Town of Gilford, New Hampshire
Deliberative Session
“First Session”
February 7, 2006
At 7:00 p.m. Moderator Peter Millham opened the deliberative session with the Pledge of Allegiance. There were approximately 98 voters in attendance. Mr. Millham explained the first order of business was to discuss the proposed zoning amendments. Mr. Millham informed the voters that although they may ask questions and gain information, no amendments may be made to the zoning amendments during this meeting. Mr. Millham further explained that voting would be set up in the rear of the room, if need be. Mr. Millham recognized all non-voters in attendance (Media, Department Heads) and asked that they refrain from voting during the meeting. Mr. Millham explained the basic rules of the meeting such as courteous debate and no name-calling. Mr. Millham explained that he would be using the rules in the Moderator’s Manual. He explained there would be no disorder permitted. Mr. Millham stated, “At any time during the meeting I may command constable to remove anyone, and you must be
silent at command of the Moderator.” Mr. Millham explained the general procedure of the meeting. Mr. Millham further explained that there would be a moving of the article, a second, and an explanation. The speakers would have 5 minutes the first time at speaking on the microphone and 2 minutes the second time; after all speakers have spoken for their first time. Mr. Millham informed the voters amendments must be in writing and stated in the positive. Mr. Millham explained that the amendment determines the language to be used on the ballot for March voting. Moving the question will terminate the discussion and move to the next article. Mr. Millham explained the right of the voters to over-rule the Moderator by vote. Mr. Millham introduced the Board of Selectmen, Town Administrator, Budget Committee Chairman, and Town Clerk.
The Moderator read Article 2 as written:
Article 2: Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 1 as proposed by the Gilford Planning Board for the Gilford Zoning Ordinance as follows:
Amend Article 3, Definitions, by creating a new definition, Year-Round Brook, and define the term as being a flowing surface water in a channel, such as a river or stream, which is depicted by a solid blue line on the most recent edition of a USGS 7.5-minute series topographic map.
John Ayer, Director of the Planning & Zoning Department, explained Article 2 to the voters. Kristen Gardiner wanted to know how often the USGS maps get updated. Mr. Ayer told the voter that it was done periodically. There was no further discussion on Article 2.
The Moderator read Article 3 as written:
Article 3: Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 2 as proposed by the Gilford Planning Board for the Gilford Zoning Ordinance as follows:
Amend Section 5.2.1(a) to reduce from 100 feet to 40 feet the setback required for most structures from year-round brooks, which would make that setback consistent with the setback required from Lake Winnipesaukee, Saltmarsh Pond, and Lily Pond.
John Ayer, Director of the Planning & Zoning Department, explained Article 3 to the voters. Joseph Hoffman spoke against the amendment. Mr. Millham warned Mr. Hoffman that there are no derogatory comments to be made. Betsy Domin wanted an explanation of the environmental set back. Mr. Ayer explained the brook set back vs. the lake set back. Mr. Ayer further explained that the proposed change was to make a consistent set back to the lake. Mr. Hoffman made reference to the parking lot and the run off of MTBE. Mr. Hoffman also made reference to Smith Cove and Fay’s Boat Yard. There was no further discussion on Article 3.
The Moderator read Article 4 as written:
Article 4: Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 3 as proposed by the Gilford Planning Board for the Gilford Zoning Ordinance as follows:
Amend Section 5.2.1(c)(3) to read, “(3) Anyone conducting the land use activities referenced above shall control erosion and siltation of Lake Winnipesaukee, Saltmarsh Pond, Lily Pond, Poor Farm Brook, Meadow Brook, Jewett Brook, Gunstock River, or any other year_round brook by using best management practices in accordance with requirements of the NH Department of Environmental Services.”
John Ayer, Director of the Planning & Zoning Department, explained Article 4 to the voters. Doug Lambert made reference to the Department of Environmental Services (DES). There was no further discussion on Article 4.
The Moderator read Article 5 as written:
Article 5: Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 4 as proposed by the Gilford Planning Board for the Gilford Zoning Ordinance as follows:
Amend Section 5.3.1, “Building Heights”, by deleting incorrect wording and adding correct references to related regulations.
John Ayer, Director of the Planning & Zoning Department, explained Article 5 to the voters. Mr. Millham spoke about measuring from the sill opposed to the lowest part of the building grade. Mr. Hoffman made comments regarding a
different article. The Moderator told Mr. Hoffman he was speaking about the wrong article. A voter asked Mr. Ayer another question but did not speak into the microphone, therefore it is not recorded. There was no further discussion on Article 5.
The Moderator read Article 6 as written:
Article 6: Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 5 as proposed by the Gilford Planning Board for the Gilford Zoning Ordinance as follows:
Amend Section 5.3.1 to permit up to 48 foot building height in the Industrial, Commercial, and Professional Commercial zoning districts which will encourage enhanced architectural design of buildings.
John Ayer, Director of the Planning & Zoning Department, explained Article 6 to the voters. Mr. Lambert thanks SB2 and states he likes the discussion process. Mr. Lambert asks if the Fire Department will have different needs. Mr. Ayer says according to Fire Chief Mooney, there would be no additional needs. The Moderator asked the new Fire Chief James Hayes if he would like to respond. Chief Hayes said that he would look at the needs of the community as a whole at that time. Betsy Domin asked what would prevent a flat roof building at 48’? Mr. Ayer referred to amending site plans rules and regulations with Article 17 zoning ordinance in reference to architectural standards for the Town and would have a more appealing, aesthetic look to it. Mrs. Domin stated that enforcing the
three-story rule would be the way to go. Mr. Ayer explained there was no second public hearing to amend the regulations. Mr. Hoffman spoke in opposition of the amendment and suggested it be worked on for next year. Mr. Ayer stated the provision for 60’ height in the Lakes Business Park. Until now the Town had only 35”. Fay’s Boat Yard has 43’ and required a variance. Jack Stephenson spoke about Fay’s Boat Yard dry storage and steel building. Mr. Stephenson further explained the variance. Mr. Hoffman gave his opinion on the legality of Fay’s Boat Yard. Mr. Millham asked Mr. Hoffman to sit down. Mr. Millham asked Mr. Hoffman to speak to the article. 8:44 p.m. Mr. Millham asked Mr. Hoffman to leave. The Moderator asked to have Mr. Hoffman removed from the meeting. The Moderator changed is mind and said Mr. Hoffman could stay but warned Mr. Hoffman that he will have to leave if he’s off the subject again. Mr. Millham asked if Mr. Hoffman understood. Mr. Hoffman stated
that a public meeting is for input. Mr. Millham repeated the rules to Mr. Hoffman. Mr. Hoffman sat down. There was no further discussion on Article 6.
The Moderator read Article 7 as written:
Article 7: Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 6 as proposed by the Gilford Planning Board for the Gilford Zoning Ordinance as follows:
Amend Section 8.9, Signs Exempt From Regulation, by deleting in its entirety the existing Section 8.9.3, Holiday Lights and Decorations, which states that holiday
lights and decorations may be displayed between November 15 and February 1 without regulation, since such lights and decorations do not constitute signs.
John Ayer, Director of the Planning & Zoning Department, explained Article 7 to the voters. There was no further discussion on Article 7.
The Moderator read Article 8 as written:
Article 8: Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 7 as proposed by the Gilford Planning Board for the Gilford Zoning Ordinance as follows:
Amend Article 3, Definitions, by amending the existing definition of Cluster Development to clarify that a Senior Housing project is not subject to the Cluster Development regulations of Sections 4.2.2, 4.7.2(b), or 11.4.3.
John Ayer, Director of the Planning & Zoning Department, explained Article 8 to the voters. There was no further discussion on Article 8.
The Moderator read Article 9 as written:
Article 9: Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 8 as proposed by the Gilford Planning Board for the Gilford Zoning Ordinance as follows:
Amend Article 3, Definitions, by creating a new term, Commercial Cluster Development, and defining the term as being a commercial development that incorporates clustering of buildings and/or building pads according to the provisions of Section 5.4.1, Cluster Development.
John Ayer, Director of the Planning & Zoning Department, explained Article 9 to the voters. There was no further discussion on Article 9.
The Moderator read Article 10 as written:
Article 10: Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 9 as proposed by the Gilford Planning Board for the Gilford Zoning Ordinance as follows:
Amend Article 4, Permitted Uses and Regulations, by deleting Section 4.4.5, Cluster Development, from the Chart of Uses, and deleting Section 4.7.4(e), Cluster Development, to clarify that this development concept is not a type of land use.
John Ayer, Director of the Planning & Zoning Department, explained Article 10 to the voters. An unidentified voter asked if a commercial cluster is a business campus setting compared to a mall setting? Mr. Ayer stated the next article is relative allow innovation. It is currently in the industrial zone. It expands ability to commercial zones and professional commercial zones. There was no further discussion on Article 10.
The Moderator read Article 11 as written:
Article 11: Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 10 as proposed by the Gilford Planning Board for the Gilford Zoning Ordinance as follows:
Amend Section 5.4, Exceptions – Industrial Zone, and Section 5.4.1, Cluster Development, to allow Cluster Developments in the Industrial (I), Commercial (C), and Professional Commercial (PC) zones whereas they are currently allowed only in the Industrial (I) zone. This proposal also changes the names of Section 5.4 to Exceptions, and Section 5.4.1 to Commercial Cluster Development.
John Ayer, Director of the Planning & Zoning Department, explained Article 11 to the voters. There was no further discussion on Article 11.
The Moderator read Article 12 as written:
Article 12: Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 11 as proposed by petition for the Gilford Zoning Ordinance as follows:
Create Aquifer Protection District Regulations through the following provisions:
1. Create a new Section, 2.2.7, Aquifer Protection District, in order to protect, preserve, and maintain potential groundwater supplies and related groundwater recharge areas within known aquifers identified by the Town;
2. Add to Article 3, Definitions, the term “Aquifer” and a definition for the term; and
3. Add Section 5.2.6, Aquifer Protection District, which describes uses that are prohibited within the district, how one may more accurately determine the precise boundary of the district if the boundary of the district is in dispute or uncertain, and under what conditions pre-existing, non-conforming uses may or may not continue.
(The Planning Board recommends the adoption of this amendment.)
John Ayer, Director of the Planning & Zoning Department, explained Article 12 to the voters. Mr. Ayer explained the Amendment was submitted by petition. Mr. Ayer stated that the Planning Board may be revisiting their recommendation.
Millham questioned the Planning Board to determine the terms and zoning. Mr. Millham suggested it was unspecific as to where it is located and regulations. Mr. Ayers stated that there are clear specific boundaries on the USGS map. Mr. Lambert is concerned with protecting the lakes and natural beauty. Mr. Lambert stated the following:
1. A flawed piece of legislation.
2. Over lay district – uses prohibited in the district.
3. Compliance if we pass the law for property owners.
Mr. Lambert spoke in opposition of the Amendment. Phil Brouillard stated the following:
1. Severely flawed
2. No work session.
3. Too hastily done.
4. No planners report.
5. 11% of the Town is approximately 35,000 acres.
6. Prohibits underground propane lines to home for fuel.
7. Allows no special permit/no special exception permit.
Mr. Hoffman explained that a petition is “our power” and continued to explain the proper procedure for petitioning. John Goodhue, Conservation Commission member and Gilford Drinking Water Committee member stated that they have met for a year; Atty. Steve Nix drafted amendment. Mr. Goodhue spoke in favor of adoption. Mr. Goodhue stated that the amendment would need to be “tweaked” over a period of time as other amendments are and issues can be addressed as they come up. Mr. Goodhue quoted, “Civilization itself rests upon the land” by, Thomas Jefferson. Mr. Hoffman recited RSA 674:39 and stated the RSA will protect you if it passes; if it is not recorded you will not be protected. Attorney Doug Hill, Belknap Point Rd., represents Cumberland Farms spoke in opposition
of the article. Mr. Hill is concerned with the storage of heating fuel and feels this amendment will have a negative effect. Mr. Hill further explained about Cumberland Farms vaulting their tanks and being treated as above ground tanks. Mr. Hoffman referred to RSA 674:39 and stated that they can keep what they have. There was no further discussion on Article 12.
Other Municipal Articles
Article 13: To see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $2,964,224 for the construction, furnishing, equipment and landscaping of a new police station, and to fund this appropriation by authorizing the issuance of $2,964,224 of bonds and notes in accordance with the provisions of the
Municipal Finance Act (RSA 33) and to authorize the Selectmen to issue and negotiate such bonds or notes and to determine the rate of interest thereon. 3/5-majority vote required.
(Recommended by the Board of Selectmen, Recommended by the Budget Committee)
The Moderator read Article 13. Selectman, Alice Boucher moved the article. Mr. Hickok Seconded. Chief John Markland presented a power point presentation to the voters and explained the needs of the Police Department. Selectman Boucher explained the Board of Selectmen unanimously endorsed the project. Hickok explained the Budget Committee originally voted against article 13 but changed their vote (7-3) in favor article 13 after the public hearing. Mr. Hoffman spoke about the temporary buildings the school had. Mr. Hoffman spoke about using the building for storage and landscaping around them. Mr. Hoffman added that the SAU and employee area should be removed. Mr. Hoffman spoke in opposition of article 13. Mr. Lambert spoke in opposition and would like a new proposal for the voters. Connie
Grant spoke in opposition and thought the new proposal was too large. Richard Campbell spoke in opposition and wanted to know about the energy efficiency. Jack Stephenson spoke in opposition and spoke about the energy efficiency and wants a lower cost. Mr. Hoffman spoke again in opposition, making reference to the energy and athletic facility. Mr. Goodhue spoke in opposition, stating lack of information and not a full set of plans, would like to see a plan that would last 50-70 years. Chief Markland explained the growth of Gilford since his tenure with the Town. Ingrid Moulton of Banwell Architects and Andre Kloetz of Bauen Corp. had the following information on the construction of the proposed building:
1. Energy Cost $2.00/Sq.Ft.
(Spray foam insulation, high quality heating system)
2. Longevity of the proposed building – more than 20-25 years.
(Concrete Block, poured slab)
3. Referred to the Town of Meredith’s building coming in lower than
expected costs.
4. The new proposal has included a 6% - 8% increase included for
projected material costs.
Ms. Moulton further explained many towns pass a project and do the hard plans after the fact. Ms. Moulton also mentioned the windows being used are a high R factor for energy efficiency. Chief Markland spoke of the need for sufficient evidence room space. Selectman Boucher wanted to know when the next meeting was scheduled. Chief Markland said the next meeting would be on February 16 at 7:00 p.m. and would also have some daytime meetings available in the future. Gail Wood asked about the guaranteed price. Chief Markland told Ms. Wood that it was a guaranteed maximum price. Chief Markland further explained that the Facility Planning Committee (FPC) would stay on during the building of the project and try to save more costs. The committee was researching if the police specialty products may be
bought in bulk with the Town of Meredith for a cost savings. Mr. Hoffman spoke about the FPC at the time of building the current Town Hall and replacing a roof ten years later. Mr. Campbell had additional energy efficiency questions. Mrs. Grant wanted to know how many new officers would be needed with the new station. Chief Markland remarked with the ability to add on as needed. It was difficult to predict the growth of the Town. Mr. Hoffman spoke in opposition and wants to add to a capital reserve fund. There was no further discussion on Article 13.
Article 14: Shall the Town of Gilford raise and appropriate as an 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 $10,289,121? Should this article be defeated, the default budget shall be $10,178,703, which is the same as last year, with certain adjustments required by previous action of The Town of Gilford or by law; or the governing body may hold one special meeting, in accordance with RSA 40:13, X and XVI, to take up the issue of a revised operating budget only. Note: This warrant article does not include appropriations in any other warrant article. (Recommended by the
Board of Selectmen, Recommended by the Budget Committee)
The Moderator read Article 14. Hickok moved the article. Selectman Dennis Dote seconded. Mr. Hickok gave an overall summary of the article and referred to page 9 & 10 of the handout. Mr. Hoffman asked about the legal costs of $60,000 and makes reference to Kings Grant Inn and the insurance company. Mr. Hoffman was informed that Kings Grant Inn was in the 2005 budget. Barry Grevatt thanked the Town and the work that they have done. Mr. Grevatt made reference to the many empty seats in the audience and said that he really missed the regular town meeting. The Moderator warned Mr. Grevatt to stick to the amendment at hand. Mr. Grevatt asked if the solid waste line item was up 25%. Sheldon Morgan, Director of Public Works responded to Mr. Grevatt about the line item being the biggest item being
operation costs. Over 7,000 tons of garbage and a price increase at the plant of $41.65 per ton. Laconia Transfer Station from $9.60 an increase to $13.75. Hickok stated the Budget Committee questions the amount but has no expertise in the field. Mr. Grevatt asked about recycling. Morgan said that recycling in the community was down from last year. Grevatt asked about the income from recyclables. Morgan explained about the change in the market at different intervals of time. Morgan stated that cost is cheaper to throw away than to recycle. Mr. Grevatt questioned Morgan about under spending the line item in 2004 & 2005. Morgan explained the need to set aside money for recycling heavy product such as concrete and asphalt. Mr. Grevatt stated that there is no incentive in the budget and the community needed goals. Mr. Grevatt made the following amendment:
“To reduce the budget by $5,000 from the solid waste budget to $10,284,121.00”
Seconded by Mary Lou Grevatt.
Evans Juris, Town Administrator informed the assembly a deduction must be from the total and not by a line item.
Mr. Grevatt stated that he was trying to promote recycling. Hickok stated that any article he has ever read says not to recycle to save money, but do it for a feel good reason. Morgan explained the rest of the money in the solid waste account was for the Hazardous Waste Day, Annual Spring Cleanup & Island Resident Cleanup. Kathy Dumais stated that they pay their own garbage pickup. Morgan explained that Ms. Dumais was paying for the hauling of the waste but the Town actually pays for the disposal of the waste. Mr. Hoffman asked if we have a contract with Bestway? Morgan replied that Ms. Dumais has the contract not the Town. Doten spoke in opposition of the amendment reminding everyone that it just reduces the bottom line of the budget. Mr. Grevatt stated that he wanted to “put the
challenge before us” and spoke in favor of the amendment.
The Moderator called for a vote on the amendment. The amendment was defeated.
Mr. Lambert made the following amendment:
“To reduce the budget by $11,100.”
Mr. Lambert wanted to justify the amount as follows:
1. $7,000 Radar Trailer
2. $1,800 New Beginnings
3. $1,300 Officials Dinners
4. $1,000 Volunteer employee recognition.
$11,100 Total Deduction from bottom line budget.
John Deery seconded the amendment. Mr. Lambert spoke in favor of the amendment and further explained his reasoning. Mr. Lambert recognizes areas are suggestions to reduce. Mr. Hoffman spoke about the $60,000 line item for legal fees. The Moderator told Mr. Hoffman he was out of order and warned him about having to leave the meeting. The Moderator called for the vote on the amendment and the amendment was defeated. There was no further discussion on Article 14.
Article 15: To see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate $5,000 for the Thompson-Ames Historical Society. Approval of this article to be rescinded if Article 20 is approved. (Recommended by the Board of Selectmen, Not recommended by the Budget Committee)
The Moderator read Article 15. Selectman J. Kinney O’Rourke moved the article. Selectman Boucher seconded. Selectman O’Rourke moved to amend the article and strike the second sentence and delete the words “Approval of this article to rescinded if Article 20 is approved” and insert “This article shall be rescinded and have no effect if Article 20 is approved.” Selectman Boucher seconded the amendment. The Moderator called for the vote and it was in the affirmative, the amendment carried. Selectman O’Rourke further explained the reasoning for the decrease from $10K to $5K per year. The over all effort was to reduce the budget and support the outside agencies. Mr. Hickok spoke in opposition of the article stating that the Budget Committee feels the Thompson-Ames
Historical Society should be funded by donations; the vote was 7-4 not to fund the Society. Mr. Lambert spoke in opposition of the article. There was no further discussion on Article 15.
Article 16: To see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate $10,000 for the Laconia Airport Authority. The Selectmen are authorized to transfer such monies to the Laconia Airport Authority for major capital improvements at the airport upon written notification that the major capital improvements have been approved by the required Federal, State and Local agencies, as well as being in compliance with state and local land use and environmental requirements. (Recommended by the Board of Selectmen, Not recommended by the Budget Committee)
The Moderator read Article 16. Selectman Boucher moved the article. Selectman Doten seconded. Mrs. Boucher explained two years ago the Airport Authority came to this town for a 5-year commitment. Mrs. Boucher explained that the money is not used for the operating budget, but for the safety issues. Mr. Hoffman asked about using the hangars for inventory. Boucher explained that the problem had been taken care of. Mr. Hickok said the Budget Committee was in opposed the amount by an 8-3 vote. Mr. Hickok stated that the Budget Committee felt that FAA fees are user fees and should not be taxpayer based. There was not further discussion on Article 16.
Article 17: To see if the Town will vote to establish a capital reserve fund under the provisions of RSA 35:1 for the purpose of bridge replacement and to raise and appropriate the sum of two hundred seventy one thousand six hundred dollars ($271,600) to be placed in this fund, and to appoint the Selectmen as agents to expend from this fund. (Recommended by the Board of Selectmen, Recommended by the Budget Committee)
The Moderator read Article 17. Mr. Hickok moved the article. Selectman O’Rourke seconded. Hickok explained about the need for replacement of the Hoyt Bridge and the 80% future reimbursement from the State of New Hampshire. Wayne Snow explained his position as a Trustee of the Trust Fund and the need for a specific purpose for the capital reserve fund. Mr. Snow stated that the article as written is incorrect and needs to be more specific. Mr. Snow made the following amendment to the article:
To remove “bridge replacement” and add “of the Hoyt Rd. Bridge.”
Kevin Hayes seconded the amendment. Mr. Hoffman discussed the payroll of Attorney Mitchell. Moderator Millham asked Mr. Hoffman to leave. Mr. Hoffman continued to act disorderly and continued name-calling and badgering the Moderator. Chief Markland and Special Officer Hopkins escorted Mr. Hoffman from the meeting. Mr. Juris spoke in opposition of the amendment because the reserve is intended to be used for other bridge replacements. Mr. Snow stated that the statutes read that the funds have to be set up for a specific purpose. The Moderator called for the vote of the amendment and the amendment was defeated. There was no further discussion on Article 17.
Article 18: To see if the Town will vote to establish a capital reserve fund under the provisions of RSA 35:1 for the purpose of ambulance replacement and to raise and appropriate the sum of sixty thousand dollars ($60,000) to be placed in this fund. (Recommended by the Board of Selectmen, Recommended by the Budget Committee)
The Moderator read Article 18. Mr. Hickok moved the article. Selectman Doten Seconded. Mr. Hickok stated the Budget Committee recommends because of ambulance replacement. Kevin Hayes asked how much an ambulance cost. Chief James Hayes answered approximately $185,000. There was no further discussion on Article 18.
Article 19: To see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate seventeen thousand dollars ($17,000) to be added to the highway equipment replacement capital reserve fund. (Recommended by the Board of Selectmen, Recommended by the Budget Committee)
The Moderator read Article 19. Mr. Hickok moved the article. Selectman Doten seconded. Mr. Hickok explained about using the same logic as the previous article but for highway equipment. Mr. Lambert wanted to know what kind of equipment. Hickok explained the Budget Committee’s position of level funding for next year. There was no further discussion on Article 19.
Article 20: To see if the Town will voted to raise and appropriate the sum of $10,000 to support the collection management efforts of the Thompson-Ames Historical Society, our town’s non-profit cultural organization committed to preserving and celebrating Gilford’s heritage. (Submitted by Petition) (Not recommended by the Board of Selectmen, Not recommended by the Budget Committee).
The Moderator read Article 20. Joan Nelson moved the article. Seconded from the floor. Ms. Nelson explained the need to fund the Thompson Ames Society (TAS) to work on collections management. TAS has made progress the last six (6) years but the work is not done. Collection management activities are only two (2) days a week, 16 hours a week. Ms. Nelson spoke in favor of the article. Mr. Hickok stated that the Budget Committee is opposed to funding. Mr. Juris noted a typographical error and made and amendment to remove the word “voted” and replace with the word “vote.” Mr. Lambert seconded the amendment. The moderator called for the vote and it was in the affirmative, the amendment carried. There was no further discussion on Article 20.
Article 21: To see if the Town will vote to amend Article 29 of the 1964 Town Meeting, which will allow for the appointment of three (3) alternate members to the Recreation Commission by the Board of Selectmen, who will serve without pay. In the first instance, one (1) person to be appointed for one year, one (1) person to be appointed for two years, and one (1) person to be appointed for three years. Their successors to be appointed for three (3) years. Vacancies, as they may occur, to be filled for the unexpired term only.
The Moderator read Article 21. Selectman Boucher moved the article. Selectman Doten seconded. Selectman Boucher further explained that approving this article would bring this commission up to speed with other like commissions. Mrs. Boucher said several people had applied for an opening and would like to have alternates. There was no further discussion on Article 21.
At 10:20 p.m. (Approximately 48 people in attendance) there being no further business to come before the meeting, the Moderator declared the meeting adjourned to March 14, 2006.
Respectfully submitted,
Denise A. Morrissette, NHCTC
Town Clerk – Tax Collector
| 
