| July 14, 2008 Meeting Minutes |
|
City Council Meeting
Draft Minutes
July 14, 2008
Consultation with City
Solicitor to discuss the City of Concord’s current sign ordinance
to follow the meeting.
City Council Chambers
7:00 p.m.
3. Pledge of Allegiance.
Action: Councilor Blanchard moved approval of the June 9, 2008 meeting minutes. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes. Councilor St. Hilaire moved approval of the June 23, 2008 meeting minutes. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Action: General Services Director Chip Chesley explained that this is a plan that began in FY05 and was broken down into three phases. He noted that the city has a supply of 6.7 million gallons of water per day and is comprised of three sources including: Penacook Lake at 2.5 million gallons per day; the Contoocook River at 3.2 million gallons per day; the Pembroke Well Field at 1.0 million gallons a day. He indicated that this is sufficient water to carry the city forward through 2025.
Robert Williamson, Senior Project Manager for Wright-Pierce, provided a brief overview explaining that Phase I consisted of looking at and confirming the existing supply availability and to identify long term what would keep the city sustainable for the next hundred years; Phase II consisted of how to treat those supplies once they are identified; Phase III consists of looking at the infrastructure and how it is transmitted throughout the city. He pointed out that Phase I concluded that the city has adequate supply to 2030; that the best long term supply opportunity is from the Merrimack River; and maintaining treatment at Penacook Lake is the lowest cost and best opportunity for the city moving forward. He explained that the goals and objectives for Phase II included: assessing the entire facility; develop a short-term sustainability plan for the next 10 to 20 years; develop a long-term plan on how the facility would be expanded to meet the demands moving out twenty years from now. Mr. Williamson indicated that the findings from the study included: the physical condition of the facility is at least average to above average condition; the existing process is applicable if introducing a new source; short-term investment is needed to sustain reliability of the facility for the next 10 to 20 years; the facility can be expanded for increased demands. He finished by highlighting the following recommendations: invest in the critical infrastructure to sustain reliability and service; prioritize the non-critical needs; begin the planning process for expansion; continue with the distribution study – Phase III; implement the CIP.
Councilor Blanchard indicated that she recalled being told that the city’s water supply is adequate for a population of up to 50,000. Mr. Williamson indicated that to be correct explaining that Phase I included a detailed projection of population growth and water need.
Councilor Black inquired whether there was a way to get a handle on cutting down demand. Mr. Williamson responded that Phase I included a cursory look at the demands and where they were being used and allocated. He indicated that Phase III is going to look, in detail, each category of water use in the city and from this is the hope to be able to identify where conservation or savings to reduce demand can be targeted.
Councilor Lemieux inquired as to why the city can’t supplement its water supply from the Contoocook River. Mr. Williamson responded that there are some limitations on what can be taken from the Contoocook River. He explained that most of the supply that can be taken here can only happen during the high flow or run-off periods.
Councilor Lemieux moved approval of the report and to proceed with Phase III. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
- Consent Agenda Items –
Note: Items listed as pulled from the consent agenda will be discussed at the end of the meeting following unfinished business.
Action: Councilor Bouchard indicated that she would like to place item 36 back on the consent agenda explaining that staff’s report was very clear about the situation but noted that she feels that there is still an issue of fairness and clarity and the city needs to do a better job of informing residents that live on private roads of their rights. Councilor Lemieux moved approval of the consent agenda with item 35 removed for discussion at the end of the agenda. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Referral to City Administration
Referral to the Traffic Operations Committee and the Parking Committee
Referral to Community Development – Engineering
Items Tabled for a August 11, 2008 Public Hearing
From the City Manager
Consent Reports
Action: This item removed for discussion at the end of the agenda.
Action: This item placed back on the consent agenda.
Consent Resolutions
37. Resolution authorizing the City Manager to submit an application to the US Department of Justice – Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program for funds designated for law enforcement related programs; together with report from the Police Department.
38. Resolution in honor of Concord Fire Department Life Safety Officer, Captain Sean Toomey. (For presentation in August)
Consent Communications
39. Street closure request from the New Hampshire Cycling Club for their 27th annual Concord Criterium bicycle race around White Park to be held on Saturday, August 2, 2008.
40.
Street closure request from the Hayward Brook Association for a cancer
fundraising benefit and wiffle ball tournament to be held on Saturday,
July 19, 2008 from 10:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.
41. Street closure request for a neighborhood block party to be held on Monday, September 1, 2008 from 11:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Bainbridge Drive from Oscar Boulevard to Styles Street.
**End of Consent Agenda**
A. Ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances, Title II, Traffic Code, Chapter 18, Parking, Article 18-1, Stopping, Standing and Parking, Section 18-1-9, Bus and Taxi Cab Stands; together with report from the Assistant City Planner. (6-19)
Action: City Manager Tom Aspell provided a brief overview explaining that there are currently two bus stops on Centennial Senior Center Drive and is a housekeeping item to change this to one bus stop on what is currently known as Concord Christian Academy Drive.
Mayor Bouley declared the hearing open. There being no public testimony, the Mayor closed the hearing.
B. Resolution authorizing the expenditure of $175,000 and authorizing the issuance of $175,000 in bonds and notes for the design services for the refurbishment of one biotower at the Hall Street Wastewater Treatment Plant, CIP # 104; together with report from General Services. (6-20)
Action: City Manager Aspell provided a brief overview explaining that in 2006 the study evaluation that the city had for the Hall Street Wastewater Treatment Plant identified the biotower as significantly contributing to off-site odors at the plant. He indicated that a detailed analysis of alternatives had been done to replace the existing failed media and the improvement for $175,000 in sewer bonds is suggested to move forward with the odor control improvements at the plant.
Mayor Bouley declared the hearing open. There being no public testimony, the Mayor closed the hearing.
C. Resolution authorizing the expenditure of $40,000 and authorizing the issuance of $40,000 in bonds and notes for the design and engineering services for the replacement of one screw pump at the Hall Street Wastewater Treatment Plant, CIP # 104; together with report from General Services. (6-21)
Action: City Manager Aspell provided a brief overview.
Councilor Coen inquired as to how many screw pumps there are. Mr. Aspell responded that there are three pumps explaining that this is being done on a program basis and the other two are programmed over time to be replaced.
Mayor Bouley declared the hearing open. There being no public testimony, the Mayor closed the hearing.
D. Resolution appropriating the sum of $619,500 and authorizing the issuance of bonds and notes for CIP #85, water main construction; together with a report from the Associate Engineer. (6-22)
Action: City Manager Aspell provided a brief overview explaining that water main replacements have been scheduled including: 1,300 feet on Rum Hill Road, 200 feet on Kent Street and 520 feet on Park Street. He added that the main replacement on Rum Hill Road will require work at the intersection of Rum Hill Road and Pleasant Street which will have some traffic impacts.
Mayor Bouley declared the hearing open. There being no public testimony, the Mayor closed the hearing.
E. Resolution appropriating the sum of $105,000 and authorizing the issuance of bonds and notes for improvements to the School Street retaining wall reconstruction project, CIP #440; together with a report from the Associate Engineer. (6-23)
Action: City Manager Aspell provided a brief overview explaining that this was identified as a project that would need to be done and dollars were appropriated to do an analysis and a study to determine how to best put this retaining wall back in good operating order. He indicated that it supports a sidewalk and a roadway and has begun to collapse.
Mayor Bouley declared the hearing open.
Five Minute Public Testimony
Roy Schweiker, Concord resident, noted that he feels that $125,000 seems like a high amount. He indicated that instead of putting back a vertical wall, that a slope garden be built. He asked that Council consider asking staff whether something such as this had been considered.
There being no further public testimony, the Mayor closed the public hearing.
F. Resolution authorizing the expenditure of $65,000 and authorizing the issuance of $65,000 in bonds and notes for improvements to the Memorial Field Facility, CIP #58; together with report from General Services. (6-24)
Action: City Manager Aspell provided a brief overview explaining that in accordance with the capital budget, improvements to Memorial Field are being recommended including: the replacement and installation of lighting fixtures, wires and poles at Doane Diamond; renovation of the football locker rooms and the purchase of a new water cannon.
Mayor Bouley declared the hearing open. There being no public testimony, the Mayor closed the hearing.
G. Resolution approving the acquisition of open space property northwesterly of Lake View Drive, and authorizing the expenditure of up to $182,500 from the Conservation Fund for this purpose, as approved by the Conservation Commission, together with a report from the Conservation Commission. (6-25)
Action: City Manager Aspell provided a brief overview explaining that at the last meeting the Chair of the Conservation Commission had indicated that he would go back and look at whether this should be an easement or a fee acquisition.
Kit Morgan, Conservation Commission Chair, indicated that the commission recommends acquiring the property in fee explaining that the state funding will only pay a portion of the value of the easement. He noted that the commission feels that there is value to both the city and the residents with public ownership of the property because it can be used for recreation and trail use. He explained the approach is to acquire easements for property that is in active use for agriculture or other use by the owner and to acquire land in fee is more or less forest land that is suitable for public recreation and trail use pointing out that this parcel falls into the latter category. Mr. Morgan explained that the report summarizes the reasons why the commission is recommending acquiring this land and noted that the commission carefully considers proposals to acquire open space land and that one of the advantages is that they are able to leverage state funds instead of just using a hundred percent city funds.
Referencing the $230,000, Councilor Blanchard noted that it is indicated that this includes costs associated with preparation of a survey and closing fees and that the city is not actually paying more than the appraised value. Mr. Morgan indicated that to be correct.
Councilor Black inquired what would happen to the land if it was not purchased. Mr. Morgan responded that he was unsure what would happen noting that it could be developed. He added that the City Forester had surveyed the property and indicated that it could be subdivided into some number of house lots.
Five minute public testimony
Roy Schweiker, Concord resident, noted that he feels that the city should not purchase the property because it costs too much. He indicated that the city already owns quite a bit of land within this area and feels that the city should be buying conservation land in other parts of the city.
There being no further public testimony, the Mayor closed the hearing.
H. Ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances, Title I, General Code; Chapter 1, Government Organization, by amending Schedule I of Article 1-5, Fees, Fines and Penalties; together with report from the Solicitor’s Office. (6Sus3)
Action: City Manager Aspell provided a brief overview explaining that this is a housekeeping item to make these fees work with the rest of the fee system and charge on a per month basis versus an annual basis.
Mayor Bouley declared the hearing open. There being no public testimony, the Mayor closed the hearing.
I. Public Hearing concerning provisions of the proposed development agreement between the City and Mark Carrier Construction for sale and redevelopment of Scandia Hall at 14 Knight Street which specifically pertain to environmental indemnification; together with report from the Assistant for Special Projects. (Supplemental report from the Assistant for Special projects submitted)
Action: City Manager Aspell provided a brief overview explaining that the last time Council discussed this they determined this should be brought up as a public hearing before Council makes the determination of a couple of options which staff has outlined within their report: Option One – to cancel the negotiations with Carrier/Jordan and seek a new developer for the project; Option Two – to proceed with Carrier/Jordan and accept that the city may have future financial liability if contamination is discovered at the site. He indicated that based on a level one site analysis that had been done, there were cracks in the foundation and oil tanks in which there had been some small spill of oil in the facility over the years. He added that there is potential for contamination within the property and the developer would like some type of protection from the city in terms of any type of contamination with this.
Referencing the third bulleted item on page two of the report, Councilor Lemieux inquired whether fees are actually in revenue against the project or whether the fees offset costs that the city has in processing those permits. Mr. Aspell responded that the costs are already there and these would be new revenues to offset existing costs. Councilor Lemieux noted that throughout the report it indicates that the city is indemnifying the developer against the possibility that there may be contaminants found and questioned whether this indemnification is permanent. Assistant for Special Projects Matt Walsh responded that staff has not negotiated specifically with the developer how long the indemnification will last explaining that they are specifically worried about finding something there during their construction process. He indicated that typically if the city is the responsible party for the tank, the indemnification would last for as long as the tanks are there or anything associated with the tanks may be there. Councilor Lemieux questioned whether the city should be concerned about some future time there is another fuel tank that leaks into the soil under the foundation and at that time there becomes a debate as to who is responsible for the clean up. Mr. Walsh responded that in the scenario of “what if”, if Scandia Hall is removed in the future and something is found under the foundation many generations from now, it could become a conversation at that point and they would go back and do due diligence like the city did to figure out who put the tanks in and who is responsible. Mr. Walsh noted that it could be conceivable that the city be on the hook for something that far in the future.
Referencing the property passing through several owners, Councilor Coen questioned as to what happens if a future owner does something to contaminate the soil inquiring whether the city would still be responsible. Mr. Walsh responded that it would have to demonstrate that the source of the contamination goes back to the responsible party as defined in the law. Councilor Coen inquired as to whether there would be an objection to the developer if there were a 15 or 20 year limitation on this.
City Manager Aspell provided an overview of the process of negotiations.
Councilor Blanchard questioned whether the tanks were still located on the property. Mr. Walsh responded yes. Councilor Blanchard further questioned whether the tanks were going to remain on the property. Mr. Walsh explained that the tanks are the size of home heating oil size tanks and are approximately 275 gallons each. He indicated that the issue that caused concern was that there was a little bit of residue around where the spout connects into the tank. He noted that he feels that it is a relatively minor issue, if one even exists. He added that there didn’t’ appear to be much staining on the floor and if there is any quantity of oil that has gone through the foundation it would be very small. Referencing the tanks remaining in place, Councilor Blanchard inquired whether there is a continued future risk. Mr. Walsh responded that he is unsure of the developer’s intention for heating but that the building may receive a new HVAC system and the tanks may disappear. He pointed out that the liability that would remain is that if any oil penetrated the foundation of the building and the building ever disappeared, through the course of doing development oily soil is found in the ground then the city would own the removing of that oily soil. With regard to the indemnification, Councilor Blanchard noted that she feels that the city could limit that to this developer and not continue indefinitely.
Councilor Stetson inquired that if in the course of the construction the developers find that there is nothing that needs to be removed and the city has granted this, whether it comes to an end when the site is clean. Mr. Walsh explained that usually the way it works is if the project is being done and nothing is found and then someone five years later finds oily soil because they dug in a spot that hasn’t been dug up before and this is what starts the “what if” scenarios and this is why the law usually goes back to the responsible party.
Councilor Keach questioned that if this was a private sale between someone other than the city would this be a typical request. Mr. Walsh responded that if it was a private sale most individuals would indicate that it is sold “as is” and assume that they are covered. He explained that an “as is” sale does not mean they are necessarily covered.
Five minute public testimony
Roy Schweiker, Concord resident, noted his concern with oil being placed back into the tanks. He indicated that he feels that as part of the agreement the city should have the tanks removed and cleaned up immediately or fill the tanks with a permanent inert material so that no oil is placed in the tanks in the future.
Mayor Bouley inquired whether Mr. Schweiker felt that the city should or should not move forward with the developer. Mr. Schweiker responded that he feels that the city should move forward with the developer making it clear that the tanks are not to be re-used and that they either be filled with inert material or be removed.
Mark Carrier, Carrier/Jordan, indicated that the oil tanks are not in use at this time because the system has been converted to gas. He explained that the plan is to remove the tanks from the building with the issue being any oil left in the ground, if any. He noted that he doesn’t feel there is or that there will be an issue with it but is something that developers can’t be accountable for. He indicated that a level one site assessment has been done and there are other hazardous materials that they are aware of and will be taking care of including: asbestos and lead paint.
John Jordan, Carrier/Jordan, indicated that the level one assessment had been done noting that there is a possible issue and therefore they cannot proceed forward with that liability indicating that he hopes that something can be agreed upon that works for everyone.
There being no further public testimony, the Mayor closed the hearing.
J. Resolution appropriating the sum of $80,000 in US Department of Transportation Grant Funds from the State of NH, Department of Transportation, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Enhancement (CMAQ) Program, and authorizing the City Manager to amend the existing Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Enhancement (CMAQ) Program Agreement with the State of New Hampshire Department of Transportation to construct a roundabout at the intersection of Liberty, Centre and Auburn Streets, (CIP #29); together with report from the City Engineer.
Action: City Manager Aspell provided a brief overview explaining that the bids came in higher than the money that had been appropriated based on the city and federal dollars. He indicated that the City Engineer tried to find out if there was any additional dollars that may be available from the federal and state government and both governments stepped forward indicating that they can make another $80,000 available without any additional match from the city.
Councilor Black inquired as to when this project is expected to begin. City Engineer Ed Roberge responded that staff would like this to begin August 4, 2008.
Councilor Coen inquired whether the additional $80,000 would cover the entire cost. Mr. Roberge indicated that to be correct. Councilor Coen inquired whether this included any upgrade to the aesthetics of the design. Mr. Roberge responded that the city bid alternatives to look at some of the aesthetic upgrades explaining that the amount approved is the base bid that includes one alternate which was a credit alternate for the temporary closure during the day time during the construction. Mr. Roberge explained that the alternatives included looking at an in-lay type of surface treatment on the island as well as an enhanced crosswalk which could not be afforded within the base bid. He noted that the surface treatments proved to be too cost prohibitive and therefore was not included within the additional federal grant. He added that staff will look at the progress of the project indicating that there are some landscaping features that will enhance the intersection.
Councilor Stetson questioned whether this roundabout has been redesigned from the original received from the roundabout expert. Mr. Roberge responded that this is the same roundabout that came from the expert. Councilor Stetson inquired whether it was smaller. Mr. Roberge responded that it is a hundred foot diameter and was always the case. He explained that one of the options that had been explored during the early design was to create a larger five legged intersection which would have included impacts to private property as well as White Park and it had been opted not to do this.
Mayor Bouley declared the hearing open. There being no public testimony, the Mayor closed the hearing.
July 14, 2008 Public Hearing Action
Action: Councilor St. Hilaire moved approval. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Action: Councilor
Bennett moved approval. The motion was duly seconded and passed 14-0 on a roll
call vote with Councilors Bennett, Black, Blanchard, Bouchard, Mayor Bouley,
Councilors Coen, Keach, Lemieux, McClure, Patten, St. Hilaire, Shurtleff,
Stetson and Werner voting yes.
Action: Councilor Bennett moved approval. The motion was duly seconded and passed 14-0 on a roll call vote with Councilors Bennett, Black, Blanchard, Bouchard, Mayor Bouley, Councilors Coen, Keach, Lemieux, McClure, Patten, St. Hilaire, Shurtleff, Stetson and Werner voting yes.
Action: Councilor Lemieux moved approval. The motion was duly seconded and passed 14-0 on a roll call vote with Councilors Bennett, Black, Blanchard, Bouchard, Mayor Bouley, Councilors Coen, Keach, Lemieux, McClure, Patten, St. Hilaire, Shurtleff, Stetson and Werner voting yes.
Action: Councilor Lemieux moved approval. The motion was duly seconded.
Councilor Black inquired whether Mr. Schweiker’s idea could be incorporated within this. City Engineer Ed Roberge explained that staff along with the consultant engineer worked closely with the two property owners that affect this looking at a number of options including utilizing and maintaining the existing granite blocks or going with a new modular retaining wall. He indicated that they decided that they like the modular retaining wall and didn’t want to lose any more area in the side yard.
Councilor Lemieux’s motion passed 14-0 on a roll call vote with Councilors Bennett, Black, Blanchard, Bouchard, Mayor Bouley, Councilors Coen, Keach, Lemieux, McClure, Patten, St. Hilaire, Shurtleff, Stetson and Werner voting yes.
Action: Councilor St. Hilaire moved approval. The motion was duly seconded and passed 14-0 on a roll call vote with Councilors Bennett, Black, Blanchard, Bouchard, Mayor Bouley, Councilors Coen, Keach, Lemieux, McClure, Patten, St. Hilaire, Shurtleff, Stetson and Werner voting yes.
Action: Councilor McClure moved approval. The motion was duly seconded.
Councilor Black indicated that he would be voting against this item because he feels that the cost is too high and that the land is very developable making it a great opportunity to expand the city’s tax base.
Councilor Blanchard questioned the ramifications as to risk to the water supply if this land was developed. She inquired whether it would include city water and sewer or private wells and septic systems. City Manager Aspell responded that the city water system does not go out this far stopping at Little Pond Road approximately 1,000 feet after the intersection with Auburn Street. He added that a watershed protection zoning district had been created around the lake and this property is included within this district. Councilor Blanchard inquired as to how much negotiating is done when purchasing property. Kit Morgan, Conservation Commission, explained that they do negotiate with the property owners/sellers and generally when they have conversations with them they may include communication that they have had with developers. He indicated that in this particular case they have had offers from developers well in excess of the amount being offered. He added that it had been agreed that the fair market/appraised value would be offered and the commission feels that it is a good price.
Councilor Lemieux questioned whether the parcels submitted to Council for purchasing are prioritized in any way and if so is this a high priority parcel. Mr. Morgan responded that there are areas within the city that are high priorities which include characteristics with the property that make them a high priority including: the resources present and being adjacent to other open space. He explained that the commission does not have a strict numerical ranking but the open space plan does identify areas in the city and types of open space that are higher priority and this property would be included as one of those.
Referencing the money in the Conservation Fund, Councilor Keach inquired whether they are limited by ordinance to only be used for land acquisition or are these funds transferable. Mr. Aspell explained that a few years ago Council changed it so that it can be used for land acquisition, survey work, appraisals and legal work. Councilor Keach asked if the money could be transferred to pave a road. Mr. Aspell responded that he believes that technically Council could.
Councilor McClure indicated that in the past Council has made it priority to implement the open space plan and has encouraged the Conservation Commission to move forward. She noted that the landowner wants to protect their land but is not in the position to donate or take advantage of the tax deduction. She indicated that there is money available in the Conservation Fund that is dedicated to land conservation and in addition has received a grant that the Council approved to purchase the property. She pointed out that Council encouraged the commission to look into purchasing the property at the meeting because they felt that for the value received in the easement, it made more sense to own the land for more access and use of it. She explained that this is a steep piece of land on which development would not be ideal or environmentally sound; it is in the watershed and down the road from a similar property in which there was considerable erosion contaminating the water supply. Referencing the price, Councilor McClure indicated that she feels that the appraised value is something that city is lucky to be able to offer to landowners and appraised values are often not generally what a landowner envisions their land is worth. She urged Council to support this expenditure.
The motion to approve passed on a voice vote.
Action: Councilor Blanchard moved approval. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Action: Councilor Bouchard moved to proceed with staff’s recommendation of option two. The motion was duly seconded.
Councilor Stetson inquired that if Council votes in favor of the motion whether this means that staff will proceed with an agreement with the developer. Mayor Bouley indicated that is his understanding. Councilor Stetson questioned whether Council would see the agreement. Mayor Bouley indicated that it is his understanding that staff would come back to Council with the development agreement. City Manager Aspell explained that staff would bring a full copy of the development agreement back to Council to review and Council would then vote on it. He noted that staff hopes to bring this agreement back at the next meeting.
The motion to proceed with option two passed with no dissenting votes.
Action: Councilor Lemieux moved approval. The motion was duly seconded.
Councilor Coen indicated that he would be voting against this item to be consistent with his voting history on the roundabout. He noted that he feels that the core defect is the intersection of Auburn Street and Liberty Street on the north side and not Centre Street and Liberty Street. He noted that he feels strongly that turning Liberty Street northbound to one-way would accomplish the same feat of enhancing the traffic pattern and costing less.
The motion to approve passed 9 to 5 with a show of hands vote.
Reports
Action: City Manager Tom Aspell provided a brief overview explaining that there are three pieces to this item including the floor proposals for the Municipal Association for the 2009-2010 legislative policy process. He indicated that staff has reviewed them and does not have any issues with the ones that are proposed noting that the cover report suggests Council review the proposals and if they are okay with them, adopt them. He also suggested that Council adopt the additional proposal from the City Assessor and appoint a member of Council to attend the meeting and represent the city. Mr. Aspell pointed out that Council has received three ideas from Councilor Lemieux on some additional policy proposals in which Council should review and make a determination whether or not Council wants to support these.
Mayor Bouley indicated that the first motion would be on the NHMA Legislative Policy Process 2009-2010 which is broken into three general sections including: general government, revenue and intergovernmental relations; planning and environmental quality, municipal administration and finance management.
Councilor McClure moved approval of the report. The motion was duly seconded.
Councilor Lemieux inquired whether Council was voting to send a representative to NHMA to vote the city’s position on these items along with the positions of all the other cities and towns in the state. Mr. Aspell indicated that to be correct. Councilor Lemieux inquired whether the city is one small piece of whether or not these items will be forwarded to the legislature for action. Mr. Aspell indicated that to be correct noting that when different issues come up at the legislature over the next two years it helps NHMA formulate its position on where it is going to stand on certain issues.
Mayor Bouley pointed out that within each areas identified they are broken into three parts including: recommended action positions; recommended policy positions; standing policy positions.
Councilor Lemieux indicated that he sent Council a discussion about one item on page one of the NHMA, Highway Fund noting that he does not feel that the city should support. He noted that voting in favor of this “continues to support alternative funding sources and greater focus and greater financial support for public transportation, including rail and bus services”. He noted that he feels that the state has not done a very good job of holding service providers accountable for the money they spend on transit indicating that the money spent on transit compared to the benefits is way off and the thought of giving greater financial support to those organization is disturbing.
Councilor Lemieux moved an amendment not to support the action position of the second line of item 4, Highway Fund under general government, revenue and intergovernmental relations. The motion was duly seconded and passed 9 to 5 with a show of hands vote.
Councilor Shurtleff moved an amendment to oppose the action position of increasing the gas tax and other fees dedicated to the Highway Fund on the first line of item 4, highway fund under general government, revenue and intergovernmental relations. The motion was duly seconded.
Councilor Bouchard explained she doesn’t think supporting the NHMA recommendation is increasing the gas tax but leaves it on the table. She noted that the highway fund is more than broke and to move forward to not only preserve and maintain the roads and bridges everything needs to be left on the table.
Councilor Shurtleff withdrew his motion.
The motion to accept the report, as amended, passed on a voice vote.
Councilor Lemieux moved approval of the floor proposal policy from the City Assessor. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Referencing Councilor Lemieux’s additional proposed policies, Mayor Bouley suggested that these three items be voted on separately by Council.
Councilor Lemieux moved approval of a policy to see if NHMA will support requiring the NHDOT to pass through a portion of federal “Surface Transportation Program” funds to municipalities according to the same ratios and using the same factors as used by the federal government to distribute those funds to New Hampshire. The motion was duly seconded.
Councilor Lemiex explained that the federal funds for this one program are distributed among the states based on the mileage of roads that are classified a certain way. He noted that New Hampshire has 3,415 of roads within eligible functional classification and for this the state receives approximately $9,170 per mile. He pointed out that 679 miles of these roads are under municipal jurisdiction, including 48 miles in Concord. He noted that the NHDOT receives $9,170 per mile per year for the city’s 48 miles of road and uses it on their roads. He pointed out that it would amount to $440,000 a year that the city would have to spend on reconstruction, rehabilitation, resurfacing, restoration and operational improvements. He explained that what this proposed legislation would do is require that the state distribute the funds to the municipalities at the same proportion that they receive the funds.
Councilor Lemieux’s motion to approve his first proposal passed with no dissenting votes.
Councilor Lemieux moved approval of a policy to see if NHMA will support doubling fines imposed upon violators of state traffic laws and passing 50 percent of the income derived from such fines to the municipalities in proportion to the tickets issued by each municipality. The motion was duly seconded.
Councilor Lemieux noted that his understanding has been that when a Concord police officer issues a ticket to a violator of a traffic law and when it is adjudicated and the fine is paid, the fines go to the state.
Councilor Shurtleff noted that he would be voting against the motion explaining that currently ten percent of all traffic fines goes to police standards and training and feels that this is an appropriate use for the money.
Councilor Coen indicated that he is not comfortable with this motion noting that he feels that doubling the fines would be punitive.
Councilor Bouchard indicated that she will not be supporting the motion explaining that she also feels that doubling the fines is punitive. She explained that the system prevents municipalities from setting up speed traps and other types of traffic violations to enhance their revenues.
Councilor Lemieux explained that he used the word “doubling” as a starting point explaining that what he was trying to avoid was the argument that if the fines are not increased then the state is not going to be too anxious to share what they have now with municipalities.
Councilor Black noted that he feels that municipalities should get a part of the fine without raising the amounts.
Councilor Bennett pointed out that most residents don’t realize that the state receives the total amount of the fines and that the municipalities do not receive anything.
Councilor St. Hilaire noted that he understands the argument that municipalities pay local law enforcement to issue the tickets. He indicated that he feels that officers will have a lot of pressure to issue more tickets to generate the revenue to increase their own budgets. He noted that he will be voting against this item.
Councilor Keach indicated that he will also be voting against this item explaining that Council should at the current pressures they feel to raise meter prices and enforcement efforts noting that there are parallels there.
Councilor Lemieux’s motion to approve his second proposal failed on a voice vote.
Councilor Lemieux moved approval of a policy to see if NHMA will support adding an earnings and net worth test to existing property tax exemptions allowed for blind property owners. The motion was duly seconded.
Councilor Lemieux indicated that he learned that to get a blind exemption an individual does not have to have a low income or low net worth and also do not need to be a resident of Concord for very long. He noted that he feels that there should be an earnings and net worth test to ensure that individuals receiving blind exemptions deserve them.
Councilor Shurtleff indicated that he would be voting against this proposal because blind citizens have extraordinary expenses because of their sight impairment and doesn’t want to see testing extend to veterans. Referencing the veterans exemption, he indicated that the city is one of the least generous of any community within the state.
Councilor McClure noted her support of this proposal explaining that she has consistently voted against the blind exemption for the very reason that it is not tied to income or net worth testing. She indicated that she fully supports an exemption or an aid to taxes for those who do not have the means to pay their taxes and noted that there are many residents who have various disabilities and are paying all their taxes.
Councilor Lemieux’s motion to approve his third proposal failed on a voice vote.
Councilor Bennett volunteered to be the representative for the city.
Action: Councilor Blanchard indicated that the article in the Concord Monitor had raised concerns from her constituents that the city might grant Red River Theatres the exemption. Referencing discussions regarding the Capital Commons project, Councilor Blanchard noted that she specifically remembers asking if the city would realize all of the property taxes for that property and indicated that she had been assured that would happen. She indicated that she does not recall any Council discussions with regard to this project that would indicate that any tenants in the building would have tax exemptions. She noted her concern that anybody would inadvertently given that impression or that it had been misunderstood. She noted her agreement with the report and indicated that she does not feel that the city should be granting the theater a tax exemption or a grant to them.
Councilor Bouchard indicated that her questions had been answered earlier.
Councilor Coen noted that he is in favor of having a grant of $18,000 for at least this year towards Red River Theatres for the social economic cultural reasons of helping to develop the south end of Main Street.
Councilor Black noted his agreement with Councilor Coen indicating that he feels that the theater is a significant cultural economic powerhouse for the south end of the city.
Councilor Stetson inquired whether the TIF district is performing as expected. City Manager Aspell indicated that it is. Referencing page two of a 2002 report by Matt Walsh, Councilor Stetson pointed out that it stated that it was “expected to increase business for the proprietors of shops in the area”. He questioned whether there has been any follow up to this and has actually helped businesses in the area and whether any of this can be attributed to the Red River Theatres. Mr. Aspell responded that it has not been opened long enough to make that determination. He explained that the Capital Commons project itself made a vast amount of physical improvements to much of the area and some of the businesses in this area. He indicated that it was never carved out what Red River Theatres would do as part of the Capital Commons project in terms of improvements explaining that when the city did the analysis as to whether or not a theater could be supported in downtown and whether it would have value, the answer to that was yes.
With regard to the TIF and the taxes realized from Capital Commons, Councilor Blanchard indicated that there is still quite an area that has not been leased. She inquired as to how this is affecting the TIF. Mr. Aspell responded that it depends on the revenue derived from the property tax value increases to make the bond payments and it is doing that.
Councilor Keach indicated that the theater is a cultural anchor and a great benefit to downtown but so far they have only demonstrated an expectation that this tax relief was going to be there for them and have not demonstrated any type of financial need or deficit to their operation and wouldn’t be fair to other deserving organizations within the community.
Councilor Bouchard noted her support of the staff recommendation on the premise that this is a business that competes with two other businesses within the city and doesn’t feel that the city should be putting public money into an entity that is competing against private businesses. She indicated that as much as she enjoys Red River Theatres she feels that the fundamental issue is should city dollars go to a non-profit that is competing with private businesses.
Councilor Patten noted his concern with individuals that are struggling to pay their taxes and receive no relief.
Councilor Coen noted that the difference between the Red River Theatres and the other privately owned theaters is the products offered explaining that Red River Theatres does not show mainstream movies.
Following additional Council discussion, Mayor Bouley pointed out that the last page of the staff report states that “Red River Theatres is not eligible for a property tax exemption under state law because they don’t own the property”. He clarified that what is being discussed this evening is a grant. Referencing the last line of the memo on page three, he pointed out that “there is no legal way to grant the tax reprieve to one taxpayer when many others are required to pay them” and noted that he agrees with the memo which states that it is a great asset to the community. He highlighted some of the comments that he received via email. He added that he concurs with the memo before Council this evening.
Councilor Black moved to allow representatives from Red River Theatres to speak before Council. The motion was duly seconded and passed 9 to 5 with a show of hands vote.
Connie Rosemont, Acting Executive Director of Red River Theatres, indicated that they are before Council to ask for an $18,000 grant. She explained that the theater is incredibly unique, eight months old and have sold more than 30,000 tickets making this more than 3,000 people a month that come through the doors and walk out onto Main Street. She explained that they do not fairly compete with the other two theaters because they are a non-profit and the others are part of commercial business. She explained that they do not have the opportunity to show the films that the movie industry invests in. Ms. Rosemont indicated that a very dedicated group of volunteers have worked very hard to bring the opportunity to see the best films made in the world and also to have an opportunity to have access to locally produced films or films that impossible to see. She explained that the theater offers discounts to seniors, students, military and members and sells local pastries and candies for concessions. She indicated that they feel that it would be a generous nod in these tight economic times if the city could say they are committed to affordable, wonderful culture and great for Concord.
Emily Rice, Chair of the Board of Directors for Red River Theatres, thanked city staff for helping them and noted that the city deserves a lot of the credit along with the donors, board members and volunteers for putting the theater on Main Street in the Capital Commons building. She indicated that she wants Council to know that they do understand that these are very tough times and that Council has to make a lot of tough decisions. Ms. Rice explained that the theater continues to raise significant funds through donors, was privileged to be able to participate in the CDFA program, have very dedicated sponsors, advertisers, members, program grants and special events and this is just part of the theater’s effort to be as fiscally responsible and lean as can be.
Mayor Bouley thanked the theater for everything they do noting that they have a fantastic board and is a wonderful asset to the community.
Councilor Stetson inquired whether this would be a one time grant. Ms. Rice responded that they would make the request for a total of three years.
Councilor Werner inquired as to what the impact would be to the theater’s cash position and would the failure of obtaining the grant create a situation in which they would not be able to pay the property taxes. Ms. Rice responded that it would not.
Councilor Stetson moved approval of the staff report. The motion was duly seconded and passed on a voice vote.
Comments, Requests by Mayor, City Councilors
Councilor Blanchard has heard comments over the removal of a very old and important tree in regards to the North State Street construction in preparation of the roundabout. She noted that residents feel that they should have been consulted of the removal.
Councilor Patten commended city departments that helped in the fourth of July celebration.
Councilor Keach commended the General Services Department for the work they did at Pecker Park area.
Comments, Requests by the City Manager
City Manager Aspell indicated that earlier today there was a major drug bust on Basin Street.
Consideration of Suspense Items
Action: Councilor Lemieux moved to suspend the rules to consider the suspense items that were not previously advertised. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
7 Sus1 Appointments
City Manager’s proposed appointments to the Building Board of Appeals.
Richard Burpee, Gerard Blanchette, Peter Welch, Ed Rimm, Gary Purington and
Duene Cowan
Action: Councilor St. Hilaire moved approval of the proposed appointments to the Building Board of Appeals. The motion was duly seconded.
Councilor Stetson inquired whether there is a move to find new people for committees. City Manager Aspell responded that this board meets once every four to five years and must have a certain criteria of skills.
Councilor Lemieux questioned whether they are all Concord residents. Mr. Aspell responded that he believes they are.
The motion to approve passed with no dissenting votes.
7 Sus2 Appointments
City Manager’s proposed appointments to the Library Board of Trustees.
Jessica Ellis
Action: Councilor St. Hilaire moved approval of the proposed appointment to the Library Board of Trustees. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
7 Sus3 To be set for an August 11,
2008 Public Hearing
Resolution appropriating the sum of $15,000 in unmatched grant funds
from the New Hampshire Department of Justice Enforcing underage drinking laws
grant program; together with report from the Police Department.
Action: Councilor Stetson moved to set this resolution for an August 11, 2008 public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
7 Sus4 Report from the Deputy Fire
Chief
Report to Council from the Deputy Fire Chief in response to citizen
comments at the June 23, 2008 City Council meeting relative to the Concord Fire
Department’s current staffing of paramedics.
Action: Councilor Stetson moved approval of the report. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
7 Sus5 Report from the City
Engineer
Report from the City Engineer in response to a request from Charter
Trust Company to license the installation of a fixed canopy within the municipal
right-of-way along the façade of their building at 90 North Main Street.
Action: Councilor Shurtleff moved approval of the report. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
7 Sus6 Referral to the Traffic
Operations Committee
Communication from Skip Tenczar on behalf of residents of Rockingham
Street requesting that the speed limit on Rockingham be reduced to 25 m.p.h.
Action: Councilor Shurtleff moved to refer this communication to the Traffic Operations Committee. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
7 Sus7 For presentation in August
Resolution in recognition of the services of Mary Anne Chapman.
Action: Councilor Stetson moved approval of the resolution. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Adjournment
The time being 10:05 p.m., Councilor St. Hilaire moved to adjourn the meeting and enter into non-public session for a consultation with City Solicitor to discuss the City of Concord’s current sign ordinance. The motion was duly seconded and passed 13 to 0 on a roll call vote with Councilors Black, Blanchard, Bouchard, Mayor Bouley, Councilors Coen, Keach, Lemieux, McClure, Patten, St. Hilaire, Shurtleff, Stetson and Werner voting yes. Councilor Bennett left the meeting before adjournment.
A true copy; I attest:
Michelle Tiffany Deputy City Clerk
Colors: red blue gold red blue gold