MINUTES

ANNUAL TOWN MEETING

NEWMARKET NH

FIRST SESSION: APRIL 7, 2009

Moderator Clay Mitchell of 5 Hilton Drive called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. Approximately 55 registered voters were in attendance. The Warrant, Budget, Default Budget, and document prepared by the Newmarket Conservation Commission, were distributed.

Moderator Mitchell then requested, and all observed, a moment of silence in honor of all who lost their lives this past year, particularly our armed service personnel, as well as for our family and friends currently serving in the armed forces.

Moderator Mitchell presented the Warrant and explained the manner in which he would conduct the meeting. He stated all articles would go forward as written to the ballot for the second session to be held on May 12, 2009, unless any amendments to the articles are passed.

Article 1. To choose all necessary Town Officers for the ensuing year.

Town Council: Two for three (3) years

         Town Clerk-Tax Collector: One for three (3) years

         Budget Committee: Three for three (3) years, Two for two (2) years

         Planning Board:  Two for three (3) years

         Trustee of Trust Funds: One for three (3) years

Supervisors of Checklist: One for six (6) years

Trustees of the Library: One for (3) years

Moderator Mitchell read the article. There being no discussion, Moderator Mitchell stated Article 1 would be put forward as written.

A motion was duly made by Councilor Michael LaBranche of 15 Spring Street, and seconded by Budget Committee Chairman Lorrianne Caprioli of 40 Riverbend Road, To move consideration of Article 3 prior to consideration of Article 2.

It was VOTED, and the motion passed.

Article 3. Operating Budget

To see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate, as a gross 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 vote of the first session, for the purposes set forth therein, totaling $10,177,760. Should this article be defeated, the operating budget shall be $10,546,520, which is the same as last year, with certain adjustments required by previous action of the Town of Newmarket, or by law, or the Town Council may hold one (1) special meeting, in accordance with RSA 40:13, X and XVI, to take up the issue of a revised operating budget only.

(Majority vote required)

Recommended by the Budget Committee

Moderator Mitchell read the article. Administrator Edward Wojnowski explained the budget put forth this year is actually 368,760 less than the default budget due to the combined efforts of department heads, himself, Town Council, and Budget Committee. He stated it is a very lean budget, $508,616 less than the budget passed last year, and is focused on maintaining the same level of day-to-day operations as well as putting off a number of capital expenditures for 2-3 years due to the current overall economic situation. Administrator Wojnowski explained the law requires a default budget be established based on the previous year’s budget plus any special warrants passed at that time. He noted the budget included a pay increase for the police union contract as well as for the non-union employees. However, he stated the budget does not give the Town the ability to negotiate a labor contract with the Department of Public Works; therefore, any pay raises for that Department would be put off for at least one year.

There being no discussion, Moderator Mitchell stated Article 3 would be put forward as written.

A motion was duly made by Councilor Michael LaBranche and seconded by Councilor James Bergeron of 51 Packers Falls Road, To limit reconsideration of Article 3.

Council Chairman Dana Glennon of 2 Beech Street asked what a vote to limit reconsideration would mean. Moderator Mitchell explained, if passed, the Article could not be brought up again during the remainder of the meeting for reconsideration.

It was VOTED, and the motion passed.

Article 2. Bond for New Village water, sewer and drainage improvements and for improvements to sewer manholes, acquisition of a step screen and water meters.

To see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $2,782,500 (gross budget) for the purpose of construction improvements to the New Village water, sewer and drainage systems, in addition to, improvements to the sewer manholes within the sewer district to eliminate infiltration and inflow of groundwater, acquisition of a step screen for the Creighton Street lift station, and water meters under the Federal Stimulus Package Program and will qualify the Town for federal funds in the form of 50% principal forgiveness, such sums to be raised by the issuance of Serial Bonds or Notes not to exceed $2,782,500 under, and in compliance, with the provisions of the Municipal Finance Act (NH RSA 33:1 et seq., as amended) and to authorize the Town Council to issue and negotiate such bonds or notes and to determine the rate of interest thereon, and to take such other actions as may be necessary to effect the issuance, negotiation, sale and delivery of such bonds or notes as shall be in the best interest of the Town of Newmarket, NH, additionally to participate in the State Revolving Fund (SRF) RSA 486:14 established for this purpose, and to allow the Town Council to expend such monies as become available from the Federal and State Governments and pass any vote relating thereto. Subject to the receipt of Federal Stimulus Funding.

(3/5 ballot vote required)

Recommended by the Town Council and recommended by the Budget Committee

Moderator Mitchell read the article. Sean Greig, Town Water and Sewer Superintendent, explained the article. He stated the town is currently attempting to replace water meters and manholes as an ongoing process and expense. In addition, it is necessary to replace and relocate the sewer pipes to beneath the roadways in the New Village area. Currently, many of these old pipes are located behind people’s homes in back yards and are in a significantly deteriorated condition. Also, much of the water drainage is leaking through deteriorated manholes into the sewer system as well as being pumped into the sewer system by residents’ sump pumps, creating unnecessary expense in wastewater treatment. The goal is to incorporate all of this work and expense into anticipated federal stimulus fund programs. Mr. Greig stated Newmarket is currently 24 on the list of the top 30 in the State and is slated to receive $940,000 for this New Village project.

Mr. Buzz Dietterle of 4 Smith Garrison Road, asked if homeowners would be responsible to bring the sewer pipes to the front of their homes. Administrator Wojnowski responded they would not be responsible. However, Mr. Greig noted individual homeowners would be responsible for relocating the actual connection to the front of their home, if necessary.

In response to a question by Mr. Edward Portyrata of 177 Exeter Road, Mr. Greig and Administrator Wojnowski confirmed there is currently no guarantee the Town will receive the anticipated federal stimulus funds, and they stated this work would not commence if the Town should not receive the federal stimulus funds, confirming the wording in Article 2 stating, “Subject to the receipt of Federal Stimulus Funding.”

There being no further discussion, Moderator Mitchell stated Article 2 would be put forward as written.

Article 4. Veterans Memorial Expendable Trust Fund

To see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $5,000 to be placed in the Newmarket Veterans Memorial Expendable Trust fund. These funds will be used for the renovations to existing memorials and for proposed new memorials.

(Majority vote required)

Submitted by petition

Moderator Mitchell read the article. Mrs. Janice Rosa of 421 Wadleigh Falls Road explained the intent of petitioners. She noted the Town Council, in its budget deliberations, voted to zero out the $5,000 proposed for the Veterans Memorial CIP account. Subsequently, the Town Budget Committee did not accept the Town Council’s recommendation, and returned the $5,000 amount to the budget. However, in the meantime, the petition was submitted without the knowledge that the $5,000 had been returned to the budget. Mrs. Rosa stressed it was not the intent to duplicate the $5,000 funds, and the petitioners did not want to negatively impact the taxpayers. Therefore, she said, in good faith, she wished to make a motion to remove the Special Warrant article to appropriate $5,000, since it was now already included in the Town budget under Article 3.

A motion was duly made by Mrs. Janice Rosa and seconded by Budget Committee member Brian Hart of 13 Beech Street, To amend Article 4 to state: “To see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $1.00 to be placed in the Newmarket Veterans Memorial Expendable Trust fund. These funds will be used for the renovations to existing memorials and for proposed new memorials.”

Mrs. Rochelle Sharples of 10 Lamprey River Park, asked if the amended motion failed, would the Town still be able to appropriate the $5,000 in the budget to Veterans Memorial Expendable Trust Fund? Moderator Mitchell explained if the motion failed, the Town would not be able to appropriate the $5,000 in the budget to this fund, since this would fall under the “no means no” statute (RSA 32:10). By voting no on the amended article, even though it reduced the article to $1.00, the Town would be voting “no” on the ‘purpose’ of the special warrant article, thus the purpose could not be carried out in any form.

Accordingly, Mrs. Janice Rosa stated she wished to rescind her motion, and Mr. Brian Hart also stated he wished to rescind his second. Accordingly, the motion was rescinded.

A motion was then duly made by Mrs. Janice Rosa and seconded by Councilor Michael LaBranche, To amend Article 4 to state: “To see.”

In response to questions for clarification, Moderator Mitchell explained this type of amendment is a legal amendment. He noted there was a recent court case out of Barrington, NH, in which this same thing was done. By removing all of the language in Article 4 following the words “to see”, the Article is rendered ineffective, and regardless of the outcome, since the amended Article would in essence have no meaning, there would be no effect on the purpose of the $5,000 for the Veterans Memorial Expendable Trust Fund already included in the Town budget under Article 3.

It was VOTED, and the motion passed.

Mrs. Sharples suggested explanation be provided in advance of the May 12 Second Session of the Town Meeting so voters would understand the purpose or intent of Article 4 as amended.

Article 5. Rescind Bonding Authority for Fire/Rescue/Highway Infrastructure Bonding

To see if the Town will vote to rescind the $1,600,000 bonding authority for the Fire/Rescue/Highway Infrastructure Bond adopted on May 11, 2004, and reaffirmed on August 27, 2008.

(Majority vote required)

Moderator Mitchell read the article. Administrator Wojnowski explained the purpose of the article. He noted when the original bond was adopted, the Town had failed to properly post the public hearing; and as a result, the bond was never issued, the expenditures became a liability on the Town’s fund balance, and the Town’s ability to reduce the property tax rate was negatively impacted. As a result of the special Town meeting held last August to rectify the public hearing deficiency, the Town attempted to bond $1.3 million of the original $1.6 million bond amount. However, it quickly became clear the high interest rates at that time would result in the Town paying nearly $1.1 million in interest on a $1.3 million bond. Therefore, since the infrastucture/building is now paid in full and the Town has already realized the negative impact on the fund balance, the Town Council determined it to be in the best interest of the community to rescind the bonding authority.

There being no further discussion, Moderator Mitchell stated Article 5 would be put forward as written.

Article 6. Change the Purpose of Downtown Redevelopment Capital Reserve Account

To see if the Town will vote to change the purpose of the Downtown Redevelopment Capital Reserve Fund, established May 12, 1998, to the Town Clock Repair and Maintenance Capital Reserve Fund.

(2/3 vote required)

Moderator Mitchell read the article. Administrator Wojnowski reported the Capital Improvement Committee became aware there is approximately $25,000 remaining in the Downtown Redevelopment Capital Reserve Account, and the purpose has been fulfilled. Simultaneously, the Town Council was addressing ways in which needed repairs and maintenance for the town clock situated in the Community Church might be addressed. Therefore, it was determined the existing purpose of this capital reserve fund should be changed to a new purpose of repairing and maintaining the town clock.

Mr. Robert Gazda of 27 Packers Falls Road spoke about the history of the clock. He noted the clock was built in 1872, and his father, who was a watchmaker in town and who died in 1984, was the last ‘keeper of the clock’. He reported the clock was last overhauled in 1972, and Mr. Gazda and his father have been maintaining the clock for nearly 50 years. In attempting to recently get the striking mechanism to work, after being shut down nearly 20 years ago, a plate fell apart due to an old clad weld, causing considerable damage to the striking mechanism gear and other parts. Mr. Gazda noted there only 3 such clocks still operating, one in Massachusetts, one in New London, and Newmarket’s. He estimates it will cost $30,000 to $40,000 to overhaul the clock, repair or rebuild the gear mechanism, and to remake and replace the face of the clock that is damaged.

Mrs. Nicole Benson of 12 Mockingbird Lane asked if technology would allow the clock striker to operate during limited hours. Mr. Gazda responded no; technology does not allow this since the clock is a manual clock.

Mr. Buzz Dietterle asked the Town Council, since the decision was made to stop the clock from striking 20 years ago, if they will allow the clock to strike if it is repaired. Four of the five Councilors who were present stated they would agree to allow the clock to strike if it is repaired; however, it was noted the Council has not officially acted on this issue.

Mr. Buzz Dietterle also inquired about the issues associated with PSNH’s unanticipated charges to the Town associated with the downtown area. Administrator Wojnowski stated this reserve account could not be used with regard to any possible PSNH issues, since it is totally unrelated.

There being no further discussion, Moderator Mitchell stated Article 6 would be put forward as written.

Article 7. Revise the Purpose of the Sewer Fund Capital Reserve Account

To see if the Town will vote to change the purpose of the Sewer Fund Capital Reserve Fund, established March 8, 1977, to be used for the purpose of Improvements to the Sewer System.

(2/3 vote required)

Moderator Mitchell read the article. Superintendent of Water and Sewer Sean Greig explained the purpose of this article is to clarify and broaden the definition of the purpose of the fund. He stated the intent is to use the fund for ‘improvements’ of the sewer system, not just specifically for ‘equipment’ for the sewer system, so that the purpose encompasses everything having to do with water and sewer operations (including lift stations, lab work, buildings, manholes, pipes, etc.)

There being no further discussion, Moderator Mitchell stated Article 7 would be put forward as written

Article 8. Allow Conservation Commission to expend funds

To see if the Town will vote to adopt the provisions of RSA 36-A: 4-a, I (b) to authorize the Conservation Commission to expend funds for contributions to “qualified organizations” for the purchase of property interests, or facilitating transactions related thereto, where the property interest is to be held by the qualified organization and the town will retain no interest in the property.

(Majority vote required)

Moderator Mitchell read the article. Valerie Shelton of 124 Cushing Road, a member of the Conservation Commission, explained the purpose of the Article. She referenced the document that was handed out to all in attendance explaining why the Conservation Commission urges support of this Article and of Article 9. Ms. Shelton noted the Commission receives its funding from the Land Use Change Tax when an affected property is taken out of Current Use. One-half of the penalty tax goes to the Conservation Commission, and one-half goes to the Town’s general fund. She pointed out Articles 8 and 9 have no impact on the taxpayers. She also explained the Articles, if passed would assist other qualified organizations to partner with the Town’s Conservation Commission to protect lands, and then the organizations acquiring the lands would manage the properties, alleviating the Conservation Commission of potential future burdens.

Mrs. Linda Mantegani of 7 Doe Farm Lane asked for the current balance amount in the Conservation Fund. Town Finance Director Donald Parnell indicated he did not have that information available with him at the meeting. Second, Mrs. Mantegani asked whether the Conservation Commission was required to go before the Planning Board and/or the Town Planner to obtain permission to use these funds. Moderator Mitchell pointed out Planning Boards do not oversee expenditures of funds by Conservation Commissions.

There being no further discussion, Moderator Mitchell stated Article 8 would be put forward as written.

Article 9. Allow Conservation Commission to expend funds outside the boundary of Newmarket

To see if the Town will vote to adopt the provisions of RSA 36-A: 4-a, I (a) to authorize the Conservation Commission to expend funds to purchase interests in land outside the boundaries of Newmarket, subject to the approval of the Town Council.

(Majority vote required)

Moderator Mitchell read the article. Valerie Shelton referenced the Smith Property, of which the Conservation Commission recently acquired an easement, noting most of the land is in the Town of Durham. She pointed out the significance of the easement is due to the fact protection is acquired for Newmarket’s acquifer and well head area.

There being no further discussion, Moderator Mitchell stated Article 9 would be put forward as written.

Article 10. Other Business

Mr. Portyrata, referencing the fact that the Municipal Audit Committee was meeting simultaneously with the Deliberative Session, asked for an update, whether there were going to be any legal actions and whether the Town would be recouping any of the monies lost. Council Chairman Glennon explained the purpose of the Municipal Audit Committee did not address these issues, but rather the Forensic Audit Committee had responsibility for these issues. Chairman Glennon explained the Forensic Audit Committee has ended its discussions, and the matter is currently in the hands of legal. The entire audit is on the town’s website, but the Council is not at a point where any further information can be released as they are waiting for response by the Attorney General and other legal authorities.

There being no further business, a motion was duly made by Brian Hart and seconded by Councilor Michael Ploski of 60 No. Main Street to To adjourn the meeting.

It was VOTED, and the motion passed.

The meeting was adjourned at 8:04 p.m., April 7, 2009.

Respectfully Submitted,

Becky I. Benvenuti

Town Clerk and Tax Collector