City Council

JOURNAL OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORWICH MAY 5, 2015 A special meeting of the Council of the City of Norwich and the Charter Revision Commission was held May 5, 2015 at 5:00 PM in Council Chambers. Council Members Present: Mayor Hinchey, Ald. Desaulniers, Noblick, Eyberse, and Bettencourt. Council Members Absent: Ald. Wilson and Nash. Attorney Michael Driscoll and Acting City Manager John Bilda. Commissioners Present: Chairman Les King, Michael Gualtieri, Janis Sawicki (5:07 p.m.), Arthur Lathrop, Debra Dickey (5:31 p.m.), Richard Podurgiel Commissioners Absent: Linda Becker. Mayor Hinchey presided. The City Council shall confer with the Charter Revision Commission to review, discuss and possibly take action on recommendations with respect to the proposed Charter changes. Mayor Hinchey explained protocol for the meeting and noted that the meeting would be informal. She noted that Ald. Nash could not attend the meeting, but asked to relate that he would have asked for the NPU contribution to be raised from 10% to 12%. It was agreed to go through each recommendation and provide information on each to the commissioners. Mayor Hinchey read the first recommendation - Chapter V. The Council, Sec. 2 – Officers (a) Mayor. The council recommended having the mayor continue as an “ex-officio” voting member and to leave the Economic Development Coordinator (EDC) in the charter. The rationale given for this recommendation was discussed. Attorney Driscoll stated that he recommended this change in voting to the Charter Revision Commission due to party affiliation requirements (minority representation) and other legal issues. With regards to the EDC position Mr. King stated that the last 4 mayors have not used this position which is the main reason the commission omitted the position in the charter. Mr. King stated that the commissioners will look at this at their meeting on May 8, 2015. Mayor Hinchey read the second recommendation – Chapter V. The Council, Sec. 2 – Officers (b) Other officers. The council concurred with abolishing the position of president pro tempore and replacing with the position of deputy mayor. However, the council recommended that the deputy mayor would be the alderman appointed by the council by resolution. The rationale given for this recommendation was discussed. The major concern was that the alderman with the highest number of votes could be a newly elected alderman without experience. Mr. King stated that the commissioners will look at this at their meeting on May 8, 2015. Mayor Hinchey read the third recommendation – Chapter VI. City Manager, Sec. 4 – Power of appointment and removal. The council recommended deleting this proposed addition. The council felt that the City Manager should have the authority to work on a proposal for restructuring/reorganization, but should bring those issues to the council for approval as issues like that could also affect the budget, which falls under the council’s purview. Mr. King explained that the commissioners talked about this issue at length and reviewed the processes in place now, but felt that this language opened the flexibility to move departments and responsibilities of the departments from one group to another for efficiencies/savings. Mayor Hinchey read the fourth recommendation – Chapter VIII. Borrowing, Sec. 4 – Bonds and notes, how authorized. The council recommended changing the $800,000 bonding threshold to a threshold amount equal to 1% of the budget of the preceding year. Mr. King explained that the 1 JOURNAL OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORWICH MAY 5, 2015 commissioners talked about this issue at length and that they reviewed historical information pertaining to bonding and found that the list contained nothing that came close to the current cap. He added that the commission had no information on what was prevented by this cap. Mr. Lathrop spoke about the 2002 charter revision vote and noted that the public approved every charter proposal put forth with the exception of the item to raise the bonding cap. He noted that the reason is because the voters of the city would rather see that type of spending under the control of the voters (referendum) rather than politicized. Mr. Podurgiel stated that the public wants a say in larger projects. He added that when looking at what was bonded over the years he didn’t see an issue with leaving the cap alone. Ald. Bettencourt noted the only thing he could think of that was an issue was a ladder truck that ended up being leased. President Pro Tem Desaulniers stated that he would rather see the 2% in capital versus a higher bonding cap. Mayor Hinchey read the fifth recommendation – Chapter XIII. Public Welfare, Sec. 1 – Board of education. The council did not agree with the commission’s recommendation of staggered four year terms and recommended staggered terms other than the proposed four year term. The council feels that the two year terms are fine and they are not sure why the commission recommended a change to four year terms. Mr. King explained that the Board of Education Chair met with the commission and presented information to them requesting a change to four year staggered terms. The rationale was mainly the time it takes to get Board members up to speed, risk of losing all experience at once, training requirements, and continuity to see projects through. Mayor Hinchey read the sixth recommendation – Chapter V. The Council, Sec. 1 – Members of the council (a) Composition. The council did not agree with the commission’s recommendation to leave terms at two years. The council recommended a change to four year terms and noted that their rationale for this recommendation mirrors that of the Board of Education’s request. Mr. King stated that the roles of the Board of Education and City Council are very different and compared them to legislative and judicial forms of government. The commissioners spoke about why they made the recommendation. Mr. King stated that the commissioners will look at this at their meeting on May 8, 2015. Mayor Hinchey read the seventh (final) recommendation – Chapter V. The Council, Sec. 1 – Members of the council (b) Compensation. The council recommends that the compensation of each council member be established by ordinance. The rationale for this request was that council members must attend functions, no gas mileage reimbursements, etc. It was noted that the city has made efficiencies in the budget by no longer using Public Works to deliver packets as they are emailed to members (copies can be picked up by request at Town Hall or mailed). This was discussed by the council members and commission members at large. Mr. Podurgiel stated that this could be handled through the department budget and felt that the council should attend affairs (encourages attendance) and noted that this can be costly. However, he felt it could be handled through the council’s budget. Mr. Lathrop agreed with Mr. Podurgiel and added that he feels the council needs to set a modest line item for these items. Mr. Gualtieri asked to comment on Ald. Nash’s recommendation regarding the NPU contribution. Mr. Gualtieri stated that the commission had considerable discussions regarding this item and were led to believe that this type of request would most likely be reflected by a rate hike to the residents of the city. The commission instead looked for ways to make the department more profitable by expanding its gas franchise agreements and allowing them to sell fiber optic services. 2 JOURNAL OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORWICH MAY 5, 2015 President Pro Tem Desaulniers and Mayor Hinchey thanked the commissioners for all of the work they put into this revision work. Mayor Hinchey also added that the discussions tonight helped as well. Upon a motion of President Pro Tem Desaulniers, seconded by Ald. Noblick, it was unanimously voted to adjourn the meeting at 6:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Jennifer Kayser, Recording Secretary. CITY CLERK 3