STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
WINCHESTER SCHOOL DISTRICT
WARRANT FOR 2011-2012

To the inhabitants of the town of Winchester in the County of Cheshire in the State of New Hampshire, qualified to vote in school affairs:

You are hereby notified to meet at the Winchester School Gymnasium at 7:00pm on Thursday, February 10th, 2011 to consider the following articles in Deliberative Session pursuant to RSA 40:13. The official voting of the business of the School District  as determined at the deliberative session and the election of School District Officers will be held at the Winchester Town Hall on Tuesday, March 8th between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 7:00 P.M.

ARTICLE ONE: Shall the Winchester School Distric raise and appropriate as an operating budget, not including appropriations by special warrant articles and other appropriations voted separately, the amounts set forth on the budget posted with the warrant or as amended by vote of the first session, for the purposes set forth therein, totaling $10,500,000?
Should this article be defeated, the default budget shall be $11,112,784, which is the same as last year, with certain adjustments required by previous action of the Winchester School District or by law or the governing body may hold one special meeting, in accordance with RSA 40:13, X and XVI to take up the issue of a revised operating budget only.

ARTICLE TWO: To see if the Winchester School District will vote to approve the cost item included in the collective bargaining agreement reached between the Winchester School Board and the Winchester Teachers Association which calls for the following increases in salaries and benefits at the current staffing levels:

    Fiscal Year         Estimated Increase

    2011 -  2012             $37,306
    2012 -  2013             $57,495
    2013 -  2014             $71,722

and further to raise and appropriate the sum of $37,306 for the  upcoming fiscal year, such sum representing the additional costs attributable to the increases in salaries and benefits  required by the new agreement over those that would be paid at current staffing levels in accordance with the most recent collective bargaining agreement. ( NOTE: pursuant to RSA273-A:12 if approved, the terms of this collective bargaining agreement, including the pay plan, but excluding cost of living  increases, will remain in effect until a new agreement is executed. ) The School Board and Budget Committee recommends this appropriation.

ARTICLE THREE: To see if the Winchester School District will vote to approve the cost item included in the collective bargaining agreement  reached between the Winchester School Board and the Winchester Support Staff Association which calls for the increase in salaries and benefits at the current staffing levels:

        Fiscal Year         Estimated Increases

        2011 - 2012             $8,338
and further to raise and appropriate the sum of $8,338. for the  upcoming fiscal year, such sum representing the additional costs attributable to the increases in salaries and benefits  required by the new agreement over those that would be paid at current staffing levels in accordance with the most recent collective bargaining agreement. ( NOTE: persuant to RSA273-A:12 if approved, the terms of this collective bargaining agreement, including the pay plan, but excluding cost of living  increases, will remain in effect until a new agreement is executed. ) The School Board and Budget Committee recommends this appropriation.

ARTICLE FOUR: Shall the Winchester School District, if articles #2 and/or #3 are defeated, authorize the governing body, to call a special meeting, at it's option, to address items #2 and/or #3 cost items only? ( Majority vote )

ARTICLE FIVE: Shall the Winchester School District receive reports of it's agents, auditors, committees and officers?

ARTICLE SIX: Shall the Winchester School District vote to transact any other business as may lawfully come before the meeting?

TOWN MEETING WARRANTS For 2011

TOWN MEETING WARRANT

SB2

TOWN OF WINCHESTER

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

To the inhabitants of the Town of Winchester, in the County of Cheshire in said state, qualified to

vote in Town affairs:

You are hereby notified to meet in the Town Hall in said Winchester on Saturday the 5^th of February next 2011 at nine o’clock in the forenoon to discuss, debate and amend warrant articles # 1 through #15 and to receive the reports of the selectmen, town treasurer and other town officers including the agents and committees, and act thereon. Final vote will be by the official ballot on Tuesday, March 8, 2011.

You are hereby notified to meet in the Town Hall in said Winchester on Tuesday, the 8^th of March next 2011 at eight o’clock in the forenoon to act upon the following subjects. The Polls not to close an hour earlier than seven of the clock in the afternoon.

ARTICLE 1.      To choose all necessary Town Officers for the ensuing year.

ARTICLE 2.      Shall the Town of Winchester raise and appropriate as an operating budget, not including appropriations by special warrant articles and other appropriations voted separately, the amounts set forth on the budget posted with the warrant or as amended by vote of the first session, for the purposes set forth therein, totaling $3,531,111?  Should this article be defeated, the default budget shall be $3,553,602 which is the same as last year, with certain adjustments required by previous action of the Town of Winchester or by law or the governing body may hold one special meeting, in accordance with RSA 40:13, X and XVI, to take up the issue of a revised operating budget only.

Recommended by the Board of Selectmen 4-0

Recommended by the Budget Committee 9-1

ARTICLE 3.      To see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate up to $100,000 to be used to continue with the reconstruction of Old Westport Road.

Recommended by the Board of Selectmen 5-0

Recommended by the Budget Committee 7-3

ARTICLE 4.      To see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $28,450.00 to be placed in the Capital Reserve Fund established under Article 16 at the 2006 Town Meeting for the purpose of performing the assessing update or revaluation of the real estate in the Town of Winchester scheduled for 2014-2015.

Recommended by the Board of Selectmen 5-0

Recommended by the Budget Committee 10-0

ARTICLE 5.      To see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $10,000 for the Town’s share of State road grant reconstruction costs for bridges and place it in the non-lapsing Capital Reserve Fund established at the March 2006 Town Meeting under Article 19 for that purpose.

Recommended by the Board of Selectmen 5-0

Recommended by the Budget Committee 9-1

ARTICLE 6.      To see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $6,000 to support the annual Pickle Festival.

Recommended by the Board of Selectmen 4-1

Recommended by the Budget Committee 8-1, 1 abstention

ARTICLE 7.      To see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate an amount not to exceed    $18,000 to be deposited in the Evergreen Expendable General Care Trust Fund established by an affirmative vote by the 1998 Town Meeting as Article 11; the source of these funds to be withdrawn from the surplus generated by the perpetual care funds already established for the care and maintenance of lots within the Evergreen cemetery, and not from taxation.

Recommended by the Board of Selectmen 5-0

Recommended by the Budget Committee 10-0

ARTICLE 8.      Shall the Town modify the provisions of RSA 72:37-b, Exemption for the Disabled from property tax, based on assessed value for qualified taxpayers to be $15,000? To qualify, the person must have been a New Hampshire resident for at least 3 years, own the real estate individually or jointly, or if the real estate is owned by such person’s spouse, they must have been married for at least 5 consecutive years. In addition, the taxpayer must have a net income of not more than $22,700 or if married, a combined net income of not more than $30,000, and own net assets not in excess of $50,000 (excluding the value of the person’s residential real estate up to 2 acres).

Recommended by the Board of Selectmen 3-0

ARTICLE 9.      Shall the Town modify the Elderly Exemption from property tax in the town of Winchester, based on assessed value, for qualified taxpayers, to be as follows: for a person 65 years of age up through 74 years, $20,000; for a person 75 years of age up through 79 years, $30,000; for a person 80 years of age or older, $60,000. To qualify, the person must have been a New Hampshire resident for at least 3 years, own the real estate individually or jointly, or if the real estate is owned by such person’s spouse, they must have been married for at least 5 years. In addition, the taxpayer must have a net income of not more than $22,700 or, if married, a combined net income of less than $30,000, and own net assets not in excess of $50,000 (excluding the value of the person’s residential real estate up to 2 acres).

Recommended by the Board of Selectmen 3-0

ARTICLE 10.     To see if the Town will raise and appropriate the sum of $9,200 to be used for repairing and painting the interior of the Conant Library, plus stripping, cleaning and poly-coating the Exterior Doors.

        *Note:  The Building is the Sole Property of the Town of Winchester and the contents are under the Governing body of the Conant Library Trustees.

Inserted by Petition

Not recommended by the Board of Selectmen 4-0

Not recommended by the Budget Committee 8-2

ARTICLE 11.     To see if the Town will raise and appropriate the sum of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) for the purpose of subsidizing youth recreation in the Town of Winchester to be paid to the E.L.M. Memorial Community Center on a contractual basis.

Inserted by Petition

Recommended by the Board of Selectmen 3-0, 1 abstention

Recommended by the Budget Committee 8-2

ARTICLE 12.     To see if the Town will raise and appropriate the sum of $5,000 to be given to the Winchester Historical Society for the purpose of operating and maintaining the Sheridan House so that this museum may continue to preserve the history of Winchester for the benefit of the public.

Inserted by Petition

Recommended by the Board of Selectmen 3-1

Recommended by the Budget Committee 10-0

ARTICLE 13.     To see if the Town will raise and appropriate the sum of $2,000.00 (two thousand dollars) to support the operation of the Boat Ramp at Forest Lake.

Inserted by Petition

Recommended by the Board of Selectmen 4-0

Recommended by the Budget Committee 9-1

ARTICLE 14.     Are you in favor of the adoption of amendment #1 as submitted by the Board of Selectmen? To amend Article II, the Winchester Zoning District Map, to rezone properties of Map 6, lots 15,16,17, & 20 from residential and agricultural districts to commercial district. This is to provide the Town the opportunity to market these Town owned properties for commercial ventures.

Recommended by the Planning Board

ARTICLE 15.     Are you in favor of the adoption of amendment #2 as proposed by the Planning Board? To amend Article XXII, Table of Usage, Section K,2, Keeping of Livestock. In the Commercial and Highway Commercial Districts, change from NP (not permitted) to SE (Special Exception). And * &**, omit the wording of “Cheshire County Extension Service” and replace with “NH Agricultural Best Management Practices and the UNH Housing and Space Guidelines for Livestock”.

Note: The * & ** refer to two footnotes in the Zoning Ordinance.

BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING Minutes 01/19/11

MINUTES of the

BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING

Wednesday

January 19, 2011

Board Members Present:  Sherman Tedford, Chairman; Roberta Fraser; Kenneth Gardner; and Gustave Ruth. Also present, Joan Morel; Town Administrator, and Executive Assistant Shelly A. Walker. Theresa Sepe is absent.  The meeting convenes at 7:00 PM.

1^st Order of Business: Open Meeting and Acceptance of Minutes

Selectman Gardner makes a motion to accept the regular minutes of January 14, 2011.  Selectman Ruth seconds the motion.  Motion carries 4-0.  

2^nd Order of Business: Meeting with State Representatives

Our State Representatives Dan Carr, Edwin (Smokey) Smith and William Butynski met with the Board to bring them up to speed on the proposed State budget cuts that may impact the Town and School. The State budget has a $875,000,000 deficit. The State will be making cuts for two years to make up the deficit that would be 12% of the overall budget.

Communities will see cuts in revenue sharing, retirement, and rooms & meals taxes.

Schools will see larger cuts, schools education funding formulas will change, cuts in school revenues, cuts in special education and possibly cutting unified arts programs.  Governor Lynch supports a Constitutional Amendment for Special Education that would benefit Hinsdale and Winchester. This would be consistent year to year if it happens.

Health and Human services will be cut, and will impact community welfare programs.

The Chairman inquired as to the affects these cuts may have on the Highway Block Grant.  Edwin Smith clarified that this grant will not be impacted as money to fund this comes from gas taxes.

The State Budget will pass from the House to the Senate on March 7, 2011, and the final budget will be passed in June. These proposed budget cuts will go into effect on July 1, 2011 but will be retroactive to January for towns on that fiscal year.

3 ^rd Order of Business: Other Business

The Board reviewed a report from Dick Drew, LLS on the property line between lots 14 and 15 on Map 6, and noted that it is clearly marked, and that it is located where the town thought it was. The current activity on the lot does not impact the area of the boundary line. The Board is in agreement that no action needs to be taken on the matter of the bank at this time.

The Chairman read Warrant Article #2 “Shall the Town of Winchester raise and appropriate as an operating budget, not including appropriations by special warrant articles and other appropriations voted separately, the amounts set forth on the budget posted with the warrant or as amended by vote of the first session, for the purposes set forth therein, totaling $3,531,111?  Should this article be defeated, the default budget shall be $3,553,602 which is the same as last year, with certain adjustments required by previous action of the Town of Winchester or by law or the governing body may hold one special meeting, in accordance with RSA 40:13, X and XVI, to take up the issue of a revised operating budget only. Recommended by the Budget Committee 9-1”

The Budget Committee has set the Town Operating Budget at $3,531,111.  This is less than the Board of Selectmen’s proposed budget due to a change in the Ambulance budget. After a brief discussion Chairman Tedford makes a motion to recommend $3,531,111.  Selectman Gardner seconds the motion.  Motion carries 4-0 with 1 absent.

An Application for Forfeiture Money that was seized during a drug investigation has been submitted for approval.  Selectmen Fraser makes a motion to approve this application and for the Chairman to sign the application.  Selectman Gardner seconds the motion.  Motion carries 4-0.

An Agreement and Release for 357 Back Ashuelot Road has been submitted for a signature.  Chairman Tedford makes a motion for the Town Administrator to sign the Agreement.  Selectman Gardner seconds the motion.  Motion carries 4-0.

A Raffle Permit to benefit Wayne B. Snow has been submitted for approval. Selectman Fraser makes a motion to approve the permit.  Selectman Gardner seconds the motion.  Motion carries 4-0.

Five documents necessary to receive the Aid Anticipation Note for the Old Westport Bridge over Wheelock Brook project have been received and need to be signed by all Board members.  Selectman Fraser makes a motion to sign the Aid Anticipation Note documents.  Selectman Gardner seconds the motion.  Motion carries 4-0.

4th Order of Business: Open to the Floor (15 minutes)

Ken Cole spoke to the Board regarding a meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Trust Fund to be held Thursday January 20, 2011. This meeting will address changes to their investing policy.

Ted Whippie came before the Board to inform them that he really enjoyed hearing the State Representatives advise the Select Board of State budget cuts and the impact it will have on the Town and School.  He regretted that this had not been separately noted on the agenda.

5^th Order of Business: Office Documents

• An Ambulance Billing Special Funds Manifest for a Power Pro Ambulance cot with a battery-powered lift in the amount of $14,613.70 has been submitted. Selectman Fraser makes a motion to approve the manifest.  Selectman Gardner seconds the motion.  Motion carries 4 -0.

6^th Order of Business: Non-Public Session under RSA 91-A: 3II

Selectman Fraser makes a motion to enter non-public session under (a) and (c). Selectman Ruth seconds the motion.  A role call vote is taken and all members vote “yes”, and the Board convenes in non-public session at 8:03 PM.  

7^th Order of Business: Reconvene Public Session

The Board reconvenes in public session at 9:02 PM. Two non-public minutes under (a) and two non-public minutes under (c) have been sealed. One non-public minutes under (a) and one non-public minutes under (c) have not been sealed.

8^th Order of Business: Adjournment

Selectman Gardner makes a motion to adjourn.  Selectman Ruth seconds the motion and it carries 4-0.  The meeting adjourns at 9:04 PM.

Respectfully recorded,

Shelly A. Walker

Executive Assistant

Asphalt Plant Is An Injustice To Town

I am writing with commentary on the recently approved asphalt hot mix plant to be located on Route 10 in Winchester in an existing gravel pit.

The pit owner is from Massachusetts, and he presented his asphalt plant proposal to the town with not one but two attorneys.

I have been directly involved in the public opposition to the plant and was a witness to the process wherein the Winchester planning and zoning boards eventually approved the plant application on Jan. 3.

The decisions by both boards to approve the asphalt plant were unjust, unfair, and inappropriate for many reasons, but primarily because of the following conflict: It does not do environmental justice.

This term does not refer merely to the geography of the land but also to the people who inhabit the neighborhoods surrounding the proposal.

Environmental justice is the fair treatment of people of all races, ages, and incomes with respect to development, implementation, and the enforcement of environmental laws, regulations and policies.

This obviously applies to town boards and land use applications.

The community around the sand and gravel pit includes people who are disadvantaged due to age, health status, income, lack of resources, lack of experience and a lack of knowledge of how to stand up for their rights.

Many are elderly or children. Some are single parents. Others are working so much they lack the time to defend themselves. This is clearly a vulnerable community. Although the community did mobilize against the plant, the boards disregarded public opinion and were clearly biased toward the business applicant.

Asphalt mix plants are never proposed in affluent white collar communities with multiple resources to block their establishment.

The industry is known instead to target vulnerable populations and small communities like Winchester, where they almost always succeed in getting in, and where it is impossible to get them to leave once they have arrived.

The best this asphalt plant has to offer (besides a modest amount of tax dollars to the town) is a few jobs, and they are not likely to be hiring locals for these specialized technical jobs.

The Winchester boards have essentially approved the plant in exchange for a local eyesore, potential health and safety hazards to the community, lower property values of nearby residents, a noise nuisance, air pollution, traffic issues on Route 10, environmental safety risks, foreseeable damage to the local ecosystems and agitation of the area wildlife.

Asphalt plants affect the air for a radius of 10 miles, according to the NH Division of Environmental Services, and the DES will only inspect the plant for compliance at start up and every five years thereafter. This is hardly reassuring to nearby residents. As a matter of fact, it is alarming.

The plant will be nearly self-regulating. The proposed asphalt mix plant is not in the best interest of the community or the town of Winchester, and it does not do environmental justice, or any kind of justice at all.

MARY E D RYAN
129 Westport Village Road

A citizens opposition group has been formed to fight the approval of this plant and to prevent it from ever operating and endangering the health and livelihoods of the citizens of Winchester and Swanzey; not only those of us who live in close proximity but for all of us who's lives will be forever changed if this plant is allowed to operate in Winchester and in our Protected Aquifer Zone. We ask every citizen concerned about the health of their families, the environment and wildlife in the region to join us in our fight to stop this polluting business from getting started and to send the owner back to Massachusetts where regulations are stricter and where they won't allow what he is proposing for NH residents. 

To join the fight send an email to: winchesterinformer@gmail.com please include a contact name and your email address and we'll put you on our mailing list and in touch with a contact from the group. 

 

AIR QUALITY ALERT

Issued by The National Weather Service

Boston, MA

11:29 am EST, Fri., Jan. 28, 2011

... AIR QUALITY ALERT IN EFFECT UNTIL 11 PM EST SATURDAY...

THE NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES HAS ISSUED AN AIR QUALITY ACTION DAY FOR FINE PARTICULATES... IN EFFECT UNTIL 11 PM EST SATURDAY.

AN AIR QUALITY ACTION DAY MEANS THAT FINE PARTICULATES CONCENTRATIONS WITHIN THE REGION MAY APPROACH OR EXCEED UNHEALTHY STANDARDS.

 
Wow, this is Winter when the air is supposed to be being cleaned by snowfall and storm after storm racing across the country. Can you imagine what it will be like with an asphalt plant on the Swanzey/Winchester line and a wood burning ( among other things) Power Plant downtown .. real healthy for the Monadnock Region and beautiful downtown Winchester.

Aid Cut Looms ... Is Winchester Next ?

Marlow Could See Higher Taxes After Change

MARLOW — It took about an hour, but when Marlow residents thawed out Tuesday night, a meeting with state legislators really heated up.
The Marlow School District is due to see a cut of 46 percent in its state aid next year, a cut that could raise the school portion property tax rate by 33.7 percent, or an additional $4.27 per $1,000 of property value, if the budget stayed flat.
A committee of residents has been meeting since the March 2010 district meeting, when school officials painted a grim picture for the future.
The committee invited Marlow’s state legislators, Rep. Anne Cartwright, R-Alstead, Rep. Tara Sad, D-Walpole, and Rep. Lucy M. Weber, D-Walpole, and Sen. Robert P. Odell, R-Lempster, who represents Alstead, Charlestown and Marlow, among other towns, to answer residents’ questions about the looming cut.
Large portions of the district’s $1.5 million budget go to Keene as tuition for Marlow 7th- through 12th-graders who attend Keene Middle School and Keene High School, or to special education services mandated by law.
Residents said they fear the $270,000 cut will have to come out of the roughly $850,000 allocated to run Perkins School for students in kindergarten through grade 6.
Odell told the 60-odd residents at the meeting their school officials had two years’ warning, from when the state built a new school funding system.
Resident and former Marlow School Board member Art Andreason took issue with Odell’s implication.
“Your expectation ... is that we should have cut somewhere. Where? I don’t see it ... if (our) control over the budget is so small. This isn’t about cutting to hold the line, or cutting to maintain,” Andreason said.
The state government’s formula for distributing school aid is based on the number of pupils, with certain per-student boosts for schools with high numbers of poor students, those with special education needs, or who speak English as a second language.
Weber proposed a bill adding money for each student at a small, rural school, because these schools don’t have the ability to absorb costs the way bigger schools do, she said.
But, she said, in the current fiscal environment, she’s not hopeful anything that would add to the state’s expenses will win much support.
Wayne E. Woolridge, who serves as the Marlow district’s superintendent through N.H. School Administrative Unit 29, agreed.
He’s been surprised by other superintendents’ attitudes toward the formula in recent conversations he’s had with them, he said.
“Everybody wants to be fair until things get really tough. When things get really tough, people are less likely to be what they perceive to be generous,” he said.
To him, however, “it’s not about generosity, it’s about fairness. This is a state responsibility and a state revenue source should fund it.”
In 2011-12, the state plans to send districts $3,450 per pupil to fund what it’s determined to be an “adequate education.”
For districts with a lot of students, such as Manchester, Nashua and Bedford, it’s a multimillion-dollar boost they’ve been waiting for since 2008, when the new formula was written.
Marlow’s not alone in anticipating a cut. The Harrisville, Keene, Marlborough, Nelson and Westmoreland districts all stand to lose state aid under the new formula.
Charlestown, a member of the Fall Mountain Regional School District, is also expected to lose state funding under the new formula.
Legislators saw the adverse effect the formula would have on some towns so they set a two-year transition period, due to expire in July.
Odell recently proposed a new law, co-sponsored by 17 other legislators, extending the transition another two years.
But change is coming, he said, one way or another.
If the big cities, who have been “chomping at the bit” for their boost in aid, don’t like the idea of waiting another two years, they’re likely to sue the state, Odell said.
The Supreme Court might then force the new formula into place.
Another change might adjust the formula, he said.
It provides extra funding for schools if a certain percentage of students need free or reduced-price lunch, among other categories. If the school doesn’t meet the threshold, it doesn’t get the extra funding.
Some legislators have proposed installing a graduated system instead for giving aid, on that issue and others, he said.
Legislators are also working on a much bigger change: constitutional amendments.
The N.H. Constitution requires the state fund an adequate education, but does not allow money to be targeted to the most needy communities.
Drafts of amendments allowing targeted aid have been proposed several times over the past few years, but none have made it past the N.H. House.
“The devil’s in the details,” Weber said.
She said she supports the idea of an amendment, but hasn’t seen one she can support yet, because, in her interpretation, all the drafts so far allow the state not to fund some students’ education.
“And if the state doesn’t have to pay for something, I’ve learned over the years, it won’t,” she said, earning one of the night’s few laughs.
So, residents asked, what can we do?
“Do this,” Weber said, looking around the room. “You’re telling us what you want ... Let the governor know what your concerns are. The more input each of you has, the better.”
But residents in Manchester and Nashua, who want that money for their schools, to lower their property taxes, will be doing the same thing, and the large urban districts have more votes in the House, she warned.
Marcia Levesque, a member of the committee hosting the forum, said giving a voice to rural towns is the most important thing that can happen now.
“This state was founded on small, rural schools. To give all the state’s money to big cities and ESL (English as a Second Language classes) will fundamentally change our state and what kind of student is coming out of it,” she said.
So is it us against them?” resident Dave Vesco asked.

A voice from the crowd chimed in, “It always is.”

MINUTES of the

BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING

Thursday

January 13, 2011

Board Members Present:  Sherman Tedford, Chairman; Theresa Sepe; Kenneth Gardner; and Gustave Ruth. Also present Margaret Sharra; Land Use Assistant, Rick Meleski; Water/Wastewater Superintendent, John Gomarlo; Landfill Coordinator, Joan Morel; Town Administrator, and Executive Assistant Shelly A. Walker. Roberta Fraser is absent. The meeting convenes at 1:00 PM.

1^st Order of Business: Open Meeting and Acceptance of Minutes

Selectman Gardner makes a motion to accept the regular minutes of January 5, 2010.  Selectman Sepe seconds the motion.  Motion carries  4-0.  Selectman Gardner makes a motion to accept the work session minutes of January 10, 2010.  Selectman Ruth seconds the motion.  Motion carries  3-0, with 1 abstention.  

2^nd Order of Business: Other Business

Selectman Fraser joins the meeting.

A Transportation Enhancement Program Agreement for the Sidewalk Grant has been submitted for the Chairman to sign.  The Land Use Assistant came before the Board to give an update on the project.  The Chairman inquired about the Engineering on this project.  Margaret Sharra noted that Engineering has not been done yet, but a Certified Engineer has done preliminary drawings. The Town Administrator noted that this Agreement needs to be signed and a Project Coordinator needs to be designated, for the project to move forward.  The Board is in agreement to designate a Project Coordinator at a later date. After some discussion, Selectman Sepe makes a motion to sign the Agreement.  Selectman Fraser seconds the motion.  Motion carries 4-1.

The Agreement to renew Advanced Life Support Intercept Services has been submitted to the Board.  Selectman Fraser makes a motion to approve the agreement.  Selectman Gardner seconds the motion.  Motion carries 4-0, with 1 abstention.

A Sewer abatement for Map 31, Lot 3 in the amount of $17.50 has been submitted for approval.  The Wastewater Superintendent came before the Board to explain this abatement. The Superintendent had denied this abatement due to the water being used to make coffee, soups etc. for a store.    Selectman Gardner makes a motion to deny the abatement.  Selectman Sepe seconds the motion.  Motion carries 5-0.

Two Intents to Cut Timber for Map 1, Lot 36-1 and Map 6, Lot 46-2 have been submitted for signatures.  All Board members signed these.

A Timber Tax Levy in the amount of $225.09 for Map 4 Lot 33-1 and 33-2 has been submitted for approval. Selectman Fraser makes a motion to approve the levy.  Selectman Sepe seconds the motion.  Motion carries 5-0.

Previously, it had been brought to the attention of the Board that Kulick’s Sunoco is discontinuing business accounts and requiring businesses to get Sunoco credit cards in their place. If the Town switched to using credit cards, there would need to be 6-8 issued. And with the credit cards there would be no signature required, therefore it would be difficult to track fuel purchases.  The Town fuel purchasing has primarily been from J & G’s Gas Station, with the exception of the Fire Department.  The Town has an account there, which makes it easy to keep track of the fueling expenses.  At the last meeting, the Board took no action on this matter. Selectman Sepe makes a motion to close the account at Kulick’s Sunoco and to direct all departments to refuel at J & G’s Gas station.

Previously, the Board had received a petition letter from residents of Winchester and surrounding communities concerning the decommissioning of Vermont Yankee and it’s effects on its employees and neighboring towns and cities. The Board was in agreement to not take any action until all Board members had reviewed the letter. The Board had reviewed the letter and was in agreement to compose a letter of their own concerns and support regarding the decommissioning of Vermont Yankee.  A copy of this letter will be forwarded to Jennifer Bellam, the contact person.

It has been brought to the attention of the Selectmen, that the electric bill of a tax-deeded property that had been deeded back to its owner was still being billed to the Town.  The Board directed the Town Administrator to draft a letter to the owner, the mortgage company, and the mortgage company’s attorney. This letter should state that the electricity would be shut off at the end of the month and to contact the electric company to change the account over.

A letter has been submitted to the Board inquiring whether the Board is supportive of an Employee Sick Pool. This issue has been discussed in the past with the Board. The Board is still waiting for a proposal from the Employee Committee on this matter before it can take any action.

The Town Administrator gave the Board a brief update on various things going on in Town Hall:  The Aid Anticipation Note Commitment letter for the Old Westport Road Bridge over Wheelock Brook has been signed, Tata & Howard is working on an estimate for the changes to be made on the Head Works Building, the Town will be receiving an additional $244,907 in ARRA funds due to the Town of Plymouth’s decision not to used these funds, the Town Attorney has reviewed the Warrant Articles, and the Selectmen need to look at the new Zoning maps before they are approved and printed.

It was brought to the attention of the Board that an article for the warrant from the Planning Board regarding rezoning of Map 6 lots 15, 16, 17 & 20 was worded as “submitted by the Board of Selectmen”, as that Board had previously submitted a suggested warrant article with the request for the Planning Board to review. After much discussion, the Chairman asked the Land Use Assistant if a public hearing had been held on this article.  This was confirmed and the wording will remain the same. Selectman Fraser left the meeting.  

Selectman Sepe left the meeting.

John Gomarlo came before the Board to give an update on the Old Westport Road Bridge over Wheelock Brook.

The Water/Wastewater Superintendent came before the Board to request permission to have a part-time employee help clear fire hydrants.  The funds would be used from the Water Superintendent’s line. The Chairman makes a motion for the part-time sidewalk tractor operator to help clear fire hydrants to be paid for from the Water Superintendent’s line.  Selectman Gardner seconds the motion.  Motion carries 3-0.

Selectman Gardner makes a motion to recommend the budget that the Budget Committee recommends.  Selectman Ruth seconds the motion. After a brief discussion Selectman Ruth withdraws his second, and Selectman Gardner withdraws his motion.  This will be addressed next week.

The Board has scheduled a Work Session meeting for 1-26-11 at 10 AM to address the final review of Warrant Articles and any other business.

3^rd Order of Business: Adjournment

Selectman Ruth makes a motion to adjourn.  Selectman Gardner seconds the motion and it carries 3-0.  The meeting adjourns at 2:57 PM.

Respectfully recorded,

Shelly A. Walker

Executive Assistant

State Budgets: The Worst Is Yet to Come

Hopefully members of our BOS, Budget Committee and School Board read and can understand the burden they put on our shoulders every time they raise salaries, add spending and ignore the signs that things will only get much worse for everyone if they continue to ask for more and more money instead of making some serious cuts to our town budget.


To close more than $400 billion in budget shortfalls, states have resorted largely to spending cuts, tax increases, and borrowing over the past four years.
But as governors and state legislatures prepare to write their budgets for fiscal 2012, they are “bracing themselves for what is likely to be the hardest year yet in what already has been the most difficult budget period in modern history,” according to Stateline, the news service of the Pew Center on the States.
State revenues have been up recently, but they dropped so deeply in 2008 and 2009 that it could take years for states to return to pre-recession levels. Also, the federal stimulus program, which helped states narrow budget gaps, is expiring just as healthcare costs are rising.
The dire prospects for 2012 are compelling state leaders to contemplate moves that “were once considered unthinkable,” Stateline reported.
• Maryland faces a budget shortfall of as much as $1.6 billion and may cut education spending and lay off government workers for the first time.
• New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo wants to take the politically unpopular step of scaling back his state’s Medicaid program.
• South Carolina will stop paying for hospice care for the poor.
• California Gov. Jerry Brown is arguing for the broad-based tax increases that voters overwhelmingly rejected two years ago.
• Georgia may begin applying the sales tax to groceries, despite legislation passed 15 years ago repealing the grocery tax.
• In Oregon, officials are considering cuts to pension benefits for current and future public employees.
Overall state tax revenue has grown over three consecutive quarters and economists expect economic growth in 2011.
But Scott Pattison, executive director of the National Association of State Budget Officers, said the growth masks the reality that states are dealing with.
“You might have some ridiculously high-sounding revenue growth but that’s because the base is so low,” Pattison told Stateline.
“I’ve been telling a lot of people, ‘Compare the budget totals to pre-recession levels, because that’s a better measure. Don’t assume happy days are here again.’” 

They did not mention the trouble New Hampshire is in, we all know without being told; without a state tax or income tax, funding everything falls on the shoulders of property owners. Just where do our legislators think the unemployed, elderly and disabled are going to keep coming up with the money to bail their asses out ?

WHO IS GOING TO RUN?

Let us know if you plan to declare your candidacy and for what position! 

Beginning on Wednesday, January 19th the Town Clerk's Office will be accepting nominations for the following Positions that are up for election:
Board of Selectman:
One position (Roberta Fraser)

Budget Committee:
Three positions (Richard Horton, Jacqueline Beaman, Jack Marsh Jr.)

Planning Board:
Two positions (Jack Marsh Jr., Larry Hill)

Trustee of the Trust Funds:
One position (Kenneth Cole)

Conant Library Trustees:
Three positions (Richard Durkee, Arthur Libby, Marcia Racine)

Thayer Library Trustees:
Four positions open (Julia Ferrari, Irene Clark, Annmarie Pasquarelli & Andrew Gordon)

Treasurer
One position (Ruth Tatro)

Cemetery / Musterfield
One position (Clifford Struthers)

APPOINTED Positions

Zoning Board of Adjustments:
Three positions (Christie Baker, Allen Humes, John Hann)

Conservation Commission
Two positions (James Ammann, John Hann)

Historic District
One position (Penny Chagnon)

Town Beach Committee
Two positions (Tracy Pelky, Linda Gibson)

We believe the last day is on the 28th.  Can someone confirm this for us.  There is nothing on the Town's Website to indicate what the actual dates are.

Attorney General Department of Justice

"On July 15, 2009, the Attorney General’s Office updated its Memorandum on New Hampshire’s Right-to-Know law, RSA Chapter 91-A. This Memorandum describes the law and the judicial decisions that further define and explain the peoples’ right to know.

The purpose of this Memorandum is to provide guidance in complying with Revised Statutes Annotated (“RSA”) chapter 91-A to State and local officials, the public and the media. While enforcement of the Right-to-Know law is assigned to the superior court, the Attorney General’s Office will continue to promote the public’s understanding of the Right-to-Know law and compliance by public officials with the Right-to-Know law.

In 2008 and 2009, the New Hampshire Legislature amended the Right-to-Know law to clarify how it applies to governmental records in electronic form, electronic communications used to transact governmental business, and the duty to preserve electronic records. The amendments provide new definitions and set forth how the Right-to-Know law applies to public bodies versus public agencies. This Office has updated our Right-to-Know law Memorandum to reflect these amendments to the law and recent court decisions.

In an effort to enhance the usefulness of this Memorandum, the appendix now includes sample motions for use by public bodies when the members want to go into nonpublic session, seal non-public minutes, or adjourn to consult with legal counsel. It also includes a sample index for use when a person has requested documents that are exempt from disclosure or contain confidential information. The index can be used to inform the requestor of which documents have been withheld and the reason for their nondisclosure.

For those interested in municipal government records, the statute that establishes the retention period for municipal records is provided. Finally, the appendix includes a list of statutes, rules, and court cases that designate certain information as confidential or privileged."
 
The document is 127 pages long - so we suggest you look through it for any questions you might have -
 
http://doj.nh.gov/publications/documents/right_to_know.pdf
 
The two items below are subject matters that have been asked recently regarding the public's right-to-know.
 
2. Basic Meeting Requirements

a. No meeting shall be conducted by electronic mail or any other form of communication that does not permit the public to hear, read, or otherwise discern the meeting discussion contemporaneously at the meeting location specified in the meeting notice. RSA 91-A:2, III(c).
 
c. Any person shall be permitted to use recording devices including, but not limited to, tape recorders, cameras, and videotape equipment at such meetings. RSA 91-A:2, II;

School Budget Meeting, Thursday at 7 p.m. in the Winchester School cafeteria.

The Winchester School Board refused to have the meeting on a Saturday so that more parents and concerned citizens could attend and voice their outrage over the increase in spending and new contracts to add over
$ ONE MILLION MORE to an already over bloated top heavy money pit. Winchester voters will have a chance to weigh in on the new budget and contracts and they better show up in numbers Thursday night; or start getting those "HOME FOR SALE" signs ready.

WINCHESTER — Winchester School District voters are invited to a public hearing Thursday before the budget is set for the deliberative session next month.

For at least the second year in a row, the Winchester School Board and the district’s budget committee are disagreeing over the numbers.

The budget committee sets the budget proposal for the warrant, but the school board can make recommendations and is in charge of deciding how the money is spent.

The school board’s recommended budget sits at $11,243,320, while the budget committee recommends $10,735,325.

The default budget, which kicks in if the budget proposal is defeated at the polls, is the current year’s budget plus contractual expenses and minus one-time expenses.

That figure sits at $11,112,784.

All of the proposals for the 2011-12 budget include money to run the district’s new administration, which was created after voters decided to withdraw from N.H. School Administrative Unit 38.

The cost to run the school this year is $10,006,293, plus $253,169 for Winchester’s share of the Unit 38 budget, for a total of $10,259,462.

The budget committee’s recommendation for next year would be a 4.6 percent increase from this year.

The school board’s recommendation would be a 9.6 percent increase.

However, not all of the increase would have to come from local taxpayers’ pockets, officials said.

“To the extent possible, increases are offset by ... increases in non-local revenues,” district Business Administrator Thomas P. O’Connor wrote in an e-mail message.
He's counting on the State to come through with money; wishful thinking, the State is near broke.

If the school board recommendations are approved, the estimated tax increase would be $154,192, about 2.7 percent, which could result in an estimated 55-cent increase on the local school tax rate, O’Connor said.

The tax impact for the budget committee’s proposal was not available.

Besides the operating budget, voters will be asked to consider a three-year agreement with teachers and a one-year contract for the newly formed support staff union.

The teachers contract would add $37,306 to the budget in 2011-12. Last year, voters rejected a one-year contract with teachers that would have added $45,060.

The support staff contract would add $8,338.

 The district public hearing will be held on Thursday at 7 p.m. in the Winchester School cafeteria.

After the public hearing on Thursday night, the budget committee will meet to vote on a budget figure for the warrant for the deliberative session in February. Voters will then have their chance to change the figures before going to the polls in March.

School Budget Mess .. Too Bad People Didn't THINK Before they Voted

Town of Winchester, NH

Budget Committee

December 16, 2010

Members Present:  Ken Gardner, Elisha Jackson, Jacqui Beaman, Ted Ryll, Jack Mash, Hubie Crowell, Harvey Serian, Kevan Whippie, Rick Horton, Kathy Hebert, Trevor Croteau, Rikki Bolewski (Clerk)

Others Present:  Dr. Gassau, Tom O’Connor, Principal Jim Lewis, Assistant Principal Pamela Bigelow

        Meeting called to order at 7:06pm

Statement was made last week, when presenting this budget, that it was a “bare bones” budget. Jack questions that, with a $900,000 increase in the asking budget, what happens if it goes to default.  Concern is that SAU budget has always been a warrant article and is now in the budget. With the budget being a bottom line budget, there is the ability to move things around; concern is that money from services could be taken away to pay for SAU.

Discussion regarding Tuition to Keene High, question as to how many students.

129 Reg. Ed. Students @ $11,793

60 Sp. Ed Students @ $21,847

( why are there so many "special Ed" kids in Winchester ?)

• Summer programs – Sp. Ed. Year round programs (i.e. Residential Facilities)

5 Public, 17 Private – These are Sp. Ed tuitions that are not at Keene High

• Discussion regarding whether or not someone who is doing two part-time positions will be paid benefits – it is being looked into.  Also, what about a position that is being shared between Winchester and Hinsdale as a full-time position – who is paying benefits
• Discussion regarding the breakdown of the Superintendent position and how the salary compares to other similar size school districts in the state

• 3 days a week as Superintendent, 1 day a week as Sp. Ed. Director, and in Surry 3 days a month (will be getting Return Revenue from this portion)

Wondering where our obligation is to Surry.  Some of our positions seem to be being made into full-time position to accommodate assistance to Surry

SAU positions that are open will be posted.  Question as to whether the people who have already been put in place were guaranteed these proposed salaries

There are letters of intent for the people in the current SAU that they want for these positions.

Discussion regarding office housing for new SAU. ( what will this cost? )

Discussion regarding substitutes budget – is up $10,000; what is the reason?  Budget is based on current years actual

Discussion regarding SAU budget.  Were under the assumption that it was at about $488,000.  Came across more lines in the budget that committee was under the assumption that were included in the SAU budget that total over $200,000.  This brings that budget to about $700,000.  Are we budgeting twice for these items or is it really that high?  Kevan will look into

Discussion about Language; state recommends that the school offer a language.  Looking into what language to offer; hasn’t been offered for the past two years due to budget and finding the right person who will work part-time.  Also looking at how they will fit into the budget

Discussions about some of the programs the school is offering to help students who may need some extra help

Jack makes a motion to adjourn, Kevan seconds

Meeting adjourned at 9:25pm

Respectfully Submitted,

        Rikki Bolewski

Next meeting will be held Tuesday, December 28, at 7pm in the Winchester School Library

_______________________________________________________

By the looks of things, this year's property tax break was a charade to lull us all into thinking things in Winchester may have turned around; but as you can see, we're in for a rocky ride come next tax bill, what a mess and only 149 registered voters turned out. Rumor has it that by the time they are done, we could be looking at an increase of around $5.00/thousand, think about that.

According To The DES; Asphalt Plants Emit Toxins

The following was taken from the Planning Board minutes of 12-20-2010. There have been statements made here on the blog that we have posted erroneous information when we stated asphalt plants are smelly, noisy and present numerous health hazards to the surrounding population;

Third order of business: 6:30pm. The board continues the public hearing on the application of Mitchell Sand & Gravel, LLC for an asphalt plant.
M. Sharra reminds everyone of the protocol for a public hearing. The board will begin tonight with a short presentation by Barbara Dorfschmidt of the Air Resource Division at DES. She is a Senior State Permitting Engineer. The board requested Ms. Dorfschmidt come to the meeting to explain about the state permitting process. The board thought it would be helpful for the public and the board to understand the process. Liz Nixon of DES is here also.
Ms. Dorfschmidt states she does not have an application at this time for this asphalt plant. She explains the process to obtain a permit from the state. Once DES receives a complete application a copy is sent to the Town Clerk for the public to review. DES looks at two classes of pollutants in their review. The first is criteria pollutants; emitted from boilers, cars, woodstoves, and asphalt plants. These are sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide and particulate matter as regulated by the EPA. She speaks of federal requirements for plants built after 6-11-73. These requirements address emission standards for particulate matter. The state also promulgated EPA standards a few years ago in NH regardless of the age of the plant. All plants must meet these standards.
Next the state reviews the toxic air pollutants. There are 800 pollutants on the list and the ambient levels must be met. Asphalt fumes are a regulated toxic air pollutant.

 We hope this clears up any confusion that asphalt plants pollute the air with numerous toxins and are clearly a danger to human health and the residents of Winchester and Swanzey. Remember testimony was given by an expert hired by the town who stated that theses toxic fumes will travel a distance of up to 5 miles or more from the plant on prevailing winds,  downtown Winchester is roughly 6 miles from the plant. There is a pre-school and elementary school within the fallout range of these toxic fumes. Perhaps residents should buy their children respirators now just to be on the safe side as active young children are more susceptible to being harmed by pollutants than any other group of the population. Why our ZBA and Planning Boards voted to okay this plant, knowing full well of the health risks is anyone's guess. Like other towns here in New Hampshire and across the country, they should have voted to protect us all and turned them away as his hometown in Massachusetts did.

Rehearing Request Before The ZBA on Mitchell "Special Exception"

A request for a rehearing will come before the ZBA at Thursday night's 7:00pm meeting and it's important that all of those concerned with their decision to grant Mitchell a special exception to allow him to build an asphalt plant in the agricultural zone attend.

Mr Towne, on behalf of the residents of Winchester and those residents of Swanzey who also will be affected by this plant, has filed a request for a rehearing based on procedural  conduct by the chairman of the board. Mr. Towne, was also not notified of this scheduled hearing as required by law.

There is definitely something wrong with our town boards when they act in such a secretive and arrogant manner and have no respect for the law or the town's citizens.

For those of you who did not attend the previous meeting when the exception was granted, here is content taken from the minutes of that meeting;

Rob Hitchcock, Engineer from SVE for Mitchell, responds to the five requirements for a SE. 

He speaks to the criteria and also submits them in writing.

 

1. Is the proposed use permitted in the district?

Manufacturing is allowed in the Agricultural District (AD) with a SE. 

the real answer is no it's not

 2. Is the specific site appropriate location for such a use?

It is very appropriate. The site is currently an active gravel pit. The preferred location is more than 1200ft away from abutting residences. The exit/entry is to Rt. 10 and town roads are not impacted. Aggregate is available on site for the process.

the only reason they want to move it, is because it gives them more area for expansion and the location will not be affected by the upcoming State's highway project and bridge replacement project

3. Will the proposed use adversely affect the adjacent area?

Once the plant is built we think the residents of Winchester and Swanzey will barely notice its presence. The facility has minimal odor, little noise and will not distract from property values. Asphalt is a benign substance.

A. Humes would like to know what evidence the applicant has in regards to property values. Mr. Hitchcock states he has spoken with Diane Smith at Powers Appraisal. She said it was her opinion and the opinion of her staff, the asphalt plant will not have a negative impact on property value. This was not an actual appraisal.

A. Humes raises his hand and asks for a show of hands of those who think property values will be negatively affected. Seven Westport Village area residents raised their hands along with A. Humes.

Chris Wilder, Westport Village, asked if the homes near the Keene asphalt plant were built before or after the construction of the asphalt plant. Mr. Hitchcock does not know. His question to Diane was: would the plant have a negative affect on values? Powers Associates said when finding comparable home sales, they would not make any adjustment because of an asphalt plant at that location.

Mr. Little explains how appraisals are done and concludes there would not be a negative impact.

A. Humes disagrees because if neighborhood characteristics change, then values change. Mr. Little speaks of Rose Lane values (the neighborhood near the Lane asphalt plant in Keene) and says there is not a negative value adjustment.

Mr. Hitchcock reminds the board the preferred location will be 2000 ft away from Rt. 10.

A. Humes states the wind currents affect Westport Village.

Mr. Hitchcock reminds the board the state addresses air quality.

this is all a bunch of malarkey and opinions, evidence from other areas affected by asphalt plants in near proximity to homes has shown a decrease in property values on average of 27%. and this information along with other documents were submitted to the board and were ignored. Asphalt plants are noisy, smelly and do affect not only property values; but the health of nearby residents

4. Will the proposal result in nuisance or serious hazard to vehicles or pedestrians?

The presence of the hot mix plant will not have any adverse impact on vehicles or pedestrians. May have up to 40 additional trucks per day for asphalt, but that would be offset by a decrease of about 20 trucks per day that now ship material.

once again, another misleading statement and the unsubstantiated opinion of Hitchcock; increased traffic is both a safety hazard and an increase in air pollution from diesel fumes, therefore a nuisance and serious safety issue to anyone driving, walking or living in the area. We find it almost laughable that they say there will be a decrease in truck traffic as they stated before the Planning Board that there would be upward of 80 to 100 trucks a day.

5. Will adequate and appropriate facilities be provided for the proper operation of the proposed use?

The existing house will be converted to office space. Water and sanitary services are available. 

 

Further, the Supreme Court has declared that each of the following conditions must be found in order for a variance/special exception to be legally granted;

a) the variance will not be contrary to the public interest; ( more than 125 people signed a petition against this plant)

b) the variance is consistent with the spirit of the ordinance; seeing as how this is NOT ALLOWED in the Agricultural Zone, it surely is isn't consistent with the spirit of the ordinance

c) substantial justice is done by granting the variance; what justice? Mitchell could build in the Highway Commercial part of his lot without any variances/special exceptions, yet he'd have no room to expand there and would be held up by the State.

d) granting the variance would not diminish the value of surrounding properties; evidence was provided that it would despite statements from Mitchell ans the project was declared one of regional impact.

e) special conditions exist such that literal enforcement of the ordinance results in unnecessary hardship".

there are no conditions .. period.

Planning Board Refuses To Protect Winchester/Swanzey Citizen's

After being wronged by the ZBA last month, citizens of Winchester and Swanzey were once again told their health and concerns over the quality of their lives does not matter to those who swore an oath to protect them. With absolutely no benefit to the town of Winchester or it's people, or compliance with the Town's Master Plan; Mitchell Sand and Gravel got just what it wanted from 6 members of the Planning Board who voted to approve their application for a smelly, noisy, toxic fume spewing asphalt plant on Route #10, which will lower property values in the area and drive residents indoors during operating hours. For those of us who will be affected 6 days a week from 6:00am to mid afternoon and quite possibly during the night time hours too, this fight will go on !

The board received hundreds of pages of credible evidence and hours of testimony on numerous topics besides air quality; but in their haste to go home early last night they did not even broach the subjects they could have considered to deny this application. One other issue that stands out in all of this is that Mitchell, who owned property in the Manning Hill/Burt Hill area and who approached the board several years ago after being turned down in his home town of Turner Falls, Massachusetts, pulled his application after a certain town employee made it clear to others that there were too many expensive homes in that area for something like this. Care to guess who was involved ?

Published: Tuesday, January 04, 2011

WINCHESTER — After months of heated public hearings, the Winchester Planning Board’s final meeting on plans for a proposed asphalt plant was relatively quiet.

The application was approved 6-1, with a list of 21 conditions attached addressing a range of environmental concerns.
During previous public hearings on the proposal, residents had pleaded with the board to reject the application, citing concerns about the effect the plant would have on both health and property values in town.
But on Monday night about 30 people assembled quietly to listen as the board reviewed the application by Mitchell Sand and Gravel of Shelburne, Mass., to add asphalt production capabilities to the company’s gravel pit near the Winchester-Swanzey town line on Route 10.
At one point, a “stop the asphalt” sign fell out of a resident’s pocket and unfolded slightly on the floor. She returned it to her coat. 
It was clear early in the meeting that the majority of the board’s seven members were inclined to approve the application, but they spent almost two hours hammering out the limitations they would impose on the facility. 
During the public hearing, which began in November, residents opposed to the plant urged board members to consider air quality concerns in their ruling.
Board members, however, pointed out they do not have the jurisdiction to regulate air quality, which is done by the N.H. Department of Environmental Services.
However, the board is requiring the company to give the town copies of the regular maintenance test reports it submits to the state environmental agency.
The reports will be available for the public to review at town hall.
Also available at town hall will be the results of an annual test of four water-quality monitoring wells the board is requiring. This includes two existing wells and two wells to be added downhill of the proposed plant.
The board set the normal operation of the facility at 6 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., six days a week.
The plant will take up no more that 1.5 acres inside the existing gravel pit. The board set a maximum height of 80 feet.
Mitchell Sand and Gravel representative Robert Snedeker said three or four employees will be hired at the start, with the possibility of hiring 25 people within five years. He said the company plans to have the plan running within a year.
If the company is hired for a job that requires overnight operation, it will be required to give 14 days advance notice to the towns of Winchester and Swanzey as well as abutting property owners.
The facility will be subject to a review by the planning board and the Winchester Fire Department before it begins operations, to make sure it complies with the town’s requirements.
Board member Kim Gordon voted against the application. She questioned whether the erosion and runoff plan for the facility were complete, as it lacked an engineer’s stamp of approval.
“I’m not going to approve anything the engineer won’t put his stamp on,” she said.
Snedeker said he thought the board’s conditions were fair.
“There’s nothing there that’s unreasonable,” he said.
But some residents were dissatisfied.
“None of the things the people asked for were considered ... there’s been ample knowledge of people being upset about this,” said Winchester resident Julia Ferrari.
Ferrari intends to continue her opposition.
“This is not the end of the process,” she said. “The state still has to review things.”

Sarah Trefethen can be reached at 352-1234, extension 1439, or strefethen@keenesentinel.com