AVON TOWN COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
June 2, 2011
I. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. at the Avon Town Hall, in the Selectmen's Chamber by Chairman Zacchio. Members present: Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Shea, Pena, and Evans.
II. PUBLIC HEARING
10/11-55 Neighborhood Assistance Act
The Town Council held the following first Public Hearing:
“LEGAL NOTICE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that the Town Council of the Town of Avon, Connecticut will hold a Public Hearing on Thursday, June 2, 2011 at 7:30 p.m. in the Town Hall, Selectmen’s Chamber, 60 West Main Street, for the following purpose:
To consider participation in the Neighborhood Assistance Act in accordance with Public Act 95-268.
Dated at Avon, Connecticut this 6th day of May, 2011.
Brandon L. Robertson, Town Manager”
Marshall Brown, Music Director and Conductor of the Nutmeg Symphony Orchestra reported that they did their signature fundraiser, the High School’s Gala at the Golf Club of Avon this year, and the third graders from the Avon schools attend their children’s concert that was held last week. He reported the Nutmeg Symphony Orchestra through the power of music energizes, inspires, and educates our community which is their mission statement. Chairman Zacchio thanked Mr. Brown for attending.
A member from the Gifts of Love reported that their organization is going to be working together with the Nutmeg Symphony Orchestra. She reported that their organization currently serves approximately four hundred and fifty families per month with food, household items, linens, clothing, fuel assistance, getting people back into school tuition free, and so many other things. She reported that they have their weekend backpack program up and rolling with approximately one hundred kids that every week we provide food to. She reported that they are part of the Simsbury Community Garden with an acre of land with an organic farmer on staff with Gifts of Love; they have turned their back parking lot into a whole garden because who needs to park a car when you need food; they have just moved their food pantry
into a new, expanded facility and really excited about that. Chairman Zacchio welcomed and thanked her for attending.
The Town Manager reported that he received an e-mail from Mrs. Gugliotti, Board of Director President with the Avon Volunteer Fire Department, last night stating her regrets that the Fire Department could not make it tonight as they have a meeting but do hope that Council supports their two applications. Chairman Zacchio responded that Council certainly does.
Chairman Zacchio thanked those applicants in attendance for coming out and talking to Council about the programs that they represent, glad they are here, and glad they are taking advantage of the grant process.
Mr. Evans questioned an application that he was not familiar with from the For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology organization, noticing that they are a New Hampshire organization and they claim to serve neighborhood communities throughout the State of Connecticut. Mr. Evans questioned how they came to make an application here in the Town of Avon. The Town Manager responded that the organization is nationwide but they have branches throughout and there is a branch in Connecticut that is called CT FIRST with Susan Glasspiegel from Simsbury.
Chairman Zacchio closed the Public Hearing.
On a motion made by Mr. Pena, seconded by Mrs. Samul, it was voted:
RESOLVED: That the Town Council approve the following requests:
a. Avon Volunteer Fire Department - $150,000.00
b. Avon Volunteer Fire Department - $50,000.00
c. Gifts of Love - $25,000
d. CT FIRST - $150,000
e. Nutmeg Symphony Orchestra - $100,000.00
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Pena, Shea, and Evans voted in favor.
10/11-56 Town of Avon to Grant Easement to CL&P: Knoll Lane Subdivision
The Town Council held the following second Public Hearing:
“TOWN OF AVON
LEGAL NOTICE
Notice is hereby given that the Town of Avon, Connecticut will hold a Public Hearing on Thursday, June 2, 2011 at 7:30 p.m. at the Avon Town Hall, Selectmen’s Chamber, 60 West Main Street, Avon, Connecticut to consider the acceptance of an electric disbursement easement as defined below:
Said Easement Area located on the northerly side of Knoll Lane described as the southerly most ten feet of a parcel identified as Town of Avon Open Space on a map entitled “Compilation Plan Map Showing Easement Area to be Granted to The Connecticut Light and Power Company Across the Property of William A. & Pamela W. Ferrigno and the Town of Avon #191 & #193 Haynes Road, Avon, Connecticut Scale 1”=40’ Mar. 1, 2011 which map is on file in the office of the Town Clerk of said Town of Avon, Connecticut.
Dated at Avon, Connecticut this 6th day of May, 2011.
Brandon L. Robertson, Town Manager”
Chairman Zacchio reported that Council talked a lot about this at the last meeting and looked at the maps before we set the public hearing date.
Mr. Meyers, Attorney representing Sunlight Construction who is building the Knoll Lane subdivision, reported that Council has a procedure whereby they can incorporate all that was said last time into tonight’s record and asked if that was possible. Chairman Zacchio responded that it has already been incorporated in the minutes. Mr. Meyers reported that the Town Manager was very kind to say that if Council happens to vote for it he would sign the papers tonight since he would not be in his office tomorrow.
Chairman Zacchio closed the Public Hearing.
On a motion made by Mr. Pena, seconded by Mr. Evans, it was voted:
RESOLVED: That Town Council approve to grant Said Easement Area located on the northerly side of Knoll Lane described as the southerly most ten feet of a parcel identified as Town of Avon Open Space on a map entitled “Compilation Plan Map Showing Easement Area to be Granted to The Connecticut Light and Power Company Across the Property of William A. & Pamela W. Ferrigno and the Town of Avon #191 & #193 Haynes Road, Avon, Connecticut Scale 1”=40’ Mar. 1, 2011 which map is on file in the office of the Town Clerk of said Town of Avon, Connecticut.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Evans, Shea, and Pena voted in favor.
III. MINUTES OF PRECEDING MEETING: February 12, 2011 Budget Work Session
May 5, 2011
On a motion made by Mr. Shea, seconded by Mr. Pena, it was voted:
RESOLVED: That the Town Council accept the February 12, 2011 Budget Work Session minutes as submitted.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Shea, Pena, and Evans voted in favor.
The Clerk explained that Council has the salary for the Town Manager in the February 12, 2011 Budget Work Session minutes and if Council does not have an approved budget then Council would have to be rescinding their votes so it is just as easy to wait until now to approve those minutes.
Mr. Evans requested a clarification in the May 5, 2011 minutes on the first page, first paragraph, seventh line which should read that, “…..the Board of Finance ever really conferred with us in a way that they didn’t ask our opinion…..”
On a motion made by Mr. Pena, seconded by Mrs. Samul, it was voted:
RESOLVED: That the Town Council accept the May 5, 2011 minutes as amended.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Shea, Evans, and Pena voted in favor.
IV. COMMUNICATION FROM AUDIENCE
Chief Mark Rinaldo, Avon Police Department, reported that there is a fundraising event, a community sponsored event by Miller Foods and Mitchell Auto Group called “Waggin’ for Wheels” on Saturday, June 18th and the excitement and enthusiasm for this event has been outstanding. He reported that Sandy Trudeau, Carolyn Miller, & Capri Frank from Miller Foods have organized the event to get Animal Control a dog wagon. He reported that they are in desperate need of an Animal Control vehicle, have had one for eight years that was donated and it is now costing them a lot of money to maintain. He reported that Miller Foods and Mitchell Auto Group have decided to raise funds for a vehicle and will save the Town approximately $30,000 and it is a wonderful partnership. He
distributed flyers to Council members and invited them to attend the event as it will be a great community event and would appreciate their support. He reported that when this is done he believes they will have a beautiful vehicle for our Animal Control. The Town Manager reported that this is a joint venture with the Town of Canton and noted that Dick Barlow, Canton First Selectman, was sitting in the audience.
V. COMMUNICATION FROM COUNCIL
Mr. Shea reported on the passing of Joe Woodford who served on the Board of Education for many years, then on the Council for many years. He served with Joe for quite some time and was a dedicated, hard-working, smart citizen who cared deeply about Avon and really embodied the spirit of community volunteer. He reported that Joe gave a great deal to this community, he was a great husband, a great father and he thinks one of the finest citizens we have ever had. He reported that Joe’s passing is sad and he thinks as evidenced by what we are going to be doing a little bit later will be very supportive of his causes.
Chairman Zacchio acted on Mr. Shea’s sentiments with Joe’s passing and we will be making donations to causes that were important to Joe including the Fire Department and the Social Services. He reported that while he and Caroline LaMonica, Town Council Clerk, were talking before the meeting she remembered that Joe and his mother used to deliver foods to the needy back in the welfare days so Joe had a very close tie to the community in terms of the Social Services Department and the Fire Department he was an honorary member; certainly something he thinks the Town should appreciate with a volunteer who spent so many years here on this Board as well as others helping the community become what it is today.
Chairman Zacchio congratulated all the Town officials and employees and all the volunteer organizations within Town as we have special recognition by Hartford Magazine this year along with a lot of the surrounding communities with high praise for being one of the best towns in Hartford County to live in as well as accolades for several other categories including our educational department. He reported that it is just so important that you recognize that it takes an entire village of volunteers, we have great volunteer organizations here in Town, as well as on the Boards and are blessed with great professional staff so he thanked everyone on behalf of the Council and the Town and congratulate everyone for a very, very well done job.
VI. OLD BUSINESS
08/09-47 Presentation by Canton Hydro Project Advisory Committee & Consultant,
GZA Environmental Inc.: Findings & Recommendation
Richard Barlow, Canton First Selectman, first congratulated Avon on being number one as Canton was number four and will have to try a little harder next year. Chairman Zacchio responded that if you are top ten in the State of Connecticut you are doing pretty good.
He thanked Council for having them here this evening. He reported that it had been approximately one year and a half since he last talked to Council about the hydro project and since that time they received a $50,000 grant from the Connecticut Clean Energy Fund and with him tonight is Matt Stone, head of Canton’s Hydro Advisory Committee, and Chad Cox from GZA to give you a brief update on where they have gone to date.
Matt Stone, Chairman of the Canton Hydro Committee, reported that he would give a brief overview, because you are no doubt familiar with the project already, and turn it over to Chad Cox from GZA who will give a more in depth review but still high level review of the voluminous draft report that you seen already, and then he will give it back to him for a little commentary on our recommendations and next steps going forward as we see it. Mr. Stone asked Council to ask questions at anytime or even change it if they need to.
Mr. Stone reported that the Canton Board of Selectmen constituted the Canton Hydro Committee roughly two years ago with their first meeting in May 2009, five members from Canton and two each from Avon and Burlington; they realized pretty quickly that the first thing they needed to do is to sort of understand what we have. Mr. Stone reported that a lot of the project was reviewed approximately three years ago when the first licenses were initially transferred to Canton and an environmental assessment was done, but so they needed fresh eyes on this. He reported that through an open RFP process they selected consulting engineers, GZA, from Massachusetts and they came in with their sub-consultants and did a fairly thorough review, as much as you can do for the $50,000 grant received from the Connecticut Clean
Energy Fund. He reported that the Committee thinks GZA has prepared what is a pretty thorough report at this stage showing the costs, benefits, and risks associated with this project.
Chad Cox, Engineer with GZA, reported that on the assumption that Council might not have read every page of the report that we sent over he prepared a cheat sheet that has some of the summary facts which he distributed to Council. He reported that he would go through a quick summary of the study that they conducted, tell you what we did, tell you what we found, and give you a few of the basic facts. He reported that their study was a prefeasibility study but it was rather broad so they were not asked to go deeply into any particular subject but we were asked to try to look at all of the issues that might bear on hydro power development at the two dams and in particular try to identify whether there were any showstopper fatal flaw issues that might prevent development at one or both of the sites. He
reported that they were asked to look at the civil works that exist at the sites, hydraulics and hydrology, historic significance, pre-historic impacts, the existing equipment that is there and any new equipment that might be necessary, environmental resources, and permitting needs. He reported that after those issues were looked at, they were asked to come up with some preliminary design concepts, perform a financial analysis, and then write their report with some recommendations.
Chad Cox reported that with civil works, they walked the sites with mechanical engineers and architects, took a look at the existing structures not so much focusing on the dams which are in what they believe to be relatively good condition based on inspections that had been done by the State; there obviously are always potentially issues with dams but given what they found that the State had said about the dams they focused more on the specific hydropower infrastructure. He reported that they found that the upper gatehouse is in very good condition, it is usable, and it may be necessary to expand the upper gatehouse to really get the full benefits of the full amount of power that is possible to be generated at the upper site. He reported that in the past power was generated on both sides of the river and their
concept is to put the power back on the right side as you are looking downstream into that gatehouse to get a turban generator system that is big enough the gatehouse may have to be expanded a little. He reported that at the lower dam things are not in such great condition; the roof on the lower powerhouse is completely caved in so there is going to be significantly more need to improve those facilities. He reported that their concept for development at the lower site would be to go ahead and use the lower powerhouse; they looked at maybe eliminating the lower powerhouse and just generating at the gatehouse structure that is immediately adjacent to the dam but you pick up some extra power generation by moving downstream to the existing powerhouse so their concept is to utilize that site, to keep the shell of the building in place, and to build a new powerhouse inside which gives you some architectural benefits by keeping the old façade and stay in the same location
with the same power canal. He reported that they like the concept but because of the condition of the lower powerhouse there will be some extra work necessary.
Chad Cox reported that with respect to hydraulics and hydrology they had two key items that they found of interest; the first is that there is quite a bit of water available at both of the sites however the previous licensee, who was a private hydropower developer, was not granted by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) the right to fully utilize all of the flow available at the upper site; the lower site he was able to use what they believe to be a reasonable amount of flow given the hydrology of the river, at the upper site that licensee was granted the right to use substantially less flow for aesthetic reasons at the upper site. He reported that there was some concern about how the diversion to a hydropower turban would affect the aesthetics of water going over the dam. He reported that in his
opinion that is an absolutely legitimate issue to think about but there was too much water diverted away from the hydropower project and maintained over the dam and more water could have been utilized at the site of the upper dam and not compromise the aesthetics of the dam and the site which is quite pleasant. He reported that the second item is that they made the assumption that both dams would be fundamentally raised from the current condition that they are in, by the addition of flash boards to the tops of the stow ways is the condition that they had historically operated in; three foot of additional boards at the upper dam, five foot of additional boards at the lower dam so it was their assumption that those boards could be put back; they did the analysis with and without the boards but hydropower is a function of flow and head, head meaning the amount of vertical fall that the water can go through, so if you can raise the impoundments you just get more power. He
reported that the one issue they found was that it is possible based on the best information that they have currently that by raising the elevation of the lower dam impoundment that could cause water to back up against the upper dam and actually drown out some of the benefits that you get from raising the upper dam. He reported that raising the lower dam might cause the water to backwater all the way up to the tow of the upper dam and thereby reduce the amount of effective head at the upper dam. He reported that there is that possibility, again there was no survey done so they do not have exact information and had to rely on older information in older existing reports and that is an item that is open for further analysis and verification.
Chad Cox reported that with respect to historic and prehistoric issues there will be historic mitigation necessary, the previous licensee is going to have to do some historic mitigations in terms of not knocking down the existing structures, maintaining them, historic plaques; not a deal breaker but some work will have to be done. He reported that GZA did not feel like any of the existing equipment is viable so new equipment would be necessary but there is appropriate equipment available for the size of both sites.
Chad Cox reported that with respect to environmental issues, fish passage upstream and downstream is going to be a major issue; the dams stop fish from going upstream so the issue is already there. He reported that were hydropower to be developed it would bring the issue to a head and in order to obtain a license it is more than likely that a condition of the license would be that fish passage both in the form of downstream passage sort of over the dam in an appropriate way not through the hydropower turbans and upstream passage via a fish ladder at both sites would be a requirement of any license that was granted to the hydropower developer. He reported that is good and bad; it is bad in that it has additional costs to the projects and they accounted for those costs because they assumed that they would be
there; it is good in that it brings fish passage to the river which is a goal of people who have no interest in hydropower so there is a nice synergy there with hydropower and environmental restoration to the river via the fish passage issues. He reported that those would have to be operated so there is some extra effort that goes into that but again that is a benefit that goes above and beyond the hydropower. He reported that maintenance of some flow will be necessary passing over the dam, you cannot just take all the water in the river and pass it through your hydropower turbans; you have to maintain some flow over the dams, that is just good environmental practice and is to be expected. He reported that there is a little bit of uncertainty as to how much flow that would need to be; GZA feels that the previous license retained too much flow over the dam for purely aesthetic reasons and a reduction in that amount of flow is justifiable, would maintain its
aesthetics and the environment in the very short portion of river that is between the dam and where the hydropower comes out and the same at the lower dam, GZA does not feel like the short bypass reach is an insurmountable problem between the dam and where the powerhouse is just downstream. He reported that while they thought the scenic river status could have been a deal killer, federal law prohibits hydropower development on wild and scenic rivers or where wild and scenic rivers would be affected, however, in consultation with the folks that are working on the wild and scenic river status, GZA understands that they are in concept supportive as they are not against hydropower development at either of the dams and they have crafted the legislation that would expand the wild and scenic river to permit development of hydropower at the two sites.
Chad Cox reported that with respect to permitting, FERC licensing is necessary, all hydropower in the United States is subject to licensure by FERC and what makes hydropower different from other renewable energy sources. He reported that hydropower has to be licensed through FERC as the waters in the United States are considered federal interests and also because there are so many other interests that are affected by hydropower generation with respect to fisheries, wetlands, and other environmental issues; FERC acts as a clearinghouse so licensure would be necessary and is an extended process and well understood, it has a timeline and does open up a venue for comments and discussion about hydropower and in general that is a good thing as you would not want to develop a project that is going to be environmentally
disruptive so bringing in people to talk about the issues and finding ways of mitigating them is a good thing and that is what the FERC process does. He reported that knowing that the FERC process however does have a reasonably lengthy timeline, talking about years, there are some steps that have been taken to attempt to expedite that, in particular there is some federal legislation that has been proposed that would transfer the existing licenses which were held by a previous private developer and were then rescinded because that developer could not develop the project in a timely manner and there is some legislation that is proposing to take those existing licenses and transfer them to the Town of Canton which would greatly expedite things; currently that legislation is in a bit of limbo. Dick Barlow, Canton First Selectman, reported that the bills have been filed both in the House and Senate by Congressman Murphy and Senators Dodd and Lieberman and anticipated last
year that the House got the bill out while the Senate did not get it done so since it is a new session of congress they have to start fresh again but in talking with Congressman Murphy’s staff they are moving forward and anticipate having a good chance of getting through both committees this year. Chad Cox reported that would greatly expedite the process; the one thing that should be understood about that is that a new environmental review is part of that legislation so that is generally a good thing as GZA already knows that our friends in the fisheries community have some new goals for the sites with respect to fish passage and they are going to get a chance to bring those goals up if the licenses were transferred in the new environmental review that would take place. Dick Barlow added that the review would be paid for by FERC.
Chad Cox reported that there are other permits that would necessary, but the last key issue is that the Town of Canton currently holds preliminary permits on both of the sites; a preliminary permit is issued by FERC and does not allow for development of a project or generation but it allows for a site to be studied and gives a certain period of time that the holder of the preliminary permit, in this case the Town of Canton, can exclusively explore development at the site of which the permit expires at the end of this year at which point the sites are then open for other developers to file either preliminary permit or license applications on the site. He reported that federal law allows a developer to come in and file for a licensing on a hydropower site even if they do not own the site and essentially if they can
put together a legitimate case for moving the project forward and meet the environmental considerations they can be allowed to do that. He reported that once the preliminary permit from the Town of Canton expires at the end of this year that process restarts and the sites are open for other developers.
Chad Cox reported that with respect to those issues that GZA looked at, there are unresolved issues that were beyond the scope of the prefeasibility study and tried in their report to identify at least conceptually those issues, sediment quality and those things that need to be looked at a little more closely but in general they found no obvious fatal flaws, no obvious issues that would preclude hydropower development; some of the additional issues out there could have cost and timing implications but do not think there is anything looming below the surface that would automatically preclude hydropower development. He reported that was their initial evaluation, the next step GZA had was to come up with some preliminary design concepts which they did; they came up with multiple concepts: four for developing the upper
site and three for developing the lower site. He reported on the preferred ones, the ones they thought were the best options. He reported that he would detail two scenarios at the upper dam because they looked at the case where the existing license would just be transferred which is general a good thing except for the fact that the existing license has the clause in it that requires utilization of a smaller flow in the river so by only being able to use the smaller flow in the river you generate less power and looked at the scenario where they thought they could use the actual amount of water available. He reported that the difference between those are about a 4,000 kilowatt generation site at the upper dam if we use less water and a little over 1,000 kilowatts (1 megawatt) of power at the upper dam if we use a reasonable amount of water and at the lower dam just shy of 900 kilowatts of power they feel the site is capable of producing and that is with the
assumption that the impoundments are raised. He reported that GZA feels those are good development options, one of the issues identified is that there are a number of ways of raising the impoundments and the simplest are the flash boards discussed however they may be other ways that might be preferred by the environmental community, those are doable they just add a little bit of cost. He reported that their economic and financial analysis you are looking at approximately $4.5 million for the upper site as previously licensed and approximately $6.5 million for the upper site with the most favorable and a little over $7 million for the lower dam is their conservative cost estimate with contingencies involved. He reported that GZA looked at how this is going to pay for itself and the key issues are how can you sell the power?; if you have to sell the power back to the grid you get a wholesale price and it is less attractive than if you could use the power on site
than you are offsetting power purchase at a retail cost which is a much better scenario economically; the problem there is not a lot of demand at the sites so you have to connect the dams to your loads. He reported that towns have loads that can use the power but it is an issue of connecting the two.
Chairman Zacchio questioned if those costs are inclusive of connecting the two sites; if you were able to get into that retail mode are the costs to get into municipal sites included. Chad Cox responded that those costs are not inclusive of the connection; they looked at connections at the upper site and did not look at hard-wire connections at the lower site which is beyond their current scope. Dick Barlow, Canton First Selectman, reported that the absolute best scenario was if you could get the retail. Chairman Zacchio questioned how feasible that is in terms of sites similar to this or any kind, whether it is hydroelectric or photovoltaic. Dick Barlow responded that there is a concept called virtual net-metering where you can use power generated on one site and spin the meter back to another
location so you can generate power at the lower dam and use it for your schools or town hall; there is a bill in legislature (SB1) which might be acted on today or before the end of the session in which Senator Witkos has been very active in promoting and within that bill virtual net-metering for municipal facilities would allow us to then get the higher rate for the electricity and bypasses that whole issue of having to find some way to get it distributed back to either of those sites; it clearly spins the economics of it. Chairman Zacchio reported that without that the economics do not pan out. Chad Cox agreed that net-metering is a key issue and another place where revenue can be generated is from the sale of removable energy certificates; hydropower is a green energy source so it can be counted against commitments to generating renewable energy and so there is a monetary value to that; they can be sold separately from the value of the power itself and that generates
revenue. He reported that if we look at the retail value, assuming that we get such, the upper dam has some good things but the lower dam does not do well as it does not have as much head so it produces less energy and there is a larger requirement for capital costs in terms of rehabilitating the facilities. He reported that in and of itself with the costs that GZA estimated it does not look like a great investment. He reported that they did look at the scenario of grants being made available and there is precedence for such to develop renewable energy systems and they tried to look at what would be the grant money necessary to make the project at the lower dam positive cash flow from the first year and their estimate is approximately $2.6 million in grant money to offset initial capital costs and would create a situation where, under the financial scenarios that they studied, you would have positive cash flow from year one. Chairman Zacchio questioned if
the $2.6 million is just for the lower dam. Chad Cox responded yes. He reported that in general they looked at the upper dam and the lower dam separately but also looked at scenarios where the upper dam and lower dam are treated as a single project and combined revenue and the project is financed cumulatively and the estimate is approximately $4.0 million in grant monies with positive cash flow from the start. Chairman Zacchio questioned if that is splitting the output equally based on the net-metering if that becomes viable from a process. Dick Barlow responded that Avon and Burlington could split the lower dam and Canton could have the upper dam. He reported that the virtual net-metering bill that is being proposed would be five sites; all the power could be used at the upper dam within the Town of Canton for five sites; Avon and Burlington could consume all the power generated at the lower dam. Chairman Zacchio questioned that there would be
less power generated at the lower dam. Dick Barlow responded yes; it really comes down to a question of, right now it is not economical but if we had the opportunity to secure grants does that make it an investment that if we put out bond money for the project that we are going to start to see a positive cash return in the first year. Chairman Zacchio reported that anytime you are rehabilitating an energy source like the dam where some infrastructure is there already and you are able to produce renewable energy it is a good thing and he is supportive of it and thinks the Council would be supportive of it, but the economics of it have to make some sense too so it comes down to the net-metering issue as well as if there are other grant sources available to be able to continue down this path. He reported that he would not think neither the Town of Avon or Town of Canton would be able to put these kinds of dollars up with these kinds of figures without assuring that
you have a positive cash flow as well as some grant monies from outside.
Dick Barlow reported that Avon may be a little different but Canton, which is the center of Collinsville, aside from people complaining about the pothole at the end of their driveway the other question he continues to get from everybody is how is the hydro going; it is amazing in a kind of civic pride interest, let us bring back something good feel type of project and how much support there seems to be for it but clearly when it comes down to economics is the question of how much in grant monies can be received. He reported that there is legislation in Congress right now that would put $50 billion a year for small hydro, if that goes through that is an opportunity, and based on Senator Witkos’ comment there may even be modest amounts of money in the energy bill and hydro would be in the top category so they
will monitor what money is out there and to this point and time they have gone forward other than the $20,000 to cover licenses and staff time, no other money has been expended on it covered by the $50,000 grant. He reported that everybody has been riding for free so far and the question is how much further can we ride; we will get some answers to net-metering within the next week. He reported that he has a meeting tomorrow with DEP to talk about getting arrangements for the lease for the dams. Chairman Zacchio responded that seems key to the economic side. Dick Barlow reported that the benefit to the State is that they get fish passage at two facilities.
Chairman Zacchio questioned what they need from Council tonight; from a support perspective back in February 2010 Council was supportive of the idea going forward to regenerate the dams on the energy side; the financials is an uncertainty right now so from a decision point are you looking for something specific from Council. Dick Barlow responded that there were five recommendations. Matt Stone reported that the Hydro Committee has adopted four of the five recommendations and added one of their own, including: the next step would be to file a notice of intent and pre-application documents for development of the more favorable alternatives at both projects so they would engage the services of an attorney down in D.C. that they have already done some business with who is a FERC expert; have discussions with
Burlington and Avon on joint participation and clearly we are already doing that; to pursue any grant opportunities that might be out there with the Clean Energy Fund, DEP, other State and Federal sources; to pursue the legislative initiatives, both state and federal; and finally to initiate discussions with DEP regarding the leasing of the dam and getting some sort of agreement with DEP that we could develop the sites if we end up going down that route. He reported that the Committee feels all of these things can be done on a parallel path and nothing in the report says it is an absolute no-go and GZA came up with a figure of approximately $75,000 to $100,000 to pursue these next steps for the legal costs and any associated engineering costs. Dick Barlow reported that at this point and time there is still a question as to whether or not we want to ride out the counsel legal energy legislation and try to get the permits that way or to file a more formal FERC license
which would cost additional money. He reported that the Canton Board of Selectmen would be hesitant to go that route to spend that money and more likely to wait to see if the federal law changes. Chairman Zacchio reported that it sounds more viable that the upper dam, just because of its condition, is probably in better shape and produces more energy. He reported that he remains supportive of any kind of project like this that gets us a renewable energy source; the financials are going to have to work for us though and planning for those kinds of expenditures through operating and capital budgets going forward. Dick Barlow reported that we would be able to explore going forward is putting together some kind of an inter-local agreement defining how we are going to participate as a group, which is relatively easy as was done for Rails to Trails maintenance and basically starts out by any two communities passing an ordinance on a particular issue and form an
inter-local agreement. He reported that we may want to explore trying to develop the framework for that inter-local presuming that it is Canton, Avon, and Burlington or whatever combination decides to go forward. Mr. Pena questioned if any thought has been given to if in the event that this bill does not pass is there another plan. Dick Barlow responded that if the bill does not pass they can go forward but it changes the amount of grant money needed to make it a viable project so right now fingers are crossed to go the cheapest route possible; Senator Witkos is the ranking minority member on the Energy Technology Committee and has been working very closely with the co-chair and indications received back from Senator Witkos was that it would pass; there was concern from some of the utilities on the net-metering as being too broad if it was opened up for everybody but it would only apply to municipalities so that limits the pool enough that the resistance coming
from the utilities having to equalize that cost over all the other users is going to somewhat be dispelled. Mr. Pena responded that the best thing going is that as it gets closer to the date, legislators like to push through things and maybe it will steer that way.
Chairman Zacchio thanked Chad Cox, Matt Stone, and Dick Barlow for making a presentation to Council and especially to Dick Barlow and his team spearheading this. He reported that Council is still supportive, in theory, of the process but we need a lot more information, net-metering and other issues to settle before we can make any kind of financial decisions around how we support it going forward or if we support it going forward. Dick Barlow thanked the Council for their time.
10/11-43 Review, Discussion, and Set Public Hearing Date: Acceptances: Transfers
of Property and Easement to Town of Avon
Mrs. Samul did not participate for this agenda item as she has previously represented the Ceceres on a personal business matter. Mrs. Samul left the meeting table.
Chairman Zacchio reported that there was some discussion on this item in the last few Council meetings which concerns a property owner on School Street and a developer who built a number of homes down School Street on an easement that was part of the Planning and Zoning application to the Town of Avon for the widening of School Street where it meets at Huckleberry Hill Road adjacent to the Cecere property. Over the last few months Council has delayed setting a public hearing date and tonight need to talk about setting a public hearing date for the next Council meeting in order to hold a public hearing to accept the easement and hear from abutters. Chairman Zacchio asked Mr. Cecere if he would like to add anything. Mr. Cecere reported that his attorney was going to send a letter to the Town Manager and
Steve Kushner, Director of Planning and Community Development. Chairman Zacchio responded that Council has not received a copy of such and town staff would look into that. Mr. Cecere reported that he would obtain the letter from his attorney and drop off copies to the Town Manager and Steve Kushner.
On a motion made by Mr. Pena, seconded by Mr. Evans, it was voted:
RESOLVED: That the Town Council set a public hearing date to consider the acceptance of certain property and easements between the Town of Avon, Nicholas & Barbara Cecere, and Cizek Incorporated to be held at the July 7, 2011 meeting.
Messrs: Zacchio, Evans, Pena, and Shea voted in favor.
Mrs. Samul resumed her seat at the meeting table.
10/11-58 Appointment: Wild & Scenic River Study Committee (D – 12/31/2011)
On a motion made by Mr. Pena, seconded by Mr. Shea, it was voted:
RESOLVED: That the Town Council table the appointment to the Wild & Scenic River Study Committee to the July 7, 2011 meeting.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Evans, Pena, and Shea voted in favor.
10/11-59 Appointment: Youth Services Bureau Advisory Board
On a motion made by Mr. Evans, seconded by Mr. Pena, it was voted:
RESOLVED: That the Town Council table the appointment to the Youth Services Bureau Advisory Board to the July 7, 2011 meeting.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Evans, Pena, and Shea voted in favor.
VII. NEW BUSINESS
10/11-61 Presentation by Steve May, Milliman: Insurance Renewal
Chairman Zacchio reported that when we budgeted for this line item this year we had an estimate and a forecast that was fairly well above what we ended up coming in at which was a good surprise. He reported that tonight’s presentation is around the process of developing what those budget forecasts were and understanding a little bit more behind the numbers and how we got there. He reported that one of the surprises was the spread was so big in such a short period of time and want to make sure that we understand it and hope that we do not have those kinds of spreads in the future if we can avoid them.
Steve May, Milliman, reported that he would discuss where we start, what time of year we start, how we come about it, the make-up of the numbers, and then open up for questions. He reported that with the political and budget process on the Board side they start at the end of October/beginning of November and take a look at what your claims are and how to project them forward. He reported that they use your claims experience, the most recent year’s worth of claims, and project them forward into the next year. He reported that starting back in the beginning of November 2010 they have information through September 2010 of that previous year before the budget and trying to project forward through the end of June 30, 2012. He reported that there is a fair amount in the projection process of the
math; they take the current trends today which are 12.6% for medical and 10% for drug and compound that out for all months to get to the end of the next budget year so they are sure that the Town has enough money set aside to pay June claims at that time. He reported that they are using more compounding of trend than actual experience and as they get closer to the actual budget time in July 1, 2011 they can use more experience and the trend piece shrinks and their crystal ball gets a little bit clearer; the further out they start the more they have to rely on the projection, the closer they get to budget the more they are confident in the claims experience as it rolls through. He reported that with the claims experience they saw that the Town had a good year, claims developed better than expected which leads to a smaller rate increase; it has also helped us as the last time they were out and talked about budget there were issues with reserves and building that account
up but the current claims running better has helped the health of the reserve account. He reported that they also noted with the claims experience that the large claims activity was less than might be expected for a group the Town’s size with four claimants over $100,000; they took a look at your risk profile which helped to save money too and only had to add a little bit more claims activity or risk into the Town’s claims base in the projection.
The Town Manager asked Steve May, in terms of the risk profile, to address the issue with the stop loss coverage. Mr. May reported that from when they started to when they came down to this last projection what they also included was a near $100,000 savings in their projections because the stop loss level was increased from $100,000 to $120,000; it is called a stop loss because it stops the Town’s loss for each individual. He reported that right now the Town’s plan is protected; any claimant you pay for the first $100,000 and then CIGNA pays for all the claims above that. He added that going forward July 1, 2011 the Town will pay for the first $120,000 and CIGNA pays for any claims over that; so the Town takes on more risk therefore the annual premiums are lowered by approximately $100,000. He reported that the $100,000 is a little bit rich which at one time was the standard coverage; now they see municipalities of the Town’s size in the $150,000 to $200,000 in stop loss taking
on that much risk and through their analysis it was deemed that a big step might be too much to take on. Chairman Zacchio questioned if that is related to their fund balance in terms of the reserves as it sounds like a lot of risk; when you compare it to how well they are funded in terms of their reserve account is that risk really not as great as it sounds because their fund balance is significant because the amount of risk to be taken on is directly proportionate of what your fund balance is and how much you want to support it. Mr. May responded it is something to do with that; it was part of the discussion had while taking a look at it with the Town and Board knowing where the reserve was and where we were moving and how the budget was being set; he would think the others would do it, size comes into it with other municipalities so if the average is $200,000 that is probably on the larger size of the scale. He reported that even now at Avon’s size people
are moving towards that $200,000; $150,000 is probably the norm for Avon’s size in a tough budget time and the savings is very valuable with the State cutting back.
Mr. Shea questioned, recognizing the difficulty of Mr. May’s role culturally how do you step in and bring your reasoning, objective analysis to Avon, and at what point would have said no you have gone too high. He added that Milliman is the Town’s outside consultant here to watch and guide Avon, doing a fine job but at what point do you step in and say that he does not advise that. Mr. May responded first the level that we were at was not uncomfortable for us when we were having discussions; they do have open discussions with the finance side from both the Town and the Board and Human Resources and the Town Manager sits in the meetings. Mr. Shea questioned what factors Milliman uses to objectively guide the Town because no matter who is sitting in these chairs whether they work for the Town
or they are a community volunteer, Mr. May is the one in the room who is the “expert.” Mr. May responded that they take a look at the claims experience, how low things were now so that was a flag as the Town had a very good experience year with some low large claims but is it an anomaly that next year it will jump up. Mr. May reported that they did know that the reserve balance at the time they were looking at this was a concern; the fiscal duty was a key concern in what they wanted to do; the discussions did get to a point where at this point with this kind of step if they would have gone over $150,000 they would have been a little “watch out for that.” Mr. Shea questioned how many clients your company serves in Connecticut. Mr. May responded that for municipalities with our consulting work is over forty. Mr. Shea questioned of the forty, how many were advised not to go where they went. Mr. May responded that stop loss is
a sporadic issue so he doesn’t see it every single year and do not review it and increase it every year, but when it comes to stop loss he has not seen anybody say no to what has been recommended, so in essence zero. Mr. Shea reported his concern that it is easy when you are on this side of the table to say let us just keep raising the stop loss and really the check and balance that the community has is Milliman going on record saying that you think professionally speaking that I would not do that. Mr. Shea questioned if it is the responsibility of the various boards, Human Resources, the Town Manager; the only difficult position is that you are hired as a consultant but your guidance is valuable so he is interested in the factors that are used, how many clients you have in Connecticut and how you go about trying to prevent them from mortgaging their future because he recognizes, and Mr. May is right on point, that there is a great deal of pressure on all of these
different communities whether you are small or large and it is very easy to say let us raise the number until you have that year and if you look at different businesses in Connecticut, all the news and economic factors are saying that we are still in a recession, they are going to run out of money. Mr. Shea reported that Mr. May’s role is very valuable and Council’s job is to make sure that he is sturdy and strong and will stick to your guns even at the risk of being in disfavor with whomever you are speaking with at that time.
Mr. May reported that the discussion did not get to an uncomfortable level with this case; everybody understood and we laid things out so people understood. Mr. May asked the Town Manager if the report for the stop loss was shared with Council back when we were talking about it. The Town Manager responded that it was provided to Council at one point. Mr. May reported that it was easy for people when they gave the first report and during the discussions to look at the big amount of money and the discussions started at $200,000 being a big jump and what does that mean. He reported that they had the discussions of five large claims wiping out that savings and what does that mean; we knew where the reserve amount was and what the fiscal goal of the Town was to try and get there and very quickly said
that is too big of a jump; what does $150,000 do for us. He reported that there was comfort with that as other towns are there, probably a standard for someone the Town’s size right now, what does that do.
Mr. Shea questioned when you say size, do you mean number of people, size of their budget, etc. Mr. May responded the number of employees that you cover. Mr. Shea questioned why we would not factor in our reserve. Mr. May responded that is part of the discussion in wanting to increase the reserve and get to a point where we are at the recommended level because last year the Town was below that; we knew there was a goal on how to try and get there. He reported that there were a couple of early factors with the claims experience running better than expected which helped out at this time. Chairman Zacchio commented that was just luck of the draw in that year. Mr. May responded that is true; claims were the claims and they ran low. He reported that it is the fiscal discipline that has
taken that good cash flow and put it into the reserve to grow it to a level that is comfortable now. He reported that there are things through the process that yes it could be good and that money could be put into a general fund and spent and be in the same problem. He reported that now we are going to have to watch, this is what we expected, we used this claims experience to project this forward, just like last year and we expected a number this high and it came in less.
Chairman Zacchio reported that it all comes into that crystal ball and the claims experience and how much risk you want to take in terms of was that a below normal year, a normal year, or a higher than normal year and that is where Milliman comes in and might suggest that the Town might want to raise it this year but you had a very low experience rate and you have to temper that with the idea that that is not normal and you can be exposing yourself more than just the rise on one claimant. Mr. May reported that the fiscal discipline is also fiscally conservative which is a good thing, the high bond rating is good because of that and that was part of the discussion and landed on can we go all the way to $150,000 or do we bite something off at $120,000, see how this good year pans out and if we have another one at the
next renewal we can always do the same analysis. He reported that because we are coming through a good year it made us recoil a little bit, take a baby step and take advantage of a significant amount of money and see what happens after this year; it can be looked at every single year at renewal time and see what happens. He reported that because this is tracked on a policy year basis so you typically make the change then.
Mr. Shea expressed his concern that we get a little aggressive and we start raising that stop loss to a level and be able to say that we had some good years; he thought that jump from $100,000 to $120,000 was a large jump but that is one person, one opinion, obviously we benefited on the cost of the increase of the renewal. He reported that he does not have a crystal ball much like Mr. May but it really concerns him with not only this community but other communities in Connecticut that are going to try and ride that train because health insurance as we read is going through many, many changes. Mr. May reported that with the budget setting process it is something to do with that statement Mr. Shea made and kind of the conservatism in keeping the plan healthy as well as reserves; some things you may want to
discuss as budget goes beyond is are there policies for setting the budget so years from now you do not get into that point where there is a desperation around what is happening and saying we are going to set the budget at no less than the expected level or set it at 102% of the expected level so we have margin. He reported that those are some things that he has seen with other towns that have helped them through tough times like this, that there is rules and policies set on how you put the budget together that can help to protect against some of the things that your statement shows a little bit of nervousness to us.
Mr. Evans asked the Town Manager who ultimately made this decision to increase the stop loss to $120,000. The Town Manager responded that ultimately he made the call, in consultation with the consultants and everyone else; the most important bit of analysis for him was Mr. May’s analysis regarding the cost benefit. He reported that there are so many variables involved in this and getting into the crystal ball, but it is really the offset between the additional cost that you are paying for having such a low stop loss at $100,000 so the insurance companies are slamming you on that end versus what you save and the additional risk that you take on. He reported that when you look at that cost benefit analysis scenario, even bringing down the experience a little bit so it does not look as rosy as it has
been it still netted out to a savings but certainly talking it over with Gary Mala, Superintendent of Schools, who was on the same page and he gave the direction to do it. Mr. Evans responded that he is not being critical of the decision, but more going to Mr. Shea’s point, is the process that leads up to the decision-making and whether or not we look at the process in its entirety and if it should rise to the Council at some point versus administrative level.
The Town Manager responded that what we will do next year, as Mr. May eluded to, if there are a number of policy decisions to be made in this arena and one of the most important ones is that we now have a balance in the self-insurance fund that is about 10% of the budget for the current year and we have recently had a good bump-up of approximately $400,000 into this fund so there are other concepts that kick in and Mr. May is much more knowledgeable about these than he is but there may come a point where the Town wants to self-insure for its stop loss and some communities have done that, for example Manchester, where they basically build up their stop loss to save twenty percent of the claims, they do a cost-benefit analysis, and they find that they can cover themselves in those large claims more efficiently and cheaply
than paying the insurance company to take on that risk. He reported that would be one strand of the policy discussion but more importantly as we go through the budget next year, he will break this out, he has already talked to Mr. May about moving forward and what the process is going to be, and early on in the process we will get information to Council about the cost-benefit analysis, what it would look like going to $150,000 and involve the Council in the process much earlier so that by the time we all feel comfortable with stopping the clock and saying this is the trend that we want to set next year’s allocation rate on, Council can feel good about the kind of risk being assumed. Mr. Shea thanked the Town Manager for his explanation but wanted to share Mr. Evan’s thoughts and by no means being critical of Mr. Mala or the Town Manager as he is very comfortable about what they did but his concern is really the future. Mr. Mays reported that with
regards to the Town of Manchester years ago they had some budget pressures and they ate into their reserve to offset their health benefits budget and they brought that down to zero and actually went into the red in that part of their budget so they had to tighten the screws on their budgeting and they had a goal of self-insuring this risk so they built their budget up to one hundred twenty-five percent of the expected claims level so they had a twenty-five percent cushion that covered their reserve, their claims margin, and also the premium that they used to pay for this type of protection so if they had the worst case scenario they had it in their fund to pay it. He reported that if you go that route there is another area of policy, when do you pay that fund back; pay it over the next twelve months in the next budget, over two years so that you do not get to a point where you had to pay the bad year and now we have a hole in our fund again. He reported that as you
start to explore these things it does become apparent that maybe it comes back to policy to say this is our rule if we borrow from this fund to offset the next year’s budget so as we have the discussion those things will be first and foremost. Mr. Shea questioned that when Mr. May discusses it with staff if he could also take into account our surplus and other communities of the forty other communities with the same percentage of our surplus; the percentage issue is going to give us a better indication.
Ms. Roell, Board of Education Chairman, reported that when Mr. May met with the Board of Education a few weeks ago having the same discussion one of the suggestions that came up was that sometime through this process during the fall timeframe that we have a joint meeting between our two boards and have them explain it and discuss it at one time since we are all on the same plan and need to be under the same conclusions versus having two separate discussions about it. Mr. Shea responded that would be a large group and suggested trying to form a sub-committee first for them to go through that with, perhaps a few members each from Council, the Board of Education, the Board of Finance and a few staff members, we will at least be able to drill down and earth a lot of the concerns and when you get to the bigger group it
will help. Mr. Shea questioned Mr. May on that idea. Mr. May responded that he is fully supportive; this discussion was at the front end of the process, we can come out with the preliminary budget like we do with the Boards so everyone sees where the starting point is, talk about points of update, set that calendar because we got to a point with the budgeting that claims experience was kind of the same and then we got four months new information and that is where we came down to the two percent so we can set a schedule if we want to look every two months at what the answer is and how it is moving and if we do have these different decision points, we want to look at stop loss or maybe there is the drug coalition that interests us or the State is doing something, at those points we can see how that affects Avon also. He reported if that means we do it with some sub-committee with both or if we have to come out and sit at different points with the Council and the
Board. Mr. Shea responded that he thinks a sub-committee meeting would help Mr. May and would earth a lot of the issues and then come to the big meeting. Council agreed. Mr. Evans questioned if you meet in October/November and start doing pre-budget planning do you have information and experience by then to really make a real evaluate analyses of our program. Mr. May responded that right now with what we use we had claims experience from November 2009 through March 2011 and he would continue month by month to look at the patterns. He reported that Avon is of the size where the credibility is there and he would make an argument that if you were fully insured that we should only use the twelve months and project forward; the Town Manager has asked about what if we melded a few years together to mitigate our risk over time. He reported that we would have enough experience to look at stopping in September and try to project through to the next June;
we are going to be at that math point and now let’s watch the claims experience come closer to the timeframe for us; we have to start that way. He reported that one thing he typically does with groups when we get to big numbers like that is, here we are twenty-two months out what if we were three months away what does that look that, the experience could go different, but let us cut all that math and margin out of it and see what it looks like so we can have that range and then at this end of the process we can kind of see where it is. He reported that his fear in that is that you get comfortable with, well we always start at eighteen and it always ends at ten, and then the budget is set at ten and the experience really only brings us down to seventeen and a half so it gives an illustration of what the process and how things work but it should not give a comfort level of ok we know it starts here so we are going to budget here as that is also where we can get into
trouble. He reported that we use what we have to guess the best and the Director of Human Resources calls regularly and asks for updates and we move like that and if we do it every two months and take a look, we just have to wait until we have that experience. Mr. Evans questioned when the 2.4% was eventually determined. Mr. May responded that it was very late in the process so we had information through March and his letter was dated April 26, 2011. Mr. Evans questioned how valuable it is, the process that leads up to that, if you really do not have the best numbers until you are a month or two from the budget season. Mr. May responded that the political process of the budget setting means we have to start so that everybody knows what their departments need to look like. Mr. Evans responded all the more reason for a sub-committee. Mr. Shea commented to Mr. May that both the Town Manager and Mr. Evans said that we are very impressed with
him and they were right; thank you for all of your hard work. He reported that he is continually impressed with the people that work for the Town of Avon, our Town Attorney, people like yourself, come in and really represent yourselves well and serve the Town well so thank you and thanks for being patient with us.
10/11-62 Sign Tax Warrant (Rate Bill)
On a motion made by Mr. Pena, seconded by Mr. Evans, it was voted:
RESOLVED: That the Town Council authorizes the signing of the Tax Warrant/Rate Bill, as presented.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Shea, Pena, and Evans voted in favor.
10/11-63 Review, Discussion, & Approval: Agreement: Emergency Medical Services
Chairman Zacchio reported that there are a few contracts coming due, a proposal from UCONN for a reduction in our contract primarily because they are looking for the ability like other carriers to bill insurance directly which Dr. Adam Corrado supported as well.
The Town Manager reported that we are talking about three contracts tonight; two of the contracts involve AMR and third is a contract for service between the Town and the UCONN Health Center. He reported that one contract is with AMR and Farmington for the basic life support service, the transport service with no changes; the contract was initially for five years which allows for two years of extensions one year at a time and tonight he is recommending that Council authorize him to execute another one-year extension of that agreement. He reported that the next contract is basically a rider on that agreement between Avon and AMR and as you may recall, last year we were able to negotiate a new service through AMR and as of July 1, 2010 AMR began to provide advanced life support (ALS) paramedic service in Town
and AMR through this contract promised to provide a paramedic in Town during peak activity hours Monday through Friday and they have done that; the vehicle for that is this rider and he is recommending that they extend the rider for another year to expire June 30, 2012. He reported that there are no changes in those two agreements but there is a change in the third agreement with UCONN and the change is whereas Avon does not pay any fee to AMR, they make their money by billing the patients and insurance carriers directly; historically the town has paid UCONN a fee for service, in the current fiscal year it is approximately $54,000 and it covers their paramedic services to the community. He reported that what the Health Center stated to the Town that they would like to have the ability to bill for their service and in return for having the ability to bill the insurance carriers directly they would reduce the annual fee that the Town pays to approximately $27,000; that is
the primary change in the way that the three contracts that underpin our EMS service hang together.
The Town Manager reported that there has been a fair amount of discussion this past year and the main area of discussion has been an Ad-Hoc that the Town Manager asked the Chief of Police to pull together to talk about EMS services for the short-term knowing that all of these contracts are on a year-to-year basis, to have them think about contingency planning because UCONN is in a lot of flux and we saw a couple of years ago where they said they would not like to provide paramedic service anymore so we have no reason to believe that is going to happen again but just being prepared for the contingency, and also having this group think long-term as the community ages and needs of the community change what kind of service does that look like. He reported that the Ad-Hoc committee had representation from Dr. Corrado,
Council’s liaison for EMS service, Dr. Richard Kamin, our medical control officer at UCONN who oversees the patient that come in from a quality perspective and reviews the AMR records, the Avon Volunteer Fire Department, AMR, and Farmington staff; he thinks there is broad consensus that this is a good solution for now but he thinks there are still a number of questions out there and in particular there has been some frustration about getting data and what we should be looking at, how should we measure whether or not this is what we should be providing and how do we really know. He reported that it is turning out that a lot of that data just is not available or in the form that it needs to be in so while there is consensus, is it a fully informed consensus; there is general consensus at this point that this is the direction to go but a recognition that it is something that we need to continue to be mindful of and look at. He referred to two e-mails from Dr. Corrado
and stated that Dr. Corrado has been very helpful through this process and recognizes that the conversation is not over and something that we need to continue to look at; there is recognition on Dr. Corrado’s part that there is a difference between the UCONN paramedic and AMR paramedic. He reported that it is going to be an ongoing conversation, a good solution for now, and one area in particular where we are going to beef up our efforts, something that Chief Rinaldo is going to have the Police Captain work on as well, on really minding the shop when it comes to the AMR agreements as it is very complicated with penalties for non-compliance and something that we really need to actively manage that contract. Mr. Shea questioned if the Town Attorney ever looks at these contracts. The Town Manager responded that the Town Attorney looked at the initial contracts and the paramedic provision contract as it was a new contract, but the others it is basically the same
language. Mr. Shea questioned that if there is a change is it run by the Town Attorney. The Town Manager responded yes.
On a motion made by Mr. Shea, seconded by Mr. Evans, it was voted:
RESOLVED: That the Town Council recommends that the Town Manager be authorized to execute the agreement with UCONN for the provision of paramedic services and the contracts with Farmington and AMR for basic ambulance service and AMR for ALS service be extended for a period of one year from July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2012.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Evans, Pena, and Shea voted in favor.
10/11-64 Appointment: Inland Wetlands Commission (D – 12/31/2013)
On a motion made by Mr. Pena, seconded by Mr. Shea, it was voted:
RESOLVED: That the Town Council appoint Bryan Short to the Inland Wetlands Commission with a term to expire on December 31, 2013.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Evans, Pena, and Shea voted in favor.
VIII. TOWN MANAGER’S REPORT/MISCELLANEOUS
Misc. A: Purchasing Update: The Town Manager reported that our playing field/irrigation bid went out and as a result of the competitive bidding process we are actually back to where we started with our prior contractor which was Anderson Turf Irrigation and saved approximately $10,000 in the process. He reported that with the scrap metal recycling, per ton value of the scrap has gone up; we put it out to bid and are looking at another $6,500 in revenue on that front. He reported that in terms of the library project there has been a lot of RFP activity and into three bid packages now: millwork, phase one of information technology, and phase one of furnishings. He reported that millwork was the biggest surprise as we budgeted $85,000 for custom desks and
received a bid from a firm out of Florida for a cost of approximately $43,000; staff did their due diligence and reviewed all of the references and found that it was a credible bidder and the Library Building Committee recommended that the Town enter into a contract with this firm; there is a 100% bond so we are certainly covered in the event we have a problem and we have saved quite a bit on our budget. Mr. Evans commented that is a pretty big discrepancy. The Town Manager responded that he thinks everybody was surprised and because there was such a big discrepancy that is where the due diligence came in and actually tracked down the references for work that this firm has done for others and could not find any problems. Mr. Pena questioned if the firm has done work in Connecticut. The Town Manager deferred to the Assistant to the Town Manager who responded no but they have been in the Northeast including New Jersey, New York, and Massachusetts. He
reported that with the phase one of furnishings we budgeted approximately $400,000 and it came in at approximately $373,000, not as much savings but still good and this contract was also recommended and approved by the Library Building Committee.
Mrs. Samul questioned in the bids for the library, obviously the Clearwater bid is significantly below our estimate, is it that the bids are just coming in on schedule after considering a five to ten percent potential for error. She further reported that the bids are basically coming in at what we projected but then we had put a little bit of a cushion in there to be sure that we had enough money. The Town Manager responded that generally when we budget for these packages we look at it by line item, on aggregate and the last thing we want to do is not have enough. He reported that with the grounds maintenance/snow removal services bid it is one of our largest bids where we contract out a lot of the Public Works type services; one of the things that is a little bit complicated with this bid is that the
landscaping firms had the ability to submit bids on different parcels in Town so the idea was to get the best possible price; it would probably entail having one firm do all the work but they were allowed to bid on it separately. Mr. Evans questioned if this is a one-time thing. The Assistant to the Town Manager responded that it is a three-year contract. The Town Manager reported that with the technology infrastructure for the library project we were a little bit over by $15,000 but looking at it aggregate we have room in the other line items. He reported that phase two for furnishings for the library project is being put together and negotiating the scope for the movers by moving things around internally and not moving offsite. He reported that there has been a committee working on a dump truck replacement; it was in the FY 10/11 CIP for approximately $92,000 and the committee has completed their work and will be going out to bid shortly. He
reported that the turnaround on dump trucks is nothing like the fire trucks so the plan is to have it on the ground for the winter plowing season.
Mr. Shea questioned how big the contract is for the moving phase of the library project. The Assistant to the Town Manager responded that the budget for this item is $58,000. Mr. Shea asked if there is a reason why we do not have more than one bidder. The Town Manager responded that he does not know what the process was to get here but just being on the State bid list sometimes there is an assumption that is the lowest or most competitive bidder out there; he added that it did not go through the same process that the other items went through. The Assistant to the Town Manager added that part of the background is that William B Meyer, Co., a moving company, was brought in three years ago to take a look at the project when it was in its development stage. Mr. Shea questioned who brought them
in. The Assistant to the Town Manager responded that the former Assistant Town Manager and the Architect brought them in; they have a long history of doing work with libraries and the fact that they were on the State bid list, talked to the State Library and they said that they know the project so feel free to negotiate with them. Mr. Shea questioned if we put this item out to bid. The Assistant to the Town Manager responded no. Mr. Shea questioned who made that decision. The Assistant to the Town Manager responded that it is consistent with the Town’s purchasing policy where if you have a vendor on the State bid list there is not a need to competitively bid, as the same with CRCOG and many other contracts that we have. He added that the Library Building Committee had a lengthy discussion about this and came to the conclusion that because of those factors and the familiarity with the project that we could go forward and work with that
company.
Misc. B: Construction Update: The Town Manager reported that we have spent approximately $1.83 million on the library project with very little out of the project contingency thus far; there is an important measure which is that whenever you think about the guaranteed maximum price we have spent about eighteen percent of that. He reported that we are on track to get the grant funding from the State but the reimbursements from the State is triggered as you meet various milestones in the project and we are not there yet. He reported that we received notification from CL&P that we will be receiving a check in the amount of approximately $23,000 as a result of a large capital project that results in efficiencies. He reported that at the last Council meeting
safety concern at the library was raised. The Town Manager reported that to date CIRMA has made two unannounced visits to the library and always find something, make recommendations, and keep everyone on their toes; we have a lot of eyes on the project including Public Works Director, Building Official, and Fire Marshal who visit the project consistently. He reported that with regards to the STEAP grants we will be applying for Phase IV of our STEAP grant project and there is STEAP funding that is included in the Governor’s budget and the applications are due June 23, 2011. He reported that our plan is to continue with the sidewalks and the lighting to enhance the Town Center. He reported that with regards to the Police Communications Center Upgrade there was funding for this project in the FY 09/10 capital improvement budgets and total project appropriation was approximately $500,000; we still have a few invoices that are trailing out there but we
think we will end up with approximately $100,000 balance in the project. He reported that earlier this year we had discussions about equity in capital project funds so when a capital project is completed, we have some money leftover and how Council would like to handle that? He reported that he has some ideas on some other things that have come up, one of which is very closely related to the Police Communications Center and it has to do with laying fiber conduit and fiber to another location in Town so we have a point to point connection rather than paying a really expensive monthly charge. He reported that there is another project out there that has nothing to do with the Police Communications Center or Police Department but having this balance he would like to bring it forward to Council probably at your next meeting to have the discussion about it.
Misc. C: Captain Vacancy: The Town Manager reported that Captain Whitty’s last day was June 1st creating a vacancy in the Police Department now; he is working with Human Resources to prepare the documents to get this posted and to begin the recruitment process; it will be posted next week and would expect to have applications due around the end of June or into the middle of July given the fact that we are in the summer months and he wants to give folks as much time as possible to apply. He reported that we will be working diligently to get that filled.
Misc. D: Central Connecticut Solid Waste Authority: The Town Manager reported that there has been an extraordinary amount of activity on this; the legislature is in session and there are a few bills that directly affect CRRA and the CCSWA. He reported that he initially reported out, because CRRA had advised us, that they wanted towns to make decisions regarding their waste disposal contracts by July 1, 2011; towns had a problem with that and CRRA said that it does not have to be July 1, 2011 and we will push it to August 15, 2011. He reported that is what it was as of this morning. He reported that this evening First Selectman Dick Barlow informed him that there was a CRRA meeting earlier today and they have now pushed the date back to October 1, 2011.
The Town Manager reported that the reason there is this much activity is because the final disposition of some of the bills that are floating around could have an impact on what our options are. He reported that our exposure is minimal and has had the Town Attorney involved in all of this and we have thought through what the contingencies are. He reported that there are two kinds of towns that are involved with the Mid-CT Project: the original towns and the subscriber towns; Avon is a subscriber town, a contract town and furthermore the only waste that this affects for us is the waste that is coming directly out of our landfill. He reported that it is a fairly small tonnage compared to the Hartfords that are member towns running their waste operation and has a huge impact on them depending on where they finally dump their trash. He reported that there is more coming on this, we have a little more time, and he will keep Council updated as it moves but
it is not unlike the hydro project where there are a lot of little moving parts and once the session is over some of these things will solidify.
Misc. E: Old Farms Road Project: The Town Manager reported that after receiving a phone call last Thursday afternoon about a meeting we had been hoping to have with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) had been scheduled for Friday of which he, Tom Daukas, and Phil Schenck attended. He reported that there was also representation from FHWA who is the lead agency, a representative from the Army Corps Engineer, and representatives from the Department of Transportation (DOT) Environmental Planning Office, and the DOT Project Manager. He reported that what we are concentrating on now, and things move slowly, is getting the scope of services for the environmental assessment done and we are negotiating with these agencies the table of contents for the environmental
assessment. He reported that the reason we are putting so much time and care into this is that if we do not get the table of contents correct for the environmental assessment and get in there what all of these agencies need to see which is an extraordinary array of information then we will have wasted our time because we will produce an environmental assessment that will not meet their needs, we may get it approved but we will be nowhere when it comes to permitting. He reported that the way we are approaching this now is to deal in some measure with those permitting issues up front so that we take all of that into account, we make the rounds with the agencies, we make sure that we are getting all of the responses in writing for what they need to see so that whenever they come back to us at the end of the project and tell us that we did not do something we have thought enough about that that we can say that you should we did not have to and here is the letter. He
reported that this is where in the past this project has broken down a little bit; it has been in the spin cycle because we would go down a path we were told to go, people would change, and they would change the path on us; now that we have dedicated staff with Tom and Phil, doing the grunt work, we are really documenting it so we will get to a better place through this process. He reported that we have a follow-up meeting on June 15th to continue that discussion and hopefully finalize it; he will make sure that Council receives a copy of the scope with a lot of different things to look at. He reported that one thing that is very important about the scope of services is that there is a large public participation component involved in that as the agencies want to make sure that the local population has had their say in the process and the abutters have been notified so that will be a big piece. Mrs. Samul questioned if the abutters are anyone other than
the Town and Avon Old Farms School. The Town Manager responded that he does not mean abutters in a sense of a notification for a planning and zoning process but alerting residents on Cotswold Way, Scoville Road, and Thompson Road. Mrs. Samul responded that is good not only with the notification but the approach and attention to the table of contents because on the walk that was the criticism of the earlier one that was done about twenty years ago and it was not what they were looking for.
Misc. F: Planning Updates: Village Center & CREC: The Town Manager reported that the Village Center regulations are working their way through the process; Planning and Zoning has had the public hearing on the new regulations and was lightly attended and Planning and Zoning is likely going to adopt those regulations at their July meeting. He reported that there is another public hearing coming up that has to do with the design guidelines for subdivisions which are an outgrowth of the LID grant. He reported that the CREC proposal is going to move forward through the regulatory process; they have identified the Cider Mill Road (Dr. Beebe Property) as the location that best meets their needs; there are a number of regulatory hoops that they have to jump through,
including special permits and zone change.
Misc. G: Matrix Study Update: The Town Manager reported that he has had very productive and useful discussions with the new Superintendent of Schools about cooperation and he is on board. He reported that internally we have continued to move forward as funding has allowed with the recommendations that impact the Town side and these improvements are going to be transparent to Council but at the staff level will have a fairly significant impact including the upgrade to ADMINS which is having a very significant impact on the Town’s Finance Director as it takes a lot of time and training to get up to speed on it and implementation of a software package called NOVATIME which will automate our time-keeping procedures, much more efficient reporting system, provides better
reports about attendance, trend analysis; internally it does take some re-jiggering on the administrative side to get everyone following the process and procedurally getting it in place; Public Works is already on board and Police Department will be soon. Chairman Zacchio reported that we are really getting traction on some of the initiatives. He reported that he cancelled the last couple of Administrative Services Study Committee meetings as we are in the transition with a new Town Manager and new Superintendent of Schools, but we are getting a ton of traction now that the Town Manager has had time and the Superintendent of Schools had had a lot of experience and brought new experience to the table that he has done in terms of share and opportunities; the Committee will hold a meeting in July.
The Town Manager reported that as we head into the summer season you are going to see some road work around Town and he highlighted work specifically on the trails areas including Security Drive near Donnelly which is being done with grant funding. He reported that in the past we have had various requests to fill-in a very small path from Cotswold Way to the trail on Scoville Road; he and Public Works Director had a discussion about this a few months ago and something that kept coming up on the radar so it is really a very small that took a couple of days and did it all in-house and talked to the abutters.
The Town Manager reported in terms of the sewer and water projects, Haynes Road is going to be moving forward of which the road will be torn up for a little while as both the sewer project, being done by the developer, and Avon Water Company is doing a water project there. He reported that the infrastructure will be updated but there will be some inconvenience there for a little while.
The Town Manager reported he has been watching the process by COST an organization made up of small towns. He reported the Lt. Governor and the legislative leaders appear all on are the same page in that; municipalities will be the last place they are going for budgetary reductions.
The Town Manager reported in consultation with the Council Chairman the Town will be making two contributions in memory of the late Joseph Woodford, a past member of the Council. Also, the town flags will be flown at half mast on the day of Mr. Woodford’s memorial service.
On a motion made by Mrs. Samul, seconded by Mr. Shea, it was voted
RESOLVED: That the Town Council adds the following item to the agenda: 10/11-65 Memorial Contributions.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Shea, Pena and Evans voted in favor.
10/11-65 Memorial Contributions
On a motion made by Mr. Shea, seconded by Mrs. Samul, it was voted:
RESOLVED: That the Town Council authorize the Town Manager to make two contributions, each in the amount of $250.00 to Social Services and the Avon Volunteer Fire Department in memory of Joseph Woodford.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio Shea, Pena and Evans voted in favor.
Adam Lazinsk, who was in the audience brought to the Town Council’s attention, the passing of Officer Kennedy who was a member of the Avon Police Department for 20 years.
IX. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Collective Bargaining
On a motion made by Mr. Pena, seconded by Mrs. Samul, it was voted:
RESOLVED: That the Town Council go into Executive Session at 9:40 p.m.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Shea, Pena, and Evans voted in favor.
The Town Manager, the Assistant to the Town Manager, the Town Attorney, and the Clerk attended the session.
On a motion made by Mr. Pena, seconded by Mrs. Samul, it was voted:
RESOLVED: That the Town Council come out of Executive Session at 10:05 p.m.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Shea, Pena, and Evans voted in favor.
On a motion made Mr. Shea, seconded by Mr. Pena, it was voted:
RESOLVED: That the Town Council adds the following item to the agenda: 10/11-66 AFSCME Local 1303-096 Contract.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Shea, Pena and Evans voted in favor.
10/11-66 AFSCME Local 1303-096 Contract
On a motion made by Mr. Shea, seconded by Mr. Pena, it was voted:
RESOLVED: That the Town Council approve the AFSCME Local 1303-096 Contract as presented by the Town Manager for three years - July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2014 and which has been approved by the Public Works employees and is made part of these minutes as follows:
Rates of Pay Employees Group Insurance – Amend as follows:
July 1, 2011 – 1.75% All regular employees may join the medical plan
July 1, 2012 – 2.0% (PPO) currently administered by Cigna (the Plan)
July 1, 2012 – 2.0% subject to changes in State or Federal Law amended
as follows effective July 1, 2011
Co-Pay
Office Visit – From $ 5.00 to $10.00 effective July 1, 2012
From $10.00 to $15.00 effective July 1, 2013
Prescriptions: From 3/6 to $5/$10 effective July 1, 2012
From $5/$10 to $10/15 effective July 1, 2013
Mail Order – 2x co-pay effective July 1, 2012
Employee Group Insurance
Delete last paragraph regarding modifications of Section 8.1 as this provision has sunset with this agreement.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Shea, Pena and Evans voted in favor.
XI. ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 10:10p.m.
Attest:
Caroline B. LaMonica
Clerk
| 
