OFFICE OF THE SELECTBOARD
TOWN OF HALIFAX, VERMONT
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
AUGUST 20, 2024
6:00 PM AT THE HALIFAX TOWN OFFICE
CALL TO ORDER
Time: 0:00 – The meeting of the Selectboard was called to order by Edee Edwards at 6:02pm. Selectboard Members present were Edee Edwards, Karen Christofferson, Rhonda Ashcraft, and Tristan Roberts (joined remotely at 6:05pm). Others present were Tim Jones, Mike Bernard, Randy Pike, Stephanie Pike, David Jones, Stephan Chait, Nancy McCrea, Diana Conway, Rebeca Stone and Hope Phelan. Others participating remotely were Doug & Marilou Parkhurst, Chris Beagan, Inez Hedges and Tom Raffensburger.
CHANGES AND ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA Time: 1:14 – None
OLD BUSINESS
Rescinding driveway permit request (Time: 1:30)
Edwards introduced a request for a rescindment of a driveway permit that was discussed briefly at the last meeting. At the time Edwards asked for forbearance to contact the Town Attorney (Bob Fisher) in order to understand what action, if any the Town needed to take to rescind this driveway permit which was issued to a landlocked location. Edwards noted that when the permit was signed, the landlocked nature of the permit did not jump to the forefront of her thinking but after speaking with Town counsel and VLCT Edwards reported that according to State Statute, the Town does not have the responsibility to determine the full ROW beyond the driveway permit. As a legal matter, we are only issuing in this case a permit in the Town’s ROW. However, Edee apologized to the people involved in the matter for not taking the step to ask if the person requesting the permit had checked with the adjacent property owners’ participants in the matter. Attorney Fisher said that he would be happy to help us review (Roberts joined) what goes into the form making sure it is clearer on the form that the ROW beyond the driveway permit is still the responsibility of the person making the driveway request. Christofferson asked for clarification on what was being reviewed by Fisher asking if he was going to review it with the Selectboard or work on it himself. Edwards read a portion of the form which states, last line in bold “ an approved permit is only valid for work done in the Town ROW. Edwards further noted that the form states it is the person requesting the permit to acquire any other necessary permits that may be needed in relation to the proposed work prior to starting work. Edwards stated her belief, though it is not on the form, that a driveway permit is necessary before the other permits from ZBA/Planning can be issued. Edwards further noted that the form states that landowner names much match the (relevant) deed Edee further stated that it doesn’t sound like the Town has a real responsibility to cross check deeds and names on the permit request form. Edwards would like to know what else can we do to make it clear what the process is and what we need to have happen. Fisher mentioned an instance where there is part of the legislation regarding underground conduits. That should also come before the SB if it is crossing the Town ROW versus on someone’s property. Edee noted the Form is dated May 2017 and the driveway standards were last amended in November 1996.
Edwards suggested that when a driveway permit is requested that the Highway Supervisor go to the site and review the area to say what size culvert is needed. Edwards noted that this is a learning experience.
(Time: 7:24) Phelan, the resident who requested the permit noted that she spoke to Town Clerk and made it very clear that it is for a land locked property. She stated that she was told to get a driveway permit and then the SB will notify the neighbors and that clearly was never done so she understands why the other landowners are upset. She further explained her understanding that she was told that the other landowner could protest and then she would need to go into getting an easement. If there was no protest she would get the driveway permit. The form clearly states it is for a landlocked property so when the SB approved the permit she was told the landowners were notified and she feels the rug is being pulled out from under them when this is clearly a SB mistake or Town Clerk mistake, or both. She understands why Jones is upset and she stated that they could find another way to get to the property and she is fine with that. She feels it was a really big misstep.
Roberts asked a clarifying question. To do what you wanted to do, did you think that the driveway permit would serve as the easement? The resident responded that Patty told her that was the time for the other neighbors to say whether or not they wanted it to happen and then it would be time to negotiate some other easement. Roberts said that if that is what was communicated by the Town Clerk that was an error or that it wasn’t what she meant because a driveway permit is not an easement. The resident noted that the form clearly stated it’s a landlocked property. In defense of the SB Roberts noted the language on the form that it is for work done on the town ROW, nor does the form say it is an easement. Roberts pushed back to say it is on you as the owner of the landlocked property,, to understand the legal process to reach it.
(Time 10:29) Jones noted that it is obvious there was a misunderstanding at the beginning and the applicant felt that the issuance of the permit was a license to either build the driveway or that someone other than the applicant would be taking the steps to request an easement. Jones said he thought we can agree that there was a misunderstanding. Jones then said that he and Dennis Lefebvre want the SB to do these things: (i) state unequivocally that the driveway permit was issued in error and is now rescinded, (ii) include a statement of the recission in the minutes of this meeting, (iii) ensure the Town Clerk reflects the recission in the property records because right now the permit is recorded in the Town’s property records and (iv)the Town needs to consider its process for reviewing driveway permits. It would be a simple matter to determine if the applicant has frontage on a road and that the applicant is the owner of the property. Jones noted that if those two steps had been taken in this case the permit would not have been approved and simple due diligence would have ended the matter unless the applicant wanted to talk to other land owners saying the owner of a landlocked property has three choices, you remain landlocked, you get an easement or you sell the property. Jones asked the SB to do the four things he listed in this meeting.
(Time 13:05) Edwards restated the advice she received from the Town attorney that the SB does not need to rescind the permit and she also got advice that there is no process to do. There is a fairly short period of time, possibly 15 days, during which the person can say they are appealing this. There is no mechanism to rescind the permit at this point. Jones noted that the SB does have the ability to state unequivocally that the permit was issued by mistake. Edee said she thought everyone thinks it was issued by mistake, and further expressed that her question is do we have the authority to decline a permit when we don’t know if there is an easement or ROW. Roberts noted that if legal advice said there is no way to rescind this permit we could make our own motion and say that we have reviewed the information on this permit and believe it was issued in error and state it on the record. Christofferson and Ashcraft agreed. Christofferson noted that the applicant still has to figure out how to get from the beginning for the driveway across the land you don’t own. It sounds like the form is particularly devoid of helpful information. For this purpose we need to follow-up on what is in front of us right now and determine what the resolution should be and David suggested one, secondly this needs to go to Fisher and have him redraft the document. It doesn’t seem like we need to spend a lot of time reviewing it in front of the board and to cut down on legal expense it should be a 15 minute fix based on what he has already shared with Edwards. If we can approve other matters with conditions, and its conditional upon the approval of all adjacent landwowners can we put something like that in the firm and that’s when it goes to the Zoning Board. Edwards reiterated that we don’t have a process. A discussion ensued. Roberts highlighted that there are a lot of parts to figure out if you are developing a piece of land and that is why people retain a lawyer to help with that. Those that don’t retain a lawyer find that there are difficulties. Hesitant to put the SB in a role that isn’t ours where we are checking that other permisions have been obtained. Christofferson clarified that she wants the permit applicant to come with other permissions. A discussion further ensued, Christofferson asked if SB could be the end of the process, Roberts then said the SB is being put in the place of checking others work. Edwards concluded that we had a discussion amongst the board. She noted we needed to make sure the form is accurate and the processing is also as a piece of paper is turned around is able to flow. The work to be done is to make sure someone is not rushing a driveway to the road.
Jones noted the Grand List shows the owners of properties and it is a simple matter to determine if the applicant is applying for a driveway on property they own. In this case there was not an application owned by the applicant because there is no frontage. Jones asked that the SB make very clear that the permit was issued in error.
Edwards noted a comment earlier that a motion be made. Edwards asked for some help drafting the motion from the SB. Roberts heard clearly that no one is moving forward with any work on this so getting good wording for the motion, volunteered to bring the motion to the next meeting but right now a motion that didn’t cover all the bases might not be the best idea.
Edwards re-stated her apology and regret and asks everyone on the board to review and over the years this has come to the Chairman. In order to do this correctly she doesn’t want to do something now that would obligate the Town and wouldn’t be legally defensible.
McCrea asked how it could happen that someone gets approval to divide a property and getting a landlocked piece of land. Edwards replied that land use is based on history and property disputes can go back a long way. A discussion ensued and Edwards restated that we need advice on how to handle this from a legal perspective.
Jones then noted that we would defer this to the next meeting. Edwards agreed. The SB asked if it would be helpful to ask Fisher to come to the meeting, he is here for residents to speak to. He is physically here and people can ask questions.
GMP moving electric lines underground along Collins project update Tim Jones/Mike Bernard) (Time 28:57)
Edwards introduced Tim Jones and Mike Bernard from GMP to provide a project update to the prior action by the board to authorize GMP to put lines underground along the Collins Road Town ROW. Edwards asked when it is planned to happen so we can notify residents and highway team about timing and road closures. Edwards further asked GMP to provide assurance that hey are working with landowners to get specific permissions.
Jones introduced himself saying he presented to the SB last October and Bernard as the Operations Supervisor who will be supervising the construction. Time estimate is a couple of months away from starting in Halifax. GMP is working with a ROW Agent who is working with the land records to finish entitlements in Halifax which gets us from the border to Reed Hill Road. Crews are in Newfane/Dover and will be wrapping up. A crew is starting in Whitingham which is the start of this project which comes through Whitingham Lake Hill Road to Collins and then to Reed Hill. Jones described the work as mostly overhead with some undergrounding. The expectation is to continue with overhead build through the winter months with this being about a 6 month endeavor to get it all built in Halifax.
Edwards directed attention to the maps. Blue line is overhead and grey line is to be retired. Lines are to be brought roadside. Ashcraft asked for clarification of the roads. Christofferson clarified that it is to be underground from Tony Hanson to Reed Hill. Bernard agreed. The Blue dash line is underground and Blue Solid is overhead. Edwards said she would forward maps to the SB via email, Ashcraft has taken a paper copy. Jones noted that Bernard has been working on other locations where it will be a direct bury in the Town Road (Reed Hill). Jones described how they manage ½ road closures and their ability to work with the Town, keep SB informed. Bernard described other work to be discussed as underground to Laraby Road through Rt 112. Then overhead by Stones Farm to Fowler Road, then underground to Aldrich and then hit McMillan Road to the trouble spots where most of the outages are caused.
Jones noted the design wrapup is pending and they will have a formalized request. He also noted that GMP is working with the Town Road Supervisor about culverts and how to work with the Town. It will be an opportunity if we have the stock to give them the culvert and they will do the replacement. The road is put back as it was where line is buried at a depth of about 4 feet and bring road back to grade. Jones said there would be signs noting underground utilities. Bernard explained that the shorter distances with junction boxes should take care of the outages and reduce the numbers.
Edwards mentioned a potential conflict with the road crew on Reed Hill where we have been doing ditching for Clean Water Act where we have gotten grants. Bernard said he talked to Mike Fournier and the spots have already been completed. Christofferson asked if he meant the upper part. Bernard confirmed it was all done.
Jones asked if the utility route would be moved to the roadside. He asked what happens to the existing telecommunications lines on the poles and that goes through the woods. Where the utility goes underground does the plan include a path for the telecom cables to reach the houses the same way the electrical reaches the house. Jones affirmed that GMP is partnering with their telecom partners and that they are waiting for GMP to do the work so they can join underground or be overground on the new pole.
Chait asked if the old poles were going to be retired would they be removed. Bernard said they would if they have total access to them. Ideally the easement can then be quit claimed back to the landowner. Chait expressed concern over creosote poles. Edwards noted some lines are used by snowmobile clubs regarding access rights.
Beagan asked where property owners can get access to the design plan. A discussion ensued regarding the double ditch line on Collins Road where GMP is unable to use the trenching machine. GMP confirmed it would be overhead from Whitingham to Tony Hanson. Beagan inquired about the ability to go underground at his property. Jones offered to drop off plans if they are home. Jones said he would hand deliver a set of plans.
Bernard said that once the process of acquiring all the easements is completed he will sit down with Mike Fournier to go over everything and make sure nothing interferes with the road boss.
Administrative assistant job opening update (Time: 50:16 )
Edwards provided an update on the search of an Administrative Assistant. No official applicants received in the month. Ads are not dynamic and put notices around town. Edwards said that there is a question for the board, specifically, are we willing to think about revisiting how this position is set up if someone is willing to do the secretarial portion instead of the full Administrative Assistant position. The person who is considering this is well qualified and has lots of experience and town knowledge. When SB members have to do meeting minutes and job advertisements it becomes more obvious and important it is to have good administrative support. Edwards notes the low unemployment rate. The advertised position is less than full time and does not have benefits.
Roberts commended Edwards for doing everything since Alison left. If there is an applicant the job needs to follow the applicant, have them apply so we can have the conversation. Christofferson asked for clarification on what the specific role of the secretarial position would be. Edwards noted her view that it would be (i) attending meetings, (ii) taking meeting minutes, (iii) help with Agendas and (iv) help prepare for meetings with SB and Highway orders. Edwards noted that was her perspective and not a SB decision. Is the SB willing to have a special meeting with someone if they are still interested? All SB members present agreed. Stephanie Pike suggested that the SB have a job description so the applicant knows what to do. Edwards noted the job description has been revised and is on the website so the conversation would be how we reallocate to two buckets from one bucket. Edwards described conversations regarding shared services with other communities. The towns that have successfully done that are larger than we are so the person could get benefits.
Stone asked if she should email Edwards. Becky noted that the earlier discussion mentioned talking to Bob about rescinding the driveway permit and to make sure that he is available. She strongly suggests that Fisher draft the letter and not the SB. She also expressed excitement that GMP is coming through and will make different subdivisions so when power goes out in Jacksonville and Wilmington most of Halifax won’t go out too.
Town Garage Roof bids discussion (Time 58:55)
Edwards introduced Roberts for a discussion about the Town Garage Roof bids. Roberts reported that we received four bids from two different companies that met our specifications. Roberts recommends that the SB select a bid and then discuss funding because we didn’t budget for it and I have a suggestion on both of those topics.
Edwards asked that the budget piece be discussed as it is top of mind and there are other Agenda items later that will require funding. Edwards noted that she is fine starting with the money piece.
Roberts noted that the 2 lowest bids are $77,300 for a ribbed metal roof and next lowest bid is $82,458 for a rubber roof. There is a bid for $89,725 for a standing seam roof so that gives us 3 different material choices and cost range from $77k to $89k. There is a higher bid for $147,000 for a standing seam roof. Roberts said he would leave that one out so we need to come up with $77K to $89K to fund this project.
Roberts spoke to Town Treasurer about this and we have a $65k loan from the Scott Fund that we are budgeted to pay back and Patty suggested, and I think it’s a good idea, why don’t we either extend that loan or borrow from the Scott fund. I talked about this with Patrick McAllister from a financial perspective he correctly pointed out that the fund is really meant to be growing principal as an investment so by borrowing that money out of the investment market. So one way we can be fair to ourselves while still reducing financing costs we can still pay interest. The suggestion is reduce our borrowing costs while recognizing the Scott Fund has its own purpose. Patty also nboted a Building Maintenance Fund that she would like to close out that has about $7k in that fund. So between the two sources it gets us within the ballpark of what we need to raise and we can look at other line items or other ways to close the gap. I think it is doable to find the money from those sources and pay it back in the next fiscal year.
Edwards noted the idea of using the Scott Fund open is an interesting one and it is always easy but bad practice to spend the money twice. One of her thoughts is could some amount of the Scott Fund help with our equipment purchases if we were to consider trying for one of the equipment loans requiring a 25% match. This is where the Agenda timing gets a little confusing. Edwards is thinking about a large budget increase this year and that we probably don’t wish to do that again and yet the $187k that was the error is the amount of money we don’t want to go over. In order to level fund the budget we wouldn’t want to come up with projects like this that touch into that too deeply. So this is about ½ of the $187k so this something to be cognizant of and I don’t want to hear about this Town roof again, heard about it for decades and its not ideal to keep kicking the can
Christofferson thanked Roberts for pulling this together and laying it out the way he did. Thank you also for talking to Patrick while he was still available. I think the idea of the Scott Fund and remembering the discussions we had at Town Meeting and I know the SB has the ability to use it as it chooses but if I think about it from an audit perspective, we should close out what we did, period. Then if we want to “extend” it that is step 2. I don’t think this is a rolling loan gathers no loss and would be a bad practice. If the Scott Fund is under consideration we pay it back like we told the residents and got approval for then the Garage Roof is a different conversation with something written and where we charge interest which I think is a good idea then it’s a completely separate transaction and not rolling over the loan. I think a roll over would worry auditors and I think it would worry residents because then it becomes a slippery slope that never gets repaid. I think we should be very clear what we are doing in discrete sections. Edwards noted she is confused about the minutes in a prior meeting where Patrick said he hadn’t had a request as a Trustee of Public Funds to repay it. What is the next step if we want to repay it then Edee had a questioon about is it really the time to pay it back and are we jumping the gun. Christofferson thought this is really straight forward there is probably a one paragraph email that said the SB is ready to repay and we talked to Patty and there is money in the account to request the payback. We tell Patty to pay it back. When he said he hadn’t gotten the request he just hadn’t received the formal request. Edwards then said it was on the SB to make the request. It needs to go on the Agenda next time. Christofferson said it doesn’t need to be on the Agenda next time, we keep rolling it forward. Christofferson will talk to Patty and if I have to call Ireland I will talk to Patrick and get what we need drafted up. If the board agrees and we want to close it out and Patty says we have enough money we should just do it. Then we can have another conversation about what other opportunity there might be to finance other things. Roberts agreed that we should close it out. Edwards said she had other questions out to Patty that she hadn’t heard a response on related to the Scott Fund. Christofferson asked Edwards to send her the email she sent to Patty because this can’t wait, its already been too long. Edee began reading the email she sent to Patty. Edee wants detail to what “we have enough” means. The Pike Road FEMA repairs won’t be releasing money. Roberts said we got the FEMA money and she felt good about her cash flow. We got $179K for Pike Road. Christofferson will talk to Patty, we have to finish the financial statements, I will touch base with you offline to make sure we are hitting all your hot buttons because we have to get the financial statements and get the budget (spend for last FY) done.
Edwards asked if we want to circle back to the bids and move forward on the assumption we will figure the money out. Roberts said he would like to accept one of the bids and moved that we do that to bring this project forward. No one wants to spend the money but we need to stop the leak of the Garage roof and was pleased with the bids we got, Four bids is competitive. The numbers didn’t inflate as much as expected. To be more specific, the bid for the rubber roofing is the best bang for our buck. It’s a 20 year warranty. One of the estimators said he wasn’t surprised the roof is leaking, I know we have been kicking ourselves and trying to figure out what happened and these roofs leak all the time, its pretty common. Rubber roofing is the right material for this application. The 20year warranty could go to 30 years. I move that we accept the bid from Walker Industries for $82,458 for a Duralast Roof. Christofferson asked if this was a flat roof. Are we shoveling this roof when we have 4ft of snow. Roberts said it was a low slope roof. Christofferson’s concern is that a flat roof under a snow load is a problem. Is it hard to shovel a rubber roof. Roberts said no one is shoveling the roof. There is no change to the slope. Christofferson said her experience with flat roofs is that they weaken over time and could collapse. If high snow loads happen, is there a problem. Christofferson said she wants to go in eyes open, if it isn’t and issue she is all for it. Roberts said we don’t have answer for the engineered snow load which wasn’t discussed as a scope for this project. It would be very expensive to change the structure of the roof. Edwards asked for a second to Roberts’ motion for a Duralast Roof for $82,458 from Walker Industries. Christofferson doesn’t want to change the structure but just wanted to know what the added maintenance would be. Roberts said you could shovel the roof. Jones said you could shovel, he does it every winter. Ashcraft seconded. Randy Pike interjected agreeing with Roberts, it’s a low slope roof, snoe doesn’t slide off metal now. The building should have been engineered originally to withstand snow loads. He thinks it was because the building is still standing. You can shovel rubber but you need to not touch the rubber. RPike asked Roberts if there would be 4” or 2” of high density foam underneath the rubber in case something hits it. Edwards reviewed the bid and said it was 4” insulation board. The other question was did Walker Roofing talk about condensation or roof breathing ventilation. Edwards said they would install plumbing vents. Rand said he was asking a different question, any roof should breath you need air intake in the soffets and ridge to breath to prevent condensation. He has heard of Walker roofing. Roberts said he didn’t specifically talk to him about that. Roberts agrees that ventilation should be considered but would have to talk to them. Edwards said the scope of work is what she read. Edwards said she might vote no because the concerns about the funding b/c it wasn’t budgeted. SPike said she wanted to consider prioritizing this before purchasing equipment. We have a lot of costs hitting taxpayers and the roof is a long term project that we need to take care of. Roberts thinks that raises a point to reiterate, he reminded everyone that we had an energy assessment for this building that could reduce our fuel and heating costs. It doesn’t make sense to do those projects until we get the roof working. We may be able to get State support for the energy projects There are some next steps where we could reduce our operating expenses as a town through energy conservation. To the point about equipment, this is where we repair and store our equipment, it isn;’t well lit and it is leaking energy. Jones asked if there was any discussion with bank lenders about their willingness to extend secured or unsecured loan like a second mortgage financing then the cash outlay by the town would be a fraction of the total cost. Edwards said we had not had any discussion about bank financing. Christofferson said it could be interesting to think about a bank but she doesn’t know about municipalities and if it is a secured loan, what asset is being secured against. Could we inadvertently be giving up something. As an aside, we don’t have the ability to do proper financial statements because of our software and we won’t have audited financial statements for a couple years because we are on a three year cycle. Its one thing when you deal with Municipalities (Municipal Loans) because they work with small towns but it does get harder when you look at secured loans from a bank and will mean higher interest rates. We just don’t have the ability to provide an audited financial statement right now. Edwards said it was ok to disagree and things don’t have to be unanimous. If we had a tie she might rethink her response. If we go ahead with the motion then we have to figure out how to pay for it and the current plan is to borrow from the Scott Fund or seek other financing. Ashcraft asked how much was in the Scott Fund. Edwards said overall its between $300k and $400k. It needs to be invested so we get that $14k each year in income. Roberts encouraged Edwards to vote her conscience.
No further discussion. Motion carried to accept the bid from Walker Industries for a Duralast Roof for $82,458. Following a question by Ashcraft about how we will pay for it, Christofferson went through the need for the repair, the prioritization of equipment and she is in favor of solving with the Scott Fund for $72k, it isn’t a zero sum game but we need to come up with it. Using bank financing is not something we can do based on information available. Ashcraft said she would vote in favor. Edwards votes Nay and the motion carried 3-1
Ditch work safety concerns (Time 1:23:48)
Ashcraft spoke to the resident about deep ditches and she was concerned about two cars on the road one could go in the ditch. Ashcraft talked to Mike Fournier about why they are so deep and he said the state mandated it. He said she could go and listen to Pete Silverberg’s comments to get the minutes which she didn’t want to do. McCrea said that the State sent a mandate that the ditching had to be done in a specific way – if we don’t do it that way we don’t get other funding.
Edwards noted that there are advantages posting things to the website and the concern by the conservation committee because of ditching getting close to the tree roots. Edwards suggested that the citizen get information from.
Second mowing of landfill (Time 1:35:00)
Edwards received an estimate to also clear a tree that fell on top of landfill before mowing. The new scope of work price is not to exceed $1,900.00. It was originally $780 to mow and $1,100 to clear the tree. Edwards moved that we go ahead and accept the Saladino estimate. Roberts seconded. There was no further discussion. Motion carried 4-0
Hazard Mitigation Grant – project list review (Time 1:37:00)
Edwards explained that we have discussed this in piecemeal fashion at prior meetings because who was at different meetings. The three possible projects are (i) Bridge Road at Rte. 112, (ii) Stark Mountain Road – Lower section and (iii) Hubbard Hill Culvert Upgrades. Those two things are not on our Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. We need to identify what hazard we are protecting against for the bridge Edwards is not convinced a flood will take it out. Edwards wants to give authority to say if we can’t do a cost justification for the project not to submit the bridge (for example). Christofferson reported that we have about 13 days to submit this. We now have a fire drill. I will go ahead and file what we can. According to Windham Regional the guidance was to put them all on and get inDoto the queue. Christofferson noted that if a big flood comes and we don’t have the money, God help us. Maybe we get FEMA money. Edwards noted that in another time we might have the ability to talk about as a community what happened in Irene b/c there are roads that we might not open again after the next flood. Doug Parkhurst asked about the bridge on Route 112, what is it? Edwards described it as across from Gretchen Beckers farm. Christofferson noted there has been a long discussion about what portion is Town vs State because of the way it is oriented. An inspection is pending but it could take $600k. Edwards noted that there are other grants. Edwards thinks the states are going to use it to buy up properties and this funding will go upstate to places hit the last two years. Edwards also noted the line of site discussions in the past but that has never been resolved. Christofferson noted that it wouldn’t be part of this hazard, Edwards agreed and said it may have some engineering information.
National Opioid Settlement (Time 1:43: 15)
Edwards noted that we have about $300.00 of Opiod money given to Voices of Hope historically. Edwards was not able to check to see if the Fire Company had use for having Narcan on site. Roberts said the Department of Health be kept at business, town offices, the Fire Company. Roberts would like to demystify Narcan. This discussion is about Voices of Hope that works with Opiod recovery. The reason it is on the Agenda is because we get small amounts of money in $25 and $50 checks on an ongoing basis. We had previously moved to authorize the Treasurer to as the checks come in to give them to Voices of Hope. If Fire Department wants to have Narcan on site we should obtain it, but now Voices of Hope has come to us. Roberts moved. Edwards seconded. Christofferson stated support for having Narcan at Town Office based on its availability in deli’s and it is now almost ubiquitous but that is a separate conversation. Motion carried 4-0
NEW BUSINESS (Time 1:46:45)
Christofferson noted the time as 7:48pm
Whitneyville Road access (Time 1:46:50)
Edwards noted that Linda Huebner was not here so this topic will be deferred to another meeting.
FEMA Public Assistance funding pause (Time 1:47:14)
Edwards wanted to note that she forwarded an email to Christofferson saying FEMA doesn’t have money so if you are waiting for FEMA to pay then you have to wait for FEMA to have the budget to do something. We should not expect to receive anything new in and the State is aware of that. (Subsequent note per email referenced by Edwards: The Funding has been paused not cancelled. Towns are urged to complete the work with FEMA PDMG to complete projects and funding will be released when it is available.)
New Selectboard member or vacancies discussion (Time 1:48:06)
Edwards said that one of the people of interest is here. Edwards noted we just had an election. There were write in candidates but no one who got on the ballot for the Selectboard. The winner of the postion for the remainder of the Selectboard term is the person with the most votes is Randy Pike with 14 votes. That is enough votes for him to accept the position if he chooses to. A complication is that if he becomes a SB member then Stephanie can not be an Auditor. That is a conflict of interest and those positions are incompatible. Edwards said she thought the Town Clerk was going to get in touch with each of Randy and Stephanie Pike. This board has a responsibility to declare a vacancy if there is one. Edwards was not able to go to VLCT to see what the parameters are in this situation. We don’t know if there are a certain number of days by which you need to be sworn in and if you don’t by that date can we declare a vacancy or if you can declare you are not interested whether we can take that and declare a vacancy. You look a little stunned. RPike agreed, he is a little stunned. He didn’t plan on running at this time and thought the number to win was 25. Christofferson said it was 7 votes representing 1%. Edwards reported the next highest person was Max Stewart with 6 votes and the next highest was Bob Teree with 4 votes. Edwards expressed her feeling that it is important to fill the vacancy. Edwards think we will have to take this up as a board at our next meeting. We need to figure out how to entice someome to do this for afew months until the March time frame when they can choose to run or not run. Christofferson made a plea for RPike to consider taking the role at least until March. Christofferson said he had been really helpful when coming to the meetings, She said he had been very helpful with things that had come up. She recognizes he has a business and a ton of stuff but she thinks the Town would really benefit from your help.
RPike said he needed to think about it. He didn’t think it would be brought up because he din’t think there would be enough votes. Edwards agreed and said she would go through VLCT notes to tget the process on the SB end. Edee expressed this is a labor of love that might fit one year and not the next but she hopes that RPike will consider it. Christofferson noted that the conflict of interest was important and the Auditor work doesn’t happen for a number of months and lasts for a period of days. We are thrilled you, SPike, put your name up. Christofferson thanked RPike for at least considering it.
Town Fair / Annual Meeting Voting Delegate (Time 1:55:20)
Edwards reported that she is going because she was asked to be on a panel. If anyone wishes to be a voting delegate on October 2nd and we will make it happen. Roberts was a voting delegate last year.
Highway wage increase—review budget, determine next steps (Time 1:56:26)
Edwards reported we did the performance reviews for the highway department and we last year did not do a wage increase until December because of budgeting reasons. This process has been talked about being more performance based rather than just a percentage Cost of Living. Edwards asked the board to do an Executive Session to talk about the highway department writ large. Roberts asked that we review the budget as we set it last year. The budget excluding benefits for FY24 was $318,213 and the budget for FY25 was $347,412 a 9.18% increase. Edwards noted that last year we did wage adjustments because the labor market has been really tight and we had to level up. At the time we did the budget we hadn’t hired our most recent employee. We hired him in March but at a rate given his qualifications was a rate higher than the previous employee was making. Christofferson noted he was more experienced and filled a different role. Edwards wants to figure out what our next steps are. Edwards suggested figuring out what it normally would be with the current employees. Christofferson said she preferred to do that in Executive Session and that she didn’t have the ability to do that now. Edwards only wants to figure out next steps. A discussion ensued regarding what can and can not be discussed during executive session. Christofferson made the point that by definition a performance based discussion should be in Executive Session and when we come out of Executive Session we can discuss the public information. Edwards will check with VLCT about Executive Session vs Open Session.
Edwards said that next meeting we will level set with current staff and an Executive Session to talk about highway department overall.
SPike asked if we are basing the raise on performance do you have a set standard for what you are looking for? Edwards responded that as a small town in past years we had not paid on performance. We currently only have 1 person who has an up to date job description and been able to review with everyone the line by line description of what we are expecting. As much as large firms try to make this a fair process, it is always a judgement call. Not everyone has the same skill set so we look at it from that perspective. We also have access to VLCT salary data. Last year we spent a lot of time trying to get those numbers to work. The numbers are always moving around. Dover is looking for people, Marlboro is looking for people. Christofferson noted she had had some preliminary conversations regarding Wilmington at $30 hour. Another thing that becomes part of the calculation is benefits. What I don’t yet know is how the benefit package would translate into an hourly rate. Then we need to think about what is better for employees, what do we think, what do the employees think. Christofferson would like to figure out with Patty what the hourly equivalent of the benefit package is. Edwards noted that many years ago she did a total cost of year benefits when the ACA began coming through. The Town pays 100% and Edwards noted that it will be going up 18% or thereabouts.
SPike noted that having a job description would be helpful for having the performance discussion, she also noted that she compared our budget to Readsboro which is similar demographically. We budgeted $297K for just wages and Readsboro budgeted $206K for perspective. Christofferson noted that was just wages and excluded OT and Health Insurance. SPike noted that we budgeted benmefits at $139K and Readsobo budgeted $114K for FY25. Edwards asked how many employees they have. SPike noted they have different numbers for winter and summer crews but they didn’t say. Edwards noted that Roberts did a lot of that same checking around last yearand has a spreadsheet. Roberts said he did a thorough check of wages, salary, healthcare and retirement. He has a spreadsheet that was used to inform our decision last year. He thinks updating that would be a good baseline for us this year. We didn’t take the step of translating health insurance to an hourly rate equivalent. The statewide information was less useful. Christofferson noted the rWindham Regional eport that puts Halifax vs all the other towns in Southern Vermont by roads, miles and number of tax payers. Edwards said it is on the website on the SB communications page,
SPike had one last question, does the road crew salary include the Road Commissioner salary.A discussion ensued regarding the Road Commissioners and what amount went to MFournier and the $2K went to the Road Commissioners if we choose to take it and we are encouraged to take it. The $5K went into MFournier’s salary. Mike got a pay cut because of these changes.Christofferson noted that he is still involved in Road Commissioner activities where needed. Christofferson confirmed that the Executive Session would be at the next meeting and that we would have to allocate enough time for a robust discussion. Edwards confirmed and said it would be put at the end of the meeting.
Election results for equipment purchases with long-term loans (Time 2:15:17)
Edwards reported that Article 2 to purchase a fleet excavator for an amount not to exceed $350K and financed for a period not to exceed 15 years received 93 yes votes, 74 no votes and 13 blank votes. That is a yes.
Article 3 to purchase a fleet loader for an amount not to exceed $235K and financed for a period not to exceed 15 years received 89 yes votes, 76 no votes and 15 blank votes. That is also a yes.
Following up from the informational meeting before the meeting Edwards also reached out to Town counsel on this question and he also said we are authorized but not required to purchase these pieces of equipment. He pointed out that we could go for the refurbishment option but we do not have any budget to cover the refurbishment. Edwards does not think we need to come to a decsion but what are we feeling. If there are thoughts to do other things, what might they be.
Christofferson asked to be reminded what the refurbishment costs were $194K? Edwards said she estimated it was over 1/3 of the purchases. Christofferson noted that it was $34K for the buckets and $129K to refurbish it with $10-$15k of additional estimates. Let’s assume for discussion it is between $150K and $190K for just the excavator. Christofferson said she doesn’t know a lot about machines but we are high on hours. Without an excavator we are at a disadvantage. Without an excavator what to we do? Christofferson would like to have this conversation in the context of what do we do worst case, hopefully nothing snaps off and causes an injury. Christofferson referred to the Town Report showing current hours on the excavator of 7,921 as of Dec 2023. We just learned it clicked up to 9,000 hours. Ashcraft asked if the vote would allow us to lease. Edwards responded that it wouldn’t allow us to lease. We could purchase a used machine. Christofferson said she expected if we purchased a used machine from a dealer, we could get a dealer warranty,
Edwards said we should go ahead and put a bid out for the excavator versus the refurbishment option because the risk to avoid a circumstance where we are caught flat fotted in a circumstance like Irene where we might be left without an excavator. Edwards further noted she thought the refurbishment costs were high to get a 3-5 year motor warranty. It’s a lot of money to sink into an old machine. Regarding the loader, her thought was that it is a less expensive piece of equipment and the 25% of the Towns portion in cash is a lot of money. BY Oct 13th we could put in for the Municipal Loan for less than 5 years at a 2% interest rate. Looking ahead the next piece of equipment is the grader. Is there refurbishment opportunity for the grader and get off the cycle of everything coming due in the same year. Christofferson noted that the estimate we put in for the grader was $445K the hours in December were 6,980. Edwards thinks we have some time to plan for the grander but not so much time to plan for the other two machines. Edwards said she spoke with Katie Buckley has contacts. Christofferson recalled a webinar last October where the Municipal Bond guy spoke. I asked what kind of financial statements are needed and don’t think got an answer. Christofferson volunteered to follow-up with Katie Buckley.
SPike asked why this wasn’t put on the warning for Town meeting and who said we replace every 15 years. Edwards said it wasn’t put on last March’s meeting because we didn’t know if we could get a bond, and the answer was we don’t have the right accounting system and then we found the error and we didn’t have enough data. One of the things that got out of date was the old equipment schedule that looked like it was going down but it never had the new equipment added.
SPike said we look at it every 15 years. Equipment ages out and breaks and we don’t want to get into a break situation. Christofferson noted she joined the board to get a little more transparency in the budget around line items and equipment, what we did is updatde and expanded the schedules to show a forward capital expense view. In February we also separated out the expected principal and interest. Christofferson expressed her observation that we have used equipment far beyond its useful life to the point we have high repair budgets and no zero trade in value. When we replace it we need to wait a year to take delivery. Christofferson noted that taxes have been kept low for a lot of reasons but part of what took the hit is equipment because it is so expensive. Edwards described the time crunch and that the board was not able to discuss the time line for the hold periods. She mentioned seeing a Whitingham report saying the time line is 20 years but we don’t know how that is working for them. Edwards doesn’t know what an industry standard is. There was a special meeting when the loader was discussed and she recalls trying to discuss the lifespan.
SPike’s recommendation would be having rules for specific uses for each activity. The excavator has been used to move a tree where that is something that a truck could do. That is wear and tear, driving the excavator across town when a truck could do the same thing. She also mentioned that a friend of hers purchased a piece of equipment from the Town as used and all it needed was a $600 part. Just sharing information she has heard from others who want to be sure preventative maintenance is done and maybe having the SB or Road Commissioners sign off on maintenance. If Whitingham can get 20 years what are they doing? Preventative maintenance and proper usage not misuse is so important with these big pieces of equipment.
McCrea found the report referenced earlier in the meeting and said that Halifax had 12.6 miles of paved roads and Whitingham has 30 miles. Paved roads might be easier on equipment. Roberts noted that the cost of maintaining paved roads is lower than unpaved and use of equipment.Ashcraft asked if the Town guys are not using the equipment properly and noted that Wayne used to run the grader and that lasted a long time because he was gentle. Edwards said it was good to know what the sense is and we don’t have the technical skill to know if what is being done is abusive. We continue to acknowledge that it is difficult to hear we need equipment. She asked the SB if we needed to take action tonight to get the requests out for bid or do we need more time.
At some point Mike said that if we were going to try and refurbish that would be during the winter months.
RPike said he has a lot of ideas and thoughts about this, the one thing is the Town did vote yes. The informational meeting was not well attended. His thought is not to keep kicking this down the road but at Town meeting you might get more input from people. RPike is in favor possibly of refurbishment if there is more detail. Edwards told the Road Supervisor that she was curious about the perspective of the employees was with respect to the refurbishment vs purchase option. RPike said that somebody on the road crew said we don’t need an excavator right now. He has ideas on maintenance. As to the loader, with 7,098 hours in December, but with diesel equipment it has to run a lot in the winter the hour meter is running but it isn’t necessarily working hours. It might be worth looking into refurbishing that piece of equipment.
Edwards asked if we want to put this on the Agenda under old business next meeting. Christofferson noted we kind of have to. Roberts noted it is getting late to make a decision. Christofferson noted it we would be better informed after the Executive Session because different people do different things with different people, it is becoming a rubics cube.
New England Green River Marathon: road closure request-Green River Road from Moss Hollow to Deer Park, August 25-7:00-8:30 am (Time 2:44:01)
Edwards reported that there is a request to close the road from Moss Hollow to Deer Park to local traffic only from 7:00-8:30 am on Sunday August 25th. On the call is Mr. Raffenspurger who has the information. Edwards noted that typically these events are people running and how does it stay safe for residents and an awareness of the races for the Fire Department so she did forward this tot Dennis (Annear).
Roberts moved that we close Green River per the request and that we have done this for several years and it is a successful and growing event. Roberts lives on a section of road that is closed and during an emergency the road is not blocked. With all the runners it is much safer to just close it and that has been successful before. The Motion was seconded by Edwards, Christofferson asked what “Closed” means. It is only 90 minutes but what does closed mean is it local traffic only. Roberts says it is closed. If you are a local person you can assess the situation. Raffensperger said they have a person at each end where the sign is at Deer Park and at Moss Hollow. Generally, they are let in. The road isn’t shut down, they are just making people aware. Its Sunday morning and there isn’t a lot of traffic. Christofferson agreed and said she is in favor of it but was sensitive about the word “closed’ due to a scuffle we had about the word during mud season. Edwards noted that there are formal processes to close a road. Edwards said we do have some local traffic only. We may be able to provide different signs this year. With no further discussion, the motion carried 4-0. Edwards will post on Mailchimp and Christofferson suggested perhaps Front Porch Forum.
HEARING OF VISITORS (Time 2:49:25)
DParkhurst requested a copy of the maps discussed during the GMP Collins Road discussion at the beginning of the meeting. Edwards to provide via email.
RPike said he would get the SB an answer in the next few days.
SPike said she would suggest putting things in the Halifax News. Edwards said it only comes out once a month and the requirements for a special meeting are that it must be done 48 hours in advance. Please encourage people to go to the Halifax website and sign up for Agemdas and pick which boards. Now there are about 60 people on the distribution list. Then someone else said the website still had the old constable not the new constable. Edwards will check.
APPROVAL PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES (Time 2:53:27 )
Roberts left the meeting at 8:55pm. No visitors remained in the meeting.
July 2, 2024 Selectboard Regular Meeting – Moved to approve with changes by Edwards, Seconded by Ashcraft. Motion carried 3-0
July 22, 2024 Selectboard Special Meeting – Moved to approve by Christofferson, Seconded by Ashcraft. Motion carried 3-0.
Christofferson said she was not in attendance for the August 6th meetings. Edwards said there wasn’t a quorum for the Informational Meeting. Edwards proposed leaving them in Draft. She said Cara Cheyette did the minutes for August 6, 2024 Informational Hearing before Special Town Meeting
August 6, 2024 Selectboard Regular Meeting will need to come back to.
August 12, 2024 Selectboard Special Meeting – Patrick tried to get access to this meeting but wasn’t able to. Moved to approve by Ashcraft, Seconded by Christofferson. Motion carried 3-0.
EXECUTIVE SESSION (None)
OTHER BUSINESS (None)
CORRESPONDENCE (Time3:04:48 )
Christofferson mentioned the email received from Cara Cheyette at 1:48pm which was circulated to SB in advance of the meeting. She hoped to attend but she couldn’t she talked about Town minutes, Town Trails and doing hiring and using Zoom versus other technologies.
Edwards noted the comment on the July 2nd minutes about Town Responsibility to maintain Class 4 roads. She is asking to be on the next meetings agenda to discuss.
Edwards noted a 5:01pm email from Paul Blais saying that the Halifax Local Hazard Mitigation Plan has been approved effective August 20, 2024 through August 19, 2029. Final review tool is attached, the final approval letter will be sent to us from FEMA. This makes us eligible for those grants. Edwards reached out to Mike McConnell, Paul Blais and someone on the state level requsting a copy. Mike McConnell sent a legible copy. It is good for 5 years and it is already needing real time updates. Edee will get a word document and she will share with SB and Patty. Christofferson said at some point the electronic record should go up on Google docs.
Christofferson said that she thought the report should go onto the website under Reports but a new category needs to be created first.
Edwards needs an accounting of the money spent during FY24. Christofferson spoke with Patty who sent a draft 2 days ago. As an oversight matter, Edwards wants to understand the cash flow for the money we borrowed and the money that came in so we didn’t need to borrow as much as we used from Scott Fund. Christofferson said that the intent was to borrow in tranches.
A discussion ensued regarding the sequence of the Public discussion versus the Executive session so that the performance part of the budget discussion occurs in Executive Session. Christofferson doesn’t want to obviate the public discussion but just change the sequence. Edwards will speak with VLCT about Executive Session versus Public discussion for performance vs Cost of Living wage increase.
A discussion ensued about the cost of benefits.
SELECTBOARD ORDER (Time 3:29:45 )
Edwards noted that there are times we are not getting 40 hours from people this summer. Some of that is medical leave. When we look at the overall budget, some of this might be underspent. We need to understand why. Christofferson noted that the Budget was $318,213 and we only spent $303,415. We were shorthanded for a period of time. The biggest change was in OT where the budget was $43,500 and we spent $31, 276
At 9:31pm Edwards read the Highway Order into the record. Edwards also read the Selectboard Order into the record for a total of $14,747.74 Christofferson noted the receipt copies needed for the Lister’s postage amount and the note to Patty attached. Christofferson also noted we need the Tear Sheets.
ADJOURNMENT (Time 3:44:25)
Edwards Moved to adjourn the meeting. Ashcraft Seconded. Motion carried 3-0.
9:46pm Meeting adjourned and recording stopped.
Respectfully submitted by Karen Christofferson, Secretary Pro Tempore
Meeting YouTube Recording Link: https://youtu.be/5t3QA6l_Jfs