|
|
Town of AmherstBoard of SelectmenJanuary 3, 2005
|
The five member Board of Selectmen met at the Central Fire Station at 6:45 p.m. and presented plaques of appreciation to the following retiring firefighters: Christopher Whittaker – 32 years of service, Peter Bergin – 30 years of service and Donald Lipkin – 23 years of service.
Regular Meeting
Chairman Robert Heaton called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. Selectmen present: Marilyn Peterman, George Infanti, Bruce Bowler and Jay Dinkel. Also present Town Administrator Carl Weber and Executive Assistant Sharon Frydlo.
Citizens’ Forum
There were no questions or concerns from members in the audience.
Rolf Biggers re Town Hall Update
Architect Rolf Biggers summarized the first two phases of the Town Hall renovations indicating that this next phase was the first floor build-out. Items discussed a year and a half ago included things outside the envelope such as repointing the brick and fixing the windows. They also talked about site issues some of which was to be done by other groups. There was a need to get more parking, with less pavement, which would be 3-4 years away. In Phase III, the mechanical and electrical work is already proceeding between LeBlanc Heating and Boisvert Electric. A build-out of the basement has not been figured in any of the phases.
Mr. Biggers remarked that after doing some demolition work, they had a structural engineer come in. He described the studs existing as being 2x2’x rather than 2x4’s - they will be addressed by the structural engineer. He indicated this was not unusual for an old building. As soon as they get all the last pieces together, the structural work, the design for the mechanical system, ducts for the heat and the rest of the design work, they can go forward with the actual construction of rebuilding the downstairs. Some of the work has already taken place such as the sprinkler system and some of it may have to be redone – hopefully very little. They will be keeping the inside fairly simple and do not know what to do with the fireplace and won’t know until they open it up. He showed the Selectmen a presentation board containing a rug sample, a wooden floor sample, a counter sample and a three-color paint scheme. He briefly described the area where these samples will be placed. Once the money is spent, these materials will be maintainable.
Mr. Bowler suggested they may want to look into a fabric slip and grate type of mat in the vestibule area. He knew what it did and works very well in high maintenance areas. He volunteered to get information to Mr. Biggers. Mr. Heaton asked if they had any discussions yet with Lisa Sasser of the Heritage Commission. He would like to make sure she was involved earlier on rather than later on in the process. Mr. Biggers indicated they were approaching the point where a lot of this information is coming together. They have almost identified the fixtures and the pendant fixtures in the public area. Mr. Heaton suggested that before the Board makes a judgment, he would like Ms. Sasser to weigh in on the project as a representative of the Heritage Commission.
Mr. Heaton asked what phases have already been appropriated? Mr. Biggers indicated the entrance, electrical and mechanical work have been appropriated. The current design has not been appropriate. On a rough preliminary budget he thought the amount should be approximately $160,000 not including contingency and was based on the Town doing some of the work. Mr. Heaton had the sense the Board like the concept and urged them to make sure they put enough money in the warrant article. Mr. Biggers mentioned that to be on the safe side they could always apply it to the next scope or drop it back to the bottom line. He knew they were going to see an increase in productivity because people will have a better place to work. They were trying to keep the budget in mind and determine where the best return was for the money. In answer to questions raised by Ways & Means, Mr. Biggers thought the next step is addressing the exterior envelope – painting, window repairs, repointing. They want the building to last another 150 years and it needed some TLC. The repointing will be done within the next 2 years and it was his belief that future landscaping will be done this summer. The space in the basement can be reconfigured in the future as the town grows and will be during the last phase.
In answer to Mr. Dinkel’s question, Mr. Weber advised if the warrant article failed, they would finish a room and them move everyone back to where they were. Linda Kaiser asked the cost to finish the basement? Mr. Weber indicated it was not a matter of cost but what to do before putting in walls. They were not going to see a large warrant article to finish it off. Essentially they will be putting in walls and a ceiling. Space was needed to store files while the first floor is being renovated. Mr. Heaton remarked that at this point they have not seen this as a high priority. Mr. Biggers added that it should be noted they wee doing this while the building is being occupied. Mr. Dinkel thought that Mr. Biggers was also acting as a project manager and if so was doing an excellent job. Mr. Heaton also thought that what he has accomplished in the project has been unbelievable and the town owes him a deep amount of gratitude.
CIP Update
Chairman Addie Hutchison thanked the Board on behalf of the Amherst CIP Committee for giving them the opportunity to present their Interim Capital Improvement Plan Report for FY 06. Members of the committee present: John Maynard, Sally Wilkins and Robert Heaton. The report deals with capital items to be included in the FY 06 budget. They have incomplete data to proceed to a ten-year cycle. It is the committee’s intent to provide the Selectmen, prior to their budget next year, a completed report. They looked at submissions from Fire, DPW, Conservation and Recreation. It is also the committee’s intent to include submissions from the schools, but have not received anything from them yet. Without the schools the CIP would be limited in scope and the plan useless in the outcome. Mr. Heaton commented that they have been part of the process and had not been ignorant of it. He believed that by the next report, they will be a full recipient in this process. They will have to be, he said, for the Planning Board to use the CIP as a tool for impact fees.
Mrs. Hutchison highlighted contents of the report that contained Table I Amherst population from 1940-2025, Table II Amherst’s operating budget from FY96-FY05, and Table 3 a summary of projects requested for 2005. Appendix A contained back-up documentation associated with the RSA’s. In general, they included items of $10,000 and a useful life for three years. Appendix B was a copy of the CIP worksheet and submission form filled out by the departments and used for the basis of discussion. Appendix C was a schedule of CIP projects for FY06.
The report also contains information on financing methods – capital reserves, lease/purchase, bonds, one year appropriations that normally appear in the operating budget and impact fees. Under Section D, they discussed their Priority System by designating or using a grading system such as: “U – Urgent”, “C – Committed”, “N – Necessary”, etc. along with a brief description of what these terms meant to the committee, said Mrs. Hutchison. She described Table 3 as a Summary of Projects Requested. Contained in this table is information pertaining to the “Department/Project”, “Department Cost without Debt/Revenue”, “Starting Year (Dept. Request)”, “Financing Method (Method Recommended by Dept.)”, and “CIP Committee Priority Recommendations”.
Under Section E – the committee used information provided by the departments as far as they saw it and the committee’s discussions. Conclusions and recommendations were also included but were very basic. First, they would like the Selectmen to authorize the committee to continue as a standing committee in order to review and update the CIP prior to the budget deliberations. The committee strongly encourages participation by all town and school departments. They also believe thought should be given to implementing a program of annual capital reserve contributions. They will make their recommendation in the final report. They would like to look at the ten year cycle to see if they can make a recommendation to balance out the capital reserve contributions and level out the budget. Once they have this information, they can make further recommendations in this regard.
Mr. Infanti was impressed on what the committee has done and has given both the Selectmen and Ways & Means on where to go from here. Mr. Heaton commented that this has been a learning process to the people giving them this message to make it happen. Mrs. Hutchison said as Chairman she made a recommendation that someone from the Selectmen’s office conduct some type of training workshop with the department heads, school department and all the people who are going to participate in this process to understand what they are looking for, how far they are going to use the CIP and how they evaluate capital needs.
In response to Mrs. Peterman’s several questions, Mrs. Wilkins indicated they chose $10,000 because it was small enough to catch and something they didn’t want to miss. Mr. Weber added they also wanted to be consistent with GASB34. Mrs. Hutchison advised there was no priority level once a request is reviewed under Table 3. The department heads assign a priority and then the committee assigns another. The CIP has had quite a bit of input from the Planning Board as it related to the use of impact fees and is very focused on these items, explained Mrs. Wilkins. Mrs. Hutchison indicated they talked about upgrading the landfill – some of it is being increased because of the population and the sheer number of people that are going on Saturdays. They could impose impact fees, but they decided not to do it at this time. Mrs. Hutchison told Mrs. Peterman that in the committee’s review of the projects that were submitted, over half of them they classified them as being “desirable”, not necessarily “urgent”. If faced with a new school, those were items they would think about deferring after knowing what the requests from all the departments were.
Mr. Heaton commented they have many requests in the database and were only dealing with 2006 to help the Selectmen in some way. Mrs. Hutchison added they did get ten years of requests from Fire, Recreation, Police, Heritage and DPW, but nothing that would impact the budget in 2006. She also indicated that Mr. Heaton had put together a database where they can look at just a year, ten years, department levels and had built in figures for escalating costs. Relative to open space, Mrs. Peterman said they put aside half the amount of current use and was not sure it should be in the CIP. Mr. Heaton indicated they will see this and potential land costs will be identified. Mrs. Wilkins added they looked at about a dozen CIP plans and everyone looked at land purchases in their plans.
Mr. Dinkel said he assumed the CIP Committee was just like all their other permanent committees – that it would have terms and members would be replaced. He thought this statutory and everyone is on the committee until March. Mr. Heaton indicated they had not talked about this and did not think there was any mechanism established, but they could recommend a process. Mr. Dinkel felt they could probably come up with something, but would like input. Mr. Bowler had no questions other than it was a great job. Mr. Heaton thanked Mrs. Hutchison for the CIP report.
Other Business
Mr. Infanti once again spoke about the Davis Lane Tennis Courts and it being a hang out. He asked that the Town Administrator talk to the Police Chief about it as it “obviously is a hot spot”.
Mrs. Peterman talked about the southeast Asia disaster and wondered whether the town could set up collection locations so that the Town of Amherst could designate a specific location in that part of the world. Communities across the country are doing this and she thought this a way to reach across the ocean to identify with these people. Mr. Heaton thought this may be beyond the scope they may want to handle. Mrs. Peterman indicated that she knew churches and other organizations are doing their share. Mr. Weber commented that one of the benefits of going with a known entity is to give the collection some legitimacy. Many people who donate get a tax write-off. While Mrs. Peterman knew they could not take money out of the town budget, she would like to see something done, but was aware that it might not be possible and/or the Board did not agree with it.
Mr. Heaton asked if they were asking Mr. Weber to contact Town Counsel on the matter? Mr. Weber verbally posed the question to Counsel – the Board would like to gather some type of disaster relief, can they do it generically or do you want to have the American Red Cross, what are the allowances and what are the ramifications? Mr. Bowler asked where the drop off locations would be? Mrs. Peterman thought the Town Clerk’s office, the Library, Town Hall, Moulton’s. Mr. Weber advised these were not the most secure locations with a larger risk if they used the open can approach.
Mr. Bowler suggested they contact the Red Cross and work with them – as this is what they do. Mr. Dinkel agreed – he would rather go through a professional fundraising organization and the Red Cross was fine with him. Mr. Heaton agreed with this – he preferred an organization put in drop off boxes rather than the town being responsible.
Mrs. Kaiser mentioned there were collections being done on a massive scale. Shannon Chandley thought there were two options: Mrs. Peterman’s point was well taken and a point they may want to consider. She also mentioned that hosting a fundraising effort gives them a chance as people of the Amherst to join together as a community and give. Putting out a box is not going to be as satisfying. No commitment was made at this time.
Town Hall Surplus
Mr. Bowler moved to declare five 19” monitors surplus, second by Mrs. Peterman. Vote: Unanimous.
Other Business
Mr. Dinkel re Open Space Committee – the committee reviewed the proposed wording on the warrant article, they also prepared a press release - the draft being emailed to the Board by the next day with the Selectmen forming the committee. He advised the Conservation Commission has no ability to track all open space. Mrs. Peterman spoke about PRD’s having protective land and wondered if this was also being tracked? Mr. Dinkel indicated that they had not tracked this land, but it could be done. Mr. Dinkel indicated there was a recommendation that the Selectmen appoint a recreation-oriented person who has their pulse on recreation needs.
Mr. Dinkel also reported that he attended a meeting last week with the school and a 50/50 split was acceptable for the School Resource Officer.
Budget Discussion
Mr. Weber advised that since most of the W&M members were not at last week’s meeting, he would be having a separate meeting with them. Handouts were distributed one of which was increases in the FY 06 budget that included: Health insurance, full & part time wages, workers comp insurance, STD insurance, SRO officer, Fire Department tools & equipment, DPW administration overtime, street sweeping, salt, DPW vehicle & equipment repairs, SRLD, landfill outside hire, PMEC subsidy increase (wages), gasoline, diesel and heat. They had identified some of the large ticket items and will try and refine them a bit more.
Another handout contained information on budget cuts and revenues as of 1/3/05. Because they had to find an additional $25,150 to fund the SRO position, this worksheet had been prepared. Mr. Weber described some of the cuts and the reason for doing so. After this had been created, they found they had a surplus balance of $11,898.
On the revenue side, Mr. Weber talked about the increase in rooms & meals tax and additional revenue that would come in the form of driveway permits and other police revenue. In this area, they were up $1200 and were half way through the year. The additional revenues and additional cuts gave them a balance of $52,000. Those items on the “wish list” totaling $51,872, the departments would like to see back in.
Mr. Heaton remarked the Board gave Mr. Weber a guideline of 4% and he believed the consensus was 4% of a gross budget. He felt the budget should be “net net” because ultimately it is the impact on the taxpayer. They have to be conservative and careful on the estimated revenues. Mr. Infanti looked at the bottom line and what it is going to cost the taxpayer. Mrs. Peterman felt that when they set a goal they should say it is to be a “net net” budget. If 4% was the goal for the gross budget, she was willing to go through some of the items to make sure they are needed. Mr. Dinkel indicated the original goal was based on gross and it was finally achieved. He has looked at the income in detail and was concerned about the Fire Department – it seemed like a big number to count on. He assumed the other big number is building permits. Mr. Weber explained that on some of the revenues, such as the Town Clerk, he was a little conservative. In some of the new ones it could be a guesstimate. Mr. Dinkel thought with the exception of rooms & meals tax and highway block grant, the revenues did not rise with the expenses the way they talked about last week. In order to get a true gross goal of 4%, they needed to reduce salaries. Mr. Bowler was fine with it last week and was still fine with the 3.62% it this week. He read an article regarding Fire Department revenues and many volunteer and large city departments are taking advantage of this new billing process.
John Maynard indicated he was totally against a “net net” budget as a taxpayer because he did not want to see any increase. He also mentioned that of all the things they would be adding back in were labor hours. Mr. Weber remarked this is a part he was wrestling with. Part of what they were running into was the communities the size of Amherst have lots of people in their Finance Department. Relative to DPW, he was seeing many times when we take people off the road crew to spend time remodeling buildings. They were also losing plowing contractors. The more clerical oriented ones they will have to take a hard look for the long term - some of it could be handled by the dispatchers during the midnight hours. He mentioned performance pay, rather than the automatic steps, might bring these items down somewhat. Over the years they tried to go very slow before adding people.
In response to Mr. Maynard’s question, Mr. Weber advised the department heads hashed out the budget in a meeting last week on what they should take out and what should they put back in. Mr. Heaton spoke about the “net net” budget. In his opinion, this was where they reflect the services needed to provide to the town because it is growing. When does the Police Chief need a new police officer, etc. reflects the fact that new businesses and new homes are in town. Mr. Maynard said he would then look for a zero increase for a “net net” budget. They could look at where the budgets are and maybe next year they should look at a target on net increases rather than gross. After further comments, Mr. Weber remarked that if they looked at the last three years, they have been at a low percentage and this was a gross number and not net. They have refined them and the numbers on the “wish list” would be the first ones to be cut and would amount to $51,872.31. Mr. Bowler indicated he was fine with the “wish list”, but if there was a possibility of refining it, he would suggest that they reduce the Fire part time wages to six months rather than 12 thus saving approximately $4000. Mr. Dinkel said he agreed totally and was okay with it. Mrs. Peterman agreed – she knew unfortunately that the departments needed staff and this is where the money continues to grow. Most of the town runs a fairly “mean and lean” budget regarding part time positions – she said she would go along with what was recommended. Mr. Infanti included his support of the budget.
Mr. Heaton thought the process that Mr. Weber and the Department Heads went through was the best he has ever seen to come up with a reasonable budget because when there is a net budget of 3.62% there was a reasonable effort to improve services. Mr. Maynard said he would like to re-group his committee to discuss this further on the increased numbers every year of employees that have been added. Mr. Weber reminded the committee that they have let folks go in the assessing and fire departments. Mr. Maynard remarked that the town runs very efficiently. Mrs. Peterman commented that the demand put on the people they have has increased, some at a greater level than it has over other times in history.
Mr. Heaton asked that in fairness to Mr. Maynard he asked his thoughts. Mr. Maynard indicated it was just an observation and that the number of hours to run the town goes up and goes up more than the population or if were they operating efficiently? This was just an observation, he said. Mrs. Peterman advised there were services the town provides that are requested by the public such as a web page, communications committee and services that have been asked for and what was not demanded years ago – there was a different group of people living in the town than were twenty years ago. Linda Kaiser remarked that the population since she has lived in town has gone up 50%, however, her taxes have tripled and they needed at some point to get a handle on this. Mr. Heaton commented that this was something the CIP was going to look into because they want to see what is really happening.
Other Business
Mr. Bowler asked what happens to members of committees who do not attend the meetings? Mr. Heaton suggested the Chairman of the committee come to the Selectmen with reasons for potentially removing a member.
Minutes
Mr. Bowler moved to approve the minutes of December 20, 2004, second by Mr. Infanti, amended as follows: Line 44 – insert “to” before the “work”; Line 52 – replace “one” with “some”; Line 79 – insert “on Phase I” after “start”; Line 87 – replace “they” with “we” in both instances; Line 93 – replace “bond” with “borrow”; Line 100 – replace “process” with “costs”; Line 160 – insert “a donation of” after “get”; Line 162 – correct typo “to”; Line 212 – replace “$269,198” with “$49,000” and insert “for dispatch” after “paying”; Line 277 – insert “that are not” after “stipends”; Line 282 – insert a period after “doubled”; Line 283 – strike “and”, strike “change” and replace with “reduction”; Line 284 – insert a period after “spent”, strike “and”, replace “a” with “A” and then insert “follow up”; Lines 307-311 – strike all those lines beginning with “It”. Vote: Unanimous.
Mr. Weber advised they will be finalizing the budget and warrant articles next week. Mr. Dinkel asked that Town Counsel look at the land bond.
Non-Public Session
Upon a unanimous roll call vote, the Board entered Non-Public Session at 10:20 p.m. under RSA 91-A:3 II (a) personnel and RSA 91-A:2 I (b) collective bargaining.
The Board exited Non-Public Session at 10:40 p.m. and unanimously voted to seal the minutes.
Other Business
Mr. Infanti asked about a piece of equipment that was working sporadically for fire and EMS calls. Mr. Weber explained they had older equipment that had been worked on but the question was did it make sense to repair it now or get new equipment. To replace it in kind, it would cost approximately $4-5000 and they were analyzing it. Mr. Bowler felt they should order a new radio for fire and EMS for $5000 – he had a problem with trying to make a 20 year old radio work. Mr. Bowler moved to authorize spending up to $5000 out of contingency to buy and install a base radio for EMS and fire, second by Mr. Dinkel. Vote: Unanimous. Mr. Weber advised the departments had been struggling with this and thanked the Board for this.
Mr. Heaton suggested that the Board visit the new communications center at 6:45 p.m. before their next meeting. Mr. Weber will make arrangements to see if this is convenient.
Mr. Infanti moved to adjourn the meeting at 10:55 p.m., second by Mr. Dinkel. Vote: Unanimous.
Respectfully submitted,
Sharon l. Frydlo
Executive Assistant