|
REPRESENTATIVE TOWN MEETING
TOWN OF GREENWICH
EXPLANATORY COMMENTS FOR
SEPTEMBER 2009 MEETING
DEPARTMENT: Public Works 1009PW01
REFERRED TO: Finance, Public Works Committees
VOTES: July 20, 2009 BET, 12-0-0
RESOLVED, that the sum of $40,000 be and the same is hereby appropriated to be added to Capital Account Number Z312-59620-28007, known as “Round Hill Road Bridge”.
EXPLANATORY COMMENTS
DPW is requesting interim funds to augment our existing capital budget for the Round Hill Road Bridge replacement project. This will allow us to proceed with this critical project. This interim funding is essential to move the project forward in accordance with the CTDOT (State of Connecticut Department of Transportation) bridge reimbursement program requirements.
Project Background:
- In FY 04-05 funding in the amount of $40,000.00 was requested for design services for minor repairs. During this design process, it was determined that more extensive repairs were necessary.
- In FY 06-07, additional funding in the amount of $135,000.00 was requested for design services due to the additional repairs needed.
- In December 2006, funding in the amount of $135,000.00 was requested for FY 07-08 for construction.
- In July 2007, the State of Connecticut, Department of Transportation notified the Town that the bridge is eligible for 80% reimbursement under the State Bridge Program. The Town receives a commitment from the State for $1,600,000.00 to replace the bridge.
- Town suspends design work. When reimbursement commitment is received the Town must now follow the State regulations for such projects.
- Town goes through the “qualification based selection” (QBS) process in order to keep the engineering design firm which had already begun design work on this bridge. This process took approximately one (1) year for the State approval.
- In May 2009 the State signs agreement for engineering services. At this time, estimated costs for engineering were $240,000.00.
- During final review of cost estimates by the State, estimated engineering costs have escalated to $280,000.00 – an increase of $40,000.00.
- This increase in cost is due in part to the fact that under State regulations, some tasks already completed by the design engineer (prior to the State including the bridge in its reimbursement program) now have to be repeated.
DEPARTMENT: Public Works 1009PW02
REFERRED TO: Public Works Committee
VOTES: July 23, 2009 Board of Selectmen 3-0-0
RESOLVED, that the “Building Permit Fee Schedule” be amended as follows to take effect October 1, 2009.
Revenue Code |
Permit Type |
Last Revised |
To be Implemented |
Current Fees |
Proposed Fees |
A351-42165 |
Building Residential |
2004 |
10/01/09 |
$12.00/$1000 |
$13.00/$1000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
A351-42165 |
Building, Commercial |
2004 |
10/01/09 |
$12.00/$1000 |
$15.00/$1000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
A351-42165 |
Demolition, Residential |
2004 |
10/01/09 |
$12.00/$1000 |
$13.00/$1000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
A351-42165 |
Demolition, Commercial |
2004 |
10/01/09 |
$12.00/$1000 |
$15.00/$1000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
A351-42167 |
Special Event Electrical |
2004 |
10/01/09 |
$50.00 |
$100.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
A351-42169 |
Special Event, HVAC |
2004 |
10/01/09 |
$50.00 |
$100.00 |
DEPARTMENT: Parks and Recreation Department 0909PR01
REFERRED TO: Finance, Public Works Committees
VOTES: BET 12-0-0
RESOLVED, that the sum of $24,692 be and the same is hereby appropriated from RESERVED for CAPITAL & NON-RECURRING FUND to the Department of Parks and Recreation account Z834-59700-21961 for a Marine Sewage Disposal Facility (MSDF).
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the First Selectman is authorized to accept a grant of $18,519.00 from the State of Connecticut, Department of Environmental Protection, for the construction and installation of a Marine Sewage Disposal System at Grass Island marina. The grant is funded through the State of Connecticut Clean Vessel Act and such grant shall be appropriated to account Z834-59700-21961.
EXPLANATORY COMMENTS
The Town of Greenwich through the Department of Parks and Recreation's Marine and Facilities Operations Division, has received approval for the construction and installation of a Marine Sewage Disposal Facility (MSDF) at the Grass Island marina from the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection.
The Connecticut Clean Vessel Act provides for reimbursement of the project at 75% of the cost of the construction or upgrade of such pumpout facilities. The town has received the approval and purchase order from the State of Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection in the amount of $18,519.00.
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
REFERRED TO: Finance , Parks & Recreation Committees
VOTES: None
RESOLVED, that the Town of Greenwich accept a gift in the amount of $25,562.09 from Greenwich Green and Clean to purchase thirty-four (34) decorative waste receptacles for placement on Greenwich Avenue.
EXPLANATORY COMMENTS
We request acceptance of a gift of thirty-four (34) decorative waste receptacles for placement on Greenwich Avenue. These waste receptacles will be dual purpose receptacles (one side for waste, one side for recyclable materials). These receptacles will be hunter green with gold lettering. These receptacles will be placed along Greenwich Avenue between the Post Road and Railroad Avenue.
Greenwich Green and Clean will purchase the receptacles directly.
DEPARTMENT: Selectmen
CONTACT: Peter Crumbine 622-7710
REFERRED TO: Appointments, Health & Human Services Committees
VOTES: Board of Selectmen 3-0-0
RESOLVED, that the following named persons, nominated by the Board of Selectmen, be appointed a member of the Nathaniel Witherell Building Committee.
LISA MORE BIENSTOCK
Explanatory Comments
Lisa More Bienstock. 18 Indian Chase Drive, Greenwich. New nomination as a member of the Nathaniel Witherell Building Committee.
Self-employed. Member of First Presbyterian Church Property and Finance Committees, Co-chair of Junior Sailing Program at Belle Haven Club, Member of the BHC Building Committee, First Presbyterian Church Chair of Building Committee, FPCG Head of Flower Committee, Putnam Indian Field School Board Member, PIFS Auction Chair.
DEPARTMENT: Selectmen
CONTACT: Peter Crumbine 622-7710
REFERRED TO: Appointments, Land Use Committees
VOTES: Board of Selectmen 3-0-0
RESOLVED, that the following named person, nominated by the Board of Selectmen, be appointed an alternate member of the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency for a term beginning 4/1/09 and expiring 3/31/13.
JOSEPH E.L. ROGERS
Explanatory Comments~
Joseph E. L. Rogers. 2 Grove Lane, Greenwich. New nomination as an alternate member of the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency for a term beginning 4/1/09 and expiring 3/31/12.
BSc Chem. Eng. University of Edinburgh, SM and ScD Chem. Eng. MIT.
Self employed – part time consulting in the chemical industry.
DEPARTMENT: Selectmen
CONTACT: Peter Crumbine 622-7710
REFERRED TO: Appointments, Health & Human Services Committees
VOTES: Board of Selectmen 3-0-0
RESOLVED, that the following named person, nominated by the Board of Selectmen, be appointed a member of the Board of Social Services for a term beginning 4/1/09 and expiring 3/31/12.
CHRISTINE J. CHAO
Explanatory Comments
Columbia Law School, Juris Doctorate, Colgate University, Bachelor of Arts and National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan.
Executive Board Member, ISD PTA, Sunday School teacher at First Congregational Church, provides pro bono legal counsel to Alzheimer’s Association and active with Legal Counsel for Battered Women.
DEPARTMENT: Conservation Commission 0909CC01
REFERRED TO: Land Use Committee
VOTES: Board or commission name vote (y/n/a)
RESOLVED, that (a) the Conservation Commission of the Town of Greenwich be hereby authorized to accept receipts from the Atlantic Center for the Environment in the amount of $500 and (b) these receipts to become appropriations in appropriate accounts upon approval of the Board of Estimate and Taxation.
EXPLANATORY COMMENTS
The Conservation Commission has received a mini-grant from the Atlantic Center for the Environment to purchase computer equipment to be housed at the Greenwich Adult Day Care to augment the equipment used to operate the fishway camera. No matching funds are required.
Minigrants such as this require minimal effort just a short letter of intent (1-2 pages) and a quick follow-up report (1 page) indicating the project has been completed.
DEPARTMENT: Department of Public Works
John McKee, Superintendent, Waste Division, 869-6910
Eugene F. McLaughlin, Assistant Town Attorney,
REFERRED TO: Legislative & Rules, Public Works Committees
VOTES:
RESOLVED, that Chapter 9 of the Town Code, REFUSE, be amended as follows to WASTE AND LITTER.
CHAPTER 9. WASTE AND LITTER [REFUSE].
ARTICLE 1. WASTE COLLECTION AND [REFUSE AND GARBAGE] DISPOSAL.
Sec. 9-1. Definitions.
(a) As used in this article [chapter]:
(1) Acceptable solid waste shall mean unwanted or discarded materials, garbage and refuse that the town is permitted by the state to collect, store and transport from the town disposal area to resource recovery combustion facilities or landfills that are licensed to accept municipal solid waste but shall not include recyclable materials, bulky waste or hazardous waste.
(2)[(1)] Approved containers shall mean covered, watertight containers.
(3)[(2)] Approved vehicles shall mean a conveyance equipped with fully enclosed metal bodies of the type designed and maintained to promote the absence of leakage or spillage approved by the Superintendent [Director of Health].
[(3) Combustible refuse shall mean paper, cartons, rags, old clothes, small pieces of wood, leather and metal containers of not over one (1) quart's capacity.]
(4) Bulky waste shall mean land clearing, demolition and construction debris, discarded machinery and equipment, and other unwanted materials that cannot be feasibly disposed of at resource recovery combustion facilities and landfills as acceptable solid waste because of size or non-combustibility but which can be disposed of at specially permitted and available landfills as determined by the Superintendent.
(5) Commissioner shall mean the Commissioner of Public Works or by the designation of the Commissioner the Deputy Commissioner of Public Works.
(6) [(4)] Garbage shall mean every accumulation of animal, vegetable or other matter that attends the preparation, consumption, decay, dealing in or storage of meats, fish, fowl, birds, fruit, vegetables, beverages or other edibles, including the [cans,] non-recyclable materials of containers or wrappers disposed of along with such materials.
(7) Hazardous waste shall mean pathological and biomedical discarded items, sewage sludge, gunpowder, dynamite, cartridges, shells, gasoline, naptha, benzene, ether and other refuse materials that have flammable, explosive, corrosive, toxic , infectious or reactive characteristics that when present in significant quantities require special handling for collection, transport and disposal in accordance with applicable state or federal law.
(8) Recyclable materials shall mean the materials defined in Sections 8A-2 and 8A-3 of the Code.
(9) Superintendent shall mean the Superintendent of the Department of Public Works Recycling, Waste Collection and Disposal Division.
[(5) Waste material shall mean bricks, plaster, furniture and all other noncombustible refuse which has been discarded.]
(Ords. & Reg., § 2-11.1, 2/1/1940.)
Sec. 9-2. Accumulation prohibited.
The accumulation of acceptable solid waste [garbage, combustible refuse] or waste material of any kind not otherwise provided for in this chapter except in approved containers is prohibited.
(Ords. & Reg., § 2-11.2, 2/1/40.)
Sec. 9-3. [Garbage and refuse] S[s]torage containers.
Acceptable solid waste [Garbage and combustible refuse] shall be stored in approved containers. All garbage shall be drained and wrapped [in paper] before it is placed in the containers. The containers shall be kept in a clean and sanitary condition.
(Ords. & Reg., § 2-11.3, 2/1/40.)
Sec. 9-4. [Garbage and refuse] C[c]ollection.
All acceptable solid waste [With the exception of recyclables as defined in Section 8A-2 of the Greenwich Municipal Code, all garbage and refuse, in approved containers,] shall be removed in approved containers or approved vehicles at least once a week unless more frequently [otherwise] required by the Superintendent or Director of Health.
(Ords. & Reg., § 2-11.4, 2/1/1940; 8/26/1991.)
Sec. 9-5. Transport and disposal [Incineration] required; [permit; exceptions].
[(a)] All acceptable solid waste [garbage and refuse] shall be transported to the town disposal area. All bulky waste [material] shall be loaded and transported to any place as directed and designated by the Superintendent [Director of Health].
[(b) The Director of Health may in special instances grant permits for the disposal of garbage and combustible refuse by burial or incineration upon the premises where it originates. The Director of Health may in special instances grant permits for installation and maintenance of garbage grinders for the disposal of garbage into a septic tank.]
(Ords. & Reg., § 2-11.5, 2/1/40.)
Sec. 9-6. Delivery from outside town.
No acceptable solid waste, bulky waste or hazardous waste [garbage, combustible refuse or waste materials] shall be transported for disposal into the town from any place beyond the limits of the town[.] unless otherwise approved in writing by the Commissioner as part of a reciprocal municipal cooperative aid agreement.
(Ords. & Reg., § 2-11.7, 2/1/40.)
Sec. 9-7. License to transport; application.
(a) No person shall engage in the business of transporting acceptable solid waste to the town disposal area [garbage, combustible refuse or waste material] without having a valid license from the Superintendent [Director of Health] and without using an approved vehicle.
(b) The application for a license valid for one (1) year shall be on a form furnished by the Superintendent [Director of Health].
(Ords. & Regs., §§ 2-11.9.1, 2-11.9.2, 2/1/1940.)
Sec. 9-8. License revocation; hearing.
(a) The Commissioner [Board of Health] shall have power to revoke the license of any waste [refuse] collector found not to be operating in compliance with the provisions of this Code.
(b) No order of revocation shall be made except after a hearing. When a license has been revoked another license shall not be issued except with the approval of the Commissioner [Board of Health].
(Ords. & Reg., § 2-11.9.3, 2/1/1940.)
Sec. 9-9. Approved [Refuse] vehicles; numbers; maintenance.
(a) Every approved vehicle of a licensed waste [refuse] collector under these regulations shall have conspicuously displayed on each side a number issued by the Superintendent [Director of Health].
(b) Every approved vehicle used in the transportation of waste [refuse] shall be kept in a sanitary condition.
(Ords. & Reg., §§ 2-11.9.4, 2-11.9.5, 2/1/1940.)
Sec. 9-10. Delivery of acceptable solid waste [refuse].
All acceptable solid waste [garbage and combustible refuse] shall be promptly delivered at the town disposal area [incineration plant] on the same day that it is placed into the approved vehicle [truck].
(Ords. & Reg., § 2-11.9.6., 2/1/1940.)
Sec. 9-11. Prohibited substances.
No hazardous waste [gunpowder, dynamite, cartridge, shell, gasoline, naphtha, benzine, ether or any other explosive or similarly dangerous substances or material] shall be cast into any approved container or transported to the town disposal area [incinerator] but shall be handled and disposed of in accordance with state and federal law.
(Ords. & Reg., § 2-11.6, 2/1/1940.)
Sec. 9-11.1. Penalty; appeal; hearing
(a) For dumping more than one cubic foot in volume of waste in violation of the provisions of this article the Superintendent may impose civil penalty fines of up to (i) one thousand dollars ($1,000) for a first violation, two-thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) for a second violation and ten thousand dollars ($10,000) for each subsequent violation by a commercial waste collector and (ii) one hundred dollars ($100) for a first violation, two hundred fifty dollars ($250) for a second violation and one thousand dollars ($1,000) for each subsequent violation by any other person.
(b) For any other violation of this article the Superintendent may impose civil penalty fines of up to two hundred fifty dollars ($250), with each day of violation constituting grounds for a separate fine.
(c) Fines shall be payable to the town and may be appealed within ten days to the Commissioner who shall conduct a hearing and render a decision thereon.
ARTICLE 2. LITTER.
Sec. 9-12. Definitions.
(a) As used in this Article:
(1) Authorized Private Receptacle shall mean a litter storage and collection receptacle as required and authorized by the town [in the Refuse Ordinance of the Town Sanitary Code].
(2) Garbage shall mean and include all putrescible wastes, including vegetable and animal offal and carcasses of dead animals, but not sewage and body wastes.
(3) Litter shall mean garbage and/or rubbish as defined herein and all other waste material which, if thrown or deposited as herein prohibited, tends to create a danger to public health, safety and welfare.
(4) Park shall mean a park, reservation, playground, beach, recreation center or any other public area in the town, owned or used by the town and devoted to active or passive recreation.
(5) Public Place is any and all streets, sidewalks, boulevards, alleys or other public ways and any and all public parks, squares, spaces, grounds and buildings.
(6) Rubbish shall mean and include all nonputrescible waste materials (except ashes), including but not limited to paper, cardboard, tin cans, wood, glass, bedding, crockery, refrigerators, junk automobiles, demolition material, tree limbs and industry wastes.
(7) Vehicle shall mean every device in, upon or by which any person or property is or may be transported or drawn upon a highway or sidewalk, including devices used exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks.
(8) Handbill shall mean any advertisement, sample or device, dodger, circular, leaflet, pamphlet, paper, booklet or any other printed or otherwise reproduced original or copies of any matter or literature.
(Ords. & Reg., § 2-11.8; as amended 11/10/1971; RTM 6/10/1991.)
Sec. 9-13. Litter in public places; use of receptacles.
No person shall throw or deposit litter in or upon any street, sidewalk or other public place within the town except in public receptacles, in authorized private receptacles for collection or in official town disposal areas.
(Ords. & Reg., § 2-11.8; as amended 11/10/1971.)
Sec. 9-14. Manner of placing litter in receptacles.
Persons placing litter in public receptacles shall do so in such a manner as to prevent it from being carried or deposited by the elements upon any street, sidewalk or other public place or upon private property.
(Ords. & Reg., § 2-11.8; as amended 11/10/1971.)
Sec. 9-15. Sweeping litter into gutters prohibited.
(a) No person shall sweep into or deposit in any gutter, street or other public place within the town the accumulation of litter from any building or lot or from any public or private sidewalk or driveway.
(b) Persons owning or occupying property shall keep the sidewalk in front of their premises free of litter.
(Ords. & Reg., § 2-11.8; as amended 11/10/1971.)
Sec. 9-16. Throwing litter from vehicle.
No person, while a driver or passenger in a vehicle, shall throw or deposit litter upon any street or other public place within the town or upon private property.
(Ords. & Reg., § 2-11.8; as amended 11/10/1971.)
Sec. 9-17. Transporting litter; trucks to be covered.
No person shall drive or move any truck or other vehicle within the town unless such vehicle is so constructed, covered or loaded as to prevent any load, contents or litter from being blown or deposited upon any street, alley or other public place.
(Ords. & Reg., § 2-11.8; as amended 11/10/1971.)
Sec. 9-18. Depositing litter in water prohibited.
No person shall throw or deposit litter in any fountain, pond, lake, stream, bay or any other public body of water in the town.
(Ords. & Reg., § 2-11.8; as amended 11/10/1971.)
Sec. 9-19. Littering occupied private property.
No person shall throw or deposit litter on any occupied private property within the town, whether owned by such person or not, except that the owner or person in control of private property may maintain authorized private receptacles for collection in such a manner that litter will be prevented from being carried or deposited by the elements upon any street, sidewalk or other public place or upon private property.
(Ords. & Reg., § 2-11.8; as amended 11/10/1971.)
Sec. 9-20. Owner to maintain premises free of litter.
(a) The owner or person in control of any private property shall at all times maintain the premises free of litter.
(b) This section shall not prohibit the storage of litter in authorized private receptacles for collection or prevent the storage of wood or branches on the owner's premises that do not constitute a nuisance to neighbors' properties.
(Ords. & Reg., § 2-11.8; as amended 11/10/1971.)
Sec. 9-21. Depositing litter on vacant property.
No person shall throw or deposit litter on any open or vacant private property within the town whether owned by such person or not.
(Ords. & Reg., § 2-11.8; as amended 11/10/1971.)
Sec. 9-21.1. Placing handbills on vehicles.
(a) Purpose. The public interest, convenience and necessity require regulating the placement upon vehicles of handbills, to protect the people against litter and the detriment and danger to public health and safety incident to such placement. To that end, the purposes of this section are specifically declared to be as follows:
(1) To protect the people against the health and safety menace and the expense incident to the littering of the streets and public places by the placement of handbills on vehicles.
(2) To preserve to the people their constitutional right to receive and disseminate information by delivering handbills to all who are willing to receive the same.
(b) No person, organization, association or business shall distribute, deposit or throw or cause the distribution, deposit or throwing of any handbill in or upon any vehicle in any public place. The provisions of this section shall not prohibit a person, organization, association or business from handing, transmitting or distributing, without charge to the receiver thereof, a handbill to the owner or other occupant of any vehicle who is willing to accept it.
(RTM 6/10/1991.)
Sec. 9-21.2. Severability.
If any subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this section should be declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, for any reason whatsoever, such decision shall not affect the remaining portions of this section, which shall remain in full force and effect, and to this end the provisions of this section are hereby declared severable.
(RTM 6/10/1991.)
[ARTICLE 3. VIOLATIONS]
Sec. 9-22. Penalty.
Any person violating any of the provisions of this article [chapter] shall, upon conviction, be fined not more than two hundred fifty dollars ($250).[one hundred dollars ($100.)]
ARTICLE 3. BOARD OF HEALTH; DIRECTOR OF HEALTH
Sec. 9-23.
Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to limit the power of the Board of Health or the Director of Health as it relates to public health.
Additions bold
Deletions in [brackets]
EXPLANATORY COMMENTS
The proposed Chapter 9 Waste and Litter ordinance updates the prior Chapter 9 Refuse provisions to provide more modern working definitions in the area of solid waste disposal and increase fines to deal with violations including the prohibited dumping of out-of-town refuse.
In 1990 Section 155 of the Town Charter was revised transferring the administration of waste disposal and collection from the Department of Health to the Department of Public Works Waste Collection Division. The new provisions of this ordinance do not diminish, however, the power of the Board of Health as it relates to public health.
The prior provisions of the 1940 Chapter 9, Article 1 refuse and garbage disposal ordinance revolved around what could be burned at the old Town incinerator. The new provisions of the waste collection and disposal ordinance deal with (1) what is acceptable solid waste under resource recovery facility and land fill requirements to which the Town’s solid waste is sent by contract, (2) bulky waste, which generally cannot be burned, and (3) hazardous waste which is not acceptable at the Town’s transfer station. Commissioner of Public Works Amy Siebert and Waste Division Superintendent John McKee worked with the Law Department to develop a simple and workable approach to this ordinance within the framework of the prior sections in order to make it readily understandable for reference by the public.
A new section 9-11.1 has been added increasing the amount of fines for illegal dumping by a commercial collector up to $1,000 for a first offense which can increase up to $10,000 for subsequent violations. In addition to the Department of Public Works, the Audit Committee of the Board of Estimate and Taxation and Town Administrator felt that these provisions generally needed to be strengthened in accordance with state law in order that illegal out-of-town dumping could be effectively addressed since the Town under its new solid waste disposal contract is no longer under a minimum commitment to deliver waste to a disposal facility. Penalties for violations by other persons have also been increased but not as significantly.
The Board of Selectmen at its August meeting approved the revisions for placement on the call of the Representative Town Meeting.
DEPARTMENT: First Selectman
REFERRED TO: Finance, Land Use Committees
VOTES: Board of Selectman 2-0-1
To consider and act upon the following resolution requested by the First Selectman and approved by the Board of Selectman and the Planning and Zoning Commission.
RESOLVED, that the Representative Town Meeting hereby approves the sale of a 4,083 square feet portion of a Town owned right of way adjacent to Holly Hill Lane to 644 West Putnam Avenue Associates, LLC for the sum of $300,000.00.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the First Selectman is hereby authorized to execute on behalf of the Town any contract documents necessary to effectuate the sale of the above referenced property.
Explanatory Comments
The Town has been approached and asked to sell a small piece of land that is part of the right of way on Holly Hill that adjoins 644 West Putnam Ave. The property ranges in width from 10’ to 15’ and is approximately 300’ in length and totals 4,083 square feet. The corporation that owns 644 West Putnam Ave. wishes to use the land to build a CVS Pharmacy and other commercial uses. The land will permit the corporation to reconfigure the proposed building in a way that is most desirable for their uses. The land will permit the corporation to build a maximum of an additional 2,000 square feet on the site. Town departments have reviewed the property and determined that there are no circumstances in which the Town would need this
property for governmental purposes. The Town has retained the services of the real estate appraisal firm, Liberty Unlimited, Inc. They have advised the Town that the fair market value to any developer of an additional 2,000 square feet of FAR at this site is $303,310. After several months of negotiations the parties have agree to a sale price of $300,000.
DEPARTMENT: Selectman
REFERRED TO: Education, Legislative & Rules, Parks & Recreation Committees
VOTES:
This proposal was submitted by a Neighborhood Resource Officer, Keith E. Hirsch, and is supported by the Greenwich Police Department and the Community and Police Partnership. The purpose of the ordinance is to protect children in the community from registered sex offenders. At the current time, twenty-two (22) states and four hundred (400) municipalities restrict where sex offenders can live or visit. Most of these restrictions prohibit them from visiting or living in close proximity to places where children congregate. Five (5) communities in Connecticut have adopted a Child Safety Zone Ordinance: Danbury, New Milford, Windsor Locks, Brookfield and Ridgefield.
The ordinance creates Zones (public areas where children congregate, such as parks and schools) which registered sex offenders may not enter. There are exceptions made for entry under certain circumstances. If a sex offender enters a Child Safety Zone, and if a police officer reasonably believes that a sex offender is present within a Child Safety Zone in violation of the ordinance, the officer shall require the suspected sex offender to provide identification. If it is established that the individual is a sex offender, then the officer shall issue a written warning and require the individual to leave. If a person refuses to leave and is later found to be in the same or other Child Safety Zone, the officer may issue a citation which provides for a penalty of One Hundred and 00/100 Dollars ($100.00).
This ordinance was unanimously approved by the Board of Selectmen at its meeting of August 13, 2009.
ATTACHMENT No. 1
You asked (1) for the number of Connecticut municipalities with ordinances banning sex offenders from certain areas, (2) the legal authority municipalities have used to adopt these ordinances, and (3) whether the ordinances have been challenged.
SUMMARY
Ordinances in five Connecticut municipalities ban convicted sex offenders from many public places frequented by children (so-called “child safety zones”). Danbury adopted the first of these ordinances in 2006, banning sex offenders from city-run recreational areas. Brookfield, New Milford, Ridgefield, and Windsor Locks followed. All of these towns give police the authority to detain and fine violators. Greenwich residents considered but defeated a sex offender ordinance in a June representative town meeting, citing concerns about constitutionality and potential legal challenges from civil liberties groups. The Greenwich board of selectmen will vote on another version of the ordinance at its August 13, 2009 meeting.
Apparently, these municipalities are using the broad police powers granted to them by statute as their authority for adopting ordinances banning sex offenders from certain areas. Generally, courts have upheld ordinances based on this authority if they are reasonably calculated to achieve health, safety, and welfare.
After an electronic search for cases and contacting the American Civil Liberties Union, victim advocate, child advocate, and town attorneys in the towns with sex offender ordinances, we do not believe there have been any legal challenges to these ordinances. However, numerous other states and municipalities have such laws and ordinances that have been challenged with varying degrees of success. None of these decisions are binding on Connecticut courts.
MUNICIPAL SEX OFFENDER ORDINANCES
Municipal ordinances in Brookfield, Danbury, New Milford, Ridgefield, and Windsor Locks prohibit “child sex offenders” who are required to register in this state from being present in any “child safety zone. ” ~ If a police officer reasonably believes a child sex offender is in a child safety zone in violation of the ordinance, the office must ask for identification (i. e. , name, address, and telephone number). ~If the officer's belief is confirmed, he or she must issue the offender a written warning and require him or her to leave the area. ~An offender who refuses to leave or commits subsequent offenses is subject to a fine for each violation. ~The fine does not apply if the offender's conduct results in his conviction for a new criminal offense or if his parole or probation
is revoked because of it.
Table 1 shows the key components of the sex offender ordinance in each municipality, including available citations.
TABLE 1: MUNICIPAL SEX OFFENDER ORDINANCES
Municipality with Citations |
Definition of Child Safety Zone |
Definition of Child Sex Offender |
Penalty for Violations |
Brookfield § 186-1 et seq. |
Parks, schools, playgrounds, pools, recreation centers, beaches, sport facilities, sport fields, and the land and buildings upon which they are located |
All sex offenders required to register in this state, including those found not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect and convicted out of state. The ordinance does not apply to an offender: 1. whose name has been removed from the Department of Public Safety's Sex
Offender Registry or from the registry in another state or in the federal or military system by court order or expiration of the registration term, 2. entering into a polling place in a child safety zone to vote if he or she leaves immediately after voting, or 3. entering a child safety zone to drop off or pick up his or her child if he or she leaves immediately after doing so. |
$ 250 |
Table 1: -Continued-
Municipality with Citations |
Definition of Child Safety Zone |
Definition of Child Sex Offender |
Penalty for Violations |
Danbury § 12-27 |
Same as Brookfield |
All sex offenders required to register in this state, including those found not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect and convicted out of state. The ordinance does not apply to an offender: 1. whose name has been removed from the Department of Public Safety's Sex Offender Registry or from the registry in another state or in the federal or military system by court order or expiration of the registration term, 2. entering into a polling place in a child safety zone to vote if he or she leaves immediately after voting, or 3. complying with a sentence or order of probation or parole |
$ 250 |
Greenwich draft proposed ordinance |
Same as Brookfield plus educational facilities and the land and buildings upon which they are located |
Same as Brookfield plus offenders complying with a sentence or order of probation or parole or meeting with an adult about their child's medical care or condition or educational program |
$ 100 |
New Milford § 26-1 et seq. |
Same as Brookfield plus youth gardens, youth farm enterprises, educational facilities, and the land and buildings upon which they are located |
Same as Danbury plus offenders who are custodial parents entering a zone to meet with an adult about their child's medical care or condition or educational program |
$ 100 |
Ridgefield |
Same as Brookfield |
Same as Danbury |
$ 250 |
Windsor Locks |
Same as Brookfield plus libraries and the land and buildings upon which they are located |
Same as Danbury |
$ 99 |
AUTHORITY FOR MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES
The state Supreme Court has long held that municipalities have no inherent powers (see Old Colony Gardens, Inc. ~v. ~Stamford, 147 Conn. ~60 (1959)). ~Thus, the only powers municipalities have are those granted to them by the state constitution or state statutes. Municipalities have the authority under state statutes to protect or promote the peace, safety, good government, and welfare of the municipality and its inhabitants, including regulating the use of streets, sidewalks, public places, and grounds for public and private purposes (CGS § 7-148 (c)(7)(H) (xii) and (xiii)). ~Municipalities are apparently using this broad police power to ban sex offenders from certain areas.
Any ordinance drafted pursuant to a municipality's police powers granted under CGS 7-148 is facially valid if it relates to safety and general welfare (Greater New Haven Property Owners Association v. New Haven (288 Conn. 181 (2008)). The “statutory scheme of § 7-148 envisages its adaption to infinitely variable conditions for the effectuation of the purposes of these statutes” (Modern Cigarette, Inc. v. Orange, 256 Conn 105 (2001)). The test for determining whether a municipal ordinance enacted pursuant to CGS § 7-148 is valid in its application is whether it is reasonably calculated to achieve health, safety, and welfare (Greater New Haven quoting Modern Cigarette 288 Conn. 181, 187).
CHALLENGES TO ORDINANCES PLACING RESTRICTIONS ON SEX OFFENDERS
As of 2006, 22 states and 400 municipalities restrict where sex offenders can live or visit (see OLR Report 2007-R-0380). Most of the restrictions prohibit them from visiting or living in close proximity to places where children congregate. Sex offenders have challenged some of these laws and ordinances on the grounds that they violate provisions in the federal and state constitutions.
Although the U. S. Supreme Court has determined that an imposition of restrictive measures on sex offenders adjudged to be dangerous is a legitimate, nonpunitive governmental objective (Kansas v. Hendricks, 521 U. S. 346, state statute required the involuntary civil commitment of sexually violent predators), residency restrictions have been overturned.
For example, the Georgia Supreme Court held that a state law prohibiting convicted sex offenders from living or loitering within 1,000 feet of schools or other common gathering places for children constituted an unconstitutional regulatory taking. It found that the restrictions placed nearly all of the homes in certain counties off limits, amounting to banishment, and subjected offenders who complied with the law to the possibility of being repeatedly uprooted whenever someone opted to open a school, church, or other facility serving children near their home (Mann v. Georgia Department of Corrections, 282 Ga. 754 (2007)). The Indiana Supreme Court held that a state law making it a class D felony for sex offenders to live within 1,000 feet of school property, a youth center, or a public park
violated the state constitution's ex post facto laws when applied to offenders who purchased their home and committed a sex offense before the law's enactment (State v. Pollard, No. 05 S02-0906-CR-305 (6/30/2009)).
Other states have upheld sex offender residency restrictions. For example, the U. S. Court of Appeals upheld an Iowa statute prohibiting certain sex offenders from residing within 2,000 feet of a school or registered child care facility. Plaintiffs argued that the statute violated (1) their rights to due process, travel, and personal choices regarding family; (2) right against self incrimination; and (3) the ex post facto clause of the federal constitution.
The Court held that the:
1. inability of some towns to identify the location of all schools and registered child care facilities did not deprive the plaintiffs of notice in violation of due process;
2. law's failure to provide a process for individual determinations of dangerousness did not constitutionally foreclose a right to be heard in violation of due process;
3. law did not impose any obstacle to a sex offender's entry into Iowa or erect an actual barrier to interstate movement;
4. U. S. Supreme Court has not decided whether there is a fundamental right to intrastate travel;
5. plaintiffs were not persuasive in arguing that the federal constitution establishes a right to live where you want;
6. law does not regulate the family relationship or prevent any family member from residing with a sex offender in a residence that is consistent with the law; thus, there is no liberty interest relating to a matter of marriage and family that requires heightened scrutiny;
7. residency requirement does not compel a sex offender to be a witness against himself or herself; and
8. law established a civil proceeding that was not “so punitive either in its purpose or effect so as to negate the state's nonpunitive intent” (Doe v. Miller, 405 F. 3d 700 (8th Cir. 2005) citing Smith v. Doe, 538 U. S. 84 (2003)).
SNE: ts
ATTACHMENT No. 2
You asked for information about state laws and local ordinances that preclude registered sex offenders from residing in or visiting certain areas.
SUMMARY
As of August 2006, at least 21 states and over 400 local governments had adopted sex offender residency restriction laws and ordinances, respectively, according to the California Research Bureau in an August 2006 report entitled The Impact of Residency Restrictions on Sex Offenders and Correctional Management Practices: A Literature Review. These laws are modeled after nuisance codes, creating sex offender-free zones like drug-free zones. They typically prohibit sex offenders from living, and sometimes working or loitering, within a specified distance of designated places where children congregate.
Like all states, Connecticut requires sex offenders to register. And like most states, police must notify residents when a sex offender moves or returns to their neighborhoods. But, the state has not enacted a law restricting sex offenders' residency. This could change soon, however. A bill, sHB 5503, currently before the General Assembly requires the Risk Assessment Board to use the risk assessment scale it develops to determine the sex offenders who should be prohibited from living within 1,000 feet of the property comprising an elementary or secondary school or a licensed center- or home-based child day care facility.
Danbury is the only city in this state known to have an ordinance restricting sex offenders' residency. The ordinance prohibits sex offenders from entering a public park, playground, recreation center, bathing beach, swimming pool, sports field, or sports facility.
Proponents of residency restrictions argue the need to safeguard potential victims and opponents argue the need to track offenders. We have found no empirical studies on whether these laws reduce crime rates.
Constitutional challenges to the laws and ordinances have been unsuccessful.
BACKGROUND
States began trying to keep track of sex offenders over 50 years ago, when, in 1947, California enacted the first sex offender registration law. Now all states have sex offender registration laws that help law enforcement agencies keep track of offenders' movements.
In the mid 1990's states, following the federal government's lead, enacted community notification laws that require law enforcement agencies to inform residents of the identity and location of sex offenders in their neighborhoods. These notification laws caused people to complain to their local official when sex offenders moved into their neighborhoods. As a result, five years after the first notification law the first sex offender residency and child safety zone restriction law was enacted in Texas.
SEX OFFENDER RESIDENCY RESTRICTION LAWS AND ORDINANCES
State Laws
At least 21 states have laws restricting where registered sex offenders can visit or live. The most common type of restriction prohibits them from residing within a certain distance of specified places where children congregate. Distance markers generally range from 1,000 to 2,000 feet from the designated place; however, Illinois and South Dakota have 500 foot distance markers. Some states limit the restrictions to offenders (1) convicted of only the most serious offenses (Arkansas, California, Indiana, and Louisiana) or (2) most likely to reoffend based on some type of risk assessment (Minnesota and Washington). Table 1 shows the 22 states, lists their relevant statutes, and describes the ban.
TABLE 1: RESIDENCY RESTRICTIONS BY STATE
|
|
|
States With Sex Offender Residency Restriction Laws |
State |
Statutory Citations |
Restriction |
Alabama |
§ 15-20-26(a) |
A sex offender may not live or work within 2,000 feet of schools or childcare facilities. |
Arkansas |
§ 5-14-128 (a) |
A level 3 or 4 (most serious) sex offender cannot live within 2,000 feet of schools or daycare centers. |
California |
W&I Code § 6608. 5 (f) (2005) Penal Code § 3003 (g) (1) (3) |
A sexually violent predator or a serious paroled sex offender cannot live within one-fourth of a mile of a school, and high-risk paroled sex offenders cannot live within one-half mile of a school, daycare center, or place where children congregate. |
Florida |
§ 947. 1405 (7)(a)(2) |
A sex offender whose victim was under 18 years old cannot live within 1,000 feet of schools or places where children congregate. |
Georgia |
§§ 42-1-13 and 42-1-15 |
No sex offender may live, work, or loiter within 1,000 feet of any school, childcare facility, school bus stop, or place where minors congregate. |
Illinois |
§ 5/11-9. 3 (b-5) |
A child sex offender may not live within 500 feet of a school or school property. |
Indiana |
§ 11-13-3-4 (g) (2) (A) |
A violent sex offender cannot live within 1,000 feet of any school property while on parole. |
Iowa |
§ 692 (A)(2A) |
A sexual offender may not live within 2,000 feet of a school or childcare facility. |
Kentucky |
§ 17. 495 |
A sex offender may not live within 1,000 feet of a school, childcare facility, ball field, or playground. |
Louisiana |
§§ 14: 91. 1 and 15. 538 |
A sexually violent predator and serious paroled sex offender may not live within 1,000 feet of schools or related school activities, including school bus stops for life or duration of parole or probation. |
Michigan |
§§ 28. 721 to 28. 732 |
A sex offender cannot live within 1,000 feet of school safety zone. |
Minnesota |
MSA Chap. 244. 052 et al. |
The parole commissioner determines if a level III sex offender may live within 1,500 feet of school zones. |
Missouri |
§ 589. 417 |
A sex offender may not live within 1,000 feet of a school or childcare facility. |
Ohio |
§ 2950. 031(A) |
A sex offender cannot live within 1,000 feet of any school, childcare facility, or place where children gather. |
Oklahoma |
OSA Tit. 57 § 590 |
A registered sex offender cannot live within 2,000 feet of a school. |
Table 1: –Continued-
|
|
|
States With Sex Offender Residency Restriction Laws |
State |
Statutory Citations |
Restriction |
Oregon |
§§ 144. 642 (1)(a) and 144. 644(2)(a) |
The Department of Correction decides where and how close a sex offender can live to a school or daycare center based on a decision matrix. |
South Dakota |
§ 22-24B |
A sex offender cannot live or loiter within 500 feet of community safety zones. |
Tennessee |
§ 40-39-[2]11(a)-(b) |
A sex offender cannot live within 1,000 feet of schools, childcare facilities, or the victim. |
Texas |
Texas Govt. Code Chap. 508. 187 (b) |
The state parole board decides how close to a child safety zone a paroled sex offender can live or visit. |
Washington |
§§ 9. 94A. 712(6)(a)(ii) and 9. 95. 425-430 |
A sex offender convicted of a serious offense with a high-risk assessment (Level II or III) cannot live within a community protection zone (within 880 feet of any school or daycare center) |
West Virginia |
§ 62-12-26 (b) (1) |
A paroled sex offender cannot live within 1,000 feet of a school or childcare facility. |
Source: California Research Bureau/ California State Library, 2006.
Local Ordinances
According to the California Research Bureau, over 400 municipalities have enacted restrictive ordinances, primarily within the past two years. States with known local ordinances include California, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, New Jersey, New York, Texas, Virginia, and Washington. The number of municipalities with such ordinances varies by state but according to the bureau, at least 113 municipalities in New Jersey and 60 in Florida have them. Like state laws, local ordinances on this issue either preclude offenders from certain areas where children are known to congregate or establish distance markers.
Danbury is the only city in Connecticut with such an ordinance. It prohibits child sex offenders who are required to register in this state from being present in any child safety zone. A “child safety zone” is a public park, playground, recreation center, bathing beach, swimming or wading pool, or sports field or facility and surrounding land.
The prohibition does not apply to any person:
1. whose name has been removed from the Department of Public Safety's Sex Offender Registry or from the registry in another state or in the federal or military system by court order or expiration of the registration term or
2. entering into a polling place in a child safety zone to vote if he leaves immediately after voting.
If a police officer reasonably believes a child sex offender is in a child safety zone in violation of the ordinance, the office must ask him to provide his name, address, and telephone number. If the officer's belief is confirmed, he or she must issue the offender a written warning and require him to leave the area. An offender who refuses to leave and subsequent offenders are subject to a $ 100 fine for each violation. The fine does not apply if the offender's conduct results in his conviction for a new criminal offense or if his parole or probation is revoked because of it (Danbury City Ord. § 12-27).
ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST RESTRICTIONS
The most powerful and often the single argument in support of safety zones or residency restrictions is that they reduce recidivism rates by keeping potential victims safe and apart from offenders. Opponents argue that these restrictions have a number of unintended consequences. For example, they (1) isolate offenders, often forcing them to live in rural areas that lack jobs, transportation, housing, and treatment; (2) create homelessness, making it difficult for law enforcement officers to track offenders; (3) cause offenders to go underground and not update registration information; and (4) can prevent offenders from residing with supportive family members who live in the restricted areas.
CONSTITUTIONALITY OF RESIDENCY RESTRICTIONS
Residency restrictions have withstood constitutional challenges in trial and appellate courts in Illinois, Iowa, Ohio, and South Dakota. At issue in these cases collectively was whether the restrictions (1) impose criminal sanctions that penalize offenders whose convictions are final in violation of the ex post facto clause of Article I, Section 10, Clause 1, of the U. S. Constitution, (2) violate the constitutionally-protected right to travel, or (3) discriminate against offenders in violation of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
These courts have held that (1) residency restrictions are a form of civil regulation intended to protect children and thus prohibitions on ex post facto laws do not apply; (2) the federal constitution does not include a right to live where one chooses; and (3) residency restrictions are rationally related to states' legitimate interests in protecting children from harm (see Doe v. Miller, 405 F. 3d 700 (8th Cir. 2005); State v. Steering, 701 N. W. 2d 655 (Iowa 2005); Coston v. Petro, 398 F. Supp. 2d 878 (S. D. Ohio 2005); and People v. Leroy, 357 Ill. App. 3d 530 (2005)).
SN-E: ts
Introductory Comments
From the Special Committee on Structure and Rules
To Fellow RTM Members:
The Special Committee on Structure and Rules offers for the RTM’s consideration 11 resolutions which follow these introductory comments. It is the Committee’s recommendation that no final votes on these resolutions be taken at the September meeting. We firmly believe that the RTM should have the benefit of discussion at the Committee and District levels in September, and to have a full discussion of the issues at the September RTM, to hear the recommendations of the Committees and the Districts, and the items be referred back to the appropriate Committees for further action and voting at our October meeting. This would give the RTM, its Districts and Committees adequate time to consider and/or revise these resolutions to reflect the will of the RTM. It is our hope that these items can be voted
up or down at the October meeting, so that we can begin our new term in January with any new rules in place.
DEPARTMENT: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules
CONTACT: Joan Caldwell 869.2553 no email
REFERRED TO: Land Use, Legislative & Rules,Public Works,Town Services, Transportation Committees
VOTES: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules vote (10-0-0)
RESOLVED, that, effective December 31, 2009, the RTM Transportation Committee be dissolved, and that its responsibilities be assigned to the Public Works, Land Use, and Town Services Committees as outlined in the revised APPENDIX B, Descriptions of Standing Committees, and that the words “Transportation Committee” be deleted from paragraph V.B.2 of the Rules of the RTM.
APPENDIX B
F. LAND USE COMMITTEE
Operational Responsibility:
* Reviews all matters concerning land use and planning and zoning submitted for RTM approval.
* Reviews operations of Planning & Zoning Commission and the Planning & Zoning Board of Appeals.
* Reviews operations of Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency.
* Reviews all items of municipal improvement status.
* Reviews planning of transportation initiatives.
* Reviews all items of the Conservation Commission.
* Reviews purchases, sales or leases of Town real property.
* Reviews any updates of the Town’s “Plan of Conservation and Development” and annual amendments thereto.
* Reviews all grants of easements.
* Reviews all matters regarding condemnation and condemnation awards.
* Reviews all gifts of real property to the Town.
* Studies and debates acceptance or abandonment of private roads by the Town.
* Reviews demolition or renovation or any change in use of Town-owned property.
Budget Responsibility:
* Reviews all appropriations and budgets for:
- Planning & Zoning Commission, and Planning & Zoning Board of Appeals.
- Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency.
- Conservation Commission.
- Historic District Commission.
- Architectural Review Board.
- Condemnation Commission.
- Flood and Erosion Control Board.
Overlapping Responsibility:
* For financial items over $50,000: with the Finance Committee.
I. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
Operational Responsibility:
* Reviews operations of all branches of Town government relating to public works and recycling.
* Reviews the planning, construction, modification, maintenance, renovation of Town buildings and highways.
* Provides ex officio representation on school building committees.
* Reviews transportation issues such as traffic control, traffic flow, and highways and parking.
Budgetary Responsibility:
* Reviews all appropriations and budgets for:
- Public Works Department including all programs, divisions and personnel.
- Sewer Improvement and Maintenance Fund
- Fleet Department
Overlapping Responsibility:
* For financial items over $50,000: with the Finance Committee.
J. TOWN SERVICES COMMITTEE
Operational Responsibility:
* Reviews operations of departments concerned with public safety.
* Reviews operations of Purchasing Department.
* Reviews communications matters: data processing, network services, information planning.
* Reviews risk reduction programs, such as training personnel in the safe and proper use of equipment, enforcing safety rules, and the contract obligations of Town vendors.
* Reviews Board of Ethics.
* Reviews Shellfish Commission.
* Reviews Fleet Department operations.
* Reviews traffic control, traffic flow, highways and parking and other transportation issues
Budgetary Responsibility:
* Reviews all appropriations and budgets for: including all programs, divisions and personnel for:
- Fire Department including all programs, division and personnel
- Fleet Department
- Police Department including all programs, divisions and personnel
- Purchasing Department
- Consumer Affairs Coordinator
- Board of Ethics
- Administrative Services Center
- Representative Town Meeting
- Office of First Selectman and Board of Selectmen
- Town Clerk
- Shellfish Commission
- Alarms Appeal Board
- General government areas not specifically covered by other RTM committees
Overlapping Responsibility:
* For financial items over $50,000: with the Finance Committee.
K. TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
Operational Responsibility:
- Reviews all transportation related issues, including mass transportation facilities (bus, rail, air).
- Other transportation concerns, including traffic control, traffic flow, highways, parking, parking fund.
- Reviews Fleet Department operations.
Budgetary Responsibility:
- Fleet Department, including all programs, divisions and personnel.
Overlapping Responsibilities:
* For financial items over $50,000: with Finance Committee.
* For parking and parking structure items: with Public Works Committee.
EXPLANATORY COMMENTS
It is the recommendation of the Special Committee on Structure and Rules that the RTM vote to dissolve the Transportation Committee and assign its responsibilities to the Public Works, Town Services and Land Use Committees, as outlined in the revised Appendix B.
In the thirty-four (34) RTMs from January 2005 through January 2009, Transportation was assigned twenty-eight (28) items, of which four (4) were May budgets and eleven (11) were items assigned to all committees (See Appendix C of Special Committee Report dated April 2009). At fifteen (15) meetings, no items were assigned to Transportation.
The Committee concluded that the work of the Transportation Committee could be effectively handled by other committees as follows:
Assign the review of transportation facilities to Public Works Committee
Assign the review of transportation planning, including parking, pedestrian, bicycle, traffic control planning to Land Use Committee, and
Assign the review of fleet and transportation operations to Town Services Committee.
DEPARTMENT: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules
CONTACT: Joan Caldwell 869.2553 no email
REFERRED TO: Appointments, Budget Overview, Finance, Legislative and Rules Committees
VOTES: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules vote (10-0-0)
RESOLVED, that section VI.C of the Rules of the Representative Town Meeting be re-captioned VI.D and a new section VI.C be inserted.
The new VI.C. reads as follows:
C. CAPITAL PROJECTS REVIEW COMMITTEE
1. Function:
The Capital Projects Review Committee (“CPRC”) shall:
a) Identify and report on the long term financial obligations associated with First Selectman's Capital Improvement Projects Budget (“CIP”);
b) Evaluate and report on the comparative advantages of pay as you go versus short term bonding or other financing for CIP;
c) Evaluate and report on the estimated project costs for the current and out-year appropriations to ascertain whether they include adequate provisions for cost increases, contingencies and soft costs;
d) Evaluate and report on the effect of an unanticipated capital requirement on the capital budget;
e) Analyze the capital budget approved by the First Selectman each year and report on the status of major projects previously appropriated including current estimated completion costs and dates;
f) Evaluate and report on proposed new projects with special attention to those over $1,000,000;
g) Identify for the RTM new projects for which costs will be appropriated in more than one year and whether the first year's appropriation effectively obligates the Town to appropriations in subsequent years;
h) Review and report on proposed projects' consistency with the Plan of Conservation and Development;
i) Identify for the RTM projects that should be eliminated from the capital budget and the reasons therefore;
j) Identify for the RTM projects that were in the prior year's CIP but eliminated from the current CIP and the reasons therefore;
k) Identify for the RTM projects for which there were significant changes in scope, cost estimates or completion dates since appropriation;
l) Identify for the RTM projects which should be but are not included in the CIP;
m) Provide a delegate and alternate nonvoting member to the First Selectman's CIP committee.
2. Composition:
The CPRC shall consist of 7 members, all of whom shall be members of the RTM and who shall be appointed by the RTM on nomination of the Appointments Committee for terms expiring at the end of the term of the RTM during which they are appointed, provided that the term of each member shall continue thereafter until a successor shall have been appointed, and further provided that said members continue to be members of the RTM.
3. Election of Officers:
Officers shall be elected by the members of the CPRC from among their number as soon as convenient following their appointment. Votes shall be by written ballot, and a majority of the committee members shall constitute a quorum. The newly elected chairman shall promptly notify the Town Clerk of such elections, and the Moderator shall announce the election of the committee officers at the next meeting.
4. Meetings:
The chairman shall convene CPRC meetings to plan and carry out the work of the committee. All meetings shall be posted in compliance with the Freedom of Information Act.
5. Reports:
The CPRC shall report to the RTM at its April meeting (or May if there is no April meeting) on its findings with regards to the proposed CIP appropriations and bonding, and shall recommend such action as it deems necessary to protect the Town's fiscal stability and interests. It shall also review the CIP process and recommend such changes as it considers advisable at the June RTM. It shall report to the RTM at such other times as it deems appropriate.
6. Minutes:
The minutes of all meetings of the CPRC shall be filed with the Town Clerk in compliance with the Freedom of Information Act. Such records shall be public records and shall be maintained for three terms after the end of the term to which they apply.
EXPLANATORY COMMENTS
The Committee recommends creating a seven (7) person special committee nominated by the RTM Appointments Committee and approved by the RTM.
At present, there is no committee of the RTM charged with looking at our capital projects on an ongoing basis extending beyond the present budget. The Special Committee feels that a need has arisen to have a committee, presumably with financial expertise, and is therefore recommending that a new committee be formed.
The new committee is to review all aspects of the CIP Budget including previously authorized projects, current recommended projects, and out year projects for their consistency with the POCD. The committee should also review financing approaches and the quality of cost estimates for these projects and make recommendations to the RTM on actions it should take at the May budget meeting. The new committee, to be called the Capital Projects Review Committee (CPRC), to avoid any confusion with the First Selectman’s “CIP” Committee, should also appoint a member and alternate member to the First Selectman’s CIP Committee.
DEPARTMENT: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules
CONTACT: Joan Caldwell 869.2553 no email
REFERRED TO: Legislative & Rules Committee
VOTES: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules vote (10-0-0)
RESOLVED, that Paragraph B Claims Committee of Section VI SPECIAL COMMITTEES of the Rules of the Representative Town Meeting be amended by inserting a new section 2., and to renumber the following section as number 3., as follows:
2. Other Responsibilities. The Claims Committee is charged by the RTM to advise it and the First Selectman of any exposure to liability that the Committee may discern from time to time in Town operations or on Town-held properties.
2. 3. Organization.
EXPLANATORY COMMENTS:
In recent years, the Town has paid enormous settlements for claims brought against the Town resulting from a failure to address risk management situations. The Claims Committee, acting for the RTM, is the committee most aware of such exposures. The charge to the Claims Committee should be broadened to identify such exposures where known so that the RTM and Town officials can address these risks.
DEPARTMENT: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules
CONTACT: Joan Caldwell 869-2553 no email
REFERRED TO: Legislative & Rules Committee
VOTES: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules vote (10-0-0)
RESOLVED, that section V.A.4 of the Rules of the Representative Town Meeting be amended by deleting the existing section V.A.4 in its entirety and inserting in its place the following:
4. Attendance of Delegates. If a delegate does not attend a minimum of 50% of the meetings of the committee to which he or she has been designated within the first calendar year of each term, the delegate is ineligible to serve as a delegate to that committee the following year, and a successor shall be selected in accordance with these rules. Each delegate to a committee shall be responsible for representing his district at the committee's meetings. In the event the delegate is unable to attend, he should confirm that his alternate will attend, and if the alternate is not able to attend, work with the district chairman to find a substitute to represent the district. No later than each December 31, of the first calendar year of each term, the secretary of
each committee shall report the names districts having more than one absenceof each delegate failing to meet the minimum attendance requirement to the Town Clerk and to the appropriate district chairmanchairmen. The eligibility of such a member can be reinstated by a majority vote of the district members.
EXPLANATORY COMMENTS
The present rule requires that a district delegate who fails to attend at least 50% of the committee meetings in the first year be dropped from the committee and that the relevant district appoint a new delegate. The Special Committee believes a delegate’s main responsibility is to report committee action to his district. Accordingly, we recommend that the rule be changed to provide that district representation be the objective, with only one district absence permitted per year. It is the delegate’s responsibility to make sure that the district is represented. The critical issue is district representation, not by whom. Districts that exceed the one permitted absence per year shall be cited from the lectern by the Moderator.
The existing section V.A.4 is printed below as a reference:
4. Attendance of Delegates. If a delegate does not attend a minimum of 50% of the meetings of the committee to which he or she has been designated within the first calendar year of each term, the delegate is ineligible to serve as a delegate to that committee the following year, and a successor shall be selected in accordance with these rules. No later than December 31 of the first calendar year of each term, the secretary of each committee shall report the names of each delegate failing to meet the minimum attendance requirement to the Town Clerk and to the appropriate district chairman. The eligibility of such a member can be reinstated by a majority vote of the district members.
DEPARTMENT: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules
CONTACT: Joan Caldwell 869-2553 no email
REFERRED TO: Legislative & Rules Committees
VOTES: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules vote (10-0-0)
RESOLVED, that section III. B. 4 of the Rules of the Representative Town Meeting be amended by inserting the following language at the end of that section:
The Call and documents will be electronically transmitted to RTM members who waive, in writing, the requirement that they be mailed.
EXPLANATORY COMMENTS:
The Special Committee thinks that there is an economic benefit to be gained from electronically transmitting the Call and support documents, but adopting this provision requires that the Town make a commitment to make all documents available by email.
Nonetheless, the Committee is recommending that those members who desire such transmission waive their right to delivery by postal mail in writing to the Town Clerk.
The Town Clerk has said that email delivery is possible.
DEPARTMENT: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules
CONTACT: Joan Caldwell 869.2553 no email
REFERRED TO: Legislative & Rules Committees
VOTES: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules vote (10-0-0)
RESOLVED, that section III. I. 6 be added to the Rules of the Representative Town Meeting to read as follows:
6. Second Reading Procedure
No resolution that:
- Revises the Charter; or
- Enacts or revises an ordinance; or
- Revises the Rules of the Representative Town Meeting; or
- Appears on the Call by way of a petition signed by at least twenty (20) registered voters (all of the above are hereinafter “The Proposed Resolution”),
- shall be voted upon by the Representative Town Meeting unless it has been subject to the following procedure:
a. It shall be placed on the Call of an initial Representative Town Meeting, and shall be referred to the appropriate committee(s) for review. The Proposed Resolution shall then be presented at the initial Representative Town Meeting, and committee reports shall be given.
b. Except in the case of an emergency, as defined below, no final action shall be taken on The Proposed Resolution without first being placed on the Call not sooner than the next regularly scheduled Representative Town Meeting. It shall be referred to the appropriate committees for a second reading, revisions and/or committee voting. It may then be considered and voted upon at the subsequent Representative Town Meeting.
c. An emergency is defined as a situation requiring immediate action to protect the public health or safety, or to protect the Town’s financial interest. In an emergency, The Proposed Resolution may be voted upon without a second reading. A two-thirds affirmative vote of the members present and voting shall be necessary to move The Proposed Resolution for a vote in such an emergency.
EXPLANATORY COMMENTS
Many items that come before the RTM are complex, especially those that involve our Rules, the Charter and Town Ordinances. Many time items that come to the RTM by way of petition are well-meaning but often poorly drafted.
The practice of requiring a second reading of documents is currently used in the Connecticut General Assembly. It gives members of that body extra time to consider the implications of the proposed legislation. The Structure and Rules Committee believes that a second reading would help to ensure that the RTM does not enact legislation that is not thoroughly considered by its committees. As drafted, it would apply to all non-emergency resolutions that amend the Charter, Town Ordinance, Rules of the RTM, or come to the RTM by petition of the voters.
DEPARTMENT: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules
CONTACT: Joan Caldwell 869-2553 no email
REFERRED TO: Legislative & Rules Committee
VOTES: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules vote (10-0-0)
RESOLVED, that section III. B. 6. be added to the Rules of the Representative Town Meeting, to read as follows:
6. A copy of any report to the RTM by a special committee shall be filed with the Town Clerk for permanent retention.
EXPLANATORY COMMENTS:
The Committee, as it prepared to undertake its charge from the Moderator, could not locate a copy of the l996 RTM Report. Eventually one was located in the files of a long standing member. This revealed an error in our procedures because much good work is done over the years by committees of the RTM created for special purposes. The Committee believes that all such reports should be filed with and permanently retained by the Town Clerk so that they may serve as a basis for future reference and may serve in many instances as a statement of interest and purpose.
DEPARTMENT: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules
CONTACT: Joan Caldwell 869.2553 no email
REFERRED TO: Legislative & Rules Committee
VOTES: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules vote (10-0-0)
RESOLVED, that the voting procedure of the Rules of the Representative Town Meeting be amended by revising paragraph III.I.4.b. and c., to read as follows:
b. Where required by the Freedom of Information Act or upon motion duly adopted, a record vote shall be taken by the district chairmen on a voting card properly identified as to the subject being voted upon. The vote shall be taken in the following manner: The district chairmen shall first delete from the voting card the names of the members not present. The chairmen shall then circulate the voting card among the members of the delegation to personally record their own votes.
c. Upon completion of the vote, the district chairmen shall deliver the voting card to the Town Clerk.
EXPLANATORY COMMENTS
The following is the redlined version of III.I.4.b. and c., reflecting the changes made to the existing Rules:
b. Where required by the Freedom of Information Act or upon motion duly adopted, a record vote shall be taken by the district chairmen on a voting record card properly identified as to the subject being voted upon. The vote may shall be taken in either of the following manners:
1. The district chairmen shall first delete from the voting record card the names of the members not present. The chairmen shall then permit circulate the voting card among the members of the delegation to personally record their own votes.
2. In the alternative, the district chairmen shall first delete from the voting cards the names of any members not present. The chairmen shall then poll the district and record the vote of each member. The voting record card shall then be exhibited to the members of the distract, who shall verify the marking of their votes.
c. Upon completion of the poll vote, the district chairmen shall deliver the record vote to the Town Clerk.
There was some concern over the lack of uniformity in the recording of votes by different districts at the RTM. The Committee feels that this could lead to questions as to the accuracy of the vote. Therefore, it is recommending that each member be responsible for recording his or her own vote on an item.
DEPARTMENT: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules
CONTACT: Joan Caldwell 869.2553 no email
REFERRED TO: Legislative & Rules Committee
VOTES: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules vote (10-0-0)
RESOLVED, that the Legislative and Rules Committee be charged with the responsibility of periodically updating the Rules of the Representative Town Meeting, by deleting the following from Appendix B, paragraph G:
* Furnishes copies of RTM Rules, Appendices and Town Charter to RTM members.
And inserting in its place the following:
* Prepares revisions of RTM Rules and Appendices for the Town Clerk.
* Periodically updates RTM Rules for distribution to Town Clerk and RTM.
EXPLANATORY COMMENTS
At present, no one is charged with responsibility for keeping the RTM Rules up to date and periodically the RTM has amended or added to its own rules. The Committee, therefore, is recommending that the Legislative and Rules Committee be charged with that responsibility.
ATTACHMENTS
See redlined version of Appendix B, paragraph G.
From: Appendix B
Description of Standing Committees
G. LEGISLATIVE AND RULES COMMITTEE
Operational Responsibility:
* Rules on the legal aspects of items on the RTM call.
* Reviews operations of the Law Department.
* Reviews Charter amendments and town ordinances, leases and other legal documents submitted to the RTM for approval.
* Examines RTM rules and procedures, with respect to the body as well as to its committees and districts.
* Considers any appeals from the decisions of the Town Attorney.
* Proposes revisions of the Rules of the RTM.
* Furnishes copies of RTM Rules, Appendices and Town Charter to RTM members.
*Prepares revisions of RTM Rules and Appendices for the Town Clerk.
*Periodically updates RTM Rules for distribution to Town Clerk and RTM.
Budgetary Responsibility:
* Law Department
Overlapping Responsibility:
* For financial items over $50,000: with the Finance Committee.
DEPARTMENT: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules
CONTACT: Joan Caldwell 869.2553 no email
REFERRED TO: Legislative & Rules Committee
VOTES: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules vote (10-0-0)
RESOLVED, that paragraph IV.D.3 of the Rules of the Representative Town Meeting be amended by inserting the underlined language, to read as follow:
3. At Representative Town Meetings. The district Chairman shall record the attendance, and report it to the Clerk within 30 minutes of the Moderator's call to order, and supervise the voting of the district delegation at RTMs.
EXPLANATORY COMMENTS
The Committee discussed attendance recording and reporting, but overlooked including its recommendations in its April 2009 report. It is correcting the oversight.
The RTM maintains attendance and voting records. The purpose of the attendance record is to identify those members who are qualified to be on the election ballot without having to submit a petition. As noted in Appendix C of the Committee's report, only 95% of those recorded as "attending" vote on the meeting's first vote, indicating members arrive late. Our present rules do not provide any guidance as to when attendance is to be taken. This amendment corrects this and provides that it will be at the beginning of the meeting. Failure to be on time does not preclude a tardy member from voting subsequent to his or her arrival.
DEPARTMENT: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules
CONTACT: Joan Caldwell 869.2553 no email
REFERRED TO: Budget Overview, Finance, Legislative & Rules Committees
VOTES: RTM Special Committee on Structure and Rules vote (10-0-0)
RESOLVED, that paragraph V.G of the Rules of the Representative Town Meeting of the Town of Greenwich be amended by deleting the existing paragraph V.G in its entirety, and inserting the following language, to read as follows:
G. Budget Planning Process
Committees shall plan and coordinate their departmental budget reviews with the budget schedule promulgated by the Board of Estimate & Taxation.
AND FURTHER RESOLVED, that Appendix H be amended by deleting the entire language, and inserting in its place the following language, to read as follows:
APPENDIX H
BUDGET PLANNING PROCESS
Committees shall plan and coordinate their departmental budget reviews with the budget schedule promulgated by the Board of Estimate & Taxation.
EXPLANATORY COMMENTS
The current Rule contains a prescriptive process for budget reviews which has been more honored in its breach than its observation. Each year, the BET produces a schedule for the submission and review of departmental budgets. This schedule provides a timeline which RTM committees can follow in their own reviews.
ATTACHMENTS
Redlined version of paragraph V.G of the Rules.
Redlined version of Appendix H.
From V. STANDING COMMITTEES of the Rules of the RTM of the Town of Greenwich
G. BUDGET PLANNING PROCESS
Each standing committee, except for the Appointments and Budget Overview Committees, is charged to adhere in accordance with the following timetable provided:
September:
1) Standing committees establish budget sub-committees whose purpose is to monitor the Town budget proceedings involving their respective functional Town departments.
2) Chairman of each standing committee provides reporting guidelines to its budget sub-committee.
3) Standing committee chairmen meet collectively with the Town Budget Director to review the budget process for the fiscal year.
4) Standing committee chairmen distribute the names of RTM members serving on
their respective budget sub-committees to the Town department(s) and/or agency(s) with which the committee is functionally involved as well as advising the Budget Overview Committee of their budget sub-committees’ personnel. Each standing committee chairman should formally request of the Town department(s) monitored by that committee a schedule of all budget meetings its delegate may attend.
October:
1) Each standing committee chairman, on behalf of its budget sub-committee, requests from the Budget Overview Committee copies of the pertinent departmental budget requests and support documents when made available in early November.
November:
1) Committee chairmen receive and distribute pertinent departmental budget documents to their budget sub-committees.
2) Budget sub-committees should monitor the development of the budget requests of their functional departments and attend scheduled meetings between Town department heads and the Budget Committee of the BET.
3) Sub-committees conduct research into line item requests and discuss their thoughts with department managers and their standing committees, if necessary.
December:
1) Budget sub-committees attend subsequent meetings between BET Budget Committee and Town departments with which they are functionally involved.
2) Sub-committees make their reports to their respective standing committees. Each standing committee may draft its conclusions and submit its report to the Budget Committee of the BET, which is preparing its Recommended Budget.
January – March:
1) Each standing committee determines whether to submit its finding and recommendations to the Town Clerk for distribution with the publication of the Recommended Budget in early February.
2) Budget sub-committees discuss and evaluate any information subsequently submitted by Town departments to the BET Budget Committee for changes or reinstatements to the Recommended Budget.
3) By Mid-March any standing committees having differences with the BET Budget Committee should be prepared to discuss their findings and recommendations at their respective meetings with the BET Budget Committee.
4) RTM members are encouraged to attend the public hearings held by the BET to discuss the various departmental budgets.
April:
1) Standing Committees may submit their final budget conclusions and recommendations in a written report to the Town Clerk for distribution, together with the Proposed Budget, to the members of the RTM.
May:
1) At the RTM budget meeting, if a standing committee plans to offer a line item amendment, the committee chairman shall offer a standing committee report in accordance with Rules of the RTM, Section III G., “Making Standing Committee Reports.”.
APPENDIX H
BUDGET PROCEDURE AND SCHEDULE
The adoption of the Town’s annual budget is a lengthy process. It begins within the various departments as early as a year before the final action, by the RTM at its May meeting.
During this process there are opportunities for interested persons to attend meetings, which are public under the Freedom of Information Act. Supervisory and managerial conferences are not classified as public meetings. In some meetings it is possible to participate in the discussions, but in others the discussion is restricted to the principals involved. Hearings are open to the public for their information and comments.
Any member desirous of participating in the formulation of any part of the budget or of becoming better informed, can obtain information about meetings and hearings by calling the appropriate department head. Interest and participation will be welcomed.
Following are the major segments of the budget process. Dates are approximate, as they vary from year to year. Opportunities for RTM members and the public to participate in discussion are indicated in the margin below by the letter “P” and meetings where they can only monitor the proceedings are shown by the letter “M.”
1. In August, the Budget Director issues instructions to department heads, including a schedule of dates for specific events in the budget process. School principals will have been instructed by the Board of Education during the spring to develop their capital recommendations and special educational needs. All departmental personnel develop long range plans and specific proposals for the year in question, with estimated costs and revenues. These are reviewed and revised at conferences and meetings at the supervisory and managerial levels, with priorities being established at the executive level. Final action
of this phase is the approval of each department’s request by its elected official or board, or its appointed board or commission. These conferences are not open to the public. However, constituencies are free to offer suggestions to departmental personnel during this development phase, particularly in the area of capital involvements.
2. In September, RTM standing committees appoint budget sub-committees.
3. Each department’s request is forwarded by October 31 to the Budget Director, who then compiles all departmental budgets and within 5 to 10 business days forwards a set to each member of the Board of Estimate and Taxation (“BET”) Budget Committee (the “Committee”) and two sets to the RTM Budget Overview Committee. The BOC distributes applicable portions of one of the sets to the appropriate standing committees.
M 4. Beginning as early as mid-November commission members and department heads meet with the Committee, Comptroller, and Budget Director to review budget requests and furnish additional information or explanation that the Committee requires.
M 5. Following the completion of these budget reviews, the departments submit any additional information requested by the Committee. The Committee then meets in full day session (prior to the Christmas Holiday) to make decisions regarding its “Recommended Budget.” The Recommended Budget is then compiled for submission to the total membership of the BET, with copies given to the entire RTM and made available to the general public. The Recommended Budget, also known as the “Big Book”, presents the data by “object code”, line items, such as 101, 110, and 111, for expenses and by article or item for equipment and capital
improvements. The Recommended Budget is published and distributed in early February, but its contents become known earlier through media publication following the decision-making meeting in December. From their attendance at BET Committee meetings, RTM budget sub-committee delegates will have complete information relating to the Recommended Budget in advance of its publication.
M 6. In early to mid-February, the Committee entertains reinstatement requests by department heads who feel that the Committee has misinterpreted information or lacked information when making certain budget decisions. At the end of the reinstatement meetings, the Committee votes as to whether to reconsider some of its budget decisions and whether to recommend changes to the full BET at the public hearings. RTM budget sub-committee delegates should attend the reinstatement meetings.
P 7. In mid-March, the Budget Committee meets with various RTM standing committees to review with them the reasons/philosophies for the actions taken in compiling its Recommended Budget. RTM members will have had a full month to study the book and to identify the items they wish to question.
P 8. During March-April, the BET hold public hearings over the Recommended Budget. The various department budgets are scheduled over these three nights. The primary purpose of these hearings is to allow the public, departments, and RTM members to offer additional information and explanations to justify reinstatement of items reduced by the Committee, or to recommend reductions or deletions of specific items. The BET then makes its decisions on items in question, and all items in the budget. These constitute the “Proposed Budget.”
9. In April, the BET publishes the “little book” containing its Proposed Budget for the coming fiscal year. The format is to combine all object codes (e.g., 101, 110, 111) into major object codes (such as 100, 200, 300) through the 800 series. Only items in the 900 series (Equipment and Improvements) are scheduled individually.
P 10. The May RTM is normally devoted to the Proposed Budget. Exceptions usually are made only for emergencies or non-deferrable actions such as ratification of a labor contract. Standing committees will have met on scheduled evenings with personnel of the departments for which they are functionally responsible. The RTM consideration of the budget also serves as a public hearing, with the public entitled to speak without a vote.
The RTM cannot increase or initiate any item of the Proposed Budget. It can only approve, reduce, or eliminate. It deals with numbered codes as they appear in the Proposed Budget, the “little book.”
In the Schools category, the RTM cannot reduce or eliminate a major object code or a divisional total, such as 600, 620, etc. The RTM can, however, vote to reduce the entire Educational budget by a dollar amount, leaving a reasonable amount to operate the educational system. The Board of Education then spreads these reduced dollars to the code(s) they select. The RTM can, however, reduce or eliminate a specific non-educational capital equipment or capital improvement item.
The parliamentary procedure in acting on budget will be to consider, page by page, each coded item. Any challenge of an item will be voted on as a parliamentary resolution before any other items are considered. After every page is considered, and all challenges disposed of, the basic Appropriation Resolution, as drafted on pages of the little book and repeated in the Call of the meeting, as may be amended by the RTM, will be put to a final vote.
11. On the third Monday of May, the BET sets the tax rate for the coming year, based on appropriations approved by the RTM and on other fiscal provisions determined by the BET, such as contingency and working capital reserves, revenues from State and Federal agencies and local user fees. The net of all the foregoing is then divided by the Grand List of assessed values as of the previous October 1st, to calculate the mill rate.
| 
