Board of Mayor and Aldermen

BOARD OF MAYOR AND ALDERMEN

March 3, 2026 at 7:00 PM

Mayor Ruais called the meeting to order.

Mayor Ruais called for the Pledge of Allegiance; this function being led by Alderman Sapienza.

A moment of silence was observed.

The Clerk called the roll.

Present: Aldermen Kaw-uh, Goonan, Dexter, Fajardo (late), Bonilla, Kantor, Trisciani, O'Neil, Terrio, Sapienza, Burkush, Barry, Vincent, Thomas

PUBLIC COMMENT

1. The Mayor advised that the purpose of the public comment session is to give residents of Manchester the opportunity to address the Board. All people wishing to speak must sign up with their name, address and topic. Once called, they will have up to three minutes to speak and any comments must be directed to the chair and concluded when their time is up. If the Clerk calls their name and they are not present to speak, they will not be given a second opportunity. Any resident wishing to speak will come forward to the nearest microphone, clearly state their name and address when recognized and give their comments.

Troy Micklon, 29 Ode Way: At the last few meetings, I've raised some observations regarding how the city addresses snow emergencies here in Manchester. In doing so, several residents have reached out to me about winter operations more broadly. One recurring concern that they've raised is sidewalk snow removal, and the confusion over who is responsible for clearing municipal sidewalks. Recently, I reviewed a number of the SeeClickFix responses regarding snow removal from sidewalks and Ordinance 150.061 was cited, which states that property owners are responsible for maintaining sidewalks free of snow and ice. At the same time, New Hampshire law provides that sidewalks constructed as part of the public highway system are maintained by the municipalities. RSA 231:113 states that such sidewalks shall be maintained by the city or town in which they are located. Additionally, the New Hampshire Supreme Court in State versus Jackman, all the way back from 1898, recognizes that municipalities cannot fully shift their statutory sidewalk maintenance duties onto abutting properties. More recently in Tinker versus Tilton, the court clarified that municipal sidewalks must be maintained in an accessible condition, including reasonable snow removal by the cities. Rather than simply raising this issue, I've included two possible ordinance updates in the handout, which I have for you tonight. First, the board could simply strike the reference to sidewalks from 150.061 entirely so that the ordinance applies only to walkways, steps, and driveways located on private property. And second, the board could clarify that 150.061 applies only to private sidewalks located on the property, and ensuring that ordinances do not create confusion with municipal sidewalks located on the public right of way. Both approaches are intended to bring the ordinance into clear alignment with state law, while still preserving reasonable expectations for property owners to maintain features on their property, regardless of how the city ultimately proceeds. I would suggest that any responses regarding sidewalk snow removal, whether through SeeClickFix or any other public communications, clearly reflect the distinction between municipal sidewalks within the public right of way and private walkways located on private property. Providing that clarity will help ensure residents understand both the city's responsibilities and their own while keeping our ordinances and state law aligned.

Rick Blais, Chestnut Street: Before I get started, I just want to make a note. There's a young lady that was supposed to do the Pledge of Allegiance, and I think it got missed, so maybe you can address that later on. Congratulations to all the winners from the election. I am back in New Hampshire, glad to bring back the snow with me. For more than two decades now, the Manchester School District has struggled to deliver the level of education our children deserve. This is not a political rooted statement. It's rooted in decades of declining results. The state keeps all the records. Year after year, we see reports showing significant proficiency scores, widening achievement gaps, and just slipping away. Students graduate without the skills they need to compete in today's economy. Meanwhile, families are told the answer is always the same: more money. This year alone, we're being asked for another ten plus million dollars. I don't know what the last number was, but let's be clear, investing in education is important. I fully support paying great teachers well, providing safe schools, giving students the tools they need. But investing without accountability is not leadership. It's complacency. And that's what I've seen for 20 years. I am a graduate of Central High. I mean, even back then, you saw that starting to creep into the school systems. For over 20 years, spending has risen, administrative costs have exploded out of control. Not the teacher's costs, but the administration costs. Budgets have expanded. Yet the outcomes have no meaningful improvement on the kids. If a private business delivered mediocre results 20 years, while increasing budgets year over year, leadership would change, strategies would change, systems would change. Why is it different in education? This is not about attacking teachers. Many of them work tirelessly late nights with kids, doing homework, reports, all kinds of things. This is about priorities and accountability. We need to ask tough questions. Where is the money actually going? Why are reading and math proficiencies not where they should be? And if you're an employer, you know what I'm talking about in interviews with some of these people. Oh my God, I feel bad for them. Why are families increasingly seeking alternatives? We hear so much about charter schools and if we're going to invest in our schools, it doesn't have to be money. It has to be standards. If you don't have standards that kids can achieve, it's not worth putting it out there for anybody, money-wise. Why does more funding automatically mean better results? You know, every time we have a budget issue, the kids are marched in from schools, parents are marched in. More money. More money. You're taking money away. This is a budget. It's not even approved yet. You're not taking anything away. But you as aldermen and mayor, you guys are asking for accountability and you get toasted for that. Unfortunately, throwing money at a problem without structural reform is not a solution. It's a delay tactic. We need results driven approaches, clear performance benchmarks, transparent budget, administrative efficiencies, especially with AI now, strong support for the classroom teachers, data backed curriculum for improvements, and leadership that is accountable to the parents and taxpayers. Our children get one chance at their education, one chance to learn to read proficiently, one chance to build math foundations, one chance to develop the discipline and skills that shape their future. We owe them an excellent education, not a good enough education to skirt them by. We owe them results, not excuses. And we pay. We, the taxpayers, want transparency. I don't think any of us here want to deny a child a great education, but when we see our money being squandered on stupid projects, we get upset. This isn't about cutting education, it's about demanding performance. It's about aligning funds with measurable improvements. It's about restoring trust. Manchester families deserve schools that prepare their children for college, careers, and in life, not a system that asks more every year while delivering the same outcome. It's time for a reset. It's accountability, and it's time to put the students, not the bureaucracy first. I got my little form to fill out for my commercial building that says, hey, what size is it? All I can say is, does this mean we're going to be paying? You're going to tell me that my tax rate went down and I should be grateful. But yet I'm paying $5,000 more. It doesn't make any sense. So, I would encourage you, don't play the game with the new assessments that are coming out. A dollar is a dollar. But I appreciate all you guys do. And thank you again for volunteering your time.

Mayor Ruais: May I suspend this public comment period for one second? I need to apologize. We had a scheduling mishap. I would love to invite the kids from Saint Catherine's to come on up and do the Pledge of Allegiance. Why don't we have you come and say your names in the microphone? Tell the audience who you are and then we'll do the pledge.

Students from Saint Catherine of Siena School introduced themselves and led the Board in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Mayor Ruais re-opened public comment.

Cindy Stewart, 255 Sagamore Street: I am a member of the Manchester School Board. As we continue deliberating the fiscal year 27 budget, I want to clarify some facts and correct some misinformation. The school board has approved three operating budgets. First, the required tax cap compliant budget, which creates a $16 million shortfall from our current operating budget. Second, a baseline budget that simply level funds the district so that we can maintain current staffing and programs. And third, a fully funded budget that moves Manchester closer to the state average for per pupil spending. Right now, Manchester spends about $4,600 less than the state average. Our current situation is a result of chronic underfunding, rising mandated expenses, downshifted state costs, and the requirement that we provide transportation and special education services to parochial, private, and charter school students with no reimbursement. These pressures come from federal, state, and city levels. I want to share my understanding on how the tax cap works. It applies to both revenue and expenses, and the combined city and school budgets cannot exceed it without an override from you, the Board of Mayor and Aldermen. The tax cap is essentially meant to function as an annual cost of living adjustment. So, when people say the school district has been under the tax cap since 2021, thinking that's a good thing, what that really means is that the district has not received a cost-of-living adjustment for six straight years. If we had received a full tax cap compliant budget in the last two fiscal years, we would likely not be facing this $16 million shortfall. I've heard claims that the district is asking for a 9% or a 14% tax increase. Those numbers are simply not confirmed, as the actual tax impact depends entirely on how revenue is allocated between city services and the school district. We will not know that information with certainty until Mayor Ruais presents his budget at the end of this month. Finally, I want to address the idea that the district has too much fat. We are a $265 million enterprise, serving 12,000 students with 2,350 staff members, and we only have six administrators. We are the largest and most complex district in the state. 24% of our students receive special education services, 21% are English language learners, and 54% are economically disadvantaged. This district is run efficiently and responsibly. During my campaign, I knocked on hundreds of doors. The overwhelming majority of residents that I met told me that they want our public schools to be made whole. They understand that investing in our schools is an investment in our future workforce and in the community. Leaders sitting in our classrooms today and Manchester can only thrive when our public schools are strengthened, protected and celebrated.

Garth Corriveau, 215 North Street: I'm a former Manchester Alderman, having represented ward six for six years. I'm here in my capacity as an attorney with Devine Millimet representing Project Elm LLC. Project Elm owns a five-story building which includes the Campo Enoteca and Taj India restaurants, located at 959 and 967 Elm Street in the central business district. Project Elm purchased the premises from North Street Properties, LLC, following approval by the Board of Mayor and Aldermen of North Street's 79-E Community Revitalization application on April 16th, 2020, for a required covenant between the city and North Street. However, it was never recorded by the city prior to the sale of the premises to Project Elm. Rather than record the covenant, city staff notified us that a new 79-E application must be filed due to changes in the redevelopment project, namely the conversion of vacant office space into 27 residential units, rather than the initially proposed 36 units. Accordingly, my client submitted its 79-E application to the city on January 16th, 2026. Attached to my testimony, which I provided to the City Clerk, is a letter to the BMA from my colleague, Attorney Suzanne Brunelle, containing additional factual and legal details about our 79-E application that I would encourage you to read tonight, because tonight you are scheduled to vote on the implementation of a TIF district for the purpose of constructing a parking garage on the Pearl Street lot. Although 959-967 Elm Street is located within the proposed TIF district, we want to be transparent that Project Elm is not seeking duplicative public financing, but simply the same relief granted by this board less than two years ago. For reasons unknown to us, our January 16 79-E application was not placed on tonight's BMA agenda, despite it having been submitted prior to the BMA's February 3rd public hearing on the TIF district, and to the letter in your agenda from Community and Development Director Jeffrey Belanger, to effectuate the adoption of the TIF district dated February 24th. Yet this board apparently will vote on the TIF district before voting on my client's 79-E application. The BMA is not scheduled to vote on my client's application until March 17th. But you are being asked to approve the TIF district tonight; when you decide to schedule votes on these separate matters is a policy choice of this board. But in recognition of the past 79-E approval of this redevelopment project by this board and these unique scheduling circumstances beyond the control of my client, we request that the 79-E relief be granted or regranted, depending on your perspective at a fair hearing on March 17th, regardless of tonight's vote on adopting the TIF district.

Avery Cyr, 30 Hanover Street: I just wanted to take a moment to remember my former teacher Miss Gemme, she was my creative writing teacher, and she was a teacher to probably hundreds of students. She first started working for the district back in 2000. And she's been working up until her death last week. And I just want to say she was really somebody who filled the room, and she really connected well with all of her students. She really tried hard to teach the material, and she just was one of those teachers that went above and beyond. She was involved in a lot of activities. She was a senior class advisor. She was one of the coaches for cross country. She was the basketball coach. She helped design some yearbooks. And she was also part of the Central Pride Foundation. I interacted with her quite a bit when I was there at Central myself. And I just think that her loss is very shocking and will leave a really important personality. I think she's almost kind of become part of Central High School's identity. And I just think everyone's going to be really sad, and I'm going to be sad. And I just want to take one moment to remember her. The last thing I'll say is anybody who's interested, calling hours for her will be tomorrow from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. at the Connor-Healy Funeral Home at 536 Union Street. And her funeral will be on Thursday, so two days from today at 10 a.m. at the Saint Catherine of Siena Church at 207 Hemlock Street. This is all in her publicly available obituary, so I'd assume it's for the public.

Glenn Ouellette, 112 Auburn Street: First, I want to thank our first responders. It's been a tough winter and a lot of accidents, a lot of snow. The highway department's done very well, especially with the amount of snow that we've had and we're still having. So, I congratulate them. There are some things in the city that really are working as they should be, and that is good. All cities have problems. That's for sure. Some greater than others. Education is an important thing to our community, for our students' future, but we also have to be accountable, just as we have to be accountable here at the board for the services that they are providing. That's the way it works. I want to thank the city for opening up the new shelter. It's going to take care of a lot of the seniors and handicapped that are losing their rent because of the new state law that provides that. It's changed it so much and it's their fault. If they only have a 3% increase in income through their Social Security, and that's all they have for income, and the rent goes up 15%, 20%, 30%, it doesn't compute. So, they're out the door. We can do better as a city. And we should. These people, most of them have worked all their lives. With that, I think we need to do better on some of the issues of the homeless. I understand that those who do not want to conform with the rules and regulations and laws, we are an abiding city, county, state and nation of laws. That is hard to help these people and sometimes you can't reach them. There are some things you can do to help people, and there are some things you can't. But most people that are homeless are looking for a way out. And I personally will tell you that people in this city that are becoming homeless are not dreaming to become homeless or they don't want it. It takes away their jobs. It takes away their lives. It's a big change to go from living in a home and being homeless, and it takes sometimes a long time, the detriment of what is caused to get these people back on board. So, whatever we can do to help those who want to help themselves, we should do it because that's to our benefit. And putting them back into working, paying taxes, volunteering, the things that we do as a community.

Mayor Ruais asked if there were any others present wishing to speak. There were no other speakers.

On motion of Alderman Sapienza, duly seconded by Alderman Terrio, it was voted to take all comments under advisement and to receive and file any written documentation presented.

CONSENT AGENDA

Accept BMA Minutes

2. Minutes from the February 17 BMA and Finance meetings.

Approve Under Supervision of the Department of Highways, subject to funding

3. Sidewalk Petition (Residential): 152 Poplar Street

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

COMMITTEE ON ACCOUNTS, ENROLLMENT AND REVENUE ADMINISTRATION

4. Advising that the update on the Revolving Loan Fund has been accepted. (Unanimous vote)
5. Advising that the Finance Department reports: Accounts receivable over 90 days; Aging report; Outstanding receivables — have been accepted. (Unanimous vote)
6. Advising that the Monthly Financial Report (unaudited) for the first seven months of fiscal year 2026 has been accepted. (Unanimous vote)
7. Recommending that the request from the Welfare Director to establish a non-lapsing Welfare Reserve Account be approved and referred to the Committee on Bills on Second Reading for technical review. (Unanimous vote)

COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATION/INFORMATION SYSTEMS

8. Recommending that the request from the Board of Assessors to increase the Disabled Veteran Credit from $2,000 to $2,500 effective for the April 1, 2026, tax year be approved. (Unanimous vote)
9. Recommending that the proposal to amend the Board of Mayor and Aldermen's Rule 3 regarding public participation be received and filed. (Aldermen Fajardo, Bonilla, and Kaw-uh voted yea; Aldermen Kantor and Sapienza voted nay)

COMMITTEE ON LANDS AND BUILDINGS

10. Recommending that the request from the Parking Manager to install a mural on the Victory Parking Garage be received and filed. (Unanimous vote)
11. Recommending that the request from Manchester Connects to install a mural at the Canal Street and Pleasant Street crossing be approved. (Unanimous vote)
12. Recommending that the request from the property owner of 290 Granite Street for a revocable license agreement for the construction of a permanent structure that will be partially within the city's right of way be approved. (Unanimous vote)
13. Recommending that Dube Dogs be authorized to operate its food service cart at the Mill Girl steps location for a term of five years at a cost of $500 per year subject to all health, licensing, and other city requirements. (Unanimous vote)

HAVING READ THE CONSENT AGENDA, ON MOTION OF ALDERMAN O'NEIL, DULY SECONDED BY ALDERMAN TERRIO, THE CONSENT AGENDA WAS APPROVED.

REPORT OF THE JOINT SCHOOL BUILDINGS COMMITTEE

14. Advising that the Manchester School District Priority I status and financial reports for December 2025 and January 2026 submitted by LeftField have been accepted. (Unanimous vote)

Alderman Sapienza requested that agenda item 14 be removed from the consent agenda.

Alderman Sapienza: I'm looking at that chart there. It's a bit complex, but my understanding is at the end of January, $54 million has been spent on phase one so far. I also understand that none of the money from the bond that this board approved, not this particular board, but the Board of Mayor and Aldermen approved has been spent. So, can someone please explain that to me? Sharon, I know we talked about this at the last meeting. That was a couple of weeks ago. We were both kind of scratching the surface, but this is in the ensuing two weeks. I'm thinking we've gained a little bit more knowledge on that.

Sharon Wickens, Finance Director: So, the bond has been spent. We didn't go out and issue the full amount of the bond because we didn't need all of the funds immediately. So, we issued a bank anticipation note. And our resolutions allow us to issue loans, bonds, whatever the financing may be. So, we issued a small tax anticipation note, I think it was just shy of $30 million. A year later, we were kind of in the same position this past November, where it was estimated we'd spend about $78 million. So, we paid off the anticipation note. So that's gone. And we took out a new anticipation note for $78 million that's under this bond resolution. And of that, there has been money spent. I don't have the figures in front of me, but I think someone in my office does have a reconciliation of it, and I could email it to the Aldermen tomorrow.

Alderman Sapienza: So as of the end of January, approximately $54 million has been spent on phase one, correct?

S. Wickens: Yes, that sounds about right.

Alderman Sapienza: How much of that has come from the bond?

S. Wickens: That exact same amount. It may not be a bond, it is a loan at this time. But when we issue the bond, we're going to pay off that note, and then we'll have a new bond. You don't want to borrow $290 million and start paying interest on that if you know you're not going to need the money. So, we've been doing it in increments so that we're only spending interest on money that we expect to spend in that year.

Alderman Sapienza: Another way of putting it is none of the operating budget has been spent on phase one so far.

S. Wickens: The school district's operating budget, yes. I want to say it's north of $60 million because the first payment that they received in state aid from the state, I think they put $20 million aside and paid cash. The following year they put $17.7 million, I believe, towards the project. Because their debt service payment, it's just one payment. You're paying it off a year later, plus interest. Well, then they still set aside that same amount of money that they expect to pay when the big bond is issued, to try to be prudent to pay the bond down. That's why when we go to issue the bond, it'll be $231 million bond.

Alderman Sapienza: So, $54 million expended so far in phase one, and $54 million has been spent from the operating budget to cover what they've spent.

S. Wickens: Yes, on the bond they've spent $60 million probably in cash. So, you add those two numbers together and that's the total amount that has been spent on the project.

Alderman Sapienza: $114 million so far.

S. Wickens: Probably about that. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but that's pretty close.

On motion of Alderman Burkush, duly seconded by Alderman Barry, the report of the committee was accepted and its recommendation adopted.

REGULAR BUSINESS

15. Nominations: - Board of Adjustment: Matthew Robert Carnevale, Jr. to move from an alternate to a regular member succeeding Greg Powers, term to expire March 1, 2029; Nick Taylor to move from an alternate to a regular member, term to expire March 1, 2029 - Planning Board: Christopher Morrow to fill a vacancy as an alternate member, term to expire May 1, 2028 - Manchester Public Television Service: Dave Wihby to fill a vacancy as a regular member, term to expire July 1, 2028 - Retirement Board: John Clayton to succeed Richard Bunker as a regular member, term to expire January 1, 2029

(Note: Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Board of Mayor and Aldermen, these nominations will layover until the next meeting of the Board.)

16. Aldermanic Nominations: - Manchester Public Television Service: Cristina Goodwin to succeed Brad Cook as a regular member, term to expire July 1, 2028; Sarah Ambrogi to fill a vacancy as a regular member, term to expire July 1, 2027

(Note: Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Board of Mayor and Aldermen, these nominations will layover until the next meeting of the Board.)

17. Confirmation: Arts Commission — Michael Garcia to fill a vacancy as an alternate member, term to expire December 1, 2027.

On motion of Alderman O'Neil, duly seconded by Alderman Terrio, it was voted to confirm the nomination as presented.

18. Agreement between the City of Manchester and Manchester Public Television Service, Inc.

On motion of Alderman O'Neil, duly seconded by Alderman Barry, it was voted to approve the agreement.

19. Communication from Jeff Belanger, Planning and Community Development Director, requesting the establishment of a tax increment financing (TIF) district for the purpose of financing the construction of a public parking garage on the Pearl Street Lot.

Alderman Trisciani moved to approve the request. Alderman Bonilla duly seconded the motion.

Alderman O'Neil: This has come up, this 79-E versus the TIF. Are we being fair to them if we end up not approving the 79-E tonight where there should have been a covenant apparently at some point? How do we handle this 79-E request relative to the TIF district approval?

Emily Rice, Solicitor: I don't want to comment on any specific case in in public, but I think you have the recommendation of the Planning Director, and I think that Jodie Nazaka has the other matter well in hand. So that's about all I can say on the public record at this time.

Alderman Terrio: It's my understanding that even if we approve the TIF, although it weighs against future 79-E approvals, we can still do it. So this doesn't bar it in the future, it just kind of weighs against them.

Jeff Belanger, Planning and Community Development Director: You're exactly right, alderman. The statute does not prohibit you from granting the tax relief when a parcel is within a TIF. It simply allows for it to happen easily. It's at your discretion to deny should you want to. But procedurally, this TIF could go forward, and then you could then weigh the application for the 79-E at a later time with the understanding that should you grant the 79-E request, that would reduce the amount of incremental revenue going to pay off the bond for the garage.

Alderman Terrio: Because this is a special case where it was approved two years ago, it's been pending. But going forward, I believe we can just say to people, there's a TIF in place, we're not even going to hear you. Something to that effect, right? We don't even have to have hearings.

J. Belanger: The statute allows for the board to, at your discretion, deny purely based on it being within the boundaries of the TIF.

Alderman Sapienza: Is a 79-E transferable?

J. Belanger: I'm not an expert in 79-E. That's a good question for economic development. I don't handle those myself.

Alderman Sapienza: Is there anyone here who's an expert in 79-E? Because I think Garth Corriveau deserves an answer. Can anyone maybe make an educated guess?

Jodie Nazaka, Economic Development Director: So the question is, are they transferable?

Alderman Sapienza: Yes, ma'am.

J. Nazaka: Yes. So, they're transferable when they are recorded and the covenant is in place. If you're referring to this approval for 959 Elm Street that you'll be hearing at your next meeting, it was approved two years ago. The prior applicant never solidified that approval, never recorded anything their one year lapsed.

Alderman Sapienza: Is the onus on the applicant and not the city to finalize it?

J. Nazaka: So, we share with the applicant a draft covenant that goes back and forth. Their attorneys make edits, but it never even got that far with the last applicant.

Mayor Ruais called for a vote. The motion carried unanimously.

20. Report(s) of this evening's committees, if available.

The Committee on Public Safety, Health & Traffic respectfully recommends, after due and careful consideration, that the request from Alderman O'Neil for the painting of shamrocks where Elm Street intersects with Hanover Street and Pleasant Street, in coordination with the Police and Public Works Departments, be approved.

On motion of Alderman O'Neil, duly seconded by Alderman Terrio, the report of the committee was accepted and its recommendation adopted.

The Committee on Community Improvement respectfully recommends, after due and careful consideration, that the request from the Fire Chief for $65,000 of City Opioid Abatement funds to help supplement Squad One's funding shortage be approved.

On motion of Alderman Goonan, duly seconded by Alderman Fajardo, the report of the committee was accepted and its recommendation adopted.

The Committee on Community Improvement respectfully recommends, after due and careful consideration, that the Amending Resolution and Budget Authorization providing for the acceptance and expenditure of funds in the amount of $27,000 for CIP C300040426 Safe Haven Baby Box Installation be approved and referred to the Committee on Finance.

On motion of Alderman Burkush, duly seconded by Alderman Goonan, the report of the committee was accepted and its recommendation adopted.

The Committee on Community Improvement respectfully recommends, after due and careful consideration, that the request from Chestnut MNH Limited Partnership for subordination of a city lien be approved.

On motion of Alderman Fajardo, duly seconded by Alderman Trisciani, the report of the committee was accepted and its recommendation adopted.

The Committee on Community Improvement respectfully recommends, after due and careful consideration, that the request from the Fire Chief for permission to apply for a $75,000 Opioid Grant through NH Charitable Trust be approved.

On motion of Alderman O'Neil, duly seconded by Alderman Barry, the report of the committee was accepted and its recommendation adopted.

The Committee on Community Improvement respectfully recommends, after due and careful consideration, that the request from the Fire Chief for permission to apply for a $90,000 Congressionally Directed Spending Grant be approved.

On motion of Alderman Burkush, duly seconded by Alderman Goonan, the report of the committee was accepted and its recommendation adopted.

The Committee on Community Improvement respectfully recommends, after due and careful consideration, that the request from the Fire Chief for permission to apply for a $1,600,000 Congressionally Directed Spending Grant be approved.

On motion of Alderman Burkush, duly seconded by Alderman Goonan, the report of the committee was accepted and its recommendation adopted.

The Committee on Public Safety, Health & Traffic respectfully recommends, after due and careful consideration, that the request from York Hallsville Building LLC for the following on-street parking signage:

RESCIND NO PARKING ANYTIME SIGNAGE - Jewett Street, east side, from Merrill Street to a point 30 feet south

NO PARKING ANYTIME SIGNAGE - On Jewett Street, east side, from Hayward Street to a point 65 feet north, coinciding with the end of existing double yellow striping - On Hayward Street, north side, from Jewett Street to a point 53 feet east, coinciding with the end of existing double yellow striping

be approved.

Alderman Terrio: I talked to Kristen Clarke and I did hear from Fuss & O'Neill. I don't have a problem with this, but my only request is I know this needs to be approved for the project to go forward. My only request is can this be delayed until the project's about done? There's no reason to restrict parking now. If the project's not going to be done for a year and a half, is that a possibility? Owen, it's my understanding you need approval tonight for the project to go forward. But it's also my understanding that the project's not going to be done for a year to two years. Would it be okay if we approve it tonight but you make the signage changes concurrently with when the project's done or around that time?

Owen Friend-Gray, Deputy Public Works Director: Yes, we could handle it that way.

On motion of Alderman Terrio, duly seconded by Alderman O'Neil, the report of the committee was accepted and its recommendation adopted, with the condition that the signs be installed/removed concurrent with project completion.

NEW BUSINESS

Mayor Ruais: I did have one piece of new business first. This is the mayoral appointment to the Lead Exposure Prevention Commission. I'm appointing Alderman Goonan to that.

Alderman Sapienza: We probably don't have an update on the state police investigation into OYS, right?

E. Rice: I do not have an update for you.

Alderman Sapienza: Could we request an update from the state police? Because it has been a good amount of time. I've tried to call. They won't return my calls. Perhaps the solicitor's office could make some contact with the state police.

E. Rice: We are in contact with the state police.

Alderman Sapienza: What did they say?

E. Rice: I can't comment. It's not my investigation.

Alderman Sapienza: So it's still ongoing?

E. Rice: That is correct.

Alderman Sapienza: So, is this information confidential that we're not privy to it?

E. Rice: That's correct.

Alderman Sapienza: Did they give an estimate how long it's going to go on?

E. Rice: No, they did not.

Alderman Sapienza: So, what do we do? We just keep waiting another five years?

E. Rice: No. I think we need to let the New Hampshire State Police follow the facts and come to a determination.

Alderman Sapienza: I mean, nobody was murdered or anything. There are a few missing dollars.

E. Rice: I just don't think it's appropriate for me to comment on investigations.

Alderman Sapienza: I'll keep waiting.

Alderman Kaw-uh: This pertains to an email that I had sent earlier. I don't have any motions tonight regarding it. I think it's a better point of discussion for the Committee on Public Health, Safety and Traffic. But as everyone knows, at this point, the Saint Patrick's Day parade is unfortunately not going forward this year, and I know that a lot of folks on this board and in the public are frustrated and disappointed by that, and I wanted to invite the rest of this board from an informal standpoint to look into why this happened, how we got here and what we could possibly do to address it in the future so that no other parades run into the same situation. I was able to find out that the Department of Homeland Security issued some new guidelines regarding public events such as this, and that was what the Manchester Emergency Operations Center had then taken under advisement and then implemented some of these parade route changes. So, it was all done with public safety in mind, as we had heard from the start. However, I do think that there are probably things that the city could do to help ensure that we both maintain public safety and also maintain some of the cherished events that we have in the city. So, I'm going to be looking into this unofficially and eventually, if it comes forward in a Public Safety, Health and Traffic Committee, that would be great. But otherwise, I'd invite everyone else to look into this as well.

Alderman Barry: Alderman O'Neill is working with our police and fire and the emergency operations center in reference to this. I'm hoping myself personally, I hope we get, at the very least, the two parades, the holiday parade and the Saint Patrick's Day parade, back to Salmon Street. I think it's it needs to be there with everything that's involved with safety in mind also.

Alderman O'Neil: A few items just kind of an FYI, work has started on a potential exhibit honoring the contribution of the Irish as our country is celebrating its 250th birthday, specifically in Manchester in its infancy. Has any work happened on ADUs and how it was assessed? Did a committee hear that yet?

Mayor Ruais: Yes, I'm struggling to remember now but that that has been looked into.

Alderman O'Neil: Can we get an update at some point?

Mayor Ruais: The assessor's office had a suggestion on that.

Alderman O'Neil: That'd be great, thank you. Our own Ben Normand, son of City Clerk Matt Normand, has been accepted at Husson College up in Maine to get a quality education and play basketball. So well done, Ben. We kind of followed his career here.

Mayor Ruais: And he made first team all-state, if I'm not mistaken.

Alderman O'Neil: We were greatly under the gun a couple of weeks ago trying to follow the playoff game, all of us here. Also, Henry J. Sweeney post will be having an event on Sunday, March 29th. It's called the No Parade Party. It is a corned beef dinner, $10 for members, $15 for guests. Music starts at 1:00. And then the Saint Patrick's Parade Committee on that same day, March 29th, in an effort to help some of the parade committee's longest sponsors, we will be sponsoring the McGonagle School of Irish Dance and the New Hampshire Police Association's Pipes and Drums, who will be performing that afternoon at Strange Brew Pub, Shaskeen Pub, and the Wild Rover Pub. The times are just being finalized now, but it was a pretty good financial hit. There was a financial hit to these businesses and their employees. So, this is an effort by the parade committee to try to help some people. And we hope you all will spend some time, whether it's those three establishments or many of our downtown establishments, on the 29th. So, support Sweeney Post.

Alderman Kantor: Did Sharon say it was $230 million for the bond that they'll go for later?

S. Wickens: Yes, that is correct.

Alderman Kantor: So they're reducing the bond?

S. Wickens: You've got that right.

Alderman Sapienza: I'll piggyback on that. So, if the bond is being reduced, that would mean more operating money is going into this, right?

Mayor Ruais: My understanding is that they're paying forward on it to reduce the size of the bond. If I put a larger down payment on a home, my mortgage every month is less. That is my rudimentary understanding of it.

Alderman Sapienza: The only problem with that is we have a budget coming to us, and we know we're looking at a deficit. So maybe you should have just put the minimum amount down on the house because it's coming. The bill is coming. Maybe we shouldn't put that amount of money down if we don't have to. This board greenlighted a bond of $290 million. Now I'm hearing that it's less than that. Well, that's great, except for the fact that we have a very sizable budget deficit coming. So maybe it's not such a good idea.

S. Wickens: Well, the interest that they've saved is staggering by not issuing the bond early. I think that they've been very prudent. They have followed the advice of our financial advisor, and they have issued only what they needed in this last bond. They'll spend in maybe a little over a year, the $231 million. It'll be depleted, but they've been very prudent in how they've bonded this.

TABLED ITEM

21. Report of the Committee on Public Safety, Health & Traffic recommending that the request from the Highway Chief Engineer for the following changes to the parking regulations on Hanover Street which will allow the Downtown Sidewalk project design phase to progress be approved:

CROSSWALK - On Hanover Street, east of the private way (old Nutfield Ln)

NO PARKING ANYTIME - On Hanover Street, south side, from Nutfield Ln to Chestnut Street - On Hanover Street, north side, from Elm Street to a point 260 feet east - On Hanover Street, north side, from a point 340 feet east of Hanover Street to Chestnut Street

NO PARKING – LOADING ZONE - On Hanover Street, north side, from a point 260 feet east of Hanover Street to a point 80 feet further east

RESCIND METERS- 2 HOURS - On Hanover Street, north side, from a point 50 feet west of Chestnut Street to a point 60 feet westerly (ORD 7787) - On Hanover Street, north side, from Nutfield Ln to a point 158 feet west of Chestnut Street (ORD 7784) - On Hanover Street, south side, from Nutfield Ln to Chestnut Street (ORD 7780)

RESCIND NO PARKING- LOADING ZONE - On Hanover Street, north side, from a point 110 feet west of Chestnut Street to a point 48 feet westerly (ORD 7692)

RESCIND NO PARKING- LOADING ZONE 8AM-8PM MON-SAT - On Hanover Street, north side, from Chestnut Street to a point 50 feet west (ORD 8485)

(Unanimous vote with the exception of Alderman Thomas who was absent) (Note: Tabled on February 17, 2026.)

Alderman Dexter moved to remove item 21 from the table. Alderman Bonilla duly seconded the motion.

Alderman O'Neil: Can Alderman Dexter speak to why he is pulling the item off the table?

Alderman Dexter: The reason for pulling it off the table is I would like to move it to the Committee on Public Safety again. There's some language that needs to be worked out. We also have some scrivener's errors that need to be corrected. There's been some discussions and some work done in the last couple of days that in the next two weeks, we should be able to get this to Public Safety Committee and have some sort of resolution on this for the next meeting.

Mayor Ruais called for a vote. The motion carried unanimously.

On motion of Alderman Dexter, duly seconded by Alderman Bonilla, it was voted to refer the item to the Committee on Public Safety, Health & Traffic.

There being no further business, on motion of Alderman Sapienza, duly seconded by Alderman Trisciani, it was voted to adjourn.

A True Record. Attest.

City Clerk (signed: Matthew Normand)

Meeting Start Time: 7:00PM Meeting End Time: 7:50PM Minutes Prepared By: Michael Intranuovo