|
ENFIELD TOWN COUNCIL
MINUTES OF A PUBLIC HEARING
JULY 5, 2005
A Public Hearing was held in the Council Chambers of the Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut on July 5, 2005. The Public Hearing was called to order by Chairman Tallarita at 6:02 p.m.
ROLL-CALL – Present were Councilmen Edgar, Egan, Fiore, Mangini, Peruta and Tallarita. Councilman Dodd entered at 6:03 p.m., Councilman Kaupin entered at 6:05 p.m. and Councilmen Peruta and Reveruzzi entered at 7:09 p.m. Councilman Crowley was absent. Also present were Town Manager, Scott Shanley; Assistant Town Manager, Daniel Vindigni; Town Clerk, Suzanne Olechnicki; Director of Finance, Gregory Simmons; Director of Public Works, John Kazmarski; Assistant Director of Public Works, Colleen Brand; Director of Information Systems, Charlene Bond.
Chairman Tallarita read the notice of public hearing which was published in the Journal Inquirer on June 25, 2005 as follows:
TOWN OF ENFIELD
LEGAL NOTICE
PUBLIC HEARING
TUESDAY, JULY 5, 2005
“The Enfield Town Council will hold a Public Hearing in the Enfield Town Hall Council Chambers, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut on Tuesday, July 5, 2005 at 6:00 p.m. to allow interested citizens an opportunity to express their opinions regarding the Athletic Field Referendum Questions. Copies of the referendum questions are available for public inspection in the office of the Town Clerk, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut, Monday through Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.”
Acting Chairman Fiore announced the ground rules for the Public Hearing.
Mr. Shanley stated the proposal for Fermi High School involves re-doing the fields, irrigation and drainage. He noted there would be three baseball diamonds, three multi-use fields, a synthetic running track, a football field, which can also be a game-based soccer facility. The field will have lighting and bleachers. Expanded parking will also be included. He pointed out these are concept plans and if approved by referendum, the design would be more detailed.
He stated Enfield High School involves a complete reconstruction of the drainage, irrigation, four multi-use fields (soccer/hockey), four reconfigured baseball diamonds. There would also be a synthetic running track with the appropriate width which allows for a football field and game-based soccer field. Bleachers would be included as well as lighting.
He stated the reason for synthetic turf is to allow for much more use without being worn out. He noted Enfield High is also proposed to have a practice football field. Additional parking is also proposed at the bottom lot.
Mr. Shanley read the referendum question which is being considered by the Council this evening:
“The resolution to appropriate $5,700,000 for improvements to and/or new construction of high school athletic facilities and to finance the appropriation by using not less than $4,200,000 of unexpended funds from the elementary school project and by issuing bonds and notes in an amount not to exceed $1,500,000 shall be reduced by any grants that may be received from the project and by any proceeds that may be received from the sale of the Asnuntuck Community College Campus.”
Mr. Shanley stated the $5.7 million dollars is detailed extensively in an update they had in February of this year. He noted it’s broken down by site removal, site preparation, site drainage, synthetic fabric, reconstruction, lighting, bleachers, etc.
He stated the $4.2 million dollars is money that is currently available, and it’s left over from the elementary school projects, the JFK project, and the Head Start project. He explained the other proposed piece of the financing is the sale of the Asnuntuck Community College Campus to the State of Connecticut. He noted there was a lease that was signed around 1980 which calls for the sale at the end of the lease in 2007 to the State of Connecticut for $2 million dollars. He noted that date is coming up. He stated the State budget does include $2 million dollars in the bonding package for the purchase of Asnuntuck sometime before the end of 2007. He stated in the end the State does not have to make this purchase, however, there’s every indication that the State plans to purchase this facility.
Also present for this Public Hearing was Vincent McDermott, Consultant.
Jeff Cross, 1116 Enfield Street
Voiced his support of this project. He noted he is a member of the Enfield High Grid Iron Club and he has noticed the terrible condition of Enfield’s school athletic fields compared to other towns. He stated the method of financing for this project should not have a big impact on taxes. He noted school athletics are a positive outlet for the youth.
Margaret Jedziniak, 232 Abbe Road
Stated if the fields are in such terrible condition, they should be shut down for liability reasons. She questioned the maintenance of these fields over the years.
Ms. Jedziniak stated work is being done on the Brainard Park field. She stated her understanding Mass Mutual donated some money. She questioned how much money has been spent on the Brainard Park field, and is any more money proposed to be spent. She questioned what leagues play on that field and how much use will the field get.
She suggested that if the fields are in such terrible condition, perhaps they should erect a sign saying, “play at your own risk”.
Jack Sheridan, 7 Buchanan Road
Stated Enfield has three general obligation bonds – one was dated 10/15/1999 for $10 million dollars; $14 million dollars dated 3/1/2002; $14.5 million dated 4/1/2003. He noted this totals approximately $38.5 million dollars, and as of 3/1/2005 the expenditures on the school projects amounted to $30.5 million dollars. He noted that is an $8 million balance, and it took until just recently to realize there’s a $4.2 million dollar excess. He noted the Board of Education had realized a $526,000 excess just a few weeks ago, but none of that excess was allocated to recreation fields.
Mr. Sheridan referred to Dr. Gallacher’s numbers from the Strategic School Profile in that there will be 495 fewer students by 2008. He noted there are already six empty classrooms at one of the schools. He questioned whether this might be an indication for an audit.
He stated it’s obvious to him that the Board of Education doesn’t want to spend any part of their $72.5 million dollar budget on recreation fields.
As concerns the Town taking over the maintenance of the fields and the need for hiring four new people for this purpose, he questioned why this wouldn’t be debited from the school system.
He questioned the necessity of re-doing the athletic fields at both high schools.
He stated his belief they should change the form of government and have some accountability.
Sean Sweeney, 72 Oakwood Street
Stated he is a coach, teacher and taxpayer in Enfield. He stated his belief that the Council should stress to the people that this project is really for the good of everyone. He stated his belief it’s wrong to blame the problems with the fields on maintenance. He noted the maintenance people do the best they can with what they have.
Mr. Sweeney questioned if the leftover money has to be spent on something for the school. He questioned if there’s a contingency plan in place if the referendum fails.
Ronald Prostka, 34 Foxcroft Road
Questioned how many additional fields will be added at each high school. He questioned how the fields will be protected from vandalism if they are open to public use. He proposed the fields be open from dusk to dawn if the Town takes it over and not provide extra lighting so that youth can loiter late at night. He added he would like to see “no loitering and play at your own risk” signs erected.
Richard Adams, 12 Cartier Road
Voiced his support of addressing the athletic fields. He noted students and citizens of Enfield deserve this. He noted the improvements other towns have made in their athletic facilities, i.e., Ellington and Manchester. He stated his belief the improvements have to be made at both high schools.
Mark Grinuk, 1266 Enfield Street
Voiced his support of the referendum. He noted Enfield has made no capital improvements to their athletic fields for 45 years at Enfield High and 35 years at Fermi High. He commended the school grounds crew for their efforts over the years in making these sub-standard fields into playable and safe facilities for the youth and citizens of Enfield. He commended the Town of Enfield for volunteering to take over the long-term maintenance responsibilities for the new athletic fields should the referendum be passed by the voters of Enfield. He noted too often the Board of Education has been forced to choose between teachers and textbooks vs grounds staff and fertilizer with the expected result.
Mr. Grinuk stated in the Town’s pursuit of providing premium facilities at the Enfield and Fermi High Schools through the combination of Town and School staff, he hopes they recognize that in addition to the approximate 40 acres of playing fields at the high school, they’re assuming an additional 220 acres and ten playgrounds at the 13 school facilities. He stated his expectation that upon further reflection and negotiations regarding the combination of staff, the Council and Board of Education will arrive at a prudent decision that’s in the best interest of the Town of Enfield.
He recommended the Board of Education accept the Town Council’s generous offer to provide their staff and resources to the new playing fields at the Enfield and Fermi High Schools. Additionally, he recommended the Board of Education retain the existing grounds staff and equipment to maintain the remaining 220 acres and ten playgrounds which will not be part of the new athletic fields.
Mr. Grinuk applauded the Town Council and Board of Education for making many wise choices in the past several years such as the new senior center, school additions, Roads 2000 and Roads 2005 and trust they will choose wisely for Enfield’s future.
Charles Woods, 11 Westerly Drive
Stated his belief the Board of Education has had opportunities to take cost savings measures, however, they have not done so. He noted he has continually spoken about the idea of having one high school and one junior high school. He pointed out the junior high school would not require fields of the same level as high school fields. He noted he hasn’t heard any mention of a central athletic facility in Enfield.
He noted he would also like to see an audit of the Board of Education.
Mrs. Collins, the Hazardville Section
Stated as a child, her playing fields were a lot less than what the youth have today.
Chairman Tallarita stated the Council did consider the option of one athletic facility as far back as five or six years ago. He noted this idea was researched. He stated issues looked into at that time were which school would have the athletic facility, or was there a town-owned piece of land to have a central facility. He noted Asnuntuck was considered, however, that campus is being sold. He stated Asnuntuck was not interested in re-opening the lease to discuss whether the Town of Enfield could maintain possession of the land behind the college. Another site considered was the Mancuso Park, however, that facility has no infrastructure whatsoever, i.e., utility lines, sewers, buildings, therefore, the cost to produce a facility at this site would be astronomical.
Chairman Tallarita stated there is still the issue of the current condition of the playing fields. He noted even if they did a centralized facility, there would have to be some improvements even for practice facilities. He noted there’s also the matter of transporting students to a central facility. He acknowledged that in essence this sounds like a great idea, however, when it’s detailed out on paper, it does not work.
Chairman Tallarita stated the maintenance factors haven’t been the driving factor in why they’re trying to address the school fields. He stated the reason the Council is hopefully putting something forward to the community is due to the fact these fields are antiquated and they need updating. He noted the issue at hand is does Enfield have quality athletic fields to meet today’s needs for today’s athletes to today’s standards.
As concerns future maintenance, Chairman Tallarita stated they are looking at this issue. He agreed with an earlier speaker regarding the school system having to make decisions between book and teacher cost vs fertilizer and lawn cutting. He noted the Council believes it would be best to have this in the hands of the Town whereby they can allocate the appropriate dollars on an annual basis to protect this investment.
Mr. Shanley stated he could talk with Mr. Sheridan about the bonding figures. As concerns remaining bond money, the voters have to decide how that money can be spent. He noted that money can’t be used to buy down existing debt.
As concerns how many additional fields, Mr. Shanley stated his belief there would be one more field at Enfield High School and one field is being eliminated at Fermi for safety reasons.
As concerns erecting a sign which says “play at your own risk”, Mr. Shanley stated that cannot be done.
As concerns how they’d address the fields if the referendum failed, Mr. Shanley explained the Town Charter only allows the Council to spend up to $400,000 per year on any one project. He explained they would have to put away $400,000 per year for the next five or six years to do the least expensive project.
Chairman Tallarita stated his belief this is a good proposal and he hopes the community will accept it. He noted there’s no contingency plan.
Councilman Kaupin addressed the contingency aspect and stated if people believe the current conditions of the field are acceptable, they won’t support the referendum. He pointed out the fields are not in a state that can be refurbished into a good condition.
Chairman Tallarita stated the primary purpose is to benefit high school athletes, however, this is a community project and is a part of the quality of life in Enfield.
Margaret Jedziniak, 232 Abbe Road
Questioned why wasn’t this meeting televised. She noted this would have been a good way to get all this information out to the public.
Chairman Tallarita stated the Council has an open invitation to the volunteer who tapes the meetings, and the Council would like to see more meetings taped. He noted five months ago he sent a letter to Cox Communication requesting they broadcast all Council meetings, however, they haven’t responded to that letter.
Councilman Fiore agreed with the Town Manager in that it wouldn’t be possible to do this particular project with normal capital improvement allocations. He pointed out as Councils change, there’s no guarantee they will want to continue that project.
Jack Sheridan, 7 Buchanan Road
Stated his belief the Risk Manager advised them that because of the problems they were having at the skateboard parks that it would be better to post a sign saying “participate at your own risk.” He noted these signs are commonly seen and may discourage people from using facilities after a certain hour.
Mr. Sheridan stated he would like an estimate on the cost for maintaining the fields, and he would like that information made public.
Mr. Shanley stated this type of signage cannot be placed on a school athletic field and the Town has to absorb the liability.
Mr. Shanley stated the maintenance numbers depend upon what is included. He noted he asked Public Works to put together an estimated number based on a number of things, i.e., lighting, irrigation maintenance, grooming, rejuvenation of the running track after a number of years, etc. He stated the estimate came out to about $319,000 for the two facilities per year, which includes the setting aside of monies for rejuvenation purposes.
As concerns the revaluation, Mr. Shanley stated commercial property isn’t appreciating like residential property and that leads to a shift. He noted if this plan comes to fruition, there will be no additional tax cost above and beyond what taxpayers are already paying for this project.
Charles Woods, 11 Westerly Drive
Questioned the possibility of cost accounting since they’re taking over more functions from the school. He noted this has become an issue when it comes to figuring out the education cost per student. He stated quite often the Board of Education has a different number than what the Town has. He stated his hope the Council is also considering instituting a cost accounting system that would designate that money as also being spent on education.
Frank Jedziniak, 232 Abbe Road
Commended the taxpayers of Enfield for giving a good living to the school system for many years.
Councilman Tait stated approving this referendum will increase taxes by $300,000 per year for maintenance. He noted future Councils will decide whether to make that expenditure from year to year.
As no others wished to speak, Chairman Tallarita closed the Public Hearing at 7:35 p.m.
|