We have written a great deal about Ashland's economic problems and discussed some of the ways that we can deal with these problems. The town cannot expect to resolve these problems by placing the entire burden on residential tax payers. We need sustainable economic development. Tax Increment Financing (TIF) is one way for towns to encourage economic development and fund necessary infrastructure improvements without increasing the tax burden. A number of cities and towns in New Hampshire and in other states have already used TIFs successfully to improve their downtown areas, historic districts, and business parks.
TIF is the financing of public improvements with the incremental taxes created by new construction, expansion, or renovation within a defined section of a community. Say that the town of Ashland voted to create a TIF district in the downtown and mill area, and a business owner in that district renovated the building. The tax increase from the renovation could then be used to make public improvements in that area. The taxes originally paid on that building would still be distributed as they are now between then town, school district, and county.
Towns in New Hampshire have used TIFs to pay off bonds and to create "savings accounts" to pay for public improvements, and in conjunction with grants and other sources of funding. There are number of improvements that need to be made to the downtown that could be funded using a TIF. The repair of the Fire Station Roof, replacement of the water pipes, addition of parking spaces, and several of the ideas from the Charrette. Businesses and home owners in a TIF district benefit because money they spend to improve their property gets reinvested in their district. A TIF can also be used to attract new business because it can be used to finance infrastructure that a new businesses would need to locate in Ashland.
A TIF is not a silver bullet that will solve our economic problems. It is only a tool that can be used if the town can develop the right opportunities. It requires that we have the right expertise in terms of planning, budgeting, economic development, accounting, and leadership to develop effective partnerships with businesses and developers. It requires a great deal of work as well as commitment from the town. But, it could prove the be a great help in revitalizing the downtown and bringing new business into the mill area.
For more information on TIF, see the following links:
Sunday, March 25, 2012
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Dear Negativity, Negativity, Negativity
Thank you for your comment. I wish I knew what negative comments you were referring to or which statements you think are false. In reference to your comments about negativity, we think there is a difference between fact-based criticism and negativity. Personal attacks are negative; criticism of documented actions and policies are not. One of the reasons we started the Coalition for Action was to change the political dialog and focus the discussion on issues rather than personalities or ideologies. We do not agree with the kind of name calling that goes on in state in and national politics. When we need to fix the Fire Station roof, we need to focus on the facts about the roof and the best way to finance the repairs. My point in my article about the roof was that the select board needs to have a good understanding of the problems and the options for repair, and they should have either had someone explain the report or been able to explain it themselves. We made no value judgments about any select board members. We do not engage in name calling, nor do we misrepresent ideas or actions. We do have a right, however, to analyze and interpret the facts.
Your comment that we should not "interfere" with meetings troubles me. Our role as citizens requires us to participate responsibly in government. I participate whether I think people are doing a good job or not. I respect the office and our system of government, but citizens need to make sure that the government is accountable for its actions. The Coalition believes that the way to do that is through responsible dialog. You could help us by providing specific information so that we can address your concerns or correct any errors that me may make.
Your comment that we should not "interfere" with meetings troubles me. Our role as citizens requires us to participate responsibly in government. I participate whether I think people are doing a good job or not. I respect the office and our system of government, but citizens need to make sure that the government is accountable for its actions. The Coalition believes that the way to do that is through responsible dialog. You could help us by providing specific information so that we can address your concerns or correct any errors that me may make.
NEGATIVITY, NEGATIVITY, NEGATIVITY
We received a comment from Concerned Citizen.
I cannot believe that you like putting negative comments on this website after the selectmen's meetings. You should be putting positive things
on about what they accomplish and how much time they put in. I have heard about the
people involved in the CFA and I am not impressed at all. You seem to like targeting
people and saying false things and negative things. You should fine something more
constructive to do. I would hate to think that people like you are involved with the
town. I feel we had a great board and now have new board that will do a great job. I
watch the meetings and I am appalled by the way you people act and the questions you
ask. You only care about yourself and not the town. As far as Jeanette Stewart is
concerned I feel she is doing a great job as chairperson as I see her on TV. Let her
do her job. Stop interfering. Going to the meetings is fine, but acting the way
your group does is uncalled for.
I cannot believe that you like putting negative comments on this website after the selectmen's meetings. You should be putting positive things
on about what they accomplish and how much time they put in. I have heard about the
people involved in the CFA and I am not impressed at all. You seem to like targeting
people and saying false things and negative things. You should fine something more
constructive to do. I would hate to think that people like you are involved with the
town. I feel we had a great board and now have new board that will do a great job. I
watch the meetings and I am appalled by the way you people act and the questions you
ask. You only care about yourself and not the town. As far as Jeanette Stewart is
concerned I feel she is doing a great job as chairperson as I see her on TV. Let her
do her job. Stop interfering. Going to the meetings is fine, but acting the way
your group does is uncalled for.
Monday Night's Board Meeting - Avoiding the Past and the Future
I recommend that people watch Monday night's Select Board Meeting on Public Access television. At that meeting before public comments were allowed, Jeanette Stewart said that she would not entertain any questions or comments from the public about the past. She said the board had a great deal to do in the coming months like the Capital Improvement Plan. The board itself discussed the past, however, and did not address any future concerns.
I might understand not discussing the past if this was a completely new board. However, Jeanette Stewart and Dan Golden were on the previous board, and Jeanette Stewart ran on a platform of providing continuity to the board. Most of the issues discussed at the meeting were continued from the previous board: The Fire Station roof, the campground dumpster, Northern Lakes Veterinary Hospital, and Time Warner Cable. That is why these items were placed under "Old Business." The board discussed the past while the public was prohibited from doing so.
They also avoided discussing the future. They spent 25 minutes discussing the campground dumpster, a subject the previous board spent almost the same amount of time discussing at the last Work Session with exactly the same result. The issue of the dumpster should have simply been turned over to the town administrator to handle with the assistance of the Public Works and the Police Department. If the dumpster was properly shielded and the local ordinances were enforced, there would be no problem. They also spent time discussing issue at Northern Lakes Veterinary Hospital, which is really a matter for the Planning Board. The board did discuss the engineering report on the Fire Department roof, but when asked to provide more details on the report, they could not explain the problem or the options for repair other than reading from the list in the report, which the town administrator provided. They should have been prepared with a summary of the report the townspeople would understand the situation.
Despite the fact that Jeanette Stewart told us on Candidate's Night that the town is in serious financial trouble, the new board did not discuss developing the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) approved by voters or starting an Economic Development Committee. Both of these are critical to returning the town to a healthy financial position. The town's financial situation should be the board's top priority. It should have been the first item under new business, even though it is really old business. It is new business because the previous board did not take any meaningful steps to deal with the problem. That may be why the new board wants the public to forget the past and why they did not discuss the future.
I might understand not discussing the past if this was a completely new board. However, Jeanette Stewart and Dan Golden were on the previous board, and Jeanette Stewart ran on a platform of providing continuity to the board. Most of the issues discussed at the meeting were continued from the previous board: The Fire Station roof, the campground dumpster, Northern Lakes Veterinary Hospital, and Time Warner Cable. That is why these items were placed under "Old Business." The board discussed the past while the public was prohibited from doing so.
They also avoided discussing the future. They spent 25 minutes discussing the campground dumpster, a subject the previous board spent almost the same amount of time discussing at the last Work Session with exactly the same result. The issue of the dumpster should have simply been turned over to the town administrator to handle with the assistance of the Public Works and the Police Department. If the dumpster was properly shielded and the local ordinances were enforced, there would be no problem. They also spent time discussing issue at Northern Lakes Veterinary Hospital, which is really a matter for the Planning Board. The board did discuss the engineering report on the Fire Department roof, but when asked to provide more details on the report, they could not explain the problem or the options for repair other than reading from the list in the report, which the town administrator provided. They should have been prepared with a summary of the report the townspeople would understand the situation.
Despite the fact that Jeanette Stewart told us on Candidate's Night that the town is in serious financial trouble, the new board did not discuss developing the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) approved by voters or starting an Economic Development Committee. Both of these are critical to returning the town to a healthy financial position. The town's financial situation should be the board's top priority. It should have been the first item under new business, even though it is really old business. It is new business because the previous board did not take any meaningful steps to deal with the problem. That may be why the new board wants the public to forget the past and why they did not discuss the future.
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
The Fire Department Roof
Of the Agenda Items for the Future we posted yesterday, the only item discussed at the Select Board meeting last night was the Fire Station roof. The towns people approved a warrant article for $50,000 for the repair, and last night the board agreed to additional engineering studies before proceeding with repairs.
I asked the board to provide more details about the specific problems outlined in the report and the recommended repair options that range from $40,000 to $175,000. Jeanette Stewart read a section from the report that did not answer my question, but Fire Chief Steve Heath offered to take people down to the Fire Station and explain the basic problems. Several residents attended including two members of the Coalition for Action and newly elected Select Board member Phil Preston.
Steve Heath told us that the Fire Station was built in 1967 and the current roof was updated in the late 1980s. There are four sections of the roof. Looking at the building from the street, there is a small section to the right that was the old radio room. The large section in middle is the equipment bay, and to the left are two lower sections that house the offices, radio room, and classroom. In terms of repair, the old radio room seems to be in the best shape, and the sections over the offices and training room are in the worst shape.
The roof is supported by metal stanchions that support sections of corrugated galvanized steel that are covered by a thin layer of cement, insulation, a rubber membrane, and a layer of material to hold the membrane in place. Steve Heath took us into the equipment bay to show where there has been leakage through the seams in the corrugated steel. He shined a flashlight on the seams to reveal what he called small stalactites ranging in size up to several inches. The seams were formed by overlapping the corrugated sections, and a layer of cement was poured on top of the steel to provide additional strength. In order for the roof to leak and the stalactites to form, water would have to penetrate the cement and then make its way under and back up over the corrugated seam.
Picture water making its way down into the U-shaped channel that is filled with cement and then back up over the inverted U-shaped corrugation. According to the engineer, what may have happened over the years is that the cement deteriorated - turned to sand - as a result of water freezing and thawing. Even though there is a layer of beaded styrofoam insulation over the cement, the roof was designed to let heat through to help melt the snow on the roof. There are drains in the roof to channel the water off, but the engineer found evidence of pooling in the center of the roof. The pitch of the roof will need to be changed in order to correct this problem.
Steve said that they are not sure where the water is coming from. No core sample was taken in the portion of the roof to determine the condition of the insulation or the cement layer. In addition, the roof does not meet current load standards for emergency buildings. Further engineering studies are needed to determine the nature of the problem and to develop approaches for repairs given the limited amount of money the town has. Steve said that we may to increase the strength of the supports before we actually repair the roof.
The sections of the roof to the left of the equipment bay are in worse shape. Snow blows off the equipment bay roof and piles up on these sections. A core sample was taken somewhere in this area and the fiber board insulation was found to be 100% saturated. Pictures of the stanchions show that there has been more leakage in these sections, and there is evidence that the rubber membrane has come loose at either end of the roof. The engineer is also concerned about whether the stanchions were properly installed and has suggested that we consider making the building earthquake safe. (We had a small earthquake in Ashland a few years ago, and the state is working on new standards.)
There were several approaches to fixing the roof ranging from $40,000 to $175,000, but further engineering studies are needed to determine the extent of the problem and the best approach for fixing the roof. Hopefully, the board will do a thorough cost benefit analysis before making their decision.
I asked whether the engineering report could be put on the town website so that it would be easily available for all of those interested in the repairs. Jeanette Stewart said that the report could not be placed on the website but did not explain why. The report is a public document and is available for viewing at the Town Hall.
I asked the board to provide more details about the specific problems outlined in the report and the recommended repair options that range from $40,000 to $175,000. Jeanette Stewart read a section from the report that did not answer my question, but Fire Chief Steve Heath offered to take people down to the Fire Station and explain the basic problems. Several residents attended including two members of the Coalition for Action and newly elected Select Board member Phil Preston.
Steve Heath told us that the Fire Station was built in 1967 and the current roof was updated in the late 1980s. There are four sections of the roof. Looking at the building from the street, there is a small section to the right that was the old radio room. The large section in middle is the equipment bay, and to the left are two lower sections that house the offices, radio room, and classroom. In terms of repair, the old radio room seems to be in the best shape, and the sections over the offices and training room are in the worst shape.
The roof is supported by metal stanchions that support sections of corrugated galvanized steel that are covered by a thin layer of cement, insulation, a rubber membrane, and a layer of material to hold the membrane in place. Steve Heath took us into the equipment bay to show where there has been leakage through the seams in the corrugated steel. He shined a flashlight on the seams to reveal what he called small stalactites ranging in size up to several inches. The seams were formed by overlapping the corrugated sections, and a layer of cement was poured on top of the steel to provide additional strength. In order for the roof to leak and the stalactites to form, water would have to penetrate the cement and then make its way under and back up over the corrugated seam.
Picture water making its way down into the U-shaped channel that is filled with cement and then back up over the inverted U-shaped corrugation. According to the engineer, what may have happened over the years is that the cement deteriorated - turned to sand - as a result of water freezing and thawing. Even though there is a layer of beaded styrofoam insulation over the cement, the roof was designed to let heat through to help melt the snow on the roof. There are drains in the roof to channel the water off, but the engineer found evidence of pooling in the center of the roof. The pitch of the roof will need to be changed in order to correct this problem.
Steve said that they are not sure where the water is coming from. No core sample was taken in the portion of the roof to determine the condition of the insulation or the cement layer. In addition, the roof does not meet current load standards for emergency buildings. Further engineering studies are needed to determine the nature of the problem and to develop approaches for repairs given the limited amount of money the town has. Steve said that we may to increase the strength of the supports before we actually repair the roof.
The sections of the roof to the left of the equipment bay are in worse shape. Snow blows off the equipment bay roof and piles up on these sections. A core sample was taken somewhere in this area and the fiber board insulation was found to be 100% saturated. Pictures of the stanchions show that there has been more leakage in these sections, and there is evidence that the rubber membrane has come loose at either end of the roof. The engineer is also concerned about whether the stanchions were properly installed and has suggested that we consider making the building earthquake safe. (We had a small earthquake in Ashland a few years ago, and the state is working on new standards.)
There were several approaches to fixing the roof ranging from $40,000 to $175,000, but further engineering studies are needed to determine the extent of the problem and the best approach for fixing the roof. Hopefully, the board will do a thorough cost benefit analysis before making their decision.
I asked whether the engineering report could be put on the town website so that it would be easily available for all of those interested in the repairs. Jeanette Stewart said that the report could not be placed on the website but did not explain why. The report is a public document and is available for viewing at the Town Hall.
Monday, March 19, 2012
An Agenda for the Future
The election is over, and now we need to address the key problems we face as a town. The following is a list of items we think should be on the agenda of the first meeting of the new board:
- Development of the Capital Improvement Plan
- Establishment of an Economic Development Committee
- Consideration of Tax Increment Financing (TIF)
- Decision about the Fire Station Roof
- Plan for Dealing with the Bucket Loader and Tractor
- Status of Correcting Discrepancies in the Union Contract
- Plan for Renegotiating the Employee Contributions to the Health Care Plan
- Repair of Thompson Street, Smith Hill Road, and West Street
- Hiring a full-time Grant Writer
Development of the Capital Improvement Plan is a campaign promise made by Jeanette Stewart at Candidate's night and was approved by town. It is imperative that a committee be established and that work commence on the plan immediately.
Establishment of an Economic Development Committee was a campaign promise made by Jeanette Stewart at Candidates' Night. A committee should be formed by the select board as soon as possible. Promoting economic development is essential to meeting the goals for the town established in the master plan, is critical to the town's economic future, and necessary for improving our quality of life.
Consideration of Tax Increment Financing (TIF). Establishing a TIF district is one way to improve the downtown area and attract both new businesses and talented people to the town. Many towns in New Hampshire have used this approach to revitalize areas for business and recreation. TIF funds are accumulated from tax increases on property improvements and are spent on improving infrastructure in established TIF districts.
Decision about the Fire Station Roof. The board has had the report on the fire station roof for a week and should be ready to discuss a plan for the repair. There are several approaches to repairing the roof that range from a little less than the $50,000 approved by the town to about $175,000.
Plan for Dealing with the Bucket Loader and Tractor. The town did not approve the warrant articles to lease a new bucket loader and tractor. However, the problem of either repairing or replacing this equipment remains. We need to know how the board plans to deal with this situation, what the options are, and how much it will cost.
Status of Correcting Discrepancies in the Union Contract. We wrote a blog article outlining the major discrepancies in the new union contract. Jeannette Stewart said at a board meeting that she would address these problems by calling a meeting of the negotiating team. That meeting has not yet been held. At a later meeting she said that the discrepancies were not a problem because the town had not approved the final contract. The town voted to approve the contract, but as far as we know the contract has not been corrected.
Plan for Renegotiating the Employee Contributions to the Health Care Plan. At a board meeting Jeanette Stewart said that the union had agreed that they would go back to the table and renegotiate the issue of employee contributions to their health care plan. This is an important issue since non-union employee are required to contribute to their plans, and the non-union employees did not receive the same increases in salaries. We voted to approve the contract based, in part, on the promise that this issue would be renegotiated. It should be done soon.
Plan to Repair of Thompson Street, Smith Hill Road, and West Street. These three roads along with the dirt portion of Owl Brook Road, are the worst roads in Ashland. They are in desperate need of repair, but the town does not have a plan to repair them. The town approved $125,000 capital reserve fund for roads, but it will cost over $1 million dollars to repair these roads. At the rate of $125,000 a year, it will take at least 8 years to save enough money to do the major repairs, but the roads need temporary repairs until then. There are people living in all of these areas with health problems who are finding it very difficult to travel over these roads. The board needs to develop a plan to address this issue. I believe the following figures are correct. We have $50,000 in the budget for road repair, but more than $30,000 will go to Owl Brook.
Hiring a full-time Grant Writer. The town has a grant writer who is very dedicated, but we need to place much more emphasis on writing and getting grants. The town's financial position should qualify us for grants in a number of areas.
All of these issues should have been addressed by previous boards, but we as voters need to make sure that they are addressed now, and they are addressed soon.
Saturday, March 17, 2012
Setting the Record Straight
I have received information from several different sources now that false information was spread during the recent campaign. People were told not to vote for Fran Newton because she wants to change the downtown, including putting in a roundabout. If you went to Candidate's Night or saw the broadcast on Channel 20, you would have seen that (1) Fran Newton wants to develop a shared vision for Ashland, and (2) she did not say anything about changing the downtown or putting in a roundabout. A roundabout would be extremely expensive; it would create traffic problems, ruin the appearance of that section of town, take away parking space, and cut into Memorial Park. She did, however, express her desire for economic development and revitalization, thoughts echoed by many.
However, there is a case to be made for reconfiguring the traffic island. One of the ideas initially proposed by the Charrette team was to close the short section of 132 by the traffic island and make the island part of Memorial Park. This would make that corner safer for cars and pedestrians, improve the appearance of the island, add space to Memorial Park, and add parking spaces to the lower village. The cost to do this would be moderate, especially compared to a roundabout. However, this was just a preliminary idea. We have not seen the final report to see whether the plan is even viable. Fran made the point at Candidate's Night that all options would be on the table. This means that if the plan were viable, it would be something we should consider. I put the emphasis on WE, because improving the downtown must be part of a shared vision of the townspeople, not something that a single person or small group wants.
Behind this issue is the larger issue of economic development. The fact is that we need to attract businesses and talented people to our town even if we just want to maintain the town as it is. We do not have enough people to pay the taxes to support necessary services and maintain the equipment, buildings, and roads as they currently exist. Previous boards have not addressed economic development, and they have let our infrastructure and equipment deteriorate. The town is in a very difficult position in terms of attracting business because of our financial situation and because our downtown area is not attractive to new business for a number of reasons. We are having a difficult time sustaining businesses.
One way to attract business is to work on both situations. Improve our financial situation by controlling spending and building reserves, and improve the appearance of the downtown. We are going to develop a Capital Improvement Program, and we should consider making the downtown area a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District so that money generated from improvements can be funneled back into improving the downtown without negatively affecting the tax rate. We need to work much more closely with other government agencies to find ways to address specific problems and obtain grant money to make the process of improving our town easier on taxpayers. Hopefully, there will be a number of ideas in the Charrette report that will help us promote economic development, but we have to examine them, determine what is feasible, find ways to finance them, and prioritize them before we implement them.
In general, unfounded rumors are detrimental to the town. We do not need leaders who discourage creative thought, who mislead voters, and who stand in the way of progress in order to promote their own political agendas. As Fran clearly stated, we need to develop a shared vision for the town. This vision must be based on the truth and on the facts. And, we need people who have integrity, vision, and the ability to bring people together to support a common purpose. We certainly hope the newly elected board will exemplify these ideals and, if they do, find support from the town.
However, there is a case to be made for reconfiguring the traffic island. One of the ideas initially proposed by the Charrette team was to close the short section of 132 by the traffic island and make the island part of Memorial Park. This would make that corner safer for cars and pedestrians, improve the appearance of the island, add space to Memorial Park, and add parking spaces to the lower village. The cost to do this would be moderate, especially compared to a roundabout. However, this was just a preliminary idea. We have not seen the final report to see whether the plan is even viable. Fran made the point at Candidate's Night that all options would be on the table. This means that if the plan were viable, it would be something we should consider. I put the emphasis on WE, because improving the downtown must be part of a shared vision of the townspeople, not something that a single person or small group wants.
Behind this issue is the larger issue of economic development. The fact is that we need to attract businesses and talented people to our town even if we just want to maintain the town as it is. We do not have enough people to pay the taxes to support necessary services and maintain the equipment, buildings, and roads as they currently exist. Previous boards have not addressed economic development, and they have let our infrastructure and equipment deteriorate. The town is in a very difficult position in terms of attracting business because of our financial situation and because our downtown area is not attractive to new business for a number of reasons. We are having a difficult time sustaining businesses.
One way to attract business is to work on both situations. Improve our financial situation by controlling spending and building reserves, and improve the appearance of the downtown. We are going to develop a Capital Improvement Program, and we should consider making the downtown area a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District so that money generated from improvements can be funneled back into improving the downtown without negatively affecting the tax rate. We need to work much more closely with other government agencies to find ways to address specific problems and obtain grant money to make the process of improving our town easier on taxpayers. Hopefully, there will be a number of ideas in the Charrette report that will help us promote economic development, but we have to examine them, determine what is feasible, find ways to finance them, and prioritize them before we implement them.
In general, unfounded rumors are detrimental to the town. We do not need leaders who discourage creative thought, who mislead voters, and who stand in the way of progress in order to promote their own political agendas. As Fran clearly stated, we need to develop a shared vision for the town. This vision must be based on the truth and on the facts. And, we need people who have integrity, vision, and the ability to bring people together to support a common purpose. We certainly hope the newly elected board will exemplify these ideals and, if they do, find support from the town.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)