|
|
Town of AmherstBoard of SelectmenJanuary 7, 2008
|
Chairman Bruce Bowler called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Selectmen present: Reed Panasiti, George Infanti, Thomas Grella and Brad Galinson. Also present: Town Administrator Gary MacGuire and Executive Assistant Sharon Frydlo.
There were no concerns or questions from members of the audience.
It was noted that Arlene Magoon was not present for the interview and the Board proceeded with the next appointment.
Liz Overholt thanked Gary and the Selectmen for putting them on the agenda as well as Bruce Berry and the Ways & Means Committee. She explained that on December 11, 2007 they submitted a paper to Gary and W&M about road funding. Mrs. Overholt read the cover page that contained three choices they felt the Town had: (1) Continue with the current ten year plan that has DPW working year by year to bring roads up to standard. (2) Float a bond so that we can get all the roads needing an upgrade finished in one or two years. (3) Some combination of 1 and 2. Their proposal was for FY 2009. She remarked that after Mr. Berry had answered questions, they had additional ones.
Bill Overholt thanked Mr. Berry for his response because it helped them to understand questions on financial areas, as well as technical ones. They were talking about a project over a ten-year period of over six million dollars with a potential of saving money. Their suggestion is that there are some things that needed to be looked at – there is a cost of road material and he did not believe it would decrease in the future. They did not know what the cost of oil would be in ten years and spoke of other costs going up, but did not know how much – everything indicated that the price will go way up. If they looked at bonding historically, a 4% bond doesn’t cost the Town anything. Looking at the cost of oil products, they might consider bonding and pay materials at today’s rate in comparison to 8-10 years out. He thought Mr. Berry had done a very good job with the constraints given him if he had more money up front, rather than the $600,000 each year. The plan they have now has not taken into consideration inflation. “The real question is which plan would give us the best infrastructure of roads ten years from now”.
Mr. Overholt continued … Relative to rebuilding roads such as Boston Post, these were questions they didn’t have any answers for and certainly he did not expect to get any answers that night. He thought they may want to put together a study group because six million dollars or maybe more was a big number. He briefly explained what he meant by saying a bond wouldn’t cost anything based on 4% interest, 2 ½ % inflation and cost of living, a tax base in Town and more taxpayers would be a net zero.
In response to Mr. Bowler’s question, neither Mr. Berry nor Mr. MacGuire had any further comments. Mr. Infanti remarked that when he first saw the questions, he thought this was a lot of work for Bruce to answer and there were a lot of good answers to questions they all should know. Bruce came up with a good plan that laid out $25.00 per gallon compared to $100.00 per gallon for oil that will continue to go up. He felt they should take a greater look at bonding and that six months or one year ago he wouldn’t have said this. He commented that hiring a Clerk of the Works may cost the Town another $100,000.00 which may be recouped. He did not have the answers, but he was more receptive than he was before and thanked the Overholt’s for looking into this and Bruce’s response. He would like to look into bonding with Bruce’s further input.
Mr. Overholt commented he would like to separate the bonding with the actual work because they needed to separate the financing between who did the work. Mr. Grella agreed that bonding had merits on particular roads and could be done faster with an outside group particularly on Boston Post near the High School. He felt it would require more study and should be placed on a spreadsheet in order to make an intelligent decision. Bruce has answered it all very specifically and very intelligently. Mr. Galinson thought this a good discussion because something was said about separating the finance and the actual work. Interest rates would be 4% to bond and overhead would be an additional 15%, compounded approximately 6% to bond. Financing-wise they were about the same costs and to him the discussion would be – do you want to do all the projects up front or some upfront within ten years. The seal coating, which they may have been a little remiss, he felt Bruce was correct in what he was proposing. He thought they should consider the things they may want to space out, what to do with roads over the next ten years, and those they may want to bond the largest majority and which they may want to hire an engineer for. Mr. Overholt spoke about the issue and the constraints and the best way to handle this.
Mr. Panasiti talked about the visual effect in where they were talking about a lot of money to bond if they wanted to bond an entire year’s repair. With today’s tax interest rates, maybe there were other things the Town should be looking at bonding in the future what they needed to do in Town to get their infrastructure back to where they want it to be. It came down to whether to believe a bond would pass with the interest rates as low as they are or using $650,000 each year and piecemeal the roads over the years. He believed that bonding was the way things were and perhaps this was the best time and the best way to go.
Mr. Bowler thanked the Overholt’s and Bruce’s time spent to answer their questions. He remarked that many years ago, year after year, the Town had a warrant article for approximately $55,000 and sometime after SB2, it was included in the budget. He was not against bonding, had some discussion with Bruce and was glad they got the money last year. This was not a bad thing, but the Selectmen were caught off guard. He was very impressed in the first three months they had the money and what Bruce was able to accomplish. There were other road projects such as Boston Post from Thornton Ferry Road to the town line that would be bonded, but couldn’t be managed in-house and he cited Bedford’s experience. There were some things that may need to be bonded, probably as soon as next year. It would be nice to get a full year under Bruce’s belt to see how much can be done in-house and how much may need to be bonded.
Mrs. Overholt remarked that the road work that has been done was beautiful and what they generated had nothing to do about the quality of the work that had been done. Mr. Overholt added that his thinking is that they bond per project, not necessarily particular roads.
Marilyn Peterman, 130 Amherst Street, thanked the Overholt’s for their due diligence that had not been done. Mr. Bowler advised that the CIP has done work on the road issues. As a point of information, she said that the warrant article that they put on the ballot year after year was a paving article. Richard Crocker had a 20 year plan and by the end of his term, he completed the work. Bruce Berry has been tasked to do a lot more than Red Crocker had done because of the times and each year has been asked to do a lot more work than any Road Agents or DPW Directors have done and she commended him for this. She talked about the Transfer Station and renovation of Town Hall that the Department has taken on. When she looked at the Overholt’s questions, many of the roads needed reconstruction and some of Bruce’s were maintenance based. She agreed with Bill and Liz about the costs, to spread the burden over a much broader portion of their population by bonding. Last year the $400,000 cost the Town approximately 24 cents on the tax rate. They may want to consider putting things in the budget rather than a warrant article. They were all heading in the right direction and would be a favorable way to do this for the taxpayers. She again thanked the Overholt’s for their due diligence and Bruce Berry’s answers to the questions.
Bill Belvin, 231 Boston Post Road, commented that he did not know about the bonding capacity of the three entities – Town, Amherst School District and the Souhegan School District. He did not have a solution, but thought they needed some mechanism with the Districts pertaining to the bonding capacity.
Cal Wood, Woodland Drive, spoke about bonding concepts indicating that the only way a bond would not cost the taxpayer anything is if they paid no interest, principle or be charged for default. They need to look at three areas – maintenance, repair and rebuild. He felt maintenance is a valid cost to the operating budget and that major repairs and rebuilding would be bonded costs. Mr. Overholt spoke about his comment that bonding wouldn’t cost the taxpayer anything. He hoped they could look at this and appoint some type of committee with someone who understood finances and someone, like Bruce Berry, who understood the issues of rebuilding the roads. Mr. Bowler thanked the Overholt’s for coming in.
Budget Discussion
Mr. MacGuire advised the Library Trustees were meeting on January 8th and they are waiting their response on budget cuts. He has received the default budget number that afternoon, it was the first time it was actually higher than the proposed budget and he wanted to do further checking between now and next Monday night. The number is in the proposed warrant article. He had also prepared a budget synopsis on the individual lines.
Mr. Infanti indicated he had looked it over and was very comfortable on where they were. They will wait for the Library’s response which would not make or break the budget. He was surprised with the default number. They have a good tight budget and everyone has worked very hard on it. Mr. Grella looked over the adjustments and was satisfied also. The remaining Board members were also fine with the budget and were just waiting for the Library. Mr. Bowler thanked W&M Committee for allowing him to attend their meeting last Thursday night and to listen to their debate on items.
Deirdre Rogusky, W&M Chairman thanked Nancy McMillan who talked to them about Recreation Revolving Account and to understand it more. The Committees hoped that the Department could be more sustaining. She also thanked Peter Lyon who talked to them about Tasers. They all appreciated it very much. Mr. Bowler advised that the Tasers were not in a line item by itself, but rather was an item found in Equipment.
Mr. Infanti noted it had been a pleasure working with this W&M Committee - looking across the room seeing 6-7 members at every Selectmen’s Meeting bringing up questions. It makes the process work and he was very appreciative for what they have done this year. The process was so much easier and while they may not always agree, questions and answers were discussed back and forth. He was grateful for what they had done as a Committee and it was a pleasure they had gotten to this point.
Proposed Warrant Articles Discussion
Mr. MacGuire advised the Warrant in front of them is Version 5. He spoke briefly about Article 2 – Phase III Baboosic Lake Community Septic System’s figure that may change before the Deliberative Session depending on the bids received on the construction. The bottom line would be zero because of the grants, etc. received. Relative to the default budget, Mr. MacGuire told Mr. Galinson that added into the default budget was the $400,000 plus the capital reserve numbers they had taken out of the proposed budget.
Regarding Article 10 DPW Land, Mr. MacGuire commented that the Selectmen were aware that there was some confusion in what was being presented – the 2.5 acres were closer to 1.8 or 1.6 acres. There was no intent to not present the correct acreage, but rather a bit of miscommunication and had gone back to the potential seller and revised the actual lot line which actually brings it to 2.0 acres for the same cost. This is dependent on the Board’s pleasure. He proposed, if they wanted to still consider it as a warrant article, to amend the acreage from 2.5 to 2.0. He briefly explained the difference in the lot lines if it was sold as a house lot to Mr. Panasiti. Mr. Infanti supported the change and remarked that even if it was 2 acres, at that price it was a good deal and he knew they needed the land. Mr. Bowler noted he had come in and looked at the new configuration and layout. He was glad it was discovered now and not on February 6. He also supported the purchase using the LUCT funds. They were working with the Assessors to get an assessed value on this lot. If it wasn’t purchased, and it is subdivided into a house lot, there would need to be frontage which the Town did not need. Mr. MacGuire wanted it to be clear that should the Town buy this, there is not another house lot available within the lot. Mr. MacGuire told Ms. Rogusky that he was waiting an answer on another question and hopefully he will have something on the estimate time by the next day. Bob Petrella thought this a good warrant article, good use of LUCT funds, but it needed to be explained very clearly to the voters why they needed to buy this now. Mr. MacGuire explained that this is a good time to buy it because of a Town infringement on that property.
Article 19 – Refurbish Davis Lane Tennis Courts, Mr. MacGuire advised he was a little unclear from the earlier discussions to know where the Board was on the matter and not sure if the Selectmen wanted to include it. Mr. Bowler thought was to remove it until they have a working agreement or an agreement in place with the School District. Mr. Panasiti indicated there was a lot more to talk about and agreed they should take it off. Mr. Galinson also agreed as did Mr. Grella and Mr. Infanti who thought it premature. He was not saying they didn’t need tennis courts, but in order to do them properly they needed to be rebased, refinished and repainted or did they want to have them in another location - he felt they should talk to the School first. Ms. Rogusky said the Committee agreed and had further discussion on how to raise the money with user fees.
Mr. MacGuire reported that on the draft warrant, he had added the petition warrant articles that came in that day and verified. Mr. Infanti commented that there were some grammatical errors on the first one. Mr. MacGuire advised he had scheduled a meeting with Town Counsel on Wednesday afternoon to discuss the warrant articles and the language. Ms. Rogusky asked if there would be any tax impact. Mr. Bowler thought the second petition warrant article would definitely have one, but difficult to determine what it would be. At Mr. Petrella’s request, Mr. Bowler read for the TV audience, the petition warrant article as it pertained to an elderly local school tax credit for residents 65 years old and up at a 25% reduction on the local school rate portion of the annual tax assessment per year for qualified taxpayers. Mr. Galinson thought it interesting to see if a town could pass this or whether it would have to be a State RSA. In response to Mr. Bowler’s request, Mr. MacGuire asked that he talk to Town Counsel on Wednesday before talking to Merri and Gail about potential tax impact. Mr. Petrella thought that the last petition warrant article on the creation of a transportation system for Town residents unable to drive themselves to necessary appointments had a tax impact. Mr. Bowler explained that it did not. In his discussion with them after the meeting, the Selectmen were willing to work with Milford to form a Study Committee.
Mr. MacGuire advised that Article 21 had new proposal by the Library Trustees for renaming the Library Land Capital Reserve with something to broaden the $150,000 that will be discussed at their meeting the next night. Mr. Grella questioned whether this would preclude a land purchase. Mr. MacGuire responded that the issue they would like to see is something less than land acquisition, but not excluding it.
Mr. MacGuire advised that the Zoning Articles were also now included in the draft warrant.
Mr. Petrella asked about Article 18 Highway Equipment Capital Reserve Fund that was unclear to him and what the $20,000 was for – he had heard various scenarios such as for trucks and plows and should this request be in the operating budget rather than in a Capital Reserve. Mr. MacGuire explained that the number in the operating budget was on a year-to-year basis on items that broke down on a smaller scale and the purpose of the Capital Reserve as set up was for emergency items. Mr. Berry added that he believed what they were trying to experience was something that wasn’t planned. Mr. Bowler noted that it was not strictly for maintenance and the intent was to purchase new equipment. Mr. MacGuire remarked that if it was for maintenance, it wouldn’t be routine maintenance, but something out of the ordinary. Mr. Bowler indicated this was the same as the warrant article for computers.
In response to Ms. Rogusky’s question, Mr. Bowler told her it would be nice to have all W&M ‘s final positions available for January 14th’s Public Hearing.
Approve Proposed Common Driveway Name
Mr. Bowler read the proposed names from Meridian Land Services for a common driveway off Christian Hill Road at the site of a former apple orchard. An email was received from Police Chief Peter Lyon and Highway Safety who recommend the first name of McIntosh Lane. Mr. Infanti moved to approve the common driveway off Christian Hill to be named McIntosh Lane as requested, second by Mr. Grella. Vote: Unanimous.
Approve Recommendations and Sign Abatements
Mr. Bowler read the recommendation for an abatement at 6 Carol Ann Lane M/L 5-83-3. Mr. Infanti moved to issue an abatement at 6 Carol Ann Lane in the amount of $465.33 in tax dollars, second by Mr. Grella. Vote: Unanimous.
Mr. Bowler read the recommendation for an abatement at 18 Boston Post Road M/L 7-83-6. Mr. Infanti moved that M/L 7-83-6 receive an abatement in the sum of $54,500.00 as recommended by the Assessors, second by Mr. Grella. Vote: Unanimous.
Minutes
Mr. Galinson moved to accept the minutes of December 17, 2007 as typed, second by Mr. Panasiti. Vote: Unanimous.
Other Business
Mr. Infanti reported of a
meeting Wednesday night of the Master Plan Steering Committee and Wednesday
morning of the Cemetery Trustees.
Mr. Grella had nothing to report. Mr. Galinson reported there was a meeting of
the Library Trustees the next night to finish the budget. PMEC Advisory Board
had a meeting with two new members in attendance. Gary and he will discuss
matters further in order to try and move things along.
Mr. Panasiti had nothing to add. Mr. Bowler reported the Moderator was in prior to their meeting and he would like the Board’s permission for posting signs at Souhegan High School limiting 45 minute parking and something they have been given permission for several years. The Selectmen had no issues allowing him to do this. The Board also discussed when they would be available to man the voting machines at the polls the next day.
Non-Public Session
Upon a roll call vote, the Board entered non-public session under RSA 91-A:3 II (d) Land Acquisition at 8:39 p.m. The Board exited non-public session at 9:20 p.m.
While in non-pubic session, the Board was given an update on ongoing negotiations for acquisition of land.
Upon a motion made and duly seconded, the Board adjourned the meeting at 9:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Sharon L. Frydlo
Executive Assistant