Incoming

Outgoing Correspondence:

DISCUSSION: Ms. Killam reported that she submitted this on Sept. 7^th . She increased the budget by $6,000 to $24,000 (33% increase over 2006); the reason being 2006 will be over-expended. Relates to master plan, recording clerk, and circuit rider. Passed current year report to date to members for review. Next year is a significant increase.

Mr. Earley noted regarding the circuit rider, and the last planning board meeting with Peter Lewis with discussion from Mr. Lewis regarding state tests on his wells and water system, usage. The circuit rider indicated he had to watch this too; and Mr. Earley asked where the circuit rider gets the authority to watch water. Ms. Killam answered possibly because of regulation changes at the state; Mr. Earley thought the intended use of the circuit rider was for master plan and Mr. Lewis’ water system is not in the master plan.

Ms. Killam reflected that in the past one could have a number of small wells which none of them individually would be considered a large ground water withdrawal. Regulations have changed and the cumulative set of wells, add up to enough to fit the definition. Never before has the town had to worry about large ground water withdrawals, but under the new regulations, we will have to be concerned//actually it is the state’s concern.

Mr. Guischard asked to clarify that Atkinson would not pay the circuit rider for the function of monitoring the wells, but that he was hired just for the master plan; and Ms. Killam responded that Atkinson was paying the circuit rider to: 1) review plans when they come in, yet no plans have come in recently; 2) interface with developers to make sure that applications meet the basic requirements; and 3) make sure that department heads that need to be contacted regarding the application/that all communication takes place.

Mr. Morse noted that appeared the circuit rider would be doing what Steve Keach, the Town Engineer, does; Ms. Killam said yes, he would be doing a lot of what Mr. Keach does. Mr. Morse asked when the Planning Board hired the circuit rider; and Mr. Sapia pointed out that the Planning Board does not have that authority, the Selectmen hire the circuit rider. It was done for a number of issues.

Mr. Sapia reported that this same day, the Selectmen interviewed five people for the position of Town Engineer, including Mr. Keach. All interviewed indicated that hiring a circuit rider or some type of professional planner was an excellent decision to increase the level of professionalism in this town. Some issues brought out by these people was the fact that the planner had a broader perspective in looking at issues that affect the town from beyond, like Rte. 93 and Rte. 111.

Secondly, an engineer is an expert in engineering, and the circuit rider is more of a planner; and one of the reasons the Selectmen brought a circuit rider in was to help with the master plan. The circuit rider has already helped to move things along by breaking the project up into groups. Look at a master planner as a resource, as someone who facilitates ideas to bring before the planning board and board of selectmen; and make sure that we are looking 5-10 years to the future with a good strong master plan.

Mr. Sapia continued that all members of the planning board and board of selectmen were volunteers doing their best; it is a good idea to bring in a facilitator at a professional level. This person has experience, can give advice and lend a hand, make suggestions. Ms. Killam has been looking for help for five months. Mr. Earley asked how much this circuit rider is paid; and Mr. Sapia answered an hourly rate to reach $6,000

Mr. Earley asked if Atkinson was going to still have an engineer; and Mr. Sapia said yes. Mr. Earley continued in that he felt Mr. Keach had done a good job and suggested reviewing the current members’ opinions as the planning board interacts the most with the town engineer. He has expedited and improved the processes of the planning board and the public meetings. The road agent also works closely with the town engineer and should have some input.

Mr. DiMaggio thought the planning board would be meeting with the prospects soon and be included in the interview process; but Mr. Sapia noted this had not been in the works. Five interviews took place today; it is the Selectmen’s responsibility to keep looking at and reviewing people and insuring a good job is being done. There were ten applications initially, narrowed down to five. Mr. Sapia noted that he had contacted Ms. Killam, tried Mr. Stewart and Bob, the Bldg. Insp. For any pertinent questions they may have to be asked during the interviews. He considered this a vendor-type position, and as in most businesses, there is an occasional vendor review.

Mr. DiMaggio asked if the Planning board would be invited in to the loop at some point for opinion regarding the person with whom the board will be working

Mr. Morse noted the planning board also had a circuit rider to work with where the board had no input in the decision. Mr. DiMaggio suggested if the board could not give formal input, they should be allowed to give informal input. It would be polite to ask the town engineer’s co-workers to have some input in the process.

Mr. Sapia noted that this topic has been discussed at many Selectmen’s meetings; and Mr. Earley noted he had brought up the topic at a planning board meeting two months ago but it was not resolved then. Last time there was a selection process, the planning board was deeply involved.

8:45p.m. Emergency call/Mr. Earley and Mr. Stewart left.

Mr. Sapia understood the need for the planning board to look at the other candidates and that the members were comfortable with Mr. Keach. Ms. Killam asked what happens next in this process; and Mr. Sapia said the Selectmen required more details from some of the individuals and then it will be reviewed and a decision made. He will check with the other Selectmen regarding including some planning board members( A large group was deemed not appropriate).

Mr. DiMaggion reiterated the Planning board being involved in this decision process in the past; and Mr. Sapia noted that all three Selectmen’s opinions were consistent regarding each applicant; and he would work at including the planning board. Mr. DiMaggio did not want to see volunteers alienated; and Mr. Sapia said they will weigh the boards feelings; and noted the need for mutual respect from both boards.

Mr. Fletcher said he looks at government as a business as any other business but feels unfortunately it is a spoils system with personalities getting involved. In the real work you are reviewed every year on merits and contributions to the system. Here in town, that doesn’t happen; the town engineer exists for 2-3 years, only reviewed when there is a particular question. We need to run this more like a business. Mr. Sapia noted the criticism taken for doing his job, as done today; and it would have been a lot easier to keep the status quo.

Mr. Morse agreed for the need to review all professional positions in town; but was upset with the non-inclusion of the planning board in a decision regarding the hiring of a person to be working with //both the town engineer and circuit rider. The whole board did not discuss either issue this time. Mr. DiMaggio agreed. As a volunteer, giving up time, he felt the Selectmen should give members that courtesy.

Ms. Miner noted at her position in the business world, she doesn’t get to choose which professionals she will have to work with; someone else makes that choice; and as a mature individual she has to accept it and work with it. She continued that her understanding, as a role of the planning board, would be to give input with regard to requirements seen and felt needed from this individual, a job description and requirements. Let someone else make the decision based on those requirements; this takes personality out and finds who is best for the job. If the planning board is at least allowed to give input as to the job description and what is expected, then whoever the governing body is whose responsibility it is to decide, the planning board has to trust that that board makes the right decision.

Mr. Sapia clarified that the Selectmen didn’t get to interview for a circuit rider, the town applied and was given one. The RFP for town engineer has been advertised for two weeks, and no one from this board called him; but he did agree he probably should have formalized it at a planning board meeting. Ms. Killam added that about three years ago when Mr. Keach’s contract was up for review, a similar situation occurred and the planning board strongly voiced their opinion in a memo to the Selectmen. She agreed that all such positions need to be reviewed.

Ms. Killam responded to Mr. Morse’s earlier question regarding the circuit rider; she was asked several months ago at a Selectmen’s meeting her opinion of the need for a circuit rider and she answered yes: 1) for help with the master plan; and 2) Atkinson has some seriously perforated procedures between the planning office, code enforcement, and the Selectmen’s office. We need help putting our procedures together so they work correctly, that applications make sense, and everything flows and ties. It is disjointed and that is where a circuit rider can help. The Selectmen took action.

Mr. Guischard asked why the town administrator couldn’t correlate, collate, and coordinate forms, etc.? Ms. Killam answered that it had not occurred to her that the town administrator could coordinate planning.

Mr. Fletcher asked if the town engineer worked on behalf of the town and also on behalf of the developer; and Ms. Killam said it is not supposed to happen, the ultimate goal is to work for the twon. Mr. Fletcher disagreed; and Ms. Killam explained that the town engineer is out in the field while the circuit rider is in town hall with planning and paperwork; both working on the town’s behalf to get things done right.

Mr. Sapia added that all the town engineer candidates assured the Selectmen that the town was their customer not the developer; and Mr. Fletcher asked where do they draw the line between serving the best interest of the town and not hurting the developer. Mr. Sapia answered by adhering to the zoning book standards and there is no latitude. The prospects had differing perspectives over recent issues that the town had faced; and one candidate is eliminated who won’t attend night meetings, a definite requirement.

Ms. Killam asked if the board of Selectmen agree to include the planning board, shouldn’t it be after the number of candidates are reduced to the final three. Agreed.

Mr. Morse noted for the record, casual conversation, we had a circuit rider in the past, provided by the same current group, who reviewed plans and it was not a good experience. Ms. Killam suggested considering the circuit rider as handling issues in the town hall. Look at applications, make sure the application is complete, make sure it conforms to zoning, and ensure that it gets forwarded to department heads as appropriate before the Planning board sees it. Mr. Morse thought the board discouraged this happening until the planning board takes it under jurisdiction. Change in procedure??

Ms. Killam continued that the town engineer’s job is to insure the application conforms to engineering standards, highway codes. Then both work with the board during the application, review and approval processes. The town engineer would also supervise during project or site plan. The circuit rider is in house with paperwork. Mr. Dimaggio agreed that the circuit rider is purely a paperwork position and usually is short term.

Some members felt the whole board should meet the new candidates, some members wanted to participate and some trusted the decision that will be made. Ms. Miner felt as long as the planning board had input in the requirements, she didn’t see the need to meet the candidates; and Ms. Killam didn’t feel the planning board had any input in the job requirements. Mr. Morse said as a final comment on the circuit rider; we have been working with one person reviewing plans and it has been working well; he did see the need for the circuit rider to do all the other ideas mentioned; but he didn’t see why the town needed a circuit rider to do the plans as well. Ms. Killam felt the circuit rider would only review the applications not the actual plans. Mr. Sapia reiterated that the circuit rider may have a broader view in certain situations and in abutting areas, with regional impact. All indications are that it is a positive thing; a resource and a tool for all to use.

9:20p.m. Mr. Earley and Mr. Stewart returned from the emergency call. Mr. DiMaggio recapped that while these members were out, that the board expressed its disappointment at not being involved in the process and Mr. Sapia will check with the Selectmen to allow the board to be involved in the second interview of the top three contenders; and listen to the boards opinions.

Mr. DiMaggio noted three interesting articles on new legislation in Town & City. 1) Video terminals being forbidden at the dumps effective July 2007; and Mr. Stewart noted that Atkinson was already compliant with this five years ago. People have to pay to deposit in the electronics recycle bin. 2) Zoning change, Chapter 285, House Bill 1508, Amending RSA 676:12, VI//protects planning board applicants from proposed zoning subdivision and site plan review changes that would affect their applications. Under the amended law, the proposed change will not apply to an application which was subject to notice under RSA 676 prior to the first legal notice of the proposed change. Ms. Killam reviewed that it is being moved to the notification rather than as currently done when we accept the application. Mr. Morse added currently if we don’t take a plan under jurisdiction, we can change zoning. This is stopping that from happening by way of as soon as the plan is seen/noticed, no changes affect the plan. 3) In lieu of payment for wetlands’ restoration, Chapter 313, Senate Bill 140, allows DES to accept payment in lieu of other compensatory money, litigation for an unavoidable loss in aquatic resource functions and values resulting in from wetlands activity if it meets the US Army Corps of Engineers criteria; minimum payment is permissible; only if activity affects less than one acre of wetlands.

Mr. Early commented on his review of instructions for completing and adopting a model flood plain development ordinance; and asked if this was a planning board function and Ms. Killam answered yes. Mr. Earley felt the building inspector would be involved; seems like a lot of work involved regarding permit applications and such. Were any houses damaged in the spring floods; and Mr. Stewart said no, and added there are three flood zones indicated in town (Killam/Shaffer on West Side Dr., Little River Run and Island Pond.

Mr. Sapia reiterated that there was supposed to be arrangements made for an expert speaker to come and meet with the planning board and selectmen at a Selectmen’s meeting. Mr. Stewart pointed out that the only likely conflicts are around the pond, and he felt our zoning was more strict than the proposed adoption. Ms. Killam explained that with the floods in May came a question regarding the national flood insurance program, but Atkinson doesn’t participate, so people can’t get the insurance The Selectmen voted to go with it and the planning board is responsible to enact an ordinance. Flood Plain.

Mr. Sapia will recheck with the town administrator about facilitating the arrangements; and Mr. Stewart suggested this as a good project for the circuit rider. Here there was some discussion regarding the town administrator and all the necessary facilitating coming up. Ms. Killam added that too much of Mr. McAllister’s time is spent on recording meeting minutes; and Mr. Sapia noted he also does a lot of research and brings a lot of tools and assets to the town which no one really sees. Selectmen keep coming and going, but he’s the stability, knows how to both with IT and process and has a good perspective on everything.

MASTER PLAN SURVEY: Ms. Killam asked members to review quickly the rough draft of questions and propose any eliminations or additions to make a final pass prior to sending it off to UNH.

Page 1-General Info/Demographics; one survey per household; assuming the age of the one adult filling it out.

Ms. Miner suggested asking educational level.

Mr. Guischard suggested age ranges for the adults.

Mr. Stewart asked if regarding how many years in town might be better if asked how many years in the home; and Ms. Killam answered that the intended response was number of years not homes. Ms. Miner suggested moving this question further down into the list.

Page 2-Meat of the Survey-Asking opinions/’Should the Town’? These questions came from Mr. DiMaggio’s earlier survey. The reason they were used was to see how many of these will be as important to the general population and not just those interested in particular issues.

Mr. Stewart noted where the town has frontage on Island Pond via Conservation, should there be a question like: does the town need a public swimming area; or a town beach. Why limit it to a pool. Add the question.

If there is a large response on any of the questions, they will have to entered into the master plan.

Ms. Killam noted a lot of the information in the survey is not necessarily land use planning, but issues that should be looked at by departments and capital. The questions were submitted in several different formats to make it more interesting to fill out.

Ms. Miner asked about the water supply question and the need to know which the person had/ public or private.

On the right side of this page, were questions asking about satisfaction geared to town services and facilities with very subjective ratings.

Mr. Morse felt regarding zoning and the set back issue, the answers we get aren’t going to mean anything because it doesn’t ask why they are satisfied or dissatisfied. Mr. Dziechowski noted the same issue with EEE question, of more or less spraying, why. Both Mr. Morse and Mr. Dziechowski felt this particular format not a good idea to get real answers. Ms. Killam noted that this was why Atkinson was using UNH to structure the questions to get more meaningful answers.

Next page-Rate Town Facilities and Services: Mr. Guischard noted that the Atkinson Academy was on the list but not Timberlane; Ms. Killam pointed out the need to be in town, but further along could be included in services, schools as this is not a land use issue. Mr. Morse pointed out that the town doesn’t own the schools; suggested putting both schools on and seeing what answers come back and then forward the information to the correct department.

Mr. Sapia commented that similar to the school issue is the roads in town; some are state responsibility; maybe we want some feedback regarding the state maintained roads as opposed to the town highway department roads.

Next page-Responses are: Agree, Disagree, Strongly, etc.

Mr. Morse suggested adding something regarding town center zoning; and Mr. DiMaggio verbalized: should we encourage private development in the town center?

Mr. Dziechowski suggested a question: should cluster open space be accessible to the public?

Mr. Morse suggested a question: should hundreds of acres of conservation land be open to hunters? How do we change things; get back on the warrant and do one piece a year for reopening.

Mr. Dziechowski was concerned that there was a lot more town facilities issues and not much land use in the survey.

Mr. Morse asked when this had to be back and how much time the board had to digest it. ASAP via email for any additional changes.

Mr. Dziechowski suggested members read the l998 questionnaire which is on line. He noted that it was interesting to see the number of responses to the selection of OTHER. He suggested putting it on more than one set of questions.

Mr. DiMaggio asked if the master plan committee had reviewed the 98 questions while doing the new one; and Ms. Killam said no really. Mr. DiMaggio thought perhaps a follow-up on changes and or the need for more changes should be looked at.

Mr. Morse suggested a question: should we do more for workforce housing (portable) for firemen and policemen/this would affect zoning.

Ms. Miner suggested a question: household income.

Mr. Earley suggested a question: how to keep young people in town; and Mr. Stewart added that there were no starter homes in Atkinson.

MASTER PLAN CHAPTERS: Last meeting the members volunteered to champion certain chapters and Ms. Killam had several copies of each of the existing chapters made for each group to review as they begin their work.

Mr. Dziechowski/Natural Resources with Mr. Fletcher

Mr. Sapia/Community Facilities with Ms. Miner, and Mr. Guischard

Mr. DiMaggio/Historic and Cultural with Mr. Earley

Ms. Killam/Existing Land Use with Mr. Stewart and Mr. Morse

Ms. Killam updated that it was anticipated to get these chapters done this fall and at the end get the survey reflected in there for the future. Next spring will be the chapter on Future Land Use. RPC will help with population, housing, transportation chapters and the two newly required chapters. We need to get through a public hearing before the end of the year. Each chapter has a recommendation section at the end; use the survey information there.

Mr. Dziechowski suggested using email groups to communicate back and forth while working/ Groups @ yahoo.com/ampuc. All files from 1998 are there and in pdf format, can be printed but only viewer rights.

Ms. Killam noted that they had two more volunteers, two attorneys, Wayne???, and John Troy.

Meeting adjourned unanimously at 10:15p.m.

Joanne Carbone, Recording Secretary