Capital Improvement Committee

City of Laconia Planning Board Capital Improvement Sub-Committee Notice of Public Hearing Thursday, November 8 - 6:30 PM Conference Room 200A 11/8/2018 - Minutes 1. CALL TO ORDER T Chair: P. Brunette: Calls the meeting to order at 6:30 PM 2. ROLL CALL F R. Mora: Conducts roll call with the following present: Dean Anson, Charlie St. Clair, Bob Hamel, and Peter Brunette. Michael Foote and Bruce Cheney arrived at 6:32 PM A 3. RECORDING SECRETARY Robert Mora, Zoning Technician 4. STAFF IN ATTENDANCE Dean Trefethen, Planning Director R 5. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS Chair: P. Brunette: Asks if everyone had a chance to review minutes and if changes were requested. No Changes were requested. D Chair: P. Brunette: States the minutes will be considered accepted as presented. 6. REVIEW OF RANKINGS 6.I. CIP Scores Sheets (PDF) D. Trefethen: Explains that the scores were all compiled and have been ranked according to how high they were scored by the board members. Also that two board members did not submit scores. Continues on explaining that each item is scored by year and then only FY19 is presented to the Planning Board. C. St. Clair: Asks about when this is presented to City Council how many are presented and or approved? B. Hamel: Explains process in regard to how City Council approves items that are presented for CIP. Also that perhaps in the future we should move items so that they are not grouped together for example items that are funded by Enterprise Funds should not be grouped with other items that are not Enterprise Fund. Improvements such as Water Projects and Sewer projects are mostly self-funding and should not be grouped with items that are not. Board Discussion: Board discusses where the rankings fell and the costs of the projects also that the rankings are similar to last year. Also that City Council often picks items to fund that are not always at the top and the City Manager also voices input. Continues on that the cost of the project should not weight on the value of the score that is provided. B. Cheney: Explains that he did not submit a score sheet. Also that he feels the process is flawed and could be improved upon. That he would like more information on what is being submitted as a proposal  rankings are similar to last year. Also that City Council often picks items to fund that are not always at the top and the City Manager also voices input. Continues on that the cost of the project should not weight on the value of the score that is provided. B. Cheney: Explains that he did not submit a score sheet. Also that he feels the process is flawed and could be improved upon. That he would like more information on what is being submitted as a proposal from each of the departments. Board Discussion: Discusses purposes of the CIP Committee. That the board should be asking questions to try to gather all of the facts for these projects. Also discuss the bid process on how the City would purchase or pay for upgrades and award contracts. That departments during their presentations should emphasize more of what is needed and to provide time frames and more rationale to why they need these items. Continuing on board discusses rating for Fire Safety which affects Homeowners insurance rates in the municipality when ratings are lower or higher. T P. Brunette: Explains that he thinks that members of the board should compile their thoughts on changes that should be made on this process so that another meeting can be held and propose changes to the Planning Board to help improve this process. F Board: Explains that they should not hold the process up this year for this process however carry forward with the process this year and be prepared to make changes next year so that the process starts fresh. Also that perhaps items that are already funded they should not be showing. Board discusses tax cap and Consumer Price Index. A D. Trefethen: Explains Enterprise Funds, Grants, and Reserve Funds. That the dollar value of an item is the driving factor that forces the item to be added to the Capital Improvement Program. Also that there are laws that require how items over a certain dollar amount need to be recognized. Also recommends to the board that they we could remove the water department and Sewer fund items from the list and make them separate so they would be graded separately. Which would provide a different R view to future boards with CIP Budgets, also funding sources could be highlighted more. Though at the beginning the funding is shown and as the process continues the funding codes begin to fall off. B. Hamel: Explains that he believes that the purpose or spirit of this committee to show what they view as priorities that the City needs fund as opposed to the City Manager or City Council just deciding to fund what they view as important, adding an extra layer of transparency to the process. D Board: Discusses that they would like to make improvements to the process. P. Brunette: Explains that he would like to make a motion and have it shown under Other Business. Makes a motion for board members and the public to submit proposed changes to the Planning Board and that the CIP Committee will schedule a meeting at a future date to discuss proposed changes. Board: Continues discussion on that the process should be updated. B. Hamel: Motions to have Dean pull Water and Sewer off the proposal and put them on a separate page for the presentation to the Planning Board and to City Council. Board: Discusses that presentations were more abbreviated this year. Also compares State Capital Improvement Plan. P. Brunette: Asks Dean if he can put an Agenda Item on the Planning Board Agenda to Review the CIP Process. B. Hamel: Motions to send the CIP Scores to Planning Board with the amendments proposed by Dean Trefethen. C. St. Clair: Second motion. All voted in favor 7-0 7. OTHER BUSINESS  C. St. Clair: Second motion. All voted in favor 7-0 7. OTHER BUSINESS P. Brunette: Recommends that Dean add an agenda item to the Planning Board to review the CIP Process and that the CIP Committee could schedule a meeting at a future date to discuss proposed changes. 8. ADJOURNMENT M. Foote: Motions to adjourn at 7:21 PM T C. St. Clair: Seconds motion. All voted in favor 6-0 to adjourn at 7:21 PM Minutes respectfully submitted by: Robert Mora, Zoning Technician AF D R