|
ENFIELD TOWN COUNCIL
MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING
AUGUST 2, 2004
A Special Meeting of the Enfield Town Council was called to order by Chairman Tallarita in the Enfield Room of the Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut on Monday, August 2, 2004 at 7:04 p.m.
ROLL-CALL - Present were Councilmen Edgar, Egan, Fiore, Mangini, Peruta, Reveruzzi, Tait and Tallarita. Councilman Crowley entered at 7:05 p.m. Councilmen Dodd and Kaupin were absent. Also present were Town Manager, Scott Shanley; Assistant Town Manager, Daniel Vindigni; Town Clerk, Suzanne Olechnicki; Director of Public Works, John Kazmarski; Town Engineer, Jeff Bord and Director of Finance, Gregory Simmons.
Present from the Enfield Board of Education were Donna Corbin Sobinski, Kristen Provencher Hamilton, Albert Harrison, Kenneth Hilinski, Roger Jones, Sharon Racine, Carol Santoski, Lynn Scull, Nicholas Sinsigalli. Also present were Superintendent of Schools, Dr. John Gallacher; Assistant Superintendent of Schools, Anthony Torre, Director of School Facilities, Arthur Pongratz
DISCUSSION RE: SCHOOL ATHLETIC FACILITIES
Present for this discussion was Thomas Shield from Milone & MacBroom.
Mr. Shanley provided an overview of the timelines if this was to go to referendum in the fall. He noted the question has to be in the hands of the Secretary of State on September 2nd. He stated before that the Council would have to have a public hearing and a vote on the questions. He pointed out the first opportunity to schedule a public hearing will be at the August 16th meeting of the Town Council. He noted they are at the zero hour at this point, therefore, they need to know what the Council and Board of Education want to do.
Councilman Reveruzzi referred to the July 15th memo from Art Pongratz and noted the current labor cost for maintenance is $214,000 and the proposed labor cost for new fields is exactly the same. He questioned if this means there isn't any increase associated with maintaining the new fields. Dr. Gallacher stated his belief the numbers provided by Mr. Pongratz were based on the fact that they would be cutting the same amount of grass. He noted their question would be if they go with the synthetic surface and irrigation.
Mr. Pongratz stated he does not see the Board of Education being able to afford additional labor for the grounds.
Councilman Reveruzzi stated they really need to know whether or not there's an additional cost with the installation of the fields.
Mr. Pongratz stated they currently maintain 260 acres, and he does not see that figure changing.
Chairman Tallarita pointed out the footprint hasn't changed, but the maintenance on that footprint will be more involved.
Councilman Reveruzzi stressed the importance of providing all the information necessary to help people make a decision. He voiced his concern about the long-term investment and maintaining the quality of that investment within the confines of the budget they currently have.
Chairman Tallarita questioned if they went with a synthetic field, are additional man hours required. Mr. Shield stated they get their greatest savings in maintenance costs as relates to a synthetic field vs a grass field. He noted Norwalk is spending in the range of $4,000 per year in maintenance for their synthetic fields.
Mr. Pongratz stated his belief they should go with a synthetic field because they can increase the playing time and they can hold in check a certain amount of recurring costs.
Chairman Tallarita stated his belief they will recognize an increased dollar amount in the maintenance costs of these fields, but not necessarily in the labor costs. He noted the labor will be able to be maintained at its level because the two football fields would have decreased man hours, therefore, that attention can be used at other areas of the athletic fields.
Mr. Pongratz stated given the other duties and responsibilities that the Board of Education has, this is the budget they are going to want to stay with. He noted they don't want to build something that is going to require an enormous amount of maintenance.
Councilman Reveruzzi questioned if they can get a copy of the budget for Norwalk's athletic fields as concerns maintenance costs and what the School Board of Norwalk allocates to field maintenance. Mr. Shield stated the Parks and Recreation Department of Norwalk maintains the fields.
Councilman Fiore voiced his support of the synthetic fields. He noted he also likes the idea of piping water from the Connecticut River for irrigation. He stated if and when they move forward with this, he wants to see improved maintenance. He stated his belief the community has to make a commitment to the maintenance of these fields. He requested Mr. Pongratz coordinate with Mr. McAlmond or the consulting firm to take another pass through the maintenance numbers, i.e., irrigation of Enfield High School fields; equipment costs to maintain synthetic fields, as well as electrical costs to light the fields for four to six months of the year.
Councilman Fiore stated they need as much information as possible and they need to be able to display to the residents that if they go forward with this, they have a maintenance plan in place as well as the dollars to back it up.
Councilman Crowley stated his belief the small grounds department for the school system does a great job. He acknowledged the fields are in tough condition, but those fields have been played on for a long time. He stated his belief if they do go forward, they need to break it into a grounds crew and a field maintenance crew. He noted there should be some people responsible for those fields, instead of having one total group covering everything. He pointed out other towns have what is called a Field Manager. He stated his belief it's important to let people know there will be a group solely responsible for maintaining the fields.
Councilman Crowley questioned if they went with a synthetic field, would that field be a multi-use field. Mr. Pongratz stated those sports that would best adapt to a synthetic field would be football, soccer and field hockey.
Councilman Mangini encouraged the Town and School sides to work hand-in-hand regarding the funding of the maintenance of the fields.
Councilman Tait stated he would like to see a break out of the numbers regarding the maintenance of both the synthetic and natural fields. Mr. Pongratz pointed out his memo does reflect that.
Councilman Tait questioned if the 260 acres of grounds encompasses all of the schools, and Mr. Pongratz responded that's correct. Councilman Tait suggested in the future the Town and School sides discuss what efficiencies might be gained regarding the maintenance of this acreage, i.e., would it be less expensive to consolidate grounds maintenance.
Chairman Tallarita stated although they might not be able to pinpoint things, they should be able to provide some type of budget estimate as to what funding will be required in the future to maintain the fields. He noted if the Town removed the maintenance aspect from the Board of Education's responsibilities, the Board would no longer have to grapple with it.
Councilman Reveruzzi referred to the budget figures in Mr. Pongratz's memo and noted that a lot of the $214,000 doesn't have to do with maintaining fields. He noted $214,000 is the cost for labor to maintain the buildings and the grounds. He stated they need to break out a maintenance cost. Mr. Pongratz stated he could provide the national standard per acre. He pointed out his memorandum was explaining what the School Department's grounds crew does besides mow fields. He noted they have a lot of other duties besides mowing.
Mr. Shanley stated the concept of having a group totally focused on one thing isn't realistic in the municipal environment where there's pressure to keep down the overall costs.
Mr. Hilinski stated his belief it's unrealistic to assume they are going to be spending the same amount with new facilities. He noted it has to increase somewhere. He stated they have to determine what is adequate maintenance so that the fields don't deteriorate over their ten-year period of life. He added his belief they need to get a realistic number. He noted since the life of the fields is about ten years, they should be sure to have a capital plan in place for refurbishment in the future.
Mr. Shanley stated his belief there would have to be a commitment for a capital plan.
Councilman Fiore stated tracks have an eight to ten year life, and in ten years the tracks will have to be replaced. He noted the only way to do that is to set aside about $200,000 per year in the capital improvement budget over the next five or six years so that they have the money in hand to replace those tracks. He stated this Council needs to have commitment and sell that commitment to Councils that follow.
Councilman Fiore questioned whether the Board of Education members want to move forward with this, and the general consensus was yes.
Mr. Harrison pointed out it's not only the schools using the athletic fields, but also numerous community groups use these fields.
Chairman Tallarita stated the Council recognizes that at some point money will have to be put aside to keep up these fields. He questioned if they are at the point right now where they have to make the choice of improving these fields. He pointed out they have generations of children playing on substandard, inadequate facilities.
Councilman Crowley stated he's in favor of the fields being done. He explained one of his real concerns about this is if the Town takes the maintenance of the fields away from the School Board, and in the future the Board decides to take away sports, i.e., football due to budget constraints. He stated to justify this kind of investment, there has to be a commitment from both the Town and School side to support sports' programs.
Councilman Reveruzzi raised the idea of funding this project through a different economic plan. He noted this might provide the opportunity to start work, even if it's at one of the schools and one of the fields. He noted they could also build up their capital improvement budget, and perhaps they could end up having a completed project with a success story. He noted at that point they could go out for a referendum for the balance of the field improvements.
Ms. Racine voiced her concern about the equity issue. She noted they do have to do something about the practice field because players are getting hurt. She pointed out athletes put more time into practice than games. She noted if they refurbished the fields at one school and those fields were shared by both schools, they would have a transportation cost to transport students to those fields.
Chairman Tallarita stated his belief they are now in a situation where the "house is falling down", and he feels they're past the point of doing this project piecemeal.
Mr. Shanley distributed a financial chart entitled, "Project Finances". He pointed out over the course of ten years, the Town will spend $1 billion dollars, and $2 million dollars of that would go towards the athletic fields.
Councilman Crowley questioned whether they would go forward with the project if Asnuntuck was not sold to the State. Mr. Shanley explained the referendum question could be phrased in such a way as to take into consideration the sale of Asnuntuck Community College property. He went on to state they could borrow short term in anticipation of the funds coming in as a result of that sale.
Councilman Fiore stated his belief they should get their state representative and senator involved to get clarification from the state as to the sale of the Asnuntuck property. He noted he would like a guarantee from the state concerning this property.
Mr. Hilinski stated this seems to be a real opportunity to get this done, based on the fact that some of the funding is available. He noted regardless of whether the Asnuntuck funding is going to be available or not, they do have extra monies from the school renovations. He stated his belief they should act as quickly as possible to get things moving so they don't lose this opportunity.
Chairman Tallarita requested Mr. Shanley formulate a couple questions as to how this will be phrased so that this can be discussed and voted upon at the August 16th meeting.
He noted one question could relate to waiting for the sale of the Asnuntuck property and another question about going forward prior to the sale of the Asnuntuck property, as well as some back-up funding documentation.
Chairman Tallarita requested Mr. Pongratz supply further documentation regarding budget numbers and work with the Town side to be sure they can come up with some additional budget numbers based on this evening's discussion.
Chairman Tallarita stated his understanding the Town Manager has said they've been contemplating looking at what a consolidation would look like, whether it's possible, what kind of dollar amounts are involved, etc. He requested that be accelerated, adding his understanding this may not be possible to do, but they should have that discussion. Mr. Shanley pointed out he will be on vacation for the next ten days, however, he will have someone work on that.
Councilman Crowley raised the possibility of raising funds through the private sector. Chairman Tallarita pointed out nothing precludes them from doing that after the fact.
Chairman Tallarita recessed the Special Meeting at 8:30 p.m.
Chairman Tallarita reconvened the Special Meeting at 9:08 p.m.
DISCUSSION RE: ROAD 2005
Mr. Shanley stated the Council has a handout of approximate costs for the project. He noted earlier he handed out cost information.
He stated the Town received about $3 million dollars in federal and state funds for the Post Office/Town Farm Road project. He noted that project is nearing final design and the estimated cost at this point is about $4 million dollars, leaving a gap of about $1 million dollars. He stated adding this amount to the referendum amount will allow them to move forward with that project and then search for other sources of funds for that in the meantime.
He referred to the revenue side and noted they currently have a CIP contribution of $600,000 per year, and they have a current Post Road contribution of $200,000. He noted assuming those contributions continue from the general fund each year and count toward the total amount available for Road 2005, that would be $4 million dollars over the five years; bond $18 million dollars and that would amount to $22 million for road work over the five years.
Mr. Shanley stated there are overlays in the sections - some are reconstruct, some are overlays, some have drainage work that needs to be done. He noted they've attempted to understand the relationship between what the computer software generated as an estimated cost and their actual experience from the bids over the last couple years. He stated Jeff Bord has included a factor in the costs to recognize that. He noted there is erosion due to inflation which takes place. He pointed out there are savings that the engineering crew has been able to put together for Road 2000 on certain sections, and they've taken advantage of that savings to cover overages in other sections.
Mr. Shanley stated the question before the Council on August 16th would be very simple.
Councilman Fiore questioned if this would be a ten or fifteen year bond. Mr. Shanley stated that hasn't been decided as yet.
Councilman Fiore questioned if this list was re-looked at based on the benefit calculation within the software program. Mr. Kazmarski responded it wasn't run through with the cost benefit analysis as being prime factor.
Councilman Fiore stated he would not want to get 100% locked into this list. He stated he has a difficult time justifying large amounts of money being spent on particular roads when there are a miniscule amount of residents living on such roads. Mr. Shanley stated if anyone has difficulty with specific roads, they should let that be known before the list is adopted.
Councilman Peruta questioned the status on the sidewalk on Raffia Road. Mr. Kazmarski stated he had a preliminary design and wherever it was possible, they would pull those sidewalks away from the edge of the road. He noted they recognize this as a significant hazard anywhere.
Mr. Shanley stated the Council asked staff to include a drainage problem on Jondot in Section #13. He noted Public Works has been engineering that problem, and it has turned out to be a huge cost.
Mr. Kazmarski stated they originally thought they'd be able to pick-up some drainage in that area, however, the designers have found that the drainage on the state road is inadequate to handle any more flows. He explained other possibilities to resolve the drainage problem on this road. He noted they will try over the next several weeks to come up with a plan for Jondot.
Mr. Shanley suggested perhaps they be released from this commitment when they bid Section #13 and find another way to address it. He noted it might be additional appropriations for off-road drainage since that is where most of the cost of this lies in order to protect those two homes. It was the general consensus that staff is released from this particular responsibility.
Councilman Peruta questioned how the information gets out to the public. Mr. Shanley stated the Council authorizes an explanatory text which has to be approved by bond counsel. He noted this text cannot advocate in any way.
APPOINTMENTS - LOAN REVIEW COMMITTEE
NOMINATION #7306 by Councilman Fiore to appoint Michael Olschafskie, Charles Duren, and Mary Lavorgna to the Loan Review Committee.
MOTION #7307 by Councilman Tait, seconded by Councilman Mangini to close nominations.
Upon a SHOW-OF-HANDS vote being taken, the Chair declared MOTION #7307
adopted 9-0-0.
Upon a ROLL-CALL vote being taken, the Chair declared Michael Olschafskie, Charles Duren, and Mary Lavorgna to the Loan Review Committee by a 9-0-0 vote.
NOMINATION #7308 by Councilman Fiore to appoint Gene Giuliano as an Alternate on the Loan Review Committee.
MOTION #7309 by Councilman Tait, seconded by Councilman Egan to close nominations.
Upon a SHOW-OF-HANDS vote being taken, the Chair declared MOTION #7309 adopted 9-0-0.
Upon a ROLL-CALL vote being taken, the Chair declared Gene Giuliano appointed, as an Alternate, to the Loan Review Committee by a 9-0-0 vote.
MOTION #7310 by Councilman Mangini, seconded by Councilman Kaupin to go into Executive Session to discuss Personnel Matters, Pending Litigation, Collective Bargaining, and Real Estate Negotiations.
Upon a SHOW-OF-HANDS vote being taken, the Chair declared MOTION #7310 adopted 9-0-0, and the meeting stood recessed at 9:55 p.m.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Executive Session of the Enfield Town Council was called to order by Chairman Tallarita at 9:56 p.m.
ROLL-CALL - Present were Councilmen Crowley, Edgar, Egan, Fiore, Mangini, Peruta, Reveruzzi, Tait and Tallarita. Also present were Town Manager, Scott Shanley; Assistant Town Manager, Daniel Vindigni; Town Clerk, Suzanne Olechnicki; Director of Finance, Gregory Simmons.
Personnel Matters, Pending Litigation, Collective Bargaining and Real Estate Negotiations were discussed with no action or votes being taken.
Chairman Tallarita adjourned the Executive Session at 10:12 p.m. He reconvened the Special Meeting at 10:13 p.m. and stated during Executive Session they discussed Personnel Matters, Pending Litigation, Collective Bargaining, and Real Estate Negotiations with no action or votes being taken.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION #7311 by Councilman Tait, seconded by Councilman Mangini to adjourn.
Upon a SHOW-OF-HANDS vote being taken, the Chair declared MOTION #7311 adopted 10-0-0, and the meeting stood adjourned at 10:15 p.m.
|
|