Town Council - Regular Meeting

Derry Town Council meeting for Monday, August 3rd, 2026. Everyone please rise for the pledge.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

I will open public comment.

Good evening. I'm just going to read this because I don't want to miss anything. Glenn Douglas, 6 Overlook Ave. I run a website called The Town Underground. I've been attending town meetings, town council meetings, and just about everything from conservation to ZBA for 25 years. 20 years ago, I started townunderground.com as an online discussion forum so residents who couldn't attend meetings could still stay informed and participate in local government. Over the years, it's grown from a simple text-only forum into a website, YouTube channel, and Facebook page, each providing different ways to share information with the community. People often comment that I ask a lot of questions. The truth is, many of the questions aren't my own. They come from residents who, for one reason or another, don't feel comfortable speaking at these meetings or simply cannot attend. I try to help by asking those questions on their behalf. A few weeks ago, a resident contacted me with concerns about a planning board meeting notice that they had received and how a proposed project might affect their property after researching the issue. And discussing with them, we determined that there had been some confusion about the project and the process. In the end, the proposal didn't affect his property, and he decided there was no need for me to attend the meeting. Last week, another resident reached out through Facebook asking how they could become more involved with the planning board, but didn't know where to start. That inspired me to begin a new series called How Does It Work video series with the first episode explaining how the planning board functions and how residents can participate. A recent question I've raised concerns a legal opinion that was discussed regarding the legal subcommittee. Because public comment is limited to only five minutes, I won't revisit that topic because that took five minutes to explain. Anyone interested can watch the video should simple questions require a legal review at a cost of $500 an hour. Tonight I'd like to address the veteran's tax credit. This is an issue I believed had already been resolved, yet it continues to come up. I've shared the information that is publicly available, but I realize that one important has never been released. The legal opinion that has been referenced several times during town council discussions. Last week I submitted a request to the town manager for a copy of the legal opinion so that I could post it and residents could review it for themselves and hopefully put this issue to rest. The response I received was, the council has not acted to release that document. It is protected under client attorney privilege. I have included Chairman Dunn on this email to respond. Unfortunately, Chairman Dunn chose not to respond. So tonight, I am asking the town council to consider making a motion to waive attorney-client privilege for that legal opinion and to release any non-public meeting minutes which the veterans tax credit may have been discussed to the extent that they can legally be released. This question has been raised repeatedly by members of the public transparency BENEFITS EVERYONE RELEASING THE LEGAL OPINION WOULD ALLOW RESIDENTS TO UNDERSTAND THE BASIS FOR THE COUNCIL'S POSITION AND HELP BRING CLARITY TO AN ISSUE THAT HAS CONTINUED TO GENERATE ONGOING QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT?

Ron, excuse me, Mr. Chair. Before this goes any further, he asked for a motion. Where would the appropriate spot be to move that motion forward to get that document out? I mean, you had said we were going to answer things as it goes along.

I would say put it on the agenda. Make it an agenda item so we can discuss it beforehand and we can have the public weigh in.

So if I say I wanted to discuss it tonight, you're saying we can't do it today?

I can't prevent you from discussing anything, but I know that I'd want to get a legal opinion whether or not we can release it or not before we decide to do it.

You want a legal opinion on releasing a legal opinion on something that's already been resolved?

Yes.

So you want to spend more money on top of more money on something that's already resolved?

Yes.

MR.

CHAIR WHO WOULD RENDER THAT LEGAL OPINION WOULD IT BE THE ATTORNEY THAT RENDERED THE LEGAL OPINION OR ARE WE GOING TO GO TO THE $500 AN HOUR ATTORNEY TO REVIEW I GUESS THAT WOULD BE FOR FURTHER I I GET DON'T JUST THINKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW I GUESS I WOULD HAVE THE PERSON THAT GAVE US THAT OPINION BUT I'M JUST THINKING OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD LIKE YOU'RE SEEING SORRY

Christine Perez, 5 Wesley Drive. I have a quick question. Why are all or most of the 91As being referred to Shaheen and Gordon for answers at, what, 500 plus an hour, rather than simple ones that could be answered being answered? Why are all of them being referred to legal counsel at the expense of the... Okay, no answer there. I attended the session last week on the PUDs, and thank you, Mr. Mulholland, for doing that. It was informative, and it was nice to hear from other people too. And once again, the concern, need, or want for impact fees came up from people in attendance. They want to know why it hasn't been addressed. I have asked several times, what happened to the statement in 2025, early 2025, when you, chairman, said it would be addressed during budget season? Budget season came. Judging season went. We had elections. Now we're back another year later, and it still hasn't been addressed. It also came to our attention at that meeting, and correct me if I'm wrong, please, Mr. Mulholland, that the planning board had actually sent to the council some thoughts on impact fees. I say thoughts because I don't know exactly what they were, months ago. I don't believe that that has ever been addressed by any of you. And it certainly hasn't been made public, so you haven't addressed it publicly. And what happened to that? Now, Counselor Dunn, let's get things done may look good on signs, but actions and lack of actions speak much louder. Can you start answering questions? When you first were elected, you said, I will answer questions, and we will have them at the next meeting. Quote, Sean will write them down. and we will answer them. Lie? That was a lie.

Thank you. Mr. Chair, I want to address the comment about the information coming from the planning board. I have never seen, I don't recall ever seeing anything like that brought to the council from the planning board.

Okay, we'll look into it. Anybody else have public comment? Good evening. How are you today?

Good. How are you? Good evening. My name is Laura Gandhi. I'm an attorney with divine Milliman branch in Manchester, New Hampshire here to quickly discuss, um, item F under old business for two Litchfield road. I did appear at the last town council hearing for that. And I gave a lot of information at that point in time. It's my understanding that the council has reviewed or had in its possession, the packet of information to review. And I presented the town with, I believe over 62 pages of information for that abatement. And the first part of that document that you have was this sheet from the assessing department that states the tax pays asserted value of zero is not credible and lacks any analysis. So what I want the board, the council to remember is that this property is unique. This property has three different lays of regulations, C3, which is a zoning district, the historic overlay, which is another zoning district, and then the historic preservation easement deed, which was a private agreement between the town and the property owner at that time. Not aware of any other property in town that has this. And in fact, if you look at your zoning section 4.6 for the historic district, there are five properties in town that fall underneath the historic district. The Morrison House, the Town Common, Kent Allen Forest, Grange Hall, and out of the blue is 2 Litchfield Road. Those are the five. So what type of analysis did the town want from the property owner? we can't do any comparables there's nothing in town to compare that to there's nothing in town that has the two zoning districts with the historic preservation easement deed so what we did give you was what we thought was the best option and that was a letter from uh casey folly dated march 1st 2026 and again that said in her professional opinion the easement renders the property functionally unsaleable in the open market I have attached an MLS sheet showing that I had the property listed for 582 days. I had dozens of showings and interested parties that immediately lost interest when they became aware of the easement. That does not even get into the two additional zoning districts on that property. So again, we ask this council to reconsider the denial of that abatement. And I also want to point out that we did ask for the abatement going back to 2017 when my client first purchased the property, which we can do under RSA 76 colon 16. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else have a comment? Seeing none, I will close public comment. Up next, we want to discuss the strategic plan, sir.

I want to talk about this impact fee issue. The council asked me back in 2005 to generate what the options were in that regard. And I produced a white paper that was presented to the council at that time with that information. So that was presented to the council. NO ACTION WAS TAKEN ON THAT BECAUSE THE COUNCIL ALREADY HAS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS, WHICH IT USES, AND THE STATUTORY PROVISION TO USE EXACTIONS, THE PLANNING BOARD DOES HAVE THAT AUTHORITY, BUT THAT IS LIMITED TO IMPROVEMENTS ON ROADWAYS, DRAINAGE AND UTILITIES, WATER AND SEWER. And then subsequent to that, we ran into this issue when it came to the Procopio project in terms of how we apportion the cost to a developer of roadway improvements when some of those are clearly the responsibility of the town and some of those are to that developer or subsequent developers. And I proposed a number of options to do that. And I asked for a smaller group of people to at least develop the strategy to frame it out to get it to the council and the planning board. So I had the planning board chair. I had Tony DeFrancisco, a member of the planning board, Chairman Dunn and Vice Chairman Faber in there, as well as staff. And we went over a number of those options, but no conclusions were drawn as to, no direction was provided at that time as to what to do next. And I think that's what you were referring to, Councilor Bouchard. That was several months ago that I generated that. So that's where we are. We also expected that we were going to have the Procopio development in front of us for approval. And then we have developed a methodology for that one to see how that works. Well, that hasn't happened. And then we did enter an agreement with Woodmont in regards to proportional shares back in May. I think it was May that was approved. And that was just signed recently, as a matter of fact. So that is the progress to date as to where we are in that regard. And with the new proposed PUD, we're developing a strategy plan on that with all of the functional areas. I've been working with departments on that. There's 30, 60, 90, 120-day tasks in there that we have put into place to be able to make sure the town has a strategy to deal with the impacts and also be able to work with our neighbors in Auburn, Derry, and Manchester, and the developer to develop the property from our perspective, what's in the best interest of the town. And we're still working through that process. All right. The next thing is in regards to the strategic plan. That is personally scheduled for a public hearing on the 17th of August. And I have prepared a statement in regards to that, and I have sent that around to counselors to look at to make sure everybody understands that nobody's caught off guard by that. And I wanted to make sure that I read this tonight if the council chooses to take action so that people don't show up on the 17th, perhaps unnecessarily. Chairman Dunn, members of the council, residents of Londonderry, after reviewing the current draft strategic plan, the proposed revisions, staff analysis, feedback from boards and commissions, public comments, and the status of the FY2028 budget process, I recommend that the council withhold final action on the draft FY2729 strategic plan in abeyance until spring of 2027. At that time, the administration should return with a revised framework designed to provide meaningful direction for development of the FY 2029 budget. This is not a recommendation to abandon strategic planning or to discard the work already completed. The process began in June of 2025 and was formally launched in July of 2025. Departments, boards, commissions, residents, businesses, staff, and the council contributed substantial time and ideas. That work was synthesized into seven functional areas, 20 measurable objectives, and a detailed record of source material. The Council held workshops, considered the plan at multiple meetings, and conducted a public hearing. The Town should preserve and build upon that investment. At the same time, the value of a strategic plan is not measured in how quickly it is adopted, by how many pages it contains, or by whether it meets an artificial deadline. Its value is measured by whether it creates shared direction. guides real choices, aligns resources, and can be implemented by the organization that allows the council and the public to judge progress. On those measures, the town is not yet at the point where final adoption would be prudent. First, we do not have durable consensus about what the plan should be. Substantial proposed revisions were presented at the late in the process. Those revisions were not minor wording changes. They raised fundamental questions about the scope of the plan. The relationship between objectives and implementation, the appropriate use of action items and performance measures, the connections to the master plan, the responsibilities of the council, boards, commissions, and staff. The feedback received since then demonstrates that these questions remain unresolved. Forcing a final vote now would not create consensus. It would likely produce a plan that some view as too detailed and others view as too general. or a plan that has formal approval but lacks the shared ownership necessary for implementation. A strategic plan adopted without sufficient agreement can become either an aspirational document that does not influence day-to-day decisions or a detailed administrative work plan that is viewed as exceeding the council's intended policy role. Neither outcome would serve Londonderry well. Second, the timing no longer aligns with the FY2028 budget cycle. The central purpose of the strategic plan is to establish priorities that guide budgeting and resource allocation. The FY2028 budget process is already underway. The budget calendar and related guidance have been under council consideration and departments must proceed with the work necessary to develop operating capital requests. Adopting a strategic plan after the process has begun would either leave the plan unable to meaningfully shape the budget or require the budget process to be retrofitted around a document that has not yet achieved consensus. That would create confusion, unfunded expectations, and avoidable rework. Holding final action until spring of 2027 provides a more responsible sequence. The council could complete the necessary alignment work, consider a revised plan in public, and adopt priorities before the administration issues formal guidance for the FY2029 budget. The plan can then perform its intended function, leading the budget process rather than following it. The pause should be active, not passive. The initiatives already underway will continue under existing budgets, policies, legal responsibilities, administrative authority, and prior council direction. These include digital permitting and licensing, records modernization, Microsoft 365 and SharePoint implementation, asset management, water and transportation planning, facilities and capital work, public safety and emergency preparedness, financial and budget modernization, lean process improvement, standard operating procedures, cross-training, employee development, and improved public communication. These efforts did not begin solely because a strategic plan was proposed, and they should not stop because final action on the plan is deferred. During the period of abeyance, the administration should preserve the complete planning record, maintain a crosswalk showing how current work relates to the draft priorities, identify capacity and resource constraints, establish practical baselines, and concentrate on the FY2028 budget and the town's immediate operational needs. Early in 2027, the council should hold a focused alignment session to reassess the draft plan. The draft plan or revised framework can then be reviewed publicly and brought forward in May of 2027 before the FY 2029 budget guidance is issued. Some may view a pause as lost time. I view it as protecting the time and effort already invested. Adopting a plan without sufficient consensus, implementation readiness, or budget alignment will create the appearance of progress without the conditions needed to deliver results. Taking several months to establish these conditions is more responsible than approving a document that may immediately require revision or may not guide actual decisions. Strategic patience is not an action. It is responsible sequencing. The town should continue doing the work that residents expect while taking the time necessary to produce a plan that is shared, realistic, measurable, implementable, and directly connected to the budget. Londonderry does not simply need a strategic plan on paper. It needs a strategic framework that can be carried out, funded, monitored, and trusted. For those reasons, I respectfully recommend that the council hold final action on the draft strategic plan in advance until spring 2027. Confirm that the currently authorized priorities and initiatives will continue and direct the administration to return to the council with a draft plan in time to guide the FY 2029 budget process. Then I provided the schedule, which you have, and there's a draft motion for your consideration.

Any discussion? frustration because we spent all this time you know staff has spent time citizens have spent a lot of time coming to these things I blame the council for dropping the ball on this you know some counselors were like well I want something smaller I said it before you should have spoken up you should have gone to these meetings that's your job okay you got elected you to represent the people. I know it's a lot of work, but that's what you signed up for. You should have gone to these meetings. You should have done your homework. You should have spoken up and said, let's make it smaller. Let's downsize this thing. Nothing to the last minute. So that's my frustration on it. Okay. Do you want to?

the constant weekly anger when people want to fight with themselves it's hard to go can't you all just get along I'm not going to participate in that kind of thing. The only thing I'm going to say is it is performative because if we're worried about wasting time, we could pass part of that and go forward. But instead, it's got to be the whole thing. Otherwise, it's a giant waste of time. That doesn't even logically make sense.

But good speech. I just think it's the best thing for the council right now. We don't all agree. And I think the town manager came up with a a good solution we're not putting it on the we're going to keep moving forward with it and be ready to go in the spring with it and that way it will start right at the beginning of budget season and it makes sense

Oh, I agree with not just doing away with it, Mr. Chair. I think we need to look at this. We need to move forward with it. We need a plan. That's a lot of things that this community lacks is planning. All right? So, yes, I'd like to see this. Down the road. Okay. Move forward. I'll accept them. Anyone want to make a motion? Do you have the motion? I do not.

Thank you, sir.

You want me to do it? It's up to you. You want to do it, Sean?

It's up to you. I'm going to read it. Okay. I guess I have an issue with the motion. I would, I would, I mean, I'm okay on holding on this, but part of this is there's a lot in here and it's, well, can you share it?

Can you read it?

Yeah. Yeah. I mean, do you want me to just read out what it is?

Yeah. Sure.

Um, London area town council hereby holds further action on the draft fiscal year, 2027 to 2029 strategic plan in advance until spring 2027. No issue with that. Direct the town manager to preserve and use the existing draft public input commission and feedback council deliberations and preparing a concise policy framework. So I guess the second half of this, I don't, I don't mind holding further action. The rest of this is just, let's just do the strategic plan, but not do the strategic plan is I guess the way I'm reading it.

It basically keeps it, keeps it moving forward.

Yeah, I mean, if you listen, there's still stuff that needs to be done that we're moving forward with.

I understand. I guess there's things in the strategic plan that five of us have consensus on. There are things in the strategic plan that we don't all have consensus on. I'm fine with the motion. All right, I'll read it.

I'll move that the Londonderry Town Council hereby holds further action on the draft FY2027-20... FY 2029 strategic plan in abeyance until spring 2027, direct the town manager to preserve and use the existing draft, public input, board and commission feedback, and council deliberations in preparing a concise council level strategic policy framework. Confirm that priorities and initiatives already underway through existing budgets, policies, plans, contracts, or council action will continue and direct the town manager to return no later than May 2027 with a revised plan for public hearing and council consideration so that the adopted priorities may guide development in the FY 2029 budget.

That's a motion. A motion from Dan.

I'll second it.

A second from Deb. Further discussion?

The only thing I can say is, you're right, we didn't agree on it all. But why toss the whole thing out? You've got all this data. Some of it will be relevant. Some of it will be unrelevant. But at least, you know, starting from scratch again. And that would be a sin to have to do it all over again. Do we going to have some more public input and stuff? Yeah. So I don't see what's wrong with just saying, okay, we're going to put it over here and they're going to wait. And I think it's the right thing to do. That's all.

So I guess I'll ask this. Are you okay with everything in there going forward? Because that's what the motion says.

That's not what the motion says to me. It doesn't say that to me. That doesn't what it says to me. Okay. That motion says that it's going to stay active.

Yep.

I mean, I'm reading that motion.

So actually, I can actually ask Sean. That'll help clear this up.

We're not moving. We're not implementing the strategic plan. There's a number of things in there that the council has never directed me to do. In fact, most of the things that are in there, I was not directed to do. But there are a lot of things we have going on. You know what they are? And I listed those out in my statement, which is going to be part of that record.

Yeah.

So I know there's some things that you have this controversy about. Those things are specifically not in there. I have no direction to move forward in any of those. So it's a good point that you bring up. Yeah, I'm just reading through it. Right. You don't want to write a blank check, and that's absolutely appropriate. You're the governing body. So the things that are already in the way, and I listed those, and they're actually in that. You've got it in front of you there. They're listed in there, and I made sure that I listed those, that that's the things I'm moving on. I know there's some controversial items, and I've left – Those alone. The emergency management one I know is a controversial one, but I am moving forward on that because we actually have an obligation to do that anyway. So that one is moving forward because that is listed in there. But it's a good point. You're not writing a blank check for me to go out and then come up with whatever I want, or just take the strategic plan as it was proposed and go implement it. Because that's clearly not the direction of the council, and that should be clear on this record.

I just wanted to make sure of that, because the language wasn't in my packet. Otherwise, I would have reviewed this in advance. I understand it was in a separate email. I just didn't.

So the way I read it, and correct me if I'm wrong, it says existing budgets, policies, plans, and contracts will continue. That are already existing, things that are in the plan are going to be worked on.

Right.

That's the way I read it. Am I reading that correctly? Yeah, because I really don't have any other direction. Right. So I want confirmation. I want to make sure you feel comfortable.

Doing what you want me to do.

Yeah, that is the way. Am I interpreting it correctly, sir?

You are, and again, it's been said out loud, so that's helpful.

All right, any further discussion? All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Chair, what's the affirmative?

4-0.

4-0, sorry.

All right, up next we have- Could we just make for the record, so people don't show up, and there will be no public hearing?

Yes, there will be no public hearing on the strategic plan on the 17th.

Up next, board appointments. Can I say something here? I want to address Mr. Douglas' issue with the legal opinion. Last meeting, I asked you if you got a legal opinion, and you said you had a legal opinion. That was on 720. I'm going to read what you said. The full subcommittee has voted to establish a subcommittee and delegate its authority to subcommittee. The subcommittee is not authorizing any expenditures. The full council has approved the engagement letters and authorized legal expenses as necessary. The town charter explicitly authorizes the town council. Hold on a second. So I got the legal opinion because I asked for it. And I got it from you. And the legal opinion was dated July 21st. Now, I read the entire legal opinion. I don't find anything that you said that was in the legal opinion. But what I find interesting is we're paying an attorney $500 an hour plus whatever, whoever else helps him write this. And it says the town council shall act in all matters as a body. Town charter 4.8, pursuant to 4.19. I reviewed the entire town charter. I don't find any 4.19. So I don't know what this attorney is referring to. I believe the town charter was renumbered. Well, he says 4.19. I look at it, there's no 4.19. It also says the subcommittee will report to the full council. We have not received any report from the two of you as far as what is going on with legal. In the email, I also get this email about he's looking at reorganization plans. I don't know when we talked about having an attorney looking at reorganization plans. So I continue to look at his email. And I find it's typical lawyer stuff. They don't put everything in there. They leave parts of it out. He writes in here that town council may receive such reports or considered other privilege or confidential information as closed session outside the presence of the town manager. Town Charter 4.16. The manager shall attend all meetings of the council unless excused by the council. He ends it there. If you continue reading the charter, it says the manager shall have the right to take part in the discussion of all matters before the council, but not a right to vote. I just find it interesting how attorneys will put certain things in there and then just leave it out. And it also says, therefore, prior to any legal matter that could result in any new engagement of financial obligation.

Are you disclosing?

I'm not disclosing anything. No, I'm not.

I'm just for the record.

Okay. We talk about In the charter, we act as a body, not as two people. So I got a whole bunch of questions. How much have we spent to date on these investigations? And did the subcommittee that you established give the attorney a blank check? Because how much are we paying for this stuff? I mean, all of a sudden, there's other stuff coming up that we're investigating this, investigating that, but... Are any counselors here under investigation? Can you answer that?

No, I can't.

You can't answer if counselors are under investigation. So apparently we have counselors that are under investigation. If you can't answer it. Because it's not hard to say no. I know that. The investigation that was completed, I was under investigation. I had no idea. So I think the people have a right to know. You know, when are these investigations going to end? It's been like six months of investigations, all this secret squirrel stuff. Why isn't the entire council not being included in the legal correspondence? We have discussed this. We said, as a council, everybody is going to get everything from the attorneys. We're not getting nothing, even though he says you're supposed to let us know. Unless you're just doing it, the three of you, and you're not letting Councilor Paul and myself know, because neither one of us know what's going on here. So are you going to answer any of these questions, or are you going to choose not to answer as usual? I'm not going to answer.

These have been answered? All right. They've been answered?

How much we've spent to date? You haven't answered that.

Okay, Dan. All right, up next, board appointments and reappointments. We have the resignation of Harry Schwartz from the Conservation Commission. Can I have a motion to accept his resignation? So moved. Motion from Sean. I'll second it. All those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Chairman, what's the affirmative for zero? Thank you, Harry, for your time on the Conservation Commission. We appreciate it. I'll accept the motion for resignation of Caitlin Moore from the old Home Day Board of Directors. So moved. Motion from Sean. Second, I'll second it. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Chair votes the affirmative 4-0. Thank you for your time on the old Home Day Board of Directors and hopefully we can get somebody to replace you soon. Since it's coming up. We don't have any public hearings tonight. And up first, discuss and approve the request for expenditure of the roadway maintenance trust fund. And you wanted to do that, sir.

Yes, so this is for the applied ship seal to those roadways, Plainview Drive, Delta Drive. As you know, they're not residential roads by the airport. It's a roadway preservation technique that's far less expensive than paving roadways, and it extends the life of those roadways. We've been through this. We talked about it quite a bit. You've got documentation in there. We're requesting the authorization to transfer $175,000 from that roadway maintenance fund to the general fund to get that work done, and hopefully we can get it in this construction season. We're kind of late in the process, but we're hoping, and it depends on what the weather is, too, on their schedule. It's going to be dry, obviously, to do that. Any questions? Is $3.2 million in that fund presently?

No questions? Do a motion? Make a motion to accept that.

I guess if no one makes a motion, we move it to the next meeting.

Where is it? I'm looking for it.

It's under, on the agenda. Have it on your screen, Ron. Let's see. If you click on the cover sheet, it's new business, number one, then documents, number one.

Right here, yeah.

Oh, you're going on the wrong side. I know. Hold on. Hold on, Dan. Hold on.

All right, Dan.

All right, I got it. I'll move that the Londonderry Town Council hereby approves Order 2026-16, directs the trustees of the trust fund to disperse $175,000 from the roadway maintenance trust fund to the general fund for all work associated with chip sealing Plainview Drive, Delta Drive, Aviation Drive, and Harvey Road between North Wentworth Ave and Pettengill Road, with the final scope to be determined based on the project priorities, field conditions, and available funding.

I'll second.

A motion from Dan and a second from Sean. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? So it's the affirmative 3-0. Councilor Paul stepped up. Up next, discuss the request by the town of Litchfield to provide ambulance service and fire dispatch. First, I would like to recognize that we have Selectman John Bernal here. We have Town Administrator Kim Kleiner, and Fire Chief Doug Dickles here. Thank you for coming today, and I would welcome the Chief. How are you tonight, sir?

Good, thank you. How are you? Good.

How are you, Phil?

We have no controller tonight.

No, I'm your remote controller.

Thank you for having us tonight. I'm here to discuss something that I'm excited to bring before the town council tonight, and that's the opportunity to provide both ambulance and dispatch services to the advantages to both communities as demonstrated through our presentation tonight. Next slide please. So we were initially approached the fire department that being by Litchfield in April to discuss the potential of providing both services to their town. I was fairly new at the time and I was excited about the opportunity but didn't know much about it and began researching the subject. In May It drafted and proposed a formal inter-municipal agreement and was provided to Litchfield for their review. In June, we had additional meetings with representatives from both towns, being the Litchfield Board of Selectmen, our town manager, myself, as fire chief, and Chief Nichols from Litchfield. In July, the Litchfield Board of Selectmen authorized moving forward with our proposal. And also in July, a draft regarding the terms and conditions was finalized via an inter-municipal agreement. And again, that's in draft form at this time. And that leads us up to tonight where we're presenting this to the town council for your input and review. Some of the advantages of this enhanced partnership is the long standing relationship that we've had with Litchfield Fire through mutual aid for many, many years. Back in the 1980s, we did provide their dispatch services prior to them moving over to the town of Hudson, and that was before we had ambulance service. And we've also served as their backup communication centers for more than 20 years. The increased staffing resources available for both towns will benefit their residents, our residents, and we'll demonstrate that further throughout this presentation. The increase in department staffing, benefit londonderry without increasing the tax rate and the staffing that's paid for 100 by a combination of the assessment to the town of litchfield and ambulance transport reimbursements will benefit benefit us our town 83 of the time statistically By adding more staffing, we're enhancing the safety and well-being of our staff within the Londonderry Fire Department, as well as the citizens and visitors to our community and the community of Litchfield. Next slide, please. The proposal within our communications divisions, that being our telecommunications officers within dispatch, This agreement would be over three years and commence on January 1, 2027. It would add one additional full-time TCO operator to the staff, bringing the total number to six full-time staff. The revenue is laid out there in years one through three. Again, this would be a three-year inter-municipal agreement, and the figures are there before you, years one, two, and three. The assessment model is comparable to the communities of Pelham and Hampstead, which we already serve throughout our dispatch center. And we would be adding approximately 900 more calls of workload for our TCOs, which averages 2.47 calls per day. Within the operations division, again, we're entertaining a three-year inter-municipal agreement, which would commence at the same time, January 1st, 2027. It would add four full-time firefighter and EMT positions. They may be EMTA or paramedic positions or EMT basic positions depending on the hiring pool or the candidate pool we're able to draw from. The assessment model is laid out there in years one through three. For purposes of clarity, in year one it was initially a proposed $200,000 assessment. Litchfield does have to take into consideration a tax cap that they have in their community, and they propose to move $25,000 from the first year's assessment into year three. So first year assessment would be 175, which originally was proposed as 200, but then year three becomes much higher because the $25,000 reduction in year one is then moved to year three. The assessment model is comparable to surrounding communities. For example, Hudson's current agreement serving the town of Litchfield and Derry serving both Auburn and Chester. Those agreements were taken into consideration when calculating a reasonable assessment that would work for both communities. Within the operations division, the workload would increase for our folks by approximately 620 responses annually, which works out to be about 1.7 responses per day. Additional sources of revenue are the patient insurance reimbursements that will provide the largest source of revenue. Each time we transport a patient to the hospital within a Londonderry ambulance, the insurance reimburses us for that transport. It's also important to note that they reimburse for mileage. In some of my conversations with various folks, some concerns about increased fuel costs, wear and tear on the vehicle, and long term capital replacement has been discussed. We charge more than $30 per loaded mile when transporting to the hospital. And that calculation is based on breaking down per call what it costs for the increase in fuel, mileage, wear and tear, long term maintenance, and capital replacement of ambulances. Based on an estimated 10% of responses not resulting in a transport, which we do have to take into consideration, not everybody that calls 911 and has an ambulance response is transported to the hospital. So we account for approximately 10% of our total responses to not result in a transport. And using very conservative historical billing estimates, The insurance reimbursements are estimated at $361,852. Now, Hudson's reported actuals for residents of Litchfield transported in Hudson Ambulance last year was 425,000. So using a calculation and taking the average between the two and then accounting for non-transports, we've arrived at, you'll see on the next slide when we advance to that, the estimated revenue in year one. So the total estimates, excuse me, it's on this slide, my apologies. The total estimate for year one of both dispatch and EMS agreements combined together in the figure in the calculation I just discussed is $605,309. So year one cost to provide services, and this is speaking to the hiring cost of full-time personnel specifically. Four firefighter paramedic wages totals $276,581. That's calculated at a firefighter paramedic coming in at approximately step four based on experience. Do we expect that to happen? Likely not, but we used high hiring costs intentionally and low revenue costs so there are no surprises. In addition to wages, we always need to take into consideration benefits. The total benefits for the four firefighter paramedic positions is $216,392. This includes health and dental based on the average of all three plans. That would be single, single plus one, and family plans. Because we do expect a cross section of those plans to be assigned to the four new people who would ultimately accept the positions. It also does account for full retirement contribution by the town. The additional TCO, their wages are listed there at $59,571. Their total benefits for a family plan, health and dental, as well as full retirement contribution by the town is $51,601. Please excuse me, it is a little late. So the total cost of wages and benefits for all five positions proposed to $604,146. You subtract those costs from the total anticipated revenue of $605,309, it results in a small net gain of $1,162. Now the purpose of that is to demonstrate that even anticipating our hiring costs to be very high, in our revenue figures to be very conservative, we still end up with a small net gain. We expect that net gain to be even greater. Now with the deployment of new staffing, there are options available. We will continuously evaluate that and provide the most efficient and cost effective approach to deployment of the new staffing. Some of that will require discussions with the local labor union and collaborative effort to deploy our new staffing in the most cost-effective approach but also the approach that benefits the end users being the patients in the most efficient manner possible. No matter what the deployment of new staffing is what will happen is there will be a better response for our overlapping calls of service annually as you can see there in 2025 52.84% of our responses occur when another response is already occurring. That's a significant amount of overlapping incidents every year. This initiative is aimed at reducing the reliance on mutual aid from surrounding communities, which will reduce response times and provide better care to the patients who are calling for our services in both communities. And it will also maximize the amount of revenue that the town sees from our ambulance service because if we're transporting the patients in our own ambulances from both towns, we will receive that revenue versus a mutual aid ambulance from another town where they would receive that revenue if they transport the patient. Next slide please. The path forward after taking everything into consideration, I've determined that the fire department is capable and willing to undertake this increased service demand, this modest increased service demand that has quite a bit of financial benefit for our town. It also helps us move forward towards a path of increasing our staffing, which we have all identified as a need within this town in a way that does not impact the tax rate. The return on the investment is greater than the increased demand that we are willing to take on as a department. Both towns, the town of Litchfield as well as the town of Londonderry, will receive outstanding service from our outstanding EMS professionals through a sustainable assessment model. Londonderry will receive the increased staffing that we desperately need that's funded by sources, a new revenue source, which will benefit both communities. And I will reiterate once again that the five new positions that we are proposing by means of new revenue will be 100% funded by a combination of the assessments to Litchfield and the insurance reimbursements coming into us through ambulance transports. We'll be able to add five new people without impacting the tax rate. And statistically, 20 hours out of every day, Londonderry will retain that new staff, it will be available to our residents, and it will have, again, no impact on the tax rate. So before I open it up to questions, where I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have, I just wanted to reiterate a few more points. To say once again, I think it's a fair statement that we have all discussed. and identified a need to increase the staffing within the Londonderry Fire Department. I can only assume that by way of your support for the recent SAFER grant that we applied for, looking to increase our department by eight positions, the many, many conversations I've had with residents, the independent reports that have identified additional staffing needs within the community, et cetera. Municipal fire departments have very, very few options. when it comes to obtaining additional staff. One of course is to increase the operating budget, which substantially impacts the tax rate. Another option is to increase revenue. That can be done modestly through some things like increasing permit fees, et cetera. But it's very difficult to substantially increase your revenue source without taking on increased service demand for a department that provides ambulance service, which leads me into your third option. And that is to accept an increase in service demand for a large return on that investment. And that's what the proposal accomplishes. I'd like to reiterate the point again that our projected hiring costs are higher than what we anticipate to see. while our revenue projections are lower than what we anticipate to see. That was done very intentionally to show the value in pursuing this agreement and the advantages that it has for both communities participating in it. The opportunity to add five full-time employees with salaries and benefits that are covered 100% by a new source of revenue is extremely, extremely rare. Especially when that new staffing will benefit Londonderry the large majority of the time as demonstrated. This is one step in a multifaceted approach from our department to obtain additional staffing. I've already mentioned the Safer Grant. We're looking at the regular budget process and reasonably and responsibly adding staff through the budgetary process, increasing our fee schedules, et cetera. And there'll be more information about that as we move through the budget process and looking at adjusting our fees and charging additional fees for services rendered by the department. That's a topic and a discussion for a future time. And the last point I'd like to I know when I was first hired here and I spoke with this town council, I had mentioned looking at ways to maximize the amount of revenue coming into the department. It's something that I consider one of my specialties from past experiences. This idea may seem foreign to some, it's not foreign to me. For many, many years, we worked under a very similar inter-municipal agreement. Where my former employer was the host community and we provided EMS services to five municipalities. Assessing four of them and seeing the success that it had for all communities involved was a very gratifying thing. It's a sustainable model. It works. There are some gives and takes, but the overall benefit far outweighs the sacrifices involved in doing something like this. So I just wanted to leave you with that sentiment. So my question to you is, do you have any questions that I can answer for you?

Good, just one quick question. The term of the initial agreement, that's three years?

It is three years, yes.

Deb, go ahead.

I'm going to be the pain, I'm sorry. Not that I'm for or against this, I'm still gathering data. So what happens if at the end of the three years they fall out of love with us like they fell out of love with Hudson? We still have these five employees that we would have to figure out a way how to fund, correct?

You would have options.

If you no longer have an intermunicipal agreement which was funding those positions, then it would be your job as a council to reevaluate whether we maintain those positions or not. As a fire chief, I'm always going to advocate to maintain those positions. Of course, I would not advocate to eliminate them. But there are revenue concerns that need to be taken into consideration and budgetary concerns that need to be taken into consideration.

I'm just trying to be realistic as to what if on the four sides. So at the end of the day, we have a grant for eight people, correct?

Correct.

Can part of that grant be used towards that five and then bump that money out that Litchfield's giving to cover it in a future date when the grant stops covering it? Because that one $1,000 or $1,500 is really not going to help after that three years. I mean, I don't know what's going to happen then. And so I'm trying to think of this. So you're talking 13 new firefighters. And are we going to need more equipment for these 13 firefighters?

Just to be clear, we don't have a grant.

Well, we applied for it. I just want to be careful because- All right, let me bring back the hypothetical. If we got the grant, right, there's eight, and then you want these five for Litchfield, so that's a total of 13. Is there a way to include that five in that grant? And then take the money from Litchfield, put it in a fund for future funding, In case, and to cover costs of raises and whatever else that could come forward. I'm a little cautious because I'm afraid if everything came to fruition and then if the rug got pulled out, what would happen?

So first piece, Deb, is that the $1,100 very small- Gain. that we would get at the first year, that's just the first year. That's going to grow each year. It's not going to stay that point. It is because the fee schedule goes up each year. If you notice, the first year was $175,000. Last year was $256,000. So that number is going to go up just based off of the increase in fee from Litchfield plus what?

Well, because, well, in that increase, you have health insurance going up, and you have raises going up, and overtime going up, because there could be more building over in Litchfield, which they are doing. So now you have more calls. So my point is, you can't guarantee that that money's going to come.

Well, but with those more calls is more revenue from the ambulance. See, it's like a compounding effect, right? And I'm not saying it's a huge increase. I don't know that because we can't predict revenue. We can't predict ambulance revenue other than what we have historically gotten from past, right? But in theory, based off of fee schedules increases, call volume increasing, That money goes up. That revenue goes up.

I think it would be helpful to see year two and year three too. I get that we don't know what benefits, but we can base it a little bit on what historically has happened in the past and just, you know, at least to see something in there.

It is... Not responsible to do that, in my humble opinion, and I'll share why. We can do that with the assessment model, and the assessment model was built to increase, to keep pace, and actually keep ahead of inflation, historical percentage inflation year to year. The assessment of fixed costs, it's very easy to do that. Without keeping a rolling average as calls increase year to year, typically increase year to year within the municipality. It is nearly impossible to project what year two and year three would look like as far as the insurance reimbursements from the ambulance transports themselves. We do expect them to increase because historically we've seen a call volume increase year over year just within the town of Londonderry. litchfield has provided excuse me historical data that has also shown that same thing and demonstrated increased call volume year to year to year so we do expect that increase but without having a rolling three or five year average to be able to calculate that for you we're really just taking a shot in the dark and that's not something i want to do and provide you with inaccurate data we have the rolling three to five year average though the prior and that's how we landed on all of these mathematical calculations here without adding 12 months at the tail end of it we don't have up-to-date data and we're looking historically at a trend that's not accurate within the last so it'll be based on that historical trend and with the new state ambulance revenue billing that we

that we put into play with the contracts that we spoke with you guys about probably six months ago. That's the other piece of it, that it's hard to get that data because this is a different model of billing per the state than has been done previous to this year, right? So unfortunately, we don't even have that data because that just went into play this year.

Additionally, when the ambulance rates are adjusted each year, they're done so at usually the federal level. When you talk about Medicare and Medicaid, those are adjusted in accordance with historical trends of inflation as well. So all of these things that we expect to see moving forward will keep pace or slightly exceed rates of inflation when we're talking about contractual increases and the increase of costs and goods moving forward.

Go ahead, sorry. Continue on.

Again, I am concerned about our firefighters, okay? And I don't want to hire people and then in three years we can't keep them. And I don't want to overstress. our firefighters, because it's a very, you know, stressful, high-anxiety sort of job, just as the police are. It's that you're on lead, sort of, you know what I'm saying. And so I want to make sure, like, have you... Because you did all the positives. I really would have liked to have seen the negatives. What happens at the end of the three years? What happens if Hudson decides to seduce them back or Merrimack decides to encourage them to go over there? What happens then to us and to those poor guys that are now part of your team? Are we going to be able to cover them? Those are questions that... I, as one counselor, really, because I don't think that's fair to hire someone to go, oh, I'm sorry, three years that thing broke up. We've got to let you go. I wouldn't want to do that. I mean, I probably won't be here, and that's fine.

You'll physically still be here, Deb, in town, I hope. I said you'll physically still be here in town.

But you know what I'm trying to say. I don't want to do that to somebody. I think about that as a human being. You don't want to.

So I like to sit up here and bring back revisionist history or history of the voluntary fire department. Right. And I'm not going to speak to the end of the contract and what happens, but to the point of thinking about how it affects our organization. Right. So five years ago, past fire department and town administrations wanted to bring in the town of Candia for dispatching services. Right. For a nominal amount of money. And it would have added more workload to our dispatchers. with no benefit to our community. Well, it would be a negative to our community and our dispatchers, right? And so when I moved into this position and Chief Butler moved in, we got re-approached about this. And we said, we are not going to move forward with another contract that brings zero benefit to the town of Lundenderry or our members, right? So this contract, of course, came up and we shared the back story with the chief on how we got Hampstead and how we brought Pelham in under dispatch. But we said that in order for this to work, This has to provide a positive outcome for the community and our membership, because we're not just going to continue to put more work on our members for nothing. And we really took that into consideration when we looked at this and went through this process. And we wouldn't have moved forward with it if there was not going to be a benefit to our community and our members, because it's not, to your point, right. And we looked at that, right, with the past. And I'll be honest with you, the Hampstead and Pelham contract strained our TCOs, our telecommunications operators. And so that was a big sticking point with myself and Chief Heinrich when we talked to the chief about this. We can't, especially with dispatch, bring on another contract if there's not an added benefit of another person, which we've proven by having two people in there. is a game changer right otherwise it's it's it's bad for for our town it's bad for our members right so we took that into consideration when we first even started entertaining the idea of this right and we made that clear to chief nichols from the onset if this doesn't benefit our community and our membership then it's not it's not a value to us so so are we going to need more equipment more ambulance more trucks

so as far as equipment every firefighting needs to be outfitted with personal protective equipment yes and i do believe a combination of our current operating budget as well as the decreased hiring costs and the increased revenue will be able to offset that additionally to your point trucks equipment things like that if we do nothing different today we still are going to maintain has recently approved four ambulances with a fifth mechanical reserve. We're not bringing on an additional ambulance or additional pieces of apparatus or anything like that.

But to that point, if in the future, and this should be done now with Litchfield, In seeing heavier volume because of the types of houses, getting closer, whatever, more people, it should be built in there that somehow or another, we're not solely responsible for buying a new ambulance. They should have their belly up to the bar and pay for half of that truck. Yeah, we own it, we maintain it, but we're using it to help them. Do you know what I, like, I'm being forward thinking. Like I said, I'm not against or for, I'm just getting information and trying to find every possible thing that could, fall through the holes, and make sure we address it in a logical fashion so that I personally can look people in the eye and say, this is a really good thing because I feel safe that this and this and this is going to be covered. We're not going to be held holding a basket of cracked eggs. That's all.

So if you could provide some clarity on your thought process as to why you feel Litchfield should be buying an additional ambulance. I'm a little bit lost with that concept.

Because- We're gonna have some of our own, we're putting in, we have our own, right? But now we're taking theirs on, and as we go forward, right? And I'm not saying they're gonna do it like today. I'm saying at the end of the three years, if we evaluate this with their building, and I do know the building is going on over there. So with the building that's going on over there, and the building that's going on over here, if the call volume steadily increases, That pushes to the point where we need to have another truck. It should be some sort of partnership there because we might have not needed that or there would have been less wear and tear on our trucks that we have if we hadn't been sourcing them. They're covering the cost of the firefighters themselves and that's wonderful. But along with those firefighters, you don't want them having crappy equipment. That just puts them in an unsafe situation, and we don't want to do that. And I'm not trying to be greedy or anything. I'm just trying to be truthful in how I see things. which is a scary thing. I'm sorry.

So chief, wouldn't that wouldn't they actually be paying more because their mileage is going to be higher than when our residents are paying because they have to for the ambulance is going to travel further into their town. So they're going to pay a higher proportion per call their residents than our residents do as part of that mileage at $30 per mile for service call. So they are going to pay more aren't they? And that's what goes towards paying for the cost of that ambulance and running that and the capital costs that go along with it. Not correct.

Correct, yes. The longer you travel, the more miles you travel, the more you recoup in that mileage reimbursement. And it's a mathematical calculation as discussed to cover such things as capital replacement, wear and tear, fuel consumption, etc. To your point though, thank you for explaining it to me. It helps me see it more clearly where you're coming from. At the end of the three years, we determined that the call volume sufficient enough to entertain looking at adding an additional piece of apparatus. Because of the additional workload that we took on, absolutely it would be appropriate to have those discussions and open dialogue with Litchfield about a capital replacement program when we're undergoing the renewal of that intermunicipal agreement would be appropriate at that time.

And I agree with you, but I'm an upfront sort of person. I would have the upfront conversation, but should we be taking, like Sean had said about the mileage, should we be taking those funds that come from mileage specifically and putting them in a specific account? For ambulance, I've seen you do it before.

Vehicle repair costs, and so the town manager beat me to it. But the point of the mileage, just like when you file taxes under a business and you can put in mileage if you use it for work, is there to cover the costs of the wear and tear. of whatever is getting you from point A to point B to do your work, right? So I think it's worth understanding that the repair and maintenance of those ambulances built into that mileage fee, right? Instead of having to say, hey, we want Litchfield to pay X amount of dollars to, right? It's kind of, it's a very small proration over a three-year period in that mileage, right? And so that's what would cover that cost, right? And-

And again, I'm not against this. No, not at all. I don't want to take advantage of Litchfield. I believe personally all police need to be regionalized, and that's how you're going to save money. But I understand the fiefdom. So at that point, we'll leave that there.

It is good, Deb, to look at the 360-degree view of everything.

But I do believe that's the wave of the future because it's the only way you can sustain it.

And that's exactly what they're proposing here. This is regionalization because we can't get the additional staff. I mean, adding four more people. I know we applied for a grant, and if we get it, we're going to really struggle if we get it. because there's matching requirements, and then we have a cliff at the end of eight full-time positions. That's like $1.3 million that I don't know how we're going to pay for that. But we won't know until September as to whether or not we got that grant. But that is what the vote was to move forward on that. So we're in a position now that when this decision is made, we're going to find out in September whether or not we got this grant or not. And that's going to be a key decision point. So if we get the grant for eight positions, and it wasn't 13, by the way, it was 12 because one's a TCO, then I would suspect that we're not going to add the additional four. We're just going to go with the eight.

They'd all be inside of that.

Right. So what timing is the key because you can't supplant federal funds.

No, I understand.

right so when that is signed on the dotted line we want to have the answer one way or the other about that grant but these folks need to have some they need to know which way they're going they need to know the council supports this plan moving forward because they're running out of time and they have to i don't know what other options they might have but they have to figure out what that is so we need to get them an answer on that so the timing and the strategy is important i'm sure they would prefer the 12 positions but I do not recommend that if you get the eight because you've got a huge cliff at the end, which means we're not going to be able to do anything else.

If we don't get the grant, and let's just say we move forward with Litchfield and we don't get the grant, at the end of the day, it would be just those positions.

Right.

But if we do get the grant, we still have to hire an additional eight or we just have to hire an additional four?

We need four people to be able to provide the coverage to both our town and their town. We can't do it with the existing state.

I understand that.

Right. So you would have the choice if you're going to do eight or 12. I don't recommend 12.

Okay. So we just stay at the eight. I got it.

But what you said at the beginning, we would take that money that's provided by Litchfield and we would, in essence, bank that and reduce our property taxes on that.

Right. That's what I was trying to... Okay.

So at the end of the day... These regional relationships only work when they're in the best interest of both parties, and we're not sticking it down their throat and charging them for costs. And we wouldn't want to be those people. I know, I know. But I want to be clear for the public, it's not about us making money. It's about covering our costs, and the addition is we get the additional service. If they got one call or 1.7 calls per day, we've got that staff to run a second ambulance. We only run one ambulance right now. We've got three ambulances, and we're going to have four with a spare. Chief?

Correct, yes.

So that's one of each station. I just want to be clear so people understand this. Right.

That's what I'm trying to do because it's confusing. Right.

Right now we run one ambulance and jump in where I'm wrong here, Chief. We run one ambulance, staff one ambulance out of the central station to cover the entire town. Now we're going to run two ambulances. And the advantage of Litchfield, the geography of their town and ours, is all three of our stations can laterally travel into their town. It actually works out quite well. Like Hudson, they have to come from the bottom of their town and go up 3A to get there because there's a river in between. So we're in a much better position to provide that service much more quickly, which means our units can get back in service much more quickly to be able to do that.

It makes more sense. I mean, doing it there as opposed to Hampstead or Candy, it's way too far away. It's too much distance. I mean, I know you guys go anyway to help people.

Well, and with that, we're dispatching, so that would be a- All right, I'm good with my question.

I didn't mean to- You're good, that's what we're here for. I just have a quick question. Do we have the ability to hire and train these folks prior to the 1-1-27 deadline? Do we think we can accomplish that?

So that's one of the reasons why we're here. Both Litchfield needs to obviously determine the path forward that they need to go in. And if that path forward involves Londonderry taking on that agreement, we need time to start getting all of our ducks in a row. And that means starting the hiring process and putting all those things in motion. the revenue will not start to come until we actually take on that service, and we cannot spend money without the ability to bring the money in. So to physically hire them prior to January 1st, we could certainly, correct me if I'm wrong, extend offers and things like that, but they can't come on board and be on the payroll until January 1st of 2027. But there's a lot of work that we can do ahead of time to get to that point.

So we would be confident, I don't want to let these folks down, that if we agree to this and we all both sign off on it, that on New Year's Day, if Richfield has calls, that we'll be able to respond with the current crew that we have officially and our residents won't suffer, is what I'm basically asking.

As a hiring officer for the fire department, Ron, I attest that we would have four people hired by January 1st of 2027. I work very diligently at that, Ron, and I will continue to do that.

Does the Litchfield Select Board have to approve this?

I don't know if Litchfield would like to speak to it. I can speak to the fact that they've already done that in public session.

I think it would be appropriate to have someone from Litchfield speak to that.

Yeah, absolutely. If anyone from Litchfield would like to speak.

I just want to know if there's process on their end or that's already complete.

I appreciate you guys coming out tonight, so thank you.

Good evening, thank you for having us and taking up this opportunity. So the Board of Selectmen- Sir, if you could just state your name for the record. Sorry, John Bernal, Litchfield's Chair of the Board of Selectmen. So the Board has already taken this up. We have approved it. Obviously, looking forward for you folks to approve it. We've already put it in our budget. We've already worked through all those logistical things, so we're actually ready to go. We'll have to sell it to our town to make these changes. But from that perspective, it's in our operating budget and we'll proceed forward. Okay. I think what's interesting is Londonderry, as was stated earlier, has had a good work relationship with our community. Londonderry does respond to our community for mutual aid and does do ambulance coverage when Hudson's not available. So it's a lot of good parodies there that'll work well for the community. So we look forward for you folks to actually support it and move it forward.

Any other questions for Litchfield? Danielson for Litchfield? Go ahead. I have more questions, but not for Litchfield. No, not for him. I want to be able to let him off. I didn't realize it would be the hot seat. He has his own council meetings he has to attend, so I don't want to. Thank you, sir. Thank you very much for your time. I just had one other question. With the ambulance increase fee schedule and obviously the rising number of calls, do the people or the person who bills the insurances, do we need to add on to that end too? Are we good there? Like, will we have enough people to bill out all the insurance calls that we have?

That's done through a private contractor, and they charge a percentage of the amount collected. So that's part of the assessments. As they increase, those mathematical formulas are accounted for to account for the increase in the billing percentage.

Great.

Dan, you're up.

First of all, I want to thank our firefighters out there sitting out there. I want to thank you for everything you do for our community. I'm sure that's why the community of Litchfield is looking for service from us because of your professionalism. I want to thank the... representatives of Litchfield I can tell you that I've lived here for over 40 years and it's great to see the mutual aid between London Dairy and Litchfield you guys have come here helped us out we've gone there and helped you out I think this is I just want to say thank you for that do you have any assisted living facilities in Litchfield none Okay. You don't have any urgent care or... Okay. Just because I know all the calls that we get on the fire department.

Those are valid questions, Andy.

Okay?

Yes, they are. Valid questions, Andy.

So I remember when... Derry was providing ambulance service here to London Derry. And people were concerned about, oh my goodness, you know, these people are great in Derry and all that. And our communities have grown so much. I think this is, we have a very excellent fire department and they provide a great service. I also look at town manager stole my thunder geographically when I first looked at this I said wow for Litchfield this is a plus because if you think about it everything comes from Hudson they have to head north they're all in the southern part of your town the way London Dairy is positioned we have the north fire we have central and we have south so we're just cutting across to you guys and helping you out so i think this is um something that i want to look into further i think it's a great deal i know that chief when you came on I was in your office. We talked about this. And most people would be going, yeah, extra revenue. I'm going to go look at that. He didn't do that. He said, let's look into this a little deeper. I'm not sure if financial this or if this would be a good thing for one of their... I'm glad you guys did a really good deep dive on this. And, you know, from talking with you, Phil, and about this, and, Chief, I think that... This is something that I am willing to explore further, and I think it would be very beneficial for Londonderry and beneficial for Litchfield.

Any further discussion or questions? All right, we have this on the agenda for August 17th, so if anyone has any further questions or anything in the meantime, please reach out. Thank you. Thank you both and thank you Litchfield for coming tonight. We appreciate it.

Thank you.

Up next, discussion scheduled public hearing August 17th regarding appropriations for the general assistance guidelines.

Thank you. Sorry, I'm not talking my voice yet. Yeah, so this is an administrative update to the general assistance guidelines based on some legislature that was passed in the 2026 session. This is largely involving. Determination of residency and assigning responsibility based on determination of residency for ultimately who. Provides durable assistance, so more recurring assistance versus temporary emergency assistance. inserting the necessary carve-outs for domestic violence, stalking, sexual assault, and human trafficking. So the language in here has been our executive assistant and risk manager, Tanya Pinter, created this language in this and then worked with CHS to make sure it fit in with our current guidelines and how we move through the process. It complies with the new laws and does not substantially place a burden on any additional financial burden on the town of Londonderry whatsoever.

Any questions?

You have a clean copy and a red line copy in advance of the public hearing, so you can see specifically where those changes took place and how it reads holistically.

Go ahead, Deb, go.

I'm sorry, do you want to go, Sean?

No, no.

I just want to thank you for that. That was so helpful, having those two red lines, so thank you. I know it was a lot of work, so I appreciate it.

I'll pass that on to Tanya.

And it's nice to know that we're finally catching up. So a lot of the state laws that are in place, and I think, I know Tanya's working on some stuff, but I'm so happy we're updating this, because I think it's been falling to the wayside. People always think, oh, Londonderry, we're all upscale, everybody's rich, and that's not necessarily the truth. Domestic violence happens. No matter what, no matter what your income is, and things can flip in an instant. And so I'm happy, personally, as one counselor, I'm happy we're not letting people fall through the cracks. So thank you again for updating everything and taking the time to do both the red line, what changed, what didn't, what the RSAs were, all very helpful. Thank you very much.

You're welcome. I'll make sure she hears that, too.

Any other discussion?

Nope. And we will move this to the August 17th for a public hearing.

My apologies, could we get a motion and a second on that?

It's not on the sheet, I apologize. It's not me. I just caught that on there. That's right. All right.

I'll make a motion that we move this to our public hearing. A motion from Dan.

Second.

A second from Deb. Any further discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Chair will say affirmative. 4-0. We will have a public hearing on this on August 17th.

Thank you.

Up next, discuss and schedule a public hearing for August 17th regarding a proposed change for Pettengill Road TIF district. Mr. Mulholland.

Dan, if you could come up as well, sir. I've asked Dan to come up. He's chairman of the Londonderry Housing and Redevelopment Authority, who we're working in partnership with on this particular project. So we're proposing that four properties be added to the Pettengill Road TIF district. TIF districts have to be contiguous areas in order to include 10 Navigator Road into that. We need to include four here, 148 Harvey Road and 11 Navigator Road. So 10 Navigator Road, folks may not realize, but that is a property, there's a building there that is owned by the London Area Housing and Redevelopment Authority that is leased to Enterprise Mobility. That's the rental car entity. And I do believe it is the largest rental car facility in the state. As you know, we receive considerable motor vehicle revenue from that operation on a regular basis. The information's in your packet there. It's over a million dollars. And the... Renovations are necessary to that particular building. And what we're proposing is to be used the TIF revenue, the increment that we received from the TIF district, and make upgrades to this public building that belongs to LHRA. In return, LHRA will have a lease agreement with Enterprise Mobility to bring in extra motor vehicle revenue to the town. to offset property taxes, which, as you know, I think we are the single largest collector of motor vehicle revenue in the state for rental vehicles, and this will increase that, which will mean that there will be rental vehicles coming from other communities here to be added to that. If they don't make those payments, they have to make those payments in terms of a lease payment to LHRA. So we'll be making investments in a public building that they have to – Enterprise Mobility has to pay property taxes on because it's a private entity on a public piece of property. So we're going to enhance that property, which is going to increase the taxable value of that property, bringing in additional revenue, which will now go back into the TIF district to be reused to advance that property and other – whatever other projects the council approves in the future for the TIF district. And I've outlined those revenues here as projected. In order to do this, we're going to need a MOU with LHRA, which is in draft form right now, needs to be finalized with that. So the process is to schedule this for a public hearing in front of the council, which we would do on August 17th. The statute requires a 15-day period after the public hearing to act on those changes to the TIF district. And that would occur on September 14th because we don't have a meeting on the 8th because that is the primary election. So we had a meeting on the 14th. So that's when the final decision would be made, assuming you move it forward in the process to do that. That's a bit of the broad brush. There's quite a bit of detail in there. I sent you a draft of the proposed changes in the plan in the TIF district. The only there's a statutory changes, you know, no longer requires a TIF advisory board. I did not propose that change in here. But if that is something that you want to do, you should do it now. Because as you can see, it's a basically a three meeting process to do that. But that will be something that you would have to choose to do if you're on or not. I'm not proposing that in here. But if you do want to do that, this would be a time to add that in there if you want to make that change. So, again, that's our pretty broad brush. There's a lot of detailed information there. I worked with Councillor Faber, who is on the TIF Advisory Board, went over that. And, Dan, do you want to add anything to that, sir?

Yeah, if you don't mind. So, Dan Root, LHRA Chair. So, we are 26 years into an existing lease with Enterprise Mobility for the 10 Navigator Road lot. The town has obviously experienced considerable revenue from Enterprise over the years. They've always, to my knowledge, exceeded the minimum revenue requirement to the town of Lennonderry. um shauna's team you know again we for the last three years we've been trying to negotiate this lease renewal for them that has four years left on it so uh shauna's team were able to find this creative avenue to to sort of mitigate the cost that they're looking to make improvements in the building to hopefully keep them here for another 30 years and that's the gist of that's the gist of our review respect to attendant to navigator and getting that into the tiff district

Any questions? Deb, go ahead. Of course.

Go ahead, go. Just a real specific question. Why those specific four pieces of property, because I know people are going to ask that question. And how long will this TIF district last? Usually they last for a period of time.

This is going to be indefinite? No, it lasts as long as you choose to keep it lasting. The only difference is if you borrow money, you can't eliminate the TIF district until you pay off the debt. But we're not borrowing money.

Because usually it hits a point where it's breaking even and you kind of flip it back to a regular project.

This is actually an area where Londonderry sets the example for the rest of the state and the country, quite frankly, when you did that Pettengill Road project and you paid it off early. You folks set the example for everybody else. I know when I worked in the other community I worked in, we looked at what you did and the example that you set, and you did it the right way. The idea was TIF districts, you only keep them as long as you need them, and then you eliminate them.

That's what I'm hoping to do.

Right, but you're known nationally, London Dairy is known nationally for doing this as the case example of doing this the right way. So there's no debt at this time. So you could choose to eliminate this through the same process.

We need it there to do this project. So my point is, do we have any anticipation? So we can put it in our books and on our radar that it should be developed or fixed by 2030, and that's when we should reevaluate. Do you know what I'm trying to say? Right.

So just a couple of things. There's a broader discussion about the TIF district, but for the purposes of theirs, they're looking at a couple years probably, and they're going to be done their renovations. So that's to that building. You also have Pettengill Road, and we have a grant for $2 million. We're still awaiting for final. It's been approved by Congress, the money, but we don't actually have the grant letter yet from them. I don't know what's going on there. But anyway, you're going to need some matching funds, like 20% matching funds to do improvements to Patton Gill Road. So my suggestion is you keep that TIF district open until that's the case. And also, whether or not you need to make any water or sewer improvements in the area, I don't know if there's any.

So, but why those four parcels?

Because the TIF district ends just below a curiaway. And as I indicated, you have to have four continuous properties. So you can't have one up here unless they attach to the others. So in order to get there, you've got to add the other three. Can you just go back to that? So you've got to add these other three so they attach to each other. You've got roadways in between. They don't count. So in order to get to number 10, you've got to add 4, Kira, the Harvey Road address, 11 navigated, and then 10 navigated. That's where...

And what businesses are there, do we know? Who's on those properties and how are they going to benefit or not benefit?

It has nothing to do, they pay the same taxes they always pay. The only difference is you decide where the money's spent in the TIF district.

Okay, so basically what we're doing is taking the money that comes in on those four pieces of property, using it to fix this thing.

No, no, no. So you already have a TIF district.

Sorry, but I'm sure a thousand other people are out there just asking the same question. No problem.

So you have a TIF district. When you create the TIF district, you freeze that assessed valuation. Any increase in that evaluation, the increment, that additional money goes into the TIF fund. The base goes back to the taxes like it always did. So now you're adding to the TIF district these new properties. So their assessed valuation on the 14th of September, whatever that is, that money continues to come in to the school district, to the county, to the town, like it always has. If there's any increase in the value of those properties, that is called increment. That goes to the TIF fund. So we know on 10 Navigator they're going to make improvements to it. When they do that, that's going to increase the value of that particular property and that additional amount of tax revenue is going to go to the TIF district. So in these other properties, if they make any improvements or they assess valuation changes and it goes up, if it goes down, it doesn't go to the TIF. If it goes up, anything additional will go to the TIF district for as long as you have the TIF district.

And then that money then goes, if we get this thing from Congress, like you were just saying, some letter, right? That money would then go to fix that road?

If you decide, that's where it gets spent.

But it has to be spent within a TIF district, correct? And it can only be spent on infrastructure, correct?

Yes. Well, actually, it does say operating expenses, too, actually. I would not do that, though. That would not be wise. I would just do capital expenditures.

So say we left it there for a while, and this thing, this letter never shows up, and whatever doesn't happen. Just hypothetically. Play with me. What then happens with that extra money? Can it go back into the undesignated fund balance? Let's say we dissolve the TIF. We go, look, this isn't happening. We're done. And we dissolve it, and we get your... Things all built, and they're happy, and this didn't happen. So that money, what then would happen to that money?

It goes back to the town.

It does? Yep. Okay.

Or if you choose to spend it.

Well, you do spend it within the town, but.

Right, but there's some options for you because you have the ability to do that.

Okay, okay, and who follows this? You, your office?

I'm the TIF district administrator.

Oh, you got a new hat? When did that happen?

I should be wearing a hat, as you can see. That's what happens when you don't wear one after a while.

Okay. So your office is in charge of that.

Well, in terms of administering it, you set public policy. Yeah, I just want to be clear about that.

I understand that part. I just wanted to make sure that somebody's going to remember to look at this. Every so many years. Like, what's the status? What's going on?

Well, every year you appropriate money into the TIF district.

Okay. And it's brought up at budget?

It is. Yep. Every year you approve that.

I remember that, but I believe you.

Yeah, there's a few dollars in there.

Okay.

Right? I mean, amongst all the things we have to approve, to your point. But yes, every year you approve the appropriations for the TIF district.

Okay. Well, thank you for that clarification. I appreciate it.

In terms of LHRA, they will be responsible for the building in terms of what improvements are going to be made. And then we're just going to make the transfer of the TIF funds to do that. We're estimating about $2 million is what they're looking at for renovations. That's how that would work.

And there's not going to be any other benefits applied to this thing where they get a break on their taxes because you know that thing we have? If you fix your building in ten years, you get 50% off to 20 years.

Yeah, they don't own it.

Okay, so we own it.

Well, yeah, LHRA, which is a governmental entity, yes.

Okay, never mind.

No, these are good questions and I understand why you're asking.

Have people double dipping. Watching people's backs.

Well, we're the ones double dipping though.

Well, that's okay. Exactly. Because we need to do that right now, so that's okay. I'm done.

You want a motion? Are there any more questions first off? Do we have any more questions or? I'm good.

All right. So a motion that the Londonderry Town Council hereby schedule a public hearing on August 17, 2026 at 7 p.m. to receive public input regarding the proposed changes to the Pentonville Road Area Tax Increment Financing District to include adding five additional properties.

Is it five or four? Four.

Four. It says five here. Four. All right. So adding four additional properties.

I have a motion from Dan. A second from Deb. Any further discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Chair votes the affirmative 4-0. Up next, discuss and schedule a public hearing for September 14th regarding adding alternates to cemetery trustees.

Thank you. So I attended the cemetery trustees meeting on July 21st to review with them their charge, review with them kind of the duties and responsibilities of the cemetery trustees. And the two trustees were there. This came up largely because there were two of the three trustees there and one had to leave early. So we went through this presentation lightning fast. As part of that, though, we discussed their need to meet more frequently. We discussed kind of a quarterly meeting schedule. They brought up the fact that it would be really helpful if they could have alternates as they are permitted to under RSA 289.6. The appointing authority for the alternates would be you. The way the statute reads is they can recommend up to two alternates to the appointing authority, who then can decide to appoint them. And then they're appointed for a term of one year. Staff is recommending that if you move through this, you make those terms one calendar year following the rest of your appointed boards. That way it falls in the same cycle. in order to do this we have two ordinances here the first one is when the town constituted the cemetery trustees it was not added to the municipal code so our municipal code actually doesn't have the cemetery trustees in there and if we're fixing the cemetery trustees part of the municipal code title five chapter three section one we should probably fix all of section one and so that's what I have here so it ordinance 2026-11 fixes the first part of the boards and commissions um part of the municipal code to reflect accurate charter references the actual reference the actual statutes that pertain because a lot of them are wrong in the code and to reflect the actual boards and commissions we have. Because if you look at the list of boards and commissions in that title, in that chapter, it's mostly boards we don't have anymore. And it doesn't have the boards we do have. So that's the red line version that's in there. And then ordinance 2026-12 would add chapter 10.2b, which is a charge for the cemetery trustees in a more modern codified format that we've been using as we've created and added specifics to the code that should be there. So I understand it's a little strange updating the first part of the code, but in order to get, since we're adding something to the code about the cemetery trustees, we should probably adjust that. Alternatively, there's a previous version that was put on the table of the boards and committees one. We could pull that back off the table or we can just update section one. Whatever you guys want to do, that's on you guys. But in order to add alternates to the cemetery trustees as they're requesting, that's what we need to do. And we're proposing the public hearing be on September 14th because we got a lot of them on the 17th already.

I have a question on the red line document, a couple of them. Municipal Records Committee.

Yes.

Where did that come from and what is it?

That is a statutory committee under RSA 33A-3A. Let's see if I got that right without looking at it.

RSA 33A. I see the RSA. I just don't know. We didn't discuss that one, so I just wonder where it came from.

No, that one you don't have a choice about. Okay. The council can't make that committee. It exists via statute. It has statutorily determined members, which is... A member of the assessor's office, the town clerk, the tax collector, the treasurer, and technically all of you in the past, a representative of the municipal board sits on it.

So would I have to appoint somebody to that?

You could absolutely appoint somebody to that.

I just, it's the first I heard of it, so I just wanted to make sure that the public, I see a big smile.

That's a function of the clerk to manage.

Okay.

So, I mean, that would be something you'd want to work through with the clerk. Okay. Do that. Again, it's by statute. It is required. It's not optional. We're trying to make sure that we have all the boards and committees listed in here, and we spell out their functions, because for this very reason, you didn't know it existed. So people should be able to look and say, yep, here they all are, and here's how they all work. And towns and cities that have a charter, they're listed in your code.

I just know that in my time as the chair, I've never appointed anyone to this board. I know. So that... Is helpful, thank you.

I was going to say, it's only really been meeting really regularly for about the past year.

And in Section D, I'm glad we're updating because Sol Waste Committee has been, I think, five years or so. It's been gone for a while, so I'm glad we're updating some of these committees. to what they should be. That I think is a positive. And I do appreciate your red line document. That is very helpful. Sorry, we need to

Kirsten, you say they need to meet more often. Is that because more people are dying?

Well, you know, here's the joke that everybody says I have to say when I do this. It's the cemeteries. People are dying to get in there. Okay, there we go. Actually, it's a good question because there's a couple of reasons. One is that they have statutory responsibilities to update the bylaws and the budget. And these are shalls under state law, not maize. So these are things like this town shall, they must have a place to bury. And so it's really their job to determine direction and to suggest direction of the budget and policy to the town manager who then brings it to you for the budget. Okay. And then they're entirely charged with spending those monies that are raised and appropriated for the cemeteries and that are raised and appropriated or that exist in perpetual trust funds. So it's their job to decide how to spend those. There's also, frankly, a need for evolving regulations with, believe it or not, the changing landscape of. You know, internments, there's a need to have, look at things around policies such as green burials, columbariums, all the different options as space in cemeteries runs out and as, quite simply, green space runs out. One of the most efficacious things they have done is they, last year they stopped pre-sales of plots where people could buy up the cemetery in advance. It actually dramatically slowed down the growth. That was an excellent policy decision that they made. And those types of things, if they meet quarterly rather than biannually, they'll have a more of an ability to do that.

The other part is we have an aging population, obviously. We have a growing population. And we do anticipate, despite the best efforts of our public safety people, that there are going to be deaths in the future. It seems inevitable, at least for now. So we do have a statutory responsibility to make sure we have enough room to be able to deal with that. And right now, you only have plots. You don't have column barriers, which allow for a lot more density and save on a lot of space. And some planning needs to go forward in that. We've got capital reserve fund. We were putting money away to do that. And there needs to be a strategy as to what the best way forward is. Presumably, it's probably going to be an option for both. But being able to maximize the use of that space, because obviously, you know, the town's growing and there's not a whole lot of space. And that green space will disappear over time. We've been around since 1722. We're going to be around probably for a very long time. And the decisions we make now for the long-term future of this community, it makes sense to be working on those. And right now there's two members. There's one that's consistently not there. That person's term is up in March. um and there's only three of them so having alternates and this is the right way to go about that process to create alternates it's up to you you're the legislative body uh for this purpose in towns that don't have a council it's the town meeting that does this but you have that authority here and that's why we're before you uh on their behalf making that request

So, Mr. Chair, I just want to say that I had concerns about this because the library issue where we had the alternates, and I met with the town manager, and he explained to me how we're doing the right process here, unlike what they had done. So I'll make a motion that the Londonderry Town Council hereby.

I just want to make sure, Debbie, do you have any more questions? All right, go ahead. Yep.

Hereby schedules a public hearing on September 14th, 2026 at 7 p.m. in the Moose Hill Chambers of the Leonard Derry Town Hall on amending Title V, Chapter 3 of the Municipal Code and adding Chapter 10.2b to the Municipal Code.

I have a motion from Dan. Second. Second from Deb. Further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Chair votes in the affirmative. The public hearing will be on September 14th at 7 p.m. All right. Up next, discuss and schedule a public hearing for August 17th to approve the revision of the fire department rules and regulations. Mr. Johnson. Mr. Johnson. You're up.

Okay.

Oh, so no? Is it not?

Well, no, this is really tiny. And I was joking with Brian. I was saying I hope this was the biggest waste of his time ever. Oh, okay. I assume Brian was speaking.

Okay, that's fine. Sorry, Brian, if you're not.

Quite simply, what we're looking for, and the reason I'm saying it instead of him, is he and I went back and forth on the easiest way to do this. Okay. Right now, this is simply a technicality in our code. We have the ability to generate revenue, and you've heard the chief speak earlier about the importance of revenue and services. The fire department rules and regulations simply say that if we're providing private fire detection and alarm services, they have to use a radio meter box. Technology is such now that cellular and Internet communicators are sufficient, but technically they can't use those, and there's the potential of losing out on those contracts to a private security company or if we don't allow them to be used. So this is literally just adding those six red words to the code on 4.4, Chapter 4, Section 4-1.1.1B. I think I got that right. But just adding those six words to the code. And we just need you to schedule a public hearing, if you're so willing, on August 17th to approve it.

That's fine. Any questions?

Okay, I'll move that the Londonderry Town Council hereby schedules a public hearing on August 17th, 2026, 7 p.m. in the Moose Hill Council Chambers at Londonderry Town Hall to receive public input regarding amending the Londonderry Fire Department rules and regulations. I have a motion from Dan. I second it.

I second from Deb.

Any further discussions?

All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Share with us the affirmative, 4-0. Sorry if I scared you. I had you on my list, so. Good job, Brian. Let's see.

To his credit, it was his work that got us here.

All right. Up next, under old business, discuss the denied abatement of two Litchfield Roads. Do we have any further questions on that? Everyone got their questions answered?

All right, let me. Be a motion to approve the denial of the abatement request. Dan, you want to make the motion?

I don't see the motion.

Should I say be a motion to- Okay. To approve the denial of the abatement request.

I'll make a motion that we approve the denial of the abatement request for Two Litchfield Road.

I have a motion from Dan. Second. A second from Deb. Any further discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed?

Abstain.

Chair votes in the affirmative. 301. 301, councilor Faber abstained. I'll accept the motion to approve the consent items. So moved. A motion from Dan.

Second.

Second from Sean. Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye. Any opposed? Chair will stay affirmative, 4-0. Liaison reports.

I don't have any reports. Okay. But I did go to the Jake Nahr sixth annual basketball tournament that was held on our new courts this year. Very well attended. It's a very good cause and that was very exciting. And I just want to remind everyone that I'm not on the committee, but Old Home Day is in full bloom. It is happening. I know a couple people have called me, and they're like, is there anything going on? And I'm like, I don't know. But I found out, and yes, there is. And you can go to the town website. You can find it on Town Underground. You can find it in the Londonderry Times. It's all over there for everybody to see. We hope everybody attends and has a great time. And this year it starts on Tuesday with the library kicking it off, correct?

Special preview event.

There we go.

Magician Mike Venn, 4 o'clock, Town Common.

Thank you.

And hope for good weather.

Yes, hopefully weather.

Any other liaison reports?

Mister chair, we're going to get a liaison report from the legal subcommittee at some point. Yes, you know when when we might schedule that I do not have an I do not have a date.

To be more accurate, probably not going to get a liaison report right will be a it'll be an action item.

A report would be nice.

Time is report. So two things. I'll have Kirsten talk about the progress on water projects, give you an update on that. Absolutely.

Thank you, by the way, for doing that.

Yeah, no problem. So I'll just be really brief about each of these. If you have additional questions, please let me know. I'm going to start up in the northeastern part of town. As you know, the old Derry Road water main was constructed as part of the southern Hampshire water system to connect water systems in the northern TO PROVIDE BETTER REDUNDANCY AND SUPPLY. THAT WATER MAIN HAS BEEN COMPLETED. THE IN-ROAD CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN COMPLETED. THEY ARE CURRENTLY WORKING ON THE PUMP STATION WHICH IS SITUATED ON THE AUBURN ROAD. the Auburn Road site and that is due to be completed next spring at which point residents along Old Derry Road would be able to apply it would be able to you know apply to connect to that water The completion of that is and the that line coming online would be a precondition for one of the applications we put in for congressionally for congressional funds. That's to put in water lines on Calla and Lilly. Nope, Cal and Iris. Sorry, I'm not a big flower person. I get them mixed up in my brain all the time. More broadly, the congressionally directed funding, the two projects we have, they're currently making their way through subcommittee and through Congress. So we should have at least some information on the amounts If we receive those funds and the amounts that we received within the next six weeks or so, when we actually receive access to those funds.

They haven't passed a budget in 15, 20 years, the federal government. We'll find out in March, seriously.

He and I have thought about this a bit. I'm saying we're going to at least find out the number. I didn't say we're going to get access to it in six weeks. I'm going to say they're going to publish that worksheet. He might owe me a Guinness. So we're working through that process. I am monitoring its movement through committee. Both of our projects did make it through committee. It's a little unclear if they made it through committee with the full funding amount. But I am keeping an eye on it, and I know the process is moving forward. Which brings me to the other projects that we have that are mostly with we're working with Pennachuk. So that project is the only one in town that's not a partnership with Pennachuk in some way, shape, or form, whether it's our money or money obtained through a separate application process to DES. So we're headed down to South Road now. As you know, the South Road started construction right during school break and the main has been installed and they're finishing final maintenance, pressure and quality testing on the pipe. So it's been installed down South Road, and they've just about finished work going down Pleasant Drive to connect to the private water system, the old community well system there. So it's moving along. Like I said, they're still doing final testing. It's not ready to connect to yet. And then they have to do the final connections to the condo development down there, which is receiving water as well. Old Country Village, maybe. Old Country Village? Yeah. The next project, of course, is the high-range road water main. So as you know, phase one was from Old Nashville Road to Royal last year. That has been completely pressure tested. It's all set up. It's in the final stages of testing, doing the final bacteria testing. So they anticipate that being live and people able to apply to connect sometime in early fall. The Old Nashua part of that project, so the part that runs down Old Nashua from 102... to connect Rolling Meadows. That is actually done, pressure tested, bacteria tested, and all set for people to apply to connect to. So if you live on Old Nashua Road, you can actually apply to connect to that line. Rolling Meadows is all connected as well. They are doing some final plumbing to make sure it gets, you know this better than I would, but they're doing some final plumbing work to make sure it can get everywhere within the development. But the line itself has reached substantial completion. And on High Range Road Phase 2, so from Royal North, they hit some pretty, I think the only applicable word is gnarly ledge right around between Braeburn and Davis. When they did the engineering, they did extensive ledge probes to figure out where it was, whether it's a boulder, whether it's a ledge. That doesn't tell you how easy it is to drill through that ledge. And on Phase 1, it was a lot easier to drill through. Now they're having to use some additional more kind of heavy duty tools. So if anybody is really into that, like construction machinery, definitely take a, you know, drive by don't stop, but take a drive by. Um, and so they're doing more aggressive drilling in that area. So that slowed down a little bit, but not to the point where they think it will throw any sort of wrench into the completion and they anticipate substantial completion mid fall on that part. And that will connect all the way up through Alexander.

I'd spoken actually to representative bill Boyd from Merrimack this weekend about just he's he's a big involvement along with um chairman Dunn here up at the state and he was really impressed with how much progress we've made in such a short span in this water in this community so I think we're doing all the right things but it's good to hear it from some other people outside their water issues are probably a little more substantial than ours but it's it's um good to know we're on the right path thank you for the update

you're welcome i do have two kind of non-updates in there too um we don't really have any concrete details on sanco bay moving west into the neighborhoods other than the fact that that process of engineering has started we don't have any public updates on that but those services and those connections that process will start next year And I would encourage people in that area, if they get a mailing, a letter from Penachuk, please open it. Look at it. It's actually, they're going to be asking for access to those properties so they can properly do the engineering. And the other update is on Ross and Tocanel down there in the EPA area. There has been some preliminary conversations about engineering, but we're canon site group is still working with the epa on the final execution they are in the final stages of that negotiation though nothing to report on it yet but um they're still actively engaged in the process and we'll get an update further later this fall i appreciate everything i appreciate those updates thank you

Just want to talk about budget process. Things are well underway. Departments have submitted their items. We gave DPW some additional time. Of course, they had the biggest multifaceted portion of the budget, so theirs will be coming in a little bit later. Working with the CIP committee with Council Pauls on that, and we're making good progress there, and that's pretty much on schedule to go. So just as a reminder, in October, we're going to be talking about the Warren articles. Usually we do it in January. We're front-ending that because we have a pretty good idea what those are going to be to help streamline the process a little bit. The only difference is you have to keep in mind that the guidance that was provided by the council is default budget plus 1% I won't know that number till probably the I'll probably find out sometime around the middle of October Usually that's when we get it and then we'll have to finalize that so you'll get that budget on November I think it's seventh this year is when that Saturday meeting is but you'll get it by the end of October So just some So you're going to get a bunch of WARN articles. Remember, the WARN articles are part of that default plus 1%. So I'm going to give all of them to you that we're looking at because I won't know what the number is going to be because I won't have it yet because we'll be talking about those in October. The other thing that we came across was... This obviously is in regards to spending the guidance default plus 1%. That's a spending amount. It doesn't have a direct relationship necessarily on what the property tax rate is. It's going to be similar, pretty close to. I think the objective was clearly that council wanted to control the tax rate increase, which is typical of every governing body, right? You want to try to limit that. But we do have circumstances like we talked about the CART service. So presently in the FY27 budget, we have $37,000 appropriated for CART. We're going to spend $101,000 because of the extended service and also the increase in rates that they're charging us for that. So we'll spend that in FY2027, presumably, and then some similar number will be spent in the FY28 budget. That is going to be funded by that $5 fee that the voters approved. So the actual $37,000 we won't actually need to raise taxes on because we're going to pay for it in a different way. So when we set the tax rate in the fall, when we originally developed the budget, we were planning on raising $37,000 worth of property taxes. We won't have to do that now because we're going to use that fee. Presumably, you have to approve that, and we did talk about that at the last meeting. But when I put that in the budget, so when I do the FY28 budget, I'm going to budget for the 101 or whatever it's going to be. That's going to eat up considerably the amount of that 1%. Obviously, that doesn't raise property taxes. It's funded through that $5 fee. So we didn't anticipate that process. So the way I'm going to do that is I don't consider that part of that 1%. It doesn't go in the default budget because there's no ongoing obligation, so it doesn't fit in the default budget. So I just want to make sure we had that understanding that that's how I need to do that. And there may be other circumstances like that. Obviously, this thing with Litchfield, if that goes forward, that's $605,000 of additional spending that... is not raised in property taxes. That would completely blow the 1% out of the water. But I mean, again, I think obviously the council's goal was to limit property tax increases. It's the spirit. Yeah, exactly, right? So I'm not asking you to vote or change what you said. I just want to make sure you have that understanding. That's how I'm going to present it. What you ultimately do will be, of course, up to you when we go through the budget process because you don't know what you don't know until you get it and you're looking at it and here's my options and the decisions you've got to make. But I wanted to have that discussion to make sure everybody understands that. Does everybody understand?

Yep. Okay, we're good.

And that's very confusing with that.

1% default 1%. You know, I think if we would have looked at it differently run and said, you know, let's look at what's a 3% kind of look like or 2% off our budget, you know, and then have options. So what we could Eliminate things.

We still have options. I think we decided that because we didn't want to work in reverse like we were doing last year, where we can work forward this time. Thank you, sir. With that, I will open public comment. Good evening, sir.

To release an opinion to be more transparent yet you guys have referred to this opinion for months to justify your action Transparency I Find it easier when you start a project if you know the full details of the project you can do things quicker so whoever is going to be Getting this opinion, if you could ask them to track how much it's going to cost, because that is going to be a question I will be asking. It was stated that this will be on a future agenda item. I'd like to know how it is. I find out what agenda item it's going to be on, what date. Because honestly, you ask a question, you never get an answer. I'd also like to know if this falls underneath the legal subcommittee duties because Mr. Bouchard asked, well, who are we going to send this to? No one seems to know. Then I'd like to know when the committee is going to meet because it needs to meet in public. Second one, Councilor Bouchard was accused of releasing privileged information because he read, I guess, part of a, It's late. I don't even know what I'm talking about anymore. A legal opinion. That was the legal opinion I actually asked for, and now I've been told it's going to cost me $500 an hour for, I guess, some attorney to sit through and watch a video and figure out what I was talking to about this and that. But what I also find interesting is when Mr. Dunn read from the same opinion, he was not accused of divulging information. privileged information. I just think that's interesting. The last one, looking forward to budget season and all the budget cuts that have been stated are coming because we have to cut the budget now to pay for all of these legal expenses that we basically have no idea how much it's going to cost because Honestly, some of you guys spend worse than drunken sailors. The difference is drunken sailors actually when they're not on leave, get back on board the ship, they do their damn job. I don't see that here. All I hear is basically lies coming from the chair. We'll answer that. No, you don't. We'll do this. No, you don't. We don't kick things down the road. Yes, you do. All the time. It's embarrassing. Thank you. Anybody else in public comment?

I've got something to say.

Seeing none, I will close up a comment. Go ahead.

I want to answer that question. When are we going to put it on the agenda? Is it the, can we put it on the 17th or?

Put what on the agenda, Deb?

The thing that Glenn was just talking about.

You talked about several things. What specifically?

The first one. The thing about the veterans.

There's a lot of things to consider for the agenda. So it's not an instant answer. I understand wanting to know, but it's.

For the veterans legal opinion, Deb, is what you're looking at? I'm sorry, Dan. Are you looking for the veterans?

It's just very vague. frustrating to sit here and work really hard and try to do everything right for this town and make sure you ask the proper questions research all the documents come up with information there's no discussion you're shushed and you your opinion is basically flushed down the toilet and it's just like We're going to do our thing. Your thing doesn't matter. And I'm just feeling bad for people who are not getting answers, whether I agree with the answer or don't agree. Doesn't even matter. The fact is, these people deserve, these people are our bosses. They deserve an answer. Would you say that to your boss? You're a manager. Would you go to the regional manager and say, I'm not going to answer you today. I don't feel like it.

Tim, I just asked you a question. You knew what I was talking about. I did not. Several things were just addressed. What specifically?

What was the one thing that gentleman asked you for?

So he asked you for several things. But he did. I haven't written down here.

Yeah, what were they?

He asked about veterans tax credit. He asked about Releasing of a document, he asked about the legal sub review team, he asked about dates, when the sub committee is going to meet.

What is the one thing he asked to be put on the agenda at the first public comment?

Okay, Deb, so that's what you'd like addressed. I will get back to you with the answer.

I just have to give him some idea.

I do not have any idea. I don't want to be accused of lying. I don't have an answer. So Mr. Chair.

What's convenient for you?

I don't have. I don't have an answer for you.

You have a manager sitting right there. Can you look at our docket and see when we have some space?

There's other considerations of things that may need to be added or removed.

What is consideration of things, Sean? Be clear. Be clear.

Okay.

Just be clear.

Can you let me answer or I just won't answer?

You answer. Answer. Specifically. Go ahead.

You think nothing comes up that gets added or removed from the agenda in between now and by the time the agenda is set? There are lots of other things that come up for consideration, some other things that happen tonight that may or may not need something to be added. It's not like this... is the only sole thing that's going to change in the agenda.

To be honest, Sean, I wouldn't know because nobody shares that information with me. I see a draft agenda, I see nothing else except, by the way, there's an update. So to answer your question, no, I don't know honestly, because I don't see it. So you might know, you're privileged, I'm not. That's all there is to it. And the fact is this hiding of crap has got to stop, Ron. You have to. Not you, Sean. I'm not talking to you. You're the vice chair. I'm talking to the chair. Ron, you need to do this. It's a disservice to the public by not just being forthright and honest. It's a disservice to me. It's disrespectful to me as a fellow counselor.

Okay, Deb.

I just want an answer. The answer could be as simple as saying, Mr. Mulholland, could you look at the agendas and see which one seems to be the lightest? We could potentially, keyword, potentially put it on this agenda.

I cannot do that until I talk to legal about it.

Are you going to talk about legal for every little thing? This is ridiculous.

So, Mr. Chair, just to refresh your memory at the beginning, Mr. Douglas came up. He asked about the legal opinion that we were given for the Veterans Tax Credit. I asked you, what attorney are you going to ask? Are you going to ask the $500 attorney or the one that actually gave us the opinion?

I gave you an answer.

Sean, I'm not talking to you. Please don't interrupt. Please don't interrupt, Sean.

I'm interrupting you.

Okay. And you gave me an answer. You weren't sure, but you think you were going to. talk to the person that wrote the opinion, okay? I think what Deb is asking is that once you get that opinion, all right, can we put it on the agenda to answer Mr. Douglas's question? I don't think it should wait six months or weeks. I mean, I know we have the 17th coming up, but then after that, we're very limited on meetings because of... Answer your question, Dan, is yes.

But I don't want to be held to a date, because as you've seen here, dates don't work. Okay. So I will accept the motion to go into non-public session pursuant to RSA 91A, 3, 2B, the hiring of any public employee. I need a roll call vote. I'm sorry, I need a motion. So moved. I have a motion from Dan. Second. Second from Shawnee, a roll call vote.

Aye, Dan Bouchard.

Aye, Ron Dunn. Aye, Sean Faber. All right, we are not coming back here, correct? Correct. Okay.

Just for the record, we'll be adjourning after this.

Okay, so thank you all.