Recently in Selectmen Meetings - Minutes Category

 Karel was asked to explain about the fields for Playground Drive and Community Center. She stated that this will be in a separate warrant article and is proposing to build a field at the Lions Club property to be used while the field at Playground Drive is being repaired. Lori Whitley, School Board member stated that the fields at the Academy and Central School are over utilized by the schools and the Recreation Department. She added that 67% of all students are involved

in athletics. Donna Kuethe stated that more than just children are using the fields and the demand is increasing. The Selectmen were asked and Karel responded that there has been a review of the placement of playing fields and a future building at the Lions Club Property. Carter presented the plat, explaining that the design allows for the work to be done in phases and one is not contingent upon the other. He added that the design has 6 to 7 phases with a 10 to 15 year build-out plan. Initially, drainage will be installed for the whole property. Ed stated that he wished the plan had been presented earlier and his concern about going forth with this project. He also stated his dismay that the 2008 amount budgeted was in excess of what was actually spent. Carter explained that the discrepancy was not as large as it numerically appears and was due to many factors. He added that a large percent will be used towards the tax rate in an effort to keep it low. ABC Chair, Jean Beadle stated that they have recommended completing a quarterly budget review in order identify if department’s are within their budgeted amount.

 

The above is from the 2/9/09 Board of Selectmen’s meeting minutes. Funny how things have changed a bit since then. What statistics are there to back up the statement made by former School Board Member/Chair, Laurie Whitley, that the ‘fields at the at the Academy and Central School are over utilized’? How is it possible to over ‘utilize’ a field? What does that mean? Too many people on the field at the same time? People lining up to use the fields? Over scheduling or conflicting schedules? How do any of the above warrant building another field?

 

I wonder if the statement that 67% of all students are involved in athletics’ is still true. Show me the numbers. No one has ever come forth with the numbers. It’s always statements such as ‘more than just the children are using the fields and the demand is increasing’, according to Recreation Director Donna Kuethe. What does that mean? How many? When? How often? What were they doing? What time of year?

 

Let’s look further into these minutes. Carter explained the design for the Lion’s Club property is‘to be done in phases and one is not contingent upon the other’. Really? ‘The design has 6 to 7 phases with a 10 to 15 year build out plan’. I wonder how that changed to a 3 phase plan to start by 4/1/10, with the drainage and clearing of trees for all 3 phases to begin immediately. Where was I when this was announced?

 

How many times has the Town Administrator been asked about ‘staff meetings’ and where the minutes were for those meetings this last year? The citizens of Moultonboro are not dumb. While many people don’t care or pay attention to the activities of the government of our town, which is typical across the country, many do. Many pay attention to and follow what goes on at all the board and committee meetings. So do I. But it is apparent that our Town Administrator has little regard for the ‘frequent flyers’ as he condescendingly refers to the folks that regularly attend BoS meetings.

 

I am appalled at the activities of our Town Administrator and the actions that he has taken in so many meetings held under the guise of staff meetings.

 

According to the minutes of 2/09/09, there were many concerns about proceeding ahead with the Lion’s Club project.

 

Ed stated that he wished the plan had been presented earlier and his

concern about going forth with this project. He also stated his dismay that the 2008 amount budgeted was in excess of what was actually spent. Carter explained that the discrepancy was not as large as it numerically appears and was due to many factors. He added that a large percent will be used towards the tax rate in an effort to keep it low.

 

Where did Carter learn mathmatics. ‘The discrepancy was not as large as it numerically appears’.  I don’t get it. Numbers are what numbers are. We are talking dollars here, not some twisted statistics to prove something one way or the other. Or are we?

 

A few notes from 1/108 BoS meeting discussing the RSPC proposal for a community center:

 

 He [Joel] feels that the project should be put off for a few years until the

state educational funding question is resolved. Joel suggested putting money in the Municipal Building Capital Reserve fund with this project in mind. In addition, Joel acknowledged the Municipal Needs Committee’s recommendation of doing further studies regarding the water table of the Lions Club property. Joel concluded that he feels the community center is a good idea, but not at this time.

 

Gee, do you think? Why then are we less than a year later, proposing the same thing, only in a bigger hurry? What is going on here folks? Someone, somewhere is pushing harder and harder to get something going on the Lion’s Club property. But, why? Well, here’s a thought: once we get a ‘soccer field’ built, why not build something else? Like a Community Center? After all, there’s so much space there, right? How ‘bout 237 parking spaces for all the programs that will be conducted in that building? Human Services will be in there, too. Oh really? Since when? Who decided that and when? Was that in another staff meeting of which there are no minutes?

 

Goodness, folks, this is a bit too much for me to digest all at once. I’m overwhelmed by the magnitude of the arrogance that I am too ignorant to care as an ordinary citizen or an abutter to the Lion’s Club property to see that there are those with an agenda pushing forth to build something, anything on that land and as fast as possible.

 

I have personal reasons for not wanting anything built there, as an abutter, but the more that we see in writing and in conceptual ideas, and the more we hear of the history, the wetlands, wildlife, environmental concerns, the angrier I get.

 

I have nothing against a soccer field, but I believe it should be built in 1) a central location, which the Lion’s Club is not, 2) where the kids are, which the Lion’s Club is not, 3) not on a wetland, which the Lion’s Club is!! Has anyone consulted with the Town Planner on this project? Anyone at all?

 

Let’s take a closer look at the entire ‘concept’ here. Let’s suppose it was determined that there is a real need for an additional all purpose ball field. What would the criteria be for choosing a location? Here’s a few that come to my mind, and I will admit that I have no training in town planning or civil engineering:1)High, dry land; 2) Central location and close to existing parking; 3) the least expensive land in clearing or developing a field. So, do any of those fit the Lion’s Club property? Uh, no.

 

Once upon a time, a long time ago, kids used to walk, bike and run all over the place. In this day and age, they don’t. They are driven or bussed to and from school, activities, etc. The proposed ‘safe routes to school’ doesn’t work for me either. This is a plan that was developed as a way to convince people that the Lion’s Club property is the perfect place for a ball field. I can tell you from my own observations driving passed the school, the high volume of personal vehicles driven by parents to bring their kids to school. No one walks to school. My neighbors drive their kids, and they live less than a mile away. 

 

In my opinion, there are so many fingers in the pie. It’s hard to find out how this entire ‘conceptual plan’ came into existence. Nowhere can I find meeting minutes that have discussed these plans before the public. From the 9/17/09 BoS meeting, Karel summarized the costs for the Town engineers design for the ‘Recreational fields at the Lion’s Club property’ at $54,740. Gee, nothing like spending a good portion of the $300,000 approved for the construction of a new field and the repair of Playground Drive field, to come up with plans that the Planning Board have found unacceptable and of poor quality, looking as if they were thrown together at the last minute.

 

Here we are at the end of March 2010, and plans were discussed since Sept 09, and poor quality plans referred to as ‘conceptual plans’ are the best the Town Administrator and Town engineer have come up with? Gee, folks. This only cost us $54k! Let’s send them back to the coloring books for another $1500!!

 

Where does this madness stop?

 

I would, however, like to give kudos the the Board of Selectmen and the new Chair for questioning these 'conceptual plans' and sending them back to come up with plans that: 1) make sense; (I don't care how many times!) 2) that will be put forth in a public hearing! Finally!! Someone might actually be listening to the town's people and especially the abutters!

 

Maybe there is hope after all!

 

Linda N. Punturieri

Abutter

 

A few more things from tonight’s Selectmen meeting:

 

  • $20K state grant approved for “Rt. 109 playing field” and Playground Drive soccer field. Can’t spend it yet though as there are a number of stipulations that the state requires. (This $20K grant precipitated the the whole process that eventually will cost us  taxpayers more than $400K. What a bargain!)

 

  • Ossippee Park Road still has some more work to be completed. About $125K (which includes $21K from the insurance company to repair damage from a motor vehicle accident this winter). About $70k will be used for “super pavement” overlay on a portion of the road.

The Board of Selectmen meeting was a bit difficult to hear tonight, but that’s not unusual. We have written about that before. We would like to see a microphone available for the Selectmen to use so that all members of the audience can hear as well as the listening audience from the video tape.

 

A few points of interest: Our legislator, Betsy Patton addressed the chair with some research she had done on the Heritage Commission appointees. She began to cite the RSA pertaining to Planning Board Members on a heritage committee. While it is true that no two members of a planning board can be on a heritage commission, sadly, she was not able to quote the correct RSA. She had gone so far as to pass out copies of the alleged RSA, but when she realized she had the wrong RSA, she said ‘Oh well. I can’t find it.” What can you say, but it’s very difficult to follow what she is trying to convey to the listening public. This is not just folksy charm. It’s a lack of familiarity of the facts.

 

Another point of interest: Why is it that Jane Fairchild, who is more than qualified to be on the Heritage Commission and has pressed for the establishment of the Commission, seems to be targeted to be pushed out of appointment altogether? A member of the Board of Selectmen needs to be on the Heritage Commission as stated earlier, but why not let Jane be on the commission? Another Board member could easily be appointed who is not on the Planning Board.  So, why the delay?

 

And another point is that the summer schedule for the Board of Selectmen will be the 1st, 3rd and 5th, if there is a 5th, Thursday of each month, beginning now. July 2nd is the next meeting. Workshops are scheduled for the 4th Thursday of the month. This will be posted on the Town Webpage.

 

That’s it for tonight folks! Keep tuning in. We will be adding more information as it develops!

 

About this Archive

This page is a archive of recent entries in the Selectmen Meetings - Minutes category.

Selectmen Meetings - Agendas is the previous category.

Senior Issues is the next category.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Powered by Movable Type 4.01

Categories