PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES
MAY 19, 2003
SOUTH WINDSOR COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7:30 P.M.
PURPOSE: TO RECEIVE CITIZEN INPUT ON THE EXPENDITURE OF $420,600 FROM CAPITAL AND NON-RECURRING EXPENDITURES ACCOUNT
The Public Hearing was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Aman. The Clerk of the Council read the Call of the Meeting (a copy of which is attached).
Council Members Present:
: Mayor William Aman
Deputy Mayor Matthew Streeter
Councillor Barbara Barbour
Councillor Paul Burnham
Councillor Deborah Fine
Councillor Judith Paquin
Councillor Edward F. Havens
Councillor John Pelkey
Members Absent:
Councillor Thomas Delnicki
Also Present:
Town Manager Matthew B. Galligan
Town Attorney Barry Guliano
Don Neel, Business Manager of the Board of Education, came forward and stated that these projects are very important, had been endorsed by the Board of Education; and brought before Council by the Town’s Capital Projects Committee.
MINUTES
Public Hearing on Expenditure of $420,600 from Capital and Non-Recurring
For Board of Education Capital Projects
Page 2
May 19, 2003
Mr. Neel then gave a brief description of each project.
1. $120,000 for “Improvements to the High School Cafeteria and Servery Ventilation”
Mr. Neel stated that the original building and installation of the ventilation was under the direction of the Public Building Commission, and he was not aware of the decisions made on the engineering and construction. However, he said, the system is based entirely on “fresh air” for cooling and just doesn’t have the capacity to keep up with the need in the cafeteria when it is full of students—particularly in the servery area where there are steam tables, etc.
2. $50,600 for “Replacement of High School Kitchen Equipment.”
Mr. Neel said that the items included in this expenditure ranged in age from 12 to 25 years old; and, although the food service people have done a “real top notch job of taking care of all their equipment,” inside they are old and parts are starting to go. The failure of any one of these pieces in a large commercial kitchen such as in the High School is “extremely disruptive” to the program.
3. $250,000 for “Resurfacing of High School Track.”
Mr. Neel reminded Council that, this too, is 11 years old; and staff began noticing cracks a few years ago; and in the Summer of 2000, the Board spent about $18,000 on a “temporary” repair job where the cracks were sealed, resealed the surface and repainted the lines. However, by now, he added the cracks are “very large indeed” and at least in one area it appears that base under the track is starting to fail.
Mayor Aman asked why it would cost $250,000 to bring an 11-year-old, quarter mile track up to standard. Mr. Neel responded that the school administration had taken a sampling of other High School tracks in other Towns—i.e., Tolland recently did one of similar construction—and they were all in the range of $250,000 to $350,000, including architectural fees.
MINUTES
Public Hearing on Expenditure of $420,600 from Capital and Non-Recurring
For Board of Education Capital Projects
Page 3
May 19, 2003
Councillor Burnham asked if the contractors installing the track gave any indication to Town officials how long that track should last. Both Mr. Neel and Patrick Hankard, Director of Facility Services for the Board of Education, both said they were unaware of such a prediction. Councillor Burnham, too, was surprised the school was experiencing problems after only 11 years.
More questions followed including questions with regard to other older kitchens/cafeterias in the elementary schools, and their condition; was the original “track” installed properly; how many lunches are served daily (next year, about 1,850); why such a high price tag on resurfacing the track (mainly because of the material used which has to be “athlete-friendly “ although not as durable as asphalt); do we know how long the new track will last (no); the suggestion of the maintenance of a replacement schedule of school equipment and capital projects anticipated in the next few years; how the Town may protect itself, even 10 years down the line, against “shoddy” workmanship; etc.
Atty. Guliano addressed the last question with regard to the performance of a contractor or the use of defective material. Although the Town does require a “Performance Bond” of contractors, these bonds usually do not extend 5, 6, or 10 years into the future.
Mr. Galligan said that not only are their Performance Bonds, but the Town also requires, as a rule, a Labor Bond, and require a “retainage.” When the bills are submitted, he added, the Town usually keeps a 10% retainage—which is kept in a separate bank account, and not paid out until a year later after the project has been done. The key position, he added, and one that has to be watched for diligence is the “Clerk of the Works” who is the construction manager.
Councillor Havens felt that the quality of the workmanship of the track should have been addressed a long time ago; and the Councillor was of the opinion that speculation with regard to what the Town can do 11 years later was “nonsense.” These items, he said, were things that had to be done, this year, to “maintain our public school system” – particularly when it concerned safety issues.
MINUTES
Public Hearing on Expenditure of $420,600 from Capital and Non-Recurring
For Board of Education Capital Projects
Page 4
May 19, 2003
Mayor Aman felt that some of the fault, at times, could be attributed to the fact that the Town is obliged to “go with the low bid” (unless the contractor did not meet the specifications). At times, he added, the “specs” are done to the marginal parameters.
Questions followed from the Council regarding original construction and bid process; timing of this request considering the fact that the school budget had been cut by “a couple of million dollars;” when were some of these problems, failures, etc. first notices; etc.
At 8:00 p.m., Mayor Aman called the Regular Meeting to order and immediately recessed it to continue the Public Hearing and then to conclude the already recessed Work Session.
Marge Anthony, commenting as a member of the public, offered her opinion that you cannot compare the usage of kitchen equipment at an elementary school which services, perhaps, 400 meals per day with a school such as the High School that serves 1,500 meals. She also asked if the Council’s vote would be on each individual item, or all three at once. Mayor Aman replied that it would be item by item.
Mayor Aman then thanked Don Neel for his appearance to answer Council’s questions regarding these three expenditures. He also stated that as a “goal” for himself, Councillor Pelkey, other Members of the Capital Projects Committee, and including the Town Manager, Pat Harkard, and Don Neel—he would “love to be able to have the discussion we’re having tonight in our second or third meeting in January next year.”
Although the Council may not know how much money is available for Capital Projects next January, the Mayor felt the 8 or 10 projects that had cleared the Capital Projects Committee should be presented to the Town Council and to the public so that questions like this could be answered when they’re asked.
The Mayor then corrected a previous statement that the projects would be voted on individually; however, the Clerk of the Council had brought to his attention that the Legal Notice had posed the question as “one question” requiring one vote.
MINUTES
Public Hearing on Expenditure of $420,600 from Capital and Non-Recurring
For Board of Education Capital Projects
Page 5
May 19, 2003
Mayor Aman then reread the Legal Notice and called for a straw vote on the proposal. The result of the vote was:
For the Proposal 0
Against the Proposal 0
The Public Hearing was closed at 8:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Patricia R. Brown
Clerk of the Council
Attmt. (Legal Notice)
| 
