RICHMOND — Many area towns and school districts will hold their annual meetings this month. Richmond residents will elect local officials and vote on several proposed zoning amendments Tuesday, but officials have postponed town meeting until April 10.
Here’s a look at Richmond’s ballot:
Proposed zoning amendments:
Reducing the extent of the wetlands conservation district to all land within 25 feet of a pond, stream, brook or other wetlands area. The existing district includes all land within 75 feet of those features.
Revising the purpose of the wetlands conservation district as follows: “To prevent the development of structures and land uses on naturally occurring wetlands, which could contribute to pollution of surface and ground water by sewage or any other pollutants, or cause damage to abutter’s property.” The current regulation defines its purpose as preventing those uses that “would contribute” to pollution of the surface and groundwater.
Authorizing recreational vehicles to be temporarily occupied for up to two weeks without a permit from the town’s selectboard. The existing regulation requires selectboard permission for any occupancy. This amendment would be invalid, if passed, because it was not properly warned, according to Town Clerk Annette Tokunaga.
Contested races: Carol Jameson and incumbent Andrew Wallace are vying for a three-year term on Richmond’s selectboard.
Elections: Polls will be open from 11 a.m. to 7 p.m. March 9 at Veteran’s Memorial Hall at 150 Old Homestead Highway.
Town meeting: Richmond officials have exercised an emergency option that allows Granite State communities to postpone the annual session due to concerns around COVID-19. It is now scheduled for April 10 and, like voting Tuesday, will take place at Veteran’s Memorial Hall.
This story has been corrected to indicate that the proposed new purpose of the wetlands conservation district would be to prevent uses that "could contribute" to surface and groundwater pollution. It has also been updated to reflect that the amendment proposing a change to the permit requirement for occupying recreational vehicles will be invalid, if passed. This was not evident in a sample ballot posted on the town's website.