BOS Minutes 05-18-2004

APPROVED

TOWN OF PELHAM

BOARD OF SE= LECTMEN MEETING

MINUTES

May 18, 2004

APPROVED – June 1, 2004

CALL TO ORDER

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

PRESENT:

Mr. William McDevitt, Mr. Victor Danevich, Mr. Harold Lynde, Mr. Jean-Guy Bergeron, Mr. Richard Derby

Also present:

ABSENT:

Mr. Tom Gaydos, Town Administrator, members of the p= ress and general public.

None

&nbs= p;

The Chairman, William McDevitt, opened the meeting at approximately 6:30 pm.

MINUTES RE= VIEW

May 11, 2004

MOTION:<= o:p>

(Derby/Bergeron) To approve the May 11, 2004 meeting minu= tes as written.

=

VOTE:

(5-0-0) The motion carri= ed.

OPEN FORUM=

None.

APPOINTMEN= TS

Highway Ro= ad Agent regarding general operations, backhoe issues, highway garage, condition of trucks, and maintenance plans.

Highway Road Agent Don Foss met with the Selectmen and= began his discussion by reviewing the options in connection with obtaining a backhoe. He said the Town had= not passed the Warrant Article to purchase a backhoe, which left the following options: 1) repair the existing 1990 backhoe at an approximate cost of $17,= 000; 2) rent a backhoe for $2500 per month; or 3) lease/purchase for $18,000 per year (for four years). He sai= d the Highway Department was in need for an additional piece of equipment and the 1990 machine needed extensive work. He felt putting $17,000 into a fourteen year old vehicle was not advisable. He noted there were times that two machines were used on a job and didn’t know what would happen if the older machine broke down.&nb= sp; He said after the repairs were done, other problems may occur, such = as needing a new engine, or transmission.&nbs= p; He was unsure if the work in the Town could be done with one machine= .

Mr. Bergeron asked if the lease/purchase amount includ= ed the value of the 1990 backhoe. Mr= . Foss said the 1990 backhoe was not included in the cost and it would probably be taken to the state auction in = Concord. Mr. Bergeron asked if the used mac= hine could be applied to the cost of the lease/purchase. Mr. Foss inquired, but believed th= at they did not want the 1990 backhoe for trade because of its condition. He said he would lease/purchase a = new backhoe.

Mr. Lynde asked if the backhoe was used year-round. Mr. Foss answered yes. Mr. Lynde asked if the lease/purch= ase backhoe was the same as requested in the Warrant Article because the cost w= as less than requested. Mr. Foss= said the backhoe was the same one requested, and noted that the amount requested= had been the budget price. Mr. Ly= nde reviewed the options and felt the lease/purchase option was advisable becau= se it was the least cost to the Town this year (and bring it to Town Meeting f= or purchase). Mr. Gaydos discuss= ed New Hampshire la= w in connection with lease/purchase agreements.= He said the ‘non-replacement’ clause may pose a problem because if the voters turn it down, the machine could not be replaced during the leased time period. There= was a brief discussion regarding how the Town would be able to enter into a lease agreement. Mr. McDevitt sugge= sted that the numbers be put together for Selectmen review at a later meeting. <= /p>

Mr. Foss provided the Selectmen with a brief review of= the Highway Department’s general operations. He said he would like to hire two part-time laborers during the summer, which was included in the budget. He then outlined the road work that would be done during the remainder of the year.

Mr. Lynde wanted to know how Mr. Foss felt about catch basins because residents had commented that the Town would be better off without catch basins. Mr. Fos= s said the Town needed catch basins for anything over 4%; anything less than 4% had sheet drainage. He said there= were 1029 catch basins last year. =

Mr. Foss said the Highway Department needed a garage f= or the winter months as well as to perform minor repairs. He said two trucks and two backhoe= s were stored in the salt shed, which wasn’t good for the machines. He discussed the problems that occ= urred in the cold weather due to storing the trucks in the elements. He said the Town owned over $500,0= 00 worth of equipment. Mr. Foss = said the only truck costing the Town a lot of money was the F450 one-ton dump tr= uck which had cost the Town $3600 for repairs this year. He said a one-ton dump truck could= be lease/purchased for $8000 per year.

Mr. McDevitt said NRPC had done a road maintenance stu= dy for the Town (the repairs had been bonded) and asked if there was a plan to do another study. Mr. Foss said = NRPC had been contacted last year, the results were expected in the fall. He said the paving had been kept u= p with by the block grant money.

Pelham-Windham Co-op= School Committee – Requesting Selectmen’s input

Co-operative School Committee members Mr. Rich Resmini= , Mr. Bob Turnquist, Mr. Al Letizio, Ms. Jean Morrow, Mr. Larry Hall, Ms. Diane Carpenter and Dr. Elaine Cutler met with the Selectmen to discuss the high school issues, possible solutions and solicit input. Mr. Resmini discussed the history = of the Articles of Agreement that had been approved by the State in 2003 and voted= on in January, 2004. The Articles passed in Windham<= /st1:City>, but not in Pelham. He said a = review of the articles had occurred and two changes had been made. He went on to review the Articles = of Agreement between the school districts of Pelham and = Windham and the recent changes to the document. Mr. Turnquist discu= ssed the current high school building and a summary of facts that had been documented by Team Design and the High School Feasibility Study Committee.<= /p>

Mr. McDevitt asked what would happen if the school ‘flunked’ the accreditation review. Dr. Cutler said if the school didn’t receive accreditation it would jeopardize a student’s ability to enter into institutions of higher education and competitive universities.

Mr. Lynde said the bottom line questions for some was = the cost comparison and wanted to know how the Co-op Board would respond. Mr. Turnquist said that Team Desig= n had provided estimated numbers and separately he went on-line and came up with numbers that were nearly identical to Team Design’s figures. He said Team Design used an estima= te enrollment of eight hundred students and came up with a cost of $28,000,000-$29,000,000 for a Pelham only school and an estimated $50,000,0= 00 for a co-operative school with an estimated enrollment of sixteen hundred s= tudents. He explained that a Pelham only sc= hool could receive 30% in state aid; a co-operative school could receive 40% sta= te aid.

Mr. Lynde said there may be concern from residents reg= arding what was proposed to be included in the co-operative school, versus if it w= ere built for Pelham only. Mr. Turnquist said Windham’s per pupil costs were similar to Pelham’s costs. Mr. Letizio said Windham was conservative with their expenditures and held the School District’s ‘feet to the fire’. The residents were concerned about education, but were equally concerned with t= heir tax rates. He discussed the r= ecent decisions in the Windham community. He noted that Windham was going= to face decisions not only for a high school, but also an elementary school. He said the manner in which school= costs were determined, were by first making a decision regarding the curriculum, = and second by pricing the facility.

Mr. McDevitt asked how the costs for a co-operative sc= hool versus a Pelham only school compared when reviewed over a ten-year period a= nd which one came out better. Mr. Letizio said the operating cost (i.e. building, teachers, transportation) w= as the larger number and capital expenses were inspired by the state. Mr. Turnquist clarified that the operating costs had nothing to do with having, or not having a co-operative school; the cost savings came by the enrollment.

Ms. Morrow discussed school size and the student’= ;s ability to interact with staff; for this reason, she felt a larger school was better for students.

Mr. Bergeron asked that certain issues be addressed, s= uch as the cost of transportation and time involved as well as school size, which = some felt a smaller school was preferred. Ms. Morrow said because students were preparing for all kinds of fur= ther education with greater competition, she felt a larger school population was more cost effective. Ms. Carp= enter noted that the teacher ratio could remain the same in a large school as it = was in a small school. She said a= large school provided students with the opportunity for more choices in order to = be competitive in today’s society.

Mr. Letizio noted that the Articles of Agreement calle= d for a proposed co-operative school to be located as centrally as possible for b= oth communities. He didn’t = feel that there should be any concern of protracted bus ride times with the curr= ent locations being considered.

Mr. Derby asked what the projected student population was. Mr. Letizio presumed tha= t the co-operative would be for two thousand students (one thousand from each tow= n). Mr. Derby noted that Pelham Elementary S= chool was supposed to be a ten year plan, however during the last budget season (three years into the school) it was reported to already be at capacity. Mr. Letizio felt student growth fo= r high school was more predictable than in lower grades. Dr. Cutler circulated a chart show= ing the Pelham School District student count hist= ory and projections.

Mr. Feola, a member of the public in attendance, noted= that Pelham had a lot of items coming up (i.e. revaluation, fire stations) that = will impact taxes and wanted to know if the residents would receive actual numbe= rs before voting on the Articles of Agreement. Mr. Turnquist said numbers would be provided before the Articles of Agreement were voted upon however the final curriculum that would dictate the type of school required and would be vote= d by the elected School Board. Mr. Letizio didn’t feel that the building requirements would vary much fr= om the current numbers outlined. He reiterated that he didn’t feel that the operating expense (which is greatly affected by the ratio of staff to teachers) would change greatly.

Mr. Lynde felt it needed to be realized that there wer= e such deficiencies at the high school that were intolerable during the winter and warmer months. He said the key thing was that the renovations needed would require that the building be brought up to code. He said it could be concluded that a new building was needed and a decision then neede= d to be made for a Pelham only, or a co-operative school. He felt that certain issues at the= high school should be addressed now, and not put off pending a decision about a = new high school.

Mr. Danevich said his comments were driven by cost and= long-term outlook. He said the concerns= he heard from residents were: 1) where the school would be located; 2) how much will the school cost; 3) what specific costs will the tax payers have; 4) re-use of equipment currently at the high school and 4) cost control.

Mr. Letizio addressed the location issue and informed = that Windham was concu= rrently pursuing a Windham= only and co-operative school, as well as an elementary school. He said Windham would be acquiring land that co= uld be used for either of the schools and disposed of if not needed. He also wanted to dispel the rumor= that Windham was pursu= ing a co-operative school with Salem= . He felt the headline in the newspa= per was misleading and did not originate from either the = Windham, or Salem co-operative school. He said Windham had asked if the option of form= ing a co-operative with Salem would be considered so if the question was asked, the Windham School Board would have an answer.

Mr. Bergeron said there was a question regarding what = Pelham would do with the existing high school if a co-operative high school were b= uilt; a problem that Windham does not have. Mr. Letizio sa= id he would want to turn the building into cash and reinvest it as tax payer money. Mr. Turnquist said any change at the high school building would cost millions of dollars. He felt the best option would be to bulldoze/remove the building which would cost approximately $300,000. He discussed the options for the s= ite and possibilities for the building. Mr. Bergeron asked if it were possible to level the school and build= ing a new one on the site. Mr. Turnquist said the school could be leveled, but to build a school that would accommodate students long term would require certain properties to be taken along Marsh Road. He said some of the playing fields= would need to be relocated. He didn’t know where the seven hundred displaced students could be sent = for the two years during construction. He ended by discussing the difficulties with phased construction.

Mr. Letizio said they would like to return and continu= e the dialogue once the substantial costs were determined at some point before the vote in September.

Ms. Carpenter noted the following dates: May 25, 2004 &#= 8211; public hearing for Articles of Agreement presented at Pelham Elementary S= chool; June 2, 2004 - deadline for Articles of Agreement to be submitted to the State Board of Education f= or review and approval; September 14, 2004 – vote on Articles of Agreement. She noted that the deliberative se= ssion for the Articles of Agreement would be held in August.

Ms. Lorraine Dube, a member of the public in attendanc= e, questioned the $29,000,000 cost stated for the Pelham only high school. She said the report containing the= data provided two figures, the first being a school with an auditorium with a st= age, and the second figure (which was approximately $5,000,000 - $6,000,000 less) was for a school without an auditorium and stage. It was her opinion that the stage = and auditorium may not be needed at this time, but at a later time an auditorium could be constructed. She als= o had concerns regarding state funding. She asked the procedure for conducting an open forum meeting with the Selectmen. Mr. McDevitt said = Mr. Gaydos could set up a meeting for the Selectmen. He noted that the School Board wou= ld be holding a public hearing on May 27 and didn’t feel that the Selectmen should hold public hearings regarding the school.

OTHER BUSI= NESS

Assessing Department Update

Mr. Gaydos provided the Selectmen with a brief update regarding the Assessing Department. He said the department had been kept in a very orderly manner which = made it easy to identify the clerical tasks that needed to be updated before tax bills were sent out. He said = the computer systems (assessing system and BMSI) that would be merged. He said there were a large number = of properties that had not been visited; those upgrades would be addressed dur= ing the second billing. Mr. Lynde= urged that some of the properties receive a supplemental summary so they would receive a full-value bill in the fall.&nbs= p; Mr. Gaydos didn’t feel the department was geared for that type= of task. He felt the objective w= as to get a team into the department and get the work done by the second billing,= and by next year, have all the pick ups done for the first billing. There was a brief discussion regar= ding how properties were assessed.

Pelham Cente= r traffic issues discussion

Mr. McDevitt suggested that the Selectmen hold a joint meeting with the Planning Board to have discussions on how to resolve the s= hort and long-term problems and come up with solutions. Mr. Lynde recalled that the mornin= g data was still needed. Mr. Bergeron noted that Steve Williams (NRPC) had provided the AM peak hour information. He said three tr= affic options had also been discussed. He said Congressman Charlie Bass had been able to obtain funds for road improvements in some towns. He wanted to pursue contacting Congressman Bass to make him aware of Pelham’s current situation. There were no objections to Mr. Bergeron contacting Congressman Bass= .

No Hunting Ordinance for Raymond Park, PVMP, and Muldoon Park

Mr. McDevitt said the Selectmen had a discussion regar= ding a No Hunting Ordinance at the last meeting.&= nbsp; He read aloud the proposed ordinance. Mr. Danevich asked that Pelham Vet= eran Memorial Park (PVMP) be included in the definition of ‘Town ParksR= 17;; Town Parks shall be Muldoon Park, Raymond Park and PVMP along with the park= ing areas.

MOTION:=

(Danevich/Derby) To amend the No Hunting Ordinance proposal to include Pelham Veteran Memorial Park with Muldoon Park and Raymond Park including the parking areas of each.

VOTE:

(5-0-0) The motion carried.

MOTION:=

(Danevich/Derby) To adopt the regulation, as amended, entitled Prohibiting Hunting and Discharge of Fire Arms in Town Parks effective May 18, 2004

VOTE:

(5-0-0) The motion carried.

Mr. Danevich said those he spoke with supported the regulation. He asked what the= plan was for installing signs and suggested that Mr. Gaydos contact the Park &am= p; Recreation Director to draft an implementation plan for presentation to the= Selectmen. It was noted that per RSA 635:4 si= gns should be placed no more than one hundred yards apart. Mr. Danevich asked that the regula= tion be released to local papers and posted electronically on the Town website.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> He said a resident had questioned = the possibility of posting ‘for hunting’; which he recommended against. It was understood th= at hunters would have to continue to follow hunting guidelines and laws in tho= se areas where hunting was not specifically restricted. Mr. McDevitt noted that the reside= nts who were concerned with hunting in Town parks had volunteered to help insta= ll signs.

2004 Warra= nt Article Review

Mr. Gaydos provided the Selectmen with a status update= of the 2004 Warrant Articles.

Mr. Lynde asked that an expenditure update be provided= for review. Mr. Gaydos answered yes.

Castle Hil= l bridge discussion

Mr. McDevitt said there had been a question regarding = the 2002 Warrant Article (#26) and what the $15,000 represented. He circulated a copy of the explan= ation that had been sent to voters prior to the 2002 Town Meeting which said the total engineering design cost would be $30,000 ( Pelham and Windham each be= ing responsible for $15,000) with 80% reimbursement from the state. Mr. Gaydos said when he was first = employed with the Town it was explained that the cost would go through the final des= ign (total cost of which would be $150,000 – after splitting the cost wit= h Windham, Pelham&#= 8217;s share would be $15,000). He s= aid documents signed with the state indicated that the Town would not receive a= ny reimbursement until final design was completed. Mr. Gaydos was under the impressio= n from the beginning and had reported during the last budget season that the Town = was going to move forward with final design and was waiting for Windham to vote. Mr. Lynde asked if Windham’s warrant article was dif= ferent than Pelham’s warrant article. Mr. Gaydos believed Win= dham’s warrant article specified preliminary design. He said Pelham’s warrant art= icle description could be interpreted as either preliminary, or final. He noted that going ahead with the= final design did not commit the Town to going to bid and finishing the project. Mr. Lynde said the Town should dis= cuss the issue with DRA and find out if the $15,000 could be spent. Mr. McDevitt said the Selectmen didn’t want to willfully misinterpret the direction of Town Meeting a= nd therefore should ask DRA and report back to the Selectmen.

Review of priorities list

Deferred to a later meeting.

Assignment= of executive sponsors for priorities

Deferred to a later meeting.

TOWN ADMINISTRATOR’S/SELECTMEN’S REPORTS

Mr. Gaydos informed that the final documents were in p= lace with Newport Construction for the Spring Street Extension project. He said the documents were ready f= or signature and would be placed in the reading file for review. He said the reading file would also contain two documents pertaining to potential land donations. Mr. Gaydos said the parking regula= tion restricting parking for NH Route 128 (Mammoth Road heading East) near Muldoon Park had been approved by the state. He said that he had met with the Park & Recreation Director Darren McCarthy and informed him that work done on any Town properties should be reviewed w= ith the appropriate Department Head and presented with a recommendation to the Selectmen.

Mr. Bergeron had no report.

Mr. Derby had no report.

Mr. Danevich asked if consideration could be given to = moving the Selectmen meetings to the High School due to the heat in Sherburne Hall.

Mr. Lynde said there had been a review of the tire dump adjacent to Raymond Park by a DES representative, Mr. Craig Musselman, Mr. William Hayes, Mr. Walter Remis and Mr. J.R. Gauthier. The purpose of the meeting was to try and define = the extent of the tire dump. Mr. = Lynde provided the Selectmen with a summary of the discussions and noted that additional s= oil testing would be done. A cruc= ial item was the determination if the land fill was pre-1981, which had caused some debate. A pre-1981 land fill = may remain in place, however a post-1981 land fill would need to be excavated.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Mr. Lynde said the issue had been = turned over to CMA Engineers to handle and work with DES to make a recommendation = to the Selectmen. Mr. Danevich a= sked if there had been any questions regarding permits associated with Raymond Park. Mr. Lynde said there ha= d been a separate discussion and intended to review the associated permits (wetlan= ds permit and site specific permit) believed to be filed with the Town Clerk/T= ax Collector. Mr. Gaydos believe= d that the permits were already being reviewed (by Mr. Musselman) and a report wou= ld be provided to the Selectmen. Mr. Danevich asked if the Planning Board or Conservation Commission had reviewed the site. Mr. Lynde was not a= ware of such a review. Mr. Danevich asked if the new Park & Recreation Director (Mr. McCarthy) had been involved. Mr. Gaydos believed= once the permit issues were complete that may be the time to involve Mr. McCarthy. Mr. Danevich listed= the issues that would need to be reviewed and resolved and asked that a firm capable to deal with such stayed involved.= He wanted the Selectmen to take a position. Mr. McDevitt discussed his concern= s and said the goal was to allow children to utilize the fields. Mr. Lynde said another issue to be= resolved was the watering of the fields.

Mr. Lynde discussed some of the Eagle Scout projects t= hat were planned and would be presented at a later date. He said there had been a discussio= n at the Park & Recreation Committee meeting regarding the use of a vehicle = by the Park & Recreation Director. Mr. Gaydos and Mr. McCarthy will work the details out. Mr. Lynde ended by informing that = Mr. McCarthy had worked out a deal with BFI and they had donated twenty 70-90 t= rash containers (with lids) and would empty them weekly into the dumpster at no = cost to the Town.

Mr. McDevitt read aloud a letter submitted by Police C= hief Evan Haglund regarding awards the Town had been given in connection with driving while intoxicated.

ADJOURNMEN= T

MOTION:<= o:p>

(Danevich/Derby) To adjourn the meeting.

VOTE:

(5-0-0) The motion carri= ed.

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:00 pm.

&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Respe= ctfully submitted,

&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Chari= ty A. L. Willis

&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Recor= ding Secretary