WINCHESTER — All
but three of 32 articles on the warrant will make it to the town meeting
ballot untouched following a five-hour deliberative session Saturday.
The articles voters
amended dealt with how much the town gives to the E.L.M. Memorial
Community Center, bringing back the community’s budget committee, and
whether to continue having a housing standards ordinance adopted at last
year’s town meeting.
Meghan Foley can be reached at 352-1234, extension 1436, or mfoley@keenesentinel.com. Follow her on Twitter @MFoleyKS.
In addition, voters
unsuccessfully attempted to make amendments to the town’s proposed
2016-17 operating budget of $3,567,376, a warrant article seeking to
establish and fund a legal-fund-capital-reserve account for the purpose
of opposing the proposed Northeast Energy Direct pipeline, and a
petition article seeking to raise $50,000 for enrichment programs for
local children and teenagers as part of ACCESS (All Children Cared for,
Educated, Supported and Successful).
Roughly 80 people attended the meeting at Winchester Town Hall, tempered by a 10-minute break and a 30-minute lunch.
Despite some protest, residents
first took up warrant article 20, which asked voters if they want the
town to have a budget committee, at the request of town Moderator Denis
V. Murphy 2nd. Murphy said he expected the article, inserted by
petition, to be contentious, and wanted to get it out of the way.
According to the warrant article,
the committee would include three at-large members appointed by the
town moderator, and one person each from the selectmen and school board,
appointed by their respective board.
Last year, town meeting voters
approved a warrant article, which was backed by selectmen, to abolish
the budget committee. The committee had existed since 1935, and was in
charge of setting the town’s annual operating budget for voters to
approve.
Without the committee, the
selectmen set the budget this year with the help of a four-member
financial advisory committee appointed by the board.
Resident Richard Horton served on
the budget committee in the past, he said, and found it an important
part of how the town functions.
However, he opposed the article because it didn’t make clear that the committee’s members would be elected.
“The political process allows people to choose who goes on a public committee,” he said.
Resident William A. “Bill”
McGrath said he interpreted the article and what Murphy was trying to
explain about it to mean the moderator would appoint the three committee
members for the first year, if the article passes. After that, voters
would elect the committee members, McGrath said.
After some back-and-forth with
the town’s attorney, Barton L. Mayer of Concord, Horton moved an
amendment that the moderator would appoint the three committee members
for the first year, and have voters elect them for the following years.
Voters passed the amendment, and then the amended warrant article, by voice votes.
Discussion lasted for about an
hour on a petition warrant article asking voters to rescind the town’s
housing standard ordinance.
Deputy Moderator Kevan D. Whippie
read the warrant article, and as soon as he finished resident Margaret
A. Sharra moved to amend it to say that voters would vote to continue
the ordinance.
Gotta keep hubby employed to do her work for her
Gotta keep hubby employed to do her work for her
Sharra, the town’s land use
administrator and zoning code enforcement officer, said town meeting
voters overwhelming approved the ordinance last year, and it’s needed.
“We have a lot of substandard
rental housing in town, and in order to improve the town and have
residents live in good and safe housing, inspections are necessary,” she
said. “We need the ordinance. Without it we can only inspect a property
if we receive a complaint, or we’re invited by the tenant or landlord.”
Some landlords attending the
meeting questioned the ordinance, saying they were concerned it was
putting an unfair burden on them to upgrade their buildings, some of
which are decades old, to meet current fire, health and safety codes.
"Lots of substandard rental housing in town" Really?
"Lots of substandard rental housing in town" Really?
Resident Bill Devino gave a
lengthy presentation about the problems the ordinance was causing a
property owner who was elderly and lived out of state, but was a former
resident.
Devino said when the property
owner learned of the new ordinance, he and his daughter, who helps
handle his affairs, contacted town officials to set up an inspection.
While the inspector found the
home had been well kept, there were some minor problems, and noted the
lack of an interconnected, hardwired, battery backup carbon monoxide and
smoke alarm detection system, Devino said.
In addition, the inspector said
some rooms needed wall switches even though the pull chains on the light
fixtures were in fine functioning order, Devino said.
Further the property owner was
only given 20 days to fix these problems before a re-inspection based on
the letter he received from the town, Devino said, and that is an
impossible deadline to meet.
Installing a hardwired fire and
carbon monoxide system alone would be cost prohibitive for the property
owner, in part due to the work that would be involved with the house
being over 100 years old, Devino said.
“It has certainly caused an
87-year-old man who was once a proud resident of town mental anguish,”
Devino said. “I’d say scrap it and start over with all the rules on the
table so that everyone understands.”
Resident Bridget E. Pearce spoke
in favor of keeping the ordinance, saying tenants sometimes fear their
landlords will retaliate against them, if they report a problem with
their residence. It’s time tenants have rights and not just landlords,
she said.
“The problem we face is we expect people to do the right thing, and time and time again we find that is not happening,” she said.
Tenants do have rights and there is already a state law in place to help them in all rental matters, all they have to do is report the problem(s) in writing.. http://doj.nh.gov/consumer/sourcebook/renting.htm
“The problem we face is we expect people to do the right thing, and time and time again we find that is not happening,” she said.
Tenants do have rights and there is already a state law in place to help them in all rental matters, all they have to do is report the problem(s) in writing.. http://doj.nh.gov/consumer/sourcebook/renting.htm
Sharra’s amendment eventually passed by a voice vote, as did the amended warrant article.
Resident Andrew Wallace wasted no
time in proposing an amendment to a warrant article to establish and
put $15,882 into a fund that would pay for the town’s portion of legal
expenses for being a member of the N.H. Municipal Pipeline Coalition.
The coalition is a group of 15 towns, including Winchester, fighting the proposed Northeast Energy Direct pipeline.
Wallace proposed the amount be zero, saying not everyone is against the pipeline.
James Wallace, who seconded the
amendment, said the pipeline could potentially bring jobs to the area
and $700,000 in tax revenue.
“We have the third or fourth
highest tax rate in this town. We have one of the highest unemployment
rates in the county,” he said. “I think we need to look at ways for
people to keep their homes and lower taxes. This has the potential to
lower energy costs, and it’s something to bring the tax rate down.”
Resident Brandon Day agreed, saying residents shouldn’t be fighting something that could be added to the town tax rolls.
It’s important that a group of people that wants to oppose the pipeline not have those who support it pay to fight it, he said.
Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co. LLC, a
subsidiary of Kinder Morgan, is proposing the 419-mile interstate
pipeline, which would carry fracked natural gas from the shale fields of
northern Pennsylvania to a hub in Dracut, Mass.
Along the way, the pipeline is
proposed to travel through 18 communities in southern New Hampshire,
including the Cheshire County towns of Fitzwilliam, Richmond, Rindge,
Troy and Winchester.
Opponents of the pipeline
countered the arguments from the Wallaces and Day, saying Kinder Morgan
has a history of saying a pipeline would bring in so much revenue to the
town, but when the company receives the bill, its officials file for
abatement.
In addition, resident Susan L.
Durling, co-founder of Winchester Pipeline Awareness, said her research
has shown the values of properties that have natural gas pipelines going
through them decrease, which puts the burden on a town’s other
residents to make up the difference.
Further, compressor stations,
like the one being proposed in neighboring Northfield, Mass., can cause
health problems, including increases in asthma attacks and exacerbating
symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, she said.
Resident Peter J. Eisenstadter
said the arguments being presented about the pipeline were important and
relevant, but it shouldn’t be up to a small group of people at
deliberative session to decide for voters at town meeting.
“I say leave the money as is. The
town can still vote it down, but it leaves the choice to the voters. To
me that seems more democratic,” he said.
Debate on the amendment lasted
about 30 minutes before it was voted down in a voice vote. The warrant
article will go to the town meeting ballot as originally written.
Town meeting is scheduled for March 8 from 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. at Winchester Town Hall.
3 comments:
How long are we going to continue putting up with conduct that places a financial burden on both the town and it's residents year after year by a person who is driven by her own personal agenda? From numerous court cases for violations of personal rights and town and state regulations to now a position for her spouse that pays $39,000 a year for 28 hours of work, approved and appointed by her friends on the Board of Selectmen. This is a disgusting show of nepotism to say the least. Is this not a conflict of interest to amend a warrant that would possibly do away with an unneeded position to that she pushed for and then her husband was chosen to fill? This same person who could not see that the property they were purchasing on Main Street has and I quote " numerous issues that are cost prohibitive to repairing", is now going to inspect others property for code infractions. You have to be kidding.
Remember, this is strictly voluntary and if landlords don't participate, we'll be supporting this venture fully, now year after year. Another thing to think about is the added costs as mentioned above to upgrade fully functioning systems that are grandfather in and meet the safety standards, though not new building codes. These costs will be passed onto to tenants, raising rental costs or landlords will will weigh the costs against lost revenues and stop renting, causing more issues.
Tenants have a bill of rights to protect them and landlords know their duties and keep their rental properties in safe and decent shape already without being told, otherwise they wouldn't be able to rent them.
The only family this position and salary are helping is the Sharra's.
VOTE NO in March, we don't need another Code Inspector if someone will just follow up on any complaints she receives.
As for the pipeline bring jobs to the area and $700,000.00 in tax revenue, I think James Wallace is having pipe dreams and would like to know where he got this dollar amount from? There will be NO local jobs, all positions will be filled by company, unionized employees and as mentioned in the article by Susan Durling is correct, this Kinder Morgan company takes towns and counties to court seeking tax reductions all across the land. They lie and make promises they have no intentions of keeping, after all it's a business in business to make huge profits. Their safety record speaks volumes as to what they care about most and it sure isn't their employees or people affected by their projects.
VOTE YES in March to support not only your fellow citizens whose homes and lives will be affected but also those of people of NH in our surrounding towns. This pipeline benefits no one but greedy cooperate enterprises from far outside our state.
What the Hell eyes wide open, most of our selectmen and their friends enjoy tax reductions without going to court. they give it to themselves..WTF just look locally.
I find it highly suspect and quite concerning that the people who have asked to be allowed to tear down a historical building on Main Street, one that the State of NH placed on a list of buildings to save, all because in their opinion it is too costly to repair. That they didn't consider this before purchasing baffles the mind and leads one to believe, after the dealings that went on over a proposed Dollar Store, there is much more going on here than meets the eye. I am wondering how two obviously unqualified persons are our Code Enforcement Officer and Building Safety Inspector when it is obvious they have no clue what they are doing. I believe we have been hoodwinked by our dubious Board of Selectmen and Ms. Sharra into adding an unnecessary position to the town's employment and someone who obviously isn't knowledgeable enough to make these decisions that will ad a financial burden to property owners. I agree an implore anyone with common sense to vote no on continuing this charade.
Post a Comment