Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Budget Transparency topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Aldermen and residents press for clearer budget book numbers after bond questioned; motion to table R-26-028 passes

Nashua Board of Aldermen · May 12, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

During budget review, residents questioned a $3 million bond and a perceived $100,000 discrepancy in the architect contract; aldermen debated accessibility of 'actuals' in the budget book. A motion to table R-26-028 to the next meeting passed by voice vote.

The Nashua Board of Aldermen heard sharp public comment about bonding and budget transparency during a budget hearing. Resident Bill Ferriero questioned why a recently approved $3,000,000 bond for a new garage included about $100,000 more than the HKT Architects proposal of $550,427 and asked the board to explain the difference.

"Why would you allow the city to be able to borrow a $100,000 more than the architect asked for?" Ferriero asked during the public-comment period, urging the board to emphasize proposed budgets compared with actual spending.

Laurie Ortolano, another resident, urged aldermen to scrutinize inflated bond amounts and cited an earlier Mulberry Street example where bond increases followed property decisions. Aldermen responded: Alderman Deebo said unsold bond capacity can remain unused and thus would not automatically impact taxpayers; others acknowledged public frustration and called for clearer presentation of 'actuals' in the budget book.

Procedural action: Alderman Deebo moved to table R-26-028 to the next budget meeting. The chair called for the ayes, the body responded "Aye," and the chair declared the motion carried.

Why it matters: public trust and transparency in capital projects and the budget process were central to public comment. Aldermen said the actuals are available online but several members urged better accessibility and printed materials for some members. The discussion ended with the committee asking for written suggestions on improvements to the budget book for next year.