Common Council
Regular MeetingMiddletown, CT · January 6, 2025
Minutes
COMMON COUNCIL
MIDDLETOWN CONNECTICUT
SPECIAL MEETING
QUESTIONS TO DIRECTORS
MONDAY, JANUARY 6, 2025
MINUTES
A Special Meeting of the Common Council of the City of Middletown, Questions to Directors Workshop, was held
on Monday, January 6, 2025, beginning at 6:00 PM. This meeting was a hybrid meeting with in-person participation
in the Common Council Chamber and remote access via WebEx. The meeting was also live streamed on
Facebook and the City webpage and was broadcast on local cable access television.
Present:
Councilwoman Jeanette Blackwell Councilman Anthony Mangiafico
Councilman Grady Faulkner, Jr. Councilman Eugene Nocera, President
Councilman Anthony Gennaro, Sr. Councilman Jonathan Pulino (arrived 6:05 PM)
Councilman Steven Kovach Councilwoman Linda Salafia
Councilman Vincent Loffredo Councilwoman Leslie Spatola
Councilwoman Kelly Sweeney
Absent; Councilman Darnell Ford
Also Present: Sergeant-at-Arms: Middletown Police Officer DiMassa
Linda Reed, Clerk of the Common Council
City Staff:
Central Communication – Robert Grauer, Deputy Director
Economic & Community Development – Christine Marques, Director
Equal Opportunity & Diversity Management – Faith Jackson, Director
Finance & Revenue Services – Carl Erlacher, CPA, Director
Fire – David Albert, Chief
General Counsel – Kori Wisneski, Deputy General Counsel
Human Resources Division – Justin Richardson, Division Director
Land Use -- Marek Kozikowski, AICP, Director
Library – Ramona Burkey, Director
Police -- Erik Costa, Chief
Public Works – Howard Weissberg, Acting Director
Recreation – Cathy Lechowicz, Director
Technology Services – Brianna Skowera, Director
Water & Sewer – Joseph Fazzino, Director, Theresa Spalletta
Absent:
Hon. Benjamin Florsheim, Mayor
Assessor -- Damon Braasch, CCMA II
City & Town Clerk – Ashley Flynn-Natale
Youth Services – Justin Carbonella, Manager
Public: Chamber: approximately 1 WebEx: 7 Facebook: unknown
1. Call to Order
Councilman Eugene Nocera is designated as Chair for this meeting.
The Chair calls the meeting to order at 6:05 PM. He welcomes everyone to the Common Council’s Special
Meeting, the Questions to Directors Workshop.
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Council Clerk Reads the Call of the Meeting and Mayor declares call a legal call and meeting a legal
meeting
The Clerk of the Common Council reads the Call of the Meeting and the Chair declares the call a legal call
and the meeting a legal meeting.
January 6, 2025 COMMON COUNCIL – SPECIAL MEETING Page 2
QUESTIONS TO DIRECTORS
2. Questions to Directors Workshop Opens
The Chair opens the Questions to Directors Workshop session at 6:08 PM.
Councilwoman Jeanette Blackwell: Thank you. Attorney Wisneski, I have questions regarding the
classification and compensation study. The classification and compensation study, I believe less than two (2)
months ago, (Human Resources Division) Director Richardson had indicated that he was finalizing his last
interviews with department heads. Can you provide to us this evening a status update, please?
Attorney Wisneski: Sure. My understanding is that Justin (Richardson) completed his interviews and meetings
with all the department heads where he went through the job descriptions and he has since forwarded on those
job descriptions to the respective unions, either local 466 or UPSEU. I know that they had a meeting to go over
kind of where they were in the process and how he came to what he came to for each job description. My
understanding is that those job descriptions are with the unions currently.
Councilwoman Blackwell: Can you just clarify? Do you have the timeframe of the meeting? Do you know when
that meeting occurred with the unions?
Attorney Wisneski: I do not. That would be a question for Justin (Richardson). I'm not in those meetings.
Councilwoman Blackwell: Yes, and I did.
Attorney Wisneski: He's on. He's just not present.
Councilwoman Blackwell: If he's on, I'd rather direct my question to (Human Resources Division) Director
Richardson. Is he on line?
The Chair asks the Council Clerk to bring Human Resources Division Director Justin Richardson up to the
panel.
Councilwoman Blackwell: Hello, Director Richardson. Happy New Year. Director Richardson, I was just asking
the question of Attorney Wisneski. I am looking for a status update of the classification and compensation study.
Can you please provide the Council with that update?
Human Resources Division Director Richardson: Yes, I can. I met with the unions on December 12th. That is,
they were given -- excuse me, I want to make sure I have that deadline -- yes, December 12th is when they
were all sat down with me and we went over the various things that I had provided them. So they were given
that a little bit -- like maybe a week prior to -- and then I asked them, if they wanted to come and meet with me,
which they did. I met with both unions simultaneously to answer questions on process and what they were
looking at as far as job content and makeup. The meeting went very well. They understand that I'm available
nearly 24/7, if they have any questions or need to get any information especially related to any of the job PAQs
or job descriptions that may need. As of right now, I've been answering their questions that they come up, a
few here and there, but nothing too alarming. I'm actually hoping to reach out with them in the coming week to
find out if we can get an end of the month deadline for discussions on next steps for those job descriptions,
meaning that they have reviewed them and if they have any comments for us to meet that next step where we
will meet to impact bargain.
Councilwoman Blackwell: Director Richardson, can you just clarify which unions did you meet with?
Division Director Richardson: UPSEU and Local 466, the two that are involved in that.
Councilwoman Blackwell: Okay. I just wanted to make sure we had that for the record. So you had your meeting
with UPSEU and 466 on December 12th.
Division Director Richardson: Yes, ma'am.
Councilwoman Blackwell: On December 12th and you are planning to schedule a subsequent meeting?
Division Director Richardson: Yes, actually what I'm planning to do is send out notice and say that we would
hope that the City would like a response back by the end of the month on their status. If they need more time
or for that they wanted to start impact bargaining on the various jobs is over a 140 of them that they have to go
through. I anticipate that 466 may need some time because they had broken down theirs into various divisions
because of their scope. They covered a vast degree of expertise and trades. I'm going to reach out to them,
see how their progress is, and then hope to get an answer by the end of the month as far as next steps.
Councilwoman Blackwell: So by the end of the month is your target date.
Division Director Richardson: Yes, ma'am.
Councilwoman Blackwell: To hear back from them. And both UPSEU and 466, their contracts expires this year,
correct?
Division Director Richardson: Yes.
January 6, 2025 COMMON COUNCIL – SPECIAL MEETING Page 3
QUESTIONS TO DIRECTORS
Councilwoman Blackwell: How do you envision this process impacting that process?
Division Director Richardson: Hopefully, it will go seamlessly, kind of parallel in process where we'll have the
classification plan and revisions going forward. And then, if we can impact bargain, because we're going to
need to at the end anyway, if we can wrap that into negotiations, all the better to have it all at once. If we can't,
then it's something that we have to do outside. We can't force them into that, but it is something that we can
discuss with the Mayor as far as the topic of discussion for impact bargaining.
Councilwoman Blackwell: Thank you. One more question. So there are 140 positions.
Division Director Richardson: Roughly. I'm (inaudible). There's about probably over a 147, if I had a guess.
Councilwoman Blackwell: And that's combined with both unions?
Division Director Richardson: Correct.
Councilwoman Blackwell: Thank you, Director Richardson.
The Chair/ Councilman Nocera: Are there any more questions for Justin Richardson? Councilman
Loffredo.
Councilman Vincent Loffredo: Thank you. So the discussions you're having with the unions, what are you
discussing with them?
Division Director Richardson: If there's any missing documents or documents that they thought that were
missing such as the employee PAQs, which are Position Acquisition Questionnaires. So, if an employee said
they had submitted it, do we have a copy of it or do they have a copy of the supervisor’s one? You know, was
there one that was missing? Was there the one that was not things like that? Or if there was a job description
that was missing from the file that they need to make sure that it is there, things of that sort.
Councilman Loffredo: So to what degree does the work done by Baker Tilly have to do with what you're
engaging with the unions about?
Division Director Richardson: Baker Tilly has no input at this point. They will have input once we're done. Every
revision that we make in these jobs that is agreed upon will have a subsequent impact in the rubric scale that
Baker Tilly has devised. So they'll have a team of experts. We've asked them this question: what is the next
step once we have all these red lines? They'll have a team of a couple experts going through each job making
sure that the rubric that we work off of, the new information is inputted in and calculated. So if there was an
increase in education or increase in experience or supervision, those are things that might have an impact on
a job's overall outcome in that in their in their classification plan.
Councilman Loffredo: So the job descriptions of the City of Middletown do require councilmatic approval, do
they not?
Division Director Richardson: For ultimate approval, yes.
Councilman Loffredo: So if these jobs -- 147 or a substantial number of them, any or all of them -- would have
to come to the City Council prior to them moving forward in some sort of reclassification, or we would have to
agree that we're agreeing to agree to those changes in jobs that have been substantiated and the likes. So
where do we fit in? I've been quite concerned since, for months that this has been going on. So where do you
know . . . normally, that's how jobs get modified: at some point, they do require us to properly review and either
accept or deny the job description in terms of the changes.
Division Director Richardson: So at the very end of this process, we should be given a package of what are the
new job descriptions from the old one. We'll be given a new pay plan and will be given information related to
our pay scales and where they fall for each position. It'll be up to the Council to either accept that or deny it.
Councilman Loffredo: So the...
Division Director Richardson: Hopefully, at that point in time, we've already had impact bargain and negotiated
the various steps and stages with the unions.
Councilman Loffredo: So Baker Tilly, have they completed their initial study of what the current jobs are in the
City of Middletown?
Division Director Richardson: You have to be a little bit more clear. What do you mean by that?
Councilman Loffredo: Did Baker Tilly for $150K, was going to take a look at our current classification system
and make recommendations. Based on that -- those recommendations -- potentially, we would adopt a new
classification study or new job description and the like going forward. To date, we -- at least I'll speak for
myself -- I'm not aware that the Council, myself or we, as a whole, have ever received anything formally – a
January 6, 2025 COMMON COUNCIL – SPECIAL MEETING Page 4
QUESTIONS TO DIRECTORS
report -- lately. We had one brief meeting with them maybe months, maybe four or five months ago, but
nothing has come forward to us subsequently.
Division Director Richardson: Yep. Is there a question?
Councilman Loffredo: Yes. The question is, do you have any report from them when they did their analysis?
Did they do this analysis or did they not? What did we spend $150,000 on?
Division Director Richardson: So part of their portion is to do the initial step of the analysis, which is that PAQ:
take all that data and put it in, and make the new job descriptions. The second part would be the market study,
which is maybe what you're thinking of: the comparison. They have that data. They're waiting for it to come
from us. They're waiting for our end on the job descriptions to provide us the market data. They can't provide
us the market data without having the job descriptions because the job descriptions will dictate where the salary
grades go. Do you understand how each piece kind of fits into each other?
Councilman Loffredo: The concern I have is they were supposed to initially look at the current jobs and do this
analysis step by step as you've outlined, not based on a new set of job descriptions, which the City has not
even approved and has not been properly reviewed by the City, not meaning the elected body that is responsible
for that, and the body that authorized by Charter, this classification review. Looking at our current setup, and if
then, if changes are justified going forward, that is something that, but we have never received a report based
on: we pay our 147 individuals that are employed with the various unions based upon a job description and
based upon the classification and so forth. That was supposed to be part of the review, which I assume they
did. Did they not?
Division Director Richardson: Would you say that question again?
Couniclman Loffredo: Did they, or did they not, review the current classification system of the City of Middletown,
including these 147 jobs that you've been looking at? I gather some folks are considering to modify them. Did
they do an appropriate stand-alone review of how those jobs and how they're evaluated in the system by which
they were evaluated? Any review of that nature that was the understanding in terms of that?
Division Director Richardson: Well, that review will happen, Councilman. They probably have some sort of an
initial review of where our positions in current grades and salaries stand compared to other comparables, but
what they will do with a comparison is when we are done redoing our job descriptions by the . . . don't forget,
you've got the experts of the Department heads weighing and the Supervisors, and then you've got the Union
weighing in. So you've got a full circle of experts that'll.
Councilman Loffredo: There's a problem.
Division Director Richardson: A job description that way.
Councilman Loffredo: You're having these reviews and so forth taking place on job descriptions that have not
been reviewed and acted upon by the body that has the responsibility to accept or reject new job descriptions.
You are in the process of doing all that without us involved at all.
Division Director Richardson: Correct, it's the Council's job to be at the end of that when they the jobs are being
presented to you. In no way, shape, or form does the Council get involved in the creation of a job description
or the makeup of it. That would be, you know, something of the Executive branch and with the union.
Councilman Loffredo: Yes, I understand that, but at the end of the day, they do come here, there is a fiscal
responsibility that's involved in all of this from day one. At this point, the preliminary reports have been lacking
substantially where things are. We have not been properly apprised -- brought up to date. A lot of things are
happening without our involvement at all, presuming that, at the end of the day, these would all be acceptable.
I'll leave it at that, your Honor.
The Chair/Councilman Nocera: Councilwoman Blackwell, do you have a follow-up?
Councilwoman Jeanette Blackwell: I did, but I actually want to switch gears and ask Director Richardson,
since we're talking about Human Resources, how many vacant positions do we have in the City currently?
Division Director Richardson: I forgot what the report that I just provided you . . . upwards about like 25 or 30.
Councilwoman Blackwell: So, if I counted correctly this evening, I counted 42 vacant positions, which is seven
(7) more positions than reported by the Mayor about two (2) months ago. There are several positions on the list
in the “Status” column that states “waiting for requisitions to backfill,” and you had indicated that means you're
waiting to hear back from the Director of that particular department.
Division Director Richardson: That is true. Yes. If the Department does not need to backfill it just yet, the position
will remain vacant.
Councilwoman Blackwell: Okay, I just wanted to make the point that we've gone from 35 vacant positions to 42.
Thank you.
January 6, 2025 COMMON COUNCIL – SPECIAL MEETING Page 5
QUESTIONS TO DIRECTORS
The Chair/Councilman Nocera: Any other questions for Division Director Richardson? For any other
directors? I have some, but will save them for the end. Councilwoman Blackwell.
Councilwoman Blackwell: I think my colleague had the light on first. Councilman Loffredo.
The Chair/ Councilman Nocera: Councilman Loffredo.
Councilman Vincent Loffredo: Thank you. Finance Director Carl Erlacher, please. The question I have is on
the agenda, of course, is a bond ordinance for $2,550,000. Normally, when we deal with bonds of this amount,
we would go to have a referendum.
Director Erlacher: Correct.
Councilman Loffredo: And so what we have before is not standard procedure. This is a unique procedure,
Director Erlacher: Not really unique. We've done it.
Councilman Loffredo: But it's unique rather recently, I mean we haven't done this lately.
Director Erlacher: Well, the reason we haven't is the 2% loans that we're going to get with part of it being a
grant, our GO interest rate was a lot cheaper, so we would borrow with that. It is a state law.
Councilman Loffredo: Okay, so would just explain how this one is appropriate before us this evening versus
not going out to referendum.
Director Erlacher: Sure. We used to do it a lot probably 10 to 15 years ago when Seb Giuliano was Mayor all
the time because the 2% interest rate for 20-year period was a lot less than the interest rates that we could
borrow for. If there's a $3 million threshold. Then it has to be under $3 million. We did most of our bonding with
sewer projects, but it does apply to water projects also. We did we confirmed that with bond council and it is
State law.
Councilman Loffredo: Okay, so this is the unique situation, and it happens to be the interest rates are very, very
good. So we've been assured already that what we're proposing, we've already been in touch with State officials
regarding and . . .
Director Erlacher: I believe half of it's going to be reimbursed for a grant purpose, correct, Joe (Water & Sewer
Director Joseph Fazzino)? So we're only going to have to pay 50% of that back.
Councilman Loffredo: Fifty percent. So it's $1.2M.
Director Erlacher: Yeah. Over 20 years.
Councilman Loffredo: Over 20 years. That's the other unique thing. We normally we don't bond for 20 years.
Director Erlacher: I would say 95% of our debt is 10-years, unless we come up with this interest rate that's a lot
lower than we could go out for it. We take advantage of it.
Councilman Loffredo: The question I have is, “Are all the taxpayers in the City of Middletown responsible for
the City’s half?”
Director Erlacher: Just the taxpayers that have water.
Councilman Loffredo: Okay, so if you don't have water, you're not going to pay for this.
Director Erlacher: Correct.
Councilman Loffredo: Thank you.
The Chair/ Councilman Nocera: Councilwoman Blackwell.
Councilwoman Jeanette Blackwell: Thank you, your Honor. I was going to ask a very similar question that
was posed by Councilman Loffredo. I just want to note for the record, the law that you're referring to is
Connecticut General Statutes, Section 7-263a. Thank you.
The Chair/ Councilman Nocera: I should add that this was vetted with the Water & Sewer Commission
extensively. I thank our Director for his hard work in bringing this forward because of the work is on emergency
basis. We need to get this work done. Thank you, Director Erlacher. Any other questions? Councilman Loffredo.
Councilman Vincent Loffredo: The Director of Water and Sewer, Joseph Fazzino. Good evening. This is
dealing with, specifically, a particular pump station for a particular portion of the City.
January 6, 2025 COMMON COUNCIL – SPECIAL MEETING Page 6
QUESTIONS TO DIRECTORS
Director Fazzino: Correct.
Councilman Loffredo: The costs will be born though by everyone, in terms of this is part of the overall system,
not just the individuals that are serviced in that area by this pump station.
Director Fazzino: It'll be covered by the water rates, the people who are connected to water, as Director Erlacher
had mentioned.
Councilman Loffredo: Okay, so the water rates . . . so this is a capital expense. Correct. I'm paying for my water
based on my usage. So how does this roll into the rate of expense for the water that I'm using. Is this an
additional amount that's going to be based on the bill to cover that additional $1M plus?
Director Fazzino: Correct, basically every year when I do my budget, I get numbers from the Finance
Department for principal and interest on the bonds for the Water Department. I also get principal and interest
for the bonds on the Sewer Department. So that incremental increase for the principal and interest for water
will get included in the overall calculation for the water rates. Because it is 20 years, there is less of an impact.
Councilman Loffredo: Do you have any estimate at this point when paying off these bonds, the principal and
interest?
Director Fazzino: Not at this time. When I do the budget, I'll have better information and, when we start paying
it back, probably won't be for a year or two down the road. Other bonds that we have in Water will be dropping
off, so it may be no increase.
Councilman Nocera: So the anticipation, as we look forward to adopting this year's budget -- the budget for next
year -- I should say in our budget deliberations, you don't anticipate that this would not be ready to be included.
Director Fazzino: Not for 2026, probably in 2027.
Councilman Loffredo: Okay, very good. Thank you very much.
The Chair/ Councilman Nocera: Councilwoman Blackwell
Councilwoman Jeanette Blackwell: When you come back before us regarding the budget, if you can also
expand on the $19.9M, that bond.
Director Fazzino: Correct.
Councilwoman Blackwell: That bond and sort of where you are with the work. I know that you and I spoke about
it and it's in phases at this point, but it would be helpful to know where we are with the work for that.
Director Fazzino: Sure. You may have noticed we have been doing some water work on High Street, Court,
Street, and in the Westfield area, so as those projects get completed and get closed out, those will start
becoming part of the principal and interest that I'll have to pay back.
The Chair/ Councilman Nocera: Other questions for Director Fazzino? I should note that also that this we did
have a public hearing on Bartholomew Road. We had, we had residents that were very helpful in our planning.
Any other, questions for it? Okay, questions for any other directors.
I have one question, myself. Director Fazzino covered my second question. I understand that Marek
Kozikowski, our land Use Director is on WebEx.
Land Use Director Marek Kozikowski: Good evening. Can you hear me? Yes. Okay.
Councilman Nocera: Thank you, Director Kozikowski. We had a conversation a few days ago. I indicated that
the Council, through caucus discussions, thought it would be important in the future to have an update on our
land use -- the priority items each month -- as you do with our business leaders at the at the Chamber of
Commerce once a month. It's very helpful and you do an excellent job. Can you provide the Council with a brief
update of the most important issues that the City is working on right now? Thank you.
Director Kozikowski: I'd be happy to. This coming Wednesday, the Planning & Zoning Commission is going to
be holding a public hearing. It's actually a continuation of a public hearing for a project on Randolph Road, the
former Eversource property. The property was purchased by Zach Eddinger, who is the principal of Vale Sports
Club. They're looking to relocate their indoor/outdoor soccer facility to that location. Actually, they obtained
special exception approval in April. They're coming back to modify their site plan to move their proposed indoor
facility to another location on site and add some uses to the existing building on site. Their plan is in two (2)
parts. First is to do kind of commercial marketplace area, similar to kind of the layout of Main Street Market that
we have in our Downtown. They also are looking to add a brewery to that building. As I understand it, it's the
same Eli Cannons is looking to expand their stakeholder in Middletown into this location. So that public hearing
will be on Wednesday at 7:00 PM.
January 6, 2025 COMMON COUNCIL – SPECIAL MEETING Page 7
QUESTIONS TO DIRECTORS
Also coming down the pike, it will go to Inland Wetlands Commission (IWWA) next week, and, if it's successful,
the Planning & Zoning Commission the following week. We're having a, a proposal for a new 54,000 sq. ft.
industrial building with a manufacturing warehouse office uses on the last vacant on Philmack Drive, and
extending onto a property that's fronting the Middle Street, but all the access to that property -- that building --
will be off the Philmack Drive. That's coming up later this month.
Also coming up in February, the Planning & Zoning Commissions will be holding a public hearing on a proposal
for a new used car dealership on Newfield Street. That is at the location of the former Wild Bill’s site.
So that's what's coming down the line.
A little update on the larger projects that were recently had gone through the Commission approval, including
the Community Health Center had a proposal to do a new greenhouse structure on Main Street on their the
corner of Main Street and Grand. Also last November, the Planning & Zoning Commission approved an
application from by the St. Vincent de Paul for a new facility, a 4-story building with a new warming center, soup
kitchen, eight (8) supportive housing units, and offices for their operations. Those already have their approvals.
They hope to break ground soon.
So that's what's going on, right now pending in our office. I'm happy to provide these reports. I'll also encourage
Councilmembers and the public, anybody that's listening. We do have all our pending applications available,
linked on our website. So if you go to the Middletown.CT website and go to the Land Use Department page, on
the left hand column, there's a link to pending applications. Through there you can see all pending applications
and recently approved applications for the Planning & Zoning Commission, Inland Wetlands Commission, and
the Zoning Board of Appeals.
So, and with that, with that information you it has what, what's pending and it also provides a link to all the digit
to the digital file for that file. So every which is updated you know in real time as we download that link is
updated. So that that information is always available with a couple of clicks of the buttons. So, that's the report.
I'd be happy to address any questions.
The Chair/Councilman Nocera: Thank you, Director Kozikowski. That's an excellent summary of some very
important projects. My only question – then I'll open it up to the rest of the Council -- is the St. Vincent de Paul
– I have been involved in so many different levels -- is that, a large portion of that? Was that out of ARPA
(American Rescue Plan Act) money?
Director Kozikowski: That is not my wheelhouse. I don't know the answer to that question. I don't know.
The Chair/ Councilman Nocera: That is something I have to check on my own, but I'm glad to see that these
projects are moving forward. Thank you. Are there any other questions for Director Kozikowski? I don't see any
lights, so thank you Marek.
Are there questions for any other directors? Alright, I think any online don't think so.
3. Questions to Directors Workshop Closes
There being no further questions, The Chair closes the Questions to Directors session at 6:41 PM.
4. Meeting adjourned
There being no further business, Councilwoman Jeanette Blackwell moves to adjourn. Councilman Vincent
Loffredo seconds the motion.
There being no discussion, the Chair calls for a voice vote.
The motion is unanimously approved by a vote of 11 to 0. (AYE: Councilmembers Blackwell, Faulkner, Gennaro,
Kovach, Loffredo, Mangiafico, Nocera, Pulino, Salafia, Spatola, and Sweeney; ABSENT: Councilman Ford).
The meeting is adjourned at 6:43 PM.
ATTEST:
LINDA S.K. REED,
COMMON COUNCIL CLERK
K: review/ minutes/ 202Jan 06 – Ques to Directors - 6 Jan 2025
Agenda
COMMON COUNCIL
MIDDLETOWN CONNECTICUT
SPECIAL MEETING
QUESTIONS TO DIRECTORS
MONDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2024
MINUTES
A Special Meeting of the Common Council of the City of Middletown, Questions to Directors Workshop, was held
on Monday, December 2, 2024, beginning at 6:00 PM. This meeting was a hybrid meeting with in-person
participation in the Common Council Chamber and remote access via WebEx. The meeting was also live streamed
on Facebook and the City webpage and was broadcast on local cable access television.
Present:
Councilwoman Jeanette Blackwell Councilman Anthony Mangiafico
Councilman Grady Faulkner, Jr. Councilman Eugene Nocera, President
Councilman Darnell Ford Councilman Jonathan Pulino
Councilman Anthony Gennaro, Sr. Councilwoman Linda Salafia
Councilman Steven Kovach Councilwoman Leslie Spatola
Councilman Vincent Loffredo Councilwoman Kelly Sweeney
Also Present: Sergeant-at-Arms: Middletown Police Officer Kurt Scrivo
Linda Reed, Clerk of the Common Council
City Staff:
Arts & Culture – Kisha Michael, Coordinator
Central Communication – Wayne Bartolotta, Director
Economic & Community Development – Christine Marques, Director
Equal Opportunity & Diversity Management – Faith Jackson, Director
Finance & Revenue Services – Carl Erlacher, CPA, Director
Fire – David Albert, Chief
General Counsel -- Brig Smith, Esq.
Library – Ramona Burkey, Director
Police -- Erik Costa, Chief
Public Works – Howard Weissberg, Acting Director
Recreation – Cathy Lechowicz, Director
Technology Services – Brianna Skowera, Director
Water & Sewer – Joseph Fazzino, Director
Absent:
Ho. Benjamin Florsheim, Mayor
Assessor -- Damon Braasch, CCMA II
City & Town Clerk – Ashley Flynn-Natale
Human Resources Division – Justin Richardson, Division Director
Land Use -- Marek Kozikowski, AICP, Director
Youth Services – Justin Carbonella, Manager
Public: Chamber: approximately 15 WebEx: 8 Facebook: unknown
1. Call to Order
Councilman Eugene Nocera is designated as Chair for this meeting.
The Chair calls the meeting to order at 6:00 PM. He welcomes everyone to the Common Council’s Special
Meeting, the Questions to Directors Workshop.
A. Pledge of Allegiance
The Chair asks everyone to join him reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.
B. Council Clerk Reads the Call of the Meeting and Mayor declares call a legal call and meeting a legal
meeting
The Clerk of the Common Council reads the Call of the Meeting and the Chair declares the call a legal call
and the meeting a legal meeting.
DECEMBER 2, 2024 COMMON COUNCIL – SPECIAL MEETING Page 2
QUESTIONS TO DIRECTORS
2. Questions to Directors Workshop Opens
The Chair opens the Questions to Directors Workshop session at 6:05 PM.
Councilman Vincent Loffredo: I have questions for the Fire Chief, please. Good evening.
Fire Chief David Albert: Good evening;
Councilman Loffredo: On the agenda this evening, as you know, is the proposed purchase of land on Newfield
Street. Looking back at the fact that the City did acquire use of the former military site -- the Nike site – on Mile
Lane, looking back at that purchase, it was designated for potentially a firehouse to be built on that property as
well as a training center and a few other items Most recently, I don’t believe there has been a new site design
for that property laid out, so at this point, we are not proposing to use that site as a fire station.
Chief Albert: Correct, and we had a good conversation about it at EDC (Economic & Community Development
Commission) and with Public Safety (Commission). That site is just not conducive to what we are trying to do.
Back in 2008-2009 when the Nike site was a possibility, it was working in conjunction that the State Fire School
was going to go there so we were going to get a station out of them. That’s why they were looking at it. That
is no longer the case. The State school is no longer in Middletown, They are no longer in Middletown so there
would be no partnership with them. We also have to think about that, in 18 years, the landscape on that are
has drastically changed. There is Talia Trail. They are all of the new development. I’m sure the last thing they
want is a fire station in their backyard. That’s where t would basically be. And then the contaminants that were
possibly at Mile Lane 18 years ago that were probably not that a big a deal. With history and science, we now
know it’s a pretty big deal today. We cannot -- I cannot talk too much about the contaminates – say how much
or how bad. I think Christine (Economic & Community Development Director Marques) may have a little bit
more history on that.
Councilman Loffredo: So we have had the site for some time. There is over 22 acres of land there. Based on
the referendum and discussion on the 911 Center, and with the 911 Center on that property.
Fire Chief Albert: Correct
Councilman Loffredo: It was originally designed and so forth. Has the City, in terms of, I’m not aware it has
been done, any update regarding the contaminants that are there. We do have an emergency center the, the
plot that we use for training and the like. Right now we own property. At the same time, we are asking to pay
for an additional 1.2 acres of land over $500K approximately plus demolition costs and so forth. Folks are asking
and I guess we need a better -- a stronger -- explanation why it has been decided. What are we going to do
with the 22 acres? Can it be used for other activities? As I looked over the received information, it seemed that
we are locked into a certain type of usage: clearly, your firehouse or some other emergency response center
of some nature would be appropriate for the site. The site is appropriate for a fire station. We're still deciding
that we're going to put a fire station on Newfield Street directly.
Fire Chief Albert: Do we think maybe something can go there? Possibly, but we also have to think about the
overall grand scheme and logistics of things. That property is on Newfield Street and Mile Lane is 0.9 of a mile
off Newfield Street. We don't cover anything to the left besides one structure almost closer to the East Street
and Ridgewood Road. It's not a benefit for us to be all the way up that access road, all the way in the back,
then have to still make our way right, go 0.9 mile through a residential neighborhood where their school during
the day, in the afternoon with traffic to get back onto Newfield Street. Also, where we would have to build would
be way in the back, so we'd be set back further. We'd have to wait for the gate to open, come down the access
road, and then 0.9 mile just to get Newfield Street. That right there could be two (2) minutes to your response
time. You know . . .
Councilman Loffredo: We understand. You're saying the idea of putting a fire station in the first place, because
the location and the distance between Point A and point B has not changed. This is between the Mile Lane site,
which we own -- the 22+ acres -- and where it's located and coming out and coming onto that. You're indicating
then that the idea of putting a fire station there really never didn't make much sense.
Fire Chief Albert: No, no. I think back 17 . . . 16 years ago, when it was pitched to us where we possibly could
have a station out of having a school there, I think at that point it's like, well, we've needed a station since the
eighties. If this can make it happen, we might do that. But if you notice, once the money from the State school
went away, the project never came to fruition. We had past retired Chief Kronenberger at Public Safety
(Commission) just a few weeks ago, and he actually spoke to the committee on how he pivoted away from that
property to be a fire station many years ago, knowing that it just is not conducive for our response times. I have
to think about where Newfield Street is, where that property that we want to buy where we can go left, we can
go right, or we can go straight. We're on the main road. We don't have three (3) or four (4) minutes to get to the
main vessel of travel. We're right there and we can easily pivot either way for our response times.
Councilman Loffredo: There are three (3) fire districts in the City. The Central Fire District has two (2) fire
houses. Now we would have three (3).
Chief Albert: Correct.
Councilman Loffredo: The other districts only have one (1) firehouse.
DECEMBER 2, 2024 COMMON COUNCIL – SPECIAL MEETING Page 3
QUESTIONS TO DIRECTORS
Chief Albert: Correct, but we are also double size. So a lot of you know -- especially the Public Safety knows -
- this isn't just about getting a fire station for our response times and to better align ourselves to meet NFPA
standards. We also have a massive space issue within our department. I have 24 staff members Monday
through Friday from 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM, jammed into two (2) small buildings with very small square footage.
After-night hours, we have about 15 to 12 people that are there at 24/7. We are crammed in. We have things
sitting outside. We don't have storage. We have water issues. We have a leaky roof. Our buildings are in drastic
need of repair and sprucing up into this century. So it goes more than just the response time issues and making
sure that we can cover that section of town to meet NFPA standards and to make sure that we provide a high
level of service to everyone in that total road area, but it's also for feasibility and infrastructure for my people.
About a year ago we did a department wide survey and asked everybody: What is (sic) our deficiencies? What
is the number one thing you wish you can change here? Pretty much from everyone the answer was “space.”
That was pretty much from every single member, from every single rank, every single division.
Councilman Loffredo: As you know, the three (3) fire districts are three (3) different taxing districts.
Chief Davis: Correct.
Councilman Loffredo: Any possibility, since the location of this is going to be out in in that area, of doing a
combined station with Westfield.
Chief Albert: So I did. That question did come up I don't know if it was in EDC (Economic Development
Commission) or not. Let's just say, what if we became one fire department one day? From Main Street to East
street -- it maybe only 3 ½ miles, but you have to look at ease of travel and how fast we can get an engine to
that side of town. Even if we did consolidate, or take over and become one big department, you still need to
station on Newfield Street.
Councilman Loffredo: I understand. I will make my question clearer: Any possibility of both districts combining
to develop the fire station out of the Newfield area shared within the two (2) districts? Has that discussion
occurred?
Chief Albert: No, and I don't think that can happen because it's in our district, so they wouldn't be able to come
into our district to do anything or . . . Would we respond to them with mutual aid? Yes, we would help them
when aid if they, if they call it and vice versa, like we currently do have now.
Councilman Loffredo: So you're saying that having such an arrangement is it . . . in the Charter, it talks about,
the Charter mentions, at some point in it, regarding providing fire services being part of the overall City
responsibility: the fact that that we would then take on the responsibility -- “we” meaning those folks living in the
Central Fire District -- being responsible based on the current set of circumstances. The operation and the costs
of the personnel and operation of a 3rd station would be totally borne by just those taxpayers, correct?
Chief Albert: That would be a question for Finance, and that's a good question. I don't know. Well, anything,
salaries, anything like that, “yes,” that's borne by anyone in the Fire District. The building aspect, I don't know.
Yeah, we're a tax district, but I don't know if we have the bond the building, if the City share comes out of the
General Fund. That I don't know. I'm not a finance guy, but I will say we are looking to seek State and Federal
funding, so we're hoping that this comes with a very minimal cost to the taxpayers.
Councilman Loffredo: My last question is: who is involved in setting, how do how do we come about, or how did
the City arrive at the agreement, or the potential agreement, with the owners of that property for the purchase
price and the like?
Chief Albert: That was done through legal counsel Christopher Forte, the City attorney, who I think handles all
the real estate for the City. He's the one, I got the contact information for the property for the realtor. He's been
the point of contact, going back and forth with the realtor.
Councilman Loffredo: So, do you know what the assessed value is? Is Chris Forte on the call?
Chief Albert: That I don't know. He can answer that question.
Councilman Loffredo: Can somebody from the . . . So the property, I assume, was for sale.
Chief Albert: Yes, it was. It's been for sale for several years now.
Councilman Loffredo: Okay. And what were they asking?
Chief Albert: At one point, it was listed for over $1M or right around there. Then it went to $850K, then $650K,
and then we made the agreement for $499K
Councilman Loffredo: Thank you.
Chief Albert: No problem.
Chair/Councilman Nocera: Do any other Council members have questions for Chief Albert? Okay, thank you,
Chief. Are there other council members that have questions for other directors? Councilwoman Blackwell.
DECEMBER 2, 2024 COMMON COUNCIL – SPECIAL MEETING Page 4
QUESTIONS TO DIRECTORS
Councilwoman Jeanette Blackwell: Thank you. Attorney Smith, could he come up. Good evening, Attorney
Smith, and thank you for providing a document literally “hot off the press.” I think you're able to share. You have
some additional copies that you can disseminate to my colleagues. So I wanted to know, because we had three
items -- Resolutions D, E, and F -- related to the ARPA unencumbered dollars. I wanted to know the exact dollar
amount that we currently have. If you could just step us all through the current dollar amount and then I'll pose
my questions.
Attorney Brig Smith: For sure. And just to say, I think that you had earlier, document approximating this
spreadsheet saying here are the 18 or so City projects that we have and here's what's left. And you may recall
that we had to have sort of an update here as we're having right now because we didn't know for sure the exact
amount that we would have left over. So we told departments they've got to get their stuff in finalized by
Wednesday of last week before Thanksgiving. Purchase orders then had to have been in process so we knew
exactly how much money was actually going to be obligated. We did that because we wanted to make sure that
Council had a chance to review it, reallocate it as need be, and then give the departments a chance to get
things executed -- obligated -- by the end of the year. If the money's not obligated by the end of the year, then
it risks going back to Treasury. What you have right now in front of you is a spreadsheet that says here are the
18 City projects that we've been tracking, in the far right hand column, you see the balance of funds that are
remaining for each of those projects. The final row that says Previous Unallocated ARPA funds: $178K. What
that is, is the money that had been set aside and not used by the Task Force in the thought that it might be
contingencies, there might be unexpected expenses. The Task Force had sort of kept that aside and never
recommended it being spent in our recommend forwarded to the Council. So, all told, there's $669,096.17 of
unobligated funds. That means that, if we don't use it, we lose it. So before you tonight, you have the resolution
that we propose $550K for the fire station we just talked about, and another resolution that talks about taking
any remaining unobligated funds and using them for Water & in Sewer projects. So that is what this is, and, as
you said it is quite literally “hot off the press.”
Councilwoman Blackwell: Yes, so, the, the dollar amount remaining -- just did the math – is $120,069. So that
is the amount from the purchase that, if we vote in the affirmative this evening, would go to the Water & Sewer
Department.
Attorney Smith: That's sounds right. I I went to law school, not math school so I trust your calculations.
Councilwoman Blackwell Calculated. I just did the math. I was curious about it because there is no dollar amount
in the resolution for Water & Sewer.
Attorney Smith: Correct.
Councilwoman Blackwell: I just thought it would be helpful to know what we're actually talking about here. So
the purchase of the fire station on Newfield Street is Resolution 10D.
Attorney Smith: Yep.
Councilwoman Blackwell: There's another resolution -- 10F -- that also speaks to the demolition. So we know -
- and I guess I probably could have asked the Chief this question as well -- it's $499K for the purchase and then
the demolition is roughly $50K.
Attorney Smith: Correct.
DECEMBER 2, 2024 COMMON COUNCIL – SPECIAL MEETING Page 5
QUESTIONS TO DIRECTORS
Councilwoman Blackwell: Okay. Maybe I should ask the Chief this question while you're at the podium. If the
chief could also come up, please. And while the Chief is coming up . . . that's $120K that we're trying to now
allocate over to Water & Sewer.
Attorney Smith: If you decide to allocate.
Councilwoman Blackwell: Correct. It would go over to Water & Sewer.
Attorney Smith: Yes
Councilwoman Blackwell: Good evening, Chief. So the $50K – and you may have answered this question so I
apologize if you did during the questions that Councilman Loffredo posed -- the $50K for the demolition cost,
how did we come up with that amount?
Fire Chief Albert: We went out and we got three (3) bids. I did contact three (3) companies, who are all on the
State bid list to go out and do that, and we did get three (3) bids. The $50K would be sufficient enough to be
able to demo that building. I think the one -- the award winning bid -- would be about $47K.
Councilwoman Blackwell: $47K. Do you recall the time frame you did those bids?
Fire Chief Albert: I reached out to them before the holidays and just told them that I would like an answer or a
final price by today. So I got the 3rd bid finally today. So, obviously, if you approve everything tonight, I'll go right
to Purchasing tomorrow because I know time is of the essence. We have to get everything in play, but at least
the money will be encumbered. But I did go through the bid process, get three (3) proposals, that way we don't
have to do a formal, open process, which would take even longer.
Councilwoman Blackwell: Okay, thank you. I think my questions have been answered. Thank you.
Chair/ Councilman Nocera: Councilman Loffredo.
Councilman Vincent Loffredo: Good evening. So there's another document that's been submitted to us as
well. This one with a couple of colored documents.
Attorney Smith: Correct.
Councilman Loffredo: As just as an explanation because the original document turned to the City projects
unallocated is the $669,096.17. And, of course this indicates balance of funds remaining, but that's not
unallocated. Do we know what that is? Is there what the total unallocated?
Attorney Smith: Yeah, I could and I'm sorry if I was unclear. The document that you have: it's sort of a colored
spreadsheet, was as of this morning. It was just my best effort to put together as like a quick snapshot of the
projects that are still out there – we were getting from Finance and Purchasing -- the obligated funds as they're
coming in: what are the purchase orders that actually being entered? So, the morning document -- the document
DECEMBER 2, 2024 COMMON COUNCIL – SPECIAL MEETING Page 6
QUESTIONS TO DIRECTORS
has color on it -- has a larger balance of unobligated funds than the current one because we've now processed
those POs. So the correct value, as of right now and for the Council to consider, is $669,096.17.
Councilman Loffredo: So as far as the non-City projects there, all of that has been properly encumbered.
Attorney Smith: Yes.
Councilman Loffredo: So it's only on the City side that we have situations where we have non-encumbered.
Attorney Smith: Correct.
Councilman Loffredo: So if I understand correctly, all of the proposed projects that were approved months ago
are all in line, financially, and all the rest at this point.
Attorney Smith: Yes. “Use it or lose it,” Departments are told, and so they were got purchase orders in process.
The portions that weren't processed are those that remain here the unobligated funds.
Councilman Loffredo: I'm just wondering on the groups, the others not the City side.
Attorney Smith: The subrecipients.
Councilman Loffredo: They have all complied?
Attorney Smith: Yes, I believe they have. I don't know if there's some . . . Yeah I believe they have if there's any
like leftover it'd be de minimus.
Councilman Loffredo: And that's the kind of thing that would either come back to the city or anything leftover
from any of the other good is that money that potentially the city could reallocate?
Attorney Smith: Could have been, but as I said, if there's anything it is de minimus.
Councilman Loffredo: Okay. Thank you.
Councilman Eugene Nocera: I serve on both committees and I was at the meeting when we unanimously
approved the issues before us tonight. My understanding from the meeting, though, is that there may be some
grantees and they are going to fall short and that, with the POs that are necessary to be completed by.
Attorney Smith: Just to be clear, so under the Federal guidelines, “obligated” is different than “encumbered.”
“Obligated” means there has to be a contract, some agreement, some kind of purchase obligation in place. The
City departments have done that. The subrecipients, from my recollection, I think they've largely done that.
Councilman Nocera: But there was a little gap that seemed to be between what we are hoping “use it or lose it”
that additional money may come its way quickly to the City projects.
Attorney Smith: On the subrecipient side.
Councilman Nocera: Right.
Attorney Smith: Okay, I'll confirm and get back to you.
Councilman Nocera: Do you have any estimate what that might be?
Attorney Smith: No, as I said, I didn't think it was much of anything, so I'll confirm that.
Councilman Nocera: Thank you.
Chair/Councilman Eugene Nocera: Are there other questions for directors at this time? I don't see any, so I'm
going to close.
3. Questions to Directors Workshop Closes
There being no further discussion, the Chair closes Questions to Directors at 6:28 PM.
4. Meeting adjourned
Councilman Vincent Loffredo moves to adjourn. Councilwoman Jeanette Blackwell seconds the motion.
There being no discussion, the Chair calls for a voice vote. The motion is unanimously approved by a vote of
12-0 (AYE: Councilmembers Blackwell, Faulkner, Ford, Gennaro, Kovach, Loffredo, Mangiafico, Nocera,
Pulino, Salafia, Spatola, and Sweeney). The matter is approved.
The meeting is adjourned at 6:29 PM.
DECEMBER 2, 2024 COMMON COUNCIL – SPECIAL MEETING Page 7
QUESTIONS TO DIRECTORS
ATTEST:
LINDA S.K. REED,
COMMON COUNCIL CLERK
K: review/ minutes/ 2024 Dec 02 – Ques to Directors – 2 Dec 2024
Get email alerts for Middletown
A daily email when new agendas and minutes are posted.