"Real liberty is neither found in despotism or the extremes of democracy, but in moderate governments.
Alexander Hamilton

Tuesday, July 29, 2014

Proposed BRC Needs and Feasibility Study

Last March, the legislative body approved money for a site study for the Blue Ribbon Committee recommendation for a gym/recreation facility on or adjacent to school property.  That work has been underway and recommendations will be made to a joint School Board/BoS meeting on August 12th.
There is a clear need to understand what we really need and want as a community and a feasibility study is necessary  to get to the right conclusion. This has and will continue to be a contentious issue for the community and determining need as well as maximizing current space and facilities will be a crucial piece of the puzzle.
The following was presented to the BoS last Thursday at our meeting and some questions arose. I certainly felt that we needed to do "due diligence" and investigate the individuals proposed to lead the study. I had and still have concerns about inherent bias as the study team are recreation professionals. I did not mean to imply that they would jeopardize their  professional reputations in any way, but only that their view point may not be balanced. Along those lines,  I made a comment that ideally we need to balance the team with someone who is 100 lbs overweight and hasn't exercised in 20 years. The possibility of an MBA type to join the team will be investigated.
 The BoS requested that the team leaders come to the next BoS meeting on August 7th and also provide examples of their previous work.
The following is a "draft" proposal and has not yet been approved by the BoS.


Here We Go Again said...

So Carter, our T A, who has been in favor of this since 2008. - way before his BRC was formed, to quote this report.....has taken this a great step forward. It is not the Rec Gym...it is Not the senior center. - it is the BRC Facility......anything that they want it to mean. This should make it much easier to sell.
Note there is not one word about visiting school facilities, or sharing space..not on the agenda. Preconceived notions here from the T A ? Did he see the Master Plan survey results?
Very pleased...NOT..about a Delphi technique meeting for 200 people, with I wants...gathered into groups of 8 to 10, so no one can hear any other group, then all taken back to UNH for their spin. We did this on the last charrette, which had a 10 % believability rating on the M P.. When will they learn... Our rec future determined by. UNH grad students and professors? ? What happened to the real world?
If this has been our T A's dream since 2008, he is dreaming in the wrong town. We know that anyway.

Anonymous said...

$200-275 a square foot for the building plus the cost to equip the building and then we need to do something with the old rec bldg and the cost could easily add up to $6 million or more. If my math is correct that is an increase of maybe $2 dollars on our tax rate if it is paid for in one shot. That pushes the tax rate over $10.50. Seasonal lake front owners would pay for our shiny new building at the tune of about $2,000 for each million of value. A $200,000 middle class home, only $200. Quite a bargain I would say for our not so well to do populace. Our dimwit selectmen will say it will be phased in, so a little here and a little there, take some from reserve funds, and you will hardly notice it. Who can say no to that?

Anonymous said...

I would like to see the reports of some of their previous work. Do they ever say not needed? There is too much interaction with just the TA and Rec Director and staff. They are not objective as we know. Maybe the UNH team will be able to obtain the attendance figures instead of the registration numbers from Donna although I suspect she will take them to her grave. What are Moultonboro's peer communities? There is another web survey. Already a no vote from shipp since he considers them unreliable. Could it be because he doesn't like all the no more rec facilities responses? I say the only honest vote would be at a special town meeting scheduled in the summer by the BOS. Once again this study is scheduled to wrap up just in time to get it in next years warrant items for the Annual Town Meeting.

Mumbo Jumbo said...

What a bunch of mumbo jumbo.
Make all complicated with paragraphs and sub-paragraphs.
What this town really needs for a complete study of this project is a Quark-Gluon Supersymmetric Quantum Study.
Then everyone would have the ability to comprehend all easily.
It has to be assumed that all voters in this town are familiar with Quark-Gluon Supersymmetric Quantum Study methods.

Hard Cost said...

The T A 's estimate of $ 270 per sq ft of building is LO-Ball. Residential is $ 300 to 500 per foot. A comparable building just bid was the Belnap County jail, at $ 525 per foot.

Anonymous said...

Really this should be a slam dunk with a Rec Director serving in this town for some 30 plus years. She always needs more to run her programs and could have more programs with a new building, for who? Thank goodness for a Bos member finally asking the right questions and looking out for all taxpayers. If a wonderful job was being performed in our town than we would all support her and reward her that new building. Apparently she is doing something right nationally, let that award to her be enough for now.

Hate To Be Had said...

The outline above is for a sales pitch - not a fact finding for Rec Needs. You go to the people for that...not the " experts ". This will be another term paper to agree with the T A' premise, that we need a gym.
Funny how we do study after study to sell a project...but on a more popular project like cleaning up States Landing Beach ( $ 550,000 ) we do NOT hire an expert on lake issues. We just hear the T A tell us it will stay clean 15 years. Any one stop and think " how many lakes has he cleaned ? "

Anonymous said...

Have you ever actually listened to or talked with the TA on this or any subject or sent him an email? In general I am a fan. He brought in the UNH fellow who said we might do just fine if we merged the Rec/SAU Director, saving $40k, and put all the facilities in control of one single scheduler. I watched the video as he and the ABC's Ms. Beadle and UNH's Mr. Branley were dismissed out of hand by our two elected board (BoS/SB). I was present at his Charting a Course presentation in 2008 in which he said a Community Center should only be built after it survived "... a fully vetted business plan..." by an independent 3rd party. Most importantly he said "... we must bring these matters to a conclusion to allow us to focus our energies on our priorities." Sadly – for the most part – his observation back then that the Town lacked a vision and decisive leadership continues to this day as we rehash the hash at every turn. You don’t have to take my word for it; read the on-line report!

Not My Roll Model.. said...

You may not be watching Town Hall Antics closely enough. Two months ago a committee member voiced a need to revisit the Branley report, as times have changed. The TA announced he considered the Branley Report a settled matter, and would not re-open it.
The report, which was not widely circulated, called for combining the two after school programs into one, under the school Atheletic director.
Were you present at the four sidewalk meetings, where 35 people showed up to " build a sidewalk, then had their questions totally ignored?
Were you here for the attempted Planning Board Purge ?
I put in 2 to 4 hours a day, either at meetings, or watching the videos, and studying R S A's. Believe me, all is not well in tithe Town Hall Closet.

Joe ormier/jcormier2@myfairpoint.net said...

The legislative body, at the 2014 Town meeting, approved Article 13; $17,500 to carry out the site study.

It should not, and does not, mean the facility is approved by the legislative body.

The process and politics of the facility becoming real, will be the votes of the legislative body ... like it or not!

If SB 2 has a better shot of killing this facility ... better get that moving ... or live with the results of the current make-up of the legislative body (like lipstick on a pig)!

The Associate Professors will be doing the study for the Rec. Dept.??? Article 13 doesn't say Rec. Dept.!!!!!!!!

Are these the Assoc. Profs.?

Dr. Barcelona:






Dr. Boyd Hegarty:




Where are the bean-counters (saying that affectionately)??

Explore All Avenues said...

It was stated at one of the CIPC meetings the Rec. Director wants $150,000 for lights for the baseball field at Playground Dr. It was also stated that we pay Meredith $800 a year to use their lighted field. I agree with Mr. Ballard, that's a bargain when you do the math. It makes more sense to pay Meredith $800 a year to use their lighted field which includes the cost of electricity than $150,000 for our own lights. The $150,000 is just for lights and installation it does not include the costs to run or maintain them. Per our President "electricity cost will necessarily skyrocket." Those costs are set to "skyrocket" in the very near future.

Have there been any conversations with Meredith to talk about sharing their community center?

Done Deal said...

"Have there been any conversations with Meredith to talk about sharing their community center?"

Ya, right !

All this town wants is more monuments.
Gimme, gimme, gimme.
Whether needed or not.

All of you have a new Community Center/Recreation Complex coming whether you want it or not.

U N H Knows Us ? said...

This effort handled by the U N H dept of recreation management has a slim to none chance of understanding, or relating to the residents of Moultonboro, and why we are here. We have the lake, the mountains, hiking trails, country roads, and so many other opportunities aligned with nature and the great outdoors. It will be impossible to explain that draw to a couple of big city professors, who are paid to come up here and hawk organized recreation. This exercise will produce another misfit report, based on downstate values. It is an affront to us all that our T M and Rec Director are allowed to go to this length to sell their idea. The BOS must turn this approach down.

An American Guesser said...

Last year ,200 Moultonboro citizens signed a petitan, handed to the Selectmens Board by a well respected citizen ,not to rehire Carter Terrenzini.The Bos elected not to listen to the towns people and they rehired him.Today, he is the single most liability this town has for its future planning.Maybe we could have a special meeting,(fully legal by R.S.A's) to vote him out .He is cherry picking all studys to fit his wants for our town.In the final Blue Ribbon Commission's report,the commission say's in the 5th paragraph,"The commission believes that coordinated planning between the Recreation Department and the School Athletic Department,of when the annual maintenance to both the MCS and MA gymnasiums will take place could allow for the use of these facilities for part of the summer months". That would mean no summer programs cancelled because of rain.This is the continued plan to create a need for a new gym,rather than be more efficient with what we have always have.Three gyms are enough for most small communities ,like our Moultonborough.

Anonymous said...

Never ending complaints on the blog.

We voted for the BOS, PB and ZB members. But, it seems that most posters here take exception to most of their discussions and decisions.

And the posters cannot find one thing that the TA or Town Planner do that is even marginally good; all is bad. How about those aliens from UNH
(where we send our children to college - oh, maybe we could have the University of M'boro?)or any other place outside of Town boundaries...

Would be interesting to read more discussion containing constructive ideas rather than continual bashing and complaining...

Well folks, we've cooked our own stew; be proud of it.

Anonymous said...

I think there is a lot of constructive discussion on this blog. There are many town residents/voters who feel frustrated, and they have a right to feel that way. When we take the time to sit through town meeting year after year in order to vote for or against town expenditures, it is maddening to find something that was SOUNDLY DEFEATED by a majority of the voters RESURFACE with slightly different wrapping. I am, in this case, referring to the new gym/rec. center that is being pushed at us by TWO TOWN EMPLOYEES who won't take no for an answer. We don't need it, we can't afford it, and our population continues to decline! Wake up, sleepyheads!

Anonymous said...

bashing or constructive comments. Both I think are true, although there is far more negative bashing then constructive ideas. Whys is that do you suppose? We have here on this blog and outstanding resource to learn and grow with all the videos and information posted and some of you do nothing but complain and use it as an opportunity to tak pot shots at all in town government. You make outrageous accusations often without proof. Look, if you are not happy with who you elected, run for office yourself.
Like it or not, this is a democracy and we do have town meeting. Deal with it or move.

Anonymous said...

bashing or constructive comments. Both I think are true, although there is far more negative bashing then constructive ideas. Whys is that do you suppose? We have here on this blog and outstanding resource to learn and grow with all the videos and information posted and some of you do nothing but complain and use it as an opportunity to tak pot shots at all in town government. You make outrageous accusations often without proof. Look, if you are not happy with who you elected, run for office yourself.
Like it or not, this is a democracy and we do have town meeting. Deal with it or move.

O P Money said...

We are talking about spending $ 1,250. For every man, woman and child in town to pay for this building, not including annual staff costs and maintenance.
When did it become an obligation for us to pay for other people's I wants?
Many thanks for this blogsite. If it wasn't for this site, we would know zero about the town hall antics.

Hear The People.. said...

This proposal, which may be canceled or amended by the B O S allows two weeks for an online survey, with copies available at town hall, rec, and library. This follows the same survey format as the recent Master Plan, which gave us a poor response number wise, and not represenative of the towns residents. Five $ million at stake, and town hall will not spend $ 4,000 to give all an opportunity for input, thru the use of the U S Mail, plus the online option, if desired. This issue is worthy of a complete response from the towns voters. We need a chance to have a definite input from all, and hopefully, once and for all..
Interesting to note tho, that the last M P Survey, with 688 returns, went 2 to 1 against more money for Rec land or buildings. What will it finally take to get them to listen to a survey? As this is optional spending, not required by law, majority rule should be the deciding factor. Let's not degrade it by a half-assed survey.

Tired of Being Treated Like an ATM said...

Anonymous 9:46 would have us to zip our lips and follow blindly along with the T A and some on the Select Board. May I remind Anonymous 9:46 all these "improvements" on your want list cost money.....taxpayer money.

It's unsettling to watch an out of touch Select Board treat residents like an ATM. We are expected to pay for your wants and not make a peep. What's needed are 2 new Selectmen in 2015 that can deal with reality and not be swayed by the entitlement crowd.

Anonymous said...

Dear Tired,
I fail to see anywhere in the comment made at 9:46 that supports any of the accusations you make.
Please point out which parts of that comment support any of your outrageous statements.

Anonymous said...

To Not My Roll Model:

I understand the TA saying that – for him – this merger and scheduling issue is a “settled matter”. I went and reread the SM and SB minutes of November 15, 2011. “Carter felt that Mike’s report showed that a better job could be done in scheduling facilities… One person has control and responsibility of scheduling the facilities. The proposal made would allow the Town to do a better job and added to that a savings $40,000 (a reduction of .02 on the tax rate). Presently there are two out of the four full time jobs are vacant and there will never be a better time to try this. Carter urged the Boards to move forward by saying, “We can do a better.”. “Upon the vote on the two Branley reports; Mark (Borrin) said that by Unanimous vote both Boards have decided that both programs should be left as is."

The TA works for the SM. Once your boss decides something how many times would you go back to ask for it to be revisited?

Tired said...

Anonymous 12:01....missed the point? Let's cut to the chase. The blog is about the BRC needs/feasibility study. Translation......MONEY, TAXPAYER MONEY, 5+ MILLION DOLLARS of OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY......PERIOD.

It's apparent some on the Select Board chose to listen to a small percentage of residents that attend town meeting each year to push their agenda on the rest of us.

This small group seem to think we NEED such a facility. Where are the FACTS to support this proposal? There are a number of residents, the silent majority, unable to attend town meeting, whose opinions don't seem to matter to some members on the Select Board.

Many of these residents have voiced their concerns via numerous town surveys and focus groups yet some on the Select Board refuse to hear them. It's time to vote for two new Selectmen in 2015, two that will listen to those patiently waiting for their opinions and concerns to be recognized.

Anonymous said...

The July 30 9:23 pm post noted, I believe, a need to keep the summer programs running during inclement weather. Why? The programs get old for the kids pretty quickly. Attendees peter out, sometimes down to more staff than kids.