Economic Development Advisory Committee
Meeting Minutes
Recorded by Sharon Rossi
October 21, 2013
Members present: PRenaud, NNickerson, RCilley, AWood (sitting in for JFletcher)
Also attending: JHopkins
7:02 p.m. PRenaud opened the meeting.
RCilley motioned to accept the September 16 meeting minutes. NNickerson seconded. Vote unanimous in favor.
SWOT analysis: Opportunities and Threats need to be completed. PRenaud asked if the committee members would like to finish the SWOT analysis or wait until a full board is present. PRenaud said he will be meeting with the Select Board and hopes to include the SWOT analysis. He also mentioned that JFletcher would like to do a summary of each section. RCilley motioned to table the SWOT analysis to next month. NNickerson seconded. Vote unanimous in favor.
PRenaud will be presenting information about the proposed industrial overlay lots to the Planning Board on November 11 and would like an advisory or consensus opinion on the zoning ordinance from the EDAC. He would also like to discuss RSA 79-E, Community Revitalization Tax Relief Incentive. He commented that he will send to the Select Board information on RSA 79-E and hopes to have the Select Board adopt it this year. If the Select Board doesn’t adopt this RSA, a petition will have to be circulated and presented at Town Meeting. If it fails at Town Meeting, then someone at Town Meeting can make a motion to have the RSA put on the ballot for adoption the following year.
PRenaud said right now we have to get the Select Board on board with this RSA. AWood said it sounds like a good thing for a person who is rehabbing a building, but how many examples are there in town? NNickerson said the biggest building in town has already been rehabbed. RCilley said there are several locations, the B&B, the church, the Depot Building, the old clothing store, and house adjacent to it, which is a tear down.
PRenaud said RMarshall and APatt are planning a charrette next year and this RSA would help increase the possibility of housing. He said he thinks this would be an excellent forum for residents to discuss what types of housing options they would like to see in town. This RSA could be another incentive for incoming residents. Also, the Select Board, the governing body, may deny an RSA 79-E application in its discretion: “…such denial shall be deemed discretionary and shall not be set aside by the board or tax and land appeals or the superior court except for bad faith or discrimination.”
RCilley asked has the Planning Board looked at this RSA? PRenaud said it really doesn’t have to come before them, but I asked RMarshall to have the Neighborhood Heritage District Committee look at it. PRenaud also asked if the NHDC committee will be active after the town meeting. However, I didn’t get a clear answer on that. The NHDC doesn’t have any input on this as they aren’t active beyond working on the NHD ordinance until possibly after the Town Meeting.
NNickerson asked if PRenaud will bring this up with the Planning Board and ask the NHDC to support this as well. PRenaud responded that he will ask BMarshall to support this and speak about it when presented to the Select Board. AWood said this is a definite win for this town. NNickerson said the RSA doesn’t spell out the length of time for no tax increases. PRenaud said 5 years maximum time. The Select Board has a lot of discretion in the administration of this RSA.
AWood said having more multi-tenant buildings in the town will have a definite direct impact on school budget and services, but we wouldn’t have more tax base. NNickerson said we would still have a fixed base, as rentals do not cover the children in those rentals. He said eventually having more families in town, which hopefully will bring in more trades people, will increase the tax base. PRenaud, citing responses from last year’s Master Plan survey, said more affordable housing is one of the biggest issues that have been raised by current residents.
JHopkins said he has heard many saying they wish there was a 55 and over community location. The church property has a well and septic with 7 or 11 acres. It was bought for $250K and there is a possibility for 8 houses. Well is artesian. There are many 55 and over communities around the state and there are grants available for those who wish to build such communities. RCilley said the draw is that the residents don’t want to have children around their property, and they don’t want to do any of the maintenance which 55 and over communities accommodate.
PRenaud said for the public benefit requirement of RSA 79-E, the Select Board can specify further definite requirements for the RSA. AWood said we should go forward with the RSA. AWood said this can also be for businesses as well.
PRenaud asked do you want to vote on presentation of this RSA 79-E to the Select Board? NNickerson motioned to vote for this RSA to be presented to the Select Board. RCilley seconded. RCilley commented we ought to be prepared to know the timeframes for the petition if there is no response from the Select Board, and then the petition should be prepared to circulate. Vote unanimous in favor.
PRenaud said at November’s meeting, I want to go over the specifics as to how this will be presented to the Select Board. I want other member’s opinions and advice on how to present the RSA 79-E. RCilley asked how many names need to be on the petition for presentation. PRenaud said he didn’t know but will e-mail the quantity of names needed for the petition.
PRenaud commented that copies of the procedure flowchart and the talking points are what the Select Board will have during the presentation. RCilley suggests that a copy of the flowchart be presented to APatt just before the meeting with the Select Board.
PRenaud asked NNickerson if he was still on the Budget Advisory Committee. He is. PRenaud said after CIP is done, I have meet with the Budget Advisory and Select Board and asked can this be done as one meeting? NNickerson said that would be a good idea. CIP public hearing is 11/11. PRenaud will contact APatt to set this up.
Rezoning:
PRenaud said a binding vote will be needed by the Planning Board in November on the proposed Industrial District changes.
PRenaud presented the following locations to be included in the Industrial District changes:
Northern location - R2, 15-4, 60 acres, and R2 15-3, 45 acres. These two lots are contiguous to the Industrial overlay and have frontage on Sawmill Rd.
Southern location: R9-20, 34 acres, R9-18-3, 10 acres (Seigars property); R9-18-6 and 7, 4.75 acres and 2.3 acres which are for sale and could possibly included. Also, R9-3-8 6.3 acres abutting two Monadnock Paper Mill warehouse. These lots would be expanding the Industrial Zone. Some of the lot areas on New Boston Rd. are in the 100 year floodplain.
PRenaud has presented all of this to the Planning Board. JHopkins asked, “What is the purpose of expanding the industrial zone?” PRenaud said with so little industrial acreage available now, the expansion would allow smaller type businesses to come into the Town. JHopkins commented that the lots on New Boston Road could be too wet, making it not cost effective for businesses, as insurance costs would be too high.
NNickerson said there are very limited options in town for industrial growth. PRenaud said the Planning Board favored the Northern section. PRenaud wants to know should we do this on a lot by lot basis, or do both sections at once? NNickerson said both sections because should someone come in town looking for land, we can offer options to them.
AWood said when developing the Northern section we need to make sure the wording is tight so as not to allow access from Crotched Mountain Road.
RCilley and NNickerson said the Northern location and the one lot in the Southern next to Monadnock Paper Mill warehouse would be sure items. RCilley said leave the Seigars lot alone as we want to encourage the agricultural aspect of the town. AWood said we all like the northern section and the one lot near the warehouse, leaving the other lots due to water issues and agriculture issues.
PRenaud said he feels the consensus from EDAC about the industrial district changes are the Northern location and the one Southern location, the lot abutting the warehouse. AWood feels two separate amendments should be made to the industrial zone ordinance with specifics for entrance and egress on the Northern location, with the Southern location as a separate amendment. PRenaud will list advantages and disadvantages of each lot on a handout and will present this to the Planning Board.
Budget:
PRenaud thought that we would be discussing our budget this evening. However, APatt conveyed to RMarshall that he wanted the budget figures in by mid-October. Our budget is through the Planning Board budget and was increased from $1500 to $2000, including about $900 for secretarial costs. This was decided at the last Planning Board meeting. JFletcher asked for the increase due to the tradeshow next year. PRenaud continued, “As for using it as ‘seed’ money, we can’t legally do that. We can steer businesses towards grants, the state Business Resource Association, federal loans, banks, and other sources of financial assistance, including private funding. There is no way to ask taxpayers to use public funds to ‘seed’ businesses. RCilley
commented if there are costs such as mileage, training/education, he feels at least the chair should be reimbursed through budget for these costs. PRenaud agreed that this can be done.
Broadband Forum:
PRenaud stated he had attended a public forum in Keene on September 25, 2013 to review the components of the regional draft broadband plan and for the stakeholder group and SWRPC to respond to questions and comments from the public in attendance.
In the plan, there are 4 goals, with each goal having 2-4 objectives and several strategies for each objective, with 47 strategies in all. In July 2014, the final plan is scheduled to be completed and publicly presented in early autumn next year. At that time, timeframes, funding sources and stakeholders will be specified in the plan. PRenaud said the town should be a stakeholder. He read the 4 goals. By the end of the decade, SWRPC wants to implement all of these strategies. The website is open for viewing the plan and they will take comments on it until the end of the year.
UNH has been selected to test “white space” for broadband for rural areas. UNH testing will continue until the end of the year and they should have a conclusion by springtime.
AWood explained broadband, advantages and disadvantages of using various frequencies, and costs associated with installation of equipment.
PRenaud said any solution for broadband would probably require amending the town’s telecommunications ordinance. It appears that SWRPC is really trying to encourage local solutions.
NNickerson said we need to get something in here for business. AWood said we could possibly fund it off of residential, but it could be unreliable because of concurrent bandwidth usage. RCilley questioned, “Do we know how many in town would need this high speed internet?” AWood responded all businesses in town would need the high speed internet.
AWood said there are opportunities, so we could buy the bandwidth, and then we could distribute the net so we could be functional.
NNickerson commented that high speed internet is a criterion for big business and would be a big draw for new businesses as well. PRenaud commented that addressing internet and broadband options by a subcommittee should begin in January.
Other business or continuation of previous business:
PRenaud said we will continue the rest of SWOT at our next meeting. He commented that JMoran sent him some interesting survey data on what businesses value most when considering a site for a new facility. He will e-mail it to members. He will report back on the re-zoning results with the Planning Board and will also go through his presentation on RSA 79-E and will want the committee’s input.
RCilley said we had a discussion on non-taxable property and was under impression that APatt was going to put a report together for the EDAC. He is inquiring if that was being done. PRenaud said that he remembers hearing that APatt is doing that study and will ask about his progress on that report. RCilley wants the information so that a ‘negative’ can be turned to a ‘positive.’ NNickerson said if you can take and get a formula that treats each the same way…equitable to everybody and let the townspeople see it that will go a long way in changing the negative perception to a positive one.
PRenaud said it is possible that the recycling options project will be coming up. He has already become aware of some possible alternatives for town recycling. It has been suggested that a subcommittee be created to review costs of running of the recycling center and to find out why we aren’t getting enough revenue. NNickerson commented that the Budget Committee did a study and presented a report presenting alternatives and the recycling dept. didn’t want to hear about the suggestions made. NNickerson said he is glad to see that the Select Board is looking at the recycling center cost effectiveness.
NNickerson said a lot of this has been looked at before and should be looked at again. PRenaud said how will this work with the recycling committee? The recycling issue could be discussed with the Select Board by PRenaud and will probably be addressed beginning in early 2014.
NNickerson said he will try and get the previous budget committee report on recycling to PRenaud soon.
EDAC’s next meeting will be on November 18 at 7:00 p.m.
9:45 p.m. Adjournment
PRenaud motioned to adjourn. AW seconded. Vote unanimous in favor.
| 
