Minutes of the Special Meeting of the Legislative Council
Held in the Meeting Room of the C.H. Booth Library
25 Main Street, Newtown, Connecticut
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
* These are draft minutes and as such are subject to correction by the Legislative Council at the next regular meeting. All corrections will be determined in minutes of the meeting which they were corrected.
Chairman Jeffrey Capeci called the meeting to order at 7:34 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, Board of Education Chairman Bill Hart; Board of Finance Chairman John Kortze Board of Finance members Jim Gaston, Joe Kearney, Harry Waterbury and Marty Gersten; 4 members of the press, and 23 members of the public.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
John Aurelia, 83 castle Hill Road, told commissioners that the people spoke when 1700 voted no to the budget and 1500 voted yes. He stressed that “obviously no means no” and suggested the Council take an additional $100,000 from the town side and $600,000 from the school side.
Michelle, Farms Road, noted that it was important the town and school sides talk together to get the budget passed. She stressed that the seniors, the children and services are impacted by this and added that there are 5000 students in the school who didn’t get a say.
Ms. asked the Legislative Council to “take it seriously” and suggested that the next time around the Council put the budget out to the general public what the monies were for.
Chairman Capeci noted that most of the document is on the Town website.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
Discussion and possible action on: 2011-2012 Town of Newtown Budget -
Chairman Capeci asked for the Board of Finances input and the Board’s Chairman, Mr. Kortze offered his fellow finance members the chance to speak first.
Mr. Gaston suggested that the pension fund balance should not be touched. He alluded to the fact that the budget vote was very close with a one and half percent difference and it could have swung either way.
Referring to the discussion regarding the assistant principal, Mr. Gaston suggested that $150,000 be removed from the Board of Education side. In regards to the town side, Mr. Gaston said it was his impression the new police officers would not be employed until after the budget and suggested that those positions should have remained on the table. He noted that the Council should take a look at the police budget and suggested that the cars or cameras could be differed.
Mr. Gaston cautioned the Council to be wary of what happened last year with the budget vote and suggested they use a “chisel” rather than a sledge hammer to make additional budget cuts.
Mr. Gersten noted that the exchange of ideas is great and suggested that everyone has collaborated. However, he suggested that everyone failed to recognize that there are certain numbers people can live with and those people have spoken voting against the budget.
Mr. Gersten suggested that the Council pick numbers for the Town and the school board and see if the two sides can work with them. He suggested that the school board made a mistake 2 years ago when it over-built the high school and noted that it is concerned about keeping teachers the board needs to shut down some facilities.
Mr. Waterbury told the Council he suggested people to vote for the budget. He indicated that it was their job to be the financial people and say “it’s a good budget.”
According to Mr. Waterbury, he believes that that this year the no vote was significant and he doesn’t think a small amount is right to cut as what the public doesn’t want.
Mr. Waterbury warned that there is going to be a time when services will have to be cut and he urged the Council to make sure it thinks about what the people want.
Mr. Kearney reminded the Council of the no vote the last time around and suggested that everyone thinks about where they are regarding the state of the State and the state of the Union. He suggested that Newtown has done a good job.
According to Mr. Kearney, the State is the real problem and the Town will get significantly hit by what the State will do. He suggested the Town be prepared to take another “clipping.”
Mr. Kearney noted that originally the Board of Finance came up with a 1% cut taking out pension obligations as well as debt service. He suggests that today he will support an additional cut of $955,000 - $830,000 from the Board of Education and $125, 000 from the Town, for a total reduction of $400,000 to the Town and $1.5 million to the Board of Education accepting debt service and pension. He noted that the overall budget increase would be 1.3% or 1.4%.
As fellow Board of Finance member Mike Portnoy could not attend the meeting, Mr. Kortze read Mr. Portnoy’s letter.
Mr. Portnoy suggested that although the voter turnout was light, they “spoke loud and clear.” He indicated that the Newtown should limit the budget increase and suggests that the Town and the School system need to decrease the staff and infrastructure.
Mr. Kortze stated that he was struck by the fact that the Board passed the budget on as it is and that it was not only defeated but that there was a low voter turnout. He said he concluded that the apathy is greater than he thought, but not for a fear of a larger cut.
Mr. Kortze noted that the Council has a difficult job to determine what the no vote meant. He indicated that it is an easy out to draw from the fund balance, but urged members to avoid that. Mr. Kortze noted that they put in a same service budget and it failed.
According to Mr. Kortze, the Council needs to way and measure all the issues for the budget and added that clearly reductions need to be made.
Mr. Kortze believes the Council should come up with a number and give it back to the Board of Education and Board of Selectmen and let them come up with what reductions to make.
Ms. Jacob proposed a resolution that directs the Board of Education and Board of Selectmen to reduce their combined requested budget by 1%, equaling $1,066,259. The Council recommends that amount to be divided 30% on the Board of Selectmen side and 70% on the Board of Education side. After collaboration with their own boards and jointly as they have throughout this budget process, we ask that the Board of Education Chair and the First Selectman return to us next Tuesday with their recommendation. Ms. Fetchick seconded.
According to Ms. Jacob, this resolution would reduce the original increase to 1.59% or 1.58%. She noted that she couldn’t disagree more about using the fund balance.
In regards to her proposed resolution, Ms. Jacob suggested that by voting against the budget the voters called for the reduction.
Mr. Amaral asked the First Selectman if the money was taken out of the fund balance would it be hard to recover that too. Mrs. Llodra explained that she is hearing a strong sentiment from members of the Board of Finance and Legislative Council against taking money from the fund balance, but suggested that by not doing that Newtown would have to raise revenues beyond the $1 million.
Mr. Woycik indicated that he agrees with Ms. Jacob because the vote was significant but also disagrees with her suggesting that the voters opposed to the budget were advocating a 0% increase. He suggested that her motion was not enough and recommended an amendment.
(Amendment #1) Mr. Woycik proposed that the resolution be amended to reduce the Board of Education side of the budget by $1,125,000 and reduce the reduction on the Board of Selectmen side from $330,000 to $300,000, for a total reduction of $1,425,000. He recommended that the Board of Selectmen reduction come from the contingency fund. Mr. Merola seconded.
Mr. Woycik suggested that this amendment brings focus in terms of the impact regarding the taxes. He said he wants the Council to consider his recommendations and suggests that it will bring the tax increase down to 1.16%.
Mr. Spragg supported the original motion, but offered an amendment for the purpose of clarification. He suggested that the voters spoke and no means “too high.” Mr. Spragg believes voters want a more efficient budget and want to know the impact of what the Council decides. He noted that the town and school system received high marks for their collaboration and suggests that this is a way to allow it to continue
He suggested the following: change the reduction of 1% to the reduction of 1% or more; the town and the school decide the ration rather than the 30% and 70% fixed figure; and the money the town and school board would be looking for collaboratively would not be inclusive of revenue adjustments.
Chairman Capeci asked that Mr. Spragg’s suggestions be offered as friendly amendments to the original motion.
Mr. Merola agreed that what the Council decides should be sent forward for input from the Board of Selectmen and Board of Education. He explained that at the public hearing for the budget three voters spoke and all asked for no tax increase and added that he believes the 0% budget increase is just as valid. Mr. Merola suggested that the Council ask the Board of Education to reduce their budget $1.5 million and the Board of Selectmen to reduce their budget by $400,000 - a 4:1 ratio; and offered his amendment to change the ratio in the original motion to 80% and 20%.
(Amendment #2) Mr. Merola proposed an amendment to the original resolution recommending the combined reduction ratio be changed to 80% on the Board of Education side and 20% from the Board of Selectmen side. Mr. Woycik seconded
Mr. Fitzgerald was concerned that the turnout was as low as it was. He suggests that the Council recognize what doesn’t matter and noted that the budget was clearly defeated. Mr. Fitzgerald recommends the Council not mandate what cuts are to be made. He suggests that the Council keep the increase below 1.99% and find out what to cut after hearing back from the Board of Education and Board of Selectmen. Mr. Fitzgerald concluded by noting that the Council needs to avoid making a dramatic cut.
Mr. Ferguson reminded the Council that there was a low turnout for the charter change and a low turnout for yesterday’s budget referendum. He believes they are seeing fears due to the economic decline for the past 4 years now and the largest tax increase potentials the history of the state.
Mr. Ferguson suggests that with the increase Towns could see an additional 15 million to 25 million going to the State. He suggests that there is more fear than apathy noting that the increase would be an impact of 100’s of dollars to each household and 1000’s of dollars on the State level.
Mr. Ferguson supported the motion and the process and suggested that he would like to hear from the Superintendent and Chairman of the Board of Education and see if they “buy into this as well.’
Ms. Fetchick told fellow Council members that with the lack of people coming out, she doesn’t think it matters people didn’t agree with the same services. She indicated she wants to send it back to the Board of education and Board of Selectmen allowing the Council to know if they cut money what it will affect.
Ms. Fetchick warned the Council that they should not be grabbing at money here and there to make the necessary cuts but suggests there be structural changes made as well as changes on how to do business differently. She added that she doesn’t support the amendment by Rich but support the resolution by Ms. Jacob.
According to Mr. Belden, whether it is apathy or fear he believes that the sentiment of the people is that they have had it with the issue of money. He noted that now Newtown officials are faced with making cuts regardless of whether they impact services or not. Mr. Belden added that he likes Mr. Woycik’s logic, but thinks original resolution is probably sufficient.
Mr. Davis noted that the Board of Selectmen and the Board of Education did a much better job of collaboration on the municipal education portions of the budget. He noted that for the first time they brought forth cuts with little reductions made by the Board of Finance. Mr. Davis indicated that it was a budget everyone said they could live with; but the budget was defeated because voters lost confidence in the government. He added that they don’t believe it was a cost effective budget.
Mr. Davis reminded the Council that last year he was an advocate for restoring education costs by the Board of Finance. He believes that if they were listening to the voters this year, the Council would reduce the proposed budget significantly. Mr. Davis suggests that they undertake a thorough review of the school operations. He concluded that the message is clear by the voters - reduce the costs of government and reduce their taxes.
Mrs. Llodra told the Council she looks forward to the opportunity to review the budget again and noted that this was the first time this has transpired, adding that normally the Legislative Council does it.
She added that she thinks the assessment everyone is making is that the voters have spoken and the same services budget was rejected.
The First Selectman added that she is disappointed the budget didn’t pass and believes that making further reductions will be difficult.
Mr. Hart indicated that he shares Mrs. Llodra’s disappointment that the budget didn’t pass. He believes that they need to be thinking about the budget all the time. Mr. Hart noted that education is a people business. He implied that the school board can’t due budget reductions with “gimmies” adding that there is no magically found money and suggests it will have to be a structural change.
According to Mr. Hart, he polled the Board and truly, personally believes that for the board to reduce the budget number the outcome will be no different than what it was. He added that the school board will try to do its best.
Mrs. Llodra told the Council that the Board of Education and the Board of Selectmen are involved right now in an organizational analysis. She added that Charter mandates that the budget be decided by Tuesday, April 3.
Chairman Capeci echoed the common belief that the voters had spoken, defeating the same services budget. He suggested that the voters like the collaborative process but the “price tag” was too high. The Chairman believes the process described that night will foster continued collaboration. He suggests that regarding the next budget the Council will rely primarily on the advice of the Board of Selectmen and Board of Education.
Mr. Davis told the Council that it is looking for a general commitment and suggested that what they approve that night will be the start of the process
.
Ms. Jacob reminded fellow Council members that the resolution they were passing that night is non-binding.
Mr. Ferguson suggested that when the Board of education and Board of Selectmen bring back their revised budgets they do so sequentially, indicating which is to be cut first.
Mr. Amaral asked why take money out of the contingencies. Mr. Woycik responded that it would be the cleanest way to do it and added that the contingency account reserved for emergencies.
Mr. Davis suggested that Mr. Woycik’s amendment would not allow the Board of Selectmen to make a decision, but would allow the Board of Education to return with one. He also noted that contingency doesn’t allow for structural changes
The Chairman reviewed the original resolution, the amendments and the resolution incorporating the friendly amendment.
Mr. Ferguson offered a third amendment to the resolution asking that the Board of Selectmen and Board of Education consult with and have discussions with the various groups they do collective bargaining with to see if any of those groups would like to be a part of this process. The amendment received no second and was summarily dropped.
Chairman Capeci called for a vote on amendment #1. The amendment failed 3-9. Mr. Amaral, Mr. Merola and Mr. Woycik voted for the amendment.
Chairman Capeci called for a vote on amendment #2. The amendment failed 3-9. Mr. Amaral, Mr. Merola and Mr. Woycik voted for the amendment.
Incorporating the friendly amendment by Mr. Spragg that changed some of the language in the original motion, Ms. Jacob proposed a resolution that directs the Board of Education and Board of Selectmen to reduce their combined requested budget by 1%~ or more, equaling~ a minimum of $1,066,259. The Council recommends that amount to be divided 30% on the Board of Selectmen side and 70% on the Board of Education side however, that may be modified upon agreement of both boards . This reduction is defined as a reduction in expenses, not an increase in revenue. After collaboration with their own boards and jointly as they have throughout this budget process, we ask that the Board of Education Chair and the First Selectman return to us next Tuesday with their recommendation. Miss Fetchick seconded and the
resolution passed 10-2. Mr. Merola and Mt. Woycik voted against the resolution.
The Council took a brief recess at 9:05 pm.
Possible Action on Resolution of Litigation with United Water -
The First Selectman provided the Council with a brief history regarding the proposed extension of a waterline by United Water in January 2010 for an existing residential area, Green Ridge primarily in Brookfield and part of Newtown. Recently, she indicated, Brookfield approved the waterline. Mrs. Llodra noted that both Newtown and Brookfield were represented by Cohen and Wolff and suggested that it was also important to get counsel other than with Cohen and Wolff. Subsequently, she added, the Town was represented by Jim Rice with Brody Wilkinson, as well, in April 2010.
According to Mr. Rice, United Water became involved when they were ordered by DPUC to take over the water system in Green Ridge in Brookfield and Newtown. He noted that through the cooperation of DPUC and DPH, Newtown was able to bring its position forward as well as Brookfield.
Mr. Rice suggested that an alternative would be for DPUC and DPH to provide another way to get water to Green Ridge. He added that another alternative would be to delay the matter by taking it to superior court.
Mr. Rice informed the Council that the stipulation has resolved that water will flow to Green Ridge; however, he noted that they neglected to add another major player which is the Borough of Newtown and its connection between the wells and up Main Street.
Mr. Rice reviewed the 20 – page report he handed out to the Council. He targeted the primary sections of the stipulation:
- Newtown and the Borough were withdrawing their objections to the main.
- For a period of time water will be used only by those in Green Ridge. The area granted to United Water is larger than that and there are schools and communities along Wisconir Road that could use it. The Town asked for three years that they could not do that
Mr. Woycik stated that he doesn’t think the best interest of Newtown will be in their thoughts as to how the water will be sourced. He stressed that he would like stronger language in the agreement that gives Newtown greater protection.
Mr. Belden indicated that this is like a time out and agreed with Mr. Woycik stating that he would also like to see stronger language.
Mrs. Llodra informed the Council that the action DPUC and DPH were allowing to take place letting a Town craft its guidelines, was unprecedented. She noted that DPUC and DPH originally thought this would be operational by September 2010, but credited the tenacity of Mr. Rice for securing the stipulation.
Ms. Jacob noted that the agreement was approved by the Town of Brookfield.
Mr. Gaston indicated that it was approved by the Board of Burgesses, subject to Mr. Rice’s discretion and prior to him signing it.
Mr. Rice noted that the Council can change things but indicated that time is running out with DPUC and DPH.
Mr. Spragg indicated that he was all for moving the process along.
According to Mr. Rice, the stipulation is that DPUC will make this part of their order and that United Water will have to do the study.
Mr. Ferguson alluded to the fact that three years from now the study will be at United Water’s sole discretion. He added that he feels attorneys crafted this to allow United Water loop holes to do business as usual. Mr. Ferguson questioned whether this same waterline will eventually be connected to the North to New Milford. He suggested that one doesn’t build a 12-inch main to put a stub on it.
Mrs. Llodra indicated that it was the State’s intention in 50-year Plan to have integrated water systems. She added that water is a public utility and explained that the Town has no authority when it comes to public utilities.
Mr. Gaston suggested that there were a number of issues with respect to the Borough that if successful would delay the process for 2 years. He noted that one issue was to put the waterline down Main Street and do a patch job rather than repaving. He added that is in the Historic District and questioned if DPUC takes control of that or if the Historic District does.
Mr. Gaston indicated that another issue was the need to put an electrical box system in to provide additional pumping. He noted that would go next to Town Hall South. Mr. Gaston stated that this will need to go through the Historic District and it will need to go through zoning.
Mr. Spragg moved to adopt the resolution authorizing the first selectmen to sign a stipulation agreement regarding the litigation with United Water. Mrs. Jacob seconded and the resolution was unanimously passed.
The special meeting was adjourned at 10:10 pm.
Ted Swigart, Clerk
MOTIONS of the Special Meeting of the Legislative Council
Held in the Meeting Room of the C.H. Booth Library
25 Main Street, Newtown, Connecticut
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
* These are draft minutes and as such are subject to correction by the Legislative Council at the next regular meeting. All corrections will be determined in minutes of the meeting which they were corrected.
Chairman Jeffrey Capeci called the meeting to order at 7:34 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, Board of Education Chairman Bill Hart; Board of Finance Chairman John Kortze Board of Finance members Jim Gaston, Joe Kearney, Harry Waterbury and Martin Gersten; 4 members of the press, and 23 members of the public.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
Discussion and possible action on: 2011-2012 Town of Newtown Budget -
Ms. Jacob proposed a resolution that directs the Board of Education and Board of Selectmen to reduce their combined requested budget by 1%, equaling $1,066,259. The Council recommends that amount to be divided 30% on the Board of Selectmen side and 70% on the Board of Education side. After collaboration with their own boards and jointly as they have throughout this budget process, we ask that the Board of Education Chair and the First Selectman return to us next Tuesday with their recommendation. Ms. Fetchick seconded.
Mr. Woycik proposed that the resolution be amended to reduce the Board of Education side of the budget by $1,125,000 and reduce the reduction on the Board of Selectmen side from $330,000 to $300,000, for a total reduction of $1,425,000. He recommended that the Board of Selectmen reduction come from the contingency fund. Mr. Merola seconded and the amendment failed 3-9. Mr. Amaral, Mr. Merola and Mr. Woycik voted for the amendment.
Mr. Merola proposed an amendment to the original resolution recommending the combined reduction ratio be changed to 80% on the Board of Education side and 20% from the Board of Selectmen side. Mr. Woycik seconded and the amendment failed 3-9. Mr. Amaral, Mr. Merola and Mr. Woycik voted for the amendment.
Incorporating a friendly amendment by Mr. Spragg that changed some of the language in the original motion, Ms. Jacob proposed a resolution that directs the Board of Education and Board of Selectmen to reduce their combined requested budget by 1%~ or more, equaling~ a minimum of $1,066,259. The Council recommends that amount to be divided 30% on the Board of Selectmen side and 70% on the Board of Education side however, that may be modified upon agreement of both boards . This reduction is defined as a reduction in expenses, not an increase in revenue. After collaboration with their own boards and jointly as they have throughout this budget process, we ask that the Board of Education Chair and the First Selectman return to us next Tuesday with their recommendation. Miss Fetchick seconded and the
resolution passed 10-2. Mr. Merola and Mt. Woycik voted against the resolution.
Possible Action on Resolution of Litigation with United Water -
Mr. Spragg moved to adopt the resolution authorizing the first selectmen to sign a stipulation agreement regarding the litigation with United Water. Mrs. Jacob seconded and the resolution was unanimously passed.
The special meeting was adjourned at 10:10 pm.
Ted Swigart, Clerk
| 
