Seems once again the Keene Sentinel has gotten some of it's "facts" twisted around. According to sources (in the know) the real story goes like this;
Our Code Enforcement Officer is up to his usual antics – attempting to cover his butt! This time he had some help and it did not come from M. Haman, chairman of the HDC, as the Sentinel reported; but from the Town's Administrator. Leroy requested that the minutes be removed.
The Historic District has had numerous occasions over the years, in which Leroy has handed out building permits in the Historic District - which is not the proper protocol. Anyone wishing to build or remodel their home in the historic district have to come before the board before any permit can be issued. Apparently, after reading the HDC's meeting minutes, posted on the Town's website Leroy pulled the copies of the minutes from the town bulletin boards and marched up to Joan Morel’s office and requested that she pull the minutes from the Town’s website (which constitutes a misdemeanor under NH State Law). He told her that he would take full responsibility for this action.
If the Town won’t post the minutes, we will! - We believe in transparency and honesty and that the people of Winchester have the right to see these minutes. - You decide for yourself:
Meeting Minutes of the Town of Winchester
Historic District Commission
Monday, November 22, 2010
Attendance: Michael Haman (Chairman), Mary DePina, Julia Ferrari (Vice Chairman), Harvey Sieran, Kim Gordon (Planning Board Rep & acting Secretary), and Absent: Penny Chagnon, Gene Park & Selectman’s Representative. Public Attendance: none
M Haman called the meeting to order at 6:58 pm.
First Order of business: M Haman reads the minutes from the previous meeting held on Monday, October 25, 2010. H. Sieran moves to accept the minutes as complete, M. DePina seconds. J. Ferrari made a friendly amendment. All in favor.
Second order of business: One week ago, M. Haman and K. Gordon met to view the renovations being made by M. Ambrigio at 19 High Street. The board discussed what kind of measures to take, since he has done this numerous times in the past and had agreed to come before the board in the future. M. Haman read a draft letter requesting that M. Ambrigio cease all exterior construction until he has come before our board for review. K. Gordon made the motion to send the letter certified mail, Julia seconded. All in favor.
The board discussed measures that they could take to insure that the Building Inspector, Leroy Austin does not continue to give out building permits in the Historic District. H. Sieran will check with the Town Administrator, Joan Morel, to see if Avitar can include this in their information/cards; along with all properties in town listing which zone(s) they are in. This would help to insure that all historic properties would bring up a red flag on the Land Use computer system. It was also decided that K. Gordon & M. Haman would come up with a mailing list of all historic district owners that L. Austin could use as a quick checklist.
Third order of business: Matt Abbott contacted the board earlier in the month with their concerns about their attorney not being able to get a clear title on the Back Ashuelot Road property. The board will inform them know that it is important that they meet with the Board of Selectman on this matter. There was discussion on property deeds & titles and how could the Town sell properties that do not have a clear title. Members will inquire about this.
There was discussion on Deano’s Pizzeria. No one has heard anything about the remodeling taking place. M. Haman will check to see if they will be doing any exterior work and if they were issued a building permit also. This lead into a discussion that was brought up during a R.E.D. committee meeting by H. Sieran - the matter of the incomplete A-1 Pizza building. There was a lengthy discussion on this issue. K. Gordon informed the board that approved projects before July 1, 2009 had only one year to complete active or substantial development (as long as the development remains in compliance with public health regulations). At this point the project is no longer “vested” and is well beyond the deadline and no longer has an approved site plan. They are required to go before the Planning Board for a new site plan review or tear down the building. The Planning Board should have reviewed this several years ago and L. Austin should have issued the owners the appropriate warnings and instructions.
H. Sieran was reminded about the additional funding request (to the Budget Committee) needed for a mass mailing to all historic homeowners. He reminded the board that these funds would not be in place until after July 1, 2011.
J. Ferrari contacted the State’s Historic Department and was informed that they do not keep records of Historic Districts, just historic buildings throughout the state. There was another discussion about expanding the historic districts on the March ballot. Will discuss this issue at the December meeting.
Next meeting date scheduled on Monday, December 27 at 7:00 PM. Meeting adjourned at 7:36 pm. H. Sieran announced that he wouldn’t be able to attend.
Minutes respectfully submitted:
Kim N. Gordon, HDC Secretary
Minutes approved by the board on: 01/20/11
Minutes signed by: Michael Haman, HDC Chairman
Also illegally pulled from the website and the bulletin board –
Meeting Minutes of the Town of Winchester
Historic District Commission
Monday, July 26, 2010
Attendance: Michael Haman (Chairman), Harvey Sieran, Kim Gordon (Planning Board Rep & acting Secretary) and alternates Gene Park. Absent: Penny Chagnon, Mary DePina, Julia Ferrari, & Selectman’s Representative. Public Attendance: none
M Haman called the meeting to order at 7:01 pm.
First Order of business: M. Haman gave a brief summary of the minutes of the last meeting held on Monday, June 26, 2010. H. Sieran made a motion to accept the minutes and G. Parks seconded. All in favor.
M. Haman informed the group about his correspondence with Jane Sheeran about the approval of the metal roof on the rail station. Ms. Sheeran then sent an email that stated, “…any future building repair, your request for HDC permit may conflict with Mr. Austin’s authority and the exemptions detailed in the HDC guidelines.” She was then notified by email from M. Haman, “I have spoken at length with Leroy Austin in regards to your reply to my mail requesting you file a new application with the HDC for continued work on the train station. Leroy and I are in agreement that you need to make a new application to the HDC to continue your work.”
According to the commission’s ordinance, M. Sheeran does need to come before the committee about the removal of trees. Not only is the property in the 250’ Shoreland Protection buffer, but trees are listed twice in the ordinance as a requirement to come before the committee to receive approval.
H. Sieran, as a Budget Committee member, will research the budget for our committee. Also, where do the funds go from the monies received for an application? An amount was discussed to present to the budget committee as a budget. He will also speak with the town clerk Jim Tetreault about our committee submitting a summary in the annual report. K. Gordon made a motion to approve and G. Parks second. All in favor.
Selectman Gus Ruth had suggested that signs be made to distinguish the historic districts. Considerations are being made to extend the district to include the entire block of Richmond Road to Parker Street. There was further discussion on improvements to the ordinance and a summary to be given to all households within the historic district. It was agreed that all members should be present to discuss this further. There were questions about the “Certificate of Approval” mentioned in the ordinance. Will check with Bob Gray if one exists, otherwise one will be designed by the secretary before the next meeting. Discussion on organizing an Advisory Committee that would include local business people with knowledge in construction, architecture, engineering, real estate, legal, etc.
Next meeting date scheduled for the committee’s regularly scheduled meeting on Monday, August 23 at 7:00 PM. Meeting adjourned at 7:45 pm.
Minutes respectfully submitted:Kim N. Gordon, HDC Secretary
Minutes approved by the board on:
Minutes signed by: Michael Haman, HDC Chairman
31 comments:
It occurs to me that if Mr Austin was DOING HIS JOB he would not be a topic of discussion by the Commission and he would have nothing to complain about
The Historic District in Winchester is a farce. The lack of continuity in structure design compared to a place like Fitzwilliam Common, is obvious. Although there are individual historically important buildings within the district, it is an architectually mismatched eyesore.Preserve the historic register buildings i.e. town hall, churches, community center,covered bridges, etc. and leave the rest be. The historic district here was an attempt to make Winchester have class that doesn't exist and is obvious to the educated. This is just another layer of control that is squelching economic prosperity in an already impoverished communtiy.
Why was this group Talking about A-1 Pizza building? There is nothing historical on the 4 corners and there is no way that can be a historical district. This whole committee does nothing but cause problems for home owners who are doing nothing but trying to improve or repair their own property. I believe the women was doing a great job repairing the run down falling in deopt and as usual these people got involved and now it will never be repaired and it will fall down and we will lose this beautifull building sometime soon.If someone could write a warrent article disbanding this group the voters would vote it in,at least make it so the Members of this board must live or own property in these districts that way they may be more reasonable or fair when it comes to their decisions. People making decisions about other peoples property when it wont effect them and there own property seem pretty unfair.
You two seem to have missed the point altogether, exactly why we have the problems we do in town and with our so-called leaders. They do what they want despite the law and their supporters put the blame on everyone but them. I see no reason why these minutes were removed from public view, this board was having a meeting discussing matters relevant to their duties and an issue affecting their performance of them. That Mr. Austin took offense to the board discussing his ineptness and poor performance and mistakes he has made, does not give him or anyone else the right to remove public records. This is not the first time this has happened, check the minutes of other town boards and committees; but no one else has demanded public records be removed or altered, then lied about it. Would the town administrator do this if a member of the public came in and complained they did not like what was said about them at a meeting? I think not, nor should it have been done in this case either.
The Historic District does not employ Mr. Austin, the Town selectmen do. I don't see how discussing a Town employee is a 91-A violation. Town employees and officials should expect the public to be watching, and discussing, the things that they do and say in the performance of their duties. Minutes should accurately reflect what happens at meetings and should inform the tax paying public as to the true nature of what is going on. As long as the information shared is true, what's the problem?
Meeting minutes at issue:
This is not the first time Leroy Austin has taken it upon himself to abuse his authority as town building code enforcer and make side deals for his friends. The selectmen have given him written warned letters for just this same reasons. Still he performs at will... The whole town operations from the selectmen on down are a ridiculous,
absurdity, farce and a total sham leaving us town’s people to be the joke of the state. Consequently we must love to be the circus clowns.
Keene Sentinel News Report:
Winchester officials disagree about what’s public
By Dave Eisenstadter
Sentinel Staff
Published: Sunday, February 13, 2011
WINCHESTER — A recent dispute over the state’s Right-To-Know law led to the removal of public documents from the town’s website.
Michael P. Haman, chairman of the historic district commission, asked town officials to remove minutes from Nov. 22 and July 26 meetings of his panel after town employee Leroy E. Austin accused him of straying from the committee’s agenda.
Austin, who serves as Winchester’s building inspector, code enforcement officer and health inspector, said the minutes recorded criticisms of his job performance, which constitutes discussion of personnel matters in a public meeting.
“My name was brought into it and I didn’t like what they were talking about,” Austin said.
The minutes from the November meeting state that “The board discussed measures that they could take to insure (sic) that the Building Inspector, Leroy Austin does not continue to give out building permits in the Historic District.”
Haman said it was inappropriate for the board to have discussed this matter, which was not on the agenda, in public session, and asked that the minutes be taken down from the town website.
“I realized that as the chairman of the historic district commission, I wasn’t following the agenda the way it should have been followed,” Haman said.
Haman said he has been chairman of the commission for less than a year and is still learning procedures.
Kim N. Gordon is also on the historic district commission and takes the minutes. She contends the minutes should not have been removed from the website.
Gordon said the contents of the minutes were appropriate and that the commission was coming up with ideas to avoid building permits being improperly awarded.
Taking the minutes off the website constituted a violation of state law, Gordon said.
“I’m rather disturbed that anyone would force another board to change their minutes to what they would like them to reflect,” Gordon said.
The minutes are still available at the town clerk’s office and always were, according to Haman.
Taking minutes off of a town website if they are still available at the town office does not constitute a violation of the Right-To-Know law, according to N.H. Associate Attorney General Ann M. Rice.
Haman said he believes the issue in question on the minutes has been dealt with and he plans to ask the commission to re-post the minutes.
Dave Eisenstadter can be reached at 352-1234, extension 1432, or deisenstadter@keenesentinel.com
I just visited the town web site and read up on the Historical commission minutes and board members and I'm rather concerned,I'm concerned about the things these people worry about, like color choices when a property owner wishes to paint?. and by looking at the board members, it looks like only 1 of the 9 members may actually lives in any of the historic districts. This cant be right, you have a small group of people making decisions that effect other tax paying property owners but not them and their property? I really question if we need this board, as the poster above mentioned its important to protect our "town owned" buildings and covered bridges but maybe not private property. It does seem to be very sensible that if we must have a HDC it should be made up with a board of people who live in these districts and not by people who are unaffected by there own rulings or decisions.
So you're saying that unless you live in an area that as a member of a board, any board, that you don't have the right to make a decision based on law and regulations? How foolish you are to make such a silly statement. Applying your logic, no member of the zoning or planning boards should be allowed to rule on anything unless it's in their own neighborhood; don't we all wish this were true.
Been reading this blog for the past couple of years and can't begin to offer the praise that the people sticking their necks out deserve for their time and perseverance in posting pertinent information for all of us and laughing at the few self important idiots who post on here to be disruptive ( see above )and attempt to put a negative spin on the comments of others. Keep up the great work, we're watching and learning.
RSA 91-A:4 Minutes and Records Available for Public Inspection. –
III-a. Governmental records created or maintained in electronic form shall be kept and maintained for the same retention or archival periods as their paper counterparts. Governmental records in electronic form kept and maintained beyond the applicable retention or archival period shall remain accessible and available in accordance with RSA 91-A:4, III.
Methods that may be used to keep and maintain governmental records in electronic form may include, but are not limited to, copying to microfilm or paper or to durable electronic media using standard or common file formats.
RSA 641:7 Tampering With Public Records or Information. – A person is guilty of a misdemeanor if he:
III. Purposely and unlawfully destroys, conceals, removes or otherwise impairs the verity or availability of any such thing.
Excerpts from the HDC bylaws:
The purposes of this Ordinance are to:
a) Safeguard the heritage of the Town of Winchester by providing for the protection of the structures and areas representing significant elements of its cultural, social, economic, political, and architectural history;
b) Enhance the visual character of the municipality by encouraging and regulating the compatibility of new construction within the historic districts to reflect or respect established architectural traditions;
c) Foster public appreciation of, and civic pride in, the beauty of the Town of Winchester and the accomplishments of its past;
d) Strengthen the economy of the Town of Winchester by protecting and enhancing the attractiveness of the community to residents, tourists, and visitors;
e) Conserve property values within the Town of Winchester; and
f) Promote the private and public use of structures and areas within the historic districts of the Town of Winchester for the education, pleasure, prosperity, and general welfare of the community.
1. ACTIVITIES REQUIRING REVIEW
a. Regulated Activities
It is unlawful for any person to construct, alter, repair, move or demolish any building, structure or improvement which lies within the Historic Districts without first obtaining a certificate of approval from the Historic District Commission.
b. Historic Commission Review
For the purpose of this Article, the following activities shall be reviewed by The Historic District Commission:
1. Erection, alteration, repair, sand blasting, abrasive cleaning, relocation, or demolition of the building or structure, and construction of any site;
2. Erection, alteration, or removal of any exteriors or visible features of a building or structure;
3. Construction, reconstruction, or repair of any stone wall or fencing; and
4. Grading, excavation or removal of stonewalls, fences, and trees.
2. REVIEW CRITERIA
In making a determination on an application, The Historic District Commission shall take into account the purposes of this Ordinance and consider, but not be limited to: the impact of a proposal upon existing improvements and properties and the Historic District, and historical, cultural and architectural values; the general scale, size, style, design, landscaping and the compatibility and appropriateness of the project in the context of The Historic District Commission; alternatives to demolition; and new construction upon sites within the District.
Like it or not, the town voted for this and is now governed by it.
to Anonymous on February 14, 2011 1:11 PM
we are not talking about planning board or zoning board unlike the HDC they are important boards placed to help all the town not just make a few people happy like the HDC does
Get real
The most common tactic of the haters who read this blog is to create a straw man that everyone can beat on, diverting attention from the real issue. Case in point, opinions about the HDC and whether it is a necessary board have nothing to do with the issue here. If you have a problem with the Historic District Comission and the immense power they weild (to dictate what color people paint their houses)then you should have considered getting off your lazy arse and petitioning a warrant article to disolve it. The signatures are not hard to come by and then the public could decide.
In the mean time, lets stick to the problem at hand - we have a town board that is being bullied by a town employee for discussing how they can help him to do his job better.
Anti bullying programs have become the latest buzz-word thing in our schools, perhaps they should be in town hall as well.
The easiest way to solve the problem would be to dissolve the HDC, and the land use office. With the governor signing the new legislation a few weeks ago to limit SB2 towns from changing the intent of warrant article petitions, it just might be easier than one could imagine.The SB2 abusers are usually the ones stacked on the boards. You can't get any more transparent than not having a board to create controversy.
To Thank You Governor said...
I second that motion.
does any one reading have knowledge on writing warrent articles for next years ballot? Im sure its to late for this year
I cant believe that some people would comment to stay on track, we are. This site is about reporting and discussing wrong and unfair issues in this town or boards who act appropriately and some of us believe that is the case with the HDC. As a tax paying homeowner who lives in one of these districts I'm tired of being told what I can and cannot do to my own home by a few people and there is no way to appeal decisions to this board they seem to have absolute power on dictating what we can do to our homes.
It looks like the person who brought this post to the informers attention is on this board and now doesn't like the attention it is getting.
At least with the Zoning & Planning board you can take your chances and appeal rulings but not with HDC there is no protection for property owners from this group.
So you stay on track please.
I think there may be another way to look at this situation, lets use Mr Town for a example its well know how he feels he has been mistreated by both the Zoning board and Planning board, we have all been reading about this for years now. Can you imagine Mr Town if your home was located in one of these historical districts and you had to deal with the HDC and there supreme power with no checks, Does this shed any light on the situation that those of us living in these districts have to deal with?
To the person above:
There are rules and regulations for every board and committee that they are required to follow. Be it the PB, ZBA, HDC or BOS, etc. The people on these boards, whether elected or appointed are required by law to follow these rules, be fair and just and use common sense in their determinations. In my dealings with the PB, ZBA and BOS, I have found that several members of these boards time and time again circumvent the rules and regulations as written, allow personal feelings to cloud their judgments and will say and do anything to hide these facts. It has been well documented on this blog and in court papers that their behavior is not favorable to the town.( I am not the only one to have had to seek relief in court ) As for the HDC, I have had no dealings with them and therefore can not judge any member of that board as being unjust or unfair; but I would hope that they follow rules set forth by the town and state regarding matters brought before them. Unlike the PB and ZBA who make the rules governing land use and zoning ordinances, my understanding is that the HDC is just required to enforce what is on the books before them. I can understand your position as being an owner of property and having to toe the line; but can you really put the blame on members for just doing what is required of them by law? I would strongly suggest that if you have issues with this board to attend a meeting and raise those issues and that if you are not happy or feel you have not received fair treatment then you do as I have; exhaust all of your options and take the matter before the courts and seek relief. However, be forewarned, courts are expensive, time consuming and rarely will go against a town board decision unless it is really flagrant. Most times they side with the town; though judges don't always agree with what transpired. This I know from experience.
To the anonymous person who is attempting to discredit and attack Mr. Towne personally:
Your comments will continue to be deleted and not posted. You have been warned previously for this behavior, it will not be allowed or tolerated.
Grow up.
Why is the Informer not posting comments? What is the anonymous person saying about Mike Towne that you find so offensive. I am concerned you are protecting one of your own, without letting us see what people are saying. If it is a personal attack.. then fine you can edit this. What is the story? Arent you being hypocritical when you and others make personal attacks against people working for the town.. caliing them stupid, idiots etc... and one of your own can't be criticized. Sounds like you are supporting a blog with posts that only suit your purpose and not for everyone to read and make their own assessments. I don't need you to make a determination of what is appropriate or not.
I don't care how concerned you are about why we decide to do things. This is our blog, we make the decisions to allow or disallow comments we find offensive. Don't like it, don't come here. Follow the rules and there's no issues.
This discussion has nothing to do with Mr. Towne, the subject is about censorship and secrecy.
Either comment on the subject or send an email to us about another you would like us to open for discussion, stop trying to steer the conversation away from what's being discussed.
Personal note to you;
Why don't you go start your own blog and then you'll have nothing to bitch about. Frankly I'm a bit tired of your whining and off subject comments and having to answer your juvenile rantings.
Last warning !
This is not a blog or conversation this is Propaganda and very 1 sided but thats ok because the people who vote and the people who matter figured this out years ago. Why do you think that any candidate you back loses.
Thank you and Im sure we wont see this posted
Excuse me informers for these comments but I feel this needs to be said. Who are these fools who have suddenly shown up here and are attempting to discredit boards, Mr. Towne and anyone else that seems to rock their world? I think we all know who's behind this effort as this has happened several times on here in the past. My message to the trio of naysayers posting drivel is to go find someplace else to spout your hatred and though you may think you do, you do not speak for all of the voters in Winchester nor anyone with any sense.
These are probably town employees who feel threatened or one or two of their spouses who dislike what is said in discussions of the topics posted on here. Myself, I find the blog informative and openly honest. Though I do not agree all the time with comments by others, I find the subject matter posted on this blog to be somewhat alarming at times especially the conduct of some of our elected officials towards the general citizenry of town and certain individuals in particular because of their refusal to be bullied into submission. Keep up the good work blog and just ignore those who come here to post garbage and toot their own horns, we're wise to their ways.
Heck if I had a job with this town, another 3 day work week coming up, I wouldn't want anyone upsetting the apple cart either. Are some of these negative blogs coming from the town hall on Company time?
Ya we really saved money this year going to a 4 day work ( excuse the pun ) week didn't we? Course we spent more on 10 hour holiday pay days than it would have cost us to stay open on Fridays but who's counting? Surely none of the people we have in charge.
What, another 3 day week, looks like we have a building full of part time help getting full time pay. I think this is proof that 1/2 these jobs could go to part time and still provide the same service.
Perhaps the Selectman in their infinite wisdom should have taken Bob's advice and replaced Sharra & Austin with someone who knows what they're doing in the Land Use Department. Someone who is fluent with computers and construction (not just familiar with it)!
The two of them have cost the Town a great deal of money and it's getting worse every day. This is only one example of them "covering" their incompetant butts.
It seems Leroy can do pretty much as he pleases with the right people pushing his buttons. He condemned a building at 39 Jones rd and made my daughter and grandchildren homeless, telling us there would be no certificates of occupancy issued til all was taken care. About 10 days after my daughter moved out the certificates were issued, even though there is black mold in the ceilings, asbestos in the floors, an electrical system that our electrician said he would never trust being as you cant tell what piece of which apt is hooked into where. The plumber said the entire building is a nightmare. But with the right prodding from owner Dennis Chung magically certificates of occupancy appeared while ice was still forming on the inside walls of the apartment my daughter just moved out. Too bad the town is a sham, no ones safety matters, someones kid will get sick from the black mold and noone will know why or even care.
File a report with the State Health office and have your daughter and her children examined by a physician immediately. Black mold is toxic and can cause many health issues and be very costly for both those exposed and the landlord. Tenants have rights here in New Hampshire .. visit this website for help.
http://www.hud.gov/local/nh/renting/tenantrights.cfm
Post a Comment