Non-Public BOS Session Scheduled (March 18, 2019)

By Muriel Bristol | March 15, 2019

The Milton Board of Selectmen (BOS) have posted their agenda for a BOS meeting to be held Monday, March 18.


This meeting is scheduled to begin with a Non-Public session beginning at 5:30 PM. That agenda has two Non-Public items classed as 91-A:3 II (a) and 91-A3 II (b).

91-A:3 II (a) The dismissal, promotion, or compensation of any public employee or the disciplining of such employee, or the investigation of any charges against him or her, unless the employee affected (1) has a right to a meeting and (2) requests that the meeting be open, in which case the request shall be granted.

91-A:3 II (b) The hiring of any person as a public employee.

A new Town year begins with a secret meeting, about raises and hiring. It is like they cannot help themselves. It does beg a question: legally, can Selectman-elect Rawson participate in this prior to being sworn?

The BOS intend to adjourn their Non-Public BOS session at approximately (*) 6:00 PM, when they intend to return to Public session.


The Public portion of the agenda has New Business, Old Business, and some housekeeping items.

Under New Business are scheduled twelve agenda items: 1) Swearing in Newly Elected Officials, Board and Committee Members, 2) Re-Organization of Board of Selectmen, 3) Board of Selectmen Committee/Board Assignments: a. Budget Committee b. Planning Board c. Zoning Board of Adjustment d. Economic Development Committee e. Recreation Commission f. School Board, 4) Board of Selectmen By-Law Discussion, 5) Board of Selectmen Recording Clerk Contractual Agreement Approval (Danielle Marique), 6) 2019 Town Election Results Discussion, 7) Request Approval of Motor Vehicle Registration Fees Abatement, 1 of 2 (M. Beauchamp), 8) Request Approval of Motor Vehicle Registration Fees Abatement, 2 of 2 (M. Beauchamp), 9) Durgin Fund Reimbursement for Veterans’ Park Project (Michelle Beauchamp), 10) Approval of Payment to JS Marine & Vinyl Works (Richard Krauss), 11) Town Ordinance Exception Request (David Paey), and 12) Discussion With Atlantic Broadband Representative Re.: Franchise Renewal (Dave Owen).

Agenda Item #12 has a fixed time of 6:30 PM. The other items will “flow” around this fixed time.

Swearing in Newly Elected Officials, Board and Committee Members; Re-Organization of Board of Selectmen; Board of Selectmen Committee/Board Assignments: a. Budget Committee, b. Planning Board, c. Zoning Board of Adjustment, d. Economic Development Committee, e. Recreation Commission, and f. School Board. All of the newly-elected officials are to be sworn; the BOS will identify their Chairman (or Chairwoman) and Vice-Chairman (or Vice-Chairwoman); and they will decide which selectman or selectwoman will sit on which Town committee.

As there are six committees and three selectmen, an even division would be two committees per selectman. Last year, Selectman Lucier hung back and took only one, while Vice-Chairwoman Hutchings picked up his slack.

Board of Selectmen By-Law Discussion. Will they continue Selectman Thibeault’s meeting by-laws?

Board of Selectmen Recording Clerk Contractual Agreement Approval (Danielle Marique). Renewal of the Recording Clerk’s contract.

2019 Town Election Results Discussion. The Town budget was rejected, 614 (61.6%) to 382 (38.4%). None of last year’s selectmen voted like the (nearly two-thirds) majority of the voters that rejected the increased Town budget. The BOS served again in their accustomed role as rubber stamps for more increases. Might this discussion include their apology, accompanied by a promise to better represent the taxpayers’ interests in the future? We shall see. Wonders never cease.

Request Approval of Motor Vehicle Registration Fees Abatement. Times two. When last this occurred it was an adjustment for a vehicle no longer owned.

Durgin Fund Reimbursement for Veterans’ Park Project. The Ira S. Knox Fund (AKA the Durgin Fund).

Approval of Payment to JS Marine & Vinyl Works. Although the States of New Hampshire and Maine have sole jurisdiction on the ponds, the Milton Police Navy feels a need to be a “presence” there. When last seen, Chief Krauss wanted $40,000 for a “patrol truck” capable of towing their boat. At that time, he mentioned that their boat had been damaged by the ice.

Town Ordinance Exception Request. On February 20, the Milton Planning Board voted 7-0 to “approve the request to renew the existing excavation permit submitted by David Paey Jr. owner / excavator, property located at 76 Piggot Rd.”

Discussion With Atlantic Broadband Representative Re.: Franchise Renewal. Cable TV is on its way out. (They raise prices like selectmen). One hopes at least that the contract term is a short one, allowing for future developments.


Under Old Business are scheduled two items: 13) Follow Up Discussion on Town Owned Properties, and 14) Follow Up Discussion on Town Vehicles / Equipment.

Town-Owned Properties. When last seen, the BOS was inching towards auctioning the three-year tax seizures. Chairman Thibeault would not “support” including the “Blue House,” valued at $168,300, in the list. He preferred giving it away to his favorite private organization. Here is his chance for a recount.


Finally, there will be the approval of prior minutes (from the BOS meeting of March 4, 2019), the expenditure report, Public Comments “Pertaining to Topics Discussed,” Town Administrator comments, and BOS comments.


Mr. S.D. Plissken contributed to this article.


References:

NH Magazine. (2016, January). Losing Your Home. Retrieved from www.nhmagazine.com/January-2016/Losing-Your-Home/

State of New Hampshire. (2016, June 21). RSA Chapter 91-A. Access to Governmental Records and Meetings. Retrieved from www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-3.htm

Town of Milton. (2018, March 15). BOS Meeting Agenda, March 18, 2019. Retrieved from www.miltonnh-us.com/sites/miltonnh/files/events/3.18.19_bos_agenda.pdf

Youtube. (1965). Cone of Silence. Retrieved from www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1eUIK9CihA&feature=youtu.be&t=19

Town Election Results for March 12, 2019

By Muriel Bristol | March 15, 2019

Milton had the second part of its annual Town election (the first being the Deliberative Session), on Tuesday, March 12, 2019.

Only about one-third (32.4%) of the electorate chose to participate: 1047 / 3232 = 32.4%.

Town offices appear first, followed by Town Warrant Articles. (Both are listed in the order of the percentages of votes received).


Town Offices (in Descending Order by Percentages Received)

Town Clerk / Tax Collector – One for Three Years

Michelle Beauchamp won the seat with 903 (86.2%) votes. She ran unopposed. “Scattering” received 6 (0.6%) votes.

Library Trustee – One for Three Years

Miranda Myhre won the seat with 844 (80.6%) votes. She ran unopposed. “Scattering” had 2 (0.2%) votes.

Cemetery Trustee – One for Three Years

Bruce W. Woodruff won the seat with 840 (80.2%) votes. He ran unopposed. “Scattering” received 7 (0.8%) votes.

Treasurer – One for One Year

Mackenzie Campbell won the seat with 836 (79.8%) votes. He ran unopposed. “Scattering” received 11 (1.1%) votes.

Trustee of the Trust Funds – One for Three Years

Brittney Leach won the seat with 814 (77.7%) votes. She ran unopposed. “Scattering” received 2 (2.0%) votes.

Planning Board – Two for Three Years

Joseph A. Michaud won a seat with 791 (75.5%) votes. He ran unopposed. Nick Philbrick won a seat with 20 (2.0%) write-in votes.

Budget Committee – Two for Three Years

Thomas McDougall won a seat with 700 (66.9%) votes. Humphry Williams won a seat with 575 (54.9%) votes. They ran unopposed. “Scattering” received 45 (4.3%) votes.

See also Wintry Mix – Budget Committee and Meet Mr. Williams

Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) – Two for Three Years

James M. “Mike” Beaulieu won a seat with 646 (61.7%) votes. Sean Skillings won a seat with 618 (50.0%) votes. They ran unopposed. “Scattering” received 16 (1.5%) votes.

Fire Chief – One for Three Years

Nicholas Marique won the seat with 630 (60.2%) votes. Stephen D. Duchesneau received 396 (37.8%) votes. Neither of the above received 21 (2.0%) votes.

See also Wintry Mix – Fire Chief

Board of Selectmen – One for Three Years

A total of 963 votes were cast for the five candidates for the single three-year seat on the Board of Selectmen.

Andrew “Andy” Rawson won the seat with 311  (33.9%) votes. (That would be 9.6% of the total electorate).

Laurence D. “Larry” Brown received 250 (23.9%) votes, Billy Walden received 223 (21.3%) votes, Adam G. Sturtevant received 104 (9.9%) votes, None of the above had 84 (8.0%) votes, James M. “Mike” Beaulieu received 72 (6.9%) votes, and “Scattering” had 3 (0.3%) votes.

See also Wintry Mix – Board of Selectmen

Budget Committee – One for One Year

Dennis Woods won the seat with 154 (14.7%) votes. That would be 56.6% of the 272 write-in votes.


Town Warrant Articles (in Descending Order by Percentages Received)

Article 15: Eradicate Invasive SpeciesPassed – 740 (70.7%) in favor, 275 (26.3%) opposed, and 32 (3.1%) neither

Article 17: Milton Cemetery Expendable Trust FundPassed – 715 (68.3%) in favor, 248 (23.7%) opposed, and 84 (8.0%) neither

Article 18: Community Revitalization Tax Relief Incentive RSA 79-EPassed – 673 (64.3%) in favor, 286 (27.3%) opposed, and 88 (8.4%) neither

Article 2: Amend Zoning MapPassed – 632 (60.4%) in favor, 408 (39.0%) opposed, and 7 (0.6%) neither

Article 14: Bridge Capital Reserve FundPassed – 626 (59.8%) in favor, 379 (36.2%) opposed, and 42 (4.0%) neither

Article 5: Operating BudgetRejected – 382 (36.5%) in favor, 614 (58.6%) opposed, 51 (4.9%) neither

Article 3: ZoningRejected – 382 (36.5%) in favor, 609 (58.2%) opposed, and 56 (5.3%) neither

Article 6: Highway and Road Reconstruction FundPassed – 595 (56.8%) in favor, 406 (38.8%) opposed, and 46 (4.4%) neither

Article 13: Geographic Information SystemPassed – 583 (55.7%) in favor, 419 (40.0%) opposed, and 45 (4.3%) neither

Article 16: Conservation Commission Casey Road FundPassed – 576 (55.0%) in favor, 431 (41.2%) opposed, and 40 (3.8%) neither

Article 11: Milton Free Public Library Capital Reserve FundPassed – 576 (55.0%) in favor, 429 (41.0%) opposed, and 42 (4.0%) neither

Article 7: Fire Department Equipment and Apparatus Capital Reserve FundPassed – 551 (52.6%) in favor, 455 (43.5%) opposed, and 41 (3.9%) neither

Article 12: Town of Milton Technology FundPassed – 549 (52.4%) in favor, 452 (43.2%) opposed, and 46 (4.4%) neither

Article 19: Town Boat Ramp Revitalization and Construction (Submitted by Petition)Rejected – 412 (39.4%) in favor, 546 (52.1%) opposed, and 89 (8.5%) neither

Article 4: ZoningPassed – 546 (52.1%) in favor, 428 (40.9%) opposed, and 73 (7.0%) neither

Article 8: Highway Department Special Equipment Capital Reserve FundPassed – 539 (51.5%) in favor, 455 (43.5%) opposed, and 53 (5.0%) neither

Article 9: Highway Department Capital Reserve Vehicle FundPassed – 513 (49.0%) in favor, 495 (47.3%) opposed, and 39 (3.7%) neither

Article 10: Municipal Buildings Capital Reserve FundRejected – 497 (47.5%) in favor, 500 (47.8%) opposed, and 50 (4.8%) neither


See Town Election Results for March 10, 2020 and Town Election Results for March 9, 2021. (See also School District Election Results for March 12, 2019)


References:

Milton Town Clerk. (2019, March 14) March 12, 2019 Town Election Results. Retrieved from www.miltonnh-us.com/sites/miltonnh/files/news/march_12_2019_town_results.pdf

Wintry Mix – Selectmen

By S.D. Plissken | March 10, 2019

The Milton Meet the Candidates night went forward as planned. The winter storm had largely dissipated by late afternoon. High winds followed.

As for the presentations, they were … interesting.

Continued from Wintry Mix – Fire Chief


New Hampshire’s Daniel Webster (he of the Daniel Webster Highway) observed that

There are men, in all ages, who mean to exercise power usefully; but who mean to exercise it. They mean to govern well; but they mean to govern. They promise to be kind masters; but they mean to be masters.


Candidates for Selectman – Five for One Three-Year Position

The five candidates for the single three-year seat on Milton’s Board of Selectmen are James M. Beaulieu, Larry Brown, Andrew Rawson, Adam G. Sturtevant, and Billy Walden.

Messrs. Beaulieu and Rawson

Former selectmen Beaulieu and Rawson did not appear at the Meet the Candidates Night event.

Mr. Dennis Woods, a write-in candidate for the one-year slot on the Budget Committee, asked this question on the Milton, NH Community News Facebook page:

Why would we re-elect [former] Selectmen that are, at least in part, responsible for current conditions?

That is a good question, Mr. Woods. These are the very men, along with current Chairman Thibeault, that created the 2017-18 valuation fiasco. (Mr. Beaulieu’s responsibility, if any, is not as clear as Mr. Rawson’s).

Now, it might be, just possibly, that they have seen the error of their ways since and wish to repair, to the extent possible, all of the damage that they have done?

Mr. James M. “Mike” Beaulieu has not explained his absence from the Meet the Candidates Night event, nor has he issued any statement as a substitute. It is rumored that he might favor cutting taxes, but that is perhaps an uncertain foundation on which to build the necessary reforms.

He is said to be available by phone to answer any questions. (I will not give the number here because … the internet). At any rate, Mr. Beaulieu’s “retail” campaign strategy does not suggest someone running seriously to win. (He is engaged also in an uncontested race for a seat on the ZBA).

Rawson, AndyMr. Andrew “Andy” Rawson explained in a statement that he was away on a vacation that he had planned for two years. Okay. The remainder of his statement does not suggest that he has learned anything at all since he was turned out of office last year (by current Vice-Chairwoman Erin Hutchings with a very narrow margin).

Mr. Rawson arranged for a statement to be handed out, which the moderator read into the record. It did not address any tax reduction, as such, except to provide the usual formulation about being “careful” when spending tax money. Translation: he would not be cutting taxes. Former Selectman Long, who completed Mr. Beaulieu’s last term, used his question time to instead make an endorsement of Mr. Rawson.

The Question

Messrs. Brown, Sturtevant, and Walden all appeared at the Meet the Candidates Night event.

No one in the audience asked The Question, as such, although they were restive. Mr. Bailey asked something similar of his own.

Moderator Jacobs: Alright, next question. Anyone. Sir.

Glen Bailey: I was just wondering … a couple of people behind me asked, “was there a limit to all this … this taxation?” I was a little disappointed … this is the School Board, obviously … I was a little disappointed that they didn’t seem to think there was. Or they were confused, one or the other. So, the same question for you – which of you, or maybe all of you, is going to cut my taxes? Not cut the rate of increase, not everything else on the planet. Who is going to cut the bottom line of my taxes?

Moderator Jacobs put in his oar to argue for the status quo of increasing taxes. (You will want remember to thank him at his next election). He asked Mr. Bailey the “muh services” question.

Jacobs: Can I ask a counter question? I one time thought we could just shut down the transfer station and send everybody to Rochester – when I was a selectman – close out the fire department and just go to Rochester; close the ambulance service and ask Rochester, Frisbee, to come up here; and contract out with somebody to plow the roads.

Bailey: Don’t forget the police.

Jacobs: It meant a huge level of service decrease. Is that acceptable?

Bailey: It’s not acceptable to keep raising the taxes to the point that you’re driving people out of town.

Audience member: That’s happening a lot.

Bailey: It’s not acceptable, so something has to go. So, which of you will cut my taxes?

Thank you, Mr. Bailey, for helping us cut the … get to the point.

Messrs. Brown and Sturtevant

Messrs. Brown, Sturtevant, and Walden were present and answered questions. Our interest here is in whether the candidate would work to reduce taxes.

Sturtevant, AdamMr. Adam G. Sturtevant went first. He spoke of efficiencies of scale, return on investment (as well as its acronym ROI), brick and mortar, “muh services,” etc. When prodded, he offered this final answer:

I’d be lying if I said I’d be cutting your taxes without seeing the full budget and knowing what you’d be getting. So, the answer is I would cut it if it was possible, but I don’t know that answer.

Mr. Laurence D. “Larry” Brown went third. He used his time, but did not need to be prodded for his conclusion. His final answer:

I’ll say it straight: I don’t think I can reduce your taxes in any substantial fashion. The structure of Town government, the structure of the School system, the structure of New Hampshire State tax system preferences are stacked against the lower income property owner in New Hampshire.

Mr. Billy Walden

Mr. Billy Walden went second. His final answer:

Walden, Billy[Regarding Milton Town taxation as an “existential threat”:]. Yes, it is. You hear a lot of people say that. Older folks. I don’t want to be eating cat food. But the way the Town is going right now, with the tax increases and things like that, that’s where it’s headed. I am going to do whatever I can, within my capacity, to lower taxes. I mean, that’s the goal. It really is a sinking ship when you look at the amount of people that are trying to possibly move out of Town or find a better place with a lower tax rate. What I really want to do is try to grab a bucket and bail some of the water out of the ship. That’s really my goal. And whatever I need to do to make that happen, that’s what I’m going to do. Within my capacity, because I’m one of three.

The Answer to The Question

Of all the five candidates only Mr. BILLY WALDEN committed himself to work, vote and act to reduce Milton’s oppressive taxation.

He purports to be not another George. It might be that we will get to see.


See also Wintry Mix – School Board Candidates, Wintry Mix – Budget Committee, and Wintry Mix – Fire Chief.


References:

Town of Milton. (2019). Meet the Candidates Night. Retrieved from youtu.be/nOmRUcqTf08?t=6803

Not Yours to Give

By S.D. Plissken | March 8, 2019

The Properties

According to the Town’s Avitar listings, the Plummer’s Ridge Schoolhouse No. 1 property at 1116 White Mountain Highway is valued at $89,600. That includes $29,800 for 0.18 acres of land, $59,000 for the Schoolhouse itself, and $800 for its 10’x15′ wooden shed.

The “Blue House” property across the street at 1121 White Mountain Highway is valued at $168,300. That includes $40,400 for 2.64 acres of land, $124,200 for the house itself, and $3,700 for its “features” ($749 for its 18’x20′ wooden shed and $3,000 for its Fireplace 1-Stand). (I know the features do not add up).

Now, we all know that Town valuations are questionable at best. Few will ever realize the inflated bubble prices that the Town asserts for tax purposes. But, for the sake of argument, let us suppose their valuations are accurate.

The Proposal

Board of Selectmen (BOS) Chairman Thibeault proposed “selling” both properties – valued together at $257,900 – to the Milton Historical Society (MHS), on whose board he sits, for $2. The whole BOS was on the verge of rubber-stamping this proposal as a Warrant Article on this year’s ballot.

It so happens that BOS Chairman Thibeault and the MHS’s own Vice-Chairman Thibeault are the very same person; just as BOS Vice-Chairwoman Hutchings is a member of that same society. Outgoing Selectman Lucier has never announced his affiliation, if any there be, with the MHS.

A Question

An audience member asked if the BOS were not concerned with the apparent conflict of interest: BOS members arranging to virtually “give” away “Town-Owned” property to a private society in which they have an interest.

Mr. Larry Brown, helpful as always, pointed out that it was for the board alone to decide if they had a conflict of interest. According to Mr. Brown, it would not be a conflict of interest if they received no money and did not hold paid positions with the society.

The audience member pointed out that money need not be the only consideration. Which is why legal boilerplate is often included in real estate deeds that mentions also “other valuable considerations.” Thank you, Mr. Brown. (You have an opportunity of thanking him yourself, if you wish: he is a currently a candidate for a seat on that same Board of Selectmen).

That proposed Warrant Article did not go forward. Vice-Chairwoman Hutchings and Selectman Lucier apparently saw the problem and voted “nay” in a rare 2-1 split. (Chairman Thibeault dug in his heels).

Nobody with a lick of sense supposes that the Town will ever realize anything like its fantasy valuation of $257,900 for the two properties at an auction. The “Blue House” was seriously overvalued. (Its original Corcoran valuation of $208,600 dropped by 19.3% to $168,300). It has developed serious problems since. But those are the absurd values that the Town claimed as being valid when it was busy over-assessing, overtaxing, charging penalties and interest (I have heard 18%, like some kind of insane credit card), and finally seizing the property.

Even so, the Town will likely realize much more than the $2 that Chairman Thibeault was proposing – the difference being at least some tens of thousands of dollars. And that difference – four orders of magnitude – belongs to the taxpayers.

So, “No” Means “Yes” Now?

At this most recent BOS meeting, that of March 4, 2019, the BOS, Town Administrator, and Town Assessor went around in circles again on “Town-Owned” properties. (They seem to enjoy covering always the same ground).

There are three-year properties, for which the dispossessed owner will get nothing at all; less than three-year properties, for which the dispossessed owner might get some residue; as well as phantom properties, slivers, old fire stations, gifts versus seizures, etc., etc.

Chairman Thibeault: I think the ones that we’ve had for three years were all set to go for auction. The only one that I would not support selling was the 1121 White Mountain Highway … until there’s further discussion with the Historical Society and what that could potentially become … but other than that, all the three-year ones?

Well, we knew the Chairman never “supported” selling that one – at a market price – because he wanted to give it away to his other board. He lost that vote. Even the other selectmen could see that it was a “questionable” proposition, but the erstwhile Chairman just can not give it up.

Not Yours to Give

Thanks to these same selectmen, there are fewer saved dollars – less actual capital – going spare in Milton these days.

Whether fairly or foully obtained – these “Town-owned” properties belong now to the taxpayers. The BOS has no right to give away taxpayer properties – valued together at over a quarter-million dollars ($257,900) – to Chairman Thibeault’s buddies at the Milton Historical Society for a measly $2. For philanthropically-minded selectmen: these properties are just not yours to give.

If the Milton Historical Society wants to pony up the $257,900 right now, or even bid some much smaller amount at a “tax-title” auction, they can make it happen. The BOS can set the auction date and the society can start its fundraiser.

Or the Chairman, who feels that the taxpayers just cannot give enough, can prove the strength of his own “support.” He can take out another mortgage on his own home, buy the properties in question, and donate them to the Historical Society himself.


References:

Lilley, Floy. (2012). Not Yours to Give | Davy Crockett. Retrieved from www.youtube.com/watch?v=daay8yvgsGM

Town of Milton. (2019, March 4). BOS Meeting, March 4, 2019. Retrieved from youtu.be/-io2f380xjE?t=3478

 

Wintry Mix – Fire Chief

By S.D. Plissken | March 5, 2019

The Milton Meet the Candidates night went forward as planned. The winter storm had largely dissipated by late afternoon. High winds followed.

As for the presentations, they were … interesting.

Continued from Wintry Mix – Budget Committee

For Fire Chief – One Three-Year Term

Incumbent Fire Chief Nicholas Marique provided handouts. One was his resume and the other a description of the interim pumper truck. The challenger is Mr. Stephen Duchesneau, a former Milton firefighter, who has run several times before.

The Point

Lest we forget: the point of this exercise is to determine which candidate can perform this task adequately at the lowest cost to the taxpayer.

Marique - 2Much concern arises from the vast sums of money that have been spent already, such as the exceedingly expensive Fire palazzo, for which Chief Marique claimed the credit and responsibility. I have heard many, including some highly-placed officials, question the basic wisdom of this purchase. Whether it was money well spent is perhaps no longer an issue, but the scale of it hardly whets the appetite for still more. Many are feeling fairly “stuffed” right now, thank you. And engendering that overfed feeling was a part of the station’s cost too.

Chief Marique claimed that, in terms of such grand and ever increasing expenditures, we are very nearly there. If we will just stay the course – the one he has set – we will very soon reach an equilibrium point where the CIP plan can maintain us.

Of course, that plan is itself very much in question. It fuels constant spending at a level that one might well dispute. CIP oversight seems quite weak, both as regards the additions to the plan, the size of the expenditures, and the pace at which those acquisitions are scheduled.

The EMT Department

The moderator, Mr. Jacobs, helpfully pointed out that it might be possible to just eliminate the fire department altogether. It also emerged in discussion that the fire department spends 70% of its time on EMT ambulance service. Perhaps even calling it a fire department is then a bit of misnomer: it would seem to be principally an ambulance service that spends some of its time fighting fires.

DuchesneauMr. Duchesneau, put forward an overall claim that he could run the EMT Department at a lower cost than the incumbent, Chief Marique.

In broad strokes, Mr. Duchesneau’s plan seems to be that he would “Stop the Spending.” He spoke to increasing the proportion of resident firefighters relative to the number of out-of-town firefighters. The need to pay out-of-towners for sleeping-over would be reduced thereby, if not eliminated. Other cost-saving measures were on the table also.

He seems to assume, at least for daylight hours, that the resident firefighters would be drawn from the extremely small segment of Milton’s population that actually work in town. Otherwise, they would also be coming from afar.

That Pumper Truck

A brand-new $550,000 pumper truck was rejected on last year’s ballot and many were surprised and displeased to see it appear again this year. Because “‘no,’ should mean ‘no’.” Chief Marique heard them (somewhat belatedly) and substituted in a used pumper, at a very good price, but as a stop-gap. The planned $550,000 expenditure did not go away. It is still lurking around as a part of the CIP plan.

Chief Marique explained at one point that a thousand-gallon pumper truck will dispense water for about four minutes only. Two will do so for eight minutes, and so on. Not mentioned was how much time was required to put out the average house fire.

It might be argued that Milton should never buy a brand-new pumper truck. I have known people who have never had a new car in their entire lives. For them, that is basic frugality. Milton’s small (and stagnant) population size might require us to restrict ourselves always to the used market.

Uneven Coverage

It also emerged that the average response, given the distances involved and the need for firefighters to assemble, is about fifteen minutes. The response times should be shorter for those closest to the Fire palazzo, or, to some extent, for those near the Milton Mills substation.

The longest response times would be experienced by homeowners in South Milton, West Milton, outlying stretches between the two stations, and out on NH Route 153.

The time differential of a response to fires close to the Fire palazzo and those occurring on the outskirts is far greater than the additional four minutes that another pumper truck provides.

You have parts of town that are basically in the “Fire District” and those that are not. Not unlike the Water District. Perhaps that basic fact of uneven coverage should be reflected in the assessments and the bottom line of the taxes paid by those with the lesser coverage.

That Truck Fire

Mr. Duchesneau cited a truck fire that occurred near the fire station as an example of the current situation not working. The details remain hazy. It seems that there were two staff firefighters (rather than the volunteers) who were both out of town when the truck fire took place. They were picking up a vehicle that had undergone some maintenance. It seems that both staffers had been required for this vehicle pick-up because that is the minimum required to “man” this sort of vehicle.

I am not persuaded that this was in fact necessary. Has no one ever seen a taxi or bus with an “out of service” sign? This vehicle was out of service while being serviced and could no doubt continue to be out of service while some single firefighter or even some non-firefighter returned it from out-of-town. Where it could then be put back “in service.” Meanwhile, there would have been coverage.

But neither am I persuaded that this single fumble tells the tale all by itself. The point remains: who can maintain a fire department that we can actually afford?

Mr. Duchesneau’s points spoke largely to improved coverage, rather than reduced costs, except to the extent that it might reduce or eliminate the need for paid sleepovers. A smaller – but closer – staff might reduce costs (including breathing and other per-person equipment outlays).

Per-Person Expenses

A $70,000 expense for replacement breathing devices has been much mentioned lately. Each firefighter, or perhaps each seat of the fire vehicles (?), needs one of these. The Chief has said that they have a life-span of fifteen years and that ours are at the ten to twelve year mark.

Some have questioned why this expense comes all at once and not in some “rolling” sequence of, say, three or four a year. The Chief says that the equipment changes over time – their features, capabilities, and the placement of their dials and settings – and differences in equipment would emerge with phased purchases. That would be confusing at critical moments.

No one doubts the necessity for such equipment. But, if this is a per-firefighter expense, the size of Chief Marique’s roster has been questioned. A smaller personnel roster would require fewer personal devices.

Veering Off the Point

Unfortunately, both the challenger, the incumbent, and the audience seemed to veer off the point: coverage at the lowest possible cost.

There seemed to be a strong animosity between the two camps, whose origin remains unclear. Mr. Duchesneau said that neither he nor the Milton-resident firefighters that he would engage will work (or work again) for the current Chief. The reason – assuming they all have the same reason – was not explained.

Many of the questions seemed designed to highlight a perceived difference in qualifications between the two candidates. The difference seemed rather slight – one having, I believe, thirteen years experience versus the other’s twenty years. The Chief has been chief for over nine years.

Were Mr. Duchesneau’s firefighter’s certifications current? No, you need to be an active firefighter for that, which he would be if he won the election. Was his EMT license current? Yes, he has a national one. And so on.

This line of attack – it was quite heated, and repetitive – seemed weak to me. Ad hominem arguments – arguments against the man, rather than against his premise  –  are by definition fallacies.

First of all, licensing is when your right to do something is taken away and then sold back to you.

Secondly, all of the licensing demanded by the inquisitors – both the firefighter and the EMT certifications – were of the sort that only current employees may hold. There is no way that an ex-employee – even one with thirteen years experience – may secure the licensing in advance. This is the case in many fields. Mr. Duchesneau claimed to have the necessary classes and experience and, if he won the election, licensing would drop into place.

Mr. Duchesneau may have given the impression that he had more certifications than he presently does. He should clarify that in some way.

But this absolute faith in certifications and licensures is puzzling and somewhat misplaced. The College of Cardinals is not required to pick a cardinal, or even a Catholic, to be the Pope. Theoretically, anyone  in Christendom might be selected as Pope. Likewise, there is no requirement that a Supreme Court Justice be selected from among judges of lower Federal courts, or State Courts, or even country lawyers. Anyone at all can occupy that seat.

Likewise, another firefighter/EMT with similar experience, though with a slightly briefer tenure, could be Fire Chief. It might even be that someone with no experience or licensing at all could occupy that position, albeit in a administrative or managerial capacity only.

We will likely never know the cause of all the animus on display. But, that does not mean we do not note that it was present.

One might wish the inquisitors had stuck to the relevant issue: which candidate will run this department with the lowest possible tax expenditure?


See also Wintry Mix – School Board Candidates, Wintry Mix – Budget Committee, and Wintry Mix – Selectmen.


References:

Town of Milton. (2019, February 24). Meet the Candidates Night (Fire Chief). Retrieved from youtu.be/nOmRUcqTf08?t=9986

Wikipedia. (2019, January 31). Ad Hominem. Retrieved from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

 

BOS Session Scheduled (March 4, 2019)

By Muriel Bristol | March 3, 2019

The Milton Board of Selectmen (BOS) have posted their agenda for a BOS meeting to be held Monday, March 4, 2019.


This meeting is scheduled to begin with a Public session beginning at 6:00 PM. The agenda has New Business, Old Business, and some housekeeping items.


Under New Business are scheduled six agenda items: 1) Ira Miller’s General Store Sell of Alcohol Request (Amy Darling), 2) Request Motion to Reimburse Due to Fund for Police Radio/Computer CRF (Richard Krauss), 3) Discussion on Purchase Process of Replacement Police Vehicle within CIP (Richard Krauss), 4) Discussion on Letter from DES Re.; Lockhart Field (Dave Owen), 5) Discussion on Donation of Parcel of Land to the Town Map 49 Lot 52 (Dave Owen), and 6) Request for DPW to Host Earth Day Clean-Up & Accept Donations (Pat Smith).

Ira Miller’s General Store Sell of Alcohol Request (Amy Darling). The first official act of the original Milton selectmen was the granting of a liquor license. Franklin D. Roosevelt announced the repeal of Prohibition on Tuesday, December 5, 1933. It marked the “End of an Error.” This should not take long.

Request Motion to Reimburse Due to Fund for Police Radio/Computer CRF (Richard Krauss), 3) Discussion on Purchase Process of Replacement Police Vehicle within CIP (Richard Krauss). How old is your car?

Discussion on Letter from DES Re.; Lockhart Field. A letter from the NH Department of Environmental Services.

Discussion on Donation of Parcel of Land to the Town Map 49 Lot 52. One of the phantom properties. Not buildable, only good for taxation. Would you like one, or would you like to get rid of one?

Request for DPW to Host Earth Day Clean-Up & Accept Donations. Lots of “nips,” beer cans, and other trash out on Milton roads. I’ve actually pulled televisions, broken lawn chairs, old tires, and other rubbish out of its waterways. Here is your Earth Day lesson in “unintended consequences”: if you charge for disposal of such items at the transfer station, do you think it will become more likely or less likely that such trash will be dumped in woods and rivers?


Under Old Business are scheduled three items: 7) Follow-up on Approval and Signing of Avitar Assessment Contract, 8) Follow-up on Strafford Regional Planning TAC Appointment Process, 9) Follow-up on Old Fire Station Status, and 10) Follow-up Discussion of Town Owned Properties Available for Disposition.

Approval and Signing of Avitar Assessment Contract.  We paid twice for the 2017-18 assessment: once for Corcoran to “assess” everything (said to have cost $80,000), and again for Avitar to “fix” what Corcoran had done (then predicted to cost $100,000 or more).

In the interests of “transparency” and “accountability,” no explanation has ever been given for the 2017-18 valuation problem. The overages extracted were spent in covering increased spending, rather than being returned. For accountability’s sake: then selectmen Thibault and Rawson gave Corcoran their go-ahead. (Then selectman Beaulieu’s role remains unclear). An agenda inquiry that suggested reclaiming Corcoran’s fee was disregarded.

Beaulieu and Rawson will appear on next week’s ballot as candidates to be selectmen again.

Strafford Regional Planning TAC Appointment Process. In hopes that a squeaky wheel will get some bridge grease. Note the fact that this seems to be necessary.

Old Fire Station Status. The great white elephant again. When last discussed, it had been discovered that only a warrant article or special town meeting could clear its path. This was said to be the case because it was originally a gift. (Note the donation in New Business).

Town-owned Properties Available for Disposition. All of them.


The Town Deposit Location Policy was to be sorted out by department heads before the end of January. One of the proposed solutions had the Town Clerk, an elected official in her own right, being forced to break her own campaign promises regarding office hours.

The Town government has opted instead to post an extra position. This solution is good for the department heads, who last summer off-loaded their accounting tasks and hours to the Town Clerk. (There was briefly some danger of them having to take them back). This solution is good for the Town Clerk, who was swamped, having picked up the extra hours from the departments without having been given any extra staff.

It is yet another dead loss for taxpayers, who have now an additional permanent expense incurred with no net increase in “services.” Thanks, department heads, and thanks, Selectmen. And a special thanks for the new Town Treasurer, who arranged it all.


Finally, there will be the approval of prior minutes (from the BOS meeting of February 20), the expenditure report, Public Comments “Pertaining to Topics Discussed,” Town Administrator comments (on the Town Election), and BOS comments.


Ms. McDougall has called an eighth meeting of her Milton Advocates group. It will take place again in the Nute Library’s Community Room, on a date and time not yet determined. All town residents are invited. Bring your best manners. (Not her words).


Mr. S.D. Plissken contributed to this article.


References:

State of New Hampshire. (2016, June 21). RSA Chapter 91-A. Access to Governmental Records and Meetings. Retrieved from www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-3.htm

Town of Milton. (2018, March 1). BOS Meeting Agenda, March 4, 2019. Retrieved from www.miltonnh-us.com/sites/miltonnh/files/agendas/3.4.19_bos_agenda.pdf

Wikipedia. (2018, December 22). Repeal of Prohibition in the United States. Retrieved from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeal_of_Prohibition_in_the_United_States

Wintry Mix – Budget Committee

By S.D. Plissken | March 2, 2019

The Milton Meet the Candidates night went forward as planned. The winter storm had largely dissipated by late afternoon. High winds followed.

As for the presentations, they were … interesting.

Continued from Wintry Mix – School Board Candidates

For the Budget Committee – Two Three-Year Slots

Mr. Thomas McDougall and Mr. Humphrey Williams both made statements (see also Meet Mr. Williams). Both spoke to the need for beginning the budget process much earlier in the year and for setting definite goals. No more November surprises.

Both spoke also to the need for the Board of Selectmen (BOS) to manage actively the sizes of departmental budgets. (The BOS has had in spades the same diminishing marginal returns problem that puzzled so many School Board candidates).

The “new dog,” Mr. Williams, cited his experience of creating large budgets in his career at the shipyard, and seemed to be appalled at the incomprehensibility and duplication in Milton Town budgets and budget processes.

Mr. Williams claimed that it should be possible, for a time, to have every year a lower budget. Well, of course. He cited an example of having implemented a 10% annual reduction, which was carried forward over a number of years, until the budget was halved. Over the same period twice as much was being accomplished, i.e., production increases. In this case, the product is termed “services.”

These two candidates are running for two seats. They will both be “elected.”

Mr. McDougall is running for re-election. He thought the budgets are more complicated than they need to be. He has not proposed cuts in the past, as he felt it might impact services. He thought the budget process has a lot of repetition.

Mr. McDougall twice expressed his disappointment at not having any competition for his seat. And, with that kind of thinking, he would have had a good chance even in a contested race.

For the Budget Committee – One One-Year Slot

Two other candidates have thrown their hats into the ring as write-in candidates for the third empty seat. That would be the empty one-year Budget Committee spot on the ballot, and the candidates would be Mr. John Gagner and Mr. Dennis Woods.

Mr. Gagner posted a statement on February 2:

I believe that I have the technical fortitude and never-back-down attitude that our town desperately needs. It would be my honor to better my home. Please feel free to ask me about any of my ideas.

Mr. Woods has had a vacation home here for many years and is now retired here. You may find his posting of February 25 at the Milton NH Community News Facebook site. The portion that states his intentions regarding the budget process is excerpted here:

Like most Milton residents, I’m concerned about the increased spending that leads to higher taxes, and would like to apply my experience in Corporate management and finance, to see if we can make some changes that will provide relief without sacrifice.

Neither of these postings really commit their candidates to reducing Milton’s taxes. Mr. Gagner claims to have the technical “chops” and never-back-down attitude required. Unfortunately, he does not say whether he would be applying that attitude towards increasing or decreasing taxes. Mr. Woods is “concerned” about increased spending, but commits only to “relief without sacrifice.”

Muh Services

The departments will present ever larger budgets, as they have for many years. If they encounter any “never-back-down attitude,” they put on a pantomime regarding cuts to “muh services.” The last full-on Washington Monument show presented by the Town featured the claim that a 10% cut would require 20% staff reductions, i.e., an apparently disproprotionate “sacrifice.”

There used to be an old but effective shell game played on clueless managers or, in this case, budget committeemen. They would be presented with three choices: something catastrophic, something requiring “sacrifice”, and finally the thing that they are intended to choose. Not infallible, but very reliable.

Turkey VultureA “concerned” tax cutter is going to need intestinal fortitude as well as technical fortitude in order to choose lower taxes. The usually-proffered third choice also entails a less obvious “sacrifice”: sacrificing the interests of struggling taxpayers and, ultimately, sacrificing those taxpayers entirely.

Never forget Selectman Lucier gloating over the tax seizure of a home: “We’ll own that property soon, right?” It needed to be done … in the interests of the “community” … to preserve “muh services.”

Without a firm commitment to tax reduction, it is difficult to see why fence-sitters’ names should be even remembered, let alone “written in.” Perhaps they might wish to “amend” their statements?

SB2 Town Discussion

The panel’s discussion ended with a interesting description of the SB2 Town format and what would be needed to revert to the former Town Meeting format, which would permit also department-level budget votes, rather than the current whole-Town Budget up or down votes.


See also: Wintry Mix – School Committee, Wintry Mix- Fire Chief, Wintry Mix – Selectmen, and Meet Mr. Williams


References:

Town of Milton. (2019, February 24). Meet the Candidates Night (Budget Committee). Retrieved from youtu.be/nOmRUcqTf08?t=8564

Wikipedia. (2019, January 27). Marginal Utility. Retrieved from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marginal_utility

Wikipedia. (2018, June 22). Washington Monument Syndrome. Retrieved from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Monument_Syndrome

Wintry Mix – School Board Candidates

By S.D. Plissken | February 26, 2019

The Milton Meet the Candidates night went forward as planned. The winter storm had largely dissipated by late afternoon. High winds followed.

As for the presentations, they were … interesting.

They certainly revealed some differences between candidates, which may be helpful, but, sadly, more often than not they revealed differences between the candidates and reality.

Candidates for the School Board – Two Three-Year Seats

The candidates were incumbent Ms. Melissa J. Brown, challengers Ms. Emily Meehan, Mr. Carter Wentworth Terry, and write-in candidate Mr. Alfred “Mr. Al” Goodwin.

I usually stay away from school issues, although they are certainly the tax elephant in the room.

Many of the same issues that plague the Town are also affecting the School District. However, the School District has been generally more prudent than the Town in terms of the rate at which their demands increase. They have even returned overages. It is still too much.

Who Owns You?

Mr. Brown definitely “put the stick about a bit” when he asked for opinions about a bill before the legislature. It would allow for state grant money to be redirected – on a per pupil basis – to alternative vendors, such as charter schools, parochial schools, technical schools, etc. None of the candidates, including the former homeschooler, favored this purely theoretical proposition. Nor did much of the audience.

Both the candidates and some in the audience made it sound as if Milton-resident students somehow “belong” to the School District. No one should be permitted to study elsewhere and, thereby, take “our” state tax money with them. Astonishing, really.

Escaped slave and abolitionist Frederick Douglass once spoke to this conception:

I appear this evening as a thief and a robber. I stole this head, these limbs, this body from my master, and ran off with them.

Does the Milton School District “own” the students? Does it “own” State money set aside for them?

Accreditation

One woman asked about school accreditation. Was it true that Milton’s schools are not accredited? I looked into this accreditation issue myself some years ago. It seems that many, if not most, of New Hampshire’s schools are not accredited. It has more to do with infrastructure failings then academic ones. Which makes one wonder about the accreditation process.

Standardized Testing

Low test scores were also queried and not easily explained. Milton ranks near the bottom of statewide test scores and has for many years. In some years it has “won” the race to the bottom.

The candidates seemed to be agreed, to a great extent, that standardized testing is of doubtful value and legitimacy. According to them, they deform education by causing teachers “to teach to the test.” I have heard this argument many times over many years. Samples of prior years’ tests are publicly available, and seem to be pretty basic reading, ‘riting, and ‘rimatic. “Teaching to the test” should not fall much out of alignment with just plain teaching.

These “teaching to the test” arguments may not be as persuasive or comprehensive as some seem to think.

There is another explanation available, which comes from the business world: “Project teams detest progress reporting because it so vividly manifests their lack of progress.”

Meanwhile, Milton is paying about a quarter over the state average on a per pupil basis. So, insufficient expenditure can hardly be the sole explanation.

Where Does It End?

Several members of the audience asked if there was some upper limit to constantly rising school taxes. Will there finally come a day when there is “enough” – some high plateau where we might rest? Or must the increases go on forever?

For most of the candidates, this seemed to be genuinely a “poser.”

Evidently, an upper limit is a difficult concept. Sort of like: what lies outside the universe, or when was before time? And therein lies a problem, because there is such a limit.

Why are such expenditures never enough? Because of marginal utility. The first dollar spent might bring more than a dollar’s worth of utility, as might the second, and so on. Each additional expenditure is at the leading “margin” of an increasing sequence. But, and this is the point, somewhere in the sequence the value returned is less than the dollar spent. As one proceeds further out in the sequence, the value returned for each additional dollar spent becomes smaller and smaller. This is what is meant by the term “diminishing marginal returns.”

Once the point of diminishing returns has been reached, each additional dollar provides less value than the one spent before it. Eventually, it will bring no additional value at all.

Now, compare the expenditure of that next dollar – that expenditure that brings diminished returns – with the tax dollar extracted from a struggling taxpayer. You propose to take money from a new family setting out in life, or a pensioner struggling on a fixed income. (Businesses might struggle too). For them, that dollar is still returning value – mortgage, groceries, heat, etc. You propose to take dollars from where they have value still – productive value – and spend them where the value is diminishing, or even gone altogether.

Are you really so sure that you are making the world a better place by taking that next dollar?

So, for the School Board candidates: the answer was “yes.” We will arrive at a place where the next dollar is just wasted. There is such a place. (Some might say that we arrived there quite some time ago).

You need to know that, in order to represent us, you must justify each additional dollar spent as bringing increased value, rather than diminishing value.


See also: Wintry Mix – Budget Committee, Wintry Mix – Fire Chief, and Wintry Mix – Selectmen


References:

Town of Milton. (2018, February 24). Meet the Candidates Night (School Committee). Retrieved from youtu.be/nOmRUcqTf08?t=271

Wikipedia. (2019, January 27). Marginal Utility. Retrieved from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marginal_utility

The Question

By S.D. Plissken | February 24, 2019

Meet the Candidates Night is to take place tonight, February 24, at 6:00 PM, at the Emma Ramsey Center.

There are actually few choices to be made on this year’s ballot. Most of the candidates are running unopposed.

Running Unopposed

Thomas McDougall and Humphrey Williams are the two candidates running for two seats on the Budget Committee. There is a third seat with no candidate at all.

James M. “Mike” Beaulieu and Sean Skillings are the two candidates running for two seats on the Zoning Board of Adjustment.

Bruce W. Woodruff is the sole candidate for the Cemetery Trustee seat. Miranda Myhre is the sole candidate for Library Trustee. Joseph A. Michaud is the sole candidate for a Planning Board seat. Mackenzie Campbell is the sole candidate for Treasurer. Brittney Leach is the sole candidate for Trustee of the Trust Funds. Michelle Beauchamp is the sole candidate for Town Clerk / Tax Collector.

Barring some upset write-in candidate, these people will hold these seats. Votes by themselves, their spouses, their parents, and their children would be enough to put them in office. That is nothing against them, who have stepped up to do a task, but just don’t take it as much of a “mandate.”

The only contested elections are for a single seat on the Board of Selectmen and a single three-year seat as Fire Chief.

Fire Chief – Three Year Position = Vote for not more than One

Incumbent Nicholas Marique and challenger Stephen D. Duchesneau are vying to be Fire Chief. I am not aware of any published statements issued by either candidate, except perhaps that Mr. Duchesneau’s campaign signs are frequently accompanied by similarly colored ones urging us to “Stop the Spending.”

Board of Selectmen – Three Year Position – Vote for not more than One

The five candidates for the single seat on the Board of Selectmen are Andrew “Andy” Rawson, Adam G. Sturtevant, Billy Walden, James M. “Mike” Beaulieu, and Lawrence D. “Larry” Brown.

You may recognize the names of Andrew Rawson and James M. “Mike” Beaulieu as being two of the three selectmen of the year before last: the 2017-18 year. The third of that year was the current board chairman, Ryan Thibeault.

This is the group that authorized and oversaw the massively flawed valuation of that year. James M. Beaulieu left office early, so did not take a part in the aftermath. Neither then Chairman Andrew Rawson nor then Selectman Thibeault have ever explained what caused the problem – apart from blaming the assessing contractor – or any details of its size and scope, or their role in the problem – either in its making or in offering any proposed solutions.

The current board, which includes then Selectman Thibeault as its current chairman, claimed the unauthorized overages and used the money to blur their own spending increases. Candidate Lawrence D. “Larry” Brown noted approvingly that the law permits this.

Even without the assessment problem, the trio of Rawson, Beaulieu, and Thibeault were right in line with past boards in completely failing to rein in greater-than-inflation budget increases. They were the component parts of yet another failed board – voting unanimously to spend more than we have.

So, Andrew “Andy” Rawson, James M. “Mike” Beaulieu, and, to a lesser extent, Lawrence D. “Larry” Brown, who has held nearly every office except selectman, have all quite a bit of overdue explaining to do. Of all the five candidates, these three most of all would need to demonstrate firm commitments to change – I know, the likely worth of politicians’ promises – before they are again trusted with the keys.

The Question

In terms of this Meet the Candidates Night, there is one fundamental question to be asked.

That question is not “how long have you lived in Milton,” nor is it “by how much will you cut the tax rate,” nor “by how much will you cut the rate of budget increase,” nor whether or not Milton needs “more businesses” to fuel its overspending, nor how might such cuts affect services, nor even “muh community.”  It is much too late for all those standard circumlocutions.

The only meaningful question for these candidates is: By how much will you cut the Town budget?

If, as has been reliably calculated, our current Town budget is half again what it should be, only budget cuts can restore sanity. Not fiddling of a combination of valuation and tax rate, nor level-funding a bloated budget, but cutting the overall budget.

Anyone who cannot answer this simple question in a clear and satisfactory manner can not be trusted with the keys. In effect, they will be telling you – by not answering – that they will be the reliable third vote on future budget and tax increases.

Kick start the change now. Ask the question. Vote only for candidates that can answer it.

References:

Town of Milton. (2019, February). Meet the Candidates. Retrieved from www.miltonnh-us.com/sites/miltonnh/files/agendas/2.24.19_candidates_night_.pdf

Non-Public BOS Session Scheduled (February 20, 2019)

By Muriel Bristol | February 15, 2019

The Milton Board of Selectmen (BOS) have posted their agenda for a BOS meeting to be held Wednesday, February 20.


This meeting is scheduled to begin with a Non-Public session beginning at 5:30 PM. That agenda has one Non-Public items classed as 91-A:3 II (a).

91-A:3 II (a) The dismissal, promotion, or compensation of any public employee or the disciplining of such employee, or the investigation of any charges against him or her, unless the employee affected (1) has a right to a meeting and (2) requests that the meeting be open, in which case the request shall be granted.

The agenda has the additional notation that, in this case, the Non-Public session concerns “Employee Compensation.”

The BOS intend to adjourn their Non-Public BOS session at approximately (*) 6:00 PM, when they intend to return to Public session.


The Public portion of the agenda has New Business, Old Business, and some housekeeping items.

Under New Business are scheduled seven agenda items: 1) Approval of Motor Vehicle Registration Fees Abatement (M. Beauchamp/D. Owen), 2) Annual Wastewater Operator Contract Renewal (Dale Sprague), 3) Approval of Town Planner to Serve as Spokesperson for Bridge Projects (D. Owen), 4) Approval of Town Planner to Serve as Spokesperson for Transportation Advisory Committee for Strafford Regional Planning (Dave Owen/Bruce Woodruff), 5) Sale of Old Fire Station 460 White Mountain Highway (Dave Owen), 6) Snowmobile Club Winter Beach Access (Andy Lucier), and 7) RFP For Legal Services.

Motor Vehicle Registration Fees Abatement. Wonders never cease.

Town Planner to Serve as Spokesperson for Bridge Projects and Town Planner to Serve as Spokesperson for Transportation Advisory Committee for Strafford Regional Planning. By now, most will have heard that the Milton-Lebanon bridge replacement has been put off by the State for a predicted two years. (Sympathies for the store owner who needed the new bridge as soon as possible). The Town proposes and the State DOT disposes. What are planners to do?

Sale of the Old Fire Station. If this time the BOS really means it, they will be accepting finally a market-clearing price. Assuming someone will make such an offer again. Time for selling near a peak is running out for this, as the current housing bubble cannot last forever.

Snowmobile Club Winter Access. One assumes the same beach-access fees apply in winter as they do in summer. Or perhaps all such fees are hereby cancelled.

RFP for Legal Services. Previous Town Lawyers have had some interesting legal opinions. One thought that Town edicts, rather than those of the State, have legal pre-emption. Another thought that the Town could impose parking restrictions on a State highway. And other novel ideas. Now we are shopping for other advice.


Under Old Business are scheduled three items: 8) Review and Approve Adjusted 2019 Town Warrant (Dave Owen), 9) Review and Approve 2019 Voters Guide (Dave Owen), and 10) Discussion of Town Owned Properties Available for Disposition (Dave Owen).

Adjusted 2019 Warrant. Tune in for the final adjustments. One supposes budgets and taxes have not been adjusted downwards.

Approve 2019 Voters Guide. Presumably held for final adjustments to the warrant.

Town-Owned Properties Available for Disposition. When last seen, the Little-Endians seemed to be having the best of the argument.


The boxed item list entitled Outstanding Items, as held over from prior BOS sessions, is no longer present. Its Town-Owned Property item appears under Old Business, elements of the Town Report item appear under Old Business, and the Website Update item presumably dropped off because the Town Website was updated.

The last BOS meeting informed us that Milton has no hand to play in the matter of Atlantic Broadband. One hopes at least that the contract term is a short one, allowing for future developments.

The Property Maintenance Code item, as well as the Recreation Revenue and Office Discussion item, were Selectman Lucier’s particular hobby horses, unlikely to have much traction without him.

The Property Maintenance Code was particularly ill-advised. You knew something dreadful was afoot when Selectman Lucier introduced it with, “Yes, I know, that whole ‘Live Free or Die’ thing, but …” And that “but” tells a tale. He evidently thinks there is a third choice that is neither freedom nor death: slavery, perhaps? Hopefully, it will never again see the light of day.

The Junkyard and NH Listens items might continue in some form.

The Town Deposit Location Policy was to be sorted out by department heads before the end of January. One of the proposed solutions had the Town Clerk, an elected official in her own right, being forced to break her own campaign promises regarding office hours. Let us hope that was not the solution.


Finally, there will be the approval of prior minutes (from the BOS meeting of February 4, and the Deliberative Session of February 9), the expenditure report, Public Comments “Pertaining to Topics Discussed,” Town Administrator comments (on the Town Election), and BOS comments.


The BOS will disappear into yet another Non-Public session at the conclusion of the Public session. The reason was not fully coded, so it might be any one of the coded reasons under which they justify these secret sessions.


Ms. McDougall has called a seventh meeting of her Milton Advocates group. It will take place again in the Nute Library’s Community Room, on Saturday, February 23, at 10:00 AM to 11:30 AM. All town residents are invited. Bring your best manners. (Not her words).


Mr. S.D. Plissken contributed to this article.


References:

NH Magazine. (2016, January). Losing Your Home. Retrieved from www.nhmagazine.com/January-2016/Losing-Your-Home/

State of New Hampshire. (2016, June 21). RSA Chapter 91-A. Access to Governmental Records and Meetings. Retrieved from www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-3.htm

Town of Milton. (2018, February 15). BOS Meeting Agenda, February 20, 2019. Retrieved from www.miltonnh-us.com/sites/miltonnh/files/agendas/2.20.19_bos_agenda.pdf

Youtube. (1965). Cone of Silence. Retrieved from www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1eUIK9CihA&feature=youtu.be&t=19