NOTTINGHAM BUDGET COMMITTEE MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 2008
PUBLIC SESSION
NOT FINAL UNTIL APPROVED BY THE COMMITTEE
PRESENT: ABSENT:
Mr. Michael Koester, Vice-Chair Mr. John Decker, Chair (Excused)
Mr. Scott Curry Mr. Kurt Duprey (Excused)
Ms. Charlene Andersen
Mr. Philip Fernald
Ms. Gail Powell
Mr. Kyle Barry
Ms. Mary Bonser, BOS Representative
Mr. Terry Bonser, School Board Representative
Mr. Chet Batchelder (Arrived 7:40pm)
OTHERS PRESENT:
Mr. Charles Brown, Town Administrator
Mr. Carl Schmottlach
Ms. Elaine Schmottlach
Ms. Heidi Seaverns
Mr. Peter Bock, Board of Selectmen
Mr. Bill Netishen, Board of Selectmen
Mr. Gunnar Foss, Police Chief
Mr. Thomas L. Sweeney
Mr. Chris Mills
Ms. Gail Mills
Ms. Laurie Legard, Library Trustee
Ms. Jo-Ann Albert
Ms. Pat Vachon, Library Trustee
Mr. Sam Demeritt
Ms. Deb Stevens
Mr. Jaye Vilchock, Fire Chief
Ms. Sandra Vilchock
Mr. John Terninko
Mr. Tom Rothery
Mr. Roger Bevins
Ms. Linda Bevins
Ms. Donna Danis
Ms. Karen Batchelder
Ms. Heidi Carlson
Ms. Joy Bicknell, Library Trustee
Ms. Janet Horvath
Ms. Traci Chauvey
Ms. Kelly Tivnan, Budget Committee Secretary
PUBLIC HEARING:
Mr. Koester called the public hearing to order at 7:00pm.
The Budget Committee members introduced themselves for the television audience.
EXECUTIVE:
Mr. Koester asked Mr. Brown to present the highlights of the town budget.
Mr. Brown said that the Town Administrator salary had been increased by the 2.3% cost of living adjustment.
Mr. Brown said that he had thought about the concerns the Budget Committee had regarding hiring a full time person in the Town Office for extra secretarial help and he said that he had decided that he would be happy if they could hire an additional part time person instead to fill that need for 25 hours per week. He said that change also reduced their budget for Blue Cross/Blue Shield because he had budgeted to give the new person a family plan of health insurance just in case. He said that he had been uncomfortable with the fact the Budget Committee was not warm and fuzzy in favor of this additional position and he said that the Board of Selectmen had agreed to changing the proposed position to part time. He said that they would revisit this issue next year.
Mr. Brown said that the cost of postage had increased in the proposed budget to reflect usage. He said that the cost of dues and conferences had increased. He said that the copy machine lease would be up in August and they would need to get a new machine. He said that would be more expensive. He said that the cost budgeted for equipment was decreased because he did not foresee that there would be a need for the town office to make any large equipment purchases in the upcoming year. He said that the federal mileage allowance had increased to 50.5 cents per mile. He said that he had not increased the mileage lines to reflect that but he wanted to make the Budget Committee aware of it.
Mr. Brown said that he hoped to do some negotiations with their cable company but he said that it was an 18 month process. Mr. Curry noted that Nottingham was paying the lowest franchise fee in the area but he said that the fee they were paying was still too high. Mr. Brown said that the town had gotten $3,500 back from franchise fees. He said that the town owned their cable broadcasting equipment but he said that it was 20 years old.
Mr. Brown said that the line for enforcement was being decreased and he said that the line for the Pawtuckaway Lake Advisory Committee was being decreased because there were no active grant applications. He said that the cost of the newsletter would go up slightly because the newsletter committee planned to increase the number of pages that were a part of the newsletter.
TOWN CLERK:
Mr. Brown said that the Town Clerk fees were increased so they would bring in more revenue. He said that the costs for the Town Clerk to go to dues and conferences had been decreased. He said that the cost of postage for the Town Clerk had increased considerably because of mail in registrations but he said that there had been positive feedback about that new option. He said that the costs for printing and publications had decreased and the costs for office supplies had increased. He said that the town had gotten a grant for the restoration of their records. He said that the total amount requested in the Town Clerk budget was $61,182 but he said that the Town Clerk took in offsetting revenues of $700,000-$750,000.
VOTER REGISTRATION:
Mr. Brown said that the cost of election worker salaries was increased in 2008 because of the large number of scheduled elections. He said that the cost of printing would also be up because they had to pay to print a larger number of ballots because there were more elections. He said that there was also a cost to program the vote tabulating machine. He said that the machine needed to be programmed before each election.
ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING:
Mr. Brown said that the proposed budget included the 2.3% cost of living adjustment for the bookkeeper. He said that the salary of the Treasurer had been increased from $4,250 to $5,000. He said that she did a fantastic job and deserved the extra $750. He said that she invested their money very well and made lots of interest on it for them. He said that the increase in equipment was for a new computer for the bookkeeper. He said that the cost of broadcasting had decreased and he said that there were not any bond fees.
REVALUATION OF PROPERTY:
Mr. Brown said that the line in the budget for the position of Assessing Coordinator had been moved to the revaluation of property section of the budget. He noted that the line had not changed, just its location in the budget.
Mr. Brown said that he had received bids for contract assessors but he had not reviewed them yet. He said that the numbers in the proposed budget reflected a worst case scenario.
Mr. Brown said that there had been a slight increase in the line for mapping because the town got their tax maps updated each year.
Ms. Andersen asked how many bids the town had received for contract assessors. Ms. Seaverns said that there had been seven total bidders but they had not all bid on everything up for bid. She said that the numbers in the budget reflected the highest bids.
LEGAL EXPENSE:
Mr. Brown said that the town attorney line had increased. He said that there were two active litigations and he foresaw at least two more. He said that they also did not know the ramifications of the zoning warrant. Mr. Terninko asked what litigations were active. Mr. Brown said that there were two active litigations against the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION:
Mr. Brown said that the line for Blue Cross/Blue Shield was for employee health insurance. He said that there would be corresponding revenue for that line to reflect employee contributions. He said that there was a 10.7% increase in health insurance premiums. He said that there had also been some changes in personnel coverage such as people switching from single coverage to family coverage. He said that there had also been a 2.1% increase in short term disability. He said that the police and fire department retirement rates were set by the state and he said that the town would contribute up to 3% for the retirements of their other full time employees.
PLANNING BOARD:
Mr. Brown said that the Planning Board Secretary would be paid a cost of living increase and she would also receive an increase in her number of hours.
Mr. Brown said that the Board of Selectmen had taken the Planner out of the budget. Ms. Mills said that she disagreed with that decision. She said that she felt it was essential for the Planning Board to have that expertise. Mr. Bock said that the Board of Selectmen had seen difficulties over the past two years with the Planner position and they had made the decision. Ms. Mills said that the Board of Selectmen should have approached the Planning Board about this and let them discuss it. Mr. Bock said that if not having a Planner turned out to be a serious problem for the Planning Board, the Board of Selectmen could revisit the question next year. He said that he thought they would have a better idea after one year what they could do with their present staff. He said that the Board of Selectmen saw
this as a positive. Ms. Mills said that this move could trigger lawsuits because the Planner had caught mistakes that no one else had caught. She said that she felt so strongly about this that she would not run for the Planning Board again because of this decision. Mr. Curry said that as a former member of the Planning Board he would comment that the Planning Board was one of the most time consuming town boards. He said that having the Planner reduced the effort each member of the Board needed to make. He said that he agreed that getting rid of the Planner was to some degree to their peril but he said that he did not object to the decision of the Board of Selectmen. Ms. Bonser said that their initial goal in hiring the Planner was to make their ordinances easier to read and use. She said that they had not achieved that. She said that she was going to suggest to the Planning Board that they create a subcommittee. She said that
she had been approached by people who were willing to participate on such a committee. She said that she was not sure what the town had gotten for their $5,000 that they paid for their Planner. She said that they could work within their own Planning/Zoning and Building Departments to try to do what the Planner had been doing. Ms. Mills said that she thought any planner would have had trouble with the Nottingham Planning Board. She said that she did not think it was fair of them to blame the Planner for the fact that the goal of changing the ordinances had not been met.
ZONING BOARD:
Mr. Brown said that the proposed budget for the Zoning Board of Adjustments was similar to that of the Planning Board. He said that the number of hours for the secretary had been increased.
GENERAL GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS:
Mr. Brown said that the cost to maintain the new fire house would be an increase from the cost to maintain the old one. He said that the fuel charges had increased and they were hoping for good weather.
Ms. Schmottlach said that the Grange building looked really bad. Mr. Bock said that the Board of Selectmen had made cuts because they were trying to look at the overall budget. He said that they were looking at the economy. Mr. Brown said that he thought infrastructure was important. Ms. Schmottlach said that the town of Nottingham had a history of putting off repairs and making the overall cost end up being more. Ms. Bonser said that the town had taken on a lot of debt service in order to build the new fire station and she said that before the Board of Selectmen asked the town to put money towards the Grange building they wanted to have a specific plan for what they would do with that building. She said that the Board of Selectmen was hoping the economy would be better in two years. Mr. Brown said
that it would cost between $5,400 and $16,000 to paint the outside of the Grange building. Mr. Netishen said that the Building Committee was looking for input from the public about what to do with that building. He said that the building would need to be fully evaluated and they would have to determine a methodology for moving forward with repairs to the Grange building. Mr. Sweeney said that the Building Committee would add the Grange building to their agenda if they could hire someone to go through the building and look at it. He said that the Building Committee would be holding a meeting open to the public on February 25, 2007 and they would be looking for ideas regarding several buildings in town.
CEMETERIES:
Mr. Brown said that there would be some offsetting revenue for the cemetery.
ARTICLE 13:
Mr. Koester noted the time and asked if anyone in the audience would like to speak about a specific issue.
Ms. Danis said that she would like to speak about Article 13 and say why she thought the Budget Committee should support it.
The text of Article #13 is as follows:
"To see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $4,000.00 for the purpose of conducting courtesy inspections of boats using the State Boat Launch at the Fundy Boat Ramp and the Pawtuckaway State Park Boat Ramps on Pawtuckaway Lake to remove fragments of exotic invasive aquatic species and to educate the public on how to prevent the spread of exotic species from water body to water body. This article was submitted by the Pawtuckaway Lake Improvement Association, by a majority vote."
Ms. Danis explained that the Pawtuckaway Lake Advisory Association was focused on four major initiatives. She explained that it was a very active association and they were very involved. She said that she had shown the Budget Committee pictures of the amount of damage that could be done by millfoil. She said that the Pawtuckaway Lake Advisory Committee had been conducting voluntary inspections with money from the state but she said that they had already been informed by the state that they were going to receive less money. She said that as a result of them getting less money from the state, they were asking for the people of the town to help them make up the difference. She said that they had someone monitor the boat ramps from 6:00am-6:00pm approximately 30 days per year. She said that during the previous
year the Pawtuckaway Lake Advisory Committee had done 2,829 inspections of boats going onto the lake and they had found millfoil. She said that they had saved a lot of trouble for everyone by finding that before it had appeared in the lake. She said that the Committee had spent 1,386 hours monitoring boats over the past year and she said that they would like to add 600 additional hours to that for the upcoming year. She said that the health of the lake was important to the whole town. She noted that the Recreation Department used the lake for their swimming lessons. She said that the Pawtuckaway Lake Advisory Committee was just looking for some additional support with this warrant article. Ms. Andersen asked whether there was day use of the boat ramps. Ms. Danis said yes. She said that the Pawtuckaway Lake Advisory Committee would like to expand their coverage of boats going into the lake. She said that they only had coverage on
peak days for 8 hours per day. She said that millfoil was very difficult to control once it arrived in a lake. Ms. Powell asked if there was any way that a fee could be charged to those who used the lake. Ms. Danis noted that it was important for the lake to be healthy for swimmers as well as boaters. Mr. Curry said that he had grown up on a lake and he had seen millfoil ruin a lake in 10-15 years. Ms. Danis said that the Pawtuckaway Lake Advisory Committee had very active weed watchers. She said that they were volunteers and college students and she said they were a tremendous help but she noted that there was some liability in having college students and volunteers do voluntary boat inspections at odd hours. She also noted that it was difficult to ask volunteers to do this on holidays and weekends when there was the most boat traffic. She said that the Pawtuckaway Lake Advisory Committee worked very closely with the schools in Nottingham
and they took the 5th graders out on a field trip to the lake and taught them about water quality.
KENNARD ROAD:
Mr. Koester asked if there was anyone else in the audience who would like to speak on an issue.
Mr. Rothery said that he lived on Kennard Road and he had been under the impression that it had been going to get fixed and then he had heard that it was not going to get fixed. He said that he would like to get more information.
Mr. Koester read out loud a memo from the Town Administrator dated February 6, 2008 and regarding the town road projects. Following is the text of the memo:
"In response to the discussion regarding the Town's 2008 planned road projects, I have made inquiries to the Road Agent, the Chief of Police and done onsite driving inspections of the roads in question.
Kennard Road is in fact very rough on the paved portion beginning on the Freeman Hall end. There is approximately 3,750 feet of road in this section with 8 homes. It is certainly in need of attention. I do not have any information on the volume of traffic on Kennard Road. It would not surprise me if the highest volume is on the Smoke Street end of the road.
Deerfield Road is also very rough with the worst portion beginning at the Town line, all the way to Back Creek. This section of road is approximately 6,280 feet long with 30 homes. This road has an additional problem in that the ditch line of this road has been damaged by the flooding and rain events over the last two years. I have been informed by the Police department that there have been incidents of vehicles stuck of off the road because of this issue. The remaining portion of this road, is not as bad as the beginning or that of Kennard Road. Deerfield Road is also a main artery between Nottingham and Deerfield and has a steady volume of traffic.
Both Highway and Police Departments acknowledge the condition of these roads and feel that Deerfield Road has a higher priority for rebuilding in that it services more residents and is considerably longer than the paved portion of Kennard Road."
Mr. Koester explained that the Capital Improvement Plan had read that the Highway Department would fix Kennard Road this year but the Highway Department had talked about using the money to fix Deerfield Road instead. Mr. Brown said that it would not be cost effective to split a project and have to move heavy equipment and other resources from one road to another. Ms. Bonser asked if it would be possible to put down gravel on Kennard Road. Mr. Brown said that gravel was expensive but it might be possible to make Kennard a dirt road. Mr. Rothery said that Kennard was a 5 mile per hour road and it was tearing up the cars that he and his wife drove on it. Mr. Bevins said that Kennard Road had been in bad repair for several years. He said that the difficult road had been affecting his wife's business. Ms.
Bevins said that she had been losing 30-50% of her income because of the condition of Kennard Road. Mr. Schmottlach said that fixing Kennard Road had been a part of the plan. He said that the road would not fix itself. He said that driving on Kennard Road had to be hard on the school bus. Mr. Brown said that he could talk to the Board of Selectmen and the Road Agent about this issue before the Town Meeting. Ms. Bonser suggested that they could change the wording of the warrant article regarding road repair and take out the words "if emergency arises." Ms. Schmottlach said that she was worried about an ambulance having to go down Kennard Road. She said that would be a liability for the town. She said that she was all for the band aid approach of making Kennard a dirt road. She said that the road was really, really awful.
Mr. Koester said that it was not just people who lived on Kennard Road who complained about it. He read out loud an email he and Ms. Andersen had received from a resident on this subject. Following is the text of that email:
"Michael and Charlene:
I write to you as known members of the Nottingham Budget Committee, hoping to catch you before the budget is sealed, in case you were unaware of a glaring liability and safety issue. I request that you share this letter with the entire committee.
I had occasion to drive down Kennard Road tonight. Remind me not to do that again. I thought my end of Garland Road was bad. But Garland is the autobahn compared to Kennard, which is way more like a mogul field than a road. Really, it is almost shameful to see a road in that condition. It is nearly impassable. I had to pick my way down the road, avoiding innumerable upheavals, any of which could have wrecked my alignment, maybe cracked an axle, or jostled my car off the roadway. Gadzooks.
I certainly hope this coming fiscal year budget includes funding sufficient to repair that road, that the money is earmarked, and that the road agent has it on his to do list.
Thanks for all you do!
Bonnie Winona Whittemore
Garland Road"
Ms. Schmottlach read out loud a similar email that she had received from the Nottingham School Board Secretary who had taken her children on a drive down Kennard Road. Mr. Mills said that he had been in an ambulance and had been talking to the driver. He said that the driver had mentioned that there were roads in town where he had not been able to go faster than 5 miles per hour. He said that things did happen and it was something people should consider.
POLICE DEPARTMENT:
Mr. Brown said that a new police officer would only be employed for nine months out of 2008 so the proposed budget had been changed to reflect that. He said that hopefully they would find a new officer soon. He said that the Police Department was not going to buy computers and they were working on getting a savings on software.
Mr. Schmottlach asked why the line for Police Department dues and conferences had increased by so much. Mr. Brown said that the Police Department was looking into joining an accreditation program. Mr. Netishen said that the program was recognized throughout the state. He said that it was a complete program which involved peer review. Mr. Schmottlach asked if this was a one year program. Mr. Netishen said that it was conceivable that the program could be carried over into another calendar year but he said that it was a program which would only take a specific amount of time to implement. Mr. Bock said that the Board of Selectmen had talked to the previous as well as the current police chiefs about this program and they had both been in favor of it. He said that liability costs had been reduced for
other departments which had implemented this program. He said that there were lots of benefits to the program. Ms. Andersen asked about which other local police departments had implemented this program. Mr. Netishen said that the Board of Selectmen had talked to several chiefs of Police including the Chief in Goffstown about this. He noted that Goffstown had been certified through this program. He said that the Board of Selectmen had also talked to the Local Government Center about this process and they had watched a film about it. Ms. Bonser said that this was a nationally recognized program. She said that its member departments were considered to have a higher level of professionalism than other departments. Mr. Foss said that the accreditation program standardized the rules and procedures of member departments. He said that the Nottingham Police Department would also go for National Accreditation.
FIRE DEPARTMENT:
Mr. Brown said that the salaries for the full time employees of the Fire Department had been increased by the 2.3% cost of living adjustment. He said that there had also been an increase in the lines for mileage because fire department members had been using their own vehicles more and more. He said that if the warrant article for the self funding of the ambulance passed than the line for medical supplies could be reduced to $0. He said that the cost for a radio upgrade had been decreased by $500. He said that the cost for telephone had decreased slightly.
CODE ENFORCEMENT:
Mr. Brown said that the code enforcement budget was only up by $30 and he noted that the Building Inspector brought in revenue for the town.
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT:
Mr. Brown said that the Budget Committee had received a memo dated February 4, 2008 from the Emergency Management Director regarding a question they had previously asked.
Mr. Koester read the memo out loud. Following is the text of the memo:
"As requested, here is more information concerning the budget line for grants. I have budgeted last year and again this year for $3,000.00 to have monies to pay the Town's portion of any grants we may be awarded. Last year we did not receive any awards. I have applied for a grant that would be used to update the Town's Emergency Operation Plan.
We need to update the plan in the new format FEMA requires. If the plan is not updated the Town will become ineligible to receive grants from FEMA in the future. We have until 2010 to update the plan. We are currently working on an updated plan that is still about a year away from being submitted for approval. Obtaining the grant will insure that our plan meets all the requirements placed by FEMA. The grant cycle for the first of the year has already passed and and we were not awarded any grant as of this date. The next round of awards is to take place in early July and the State of NH, who administrates the grants for FEMA has stated that we should be awarded monies within the summer months.
Concerning the telephone line, this budget line covers the use of the hard wired phones in the office shared by the Building, Planning, Zoning, Conservation and Emergency Management Departments/Committees. This line also covers the cell phone for the Building Inspector/Emergency Management Director. This phone is equipped for both voice and email capabilities. There are times in a time of emergency that both the State of NH emergency management office and FEMA send direct email communications to me when I am in the field.
Last year we priced the cost of getting this type of phone or using a wireless card for the notebook computer and price comparisons said this was the most cost effective way to go."
Ms. Andersen noted that the memo from the Emergency Management Director had not been very specific. Mr. Brown said that basically the Emergency Management Department applied for any grant they thought they could get as soon as the grant money became available.
HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT:
Mr. Brown said that the Highway Department had applied for a grant to help them fix Back Creek Bridge on Deerfield Road. He said that the town would have to come up with 25% as well as the costs for engineering and permitting the project.
Mr. Brown said that there was a need to increase the money in the budget for construction and reconstruction each year in order to maintain the level of work that could be done. He said that the costs of construction and reconstruction just kept increasing.
RECYCLING:
Mr. Brown said that he would like an additional part time person to randomly monitor the recycling center. Mr. Schmottlach said that the town was charged when things were found in the recycling bins that did not belong there. He said that the town would break even on the part time person if they prevented some people from putting things in the bins that did not belong there.
Mr. Brown said that the town had asked to cut back on one of the tests they had been doing. He noted that it had been four years since they had gotten a positive test result.
Mr. Brown said that Nottingham had tried to get involved in a Hazardous Waste cleanup but they had gotten very limited participation. He said that they were working on a proposal with Epping and Lee so that maybe such an event could be held closer than Dover. Mr. Koester asked if it would be possible to do a hazardous waste cleanup in Nottingham. Mr. Brown said that Hazardous Waste cleanups required a very extensive set up. He said that they were expensive and it was difficult to find ways to transport the hazardous material.
Mr. Brown said that there was a warrant article for a new baler at the Recycling Center. He said that they still needed to send out the waste even if they couldn't use the baler and he said that the cost of sending light loads added up quickly.
ANIMAL CONTROL:
Mr. Brown said that there had not been any changes in the budget for animal control. He noted that there had been a happy ending story earlier that day which showed how well the animal control system worked.
GENERAL ASSISTANCE:
Mr. Brown said that it seemed like the state was trying to transfer costs to the municipalities. He said that the good news was that they had received an anonymous donation from a family in town who wanted them to use it to assist another local family in need.
RECREATION:
Ms. Horvath noted that there was a connection between the Recreation budget and the Police budget. Mr. Brown said that the proposed budget included making the Recreation Director a full time position. He said that there had been a cut in programs but he said that lots of things in the Recreation Department budget were paid for through grants. Ms. Powell asked about the budget for Recreation Department advertising. Ms. Horvath said that money was used to advertise for employees if necessary. She noted that there were some years where they had not had to use it because all their previous employees had returned or they had gotten employees through referrals or for some other reason, they had not had to advertise for employees but she said that they could not count on not having to use that so it was important to
have it in the budget. Ms. Powell noted that the equipment line had been decreased. Ms. Horvath said that the Recreation Department did not need a computer this year. She said that she had been upset about the cut which had been made because it might result in one less summer concert but she said that she would try to get another grant in order to keep the concert.
LIBRARY:
Ms. Legard said that any significant increases in the library budget were due to the costs of automation. She said that was a one time expense. Ms. Vachon explained that the purpose of the automation was to eliminate the card catalog. She said that they had gotten a really good deal where they could combine with the school library and visitors to either library could access the catalogs of references from both libraries. She said that this would make running the library more efficient. She also said that the automation programs were easier to use and once this was complete she thought it would produce significant savings. Ms. Carlson asked about the overall cost of this program and the annual fee once it was completely implemented. Ms. Vachon said that the cost so far had been about $10,000 and the
next step in the process would cost about $14,000. She said that would put the total cost of automation at about $25,000-$26,000. She said that the annual fee for the program after it was fully implemented would be $829.
Ms. Legard said that the Library Trustees wanted to reduce the Technology line by $2,000 because she said that the cost of computers had decreased. Mr. Terninko asked if the library had backup of their files. Ms. Albert said no but she said that soon they would. Mr. Sweeney asked if the backup would be at the school building. Ms. Albert said yes. Ms. Carlson asked how the connection would be made so people could see the catalog for both the school and town libraries from either location. Ms. Albert said that would be done via an internet connection.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT:
Mr. Brown said that there had been no request to fund economic development. Mr. Curry asked if there had been any tangible result from the Economic Development Director. Mr. Brown said that he had not gotten much feedback regarding the Economic Development Director. He said that the Economic Development Director had done some type of brochure and ad campaign. Ms. Horvath said that a list of businesses in Nottingham had been compiled. Ms. Bonser said that list would get online to the town website. Mr. Bock said that the Board of Selectmen felt the town had not gotten value for the money they had spent on the Economic Development Director.
WARRANT ARTICLES:
Ms. Andersen asked why some petitioned warrant articles had been put on the warrant before the operating budget. Mr. Brown noted that those articles would require lots of discussion and he thought people would prefer to discuss them early in the day before they got too tired.
ARTICLE 3:
Mr. Koester noted Article #3. The text of that article is as follows:
"Are you in favor of a 3-man board of Assessors to be the legal assessing authority for the town?" (Majority Ballot Vote Required) (Submitted by Petition).
Mr. Koester asked whether this article would have budgetary impact. Ms. Seaverns said that if it passed the article would not have any budgetary impact until 2009. Mr. Koester said that the people in town needed to know the article might have budgetary impact in the future. Ms. Seaverns said that she only knew of three towns in New Hampshire that had elected Boards of Assessors and she said that all of them still hired an outside company to do their assessing. She said that she was unsure of whether the board members would receive a stipend for their time. Mr. Batchelder said that the Board of Selectmen should take a stand and make a statement about this. Ms. Seaverns said that there were still a lot of unanswered questions about the expected implementation of this particular article. She noted that
the Board of Selectmen had not had the chance to see this article at a meeting yet. Mr. Sweeney said that there was not enough information on this article. Mr. Batchelder said that the voters, the Budget Committee and the Board of Selectmen needed to know what the future impact of this article would be. Ms. Carlson asked whether the Board of Assessors would have to be elected. Ms. Seaverns said yes.
ARTICLES 7, 8 & 9:
Mr. Schmottlach noted that articles 7,8 and 9 had to do with the town ambulance being self funding. He said that the voters would vote on the budget before they voted on these three articles. Mr. Brown suggested that someone at Town Meeting could ask to change the order of the discussion.
ARTICLE 14:
Mr. Brown read out loud Article #14. Following is the text of that article:
To see if the voters will require the Selectmen/Assessors to deny Property Tax abatement appeals (or other forgiveness) for interest accrued due to the Town for nonpayment of property taxes. This does not affect or apply to those abatement appeals that are filed for genuine poverty demonstrated to the Town and kept confidential. This does affect those taxpayers who choose to pay late and ask for a forgiveness of incurred interest through the abatement process or other agreement with the Selectmen. This is also known as an interest free loan of Town monies. Passage of this article would require implementation for tax year 2008 and the following years. A yes vote indicates a directive to the Selectmen as stated in this article."
Mr. Bock noted that a very small amount of money had been forgiven by the Board of Selectmen. Mr. Brown said that the total amount forgiven in 2007 was about $19. He said that the last thing that the town wanted was for someone to lose their home because they could not pay the taxes. He said that the Board of Selectmen worked with people on this and helped them work out payment plans. Mr. Bock said that hearing someone go in front of the Board of Selectmen because they were having trouble paying their taxes was a difficult and painful process. Mr. Brown said that the article would have some budgetary effect but he was not sure how much.
ARTICLE 15:
Mr. Brown read out loud Article #15. Following is the text of that article:
"Do you approve of directing the Board of Selectmen/Assessors to mail a copy of any property tax card that changes assessed value to the listed property owner? Such card shall be accompanied with the previously effective card. Property cards shall be mailed within 30 days of any such changes. There shall be no charge to the property owner for this service. If this article is accepted by the Voters, it shall be effective immediately upon passage. A yes vote indicates mandatory direction to the Selectmen as stated in this article."
Mr. Brown said that this article would have a monetary effect. He said that 250-500 property tax cards changed per year. Ms. Carlson asked whether someone could get their tax card for free if they came into the town office and asked for it. Ms. Seaverns said yes. Mr. Brown said that the assessors left a door hanger when they visited a house and he said that normally assessments went up when a person took out a building permit.
ARTICLE 16:
Mr. Brown read out loud Article #16. Following is the text of that article:
"Do you approve of directing the Board of Selectmen/Assessors to disclose, via the Town web page and public posting at the Town offices, at not more than 6 month intervals, all pending litigation involving the Town? Such posting will include the parties involved, the subject of the litigation, the court involve, anticipated court appearance dates, location, applicable case or docket numbers, and an estimate of monetary exposure to the litigants. Such posting shall include any NH Court, any Federal Court, and the NH Board of Tax and Land Appeals. The first instance of disclosure/posting shall occur no more than 30 days after an affirmative vote by the voters. A yes vote indicates mandatory direction to the Selectmen as stated in this article."
Mr. Brown said that if this article were passed it would mean additional clerical work for the Town Office staff. He said that these questions were answered in the office by anyone who came in and asked.
ARTICLE 17:
Mr. Brown read out loud Article #17. Following is the text of that article:
"Do you approve of directing the Board of Selectmen/Assessors to institute a policy of hearing property tax appeals for abatement of property taxes and/or abatement of accruing interest late payments? Such hearings are to be a public meeting and subject to all parts of the New Hampshire Right To Know Law (RSA 91A). A yes vote indicates mandatory direction to the Selectmen as stated in this article."
Mr. Brown said that he was unsure about the legality of Article #17. Ms. Carlson said that a hardship matter was specifically excluded from the Right To Know law. Mr. Brown said that he would need to get all of these petitioned warrant articles approved by attorneys.
ARTICLE 18:
Mr. Brown read out loud Article #18. Following is the text of that article:
"Do you approve of directing the Board of Selectmen/Assessors to institute the following schedule of copy charges for public records held by the Town of Nottingham. A yes vote directs the Selectmen to implement this fee schedule upon passage of this article.
Single sided 8.5 x 11 .10 (ten cents each)
Double sided 8.5 x 11 .20 (twenty cents each)
Property Record Card (2 sided) .20 (twenty cents each 2 sided card)
Legal Size 11 x 17 .20 (twenty cents each)
Tax maps (small side) .25 (twenty five cents each)
Electronic copy to CD, per CD $2.50 (per CD)"
Mr. Brown said that this article would take away the authority to set the copy rates from the Board of Selectmen. He said that the town might not be able to fight this because a legislative body could sometimes outweigh a government body. Ms. Seaverns noted that the town would lose money if this article passed. Mr. Koester asked whether the fees mentioned in the article were low. Mr. Brown said yes. He said that they were very low. Ms. Seaverns noted that the people who made the most copies were real estate developers.
ARTICLE 19:
Mr. Brown read out loud Article #19. Following is the text of that article:
"Do you approve of directing the Selectmen/Assessors to implement required property assessor training for a Town of Nottingham Assessing Official on a continuing basis? The training requirement does not apply to any non elected official. The Selectmen/Assessor or a member of the Town of Nottingham Board of Assessors, as applicable, shall participate in the International Association of Assessing Officials (IAAO) approved assessing course 101. Such training must be successfully completed online or with an IAAO approved instructor. An elected Assessing Official must be enrolled within the 2008 fiscal year and be completed within one year of the date of passage of this article. Failure to successfully complete the IAAO 101 course shall be sufficient cause for the affected Town Official to resign from his/her
elected position that affects property assessing. In any case there shall be a municipal requirement to have an enrollee yearly until all sitting elected Assessing Officials have successfully completed the subject training."
Ms. Carlson asked whether that requirement was possible for a three person board. Mr. Brown said that the requirement would also include the Board of Selectmen. He said that the town would have to pay for the affected officials to take the course.
ARTICLE 20:
Mr. Brown read out loud Article #20. Following is the text of that article:
"To see if the Town will vote to approve the following resolution to be forwarded to our State Representatives, our State Senator and our Governor:
Resolved: We the citizens of Nottingham, NH believe in a New Hampshire that is just and fair. The property tax has become unjust and unfair. State leaders who take a pledge for no new taxes perpetuate higher and higher property taxes. We call on our State Representatives, our State Senator and our Governor to reject the "Pledge", have an open discussion covering all options, and adopt a revenue system that lowers property taxes."
Ms. Bonser commented that she thought the article should state, "a revenue system that eliminates property taxes." She said that otherwise in her opinion the property taxes would go down for a few years and then they would creep back up as the costs increased and then they would have high property taxes as well as other taxes.
REVENUES:
Mr. Batchelder asked if the Budget Committee could get a short presentation of the revenues. Mr. Brown noted the timber taxes and said that he had been trying to be conservative in estimating the revenues. He said that they expected the revenue from building permits to be less then the previous year. He said that the revenue from the Building permit taken out by USA Springs had been $180,000. He noted that there was some money from the Federal Emergency Management Association. He said that they had been given 50% of the estimated cost for the bridge and he said that they would get the other 50% in 2009. Mr. Curry asked if the only state revenue the town received was from the room and meal tax. Ms. Seaverns said that the forest and land tax also was revenue from the state. Mr. Brown said that
the Highway Block grant was also revenue from the state. Mr. Fernald asked whether the town could make the temporary bridge permanent. Mr. Brown said that he did not know. Ms. Carlson asked whether the town paid rent on the temporary bridge. Mr. Brown said yes but he said that they did not pay a large amount of rent on the temporary bridge.
After asking whether the members of the public had any further comment, Mr. Koester closed the public hearing portion of the meeting at 10:10pm.
BUDGET COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Mr. Koester reconvened the meeting at 10:20pm.
Ms. Powell said that she did not want to support a salary of $17.50 for a secretarial position.
Ms. Powell made a motion that the line for the proposed additional Town Office part time secretarial position be cut to $19,500.
Ms. Powell said that cut would make the maximum salary no more than $13/hour for 25 hours per week.
Ms. Andersen seconded the motion.
Mr. Batchelder noted that the Budget Committee had no say in what hourly rate was paid to employees. Ms. Bonser said that the budget needed to leave some latitude in order to help with the hiring process. Mr. Bonser noted that part time employees were more difficult to hire because they did not receive benefits. Mr. Brown agreed and said that the only benefit received by part time employees was six hours of paid holiday time. Mr. Batchelder said that technically the Board of Selectmen could pay a new employee whatever they wanted but they would just have to take the money from a different line item if this cut passed. Mr. Koester said that the additional money in the line would allow for more flexibility in case the Town Office decided to increase the number of hours in the position.
Ms. Powell and Ms. Andersen voted in favor of the motion to cut the line for the additional Town Office part time secretarial position to $19,500. The other present members of the Budget Committee voted against the motion. The motion was defeated 7-2.
Mr. Fernald noted that the people who worked in the Nottingham Town Office did a lot of work.
Mr. Curry asked where the town would find the money if the legal fees went above the budgeted amount. Ms. Bonser said that there was a procedure for that. She said that first the Board of Selectmen would appeal to the Budget Committee and then to the Department of Revenue Administration. She said that the procedure was only to be used in catastrophic emergencies. Mr. Brown said that he thought the article named "Nottingham Water Rights and Local Self-Government Ordinance" would have the most legal impact. He said that he did not foresee a huge legal impact from the other articles. Mr. Bonser noted that if the water rights article did not pass then someone could lower the legal line of the proposed budget from the floor of the Town Meeting.
Ms. Andersen said that people had spoken in support of the Planner position during the public hearing portion of the Budget Committee meeting. She said that the Budget Committee should consider those comments. Mr. Curry said that he had a concern about the Planning Board not having the money available for services that they needed. He asked whether they could get a private planner who was not affiliated with the Strafford Regional Planning Commission. He said that he was not sure the Planning Board had gotten value for their money that they had spent on a Planner. Mr. Brown said that part of the problem had been that the Planning Board could not come to consensus. He said that in that case it would not have mattered who was in the Planner position. Ms. Andersen said that a subcommittee to look at the
regulations should be derived from the Planning Board. She said that she felt it would be in the best interests of the town in the long term to have a certified planner.
Ms. Andersen made a motion to increase the line for the certified Planner to $12,000. Mr. Curry seconded the motion.
Mr. Curry said that the purpose of the Planner should be to amend zoning and planning regulations. Mr. Bonser noted that the Building Inspector would have more time to help review plans. He said that it was going to be a slow year in the building department because the economy was in a downturn. He said that he did not think the Planner had worked out. Ms. Powell suggested that maybe the money should go to the Planning Services line instead. Ms. Bonser said that she did not know what it would cost if the Planning Board used the services of a Planner outside the Strafford Regional Planning Commission. Mr. Batchelder said that the Board of Selectmen had spoken against having a Planner. He said that he would not vote in favor of the motion. Mr. Curry said that the Planning Board had not wanted to
lose the services of the Planner. He said that the Planning Board wanted regulations in place so that they could make the town the way that the people wanted it to be. Ms. Bonser said that the Planning Board wanted the ordinances to agree with each other.
Mr. Curry, Ms. Andersen and Ms. Powell voted in favor of the motion to increase the Planner line to $12,000. Mr. Koester, Mr. Barry, Ms. Bonser, Mr. Batchelder, Mr. Bonser and Mr. Fernald voted against the motion. The motion was defeated 6-3.
Mr. Koester made a motion to raise the stipend line for the Fire Department to $30,000. Ms. Powell seconded the motion.
Mr. Koester said that he thought the town should keep promoting volunteerism. He said that he thought the town would suffer if they did not. Mr. Curry asked why the Board of Selectmen had cut the line. Ms. Bonser said that the taxpayers had taken on a lot of debt from building the new Fire Department building. She said that the Board of Selectmen had planned to revisit this issue next year. Mr. Batchelder noted that raising the line to $30,000 would be a 20% increase. Mr. Vilchock talked about how the Fire Department stipend point system worked. He said that there were approximately 32 fire department volunteers. Ms. Carlson said that the value of a point had decreased over time. She said that they had more people on the department and she said that most years the number of calls
increased. She said that the department did not want volunteers to think that their time spent on calls this year was worth less than their time spent last year. She said that the amount of stipend had not changed since 2003 which she stated was the year when the stipend program had first been implemented. Mr. Fernald asked whether a $25,000 stipend was ok with the Fire Department. Mr. Vilchock said no. He said that the Fire Department had tried to change it to $30,000 and the Board of Selectmen had cut it back to $25,000. Mr. Batchelder said that he was ok with increasing the stipend since it had not been increased since 2003.
Mr. Koester, Ms. Powell, Mr. Curry, Mr. Barry, Ms. Bonser, Mr. Batchelder, Mr. Bonser and Mr. Fernald voted in favor of the motion. Ms. Andersen voted against the motion. The motion passed 8-1.
Mr. Batchelder made a motion that the medical supplies line for the ambulance be reduced to $0. Ms. Bonser seconded the motion.
Ms. Carlson said that the Fire Department wanted the ambulance warrant articles to pass so they were ok with taking this $10,000 out of the budget.
The present members of the Budget Committee voted unanimously in favor of the motion to reduce the medical supplies for the ambulance line to $0. The motion passed 9-0.
Ms. Andersen made a motion to cut the line for new fire station electric to $5,000. Mr. Curry seconded that motion.
Ms. Andersen said that she thought the Fire Department could cut some use of lights in their building. She noted that the parking lot was lit very brightly all night long. Mr. Vilchock said that the parking lot had to well lit for safety reasons. Ms. Carlson said that the Fire Department had received complaints about their lights. She said that the department had lots of discussions about it. She said that all of the parking lot lights were on the same circuit. She said that in order to have the lights on less the Fire Department would need to have an electrician to reset their wiring. Mr. Brown said that the amount in the electricity lines was based on actual bills the town had received.
Ms. Andersen retracted her motion but said that she hoped the Fire Department would work diligently to address the concerns of the public who had complained about their lights.
Mr. Curry said that he thought the town could get their library software from free services. Mr. Bonser noted that the school and the town would be sharing those costs.
Mr. Koester noted that the new total on the operating budget in the Budget Committee recommended column would be $3,328,943.
Ms. Bonser made a motion that the Budget Committee recommend Article #4 (the operating budget). Mr. Barry seconded the motion. The present members of the Budget Committee voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 9-0.
Mr. Koester noted that Warrant Article #2 (the "Nottingham Water Rights and Local Self Government Ordinance") did have fiscal considerations. He said that those considerations would be both positive and negative. Mr. Bonser said that he was not sure they wanted other organizations helping to defend this ordinance because he was concerned that would make other organizations liable. Mr. Koester noted that USA Springs might sue if this ordinance passed. He said that it was up to the town whether they decided to defend the ordinance. He said that it was very likely the town would be sued as a result of this article if it passed. Mr. Curry said that since USA Springs was a case which had already been approved by the Planning Board he thought it would probably be grandfathered.
Ms. Andersen made a motion that the Budget Committee did not weigh in on this article.
Ms. Andersen said that she did not think that the Budget Committee had the information to properly evaluate this article and she said that the article did not contain any clear numbers. She said that she felt the Budget Committee would be doing a disservice to the town if they made a statement on this article.
Mr. Batchelder seconded the motion.
Mr. Batchelder said that the Budget Committee did not have to make a statement on this issue.
Ms. Andersen, Mr. Batchelder, Mr. Koester, Mr. Fernald, Ms. Powell and Mr. Barry voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Curry, Ms. Bonser and Mr. Bonser voted against the motion. The motion passed 6-3.
Mr. Curry said that he did not think the Budget Committee should address Article #3 (regarding the election of a Board of Assessors).
Mr. Koester noted that the Budget Committee had heard testimony regarding Article #5 (regarding highway construction and reconstruction). Ms. Bonser suggested that the Budget Committee amend the article by taking out the words "if an emergency arises." Mr. Brown said that any amendments to the wording would need to be done from the floor of town meeting. He said that the Budget Committee only had the authority to recommend or not recommend the articles.
Mr. Curry made a motion that the Budget Committee recommend Article #5 as written. Mr. Batchelder seconded the motion. Mr. Curry, Mr. Batchelder, Mr. Fernald, Mr. Barry, Ms. Bonser and Mr. Bonser voted in favor of the motion. Ms. Powell, Ms. Andersen and Mr. Koester voted against the motion. The motion passed 6-3.
Ms. Bonser made a motion that the Budget Committee recommend Article #6 (regarding purchasing a baler for the Recycling Center). Mr. Bonser seconded the motion. The present members of the Budget Committee voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 9-0.
Mr. Bonser made a motion that the Budget Committee recommend Articles 7, 8 & 9 (regarding the ambulance). Ms. Andersen seconded the motion. The present members of the Budget Committee voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 9-0.
Ms. Bonser made a motion that the Budget Committee recommend Article #10 (regarding a Capital Reserve Fund to purchase trucks for the Highway Department). Mr. Bonser seconded the motion. Mr. Curry, Mr. Batchelder, Mr. Fernald, Mr. Barry, Ms. Bonser, Mr. Bonser, Ms. Powell and Ms. Andersen voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Koester abstained from the motion. The motion passed 8-0 with one abstention.
Ms. Bonser made a motion that the Budget Committee recommend Article #11 (regarding a Capital Reserve Fund to purchase Fire/Rescue vehicles). Mr. Batchelder seconded the motion. The present members of the Budget Committee voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 9-0.
Ms. Andersen made a motion that the Budget Committee recommend Article #12 (regarding support of Social Service Agencies). Ms. Powell seconded that motion. Mr. Curry, Mr. Batchelder, Mr. Barry, Ms. Bonser, Mr. Bonser, Ms. Powell, Mr. Koester and Ms. Andersen voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Fernald voted against the motion. The motion passed 8-1.
Ms. Andersen made a motion that the Budget Committee recommend Article #13 (regarding inspections at the boat ramps). Mr. Curry seconded that motion.
Mr. Bonser commented that he thought the state should do more to help with this problem.
The present members of the Budget Committee voted unanimously in favor of the motion to recommend Article #13. The motion passed 9-0.
Mr. Bonser made a motion that the Budget Committee NOT recommend Article #18 (regarding copy charges). Mr. Curry seconded that motion. Mr. Bonser, Mr. Curry, Mr. Batchelder, Mr. Barry, Ms. Bonser, Ms. Powell, Mr. Koester and Mr. Fernald voted in favor of the motion. Ms. Andersen abstained from the motion. The motion passed 8-0 with one abstention.
Ms. Bonser made a motion that the Budget Committee members sign the MS7 form. Mr. Curry seconded the motion. The present members of the Budget Committee voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 9-0.
Mr. Curry made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 11:45pm. Mr. Bonser seconded the motion. The present members of the Budget Committee voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 9-0.
Respectfully submitted,
Kelly Tivnan
Budget Committee Secretary
| 
