Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Local Government Finance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Select Board adopts proposed regulatory compliance fees after public hearing

Tamworth Select Board · June 10, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After a public hearing June 9, the Tamworth Select Board adopted a set of proposed fees intended to cover staff time for regulatory compliance and permitting under RSA 419‑A; board members and the public asked about time studies, comparators and planning‑board workload.

The Tamworth Select Board opened and closed a public hearing June 9 under RSA 419‑A and voted to adopt a schedule of regulatory compliance fees designed to recoup the town’s expected staff time for certificate and permit processing.

Staff explained the fee table was prepared by estimating hands‑on time for an enforcement/compliance officer and by folding in some town processing costs (for example, site visits and plan review). The presenter said some filings will remain no‑fee pass‑throughs while others, such as groundwater or multi‑visit reviews, include fees to cover visits and meeting time. The presenters characterized the initial schedule as a conservative start with the expectation that staff will log hours and the board will revisit fees if the estimates prove inaccurate.

Members of the public and the board asked whether time studies were conducted, how the town’s approach compared with nearby municipalities, and how the planning board’s volunteer workload would be handled. Staff replied that no formal time studies had been done; Sandwich was cited as a town with a similar model but higher fees. The planning board supported shifting certain procedural tasks (e.g., submission and filing steps) to a compliance officer to make volunteer responsibilities more consistent.

After questions and discussion, the board voted to adopt the proposed fee schedule. One board member recorded a vote of no on principle, while the majority supported adoption. The hearing was then closed and the fees will be implemented as described, subject to later adjustment if time‑tracking indicates changes are warranted.