Minutes
Selectmen’s Meeting
January 24, 2004
6:40 PM Chair Caron opened the meeting and asked all those present to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.
Members: Jon Caron, Bill Netishen, Mary Bonser and Heidi Seaverns, acting secretary.
Guests: Gene Reed, Sue Mooney, Dan Comte, Jay Michael, Sam Demeritt, Susan Mooney, Celia Abrams, Peter Bock, Dina Bock, Kate Hiza, Mark West, Deb Ames Kimball and several other citizens.
The meeting began with administrative business and the minutes of previous meetings were discussed first.
Motion: Bonser, second Caron to accept the minutes of the January 10th meeting as corrected.
Vote: 3-0 in favor.
Motion: Bonser, second Netishen to accept the minutes of the December 21st meeting as written.
Vote: 3-0 in favor.
Motion: Bonser, second Caron to accept the minutes of the October 20th meeting as corrected.
Vote: 3-0 in favor.
Motion: Bonser, second Caron to accept the minutes of the January 18th meeting as written.
Vote: 3-0 in favor.
From the signature file,
Motion: Caron, second Bonser to sign timber tax levy for Map 39, Lot 26 and Map 42, Lot 1.
Vote: 3-0 in favor.
Gene Reed indicated that in the 1/10/05 minutes Mr. Marken’s name was Mark and that it should be changed.
Motion: Caron, second Bonser to amend minutes of January 18th meeting as corrected.
Vote: 3-0 in favor.
The Board announced the upcoming informational meeting concerning the purchase of land for a new fire station. The meeting is on Friday, January 28th at 7 PM, Conference Room #1 in the town office building.
7:00 PM Members of the Conservation Commission arrived to discuss the Comte conservation easement and to have a general discussion with the Board members regarding conservation easements. Chair Caron remained at the table throughout the general discussion with the Conservation Commission members. Co-Chair Jay Michael stepped forward to speak about the use of funds for purchasing easements and the direction the commission is going in. They had provided the Board a list of Local Resource Protection Priorities (LRPP), which was given to Strafford Regional Planning Commission for inclusion in the NH DES LRPP update. These are areas that the Conservation Commission believes should be protected not a list of potential easements. There is not a formal map of potential easements and it is not within the Conservation
Commission’s power to actively solicit landowners. There was a discussion about a couple of parcels in Town that would be desirable to hold easements on. The Commission does not have specific criteria for potential parcels to have to tie in to other parcels with easements. The Rosenfield Mallette easement tied in with Pawtuckaway and if the Comte easement were purchased it would tie in with the Bock easement and the Newhall easement in Barrington. Beyond these easements, Mendum’s Landing also has property in conservation easement. Connectivity between parcels is desirable but any pockets that can be acquired within the residential area are desirable. Also connectivity between parcels may open the door to other adjoining easements. The Conservation Commission wants to work on getting information out to the public.
BearPaw has worked with Deerfield, Northwood, Raymond and Strafford. They are not the only entity who can help with easements but their knowledge and experience has been beneficial to the Conservation Commission.
Sue Mooney stepped forward and provided the Board with the Conservation Commission’s criteria list, which the Commission developed. Ms. Mooney reviewed the items on the list and explained that the Commission uses this list on site walks of property being considered for easements. The list breaks down the favorable and unfavorable (if any) criteria of the property being considered. The list was used on the site walk of the Comte property and had several criteria that received an outstanding ranking. The list was not used for the Rosenfield/Mallette easement but Ms. Mooney felt the property would rank equally given the agricultural land, the links to existing BearPaw easements, uniqueness of the property and the fact it abuts protected land (Pawtuckaway). In a survey of surrounding towns and their contributions
of Land Use Change Tax for conservation acquisition, most contribute 50% with the exception of Candia, Raymond and Deerfield who contribute 100%. All towns in the survey have no caps on contributions to the fund with the exception of Epping ($75,000). All of the towns are seeing similar development. The idea is to try to protect the rural character, natural features and farmland as affordably as we can. Each time the easement process is completed, it is more obvious how to proceed and how to streamline the process if possible next time. An emotional attachment to the land often motivates the owner to protect it. The next property being considered is April Bacon’s property consisting of around 45 acres on Route 156. The criteria list was used and the property contains uplands, older trees, beech trees and it abuts Pawtuckaway on the backside.
Co Chair Sam Demeritt stepped forward with an overall map of the Town which had some of the conservation easement properties outlined (State forests, Pawtuckaway State Park, Terninko & Friend). The Mendums Landing and Rosenfield/Mallette property have been added since the map was created. Also the Brooks Crossing subdivision has an easement on it and the Highlands subdivision has restrictions. Ms. Bonser thanked the Commission for their time. Mr. Caron said the criteria sheet is a good way to rank property. Mr. Michael suggested that the Conservation Commission get together with the Board a couple of times a year to be sure they are working together towards the same goal. The Commission needs to stay proactive and to make the information available to people as they did in the meeting they had a
couple years ago with Bear Paw regarding conservation easements. Mr. Michael stated he thought the Commission would be able to pursue the Bacon easement if the Comte agreement goes through. Mr. Netishen asked whether there was intent to use a third party as the monitor for the easements. Mr. Michael responded it was in our best interest to have a professional to do monitoring, etc. Mr. Caron stated that professional stewardship is important, as there are many factors involved in monitoring an easement. Too many things could happen on an easement property that was not being monitored correctly that could jeopardize the easement enforceability.
7:30 PM Mr. Caron recused himself from the discussion of the Comte easement as he is an abutter. Mark West stepped forward to speak about the easement. The Town attorney has been in touch with Tom Maslin, attorney for Bear Paw, who is drafting the Purchase and Sale agreement.
The application has gone into the Norcross Foundation for the bridge loan. Mr. West is hoping to do a site walk on the property soon with a representative from the Norcross Foundation.
Ms. Bonser said the Board needs to make a decision whether they want to pursue this.
Mr. Netishen asked if there were any unfavorable criteria on the Comte property seen during the site walk. Ms. Mooney said none. Much discussion followed on the escrow, the bridge loan and the terms of the agreement. There was some confusion on the terms of the agreement. Mr. West stated that once the money is obtained from the Norcross Foundation, Bear Paw has 1 year to obtain additional funding through grants. Any monies obtained by Bear Paw would go to the Comtes. Mr. West further stated that if Bear Paw is unable to secure any grants, the Comtes would take $160,000 since that would satisfy their financial obligations. The town attorney will be consulted about the latest language in the agreement. Once all concerns have been met and the attorney questions have been answered, a public hearing can be
held with the Conservation Commission and the Board of Selectmen concerning spending the $160,000. The town would hold the funds in escrow in the custody of the town treasurer. Ms. Bonser stated her concerns about the third party monitoring are lessened and she is comfortable with this part of the proposal. It was clear from the vote at Town Meeting that the townspeople are interested in acquiring easements. The question of money available for other easements if the Comte easement goes through was brought up. Mr. Michael said protecting available land is important and he felt that there was enough money available to secure both the Comte & Bacon easements. He said there may not be additional easements available and it would be a disservice to the voters to not complete this deal because another one may not come along.
Mr. Netishen wants to challenge Bear Paw to come up with $10,000 for administrative costs. Ms. West said that Bear Paw is a nonprofit organization that negotiates deals to encourage land protection and they need $10,000 for administrative costs, to offset grant writing expenses and attorney fees that Bear Paw has & will incur. The first priority is to protect the land and the second is to raise the $10,000 to make the deal work. With the agricultural land, managed forest, and large tract of land involved in this easement, there are high expectations to get grants. Mr. Netishen still feels Bear Paw should come up with $10,000 and challenged Bear Paw to raise that money through grants.
Motion: Bonser, second Netishen to go forward with the Comte project and direct the attorney to develop a purchase and sale agreement based on the January 6th document incorporating the Board’s concerns. Once the agreement is signed by the Board, a joint hearing between the Board and the Conservation Commission will be held to gain public input.
Vote: 2-0 in favor.
Mr. Netishen said he appreciated the time the Conservation Commission has spent on this.
Next, Mr. Dwayne Helton discussed his property at 3 Little John Lane. Mr. Helton spoke to Joanne Richard from DES who said that the State did not require documentation for any septic system before 1967 and they have no records of any system installed before 1971. Whatever is on the property is most likely grandfathered by the age of it. If there is an adequate system something must be put on file. Mr. Helton said it is the same system as in 1964 and it has been pumped. It is a tank with a pump system to a leach field because of the basement unit. The house was built in 1962. Ms. Bonser is concerned about safety with no 2nd exit from the basement apartment and a state approved septic system. Mr. Helton stated that the system is not in failure per the home inspection. Mr.
Netishen said it being used as a multi-family home in a residential neighborhood and he has concerns with the egress and the septic system. The Building Inspector outlined options for the Board, some of which included the Heltons going to the ZBA for relief. Mr. Helton does not feel he should have to go through the ZBA. He stated that it has been used as a multi-family unit for 40 years so this is after the fact. Mr. Caron noted that a duplex does not elevate is to multi-family purpose. Mr. Helton stated that the house is vacant and is costing a lot of money. Ms. Bonser doesn’t think the ZBA is necessary. The egress and septic system are the major concerns. Mr. Caron agrees with Mr. Netishen and Ms. Bonser. The system should be left in place as long as it is not in failure, a design should be on file with the state and the egress should be signed off by the Building Inspector.
Motion: Bonser, second Caron to have to Mr. Helton, owner of the property at 3 Little John Lane, get an approved septic plan on file with the state and have an inspection of the current system and egress signed off on by the Building Inspector. Also, the Board will waive the ZBA process since the property was legally conforming in 1962. This motion and action contained within is subject to approval by the Town attorney.
Vote: 2 in favor, 1 opposed (Netishen).
8:24 PM Mr. Gene Reed spoke next following up with questions he had from his letter dated January 3, 2005. The Board received a letter from Avitar today responding to Mr. Reed’s letter. Mr. Caron said that the forum he requested would not happen before Town Meeting. Ms. Bonser stated she thought that the meeting should be a workshop with the Board & Avitar. Mr. Netishen asked Mr. Reed to get a copy of his data to the Town office before the meeting so it could be forwarded to Avitar so the meeting would be productive. Mr. Reed requests that Gary Roberge, president of Avitar, be at the meeting as well as Loren Martin. Mr. Reed will be put on the agenda March 21st, 2005 to revisit the meeting issue, and a tentative time for the meeting will be set up at that time.
Concerning other business- Ms. Seaverns brought a letter received from SRPC to the Board’s attention regarding the NH DOT 10-year transportation plan. It had been sent to Earle Rourke as the TAC committee member for the Seacoast MPO. He forwarded the letter to the office. After some discussion, the Board requested that Ms. Seaverns work on the response. The memorial page in the Town report was discussed and Ms. Seaverns & Ms. Horvath will work on it. Next to be reviewed was the action list given to the Board in regards to issues that needed action while Mr. Brown was out of the office on medical leave. Mr. Netishen will address the NYA questions, and handle the scheduling of the filter replacements for the air handlers. Ms. Bonser will write a letter to the applicant not chosen for the Recreation Director
position, verify references for the company being considered for the lawn care work in 2005, and will follow up with John Teague in regards to the Comte easement. Mr. Caron will work on the BOS report for the Town Report. All 3 board members will address the last three items on the list-letter from NHDES in regards to the SRF, employee policy and employee agreement. A general budget discussion followed in regards to changes made to the warrant as a result of the budget committee meeting on 1/20/05, capital reserve funds, the narrative for the public budget hearing and the status of a warrant article for the Recreation Department. It was determined that the Recreation warrant article for a climbing structure should be pursued next year. There was also a brief discussion about debt. Ms. Bonser provided a draft Capital Improvement Plan for the Board’s review. The Board reviewed the mail, correspondence, legal and bill files. Next to be discussed was a memo from the Town Clerk to
the BOS regarding dog licensing. Mr. Caron thanked the Town clerk for the memo and said that the forwarding solution proposed by the clerk made the most sense.
Motion: Caron, second Netishen to use the Animal Control Officer to serve notices to delinquent dog owners that are on the list generated by the Town Clerk on June 20,2005.
Vote: 3-0 in favor
Having no further business to discuss
Motion: Netishen, second Bonser to adjourn the meeting at 9:30PM.
Vote: 3-0 in favor.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Seaverns
Approved as corrected
2/28/05
| 
