OFFICE OF THE SELECTBOARD
TOWN OF HALIFAX, VERMONT
SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES
March 4, 2025
2:00 PM AT THE HALIFAX MULTIPURPOSE ROOM
CALL TO ORDER
Edee Edwards called the meeting to order at 2:17pm. Selectboard member Karen Christofferson, Randy Pike, and Rhonda Ashcraft were also present with Secretary Assistant Emily Dow taking minutes. There were numerous members of the public present in person or remotely.
CHANGES AND ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
There are no changes to be made to the agenda.
HEARING OF VISITORS (aka other Non-Binding Business)
No visitors wished to speak.
NEW BUSINESS
Community awareness or input on:
Halifax Connectivity Program
David Jones explained the purpose of the Halifax Connectivity Program is to get help to understand what service you have and what you may need to do to get a connection. DVFiber requires a path to connect to your home either overhead (easy install) or underground (more complex install).
Broadband Committee page on the Halifax website has a flyer about the program with a link to the survey to assess installation and connection needs. Jones will schedule a visit to the homes to assess and explain the connection requirements. There is funding available to assist in connection costs. The Halifax Connectivity Program has worked with 50 Halifax residences thus far.
Edwards spoke about the WIFI Hotspot. The Selectboard made the decision to cancel the Hotspot at the Town Garage. The new WIFI Hotspots are at the Town Office and Community Hall. These locations are closer in proximity to community members.
Animal Control Ordinance: VLCT Model Policy
Prior conversations have been held in Selectboard meetings during the last couple years where people have expressed concerns about neighbors’ dogs and handling situations where they didn’t feel safe. The Vermont League of Cities and Towns have a model policy that towns can adopt. The ordinance has not been created yet but, the ordinance component will be presented here. A formal process to create an ordinance will be followed. Edwards will proceed with brief conversations about which aspects of the ordinance Halifax should consider adopting.
- Animal waste being left on neighbors’ properties: Edwards hasn’t heard that this is a problem in Halifax. Community members present at the meeting agreed this section of the ordinance doesn’t pertain to the Town of Halifax.
Pike mentioned: Without an ordinance in place, enforcement cannot happen. There are instances of stray dogs in town for which one stray attacked an owned dog.
Andy Rice noted that Halifax previously had ordinances. The Selectboard in the past repealed the ordinances and followed state guidelines. The state law applies if there is a dog bite, in certain circumstance. Rice noted the ACO isn’t expected to search for stray dogs on a regular route. Rather, the townspeople create a solution amongst one another such as if an owned cow became loose. They said stray dogs are a frequent occurrence in Halifax.
Cassie McLaren asked if the ordinance is solely for dogs. There are livestock that cause a nuisance as well. Edwards explained the ability to enforce offenses are limited until ordinances are in place. There is a separate state law that covers livestock and the Selectboard may revisit that in the future. Once the dog ordinance is in place, it’s expected to have an uptick in meetings and concerns.
The concern for the Halifax community is to safely walk on public roads without the concern for menacing dogs.
Laurel Copeland said she had previous encounters with aggressive dogs in Halifax. Edwards explained the state law is limited in what they cover however, being bitten as an extreme example is covered for which then you can end life of the dog. The state law does not provide coverage options for altercations between animals.
Linda Lyon said she walks her dogs frequently on town roads but some specific roads are not safe as they house threatening dogs who have previously been dangerous and aggressive towards other dogs. Linda specified an ordinance expectation is that the dog would be on a property of their own, or under voice control from the owner. Edwards explained that law enforcement has discretion on the level of enforcement they can use.
- Fine for disturbing the peace- including incessant barking: This has been mentioned previously of this happening in Halifax. Edwards took a verbal poll and a smattering of audience members raised their hands.
Paul Blais commented: Direct the above issue to Andy Rice as this has past occurrences in town. Blais questioned if the ordinance was in place, if it would cover this issue.
Andy Ride suggested if a noise ordinance was in place, extend it to loud and unusual noises in the nighttime which would include the specification of “a certain level of decibel that is beyond the property line” such as loud motorcycles and loud mufflers. He explained that inclusion of the noise ordinance is beneficial as it includes all types of over-decibel sounds.
Elijah Summers suggested to limit ordinance to village or town center as they live in a rural residential area in Halifax. They explained that living without many neighbors is appealing to them therefore, the hound dog they own is loud but feels safe to allow their dog to bark. They mentioned there is an expectation that a certain distance from the center, or living in a more secluded area, will have less restrictions on barking dogs.
Marilou Parkhurst commented for wanting an ordinance for nuisance dogs to apply to the town as a whole rather than limit to the center of town. She explained that roads outside the center of town pose concern and wants to be covered if she encounters a situation where she has to protect herself. She also mentioned that the noise ordinance could include loud music that’s a certain decibel across a property line.
Doug Parkhurst commented that it is the right of the citizens to walk safely as well as have peace inside their homes without incessant barking. Parkhurst specified that priority may include barking/vicious/biting dogs and that should be the responsibility of the dog’s owner.
- Unconfined in heat: No comment and doesn’t pose a current concern.
- Lack of current license or Rabies tag: There is already a licensing requirement. This poses as a second level of offense for someone who does not currently have a license or Rabies tag on their dog. There was no comment or current concern for this issue.
- Running at large: This includes if your dog is loose. There was no comment on this issue.
- Potentially vicious dog: No comment on this issue.
Edwards talks about other sections that could be considered as well as a reasonable fine amount. Specifics of the violations include a warning or first offense, second offense, third offense and subsequent offenses such as impoundment or a larger fine. There are times when a warning is appropriate as well as other situations when a first offense fine would be more applicable depending on the level and details of the offense. A goal is for the warning or first offense violations pose as a deterrent.
Liz Moore commented on some questions such as if someone unintentionally left their gate open and their dog escaped. She mentioned she owns a hound dog who has left the property on prior occasions as they may have picked up a scent from their hound dog nature. She believes this would suffice as a warning.
David Jones commented on the importance of writing and enforcing an ordinance should prioritize the largest concerns first and they should be included in the ordinance if they aren’t already, or in addition to, what’s addressed by the state law. Halifax has had many occurrences of dogs running loose and experienced one climbing into his vehicle (no harm was done) making a mess and leaving. He mentioned that he expects that to happen given the area he resides. He said even though that dog didn’t cause harm, there are other times when harm can happen but posed the question if a separate ordinance is necessary if there’s state law in place. Edwards explained the goal of model policies is as such.
Paul Blais explained the difference between the level of offenses such as a dog running loose after escaping their property, which may fall under the inclusions of a leash law; versus when damage and harm is caused by the dog. He suggested an escaped dog is a warning however, a bite is a first offense. Repeat offenders should have violation requirements that are more than what’s provided with a warning.
Andy Rice commented that there may be a warning as well as a bond or legal precedent that the owner will have to present and pay. He emphasized the owner should be held responsible for their dog. Rice suggested a waiver fee that owners can pay for which they don’t have to follow the whole process.
Marilou Parkhurst commented about an experience she had in a previous out of state residence with an aggressive dog, who was a repeat violation offender, attacking wildlife. Edwards agreed that interaction with wildlife is common.
Kim Lehner commented on the enjoyment of living where there are friendly dogs wandering. However, she had an experience where her dog was attacked and endured an emergency vet visit along with a bill. She explained that even though ACO Kyle Farnsworth was present, without the ordinance in place, little could be enforced. In her case, the owner of the attacking dog was responsive and provided necessary documents to the injured dog’s vet. She specified that an ordinance should have detailed specifics on the levels of offenses and violations they must endure as some experiences are compliant and others could pose different situations.
Cassie McLaren said that accidents can happen and there is a defined line between an accident and an irresponsible owner. She mentioned loose dogs are a frequent occurrence in town but there is a mix between friendly and aggressive dogs. Edwards specified that the ordinance can include frequency of offenses within a range of time such as 3 or 6 months. The ordinances will be followed through a formal adoption process and will continue to have conversations as it moves forward.
Edwards presented to the audience that if anyone has interest in being a part of the group that works through these issues to reach out to a Selectboard member. Community members can structure a policy that best suits the community’s needs.
Housing and Economic Development
Edwards spoke on her lack of knowledge of the topic in place of Roberts. Edwards explained that it is known that housing is a problem in Vermont. Economic Development is important in bringing more people to the community and having opportunities for those who are current residents to thrive.
Issues for concern or ideas Halifax could use to assist the aging population. Elijah Summers suggested building condo style housing with 5 to 10 apartments where the elderly community members can continue living in Halifax but, without having to maintain their homes. They mentioned this should be on the town’s topic of concern within the next decade as they attended Halifax aging meetings and shared the main concern. Additional positive aspects the community living could present are easier access to home medical care and housing. This will also pose an opportunity for new community members to live in and maintain the homes.
A brief discussion was held about AirBnB.
A resident explained the Windham & Windsor Housing Authority Director doesn’t currently have a presence in Halifax and there are limited funds with high needs. One impediment for higher density housing is wastewater treatment but there is an organization that can assist.
Andy Rice commented on the Rehab Housing that Halifax, Marlboro and Whitingham voted on that includes the need to create affordable housing. This program encourages homeowners to continue living in their homes. He mentioned that previously he attempted to obtain additional funds for housing and was not successful.
Edwards spoke about the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan stating that Halifax has a growing number of vacant homes due to deceased owners and properties in disrepair. As this is a larger project for housing and also might creating projects for new homeowners, funding for this type of situation may be available.
Randy Pike commented on the amount of time that was needed to go through and prepare the budget. The Selectboard assessed each item line by line. The board didn’t always agree, but we looked at each line being increased, decreased, voided, and unchanged. The board encourages everyone to attend any Selectboard meeting but especially budget meeting. Be involved!
ADJOURNMENT
Ashcraft made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 2:57 pm. Christofferson seconded the motion. Motion carries 4-0.
Respectfully submitted,
Emily Dow
Halifax Administrative Assistant
Recording Link:
https://youtu.be/XN_T3ftTNBo&t=761 (at the starting point of the recording/audio. There is very little visual input as the meeting was held in the multipurpose room and there was no camera set up.)