Minutes of the Special Meeting of the Legislative Council
Held in the Municipal Board Room in the Newtown Municipal Center,
3 Primrose Street, Newtown, Connecticut
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Chairman Jeffrey Capeci called the meeting to order at 7:03 pm.
PRESENT:
George Ferguson III, John Aurelia Sr., Chris LaRocque, Richard Woycik, Benjamin Spragg, James Belden, Gary Davis, Daniel Amaral, Jan Andras and Jeffrey Capeci
ABSENT:
Kevin Fitzgerald and Mary Ann Jacob
ALSO PRESENT:
Town Attorney David Grogins, two members of the press and seven members of the public
VOTER PARTICIPATION:
Karen Pierce, 10 Chestnut Hill Road, read a statement she had prepared concerning what a “yes” and “no” vote means to her and voting for standards of service.
According to Ms. Pierce, she struggled with a suggestion by the PTA and some of the members of the Board of Education that the Town should vote “Yes” in the budget referendum for fear that no vote would bring more cuts to an already “debilitating” budget.
She noted that Dr. Robinson and the Board of Education have stated that a $2.5 million cut would have a negative impact on educational programs. She added that although Dr. Robinson said “no” when asked by the Legislative Council if the Board of Education would be able to provide services needed by the schools to function properly with the budget as presented by the Board of Finance, the Council approved the budget as recommended by the Board of Finance 9-3.
Ms. Pierce told the Council that to her a Yes vote on the referendum means she believes the proposed budget supports officials on both sides of the budget – Municipal and Education – so they can achieve their charge of achieving and maintaining high levels of performance. She noted that a No vote would mean she doesn’t believe this to be true.
She concluded by stating that her vote will be based on making the continued efforts toward attaining and maintaining high standards of performance attainable for elected officials on both the Municipal and Education sides of the budget and not out of fear of further cuts.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
Discussion and possible action: Amendment to Previous Action on Budget Advisory Questions -.
Mr. Spragg moved to amend the motion made last week striking the portion of the motion that says “given that the 45-day deadline had passed” and said the motion should read “Having received the opinion dated April 12, 2010 from the Town Attorney, that absent a specific charter provision or statutory authority, Advisory Questions are not permitted on the budget referendum ballot.” Mr. Aurelia seconded the motion.
Mr. Spragg noted that based on lack of enabling legislation locally through the charter or through state statutes the Council is not allowed to put advisory questions on the ballot.
Mr. Ferguson questioned whether it was appropriate to amend a motion that had already passed and Chairman Capeci noted that Robert’s Rules supports it.
Chairman Capeci told the Council that Attorney Grogins erred in the opinion he gave last week and gave his new opinion that his statement regarding section 9-369A, concerning the 45-day deadline, be stricken from the record.
Mr. Grogins stated that he stood by his opinion regarding the appropriateness of advisory questions on the budget referendum. He noted that after reviewing the time limitations following the meeting last week he called Theodore Bromley, Staff Attorney for Secretary of States’ office, and confirmed that the 45-day rule was attached to electoral ballots. The Town Attorney apologized for giving an opinion off the top of his head and re-emphasized that the 45-day rule would not apply to local questions on the referendum.
Mr. Davis asked Mr. Grogins if the question he posed at the last meeting (“Shall the budget be decreased if the budget is defeated - Yes or No?”) would pose as a local question. Mr. Grogins indicated that he was unable to find anything on that point or how to further define a local question.
Mr. Davis asked the Chairman that the Legislative Council be given the option to add a local question to a new referendum.
Mr. Ferguson noted that it was still not clear what a local question is versus an advisory question and questioned what the level of specificity is
Mr. Amaral asked whether or not the local question would be binding.
Chairman Capeci noted that the Charter mandates the budget be completed by the second Wednesday of April. He added that the Council is “already outside that window.”
The Chairman ended the line of questions and called for vote.
The motion was approved 8-2 in a roll call vote. Mr. Ferguson, Mr. LaRocque, Mr. Spragg, Mr. Amaral, Mr. Aurelia, Mr. Woycik and Chairman Capeci voted in favor. Mr. Davis and Mr. Belden voted against.
VOTER PARTICIPATION: none
ADJOURNMENT:
Mr. Davis moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:20 pm. Mr. LaRocque seconded and the motion was unanimously carried.
Ted Swigart, Clerk
* Minutes are not finalized until approved at the next regularly scheduled meeting.
| 
