Sep 9

9/9/2008

JOINT MEETING TRUSTEE & SELECTBOARD
WORK SESSION MEETING
September 9th, 2008

Trustees present: Gordon Smith, Walter Pomroy, Ellis O’Hear, Will Jennison. Selectboard present: Eric Osgood, Howard Romero, Brad Reed
Others present: Duncan Hastings, Steve Towne, Steve Smith, Art Sanborn, LEDC and Don Foote
Gordon and Eric called the meeting to order at 4:00 PM at the municipal complex on RR St.
Eric asked Duncan to advise the Selectboard about the request of the Laraway School to rent office space at the lower building. Duncan told the Board that they wanted to use the office space in the building for “one on one’ work with students and other space needs they had. They had looked at the space and thought it would meet their needs. Duncan had suggested they make an offer of rent, which they had done. The offer was $300.00 per month and they would replace the carpet. The offer had been discussed with the Trustees last night, who were generally in favor but had asked Duncan to do research into costs of heating the building and other utility expense. Duncan reported that we spent $4200.00 last year which would probably translate to $6000.00 this year. Duncan had also researched going rates for office space and found they ranged from $8/sq ft/yr to $12/sq ft/yr which did not include utilities. The $300.00 per month figure therefore falls short of even the lowest base rates. There was general consensus that getting some revenue would help offset heating costs. It was decided to seek $500.00/mo including utilities and see if they would agree to that figure.
Duncan then handed out a memo to try and focus the discussion on the long and short term plans for the Talc Mill property jointly owned by the town and village. The list included the following issues to be addressed by the Boards and the actions that were taken:
Long Term
1) Development for commercial industrial or some other economic enhancement/ job creation purposes.
2) Development of housing in appropriate locations.
3) Development as a comprehensive multi use Recreation resource (rail trail amenities, snowmobiling, canoeing, biking hiking, etc.)
4) Maintain for natural resource production and maintenance (sugarbush, timber stand management, wildlife habitat, etc)
With regard to the Long Term issues, there was general consensus that the portion of land north of the railroad tracks should be retained, at least for now, for possible future use as industrial/commercial space and to provide access for rail trail or other recreational purposes as may be needed. The balance of land that was not needed that, or for municipal purposes should be sold and the purchaser could develop it as they saw fit.

Short Term
1) What portions of the land need to be retained for municipal purposes? There was general consensus that the lower building should be retained as well as additional land retained to provide necessary buffers and future use to the west of the 15 acre parcel originally purchased by the town and village

2) Permanent location of salt and sand storage for the town? There was general consensus that the permanent location of salt and sand storage for the town should not be on the flat “pad” area where it is currently located as this has the most promise for other economic development uses.
a) Could these be located in the gravel pit if enough space could be made? There was not much discussion on this question.
b) Could the old structure behind the town garage be re-habed for salt/sand storage? There was not consensus on this issue, but it was decided that the Selectboard could further investigate options for the structure and if no use was feasible, then efforts should be made to have the structure removed.
c) If not should something be done with this structure? See above.
d) Could the salt/sand storage be located at the lower building? This did not seem viable as the Water and Light Department is going to move to the lower building. Steve Smith stated the state had been asked about locating sand and salt storage area there in the past and had said no due to proximity to the river.
3) Relocation of Water & Light facilities (upper building to lower building)? Both Boards voted to have the Water & Light Dept move it’s operations for the current building to the lower building and to have the current building become the joint “cold storage” building.
4) Use of Mill House “office” building? There was not consensus on long term plans for this building but short term it was agreed to retain it and re-evaluate after Steve Towne no longer needs it for office space.
5) Relocation of Village pole pile? The pole pile will likely be relocated to the lower building in conjunction with the move.
6) Location for rail trail next to town garage (removal of “lab building”)? Steve Smith stated that he had discussed removal of this building with VTRANS and they told him we owned it and could remove it. He would like to see it removed and the rail trail moved to the north and further away from the town garage. Duncan stated that such a plan would have to be brought to the boards and VAST would have to agree as well. More work needed on this.
7) Should the town try to be the “developer” of the land that is not retained (Commercial Park for example)? There was not consensus on this issue. Art Sanborn offered some thoughts about municipally owned industrial parks and the fact that there were none in Lamoille County (the only county that does not). There would be some advantages in his opinion. Walter stated it should be sold to someone that wanted to develop it and let him pay the costs. Duncan stated that ownership preserves control of uses. Don Foote stated that, at a minimum, the town/village should consider doing perc tests on the property they would want to sell as this would add a lot of value to the land and garner a higher selling price.
8) Should there be reservations of rights or deed restrictions placed on the sale of land that is not retained? (snowmobile trails, sewer and water easements, etc) This was not discussed in depth. There was some discussion of the fact there is only one “approved” crossing of the rail trail to access the southern portion of land and the fact the snowmobile trail crosses the property.
Art Sanborn mentioned to Lea that doing some of the work necessary to sell the property, such as surveys, perc tests, etc might well qualify for an Act 200 grant. Lea stated we had received one for the study and that would make a good follow up application.

Art asked about the recreation field and if anyone had considered that as a location for industrial/commercial space. Duncan stated that that had been discussed a little, but the town did not own the land, they just had a lease on it. A multi national corporation, Rio Tinto, had recently purchased the property from Luzenac and they had hired a title searcher to come find out what they owned. Art suggested this might be an opportunity to contact them and see if they would gift it to the town. Duncan stated that was an excellent idea and would pursue it. The recreation field has all village service available on site and would make an excellent space. Relocating the recreation fields could be done with grant money from Land Water Conservation Fund.

Duncan stated that he forget to mention the VSC tax appeal at the Trustees’ meeting last night and asked the Trustees if they wanted to participate in the appeal. He also stated according to the town Attorney, it was uncertain whether or not could participate. If they could, Doug Molde could not represent either the village or the VSC as he did work for both of them. Dave Barra, the Town Attorney would be willing to represent the village if it could be done.
Gordy stated that the village had a lot to lose if the case went against the town and thought the village should participate. Will thought we should participate but did not want to do so on a 50/50 basis. Walter thought the basis should be closer to 80/20 town village, based on tax dollars at risk. Regardless of the cost share there was general consensus that participation in the suit was reasonable.
Duncan stated that maybe it was better to wait and find out if the village could participate and then decide; it was also possible it might be settled out of court and the question would be moot. No action taken.

Respectfully Submitted by,
Duncan Hastings, Administrator

Tags: