Pittsfield Zoning Board of Adjustment
Town Hall, 85 Main Street
Pittsfield, NH 03263
Minutes of Public Meeting

DATE: Thursday, October 9, 2008

ITEM I. Call to Order at 7:02 P.M. by Ed Vien, Chairman

ITEM 2. Roll Call

Members Present: Ed Vien (EV) Chairman, Susan Muenzinger (SM), Vice Chairman, Carole Dodge (CD), Paul Metcalf, Sr. (PM), Jesse Pacheco (JP), Larry Federhen (LF), Alternate, and Delores Fritz, Recording Secretary.

Members Absent:

David Rushford (DR), Alternate.

(EV) Larry Federhen will be seated on Board due to the fact that he was present on the Board when the Certificate of Approval was granted.

ITEM 3. Approval of Minutes of September 11, 2008

(CD) Motion to approve Minutes of September 11, 2008 as corrected.
(PM) Second. Carried 4-0. (EV) and (LF) Abstain.

ITEM 4. A Motion for Rehearing concerning the Board decision of August 14, 2008 to issue a Certificate of Approval to James Snedeker, 629 Tilton Hill Road, Pittsfield, NH pursuant to
RSA 236:114.

(EV) Since the Motion for Rehearing was filed, we have had an Amended Motion for Rehearing come in and that will be the first item we will address to either approve or deny.

I have reviewed the Amended Motion for Rehearing and why they think they have the right to file this Motion. There is no problem with the posting of the Minutes and they have no right to ask for an Amended Motion for Rehearing to be heard.

(CD) noted that the question before us is in regard to the 144-hour rule. (SM) There is a difference between Minutes being approved and posted. (EV) As soon as they are posted, the clock is ticking. Minutes are posted the Wednesday following the meeting, which falls within the 144-hour rule.

(EV) We have to now act on the Amended Motion for Rehearing to either approve or deny it. (LF) So, it was posted within the correct timeframe? (EV) “Yes.” (LF) So, if this is denied then we go back to deciding on the original Motion for Rehearing. (EV) “Correct.”

(CD) Motion that we deny the Amended Motion for Rehearing filed by Paul and Carol Richardson citing the 144-hour rule as we are in compliance by filing the September 11, 2008 Minutes in a timely manner. (PM) Second. Carried 5-0.

(EV) Amended Motion for Rehearing denied. (EV) Board will now decide on the Motion for Rehearing.

(SM) Do we have a copy of the local ordinance noted in the motion (Page 2, Paragraph 8? It is not part of the Junkyard Ordinance, but rather a local Ordinance according to the Motion. (EV) read into Minutes RSA 677:3, Rehearing by Board of Adjustment, Board of Appeals, or Local Legislative Body. Part of the reason for a Motion for Rehearing would be new evidence or something Board did which was in error. I would note that I do not see any new evidence.

(SM) It is alleged that there is no application for a junkyard filed by Mr. Snedeker. (EV) An application was completed though it is not date stamped. I requested that Cara research when the fees were taken and she notes that $152.50 on March 10, 2008 was received for Application for Motor Vehicle Junk Dealers License. It has Mike McLaughlin’s initials on it. It was applied for but not acted upon; instead he applied for Variance and withdrew it because of proposed grandfathering. Several people have asked about this and were notified that there was not one present. (PM) “So there was one?” (LF) It was noted in the second Motion and (SM) also in the first Motion for Rehearing. (EV) Cara has researched when the payment of $152.50 was made in cash and this was on March 10, 2008. I requested information on this, and the Zoning Board Secretary provided me with a copy of it. (SM) So, an application was made under the local Ordinance on March 10, 2008. (EV) Some of the other items noted in the Motion, we have already discussed.

Board reviewed the Motion for Rehearing 7:17 P.M. to 7:40 P.M.

(CD) Motion to deny request for Motion for Rehearing filed by Paul and Carol Richardson concerning the Board’s decision of August 14, 2008 as Board found no new evidence or information has been brought forward nor any errors made. (PM) Second. Carried 5-0.

Carol Richardson, “Are we not allowed to say anything then?” (EV) advised her that the Motion for Rehearing is reviewed strictly by the Board. Mr. Jim Pritchard advised her to wait until Public Input. You do not get to comment on this.

(EV) reiterated that the vote is 5-0. Motion for Rehearing is denied.

ITEM 5. Members Concerns

(SM) During the last meeting, it was noted that (EV) would contact David Rushford regarding his non-attendance at Zoning Board meetings.
(EV) noted that he has tried several times unsuccessfully to contact Mr. Rushford and has left messages for him to contact (EV). (SM) suggested sending him a letter. (EV) to do.

(PM) noted that he had a concern regarding what was noted previously about an individual in the Administrative Office not being able to locate the application for junkyard. There should be one person that people can ask so that there is not a lot of misinformation provided. (SM) noted that Dee is Board Secretary but she is not here every day. (PM) If the Board Secretary is not in, they should be referred to another individual for information who can provide them with what they are requesting. That is the cause of the problem. (SM) It is the cause of a lot of problems. (EV) If Cara were able to offer them the information that is fine, then they would not have to come back later. (CD) That makes perfect sense. (EV) I will follow-up with Town Administrator on this.
(CD) For our own Board, isn’t there someplace we can post the 144-hour rule so people clearly understand it? (SM) Maybe in the Rules of Procedure. (EV) I will talk to Paul Skowron about this.

ITEM 6. Public Input

Mr. Pritchard indicated that he had a couple of points, he would like to address. First of all, the 144-hour rule has nothing to do with the Rules of Procedure. This is an RSA rule and is stated there.

Also, regarding the Right-to-Know Rule and not having asked the right person. I asked Cara also for the application as did Carol Richardson and she stated she could not find it. The Richardsons have been badly hurt by the Town not coming up with this application. I feel that my Right-to-Know has been violated by not asking the right person.

Carol Richardson questioned the Application for Motor Vehicle and Junk Dealers License, which was filed. I have the application for a Variance, which he withdrew. (Ms. Richardson and Mr. Pritchard were provided copies of the junk dealers application.) (EV) This is the information, which we found: he filed the application and paid the fees in cash.

Ms. Richardson questioned Board as to their knowledge regarding the local Ordinance as noted on Page 2, Paragraph 8, which was a lot of what I was referring to in my letter. (SM) I am now. Ms. Richardson, “When were you aware of that?” (SM) When I read your letter.

ITEM 7. Adjournment

(PM) Motion to Adjourn. (LF) Second. Carried 5-0.

Meeting adjourned at 8:00 P.M.

Approved: March 26, 2009

__________________________ ________________________
Ed Vien, Chairman Date