Transcript
SOURCE TRANSCRIPT
This transcript is downloaded from the source you provided but we haven't reviewed it for accuracy. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record. You can also request an AI-transcription of the audio file with the button to the left.
[0:05]
This is NHTV2, North Haven Government Television, a service of North Haven
[0:10]
Community Television.
[0:13]
The following program is brought to you through the support of
[0:19]
the Town of North Haven.
[0:24]
All right. Good evening, everyone.
[0:26]
I'd like to have everyone take their seats, please.
[0:28]
I'm Mike Freed, North Haven's Selectman, and welcome to our October Board of
[0:32]
Selectman meeting. Joined as always by our second Selectman, Mr.
[0:36]
William Piper, and our third Selectman, Mr. David Cohen.
[0:40]
Let's rise for our pledge of allegiance.
[0:43]
I pledge allegiance
[0:44]
To the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it
[0:49]
stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
[0:59]
Before we get started, I want to have a motion made, and I want to explain
[1:05]
why I'm going to make this motion to change the order of this agenda.
[1:10]
As many of you know, I have a very good relationship with the media, so I have
[1:14]
Channel Eight coming in here. Channel Eight will be here for the drone portion of
[1:19]
this meeting. I want them to come in. Preston Stover's going to be here.
[1:23]
We work very closely together, because I'm going to be making a presentation so
[1:27]
that not only everyone here, everybody on North Haven TV, and everybody watching on
[1:32]
Channel Eight is going to be updated in terms of what's happening on this Amazon
[1:35]
drone issue here in North Haven. So Preston Stover will be here at
[1:41]
7:12. So I'm going to make a motion to amend this agenda to reverse the order of
[1:47]
this. So item number four, which is the first Selectman's overview, which is this
[1:52]
presentation I'm going to give, goes after item number five, which now
[1:58]
will become four, which is the veterans exemption.
[2:02]
Is there a motion? I'm making the motion.
[2:05]
Before we, and if-
[2:07]
Yes
[2:07]
... if the press isn't here yet, we could push that. You want to push it even more?
[2:12]
Yes.
[2:12]
Yeah, I would agree with that. That maybe, we have all these other resolutions and-
[2:17]
We can do the bonding.
[2:18]
Yeah, maybe we'll do the bonding. Yes.
[2:19]
Do some of it.
[2:21]
And then there's a second part to this.
[2:22]
We agree to-
[2:23]
Yes. And I'll second your-
[2:25]
Yes
[2:25]
... your motion here to
[2:28]
move the agenda around, and I guess we'll be a little flexible-
[2:31]
Yes
[2:32]
... with which items we address first.
[2:34]
We'll, of course, get to every item on the agenda, but we'll move it around as
[2:38]
necessary and wait for press to get here.
[2:41]
And in conjunction with this, what we're going to do to wait for Channel Eight to
[2:45]
come in, we will have public comment after I deliver this presentation.
[2:51]
And we'll also have public comment to the issue about the petition of the firetruck
[2:57]
rather than wait till the end of the meeting for public comment.
[3:00]
We'll still have public comment on other issues.
[3:03]
So what we're going to be proposing here in this motion through the discussion is
[3:06]
that I'm having Channel Eight come in, and we will allow public comment while
[3:11]
Channel Eight's here on this drone issue that I'm going to present and give
[3:15]
everybody an update, and we'll do the same thing on the petition on the firetruck.
[3:21]
Right. And to clarify, so for each, I'm totally on board with that.
[3:26]
A lot of folks have asked us to do that generally, that they would like to comment
[3:30]
on agenda items before we get to the end of the meeting.
[3:33]
So with respect to the drone update, folks will be able to come up and speak to it
[3:38]
so it gets recorded,
[3:40]
so the media can see it. And then also agenda item six, which is the petition with
[3:45]
respect to the new fire engine.
[3:48]
Yeah.
[3:48]
The canceled fire engine. So we'll do both of those.
[3:51]
And in respect of each, once that agenda item's done, we'll go to the next one, and
[3:56]
people will be able to speak to that as well.
[3:58]
And then at the end of the night, please don't come back up and raise those two
[4:02]
agenda items. So those will be specific and exclusive to those two agenda items.
[4:07]
And then at the end of the night, when we have normal public comment, it'll just be
[4:11]
for anything other than those two agenda items.
[4:14]
Want to talk about the timeline?
[4:15]
Yes.
[4:16]
Plus, I think we're going to also ask that you, so that everybody has a chance to
[4:20]
speak, you limit your comments to no more than five minutes like you would at a
[4:24]
town meeting or a special town meeting.
[4:26]
And then if you have more comments to make after everybody has spoken, then you
[4:30]
could get back up on either of those agenda items and speak again.
[4:34]
So this way, at least,
[4:38]
as opposed to somebody talking for 15 minutes, you can still talk for 15 minutes,
[4:42]
but you need to do that in five minutes and let other people speak.
[4:46]
And then ultimately, if there's nobody left, finish your comments.
[4:49]
I think that's a fair thing to do as opposed to dominating the floor, and that's
[4:54]
exactly what we do for a town meeting.
[4:58]
Yeah.
[5:00]
Okay. That works. We'd be able to-
[5:02]
And hopefully that takes care of it.
[5:04]
It's great that we have such a good turnout tonight.
[5:08]
Yeah.
[5:08]
Thank you.
[5:09]
And when I have Channel Eight come in, we're going to allow them a few minutes to
[5:12]
set up so they can film this meeting and film public comment.
[5:15]
Okay, great.
[5:15]
Very good.
[5:16]
So, second the motion.
[5:18]
Okay. We'll have a motion, second, any other discussion?
[5:21]
No.
[5:21]
All right. Hearing none, we'll call for that vote. All those in favor?
[5:24]
Aye.
[5:25]
Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen.
[5:26]
Thank you.
[5:27]
Okay. Item number two, any public comments relative to the agenda?
[5:32]
Okay. Very good. Item number three, the approval of the minutes of the Board of
[5:36]
Selectmen meeting from September 3rd. Is there a motion?
[5:41]
Make a motion to approve the minutes from September 3rd, 2026, the Board of
[5:44]
Selectmen meeting.
[5:45]
I'll second that motion.
[5:46]
Okay. We have a motion, we have a second. Any other discussion?
[5:50]
Hearing none, we'll call for that vote. All those in favor?
[5:53]
Aye.
[5:53]
Thank you very much. Okay. Now, item number four is now item number five.
[5:58]
So,
[6:00]
was item number five.
[6:02]
Right.
[6:02]
So we're going to read the consideration.
[6:05]
David and Bill, would you like to participate?
[6:07]
Sure. Bill, I'll have you start. To consider, so new item number four, to consider
[6:12]
and vote upon whether to recommend that the town meeting adopt Article 13,
[6:18]
exemptions for veterans with total service-connected disability and surviving
[6:21]
spouses of residents killed in action of the taxation ordinance at Chapter 184 of
[6:26]
the ordinances of the Town of North Haven.
[6:30]
Result, to recommend that the town meeting adopt Article 13, exemptions for
[6:34]
veterans with total service-connected disability and surviving spouses of residents
[6:39]
killed in action of the taxation ordinance at Chapter 184 of the ordinances of the
[6:44]
Town of North Haven.
[6:46]
Okay. Is there a second?
[6:49]
I'll second.
[6:50]
Okay. In the discussion,
[6:53]
you see here a copy of the proposed ordinance.
[6:58]
Now, for those that don't know, Bill Piper,
[7:01]
retired lieutenant colonel, United States Army.
[7:05]
He is the municipal liaison between the town and the veterans.
[7:11]
So I'm going to turn this over to Bill to go through the ordinance, and we've
[7:15]
invited our town assessor here, Lynn here.
[7:17]
She's here also to offer some commentary or answer any questions. Bill?
[7:24]
This exception actually, these are actually
[7:29]
exceptions that we can approve at the municipal level.
[7:33]
There's a mandatory exception that already exists under Connecticut statute,
[7:38]
where municipalities must provide an exemption to eligible participants who are
[7:43]
100% permanently and totally disabled.
[7:47]
But these are two other situations that we locally can approve.
[7:53]
The ones that I just mentioned, the general one, is mandatory, and I think we're
[7:59]
already, as Lynn's going to mention as our town assessor, is already being
[8:05]
applied and given to people,
[8:07]
or veterans rather, that are entitled to that
[8:14]
property relief. But these are ones that would extend it maybe to a few more people
[8:19]
who do deserve it, that may not quite fall under the complete statutory
[8:26]
arrangement that for permanently and totally disabled.
[8:29]
And I think including the
[8:33]
surviving spouses for somebody that we may not even have anybody that regrettably
[8:38]
were killed in action, and would be entitled to this if it ever happened in the
[8:44]
future. So, I
[8:46]
think it's a good thing. I think it recognizes that there are veterans, the state
[8:51]
statute does, and our extension may be the state statute into some cases that are
[8:56]
technically maybe not covered by the state statute, but where the veterans are
[9:01]
permanently and totally disabled, they will have tax relief, and they will not be
[9:05]
paying taxes on their primary residence up to, I think, two acres of land.
[9:11]
No, not the two acres, just one of them. I'm sorry, just one.
[9:14]
So we got the assessor here. Just one acre of land.
[9:17]
They don't own- No, just the dwelling. Pardon? Just the dwelling, no acreage.
[9:21]
Oh, just the dwelling, I'm sorry. Just the dwelling. Just the dwelling, no acreage.
[9:24]
And, if they don't have a dwelling, it would apply to 100% on one vehicle.
[9:29]
On one vehicle. Mm-hmm. So maybe
[9:32]
after that, I think maybe it would be appropriate for our assessor to come up and
[9:37]
maybe provide some further comments.
[9:39]
Sure.
[9:39]
That maybe actually clarifies what I've said.
[9:42]
Lynn, the floor is yours, Lynn.
[9:44]
Well, thank you, Bill, for your service. My husband is also a Marine.
[9:51]
Well, not retired but ex.
[9:55]
So the state rolled this program out for veterans who are 100%
[10:00]
P&T. It began in '24.
[10:04]
Initially, when they wrote the statute, they had ambiguity about the percentage of
[10:10]
disability, whether it was permanent.
[10:14]
So in '25, they rewrote the statute, or they actually rewrote it
[10:20]
before the 25 grand list was effective, but they made it effective with the 25
[10:25]
grand list that it would be somebody who has 100% permanent and
[10:33]
total disability.
[10:37]
It allows the dwelling of that individual, as Bill pointed out, to be fully
[10:43]
exempted or their motor vehicle to be exempted if they don't have any real estate.
[10:49]
What happened was is there's a group of individuals who are veterans
[10:55]
who have a disability that isn't 100%, but they get
[11:01]
paid at the 100% rate because they're unemployable, and it's permanent and total.
[11:06]
So those were not included in the statute when they wrote that.
[11:11]
So what the state did is they allowed municipalities to adopt this statute to
[11:17]
include that population and afford the exemption to them.
[11:24]
As of the 25 grand list, we only have 12 TDIU, nine of them have
[11:30]
real estate and three motor vehicle.
[11:33]
I don't know if there's anything else I can elaborate on.
[11:36]
Sure. Thank you so much, Lynn.
[11:37]
Oh, you're welcome.
[11:38]
So this is an expansion of the state's statute, right?
[11:41]
We're kind of filling in the gaps.
[11:43]
Right. The state is not mandating us to do this.
[11:46]
They're allowing the municipality to decide whether or not that they want to do it
[11:50]
because the state does not reimburse for this.
[11:53]
And does the state reimburse for the statute that they promulgated?
[11:56]
They do not.
[11:57]
No. Okay.
[11:59]
Have most municipalities taken up the offer to expand the statute itself and
[12:05]
fill in the holes here?
[12:09]
I don't know the complete statistics on that.
[12:12]
I do know that there are quite a few towns and municipalities have not
[12:18]
adopted it.
[12:19]
Okay.
[12:20]
So.
[12:22]
And then the second piece is-
[12:23]
Trumbull, I know it did.
[12:26]
From talking to other municipal veteran drafts, it sounds like a lot of towns, if
[12:29]
they've not done it, are considering it.
[12:30]
Are considering it.
[12:31]
Right. Yes.
[12:32]
I'm sure they are.
[12:32]
Yeah.
[12:32]
I think they gave us that ability because
[12:35]
the way the statute was drafted maybe wasn't as encompassing as it was initially
[12:41]
intended.
[12:41]
Right. And tying it to employability was the way to give the folks who clearly
[12:47]
could fall into this the opportunity to take advantage of the exemption. Okay.
[12:51]
Right.
[12:51]
And I think one of the things that I was mistaken about the land, because we could
[12:55]
do that as an exemption on a future basis for up to two acres.
[13:00]
Yes.
[13:01]
Because I think the way it was drafted originally, again, by the state legislature,
[13:06]
talked about dwelling and not the property.
[13:09]
Mm-hmm.
[13:11]
Okay.
[13:11]
Right. That is correct. You can exempt it up to two acres.
[13:17]
So again, a lot of this language came after they were pushing to get the
[13:23]
exemptions afforded to the veterans as they deserve.
[13:28]
But there was a lot of ambiguity because there is a complexity in the way the VA
[13:34]
assigns disability ratings. So you can be 100% and not permanent and total,
[13:41]
and your percentage of disability at 100% could go down to 50. It could change.
[13:47]
So
[13:49]
it was my understanding the same could occur even if they assigned less than 100%
[13:54]
and it was P&T. So they just had to redefine it and make it less
[14:00]
ambiguous.
[14:01]
Mm.
[14:02]
A lot of it has to do with the VA defining disability in a couple of different
[14:08]
ways based on how they can maybe most
[14:14]
properly pay benefits for veterans who are really 100% permanently and totally
[14:19]
disabled-
[14:20]
Right
[14:20]
... in terms of home healthcare and trying to allocate it properly.
[14:24]
The other thing that I think is important to know is, and Lynn you can help me with
[14:28]
that too, is that it is something, unfortunately, you think if you're 100%
[14:33]
permanently and totally disabled, you'd always be that way.
[14:36]
Sometimes the VA changes that disability, and they have to apply by January 1st of
[14:41]
every year.
[14:44]
Yeah.
[14:44]
You can comment on it a little bit more.
[14:45]
I think you understand that better than I do.
[14:47]
So it was my understanding that that can change more variably with
[14:52]
100% and not P&T.
[14:57]
There are exceptions where if you are 100% P&T, that permanent and total
[15:03]
disabled, that it could change. It's not likely to get
[15:09]
that percentage of disability. You'd have to really demonstrate
[15:14]
a significant
[15:17]
qualification for that. So I am not really that well-versed in terms of
[15:24]
what that entails. But I do know that it is possible to go below the
[15:30]
100%, but not likely to.
[15:33]
Okay.
[15:33]
It is more likely if you were just 100% and not P&T.
[15:36]
Right.
[15:36]
I'm not really clear as to why they made them require to come in and
[15:42]
apply annually, but I guess it's just to make sure that they in fact still
[15:48]
qualify more than anything, possibly not even really truly understanding
[15:55]
the whole ins and outs of that disability rating.
[15:59]
Yeah.
[16:00]
Mm-hmm.
[16:01]
I think that's very helpful. And then the second prong of this is still in action.
[16:06]
Spouses of service members killed in action.
[16:09]
Yes.
[16:10]
The exemption applies as well.
[16:11]
Yes.
[16:11]
Is this an expansion or is-
[16:14]
This would be an expansion, not mandated. This is just a municipal option.
[16:19]
Okay.
[16:19]
And it's for anyone. They call them Gold Stars.
[16:22]
Yep.
[16:23]
But we don't have anyone, luckily-
[16:27]
Norhaven-
[16:27]
... in Norhaven as of this point. Yes.
[16:31]
That we're aware of that sometimes, unfortunately, not everyone is aware
[16:37]
of the program. But I do know that the VA and a lot of the representatives did go
[16:42]
out and try to reach out to as many members as they possibly could.
[16:48]
But as far as I am aware, we do not have anyone.
[16:53]
Right.
[16:53]
There's also, and again, it just complicates Lynn's job from an assessor's
[16:58]
standpoint, is that if you've been in another town and move into North Haven-
[17:03]
Mm-hmm
[17:03]
... and you've already applied by January 1's portability.
[17:06]
Okay.
[17:07]
Right.
[17:07]
Actually, I talked to a veteran in another, not in North Haven, but if he's in
[17:12]
South Haven or Plainville, who'd moved, somebody who I knew was a veteran.
[17:16]
We talked about that, and I told them.
[17:18]
He did have the documentation and moved-
[17:20]
Mm-hmm
[17:20]
... and they should accept, the assessor in the other town should accept the
[17:25]
documentation that approved in the prior town. So.
[17:30]
Yeah. Usually, they have to have their DD 214 filed in the other
[17:36]
town, and they have to provide it to us within the assessment year.
[17:42]
But yeah, and in any case, to qualify, they have to have their DD 214
[17:48]
filed by September 30th, regardless of what town they are in.
[17:54]
So.
[17:56]
And this is all separate from the standard
[17:59]
exemption we have in the town of North Haven for any veteran who served, $3,000
[18:05]
that
[18:07]
is deducted from their assessed value.
[18:13]
Right.
[18:14]
Which again, is based on our mill rate, is about maybe a savings of about $90
[18:20]
to $100.
[18:21]
Yeah.
[18:21]
Right.
[18:22]
At 31 mills, a $3,000 exemption.
[18:25]
But there are additional-
[18:26]
Additional ones too. Unlimited ones
[18:28]
... so you have others that have a disability rating, and so they'll get a range of
[18:34]
a greater exemption benefit. It's also based on income.
[18:40]
So you could qualify if you didn't meet the income threshold.
[18:46]
Then there's a local exemption you could get if you met the income threshold and
[18:50]
you had a disability rating, or even if you met the income level and didn't have a
[18:57]
disability rating. It's a fun chart.
[18:59]
If you ever want to pop in, I'll be happy to show you.
[19:03]
Actually, it raises an important question that people have asked me before.
[19:06]
Do we have a dedicated space on our town website where people can find-
[19:13]
It's probably not in the chart, but the information or chart, if there's something
[19:17]
that they can-- There's a resource we have so that folks who can qualify for some
[19:21]
of these programs, be it at the state or municipal level or a combination thereof,
[19:25]
how do we make sure that folks have that information?
[19:27]
So we do have some application forms on there and some general
[19:33]
information for veterans.
[19:37]
One of the goals that I just started in at the end of April, but one of my
[19:43]
goals is to improve and enhance and utilize that website as a tool.
[19:49]
Great.
[19:50]
But it's not to where it needs to be right now.
[19:54]
So some of the other information that we have out there right now has been updated,
[19:57]
like for personal property that's going on right now.
[20:01]
I was waiting for this to get final before I started putting out information, so I
[20:07]
knew where we stood in terms of what we can communicate to our veterans, because
[20:12]
that will matter. We are intending to send out letters to all the veterans who have
[20:17]
a disability rating of 10% or more, and the chance that they may end up
[20:22]
qualifying.
[20:24]
Just so that we make sure we got that
[20:29]
well communicated. They are
[20:34]
welcome to call our office. We have information for them available, and we're
[20:40]
willing to walk through and hold their hand through the whole process.
[20:44]
But I can put something out there for them.
[20:47]
I just haven't quite committed to that yet.
[20:50]
Part of it was just to make sure, again, with this meeting and decision as to
[20:55]
whether the town was going to adopt it. It made more sense to then finalize it.
[20:59]
Great.
[20:59]
So on the town webpage, I have a veteran site under community that actually has a
[21:04]
link to the assessor's office, links to the VA, to the Connecticut Department of
[21:10]
Veterans Affairs, to veterans discounts, and all kinds of stuff.
[21:15]
So I think, if you go to the website,
[21:20]
I can show you where that link is.
[21:22]
Yeah.
[21:23]
But
[21:24]
it is on our main webpage.
[21:28]
Yeah.
[21:28]
And from time to time, I do make sure that the links still work.
[21:32]
Yeah.
[21:32]
And there is a link to the assessor's office on that site.
[21:36]
That's great. And I also think it would be wonderful if we made the navigation of
[21:40]
these pages really simple for folks so they can go on, not just for veterans, but
[21:44]
there may be a lot of people out there who qualify for a variety of exemptions of-
[21:49]
Of town benefits. Yeah
[21:50]
... services.
[21:50]
And town benefits, yes.
[21:50]
Yeah, or town benefits, either from the state or the municipal level, who don't
[21:54]
know it-
[21:54]
Right
[21:54]
... maybe because they're not aware of it.
[21:57]
So having a very simple, almost like a flowchart, like, "Hey, this is who I am.
[22:02]
Who are you?" And you fill it out, and it tells you, "These are the things you
[22:05]
might be able to access. What are your basic background and
[22:10]
information?" And just giving people a sense, okay, I can check out these things
[22:15]
and go ask these people.
[22:16]
Mm-hmm.
[22:17]
I think that would be really helpful.
[22:19]
Yeah.
[22:19]
I love your goal.
[22:21]
It's, yes.
[22:22]
Yeah. It's a good goal.
[22:23]
Yes.
[22:24]
It's an important goal.
[22:24]
And we're getting there.
[22:25]
Yeah.
[22:25]
We're getting there, too.
[22:26]
Good.
[22:27]
It is very helpful. I do have links to the website in the automated email
[22:32]
responses. So you do your out-of-office reply, is basically what it is.
[22:38]
So instead of getting, "We're out of the office," I'll actually give them an email
[22:42]
that has links to our website and all the information that they can get.
[22:46]
So it's pretty useful. Hint, hint.
[22:50]
Yeah.
[22:50]
Lots of information about motor vehicles, personal property-
[22:53]
Yeah
[22:54]
... just real estate in general. And of course, we're always available to help
[22:59]
answer any questions you have.
[23:00]
Great. That's great. Thank you. Yeah.
[23:01]
Lynn, I want to thank you, and just so the public knows that we were very fortunate
[23:06]
to have Lynn join us about three ago, was it about three months?
[23:09]
It's about five now.
[23:10]
Five months now.
[23:11]
Yeah.
[23:11]
Right. So our assessor, Gary Johnson, retired, and what we're finding in
[23:16]
government, that it's awfully difficult to find directors of finance, assessors,
[23:20]
building officials. Very, very difficult.
[23:25]
And we're grateful to have Lynn because of her municipal experience.
[23:28]
She came to us from another municipality, and she's well-versed in, as you can see
[23:33]
here tonight, in some of the things she spoke about.
[23:36]
So we're grateful to have you, Lynn.
[23:38]
Well, I'm very grateful to be here, and thank you very much for the opportunity,
[23:42]
and I am happy to serve the town of North Haven.
[23:46]
Thank you. Thank you.
[23:46]
Thank you.
[23:46]
It sounds like you had a goal when you started work.
[23:49]
You started work in April, it sounds like.
[23:51]
Yeah.
[23:51]
Yeah. So you set those goals in April.
[23:53]
Oh, yeah.
[23:54]
I love it.
[23:54]
I'm making everybody earn it.
[23:55]
I love it. It's great.
[23:58]
Thank you.
[23:58]
They may not like it, but they're good, and I have a good staff, so.
[24:02]
The more information people can have access to, the better.
[24:05]
Yes.
[24:05]
Yeah.
[24:05]
Yes, and that's ultimately our goal. So all right.
[24:10]
That's why we redid your office.
[24:11]
Yeah.
[24:11]
To make it so-
[24:14]
And it's very nice. It's very, very comfortable. Thank you.
[24:17]
That's great.
[24:17]
All right.
[24:18]
So before we continue, the goal here tonight is to vote on this
[24:24]
resolution and then bring it to a town meeting.
[24:27]
Now, I just noticed that it says September.
[24:30]
Val, it should be- That is- ... the town meeting. I don't know ...
[24:34]
the town meeting is-
[24:35]
I don't know.
[24:36]
I think it's the-
[24:36]
It comes later.
[24:37]
It comes later. Okay.
[24:38]
It comes later.
[24:39]
It's October-
[24:40]
So it's October 20th.
[24:42]
Very good. Okay. That's very good.
[24:44]
Just vote whether or not to recommend it, and then it will come later.
[24:47]
Then it comes later. Back later, okay. So very good. So we have a motion for this?
[24:51]
Bill, second. Bill, second? Yeah. All right. Motion and a second.
[24:55]
Any other discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor?
[24:59]
Aye.
[24:59]
Thank you.
[25:02]
All right. We're about eight minutes away from Channel 8 coming in, but just wanted
[25:08]
to see if that's him out there.
[25:12]
Maybe we do the bonding real quick. Let's go to the bonding.
[25:14]
Yeah, let's do the bonding.
[25:19]
Okay. Okay.
[25:21]
David, do you want to do an overview, or want me to go through the-
[25:23]
Yeah. I'll do an overview. So
[25:26]
it's important to note here that what you're going to see is a series of
[25:30]
resolutions that we're going to ask at the town meeting to
[25:36]
bond for these projects.
[25:39]
One of the most important points that I'd like you to remember about this is other
[25:43]
than the $7 million worth of road paving,
[25:47]
every other resolution on here that you'll see is fully reimbursed with state
[25:53]
grants. So the $7 million in road paving will be road
[25:59]
paving for next year, starting in April, May, and then up to September.
[26:05]
That is not reimbursable. Everything else you see, the dollars you see here, like
[26:10]
Sackett Point Road you're going to see, all of that is reimbursable.
[26:14]
So the way it works is that
[26:17]
consider it like a revolving loan at a bank, okay? We have to do the bonding.
[26:22]
I have to go to the rating agencies now for a rating call.
[26:25]
I have to go for a rating call in October, and we're going to get re-rated or rated
[26:30]
or holding our rating. I have to present the profile.
[26:33]
I have to present the corporation of North Haven.
[26:36]
And these, as I've said before, they're some of the smartest financial people in
[26:39]
the United States. So we have to be on our game,
[26:43]
and that is what's going to happen in the rating call.
[26:46]
So I'll be dealing with S&P 500, presenting the town of North Haven, all of its
[26:50]
intricacies, all of its finances, and the economic development, and anything else
[26:55]
that they ask.
[26:57]
So from there, we bring it to the town meeting.
[27:01]
And then what happens is in the bonding, because our
[27:05]
town has been very-- People have been very interested in our town's
[27:11]
notes, because when I say notes, the bonding, okay? We have to take loans out.
[27:16]
They're bonds. We get a lot of financial people, financial people that come in and
[27:21]
bid on the bonds. And when that happens, is we get the lower rate
[27:26]
because our town is so attractive to the outside investors that we get
[27:32]
five, six, eight, 10, 15 people bidding on our paper, we call it. Okay?
[27:37]
And that's what we want to see, because when you only have one or two people, you
[27:41]
don't have the ability to get the lowest interest rate.
[27:45]
So that's why the strength of this organization from a financial standpoint
[27:51]
is appealing to the investors.
[27:54]
So that's an overview. We're going to go through the resolutions.
[27:57]
David and Bill are going to read the resolutions.
[28:00]
But remember, when you see all these numbers, only $7 million is not reimbursable.
[28:06]
Everything else is reimbursable. David and Bill?
[28:09]
Yeah, that's not any, I think, different than it has been over the years-
[28:13]
Yes
[28:13]
... where so much of what we have to bond for initially,
[28:17]
eventually
[28:19]
does get reimbursed because there is state reimbursement for it.
[28:24]
So this is no different. I think it just goes through the same process.
[28:27]
The other thing, I think, and I should have brought my- Brett, the numbers
[28:33]
with me, but the other thing to note is we have a maximum level that we
[28:39]
can bond. We're substantially below that bonding level.
[28:43]
Yeah.
[28:43]
I think only
[28:45]
half or 60% of maybe what we could bond as a...
[28:48]
So I think from a debt service standpoint, if
[28:53]
you've looked at the town's financials over the years, we've been very good about
[28:59]
not extending our bonding to such a level that we have no flexibility to bond in
[29:05]
the future.
[29:06]
Exactly. One of the things that I'm trying to accomplish before I leave at the end
[29:09]
of December is, over the past seven years, we've been
[29:14]
calculating what the debt service reduction will be.
[29:18]
Right.
[29:19]
So you'll see that after I leave. You'll see that over the course of the next few
[29:24]
years, all of a sudden there's going to be a sliding debt, which means that that is
[29:29]
less money that has to be put in town budgets in future years.
[29:33]
However, what generally happens is that if there's other capital projects that are
[29:39]
needed, let's say it's a new building, let's say, okay?
[29:42]
That the key is to try to not add on debt, but to add the debt
[29:48]
as other debt is falling off the books.
[29:52]
So that'll be something that you'll see in the next couple of years, that the debt
[29:57]
service will be sliding, which is a good thing.
[30:00]
It'll offer capacity for the new administration to come forward with
[30:06]
other projects that need to be bonded for.
[30:09]
And that new administration will then be able to utilize the sliding debt scale
[30:15]
and replace debt with things that are needed from capital expenditures in the
[30:19]
future.
[30:21]
Okay.
[30:22]
Just a question on that. Are the projects that are kind of falling away or we're
[30:27]
making our payments and paying it down, are those the firehouse and police
[30:32]
and high school and middle school? Are those the big capital projects?
[30:35]
That's a great question, Dan. We've talked about this before.
[30:38]
So a lot of times, ladies and gentlemen, that when you see a new building built
[30:42]
like four new firehouses back in 2012, '13, or you see a new police department, or
[30:47]
you see a $69-million middle school that's been built, people think it's already
[30:52]
paid for. That's when the debt service begins.
[30:55]
So to David's question here, we're closing out the debt on the firehouses.
[31:01]
We still have the debt on the police department.
[31:04]
We probably have another nine years to 10 years on the middle school.
[31:09]
So that's the way it works. And even when you pave roads, okay?
[31:13]
That's adding debt service that over the course of time, we have to add to our
[31:19]
budget on debt service because these projects now that are built, the
[31:25]
debt pretty much starts.
[31:29]
So always remember that in the future, folks.
[31:31]
When you see a building that's built, that doesn't mean it's paid for.
[31:34]
It's like taking a mortgage out on a house.
[31:36]
You're going to pay it out over 20 years, let's say.
[31:40]
And it's no different than in government.
[31:42]
So, good question, and I think that's a good discussion to have here.
[31:45]
Yeah, absolutely. And opening up capacity for future capital projects.
[31:49]
Future capital projects, that's right.
[31:50]
That's a great thing for town.
[31:53]
All right, so let's get into it. So the first one I'm going to read is the only
[31:57]
one, to Michael's point, that is on the town budget. The rest will be reimbursable.
[32:03]
This is Sackett Point Road. "Consider an act upon a resolution recommending a
[32:07]
$7-million appropriation and bond authorization for reconstruction of Sackett Point
[32:13]
Road. The project shall consist of the reconstruction, milling, and paving of the
[32:17]
roadway,
[32:19]
installation and repair of sidewalks,
[32:22]
lighting, signage, traffic controls, drainage, and other related improvements and
[32:26]
repairs." That could be the resolution then, Bill?
[32:28]
Yeah.
[32:29]
"Resolved, that the Board of Selectmen recommends that the Town of North Haven
[32:32]
appropriate $7 million for reconstruction of Sackett Point Road.
[32:36]
The project shall consist of the reconstruction, milling, and paving of the
[32:39]
roadway, installation and repair of sidewalks, lighting, signage, traffic controls,
[32:43]
drainage, and other related improvements and repairs.
[32:47]
The appropriation may be spent for design, construction, demolition and removal
[32:50]
costs, materials, installation, easements, equipment, engineering fees, other
[32:55]
consultants' fees, legal fees, net temporary interest and other financing costs,
[32:59]
and other expenses related to the project.
[33:01]
And that the town shall issue bonds or notes and temporary notes in an amount not
[33:05]
to exceed $7 million to finance the appropriation.
[33:09]
The total amount of the bonds issued shall be reduced by the amount of grants or
[33:14]
other funds received and not separately appropriated for the project."
[33:19]
So we'll, I'll make a motion for the motion.
[33:22]
I'll second that motion.
[33:23]
All right, we have a motion and a second. Any other discussion on this item?
[33:27]
So again, just to be clear, we have three more bonding-- Actually one, two, three,
[33:33]
four more. This is the only one that is-
[33:36]
No. Let me-- So there's two $7 million.
[33:40]
What I was saying earlier is the $7 million on road paving is-
[33:44]
Oh, road paving.
[33:45]
Sackett Point Road. They happen to be the same numbers.
[33:47]
Seven million. Okay. Forgive me. I'm sorry. I was mistaken. So that's for 10.
[33:50]
So we'll come back to that. So this one is reimbursable.
[33:54]
This one's reimbursable.
[33:55]
Yeah. Okay, great. Motion and second. Any other discussion?
[33:59]
I think it's what, 90% reimbursable?
[34:02]
If I remember right
[34:04]
from the Board of Finance meeting, I think when you discussed it.
[34:07]
Yeah, there are some ancillary fees for the design side, I think, so I'm not sure
[34:13]
if it's 90 or whatever it might be.
[34:14]
But it's a significant portion.
[34:15]
Basically. In other words, let's say it's 5%.
[34:19]
You've got to pay five to get 90% of $7 million.
[34:24]
But this is primarily reimbursable.
[34:27]
Mm-hmm.
[34:28]
So.
[34:29]
Okay.
[34:30]
Okay.
[34:30]
And I'll second that resolution.
[34:33]
All right. All those in favor?
[34:35]
Aye.
[34:35]
Aye.
[34:36]
Now, we have Charlie here. Preston, how are you?
[34:39]
I'm good.
[34:39]
So I think procedurally, I'd like to make a motion to maybe pause this, okay?
[34:45]
Sure.
[34:45]
We'll get into the Amazon presentation.
[34:48]
Preston, as we spoke earlier, I've made arrangements here to have public comment
[34:53]
after this presentation.
[34:55]
Sure.
[34:55]
And answering questions for the public.
[34:57]
Thank you for making that change.
[34:58]
I thought you came for the bonding.
[35:00]
That too, yeah.
[35:01]
Yeah. That's the most exciting thing we do.
[35:03]
Exactly. All right. So, okay. So we'll pause right here now.
[35:08]
So here we are, and I direct everyone's attention to the TV camera here, okay?
[35:14]
Preston, if you're okay.
[35:16]
Yes.
[35:16]
Right there. Thank you.
[35:19]
We'll do an audio check, Preston. How does that sound?
[35:22]
Yeah. Count to three real quick.
[35:23]
Okay. One, two, three. We're good? Okay. All right.
[35:30]
So the purpose of this presentation is to tell you what's happening here
[35:36]
and what
[35:38]
we are doing about this, okay? So let's start,
[35:42]
if you look ahead here,
[35:47]
the Amazon Prime Air drone delivery. I'm going to go to the next slide here.
[35:54]
It's important for me to tell you that this North Haven Amazon distribution
[35:59]
facility, the one we have here in North Haven, and its local management, is
[36:05]
not the driving factor for these drones. They're not the driving factor.
[36:13]
It's Amazon corporate
[36:16]
on a national basis that's the driving factor in bringing this project forward.
[36:21]
And right now, it's about 15 states all over the country.
[36:26]
We happen to have the facility in North Haven.
[36:30]
And because we have the facility in North Haven, the facility is essentially
[36:36]
almost mandated by this project to move forward with this project
[36:42]
in the event it passes through the FAA and the Connecticut
[36:48]
Department of Environmental and Energy Protection. Is everyone clear on that?
[36:54]
I'm going to go step by step on this.
[36:57]
Any-
[36:58]
Well, why is it important that it's not the local management and it's a national?
[37:03]
Because they're coming.
[37:05]
Yes. It's important because people think that Amazon locally is driving this, okay?
[37:11]
It's Amazon corporate. But people don't understand that there's almost two separate
[37:16]
entities here. It's a perspective that I want to share with you before we move
[37:20]
forward here.
[37:22]
So if you just bear with us here, okay? You can get up after this, okay?
[37:25]
Also, to answer that question, it's we as a municipality do not control
[37:31]
anything above the ground. The FAA does.
[37:34]
Okay. We're going to get to that.
[37:35]
The EP does.
[37:36]
We'll get to that. All right, let's go to this.
[37:40]
So the North Haven Planning and Zoning Commission did not authorize drones being
[37:44]
flown in the airspace, because that seems to have been an area of confusion here.
[37:50]
So because the North Haven Planning and Zoning, nor does
[37:56]
any other planning and zoning, have any authority to authorize
[38:02]
drones being done in the airspace.
[38:05]
So I feel like a lot of people, they think, why did Planning and Zoning authorize
[38:08]
this? They didn't authorize the drones being flown.
[38:16]
What happened here was that Amazon applied to the town for a site plan approval
[38:23]
for a planned drone facility at its distribution center at 409 Washington
[38:29]
Avenue.
[38:30]
What this means is it was planned
[38:35]
the drone facility would take place only if the FAA and
[38:41]
the DEEP organizations authorized the drones being flown.
[38:48]
The town's approval, Planning and Zoning,
[38:51]
five Planning and Zoning commissioners, Democrats and Republicans,
[38:58]
they voted for the site plan approval for the improvements
[39:04]
necessary for the drone handling and preparation in the event the drone was
[39:10]
authorized by the FAA and the DEEP.
[39:16]
In other words, if the drone airspace flying is not
[39:22]
authorized by DEEP and the FAA, this
[39:28]
facility probably will not be built.
[39:31]
So I want to make sure that everyone understands that.
[39:35]
So due to the nature of the application that was presented back in May to Planning
[39:39]
and Zoning as a site plan application and the nature of the proposed ancillary use
[39:44]
itself, the commission was limited in its scope of review.
[39:50]
Again, no authority to authorize drones.
[39:56]
All aspects of the drone operations and airspace are essentially what I just
[40:00]
mentioned. They're within the exclusive jurisdiction of the FAA, and the town has
[40:06]
no authority or any aspect of drone flight path elevation, time of
[40:12]
day, restrictions, method of delivery, noise, or privacy.
[40:18]
We have no jurisdiction over that, no authority.
[40:20]
And by the way, so we're not happy with it, but that's the reality.
[40:26]
So all over social media,
[40:30]
there's been people who have been accepting our suggestion to send
[40:36]
your testimony in to the FAA and to DEEP.
[40:41]
So
[40:44]
the concerns really need to go to both organizations, FAA and DEEP.
[40:50]
As part of the FAA approval process, Connecticut DEEP
[40:55]
has it been included for a coastal area management review, which is under their
[41:00]
jurisdiction. Residents, and I said this before, may also, we encourage it.
[41:06]
We encourage that they provide public comment to DEEP during the review process.
[41:12]
Now,
[41:14]
October 1st was the deadline, which is today, but I know that hundreds and hundreds
[41:18]
of people have already submitted testimony, as I have, as our state delegation has,
[41:24]
and even talking to our
[41:27]
third congressional district, they have. They called me.
[41:31]
So all of that has been submitted, and we have copies here for those that want to
[41:36]
read it.
[41:40]
The FAA, based on some feedback back to the residents in North Haven,
[41:47]
some of the residents who
[41:49]
actually went on the FAA email,
[41:54]
some of them have been responded back to, and the FAA has advised those
[42:00]
town residents. Is Alex here tonight?
[42:03]
No.
[42:03]
Okay. So Alex was one of them, because he sent me a message and I talked to him.
[42:07]
We've been talking to people all week on this, in the last two weeks.
[42:12]
This is the FAA telling some of our residents.
[42:14]
The matters that are specific to the Amazon drone delivery operations,
[42:21]
the FAA is advising those residents, if they have any questions, to call
[42:27]
Amazon directly at this number and on the website, submit your testimony.
[42:33]
I think that even though DEEP and
[42:38]
FAA, that sunsets, October 1st is the sunset, that I think that testimony
[42:44]
can still be sent to Amazon,
[42:47]
and we can supply these websites and phone numbers again.
[42:52]
So, the last couple weeks, I've expressed my own concern.
[42:56]
And I talked to Amazon corporate, and right from the beginning, and I explained
[43:01]
that there should have been public meetings on this in every city and town,
[43:07]
specifically in the 7.5-mile zone, because a lot of my colleagues, I'm friendly
[43:12]
with all the mayors in the area. A lot of my colleagues also share the same
[43:16]
concerns. There have been no public meetings.
[43:21]
So that's going to change.
[43:25]
So I've asked Amazon, I have asked Amazon, to pause this project until all
[43:31]
meetings take place throughout the region where the people can be heard
[43:37]
and where the people can ask their own questions and express their individual
[43:42]
points of view in these public meetings. So where are we right now?
[43:48]
I mentioned that I've written to both FAA and Connecticut DEEP, and what I've said,
[43:52]
basically, I'm not going to get behind this project and that public meetings need
[43:55]
to be taking place.
[44:00]
I'm also working with my colleagues in the south central region, the mayors and
[44:03]
first selectmen in the area. And what we're doing is, and I tried to do this back
[44:08]
in September, to have a mayors meeting.
[44:10]
I had all the mayors in the area on board with this, but it was canceled by Amazon.
[44:15]
They
[44:17]
had other things
[44:19]
relating to this that they felt they needed to present.
[44:23]
So
[44:25]
we're concerned that
[44:28]
the way it's unfolded is not the right way,
[44:34]
and we're not happy because it's not the right way.
[44:37]
So we've urged Amazon, myself, as I mentioned here, and my colleagues to
[44:43]
reschedule the public meetings, which they've agreed to do.
[44:47]
We don't have dates on that yet. But
[44:50]
we also got them to agree
[44:54]
that it'll be the mayors meeting before the public meetings, will be either the
[45:00]
third or fourth week of October, this month.
[45:04]
Amazon has also informed me that they're also going to be providing virtual
[45:08]
meetings on Monday, October 5th, with all the state senators and all the state
[45:12]
representatives across the state of Connecticut.
[45:17]
Our delegation, our legislation,
[45:21]
our state colleagues, they've all submitted their own recommendations, as have
[45:25]
other members of the State House and State Senate.
[45:32]
So what do we see happening in the future?
[45:36]
We don't know what the FAA or DEEP is going to end up saying, but I
[45:42]
think that the fact there is some agreement now that the mayors meetings will take
[45:47]
place first after the meetings with state senators and state representatives, and
[45:52]
there'll be a lot of people on that call to ask their own questions.
[45:57]
And then to follow it up with the public meetings, that's going to be able to
[46:02]
thoroughly vet this out so the public is satisfied or not satisfied with whatever
[46:07]
the answers are. And that's the story right now, ladies and gentlemen.
[46:13]
Now I'm going to open up the public comment one by one.
[46:15]
Identify yourself, your address, and please stand up.
[46:18]
Yes
[46:23]
Just, I'm so sorry to interrupt. Just a reminder, we're going to try to limit it to
[46:26]
five minutes.
[46:27]
Oh, yeah. I don't have long.
[46:30]
Sharon Sarasoli, 48 Vista Road, town resident for maybe 28 years.
[46:35]
And thank you, Mike, for that presentation. That was helpful.
[46:38]
I guess my only thought from the presentation would've been, is rather, I found out
[46:44]
about this through an article in "The Register," so I didn't hear anything from
[46:46]
town. I didn't hear anything from
[46:49]
Planning and Zoning. I just wonder if there's a different way to disseminate
[46:53]
information in the future. We don't have a town newspaper anymore.
[46:55]
We don't have a great way to disseminate, and I was talking to people in the rec
[46:59]
center today who still didn't know this was going on.
[47:01]
So my concern is just how are we, and I don't have an answer to that, but how are
[47:05]
we going to inform all the residents?
[47:07]
Yeah, I think, Sharon, first of all, nice seeing you here tonight.
[47:09]
I didn't recognize you with the mask on, by the way.
[47:11]
Right.
[47:11]
So,
[47:13]
I want to let you know that
[47:15]
we weren't the ones, not us, all the citizens, we weren't the ones hosting the
[47:20]
public meetings.
[47:20]
Right.
[47:21]
It was Amazon that had agreed to host the meetings.
[47:23]
Not the public meeting, on the fact that Planning and Zoning approved the site
[47:29]
piece of it back in May.
[47:31]
Yes.
[47:31]
And this is the first time hearing of it a week and a half ago.
[47:34]
Yeah.
[47:34]
So what happened there that disconnected town residents didn't know?
[47:37]
Yeah, I think here's what I think happened.
[47:38]
I wasn't at the Planning and Zoning meeting.
[47:39]
Yeah, no.
[47:40]
It was May 4th. It was a public meeting. Yeah.
[47:43]
But it was a public meeting that was televised on TV. Okay?
[47:46]
So we realize sometimes that people aren't watching these TV shows.
[47:50]
They're not watching the town meetings, right?
[47:52]
But the minutes were posted, so Planning and Zoning and the staff did what they're
[47:57]
obligated to do.
[47:59]
Right.
[47:59]
They're not obligated to hold another public meeting.
[48:01]
No, and I don't want to use up my time necessarily all on this.
[48:04]
I will just say, I just think there's a way for them to disseminate information.
[48:07]
I'm just going to put that nugget there that to just rely on us watching a public
[48:11]
meeting virtually to get the information in this day and age is just not a good way
[48:15]
to do it-
[48:16]
Okay
[48:16]
... in my opinion.
[48:17]
Fair.
[48:18]
Okay. So, sorry. Thank you, though. I appreciate that.
[48:20]
So I'm absolutely, completely opposed to the drones.
[48:23]
Other than corporate profit and maybe trying to get people's dopamine hits going, I
[48:27]
really don't understand why this is necessary.
[48:31]
I was totally in support of the Amazon facility because of the jobs created, and
[48:34]
this is doing the opposite of that, right? This is not creating jobs.
[48:37]
It's going to be taking away if it's a drone that's manned, say it's a $30,000 or
[48:40]
$40,000 drone.
[48:43]
So I think it's completely unnecessary.
[48:46]
I'm concerned about the potential harm to the animals, pets, environment, water,
[48:51]
you name it, just the environment.
[48:53]
I did send emails to both
[48:56]
entities. I'm concerned about the noise level.
[48:59]
I don't know how many people have read "The New York Times" article or seen some of
[49:02]
the videos online from Richardson, Texas, and it's pretty astounding to hear their
[49:06]
comments.
[49:08]
One guy quote said, "I get up in the morning, the drones are there. I go to work.
[49:12]
I come home. The drones are there." They interviewed several people who said they
[49:16]
can't even enjoy the outdoors anymore because of the constant, constant irritant of
[49:20]
the noise. And we have a nice quality of life here.
[49:23]
I just don't want to sacrifice it so people can get their item in 30 minutes, if
[49:28]
that's accurate, or an hour instead of overnight.
[49:31]
When I go online now, I usually order, and I don't order that much from them
[49:34]
actually, truly, because I'm not a fan of Bezos.
[49:37]
But when I go online and order, it usually is next-day delivery or for an extra $2
[49:41]
to $2.99, you can get it first thing in the morning, 4:00 to 8:00 AM.
[49:46]
So I just, again, think it's completely unnecessary. Noise level issues.
[49:50]
Some of the videos said that the drones have hit property or hit the house.
[49:54]
What happens if they damage property? What about the surveillance?
[49:57]
I know we're relying on all these corporate entities in the US to police themselves
[50:01]
to get rid of the surveillance information. Where really is that going?
[50:06]
And that's a total trust issue. I'm supposed to trust this mega corporation to get
[50:11]
rid of any personal information flying around my neighborhood, people are outside,
[50:14]
kids are outside. That's a total privacy violation.
[50:18]
To me, the bottom line is it's going to be decreased housing values.
[50:21]
I've noticed, unrelated to this, quite an increase in the noise level just in the
[50:26]
Avelo Airlines going overhead. And when Tweed finishes their expansion, just wait.
[50:30]
And this to me is just look at your housing, what it's going to be worth if you
[50:34]
have these constant drones. Because again, look at the Richardson, Texas, videos.
[50:37]
Look at the article by "The Times," I think this past week or so, and it's very
[50:42]
clear the quality of life is impacted there,
[50:46]
and then the reduced employees, I think.
[50:48]
So that's, yeah, as you can tell, I'm 100% completely opposed, and I think what I'm
[50:52]
going to write Amazon is if this passes, I know it's going to be hard, but I will
[50:56]
just not order from them again. I will boycott them totally because it's not in the
[50:59]
best interest of our town. It's just not.
[51:01]
So Sharon-
[51:02]
And not just our town, but Hampton, North Haven, Longford, and I believe parts of
[51:05]
New Haven, anybody in the 7.5 mile radius.
[51:10]
So it should be noted also, Sharon, for those that don't know, that we don't know
[51:14]
what their end up decision's going to be.
[51:16]
Sure.
[51:17]
But it's important to know that you have the ability to opt out.
[51:20]
So because it's a fee-based-
[51:22]
But that's not going to affect it if everybody else in my neighborhood is opting
[51:25]
in.
[51:25]
I know.
[51:26]
I will not opt in, but I'm just concerned with people's impulsivity and wanting to
[51:31]
get things so quickly that it's going to ruin it for the rest of us.
[51:34]
Right. I guess what I was trying to say is that if you have family and friends, if
[51:38]
you don't want it, you might have the ability to have it opted out in other-
[51:42]
I can do it, but I think as a community, we need to come together and really stand
[51:44]
up.
[51:45]
I agree.
[51:46]
And that's the only way we're going to make change.
[51:47]
I'll email Amazon, but honestly, I don't think that this is, as you said, driven by
[51:52]
corporate. To me, it's driven by greed.
[51:54]
Right.
[51:54]
The bottom line, the dollar, and they're not going to listen to us is my opinion.
[51:57]
Okay.
[51:58]
Just my opinion.
[51:58]
Thanks, Sharon.
[51:59]
Thank you.
[52:00]
It's very frustrating that it's not something that we control directly
[52:05]
locally.
[52:06]
Oh, yeah. Totally. I totally get that.
[52:07]
I appreciate your comments, and Mike has totally-
[52:09]
You'd think for sure that we would control-
[52:12]
Yeah
[52:12]
... the space over our heads and-
[52:14]
Exactly
[52:15]
... and I would not have known before this that-
[52:17]
Kind of science fiction, right?
[52:18]
Yeah. That we're dependent on the FAA to say no.
[52:22]
Exactly.
[52:24]
Or actually do it in a reasonable way where you wouldn't have things like noise
[52:28]
problems or potential injury to pets or-
[52:31]
Or even-
[52:32]
I did read the article you're talking about.
[52:33]
Even the 6:00 AM to 10:30, I've been told that they've opted out of that because
[52:37]
it's in the air, but that's an absolutely ridiculous timeframe for delivery.
[52:41]
But I will say that at whatever the meeting is, too. Thank you very much.
[52:45]
Okay.
[52:45]
Thank you.
[52:46]
Next. Anyone else who would like to speak?
[52:48]
Mary White. Yes.
[53:05]
Mary White, Summer Lane. Okay, so I would like to start off by giving people, I
[53:10]
guess we have until midnight,
[53:13]
the correct emails that you want to send comments to in
[53:19]
opposition. So for Connecticut DEEP, it's
[53:22]
karen.michaels@ct.gov, and it's exactly like it
[53:28]
sounds. So
[53:29]
K-A-R-E-N.M-I-C-H-A-E-L-S
[53:36]
@C-T.gov. And for the FAA, the name of the
[53:42]
individual is Christopher Hurst.
[53:44]
Hurst is spelled H-U-R-S-T, and it's a long email, so I'll
[53:50]
go slow. First I'll say it. So it's
[53:54]
9-FAA-drone-environmental@faa.gov.
[54:02]
So we're going to go nine, and then the number nine. A dash.
[54:07]
And then FAA is capitalized. And another dash.
[54:11]
And then drone, the D is capitalized, R-O-N-E.
[54:15]
A dash, and then the word environmental,
[54:18]
E-N-V-I-R-O-N-M-E-N-T-A-L
[54:23]
@F-A-A.gov. Okay. So
[54:27]
for Connecticut DEEP, the proposed operations of the Amazon Prime Air deliveries
[54:33]
are not consistent with the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act's enforceable
[54:38]
policies. So there was a 2021 nesting season drone
[54:43]
harassment incident, and I think that that's enough for Connecticut DEEP to say no
[54:49]
to Amazon Prime Air. So what happened was,
[54:54]
in the 2021 nesting season, a pair of American oystercatchers and a pair of
[55:00]
nesting piping plovers where the birds received the drone as a threat, which caused
[55:05]
them to dive bomb the drone because it was such a disturbance, which
[55:10]
caused the oystercatcher to sustain a leg injury, and then later
[55:15]
on, the little birds did not hatch, so infertility.
[55:22]
And then it also caused the abandonment of their nests.
[55:25]
So These are a never-ending nuisance for the birds.
[55:33]
So we have actually endangered species and threatened birds.
[55:37]
So examples are short-eared owl, king rail, saltmarsh sparrow, piping
[55:43]
plover, great egret, and the bald eagle.
[55:46]
So North Haven provides the low disturbance and quiet coastal habitat.
[55:50]
The hundreds and hundreds of flights daily, 6:00 AM to 10:30 PM, the birds will be
[55:56]
harassed. They'll become distressed, injured, and like I said, leading to nest
[56:00]
abandonment and
[56:03]
infertility. And what else? So this will cause destruction of a
[56:08]
fragile, natural
[56:11]
ecosystem, and will guarantee those threatened and endangered bird species will
[56:16]
become extinct.
[56:21]
The previous speaker mentioned Richardson, Texas.
[56:24]
So Prime Air is operational there.
[56:26]
Residents report the drones' loud buzzing noises are louder than a lawnmower and
[56:32]
can be heard over the television indoors.
[56:35]
Residents report the drone flight patterns are below promised altitude range.
[56:42]
Residents also report hundreds and hundreds of drone flights daily, day and
[56:48]
night, over their homes.
[56:53]
The drones will have cameras. We know they're operating 6:00 AM to 10:30 PM.
[56:59]
That leaves 7.5 hours of quiet time.
[57:03]
I personally need eight hours of sleep and quiet. That's not enough for me.
[57:08]
So we will have no peace, no privacy.
[57:11]
Whether you're going for a walk in your neighborhood or you're trying to enjoy your
[57:15]
pool in the backyard, there is no privacy.
[57:18]
So I definitely am against this, and I encourage everybody, you have until
[57:22]
midnight. If you haven't sent an email to Connecticut DEEP, or you haven't sent an
[57:26]
email to the FAA, I strongly encourage you to do so. Thank you.
[57:32]
Thank you, Mary.
[57:34]
Next. Anybody else?
[57:37]
Nobody else?
[57:39]
You going?
[57:40]
No, you're-
[57:41]
Oh, boy.
[57:43]
Can I say one quick thing before you-
[57:45]
Sure
[57:45]
... just really quick? I'm just going to be really quick.
[57:52]
Stephanie Magnuson, Seven Manor Drive.
[57:54]
So just really quickly, on the note of the planning and zoning, I just did want to
[57:58]
make one point with their agenda. If you look at the agenda items, it does say
[58:03]
Amazon, but there's no mention of it actually being a drone site building.
[58:10]
So there was nothing there to sort of alert the public that this was something that
[58:14]
they were approving or denying that day.
[58:16]
So that was just something that I noticed when I was looking into it.
[58:20]
I know those agendas are-- Because it was actually their lawyers, I believe, that
[58:23]
were there and not Amazon, is from what I understand, and you guys can correct me
[58:28]
if I'm wrong.
[58:29]
You can have a seat.
[58:31]
Oh, go ahead. No, go ahead, Steph.
[58:32]
No, I'm good. That's it. That's all I want to say, is that the agenda was just a
[58:36]
little bit-- There was nothing there that would've alerted us to say they're
[58:40]
approving a drone site building.
[58:42]
Yeah.
[58:43]
So to the public, they wouldn't have known whether to show up to that meeting to
[58:48]
make public comment on a thing like that.
[58:50]
Okay.
[58:50]
That's only thing.
[58:52]
Okay. Yeah.
[58:52]
Thanks.
[58:53]
Can I just say one thing in response?
[58:55]
Yeah, sure.
[58:56]
Sorry. Normally, don't do this, but
[59:02]
Mary White-Zermolen again. I just want to respond. I'm very familiar with zoning.
[59:07]
I go to the meetings every month. So it's under site plan, and even if they had
[59:13]
said in the description that it was about the drone docking station that they want
[59:18]
to build, the public cannot speak.
[59:21]
So even if we knew about it, it's a site plan application.
[59:24]
There is no public comment. It's not a public hearing.
[59:27]
So I just want to tell you
[59:29]
that.
[59:30]
We might have known about it.
[59:30]
Recognize that.
[59:30]
Yeah, we might have known about it.
[59:31]
Right. But because-
[59:33]
But thank you for that, though. I appreciate that.
[59:35]
I think Mary's at every plan and zoning.
[59:38]
I know. I watch them all on YouTube. I'm sitting at home.
[59:40]
I actually think the town should hire Mary to tell everybody what's happening at
[59:44]
all the meetings in town.
[59:47]
All right. Next. Yes, sir.
[59:49]
Yeah.
[1:00:03]
Mr. Freda, thank you for taking the time. Mr. Cohen, nice to see you.
[1:00:08]
You too.
[1:00:09]
Mr. Piper,
[1:00:11]
I'm curious about what's going to happen at the end of the year with your
[1:00:14]
departure.
[1:00:14]
Can you identify yourself, please?
[1:00:15]
Sure. My name is Adam Francis. I live at 24 Vista Road, right here in North Haven,
[1:00:20]
Connecticut, about 3.2 miles away from the distribution center.
[1:00:26]
You've given a good presentation, and I understand that the town does
[1:00:30]
not have the capability to do a lot, but I'd still like to read some stuff into the
[1:00:35]
record-
[1:00:35]
Absolutely
[1:00:36]
... so that you can hear that.
[1:00:37]
Yes.
[1:00:37]
So that the folks here can hear
[1:00:40]
my concerns.
[1:00:44]
Yeah.
[1:00:44]
So I've been following the proposed Amazon drone operation because I have some very
[1:00:48]
basic questions about what happens when we put potentially thousands of commercial
[1:00:53]
aircraft into the skies over our community.
[1:00:59]
The property may be in North Haven,
[1:01:03]
but the operation won't stay there.
[1:01:06]
The FAA's documents for Amazon MK30 contemplates up to 1,000 delivery flights a
[1:01:11]
day, operating from 6:00 AM to 10:30 PM.
[1:01:16]
That's 16 and a half hours a day. That's an average of more than 60 flights an
[1:01:21]
hour, essentially one flight every five minutes, for 16 and a half hours a day.
[1:01:27]
Potentially 365 delivery operations a year from one facility,
[1:01:33]
covering a potential operating area of 174 miles.
[1:01:38]
And Amazon won't necessarily be the only company.
[1:01:43]
What happens when Walmart,
[1:01:45]
Wing,
[1:01:47]
Zipline,
[1:01:49]
UPS, or any medical delivery company decides to do drone delivery in the area?
[1:01:56]
How many commercial drones can occupy the same low-altitude airspace before we have
[1:02:02]
reached too much?
[1:02:06]
And who decides?
[1:02:09]
And it isn't some distant hypothetical either.
[1:02:13]
So here's my question:
[1:02:16]
How do we meaningfully evaluate the impact on a particular community before we know
[1:02:21]
exactly where the drones are going to fly?
[1:02:28]
Where exactly are these drones going to fly if the routes are fixed?
[1:02:33]
Let's see them. Let's see which neighborhoods are underneath them.
[1:02:38]
Let's see which homes are underneath them.
[1:02:39]
Let's see what happens around schools, businesses, and parks.
[1:02:44]
And yes,
[1:02:46]
Sleeping Giant. Not in this town, but five minutes away from my home.
[1:02:53]
Who's going to be underneath these flight paths? Who is going to hear them?
[1:02:57]
Who is going to have cameras and sensors passing over their property?
[1:03:02]
I currently volunteer with the Sleeping Giant Park Association trail crew.
[1:03:07]
I'm out there helping maintain trails that generations of volunteers have cared for
[1:03:12]
for more than 100 years.
[1:03:17]
So I care about what's happening there.
[1:03:19]
But it's not just about Sleeping Giant.
[1:03:21]
It's about the quality of life of everyone living underneath this proposed flight
[1:03:26]
area. It's about noise, it's about privacy, it's about surveillance.
[1:03:30]
These drones use cameras and sensors to navigate.
[1:03:37]
Amazon says those cameras aren't being watched by live people.
[1:03:43]
Okay.
[1:03:45]
But what exactly is being collected?
[1:03:48]
How long is it retained?
[1:03:51]
Who owns it? Who can access it? Can law enforcement obtain it?
[1:03:57]
Can it be subpoenaed? Can it be used to improve Amazon's technology or artificial
[1:04:02]
intelligence? And what protection does a person underneath that drone have,
[1:04:06]
particularly when that person is not an Amazon customer?
[1:04:13]
The FAA position is clear. The FAA does not regulate privacy.
[1:04:19]
It says state and local privacy laws may apply.
[1:04:25]
But Connecticut law also says municipalities generally cannot regulate the use of
[1:04:30]
operation of commercial unmanned aircraft, except where otherwise authorized by
[1:04:34]
state or federal law.
[1:04:37]
So I have a very simple question.
[1:04:41]
Who does?
[1:04:43]
Who is responsible for the privacy? For the noise?
[1:04:48]
Who monitors the operations? Who receives complaints?
[1:04:52]
Who has the authority to make Amazon change something?
[1:04:56]
And most importantly,
[1:04:59]
what protections are in writing?
[1:05:03]
Not what Amazon says it will do, not what we're told at a meeting.
[1:05:09]
What is legally enforceable?
[1:05:12]
That is not an unreasonable question.
[1:05:17]
Connecticut is asking some of those same questions right now.
[1:05:21]
Governor Lamont called for statewide review of camera and surveillance technology,
[1:05:26]
including drones, asking what data is collected, how long it can be stored, who can
[1:05:31]
access it, and how it can be shared.
[1:05:35]
And that's a larger issue for me. This just isn't about whether Amazon can build a
[1:05:41]
facility in North Haven.
[1:05:44]
It's about whether we understand what we are actually approving.
[1:05:49]
Because once you establish the infrastructure, the technology can scale.
[1:05:55]
One company becomes several companies, one facility become multiple facilities,
[1:06:01]
and one flight path becomes a network of flight paths over communities.
[1:06:06]
I'm not asking North Haven to stop technology.
[1:06:11]
I'm asking North Haven to slow this down long enough to answer the questions before
[1:06:16]
the skies are filled with it.
[1:06:19]
Tell us where the drones will fly.
[1:06:21]
Tell us who is responsible. Tell us what the limits are.
[1:06:25]
Tell us what data is collected. Tell us who owns it.
[1:06:28]
Tell us how long it is retained. Tell us who can access it.
[1:06:34]
Tell us what residents can do when something goes wrong.
[1:06:41]
Put those protections in writing.
[1:06:45]
Because once we have 1,000 flights a day, and potentially multiple companies doing
[1:06:49]
the same thing, it becomes much harder to have a meaningful conversation about
[1:06:54]
whether we should have started at that scale.
[1:06:59]
Before you ask residents to accept the operation, can residents see the
[1:07:04]
operation?
[1:07:07]
Time.
[1:07:08]
Thank you.
[1:07:10]
You did a nice job here, Adam. Nice job.
[1:07:16]
Thank you.
[1:07:16]
Adam, thank you very much, and I would 100% read that exact speech
[1:07:22]
at the Amazon meeting that's going to be held.
[1:07:24]
Yes, I agree.
[1:07:25]
Those are all vital questions.
[1:07:28]
And Adam, thank you for the correspondence packet that you sent to Valerie.
[1:07:32]
That was very helpful.
[1:07:33]
Valerie, who-
[1:07:34]
Right
[1:07:35]
... Bill-
[1:07:36]
Right
[1:07:36]
... Dave-
[1:07:37]
Regarding the-
[1:07:37]
... Laura
[1:07:39]
... regarding the 188 number that you provided.
[1:07:42]
That was very important for us to know. Thank you.
[1:07:48]
Okay, anything else?
[1:07:51]
All right. Yes.
[1:07:53]
Yes.
[1:07:54]
Yes, Chris. Come on up, Chris. All right, Chris. Good.
[1:08:00]
Good evening. Christopher Hoffman, 25 Janet Drive.
[1:08:04]
Okay.
[1:08:05]
I'm not quite sure what to add here.
[1:08:06]
I think people have done a fantastic job, especially Adam.
[1:08:11]
Yes.
[1:08:11]
Yes, talking about these things.
[1:08:15]
Just a couple of other things that I would-- And I agree with everything everyone
[1:08:19]
said,
[1:08:21]
especially the Pandora's box that has been opened up by this.
[1:08:26]
Because we have a UPS facility, a large UPS facility, we have a large FedEx
[1:08:30]
facility, we have a Target, I don't see how they're not going to want the same
[1:08:35]
thing, and I don't see how that is viable, and we're going to look like wartime
[1:08:41]
Ukraine in no time at all. And just one perspective on these things,
[1:08:47]
when we talk about the size of them, they're five by five.
[1:08:49]
So essentially, what you have is a riding lawnmower in the sky,
[1:08:55]
200 feet above your-- What, 225 to 400 feet?
[1:08:58]
Mm-hmm.
[1:08:59]
So that's not that far above your roof.
[1:09:02]
Between 200 to 400. 200 in roof drop off, 400 on the way back.
[1:09:07]
400 on the way back. So that's still, most houses are what about, two-story house
[1:09:12]
is-- It's not that high.
[1:09:15]
So
[1:09:17]
one thing I wanted to talk about is the PCC.
[1:09:21]
And a very good point was made here about the agenda, because I look at the agenda.
[1:09:26]
I spent my career as a reporter. I've looked at more agendas than I even want to
[1:09:29]
talk about and think about. And that agenda was not clear.
[1:09:33]
No one would've ever looked at that agenda and said, "Oh, they're talking about a
[1:09:38]
drone facility." So
[1:09:41]
I don't know how that happened, but that should've been clearer.
[1:09:46]
I would also point out that the Amazon representative, I watched the tape,
[1:09:51]
misstated
[1:09:53]
the hours. He said an hour before sunrise and an hour after sunset.
[1:09:59]
That's what he told them. That's not what we're being told now.
[1:10:05]
I don't know. I'm not a lawyer. I would question, does that mean that perhaps the
[1:10:09]
approval could be set aside? Because it was based on incorrect
[1:10:13]
information.
[1:10:18]
I also want to point out, and I know you guys have no power over what they do.
[1:10:22]
I understand that they're an independent entity, and you can't tell them what to
[1:10:25]
do.
[1:10:26]
Having said that,
[1:10:29]
if you look online, you can see, particularly in Westborough, Massachusetts, the
[1:10:33]
planning commission slowed it down.
[1:10:36]
The planning commission immediately said, "Wait a minute. This is a very big deal.
[1:10:41]
We're not going to do this right away. We're going to take our time.
[1:10:45]
We're going to get more information.
[1:10:46]
We want you to come back with more."
[1:10:49]
I really don't understand why the PCC didn't do that.
[1:10:54]
This is a hugely consequential decision.
[1:11:00]
I understand that
[1:11:02]
the FAA ultimately has the jurisdiction over this, and I understand that this is
[1:11:06]
not an easy thing to push back against.
[1:11:09]
But I believe very strongly that if everybody got on the same page,
[1:11:16]
that we would have a real chance of stopping this.
[1:11:20]
Mm-hmm.
[1:11:21]
And I want to say, by the way, Mike, thank you very much here.
[1:11:24]
I think you're definitely-- I think these are great steps that you're talking about
[1:11:28]
here.
[1:11:30]
But if all the towns could get together, and if you could bring in the delegation.
[1:11:36]
You could bring in the federal elected official, the two senators, and the
[1:11:39]
congresswoman, and perhaps the governor, and perhaps AG Tong,
[1:11:46]
and everybody came out and said, "No, we don't want this." Or got
[1:11:51]
creative with some law that was passed in the upcoming session that somehow, I
[1:11:56]
think these ideas about privacy are also very, very relevant,
[1:12:00]
that there would be a chance to stop this.
[1:12:03]
I think you're right, Chris.
[1:12:04]
Okay.
[1:12:04]
Because the way the momentum's going right now, putting aside the P&Z issue, this
[1:12:08]
board doesn't put the agendas together. We have our own agendas.
[1:12:11]
But what I'm seeing here is, because I mentioned earlier about all the other
[1:12:14]
mayors, everybody's on board with this right now.
[1:12:17]
These are 15 mayors and first selectmen who I work very closely with.
[1:12:22]
The fact that the state is going to be involved with this Teams meeting or Zoom
[1:12:27]
meeting, there's going to be a lot of questions asked.
[1:12:31]
The fact that Rosa DeLaura called me up and said, "Mike, I want to support you on
[1:12:34]
this." And you see, she sent me a letter on this.
[1:12:37]
That's great news.
[1:12:39]
So we
[1:12:42]
are doing everything we can here, and I'm kind of leading the charge on this.
[1:12:46]
And I'll tell you what, because the facility is in North Haven, so a lot of the
[1:12:50]
mayors say to me, "Mike, what's your position on this?" Right?
[1:12:53]
So there are a lot of questions. My colleagues in East Haven, New Haven, Tweed
[1:12:58]
Airport, drones dropping in flight zones with the airplanes coming in.
[1:13:03]
The momentum now is shifting the other way.
[1:13:07]
But what we don't know is that--
[1:13:12]
It was almost like what Adam sent to us, okay, this information.
[1:13:17]
It was almost like the FAA basically flipped it back to the local municipalities.
[1:13:22]
Mm-hmm.
[1:13:23]
When I read that, Valerie read it, I read it.
[1:13:26]
It was a, I hate to say it, folks, it was like a cop-out.
[1:13:29]
Mm-hmm.
[1:13:30]
Instead of accepting responsibility-
[1:13:31]
Absolutely.
[1:13:32]
Yes.
[1:13:32]
What did they say?
[1:13:33]
Well, they basically said, "Well, we don't have jurisdictions over having
[1:13:37]
meetings," right? Instead of saying, "We have the jurisdiction over the airspace,
[1:13:41]
and we hope that there are meetings that are going to take place at the municipal
[1:13:46]
level." I look at that as a cop-out, Adam.
[1:13:49]
It was.
[1:13:50]
Total cop-out.
[1:13:51]
Mm-hmm.
[1:13:52]
So I think though, Chris, coming back to the issue here,
[1:13:56]
the momentum's going the other way now
[1:13:58]
Yeah.
[1:13:59]
We don't know, though, what the outcome's going to be. We don't know.
[1:14:01]
It may also be that the technology is ahead of the federal law.
[1:14:06]
And I think maybe, again, this is not unique to us, obviously.
[1:14:11]
So I think maybe something, again, that's where it's good that you've gotten our
[1:14:16]
congressional elected officials-
[1:14:18]
Yes
[1:14:18]
... involved, because it really affects everybody.
[1:14:21]
And maybe, again, the reason the FAA is copping out is because the law doesn't
[1:14:27]
provide guidance because it's not anticipated yet.
[1:14:30]
And all the things that have been brought up tonight, and everybody's concerns,
[1:14:34]
really, the law, I don't think properly-- The FAA doesn't really think about or has
[1:14:40]
the authority to even maybe address, because the technology is moving in a way that
[1:14:46]
the Congress at the national level hasn't done anything with yet.
[1:14:50]
Yeah.
[1:14:51]
That's true with data centers as well.
[1:14:54]
Yeah.
[1:14:55]
Yeah. I think this could end up being as big or bigger than data centers.
[1:14:58]
I think it could be-
[1:14:59]
Yeah
[1:15:00]
... equally problematic, similar issues. So, okay.
[1:15:03]
But again, thank you, and
[1:15:06]
anything that, I think I'm speaking for everyone here, anything we can do to help,
[1:15:10]
let us know.
[1:15:11]
Keep speaking.
[1:15:13]
Keep speaking.
[1:15:14]
Okay.
[1:15:14]
Thanks for the-- We exchanged emails together, so thank you for that.
[1:15:17]
Yeah.
[1:15:17]
Okay. But I hope that everyone sees that there are efforts being made
[1:15:24]
to change the momentum on this.
[1:15:26]
Yeah.
[1:15:27]
So.
[1:15:27]
Excellent. Thank you very much.
[1:15:29]
Okay.
[1:15:29]
Yeah.
[1:15:29]
Good seeing you. Thank you.
[1:15:30]
Chris, thank you very much. Some of the things that are interesting to me-- I'm
[1:15:34]
sorry. Does anyone else want to speak?
[1:15:37]
I just have one more thing.
[1:15:38]
Of course.
[1:15:38]
Sorry.
[1:15:53]
Mary White, Stillwater Lane.
[1:15:56]
I wanted to mention the
[1:16:00]
part about,
[1:16:02]
I'm just going to say drone wars. We're familiar with
[1:16:06]
the war in Ukraine, the non-war
[1:16:12]
in Iran. And so I don't know how many of you heard about it, but
[1:16:18]
earlier in the non-war, Iran war, a girl school was hit,
[1:16:23]
an all-girl school, was hit with more than 165 killed.
[1:16:28]
The facility or the school was
[1:16:35]
a military compound, from what I understand.
[1:16:38]
They moved out, and the girls' school moved in.
[1:16:41]
And from what I've read, it was a drone that calculated
[1:16:47]
that this was a site for attack, and that's what happened.
[1:16:52]
So why am I bringing that up? Because you hear about hacking all the time,
[1:16:58]
different federal agencies and local agencies, there's just hacking occurring all
[1:17:03]
over the place. So my concern is about, is there a
[1:17:08]
possibility that America's enemies, terrorists, that they could create,
[1:17:14]
copy an Amazon 80-pound drone in size and color,
[1:17:21]
and then load it up with explosives and then,
[1:17:25]
because they can operate it from seven miles from where its destination or
[1:17:30]
whatever, and then fly this thing over a school, fly this over the town green.
[1:17:35]
And so I think that there's a safety issue that I'm not hearing anybody talk
[1:17:41]
about. And I think if a drone in the wartime can
[1:17:47]
bomb a girls' school, how did we not know that there were red-- Oh, I'm sorry.
[1:17:54]
Red, what do you call those things? The highlight, when they show the body heat.
[1:17:59]
How did we not know that there
[1:18:02]
were little ones, that there were girls there?
[1:18:05]
So I'm just concerned that this is not even being spoken about.
[1:18:09]
And I think that there's a possibility of either hacking or duplication and that
[1:18:13]
we're really--
[1:18:16]
It's just something we should think about, and I wanted to bring that forth.
[1:18:19]
Thank you.
[1:18:19]
Thank you, Mary.
[1:18:21]
All right, seeing no other comment, I'd like to offer, do we have our town attorney
[1:18:25]
here who's been waiting-
[1:18:26]
Yes
[1:18:26]
... because we have the next issue with the town petition.
[1:18:28]
Yeah, of course.
[1:18:28]
So, we good, Preston? Yeah. I have a question. Yeah.
[1:18:32]
Is it a Zoom meeting with the FAA when this all comes to a head?
[1:18:36]
Is there a date for that meeting? Well, the meeting on October 5th, Preston, I'll
[1:18:41]
text you on this, okay? Sure. Whether it's going to be Teams or Zoom, whatever it
[1:18:44]
may be, okay? Awesome. I'll get back to you on this, okay? Absolutely. Thank you.
[1:18:48]
Thank you.
[1:18:48]
Thank you very much.
[1:18:49]
Okay.
[1:18:49]
What is the status of the pause that you asked for, Brandon?
[1:18:53]
Until all of the meetings take place, Adam, with the ma-
[1:18:56]
No, what is the status of what Amazon said?
[1:19:00]
It's a good question. It's kind of ambiguous right now.
[1:19:03]
That they-
[1:19:03]
Because you have asked, but they have not responded, correct?
[1:19:05]
They have not responded in terms of time frames when the public meetings will take
[1:19:10]
place. They did say, in general, there will be public meetings to take place.
[1:19:15]
They gave me the date of October 5th with the state senators and state reps.
[1:19:20]
We've got the meeting with the mayors on, I think it's October 22nd or 24th, that
[1:19:24]
last week in October, I think it is.
[1:19:27]
So my interpretation, although they didn't say it directly, is that they're going
[1:19:31]
to start the meetings after the meetings with the state and the meetings with the
[1:19:35]
mayors.
[1:19:36]
But they haven't paused anything. They are continuing on with their program.
[1:19:39]
I think-
[1:19:40]
Like the zoning meeting, they're like, "This is just the first step.
[1:19:43]
Now we have other steps." So I take that to be you've asked for a pause-
[1:19:46]
Yes
[1:19:47]
... they're not pausing. They're just simply giving us a crumb of something they
[1:19:50]
should have given us five months ago.
[1:19:52]
Right. They give-
[1:19:52]
Essentially saying, "We are going to proceed."
[1:19:55]
It's possibly the interpretation. You might be right about this, yes.
[1:19:58]
I wonder about the site plan that was approved by planning and zoning, and
[1:20:05]
how far along the construction is-
[1:20:08]
Oh, no
[1:20:08]
... at the Amazon facility.
[1:20:09]
There's no construction-
[1:20:10]
It doesn't have one yet
[1:20:12]
... there's no planned construction, from what I'm told, until there's a decision
[1:20:17]
made on the drones. So until the decision from-
[1:20:22]
The FAA
[1:20:22]
... from the FAA, which I believe the FAA has given them approval to fly.
[1:20:26]
Is that correct?
[1:20:27]
No, I've never heard that, no.
[1:20:29]
There's been no approval to fly?
[1:20:31]
No, that's the whole purpose of the whole thing.
[1:20:33]
Well, the thing ends October 1st-
[1:20:36]
Right
[1:20:36]
... was for public comment.
[1:20:37]
I thought the approval was subject to DEEP or the local regulator, the state level
[1:20:42]
regulator, approving the flight paths with respect to the coverage of DEEP.
[1:20:49]
I think it's an overall approval for the thing to happen here.
[1:20:51]
I don't know if DEEP has authority beyond
[1:20:55]
certain areas of the Quinnipiac and the marsh areas.
[1:20:58]
Okay.
[1:20:59]
That's what's not clear to me-
[1:21:01]
Okay
[1:21:01]
... where the authority rests, who has authority, how far DEEP can go to slow this
[1:21:06]
down.
[1:21:06]
Right.
[1:21:07]
And then if it does slow it down, does that mean Amazon says, "Fine, we're going to
[1:21:11]
carve out these particular areas and fly in these areas"?
[1:21:14]
Yeah.
[1:21:14]
I think the FAA has given,
[1:21:18]
my understanding is, it's provisional authority subject to DEEP confirming that it
[1:21:22]
complies with state environmental laws.
[1:21:25]
If that's true, that's not good news.
[1:21:27]
I'm not positive about that, and it's unclear to me.
[1:21:30]
Right.
[1:21:32]
So to the point that's been made about slowing this down,
[1:21:37]
and I know we want to get to Jeff, too, but to the point that was made about
[1:21:40]
slowing this down, and again, it's not entirely clear to me where this sits from a
[1:21:44]
legal perspective, like where the FAA comes in, where DEEP comes in.
[1:21:47]
But the letters that I've read
[1:21:50]
are specifically addressing DEEP, and DEEP's coverage of this
[1:21:56]
issue, and where DEEP sits in terms of its jurisdiction.
[1:22:01]
And that's a pathway to slowing this down, that DEEP can, as a state-level
[1:22:07]
regulator, slow this down because they can say, "Look, you're not complying with a
[1:22:12]
variety of state environmental codes and regulations." And then Amazon would have
[1:22:17]
to respond to that. The other thing I think might be interesting is where these
[1:22:21]
site plans sit and how far along that construction is, because maybe they've
[1:22:24]
started to do some stuff on site.
[1:22:26]
Well, we'll check that because that bears watching. I would agree with that.
[1:22:30]
Yeah.
[1:22:31]
We'll let everybody know on that, okay?
[1:22:32]
If there's any construction on the actual site.
[1:22:36]
But-
[1:22:37]
Because I think it was contingent on overall approval.
[1:22:41]
Yeah, I don't know how much more the FAA is going to be involved.
[1:22:45]
That is my question. I think they've now kind of handed over
[1:22:50]
to the
[1:22:52]
state level environmental authority, which in our case is DEEP, and said, "Hey,
[1:22:55]
does this comply with what you need it to comply with?" And then once that is
[1:22:59]
approved
[1:23:01]
These folks can build their site and start flying, is how I understand it.
[1:23:05]
So the way to push this back and to slow it down is to use our
[1:23:11]
friends at DEEP, is to use our local representatives, including Congressman
[1:23:16]
DeLauro, Congresswoman DeLauro, and also any other...
[1:23:20]
What's amazing to me that you've mentioned multiple times is the bipartisan
[1:23:24]
opposition to this.
[1:23:25]
Yes.
[1:23:26]
It's fascinating to me. How many times of recent note have we seen such bipartisan,
[1:23:30]
passionate opposition to something-
[1:23:32]
Right
[1:23:32]
... like this?
[1:23:33]
Right.
[1:23:33]
And so that to me tells us really everything we need to know, that
[1:23:38]
there's going to be a real push from every level,
[1:23:43]
every state apparatus, and also every local person, every local rep, and the people
[1:23:48]
in these towns to push back against this.
[1:23:50]
And I think that's a really good thing, and that's the way we need to approach it.
[1:23:54]
And I think, again, my point earlier was, I think maybe there's a lack of federal
[1:24:03]
legislation that needs to provide maybe more guidelines than exist.
[1:24:08]
Because I actually know drone operators, and they out west do things like
[1:24:14]
lay down insecticides and fertilizer. They track power lines.
[1:24:19]
They do all kinds of agricultural tasks now, that before, you'd have people on the
[1:24:24]
ground doing.
[1:24:25]
Yeah.
[1:24:26]
So I think other parts of the country are already seeing it in terms of they just
[1:24:30]
happen to be maybe less populated than we are.
[1:24:34]
Yeah. The Richardson case is instructive for us as a community because they clearly
[1:24:39]
have authority to fly there, because they're flying. Right? This is happening.
[1:24:44]
So the FAA clearly has already given them authority to fly in that community.
[1:24:49]
And whatever local and state-level ordinances in Texas they've had to comply with,
[1:24:53]
they have, and so they're currently operating.
[1:24:56]
And so I think that's what is probably happening here, right?
[1:25:02]
There's a sequence of events that needs to happen.
[1:25:05]
The first thing at the municipal level was the approval of the site plan for
[1:25:10]
construction, which as you discussed, was a very limited purview and a very limited
[1:25:14]
review. And then the next thing that needs to happen is DEEP needs to say whether
[1:25:19]
or not, as we've been discussing, where they are out of
[1:25:24]
step with local and state-level environmental controls and laws.
[1:25:30]
So I think that's where this sits.
[1:25:33]
And so using DEEP as a way to really slow the train here, I think is a good path.
[1:25:38]
Well, all of our state legislators, Republican and Democrat, have sent letters to
[1:25:41]
DEEP. So
[1:25:44]
our congresswoman has done so. And what this might explain, an
[1:25:50]
article I just read, that there's 15 states in litigation with the FAA.
[1:25:55]
I just read this earlier.
[1:25:57]
Yeah, because-
[1:25:58]
That's been going on for a couple of months.
[1:25:59]
Couple of months. Yeah.
[1:26:00]
Yeah. Because I think part of this is if we as a municipality
[1:26:06]
don't approve the site plan, Amazon will respond and say, "Well, why?
[1:26:10]
What's wrong with-- You have no legal reason to not approve our site plan."
[1:26:14]
Right.
[1:26:15]
And so that would create potentially friction with Amazon, and they may sue us, and
[1:26:20]
we may have to respond to that. Now, whether or not that actually happens, who
[1:26:23]
knows? But I think that threat is out there, that the limited purview of the
[1:26:28]
Planning and Zoning Commission is such that they had no rational or logical or
[1:26:33]
reasonable reason to say no to the site plan.
[1:26:37]
And so
[1:26:39]
now that Amazon has that approval, they can start building subject to the approval
[1:26:45]
of the state-level authority. I think that's where this sits.
[1:26:48]
Could be.
[1:26:49]
But the bipartisan opposition I think it's
[1:26:54]
great, and I think it really is one of our best halfways to slowing this down.
[1:27:01]
Can I just-
[1:27:01]
I know, but if I--
[1:27:06]
Oh, sorry. I feel like we're kind of speculating where things are at with the FAA.
[1:27:09]
Can we find that out?
[1:27:09]
Yeah, absolutely.
[1:27:10]
Instead of like, is there a way that you guys can find that out and report back?
[1:27:13]
Yeah, we can try to figure that out.
[1:27:15]
Because otherwise, we're just kind of bouncing it around what we think it is-
[1:27:18]
Yeah
[1:27:18]
... as opposed to what it is.
[1:27:19]
I don't think we can. I don't think they're going to respond to us.
[1:27:21]
Oh, okay.
[1:27:22]
That email that Adam shared with us, but I think we can engage our federal
[1:27:26]
delegation to find out.
[1:27:27]
I think that's great. Yeah. Good idea.
[1:27:29]
Yeah. I'll work on that.
[1:27:30]
Rose and just-- Yeah, exactly. Thanks.
[1:27:32]
Thanks.
[1:27:34]
Yes, Chris.
[1:27:34]
I'll make it quick. I know you guys want to move on to other things.
[1:27:38]
It just occurred to me, just talking about keeping people informed.
[1:27:43]
I don't know if you have someone who writes press releases for you or if you write
[1:27:46]
your own press releases, but maybe a press release every time, for example, when
[1:27:51]
you're going to have this meeting with Amazon. Here's what happened.
[1:27:55]
You could put it on the website. You could share it with the different
[1:28:00]
groups on Facebook, with like Know North Haven.
[1:28:04]
I know there's two that are called North Haven Community.
[1:28:06]
Yeah.
[1:28:06]
There's two different ones, and just make an arrangement with whoever is operating
[1:28:10]
those that you can send them this press release. You could send it to Channel 8.
[1:28:15]
So an idea just as far as keeping everyone informed as to what's going on and
[1:28:19]
particularly when these public forums are going to happen and so on. An idea, so.
[1:28:24]
Yeah, absolutely.
[1:28:26]
All right. So, thank you, ladies and gentlemen.
[1:28:29]
Thank you, Channel 8, Preston, for being here.
[1:28:32]
The idea here was with Preston and I that this gets pulsed out all over the Greater
[1:28:37]
New Haven County area. So thank you.
[1:28:40]
Yeah. Thank you.
[1:28:41]
Thanks.
[1:28:43]
We'll see you next time, Preston, okay?
[1:28:45]
Yeah.
[1:28:45]
We'll talk to you again.
[1:28:46]
Is tonight or tomorrow morning?
[1:28:48]
It's tonight at 11:00.
[1:28:49]
Thank you.
[1:28:49]
We have it on our website.
[1:28:50]
Thank you, North Haven Public TV, too, because they're still filming as well.
[1:28:54]
Yeah. Perfect.
[1:28:55]
So we got double filming with-- Thank you for coming.
[1:28:58]
Thanks. Good seeing you, Preston. Talk to you soon. All right.
[1:29:02]
So I think we can-
[1:29:03]
Absolutely.
[1:29:04]
Yes.
[1:29:04]
So sorry.
[1:29:06]
He's been very, very patient.
[1:29:08]
Yes. Which number is this?
[1:29:12]
This is number six, right?
[1:29:13]
Well-
[1:29:13]
There's no Yankee game on tonight
[1:29:15]
... I think it's going to be seven.
[1:29:17]
Seven.
[1:29:18]
Oh. Was former six and now?
[1:29:20]
The former six, yeah.
[1:29:21]
Former six. Okay.
[1:29:23]
That's where we are, yes.
[1:29:24]
The real problem is-
[1:29:24]
Okay.
[1:29:25]
Former six.
[1:29:27]
So Michael, I'm happy to read.
[1:29:29]
Please read.
[1:29:29]
Okay. So this is the former number six on the agenda.
[1:29:33]
Consider and act upon a petition filed with the town clerk on September 14th, 2026,
[1:29:37]
requesting the Board of Selectmen warn and convene a special town meeting pursuant
[1:29:42]
to Connecticut General Statutes 7-1.
[1:29:48]
I'd like to invite our town attorney, Jeff D'Onofrio.
[1:29:51]
Jeffrey, sorry to keep you waiting here, but thank you.
[1:29:54]
Hi, folks.
[1:29:55]
Council.
[1:29:56]
Hi, how are you?
[1:29:58]
So I was asked to come tonight to provide an opinion on a
[1:30:04]
petition that was filed with the town on September 14th that requests
[1:30:10]
that the board, under Connecticut General Statute 7-1 and under the town
[1:30:15]
charter, warn a special town meeting with respect to the three questions that are
[1:30:21]
presented in the petition.
[1:30:24]
We don't get a lot of petitions for special town meetings in North Haven.
[1:30:30]
I think this is probably the third in the last 20 years that we've had.
[1:30:36]
So just as a refresher, under the Home Rule Act in Connecticut,
[1:30:41]
municipalities have the power to adopt a charter to serve as the
[1:30:47]
organic law of the municipality. North Haven has a charter.
[1:30:52]
The extent of the town meeting's involvement and authority is set forth
[1:30:58]
in Section 901 of the charter. So whenever there's a petition
[1:31:04]
submitted asking the board to warn a special meeting of the town
[1:31:10]
meeting, we have to look at whether those questions are proper. Okay?
[1:31:14]
We have to determine if the proposed questions are within the purview of the town
[1:31:19]
meeting, because a special town meeting, any town meeting, pursuant to
[1:31:25]
Connecticut General Statute 7-1, which is cited in the petition, can only be held
[1:31:30]
for the transaction of proper business before that meeting.
[1:31:36]
So the petition at issue has three proposed questions.
[1:31:41]
I'm going to take them in inverse order because when I looked at it, they kind of
[1:31:48]
required that sort of analysis. Okay?
[1:31:52]
So item three asks that you warn a town meeting to
[1:31:57]
appropriate $1,251,797.49 by municipal bond
[1:32:03]
for the purchase of an item.
[1:32:06]
The Board of Finance under Section 709 would have to recommend any
[1:32:12]
borrowing or any bond issuance. So item three is not a proper purpose for a town
[1:32:17]
meeting. There's been no Board of Finance recommendation for an appropriation or
[1:32:23]
for issuance of bonds, because town meeting does not have authority to do that.
[1:32:27]
Okay?
[1:32:28]
Item number two seeks to direct the Board of Selectmen to deliver a full public
[1:32:34]
accounting and written report to the town within 30 days, detailing the
[1:32:40]
execution, terms, cancellation, and financial liabilities of the fire engine
[1:32:45]
contract signed without voter authorization.
[1:32:49]
The town meeting does not have authority under the charter over the Board of
[1:32:53]
Selectmen. Okay? It's a separation of powers issue. Okay?
[1:32:57]
The town meeting has certain authority under the charter, and the First Selectman
[1:33:03]
under the charter is responsible for all purchasing done in the name of the town,
[1:33:08]
and the First Selectman is responsible for making periodic reports to the Board of
[1:33:12]
Selectmen and the Board of Finance under charter Section 502.
[1:33:17]
The town meeting has no supervisory authority over the Board of Selectmen and has
[1:33:21]
no authority to compel the Board of Selectmen to perform
[1:33:25]
whatever is being requested here, a full public accounting.
[1:33:29]
I don't know if that means
[1:33:31]
from the outside auditors, from an investigation, but whatever it is, the town
[1:33:37]
meeting doesn't have jurisdiction to direct the Board of Selectmen to do that.
[1:33:41]
Item number one asks for a town meeting to adopt a resolution
[1:33:47]
prohibiting the expenditure or transfer of any municipal funds, including the sum
[1:33:53]
of $31,294.94, for penalties, fees, or
[1:33:58]
damages associated with the canceled fire engine contract, unless and until such
[1:34:04]
expenditure is explicitly approved by a vote of the town meeting.
[1:34:09]
So item number one essentially seeks to prevent a contract from being canceled.
[1:34:15]
The town meeting does not have authority under the charter to direct the town to
[1:34:19]
enter into contracts. That authority is granted to the First Selectman.
[1:34:23]
My understanding is that the $31,294.94
[1:34:29]
used to cancel that contract was appropriated from the
[1:34:35]
contingency line in the current fiscal year budget by the Board of Finance, which
[1:34:39]
is their purview. So there's no appropriation needed because the contingency line
[1:34:44]
is already appropriated in part of the budget, so transferring money out of the
[1:34:48]
contingency line does not require a town meeting approval.
[1:34:54]
So my opinion is that none of these questions are proper questions for the town
[1:34:59]
meeting. The town meeting doesn't have jurisdiction over these items.
[1:35:04]
Thank you, Jeff.
[1:35:06]
Jeff, thank you so much. Sorry that it was such a long time before you got a chance
[1:35:10]
to speak.
[1:35:10]
No problem.
[1:35:11]
Can you discuss what would be a proper purpose under general statutes here in
[1:35:17]
Connecticut and under our charter?
[1:35:19]
Well, if you look at Section
[1:35:26]
901 of the charter,
[1:35:27]
"The town
[1:35:33]
meeting shall have the power to enact ordinances not inconsistent with this
[1:35:37]
charter, or the Connecticut General Statutes shall have power to amend or repeal
[1:35:40]
such ordinances. The town meeting has authority to establish offices, boards,
[1:35:45]
commissions, set their powers, duties, numbers, terms of qualification, abolish,
[1:35:49]
consolidate, alter the powers, duties, numbers, terms of any board, commission, or
[1:35:54]
agency, except those specified elsewhere in the charter.
[1:35:58]
The town meeting also, except as otherwise provided in this charter, the
[1:36:01]
legislative power of the town shall be vested in the town meeting." So the town
[1:36:04]
meeting is the legislative body of the town.
[1:36:07]
"It shall exercise and perform all the rights, powers, duties, and obligations of
[1:36:10]
the town, except as the same may be assigned by this charter to some other office,
[1:36:16]
board, commission, or agency." Okay?
[1:36:19]
So, the law in Connecticut interpreting the jurisdiction of town meetings has
[1:36:25]
always been in towns that have a charter, you look to the charter to see what
[1:36:30]
power, what authority has been given to the town meeting, and if
[1:36:36]
a specific
[1:36:40]
role or a specific duty or responsibility or power is given to another
[1:36:46]
board or town official, then that's who has that role.
[1:36:53]
Obviously, the town meeting has a role in adopting a budget.
[1:36:58]
That's part and parcel of
[1:37:02]
the function of the legislative body in any town.
[1:37:07]
And in North Haven, it happens to be the town meeting.
[1:37:12]
There's also case law that
[1:37:15]
stands for the proposition that a charter's silence as to authority for a town
[1:37:21]
meeting to specifically act as to a matter is evidence of the town's intent not to
[1:37:26]
imbue the town meeting with such authority.
[1:37:30]
So in this case,
[1:37:33]
number three, item three, there can't be any debate about.
[1:37:38]
It would be completely illegal, and you would never get an opinion from Bond
[1:37:42]
Counsel saying otherwise, to go and borrow money without the Board of Finance
[1:37:47]
recommending it. It's not possible.
[1:37:50]
You would never even be able to issue
[1:37:53]
a public offering statement and go to the bond market with it because you wouldn't
[1:37:57]
get an opinion from me, and you wouldn't get an opinion from Bond Counsel, and you
[1:38:00]
wouldn't even have a resolution from the Board of Finance, okay?
[1:38:04]
So that one, don't even waste a second thinking about it.
[1:38:07]
Mm-hmm.
[1:38:09]
The first one,
[1:38:12]
about prohibiting the expenditure of funds until there's an
[1:38:18]
appropriation, there is an appropriation.
[1:38:20]
Mm-hmm.
[1:38:22]
It's the contingency line in the existing fiscal year budget.
[1:38:29]
And, if somebody thinks it's not an appropriate use of the contingency, then they
[1:38:34]
deal with that at the Board of Finance.
[1:38:35]
The town meeting doesn't have authority over that.
[1:38:38]
So what's an example, a kind of simple example of something that--
[1:38:43]
Just, I think, just to take a step back, I do not know if everyone is aware of the
[1:38:47]
fact that there is a petition that was signed by about 20 or so folks, maybe 20
[1:38:53]
to 30 people. And Jeff just read through the three items that the petition was
[1:38:58]
seeking.
[1:39:00]
And we as a board asked Jeff to give an opinion and render an opinion as to why,
[1:39:05]
whether or not this was a valid petition.
[1:39:08]
And Jeff is now explaining why, in his estimation, from a legal perspective, it
[1:39:14]
is not a valid petition, and why.
[1:39:18]
It's not that it's not a valid petition, it's that the purposes-
[1:39:21]
The petition itself is valid, yes
[1:39:21]
... for which the town meeting is being asked to convene are not within the purview
[1:39:26]
of the town meeting.
[1:39:28]
Thank you. That's an important clarification.
[1:39:29]
The petition itself, so under our general statutes, 20 people can create a petition
[1:39:34]
if they want. That's a completely valid thing to do.
[1:39:37]
It's whether or not the items on this petition are valid in and of themselves.
[1:39:42]
And that's what Jeff is explaining right now.
[1:39:45]
What's a simple
[1:39:50]
thing a town meeting could get 20 people and sign a petition and force the Board of
[1:39:54]
Selectmen to do?
[1:39:55]
Ordinance.
[1:39:56]
An ordinance.
[1:39:57]
Abolish an ordinance, repeal, amend, adopt an ordinance, create a
[1:40:03]
committee.
[1:40:05]
That kind of thing.
[1:40:06]
Again, assuming it doesn't conflict with anything else in the charter or the
[1:40:11]
general statutes. Okay?
[1:40:13]
Mm-hmm.
[1:40:14]
So let's say you wanted to create a, I'm going to pick on him because he's sitting
[1:40:17]
there looking at me. Let's say you want to create a fire commission oversight
[1:40:22]
committee,
[1:40:23]
somebody to keep an eye on the fire commission.
[1:40:25]
Mm-hmm.
[1:40:26]
My opinion would be that's not proper because there's a statute.
[1:40:30]
Same thing with the police commission.
[1:40:31]
Mm-hmm.
[1:40:32]
Okay? There are other boards and commissions that are not creatures of statute,
[1:40:37]
right? A
[1:40:39]
lot of towns have more, unfortunately for me, in the towns that I represent, a lot
[1:40:45]
of towns have more boards, commissions, and committees than North Haven,
[1:40:49]
significantly more. Architectural review boards, downtown beautification
[1:40:54]
committees, standing building committees, permanent project building committees.
[1:40:58]
If the town meeting wanted to present, we don't have it under the charter, it's not
[1:41:03]
somebody else's role. If the town meeting wants to call a special town meeting to
[1:41:08]
talk about that Take action on it. It's perfectly within their purview under the
[1:41:12]
charter.
[1:41:13]
And if they had 20 people sign a petition saying, "We want to create a
[1:41:17]
beautification commission for the green," they could present that to us, it would
[1:41:22]
be a valid purpose, and we would have no choice but to call a town meeting for that
[1:41:26]
purpose.
[1:41:26]
Correct.
[1:41:28]
So anything having to do with the spending of money, appropriation of money, where
[1:41:34]
does that sit? Where does the authority to spend the dollars of this town sit?
[1:41:37]
I think you've already said that in terms of starting with the board of finance.
[1:41:40]
I just said, yes, I just want you to speak on it one more time.
[1:41:49]
If the idea is you want an answer about whether the town meeting in
[1:41:55]
a vacuum and without the participation of the board of finance can just spend
[1:42:00]
money, the answer is no.
[1:42:02]
So let's, so Bill, there was a reason why I was asking.
[1:42:05]
Go ahead. Sorry.
[1:42:07]
No, it's totally fine. What would happen if 20 people could get together and force
[1:42:12]
the board of selectmen to call a town meeting to spend money?
[1:42:14]
What would be the result of that?
[1:42:19]
Well, the problem becomes, where are we getting the money from?
[1:42:27]
There's only a couple places that we get money from.
[1:42:30]
One is the unappropriated fund balance, one is the budget.
[1:42:35]
Right.
[1:42:35]
Right? So depending on how much money you're talking about,
[1:42:41]
and whether, are we going to try to borrow it?
[1:42:45]
Where's it coming from?
[1:42:46]
Right.
[1:42:47]
If it's not in the budget.
[1:42:50]
The town meeting gets a machine vote on the budget,
[1:42:55]
and it's been that way for 25 years now.
[1:42:57]
It used to be just in the gym or in the auditorium at the
[1:43:03]
high school. But it's been going on machine vote for about 25 years now.
[1:43:07]
Right.
[1:43:07]
So that's the budget, right? Once the budget's adopted, you can't-
[1:43:11]
Spend money
[1:43:12]
... petition for, "Okay, I want to change the budget."
[1:43:16]
Or, "I want to spend beyond the four corners of it."
[1:43:18]
Well, that's a special appropriation. You go to the board of finance for that.
[1:43:22]
Right. The reason I'm asking is I think it would be chaos.
[1:43:25]
If you could have 20 people who could prepare a petition-
[1:43:29]
How do you set a mill rate?
[1:43:30]
Not only how do you set a mill rate, but
[1:43:34]
if you could have 20 people prepare a petition and force the board of selectmen to
[1:43:37]
call a town meeting to spend funds outside of the budget that haven't been
[1:43:41]
appropriated.
[1:43:44]
Chaos would ensue, right? You would have-
[1:43:46]
There's no authority in the charter to do that.
[1:43:47]
There's no authority, but it would also create terrible situations.
[1:43:52]
Somebody could say, "I want to spend $3 million on this pet project of mine.
[1:43:56]
I have 20 people who signed this petition."
[1:43:58]
Yeah.
[1:43:58]
"I want you to call a town meeting."
[1:43:59]
Well, if you're asking me the practical import of it-
[1:44:01]
Yes
[1:44:02]
... your bond rating would go to junk bond status.
[1:44:05]
Right.
[1:44:06]
Because there's no reliability, predictability, or stability in your budget.
[1:44:12]
I'm sorry to monopolize. I just want to drive the point home here.
[1:44:14]
And that's what we're doing today with the resolutions that we've, the one we've
[1:44:19]
read and the other ones we're going to read.
[1:44:21]
They were actually sent to the board of selectmen by the board of finance.
[1:44:26]
They were sent from finance to us.
[1:44:29]
Right.
[1:44:29]
Yeah.
[1:44:29]
They were sent by board of finance, approved them at the la-- we were both there at
[1:44:33]
the last-
[1:44:33]
Yeah
[1:44:33]
... board of finance meeting, and we already read one of the resolutions in terms
[1:44:38]
of funding. And as it indicates at the very end there, we're going to approve the
[1:44:42]
recommendations concerning those appropriations and send that to the town meeting
[1:44:46]
for bonding.
[1:44:48]
Right. And that's the path of how something gets done in town.
[1:44:53]
Right. You could have bond counsel come in and tell you what...
[1:44:57]
I review the packet
[1:45:00]
before it goes to the town meeting to make sure the right resolutions are in there.
[1:45:05]
If there's no board of finance resolution, it never gets to this point.
[1:45:09]
Right. Because the board of finance has the-
[1:45:11]
Bond counsel won't even draft it for you.
[1:45:13]
Right.
[1:45:13]
Because it's DOA with the bond market.
[1:45:16]
And the point is, we elect folks on the board of finance to make principal choices
[1:45:20]
about how we spend our dollars. The town meeting approves the budget, and if
[1:45:25]
there's expenditures beyond the budget that need to be made, the board of finance
[1:45:30]
has to appropriate those funds either from the contingency fund or the surplus
[1:45:34]
fund.
[1:45:35]
Or they recommend to the town meeting a special appropriation.
[1:45:38]
We've had plenty of those over the years.
[1:45:40]
Right.
[1:45:40]
If the school needs a capital item like a new boiler or something-
[1:45:43]
Which is happening right now, actually
[1:45:44]
... the board of finance recommends a capital item.
[1:45:46]
Right.
[1:45:47]
We've had it with, in my 35 years, we've had it with fire apparatus before,
[1:45:53]
where the board of finance rec-- there's a presentation made by a department head,
[1:45:59]
and a request is made for a special appropriation, either because it didn't make it
[1:46:04]
into the budget that was approved, or it's interim.
[1:46:08]
It's in between when the budgets were approved.
[1:46:11]
And there's a need, it goes to the board of finance, they recommend it to the town
[1:46:15]
meeting, and then you call the town meeting because the board of finance
[1:46:17]
recommended it to you.
[1:46:18]
Right.
[1:46:19]
And it's-
[1:46:21]
And if the board of finance recommended it to you
[1:46:24]
and you said, "You know what? We don't want to call the town meeting.
[1:46:29]
We don't want to do it." And then 20 people signed a petition saying, "The board of
[1:46:35]
finance recommended this, you have to call this town meeting," then I'd be here
[1:46:39]
telling you to call a town meeting.
[1:46:40]
Because we cannot disobey, or we cannot say no to that
[1:46:46]
request from the board of finance.
[1:46:48]
If they're appropriating funds, our obligation is to call a town meeting.
[1:46:52]
It's a proper purpose for the town meeting.
[1:46:54]
Right.
[1:46:54]
Yeah.
[1:46:56]
So this is all-
[1:46:57]
That's also why we have for smaller items, the contingency is just-
[1:47:00]
Of course
[1:47:01]
... as Jeff said earlier, for not having to go through those steps because there
[1:47:06]
could be smaller items or, that we can't plan for.
[1:47:10]
And, the $300,000 contingency I think that we had this year is just a very
[1:47:16]
extremely small infinitesimal amount compared to the entire budget.
[1:47:21]
It's been $300,000 for a long time, folks.
[1:47:24]
Yeah.
[1:47:24]
For a long time.
[1:47:25]
Yeah.
[1:47:25]
Just for
[1:47:27]
unforeseen things that we didn't appropriate that needed to be done.
[1:47:31]
And just to speak to the where this was all coming from.
[1:47:36]
It was coming from a group of concerned citizens who believe that the
[1:47:42]
fire engine that was canceled should not have been canceled, and it should have
[1:47:47]
been made a priority by the board of finance.
[1:47:50]
Money should have been appropriated, and we should have not canceled that contract,
[1:47:53]
and we should have an engine coming. So I think it comes from a good place.
[1:47:58]
It comes from a fine place-
[1:48:00]
I'm sure it does
[1:48:00]
... and a place that we can absolutely discuss.
[1:48:02]
I don't question that for one minute.
[1:48:03]
Correct. And I want to make that clear that this comes from people who are
[1:48:07]
concerned about our fire department and the equipment they have and whether or not
[1:48:11]
it meets the needs of the department.
[1:48:13]
I mean, yeah-
[1:48:13]
But this petition is invalid for the reasons you laid out.
[1:48:17]
Right. The other concern that I have, when this was brought to me about,
[1:48:23]
I've got to read my own writing, September 15th, okay, when this was sent to me.
[1:48:29]
And I asked some questions of the finance director about what
[1:48:34]
exactly transpired. There was never a purchase order that was requested or issued.
[1:48:42]
So immediately, my concern as the town's counsel was
[1:48:48]
how are you going to pay the bill? There's no encumbrance.
[1:48:52]
There's no funds that have been encumbered anywhere for this.
[1:48:57]
So,
[1:49:00]
basically, the town has three choices.
[1:49:02]
This goes a little bit beyond the petition, but you brought up the underlying
[1:49:05]
circumstances.
[1:49:06]
Mm-hmm.
[1:49:06]
And I talked to Commissioner Criscuolo about this last week.
[1:49:10]
Basically, the town in this situation has three choices.
[1:49:14]
You don't cancel the contract, and
[1:49:20]
you get notified the apparatus is ready for delivery. We need your $1,251,000.
[1:49:26]
Where's that money coming from?
[1:49:29]
Under the charter and under Connecticut General Statute 7-348,
[1:49:34]
no town official has authority to cut that check, okay?
[1:49:41]
Because there's not been an appropriation of $1,251,000. All right?
[1:49:46]
So in that situation,
[1:49:48]
town's going to get sued.
[1:49:51]
Okay? And I understand the market for,
[1:49:56]
I represent 23 towns, okay? I understand the shortage of this
[1:50:02]
equipment, and I understand the wait list and the wait time.
[1:50:06]
And if I'm here, not as a lawyer, but just as a
[1:50:12]
... regular person who's familiar with the municipal equipment market and the
[1:50:17]
supply chain, I'm thinking, "Oh, we'll be able to sell it," right?
[1:50:21]
If we don't get the money up. But as a lawyer, I can't stand here and say, "Don't
[1:50:26]
worry about 7-348. Don't worry about the charter.
[1:50:29]
If the Board of Finance doesn't come around and recommend the appropriation, and
[1:50:34]
the town meeting doesn't approve it, you'll be able to sell it." Okay?
[1:50:39]
Because first of all, I don't know that you're going to be able to take delivery of
[1:50:41]
it, so how are you going to sell it?
[1:50:44]
Okay? And for all I know, the market changes by the time it gets
[1:50:50]
sold, and they sell it for less and come to you for the difference.
[1:50:55]
I can't speculate about what the outcome's going to be.
[1:50:58]
All I know is what the law says. So scenario number one is not at all attractive to
[1:51:03]
the town because it exposes the town to 1,251,000 that hasn't been appropriated.
[1:51:08]
Mm-hmm.
[1:51:08]
Okay? So doing nothing
[1:51:11]
is not very prudent. Okay? Scenario number two is the Board of Finance recommending
[1:51:17]
the appropriation and the town meeting appropriating the money.
[1:51:21]
I don't have any concern or objection to that. That's not a legal issue.
[1:51:26]
That's a how-you-want-to-spend-your-money issue, right?
[1:51:30]
And then scenario number three is to cancel it to mitigate the exposure. Okay?
[1:51:35]
And that's what was done here. So in terms of...
[1:51:44]
The chief, the fire commission, they all do a great job.
[1:51:48]
I don't question their judgment. I don't know. I'm not privy.
[1:51:53]
I'm not in the meetings where the discussion with the Board of Finance, if there
[1:51:57]
was one, happened about why they're not recommending an appropriation.
[1:52:01]
All I know is they didn't.
[1:52:04]
So the town, in those three scenarios,
[1:52:10]
there's not a fourth scenario where we wait it out, and if we change our
[1:52:15]
mind, we don't have to pay anything.
[1:52:19]
Right. And I believe, and can you tell me if this is correct, did we call the
[1:52:24]
manufacturer and ask the question, "Can we continue to hold this until our town
[1:52:29]
meeting and budget referendum next year?
[1:52:31]
What would be the outcome if we did?" Would that have meant the cancellation fee
[1:52:35]
would've been more? What was the answer to that question?
[1:52:37]
Well, they said absolutely not. They wanted the money by September 30th.
[1:52:40]
They wanted a firm commitment and the money by September 30th.
[1:52:43]
Well, the number was going to go up.
[1:52:44]
The cancellation fee was going to go up. Okay.
[1:52:47]
Right.
[1:52:47]
So the decision from Rich Monaco's perspective, the prudent decision was to cancel
[1:52:52]
the contract, stop the bleeding, and that was the third option that you just laid
[1:52:58]
out.
[1:52:59]
Yeah. Again,
[1:53:04]
doing nothing
[1:53:07]
and hoping that by the time it's ready for delivery, the
[1:53:12]
appropriation has happened,
[1:53:15]
is a big concern to me because the charter and 7-348
[1:53:22]
say that we shouldn't have even gotten this far.
[1:53:24]
Right.
[1:53:25]
Okay? Nobody has authority to obligate the town to pay that money unless
[1:53:31]
it's been appropriated. And then when I found out there was no PO requested and no
[1:53:36]
PO issued,
[1:53:40]
I don't know how it got this far. But the reality of it is, that's not my-- Just
[1:53:45]
like the town meeting has its limitations, I have my limitations.
[1:53:49]
I don't get involved in your business decisions.
[1:53:52]
I get asked for a legal opinion about what's appropriate under the law, not, "Hey,
[1:53:57]
do you think we should have this fire engine or not?" Nobody's asked my opinion,
[1:54:00]
nor should they because I don't have-
[1:54:01]
Yeah
[1:54:01]
... the expertise they do.
[1:54:05]
And we have discussed a number of times about how this happened, and that there was
[1:54:09]
miscommunications. You've acknowledged that these things were not done properly
[1:54:15]
when it happened, and we addressed it and remedied the last situation
[1:54:21]
with an appropriation from the Board of Finance because there was an emergency
[1:54:24]
situation with the breakdown of the ladder truck.
[1:54:26]
That was a lease, right?
[1:54:27]
That was a lease.
[1:54:28]
Yep.
[1:54:28]
You were permitted to sign the lease.
[1:54:30]
So we went through the proper process there to remedy the same situation.
[1:54:35]
And in this case, the Board of Finance did not determine that there was a need for
[1:54:39]
another appropriation here. So that's the answer.
[1:54:43]
There's a disagreement between the fiscal authority of the town and the commission
[1:54:48]
responsible for managing the fire department about whether that's necessary.
[1:54:52]
And to resolve that-
[1:54:53]
It's their disagreement.
[1:54:54]
Right.
[1:54:55]
It's not the Board of Selectmen being able to circumvent the Board of Finance.
[1:55:00]
That's not an option here.
[1:55:01]
That's right. And I think to address the larger issue is
[1:55:05]
the need of the truck. Do we need this engine? And that's a subjective question.
[1:55:10]
And those types of questions should be answered by the town during a referendum
[1:55:15]
process. Understanding, and this is my personal opinion, understanding that the
[1:55:20]
engines will increase in cost most likely, and they may be delayed getting here
[1:55:26]
because of the current market conditions.
[1:55:29]
The subjective question, do we need an engine, I think should be asked and answered
[1:55:35]
by the town during the referendum process.
[1:55:36]
Well, that's an appropriation.
[1:55:41]
Still, the Board of Finance has to make that recommendation in order for it to end
[1:55:45]
up on a ballot.
[1:55:46]
Well, what I'm saying is it would come through the chief's request for a new
[1:55:49]
engine.
[1:55:50]
Yeah.
[1:55:50]
The Board of Finance would say yes to his request.
[1:55:52]
It would go to the town and with the aggregate of the budget request, and so I
[1:55:56]
think that's the proper place to answer this.
[1:55:58]
Yeah, it can be a separate... You can certainly, a lot of towns do that.
[1:56:02]
A lot of towns do it with a lot of capital items, whether it's fields or
[1:56:08]
equipment, a lot of towns do it. Open space money, you make it a separate question.
[1:56:14]
Right. There's no-
[1:56:15]
Because that way, if people want to vote for the budget-
[1:56:17]
There's no appetite for that right now.
[1:56:18]
You know?
[1:56:18]
Right.
[1:56:19]
There's no appetite in town to do that right now.
[1:56:21]
I don't know.
[1:56:22]
Yeah. That's been the decision of the Board of Finance.
[1:56:25]
Yeah.
[1:56:25]
So-
[1:56:25]
It's their call. That's the reality of it.
[1:56:32]
Bill, anything more? Forgive me. I wanted to make sure we had a full discussion on
[1:56:36]
it.
[1:56:36]
Mm-hmm.
[1:56:36]
It's been a hot topic for a long time here.
[1:56:40]
Thank you so much to all of you for-
[1:56:42]
Well, I liked Jeff's approach where he went through the
[1:56:46]
three items and worked our way through that logically in terms of the petition
[1:56:52]
versus the charter, and the respective responsibilities of the Board of Selectmen
[1:56:56]
and the Board of Finance under the charter.
[1:56:59]
Yeah. It's a great reminder.
[1:57:01]
I think it was a good way to explain it.
[1:57:04]
Yeah. Good job, Jeff, as always.
[1:57:06]
Thank you.
[1:57:07]
Thank you, Jeff.
[1:57:08]
Are we good?
[1:57:08]
We're good.
[1:57:09]
Any other questions?
[1:57:11]
No.
[1:57:12]
Yeah.
[1:57:12]
Jeff, we're allowing public comment to this issue now.
[1:57:15]
Do you want me to stay?
[1:57:15]
That'd be great.
[1:57:16]
Okay.
[1:57:16]
That'd be great. Thank you.
[1:57:18]
I just want to go on the record that you're asking me to stay because my dog is
[1:57:23]
home alone.
[1:57:24]
Oh.
[1:57:24]
My wife is, my daughter's got a medical issue, so my wife is in DC with her.
[1:57:28]
I mean, this-
[1:57:29]
So when I get home and my dog's been home alone for 13 hours-
[1:57:34]
Oh, boy
[1:57:34]
... and my house is a mess-
[1:57:36]
Go home
[1:57:36]
... I just want it to be on the record that you're asking me to stay.
[1:57:39]
I think, we'll give you-
[1:57:41]
I'll stay, but-
[1:57:42]
... 10 minutes.
[1:57:43]
In case you need it, Jeff-
[1:57:44]
10 minutes
[1:57:44]
... you can have
[1:57:46]
my dog bag.
[1:57:47]
I think we're past that.
[1:57:49]
Yeah. All right. Let's, yeah.
[1:57:51]
Like everyone always says, "In memory of my dog."
[1:57:56]
Peter Criscuolo, 54, Fields Lane Court.
[1:57:58]
And trust me, I have the utmost respect for counselor.
[1:58:02]
What he says, I believe 1,000%. And if you go back to the meetings, I said, "If
[1:58:07]
anyone could help us with this, get ahold of Jeff Demario." That's on the record.
[1:58:14]
I'm going to direct this partly to what you call the council.
[1:58:16]
Yeah.
[1:58:17]
Is there a way that you could go back to the vendor
[1:58:23]
in, I don't know how much time it would take for, I know we can't do the petition,
[1:58:28]
everything else. Maybe go back to the Board of Finance
[1:58:33]
some way
[1:58:35]
to prolong this maybe 90 or 120 days.
[1:58:40]
Even if they say we paid what? 31,000, $32,000, whatever we paid.
[1:58:45]
Somebody mentioned about a 2% increase per month if we stall it, okay?
[1:58:52]
Is it possible where we can get another 120 days?
[1:58:56]
Let's say it costs us 2% a month, 8%.
[1:59:00]
Let's say 10% is $3,200, not the end of the world, okay?
[1:59:05]
I'm sure we can find that in appropriated funds somewhere.
[1:59:09]
Last week we talked about how much money that we have Coming in over our
[1:59:13]
anticipated budget, $150,000 a month, half a million dollars we got extra back from
[1:59:20]
Board of Ed. That pays for the entire engine just with that on a 12-month basis.
[1:59:25]
But let's go beyond that. First and foremost, why did
[1:59:31]
someone call from the town, the vendor, and cancel if there was no communication
[1:59:37]
from the vendor to us? The vendor, from what I understand, never called the town
[1:59:42]
and said, "Hey, your apparatus is coming August the 27th.
[1:59:48]
Do you still want it? Do you still want to pay for it, or do you want to get
[1:59:50]
penalized?" I don't think anyone called from the vendor, and I may be wrong.
[1:59:56]
I don't know that. That's why I'm asking.
[1:59:57]
I have no idea.
[1:59:59]
I've asked that question at a couple of meetings.
[2:00:01]
You can go back on the tapes, and you'll check it. I can't get an answer.
[2:00:06]
I understand that September, our finance director poked the bear and said, "We
[2:00:12]
can't take it," and that's it. Opened this up for the penalty.
[2:00:17]
Took us off the vendors list. It's a 42 to 48-month wait. Okay?
[2:00:24]
And I want to stand corrected, last week, the finance director asked me if we can
[2:00:29]
get four pieces of apparatus out all at once. I was not sure, so I checked.
[2:00:33]
Yes, we can. If we have to get them out, we can get out four because we'll take one
[2:00:38]
out of Northeast with a minimum of three volunteers on the engine, the Ridge, three
[2:00:44]
on the engine. We'll have three at headquarters, and we'll have three at Mountain
[2:00:48]
Lakes. So that would work. And if it was really bad, we could get other volunteers
[2:00:53]
to come in, another group of three, and take out a fifth engine.
[2:00:57]
So it is possible, okay? We do have a lot of breakdown.
[2:01:01]
Even with the engines that are 12, eight years old, we still get breakdowns with
[2:01:06]
those. We had them just last week with our ladder.
[2:01:09]
Seven weeks old, it was tied up for a month. A month, okay?
[2:01:13]
We have apparatus now that is out of shelf time.
[2:01:17]
NFPA says 20 years, five years for backup. They're responsible. They run.
[2:01:23]
If they're at Selectmen as a volunteer, he said he's been on them, they run.
[2:01:27]
Are they dependable? We have brand new ones that aren't dependable, that they break
[2:01:32]
down. Now you have something that's already out of date.
[2:01:35]
I don't know if our insurance even covers that, that they're out of date, and we're
[2:01:38]
still using them. I don't even know if that works, okay?
[2:01:41]
So between
[2:01:44]
you and I, listen, utmost respect for you. If anybody can do it, it's you.
[2:01:49]
Trust me. If we can get this prolonged with the vendor,
[2:01:55]
give us 120 days, maybe we could get a special meeting somehow.
[2:01:59]
Some way, somehow, through the Board of Finance, we can get some kind of a meeting
[2:02:03]
to open this back up again.
[2:02:06]
Push comes to shove, I'm sure that after the first of the year, we'll be able to
[2:02:11]
put this in a budget for a capital for emergency spending.
[2:02:16]
We did an emergency spending because the motor blew on truck one.
[2:02:21]
On truck two rather, it blew, and we had to get an emergency spend, and we got the
[2:02:24]
Quint. Now we have two engines right now that are out of shelf life,
[2:02:30]
two already. We have a third one that's going to come up very shortly, okay?
[2:02:36]
If we have to postpone this, and we lose this, and we order it next
[2:02:41]
year, we have a four-year wait.
[2:02:45]
70% of our fleet's out of time. We're out of time.
[2:02:48]
We're out of shelf life because of the four-year wait.
[2:02:51]
It's not like, and I use a police cruiser-
[2:02:53]
Pete, I'm so sorry to interrupt. Remember, there's a five-minute limit here.
[2:02:56]
Thank you.
[2:02:57]
Okay. Keep going.
[2:02:58]
The answer to your question-
[2:03:00]
It's not five minutes
[2:03:00]
... is in an attorney-client relationship, I'm an attorney.
[2:03:05]
So if my client wants me to contact, the town wants me to contact the vendor
[2:03:10]
and see what they'd be willing to do by way of holding off, I'll certainly
[2:03:16]
do it. But somebody's got to direct me to do that.
[2:03:19]
I don't have any contact info for the vendor.
[2:03:22]
I haven't had any communications with the vendor.
[2:03:24]
I've asked that question from the first meeting I stood up here, and I said to
[2:03:29]
everyone up here at both meetings, "Give it to Jeff Donofrio."
[2:03:33]
But Pete, to answer, stay.
[2:03:38]
I believe I asked the question a moment ago.
[2:03:41]
The manufacturer was contacted, and we asked what the options were, and the
[2:03:46]
response was, "You got to pay me by the end of the month, and if you don't, the
[2:03:50]
cancellation fee continues to tick."
[2:03:52]
They wanted a 100% commitment from the town that it will accept and pay for the
[2:03:58]
truck once it's produced.
[2:04:01]
And if we ask, can we continue to hold it and
[2:04:07]
pay you an interest fee or a ticking fee or something, and the response was it'll
[2:04:12]
keep getting-
[2:04:12]
Pete, I'm telling you, they said we needed to say by September 30th.
[2:04:15]
They wanted a
[2:04:17]
100% commitment by September 30th that we would take-
[2:04:23]
Originally, it was said that we would have to pay a percentage of interest for
[2:04:27]
every month after that. It wasn't in full until after we poked the bear again.
[2:04:33]
So poking the bear caused this whole problem.
[2:04:36]
The point I make it also, if we continue to hold this off, if council can hold this
[2:04:41]
off by direction of whatever board, finance or selectmen, if we could hold this
[2:04:47]
off for a while, maybe we could get this through an emergency grant like we did
[2:04:53]
with the ladder, based on the fact that we don't have equipment that's certified by
[2:04:58]
NFPA.
[2:05:00]
Pete, so I'll try to address it. Listen, to be clear, your dedication to the
[2:05:05]
department is unquestioned. I think what we're saying up here, what the Board of
[2:05:09]
Finance is saying, is the need for this engine right now, that's a subjective
[2:05:14]
question. They did not believe there's a need for this engine, so they did not
[2:05:18]
appropriate the money. Therefore,
[2:05:21]
there's no town meeting to call to appropriate additional funds.
[2:05:24]
I understand that. If we get an extension, and we could do it under an emergency
[2:05:28]
purchase, and you say the Board of Finance didn't think that there's an immediate
[2:05:33]
need. How could they say there's not an immediate need
[2:05:38]
if we have vehicles, apparatus, that's four, five, and six years old that is out
[2:05:44]
of commission for a month at a time because of the work? There's problems.
[2:05:51]
There's a new system with diesels. We have to get it.
[2:05:57]
Trust me, it's great for the environmental, it's bogging down our equipment, okay?
[2:06:02]
Plus the use that we're constantly running.
[2:06:05]
Again, we have a ladder truck that at this juncture, that ladder truck should have
[2:06:09]
30 to 32,000 miles on it. Same truck, we're at 60,000 miles.
[2:06:15]
We've doubled the use because we're running a piece of apparatus we shouldn't be,
[2:06:20]
but it's covering another piece of apparatus.
[2:06:23]
Okay, so-
[2:06:25]
So Chief will put it in his budget in January.
[2:06:27]
The Board of Finance will decide whether or not it's an appropriate expenditure of
[2:06:31]
capital funds.
[2:06:32]
Exactly. But if we could hold this off till January, we are in October.
[2:06:37]
If we could hold this off-
[2:06:38]
But we can't.
[2:06:42]
We can't.
[2:06:42]
January doesn't help us because-
[2:06:44]
I would-
[2:06:45]
... the money won't be available till after the beginning of the next business.
[2:06:48]
But originally, the vendor-
[2:06:49]
That's July
[2:06:50]
... originally, the vendor never called us. We called the vendor. Why?
[2:06:54]
I don't know yet. I still don't know why we called the vendor.
[2:06:56]
Because we didn't have a purchase order.
[2:06:57]
I understand that, but we didn't have a purchase order for the Quint.
[2:07:02]
Right.
[2:07:02]
But we didn't call the vendor.
[2:07:05]
We called the vendor. No one seems to know why the finance director called the
[2:07:10]
vendor. He called the vendor on his own.
[2:07:12]
And then we-
[2:07:13]
Well, that's-
[2:07:13]
Once you opened up that can of worms-
[2:07:15]
That's not accurate
[2:07:15]
... this is what happened. So it's too late. I mean, it's already done.
[2:07:18]
But Pete, that's not an accurate statement.
[2:07:20]
The finance director called the vendor because we didn't have the appropriation
[2:07:24]
necessary for the engine.
[2:07:26]
Well, he could've waited to find out if we could've got it by the first of the year
[2:07:30]
instead of calling now.
[2:07:31]
I think that was asked and answered of the manufacturer.
[2:07:33]
And they said you need a firm commitment for a million two, and the board declined.
[2:07:36]
Only after he called them. Had he not called them first, they never would've called
[2:07:41]
us.
[2:07:42]
Then they would've delivered the truck and we didn't have the money.
[2:07:44]
But we had no-
[2:07:45]
Now hold on a second. We're past the five minutes.
[2:07:47]
We could've waited till August the 27th.
[2:07:50]
Pete, just listen. I-
[2:07:52]
Go on
[2:07:52]
... the decision has been made by the Board of Finance not to appropriate funds for
[2:07:56]
this period.
[2:07:56]
And you know that it's another $271,000 to buy the same engine tomorrow.
[2:08:01]
I-
[2:08:01]
If we order it tomorrow for an emergency purchase, it's $271,000 more.
[2:08:06]
All right. So those numbers, we have no idea how much.
[2:08:09]
At all. We already told you.
[2:08:12]
When we order it, we will get a quote, and there'll be a purchase order issued if
[2:08:16]
it's approved by the town meeting Sally Breemy, please. Yes, Pete. Thank you.
[2:08:21]
Yeah, thank you. Thank you, Jeff.
[2:08:22]
Sally Breemy, five Blossom Drive. Mr. Criscuolo spoke for 12 minutes. I timed him.
[2:08:29]
You don't want me taking-
[2:08:30]
No, I want 12 minutes.
[2:08:32]
Yeah. We're trying.
[2:08:36]
I wasn't going to get involved in this, but I just can't help myself, I'm telling
[2:08:40]
you. I just can't.
[2:08:45]
The circulator came to my house with this petition, and I signed it
[2:08:51]
because I believe in the town meeting form of government.
[2:08:54]
Third Selectman Cohen wrote in a column about six months ago, he wrote
[2:09:00]
very eloquently, how lucky we are to live in a municipality with a town meeting
[2:09:05]
form of government where the people make all the big decisions.
[2:09:10]
Those were his exact words. So I told her, the circulator
[2:09:16]
of this current petition now before this board, 7-1 petition, I will sign it
[2:09:21]
because I believe in the town meeting form of government.
[2:09:24]
But unlike the quint, which I supported, I supported the need for the quint.
[2:09:30]
I didn't support how it was purchased because of 7-348 and the town charter.
[2:09:37]
We should have had a town meeting for that.
[2:09:39]
But,
[2:09:41]
I supported the quint because we needed another ladder truck. We only had one.
[2:09:45]
We needed another ladder truck. This is an engine.
[2:09:49]
A lot of people don't know the difference between a truck and an engine. I do.
[2:09:52]
This is an engine.
[2:09:54]
And I told her, "I'll sign your petition.
[2:09:56]
I believe in the town meeting form of government, but if there's a town meeting,
[2:10:00]
I'm going to
[2:10:02]
speak against the purchase." But here's what I want to tell you.
[2:10:07]
I don't decide whether I want a town meeting based on whether I'm in favor of
[2:10:12]
what's on the agenda or not. I'm always going to support a town meeting because
[2:10:17]
that's what our form of government is like.
[2:10:20]
And until we have charter revision and we abandon the town meeting form of
[2:10:25]
government, I am always going to vote for a town meeting,
[2:10:30]
whether I am in favor of the end result of that meeting or not.
[2:10:38]
One thing I learned in my 12 years is sometimes the rules are bent a little bit if
[2:10:43]
you don't like what's going to be coming up.
[2:10:45]
And sometimes the rules are followed to a T if you want the result.
[2:10:50]
I don't bend the rules, I follow the rules, or I want to follow the rules all the
[2:10:55]
time. So let's talk about 7-1. This is the third
[2:11:00]
petition that I am familiar with. The first one that I am very familiar with was in
[2:11:06]
2009. A 7-1 came before the Board of Selectmen on May 4th,
[2:11:12]
2009. Mr. Freda was the third selectman.
[2:11:16]
That was a petition by a town employee, and the question was,
[2:11:22]
shall the position of engineer two in the Department of Public Works be retained or
[2:11:28]
restored to the fiscal year budget?
[2:11:31]
It was to restore one position worth maybe $50,000 back then in salary, who knows?
[2:11:39]
The Board of Selectmen, again, Mike Freda was the third selectman at the time to
[2:11:44]
vote. Board of Selectmen voted to reject the petition. Hold on a second.
[2:11:53]
It was a two to one vote. Mr. Freda voted in favor of calling the town meeting.
[2:11:57]
He was a good third selectman. And here's what he said. Mr.
[2:12:01]
Freda cited case law that he had studied, Morris versus Cogdin,
[2:12:08]
where the Supreme Court required the Board of Selectmen to call a town meeting.
[2:12:13]
I wonder who gave him the cite of Morris versus Cogdin.
[2:12:17]
You did.
[2:12:18]
I did not. I was not involved in town government at that time.
[2:12:22]
But someone gave him that cite.
[2:12:24]
Sorry.
[2:12:25]
And it has some companion cases, like Lyon versus Rice, which said,
[2:12:31]
and I quote, "As long as the requested hearing is for any legitimate and proper
[2:12:36]
purpose, the selectmen must warn the meeting and have no discretion to refuse."
[2:12:42]
So what happened in 2009 when despite Mr.
[2:12:47]
Freda's vote to hold the town meeting, the Board of Selectmen, the two Democrats,
[2:12:52]
the first and second selectmen, voted no town meeting. What happened?
[2:12:57]
It went to court on a writ of mandamus, and the town tried to get rid of that.
[2:13:03]
A writ of mandamus is something that's filed to compel a public entity or public
[2:13:08]
officials to do something, which was to hold the town meeting.
[2:13:11]
That was what the writ of mandamus was.
[2:13:13]
The town fought that, and the town lost.
[2:13:19]
A very esteemed Judge Berdon
[2:13:24]
said he quoted Mr. Freda's case. He quoted in his decision,
[2:13:30]
Morris v. Cogdin, which was the exact case Mr.
[2:13:33]
Freda quoted and is referenced in the minutes where he supported the town meeting.
[2:13:40]
And so the judge said, here, 20 people
[2:13:47]
have provided for a purpose. Is it for a legitimate, proper purpose?
[2:13:52]
And he said, and I quote, this is the judge, "It is obvious that the appointment of
[2:13:57]
an engineer two is such a purpose." I think
[2:14:06]
a counsel for the town might say, "That's for the board of finance to
[2:14:11]
decide." Well, the board of finance took it out of the budget, and this judge said
[2:14:17]
that a town meeting could decide whether to put it back in.
[2:14:22]
That's what happened. It's right here.
[2:14:24]
Have you read Roberts Burns versus Town of North Haven in your-
[2:14:29]
Please continue.
[2:14:30]
No.
[2:14:32]
I don't know how you could hear a 7-1 petition without reading this case, because
[2:14:37]
it happened while Mr. Freda was on the board.
[2:14:42]
So I think that if
[2:14:46]
restoring a position that the board of finance took out of the budget, if a
[2:14:52]
judge says restoring it is a legitimate legislative purpose, and so
[2:14:57]
the Board of Selectmen should have granted that town meeting, certainly the
[2:15:03]
purchase of a $1.2 million fire engine is within the purview
[2:15:09]
of a legitimate legislative purpose.
[2:15:12]
But town counsel says, number one, says the
[2:15:20]
first item in the petition, the town needing to adopt a resolution prohibiting
[2:15:25]
funds of 31,000 to cancel the contract. Well, we all know what that means.
[2:15:31]
That means that the petitioner wants the contract to stay in force.
[2:15:36]
That is a legitimate legislative purpose.
[2:15:39]
That's why I signed the petition, even though I do not support the purchase of this
[2:15:44]
engine. I believe Mr. Monaco described it correctly.
[2:15:50]
I don't always agree with him, but I agreed when he said,
[2:15:54]
we can't buy a lot of fire apparatus at the same time.
[2:15:58]
We have to
[2:16:00]
spread them out. And in 2019, we had a town meeting,
[2:16:05]
we bought an engine. 2020, we bought ladder one.
[2:16:10]
A couple of years ago, we took delivery of two more new engines.
[2:16:14]
Now we bought a new quint. So I believe Mr.
[2:16:18]
Monaco actually convinced me that we have to stagger our purchases of fire
[2:16:23]
apparatus. We have bought a lot of them in the past six years.
[2:16:27]
You don't want them all reaching an old age at the same time.
[2:16:31]
So that's the only reason why I don't support this engine, but I did support the,
[2:16:38]
I'm one person. There's a lot of people in town.
[2:16:40]
I will always support a town meeting and the wisdom of the
[2:16:46]
group.
[2:16:48]
So I guess what I'm really trying to say is
[2:16:53]
maybe it wasn't worded exactly right, but that first item in the petition is really
[2:16:59]
saying, let's keep that engine contract going.
[2:17:04]
And that to me, if restoring a $50,000 engineer
[2:17:10]
position is a legitimate legislative purpose, then restoring a $1.2 million
[2:17:16]
purchase of a fire engine is also a legitimate legislative purpose.
[2:17:22]
And for that reason, this petition should be granted.
[2:17:28]
I also wanna say that the contingency that
[2:17:34]
was used, the 31 came from the contingency.
[2:17:38]
The Board of Finance did not vote to use the contingency until after this
[2:17:44]
petition was filed.
[2:17:47]
I found that very interesting.
[2:17:50]
It was done after the fact to
[2:17:56]
reduce the effectiveness of this petition.
[2:18:00]
And everyone on the Board of Finance knew that the petition had been filed.
[2:18:06]
The contingency fund was authorized by the Board of Finance after the fact.
[2:18:12]
So that's my position. I think that Burns versus
[2:18:19]
the Town of North Haven is very clear that
[2:18:24]
the 7-1 should be
[2:18:27]
granted as,
[2:18:30]
again, as he says here, let me get the exact court language.
[2:18:35]
Here it is. "As long as the requested hearing is for any legitimate and proper
[2:18:40]
purpose, the selectmen must," which was highlighted, "warn the meeting and have no
[2:18:46]
discretion to refuse." I support our town meeting form of government, and that's
[2:18:51]
why I signed the petition. And
[2:18:56]
also, there was a 7-1 in 2017. I was the only member of the Board of
[2:19:02]
Selectmen that voted to hold the town meeting, and now we have this petition.
[2:19:06]
So in 2009, Third Selectman Freda fought hard for the town
[2:19:12]
meeting. In 2017, Third Selectman Buemi fought even harder
[2:19:19]
for the town meeting. Both times, those third selectmen lost.
[2:19:24]
I paid a price. I had my house vandalized because of that.
[2:19:28]
The turf field was the issue. The chrome rubber turf field was the issue, but I
[2:19:34]
didn't care about vandalism. I didn't care about threats.
[2:19:38]
I believed in the town meeting form of government, just as Mr.
[2:19:41]
Freda, as Third Selectman in 2009, believed in the town meeting form of government.
[2:19:47]
And that's all I'd like to say. Thank you.
[2:19:51]
Okay.
[2:19:51]
Just real quick, three things.
[2:19:53]
Okay.
[2:19:54]
First of all, Morris versus Cogden, that involved the town of Preston, which had no
[2:19:59]
charter.
[2:20:01]
No charter, unlike North Haven. Okay?
[2:20:06]
The whole premise here is the town meeting is granted the authority by the charter.
[2:20:12]
Notice how Attorney Buemi didn't tell you where in the charter the town meeting
[2:20:17]
gets any of the authority that she thinks they have.
[2:20:20]
And I also noticed she didn't bring up item number three. Okay?
[2:20:25]
Item number three,
[2:20:28]
the notion that the town meeting can bond without Board of Finance
[2:20:34]
approval, 1,250,000 is outrageous. Okay? Outrageous.
[2:20:40]
So Morris versus Cogden, Town of Preston, unlike North Haven, no charter.
[2:20:45]
Secondly, we do have a charter, and you didn't hear any citation to where the town
[2:20:51]
meeting supposedly gets the authority to do the things that are requested by the
[2:20:55]
petition because it doesn't have the authority. Okay?
[2:20:59]
And the last comment that I would make is,
[2:21:06]
I'm not opposed. The idea about bending rules, I take great
[2:21:12]
exception to that. Okay? That's outrageous to me.
[2:21:15]
I've been doing work for the town of North Haven since 1991, okay?
[2:21:19]
I've donated personal funds to the fire department. Okay?
[2:21:24]
The idea that I'm opposed to this and that somehow taints my opinion, you know
[2:21:30]
what? I shouldn't have even stayed because it's ridiculous. Honestly.
[2:21:34]
I don't appreciate it one bit. I'm very surprised that somebody who served on the
[2:21:39]
Board of Finance-
[2:21:40]
Jeff
[2:21:40]
... and the Board of Selectmen would sign a petition calling for the town meeting
[2:21:43]
to bond funds knowing full well they have no authority under the charter to do
[2:21:47]
that.
[2:21:48]
Jeff, you have our unanimous support.
[2:21:50]
Yeah. So if you want-
[2:21:50]
And you can go home
[2:21:51]
... if you wanna have the town meeting, have the town meeting.
[2:21:53]
But if I'm asked for an opinion-
[2:21:54]
We're gonna-
[2:21:55]
... about the legality of it-
[2:21:56]
Yep
[2:21:56]
... my opinion will be that any outcome from that town meeting is illegal and not
[2:22:00]
enforceable.
[2:22:01]
We're gonna end the conversation here. Jeff, you have our unanimous support.
[2:22:05]
It sounds like I'm-
[2:22:05]
I'm not. It's not about me. It's about the petition.
[2:22:07]
No, but we're talking about your assistance and support of this town.
[2:22:11]
No, I appreciate it.
[2:22:12]
You gave us an opinion, and we appreciate it, and you should go home and take care
[2:22:16]
of your dog.
[2:22:16]
That's what I'm gonna do.
[2:22:17]
Thank you.
[2:22:19]
Counsel.
[2:22:20]
Thank you.
[2:22:20]
You have my 100%.
[2:22:23]
All right. Let's-
[2:22:23]
I only addressed the first issue because that was the only one that I thought was
[2:22:28]
appropriate. I agree with town attorney that two and three are not appropriate, but
[2:22:34]
one, I thought was.
[2:22:35]
Okay. Sally, cherry-picking the petition, I think that doesn't win the day here.
[2:22:40]
So we're done with this conversation.
[2:22:41]
All you need is one legitimate reason for the petition to be valid.
[2:22:43]
We're done with this conversation. Does anyone else have anything?
[2:22:45]
I think we've exhausted this conversation.
[2:22:47]
I agree with you. Let's move on.
[2:22:49]
It's not about the petition.
[2:22:51]
We have to move on to our agenda.
[2:22:52]
It's not about this.
[2:22:53]
I understand. There's time for public comment-
[2:22:55]
It's not about this
[2:22:55]
... there's public comment later. Okay.
[2:22:58]
Okay. So we're gonna move forward.
[2:23:00]
Mary.
[2:23:01]
Yeah.
[2:23:01]
Can I talk about public comment?
[2:23:02]
You know where.
[2:23:03]
If you want to make a comment.
[2:23:06]
Mary, we're trying to-- Thank you, Mary.
[2:23:08]
I know this is a-
[2:23:09]
This has been 10 months of this discussion.
[2:23:13]
We need to move on here.
[2:23:15]
I just had some clarification because I've been trying to understand this.
[2:23:20]
Mary White, Summer Lane. So it's about getting on the Board of Finance's agenda.
[2:23:25]
The agenda's done by the Board of Finance's chairman, okay?
[2:23:30]
How do you get on the Board of Finance's agenda?
[2:23:32]
The item is put in the department head's budget at the workshop.
[2:23:37]
The budget goes to the Board of Finance.
[2:23:40]
The Board of Finance decides whether or not that item stays in the budget, yes or
[2:23:46]
no. Also, what we heard tonight is there could be a presentation
[2:23:52]
or an event that the Board of Finance and the finance director see,
[2:23:58]
and they determine that the use of the contingency fund needs to happen,
[2:24:04]
and then therefore, the Board of Finance chairman puts it on the
[2:24:09]
agenda as a form of a resolution, and then the resolution goes to the Board of
[2:24:15]
Selectmen,
[2:24:17]
and then it gets called for a town meeting. I think I got it. Is that right?
[2:24:23]
Sounds right.
[2:24:24]
Yeah.
[2:24:24]
Sounds right.
[2:24:25]
That's okay. Yeah.
[2:24:26]
Okay, because an event could be a truck blowing up or something like that.
[2:24:29]
We've got to move on.
[2:24:29]
I think I got it.
[2:24:30]
Okay, we've got to move on to finish this business here, okay?
[2:24:33]
Thank you, Mary.
[2:24:34]
Let's go back to the bonding.
[2:24:34]
Yeah, let's quickly do the bonding here.
[2:24:37]
So the seven million for Sackett Point was seconded-
[2:24:40]
Seconded.
[2:24:41]
They didn't vote on the petition.
[2:24:43]
Oh.
[2:24:45]
Thank you, Sally.
[2:24:46]
Thanks. Okay, so-
[2:24:47]
All right. We need to vote on the petition
[2:24:47]
... I would like to make a motion to reject the petition for a special town
[2:24:52]
meeting. Do I have a motion, is there a second?
[2:24:55]
I'll second.
[2:24:56]
Any other discussion?
[2:24:58]
Hearing none, all those in favor?
[2:24:59]
Aye.
[2:25:00]
Aye.
[2:25:00]
Aye.
[2:25:00]
Let's move on. Okay. All right, so the old number seven, we finished, right?
[2:25:06]
We had a second, and we had a-
[2:25:07]
Yeah.
[2:25:07]
Yes, is that right, though?
[2:25:08]
Yes.
[2:25:08]
Okay. Great.
[2:25:09]
So we're going to old number eight.
[2:25:10]
Old number eight. Okay, terrific.
[2:25:13]
Consider-- I'm sorry, Bill, would you like to-
[2:25:16]
Sure.
[2:25:17]
Okay.
[2:25:17]
Give you a break.
[2:25:22]
Next item on the agenda is consider and act upon a resolution recommending a $2
[2:25:27]
million appropriation in bond authorization for pedestrian and safety
[2:25:33]
improvements on Church Street. The project shall consist of upgrades to roadway and
[2:25:38]
sidewalk conditions, crosswalks, traffic controls, lighting,
[2:25:44]
signage, handicap access, and other related improvements and repairs.
[2:25:51]
Resolved that the Board of Selectmen recommends that the Town of North Haven
[2:25:56]
appropriate $2 million for pedestrian and safety improvements on Church Street.
[2:26:01]
The project shall consist of upgrades to roadway and sidewalk conditions,
[2:26:07]
crosswalks, traffic controls, lighting, signage, handicap
[2:26:12]
access, and other related improvements and repairs.
[2:26:16]
The appropriation may be spent for design, construction, demolition, and removal
[2:26:22]
costs, materials, installation, easements, equipment, engineering fees,
[2:26:28]
other consultant's fees, legal fees, net temporary interest and other financing
[2:26:33]
costs, and other expenses related to the project, and that the town issue bonds or
[2:26:41]
notes and temporary notes in an amount not to exceed $2 million to finance
[2:26:47]
the appropriation. The total amount of bonds issued shall be reduced by the amounts
[2:26:52]
of grants or other funds received and not separately appropriated
[2:26:58]
for the project. So I'll make a motion for that resolution.
[2:27:02]
I'll second.
[2:27:03]
All right, motion, second. Any other discussion?
[2:27:07]
Hearing none. All those in favor?
[2:27:08]
Aye.
[2:27:08]
Aye.
[2:27:09]
Next.
[2:27:10]
Okay, number nine, consider an act upon a resolution recommending a $3 million
[2:27:13]
appropriation and bond authorization for construction of drainage improvements on
[2:27:18]
Poole Road. The project shall consist of improvements too, including replacements
[2:27:22]
of storm trains, sewer pipes, curbs, and runoff pavement repairs, and other related
[2:27:26]
improvements and repairs. Resolve that the Board of Selectmen recommends that the
[2:27:30]
Town of North Haven appropriate $3 million for construction of drainage
[2:27:33]
improvements on Poole Road. The project shall consist of the improvements too,
[2:27:37]
including replacements of storm drains, sewer pipes, curbs, and runoff, pavement
[2:27:41]
repairs, and other related improvements and repairs.
[2:27:44]
The appropriation may be spent for design, construction, demolition, removal costs,
[2:27:47]
materials, installation, easements, equipment, engineering fees, other consultants'
[2:27:51]
fees, legal fees, net temporary interest and other financing costs, and other
[2:27:55]
expenses related to the project. And that the town issue bonds or notes and
[2:27:59]
temporary notes in the amount not to exceed three million to finance the
[2:28:02]
appropriation. The total amount of bonds issued shall be reduced by the amount of
[2:28:05]
grants or other funds received and not separately appropriated for the project.
[2:28:12]
Okay. Is there a motion?
[2:28:13]
There's-
[2:28:15]
Motion on the floor. Is there a second?
[2:28:16]
I'll second that motion.
[2:28:18]
All right, we have a motion and a second. Any other discussion?
[2:28:21]
Hearing none, all those in favor?
[2:28:23]
Aye.
[2:28:23]
Aye.
[2:28:23]
Next.
[2:28:25]
Next is consider an act upon a resolution recommending a $7 million appropriation
[2:28:31]
bond authorization for the milling and paving of town roadways and drainage
[2:28:35]
improvements. The project shall consist of milling and removal of waste materials,
[2:28:40]
paving and materials, installation of manholes and drainage risers, traffic
[2:28:45]
protection, including signage and police and flag personnel, and other
[2:28:50]
related improvements and repairs.
[2:28:57]
Resolve that the Board of Selectmen recommends that the Town of North Haven
[2:29:00]
appropriate $7 million for the milling and paving of town roadways and drainage
[2:29:06]
improvements. The project shall consist of milling and removal of waste materials,
[2:29:11]
paving and materials, installation of manholes and drainage risers, traffic
[2:29:17]
protection, including signage and police and flag personnel, and other related
[2:29:22]
improvement and repairs. The appropriation may be spent for design, demolition,
[2:29:28]
and construction costs, equipment, furnishings, materials, site
[2:29:34]
improvements, survey costs, architectural fees, engineering fees,
[2:29:39]
other consultants' fees, legal fees, net temporary interest and other financing
[2:29:45]
costs, and other expenses related to the project, and that the town issue bonds or
[2:29:50]
notes and temporary notes in an amount not to exceed $7 million to finance the
[2:29:56]
appropriation. The total amount of bonds issued shall be reduced by the amount of
[2:30:01]
grants or other funds received and not separately appropriated for the project.
[2:30:07]
So I'll make a motion for that resolution.
[2:30:09]
I'll second.
[2:30:10]
All right. A motion, second. Any other discussion?
[2:30:13]
So this is the one bond that is on our books.
[2:30:16]
On our books.
[2:30:16]
Yep.
[2:30:17]
Yes.
[2:30:17]
Got it.
[2:30:17]
For the roads.
[2:30:18]
All those in favor?
[2:30:19]
Aye.
[2:30:20]
Aye.
[2:30:20]
Thank you. Next.
[2:30:22]
Consider an act upon a resolution recommending $800,000 appropriation of bond
[2:30:26]
authorization for the Connectivity Project.
[2:30:28]
The project shall consist of the installation, repair of improvements to sidewalks,
[2:30:32]
roads, and other infrastructure in order to make conditions safer and more
[2:30:34]
accommodating for pedestrians and bicyclists, improve safety and other related
[2:30:39]
improvements and repairs. Resolve that the Board of Selectmen recommends that the
[2:30:43]
Town of North Haven appropriate $800,000 for the Connectivity Project.
[2:30:46]
The project shall consist of the installation, repair of improvements to sidewalks,
[2:30:50]
roads, and other infrastructure in order to make conditions safer and more
[2:30:53]
accommodating for pedestrians and bicyclists, improve safety and other related
[2:30:57]
improvements and repairs. The appropriation may be spent for design, construction,
[2:31:02]
demolition, and removal costs, materials, construction, installation, easements,
[2:31:05]
equipment, engineering fees, other consultants' fees, legal fees, net temporary
[2:31:09]
interest and other financing costs, and other expenses related to the project, and
[2:31:13]
that the town issue bonds or notes and temporary notes in amount not to exceed
[2:31:16]
$800,000 to finance the appropriation.
[2:31:20]
The total amount of bonds issued shall be reduced by the amount of grants or other
[2:31:23]
funds received and not separately appropriated for the project.
[2:31:28]
So let's make a motion there.
[2:31:31]
I will second that motion.
[2:31:32]
All right, motion, second. Any other discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor?
[2:31:38]
Aye.
[2:31:38]
Aye.
[2:31:39]
Okay, so this is the omnibus resolution
[2:31:45]
for all of the things that we will be discussing and voting on at the next town
[2:31:49]
meeting scheduled for October 20th.
[2:31:52]
Yes.
[2:31:53]
Yeah?
[2:31:53]
That's it, yes.
[2:31:54]
That is.
[2:31:54]
Bill, go for it.
[2:31:55]
Thank you.
[2:31:57]
Consider an act upon a resolution calling for the annual town meeting to be held
[2:32:02]
Tuesday, October 20th, 2026, at 6:30 PM in the
[2:32:08]
auditorium of the North Haven High School, 221 Elm Street in North Haven,
[2:32:13]
Connecticut, to consider, discuss, and act upon the aforesaid resolutions.
[2:32:19]
Resolve that the annual town meeting be held Tuesday, October 20th, 2026,
[2:32:25]
at 6:30 PM in the auditorium of the North Haven High School, 221
[2:32:31]
Elm Street in North Haven, Connecticut, to act upon the following resolutions in
[2:32:37]
accordance with the recommendation of the Board of Finance concerning the
[2:32:41]
adjustment of appropriations, certain line items among the various departments in
[2:32:47]
the fiscal year 2025 to 2026 budget, transferring
[2:32:52]
amounts over $20,000 in the total sum of
[2:32:56]
$994,382.29.
[2:33:04]
To consider and vote upon whether to adopt Article 13,
[2:33:10]
exemptions for veterans with total service-connected disability and surviving
[2:33:15]
spouses of residents killed in action of the taxation ordinance in
[2:33:21]
Chapter 184 of the ordinances of the Town of North Haven.
[2:33:26]
In item number C, to consider and vote upon the above recommendations concerning
[2:33:31]
the aforesaid appropriations and bond authorizations, and that the notice for the
[2:33:37]
annual town meeting presented at this meeting be approved and signed.
[2:33:42]
I'll make a resolution for those items.
[2:33:46]
All right.
[2:33:47]
I'll second.
[2:33:48]
Second?
[2:33:48]
Yep.
[2:33:49]
Okay. Motion and a second. Any other discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor?
[2:33:54]
Aye.
[2:33:54]
Aye. Thank you.
[2:33:56]
Aye. Sorry.
[2:33:57]
Okay. Bond releases.
[2:33:58]
Bond releases, individually.
[2:34:01]
Yes.
[2:34:02]
Number 13, bond releases and reductions.
[2:34:04]
Bond number P24-10, Edible Arrangements, 101 Washington Avenue.
[2:34:09]
Amount of original bond, $3,000. Current balance of bond, $3,000.
[2:34:12]
Release the entire bond balance of $3,000 with the recommendation of Planning and
[2:34:16]
Zoning Commission.
[2:34:19]
Make a motion to release bond number P24-10.
[2:34:24]
Is there a second?
[2:34:26]
I'll second.
[2:34:26]
Okay. Motion, second. Any other discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor? Aye.
[2:34:32]
Aye.
[2:34:33]
Aye.
[2:34:34]
I'll continue. Bond number P14-26, Central Plan Construction Company, Half Mile and
[2:34:39]
Benedict Drive. Amount of original bond, $3,730,000.
[2:34:44]
Current balance of bond, $3,730,000.
[2:34:49]
Release the entire bond balance of $3,730,000 with the recommendation of the
[2:34:53]
Planning and Zoning Commission. Make a motion to release bond number P14-26.
[2:35:01]
I'll second that motion.
[2:35:03]
Okay, motion, second. Any other discussion? Hearing none.
[2:35:06]
A little bit higher than normal amount in terms of a $3 million bond.
[2:35:11]
All the backups in there, I think it's all right.
[2:35:12]
That's what I was just looking at.
[2:35:13]
Okay. All those in favor?
[2:35:16]
Aye.
[2:35:16]
Aye.
[2:35:16]
Okay. David?
[2:35:18]
All right. Property tax refunds. We'll do this in one go.
[2:35:22]
We have a list of property tax refunds in here,
[2:35:26]
very immaterial dollars here across the board.
[2:35:30]
I'll make a motion to accept all property tax refunds.
[2:35:34]
Okay. Is there a second?
[2:35:36]
Don't see anything that I have an issue with.
[2:35:38]
I'll second those property tax refunds.
[2:35:41]
All right. Motion, second. Any other discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor?
[2:35:47]
Aye.
[2:35:48]
Aye.
[2:35:48]
Thank you. Item 15, the next regular scheduled meeting of this Board of Selectmen
[2:35:52]
is Thursday, November 5th, at 6:30 here in the upstairs conference room at the
[2:35:57]
Memorial Town Hall.
[2:36:00]
Now we're up for the point of other public comment. Peter?
[2:36:09]
Peter Criscuolo, 54 Fieldstone Court.
[2:36:12]
Mike, I know you're leaving in January, and sadly missed, and I know all these
[2:36:18]
years you were gracious enough
[2:36:22]
and unselfish to put yourself in economic development director's role for no pay.
[2:36:28]
Nothing. Zero. Okay? I would like, you have a couple more months to think
[2:36:34]
about it, if you would stay on after the first of the year as head of economic
[2:36:40]
development, president, chair, whatever.
[2:36:43]
Because no one's going to do it like you, okay?
[2:36:47]
And I don't want to see the infrastructure of this town collapse.
[2:36:53]
I will consider it. Not to be the head, but I'm already a member of the commission,
[2:36:58]
okay? So I might be able to work this out, because any new
[2:37:04]
development that I'm directly involved with bringing in is going to be additional
[2:37:07]
customers for the water authorities.
[2:37:11]
Oh, okay.
[2:37:13]
So I'm going to consider this, okay?
[2:37:16]
Thank you very much.
[2:37:17]
Interesting.
[2:37:18]
I don't mean to put you on the spot, but-
[2:37:19]
That's okay.
[2:37:20]
Yeah.
[2:37:20]
That's okay. Thank you.
[2:37:21]
But we need you there.
[2:37:22]
Thank you.
[2:37:22]
Thank you very much.
[2:37:25]
Mary White. Yes.
[2:37:29]
Thanks, Pete.
[2:37:38]
Mary White, Summer Lane. Just very briefly, the next scheduled Board of Selectmen
[2:37:42]
meeting we heard is Thursday, November 5th. Election day is Tuesday, November 3rd.
[2:37:48]
I encourage everybody to get out and vote, and I say you can't complain unless
[2:37:54]
you get out and vote.
[2:37:55]
Absolutely. Thank you, Mary.
[2:37:56]
Don't forget, vote.
[2:37:57]
Thank you. Mary, I'm serious. You should start a town newspaper.
[2:38:01]
Okay.
[2:38:01]
You know more than anybody, and you go to these meetings.
[2:38:06]
You're incredibly diligent, you're capable, you're articulate, you're thoughtful.
[2:38:11]
You should start writing this down. You would have a lot of people who read it.
[2:38:14]
I'm totally serious.
[2:38:16]
I'll think about it.
[2:38:17]
And people would read you, and people would start to learn about what happens at
[2:38:21]
these meetings, and I think you'll find a lot of interested parties. Yeah.
[2:38:25]
There's plenty of opportunities, Mary, as you say, not only to vote on Election
[2:38:28]
Day, but for early voting.
[2:38:30]
Right.
[2:38:30]
And for-
[2:38:32]
You can also request your absentee ballot, I think, as of yesterday.
[2:38:36]
Yes. Absolutely.
[2:38:38]
And there's actually no-
[2:38:40]
No excuse
[2:38:40]
... for the first time, I think there's no-excuse absentee ballots as well.
[2:38:43]
So, there were reasons that you could get absentee ballots.
[2:38:47]
Now you can just request one. So those are all good points by Mary. Thank you.
[2:38:53]
I agree about Mary. I used to think of her as the fourth selectman.
[2:38:58]
She should be the town scribe. Absolutely. She'd have her own newspaper.
[2:39:03]
I love
[2:39:05]
it.
[2:39:05]
Sally Blamey, Five Blossom Drive.
[2:39:06]
I just wanted to give an update on the Revolutionary War plaque.
[2:39:10]
I wanted to thank Mr. Piper, who, when I was here last month, gave me the
[2:39:16]
suggestion of meeting with the Post 76, which I did meet with.
[2:39:21]
I was with you September 17th, and as a result of that meeting, we have a change
[2:39:27]
in the time of the
[2:39:30]
ceremony because the Post 76 guys, we were talking at last month's meeting
[2:39:36]
about it starting at 11:00, but the Post 76
[2:39:41]
members couldn't make it that early because they're tied up at the pancake
[2:39:46]
breakfast over at the middle school that morning.
[2:39:49]
So we are moving the Revolutionary War plaque to noon with the
[2:39:57]
regular veterans ceremony immediately thereafter.
[2:40:01]
So I wanted everyone to know about the one-hour change.
[2:40:04]
This is still on the second Sunday?
[2:40:05]
It's still on Sunday-
[2:40:07]
The 8th.
[2:40:08]
November 8th.
[2:40:09]
Yes. Okay.
[2:40:09]
On the green, but not at 11:00, at noon.
[2:40:13]
Mm-hmm.
[2:40:13]
And so, we definitely wanted to accommodate the veterans at
[2:40:19]
Murray Reynolds Post 76. So again, I thank Second Selectman Piper for suggesting
[2:40:25]
that I meet with them, and we had a great meeting. And again, great donuts.
[2:40:30]
So it was great.
[2:40:31]
Well, you've done a great job getting this
[2:40:35]
plaque-
[2:40:36]
Sorry, I don't understand.
[2:40:38]
Somebody's AI is taking over.
[2:40:40]
This plaque done. Completed, but also the movement of the other two plaques.
[2:40:46]
Yes.
[2:40:46]
And actually, I think what we did at the veterans meeting is,
[2:40:50]
or at the American Legion meeting, is the Veterans Day ceremony is really one
[2:40:55]
ceremony, and it starts off with the
[2:40:59]
plaque, but it's also part of the normal ceremony.
[2:41:04]
It's just really one-
[2:41:05]
Yes.
[2:41:05]
It's not two separate ceremonies. It's one big one.
[2:41:07]
We're going to do it as one-
[2:41:08]
As one
[2:41:09]
... with the regular, very poignant, we have it every year, the Veterans Day
[2:41:14]
ceremony led by commander of the Post 76.
[2:41:19]
So it'll start at noon. I just wanted to report that change.
[2:41:24]
And my final fundraising was $10,405, which,
[2:41:29]
after talking at, meeting at length with Finance Director Monaco, was
[2:41:35]
certainly enough to pay the $7,600 for the bronze plaque, as well as the
[2:41:41]
installation of not just the new Revolutionary War plaque, but the other two that
[2:41:46]
you already alluded to, the Civil War plaque and the World War I plaque, which will
[2:41:50]
join the Revolutionary War plaque on the back of the existing World War II
[2:41:56]
monument. So I was very happy to have been able to raise enough funds for the
[2:42:01]
installation of all three. And again, I thank all of the donors who I will be
[2:42:06]
thanking individually
[2:42:10]
in a list form at the ceremony. So, thank you.
[2:42:14]
Noon on Sunday, November 8th. Thank you.
[2:42:17]
Thank you, Sally.
[2:42:17]
Thank you. Thank you for all you accomplished for-
[2:42:20]
Yes.
[2:42:22]
And that's a major, I think,
[2:42:25]
a great addition to the town green based on what you're doing in terms of
[2:42:29]
remembering
[2:42:32]
residents of New Haven that were in the Revolution, and also now the Civil War and
[2:42:38]
World War I.
[2:42:39]
Yeah, there's a very old plaque, but now they'll be seen.
[2:42:43]
Where we actually know they're there.
[2:42:45]
Yes.
[2:42:45]
Great. Thank you. Thank you, Sally.
[2:42:46]
Good job. Okay, ladies and gentlemen, seeing no other public comment, the motion to
[2:42:51]
adjourn.
[2:42:53]
Second?
[2:42:54]
No.
[2:42:56]
I'll second.
[2:42:58]
All right. All those in favor?
[2:42:59]
Aye.
[2:43:00]
Aye. Thank you very much. Thank you.
[2:43:01]
Thank you, everybody.
[2:43:04]
The preceding program is brought to you in part through a grant from
[2:43:10]
the Town of North Haven.
[2:43:19]
Watch town meetings or
[2:43:20]
other
[2:43:39]
videos on demand at
[2:43:44]
nhtv.com.