|
|
Town of AmherstBoard of SelectmenJanuary 9, 2006
|
Chairman Marilyn Peterman called the meeting to order at 6:08 p.m. Selectmen present: George Infanti, Thomas Grella, Bruce Bowler and Jay Dinkel. Also present Acting Town Administrator Gary MacGuire and Executive Assistant Sharon Frydlo.
There were no comments or concerns from the audience.
Article 2 – Baboosic Lake Bond: After reading the article Mrs. Peterman advised there will be no impact on the tax rate because the amount will be shared by the users. They are to raise and appropriate $418,500. The Selectmen supported this bond by a vote of 5-0. W&M supported it by a vote of 7-0.
Articles 3, 4, 5 discussion was postponed temporarily.
Article 6 – Police Union: Mr. MacGuire had nothing to add. The Selectmen supported this article. W&M had not yet taken a vote.
Article 7 – Fire Department Vehicle Replacement: W&M Chairman Linda Kaiser indicated she had spoken to Chief John DeSilva and asked if he could give this up for a year and he said yes he could drive the current vehicle a bit longer. They had $49,000 in the fire department apparatus account now. Mrs. Peterman did not have a problem with this as long as it met the requirements of the way the Capital Reserve Fund was set up. Mrs. Frydlo to research the matter further. Chief DeSilva explained his current plan for vehicle replacement – the next vehicle to be replaced was Engine 2. This was the oldest of the four engines at the South Station and he was talking four years out. Mr. Infanti commented they have $49,000 in an account and asked if they wanted to spend it for this vehicle or save it for the next vehicle. The Chief’s recommendation was to purchase Car I out of Capital Reserves and then set up a Capital Reserve through FY 2011 – it took 8-12 months to build a vehicle. Mr. Dinkel mentioned they may not have enough money in 2011 saved in the Capital Reserves. It was Mr. Infanti’s opinion to take off the warrant article. Mrs. Peterman felt it should stay on – the purchase would come out of the Capital Reserves and have a zero impact. Both the Selectmen and W&M were in favor of this article.
Article 8 – Refurbish Fire Department Engine 5: The Chief explained this vehicle is their second oldest and was beginning to show areas of corrosion primarily on the cab. It was not critical, but he was looking at this as preventive maintenance. The truck was never stripped with reflective striping and they would be repainting the cab and fixing the interior portion of the doors along with replacing emergency lights to bring it into compliance. They also plan on putting air conditioning in the cab. Questions were raised and answered by the Chief. Mr. Grella asked if this would extend the life of the vehicle? Mr. DeSilva felt it would be five years. Mr. Grella said he would be in support of this. Mr. Bowler also was in support of refurbishing vehicles and thought if it was refurbished it should get them another ten years from today. $55,000 was a lot of money, but it buys them a lot of time. Both Mr. Dinkel and Mrs. Peterman agreed.
In response to Mrs. Peterman’s question, the Chief explained how they went about determining who should do the refurbishment. Deirdre Rogusky viewed the engine and explained that Deputy Fire Chief Steve Bair pointed out the doors and above the tire well showed blistering, He talked about window seals cracking, the special color paint and that stenciling had to be redone. When asked if the refurbishment would impair the vehicle he said “no”. It would probably go up to $62,000 in another year. Basically he said it could go for another year, she explained. She further commented that Mr. Bair would like to see a fund set up that would always be made available for these types of repairs. Mrs. Kaiser commented that W&M were fine with this as long as they got bids. Both the Selectmen and W&M supported this article.
Article 9 – DPW Truck Replacement: DPW Director Bruce Berry explained what is currently being carried in Capital Reserves and what is in the budget for adding to the Capital Reserves is sufficient. Information has been submitted to the CIP, but he has not seen the final draft. Mr. Dinkel explained it was the Committee’s position to buy smaller items out of the Capital Reserves. Larger expenditures would be either bonded or purchased through a municipal lease. Mrs. Peterman added that the Selectmen had not taken any official vote, it is only a recommendation from the CIP. Mr. Berry advised this warrant article has been out there in various forms for a number of years and hasn’t been changed. It is the position of the Board to do more with less that is moving more material with fewer people. Mr. Dinkel indicated there were two issues to fund a six wheeler or a ten wheeler. In terms of funding, he would go with a lease/purchase option. In July, the rates will still be favorable and will allow them to continue to building up their Capital Reserves. Six wheeler vs. ten wheeler has been the discussion over several years. Mr. Berry explained that a six wheel truck typically carries 7 yards and a ten wheeler can get 14 yards – twice as many yards.
Mr. Bowler said he was not in support of it because what was up in the Barn for equipment. They still have some old trucks that needed to be replaced. He would support two six wheelers instead of one ten wheeler. Mr. Grella thought they would be better off getting two new six wheelers and take the funds out of capital reserves. Mr. Infanti remarked he looked at both sides. One being that they would save drivers. Looking at Mr. Berry’s side, they had at least one truck they should have gotten rid of, but kept it and he knows they have several old vehicles. He asked how often did they need a ten wheeler? Mr. Berry said it would be used every day and would become the first choice. Mr. Infanti opted for two six wheelers. Mrs. Peterman indicated they have a DPW Director and have asked for his advice and recommendation – he is running the Department. She agreed with Mr. Dinkel that they needed to build up the Capital Reserves. Mr. Berry commented that while he would prefer a ten wheeler he was comfortable that they all are promoting something, rather than they were not in support of anything.
Mrs. Peterman asked his honest opinion of what he really needed. Mr. Berry advised they have two very tired trucks which didn’t pass inspection last year. They used the two trucks sparingly and the ten wheeler would replace the oldest truck. Mr. Bowler agreed with Mr. Berry, you can hold twice as much, but what they have up there and the age of trucks plowing snow is the worst thing they can do with a vehicle. He would like to see him have a reliable vehicle. In response to Mr. Foley’s question, Mr. Berry described hauling processes and what his Department moves on a regular basis. He commented that if he had to move a lot of dirt, it was not efficient to move seven yards at a time and they do this throughout the summer.
It was Mrs. Kaiser’s personal opinion that Mr. Berry deserved this truck. It allowed him to manage his department. Mrs. Peterman explained that when they have their public hearing on the budget and warrants, they can change positions.
Article 10 – DPW Salt & Sand Storage Facility: Mr. Berry said he had a concern about using the word “addition” because it sounded as if they were adding something on and they weren’t. Both the Selectmen and W&M were in favor of this article.
Article 11 – DPW Interdepartmental Operability of Two-Way Radios: All Board members were in favor of this article. Mrs. Kaiser remarked that W&M was not in favor of this article and would like to see it in the budget. If Mr. Berry felt it is necessary for them to communicate, it should be an expense and put into the budget. Mr. Bowler agreed with this. Mrs. Peterman asked if there was any way to obtain grant money? Mr. MacGuire was not aware of any. His question was would this put them in a position to reduce the maintenance line if they put it in the budget? Mr. Berry explained that he carried money in the budget if it was not included. Mr. Bowler indicated there was $4000 in radio repairs. Mr. Berry advised he had four radios that had to be maintained and would suggest leaving in $500. The new equipment line item was increased by $27,000 and the radio repair line was reduced to $500.
Article 3- Increase Recycling Capacity and Improve Traffic Flow and Safety at the Transfer Station: Without discussion, both the Selectmen and W&M were in favor of this article. Mrs. Peterman thanked several of the Solid Waste Committee members who had come to the meeting.
Article 4 – Peabody Mill Environmental Center (PMEC): PMEC Advisory Board members present were Chairman Ann Logan, Anne Krantz, Jane Jones and Gerry Wilkins. Mrs. Logan corrected the article to read 5200 square feet which was the total. The 2600 square feet in the article was only for the first floor. They were asking for $250,000 for one year. They may be able to lower it at the deliberative session. After watching the discussion on TV, she was sorry to say they did not know that much about PMEC and some of the Board members were there to answer all their questions.
In 2001, they were formed as an Advisory Board. None of them were on it with the exception of Anne Krantz and Jim Bowen - they were an arm of the Conservation Commission. As they moved forward, Conservation put forth an article where they were to begin building a building to support the programs. In 2002 she joined the Board. In 2003, Jim Shildneck found out they did not have an operating budget and had a Director being paid by the schools. Carl Weber wished them to become part of the Town and in June this happened.
Mrs. Krantz reviewed a newspaper article she had written in November. It covered the construction of the new building as it currently stands, the type of materials that went into the project along with the names of the volunteers associated with this. She brought them up to speed on what was on the site presently. Mr. Wilkins told them they formed a building sub-committee who thought the building plans were too grandiose. He spoke of the square foot costs, the estimated $50,000 for the septic system, lighting fixtures and geothermal heating. They estimated $10,000 for site work and $21,00 for other construction. They raised $114,000 leaving them $441,000 to complete the project.
Mrs. Jones informed them that since they entered into Phase II, they raised $69,000. In 2005, they were awarded a $50,000 matching grant and they have also raised some other funds and hoped to raise $100,000 this year. They hope to secure some in-kind donations from businesses and close the financial gap. They look to the Town for guidance as they continue to pursue the project. Mr. Infanti strongly supported PMEC. It is a great asset to Amherst as well as surrounding towns. The project was long overdue and supports one to two generations. He thought every citizen in Town should support this.
Mrs. Logan said their goal is to achieve this building because they cannot support all the programs. The Middle School is talking about not sending the kids to Squam Lake. She recently met Recreation Director Nancy McMillan and there were additional things they would like to see happen. Since they became a Department of the Town everything has come together. All Board members have committees they serve on. Mr. Grella supported the article and commended the group for their financial endeavors on getting this started and they had done a great service to everyone. Mr. Bowler said that Mr. Infanti said it all. He, too, supported the project and they need to get the building built so that they can expand their other programs. Mr. Dinkel supported it, but commented on the fact that they wanted to raise the funds in one year. Mrs. Peterman supported the program and the building and the cost. She applauded them in their fundraising efforts. She spoke about her bonding philosophy. She also mentioned that this article is nineteen cents on the tax rate and higher than any other item the Selectmen agreed on. Mrs. Kaiser said W&M were very much in support of this going forward this year. The mechanics of bond vs. warrant article they had not discussed. This was a jewel in Town – they were teaching kids on how to deal with the planet and how to deal with the earth – they need to pay for the building. Another concern is that it takes many votes to bond. After further discussion on bonding and the cost on the tax rate, Mr. Bowler commented that the goal is to be self-sufficient and for PMEC to get away from the Town subsidy. The Selectmen’s vote to bond vs. one year was 4 for one year and 1 to bond (Mrs. Peterman).
Article 17 – New Police Officer: Mr. Dinkel was not in favor of this article and it was not that he didn’t recognize the concerns that may have brought this article forward. He felt they should proceed with allocating their existing resources. He believed there has been some progress made based on folks bringing it to the Police Department’s attention, based on the existing officers and the speed board device placed around Town. To cut down on speeding, it would be $56,000 plus annual per year. Mr. Bowler attended both the meetings at Town Hall and he stated then he would support it and he continues to support it. This was town-wide and not just a Mack Hill issue. It was a six month position and he believed that Chief MacGuire would be here again next year requesting another officer. They were putting it off six months. The Chief initially said there wasn’t anything this year. He attended the meetings and brought it up as a six month position. They all travel down 101A and Lowe’s will be putting a strain on the Department next summer. It would take effect January 2007 and he supports it.
Mr. Grella remarked he would go along with the $28,446.16 and it would be money well spent. He too attended the meetings and he was in favor of it from the beginning. Mr. Infanti spoke to everybody about this and he had mixed feelings. It was too bad that the signs didn’t stop people from speeding. He hated to spend money, but he supported the Chief on this request. Mrs. Peterman was not in support of the article. They have had the same discussion for many years. If they responded in the same way, they would have had a lot more Police Officers in the Department. With Chief MacGuire’s efficient management he has managed to stay under the number of officers many other towns have. Citizens have stood up and said please stop speeding on our roads. The Chief was thinking about another officer, but not this year.
Mrs. Kaiser mentioned that when they first started this discussion she was in favor and everyone else on W&M said all they had to do was enforce the speed limit. She spoke about watching large number of cars coming down Mack Hill and they need to declare as citizens that they won’t tolerate speeding. They should enforce speeding and were not controlling it was her opinion. Mr. Foley did not support the article for the same reasons as Mrs. Peterman. He was not convinced that adding police officers every time there was a spike or an outcry of speeding was the right thing to do. Robin Warren was not in favor, neither was Ms. Rogusky or Ted Landon.
Sue Clark, 6 Mack Hill, said if they recognize that it has been an issue for this many years they should take a stand. Mrs. Peterman explained the various techniques the Town had done over the years relating to speeding. Mrs. Clark indicated everyone needs to take personal responsibility, but they all know this won’t happen. Mrs. Peterman asked how many Police Officers did they need to keep people from speeding? Mrs. Clark said one would help. There were many people who were so concerned and asked to please attempt to appropriate the funds. Mrs. Peterman commented that the townspeople will vote on it.
Laurie Biggers, 25 ˝ Mack Hill, indicated they had some momentum and this was an issue in a lot of people’s minds. This was something that Chief MacGuire felt to do what they were trying to do. This problem cannot get any better. They can defer for another six months or another year and this would be something the Town of Amherst would take responsibility for. She did not think one Traffic Officer is a cure all, but sends an important message.
Chief MacGuire mentioned that the point missed was that over the years when he has come in and asked for another Officer it would be to address calls and response times – never had they ever heard him say they will be addressing speeding. If they haven’t made a dent yet, then he did not think they were “winning the war”. He probably will be asking for another Police Officer and it will be to address their calls and responses. He estimated this would be in two years. The roomful of residents was a wake up call that he needed to take a stand and address. This was an attempt to dedicate the person to a program that they probably should have done many years ago. This would be a program where they will work with a group similar to this one and in other parts of Town and try to address safety issues in general. It was his conservatism that stopped him from asking for $52,000 so that they could use this person now. This was his decision to take it out of the budget and put into a warrant article. He would hope to see the Selectmen and W&M support it.
Mrs. Peterman asked how many years have they had the motorcycle? The Chief advised it was four years and used by existing personnel. Mrs. Peterman remarked they got it for traffic control and from the last time she looked at the web site, she knew they issued many tickets. Amherst has been known for the amount of tickets they issue. Mr. Bowler asked if he was successful in getting this position, would he not be looking for an Officer next year? Mr. MacGuire responded that they would not be connected and he could not say this. It was dangerous forecasting residential and commercial growth. His feeling is they need another Office for call response and it was not related to this article. The area of concern is as development occurs, their calls have increased and their numbers for traffic enforcement have dropped. Vote on the article – Selectmen 3 in favor 2 against, W& M 1 in favor 4 against.
Article 16 – Forestview Cemetery Design/Layout (Formerly Cemetery Fields)): Peter Bergin, Chairman of the Cemetery Trustees, told them that in the past the Trustees had been funding the maintenance of the cemeteries. Interest had been high, but over the last five years they have not been generating any income. This would be the last year they will be able to generate any income to maintain the cemeteries. They felt they needed to start to build a fund so they can design Forestview. There were only 7-8 graves left at Cricket Corner. They were in the process of getting estimates from companies about what it would cost – several people had estimated over $100,000. He talked to Lee Mayhew after he heard about this article. Mr. Mayhew felt it important for the Town to look toward the future and suggested a Capital Reserve for $15,000. Mr. Bergin thought if they go for a Capital Reserve for this amount, they as Cemetery Trustees should come back and say how much money they could generate from their Trust Fund to help defray some of the costs to lay Forestview out.
In answer to Mrs. Peterman’s questions, Mr. Bergin felt it would 3-5 years before they begin using the cemetery. They were looking at the finances and were not in a position to go out and hire someone to start the work this spring. Meadowview will not be filled up yet. However, there were people living in the south end of Town that might want to be buried at Forestview rather than Meadowview. Mr. Dinkel said he was mistaken at the last meeting. The design/layout also includes site work. Mr. Bergin indicated yes as well as layout of roads, etc. In answer to Mr. Bowler’s question, Mr. Bergin told them that they would not lay it out all at once, but do sections as needed. Meadowview was done this way. Mr. Grella abstained from the discussion as his wife, Marie, was a Cemetery Trustee.
Mrs. Peterman asked about the Cemetery Trust Funds. Mr. Bergin explained they had been generating approximately $27-28,000. If they keep maintaining the cemeteries with Cemetery Trust Funds, they won’t have any money to utilize it for the layout.
Mrs. Kaiser mentioned that at the Conservation Commission’s last meeting there was some talk about connecting trails and that the Cemetery Trustees were not in favor of it. Mr. Bergin explained that the Commission had approached them about trails, however, they were responsible for the grasshopper sparrow endangered species and they have to be protected. The Trustees were working with NH Fish & Game and the reason it was opposed. In response to Mr. Foley’s question, Mr. Bergin advised that in most towns the cemeteries were maintained through the town budget. In Amherst it was done that way for years. Sometime ago the Cemetery Trustees said they can take this on and have funded it, but now they are not generating any income even though there is a sizeable trust. They have raised the burial fees and the cost for buying cemetery plots. They found they were very generous in the cost of burials and plots. Both the Selectmen and W&M were in favor of this article.
Article 23 – Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremony – By Petition: Ann and Peter Bergin asked to speak to the Board about this article. Mrs. Bergin did not think she should be here. She was disheartened to find that people signed this petition and she didn’t even know anything about it. She read from a prepared statement in which she mentioned this was not a official town sponsored event. She spoke to several Selectmen including Mr. Grella who had signed the petition. He felt, she said, that the program would run too long if too many holidays were involved, although it only runs 15-20 minutes after including several other holidays. Mrs. Bergin produced a letter dated 1984 in which it refers to the Amherst Tree Lighting. She did not believe the issue was about holidays, she believed it was about power and control. The warrant article is asking to permit the Town to use symbols and traditions of Christmas and to acknowledge that the illuminated and decorated evergreen tree displayed on the town Green during the Christmas season be referred to as a Christmas Tree. The official name, said Mrs. Bergin is the Richard G. Crocker Tree. Groups elect to participate at their own expense. The Town does pay for the electricity for the lights on the tree along with the PA system they used over the years that had been donated. As she is the provider of the event, the warrant article seeks to control what she calls her event. She wondered how enforceable was the whole issue? She was puzzled and perplexed that this had come about. It makes the Town seem to be very elitist.
Mr. Bergin agreed with Ann and asked how they would control this if he was to say “Welcome to the Amherst Tree Lighting” – would the Police Chief arrest him. In the United States they have freedom, he spoke briefly about First Night in Boston. He commented that the 4th of July makes the Town what it is and he was obviously against the article. Mrs. Bergin briefly spoke about the origins of the Tree Lighting dating back to 1977 when she was asked to run it by the Amherst Junior Women’s Club.
Mark Vincent, 2 Nathaniel Drive, told them that he was the author of the article and was based on the U.S. House Resolution 579 that was passed on December 15, 2005 by a vote of 401 to 22. It expressed strong support of the use of symbols and traditions of Christmas. In response to questions and comments, Mr. Vincent remarked that the warrant article doesn’t say it excludes any other holidays. Mr. Bergin mentioned that this was an article on the Town warrant and a resolution by the U.S. House of Representatives is a reason why they have to check with Counsel to see if this would become an ordinance or law in the community. Mr. Vincent said the first part of Mr. Bergin’s statement was correct. This was an identical goal of the House Resolution. This article would get a sense of the electoral voters. He told Mrs. Peterman that he was not aware that this was to be proposed by the Senate. The second part of the article doesn’t reduce free speech from anyone it only asks the Town on its publication on the web site that they refer to one symbol and that is the symbol of one particular holiday - simply refer to it as a Christmas Tree. The web site refers to the Christmas Tree Lighting as one of the signature events. It does not say they want to change any of the events. He has heard nothing but good words and Ann’s good works. He has been here for three years and had not attended the event.
Mrs. Peterman felt it offensive to her as an American citizen. She was a member of a minority group and spoke as an American citizen. She has never seen anything on the Town’s warrant as offensive and decisive as this. Mr. Vincent indicated that there were signatures from people who were not Christians. Mr. Dinkel indicated that he too was offended to any use of the First Amendment, he voted not to support it. Mr. Bowler voted no. Mr. Grella asked if this article had been reviewed by any legal counsel? Mrs. Peterman explained this was a petition article and it will appear on the ballot. Mr. Grella said he signed this petition and he felt there was enough discussion about it and the townspeople can vote on it. He voted to support it. Mr. Infanti voted no.
Mrs. Kaiser mentioned that two of her great great grandfathers signed the Constitution, she was a Christian and she wanted everyone to have the right to speak. She was deeply offended by what Mr. Vincent had done – there is the freedom of religion, freedom of the press and he had just got on her wrong side. Mr. Vincent asked what in the article runs against the Jewish religion? Mrs. Kaiser indicated he didn’t care that he was saying that his Christian religion should name the tree. Mr. Foley would vote not to support. Mr. Warren, Ms. Rogusky and Mr. Landon felt this was not a matter for W&M.
Liz Overholt asked why this was so important to him? Mr. Vincent indicated this was a national issue – there were many people who believed that there is an effort underway to diminish the importance of Christmas in the holiday season. This is one holiday that is a Federal holiday and December 25 offices are closed for a reason. It was mentioned that this has been known as an Amherst Tree Lighting – things have changed. There is a sense in the Nation and in the Town that to have a symbol and a tree that is illuminated and decorated in the month of December is a symbol of Christmas. Mr. Foley asked if he was saying that he can’t refer to it the way the Town refers to it? Mrs. Peterman commented that there has been an effort to take Christmas out of the Christmas holiday and agreed with Mrs. Bergin that it was about power and control – they begin it after Thanksgiving. To bring this article to this Town at this time, she hoped it was soundly defeated. Mrs. Overholt thought it pretty easy to push his Christian identity and Christian agenda.
Cal Wood commented that this was the most exciting debate he has heard since he has been attending the Selectmen’s meetings. Taking the emotion out of the discussion, he felt the question this raised on the tree lighting is it a private activity or is it a governmental activity. If it was governmental, there may be grounds to the petition. If it was a private activity, then this government or any other government has any right under the U.S. Constitution to infringe on the speech of the private individual. If it was totally a private activity and whether this particular item passes or not, it will have no effect. Mrs. Peterman remarked that it is not sponsored by the Town, but it is for the benefit of the Town. After further discussion the Board moved onto the next article.
Article 21 – Veterans’ Exemption – Board of Selectmen’s Proposal & Article 22 Veterans’ Exemption – By Petition: Mrs. Peterman commented that this and the next article by petition were not included on the tax impact list. She explained the Board had taken a vote to increase the benefits from $150 to $300. The petitioner has requested they increase it from $150 to $500. Vote by the Board of Selectmen: Mr. Dinkel in favor of Article 21 opposed to Article 22, Mr. Bowler in support of both 21 and 22, Mr. Grella in support of both 21 and 22, Mr. Infanti in support of both 21 and 22, Mrs. Peterman in support of 21 and opposed to 22. Mrs. Kaiser advised W&M voted not to support either article. Mr. Warren commented that “the vote was all over the place”. It was his feeling that the Town did not owe him anything. Article 21 vote summarized: Selectmen all in favor, W&M 1 in favor, 4 opposed, 1 abstained. Article 22 vote summarized: Selectmen 3 to 2 in favor, W&M 1 in favor, 4 opposed, 1 abstained.
Article 12 – Selectmen’s Authority: All Selectmen were in favor, W&M did not vote as it had no tax impact.
Article 13 - Summer Street Town Boundary Relocation: Mrs. Peterman reported Mr. Dinkel testified for the Town and a similar warrant will be placed on Milford’s warrant. The Selectmen support this article.
Article 14 – Information Technology Equipment Replacement Fund: Mr. Dinkel clarified that he had thought this article was for the CIC recommendations when discussed last week. Mr. MacGuire indicated this was for $10,000 and slightly different language than originally proposed. The establishment of this Capital Reserve would insure funds for the replacement of major computer systems in the Town. For example, should they lose servers during a year when they have not been budgeted. Mr. Mayhew had recommended they address this budget need. Mrs. Peterman mentioned that Merri Howe had called this to Mr. Mayhew’s attention as it related to servers and other components. Mr. MacGuire mentioned that last week they were talking about $10,000, this week they will reduce it to $7,500 and will leave this up to the Selectmen to decide. Mr. Dinkel felt this was one reason they have a contingency fund and asked if this was something they should pay special attention to?
Ms. Rogusky questioned the Town’s infrastructure, what made up the core, how many servers did they have, how old were they and what is connected to them. What state are they in and what are the servers supporting. She would like to know more about what the infrastructure was. Mr. MacGuire advised that the Police Department currently supports three servers, two were six or seven years old. They run all their records management and wireless system and all of their dispatch services. Town Hall has two servers one of which was fairly new. DPW has one server. Mr. Landon mentioned that the Library has one server and 29 computers. Ms. Rogusky asked what were the plans to keep the system and was thinking from a software perspective. Mrs. Peterman suggested she contact Mrs. Howe before they take a vote. Mr. MacGuire indicated it was his understanding that this was an amount to address an emergency situation as opposed to updating the entire system.
Mr. Foley agreed with Mr. Dinkel’s thinking. Mr. Dinkel liked the idea conceptually as a Capital Reserve replacement fund. On the bigger picture hearing about all the different components probably an establishment of a Capital Reserve made sense. Mrs. Overholt asked if this money is put into a Capital Reserve this year, would this be the only year or were they looking to fund it every year? Mr. Dinkel felt it would likely be used for an emergency. Both the Selectmen and W&M were in favor of the article.
Article 15 – Master Plan Funding: Both the Selectmen and W&M were in favor of this funding.
Article 18 – Public Access Television Equipment Fund: Mr. MacGuire advised this article had been left out originally and this was his wording based on the information given. Newly appointed CIC Chairman Doug McAllister advised when they originally built the system, they did it on a limited concept basis. It was started three years ago and this is the next step in the process to allow them to have more flexibility in what they broadcast in Town. They were limited currently to two broadcasts per week. Instead of buying additional players and recorders, they want to go digital – take a program, put it on a computer and it would give them unlimited ability to broadcast. They want to add a capability for other Departments in Town to broadcast emergency messages and not have the Committee do it. They were also asking for standard maintenance and they need another rack. Mrs. Peterman asked where this was going in five years? Mr. McAllister mentioned that technology changes very fast. The life of a PC is about 3-5 years. They have a server themselves and can’t anticipate when it may fail – essentially they are self-insured, they have no service contracts.
Mr. Dinkel spoke about costs and suggested they increase the operating budget to $5520 for mikes, speakers, etc. Mr. McAllister explained that there were features that Carl Weber was going to put into the Town Hall renovations approximately worth $4500 that was outside the warrant article Capital Reserve Fund. Mr. Dinkel mentioned that to establish a number suggested $7500 with the intent not to spend it all at once. The Selectmen concurred as did W&M.
Article 19 – Establishment of Revolving Fund for Public Safety Services: With very little discussion the Board voted to support the article.
Article 20 – Authority to Lease: Mrs. Peterman explained this would be a potential revenue source. Mrs. Kaiser mentioned the tower proposal would still have to go through a site review and as long as this happens, everyone will be able to step up and give their views. Mr. MacGuire commented that the proposed tower at the Public Safety Center would replace the existing tower. Mrs. Peterman added there are height requirements and it is well regulated.
It was announced that additional funds were added that evening to the budget changing Article 5 – Operating Budget from $8,523,448.08 to $8,498,288.08. Mrs. Peterman reminded everyone that the public hearing on the budget and bonds are on January 17 at 7:00 p.m. at the Town Hall. The Deliberative session is on February 8 at 7:00 p.m. at the Souhegan High School.
Mrs. Overholt indicated that about a month ago the Board was talking about the roads and they had commented on how much more expensive it will be as time went by. They also had talked about the possibility of doing it this year. Mr. Dinkel said he did and this was a tough decision. Mrs. Overholt said her suggestion was to put this into a warrant article and it seemed to her that $250,000 to repair the roads in addition to the line in the operating budget. Pick the ten worse sections in Town and get the contract bids out and get the work started. Mrs. Peterman asked why she was waiting until now to bring this up. Mrs. Kaiser remarked they discussed the road budget and paving issue in detail. Lee Mayhew got a copy of Milford’s paving plan which W&M really loved. They had gone to Mr. Berry and asked if he had something similar. Mr. Berry is working on a plan. Mrs. Kaiser indicated they were comfortable meeting with Mr. Berry and him getting back to the Selectmen with a paving plan. This is his intention, let him go for now and give him six months. Mrs. Overholt indicated she understood this. Mrs. Peterman added that this was an extensive discussion and Mr. Berry was not present to respond. Mrs. Kaiser mentioned they have money in the budget to pave and do their roads. Mr. Infanti advised that it is all based on oil prices. Mrs. Kaiser remarked they have addressed it and were confident things will get done. They received Mr. Berry’s feedback, they all know it is being addressed properly and he will be coming to the Selectmen with a proposal. Mrs. Overholt commented that this may be the way to go and apologized that she hadn’t put this together a long time ago.
Mr. Dinkel reported that Addie Hutchison worked very hard over the last week to complete the draft. It went out to the other active CIP Committee members with the intent to present it to the Selectmen. Realistically he would like to push it out several weeks and then the draft would be ready to be submitted to the Selectmen.
Mr. Dinkel moved to grant abatements to owners of M/L 21-20-68, M/L 21-20-67 and M/L 5-2-14, second by Mr. Infanti. Mr. Dinkel advised that one was a current use adjustment and the other two were $3000 each. Vote: Unanimous.
Mr. Bowler moved to approve the minutes of December 19, 2005, second by Mr. Grella amended as follows: Line 160 – Strike “made money” to “made sense”; Line 193 – Strike “if”, replace with “how rates were calculated for”, Strike “II” replace with “I”; Line 240 – Insert “Amherst” before “Police Chief”; Line 272 – Insert “Deputy” before “Fire Chief”; Line 384 – Replace “no” with “non” and insert “not” before the word “generated”; Line 384 – Strike “to” replace with “with other”; Line 463 – Strike “and” replace with “in place of”; Line 545 – Replace “do” with “to”. Vote: Unanimous.
Mr. Bowler moved to approve the minutes of December 27, 2005, second by Mr. Infanti amended as follows: Line 105 – Replace “moved” with “move”; Line 139 – Insert “under budget” after “program”; Line 234 – Strike the first “the”; Line 244 – Replace “suppose” with “supposed”; Line 512 – Change “one hour” to “half hour”; Line 584 – Strike “that” replace with “since it”. Vote: Unanimous.
Upon a roll call vote, the Board entered non-public session at 10:14 p.m. under RSA 91-A:3 II (a) personnel.
The Board exited non-public session at 10:45 p.m. While in non-public session the Board discussed the hiring process for the Town Administrator and a personnel issue. The Acting Town Administrator was directed to follow up the matter with the Finance Director.
Upon a motion made and duly seconded, the Board adjourned the meeting at 10:46 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Sharon L. Frydlo
Executive Assistant