Common Council Meeting 2/24/09

Common Council MTG 2/24/09

Attending: Krummel, Serasis, Brown, Duleep, Lindstrom, Hilliard, Geake, Moccia, Maslan, Bolden, Straniti, Conroy, Bonenfant, Kydes, Hempstead, McQuaid

They approve the minutes with some minor comments about corrections, Duleep makes some adjustments and so does Brown but Kydes wanted to add something that he didn’t say and the Mayor reminded him that it was not a verbatim. They vote unanimously.

Public Commentary:

Scott Vetare : Secretary and Treasurer of local 2405. They did not sign the retirement package because there was a stipulation that temporary personnel could be hired to replace the people who would take the early retirement package. He points out that there are people with 30 years who can’t retire but they can’t move up.

Marney Smith: Reminds council members that she was on the conservation commission, and is presently the president of the Norwalk Land Trust. She is asking that the second position in the conservation office. Explains that the second person has been a great asset to the conservation office.

Christopher Aut: Reads from a statement about the economy and the city’s fiscal condition. Says that current national policy is to put people to work. Says that the city budget is doing the opposite by putting people out of work. Says that the public has not been informed about the cuts and that essential jobs and services should be saved. Supports raising the cap.

Tod Bryant: Speaking on the budget cap. Concerned about the charter and the registrars office. Says that is our guide to how to function, and that we should be careful in what we do to it. Also raises the issue of the budget cut in the environmental department and that in a two person department that cutting one person would double the workload of that office.

Mayor Remarks:

Says that most of the stimulus package will go to the state and that he has met with Congressman Himes and will urge that money get to the city, but that the stimulus package is targeted the 50 governors. Starts with saying that the stimulus build in primarily targeted towards infrastructure, and that will not help city operating expenses. Reminds the audience that other cities have already done layoffs, but the last thing he wants to do is tell people that don’t have a job anymore. He also says that there are people who don’t have a job in the private sector and that they can’t afford tax increases. Asks that the council members respect each other’s opinion and not have a crossfire of accusations going on.

Resignations & Appointments:

None.

Council President remarks:

Bolden talks about the dedication to the Bea Brown. On march 10th, the appointment of the ethics board will be on the agenda. Bolden reads off the consent calendar items.

Consent Calendar

They vote unanimously.

They go into Executive Session.

Upon return from the Executive Session and then take up the early retirement package.

McQuaid: Moves the item. He asks if they can make an adjustment that 2405 could still negotiate.

Hasselkemp: Says that they could condition in the approval by the union. Hasselkemp says that he spoke to the union and that they may come to a resolution.

McQuaid: Adjusts the motion and moves it forward, contingent on a deadline on Friday due to the time constraints.

Brown: Asks if the other 3 unions will be hindered if 2405 doesn’t approve it.

McQuaid: Says that 2405 just gets another at bat to negotiate.

Hasselkemp: Says that he has signed documents with the other 3 unions, so those negotiations are closed.

Maslan: Makes a suggestion on the language of the approval.

Moccia: Says that Maslan write the language, that specifically references 2405 and the Friday deadline.

Krummel: Says that early retirement package is only for City employees and not the BOE.

Moccia: Says they don’t need to make that amendment.

They do roll call vote on this.

Brown Y

Geake Y

McQuaid Y

Duleep Y

Bonenfant Y

Serasis Y

Bolden Y

Hilliard Y

Kydes Y

Lindstrom Y

Hempstead Y

Straniti Y

Conroy Y

Krummel Y

Hilliard: Moves the motion to set the budget cap on the city’s operating budget. The limit is $263,659,873. [An interesting tid bit: in 1996 the charter was revised to allow for the common council to set a budget cap. Prior to that the council had no budget cap power. As it is, the only power they have is really to lower the spending cap, since the BET can create a budget lower than the cap, but can’t exceed it.]

Duleep: Makes an adjustment to the language pointing out that the dates are wrong.

Krummel: Makes an amendment to increase to the numbers, and explains that the $400k increase is to cover services in the city, the human services fair rent field agent should be funded and that he’s adding back in the director of youth services, and that position is important because of gang activity, and the two registrars should be considered full time in the ordinance code, and includes the conservation compliance officer, and finally a civil engineer in DPW should be needed particularly because of the permit software pointing out revenue loss.

Serasis: Agrees with raising the cap, particularly the youth services department position. Says that the part time position of the Norwalk After School alliance. Outlines grants in hand that fund programs, and the coordinator is essential to this position. 42 members are in the alliance, and the work needs to get done.

Brown: Agrees with Krummel and Serasis, and says that the human relations and fair rent department in particular that in hard times we need to be fiscally responsible and that citizens of Norwalk deserve the same level of services. Says that several departments have been decapitated under Hamilton’s meat cleaver budget.

Kydes: Said that Hamilton never mentioned that he used a cleaver. [Moccia and Hamilton said he did] Kydes goes on to say that he won’t be supporting any tax increases or increases in the cap, or special interest groups that are done for political reasons and that they need to cut.

Bonenfant: Explains that while some have said that they are raising the cap for specific purposes that the BET makes the determination.

Lindstrom: Says that she supports Krummel’s amendment and reasons for it, and says that purpose of raising the cap allows the public to have a voice and gives the BET an opportunity to listen to the public and adding positions back in.

Bolden: Appreciates all the comments, supports raising the cap, and says that the BET does have the final say. Speaks to the Employee Assistant position and that it’s a hard position to lose and it’s a very important position for seniors.

Duleep: Supports the Krummel amendments and that because there’s uncertainty in knowing when the economy will turn around, that because particular positions are cut that the city may be opening itself to a liability that may be down the road. Points to an item that was approved on consent. Agrees that it gives the public an opportunity to advocate for positions in front of the BET.

Moccia: Points out that law suit that was referenced by Duleep was an eminent domain issue under the Knopp administration. That it didn’t have anything to do with personnel.

Duleep: Says that it was a point about not having money available for stuff.

Geake: Speaks to inspector for fair rent, the person who did the job did 250 inspections in the past year. There’s no point in having a fair rent department if not inspections.

Moccia: Says Geake should check numbers the 250 may be complaints not inspections.

Conroy: AAA bond rating didn’t mean much in the past, but now it makes a big difference. There’s a 4 point difference between single A and triple A. It’s been good management that has led to this. The BET will be juggling monies in the budget and that so many of our constituents will be paying higher tax bills. The timing for advocating for a cap increase is difficult. Doesn’t support the amendment, because he thinks that there’s plenty of room in the original budget.

Hilliard: Thinks there’s savings that can be made in the health care services, and that his personal experience has led him to this conclusion.

McQuaid: Does also believe that the BET will be compassionate to positions that are still needed. That the pencils need to be sharpened and that other savings can be found and positions may be saved.

Brown: Based on Conroy’s assessment, but asks what the tax levy increase would be with the extra 400k.

Serasis: Supports the Krummel increase because children are not a special interest, and that the after school alliance is important to the city and the children and that children are special.

Krummel: Says he’s pleased that we have public participation, and that he remembers that one summarizes his position, “put people to work” Says we have no business in putting people out of work. Cites Nancy Wyman’s pitch to have non union workers to take days off.

Moccia: Says he’s not trying to cut off debate, but Nancy Wyman’s and union contracts is not what is on the table for a vote. Points out that his office has had cuts and that he cut the assistant to the mayor position before.

Straniti: Says that she has been consistent she has been opposed to any increases including any tax increases. Agrees that there is some wiggle room in there.

On the Krummel’s Amendment to raise the cap:

Brown Y

Geake Y

McQuaid N

Duleep Y

Bonenfant N

Serasis Y

Bolden Y

Hilliard Y

Kydes N

Lindstrom Y

Hempstead N

Straniti N

Conroy N

Krummel Y

The amendment passes 8-6.

Hempstead: Tries to make an amendment to lower the cap to 262,548,231, the original cap as recommended by Hamilton.

Maslan: Checks the rules to see if Hempstead can made an amendment, and says that only one amendment can be made.

Hempstead: Said he listened to the proposal and that we are missing a few, the library, police could use some over time, said that all the departments probably asked for because they were needed. Says that they were elected to make those financial decisions on how to impact the taxes on the citizens can absorb. Says he’s never seen a nose dive in the economy in his life, and that key indicators are still diving, that we have not hit bottom. He has difficulty going to taxpayers who may have lost their job or had reduced hours. The people who will be impacted will be people who own cars, and how live in apartments, because commercial properties will be seeing tax increases.   “Our job is choices, and those decisions impact us today.” He cites the 96 million spent on school improvements that are being paid today to at tune of $10 million that represents positions. Says that the extra $20 or so that anyone says increases its on top of the $580 a month in the average taxes a home owner pays.

Brown: Says that the BET will set the final budget, but that this cap allows a wiggle room. Says she’s impressed by Hamilton’s budget, but that they are not increasing anything tonight, they are trying to maintain in the best of our ability to preserve the services that the public wants.

They vote on Hempstead’s amendment:

Brown N

Geake N

McQuaid Y

Duleep N

Bonenfant Y

Serasis N

Bolden N

Hilliard N

Kydes Y

Lindstrom N

Hempstead Y

Straniti Y

Conroy Y

Krummel N

The motion fails 8-6.

Now they vote on the main motion:

Hempstead: Will not vote on the cap because it’s the council’s authorization to spend more.

Brown gets confused on what they are voting on after voting no on the initial roll call she votes No. Mary Roman reads the amended motion, and they start the roll call vote over.

Brown Y

Geake Y

McQuaid N

Duleep Y

Bonenfant N

Serasis Y

Bolden Y

Hilliard Y

Kydes N

Lindstrom Y

Hempstead N

Straniti N

Conroy N

Krummel Y

The budget cap passes 8-6.

They move to adjourn.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

  • anonymous

    What a disgusting display of mindless partisan bots! Looks like Duleep lacks the intestinal fortitude to stand on her own feet. No surprise there. This is a disgraceful political display that continues to shamelessly give money away to the BOE to build more slush funds. Why can’t we get intelligent, realistic people on the council?

  • Secondhand Rose

    So – did the registrars’ position go to part time or did it not? This summary of the meeting is very confusing.

    I think you’d be better served by obtaining a copy of the meeting minutes from Telesco Secretarial Services and posting them instead of attempting to summarize the meeting unless you can put everything in.

  • Anonymous

    #1– well said..too many give away the store dems on the council who relish spending money frivolously. We need responsibility for the beleagured taxpayer.

  • Anonymous

    Let’s not forget Doug Hempstead, who voted in committee to raise the cap more than $1M.

    All together now: FLIP-FLOP

  • Anonymous

    read the entire article before making accusations. read what was actually said and who voted for what. Hempstead voted to increase city spending to be directed to police, fire department and the library. I don’t see this as flipflopping, I see it as being mindful of what services are needed and should not be cut. Unlike the recommended increase to the BOE of 3%

    http://www.thehour.com/story/465241

  • Anonymous

    Voting to increase in committee and then to decrease on the full council floor (a decrease that could impact the very departments he claimed to be protecting).

    Nope, no way to call that a flip-flop.

  • Norwalker

    They were all talking about this position and that position but nobody mentions the cutting of a fire inspector.

  • anonymous

    Hempstead is consistently conservative with taxpayers’ dollars. He was making a point in committee that you cannot prioritize funds for city services that are equally important.

  • Secondhand Rose

    So the question remains – Has the registrars’ job been reduced to part time?

    • turfgrrl

      Secondhand Rose: That is the recommendation, and the BET makes final budget allocations.

  • AnnonHT

    #9 Who Cares???

  • Anonymous

    So when ARE they going to decide about officially offering early retirement encouragement?

  • http://www.MGeake.org MGeake

    The early retirement incentives are officially in place, and three of the four unions have signed their acceptance of the conditions. Local 2405 has not signed and the Council gave them an extension until CoB this Friday to negotiate their objections.

    There are 58 (including those in 2405) employees eligible, and they have until March 13th to announce their retirement. After that, these enhancements go away.

  • Dems against raising taxes

    I am a staunch democrat, but I will not vote for any candidate that moves to raise my taxes this year. I simply can’t afford it. I’m sorry that the city and BOE budgets may be reduced and as a result, people may lose jobs but that is a reality of the economy today. Talk of spending more money, even if it is only “2.75%”, makes my stomach turn.

  • Anonymous

    #14-people have to get out to these meetings and voice their concerns. If you don’t, then things are done out of your control. Unfortunately this whole thing was done in a partisan manor without concern for the taxpayers yet they gave reasons as to why the cap should be higher even though Mr. Hempstead and others explicitly explained there was plenty of wiggle room in the original recommendation. The entire country is in recession, people are eating scraps, losing their homes and can’t pay utility bills and these people choose to ignore this. Did anyone look at possibly cutting some of these positions to part time until we can get back on our feet? This would certainly remove the necessity to cut jobs altogether. At such time as the economy takes an upswing and funds are readily available and then put them back to full time. it has to be better than no job at all. For those who are eligible for early retirement, now would be a great time. Instead of a 40 hr work week, city employees could be reduced to 35 in some areas. There are alot of things that can be looked at. Its hard for everyone right now and until there is insight as to where the economy is heading, we can all make a few concession. Labor unions are also in a position to make some concessions in order to keep their members working.

  • Anonymous

    Yeah, that’s why Hempstead tried to RAISE the cap by more than $1M in the Finance Committee! Tuesday was nothing but grandstanding by a party that knew it didn’t have the votes.

  • anonymous

    this is easy. if you raise my taxes I wont vote for you in November. nice and simple. these people do not get it.

  • Anonymous

    #16-AGAIN…Hempstead is consistently conservative with taxpayers’ dollars. He was making a point in committee that you cannot prioritize funds for city services that are equally important.
    Because he said this to make a point my friend…lets just bash one of the best council people this town has ever seen just so the dems can get a little pat on the back. Ok, here’s the deal..Repubs voted 2%-Dems voted 2.75% hmmmm not spotlight here my friend! Just more tax and spend without thinking about those who have to dish out the money. THE TAXPAYERS!

  • anonymous

    Oh, please. Number 16 has been on a Hempstead war in other threads. There is a serious plot to unseat Hempstead in district D next election. These cheapshots are an indication of what is to come. This is exactly why people are SICK and TIRED of the damn politics. As an unaffiliate with a Democratic bent, I am so put off by the Democrats in this town. What is their goal? To make Norwalk a better place or to gain control at any cost?Let’s not hope that ever happens. There needs to be a check and balance and a few Repubs on the council is a very necessary thing. Yes, by all means, let’s get rid of Norwalk’s finest council person and replace him with someone who has a liberal agenda (whatever that means) and lives in district D temporarily. We could use some affordable housing in district D.

  • Anonymous

    Dems will be very surprised this November! There will be Repubs that will run and win. Maybe one or 2 will lose but there will be Dems that run again and lose. Many of us are watching and its all in who the candidates are and as someone who votes the person, my bet is on some of the Rebubs not yet announced.

  • anon

    I like Doug Hempstead but he is a politician who will say whatever people want to hear and then vote right with what the politicos want. He is not his own man…

  • anon

    Anyone who needs votes, quite simply, is a politican. It is the nature of the beast. Sorry, 21, but I disagree. Hempstead is a man of conviction and has been known to face a full auditorium of angry parents with armbands. Perhaps it is time for him to leave. When a town does not appreciate the good representation it has, it deserves to go without.

  • Joanne

    #21- I have to seriously disagree with you. I have known Doug for the good part of 20 years and I can tell you, he is definately his own person. Doug does not vote with the politico’s as you say. I can tell you first hand that Doug is one of the smartest and fairest people I have had the pleasure of knowing. He truly cares about Norwalk and his constituents. He’s informed and speaks from his heart. He has taught me so many things over the years and Norwalk is lucky that he chooses to be one of its representatives. He goes over every bit of information and makes educated decsions based on his research and understanding of each item. While we may not always agree with other people and their views, there is absolutely no truth in what you said. I thought this of him a long time before he became a Republican and I would think the same should he for some reason change parties. You can’t attack his integrity without reason.

  • anon

    16 – To me, grandstanding only occurs when there is a fully packed room of spectators at a council meeting with several reporters itching for that one sensationalistic moment. Check out the televised council meetings. You can easily see who the windbags are. Those are the grandstanders. The council reps who do the work in committee are not looking for kudos but, rather, to get the work done. By the way, as a resident of Norwalk, frankly I would want my library, fire and police departments to get a fair share of whatever we are handing out. Give it all to the the notorious board of ed? Are you kidding? I think the point here is that if the board doesn’t need it and no one thinks the other service entities do not need it, then there is no reason to raise the cap. Solid thinking for the economic situation we find ourselves in today.

  • anon

    In reading the synopsis of Turf’s article, I am finding more proof of what I’ve believed to be true from the start of this term: more seasoned politicos are vigorous working behind the scenes to coach certain members of the council.

    We desperately need independent thinkers on the council.

  • Anonymous

    I agree we need all new blood in the council except for a few like Hempstead and Krummel, these men want to do the right things for Norwalk and give alot of their time doing so. The BOE also needs new blood and quick vote in November.

  • OH NO!

    I disagree, Keep Hempstead, get rid of Krummel, keep McQuaid, Straniti, Lindstrom, Hiiliard and Bolden! Then get new blood! Anyone know who both sides have in line?

  • Anonymous

    Krummel is 80 years old! He needs to retire and let someone else take his place. PLEASE!

  • anonymous

    The thing about Krummel is he is well set in his own Democratic ideologies, so much so, that he finds it very difficult to embrace other lines of thinking. Tell me otherwise, but I’ve witnessed his rants and they are most uncomfortable. They are purely partisan. It so reminds me of when people exclude others who belong to different religious organizations other than their own, or rather, the gang mentality that exists between different racial groups in an inner city school. Both mindsets are a scourge on our society today and something that intelligent – truly intelligent – people cannot understand. Sadly so, Mr. Krummel is not the only one at fault. Methinks there is a genuine dysfunctional entity that has a handle on the control pad. It is so disconcerting to think that true Democratic principles are buried beneath this debris of ignorance and intolerance. And yes, I do agree – keep Bolden, Hilliard, Lindstrom, McQuaid, Hempstead, and Straniti. I might be forgetting someone at the moment. These people CAN work together for the common good.

  • MGeake’s wife

    I hope that you consider my husband, Michael Geake as someone who can work together for ALL of Norwalk. That’s why he is running again for something, he just hasn’t figured out what yet! ;-0)

  • anonymous

    Oh yes! Mike Geake truly does work well with the other side. It’s grown-ups like Mike who we want to represent us. The ones who “use their words” and convince others to see their side of an argument through good healthy debate. This control through partisan majority is unhealthy, to say the least. Especially when there is clearly a partisan line of voting. Someone is coaching someone from the controls. Ick. Grow up, people.

  • Secondhand Rose

    Krummel is not mired in Democratic ideologies so much as his modus operandi is to vote for the item that was his last discussion. He could talk with six people about one single issue, and no matter how many different viewpoints are presented to him, he will agree with all of them and whatever was the last viewpoint discussed will be the one he votes in favor of – even if he told the other five people he was in favor of each of THEIR viewpoints. Whomever gets to Krummel last is the one who makes the difference. I’ve personally had discussions with him and seen it happen.

  • Mired in Democratic Ideologies?

    Not clear Krummel understands Democratic ideologies!