Meeting Join URL: https://litchfield.webex.com/meet/TownHall

Join by phone:(US toll) +1 415-655-0001 (access code: 26336190341)

6:00 pm  Non-Public Session

 RSA 91-A:3, II (a) The dismissal, promotion, or compensation of any public employee or the  disciplining of such employee, or the investigation of any charges against him or her, unless the  employee affected (1) has a right to a public meeting, and (2) requests that the meeting be open,  in which case the request shall be granted. 

1. GMS Project Presentation - Andrew Cutter

4. Engineering Review and Escrows

Pros

• Cost recovery: Applicants pay for reasonable engineering review costs attributable to their projects rather than municipal taxpayers.

• Independent technical expertise: The Planning Board can obtain professional review of drainage, stormwater, traffic, utilities, road design, grading, and other engineering issues.

• Better protection for the Town: Qualified engineers can identify deficiencies and technical risks before plans are approved.

• More defensible decisions: Written engineering reports help the Board establish a documented technical basis for conditions of approval or denial.

• Consistent standards: A formal escrow procedure helps ensure applicants are treated similarly.

• Improved project tracking: Deposits, invoices, review comments, and outstanding deficiencies can be tracked throughout the application process.

• Reduced budget uncertainty: The Town is less likely to absorb unbudgeted, project-specific consulting costs.

Cons

• Administrative workload: Staff must establish accounts, track deposits, review invoices, reconcile balances, and process refunds.

• Applicant objections: Developers may view escrow deposits as an added upfront cost, particularly for small projects.

• Potential delays: Reviews can stall if deposits are inadequate, invoices are disputed, or additional funds are needed.

• Cost disputes: Applicants may challenge the amount of work performed, the hourly rates charged, or whether an expense was necessary.

• Perception of bias: If the Town's engineer reviews work performed by another consultant, applicants may question the process or impartiality.

• Accounting and legal risks: Poorly defined procedures can create problems with fund custody, interest, refunds, and authorization of payments.

• Risk of overreach: An escrow should not become an unlimited source of funding for general municipal engineering or unrelated projects.

Require escrow when justified. The Planning Board determines whether an application needs independent engineering review based on its complexity and potential impacts.

Estimate costs before work begins. The Town Engineer or other qualified consultant provides an anticipated scope of work and estimated review costs.

Collect an initial deposit. Establish the amount based on the anticipated work, with a published fee schedule or written methodology that complies with applicable law.

Keep funds separate. The Treasurer maintains the required separate, nonlapsing account and tracks funds by application.

Pay only documented expenses. Require detailed invoices describing the services performed, hours, rates, and expenses.

Require replenishment when necessary. Notify the applicant when the balance falls below an established threshold and request additional funds under the adopted procedure.

Reconcile and refund. At the conclusion of the applicable review, provide an accounting and return the unused balance in accordance with the Town's procedure and applicable law.

Town Administrator's Report

1.  See the addendum #1 for the Cleaning Services RFP

2.  Review of Health Services warrant article

 Adjournment