Select Board Meeting ~ March 15, 2022

2022-03-15 · Select Board · 1:41:46 · watch on YouTube →

Select Board meeting of March 15, 2022, rescheduled from its usual date because of a snowstorm; four members were present and one was excused. The main item was two competing proposals for use of the town ball field behind the Eureka Center, which has been used for girls softball under a lease dating from 2018. The board took no vote, asked for the town attorney's opinion on whether that lease is still valid and whether it can be sublet, and invited the two organizations to try to agree on sharing the field before the March 28 meeting. The code enforcement officer went through proposed changes to the town fee schedule and said he will begin enforcing reinspection fees and double permit fees that are already in the ordinance; the board asked him to bring back a summary of the changes and the full schedule to adopt at the next meeting. The board then reviewed the final town meeting warrant, including the planning board's revised recommendation to put resource protection to voters as a single question, and moved to set the warrant as presented. The recording ends during the upcoming meetings item, before an executive session the chair said would be needed.

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
   Call to order and public comment

   The meeting was rescheduled from its normal date because of a snowstorm; four members were present and one was excused, the name not clear in the transcript. A resident asked about the resource protection warrant question and was told the planning board, meeting the night after the last select board meeting, had changed its recommendation from two questions to one because the two-part version was creating confusion. She said the maps do not represent the actual effect, disputing a statement from someone on the conservation commission that what comes out of resource protection and what goes in is about equal, and said a lot of land appears to be going in.

2. 5:21
   Ball field behind the Eureka Center: Durham Youth Baseball proposal

   The chair said two organizations had submitted proposals for what has historically been the girls softball field and that no vote would be taken that night. Michael Clark, president of Durham Youth Baseball, asked to take over the lease and the maintenance: replacing dugout netting with metal fencing, repairing wood rot, repainting, resurfacing the infield annually, reloaming and seeding the outfield in the fall, and providing a portable toilet. He said the league had about 120 to 130 children last year from t-ball through age 12, is made up entirely of Durham families, and has had to work around the school softball schedule for field time.

3. 10:22
   The 2018 lease on the field

   Dave Stewart, who has run Durham softball for 14 years, said he holds a receipt dated 4/12/18 for a seven-year lease on the field and offered either to hand it over to Durham Youth Baseball or to sublet it to them, along with donating equipment and materials. The lease was taken in the name of the Durham Booster Club, which later changed its name and purpose with the state to Durham Softball; he said the 501(c) still exists but has not been active since January. Board members said they would need to read the lease to see whether it permits subletting and whether it was made to Stewart personally or to the organization.

4. 20:49
   Tri-Town Little League proposal

   Matt Walsh (?) said he represents tri-town little league and the softball side that about 45 Durham players joined this year, and that those girls should be able to play on the field they grew up on regardless of which organization they play for. He said the organization has around 300 children and access to fields at Hunter Road and Freeport Middle School, but that softball is left with one usable field. He also said Peter Wagner, the RSU coordinator, had released the reservation on the Durham school softball field and told the two organizations to work it out between them.

5. 31:31
   Field reservation process and comments from parents

   Members asked how reserving town fields differs from reserving RSU fields; the answer given was that RSU fields go through the RSU office and town fields through the Freeport town office, and no one present could explain it fully. Tim Kieger (?) said families moved to tri-town because the Androscoggin County league they had been in ran only about six weeks and had one field carrying seven teams, and that tri-town offers year-round clinics. Members also raised past instances of Durham players being turned down for the Hunter Road fields.

6. 37:12
   Suggestion of sharing the field

   A board member asked whether the field could be reserved for games only, with the two organizations scheduling alternating days and finding practice space elsewhere. Speakers (?) said practice space has always been the harder problem, with one coach describing driving teams to Beaver Park in Lisbon to practice.

7. 43:07
   Referral of the lease to the town attorney

   The board asked the town manager, Jerry, to have the town attorney review the lease and give an opinion on whether it is still valid given the state of the organization that holds it, and if so whether the holder can sublet it. Members noted that if the lease is valid and allows subletting, the decision is the leaseholder's rather than the board's.

8. 48:19
   No decision tonight; matter set over to March 28

   The chair stopped a back and forth between the two organizations, saying the meeting was not the forum for it, and said the board would take the matter up and expect to vote on March 28. He said it would be better if the two groups came back with a cooperative agreement of their own. Speakers on both sides said some group of Durham children will lose out whichever way it goes.

9. 53:48
   Fee schedule: reinspection fees

   Code enforcement officer Alan Plummer (?) presented recommended changes to the fee schedule the board now approves annually, starting with a correction that the entrance and driveway permit on page three should read $50, not $100. He said reinspection fees of $50 for the first and $100 for the second are already in the ordinance but have not been enforced, and that he intends to start enforcing them for repeat failures. Members told him to give notice up front on the permit itself and warned that applying the fee case by case rather than consistently would leave the town open to challenge.

10. 1:04:04
    Double fees and the building permit rate

    Plummer (?) said the ordinance already provides double fees for starting work before a permit is issued and that this has not been enforced either. He proposed raising the new construction building permit fee from 25 cents to 40 cents per square foot, and treating anything that adds square footage as new construction rather than the cheaper addition rate. Members said changing how additions are classified would require an ordinance change, not just a fee schedule change.

11. 1:09:18
    Cell tower permit fees

    The town currently charges a single $75 electrical permit whether one antenna or six are added to an existing tower, and Plummer (?) said the company he spoke to told him the town could charge what it wanted. He proposed $100 for one to five additions and $150 for six to fifteen. Members noted there is no cell tower fee in the ordinance at all and questioned whether the board can add a fee that the ordinance does not name.

12. 1:15:00
    Whether the board can add fees not in the ordinance

    The chair said he wanted an opinion, from the planner George and the attorney together with Plummer, on whether the board's authority to set the fee schedule includes adding fees the ordinance does not otherwise express. The board split the work in two: adopt changes to fees already on the schedule now, and handle anything beyond that separately. An ordinance review committee was raised as a way to look at ordinances that have not been reviewed in 15 or 20 years.

13. 1:20:12
    Proposed new fees, and the absence of a solar ordinance

    Plummer (?) proposed an occupancy inspection fee and a 911 addressing fee, saying those tasks take a large share of his 34 working hours a week. A member said the board should distinguish fees charged to a developer as part of a revenue stream from charges that fall on residents for services their taxes already pay for. A member also noted that a company has been talking to a Durham property owner for at least two years about a large-scale solar array and that the town has no solar array ordinance or fee, which leaves it without a basis to act.

14. 1:25:45
    Final town meeting warrant

    The budget and capital improvement articles were unchanged from the draft. The two ordinance articles are the single resource protection question, asking whether to put into the ordinance the resource protection criteria the town approved in the 2018 comprehensive plan, and an article requiring a town meeting vote before the town takes on maintenance responsibility for a new road. The business articles are the same as before with the addition of Article 32, asking whether to reduce the budget committee from nine seats to seven. Members said the comprehensive plan was voted in by the town in 2018 and should either be implemented or changed, and that the article language is now readable by a layman.

15. 1:30:47
    Motion to set the warrant, and signing

    A motion was made to set the town warrant articles as presented and it was seconded. After the vote the board signed the clean copy, checking that it was not the one marked draft.

16. 1:30:47
    Town manager report

    Jerry (?) reported that the MMA workers compensation audit for 2022 was completed on time and the town was refunded $4,500 for overpayment. An MMA loss services representative is coming on the 22nd to walk through the town office, public works and the fire station and to discuss policies on lifting, ladder safety, bloodborne pathogens and return to work, which he said could reduce the town's workers compensation cost by five to ten percent. He also said he has received his notary public commission and raised the need to be able to project slides, control the screen and control the lights at town meeting.

17. 1:36:22
    Consent agenda and upcoming meetings

    A motion was made to approve the consent agenda, which held the minutes and the warrant. Upcoming dates given were select board meetings on March 28 and April 11 at 6:30 p.m. at the town office, the annual town meeting on April 1 at 9 a.m. at the Durham Community School, and the annual election the day before, March 31, at the Eureka Center. The chair said an executive session would be needed; the recording ends here.

What was decided

• 43:07
  Have the town attorney review the field lease and give an opinion on whether it remains valid given the state of the organization holding it, and whether it can be sublet. Agreed in discussion; no motion or vote was taken.outcome unclear
• 48:19
  Take no action on use of the Eureka Center ball field tonight; carry it to the March 28 meeting, with the two organizations invited to bring back a cooperative agreement of their own in the meantime.tabled
• 1:15:00
  Adopt no fee changes tonight; the code enforcement officer is to bring back a one-page summary of the proposed changes together with the full fee schedule for the board to vote on at the next meeting, with questions about fees not named in the ordinance handled separately.tabled
• 1:30:47
  Set the town meeting warrant articles as presented. The recording gives the motion, a second and 'all in favor' but does not state the result; the board then signed the warrant copy.outcome unclear
• 1:36:22
  Approve the consent agenda, containing the minutes and the warrant. The recording gives the motion, a second and 'all in favor' but does not state the result.outcome unclear

An outcome reads "unclear" where the recording does not state it plainly. The recogniser drops short words, and "the motion does not carry" is one missing word from its opposite.

Worth knowing

• 10:22
  The field lease is the crux of the dispute. Dave Stewart holds a receipt dated 4/12/18 for a seven-year lease taken in the name of the Durham Booster Club, an organization since renamed Durham Softball and inactive since January. Whether the lease is still valid and whether it can be sublet is going to the town attorney, and if it can be sublet the board says the choice is the leaseholder's, not the town's.
• 1:04:04
  The code enforcement officer proposed raising the new construction building permit fee from 25 cents to 40 cents per square foot, and said he will begin enforcing reinspection fees of $50 for a first failure and $100 for a second, plus double fees for work started without a permit, all of which are already in the ordinance but have not been applied.
• 1:20:12
  A company has been talking with a Durham property owner for at least two years about a large-scale solar array, and the town has no solar array ordinance or fee schedule for it.
• 1:30:47
  The town was refunded $4,500 after the MMA workers compensation audit. The town manager put the town's workers compensation rating at 2.13, which he described as 113% more than an average town, with the aim of bringing it closer to 1.

Motion language found in the transcript

Located by pattern matching, with no model involved: "I move that", "I'll second", "all those in favour". This is an independent check on the summary above: 2 passages of motion language, against 5 decisions summarised.

Elsewhere

← 2021-05-11 Select Board2022-03-15 Select Board →All meetings