Hanover's Capital Improvement Program

League of Women Voters^®
of the Upper Valley

To: Members of the Hanover Planning Board, Jonathan Edwards, Julia Griffin
From: League of Women Voters of the Upper Valley
Date: June 3, 2008
Topic: Hanover's Capital Improvement Program / Cover Letter
The League has a long-standing interest in public policy issues and town government. This past year we have embarked on a study of regional growth management topics and issues. One such topic is a Capital Improvement Program (CIP), which some consider a "growth management tool". In January we held a public meeting where the planners from Lebanon and Hartford described the process used in their towns after they formally adopted a CIP.
We note that Hanover has taken some preliminary steps in the CIP process:

The 2005 Town Meeting authorized the Planning Board "to prepare and amend a recommended program of municipal capital improvement projects projected over a period of at least 6 years for the purpose of preparing the annual budget, pursuant to RSA 674:5"
In 2006, a staff-created draft CIP was produced, and on May 1 2006, there was a joint meeting of the Planning Board and Select Board to discuss this draft document.
We understand that an updated version of this draft CIP is now underway.
Page 110 of the Big Blue Budget Work Book for 2008 budget mentions the CIP, and the need for a "more comprehensive capital planning process...due to projected development and growth over the next several years"; however the actual budget contains no reference to the CIP.
We understand that another joint meeting of Select Board and Planning Board is set for June 23.

We are concerned that the status of the CIP has languished in the past two years, with little discussion by members of the Planning Board or public since the 2006 May meeting. As we understand from NH enabling legislation, the CIP is based on input from town departments but also "shall take into account public facility needs indicated by the prospective development shown in the master plan of the municipality or as permitted by other municipal land use controls".
Unfortunately, since the adoption of the Master Plan in 2003, it is not evident how town spending follows from the Master Plan. We are concerned that CIP planning is happening without the full knowledge of all interested parties. Is it probable that the "projected development and growth" mentioned in this year's budget workbook is happening now, for surely recent "development and growth" have already impacted the community, without an adopted CIP to guide discussion of recent projects; indeed, taxpayers may be subsidizing the impacts of this growth. Future growth in the region, and Hanover in particular, is increasingly challenging; our spending priorities need urgent public discussion and creative solutions. All players, including all town boards and public, need to be kept adequately informed.
How it works in other Upper Valley towns:

Hartford's planner Lori Hirshfield reports (phone conversation 5/19/08) that their 5-year Master Plan process has a parallel CIP component. The last round for Master Plan had specific direction from the Planning Board to concentrate on the town's system of sidewalks and bike paths, with direction to the staff for initial inventory of these so that a proper pedestrian/bike plan is implemented and funded by grants. Lori is the first to admit that often "urgent" issues take priority, leaving the critical "big picture" issues in limbo. Further, she notes that the CIP is always a work in progress; it is never perfect.
Lebanon's Planning Board has adopted a formal system to help implement the city's CIP, as noted in the LWV notes from our January 2008 meeting on the municipal budget process (with special emphasis on capital spending). We attach a protocol for consideration of capital items, adopted by the Lebanon's PB in 2003. The city's current year's CIP entries occupies a small section of the Lebanon's 2008 budget.
The Upper Valley Lake Sunapee RPC can help a town make the connection between the Master Plan and CIP.

The list of Hanover's spending priorities is large, and the town's budget has been challenged for extraordinary needs, such as repairs of damage from the June 2005 storms, the sewer plant upgrades and NH retirement fund shortfall. Given the town's limited resources, we urge the Planning Board to address the priorities facing the town and review, adjust and then adopt the CIP.
The League is concerned that some "Big Picture" issues have slipped into the background, with urgent matters taking precedence. A CIP discussion could lead to innovative and constructive solutions given our limited resources and the region's development pressures.
The League hopes that you find this note and enclosed materials helpful. We request agenda time to speak to this topic at the June 10th Planning Board meeting.
Enclosures:

Summary notes from LWV's Jan 2008 meeting on municipal budget process/capital spending
Summary + Capital Improvement Programs, NH Planners Handbook
Capital Improvement Worksheet + Lebanon Planning Board (2003)

Comments, suggestions, questions? Contact our webmaster. Last revised: September 4, 2010 18:17 PDT.