Town of Warwick Selectboard December 13, 2010 Minutes Members present: Dawn Magi, Patricia Lemon, Nick Arguimbau Others present: Town Coordinator David Young, Town Secretary Rosa Fratangelo Calcari, Planning Board Chair Ted Cady, Finance Committee and Board of Health member Dick Whiting, Todd Dexter, Highway Superintendent Tim Kilhart, Tree Warden Dana Songer, Warwick Police Officers Bruce Kilhart and Dave Shoemaker, Assessor Chris Ryan, Assessor's Clerk Beth Gilgun, Cemetery Commission member Jim Toth, Jon Calcari, Jared Robinson (Athol Daily News) I. Call to Order Chair Arguimbau called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Town Hall. II. Public Comment None. III. Minutes Lemon MOVED to accept the minutes of November 29, 2010, as printed. Magi SECONDED. Motion carried by a vote of 3-0-0. IV. Presentations and Discussions 1. Police Policy Regarding Use of Personal Vehicles -- Arguimbau thanked the Police Chief for his early submission of the Guidelines for Personal Vehicle Use by Officers (Appendix I). He asked for clarification of the exact meaning of the word "civil" within the context of the policy document. Young said that a civil infraction is one which is citable but not arrestable. Police Officer Bruce Kilhart concurred. He said that the Police Department does not to completely rule out the use of personal vehicles, as to do so might not be in the public's best interest. He noted that the use of personal vehicles is discretionary, but discouraged. Magi inquired about the possibility of using magnetic decals on personal vehicles. Officer Kilhart explained that police officers do not patrol in their personal vehicles, but if an officer observes an accident or someone breaking the law, he will stop and intervene. Upon Officer Shoemaker's arrival, Arguimbau asked him about the term "civil" as it applies to this policy. Officer Shoemaker said that by statute, all motor vehicle infractions are civil unless designated criminal. Lemon MOVED to accept the Guidelines for Personal Vehicle Use by Officers presented by Police Chief Peters, with thanks. Magi SECONDED. Motion carried by a vote of 3-0-0. Cady pointed out that the policy as printed has no date on it, and should be dated. Lemon MOVED to amend the motion to include today's date of December 13, 2010. Magi ACCEPTED. Motion carried by a vote of 3-0-0. 2. Wood Cut by the Highway Department -- Highway Superintendent Tim Kilhart wanted to make sure that documents he had given David Young (Appendix II) were included in the Board members' meeting packets; they were. Kilhart also gave the Board a copy of an Email from Cemetery Commissioner Jim Toth (Appendix III) and a list of people from 29 households who have gotten wood from Highway Department cuttings since he became Superintendent (Appendix IV). Kilhart's documents asked the Board to rescind its June 14, 2010 vote on merchantable wood, and gave reasons for this request, which included: added safety risk to personnel; the need to use an additional vehicle; time taken by picking up, loading, transporting and unloading wood would negatively impact time for other necessary jobs; additional costs for operation and maintenance of town equipment. Kilhart said that each member of his crew would rather agree to never take wood again than to pick up and move wood once it has been cut. Arguimbau suggested that a second Highway Department phone line be put in for the purpose of a having a voicemail message detailing the date, time, and place for wood cutting. Kilhart preferred posting a notice on the office door, as this would be less costly and make it less convenient for non-residents to obtain the information. Lemon asked Kilhart why the Cemetery Commission was considered the authority in the matter of wood cutting at the cemetery, and not the Selectboard. Cemetery Commission member Jim Toth had just entered the room, and told the Board that he had spoken to the Highway crew as to the disposition of the wood. Toth said that he wanted the wood picked up and taken away quickly to avoid any potential liability, and told the crew it would be on a first-come, first-served basis. He said that the Highway workers asked him if they could take the wood, and he told them that they could. Arguimbau said that a policy is needed that prohibits all town employees and their immediate families from taking personal advantage or making money on the side from the Town. Young noted separately that employees cannot make money on the side from where they work, as this creates an unfair advantage. 3. Tax Classification Hearing-- Arguimbau opened the hearing at 6:30 pm. The purpose of the public hearing was to set the tax rate. Assessor Chris Ryan recommended a single tax rate as has been the case in the past. Arguimbau suggested the possibility of changing the rate for utilities. Assessor's Clerk Beth Gilgun explained that the State does not allow utilities to be classified separately. Arguimbau closed the hearing at 6:35 pm. Lemon MOVED to accept the single tax classification for the Town for FY 11. Magi SECONDED. Motion carried by a vote of 3-0-0. 4. Wood Cut by Highway Department (continued) -- The discussion resumed with Tim Kilhart pointing out that cemetery wood-cutting differs from roadside wood, which was the subject of the June 14th policy vote. Magi explained that she has received a call from a concerned citizen that people in unmarked trucks were loading wood in the cemetery. Since Town Coordinator David Young was out of town, she checked on the situation and found three men with non-Town trucks cutting wood for the cemetery. She admitted she did not identify herself as a Selectboard member because she assumed they knew who she was. She said that she was told by the Highway crew that Jim Toth had given them permission to take the wood. She told them about the merchantable wood policy and asked them to please take the wood back to the Highway garage. She said that the men agreed to do so, but she later heard that the wood had not been brought there after all. Magi said that she did not differentiate between roadside and cemetery wood because it is all Town property. T. Kilhart, who had the day off the day the wood was cut, said that the wood taken away was ash that was essentially rotted at the core and covered in mushrooms, and therefore not really merchantable. Magi reiterated that she had told the men that the wood was to be taken back to the Highway garage and had not said it was all right to take it. He pointed out that there has yet to be a place designated for the storage of cut wood, and that there is currently no place to put it. Shoemaker asked what had precipitated the need to establish a policy for cut wood in the first place. Lemon said that there were complaints of people with inside information taking the wood before others had a fair chance to. Whiting said that historically the abutter has had the first choice and usually took the cut wood. Arguimbau suggested putting a sign on the Highway office door and posting on the Warwick "L" when wood is being cut. Young said that he did not favor backing off of the merchantable wood policy. B. Kilhart asked if the Town has the right to make policy for wood on state land. Todd Dexter read aloud a letter he had written to the Selectboard (Appendix V) detailing his reasons for rescinding the wood policy vote, and asking that the issue be brought to Town meeting floor in the Spring. Tree Warden Dana Songer noted that he was never consulted about this policy. He pointed out that no tree should be cut before the Tree warden has been notified, and explained that a tree is out of the Tree Warden's jurisdiction once it is down; a tree is within his purview only while it is standing. Cady handed out and read aloud a highly detailed written document (Appendix VI) opposing the merchantable wood policy. Young noted that wood can sit for a year and season, and a Town Meeting vote during that time can designate whether revenue from the wood would go to the Poor Fund or the general fund. Songer suggested that potential liabilities to the Town in selling wood should be considered. He said that his budget is small and limited, and that he generally deals with dead, dangerous or diseased trees that would not be marketable. Songer pointed out that Tim Kilhart will, in his duties around Town, identify dangerous trees and notify him before the Highway Department takes them down. If this practice were to cease because time is taken up elsewhere, Songer said that he would have to ask for a greater budget at Town meeting. Arguimbau said that it may be a better practice to allow people to pick up wood after it has been cut as they have in the past. Lemon MOVED that in accordance with MGL 268AS23 (Appendix VII), Town Highway employees, supervisors, and relatives be strictly enjoined from picking up roadside cordwood and that David Young be directed to consult with Ted, Tim and Nick in drafting a policy responding to the input received at tonight's meeting and that, in the meantime, the customary policy be continued that the abutter gets right of first refusal. Magi SECONDED. Arguimbau offered a Friendly Amendment to include all employees, and then withdrew the amendment. Lemon called the question. Motion carried by a vote of 3-0-0. Young, Magi and T. Kilhart will meet to find an administrative solution with regards to the Highway crew and wood taken from the cemetery. Lemon said that she would like to see the crew members apologize to Dawn Magi for insubordination. Arguimbau suggested that they may have created a situation in which they appeared to be insubordinate, and said that he favored an administrative solution. 5. Review Customer Premises Equipment Grant Documents--Young explained the documents (Appendix VIII) and pointed out changes from the previous draft. Included in the documents were the Internet Customer Premises Equipment Application, General Information Guidelines, Checklist, and Step-by-Step Procedures Handbook. He noted that there have been five requests for applications, with available funding for twenty. Cady said that because this involved the sum of $10,000.00, the Board should vote on whether or not to accept the project. Lemon MOVED to accept this as protocol for making CPE Grants. Arguimbau added the calculation of annual income; Magi corrected the term workmen's comp to read "worker's comp," added "and" between the phrases "potential conflict of interest" and "describe/attach resolution," and eliminated "bring" in Paragraph 15D of the Procedures Handbook. Lemon then added to her motion "with the Town Coordinator able to make minor administrative changes. Magi SECONDED. Motion carried by a vote of 3-0-0. 6. Selectboard Reports--Lemon said that she spoke with Senator Brewer's staff and asked for the Senator's advice regarding Chapter 40B. They got back to her and told her to draft a bill for an amendment to Chapter 40B. Lemon wanted to post a meeting so that the other Board members could review the language of her draft. The meeting was scheduled for Friday, December 17 at 10 am in Town Hall. Planning Board Chair Ted Cady will attend. 7. Coordinator Report--Young said that the Board has received an invitation to attend the swearing-in ceremony of Sheriff-elect Chris Donelan on January 5, 2011. He said that he had completed the budget worksheets and would distribute them to the departments this week. Young said that the Accountant will submit tax-rate documents this week. He also reported that IKO had denied the claim on the WCS roof failure, and said that the Town will likely have to file a lawsuit. Young was able to locate rebuilt parts for the failed dry valve at WCS, and he will be seeking quotes for installation. Young told the Board that the Town Hall roof contractor has sent a letter threatening a lawsuit. Town Counsel Fred Dupre has been notified. 8. Other Business-- Cady spoke about the need to develop a hazard mitigation plan in order to be eligible for FEMA funded grant which awards funds to mitigate against damage. The Town may be able to obtain assistance with this issue from the Franklin County Regional Planning Board. V. Adjournment At 8:43 pm, Lemon MOVED to adjourn the meeting. Arguimbau SECONDED. Motion carried by a vote of 3-0-0. Minutes taken by Rosa Fratangelo Calcari Appendix I GUIDELINES FOR PERSONAL VEHICLE USE BY OFFICERS Officers shall enforce all Federal, State, and Local laws. When electing to effect a motor vehicle stop for which the underlying infraction is civil in nature, Officers using their personal vehicles are to be aware that a heightened state of apprehension may exist on the part of the motorist being stopped, and are to take such actions as they deem suitable to lessen the anxiety of the situation. Under no circumstances is the Officer to place him/herself or the motorist at risk by taking such action. Officers shall make every effort to avoid stopping motorists with personal vehicles; however this is left to the individual Officer's discretion, based upon the totality of circumstances. Should an Officer elect to stop a motorist with his/her personal vehicle, the Officer shall make every effort to make the stop in an area that is not isolated, and shall immediately identify his/herself by showing BOTH badge and official Department Identification Card to the motorist. The Warwick Police Department is committed to "Public Safety Through Public Service." Brian C. Peters, Chief of Police 12/13/10 Warwick Police Department Appendix II Highway Superintendent Tim Kilhart's Submissions Town of Warwick Highway Department 12 Athol Rd. Warwick, MA. 01378 Phone: 978-544-6349 Fax: 978-544-6499 E-mail: HYPERLINK "mailto:highway@town.warwick.ma.us" highway@town.warwick.ma.us Dec. 6, 2010 Honorable Select Board: I am writing in regards to the wood policy you voted on June 14, 2010 and the confusion it has caused. I have had many residents come to me thinking this policy is not necessary and should be rescinded. They feel it is a waste of our time. I have many other concerns in following this policy as well. I would like to list my concerns for you to consider and then to make a final decision as to how you work like the highway department to proceed. My number one concern would be the added risk of my personnel getting injured with all the extra work required to remove and relocate the wood that is cut. Most of our cutting is done in the winter months when snow and ice are a factor. On most occasions we are going to need an extra vehicle to go out to the job site just to pick up wood. This will increase our fuel consumption and wear and tear on our vehicles. It will take us more time to accomplish our tasks. We do not have a designated site to stack the wood removed. We do not have a good place to locate the wood that would not be in the way. We do not have a legitimate site to get rid of wood that is not wanted. Your policy as voted requires us to pick up wood cut by the utility companies as well. They do not notify me when they do cutting. Many times we have to cut up trees that come down during storms and do not have time to pick them up as we are just trying to open up roads and can't spend the time to pick up the wood at the same time. Other area towns leave wood on the roadsides for people to pick up. We actually cut the wood in sizes to encourage people to pick it up to get it out of the way. I have spoken with the Tree Warden and he feels it is a waste of time and taxpayers money to be picking up the wood we cut instead of letting others take it. All of the highway workers have agreed that none of us will ever pick up wood from the roadside in the future for our personnel use. There is a lot of wood available for people who want it around town. All they have to do is to look or they can call me and ask if any is lying around town. I write in my weekly log reports and monthly newsletter what we are doing including cutting that occurs around town. There is wood on Gale Rd., Beech Hill Rd., Chase Hill Rd., Northfield Rd., Flower Hill Rd., Athol Rd., Old Winchester Rd. and in the Cemetery right now that has not been picked up. Some of this wood has been on the edge of the road for over a month. Overall, I feel it would be better to leave the wood for people to pick up. Many residents in town have benefited from the wood we have cut in the past. It would mean a lot less work for the highway department and the wood would go to good use instead of possibly being wasted. I would like to formally request that the Select Board rescind your vote on June 14, 2010 requiring the highway department to pick up all cut firewood and to allow the highway department to leave the wood on the roadsides as has been done in the past. If this is not your desire then please inform me of the Select Boards desires and we will follow them in the future with our wood cutting. Please feel free to contact me with any further questions or comments you might have in this matter. Tim Kilhart Warwick Hwy. Supt. Appendix III Letter from Cemetery Commissioner Jim Toth December 9, 2010 Warwick Selectboard Town of Warwick 12 Athol Road Warwick, MA 01378 Subject: Tree cutting/firewood issues I understand that the board will be discussing firewood removal from the cemetery by highway department personnel at your Monday night meeting. I will be unable to attend the meeting so I am sending you several comments via this letter that I urge you to take into consideration regarding the related issues. First off, the cemetery commission had requested the highway department's assistance with cutting and chipping brush and trees at the rear of the cemetery last year. The highway department was unable to assist us in this last year and we renewed our request this year. The highway department indicated that they may have the opportunity to assist us this year and the commission met with superintendent Kilhart on 10/13/2010 to discuss the proposed cutting. All agreed on the scope of work and Tim stated that the work may commence within 2-4 weeks. As it turns out the work commenced on or around 11/22 and was completed on or around 11/24. The commission is very pleased with the work and would like to take this opportunity to thank the selectboard and the highway department for their cooperation and assistance. Cooperation of this sort is what makes small town government operate at efficiencies not available to larger bureaucracies. Again thanks to everyone involved for their help. As part of the above project, I was on site once while the highway crew was working and was asked what was to be the disposition of the wood. I stated that the wood was up for grabs and the sooner it was gone the better off the commission would be since the wood represented a liability to us as opposed to an asset. There were some hardwood trees that would yield some good firewood but much of the wood was softwood or other low-grade firewood. When the crew asked if we had any problems with them taking it, I stated that we did not since the less we had to deal with later, the better. Ideally we could have scheduled the cutting for specific days and posted advance notice in the community newsletter thereby giving the entire community equal opportunity to get the wood if they wanted it and could be there when or shortly after it was cut. The actual cutting schedule wasn't known until the Friday before and was even then subject to weather and/or other potential conflicts. At that point an electronic notice could have been posted or a posting could have been made at the town hall or cemetery but these postings would not have given the community equal opportunity for the "resource". It is my understanding that some members of the highway crew may be under consideration for disciplinary action for their removal of the wood. I would strongly urge the board to take no such action unless the crew members clearly violated specific instructions not to take the wood by the selectboard, superintendent, town coordinator, or the cemetery commission. They certainly were not given any such instructions by the cemetery commission, and as I stated earlier, they were encouraged by us to take the wood. David and Tim have informed me that the selectboard had voted a new firewood policy last summer but that the specifics of the policy have not yet been written. I understand the policy is intended to include provisions for the highway department to pick up all wood that they cut and haul it to a central location. If so, I strongly urge you to reconsider this for a number of reasons. First, the trees that are adjacent to Warwick's roadways belong to the holder of the fee title to the land on which they are growing. Even though they may be within the so-called highway right-of-way, the right-of way is generally only a permanent easement for highway purposes with the underlying fee owned by the abutters. Very few, if any, of Warwick's roads are owned by the town or county in fee. To determine the fee status of the roadway, the highway layout needs to be found and reviewed. Only if the layout contains an Order of Taking with specific language taking the land in fee would the town actually own the land that the road and trees occupy. Absent that, the trees belong to the abutters as does the wood from the trees if the trees are cut down by the town for highway or safety purposes. Traditionally, the town cut the trees and left the wood in four-foot lengths for the owners to retrieve at their convenience. This tradition has worked to a degree but has its drawbacks, including the timeframe in which the owner removes the wood. The wood can be deemed a roadside safety hazard in some instances and the longer it remains, the less safe the roads are. This issue has been mitigated over the years by the practice of roadside firewood scavenging by third parties. The scavenged firewood is usually picked up soon after it is cut and thereby minimizes its safety hazard to vehicles running off the road. The town generally is not in a position to encourage this scavenging process because the wood is not the town's property. The removal of this wood unless authorized by its owner amounts to theft. Getting authorization from every abutter poses an unwieldy process. Even though many of the New England towns face the same roadside firewood issue, it is doubtful that any of the towns have come up with a workable legal solution in the form of a written policy. You may wish to consult further with counsel on this issue before proceeding with further policy formation. Sincerely, James J. Toth Appendix IV List of Warwick Residents who have Benefited from Roadside Wood The following is a list of town residents that we know have received the benefit of roadside wood in the past. This list is only those town residents that we know of picking up the wood for their personal use. It does not include the present highway workers or the people from out of town who have taken wood as well. The list is in alphabetical order and contains 29 households that have benefited from the wood that the Highway Department has cut. Richard Alden Vern and Kim Bass Alan Berman Ted Cady Brad Compton George and Alana Day Robert Day Todd and Marcia Dexter Barbara Erickson Charles and Patricia Ernest Calvin and Fredericka Fellows Mark and Jeannette Fellows Oliver and Virginia Fellows Ron and Lorraine Gates Robert and Penny Grant Ken Hubbard Pete Hubbard Howard and Evadene Keith Bruce and Nancy Kilhart Bill Lyman Ed and Sharon Matthews Anthony and Sharon Miner Brian Miner Vincent and Linda Perkins Brian and Emily Peters Francis and Suzanne Renna Kevin Smith Dana and Debora Songer John and Mary Williamson Appendix V Dexter Letter to the Selectboard December 10, 2010 Town of Warwick Honorable Board of Selectman 12 Athol Road Warwick, Massachusetts 01378 Dear Board Members, I am writing this letter with concern regarding the ongoing matter of the Town of Warwick's "Wood Cutting & Collection Policy". Since Highway Superintendent Timothy Kilhart assumed his position with the Town of Warwick drastic improvements have been made town wide. Our roads have been improved, culverts replaced winter road maintenance and brush clearing has been performed with great care. With the current policy of having to remove all usable wood for the purposes of storage so the town may sell and/or give to those in need is not feasible. It not only slows the pace of the Highway Crew's progress, it creates a cumbersome and time consuming operation. The cost of manual labor is the number one highest expense of any budget. We, as citizens of Warwick have elected our officials to oversee our tax dollars with the trust they will be spent affording the best services our budgets can afford. If labor, time and ware on town equipment were calculated while cutting, chipping, trucking, loading and unloading of the wood it would quickly prove not to be cost effective. The value of the wood will not pay for four men, fuel and equipment to maintain such a policy. Superintendent Kilhart's budget is going on three years level funded. Can we really afford to waist time and labor verses leaving the wood for the land owner? In today's economy with tight budgets on the local, state and federal levels we cannot afford to waist our precious resources on lost time and labor. As a property owner and town resident I am asking the board to rescind the vote supporting this policy or bring it to the town meeting floor in the spring for consideration. There is not enough money to be made moving and selling cord wood. There are many other concerning matters which needs the highway crew's attention and time. Please use our resources efficiently and not frivolously. Sincerely, Todd A. Dexter Appendix VI Ted Cady's Statement Opposing the Selectboard's Merchantable Wood Policy Comments to the Selectboard in Opposition to Policy of Requiring Highway Department to Deliver Cut Roadside Wood To a Central Location by Ted Cady My name is Ted Cady, living on Winchester Rd in North Warwick, and am commenting as a private individual against requiring the Highway Department to pick up cut wood alongside the road and deliver it to a central location. 1. There is a long local tradition of leaving cut roadside wood along side the road for the abutter, or others. This probably stems from the fact that most of our roads are not owned by the town but are easements on private property. Obviously the Highway Department needs to maintain the way, but the wood is growing on private property and it seems reasonable to allow the owner of the property to have the wood. The Town's rights on the easement are to maintain the road for "public convenience and necessity." The long established policy of leaving wood for the abutter to the road is clear evidence to me that public convenience and necessity are not served by having town employees pick up the firewood. Looking at this from a personal point of view as a tax payer with over 900 feet of road frontage who heats with wood, I do not want the Highway Department taking my wood to give to some other family. I pay my taxes and want any firewood cut on the town easement on my property to be left for me. If the town wants to get into the firewood business I am willing to sell it stumpage at the going rate for readily accessible wood. 2. A clear distinction should be made between wood that is on town property and wood that is on an easement the town has over private property for roads. The various town boards which manage town owned land (the Selectboard, Town Forest Committee, Conservation Commission and Cemetery Commission) have used different land management approaches. Most recently the Cemetery Commission had the Highway Department cut and chip an area cleared for future expansion with the firewood left for people to pick up. The Town Forest Committee has sold firewood and biomass stumpage to a private contractor as part of a timber sale. Some years ago the Selectboard sold gypsy moth killed oak firewood stumpage at the dump along with a light thinning of the pine. In these cases the town owned the wood in fee. Trees in the public way are called Shade Trees and are governed by Mass. General Laws Chapter 87, Sections1 through 5. Section 1 says that a shade tree is public property. Section 3 says that only the tree warden may designate a tree to be cut, not the owner of the land, but "Any person injured in his property by the action of the officers in charge of the public shade trees as to the trimming, cutting, removal or retention of any such tree, or as to the amount of the award to him for the same, may recover the damages, if any, which he has sustained from the town under chapter seventy-nine." The law clearly states that an award may be made to the property owner which may be appealed if not adequate. Neither the law nor the cases that I looked at dealt with the disposition of the wood after it had been cut. 3. In winter when the wood cutting is done, I can tell you from personal experience, it is exhausting carrying wood in knee deep snow to the edge of the road. I would not feel safe operating a chain saw after a half day of carrying wood through deep, compacted snow throw by the snow plow well off the road and over the snow bank at the side of the road. The work is especially difficult because the snow alongside the roads is much deeper than in the woods because of snow plowing. 4. The wood that goes over a bank is extremely difficult to carry uphill in deep snow. 5. The policy should be uniformly applied to all cut wood, but most people will not burn soft woods. There are cut to length pine and hemlock that are very close to the road but have not been picked up in over a year. As a practical matter it makes little sense to waste time bringing in wood that no one will accept when better wood is available. In some areas almost all of the wood cut is softwoods. However, it should be noted that when folks get desperate for wood even the softwood is picked up. 6. Often, especially after storms, the wood is larger than a man can carry. When this wood is on level ground it is easy to pick up with the front loader, but if it is over the bank it is would be quite time consuming to yard it up to the road for loading. 7. During an emergency clean up it is not practical to distract the Highway Crew from its primary mission of opening roads by requiring it to pick up the wood. At the same time volunteers are also working to open roads which they might be less willing to do if they had to bring the wood to a central location. If wood is left at the side of the road there should be no expectation that the Highway Department will be able to pick it up at a later time. Often during these emergencies day-job-work is called off so there are a lot of people with time on their hands who will be out looking to help and to pick up wood. 8. Wood that is on the other side of a guardrail, which usually means it is also downhill from the road, is difficult to bring to the roadside. 9. Warwick does not have a policy of killing roadside poison ivy. Many times trees that must be cut, or storm damage that must be cleaned up, involves trees with poison ivy growing on them. All members of the Highway Dept. get poison ivy. It is prudent to avoid handling trees with poison ivy vines. The worse case of poison ivy I ever got was from the stems of poison ivy handled when leaves where off. In the case of cleaning up storm damage when snow is not on the ground, the amount of walking in roadside areas of poison ivy should be minimized, which suggests that in these cases the wood should be left at the side of the road. (It does get picked up either by folks who are immune to poison ivy or who do not carefully assess the situation.) 10. The proposed policy of bringing all wood to a central location was based on response to a particular situation that no longer exists, so there is no need for the policy. 11. The policy does not make economic sense, and is a diversion of personnel from more important and productive work. 12. There are many cases of huge dead and rotten trees, such as sugar maples, that are a hazard and must be cut for public safety. The wood on the bole of the tree has old maple taps up about 4 or 5 feet from the base which a prudent woodsman would avoid cutting. The large diameter of the branches and leaders and the twisting grain makes the wood extremely difficult to split. Large portions of the tree are too rotten to be used as firewood, and in some cases should not be taken into the home because of the danger of carpenter ants. There should be no thought about bringing these trees to a central location to be used as firewood. 13. It is not clear how the wood will be handled at the central storage location. Who will cut, split and deliver the wood? Will that be contracted out to a private operator? Will townspeople be allowed under some scheme to cut what they need? Will the Highway Dept process and deliver it? No one wants the softwood, but on some roads that is what will be produced. How will the mix between softwoods and hardwoods be handled? If people have their choice, the town will end up with a huge pile of softwood firewood that will cost the town money to get rid of. Any policy adopted by the Selectboard should be complete which would include a detailed policy of how the collected wood would be disposed of, as well as detailed instructions to guide the Highway Department as to when it must pick up the wood and when it does not need to (such as emergency situations, when called out at night, etc.), steep bank policy, poison ivy policy, deep snow policy, species policy, diameter limit as to what is too big to carry out, etc. It is strongly recommended that the policy be written, if there is going to be a policy. I was present at one of the Selectboard meetings concerning roadside wood cutting policy and seem to recall that it was to be a written policy. In a town where many people heat with wood roadside firewood is a hot topic and there have to be clear reasons why the Highway Dept does or does not take a particular piece of wood. 14. There appears to be no effort whatsoever directed to how the wood will be processed and distributed after it is dumped in a central location. I heard someone say that the wood will go to needy people, but the neediest people who do not have firewood usually do not have a chainsaw and pickup truck to move the wood. Cutting up a jumbled truck load of dumped wood is fairly dangerous work and should not be attempted by inexperienced cutters. The neediest people can get fuel assistance in the form of heating oil or firewood. Care should be taken to dump the wood where it will not pick up sand (which dulls a chainsaw very quickly). Two options to consider to improve efficiency, reduce costs and probably increase fairness might be to directly deliver the wood to people on a list and they have to take the wood as it is produced - one load per household starting at the top of the list, a second option would to have an agreement with someone to came along and pick up all the firewood and sell it at a reduced price within Warwick. An option that is a modification of one suggested during the Natural Heritage Process would be to bring everything back to the central area and chip it into a huge pile and then sell the pile to a biomass plant, or chip everything that is cut and blow the chips into a trailer to go to a biomass plant. I mention these only to broaden your mental horizons as to options for disposing of the wood. Given all the hassle about roadside fuel wood, the person in charge should probably be outside the Selectboard-Highway Dept. chain of command, perhaps a group like the Women's Guild, or the Tree Warden if local firewood is involved. This will allow the Selectboard to stand back and adjudicate any kinks that develop in the system. 15. I have heard that the Selectboard has concerns about who is allowed to take the cut firewood from the side of the road. If this is a concern then a more limited written policy covering this issue might suffice. It may be a delicate issue, but dealing with it seems preferable to developing a policy that is counter productive to our rural traditions while significantly reducing Highway Department productivity, and reducing the amount of firewood available from this activity. 16. Currently the Highway Dept does a good job of leaving firewood sized material for pickup along side the roads. If this new policy were adopted and I was running the chipper, I would chip a lot of the material that currently is left as fuelwood to help local folks save on their oil bill. It is much easier to feed it into a chipper than to load it into a truck and bring it back to a central yard. This is opposite to the way we should be going. 17. Private enterprise in Warwick is doing a good job of supplying firewood on the open market. There is no pressing need for the Highway Department to get into the firewood selling business and compete with local businesses. 18. If the Selectboard has its heart set on this policy, I suggest that alternative strategies be considered. For example, the Selectboard could select, though whatever process it feels comfortable with, a private contractor who would pick up the wood cut by the Highway Dept. This moves the firewood pick-up operation into the private sector, which is better equipped to deal with it, eliminates the very expensive collection of wood by the Highway Department, and solves the problem of the town having to deal with the safe guarding of its firewood supply and the disposition of the wood from where ever it is stored. 19. The Selectboard and Planning Board jointly chair a committee which is looking at tree cutting along town roads in great detail and the committee has been meeting more than once a month since our joint meeting in March and has been involved with one joint hearing as voted by the Selectboard on cutting on Hockanum Road. Co-chair of the Committee is the Chair of the Selectboard. In addition, Minutes of the meetings and draft policy documents go to the Town Coordinator. The Highway Department and Tree Warden are part (although not always happy about it) of the process of developing the policy. It seems odd to me that the Selectboard has ignored its own committee formed to guide policy in cutting by the Highway Department as it decides what policy to have about cut wood. 20. I have read that town counsel recommends that wood cut on the side of the road be declared surplus property and be brought into a central location. In more urban towns and cities that have a tree department with crane trucks, trucks for hauling logs and trucks for hauling chips this is often done. Everything is brought into a central yard. In a town as rural as Warwick this is not an optimum solution. As an example it is much easier and cheaper to fell big, rotten, roadside trees into the woods where the tree will continue to rot and provide habitat. Because most of our roadsides are wooded it is appropriate to side-cast wood chips into the woods. It is not appropriate to just declare hardwood firewood surplus property, it seems to me that all the trees are surplus property or none of them are and if the tree is surplus property that means the entire tree. Some larger towns require the private contractor tree crews that do cutting to maintain the power lines to bring all wood they cut and chips they produce to a central location. Our tree warden can get extra work done by the line maintenance crews by not requiring this. Currently folks who get a driveway permit are not required to bring the woody vegetation they cut along the public way for access to the public way to a central location, but if all trees are surplus property they should do that. Our highway department currently side-casts the chips into the woods, but these chips are worth $32 a ton delivered to Pinetree in Westminster, MA and should be considered surplus property as well. Our Highway Department has its trucks set up for snow plowing, and not for hauling chips and logs so probably equipment would have to be hired to do this. An additional consideration is that landowners have given the Highway Department the right to cut on their land for roadside maintenance. If we have a policy of bringing all roadside wood to a central location, then the wood cut on private property as part of roadside maintenance should also be brought to that central location, which brings up a whole set of issues. A major reason for bringing wood in urban areas to a central location is because the citizens of the community do not want the wood, there is no convenient place for the highway department to side cast chips and few people heat with wood. The situation is totally different in Warwick, and this urban solution is not appropriate for our town. 21. A crew of 3 or 4 men produces a lot of wood. I picked up 7 cords of wood cut by 3 men of the town crew on Flower Hill Road on the section from Buzzell Place Rd to Route 78, and I was not the only one picking up wood. In this case the Highway Dept. cut about 10 cords in about 3 or 4 days. Of course the production rate varies with roadside conditions and the amount of time the crew spends cutting wood varies, but it might be that the Highway Dept cuts about 100 to 200 cords per year not counting the chipped wood. 22. I have been told if more than 200 cubic yards (equal to about 7 or 8 cords) of woody material is going to be stored then a permit is required from DEP. I have not confirmed that information. 23. Most towns give the Tree Warden a key to the wood dump to facilitate dumping by tree surgery companies and power line clearing crews. 24. Many towns open their tree dump to dumping of brush, leaves and other woody material by residents with a dump sticker and for a fee usually during normal transfer station hours. SUMMARY and RECOMMENDATION There is a small army of people who pick up firewood alongside the road that has been laid down by the Highway Department. This has significantly benefited the homeowners by saving them heating oil costs which is a big deal in one of the poorest towns in Massachusetts. At the same time it has about doubled the roadside cutting productivity of the Highway Dept. There is a code of ethics involved with picking up this wood which is known by this small army of people so the citizen pickup operation goes quite smoothly. Thousands of cords have been picked up this way without incident for as long as I can remember. It is a wonderful Warwick tradition, which should be kept. If the Selectboard feels that Highway Department employees, their household members, and their relatives should be barred from picking up wood after working hours than make that a rule. All cut wood gets picked up, so that small army is effective. If the Selectboard wants to ensure that everyone has equal opportunity to get roadside wood then the availability of roadside cut wood could be published on the Warwick L and Warwick.org. This concern suggests that the Selectboard has not been fully briefed on the effectiveness of the communication net of this underground wood heat network. Bringing all wood and wood chips to a central location adds significantly to costs and most likely will become more of a management headache than you have imagined. In urban areas these storage yards are quite large usually measured in acres, because a lot of different types of wood products are produced that need to be stored separately and usually are accumulated until there is enough to justify hiring a tub grinder to process the junk wood. I encourage the Selectboard to better understand and support this Warwick tradition. Tweak it to fix things you think are wrong, but do not throw it out until you fully understand it. Arguimbau Cc: Ed Hawes , Timothy Kilhart , Ted Cady Subject: Re: Firewood issues Reply-To: Ted Cady To All, I have a minor comment to add to the Cemetery Commissioner's Letter. I met with Tim Kilhart as the Cemetery was being cut to discuss in detail his comments on a draft of the Scenic Roads Cutting Policy. At that time he mentioned that after our meeting he was headed for the cemetery to check on cutting. He also told me there was wood on the ground there that townspeople could pick up. I mentioned this to Brad Compton and believe that he went to the cemetery. My point here is that there was no secret deal or exclusive agreement and that other residents of the town took wood from the cemetery. Ted Cady Appendix VII MGL 268AS23 PART IV: CRIMES, PUNISHMENTS AND PROCEEDINGS IN CRIMINAL CASES(Chapters 263 through 280) TITLE I: CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS CHAPTER 268A: CONDUCT OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES Section 23: Supplemental provisions; standards of conduct ... [ Clause (3) of subsection (b) effective until September 29, 2009. For text effective September 29, 2009, see below.] (3) act in a manner which would cause a reasonable person, having knowledge of the relevant circumstances, to conclude that any person can improperly influence or unduly enjoy his favor in the performance of his official duties, or that he is likely to act or fail to act as a result of kinship, rank, position or undue influence of any party or person. ... --http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/Chapter268 /Section 20 Appendix VIII Customer Premises Equipment Grant Documents TOWN OF WARWICK CUSTOMER PREMISES INTERNET EQUIPMENT PROGRAM GENERAL INFORMATION GUIDELINES Introduction - The Community Development Block Grant Customer Premises Internet Equipment Program will provide the loan of Town owned Internet radio modems to eligible Warwick primary residences. The funding source is Program Income derived from repayment of other HUD / DHCD grant activities to the Town. Financial Mechanisms - The total amount of funding available for this program is $10,000. We expect to serve at least twenty eligible households. When the money is expended the program is over. The Selectboard will keep a waiting list in case some equipment is returned, purchased, or we get additional grants. Eligibility - This assistance is for primary residences (not second homes) whose households are income eligible. Applicants must meet the current CDBG income guidelines that apply to Warwick per the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD). Current CDBG income guidelines are as follows: # In Household Gross Annual Income 1 $43,450.00 2 $49,700.00 3 $55,900.00 4 $62,100.00 5 $67,050.00 6 $72,050.00 7 $77,000.00 8 $81,950.00 A household for purposes of this grant activity is defined as those persons living under one roof sharing kitchen and bath facilities. Other Requirements - As with Warwick Broadband's CPE time payment / financing program, the applicant's local / Town taxes must be current. Assistance doesn't apply to households who already have paid $500 connection charge. Once awarded the customer premises equipment (CPE) is property of the town on permanent loan as long as a subscriber household is paying for the service and living in Warwick. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) rules and regulations apply. Assistance applies to new customers except that if a customer is on a payment plan and are demonstrated to be income eligible only the current remaining balance is available for grant assistance and the equipment becomes the property of the town if the grant pays for the remaining balance owed on equipment Participant must pay the monthly charge as a condition of having the CPE. Any participant chronically late in payment forfeits their equipment which will be relocated to the next eligible family on the list. Decision Criteria - There will be an application period. Award decisions will be based upon a priority system in which eligible households with students in school or employment-related telecommunications needs have the highest priority and the lowest income households within that group would have the highest priority. The broadband committee will establish priority once eligibility is established. If all available funds are not awarded in the first cycle and new application period will be opened. The first application period will begin Dec. 1, 2010 and end Dec. 31, 2010 and continue monthly until funding is exhausted. The Selectboard will decide any disputes. Applications can not be reviewed until completed. Monthly service includes option of "lite" service priced at $30 / month with slower throughput than the standard $50 plan. (This 'lite" service when offered is available to any Warwick Broadband Service subscriber). Broadband Committee will maintain a database to keep track of the town owned equipment loaned under the grant. The Town will do the income eligibility verification using CDBG standard application procedures which may include an interview.