Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Legislative Council
Held in the Board Room in the Newtown Municipal Center,
3 Primrose Street, Newtown, Connecticut
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
* Minutes are not finalized until approved at the next regularly scheduled meeting.
Chairman Jeffrey Capeci called the meeting to order at 7:32 pm.
PRESENT: George Ferguson, Ben Spragg, Dan Amaral, Jan Andras, Gary Davis, Rich Woycik, Kevin Fitzgerald, Jim Belden, Bob Merola, Kathy Fetchick, Mary Ann Jacob, and Chairman Jeff Capeci
ABSENT: none
ALSO PRESENT: First Selectman Patricia Llodra, Finance Director Bob Tait, 2 members of the press and 3 members of the public.
VOTER PARTICIPATION: none
APPROVAL of the MINUTES of the regular meeting January 5, 2011
Mr. Spragg moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting January 5, 2011 as corrected. Mrs. Jacob seconded and the motion was carried.
Corrections/ Amendments: (Noted at end of minutes.)
COMMUNICATIONS:
Chairman Capeci told Council members that he had spoken to Registrar of Voters, Leraine Frampton, regarding the referendum. He indicated that she would need 3 weeks to program the machines and hopefully set the referendum the last Tuesday of March.
Mr. Belden noted that the Ad Hoc School Facilities Committee would meet the following evening, Thursday, January 20, 2011.
FIRST SELECTMAN’S REPORT: Chairman Capeci indicated that the First Selectman was attending a Fairfield Hills Authority (FHA) meeting and would arrive at the Council meeting later.
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
Education Committee – Ms. Fetchick reported that the Education Committee met last week and spoke with Board of Education Chairman William Hart and Superintendent Janet Robinson as far as what is coming down the pike. She said that there were no surprises with the exception of the number of teachers needed for secondary school reform. The Committee Chairman noted that Dr. Robinson also wants to put in costs of funding for all day kindergarten. In regards to the 12 additional teachers needed for secondary education reform, Ms. Fetchick indicated that the school has to have everything in place in 2014 for the graduating class of 2018. She added that the state hasn’t written regulations yet to go along with the policy yet.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
Newtown Comprehensive Annual Fiscal Report for Year Ending June 30, 2010 –
Mr. Spragg made the motion that the Council accept the Newtown Comprehensive Annual Fiscal Report for the Year Ending June 30, 2010 and refer to the Board of Finance the items that have not been addressed. Ms. Fetchick seconded the motion.
Chairman Capeci asked Auditors, Joseph Centofanti and Kristen Brown, Manager for the Newtown Audit, to present their audit for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010.
Mr. Centofanti reported that their objective was to provide an overview of the audit, discuss the various reports issued, review recommendations, and provide required communications. He noted that the following reports were issued: the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, Federal and State Single Audit Reports, Recommendations to Management and SAS 114 Communications.
COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FISCAL REPORT (CAFR):
Opinion - Mr. Centofanti told Council members that their opinion on the financial statements was on page 10. He indicated it was an unqualified clean report and noted that they had no problems with accounting issues.
Management Discussion and Analysis – Mr. Centofanti indicated that this executive summary of fiscal year operations, written by Mr. Tait, compares last year’s results to this year’s results. He noted that in that summary was a discussion of changes from prior years operations: General Budget (page 19), Water and Sewer Operations (Page 20), Capital assets (Page 21), and Changes in Long-term debt for the Town (Page 22).ARRA funding reported in the Schedule of Expenditures of federal Awards (FSA) (Pages 1-2).
EXHIBIT C – GENERAL FUND: Mr. Centofanti indicated that the undesignated fund balance was on Page 26. He indicated that they used rating agency guidelines 5% to 15% of the total operating budget. He noted the following fiscal years, undesignated fund balance and percent of the total operating budget: 2008 $7,821,198 7.93%; 2009 $7,636,522 7.18%; and 2010 $6,903,051 6.46%.
GENERAL FUND OPERATIONS: In their report, the auditors noted the following: Exhibit D (GAAP basis)(Page 28) – Net decrease in fund balance $2,012,928; Exhibit F (Budgetary basis) (Page 31) – Net Decrease in Fund Balance $1,733,471; Difference from GAAP basis is timing of encumbrances of $279,457; and Revenue budget shortages $1,063,531 offset by spending savings of $1,172,908.
SEWER AND WATER FUNDS: Sewer and Water Funds were highlighted in Exhibits G, H and I (Pages 32-34): Operations – Sewer $471,886 (Depreciation $527,798), Water $83,736 (Depreciation $111,964); Unrestricted Net Assets – Sewer $10,253,989; Water $921,473
PENSION FUNDS: Highlights for the pension funds were as follows: Detailed Financial Statements (Pages 35-36), Increase in net assets: $2,066,850 (Change in FV $1,509,418); Decrease in funded ratio (Page 67): Police 1.5% from 91.0% to 89.5%, Selectmen and Board of Education 2.5% from 99.3% to 96.8%. (5 –year smoothing of asset values is causing a decrease in funding level in an improving market)
SINGLE AUDITS: The audits were broken down as follows: Federal Single Audit – Schedule of Federal monies spent (Page 1-2), unqualified opinion on compliance, no findings or questioned costs, and ARRA funding new in 2010. State Single Audit – Schedule of State monies spent (Page 10), unqualified opinion on compliance, no findings or questioned costs, and SSA threshold increased to $200,000.
To get a feel for the estimate, Mr. Spragg asked how much additional funding the Town and the school separately receive in State grants that aren’t in the budget.
Mr. Centofanti referred to Exhibit D (Page 28) $21.4 million - $12 million in the General Fund that’s State and Federal combined. The school building grants he added were a bigger part of that.
RECOMMENDATIONS: Mr. Centofanti indicated the following 2010 recommendations: Policies and Procedures, Journal Entries, Board of Education (General Ledger, Grants and Budget Transfers) and Follow up on prior year.
REQUIRED COMMUNICATIONS: SAS 114 Letter – estimates (item 2), disclosures, management representations, and corrected and uncorrected misstatements.
FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS: Mr. Centofanti identified what was coming up: New Accounting Standards issued in 2011 – fund balance reporting (GASB 54) and Financial Instruments Omnibus (GASB 59) and Red Flag rules (policy to prevent identity theft).
FUND-BALANCE REPORTING: The Fund balance Reporting was broken down as follows: Fund balance components - New fund balances components that were previously reserved: Non-spendable, Restricted and Committed. New fund balances that were previously unreserved: Unassigned and Assigned.
Additional footnote disclosures – Fund balance policy and minimum fund balance
TRANSITION TO GASB 54: In regards to the transition to GASB 54. The following was necessary: Review classification of funds; Adopt a fund balance policy to address: order of spending from each fund balance category, the level of decision-making authority/employee necessary to commit a balance and disclosure of minimum fund balance requirements; and Update CAFR presentation FY 2011.
After the presentation, Mr. Spragg commended Mr. Centofanti, Ms. Brown and Mr. Tait for their work on the audit.
Chairman Capeci called for a vote and the motion was unanimously approved.
2011-2012 – 2015-2016 Capital Improvement Plan -
Mr. Spragg made the motion to accept the Legislative Council Finance Committee recommendation to return the Capital Improvement Plan to the Board of Finance with a message that the Legislative Council wants them to:
- Review the current Middle School Roof Project for the surplus available between what was authorized and what actually will be needed to construct the new roof.
- Hook and ladder may be pushed one year from the February 2011 borrowing or pushed out further.
- The Board of Finance should look at moving needed projects up in the plan with any funds that become available per the above.
- We recommend that you look at moving the Open Space Acquisition up in the plan at a minimum of $1.5 million per year.
- We would like you to review the Hawleyville Sewer Extension cost of 2.5 to 4.0 million dollars (less sewer assessments, buy-ins, etc.) and moving the project up in the plan.
- The fifth year of the plan 2015-2016 requires $30,000,000 in bonding or almost 60% of the entire borrowing for the entire five years. Almost all of the projects are still in the planning stages and are in the plan as place holders. We recommend that you reduce the bonding in year five to $20,000,000 which Mr. Tait indicates will bring the Debt Service as a percent of Budget to 9%.
Ms. Andras seconded.
Mr. Spragg told the Council that the longest return is in the fifth year, dropping $10 million off the plan and dropping as a percent of budget from 10% to 9%. He noted that they can reduce reliance on debt in year five of the plan. As Chairman of the Finance Committee, Mr. Spragg indicated he met with individuals such as the First Selectman, Park and Rec, Land Use to discuss open space. He added that based on that discussion he had a good sense that a lot of the projects in year five are place holders.
Chairman Capeci asked Kevin Cragin, Chairman of the Board of Fire Commissioners and Rob Manna of the Newtown Hook and Ladder Building Committee to come forward to discuss the recommendation being presented.
According to Mr. Manna, they are currently waiting on Borough Zoning to render a decision. He added that they will appeal if the Borough’s decision is no. He said their goal is to break ground in the spring.
Mrs. Llodra noted that the money would become available for the project after February 2012.
Mr. Woycik agreed that the need for adequate facilities for Hook and Ladder was sorely require and that there was also significant opposition to the current location. He suggested that they need to consider if it would be appropriate to redistrict and have Newtown Hook and Ladder in a less controversial location.
Mr. Spragg noted that they’re not recommending everything change. They are recommending it to the Board of Finance.
Mrs. Llodra reminded members of the Legislative Council that they are not obligated to return any of the discussion to the Board of Selectmen. She suggested that it would be appropriate and helpful to include the Board of Selectmen, as they are the ones who originate the document, to get some thoughts of what hat group might have. According to the First Selectman, there is a reason things are where they are in the budget.
Mr. Spragg agreed the Board of Selectmen should be involved, but thinks the Board of Finance will get everyone involved.
Amendment #1 - Mrs. Jacob asked to remove #4 that looks at moving up open space, and #5 that looks at moving up the Sewer Extension, and just include the things about reviewing spending and let the First Selectmen in her capacity determine if anything is going to be moved up. Ms. Fetchick seconded amendment #1 to the motion.
Amendment #2 - Mr. Ferguson moved to amend the motion to send it back to the Finance Committee for further review. Mr. Fitzgerald seconded the second amendment to the motion.
Chairman Capeci called for a vote on amendment #2 to the motion and the motion failed 2-10. Mr. Ferguson and Mr. Fitzgerald voted for the amendment. Ms, Fetchick, Mr. Merola, Ms. Andras, Mr. Spragg, Mrs. Jacob, Mr. Amaral, Mr. Belden, Mr. Woycik, Mr. Davis, and Chairman Capeci voted against the amendment.
Chairman Capeci called for a vote on amendment #1 to the motion and the motion failed 3-9. Mrs. Jacob, Ms. Fetchick and Chairman Capeci voted in favor of the amendment. Mr. Ferguson, Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. Merola, Ms. Andras, Mr. Spragg, Mr. Amaral, Mr. Belden, Mr. Woycik and Mr. Davis voted against the amendment.
Chairman Capeci called for a vote on the original motion. The original motion was approved 11-1. Ms, Fetchick, Mr. Merola, Ms. Andras, Mr. Spragg, Mrs. Jacob, Mr. Amaral, Mr. Belden, Mr. Woycik, Mr. Davis, and Chairman Capeci voted for the motion. Mrs. Jacob voted against the motion.
Creation of a Self-Funded Health Insurance Fund and Committee Ordinance –
Mrs. Jacob made a motion to approve the Creation of a Self-Funded Health Insurance Fund and Committee Ordinance. Mr. Belden seconded and after a brief discussion the motion was unanimously carried.
According to Mrs. Jacob, the purpose of the ordinance was to create a committee that will work with two bodies in Town to manage the fund and how fund should be funded. She told the Council that they received a lot of input who are stake holders in the policy – Mr. Tait and members of the Board of Education. She added that it talks how the fund committee should operate and work with the two members of the fund as well as how the funds are to be spent once they are deposited in the fund.
Mrs. Jacob indicated that the purpose of this ordinance is to dictate how the committee operates and how the funds are spent but since there is no building balance, investing issues are not a concern here like with the pension fund.
Charter 229 Fire Lanes Ordinance Amendment –
Mrs. Jacob moved to approve proposed Fire Lanes Ordinance as presented. Mr. Ferguson seconded.
Chairman Capeci suggested that the adoption date noted be changed to that evening. The motion was unanimously approved.
NEW BUSINESS:
Discussion and possible action on: a resolution titled “Support for Public Understanding of a Proposal to Redevelop Cochran House at Fairfield Hills” –
Ms. Fetchick moved to adopt a resolution titled “Support for Public Understanding of a Proposal to Redevelop Cochran House at Fairfield Hills.”
Whereas a broker has offered a proposal for possible residential development of Cochran House at Fairfield Hills;
Whereas the merits of said proposal remain unknown to the Fairfield Hills Authority and to the people of Newtown;
Whereas a full understanding of said proposal is needed prior to making a decision;
Whereas consideration of said proposal is not equivalent to casting judgment it;
Whereas unwillingness to consider said proposal is analogous to its rejection
RESOLVED, That the Newtown Legislative Council;
- recognizes that Residential housing is not currently permitted under the Fairfield Hills Master Plan;
- understands the current master plan is under review by a committee appointed by the Board of Selectman;
- supports reviewing and vetting all projects that may bring economic stability to the Fairfield Hills Campus;
- encourages the Fairfield Hills Authority to reconsider its inaction on the Cochran House Development project; and
- encourages the Authority to invite the parties to present their offer at a pubic meeting where the residents of Newtown can learn all surrounding facts prior to discounting a potential municipal revenue source.
Mrs. Jacob seconded.
Ms. Fetchick suggested that it would benefit people to understand what this redevelopment project means to Newtown. She noted that the purpose was not to change the current rules, but to better understand the proposal and to be better informed.
Mr. Woycik agreed with Ms. Fetchick believed this would be more appropriate to refer to the Fairfield Hills Review Committee.
Mr. Ferguson indicated that he did not like the language of #4 and wants to strike #4 in its entirety from the motion. He also suggested in #5 that they strike the word “Authority” and replace it with “undetermined group.” In addition, he suggests that the proposal be referred back to the Board of Selectmen.
Mrs. Llodra told the Council that the developer really works for Fairfield Hills Authority (FHA). She indicated that the contracts are under the umbrella of the Authority, and she added that FHA doesn’t have the right to contract services without review by the Board of Selectmen. Mrs. Llodra noted that she appreciates the interest to send it back to the Board of Selectmen but doesn’t think it’s the right place.
Chairman Capeci noted that Council members are just representatives of the people and while they can’t force FHA to do anything they are just asking FHA to reconsider. The decision, he feels should be made with all the facts on the table. He added that this is a nonbinding resolution.
Ms. Andras stated that she attended every meeting of the FHA and indicated that they were not against the idea of housing. She suggested the public was in opposition to housing at Fairfield Hills and feels the Council will be viewed in support of it.
Mrs. Jacob stated she had no idea whether housing is right or wrong at Fairfield Hills. She added that with all of the political discussions in the past few years about openness and honesty we need to be willing to have difficult discussions about issues even if that means we go in a direction we may not personally support.
Mr. Fitzgerald suggested they need to let the Review Committee finish the process as they are only a few months away.
Mr. Davis indicated that they need to discuss housing and get it in place and noted that he would not support the resolution as it stands.
According to Mr. Spragg, the developer was proposing apartments and he suggests they add “into apartments” to the title. Additionally, he believes the Council shouldn’t implement the resolution and suggested the Council be neutral to the issue.
Amendment #1 Mrs. Jacob proposed an amendment to the motion officially striking #4. Mr. Ferguson seconded.
Amendment #2 Mr. Spragg proposed an amendment to change the title and add “into apartments”. Mr. Ferguson seconded for the purpose of discussion
Mr. Ferguson suggested that FHA is a lightning rod in the community and suggested the authority may be reluctant to add housing, another lightning rod, onto that lightning rod.
Mrs. Llodra reminded the Council that the FHA has had a hard road the over past couple of years and endured a lot of unwarranted criticism.
Mr. Capeci added that the intention of the resolution is not to bring an undo criticism to the Authority.
Chairman Capeci called for a vote amendment #2. Amendment #2 failed 3-9. Mr. Spragg, Ms. Andras and Ms. Fetchick voted in favor of the amendment. Mr. Ferguson, Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. Merola, Mrs. Jacob, Mr. Amaral, Mr. Belden, Mr. Woycik, Mr. Davis and Chairman Capeci voted against the amendment.
The Chairman called for a vote on amendment #1. Amendment # 1 was approved 11-1. Mr. Fitzgerald voted against the amendment. Mr. Ferguson, Ms. Fetchick, Mr. Merola, Ms. Andras, Mr. Spragg, Mrs. Jacob, Mr. Amaral, Mr. Belden, Mr. Woycik, Mr. Davis and Chairman Capeci voted
Chairman Capeci called for a vote on the original resolution as amended striking #4. The motion passed 7-5. Mr. Woycik, Mr. Davis, Mr. Fitzgerald, Ms. Andras and Mr. Spragg voted against the motion.
FIRST SELECTMAN’S REPORT:
Mrs. Llodra reported that she attended the Pre-proposal Conference with people that are responding to the Organizational Analysis RFP. She explained that 18 companies attended the conference and presented some terrific questions. The First Selectman noted that this was a great strategy to help them clarify their proposal. She added that they will get the RFPs in by the second week in February and then they should have the results back in ten days.
Discussion and possible action on: Transfers From: 01570-2000 Contingency Fund to Various salary/benefit accounts the Amount of $23,408 for Town Hall Employee contractual 1.5% wage increased Life Insurance Fund Benefit – According to Chairman Capeci, the Council will skip the decision on the transfer until it goes through the Board of Finance.
Executive Session to discuss possible litigation vs. Dauti Construction, LLC – Chairman Capeci noted that the executive session was cancelled because the Board of selectmen meeting was cancelled due to the recent storm and said the Board will meet Thursday.
Discussion and possible action on: Litigation discussed in Executive Session – Tabled as there was no executive session.
VOTER PARTICIPATION: none
ANNOUNCEMENTS: none
ADJOURNMENT:
Mrs. Jacob made the motion to adjourn at 10:13 pm. Mr. Davis seconded and the motion was unanimously carried.
Corrections/ Amendments to minutes of January 5, 2011:
Page 4, under First Selectman’s Report, last paragraph, 1st sentence - Mr. Woycik noted the following: strike the title of “Commissioner” before his name.
Mrs. Jacob suggested the following amendments (in italics): Page 2, under Development, 5th paragraph, 3rd sentence and 4th sentences– “Mrs. Jacob said she was confused when she heard Mr. Davis say that Dr. Reed was showing restraint, but heard him say he had 12 serious inquiries that vaporized. She noted for the record that turning away revenue and improperly vetting it was a waste and she said she hopes the review committee would consider that and act more quickly on current and future proposals.” Page 3, under Unfinished Business, Discussion and Possible action: Charter Revision Commission (CRC) Draft Report, 7th paragraph – “Mrs. Jacob asked if any of the Town’s
thought the bifurcated budget was beneficial. Mr. Lavery said two or three wealthy larger Town’s that didn’t carry a lot controversy like Weston and Westport because their budgets always pass.” Page 4, under First Selectman’s Report, Permits – suggests heading be “Building Permits” to clarify what kind of permits. Page 5, under Announcements, 2nd paragraph – remove “s” from Mrs. Jacob’s name.
Ted Swigart, Clerk
| 
