 |
TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR
MINUTES
TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION
COUNCIL CHAMBERS MARCH 4, 2002
SOUTH WINDSOR TOWN HALL 7:00 P.M.
1. Call Meeting to Order
Mayor Aman called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Mayor William Aman
Deputy Mayor Matthew Streeter
Councillor Barbara Barbour
Councillor Paul Burnham
Councillor Thomas Delnicki
Councillor Deborah Fine
Councillor Edward Havens
Councillor Marianne Lassman Fisher
Councillor John Pelkey
Also Present: Town Manager Matthew B. Galligan
Town Attorney Barry D. Guliano
3. Public Participation
Terry Dickey-Gaignat, representing the Patriotic Commission, stated that the topic of the annual Essay Contest sponsored by the Commission has changed. The topic for Kindergarten through Grade 8 is
Communications - None
Town Manager's Report - None
Items for Discussion
A. Update on Affect of CRRA/Enron Issue on Municipalities
Mayor Aman, noting that he had attended several meetings on this issue during the last week and a half, explained that there are numerous things being proposed which would soften the impact on South Windsor. He said that the taxpayers of the State of Connecticut are going to have to absorb this loss. The question is whether it will be done through tipping fees, through general tax collections, through an increased bonding, or through an increase in electric bills.
The Town Manager provided the following as an overview of the subject:
When this issue arose, he and the Mayor attended a CRCOG meeting, during which Mr. Robert Wright, CEO of CRRA, explained what had happened with the transaction. At that meeting, an internal memo addressing the issue was shared, which said that there was an original bond resolution done in 1984-1985 which discussed the proposed use of the bonds. The bond resolution states, steam, and CL&P would take the steam, turn it into electricity and transfer it back out to customers. There were some municipalities, back at that time which were concerned about whether tipping fees would be increased if something were to go wrong. The bond resolution stated that if the tipping fees were to go as a net operating cost, permission would be sought from municipalities before the Energy Purchase Agreement would be changed.
Continuing, Mr. Galligan quoted from a legal opinion: The result of CRRA's covenant was to preclude CRRA, without the consent of municipalities for permitting any change to the existing Energy Purchase Agreement that would result in higher net cost of operations and, therefore, higher disposal fees payable by municipalities. CRRA has not solicited and does not anticipate to solicit the consent of municipalities for the proposed restructure. They felt that the deal with Enron was not going to increase costs, so they wouldnconsent of the municipalities to the proposed restructuring is not required by bond resolution. CRRA took it upon themselves to make all the determinations that the municipalities didn
Other issues examined by the firm included the change in the projected net revenue, the change in the credit quality obligor and change in risk. Our position has been that there was a change in risk because they got into the electricity business. Mr. Galligan said he felt that this was a violation of the State statutes, since electricity is not their business.
Mr. Galligan referenced a letter from the State Treasurer's Office stating that she never looked at the Enron deal. He said all they did was issue bonds of $1.4 million for the use of the CRRA for trash and waste.
Following numerous meetings, a rate increase was approved for municipalities to be charged $67 per ton. Mr. Galligan said he had sent a letter to State legislators regarding the fees and asking that options be examined with regard to a restructuring. He had submitted suggestions to CCM, and he said a meeting was scheduled for the following day. On Wednesday at noon, a bill was being pushed by the State Representatives so that CRRA could not raise their fees for six months and they would look to restructuring for possible savings. The possibility also exists that there are reserves in the State coffers to pay for debt.
Another bill which the legislators were being asked to push related to changing the hierarchy of CRRA. They are asking for a restructuring so that more towns would have representation on the board.
Mayor Aman explained, for the viewing public, that this discussion related to the Town of South Windsor
Councillor Pelkey didn't feel a postponement of paying was an option; he felt that the Town should not pay it at all. He felt that if the Town of South Windsor filed a temporary injunction, it would position the Town in a legal battle. Atty. Guliano said that was correct and there are towns looking at that issue now. He added that it could be a joint effort by many municipalities which are affected in the same way. There is no time limit with regard to a temporary injunction. Atty. Guliano said that he is corresponding with other town attorneys, and he would prefer to come back to the Council when he has a specific recommendation. He said it would be a very short period of time before he would be coming back with information.
Mayor Aman recessed the Work Session in order to call a Public Hearing to order. Immediately following the Public Hearing, the Work Session reconvened.
Councillor Delnicki recused himself from tonight
Review of Redevelopment Agency's Development Plan for I-291 Corridor
A draft Project Plan had been distributed to the Council members, and Town Manager Galligan presented the following report:
The entire Town was reviewed to determine possible areas for new buildings, the rehabilitation of old ones, façade improvements, etc. A Request for Proposal was prepared, and an individual came and looked at the Buckland Gateway Zone and the I-291 Corridor.
The Agency felt that the Buckland Road area would probably develop on its own because the market was strong. The one issue there is a wetlands mitigation program.
The I-291 Corridor has issues, such as water and sewer lines, utilities, and getting the landowners to work together in providing utilities. If each person puts in their own sewer, their own water, etc.
Certain properties have 56-inch storm water managements, while others have nothing. It was felt that if the piece was looked at as one, detention basins could be used in key areas, rather than using valuable property for many basins.
Under State Statutes, tax income financing is not available unless a municipal development plan exists. The advantage of this financing is the municipal rate of 4%.
Under a redevelopment plan, the Agency has the right of eminent domain in certain circumstances. If the landowners will not work together, the Agency could go in under eminent domain, take the property and hire a preferred developer. That is not currently a part of this Plan because the Agency would like input from Council as to whether they feel that is necessary.
The Plan will be distributed to all Boards and Commissions, and public hearings will be scheduled to review the Plan.
The Town has submitted an application to the State for funding. However, the cost for the State to prepare a municipal development plan would be substantial. The Agency didn't feel that this would be a viable option. There is new legislation for communities under 35,000, so that application can be made for a grant up to $500,000 to fund utilities.
Regarding the subject of eminent domain, Mayor Aman stated that such authority was withheld when the Redevelopment Agency was set up by the Council. The Agency would have to make the recommendation to the Council.
Mayor Aman questioned whether the Redevelopment Agency's approval was addressing the 22 acres or the entire site. If it was for the entire site, he asked what would happen if P&Z were to have a 5:4 vote and the Redevelopment Agency had a 5:4 vote in the other direction. Mr. Galligan said he believed it was on the entire site, and he felt the Agency would have the right to preempt. He said he would provide the Council with documents from Robinson & Cole.
Mr. Galligan stated that in order for the 22 acres to be transferred by the Town to the Redevelopment Agency, an appraisal would have to be done on all of the properties. Mayor Aman asked Mr. Galligan to get clarification on how the Town would actually transfer title to the land. Atty. Guliano said that if the value was above $25,000, it would have to go through the process outlined in the Town's Charter.
Mr. Galligan stated that, in this Plan, the Redevelopment Agency has adopted the Planning & Zoning regulations. Following further questions relating to the authority of the Planning & Zoning Commission versus the Redevelopment Agency, Mr. Galligan responded that Atty. Guliano would check with Robinson & Cole.
When asked if Mr. Galligan had met with the land-owners to seek their mutual cooperation, he said he had met with them and the land-owners had a copy of the Redevelopment Plan as well as a two-page agreement addressing the issues. He said that there are four land-owners in addition to the Town, with two of those looking at the same direction as that of the Town. He indicated that there has been interest shown in the area by a developer, but that individual is
Mr. Galligan noted that the interchange of Route 30 by the DOT will help open up that area.
Councillor Pelkey questioned the number of members of the Redevelopment Agency and whether it would be necessary to replace Barbara Barbour because of her election to the Town Council. Atty. Guliano said he would have an opinion to Councillor Barbour and a response to the Council in about a week.
7. Executive Session - None
8. Adjournment
A motion to adjourn was made by Councillor Delnicki at 8:00 p.m. It was duly seconded and was unanimously approved.
Respectfully submitted,
Merlyn P. Guild
Assistant to the Clerk of the Council
| |
