Coordinator report December 6, 2012

Governor Patrick has asked the Legislature to allow him to unilaterally
reduce unrestricted local aid to cities and towns by 1 percent in the
face of a half billion dollar revenue gap. This translates to $2,200 for
Warwick except that half our local aid is PILOT (payment in lieu of
taxes) and not considered local aid by the state so we might only get
cut $1,100. To provide context, our FY13 budget is about $2M.

Every year the Selectboard is required to hold a hearing after which the
Selectboard decides whether to tax all property at the same rate or
establish different tax rates for commercial or industrial property from
residential.  Never has Warwick had a split rate and there is no
justification to do otherwise than have one rate. We are in the midst of
the tax rate setting process and our new property valuations have been
approved by the DOR. In general valuations have fallen about 5%. This
doesn't affect the amount the town can tax (the levy limit) and instead
all goes to how we allocate the tax burden. If valuations go down, the
rate goes up and total levy stays the same.

The Forest Legacy Program has indicated that it won't be able to close
the two CR (conservation restriction) projects before the end of the
year. The delay is problematic because of the potential that capital
gains tax rate will increase.  Mount Grace is willing to pre-acquire the
CRs from Manring and Jay and close by year's end. The process will be as
follows:  Mount Grace acquires the CR from Manring and Jay in return for
a promise to pay and for the value of the CRs.  Once Forest Legacy is
ready to close (early 2013), Mount Grace will assign the two CRs to the
Town of Warwick and Mount Grace will be paid for the two CRs and
mortgages will be retired with the proceeds of the state grant to the
Town.

Counsel has offered an opinion on our right to farm by-law. There two
ways to assess protections under the bylaw and both must be met. One is
whether the condition is a product of a normally accepted agricultural
practice. The other is whether the condition or output is "incidental"
to farming.  While counsel notes that there is room for interpretation,
he did answer directly the questions I posed. The pigs digging up the
neighbor's yard aren't protected. The loud machine at 3 a.m. isn't
protected. And the dog barking constantly isn't protected.

Transfer station commissioners have adopted a revised fee schedule
effective January 1, 2013 and it does away with the vehicle sticker $20
fee and introduces a 55 gallon bag priced at $9 each. A copy is attached
and will be published in the January newsletter. The budget, in balance
is in the amount of $42k, makes no demands on the property tax levy, and
anticipates appropriation of an FY12 surplus of $7k. The commissioners
will present their proposed FY14 budget to the Selectboard in early
January.

Pequoig / Adams farm solar project groundbreaking takes place next week.

The road treatment standard for winter snow and ice removal is again on
the agenda. This is a result of a complaint made to two Selectboard
members directly, by phone, to them at home in the early am.  The
complaint was that the roads ought to have been sanded on a morning when
they weren't.   Tim decided against doing so based on his observations
of conditions and on his best judgment.  This was the first storm of the
season. I don't think he made a mistake in this case.  That is not to
say that sometimes he won't get it wrong as anybody could. Ask yourself,
is there anybody else we'd rather have making these calls? Is it
appropriate for Selectboard members to be fielding these complaints? As
one resident said to me, "We hire a dog to bark we should let the dog
bark".  There isn't a problem of decisions being made based on bad data.
It is that there is sometimes a problem with Tim's interface with the
public. This is what needs work. We don't need nor can we afford to move
the bar or however one might characterize our doing more and more
sanding and maintenance to make the road surface like it is summer.  It
is the responsibility of the traveling public to drive at speeds that
are safe for conditions. Each sanding event costs us thousands of
dollars. The expense is mostly for material and fuel. There is in
addition the cost of depreciation of the vehicles and the cost of labor.
Nobody has sued a town and won because the town didn't do enough storm
maintenance. I think we would do well to remember the results of our
highway survey a few years ago. Half the town thought the standard or
level was "about right" and of those who disagreed, half thought we went
too far and the other half wanted more done.  The problem is that some
folks chafe at the idea of calling our department head with a concern or
complaint.  In every other respect Tim's professional performance is
stellar. This customer interface is the matter that needs fixing and
throwing thousands of dollars at the roads for extra treatment is not a
good way of solving the problem.