CONSERVATION COMMISSION

MINUTES OF August 2, 2007

Present: Chris Giordano (Chairperson), Judy Jervis, Sheila Johannesen, Michele Tingley

Also present: Francis Boksanke

The meeting opened at 7:30 and was televised.

Mr. Boksanke presented to the commission an overview of plans that he and his wife have for restoring to wetlands a certain area of their property on 31 Cross Rd. He had applied and was accepted for the Wetlands Reserve Program through the Natural Resources Conservation Service of the US Department of Agriculture. He’s very happy about this and was unsure of the next step. As this is the first of its type to come to the attention of the commission, it is unclear what will happen next. Mr. Boksanke submitted photographs of his property and a schedule of operations for the restoration project. There will be a one acre area restored to wetlands and 4.2 acres created for wetland wildlife habitat management.

Several questions were posed to him. He explained that he and his wife moved there for privacy, the area is beautiful, and they wanted to keep it that way. The USDA will pay for 75% of the project. The contract will last for ten years after which he has the opportunity to possibly put a conservation easement on the property. If he decides not to, he must repay the federal government all of the fees, which are quite costly. They have no intention of ever building on the property.

He invited the Commission to walk around the property anytime. He assumes that he’ll be told what the next step is and if any permits are necessary. If the Commission receives any information that needs to be shared with the Boksankes, they will do so. Mr. Boksanke will also keep in touch with any pertinent information. At this point, Mr. Boksanke left the meeting.

The minutes of May 17^th were discussed. Sheila made a motion to accept the minutes as written and Michele seconded the motion. The motion passed. The minutes of June 7^th were discussed. One amendment will be made. The notation of the joint meeting having been planned for either July 18^th or July 19^th needs to be added to the final draft. Janet explained to Chris that two drafts of the June 7^th meeting had been made. The first had been sent to the Commission, after which Chris reminded Janet of the tentative joint meeting. The July dates were added to the draft, but that updated draft was not sent to the Commission. Michele made a motion to accept the minutes as amended, Sheila seconded and Judy abstained. The motion carried. The minutes of July 19^th were discussed. Judy made a motion to accept the minutes as written and Michele seconded the motion. Sheila abstained and the motion passed.

The land survey proposals were reviewed. Chris had called three surveyors but had only heard from two. There was a general consensus to accept the Cummins offer rather than the Doucet’s. There are grants available to help with surveys and those will be researched by Judy to see what’s available. Judy made a motion to accept the Cummins offer after possible grants had been investigated. Michele seconded and the motion carried. Chris will let Cummins know that he has the project but we’ll see first if there is any grant money. Chris mentioned that obtaining grants can take time. Judy mentioned that those offering grants often want to know up front what the cost is of the project they’re helping fund.

Beavers and lowering the water table were discussed. Terra Realty will be attending the Planning Board meeting. Chris said the Selectmen will be pushing the Commission to look into the problem. Emily Brunkhurst could be contacted to make a referral for someone who can come to town and suggest solutions.

It was agreed that Beaver Solutions would be called and then we can all do a site walk, inviting the Forestry Committee, and assess the entire situation, since it’s suspected that there is more than one problem to address. With the water level dropping, heron nests may be exposed, which would necessitate putting rings around the trees to protect the nests. Sheila and Judy will take kayaks and mark the trees containing exposed heron nests. Chris will call Ms. Brunkhurst and Beaver Solutions, see what can be arranged, and get back to the rest of the Commission with possible dates for a site walk.

Chris asked for everyone’s opinion of the previous joint meeting with Wally Fries and the Forestry Committee. Sheila said that there had been a discussion of subcommittees before and that the Conservation Commission had voted to not participate in subcommittees. She also wondered how Wally got involved. Chris mentioned that Curt Springer had invited him. She again said that her time is limited and to participate on another committee would be asking too much.

Michele expressed her opinion of the joint meeting. She said since she’s been away from the commission so what she hears now is simply hearsay, but she has since seen the two committees (Conservation and Forestry) getting nowhere. She’s excited about the current projects going on but sees a definite stop with the Stewardship plan. She likes the subcommittee idea in the fact that it might afford each other a chance to understand each other. However, of the two she was to work with, one has resigned and the other she has not heard from. She has notes ready to be discussed in a subcommittee. She said that she can fully understand why someone would be frustrated if they’ve worked on a project for years and then have someone else throw roadblocks at it.

Sheila added her opinion that this is another stall tactic by the Forestry Committee. She feels that this is another way to delay any progress until voting time in March. Also she feels that the Forestry Committee doesn’t want Conservation to move forward with the Easement or the Stewardship Plan.

Judy explained her unhappiness with the joint meeting. Her biggest grievance was that the Forestry Committee has complained that they were being left out. She explained some history behind the grievance. She recalled a meeting at which Forestry, Heritage, Selectmen and she thinks Recreation were all in attendance. At this meeting everyone had a chance to be heard. She remembers that Forestry was not particularly happy with the general consensus concerning the Easement. Some of their suggestions became null and void, resulting in the decisions made that night being a mixture of what everyone else and Audubon was saying. She said one of the Forestry members walked out of the meeting and has not attended a joint meeting since. Other joint meetings regarding the Easement have been advertised and invitations have been extended to other committees to participate. Heritage has let the Conservation Commission know that they had their issues addressed already. The Selectmen as well have not been in attendance to other joint meetings. Therefore, at the July 19^th meeting, to be told by Forestry that they weren’t invited or weren’t welcome is effrontery. Judy explained that she can’t be responsible if they choose to not attend. If they don’t attend a meeting, that’s their problem, the meeting is held anyway. Forestry has been invited to sit at the large table with everyone else, and to complain that they are being shunted to the side while Conservation takes charge is without precedent. Again, if they choose to sit elsewhere, that’s their decision

Regarding the non-attendance of other boards, Judy stated that when a meeting is planned to review the Easement, (and there have been several reviews,) if no one else attends, they still have the review and move forward. Copies of the Easement have been sent to committee members and time is given for everyone to review the draft and form opinions. All of this takes time. Granted, they haven’t been moving at lightening speed, but there has been steady work on it. It’s been over two years that they’ve been working on this, and she saw all that work “going out the window” because one committee decided they had been left out.

Also regarding the Easement, Judy explained that way back, going to the beginning of the process, there was a discussion about subcommittees; i.e. dividing the workload, but the general agreement between the committees was that it would be done as a group. Therefore, to then have the idea brought up again that there would be subcommittees, Judy sees this as a stall tactic because, in her opinion, Forestry does not want Audubon as partner in the Easement, and this is what the delay is all about. Having subcommittees is going backwards, and she’s put too much work into this to go backwards.

Judy called LGC and spoke with the attorney who was answering questions that day (July 31, 2007) and asked about joint meetings: is there a chair, who presides, voting, is a quorum necessary, etc. She was told that there is nothing specific in the law about joint meetings except for zoning boards and planning boards, but rules need to be followed operating as a single unit. In other words, if it’s a joint meeting, both parties have to advertise the joint meeting, but perhaps advertise it as a “work session.” At work sessions there is no voting. At some point the parties decide on the rules, such as who takes minutes. If one party takes the minutes, then both parties in their own separate entities have to agree on the minutes that were taken. Also who runs the meeting, etc. would be agreed upon before the meeting starts.

Regarding a nonmember running the meeting, the problem with that is the nonmember has no authority to recognize anyone in the meeting. If there is conflict between the two parties and the moderator is running it, as long as both groups agreed ahead of time who would run the meeting, but that might be a good idea to run it as a work session. If voting needs to take place in a joint meeting, the parties vote as separate boards, or wait until the boards meet separately to vote. To run a joint meeting, there has to be a full quorum on each side.

Everyone was in agreement that they didn’t mind Wally being there as a moderator. Chris was asked about his opinion of the meeting. Before he expressed his opinion, he read a letter dated July 31, 2007 from Jason Holder. It reads:

Dear Danville Conservation Committee Members:

Regretfully, I will not be available for the August 2, 2007 meeting. My summer adolescent adventure program does not finish until August 4th. It has been conveyed to me that there are issues not yet ironed out amongst the committees in regards to sub committee and trail use.

It is my opinion, based upon earlier meetings and minutes that prior to the development of sub committees, we first come together and address the needs and desires of the townspeople and the future of our town. Thus, we need to come together with open minds and without hidden agendas to serve our community. This isn’t congress.

Again, I apologize for not being able to attend this meeting (sounds like congress!) and l look forward to the August 16th meeting.

Yours truly, Jason D. Holder

With that said, Chris mentioned that care should be taken in what the meetings are called. He apologized for not notifying the board about having asked Wally to moderate the meeting and for not having an agenda. He mentioned that it was Curt’s idea and Chris had agreed, knowing that Wally was a good choice. He stated that if Forestry feels they were left out, they need to specify how they were left out so that it can be resolved. The purpose of the July 19^th meeting was to resolve issues, not invite more hard feelings. There are issues still out in the open, which may be resolved if the two chairmen get together, rather than have subcommittees. This could simplify the process.

The other issues left about the Easement and Forestry Management Plan were mentioned, such as it not being as wildlife oriented as it should be, setbacks, wetlands, ATV’s, shooting range vs. hunting, etc. These issues were thought to be ancillary to the issue of the Stewardship Plan, especially in regards to the Forestry committee volunteering to do the plan, then saying they won’t do it because they either lack the expertise themselves or the funds to hire someone else. Chris said there was no reason for the Conservation Commission to not be able to resolve issues minus headbutting. It’s his opinion that if the chairs get together, it will be less cumbersome; the issues can be hashed out and then shared with the respective board members.

Chris was asked what he thought of as the list that needs reviewing, since the list produced at the July 19th meeting was a mishmash of grievances about the Easement, Stewardship and Forest Management Plan. He said he’d like to have wildlife inventory done on the town forest to see what we’re actually protecting, have that incorporated into the master plan, and see what Ms. Brunkhurst recommends as setbacks and vernal pools.

Judy mentioned a lot of that information can be found in what was presented to the group when Ms. Brunkhurst visited. Chris will contact Curt and see what he thinks. If they agree, at the next meeting, we will compile a list of what is really important, ask Forestry to do the same, Chris and Curt can review those lists and move forward. Sheila made a motion that Conservation Commission will not do subcommittees. Judy seconded and the motion carried. Michele mentioned that she’s disgusted with the amount of time it takes to get things done in this town, because, after all, this is not Washington DC and no one is vying for a senate position. This work is being done for the benefit of the citizens of Danville and the headbutting needs to stop.

Judy mentioned again that there is money for the Stewardship plan and there is some money left in the Lester Colby Fund. She wanted to remind everyone that the Lester Colby Fund paid for the Forest Management Plan to the tune of $20,000.

Michele was asked about the website updating. She had a list of ideas to include (see two attached papers.) This was reviewed and suggestions made to Michele.

Judy said she had spoken with Laura who is looking into grants. She asked about the tax map overlays, which Chris has. She will submit to the commission recommended changes to what is currently on the LChip register for Danville. Chris will email the measurements of the tax maps to Sheila so she can get a price for laminating.

Correspondence:

• Minimum Impact Expedited Application for a dredge and fill; replacing the culvert on Cotton Farm. To be filed.
• Newsletter from Tideline.
• Current budget
• Copy of survey of the town forest. Chris will keep this.
• From DES, alteration of terrain permit for Caleb Corner. To be filed.
• Dave Knight’s resignation from the Forestry Committee
• Invoice for nuts, bolts, and 12x30 sign. To be given to Forestry.
• LGC spring publishing catalog.
• NH Recreation and Conservation leaders survey from UNH.
• A copy of the 2007 NH Off Highway Recreational Vehicle Laws Digest. To be filed.
• From DES, alteration of terrain permit for Caleb Corner. To be filed.
• From UNH Estuaries Project, free technical assistance September 28^th.
• From LGC “Knowing the Territory” 2007 edition.
• Notice of a seminar about the Rinker Stormceptor.
• From DES, regarding Hoyt’s subdivision at Caleb Corner, requests for any comments on the technical aspects.
• Balance of Conservation funds
• A grants and assistance training catalog
• Notice of workshop held the night before
• Survey about ’07 watershed conference
• Memorandum from the Rockingham Planning Commission, money available for grants.
• SPACE spring newsletter
• 20^th annual municipal volunteer award nomination form
• from DES, listing conditions to allow the permit for the terrain alteration permit. To be filed.
• From NH Estuaries Project, request for proposals
• Newspaper clipping from Wally Fries about Nova Scotia’s new approaches for treating waste water
• From DES, letter dated July 10^th regarding the Hoyt alteration of terrain permit. To be filed.
• LChip status-the house and senate agreed to fund the $12 million budget

Michele made a motion to adjourn the meeting and Sheila seconded. The motion passed and the meeting adjourned at 9:45 pm.

*****Next Meeting: August 16, 2007, at 7:30pm****

THESE MINUTES ARE NOT PERMANENT RECORD AND ARE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL AT THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEETING, AT WHICH TIME, THE ABOVE MINUTES, AS CORRECTED, BECOME PERMANENT.

Minutes are prepared by Janet S. Denison, clerk