SEL20100511

APPROVED

TOWN OF PELHAM

BOARD OF SE= LECTMEN MEETING

MINUTES

May 11, 2010

APPROVED &#= 8211; May 25, 2010

CALL TO ORDER – 6:30pm

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

PRESENT:

Mr. Douglas Viger, Mr. = Edmund Gleason, Mr. Robert Haverty, Mr. William McDevitt,

Mr. Harold Lynde (arriv= ed after the meeting commenced), Town Administrator

Tom Gaydos

ABSENT:

None.

MINUTES REVIEW

April= 27, 2010

MOTION:

(Gleason/Haver= ty) To approve the Ap= ril 27, 2010 meeting minutes as amended.

VOTE:

(3-0-1) The mo= tion carried. Mr. Viger abstaine= d.

OPEN FORUM

None.

APPOINTMENTS

Eagle Scout Project – John Andrew Nicholson: Safety Fence = for Raymond Park

Boy Scout John Andrew Nic= holson came forward and explained the details of his proposed Eagle Scout Project. He proposed to const= ruct a wooden two-rail safety fence at Raymond Park. He also proposed to add a gutter a= long the edge of the meeting hall.

Mr. Gleason asked if pres= sure treated wood would be used. S= cout Nicholson didn’t believe the wood was pressure treated, it would be p= ainted. Mr. Gleason asked if power tools w= ould be used. Scout Nicholson info= rmed that adults would use such tools, not the scouts. It was noted that the safety rail = would be kept back away from the edge of the cliff so no one would fall over it.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> The Park & Recreation Director (Brian Johnson) was in favor of the project.

Mr. Viger questioned if t= here was still money available in the trust funds for Eagle projects. Mr. Gleason answered yes; the Tracy Davis Fund contained approximately $7000 ($5000 of which was restricted principle).

Mr. McDevitt asked if the= posts (going in the ground) could be pressure treated. Scout Nicholson said the fence com= pany told him the wood shouldn’t be a problem because it didn’t rot = very easily. Mr. McDevitt said it = would be great if pressure treated wood could be used, but it wouldn’t block his ‘yes’ vote. <= /p>

Mr. Viger questioned when= the project was anticipated to be completed.&n= bsp; Scout Nicholson stated that he would be turning eighteen in September and was hopeful that the project would be completed before August.

Mr. Lynde arrived.

Mr. Viger said he appreci= ated Scout Nicholson identifying issues in the community and that he stepped for= ward to provide the services.

MOTION:

(Gleason/McDev= itt) To accept the project as proposed by Boy Scout John Andrew Nicholson.

VOTE:

(5 -0-0) The motion carried.

Paul Zarnowski, Deputy Health Officer – Article K Hearings= :

Deputy Health Officer Paul Zarnowski came forward to conduct the Board of Health Meeting. The Selectmen convened as the Boar= d of Health with Mr. Zarnowski as Chairman.

Mr. Zarnowski called the = Board of Health meeting to order.

Map 30, Lot 11-139: 20 West Shore Road – Owner Jo= seph & Debra Rufiange – Mr. Lee Cavanaugh came forward to discuss = the requested waiver requests. The system was currently in failure. The requested waivers were: 1) Section 295- setback from leach field to pond – 125ft. required, 104ft. requested; and 2) setback from well to sept= ic tank – 75ft. required (if SDR pipe used the requirement is 50ft), 27f= t. being proposed. A well compan= y will check the seals on the well. =

Mr. Gleason asked if the = request fell under any new Department of Environmental (‘DES’) requirements. Mr. Zarnowski d= iscussed the states requirements for setbacks.

There was a brief discuss= ion regarding the proposal and how the system would function.

MOTION:

(Lynde/Gleason= ) To grant four waivers (for Map 30, Lot 11-139: 20 West Shore Road) as follows: 1) Section 295-15 – lot size, one acre required, .9 acre requested; 2) Section 295-16 – setback from well to the tank, 75ft. required – 50ft. provi= ded; 3) Section 295-16 – setback distance to well from disbursal area, 7= 5ft. required – 50ft. provided; and 4) Section 295-16 – setback to= the pond – 125ft. required, 104ft. provided.

VOTE:

(6 -0-0) The motion carried.

Map 40, Lot 6-185-48: 17 Township Road – Owner John & Kathleen Scalia – Mr. Peter Shower came forward to discuss the Article K waiver requests. The waiver request was to Section 295-14 - bottom of leach bed to be 4ft. above seasonal high water table. The system would repla= ce a failed system; the seasonal high water table is at 54inches; if they had to maintain the 48inches they would have to replace the gravity system with a = pump system. The request was to al= low 39inches to the seasonal water and to continue to use a gravity system.

Mr. Haverty commented tha= t the applicant lived within a couple houses from his home. He stated that he would not be imp= acted by the proposal in any way, but wanted it known that they were within a cou= ple houses from his home.

Mr. Zarnowski discussed t= he function of the proposed system that would work effectively at 30inches. It is believed that the existing s= ystem is in failure.

MOTION:

(Lynde/Gleason= ) To grant the waiver for Map 40, Lot 6-185= -48 to Section 295-19 – distance between bed bottom and seasonal high water table – 39inches requested where 4ft. required.

VOTE:

(6-0-0) The mo= tion carried.

Map 31, Lot 31-11-302: 9 Berthel Street – Owner Gregory Stupack

Mr. Vern Dingman came for= ward to discuss the waiver requests. = The waiver requests were as follows: 1) Section 295-16 – 75ft. to wells f= rom leach field; 2) Section 295-16 – 125ft. to pond required. Mr. Dingman discussed the site and= the existing system. He proposed a Clean Solutions system. It was suggested that the owner and the abutter enter into a hold harmless agreeme= nt with the Town stating that if anything were to arise, the Town would never = be held liable.

Mr. Gleason asked at what distance the owner’s and the abutter’s wells were to the system. The owner’s wel= l was 21ft. and the abutter’s well would be 53ft.; the requirement was for a well= to be 75ft. from a leach.

Mr. Gleason asked what the requirement was for the proximity to the pond. Mr. Dingman said 125ft. was requir= ed, they were requesting 109ft. M= r. Gleason questioned if Town Counsel had reviewed the hold harmless agreement. Mr. Lynde commente= d that the Board had accepted similar documents without legal review. It was noted that both parties had signed the agreement and it would be recorded. Mr. Gleason asked if there were any requirements to contact the Department of Environmental Services (‘DES’). Mr. Zarn= owski said the applicant would need to go to DES for the setback to the well, but= not for the setback to the pond. =

Mr. Viger questioned the = septic easement. It was noted that t= he property was under one ownership, but broken up under two different deeds.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Only a portion of one tank (for the leach) was on the shared portion of the lot.

There was a brief discuss= ion regarding the proposed system. Mr. Dingman stated that he was trying to use existing elements to conserve on t= he disturbance to the property. =

Mr. Gleason asked if the = proposed system was rated for a specific capacity.&= nbsp; Mr. Dingman stated that the system was rated for three bedrooms.

MOTION:

(Lynde/Gleason= ) To grant two waivers to Article K for Map 31, Lot 31-11-302: 9 Berthel Street: 1) Section 295-= 16 – distance from well to leach bed, 75ft. required, 21ft. requested = to on-site well and 53ft. to off-site well; and 2) Section 295-16 – distance from dispersal area to pond - 125ft. required, 109ft. requested. Applicant to submit a waiver for distance from disbursal area to pond. There shall be an agreement betw= een the neighbors (owner and abutter) to hold the Town harmless because of the distance between the applicant’s well and the septic system.

VOTE:

(6-0-0) The mo= tion carried.

MOTION:

(Viger/McDevit= t) To adjourn the Board of Health.

VOTE:

(6-0-0) The mo= tion carried.

The Selectmen reconvened.=

Mansur Consent Decree

Mr. Gaydos explained that= when the Selectmen reviewed the junkyard permit for Mr. Jack Mansur last year, M= r. Mansur had requested that his Consent Decree be amended to be more straight forward about what he would/would not be doing.

Mr. Viger asked what had = been changed within the document. = Mr. Gaydos reviewed the document and the proposed amendments. Mr. Gleason believed, from the Sel= ectmen’s previous meeting, the intent was to have Mr. Mansur define what he wanted changed and have him come before the Board. Because of the sensitivity of the application, Mr. Gleason wanted to know the rational for changing what was agreed to. Mr. Gaydos said a package had been circulated to the Selectmen (last week) for review contain= ing a letter (from last year) submitted after the junkyard permit was issued, w= hich put the present discussion in motion.

There was a discussion re= garding the consent decree and the limitation of having seventy-five cars. Mr. McDevitt explained that the re= ason for the limitation was due to questions regarding the size of the operation= and wanting it stipulated in writing. He said at the time the document was drafted code enforcement was no= t as it is presently. Based on the present code enforcement oversight, he questioned why a consent decree was needed versus having a junkyard license.&n= bsp; Mr. Gaydos believed because it was a prior non-conforming use it wou= ld be important to designate the area; now the area (on the lot) is designated.

Mr. Gleason believed if a decision was made to not have a consent decree, the owner would need to go = to the Zoning Board of Adjustment. H= e said the owner had never gone before the Zoning Board for a waiver to run the junkyard. He reiterated that = the issue was controversial and had been since the time of the consent decree.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> He said would have preferred that = the owner come in to the Selectmen and explain his reasons for amending the dec= ree since it was originally put in place for a reason.

Mr. McDevitt noted that a= plot plan had been submitted. He f= elt it would be an unfortunate situation to have a business, which had been around= for thirty-forty years, go in front of the Zoning Board and possibly be shut down. He didn’t underst= and what the ‘burning’ issue was for the discussion.

There was further discuss= ion regarding the stipulations in the consent decree and its limitation of the = sale of cars/parts to the general public. The Selectmen felt further clarification was needed and asked Mr. Ga= ydos to present them with information regarding specific amendments being reques= ted.

OTHER BUSINESS

Trident Consulting Agreement for Senior Center Renovation

Mr. Gaydos stated that Tr= ident Consulting had agreed to provide their oversight services for $1. Mr. McDevitt said the document sho= uld be reviewed by legal. Mr. Gaydos= said the agreement was essentially the same document the Town signed for the fire station, which had been reviewed by legal.= Mr. McDevitt said if the document was the same he had no objection.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>

MOTION:

(Gleason/Lynde= ) To approve the consulting agreement between Trident Consulting and the Town of Pelham, for them to act as owners project manager = for the Senior Center project.

VOTE:

(5-0-0) The mo= tion carried.

2010 Highway Spring Paving & Crack Sealing Bid Recommendation & Award

Highway Road Agent Don Fo= ss submitted his recommendations for the 2010 Highway Spring Paving & Crack Sealing awards, which Mr. Viger read aloud.

MOTION:

(Lynde/Gleason= ) To accept the recommendation of Don Foss, Highway Agent to award the paving bid to = PJ Keating & Co. and to award the crack sealing bid to Crack Sealing Inc. (both companies were the low bidders).

VOTE:

(5-0-0) The mo= tion carried.

Summer Board of Selectmen Meeting Location Change to Pelham Elementary School Media Center June 8 to August 31

There was a brief discuss= ion regarding moving the Selectmen meetings.&n= bsp; The Selectmen decided to continue conducting their meetings at Sherb= urne Hall.

Review and Approved Board of Selectmen 2011 Budget Review Schedu= le

The Selectmen were given = a budget review schedule. Mr. Gleason = said if the Board concurred with the schedule, it would be presented to the Budg= et Committee.

Mr. Gaydos said several department heads had asked if there were specific goals/objectives. He said he told them if they had ‘needs’ to include them and to be prepared to explain them. He asked if the Board had any furt= her instructions. Mr. Gleason sai= d he would like a memo to be sent to the department heads (as discussed by the Selectmen) indicating they had a zero growth objective allowing the incorporation of a= ny changes mandated by contract or by unions; they are also to provide the Selectmen with a list of items they would like considered above the budget.=

Union Negotiation Schedule

There was a discussion re= garding ways to proceed with negotiating sessions.= It was felt that the discussion may encompass negotiating strategy; therefore a discussion on how to proceed would be held in non-public session and later explained in public session.

Discussion – New Ordinance Requirements=

Mr. Gaydos said it was re= alized that there was a flaw in the system. He said when ordinances are approved, there should be more diligence= in reading them to determine if new task lists are being created and how the persons affected should be notified of the new tasks. There was a brief discussion regar= ding a recent ordinance that included additional tasks for the Town Treasurer; Mr. Gaydos and Planning Director Jeff Gowan were tasked with reviewing the ordinance and determining who would be responsible for newly created tasks.

TOWN ADMINISTRATOR’S / SELECTMEN’S RE= PORTS

Mr. Gaydos reque= sted if anyone had live ammunition to be disposed of that they do so at the Police Station. There was a recent situation of ammunition being brought to the Transfer Station and discharging.

Mr. Haverty, Mr.= Gleason and Mr. McDevitt had no report.

Mr. Lynde said h= e was contacted by the Local Government Center (‘LGC’) concerning HB1393; there have been proposed amendments = (by the Secretary of State) that would have a devastating impact on the Town’s insurance carrier’s ability to provide the necessary ser= vice in the future. There are two proposals: 1) set a cap on how much could be put in reserve; and 2) they wa= nt the Secretary of State to be the oversight for the insurance system. Mr. Lynde discussed the background= and the fact that the LGC is trying to correct the system. He said he left a message for Sena= tor Downing to oppose the amendments and urged the Board to do the same. Mr. Lynde informed that he attended a meeting of a subcommittee of the Municipal Advocacy Committee who was setting up proposed legislation to be supported by the LGC. He said he submitted a modificatio= n to the Elderly Exemption law put together by the Town’s Assessor relativ= e to using a household income versus an owner’s income.

Mr. Viger report= ed that May 1, 2010 was = opening day for Pelham baseball. There are ov= er 500 kids enrolled. There was a beautiful tribute to past president Bob Blinn.

REQUEST FOR NON-PUBLIC SESSION

MOTION:

(Lynde/Gleason) Request for a non-public session per RSA 91-A:3,II, a & c (Personnel; Matters which, if discussed publicly, would affect adversely the reputati= on of any person)

ROLL CALL:

Mr. Viger-Yes;= Mr. Gleason-Yes; Mr. McDevitt-Yes; Mr. Lynde-Yes; Mr. Haverty-Yes

It was noted tha= t when the Board returned, after the non-public session, the Board would not take = any other action publicly, except to possibly seal the minutes of the non-public session and to adjourn the meeting. The Board entered into a non-public session at approximately 8:26 pm.

The Board returned to public session at approximately 9:50 pm.

MOTION:

(Haverty/Gleas= on) To seal the minutes of the non-public session indefinitely.

VOTE:

(5-0-0) The mo= tion carried.

ADJOURNMENT

MOTION:

(Haverty/Gleas= on) To adjourn the meeting.

VOTE:

(5 -0-0) The motion carried.

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 9:50 pm.

= &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; = Respectfully submitted,

= &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; = Charity A. Landry Willis

= &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; = Recording Secretary