NOTES OF MARCH 12, 2015 RYE WATER DISTRICT
PUBLIC HEARING ON SB2 ADOPTION
Revised Final Revision C – Provided by the Rye Civic League
Present (left to right at table): Water District Commissioners Tom Clifford, Ralph Hickson and Art Ditto.
Persons present from the public were: Victor Azzi, Steven Borne, Mae Bradshaw, Peter Crawford, Joe Cummins, Philip McDonough, Marian Mullaly
Editor’s
note: For ease in finding particular
sections using the archived video and audio on Vimeo, 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. The video is available at https://vimeo.com/122071402/.
Summary
Introduction (0:00 elapsed)
Ralph Hickson opened the hearing,
introduced the Commissioners, and read the text of the warrant article which
would be considered at the annual meeting on March 28. Editor’s
note: The meeting will be at 10:00 a.m.
at Rye Junior High School.
“Shall we adopt the provisions of RSA 40:13 (known as SB 2) to allow official ballot voting on all issues before the Rye Water District on the second Tuesday of March?”
He stated that the petition is signed by about 35 people. He then opened the hearing for public comment.
Marian Mullaly, Victor Azzi, Steven Borne comments (1:02
elapsed)
Marian
Mullaly, 237 Locke Rd., asked about the additional cost. Mr. Hickson said that there would be
additional costs. Editor’s note: According to the
2013 Water District Annual Report, Ms. Mullaly is Treasurer of the Rye Water
District. The 2015 Water District Budget
includes a $2000 line item for “SB2 Warrant Article Expence (sic)”
Mr. Ditto stated that the Commissioners are not in favor of the warrant article. The additional administrative activities would not add value. The number of warrant articles is usually small and involve the operating budget and capital reserves, however there are sometimes warrant articles for capital projects. Two years earlier there was one for water main replacement. Editor’s note: That article was for $3.4 million. In 2008, when there were separate articles for painting the tank on Breakfast Hill Rd. and for the design of the water treatment plant, Mr. Ditto said. Typically, the articles are pretty benign and they wouldn’t warrant a deliberative session and a separate voting session. While the article implies that the election would be coordinated with that of the Town, there is no guarantee that the Town would agree to that. The RSAs require that for School Districts, but not Village Districts.
An extra checklist would be needed so that it could be verified that the person is on the checklist. That would involve an administrative person and cost. There would also be the cost of the ballot. He said “they are not major expenses, but they are additional expenses.”
(4:10 elapsed)
Victor Azzi asked whether there would be an additional ballot, and whether it would go into the same machine. Mr. Ditto stated that he did not know.
Mr. Azzi asked how decisions are currently being made, and how many people are showing up.
Mr. Hickson stated that there is an annual District Meeting the last Saturday in March. Two years ago, when the Route 1A water main replacement was discussed there were about 30 people in attendance. He agreed that this was because the project was a major piece of work.
Mr. Azzi asked about a typical year. Mr. Hickson stated that about half of that would be in attendance.
(6:15 elapsed)
Steven Borne, 431 Wallis Rd., asked whether the computer could add a mark to the existing checklist. Mr. Hickson stated that he had been informed that that was not possible.
Mr. Borne asked whether the Commissioners had done any research as to why SB2 towns had been created. The Commissioners indicated that they had not.
Mr. Borne
stated that he had researched the issue when there had been a proposal to
rescind SB2. Editor’s note: At the March 8,
2011 election, Town Petitioned Warrant Article 24, to rescind SB2 (adopted
March 10, 1998) failed 752-291. School
Petitioned Warrant Article 3, to rescind SB2 (adopted March 10, 1998), failed
741-297. Both ballot measures indicated
that a 3/5 vote was required.
Mr. Borne stated that he had spent a considerable amount of time researching the issue at the time. When towns get to be 3500-5000 people, the Town Meeting starts to become ineffective. The people don’t know their neighbors anymore. When people know their friends and neighbors they will not say or do certain things. Factions and groups that want something rally, show up, and force things through. Two years ago, this was seen. The people who lived along the water, who wanted the water main, coordinated themselves. They were the only ones that cared, and they showed up at the meeting.
Mr. Borne said that he had spoken to a number of people afterward who asked how the $3 million had ever been approved. People were oblivious. When people at the meeting had tried to speak up against the water main, the tone was slightly less than civil to the people speaking against spending the money. There are enough people living in the water district. SB2 would force more people to pay attention and take the time to become educated. There is a big apathy problem. This is why he signed the petition.
Peter Crawford comments (9:23 elapsed)
Peter Crawford, 171 Brackett Rd., stated that he was one of the proponents of the warrant article, basically for the reasons stated by Mr. Borne. A lot of people don’t realize that the Water District covers most of the Town. The assessed valuation of the Town is about $1.7 or $1.8 billion, compared to the Water District, which is about $1.1 billion. That’s approximately two-thirds. That would imply that about two-thirds of the population lives in the Water District. There must be about 3000 people living in the Water District. That is too many people to do business in the town meeting style.
Mr. Crawford agreed with the Commissioners that there are usually few warrant articles, and things move forward year after year. However, there are exceptions. The water main replacement for $3.4 million was an important issue two years ago. About 40 people turned up for that, compared to potential voters of 2500 if the children are excluded. The purpose is to encourage participation.
In the CIP Plan for 2017 there is a $5.5 million water treatment plant, and there may be other projects coming down the road. Editor’s note: It’s actually 2018. The $5.5 million would be the largest project ever voted in the Town. To imagine that such a project could be voted in by 40 people sitting around in an old-style town meeting blows the mind. If you ask those that live in the Water District whether they even knew about the $3.4 million and how it was voted in, Mr. Crawford estimated that 70-80 percent did not even know about the meeting. Yet, it was voted in and added to the Water District tax rate, Mr. Crawford said.
(11:55 elapsed)
Mr. Crawford continued, saying that the additional cost
would be extremely minor. Editor’s note: The 2015 Water District Budget includes a
$2000 line item for “SB2 Warrant Article Expence (sic)”
A Deliberative Session would replace the old-style Town Meeting, Mr. Crawford said. It would operate the same as the Town and the School now do. There would be a Deliberative Session. Warrant articles could be amended and would be on the ballot the second Tuesday in March. The cost of the Deliberative Session would be comparable to the Town Meeting which currently occurs. The additional costs would consist of having someone at the polls to deal with the checklist issue, and the printing of the ballot. The school pays less than $1000 per year for the printing of the one ballot card that they have. While there are a number of articles on the Water District ballot, one card should suffice.
RSA 670:3 already requires that “an updated checklist shall be used at all village district elections and meetings for the same purposes as checklists are used by towns as provided in RSA 669:5.” The Water District is already supposed to be preparing this checklist, he said. He gave examples of how the checklist might be prepared, including taking the Town’s checklist and adding check marks for those on streets in the Water District. It could even be done at the election based on people presenting themselves and knowledge as to which streets are in the Water District. It should not be a major problem, he said.
Mr. Crawford stated that he had already spoken with Town Clerk Beth Yeaton regarding how it would work at the polls. The machine can handle an additional card and would be able to add to the vote totals. Those in the Water District would receive the extra card, those not in the Water District would not. Thus, no cards would go through the machine for those not located in the Water District. The totals would be added up the same way as today.
The costs would be extremely minor, and would likely be less than $1000 per year for everything. This is very important for the taxpayers in Town. In the years when there is going to be something major everyone needs to know about it and needs to vote on the ballot in March. It would be penny wise and pound foolish to avoid spending $1000 when a $5.5 million bond issue is involved.
Joe Cummins comments (15:45 elapsed)
Joe Cummins, 990 Washington Rd. stated that he had learned that this would be the only water district that is an SB2. He referred to only the people with a strong interest in repairing the mains along Ocean Blvd. having shown up for the meeting in 2013. He asked whether the Commissioners had heard of other attempts to make water districts SB2. He also asked about the tradeoffs of wide participation vs. self-interested participation as was the case with Ocean Blvd.
Mr. Ditto stated that, it is not only that there were no water districts. His understanding is that there are no village districts in the state that are SB2. He expressed concern about people voting without knowledge, and asserted that these people would likely vote no. He referred to the 2013 meeting, acknowledged that it was on the “ragged edge,” but asserted that they were able to explain the technical rationale behind the proposed capital expenditure. He spoke about the expectation that there be a reliable water supply. If everybody turned out for the annual meeting there could be a better discussion.
Mr. Ditto agreed that, based on the number of customers in the Water District, and assuming two persons per household, the figure of 3000 for voters in the Water District is probably a reasonable assumption. However, at the last election, only 1500 of 4000 registered voters in Rye showed up, or about 32 percent.
Mr. Borne interjected that, assuming two-thirds are in the Water District, about 1000 of those voters live in the Water District.
Mr. Ditto
questioned how many of those would know anything about the issue prior to
showing up and being handed a ballot. He
asserted that some of the people in Rye do not even know that they are in the
Water District. They get calls from Rye
Beach from people that say that their water is not working. Editor’s
note: Rye Beach is served by Aquarion,
which is a company independent of the Town.
(21:52 elapsed)
Mr. Cummins asked whether public meetings would be held prior to large expenditures. Mr. Ditto agreed that there would be such meetings. Mr. Borne interjected that five people had shown up.
Mr. Crawford asserted, using the example of the water main replacement, that if SB2 had been in effect, whether there would have been (1) a public hearing on the bond (2) a deliberative session, and (3) an opportunity to vote at the polls. That would have provided two opportunities to educate people.
Mr. Cummins asked about the possibility that the Attorney General might determine that the Water District was ineligible to become an SB2 entity. Mr. Ditto clarified that he was not asserting that this was a possibility. He said that he had been informed that there were no SB2 Village Districts.
Mr. Crawford read from RSA 40:12, which defines “local political subdivision” as “any local political subdivision of the state whose legislative body raises and appropriates funds through an annual meeting.” The Water District clearly meets that, and the SB2 provision says that any “local political subdivision” can adopt that, he said. Editor’s note: See RSA 40:13, I. Mr. Crawford asked whether anyone was asserting that the warrant article was not legal. Mr. Ditto acknowledged that he was not arguing that.
(23:45 elapsed)
Mr. Cummins stated that he was hoping to hear the strong arguments against SB2 from members of the public because of the new ground being trod.
He asked whether the management discretion of the Commissioners could trump the will of the voters if there was a dire need or whether a reserve could be set up to provide for a compelling need.
Mr. Hickson referred to a capital reserve fund which is added to each year to provide for catastrophic failures not covered by the operating budget. He stated that they would not build up the reserve and use that to fund a major project. If the voters did not support a project, such as the Ocean Blvd. water main replacement, it would not proceed.
Mr. Crawford pointed out that the adoption of SB2 lowers the percentage needed for a bond issue to pass from 66.7% to 60%. That makes it easier to pass, assuming that the same people would be voting.
Mr. Crawford stated that the ground had been tread before with all of the towns and schools in the state that have adopted SB2. He said that he had not heard of a single instance where there has been a huge problem of crumbling infrastructure with the voters refusing to act. The fact that no village district has adopted SB2 is indicative only that most village districts in the state are fairly small. This happens to be a large one.
Mr. Crawford noted that water departments that there are under the town rather than a separate district, and the Sewer Department in Rye. These have major needs and when a major issue arises, those would go on the regular town ballot.
It’s an issue of education. If there’s a problem that is a disaster, the Commissioners would need to get out there and educate the people so that they vote the right way. To assume otherwise is to assume that the voters would make irrational decisions, Mr. Crawford said.
(31:18 elapsed)
Mr. Cummins asked what the other village districts were. Mr. Hickson said that Jenness Beach and Rye Beach are considered village districts.
Mr. Cummins asked about Garland Rd. and whether the Commissioners were always supportive of providing service there and the cost.
Mr. Hickson stated that the cost was about $200,000. The residents had presented a petition asking for extension of the water main on Garland Rd.
Mr. Cummins asked how many customers were added after the expenditure. Mr. Hickson asserted that some took service and some did not.
Mr. Cummins asserted that an attempt was made in the meeting regarding Ocean Blvd. to crunch the numbers hard, but the Moderator allowed ad hominem attacks accusing people of not caring about fires and the lack of water during Thanksgiving dinner. The dollar cost of the inconvenience seemed to be low relative to the cost of the water main replacement. The meeting was largely attended by people living on that road, he asserted.
Mr. Hickson asserted that the main replacement on Ocean Blvd. was not done just for the customers, but also for more reliable fire protection.
Mr. Ditto asserted that a main break without a valve to isolate it would drain the tank. Money needs to be spent on infrastructure because the assets have finite lifetimes. He stated, however, that he does not know whether SB2 would make a difference. However, it’s more work for their limited workforce. The staff is three people. He suggested that an additional staff member might be needed.
Mr. Crawford asserted he could not imagine that an additional person would need to be hired. For the town, there are a few people that show up election day. There’s not an entire employee who has been added, he said.
Mr. Crawford continued, saying that the warrant article is not pro or against any capital project. The disappointment with the water main project was that nobody knew about it. It came before the Budget Committee with none of the members having known about it until they walked into the meeting. They did not know that they were going to be asked to recommend a $3.4 million project. The public hearing on the bond was held, but the only people that got flyers were those that lived along Ocean Blvd., not the taxpayers. The law was complied with, but people didn’t know about the public hearing and only 40 showed up for the meeting. Last year, Mr. Crawford asserted, he was the only guy from the public, other than relatives of the Commissioners, who showed up for the Water District Meeting. Mr. Borne stated that another year it had been only him and Mr. Cummins.
When you have that little participation, Mr. Crawford asserted, it is not democracy.
Mr. Ditto asserted that it was not their fault that people did not show up.
Mr. Crawford stated that he did not say that, but felt that there could have been more publicity.
Phil McDonough comments (40:51 elapsed)
Philip McDonough, 5 Random Rd., asked about the time frame for implementation. Mr. Hickson responded that they did not know what the mechanics would be.
Mr. Crawford stated that the vote was March 28 at 10:00 a.m. People need to show up to vote it up or down. Sixty percent is needed to pass. If it passes, then in 2016 there would be a deliberative session, presumably in January or early February. Then, the second Tuesday in March, the annual Water District election would occur using an official ballot with a card similar to those used by the School and the Town.
Mr. McDonough asked about payments for use of the meeting halls. Mr. Borne stated that the space is used without payment. Mr. Crawford stated that the deliberative session replaces the annual meeting, but would occur earlier in the year. There would not be any additional cost. The election would be in the same location as the town election. All that there would be is an additional person or two to hand out Water District ballots. He asserted that the election workers are paid a minimal amount and get a free lunch. There is no additional meeting, only a few hours of additional labor, he said.
Mr. McDonough talked about the tradeoff between the cost and the ability to discuss the issue. The problem is getting the people to attend. He stated that he does not know whether SB2 has improved the democracy or not. The public doesn’t get involved whatever is done. More publicity on the part of the Commissioners would help and might avoid the need for SB2. If there is not publicity, then the problem of people not knowing what is going on arises. It cannot be run such that people do not believe that they are not getting their say.
(51:00 elapsed)
Victor Azzi stated that most of the people with whom he has spoken agree that a system is needed which allows for and causes more participation. One, two, three or forty people show up to make a decision. Tuesday of this week, 1000 people, more or less, of the 1539 people voting would have been in the Water District. That’s a lot better than 40, or three or two or one that have been showing up to make the decisions in recent years. Rye and many other towns in New Hampshire have made the transition to SB2. For some who show up at the election and are handed an additional card, they will learn for the first time that they are in the Water District and have an additional responsibility to vote on Water District issues. That would be the beginning of the education process. The Water District would not go into failure because a transition needs to be made.
Mr.
Crawford asked whether any estimate of the additional hours had been made. The Commissioners stated that they were
waiting to see whether it passed. Editor’s note: The 2015 Water District Budget includes a
$2000 line item for “SB2 Warrant Article Expence (sic)” That
would presumably include additional labor as well as ballot printing costs.
Mr. Hickson stated that the Water District would, like the Town and the School, need to mail out a newsletter explaining their ballot to the 1575 Water District customers.
Mr. Crawford asserted that the Water District issues are already appearing in the Town newsletter. Mr. Hickson acknowledged that a clip was appearing there. Mr. Crawford noted also that he had discovered that the Water District agendas and minutes are appearing on the Town website. He said that the Town is cooperating and that there is no legal requirement to put out a newsletter.
Mr. Ditto agreed that publicity was a good thing and needed to be done.
Mr. Crawford stated that the need was independent of whether SB2 is in place. Whether people vote at the polls in March or at a meeting the need exists.
Mr. Cummins asked whether a slip of paper could be included with the bills to save mailing expenses. Mr. Hickson stated that this is a possibility, but it had not been explored. He stated that they do not have the staffing to put together that sort of information. The three employees are focused on keeping the water running.
(59:58 elapsed)
Mae Bradshaw, 106 Harbor Rd., stated she is on the CIP Committee and hears that it is burdensome for the Commissioners to put out the information that is needed to put together their planning tool. The lack of administrative support is a problem for both the Committee and the Commissioners.
Victor Azzi asked how satisfying it was for the Commissioners when one or two people show up. They may be thinking that nobody cares, but it could be that nobody knows. On Tuesday of this week, 1539 people showed up for the Town election, 1000 would have received a ballot sheet for the Water District. That’s a lot better than the current participation. You can argue that those people are uninformed and should not be voting. But you could make that same argument about the 1539 people, he said.
Art Ditto stated that they have never had people contest for Commissioners. There are vacancies every year and nobody comes forward to run. When a Commissioner leaves they have to find someone else to take the place.
Mr. McDonough pointed out that when an issue is debated, people hear both sides and can change their minds. That is not the case when there is a ballot where it is more an issue of impression.
Mr. Crawford stated that there would still be an opportunity to learn because there would be a deliberative session. Mr. Crawford stated that, prior to SB2, there used to be 450 people showing up at Town Meeting. Now 100-200 show up at the Deliberative Session. However, 1000-2000 vote at the election. There has been a loss of 300-400 people that would have gone to the Town Meeting that don’t show up at the Deliberative Session because they get a chance to voter later, but all of the additional voters participating in the demographic process have been gained. The 300 that used to go to the Town Meeting and now do not go to the Deliberative Session are not as informed as they would have been, he acknowledged.
(71:45 elapsed)
Mr. Cummins complimented the Water District, and asserted that people are not showing up because the water rates are low compared to other towns. However, the meeting attended by a limited group was irksome, apparently referring to the 2013 meeting on the water main. Mr. Crawford stated that they had to have read the paper to be aware of the meeting. There was also a sign out, he said, however he does not believe that it mentioned the $3.4 million water main.
Mr. Cummins stated that, when a major capital expenditure is on the ballot, he likes the protection of having a broader range of voters.
Mr. Ditto stated that the water main replacement was driven by the Commissioners, who had done a study of where the water main breaks were occurring, rather than the residents asking for a new water main.
Mr. Cummins agreed, but stated that “It was very serendipitous for the Commissioner’s will, which had to get past the bond law or bond RSAs. It was very convenient that the people who… support it happened to be the ones that were told ‘come on down.’”
Mr. Azzi stated that he was at the meeting where the $3.4 million was approved, and couldn’t imagine that a decision of this magnitude was going on. It appeared that nobody else was interested, but he discovered later that nobody else knew that the meeting was taking place. He would like to see a more welcoming and encouraging process. The town decided a number of years ago to adopt SB2 and its time that the other entities within the town jump aboard the same bus. They would be piggybacking on what already exists.
(76:35 elapsed)
The public hearing was then closed at 7:45 p.m.