Recently in Lions Club Category
Karel was asked to explain about the fields for
in athletics. Donna Kuethe stated that more than just children are using the fields and the demand is increasing. The Selectmen were asked and Karel responded that there has been a review of the placement of playing fields and a future building at the Lions Club Property. Carter presented the plat, explaining that the design allows for the work to be done in phases and one is not contingent upon the other. He added that the design has 6 to 7 phases with a 10 to 15 year build-out plan. Initially, drainage will be installed for the whole property. Ed stated that he wished the plan had been presented earlier and his concern about going forth with this project. He also stated his dismay that the 2008 amount budgeted was in excess of what was actually spent. Carter explained that the discrepancy was not as large as it numerically appears and was due to many factors. He added that a large percent will be used towards the tax rate in an effort to keep it low. ABC Chair, Jean Beadle stated that they have recommended completing a quarterly budget review in order identify if department’s are within their budgeted amount.
The above is from the 2/9/09 Board of Selectmen’s meeting minutes. Funny how things have changed a bit since then. What statistics are there to back up the statement made by former School Board Member/Chair, Laurie Whitley, that the ‘fields at the at the Academy and Central School are over utilized’? How is it possible to over ‘utilize’ a field? What does that mean? Too many people on the field at the same time? People lining up to use the fields? Over scheduling or conflicting schedules? How do any of the above warrant building another field?
I wonder if the statement that 67% of all students are involved in athletics’ is still true. Show me the numbers. No one has ever come forth with the numbers. It’s always statements such as ‘more than just the children are using the fields and the demand is increasing’, according to Recreation Director Donna Kuethe. What does that mean? How many? When? How often? What were they doing? What time of year?
Let’s look further into these minutes. Carter explained the design for the Lion’s Club property is‘to be done in phases and one is not contingent upon the other’. Really? ‘The design has 6 to 7 phases with a 10 to 15 year build out plan’. I wonder how that changed to a 3 phase plan to start by 4/1/10, with the drainage and clearing of trees for all 3 phases to begin immediately. Where was I when this was announced?
How many times has the Town Administrator been asked about ‘staff meetings’ and where the minutes were for those meetings this last year? The citizens of Moultonboro are not dumb. While many people don’t care or pay attention to the activities of the government of our town, which is typical across the country, many do. Many pay attention to and follow what goes on at all the board and committee meetings. So do I. But it is apparent that our Town Administrator has little regard for the ‘frequent flyers’ as he condescendingly refers to the folks that regularly attend BoS meetings.
I am appalled at the activities of our Town Administrator and the actions that he has taken in so many meetings held under the guise of staff meetings.
According to the minutes of 2/09/09, there were many concerns about proceeding ahead with the Lion’s Club project.
Ed stated that he wished the plan had been presented earlier and his
concern about going forth with this project. He also stated his dismay that the 2008 amount budgeted was in excess of what was actually spent. Carter explained that the discrepancy was not as large as it numerically appears and was due to many factors. He added that a large percent will be used towards the tax rate in an effort to keep it low.
Where did Carter learn mathmatics. ‘The discrepancy was not as large as it numerically appears’. I don’t get it. Numbers are what numbers are. We are talking dollars here, not some twisted statistics to prove something one way or the other. Or are we?
A few notes from 1/108 BoS meeting discussing the RSPC proposal for a community center:
He [Joel] feels that the project should be put off for a few years until the
state educational funding question is resolved. Joel suggested putting money in the
Gee, do you think? Why then are we less than a year later, proposing the same thing, only in a bigger hurry? What is going on here folks? Someone, somewhere is pushing harder and harder to get something going on the Lion’s Club property. But, why? Well, here’s a thought: once we get a ‘soccer field’ built, why not build something else? Like a Community Center? After all, there’s so much space there, right? How ‘bout 237 parking spaces for all the programs that will be conducted in that building? Human Services will be in there, too. Oh really? Since when? Who decided that and when? Was that in another staff meeting of which there are no minutes?
Goodness, folks, this is a bit too much for me to digest all at once. I’m overwhelmed by the magnitude of the arrogance that I am too ignorant to care as an ordinary citizen or an abutter to the Lion’s Club property to see that there are those with an agenda pushing forth to build something, anything on that land and as fast as possible.
I have personal reasons for not wanting anything built there, as an abutter, but the more that we see in writing and in conceptual ideas, and the more we hear of the history, the wetlands, wildlife, environmental concerns, the angrier I get.
I have nothing against a soccer field, but I believe it should be built in 1) a central location, which the Lion’s Club is not, 2) where the kids are, which the Lion’s Club is not, 3) not on a wetland, which the Lion’s Club is!! Has anyone consulted with the Town Planner on this project? Anyone at all?
Let’s take a closer look at the entire ‘concept’ here. Let’s suppose it was determined that there is a real need for an additional all purpose ball field. What would the criteria be for choosing a location? Here’s a few that come to my mind, and I will admit that I have no training in town planning or civil engineering:1)High, dry land; 2) Central location and close to existing parking; 3) the least expensive land in clearing or developing a field. So, do any of those fit the Lion’s Club property? Uh, no.
Once upon a time, a long time ago, kids used to walk, bike and run all over the place. In this day and age, they don’t. They are driven or bussed to and from school, activities, etc. The proposed ‘safe routes to school’ doesn’t work for me either. This is a plan that was developed as a way to convince people that the Lion’s Club property is the perfect place for a ball field. I can tell you from my own observations driving passed the school, the high volume of personal vehicles driven by parents to bring their kids to school. No one walks to school. My neighbors drive their kids, and they live less than a mile away.
In my opinion, there are so many fingers in the pie. It’s hard to find out how this entire ‘conceptual plan’ came into existence. Nowhere can I find meeting minutes that have discussed these plans before the public. From the 9/17/09 BoS meeting, Karel summarized the costs for the Town engineers design for the ‘Recreational fields at the Lion’s Club property’ at $54,740. Gee, nothing like spending a good portion of the $300,000 approved for the construction of a new field and the repair of Playground Drive field, to come up with plans that the Planning Board have found unacceptable and of poor quality, looking as if they were thrown together at the last minute.
Here we are at the end of March 2010, and plans were discussed since Sept 09, and poor quality plans referred to as ‘conceptual plans’ are the best the Town Administrator and Town engineer have come up with? Gee, folks. This only cost us $54k! Let’s send them back to the coloring books for another $1500!!
Where does this madness stop?
I would, however, like to give kudos the the Board of Selectmen and the new Chair for questioning these 'conceptual plans' and sending them back to come up with plans that: 1) make sense; (I don't care how many times!) 2) that will be put forth in a public hearing! Finally!! Someone might actually be listening to the town's people and especially the abutters!
Maybe there is hope after all!
Linda N. Punturieri
Abutter
Lions Club hearing Part 1 from Moulton Boro on Vimeo.
Lions Club Hearing P2 from Moulton Boro on Vimeo.
Lions Club Hearing P3 from Moulton Boro on Vimeo.
It's that time of year again! Town Meeting is fast approaching! We recommend that everyone take some time to read the Town Warrant for this year. Click below to see each Warrant Article.
There are several articles this year that we recommend paying particular attention to.We have highlighted a few of the Warrant Articles for readers to consider.
Article 9 for $718,804 for Road Improvement Program. No where does it mention that the bond dollars that the Town paid off for the Transfer Station las yeart, has been rolled into this project budget. Please vote No on this article.
ARTICLE 9
To see if the Town will vote to appropriate the sum of Seven Hundred Eighteen Thousand Eight Hundred Four dollars ($718,804) for a road improvement program, and to meet said appropriation with funds from a NH Department of Transportation Highway Block Grant of One Hundred Forty Three Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Nine dollars ($143,259) and the balance of Five Hundred Seventy Five Thousand Five Hundred Forty Five dollars ($575,545) from taxation.
Project Budget
Paradise Drive (Reconstruction of 2,000 +/- lf) $400,000
Randall Road (Remove pavement rebuild base 550 +/- lf) $12,000
Winaukee Road Shim & Overlay (7,000 +/- lf) $200,000
Geneva Point Road 1” Overlay – Shim (2,000 +/- lf) $32,181
Engineering $74,623 TOTALS $718,804
Note: Inclusion of any road on this list was based upon a condition assessment and budget estimate prepared in January of 2010. It is no guarantee of work being undertaken on the identified roadway. Final construction decisions are made upon detailed engineering and actual bids received. Recommentd vote NO
(Recommended by Selectmen 5 - 0) (Recommended by Advisory Budget Committee 5 – 0)
Article 10 To amend Article 21 from 2009 Town Meeting to extend appropriation date to Dec 31, 2011. Please vote No on this article. This is something that never should have happened. Let Fox Hollow wait its turn. Time to put this one to bed.
ARTICLE 10
To see if the Town will vote to amend its action under Article 21 of the 2009 Annual Town Meeting, relative to the appropriation for Fox Hollow Road intersection improvements, by striking the date of December 30, 2010, at which time the appropriation was to lapse, and inserting in lieu thereof the date of December 30, 2011.
(Recommended by Selectmen 5 - 0)
(Recommended by Advisory Budget Committee 5 – 0) Recommend vote NO
ARTICLE 11
To see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate the sum of Three Hundred Thirty One Thousand dollars ($331,000) for a program of capital improvements and expenditures, and equipment as generally illustrated below.
a. Fire Equipment $ 13,000
b. Mosquito Abatement $ 52,000 X
c. Police Cruiser $ 32,500
d. Municipal Buildings Energy & Maintenance Upgrade $ 30,000
e. Highway Dept. Street Sign Upgrade – Phase 2 $ 15,000
f. Highway/B&G 1 ½ Ton w/Accessories $ 80,000 X
g. Highway Dept. Brush Chipper $ 30,000
j. Town Hall Generator $ 30,000
l. Fleet Passenger/Cargo Vehicle $ 25,000 X
m. Town Hall & Old Fire Station Repairs/Paint $ 23,500 Amend Article to eliminate ‘X’s
Total $ 331,000
(Recommended by Selectmen 5 - 0)
(Recommended by Advisory Budget Committee 5 – 0)
Article 14 Phase 2 & 3 of Moultonboro Neck Pathway. This wasn't done right to begin with, so why should we throw good money after bad to extend this? Please vote No on this article.
ARTICLE 14
To see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate the sum of Thirty Seven Thousand Five Hundred dollars ($37,500) for a program of capital improvements to the Moultonboro Neck Pathway (Phase 2 and 3) and to meet said appropriation by Thirty Seven Thousand Five Hundred dollars ($37,500) from taxation and to designate the appropriation as non-lapsing, per RSA 32:7, VI, until December 30, 2012 or whenever the project is certified as completed by the Board of Selectmen, whichever shall first occur.
(Recommended by Selectmen 5 - 0)
(Recommended by Advisory Budget Committee 5 – 0) Recommend NO
ARTICLE 34
To see if the municipality will vote to establish an Expendable Trust Fund under the provisions of RSA 31:19-a, to be known as the Milfoil Control Trust Fund, for the purpose of ongoing management of milfoil in the town’s waterways and to designate the Selectboard as agents to expend both principle and interest from this fund under rules and regulations to be promulgated. Further to raise and appropriate the sum of Two Hundred Thousand dollars ($200,000) to be placed in this fund.
(By Petition)
(Recommended by Selectmen 5 - 0)
(Recommended by Advisory Budget Committee 5 - 0) Recommend vote Yes
The Real BIG issue is the Town Budget. Frankly, there need to be more cuts. Some of the above mentioned, should be eliminated from the budget until such a time as our economy has improved for all of our residents. Then, they may be revisited. Please send the BoS back to the drawing board and make some more cuts! Vote No!
ARTICLE 41
To see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate, subject to any and all changes made at this meeting, the sum of Eight Million Two Hundred Fifty Three Thousand Six Hundred Seventy dollars ($8,253,670) to pay the general operating expenses of Town Government for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2010.
[Note: This operating budget warrant article does not include appropriations contained in any other
warrant articles.] Recommend vote NO
One article of interest is Article 17, the naming of the Lion's Club property to Veteran's Memorial Park. This is a wonderful tribute to our veterans that have, are and will serve our country. This is not an opportunity to make it a children's contest. This is for adults. Frankly, kids don't care about the name of a field or a park. They just want to play. Please support this article with a Yes vote. It's a shame that all the BoS and the ABC did not show support for this article.
ARTICLE 17
Shall we adopt the name for town property located at 139 Old Route 109, formally known as the Lions Club Property, to be named the Veterans Memorial Park. And that any field or ball park be named Veterans Field. And that if more than one ball park or ball field, that name used will be Veterans Field 1, Veterans Field 2. This name shall remain in effect until changed by future warrant article.
(By Petition)
(Recommended by Selectmen 2 Yes - 0 No - 3 Abstain) Recommend vote Yes
(Recommended by Advisory Budget Committee 1 Yes - 0 No - 4 Abstain)
The following letter from Town Administrator Carter Terenzini to a member of the MCA was in response to inquiries about what is happening behind the scenes at the town owned Lions Club property. Apparently, a lot has been going on and as is typical it seems with our Town Administrator, out of the public eye.
MCA
I write in response to your document request for (a) "All the staff members of the team that is developing the Lions Club property Sonya, Donna, Tom ect" (sic) and (b) "Also the reason all the staff meetings since 2008, time and dates, why they do not come under RSA 91 A, meetings to be posted and minutes." I will respond in the order you raised the issues.
a.) I am managing the project. I include the user agency (Recreation) and the maintenance agency (DPW) as appropriate to each discussion. I also draw upon those with experience and institutional knowledge of the history of the proposal and those who I believe can give me insight as to various volunteer efforts that might be undertaken. To date that has been Mr. Tom Howard and Mr. Larry Cotter. The project is being designed under the direction of Ray Korber, P.E. Principal in the firm of KVPartners LLC which is the Town Engineer. He draws upon those professionals on his team as he needs.
b.) RSA 91-A was crafted to ". . . ensure. . . public access to the actions, discussions and records of all public bodies. . .". A "Public body" means ". . .Any legislative body, governing body, board, commission, committee, agency, or authority of any. . . town. . .or any committee, subcommittee, or subordinate body thereof, or advisory committee thereto." [RSA 91-A VI (d)]. Simply put, the appointed staff of any community is not a Public Body. The staff is not engaged hi a "meeting" as defined by RSA 91-A. Such a convening of staff and others thus does not trigger the requirement to produce and maintain minutes under this statute.
Notwithstanding that the Staff is not a public body for the purposes of RSA 91-A, we do and will provide substantial opportunity for the distribution of information and public discussion of the major construction projects being proposed or undertaken. For this recreation fields project I expect this meeting will be sometime in November.
I trust this has, again, answered these questions.
Carter Terenzini
Town Administrator
CC: BoS; Town Counsel
