“SPECIAL” - PLANNING BOARD MEETING
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 2004
356 Main Street – Farmington, NH
Members Present: Charlie King, Gerald White, Norm Russell, Hiram Watson, Troy Robidas,
Absent: Don MacVane – (called in absent), Bob Talon
Selectmen’s Rep: Paul Parker
Staff Present: Paul Esswein, Doreen T. Hayden
Public Present: Joyce White – ZAMPS, Laurie Bourgoine, Tony Bourgoine, Margaret Russell – ZBA, Pauline Scruton, Frank Scruton, Matt Scruton – Selectman, Alicia Sprague – ZAMPS, John Nolan – Rochester Times, Paula M. Proulx – Selectman, Jane Wingate – CCC, John Wingate – CCC, Sue Ducharme – Farmington Conservation Commission, Cyndi Poulin - ZAMPS
· Chairman Charlie King called the meeting to order at 7:14 p.m. for a public hearing on the Critical Lands Overlay District.
· The Planning Board requested from the sub-committee to make a final draft, which basically incorporated a few of the ideas of both of the overlays, which has been distributed back and that is the posted and noticed copy and distributed to each of the board members.
· Chairman King requests a member of the sub-committee to explain the incorporated changes from the last version to this final draft version. Norm Russell recalls, that essentially 3 changes were made; The first of those changes falls under (B) Critical Lands Criteria where the previous version read “the areas constituting the overlays met the majority” to now read “the areas constituting the overlays met 4 out of 5”, the second change is the addition of a paragraph on page two under section “F) Habitat Protection Corridor requirements” that paragraph being b. “Development of the Habitat Protection Corridor within 500 feet
of a class 5 road or better does not require a special use permit, unless required by restrictions of any other applicable Overlay/Zone”. The third change is under 3. Special Use Permit, where the paragraphs that were identified as e. and f. are now changed to a. and b. Those were the extent of the changes made from the last public hearing incorporating with considerations all of the requested changes.
· Chairman King expands a little more to all other board members; in the last meeting there were 2 proposed overlays, major difference of the overlays in the first set was a 500’ setback from all road and the other overlay crossed over some of the adjacent roads and the comprise that was made is to limit the restrictions and to include as a contiguous overlay crossing the road, but limiting the restrictions within 500’ of such road, so that the only additional restriction over the version 1 would be an increase of the setback regarding the limited development zone from 100’ to 250’. The 500’ has been exempted from the overlay from
requiring a special use permit for development. So, in fact the only difference in minimum which was last presented and this proposed version is where those waterways cross a Class V road or better that there is a 250’ limited development zone which is an increase from the 100’ limited development zone.
· Beginning at 7:20p.m. ending at 7:50p.m. discussions between Hiram Watson, Norm Russell, Charlie King and Paul Parker about the confusion and sometimes contradictory statements of the 660’, 500’ and 250’ foot subjects of the zone. Chairman King asks for expert comments from Paul Esswein; “when reading this how do you interpret this point, does it read as in conflict?” Paul Esswein thinks that what is written in the text is very clear in definition. Continuation of discussions between Paul Esswein, Hiram Watson, Paul Parker on the descriptions of the identity of the zone. Chairman King elaborates his wants in
having the board discuss the proposed changes and having everyone abreast to the changes and answer all questions, then we will open discussions to the public for their questions and input, then we will close that session and make a final discussion and determination for any minor or substantial changes that might need to be done to the proposed overlay. Chairman King directs discussion to Troy Robidas, as he believed that Troy had concerns with the overlay and the various subjects of footage within the zones. Continue with more discussion between Chairman King, Norm Russell, Hiram Watson and Troy Robidas with respect to the overlay and the road cross over and the 250’ limited develop zone. Chairman King has one additional thought to show this in better clarity is to actually make a change to the map showing a more descriptive pattern in that area – Hiram Watson interrupts stating that is what he had asked to do at the last meeting to identify the 500’
setback - Chairman King wants it to show the delineation where it falls in the zone but in a light gray color to show the area that has less restrictions, similar to this (he’s pointing at a section of the map). Paul Parker adds that they have followed the manual “Buffers for Wetlands and Surface Waters; A Guidebook for New Hampshire Municipalities, 11/95 (rev. 5/97). Chairman King advises at this point, if no one has any major questions, he’d like to open discussions to the public and then come back to Hiram Watson concerns. Hiram agrees, Troy Robidas questions the Woodland Road area, skirting around and brought back into the zone, he believes that people halfway down will have no problem but the other half will have problems with the 500’ setback. Clarification discussions by Chairman King on Troy Robidas concerns continue, with interjected comments by Norm Russell. There is the 250’ limited development zone, 660’
protection of the wildlife corridor and we allow some encroachment on that to a certain percentage before you need to have a permit.
· Chairman King opens the hearing for discussions and comments from the public now 7:50p.m.
· My name is Anthony Bourgoine and I have 75 acres up on what was called Gray Hill Road, which is now Haywagon Road, off of Meaderboro Road, almost in the center. He feels that there is no benefit for him with the 500’ setback all his land would be affected. Chairman King asks if any of his land falls within 660’ of a full time stream? His reply is yes, he believes almost all of it does, there is a beaver bog at top and at bottom, including the streams; if you start adding all the 660’ up the only place left for him to build a home would be right in the middle of the 75 acres. He believes that this proposed Overlay will
significantly limit his ability for future development for his 3 children that are in the service. Chairman King comments that he is not familiar with the particular parcel of land and that anything that falls within the Overlay even in the 660’ there is some development allowed, in more than 10% of that area, you could come before the planning board for a sub division and potentially be granted a special use permit which is based upon specific characteristics of the land showing reasonable use of your land. Chairman King elaborates on his explanation to Mr. Bourgoine concerns for future development.
· Laurie Bourgoine, Anthony’s wife comments about the F2 section “Habitat Protection Corridor requirements” and wants to know if it is exclusive to the permitted uses in the corridor? She believes that there is a lot of stuff that is left out of the land that is commonly used there…Chairman King “such as” ……Laurie Bourgoine, such as….hunting, fishing, orchards, gardens, any farming, logging, all that kind of stuff….Chairman King….hunting is not restricted and the forestry is described as best management practices that would fall under the state standards. Laurie and Chairman King confer back
and forth about the exclusivity of the Overlay. Anthony interjects with questions about adding a field to his acreage…Chairman King…the goal is to not restrict that requirement. The determination would have to be made by the planning board at the time that adding a field would be warranted. Chairman King brings up the fact that in commercial agricultural there is the potential for higher pollution with the current agricultural that we have in Farmington, there’s not a high degree of pollution, however at a past time it was removed and Norm Russell explains that it was input from the public that if you are allowing agricultural use or tilling of land right up to waters edge that is contrary to the ordinances. He believes that is why it was removed. Further discussions between Laurie Bourgoine and Chairman King regarding section (D) Cluster Developments.
· I am Pauline Scruton – She believes the 1 thing this map does not show is that there is a good deal of land up in the far corner, she believes maybe North, that there are easements up there, the whole top of Blue Joe, and little Blue Joe, which already have easements they have 600 acres of their own that are easements. She believes that this overlay has left out the part that shows what is already under the conservation easement. She noted that part of the 600 acres they own (5 or 6 acres) that they can build on was left off this map but was on the last map and she wonders if the state regulations overrides the Towns or does the Overlay
override what they can and cannot do. Chairman King and Norm Russell believe the states regulation overrides all, however Norm passes the questions to the expert Paul Esswein for his understanding and interpretation. Paul Esswein states if the land is already under easement or some restriction than that overrides what the town wants. Discussions between Hiram Watson, Paul Esswein, Chairman King and Pauline Scruton continue discussions about the land and the overlay restrictions. Chairman King asks if we have answered your questions Mrs. Scruton? She replies, she’ll find out if she does something wrong, maybe.
· Sue Ducharme – Just wants to make a point regarding the concept of cluster developments. A more current term for it is now “open space development”. A cluster development gives the impression of all these little houses in the middle of emptiness, but the concept is open space preservation, rather than making houses all within view of each other. She continues her explanation of “cluster” and “open space” directly related to Laurie Bourgoine concerns for “clusters”. Both Sue and Laurie are having a bit of a debate about this issue; Chairman King interrupts this debate to put the meeting back on
track to let Sue finish her discussion and advises Laurie that they try to let the public talk to the board and the board talk to the public and not have debates between the public that is in attendance.
· Anthony Bourgoine asks if the town is going to bring any type of compensation for landowners, as in a reduced tax rate? My assessment on my land has increased 2 ? times from what it has been before. I’m still keeping my land the way it is, it is not going to be developed. But now there are more restrictions on his land, which devaluates it, and should I ever come to sell it I won’t be able to obtain fair market value. Again, any compensation from the Town? Chairman King states the answer to that question is no and that the town has no intention of providing such reductions. Norm Russell recommends that if they can show that
there is depreciation in value to bring it to the assessors’ office for their review and determination. Continued discussions with Anthony on the issue of land value and the proposed overlay and the effects it might have on his land.
· Matt Scruton feels that a valid point was addressed that it is dangerous to take away a landowners right and not compensate them and that there are other means to get that right through easements and purchasing through the state or counties and I don’t really think this is the best direction to get those easements of conservations rights. My primary concern that I’d like to address is why is this going to a special town meeting and not a regular town meeting. Chairman King advises that it is on the table for discussion tonight whether or not this will go to a special town meeting. Matt carries the discussion further using the last special
town meeting as an example and the poor turnout that came out for vote on the 3 articles to be added to the zoning amendments. Matt feels that this should go to the regular town meeting not a special meeting. Chairman King wants to address the compensation issue Matt presented earlier and examples; when the town adopted the Zoning in 1978 did the town compensate all landowners at that time? And has the town compensated any landowner based upon the zoning change at any point? Valid argument….point taken.
· Margaret Russell has kind of taken offense to Matt’s comment about voting, as it is in the paper, and it is publicly noticed where it is required. It is a legitimate election, not like an active group went out and got the town to get an election to get a vote on something, which is not part of a towns’ democracy. She believes the board did a very good job in its publication of notice.
· Mrs. Scruton as for compensation, when they were approached by the state for a large chunk of land, which was in the easement, it was their decision and no one else’s and they were compensated for by the state.
· Chairman King, this proposed overlay will actually be in front of the voters, if this board feels that it is important to move forward as is with any potential changes or not move forward, and based upon the input tonight, but it will take the vote of the town to put this in place. As any proposed zoning, it is going to take the majority of the towns people. That is how it is structured and it is the will of the town and not just 7 members on the board.
· Laurie Bourgoine spoke again regarding the technical notices that are required by the law and there are a lot of people that are affected and they still do not find out, we are just finding out about this special meeting. Unless you have the kind of life where you can constantly be checking up on whether there are restrictions being put upon your land, people do not read papers very much any more. She elaborates more deeply her concern to be notified when the town is taking into consideration zoning changes, she also indicates that she did not receive any type of mailing to let her know that this Zoning Amendment and hearing was taking place….but
they sure do get their tax bill straight and they can find their address for that. She feels that it is a little bit sneaky.
· Hiram Watson wants to add to Matt’s’ comment regarding the public hearing notice, this little blurb you see here (showing the newspaper copy ad), he indicates that he doesn’t always read them it was published real fast on the 19th of November and it wasn’t until the 25th that this overlay was available to the public, almost 1 week later. Chairman King stops Hiram’s discussion to ask the question when and Doreen T. Hayden, responds that it was registered with the Town Clerks office on the 18th of November and copies were posted in all 3 sites (i.e. Municipal Office front doors, Post Office and Old
Town Hall), Chairman King inquires about the availability to the public, Doreen indicated that these were printed from the Town Administrators computer which she does not have access to nor does she have a color printer to allow the printing of the maps. Chairman King noted that to re-notice again the law indicates, it not necessary; the board did it as a courtesy to the Town of Farmington residences, as this was a continuation from a previous hearing. If each landowner were noticed by mail that would have to be by registered mail at a minimum cost of $4.42 per envelope mailing.
· Joyce White comments she was in the same situation as the Bourgoine’s when a sub-division of over 60 lots was going to roll in, her land does not abut this sub-division, but she learned a hard lesson that she needs to get out into the Town of Farmington and read the notices that are published in the 3 areas. She works out of town and found it inconvenient to stop, however now she makes it a point to buy her stamps from the Farmington Post Office versus the Town of Rochester. She now pays attention, and attends the town meetings. If you live in town, you need to wake up and pay attention, you pay taxes and you should make it a point to be aware of
what is going on in your town.
· Paul Esswein makes a point that if any member of the community wants a copy of the agenda they can have it sent to them via email, by giving the name to Town Administrators Secretary…Chairman King interjects with “how about a better advertisement”….if anyone wants to be put on the mailing list for any public notice should send a notice to
planning@worldpath.net. That is the email of Doreen and she would be happy to send these to you. Doreen noted that the Town Of Farmington WEB site also has this information available to the public. Chairman King questioned this site back up and running, Doreen commented since the 1st of November.
· Jane Wingate just wants to point out that there are other people that live on the backside of Blue Joe like Brad Anderson and he keeps himself well informed even though he’s out on the island. It is no excuse to not keep yourself well informed about what is going on in your town. It is part of a democracy. Jane indicates they live within the Critical Lands Overlay Zone and they eagerly support this. They are in favor of everything the board is trying to accomplish, they have been watching the board refine and polish this plan and think that all the work and thought that has gone into it should be put before the voters and those that wish
to educate individuals on this proposed amendment should and those that want to lobby against it should, but there is no harm in putting this before the voters.
· Margaret Russell wants to point out they’re saying this overlay takes away restrictions…examples used are “pigs in their backyard” that the zoning restrictions are applied to all in one way or another, any town that adopts zoning restricts somebody from doing something on their own land. The zoning is not picking on any one individual it applies to all. If nobody wants zoning then it can be voted out and then there will be no zoning, which will then have other repercussions.
· Alicia Sprague just wants to say I am a landowner out in that area who is also affected and I hoped to give my son a piece of my land as well, however I just want to say that I am in support of this proposal.
· Chairman King now closes the public hearing portion at 8:30p.m. may reopen public discussion based upon the board members discussion. Chairman King now directs comments to the planning board; now that we’ve heard the public comments’ and have the proposed overlay before you does any member of the board have questions or concerns? Troy Robidas - discussions about the acreage splits, sub-divisions, major and minor sub-divisions and the restrictions that will be imposed upon them. Directed to Paul Esswein for clarification. Chairman King interjects “on a Class 6 road”; Troy reverts back to “Class 5 road” scenario.
Norm Russell joins in on the discussion of the major / minor sub-division regulations. Discussions amongst the board members continue about the proposed overlay and the restrictions imposed or not by this, the unfragmented land issues and the verbiage that is used in the Critical Land Overlays proposal being of somewhat vague in it’s description, special use permits, good things versus not. Chairman King polls each board member for comments, suggestions, criticisms, etc…Paul Parker addresses an error on MAP #2 of the CLDO it reads NORTH it should read SOUTH, Chairman King also notes a grammatical error on top of page 2, under Cluster Requirement - should read (D) it reads (C). Gary White questions Troy Robidas observations on the huge developments up by his house on Governors Road , he’s heard about the wildlife coming down onto Chestnut Hill Road, Troy replies, houses are all on frontage, none in back, wildlife have their
corridor. Norm Russell this came through our planners who received this information to develop a Critical Lands Overlay based on input from the public, the public did support some type of potential saving of these natural resources…the initial justification for this. The sub-committee was tasked to make it workable. Norm elaborates on the overall subject of the Critical Lands Overlay, the legality of notification, the public notifications, the costs of such, etc. Hiram, only wants to reiterate what Troy spoke about regarding the lands protected areas, and all the acreage under conservation, state land, current use land, reservoir, rivers, brooks, all land protected, 25% grade can’t use and class 6 roads stop buildings going in. Hiram feels this Critical Lands Overlay has only affected a few people but the affect is a lot. He wants the 500’ buffer done, and the statement that includes 660 feet of the reservoir and the overflow removed; if a
motion were made he would like to see that motion added.
· Chairman King now opens the public hearing to the public for one final time, then take a 5 minute recess and come back to deliberate the fate. Norm Russell states before Chairman King opens the public hearing back, he would like to make a few comments to Hiram’s statements 1) Noting that you can’t develop current use property…Hiram takes that back, Norm continues and you can also upgrade class 6 roads and there is the potential for development and he disagrees with the notion that the board agreed to change the map, what they agreed to do is remand it back to the sub-committee with considerations of all inputs the board received in the past
meetings and come back with a revised Critical Lands Overlay proposal, did not agree specifically to adopt one map or the other, some people expressed their opinion on their preference. They did exactly what they agreed upon doing “we the committee”. Hiram adds that he agrees, but it should still be identified on the 500’ buffer.
· Chairman King now opens this to the public (8:55p.m.), keeping your comments as brief as possible.
· Sue Ducharme – One comment I’d like to make is to leave this thought in mind, we’ve been talking about Meaderboro Road however, there is another piece down on Bay Road I want to remind you…those of you that know this property this is the Baby Cocheco in it’s wild state and nothing has ever been done with that property, including logging for 200 years and as a result of the ZAMPS Ordinance proposal this will be part of the Critical Land Overlay, the developers who had planned to develop this land have agreed to adopt an open space development which would be to their benefit and the benefit of the people. As a result the Town of
Farmington is going to be able to take care of about 110 acres of the beautiful critical land, which is a great resource for us. This Cocheco tests clean, at all the preservation areas down Spring Street and that the State has not seen results like this. It is a good ordinance and I urge you to approve this amendment.
· John Nolan – Wanted to know if the board had touched basis with Strafford about the boundary and what they have done? A reciprocal type thing on the other side. Chairman King, is not aware of any contact with Strafford with regard to that boundary, and believes that the same type situation on the New Durham side.
· Cindy Poulin - wants to thank all of the board for all their hard work. She has been watching this since it inception, she believes this ordinance has come a long way and strikes a balance. Believes that in our communities there is a roll of stewardship and this does that. As a community we are speaking about our values of the treasured places we have. Again, trying to strike a balance to maintain some of the open space. She agrees that we should pass this on to the voters in the community.
· Paula Proulx – Agrees with Cindy, she has watched from the start. Did start out a bit shaky, the concept was there, like Norm said the planners did give it their full support and based on the surveys from sub-committee and the community itself. I have seen the zoning group take great pains in making sure that the things they brought forth and the development of this particular overlay did not hinder the landowners as much as it possibly could and that the board took into consideration the landowners feelings. She feels land is priceless in many ways and to the community in many ways, to the landowners and the developers. What it takes minutes
to tear down it takes year to rebuild and bring back. As a community we really need to start looking at it as a whole. We all need to open our eyes and pay attention. I think it a wonderful ordinance, she feels the board has done really good job and would bring it before the people.
· Chairman King is going to close the public hearing for the final time this evening and make a motion for a 5 minute recess, Motion is 2nd by Paul Parker, all those in favor, motion passes.
· Chairman King calls this public hearing back in session, it is 9:20p.m., we closed with 2 public comments on this public hearing, we are now into final deliberation of how we are going to proceed on this Critical Lands District Overlay. Basically they are presented with 3 options:
1. Not forward to Town of Farmington for a special Town meeting.
2. Forward this as proposed with minor corrections to a special Town of Farmington meeting which we would need to decide on a date.
3. Continue modification for a later public hearing.
Chairman King states that a decision tonight needs to be made to do something with this, whatever that might be.
Hiram – Would like to see the MAP changed to show 500’ setback down on Reservoir Road and see the CLDO MAP #2, excluding the statement “including all areas that lie within 660 feet of the Rochester Reservoir and the outflow of said reservoir”.
Chairman King poses questions to Hiram – on the 500’ setback, he previously mentioned the potential to show a different highlight area that delineates that area, that has lesser restrictions than as listed under Section F, item b. Chairman asks Hiram - would that meet what you feel. Hiram NO, he’s read it and feels one contradicts the other. That is the way he feels. Chairman King asks the question, do you have any other questions, or just the 2 you posed. Hiram, just those 2 suggested changes. At this point we will not motion for any changes until all board members have had their opportunity to speak.
Norm – He is comfortable with the Critical Lands Overlay the way it is, and is very comfortable with the description on where it lies and the other is exception to the requirements of the corridor for exclusion of the 500’ of a class 6 road. He does not see how is could be better presented. He is happy with the proposal as is.
Gary – He likes it as it is. Just cannot decide if they should wait until March to vote on it and save the Town of Farmington some money. Still up in the air about when.
Paul – He agrees with everything that Norm has stated. He thinks the committee has done very well and worked very hard at taking all aspects into consideration, he thinks they’ve done very good, it’s a good ordinance. There are a few typos’ to correct. He feels they’ve worked very hard in taking into consideration what is trying to be protected as well as consideration of the homeowners that live in the area and affected by this. He believes we should send this on to the voters and let decide.
Troy – If there was one thing he could take out, that would be the mandatory cluster requirement, he could live with it, probably the biggest piece of concern he has. His change would be something similar to “cluster development is recommended in these areas or suggestions for development”, just doesn’t like to see it mandatory. Concept is good, agrees that waterways need to be protected; he just feels it’s a little bit too much.
Charlie – As you know I’m on the sub-committee and I worked with the other members of the committee, to take the thoughts and the goals of the outside planning group and the master planning group and members of the community to draft this into the best possible overlay to accomplish what they are trying to do. He feels that they have done to the 90% what can be done. Could it be tweaked a bit more…possibly? It does accomplish the goals of the overlay and has the least amount of impact to landowners and provides them avenues to seek relief from these restrictions. Some previous versions had not mechanisms for relief. He understands the concerns of the other board members and his only concern is the same as Gary’s whether to forward this to a special
town meeting or forward to a regularly schedule meeting. I’ve expressed before that as a Planning Board, they have the ability to ask the applicant to conform to this although it is not an absolute requirement. He is not opposed to a special Town of Farmington meeting; the issue is attendance and costs. He believes the board needs to come to a decision on how to proceed and if we are going to present this to the public.
Paul – go over the 2 corrections to make. Chairman King – Yes, the 2 corrections are error on CLDO MAP # 2 should state “Critical Lands South” and not “Critical Lands North”. Also, top of page 2 should be D instead of C under Cluster Requirement. Paul Esswein – Para B, #3 CLDO MAP #2, 1st line should read, “In the southwest portion of the town bounded “BY” versus “bounded the”. Para F, #2 b – reads “Development of the habitat” should read “Development in a habitat”. John Wingate – Under B, CLDO MAP #2, line 5 typo, and reads “Reservior” should read “Reservoir”.
Chairman King – If every one is in agreement with those proposed changes any motion can be made upon the agreed changes. All those in favor. Norm makes a suggestion that the Secretary reads back the changes to insure the capture of corrections. Norm makes motion to agree to changes, 2nd by Paul Parker, all those in favor of the changes, Motion passes.
Motion as amended, Norm Russell makes a motion to forward as amended the Critical Lands Overlay to the public for a vote, Chairman King asks to be more specific on a date, Norm thinks that request would be easier to handle on a separate motion, okay, 2nd by Gary White. The motion is to forward the Critical Lands Overlay as amended to the Town of Farmington to be voted on amended.
Motion, any discussion, Troy makes a friendly motion to remove the cluster requirement, Norm is not in agreement to Troy’s friendly motion for amendment. Chairman asks final opinions….Troy, no if I have to vote I will. Chairman directs to Paul Parker, he’s been very clear all along, Hiram makes a friendly amendment to eliminate all areas lying within of 660’ of Reservoir and identify 500’ setback. Norm do you accept, I would not, Chairman King, motion is not accepted.
Having no further discussion, all those in favor of forwarding as motioned to the Town of Farmington to be voted on say I. Motion passes 3-2, Paul Parker, Gary White, Norm Russell. Opposed, Hiram Watson and Troy Robidas.
Chairman King any additional motion regarding dates: Paul Parker discusses the various dates to meet and if we don’t meet them what happens? Chairman King directs questions to Paul Esswein – options are 1st possible date for special meeting would be January 14, but the document would have to be filed with the Town of Farmington Clerks office by Tuesday, December 7. The last possible date for having a special Town of Farmington meeting would be January 27th, the end of the 120 day period, from when this was originally in affect, which will be out of affect on the 28th of January. The peril is, if not forwarded to a special town meeting before the 28th this would lapse and allow an applicant to apply to build in those areas
that are trying to be protected as this proposal would not be in effect for 1 month and 1 week, actually 32 days. Further discussions about the various dates’ and what the circumstances of not meeting such dates would occur, as well as the costs associated with having a special town meeting. The Town of Farmington’s annual meeting is held in March.
Troy Robidas makes a motion for a special early town meeting, motion 2nd by Gary White. Discussion – Paul Parker do they need a paper ballot or just a voice vote. Yes by ballot - Paul Proulx, Chairman King for accountability. Paul Esswein explains that the Town of Farmington adopted an official ballot for elections.
Paul Parker wants to talk about the attendance. Discussions amongst the board members on past attendance.
Gary White asks if it’s possible for the Selectmen to vote in for a short period of time ?. Paul Esswein does not believe that the Selectmen can vote the ordinance in. . Paul Parker says he’s asked that question of the Selectman in the past.
Norm Russell makes a motion for a friendly amendment for January 18th 2005, for a special town meeting. Gary White 2nd the motions. Friendly amendment is accepted, the motion is the 18th.
Any final discussion on motion, Hiram agrees with Charlie King to wait for March Town Meeting, he thinks better way to spend the taxpayers money.
2 minutes to spare, any final discussion, on the motion to forward to special town meeting on January 18th. Hearing no further discussion, all those in favor; motion passes, all those against, Hiram. 4-1
4 in favor = Troy Robidas, Paul Parker, Gary White, Norm Russell, 1 opposed = Hiram Watson
Handouts for the board members, from Chairman King. Letter from Gary White, time off, and last night is tonight. He will let us know
Any other business to come before the board.
Any final motions?
Motion to adjourn, Gary White, 2nd by Troy Robidas, do we have any discussion, all those in favor, motion passes, meeting adjourned.
Meeting adjourned 10:01 p.m.
__________________________ ________________
Charlie King, Chairman, Date
Accepted as written with changes shown in Bold Italics Underlined and 1 with double strikethroughs’.
| 
