January 5, 2012 Minutes

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

DATE: Thursday, January 5, 2012

AGENDA ITEM 1: Call to Order

Chair Ted Mitchell called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M.

AGENDA ITEM 2: Roll Call

Members present: Jim Pritchard (JP, associate member), Pat Heffernan (PH, associate member), Gerard Leduc (GL, selectmen’s ex officio), Clayton Wood (CW, vice-chair), Ted Mitchell (TM, chair), and Peter Dow (PD, alternate).

Members absent: Fred Hast (FH, selectmen’s ex officio alternate) and Ray Conner (RC, alternate).

Members of the public appearing before the planning board: Hank Fitzgerald, Larry Konopka, Bill Miskoe, Dan Schroth, Matt St. George.

AGENDA ITEM 3: Public Input

Bill Miskoe asked TM to tell the recorder, JP, to transcribe all testimony verbatim. Bill Miskoe thinks that a board-member recorder has an inherent conflict of interest.

TM asked whether Bill Miskoe had an example of the conflict of interest.

Bill Miskoe said no.

Dan Schroth and Larry Konopka agreed with Bill Miskoe that a board member should not be the recorder because of possible conflict of interest.

TM said that the board has never had a problem with the minutes being improper. TM asked CW to take parallel notes on public testimony to check JP’s minutes.

Bill Miskoe objected to JP using JP’s own tape to transcribe minutes when TM cannot make a copy of the Town tape on the following Friday.

CW refused to take parallel notes on public testimony.

AGENDA ITEM 4: PUBLIC HEARING – PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCES.

TM opened the public hearing on Amendment No. 1 at 7:19 P.M.

Amendment No. 1 is a revision of Article 16, Parking Requirements, of the zoning ordinance.

Bill Miskoe and Hank Fitzgerald questioned whether the ballot question adequately described the amendment and whether the ballot question was legal.

Larry Konopka said that one of the department heads was not notified of the December 15 meeting.

JP said that he watched Cara Marston notify all department heads.

Dan Schroth asked why the board had not proposed retail by right in the Light/Industrial Commercial District.

TM explained that the board worked on the matters that passed last year.

TM closed public input.

The board discussed the ballot question for Amendment No. 1.

The board discussed whether to publish the whole amendment in the Suncook Valley Sun and decided that such publication is not usual.

CW said that the purpose of Amendment No. 1 was to create a fair means to implement the parking regulations that the town adopted last year.

PH asked what would happen if the parking amendment did not pass.

JP said that the board should confront that issue when it happened.

TM reopened public input on Amendment No. 1.

Hank Fitzgerald said that the amendment should have legal review.

Bill Miskoe said that the board should use its judgment, not defined guidelines, to give credit for on-street parking. The proposal is anti-development.

PD disagreed with Bill Miskoe. Bill Miskoe’s idea would make the application of regulations inconsistent.

Hank Fitzgerald said that the board cannot reserve public parking spaces for private people. In addition, the board will run out of parking spaces.

TM closed public input on Amendment No. 1 and opened the public hearing on Amendment No. 3 at 8:06 P.M.

Amendment No. 3 defines “frontage” as class V or better highway frontage.

Bill Miskoe asked whether the proposed frontage definition had been on the ballot before.

JP said no, although other class V definitions and class VI definitions have been proposed before.

Larry Konopka asked whether there had been problems with class VI subdivision while TM has been on the board. Larry Konopka could not remember any problems on class VI highways.

CW said that there have been no subdivisions during TM’s time.

Larry Konopka said that the proposal would hurt property values.

TM said that he had checked in Epsom, which has the class V standard. The class V standard has not hurt property values in Epsom.

Hank Fitzgerald said that there were only three permits on class VI highways when he was building inspector, and none had problems. The board is proposing the class V standard only because JP sued the town years ago.

Bill Miskoe proposed the definition of “frontage” in RSA 674:24, I.

JP said that, while Hank Fitzgerald was talking about JP’s lawsuit, Hank Fitzgerald had neglected to mention that Hank Fitzgerald had advised an applicant to sue the town while Hank Fitzgerald was building inspector. The applicant was the same one that JP had opposed.

Hank Fitzgerald proposed the definition of “frontage” in RSA 674:24, I. Hank Fitzgerald said that he was not attacking JP and that Hank Fitzgerald never did anything to hurt the town.

Dan Schroth said that he will try to repeal zoning next year.

JP said that the emergency temporary zoning ordinance RSA 674:24-29 is irrelevant.

Bill Miskoe said that it was not inappropriate for a building inspector to tell an applicant that the applicant can sue the town.

Larry Konopka asked about property values in Epsom and what the process to apply for subdivision on class VI highways would be. Larry Konopka sees no problem now. Larry Konopka asked to poll the board.

PH said, “I think it’s stupid. Put that on the record.”

GL said that his support for the class V standard was wavering because he thought that the proposal would hurt property values.

Hank Fitzgerald asked JP for documentation of Hank Fitzgerald advising an applicant to sue the town. “He better have documentation, or he’ll see himself in court.” Hank Fitzgerald asked the board to give him JP’s documentation.

Bill Miskoe said that a variance is a favor. Variances are hard to get. The town used flexible policies in the past, and those approvals were not favors.

PD asked what the subdivision procedures would be before and after adoption of the class V proposal.

JP explained that now an applicant would go to the planning board and then the board of selectmen, but the town now has no class VI highway policy. The proposal would introduce the variance process, which has conditions, which are listed in RSA 674:33, I, (b).

Bill Miskoe said that the variance process does not treat class VI property as having an inherent hardship. The requirement for a variance will set the bar for subdivision approval much higher.

Hank Fitzgerald said that the selectmen control whether building permits are issued on class VI highways. The selectmen will be able to override the proposal if it is adopted in the zoning ordinance.

PD asked whether there is a list of all class VI highways.

JP said no. The town has abandoned class VI highways.

Bill Miskoe and Hank Fitzgerald said that the town knows where the important class VI highways are. There are 11.2 miles of such highways.

Larry Konopka said that the selectmen do not grant building permits on cow paths.

Matt St. George asked about property values in Epsom. Matt St. George thinks that the class V proposal will decrease property values. Matt St. George proposed the definition of “frontage” in RSA 674:24, I.

Bill Miskoe said that a builder on a class VI highway has to release the town from certain responsibilities.

Larry Konopka asked how many variances for subdivision had been granted in surrounding towns with the class V standard.

Hank Fitzgerald repeated his request that the board furnish JP’s documentation.

TM agreed.

TM closed public input on Amendment No. 3 at 9:07 P.M.

PH explained that he opposed the proposal because the audience attending was immediately concerned and was against it. The board members supporting the proposal are ignoring these people.

CW said that the board is taking this proposal to the whole town, so the board members supporting the proposal are clearly listening to everyone. The board members supporting the proposal could have put it in the subdivision regulations without the voters’ approval.

JP discussed property values, noting that GL had been very concerned about tax revenues. JP went to Cross-Country Appraisals in Concord, explained the frontage proposal to an employee, and asked whether the proposal would hurt property values. The employee said no. Furthermore, JP looked at tax cards of class VI properties. Almost all of the acreage of class VI properties is in current use, which the proposal will not affect. Tax cards show that unsubdividable excess acreage on class VI highways is not appraised less than subdividable excess acreage on class VI highways.

GL said, “When I made that statement at the selectmen meeting, and I am not going to correctly quote it, I just wrote it down from quick memory, what I stated at the selectmen meeting was what was suggested by Hank, calling it ‘back land.’”

JP said, “Right.”

GL said, “I wanted the assessor to give us, to answer that one question. I, we instructed the TA, the select board did, to have the assessor, for him to approach the assessor with that question. He chose not to do so.”

JP said, “Oh, really?”

GL said, “He did not go to the assessor.”

JP said, “Okay.”

GL said, “So by not going to the assessor, the question was never answered.”

JP said, “Well, I did go to the assessor.”

GL, said, “Yes.”

TM asked, “Now, the TA is who?”

GL said, “The town administrator.”

TM said, “Oh, oh, okay.”

JP said, “In fact, I talked to the town administrator to let him know what I was doing and that I had talked to Cross-Country Appraisals.”

GL said, “Yes, but he was instructed by, to put that question by e-mail so we had it in writing. He chose not to do so. He, because you two talked, you went over.”

JP said, “I didn’t, no, that’s not true.”

TM said, “Oh no, he was going to contact him.”

JP said, “In fact, Ted reemphasized that he was going to contact him after we talked to him.”

TM said, “Yes, I said, ‘You’re going to talk to him.’”

JP said, “I was talking, I made it clear that I was talking to him as a courtesy. Ted, he can confirm that one of the last things is he said, ‘when you talk to the appraiser.’”

GL said, “The town administrator never did it.”

JP said, “Well, that’s not my fault.”

GL said, “No, I know it’s not your fault. But by him choosing not to do that, he basically snubbed his nose at the four selectmen that requested it.”

TM said, “Right.”

GL said, “And that didn’t sit well with me. And it didn’t answer my question. And when a question ain’t answered by your bosses, and it’s a simple question, all I wanted to do was find out if that word, term ‘back land’ was going to cause an impact on the tax rate. You answered the question, I agree. But the appraiser did not because the town administrator chose not to do it.”

TM said, “You didn’t have anything in writing.”

GL said, “And I didn’t have nothing in writing. So I will probably be voting against this because of that alone, because I do not like to be snubbed by my employees.”

TM said, “Well, let’s deal with Amendment 1 first. Have you got that ready to?”

JP asked, “Well, do we know what we’re going to do on this?”

CW said, “Leave it as is.”

TM said, “Pardon?”

CW asked, “Leave it as is?”

TM said, “Yes.”

JP asked, “Are we satisfied with it?”

TM said, “Yes, I am.”

JP moved as follows on the final form of Amendment No. 1:

“I move that the final form of Amendment No. 1 shall be the same as the currently proposed Amendment No. 1, dated December 1, 2011.”

CW seconded the motion.

Discussion: None.

Vote to approve the motion on the final form of Amendment No. 1: carried 5 – 0 – 0. (Voting “yes”: JP, PH, GL, TM, and CW. Voting “no”: none. Abstaining: none.) The motion on the final form of Amendment No. 1 is approved.

TM said, “Okay, now the stickier one. We’re not ready to vote on that because I do have misgivings. I don’t know that I’m willing to promote something that is going to cause a rift in town. All the boards, the selectmen, all the committees, EDC, seem to have the same vision for the town. And this is the first time that I’ve seen that the town is actually working as one to accomplish something. And I am just afraid that if this goes up, it gets passed, which I believe it will get passed, it’s going to cause a problem in town, and who knows what the ramifications will be for the future of the town as far as people’s willing to cooperate with other people and so forth. So that is my concern. Anyways. Anybody else? [Long pause] And it’s not because I necessarily believe the doomsday scenarios that people have, have said. It’s just that, if that is the perception, even if it’s not actuality, it, in itself, causes a problem. Jim?”

JP asked, “Did I hear you just right say you think it would pass if it were put on the ballot?”

TM said, “It would be passed by people that had no stake in it, personal stake. And since I have seen not one person in these three meetings that were on a class V, other than Ralph, I have a concern. If there was more public participation, then I would feel a lot better about it. And I know that we have put it out, we put it on the web site, we do this and that. And we’ve done more than I think any other board has done to try to get the information out. But there’s no indication that anybody has paid attention and interested enough to be here.”

CW said, “Well, to be fair, there’s not much information that’s gone out. They, let’s realize that, people don’t pay attention until now. There’ll be plenty of information going out. There’ll be plenty of letters written, and then plenty of time to educate people. And, you know, just saying these other people are voting and don’t have a stake in it, I disagree. I think that it’s very hard for amendments to pass in this town. They vote ‘no’ if they don’t understand. And this is general terms, but I think the general terms hold up. There’s no proof of it. Things don’t pass very easily in this town. So we have an opportunity to educate people. People feel against it, they vote ‘no,’ or the people that don’t pay attention I believe will vote ‘no.’ But that’s the tendency to do it. I mean, look at the votes, they never even add up to the total number of people that voted on the amendments. It’s always, some people don’t even do anything on them. So, you know, to say that these people don’t have a stake in it, we don’t really know, we don’t really know now. We have the opportunity to make our point and educate the public and, and without having the back and forth. That’s the problem with this type of forum. It gets very, very personal very quickly. I’m really sick and tired of hearing about Jim Pritchard is running this committee. You talk about point of order. Please. The accusations made against this guy, are we going to provide one statement? I would have blown up a long time ago. Let me defend this poor man. I would have blown up a long time ago. I blow up just to listening how he gets treated. I could go over there and spit on him and show him more respect than this town shows him. I’m a little tired of it. I’m the one that brought up class, I’m the one that brought this up, because when we went over to talk about the stupid job we did last year, when we had the senior housing and realized the senior housing went against clusters, and if you look at the RSAs, if you want to ignore it, fine, but if you look at the RSAs, the more stringent thing wins. So the clusters, you can’t do this unless you combine them. So we said, ‘gee, we’re going to have to combine those things to give the town what they wanted, they voted the senior housing in.’ It’s all in these minutes that Jim magically put together for us. And boy does he get a lot of thank you for it. Oh, by the way, the tape, one night the tape didn’t work because somebody moved everything around so the speakers weren’t connected, that’s why I check this, if we didn’t have his tape, we made copies for the town.”

Larry Konopka interrupted without being recognized by the chair and without identifying himself and said, “You know, I really don’t like this shit. I come to a hearing and listen to get educated what you guys are proposing. Now I’m getting browbeated again. That’s what happened the last time.”

CW interrupted and said, “You’re not getting browbeaten.”

Larry Konopka continued and asked, “Are you going to allow a board member to sit there and browbeat in the public? He’s sitting there raising his voice.”

TM said, “He’s raising his voice, he is not attacking any individual. He is making a comment.”

CW said, “Someone’s got to stand up for this guy.”

Larry Konopka said, “I don’t need to hear. I come here to get educated and see you guys work as a team.”

TM said, “It’s done, now, Clayton. That’s enough.”

Larry Konopka said, “To work as a team.”

TM said, “Anyways.”

CW said, “It’s appalling.”

TM said, “That’s the way I see it. And we’ve done a lot of work on it. There’s some merit in it, but I don’t think it’s going to accomplish what we want it to accomplish. I think it’s going to have side effects that we don’t anticipate. If it was more clear-cut, but I just don’t see it that way. I think there’s a problem”

JP said, “I think your attitude is most unfortunate. One of the members of the public, I think it was Hank, but I’m not sure, said that I had put up a class V frontage proposal, I think he said, seven times. Is that right, Clayton, do you remember?”

TM said, “Yes.”

JP said, “I believe he said that. That is simply not true. What has happened is I have put this up through citizen petition three times. And each of those three times, the planning board has stamped it ‘Not Recommended by the Planning Board’ right on the ballot. Three times, the planning board has tried to get class VI allowed. Three times, the most recent being last year. And it has been shot down each of those three times with the full weight of the planning board behind it. In I think it was 2009, they put up a standalone article, and it was shot down by approximately 3 or 4 to one. I think it was 3 to one, but it could have been 4 to one, I’m not sure. So what we have had is we have had a total of six attempts: three on one side and three on the other. But, in each of those six attempts, the planning board has tried to get either the status quo of nothing, or it has tried to get class VI. So that’s six times that the planning board has stood in the way of letting the town make a truly informed decision on this matter. And what I’m hearing from you is you’re hearing about five people, most of whom are class VI owners, and they are very upset about this, and we’re deciding that this is going to be a terrible thing for the town because they’re going to be upset. And we talked about the fact that, if these roads get built out, this could be an occasion for a class VI highway, and this could burden taxpayers. You know, Chief Johnson came in here and said it’s a problem when you allow this development because, you know, what did he say—‘You know, we can’t say, well, you built out there, too bad, and let it burn.’—that’s what he said. He said it’s a problem for the fire department; it’s a problem for the taxpayers. And what we’re saying is, well, these people didn’t show up to defend their future tax bills. The future buyers didn’t come in here to defend themselves. And because they didn’t come in, we’re not going to, we’re not going to protect their interests. Well, I’m sorry, I think that’s wrong. This board is here to protect the town, not the few class VI owners who show up because they want to do something and it’s going to be harder, not impossible, but harder if this passes. I think that’s, you know, now we’re going to make it 7 and 0 that the planning board has been on the class VI side of things. And, you know, to say, well, the town, things are going great right now. It’s isn’t because this board has been saying, ‘let’s do class VI.’ That is not what has made this board be productive this year. We have been trying to create guidelines, we have been trying to create standards, we have been trying to make things fair for people. The class V proposal is a big part of the reason why it is that things have been going well. If we decide we’re going to shift gears, and let’s do things the way they were done the past six in a row, I predict that what we’re going to do is we’re going to very quickly return to the way things were done during those six in a row. This year has been remarkably different, and I’d like to keep it different. I don’t want to go back to the way things were when, when, you know, bang, bang, bang, we’re going to have class VI. That’s, that’s my feeling. I think that’s a mistake.”

Bill Miskoe interrupted without being recognized by the chair and without identifying himself and said, “I’ve been very vocal tonight, and I am not affected by.”

JP asked, “Is public input still open?”

TM said, “We’re discussing it with ourselves, now.”

Bill Miskoe said, “I just want to be on the record. I am not affected.”

TM said, “You already said this before, Bill.”

JP asked, “Do I have to take minutes of his comments? Do I take minutes of his comments?”

TM said, “No.”

JP said, “Thank you.”

Bill Miskoe said, “Just listen to them.”

TM said, “Gerard?”

GL said, “I’m still, like I said, when I didn’t get my answers from what I stated at the select board, I do not like my, the people who I ask, who are professionals, not do their jobs. When he didn’t do his job, I was offended. And I will not support this.”

CW said, “So that’s the thanks I get for showing up how many Thursdays have we been here? We could have been staying home because nothing’s happening in the town. We took the opportunity to really review, to really think through it. We did more on just that one parking proposal than we did on all the stuff we proposed last year. We looked for cause and effect. And I just, I agree, I think we might as well just go back to the way things were.”

JP said, “Yes.”

CW said, “You look at the minutes, whether you believe the minutes or not, you look at the minutes, you see a mature board that got along, had different opinions. We had Fred Hast representing the selectmen. I actually reviewed all the minutes after the first one, after the first public hearing. I read through all the minutes because it’s easy to get emotionally involved in this and be concerned about destroying the town. I take that very personally. I read through all the minutes. I was very impressed with the way this board behaved compared to my three years as an alternate on this board. It was disgusting. So, and we had two different people in here, and we had a variety of opinions, and now we just, that’s it. All that work, hey, a few people have done it. I’m not dissing their opinions, but I’d like to hear from the rest of the town. That’s the opportunity we have here. We have a chance, as a board, to educate the people in what we believe is right. We get challenged to go see what the other towns are doing. I did that. We get challenged to call up Local Government Center. I’ve done that. They’ve done a whole seminar series on this, by the way. And that article.”

JP interrupted and said, “We get challenged on property values. I’ve looked at about 80 tax cards.”

CW said, “It doesn’t seem to matter. So.”

TM said, “We’re still discussing.”

CW said, “We’re willing to do our homework, and we’re willing to bring it up to the town and have the town vote on it.”

TM said, “I think we should have one final public hearing on this. One final one.”

JP said, “We still have to, we’re still statutorily required”

TM said, “Oh, wait a minute.”

JP continued, “to vote on this.”

TM said, “Yes.”

JP said, “And, if you vote it down.”

TM said, “Now, now, if, wait a minute, wait a minute. What is the limitation as far as our amendments or our ballot initiatives, when does that have to be in? Is it different than the public, the citizen petition?”

JP said, “No, it all has to be, the deadline is all the same as far as when the last public hearing can be. And you talked about having a work session on this. I hope you’re thinking about having that work session next week, because if you’re thinking about the week thereafter, that will be too late to get notices in the paper.”

TM said, “No, we’re getting, the notice is going to go in next week.”

JP said, “Yes, that’s right. So, I mean, whatever we do, it’s going to be etched in stone tonight.”

TM said, “I know that.”

JP said, “We have to vote.”

TM continued, “I realize that, and we will have another public hearing on this as well as the citizen petition same night.”

JP asked, “We’re going to have another hearing on Amendment No. 3?”

TM said, “I want one more.”

JP said, “Are you, are you going to vote on it?”

TM said, “Yes.”

JP said, “Okay.”

CW said, “We are going to change the ground rules at that meeting.”

TM said, “Yes, absolutely.”

CW said, “I’m a little tired of hearing about lawsuits and all that stuff. We have got to change the ground rules.”

TM said, “It’s going to be an abbreviated time slot. Jim?”

JP said, “I’d like to point out that, for years, I, on my computer, I have got records of letters that I’ve written to town officials up the wazoo. Just about every member of the board of adjustment who’s been on that board for the past I don’t know how many years, I’ve written to them and said, ‘would you be willing to work with me?’ Carole Dodge was willing to work with me. Dan Greene was willing to work with me. Those are the two town officials that I can think of who responded. Other than that.”

TM said, “Okay, Jim.”

JP said, “The point is—there’s a point. You opened this issue yourself, Ted, when you said, ‘this is going to create a rift.’ I have been reaching out to people for years. I’m not telling you who didn’t respond. I’m just telling you an awful lot of people didn’t respond. How many times have I asked at this meeting, ‘What do you want? What’s the compromise?’ And what I’m hearing is ‘I want carte blanche.’ That’s what they’re saying. Nobody is saying, ‘Well, we understand this could put an undue burden on taxpayers.’ They don’t want that. They want it allowed as a matter of right. That is coming across loud and clear. Now, the state doesn’t allow that, but what they want is they want a statement from the town that it is to be allowed. They haven’t been able to get that, so the next best thing is nothing. But it’s not as if I haven’t been reaching out to these people for years and years and years, trying to reach a compromise. Now, if we’re talking about rifts, you know, the only way that this rift that you’re talking about is going to be sealed is if the people who feel strongly about the class V issue are going to have to be squashed. They are the ones, they have been to the past hearings that the planning board had when they were proposing class VI, and they were very angry about it, and they expressed their anger at the polls. To think that these people now don’t care I think is very naïve. I think that they’ve looked at this board and they’ve seen that we’ve been professional and that we’ve been doing what we should be doing, and they’re thinking, ‘We don’t need to come in and scream at these people, because they’re doing their job.’ And frankly, I don’t want to let these people down. I was elected to do something, and I can tell you for sure, I wasn’t elected to support class VI frontage.”

TM said, “Okay, we’re going to vote on this. No matter what the vote is, we’re still going to have one final public hearing.”

CW asked, “Will we have enough time for legal review?”

TM said, “Yes.”

CW said, “You say, ‘yes,’ but we’re running out of time really fast. We still need legal review.”

TM said, “If they all have to be.”

CW asked, “When does it have to get to the selectmen?”

JP said, “Well there, here’s the situation as far as legal review goes. If we don’t turn this in now, we can forget about legal review. Because the next time that we can have a hearing is in February. And then we have to give it to the”

TM said, “to the selectmen on the 7th.”

JP said, “That’s five days later.”

TM said, “Yes, so it will have to be all finalized after the public hearing on the 2nd.”

JP said, “Yes, but if we’re talking about legal review, we didn’t talk about that before, but if we’re talking about legal review.”

CW said, “Well, we can get the first two done.”

JP asked, “What?”

CW said, “We can get the first two done. We voted, no, I’m saying Amendment 1 and Amendment 2 we can get done. We don’t have to wait. We can get that finalized.”

TM said, “Yes, because there’s not going to be any more public.”

JP said, “In order for legal review to be done, you know, I got all kinds of comments from the Local Government Center, ‘well, you know, you don’t need to figure this out until after the town adopts it.’ Anyway, I don’t know what we’re discussing anymore. Should I make the motion?”

TM said, “Yes.”

JP moved as follows on the final form of Amendment No. 3:

“I move that the final form of Amendment No. 3 shall be the same as the currently proposed Amendment No. 3, dated October 6, 2011.”

CW seconded the motion.

Discussion:

TM said, “Since we’re going to have one more hearing.”

CW said, “You have to ask for the vote.”

TM said, “I’m sorry, I just have to say ‘no’ to this one. Sorry.”

CW asked, “Did you ask for the vote?”

TM said, “Yes. Those in favor?”

JP and CW voted “Aye.”

TM said, “Those opposed?”

PH, GL, and TM voted “No.”

Vote to approve the motion on the final form of Amendment No. 3: failed 2 – 3 – 0. (Voting “yes”: JP and CW. Voting “no”: PH, GL, and TM. Abstaining: none.) The motion on the final form of Amendment No. 3 is not approved.

JP said, “I don’t know why we’re having another public hearing.”

CW said, “We have to have it for the citizen petition.”

JP said, “Yes, but we won’t be having a public hearing on the frontage thing, I assume. It’s just been killed”

CW said, “It’s just been voted down.”

JP said, “That’s the end of it.”

CW said, “The public hearing is for the citizen petition.”

JP said, “Yes.”

TM asked, “Now, that frontage can’t be on the ballot because it’s been shot down?”

JP said, “We just killed it.”

CW said, “We just killed it.”

PH said, “which takes care of the citizen petition.”

JP, CW, and TM said, “No, we can’t take that off the ballot.”

PH said, “Oh, all right, all right.”

GL said, “The citizen petition has to go on the ballot because it’s been polled by citizens.”

PH said, “Okay.”

JP said, “Absolutely.”

GL said, “That’s the law.”

TM said, “The only reason I did that is I wanted to check with Epsom and see what the statistics are as far as what has been approved for subdivision and the ones that weren’t. I should have thought of that ahead.”

CW said, “Yes.”

TM said, “Actually, we all should have thought of that ahead.”

JP said, “I think we pretty much thought of everything.”

CW said, “I’m sorry I didn’t think of it.”

JP said, “I can’t agree with you, Ted.”

TM said, “I know, look, I know you’re, I know you’re upset with me, but, look, we work together, and if it happens, it happens. I had to go with my gut. I’m sorry. And if.”

CW said, “I’m a big boy. I can take it.”

TM said, “But don’t throw that away.”

JP said, “Don’t throw what away?”

TM said, “What’s been done on that, because.”

JP said, “Because why?”

TM said, “If I find out the information that I want, and it satisfies my questions.”

JP said, “What are your questions?”

TM said, “I want to find out the percentage of people that went before the Town of Epsom to get a subdivision on a class VI. The percentage that was approved and the percentage that were not.”

JP asked, “What are you looking for in that?”

TM said, “To see if it is a deal killer. If they have ever allowed it. And if they haven’t, that indicates to me that there could be a problem.”

JP asked, “Why don’t you do something that’s a little closer to home, like go to the Pittsfield Zoning Board of Adjustment and look at how many special exceptions they’ve approved, how many variances they’ve approved, and figure out how many variances they’ve denied. You know, I can tell you, Susan Muenzinger, who was on the board a few years ago, stood before the planning board at a meeting that was over in the high school and said, ‘hey, we approve pretty much everything.’ Now, you know, what are you going to Epsom for to find out what their zoning board of adjustment does when we have one right here, and we know what they are going to do?”

TM said, “But they have a definition of ‘frontage,’ and we don’t.”

JP said, “Ted, we, we, we, I’m sorry, we’ve been over this. We discussed this. Let me refresh your memory.”

Matt St. George interrupted without being recognized by the chair and without identifying himself and said, “This.”

JP continued and said, “I have information that I passed around.”

Matt St. George interrupted without being recognized by the chair and without identifying himself and asked, “That, that vote’s done? So the class V.”

JP interrupted Matt St. George and said, “Yup, it’s done. Yup, this has been killed.”

Matt St. George said, “It’s not on the ballot this year, is that on the record?”

TM said, “We not saying it won’t be next year, but not this year.”

Larry Konopka spoke without being recognized by the chair and without identifying himself and asked, “How much longer before public input?”

TM asked, “Everybody got the building inspector’s page, there, two lines?”

PH said, “Yes.”

TM said, “There’s been seven, what is it, permits. Selectmen’s report.”

AGENDA ITEM 10: Selectman’s Report –Gerard LeDuc, Selectmen Ex Officio

GL discussed a property on Tilton Hill Road that the town had taken for taxes.

AGENDA ITEM 12: Public Input

Larry Konopka thanked the board for its work.

Bill Miskoe asked how his citizen petition would be processed.

JP, TM, and GL explained the process.

Bill Miskoe said that he was concerned that the town attorney would change his proposal.

AGENDA ITEM 11: Members Concerns

JP referred to the Stockman subdivision on Thompson Road, in 1990, when frontage in Pittsfield meant class V. The Pittsfield ZBA granted the variance for subdivision on this class VI highway. TM does not need to go to Epsom to see what the Pittsfield ZBA will do. JP had distributed this ZBA decision at an earlier board meeting.

CW said that Carole Dodge had said that all class VI subdivisions should go through the ZBA, but she is against the proposal, anyway. These subdivisions are all done differently. The system is broken.

JP resigned his position as recorder effective immediately. JP cited the audience’s attacks on his recording and TM’s reason to defeat Amendment No. 3: that tonight’s audience should get what they want over the probable will of the town as a whole.

AGENDA ITEM 6: Citizen’s Petition – Review/Discussion

JP distributed a draft of the notice of public hearing for the citizen petition. The notice schedules the hearing for February 2, 2012, 7:30 P.M., at the town hall.

CW moved to use JP’s notice of public hearing as written.

GL seconded the motion.

Discussion: CW read the notice of public hearing.

Vote to use JP’s notice of public hearing as written: carried 4 – 0 – 1. (Voting “yes”: PH, GL, TM, and CW. Voting “no”: none. Abstaining: JP.) The board will use JP’s notice of public hearing as written.

AGENDA ITEM 5: Approval of Minutes of December 15, 2011.

PH moved to approve the minutes of December 15, 2011, as written in draft.

GL seconded the motion.

Discussion:

JP noted the following errors:
The draft minutes refer to an obsolete agenda.
Agenda Item 5 (obsolete agenda), (page 7): “RSA 674:42” should be “RSA 674:24”.
Agenda Item 5 (obsolete agenda), (page 9): “provision provide” should be “provision (RSA 674:41, I, (c), (1)) provide”.
Agenda Item 5 (obsolete agenda), (page 11): “as matter of course if, for example the” should be “as a matter of course if, for example, the”.
Agenda Item 5 (obsolete agenda), (page 13): “similar verbiage” should be “verbiage similar”.

TM requested the following change:
Agenda Item 5 (obsolete agenda), (page 7): Delete “Hank Fitzgerald left the meeting at 7:40 P.M.”

TM called for a vote on the minutes correcting the errors that JP noted and with the change that TM requested.

Vote to approve the minutes of December 15, 2011, correcting the errors that JP noted and with the change that TM requested: carried 4 – 0 – 1. (Voting “yes”: PH, GL, TM, and CW. Voting “no”: none. Abstaining: JP.) The minutes of December 15, 2011, are approved correcting the errors that JP noted and with the change that TM requested.

AGENDA ITEM 7: Letter to The Sun – Re: Citizen’s Petition

Agenda item cancelled.

AGENDA ITEM 8: Letter to The Sun – Re: Planning Board Ballot Articles

Agenda item cancelled.

AGENDA ITEM 9: Building Inspector Report

Agenda item cancelled.

AGENDA ITEM 13: Adjournment

PH moved to adjourn the meeting.

GL seconded the motion.

Vote to adjourn the planning board meeting of January 5, 2012: carried 4 – 0 – 1. (Voting “yes”: PH, GL, TM, and CW. Voting “no”: none. Abstaining: JP.) The planning board meeting of January 5, 2012, is adjourned at 10:07 P.M.

Minutes approved: February 16, 2012

______________________________ _____________________
Ted Mitchell, Chairman Date

I transcribed these minutes (not verbatim) on January 8 through 11, 2012, and on January 29, 2012, from notes that I made during the planning board meeting on January 5, 2012, and from copies of the three Town tapes that Chairman Ted Mitchell made on January 6, 2012.

____________________________________________
Jim Pritchard, interim planning board recorder and associate member

3 Town tapes.