SEL20090714

APPROVED

TOWN OF PELHAM

BOARD OF SE= LECTMEN MEETING

MINUTES

July 14, 2009

APPROVED &#= 8211; July 28, 2009

CALL TO ORDER – 6:30pm

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

PRESENT:

Mr. Douglas Viger, Mr. = William McDevitt, Mr. Harold Lynde (arrived after the meeting commenced), Mr. Edm= und Gleason, Town Administrator Tom Gaydos

ABSENT:

Mr. Robert Haverty

OPEN FORUM

None.

APPOINTMENTS

Janet Gallant, Finance Director – 2010 Budget Introduction=

Finance Director Janet Ga= llant came forward to review the 2010 budget introduction. She explained how the budget binder would be set up. She commente= d that Warrant Article 8 (Support Contract in the amount of $64,500) and 10 (Police Contract in the amount of $156,877) had both been rolled into the respective Operating Budgets. She noted = that the numbers for the expended amounts as well as the revenue amounts would s= how a date of June 30^th for easy comparison. She stated that the one time expenditures (added last year by either the Selectmen or the Budget Committ= ee) would be excluded from the zero growth (i.e. truck at the Transfer Station). The budgets that ha= ve that type of growth will include information showing the specific reason to eliminate confusion when the proposed budget is reviewed. Ms. Gallant stated that the plan w= as to put together a summary of the whole budget (including charts) to show what = was contractual (employee as well as equipment) and what areas had to be flexib= le.

Mr. Gleason wanted to kno= w if there was a way to come up with estimated revenue to year end. Ms. Gallant said she would lean conservative on the estimated revenue.&nbs= p; Mr. Gleason felt it was important to show the Budget Committee the c= osts as well as the revenues which the Town had no control over given the present economy.

Attorney David Groff – Question of Property Ownership=

Attorney David Groff, representing Meadow Realty Trust, came forward to discuss property at 9 Meadow Lane. He stated it was an unusual situat= ion because it involved a town and adverse possession and no one could adversel= y possess Town owned property. He said = he had done research and spoke to the previous owner; an affidavit was included in= the information provided to the Selectmen.&nbs= p; His story was when the title to the property was originally acquired= (in the early 1970’s) he did a site walk with (since deceased) Charlie Therriault who had subdivided the property. During the site walk, Charlie indi= cated that the property line went to a barbed wire fence in the woods. At the time, the land was not a we= tland, which it primarily is currently. Attorney Groff stated that Mr. Donnelly believed he owned the land to the fence because that’s what he had been told by the subdivider of t= he property and had no reason to disbelieve him. Mr. Donnelly placed his trailer on= to the property and built a barn (that was still in existence), at the time there = was already a garage and a dug well. He resided there for a few years with his wife intending to construct a home, = but never did; he purchased other property on Hillcrest and resided there. Attorney Groff stated that the pro= perty was since sold and later conveyed to the Trust; the property and encroaching area had been continually used for over twenty years. His question had been if the prope= rty had been used for twenty years prior to the Town obtaining the title to the property because that would be the only way they could have title by adverse possession. In this case, Don= nelly got his title in 1972 and moved there shortly thereafter; the physical evid= ence seems to support it. The Town= took title by tax deed in 1994.

Attorney Groff said there= were a couple different ways to handle the situation and decided to speak with Mr. Gaydos and Planning Director Jeff Gowan and provide them with the documenta= tion to pass along to Town Counsel. He hoped to avoid a lot of expense and straighten out the encroachment onto the Town property. He felt the ea= siest way to handle the situation would be to file a petition with the court, exp= lain the situation, ask for a decision, have a plan prepared showing only the encroachment area, and have the plan recorded as part of the judgment rende= red by the court. From then on th= at (what was shown on the recorded plan) would be the boundary of the lot and = the remaining area would be the Town’s.&= nbsp;

Mr. Viger asked if the ch= ange of ownership affected the situation. Attorney Groff stated the periods of ownership on the lot in question were intact; as long as there was open, notorious and continuous possession= of a certain piece of property it didn’t make a difference.

Mr. Gleason asked if the = Town owned more land and if this was a piece of that land. Attorney Groff said the Town owned approximately thirteen acres that was taken by tax deed. Mr. Gleason wanted to know how much would be taken from the Town land. Attorney Groff said it was a very small portion and described the pa= rcel as having swampy areas. Mr. G= leason asked if the Town property was in current use. Mr. Gaydos said it was classified = as Town property. Attorney Groff= said the land had no particular use, there was nothing there. An aerial photograph was included = in the Selectmen’s information package.&nbs= p;

Mr. Gleason noted that th= e deed was quite explicit as to the boundaries and commented that no one had picke= d up on it. Attorney Groff said the owner recently (last year) was going to do something on the property and ha= d it surveyed, which is when he discovered he was partially on the Town’s property. Mr. Gleason questio= ned how the process would work to isolate the portion being used (encroached upon). Mr. Gaydos indicated t= hat Attorney Groff would have a plan prepared and a stamped survey that would be submitted to the Town. The pl= an and survey would be used to re-format the tax map. Attorney Groff outlined the propos= ed procedure. He said he would f= ile a petition with the court, the Town’s attorney (who had already viewed = the information) would either ignore it past the return date, in which case the= re would be a judgment by default entered or an answer would be filed that sta= ted they agreed and the court would issue the proposed decree. A new survey plan showing the lot description would be provided to the Planning Department.

Mr. Lynde arrived.

Mr. Gleason confirmed tha= t the plan would be subject to Town review and concurrence with the new boundaries. Attorney Groff sa= id there was not really a good way of presenting anything to the Planning Board for a subdivision or an adjustment between a town and an individual. He said the only way he could thin= k of (to which Town Counsel agreed) was through RSA 676:18 – restriction of registry recordings of certain types of plans. This would allow the Planning Depa= rtment to keep a plan on record so it was known what was going on with the lot. Mr. Gleason wanted to know how they would ascertain that the Town agreed (before the fact) with the division as stipulated. Mr. Gaydos propos= ed that Attorney Groff would provide the Selectmen with a completed stamped su= rvey so they could visually see that the lines had been drawn and marked; if the= y were in agreement, it would be given to Town Counsel who in turn would contact Attorney Groff to proceed with going to court. After the court made its ruling, it would then go to the Planning Department.&= nbsp; Attorney Groff said the plan would be given to the Planning Departme= nt ahead of time. He had the pla= n with him, but it needed the surveyor’s stamp. There was clarification made regar= ding what portion of the Town land was being discussed.

Mr. McDevitt asked if adv= erse possession gave the claimant the right to own or use the property. Attorney Groff stated there was a = twenty year (statute of limitations) and discussed how a claim could be brought about. Mr. McDevitt said the property was clearly marked as a piece of Town owned land that had not show= n up ‘on the radar’ of conservation. He said it didn’t seem to be anything of value.

Mr. Viger asked if abutte= rs had been contacted to make sure that someone didn’t come out after the fa= ct to make an issue. Attorney Gr= off said the abutters wouldn’t have any rights to the property; it would = just be the Town and the owner.

Mr. McDevitt was in favor= of the proposal and felt it would be wise to hold it open for a two-week period of comment.

There was no objection to= hold the item open for a two-week period of comment. Attorney Groff stated that he would provide a plan to the Town showing the lot line.

Susan Snide – Assessing Department Update

Assessing Assistant Susan= Snide came forward to provide a departmental update. She began by reviewing the status = of the cyclical update.

Mr. Gleason asked if the Assessing Department was receiving requests for abatements or revisits as a result of the cyclical revaluation. Ms. Snide answered no; the residential portion was standard. She said recent abatements were fr= om a commercial aspect because they took a big hit last year.

Mr. Lynde stated that he = would like to look at the records to see the growth rate in the Town’s valuation. He wanted to make = sure that the Selectmen were provided with the numbers prior to them being reset= so he would know what the change in the valuation was. He discussed the commercial proper= ty information and commented that there had been a lot of abatements the previ= ous year. Ms. Snide said the abat= ements came through with material data errors.&nb= sp; She said when Corcoran reviewed the property they came up with information that was more exact than what was found by Vision. Mr. Lynde asked if there were any changes in the applications for Elderly Exemptions. Ms. Snide said the number was hold= ing steady from last year to this year. Mr. Lynde asked if they thought residential property values would co= me in lower. Ms. Snide said it w= as anticipated that the residential values would come in lower. Mr. Lynde said people should be aw= are that the tax rate would go up. It = was noted although the tax rate goes up and the property value went down, the t= axes would be the same.

Mr. Gleason asked if ther= e had been an increase in Veteran’s exemptions. Ms. Snide said she had seen a few = come through, but didn’t have a percentage. She said they would be applied nex= t year because they missed the April 15^th deadline.

Ms. Snide continued to di= scuss the status of her department and felt the present outside contractor doing assessments made the department flow well.= She asked that the Town remain with the same contractor during the e= ntire cyclical process to maintain consistency.&= nbsp; Ms. Snide discussed the types of services that the Assessing Departm= ent provided for the benefit of the residents.= Residents also have access to property information through the Town website.

The Selectmen thanked Ms.= Snide for coming forward and discussing her department.

Bruce Mason, Transfer Station Superintendent – 2010 Transf= er Station Budget Presentation

Transfer Station Superint= endent Bruce Mason and Town Financial Director Janet Gallant came forward to review the proposed 2010 Transfer Station Budget.= Mr. Mason reviewed each of the line items and clarified any questions the Selectmen had. He provide= d the Selectmen with a format of how a Special Revenue Fund warrant article shoul= d be written.

Mr. Gleason asked if the = special revenue fund would be maintained by the Treasurer. Mr. Gaydos answered yes; it would = have to have a warrant article to be expended.&= nbsp;

Mr. Mason then reviewed t= he items on his priority list. The fir= st being tires for the trailers in the amount of $4673. Mr. Gleason asked if both trailers needed to be done, or if one could be done and the other deferred. Mr. Mason said he would go back and look. The other item on the priority list was a sander in the amount of $3500. He explained the safety issue of b= eing able to take care of the facility without relying upon the Highway Departme= nt. He said he was currently hand sand= ing the facility.

The Selectmen would like = to have warrant articles brought in with department budgets so they could weigh all aspects at the same time. Mr. McDevitt asked that department heads were cautioned to present only the ite= ms they felt they absolutely had to have.&nbs= p; Mr. Lynde felt differently. He would rather have the departments come in with a ‘wish list’ identified as such. Mr. McDevitt said that was okay with him. Mr. Gaydos said the department heads were asked to put the list toge= ther as a priority list in order of importance.= Ms. Gallant noted that the priority list would give foresight to what the department’s needs would be the following year.

OTHER BUSINESS

Selectmen’s Approval – 3 private Driveway names requ= ired to complete E-911 project. Dr= iveway names: Paradise Way (off Mammoth Road), Waters= ide Way (off Sherburne Road), and Allard Road (re-established for long private driveway off Sherburne Road)<= /p>

Planning Director Jeff Go= wan came forward to discuss road names for private driveways as part of the E911 project. He began by discussi= ng Paradise Way (off Mammoth Road). He said he was only able to get in= touch with one house, which was in the process of being sold. The seller requested the road name= Paradise Way; the new buyer requested the name Yellow Wood Road.&nb= sp; Mr. Gowan asked that the Selectmen approve both names; he would then work out the road name with the owner and buyer. He also felt there was some value = in creating a pre-approved road name bank for people to choose from in the future. With regard to Waterside Way, Mr. Gowan was unsure if they would need a road. The situation may be able to be corrected with sequential numbering. He said Allard Road= had been a private drive from a few years back when the owner subdivided the property.

Mr. Gleason said he recei= ved a call from an abutter to Waterside who indicated that it was only one drivew= ay to one house and there are two duplexes that were now located on Sherburne Road. He said it seemed that the Selectm= en shouldn’t take any action on Waterside until the situation was resolved. Mr. Gowan said it w= as his understanding as well and would resolve it. He said he didn’t have time = to come back again if it wasn’t what was discovered. He was only requesting that the Se= lectmen approve names versus locations. Mr. Gleason said he didn’t want to approve the road name if it wasn’= ;t going to be used. Mr. Viger s= aid the road name could be placed on a list for future use.

Mr. Lynde asked where on = Mammoth Road the new road would be. Mr. Gowan didn’t have his map and questioned if it was a concern regarding the name. Mr. Lynde just wanted to picture where the location was. Mr. Gowan said at the location there were three homes using a private drive off= Mammoth Road.

Mr. Lynde made a motion to approve Paradise Way, Yellow Wood Road, Waterside Way and Allard Road as acceptable names for future roads in the Town. Mr. Gleason commented that the req= uest had been for specific names for specific areas. He was apprehensive about Waterside Way. Mr. Viger said the way he looked a= t it was the Selectmen were approving road names and not locations. There was further discussion regar= ding which names would be approved. The agenda doesn’t reflect the motion that was made; the road names are b= eing approved, not the specific location.

Mr. Lynde asked how the T= own got to the point that they needed to name the roads. Mr. Gowan discussed the E911 crite= ria and the circumstances viewed in the specified locations.

MOTION:

(Lynde/McDevit= t) To approve Paradise Way, Yellow Wood Road, Waterside Way and Allard Road as acceptable names for future roads in the Town of Pelham that could be chosen from. The names are intended for priva= te driveways as directed by E911.

VOTE:

(4-0-0) The motion carried.

Correspondence from LGC re: Proposed Article 28-A : Lawsuit agai= nst State of New Hampshire (unfunded mandate)

Mr. Gaydos read aloud correspondence that had been received from the Local Government Center (‘LGC’).   It= stated that recently the Legislature downshifted over a hundred million dollars in state costs to local governments in order to use the money they save to fund their agencies and programs. = One of the downshifts was to arbitrarily reduce the state’s share of employe= r’s retirement contribution for Group 1 teachers, Group 2 Police and Fire Fight= ers. Starting July 1^st, the state’s contribution drops from 35% to 30% and again to 25% in 2011.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Local governments must now pay wha= t the state has decided not to pay and will cost property taxpayers $9,000,000 in= the first year, $18,000,000 in the second.&nbs= p; It stated that it would get worse; the Legislature didn’t repl= ace money it previously had taken away from local governments. While the budget legislation said = that the state would resume paying its 35% share, it was believed that the legislature intended to gradually eliminate its contribution all together leaving local governments with 100% of the obligation. The Local Government Center believed it = was time to challenge the decisions and outlined how a town could proceed. They recommended that towns pay the amount owed, but did so under protest.&nbs= p; They also requested that Pelham contribute $1621.31 (one half of one percent) to fund a legal challenge and pursue it in the New Hampshire Supre= me Court. There will be a steeri= ng committee to oversee the expenditure of funds; at the conclusion of the act= ion if there are any unexpended funds they would be returned to the participati= ng political subdivisions on a pro rated basis. <= /span>

Mr. Lynde hoped the Board= would support the LGC because it was a significant issue. He said the New Hampshire Municipal Association/LGC had been working on the New Hampshire Retirement System and correct problems within it, such as better management of the fund and to tr= y to prevent further cost sharing between the state, cities, towns and counties.= He liked the comment in the correspondence that read they needed to put the state on notice that the property tax payer could no longer be the state’s credit card.

There was further discuss= ion regarding the request and the desire to send a signal to the legislature th= at there was resistance.

MOTION:

(Lynde/McDevit= t) To authorize a contribution (to Local Government Center) of $1621.31

VOTE:

(4-0-0) The motion carried.

Mr. Gaydos said in conjun= ction with this he spoke with the Town Clerk/Tax Collector. He said the state had come up with= new fees and new ideas of how to pass the burden down to the towns. He discussed some of the fees that= would be increased. He said he aske= d the Town Clerk/Tax Collector to post a sign indicating that the increases were coming from the state, not the Town.

Announcement of Congressman Paul Hodes’ Office – Wal= k-in hours July 29, 2009 at Pelham Town Hall

Mr. Viger read aloud the announcement indicating that Paul Hodes’ Office would conduct walk-in constituent services on July 29, 2009 between the hours of 12pm and 2pm to assist= residents of Pelham and surrounding Towns with issues they may be having with the Fed= eral Government programs.

MINUTES REVIEW

June = 2, 2009

MOTION:

(Gleason/McDev= itt) To approve the Selectmen meeting minutes of June 2, 2009 as amended.

VOTE:

(4-0-0) The motion carried.

June 30= , 2009

MOTION:

(Gleason/Lynde= ) To approve the Selectmen meeting minutes of June 130, 2009 as amended.

VOTE:

(3-0-1) The motion carried. Mr. McD= evitt abstained.

TOWN ADMINISTRATOR’S / SELECTMEN’S REPORTS

Mr. Gaydos state= d at the previous meeting the Selectmen discussed a possible connection between St. Margaret’s Drive and Surrey Road. The site was reviewed by Fire Chief James Midgley and Police Chief Joseph Roark and was found to be a short area needing some boulders removed. The deeds had been r= eviewed; the Town owned the property. = Mr. Gaydos said he had asked that the boundaries be marked and a topographical = area be shot to see what would need to be done for drainage on the road. They were trying to get an estimat= e for what it would cost to gravel the road for the time being.

Mr. Lynde questi= oned if the Planning Board should review the road.&nbs= p; Mr. McDevitt said if it was Town land, it would be up to the Selectmen. Mr. Lynde asked if= the road would be done in accordance with Town regulations. Mr. McDevitt said a gravel road wouldn’t be. Mr. Gaydos= discussed what would need to be done to the site initially; the cost would be approximately $1500.

Mr. Gleason said= the bus driver at the Senior Center resigned. Mr. Gaydos stated that several applications had been received.

Mr. Lynde report= ed that the Pelham High School Study Committee continued to meet and were trying to follow the School Board’s direction to put together factual informati= on to support the decision of a new high school. He then informed that there would = be a concert on the Village Green on July 15, 2009 featuring Hooda Thunk. The next concert is scheduled for = July 22, 2009.<= /p>

Mr. McDevitt and= Mr. Viger had no reports.

ADJOURNMENT

MOTION:

(McDevitt/Lynd= e) To adjourn the meeting.

VOTE:

(4-0-0) The motion carried.

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 9:15pm.

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

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

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