Economic Development Committee
p.1 of 2
Meeting Minutes – 1/17/07
1) Meeting called to order at 6:05 pm. In attendance: Deborah Jordan (DJ), Wayne Gallup (WG), Eric Bahr
(EB), Lester Firstenberger (LF), Merrill Vaughan (MV), Daren Nielsen (DN), Cynthia Thompson (CT), Pat
Heffernan (PH), Karen Vanderpool (KV) acting as Secretary, Matt Monahan (MM) representing the
CNHRPC.
2) Minutes of 1/10/07 were approved with spelling changes to names.
3) Karen Vanderpool was nominated as Secretary pending the acceptance of the Select Board and the motion
was carried with out objection.
4) Bond Issue Discussion
a. EB distributed a table outlining a possible semiannual repayment schedule on a $10 million bond
as developed by Northway Bank. He noted that the table represented a worst case scenario.
b. EB stated that he thinks the EDC should become pro-active and appropriating Bond money would
allow improvement projects to be paid for on an as needed basis as set forth in the town’s Master
Plan of 2004.
c. DN asked why a Bond would be better than raising the money. EB replied that a Bond would
provide the critical mass needed for the money to basically self-perpetuate. DN requested that the
return on investment be demonstrated with hard numbers.
d. MV asked if the town could raise some of the money through community efforts such as the
Balloon Rally. Off topic discussion followed.
e. WG raised three questions: What makes this plan feasible? Where will the money come from to
repay? What is the taxpayer’s return on investment? DN reiterated that calculations must be made
for ROI on a case by case basis. LF stated that legal privacy issues may be raised if specific cases
are used for the purposes of hypothetical computations.
f. EB summarized the purpose and scope of the Bond as improvement and/or re-development of
infrastructure and sub-standard rental properties in the downtown area. He further suggested that it
may be possible to focus on locating the highest areas of need through coordinating with Bob
Warhem and analyzing the Police Department calls. DJ wanted to know if the money would need
to be targeted to a delineated area of downtown. EB replied that it would and that the potential
area has already been defined. LF pointed out that there are many uses for the funds and a great
deal of flexibility, particularly if paired with matching funds from other sources. EV reminded the
committee that in the past there has never been enough funding behind town projects and the Bond
will provide that needed funding so that problems like the Library Ramp will be avoided in the
future. EV also suggested potentially using income from Pittsfield’s out of town properties to
invest in projects in the downtown area.
g. EB began the discussion of funding options and mechanics by reminding the committee that the
Northway Bank numbers are a worst case scenario based on spending all of the funds on day one.
EB explained that by investing the Bond funds in something like Treasury Notes the tax impact
would be zero (0) until the funds are actually utilized. MM suggested looking into Developer
Agreements. WG asked how the tax impact could be zero if the tax payers essentially have to
agree to be taxed in order to get the Bond Issue passed in the first place. EB explained that the
Bond Warrant Article grants the authority to tax and is not an actual tax in and of itself. WG
commented that it is important to understand how the Bond will work so it can be sold to the
voters. EB further explained that the T-Notes can be sold every six (6) months to pay off the
Bond. EV wanted to know if the Bond could be worked into a block grant. LF replied that
portions could be since the Bond allows for very flexible access to the funds. EB assured the
committee that funds would be available when needed for future improvement projects.
h. DN asked if other towns have done this and if the committee has talked to anyone else regarding
possible pitfalls, ethical considerations and advantages. EV mentioned that a non-profit has been
set up in Littleton to manage Bond funds. EB stated that authority has to remain with the Select
Board for taxing and credit rating purposes and suggested that the Warrant Article language
should grant the EDC power to operate as the overseeing committee possibly as a 501-C entity.
i. WG inquired about other ways to raise $10 million. He is in favor of waiting on a decision until
the committee hears what the Main Street Program people have to say as they may advise against
Economic Development Committee
p.2 of 2
a Bond. WG further stated that he likes the Bond idea better now but still needs to know how to
“sell it to the voters”.
j. LF reminded the committee that the Bond money can not be limited too strictly. WG wondered
why the town would want a Bond if the money could be spent elsewhere. EB replied that the
Warrant language can delineate where and how the funds can be spent. PH offered an example of
the Ambulance Reserve Fund to illustrate how the funds can be directed toward defined purposes.
LF reiterated that the language in the Warrant Article must be very specific.
k. MM suggested each member of the committee research different areas of need to come up with
ideas for using the Bond funds e.g.: sidewalks. MM further wondered if having defined areas
would help and suggested looking into “T.I.F. Districts”.
l. EV commented that should the Bond be funded Step 1 would be finding someone to manage the
money. MM stated that the management issue ties into the T.I.F. District and the idea of using the
funds for specific projects. A committee member stated that as properties increase in value money
will flow back to pay for the Bond. MM also said that Development Agreements could also fund
the Bond.
m. EB stressed that the EDC must have the ability to act on opportunities as they arise.
n. DJ reminded the committee that there is a deadline approaching to file the Warrant Article and the
committee must start working on the specific language.
o. WG wanted to get an overall sense of how the committee feels about the Bond issue.
p. DN questioned how development would be orchestrated and who on the committee has time for
such an undertaking. He would like to know if this is something that the Main Street program can
help with. WG replied that a full time person would have to be hired and the Main Street people
need to give us more information. EB stated that we need to schedule a meeting with people from
the Main Street program quickly. DN commented that the Bond administration needs to be
unbiased. LF agreed stating that contracts will have to be “bidded”. EB stated that the operator
will need to have guidelines. EV would like to see the apartments “un-chopped”.
q. PH reiterated the need to begin work on the Warrant Article language and to schedule a meeting
with the Main Street Program people as soon as possible. EB requested that WG schedule the
Main Street Program meeting and that LF begin work on the Warrant Article language. WG
would like to see others work on the project as well.
r. MM requested the committee take a few moments in the next week to review his Brownfield
Cleanup Grants/Assistance memo of 1/17/07 that he distributed earlier in the session.
s. Meeting was adjourned at 7:00 pm.
Submitted by: ________________________________
Karen Vanderpool, as Acting Secretary