FROM WALLINGFORD - Of ballot and position

As published in the Record Journal, Sunday September 25, 2011.

This week’s FROM WALLINGFORD was written by Mike Brodinsky a former town councilor from Wallingford, chairman of the School Roof Building Committee, and host of public access show “Citizen Mike”

The Citizen Mike show airs on cable Channel 18 at 9 p.m. every night, except Sunday. It can also be viewed on demand at wpaa.tv. Comments or suggestions can be sent to citizenmiketv@gmail.com.

If you can’t catch the show on TV you can catch it online on their Video On Demand page.

The ballot is now set for the election of Town Councilors on November 8. The names of the six Democratic candidates for Council are in the top row. That’s Row A. Democrats get the top row because the Governor is Democratic. That’s the rule. The row of Republican candidates is below on Row B.

This format may make it appear to some that we have six individual, head-to-head contests with a Democrat on the top row facing off against the Republican directly below. But as experienced voters know, that’s not the case. Voters have nine votes, and they can select any candidate from Row A or Row B. A voter may spread nine votes around at his/her complete and uncontrolled discretion, regardless of the rows or positioning of the candidates within the rows Nevertheless, the ballot can cause pre-election angst for some candidates. Some may be concerned about their position on the ballot, which is chosen by lot. A candidate may fret, “Will I be first in the row or last? Who will be above (or below) my name? Will that matter?” They all want a good “draw.” But what is a “good draw” and what makes it good?

Republican Councilor Rosemary Rascati said she’d be looking at the name above hers because she is concerned that the “matchup” might affect her vote count. She is worried that some may vote for whoever is above her name and wrongly think that they cannot, therefore, vote for her. Newcomer candidate Democrat Debbie Reynolds’ name is above Rosemary’s. Debbie probably has similar thoughts about Rosemary’s name being below hers. Typically, a candidate wants to first on the row. There is no chance of being overlooked in that spot. Incumbent Councilor Craig Fishbein, however, downplayed his first-in-line spot on Row B, and he said that he’d rather be second in line. Maybe Craig is attempting to tamp down expectations. But the way Craig explains it, he thinks he might have a technical advantage if he had the second position on the ballot and not the first position. Incumbent Democratic Councilor John Sullivan is on top of Craig, first in line in Row A. I doubt that John is complaining about that draw.

Has any candidate ever said that he wanted to be at the end of the row? If any candidate said that, it might be Democratic Councilor Nick Economopoulos, whose name is dead last on Row A. He’s on top of newcomer, Republican Tom Laffin who drew the last spot on the Republican row. A last place draw on the ballot is a tough assignment for a rookie, according to conventional wisdom. Tom probably wants to say to voters, “Please do not use up all nine votes before you get to me.” But for being last, maybe Tom gets a beneficial underdog effect, whatever that is.

Even though candidates worry about it, the position of a name on the ballot makes no difference in Wallingford.

What makes the difference is lots of personal contacts and name recognition. With lawn signs and newspaper ads, and in some cases door-to-door campaigning, candidates try to create name recognition by being visible, hoping voters will perceive favorable distinctions while offering little substance. So, if you own a corner lot in a high traffic area, your property is very valuable to a candidate looking for a lawn sign location. Just don’t corner that candidate with a tough question.

Campaigns for Council are not based upon the issues, usually, because running on the issues is tough, risky, expensive — - and, therefore, rare. If a candidate gets too specific about where he stands, he could lose votes. Specific issues are very complicated. Ads and lawn signs aren’t. Ads and lawn signs add to valuable name recognition without the risks that go along with explaining issues. So issues get lost.

By the way, what are the issues in this campaign?

Decision on tax program coming Tuesday

As published in the Record Journal, Saturday September 24, 2011

By Robert Cyr
Record-Journal staff
rcyr@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2224

WALLINGFORD — The Town Council will decide Tuesday whether to allow developer Workstage Connecticut LLC to enter into a seven-year tax abatement program after resuming improvements to the future headquarters of Anthem Blue Cross.

The 305,000-square-foot building at 110 Leigus Road, which was mostly completed in 2007, was originally built for Mortgage Lenders Network USA Inc., but that company went bankrupt shortly after the subprime mortgage industry imploded the same year.

Workstage spent about $20 million on the project and is finishing up construction for Anthem’s move after years of inactivity, scheduled for completion in September 2012. Anthem will occupy 217,764 square feet of the campus.

“Seeing the facility come into play is a really positive step on so many different fronts,” said Donald W. Roe, economic development coordinator. “It was just sort of sitting there for years as an empty shell.”

Under the tax incentive program created in 2005, Workstage will not have to pay 20 percent of the property’s taxes for seven years. Workstage is the seventh-highest taxpayer in town with property assessed at $20,151,880. The annual break on Workstage’s tax bill would be $55,467.

According to the tax collector’s office, Workstage paid $483,654 in taxes last year and will pay $277,339 in 2011. The property’s assessed value was cut in half during this year’s revaluation, dropping from $20 million to $10 million.

To be eligible for the program, a business must make at least a $12 million investment in its property, and employ a minimum of 1,200 people in a space of no less than 60,000 square feet. The property will be revaluated again in 2016, Roe said.

The program, extended for three years in early 2010, is a payoff for the town in the long run and helps attract businesses that may stay in the area for a long time, said Mayor William W. Dickinson Jr.

The town’s grand list, which declined for the first time in more than 20 years, caused a revenue loss of $4 million at the current tax rate. Dickinson recommended using $4.6 million from the town’s reserve funds and $750,000 in Connecticut Resources Recovery Authority revenue to close the gap and fund operating expenses.

“The effort is in economic development and it helps to keep taxes lower and utilities under control,” he said. “Most towns have a program of one form or another to encourage businesses to stay in Connecticut and provide employment. We’re very interested in having businesses move to Wallingford, especially where they make that kind of investment.”

Parking lot move gets PAC support

As published in the Record Journal, Tuesday September 27, 2011

By Robert Cyr
Record-Journal staff
rcyr@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2224

WALLINGFORD — A political action committee has been formed to support the Town Council’s Simpson Court decision, which voters will be asked to decide on in a referendum Nov. 14.

The group, “Support Our Downtown,” was started by Republican Town Committee Vice Chairman Christopher Diorio to draw support for the council’s decision to enter a 30-year lease agreement with local property owners to repair and maintain a parking lot in return for free public parking.

Diorio, a 40-year-old father of three, said the deal is good for downtown businesses and the community.

Opponents say it is inappropriate to invest town money in private land. Last month a group opposing the lease agreement, headed by Robert Gross, collected enough signatures to force a referendum.

Diorio, who works in the Hartford public affairs office of the state Senate Republicans, said people from both parties support the lease agreement.

“I’m not trying to make this into a political football here,” he said. “Without an agreement, the owners may very well decide to restrict access to the property. Where can you go in the state of Connecticut where the property owners have a parking lot and are willing to go into a business merger with municipal government? It’s the town, not the owners, who will control the parking lot. Thirty years is a long time.”

Both Republican and Democratic councilors voted in favor of the lease agreement. Republican Mayor William W. Dickinson Jr. is also a supporter.

One property owner, John McGuire, has said that if the referendum fails he will pull out of the current annual lease agreement with the town and restrict access, possibly charging for parking. It is not the first time Diorio has been involved in a referendum. A political action committee he started, Save Our Charter, made more than 5,000 phone calls to local residents in 2009, urging them to vote against seven proposed amendments, one of which would have reduced the number of council votes needed to override a mayoral veto. Each proposed amendment was voted down by a margin of more than 1,500 votes.

Diorio’s committee faces the group against the lease, Citizens Against Private Parking Deal. Gross, who headed the petition drive to hold the referendum, is the PAC treasurer and has also successfully campaigned against council decisions in the past. He helped defeat a referendum five years ago that kept the town from selling its Wooding-Caplan property to a local developer.

Gross, a Democrat, said Monday that he had not heard of Diorio’s PAC and was busy collecting money and creating flyers and signs.
“This is not a party issue, this is about the town spending funds on private property,” he said. “We have no political affiliation with either party.”

The lease allows the town to spend up to $500,000 for capital improvements and mandates that the town repave the 130-space lot, install lighting and make other repairs as needed.

The town and some building owners along Simpson Court, off North Main Street, have been in a year-to-year lease agreement since 1961 for free parking in return for lot maintenance. Decades later, at least one property owner tried to make a longer arrangement and said the town wasn’t properly maintaining the lot.

Under the lease, private property owners will be given 90 passes for unlimited parking and 40 parking spaces will be available to the public with a four-hour limit.

Wallingford Referendum Facts

As provided on the Wallingford Referendum Facts blog, which “has been created so as to give the residents of the Town of Wallingford a fair and unbiased account of the facts behind the referendum taking place on November 14, 2011. Whatever your position, please take the time to vote on that day.”

This is NOT my own blog; as you may know I have four (two concerning Wallingford directly, one personal blog and a technology blog).

Bottom line – these are some great facts that will allow you to review the information and make up your mind between now and the November 14th referendum vote.
Over the next week I will be posting online all the leases, prior and proposed, so that people might get informed and make up their own mind.

Having said that as well, I am fully on the side to repeal the Council’s decision, but whatever your thoughts I agree with the blog creators:

”Whatever your position, please take the time to vote on that day” (November 14, 2011).

Celebrate Wallingford 2011 / Wallingford Fireworks Fund

Celebrate Wallingford 2011 will be taking place Saturday October 1st -- 11AM – 7PM and Sunday October 2nd -- 12PM - 6PM at the Wallingford Railroad Station Green and along Hall Ave.





I know there will be some candidates there campaigning but I will not be one of them. I will be there both days collecting for the Wallingford Fireworks Fund and that will be it.  

There might be the time for both but for me it is more important to get the needed jump start on the 2012 celebration as opposed to adding more juice to my campaign. As I need to, I can meet with people individually and in small groups in their neighborhoods; there are very few opportunities for me to reach this many Wallingford residents all in one shot for the Fireworks Fund. 

Besides, if at this point I would think that the voters are well on their way to forming their opinions about me, how I might serve the town, and what my goals and aspirations for the town are. If I need to reinforce anything or further clarify for them I can always do this on a one to one basis. 

Hope to see you at Celebrate Wallingford - thank you for the support over the past two years and I hope we can count on it again going forward.

WALLINGFORD - Citizens Against Private Parking Deal

There is a new website at http://www.500kparkingdeal.com/ set up by the organizers of the petition drive.

On the site they have a lot of pertinent information, they cross post to the Wallingford Referendum Facts blog (which may or may not be their blog – I am not sure of the identity of the actual owners) and they have PDFs for the four lease proposals.

(I was going to post these myself but now that they are here I will simply cross reference. I will still put up the original lease since it appears to not be online there).

They also have a page there as to how you can help if that is something you wish to do.

Bottom line – it’s your town, get informed, get involved and VOTE at the local election on Tuesday November 8, 2011 and at the referendum on Monday November 14, 2011.

For or against – make sure your voice is heard.

A lot is riding on Simpson Court parking

As Published in the Record Journal on Friday September 16, 2011

Jeffrey Kurz
General Assignment Editor
jkurz@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2213

It’s not a good idea to start a story with a quote. It’s some kind of journalism advice that sticks in my mind. But since I’ve said what I just said I can get on with the quote: “We did it once before and we’ll do it again.”

That was offered recently by Robert Gross, an organizer of the petition drive that will result in a Wallingford referendum, now scheduled for Nov. 14, in which voters will consider overturning a Town Council decision. That decision is the council’s vote to spend up to $500,000 in upgrades to a parking lot behind four buildings along Simpson Court in return for 30 years of free public parking.

Those vexed by the decision feel public money should not be spent on private property.

The referendum will take place not on the date of the general election, Nov. 8, but about a week afterward, and that leaves the question of whether people will feel inspired to go to the polls again, for a special issue.

At least 20 percent of registered voters are needed to participate in order for the referendum to count.

Gross told the Record-Journal recently he was confident of a successful turnout.

That’s part of what the “we did it once before...” comment was about. And he has reason for the confidence.

Gross was among the organizers who brought a referendum in 2006. That year, the vexation was over the council’s decision to sell the Wooding-Caplan property to a local developer, Joseph DiNatale, for $409,000. The town had purchased the 3.5acre parcel in 1992 for $1.5 million.

Residents repealed the council’s Wooding- Caplan decision by a wide margin, 6,659 to 413, even though the referendum took place in the middle of summer, when people have every right to have other things on their minds, including vacations.

A referendum in Wallingford, as was noted in 2006, is a rare event. So is overturning a council decision. In a referendum held in 1995 over whether the town should have purchased the 6 Fairfield Blvd. building for a recreation center at $1.4 million, residents voted 2,381 to 1,477 to reverse the council’s decision. But it was no good because turnout was 995 votes shy of the 20 percent needed.

You could argue that voters make their choice when they choose people to represent them on the council (and school board, etc.), but there’s value in a process that allows residents to overturn what enough of them consider a wrong-headed decision, particularly if that process is a tall order. Gross and others, including Town Councilor Nicholas Economopoulos, were able to collect far more than the 2,491 signatures needed to force the Simpson Court referendum, meaning 10 percent of the registered voters in town. One of the unpleasant aspects of the Wooding-Caplan referendum, a very heated issue, was what I consider to have been a cynical strategy employed by some that basically advised people to stay home and not vote, the idea being that the reversal could be defeated simply by not reaching the 20 percent of voter participation required. It probably does not take a journalist, or anyone else committed to defending Constitutional rights, to point out that urging people not to participate in the democratic process is a wrong-headed tactic.

I haven’t heard of anyone suggesting that strategy this time around, which is encouraging.

I don’t have any strong feelings about Simpson Court. I didn’t have any strong feelings about Wooding-Caplan. I also don’t live in Wallingford. If I did, though, I’d make up my mind and make sure I voted. I hope Wallingford residents will do just that.

AGENDA WALLINGFORD TOWN COUNCIL MEETING

TOWN OF WALLINGFORD, CONNECTICUT

REGULAR TOWN COUNCIL MEETING

Town Council Chambers

TUESDAY

SEPTEMBER 27, 2011

6:30 P.M

AGENDA

Opening Prayer – Reverend Dean Warburton, First Congregational Church of Wallingford, Connecticut

1. Pledge of Allegiance and Roll Call

2. Correspondence

3. Executive Session pursuant to §1-299(2), §1-200(6)(B), §1-225(f) of the Connecticut General Statutes with regard to collective bargaining to discuss Defined Contribution Pension Plan – Personnel

4. Executive Session pursuant to §1-225(f) and § 1-200(6)(B) of the Connecticut General Statutes regarding strategy and negotiations with respect to pending Workers’ Compensation Case Lanoue v. Town of Wallingford – Personnel

5. Possible Action on Lanoue v. Town of Wallingford – Personnel

6. Consent Agenda

6a. Consider and Approve Tax Refunds (#187 - #223) totaling $9,912.86 Acct. # 001-1000-010-1170 - Tax Collector

6b. Acceptance of Donation and Appropriation in the Amount of $10 Youth & Social Services Special Fund to Donations Acct #2134002-47010 and to Expenditures Acct # 21340100-58830 – Youth & Social Services

6c. Acceptance of Donation and Appropriation in the Amount of $95 Youth & Social Services Special Fund WECARE to Donations Acct #2134002-47010 and to Expenditures Acct # 21340100-58830 – Youth & Social Services

6d. Acceptance of Donation and Appropriation in the Amount of $170 Youth & Social Services Special Fund to Donations Acct #2134002-47010 and to Expenditures Acct # 21340100-58830 – Youth & Social Services

6e. Acceptance of Donation and Appropriation in the Amount of $230 Youth & Social Services Special Fund to Donations Acct #2134002-47010 and to Expenditures Acct # 21340100-58830 – Youth & Social Services

6f. Acceptance of Donation and Appropriation in the Amount of $100 Youth & Social Services Special Fund to Donations Acct #2134002-47010 and to Expenditures Acct # 21340100-58830 – Youth & Social Services

6g. Acceptance of Donation and Appropriation in the Amount of $719 Youth & Social Services Special Fund Peer Advocates to Donations Acct #2134002-47010 and to Expenditures Acct # 21340100-58830 – Youth & Social Services

6h. Consider and Approve a Transfer in the Amount of $1,464 to Uncollectible Accounts Expense Acct # 904 from Customer Records and Collections Acct # 903 – Electric Division

6i. Consider and Approve a Transfer in the Amount of $135 to Transmission-Load Dispatch Acct # 561 from Distribution-Load Dispatch Acct # 581– Electric Division

6j. Approve minutes of Regular Town Council Meeting of September 13, 2011

6k. Approve minutes of Special Town Council Meeting of September 19, 2011

7. Items Removed from the Consent Agenda

8. PUBLIC QUESTION & ANSWER

9. Consider and Approve Revised Job Description Skilled tradesman (Plumber-Boiler Room Technician) – Board of Education

10. Consider and Approve an Appropriation of $55,000 to Outside Services Acct # 923 from Retained Earnings – Electric Division

11. Consider and Approve Resolution authorizing the Mayor to enter into an Agreement between the Town of Wallingford and the State of Connecticut, Department of Transportation, for the purchase of Alternative/Clean Fuel Vehicle(s) and to execute any amendments, rescissions and revisions thereto – Grants Administrator duly

12. Consider and Approve a Transfer in the Amount of $45,299 to Town Hall Building -West Wall Repair Acct # 30102011-57000-20022 from Whirlwind Hill Road-Phase II Acct # 30102011-57000-20013 – Public Works

13. Discussion and Action regarding Amending the Recycling Regulations of the Town of Wallingford – Public Works

14. Discussion and Action Authorizing the Mayor to execute a Tax Assessment Agreement between the Town of Wallingford and Workstage Connecticut, LLC for a Seven (7) year period pursuant to the Town’s Real Property Tax Incentive Program – Economic Development Commission

15. Executive Session pursuant to §1-200 (6)(D) of the Connecticut General Statutes with respect to the purchase, sale and/or leasing of property – Mayor

16. Executive Session pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes §1-225(f) and §1-200(6)(B) to discuss the following cases:

Thurston Associates v. Town of Wallingford

North Colony Road LLC v. Town of Wallingford

Town of Wallingford v. Morin

-Town Attorney

17. Possible Action on Thurston Associates v. Town of Wallingford - Town Attorney

18. Possible Action on North Colony Road LLC v. Town of Wallingford - Town Attorney

19. Possible Action on Town of Wallingford v. Morin - Town Attorney

Meet the man behind the petition - Wooding-Caplan controversy lit a fire in Gross

As published in the Record Journal, Monday September 19, 2011

By Robert Cyr
Record-Journal staff
rcyr@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2224

WALLINGFORD — The leader of a recent petition drive that will force a town-wide referendum on whether to overturn a Town Council decision on a parking lot agreement is no stranger to politics or rallying support for public causes in town.

Robert Gross, 51, has lived in town his whole life and is the son of Wallingford attorney Leon Gross. He is a Quinnipiac University graduate, holding a bachelor’s degree in history and a Master of Business Administration degree. He works in insurance and has been married for 26 years.

Gross is one of four local residents who attend every meeting of the Town Council and take notes. The group is not shy about challenging the council on issues relating to public money and the environment, two topics that never fail to pique his interest, Gross said.

“There needs to be more open government, a breakdown of the wall between the two parties,” he said. “Everything should be done for the good of the community, and that isn’t done on certain issues.”

It wasn’t until the Town Council tried to sell the Wooding-Caplan parcel uptown to a private developer that the normally reserved Gross felt compelled to get involved, he said. He and a small group organized a petition drive, gathered enough signatures for a referendum, and overturned the vote to sell the land.

“I always paid attention to what was going on and voted, but when I saw what was going on (with Wooding-Caplan) I wanted to get involved — and I did, in a big way, I guess,” he said. “We did a lot then as a group, and I kept at it ever since.”

Since the Wooding-Caplan referendum in 2006, he has petitioned to create a Charter Revision Committee, and most recently, helped organize a referendum to reverse the council’s decision to enter into a 30year agreement with property owners on Simpson Court to maintain and upgrade the parking lot in return for free public parking.
In 2009, Gross made his first foray into politics when he ran for a seat on the council. A Democrat since 1978, Gross lost the race and has not run for any office since.

“I never say never — but at this point, no, it’s not the time to run,” he said.

But while Gross says he likes to stay out of the limelight, his criticism and questions on the environmental impact of a trash-to-energy plant in town, Covanta Energy, drew overseas attention this summer.

Previously owned by Connecticut Resources Recovery Authority, the plant was cited for emissions violations two times in three years while managed by New Jersey-based Covanta, which recently paid a $400,000 fine to the state. Gross grilled Covanta representatives at town meetings over the violations and demanded to know whether the plant on South Cherry Street had impacted the health of the community.

After reading Gross’s comments in local newspapers, producers from the British Broadcasting Corp. contacted him and flew to the U.S. to interview him at his Long Hill Road house on his thoughts about Covanta, which is trying to open a plant in Wales and is drawing opposition there.

Town Council Chairman Robert Parisi said Gross’s input is always valued by the council, but his widely varying areas of concern in town politics are often unfocused. During the public question segment of council meetings, local political watchdogs, sometimes including Gross, take an opportunity to expound on personal beliefs rather than pose a series of questions.

“I think sometimes people forget it’s a question-and-answer session. If we get too far off the subject matter, it borders on opinion,” he said. “I would prefer we stick a little closer to what the question is and allow the answer to come forward. He exercises his right to speak publicly and I put in my time to make sure he has that right. I say fine if you’re doing what the law says you can do, and what a lot of us gave up a part of our lives to do.”

Gross said he’s seen many changes in his hometown over the years and has watched the population grow, opening the doors to many of the problems — like drug use — that larger towns and small cities face.

“I’m born and raised here and I’m very committed to my town,” he said. “I feel like I have a civic duty for more transparency.”

FROM WALLINGFORD - Contrasting approaches to government

As published in the Record Journal, Sunday September 18, 2011

If I were a civics teacher, a viewing of last Tuesday’s Wallingford Town Council meeting would be a class requirement, and it would serve as a textbook example of why the functions of government should be carried out at the lowest level possible or, described another way, the level closest to the people.

On the one hand were the votes to repeal Town Council decisions to lease a piece of private property for 30 years and to spend public money on its improvement or face a referendum on the issue. On the other hand, was the report on the placement of the railroad station by the project engineer for the $647 million commuter rail project where the only impact that the citizenry of Wallingford might possibly have is on its location.

When you put these two projects side by side as was done the other night, it becomes clear why so many of us advocate for leaving as much authority and responsibility at the local level of government, or at least the lowest possible level that makes sense. Our ability to enforce accountability and transparency on those that run our various governments dissipates exponentially as decisions are made by higher and most distant entities. Here are three aspects of what I mean by that:

1. The citizen’s impact on government: the Town Council made two decisions regarding the parking lot. Those decisions have been challenged by some voters. First, they were able to argue for a repeal of those decisions in an open meeting directly with the people that made them. Not having achieved that goal, they were able to secure sufficient signatures to allow every voter in Wallingford to weigh in on the issue in a referendum. The railroad project?

Well, maybe, just maybe, if, in their judgment, they deem our comments worthy, we may, just possibly, perhaps be able to get the State of Connecticut and the Federal Railroad Administration to … listen to us regarding where to locate the station. That is the sum total of citizen impact on this $647 million project. As for any other citizen comments the other night: it was “this deal is done; sit down and be quiet” time, according to one councilor’s comments.

2. How these projects are paid for: The Town Council of Wallingford is paying for the parking lot improvements immediately from a capital and non-recurring fund financed by current contributions from our Electric Division. How is the commuter railroad being paid for? Well, the State of Connecticut is borrowing its hundreds of millions from us and our children. The feds are paying their hundreds of millions of dollars with … Happy Bucks borrowed from our great grandchildren. In other words, local government finances its wishes with real money; the state with sort of real money to be paid back years from now, and the feds with … money borrowed from … well, we really don’t know, do we?

3. Direct results: Wallingford Town Council spends $500 thousand. Result: parking lot improvements that everyone who owns a car in Wallingford can use. State and feds spend one thousand times that amount and we get: a startup commuter service that will be utilized by 6,000 residents statewide. But to justify this staggering amount of money spent on benefiting so few, they trot out the old impossible-to-quantify, years-and-years down the road “economic development” chestnut.

I am not for a second suggesting that the decisions to be made in building railroads or other similarly complex undertakings be the province of local authorities. That is clearly unworkable. However, the point I am making is that, in America today, we citizens are ceding more and more authority to higher and higher levels of government.

That Town Council meeting contained two starkly contrasting approaches to government. Unless we are wise, we will lose the one and be crushed by the other.

Wallingford Democrat Town Committee meeting to be held TONIGHT Wednesday September 21, 2011 at 7:30PM

The Wallingford Democrat Town Committee meeting is going to be held TONIGHT Wednesday September 21, 2011 at 7:30PM at Democratic Campaign Headquarters at 62 Center Street

This is the formal “grand opening” and the public is invited and welcome to attend.

Most of your Democrat candidates are expected to be on hand this evening.

FROM WALLINGFORD - Referendum? Hold your nose and vote

Originally published in the Record Journal Sunday August 28, 2011

As written by Mike Brodinsky

Some folks in Wallingford are circulating a petition, which, if signed by enough registered voters, would result in a referendum on the Council’s decision, by a divided vote, to approve 30-year leases for the privately-owned parking area in back of Simpson Court. Historically, the whole area in back of four buildings has been used for public parking, although only a portion of it has been leased to the Town. The proposed new leases, covering all the area, would enable the Town to build and maintain a new parking lot at an estimated cost of $500,000. Although money matters to everybody, the controversy is not so much about the amount being spent. The parking lot is a relatively modest project. The controversy is stoked more by principle than by costs.

You should sign the petition.

Your signature does not necessarily mean that you are against the project. Because public officials have done a terrible job explaining the details and proposed terms, many voters are confused and skeptical. You should sign the petition if you have any questions or doubts. A referendum buys more time to learn, so we can make an informed choice at the polls, before the decision is irrevocable.

Proponents of the new parking lot reasonably claim the deal will result in significant benefits. Because many people park behind Simpson Court, the town would install a spiffy new parking lot there, with 130 spaces for cars. The new lot probably wouldn’t add many extra spaces to what is there now, but it would help make the uptown area safer and more welcoming. People would experience this enhancement very personally just by parking. (Of course, they park there now, but it’s kind of depressing.) Finally, if the leases are not approved, what happens next? If this project doesn’t get completed soon, won’t the property look the same or worse for the foreseeable future? That’s not good for anybody.

Opponents, on the other hand, reasonably believe that the deal between the town and the owners of the properties is not balanced. They say the property owners are being unduly enriched, because, when the leases expire, Wallingford’s parking lot is theirs to keep. Moreover, as soon as the lot is built, the value of the private properties would go up. A new parking lot, built at the public’s expense, fully maintained and cared for by the town for 30 years, but available for a new owner’s tenants and customers, adds value. As a result, an owner should be able to sell his Simpson Court property for more money because of all the public funding. Wallingford wouldn’t be reimbursed one penny for its costs.

Opponents also suggest that if the town is going to spend money to provide improved parking, it should be spent for parking in the Wooding-Caplan area, across the street, which Wallingford already owns.

Who pays for the snowplowing and pavement repairs under the proposed leases? The town. How much more might it pay? How much less might the property owners pay? That has never been explained. Do the leases allow the property owners to claim any special parking privileges the general public would not have? Take a look at the leases. It’s revealing. Town Hall needs to be more clear about comparative maintenance costs, whether all parkers would be treated equally, and if not, why not. If there’s any doubt about these details, sign the petition to force disclosure of all the information you need.

While some are enthusiastic about the plan, others are adamantly opposed. Other voters like me are caught in the middle. They appreciate the benefits of the project, and are not offended by the costs. But they suspect that local officials could have negotiated a much better deal. Whichever way those people vote, it’s likely they will be holding their noses. It’s their Constitutional right to do that.

‘Citizen Mike’ to host local candidates for the upcoming November election

In the upcoming weeks on the public access Citizen Mike Show Mike Brodinsky will be interviewing candidates for the Town Council and Board of Education.

Brodinsky and Record-Journal Executive Editor Ralph Tomaselli also discuss the Simpson Court parking plan.

The show airs on cable Channel 18 at 9 p.m. every night, except Sunday. It can also be viewed on demand at wpaa.tv. Comments or suggestions can be sent to citizenmiketv@gmail.com.

If you can’t catch the show on TV you can catch it online on their Video On Demand page.

WHA manager position not meant to replace Nere

As published in the Record Journal, Thursday September 15, 2011

By Robert Cyr
Record-Journal staff
rcyr@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2224

WALLINGFORD — Wallingford Housing Authority Chairman Michael Misiti said Wednesday the job opening recently posted in Record-Journal want ads for a “Public Housing Manager” was not a replacement for longtime Executive Director Stephen Nere but a newly created position.

The housing-wide management position will involve several aspects of the authority, which operates 317 housing units in seven housing clusters, Misiti said. The position will not change the job description of the executive director and there will be no overlap in duties, he said.

The job will center on office operations and managing the maintenance department. The maintenance supervisor position, held by Paul Inserra for the past decade, was eliminated last month, and the new position will pick up some of those responsibilities, Misiti said.

Misiti said the position will be full-time with benefits but a salary has not been determined. The job calls for a minimum of an associate’s degree, experience with housing man­agement, and a valid state driver’s license. Applications will be accepted until Tuesday.

Late last week, Misiti said Nere told the board of commissioners that Nere desired to leave the position. Lawyers are now working on language for a severance package. Misiti would not say how much Nere will be offered in the deal.

Asked Wednesday if he intended to submit a written resignation to the board, Nere said, “I’m not resigning — if I do anything, I’ll retire.”
Nere earns about $100,000 per year.

Nere’s four-year contract is scheduled to expire on Aug. 29, 2012. He has been under intense local, state and federal scrutiny over allegations of mismanagement and was denied a buyout deal by the housing board this summer.

The new position comes after two high-profile personnel changes at the authority in the past month, including the maintenance supervisor position and the board’s lawyer of 15 years, Jim Laughlin, whose contract was not renewed.

Misiti has called the changes “a new direction” for the board.

Parking-deal foes rap Nov. 14 vote

As published in the Record Journal, Friday September 16, 2011

By Robert Cyr

Record-Journal staff

rcyr@record-journal.com

(203) 317-2224 

WALLINGFORD — Supporters of the Simpson Court referendum say the Town Council decision to hold the vote after municipal elections is an effort to draw voters away from the cause.

After long debate late Tuesday night, and questions for Republican Registrar of Voters Chester Miller, the council decided to hold the referendum from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday, Nov. 14, at three polling places. The municipal election is Tuesday, Nov. 8.

The referendum asks voters to consider reversing a council vote to appropriate up to $500,000 for parking lot improvements behind four buildings along Simpson Court in return for 30 years of free parking.

The petition for the town wide referendum was started by Robert Gross, who was also instrumental in organizing a referendum in 2006 that overturned a council deal to sell the Wooding-Caplan property to a private developer.

Opponents of the Simpson Court arrangement say the town should not be investing public money in private property.
“They don’t want the vote on Nov. 8 because the pulse of the people is against the parking lot,” Gross said Thursday. “They’re concerned the numbers will be even greater on that day.”

Council Chairman Robert Parisi said the council’s decision Tuesday was made after questions to Miller as to how legal or realistic it would be to hold the referendum on the same day as local elections. Miller told the council the town faced a large number of state mandates requiring a minimum number of counting machines that would strain the town’s supply and the space needed for the equipment.

Miller said Thursday that it would require lengthy, error- prone counting of paper ballots.

“I just think it’s inefficient,” Parisi said. “We were told towns with small voter registration and low voter counts might do that, but with the number of people we have registered, it’s inefficient and very difficult to do. If all the machines broke down, we might have to do that, but it isn’t the recommended procedure.”

The Town Charter requires 20 percent of registered voters — 4,982 — to participate in a referendum to make it valid.

Gross, who’s confident support will be strong on Nov. 14, said he and a group of volunteers would be registering a political action committee in Town Hall today and begin asking for donations to send out fliers and make signs advertising the referendum. He said the spending would be “nowhere near” the thousands of dollars spent on the Wooding- Caplan referendum campaign.

On Thursday, Town Councilor Nicholas Economopoulos said Miller misled the council with vague information that made more traditional voting methods using paper ballots seem too difficult, and dissuaded the council from considering a local election and referendum on the same night. Along with requiring the paper ballot method, holding the referendum on the same day as local elections would strain the available election staff on an already busy voting day, Miller said Thursday. The referendum is expected to cost more than $30,000.

“Why go back to the stone age?” Miller said. “Hand counting ballots is not an accurate process, as we’ve proven time and time again. It is a legal way to do that, but it’s archaic and it’s just impossible to monitor and guarantee the integrity of it.” Along with Councilor Craig Fishbein, Economopoulos was one of two votes against the 7-2 council vote to enter the agreement.

Economopoulos said he argued to have three polling places instead of the two proposed and didn’t think the council would budge on the date.

“Seven of the members on the council want the lot to go through, so, in my opinion, for those members it doesn’t matter what day you can vote on it,” he said. “I voted for it (Nov. 14), because it was all I knew I would get in the end.”

Parking question too late for vote on Nov. 8

As published in the Record Journal, Thursday September 15, 2011

By Robert Cyr
Record-Journal staff
rcyr@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2224

WALLINGFORD — Nov. 14 is the date a town-wide referendum will take place on the Town Council’s controversial decision to upgrade a private parking lot in return for public parking.

The council set the date late into its regular meeting Tuesday night. The referendum vote will likely cost more than $30,000.

Putting the referendum on Nov. 8 election ballot was not an option. The secretary of the state’s office would have needed to be contacted by Sept. 8, which was also the petition drive’s deadline, said Town Clerk Barbara Thompson.

“That was impossible from the start,” she said. “It’s not something we’ve ever done — we’re not familiar with how to do that.”

Voters will be asked to consider overturning the council’s Aug. 9 decision to make up to $500,000 in upgrades to a group lot behind four buildings along Simpson Court in return for 30 years of free public parking. Those opposing the council’s decision say town money should not be invested in private property.

Robert Gross, organizer of the petition drive to hold the referendum, said the Nov. 14 date likely won’t affect voter turnout.

Gross was also instrumental in a referendum on the town owned Wooding-Caplan property five years ago, a vote that was held during the summer, when most people were on vacation.

The town bought the 3.5acre Wooding-Caplan parcel in May 1992 for $1.5 million. In April 2006, the council voted to sell the property to local developer Joseph DiNatale for $409,000. Four months later, voters rejected the council’s decision 6,659-413.

“We wouldn’t have done it if we weren’t confident we’d get a good turnout,” Gross said Tuesday night. “We did it once before, and we’ll do it again.”

For the Simpson Court referendum, Gross and other volunteers, including Town Councilor Nicholas Economopoulos, collected far more than the 2,491 signatures needed, or 10 percent of registered voters in town. Thompson certified 2,634 names and had not counted about another 600 signatures.

At least 20 percent of registered voters must participate for the referendum to count.

The Nov. 14 vote will be held from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. at polling places in Lyman Hall’s Vo-Ag center, the Senior Center, and a third polling place at either Moran Middle School or Sheehan High School. Registrar of Voters Chester Miller said a decision on the school will be made in the coming days.

The cost of the referendum will likely exceed $30,000, he said.

“Things are more expensive than they were for the Wooding- Caplan vote,” he said. “We have to pay for things we didn’t have to before.”

Due to changes in election rules, the town now has to pick up the bill for paper ballots, and the 8,000 ballots Miller will probably order for the referendum could cost as much as $1 per ballot, he said. Add to that about $16,000 for staff to work the polls and custodial staff to keep the buildings open, and about $1,300 for memory cards for electronic voting machines, he said.

The town owns 20 electronic ballot-scanning machines, and nine are required for elections. A referendum vote on the same night as the general election would require another nine machines with staff for each unit and both personnel and back-up machines mandated by the state would be lacking, Miller said.

Other costs include setting up dedicated phone lines between election officials and making sure the different machines and polling booths are outside proscribed distances from each other, in separate rooms.

Each voting station requires separate tables for the ballot clerk, moderator, assistant registrar and official ballot checker, with a minimum of 36 square feet around each voting machine and 25 square feet around each voting booth, Miller said.

“Everybody thinks it’s clear cut, but it’s not,” he said.

New train station location proposed

As published in the Record Journal, Wednesday September 14, 2011

By Robert Cyr
Record-Journal staff
rcyr@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2224

WALLINGFORD — After much concern and public input from a meeting last month, a state transportation official returned Tuesday to present another possible location for a train station that will be part of a multi-million- dollar railway upgrade, connecting New Haven and Springfield, Mass.

Town councilors worried about increased automobile traffic and problems involving development around proposed train station sites at Judd Square and a newly proposed Parker Street location.

“I think this could be a real winner, for not only the state of Connecticut but for points up north as well,” said Councilor John Sullivan. “But my real concern is that we don’t have a long-term plan for the downtown.”

Plans call for upgrading signals along the track, which is slated to start as early as next spring. The first proposed station at Judd Square has raised concerns over an elevated platform and parking for 200 cars. The proposed Parker Street station, farther from downtown and higher-density population areas, was drafted on public input, said DOT Project Manager John Bernick.

Wallingford has the most crossings of track over road of any municipality along the corridor — 10, eight with signals and two gates without signals. The most heavily trafficked areas are Parker, Hall, Ward and Quinnipiac streets. The town now has five or six trains passing through every day. The rail project calls for 25 cars running every half-hour during peak morning and evening commutes and once an hour in between, Bernick said.

Springfield will become a central connector, with service to Boston, Vermont and finally to Montreal. The $647 million project consists of double-tracking 62 miles of track, upgrading the signals, building new stations in North Haven, Newington and Enfield, relocating Wallingford’s station and building new elevated platforms, walkways and parking garages in each town.

“This service promotes transit-related development, and allows the downtown to grow without creating traffic congestion that normally goes with it,” Bernick said. “We’re here to make sure that no matter what site comes out in the end, it’s buildable and the impacts aren’t any more than what we anticipated.”

An environmental impact study, with a public comment period, is expected to be completed and ready for presentation in November. Once the studies are done, the project will be eligible for $121 million in federal funding, he said. Full service could begin by 2016.

Public officials have said they are concerned that more trains, which can go as fast as 110 mph, would pose a safety threat to residents and disrupt nearby businesses. A traffic study previously conducted by Wilbur Smith & Associates gave several crossings poor ratings for the proposed project without altering streets and traffic flow.

Some residents, however, disagreed with the DOT’s philosophy and cost benefit studies that say the upgraded railway would create economic growth along the commuter corridor. Public Utilities Commissioner David Gessert told Bernick that the transit system would benefit few and be a financial burden to many.

“I think it’s a beautiful fairy tale, but I don’t think all of these things are relay going to happen,” he said. “It’s hard to see in my mind how this high speed train is going to be of any tremendous value.”

Wallingford council vote reaffirms parking deal

As published in the Record Journal, Wednesday September 14, 2011

By Robert Cyr
Record-Journal staff
rcyr@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2224

WALLINGFORD — In the face of an impending referendum, the Town Council stood by a controversial decision it made on Aug. 9 to enter into a 30-year lease agreement with property owners uptown that would allow the town to make upgrades to the lot in return for free public parking.

The deal was opposed by two councilors — Democrat Nicholas Economopoulos and Republican Craig Fishbein — and a petition to hold a referendum was started a day later by Robert Gross, who once ran for a seat on the council and who has previously started a successful petition drive.

Gross had until Sept. 8 to collect 2,491 signatures, or 10 percent of registered voters, to begin the referendum process. Gross, Economopoulos and a handful of other volunteers collected that amount outside grocery stores and at public events. Economopoulos said that most of the public agreed with his sentiment that town money should not be invested in private property.

“We’re going to open a can of worms if we don’t repeal this,” he said before the vote.

The council has 30 days after Sept. 8 to re­peal its decision.

The deal was pushed by three sets of property owners along Simpson Court who had been part of a year-to-year lease agreement set up in 1961. Under the recent agreement, the town will also provide maintenance, including snow plowing. The intent is to create a safer, more attractive parking lot that will continue to provide an alternative to the often- crowded parking area in front of the Simpson Court businesses.

The council approved spending up to $500,000 on improvements to the lot, including paving and lighting, as part of Mayor William W. Dickinson Jr.’s 2011-12 budget, passed earlier this year. The money would come out of the capital non-recurring fund made up of revenue from the Electric Division.

Fishbein pointed to the controversial Wooding-Kaplan property, a town-owned, undeveloped property also in the uptown area, and said that could be used for parking.

“I would rather see us deal with that situation,” he said.

Councilor John LeTourneau, owner of Wallingford Lamp and Shade on Center Street, said the spending cap of a half million dollars will likely be a high estimate for the work that has been discussed.
“It could be much cheaper than that — it’s not written in stone,” he said. “We have to have a clean, vibrant, well-lit area to attract businesses. How can we ever think of wooing a business when our downtown doesn’t look good? It’s our front yard.”

According to the Town Charter, once 10 percent of registered voters have signed a petition and those names have been verified by the Town Clerk, the council has 30 days to reverse its decision. Barring that, the issue goes before the public and a vote must take place within 60 days. A majority of 20 percent of the registered voters in town must vote to repeal the council decision.

“If we changed our minds based on a portion, that would be a disservice to everybody else,” said Councilor Vincent Testa. “I’m not changing my vote. I want to see this referendum happen, and have it be the will of the people.”

Resident Geno Zandri told the council that he personally collected more than 1,000 signatures and felt the common sentiment would prevail in the referendum to reverse the council’s decision.
“If I could have assembled every registered voter in the town of Wallingford, 90 percent of them would have signed that petition,” he said. “The public doesn’t want you to do it.”

Frederick Ulbrich, owner of 60 N. Main St. for the past 9 years, said Wallingford “needs and deserves” a good parking lot uptown. Ulbrich is not a part of the recent agreement, although his lot, now up for sale, abuts the buildings and lot in the lease.

“You don’t know what’s going to happen to that property in 30 years,” he said. “You are really taking action on the future of Wallingford. The town has a great deal.”

Gross said he started the petition drive with the confidence that he could get the roughly 5,000 votes needed at referendum to overturn the council’s decision.

“We’ll get the votes, and it will be a good example of democracy in action,” he said

REMINDER–WALLINGFORD TOWN COUNCIL MEETING TONIGHT

Just a quick reminder that there is a town council meeting this evening.

I have the agenda posted in an earlier blog post.

There are a couple of important agenda items with respect to the downtown parking situation and the referendum:

10. Discussion and Possible Action on the Repeal of the Town Council’s resolution of August 9, 2011, approving Lease Agreements of the parking lots at 2-26 North Main Street, 36-40 North Main Street, 60 North Main Street and 48-50 North Main Street - Councilor Nick Economopoulos

11. Discussion and Possible Action on setting a date for a referendum vote on the repeal of the Town Council’s resolution of August 9, 2011, approving Lease Agreements of the parking lots at 2-26 North Main Street, 36-40 North Main Street, 60 North Main Street and 48-50 North Main Street – Councilor Nick Economopoulos

 

Barbara Thompson, Wallingford Town Clerk, has certified that there are enough signatures for force the referendum if the council doesn’t repeal their decision.

The letter went out to Town Council Chairman Parisi yesterday and can be found via this link.

My thought for the day after attending a wake

Yesterday ( Thursday September 8 ) I stopped by to pay my last respects to Philip A. Wright, Sr. who passed on September 4th.

In the receiving line there was a table next to where the condolence cards were being kept. On this table was a small plaque that read:

“Life is not a journey to the grave with intentions of arriving safely in a pretty well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out and loudly proclaiming ... WOW! What a ride!”

Yeah Mr. Wright, that is EXACTLY how I am going to remember you.

Hopefully someone will come along to pick up in place of you but you’ll never be fully replaced.

Rest in peace sir.

Arbitration may cost jobs in Wallingford

As published in the Record Journal Friday September 9, 2011

By Robert Cyr

Record-Journal staff
rcyr@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2224

WALLINGFORD — In most of the town’s labor negotiations in the past year, unions have emerged the winners in costly arbitration, which has some blaming the mayor’s demand for pay freezes.

Last week, a payment of $230,000 was awarded to the 55 members of United Public Service Employees Union Local 424, a management union with positions that include town planner, public works superintendent and tax collector. The town won’t be able to cover that solely by leaving vacant positions unfilled, so officials have pointed to layoffs as a potential solution.

Mediating attorney J. Larry Foy billed both the town and the union $10,812 each for his arbitration services. But in reality, other costs associated with arbitration pushed that figure to $17,338, said Terrence Sullivan, personnel director.

In every case the town is involved with binding arbitration, each side hires its own lawyer and pays half the fee for a third-party, neutral arbitrator. Along with court reporting fees and document copying, the arbitrators account for a large portion of the process, win or lose, he said.

“It’s a small price to pay to avoid wage increases; it isn’t wasteful and isn’t wrong,” Sullivan said. “Many times the union brings the town into the process, but now the town is driving arbitration and we’re being vilified for wasting the town’s resources. Sometimes it takes a fight to get the savings and language that we need.”

In the past 12 months the town has spent $42,300 on arbitration proceedings, including processes that awarded pay raises and other contract details to three unions, including the manager’s union. Arbitration with Local 1183 of the Association of Federal, State, County and Municipal Employees cost the town $12,346 last year, and International Association of Fire Fighters Local 1326 cost taxpayers $12,566, Sullivan said. Those arbitration awards totaled more than $100,000.

The town avoided arbitration costs with school unions in February, when three chapters of the United Public Service Employees Union representing more than 60 workers in the school district were awarded four-year contracts by the Town Council.

Pay raises for the three unions amounted to $133,240.80, far less than the cost of arbitration, according to School Superintendent Salvatore Menzo. Menzo estimated the cost to arbitrate all three contracts between $42,000 and $45,000.

In late November, the council approved several internal transfers for the Public Utilities Department to cover an arbitration award for Local 1183 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, which represents about 130 employees in the sewer, public works, clerical and emergency dispatch departments. Public Utilities Director George Adair has said there is no money to cover possible pay raises for one union still negotiating a contract with the mayor.

With the highest bond rating possible and millions of dollars in its reserve account, the town’s financial success and the conservative approach of its mayor, William W. Dickinson Jr., may make it an easy target for unions wanting more, some town officials have said. Dickinson’s $141.5 million budget for the 2010-11 fiscal year, however, did not contain funding for wage increases in any department.

He stressed that the town is facing a decrease in its Grand List for the first time in more than 25 years, resulting in a revenue loss of more than $3 million.

“I don’t know how you tell the public that you’re agreeing to increases with the economy the way it is — with 9 percent unemployment,” he said. “Given the very challenging distress in the economy, there’s got to be recognition that government can’t continue as it did in the good times.”

Dickinson’s stance in union negotiations has been publicly challenged by his mayoral opponent, Democratic Town Councilor Vincent Testa Jr. Testa said the town takes a one-size-fits-all approach with collective bargaining, and that just hasn’t worked well so far.

“None of us want to see large raises when the economy is tough and we’re struggling with the tax dollars we have — but the simple fact is that, if you’re going into negotiations and you offer no pay raises for three years, you’re going to lose,” he said.

Local UPSEU Director Wayne Gilbert said the town’s stance is far too rigid with unions and more than half the negotiations end up in arbitration. He said the process put a strain on professional relationships and made it hard for things to get back to normal after the binding arbitration is finished and the awards announced.

“It’s absolutely ludicrous. It means you have to work extremely hard to present the case,” he said. “That kind of litigious nature doesn’t foster good relations between the parties. These are the employees who get water to your house, bring electricity to your house, plow your streets. They take care of the education of your children and grandchildren.”

AGENDA - WALLINGFORD TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING

TOWN OF WALLINGFORD, CONNECTICUT

REGULAR TOWN COUNCIL MEETING

Town Council Chambers

TUESDAY SEPTEMBER 13, 2011 6:30 P.M

AGENDA

Opening Prayer –  Reverend Dean Warburton, First Congregational Church of Wallingford, Connecticut

1. Pledge of Allegiance and Roll Call

2. Correspondence

3. Consent Agenda

3a. Consider and Approve Tax Refunds (#86 - #186) totaling $23,764.94 Acct. # 001-1000-010-1170 - Tax Collector

3b. Acceptance of Grant and Appropriation in the Amount of $2,897 to Police Overtime Acct 10020050-51400 and to Revenue Highway Safety Acct # 1002001-45208 – Police Chief

3c. Acceptance of Donation and Appropriation in the Amount of $20 Youth & Social Services Special Fund to Donations Acct 213-1042-070-7010 and to Expenditures Acct # 213-3070-600-6000 – Youth & Social Services

3d. Acceptance of Historic Documents Preservation Grant and Appropriation in the Amount of $6,000 to State Grant 2012 – Revenue Acct # 2281002-45114 and to Program Expenditures Acct # 22810650-58830 – Town Clerk

3e. Consider and Approve a Appropriation in the Amount of $6,000 to Revenue Preservation – Town Revenue Acct # 2281002-42030 and to 2011-2012 Fund Expenditures Acct # 22810650-58830 – Town Clerk

3f. Consider and Approve Removal of an Easement from Town’s Land Records for the Property at 8 Catlin Road (temporary cul-de-sac) - Engineering

3g. Consider and Approve Transfer of Town-owned land (former cul-de-sac) to property owners at 45 Old Lane - Engineering

3h. Consider and approve change in name of Poppy Road (previously approved on 6/21/11) to Poppy Lane – Chairman Robert F. Parisi

3i. Approve minutes of Special Town Council Meeting of August 30, 2011

4. Items Removed from the Consent Agenda

5. Presentation by DOT with regard to the Railroad Project - Mayor

6. PUBLIC QUESTION and ANSWER

7. Conduct a Public Hearing for September 13, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. to consider Repeal of existing Ordinance and enactment of revised Ordinance regarding Open Burning, Chapter 93 of the Code of the Town of Wallingford - Co-Chairmen Cervoni and Farrell, Ordinance Committee

8. Conduct a Public Hearing for September 13, 2011 at 7:15 p.m. for Repeal of Ordinance #513, dated 2003, leaving in its place the new Private Sewage Disposal Systems Ordinance #566 adopted on September 28, 2010 – Town Attorney

9. Consider and Approve a Bid Waiver for Public Bid 10-176 Single-Phase Kilowatt-Hours Meters to other low bid – Electric Division

10. Discussion and Possible Action on the Repeal of the Town Council’s resolution of  August 9, 2011, approving Lease Agreements of the parking lots at 2-26 North Main Street, 36-40 North Main Street, 60 North Main Street and 48-50 North Main Street - Councilor Nick Economopoulos

11. Discussion and Possible Action on setting a date for a referendum vote on the repeal of the Town Council’s resolution of August 9, 2011, approving Lease Agreements of the parking lots at 2-26 North Main Street, 36-40 North Main Street, 60 North Main Street and 48-50 North Main Street – Councilor Nick Economopoulos

12. Executive Session pursuant to §1-200 (6)(D) of the Connecticut General Statutes with respect to the purchase, sale and/or leasing of property – Mayor

Emails illustrate tense relationship between WHA board and Nere

As published in the Record Journal, Tuesday September 6, 2011

By Robert Cyr
Record-Journal staff
rcyr@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2224

WALLINGFORD — Hundreds of emails between the Wallingford Housing Authority’s director and members of its board of commissioners shows a pattern of tension and apprehension.

By any account, it’s been a contentious stretch at the housing authority for its director, Stephen Nere, and the board, which has seen about a half dozen configurations in the past 10 months. In fact, the five-member board is still without a tenant representative, who will be chosen in a first-of-its-kind election on Thursday.

In an enormous cache of emails between Nere and officials tied to the authority, Nere expresses concern more than once to the board’s latest chairman, Michael Misiti, that his job may be on the line in the face of requests for documentation.

“I am beyond baffled about your true agenda and how I can respond without being fired?” Nere writes in one message. Another request elicited this response from Nere: “I think your request borders on suggesting that some impropriety occurred. I am insulted,” he wrote in late July.

Neither Misiti nor Nere was available for comment Monday.

The emails, dating from April to August, were requested from unspecified housing officials by a local man who says he wants to remain anonymous. He would not say which housing officials had released the materials as part of a request.

The messages bring to light a very stressful time for Nere amid state, federal and local scrutiny of the authority and its policies and procedures, while he is inundated with requests for documents.

Earlier this year, Nere requested early retirement from the board, which it subsequently denied. Nere retracted the request via email, but it is unclear whether the retraction was submitted before or after the board’s decision.

Nere, 60, has worked for the authority for 26 years and earns about $100,000 a year. The WHA operates 317 low and moderate-income rental units and has an annual operating budget of about $1.5 million.

The board, through Misiti, has said it is going in a “new direction” after two recent high-profile changes in longstanding personnel at the authority. Two months ago the board replaced its attorney, Jim Laughlin, after 15 years, and on Friday it eliminated the maintenance supervisor position, which was held for 10 years by Paul Inserra.

At the end of July, Misiti asked Nere for a list of all authority staff, how long they’ve worked there, what their titles and duties are, how much they are paid, when and how much their last raises were and when their last evaluations occurred.

The board’s longest-serving member, at seven years, is 81year-old Thomas Mezzei, an outspoken former bank manager who has called for more strict policies and adherence to bylaws. The other members, all appointed by the Town Council this year, are Misiti, a building and grounds supervisor for Quinnipiac University; and local developers Robert Wiedenmann Jr. and Joseph DiNatale.

Mezzei said he felt the present membership of the board was “a bit aggressive,” but noted that previous members, including former Chairman William Fischer, put through measures such as a comprehensive forensic evaluation late last year and a forensic audit that is expected to be completed sometime next month.

“They’re doing a great job,” he said. “A lot of things were in the works but it took time to get things going. They’re holding him (Nere) to do his job. We’re there for the tenants.”

Three of the four commissioners were appointed this year, after the resignations of long timers Fredrick Monahan and Robert Prentice, who left just days apart. Shortly thereafter, Tenant Commissioner Debra Buckman resigned, just months into her five-year appointment.

Town Councilor Nicholas Economopoulos praised the new configuration of the board at last month’s council meeting and has publicly questioned the authority’s competence and its financial practices.

Lot owner won’t charge school for parking - But McGuire could limit public access

As published in the Record Journal, Thursday September 8, 2011

By Robert Cyr
Record-Journal staff
rcyr@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2224


WALLINGFORD — The owner of a property tied to a group parking lot uptown who has vowed to pull out of a lease agreement with the town if a referendum goes through to reverse the lease said he will not charge a church school to use his parking space if the lot is no longer public.
 
John McGuire owns 2 N. Main St, home to TD Bank and part of a large four-building parking lot that is part of a 30-year public parking agreement approved by the Town Council last month. Two town councilors and members of the public opposed the decision, calling the agreement’s stipulation that the town maintain the space a foolish use of public funds on private land.
 
McGuire was part of a previous yearto- year lease agreement with the town that began in 1961 and gave the town the same privileges. However, when he felt the town was not keeping up with paving and other maintenance of his space, he gave his one-year notice to quit the arrangement.
 
Shortly after, he verbally withdrew his notice, but not officially. He worked on a more detailed agreement with the town and other property owners instead, hammering out the deal that was approved by the council last month. The deal says the town “may” spend up to $500,000 to pave the lot, install lights, and reconstruct a cement wall

In McGuire’s 2009 letter to the town’s law department, he said that his decision to leave the agreement “will obviously impact Holy Trinity School, who uses our parking lot on a regular basis. We will have to work out a payment plan for them going forward.”

That never came to pass, however, andMcGuire said his lot remained for public use, and that he had no plans to charge the school to park in his space if the council’s decision is overturned by the referendum.

“I’m waiting for the referendum to go through, and go all the way through, but I will not charge the school,” he said. “But if it’s not going to be a municipal parking lot, then you can’t just allow everybody to park in your parking lot.”

Holy Trinity School Principal Katie Kelly said the school has never had a formal parking arrangement with McGuire or with any of the previous owners of the parking space. The school, with students up to eighth grade, only has about 10 parking spaces on its property, and uses half a dozen spaces in McGuire’s lot and a few on the street.

“If we had to pay to park on his property, we would be making other arrangements,” she said. “We’ve been here 100 years, and his decisions are not going to impact the future of Holy Trinity School. We are going to adjust, if need be.”

Housing authority cuts maintenance supervisor position

As published in the Record Journal, Saturday September 3, 2011

By Robert Cyr
Record-Journal staff
rcyr@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2224

WALLINGFORD -

The Wallingford Housing Authority board voted Friday to cut its maintenance supervisor position effective immediately, but denied the decision was spurred by allegations brought against the current supervisor by his staff, who said they were instructed to handle and dispose of asbestos.

The position held by Paul Inserra was cut completely and his duties will be taken up by remaining maintenance staff, said housing board Chairman Michael Misiti. Inserra was not a member of a union and the board’s attorney will be looking at possible severance packages for him, Misiti said. Inserra was told by housing officials that his last day of work was Friday.

“We just decided as a board we need to move in a direction to try and make it run differently,” he said. Misiti said the board’s decision was not a reflection of Inserra’s job performance.

Inserra had no contract and served at the will of the commission, Misiti said. Board members and Director Stephen Nere said they did not immediately know how much the position paid.

Inserra was not available for comment.

Misiti denied the decision was tied in any way to the recent testimony of three maintenance workers who claimed Inserra told them to remove and dispose of asbestos debris and floor mastic in 2009, shortly before and during state inspection of the maintenance garage.

“This was being talked about well before that got brought to the newspapers,” he said. “We are not investigating any further.”\

While state environmental health officials received and investigated complaints of the asbestos removal, no charges were ever filed for the alleged illegal removal and disposal of the carcinogen. State health officials said nothing more was done about the issue because they were satisfied with the removal of the material by an abatement firm in September that year.

Nere said he was not in favor of the decision, and that Inserra had worked at the authority for 10 years.

“We’re not really going to get into all the ramifications, but I really don’t think it was the appropriate thing to do. The board is moving in a different direction and they felt it was best for the authority,” he said.

Town must pay managers union $230,000

As published in the Record Journal, Saturday September 3, 2011

By Robert Cyr
Record-Journal staff
rcyr@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2224

WALLINGFORD

— The town will have to come up with more than $200,000 after the Town Council decided this week it would not contest an arbitration award in favor of a local managers’ union asking for retroactive pay increases.

A payment of $230,000 was awarded to the 55 members of United Public Service Employees Union Local 424, a management union with positions that include town planner, public works superintendent and tax collector, said Mayor William W. Dickinson Jr.

The amount reflects a 2.5 percent annual salary increase for 2011, he said. The first two years of the contract starting in 2009 involved a wage increase. A 2 percent increase is set for 2012, according to award documents.

Dickinson said he was not pleased with the decision, but the amount has to be found somewhere — and town officials will be meeting soon to examine municipal finances to meet the award.

“I certainly don’t agree with the philosophy that goes into it; I don’t think it recognizes in any way that our primary source of revenue is taxes,” he said. “It ignores the fact that taxes have to go up for increased costs, and that never seems to be included in the decision making. Clearly vacant positions wouldn’t be filled, unless there’s other money available.”

Dickinson said it was too soon to say whether layoffs were imminent. In a controversial move late last year, he laid off paramedic staff to meet arbitration awards with another town union. Mediating attorney J. Larry Foy billed both the Town of Wallingford and the union $10,812 each for his arbitration services.

Personnel Director Terrence Sullivan said the first area of savings that is looked at is vacant positions, and the salaries and other benefits associated with those positions are added up. But leaving those positions vacant will not be enough to pay the award.

“Then we get into the tougher area — whether or not there has to be reduction in staff because we have to pay that money no matter what,” he said.

Local UPSEU Director Wayne Gilbert was not available for comment.

‘Citizen Mike’ talks Simpson Court at 9PM

WALLINGFORD — Former City Councilor Mike Brodinsky discusses the Simpson Court parking plan on the latest edition of his public access show “Citizen Mike.” In studio guests include Town Councilors Nick Economopoulos and Craig Fishbein.

The show airs on cable Channel 18 at 9 p.m. every night, except Sunday. It can also be viewed on demand at wpaa.tv. Comments or suggestions can be sent to citizenmiketv@gmail.com. Record-Journal Executive Editor Ralph Tomaselli is regular contributor to the show.

If you can’t catch the show on TV you can catch it online on their Video On Demand page.

REMINDER - ‘Party for a Cure’ scheduled Sept. 4

What : “Party For A Cure” for the Muscular Dystrophy Association.
Where : Zandri’s Stillwood Inn, 1074 S. Colony Road.
When : 5:30 p.m. Sept. 4.
Cost : $50 donation to MDA.
Information, tickets, donations : Call Zandri’s at (203) 269-6695.

WALLINGFORD — The Labor Day Telethon’s annual “Party for a Cure” will take place at 5:30 p.m. Sept. 4 at Zandri’s Stillwood Inn, 1074 S. Colony Road.

The admission charge will include a buffet dinner, open bar, entertainment and a silent auction. Proceeds will be donated to the Muscular Dystrophy Association.

WTIC-TV will broadcast live from Zandri’s during the telethon. For information or a reservation, call (203) 269-6695.