:07something we should have admitted to at

1:52:09the front of the um the performing arts

1:52:11center, but we made mistakes. Um nothing

1:52:15went really perfect and um that is the

1:52:18way it is. So thank you.

1:52:19>> All right. Well, thank you uh thank you

1:52:22very much for your time this evening on

1:52:24that presentation. Um I think we

1:52:27certainly had a robust conversation and

1:52:29look forward to uh to what's to come.

1:52:32Now on to the rest of the agenda two

1:52:34hours later. Um reading of previous

1:52:38meeting minutes.

1:52:39>> None. Communications requiring only

1:52:42procedural actions and written reports

1:52:44from liaison.

1:52:45>> Communication has been received from

1:52:47Lisa Photo, director of public works,

1:52:49regarding referral from board of

1:52:50alderman O-26-023.

1:52:54Communication has been received from

1:52:56John J. Bozver, chief executive officer,

1:52:59Penach Corporation, regarding Penach

1:53:01Corporation quarterly report to the sole

1:53:04shareholder for the quarter ended June

1:53:0630th, 2026. In communication has been

1:53:09received from Robert J. Gagy, contract

1:53:13assessor supervisor regarding elderly

1:53:15exemption and disabled exemption review

1:53:17for the 2027 tax year.

1:53:20>> There being no objection, I will accept

1:53:22the communications and place them on

1:53:24file.

1:53:24>> Mr. Vice Chair.

1:53:26>> Yes.

1:53:26>> I'm sorry, Mr. Vice President. I I

1:53:28apologize. Um if I may indulge and and

1:53:31make a comment to the last

1:53:33>> um Yes. Okay. Um what I wanted to say to

1:53:36my colleagues here is that um um

1:53:39Alderman uh Clemens, Alderman Johnson,

1:53:42and myself have been working very hard

1:53:44to um get legislation through that will

1:53:48um make this elder exemption not only be

1:53:52put forward, but to be put forward in

1:53:54such a ways that we don't have to be

1:53:56here every single couple years um

1:53:59looking at the income levels. and that

1:54:01will be put forward at the next board of

1:54:03alderman uh meeting. Um, attorney Clark

1:54:05is working on it and has sent to the

1:54:08three of us an email saying that she can

1:54:10have it before the next board of

1:54:12alderman. So, and the only reason I'm

1:54:14saying this is because I didn't want

1:54:15anybody to feel they should go forward

1:54:17and try to put legislation. It's already

1:54:19in the works. Thank you very much.

1:54:21>> All right. Thank you. Uh, period for

1:54:23public comment relative to items

1:54:25expected to be acted upon this evening.

1:54:27We have two people signed up. First I

1:54:30have Fred Tboom.

1:54:37>> Boy, I'm trying to wake up.

1:54:42>> I have a question to chair. Don't start

1:54:44the clock yet. I want to speak your

1:54:45name.

1:54:46>> I want to speak on R26058.

1:54:49>> Yes.

1:54:50>> Uh do you intend to act on that since

1:54:53this is the last? Okay. I'm going to

1:54:55comment on that.

1:54:58Now you can start your clock. N

1:55:00>> name and city for the records, please.

1:55:02>> My name is Fred Tboom, 24 Cheyenne Drive

1:55:05in Nore.

1:55:06So the overlay requested is $6 million.

1:55:11$6 million represents about 2% reduction

1:55:15in tax rate.

1:55:18Now I've gone through some calculations

1:55:19with the tax rate. Since the county has

1:55:22now assigned announced $18.5 million

1:55:27load on Ashawa, we can now accurately

1:55:30predict the tax rate

1:55:33and the tax rate including the $6

1:55:35million off overlay

1:55:38offset

1:55:40is going to be 8.41%.

1:55:438.41%. 41%.

1:55:48And that's going to be a double whammy

1:55:51because you get hit hard in December

1:55:54because you're going to make up for the

1:55:55fact that you didn't pay any part of

1:55:57this increase in July.

1:56:01So people are going to get very upset.

1:56:04And even if you go by the numbers that

1:56:06Don has used, which is $16 million and

1:56:09$18 million

1:56:12compared

1:56:14county taxes previous year to this year.

1:56:17Even then the tax the increase is still

1:56:198.5%.

1:56:22Now none of you asked and insisted that

1:56:25on rate present you the tax rates. You

1:56:28went ahead with the budget

1:56:32without really understanding the impact

1:56:34of taxes on the population.

1:56:37That's a serious negligence.

1:56:41And whenever somebody asked, I think

1:56:44Paula asked a few times, she said,

1:56:46"Well, I'm doing deal dealing with the

1:56:47budget. I'm not dealing with the taxes."

1:56:49That is untrue.

1:56:52She absolutely has to deal with tax rate

1:56:54because the tax rate depends on the

1:56:56taxes you raise in this city for the

1:57:00spending you do in this city, which is

1:57:03over and above the revenues you get from

1:57:06the city.

1:57:08And those taxes amount to

1:57:11$281,99,98$870.

1:57:17That's a lot of tax money.

1:57:20Now I hear many doctors say it's beyond

1:57:23our control. We got all these things

1:57:26beyond our control.

1:57:29Let's examine at least one aspect, shall

1:57:32we? Let's take a look at the salaries.

1:57:35>> One minute.

1:57:40Mr. Bolton had an increase of $14,000

1:57:46in a salary between 26 and 27, an

1:57:50increase of 8.5%.

1:57:53Mr. Cummings had an increase of $14,000

1:58:008.5%

1:58:01his salary is $181,863.

1:58:05>> 30 seconds. Mr. Bolton's salary is

1:58:08$181,863.

1:58:11Don Enright

1:58:13got an increase of 8.5% of $13,000. Her

1:58:17salary is 174,868.

1:58:22Mr. Sullivan, Director Sullivan had an

1:58:24increase of 10% of 14,856.

1:58:29His salary is 161,000.

1:58:32These are huge percentage increases on

1:58:35large salaries,

1:58:36>> time,

1:58:38>> think about that. All under your

1:58:40control, all spent, all wasted.

1:58:47Uh, next we have uh Lori Oralano.

1:58:56>> Lori Oralano, NSHA. Um, I want to talk

1:58:59about the legislation um that might come

1:59:01off the table to table indefinitely on

1:59:0314 Malbury Street. I would support this.

1:59:06I think it should be tabled

1:59:07indefinitely. Um, I am disappointed that

1:59:10we're hanging on to this because we

1:59:12can't find anything better in a pro in a

1:59:14city this size with this much property.

1:59:17We are still focused on 14 Malberry

1:59:20Street, a Civil War era uh 30,000 square

1:59:23foot residential home that we were going

1:59:25to do resourcing and transitional

1:59:28housing that the planning board said no

1:59:30to. and you've just had that development

1:59:33at 1113 Malbury Street sell and is going

1:59:36to be a housing unit and they have not

1:59:39been in, you know, told what we're

1:59:41looking at doing that as in a butter

1:59:44potentially of what we're looking at

1:59:46doing at this property which around the

1:59:47property itself has a what I call a

1:59:50concrete skirt of lawn space or yard.

1:59:53It's so tiny. Um I have a lot of issues.

1:59:57I get very concerned when the mayor says

1:59:59we'd have to move fast because it's been

2:00:01on the market, no one's bought it. Yes,

2:00:03the price has been dropped. No one's

2:00:05bought it. If it's still no one's bought

2:00:07it in another 6 months, I wouldn't be

2:00:09moving fast. I wouldn't be worried about

2:00:11speed. We moved fast the first time and

2:00:13I think we made a lot of mistakes. So,

2:00:15I'd be very supportive of seeing that

2:00:17tabled indefinitely and really pushing

2:00:19administration to work toward um uh a

2:00:22new piece of property someplace else or

2:00:24a new plan. And this committee can help

2:00:26a lot with that. Regarding the fund

2:00:28balance to reduce the tax rate, you

2:00:30know, I think during the budget season

2:00:32and the hearing in and at NSHA North, we

2:00:34said it was going to be about 6%. I

2:00:37think with a $6 million influx or

2:00:39surplus to reduce the tax rate, which is

2:00:42one of our higher amounts we've ever

2:00:43done, it's going to be 8.5%. It would

2:00:46have been 10.5%.

2:00:48That's a huge increase. And the people

2:00:51have to absorb all of that in December.

2:00:54And I don't think they realize um it's

2:00:57it's coming. And the salary issue that

2:00:59um u Mr. Tbbo brought up. I think you

2:01:02really have to get serious about looking

2:01:04at freezing those uh unaffiliated

2:01:07salaries for top management. They are so

2:01:10ridiculously high. I I wouldn't be

2:01:13surprised if your top management

2:01:14positions are soaking up a million

2:01:16dollars an increase in your budget when

2:01:19overall salaries are doing about three

2:01:21million. You've got really high

2:01:23increases in those. Next year, a lot of

2:01:25these positions will be crossing 200,000

2:01:28a year. One minute. You don't have the

2:01:30time to deal. You don't have the the

2:01:32money to deal with that. When we heard

2:01:34Ben bring up at the finance committee

2:01:36that the adequacy grant is going to be

2:01:38cut by potentially 5 million. You got to

2:01:40get serious of not complaining what the

2:01:43state isn't giving us because that could

2:01:45happen. It's going to happen everywhere.

2:01:47What do we have that we can do here? How

2:01:49how much can we take out of property

2:01:51owners to pay? We have to look at what

2:01:54we have and we have to analyze our

2:01:56budget and say no to things, make hard

2:01:58decisions.

2:01:59>> And I don't think people uh you know, a

2:02:02management that's going to get make

2:02:04182,000 is being ripped off if they're

2:02:07not going to make 204 next year. I think

2:02:09we hold the line on some of these

2:02:11salaries. Um, and I'm going to discuss

2:02:13this in the second input regarding

2:02:15morale in um, personnel because I think

2:02:18there's some more stuff that needs to be

2:02:20said. So anyway, I think there's a lot

2:02:22of surprises and this KEF auditorium.

2:02:24Boy, I'm having a tough time with this

2:02:26one. Uh, maybe everyone wanted it, but

2:02:29I'm wondering now when they get their

2:02:31tax bills and this this sheet has

2:02:35>> million dollars of bonding on it. That's

2:02:37a lot. Thank you.

2:02:40>> Okay. Thank you. Um,

2:02:43communications requiring final approval.

2:02:46>> Communication has been received from

2:02:48Mayor Jim Donress regarding million-doll

2:02:50contract award, Transdev, Inc.

2:02:53>> Uh, Alderwoman Smith.

2:02:55>> Yes. I'd like to make a motion to accept

2:02:58and place on file and award a contract

2:03:00with TransDev, Inc. for transit

2:03:03operations to include fixed route and

2:03:06paratransit service and the amount not

2:03:09to exceed um 9,789,870.

2:03:15Um funding will be through department

2:03:18186 transportation fund transit service

2:03:22operations 55 other services. Thank

2:03:27>> you've heard the motion. Is there any

2:03:28discussion on that?

2:03:32>> Seeing none, would the clerk please call

2:03:34the role?

2:03:35>> Alderman Cle,

2:03:36>> yes.

2:03:37>> Alderman Ran,

2:03:39>> yes.

2:03:40>> Alderwoman Smith,

2:03:42>> yes.

2:03:42>> Alderman Thibo,

2:03:44>> yes.

2:03:44>> Alderman O'Brien,

2:03:46>> yes.

2:03:47>> Alderman Dow,

2:03:48>> yes.

2:03:49>> Alderman Sullivan,

2:03:50>> yes.

2:03:52>> Alderman Johnson,

2:03:53>> yes.

2:03:54>> Aldwoman Kelly,

2:03:56>> yes.

2:03:58Alderman Morgan,

2:03:59>> yes.

2:04:00>> Alderman Lopez,

2:04:02>> yes.

2:04:03>> Alderman Clemens,

2:04:04>> yes.

2:04:04>> 12 yay, zero nays.

2:04:06>> And that motion carries. Uh, petitions,

2:04:10>> none.

2:04:10>> Nominations, appointments, and

2:04:12elections.

2:04:13>> Homeless Services Gap Analysis

2:04:16Committee. Jane Goodman, new appointment

2:04:18to Quincy Street, Nashville, New

2:04:20Hampshire. 03060.

2:04:22Latana Mucoli, new appointment 3 Crown

2:04:25Street, Nasha, New Hampshire. 03060

2:04:28Tanya Kinsley new appointment 83 Major

2:04:31Drive Nasha New Hampshire 03060

2:04:35>> There being no objection I will accept

2:04:37the appointments as by the mayor as read

2:04:39and refer them to the personnel

2:04:41administrative affairs

2:04:42>> just a point of clarification

2:04:43>> uh yes all

2:04:46>> is that last name Tanya Kinsley or Tanya

2:04:48Nisler uh it's nicely I believe N I K N

2:04:51I S L E Y sorry about that

2:04:54>> Y thank

2:04:58uh reports of committee

2:05:01>> um ad hoc capital debt committee.

2:05:03>> There being no objection, I will declare

2:05:05the report of the August 10th, 2026 ad

2:05:08hoc capital debt committee to be

2:05:10accepted and placed on file.

2:05:12>> Budget review committee.

2:05:14>> There being no objection, I will declare

2:05:16the reports of the June 2nd, 2026 and

2:05:18August 24th, 2026 budget review

2:05:21committee to be accepted and placed on

2:05:22file. Joint Meeting Committee on

2:05:25Infrastructure and Library Board of

2:05:27Trustees.

2:05:28>> There being no objection, I will declare

2:05:30the report of the August 4th, 2026 Joint

2:05:33Meeting Committee on Infrastructure and

2:05:35Library Board of Trustees be accepted

2:05:37and placed on file.

2:05:39>> Joint Meeting Committee on

2:05:40Infrastructure and Board of Public

2:05:42Works.

2:05:43>> There being no objection, I will declare

2:05:45the report of the August 27th, 2026

2:05:48Joint Meeting Committee on

2:05:49Infrastructure and Board of Public Works

2:05:51be accepted and placed on file. Penach

2:05:53Water Special Committee.

2:05:55>> There being no objection, I will declare

2:05:57the report of the August 31st, 2026

2:05:59Penach Water Special Committee be

2:06:01accepted and placed on file.

2:06:03Confirmation of a mayor's appointments.

2:06:06>> Uh, airport authority.

2:06:08>> There being no objection, I will confirm

2:06:10the reappoint of Joseph Duket, 32 Hills

2:06:14Ferry Road, Nashville, with a term to

2:06:15expire August 31st, 2031 to the airport

2:06:18authority. Is uh Mr. Duket here?

2:06:21>> Present. Please come forward for the

2:06:23oath of office.

2:06:29Come, come right up. Yep.

2:06:36>> Raise your right hand, please. We

2:06:38solemnly swear that you will faithfully

2:06:41and impartially discharge and perform

2:06:43all the duties incumbent upon you as a

2:06:46member of the board of directors of the

2:06:48Nashville Airport Authority according to

2:06:50the best of your ability and agreeably

2:06:53to the rules and regulations of the city

2:06:55charter and the constitution and laws of

2:06:58the state of New Hampshire. So help you

2:07:00God.

2:07:00>> I do.

2:07:01>> Thank you. Congratulations.

2:07:05Historic

2:07:09District Commission. Uh,

2:07:10>> there being no objection, I will confirm

2:07:12the new appointment of Marne Gordon, 69

2:07:15Conquered Street, Nashville, with a term

2:07:16to expire July 16th, 2029 to the

2:07:19Historic District Commission. Uh, is

2:07:22Marne here? Please come forward.

2:07:35Raise your right hand, please. Do you

2:07:37solemnly swear that you will faithfully

2:07:39and impartially discharge and perform

2:07:42all the duties incumbent upon you as a

2:07:45member of the NSHA historic district

2:07:48commission according to the best of your

2:07:50abilities and agreeably to the rules and

2:07:52regulations of the city charter and the

2:07:55constitution and laws of the state of

2:07:57New Hampshire. So help you God.

2:07:59>> Help me God.

2:07:59>> Thank you. CONGRATULATIONS.

2:08:06OKAY. Unfinished business resolutions.

2:08:08>> None.

2:08:09>> Unfinished business ordinances.

2:08:11>> Second reading of O-26-023

2:08:15increasing sewer use fee fees, rates,

2:08:18and charges.

2:08:20>> Alderwoman Kelly.

2:08:22>> Thank you, Mr. Vice President. I would

2:08:25like to move for final passage of 02623.

2:08:29I'd like to speak to it briefly.

2:08:31>> Yes.

2:08:33>> Uh this had a leway discussion in the

2:08:35budget committee. It is the result of a

2:08:39uh study that was done a number of years

2:08:41ago. We chose as a committee at the time

2:08:43to take a more metered approach so that

2:08:45someone didn't have a very big increase

2:08:47the first year. Um, and this is just a

2:08:49continuation of that, getting our sewer

2:08:51fee rates and charges up to uh the needs

2:08:55of the infrastructure and in line with

2:08:59other communities.

2:09:01>> Okay. Any further discussion? Uh,

2:09:04Alderman Sullivan.

2:09:05>> Thank you. I watched the board of public

2:09:07works on this and then also the personal

2:09:10admin affairs and it was my

2:09:12understanding uh just from watching the

2:09:14presentations it seems the big driver of

2:09:17this in addition to covering an

2:09:20increased operations cost uh but also to

2:09:23build up the fund balance to uh carry

2:09:27three months of operating costs 25% of

2:09:30capital outlay and then one year of debt

2:09:32service payments and then I uh I did do

2:09:36some back and forth. I did have a

2:09:3730-minute conversation with director

2:09:39photo on this and I also had a back and

2:09:42forth conversation with Miss Enright on

2:09:45the fund balance specifically because I

2:09:48wanted to know if if that fund balance

2:09:50earns interest

2:09:52and it does. Um, and she forwarded me uh

2:09:56this morning. I did ask a follow-up

2:09:58question just to make sure that I had it

2:10:00right. I didn't hear back from her. So,

2:10:02I'm going to interpret it the way that I

2:10:04understand it.

2:10:05is that under here for the last three

2:10:07years

2:10:09uh let's see let me back up.

2:10:12>> Oh, Miss Miss Enright is online.

2:10:14Fantastic.

2:10:17>> If you want to ask a direct question.

2:10:18>> Yes. Okay. So, uh through you to Miss

2:10:22Enright.

2:10:22>> Yes. Uh the way uh what you forwarded me

2:10:25today was that the wastewater fund

2:10:28balance in fiscal year

2:10:322026

2:10:36got 400

2:10:38uh $469,87367

2:10:44in interest.

2:10:46The previous year, which would have been

2:10:4825, it earned $345,974.80.

2:10:56And the last year that you sent was

2:10:59$483,69420.

2:11:04Oh, there was one more year in here.

2:11:05Bonus year, $469,87367.

2:11:11So my follow-up question um earlier was

2:11:15so that is interest income in the fund

2:11:17balance that wastewater has. That's

2:11:21correct

2:11:24Miss Enright.

2:11:27>> Thank you Don Enright CFO. Um that is

2:11:30the interest that is earned on the cash

2:11:35balance in relation to the um wastewater

2:11:39fund.

2:11:40Yes.

2:11:41>> Okay.

2:11:43>> All right. That's that's all I needed to

2:11:45know. Thank you very much.

2:11:46>> You're welcome. You're

2:11:47>> welcome.

2:11:48>> Thank you. Alderman Johnson, did you

2:11:50have your hand up?

2:11:50>> I just want to say I'm I'm not going to

2:11:53support this and I know we have to raise

2:11:57money. But after hearing exactly how

2:12:01much our taxes are going up, we're

2:12:03raising this this year. Penachuk just

2:12:06put an increase of 21 I think 34%

2:12:11increase or 84 because I talked to the

2:12:14PUC. They put a temporary rate increase

2:12:16and in March they're going to then

2:12:18decide whether or not it becomes

2:12:20permanent.

2:12:21So December our tax bill is going to

2:12:24skyrocket.

2:12:26We already we're going to get another

2:12:28increase in our waste water and Penachuk

2:12:31just gave us an increase um in our

2:12:35water.

2:12:36People maybe didn't realize it. You

2:12:39know, you just pay the bills sometimes,

2:12:41but I know that people on a fixed

2:12:43income, this bill hits in December, are

2:12:47going to have sticker shock

2:12:50when Mr. T-boom, former ultimate T-Boom

2:12:54out dressing. And I saw those increases

2:12:57in salaries. I just never brought it up

2:12:59during budget.

2:13:02The average person didn't get an

2:13:03increase like that of $14,000 or $13,000

2:13:07a year. I think that's outrageous.

2:13:12People say the economy is bad. Okay.

2:13:15Whether the economy is bad or good, who

2:13:17gets a raise like that? I never saw a

2:13:20raise like that in anything I've done.

2:13:24So, I can't support this because you

2:13:26know what? When someone can't afford to

2:13:29pay their wastewater bill, we're going

2:13:30to lean their property.

2:13:34>> Thank you.

2:13:35>> Uh I saw Alderman Tibo.

2:13:38>> Thank you, Mr. Vice President. Um so,

2:13:42you know, I look at this and I I I get

2:13:44it. Things are going up. Um the last

2:13:47couple years, I think, uh three years

2:13:49ago, we did a zero increase. In the last

2:13:51two years, we've had to do 10 and 15%.

2:13:54So,

2:13:56if we didn't do anything, you know, next

2:13:57year might be 10% and the following year

2:13:59may be 14%. Right? Because we have to

2:14:02recoup that money at some point. Um, so

2:14:067% is pretty low. I know any increase,

2:14:11any dollar that someone extra has to pay

2:14:13is a lot for people. I get that.

2:14:17Manchester's rate went up 19%.

2:14:20every town and city in this state, the

2:14:22taxes are going up exponentially.

2:14:25Otherwise, people would be running out

2:14:27of Nashville. If we were the only ones

2:14:29that had any kind of tax increase,

2:14:31people would be moving out of here.

2:14:32They'd go to Manchester, wherever. The

2:14:34problem is is every city in town has

2:14:37these things going up. And again, I'm

2:14:39not saying they're it's right. I'm not

2:14:41saying it's something I want to even I

2:14:43only got one salary, so you know, it

2:14:45impacts me. I got two college loans I'm

2:14:46paying for. It impacts me just like

2:14:48anybody else. I can't do certain things

2:14:50because I have to pay my bills and I

2:14:53don't go on vacation because I pay my

2:14:55taxes instead, you know. Um, so I I get

2:14:58it. I I would love to have that extra

2:15:00money. And as far as as jobs, I mean,

2:15:02everybody wants to be paid what they're

2:15:04worth. And I wouldn't use the the

2:15:0614,000. I'd use the percentage, right?

2:15:08Because I've gotten 8% raises in the

2:15:10past in a private industry. Um, and I've

2:15:13gotten 2% raises. And some years when

2:15:16the company didn't do well, they didn't

2:15:17give any raises. So, I get it. And as

2:15:19far as the the people in the city that

2:15:21don't work in unaffiliated, they have to

2:15:24go by their contract. That's a union

2:15:26thing. So, it's not like we could just

2:15:27give them the extra money or or cut

2:15:29their salaries. It goes by by contract.

2:15:31So, um again, I'm not saying that these

2:15:34are good tax rates and this is a good

2:15:36increase, but looking back at the last

2:15:38couple years and looking at other cities

2:15:40and towns, we are not giving the worst

2:15:44percentages that we could give. And

2:15:47again, it's going to sound like, oh,

2:15:49Alderman Tibo wants to raise money on

2:15:50everything. I don't, but we got to pay

2:15:53for the infrastructure somewhere. We

2:15:54have a huge wastewater facility that is

2:15:57in has a ton of things that need

2:16:01infrastructure care for, whether it's

2:16:03repair or whether it's projects to make

2:16:05the regulatory things um up to date or

2:16:08whatever. There's a lot of

2:16:09infrastructure there. I'm I'm certain

2:16:10director photo and and uh Mr. Buché

2:16:14would not uh try to push stuff on us if

2:16:16they didn't absolutely 100% need it. So

2:16:19that's that's my take on it. It's not

2:16:20great, but it's uh I'm going to support

2:16:23it because I think we we have to get get

2:16:26that money in for for the wastewater

2:16:28treatment plant.

2:16:30>> Alderman Cle.

2:16:31>> Uh thank you. Um

2:16:33Mr. I'm sorry, President Vice President,

2:16:36I apologize. Um may I ask a question of

2:16:40Mr. Bush? I'm not sure if he knows the

2:16:41answer, but may I ask a question of him?

2:16:43online or is he here? Oh, he's here.

2:16:45Yes,

2:16:49>> Mr. Bush, I'm not sure if you know the

2:16:51the answer to this question, so I

2:16:53apologize if I'm putting you on the

2:16:54spot. Do you know what this increase is

2:16:57going to be costing the taxpayers?

2:17:00Most of them are paid on a quarterly

2:17:01basis.

2:17:03>> Do you know that?

2:17:04>> Yes. Dave Bush, wastewater

2:17:05superintendent. Uh so this is an

2:17:07enterprise fund. So this is the the

2:17:09rateayers cost. Uh so the the current

2:17:13sewer rate is $4.54

2:17:16and that is per 100 cubic feet which is

2:17:19748 gallons of use in your house. And so

2:17:23that's what you'd pay. Plus there is a

2:17:25monthly meter charge. The current rate

2:17:27is $2044.

2:17:30Uh so if the 7% were approved starting

2:17:33in January, uh that new rate would be

2:17:36$4.86

2:17:38per 100 cubic feet. And then the meter

2:17:41charge would be $21.87

2:17:43per month. And that that that meter rate

2:17:46is for a 58 meter, which is a standard

2:17:48meter in a house.

2:17:50>> Okay. Thank you. Um then I think my

2:17:52follow-up question then would probably

2:17:54be to to Miss Enright if she can answer

2:17:56this.

2:17:56>> Okay.

2:17:57>> Um thank you, Mr. Busher. Um Mr.

2:18:00Enright, do you know what the average

2:18:02increase in the bill would be?

2:18:05I'm not sure if that would go through

2:18:06your department or

2:18:10Miss Enright,

2:18:11>> Don Enright, CFO. Um, yes, the billing

2:18:14would go through my department. Um, the

2:18:17the increase would be minimal per per

2:18:20bill. Typically, these bills um are not

2:18:24significant um on a quarterly basis. Um

2:18:29the

2:18:30I don't have it calculated, but I would

2:18:33be happy to report back what that what

2:18:36that amount would be.

2:18:37>> Okay. Thank you. I I know it was

2:18:39discussed at the at the previous meeting

2:18:41and it's it's gone out of my head so I

2:18:43do appreciate that. Uh thank you very

2:18:45much. Um

2:18:47>> I can answer I can answer that.

2:18:48>> Oh, go ahead. Alderman.

2:18:49>> Yeah. So at our meeting I believe uh

2:18:51director photo said on an average bill

2:18:54per month it'd be about $3 more.

2:18:56>> That's what I thought but I didn't want

2:18:57to say that at much. So $3 on a

2:19:00quarterly basis. I I um as a person also

2:19:04on a fixed income, as a person who lost

2:19:07threequarters of their income when my

2:19:09husband passed away year and a half ago,

2:19:11um $3 is is still always a lot of money.

2:19:16But I think it's something I could come

2:19:17up with because the the the opposite of

2:19:21that is um we did have I think almost a

2:19:2415% increase one year. um actually two

2:19:27years in a row I think we had a larger

2:19:29increase than we have now might have

2:19:31been 10% I think it was I'm I'm blanking

2:19:33here and then we agreed to do 7% and 7%.

2:19:36It's lower than we did in the past two

2:19:39years and the reason why we did this was

2:19:41because um when Mr. Bouche came in there

2:19:44were some significant things that needed

2:19:46to get done um that had been um ignored

2:19:49because we weren't increasing um these

2:19:52monies and uh he's done a phenomenal

2:19:55job. I I sit there when it comes to

2:19:57finance and to other things and and to

2:19:59hear all the work that needs to get done

2:20:01because it wasn't being done. Um and

2:20:03when he came in, he did a a really good

2:20:05job in and bringing us up to par. I

2:20:08don't think $3 a quarter per um rate

2:20:13payer is a lot to ask to ensure that we

2:20:15keep our monies um in this enterprise

2:20:18fund and so on up to par. I will

2:20:20definitely support this. I think to say

2:20:23that it's going to devastate people is

2:20:25just really kind of doing a little bit

2:20:27of a a scare tactic. And um I I I don't

2:20:30I think that's that's wrong to go that

2:20:32way. Um $3 a quarter is still $3 a

2:20:36quarter, but it's not as bad as, you

2:20:39know, having to pay $300 a quarter. Um

2:20:42Panach is going up. Um temporary or not,

2:20:45they are definitely going up. That was

2:20:47absolutely stated correctly.

2:20:49Um and um if I also I also want to state

2:20:52that this wastewater bill if I'm not

2:20:54mistaken um and is calculated from

2:20:58October through March. Um it's not a

2:21:02year round. So they they take those

2:21:04months because that's when we're not

2:21:06watering lawns and we're not doing this.

2:21:08So they just take those winter months

2:21:10and they create um what they feel the

2:21:13average bill is and that's what we pay.

2:21:15we don't pay true usage because if we

2:21:18did those that are mowing I mean u

2:21:21watering their lawns would be paying a

2:21:22lot more. So they just look at those

2:21:24particular months. Um and and that is

2:21:27for water that's going down our sink.

2:21:28That's for you know toilet flushes and

2:21:31and things like that. We don't want to

2:21:33pay waste water based on lawn watering

2:21:35or filling up of pools or things like

2:21:37that. So it's calculated based on

2:21:39October through March and not the

2:21:42watering months. Thank you Mr. Vice

2:21:44President.

2:21:44>> Yeah. Some some people do have meters on

2:21:48their properties and they they they will

2:21:50pay depending on what they discharge,

2:21:52but for the most part, you're correct.

2:21:55>> Uh, Alderman O'Brien.

2:21:57>> Thank you. Uh, Mr. acting president

2:22:01there uh

2:22:04as a liaison to public works sat in this

2:22:08and looked at the thing and you know you

2:22:12think they take a little pistol and

2:22:15shoot at a dot board to come up with the

2:22:17increase I hate to disappoint you they

2:22:20don't they hired the firm and the firm

2:22:24looked around at all communities around

2:22:28us

2:22:29Manchester was much higher. Other

2:22:32communities are too.

2:22:35So, we're getting away fairly cheap

2:22:37because we have a very well-managed

2:22:40system. But if we don't do our share,

2:22:45>> and when I'm talking about doing our

2:22:47share,

2:22:49from the founding waters of the

2:22:50Marramac,

2:22:52from Tilton all the way down to the

2:22:55Atlantic Ocean down by Plum Island,

2:22:58communities pull water off the Marramac.

2:23:03We do, too. When Penachuk runs low, they

2:23:07pull off the Marramac into the pond and

2:23:10let it settled. I am grateful that the

2:23:14communities upstream of us do their

2:23:17fiduciary job to make sure the what was

2:23:21once a fluent water gets cleaned up to

2:23:25the point

2:23:27that it's not affecting the Marramac.

2:23:30You can actually swim in the Marramac.

2:23:33when I was on the fire department, I put

2:23:35my diving team in there many times. So,

2:23:39not to worry about it. But to do that

2:23:42comes with the cost. Hey, we all know

2:23:43what's going on in Washington, the cloud

2:23:47clown show, you know, the little car is

2:23:50full with all the clowns. But these

2:23:53prices for chemicals and everything else

2:23:55like that is going up and nobody's out

2:23:57there is really lowering it,

2:24:00>> lowering the cost. and it's not us into

2:24:02this chamber. So I support this mainly

2:24:06because we have a responsibility

2:24:09because I'm glad of the people upstream

2:24:11of us are doing their responsible thing

2:24:14of making sure the water that that gets

2:24:17released is at a significant quality. So

2:24:20I'll commit to this so the people

2:24:23downstream of us can benefit equally as

2:24:26the same. Thank you.

2:24:29>> Uh Alderman Sullivan.

2:24:30>> Thank you. I was just going to explain,

2:24:32it sounds like this is going to pass

2:24:33tonight, but I am going to explain my no

2:24:35vote. And from watching the meetings,

2:24:38um, it seemed as though the the the

2:24:41driving uh uh factor for this is to to

2:24:44build up the fund balance. when I when I

2:24:48uh read off the the uh the amount of um

2:24:51interest that was raised in these funds

2:24:54without doing anything, it sounds like

2:24:57they're still raising six figures a year

2:24:59in in uh in interest that goes into that

2:25:02fund balance. Now, given the economic uh

2:25:05situation that was so eloquently

2:25:08explained by my by my colleague, I think

2:25:11that in times like these, it's it's

2:25:14necessary to sometimes dig into your

2:25:16savings as opposed to build up your

2:25:18savings. And I think that the average

2:25:20Nashan would like to also build up their

2:25:23savings account as well, but they don't

2:25:24have that luxury to do so.

2:25:27I will also say that um

2:25:31uh I lost my train of thought. Uh

2:25:36anyway, voting no against it. Oh, I did

2:25:39want to say that maybe if it was, you

2:25:41know, a 3% or or 4% something ne

2:25:43negligible, uh perhaps I'd get behind

2:25:46it. 7% just seems to be a number uh

2:25:49bridge too far for me. So, I'm going to

2:25:50say no to it. Thanks.

2:25:53>> Any further discussion this evening?

2:25:57If not, the motion before us is to is

2:26:01for final passage. Um, would the clerk

2:26:04please call the role?

2:26:05>> Alderman Clay,

2:26:06>> yes.

2:26:07>> Alderman Rean,

2:26:09>> yes.

2:26:10>> Aldwoman Smith,

2:26:11>> yes.

2:26:12>> Alderman Tio,

2:26:14>> yes.

2:26:15>> Alderman O'Brien,

2:26:16>> yes.

2:26:17>> Alderman Dow,

2:26:18>> yes.

2:26:20>> Alderman Sullivan,

2:26:21>> no.

2:26:22>> Alderman Johnson,

2:26:23>> no.

2:26:25Alderwoman Kelly,

2:26:27>> yes.

2:26:29>> Alderman Morgan,

2:26:30>> no.

2:26:33>> Alderman Lopez,

2:26:34>> yes.

2:26:37>> Alderman Clemens,

2:26:38>> yes.

2:26:39>> Nine yays, three nays.

2:26:43>> And that motion carries.

2:26:45All right. So, we have next business

2:26:47unfinished at the previous meeting.

2:26:50Alderman Sullivan.

2:26:51>> Yes. I'd like to make a motion to remove

2:26:53from the table R26015,

2:26:55please.

2:26:56>> And that motion is non-debatable. Would

2:26:58the clerk please call the role?

2:27:00>> Alderman Cle?

2:27:01>> No.

2:27:03>> Alderman Rean?

2:27:05>> No.

2:27:07>> Alderwoman Smith?

2:27:08>> No.

2:27:10>> Alderman Thibo?

2:27:12>> No.

2:27:14>> Alderman O'Brien?

2:27:15>> No.

2:27:18>> Alderman Dow?

2:27:19>> Yes.

2:27:21Alderman Svin,

2:27:22>> yes.

2:27:24>> Alderman Johnson,

2:27:25>> no.

2:27:28>> Aldwoman Kelly,

2:27:30>> no.

2:27:32>> Alderman Morgan,

2:27:34>> yes.

2:27:38>> Alderman Lopez,

2:27:39>> no.

2:27:42>> Alderman Clemens,

2:27:44>> yes.

2:27:46>> Four yays, eight nays.

2:27:49And that motion fails.

2:27:51Um,

2:27:54Alderman Sullivan.

2:27:55>> Yes. I'd like to make a motion to remove

2:27:56from the table R26020,

2:27:59please.

2:28:00>> And that motion is non-debatable. Would

2:28:03the clerk please call the role?

2:28:04>> Alderman Clay,

2:28:05>> no.

2:28:07>> Alderman Roan,

2:28:08>> no.

2:28:11>> Aldwoman Smith,

2:28:12>> no.

2:28:14>> Alderman,

2:28:15>> no.

2:28:17Alderman O'Brien,

2:28:18>> no.

2:28:20>> Alderman Dow,

2:28:21>> no.

2:28:23>> Alderman Sullivan,

2:28:25>> yes.

2:28:27>> Alderman Johnson,

2:28:28>> yes.

2:28:30>> Aldwoman Kelly,

2:28:32>> no.

2:28:34>> Alderman Morgan,

2:28:35>> yes.

2:28:37>> Alderman Lopez,

2:28:39>> no.

2:28:41>> Alderman Clemens,

2:28:42>> yes.

2:28:44>> Four yays, eight nays. And that motion

2:28:46fails.

2:28:49Um,

2:28:53next we are going to move on to new

2:28:55business resolutions.

2:28:58>> Uh, first reading of R-26-058

2:29:02establishing the use of fund balance for

2:29:05tax rate.

2:29:06>> Alderman.

2:29:07>> Uh, thank you, Mr. Vice President. I

2:29:09motion to suspend the rules and allow

2:29:11for a second reading of R-26-058.

2:29:15By roll call, please.

2:29:17>> Would the clerk please call the role?

2:29:20>> Alderman Cle?

2:29:21>> Yes.

2:29:22>> Alderman Rean,

2:29:24>> yes.

2:29:25>> Aldwoman Smith,

2:29:26>> yes.

2:29:28>> Alderman Thibo,

2:29:29>> yes.

2:29:30>> Alderman O'Brien,

2:29:31>> yes.

2:29:33>> Alderman Dow,

2:29:34>> yes.

2:29:35>> Alderman Sullivan,

2:29:36>> yes. Alderman Johnson,

2:29:38>> yes.

2:29:40>> Aldwoman Kelly,

2:29:41>> yes.

2:29:42>> Alderman Morgan,

2:29:44>> yes.

2:29:45>> Alderman Lopez,

2:29:46>> yes.

2:29:48>> Alderman Clemens,

2:29:49>> yes.

2:29:49>> 12 yay, zero nays.

2:29:51>> And that motion carries. Um, Alderman

2:29:54Clean.

2:29:54>> Uh, thank you, Mr. Oh, second reading.

2:29:56>> Let's have the second reading first.

2:29:59>> Second reading of R-26-058,

2:30:02establishing the use of fund fund

2:30:04balance for tax rate.

2:30:05>> Thank you. Thank you. Uh,

2:30:08attorney Balden. Uh, Alderman Cle.

2:30:11>> Uh, thank you, Mr. Vice President. I

2:30:13motioned for final passage of R-26-058

2:30:18by roll call, please.

2:30:20>> Motion is for final passage. Is there

2:30:21any discussion?

2:30:25Seeing none, would the clerk please call

2:30:26the role?

2:30:27>> Alderman Cle?

2:30:29>> Yes.

2:30:30>> Alderman Raan,

2:30:31>> yes.

2:30:32>> Aldwoman Smith,

2:30:34>> yes. Alderman Tibo,

2:30:36>> yes.

2:30:37>> Alderman O'Brien,

2:30:38>> yes.

2:30:39>> Alderman Dow,

2:30:40>> yes.

2:30:41>> Alderman Sullivan,

2:30:43>> yes.

2:30:44>> Alderman Johnson,

2:30:45>> yes.

2:30:46>> Aldwoman Kelly,

2:30:48>> yes.

2:30:49>> Alderman Morgan,

2:30:50>> yes.

2:30:51>> Alderman Lopez,

2:30:52>> yes.

2:30:53>> Alderman Clemens,

2:30:54>> yes.

2:30:55>> 12 yay, zero nays.

2:30:57>> And resolution R2658 is declared duly

2:31:00adopted.

2:31:02Yes.

2:31:04>> sponsors.

2:31:05>> Yes. Did anybody want to be a sponsor

2:31:08co-sponsor of that? I see Alderman Cle,

2:31:11Alderman Morgan, Alderman Lopez,

2:31:13Alderman Sullivan.

2:31:18>> All right.

2:31:19>> Thank you.

2:31:20>> Um, moving on to the next resolution.

2:31:23Uh, first reading of R-26-059,

2:31:28authorizing the mayor and city treasurer

2:31:29to borrow an an amount not to exceed $3

2:31:32million through the issuance of bonds

2:31:35and/or a loan through the New Hampshire

2:31:36Department of Environmental Services

2:31:39State Revolving Loan Fund for the

2:31:41Wastewater Treatment Plant Phase One

2:31:43Upgrades Project. co-sponsors

2:31:46Alderman Cle, Alderman Rean, Alderin

2:31:50Smith, Alderin O'Brien, Alderman Dow,

2:31:54and Alderman Lopez.

2:31:57uh given its first reading uh that will

2:32:00be assigned to the budget review

2:32:02committee the board of public works and

2:32:04we will schedule a special board of

2:32:06alderman public hearing on Tuesday

2:32:08October 6th 2026 in the alder manic

2:32:12chamber at 700 p.m.

2:32:15First reading of R-26-060,

2:32:19authorizing the mayor and city treasurer

2:32:20to issue bonds not to exceed 4,275,000

2:32:26for the city's sewer infrastructure

2:32:27improvement and sewer and drain casting

2:32:30replacement programs. co-sponsors,

2:32:34Alderman Cle, Alderman Rean, uh,

2:32:37Alderman Smith, Alderman O'Brien,

2:32:40Alderman Dow, Alderman Lopez.

2:32:44Given its first reading, I will assign

2:32:47that to the budget review committee,

2:32:48Board of Public Works, and schedule a

2:32:50special board of alderman public hearing

2:32:52on Tuesday, October 6, 2026 in the

2:32:55aldermanic chamber at 7 pm.

2:32:58First reading of R-26-061

2:33:02authorizing the mayor and city treasurer

2:33:04to issue bonds not to exceed $2,550,000

2:33:10for various wastewater capital

2:33:12improvements. Co-sponsors,

2:33:14Alderwoman Cle, Alderman Rean, Alderman

2:33:17Smith, Alderman O'Brien, Alderman Dow,

2:33:20and Alderman Lopez.

2:33:23uh given its first reading. I will

2:33:25assign that to the budget review

2:33:26committee, the board of public works,

2:33:28and schedule a special board of alderin

2:33:30public hearing on Tuesday, October 6th,

2:33:32in the aldermanic chamber at 7 p.m.

2:33:35>> First reading of R-26-062

2:33:38authorizing the mayor and city treasurer

2:33:40to issue bonds not to exceed $2 million

2:33:42for various improvements at the solid

2:33:44waste department for Hills Landfill.

2:33:47co-sponsors,

2:33:49Alderman Rean, Alderman Smith, Alderman

2:33:53O'Brien, Alderman Dow, and Alderman

2:33:55Lopez. Uh given its first reading, I

2:33:59will assign that to the budget review

2:34:00committee board of public works and

2:34:02schedule a special board of alderman

2:34:03public hearing on Tuesday, October 6,

2:34:052026 in the aldermanic chamber at 7 p.m.

2:34:09First reading of R-26-063,

2:34:13authorizing the mayor and city treasurer

2:34:14to issue bonds not to exceed 2,678,828

2:34:22for the purchase of a solid waste

2:34:24capital equipment.

2:34:26>> Co-sponsors,

2:34:28Alderman Revan, Alderman Smith, Alderman

2:34:31O'Brien, Alderman Dow, uh, Alderman

2:34:33Lopez.

2:34:35Uh given its first reading, I will

2:34:37assign that to the budget review

2:34:38committee board of public works and

2:34:40schedule a special board of alderman

2:34:41public hearing on Tuesday, October 6,

2:34:432026 in the aldermanic chamber at 7 p.m.

2:34:47>> First reading of R-26-064

2:34:50authorizing the mayor and city treasur

2:34:52to issue bonds not to exceed 5,173,428

2:34:59for the purchase of capital equipment.

2:35:02>> Go sponsors.

2:35:04Alderman O'Brien, Alderman Dow.

2:35:08given its first reading. I will assign

2:35:10that to the budget review committee and

2:35:11schedule a special board of alderman

2:35:13public hearing on Monday, October 26,

2:35:152026 in the aldermanic chamber at 7 p.m.

2:35:19First reading of R-26-065

2:35:22relative to the fiscal year 2026

2:35:25transfer of 150,000 from department 191

2:35:29school account 71221

2:35:32computer equipment to fund 100000

2:35:35department 21000 food services fund

2:35:39account 4910 0 transfer from general

2:35:43fund for the purpose of funding fiscal

2:35:46year 2026 expenditures in the food

2:35:48services special revenue fund.

2:35:50>> Co-sponsors,

2:35:52Alderman Cle, Alderman Rean, Alderman

2:35:55Smith, Alderman Tibo, Alderman O'Brien,

2:35:57Alderman Dow, Alderman Morgan, uh

2:36:00Alderman Lopez.

2:36:02Uh given its first reading, I will

2:36:05assign that uh to the budget review

2:36:07committee.

2:36:09>> Uh Mr. Vice Chair, just for the record,

2:36:11it looks like uh Aldwoman Kelly has left

2:36:14the meeting at 10:06.

2:36:16>> Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. Uh

2:36:18first reading of

2:36:19>> question please. What was the date of

2:36:21the special budget? The last one is it

2:36:24>> uh there is it will it's just assigned

2:36:26to the budget review committee. Yep.

2:36:28>> Okay. Thank you.

2:36:29>> Y

2:36:30>> first reading of R-26-066

2:36:35authorizing the mayor and city treasurer

2:36:36to issue bonds not to exceed $5 million

2:36:39for the repair and renovation of two

2:36:41public inground swimming pools.

2:36:43>> Co-sponsors.

2:36:45uh Alderman Smith, Alderman O'Brien,

2:36:48Alderman Dow, Alderman Lopez, and

2:36:52myself.

2:36:54given its first reading. Uh I will sign

2:36:57that to the budget review committee

2:36:59board of public works and schedule a

2:37:01special board of alderman public hearing

2:37:04on Tuesday, October 6, 2026 in the

2:37:06aldermanic chamber at 7 p.m.

2:37:10>> First reading of R-26-067

2:37:13authorizing the mayor and city treasure

2:37:15to issue bonds not to exceed $3 million

2:37:17for the design and other ancillary costs

2:37:20to renovate the NSHA public library.

2:37:23co-sponsors,

2:37:25Alderman Revan, Alderwoman Smith,

2:37:27Alderman Tibo, Alderman O'Brien,

2:37:29Alderman Lopez.

2:37:31Uh given its first reading, I will

2:37:34assign that to the budget review

2:37:35committee board of library trustees and

2:37:38schedule a special board of alderman

2:37:40public hearing on Monday, October 26,

2:37:422026 in the aldermanic chamber at 700

2:37:45p.m.

2:37:47First reading of R-26-068,

2:37:50authorizing the mayor and city treasurer

2:37:52to issue bonds not to exceed $1,500,000

2:37:56for the design, construction, and

2:37:58equipping of a fire training facility.

2:38:01Co-sponsors,

2:38:03Alderwoman Cle, Alderman Rean, Alderman

2:38:06Smith, Alderman Tibo, Alderman Dow,

2:38:09Alderman Morgan, Alderman Lopez, and

2:38:12myself.

2:38:14Given its first reading, I will sign it

2:38:16to the budget review committee, the

2:38:18board of fire commissioners, and

2:38:19schedule a special board of alderman

2:38:21public hearing on Monday, October 26th,

2:38:242026 in the aldermanic chamber at 7 p.m.

2:38:28>> First reading of R-26-069,

2:38:32authorizing the mayor and city treasurer

2:38:34to issue bonds not to exceed $1 million

2:38:36for the design and other ancillary costs

2:38:38to replace the Pine Hill fire station.

2:38:41co-sponsors, Alderman Cle, Alderman

2:38:43Rean, Alderman Smith, Alderman Thibo,

2:38:46Alderman Dow, Alderman Sullivan,

2:38:49Alderman Morgan, Alderman Lopez, and

2:38:51myself.

2:38:53Um, given its first reading, I will

2:38:56assign that to the budget review

2:38:57committee, the board of fire

2:38:59commissioners, and schedule a special

2:39:01board of alderman public hearing on, you

2:39:03guessed it, Monday, October 26, 2026 in

2:39:07the aldermanic chamber at 7 p.m.

2:39:10>> First reading of R-26-070,

2:39:14authorizing the mayor and city treasurer

2:39:15to issue bonds not to exceed $1 million

2:39:18for deferred capital maintenance of fire

2:39:20stations. co-sponsors, Alderman Cle,

2:39:24Alderman Ravan, Alderman Smith, Alderman

2:39:27Tibo, Alderman Dow, Alderman Sullivan,

2:39:30Alderman Morgan, Alderman Lopez, and

2:39:32myself.

2:39:34given its first reading. I will assign

2:39:35that to the budget review committee, the

2:39:37board of fire commissioners, and

2:39:39schedule a special board of alderman

2:39:40public hearing on Monday, October 26,

2:39:422026 in the aldermanic chamber at 7 p.m.

2:39:46>> First reading of R-26-071,

2:39:50authorizing the mayor and city treasurer

2:39:51to issue bonds not to exceed $9 million

2:39:54for the replacement and modernization of

2:39:57the citywide enterprise resource

2:39:59planning ERP system.

2:40:01>> Co-sponsors

2:40:03Alderman O'Brien.

2:40:06uh given its first reading. I will

2:40:08assign it to the budget review committee

2:40:10and schedule a special board of alderman

2:40:12public hearing on Monday, October 26th

2:40:15in the aldermanic chamber at 7 p.m.

2:40:18>> First reading of R-26-072,

2:40:22authorizing the mayor and city treasurer

2:40:24to issue bonds not to exceed $43,500,000

2:40:28for the design, construction, and

2:40:30equipping of a division of public works

2:40:32garage and fleet maintenance facility.

2:40:35the co-sponsors,

2:40:37Alderman Rean, Alderwoman Smith,

2:40:39Alderman O'Brien, Alderman Dow, Alderman

2:40:42Lopez.

2:40:44Uh given its first reading, I will

2:40:46assign that to the budget review

2:40:47committee, the board of public works,

2:40:49and schedule a special board of alderman

2:40:51public hearing on Tuesday, October 6,

2:40:532026 in the aldermanic chamber at 7 p.m.

2:40:56>> Mr. Chim.

2:40:58>> Yes.

2:40:58>> Donna, did we should we have had this

2:41:00for the 26th and not the 6th?

2:41:08for public works. I'm sorry, Mr.

2:41:10Chairman. M.

2:41:11>> Yeah, that the 26072

2:41:15>> I have on the script for October 6th.

2:41:18>> Right. So, public works all their um

2:41:21bonds are on the 6th.

2:41:22>> Okay. All right. Okay. Thank you.

2:41:27First reading of R-26-073

2:41:32changing the purpose of up to 3,183,200

2:41:37of unexpended bond proceeds from various

2:41:40division of public works capital

2:41:41projects to the division of public works

2:41:43garage and fleet maintenance facility

2:41:45project. co-sponsors,

2:41:48Alderman Cle, Alderman Rean, Alderman

2:41:51Smith, Alderman Tibo, Alderman O'Brien,

2:41:53Alderman Dow, Alderman Lopez. given its

2:41:57first reading. I will assign that to the

2:41:59budget review committee board of public

2:42:01works and schedule a special board of

2:42:03alderman public hearing on Tuesday,

2:42:04October 6th, 2026 in the alder manic

2:42:07chamber at 7 p.m.

2:42:10First reading of R-26-074

2:42:14relative to the creation of three new

2:42:16expendable trust funds in a transfer of

2:42:19$790,387

2:42:22from prior year escros into various

2:42:25expendable trust funds for Division of

2:42:27Public Works infrastructure

2:42:28improvements, park rehabilitation,

2:42:30community development infrastructure

2:42:32improvements, general transportation

2:42:35improvements, downtown improvements,

2:42:37waterways and water bodies, and school

2:42:40deferred maintenance.

2:42:42>> Uh co-sponsors, Alderman Rean, Alderman

2:42:45Smith, Alderman O'Brien, Alderman Dow,

2:42:48and Alderman Lopez.

2:42:50Given its first reading, I will assign

2:42:52that to the budget review committee.

2:42:56And looks like we got to new business

2:42:59ordinances.

2:43:00>> None.

2:43:01>> Period. For general public comment, I

2:43:04have two folks signed up. Uh Lori

2:43:07Oralano

2:43:19Lori Ordano Nshawa. Couple things just

2:43:22on the kef auditorium discussion. You

2:43:24know, I'm I'm not a real fan of this

2:43:27renovation of maintaining that

2:43:29auditorium. I am concerned the proximity

2:43:32even when you talk about a different

2:43:34venue style and all. It's a couple miles

2:43:36from the performing arts center. Margins

2:43:39in these art centers are very, very

2:43:41tight. If you can get one or 2% profit

2:43:44margin, you're working hard to do that.

2:43:46And I'm concerned when you need to have

2:43:48like maybe on the order of a 100 shows

2:43:51to be profitable that there would be

2:43:53some overlap. It's not just going to be

2:43:54kids recital and the symphony going in

2:43:57there once a month for 12 performances

2:43:59or whatever. So, I'm concerned about

2:44:01that. the casinos also coming to Nasha

2:44:04offer arts venues now. Um that's become

2:44:07a bigger thing and you might have that

2:44:09uh possibility where they're taking some

2:44:11business away. So I'm not certain. I'd

2:44:14be thrilled if I were the downtown art

2:44:15center looking at a uh a renovation

2:44:18there. I'm not a big uh historical

2:44:21savior kind of thing in this situation.

2:44:24Um, I also think that I think I went to

2:44:26the meetings where people came out to

2:44:29share input and we talk about this is

2:44:31what the public wants, but as I recall,

2:44:33it wasn't well attended. So, we always

2:44:35say it's what the public wants, but is

2:44:37it what the public wants? And if you go

2:44:39a couple years later and your funding

2:44:41has gone up and your budgets have gone

2:44:43up and your tax rate has gone up and the

2:44:45economy has been tough and the public

2:44:47realizes it's going to cost 30 or $40

2:44:49million, they may go, "I don't want that

2:44:52anymore. We got to we got to get real on

2:44:55our time frame. So, and I'm concerned

2:44:58that if you start and you do this

2:44:59fundraising and you start down the road

2:45:01and then you can't get the money and the

2:45:03designer of the building, LMG, is

2:45:06designing it, what are you going to do

2:45:07with the art center part or the per the

2:45:10um KE part? If you can't renovate it,

2:45:13what are you going to do with it? Now,

2:45:14it's attached to a building. So, do you

2:45:16treat it all as one entity and just do a

2:45:18project that gives housing and with that

2:45:20energy and with that um with that design

2:45:23and let uh the contractor in incorporate

2:45:27that space however they want to

2:45:28incorporate it. I just think there's a

2:45:31lot of issues and I don't think Miss

2:45:32Johnson got a straight answer on the

2:45:34fundraising regarding her question on

2:45:36the art center which was how much was

2:45:38raised before we got into like

2:45:41construction. We if you recall we had a

2:45:43very huge t difficulty raising 2018 the

2:45:46fundraising started by 2021 the reason

2:45:49we went to a new market tax credit is

2:45:51because we hadn't even raised a million

2:45:54and so you know um money came after when

2:45:58we talk about having four five or six

2:46:00million all that came after we we picked

2:46:03up a million bucks when um the

2:46:05charitable foundation I think turned

2:46:07over Mr. Carter's old Nasha money

2:46:09million dollars that have been given up

2:46:11there that rolled in and the name change

2:46:13went back to the NSHA center of the arts

2:46:15I think to honor this old Nasha money

2:46:18that was a big contribution that came

2:46:20right at the end when we were opening

2:46:22>> time. So I I think the fundraising is

2:46:25going to be a huge difficult issue.

2:46:28Thank you.

2:46:30Uh, next I have Fred Tboom.

2:46:37>> Fred T-boom. Nasha, I'm still here.

2:46:42I'd like to say something about that

2:46:44performance arts center. It reminds me

2:46:47of when Mr. Cummings, the same Cummings

2:46:49that stood before you, came here several

2:46:51years ago and said, "We're going to

2:46:54build a performance arts center that's

2:46:56going to cost $12.5 million."

2:47:00and $34 million later they build it.

2:47:05I don't often agree with Mr. Loan Lopez,

2:47:09but he made a good point. Do you really

2:47:12want to pack people into a crowded space

2:47:15so you can get the tiff money, kids have

2:47:18no playground, so you can get the tiff

2:47:20money so you can build a little theater

2:47:22when there's another theater just down

2:47:24the street? Think about it. It's

2:47:26craziness.

2:47:29Now, what I really came here for,

2:47:32I have two minutes left. Let me give you

2:47:35another statistics about the all these

2:47:37salaries that you supposedly have no

2:47:39control over and that you have total

2:47:41control.

2:47:44In fiscal 26,

2:47:48167 employees in the city, it's about

2:47:50thousand employees in the city. That's

2:47:52the schools. were making over $100,000.

2:47:57In fiscal 27,

2:48:00214 employees are making over $100,000.

2:48:05Think about that one.

2:48:09The last thing I want to talk about is I

2:48:11watched

2:48:13Alman Dow's little budget meeting was

2:48:15some kind of a wrap-up meeting and I

2:48:18couldn't follow none of it. A lot of

2:48:20psycho babble as far as I'm concerned. A

2:48:22lot of rambling. What nobody did in that

2:48:26meeting is go back to R26028

2:48:29and ask the following question.

2:48:32Why was in the bottom of that resolution

2:48:34you know 26 28 the salary stuff

2:48:39adding all the salary information

2:48:42>> and the debate about 400,000 bucks that

2:48:45was added which I think is like more

2:48:46like 3.3 million no details

2:48:51and got voted on as part of the budget

2:48:53that should have been totally separate

2:48:55introduction

2:48:57and if you look at the amended act 26028

2:49:00there's nothing about about it. It's all

2:49:02disappeared. And if you look at the

2:49:05listing on the website, there's no

2:49:0802628.

2:49:10There's only 02628 amended.

2:49:16>> Now,

2:49:18the other thing they should have asked

2:49:19for solid waste runs a 7.4 million

2:49:22deficit.

2:49:24Nowhere in the budget do you find an

2:49:26inter interf fund transfer to cover that

2:49:29deficit. Nowhere.

2:49:32And no one in the budget committee that

2:49:33met at that time said, "How do we fund

2:49:36that shortfall?" It certainly wasn't

2:49:38funded by the general fund

2:49:39>> time.

2:49:41These are the things you should have

2:49:42talked about, not the psycho babble I

2:49:44listen to. Thank you.

2:49:48>> Uh thank you. Um

2:49:51remarks by members of the board of

2:49:52alderman. We'll start with Alderman

2:49:54Lopez.

2:49:55>> Uh so a couple weeks ago we had um a

2:49:57huge art festival in the tree streets.

2:50:00Um and um I just wanted to make sure

2:50:02that people were aware Chronicle New

2:50:04Hampshire Chronicle is covering that and

2:50:05the organization responsible is Art

2:50:07City. So if you're looking for more

2:50:09information about uh that festival and

2:50:10any upcoming events they have, check out

2:50:12Art City. Um and then if anybody's

2:50:14noticed, the garage is currently being

2:50:15painted as well. Um that is also a

2:50:18project. We'll see if Chronicle decides

2:50:20to cover that.

2:50:22>> Okay.

2:50:24>> Next,

2:50:25anyone?

2:50:27Alderman Cle. Uh, thank you. Um, I I

2:50:31just wanted to comment um that while we

2:50:35did see a lot of bond legislation come

2:50:38forward in in new business and so on, um

2:50:41these were all approved through the ad

2:50:44hoc um uh committee on on bonding and so

2:50:48on. So, it stays within what we had

2:50:50agreed on. Um and wastewater is paid, I

2:50:54believe, from the wastewater enterprise

2:50:55fund. Um, so we can't wait for that to

2:50:59fail. We really do need to to look at

2:51:01each and every one of those. And um, to

2:51:04my colleague from Ward 4 who mentioned

2:51:07the garage, I drove by it today on my

2:51:10way here and couldn't help but just be

2:51:14in awe of all the bright colors and so

2:51:16on. It just really kind of adds um to

2:51:18the area. Um, so thank you.

2:51:21>> Okay. Um

2:51:25committee announcements.

2:51:27Alman O'Brien.

2:51:29>> Uh tomorrow night we're having a

2:51:31infrastructure meeting 700 p.m. right

2:51:35here in the automatic train.

2:51:38>> One else I do want to announce on behalf

2:51:41of President Wilshshire. She has

2:51:44appointed uh Alderman at large uh Greg

2:51:47and alderman Tom Lopez to the gap

2:51:50analysis committee. So, congratulations.

2:51:54>> Um, with that, Alderman Cle, do you have

2:51:58a motion?

2:51:58>> Uh, yes. I'd like to make a motion to

2:52:00adjurnn.

2:52:02>> Motion is to adjourn. Alderman Kelly is

2:52:04not with us. All those in favor say I.

2:52:07>> I. Opposed. And

2:52:10>> that motion carries. And we are

2:52:12adjourned at 10:22 p.m.

```*