CLAREMONT — Two weeks after an angry city council voted down a motion to purchase equipment, furniture and fixtures for the new community center, a cordial city council met last night and unanimously approved the $350,00 expense.

During the public hearing, one resident thanked the council members for a “decent conversation.”

The motion was made after a discussion on whether a three-year lease-purchase would be more appropriate.

On July 11 council members expressed their anger over the their own public display of infighting played out in the press that started when Mayor James Neilsen said he questioned the lease proposal.

Some residents then also accused the city officials of “double dipping,” leasing equipment when the money for the purchase had already been acquired through a bond for the Claremont Savings Bank Community Center, which is set to open around the first of the year.

When saying no to the purchase on July 11, council members said they should lease the items instead but were unable to since Neilsen had asked the lease agreement be taken off the agenda while he was on vacation.

Neilsen and the full council attended Wednesday night's meeting.

City Financial Director Mary Walters said the city wasn't “double dipping” but “hedging its bets.”

“It's not double dipping. We not doing anything illegal,” Walters said.

The project has already run about $100,000 over budget and she said she wanted to lease the items so the community center could open on time and cover any other unexpected expenses.

A $10 million dollar project like this would normally budget 5 to 10 percent for unexpected costs, but since the project was run on such a tight budget there was only about 1.5 percent budgeted for the unexpected, she said.

“We'll face the responsibility if something goes wrong,” Councilman Victor Bergeron told Walters. “I just think the money is there, go buy it. To me the money's there to spend; go ahead, order it.”

Councilman Chris Irish said if the city leased the items, it would essentially be paying twice. He compared the action to an individual accepting a bank loan to purchase a car, then instead of buying the car, leasing it.

“All things being equal, we are going to pay for this twice,” Irish said, if the items are leased. “Doesn't sound smart financially. … That's not what you told the taxpayers we were going to do.”

Residents who spoke at the public forum agreed with the purchase as opposed to the lease-purchase.

“I don't believe in leasing it when it is already designated in the bond budget,” resident Cynthia Howard said.

Bergeron also defended the mayor's and any council member's right to ask questions.

“I was elected by the people to ask questions about how we spend money. If it hurts someone's feelings so be it. That's why I was elected,” Bergeron said.

- - - - - - - -

Meghan Pierce may be reached at mpierce@newstote.com.