Commission on the City Plan

MINUTES COMMISSION ON THE CITY PLAN Tuesday, December 22nd, 2015 – 7:00 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 100 BROADWAY SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA ITEMS A, B & C-CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL, DETERMINATION OF QUORUM: Ralph Page, Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. Commission Members Present: Ralph Page, Art Sharron, Michael Lahan, Frank Manfredi, and John Mathieu. A quorum was present. Absent: Les King, Daniel Daniska. Also Present: Attorney Michael Ziska, Attorney Joe Swartz, Peter Davis, Director and Debra Delaporta, Recording Secretary D. COMMUNICATIONS: Letter from Reverend Sara Ofner-Seals from Park Congregational Church, Email from David Mitchell, resident E. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None F. OLD BUSINESS: None G. NEW BUSINESS: Director Peter Davis began the meeting by stating the purpose of the Special Meeting was to discuss the Proposed Settlement of Litigation and he explained the procedure of how the meeting was going to be conducted. He introduced Attorney Michael Ziska, the attorney who represented the City of Norwich in the lawsuit filed by St. Vincent de Paul Place located at 120 Cliff St. Attorney Ziska began by explaining the history of the Soup Kitchen, what had transpired so far, and what the settlement entailed. He stated that the City had three pending lawsuits against it relating to the Soup Kitchen and that his law firm was recommending that the Commission on the City Plan approve the settlement. He said the CCP would allow public comment, although they were not required to. Attorney Ziska said that federal law is an overlay which binds local commissions just as state laws do. Attorney Ziska explained the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, also known as RLUIPA. He stated that the courts usually find in favor of the plaintiffs, and that in this case if the City lost any or all of the three federal cases against them, they could be held responsible for legal fees for both sides, possibly resulting in millions of dollars. Since the church has owned the building for over 100 years, the land owner can expect reasonable use of the building, which includes things religious in nature, such as serving food to the homeless and poor which could considered as religious and definitely “charitable”. Since St. Vincent de Paul has asked for a number of uses, Attorney Ziska believes eventually the courts would find in their favor for at least some of the uses. Michael Ziska stated that they were informed by the police department that it had not received any more calls in that area than anywhere else in the city. At this time, he asked Officer O’Reilly, who was in attendance at the meeting to address the public. Officer O’Reilly stated that this was indeed the case. Attorney Ziska said that this could be a deciding factor in the court’s decision if the lawsuit continues. He felt that substantial compromises had been made by both sides and addressed both the Commission on the City Plan’s concerns and the proposed restrictions, and stated that if this agreement is accepted, there would be no monetary award paid to the plaintiffs and that all three lawsuits would be withdrawn. At this point, Attorney Ziska turned the meeting back over to Chairman Ralph Page, who asked the CCP members if they had any questions. Since they did not, the public comment began. Speaking in favor of the proposed settlement to be approved were: Marvin Serruto, 100 Starr St, Norwich Wayne Ouellette, 54 Popple Bridge Rd, Griswold Lee Ann Gomes, 39 Tanglewood Dr, Norwich Fr. John Van Haelen, 6 Nemczuk Dr, Norwich Dr. Jeremiah Lowney, 100 Sherman St, Norwich Paige Martin, 444 Fitchville Rd, Bozrah David Holland, Norwich Julie Way, 12 Knollcrest Rd Speaking against the proposed settlement were: David Mitchell, 35 Hobart Ave, Norwich Lucia Leise, 1 Tunnel Hill Rd, Lisbon David Crabb, 46 Prospect St Brian Kobylarz, 16 Hobart Ave, Norwich At this point, Ralph Page asked if there was anyone else who wished to speak. The public comment period was closed, and Chairman Page asked if the CCP members had any comments. Frank Manfredi explained that he had attended several settlement court sessions on this matter, and that he was in support of the Soup Kitchen but felt that in order to avoid potential years of litigation and more costs to the taxpayers, that the settlement should be approved and made a motion to do so. Art Sharron proceeded to say that he supported the mission of the Soup Kitchen, and agreed about not wanting any more liability of cost to the City and taxpayers. Michael Lahan stated that he was the person who made the motion in the beginning against the Soup Kitchen, and explained how the decision was made and the reasons why. Mr. Lahan said that he felt at this point it was practical to support the proposed settlement. John Mathieu said that he believed the church was not looking at the issues that this is causing in the neighborhood, but that the stipulations put in the proposed settlement will at least keep the church from adding more things on that they can do there. Frank Manfredi made the motion again to accept the proposed settlement, and Michael Lahan seconded it, with all members in favor of acceptance for a unanimous decision with a vote of 5-0. I. EXTENSIONS: None J: BOND RELEASES: None K. ZONING MATTERS: None L. OTHER BUSINESS: None M. ADJOURMENT: Upon motion by Frank Manfredi, seconded by John Mathieu, the Commission voted unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 8:22 PM.