Friday, September 4, 2015

The Rest of the Story

There were some other things on the agenda Thursday night for the BoS (as well as the 4pm work session) besides the Carroll County business.
  • The purpose of the 4pm session was to define a broad scope for a potential gym facility so that potential cost and funding possibilities could be determined. For those of you that have been following this evolution, this was agreed to be a necessary step before we can decide if we want to place an article on the warrant. The presentation made to the BoS back in June can be found here. The summary report can be found here.
  • The Tri-Town Milfoil Committee was officially dissolved, and a check in the amount of $18,489.46 was received as retained revenue and was deposited in the General Fund. It will be added to the appropriation for the milfoil account on  next years budget. 
  • The BoS approved acceptance of $15,000 in private donations from the Lees Pond Association to be held in escrow for the Conservation Commission for the potential purchase of the Lees Pond Preserve 
  • Ginny Gassman was appointed as an alternate to the Library Board of Trustees.
  • Certificates of appreciation and gift certificates to a local restaurant were presented to Scott Kinmond in recognition of his service as Administrative Liaison and to Carol Granfield as Interim TA. 
  • A reminder to the public that our new TA, Walter Johnson, will begin next week and there will be an informal meet and greet at Town Hall at 6:15pm next Thursday prior to our 7pm business meeting. 
  • A proclamation was read honoring Paralyzed Veterans of America Day on September 12th. Former Selectmen Joel Mudget was present and spoke of the annual bass fishing event to be held on September 12th at Camp Robindel for paralyzed veterans. It was my honor to represent the BoS and present the proclamation at the dinner banquet last year  and it is my pleasure to do so again this year. 

10 comments:

Town Hall Juunkie said...

Yes, the damn gym issue is still alive. The weekend hoop-shooters, with help from our retired T A, NEVER allowed a clear Yes No question on the ballot. The issue is as persistent as two teen-agers in the back seat of Daddies car. A $ 1.6 million figure was bantered around. Must be an inflatable. Anyone with a clew knows a basketball court and bleachers is 12,000 sq ft. Miss Rec says 3,000 sq ft for an office, lockers and utilities and " storage " another 5000 sq ft. Add a broom closet sized sop for the seniors, and we have 20,000 to 25,000 sq ft.
Anyone in construction knows $ 250. Per sq ft is the minimum cost of construction......FIVE MILLION. Is how the Moultonboro math adds up. Costly for a Sunday afternoon Pick-up game.

Joseph Cormier said...

Thursday's work session (I watched via streaming) and the business session (I was there) did provide for information and communication.

For example the work session discussion about the size/cost of the Rec. Center. The BoS, I believe, are doing a good thing by "scoping" the issue before putting it to a warrant. Maybe the legislative body can help.

Warrant:
"To see if the Town will vote to build a "Rec.Center", at the Taylor property for the dollar amount of (put a number in there), and if the motion fails, the governing body will not warrant, for at least ten years, another attempt at building a Rec. Center." Or something like that ... like a floor motion!

Doesn't stop a petition, from a town resident (not non-resident employees). It should be noted that the legislative body, can "direct" the governing body, regarding town structure and employment.

Another exciting topic was the County Supplemental $2.6 million tax, of which MoBo will fork-over another, close to $600,000.

Some good things come from the County. The following URL's are from county stuff. The 2011 report (now 2015) is probably more pertinent today, than when it was written.

Maybe, instead of a Rec.Center, the town should be discussing an "Aging Community Academy and Health Center". We could start with the $230,000+ or so, sitting in the Tech Fund, waiting for the taking! :) Wonder what the Ph.D.'s will bring up at the School Presentation at the MA at 6:30 on Sept. 9th?

The Tech Fund is a tangent issue to the "broadband" discussion at the work session.

The Tech Fund's initiating warrant((Art.30, page 36, 2006/7 Annual Report) States: " ... promote development of communication infrastructure to underdeveloped parts of Town" ...

Well, the Taylor property is underdeveloped! Maybe, some mindsets as well.

"Communication infrastructure", "like" communicating a structure/infrastructure for the WHOLE TOWN, not just the kids, nor the other perceived, recreation entitled.

The kids already have the School budget and the State Ed that are part of the Town tax; 54% of the total town tax (2.26+2.53/8.86 x100 = 54%). Town is 32% and County is 14%, presently.

"Communicate", not dictate, and convince the need. Pay for your own recreation.

A Community Center ... at least there will be more varied provincial interest to vote their way, at the town meeting. Also, don't confuse school extracurricular activities, with town mandates or required state mandates.

Don't know if politically correct in MoBo, but, ... Happy Labor Day ... especially if you labored through this note and the following URL's.



http://www.nhcounties.org/pdf/aging_and_the_healthcare_system_final.pdf

http://www.nhcounties.org/index.html

http://www.nhcounties.org/resources.html



Moultonboro Blogger said...

It's disappointing that many people just don't pay attention to facts and jump to self supporting conclusions. Obviously you are not interested in the facts.
It's also disappointing to read comments directed at individuals ( myself included) and do not choose to put their real names on it. It won't get published unless you do.

Town Hall Junkie said...

Gym " Need ". The highly touted U N H Rec study stated ( before T A " proof read " )...stated the issue. Should be resolved once and for all. Tells me that the BOS could read the tea leaves and announce there is not the support, or demand for a gym. The U N H report came out of the T A " proof read " stating the question should go before the town meeting. Very clever, as. Just about anything gets approved at town meeting. Let's see how it is phrased this time...bet we do not get a clean. Yes - no.....

Anonymous said...

Town Hall ..... yes, the fair thing to do would be to put in on the ballot including provisions precluding an override at the Town Meeting through a warrant item. Many more people turn out for the town elections (factor of ten possibly) than are willing to endure the Town Meeting. The powers that be know it would most likely fail so off to the Town Meeting it goes. I could be completely off base and it can't be put on the ballot although as long as it doesn't include money it seems possible.

Nancy Wright said...

Taken from the UNH Town Feasibility Team Report to the Selectmen, June 18th 2015.

Recommendation #5 Prepare a warrant article for the development of a new indoor recreation center and gym facility.
"This is the callenge we present to the Board of Selectmen: How to balance the needs of a MINORITY (caps are mine) in the community with the opinion of the MAJORITY (caps are mine)
It is clear from the UNH report that the majority of respondendts did not favor building a new facility. A vocal minority however did.
Yet Town Meeting voted to pursue development and again for a site study.
It is also clear from the study that additional gym space is a true need for the community.
We believe that we have validated that claim."

Here's a fact, as long as the Minority that attend Town Meeting and continue to vote for whatever their hearts desire, from sidwalks to multi-million dollar facilities there will be no end to the wish list from the vocal Minority. These warrant articles will pass because so many of the the silent Majority aren't able to attend Town Meeting.

Here's another fact, many of the town's voters are away in March and have no say at Town Meeting. SB2 would allow the waterfront residents, snow birds, elderly, and voters unable to attend Town Meeting in March the right to vote on these issues by absentee ballot or at the polls from 7AM to 7PM. If ever a town needed SB2 it's Moultonboro and it's now.

Joseph Cormier said...

"Town Hall ..... yes, the fair thing to do would be to put in on the ballot including provisions precluding an override at the Town Meeting through a warrant item. Many more people turn out for the town elections (factor of ten possibly) than are willing to endure the Town Meeting."

Cannot be legally done without SB2!

" Use of the official ballot is prohibited unless a statute specifically authorizes .."

READ this:
https://www.nhmunicipal.org/TownAndCity/Article/207



Anonymous said...

Links to UNH Study and June 18, 2015 power point presentation to the Selectmen.

http://www.moultonborough.org/Pages/MoultonboroughNH_BComm/UNHstudy/Moultonborough%20Needs%20Assessment%20Report%20Final%20revised.pdf


http://moultonborough.org/Pages/MoultonboroughNH_BComm/UNHstudy/UNHFeasibilityReport06182015.pdf

For Voter Participation said...

Maybe the solution is to put this item off for another year - the Town has waited this long and hasn't yet disintegrated without more basketball courts and and a gym - and let the residents first vote for SB2 in 2016 BEFORE PLACING THIS PROPOSAL AS A WARRANT ARTICLE in 2017 instead.

Perhaps our BoS could give us the opportunity to practice some democracy, instead of recommending this warrant article before the 2016 Town Meeting.

SB2 Supporter said...

The last thing the Select Board want is SB2 on the ballot. Heaven forbide if the Legislative Body understood SB2 actually gives them power over the purse. Like no thank you we do not need a multi million dollar buiding to house the Recreation Department maybe someother time.

It's so much easier for the Selectmen and Town Moderator to control/minipulate the outcome of 5% of the voters at Town Meeting than contol/manipulate a healthy 60% or more who vote at the polls.