Minutes of the
Litchfield Budget Committee Meeting
January 11, 2007
Present: B Spencer, J. Caynon, B. McCue, D. Miller, M Falzone, J Harte, S. Martin, C. Hamblett, A Raccio
Absent: B. Lemire
Mr. Spencer opened the meeting at 7:05 p.m.
PUBLIC INPUT
There was no public input.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion: by J Harte
To approve the minutes of January 4, 2007
Second: D Miller
Vote: 6 -0-1 (A Raccio abstained)
The motion carried.
SCHOOL WARRANT ARTICLES
Article 1
Motion: by D Miller
Shall the Litchfield School District vote to raise and appropriate as an operating budget, not including appropriations by Special Warrant Articles and other appropriations voted separately, the amounts set forth on the budget posted with the warrant or as amended by the vote at the first session of the annual school district meeting, for the purposes set forth herein, totaling Nineteen Million, Eight Thousand, Five Hundred Thirty-Six dollars ($19,008,548.00 ). Should the article be defeated, the default budget shall be Eighteen Million, Eight Hundred Six Thousand, Six Hundred Thirty-Six dollars ($18,806,636.00), which is the same as last year, with certain adjustments required by previous action of the Litchfield School District or by law; or the School Board may hold one special meeting, in accordance with RSA 40:13 X and XVI, to take up the issue of a revised operating budget only.
Second: J Caynon
Mr. Miller handed out the backup information for the first number and the default information.
Vote: 6 -1-0 (B Spencer opposed the motion)
The motion carried.
Article 2
Motion: by D Miller
Shall the LitchfieldSchool District vote to raise and appropriate the sum of twenty-seven thousand dollars ($27,000.00) for the purpose of replacing the 1930’s building roof at GriffinMemorialSchool? This is a Special Warrant Article.
Second: J Caynon
Discussion:
Mr. Martin explained that the roof is over 30 years old and is leaking. He stated that the vendor is refusing to come out to repair it because it is so brittle. He also stated that this cannot wait any longer they have a quote for the work. In response to Mr. McCue’s query as to whether it would be possible to get the roof repaired for one year if the warrant was defeated by the voters, Mr. Martin stated that there is a line item in the budget for repair of holes to the roof.
Mr. Spencer requested clarification for the viewers of what happens if all the money is not used, and Mr. Martin stated that it goes back to voters. Further clarification was provided that only the work required would be undertaken and a purchase order would be raised to replace only what is required. (i.e.. the membrane). Mr. Martin also stated that they will go out for multiple quotes.
Mr. Harte asked if there would be any safety issues if it is not taken care of this year, and Mr. Martin stated there was no safety issue, however it could be argued that there is a health issue due to moisture on the roof.
Mr. Miller stated that it is thought that the roof was last replaced in the late 1970’s.
Vote: 7-0-0
The motion carried unanimously.
Article 3
Motion: by D Miller
Shall the LitchfieldSchool District vote to raise and appropriate the sum of Fifty-Six Thousand, Four Hundred Thirty-One dollars ($56,431.00) for the purchase and installation of proximity locks and a video surveillance system at GriffinMemorialSchool and LitchfieldMiddle School? This is a Special Warrant
Second: Mr.Harte
Discussion:
Mr. Raccio raised the issue of location of the locks, stating that they are affected by exposure to the elements and there could be additional costs involved for maintenance. Mr. McCue asked about layout of the entrance and it was explained that it would be a speaker and buzzer outside and video monitor inside. In response to a query from Mr. Spencer it was explained that the cost at CHS was $27,000 – $28,000, which included the ID system to make badges for both schools. Mr. McCue stated there might be an additional benefit i.e. a drop in the vandalism seen at the CHS. Mr. Spencer referred to Tuesday’s meeting and the discussion on design work, and questioned whether it was a good idea to be spending money this year on GMS if they are considering building another school. Mr. Martin responded that he had talked to the vendor and had been informed that everything can be reinstalled, apart from wiring. Mr. Harte asked about egression in emergencies and it was confirmed that there would not be any problem with this. The school representatives informed the Committee that they had not included PC’s in the cost and have not decided whether to have all the schools feeding off one system.
Vote: 7-0-0
The motion carried unanimously.
Article 4
Motion: by D Miller
Shall the LitchfieldSchool District raise and appropriate the sum of forty-four thousand dollars ($44,000.00) for the construction of an approximately eight hundred (800) linear feet long by twenty (20) feet wide emergency access road at LitchfieldMiddle School? This is a Special Warrant Article
Second: J Harte
Discussion:
Mr. Miller explained that the road would connect to the new housing project near the school and provide a second means of access to and from the school. Miss Hamblett provided some background behind the decision to do this, and Mr. Harte confirmed difficulties he had seen when there are functions on at the school and parents are waiting to pick up students – no emergency vehicles could get access to the school or the road leading to it. Mr. Spencer asked for clarification on where the road would be. Mr. Martin stated that it would be gravel or reclaimed and that it would be plowed by the school. Following a query from Mr. McCue as to whether the streets in the housing development are town streets, Miss Hamblett stated that part of the agreement with the developer was that the access road would be kept clear.
Vote: 7-0-0
The motion carried unanimously.
Article 5
Motion: D Miller
Shall the LitchfieldSchool District vote to raise and appropriate the sum of Eighteen Thousand dollars ($18,000.00) for the purpose of purchasing and installing a fan-powered combustion exhaust and monitoring system to repair the faulty draft in the existing chimney system at CampbellHigh School? This is a Special Warrant Article.
Second: J Harte
Discussion:
Mr. Martin spoke about some of the problems they had been experiencing with exhaust fumes and carbon monoxide. He explained that it is not currently a safety issue as they have installed a carbon monoxide sensor, however they are monitoring the exhaust fumes and these are still of concern. Miss Hamblett explained that sub zero weather conditions can also trigger the problem. She stated that a wider chimney stack had been recommended, however it had not been possible to do this. Mr. Martin explained that they had sought the advice of an engineer who stated that the school needs a mechanical system (power vent) and they would not then need the metal extension. Miss Hamblett stated that it would not run constantly.
Mr. McCue sought clarification for the viewers on the reason the school had no recourse with the original architect as the defect is in the original design and was told that the architect had gone out of business.
Mr. Spencer stated he would normally put something like this in the Operating budget, but that it was too late to do this now. He asked whether the Reserve Fund could be used if it was not a warrant article. Miss Hamblett stated that they could use the Reserve Fund, but that this was really meant for emergencies.
There was further discussion, with Miss Hamblett brainstorming alternatives. Mr. Caynon stated he found it frustrating that money was spent to fix the problem and it did not solve it.
Vote: 7-0-0
The motion carried unanimously.
Article 6
Motion: by D Miller
Shall the Litchfield School District vote to raise and appropriate the sum of Eight-Six Thousand dollars ($86,000.00) for the feasibility study, site testing, technical design, geotechnical review, and development and costing of an under drain system to de-water the Griffin Memorial School site? This is a Special Warrant Article.
Second: J Harte
Discussion: Mr. Martin explained that the DOT has advised they would not approve any money unless there was a plan in place to dewater the site. Following a query from Mr. Harte it was clarified that the money was not for fixing issues, only for the survey to figure out what the options, cost etc would be (i.e. an engineering plan to lower ground water in order to be eligible for building aid from the State.
Vote: 7-0-0
The motion carried unanimously.
Article 7
Motion: by D Miller
Shall the LitchfieldSchool District vote to raise and appropriate the sum of Twenty-Eight Thousand, Four Hundred Twenty-Three dollars ($28,423.00) for the purchase and installation of an additional layer of rubber and the resurfacing of the track at CampbellHigh School? This is a Special Warrant Article.
Second: M Falzone
Discussion:
Mr. Caynon stated would vote against this.
Vote: 2-5-0(A Raccio and D Miller voted for and everyone else against the motion)
The motion failed.
Article 8
Motion: by D Miller
Shall the Litchfield School District vote to raise and appropriate the sum of Eighty-Two Thousand, Nine Hundred Ten dollars ($82,910.00) for the reconstruction of approximately 2,600 linear feet of the surface water drainage swale beginning at Route 3A (north of the Griffin Memorial School), traveling east to the baseball diamond connecting to the section at the rear of the ball fields and continuing south behind the Griffin Memorial School along Anna Lane and terminating at Route 3A (south of the Griffin Memorial School)? This is a Special Warrant Article.
Second: B McCue
Discussion:
Mr. Miller explained that this had been a topic of discussion and debate for several years in the community about whether they should be cleaned and restored to see if it solves the ground water problem at GMS. He stated that numerous hydrologists have stated that this will not solve the problem, and this is why the article is not recommended by the School Board.
In response to Mr. McCue’s concerns, Mr. Martin stated that there would be no problems regarding wetlands. He explained however that the ball field cannot be lowered more than an inch due to the culvert on 3A. He also explained that the other swale on the westerly side can be lowered 2 -3 feet, but would require an easement from an abutter. Mr. Martin stated he has been asked by the School Board to contact the abutter prior to the Deliberative session. He explained that the cost includes fixing land for the abutter.
Mr. Miller explained that if the warrant article passes and the voters did not object to an open swale, $21,000 would be returned to the voters. In response to a query from Mr. Spencer, Mr. Martin explained the difference between cleaning and digging out the swales. There then followed further discussion in which Mr. Miller explained that the interpretation of what the townspeople want is deepening of the swales. He also stated that ultimately the problem is solved if the voter decides. Mr. Caynon asked if article would be removed if abutter does not agree and was told that only the ball field would be done in that scenario.
In response to a request for clarification from Mr. Raccio between this article and the de-watering one, an explanation of the purpose of the swales was provided. Further discussion took place about some of the problems with water issues at GMS.
Vote: 1-6-0(Mr. Falzone voted for and everyone else against the motion)
The motion failed.
Miss Hamblett brought up the subject of the posting of the Budget Committee hearing and the Budget Committee meeting after the hearing. It was agreed that she would make the appropriate arrangement to have the items posted at the Town Hall and the schools.
Important Dates:
Miss Hamblett shared that at the deliberative sessions there will be a two storey stage design and the seating will be on the lower level.
Mr. Lemire requested a summary of the school budget from Mr. Martin for the hearing.
In response to a query from Mr. Spencer, Miss Hamblett informed the Committee that first grade enrolment registrations would be available during the last week of January, and definitely in time for the Deliberative session.
Miss Hamblett pointed out that Dorothy Beauregard is now Vice-Chairman of the School Board.
Miss Hamblett informed the Committee about the current situation regarding State funding for kindergarten. She explained that the School Board had decided not to put a warrant article on the books for this and that she would have to withdraw their application, thereby losing the $880,000 currently earmarked by the State for Litchfield. She also stated that she will re-apply for a smaller amount, but cautioned the Committee that there would have to be something on the ballot in March 2008 in order to obtain any money from the State
Mr. Martin informed the Committee that the MS27 would be available for signing on Tuesday 16th January.
TOWN BUDGET/WARRANT ARTICLES – VOTING
Mr. Raccio suggested starting with article 2 as he did not have the figures to be entered into article 1. Mr. Spencer stated that the figure to be entered would be the one recommended by the Budget Committee.
Mr. Spencer asked for a motion for tentative approval of article 1.
Article 1
Motion: by B McCue second Mr. Harte
To see if the Town of Litchfield will vote to raise and appropriate as an Operating budget, not including appropriations by Special Warrant Articles and other appropriations voted separately, the amounts set forth on the budget posted with the warrant or as amended by the vote at the first session of the annual town meeting, for the purposes set forth herein, totaling Three million, Eight Hundred and Seventy-Seven Thousand, Four Hundred and Ninety-Three dollars ($3,877,493). Should the article be defeated, the default budget shall be _____________________________which is the same as last year, with certain adjustment required by previous action of the Town of Litchfield or by law; or the Town may hold one special meeting, in accordance with RSA 40: 13X and XVI, to take up the issue of a revised Operating budget only. Recommended by the Board of Selectmen.
Second: J Harte
Vote: 7-0-0
The motion carried unanimously.
Article 2
Motion: by A Raccio
To see if the Town will vote to hire a full-time police officer effective July 8, 2007 at an annual cost of$52,901 of which $37,669.00 is for salary and $15,232.00 is for benefits and equipment; and to further raise and appropriate the sum of $28,250.00 of which $18,834.00 is for salary and $9,416.00 is for benefits and equipment for the officer for the period of July 8, 2007 to December 31, 2007. Recommended by Board of Selectmen.
Second: J Caynon
Vote: 7-0-0
The motion carried unanimously.
Article 3
Motion: by A Raccio
To see if the Town will vote to hire a full-time staffer for the selectmen's office effective May 6, 2007 at an annual cost of$53,173.00 of which $31,837.00 is for salary and $21,336.00 is for benefits; and to further vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $34,652.00 of which $21,674.00 is for wages and $12,978.00 is for benefits for the period of May 6, 2007 to December 31, 2007. Recommended by Board of Selectmen.
Second: J Harte
Discussion:
In response to a query from Mr. Miller, Mr. Raccio outlined the basic duties which would be performed by the person who filled this position (vacation cover; assist welfare officer; support for other staff within the Selectmen’s office). Mr. Raccio clarified for Mr. Miller that it would essentially be a floating position. He also spoke in more detail about the occasions when additional staff is required and stated that the person would probably report to Ms. Durocher. He explained that it would be an entry level position and that the person would be exposed to the type of work performed by Ms. Durocher initially, and at a later point the person would be introduced to welfare administration. Mr. Raccio stated that the Board of Selectmen think the position would ultimately report to Board of Selectmen until such times as an organizational structure is put in place to address this. He also stated that Ms. Durocher and the Board of Selectmen would have input regarding how the person would be used.
In response to Mr. Spencer, Mr. Raccio confirmed that the salary for the position would be similar to the other two staffers in the office. He also explained to the Committee that right now he is the sole person responsible for the Welfare Department, but that he needs a deputy when he is out of town due to the fact that some of the issues he deals with are time sensitive. In response to Mr. Spencer, Mr. Raccio clarified that the person would provide approximately one third to one half of their time to relieving Ms. Durocher, but that there is a need to be flexible in order to cover the needs of the town.
In response to Mr. Harte, Mr. Raccio stated that consideration is being given to where the person would be located within the Town Hall
Vote: 7-0-0
The motion carried unanimously.
Article 4
To see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate the sum of$39,600.00 for the purchase of a 2007 Cub Cadet 4x4 tractor with boom brush cutter and sweeper attachments for the highway department. Not Recommended by Board of Selectmen.
Mr. Raccio explained that this warrant article had been removed.
Article 5
Shall the Town vote to establish a Public, Education and Government Program Trust Fund for the purpose of maintenance and operation of Litchfield television programming which includes but is not limited to the producing, recording, broadcasting and re-broadcasting of Litchfield public meetings, school programs and Town-related programs, and to raise and appropriate the sum of $12,000 (twelve-thousand dollars) to be placed in this fund annually; and designate the Board of Selectmen as agents to expend or act on anything relative thereto. This amount of money represents 8% of the PEG money paid by cable subscribers and collected by the town. This is a Special Warrant Article per RSA 35:1-c. Not Recommended by Board of Selectmen.
Mr. Raccio explained that this warrant article had been removed.
Article 4 (new)
Motion: by A Raccio
To see if the town will vote to hire, raise and appropriate the sum of $85,000.00 (eighty five thousand dollar) for salary, benefits and taxes per a year for a full time Town Administrator, (who has a minimum of two years experience as a town administrator), and to further raise $750.00 (seven hundred and fifty dollars) for advertising for the position. By Petition. Not recommended by Board of Selectmen.
Second: B McCue
Discussion:
Mr. Spencer stated that Mr. Scheiner had spoken on this at a previous Committee meeting. He stated that he could not support this article due to a lack of backup information.
Mr. McCue stated he felt it would be good for the town. In response to Mr. Spencer, Mr. Raccio explained that the Board of Selectmen had not recommended this as it had not been presented by any sponsorship and no one had stepped forward to speak to it. He also explained that they had issues with the wording in the article.
Mr. Miller stated that there was no job description and not enough information. Further discussion took place with Mr. Raccio providing information on the costs involved for other communities when they had decided to hire for similar positions. He also explained that it had not been budgeted for and the Board of Selectmen does not believe it will happen in the near future.
Vote: 0-0-0
The motion had no supporters and failed.
Article 5
Motion: by A Raccio
To see if the Town will vote to authorize the establishment of a Police Special Detail Revolving Fund pursuant to RSA §91:95-h, I (c). The money received from fees, charges or other income derived from police special details or other activities and services outside of ordinary police details shall be deposited in the Fund, allowed to accumulate from year to year, and shall not be considered part of the Town’s general surplus. The Town Treasurer shall have custody of all moneys in the fund, and shall pay out the same only upon order of the Board of Selectmen (no further town meeting approval required). These funds may be expended only for police special details and associated operating and administrative purposes. Recommended by Board of Selectmen
Second: D Miller
Discussion:
Mr. Raccio provided an explanation of what this article was about (an accounting system which tracks special duties funding), stating that it was a book keeping issue and relates to article 6.
Mr. Spencer stated he was unsure whether there was a need for the Budget Committee to vote on this.
Mr. Miller asked what would happen if article 5 passes and article 6 did not. Mr. Spencer suggested adding wording regarding contingency on the floor on Tuesday or alternatively the Board of Selectmen could make a change on Monday at their meeting and the Committee could on it at the hearing.
Vote: 7-0-0
The motion carried unanimously.
Article 6
Motion: by A Raccio
To see if the Town will vote to discontinue the Police Special Detail Expendable Trust established by the Town at the March 12, 2002 Annual Town Meeting, contingent upon passage of the Article establishing a Police Special Detail Revolving Fund. Said funds, with accumulated interest to date of withdrawal, shall be transferred to the Police Special Detail Revolving Fund. Recommended by Board of Selectmen.
Second: M Falzone
Vote: 7-0-0
The motion carried unanimously.
Article 7
Motion: by A Raccio
To see if the Town will vote to discontinue the Police Special Detail Expendable Trust established by the Town at the March 12, 2002 Annual Town Meeting, contingent upon passage of the Article establishing a Police Special Detail Revolving Fund. Said funds, with accumulated interest to date of withdrawal, shall be transferred to the Police Special Detail Revolving Fund. Recommended by Board of Selectmen.
Second: M Falzone
Vote: 7-0-0
The motion carried unanimously.
Article 8
It was pointed out that the Committee was not required to vote on this article.
Shall we modify the Elderly Exemptions from property tax in the town of Litchfield, based on assessed value for qualified taxpayers, to be as follows: for a person 65 years of age up to 74 years, exemption of $65,000.00; for persons 75 years of age up to 79 years, exemption of $85,500.00; for persons 80 years of age and older, exemption of $135,000.00. To qualify the person must have been a New Hampshire resident for at least 5 years, own the real estate individually or jointly, or if the real estate is owned by such person’s spouse, they must have been married for at least 5 years. In addition the taxpayer must have a net income of not more than $40,000.00 or, if married a combined net income of less than $50,000.00; and own net assets not in excess of $350,000.00 excluding the value of the persons residence. By Petition. Not Recommended by Board of Selectmen.
Discussion:
Mr. Spencer referred to the fact that Ms. Durocher had pointed out at a previous meeting that Litchfield had some of the highest exemptions. Mr. McCue made the point that the public do not have existing figures available to them. Mr. Raccio pointed out that the petitioner did not come forward to speak to their article. The members agreed that they were unsure what it would do for the elderly. Mr. Spencer pointed out that someone could amend the article at the Deliberative session and suggested that the Board of Selectmen might wish to be prepared for this. Mr. Raccio stated that the voters should be informed of the effect the article would have on exemptions.
Article 9
It was pointed out that the Committee was not required to vote on this article.
To see if the Town will vote to establish, pursuant to RSA § 430:13, I, a Mosquito Control District. Once established, the Mosquito Control District shall cover the same area as the boundaries of the Town of Litchfield. The Mosquito Control District will be governed by the Mosquito Control District Committee, consisting of 3 voters domiciled in the Town of Litchfield, appointed by the Board of Selectmen, one each for an initial term of 1, 2 and 3 years and thereafter for terms of 3 years. The duties of the Mosquito Control district Committee involve making recommendations relative to mosquito control and abatement to the Board of Selectmen and the state committee on mosquito control. For a specific list of the duties of the Mosquito Control District Committee, please refer to RSA § 430:16. By Petition. Not Recommended by Board of Selectmen.
MEMBER INPUT
Mr. Spencer asked Mr. Raccio, regarding the Town budget, why he did not see any money in the Operating budget for road maintenance work. Mr. Raccio responded that he would not answer the question until he had the view of the Board of Selectmen, but he would take to their next meeting.
Mr. Caynon requested that the meeting be re-opened for public input and Mr. Spencer as Chairman agreed to this.
Mr. John Latsha, 10 McElwain Drive asked what determines how the warrant articles appear on the ballot. Mr. Spencer explained that bond articles appear first and there is a certain order by law. Mr. Latsha stated that he thought the RSA number quoted in Article 9 for the town was incorrect as it appeared on the list. Mr. Raccio stated that the Board of Selectmen could not do anything about this. Mr. Latsha stated that he was the sponsor of that warrant article and asked Mr. Raccio to check his original submission prior to the Deliberative session.
Mr. McCue asked whether it was possible to change the order of articles at the Deliberative session and Mr. Spencer stated that usually petition articles appear last.
Mr. Latsha stated that he did not feel that Mr. Martin backed up his remarks with proof or paperwork and would like to see this done. Mr. Spencer stated that when they voted on the School budget bottom line, the Committee takes that into consideration and bases their questions on the need for back up information. Also he stated that the Committee does get lot of paperwork and ask for what they think they need to make a decision. He suggested that the Deliberative session would be a good time to ask for information if Mr. Latsha felt he needed it. Mr. Miller stated that ultimately Mr. Martin is asked by the School Board to do lot of what he does. He also stated that the School Board has to balance what and how much to spend money on, and they try to be sensitive to this fact.
Mr. Latsha asked why the carbon monoxide monitoring system was not in the Operating budget. Mr. Spencer stated he had the same discussion when the Committee voted on the article and suggested Mr. Latsha brings it up at the hearing or the Deliberative session. Mr. Miller provided background on what was done previously to solve the problem. Mr. Spencer stated he felt confident something would be done.
Mr. Raccio asked for a copy of the MS27 as soon as possible.
Mr. Spencer confirmed the Budget hearing would take place on Tuesday 16th January at 7:00 p.m.
There followed a brief discussion on the tazers for the Police department to update Mr. Raccio as he had not be able to attend the meeting when these had been dealt with by the Budget Committee.
There being no further business Mr. Spencer asked for a motion to adjourn.
Motion: by D Miller
To adjourn the meeting
Second: M Falzone
Vote: 7-0-0
The motion carried unanimously and the meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m.