All towns · brentwood

Selectboard Meeting 09/01/2026 Brentwood, NH

Video

Thank you.
Thank you.
Good evening, we'll start the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance.
Pledge of Allegiance.
Pledge of Allegiance to the flag, United States of America, and to the Republic for which
it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Amen.
Good evening, everybody.
And I'm going to make a motion for Paul to attend remotely.
I will second that.
All in favor?
Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
And we can let him in.
Is he there?
I don't know why Sue.
Join.
Is that?
We had join to do.
Well, I have it on my computer, but let's ask Paul to this one.
I think we do this.
That shows up, right?
Well, that shows up.
Paul is there.
Check.
There he is.
Nice backdrop.
Very nice.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Hello.
You look good.
You must have stayed at a Holiday Inn last night.
A Hilton True.
Okay.
It depends.
Okay.
All right.
Let's jump to it.
You have to read all those every week?
We got to review and sign the portal.
No, we don't have to.
Where do we go?
And you said you changed up something on the checks?
So what I did was on each one of those.
Sue, can you just hit your microphone, please?
Sorry.
So each one of these were checked off.
I initialed each one of these and made one change and the order was changed, too, because
there was something off in the order.
So otherwise, basically.
So you've already reconciled it?
Yeah.
This part of it.
And everything's checked out?
Yeah.
That makes me happy.
This is the treasurer's report, which has all the checks stapled to it.
Okay.
You want these?
Yep.
I'm going to pass this treasurer's report around.
We'll look at the sign, potentially.
If we can get back to that.
Just going to go through the checks.
Are these all the same thing?
Didn't she just say that she already checked those?
Okay.
So this is all set?
Yeah, it's all set.
So this is duplicate?
Yes, it is.
Okay.
And did you do all these, too?
I didn't know.
Okay.
So the payroll's already been checked.
And what error did you find?
Just one that was an employee that had a $25 due to not taking insurance.
Oh, okay.
And then one was just out of alphabetical order.
Okay.
So the total for the payroll for checks was $50,354.36.
Put into AP.
That is different than this number, just so you know.
We're showing checks was $50,354.36.
Total was $64,374.80.
Is that right?
Well, maybe it's broken out differently on that paper.
So here they have.
Oh, because they're putting in here Town Bank 2.
It's hot in here.
It is.
A little toasty in here.
Like one of these open here.
Direct deposit, $40,087.30.
Right?
Yeah.
And then checks.
You guys want to open the window down there.
$934.89.
What's the $40,087?
My only one, is it hot in here?
Payroll taxes.
Oh, there you go.
It's payroll taxes.
It was $40,087.30.
And then another payroll tax.
$9,332.17.
I wonder why the numbers are so different.
PD had six hours of overtime.
Fire department had seven and a half.
And on call for PD was $25,000.
Highway department was perfect.
No overtime for them.
Of course, it's not plowing season, so that makes sense.
Accounts payable.
We're about to do that.
These are all set.
Because she checked all that, so I'm not going to recheck it.
That we can go over if you want.
Vehicle repairs, $20 to Aiden's Garage.
Amazon Capital Services.
It's a different pile.
Yeah.
Which one do you have?
This is every source.
Electric.
Is that rec, maybe?
Jim, if you look at the top of the page, does it say, like, for rec?
Rec, yeah.
This is check manifest right here.
Here you go.
Vehicle repairs.
Okay.
All right.
$20 to Aiden's.
Yeah.
We need to get the, where's the.
Amazon Capital Services.
$268.18.
Yep.
Ben's Uniforms, $39.80.
Correct.
TD Bank, $56.78.
Hold on a second.
Bulldog.
Yep.
Comcast is $595.30.
Well, how much is Bulldog?
Bulldog was the $56.78.
Okay.
Comcast.
Is $595.30.
Yep.
Connected Office Technologies, $119.
Yep.
Daphne is $26.60.
Correct.
Dragon Mosquito, $5,795.
Yep.
E&J Auto Parts is $175.52.
Correct.
Eversource is $373.22.
Correct.
Fidelity Investments, $1,600.
Correct.
High Flying Flag Company, $120.
Correct.
Impact Fire Services, LLC is $3,818.50.
Correct.
And the Worski Law is $2,500 even.
Correct.
Jeff Collins, $5.
Yep.
Northeast Electrical is $117.25.
Correct.
Helmack is $125.
Correct.
PK Enterprises is $140.
Correct.
Samson Fastener is $16.20.
Correct.
Seacoast Mills is $20.92.
Correct.
Truly Clean is $1,770.
Correct.
Unifers Corp for $168.37.
Correct.
And Valak is $110.
Correct.
For a total of $17,980.64.
Correct.
We have basic ones, right?
REC Manifest.
Oh, those are permits.
You got the REC stuff?
Mm-hmm.
Okay.
REC, I have Eversource 344, 344.48.
Correct.
And then I have Boundtree Medical.
And that should be $67.16.
Correct.
All right.
So we just got to have to be signed.
Yep.
I think I've signed those, too.
Mm-hmm.
Nope.
So that all can go around as a packet.
I'll take a motion for the payroll and accounts payable.
Second.
All in favor, roll call.
Jim?
Aye.
Aye.
Paul, you're abstaining or aye?
I'm an aye.
Okay.
I heard you.
Okay.
I'll abstain.
Okay.
Just because I haven't looked at it yet.
I don't want to hold things up.
That's good.
All right.
And public meeting mats.
Non-public and public.
Yep.
Yeah.
Public ones were in the email.
Oh, yeah.
I always want the copy.
Otherwise, I'm looking at it from my phone, so no big deal.
That's okay.
Oh, here.
That goes with it.
I'm a little hard because I'm always up.
Give me the printout.
That's the library.
I know.
Yeah, I don't.
Is there a copy here?
Dave.
Oh, there you go.
Do we have non-public copies, too?
I didn't see it in the non-public.
I'm going to look at that.
I'm sorry about that.
I didn't catch it early.
I don't know.
You didn't share it.
Yeah, that's good.
You didn't have to go there.
You didn't have to go there.
You didn't have to go there.
You didn't have to go there.
You didn't have to go there.
You didn't have to go there.
You didn't have to go there.
You didn't have to go there.
You didn't have to go there.
I didn't have to go there.
I didn't have to go there.
I didn't have to go there.
I didn't have to go there.
You didn't have to go there.
I didn't have to go there.
I didn't have to go there.
I didn't have to go there.
I didn't have to go there.
I didn't have to go there.
I didn't have to go there.
I didn't have to go there.
I didn't have to go there.
Is there a copy of the non-public minutes in here, though?
I don't see that.
That's not any.
I have anything, what I wanted to look at.
We should always have a copy of this.
Could you send us the non-public minutes?
No.
Oh, okay.
You may make it.
Okay.
Thank you.
All right.
We'll put a pin in it.
We'll put a pin in it.
I don't know what else is there.
I always want the minutes to look at.
Jim, do you want to jump to this?
Is there anything else in here, Jim?
While we're waiting.
Just you, Jim.
We can, sure.
Yeah.
Okay.
Since Wayne's here, we can also jump to it.
All right.
We'll go on the other side.
Okay.
So some new business.
Wayne came to me with a proposal to replace the
aging tractor that we have.
People might have noticed that we've been lacking on clearing.
Mowing.
Mowing along the roads.
We've had an issue, ongoing issue, trying to get repairs for the attachments to the tractor,
and it's an older piece.
So we had talked about getting a proposal for a new tractor and attachments for mowing.
And so Wayne checked around.
And so Wayne checked around.
The best deal was Beauregard up in Concord with a New Holland tractor.
It's a mid-range tractor.
It's called a 100, New Holland 100.
They came down and surveyed our existing tractor and attachments and gave us the estimate trade-in value of 18,000.
I reviewed that.
It's on the low side, but it's within the range I would consider acceptable range for a trade-in.
I might give them a call and see if I can negotiate a little bit more value there, especially with some of the attachments.
But all in all, with the mower boom, and Wayne, correct me if I'm wrong, it's got a further reach than what we have now.
It's longer reach, right?
So we'll be able to clear more land.
So with the trade-in, as it stands right now, with the extended warranty plan, the setup and everything delivered would be $115,225.26.
I reviewed this with Wayne.
I would like to make the motion that we accept it as is.
And if I can contact them and get an even better price than for the trade, maybe a little bit more, that would be, you know, if there's any room, I'd really try for it.
So how about a motion not to expend more because we have, what, $150 in there?
That is correct.
So make a motion not to expend more than the $115,225,226?
Yep, that would be good.
I would second that.
Okay.
Thank you.
Can I ask?
Yep, go ahead.
Yeah.
Did we only get the one quote?
Wayne went to Chapel Tractor here in town.
They do not have the size tractor that we are looking for, nor do they have the attachment that we would like to get.
So Beauregard was the next closest.
I've dealt with them before.
Wayne has dealt with them before.
And the reason that we went to Beauregard from the beginning is because Fremont, Wayne's friends with the, friendly with the highway department over there, and they just went and bought the same piece and are very happy with the deal.
So Beauregard gave us the same.
So Beauregard gave us the same.
Do we just need to vote to suspend or bypass the typical process for three quotes?
I mean, what's the, I don't know, what do these things typically go for?
It, I mean, they're all, I mean, if you'd like, I can make more calls.
No, no.
But I think that, no, I understand, don't get frustrated.
I understand your question.
They're all going to be pretty close.
I think the deal that we have with them with the $18,000 for the trade-in is a good deal.
Like I said, I think, you know, I hopefully might be able to get a little bit more, but I'm not sure.
But I can certainly call around.
I don't know what, you know, we're going to have to go outside of the scope of where we can.
It wasn't what I was asking.
I was saying we should just make a motion to suspend the typical policy.
Paul's got a question.
Paul?
Yeah, I mean, I'd be concerned about suspending the policy unless there was some sort of time urgency.
So, is there a time urgency?
Grass is growing.
Has been growing all summer.
Right.
Yeah.
Well, if you have a...
Wayne, if you can come up to the microphone, please, and just turn it on.
And Betsy, we'll get to you in a minute.
Yeah.
Thank you.
Yeah.
I know it's going to take a little time, it's going to take about a month probably, to get the machine there.
Because they have to odd, the mower itself isn't there.
Right.
If you have to order that to get it there, then it has to be put on.
But what we were thinking is the faster that we can get this going, we can get detracted down here.
We might be able to get around and get some mowing.
There's a lot of trees out here that need to come down.
And how about this?
Maybe my suggestion would be if we okay the amount, and I'll call around tomorrow, if we can get a better price, we can get that proposal.
But here's what we're up against.
People need to understand that there's only so many tractor dealers in the area.
And now we might be able to get a better quote from somewhere in Maine, but that means that we'd have to get Maine to come down and deal with warranty stuff as well.
So, I will absolutely call around and get other quotes for the same product.
And, yeah, if there's room there to negotiate more, I certainly will.
But let's at least get the ball rolling and say that we want to get a new tractor and go from there.
We did have some public comment.
Jim, have we looked into lease option by chance?
No, we haven't.
We looked into not buying a tractor and renting one because there are – I believe Kingston does that with – who's the company that you went down to talk to about?
MB Tractor.
MB Tractor.
MB Tractor rents these tractors.
They have them.
They have them.
They have these tractors.
MB Tractor does.
But it's $3,000 a day.
It was $10,000 for us to get it for three weeks, and that's quite a bit.
So, what we discussed was does it make sense for us – because we're going to need it for more than three weeks – does it make sense for us to rent this tractor for, you know, a month?
Yeah.
Or do we buy a tractor and use it for not just mowing but for other things as well?
Because it does have a bucket in the front, so we can use it for multiple different things at the highway department.
So, I felt that, you know, I feel comfortable enough that Wayne and I have exhausted this, and it really makes the best sense to actually purchase it.
We do have the money in his account, and therefore, I'd like to move forward with it.
It has a five-year warranty.
Five-year warranty, correct?
Yeah, I think so.
I think the stick was on there.
Yeah.
Betsy, did you have a comment?
So, this is going to be the same day in the fall.
Okay.
Are you guys back at least in the fall or in the spring to talk about the lease option and that might be cheaper and come up with $110,000 and $10,000 revenue?
Is that going to need another tractor above you?
Well, we do now.
Yeah, we do now.
The tractor we have is in 1999, so we're due.
I think the price of the tractor is only like $84,000 for the tractor, really, without the mower.
It's a good deal on the tractor.
Yeah, because they're giving the price was $99,217, but then they're giving a discount of $16,251, plus they're giving us $18,000 for the old tractor, the old Kubota.
So, it's a good deal.
It is a good deal, and Fremont already purchased theirs, and we're sort of piggybacking right with them on this same deal.
Okay.
Anything else from the public?
There is a motion.
Do we want to – so, I will still call around tomorrow and get some more input from other dealers.
We should just expend the three bids, shouldn't we?
Yeah.
Just to kind of vote to expend, you know.
So, vote to expend up to the $1,15, $2,25.
How about to extend and not have the three bids go?
It could be just taken out of the equation and suspend that.
We did that release, didn't we, recently?
I believe so, yeah.
Suspend the three things so we can go on.
Okay.
That's fine.
I mean, it makes it legal for us.
As part of the motion?
I will put that as part of the motion.
All right.
Make a motion and we suspend the three bids.
Folks.
Hey, Wayne.
Wayne.
Sorry, bud.
All right.
So, we have a motion in a second.
And the motion is that we suspend the three bids.
Yes.
We don't exceed $1,15, $2,25, $2,26.
Yeah.
And if I can get a better deal, so be it.
Yeah.
All right.
Don't take a plan.
Where's the funding source?
What's the actual line item?
I think it's vehicle replacement.
The capital reserve for vehicle replacement.
Yes.
Capital reserve for vehicle replacement.
Right.
It's not in there.
I think we have 150,000.
We have 150,000 in it.
Different report.
Yeah.
All right.
Take a vote.
That's not it.
Roll call vote.
Close, but not.
Jim.
Aye.
Paul.
Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
I'm an aye.
Wayne, stay there.
We have one more.
Wayne also came to me with a quote for adding a plow to the recent loader that we acquired,
the large loader that we acquired.
There's two plows.
He got a quote for a nine-foot plow or a 12-foot plow.
I talked to Wayne about it.
It really makes sense for us to get the 12-foot plow.
You're clearing more roadway with one swipe, right?
It wouldn't impede any of the maneuverability of the unit because it's a bucket loader, but it's articulated.
And I think it makes sense.
We didn't do it when we originally purchased it because it was obviously an additional almost $25,000.
But now with having it in his fund, I think that we should add the plow to the loader because
we do have five highway trucks, but we are limited to the access with these trucks on smaller roads where this loader could come in,
such as three ponds, and if a truck goes down, we can put that plow on in 15 minutes and get it on the road,
whereas we wouldn't have another truck.
And the loader is just sitting there during the storm.
So it's a backup unit.
It also is a unit that we would use for the smaller areas that we can't get the big trucks in.
So I would like to make a motion to buy the 12-foot plow, hydraulic plow, for the loader that we have at the highway department.
It's $24,879.40, and that also is – there is room in that $150,000 for that – the tractor purchase that we just talked about and this plow.
Now, what that does for the highway department is that upgrades everything we have at the highway department
because we have several new trucks, newer trucks.
We've got the new loader.
We'll get the new tractor, and we can use all of them for snow removal.
And we checked.
There's room in that and Wayne's budget for it.
And so I'd like to make a motion to purchase that 12-foot plow for the loader.
So the thing I'm thinking about right now is that when we were talking about how much money to put in that account,
neither one of these things that we just – neither the one that we just approved the tractor or this was part of the planning for that.
So that is correct, but we recently –
Please let me finish.
Oh, sorry.
I thought you were finished.
Nope.
So I am in favor of this, but as we move into our budgeting cycle,
we are going to need to add more this year than we've added in the past to make up the difference.
Well, I think where we stand now, and correct me if I'm wrong, Wayne,
but we just rebuilt one truck, truck number two.
We pretty much completely rebuilt that, and that is buying us a little bit more time on the five highway trucks we have.
So we won't need to make another large purchase after this for –
The next purchase after this is in 28.
28, we talked about when do we need another truck to replace the truck.
We actually have two trucks out there that we have – eventually here we've got to replace because they're both getting old.
Now, we put $20,000 in that two truck last year.
We put $10,000 in that truck this year through the summer fixing stuff on that truck.
So hopefully we're going to get through another year with that truck.
But we also have truck six, which runs – that's an older truck.
That's actually older than – that's a 2006.
And truck two is a 2011, and that truck there, the truck six is getting old, but we have to rebuild that.
We already lost a body in that.
We put a regular sander in that one.
So we got that fixed up.
But if we have one or two of these trucks break down this year, we're going to be in a hole big time.
That's why I'm asking for the loader because we can throw that loader out there, and we can use a loader for plowing, and we also can use it for cleanup, especially around buildings and stuff like that.
We used a loader.
We had a loader years ago with our new one, and we had a plow and a wing on that truck, and we used that in developments until we got enough trucks.
Then we pulled it off, and then we sold it.
So that's what I'm trying to fix here.
So we've got enough stuff there to take care of any of these storms that we have to do.
How long does it take to get this plow?
They have the plow now, don't they?
What's that?
Beauregard has the plow.
Yeah, they can get the plow right away, I think.
So we'll be ready for this year for it, for this season.
Okay, so we have a motion.
Do we have a second?
Second.
Any other discussion?
All right, roll call.
Aye.
Paul?
Aye.
Aye.
Lady?
Aye.
Aye.
All right, Wayne, thank you.
Thank you.
I'll get in touch with you tomorrow after I make those calls.
Okay.
All right.
And on the public minutes, do I have a motion?
Motion.
Do I have a second?
Second.
All in favor?
Aye.
Oh, roll call, sorry.
Aye.
Aye.
Gladys and aye.
All right, and on the non-public, do we have a motion?
I don't think they need to be sealed.
Okay.
I don't think they need to be sealed.
Oh, okay.
But if anyone else has a different opinion.
Looks good.
Okay.
Yeah, I'm fine.
I'm for it the way it is.
Yep.
Okay.
Sealed and not sealed?
Sealed.
Why?
Lady doesn't want to have them sealed, so that's it.
It's not that I don't want to.
There are specific rules about which ones have to be sealed.
And if these...
These are pretty basic.
Right?
So if they don't have to be sealed, then it's...
All right.
Right, unless there's something, like, there's no name.
Nope.
No names.
Okay.
All right.
No names, no good.
I'm good with it.
That's fine.
Motion for the...
Second.
Roll call.
Aye.
Paul?
You have to abstain.
I didn't...
I haven't had a chance to look at those.
Lady?
Aye.
And I'm an eye.
So there we go.
All right.
We already did the treasurer's report.
Paul, I'm going to come to you about inspections on driveway permit fees.
Ah, okay.
I'm sure there are people there to speak to that, but this goes back to the last planning board meeting where a vote was taken by the planning board to increase the driveway permit fee from $300 to $1,000.
And this would be for new development and construction, and this would be for new development and construction as well as reconstruction of driveways.
This was premised on the cost and the engineering cost to go out there and do a pre-inspection after the driveway plan was put together to make sure that the specs were being followed, as well as a post-inspection plan as well.
I'm sorry, a post-completion.
So there would be, after completion, there would be a second run-through by the engineer.
So there would basically be two run-through, and that's why the cost was in that vicinity of $1,000, or why we ended up approving that, because the cost of the engineer was in that vicinity of $1,000.
Fairly steep increase, and I think this also was as a result of some issues at one of the new developments over at Tanya Lane, where there was issues with regard to how the culverts at the property were installed.
And it ended up causing a fair amount of cost in terms of trying to review and remedy and ultimately rectify that situation.
And, you know, there was a finding at that point that, you know, we needed the planning board felt as though they needed that additional engineering expense in terms of the initial inspection and then the post-completion inspection.
So fairly steep increase, but I think that's the presentation.
I'm sure there are others that would explain as well why the planning board voted as it did.
If you're asking my personal opinion at this point, I really just wanted to present what the planning board did, but I did have some reservations, and this is, you know, personally in terms of how I feel about it at this point in terms of that steep an increase.
And I can go into that when we have further discussion, but I at least wanted to put the issue on the table for everyone.
And if I've missed something, it looks like Mr. Kennedy is there, and Doug Finn is there as well.
All right.
And maybe others.
Who wants to go first?
Well, that was a pretty good synopsis, so let's start from the beginning, and I'm going to shotgun a lot of stuff at you in a relatively short period of time.
So our driveway permit process started out as a $50 fee, and what that was was simply just a rubber stamp by an engineer who didn't do any process whatsoever.
There were shortfalls in that, and they were shown in a subdivision where improperly installed culverts were not the right material and not the right cover on those culverts.
So the planning board took a real hard look at how we're doing these inspections and how they should proceed.
So we didn't know.
We knew what we wanted to do, but we didn't know the amount of money that it was going to take to do it.
So we started out at $300,000, and the process started.
I don't know if it's going to come up.
That's not.
No.
Well, there we go.
So the process started, and what you're seeing now, now Chuck is a real busy guy, and we understand that in the building department.
So the relationship between our town engineer is better served by myself.
So Chuck would take the permit.
The permit would get handed to me.
It would get scanned into my system, and then I would send it out to the engineer.
So what we're looking at here is basically the file that I keep for all driveway permits, okay?
Is this for just new?
Any new permit that comes into the town of Brentwood, it comes to my department.
New permit, new driveway?
Any driveway permit received by the town of Brentwood.
So is this $1,000 like somebody's resurfacing their driveway?
Are they going to have to pay $1,000?
Well, what I'm going to ask this board to concentrate on is the fee itself, and then you guys can work independently after on the definition of alter.
Okay.
Okay?
Okay.
So what I'm going to show you here is what the process that the planning board came up with and how it's working.
Okay.
So you can see within this file here are all the active driveway permits, and then I have a file 100% completed, and these would be the driveway permits that have been completed so far.
Okay.
So I'll go into one of them.
Let's just pick one, 24 Edgewater, and that's a new development.
Okay.
So we have the permit itself, which is filled out by the applicant, and we have a pretty comprehensive permit here, process.
Now, one of the advantages of a new subdivision is this.
Sorry, guys, there's too many things happening.
Under engineering comments, okay, this is the file that's created by the town engineer, okay?
And you can see within this file how well this process works.
She will go out and do an initial inspection.
Now, one of the great things about a subdivision plan is that we already have the driveway permits all on a recorded site plan.
So you'll see in this permit, here's the house that we're talking about.
This is the final inspection.
This maybe wasn't a great one to do.
We'll back up a little bit.
And you'll see.
Let's just go into one that's underway, three stone creek.
So we'll have the plan set that's submitted, the engineering comments, and she will issue what's a pre-approval package.
Please hold.
And in this pre-approval package, you have the application itself.
And then a certain checklist where she goes all off the checklist of what does it need a culvert, culvert required.
Turning move, it's adequate, grades adequate, with adequate, meets zoning and road requirements.
Acceptable as proposed.
And then she'll take pictures of where the driveway is going.
And in this one, we have the subdivision plan, which shows which home it is and which driveway it is.
Okay.
And then if we back up to one that's already approved, you'll see a post-approval package.
Oh, that was a state one.
Let's see.
Five days ago.
And then we have a final driveway inspection where she goes out, fills out the driveway, the final inspection report, and then takes pictures of the driveway, records the slope of the driveway, thickness of pavement, and once again, we have the subdivision plan.
So the whole point of this post-approval, pre-approval, and post-approval is to hold the applicant accountable.
Knowing how this permit process works and the proper installation of a driveway, I can assure you that there are plenty of them in town of Brentwood that do not meet the specifications.
It is extremely important that we have a pre-approval and a post-approval, okay?
We need an engineer.
We need boots on the ground to go look at where they want to put the driveway in to do your site distances at 400 feet and make sure that's good to go.
If it needs a culvert, is the ditch line good?
These things need to be assessed before any work is started.
Then you go back as a post-approval.
You make sure they did it correctly.
And if they didn't do it correctly, you can have them do it again.
So let's dig into a little bit of monetary, okay?
Under the state of New Hampshire RSA, such fees or charges shall not exceed, in the case of licenses or permits, an amount reasonably calculated to cover the town's regulatory, administrative, and enforcement costs, okay?
We are a municipality.
We are not a for-profit corporation, okay?
Our fees should be in alignment with what is necessary to get the job done and not more.
So let's go into a little bit of the billing cycle here.
Now, as you'll notice, in the billing cycles, I also have the New Hampshire DOT driveway policy, if anybody's interested in that.
And just for an example, the New Hampshire DOT District 6 does not charge anything for a driveway permit.
They consider it as a service of the state.
Are they sending out people to check it?
Absolutely, they are.
And I can go into that process in detail if you'd like.
I was just clarifying the differences and similarities.
Mm-hmm.
So as we go through some of this billing, what you'll notice is right up at the top, this bill right here of $609 is for the pre-approval packages for 5, 7, 8, 22, 28, 30, and 32 of one development.
That's the pre-approval package.
And we're charging $300 per driveway permit.
Now, there's a post-approval package that needs to go along with that, which probably will double this fee.
Now, where the real struggle comes in is when you have a one-of.
Let's just take this one-of.
This is just a general town road in Brentwood, not associated with any subdivision.
We have $418, and that's just pre-approval.
So you can almost double that when we go to a post-approval.
So $810.
That's a one-off.
But when you're going out into a subdivision, you're doing $4, $5, $6, $7 at a time for approximately the same amount of money.
Some of this extra cost doing the one-offs,
they're people who are just putting in a driveway and are not familiar with the permit process,
and they're not familiar with the engineering associated with that process.
So what you're getting is I've had to reject a few, and Tara Akalina, our town engineer,
has to review that and then review it again and again,
and then we've got to get on the same page with this particular applicant.
So there's a little more fee, a little more time involved in getting these applicants up to speed
and getting them doing what they want to do.
Yes.
So because the one-offs are with just a homeowner who maybe doesn't know a lot about driveways,
there's more back and forth.
It might actually take more time than this.
And she has to drive all the way out there for this one-off and then drive all the way back
instead of driving out to your subdivision and doing three or four or five out of whack.
So there is some room to play in here.
Now, when I posed the question, and it's important that you understand what the question was
when I asked Tara about this.
I said, could you bill direct?
Could you bill direct to the applicant and then we could be eliminated from that process
so everybody's paying what actually it takes?
And her firm was uncomfortable with that.
And then they came up with these figures here.
Now, let's keep in mind that SFC Engineering is a for-profit corporation,
and they're not going to do things that are not for-profit.
We are a municipality.
We should be charging what's fair and equitable to the applicant.
So if we're doing three or four, we can come up with a middle ground figure that isn't $1,000 that actually will cover our costs for the one-offs.
If you go through the file, you'll see.
Yeah, go ahead.
Sorry, could you go back to that other where it had the two options?
Yeah, absolutely.
So where it says up to three hours, could we put in our permit, this permit fee is good for up to three hours.
If your consultation takes longer, we will charge you more?
Or are we not allowed to-
I think you run into a billing nightmare.
Yeah, you do.
Big time.
And then I'm-
Then we are having to bill applicants individually.
And keep track of time.
But you were saying that those are one-offs.
Those are less likely.
So in the situation where most of them are going to hit this other scenario, there's going to be fewer of them that are like this.
And even with that, there are probably fewer of them that are going to go over the three-hour limit.
Oh, we're timed out.
What are we here?
Just, you have to-
Oh.
The TV.
The remote's behind you.
Oh, the TV.
The remote's behind you over there.
Just to-
But do we have to do anything to this?
I don't-
Why does it always do that?
I don't know.
No, the system restarted is what it did.
We lost it probably.
Great.
But if you went into my billing, you'll see probably a good 20 from a subdivision and three, I believe, from a town road, like a two-lot subdivision.
Right.
So I guess that's what I'm saying.
Yeah, I understand it would be more work to keep track of the hours on those specific ones, but there are relatively so many fewer.
Might that be a better way to balance the over-under charging on the two different types of new driveway applicants?
To piggyback on her thought, do you have an idea of subdivision applicants versus new driveway one-off people?
Didn't you say it was just, didn't you say it was like 20 to three or something-ish?
Yeah, I can do a quick count.
Well, one second.
But that's all going to be predicated on how many subdivisions you have during the year?
Well, like this is going to be a moving-
As an average.
I mean, so if we could bring down the cost from $1,000 to $400, that would-
I don't think $400 is going to be the number one-off.
I don't think so either.
I'm in the $500 or $600 range, personally.
There are two examples you have, since I like numbers and I like to play around with them.
Talk into the microphone a little bit more.
The one-offs that you have, that was $810, approximately, for that one-off.
Mm-hmm.
But if they did seven, it worked out to about $174.
Oh, they're back.
Yeah.
So it was like $174 when you did what it would cost for them going out and looking at seven properties that one day.
But Paul's back.
Yeah.
I'm back.
So-
I mean, this one, this one-off was $675.
So-
Right.
So I don't know how they got to-
How did you guys-
I know they gave you a number of $1,000.
Mm-hmm.
$800 for option two.
$800.
$600 for option two.
But option two is only a post-visit.
Post-visit.
So-
Yeah.
Is that just-
Is that-
And I guess I'm trying to understand, like, because I had several people reach out to me,
and one of their concerns was, is, hey, what if I'm just putting another layer on top of my current driveway?
Am I going to have to pay $1,000?
Well-
That was the concern.
That's not a new driveway, though.
This is for new driveway permits.
The word is alter.
If you're going to alter your driveway, you should be getting a driveway permit.
You're putting it back the same way it was.
Well, how do I know?
Changing the slope.
How do I know it was even right to begin with?
You don't, unless you do a pre and a post.
Yeah.
Right.
Right.
And I see it all the time.
Well, I mean, what is the purpose of a driveway permit?
So let's look at what the state of New Hampshire says the purpose of it is a driveway permit.
And this is straight out of the New Hampshire DOT policy.
And right under purpose.
To provide maximum safety and protection to the traveling public through the orderly control of traffic movement.
Minimize conflict points.
Acquire appropriate site distance or to any class 1, 3 or the state mandated portion of class 2 highways.
Maintain the serviceability of affected highways, which would require alterations to the existing highway.
Monitoring and design of construction of driveway entrances and exits to maintain compliance of 236.13.
Mark, does it make sense for us to clarify, if someone was coming in with a driveway permit to repay, for example, rather than add the additional pre-trip inspection,
would it make sense to give the applicant a checklist and say, you need to bring us pictures and, you know.
Who's looking at those things, though?
The same.
Unfortunately, I'm going to have to stay with boots on the ground.
I need boots on the ground.
I need someone qualified going out there measuring slopes.
I'm going to tell you right now that I personally would have a problem.
If I was repaving my driveway, doing exactly what was there already, having to pay that fee, I would have a problem with that.
Is your driveway currently up to code?
Yes.
How do we know that?
Because it's on record.
Yeah, maybe.
Just because it's on record doesn't mean that it meets the standards, though, as I think what we acknowledge, that a lot of these were just done.
That doesn't mean that they're safe.
So are we going to ask everyone to rip up their driveway and put a new driveway down?
No.
No.
No.
Okay.
No.
So we need to start somewhere.
I understand that.
But I don't think it's fair that we ask someone if they're just going to resurface their driveway and it's already been approved and they've had their driveway for 20 years in the town of Brentwood and they need to resurface their driveway to pay $1,000.
$1,000 or even close to that.
I understand if it's a new driveway.
But if it's an existing driveway, I do think that we should maybe come up with a tiered system where we say new driveway is X.
If you're resurfacing, you know, and you also have to remember the homeowner is not going to resurface.
So you're going to hire a company to come in and resurface.
So to be honest, I drive around Brentwood and I see brand new driveways put in with the wrong material culvert used.
These people, they don't – just because you hired someone doesn't mean they actually read the regulations of Brentwood.
Okay, but what I'm getting at – let me finish.
Let's just say hypothetically that I'm going to resurface my driveway, okay, and I have a culvert, which I don't.
But if I did, if we give that applicant a checklist and say you need to comply with XYZ and I need the company that you hire to sign off on this, now all we're paying for is the post, you know, site inspection.
That cuts that price in half, and if we do have a problem, we have it on record that both the applicant and the company hired to resurface, you know, said that they would abide by it.
And if they didn't, then we have to – then at that point we have to –
Then we tell them to tear up their driveway?
Tear up their driveway and put it the right way at their expense.
Because they wanted to save $500?
At the moment, this is what – you know, I don't want to – people have a hard time reading this, understanding it, and actually applying it.
And it's right on your permit that you have to abide by the rules and regulations of the time – Brentwood.
But yet they seem to not, in some instances, not be able to do that.
Or they don't even read 236 or 13.
Okay.
Well, all right.
And I agree with – that's something for you to decide.
But all I'm saying is that the fee should be fair and equitable.
Paul, I'll get to you in a second, Paul.
And I think we can balance that fee between the new subdivisions that come in and the ones that are done on existing roadways.
And I'm saying that I don't think it's fair for us, the town of Brentwood, to charge the same amount for someone coming in with a new driveway,
completely new driveway that hasn't had one before, and asking someone to pay the same fee for something that's already been established,
it's been there, and they're resurfacing it.
And I just don't think it's fair to ask them to pay the same price because it's not – I know you want the same process,
but I don't think that it's warranted.
I don't think it's needed.
That's just my own personal opinion.
And right now they're charging $300 for residential and $300 for a commercial, business, and industrial permit.
Those were just placeholder numbers, if I recall correctly, though?
It's on the permit.
You won't find –
I understand.
Those numbers weren't picked based on actual costs to us.
You won't find much commercial development other than on a state road, 125, 27.
Or Pine Road.
Or Pine Road would be the –
That's the only one that we'd issue a driveway permit for that the state doesn't handle.
Chuck, you discussed this earlier with me, and you said that you did a survey of surrounding towns and what their –
could you come up to the microphone and explain that, please?
Just remember to say who you are.
Before you actually start.
Okay.
Paul, go.
Oh.
Yeah, just quickly.
You raised his hand.
Oh, yeah.
Yeah, I did.
I don't know if we discussed at all, and there wasn't a lot of discussion – correct me if I'm wrong, Mark, but there wasn't a lot of discussion at the planning board with regard to option two and whether or not that was a viable option, because it was proposed by the engineer, and it is a lesser cost.
The other thing I'd say is – the other thing I'd say is at the planning board meeting, and I thought this was fairly poignant.
Glenn Greenwood, our town planner, when we were kind of getting heated about all of this, said, look, we've always been discussing this as new construction and new driveways, and that's what we've been talking about this pertaining to.
But then we – the planning board sort of went down this rabbit hole about, well, how does this pertain to reconstructed or altered driveways?
But I thought Glenn was pretty clear about it, and I agreed with him, to be perfectly frank with you.
But we did go down this rabbit hole about altered driveways, and in that regard, I do agree with the sentiments that Jim Misho was just reiterating and trying to make that distinction between new driveways and new developments versus altered driveways for an individual.
Because it starts to get fairly steep in terms of the cost of $1,000, and I think ultimately can act as a disincentive.
Could we split it so that new driveways are $1,000 and not new driveways are that option too?
I would say that being contrary to the RSA.
Because I've just shown you we do five at a time for new life.
Sometimes we do.
All the bills that I have are five at a whack.
Sometimes for new ones.
You also showed us a couple new ones that were not –
Not associated with the subdivision.
Right, but there's still new driveways.
So if I'm a developer and I'm putting in 12 driveways, and you're going to charge me $12,000 for that, for driveway fees, driveway permits,
when I know that it costs significantly less because that person is there for quite a lower amount of time.
That's not what I'm advocating for.
Okay.
I'm advocating more of a fee in alignment.
I'm not advocating for $1,000.
And I'm not saying you.
I'm just saying in general people –
I want to let people understand what we're talking about and how it could impact things.
What I do want to be very clear about, that the planning board was very adamant about a pre- and post-approval.
I get it, yeah.
For all driveways or specifically new ones?
Because it sounds like –
I'll say it again.
The planning board was very adamant about a pre- and post-approval.
That's fine.
I just want to be clear because it sounds like some of the concerns that Jim has and other people have are about existing driveways.
And you're – the planning board – you're saying that the planning board recommendation was for all driveway permits.
I can only advocate for what they voted on.
And it was – just confirm it was for all permits, all driveway permits.
I would – I can read the motion if you'd like.
Sure.
Can you just say yes or no?
I'd – I want their words to be their words.
Nope, that's totally fine.
I'm not here to interpret their words.
Read the actual motion.
Yep, that's fine.
A motion was made by D. Marino to adopt option one.
Option one will provide pre-inspection and post-inspection at a cost of $1,000 per driveway permit.
SFC will also be contacted to see if there are any cost-saving measures that can be implemented.
The motion was seconded by B. Stevens and the motion was carried.
So, Liz, free abstains.
How many – on average per year, how many driveway permits have we had over the last three years?
You're okay?
Yeah, that's good.
It's probably going to be high – because there were a lot of developments, that's not going to be –
I've only taken over this process or the accepting of these permits for a relatively short period of time,
so I cannot attest to the number of permits within three years.
Would it be accurate to say that because the planning board did not discuss splitting out the fees
into – for a new driveway and a not-new driveway,
that you would not be able to give us guidance on what their recommendation would be?
Exactly.
Okay.
Yep, I – thank you.
I just wanted to clarify.
Chuck, I'm going to jump over to you.
Sure, a lot of this, what – how I'm trying to be straightened out here is because of what existed
before January 1st with the electronic permitting and how big it was.
To top that off with the engineer that was in place at that time,
there wasn't a lot of checks and balances with anything.
So, my compliments to Mark for doing such a great job organizing this electronically
and following up with the engineer and everything else, a great job.
So, when I knew we were going to do this at the meeting tonight,
I started doing some research in other towns because a few things didn't make sense.
Most towns – well, actually, all the towns I researched,
the authority of driveways, all the driveway regulations,
through the planning board or land use administrator
in conjunction with the DPW or road agent.
And that in itself is why these and other towns are a lot less than what we're talking about here.
You know, Brentwood's Brentwood, and Brentwood's a beautiful place.
But a place like Rye or Hampton, you know, they have the staff and the money to back it up.
They have engineers as DPW directors, and they have road agents.
You know, it's a whole different animal.
It's apples and oranges.
But that's where we're at here.
That's why we're trying to figure something out.
And, Chuck, you're speaking on behalf as the building inspector, correct?
Correct.
Okay.
Which also brings up my authority and purview as the building inspector or building official.
It turns out that driveways and the authority or the permitting of them do not fall under the building department.
It falls under planning or land use or DPW.
And that's everywhere I checked.
So everything that Mark did creating this to help out the building department is exactly what should be done anyway.
And it's amazing that he's done such a great job with that.
The plaintiff can set their own permit fees.
It's not a building department thing.
We're building a life safety.
I found all this in print.
As far as the resurfacing and the altering and the new construction of the driveways, you know,
the planning department is going to set the fees they feel requires the outcome that they want or will see that outcome the way they want it.
Just listening to what's going on here, I think the biggest thing for me is, like Mark had mentioned earlier, the definition of altered.
You know, what are we talking about?
The new construction is new construction.
If somebody's putting a new driveway in, they're putting a new driveway in just for their single-family home.
And I started thinking about it.
What really triggers the driveway permit is the curb cut.
That's where you need a driveway permit.
You're putting a driveway in.
It's a curb cut.
And I also found the wording for this also that the DPW or land use or planning has the authority of the driveway within the right-of-way of the town,
which includes the curb cut.
And now then it all started to make sense.
That's why there's a driveway regulation.
That's why they take authority and permitting on that.
The building official who's in charge for enforcing the ordinances, wetlands, buffer zones, things like that,
based on the ordinances, takes responsibility from within the private property, not the right-of-way.
So once the driveway crosses the right-of-way into the private property, there already comes an enforcement issue for wetland buffers or sealed surface and things like that.
That's where we take over.
I'm just wondering if there's a way to use the curb cut guideline and the altered definition to help even things out to where it's a fair process.
If someone's just resurfacing the asphalt and not touching the mechanics of it, not touching the curb cut or anything else that's involved with the existing driveway,
is that an option for a lesser fee or to maybe not need an engineer?
But you're saying that that entire process is governed not by you, not by the select board, but by the planning board?
By what I found is the planning department, land use administrator, DPW, and road agent.
Nowhere does it involve the building official.
So based on what you were saying, the planning board voted and feels strongly that they would like a pre-end post?
Correct.
I just want to finish that.
I just want to make a motion that we adopt the planning board's suggestion.
Just to finish that thought I had real quick.
So to me, I'm not trying to overstep anything.
I completely respect where Mark's going and what he's looking for and why.
But maybe there's a way to do just resurfacing and not changing any of the mechanics,
not changing the curb cut or the dynamics of the driveway.
Maybe that can be a little bit different.
But wouldn't that be a decision that the planning board would make?
Yes, this is just an opinion.
My thought process would be that we send it back to the planning board to review it,
reconsider what they just are making a recommendation for.
Because, and I would say that you're going to have to have, you would have new construction, have a fee for that.
I don't think we get to decide that though.
Well, that's why I'm going to say we're going to, I would send it back because I want new construction altered or resurfaced because, as Paul mentioned before, that Glenn Greenwood even thought this was relative to new construction.
And seeing as you have people that are going to be re-top coating or putting a top coat on top of their driveway and they're basically just resurfacing or maybe they're adding a little parking space next to it because, you know,
a junior now is driving a car and they want to add a little space so they can park that third, fourth, fifth, tenth car that they're going to be putting in their driveway.
I don't necessarily think if I was putting $2,000 into expanding a driveway for a parking space that I'm going to pay $1,000 for a fee.
So, I would make a recommendation that we send it back to them to review, to come up with a new construction fee, an altered fee, and a resurfaced fee.
Before we do that, Chuck, can you continue please because you haven't even gotten to what you and I discussed today about other fees from local, other surrounding areas.
Well, like you touched on earlier, the other fees in other towns are a lot less, but they have the resources where they don't have to hire an engineer from outside.
Paul, you had something too, didn't you?
Well, I was going to actually ask Mark because I know we had this discussion several days ago where you were researching, you know, that, you know, authority because I was always of the impression that the select board, you know, had the authority to set these fees.
And I know you and I had discussed that.
I don't know what you ultimately concluded in terms of your research.
I wasn't able to do my own independent, you know, research on the issue, but it does, you know, raise, at least in my mind, an issue as to who has, you know, that jurisdictional authority to set those.
It does say 419-A, the select board.
Who created this application and who is in charge of?
The building inspector.
But it sounds like the building inspector has no authority.
That the authority of approval or pre and post really doesn't reflect the application.
The building department can take the application.
I define that also.
We can process an application.
I only got into this conversation with driveway permits, A, because, lack of better verbiage, the planning board felt a bit burnt by the ones that were not done correctly in a subdivision.
And it got it got heated.
And so I know Chuck is a busy guy.
He's a bit overwhelmed.
And for us to say we want a new driveway permit thing and not be a team player and help him out with that application process, I felt that it wouldn't it's not fair.
So I took that from him, grab the ball, grab the bull by the horns, and the planning board's been running with it.
Now we've got our feet underneath us.
We have a baseline, a fee.
We're just trying to navigate this.
I think the system that we have established now works well.
It works really well.
You accept the permit.
I take the permit, scan it in the system, have all the contact between the engineer, and then you have access to the files to see what's been approved and what has been disapproved.
So I don't think the system itself is deficient.
It's just we need to come up with a fee schedule that reflects the work that needs to be done.
And it's fair and equitable to not only the applicant, but to the taxpayers of Brentwood.
Because ultimately, this is what it's about, is protecting the assets of Brentwood.
Because when water infiltrates roadways, it kills roadways.
And that's part of this process as well.
Would the process that the planning board is recommending have prevented the issues that brought this conversation about?
Absolutely.
A hundred percent.
That's one of the reasons why the previous engineering firm was let go.
I have pictures from approvals of the subdivision from the engineer who supposedly took these permits in and processed them of the culverts being the wrong material.
And if I recall correctly, the process that predated this had a lot of gaps in it.
The gaps remained in the inspection process.
The original process was just they...
It was a rubber stamp.
It's like I handed you a piece of paperwork and I just went and handed it back to you.
And that's not a process.
That's someone intaking money and not doing what's required in the permit.
Can I put a second motion on the floor?
Can I put a second motion on the floor?
No.
We haven't seconded the first one.
So, I mean, my understanding is it still has to be seconded.
Does anybody want to second Letty's motion?
I'm still against...
That was to accept what the planning board is recommending.
To accept $1,000 or do we want to talk about other ones?
So, first thing, you'd have to set up a public hearing according to this RSA.
For the change of fees, you have to do a public hearing notice.
So, I'm not for $1,000.
I'm just not.
I think it has to be a tiered system.
And I think it's...
If this was new construction, it's one thing.
I have a problem with...
If I'm going to re-gravel my driveway, I'm going to pay $1,000 to re-gravel.
No, because you don't need a driveway permit to re-gravel your driveway.
I'm still changing the slope.
No.
I would say if you're altering the slope, that would be the definition of alter, then yes,
you would need a driveway permit.
So, if you already have a gravel driveway and you're dumping another load of gravel, that's
not altering the driveway.
It's going to be fixing the...
That's where you need to come up with the definitions of alter.
But is that...
That's...
If I'm looking at the plain definition of alter, to alter something is to change it.
To add material to it would be to change it.
So, if you want to define alter in different ways, that's fine.
But to use the plain terminology of alter, that's alter.
Who's responsible for the generation and maintenance of this application?
Because it might be...
It sounds like it might be the planning board, it might be the select board, it might be
the building inspector.
It's not super clear.
I don't disagree with you that we need to have good definitions, but it's really not clear
to me who makes those.
Because I've heard three different answers to who's responsible for this.
Well, I think the select board sets the fee and we have to have a hearing in order
to do so.
But what you're talking about is just changing this application, which we could do.
Well, coming up with a fee structure of what you're going to charge.
Nope, because we're talking about what it means to alter your driveway.
So, let's go back to our...
I'll make this even more complicated for you.
Oh, great.
Thank you, Mark.
You're absolutely 100% welcome.
When you have questions like this...
Time out, everyone.
Mark, while you're doing that, Chuck, you had a comment that you needed to make?
Well, I think with the definitions, if we can break it up, and I'd be glad to work with Mark
on this, with based on the things I've found and working in other towns, the definition
of resurfacing and altered and curb cuts and new construction.
We have a favorite saying with small projects in the building department, if it's the same
size, shape, and footprint, it's the same size, shape, and footprint.
And that might fall under the resurfacing act, whether it's gravel or pavement.
If they're just adding two inches of stone consistently with what's already there, then they're
resurfacing it, and it's the same size, shape, and footprint.
Thank you.
Once they tap into something or change anything, everything changes.
It's altered.
Right.
Yeah.
Well, we have in our zoning book the definition of permanent permit required.
So I think what I'm looking for, and I still haven't really gotten clarity on what actually
needs to be changed and who's responsible for changing, because it sounds like changing the
wording on the permit to better define what altered means.
I think the answers you seek are on the board here.
And the type of construction that's on this permit, it actually puts in there, it goes in
about alteration and everything else.
The changing of the application isn't really a big deal.
I had that authority through the building codes to create documents and applications to meet
the needs of the town and requirements of the town.
But do we want to also have Chuck take the application, but then forward it over to the planning
board for approval and final?
I don't think they're going to change their mind.
It's the land use administrator.
So let's not confuse terms.
You're not giving it to the planning board as the land use administrator.
I'm accepting that permit and then contacting our engineer and then helping that process.
You're just a pass through.
Yes, because I want to make the planning board itself never reviews any of this.
It only comes to my office as the land use administrator.
So we don't have a second on the motion, correct?
I'm not seconding it.
Okay.
Paul?
Paul, are you seconding that motion from Letty?
No.
Okay.
So my...
So it dies on the floor.
Okay.
I'd like to make a motion that we alter the existing application to have a tiered system,
new construction with subtitle single or subdivision, single being $800, subdivision being $500 per application.
Altered would be the second, and that would, well, the second would be $300 for residents, and the third being resurface, commercial being $100, and residential being $50.
And that, do we have to have a hearing for?
Is that what you're saying, Mark?
Well, under this RSA, it states that any change prior to the establishment or amendment of any such fees,
the selectman shall hold a public hearing notice for which shall be given at least seven days prior to the hearing
and posting in two public places in the town in the publication of a newspaper of general circulation in the town.
The notice shall include the proposed schedule of fees.
Okay.
Can you scroll up?
Is that just for driveways, or is that all fees?
Or can you tell me?
Is that just for driveways, or is that for all fees?
No, establishment of fees.
We didn't do that the last time we changed the building fees, so we should do that.
No, absolutely, absolutely, we didn't.
So we make mistakes, and then we correct them.
That's totally fine.
I'm just saying, since we're going to have to have a hearing for that anyway, we should tack this on.
Can you go back to where the ordinance talks about when a permit is required, please?
This one?
Yes.
So scroll up a little bit where it says permit required.
Mm-hmm.
If they are not altering their driveway, they don't need a permit.
Okay, so you need to read, affects the size or grade of any driveway entrance exit or approach.
I understand, but it sounds like what Chuck is saying is that you're not altering if you're redoing what's already there, right?
If you're just resurfacing, then you're not altering.
You're just putting it back, and I think that's where Jim's saying 50% back.
No, but that's why I'm confused, because the definition of alter is already in our ordinance.
Mm-hmm.
So if you are getting a driveway permit, it is because you are doing something different from what you already have, which is new driveway, changing the footprint of your driveway, changing the material of your driveway,
which it sounds like would catch the instances that you're talking about where if you're just resurfacing or dumping a new load of gravel, then you wouldn't need a permit anymore.
Well, I can make the case, Letty, resurfacing several driveways over the years myself that nine times out of ten, you're changing the grade of the driveway even a little bit because you've got to take up what was there.
You have to redo it, and oftentimes you find low spots or high spots, and you're changing the grade.
My motion, what it does is we're asking a minimal fee for resurfacing to help offset the cost of altered or new construction as well, okay?
But if it's that complicated even for resurfacing, then wouldn't you want the pre and post, which goes back to what the planning board is suggesting?
Yeah, you've come up with a fee schedule, but what you haven't put to that fee schedule is the amount of attention that will go into each one.
Will you have a pre-inspection and a post-inspection for each one of those?
That is something that the planning board is going to have to come up with.
I think so.
Hang on.
How I came up with this was the law of averages, okay?
From what you stated, I don't think that resurfacing needs to be pre and post, okay?
I do think altered does.
I do think new construction does.
But if we take this three-tiered system with the subcategories on the new construction, the law of averages will equal out and cover our costs.
I cannot say in good faith that the planning board agrees with that.
Okay.
They have a motion, they made the motion, it was seconded, and it was voted on unanimously.
Good.
I disagree with them.
That's perfectly fine to disagree with them, but you can't come up with a completely alternative schedule and then tell them how to figure out the fee for it, you know, or the level of inspection that each one of those are going to take.
Well, they've come up with a level of inspection.
They want a pre and post inspection, and the fees that you have laid out do not reflect.
I mean, if you want to spend the money, townspeople's money, you know, subsidize that with taxation, then that's perfectly fine.
100% that's fine.
That's not what I'm suggesting.
Well, you haven't defined what you are suggesting, sir.
I just did.
Will each one of those have a pre and post inspection?
I just answered that question.
You didn't hear me?
No, I did not, sir.
New construction does, altered does, resurfacing does not.
But you just said that resurfacing might lead to an alteration of grade.
You just said that.
That as you pull it up, you might realize that there's low spots and high spots, and you might need to alter the grade.
We're talking tiny bits, okay?
Personally, I think it should go back to the planning board for them to revisit it.
I think $1,000 is pretty steep.
I would like to see a tiered structure system with, like, what Jim is proposing.
We'd have to have a hearing anyway to vote on that, and then there's a bunch of other legalities that Chuck has printed out for us.
One of them is from 1989, so I don't know if that's been changed by this new one you're showing us, the RSA.
Can you bring Paul back up?
Absolutely.
Oh, he's on the bottom there.
Sorry, when you say 1989, what RSA is?
It's got a date.
What's the RSA?
Section 49, colon, 9-A, chapter 41.
Ablishment of fees.
Right, so when you pull it, yeah, that's the most recent one.
The date on it.
June 11, 1989.
Yep, the date on RSAs is always the most recent one.
So I don't know if we had, during one of the town meetings where, and I believe we had this discussion before, one of the town meetings that the town had voted to authorize the selectmen to establish and amend fees.
I'm just not sure when or where we'd have to research that.
Of course they allowed us to establish fees.
Yeah, so it says right now that, you know, it'll continue in effect until it's rescinded.
So we would have the power to set the fee schedules.
Now we have to have a public hearing to do that, then that's fine.
I understand that.
And I would definitely welcome that because I'd want more input from the public on it.
I like coming up with a tiered system.
I kind of agree that if somebody's resurfacing it and they're putting it back a like kind and quality, I don't even know.
I mean, even if somebody adds seal coating to it, I don't want somebody having to come up with $1,000 to reseal coat a driveway because technically now they're resurfacing.
But they're not.
That's not an alteration, and that's why.
Correct.
That doesn't even come under.
That's not even, you don't even need a driveway permit to get that done.
So the inspector has to come out, the engineer.
If they have to come out, then I would think that would be under the altered or the new construction.
I'm not sure if that would really.
That's a three-hour minimum on that?
That's what they said before?
No.
Right now there's nothing.
But if we accepted the $600, that's $300 an hour to come out saying that.
No, because that's not how it works because we haven't actually decided what we are going to do.
If they come out twice, based on the one example he showed us, it was $418 each time.
$418.
So that's why I think on the top, new construction for a single permit, new driveway for new construction was $810 all in.
But if it was for a development, the way they did seven of them, it would have been $174.
But we're still charging them $500, so that offsets other fees encumbered.
But that only works as long as we have developments.
Okay.
When are we not going to have developments?
Well, what other plots of land do we have?
I mean, Brentwood has done an amazing job putting large tracts of land into conservation.
There is a limited resource for how many more big developments we're going to have in town, especially with changes to our ordinance.
I still think, and I know Rob is standing in line, and I'm going to defer to Rob when it talks to conservation because he's definitely the expert because he was the chair for years.
I'm not talking about it sideways.
This has gone on long enough.
I'm the next person.
Oh, okay.
Darn it.
I was going to ask you, I know that at one point we could have, with the amount of property that was still developable in town, we could have doubled the size of our town.
And there's still plenty of.
And there's still plenty of developable lands.
I think this is one of those, because they had an issue with one of the culverts.
So to try and move this along, does this motion that I presented fail, or does it continue and we move forward with it?
Paul, do you have any, well, number one, who wants to second that motion to come up with a tiered system?
I'm going to cover all the numbers.
If we need more, there's not enough money on that to cover.
If the inspector's coming out, the engineer, I'm going to cover it.
I would, I like having a tiered system.
Paul, go ahead.
You had your hand up.
Yeah, no, I, I, I'm with you, Bob.
I mean, and, and, and no, no disrespect, Jim, but I, I just don't have enough information.
And I think, you know, this really needs to be, you know, fleshed out, you know, further.
And, and so I think the idea of, you know, looking at this more closely at, you know, at our level and, you know, by the planning board, you know, makes, makes sense to me.
This needs to be looked at more closely, in my opinion.
You know, and, and I do want to say, looking back at that, or the, the ordinance mark that you had up there before, I mean, it talks about an alteration requiring something that has substantial effects.
So, you know, is, is, you know, merely resurfacing or, or putting some, you know, gravel down, is that substantial effects?
So, I mean, these are the kinds of discussions that I think we need to, to have before we can really move forward on something like this.
So then, so then can I modify the motion on the floor?
Sure.
Okay.
So your motion, my motion then would be for the planning board to come up with a tiered system.
And I, I would, I would welcome that.
Could I, um, cause I think what you're asking for actually is that you would like to provide them with three tiers with certain requirements, like the new ones would require a pre and post the, this level of alteration require this and this.
And I'm going to leave that up to the planning board.
All I'm going to say right now is I'd like to see the planning board come back to us with a tiered system.
How they define, how they define it is up to them.
But I don't think it's fair to have a broad fee for every driveway permit, because there are different driveway permits.
Right.
And again, and I, and I know Mark had brought this up is we're not in, we're not in the business of profiting.
Correct.
And if based on just the numbers alone, if it's costing me $174 for development to go out there and inspect it free and post, and it's costing.
Based on seven driveways and someone's, yeah, some of them are more about five.
So I think your figures, I have off, but if I have a new driveway, you're onto something single person and it's $800 and I'm charging a thousand, just do 800.
And I charge you a thousand, am I not making $200?
Just simple math.
So I think it needs to go back.
It needs to be revisited.
It needs to be tweaked a little before.
I don't think it's ready for game time.
How's that?
For us to make a decision.
So at this point, I'm going to say we table it and send it back to the planning board.
I would take that motion in the form of a suggestion.
Correct.
And I would agree with that.
I'll second that motion to send it back as a recommendation or suggestion that they come up with a tiered type system and have further discussion before it comes back to us.
Okay.
And just so you know, the planning board conversation went exactly the way this has gone this evening.
Okay.
Even better.
All in favor with sending it back with recommendations for a tiered type discussion.
I'm an I.
Paul?
I.
Dave?
I.
Letty?
No.
I'm an I.
Could I make a motion?
Sure.
That we ask that the planning board come back to us with the cost that would make sense for three tiers being a brand new driveway,
a not serious alteration,
but not substantial.
And that I'm going to ask the planning board to help figure out what that would look like.
And then a basic driveway change permit.
Like a resurface?
Yep.
Okay.
The first two would be a pre and post inspection.
And the third one would be only post.
As previously stated, the planning board was very adamant about all driveways and all driveway permits getting a pre and post inspection.
I hear you.
My concern is that if we're not giving them enough to like.
Enough meat.
Enough meat.
They're just going to circle.
So if we at least say like we want kind of a small, medium, and large option.
You may suggest that.
I understand.
Or as we've heard many, many times, the good, the bad, the ugly.
So give me the good, the bad, the ugly.
The planning board was very adamant that all driveway permits get a pre and post inspection.
And it sounds like the select board currently does not have appetite for that level of engagement with the engineering firm.
So I'm trying to find a middle ground.
And I also think that from what I've heard from the townspeople and the people that have reached out, I don't think there's an appetite for people that want to have to resurface their driveway.
They actually pay $1,000 to have somebody just resurface their driveway.
We keep going back to that $1,000 number, and it doesn't have to be that fair and equitable.
So we're good.
Never mind.
I withdraw my motion.
Never mind.
Perfect.
But being nice doesn't get things done right.
No.
It just means the taxpayers are going to make up the difference.
That's all.
That's my concern is that the taxpayers make up the difference if the fee is insignificant.
Mark, thank you.
Thank you.
Appreciate you coming in, Mark.
Thank you, Chuck.
And Rob.
Ron, it's you.
Come on.
How long are you going to be?
I'm going to be as long as you make it.
I need a break, but I can hold off for you then.
Oh.
Well, then you can take a break.
He had an extra large coffee and half a water, so he's good.
Thank you, Rob Wufchuk, Chair of the Conservation Commission.
I have some appointments tonight to put before you.
I think they're all in your packets.
The first one just comes to the town, not through the Conservation Commission for the Exeter Squam Scott River Local Advisory Commission.
The town can have three to five members.
We currently have one, Eric Ter.
One of our newer members who's here with us, Rob Wamers, who's here.
And he can come up and introduce himself if you have more questions, although he's written a lengthy application, giving his background, what he appreciates about the outdoors, et cetera.
So this is something that the select board appoints.
It's a regional commission, advisory commission.
So I'm putting that before you.
And are you recommending him?
Well, personally, I am, but not as a commission.
No, it doesn't come through the commission.
It's not a commission appointment.
He doesn't sit on the commission.
He's here, though, if you'd like to talk to him, and maybe you should come up and just say hi.
I know he's going to put a face with a name.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
And if anyone has any questions.
Thank you.
Rob Wamers, I live on 34 Peabody Drive.
I look forward to serving for USLAC if you'll have me.
Do you have any questions, concerns, comments?
Make a motion.
Motion.
Second?
Second.
All in favor?
Bye.
Roll call?
Bye.
Bye.
There you go.
You're in.
You're in.
Well, I think Rob's the first person that's ever come up and volunteered instead of having
people try to get him to volunteer.
Thank you.
So the next.
Conservation.
Conservation Commission.
So we've had, you have a sheet in front of you.
We've had two members step off recently.
Becky Dunham, who served admirably as a commissioner and chair.
Her term expired in 26 and she is not re-upping.
Michelle Siduit is, has resigned.
So we have two openings.
We have two of our current alternates that have agreed to step up, Emma Layham and Chris
Nipp.
We have another member, Lise McNaughton, whose term also expired in 26.
She would like to re-up.
And then just to work out the terms with Michelle's, whose was 2027.
Lise was going to take that one.
The two alternates would take the 2029s for three years.
And then the remaining committee members would have a two years, two of us each staggered each
year going full.
And then you're looking.
And then we have a lot of alternate positions open that we would post for applications from
town residents.
Okay.
So I'll make a motion for Emma Layham.
Is that how I say it?
Yep.
And Chris Nipp for a term of 29 and then having Lise McNaughton take over the term for
2027.
Correct.
I'll second that motion.
All in favor?
Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
All right.
And I'd like to have something from the town to thank Becky and Michelle for their time
to get done, too.
Yes.
Do you agree with that?
Thank you.
Totally.
Yes.
I forgot to thank Michelle for the many years she's put forward, not only on this commission,
but all over town.
Yep.
Anything else on that?
Not on that.
Oh, sorry.
Go ahead.
Yep.
On the appointments?
Nope.
I have a couple other quick conservation commission updates if you'll allow.
So just to put it on your radar, the open space bond will expand.
Expire at the end of 27.
It had a five-year term.
We're planning to put forward a Warren article for the upcoming votes in March to extend that
so that it won't expire in between some part of 28.
Okay.
And we can get more into that, but just putting it out there on your radar.
The other thing I wanted to give a quick update on is the removal of pickpocket dam.
There was recently a meeting August 20th in Exeter with the town engineers.
They've completed 60% of the design now, so they've got a better sense of the scheduling.
So it looks like they'll be applying for the New Hampshire DES wetlands permit next year.
They expect it may take six to nine months.
They're hoping for approval in the fall of 27 with RFPs for contractors going out and then work beginning in 2028 for the removal.
So there are some things I think Brentwood needs to be aware of.
I think everyone's aware that the dam is technically Exeter's, but almost all of the impact will be in Brentwood as the impoundment goes down to a much narrower river.
So there's a couple of implications of that, but I think the key being that we will want to get comments in during the DES permitting process where the conservation commission as well as the select board will have opportunity and there will be public meetings through that period next year.
Basically, there's going to be a lot of exposed soil when the water recedes into a now or a channel.
So they are talking about seeding and remediation for that.
But they did not really commit during our questions and they don't have the exact plan yet to whether or not they'll monitor it over the succeeding years, whether there will be any remediation if things are failing.
And I think that's really important hearing from people in town.
I think the other part, which is monetary for the town, is there was discussion about which way all the trucks will go.
Will they leave through Pickpocket and Brentwood or will they go up Crossroad, up the Windy Road and go out through Exeter?
It sounds like they were originally Pickpocket, now they're leaning towards Crossroad, but I think it's going to be in the town's interest to make sure that we get something in the project plans for bonding of any road damage.
The bridge, I believe, and I don't remember 100% whether or not the town in the past has paid for half the bridge work.
How's that impact?
Because I know right now like the rec does that canoe.
Yep.
But how – I know the fire department has – off of Roll Road, how is that going to impact because we have the steps and everything else that go into the river and they've got the fill.
Yep, so that would be another good thing to –
We've got to figure out how that works, right, because now we're going to potentially lose aspect for them to have water for the pump trucks because they fill up there.
Yeah, I don't know, but all good points.
So, again, I think this has primarily been kind of looking at the early plans and the select board hasn't been too involved, but I do want to emphasize that this group should start to focus on that especially because we're going to get to the point early next year.
I think we'll have opportunity for both input on the permit as well as officially this select board making sure that there's the proper protection for Brentwood's roads and anything else that may occur.
I don't think we're allowed to actually do anything other than request that they pay us for damages.
Excuse me?
I don't think we're allowed to preemptively ask them to pay for roads.
Yeah, well, I would say just like we do for many projects, I'm sure Exeter's roads will be bonded.
They may not be considering –
So –
Anyways, I don't know if we need to discuss it tonight.
I'm just throwing it out there.
You guys can decide whatever you want to do later.
Thank you, Ryan.
I know I have Mr. Spann here also.
I don't know if you had anything you wanted to add to that.
He's been following it very closely for the town and keeping us apprised on a regular basis.
So –
Please just introduce yourself and where you're from.
Thank you.
Robert Spann, 31 Peabody Drive.
Thank you.
I'm sorry.
My voice is not good.
I have been following this from the beginning because my property abuts the river.
And we are going to lose a substantial portion – I don't know if you know where Peabody Drive is,
but there's a truly large ponded area that will disappear and that will become scrub wetland, according to Exeter.
But Mr. Montegari raises a good point about the water.
According to Exeter, the dam removal will eliminate 70 acres of impoundment, which is a lot of water.
And if the fire department – Exeter said, we don't care because that's not a water source for Exeter.
If it's a water source for Brentwood, it does matter.
So there are a lot of things.
As I've said in the past, I can't imagine a project that will have a greater impact on Brentwood than this dam removal.
And so I think it's imperative that we keep an eye on it.
We're not going to stop it from happening, although that's possible.
If the environmental effects outweigh the benefits of dam removal, it's possible that the project could be stopped, but not likely.
But the main thing is we want to make sure that whatever impact on Brentwood is taken into account and through DES remediation or mitigation is ordered.
So thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
And I'll just put in a plug.
September 26 is the Exeter River paddle that the rec department and SRLAC puts on.
So show up.
It might be one of the last couples.
The other thing is on – because you're on PVD Drive.
I am as well.
Is that pond that's down there or where the river is, is there an access – is that where the fire department also has one of those –
I don't know what it's called a scuttle or something there?
No, there's a fire pond at the top of the street.
Okay.
Bless you.
Because I know there is one at Breeze Way, right, in that little area where they go in on Rawl Road, right?
Yeah, a little further downriver, yes.
Because that will be impact.
Yeah, the least impact of this will be up there.
The biggest impact will be at the dam, and it will lessen as it gets closer up that way.
All right.
So that's a concern for me for the fire department.
We have a hydrant and steaming drive.
So in one of the reports that they put out, and I was trying to find it, but I can't right now on the fly,
they actually had, like, a map of the river, and for every – like, based on how close you were to the dam,
they were saying how much was going to drop at each step of the way, so that might get to what you're talking about.
Okay.
Because that's something I think the fire department would want to look at, too.
If I may, if you're following up on that, I have that map, and I'd be happy to circulate it.
Yeah, I was trying to figure out which report it was in.
If you could send that over, that would be awesome.
For example, at Peabody Drive, they estimate that the river will go down six feet, and that doesn't leave much.
There'll be no more paddle.
And even they admit that kayaking will not occur.
There'll be whitewater kayaking.
That's all.
Or tubing.
You need to take five.
Okay.
You can go on with Daph if you want.
I'll be right back.
Daphne, are you here?
I'm here.
How are you doing?
Whatever you want.
Oh, no.
Mass exit is great.
Go right ahead.
Thank you, gentlemen.
This is going to be 30 seconds.
Do we need to wait for David?
Do we need to wait for David?
We have the majority.
He'll be back.
Go ahead, Daphne.
Tell you.
If you want to wait, we can.
If you want to go.
I do not want to wait.
Run.
Go.
This is a new contract for our 4MAX folding machine and postage meter.
It's a five-year contract.
Ours just ended.
They're telling us that if we sign a new contract, it's the same price.
However, if we go month to month, it's going to be $4 more a month.
Motion.
Second.
You kind of need this, right?
Like, we're not going to.
Yeah, we're not really changing, but it's.
I need your signature.
All in favor?
I'm an aye.
Paul?
Aye.
Letty?
Aye.
And I'm an aye.
So all I need is to sign this?
Yes, at the bottom.
Yeah.
Not yet.
Am I signing right now?
It's accepted.
No, but it has this purchase order.
Oh, I'm just going to sign here.
There we go.
Thank you, Daphne.
Thank you.
Yeah, you can just scan it over to.
What's today's date?
September 1st, right?
Yay.
9-1-26.
Thank you.
Okay.
Have a good night.
Sorry it took you so long.
You need to have your mic on.
This is the MRI contract that includes the changes
that you had requested last week, or last session.
These hours included some training for staff.
I think staff.
Did you want to take a look at that, too?
Because I know there was a lot of stuff,
but I just want to make sure.
It's all in compliance with the requests.
Well, one of the questions that I had is,
do they know how long this is going to take?
Because they've already done some of the work.
Isn't this something that they've already been doing
and we gave them, like, do it for this much,
and then they ran out?
So do you know if they have any idea how much longer it's going to take?
He didn't give me an exact number of hours.
We put in a NOC to exceed 100.
I also am requesting that we be trained so that we could help with reconciliations.
I mean, shouldn't we – isn't this something that we should already –
what is a reconciliation?
Can we – sorry, just break it down to, like, the most basic –
is that, like, what we just did?
Everything is we're balancing.
Everything is kind of getting balanced out, reconciled.
You're – everything is coming back to where it's now.
We're on an even playing field and we're moving forward from there.
So why are we not – so who's doing this right now for 2026?
We have not started on 2026 because we haven't closed out.
25, yeah, right?
24.
We haven't actually closed out.
25.
So –
We ought to keep back with that, man.
We have a preliminary draft that we don't have – they're going to come –
we've invited them to come in.
We don't have a date yet for them to come in and go over the 24 draft audit review
and that I'll request probably budget committee people to be –
So we don't have anything with MRI right now, right?
MRI –
We have nothing with them now?
Well, they did some, right?
They did some.
They still currently work through some stuff.
Julie, I might need some help on this one.
But wouldn't it be the thing to do is to hire them as a contract and have them straight
and step out?
We don't have the money for that right now.
Well, we're going to find –
They've started on 2025.
Who are you?
Julie Stevens, former town administrator.
Can you answer her, please?
She's still fixing stuff for us.
They have gone through a preliminary reconciliation and have a number of questions that are being
worked on.
And I believe that if we extend – and they ran out of hours.
If we extend it, they will do part of that research that is now in our lab.
What was the first batch of hours that we approved?
Do you remember?
It was like 40, 50 – I don't know.
It was some –
What's the – what is the hourly rate?
70 and 100.
70 or 110.
Or 110.
Because the 110 is a –
Senior finance consultant.
So it might have been 50.
Does that sound right?
It sounds about right that it was 50, yeah.
I –
But I – yeah, I thought we had asked if they could give a –
We did.
Do what will not exceed, but –
So my concern is that this contract says that they will not exceed 100 hours.
That's another maybe $10,000 that we did not budget or plan for.
He indicated that it would only be his – he wouldn't – because he's the supervisor.
He's the senior.
He would – he gave me a name.
I don't recall the name, but he would have his staff work on it, not him.
So it's up to $7,000 that we didn't budget for when we've already paid $3,000 up until now
for them to not even get started.
Well, they've already started.
That's our choice.
So –
We need to get something going here.
I mean, keep getting further and further behind the eight ball.
But we're –
And we can't get a bond until we get –
No.
But I guess my concern is is that we are still just kicking the can down the road
because we currently are not doing this either.
But they're going to start training you as part of this process.
That is my request.
So I think we originally had requested something guaranteed not to exceed.
They're saying –
Not to exceed 100 hours.
100 hours, but we don't know exactly $100 of what.
They're saying it's going to be primarily the $70 an hour, but it could go to the $110.
To me, that's kind of – you're looking at a range between the $7,000 to $10,000.
Plus whatever we've already paid them.
Yep.
When they – where it sounds like they haven't even actually started the reconciliation.
They've just been –
Well, they've been doing work for you, correct, Julie?
Yes, they've done a big chunk of it.
They just need these questions – they need some research done on some of the transactions.
So, like, do we know how – like, I'm assuming they're going chronologically.
Like, how much – how far through the year have they gotten with –
I think they've gotten all the way through December, and they have a list of questions for each month that they need research.
For the general fund only.
Okay.
Who are they asking the questions of and how –
Well, we have the list of questions, and I know Jillian had started to do some work on those, pulling the information.
So, is this proposal to take us into 2026 reconciliation?
Just to the end of 2025.
This goes through December of 25, 26.
We haven't even gotten there yet.
We haven't closed it up.
All right.
I mean, 100 hours – doesn't – 100 hours sounds like a lot in order to, you know, do this research?
Or does that sound within, you know, reason, Julie?
To me, it does.
I mean, it's probably just going to be a matter of posting several journal entries to –
So, I would say –
I would say maybe we just go to 50 max, including supervision or whatever.
Or do it based on the $70 and say $7,000.
Yeah, we could do that.
Don't – not to exceed – I'd like to do $5,000.
Well, that's what I was going to say.
If we did it to $5,000, we're kind of pushing them to get it done within $5,000, not $7,000.
I don't think they're going to push themselves to do it in any way other than whatever is correct.
And if they run out of money, they'll just come ask for more.
Do we know – or have you been – has anyone looked up – so MRI used to do this for us on a monthly basis as opposed to on a catch-up basis?
Is that something that we should consider moving forward?
I don't think that's a question for right now based on other discussions.
I mean, this is just kind of finalizing that audit.
So, I would like to make a motion that we consider right now up to 50 hours instead of the 100 hours.
And it would be not to exceed $5,000 if they have to come back before us if they're going to go over that.
Can we – when they – so, for example, could we get reports about what work that they're doing?
Yeah, I'd want a time schedule of what they're doing.
No, I don't just want a time schedule.
I want to know what they're doing.
Okay.
Right?
Like if they're making changes to our books, I think the select board should know what changes they're making.
Some production reports would be great.
Yes.
Jim, you had a comment?
Yeah, Jim, you had a 33 Mohawk Lane.
So, we paid someone to do reconciliation of 2024.
And I remember asking this board –
Two different people, actually.
Yeah.
That's even more concerning because who does this for free?
Okay.
So, we paid someone or we were supposed to pay or whatever.
Somebody did reconciliation and it was announced to the public and to the select board that the 2024 reconciliation was completed and we could then begin the 2024 audit.
The auditing people came in, spent a lot of time on the audit and did $2.7 million of manual journal entries, specifically doing, well, bookkeeping work.
And I don't know if you've gotten the bill for that yet, but all I'm saying is you don't want auditors to do bookkeeping work, right?
And I'm sure they're not going to want to do that ever again.
I think it even said it in the report that they're not going to do 2025 if they have to do that kind of reconciliation.
So, now we're off – we're going to – I think it's a good idea if we're going to have MRI do 2025 reconciliation because we have to get the 2025 audit started.
And I don't think you can until that reconciliation is done.
I think the question that Buddy was asking about what's a reconciliation, I asked that same question over a year ago and didn't get an answer.
And I don't think I'm going to get an answer tonight.
I think I know what it is.
But my point is that if you're going to pay MRI, and I think it's a really good thing to do that, and I talked to the town administrator about this, and I talked to MRI myself during the week, they have the capabilities to come in here.
I think if you look at the audit, they found all kinds of deficiencies in our processes and procedures and our internal controls, right?
We got really dinged badly and a whole bunch of material weaknesses, which is pretty bad, right?
And my concern, and I'm sure yours is too, is that if we don't get someone in here who really knows how to do this and knows how to utilize this awesome MTS tool that we have, and it is really awesome.
I've done now the reporting, and I've done budgeting.
I did Wayne's budget today.
It's really nice.
It's powerful, but I don't know all the features, and I don't know who does know all the features in this town, any of you at this table or anyone in this building.
But we need to have somebody come in here and teach us how to do this correctly, and MRI does that.
They offer that service.
It's going to cost us money, but I hate to say this.
I don't see what choice we have unless I can't do it, unless one of you folks want to do it.
And I don't know.
Like I said, I don't think we've gone through three TAs, and I've been elected for this is my second year now, and I'm on my third TA.
And I don't want to have a fourth.
And I think it's unfair that we hire somebody or somebody to come in here and be a manager when we have no procedures and processes, and people don't know what they're doing.
So I think there comes a time when we've got to bite the bullet, admit that.
I think the audit, while it was pretty bad, the good thing about it is it's not my opinion.
It's not her opinion.
It's not his opinion of what the problem is, right?
We got it in writing now.
And it's kind of like it's basically this – as an engineer, this is what I want.
I want to know what the problem is because now we can fix it.
The problem is, is that I don't know if we have the person right now here who can fix it and document it all and at the same time do their job.
So I really think if we're going to sign a contract with MRI to do reconciliation, I think we should have them come in here and give you guys an overview.
I talked to Scott Smith.
He's really good.
And if you look, MRI – I mean, it's right on their website, right?
They have the wide range of skills and municipal expertise in performing special investigations of facts and circumstances surrounding alleged errors,
and irregularities.
We can help with the application of today's increasingly complex accounting and reporting requirements,
as well as analyzing the applications of accounting standards to financial statements.
They own that system, MTS, that we use.
Wouldn't it be great if while they were doing this reconciliation, they could help us develop processes and procedures,
and then we can maybe train our people on how to use the tool and use the process?
Well, and I think so.
I think with the contract, the motion is right now for 50 hours.
They're going to offer to do some of the training that we need.
I know there's probably, based on the audit, and we're still in the draft portion,
we're waiting for them to come in and basically that plots get in – I can never pronounce their name –
Blaston or Sanderson or whatever their name is.
We're waiting for them to come in, and I want the budget committee to be part of that discussion.
But I think right now I'd like to do the 50 hours.
I'll second that.
And then –
And again, all I'm saying is you should have them come in here and give you a presentation,
and I'd love to hear them do it, what they could do for us,
especially if they start doing reconciliations.
Maybe they can start getting a handle on where we're lacking.
You know what I mean?
Yep.
Understood.
Thank you.
Yep.
Thank you, Jim.
All right.
Can I have a vote?
We have a motion and a second.
That's for 50 hours?
For 50 hours to start with this contract.
With a $5,000 limit?
No.
Yeah, up to $5,000.
Oh.
So it's 50,000 – it's 5,000 or 50 hours?
Not to exceed –
50.
It's 50 hours not to exceed $5,000.
Okay.
So that way it's going to be between, you know, $3,500 to $5,000 because I don't know how many hours –
I don't want to pigeonhole them to basically be stuck with $70 an hour.
How quickly will they start with this contract?
Do you think they'll start right away until we get on that?
Okay.
Okay.
So –
I'm an aye.
Paul?
Aye.
Dave?
Aye.
Buddy?
Aye.
And I'm an aye.
And can we get a report list of what they've done with the first – whatever it was – I don't
remember how many hours we had them do the first time, but of what they did?
A recap.
Yep.
But like a detailed – made this change, made that change.
Cool.
Not going into those new hours that we just –
Correct.
Well, but if they did it, they should have a record of what they did.
Correct.
Yeah, they should have – they should be able to adjust to that.
And then, Jim, back up.
Cemetery.
Oh, yeah, cemetery.
Jim, you're up for the cemetery committee construction and design.
Please.
Change of pace.
Jim Hazzer, Chair of Cemetery Trustees, and I sent a copy of this to you, Mr. Chairman.
The cemetery trustees voted at our past meeting to finalize and create a subcommittee to specifically
look at the cemetery – the new cemetery design and construction.
You know, we got a – had a resident who did an amazing donation of the land for our future
cemetery, but at this point, we need to get started as a town figuring out, okay, what – how
do you make a new cemetery?
Because we've never done it before.
I mean, when we get – when we got the current cemetery, it already was a cemetery and it
was donated to the town.
We just added new Section 5.
So all I'm asking here is that we've already voted.
We've established this subcommittee.
We're looking for three public members to join.
There'll be a cemetery trustee rep, and that'll be Jillian.
She'll be the chair.
Superintendent of cemeteries.
Joyce Kegel will be on it.
Land use coordinator, either Mark or Glenn.
And then we – I'd like to have a select board rep, and then we'll have three public – at
least three public members, and we're advertising that on our website, and it was in the BNL this
month.
So all I'm asking you is if you could assign one member to be on that subcommittee.
Dave or Paul, which one of you guys want to do it?
I told him I'd do it, but Paul can have it if he wants it.
Who wants it?
How about Dave does it, and Paul, you're his alternate.
Sure.
Well, he's the attorney.
I need him on that.
Dave, you taught me how to be a cemetery trustee, so it would be great if you were on this team.
That works for me.
Awesome.
And so I'll make a motion.
Do I have a second for that?
Second.
Thank you.
Thanks, Dave.
All in favor?
I'm an aye.
Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
Letty?
Sure.
There you go.
Perfect.
Easy breezy.
So we need three people from the public now, right?
Yeah, that's a cemetery custom to do that.
Old business.
Old business.
We had a Block 5.
Sorry.
We had a Block 5 invoice that came in.
We'd signed it, and then we got contacted by Block 5 with an issue with the billing.
So Jason is here to talk.
What did you do to us, Jason?
It looks like the new price was lower, so I don't know why we're complaining.
No, I don't think so.
So I'm Jason Cohen.
I live at 333 South Road, but I'm here today as a representative of Block 5.
We originally submitted this quote for a project back in October of 2025.
Since then, the cost of storage has tripled.
We've resubmitted the quote a couple of times to you guys before the last time that we submitted
it for approval in June, July, I think.
Yeah, so we approved it on 84.
We missed one of the lines.
We made a mistake and did not update the price of, I think it's line four, the one terabyte
solid state drives.
The cost went from $210 a piece to $350.
So the total cost went up, I think, $2,200.
The quote was signed with the incorrect price by Sue.
And then when we went to execute on it...
Fine by me.
Oh, by you.
Sorry.
I like the old price better, Jason.
Believe me.
I like the price from last October even better.
Unfortunately for us, we can't eat that, so we respectfully request to adjust that price
to $350 per drive and increases the cost, but I forget what the exact number is.
$2,240.
Is this coming out of the capital reserve we have for this?
It's not on that one, I don't think.
Because it's going from $1,7,637.59 to $19,877.59.
Just increase, Jason.
That sounds fair.
I mean, honestly, I'm paying for it anyway.
I make a motion that we pay for this entire invoice out of the capital reserve for hardware.
Right?
This is a hardware.
This is hardware only.
There's a lot of project work that got added to it since the initial proposal that we're
doing basically for free.
Not specifically because of this mishap, but just because that's how we like to work with
you guys.
When we see stuff not really appreciate that, we do it the right way.
Does this include the fan for the fire department?
The fan.
Server?
Loud?
There's a very loud fan.
So actually, you might see there's language in the project proposal.
That's specifically what I'm talking about.
We're looking to get rid of the servers, Katrina servers at the fire department, to decrease
your guys' costs as we need to upgrade them again, move them virtually here.
That's part of what I'm talking about.
So a better solution?
Even better.
Yeah, it'll cost way less going forward, and then we won't have additional hardware
that we need to think about replacing in the future.
Well, it sounds like overall they're trying to help us save money.
This was an error.
I would make a motion to, well.
I already made the motion.
I'll second her motion.
I'll second her.
Okay.
All in favor?
I'm an aye.
Aye.
All in aye.
Aye.
I'm an aye.
Here we go.
All right.
So I'm going to sign it and get the new one.
Mark has a question.
Yep.
Oh, go ahead.
Who had a question?
Yes, Mark.
I would just like to take the time to commend your team.
You guys do a great job for us.
You're very responsive, and I just wanted to thank you for that.
You're very welcome.
Committee updates?
Mine, what Rob did, I was just good.
REC, we had a meeting.
Irrigation's moving forward.
I think that's taking place this week or next week for the lower fields based on the bid that
was awarded to them, and we voted on.
Uh-oh.
And then we'll put the salt out.
It's not snowing, is it?
It's not snowing yet.
The Canadian geese are flying south, but we're not going there.
And I think that's all I have.
And I think that's all I have.
For highway, we're getting a new plow for the...
Also a new tractor.
The new tractor.
And a new tractor.
Outside of that, that's all I have right now.
Well, actually, no, that's not true.
That's not true.
Hold on one quick second, please.
I wrote down for police.
Police.
I have a police update, police department update.
They've been busy with community efforts, received national attention for delivering flowers to a resident at the nursing home.
I'm sure many of you have seen that.
That's fantastic.
Community involvement, very good.
And that trickles down from leadership.
They conducted a scam-slash-fraud prevention class at Three Ponds, and that was received very well.
Currently, we have an officer in the second week of training at the police academy.
And on a side note, we checked parking throughout the day on the first farmer's market on Crawley Falls and had no issues whatsoever.
So I'd like to commend the police department for all their hard work lately.
And that's all I have right now.
I can say we have a pretty safe community because I was a dope and went out to my Jeep and opened up the back door to get something out of the car and forgot to shut the door.
My sprinklers went off and it's the only thing that damaged my car.
Well, it's a Jeep.
Who cares, right?
The water went in and it came back out through the drain plugs.
But I had the doors wide open all night.
And the only buddy that really noticed was my sprinkler that decided to get into it.
Exactly.
It didn't float away.
Were the ducks floating?
Right.
Yeah, yeah.
There was a lot of water in the Jeep.
I can say that much.
Sprinklers liked my car.
So we do have a pretty safe community, which I commend them for driving around and doing stuff.
Now there's going to be a lot of people going to Bob's house, checking out to see if his Jeep is locked or not.
The dogs didn't go hang out in my Jeep either.
So, oh, well.
Anyway, good to go.
Anything from Dave, Paul?
We already did planning, right?
Oh, yeah.
We did planning.
Adult softball.
We have a new champion, the Mad Batters, beat the Sandlot Chuggers, who had been the prior champion.
So they dethroned them in the championship game by a score of 13-8.
It was a well-played final, and I think everyone had a great season.
How was the umpiring at that game?
The umpiring was excellent.
I heard he needed a new pair of glasses, though.
That's what they told me.
The Chuggers weren't happy.
Okay.
For the record, the umpire was Paul.
Dave, anything?
Let the record show.
Anything, buddy?
The library trustees meeting was moved to tonight at 6, so I am not attending that.
The next school board meeting, because next Monday is a holiday, will be next Tuesday.
And they will be voting to pick their replacement member.
Um, that's it.
Those are my only committees.
Anything from the public?
Oh, voting on Tuesday.
Oh, yes.
That was one of the other things I wanted to discuss.
Um, so for Tuesday next week, I think we should just be signing.
I know Paul's still going to be traveling.
Um, Doug is going to be filling in, right?
Doug is always filling in.
At the polls.
Doug is filling in every new home on Friday.
It is Friday, 1 o'clock.
Okay.
What time are you sitting at?
1 o'clock?
Sorry, 1 o'clock.
Okay.
I'll see if I can squeak out from work for a little bit and come over.
I guess he's showing up at my house, and he's just going to jump in the Jeep and hang out with me.
Um, yes, sprinklers might be on, or the dogs might be in it.
Um, okay, so I think maybe next week we just do our regular signing.
So we don't have a meeting.
So we don't have a meeting, because we're going to be over there at the polls, not here.
4 o'clock, a good time to all meet.
No meeting.
No meeting, just sign.
No, we're just going to sign papers.
Why don't you want to sit together and do that?
Would you sign?
Well, we're all going to be there.
Yeah, we're all going to be there, because you have to have three of us there anyway.
So I'll be working there all day, so.
I'll be there all day, too.
So I'll bring the paperwork to you.
Just bring the paperwork over to school, and we'll sign it.
And we'll sign it.
Everyone good with that?
Yep.
Yep.
All right, so we're good with that?
Yes, Mark?
You have a ZBA alternate application that I would like to see voted on this evening.
ZBA alternate.
ZBA alternate.
For Reagan Pennington Elliott?
Correct.
She was a full-time member and had to step back, and I've convinced her to become an alternate.
Motion.
Motion.
And I have a second?
Second.
All in favor?
Aye.
Aye.
I would like to extend to the general public that if you'd like to become a Zoning Board of
Adjustment alternate, please reach out to my office.
We could always use another hand.
I don't know if you are able to.
There is a section on the town website for boards and committees that are looking for, I don't
know if there is.
Yep.
People mostly, I mean, if they're watching this meeting, they're going to get their information
here.
It's difficult, as you know, to get people involved.
Yep.
So every opportunity we get to advocate for that is an opportunity that you should take.
Thank you.
Yep.
Yep.
You're awesome.
I had one question.
Go ahead, lady.
One was, it seems like through, because of the turnover we've had, we've lost sight of
the committee process that the select board put in place to help with making sure that when
people fall off, there's a new, we're re-upping those in time, and so people aren't losing.
So we should just refresh our memories on that one, because I think it was set up so that
all terms ended June 30th.
So there's probably people on committees that are currently not up to date.
Yeah.
So at one point there was a spreadsheet.
Yeah, we need to get a schedule, right?
Yeah.
There is a schedule, and at one point there was a spreadsheet that had a list of like,
these are the people, these are when their terms end, to kind of keep track of that.
I think we've lost that.
And then at the last meeting, you had sent over a list of questions that you had for
legal about the EMS contract.
Did we get an answer to that?
Legal had reached back out and asked if we had a contract.
I said, no, there's not a contract.
What we're doing is looking at these questions first, and Laura was reviewing those questions.
She hasn't responded to those yet.
She said, okay, so there's no contract for me to review yet, but I will review these questions,
and I will get back to you.
So Annette was, I spoke with her, emailed back with her last week, and she hasn't responded
to me this week, so I'm assuming she's in the process of reviewing those questions and
getting us the answers that we need.
Would it make sense for us to move forward with a contract, and then she can tell us if
she wants to see changes pertinent to those questions to make sure we're covered?
One of the questions that I asked her is, and one of the questions that was in the packet
is do we have to go forward with a Warren article for contracts now that we're SB2, similar
to how Fremont did their Warren article for last year for the same service?
So that was one of the things that I asked her for.
I'm hoping she'll give me some things, because I think one of the things from the committee
was 53A RSA.
I want to know how that applies and what her legal interpretation is on that.
Didn't the chief say that it didn't apply, though?
She hasn't responded to that portion yet.
Okay, but the chief said it didn't apply.
The chief did, but I want legal to tell me.
Okay.
Okay.
Because it's an RSA, and last time I checked, the fire chief is not an attorney.
Oh, yep, but just, it's not like it's a complete mystery.
Right.
You have some...
Right.
So, and based on the review of it and discussion, we felt that we should have town council basically
opine on the questions that were raised by that committee.
So, we submitted all those questions, and I just got to wait for them to come back to me.
There's no time on when she'll get it back.
We don't know.
I mean, she reached out last week and said, is there a contract you want me to review with
this?
And I said, no, we haven't gotten that far yet.
She's just going to answer questions, and we're going to put a...
She's going to put the contract together?
No, because then we're going to have to go back to her with the contract.
Well, then we have to...
No, because then we...
Well, she's got to answer these questions, and then hopefully we'll have Paul take a first
swing at looking at a contract, a legal contract, and then basically before we can ratify it,
then I have to basically have her basically rubber stamp it.
And then what her recommendations...
One of the questions, I think, was what would be her recommendations for how you would structure
the contract and how you would structure that agreement between the two communities.
Did you see what was sent today on Outlook?
Yes.
You saw that thing today?
Yeah.
Okay.
Yeah, I saw that.
We had a citizens...
Yeah.
And so I did ask Sue to basically keep a folder together so we can keep it all together as
one, like, subfolder that we can review.
Yeah.
Okay.
Okay.
So do you think maybe by the next meeting we'll have more information back?
I hope so.
Okay.
Because that would be two weeks.
Yeah.
Right?
So I hope you're going to have to take in the budgets and stuff and get it to them.
Yeah.
And then we've got to figure out...
We've got to put money in their budget.
Yeah.
No, we don't have to put any money in our budget.
No, they have Fremont.
Oh, yeah.
Yeah.
They have over there.
Yeah.
All right.
Yeah.
We're aware this is a time-sensitive matter.
Yes.
Yeah.
So, which is one of the things that we sent over to legal and we'll deal with it that way.
I think we have to go into non-public for hiring.
So I'm going to make a motion to go into non-public for hiring based off of Chapter 91A.
Second.
Roll call.
Aye.
Paul.
Aye.
Dave.
Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
We're going to turn off the recording.
Paul will be back in five.
Okay.
Great.
Thanks.
All right.
All right.
We'll see you.
We'll see you next time.
Oh, yeah.
Hey, you know?
I don't know.
Yeah.
Hey.
Where's Mark?
Oh, he left.
Hey, you know how to shut your call?
Oh, hopefully we don't drop you if we do want to call you or you're going to call my son.
Oh, they're not trying to.
Oh, do you have no message?
I don't want to go to the camera.
Oh, no, then you go.
She wants to get home.
She should get home.
What are you doing?
No.
What?
No.
I've got to turn off the recording to call.
Yeah, you don't have to do it.
It's not doing anything.
I'm going to block.
All right.
Okay.
I'm still going to block.
Hey, someone.
Hey, someone.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
I'm still going to block.
You can hear me now, though, can't you?
Oh, yeah.
You want me to call Jim back?
Yep.
Paul is through these.
Paul can only hear us if these are on.
Hello.
Hello.
Come on, Jim.
What's he doing?
Talking?
Yeah.
I mean, what are you doing?
Talking, of course.
Uh-oh.
I can hear you guys still on here.
Can you still hear us?
Can you still hear us?
Test, test, test, test, test, test, test, test, test, test, test, test.
I think we're still live.
It's a little bit delayed, but it is still on here.
How is it live?
How is it live with the thing going off?
Because when we reset it, we probably.
Can we just call, Paul?
You're more than welcome to give me a call.
Paul, I'm going to call you.
We're just going to make a call of this.
All right.
Thanks.
You can't hear us again.
Did it go off now?
Should I call Paul?