APPROVED
TOWN OF
BOARD OF S= ELECTMEN MEETING
MINUTES
APPROVED –
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
|
PRESENT: |
Mr. Victor Danevich, Mr. Jean-Guy Bergeron, Mr. Edm= und Gleason, Mr. Tom Domenico, Mr. Tom Gaydos, Town Administrator |
|
Also present: ABSENT: |
Members of the press and general public. Mr. Harold Lynde |
&nb= sp;
The Chairman, Victor Danevich, opened the meeting at
approximately
MINUTES R=
EVIEW
|
MOTION:=
|
(Gleason/Bergeron) To approve the |
|
VOTE: |
(4-0-0) The motion carr= ied. |
The amendment to the minutes was as follows: page 2 &= #8211; 4th paragraph: the words ‘to file for renewal’ were added to the sentence ‘…60-days in advance of expiration to file for renewal’; page 2 – 4th paragraph: the word ‘a’ was added to the following ‘…unsure if = a Town Meeting vote would…’
OPEN FORU=
M
Ms. Deborah Waters informed that the Little Island Po=
nd Conservation
Area was ready for public access.
She said there would be a ribbon cutting ceremony held on
State Representative Lynne Ober said during the revie= w of the Highway Department’s budget there was no mention of a FEMA grant opportunity to recover funds expended due to inclement weather in January.= She said both Litchfield and Huds= on had applied for such and suggested that Pelham also do so. Mr. Gaydos informed that Fire Chi= ef Fisher, the Town’s Emergency Management Director had already complet= ed the grant application. He in= formed that anyone affected (who had expenses), not just the Highway Department, = could apply for the grant.
Ms. Barbara Stadtmiller, member of the Pelham Communi= ty Theatre and Arts Group, said performances of a murder-mystery comedy would= be held May 5,6 & 7, 2005. = She said tickets were $10, however if a person was interested in making a $25 donation to the Diane Fisher Fund they would be given a free ticket to att= end the performance. Additional information could be found on Pelhamcommunitytheatre.com
VFW Commander Charlie Mooskian informed that May 1
APPOINTME=
NTS
Bob Blinn=
–
Little League Baseball Signing for Opening Day
President of Little League Bob Blinn informed that Pe=
lham
Little League was in its thirty sixth year with current participation of 7=
75
children, which is up 10% from last year.=
Opening day will be held
Susan Sni=
de
– Vision Software Update
Assessing Assistant Susan Snide met with the Selectme=
n to
discuss the Town’s computer appraisal system (Vision Software version
4). She was happy with versi=
on 4,
but had been informed that Vision Appraisal Technologies would no longer be
supporting version 4 and the Town would have to upgrade to version 6. However, she was informed that Vi=
sion
Appraisal would support the town with version 4 until the revaluation was
completed. She noted that Vi=
sion
Appraisal provided free web sharing until
G. Philip=
Blatsos,
Commissioner, Department of Revenue Administration, Property Revaluation of
Pelham
State of
Mr. Gaydos said he and Mr. Gleason had a meeting with= the representatives from DRA and discussed the Town’s position. He said the Commissioner and his = staff listened; the purpose of this meeting is to listen to what the DRA had to say. Mr. Gaydos said they in= formed the DRA that the Town put out an RFP, a number of companies submitted proposals, however they needed commitments by certain dates or the proposa= ls would no longer be valid. The budget was not approved and the companies were informed. Subsequently, a s= econd proposal was issued for compliance in 2007 to get broader bidding and bett= er result. Mr. Gaydos said a li= st of questions had been drafted for clarification.
Mr. Blatsos reviewed the list of questions and provid= ed the following answers.
1) What are the legal ramifications of the Town’= ;s inability to effect the revaluation?
Mr. Blatsos said with no signed contr= act, the DRA would need to go to the Board of Tax and Land Appeal (‘BTLA’) and have them review the case. He was confident they would order= a revaluation. At that point t= he BTLA dictated what must be done by the DRA.&nb= sp;
2) What is the procedure now that the Town has failed= to effect the required revaluation?
Mr. Blatsos said without a signed con= tract the case would have to go before the BTLA. His principal concerns were to preserve the tax system in the state (ensure everyone was revaled within five years) and to assist in any way to help accomplish it. In other= words 1) Preserve the state as a whole; 2) do anything he could to help the Town.
3) Is there anything the DRA can do to assist the Tow= n?
Mr. Blatsos said they would do a lot = to assist with the reval process when the Town was running it (i.e. have a mo= nitor that would report to the Town and then to the DRA). If the Town was controlling the revaluation, the DRA would report to the Town, in the other case, by order= of the BTLA, the DRA would work for the state and BTLA (not the Town) and ens= ure they got what they were supposed to. If the DRA was forced to run the reval under order of the BTLA, the monitor would report directly to the DRA. Once control was lost by the Town= , it would be gone.
4) Is it possible that the Bureau of Taxation and Land Appeals will grant a further extension?&n= bsp;
Mr. Blatsos said it was possible, but= highly probable that they would not, given the language in the Cerrell case regar= ding effective enforcement. =
5) If not, what can the Town do to facilitate the pro= cess and minimize the cost impact to the Town?
Mr. Blatsos said once the Town lost control, it lost control. He= said the Town could come up with a method of raising the money to get a contract signed to do the revaluation in 2006, then the Town would control it. At that point the DRA would go wi= th the Town to the BTLA and tell them the Town was doing everything appropriately= and request that the case be held in abeyance.
Mr. Bergeron asked if the court case was recent, and = if the court case brought the revaluation issue forward. Mr. Blatsos said the court case a= bsolutely brought the revaluation to light, however, it had always been in the const= itution, just not enforced. He guesse= d that the court case was done in 2000 or 2001.&= nbsp; He said he would provide the Selectmen with a copy of the court cas= e.
6) Will the BTLA allow the Town to recommend companie= s to perform the revaluation based upon our efforts to date?
Mr. Blatsos reiterated once the Town = lost control, it lost control. He = said the process was one where the Town would pay for the revaluation, essentia= lly what would happen is the state would approve the contract, fund it up fron= t, and put it on the next tax bill. The Town would not control it, but would pay for it. He noted if the BTLA ordered the revaluation, the Town may not get the same company and possibly come up wi= th training issues (on a new CAMA system in the assessing department). He felt the Town was currently do= ing the right thing having web sharing. If left in the hands of the BTLA, the Town would lose control of this type of productivity issue. Mr. Dane= vich said he was interested in the Vision upgrade in conjunction with the Munis= oft Software (general accounting software).&n= bsp; He said the Town was looking for continuity between various departments. Mr. Blatsos sai= d he would do anything in his power to help, but when putting a contract out he= had to answer to the BTLA, as well as the Governor’s Council .= The state may not care about the Town’s long-term concerns an= d may want to go with the lowest bidder. Mr. Blatsos said in the long run it may cost the Town more in taking the lowest bid. He said he would try to be an adv= ocate, but the state looked at it with a different perspective.
7) Given that the BTLA will effect the revaluation, w= hat is the usual procedure for implementing the revaluation, the accumulation of charges and the methodology for recovering costs from the Town?
Mr. Blatsos said when the DRA is orde= red by the BTLA to do a revaluation, they get bids to do the basic revaluation (which may not be the one the Town wants), the DRA then goes to Governor&#= 8217;s Council to get it approved.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> In the end, with the order from t= he BTLA it ends up on the Town citizen’s tax bills, which are how the costs = are recovered by the state.
8) What role will the DRA play in the revaluation onc= e the BTLA has ordered it?
Mr. Blatsos said the key players woul=
d be
Mr. Petell (who would approve the contract and help get it to the Governor=
’s
Council ) and Mr. Gagnon who would be in the Town looking things over (as =
a DRA
employee). He said every cou=
rtesy
would be extended to the Town. Mr.
Petell said once the revaluation was turned over to the DRA, they had to d=
o the
job that the Town was originally supposed to do such as put out the RFP, a=
ccept
the bids, and would work with the Town.&n=
bsp;
However they had to go to the Governor’s Council to get the m=
oney
appropriated. Once the money=
was
appropriated, the DRA would award a contract and do the administrative par=
t of
overseeing the entire revaluation.
The DRA would possibly have two or three people in Town doing data
accuracy checks and sales analysis checks to ensure everything was being d=
one
properly and in accordance with the contract and state laws and rules.
Mr. Domenico asked for further explanation of the tim= eline from the point that the DRA made the referral to the BTLA and to the point= when the contract would actually begin. Mr. Petell said the Town was on a ‘watch’ list because = of being a 2006 Town. He unders= tood there was the possibility of holding an additional Town Meeting (to appropriate money). He said if Pelham mo= ved forward in that manner (appropriated money and got a contract by 2006) the= DRA would probably withdraw the order to the BTLA (if it was in), or hold it in abeyance (if the Town was acting on the contract). If placed in = the BTLA’s hands, it would probably be 6-8 months before the hearing wou= ld come up, then the revaluation would probably be ordered. He noted that twenty-four o= ther cases had been brought before the BTLA and all twenty-four had been ordere= d to do a revaluation. He could n= ot answer how fast the revaluation would be done from the point it was ordere= d by the BTLA. Mr. Domenico asked= if the order would be withdrawn or held in abeyance if funds were approved in the= Town Meeting vote of March, 2006 and the revaluation scheduled to be completed in 2007. Mr. Petell said it would be the commissioner’s choice, however in the past when orders were held in abeyance becau= se the revaluation was not implemente= d, , the BTLA ordered something to be done.&nb= sp; Mr. Blatsos noted that companies would rather deal with the Town ve= rsus the DRA or the BTLA. He felt= it was better when Towns did their own revaluation.
At this point, the questions were addressed out of or= der (#11, #10, #9, #12).
11) What had been the DRA’s experience relative= to total cost to other Towns once the BTLA has ordered a revaluation?
Mr. Petell said there were a couple t=
hings
that could affect the total costs; first of all the DRA’s costs woul=
d be
added (such as administrative, oversight, hourly fees, mileage fees, maili=
ng
fees, legal review etc.). He=
said
the Town would lose all control, other than communications with the DRA (w=
ho
would try to work with Town), but the revaluation would still have to meet=
the
standards. He said he DRA wo=
uld
probably have to go with the low bidder, even if the Town didn’t wan=
t to. Mr. Danevich said in one regard t=
here
would be an increased cost to taxpayers of legal fees, since the DRA’=
;s
legal staff would review versus the Town’s legal (which was voter
approved and paid through retainer).
He asked if it was fair to say if the state assumed control of the
revaluation it would cost the Town (per individual) more money, than if the
Town did the revaluation itself.
Mr. Petell believed this statement to be correct. He said in the last revaluation t=
he DRA
oversaw there was an increased cost.
Mr. Danevich asked if they could provide an estimated cost for the
revaluation. Mr. Petell said=
he
wouldn’t be able to provide one.&nb=
sp;
He said in addition to the DRA costs, there were companies that did=
a
lot of work in the state that wouldn’t bid on a BTLA ordered job.
Mr. Bergeron asked for further explanation how the To=
wn
could proceed by special Town Meeting.&nb=
sp;
This was not Mr. Blatsos’ area of expertise. He said he had experts on staff t=
hat
could inform the Town of all the requirements of a special Town Meeting.
Mr. Gleason asked if the timeline allowed the Town to= hold off until the March, 2006 Town Meeting, or if the Town was forced into a situation where it should attempt to do the revaluation sooner. Mr. Blatsos said if the Town appropriated funds sooner (and entered into an agreement with a company), = the BTLA could be avoided entirely. He said the DRA could hold the case back (as long as there was a signed contr= act and appropriated funds). He believed there would also be considerable cost savings when taking into consideration the extra things (i.e. assessing computer system). Mr. Danevich said there appeared = to be options such as obtain funding prior to April 2006 so the Town could maint= ain control. He questioned what = the ramifications would be if the revaluation was placed on the 2006 ballot an= d it either 1) passed; or 2) was defeated.&nbs= p; Mr. Blatsos said the DRA would go to the BTLA by then because it wo= uld not be effective enforcement; the courts would not look favorably on him a= nd the job he was doing because there was no way of achieving the goal. He was not sure if the BTLA would= buy off on waiting until 2007. H= e said if he were a citizen of the Town he would rather have the Town in control = of the process versus the DRA. = Mr. Petell felt it was important that the taxpayers understood that a revaluat= ion would take place in Town in the near future. He said it could be done either b= y the Town, or the DRA. He said it= was in the Town’s best interest to have the Town do the revaluation. The DRA would still assist and ov= ersee at no cost; however, if the revaluation was ordered by the BTLA, the DRA w= ould be up front and the Town would be in the background.
10) Does the DRA believe that the Town needs to engag=
e a
separate company to oversee the revaluation and perform quality audits?
Mr. Blatsos said if the Town was
contracting the audit out, DRA representatives would do quality assurance =
for
the Town. He said if there w=
ere any
problems it would be picked up by the DRA staff or through the hearings.
9) What can the Town do in the future to avoid this t= ype of problem?
Mr. Blatsos said a lot of towns went = on a cyclical basis reviewing 25% of the town each year (for four years) and in= the fifth year did the sales analysis (and everything else to bring them up to 100%). Mr. Petell felt it was important to know that the Town would put a lot of money into the revaluat= ion (approximately $75 per parcel). He advised the Town to stay on top of assessing. Mr. Danevich asked if other towns = were doing reviews on a cyclical basis. Mr. Petell believed approximately 150 towns in the state were using a cyclical review. Mr. Danevich confirm= ed there would be a long-term cost savings opportunity if the Town changed th= e way revaluations were done. Mr. = Petell answered yes. Mr. Danevich n= oted that the Selectmen would add the revaluation process to their priority list. Mr. Bergeron questione= d how the towns budgeted the review. Mr. Petell said a lot of towns included assessing costs in their annual budget. He said they had a c= ompany come in annually to review. = Mr. Bergeron asked if the DRA reviewed at an ongoing basis. Mr. Petell answered yes. He said they had guidelines for t= he cyclical review process which could be provided.
Mr. Gleason asked for an explanation of the effects o= f a revaluation. Mr. Petell said typically a Town’s budget was divided across the total assessed valu= e in the community, so if values increased, the budget would be divided into a = larger number (assessed value goes up) and the tax rate goes down. Typically there is minimal effect= to the average tax payer.
12) Given where we are, what does the DRA recommend a= s a course of action?
Mr. Blatsos strongly recommended that= a special town meeting be held and the Town take control of the revaluation.= He said he would do everything in= his power to help the Town.
CIP Chairman Bill Scanzani said state aid was based o= n a fair assessment of tax value and wanted to know if the Town would be hurt = (on applications for state aid) because of the lack of revaluation. Mr. Blatsos said aid shouldn̵= 7;t be affected because the DRA equalized between towns once per year. He said the DRA reviewed a sales = sample and compared it to the assessed value. He said the Town was paying its fair share (town to town), but it m= ay not be equal and proportionate within the Town.
Mr. Danevich thanked the DRA representatives for thei= r time and noted that they would make themselves available to answer questions (i= n one of the conference rooms). Mr. Gaydos would facilitate the question/answer session.
Continuat=
ion of
Interviews:
Mr. Michael = Ridlon, seeking appointment to the Fire Station Building Committee met with the Selectmen = to discuss his application. He explained that he was a resident of Pelham for approximately thirteen year= s and was a professional firefighter in another community. He said he was a concerned tax pa= yer and wanted to see the fire department expand in the future to meet the Town= 217;s needs. He believed he could = bring an objective viewpoint to the committee.&= nbsp; He didn’t feel there would be any conflicts with his appointm= ent to the committee.
Mr. Bob Yarm= o, seeking reappointment as a Planning Board Alternate met with the Selectmen to disc= uss his application. He wanted t= o make a commitment to the community and believed his background would be benefic= ial to the board. It was noted t= hat Mr. Yarmo was currently the Conservation Commission Chairman which was allowed= per state statute.
|
MOTION:=
|
(Domenico/Gleason) To appoint Mr. Michael Ridlon to=
the
Fire Station Building Committee with no specified term and to appoint Mr=
. Bob
Yarmo as a Planning Board Alternate with a term of three years effective=
as
of April 1, 2005. |
|
VOTE: |
(4-0-0) The motion carr=
ied. |
OTHER BUS=
INESS
Council o=
n Aging
Appointments
Mr. Bergeron said the Council on Aging held a meeting approximately one week ago at which point a new slate of officers were recommended for appointment by the Selectmen. It was noted that the recommended officers were all Pelham residents.
|
MOTION:=
|
(Bergeron/Gleason) To appoint the following people =
to the
Council on Aging with a one-year term: Mr. Daniel Atwood, Georgia Atwood,
Dorothy Carter, Eugene Carter, Blanche Forest, Helen Harris, Eleanor
Ingraham, Shirley Janocha, Marcy Jennings, Harriet Mansfield, Gloria She=
ehan,
Kathleen Silloway, Christopher Sintros, Otis Titcomb, Jr. |
|
VOTE: |
(4-0-0) The motion carr=
ied. |
Pelham Ci=
tizens
Corps Council Update
Mr. Bergeron informed that the Pelham Citizens Corps =
Council
met
South East
Hazardous Mutual Aid District Update.
Mr. Bergeron said he had served as the representative= to the South East Hazardous Mutual Aid District for the past two years and wanted= to know if there was any objection to him continuing. He briefly explained what the gro= up did. He said the group consi= sted of eighteen towns who met once per month; the board met twice per year (Febru= ary – general business meeting; June – discuss and approve budget). The organization be= gan seventeen years ago. Each do= nates $5000 in dues per year. Mr. Bergeron discussed the type of equipment used by the district. There were no objections to Mr. B= ergeron continuing as the representative. <= /span>
|
MOTION:=
|
(Gleason/Domenico) To allow Selectmen Bergeron cont=
inue as
Representative to the South East Hazardous Mutual Aid District. |
|
VOTE: |
(3-0-1) The motion carr=
ied. Mr. Bergeron abstained. |
Mr. Danevich said he wanted to follow the recommendat=
ion of
the Town’s insurance carrier (Primex) which was to draft a set of ru=
les
governing the
Mr. Danevich said the park maintenance was covered un= der a manufacturer warranty period (of one year) with the option to extend for as many years as wanted, for a fee, which could be included within the Park & Recreation b= udget or all maintenance could be assumed as part of the Park & Recreation default budget. He said all obligations of the insurance carrier to open the park had been met.
Mr. Gleason asked if the authorized areas for skating= and use of bikes had been identified. Mr. Danevich answered yes. He discussed the design and how the designated areas were designed.= Mr. Gleason asked when the current warranty expired. Mr. Danevi= ch believed it would expire one year from project completion. = ;
|
MOTION:=
|
(Domenico/Gleason) To adopt the Skate Park Rules as=
an
ordinance as amended (this evening). |
|
VOTE: |
(4-0-0) The motion carr=
ied. |
=
Selectmen=
’s
Priority List
Mr. Danevich said the Selectmen’s priority list= had been reviewed, revised and prioritized over the past few meetings. He said there was a total of sixt= y-four items. He said once the list= was adopted, it would be released to the public and reviewed every few months.= He read aloud the twenty ‘h= igh priority’ items.
|
MOTION:=
|
(Gleason/Bergeron) To adopt the Selectmen’s 2=
005
Priority List. |
|
VOTE: |
(4-0-0) The motion carr=
ied. |
Budget Re=
view through
Mr. Gaydos reviewed the budgets of the Town’s d= epartments and their expenditures explaining if they were on schedule, behind schedul= e or ahead of schedule. Overall, = he felt the Town was ‘holding its own’.
Mr. Gaydos went on to discuss a $12,000 expense for
repairing the dump truck at the Highway Department. He said they had gathered informa=
tion
and made a decision to hold off repairing the truck until the fall. The truck will be needed in the
winter. He said if the work =
(done
by the dump truck) was subcontracted out to vendors; the $12,000 would eas=
ily
be used. Mr. Gleason questio=
ned if
analysis had been done to determine if it was more prudent to replace the =
truck
or repair it. He asked for t=
he age
of the truck. Mr. Gaydos sai=
d the
truck was fifteen years old. He
said they knew it could not be replaced this year, but it would be needed =
this
winter. He felt the repair w=
ould
reflect in the trucks resale. Mr.
Gleason wanted to know the probability that something else could happen be=
tween
the time of repair and sale of the truck.=
Mr. Gaydos said that was the problem with having an older fleet.
Mr. Bergeron noted that the truck was a 1991 Ford with approximately 165,000 miles. He agreed that the Selectmen should discuss further.
Mr. Gaydos said there were still some 2004 Warrant Ar= ticles that were being reviewed. Mr. Danevich said the Department Heads were doing a good job helping the Town = work within the default budget. He discussed what actions had been taken to date to work within the default budget.
Electroni=
cs
Recycling
Mr. Gaydos said the Transfer Station Superintendent B=
ruce
Mason was doing a fantastic job at keeping the Town as cost efficient as
possible. He said Mr. Mason =
had
submitted a memo regarding the fact that electronics (in general) were now
falling into the category of household hazardous waste and weren’t
allowed to be land filled. H=
e said
there were approximately 40-50 televisions brought to the Transfer Station=
in a
week. Mr. Mason outlined, for
consideration of the Selectmen different alternatives for electronics. Mr. Gleason suggested that the Se=
lectmen
meet with Mr. Mason to discuss further.&n=
bsp;
Mr. Gaydos said an agenda item would be set for the next meeting.
VFW - Ave=
nue of
Flags $1000 Request
Mr. Danevich said in the past the Board had budgeted = up to $1000 annually to refresh the flags that decorate our Town.
VFW Commander Charlie Mooskian said up until last yea= r the flags were privately funded. Last year the American Legion and the VFW came befo= re the Selectmen and requested that the flags become a budget item as it was getting harder to get donations. Mr. Danevich asked if the VFW was seeking funds for this year. Mr. Mooskian said he mentioned to= Mr. Gaydos that the time was coming for the flags to be put back up and the American Legion mentioned they were going out to purchase the flags and wa= nted to make sure that the invoice was going to the Town.
The Selectmen discussed the obstacles faced this year= given the failure of the operating budget. Mr. Mooskian believed last year the Selectmen made a motion to have= the flags be included in the budget as a line item. Mr. Danevich believed it was a discretionary item and given the Town’s present situation it would b= e a difficult decision to make. = Mr. Gaydos believed in 2004 the decision was made to fund the flags from the Patriotic Purposes budget. M= r. Gleason suggested that the Spirit Committee be approached and asked if the= re were funds that could be used for the flags. Mr. Bergeron didn’t know if= the Selectmen had the authority to add items that would be funded year after year. He noted that the fire= works (turned down by the Selectmen) had a deadline. He requested that the Selectmen r= eview the minutes with the Board’s decision regarding the funding of the f= lags. Mr. Mooskian said they could revi= ew what the actual costs would be and come back in. Mr. Domenico said he would like t= o know the actual costs before making a decision.
Mr. Danevich asked Mr. Gaydos to locate the Selectmen meeting minutes for when the funding decision was made. He also asked Mr. Mooskian to pro= vide the Selectmen with the actual costs for 2005. Mr. Gleason asked that the budget= for community activities be reviewed to see if any money was allocated for the flags.
Codificat=
ion
Project – Discuss Items 1-20 of 103 items
Mr. Danevich said there were 103 items that were part= of a codification Warrant Article (of 2001 or 2002) in which the Town contracted with a company (General Code Publisher) to coordinate all the ordinances.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> General Code Publisher returned 1= 03 decision points that had to be decided upon. The intent is once the Selectmen = review the 103 items, a formal response will be forwarded to General Code Publish= er so that the ordinances could be re-adopted and open to the public.
The Selectmen reviewed the first seventeen items.
TOWN ADMI=
NISTRATOR’S
REPORT / SELECTMEN’S REPORTS
Mr. Gaydos informed that there was a recent law that = talked about a discretionary preservation easement. He reviewed a portion of RSA 79-D= :3 which allowed for the creation of a preservation easement for agricultural= structures. Mr. Gaydos said a number of appli= cations had been received and would be circulated among the Board members. He requested that the Selectmen r= eview the structures and determine if the structure should be granted a discreti= onary easement.
Mr. Gaydos said in the past he Selectmen had decided = they would hold meetings in Sherburne Hall despite the fact that there was no Occupancy Permit. He said th= e Fire Chief had bent many rules to allow gatherings of more than fifty people an= d the Town had not done a good job ensuring that other groups keep the number of people under fifty. He said = there were certain groups that wanted to use the hall and were disheartened to h= ear the associated costs for the hall’s use because they felt it was a T= own building and should be open for use. Mr. Gaydos said he didn’t know what items were needed to brin= g the room into compliance and their associated costs. He suggested that Sherburne Hall&= #8217;s use be limited to governmental use only (i.e Selectmen, Planning Board, Bo= ard of Adjustment). Mr. Danevich= agreed with the recommendation, but felt it should be further defined as to which groups could use, such as by exception.&n= bsp; Mr. Gleason felt it should be limited to government functions. Mr. Gaydos pointed out there were= smaller meeting rooms that could be used. Mr. Bergeron and Mr. Domenico agreed that the hall should be used f= or government use. Mr. Gleason = pointed out the liability of allowing people to use the hall without having adequa= te fire suppression.
Mr. Gaydos said he had been contacted by the CERT Pro= gram regarding their current location at the old Town Hall. He said they would like a more pe= rmanent home and asked if they could review the second floor of the Annex building, which they feel would have ample room.&nb= sp; CERT would be willing to install smoke detectors and fire alarms (w= ith a connection) as well as pay for other maintenance and repair. CERT is seeking the SelectmenR= 17;s permission. Mr. Danevich sai= d the Town had no money to take action with respect to the Annex and were commit= ted to it for at least the next year. He said for the next twelve months it sounded like a win-win situat= ion, however he didn’t know if it could be a ‘permanent’ solu= tion. Mr. Gleason asked if CERT would be seeking any funds from the Town in support of the move, or maintaining the facility. Mr. Gaydos answere= d no; CERT prided themselves on obtaining grant monies for anything they have done. He said part of the gr= ant funding would be to pay for expenses (maintaining the building) attributed= to them. There was further disc= ussion. Mr. Gaydos said CERT understood t= hat a decision regarding the disposition of the building could be made in the co= ming months. He said they could m= ove out of the building as fast as they could move in.
Mr. Domenico said the work on the communications plan= was ongoing, a schedule would be disseminated prior to the next meeting. He said a workshop meeting needed= to be scheduled with the Selectmen and CIP and would discuss further with Mr. Ga= ydos to set up a meeting date. He= then said an inventory of all Town vehicles should be compiled that included information such as : 1) year of manufacture; 2) primary function; 3) miles and/or engine hours; 4) 3-year repair costs noting any major work. Mr. Gaydos will work with Mr. Dom= enico to investigate further.
Mr. Bergeron reminded the Board he would like the mem=
bers to
review the Regional Bike and Pedestrian Plan and submit any suggestions.
Mr. Gleason asked if anything came out of the subsequ= ent meeting with DRA. Mr. Gaydos= said the only thing that was spelled out was that the DRA intended to watch wha= t the Town was doing and indicated that they wanted to be certain of the compani= es that we solicited bids for the 2006 year.= He said they were anxious for the Town to hold a special Town meeti= ng because they felt if the Town waited until March, 2006 that the 2006 deadl= ine could not be met. Mr. Gleaso= n asked when a Town meeting would have to take place. Mr. Gaydos said there were several scenarios that would dictate the date, which would have to be further disc= ussed and decided. He said a great= deal would depend on if there were companies available during the 2006 assessing year. Mr. Gleason endorsed t= he Selectmen meeting with CIP and would like to also get the Budget Committee involved sooner, rather than later.
Mr. Danevich said as an extension of the communicatio= n plan there would be a separate dedicated website (managed by Mr. Domenico) that would serve as an official source of information about the current project status of the revaluation. T= his site was not meant for a debatable forum, but rather a press release type site. He then discussed the = use of the message board and believed the Selectmen were ‘adults’ and= could make comments on the board. =
ADJOURNME=
NT
|
MOTION:=
|
(Bergeron/Gleason) To adjourn the meeting. |
|
VOTE: |
(4-0-0) The motion |
The meeting was adjourned at approximately
&nb= sp; = ; &= nbsp; &nb= sp; = ; &= nbsp; &nb= sp; Respectfully submitted,
&nb= sp; = ; &= nbsp; &nb= sp; = ; &= nbsp; &nb= sp; Charity A. L. Willis
&nb= sp; = ; &= nbsp; &nb= sp; = ; &= nbsp; &nb= sp; Recording Secretary
BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING/April 26, 2005