March 16, 2021 ~ Public Hearing

2021-03-16 · Public Hearing · 1:54:15 · watch on YouTube →

This was the public hearing on the March 2021 Durham town meeting referendum, held over Zoom because COVID limits on indoor gatherings made a floor meeting impossible. Ruth, the town administrator, presented the warrant article by article, with Kevin chairing and department heads, the planning board chair and the budget committee chair on hand to answer questions. No votes were taken; the purpose was to explain what will appear on the April 6 ballot and to take questions. Most of the discussion went to two subjects: the proposed land use ordinance amendments, particularly the backlot and road standards, and two articles that would stop unspent operating funds and EMS billing revenue from rolling automatically into the fire and public works capital reserve funds. The fire chief said he was not in favor of the rollover changes at this point, and several residents argued against them. Ruth also corrected a figure on one of her slides after a question from the chat, and agreed to make the land use amendments easier to find on the town website.

No written minutes could be matched to this meeting. The transcript records that the speaker changed but never who was speaking, so any name attached to a statement below is inferred from context and is marked (?).

What was discussed

1. 0:03
   Opening, format and roll call

   Kevin (?) explained that the hearing would run article by article as a town meeting would, with questions taken after each article, and that nothing would be voted on. Questions that could not be answered live would be researched and posted on the town website. He then called on the department heads and board members to check their audio, including Chief Moore, Calvin, Ruth, George, Mark Farren, Rob Hanto, Mitch George, budget committee chair Milt Simon and the planning board chair.

2. 5:21
   Why a secret ballot referendum this year

   Ruth (?) said the indoor gathering limit of 50 would not accommodate a normal town meeting, which drew about 150 people in 2019 and about 175 in 2018, and that some residents would not want to attend in person regardless. The town still had to pass a municipal budget, and a referendum also allows absentee voting.

3. 5:21
   Absentee ballots and election logistics

   As of that morning the town had 72 absentee ballot requests. Requests must be made in person or by phone directly with the voter, since the state's online request system is not available for a municipal election, and absentee ballots stop being available at 6:30 p.m. on Thursday, April 1. Voting is at the AMVETS Hall from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m., a mailer went to every household, and a referendum page with links to the January select board and budget committee meetings is on the town website.

4. 10:27
   Estimated tax impact of the whole ballot

   If everything passes, the select board recommendation adds 1.14 to the mill rate, a 5.7 percent increase in the total mill rate; the budget committee recommendation works out to 1.1 mill and about 5.4 percent. The figures are estimates because the April 1 valuation, the state reimbursements and half of the RSU 5 school budget are not yet known. The county assessment is known and rose by only $335, and the overlay, set by the select board at commitment, may be up to 5 percent of the commitment but has run a little over 1 percent in Durham.

5. 10:27
   What is driving the municipal increase

   Ruth listed the transition from a town administrator to a town manager, which adds about $61,000; a larger solid waste expense under the new Pine Tree Waste (Casella) contract; restoration of half the maintenance paving cut from the 2020 COVID budget, almost $131,000; a workers compensation increase of over $30,000 caused by an accident; two $30,000 capital reserve requests, one for fire and one for public works, after none were requested in 2020; and the end of the 2020 pay freeze.

6. 16:32
   Question 1: 2020 solid waste budget overage

   Article 3 asks to appropriate funds to cover the amount the solid waste budget was overspent in 2020, which happened because the new contract charges per ton and the tonnage estimate was based on earlier years. Solid waste was estimated at 317 tons and came in at 381, and recycling was estimated at 150 tons and came in at 160. The money would come from the undesignated fund and does not affect taxes.

7. 16:32
   Question 2: spending at last year's level if a budget fails

   The ballot must legally offer the option of reverting a failed budget question to last year's budget for that category. Without it, a failed budget article would require a special town meeting to vote a new budget question.

8. 16:32
   Capital questions: breathing apparatus and reserve requests

   One question would spend $60,000 from the fire department capital fund to buy 10 self-contained breathing apparatus, because the current units are nearing the end of their useful life. Two further questions ask $30,000 each into the fire and public works capital reserves, raised through taxes.

9. 16:32
   Land use ordinance amendments introduced

   Four ballot questions would change parts of the land use ordinance, covering roads, home-based business, the appeals process and some administrative provisions. A synopsis is online and available at the office, and a public hearing on the amendments was held on February 8 with a recording on the town website.

10. 22:31
    Backlot provisions questioned

    Tammy Thatcher of Harmony Acres, off Swamp Road, asked whether the family backlot ordinance had been eliminated in the 2019 land use overhaul. George, the town planner, said it had not, and that the proposed amendment would limit a backlot access to a single back lot with a single house. In exchange the fire department has agreed the access can be a 16-foot gravel driveway rather than a 20-foot road, with engineering and drainage standards, and the fire chief must approve the built access before the code officer issues a building permit for a house set as much as 300 feet back.

11. 27:39
    Single lot versus multiple lot review

    George (?) explained that at present a multi-lot backlot road needs planning board approval only of the maintenance agreement, which the amendments would clean up: a road serving multiple lots would go through the planning board like any subdivision, while a single back lot could still be handled by the code officer. Tammy Thatcher (?) said that answered her concern.

12. 27:39
    Finding the amendments on the town website

    Jane Rice (?) said she could not find the proposed amendments on the site. She was directed through Boards and Committees to the planning board page, where the proposed land use ordinance amendments are posted, and also to the town meeting referendum page linked from the homepage. Ruth (?) said she would try to make the link more prominent, and Jane Rice (?) noted that other residents trying to make an informed decision would face the same problem.

13. 32:40
    Road classification and existing roads

    Todd Bolier (?) asked whether the arterial, collector and subcollector classifications could be applied to already-accepted roads so as to cap further development on them. George (?) said the standards apply only to construction of new roads in proposed subdivisions, that the planning board approves proposed roads and not existing ones, and that the three roads in Durham named as arterial are state roads. He added that the current standards are tied to the repealed growth cap ordinance, and that the town does not presently have a process for accepting a road as a town road, something that will have to be revisited.

14. 37:46
    Discontinuing and consolidating old funds

    Three questions reorganise dormant accounts: discontinue the old home days fund, with the balance lapsing to the undesignated fund; consolidate the municipal building account, title searches, town office reserve and perambulation funds into a single municipal capital fund usable for any municipal capital expense; and merge the bridge account, which has held about $98,000 for five or six years, into the public works capital fund so bridges sit in the regular capital schedule.

15. 37:46
    Articles ending the operating surplus and EMS revenue rollovers

    Three further questions would end the practice of rolling unspent public works and fire operating funds, and EMS billing revenue, into those departments' capital reserve funds at year end; the money would instead go to the undesignated fund and reserve amounts would be voted at town meeting through the capital process. Ruth (?) said that last year the fire department rolled over $29,000 and public works $39,000 in operating funds, and EMS revenue of about $54,000 also went into the fire capital reserve.

16. 43:09
    Old home days balance corrected

    Phyllis Brandon (?) asked in the chat why her mailer showed $509 in the old home days fund when the slide showed a different number. Ruth checked and confirmed the fund holds $509 and that her slide was wrong.

17. 43:09
    Where the rollover change came from

    Jane Rice (?) asked who proposed ending the rollovers. Kevin (?) said it is an offshoot of the capital improvement process adopted a year or two earlier, that a variable year-end rollover makes multi-year reserve planning difficult, and that the capital improvement committee is in favour of the change. Jane Rice (?) replied that the town took on ambulance billing years ago on the understanding it would offset the cost of the ambulance, and that residents should know that history.

18. 48:41
    What the EMS revenue was meant to fund

    The fire chief said his research showed that Chief St. Michelle had intended the ambulance billing revenue for the capital fund to replace the ambulance itself, not for operational costs. Kevin (?) acknowledged the article does change something the town voted on in the past, which is why it is being put to a vote. Asked how many people were taking part, Kevin (?) said 48 attendees and panelists, of whom 14 were panelists, leaving 34 members of the public.

19. 48:41
    Resident argument for keeping the automatic transfer

    Jeff Wakeakeman (?) of Newberg Road (?) said the EMS revenue has run around $54,000 a year and that having it go straight to capital reserve has been useful. He said it is always hard to get the town to fund reserves, that there have been fights on the town floor over $25,000, and that under the change the fire department would have to ask for something like $85,000 a year.

20. 53:48
    Whether the rollover creates a spending incentive

    Kevin (?) said the argument runs both ways: the current practice could encourage padding a budget to build reserves, while the change could encourage spending every operating dollar. The fire chief said he does not design his budget around what he might save, that an operational account is for operations, and that he is not in favour of either article at this point, calling it premature until there is more information including the evaluation he has requested. Calvin, asked the same question about public works, said he understood both sides and was fine either way.

21. 53:48
    Concern about the undesignated fund balance

    Jill, of Stack Pole Road and a member of the budget committee, asked why the funds should route through the undesignated fund at all, since the money would then have to be voted back out later. She said the undesignated balance has to be kept at a certain level to help the town's loan interest rates, and worried the money would be used toward that instead of reaching capital reserve.

22. 58:54
    Capital planning rationale and how reserve articles would be funded

    Ruth (?) explained with a firetruck example that if $100,000 a year is needed in reserve, not knowing whether $5,000 or $50,000 will roll over makes it hard to decide what to put on the ballot; under the change the leftover simply goes to undesignated and the reserve request is set on its own merits. Kevin (?) said a future reserve article could be funded partly from undesignated and partly by taxation depending on the year. Jill (?) suggested instead routing the money automatically into a general capital improvement fund, the way car registration revenue is transferred, so it is not tied to fire or public works but is still committed to capital.

23. 1:03:58
    Timing of the reserve and funding decisions

    Jane Rice pressed on the sequencing. Ruth (?) said the capital improvement committee ranks reserve requests in the fall, before year-end figures are known, while the decision on whether the money comes from undesignated funds or taxes is not made until the January or February budget meetings, by which time the unspent operating balances are known.

24. 1:09:12
    What counts as capital, and which funds remain

    The fire chief said capital expenditure is more than trucks, giving thermal imaging cameras, radios, station work and unforeseen apparatus repairs as examples that do not always fit a five-year rolling plan. Jeff Wakeakeman (?) argued the two approaches amount to the same thing, since by budget time you know what lapsed either way. It was confirmed that the municipal, fire department and public works capital funds are not being merged; only the destination of unspent money would change.

25. 1:09:12
    Effect on a future town manager

    Michelle Wylin (?) asked whether the changes would make a town manager's job easier. Kevin (?) said it could be managed either way and would not be burdensome, but that consolidating the dormant accounts into one municipal buildings capital account is a clear benefit over the three or four separate accounts now in place.

26. 1:14:25
    What has to be voted to spend capital reserve

    A chat question asked whether every capital purchase is voted on by the town. Kevin (?) said what requires a town vote is putting money into capital reserve; spending from a reserve the town has already funded can be a board vote, for example a matching share of a grant for a culvert or a repair at the Eureka Center. He said the custom of asking the town to vote on major capital items such as a truck will continue.

27. 1:14:25
    No amendments from the floor this year

    Because the meeting is by ballot, none of the questions can be amended as they could be on the town floor. Each is an up or down vote, and where the two boards differ voters choose the select board recommendation, the budget committee recommendation or neither.

28. 1:14:25
    Overview of the budget articles

    Ruth (?) said the assessing, general assistance, cemeteries, planning, Eureka Community Center, debt service and conservation and recreation budgets are flat or decreasing, while administrative, animal control, fire, public works, solid waste and telecommunications increase. The select board and budget committee recommendations, both printed on the ballot, agree everywhere except the fire department, telecommunications and planning.

29. 1:19:30
    Fire department budget (question 16)

    The select board recommends $485,000 and the budget committee recommends $472,753, the same as last year's budget. Of the increase, $17,657 is the fire department's share of the workers compensation rise, which Ruth (?) said the chief cannot control. The budget committee's view was that the labour line had been underspent for several years; the select board treated the 2020 payroll figure as an outlier caused by the pandemic.

30. 1:19:30
    Animal control contract

    Joe Lamont (?) asked whether animal control is still contracted to Lisbon, whether that will continue and whether the contract is public. Ruth (?) said it is, offered to provide a copy on request, and said it costs a little more than running the service in-house did but that the town went through about four animal control officers on its own with poor service.

31. 1:24:37
    Fire chief's response on the labour line

    The fire chief said operational changes over the previous two years had reduced labour spending and that 2020 was to have been the year to prove it, but suspending four months of trainings and meetings cut a large number of member hours, worth around $17,000 at his average pay per member. He said he had presented a flat budget until the workers compensation forecast came in, and that he cannot absorb that $17,000 without an overrun.

32. 1:24:37
    How workers compensation is calculated

    Heather Roy (?) asked in the question box whether public sector workers compensation is audited annually and based on payroll. Ruth (?) said the premium is based on an estimate of payroll with an experience rating drawn from the last three years of claims, and that the town is audited each spring, usually February, and billed or reimbursed against actual payroll, normally within about $5,000.

33. 1:24:37
    Public works budget

    The maintenance paving line, halved in 2020 to offset the new road bond after COVID hit, is restored to 75 percent of the pre-pandemic level. The budget carries a workers compensation increase of $12,284 and is $45,000 below what public works actually spent in 2019.

34. 1:29:59
    Administration budget

    Ruth (?) said her budget is up 11 percent because of the transition from town administrator to town manager, partly offset by lower election expenses after an expensive 2020 election year and by decreases in certain benefits.

35. 1:29:59
    Town manager cost and search status

    Asked what a town manager will cost, Kevin gave an estimate of around $80,000 salary plus benefits, with transition costs covering roughly a month of overlap and, if the current administrator is not appointed, a severance package; he put the ongoing extra annual cost at around $35,000. Jeannie Costigan (?) asked how the salary was set, and Kevin (?) said it is based on comparable towns, but that the consultant warned the market is competitive and the figure could end up higher. The town received about 40 applications, the consultant forwarded the top 15, first-round interviews were set for that week and the next, and two or three finalists would go to a second round.

36. 1:35:07
    Cause of the workers compensation increase

    A follow-up question asked whether the increase came from claims or from payroll growth. Ruth (?) said a fairly significant claim in 2019 entered the town's rating this year and drove a large increase in the experience modifier.

37. 1:35:07
    Solid waste budget

    The town went out to RFP and received two bids, with Casella the lower, but the new contract is structured as a base fee plus a per-ton charge. Combined with a collapse in the worldwide recyclables market over the last three years and an upward adjustment to the tonnage estimate, the budget rises 21.24 percent, a little more than $54,000, and this is the first full year of the higher costs.

38. 1:35:07
    Debt service

    The town carries three municipal bond bank issues, two road bonds and one combined road and ambulance bond, plus a fire truck bond and the original public works equipment and building bonds. Debt service is $980,863 this year, slightly lower than last year because the interest owed to the bond bank declines each year.

39. 1:35:07
    Consolidated small department budgets (question 21)

    Article 23 combines animal control, assessing, cemeteries, conservation, parks and recreation, the Eureka Community Center and general assistance into one question. Animal control rose by roughly $1,500 as Lisbon adjusted its fee after a first full year, assessing and conservation went down, cemeteries stayed flat, and the Eureka budget dropped slightly as heat pump electricity costs replaced propane. General assistance was reduced, though Ruth (?) noted the town is required to overspend that line if requests exceed it.

40. 1:40:40
    Employee raise pool

    Article 24 asks $12,363 for a 3 percent overall increase in town salaries, after the 2020 pay freeze. The funds are distributed across six departments, pay rates are set by the select board, and individual raises are performance-based so some employees may receive more or less than 3 percent.

41. 1:40:40
    Telecommunications budget

    The select board recommends $55,767 and the budget committee $50,000 for a budget funded entirely from cable franchise fees, which bring in about $43,000 a year. Costs this year include moving town email to a .gov domain following last year's email breach, plus IT support that varies with whatever goes wrong. The budget committee's concern is that the town consistently budgets more than the franchise fees bring in; the current franchise contract dates from 2016 and expires in 2026, and it is unclear whether municipalities will be able to collect such fees after that.

42. 1:40:40
    Planning, appeals and historic district budget

    Ruth flagged an error on the mailer, which showed the whole budget as raised by taxes when conditional use revenue and appeals revenue offset part of it. The select board fully funded the remaining work to bring the town's ordinances into line with state requirements and the Durham comprehensive plan, while the budget committee wanted more information about the projects and set an increase of 2 percent over last year's actual. Both recommendations are below last year's budget.

43. 1:40:40
    LD 1 levy limit (question 25)

    Article 27 asks voters to exceed the LD 1 property tax levy limit, the 2005 law that caps a town's tax increase unless the legislative body votes otherwise. If all budget articles pass, the town will exceed the limit by $380,331.

44. 1:46:35
    Routine town business articles

    The remaining articles set tax due dates and interest, allow the overlay, give the select board authority to conduct town business until the next town meeting, and allow the town to borrow short term if cash runs low. Ruth (?) said there is nothing new on these questions, and that LD 1 has passed by a substantial margin every year the town has voted on it.

45. 1:51:52
    Candidates on the ballot

    In answer to a question about nomination papers, Kevin (?) said Rich George is running unopposed for the one open select board seat and Candy Decipus (?) is running unopposed for re-election to the school committee. Only two nomination papers, from Neil Barry and Lee Fischer, were returned for the three budget committee seats, leaving one write-in opening.

Worth knowing

• 5:21
  Voting is on April 6 at the AMVETS Hall from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Absentee ballots must be requested by 6:30 p.m. on Thursday, April 1, and cannot be requested online for a municipal election; 72 requests had already been made as of the morning of the hearing.
• 10:27
  If everything on the ballot passes, the select board recommendation adds 1.14 to the mill rate, a 5.7 percent increase in the total mill rate, against 1.1 mill and about 5.4 percent under the budget committee's. All of it is an estimate, because the April 1 valuation, the state reimbursements and half of the school budget are still unknown.
• 53:48
  The fire chief told the hearing he is not in favour of either article that would stop unspent operating funds and EMS billing revenue from rolling into the fire capital reserve, calling it premature until there is more information on the department's needs.
• 1:14:25
  Because the town meeting is by ballot this year, no article can be amended from the floor. Every question is an up or down vote, and on the fire, telecommunications and planning budgets voters must pick the select board recommendation, the budget committee recommendation or neither.

Elsewhere

← 2021-02-08 Public Hearing2026-03-18 Public Hearing →All meetings