BOS Minutes 06-21-2005

APPROVED

TOWN OF PELHAM

BOARD OF SE= LECTMEN MEETING

MINUTES

June 21, 2005

APPROVED = July 5, 2005

CALL TO ORDER

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

PRESENT:

Mr. Victor Danevich, Mr. Harold Lynde, Mr. Jean-Guy Bergeron, Mr. Edmund Gleason, Mr. Tom Domenico, Mr. Tom Gaydos, Town Administrator

Also present:

ABSENT:

Members of the press and general public.

None

MINUTES RE= VIEW

June 7, 2005

MOTION:<= o:p>

(Gleason/Domenico) To approve the June 7, 2005 meeting minut= es as amended. <= /p>

=

VOTE:

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

The amendments to the minutes were as follows: page 1 – insert the date June 11, 2005 for the announcement of the Bike Rode= o; under Open Forum – insert ‘Eagle Scout rank’ to the following: ‘…outstanding achievement in the Eagle Scout rank’; page 2 – insert the word and ‘committee since 1999 and given..’ ; the name ‘Antinarella’ shall be corrected; Ms.= Deb Boucher (Citizen of the Year) was amended to read ‘Ms. Deb Boucher (Postal Employee); page 5 – the word junkyard replaced the word Town ‘….&nbs= p; She said the junkyard co= uld operate…’; page 7 the sentence reading ‘He reviewed the i= tems listed by Mr. Gaydos and noted for each category determined the money would have to be allocated to the appropriate department.’ was amended to r= ead ‘He reviewed the other items for consideration listed by Mr. Gaydos a= nd noted for each category identified the money would have to be allocated to = the appropriate department’; the sentence reading ‘He believed that this was one of the conditions where both the Budget Committee and Selectme= n’s approval was needed on the ballot.’ was amended to read ‘. He believed that requested operati= onal budget would require both the Budget Committee and Selectmen’s approval.’; item #4 listed by Mr. Domenico reading ‘4) renting = the Highway Department vehicle $25,000 (conscience of the fact…’ was amended to read ‘4) subcontracting the Highway Department vehicle $25= ,000 (conscious of the fact…’; page 8 under MtBE review the word ‘disus’ was corrected to read ‘discuss’; under the discussion regarding the signalization of = Town Center - the words ‘federal money’ was amended to read ‘s= tate money’; the sentence reading ‘none of the questions talked about moving the fire station’ was amended to read ‘none of the discussions addressed moving the fire station’; page 9 – the wo= rd ‘voted’ was amended to read ‘vote’; page 10 – under Roll Call for Non-Public Session, Mr. Gleason voted no.

OPEN FORUM=

None.

APPOINTMEN= TS

Naming Com= mittee, Judge Michael Jones & Bonnie Ward

Judge Michael Jones and Ms. Bonnie Ward met with the Selectmen on behalf of the Naming Rights Committee. He said the Selectmen had asked for volunteers to work on/draft a Naming Rights Policy, which had been done and provided to the Selectmen. Ju= dge Jones and Ms. Ward discussed the categories and language contained within t= he document. Mr. Danevich said t= he Selectmen would review the document and at some point in time would adopt i= t formally. He thanked the committee for their= hard work and volunteerism.

Waiver of = Article K, Paul Zarnowski, Health Officer

MOTION:<= o:p>

The Selectmen shall convene as the Board of Health.

VOTE:

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

The Selectmen convened as the Board of Health, with He= alth Officer Paul Zarnowski as Chairman. Mr. Zarnowski said a waiver for Article K (Section 295-17)was reques= ted to convert a septic system use as a seasonal to a year-round and to convert= a seasonal dwelling to year-round for Map 24 Lot 12-83 (12 Little Island Park – Mr. Ross Sargent). He= said the applicant was seeking the waiver in accordance with Section 295-17 which go= verned conversions to Article K. This Section requires a 2/3 vote b= y the Board of Health to grant the waiver.

Mr. Joseph Maynard of Benchmark Engineering, represent= ing Mr. Ross Sargent, met with the Board of Health to discuss the waiver reques= t to Article K – Section 295-17. He said they were seeking to convert the property from seasonal to year-round; all Article K and state of New Hampshire requirements would be met to satisfy the conversion regulations. He was informed = unless they came for the waiver request, they could not put as a statement of fact= on the plan that they were converting from seasonal to year-round. He said Mr. Zarnowski had reviewed= the plan and was satisfied that it met all the requirements; the plan was ready= to go to the state, but they felt they should request the waiver first so they didn’t have to apply to the state twice.

Mr. Lynde asked if they had permission to convert from seasonal to year-round. Mr. Zarnowski said per Section 295 the applicant needed to come before the Boar= d of Health for a 2/3 vote. He sai= d the Health Officers (Board of Health) had to certify that it met the criteria f= or Article K. Mr. Lynde question= ed if a variance was needed. Mr. Zarnowski said he couldn’t find anything that covered it. Mr. Gleason believed it would have= to go before the Board of Adjustment because a non-conforming lot would be expand= ed (the setback and frontage requirements were not met). Mr. Maynard said they would be imp= roving the building outline by bringing it into conformance with current setback requirements. He said they we= re willing to raze the existing (non-conforming) building and build new within= the property setbacks required by the Town.&nb= sp; Mr. Gleason said the issue was if the applicant would be expanding a current non-conforming lot. M= r. Lynde and Mr. Danevich also believed the applicant needed to go before the Board of Adjustment. Mr. Zarn= owski said if the applicant didn’t show the location of the new building, t= he plan could be approved as seasonal only.&n= bsp; Mr. Zarnowski said he would suggest that the applicant speak to the Board of Adjustment. Mr. Mayn= ard said he tried seeking a direct answer, but had been unsuccessful; the only thing he found in the Town Ordinances was the waiver to Article K, Section 295-17. He said he would like= to go before the Board of Adjustment with the Article K waiver taken care of. Mr. Zarnowski said the Board could= grant a conditional approval based on the outcome from the Board of Adjustment. Mr. Gaydos suggested it be subject= to other applicable land-use boards. There was further discussion regarding the application.

Mr. Bergeron said based on his experience he didn̵= 7;t feel that the process was being done in the correct order. He felt the applicant needed to go before the Board of Adjustment.

Mr. Zarnowski asked if there other septic related ques= tions, other than the applicant going before the Board of Adjustment. Mr. Lynde questioned what waiver w= as being requested. Mr. Zarnowsk= i said it wasn’t a waiver, but rather to convert, an approval (by 2/3 vote of Board of Health) which says the Article K criteria is met. Mr. Danevich believed a waiver was needed for the well radius. M= r. Zarnowski said the well wouldn’t require a waiver because it was exis= ting prior to 1989. He said there = may be an implied easement for the existing well.=

Mr. Gleason said if the Board was solely looking at the septic system, it would be different, however that wasn’t the case, t= he footprint was going to be expanded and the current use was being changed from seasona= l to year-round. He didn’t f= eel that the front setbacks would be met. Mr. Zarnowski said the Board could approve subject to Board of Adjustment approval and meeting all other criteria. Mr. Maynard said because they were unable to obtain an opinion from the Planning Director as to what course to take, the only one they could see in the book was Article K, Section 295-17.

Mr. Bergeron questioned how the applicant should move forward. There was a discussi= on regarding the course of action the applicant should take. A majority of the Board felt the applicant had to go before the Board of Adjustment.

MOTION:<= o:p>

(Lynde/Bergeron) To adjourn the Board of Health.

VOTE:

(6-0-0) The motion carri= ed.

The Selectmen reconvened.

Continuati= on of Junkyard License Applications Coombs & Gendron

Mr. Bergeron recused himself.

Coombs Used A= uto Parts, 415 Mammoth Road, Pelham

Mr. Gaydos said he had been asked for clarification of= two items, the first being the Fire Inspector John Hodge sign off sheet and the second was if the fence had been completed. He said Mr. Hodge indicated that t= he items on the sign off sheet that were not checked off were not applicable t= o the Coombs’ junkyard business. Mr. Gaydos said the fence had been completed. There no remaining items.

Mr. Gleason asked if any action would be taken regardi= ng the lot line adjustment. Mr. Gayd= os said the matter before the Board was the licensing, the matter of the fence could still be brought up. Mr. Gleason questioned if it had been ascertained that the fence was on Town property. Mr. Gaydos said it appeared that the fence was on Town property.

Mr. Lynde believed there was an agreement from the Coo= mbs that they agreed to the suggested lot line change presented by Mr. William Hayes and the Town would proceed with that at some point in the future. Ms. Paula Morse (Coombs’ old= est daughter) answered yes.

MOTION:<= o:p>

(Lynde/Domenico) To grant a one-year junkyard licens= e to Coombs Used Auto Parts valid through March 31, 2006.

ROLL CALL V= OTE:

Mr. Domenico-Yes; Mr. Ly= nde-Yes; Mr. Gleason-Yes; Mr. Danevich-Yes

F. Gendron &a= mp; Co., 11-13 Hobbs Road, Pelham

Mr. Gaydos said he had been asked for clarification of= three items: 1) clarification of Fire Inspector John Hodge’s report – Inspector Hodge indicated that Section 7 & 9 were not applicable to Mr. Gendron’s recycling business; 2) Any inspection regarding what was in= side the trailers – Mr. Gaydos said when the state did their inspection th= ey inspected inside the trailers and found scrap metal of a mechanical nature;= 3) from the states point of view on May 21, 2006 a written plan for removing all materials (including inside the building) shall be submitted and complied w= ith by August 21, 2006 – the state is prepared to move forward if the two dates were not complied with; further the state indicated if the Town decid= ed not to issue a permit they expected the Town to take action because the sta= te would not.

Mr. Lynde felt the Board’s position should be th= e same as over the last several years, which was to take no action.

Mr. Gaydos said there was one other item questioned, w= hich was whether there was a certified plot plan. He said he had a certified plot pl= an on file, but was not aware of the significance of a plot plan that would eithe= r be allowed, or not allowed.

Mr. Gleason was concerned that the state in previous t= imes had issued licenses and this was a new arena for the Selectmen. He didn’t know what obligati= ons the Town would have under that provision.&= nbsp; He was reluctant to grant a license, or to continue the way the Town had. He said in the courtR= 17;s opinion this was a public nuisance and despite that fact, the Town had allo= wed it to continue which was inconsistent with what the court and tax payers contended. Mr. Gleason felt t= here had been a demonstrated unwillingness to act in good faith (and cited examp= les of such). He saw no basis to = grant a license and was prepared to put forth a motion to deny a license.

PUBLIC I= NPUT

Mr. Roland Raza, 1 Hobbs Road, asked to see a copy of the certifi= ed plot plan. He pointed out tha= t any material within fifteen feet was a violation; placing material in the trail= er was circumventing the intent. Mr. Gaydos provided a copy of the certified plot plan. Mr. Raza pointed out that the plan submitted to the Town by Mr. Gendron was the exact plan he was told he could not use by the Federal Government. He noted that the plan submitted was page 2 of 2; however, he had pa= ge 1 of 2, which indicated the certified plot plan was ‘preliminary’. He= read aloud a letter that was written to all the abutters that stated the site su= rvey had been done for the sole purpose of supporting and documenting the EPA’s clean-up activities and was not conducted to resolve any on-goi= ng property disputes; any property lines shown in disputed areas are considered preliminary and tentative. Mr= . Raza said the Board could ask Mr. Gendron if he had the site surveyed and certif= ied; he never did. He said a certi= fied plot plan had not been submitted, and said Mr. Gendron circumvented everything. He provided the T= own with a copy of page 1 of 2 for the files.&= nbsp; Mr. Gaydos said he would make a copy of the plan.

Mr. Fred Gendron, 13 Hobbs Road (applicant) addressed the Board. He said the plot plan was reviewed/stamped by a New Hampshire ce= rtified engineer. He believed the pla= n was acceptable.

Mr. Lynde confirmed with Mr. Gaydos that whether the T= own approved/disapproved a license, the state would continue to do what they cu= rrently were and Mr. Gendron would operate as he currently was. Mr. Gaydos understood that the sta= te had the consent decree and they were on their own time schedule. Mr. Lynde was not in favor of gran= ting a license because he didn’t feel Mr. Gendron would meet the criteria; he said if the Selectmen granted a license, Mr. Gendron would continue to oper= ate under the limits of the consent decree.&nb= sp; Mr. Lynde said the question had been raised regarding the storage of material within the trailers. Mr. Gaydos said Mr. Gendron was supposed to store scrap metal within the traile= rs, but no judgment had been passed as to where the trailers should be. Mr. Lynde questioned if the traile= rs were within the area outlined that prohibited storage of material. Mr. Gaydos said he was not aware t= hat the trailers were within the prohibited area.

Mr. Domenico said the issue was difficult. He said individuals in similar businesses had met with the Selectmen and the overriding theme of the other individuals was a willingness to comply and to work with the Town; this application showed a willingness to circumvent and find any/all available loopholes. He was not in favo= r of granting a license. He also believed the consent decree was clear that the owner could not operate if a license was not obtained from the local licensing authority. In good faith, Mr. Domenico said he could not support a license and believed he would support a motion to sched= ule a hearing to deny.

Mr. Gleason reiterated his concerns: 1) per court ruli= ng problems from operation of junkyard and violations of conditions of original variance applicant is unsuitable for re-licensing; 2) state previously issu= ed licensing, this year the state expressed desire to get out of licensing whi= ch was new territory under the consent decree. Mr. Gleason was reluctant to open = the Town to unexpected contingencies and obligations; 3) application is junk or automobile recyclers facility license and under item #10 it was applicant’s intention to buy, sell and repair used cars and equipment= (in addition to the junkyard)– per the state letter dated July 15, 2004 c= ites that no vehicle recycling is allowed; 4) applicant had demonstrated unwillingness to comply with all provisions of Town regulations and consent decree – accepted white goods up until May 2004, conditions of origin= al variance weren’t met, trailer proximity to fencing was in violation to Town setback requirements (in April, 2003 the applicant to the Code Enforce= ment Officer the vehicles would be moved within 30-days but instead the applicant circumvented regulations by licensing trailers knowing there was no discern= able plan to ever use the trailers in the capacity they were licensed for); 5) significant abutter concerns; and 6) consent decree had one year remaining, after which the area is supposed to be shut down 100%. Mr. Gleason was in favor of not gr= anting a license because a message had to be sent.

Mr. Danevich said his opinion had not changed in the l= ast two years. He didn’t fe= el there was adequate evidence to support a renewal this year.

Mr. Gleason made a motion that the application for ren= ewal of a junkyard license for Mr. Gendron be denied on the basis that the evide= nce from public hearings, letters and statements from local and state officials, from public statements by abutters at various public meetings of the Board = of Selectmen and findings at the Superior and Supreme Courts of the state of N= ew Hampshire indicate without qualification that the junkyard in question is a public nuisance and thus does not meet the criteria of RSA 236:121 concerni= ng the granting or denial of applications.&nb= sp; Mr. Danevich clarified that per the ordinance a public hearing had t= o be formally scheduled for the public hearing for consideration of denial of the junkyard permit.

MOTION:<= o:p>

(Gleason/Domenico) To formally schedule the public h= earing for consideration of denial of the F. Gendron & Co. recycling and junkyard permit on July 5, 2005.<= /u>

ROLL CALL V= OTE:

Mr. Domenico-Yes; Mr. Ly= nde-Yes; Mr. Gleason-Yes; Mr. Danevich-Yes

Mr. Danevich asked Mr. Gaydos to formally post the pub= lic hearing.

Mr. Bergeron returned to the Board.

PUBLIC HEA= RING – Discretionary Preservation Easements – Luce: Map 42 Lot 10-18= 0; Law: Map 22 Lot 7-1

Mr. Gaydos quoted a few sections of RSA 79-D, to see h= ow each application reflected such. He said the Selectmen had the ability to abate/exempt from 25%-75% of the asse= ssed value based on the appearance and structural integrity of the building. He said there had been two applica= tions one property was valued at $7000 (current tax $209) and the other was value= d at $14,000 (current tax $417). <= /p>

Mr. Gaydos began by reviewing the application for the = barn on the Luce property located at 55 Jericho Road.= He said the Selectmen had to decide how they would like to proceed.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>

Mr. Domenico questioned what would happen in the event= the property was sold. Mr. Gaydos= said the easement would come to the Town for a period of ten years.

Mr. Gleason questioned to whom the responsibility woul= d fall to assess the property. Mr. G= aydos said the Selectmen were the assessors of the Town and could solicit a recommendation. He said this = was the first time this was being reviewed.&nb= sp; Mr. Gleason said if an exception were to be granted he would want so= me sort of basis for which range. He would prefer a recommendation from the Assessing Department. Mr. Gaydos said the current questi= on was whether the Board felt there was a public benefit to be gained by granting = an exemption.

Mr. Lynde was impressed by the fact that the relativel= y new owners had made great effort to keep the barn in good shape and that the ba= rn was noted in the Reflections book as being an old barn in Town. Given these things, Mr. Lynde was amenable to granting some kind of Farm Preservation Tax Incentive because an interest was given to preserving the barn which had some historical interes= t to the Town.

Mr. Gleason didn’t feel the Selectmen should rul= e on the application at this time; the issue is whether the Board wanted to grant this type of exemption and if so, there should be some sort of input regard= ing their considered value. Mr. G= aydos said per the law, each application should be considered upon its own merits= and judged in accordance with the statute.&nbs= p;

Mr. Bergeron was in favor of the incentive to preserve= some of the places. He supported s= eeking guidance from the Assessor’s office.= Mr. Domenico was also in favor of seeking guidance from the Assessor= ’s office. On a side note, Mr. Domenico felt it would be to have the Historical Society work with the owne= rs to develop a one-page history of the parcel. Mr. Lynde suggested enlisting the Historical Society’s help in completing the checklist document. Mr. Danevich said he didn’t = want to create another entity to manage a process that was the Selectmen’s jurisdiction.

There was unanimous support of the easement. Mr. Gaydos was asked to have the Assessor’s office review/fill out the document and re-present it back= to the Selectmen with a recommendation if they felt it met the exemption.

The two public hearings were formally continued to the= July 5, 2005 mee= ting.

Ms. Carolyn Law, 9 Atwood Road questioned what the term of the agreement would be. Mr. Gaydos understood that part of the application was indicating the length of time t= he easement would be placed on the property.&= nbsp; He reviewed the law and said it stated ten or more years and could be done in perpetuity if the applicant wanted.

OTHER BUSI= NESS

Special To= wn Meeting Content

Mr. Gleason said there were four distinct bids from fo= ur reputable suppliers with varying degrees of competence/conditions in the proposals. He and Mr. Gaydos = tried to take the base proposal and equalize them by adding relevant factors that had to be considered.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Mr. Gleason said each proposal had= been modified to come up with all the conditions they felt were required to get through the revaluation to come up with an accurate bottom line number. He felt the numbers could be defen= ded under scrutiny and wanted to protect the vendors by not giving the numbers = out until such time that they were able to make an informed selection. Mr. Gaydos discussed what costs we= re included in the bids. He said= they had to make sure that the number would work with the assumptions that they made. He proposed the cost as= being $450,000. Mr. Gleason said th= at number would not be exceeded.

Mr. Danevich said there were two other items to be considered. He said there had= been a significant increase in fuel costs between the 2004 prices and the current price. He said there had been= a catastrophic failure in the Highway Department; the truck was one of the ma= jor snow plowing trucks. He said = Mr. Gaydos had been asked to provide data/justification for consideration; his intent was to get a consensus to give Mr. Gaydos direction.

Mr. Gaydos began by discussing the fuel and the method= he used in calculating the number. He said there would be a $16,345 shortfall for heating oil. The projected shortfall for propan= e was $2074; the projected shortfall for diesel fuel was 12,701; the projected shortfall for unleaded fuel 16,400. He requested that the Board raise a total of $47,520 for fuel at the Special Meeting.

Mr. Gaydos then discussed Highway Department truck. He said in late April, 2005 the 19= 91 6-wheel truck was taken to a garage with an inoperable engine. He said it was recommended to repl= ace the engine for a cost of $12,100; it was noted that additional parts would = have to be removed to replace the engine and was not guaranteed that those parts could be replaced if they were severely worn or corroded. It was likely that an additional $= 7900 would be spent replacing worn parts. There were four options presented for consideration: 1) do nothing; = 2) repair existing truck; 3) subcontract the route $30,200 (which would require two trucks); or 4) purchase a new truck (was going to be presented for the = 2006 Town meeting)- $92,397. Purch= asing the truck was recommended by Mr. Gaydos and Highway Road Agent Don Foss as being the most economical over a ten year period.

Mr. Gleason felt the most logical and economical appro= ach was to ask the voters to approve a truck.&= nbsp;

Mr. Bergeron began by saying he felt it was beneficial= to the Town to hire a company to do the revaluation. He discussed his position as Selec= tmen and the types of items he had voted on in the past. He questioned if the money for the= fuel and truck could be made up in= other areas. He believed there was a grant (mentioned at a previous meeting) that would take care of the fuel costs. He said based on his e= xperience, he was reluctant to vote any other items except for the revaluation.

Mr. Domenico said every department had been affected a= nd Mr. Gaydos was asked to identify an additional $100,000 in cuts; these cuts wou= ld be more unpleasant than the last round.&nb= sp; He believed he was in a position to effectively and in good faith advocate what had been presented before the Selectmen as the warrant for the Special Election. He supporte= d all three items.

Mr. Gleason reiterated his position.

Mr. Lynde felt the Selectmen had the obligation to the= Town to ensure that it ran properly and to provide the essential services. He reviewed the options presented = by Mr. Gaydos. He felt the Selectmen= owed it to the Town to put forward the proposed figure and then take on the task= of accurately/thoroughly explaining the rationale.

Mr. Danevich said he had been a strong advocate for pu= tting forth only the revaluation, however his position had changed after having t= he opportunity to discuss the situation/details with the Town Administrator. He said he was in concurrence that= the best interest for the Town would be fund the revaluation itself. He felt comfortable with the backu= p data regarding the fuel and believed it was the best estimate for now. Last, he regretted adding the high= way truck, but would support the request to purchase a truck. He said the next opportunity would= be to go to the Budget Committee for feedback.&n= bsp;

Mr. Bergeron wasn’t clear on the fuel cost and questioned if $47,500 was still needed after the grant (discussed at a prev= ious meeting) was applied. Mr. Gay= dos said the grant from the federal government had not been received yet. The amount would be approximately $40,000-$45,000; the Selectmen would have to hold a public hearing to accept the money and expend it. Mr. Bergeron questioned if $77,300 could be cut and still have safety based upon the new numbers provided by Mr. Gaydos.&nb= sp; Mr. Gaydos said they could always hit the numbers and said the quest= ion was when the other cuts would be made.&nbs= p; Mr. Gleason said some of the FEMA grant money was going to address safety items (i.e. line markings and bush cutting) and therefore would not = be totally available to offset fuel costs.&nb= sp; Mr. Gaydos said the money was going to be used as a buffer.

There was further discussion regarding the situation a= nd how the Selectmen wanted to proceed.

MOTION:<= o:p>

(Domenico/Gleason) To move forward with a Special To= wn Meeting that would cover: 1) revaluation of all property in the Town of Pelham per state requirements with an estimated cost of $450,000; 2) incr= ease in fuel cost since the default budget was established approximately two y= ears ago with an estimated cost of $47,500; 3) a highway truck purchase recognizing that this is the best economic decision before the Board at t= his time for $94,000. The warra= nt will read as follows: Shall the T= own raise and appropriate as an operating budget, not including appropriation= s by special warrant articles and other appropriations voted separately, the amounts set forth on the budget posted with the warrant or as amended by = vote of the first session, for the purposes set forth herein, totaling $8,470,374? Should this art= icle be defeated, the operating budget shall be $7,878,874, which would amount= to an increase of additional funds $591,500.

ROLL CALL V= OTE:

Mr. Domenico-Yes; Mr. Bergeron-No; Mr. Lynde-Yes; Mr. Gleason-Yes; Mr. Danevich-Yes

Mr. Gaydos was asked to prepare for Budget Committee r= eview and assist Mr. Gleason with any backup data. Mr. Gleason confirmed that the bal= lot would carry the annotation ‘approved by the Selectmen’ and ‘approved by the Budget Committee’. Mr. Gaydos said it would if it was= the vote of the Board. There was = no objection.

Priority L= ist Update

The Selectmen reviewed/updated their Priority List and decided which items could be consolidated.= Mr. Danevich said he would update the document, re-circulate to the Selectmen and post it on the web.

Codificati= on Project

Mr. Gaydos reviewed items 18-31 with the Selectmen. There were no objections to the suggested changes.

TOWN ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT/SELECTMEN’S REPORTS

Mr. Gaydos reported that the furnace at the Annex fail= ed (had a major crack) and was not worth repairing. To avoid a situation of it acciden= tally being turned on, the furnace was cut and removed from the building. Mr. Gaydos said the Selectmen need= ed to discuss all options and wanted to include an agenda item for the July 19, 2005 m= eeting.

Mr. Danevich said the Skate Park was a great success. He said = an issue had risen regarding the number of out-of-state people coming up. He said some disciplinary action h= ad been taken and if the number of people using the park, that shouldn’t= be there were reduced it may help the situation. The Police Chief, Park & Recre= ation Director, Mr. Gaydos and Mr. Danevich went to the park, made observations a= nd had discussions with people using the park. They came to an agreement that if a 30-day restriction was placed on out-of-state people and restrict the park’s use to New Hamps= hire based residents it may help the situation.= Mr. Danevich asked the Selectmen if they would accept the restriction. Mr. Bergeron ask= ed how much time the Police would spend monitoring. Mr. Gaydos said the officers revie= wed the area on their way in, or out of the Police station. There was further discussion, and = no objection to the restriction; Mr. Gaydos would communicate such to the Poli= ce Chief and the Park & Recreation Director.

Mr. Gaydos discussed the warrantee deed that would be = presented/recorded to transfer the Old Town Hall to the VF= W Post 10722. He said there were two recommendations: 1) regarding consideration – it was noted there was = no consideration paid; 2) Town named as additional insured on casualty insuran= ce policy. There was no objection. Mr. Gaydos said if= the Board concurred, he would like to take the final document to the VFW and indicate that a certificate of insurance should be provided by July 5, 2005 so = the deed could be transferred. There w= as no objection. Mr. Bergeron said = a question was raised if the building would be donated to the local post or national organization and wanted to know if it had been resolved. Mr. Danevich believed it was clari= fied when Mr. Gleason (at a previous meeting) had read aloud the warrant article (for the donation of the = Old Town Hall building)= that stated it would be deeded to Post 10722.&n= bsp; Mr. Gleason offered that Attorney Rattigan had offered the opinion t= hat the Warrant Article, as written, intended transfer to the Local Post, not t= he National Organization.

Mr. Domenico and Mr. Lynde had no reports.

Mr. Bergeron said at the last NRPC Commissioners meeti= ng it was announced that Mr. Tom Collins was nominated to serve on the NRPC Execu= tive Committee. Congratulations we= re extended to Mr. Collins.

Mr. Gleason said an editorial had been done regarding non-public session and asked that the Selectmen review the policies and procedures covering such.

Mr. Danevich informed that the next meeting would be <= st1:date Year=3D"2005" Day=3D"5" Month=3D"7" w:st=3D"on">July 5, 2005. He discussed what items would be c= ontained on the agenda.

ADJOURNMEN= T

MOTION:<= o:p>

(Lynde/Bergeron) To adjourn the meeting.

VOTE:

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

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:15 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