BOS Minutes 01-11-2005

APPROVED

TOWN OF PELHAM

BOARD OF SE= LECTMEN MEETING

MINUTES

January 11, 2005

APPROVED – January 25, 2005

CALL TO ORDER

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

PRESENT:

Mr. William McDevitt, Mr. Victor Danevich, Mr. Richa= rd Derby, Mr. Jean-Guy Bergeron, Mr. Tom Gaydos, Town Administrator

Also present:

ABSENT:

Members of the press and general public.

Mr. Harold Lynde

&nbs= p;

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

MINUTES RE= VIEW

January 4, 2005

MOTION:<= o:p>

(Danevich/Bergeron) To approve the January 4, 2005 meeting mi= nutes as amended. <= /p>

VOTE:

(4-0-0) The motion carri= ed.

The amendments to the minutes were as follows: page 3 – The first word in the proposed Conservation Policy was corrected fr= om the word ‘One’ to read ‘Only’; the third paragraph = of the policy the word ‘wish’ shall replace the word ‘with’ to now read: ‘…Commission if they wish to represent the Town.’; page 4, = last paragraph – the sentence which reads ‘He believed there was sti= ll $250,000 in available funds through the state (which Congressman Charlie Ba= ss may be able to help obtain).’ was amended to read ‘He was told = it would cost $250,000 for signalization and he felt the amount could possibly= be obtained by contacting Congressman Charlie Bass.’

OPEN FORUM=

None.

APPOINTMEN= T(S):

Chief Hagl= und, Canine Program

Police Chief Evan Haglund met with the Selectmen to di= scuss the K-9 Program. He gave a presentation which outlined what the K-9 does and why a second K-9 Unit was needed. K-9 Officer Ken Owen = will be retiring in twenty-four months; it takes approximately 12-18 months to ‘season’ and certify a dual-purpose’ police dog. Chief Haglund reviewed the training advantages of having Officer Owen assisting in the training and mentoring t= he new handler. He noted Officer= Owen had offered unlimited free assistance with training at his ‘All Breeds’ training center. He explained that the dog would be purchased through a guaranteed grant from t= he Working Dog Foundation; grant fee $100.&nb= sp; He said the cost to train the handler would be borne through their existing K-9 budget and regular training budget. In conclusion, Chief Haglund said = it was their intention to continue their outstanding K-9 service to the Town by transitioning a second replacement dog into their department at the lowest = cost and least disruption to the program.

MOTION:<= o:p>

(Derby/Bergeron) To approve the $1000 grant (with the offsetting cost of $100) to purchase a dog through the Working Dog Foundation.

VOTE:

(4-0-0) The motion carri= ed.

Darren McC= arthy, Recreation Director, Gating of Parks when closed

Mr. McDevitt said the Selectmen had been contacted by citizens questioning why certain Town Parks where closed with gates.

Park & Recreation Director Darren McCarthy explain= ed that when the Recreation offices were located at Pelham Veteran’s Memorial Park (‘PVMP’) over the summer, there were very few incidents of vandalism and dumping. He said the Recreation offices had moved back to the Municipal Building<= /st1:PlaceType> in the fall and in late October there was a major issue with trash being du= mped into the park. He had the Pol= ice investigate. Upon further rev= iew additional trash items were being found (i.e. tires, construction materials) and subsequently Mr. McCarthy discussed with the Park & Recreation Advi= sory Board the possibility of adding a gate at the entrance of PVMP. He also discussed the gate with the Highway, Fire and Police Department to make sure that gating was a good ide= a; each of which wanted to ensure they still had access. He said the gate was not intended = to close the park, but rather to stop the vandalism.

Police Chief Evan Haglund said historically it had bee= n an area of dumping and high vandalism and was difficult for the units to get up there on a continual basis, even though they do throughout various shifts.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> He said they still had access and = had noted a reduction in dumping and vandalism since the gate had gone up.

Mr. McDevitt said the issue was the gate gave the appe= arance that the park was closed and questioned if, as a solution a sign could be a= dded that stated ‘Open for pedestrian access”.

Mr. Bergeron said he had seen the gate and asked if consideration had been given to placing the gate further into the park providing vehicles with easier access in and out. He questioned if alternative signa= ge (from the two stop signs) could be added; or an additional sign indicating that motorized vehicles weren’t allowed past the gate. Chief Haglund said historically a = gate had been located in the turn around area discussed by Mr. Bergeron, however there were issues with dumping and cars gathering in the turn around area.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> He believed if the gate was moved,= there would still be problems with cars gathering and dumping. Mr. McCarthy provided ATV Trail Bi= king Guide, OHRV Guide and Snowmobile Trail Guide which spelled out where it was permissible to use such vehicles. Mr. Bergeron asked if other parks/Town owned land could be reviewed to determine where the entrances and proper parking areas were located. Mr. McCarthy said he would like the Selectmen to review how parcels were reviewed; he understood that he was responsible for the four Town Parks, but was not aware that he was in charg= e of the Town = Forest Land. Mr. Bergeron was referring to the = areas of ‘passive’ recreation. Mr. McCarthy said he would seek clarification from the Board regardi= ng such.

Mr. McDevitt questioned if an addition sign could be a= dded to the PVMP gate that indicated pedestrian traffic only allowed beyond the gate. Mr. McCarthy said he co= uld install an additional sign. <= /p>

Steve Will= iams, Director, NRPC / Ryan Friedman, GIS Planner – Signalization at Town Center

Mr. McDevitt said the Selectmen had been investigating solutions for Pelham Center for some tim= e. A study was done by GEOD in April,= 2002; Mr. Bergeron and Mr. McDevitt presented a temporary solution; and a number = of individuals had presented possible short-term solutions. He said the reason that the soluti= ons presented were short-term was because the Town was not on the state’s 10-year transportation plan a= nd it seemed unacceptable to the Board to wait more than ten years for a solut= ion to be implemented. He said Na= shua Regional Planning Commission (‘NRPC’) was gracious enough to he= lp the Town and run a couple scenarios through their traffic model; they were asked to re-review the GEOD recommendation for a round-about and for signal= ization. Some of the discussions took place= at a meeting of the Town’s Highway Safety Committee where the Selectmen had directed Mr. Bergeron and Mr. McDevitt to ‘hash things out’.

Mr. Steve Williams, Director, NRPC met with the Select= men and gave a presentation showing the analysis of options at the Town Center Intersections. He began by reviewing the existing traffic patterns at the intersection of Main Street/Windham Road/Nashua Road/O= ld Bridge Street North as well as the intersectio= n at Old Bridge Street North/Ma= rsh Road/Common Street. He said the Pelham Highway Safety Committee asked NRPC to provide assistance with reviewing the Town Center improvement alternatives as well as identifying the funding sources for such improvements.

Mr. Williams provided a summary of each scenario and discussed the traffic impacts for each; there were five scenarios discussed= as well as the GEOD study option 2B (estimated cost per GEOD $255,000). He also discussed the funding opti= ons: 1) NH DOT Funding through 10-year plan; 2) Town funding; or 3) request spec= ial appropriation of money from the Congressional Delegation. He was reluctant to give a recommendation, but said it was their opinion that the signalization option= by GEOD would operate well for the foreseeable future, and the trade off would= be modest; the down side was that the Town Center was attracti= ve and traffic signals are often not the nicest appearance. There were some signals used by DO= T that had a nicer appearance (used in the historic section in Amherst).

Mr. Bergeron said he had attended approximately three meetings and felt after reviewing the scenarios had a better understanding about the impacts of closing off certain roads. He thanked the people who helped w= ith the presentation. Mr. Bergeron asked for an explanation of the Urban Fund through the state. Mr. Williams said the state receiv= ed a certain amount of transportation funding from the Federal Government on a yearly basis; the state informed they would set aside a certain amount per capita for the communities so if the communities had traffic/highway improvements in the future it would be something they could call upon. He said the funds were not set asi= de in a bank account, but rather, the state had kept track of who had received fu= nds, and for what they received the funds for.&= nbsp; He said at this point the money had not kept up with the need and it= was not functioning the way they hoped it would.

Mr. Danevich questioned if the Highway Block Grant eli= gible for funding the project. Mr. = McDevitt said the grant could be used; the grant is used to make other road improvements. Mr. Danevich questioned what the next step would be.&nb= sp; Mr. McDevitt said the Selectmen would need to take a position, but didn’t want to proceed in Mr. Lynde’s absence. Mr. Bergeron said if the Selectmen= chose to contact the Congressional Delegation he believed the Board had to come up with a resolution; no one would try to obtain funds without a resolution. He felt Pelham would be a good can= didate for Urban Funds since the Town had not received any for a long time. He believed funds were awarded in March. Mr. Danevich said ther= e were five funding options: 1) NH DOT Funding through 10-year plan; 2) Town fundi= ng through warrant article; 3) appropriation through Congressional Delegation;= 4) Highway Block Grant; 5) place amount in Highway Budget.

Mr. Derby spoke of the current traffic at the intersec= tions and believed one big problem would be the shifting of traffic to the Willow Street. He said Sherburne Road onto Mammoth Road should also be reviewed because of long delays.

Mr. McDevitt asked if the GEOD option 2B (that had a g= rading of C) would be an acceptable level of service. Mr. Williams said level C would cl= ear the intersection at every cue.

Mr. Danevich asked if the signal would use trip wires = or be timed. Mr. Williams said the lights would= have ‘actuators’ that could be set for different signal patterns throughout the day.

Mr. Bergeron noted that the Town was not currently on = the state’s 10-year plan. He asked if the members of the Highway Safety Committee had any questions/comm= ents since most members were present. Police Chief Evan Haglund said Mr. Williams conveyed their wishes.

Mr. McDevitt said he had taken the public position tha= t he felt signals were a bad idea, but coupled it with the fact that he wanted signals to be the last resort, not the first. He said it was becoming clearer th= at signals were the solution.

Mr. McDevitt ended by extending thanks from the Town t= o NRPC for donating the plotter being used in the Planning Department.

OTHER BUSI= NESS

Discussion= of Requesting 2 Firemen instead of 4 on Warrant Article

Mr. McDevitt said the Budget Committee didn’t recommend the warrant article requesting four firefighters and questioned if the Selectmen wanted to reconsider and possibly reduce the number to two. If the Selectmen agree, the Budget= Committee would also be asked to review at reconsideration.

Mr. Derby said outside of the Town Clerk and Tax Colle= ctors office, the Fire Department was the next biggest income maker with their ambulance. He felt there was = a need for four fire fighters.

Mr. Bergeron said many calls were for medical emergenc= y; he supported requesting four firefighters and noted that the Fire Chief wouldn’t have requested them if there wasn’t a need.

Mr. Danevich felt the Fire Chief provided ample justification and back up documentation when requesting four firefighters.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> He supported four firefighters, but would not be opposed to reconsider the article for two fire fighters. Mr. McDevitt believed the intent w= ould be to request two fire fighters this year, and two next year with the hope = that both would pass. He was conce= rned with ‘all or nothing’ if the warrant article stayed as it curre= ntly was written.

There was not a majority for either opinion (keeping f= our fire fighters, or reducing to two), therefore the Selectmen would not reque= st reconsideration for the warrant article.&n= bsp;

Road Namin= g Policy & Procedure

Mr. McDevitt said a question arose whether the road na= mes being proposed for the ballot had run through the road naming process. Mr. Gaydos said a number of the ro= ad names were made years ago before the policy was in place. He said the Safety Committee was t= aking the initiative to review road names with developers prior to names being ad= ded to plans.

Petition W= arrant Articles

1) To see= if the Town will vote to withdraw the sum of $11,000.00 in income here to for and = here in after generated by the Elmer G. Raymond Memorial Park Trust Fund, which = was created by a vote of the 1982 annual Town Meeting pursuant to Chapter 402 of the 1981 New Hampshire Legislature-Senate Bill 221, and to appropriate and = expend the same for the following four categories of Park and Lodge maintenance and repair work. (there was also a breakdown of the specific items that would be addressed/upgraded. )

Park & Recreation Director Darren McCarthy met wit= h the Selectmen and reviewed a memo, dated January 11, 2005 containing the recommendations of t= he Joint Loss Safety Committee, Town Inspector Reports and a letter addressing= the use of the Scout Lodge at Raymond Park.&nb= sp; He said at this time, no other groups were being allowed to use the Scout Lodge because it did not meet current safety codes. Based on the information contained= in the memo, the Park & Recreation Department recommended that the Scout L= odge be turned over completely to the Scout Packs and Troops in Pelham.

Mr. Gaydos said the Joint Law Safety Committee reviews= all the buildings in Town and were appalled at the Scout Lodge condition. All the inspectors were asked to r= eview the building. Mr. Gaydos said= the Town’s insurance company was contacted and would make a presentation = to the Selectmen. He said they f= elt there were some serious code violations, which was the reason there not be = any Town sponsored programs there until the code violations were repaired. Mr. Gaydos said Mr. McCarthy had b= een in contact with a builder who would provide a report containing an estimate for the repairs that needed to be done. He said it was not known if $4800 would be enough to bring the build= ing into code compliance. He said= it was clear that the Scouts were proud of the building and wanted to continue= its use.

Mr. McDevitt understood that the building was a Town building and if it was to be turned over to somebody, it would require Town vote.

Mr. Danevich said after reading the inspector reports questioned whether the building should be condemned. He said there was no guarantee tha= t the $11,000 would bring the building up to code. Mr. Gaydos said the amount was $4800. He said the Scouts had licensed volunteers that would do the work. Mr. McCarthy said it w= as explained that much of the work would be donated by licensed people; a majo= rity of the $4800 was for materials.

Mr. McDevitt said the warrant article had some traps i= n it such as meeting the Boy Scouts of America Camp Safety Regulations. Mr. McCarthy said he received notification from the District Counsel regarding the Boy Scout Camp Safety Regulations and didn’t believe there were any items that would be too onerous. Mr. McDevitt asked i= f the interpretation was that the Park & Recreation department wouldn’t control the building based upon warrant article. Mr. McCarthy said at this time the building was used specifically by scouts based upon the inspector’s reports. He said he would love to have anot= her building, but the current one was not an option. Mr. McDevitt discussed the type of agreement between the Town and the Men’s Softball league and wanted to make it clear, in his opinion that the warrant article submitted by the Sco= uts didn’t give anyone the exclusive use to the building.

The Selectmen discussed the warrant article and the me= mo provided with the Joint Law Safety Committee. It was suggested that the Selectme= n take time to read through the reports and make a decision prior to the joint Bud= get Committee meeting Tuesday, January 18, 2005.

Mr. Danevich asked if the building should be condemned= . Mr. Gaydos said the insurance comp= any had been contacted to help answer the question. Mr. McDevitt asked if the Scouts h= ad an alternate meeting place. He a= lso felt the Town should be proactive helping the Scouts find an alternate meet= ing place. Mr. McCarthy said the = Scouts had been given notice that the building’s use would be at their own risk.

2) Hunting prohibited on private property except: by landowner or person with written landowner permission on their person.

Mr. McDevitt said the person who initiated the petition contacted the Selectmen and was told they had the right to petition Town Meeting, but the warrant article could not be acted on by either the Town or the Selectmen. He reviewed the response provided by Town Counsel (Attorney John Rattigan) regarding warrant article placement and in summary advised that Towns/Cities had no legal rig= ht under state law to prohibit hunting on private property other than by individual property owner posting the property per state law. He said the danger of the article = is that many voters may read it, vote in favor of it, and if it passes may be under the impression that hunting would be prohibited on their private land, although that would not be the case. He said the Selectmen should take a position regarding the article, = and during the Deliberative Session make amendments which could help to clarify= the fact that the article was illegal. <= /span>

MOTION:<= o:p>

(Danevich/Bergeron) To submit the petition Warrant A= rticle (regarding hunting on private property) for placement on the 2005 Town Meeting Ballot as NOT recommended by the Selectmen.

VOTE:

(4-0-0) The motion carri= ed.

Highway De= partment Truck

Mr. McDevitt informed that one of the Highway Departme= nt trucks stopped running. Mr. Gaydos s= aid the Selectmen had discussed placing a warrant article on the 2004 ballot to= replace the 1994 Ford, but had not. C= orrespondence had been received by Woody’s Auto that there was substantial corrosion and other problems the thought was that the vehicle should be liquidated and questionable if it would pass inspection in March, 2005. Mr. Gaydos said the transmission w= ent out and the vehicle has been parked. The problem is that the Highway Department needs a smaller truck to plow/sand/maintain the smaller roads (pond roads) in Town. Mr. Gaydos said the private contra= ctors used by the Town were unable to help out, so the other alternative was to l= ook for a truck, which the Highway Road Agent (Don Foss) has done. He said a truck was found and quot= es were obtained from several lots. The truck is a 2005 Ford; the sander and strobe lights were also fou= nd the cost would be $56,621.50 (including a 6-year/100,000 mile warranty). Mr. Gaydos said the money could be= found in savings from the 2004 budgets of the Highway Department, Transfer Statio= n, Fire Department and Police Department.&nbs= p; He recommended that the Selectmen consider purchasing the truck now = and removing the warrant article.

There was further discussion and the following motion = was made:

MOTION:<= o:p>

(Derby/Bergeron) To authorize the purchase of a truc= k (for the Highway Department) from the 2004 budget and withdraw the warrant art= icle submitted for 2005.

VOTE:

(4-0-0) The motion carri= ed.

Senior Cente= r Ramp and Awning

Senior Center Director Sue Hovling submitted a letter = in response to the Selectmen’s discussion regarding the 2002 Warrant Art= icle for improvements to the S= enior Center roof, ramp a= nd awning. She requested that the remaining $3677 be set aside = for completion of the project, which was scheduled for February/March, 2005.

Mr. McDevitt said the money would not be turned back u= ntil such time as the project is completed.&nbs= p;

Warrant Ar= ticle Recommendation

Mr. McDevitt said he and Mr. Bergeron met with Mr. Gay= dos and agreed to recommend to the Board to continue placing the Board’s recommendation on the ballot this year.&nb= sp; Also to request that the Selectmen consider putting together a commi= ttee after Town Meeting consisting of two Selectmen and two Budget Committee Mem= bers to review and determine a solution for next year’s warrant.

TOWN ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT / SELECTMEN’S REPORTS=

Mr. Gaydos informed that the 2003 audit was complete a meeting would need to be set up to review the report which would provide a better understanding of its content. He then noted that he received verbal correspondence from CMA Engine= ers regarding the water testing at the tire dump (located at the Albert Lynch Park/Raymond Park) which indicated there were no VOC’s in the water, = but there was elevated pollution (oil stained soil) in the soil in a surface ar= ea of approximately 3500SF. Approximately 500 yards of material will have to be removed; the characterization report will be provided to the Town and state within two w= eeks. Mr. Bergeron asked if ‘borings’ were done. Mr. Gaydos said borings were done, wells were installed and samples = were taken out of the wells.

Mr. Bergeron informed that the next meeting of the Mer= rimack Valley Regional Water District would be held on January 10, 2005; he would attend and as= k the Fire Chief if he would also attend. He questioned if the Town Center intersections would be discussed at an upcoming meeting.= Mr. McDevitt answered yes and said Mr. Bergeron should speak with Mr. Gaydos regarding the schedule.

Mr. Derby noted that the Budget Committee was slowly w= inding down.

Mr. Danevich and Mr. McDevitt had no reports.

REQUEST FOR NON-PUBLIC SESSION

MOTION:=

(Derby/Danevich) Request for a non-public session pe= r RSA 91-A:3,II,a (Personnel)

=

ROLL CALL:<= /b>

Mr. McDevitt-Yes; Mr. Danevich-Yes; Mr. Derby-Yes; M= r. Bergeron-Yes

Mr. McDevitt noted that when the Board returned, after= the non-public session, the Board would not take any other action publicly, exc= ept to seal the minutes of the non-public session and to adjourn the meeting. The Board entered into a non-public session at approximately 8:= 45 pm. Also present was Mr. Gaydos.

The Board returned to public session at approximately = 9:10pm.

=

MOTION:=

(Danevich/Bergeron) To seal the minutes of the non-p= ublic session indefinitely.

=

VOTE:

(4-0-0) The motion carried.

ADJOURNMEN= T

MOTION:<= o:p>

(Danevich/Bergeron) To adjourn the meeting.

=

VOTE:

(4-0-0) The motion carri= ed.

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 9:10 pm.

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

   &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;                &= nbsp;      Charity A. L. Willis

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