APPROVED
TOWN OF
BOARD OF SE= LECTMEN MEETING
MINUTES
APPROVED –
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
|
MOTION:<= o:p> |
(Gleason/Bergeron) To approve the |
|
VOTE: |
(5-0-0) The motion carri= ed. |
The amendments to the minutes were as follows: page 2,=
1st
paragraph – the word Chairman was replaced with ‘Chairperson’; page 2, 1=
st
paragraph, 4th sentence will end with the word ‘prizes’ – the fifth se=
ntence
will begin with the word ‘Inf=
ormation’;
page 8, 4th paragraph – the words ‘it’ and ‘be’ were inserted as follows:
‘...monitoring the site found it to
be alright…’; 5
MANIFEST R=
EVIEW
Payroll - $72,453.55
Payables - $666,043.14
This week’s Payroll – $75,585
Payables - $110,443
OPEN FORUM=
None.
APPOINTMEN=
TS
Introducti=
on of
new Police Officers
Police Chief Evan Haglund met with the Selectmen and
introduced the two new Police Officer Candidates. Mr. Mike Marshall came forward,
introduced himself and discussed his background and reasons for wanting to =
work
with Pelham. Ms. Mia Yeats al=
so
came forward, introduced herself and discussed her background and reasons f=
or
wanting to work with Pelham. =
Both
candidates would start
Resignatio=
n of
Dispatcher Goldman
Police Chief Evan Haglund read aloud Dispatcher John Goldman’s resignation letter. He then read aloud his response to Mr. Goldman’s letter which = was submitted to Mr. Gaydos and the Selectmen.= Mr. Lynde questioned if it would be appropriate for the Board of Selectmen to draft a cover letter and forward the letters of Chief Haglund = and Mr. Goldman to all the Town’s State Representatives and Senators. Chief Haglund thought that would be appropriate. There was no obj= ection by the Selectmen. Mr. Danevic= h said he would work with Mr. Gaydos to draft a letter.
|
MOTION:<= o:p> |
(Lynde/Gleason) To accept, with regret, the resignat=
ion of
Dispatcher John Goldman from the Police Department. |
|
VOTE: |
(5-0-0) The motion carri= ed. |
The Selectmen asked Chief Haglund to pass their deep r= egrets and best wishes to Mr. Goldman.
Planning D=
irector
Introduction
Mr. Danevich said the Selectmen had been meeting with candidates over the past few weeks and had come to a majority consensus on = the current applicant. He introdu= ced Mr. Jeff Gowan as the new Planning Director. Mr. Gowan discussed his qualificat= ions and his current/past involvements with Town boards.
|
MOTION:<= o:p> |
(Domenico/Gleason) To ratify the Selectmen’s v=
ote of
|
|
VOTE: |
(5-0-0) The motion carri= ed. |
Proposed R=
oad
Layout Across
Mr. Gaydos briefed the Board regarding the general
process. He said he was conta=
cted
by representatives of Mr. Harris.
He said there was a subdivision off
Mr. Peter Zohdi of Herbert Associates presented the ro= ad layout to the Selectmen. He reviewed the area, the current road system and proposed connectivity. He noted that the topography of th= e land was gentle and would go with the road grade. Mr. Danevich asked what would happ= en if the Town didn’t grant access across the parcel. Mr. Zohdi said there would be two cul-de-sacs. He noted that the right-of-way shown was requested at the time the subdivision was done. There was a small piece of land, o= r a portion of which, that at one= time Mr. Harris had discussed as b= eing potentially deeded to the Town. Mr. Danevich asked what exchange or benefit the Town would get for granting acc= ess. Mr. Zohdi said maybe the portion o= f the land discussed. He said the discussion was preliminary and wanted the opportunity to have a discussion = with his client and Mr. Gaydos. Mr. Danevich asked if it was appropriate to have two Selectmen represent the Selectmen. Mr. Gaydos answered yes. He felt the property sho= uld be reviewed. He asked for the si= ze of lot 12-214. Mr. Zohdi believe= d it was approximately 10 acres, but didn’t have the full boundary. Mr. Danevich said he would be inte= rested in walking the site. A date w= ould be scheduled.
Mr. Lynde asked if there were any wetlands involved.
Mr. Danevich said the Selectmen would work with Mr. Ga= ydos to schedule a site walk.
Gendron Ju=
nk Yard
– Continuation of Public Hearing
Mr. Danevich said the public hearing had been left wit= h the Selectmen pulling together a list of non-compliance issues.
Mr. Bergeron stepped down.
Mr. Domenico said since the last meeting Mr. Gendron h= ad received a letter from the Department of Environmental Services (‘DES’) citing several material violations of the existing cons= ent decree and although the Town was not a party to the consent decree, it prov= ided more information about the type of situation being dealt with. He highlighted the key points of t= he DES document and said he had serious concerns about granting a license for the facility to continue to operate.
Mr. Gaydos informed that Town Building/Code Inspector = Roland Soucy had inspected the property in relation to the seven items listed on t= he variance granted in 1974. He = said there was a question regarding storage within 15-feet of the shore of the brook. He said he was on the abutting property with Mr. Danevich and through a hole in the fence witness= ed some materials/items against the back of the fence. He said Mr. Soucy had indicated th= at the brook was not directly adjacent to the back of the fence.
Mr. Gleason said Mr. Soucy indicated that there was a = variety of wild trees/shrubs and asked if they were planted by the applicant, or growing wild. He said the 1974 variance indicated that trees will be planted to provide a visual barrier of substantial height in the future. He wanted to know if (in Soucy’s opinion) the trees had been planted to comply with the request of the board or if they had been allowed= to grow randomly as a matter of nature’s course. Mr. Soucy said his guess was its j= ust wild growth over the years in that area.&n= bsp;
Mr. Domenico asked if the fence was 12-feet on all sides. Mr. Soucy answered no.= He believed the variance required = the fence to be 12-feet high on the brook side. He said the berm looked to be eigh= t-feet with the fence on top of it. =
Mr. Danevich said when he and Mr. Gaydos were observin= g the site they saw items/debris that were clearly within 15-feet. He wanted to know how it could be = an oversight in that area. Mr. S= oucy said if the shore of the brook was on the other side of the berm, and the b= ase of the berm was 20-feet plus wide, the storage would be further than 15-feet from the shore of the brook. = He said this was by observing the area without an instrument and shooting the lines. Mr. Danevich then addr= essed number seven of the 1974 variance which stated all buildings and fences vis= ible to the public shall be maintained in an attractive manner. He questioned what ‘attracti= ve manner’ meant to Mr. Soucy. Mr. Soucy felt fencing on property lines should be fencing that was normally found in a residential area. Mr. Danevich asked for Mr. Soucy’s opinion of industrial fencing. Mr. Soucy said that = was not fencing normally found in a residential area. Mr. Danevich said he had difficult= y with what he observed on the site and had trouble agreeing that the applicant had met the original variance agreement (1974). Mr. Soucy agreed regarding the fen= cing and felt it should be taken care of, and felt that the trailers should be moved. He believed the varian= ce should have been better defined at the time. Mr. Gleason said the variance cond= itions were issued in 1974 and if the conditions were inappropriate or contested, = it should have been brought up prior to now.&= nbsp;
Mr. Danevich asked Mr. Soucy if he had a copy of the c=
onsent
decree available to him or if he had ever requested a copy. Mr. Soucy said he didn’t hav=
e a
copy and didn’t believe he had requested a copy because he was not
involved. Mr. Danevich asked =
Mr.
Soucy what he reviewed when going on the site annually. Mr. Soucy said walked through the
property and tried to make sure there were no contaminants or materials that
might cause harm to the environment, look at any approvals that the junk ya=
rd
may have and make sure the operation had not expanded beyond what is
allowed. Mr. Danevich asked i=
f soil
or water samples were collected.
Mr. Soucy answered no. Mr.
Danevich asked if batteries or chemicals are observed. Mr. Soucy said he had seen batteri=
es
stored inside the building. M=
r.
Danevich asked what Mr. Soucy looked for when reviewing a site. Mr. Soucy said he reviewed the gen=
eral
condition of a site and make sure there is nothing that might contaminate t=
he
property and whatever he had to work with (guidelines) for approval. Mr. Danevich asked if Mr. Soucy re=
viewed
the site against the Health Ordinance.&nbs=
p;
Mr. Soucy answered no; Health Officer Paul Zarnowski reviewed it.
Mr. Lynde questioned how it was known that the fence w= as placed along the portion of the applicant’s land that abutted the brook. Mr. Soucy said he didn’t know if that was known or if a certified plot plan existed for such.
Mr. Domenico noted that Mr. Gendron shook his head no =
when
asked if there were batteries on the site. Attorney George Basbanes, appear=
ing
for Mr. Fred Gendron (applicant) said there were batteries on the site, whi=
ch
were allowed. He said they ha=
d a
copy of the letter sent (
Attorney Basbanes addressed the issue of the tree barrier. He said it was obvio= us to him that in 1974 there were no trees to provide a barrier, and now, in 2005, there were trees there. He po= inted out that the state had tougher conditions than the Town; under the state, M= r. Gendron had 30 days to correct deficiencies, per the Town By-Laws, Mr. Gend= ron would have 90-days for compliance. <= /span>
Mr. Domenico asked what regular maintenance Mr. Gendro= n did on the fence. Attorney Basban= es said he didn’t know. He questioned how a fence was maintained on a regular basis. He said if there was a problem, gi= ve them 90 days to correct, and they would.&n= bsp; He said Mr. Gendron wouldn’t be there much longer; the consent decree would expire next year and Mr. Gendron would be out of business.
Mr. Lynde referred to the state’s letter in conn= ection with storage in the remedial area. Attorney Basbanes said if what they said (in the letter) was accurat= e, it would be removed, or the state would bring him to court. He said it appeared to him that th= e only thing was whether or not the fencing was attractive. He said if the Town didn’t f= eel it was attractive, a letter should sent informing of such giving 90 days to ma= ke it attractive. Mr. Lynde aske= d if Attorney Basbanes and his client would accept a definition of what the Town thought was attractive. Attor= ney Basbanes said he hadn’t heard a definition. Mr. Lynde felt as a minimum the fe= nce should be free-standing, free of any writings and of a neutral color. Attorney Basbanes said he didnR= 17;t know what the fence looked like, he had never seen it.
Mr. Gleason wanted to know if the fence that bordered = the brook attained the height of 12-feet. Attorney Basbanes believed Mr. Soucy said it did. Mr. Gleason asked Mr. Gendron if h= e had planted trees. Mr. Gendron sa= id the berm was considered part of the fence; the reason the berm was raised and t= he state paid for the fill to do so was because they didn’t want a free standing fence (wooden portion) more than 10-feet high. He said he was given a check to ra= ise the berm from the 2-ft.-3ft. height that he had to the 6ft.-8ft. height with the 10ft. of wood on top. He = said according to the statutes the definition of fencing could be anything, tree= s, growth, building, as long as it stops visibility. Mr. Gleason said the discussion wa= s in reference to the variance, not the consent decree. He referenced Item #1 of variance = (fence 12ft. in height) and asked Mr. Gendron if he met the requirement. Mr. Gendron believed he did. Mr. Gleason asked if the state pro= vided any written documentation that they would supercede the Town’s requirement. Mr. Gendron answ= ered no. He said the berm was cons= idered part of the fence; the fence and the berm were put up before the variance w= as in effect.
Mr. Danevich noted the following three items that he believed were not in compliance with the variance:
1) 12-foot fence; 2) storage of materials within 15-fe= et of the brook; and 3) buildings and fences visible to the public maintained in = an attractive manner. Attorney Basbanes said the report from Mr. Soucy indicated that nothing was being st= ored within 15-feet of the shore of the brook.&= nbsp; Mr. Danevich asked Mr. Gendron from his side of the fence, how he wo= uld know if something was stored within 15-feet of the brook. Mr. Gendron said it would be fairl= y easy to tell, something would have to be up on top of the berm to be within fift= een feet of the brook. He said th= ere was nothing on the berm. Mr. Danevich asked how far away the fence was from the brook. Mr. Gendron said the fence was pro= bably 10-feet from the brook. He sa= id if items (i.e. trailers) were touching the berm they would still be another 10-feet from the brook.
Mr. Domenico asked Mr. Gendron if he had planted trees= . Mr. Gendron answered yes. He said he planted trees three tim= es and had records that the state provided him with additional trees because the beavers destroyed the trees along the bottom of the berm. He said he put another row of tree= s at the top of the berm close to the fence and were probably thirty-five years old. Attorney Basbanes said he supposed the real question was if there was a barrier from the outside look= ing into the junk yard. He said M= r. Gendron indicated that the fence itself was sufficiently over twelve feet a= bove the basic ground level and was on top of the berm, which by itself was over= two or three feet. Mr. Gendron sa= id a lot of the fencing itself was probably that height.
Mr. Lynde felt using the fence as a basis (for denial)= would be tough argument to hold up. He said the concept was that the Board of Adjustment wanted a visual barrier.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> He said if the Board was going to = go down the path to deny they should be sure it would hold up and be prepared = to defend such. He said there we= re some ongoing problems and said the question the Board had to answer was if = Mr. Gendron complied with the state requirements, what the basis would be for denial. He felt at this point= in time that Mr. Gendron’s application for a junk yard license was incomplete because the Town didn’t have a valid certified plot plan.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> he said they had something the EPA= used, but didn’t feel that it qualified as a certification of the property bounds. Attorney Basbanes sai= d Mr. Gendron informed him that the plan the Town had on file said ‘preliminary’ on it, but that it was exactly the same plan he h= ad certified. He said if it was something that had to be corrected, he could assure the Board within 90-days they would have a certified plot plan.&nbs= p; Mr. Gaydos reviewed the plot plan submitted and confirmed that it st= ated ‘preliminary’; the plan also noted that Frederick Gendron’= ;s attorney as of date on plan has not provided information regarding recent c= ourt cases involving the property lines. He said it would be important for the Town to know the information.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Mr. Gaydos addressed the fence and= said it was deplorable, a portion of which was falling down. He felt it went against item #7 of= the variance ‘maintaining in an attractive manner’. He believed this was one reason Bo= ard members felt that there hadn’t been much willingness to take a step forward. He said having an ac= curate plot plan was a necessity. At= torney Basbanes believed the Town wanted the certified plot plan was for the meets= and bounds not the notes on the plan. Mr. Danevich asked Mr. Gendron if he disputed the boundaries. Mr. Gendron answered no. Mr. Danevich said he observed toda= y a yellow-capped stake, which Mr. Gendron’s fence seemed to exceed the s= take by approximately 2.5ft.-3ft. = Mr. Gendron said that was not true. He said the fencing in the rear was probably ten feet from his property line.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> He said some markers had been plac= ed by surveyors. Attorney Basbanes = said he didn’t know what the markers were there for, they could be wetland markers. Mr. Danevich strongly suggested that Attorney Basbanes walk the site. Mr. Gendron said when working with= a brook, brooks move, so they put markers in a place where they felt was not going to move and measured from that point to the brook. He said the marker had nothing to = do with the property line; it was just a marker (reference point). Mr. Lynde said it seemed without a proper survey of the property, an answer couldn’t be given if Mr. Gen= dron was complying with some of the conditions of the variance.
Mr. Danevich said there were four items there didnR= 17;t seem to be a consensus on: 1) variance agreement from 1974 – 12-foot fence; 2) Item #3 no cars, parts or metals of any sort, equipment being wit= hin 15-feet of the brook; 3) Item #7 all buildings, fences, visible matter to t= he public shall be maintained in an attractive manner; and 4) no certified plot plan.
Attorney Basbanes said as part of the Building Inspector’s duties are to inspect the property. He said the Building Inspector gav= e Mr. Gaydos a report dated today that said the fence had been installed, a berm existed, nothing was being stored within 15-feet of shore of the brook, the= re were no piles of materials in excess of 30-feet, the quonset hut had been remove= d, items #1 & #2 had been completed. He said he would urge his client if he had a fence that was falling = down and held up by rope to square it away because it was an irritant. He said if there was a problem, se= nd a notice and give 90-days to fix it; if it wasn’t, then if it wasn̵= 7;t the Town could do what it had to do. Mr. Danevich said the 90-day clause was intended for the issuance of= a temporary permit. Attorney Ba= sbanes understood that the 90-days were for the correction of violations.
Mr. Lynde thought when the Selectmen decided to hold t= he meeting tonight, it was with the intent to define for the applicant what conditions had to be met. Mr. Danevich asked if there was anything that prohibited an applicant from re-a= pplying if they were denied. Mr. Gayd= os answered no. Attorney Basbanes noted that a certified plot plan was not a condition of the variance, but rather a requirement of the Town’s By-Laws in which case Mr. Gendron = had to be given 90-days to correct it. He said the plan being complained about had been in the Town’s files since 2002.
Mr. Danevich recapped and said there was nothing stopp=
ing
Mr. Gendron in the ordinance that said he couldn’t reapply once he fe=
lt
he met all the conditions. Mr.
Gleason said he was uncomfortable taking any action until such time as the
remedy was provided to the state.
He didn’t feel it was appropriate to act until the state notif=
ied
the Town that the conditions of the consent decree had been fully
satisfied. If Mr. Gendron fai=
led to
take action within 30-days the state would shut him down. Attorney Basbanes read a portion o=
f the
letter (dated
Mr. Domenico said the one thing that concerned him abo=
ut a
denial was the clause in the consent decree with the state that indicates if
Mr. Gendron doesn’t obtain a license from the local governing authori=
ty,
he cannot operate within the bounds of the consent decree. He was concerned how it would affe=
ct the
ongoing issue identified in the
Mr. Lynde said the consent decree was between Mr. Gend= ron and the state. He said the To= wn should be aware because it affects what is on the site. He understood that the Selectmen w= ere going to tell Mr. Gendron the conditions he had to meet to qualify for a license. Mr. Domenico agreed,= but was concerned that the Town had taken extensive pains to separate from the = consent decree, but the core issue that the state showed up was due to pollution th= at Mr. Gendron caused in Pelham. He felt there had to be some recognition by the Board that the consent decree = was something to pay attention to. He said this wasn’t a junk yard owner who made one mistake; this was a pattern that required the Federal Government and the state to get involved = and the Selectmen shouldn’t ignore that fact. Attorney Basbanes discussed the is= sue and said if there was an eminent health hazard, then something would have t= o be done. He questioned what a fe= nce, a certified plan and trees had to do with the health and safety of the Town.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Mr. Danevich said they were all to= ols for protecting the Town.
Mr. Danevich informed that he wouldn’t be opening discussion to the public.
Mr. Domenico said Mr. Danevich and Mr. Gaydos had indi= cated information contrary to that information Mr. Soucy provided. He asked Mr. Soucy if he measured = the site. Mr. Soucy said he would= have preferred to all walk on the site, which would have worked better. He said the base of the berm had t= o be twenty (plus) feet wide, and based his opinion on the edge of the brook bei= ng at the edge of the outside of the berm.&nb= sp; Mr. Domenico confirmed if the Selectmen denied Mr. Gendron’s license, per the Town’s ordinance, he would have 90-days to comply wi= th the reasons for the denial and make reapplication. Mr. Gaydos said he could do it sooner.
Mr. Domenico made a motion to deny Mr. Gendron’s
application for a junk yard permit based upon the fact that: 1) the fences =
and
the buildings visible to the public are not maintained in an attractive man=
ner;
2) there is not a certified plot plan on file; 3) cars, parts, or metal of =
any
sort or equipment had been placed or stored within 15-feet from the shore of
the brook. He hoped to ascert=
ain
and determine through a site walk with Mr. Soucy and members of the Board t=
he
edge of the brook and where the nearest equipment was stored to it as well =
as
to verify the height of the rear fence and ensure it met the 12-foot
requirement as stipulated in the 1974 variance. Mr. Gleason seconded the motion.
|
MOTION:<= o:p> |
(Domenico/Gleason) To deny Mr. Gendron’s appli= cation for a junk yard permit based upon the fact that: 1) the fences and the bu= ildings visible to the public are not maintained in an attractive manner; 2) no certified plot plan on file; 3) cars, parts, or metal of any sort or equipment had been placed or stored within 15-feet from the shore of the brook. |
|
ROLL CALL V=
OTE: |
(4-0-0) Mr. Danevich-Yes=
; Mr.
Lynde-Yes; Mr. Domenico-Yes; Mr. Gleason-Yes |
Mr. Bergeron returned to the Board.
OTHER BUSI=
NESS
Communicat=
ion on
Town Deliberative Vote
Mr. Gaydos informed that the Deliberative Session had = been held, during which a flier had been circulated that answered a lot of questions. He said the same information was on the website and questioned if it should be sent to residents.
Mr. Gleason felt the Selectmen should distribute as mu= ch information as possible. He f= elt the overall cost impact had been somewhat neglected in the Selectmen’s discussions and believed it should be included in any information contempla= ted for circulation. There was a discussion regarding the cost impacts to residents and the effects in the e= vent the warrant article failed. I= t was decided that Mr. Danevich would work with Mr. Gaydos to draft an information sheet. Mr. Lynde felt it woul= d be worth while to include information on the actions taken by the Selectmen ov= er the past two and a half years in connection with the revaluation.
Mr. Gaydos said the intention was to provide a periodic update on how the revaluation process worked. Mr. Gleason said he wanted to reco= mmend that the Selectmen consider a warrant article for next year which would cov= er the total revaluation period (four or five years) and fund the total sum of money required and authorize = yearly expenditures against that. He= said he would like to get back to the current bidders and have them re-bid the package and add an option for subsequent revaluations at 25% per year. There was a brief discussion regar= ding the revaluation process.
Future Spa=
ce
Planning Discussion (
Mr. Gaydos said he had been tasked with coming up with=
a
plan to assess moving ahead with the unfinished areas of the
|
MOTION:<= o:p> |
(Bergeron/Gleason) To hire Castagna Consulting Group=
LLC
to establish a concept design and budget for the renovation of the six
unfinished class rooms at the |
|
VOTE: |
(5-0-0) The motion carri=
ed. |
Budget Ove=
rview
Mr. Gaydos reviewed the status of the department’= ;s budgets. The Selectmen discus= sed the schedule for reviewing department budgets.
Annual Sti=
cker
Check at Transfer Station
Mr. Danevich felt the Selectmen owed it to the residen=
ts to
ensure that the only ones using the Transfer Station were those who where
authorized. He suggested that=
the
Selectmen take shifts at the Transfer Station along with the Superintendent=
and
Police Detail to let residents know the Selectmen are involved. The Selectmen will be at the Trans=
fer
Station on
Annex Disc=
ussion
Mr. Gaydos discussed the issues surrounding the proble= ms at the Annex. He worked with Mr. Bergeron and the Joint Loss Safety Committee to review all Town buildings a= nd found some areas to be shocking. He said at the time the Annex was reviewed the Town had already moved out. He said there were over thirty ite= ms that were found to have problems. He said the Board had been questioned if they wanted to spend any mo= ney on the building. He said the = Fire Department Inspector John Hodge had a list of twelve items that needed attention. He felt PTV could continue to operate over the winter as it currently was. Mr. Gaydos felt where the status w= as for the future depended on what CERT wanted to do.
Mr. Bergeron hoped that there could be a partnership w= ith CERT regarding the use of the Annex. He said the Selectmen should discuss further and believed some of the items could be worked out with minimal cost.
Mr. Danevich said he would work with Mr. Gaydos over t= he next couple weeks to prepare a brief plan for Selectmen review.
TOWN
ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT/SELECTMEN’S REPORTS
Mr. Gaydos said over a number of years money had been = put aside for the purchase of an ambulance.&nb= sp; He said the chassis was wearing out, but the actual box was in good shape, therefore the Fire Chief was recommending that a new chassis be purc= hased and put the old box onto the new one. He read aloud the warrant article that authorized money to be put in= to the trust. He said the wordin= g had changed in the last two years; it requested money to be put into the trust,= but there was no wording to transfer the money. He said in round numbers there was $70,000 in the fund ($20,000 of which could not be transferred), leaving $58,000 available. He said the purchase order was for $32,540 and asked the Selectmen to authorize the transfer of those funds from the Trust Fund so they could order and pay for= the chasse.
Mr. Gleason made a motion to approve the transfer of $= 32,540 from the Ambulance Trust Fund for the purchase of a new chassis to replace = the existing chassis for safety reasons. Mr. Bergeron seconded the motion.&n= bsp; Mr. Lynde asked if the $32,540 would be the total cost (chassis and = work to replace), or just the cost for the chassis. Mr. Gaydos said it would be a down payment on the chassis and the ambulance remount project; the remainder wou= ld be approximately $15,000-$20,000. Mr. Lynde confirmed that the total project would be close to $50,000. Mr. Gaydos answered yes. Mr. Lynde asked how long= the unit would be out of service. Mr. Gaydos said they were looking to expedite the process. Mr. Lynde said he was a bit distur= bed at the way this was being presented and said normally the Selectmen had the opportunity to discuss further. He also didn’t know the Selectmen had the authority to take money out of= the trust fund without a Town Meeting. <= /span>
There was further discussion. Mr. Gaydos read aloud the Warrant Article (from 1992). Mr. Dane= vich suggested deferring the vote until the Fire Chief could discuss further with the Selectmen. The motion was= withdrawn.
Mr. Domenico thanked Mr. Jim Nagel of Chunky’s C=
inema
for providing water at the Deliberative Session. He then announced that the First A=
nnual
Concert on the Common would be held
Mr. Bergeron, Mr. Lynde and Mr. Gleason had no reports= .
Mr. Danevich said verbal notification was received that
$47,000 had been received in grants (Fire Chief,
ADJOURNMEN=
T
|
MOTION:<= o:p> |
(Gleason/Lynde) To adjourn the meeting. |
|
VOTE: |
(5-0-0) The motion carri=
ed. |
The meeting was adjourned at approximately
&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
BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING/August 16, 2005