|
|
Town of AmherstBoard of SelectmenDecember 3, 2007
|
Chairman Bruce Bowler called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Selectmen present: Thomas Grella, Reed Panasiti, Brad Galinson and George Infanti. Also present: Town Administrator Gary MacGuire and Executive Assistant Sharon Frydlo.
Citizens’ Forum
Cal Wood, Woodland Drive asked about the Revolving Fund and who audits the budget performance and what records were provided to the Town. He mentioned that the Selectmen and W&M Committee spend a lot of time in constructing the budget and he wonder who ensures that the budget is executed as approved by the voters. Mr. Bowler explained that the auditing firm audits both performance and finances. The Selectmen can’t spend any more money than what they were authorized to spend because of DRA rules and regulations. He also told Mr. Wood that the Selectmen can make line item transfers by a vote of the Board. Mr. MacGuire added that draft audits were in the Town Report and the current one would be in their hands shortly.
Ms. Rannenberg told the Board she lived in Amherst since 1980. Her husband is Rich Hart who is on the Conservation Commission and has put in a lot of effort. Her children have attended Hartshorn for many years and she had recently retired. Her role had been to mange small and large budgets. Over the years she had worked on many projects with her children. She also spoke of setting up workshops and running large technical conferences. She has more time available now to spend time on the Board and felt it would be interesting. Neither Mr. Infanti nor Mr. Grella had any questions. Mr. Galinson was glad she came to see them and asked if she had any thoughts or passions on where she wanted to see the building go. Ms. Rannenberg would like to see it go forward and said she was astounded in the status of the building and it could bring in more technology as well. She would like to figure out how to get more people in the community involved. Mr. Panasiti thought she could fit in on the Board – she was very articulate and would be a good addition. Mr. Bowler also had no comments, but advised they presently have seven members. Seth Zeigler has also expressed an interest. Mr. Galinson moved to appoint Wendy Rannenberg as a PMEC Board member, second by Mr. Panasiti. Vote: Unanimous.
Public Meeting on Town Hall Safety Project
Mr. Bowler advised that this Town Hall Safety Project was presented last year to the voters and it failed in March. Brad had done some work to try and raise money without having the taxpayers cover it. Mr. Galinson explained that many people know there is a safety issue in front of Town Hall with three or four intersections coming in together and they were fortunate they have not had an accident yet. The Town received a Federal Grant through the DOT and they will pay 75% of any improvements the Town makes. Currently in front of Town Hall is a big mound of concrete which adds to the safety issue. Last year the warrant article was to request a 75/25% match. People spoke pretty strongly about not wanting their taxes to go up. There is a capital fund with approximately $52,000 and the additional $15,000 would be raised privately. It was his thought, when looking at this, was that there is a four to one leverage for safety and the money will be well spent. Because the warrant article was not supported last year, the Selectmen thought they should open up the discussion to the public to see if they should consider this again or not.
Bill Veillette, 1 Pierce Lane, explained he was on the Heritage Commission and wrote the grant back in late 2005. He attended all the meetings beginning with NRPC and through to DOT in Concord to get them this $195,000 grant to do the work. The budget is $261,000 with a $67,000 match that they need to come up with in order to receive the $195,000 from the Federal Government. This was a competition for funds throughout the State in order to raise the money to improve the safety and look outside of Town Hall. The site plan has already been done through the Heritage Commission, the former Fire and former Police Chiefs. They have also gone through the Historic District Commission and were ready to go to the engineering stage. Once they sign an agreement with DOT, they would be off and running.
In answer to Chris Nowlan’s question, Mr. Veillette described the plan explaining that what they were essentially doing was eliminating half a block in front of Town Hall by extending a grass area so that the road will wrap around the common along with placing a lawn around the horse trough which is a historic feature. Manchester Road comes within three feet off the steps of the side entrance to Town Hall. He commented on what was planned in front of the Cemetery. They tried to keep the plan simple with one cross walk and no visual clutter. They may have some type of curbing, other than that it will still retain the rural village feeling. Mr. Nowlan asked if there would be any loss of parking. Mr. Veillette remarked “no” because of some improvements made in front of the Cemetery wall extended the parking a bit. The extra spaces along the common make up the six spaces on the blacktop in front of Town Hall.
Andy Ouellette, Austin Road, asked if the plan incorporated any new plantings in the lawn area. Mr. Veillette explained they didn’t have any plans along this area and decided not to burden the plan with additional plantings. They wanted to address the safety issue and improve aesthetics by basically getting rid of blacktop and hopefully have this done for the 250th Celebration in 2010.
Will Ludt, 3 School Street and Chair of the Heritage Commission, remarked on the public hearing in 2005. The process was going forward and they need to come up with funds to move ahead. The Heritage Commission was to keep the plan simple and within the rural character that they all enjoy around the Town and village. The plan gets rid of the corner along the far side of the steps where you walk immediately into the street. It also takes care of the road around the corner as to who has the lead on the street.
Linda Kaiser, Manchester Road, reminded everyone that all the neighbors thought the plan wonderful. When Gary put up the speed sign, the average speed was between 51-53 mph. For skateboarders and walkers this is a good thing. Shelly Stama indicated this was a wonderful plan receiving $52,000 from the capital fund. She wondered if there were other things that may be more critical that they could use the money for. Mr. Galinson explained this was why they were talking about this. The capital fund is a Recreation fund and a partnership - a Recreation Capital Reserve keeps going year after year. Recreation supports this and he believed the Commission’s number one priority was to be an improvement to the Middle School softball field.
In response to Liz Overholt’s question, Mr. MacGuire advised the Recreation money was unanticipated revenue and left over from earlier years. It is not part of the recent warrant article that passed. Mr. Bowler indicated that Brad has talked to the people involved and they are very much in support of this also. Mr. Panasiti asked Mr. Veillette if this would impact the road in front of his house. Mr. Veillette indicated “no”, it just wasn’t drawn on the plan. He briefly spoke of the issue of people driving down the one way section of Courthouse Road. He also commented that while they could use the money for other things in the Recreation Department, it was good to hear that they were supportive of this project. The advantage is that it comes with $195,000 additional money. If the funds were used for anything else, there would be zero additional funds. Many communities didn’t get the grant because Amherst did and he hoped the Town could take advantage of it.
Cal Wood indicated this question was asked back in March as to whether they should spend money on this project and the answer back then was “no”. If they were asking for public input, they needed to ask over 1,400 taxpayers who voted “no” and explain it to them.
Mr. Bowler asked Mr. Veillette when the Town has to actually let DOT know. He indicated they could get started, but his advice was to not sign the agreement until they know where the funds will come from. They were ahead of other TE projects and they may be able to get their project going earlier. The earlier they get the funds, the better it will be. Mr. Galinson noted that the cap fund goes away this budget season and have the $50,000 this fiscal year to spend the money. If this would have a tax impact, it would go to the voters. Bob Petrella mentioned that if this is unanticipated revenue, the money could be used for other warrant articles and was in support of Cal’s suggestion that it should be a warrant article.
Mr. Infanti agreed with Brad because the money needs to be spent this year. Mr. Galinson indicated the money was either going to go for fields this year or be spent on this project. The concept was it wouldn’t go to the General Fund to be spent on something else - it would be spent on the most beneficial project in Town. Mr. Nowlan spoke about taking advantage of the benefit of $195,000. Mr. Galinson again noted this was a serious safety issue and it would all come together with the cap fund. Mr. Nowlan commented that aesthetically in front of Town Hall, it was a parking lot. Mr. Panasiti asked when asphalt was put on the road. Mr. Bowler remarked that in front of Town Hall was the old Route 101. Mr. Veillette added it had been a long time, perhaps in the 60’s or 70’s.
Mr. Infanti suggested they take it under advisement for one week or vote on it that night. He then moved that the Selectmen expend the appropriated $52,000 for the safety improvements of Town Hall, second by Mr. Galinson. Discussion: Mr. Panasiti mentioned they knew where the funds were coming from and the counter argument they know that Recreation could have unanticipated revenue in the coming year, but did not know for sure – they may not have the extra coming in based on last year’s warrant article. They may not get additional funds and as the Recreation Representative he was a little concerned. “We will be using $50,000 for improvements on fields, having said that, I believe this is a worthwhile project and one they would support and I support it as well - this also had a reaching effect into next year’s budget.” Mr. MacGuire would not hazard a guess on how much revenue would be raised. Mr. Ouellette asked for a clarification about the money if it didn’t get spent on this project this year or on a Recreation project this year. Mr. Bowler advised it would go to the bottom line and returned to the taxpayers. “In the spirit of full disclosure, it is still taxpayer money for full disposal”, he said. Mr. Galinson commented that the voters voted to put the money into a capital fund. It would be irresponsible for a Board to not do this because it was voted to be part of a capital fund. There was a brief debate between W&M members as to the number of projects that contained leverage and those that could be warrant articles. Mr. Ouellette asked if the balance of what was in the capital fund and the total the Town had to come up with was it from privatization and had anyone else come up with something. Mr. Infanti pledged $500.00 that night. W&M Chairman Deirdre Rogusky remarked that she heard Recreation was in support of this, however, they will submit two warrant articles – why wouldn’t they spend this money on their articles. Mr. Panasiti thought the mower was a needed warrant article and did consider using unanticipated revenue, however, he thought that this was more of a budget item and not what this unanticipated revenue should be used for. Vote: Unanimous.
Mr. MacGuire announced he would like to have some discussion on this, then go into detail and invite the players to come in next week.
Phase II Baboosic Lake Community Septic System
Mr. MacGuire advised they had a presentation with NHDES this past Friday to see if they could continue receiving funding. This was basically the same article as last year, however, they did not get the Federal funding last year and they needed to go forward. Hopefully they will do better with some preliminary numbers and they could be amended at the deliberative session. Mr. Bowler announced that Gary, Bruce Berry and CLD had done an outstanding job. CLD did an unbelievable job in presenting the Town’s case. Mr. MacGuire advised that Phase III was a critical phase as those lots were closer to the Lake. Mr. Infanti mentioned the Lake was worth savings and worth continued support. In response to Mr. Grella’s question, Mr. MacGuire explained this section will be heading down to the area that has been under water for the past two years because of the flooding. Potential add-ons or Phase IV would be down near the pavilion or Tier I. In response to Mr. Galinson’s question, Mr. MacGuire said this will reference Federal funds as I or II and the Town would be underwriting the project, but not cost any money.
Loader
Mr. MacGuire advised this was for a DPW replacement loader that was a similar article that Director Berry brought forth last year and at his urging it is on their warrant article list again. Mr. Panasiti believed this should be in the budget. He believed the Selectmen should present a true budget that reflected the way to run a Town and run it as it stands. Putting this as a warrant article was not presenting it as a flat budget. They as Selectmen need to run the Town and put forth a budget without any teeth to it. Mr. Bowler commented that in the past the Board always put these types of requests into a warrant article. Mr. Panasiti mentioned that the Town needed a loader and asked if W&M agreed or disagreed that the Town needed one. Mr. Petrella was not in a position to debate the matter. Mr. Galinson was mixed on it – on one side it is part of the budget, the other side would allow the voters to look at every single big item. He commented that before he was a Selectman, he was cynical about every $5,000 or $10,000 and wondered if every Town did this. Mr. Infanti noted that most towns he was involved in, these items were considered frills. He did not want someone coming to him saying that the budget was up 25% and could the Board prepare a bare bones budget. He suggested that the citizens decide, for example, on a $100,000 loader or X amount for a mower. Taking them one at a time and adding them all up, it would add a huge percentage – he believed the voters should look at them one at a time. He worked one year with a default budget, it was very difficult and no one was going to vote for a 30% increase. Mr. Galinson did not believe the percentage in the budget was relevant, but felt comfortable giving the voters a choice on each individual item. He commented it is a warrant article draft and he has seen a lot of nice projects in it and he looked to talk to each Department across the board.
Mr. Grella remarked that they, as Selectmen, present a budget which will maintain roads and provide Police and Fire protection, for example. Any warrant article such as the loader, will make DPW run more efficiently and they have to tell voters how it will make things easier. They need to convince voters this is one way to go, but they should have a choice. Mr. Bowler also felt this should be a warrant article and not a line item in the budget. This is up to Director Berry and up to the Selectmen to support. In answer to Ms. Rogusky’s question, the Board discussed what constituted a warrant article. Mr. MacGuire indicated that the CIP Committee set the parameters for capital projects.
Salt Shed
Mr. MacGuire advised that DPW was looking for $89,000 to actually construct a salt shed that was to be purchased through Article 10 on the 2006 Warrant. It turned out not to be doable to have the DPW employees construct it and they were now looking to have an outside vendor erect it. Mr. Grella mentioned the concept was approved by the voters in 2006 and this would give DPW more time to work on the roads. In response to Mr. Panasiti’s question, Mr. MacGuire advised the original warrant was for $71,000 and only for materials. Mr. Bowler asked Mr. Berry to determine what the labor costs would be for his Department to construct it. Mr. Bowler told Ms. Rogusky that the Town still has the funds because it was a two year non-lapsing article. Mr. Petrella was told that the $89,000 was on top of the $71,000.
Diesel Exhaust System
Mr. MacGuire reported this was in the CIP plan. Bruce was putting some numbers together to address the DPW garage, Ambulance bay, Central and South Fire Stations. The number may be a total in the warrant article or some could be phased in. Preliminary figures were changed at the Selectmen’s meeting as follows: 1 at the Public Works garage for $7,660, 2 at the Ambulance bays - $18,700, 5 at Central Fire Station - $93,150 and 4 at South Station - $25,500. Mr. Grella explained this had been looked at many years ago. Many stations around here have these, he couldn’t think of too many that don’t have exhaust systems and thought it worthwhile to expend these funds for all Town employees. Mr. Panasiti looked upon this as a safety item. They were talking about safety for their personnel in buildings and they are considering putting this as a warrant article to be approved or disapproved by the voters. If it is disapproved and the exhaust system is not put in, they would not be taking care of their personnel as they should be. He believed this was a budget item. If anything were to happen to any of their employees, he would consider this almost criminal or negligent to their employees.
Mr. Bowler indicated this would be $145,000 total if all the numbers stayed the same. He did not think this was a budget item - they could do a portion of them or potentially start a Capital Reserve. Mr. Berry advised he would like a system at DPW for his mechanic. Mr. Infanti asked about the five vehicles at the Central Station and two at the Ambulance bay. He was trying to justify the $145,000 along with the number of times the systems would be used and the number of times people would be ingesting the fumes. Mr. Berry explained that each time doors were opened to exit the doors are left open and all the heat escapes. He had a concern with the EMS bay and the Police Department kitchen upstairs from it. Mr. Infanti’s major concern was the DPW mechanic and his initial thought would be to do it over a period of time and pick their priorities. Mr. Bowler asked if this could be done piecemeal at the Central Station. Mr. Berry thought the funding may go up a bit if they do individual buildings one at a time.
Ms. Rogusky noted that W&M somewhat agreed with George and understand the sequence of starting up vehicles, taking off and coming back and shutting them off. They were not familiar with this type of system and what the ongoing maintenance would be in the future.
DPW Vehicle
Mr. MacGuire reported this was for a replacement of one vehicle and installation of a utility style body to another vehicle that will be used for a different purpose. Mr. Panasiti saw two different items and one replacement as an improvement. In response to Ms. Rogusky’s question, there was money in the Capital Reserve, but without adding additional funds they were at the low end. He had some discussion with Bruce and this may end up as a Capital Reserve with no direct impact.
Department of Public Works Land
Mr. MacGuire explained there was a potential purchase for 2.5 acres of land adjacent to DPW from Robert and Susan Heaton for $100,000. Mr. Infanti added this would be for any future expansion. Mr. Bowler commented that they had done a swap at one point that was very close to the lot line. Mr. MacGuire explained this would be adjacent land for future expansion or it could become a house lot.
Impact Fee Implementation
Mr. Galinson advised that in order for impact fees to be airtight if they were challenged legally, this article would be a one time investment of $25,000 in order to implement impact fees for the Town for the future. The new Ordinance would supersede the one that passed in 2003 that is now outdated. Mr. Infanti acknowledged Brad for the number of hours he has worked on this. This would be $25,000 upfront that will bring into the Town hundreds of dollars in fees that they will be able to assess on major developments in Town. The gentleman that had given the quote was one of the best. Mr. Bowler added they have to spend money in order to get it and it was worth starting.
Update of Utility Assessments
Mr. MacGuire indicated this was a recommendation by their contracted assessing firm. In spending this money, they will be able to update all the utilities assessments and potentially receive higher taxes. They could get someone in from MRI to further explain the benefit to the Town. Mr. Bowler asked that this be done. Mr. Galinson asked why they thought the Town could get more. Mr. MacGuire explained that DRA has one way of assessing utilities, there are others that do it differently and at a higher rate.
Recreation Capital Reserve Fund
and/or
Recreation Fields Acquisition and Construction Capital Reserve Fund
Mr. MacGuire noted that part of this had been established last year and can again seek the surplus funds they received in vehicle registration and apply it the same way. Also in discussion, Recreation felt they could narrow it down to field acquisition or construction. There may be interest in a Community Center and would like to stay with one warrant article or put it all in field acquisition or a Recreation Facilities Capital Reserve. One or the other is in keeping what they have been doing and where to put the money. Mr. Galinson suggested adding equipment to the first warrant article since they may not need the land warrant article. Mr. MacGuire advised this was his wording and he would go to Town Counsel to come up with the final language.
Capital Reserve Funds
Rescue Vehicle, Library Land, Highway Vehicle
Assessing Revaluation, Town Computer System and Town 250th Anniversary Celebration
Mr. MacGuire indicated that the above six capital reserve funds had previously been in the budget or were just passed this past year. Rescue Vehicle was $22,000, Library Land was $14,000, Highway Vehicle was $85,000 for replacing DPW vehicles, Assessing Revaluation was $25,000 and put aside for when they need to do it again, Town Computer System was for $7,500 and Town 250th Anniversary Celebration was $5,000. The last two were passed this year. Mr. Galinson was interested in the Library Capital Reserve which contained approximately $150,000 and there are no plans to build a new Library. Putting aside $14,000 a year may not be the best way to spend money. Mr. Bowler agreed.
Fire Department Utility Vehicle
Mr. MacGuire told the Board that this article was similar to past articles submitted for a Fire Department Command Vehicle that would replace the 1996 Explorer. In this case, the Chief is looking to replace it with a one ton pickup, as opposed to a SUV, for $29,000. Mr. Infanti thought this would be more useful, on the other hand he said, he watch Milford’s Expedition Command Vehicle at the recent Amherst Street fire and saw how it worked. Mr. Grella would like to talk to the Chief about this. Mr. Bowler agreed with George and said this was something he was excited about.
Keystone Hall and Harbor Homes Inc.
Mr. MacGuire explained these two articles were requests from Health Agencies. Keystone Hall was on the warrant many years ago and approved, but they have not requested funding in the past several years nor had they received funding. He, therefore, put them back on as a warrant article. Harbor Homes for $2,000 is a brand new request which typically starts off as a warrant article. Mr. Infanti remarked that Sharon has put together a report, the same as last year and he would like to further review what the agencies do for the Town citizens. Mr. Galinson noted that he was always hesitant to give government money to private agencies and would like to make sure they are supporting Amherst citizens even though they are all noble agencies. It was mentioned that Sharon requires all agencies to let the Town know how many people from Amherst have been serviced.
Spaulding Field Repairs
Refurbish Davis Lane Tennis Courts
Mr. MacGuire told the Board that the above three articles were a request from the Recreation Department. One is a request to replace the Ferris Mower at $12,000 - he reminded them of the discussion two months ago when a request was made to repair it. For Spaulding Field a request for $14,000 for the purpose of repairing or replacing the retaining wall. The final article did not have a dollar amount attached to it yet, but would be for the refurbishment of the Tennis Courts on Davis Lane. He explained that Nancy had commented on solving the issue of this area being a cut-through to Clark School. Mr. Galinson’s only thought was could they add capital to the Recreation fund to cover some of these requests and he would be glad to look into it. Mr. Grella and Mr. Infanti agreed. Mr. Bowler noted that they spent money on the mower and now all of a sudden a new one was needed.
Budget Discussion
Mr. MacGuire reported he had many small pieces to add and would be better prepared for their next week’s meeting. Mr. Bowler added that the Cemetery Trustees would be meeting during the week and he had also talked to Doug McAllister of the CIC about reducing different pieces of the puzzle for their budget.
Mr. Bowler read a memo from the Tax Collector relative to an Elderly Tax Deferral for $3976.00. Mr. Infanti moved to accept the application totaling $3,976.00 at 6 Carol Ann Lane for property taxes that will be deferred, second by Mr. Grella. Discussion: Mr. Galinson commented that there are many people who are challenged in this regard, this was one fixed program and not used as much as it should be. Vote: Unanimous.
Tax Warrant for Quarterly Maintenance Charge
Baboosic Lake Septic Phase I Customers
Mr. Bowler indicated there were two warrants for the above. One was for the Quarterly Maintenance Charge for the Baboosic Lake Septic Phase I Customers for $5,529.36. Mr. Grella so moved to approve, second by Mr. Infanti. Vote: 4-0-1, Mr. Bowler abstained.
Mr. Bowler advised the second installment was for plumbing and electrical installations for those people who had chosen to pay for this over five years instead of one year, the amount was $754.49 for three property owners. Mr. Grella moved to approve $754.49 for the second installment for plumbing and electrical installation for three accounts, second by Mr. Infanti. Vote: Unanimous.
Chairman Bowler announced that the Selectmen voted last week to sign the contacts. They were now in hand and the Selectmen signed five copies.
Mr. Infanti announced the Planning Board discussed zoning changes and also briefly talked about impact fees. He had a meeting the next day with the Cemetery Trustees. Mr. Grella had nothing to report. Mr. Galinson reported that the CIP Committee will meet with the Selectmen next week. Mr. Panasiti reported that the Conservation Commission met the night before and their biggest discussion was the Master Plan input and will meet at another time to discuss changes they may want to make.
Mr. Bowler asked if the Commission had any discussion or decision on the purchase of property located on Austin Road. Mr. Panasiti advised the Conservation Commission agreed to the proposal. Mr. MacGuire added that there was a letter in their “read file” that the Planning Board had also agreed to it. Mr. Bowler mentioned there was a need to schedule a public hearing regarding this potential purchase. He also reported the SRLD met this past Thursday night with their auditing firm and had a public budget hearing for the FY’08 budget.
Mr. Bowler also commented there was a letter in the Board’s “read file” regarding correspondence relative to reappointing Bruce Beckley, a former member of the ACC and probably the longest serving member who would like to join again. He did not think the Board needed him to come in for an interview to discuss this appointment. Mr. Infanti moved to reappoint Bruce Beckley to the Amherst Conservation Commission as an alternate, with his term to expire to 2010, second by Mr. Panasiti. Vote: Unanimous.
Minutes
Mr. Grella moved to accept the minutes of November 26, 2007, seconded by Mr. Infanti amended as follows: Line 76 – Insert “for” after “Overtime”; Line 138 - Strike “one” and replace with “a swimming area”; Line 188- Change “picket” to “chain link” ; Line 197 –Change “had a” to “will have”; Line 246 – Correct typo to “Summer”; Line 411 – Correct “please” to “pleased”. Vote: Unanimous.
Mr. Infanti moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:50 p.m. seconded by Mr. Grella. Vote: Unanimous .
Respectfully submitted,
Sharon L. Frydlo
Executive Assistant