Present: John Badger (Chairman), Diane Hardy (Town Planner), Rick McMenimen (Alternate), Janice Rosa, Peter Roy (Vice-Chairman), Adam Schroadter (Alternate), Val Shelton
Absent: Judith Carr (Town Council representative), Chester Jablonski, George Willant
Chairman Badger called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m.
Pledge of Allegiance
Chairman Badger appointed Rick McMenimen and Adam Schroadter to sit in for Chester Jablonski and George Willant.
Public Comments
Chairman Badger opened the Public Comments at 7:05 p.m.
Tracy Bogacz, Secretary of the Newmarket Business Association (NBA), stated she would be presenting tonight, as Gerry O’Connell, President of the NBA, was not available. She referenced the letter dated October 14, 2008 written by Gerry O’Connell, addressed to the Town Administrator, members of the Town Council and members of the Planning Board, reading: “The board members of the Newmarket Business Association held a quarterly meeting Thursday October 2nd. At the meeting, the NBA voted to communicate a position on the Heritage District and Commission. Please consider this our formal statement.”
“The Newmarket Business Association does not support a Heritage District adopted by the Town of Newmarket, governed by an Advisory Heritage Commission. We fully recognize the historical district in Newmarket as outlined by the State of New Hampshire and support its goals.
“This in not a new opinion; the NBA has voted against the formation of the district and commission at the Town level in recent years. At this time, a commission is unnecessary at the local level, as the state already recognizes the district’s historical value. Surely, our common goals are to strengthen and promote a strong business climate and to facilitate the creation of business of the relocation of existing businesses to Newmarket. The formation of the Heritage Commission with oversight and an approval process counters these goals.
“However, this is not a permanent opinion. We are interested, certainly, in learning more about the structure of such a committee, including how the seats on its board are allocated, the approval process for board members, and how its role differs from and supports the role of other established board such as the Planning Board, the Zoning Board and the Town Council.
“We look forward with interest to continued talks on the proposal of a recognized commission.”
Janice Rosa noted Jennifer Jarvis had asked her to read an email out loud. She noted Jennifer Jarvis was against the current process of establishing a Historic District Commission and felt it should be a decision by the residents.
Mike Provost, of 16 Beech Street, explained this discussion is happening 30 years after the historic district had been established. The downtown businesses had done a study, with the Thoreson Group, in order to create an area within Newmarket that would be listed on the National Register of Historic Places. He noted it was the intent of the businesses at that time to preserve the heritage of the community. The creation of any historic district brings a great deal of discussion. He had been involved in the original set up and encouraged this discussion. He asked the Board to seriously consider this proposal along with the demolition ordinance. As a Main Street manager he has seen property values rise in communities that have property listed on the National Register of Historic Districts and a local historic district. Preserving the history of the the community is to benefit future generations. The community sets up the regulations to ensure they fit the community and the district.
Rich Alperin, of 204 South Main Street, noted he has been on the Advisory Heritage Commission for four years. Before he was on the Advisory Heritage Commission, he didn’t know anything about the heritage of the community. He encouraged the Board to conduct online research, as he had. He suggested it would be difficult to find a negative word about a community with a historic district. He suggested good things happen to communities with historic districts; historic districts and commissions do wonderful things for the community.
Chairman Badger closed the Public Comments at 7:12 p.m.
Review and Approval of Minutes: 9/9/08, 9/16/08, 9/20/08
Town Planner Diane Hardy noted the Board has implemented a new process for review and approval of minutes. The draft minutes are sent to the Board members, Board members submit their comments and changes. Editorial changes are made; substantive changes are discussed at the meeting.
September 9, 2008
Town Planner Diane Hardy discussed the editorial changes that were made.
Action
Motion: Vice-Chairman Roy made a motion to approve the September 9, 2008 minutes, as amended.
Seconded: Rick McMenimen
Vote: All in favor
September 16, 2008
Town Planner Diane Hardy discussed the editorial changes made to the minutes.
Action
Motion: Val Shelton made a motion to accept the September 16, 2008 minutes, as amended.
Seconded: Rick McMenimen
Vote: All in favor
September 20, 2008 Site Walk
Town Planner Diane Hardy discussed the editorial changes. Janice Rosa noted she had specifically asked where people could park in order to access the conservation land. She would like that reflected in the minutes. Duane Hyde from The Nature Conservancy noted people could park at the Kwaks property and walk along Route 152 to the conservation land. Janice Rosa also noted she had asked about the invasive species along the boundary lines. Duane Hyde answered there would be a management plan to address these issues. The Nature Conservancy and acquisition agent would not have authority to remove invasive species on abutting properties.
Action
Motion: Rick McMenimen made a motion to approve the September 20, 2008 minutes, as amended.
Seconded: Vice-Chairman Roy
Vote: All in favor
Regular Business
Judy Ryan – Discussion of proposal to adopt a Historic District Ordinance.
Phil LePage noted Judy Ryan was no longer the Chairman of the Advisory Heritage Commission. He discussed the boundary proposed for the historic district, the Historic District Ordinance and proposed regulations. These documents have not been reviewed by the Town’s legal counsel. He formally thanked a number of members and residents who had been instrumental in creating the documents. He discussed the Town clock being in disrepair, explaining if the Town had Certified Local Government (CLG) status there could be funds available for repair. There have been seven to nine working meetings on the language, format, and content of the regulations.
Judy Ryan explained the Advisory Heritage Commission would be presenting these draft documents to the Town Council tomorrow night. She hoped the Advisory Heritage Commission, Planning Board, and Town Council would be able to work together to finalize and adopt these regulations. All property owners within the proposed district have been notified.
Phil LePage suggested a joint meeting between the Advisory Heritage Commission, Planning Board and Town Council with Dean Peterson or Maggie Steer being present to discuss the topic. He hoped the Town Council would send this to the Planning Board for review and endorsement.
Judy Ryan suggested a public input session so as many questions could be answered ahead of time as possible.
Phil LePage noted he was surprised by the Newmarket Business Association’s position. A meeting is scheduled for Friday.
Chairman Badger asked if the draft ordinance had been developed internally or if the Commission had worked with other state officials or reviewed ordinances from other towns. Phil LePage explained the Commission had reviewed ordinances from Exeter, Durham, Keene and Somersworth. The Commission’s goal is to achieve Certified Local Government (CLG) status. He felt Newmarket is a destination town, but could be better.
Rick McMenimen noted there was nothing regarding emergency repairs to the building. He asked what the process would be for repairs ordered by the Code Enforcement Officer due to potential danger to the citizens of the Town. Phil LePage felt those kinds of repairs would be beyond the scope of the Historic District Commission.
Rick McMenimen had reservations, because he felt this ordinance may scare away business activities. There is a potential benefit to the Town particularly within the mill buildings. He felt the document needed to be worked on to ensure the best was achieved for the Town. He felt another commission for developers to meet with would prohibit developers to come into Town.
Phil LePage noted Chinburg Builders is the selected developer for the mills. Chinburg Builders has worked with Historic Districts and was familiar with the process. The official designation of this area could benefit the developer. He referenced Mike Hoffman’s renovations to the Durgin Block, stating when people make that kind of investment, they want it protected.
Chairman Badger noted the Planning Board and Zoning Board have been subject to criticism for not allowing businesses into Town. He noted there could be an applicant that would have to go to the Zoning Board, Planning Board and Historic District Commission if established. He was concerned with putting another hurdle in front of developments. Phil LePage felt once the Town adopted this ordinance, the Town would realize the value.
Phil LePage noted the ordinance would be presented to the Town Council tomorrow night.
Janice Rosa noted this document applied to the downtown area, but had heard rumors of the ordinance affecting the Town as a whole. Judy Ryan explained individual property owners could apply to have their properties designated historic, but the ordinance would apply only to the historically designated downtown area.
Janice Rosa asked what the definition of historic was and expressed her concern that senior citizens would not be able to afford the implemented regulations. Phil LePage explained historic would apply to any significant architecture or building associated history. Judy Ryan understood people were concerned with the idea of forced changes. She explained the ordinance would not mandate renovations, but would incorporate the Heritage District Commission’s opinion, when a property owner decided to renovate their property.
Chairman Badger felt the Advisory Heritage Commission would have their job cut out for them selling this idea to the community. He noted this was clearly a controversial subject. Rich Alperin noted it was not the Advisory Heritage Commission’s job to sell this idea to the community. He strongly encouraged Town officials and residents to conduct their own research to determine if this was the best thing for the community.
Continuation of a Public Hearing for an application for Subdivision and Special Use Permit.
Applicants: Norman Curti, Jane Pinney, Priscilla Syphers, Gail Mackenzie & Adrienne Rubino/The Nature Conservancy
Location: Wadleigh Falls Road, Tax Map R5, Lot 78, R1 Zone, in Newmarket, and Tax Map 17, Lot 35 in Durham
Description: The proposal is to subdivide to enable conveyance of 110+/- acres of land to the Nature Conservancy. The existing house and barn would remain on a 5-acre parcel.
Bill Doucet of Doucet Survey explained there had been a site walk on September 20, 2008. He handed out a plan, which highlights the comments from the last meeting, to each Board member. There are 8.9 acres in Newmarket that would be conveyed. He gave a brief history of the application process thus far including the two step approval process for Special Use Permit and Subdivision.
Janice Rosa asked where people could park to access the land. Bill Doucet explained people could park at the Kwaks property and walk up Route 152 to access the conserved land. He added there were no rights being conveyed for the public to cross private property.
Janice Rosa asked about invasive species along abutter boundary lines. Bill Doucet explained The Nature Conservancy does not have rights to enter abutting properties to alter vegetation.
Vice-Chairman Roy asked if there would be signs to direct the public to park at the Kwaks lot and walk along Route 152. Bill Doucet explained The Nature Conservancy properties typically do not have large signs. There are a few hundred acres of conserved land adjacent to this parcel. This parcel could be accessed through those parcels, as well. Most of the accesses to these adjacent parcels were in Durham. There would be small tags along the boundary line, so it would be clear where conserved land ends and private property begins.
Town Planner Diane Hardy explained she had reviewed the application against the requirements of Section 6.00 Residential Open Space Design Development by Special Use Permit and Section 3.14 Residential Open Space Design of the Subdivision Regulations; the application complies with the requirements. She recommended the application be approved with the following conditions:
A reclamation plan be completed by the applicant in concert with the NH Department of Environmental Services, the NH Department of Fish and Game, and the Natural Resources and Conservation Services (NCRS) and filed with the Town of Newmarket within six months of the date of approval.
The applicant shall submit to the Town, a bond or other surety, in the amount determined by the Town’s Engineer in an amount sufficient to guarantee reclamation of the gravel pit, to be released as sections of the work are completed.
All reclamation work shall be completed within two years of the date of approval.
The applicant provide the Newmarket Planning Office with a copy of the New Hampshire Highway Access Permit, or identify other acceptable access to Lot 78-1 for maintenance and monitoring purposes, prior to plan signing.
Bill Doucet noted the State sets forth what the parameters are for reclamation in RSA 155:E. It explains reclamation needs to begin within two years of the date last used. In this case, the gravel pit was last used in March 2008. Once reclamation begins, there is a period of one year to complete the work. He suggested there is a lot of case law supporting these regulations. He noted the state law stands on its own and suggested the Board not add undue burden on the landowner. He asked the Board to simply require the gravel pit to be reclaimed in accordance with state law.
The Board discussed this request. Val Shelton asked if there would be specific instances, where the Town would not be protected under the state law. Town Planner Diane Hardy noted she had included the recommendation of a reclamation bond to ensure the work was completed. She asked Bill Doucet if the applicants would be willing to enter into an agreement with the Board/Town in lieu of the bond. Bill Doucet asked for the requirements to show the gravel pit would be reclaimed in accordance to the law.
Town Planner Diane Hardy referenced a meeting NH DES had attended encouraging the habitat on the property to be enhanced. They were not advocating for just the minimum requirements to protect wildlife. Duane Hyde, from The Nature Conservancy, noted he had called that meeting. They have full desire to reclaim the property. He expressed his concern with meeting requirements over and above what the state law mandates. The NRCS had discussed funding options, but time would be needed for those funds to become available. The Nature Conservancy would likely submit the reclamation plan, but he did not rule out the Audubon Society taking over. He did not want to drag this out, but would appreciate the time allowed under State law to complete the project.
Town Planner Diane Hardy explained this is a grandfathered pit and, therefore, was in a gray area. Duane Hyde asked the Board to agree to the State regulations; two years to begin reclamation from the last time the pit was used and one year after the work begins to complete it.
Chairman Badger opened the Public Comments at 8:18 p.m.
There were no comments.
Chairman Badger closed the Public Comments at 8:18 p.m.
Action
Motion: Janice Rosa made a motion to approve the application for Subdivision and Special Use Permit for Norman Curti, Jane Pinney, Priscilla Syphers, Gail Mackenzie & Adreinne Rubino/The Nature Conservancy with the following conditions:
A reclamation plan be completed by the applicant in concert with the NH Department of Environmental Services, the NH Department of Fish and Game, and the Natural Resources and Conservation Services (NCRS) and filed with the Town of Newmarket within two years from the date of last excavation or by March 2010.
All reclamation work shall be completed within three years of the date of approval.
The applicant provide the Newmarket Planning Office with a copy of the New Hampshire Highway Access Permit, or identify other acceptable access to Lot 78-1 for maintenance and monitoring purposes, prior to plan signing.
Seconded by: Rick McMenimen.
Vote: All in Favor
The Board recessed from 8:20 p.m. until 8:23 p.m.
Continuationof Review and Comment on request by Christopher Gaziano to construct a residence on property he owns on the Class VI portion of Neal Mill Road under RSA 674:41.
Chairman Badger thanked the Technical Review Committee (TRC) members Val Shelton, Janice Rosa, and Peter Roy, who had worked hard to draft the letter to forward to the Town Council. He noted the Planning Board would recommend approval to the Town Council with several conditions. This letter discusses several difficulties and hurdles the applicant would need to overcome and also indicates there are no policies governing the development off Class VI roads.
Val Shelton noted the letter indicates it is the Planning Board’s position the Town Council does their due diligence to discuss questions concerning issues specific to developments on Class VI roads. The letter outlines questions the Board feels need to be addressed. She explained this application would need to come back before the Planning Board for site plan review following design standards for drainage, utilities and emergency service access.
Chairman Badger opened the Public Comments at 8:26 p.m.
Christopher Gaziano noted he had a site meeting with PSNH. PSNH had agreed to zigzag the poles for the first 800 feet, dramatically reducing the tree removal. They are in the process of flagging, but he had not received anything in writing yet. This would result in a 75% less impact to the area. There would be no commercial use on the property. The poles on the road would be PSNH liability; once the poles were on private property, the liability fell onto him. He is considering putting in an emergency generator system, so the property would be self-sufficient in the event of a power outage. There is wetlands way in the back of the property; about 700-800 feet from the closest building.
Chairman Badger closed the Public Comments at 8:34 p.m.
Val Shelton explained the Town Council would need to determine whether to allow the development on this Class VI road.
Rick McMenimen expressed his concern having not heard from Public Works Director/Fire Chief Rick Malasky. Val Shelton explained there would be engineered plans under the site plan review regulations. Chris Gaziano agreed stating he doesn’t have concerns with showing a more detailed utility plan.
Action
Motion: Rick McMenimen made a motion to forward the recommendation of the Planning Board subcommittee of the Newmarket Planning Board to the Town Council as drafted.
Seconded: Janice Rosa
Vote: All in favor
Chris Gaziano asked when this would be sent to the Town Council. Town Planner Diane Hardy explained it would be forwarded to the Town Administrator and Town Council Chairman. She hoped this would be put on the next Business Meeting agenda. She noted the Town Council representative to the Planning Board was not present tonight. Chris Gaziano would be notified.
Public Hearing for an application for renewal of an excavation permit.
This agenda item has been rescheduled to November 18, 2008.
Chairman Badger noted this agenda item has been rescheduled to November 18, 2008.
Public Hearing for an application for Site Plan
Applicant: Brandt Development Co of NH LLC
Location: 5 Spring Street, Tax Map U2, Lot 40, M2 Zone
Description: 6 Unit multi-family residential redevelopment project
Janice Rosa recused herself from the Board.
The Board recessed from 8:41 p.m. until 8:47 p. m. for technical difficulties.
Attorney Chris Boldt, from Donahue, Tucker and Ciandella, stated he would be representing Brandt Development Co of NH LLC. He was joined this evening by Hank Brandt and Roger Roy, from MJS Engineering. A variance had been granted by the Zoning Board of Adjustment on August 18, 2008 to allow a six unit development and encroachment of the northern sideline of the April property. He made a PowerPoint presentation showing the property as it is and an artist’s rendering of the proposed site layout and building design. There would be a three unit building in front and a three unit building in the rear. Parking for the front structure would be underneath the front building. He discussed the parking explaining the proposal provides one space more than required. The dumpster would be moved to the back of the property. The front building would not be directly parallel to Spring Street due to setback requirements; after surveying the lot, it was found the lot line was closer than anticipated. Tonight he is asking for acceptance of the plan and landscaping plan. They are asking for three waivers including:
Section 3.02(B)(1)(b) requiring a 25-foot aisle width for the parking lot. The existing travel way varies in width but is not 25 feet wide. In order to keep the front setback of five feet using the existing footprint the aisle width would be approximately 22 feet.
Section 3.10(A) requiring underground utilities. The existing utility lines ran to poles. It would serve no purpose. There would be a great deal of expense to bring the utilities underground for just a few feet.
Section 4.08 requiring 1” equals 20 feet. The plans submitted are at a scale of 1” equals 10 feet due to the size of the lot. Any scale smaller would make it difficult to see the details of the plan clearly.
Attorney Chris Boldt noted at the Technical Review Meeting, with Town Planner Diane Hardy, the question was raised as to whether granite curbing was necessary. Usually granite curbing was required for new developments and streets to delineate the traveled way and traffic islands. If this requirement applied to this application, the applicant would be requesting a waiver from Section 3.02, as curbing would be provided, as needed, to control traffic and correct drainage. He felt the curbing would not be necessary for this development, because there would be no benefit and a great deal of expense. He asked the Board to define active and substantial development and substantial completion as part of the approval process for vesting rights.
Chairman Badger asked if there is an existing sidewalk. Attorney Chris Boldt explained there is an existing sidewalk in front of the existing front building. There is no sidewalk, where the lot is currently accessed. A sidewalk would be installed, where there currently is not one. There is an easement currently existing within the deeds that depicts the maintenance between this lot, the Bridges’ lot and the Langlois’ lot and their successors.
Attorney Chris Boldt handed out a sheet of paper to each Board member to show photos of the proposed fencing. There would be a decorative fence along the April’s side of the property.
Town Planner Diane Hardy explained she had met with Code Enforcement Officer Dan Vincent on Friday to go through the checklist and shifting of the buildings. The application meets the checklist with the exception of the building being shifted. She recommended acceptance of the application, with a condition that the location of the building be shifted to conform to the variance that the Zoning Board of Adjustment approved.
Action
Motion: Val Shelton made a motion to accept the application for site plan for Brandt Development Co of NH LLC located at 5 Spring Street, Tax Map U2, Lot 40, M2 Zone for a six unit multi-family residential redevelopment project.
Seconded: Vice-Chairman Roy
Vote: All in favor
Town Planner Diane Hardy noted a drainage plan, with no calculations, had been submitted. The plan includes on-site drainage enhancements. The data provided shows less “after development” runoff. A question was raised regarding the lack of curbing and how it will affect the drainage. To ensure there is no adverse impact to the neighbors, she recommended the plans be reviewed by the Town’s consulting engineer. She briefly discussed traffic circulation, including the three parking spaces at the rear of the property being tight and not providing a great deal of room for turning around.
Attorney Chris Boldt stated the applicant would like the units to be condominiums, but financing for that kind of project is difficult in this market. Condo documents would be submitted, when the time comes to convert the rental units to condos. There is a striped paved area to allow room for vehicles to back out of one of the units. Snow storage for the existing traveled way is located at the end of the traveled way. There is also a snow storage location depicted on the site. Excess snow would be removed from the site. Town Planner Diane Hardy questioned whether the snow storage location at the rear of the property was practical and large enough for the amount of snow that could be generated from the site. She indicated a note should be put on the plan stating excess snow would be removed from the site. The review engineer would examine traffic circulation in light of the reduced aisle width.
Town Planner Diane Hardy asked for lighting details. Hank Brandt explained the architect for the project had been in touch with the Advisory Heritage Commission. This property is outside the proposed historic district, but is very close. He hoped to collaboratively come up with a lighting scheme that would work for all parties involved.
Town Planner Diane Hardy asked if any of the plants were on the invasive species list. Attorney Chris Boldt stated some of the plantings were cousins of plants on the invasive species list, but none of the plants were on the invasive species list.
Town Planner Diane Hardy asked about ADA accessibility. She asked if a handicap space was needed. Attorney Chris Boldt stated his interpretation is that no handicap space was needed due to the size of the project. This is being reviewed in consultation with the state ADA accessibility coordinator.
Town Planner Diane Hardy recommended the Board set up a Technical Review Committee and perform a site walk. Adam Schroadter, Val Shelton and Vice-Chairman Roy will be on the Technical Review Committee. Attorney Chris Boldt stated this was an in-fill redevelopment and argued the project did not need the same engineering review as a massive project would need. The drainage on the lot would be similar to existing drainage. There is no increase in impervious surface. He asked the Board to reconsider to spare that expense for the applicant. Chairman Badger stated he would feel more comfortable with the project being reviewed. The site walk was set up for October 16, 2008 at 4:00 p.m.
Action
Motion: To accept the waiver request from Section 4.08 regarding the scale of the plans in order to allow 1” equals 10 feet.
Seconded: Vice-Chairman Roy
Vote: All in favor
Town Planner Diane Hardy noted as soon as she received payment for the engineering services she would set up a time for the engineer to review the plans and schedule a site review meeting.
Chairman Badger opened the Public Comments at 9:24 p.m.
Robert Bridges, of 7 Spring Street, discussed the elevation of the proposed project in relation to the current flow of run off, explaining 7 Spring Street was downhill from 5 Spring Street. Currently water flows into the shared access way. With the elevation remaining the same and the drainage improving, this would be a good project.
Roger Roy, from MJS Engineering, explained it was the intention of the drainage plan to collect water from the parking area and roof runoff in the existing pattern.
Walter Langlois, of 7½ Spring Street, explained water flowed into his garage and collected to up to 1” at times.
Roger Roy explained the catch basin locations. The development would reduce the amount of runoff towards the Langlois property, because of gutters and roof leaders, which would tie into the catch basins.
Marie Bridges, of 7 Spring Street, asked about lighting for the driveway. Roger Roy explained there is currently minimal lighting. There is one street lamp on the utility pole. The lines cross the property. The proposal includes rerouting the wires. Wall sconces on the sides of the building would provide adequate lighting without excessive lighting. Chairman Badger asked if there would ultimately be a lighting plan. Roger Roy noted lighting plans are usually required on larger projects. The regulations allow lighting if it is less than 1800 lumens. The proposed wall sconces would be 100 watts or less. After discussions with the Advisory Heritage Commission a cut sheet out of a catalog will be provided for the records.
Marie Bridges expressed her concern with vehicle headlights shining into the windows of her home.
Chairman Badger closed the Public Hearing at 9:35 p.m.
Action
Motion: Val Shelton made a motion to continue the application to the November 18, 2008 Planning Board meeting.
Seconded: Vice-Chairman Roy
Vote: All in favor
Janice Rosa rejoined the Board.
Other Business
Rick McMenimen noted he had been appointed the Planning Board representative to the Strafford Regional Planning Commission (SRPC) and had attended his first meeting. The SRPC is involved with traffic, conservation, and land use in the Seacoast area. A number of towns participate. At his first meeting, there was a plethora of information presented. A vote had been taken to increase dues by 5% or 2.4%. He spoke up stating he would like the opportunity to speak with his town about this decision prior to voting. A motion was made by the SRPC commission and passed (minus his vote) to increase dues by 5%. He went on to explain, at the SRPC Open House, Ben Frost, representing the New Hampshire Housing Finance Authority, had given an explanation of what the new law means to towns and had provided written information. He suggested the Board look at this every time there is a major housing or apartment building development being proposed. He has been assigned to the internal auditing committee. He noted there is a meeting on November 6, 2008 with Project Coordinator Julie Glover regarding the Downtown TIF, but he will be unable to attend.
Val Shelton asked if the Town gets technical assistance from the SRPC. Town Planner Diane Hardy stated the SRPC provides a great deal of support including GIS mapping, database information and digitalization of tax maps to update subdivisions. The Town had worked with Planner Julie LaBranche to update the water resources portion of the Master Plan. Cynthia Copeland would present recommendations at a future meeting. The SRPC was involved in Newmarket Tomorrow, the initial downtown project. She discussed several ways the SRPC has supported Newmarket’s planning functions.
Vice-Chairman Roy stated the CIP held its organizational meeting; Leo Filion was voted Chairman and he was voted Vice-Chairman. Their next meeting is not yet scheduled.
Adjournment
Action
Motion: Vice-Chairman Roy made a motion to adjourn at 9:53 p.m.
