Quite the interesting meeting last night for the town council. Our first meeting after our organizational meeting was nothing short of bizzare. It started off well with a new tradition from our council chairman to select someone from the audience to start everyone off with the pledge of alliegence. Then we went to the much anticiapted public interviews of potential board appointments.
The conservation commission was first up- Interviewing 4 candidiates took about 45-50 minutes in which candidiates were allowed to say why they were interested in the appointment. Here we had 2 members with multiple years experience and 4 new people that wanted a seat in this important board. I will say that the candidates all impressed me with their backrounds and will to serve.
One experienced member Bill Hoyt did not make the final cut however I did support him in his effort to continue being an active member. I would like to thank Bill for all of his hard work and effort for the town of Derry and hope that he continues to volunteer his time! Thanks Bill
Next up was Planning Board. After another round of 30-45 minutes each candidiate spoke and again I was impressed with everyone. The way it all finalized though was not what I had in mind. Mr Nelson ( whom with very strong experience) only got the one year seat. I would of recommended the 3 year seat. Ginny Roach got a 3 year seat and Dave Granese got a three year seat. Now I do like Mr Granese, however I would of keep him on as an alternate with one year under his belt. I believe Mr Tripp should of gotten a chance at a regular seat as he has been waiting for 3 years as an alternate.
Zoning Board was my biggest surprise as the council decided to give a 3 year seat to a one year alternate vs re-appointing a very good member who has experience. I was truly shocked that Mr Virr did not get re-appointed
Then we had Public hearings on Yield signs at peabody road annex
We tabled a request to release Public Servatude on a paper road because I wanted to make sure the abbuter ( whom was in Fla) knew exactly what he was in for. We had an e-mailed copy from the neighbor but no clear indication of the possible ramifactions and I also wanted a notarized sealed copy signed by these people so that the town is protected.
Last we spoke of the congrgal care and assisted living to be added to allowed uses in the OMD district. A very small district that is close by to the hospital. Most in the public spoke in favor and a very small amount against. We will finalize our voting at the next regular meeting in two weeks
All in all we spent about 4 1/2 hours in session, and got little done.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I just happen to watch part of the meeting and I don't know any of the people who were interviewed personally. Based only the interview, however, Mr. Hoyt was robbed!!! His knowledge and passion for Conservation was glowing.
It also occurred to me that this process (public interviews on TV)will eliminte a vast amount of very capable people. Watch next year to see less people coming forward.
Who's idea was this process?
6:02,
This process, which in the past was done one person at a time and in council chambers is now done in public because of RSA 91A. You see, some people are paranoid that the big old evil goverment is hiding stuff from you and so some councilors wanted the process to happen in public.
You saw the fluff questions:
"do you support opening Manning street" and "do you like soccer fields"
The problem with this process is that the first interviewed person gets the questions fresh while all the other candidates get a chance to sit back and think of a better response. ( this is unfair to the candidates)
Also then comes the nervousness factor- people get nervous being interviewed in front of 7 councilors and a room of 35 people.
I was actually a part of this process and if I had known what it would be like, I probably would not have sought the position. As it was I almost withdrew when it became apparent that some members of the council (not yourself) were more interested in political grandstanding than in what most of the candidates brought to the table.
I'm all for bringing in new blood, but not at the expense of people with experience who are dedicated and doing a good job.
And while I would usually be in favor of having this process in public, it's quite apparent there are those on the council who just enjoy putting on a show for the camera's.
In the end, I think this process will cause the experienced people who may want to be re-appointed to rethink if they really want to be a political football for some members of the council and it will also discourage new people who just have an interest in giving back to the town, but have no stomach for town politics.
Does anyone really think those two Councilors want tranparency?!
These are the same people who recently met with the President of the Police Union without Council Authority and without even the courtesy of prior notification to the Town Administrator.
What did they talk about? Perhaps the latest Union Contract? Perhaps the recent retirements....who really knows.
How are we going to recruit a top-notched permenent Town Administrator when the last one left for LESS money and the current one is being given daily marching orders from the two via emails and is otherwise being undermined by circumventing the chain of command?
No, sadly this writer thinks we will end up with a short term martyr --- overpaid for his/her skills --- taking it for the money.
FYI, meeting the President of the Police Union by individual Councilors violates at least one and probably three Council Rules. It's on the town website --- Council tab, then "Rules Town Council" --- read the section on "ethics". Will the Council "police"? Doubtful, very doubtful.
Another irony is that one of these Councilors has pushed for an Ethics Commission. Can she spell "hipaukrasee"?
I wouldn't say that you got little done. Making sure the board positions are filled is an important responsibility.
I generally like having more openess in government. It also helps those members of the public watching the meetings know a little bit more about the applicants. I'm positive that I want public interviews for elected positions being temporilly filled until the next election. I'm not as sure about appointed positions on boards. Brian, did the public interviews cause you to change your thinking or reinforce your first impressions of how you were going to vote? I do know that anyone willing to interview in public for a volunteer position should be commended.
I also had questions on the congregal care/assisted living rezoning issue. Would the area being rezoned be large enough for additional facilities if this company (or any other) wanted to build them? I'm hoping it would be and the town isn't doing a bit of spot zoning. I wholeheartedly support bringing these faciltities into town, especially around Parkland. It's excellent public policy - provides needed support for the elderly, increases our tax base, and makes for good neighbors around residential areas. I just think that the Council should consider long-term and not just this company wanting to put the facility in now. I'm also not a fan of spot zoning because I've seen abuses in other communities.
Tom Seidell
61 Scobie Pond Road
Tom,
Thanks for your comments. On the congregal care/assist living section it is iimportant to note that this was not a re-zoning issue but it was adding an allowable use into the OMB district already established. Therefore it could not be considered "spot-zoning". It just so happened that when this company went to Zoning board for a varience because there were no zones in town that specifically allowed these as a use.
We as town need to re-look at our zoning and get them updated as far as uses are concerned.
Post a Comment