Loading...
CC MTG MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16 2013 REGULAR MEETING OF THE AGA WAM CITY COUNCIL * Minutes dated September 16, 2013 President Johnson—I'd call the meeting to order. Item 1. Roll Call President Johnson—I'd ask Barbara to call the roll please? ROLL CALL—11 PRESENT, a ABSENT President Johnson—With eleven present, we have a quorum. i Item 2. Moment of Silence and the Pledge ofAlle i;�ance. President Johnson — I'd ask everyone to rise for the moment of silence and the Pledge of Allegiance please? Item 3. Citizen's Speak Time President Johnson —Next we have Citizen's Speak Time. We have one individual signed up — Brian Halla? Brian Halla—Brian Halla, 16 Castle Hill Road, representing Agawam Condominiums for Trash Services. Council members — the Mayor has obstructed our resolution for two meetings now. Initially by having his Law Department spend five weeks creating a document dump then by attacking the character of Councilor Calabrese. For all the problems there are in Boston at least citizens can get legislation on the docket. Here, it's been two months and counting since the sub- committee meeting on our resolution and we're still not on this Agenda. I expect we all long for • the days when Agawam's legislature is a co-equal branch of government - Councilor Rossi — when our resolution finally comes up I've heard nearly half of you are inclined to recuse yourselves. Many citizens are upset by that; they and their legislator feel your vote only to bring equality to a minority of residential taxpayers who are discriminated against is ethical. However, based upon Massachusetts' Conflict of Interest Law, I can understand concern most of you have • on, you have personal or family connections to the Agawam condominium population. Recusal may depend on whether condos house a significant segment of Agawam's population. If they do, recusal is not called for; the Ethics Commission generally defines significant as ten percent and pollution based upon the last federal census. It's conceivable to you that the condo segment of the population is less than ten percent and the Mayor's shown he won't hesitate to file Ethics charges therefore you're not inclined to risk your freedom and fortunes by voting on this matter. If this is what it comes down to, let's work together to find out if condos are more than ten percent of Agawam's population. Thank you. President Johnson—Thank you. 1 • Item 4. Minutes • 1. Regular Council Meeting—September 3,2013 President Johnson — Is there a Motion to approve? Moved by Councilor Rheauit, seconded by Councilor Magovern. Questions or discussion on the meeting minutes? Seeing none, all those in favor say Ay? Any opposed? It's unanimous. Item 5. Declaration from Council President None. Item 6. Presentation of Petitions,Memorials& Remonstrances 1. TR-2013-30 -A Resolution entering into a Memorandum of Understanding for Emergency Transportation (Mayor) (Referred to Community Relations Committee) (Tabled 913113) President Johnson —The item is on the table, what's the Council's pleasure? We have a Motion to remove the item made by Councilor Calabrese, seconded by Councilor Bitzas. If you're in favor of removing the item from the table, vote yes. If you're opposed, vote no. I'd ask Barbara to call the Roll please? ROLL CALL— 11 YES,O NO President Johnson — With a vote of eleven yes, the item is off the table. It is before us, what's the Council's pleasure? I believe it was moved and seconded a number of meetings ago and then placed on the table so I don't know that we need a Motion and a second again but is there any discussion I guess on the item? Councilor Bitzas? Councilor Bitzas — I think we should vote it tonight and I hope we all vote in favor. We delay that for a few months now, it's about time to act. If something happened not good, nothing happened, and we have some information so I hope it will be very helpful to you and I urge the Council to take an action and vote yes or no so we can act to it. Thank you so much. President Johnson—Other discussion? Councilor Rossi? Councilor Rossi—As I understand what I have in front of me from this, who is it Nicole Rowen, that the town has to enter into an Agreement so that they can get reimbursement from FEMA. Am I understanding this correctly and according to this it said that the PVTA has not submitted a bill to anyone but it doesn't say that they won't so are they asking us to vote in favor of this simply to have a contract in place so they can get reimbursement?, It means that we won't get ! charged if we do that or is it possible that we will get charged with that? I don't really know, and I'll defer to anyone who may have that kind of information. President Johnson—Councilor Cavallo,then Councilor Calabrese? Councilor Cavallo —Yeah, well when you read this, it's not a sure thing that you're gonna get the money from FEMA. There's a process here that they're talking about and they describe a worst case scenario and then they also mention here mutual aid. Is that mutual aid mean that other towns like we have a mutual aid as far as police protection and fire and ambulance and so 2 • forth, are they, does that mean that West Springfield and Southwick, etc. etc. are all part of this program where they will come and help us or it's strictly, it's obviously just the PVTA which involves those communities but I certainly, you know I would like to vote for it but there's something in here that indicates that we could very well be stuck with the tab here if we have a catastrophic event but then again should money really be a concern if we have to pay, that's another thing to think about. President Johnson—Councilor Calabrese? Councilor Calabrese—Yeah,you know, the document that was provided to us tonight, I mean it kinda speaks for itself. It's agreeably ...and I guess people just need to vote how they deem fit on this particular issue. President Johnson—Other questions or discussion? Councilor Letellier? i Councilor Letellier — Yes, thank you. I was disappointed when we received this because it answers absolutely no questions and it raises more and it's also disappointing that we have a representative from the PVTA who has yet to address this issue with us directly. On the other hand, we can't get something for nothing and we need to enter into something for a future event. So it sound to me like PVTA doesn't bill the town, that hasn't billed any cities or towns yet but they have requested FEMA reimbursement. That's what I take away from this. They haven't bill any municipality but they have billed the federal government in the event of a disaster declaration. I guess that's some comfort that they haven't billed anybody yet but it's a ten year contract! It's a ten year contract with no, can we do it for a couple years and see how it goes and see if we get billed, I mean do we have to do a ten year, are they only offering us a ten year contract? I don't know if these are questions that the Community Relations Committee has addressed. I know we keep tabling this but the information that we get isn't any clearer so I'd like to have something in place and if we did it with one of the local bus companies, I can't imagine they would do it for free so probably our better chance of getting it for free is probably with PVTA than it would be with a local bus company, but to have a ten year contract that says well we haven't charged anybody yet to me is still questionable and I was so hoping that we'd get ! the information so that we could put something in place if in case there is a something, a disaster or something, I mean I don't know if the Community Relations Committee wants to talk to PVTA about lowering the, or Chet, or Chuck as Chet's referred to, wants to talk about shortening the length of the contract so that we can see what happens or have some sort of a mutual, a clause, where with six months' notice, either party could cancel, just something that, just something, I just think that they longer this goes on the more frustrating it is because we all know that something needs to be put in place but why can't simple questions be answered? Those are my thoughts. I have no idea how I'm gonna vote yet, I know George doesn't want to table this —oh, I'm still talking—Fin sorry I didn't want to be rude— I know that George wants us to vote on this and I can see why you want us to vote on this George but I also think we're not doing our job unless we're making the best possible agreement for the town. President Johnson —Councilor Magovern the Councilor Perry? Councilor Magovern — I am one that's always opposed to keep tabling an item. I think we're here to do the town's business and to table an item, 1 don't think is right, however we're asked meeting after meeting after meeting to have these answers of the questions asked and all we get is vagaries back, we've gotten nothing back as to the questions that we have asked. It's still an open-ended contract. I mean I don't believe that they're gonna do anything that's inappropriate in charging and I understand it a little bit better that they want this passed so they can collect from 3 • FEMA but there's nothing which is concrete in this agreement and I think that a ten year contract is much, much too long to go into and I would like to see the committee sit down and have a • meeting not with Chet but with a representative with the PVTA where we can ask them the questions and get specific answers but this is just totally vague. They still don't, I mean I trust that they want to do it and they want to do it right and they're not gonna take advantage of the town but as representatives of the town I think we've gotta have concrete answers to our questions. So I want to go ahead with it. I think PVTA is the right authority to do it with. I think they would do an excellent job, God forbid that we have some type of an emergency but I can't vote for it until we get our answers to the questions and being the length of the contract and a guarantee that we're not gonna be charged or if we are going to be charged, because as Councilor Letellier said, I don't believe in getting anything for nothing so there's a cost involved somewhere in this, 1 don't mind paying for it but I'd like to know what it is. I don't like open- ended contracts. Thank you. • President Johnson--Councilor Perry? Councilor Perry — Yes, thank you, Mr. President. I agree, and Councilor Magovern basically stated what I was gonna state. What I gathered from the information that we received was the simple fact is they have to have a contract with the communities that they're looking at to do this with so they can apply back to the federal government/FEMA to get reimbursed, it's what I • gathered from the information that they sent to us. It didn't answer our questions in regards to what that cost could be, it could be an incident that FEMA is not going to cover but we may need their services and what is that cost gonna be, I mean we don't know. I agree George, 100%, Councilor Bitzas that this is something that is good, we need to look at, but again, as everybody has stated, they're looking for a ten year contract and we don't even know what the fee is gonna be so, I think we need to try and get answers as Councilor Magovern said from PVTA and sit with them and hammer this thing out so I would definitely support tabling it another time around so I'm gonna go from there for the rest of the Council. President Johnson—Councilor Mineo? • Councilor Mineo — I'm in favor of this, however, I'd like to get some more information on this too and again I don't think we need to rush this, I mean today's what, September 16t'? Usually,a few years ago we had that snow storm in the end of October, I mean I do think we've got some time, I think if we get this information before the first meeting in October I think, I think we're okay here so I think we need to take our time, get all our questions answered and we move on from there. President Johnson —Councilor Cavallo? Councilor Cavallo—Yeah, as I said earlier, I think I reiterate some of the comments made by the other councilors here, that we should have it come back to our committee and let the Community Relations Committee get a hold of someone from PVTA, come up and explain this to us. When YOU were involved in a situation like this, what exactly happens because I think the key part here is reading of course the procedure for getting the reimbursement which I'm not very clear on exactly what they're talking about so it would be appropriate at this time, Mr. President, that I make a Motion that we take this and put it back— President Johnson — I would request that we hold off on the Motion to table as not all Councilors have had the opportunity to speak. Stepping from the Chair, you've had the opportunity once George, and now I'm gonna step from the Chair. I share the frustration of my 4 • • fellow councilors at the lack of information that we get but in looking at the simple contract that's before us, it's non-exclusive which means they're not our exclusive emergency transportation source, it's by our request not forced upon us, so we only utilize it when we ask them to come in. As I understand from the copy of the email that we were provided that when they respond to a single incident that they don't charge but on larger scale incidents, they rely on reimbursement. They don't get reimbursed directly from FEMA; the community would so they would charge us and we would then in turn seek reimbursement from FEMA on what they charged us, that's why the Memorandum of Understanding needs to be in place before the FEMA declared disaster • happens. So again, I share the frustration because we've asked simple questions and haven't been provided with simple answers but I don't know that we're gonna get any more answers than we've got other than they don't charge other communities for single incidents and stuff, like providing an emergency vehicle in case of a fire or something like that— a non FEMA certified disaster, if you will — non FEMA reimbursable disaster but again it's not like it's an exclusive contract and it's not, they're not gonna provide any service until requested to do so by the town. So the powers that be, whether it be the Mayor or Emergency Management Director in Agawam, would have to request the service before they would come and provide and there is language in the contract that says that they will provide an estimate of cost in advance if required so I don't think they have a price sheet, that's the problem. We keep asking for that price sheet and I don't think one exists so with that, I don't know who hasn't had the opportunity — I think Councilor Rheault hasn't had the opportunity. • Councilor Rheault—There's really not much more to add to what's been already said by several councilors except that I think you just explained a little more clearly for us to understand the procedure so I would be against I think tabling it at this time again. • President Johnson—Councilor Bitzas,then Councilor Rossi? Councilor Bitzas —Thank you Mr. president. I think you said it all, what I was thinking to say, you told us, you're not gonna see any better than what we have and to be honest with you Councilors, I got to say this. This is not be more than $500/$600 for a bus or something and we come down here for six months debating and debating a thousand dollars to ask for more questions and some of you, five of you, you want to vote to pass a $6million expenditure for the water--both are of course emergencies. I mean you have six million dollars, 6 to 5 we vote of course, I like you to ask the questions and we have the questions, but now you for five hundred dollars to one thousand dollars for one bus and you make so much fuss about it? Do whatever you like but I think we look ridiculous. Thank you. • President Johnson—Councilor Rossi? Councilor Rossi — Yeah, as I said earlier, I don't have a problem with the contract and I understand that they need this in place in order to get reimbursement, they need reimbursement from FEMA and I understand that it is at our request but I also looked at the original contract and • it calls for practice sessions for people to come in here and go through their routines for preparedness or something like that or keep updated or whatever they do for their training exercises and that's the part that bothers me that if we go and ask for these people to come in and go through some kind of a practice exercise, are we gonna be billed for that? What are we gonna be billed for? i understand that there's an emergency that we'll get reimbursement through FEMA however long that might take, but the other practice sessions and stuff like that, I don't know what that is and those are the questions that 1 think need to be answered if we were, in fact, to be going through those kinds of things but it was in the original contract and that's a question that I have. 5 • r President Johnson —Again, stepping from the Chair, if there's emergency training drills it's by our invitation. PVTA understands that it may be asked by us to participate if we want them to but they can't do it unless we ask them. Councilor Magovern? Councilor Magovern— dust basically I think that you clarified a lot of the questions in the way that you put it but I still would like to get the simple questions answered. It's very, very simple. Is it$500? Fine. Is it$1,0007 Fine. Is it$2,5007 Fine but I'd like to know what the cost is and as you pointed out we will be charged with the anticipation of getting FEMA paying it through the Town of Agawam to PVTA but it's not documented that FEMA would pay for it. It's gotta be an emergency in order for FEMA to pay but if we have a local problem that's not a national emergency and they send us a bill for the buses, and FEMA decides that it's not a national emergency, they won't refund us.for that cost and again, it's a cost that I don't mind paying but I'd like to know what the cost factor is. It's as simple as that. It's a simple question. President Johnson—Councilor Letellier? Councilor Letellier —Thank you. I think we all knew that they weren't gonna come unless we called them so I don't think that is anything that we've learned from this memo. I guess the question that I would have that might make it worth tabling is if they bill us because they think FEMA is gonna reimburse them and FEMA doesn't reimburse them, do we pay them and then hope that FEMA reimburses or do they hold off on the billing and wait to see if FEMA reimburses. I guess that is still an open question. Are they gonna bill us $10,000 for a natural disaster and then we have to pay it up front and hope that FEMA reimburses or do they bill us $10,000 for a natural disaster and then we bill FEMA or I'm sorry not bill but apply to FEMA for the reimbursement? So I guess, to me, that's still an open question. Obviously they are only gonna come if we call them. I don't think that's any big revelation but I think the issue is with the FEMA and with the billing—do we have to pay it or does PVTA waive it if FEMA says no it doesn't qualify as a disaster? So and I won't speak again. President Johnson—What's the Council's pleasure? We've got Councilor Rheault saying move the question— Councilor Letellier— Well, I think that Councilor Cavallo had made a Motion to table and you asked him to hold off on that pending further discussion — President Johnson — So I'll defer at this point, since I asked him to hold off, to Councilor Cavallo? Councilor Cavallo — I'd like to make a Motion that we place this item back on the table, take it off the table, so that the Community Relations Committee can ask the necessary questions from FEMA to clarify some of the points that the councilors made today— President Johnson —So that's actually a Motion to put it back on the table. Is there a second to Councilor Cavallo's Motion? Made by Councilor Cavallo, seconded by Councilor Magovern. If you're in favor of tabling the item,vote yes. If you're opposed, vote no. I'd ask Barbara to call the roll please? ROLL CALL-8 YES,3 NO (Councilors Johnson,Bitzas and Rheault) President Johnson —With a vote of eight yes, three no, you've placed the item back on the table. 6 • 2. TR-2013-40 -A Resolution authorizing the borrowing and appropriation in the amount of$6,340,000 for the North Westfield Street Water Main Improvement Project(Mayor) (Referred to Administrative Committee) (Tabled 9/3/13) President Johnson ---Is there a Motion? Moved by Councilor Letellier, seconded by Councilor Magovern. All in favor of taking the item off the table say Ay? Any opposed? The item is off the table. It was moved and seconded at our last meeting, what's the Council's pleasure? Councilor Letellier? Councilor Letellier — Yes, thank you. When we got this email I think it was late Friday afternoon, I looked at the rates and shocked is too strong of a word but eyebrows were raised. We're looking at going from $1.36 to $2.05 —that's almost double and then today's email from Cheryl said how much we had in Free Cash and how much we had in the Waste Water and Water Retained Earnings Accounts and there's almost$4million in the Water and Waste Water Retained Earnings Account and $6.9 in Free Cash. I would like to see more money used to decrease the borrowing amount and to see if there's a way to use some of that money to offset these rate increases. I mean one of the points I made at the sewer workshop last week is we're gonna be hitting people with the water rate increase for this item, the repair, and then we're gonna try to hit • them again for the sewer and if we're looking at almost a doubling now to residential taxpayers, those are huge hits and we all make our various points ever budget year but I always look at how much are we putting in Free Cash, how much are we over-budgeting year after year after year to the same departments? And so I can't be in favor of this tonight. I'm not saying I'm not gonna be in favor of it in the long term, but I think we need to figure out if we can use more money from Retained Earnings, from Free Cash, do something to get this rate down and this is the problem • with the City of Springfield, if they had maintained their lines properly, we wouldn't have to be putting in our own line. I know Chris talked about redundancy, redundancy, redundancy, but there's gotta be some obligation on the part of the City of Springfield to maintain lines and not wait for them to break. So I don't know if it's something where we can ask the City of Springfield Water& Sewer Commission to make some sort of a contribution, I doubt our contract allows for that, but this is their fault. They didn't maintain their lines, and now we have to incur • $6 '/2 million in debt so those are my thoughts. Thank you. President Johnson — I'd just like to step from the Chair because I have some, I share the same shock that Councilor Letellier had when we received the rate memo and again we're provided with no back up detail and simply put the numbers don't add up. What they're proposing is that • the Tier 1 rate which we have a tiered water rate here in Agawam, the lower amount you use, you pay a higher rate and the more,when you step up,there's a slightly lower rate,well the Tier 1 rate is scheduled to go up 51% and that's the rate frankly that most senior citizens pay because they're the lower water users because they have the smaller households. The Tier 2 rates which is the amount above 4,000 cubic feet and the commercial/industrial rate is scheduled to go up almost 35% and the average increase to homeowners would be about 34% when you average the two rates together. So what I did was I looked at what the impact of this bond would be on the Water Department budget. The Water Department budget this year was a little over four million dollars, the first year's principal and interest on this payment based upon the calculations used in the Capital Improvement Program — because we didn't get their proposed bond schedule with this showing what the payments would be—is about$507,000 which would represent about a 12 1/2% increase of the budget amount but yet they're projecting 51% and 35% to the water rates. So it • doesn't add up and our Capital Improvement budget which we passed a couple of months ago had the estimate for this project at $4.8million and it comes in at $6.4miliion. So again, one would assume that the project was well under the design phase at the time that they did the Capital 7 0 Improvement budget, how did it come in at 30% higher than they were estimating just a few months ago? So my problem is, as it always is it seems, is that we can't get basic information and . what we've got is conclusary memos from Tighe & Bond saying what the rate increase would be but no background information and there's gotta be more than just this project driving these rates up because again, even if you tack the full amount of the bond payment on to the Water Department budget, it goes up by 12 %% but yet they're asking us to increase rates by Tier I -- 51% and Tier 2 — 35%. They're not asking today but they say by the end of the fiscal year they say we're gonna have to raise the rates and those rates will only be good for two years before we're gonna need to raise them again and if you look at the nice graph that they provided us, if we do raise them according to what they're asking us to do, we now become, we now have the highest average residential water bill of all the communities that participate in the Springfield Water & Sewer Commission feed so we go from having with West Springfield, the lowest bill to now having the highest bill of those communities that buy from Springfield Water & Sewer. So again, on the heels of less than two years ago raising sewer rates by 30%, I don't dispute the need for the project, I share one hundred percent Councilor Letellier's view that we're being forced to do this because Springfield Water & Sewer didn't do what they were supposed to do. They're not, we're not replacing bad water lines in Agawam, we're putting in a main to get redundancy so that they can fix the line that they didn't maintain themselves and to go along with that, to raise the water rates for senior citizens by 51% and for the average homeowner by almost 35%without . getting more than just a conclusary memo, how much time does it take to say here's what the principal and interest projections are, here's — instead we get this is what the rate will be based upon the bond and other costs that we expect to be due to Springfield Water & Sewer. Again, that's why two weeks ago at our meeting I said I couldn't vote on the project without knowing what the rate increase was. It took them the full two weeks, we got this late Friday night in our email and again, it's a situation where there's very little detailed information. I apologize for stepping out of the Chair. Councilor Magovern's had his light on for a while. Councilor Magovern — I'm baffled by the numbers. I agree wholeheartedly with President Johnson's statements about the lack of information and not waiting so long to get it but one of the things that really concerns me is that they want to up up the rates and they've got $4million in Free Cash in their accounts so how much is this rate increase is gonna end up going into Free Cash? I mean Free Cash is supposed to be for a rainy day well if these pipes start bursting,we're gonna have rainy days all over Agawam so I think that we can look at some of this Free Cash and find out exactly what the cost is gonna be to the public if we can utilize Free Cash to pay for some of the cost. The project is not just something that all of a sudden has sprung up on us, I think that Chris has been planning this for years as far as putting in these water mains- President Johnson — Not to interrupt you but when you say Chris, it's Golba, so that people don't get confused that it's me! Councilor Magovern — Oh, I'm sorry, Chris Golba has been planning this for quite some time; Chris' (Johnson's) authority does not run into the Water Department. I want that stated for the R record. But Chris Golba has been working for quite some time to get the water mains fixed. The city, Springfield City Water Department, has gone for almost one hundred years and the pipes are really I think have lived out their usefulness and I think they've been planning for some time to replace them as well but it's just the crisis that came up with a burst pipe last fall has brought it to the immediate front burner so I don't want to see this tabled again. I spoke to Chris Golba after our last meeting and the Springfield Water Department had been on the phone with him stating that they were disappointed because they had valves and things ordered in order to move that project forward and there is a crisis to get the project to move forward. If we table it again, it's another two weeks which is gonna be another couple of months if things aren't right but you're S 1 • right and the questions have to be asked and we have to have the answers so I'd like to find out if we could use more Free Cash and lower the out of pocket expenses for the water fees. President Johnson—Councilor Rossi then Bitzas? Councilor Rossi—Thank you. At the last meeting, everyone here at the Council requested more information and I was in hopes that when we got that information, it would go back into committee so that we could resolve some of the points that were made here and I have to say that I agree with the points, that they were well taken. In response to Councilor Magovern over here, I don't see where their mismanagement or their ineptness makes it our crisis. I think that they should come back to the committee and I agree that more money could be taken out of Free Cash, that's what capital expenditures are for —to try to help reduce the water rates not try to increase them—and looking at the numbers over here and dealing with the sewer project over the years, I find that some of those numbers have been suspect and I find some of them here to be quite • suspect to be honest with you. So I think, or what I'd like to see happen is maybe we could probably table this, send it back to committee, hold a workshop and get the answers that we require. President Johnson—Councilor Bitzas? • Councilor Bitzas —Thank you Mr. President. I'm glad the last meeting we have, I was one of the six councilors that we ask for more information. Now this is compared to the others, apples and oranges, and what bothered me was we request information for four months, five months, for $500 for$1000 cost and we go around and this one here we almost pass it, only by one vote, and we have no more discussion about this problem we have right now so I'm very happy that six of us vote against passing last time because we have not one single information and now we have all this informations and on that one I think all of us we have a big problem. So I don't like to table things but this is really big, big item and it's $6million expenditure so we've got to find the right answers, we've got to save money for the taxpayers. We will fight it for the water rates, we gotta do our best to be the less costly for the taxpayers to see how we can find the money and I agree it's a very important issue and we have a committee meeting and actually should be a workshop • and everybody should attend it and be there and just solve this problem. Thank you. President Johnson—Councilor Perry? Councilor Perry — Yes, thank you Mr. President. I agree too, I mean, I was shocked when I . looked at this this past weekend and the rate increases that were going up, it was kind of crazy. I know in our workshop I did not attend the Administrative meeting that you had on this item because I was on vacation at the time but I did ask Chris in our workshop about this specifically in regards to, as Gina said, why is it our problem if it's Springfield's lines that are damaged? And the response I got from Chris Golba was the fact that we had planned on doing this anyways, this is something that had to be done and I don't really fully understand why it has to be done but 1 do know that they cannot repair that line until something like this is in place because I think he said in that meeting that evening that what 80% of the town would lose water pressure. So we all understand that it has to be done. There's no question about it but the bottom line is I can't and I agree wholeheartedly that we need to table this, send it back to our Bobby's committee and have a workshop on it. I mean looking at what Cheryl sent us today as Councilor Letellier said, there's a lot of money there that could offset some of this rate increase that they're projecting to us so I • would definitely go along with tabling. Thank you. President Johnson—Councilor Mineo? 9 • Councilor Mineo — You know, the way things go over a couple weeks, I was in favor of doing this and I know we need to do it however seeing the jump from $1.36 to $2.05 I mean this is, this is a lot of money to be putting on the taxpayers here. I mean I know it's gotta be done but I think, we need to be a little more creative in how we're gonna pay for this project. I really am not in favor of doubling water rates on people, no way, not fair. President Johnson—Councilor Magovern? Councilor Magovern — I just want to say nobody I think was more strongly in favor of the passage of this than I was two weeks ago and I was disappointed that it didn't go through but we didn't have all the numbers at that time and I've gotta concur with Councilor Mineo that to almost double our water rates is absolutely unacceptable in these hard economic times and if we've got this Free Cash, I think we should utilize some of that Free Cash. The rainy day is here • to keep the increases down but we've gotta have somebody come back with concrete proposals for us as to how much it's gonna cost us and again, that was not worked out in the details that we received so as much as I hate even thinking of the idea of tabling this for the delay, I don't think it's our fault, I think it's the fault of the higher ups that didn't give us back the numbers that we need so we don't have to double our water rates. President Johnson — Stepping from the Chair and then Councilor Letellier, there's something other than this project driving these rate increases and I think that that's what we really need to have a greater understanding because I don't know that there's anyone up here that disagrees with the need for the project. It's necessary albeit not because of anything that we did wrong but again, when you look at it driving the budget by 12 '/2% and they're looking for 35% increase in the rates, there's something else driving the rate and we have to understand that to know what the best course of action is. Again, I apologize, Councilor Letellier? Councilor Letellier —No need to apologize. What I'd like and whether it's a memo to Cheryl from the Council or Council President or from myself or what have you but because we found out today that there's almost four million in Retained Water and Waste Water Earnings, I'd like to know how those monies have accumulated over time, how many years has it taken to accumulate that kind of money because if we're accumulating four million dollars in Retained Earnings to what degree do we really need a rate increase at all? You know? And every time we have a discussion of a sewer or a water or waste water increase, we say gee we've got all these Retained Earnings, well I think it's time for us to figure out how long it takes for four million dollars in Retained Earnings to accumulate and therefore do we need, do we really need, an increase even though we're gonna have this bond? And so however the Council President thinks it's appropriate to word it, I think we need to find that out before we even have a workshop or schedule a workshop, in my opinion. President Johnson —I think that the most appropriate, because Water and Waste Water are two different enterprise funds, I think to get a rolling history of what the Retained Earnings have been in the Water Department for the last decade would give us an idea to show, I mean I can tell from my previous experience that when you have a dry year, you get better revenue, when you get a wet year, you get lower revenue believe it or not so you see spikes and drops based upon climate in the water area but again, to see whether this has been a rolling total or how it's changed I think if we get a ten year history on Retained Earnings in the Water Department, we can see where we were ten years ago and how it's gone up or down over that decade. s 10 r Councilor Letellier—And that would be fine because if you remember the email that we got, of that$4million, like $3.3million I think was in the Water Retained Earnings, it was like 75%of the total Retained Earnings for the two departments, was just water so I'd be fine with just getting the water information. President Johnson --A little over $3.3 in water —because that's the only that would apply here because they're different enterprise funds. So I'll get that information. I'll request it of the Auditor and get that out to all the Council as soon as we can. It should not be difficult for them to r put that information together for us. Councilor Rheault? Councilor Rheault—Yes, I agree that those are important questions that need to be addressed to the Council and I'm fully supportive of requesting that information. I think the sad part of this is that in all due respect to Tighe & Bond, that we're paying good money and high money to find out information that's hurting us. I think they should do a little more prudent with what they're, • sharpen their pencil and find out what our true costs really are because they're the supposedly the experts not us on establishing these rates but these rates are just out of whack, they're astronomical. President Johnson—Councilor Perry? 0 Councilor Perry—Is everyone all set? I was gonna make a Motion? Motion to table?. President Johnson — We have a Motion to table made by Councilor Perry, seconded by Councilor Magovern, all in favor of tabling say Ay? Any opposed? It's unanimous. That item is back on the table. It'll be referred to the Admin Sub-Committee to hold a workshop and just as a piece of housekeeping the previous item that was placed back on the table, it was my understanding that was going to go to Community Relations Sub-Committee to get those questions answered, so just as a matter of housekeeping. 3. TR-2013-42 -A Resolution authorizing the posting of the warrant for the Local and Special Senatorial Election on October 8,2013 and Local and Special Senatorial Election on November 5,2013. President Johnson -- Is there a Motion? Moved by Councilor Cichetti, seconded by Councilor Mineo. I heard it from over there and I didn't know who it was. Questions or discussion on posting the warrants? Seeing none all those in favor say Ay? Any opposed? It's unanimous. 0 4. TR-2013-43 -A Resolution Opposing the Proposed Destination Casino to be located at the Big E fairgrounds in West Springfield,NtA(Councilor Bitzas) (Referred to Community Relations Committee)To be withdrawn President Johnson—I believe Councilor Bitzas is going to make a Motion to withdraw? 0 Councilor Bitzas—Yes, Mr. President,yes, there's no need for it now. President Johnson — We have a Motion to withdraw made by Councilor Bitzas, is there a second? Seconded by Councilor Calabrese. Questions or discussion on the withdrawal? Seeing none, all those in favor of withdrawing the item say Ay? Any opposed? It's unanimously withdrawn. 11 • Item 7. Report of Council Committees . None. Item 8. Elections None. Item 9. Public Hearings None. Item 10. Old Business 1. TOR-2013-7 -An Ordinance to Amend Chapter 180 of the Code of the Town of Agawam Temporary Moratorium on Medical Marijuana Treatment Centers(Mayor) (2/2 readings) (Referred to Legislative Committee) . President Johnson — What's before us this evening is the second and final reading. Is there a Motion to approve the second and final reading? Moved by Councilor Cichetti, seconded by Councilor Letellier. Questions or discussion on the second reading? Councilor Letellier — I just have one note of discussion. At our sub-committee meeting, I indicated that I think it would be helpful for the town to look into an overlay district like we had done for adult zoning and I don't know to what degree the Planning Board or Deb Dachos look at our sub-committee meeting notes, I just want to put it on the record that I'd like the Planning Board and the Planning Department to look into the possibility of an overlay district so it's very strictly limited as to where we want to put it. Thank you. President Johnson—Other questions or discussion? Councilor Rheault? Councilor Rheault—For the record, this places an eight month moratorium? President Johnson — Let me double check, I believe that's the correct, yes, a moratorium for 8 months from the date of passage. Councilor Rheault—Okay,thank you. President Johnson — Other questions or discussion? If you're in favor of the second reading, vote yes. If you're opposed vote no. Since it's a zoning ordinance, I would ask Barbara to call the roll please on the second reading. ROLL CALL—11 YES, 0 NO President Johnson--With a vote of eleven yes, you've approved the second and final reading of TOR-2013-7. 12 ! • 2. TO-2013-22 -Budgetary Transfer from Line Items Reserve Fund (16605- 57300)to Clerk Regular Temp (11611-51020) for$5,000 due to a Special • Senatorial Election on October S,2013 and November 5,2013 (Mayor) President Johnson — Is there a Motion? Moved by Councilor Cichetti, seconded by Councilor Cavallo. Questions or discussion on the transfer? Councilor Rheault—I have a question. I thought I read in the paper that the state is reimbursing • us about $30,000 for this and I'm wondering why we,need to transfer$5000 or where the balance of that money if I read correctly is gonna go? Councilor Letellier—I can answer that. It's for the previous Special Election. So I hopefully, I was gonna make the point, hopefully there'll be another reimbursement of funds after this Special Election but it's for the Primary and the Special Election that occurred earlier this year for the • Senate seat when Kerry became Secretary of State. That's what we're getting reimbursed for. President Johnson — Other questions or discussion on the transfer? Seeing none, all those in favor say Ay? Any opposed? It's unanimous. 3. TO-2013-23 - Order granting an expanded Class 2 Dealer's License to • V&F Auto, Inc. at 7 Harding Street,Agawam, MA(Clerk) (Referred to Administrative Committee) President Johnson — Moved by Councilor Calabrese, seconded by Councilors Magovern and Cichetti. The item was referred to the Admin Sub-Committee, Councilor Rossi? Councilor Rossi — Thank you, Mr. President. The Admin. Committee met with V&F on this expanded license and what they intended to do is Mr. Palange had purchased the property that's next to the property or adjoining the property that he owns at 7 Harding Street. He filed a site plan with the Planning Board and has been approved however there were conditions to the site plan approval but we haven't received any sign off from the Planning Board or the Inspection • Department but the committee has no reason to believe that those conditions won't be met. However it was agreed upon by the committee that we would approve this as long as the conditions from the Planning Board had been met. We have no reason to believe the conditions will not be met and the committee had voted unanimously to give approval for this so long as the conditions were met and one of those were that the Occupancy Permit be issued and once that was issued then the license would take effect and this license to be expanded that we're talking about here would be the 2014 and then Mr. Palange could go ahead and continue operating under his previous license without any kind of restrictions. However the conditions have to be met, the Occupancy Permit has to be issued and the two licenses have to be joined under one address and that was all made clear and we were assured, the committee was assured that those things would take place and based on those conditions we made the approval to send a positive recommendation to the committee. President Johnson--Councilor Letellier? Councilor Letellier—Yes, thank you. Has the issue with the alleged violation of the demolition delay ordinance been addressed? • Councilor Rossi — No. I don't know if it's, what they're gonna do, I don't think that has an effect on the house itself. What he had done is he cleared the lot at 14 Wilson Street, that house 13 • is still up and I don't know what the fate of that house is, whether or not it's been approved, I think there's a waiting period to be addressed. I don't know if you want to go into Committee as a Whole maybe Mr. Palange would have the information on it but for our purposes here it was just the lower portion where he wants to expand and the site plan approval was for the expansion from 21 cars to SO cars. It didn't really take into account of the house itself but if the Council's pleasure is to go into Committee as a Whole, Mr. Palange is here. Councilor Letellier— Well, if you're telling me that the lot that the Historical Commission was concerned about is not part of this particular plan then I don't have an issue with it but if it was I thought we should get a determination as to whether that was still an issue. Councilor Rossi—I didn't believe that it was— President Johnson — It is my understanding that it was part of the same lot because the 14 Wilson went from Springfield Street up to the house. Councilor Letellier—I thought it was all the same lot too and the same application process. Councilor Rossi—Well, I— r President Johnson — It's the same lot. If you looked at the site plan it's the same lot as the house. Councilor Rossi — Well, 1, well my understanding with the site plan that I saw it didn't, his site plan didn't call for removing the house. So I don't know if that makes a difference or not and w whether the A&R would take effect if that would matter or— President Johnson — The site plan was in the Council Office that I saw had the house gone and the building expanded over,that's the site plan that I saw that was in the Council Office. Councilor Rossi — Well, if the site plan isn't the way it's supposed to be, the conditions aren't met then. Obviously the license can't be approved because that's part of the conditions. Councilor Letellier — I mean if we're looking at this not taking effect until 2014 and if you're still waiting for verification that he's met his Planning Board conditions, then I don't know why we would vote on it until we had a sign-off from the Planning Board and any other board that's involved in town. 1 don't see why we necessarily need to vote on it tonight. Councilor Rossi -- Well, that's why when the conditions were made that it wouldn't be effective until the Occupancy Permit was actually issued. Councilor Letellier—Can we issue a license with conditions? Or do we just issue it as, well all i right, well then I think they need to be written conditions not — if I may, we had this problem before where we voted down a license but didn't issue a proper written reasons for the denial at the time and the town got sued. So if we're going to issue a license with conditions, I'd rather it come to the Council with a written statement as to once these things are approved, the license is approved conditionally. I think we just need to cover our based particularly where we know that one board in town has raised an issue with regard to a violation of the Historical Demolition Delay Ordinance, I think we need to be really safe so we don't have to worry about any abutters or anybody saying if it was conditional, where's the conditions—I don't know. I'm just trying to be extra safe. Since Frank doesn't need it until 2014 anyway,those were just my thoughts. 14 i • President Johnson—Councilor Magovern, then Councilor Mineo? Councilor Magovern — I went to the Historic Commission meeting, I think I was the only councilor that was there, I think Jimmy came later and there was a lot of discussion about this item and I believe the way that it stands now with the Historic Commission is that the restriction expires at the end of October and they have no desire to extend it beyond that date so that the conditions are going to be that he can tear the building down at the end of October. So that issue • is taken care of that there's no problem with the demolition. As far as the Planning Board, they approved everything during the summer. We've got all the documentation, all the site plans and everything else and everything's been approved and the way I understand it, especially after our meeting, that Frank has gone to great lengths to see that everything has been approved and set and I think that we hold up businesses too much in this town for technicalities. I think this is a technicality because all of the requirements have been met. The only reason we were trying to • extend this until the first of the year for the license is that it saves filing two different licensing fees and getting everything set and going so that the first of the year, everything will be there. But to my knowledge, everything has been met,the address has been changed. He showed us the documentation; the addresses have been changed so it's been compiled into one. The Planning Board has met, he's gone above and beyond what the Planning Board has required for berm • retainers and everything else and I think a message should be sent that we're in favor of business, we're in favor of business expansion and I think that it's gonna be a good-looking site once it's completed so I have no problems with passing this tonight. President Johnson—Councilor Mineo? Councilor Mineo — I think you've said everything I would have said. I don't see why we wouldn't move forward with this project tonight. I mean I think Mr. Palange came to our meeting. We voted in favor of this. 1 believe it was 4-0. 1 don't remember anything that was said that he couldn't at one point demolish that building. This is all new to me tonight. President Johnson—Councilor Calabrese? • Councilor Calabrese—Yeah, I'm inclined to vote in favor of this measure as well. I don't know if anyone else would find it helpful to go into Committee as a Whole since Mr. Palange is here and obviously willing to be heard on this matter so I would like to make a Motion to go into Committee as a Whole. • President Johnson — We have a Motion to go into Committee as a Whole made and seconded. Councilor Rheault? Councilor Rheault — If we're going into Committee as a Whole, I'll wait til the vote I have a question. President Johnson —If you're in favor of going into Committee as a Whole, vote yes. If you're opposed, vote no. Barbara, I'd ask you to call the roll? ROLL CALL- 10 YES, 1 NO (Councilor Johnson) President Johnson—With a vote of ten yes,one no, we're into Committee as a Whole. 15 • • Frank Palange—Frank Palange, 1320 Morgan Road, West Springfield, representing V&F Auto. I can answer every one of those questions. I don't know if you want me to try to answer some of • the ones that I remember that you just said. As far as the conditions, every condition that's on the Planning Board's site plan has been met. As far as Occupancy Permit before the license is issued for fifty, at this point, that wouldn't work because I can't start building until next spring. The piece of property that is used for the used car lot is done, paved, drainage, bermed, every condition's met, there's no condition on site plan approval about the demolition delay. The demolition delay does not attach the property, it's just the house. I have a letter from the Historic • Commission stating that it automatically is withdrawn on October 30`h. The Building Inspector can give me my permit to remove it on October 31". The contractor is set up, the crane should be there the day before and we should be tearing it down on the 3151. I'm hoping to have the foundation and the rest of the pavement done before winter sets in. Again, all the conditions are met. There was I think two conditions —one was a berm from the top wall. Well that wall's up and there's gonna be an S"concrete, the wall is eight inches higher than the finished grade so cars • can't go over. The other ones were some conditions from the, they weren't really conditions, they were requests from the Engineering Department and we went above and beyond. We didn't need drainage because it's under an acre; I put in two complete dry wells. Those are done, inspected; we finished the grade on one today. The Engineering Department was there. I think you got a letter from them all that stuff; there is nothing, nothing holding up the used car portion of that. I request that we go back to what we talked about at the meeting and we approve it and as far as doing the paper work twice, if that's gonna make it easier I'll do it twice, for the$100 filing fee, but Mr. Rossi had suggested why and I respect that. I mean it's saving me $100 and you guys from doing this twice to get it done now so if it gets approved tonight, it's the renewal which I would be doing in December anyways. So if it gets approved tonight, as of January 1't with the new license it would have the increased car amount. So everything to do with the used car portion of it is done other than the license. The only thing I ask you to don't put on there is there's an Occupancy Permit because I can't get an Occupancy Permit, it's gonna be fall of next year by the time the addition's done which has nothing to do with the used car lot, all the requirements for the used car lot, again, is already there. This ain't a new license, it's an expansion, that's it, the garage is there, the offices are there, everything's there already. I don't remember any other questions that came up but if anybody's got anything, if anybody wants to • see the site plan,everything's here. Councilor Rheault—Yes, I just wanted to confirm what Frank just mentioned, at our committee meeting, he addressed every single issue and was in full compliance with whatever request we made of him and today I checked on the lot. The lot has been paved and the retaining wall is up in back and I would say that he's complied with everything that's necessary to go forward with the license. Councilor Bitzas—I move to get out of Committee as a Whole. President Johnson — Motion to come out of Committee as a Whole, moved and seconded. • Questions or discussion? All in favor of coming out of Committee as a Whole, say Ay? Any opposed? We're out of Committee as a Whole, the item's been moved and seconded. Further questions or discussion on the item? Councilor Cavallo? Councilor Cavallo — Yeah, I just want to say that Frank has been in town for a long time and doing business for a long time and he gave a very good presentation here and I mean we're going • over this and going over this, I have no problem voting for this tonight. President Johnson—Any questions or discussion? 16 • • Councilor Mineo -Can I make a Motion to approve? President Johnson -- It's already been moved and seconded. But if you want to make another one? Do we need to call the roll? I'd ask Barbara to call the roll. If you're in favor of TO-2013- 23,vote yes. If you're opposed,vote no. ROLL CALL— 11 YES, 0 NO • President Johnson—With a vote of eleven yes,you've approved TO-2013-23. Item IL New Business 1. TO-2013-24 - Order granting or renewing a Class 2 Dealer's LICENSE for Agawam Auto Mall,Inc.,825 Springfield Street,Agawam,MA. (Clerk) President Johnson—That'll get referred to the Admin Sub-Committee,next Agenda. 2. TO-2013-25 - Order granting or renewing a Class 2 Dealer'sLICENSE for Falcor Auto Sales,Inc.,373 Springfield Street,Agawam,MA. (Clerk) President Johnson—That'll also get referred to the Admin Sub-Committee, next Agenda. 3. TR-2013-45 -A Resolution appropriating from the Community • Preservation Fund and authorizing the expenditure of Community Preservation Funds for the Creation of a Master Plan for the Rehabilitation and Restoration of the Agawam High School Track and Field Facility(CPA) President Johnson — Who wants it? Community Relations or Finance? I think since Community Relations has already got something else that they're dealing with we'll refer it to Community Relations, next Agenda. 4. ZC-2013-5 (PH-2013-13) - A Petition for Zone Change for Parcel Owned by 194 South Street Limited Partnership located at 194 and 0 South Street,Agawam,MA—(Set Public Hearing Date—Suggest October 21, 2013) • President Johnson — We'll be setting the Public Hearing date for our second October meeting giving the Planning Board the opportunity to hold their Public Hearing, I'm officially referring it now to the Planning Board for their recommendation and I'm also referring it to the Legislative Sub-Committee for its recommendation, next Agenda. • Item 12. Any other matter that may leally come before the City Council. President Johnson—We'll start with Councilor Cavallo this evening. Councilor Cavallo—I have nothing to add for tonight. • President Johnson—Councilor Bitzas? 17 • • Councilor Bitzas — Yes, Mr. President. The Resolution TR-2013-45 the one with the appropriating from the Community Preservation Fund, the money for the High School track, I • would like as a member of the committee, I would like to see if anybody has any questions, you can come to our committee meeting and ask the questions before the next meeting so we have the answers, you can call Will from the Law Department or the Mayor's Office. My committee, we don't like to see any more delays, we try to expedite this and this is one of the best things the town could do. We applied for the CPA— President Johnson—Councilor Bitzas,this is any other business,that's an item of Agenda. Councilor Bitzas—Yes,just want to make sure, I don't like to see this to be tabled, to be sure so if you have any questions, please have them answered before the meeting. The other one is I want to, I have a brochure here, you probably have seen it one display in different restaurants, in the library, everywhere, again we have this year the Agawam Rotary Club, the Agawam Harvest • Festival and Family Fun Day. Keep the date open, October l9th, my fellow Rotarians Councilor Letellier and Councilor Magovern, we give you more information in the future, we have a performance from Dave Colucci and the High School band, the robotics, the Academy of Artistic Performance, the High School artists will have face painting, we will have about 45-50 crafters, restaurants, it will be a fantastic event, just mark your calendars, you councilors and the people who are watching us--October 19th. I hope it doesn't rain; if it's raining it would be the next day October 20th. Thank you. President Johnson—Councilor Calabrese? Councilor Calabrese—Barb, I'll be in touch about scheduling that meeting. Thank you. President Johnson —Councilor Cichetti? Councilor Cichetti—Barb, could you please schedule that meeting for the zone change please? Thank you. President Johnson—Councilor Perry? Councilor Perry—Nothing this evening. Thank you. President Johnson—Councilor Rheault? Councilor Rheault-Nothing this evening. President Johnson—Councilor Magovern? Councilor Magovern —Nothing. President Johnson—Councilor Mineo? Councilor Mineo-Nothing this evening. President Johnson—Putting on pressure here, Councilor Rossi? • Councilor Rossi — No, nothing this evening except Barb we need some time for an Administrative meeting? 18 • • President Johnson—And Councilor Letellier? Councilor Letellier —I'll break the streak. Just a reminder to vote in the Primary on Tuesday, October the 8`h and I know you had sent a note out that it moves our Council meeting but it really doesn't because our Council Meeting would still be October I". Oh, it's the, oh okay so we need to move our Council meeting then? President Johnson—I was just going to mention that our Council meeting will be on October 91h because of the election. Councilor Letellier—Instead of the 71h, okay, so don't forget to vote in the Primary. If you don't vote in the Primary, you have no say on who's in the General. • President Johnson — With that, the Chair will entertain a Motion to adjourn. Moved and seconded all around the house. All in favor of adjourning say Ay? Any opposed? We are adjourned. Adjournment. • • • • 19 •