NOTES OF JANUARY 12, 2015 RYE BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING

Final Revision B – Provided by the Rye Civic League

Present (clockwise around table): Town Administrator Michael Magnant, Selectmen Musselman, Jenness and Mills,Town Finance Director Cyndi Gillespie, Town Attorney Michael Donovan.

Persons present from the public included: Victor Azzi, Lori Carbajal, Keper Connell, Peter Crawford, Joe Cummins, Devin Farrelly, Tom Farrelly, John Heisey, Toby Heisey, Attorney Victor Manougian, Gregg Mikolaities, Joan Riley, John Riley, State Senator Nancy Stiles.

Editor’s note: For ease in finding particular sections using the archived video and audio on the Town website, the elapsed time is indicated. Use the slider and the elapsed time indicated at the bottom of the video window to fast forward to the desired section. Videos on the Town website may currently be accessed at www.town.rye.nh.us by clicking on “Town Hall Streaming” at the bottom left of the screen. Follow the link for “Town Hall Live Streaming,” then find the meeting by date under “Previous.”

The video starts at 7:01:47 p.m. (0:00 elapsed).

Summary

1. A hearing was held on the Heisey lot unmerger request involving two parcels on Harbor Rd. No decision was reached. The discussion focused on whether or not the lots had separate septic systems.

2. The final report on the Beach Parking Study was presented. Discussion focused on whether the loss of 140 parking spaces was accurate, and whether there were only about 7 driveways needing parking restrictions.

3. Residents question whether the amendment to Beach Permit revenue fund to permit water quality testing is insufficiently broad (perhaps should allow expenditure for any beach-related) and impact on taxes of less revenue going to the General Fund.

4. Fire Department consolidation discussions will continue with a joint meeting including the Board of Selectmen and Portsmouth Fire Commissioners.

Announcements (0:00 elapsed)

The closing of Town offices on Martin Luther King Day and the Deliberative Session on January 31 were announced.

Consent Agenda (1:10 elapsed)

Items A and B on the Consent Agenda, relating to chickens and Little League signs were removed for later discussion. Item C relating to an exercise at the Seabrook Station was approved as the sole remaining Consent Agenda item.

Lot unmerger request, John and Toby Heisey (2:40 elapsed)

Editor’s note: The issue of the Heisey’s land near Rye Harbor has been the subject of numerous Board of Selectmen meetings, some of which have been non-public. See the notes of the December 23, 2013, March 24, 2014, April 14, 2014, April 28, 2014, September 22, 2014, November 24, 2014 and December 8, 2014 meetings. The issue at this meeting is whether Tax Map 9.2 lots 19 and should be unmerged. Previously, the Town had taken this lot for taxes from an unknown owner on June 7, 2002 for $108.10. Based on the ongoing discussion, it appears that the Town may have conceded that that action was invalid.

Attorney Victor Manougian addressed this request, which was to unmerge lots 19 and 21. Editor’s note: According to the tax map on the Town’s GIS system (available via the Town website at www.town.rye.nh.us), lot 19 is predominantly wetlands and is located between the land on which the Heisey’s house is located and Harbor Rd.

Mr. Manougian stated that he is there under protest as the Town has established more stringent requirements for lot unmerger than those provided by RSA 674:39-aa. He also stated that the burden of proof is on the Town to establish that lots were involuntarily merged. He then discussed a boat house and dwelling, which he asserted had its own septic system and bathroom, located on lot 19. While there had been a septic system design submitted to place both structures on the same septic system, that design was never acted on. He referred to a plan of record recorded at the Registry of Deeds that showed structures on both lots 19 and 21.

There was further discussion about the septic system and the history, during which the Heiseys declined to answer certain questions, asserting that the Town had the burden of proof. There was also an assertion that Town Assessor David Hynes had acknowledged that an easement had been present since 1919.

Nancy Braese of 146 Harbor Rd. stated that, as a good neighbor, she had no objection to the unmerger. Editor’s note: See notes of December 8, 2014 meeting where the dispute between the Heiseys and Ms. Braese over electric lines to supply Ms. Braese’s house, which might need to cross the Heisey’s land, was the topic of discussion.

Dan Philbrick, 1260 Ocean Blvd. stated that, if the Town was going to err, it should be on the side of a long-term resident.

The matter was tabled pending a review of information from Mr. Hynes. Editor’s note: At its January 26, 2015 meeting, the Board of Selectmen announced that the unmerger application was being granted, with the conditions that a permanent easement across lot 19, in favor of lot 21, be recorded and that it be demonstrated that the dwelling on each is served by its own septic system, with the Building Inspector being granted access by April 2015 for purposes of such verification.

Beach parking study, final report (37:20 elapsed)

Gregg Mikolaities of Tighe and Bond addressed the revisions to the study for the final report. Editor’s note: Mr. Mikolaities also serves on the Rye Recreation Commission. There was discussion about the options for metered parking, kiosk systems and remote parking.

Selectman Mills noted that he disagreed with the $25,000 estimated cost. The problem is with 6-7 people whose complaints are not being addressed. He asserted that markings on the pavement to deal with these would cost a lot less than $25,000.

There was also discussion about brush scratching the parked cars. Selectman Musselman stated that the State does not clear brush.

Devin Farrelly referred back to the presentation made on November 10, 2014. She asserted that the final presentation is sounding more preliminary than the preliminary one. Selectman Musselman stated that both meters and satellite lots are still on the table.

Lori Carbajal referred to the loss of parking spots to create buffers for crosswalks. She raised issues with respect to vehicle size, particularly of campers.

(54:05 elapsed)

Peter Crawford, 171 Brackett Rd., stated that he had driven along Ocean Blvd. and had counted only 7 or 8 driveways located in areas where parking was not already prohibited. Mr. Mikolaities indicated that he was unsure about the figure, but that the larger figure for parking spaces lost to striping took into account not only driveways but also intersecting streets and crosswalks. Mr. Crawford asserted that some of the 140 parking spaces that are going to be lost are due to restricting parking 20 feet from a crosswalk or intersection. He stated that State law already prohibits parking within 20 feet of a crosswalk or intersection. Editor’s note: See N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. (“RSA”) 265:69, II(a) and II(c) (prohibiting parking “in front of” driveways or within 20 ft. of a crosswalk or intersection). Some spaces would be lost just by enforcing the current law. Some additional spaces might be lost if additional clearance is needed for driveways, but there only seem to be a few locations where that is the case.

Selectman Musselman questioned this. Joan Riley, Ocean Blvd., interjected that there are very few locations impacted. She spoke of approximately 7 driveways and safety issues.

Mr. Crawford stated that typical cars are 15-16 feet long and that, if the parking spaces are striped at 20 feet there might be some additional loss of parking spaces. However, when people parallel park some space is left between the cars in any event, so the cars might be spaced at 18 feet. He stated that he is not sure that that much space is being lost due to striping proposed at 20 foot intervals. Mr. Mikolaities appeared to agree. Mr. Crawford asserted that he believed that the number of spaces lost would be significantly fewer than 140. Selectman Musselman stated that this was a good point and that they would look into this.

Mr. Crawford continued, saying that the striping was a precursor to parking meters. He does not believe that the remote lots would be economically viable due to the cost of the drivers and buses. The fee that could be charged at remote lots would be less, if anything, than what could be charged along Route 1A. Mr. Mikolaities nodded in agreement.

Mr. Crawford referred to the $400,000 that the study indicated could be generated by the parking meters was almost a “no brainer.” Selectmen Musselman stated that that was “very preliminary” and needed to be looked at in more detail. He asserted, however, that Portsmouth’s experience with a remote lot had a cost of $6 per ride. If the usage is low, the fixed cost of providing a shuttle can make the lots uneconomical, he acknowledged.

Selectman Jenness referred to land needing to be purchased as well. Selectman Musselman indicated that some public land might be usable, but it would be fairly far away. He acknowledged however, that there is significant risk and that the proposition of remote lots is “dicey.”

Tom Farrelly asked whether anything out of the study would result in warrant articles. Selectman Musselman stated that the money for striping had been included in the budget. He stated that there was nothing budgeted for looking further at meters or remote lots. That would be considered for the 2016 budget.

John Riley suggested that the intersections, crosswalks and 6-7 driveways be striped right away. They could then see how that plays out before going on to the next step. He spoke about the cost and risk of meters. They know, however, about the safety issue with the intersections and the driveways. Selectman Musselman stated that they had budgeted for what Mr. Riley had described.

Police Chief Kevin Walsh asserted that “Bill” had looked at the issue, and there would be 27 driveways affected along all of Ocean Blvd. If even one driveway was done all would need to be done to be fair, he asserted. The driveways by Rye Harbor and Ragged Neck would be less affected, he acknowledged.

Selectman Mills raised his voice at Chief Walsh and stated that he had toured the area with Chief Walsh and Public Works Director Dennis McCarthy and that he had been told that they were awaiting the study. The study has been completed now, he asserted. Chief Walsh stated that, if the Board agrees to do the striping it will be done right away.

Selectman Musselman said that it was a decision to be made in the Spring. There is a difference in the numbers. Perhaps there should be a prioritization, he argued.

Joan Riley stated that there are some low impact driveways. There needs to be a differentiation, she asserted.

Mr. Crawford stated that his figure of 7 driveways was only in the Tighe & Bond study area, which was Marsh Rd. to Highland Ave. and from the Harbor to Rye Beach. That might explain the difference, he said. Chief Walsh appeared to agree, and stated that the Board should decide which of the 27 driveways should be addressed.

Selectman Musselman asked State Senator Stiles if she had any comments. Senator Stiles indicated that she had come to listen and had no comments.

About eight people filed out after the discussion concluded.

Public hearing on Beach Permit Revenue Fund (69:17 elapsed)

Peter Crawford stated that this seemed overall to be a good idea, but indicated that, once it has been determined what is causing the problems at “Stinky Creek,” the money might no longer be needed for monitoring. He asked whether it might make sense to provide a broader range of purposes, for anything that is beach related.

There was then discussion about the numbers. The beach permit revenues are about $50,000 and beach cleaning costs about $12,500. The warrant article would add another $12,500.

Mr. Crawford referred to funds being established and then the money being viewed as “free money” that has to be spent for the original purpose. That original need may no longer be there, he said. He referred to the ambulance fund and said that the large balance in the fund, resulting from cell tower revenues, is being used to justify a second ambulance.

Selectman Musselman asserted that there would other needs and that there could be a subsequent warrant article to rededicate it to another purpose. Editor’s note: That typically requires a two-thirds majority. A warrant article (11) in 2012 to broaden the applicability of the Salt Shed fund to a broader purpose, while attaining a majority, failed to gather the necessary two-thirds.

Lori Carbajal asked about the General Fund being depleted by the increased 25 percent allocation.

Mr. Crawford stated that there is another warrant article to devote $12,000 in revenues from the Parsonage Apartments to a special fund, and this warrant article earmarks another $12,000, so the total is about a $25,000 increase in taxes due to less money going into the General Fund. Selectman Musselman argued that this was not the case if the money being spent from the special fund would otherwise have needed to come out of the General Fund.

Minutes (81:18 elapsed)

The minutes of the December 22, 2014 meeting were approved with changes. The minutes of the non-public session on the same day were approved without changes. The minutes of the January 7, 2015 meeting were approved, Selectman Mills voting no.

Mosquito control contract (83:58 elapsed)

The matter was tabled as Tom Aspinwall, who had been present earlier, had left. Selectman Musselman made some comments about some discrepancies and stated that the Swamp bid had been less than that from Dragon, and that the Mosquito Control Commission is recommending Swamp. He also spoke about some things in the Swamp proposal needed to await buy in from the Conservation Commission.

Rye/New Castle Bridge (88:38 elapsed)

Town Administrator Magnant stated that the Committee had recommended a fixed bridge. The Army Corps of Engineers prefers a bascule bridge but recognizes that it is not justified. Selectman Musselman stated that dredging will still be feasible, even with a fixed bridge. It was stated that there will be a public meeting on February 5.

Selectman Musselman stated that he had a conflict as he has been involved with the New Castle Water Works for 20 years. Editor’s note: One of the advantages with a fixed bridge is that it would be possible to run a water main to New Castle across it. Selectman Jenness agreed to attend.

Fire Department consolidation (95:15 elapsed)

Town Administrator Magnant stated that he had met with Chief Achilles of the Portsmouth Fire Department. They feel stymied without a decision from the elected officials. It appeared to be agreed that such a meeting would occur with Chief Achilles and the three members of the Portsmouth Fire Commission attending. There was discussion regarding the need to notice this as multiple meetings.

Marian Mullaly letter regarding problem with neighbor’s chickens (97:15 elapsed)

Police Chief Walsh stated that the matter had been resolved, the chickens having found a new home.

Little League signs

The approval was granted, limited to a duration of seven days.

Discussion of meeting notice requirements and shift in New Castle view on bridge (100:09 elapsed)

Joe Cummins asked for clarification regarding the need for multiple meeting notices discussed in connection with the meeting regarding Fire Department consolidation. Selectman Musselman noted that there was an exception for chance encounters and social events and matters not involving town business, but that whenever two selectmen met a meeting needed to be noticed. Nobody did that 7-15 years ago. Rye is more rigorous than most, he said.

Selectman Musselman also noted that the New Castle Board of Selectman appeared to have changed its view after understanding that water system improvements would be less expensive with a fixed bridge.

Non-public session

The Selectmen then voted to go into non-public session regarding personnel and reputation issues.