|
ENFIELD TOWN COUNCIL
MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING
MONDAY, DECEMBER 18, 2006
A Special Meeting of the Enfield Town Council was called to order by Chairman Tallarita in the Enfield Room of the Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut on Monday, December 18, 2006. The meeting was called to order at 6:05 p.m.
ROLL-CALL – Present were Councilmen Edgar, Hilinski, Kaupin, Lee, Mangini, Maxellon, Nelson, Peruta and Tallarita. Councilmen Crowley and Ragno were absent. Also present were Town Manager, Matthew Coppler; Town Clerk, Suzanne Olechnicki; Assistant Town Attorney, Mark Cerrato. Assistant Town Manager, Daniel Vindigni entered at 6:52 p.m.
MOTION #8962 by Councilman Hilinski, seconded by Councilman Lee to go into Executive Session to discuss Real Estate Negotiations, Pending Litigation and Personnel Matters.
Upon a SHOW-OF-HANDS vote being taken, the Chair declared MOTION #8962 adopted 9-0-0, and the meeting stood recessed at 6:07 p.m.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Executive Session of the Enfield Town Council was called to order by Chairman Tallarita at 6:08 p.m.
ROLL-CALL – Present were Councilmen Edgar, Hilinski, Kaupin, Lee, Mangini, Maxellon, Nelson, Peruta and Tallarita. Also present were Town Manager, Matthew Coppler; Town Clerk, Suzanne Olechnicki; Assistant Town Attorney, Mark Cerrato.
Real Estate Negotiations, Pending Litigation and Personnel Matters were discussed with no action or votes being taken.
Chairman Tallarita adjourned the Executive Session at 6:29 p.m. He reconvened the Special Meeting at 6:30 p.m. and stated that during Executive Session, Real Estate Negotiations, Pending Litigation and Personnel Matters were discussed with no action or votes being taken.
DISCUSSION RE: CONNECTICUT MUNICIPAL CONSORTIUM FOR FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY
Present for this discussion were Michael Guarco, Chairman of the Granby Board of Finance and Gian-Carl Casa, Director of Legislative Services for the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities.
Councilman Mangini stated the Council does not want to support unfunded mandates, however, they should provide all the weapons and tools that Enfield’s State representatives and senators need because maybe they need to compromise and perhaps they need to be in a better position. She feels that #2 of the resolution strips them of that ability. (Copy of resolution appended). She stated she does not feel comfortable, as a Council person from Enfield, to be out there raising issues about binding arbitration and collective bargaining because she feels they have an organized group such as CCM that is doing a very effective job on the Town’s behalf. She concluded she does support the efforts of this Consortium, however, she cannot support such a resolution at this time.
Mr. Guarco stated CCM has indicated that when they go to the Capitol to represent towns on particular issues, there isn’t enough pressure from the towns to get the legislators to pay attention, therefore, CCM gets outnumbered or out-gunned by special interest groups that may come in with up to 200 people. He noted the Consortium looks at this effort as supplementing efforts of CABE, COST and CCM.
Chairman Tallarita requested that Mr. Casa outline where CCM is coming from regarding this. Mr. Casa stated CCM has a broad agenda, and they feel they do a good job in general regarding the needs of municipalities in terms of education funding, He noted every year, CCM spends a lot of time fighting off and documenting proposed legislation that impacts municipalities. He stated they haven’t had the success they would have liked to have in the area of fighting off existing mandates. He noted what CCM sees in the Consortium group is a large number of “troops on the ground” all around the state and grass roots lobbyists who can go to their legislators in a formal or informal way and speak to their legislators specifically about these kinds of mandate issues. He stated CCM will do the documentation, testimony and work at the Capitol on behalf of those issues. He noted CCM sees this Consortium as a grass roots lobbying arm to let Legislators know that there are people back in their communities that care about the issues at the State Capitol. He assured the Council that the Consortium, and Michael Guarco in particular, has been more than cooperative with CCM, CABE and COST in trying to get a joint program. He noted tomorrow CCM expects to amend their plank on the prevailing wage issue so that it’s perfectly in sync with the Consortium and the one they expect out of CABE and many of the other RPO’s. He stated none of the changes will happen this year, but it’s only through pushing over a long period of time among a variety of groups that any progress can be made on these very difficult issues. He noted CCM believes the Consortium does this by having “troops on the ground”.
Mr. Casa stated the Governor formed a task group that will be reporting soon, and this task group will be recommending there not be mandates without funding, unless there’s a two-thirds vote of the General Assembly to enact them. He noted this is a good thing because it makes them take an extra deliberative step, and it’s believed this will be helpful. He went on to note there has been increasing sensitivity at the General Assembly concerning new mandates.
Mr. Casa stated his belief this Consortium and CCM compliment one another, and he hopes they will continue to work together.
Councilman Peruta stated he hasn’t heard anything official whereby CCM, COST or CABE want to work with this Consortium. Mr. Casa stated they have a statement that they’ve drafted that will essentially say they want to work with the Consortium. He noted the Consortium has focused mainly on three planks, which are the prevailing wage, binding arbitration and unfunded mandates.
Mr. Casa stated as long as the leadership of the Consortium remains what it is, he feels comfortable they can work together.
Councilman Peruta stated his impression the Consortium was more comprised of small to medium towns. He stated his belief bigger towns such as Hartford or Bridgeport might find it difficult to join the Consortium because they’d lose a big piece of their support base.
Mr. Guarco stated there are bigger towns in the Consortium such as Milford and Torrington. He noted they haven’t had the time to approach all the towns. He added he tends to focus on those towns that have a Board of Finance. He noted the Consortium will continue to grow.
Councilman Hilinski questioned whether the Consortium is actively working with CCM and do they have regular meetings and plan strategies together. Mr. Casa stated it’s an evolving and improving relationship because the Consortium is new. He noted CCM is comfortable with the Consortium, and last year CCM worked closely with Mr. Guarco by letting him know when things were happening at the Capitol and when he needed to get his people active to put pressure on certain issues. He added his belief they will work at doing a better job this year in working with Mr. Guarco on these types of items. He noted the Consortium has had an open door policy all along and they’ve invited CCM to participate in their planning meetings and strategic discussions. He noted he or others from CCM have attended these meetings. He stated CCM believes they have a good, on-going relationship with the Consortium, and they believe it’s getting better each year.
Councilman Hilinski questioned whether CCM has a sub group that is pushing for the binding arbitration change. Mr. Casa stated binding arbitration is an on-going issue in towns of all different types and sizes. He added the prevailing wage is also a bi-partisan problem at the General Assembly. He noted there are committees that recommend positions to the general membership. He noted there’s one committee that deals with municipal management and labor relations, and they are the ones that put out the proposals on binding arbitration and prevailing wage. He stated people active on that committee are people who have testified, along with members of the Consortium, over the last year or two.
Councilman Hilinski questioned how each group goes about approaching the local legislators. Mr. Guarco responded at the local level or regional events. He stated his impression legislators have to stand up to some strong special interests, and they can say their towns want certain things.
Councilman Kaupin stated he was the one who brought Mr. Guarco forward for the first presentation, and he has forwarded Mr. Guarco’s e-mails to other Council members. He noted his impression of this Consortium is the pulling together of local decision-makers who are trying to make some positive changes, and he believes everyone is on the same page about these important issues. He expressed his appreciation to CCM for being present and their affirmation of the Consortium.
Referring to binding arbitration, Chairman Tallarita questioned how the Consortium is structured so that there’s agreement as to what they will lobby for and how hard will they lobby. He stated his belief one of the concerns of the Council is who they represent, and their association with particular groups and going out and driving a wedge between them in any way. He stated although Enfield has a place at the table at CCM, and they’re unified in the message, he questions how they control how radical the message may get in another group. Mr. Guarco stated a couple years ago they made the decision that the mission statement not change. Mr. Casa stated CCM would walk away from anything they thought was such a radical stand that it might be harmful to CCM. He went on to note that Mr. Guarco has proven over the last couple years that he doesn’t want the Consortium seen as a bunch of extremists on an issue.
Chairman Tallarita stated his understanding Connecticut has the second highest prevailing wage in the nation, and Mr. Guarco responded that’s correct. He added there are 17 or 18 states that don’t have prevailing wage on the books.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION #8963 by Councilman Mangini, seconded by Councilman Lee to adjourn.
Upon a SHOW-OF-HANDS vote being taken, the Chair declared MOTION #8963 adopted 9-0-0, and the meeting stood adjourned at 7:14 p.m.
Appended to minutes of
December 18, 2006
Special Town Council Meeting
ENFIELD TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. ________
Resolution in Support of the Consortium Group
Whereas, state interventions into traditionally local budgetary affairs have negatively impacted the delicate balance between a municipality's capacity to provide services and the local taxpayers' ability to pay for said services; and
Whereas, such interventions have effectively reduced the municipalities' ability to manage major components of a typical town budget; and
Whereas, COST, CABE, CCM and other municipal advocacy agencies have all traditionally called for repeal or reform of prevailing wage and binding arbitration laws that currently apply to and negatively impact the municipalities across Connecticut; and
Whereas, the state legislature in Connecticut continues to force new mandates upon the towns while reneging on its own statutory municipal aid commitments to said towns;
Now, therefore, be it resolved, that the Town Council of the Town of Enfield joins and supports the Connecticut Municipal Consortium for Fiscal Responsibility in its effort to bring about changes beneficial to the municipalities and taxpayers across Connecticut. Said changes include:
1. Raising the cost thresholds under the prevailing wage statute from the current $100K/$400 K levels to minimally the $1 million level; and
2. Leveling the playing field in binding arbitration by allowing an arbitrated settlement, if rejected by the local legislature body, to then be sent back into negotiations, rather than directly into the last round of appellate review; and
3. A prohibition on new mandates upon the towns from the state until the legislature meet its own funding commitment already existing on the books.
|