Skip Navigation
This table is used for column layout.
Town Council Minutes 09/06/2012
AVON TOWN COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
September 6, 2012


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. Pena, Evans, and May.

II.     PUBLIC HEARING - None

III.      MINUTES OF PRECEDING MEETING:   July 12, 2012 Regular Meeting

On a motion made by Mr. Pena, seconded by Mr. May, it was voted:
RESOLVED: That the Town Council accept the minutes of the July 12, 2012 Regular Meeting as submitted.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Pena, Evans, and May voted in favor.

IV.       COMMUNICATION FROM AUDIENCE

Ken Sedlak, President of the Avon Volunteer Fire Department, 33 Orchard Street, reported that he and Fire Chief Michael Trick were in attendance tonight to read a letter to the Town Council from the Avon Volunteer Fire Department Board of Directors regarding the training facility in Farmington.  Fire Chief Michael Trick, 48 Pine Tree Lane, read the letter (a copy is attached and made part of the minutes) to the Town Council.  Chairman Zacchio questioned if they are expecting that to be part of their CIP discussion as we get into the budget process.  Chief Trick responded yes it is.  Mr. Sedlak added that they are going to highlight it when they do their CIP presentation; they wanted to bring it forward now as it is important and time is running out to either get involved or step away from the project.  Mr. Evans questioned if there is a specific deadline.  Mr. Sedlak responded that Farmington is looking for a commitment, not money, either this month of next; they understand that the budget process is going to be a little beyond that but they wanted to let Council know the importance of it, the timeframe, and hopefully they can move forward on it as they have been working on this for close to ten years.

Chairman Zacchio questioned if Farmington is moving forward regardless of participation of all the towns.  Mr. Sedlak responded that they are; they are committed to go it alone and feel that it is that important of a facility to have.  Chairman Zacchio questioned if it is fair to expect that if we were to join later, i.e. during the budget process if we were to go in that direction, that it would be favorable to Farmington.  Chief Trick responded that is up to the governments to work out the details of that.  Mr. Sedlak guessed that if someone was willing to offer them funds towards the project that they would not turn it away.  Mr. Evans commented that Council had looked into this as a Board initiative as well so he shares all of their thoughts, but at this point he is not sure how we could even effectively or feasibly make a commitment, or within our powers to make a commitment, to participate with something that we do not have the power over the finances of the Town to honor that commitment coming up in the next CIP budget.  He added that it is worth continuing to have discussion about this.  Chief Trick commented that they wanted Council to be aware of the situation and the position that the Avon Volunteer Fire Department is in and they are going to continue to have conversation; the Town Manager has been talking to the other communities, the Assistant Town Manager has been a participant as well, and they keep them in the loop as to what is happening.

Chairman Zacchio questioned what the financial commitment was when it was presented in the past.  Mr. Sedlak responded that it is a rough number of $350,000.  Chairman Zacchio commented that was without Canton and if that changes the dynamic or as other towns come in might that change it.  Chief Trick responded that the initial four towns are what make up the rough number of $350,000.  Mr. Sedlak added that there is talk that Plainville and Burlington may not be involved but they are still willing to bet that if they went in as a 25% partner with Farmington as the other 75% they think Farmington would let them in and they can have that conversation instead of them going it alone.  Chief Trick added that the downside of this is that if Farmington does go it alone, then Avon has to schedule in and request; if Avon was a partner at the table or even a shareholder in it they have more power as to leverage their times of training and availability dates.  Mr. Evans commented that the $350,000 is like a buy in and becomes the initial investment but it does not mean that there are no further costs annually for participation.  Chief Trick responded that there would be annual funds that they would have to pay but would incorporate that into the Fire Department’s operational budget under training.  Mr. Evans questioned what they currently spend roughly annually to go to the other facility including travel.  Chief Trick responded that he does not have a specific breakdown.  Mr. Evans commented that we would have to look at all of that.

Chairman Zacchio questioned if the $350,000 is a lump sum payment and if there is any discussion with Farmington around payments over a number of years because if this is a capital budget item it is a hard sized item to absorb in one fiscal year but often times we will fund items like this over a period of years.  Mr. Sedlak responded that is a conversation they can have with Farmington.  Chairman Zacchio added that we are not there yet but just thinking ahead.  Mr. Sedlak commented that another thing they are going to do is to attempt to breakdown their costs is to seek donations, in-kind services, and grants towards the $350,000 that would make the number smaller.  Chairman Zacchio responded that would be good.  Mr. Pena questioned if this is a verbal or written commitment or something that has been discussed with Farmington already that the Council seems to be in favor of it but there is the financial part of it still needs to be discussed.  Mr. Sedlak responded that Farmington knows that they have to wait until the budget is in place.  The Town Manager reported that Mr. Sedlak, Chief Trick, and himself have been talking about this a lot and talking to the Town of Farmington.  He noted the cost-benefit analysis in Council’s folders that the Assistant Town Manager put together to get Council in the ball park for what is involved in buying in to the proposal; the issue right now is that it is a very fluid situation and the cost is really a function of the number of towns that are willing to participate in the project.  He added that at this point, based on what we know, if it were only two towns that participated being Farmington and Avon, and Farmington is not going to put anymore dollars into the project because their argument is that they purchased the land and they are building the structure with a great deal of in-kind services, Avon’s contribution would be $700,000.  He commented that we cannot make a commitment at this point other than to say that it is an intriguing proposal, we have to go through our capital budgeting process, and we will consider it in the context of all of the other obligations and priorities that we have.

Mr. Pena questioned if there is a maximum number of towns that would buy in to it.  Mr. Sedlak responded that the thought is to keep it at four towns with a limit of thirteen live burn dates per year.  Mr. Pena questioned if that falls within Avon’s type of training and schedule.  Chief Trick reported that those are only burn dates; the facility would be available to them whenever they can schedule it in and do all other types of training.  Mrs. Samul commented that as previously mentioned it would also be available for police training.  Chief Trick responded yes but unfortunately has not had a chance to speak to the Avon Chief of Police.  He noted that the Town of Farmington Police Department is very interested as well.

Sue Henneberry, 488 Huckleberry Hill Road, followed up on her e-mail that was sent to the Town Council regarding the Huckleberry Hill recreation area in the forestry program and wanted to publicly thank the Town Manager, the Director of Public Works, and the Forester for their professional response to her questions, their thorough response and the walk they went on yesterday on the property.  She noted that the more information she received, the calmer she became.  She added that it is probably beneficial for the public to get the information that she received as well.  She knows that this is phase one of three phases and she walks up there every day so she assured Council that if she gets worried again she will let them know.  She again said thank you for all of the people who gave her their time and effort; it was a very positive experience on her part.  Chairman Zacchio commented that it is very devastating when you first look at it if you do not understand the program; he took a walk up there as well and can remember when we were talking earlier when this same project was happening just towards Collinsville and it was a pretty wide open area and there is lot of science behind it.  He appreciated Ms. Henneberry coming in and appreciated the note because it got us into it even further.  The Town Managed noted that Ms. Henneberry brought a couple of items to our attention that we are going to be following up on: 1) replacing the existing and putting up additional signage in the area to explain what the project is and 2) a better job of communicating with the public what is going on because there is a very positive story to tell – we will put something in the October newsletter about what the project is and what the forest management and inventory plan is all about.  He noted that the plan is really fascinating and most recently updated by Ferrucci and Walicki in 2009/2010 and provides an inventory and management plan for 720 acres of the Town’s roughly 2,400 acres of open space and it will be posted on the Town’s web site as well.  Mrs. Samul questioned if we will be using the Natural Resources Commission to help with that.  The Town Manager responded that we can bring them into the loop.

V.        COMMUNICATION FROM COUNCIL

Mrs. Samul commended the Town Clerk and Registrar of Voters on the recent election; they responded beautifully to e-mails and questions that day and also changed their hours to accommodate the public to be sure that no one was confused or disenfranchised.

Mr. May reported that he had a personal matter to take care of at the Assessor’s Office and expressed what a wonderful job those employees did to alleviate his fears of paying for a leased car that a bank thought that he had never returned to them a year or two ago.

VI.       OLD BUSINESS

11/12-81        Energy Plan

Chairman Zacchio reported that members of the Avon Clean Energy Commission presented the Plan to the Board of Education at the Board’s last meeting.  He noted that there might be some slight changes being made to the Plan and it will be presented to Council at the next meeting for formal adoption.  The Town Manager reported that Council should not see any changes and maybe only some reformatting otherwise it is basically what Council saw earlier in the year.

On a motion made by Mr. Pena, seconded by Mr. Evans, it was voted:
RESOLVED:  That the Town Council table agenda item 11/12-81 Energy Plan to the next meeting.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Evans, Pena, and May voted in favor.

VII.      NEW BUSINESS

12/13-04        Approve Resolution: STEAP Grant, Village Center Streetscape Project
                Phase III, $215,911

Chairman Zacchio reported that this application for a STEAP grant will continue the Village Center Streetscape Project that we talked about a few months ago down Hopmeadow Street and connecting sidewalks to Sperry Park.  The Town Manager reported that the idea is to continue on the east side of Route 10 heading north, getting as far as we can and hopefully being able to connect the sidewalk with a signalized crosswalk there.  Chairman Zacchio commented that construction would start in the Spring and questioned how long it would take to complete.  The Town Manager responded that he did not recall exactly but it is not a very big project and once we cut it open and because it is such a high profile area we will get right into it and finish it.  The Assistant Town Manager added that the curbing would be the only part that would impact traffic and would be done in a fairly short window; a lot of sidewalk work is far enough off the road that should be done without impacting traffic.  Chairman Zacchio commented that the earlier we can get started the better as he thinks it will be fairly well traveled and if we can get it done early in the Spring we have the whole season in front of us that people can use it.  He added that it should come first on the list and noted that we will have in-kind services with this as well.  The Town Manager responded yes.

On a motion made by Mr. Evans, seconded by Mr. Pena, it was voted:
WHEREAS, pursuant to CTS 4-66G, the Connecticut Department of Economic and Community Development is authorized to extend financial assistance for economic development projects; and
WHEREAS, it is desirable and in the public interest that the Town of Avon make an application to the State for $215,911 in order to undertake the Village Center Streetscape Project Phase III and to execute an Assistance Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE Town Council
  • That it is cognizant of the conditions and prerequisites for the State financial assistance imposed by CTS 4-66G
  • That the filing of an application for State financial assistance by the Town of Avon in an amount not to exceed $215,911 is hereby approved and that Brandon L. Robertson, Town Manager is directed to execute and file such application with the Connecticut Department of Economic and Community Development, to provide such additional information, to execute such other documents as may be required, to execute an Assistance Agreement with the State of Connecticut for State financial assistance if such an agreement is offered, to execute any amendments, decisions, and revisions thereto, and to act as the authorized representative of the Town of Avon.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Evans, Pena, and May voted in favor.

12/13-05        Board of Education: Supplemental Appropriation Request, $48,901.99
                (unbudgeted revenue)

Chairman Zacchio reported that is probably one of the last supplemental appropriations from the Board of Education associated with unbudgeted revenue for the year-end closing that we have been doing each month as the year has progressed but the way that the budgeting is done now these will not be items that we will have to do in the future.

On a motion made by Mr. Pena, seconded by Mr. May, it was voted:
RESOLVED:  That the Town Council hereby recommends that the Board of Finance amend the FY 11/12 Budget by increasing:
REVENUES
General Fund, Charges for Services, BOE Employee Bnft Contrib,  Dent/Life, Account #01-0340-43505 in the amount of ($1,159.82); General Fund, Charges for Services, BOE Open Choice Attendance, Account #01-0330-43343 in the amount of $5,372.00; General Fund, Charges for Services, BOE Misc. General Fund, Account #01-0340-43506 in the amount of $14,817.97; General Fund, Charges for Services, BOE Food Service Rent, Account #01-0340-43510 in the amount of $29,871.84, for a total of $48,901.99.
and increasing
                             APPROPRIATIONS
General Fund, Board of Education, General Service, Account #01-9401-52185 in the amount of $48,901.99 for the purpose of recording unbudgeted revenues received to cover Board of Education operating expenditures.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Evans, Pena, and May voted in favor.

12/13-06        Approve Fiscal Year 2013/2014 Budget Calendar

Chairman Zacchio questioned the Board of Education budget usually being due by the Charter on February 15th, being moved up to February 1st and if the Superintendent of Schools was aware of that and going to be comfortable with that date.  The Town Manager responded that last year the Superintendent submitted his operating budget to him in November.  Council decided to amend the date for the Board of Education to submit their budget to Town Council to February 15, 2013.

On a motion made by Mr. Pena, seconded by Mr. Evans, it was voted:
RESOLVED: That the Town Council adopt the Fiscal Year 2013/2014 Budget Calendar as follows:

ACTIVITY
LATEST DATE
PER TOWN CHARTER
RECOMMENDED
DATE

Capital Budget Forms Prepared
and sent to Departments
August 06, 2012
Operating Budget Forms Prepared
and sent to Departments
September 07, 2012

Completed Capital Budget Forms          
returned to Town Manager

October 05, 2012
Completed Operating Budget Forms returned to Town Manager
February 15, 2013
November 02, 2012
Town Manager’s Proposed Operating and Capital Budget submitted to Town Council
March 01, 2013
January 18, 2013

Board of Education Budget to Town Council
February 15, 2013
February 15, 2013
Capital Improvement Program Submitted to Planning & Zoning Commission for Sec. 8-24 Review


March 05, 2013
Budget Work by Town Council completed and Budget Submitted to Board of Finance
April 01, 2013
March 25, 2013
Public Hearing on Budget held by Board of Finance not later than three (3) weeks before  May 06, 2013 Town Meeting

April 15, 2013

April 08, 2013

Board of Finance Completes Work on Budget

April 10, 2013
Copy of Budget approved by the Board of Finance printed in Newspaper at least five (5) days before the Annual Town Meeting

May 01, 2013

April 30, 2013
Annual Town and Budget Meeting First Monday in May
May 06, 2013
May 06, 2013
First Referendum
May 17, 2013
May 15, 2013
Second Referendum
June 07, 2013
June 05, 2013
Third Referendum
June 28, 2013
June 26, 2013
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Pena, Evans, and May voted in favor.

12/13-07        Review, Discussion & Set Public Hearing Date: Code of Ordinances,
                Chapter 2 Section 21 (b) (1), (2) & (4)

The Town Manager reported that the first four items listed on the draft legal notice have to do with this agenda item.  He added that the Town has a Pension Ordinance and the Town closed out its Defined Benefit Plans in 1997.  There are four groups: non-union, dispatch, public works, and police.  He noted that the Board of Education has one Defined Benefit Plan that is open and the Town also has a number of Defined Contribution Plans, in the late 1990s we migrated from Defined Benefit to Defined Contribution.  He reported that from time to time we have our pension attorney look through the Pension Ordinance, the Plan documents, and determine whether or not we are in compliance with current state and federal law.  He noted that during this last review Counsel recommended that the Pension Ordinance and the Plans be updated to reflect the adoption of the HEART Act.  He explained that the HEART Act is a federal law, called the Heroes Earnings Assistance and Relief Tax Act of 2008, and how the Plan would react in the event of the death of a veteran or active service member.  He added that these changes have to be incorporated into the Plans to maintain compliance with federal law.
The Town Manager also reported that with the Police Officers Defined Contribution Plan as part of a negotiated settlement with the IBPO there was a change in the Defined Contribution benefit structure so that the vesting period was increased and both the employee and employer contribution were increased as well.  Therefore the Defined Contribution Plan documents have to be amended to reflect that underlying agreement.

Mr. Evans questioned if the Plan documents are incorporated as part of the Town Ordinance.  The Town Manager responded that the Ordinance refers to the Plan documents and permits the establishment of the pension Plans and references the actual regulations of the Plan.  Mr. Evans questioned if every time there is a change in law that affects one of our Ordinances we need to change our Ordinances.  Dwight Johnson, Town Attorney, responded that is one way that you can interpret State law; State law is unclear on this subject and rather than have you modify this Ordinance every time there is a small, non-substantiate change in your Plans every year or two revise the Ordinance to incorporate all the changes that may have occurred in the Plan documents up to that point in time.  He added that the law in Connecticut is unclear as to whether or not you even have to do this but their recommendation is to incorporate these changes into the Plan Ordinances.  Mr. Evans questioned if there would be anyway of wording our Ordinances in a way that allows for it to incorporate changes automatically by State law.  Mr. Johnson responded that they do not think so.  Mrs. Samul commented that the State law on licensing refers to the Uniform Standard of Professional Appraisal Practices and says that whenever which changes a licensed appraiser has to abide by it and that is changed by a federal entity.  She added that the Town Attorney just explained that you cannot word our Ordinance to say that whenever the State changes something pertaining to this it will also be modified.  Mr. Johnson responded that they do not think that we can, in fact there was a Supreme Court case a number of years ago that disallowed changes to a Retirement Plan because all of the changes had not been made at the municipal level, adopted through an Ordinance so they are being cautious and have done it in a way where all of the Plans are incorporated by reference so only talking about one page out of your Code of Ordinances.  He added that they would not be comfortable using the same approach for the Retirement Plans as apparently can be used for licensing.  Chairman Zacchio commented that he would think that we would want to retain the control of Ordinance change here instead of incorporating it somehow into language to allow it to flow through because theoretically we could make a different decision on the Ordinance or the Plan altogether if we are even going to have it or not.  Mrs. Samul questioned if a local Ordinance would not automatically be overruled by a higher legal body like State or Federal.  Chairman Zacchio responded that you can eliminate it.  Mr. Johnson responded that Mrs. Samul is correct and that in many cases it would be trumped by State or Federal law but not all of these changes are dictated by Federal or State law and there are choices that you are making and there are also changes that you are making as a result with your union groups.  Council thanked Mr. Johnson for his explanation.

On a motion made by Mr. Pena, seconded by Mr. May, it was voted:
RESOLVED:  That the Town Council set a public hearing date to be held at the next meeting on the following:
        1.  To consider and permit all interested persons to speak on the plan of the Town Council to amend the Retirement Plan for Police Officers, Non-Organized Employees, Public Works Employees and Dispatchers of the Town of Avon to include HEART Act Provisions, as defined in the Town of Avon, Connecticut Code of Ordinances.  These provisions apply to participants who enter military service, and are required by law.
        2.  To consider and permit all interested persons to speak on the plan of the Town Council to amend the Retirement Plan for the Board of Education of the Town of Avon to include HEART Act Provisions, as defined in the Town of Avon, Connecticut Code of Ordinances.  These provisions apply to participants who enter military service, and are required by law.
        3.  To consider and permit all interested persons to speak on the plan of the Town Council to amend the Town of Avon 401(a) Government Money Purchase Plan A.N. 109844, and 401(a) Prototype Money Purchase Plan A.N. 109284 as well as 457 Deferred Compensation Plan A.N. 302055 to include HEART Act Provisions and all associated amendments, as defined in the Town of Avon, Connecticut Code of Ordinances.  These provisions apply to participants who enter military service, and are required by law.
        4.  To consider and permit all interested persons to speak on the plan of the Town Council to amend the Town of Avon 401(a) Government Money Purchase Plan (A.N. 109844) applicable to Police IBPO Union Members, as defined in the Town of Avon, Connecticut Code of Ordinances.  The amendment increased Town and participant contributions in accordance with negotiated contractual changes and revises Plan vesting provisions.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Pena, Evans, and May voted in favor.

12/13-08        Review, Discussion & Set Public Hearing Date: Code of Ordinances –
                Chapter 55 Section 32 (b) Veterans

Chairman Zacchio reported that currently the Ordinance allows for tax exemption for property in Avon up to and including any improvements being made by a disabled veteran for using that as a home.  He noted that the Federal statute has changed and only allows for either an exemption of taxes in whole for the residents or no exemption at all.  He reported that we are no longer within code of what the government wants us to do and have to make the change to the Ordinance.  The Town Manager reported that it is the Federal law, 38USC, that sets the criteria and it is the State statute that provides municipalities with the local option to either offer all or nothing.  He added that the Town Assessor’s Office is responsible for administering this benefit program.  It was initially adopted by the Council in 1986 and 38USC has very stringent requirements to receive benefits through for veterans and under this law the State statute permits municipalities to waive, at local option, 100% of the taxes due on a property that is improved through the use of these funds.  He noted that the way the Town Ordinance is currently worded it allows the Town to reduce only a fraction of the assessment.

The Town Assessor reported that this something that is a Federal law that State statute allows local municipalities to adopt on a local level by option.  He noted that we did adopt the Ordinance allowing for it for what we thought was appropriate and correct at the time and have since learned that it is not correct.  He reported that there was intent to provide some kind of benefit so to keep with the same intent that was back when it was originally adopted would be to amend the current Ordinance to allow for the complete exemption.  He noted that to qualify there is a very strict set of criteria; the Veterans’ Administration allocates a certain amount of dollars for improvements and those improvements can be spent either at once or over a period of time and they have to certify that the improvements are correct and meet their regulations before they are released.  He noted that unlike a normal veteran’s exemption where someone might file a DD214 with the Town Clerk and they receive the benefit, this has additional regulatory process to follow where the VA has to approve it.  He reported that once it is approved and appropriate proof has been received then the applicant would be entitled to the exemption.  He noted that to date we have not been approached other than our current discussion and currently the gross assessment of veterans’ exemptions that the Town currently provides is approximately $3,800,000.  He commented that we do provide a fairly large amount currently and this benefit should it be used would be a small percentage of what we currently offer.  He feels that we need to amend our Ordinance to meet the law.

The Clerk questioned that we have it defined as qualifying under limitations of income, but under the Federal or State now there are no means testing.  The Town Assessor responded that there are no means testing now.  The Clerk questioned if item 5 on the legal notice reads properly.  Council agreed that the wording “for veterans who meet the qualifying income limitations” should be changed.

Lt. Aaron Frankum, United States Navy Retiree, 234 Flood Road, Marlborough, and they are one of the three municipalities that have adopted this local option.  He can attest that having went through the minimum planning requirements for a home to go through the VA process to have those funds released are a nightmare to say the least so the VA is really staying on top of things that qualify for this type of exemption.  He noted that there are two people in Marlborough that are able to take advantage of this and there is about a dozen in the whole state that qualify for it.  He added that the requirements are rather stringent and lengthy but thanked Council for taking the time to put forth the discussion.  He also thanked the Assistant Town Manager for his assistance.

Chairman Zacchio commented to Lt. Aaron Frankum that it should be Council thanking him for your service, bringing this to us, and agrees with the Town Assessor and thinks the Council will as well that there is no better way for us to honor he thinks what was intended by the Council in 1986 and provide a benefit to our veterans but also to say thank you the real way and that is putting our money where our mouth is in terms of how we move forward with this Ordinance.

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 be held at the next meeting, with the correction in the legal notice as noted, to consider and permit all interested persons to speak on the modification of Veterans Taxation permitted under G.S. 12-81f as defined in the Town of Avon, Connecticut Code of Ordinances to be held at the next meeting.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Pena, Evans, and May voted in favor.

12/13-09        Review, Discussion & Set Public Hearing Date for proposed ordinance:
                Chapter 18 Illegal Discharge and Illicit Connection to Stormwater
                Drainage Systems

The Town Manager reported that the Town operates its storm sewer system under a State permit, called the MS4 permit and the Town is required to apply for the permit from DEEP every couple of years.  He noted that the current permit needs to be renewed and there is a new requirement in the regulation language under which we need to apply for the permit that says those that are operating MS4 permits need to have an Ordinance or other regulatory mechanism in place to deal with issues of non-compliance, i.e. illegal discharges into the stormwater system.  He reported that counsel took a look at it and not knowing exactly what an “other” regulatory mechanism would be suggested that what the Town should consider is the adoption of an Ordinance.  He noted that the proposed Ordinance is the standard format that is being adopted across the State and will help us to meet the requirements for getting the permit renewed under the DEEP regulations.  He asked counsel to review the Ordinance language to determine whether or not we can cut down the language without changing any of the meaning to keep the verbiage to a minimum.  He noted that it is not a requirement but it is highly recommended by DEEP that we have this so we can get our permit renewed to operate the stormwater management system.

Mr. Evans questioned whether or not we know if there are any issues in Town regarding discharge.  The Town Manager responded that we do not think so and even if we did come across an issue, as it stands right now we do not have regulatory authority or an Ordinance in place that would allow us to recover the costs of the solution to the problem.  He noted that the regulatory agent is the Director of Public Works; there are probably some minor issues as you will always see unfortunately people dumping oil into the catch basins but it should not come out of the wood work.  Mr. Pena questioned that awhile back in Planning and Zoning we talked about a discharge issue.  The Director of Community and Planning Development responded that Mr. Pena might be referring to the Aquifer Protection Regulations that were adopted and another DEEP program in combination with the individual water companies and are separate rules that were adopted by the Town and were administered by the Planning and Zoning Commission.  Mr. May questioned if there is a list of contaminates that would be considered contaminates in this Ordinance.  The Town Manager responded not in the Ordinance but the MS4 permit would have the language regarding the specific contaminates that are included.  Mr. May questioned what is a contaminate, as anything can be a contaminate?  Chairman Zacchio responded that it can be any non-stormwater drain run off.  The Town Manager referred Council to Section K of the Ordinance and for the next meeting would dig into the permit a little bit more to flush this out a little bit.  Mr. May questioned if anyone tests for this stuff and how do you know that there are contaminates in the stormwater.  The Town Manager responded that this is where there is an obvious discharge and you actually see it happen.  The Assistant Town Manager added that we are required to do periodic tests as previously mentioned by the Director of Public Works.  Chairman Zacchio noted that we do this as a course of business today and this really puts an Ordinance in place that gives us the authority to act on an issue if we know it.

On a motion made by Mr. Evans, seconded by Mr. Pena, it was voted:
RESOLVED:  That the Town Council set a public hearing date to be held at the next meeting to consider and permit all persons to speak on the adoption of an Ordinance concerning Illegal Discharge and Illicit Connection to Storm Water Drainage System to be held at the October 4, 2012 meeting.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Pena, Evans, and May voted in favor.

12/13-10        Approval of Real Estate Tax Refund, $2,466.01

Chairman Zacchio reported that this tax refund is a result of a double payment.

On a motion made by Mr. Evans, seconded by Mr. Pena, it was voted:
RESOLVED: That the Town Council approves a real estate tax refund to Ben Van De Bunt & Laura Fox in the amount of $2,466.01.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Pena, Evans, and May voted in favor.

12/13-11        Contract Award: Property/Casualty & Workers Compensation Insurance,
                $372,929

The Town Manager reported that we have been with CIRMA since 2002/2003 and CIRMA is the provider for both our Liability-Automobile-Property (LAP) policies and Workers Compensation (WC) carrier.  He reported that we are proposing a three-year agreement with CIRMA going out through 2015.  He noted that the last time that a formal RFP was issued for LAP and WC was in 2009 but we have an interesting situation in Avon where we have a contract with Chris Wardrop of USI who is the Town’s independent insurance advisor and his job is to give the best professional advice that he can to the Town with respect to the acquisition of the insurance program and that includes making sure that we have the right kind of insurance, the proper deductibles, the proper amounts.  He noted that is very important because when you put all of those policies together the total program is almost $600,000 per year and something that we do spend a fair amount of time on.  He reported that Mr. Wardrop and his office are always scanning the environment and testing the market, looking to see what other providers are out there in preparation for advising the Town, especially on whether or not to issue a full-blown RFP or basically to do a soft RFP which is what they did this time, poking into the other carriers and see if it makes any sense for us to go through the work.  He noted that in this case they recommended that we not go out for a full bid and a lot of reasons for that and the Town go ahead and enter into a three-year rate cap agreement with CIRMA for both the provision of LAP and WC coverage.  He reported that the only real year is 2013 and for the other years it is WC 10% and LAP 7% for 2014, WC 10% and LAP 7% for 2015 and those are rate caps.  He noted that for each of those years our actual renewal is going to be based on the experience for the prior year and how aggressive we can be in terms of the renewal.  He commented that regardless of what our actual experience is the increase will not exceed 10% on the WC side or 7% on the LAP side.  He added that this proposal was the result of a lot of back and forth with the carrier and did not simply take the carrier’s initial proposal and run with it, there was a lot of negotiating that went on there to get the rates down.

Chairman Zacchio asked the Town Manager if he would recommend that we do not do a soft market evaluation in 2015 and rather go out to bid at that point.  The Town Manager responded that we wait and see.  He noted that he is all for soft RFPs and he thinks it makes sense in this case but whenever you start getting out six or seven years from the last time you did a full RFP regardless of what the consultants recommend he always thinks it is a good business practice to put it out there and maybe you get a response that you had not expected.  Mrs. Samul questioned that for FY 13/14 and FY 14/15 that is a max and could potentially be less.  The Town Manager responded that for 2013 that is the actual but for 2014 and 2015 their commitment is that it is the max regardless of our experience.  Mr. May questioned how long we have had that insurance carrier.  The Town Manager responded CIRMA has been underwriting the Town since the early 2000s.  Mr. May asked if they have had caps previously.  The Town Manager responded yes.  Mr. May asked how the experience has been as far as charging the Town versus the caps that they have published.  The Town Manager responded that we have not gone back and done a complete look back but Mr. Wardrop’s recollection is that they have typically come in under the caps so these historically have been not to exceed amounts and the actual renewal rates have been lower.  Mr. May asked how much lower.  The Town Manager responded that he did not know.  He added that there are so many different factors that go into a renewal number and a lot of it has to do with the reinsurance market and all the different pieces that the insurers have to bake into the pie.
Mr. Evans thanked the Town Manager and the Assistant Town Manager for all of the work that they have put into this.  Mr. Evans asked for clarification on whether CIRMA is an insurance carrier or an agency as their letterhead says agency in their name.  The Town Manager responded that CIRMA is the agency.  Mr. Evans questioned who the insurer is.  The Town Manager responded that the insurer is CIRMA; they have reinsurance contracts and their own underwriters, the agency term is misleading.

Mr. Evans questioned if traditional companies like The Hartford or Travelers do municipal insurance.  The Town Manager responded that has been talked about; Travelers in the past has done some WC but for a lot of the reasons that he and Mr. Wardrop got into last week CIRMA is the municipal choice in Connecticut for WC coverage.  Mr. Evans thought that a lot of WC insurance is set by regulation but depending on the type of worker that is assigned a rate, a high risk job versus a desk job, and thought that is largely what controls your rates and is not negotiable, you cannot shop it, the State sets the rate through regulation and questioned if that is the same in municipalities.  The Town Manager responded that a lot of it is based on the covered payroll but municipalities by their risk profile, we have Police Officers and Public Works employees so there are a lot of injuries that go along with that and it pushes the cost up.  Mr. Evans commented that it is a pretty big number at close to $600,000 and not having the experience in how the Town has done this before, he questioned if we are going to be criticized as a Council for not having put the RFP out there for that kind of number and relying just exclusively on our insurance consultant to say he did a soft analysis and this is who we should really go with; it seems the pricing and the caps is all fair and does not doubt the strength of the conclusions but from a bigger macro prospective should we as representatives of the Town make sure that we go through the exercise, even if it proves as the exactly same result, of putting this out to bid.  He noted that certainly if we are getting an apparatus or a truck or a piece of equipment, if it were $600,000 there would be no question that we would issue it out to bid.  The Town Manager responded that at this point it is a good business decision to renew with CIRMA; most of the Towns in the State are renewing with CIRMA and there just are not other insurers out there especially on the LAP side that are going to underwrite the Town.  He noted that Mr. Wardrop went through and talked with him about some of the insurers that had been involved in the past in Connecticut’s municipal market and one of them became insolvent half way through a policy year, the policies were all sold off, and there was some kind of fund that was created to deal with all of that.  He shares some of the same concerns and basically Mr. Wardrop’s take on it was that this is the player in the market and at this point we are getting the best rates with the best coverage that we are possibly going to get under this arrangement.  He added that even looking out three years from now if the recommendation was the same, at that point given the fact that we had been locked up without an RFP since 2009 regardless of what the consultant says his recommendation would be to shop it.  Chairman Zacchio commented that he had the same concerns as Mr. Evans and the only thing that he is comfortable is that we had gone through that less than three years ago and that we have a consultant who is in the same place and getting the same result and probably a better business decision but he agrees that once we go out a few more years from a due diligent perspective it would seem prudent to go out to RFP regardless of what our consultant might say at that time.  Mr. Evans questioned how our consultant is paid.  The Town Manager responded it is a flat fee under a consulting agreement; it is just like the agreement with Milliman with respect to our health insurance consultant, somebody that we are paying who does not have relationship with insurance companies whose sole obligation is to give Council and staff their unbiased opinion.

On a motion made by Mr. Pena, seconded by Mrs. Samul, it was voted:
RESOLVED:  That the Town Council approves the extension of a three-year agreement with Connecticut Interlocal Risk Management Agency (CIRMA) in an amount not to exceed $372,929 for the Liability-Automobile-Property (LAP) and Workers Compensation (WC) insurance coverage required by the Town and Board of Education.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Evans, Pena, and May voted in favor.

VIII.      TOWN MANAGER’S REPORT/MISCELLANEOUS

Misc. A:  Purchasing Update:  The Assistant Town Manager reported that we had interviews yesterday related to the Old Wheeler Lane Bridge replacement project that was funded in the Capital Improvement Program in the amount of $25,000; the project qualifies under the Federal Local Bridge Program so we will be obligated to pay 20% of the cost.  He noted that A.I. Engineers, in Middletown, CT was the number one choice; their resume includes federal and local bridge projects that they have successfully completed.  He noted that the Project Manager that will be assigned to our project is new to A.I. Engineers but was the State’s Manager of the Federal Local Bridge Program for the past twenty-two years.  He commented that the funding is in place to explore what our options are for replacing the bridge; good news is that the recommendation being made is not to replace the whole bridge.  He noted that it is the super structure that is rated poor by the State; the firm could put a new deck on the bridge and those abutments would outlast the new deck that they put on so no reason for a full replacement which will save the Town a lot of money.  Mrs. Samul questioned if the $25,000 that we allocated holds well.  The Assistant Town Manager responded that it is going to get us to a point where we will have a hard construction number to do the rehabilitation.  He added that the State came up with a budget number of $800,000 to $1.1 million but that is based on no actual field analysis of our bridge; everyone seems to think that number will be significantly less.  He noted that the State DOT will come in and meet with us, our Town Engineer will be the lead on that, and we will start talking to A.I. Engineers about a negotiated fee and getting some schematics together so we can get our arms around what the cost of the work will be.  He added that we are permitted under this program to proceed up to 30% of the way through the estimated project cost and still say that we do not want to do the project and still be reimbursed for the 80%.  He reported that the State will give us a letter at the point where we are approaching and will surpass the 30% and that is when the Town has to make a decision as to whether they want to proceed with the work or take the 80% reimbursement on the design phase and walk away.  He noted that there could be good reasons to do that, one of which is that we will get scouring analysis of what is beneath the abutments and a lot of the design work done at a reimbursable rate and we may decide prior to hitting the 30% threshold we would like to take all of the permitting and analysis that has been done and sit on it because the bridge is not at a critical stage and recently rated as poor.  He reported that more information will be provided on this through the Construction Update moving forward.

The Assistant Town Manager reported that we have been with Fuss & O’Neill Technologies for IT services for a few years.  The most recent based contract is expiring in October and there is an option to extend it on an annual basis for as long as we want.  He noted that there has been some discussion lately whether we may want to test the market again for that.  He reported that he thinks the IT Committee is going to be recommending that we execute that additional year and start talking early next year about whether it is time to test the market again which would be next summer and a fairly complex RFP to put out.  Mrs. Samul questioned if the contract is being extended at the same rate/fee.  The Assistant Town Manager responded yes and noted that the number is roughly $80,000 to $85,000 per year.

Misc. B:  Construction Update:  The Assistant Town Manager reported that this building will look a little bit different at our last meeting.  We have gone through and had the pre-renovation survey done and found some of the same materials that they found when they looked at Buildings 5/6/7 on this campus which is not a big surprise; there are asbestos tiles beneath the carpet which no one seems to think need to be disturbed; the last time that side of the building was carpeted they took up the old carpet and put down the new carpet and in the testing that was done it came up pretty easily so they will be pulling up the carpet and removing any asbestos that comes up.  He reported that they also found asbestos in the joint compound in the former Probate Court office.  In the middle of October we will be abating what was discovered and then Public Works will begin the demolition work.  Chairman Zacchio questioned if the office staff would be relocating to the Avon Room.  The Town Manager responded that he would most likely be in the Building #1 conference room and everybody else in the Avon Room.  He added that we are going to do as much work as we possibly can in-house so as we get into the fall Public Works crews will be doing a lot of this.  He reported that the former Probate Court area would be a conference room and try to improve the entrance area to make it a little more welcoming and create a little visitor’s area and generally re-arrange things to help with the flow and make better use of the space that we have.

The Assistant Town Manager reported that with regards to the FY 12/13 Pavement Management Program Springbrook Road happens to be the number one road in the CIP for replacement and the Director of Public Works is going to approach that the same way that he is approaching the Huckleberry Hill Area where the contractor will supply him with a certain amount of restoration; the Town is going to get a lot more bang for its buck by taking that dollar value and rebuilding the road which needs to be done.  Mrs. Samul questioned where are we in our paving for the summer.  The Assistant Town Manager responded that we are near complete with Timber Lane; by September 21st they will be doing the road work in the Huckleberry Hill Area and they will get a binder down on Springbrook this season, let it settle and then do a final coat next summer.  Mrs. Samul questioned if we were going to get to Stagecoach.  The Assistant Town Manager responded no.  He added that approximately six miles of crack sealing will also be completed this fall.

Misc. C:  Storm Alfred Reimbursement Update:  The Assistant Town Manager reported that the Town received paperwork from FEMA identifying what the dollar amount reimbursement from FEMA would be and also submitted all of the required paperwork to FHWA as they will be reimbursing us for some of our costs at a better rate of 100% vs. 75% for FEMA roads; the auditors have seen the paperwork and said the Town should go ahead and book all of the receivables for the fiscal 2012 end-of-year which is going to be approximately $2.25 million which comes to more than 75%, so thanks to the hard work of the Director of Public Works the Town will be reimbursed more than we had anticipated when all of this started a year ago.  The Town Manager reported that for most of us that storm ended fairly quickly, but the Director of Public Works is still in the midst of it and the amount of paperwork that is required from FEMA to support the request for reimbursement is quite stunning.  He noted that Laurie Carlson, DPW Administrative Coordinator, did a great job; they went through three different FEMA representatives but got it all in.  Mr. May questioned when we might get the funds as he thought Simsbury had gotten theirs already.  The Town Manager responded that he did not know that anybody has gotten the actual check, but most of the communities have probably received notification that the FEMA representatives have accepted the packet and given us enough comfort so the auditors can tell us to go ahead and book the revenue.  He added that even though the packets have been accepted there is still an internal review process from FEMA; FEMA then cuts a check to the State of Connecticut Department of Emergency Management and Homeland Security who then cuts a check to the Town.  Mrs. Samul questioned where are we again.  The Assistant Town Manager responded that our work is done and because the threshold was more than $1 million it does not go from the field to Washington, it went from the field to Boston to Washington.  The Town Manager reported that there could be a bottleneck at the State as they have a very small office that is turning around all of this.  Mrs. Samul questioned if it has been through Boston.  The Assistant Town Manager responded that it is our understanding that it has been through Boston.  Mrs. Samul commented that now it would be the federal government sending the money to the State.  She questioned if this require that the House and Senate approve additional funds for FEMA.  The Town Manager responded no, that there is an existing federal appropriation.  Mr. Evans questioned what the purpose is of booking the revenue in this year before we actually get the check.  The Town Manager responded that the importance is that it was an approximate $2.7 million unbudgeted expenditure so if we did not go ahead and book the revenue based on the auditor’s advice it would have a significant impact on the year-end closing and probably end up with an operating deficit because of a $2.7 million hole that you had not anticipated therefore, to close for the year you would either have to drawn equity in capital project funds or transfer in from undesignated unassigned fund balance and when the money came in you would credit it back to fund balance.  Mr. Evans questioned when we close our books for fiscal year 2012.  The Town Manager responded June 30, 2012, but they can stay open for other processing and significant after-fiscal year events then that is where you have to ask the auditor’s advice and they will look at it and because it was an issue that was flagged in fiscal year 2012 they will say that it occurred in fiscal year 2012, you have a promise of a revenue, their experience has been that once FEMA gives you this letter it is as good as having the check and based on that will permit the Town to book that revenue in fiscal year 2012 before we get the money.  He noted that when we do the major year-end transactions it will feature prominently.  Mrs. Samul commented that the Board of Education also has expenditures that will be coming out of this FEMA money and how are they holding their own so far through their budgeting process.  The Town Manager responded that in preparation for the year-end transactions, the Accounting staffs are working together to reconcile year-end.  The Assistant Town Manager reported that the expenditures that the Board of Education have identified related to the storm came out to approximately one-tenth of 1% of their budget whereas the Town is facing approximately 12.5% of its operating budget.

Misc. D:  Old Farms Road Project Update:  This item was not reported on at the meeting.

Misc. E:  AMS Tennis Court Lighting:  The Town Manager reported that this item will be on the Planning and Zoning Commission agenda on October 9th.

Misc. F:  Library Bond Sale:  The Town Manager reported that the Library bond sale will be on October 16th.  He noted that the rating reviews will be on September 17th with S&P and September 18th with Moody’s.  He added that in approximately four days in advance of the interview with the rating agencies they are going to send us a list of questions.  He reported that he asked our financial advisor to go through and pick out all of the different metrics that the rating agencies look at when they are assigning values to town debt comparing all of the Aaa/AAA communities in the State and highlight where the Town of Avon stands with respect to everybody else.  Mrs. Samul commented that the rating changed to Aaa/AAA and a number of towns were added to Aaa/AAA rating recently.  She questioned if this is where we stack up amongst the new revised rating as opposed to the older, fewer towns.  The Town Manager responded yes.  He noted that Simsbury, Farmington and Glastonbury were bumped up to Aaa/AAA communities.

Misc. G:  State Plan of Conservation and Development Update:  The Town Manager reported that the State is in the process of updating the Statewide Plan of Conservation and Development.  He noted that the Town also has a Plan of Conversation and Development.  He asked the Director of Planning and Community Development and his staff to go through the State Plan and propose any changes to be made.  He may be asked to send a letter of support to the State regarding these proposed changes to the State Plan and in the event that he is asked to do that he would like to be able to say that they have been shared with Council and Council concurs.  He noted that those comments are due to the State prior to our next Council meeting.

The Director of Planning and Community Development reported that the State publishes this Plan every five years and the reason that it is important to each of the towns in Connecticut is that the State seems to be placing increasing weight on its importance; in cases where towns apply for grants through various State agencies there is a requirement that those agencies review the grant request for consistency with the State Plan.  He noted that the State Plan makes recommendations with respect to both developed and undeveloped land in all 169 towns as to whether they should be ranked into one of four different categories: high priority for preservation, priority for development, balanced (the land in the State’s opinion exhibits characteristics that might make it suitable in some ways for conservation and in some ways for development), and identifying property throughout the State that is already in a conservation status and either owned by the State, federal government, a land trust or permanently protected in some way.  He reported that the State uses Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and various layers of data that the State has accumulated by looking at both town and State resources to sort all of this out.

The Director of Planning and Community Development reported that some of the criteria that the State uses, for example, as to whether property should be classified for development or conservation in the case of development, some of the characteristics they look at are whether or not the property is in a plain sewer service area so the Town has a Master Sewer Facilities Plan and if it is a parcel of land that is identified as even being served or to be served in the future is an assumption that the Town has targeted that parcel for some sort of development and not conservation because the Town in combination with the State has invested resources in wanting to sewer that property.  He noted that water service is another criteria the State uses; most of the Town is in the long range future Water Service Plans for the Connecticut Water Company and Avon Water Company so that generally gets a checkmark.  In the case of conservation the States uses the following criteria for priority areas: if you have a parcel of land that is 250 acres in size or greater, something like the asset that is owned by the Avon Old Farms School; if there are wetland soils in excess of 25 acres the State deems that to be of great importance priority for conservation; the aquifer protection areas; and the 100-year flood plain.  He explained that the areas that the State calls balanced are areas that exhibit characteristics for both conservation and development, there is a conflict; they can be in the aquifer protection area or in the sewer service district as well.  He noted that in a way having large portions of the Town designated balanced may not be a bad thing in a sense that if the Town were to be an applicant before a State agency and the State were trying to make a determination of consistency, for example, if we had an application into the State looking for dollars to help finance the acquisition of property for open space it would seem that they could deem that in compliance and conversely if we were asking for funds to aid in development in some way that maybe could be deemed as consistent as well.

The Director of Planning and Community Development reported that the job that we have is to go through the State Plan and check it for consistency with our own Plan of Conservation and Development that the Planning and Zoning Commission adopted in 2006.  He reported that there a number of changes that he is going to present to the Planning and Zoning Commission next Tuesday and that he thinks they will endorse.  He noted that one change has to do with the Avon Old Farms School and a large error in the State’s Plan because they identified the School as already being conserved and that is not the case as it is privately owned.  Mrs. Samul questioned if it has anything to do with our regulations and the way that we refer to property in Town.  The Director of Planning and Community Development responded no.  Mrs. Samul questioned the Governor’s Horse Guard property.  The Director of Planning and Community Development responded that their property on the west side of West Avon Road shows as permanently protected, their barns/facilities area is shown as combination of balanced and development areas.  Mrs. Samul questioned if that is consistent with our zoning regulations at this time.  The Director of Planning and Community Development responded that our zoning map shows that as recreation and open space but would have to double check.  He noted that is an interesting observation because it is probably the case that the Governor’s Horse Guard is not restricted; it is owned/managed by the State Military Department and not the State DEEP and that is probably why it did not show up in the State’s database as a permanently protected resource.  He reported that we would ask the State to correctly show the Avon Old Farms School property not as protected at the moment and suggesting that they do show it as a high priority for conservation as it meets one of their thresholds of 250 acres or larger.  He added that we are also asking them to go beyond that because we are trying to think long-term and about different scenarios as to what this could possibly become in the future.  He reported that the high priority for conservation would put the Town in a position to seek funds from the State at some point down the road if that opportunity ever presented itself and at the same time asking the State to also recognize that for forty-four years the Town has been in its long-range planning talking about the reconstruction of Old Farms Road and sketched in the new alignment for Old Farms Road.  The Town Manager clarified that is one of the proposed re-alignments and when we get into the Environmental Assessment for the road that is one of the options that is going to be considered.  The Director of Planning and Community Development reported that they would also submit a copy of the current Town Plan of Conversation and Development that shows that road re-alignment which goes back to 1968.  He added that they are further suggesting that the land to the north of where the road would be reconstructed be placed in the same category as the School campus itself because of the master planning that the School has done over the years and their thoughts about possibly being able to expand their campus at some point in the future and using the new road to frame out the boundaries of their campus and give the School some greater flexibility to being consistent with the State Plan.  He added that lastly what they are suggesting to the State is to add a statement into their policies document indicating that under unique circumstances the State would be able to make a determination or finding of consistency to support a development project, such as a cluster development where houses are built in a more compact fashion but where a significant amount of open space might result in an area that might otherwise be designated as a high priority area for conservation.  He explained that the State’s basic analysis is that if they were to support, for example, the extension of a sewer line to an area of town that had two or three hundred acres of undeveloped property that was a valuable resource for protection and subsidize the construction of that sewer line in some way, they would be conducting some action that is contrary to their overall mission of preserving this valuable piece of open space because now you are supporting development in the area and using the State’s resources to help that.  He added that what is being suggested is in a unique circumstance where development is inevitable it may be a positive contribution to develop the land nevertheless with perhaps the same number of housing units but again in a more compact fashion where 50% of the land could be preserved as open space as opposed to 0% if it were developed without that public sewer line on individual septic systems and look like a lot of the rest of the Town.  He noted that with some types of creative development that does not necessarily result in a substantial increase in density and something positive could really come from it.  He suggested that to some people at Office of Policy and Management (OPM) and seems to think that is something that the State could support and a reasonable suggestion.  He reported that the multi-tier approach with respect to Avon Old Farms School recognizes where we are right now, think about the various options and try and get the State to modify their document in a way which makes it possible for any of these scenarios to occur in the future.

The Director of Planning and Community Development reported that there is a category that the State uses recognizing certain Village Centers.  He noted that with all of the effort that the Planning and Zoning Commission has done over the last few years in trying to adopt this new Avon Village Center zone, the Master Plan that was approved from Ensign Bickford, they would like the State to designate the Avon Village Center in that category on the State Plan and put us in a position for possibly being able to apply to the State for various grants as they become available because the State is really placing the focus on compact development Village Centers, walkable communities, investing State dollars where there is already infrastructure in place, etc. so that would seem to be a positive thing to have that designated.  He added that the reason it is not designated right now is they used some kind of map data layer that goes back to 2002 and there is no reason that they cannot change that.

The Director of Planning and Community Development reported that under the 100-year flood plain there are areas along the Farmington River that the Planning and Zoning Commission has for years been very strict about even before there was FEMA as to what was allowed.  He reported that the Planning and Zoning Commission is suggesting that the 100-year flood plain trump everything else and should not be showing in the balanced growth category and shown rather in the conservation category.

The Town Manager reported that the Director of Planning and Community Development will be discussing these proposed revisions with the Planning and Zoning Commission and anticipates that the Commission is going to approve these recommendations and will be sent along to the Office of Policy and Management (OPM) who has responsibility for the State Plan of Conservation and Development.  He noted that it is possible that he will be asked to write a support letter and if he is, he would like to be able to report that the Council reviewed and concurs with the recommendations.  He added that if there is some issue and the Planning and Zoning Commission does not concur with the recommendations then all bets are off but we are assuming that they will concur.

Mrs. Samul asked if the golf course on Country Club Road is all in the balanced category.  The Director of Planning and Community Development responded that some of it is in balanced and part of it in a development category.  He added that he does not believe that the State really analyzed the Town zoning map.  Mrs. Samul questioned if the golf course or Horse Guard in some form of an open space designation in our regulations.  The Director of Planning and Community Development responded that the Planning and Zoning Commission is going to be reviewing Chapter 5 – Open Space of the Plan, separate from this exercise here and give a greater thought to the zoning district that we call Recreation and Open Space (ROS); it does imply that property in that zoning district is permanently protected as open space.  He added that in the example that Mrs. Samul it clearly is not; it is a privately owned asset that happens to be in a Recreation and Open Space zoning district.  Mrs. Samul clarified that the State did their own thing and did not go into the Town’s zoning regulations.  The Director of Planning and Community Development responded yes.  He added that years ago when the State did this Plan the towns did not really give it the attention that towns are giving it now; they did not use this Plan as a basis for making decisions to grant or not grant awards and has been within the last ten years or so the State has placed greater emphasis on this so towns are paying more attention to it.  He added that there is no State planning office or State zoning office so this is about as close as you come; they have limited resources to go around to 169 towns so they are going to review each application for consistency before they make a decision.  Mrs. Samul commented that this is our opportunity to effect that the State may use to control funds that we may want at some time in the future.  The Director of Planning and Community Development responded that our goal in reviewing this has been to make it as consistent as we possibly can with the Town’s own planning documents and to try and influence the process in a way where we reserve to allow the Town as much flexibility as possible; the changes in these categories give us that flexibility and allow the Town to do what it has done for the last fifty years of zoning and planning which is to control its own future land use patterns.  He added that he thinks we are doing that; he does not see anything in the State’s Plan that is a major problem with the exception of that major problem that has to do with Avon Old Farms School and he is sure that the State will fix that as it is just an error.

The Town Manager introduced Ken Byron who is our new reporter with the Hartford Courant.

IX.      EXECUTIVE SESSION: Pending Claim Litigation / Real Estate / Land Acquisition

On a motion made by Mr. Pena, seconded by Mr. Evans, it was voted:
RESOLVED:  That the Town Council go into Executive Session at 9:20 p.m.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Pena, Evans, and May voted in favor.

The Town Manager, Assistant Town Manager, Town Attorney, and Clerk attended the session.

On a motion made by Mr. Evans, seconded by Mr. Pena, it was voted:
RESOLVED:  That the Town Council come out of Executive Session at 10:10 p.m.
Mrs. Samul, Messrs: Zacchio, Pena, Evans, and May voted in favor.

XI.      ADJOURN

The meeting was adjourned at 10:10 p.m.
        
Attest:  


Caroline B. LaMonica
Clerk