MINUTES

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 8

So it's fatally flawed, it ought to be dead on arrival, you ought to have a Pu= blic Hearing like you have the ability to do and you ought to kick it out, throw= it out, tell them to go back to the beginning and not let (inaudible). Other than that I don't have anyth= ing to say.

Doreen DeSorbo, Franklin Street, Oakville, CT&nbs= p; 06779

Ms. DeSorbo: (Tape #1, Side = A ended- may have missed some.) I'm not a nutcase, I'm simply a truly concerned citizen who fought the mall (in= audible) got involved again with the retail thing, would like to correct a couple of misconceptions and give you some information you may otherwise not have. I can't help but follow up on the = local businesses being lost. I thin= k there's a misconception that when Stop & Shop went into this Town nothing happe= ned, nobody lost. I seem to rememb= er that we had a place called Pat's Marketplace. They went out of business, what 3 = or 4 months after Stop & Shop went in? Now that might have been coincidental, but I highly doubt it. We will lose local businesses, we will lose many of them. No= w one of the things that I did want to tell you about is that being we did have LaBonne's, we had (inaudible) IGA, that was Edwards, we had Pat's Marketplace. We seem to have = lost one of those businesses, I know LaBonne's moved = over, we are minus one business. Now Pat's doing the web site, I don't put anything on the web site that I don't look at, I've read every study, I have researched every study, there isn't anything that I bring to you on that web site that is not an accurate, valid study and if it's opinion, it's labeled as such. Sometime within the past year I did write a letter to the Town Times that if anyone had a study that was pro th= is type of retail, to please let me know, I would put it on our web site. To date I have heard nothing. The only information that you do h= ave is all the Music Man, right here in River City, 76 trombones.=

You know I understand developers, I understand people wanting to sell their lan= d, I understand developers, I do understand, yes, they're going to make it look glamorous and glitzy, but you have to look beyond that, and in terms of loo= king beyond that, I would like to just tell you about 2 things that you may not = be aware of. Back in February of= 2007 the Planning Commission in Groton, CT rejected a proposal from Konover Deve= lopment to construct a 200,000 square foot WalMart Superstore on 30 acres of land i= n a water resource protection district. The Commission voted 4-1 to reject the plan. The Planning Commission cited 9 re= asons for the rejection, including inadequate storm water management and the hand= ling of hazardous materials. The T= own Planner told the Associated Press it was the most involved project we've ev= er seen this close to a water supply. At the time Konover, yes, Konover, said i= t was disappointed by the decision, they were considering an appeal. Two weeks after the rejection a le= tter from Konover told the AP that it's firm was in f= act suing the town. (Inaudible) T= own Planner's (inaudible) the developer to do more than the regulations require. W= hat you've got in front of you is something that has no regulations. You adopt this Plan as it stands i= n terms of that retail zone, commercial zone change, you= are opening the Town up, period, end of story.= Any developer can come in, I assume Konover because they're the ones with the options, and oh, the next story, it was about a 17 year battle that the citizens in Keane, NH fought against Konover who tried to put a WalMart= and then finally built their, I guess wonderful Mattanock. They tried to do a 200,000 square = foot, was hung up on wetlands issue, so it was rejected. This went on for over 15 years. The developer keeps coming back. Once you let them in they will keep coming back.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 9

You don't have a cap size, you haven't capped the square footage size on anythi= ng, you haven't done a study. If you in fact accept this tonight= as it is, you are opening the Town up for many, many years of trying to keep cont= rol over something you can control (inaudible). Please don't do that. And for all of the people in here who just happened to know that tonight was the on= ly small chance for public participation, please hold a Public Hearing. Thank you.

Ross Upton, 86 Wood Park Drive, Watertown<= /st1:City>, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Mr. Upton: I'm here to comment on the WalMart situation. We happened to hav= e as a young man, this was a long time ago, the phrase "Made In America", "Made in New England" and "Made in Waterbury", the symb= ols of quality merchandise and craftsmanship, pride in workmanship. Well where is that today? That's gone. We no longer have that in America= . Maybe you can find some miniscule = spots here and there, but primarily that is all gone to our great detriment. The era we live in was once way ba= ck then the center of activity for manufacturing of the world. "Made in New England", "Made in Waterbury" these were worthwhile comments and they meant something on the product. You could look at that product and= say that's worthwhile, we're going to buy it, it will work. And so today we go to malls and su= permarkets and what are we buying? You <= span class=3DGramE>can't hardly find anything made in America anymore. What we're finding in the markets = is made overseas, and many times slave labor and many times slave wages. So that's all cheaper of course and being cheaper unfortunately we're in a position where we end up buying that just because it's cheaper. An= d as a well known principal in that, it's the principal of material interest. Now that's a phrase you should rea= lly remember, because it governs pretty much the world, the principal of materi= al interest. Wherever the dollar is you follow = it, whatever benefits you financially you do it. It's a gross, crude thing, but it = works, I'm sorry to say. So now this proposed mall, WalMart is just another nail in the coffin of American enterprise and America's best interests. I do not think it will aid or help= Watertown, I thin= k it's to our detriment and I would say I vote against it. Thank you.

Laura Chamberlain, 459 Mt. Fair Farm, Watertown, CT <= st1:PostalCode w:st=3D"on">06795

Ms. Chamberlain: I've been hearing a very interesting point that people made here, but before I get to that, I would like to understand for the Council's benefit here, how many here are for the WalMart development or this Konover? = How many here? Could you please r= aise your hands? Okay, now please = show your hands if you are against it? You need to pay attention to this.&= nbsp; Undecided? Okay, that's fair, that really is.&= nbsp; I'll be honest with you, I'm not entirely certain that nothing shoul= d be going there, I'm actually undecided as well. It's just that I thought, one of t= he ladies who spoke very eloquently with what went on with Heminway, there was= a study that's been conducted that is going to tell us whether that will be a good thing for the Town. That= needs to be paid attention to. I ha= ve not seen a study that shows us the impact of how this is going to affect (inaud= ible) neighborhoods, this is . . . . sounds great for Konover but for us, how does it affect the people of Watertown? This really needs to be conducted.=

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 10

This is a really key issue to the people here in Watertown as you can see by the show of hands, even for people like me who are undecided. If I wanted to go to WalMart it ta= kes me 15 or 20 minutes to get there. What I save at WalMart, it costs me in gas.&nbs= p; It's for $.05 or $.10, I'm not saving a whole heck of a lot of money here, it's really not that big of a deal.&= nbsp; I think we should be supporting the people that are in our Town, the= se businesses are losing money as it is due to the malls that go in around us,= I think we need to support the areas around us. We have stores that are suffering = as a result of Stop & Shop going in. I do shop at many of the area stores and I am very well aware of big boxes like Stop & Shop and how they're going, compared to one of my favorite stores which is LaBonne's who is in fact suffering from some of th= is, I can tell you, I walk in there, I know.&n= bsp; So we bring something in and it's going there, right off the highway, how many people are going to come past that situation and come into our Town and shop at the stores that are within our Town? I don't think many will. I think they're going to stop right there, they're going to buy all their crap from China, wherever it's coming from, we need to be very leery of that, and it's your job to protect us, to show us you're protecting us.

Pam LaBonne-Stanley, 440 Platt Road, Watertown, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Ms. LaBonne-Stanley: I've lived here since 4th grade I h= ave 3 daughters, we all graduated from the High School, as did my husband and I d= on't know if anyone in this room would like to live right next to WalMart becaus= e it takes like at least 30 minutes to get there, I'm way out past Taft, and my daughter has been married for 3 years now, she's living in Oakville and I'm wondering, do I really want her to live in this Town? Would it be better for her to live= out in Harwinton because it's getting so you can hardly get through Main Street with all the traffic that we have right now, and the parking problems that = they have, and all the crime, and I just don't think it's somewhere that we want= to go, we want to stay small, stay local and it will just make things crazier.= The schools, when I was in high sc= hool we didn’t have Mt.<= /st1:PlaceType> Fair, we didn't hav= e Winding Brook, we didn't have all the developments on Litchfield Road. I know there are more and more developments coming in and we really can't even handle what we have right now. I don't think we need al= l this new traffic and new population. Thank you.

Nancy Rahuba, 99 Old Farm Road, Watertown= , CT&nbs= p; 06795

Ms. Rahuba: I have a financial background and one of the areas I look at a lot is are<= /span> we going to be ahead or behind from a tax standpoint. I agree with Jack, I looked at this= every way you can and if this goes in, it will cost us way more in road reconstruction and police costs than we will ever see, it's a loss to the T= own, and doing something like this would be committing financial suicide. You just do not want to give up th= is land which could be used for some profitable things, and give it to somethi= ng that is going to cost us more than we will ever see. The Plan itself is a mess because = it is allowing this to come in, it's recommending the zone change without a study, and it says they want to do a study, but it's recommending the zone change = even without the study, and even when you get to the section about what the stud= y is about, it doesn't say we want to know if this is going to make money or lose money which is the key reason you would want to do a study.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 11

Why would you even bother, when it talks about the road reconstruction, well the study doesn't really need to tell us the remedy for fixing the traffic, but= if you don't know the remedy for fixing the traffic, you don't know how much i= t's going to cost you and you don't know if you're going to make any money, so I just wanted to tell you that from a financial standpoint if you think you're going to vote for this to help the Town from a financial point of view, it's not going to, it's going to hurt us for many many years to come.

Denis O'Sullivan, 38 North Street, Watertown<= /st1:City>, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Mr. O'Sullivan: Thank you for the opportunity to co= me here and I appreciate that you are all volunteers. I also have been a member of CCPW = for a number of years, I've been looking at these reports, th= at's what I do for a living, read reports and try to figure out what they say. I'd like to offer some (inaudible)= that I had, maybe you can use them in your deliberations. As I see it one of the major conce= rns is the changing of the industrial area to commercial. Generally commercial is not compat= ible with industrial so what you're going to do is in my opinion, you're going to jeopardize the existing industrial people that are at that site, that's #1.= I'm just going to give you some bullets and I’m not going to spend a lot = of time on that.

The second concern that I have and this is my major concern, it was one thing t= hat I would ask you to keep in mind, is once this particular area, if you look = at the map in the study, right in the middle of the industrial area is this new area for commercial Now once = this area if it becomes commercial, there is not going to be a wall built around= it, there is no way to prevent the area from expanding to the south to the nort= h, and any other vacant area in the vicinity, and there is a substantive amoun= t of vacant area, so my concern is that when you are making a change here for ju= st a small area, the property owner who may live across the street or has proper= ty across the street is going to be in line to make a change to their property= and how do we say no? We're just = doing it for a couple of people here that own land and we're going to put a fence= down. I don't know that legally you can = do that, so my concern is that this will have a ripple effect. Now if the area is zoned industria= l, somebody comes in as they have before, I want to make a change, I want to change this to commercial, (inaudible) then say all right, show us that what the overall effect will be. M= y read of the Plan is that, I agree with the lady that spoke a little while ago, t= here is no provision in the Plan to ensure that that would in fact occur. They're going to say if this Plan g= oes through they're going to say you can become commercial and there's really no structure, there's no rules, no regulations as there would be if we leave t= he conditions as is. I'm concerned that a group of people has = to be rallied within a short period of time to hold a Public Hearing on this. I would as the Plan previously, th= is new Plan, I haven't seen this new Plan before, it wa= s just published a very short time ago. I'm concerned that you, our represe= ntatives, would even consider looking at this without having a decent Public Hearing,= not some backhanded way as these folks have come here and done today.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 12

I'd like to point out that everybody says that industrial is dead. Well I happen to be working for so= me people that are developing an industrial site on South Main Street in Waterbury, they're a branch of Albert Brothers and I've spoken with them and they have indicated to me that industrial is not dead. What = is dead is the old fashioned industrial, the large factories where you have pe= ople doing relatively monotonous things, they're done elsewhere, but I can assure you we have some very bright people in this area, we've got people that can= do things and model this thing and that's going to happen on South Main Street in Waterbury. It's not a dream. The fact is those people are inves= ting an awful lot of money to do that. So I'd like to leave you with only one question, hold a Public Hearing, be fai= r to this proposal, but don't make a judgment on it without holding a Public Hea= ring. Thank you very much.

Richard Dyer, Black Rock Road, Watertown<= /st1:City>, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Mr. Dyer: I moved here in 1971. I have brought with me a letter wh= ich was written by my neighbor who couldn't be here tonight, and I'll preface it with my own personal opinions and request that the purpose of the Public Hearing is for the Town Council to feel the words of the public (inaudible)= in this Town of ours and your decisions are critical to our well being. And the effort that has been appli= ed by many volunteers who are not members of the Town Council to gather informati= on to be presented to you and to the Planning and Zoning must be heard in a ve= ry democratic way. I personally = am very concerned about the recommendations that would lead to a catastrophic change and over time both immediately and over time that I think would dest= roy many of the reasons why we live in Watertown. This letter is written today as a = volunteer effort by someone who became a neighbor recently and I'll read it to you. T= he person's name is Judy Gilbane:

"I, Judi Gilbane, formerly of Bristol, CT recently moved to Watertown with my daughter. We were attracted to this area for= its beautiful land and the quaintness of this Town. I wanted to move away from the tra= ffic that Route 6 (inaudible) when = Bristol, CT planted the box store al= ong one (inaudible) another. The (inaudible) Bristol appeared to be develop= ing the Town with interests of local people but eventually just created a hango= ut for teenagers and most people continued to shop at the mall in Farmington. Watertown has a quaint downtown area with main shops that keep the local people in To= wn shopping and store owners have managed to maintain themselves being a perso= nal part of the community. The land of Watertown is beautiful and unique = to local areas that have malls already. Farmland is appealing in appearance with animals living on the land. (Inaudible) idealistic = but this is Watertown<= /st1:City> to her. I feel that we do not need a mall in this small town since the neighboring town of Waterbury<= /st1:place> has a mall that we can get to in less than 10 minutes. Let's keep the community which is already rich, has a rich supply of local merchants that take pride in their shops and it shows. We would = be allowing or inviting a newly proposed mall to rob the small businessmen and women of local money spent hopefully in the Town. We do not want anything to take aw= ay from Watertown's downtown area. When our peopl= e buy at the shops they also eat and meet the local restaurants. We all work together. Please see this my way. Having a lion in one's home is like having a mall in Watertown. A mall would be inappropriate when= our downtown is just the way we like it. Let's keep it the way it is. Let's keep the lion out and the kitten in where it belongs. Signed by my n= eighbor on October 1, 2007.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 13

The message here is we have a great town, let's continue to protect it, develop= it, be wis= e and listen to the residents of the Town. I'd appreciate it. Tha= nk you very much.

Gail Sangree, 895 Northfield Road, Watert= own, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Ms. Sangree: I just want to say for a change as = large as this, you need to have the regional planning agency look at the plan as = it is now proposed. They had sev= eral suggestions as Donna Masi mentioned to the previous plan. Now that there are changes in that= , they really need to take a look at it and you need their advice before you make = any decisions.

Jim McGowen, 25 Meadowcrest Lane, Watert= own, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Mr. McGowen: About 1990 the Town of Manchester, = CT finished a very large mall, probably larger than the one that you're talkin= g about, so I just thought that I would try to find out what was the effect of that = mall on their finances. I talked w= ith the Tax Collector recently and she gave me some figures that I would like to leave with you. They had a $9,000,000 road built, it was paid for by the developer. The Town gave a tax abatement in turn of about the same amount, $9,000,000 over a 7 year period. The taxes before and = the mill rate were in the low 20's. From 1990 to 1998 during the abatement period, taxes stayed relative= ly level, moved up slightly to 26.87 mills.&n= bsp; In 2005 from 98 the mill rate moved to 40.14. There were increased costs in infrastructure, roads, police, every kind of thing that a town has to spend when they increase the population and the development regardless of what it= is, they have more people, more area to protect, so the bottom line is what is = the mill rate going to be in Water= town? We're in the low 20's now. Will it stay in the 20's? Will we reach 40, maybe 45 if this development goes through? And= if you want to look at it another way, Watertown would be just an extension of = Waterbury. You just go down Lakewood Road, yo= u go in any direction in the City of Waterbury, they have more retail per square foot than anybody, and yet their mill rate is not low, in fact their taxes = have been high for years and years and don't look like they're changing, so I say look at the bottom line and look around where malls have been built and see= how the mill rate is done. Thank = you.

Mark Worenko, 636 Platt Road, Watertown, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Mr. Worenko: I spend 100 hours at 1115 Main Street in Watertown, and I love it there. I've lived here 60 plus years; I'v= e been in business 40 plus years and I went to the Zoning Board umpteen years ago = and asked about where could you set up a business like this that was retail, and they showed me a map and it was Main Street, and I invested in our Main Str= eet area, not quite the amount of money that a big box company would, but I've invested what I can in there and it's a great place to do business and live. If you were to change t= he retail area you are telling the people who invested in Main Street, which was the retail a= rea, that oops, this isn't the retail area.&nbs= p; It feels unfair. I hav= e to say I agree with the majority that have spoken that are against this for th= ings that are in the best interests of our Town, but my comments are mostly, I'm sorry to say, selfish motive, but I am also concerned about our Town. I hope you consider that, that the= game was started many, many years ago, people up and down Main Street have put t= heir heart and soul into our Main Street, and I think we're doing fine here, I don’t see the need for it. I hope you think wisely about it. Thank you.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 14

Joe Cefaretti, 80 Saugus Avenue, Oakville<= /st1:City>, CT&nbs= p; 06779

Mr. Cefaretti: I've lived here 40 years, I can say= horrible years too, but I won't. I kno= w a lot of these Council members at one time or another. Frank Nardelli and I are on good t= erms. When I want information about finances I go to him and I call him and he gi= ves me a response and I'm happy with his position; he's a fine man and he's wor= th every penny he gets, believe me.

I've heard a lot of comments here tonight, even though I’m very uncomforta= ble, I can't sit too long, I've got some medical problems which I don't want to = discuss at this point in time, but anyway I heard this gentleman here and I guess h= e's strictly against retail establishments in this Town. I hope I'm right at that's (Tape #= 1, Side B ended - may have missed some). Well as I seen other, I was here, if I could get in the door anyway,= but Donna Masi is a wonderful lady (inaudible) Town and wants to keep that town= ship so to speak but when you do that, you're going to lose site of other things= and that is money, and we live in a capitalistic society and we can't be nice, = we can't say, oh we don't want this or that.&= nbsp; I, for years since I've been here, well let's say the last 15 years = or so, I've been active in trying to get the Town Council and the Board of Edu= cation and our elected leaders to respond to our demands. Our demands fr= om them is I want responsibility and everything that I desire as a taxpayer. Well so far we've b= een lucky up to this point, we've curbed or curtailed the mill rate in this Town and now we have a chance to do something more and get more finances from establishments that come into this Town.&n= bsp; We have been successful, we have a lot of housing coming in and that means money. And the good par= t of it is a lot of it is senior development, at 55, there's one at 55 years old, and anyway those dwellings will not have children because they're old and whatever, but the good part of it all is that they will not flood the school system with children. One per= son, I listened carefully to what some of these residents proposed and said, one s= aid 4,000 students. We're going to get 4,000 more students than we have right n= ow if we have that establishment? That doesn't seem possible. One question, maybe Frank would tell me, how many students do we have in the sy= stem right now?

= ; Mr. Pawlak: About 3,600.

= ; Mr. Cefaretti: 3,600? And we've got about 23,000 inhabit= ants, right, in that range? Well how could it be possible that all of a sudden we're going to get 4,000 more?

= ; Mr. Pawlak: I think that was = a hypothetical example he was talking about; I don't think he was really saying that there= would be more.

= ; Mr. Cefaretti: I'm getting to= the point. Every time I write som= ething I have a topic sentence and I go from there on, and everything relates to i= t, so all of these people, most of them are against it for the simple reason t= hat it's going to affect the Town as far as more vehicles, traffic, all those goodies, but we have Route 8, and if we have Route 8, they'll use that to c= ome from, or 84 they'll use both of those if they're coming from out of Town. They're not going to come through = Watertown, I know that for a fact, they shouldn't anyway. If I was driving I wouldn't do it.=

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 15

= ; Mr. Pawlak: Wait a minute, pl= ease, let's give the speaker the respect, let's be quiet while he's speaking.

= ; Mr. Cefaretti: Well anyway I respect their judgment, may I say if the P & Z, the zone whatever, I fo= rget their name, but if they make decisions and say this is it, and they give it= to you and you're the governing body of this Town, you're the ones that either accepts or rejects that proposal, and that's why I say it's up to you as our leaders to make the decision. All we can do is say I want it or I don't want it, t= hat's all, that's the only way we can do it.&nbs= p; You make the decisions and I'll abide by it because I figure you're responsible and you should do it for me as a taxpayer. Thank you.

Gail DeAngelis, 212 Woodruff Avenue, Watert= own, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Ms. DeAngelis: I guess I just wanted to follow up = on the letter from Ms. Gilbane. I ac= tually, my husband and I moved to Watertown in 2000 from Bristol, similar situation, that town was really growing and we moved to Watertown after looking at abo= ut 50 houses in probably 10 different towns, and the reason we selected Watert= own was because it was quaint, felt it was a nice place to live and really get = away from things, felt as though it was an easy place to commute, and really did= not move here because we wanted to get away from the big box type stores. Really have be= en very disappointed when we learned that potentially this development could go into the area. Some folks at previous hearings have said you folks are against progress and I guess I th= ink I am against progress because I have enough of it every day at work, and ha= ve a very long commute and this change to Echo Lake Road is going to significant= ly impact my commute and I think my husband and I are going to have to reconsi= der, is this the Town that we want to be in, and I'm one citizen, so I guess this kind of is all about me I guess, but I think a lot of people who come to Watertown come here to make it their home, they want it to be a family frie= ndly area, and I'm very concerned about the crime, I'm less concerned about the additional taxes that this is going to cost me, but I truly believe that th= is is not cost neutral. If it we= re cost neutral we'd be lucky, but I'm very concerned about the crime that thi= s is going to bring into Watertown, particularly in lieu of what just happened in Cheshire, I think we should all keep this in mind, I don't think we want additional crime coming into this Town and we want to keep it a family frie= ndly place to live.

Roger Eaton, 93 Pawnee Road, Watertown, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Mr. Eaton: I just kind of came here out of sho= rt notice, thanks to the (inaudible) sent notification this Hearing. What I'm hearing tonight is that it seems that the people in the Town are really concerned about a possible degeneration in the quality of life in this Town, so I think the Town Counc= il really needs to consider that in their deliberations over this issue. So that's my main point. The other thing I want to say is th= at it seems as though the Town Council needs to be sort of a checks and balances = on the Zoning Commission. If the Zoning Commission is going ahead and making decisions without really considering the proper studies, who's job is it = to watch over those people? Is i= t the Town Council? That's what I'm hearing, and this is just spur of the moment. I haven't studied these issues, bu= t I'm hearing that the Zoning Commission is just saying willy-nilly, okay we like it. You can't allow it as the= Town Council. You people have to w= atch over those people. Thank you.=

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 16

Mark Tedesco, 145 Hard Rock Road, Waterto= wn, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Mr. Tedesco: I was a Planning and Zoning Commiss= ioner, Regular Member for over two years and spent quite a bit of time on this Pla= n of Development, 2 years of my time, 20 different special meetings, and always = in the back of my head there was you know if we make a mistake, there's always= big brother to take care of it, meaning you guys. The big question here tonight is wh= at's the big rush? It's taken us o= ver 2 years to get to this point. I= 'm asking that there should be a Public Hearing here. Now granted there are some people = that think this is a stall tactic, but you can advertise this tomorrow, and in 2 weeks have a Public Hearing, Mr. Walton is giving me a little smirk over th= ere and I don't know why, I mean I'm trying to be fair about this. I'm looking to you guys, I'm not s= aying I'm pro or against anything, but you've got to give the people a chance. This is a once in every 10 years t= his happens, how can you not have a Public Hearing? I would like one questions answere= d, then I'll get out of your face. I would like a show of hands, I would like in a political year that it is now= , is the Democrats not wanting it? Are we hiding something? Where ar= e the Republicans? Can I ask Chairm= an Pawlak to please take a consensus of your members, if there is nothing to be hidden there, who is for a Public Hearing and who is not?

= ; Mr. Pawlak: We'll get to that= when we get to the Agenda.

= ; Mr. Tedesco: Thank you.

Jeff Wilson, 1290 Buckingham Street, Wat= ertown, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Mr. Wilson: I live in the Buckingham House, on = top of Buckingham Street; I've lived there 26 years and I'm from Waterbury, everyb= ody is from Waterbury, but I lived there long enough now even (inaudible) Water= town. When I got there there was corn in= the back and in the front in the woods you would see the deer out where Mt. Fair is, it was nice and it still is nice. I was in favor of the Konover development, P & Z did a good job there, (inaudible) the park that it is because of that special use permit that they gave them. Mt. Fair is just to zoning regs, Mt. Fair is beautiful and I'm sure it's great for the tax rolls. Anyway, then 10 or 15 years they s= tarted with the mall so we got involved with that, I'm not sure if it was Konover = or whoever it was but that was voted down and I call it like the elephant in t= he room, that was the elephant in the room then and that was voted down, and t= hen last year the elephant is back in the room and we're back at these P & Z meetings at the High School there, and it's a little bit adversarial at tim= es, but P & Z finally comes up with this resolution that they need studies = and I guess that this Konover did not want to spend the $90,000 or thereabouts = for the study, and now I said well the elephant is gone, out of the room and le= t's go on with it. Now it seems l= ike we're back here, the elephant is back in the room, and for some reason now = it's before the Town Council and it's going to be sort of slid in on Monday or whatever it is, Monday night I guess it is, and you talk about studies and = we need a study of course and you can talk about yes and no.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 17

Just one last side point, traffic has always been manageable one way. On Saturday afternoons, I worked at Crestwood Ford for about 10 years so I used to watch. On Saturday afternoons it would get crazy with the traffic on = Main Street and late in the day it would get crazy,= but for the most part it's still manageable.&n= bsp; On Buckingham Street it's still management, my house gets a lot of traffic but it's still manageable, even when they started with the trucks g= oing to the waste disposal place down there and they're driving and stuff but it= 's still manageable, but if you were to enclose the system with that kind of traffic and trips they're talking about, I think the Town would become unmanageable and you guys really need to get the elephant out of the room, = as in leave that land as industrial use the way it was set up. Over the last 20 years I've see lo= ts of industrial use come and go and that place seems to prosper and you just got= to deal with this once and for all. I mean everybody should just be able to not have to be taking their time up d= ay after day, night after night, you guys listening to 20, 30, 40 people coming and expressing their opinions that this thing is not good for Watertown. I wish you guys as the Council peo= ple would take care of this. Than= k you.

Diane Cassidy, 245 Cherry Avenue, Watertow= n, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Ms. Cassidy: I moved to Town from Woodbury this year. I just heard about this recently and I'm also new to W= atertown so originally I didn't think I was going to speak, I was just going to find= out about what this was about. Bu= t what seems to be happening and what people are asking for with this Public Heari= ng seems to have to do with the process, something that I studied in school. There was a quote that I heard yea= rs ago that meant a lot to me, and that was with any decision that you make, there could be negative or positive things that could come from it. So how you make the decision is the thing that you can control and the thing that becomes very important, and if you make a fair decision then people will live with negative consequences, = but if they feel that the decision was made in an unfair way, then they have a harder time living with negative consequences. I had no idea what people were goi= ng to say when I came, I had no idea, I really didn't, it just sounds like there = are so many strong feelings in the Town about it and if the decision is made in= a way that the Townspeople don't feel is fair, and then if it turns out that there are negative consequences from it, they won't feel the process was one that they would maybe want to participate in in the future. It seems like you're going to alien= ate people (inaudible) so it just brings it back to try to focus on the procedu= res and the process that you use to make the decision. That's my thing. Thank you.

Roger Mitchell, 99 Norway Street, Watertown= , CT&nbs= p; 06795

Mr. Mitchell: We fought this thing 10 years ago.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> We heard a lot of, there's ladies present, a lot of stuff from the mall people. (Inaudible) junk yard with 55 and = 57 Chevy's; I'd love to own that junk yard, I'd be a millionaire today. I haven't heard these guys talk so= I don't know if they're straight or (inaudible). Jack was saying there would be 20,= 000 trips. At roughly 15 foot a c= ar, we're looking at 30 miles worth of cars.&n= bsp; A lot of cars. I live on = Norway Street and the corner of Par= kman. Right now that's a racetrack. I've seen the front ends of cars c= ome off the ground coming up the hill, I've seen the= m do the same thing going the other way. You put them all on that straight short cut, Copes uses it every mor= ning at 6:00 a.m., I don't need my alarm any more.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 18

I can imagine what it will be with a mall over there. They're open from 9:00 a.m. to 10:= 00 p.m. That's going to be a racetrack, and that's only a little side road. Right now the top of that hill is = not fit for 2 cars, cause more than once I've almost= wiped out. I've got a small car. I'm against it. I never liked the mall. If they put it in there= I'll be looking at it from my house, I won't have to turn any lights on, which w= ill save on my electrical, which is a good thing, but other than that, no. Thank you.

Beau Wasnitynski, 514 Sylvan Lake Road, Water= town, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Mr. Wasnitynski: The gentleman that spoke before me = spoke of the elephant. I prefer to = think of it as a 500 lb. gorilla. T= he question is if you bring a 500 lb. gorilla into my living room, where is it going to sit? The answer is a= ny damn place it wants. If you o= pen the door to the mall and say we'll confine it to this place, confine it to = this or that kind of business, no you're not.&n= bsp; Once you let that gorilla into your living room, it's going to do wh= at it wants, when it wants, it's going to sprawl out all over the surrounding area, it's going to, and then you will say well we can't do anything about = it, it's there. = &nb= sp; I speak from experience. I live= in a residential area, so you say don't worry about it, you live in a residentia= l area, there aren't any businesses in your area. Well there is a humongous business= right next door to me, and it's still a residential area, and where the business operates is a residential area. That's the Grand Oak Villa which is 50 feet from my door. Now, why is it there? Why is it allowed to continue? Because it's t= here. It's too big to close down, it's t= oo big to try and control, it's too big to put restrictions on it. Because it's t= here. And I've given up trying to do any= thing about that situation, but you're asking for the same situation here.

You say it's okay to have a mall cause it's going to be way way out of the way,= but the thing is, (inaudible) from my front door too, but you say it's going to= be out of the way, (inaudible), no. = It's going to eat this Town. We wi= ll become a suburb of Konover mall, that's what we are going to become. (Inaudible) Watertown (inaudible). We're going to be a suburban extens= ion of Konover, that's all we're going to be, and you guys are going to be answera= ble to Konover, not to me, not to the people in this room, you guys will be answerable to Konover, cause that's the kinds of mega business it is, so (inaudible). Thank you.

Colin Adams, 18 Hadley Street, Oakville<= /st1:City>, CT&nbs= p; 06779

Mr. Adams: Some of the things you need to cons= ider is first of all as past Planning and Zoning Chairman, = this Plan is all flawed, dramatically flawed. If it is allowed to go forward as it is, you're jeopardizing all of = the industrial property that we have up in the industrial site. Basically what this plan does is it seeks that this 100 acres will become retail dev= elopment. Just last week I was reading an ar= ticle in the Waterbury Republican American about a particular Costco site where t= he developers there have not been able to obtain enough retail merchants to fi= ll that facility and they're desperately trying to find clients as retail expa= nds with a mall which is proposed at the junction of 691 and Route 10 in Cheshi= re, with other retail developments which is proposed in Naugatuck at the (inaudible) Drive Platt Mills site, these retailers are going to be less, in other words have harder places to find retail, to find places to go.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 19

This Plan specifically stating that industrial development can't go into that 100 acres of (inaudible) that leaves this Plan fl= awed and the way it is written right now, it says that only retail can go there,= so you're jeopardizing our industrial area.&n= bsp; As a planning person the Council of Governments has not been updated= on this specific update of this Plan. That's plain out and out wrong.&nbs= p; I mean as the Chairman I would have never ever considered this going forward to the Council without C.O.G. giving its recommendations there. I think that we really have to con= sider that. I know that because rec= ently he made changes to some commercial property up off of Bunker Hill which is going to be now (inaudible) old retail.&nb= sp; Well the reason why that specific industrial area was never developed was because it was commercial all around it, they didn't have direct access to an interstate highway. Well here we are taking our prime = access to an interstate highway and developing it as retail which is going to agai= n, like it did on Chase Parkw= ay, chase away our industry so we really need to take those factors into consideration. I would recomm= end that if I was this Council, I would reject this, send it back to the Planni= ng and Zoning Commission, I would hold a Public Hearing on the changes that ha= ve been made now, because as of right now there have been no Public Hearings to the changes to this Plan of Development and make those recommendations.

Shirley Boostay, 33 Scott Road, Watertown, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Ms. Boostay: I'd like to go on record saying tha= t I'm against the zone change on Route 262 and expand on what Mr. Adams just said= and how adversely affected the industry (inaudible). I've been in contact with = both Federal Express and UPS and they are both very concerned that they will not= be able to operate their businesses with that additional traffic and the additional signal lights that will have to be put in on that road. We know that it will probably adve= rsely affect the retail businesses that we have.= UPS won't go out of business, they'll probably just relocate so I th= ink it's something else that we have to think about, how it will adversely affe= ct the businesses that we already have in our Town.

Joe Masi, 33 Pleasantview Street, Wat= ertown, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Mr. Masi: I'm a member of CCPW, I'm a past Zo= ning Board Chairman and you've heard from another Zoning Board Chairman and ther= e is a history of the Zoning Board from the 60's on until just recently taking a= very, very cold calculated step in making sure that the industrial area was protected, pushing for utilities up in that area to seed new sites coming i= n and we were very, very successful in doing that and to this day, Frank what is = it, about $3,000,000 or $4,000,000 a year that they pay in taxes?

Mr. Nardelli: Off the top of my head I don't kno= w (inaudible).

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 20

Mr. Masi: Okay, which is= no small sum. Maybe even larger than that. Now I don't want to go over a lot = of the (inaudible) ground that's been covered tonight, but I do want to say that t= he reason I feel that a lot of people are here tonight to take up your time du= ring Public Participation is because these comments were made constantly to the Planning and Zoning Commission to no avail, and people are upset about the = fact that they were not listened to, that the Planning and Zoning Commission majority did what it did in spite of the multitude of comments that opposed what they were doing, so they've come to you as a last resort to have you h= ear (a) the Plan is flawed, forget the change of zone. I cannot imagine us accepting a do= cument that is going to last for some 10 years which is the guide to the community= 's future that is flawed in its analysis and in its conclusions.

Now I'll take the second part of it which is the zone recommendation for the 100 acres. I have to agree with j= ust about everybody that has spoken here, and from my experience back in the 60's on = the Council, on the Planning and Zoning Commission, on the Water & Sewer Authority, in applying first the zone changes, second the finances for it, = and thirdly the recommendations from Sewer & Water to put the utilities in those areas, that that was a good thing for the community and we don't want= to destroy it and everything that you hear from all of the major people that are in this kind of business = is that it's not a win/win situation with retail, it's a loser long term. We don't want that.

We are not against development, we were never against development. When I heard comments tonight sayi= ng that well we want to keep it the way it was and we're not for development, = we most certainly are for development. We need to have that area developed properly so that it pays for the expanse of this Town and that thereby keeping our quality of life, we're choosing, according to the Plan now, we are choosing the worst of the two e= vils and that's not right, but I implore this Council to recognize the deficienc= ies in this Plan, send it back for rewrite, and hopefully they'll hear what you heard, that people are not for the change on the 100 acres. Thank you.

Bob LaBonne, Jr., 639 Straits Turn= pike, Watertown, CT 06795=

Mr. LaBonne: Just a little history. LaBonne's has been in Town since 1962. Believe it or not we've= moved 5 times. Originally we were a= cross from St. John's Church, then down in Oakville where Ken's Hardware is now, = back up to Watertown across from Pizza Hut, then Straits Turnpike where Staple's= is, and where we are now, so we've survived and competed against the big guys, = but I will say, I said it at a Zoning Meeting, we would not be here today in Watertown if we did not have two other stores. When Stop & Shop came in, it d= id take us for 20% of our business. I was only able to survive because I had two other locations to ride that sto= rm out, and then Pat's being the smaller, he could not survive that storm, so = the big box does make an impact on the smaller stores.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 21

I'm sorry my father couldn't be here tonight, he's at a (inaudible) meeting with supermarket outlets from around the country and one of the things they do is they share ideas and they share plus' and minus' in the industry. Well the gentleman from Houston has very w= ell seen the effect of the WalMart's and the big box stores. They have found that in the first = year anyone that competes with a WalMart loses 25% to 30% of their (Tape #2, Sid= e A ended - may have missed some). Flowers, hardware, restaurants, clothing, pharmacy, automotive, food, anything that competes with WalMart w= ill probably be affected by those numbers.&nbs= p; How many businesses in = Watertown can lose 30% to 45% of their business and be there 2 years from now? And what's the tax effect when all= of those businesses in Watertown are boarded up on Main Street and Straits Tur= npike, so it will have a negative impact not just on the traffic but on the charac= ter and the look of the Town.

Recently I just hired a gentleman to be my store manager, to take my place so I could spend more time in other stores. When I put up the ad on Monster.com, almost 30% of the applicants I = got were from WalMart employees, either that left WalMart or who were trying to leave WalMart. One woman who actually referred this gentleman, she'd been there 10 years, he'd been ther= e 7 years; she said WalMart is not the same WalMart it was 2 years ago. They are chewi= ng people up and spitting them out, they don't care about their employees, and it's just not the same WalMart, and just the fact that that many people, Br= ad worked there for 7 years and one of the biggest things he talked about was crime, they pretty much have to have a police officer in the store 24 hours= a day to handle all the crime. = One store alone he worked in had $280,000 in thefts in the Electronics Departme= nt, so that's a lot of police officer time and investigation that we're going to have to add that we don't have currently in the Town.

Traffic - I've heard a lot about traffic and everyone is going to come up Route 8.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Well what about the people to the = north and west, Woodbury, Bethlehem, Morris, Litchfield - they're all going to co= me through the side streets, so if you think Main Street is difficult now, wha= t's going to happen during the holidays and (inaudible) time, it's going to be a parking lot on Main Street and all of the roads that feed off of that.

(Inaudible) big boxes don't care about the little people like the businesses in Town. <= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Since we started a 1% program where= over $340,000 was given back to small organizations, churches, non-profits, (inaudible) in Town, scouts, sports teams, and probably another $500,000 in just general people that have functions that (inaudible) benefit, you name = it, LaBonne's has donated to it. Those guys don't do that, they don't give back= to the Town like the small guys do. In short, I just hope that you let the due process, let the people in Town lis= ten to what they have to say and you'll make the best decision for not just the businesses, but the residents of the Town, and not only for our children, b= ut their children. Thank you.

Kevin Brewster, 73 Wedge Street, Watertown<= /st1:City>, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Mr. Brewster: I was just curious, have any of you= guys watched the HBO special about WalMart?

Unidentified Voice: I did.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 22

Mr. Brewster: How many towns did they destroy? What did they call it? The store of d= emise? It left a trail of demise, ruined cities. Said it was going to = bring in people to help build the city, and basically destroyed them. They had to give them tax breaks j= ust to get them into the town, and then they got nothing back. I guess my question is, I own the house at 73 Wedg= e Street, what are you guys going to do to help protect my property value? That's what I'm concerned about. I mean I don't think anybody here = moved here because there was a WalMart. I mean I'm not trying to be cold, I'm just trying = to be honest. I mean we've got 4 ki= ds, we all go to school here, we all play sports, and they enjoy it. Thank you.

MaryAnn Rosa, Northfield Road, Watertown<= /st1:City>, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Ms. Rosa: I'm not sure whether I should get u= p and speak because I am in the minority cause I do su= pport retail development in the area that's before you and the change. I don't agree with a lot of the co= mments that have been made this evening, but I think the most important thing is, = no matter which side of the issue you're on, everyone is speaking because they believe in what they're saying, they believe they want to keep our Town a g= reat Town, they want to keep expenses and taxes low, and they care what's best f= or the Town, so I think we all have the same goals and we all want to achieve = the same thing. I commute down 262 every day and back up it every night to go to work and I work in an industr= ially developed area in Cheshire so I'm part of that traffic that goes in and out= of Town every day, and no, I don’t want to see it get any worse either, but I= do care and do believe that we need retail development, but I don't think that= it has to be big box. I heard so= many speakers tonight talk about WalMart, like that was a guarantee. I haven't heard one thing from Wal= Mart to say they would come to Wate= rtown. I've been to some beautiful malls = that don't have a big box, that have lovely shops that would compliment what we already have in our Town, that wouldn’t hurt the LaBonne's that we wa= nt to shop at, that wouldn't hurt the Mark's that we all go to and have for ye= ars and still intend to go to if we had retail development. I don't think we have to hurt what= we already have in order to grow. I think we can compliment each other if we work together. I sincerely believe that the Planni= ng and Zoning Commission, if they have made this decision, can also make regulatio= ns if it is approved for retail development that will limit who goes there. We don't have to let stores that a= re going to compete with our people go there.= I think we need to work together, I think we need to find a compromi= se.

I know all of you are going to be paying a lot more taxes in the next year or= two for the school projects that have been approved. I support thos= e, I was on that Board of Education for more years than I can count. Those projects= needs to be done. We have a town ha= ll project that's coming up that needs to be done. We need to find some other ways to finance those projects besides the average homeowner's tax dollars. We can't afford it as homeowners.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> So I'm saying to you there are som= e of us, and they're not here tonight, very obviously we're in the minority, but= I did want you to know that I stand up and I do support the retail development. Thank you. <= /span>Also, I got a recording on my home phone yesterday advising me about the meeting tonight. That's in direct vio= lation of anyone who has their name on the Do Not Call List, which your organizati= on can be fined. In a good neigh= borly way I would suggest to the CCPW, you better not do it again.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 23

Dick Wick, Northfield Road, Watertown<= /st1:City>, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Mr. Wick: I heard one comment this evening th= at I think speaks to what's happening tonight and it was the comment about process. I completely agree t= hat if the process is fair and valid and honest then most reasonable people will accept the outcome, will accept the conclusions, the decision that comes fr= om that process. I think it's important to point out, I'm assuming that the folks on the Council know thi= s, but I think the folks that took the trouble to come out this evening should also know that you're dealing with an unprecedented document and it's unprecedented because at the 11th hour there were changes made which necessitated (inaudible). I t= hink it's important that everybody realize that the document you have was voted = on by a slim majority of the P & Z, and that slim majority had less than h= alf the number of years of service of the people in the minority.

Mark Fusco, 135 Straits Turnpike, = Watertown, CT 06795=

Mr. Fusco: I heard a lot of negatives here tonight. It seems like the Concerned Citizens are out in force and it seems like every time there is s= ome type of project or some type of development in Town, they come out of the woodwork. I don't know why th= ey're always so against anything that will bring some tax revenue and tax relief = to the residents of this Town. Y= ou know I have a couple of questions maybe they can answer. First of all the acreage that we're talking about up there on 262 and Echo Lake Road, we're talking about rough= ly 100 acres that they're talking about proposing a zone change to. How many acres are there in total = in that area that was zoned currently for industrial use? Do we know that figure?

Mr. Minnich: 400 acres.

Mr. Fusco: 400, so then they're going to take= 25% of that? That will leave 75% = of industrial land still available for future development then, correct?

Mr. Pawlak: I guess, that's what it looks like.

= ; Mr. Fusco: So we're not wipin= g the industrial area off the map. I agree that if there are some mathematical inconsistencies in this Conservat= ion and Development Plan that's before you, and if there have been some last mi= nute changes, then this Council should, before they take a vote or decide to acc= ept it as is, I think they should look at that and make sure that the facts and= figures and equations all compute. I = don't think there should be a rush to judgment. I know that in the past being at these types of meetings, you guys have always made it a point you review everything and to check all the t's and i's and make sure they're crossed a= nd dotted, and I think you should use that same diligence. I agree with most of the folks tha= t have spoken that that should be done before you make any kind of decision. If the Plan is flawed, then there = are some problems with the figures, that should be l= ooked at. I don't think that as som= eone said that WalMart has ever approached us.&= nbsp; Has WalMart ever approached the Town? Can anybody answer that question?<= /p>

Unidentified Voice: Never.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 24

= ; Mr. Fusco: So I don't know wh= ere WalMart even came into the picture, it seems like that's all we can talk about toni= ght is WalMart but I have no knowledge of WalMart ever approaching us. I was here when Konover did their presentation, had to be about 8 or 9 months ago, and explained what type of mall they were proposing and they gave some background, other development a= reas where they put in similar types of structures and malls and I thought it wo= uld be a nice enhancement to the Town. They never mentioned WalMart either. And I'm sure Planning and Zoning co= uld come up with some kind of regulations that would limit the size and types o= f establishments that would go into a facility like that if this zone change were to go thro= ugh.

You know the Concerned Citizens are always against development, but yet it seems that they're very selective. = When the Masi's wanted to develop some of their property for residential use, wh= ich we know is an extreme burden on the Town services and school system, I didn= 't see the Concerned Citizens out banging their drum for that. You know they paint a very gloo= my picture for this like this is going to eat up the whole Town, we're going t= o be in the old west with dust and tumbleweeds going down Main Street. I really don't believe that's the case. There are a lot of other towns that have a lot of other types of open air malls, retail facilities, = and I don't see those towns crumbling, I don't see them destitute, I see a lot = of them thriving. I also was und= er the impression that the developer was going to include some open space to be us= ed as an athletic type of field. Is that also something that was mentioned at one point or another?

Mr. Pawlak: That's correct.

Mr. Fusco: Okay, so there's some positive the= re also. We all know that the availability of athletic fields is a priority for the community. We study things it seems like in t= his Town to death. We spend thous= ands and thousands and thousands of dollars to study everything to the umpteenth degree and you know I don't think we need more studies, I think the people = in this Town, between the engineer and the Planning and Zoning people, are sma= rt enough to look at some of this information, just like the Concerned Citizens have and make a sound, educated, informed decision, so I'm not really for spending thousands on studies. I also think we may be able to negotiate with Konover, have them pay for some= of the additional infrastructure and road construction if need be, if we think= that's going to be a problem. If the= y want this so bad, I'm sure they would be willing to incur some additional expense without us having to offset by tax abatements. They wouldn't keep knocking at our= door if they didn't think this was a good deal for them, and I'm sure that there is some type of negotiation to our benefit and we should play that to our advantage. I don't think we're going to chase all of these small businesses out of Town, I don't think we'= re going to put them out of business. <= /span>I really don't see that happening.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 25

I'm for this change in zoning for this area, but I would just say that I think = you owe it to the public to have a true Public Hearing. I only found out about this from a= flyer I got in the mail last week. I thought this was dead and gone long ago when P & Z wanted the developer= to spend, I think it was $50,000 or $90,000 on a study so I'm glad this was brought to my attention. And = as far as the woman who said something about the Do Not Call List, I believe if you check the consumer protection web site, non-profit organizations do have the right to call numbers that are registered on the Do Not Call List, so I don= 't think the Concerned Citizens have anything to worry about there, but I would doub= le check that to make sure. So i= f the Plan is flawed, it sounds like there are some mathematical inconsistencies,= I urge you to take a look at that and I really think that this deserves a tru= e Public Hearing with proper notification to the whole Town in the paper and then ma= ybe we can move on and get past this. Thank you.

George Sacci, 320 Georgetown Drive, Water= town, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Mr. Sacci: Just as a background, I was in manufacturing, a semi retired engineer for almost 40 y= ears and the past Chairman of the Greater Waterbury Society of Manufacturing Engineers. The reason why I m= ention that is because I've seen the demise of industry in this area over the last= 40 years and just keeps on fleeing this area and Waterbury/Watertown area. Up = on Park Road w= e've seen 3 or 4 major companies move out and we haven't replaced them with the quality of manufacturing that was there before. I heard a gentleman talk about thi= s wood burning company that's going to be generating energy that's going to be goi= ng into the grid system. That's = all done with taxpayer's dollars. None of that is private financing. I don't know where that is going to be in 5 or 10 years from now. Alternative energy is like the com= puter industry, it's going to be an ever changing thing and we may very well be s= tuck with something that won't even be operational in 10 years. One of the other pieces of land do= wn there that was bought for development I understand is turned into a dump si= te, so we have much area of this industrial park that is not being utilized for manufacturing.

This 100 acres has been available for over 20 years an= d has just laid stagnant. I am pro retail. I'm not necessarily big box, but I would definitely like to see ret= ail come into this Town. We need = more retail shopping outlets, opportunities to go out and buy retail products. We have to go out of town for this= . I don't particularly like to shop a= t KMart or TJ Maxx, or any of those types of stores. We don't have any quality retail s= tores in Watertown, we have to go out of town for them and I believe there is an opportunity to= get some of these type of stores in a small retail development outlet. I don't b= elieve that the traffic is going to overburden our Town. From what I understand the develop= ment of this 100 acres, the infrastructure for bringing in water and sewer and r= oad improvements is all on the developer. Am I correct or not in saying that?

Many people said no.

Mr. Sacci: Is the developer being asked to br= ing water and sewer to this area?

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 26

Mr. Pawlak: I do not know. David? The developer of Konover that we w= ere speaking with over the past several years, were they volunteering to bring infrastructure improvements to the site?&n= bsp; Were they going to contribute to the cost of infrastructure improvements?

Mr. Minnich: In response to your question, they= were going to be doing all of the roads and they were going to be paying for wat= er and sewer, that extended beyond what has already been approved with a grant which you're familiar with.

= ; Mr. Pawlak: STEAP Grant.

= ; Mr. Minnich: Yes. I also want to say very quickly th= at my comments are not at all related to what is now before us. Konover has (inaudible) they have = taken themselves out of the picture.

= ; Ms. Adams: Was it the interio= r or exterior roads, was it their own roads, Dave, or was it the exterior roads, 262, Echo Lake Road, or was it the interior roads, their site that they were going to pay 100% f= or?

Mr. Minnich: The roads perimeter to them, and t= heir interior, our roads and they were going to build new roads, but . . . .

= ; Ms. Adams: The interior, their property.

Mr. Minnich: Right.

= ; Mr. Sacci: There appears to b= e some very cloudy areas here that should be reviewed and confirmed. I heard they were going to be payi= ng for bringing in water and sewer and yet I can't get any confirmation from even = the P & Z Chairman, so I mean I don’t know what type of research some= of these people in Town are putting into this, but obviously there needs to be more, and I do agree with the comments here, that maybe this Plan needs to = be reviewed again. It sounds lik= e it was hastily put together. My = view of what is going on in Watertown is that we're developing residential areas= and there's thousands of farmland areas in this Town that can be further develo= ped for housing development and that's going to put a tremendous amount of burd= en on our tax base in this Town. Every student that comes into Town, every house that's being built will probably = have 2 students in it and that will put a burden of about $16,000 if not more per year on the education system. We need to offset this somehow. = We have to go forward with some type of plan to diversity our tax base. We can't rely on industry. It's not going to happen. I've been in industry for 40 years= , I was a Chairman of the Greater Waterbury Society of Manufacturing Engineers,= I know what happened to industry in this Town, its dead. We can't compete in Connecticut, period. The only reason why industry is really competing in Connecticut is because of the aerospace industry and all of those other companies get to fall off or support in that. = I have worked in consultant aerospace industries for the last couple of years prio= r to my semi retirement as a manufacturing engineer, and they are the main backb= one of industry in this State, and that comes from government money on military spending. And we don't get ha= rdly any of it around the Waterbury= area.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 27

The Greater Waterbury area has had the highest unemployment in the State for al= most 60 months, 60 consecutive months, they missed one month I think, and it isn= 't going to get any better. Watertown needs a= variety of additional shopping outlets. We just don't have the outlets in Town to do our shopping. Like I said, I'm not a very big proponent of going to KMart for my shopping needs. I do go there, but I'm not a big fa= n of big box stores, but I am a fan of developing this area for retail development. I think probably possibly we do need to explore the impact of a retail opening up this 100 a= cres for retail development. I don= 't know what the impact, I've heard a lot of numbers, pros and cons, but I don’t believe that a retail outlet will necessarily burden our Town w= ith fire, police, and with traffic, especially seeing as how it's right off the highway, and Route 262 which is a State road, I would have to imagine that = the State has some responsibility for developing the roadways around this area = to accommodate the traffic from a retail outlet on Route 262. I think that the CCPW has some val= id issues, they're saying they're not against retail development, but I have never heard anything from them saying what are we g= oing to do for retail development in this Town to diversify our tax base going forward. We have $85,000,000 = in bonds on schools, we have thousands of acres of farmland in this Town that's open for development for more residential home building that's only going to burden the educational system. We can't depend on industry as a f= uture source of growth for building our tax base in this Town. We need to diversify this Town and= bring more retail development in. T= hank you for your time.

Scott Marotta, 127 Circuit Avenue, Waterto= wn, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Mr. Marotta: I think that you all definitely sho= uld have a Public Hearing as you represent us and I think what you heard from u= s is that we all want a Public Hearing so I think you should really consider hav= ing a Public Hearing. I'm not for b= ig box development either, but I never really heard anything about WalMart or anyt= hing such as that for this area here. I think there's some really nice outlet shops, like in Lee, MA where they have LL B= ean and stores like that, where I don't necessarily think they would out compete any stores in our Town because there are no LL Beans and there's not many o= ther places, outlet stores and things like that that would take away from anythi= ng in Town besides like Burlington Coat Factory so I think this can be, you can meet in the middle here. I'm definitely not for the big WalMart's and all that, but I think something co= uld be worked out here, and I do agree that before you make any decisions on the zone change, and someone spoke about studies, studies are okay but you have= to use them and make sure that the people that perform the studies are reputab= le, so I would definitely recommend that before you make any decision on the zo= ne change that you do have some studies performed as to what the impacts of a retail development would be there and have some cost benefit analysis to base your opinion and judgment on because there are similar towns to Watertown that h= ave had similar type malls, different type of malls, not strip malls, malls sim= ilar to outlet stores and things of that nature where you can get a good compari= son as how they affected the Town's economy.&n= bsp; So you really need to look at that information before you base your decision on the zone change. = We let the population growth in this Town more people means more opportunities for businesses. I'm definitely not for businesses that wou= ld out compete our businesses in Town, you've all worked hard down on Main Street,= and I see him down there all the time working hard, but I think you can meet in= the middle somewhere and get some retail development in there that would not out compete our Main Street and things like that. That's all I have, thank you.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 28

Gary Bernier, 33 Mark Street, Oakville, CT&nbs= p; 06779

Mr. Bernier: I was a little leery about coming h= ere tonight to speak with everything that's going on. My concern is very basic, my conce= rn is that a month ago we listened to a longstanding member of P & Z come in with a minority report, a report that there ha= d been changes made since public participation was allowed. My concern is (1) did we have to h= ave a minority report by longstanding members (2) that there is a perception that this is very important milestone in this Town. We need to make sure there is no perception of impropriety, if there is any, we n= eed to send it back to P & Z and do this right. Thank you.

Barbara Migrone, 139 Smith Pond Road, Watert= own, CT 06795<= /st1:PostalCode>

Ms. Migrone: I'm not a politician, I'm not a spe= aker, but I'm a grandmother and I'm worried too with the traffic if you do change= the zoning, we do have a lot of traffic. You have the school up there on Buckingham Street, and thank goodne= ss my grandchildren are out of there right now, but my neighbor's children are go= ing up there and I just can't imagine the traffic up at that corner. Same thing at 5:00, people getting= out of work, going to stores, whatever, I just can't even think about it. Even in the afternoon when schools= are getting out, I'm thinking about Polk School down the str= eet but (Tape #2, Side B ended - may have missed some) manufacturing up there.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> This area was zoned for industrial= and then these people put their businesses because of this and to take part of = this land and use it otherwise, I don't think it's fair to them either and we do= n't need them moving out, we do need their taxes and that's about it. I wish you would think about this = Plan before you (inaudible) on it. Thank you very much.

Joe Masi, 33 Pleasantview Street, Wat= ertown, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Mr. Masi: I won't take the Board's time other= than to respond to 2 comments made by Mr. Fusco. The first is that CCPW is not anti development; it never has been. CCPW was the group that formulated and was the impetus for the Engineering Depar= tment and the Town Council at that time to take the industrial park plan as far as the State of Connecticut EDC<= /st1:State>; that did not come out of a group that was anti-developm= ent, it came out of a group that was pro development, but the right development. So to say that w= e're anti-development is a mistake and an error.

The second comment was a personal comment about the Masi's developing property. We are in the proce= ss of developing a particular site we have by the right of law, by the right of zoning. We are not asking for= a zone change, we're not asking for anything that anybody else used when they developed land for the houses that you all live in. Your houses didn't get there any o= ther way but being part of a subdivision. We're doing what the law provides.&= nbsp; We're not doing anything special and we're not asking anybody for anything. Thank you.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 29

Mike Masayda, 131 Hard Rock Road, Waterto= wn, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Mr. Masayda: I'm also a P & Z member. I can sit here and dispute a lot of things that were discussed this evening, but I'm not. I just want to say one thing, that= the checks and balances of the Plan of Development do not go far enough to prot= ect this community and it should be more fervently done. That's all.

Donna Masi, 33 Pleasantview Street, Oak= ville, CT&nbs= p; 06779

Ms. Masi: Just to answer a couple of question= s that were asked, actually statements that were made, I'd like to ask Mr. Fusco w= hat project has the Concerned Citizens for the Preservation of Watertown opposed? = That we opposed many other projects. Is he still here? Do we have an answer?

= ; Mr. Fusco: Am I allowed to re= spond?

= ; Mr. Pawlak: Can we just . . .= .

Ms. Masi: I'll answer the question. We have not opposed any other proj= ect except the Homart project in 1989 and this current project. There are others that said we oppo= sed Stop & Shop; that's not true. We never opposed any other projects and I just swore to that in court last week under oath. Also th= ere is approximately 400 additional acres of industrial property in the area of Ro= ute 262 and Echo Lake Road. Once we begin the zone change= , the only other use would be for retail. We've seen it happen on Straits Turnpike; it will happen in this area also. So you're not talking 1= 00 acres, you're talking 500 acres. I recently read in the paper that there is going to be a Public Hearing for a= zone change requested by Alves' on 58 Commercial Street, they want to change their industrial zoned property to commercial.&n= bsp; I sent a letter to Planning and Zoning to be read into the record of that Public Hearing that we would support the zone change from industrial to commercial because that area has grown into a retail area, one of our retail areas in Town, and that's the highest and best use of that property. We also support the projects that = Super Stop & Shop spoke about several months ago t= hat they were looking to develop some property as commercial. We would support and we do support commercial developing in the appropriate areas. Now we're talking about WalMart ty= pe stores. The application that = the P & Z will be reviewing Wednesday evening talks about you can build store= s as big as 200,000 square feet. T= hat's what you're talking about, so that would put all the little businesses out = of Town whether it's WalMart, KMart, whatever you want to call it, it's going to ha= ve direct competition and consequences. We talk about, well we can control this, P & Z turned down, they denied us a fair hearing and denied us a cap size restriction and that's wh= at we were pushing for and that would control this type of development but nob= ody wants that, you want big box. As far as who is going to pay to bring the water and sewer, we, the State, we'= ve already got a $600,000 grant that's going to bring some water, and I saw se= wer in the paper the other day into that area so we've already kicked in $600,0= 00.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 30

Now yea, we are at a crossroads in this community. We have a lot of expenses and we h= ave to figure out the best way to pay for these expenses, and this is what we're asking to do. Find out what's= the best way. Don't make a decisi= on before you know all the facts, and you know (inaudible) your decision is. And as far as the personal issue, I believe I mentioned that at the very beginning of this, we know that we will face P & Z and the members that were just talking about now on our subdivision but we feel it's our responsibility to speak up and we didn't a= sk for a zone change, we're developing it as it's zoned, and I rather doubt th= at anyone on this Council would donate any of their property to this community, and by indicating that we're doing something wrong is yourself wrong because all we're doing is exactly what you would do, we're selling our property an= d we have a right to do that, and I ask you again to deny this Plan.

Roger Mitchell, 99 Norway Street, Oakville<= /st1:City>, CT&nbs= p; 06779

Mr. Mitchell: Who is the developer? If there is none, why the big rush= ?

= ; Mr. Pawlak: As far as I know = the developer has withdrawn.

Mr. Mitchell: (Inaudible?)

= ; Mr. Pawlak: That's correct.

= ; Mr. Mitchell: So why is there= a big rush to change the zone?

= ; Mr. Pawlak: It's not somethin= g that is a big rush as I understand it, the Plan of Development has been undertaken for a few years now. 4 years.

Mr. Pawlak, Chairman, Closed Public Participation at 9:47 p.m.

Mr. Pawlak, Chairman, Called a Recess at 9:47 p.m.

Mr. Pawlak, Chairman, Reconvened the Regular Meeting at 9:56 p.m.

5.&nb= sp; Minutes=

&= nbsp; A. Regular Meeting Minutes – September 17, 2007

= ; &n= bsp; MOTION: (Mr. Mancini, sec. Mr. Walton) to Approve the Regular Meeting Minutes dated September 17, 2007 as presented.

= ; &n= bsp; Discussion: None<= /p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 31

&= nbsp; B. = Special Town Meeting Minutes – September 17, 2007

= ; &n= bsp; MOTION: (Mr. Mancini, sec. Mr. Walton) to Approve the Special= Town Meeting Minutes dated September 17, 2007 as presented.

= ; &n= bsp; Discussion: None<= /p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

6.&nb= sp; Chairman’s Report

A. Correspondence

Mr. Pawlak: I received a letter from the Chair= man of the Economic Development Commission that says:

"At its September 20, 2007 monthly meeting, the Watertown Economic Development Commission reviewed the plans f= or the proposed Watertown Government Center to be located in the present Heminway Park School, and voted unanimously to endorse the project. The members of the Commission felt= this was the highest and best use of the property and should serve the needs of = the Watertown/Oakville community for many years to come. We are pleased to support this pro= posal.

Joseph McGrail, Chairman

Economic Development Commission"

7.&nb= sp; Departmental Report - Crestbrook Park=

= ; Har= ry Ward, Parks Director

&= nbsp; Mr. Ward: The golf course came through the Summer of 2007 in good condition overall. The full-time and remaining seasonal staff is currently engaged in Fall renovation projects which include aerification of greens, tees, fairways, fertilization, and over seeding. Unfortunately, no major capital improvements or the purchase of new equipment is scheduled for this fiscal year due to reduced revenues as a re= sult of reduced golf rounds.

= I am very pleased to announce that as of this morning the Crestbrook Golf Operations Fund has a positive cash balance of $31,370.30.

= On the first spreadsheet of the packet I handed out is a comparative summary of 2006 versus 2007 showing total 9 hole and 18 hole rounds, total fees collec= ted including surcharge, total carts rented, total cart fees collected, and the number of rain days.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 32

= &nb= sp; As you can see at the end of the report to date concerning the 06/07 comparison for July, August, and September.

= The overall number of rounds is down by 1,137.

= Total fees including surcharge is down by $7,831.00.

= The total number of cart rentals is down by 94.

= The total cart revenue is down $432.00

= As compared to last year.

= The second spreadsheet within the packet starts in fiscal year 2005 and is a comparison or total season tickets sold and the estimated revenues from the sale of season tickets. The s= eason ticket costs have been included for reference. On the very bottom of this spreads= heet is the actual expense summary between 2006 and 2007. The expense summary is primarily w= hat I can control to a degree.

= The last 3 pages of the packet is the actual expense and revenue detail for the Crestbrook Golf Operations fund as of this morning.

= Debits - The actual gross revenues are = &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; $340,937.29

= Credits - Total Expenditures are &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; $182,648.75

= Positive Balance of &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; = $= 158,288.54

= This concludes my report on the Crestbrook Operations Fund and I would like to t= hank the Town Council for the opportunity to present this information. I would be happy to answer any questions.

= Mr. Pawlak: I'm pleased to see the progress the course is making. How are you= doing on the credit cards?

&= nbsp; Mr. Ward: They're using them.= I look at it as a convenience more= so than people actually increasing our rounds because of it, that's my personal feeling. It hasn't changed an= y of our numbers as far as (inaudible). We did have enough in May and June of last fiscal year, the reason w= hy I did the spreadsheet the way I did, there's no crystal ball to this, it's a = lot weather related, temperature related, rain related, whether are rounds are = up or down, and I really can't predict what's going to happen. So I just wanted to show you, we d= on't even know what the outcome next June will be, so that's why I wanted to show you this spreadsheet the way it's presented.

= Mr. Pawlak: I was surprised that the cash seem= s to be going in the correct direction, but the number of rounds is down by what= , a little less than 800, July to July?

&= nbsp; Mr. Ward: We're only 3 months= into this fiscal year, July, August and September.

= Mr. Pawlak: Yea, I'm just looking at July 06 a= nd comparing July 07, 5530 versus 4776, that concer= ns me because the number of rain days was less by 10 in July.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 33

= Mr. Ward: You could look at the spreadsheet = and try to analyze it, I've been looking at it now for 2 weeks and I don't understand it. Why is that so= me days you don't have (inaudible) and other days we're packed? I can't find any rhyme or reason f= or it.

8.&nb= sp; Town Manager's Report

&= nbsp; Mr. Pawlak: Trying to get this thing moving a little bit, I'm not going to ask Mr. Frigon to . . . . . . .=

&= nbsp; Mr. Frigon: If I could just m= ake one comment. I see Bob LaBonn= e and Stanley are here, I wanted to thank you.&n= bsp; LaBonne's just recently donated some work on the island at Carvel and Route 63 and I wanted to thank you very much for it, it looks absolutely go= rgeous.

= ; Mr. Pawlak: Second that.

Mr. LaBonne: Mother Nature wasn't cooperating, = and I was concerned a lot of money and time and effort went into that and I appreciate the watering, cause my guys were moving 5 gallon buckets across = the traffic, so thank you very much.

= ; Mr. Frigon: Not a problem, th= ank you again.

Mr. LaBonne: Actually we're going to do the one = on Guernseytown and Platt Road in the Spring.

Mr. Pawlak: Does anybody have any specific que= stions about the Town Manager's Report?

9.&nb= sp; Subcommittee Reports

&= nbsp; A. Public Works Subcommittee

= Mr. Rinaldi: No report.

&= nbsp; B. = Business Development Subcommittee

= ; Mr. Pawlak: No report.

&= nbsp; C. Finance Subcommittee

= ; Mr. Mancini: No report.

&= nbsp; D. Ordinance Subcommittee

= ; Ms. Plowman: I met with Chuck= and Lisa last week and we're making revisions (inaudible).

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 34

E. = Town Government Center Subcommittee=

= ; Mr. Pawlak: We're going to lo= ok at scheduling a public information meeting for that in the near future. It will probably be in late Octobe= r or early November.

10.&n= bsp; New Business

&= nbsp; A. Consider Appointments to Boards and Commissions

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; None

&= nbsp; B. = Consider Authorizing the Town Manager to enter into and execute on behalf of the Tow= n of Watertown a Transfer Station Host Community Agreement with Connecticut Resources Recovery Authority

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Mancini, sec. Mr. Walton) to Take from the Table authorizing the Town Manager to enter into and execute on behalf of the Tow= n of Watertown a Transfer Station Host Community Agreement with Connecticut Resources Recove= ry Authority.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: = ; None

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Mancini, sec. Mr. Walton) to authorize the Town Manager to enter into and execute on behalf of the Town of Watertown a Transfer Station Host Community Agreement with Connecticut Resources Reco= very Authority.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: = ; Mr. Pawlak: The people from C= RRA are here.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Pet= er Egan, Connecticut Resources Recovery Authority

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Egan: I was here in front= of this Council about 14 months ago to advise the Town that CRRA was intending= to modify the solid waste permit that governs the transfer station and among several changes, (1) was to increase the tonnage to be delivered, or that is being delivered to the transfer station and there was concern about increas= ed tonnage being delivered to the transfer station and it caused a discussion = about how the community benefits, and CRRA met with Mr. Nardelli and Mr. Frigon a= nd Mr. Pawlak over the last year and actually what CRRA undertook was to devel= op a host community agreement that it could apply in all of the towns who have transfer stations in the mid Connecticut waste to energy project, there are= 4, and Watertown is one of them.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 35

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; What you have before you is a stand alone agreement whereby CRRA will pay the To= wn of Watertown an annual host community benefit and I'll go over the terms in a minute. We have an agreement with Watertown today and today the agreement (inaudible) provides that CRRA pay Watertown $.50 a to= n for every ton of waste that comes in from the City of Waterbury. In addition to= that paid the Town $9,000 a year as part of an agreement that was made about 15 years= ago when we located the transfer station. I don’t know the details, bu= t it has to do with not setting up a residential drop-off area. So today CRRA paid the Town for th= e Waterbury waste an= d this $9,000 payment which in sum comes to about $39,000 or $40,000.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Pawlak: And that has never changed over the course of the agreement, correct?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Egan: That's correct, $.50 every year un= til (inaudible) to that $.50. Waterbury delivers= about 60,000 tons of trash to the transfer station, and at $.50 a ton that's about $30,000. This agreement is ba= sed on CRRA looking at the value of the transfer station and developing what we th= ink is a fair and equitable payment that would at least be what the Town would receive from a private sector operator, in fact it is more than that. We (inaudible) company to do a val= uation of the transfer facility here and at our other transfer facilities, we shar= ed that information with Mr. Frigon and that is really the basis for how we arrived at the proposed price, that we propose to pay Watertown.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; In summary the terms of this new agreement are it's a 10 year term, and it's effective July 1st of this year. In the event the Council approves it and goes ahead and executes it it would be retroactive to July 1st. It provides for $.50 for all the waste that comes into the transfer station, n= ot just Waterbury waste. There is no other paym= ent. It's $.50 a ton today or this past year approximately 130,000 tons came into the transfer station so at $.50 a ton represents about $65,000 a year payment.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> There is a CCI inflater so each ye= ar 2008, fiscal year 2008 would be the base year, and then each subsequent yea= r it would be an inflation factor applied that is tied off of CCI not to exceed = 3%.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Per year?

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 36

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Egan: That's per year, it will increase = to 3% and there is also a provision that whereby the agreement provides that the = City support CRRA in the event that we renew the DEP permit which we will have t= o do in 5 years. However in the ev= ent that we want to modify the permit or make any significant changes, and in particular we call out in the agreement a change in waste type or a change = in waste (inaudible), that's a reopener and CRRA (inaudible) potentially renegotiate this agreement, but if it's a simple renewal because the term expires or we install a waste permit that we have from DEP, we're looking f= or the (inaudible) support as the host community. We feel this is a better agreement= that was in place today. It's a 10= year term, we intend to be in business and offer for more than the next decade b= ut we set this term at 10 years. I think that's the summary. It'= s been a long night. I don't want to= take anymore time. Perhaps I shoul= d stop here and if you have questions; I can answer them now.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Primini: Last time we talked to you you wer= e far exceeding the amounts agreed upon in the original. Are there any restrictions here to= your tonnage right now?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Egan: Where we are today when I was here= a year ago, the DEP was going to issue a modified permit to increase the tonn= age to a daily maximum of 1,300 tons a day.&nb= sp; Under the existing permit permitting capacity is 350 tons a day and = the reason we set the limit so high is because there are about half a dozen day= s a year, specifically a Tuesday when there is a 3 day weekend, when we see 700, 800, 900 tons a day coming in and we were looking out for the next number of years and applied a contingency factor we came to the 1,300 tons. We've since revised that downwards= and what we will propose to DEP is a daily maximum of 1,070 tons, but a quarter= ly average daily maximum of 550 tons. <= /span>What our average daily amount is that we take in any quarter or over a course of= a year today is about 440 tons, so that's 110 tons per day increase in the ev= ent that there is general growth in this area, we take waste from 11 or 12 surrounding communities and that's all residential waste that we take. The reason, and I think what's cha= nged from when I was here 12 months ago is that we're proposing that we insert a quarterly daily limit which is much lower than the maximum daily limit and = I hope that that would give the Town comfort that suddenly the transfer station is= not going to expand, we're not going to bring in garbage from either towns, dou= ble or triple the amount that we see each other. Looking out over a longer term on a quarterly basis, keeping it down to the 550 tons, I think provides that assurance to the Town and we're going to ask DEP to write that in the permi= t. We submit a quarterly tonnage repo= rt to DEP, and we're going to begin copying the Town Manager on that so the Town gets a flavor (inaudible) transfer station.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 37

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Primini: Yea, you answered my question.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; C. Consider a Proposed Ordinance Authorizing an Amendment to the Code of Ordinances whi= ch shall Establish Fees for Planning and Zoning

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Mancini, sec. Mr. Walton) to approve the Ordinance authorizing an amendment= to the Code of Ordinances which shall establish fees for Planning and Zoning.<= /p>

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: = ; Mr. Pawlak: I would like to m= ake a couple of recommendations. On= the schedules, Item 3, Fees Charged for Land Use Applications - it shows 3.1.1 Application fee $250 for first or second lot, $500 for third or more lots.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> I would like to see that changed t= o for the first and second lots $600 per lot and the third and more lots stay the= way it is. Let me give you a little bit of background, I've been looking at some numbers for P & Z and while fees are never the thing that drives the P & Z and funds them, it is a fact, I believe, that the last time these w= ere enacted or changed was 92 or 93 if I'm correct, and it's an inordinately lo= ng time to not have looked at these things.&n= bsp; And within that timeframe, 92 or 93, the P & Z budget was $104,0= 00 and it's now $204,000 I believe, Frank, within a few hundred dollars. (Tape #3, Side A ended - may have missed some) less last year. It was approximately $56,386 howev= er in addition to those two numbers there was also 06/07 a total of $106,300.35 f= or legal fees for P & Z, so if you look at those numbers, you add the budg= et and the legal costs, that's about $310,000. This is not going to change that a= ll that much, but it lessens the burden, if you will, on the taxpayer and plac= es it on the builder and/or developer. I mean to ask that in this particul= ar case, I'd like to hear a Motion to change that $250 per lot for the first <= span class=3DGramE>an second lot in Item 3.1.1 to $600 per lot.

&n= bsp;

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:4'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Rinaldi, sec. Mr. Mancini) to amend the Motion for Item 3.1.1 to change the= fee from $250 to $600 per lot for the first and second lots.

<= o:p>

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:4'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: Mr. Kane: When you say that the burden will be lessened on the taxpayer and put on the developer, won't the developer in t= urn pass it along to the consumer, so you're going to pay no matter what?

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 38

&n= bsp;

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:3'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; Mr. Pawlak: He may, but the person who is goin= g to pay is the one who is going to benefit from the building and not the rest of the taxpayers in Town. I'm ju= st trying to, like I said nothing has changed in this fee structure in about 14 or 15 years, and this is just an attempt to recoup a little bit more and bring it= up to date.

<= o:p>

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:2'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Kane: You're looking at i= t from an individual standpoint because it's going to affect everyone because anyo= ne who is in the market of buying a home, so it's going to affect more than ju= st a particular individual, it will affect many people because all the homes will have this same fee attached to it, so all the homes are going to be passing along this same fee. I unders= tand your point about raising the fees because they h= aven't been looked at since 92 or 93, but I don't want to be reckless either and j= ust come up with, where did you come up with that $600 figure by the way?

<= o:p>

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:5'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: It seemed that the number should be higher and if the first and second lots are at "x" number and the third lot or more is $500, the first and second should be higher because th= at's the initial costs, the rest just follows along, the inspector is there, the (inaudible) is there already doing whatever he has to do, so the third or m= ore lots should be less expensive than the first or second. That's basically how I arrived at = that number.

<= o:p>

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:5'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: One of the issues that we wanted t= o be very careful about in this whole analysis is that even when we vote at the = very beginning of this ordinance and proposed in this ordinance as is before you= , is for everyone to get their arms around a concept that has never been put to writing before and that is that those who are coming into our Town for any = sort of development ought to pay the costs that costs the Town to do that. I suppose you're all 100% behind t= hat.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 39

<= o:p>

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:5'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; In this process of doing that, we also said in this that you can't just take t= he Planning and Zoning fees and the expenses, because no one is going to come = to Town and just get a plan, they want to build, they have to take a look at all of= the revenues, building inspection, planning and zoning, zoning board of appeals, inland wetlands, and all of those associated expenses. The important part to remember abo= ut the associated expenses is you can't take just the budgets of the building inspection and planning and zoning. What is here and in writing and hopefully you will adopt this concept, is that it is only those expenses that are re= lated to an application. I know and= you well know there is administrative time that is not (inaudible) application,= why should an applicant building a home have to pay for that, that's a general taxpayer expense, so the bottom line is we never went through an analysis to determine how much that is, but certainly it's probably close to about 50% = if I had to guess, in terms of the Planning and Zoning Office in terms of expenses. The legal fees that= you mentioned are not always related to a particular applicant.

<= o:p>

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:5'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; So the point I did want to directly address is that in terms of the magnitude = of when these fees are going to be applied is indeed in 3.1.1 the very thing t= hat you want to change and so the ones that have the first and the second lots = are often times those that don't even come before Planning and Zoning, those are things that people have an "of right" to do and so the work invol= ved in reviewing an "of right" is pretty small and so that is the rea= son in our presentation to that we have the $250 cause their work is pretty small. It's when you get to t= he larger lots, 3 and above, that we're then having $500 lots, that's where our work is and that's where the cost to the Town is, so that's the rationale behind this. Where you're rea= lly hurting, if I may say so, we're changing those first two, is you're hurting= the person who has a single lot and wants to go build it. Our work again to go review that is pretty insignificant.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 40

<= o:p>

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:5'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; My last point and I will stop is we have, as you know in here, we have somethi= ng different than we had in the past and that is that all of the inspection fe= es, whatever they will be, will be paid for by the applicant. All of the legal costs for the pos= t document review is all going to be paid for directly by the applicant, which was nev= er the case before, so I leave it at that, and I emphasize again that this is really the person who has a small 1 or 2 lots, which we don't have a lot of work to do other than to (inaudible) so I think from the Zoning Commission'= s (inaudible) $250 is appropriate there, we should be having the fee as we suggest, $500 = for each lot after the first two.

<= o:p>

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:5'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Okay, will you Withdraw your Motion?

<= o:p>

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:3'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Rinaldi: I'll Withdraw my Motion.

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Mancini: I'll Withdraw my Seconding f the Motion.

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Ms. Adams: 3.1.4 and 3.1.5, i= t says paid by applicant directly to Commission attorney, paid directly to (inaudi= ble) to the third party. I think I= 'm a little bothered by that. It s= eems to me it's a lot cleaner the way it's done now. Tonight we just appropriated, I th= ink it leaves a solid paper trail the way we do it now. I think this way will actually put= more work on the Zoning Enforcement Officer and her staff, with this way all of = the money is handled by one department. If you start putting directly to an applicant or to a third party, I think it's kind of messy. What if they d= on't send their money, then I can't do this?&nb= sp; I just this I'd like to see the way it is now, and just continue that way with the Council appropriating the money. Not only that, as Council members = it keeps us aware of things that are going on and land use boards by simple appropriations and simple votes, it just keeps us in the loop so we can find out what's going on.

<= o:p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: For legal fees I do have a comment= on that. On the legal fees which= is 3.1.4, as Ms. Adams stated this is indeed a new concept. What happens now is the Town Attorn= ey bills the Town for this and we end up paying 400% of the cost. This was a means of saying . . . .=

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: But we are reimbursed, aren't we?<= /p>

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: No.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 41

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Adams: I don't have any problem with the concept, (inaudible) I still think it should go through Frank's office vers= us the Zoning Office, that way you know.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Nardelli: Well (inaudible) inspection fees are required by land use boards and get paid by the applica= nt also?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Minnich: Well I was doing= that next, but I was on legal fees.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Nardelli: So what is the applicant going to actually pay the attorney and what happens if they don't= pay the attorney?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: Well after we give our approval as= a Town, whatever the post legal fees are for the documents that need to be fi= led with the Town Clerk and the mylars and all those kinds of things that need = to get done in getting the bond set up that they do their final (inaudible) the attorney will like any other bill, send that bill directly to that applicant and it won't go through the Town for his work.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Nardelli: So the attorney is going to have to collect on these bills?

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Minnich: Yes, the attorne= y will have to collect direct on the bill, not the Town.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Adams: What if he doesn't pay?

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Pawlak: Is there a . . . = .

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kane: It's up to the attorney to collect= it.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Is there a confirmation that all o= f the paperwork is processed correctly? Do we have that assurance?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: We have the assurance in that the documents to which they're being filed are ones (a) we've approved those fo= rms already in years past and secondly we are also involved in the approval pro= cess so the conditions of approval are all part of that. The rest of this I say is fairly standard, but it always doesn't work out that way because there's something missing on mylars, but the process is fairly standard, that they just have = to make sure it's being done, so it was only the simple part of the process th= at it was going to be going through the Town and the attorney would bill it the same as he bills a new private client.&nbs= p; That was the suggestion.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 42

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Pawlak: Do you have a pro= blem with that, Frank?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Nardelli: No, as long as they have an at= torney, I mean I would assume there should be some checks and balances before the a= pplicant is finished and has to pay the attorney, I don't know what happens if they don't pay the attorney. Where= does that leave you?

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Minnich: Well (inaudible)= on the process right now, as soon as we have finished our approvals all of that information and all the documents we have goes to the Town Attorney's offic= e, they basically handle the process from there. Now one says well tomorrow they'll= be in, that's (inaudible) the applicant will be in and go to the Town Attorney= 's office, they have 5 years to do this, some projects they're not in there for some time, so there is a direct follow-up (inaudible) so if the Town Attorn= ey hasn't heard in his office and then when the applicant comes, they do the n= ecessary legal work so we do not get involved in that, the only contact with us is t= he bonds and that's about it.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Nardelli: We don't get in= volved now but we're not getting reimbursed.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: And we won't be getting involved before. Where we care about, = and this is part of the obligation of the Town Attorney, he has to make sure th= at they mylars are filed, that the interaction between the Town and the bank a= nd the other attorneys are all settled in the matter that's appropriate. We really as a Town official hasn't= got involved in that, and don't get involved in it. What we have gotten involved in is= the standard form to which those documents need to be done from our perspective= in terms of the approvals and we're also involved in making sure that the bonds that we require are communicated to the attorney via standard bond language that they need to incorporate.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: And that would stay the same.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: That would stay the same. Nothing's changed. The only thing that's different he= re is instead of billing the Town, which we haven't gotten all the money back, now we're assured as a Town of not having any expenses at all for the post docu= ment approval and it's all done by the applicant and it's billed by the attorney= and we're not involved, that's what we are suggesting here. We couldn't establish a fee that is different every time.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 43

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Ms. Adams: What I had said was (inaudible) the way we do it now and the way it is deposited in the General= Fund, we as a Council appropriate it, we have one tonight, and just to keep it th= at way because I think it's going to place undue hardship on the Zoning Office that is woefully buried under with all the work they have to do, and second= ly it keeps the Council informed of things that are going on in Town, a simple (inaudible).

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Minnich: We believe that = the (inaudible) process is cumbersome. Being = the Wetlands Commission finds it cumbersome, quite frankly your role in what is being do= ne here is to appropriate the money to which there is no expense to the Town because everything is being paid for by the applicant, and yet this process does stall that process when any of those happen to exceed the dollar limit= to which you have authority to do, (inaudible) call a Town Meeting, so in the = case of Planning and Zoning, we have an applicant that we want to have a third p= arty review, for example a traffic study, and that study exceeds the limit to wh= ich you have the authority to do (inaudible) conversation amongst the public, a= nd we just thought that if the process is much easier and simpler to which the= re would be a third party agreement, a standard agreement that the Town Attorn= ey would draw up that would be used for the applicant and the Town (inaudible)= to the contractor that would state how those terms those monies would be paid,= but not be paid to the Town. The = only reason it comes back here is because Frank is exactly right, that because it goes to the Town you have to appropriate the monies, and if the money does = not go to the Town as is being suggested here, we won't have to go through the process of calling a Town Meeting to have a traffic study to take $25,000 (= inaudible). That's why we suggested this.= It is cumbersome now, this suggestion is to make it easier. Once again there is no financial obligation on the part of the Town = (inaudible).

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Adams: (Inaudible) now you have a developer dealing directly with your independent third party review and that just kin= d of bothers me, when this is supposed to be objective (inaudible) even though P & Z says this is the group that's going to do the study, I don’t know, I'm not comfortable with that, I like the way it's done now, and I do= n't think I've ever seen a Town Meeting in all the years I've been here where w= e've had to do that to appropriate money that it's been more than $5,000 or $8,0= 00.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Who determines the independent rev= iew?

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 44

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: Planning and Zoning or Inland/Wetl= ands would do that (inaudible) and also that once they don't get paid automatica= lly the approval for the payment and the word acceptance would be done as is now, through the Town, so that we would say that they have completed the work and then that would trigger that money being paid for directly by the applicant= to the third party review.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: But your paperwork or inspecti= on process or whatever is entailed to ensure that the third party review is do= ne legitimately still remains. T= he only thing that changes is that we don't collect the money.

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Minnich: That's correct.<= /p>

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Nardelli: The inspection = fees that are required by land use boards to be paid by the applicant, if we hav= e a Town employee that goes out and does the inspections, none of that will be track= ed, they just deposit it up front and they run that down. How will we monitor that?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Which number is that, Frank?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Nardelli: 3.1.13.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: We're suggesting that the concept = that all of the fees that all of the costs for us (inaudible) employees or be it with a third party are paid for by the applicant and not at all paid for by= the Town, and recognizing that the Town will be paying for these up front for t= heir own employees and they would just be billed back to the . . . .

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Nardelli: Cause currently= they give us money up front, they give us like $2,500 up front and we deposit th= at, then we charge off against that and as it gets down to zero we call P &= Z and tell them they need to replenish that.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: And that is no change, that's exac= tly what we will require of them.

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Pawlak: Are you satisfied= with that?

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Nardelli: Yes.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 45

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: I had also considered, under 3.1.3, special permits or special exceptions, I had a couple of questions. In that area you are also suggesti= ng a reduction in the fee from residential from $175 to $150, and I was looking = to go the other way up to $700, and with the non-residential you're going from $500 to $250, and I was thinking of going the other way myself, I was $500 = over $500,000, $500 for non-residential over $500,000. What is your rationale for in both= cases reducing those fees?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Minnich: Twofold. One is we took a look at what some= other communities were doing, Litchfield, but here is the rationale for the speci= al permits. A special permit cou= ld be, it varies a lot, but it could be simply for a sign, and therefore that's wh= at they are going to pay. Our is= sue is that under the special permits in the special exceptions, these monies that= you see here are in addition to the site plan review, if there is any, and they= 're also in addition to the application, so the application fee is also elsewhe= re so no one is going to come in for a special permit most likely with not hav= ing one of those other, so they're adding to the fee that's already there, so y= our goal of the fee of the amount you were talking about $700 or whatever, that will probably come very close to what their total will be, but one has to k= eep in mind with these special permits that sometimes the cost of what they are doing for the permit isn't going to, is going to be a lot less, it could be= a very small thing that they may do a special permit, doesn't cost a lot of money. I can think of several= that the value of those aren't that great, so we have to be careful about not ma= king these too large, and we also have thought a little bit about trying to make more divisions within this and really found it kind of hard to do that so .= . . .

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Then again it could be something e= lse that's more significant, so it could go either way.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Minnich: Yes, but if it's= more significant it's going to come in the site plan review and it's going to co= me in that special application fee so they'll be added. For example if it's for a lot, they don't need a special permit for that or a site plan review, those things are going to be additive to it. I= only suggest that if you start to bring those special permits, I think they are going to be way out of whack for what they're really wa= nting to do, and these numbers here, $150 and $250 are not out of line with other towns.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Pawlak: Well why not leav= e it where it was at the bare minimum? $175 and $500, for non-residential it was $500 for anything over $500,000, that's like 1/10th or 1/100th?

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 46

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Minnich: (Inaudible) base= d on the (inaudible) that correct, on the special permit only.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: So again my question is at the very least leave it at $175 and $500 instead of dropping it to $150 and $250? Haven't touche= d it in 14 years. Okay, so I'l= l entertain a Motion to that effect.

&n= bsp;

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:4'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Mancini, sec., Mr. Walton ) to leave the rate at= the existing rate of $175.00 for residential under 3.1.3 and $500.00 for anythi= ng over $500,000 under 3.1.3.

<= o:p>

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:4'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: None<= /p>

<= o:p>

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:4'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

<= o:p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Pawlak: I have one more s= imple question, and that is the excavation of fill material also 3.1.3 What is that? Is that for any excavation of 1,000 cubic yards or less, it goes from $250 to $500 a special permit for that?

<= o:p>

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:4'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: Yes.

<= o:p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: So it's for a total amount, so in = the case of Item 2, from 1,000 to 50,000 yards it goes from $500 to $1,000.

<= o:p>

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:4'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: That's correct.

<= o:p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: What I would really want to try to ensure is that in the future we don't go for 14 years in not looking at our= fee structure for anything, whether it's Planning or Zoning, Police Department special duty officers, whatever, so I would again, I'm looking for direction here from our experts how best to address that situation. Is it something that we want to in= clude in this ordinance indicating that at budget time you review your fee struct= ure to be sure that it is in line and should be left alone, or at least reviewed and perhaps increased? Is that something we can add to this ordinance?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: You can add it to the ordinance, b= ut it really isn't incumbent on ourselves when we go through the budget exactly a= s we arrived here to make sure we do that.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Pawlak: And that's exactl= y the problem, we never looked at it for 14 years, so I would prefer to include t= hat, while we have the time and the mechanism to do it so that a review of fee s= tructures and schedules by P & Z be conducted during budget preparation on an ann= ual basis. Is that fairly clear?<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Can I have a Motion on that?

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 47

&n= bsp;

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:4'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: ((Mr. Mancini, sec. Mr. Walton) that the fee structure be reviewed on an annual basis.

<= o:p>

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:4'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: None<= /p>

<= o:p>

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:4'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; D. Consider the Adoption of the Watertown<= /st1:City> Plan of Conservation and Development as presented by the Planning and Zoning Commission

&= nbsp; = ; Mr. Pawlak: I heard what ever= ybody said loud and clear and I would like to propose that we Table this item unt= il we can have a Public Hearing with the corrected document so that those who = wish to attend have an opportunity to speak.&nb= sp; It sort of falls in line with sometimes you can teach an old dog new tricks.

&= nbsp; = ; Ms. Adams: You said a correct= ed document?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: There are some errors in numbers h= ere, those are the only ones that I knew and obviously we did not know that befo= re hand. I assume that those can= be presented at the Public Hearing, is that correct David?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: Yea, I don't know that we will be a= ble to get a corrected document other than the final document.

&= nbsp; = ; Mr. Pawlak: I think we can ha= ve a supplement which can address any of the inconsistencies so that we can hand them out. The other thing I <= span class=3DGramE>found, and this is in no way a criticism, but when I w= as reviewing the document itself and trying to compare it with the letter that= the minority reports, so to speak, I had trouble correlating their reference numbers with what was in the report. I finally figured out that there wa= s like a 2 page difference and then everything started to fall into place, so anyw= ay we've got a Motion to Table this item?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. = Rinaldi, sec. Mr. Walton) to Table the Plan of Conservation and Development as prese= nted by the Planning and Zoning Commission.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: = ; None

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: I’m aware of the issue on Pag= e 22 (inaudible) R-12.5 and refer to the (inaudible) on Page 21. What else are you talking about th= at needs to be corrected?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: As far as I know that's, I wouldn'= t have been aware of it myself unless Donna brought it up, I assume those are the = only errors in figures.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 48

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: That's the only one that I'm aware= of (inaudible).

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: There was a table where it said 22 = homes and the percentage, R-12.5. There was something else, the R-12.5 unknown, R= -10.5 22 homes, I think there was a question there. The IR-80 . . . . and it shows 256, and (inaudible) regarding the number of potential industrial square feet of 9,761,796 indicating I think that at some time perhaps 10 ye= ars ago that number might have been about the same, and the question is is that= in fact the case, or has it in fact been diminished?

&= nbsp; = ; Mr. Minnich: You're asking, if you're going to get to that discussion, I don't k= now how hopeful we're going to be able to do that. That quite frankly is the heart of= one of the things that we paid $100,000 for a consultant. That 9,000,000 square foot number = is not a pass that we have any capability within our office or the P & Z Offic= e to do. We do for the others that= we just talked about, but that 9,000,000 is a significant amount of work to ge= t to that number and I don't (inaudible).

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Wasn't the consultant here?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: The consultant . . . .

&= nbsp; = ; Mr. Pawlak: Is this the guy w= ho left?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: The problem with the consultant is = the consultant staff who did this work isn't here anymore, is not in their empl= oy anymore so that's not going to be. . . .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: When was that in 92, 93? We had that report?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: We do, but that's the whole (inaudi= ble) one has to know how they figured it back then, now we'll have to figure how they did know, has to know what land was involved in it, I hope you can rea= lize that in itself (inaudible) that's not going to be possible to do with our resources.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Mancini: Dave, i= sn't it true that you went through this whole plan of development, the plan is actu= ally 2 years old so almost every number in this book would be off by 2 years. If you wanted an updated, corrected version, you'd have to have a complete plan done all over again? I mean if you wanted an updated nu= mber to the present time, so I think he's trying to tell you we can't give you (= inaudible) present time.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: (Inaudible) carefully to watch what= you wanted done, and what you had stated up until the 9,000,000 we can do, we'll be happy to do that.

&= nbsp; = ; Mr. Pawlak: So you're talking= about a significant lag time on these (Tape #3, Side B ended - may have missed so= me). Some of these numbers, although th= ey are the most current that we have, they may be 2 years old.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 49

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: Oh for sure, like all these economic income areas are 2 years old, etc. so those we had asked the consultant, Pat Somer, if he wouldn't mind going through that again and he said no (inaudib= le) he did the work, in fact he had to revise some of it when we asked for some clarification (inaudible) but once you ask, I'd be happy to do, but I can't= do that 9,000,000.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: But you do have the old reports, ri= ght?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: I can do what you just asked (inaudible).

&= nbsp; = ; Ms. Adams: Timeframe for this= ? I don't want to see the time run o= ut and this just is approved without conversation. We have 65 days from the first of September?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: Correct.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Somewhere around the (inaudible) November.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: The bottom line is whenever you sc= hedule a Public Hearing . . . .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: When does the clock start?

&= nbsp; = ; Mr. Minnich: It started Septe= mber 1st, so just let us know when you want the Public Hearing and we'll get tha= t ready.

&= nbsp; = ; Mr. Pawlak: We'll see what th= e scheduling calendar looks like. Any other discussion on that?

&= nbsp; E. = Consider a Resolution Authorizing an Appropriation from the General Fund in the amou= nt of $6,500 for a Third Party Review of Conservation Commission Application #= 605 of Walnut Grove Farms for construction of Southridge Estates a 23-lot Resid= ential Subdivision on Bunker Hill Road. Funds from the developer have been deposited to the General Fund to cover the cost of the Third Party Review

<= o:p>

RESOLUTION

<= o:p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; WHEREAS, the Conservation Commission/Inland Wetlands Agency (CCIWA) has received an = Application #605 of Walnut Grove Farms, construction of Southridge Estates, a 23 lot residential subdivision on Bunker Hill Road.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; WHEREAS, the CCIWA has requested that a Third Party Review be conducted in accordance with Sections 1.1 and 2.2 of the Fees Ordinance, which requires that the applicant pay for the Third Party Review;

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; WEHREAS, the developer has provided a check (#9073) in the amount of $6,500 for the Third Party Review which has been deposited into the General Fund.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 50

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Watertown Town Council hereby authorizes= the appropriation of $6,500 from the General Fund for a Third Party Review for CCIWA Application #605 to line item 010-50310-011-0000.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Dated at Waterto= wn, Connecticut this 1st day of= October, 2007.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Joseph Pawlak, Chairman

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Watertown Town Cou= ncil

&nb= sp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Mancini, sec. Mr. Walton) to Authorize an Approp= riation from the General Fund in the amount of $6,500 for a Third Party Review of Conservation Commission Application #605 of Walnut Grove Farms for construc= tion of Southridge Estates, a 23 lot residential subdivision on Bunker Hill Road.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: = ; Mr. Primini: Is this Bunker Hill Extension?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Is this the Lynn Farm?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: Yes, that's correct.

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Primini: So that would be Bunker Hill Road Extension.

&n= bsp;

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:2'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

<= o:p>

&= nbsp; F. = Consider a Waiver for Inspection Fees for Quadrato Drive

<= o:p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Mancini, sec. Mr. Walton) to Waive the Inspectio= n Fees for Quadrato Drive as recommended by Franklin Pilicy in his correspondence dated September 17, 2007.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: None<= /p>

&n= bsp;

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:2'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 51

<= o:p>

&= nbsp; G. Discussion Regarding the Heminway School Town Hall Conversion and Possible Setting of Publi= c Informational Meeting

<= o:p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Mancini, sec. Mr. Walton) to set a Public Hearing for Thursday, November 1, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. at the Watertown High School Technology Room for a presentation followed by discussion and comment on the proposed conversion = of Heminway Park School to a Town Hall facility.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: Mr. Primini: Are there going to be any harder fi= gures on that by any chance? The fi= gures that we were shown there was an awful big spread between 4 numbers (inaudib= le) presented something with that big of a spread.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Well there is actually a spread bet= ween the 3 numbers, the 4th number was an average.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Frigon: Unless we engage = the architect to do some additional work and to further define the construction= of the building, I don’t know that he can really come up with a (inaudib= le). The process that he used was at le= ast in his estimation the best process available to him. Again he had 3 contractors look at= the possible design of the building (inaudible).

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Primini: I've just never seen that big of a = spread on (inaudible).

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: They're quoting the architect on something that is very preliminary in design, so they can only guess at this point (inaudible) they can only guess at what conditions they might encounter. One contractor was willing to take a chance and offer a lower price, where one was covering hi= s . . . . .

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: I think the one that looked to= me to be way out of whack was the high one, because the other two, the two low on= es were relatively close. I thin= k it was $11,900,000 to $13,200,000, something like that?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: $18,000,000.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Well the high was at least $18,000,= 000 an maybe $19,000,000.= The other two were a lot lower than that.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: We can massage = it, maybe you want to take the high one out of the equation and take the archit= ect's out and look at the other two.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 52

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Primini: I understand these are estimates b= ut that's an awful big spread between the 3, I've never seen that big of a spr= ead before. If I'm building a hou= se and I got 3 different prices like that I (inaudible).

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: In the architect's defense, what he= was attempting to do was give you the same information that was being provided = to him, rather than coming in and saying the building is going to cost you $18,000,000 and you don't see any spread.&= nbsp; What he was intending to do is share that information with you, then it's difficult at best to get an accurate price on a very preliminary design. If you want he can co= me with a price, he was sharing that with you.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: I understand where you're coming fr= om, Ray, and I want to address it in a couple of ways. Personally a couple of years ago I= had to put a roof on my house, tear off and put on, and the pricing that I got = on that particular project ranged from about $5,500 to almost $9,000. So on a very small project there w= as a significant spread. The other= point I want to talk about also is something that is much more contemporary (inau= dible). It's an $84,500,000 project that I= know Elaine feels very similarly on this one as I do, when I questioned the architects and I said we're talking about 2 years hence and the next at that time it was about 13 months or so, if the project passed at referendum then they were going to develop all the specifications and prints and drawings a= nd everything else, then how did you come up with $84,500,000 if you haven't p= ut pen to paper or started the CAD machines grinding away? We have, I think, a similar situat= ion here, and unless and until they get real specific documentation we're going= to have to assume, I think, that at least 2 of these companies who are bidding this job are again relatively close to each other and the third one is significantly higher and he may be the Rolls Royce and we're looking at a C= hevy and a Pontiac over here. I don't know, short of stopping everything and hav= ing Whitaker actually draw all the prints and all the specifications, construct= ion drawings, mechanicals, the whole 9 yards, I think it would be almost imposs= ible to come up with a real number that you could . . . .

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Primini: I understand tha= t you can't come up with hard numbers, but there's an awful big spread, that' was= my only concern. How would we kn= ow what to vote on in a Town Meeting?

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 53

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Frigon: He did that on my request because there is a spread and I was uncomfortable with him coming in with the $18,000,000. I asked= him to demonstrate to us how he arrived at the budget price of what we eventual= ly will be going to the voter for. Certainly at some point in time we can have some discussion as to how best we can financially manage the project. Once it's bid maybe we won't (inau= dible) for $18,000,000 and it comes in at $10,000,000 maybe you want to at that po= int cap the cost of the project so we don't overspend. There are other things that we can= do to manage that, but all he is saying is that this is the information that was given to him, they're covering their liability, and rather than come in with the $18,000,000 he was really looking for guidance on this.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Pawlak: I understand they walked the school and they went through the building, all 3 of them walked through that building and Mr. Whitaker pointed out everything, the layout f= or the 3 floors.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: Yes, he had his architectural infor= mation and mechanical information as well.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: So it wasn't like he just gave them= the drawings and told them to do what they wanted to do. At least all 3 of them had the opp= ortunity to walk the plant and see what was involved, and I think with the detail th= at Steve had for him, there was enough for them to work with and they were satisfied.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: There were a couple of (inaudible).=

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kane: All we're doing tonight is setting = the date?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: That's right. Any other comm= ents?

&n= bsp;

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:2'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

<= o:p>

&= nbsp; H. Consider Approval of a Resolution Authorizing the Town Manager to enter into contrac= ts with the Department of Environmental Protection in connection with the STEAP Grant for the Echo Lake Ro= ad Sewer Project

<= o:p>

MOTION: (Mr. Mancini, sec. Mr. Walton) to approve the Resolution Authorizing the Town Manager, Charles Frigon, to enter into contracts with the Department of Environmental Protection in connection with the STEAP Grant for the Echo La= ke Road Sewer Project.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: Mr. Pawlak: Chuck, just a brief explanatio= n?

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 54

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Frigon: This is part of t= he STEAP project that's been submitted to the State of = Connecticut. We have not received payment yet a= nd come to find out that the initial authorization to sign the agreement was n= ever signed when the grant was first received, so this is really a housecleaning measure to go back and be able to sign the (inaudible).

&n= bsp;

= &= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

&= nbsp; I. &= nbsp; Consider Approval of Revised Guidelines for Sale of Real Property With Buildings

<= o:p>

&= nbsp; MOTION: (Mr. Mancini, sec. Mr. Walton) to approve the revision of the Town of Watertown Guidelines for sale of real property with buildings.

&= nbsp; Discussion: None<= /p>

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; J. &= nbsp; Consider Approval of Revised Guidelines for Sale of Real Property owned by the Town owned property with and without building= s

<= o:p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Mancini, sec. Mr. Walton) to approve the revision of the Town of Watertown guideli= nes for sale of real property with and without buildings.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion:&nbs= p; None

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

&= nbsp; K. Consider Proposal from L. Wagner and Associates for the Small Cities Housing Rehabilitation Program for Wat= ertown Residents

<= o:p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. = Mancini, sec. Mr. Walton) to Approve the proposal from L. Wagner and Associates for the Small Cities Housing Rehabilitation Program f= or Watertown Residents.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion:&nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Chuck, what is th= e amount of the grant? Is that somethi= ng to be determined or . . . .?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: It's not a grant. The funds we presently have is abo= ut $100,000, and of that $100,000 Wagner Associates will charge us a fee of $3= ,000 to administer the program and that does come out of the (inaudible).

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: The program rehab, does that interi= or, exterior?

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 55

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: It's for both.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: So if somebody needs a furnace or something like t= hat . . . .

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: If they meet the guidelines.

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Rinaldi: We had this prog= ram several years ago and maybe more than that, but the problem back then was it wasn't fully utilized. The word wasn’t sp= read, the information wasn't put out there, it's a good program, it helps a lot of people, but you have to let them know it's available.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: That's what Wagner & Associate= s are going to do.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Frank, is this the leftover money?=

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Nardelli: We have funds l= eft over, it's like a revolving loan, I mean we're n= ot getting any more funds, are we Chuck?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: No, we're not applying for additio= nal funds.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Okay, and this additional money, i= s this free and clear to the homeowners, is it a small low interest loan, or what?=

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Frigon: It's a low intere= st loan that's payable upon the sale of their property.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; L. = Consider Appropriating $12,820 from the General Fund for the Installation of Speed H= umps and Bituminous Curbing for Veteran's Memorial Park

<= o:p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Mancini, sec. Mr. Walton) to Appropriate $12,820= from the General Fund for the installation of Speed Humps and Bituminous Curbing= for Veteran's Memorial Park.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion:&nbs= p; Mr. Mancini: Frank, didn't we appropriate $17,000 for this job, and why are they asking for the $12,820 now?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Nardelli: It was in last year's budget and t= he appropriation expired in fiscal year.

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Mancini: Okay, but is the $12,820 do the same job that we approved, for $17,000?

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 56

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Frigon: The $17,000 that = you approved last fiscal year was an estimate.= We approved it, we did it, the bids came = in just short of 3 or 4 days prior to the end of the fiscal year. This came in, well actually there = were no bidders for the project, so we actually bid it this time and we're asking for a re-appropriation.

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Pawlak: Chuck, the bitumi= nous curbing, can't we do that with our guys, don't we have a machine to do that= ?

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Frigon: We do have a curb= ing machine to do that; as of yesterday we still have 71 catch basins to replace before the Winter.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Do we want to put these in? What's the timing on this?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: The Parks and Recreation would lik= e to see it done the sooner the better, there is an awful lot of activity at the park.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kane: I don’t believe we put it in= the budget, I think we removed it from the budget.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: Yes, it was an appropriation last = fiscal year. It was not in the budge= t.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kane: It was not in the budget.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: Right, that's correct. It was reflected in the budget.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kane: It was taken out.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Nardelli: But in the prior year's budget it = was appropriated, and that appropriation terminated.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kane: I thought it just came up recently= that Park and Rec asked for this again, that's what I thought.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: Yes.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Nardelli: That's right.

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Pawlak: And that occurred= in the previous fiscal year, 06/07, correct?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &= nbsp; Mr. Nardelli: (Inaudible).

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Kane: So we did approve t= his expenditure, yes or no? Now we just have to appropriate it, is that what we are doing now?

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 57

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Frigon: Yes, we approved = the appropriation last fiscal year for this expenditure, for which we had no bidders.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: The job never got done.

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Mr. Kane: And now Park and Re= c came back and said yes, we'd like this and that's why we went out to bid and are= attempting to do it now?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Frigon: That's correct.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

&= nbsp; M. Discussion Regarding Possible Long Term Lease of Watertown Fire District Property<= /p>

<= o:p>

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:2'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Everybody has a copy of the propos= al from the Fire District. There= are 9 items there. Any comments or questions?

= ; &n= bsp; Mr. Mancini: On #2, the lease= term, I just wondered if it could be extended to 20 or 25 years.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: We talked about that, let me remind= you of what t= he agreement is for our property (inaudible) $1.00 a year and no term. 99 year lease for $1.00 a year but= it can be cancelled at any time. We were suggesting here as was requested by discussion that we had with the Chairman for 10 years and then when you want to put some improvement on the property (inaudible) at that time we can talk about something extended on that. Certainly it's understo= od that if you're going to be putting any improvements on the property there o= ught to be a fair amount of time for that to be there, but we did not want to ge= t into a longer term lease because in our judgment 10 years was as much as we coul= d think of that would not fall into the category of being a sale, and that's another public entity I'm confident that given this 10 years or 25 years, that the = 25 years (inaudible) sell that land for $25.00 so our judgment that anything beyond the 10 years would certainly (inaudible) given what the improvements= are going to be, but based on just what's here, it really becomes a sale and we didn't want that, we didn’t think that was in our District's interest= to sell land for 25 years or give land for 25 years for $25.00.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: In the interest of clarity, an= d I know that my memory does fail from time to time, but I believe when we were having this discussion I think the numbers that I threw, and I think Mr. Fr= igon was there, the numbers were obviously10 to 25 years, there were two numbers. Well the only other question that I would ask is that, not a question but an observation, we do already lease or rent something from the Fire District, Unico, for 99 years= for $1.00.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 58

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: 99 years for $1.00 a year with canc= ellation terms of the following year, we need to know (inaudible). So would we be willing to do that = kind of arrangement.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Well I'm not talking about anything beyond 25.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: Well I guess the whole issue is wha= t is the threshold of what becomes a sale and what becomes simply a lease, and at the judgment of those that were sitting on the Board a month ago that if we weren't going to (inaudible) land, we really want to be (inaudible) and certainly anything in our judgment above 10 years was in that threshold of selling the land, then you ought to be paying the fair market value of the = land which was (inaudible) so we're willing to give it for $1.00 a year for 10 y= ears, also willing that when you come back with whatever improvement is going to = be there, open up discussion to extend that fair amount of time. I certainly think that if you want= ed to go back to the table, but I don't think it's in the Town's interest (inaudi= ble) 99 years $1.00 a year with cancellation at any time, that would be certainly something we would consider, but I didn't think the discussion even when I = was hearing maybe the improvements on the property was being fair to you.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: This gives us time to get our appreciation so to speak on any improvements that we might put into the property.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kane: I think it was the Town Manager tha= t suggested 10 years.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: After discussions with (inaudible)= .

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: So the only question that I had was= with respect to Item #8, did we have a structural report on that bridge?

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: Yes, we do, as part of the brook analysis.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &= nbsp; Mr. Pawlak: I'd like to see that, to make sure = there is no problem. It also talks = about Winter months, plowing, there would be no activity the= re anyway during that timeframe.

= ; &n= bsp; Mr. Minnich: (Inaudible.)

= ; &n= bsp; Mr. Pawlak: The only other th= ing we have to talk about is the parking improvements need to be defined in the le= ase; what was your thinking there, Dave?

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 59

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Minnich: Well as you know when you get arou= nd Roma's, the issue and the observation was that if there are going to be tim= es when both Unico Field is going to be used and this field is going to be use= d, there is definitely going to be inadequate parking, and at times there is inadequate parking now when WAYS Soccer group uses Unico Field, so that was= an observation that parking is a problem and before it becomes even more of a problem with whatever is going to be there, that all should be looked at .<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> We didn't have any discussion in t= erms of (inaudible) and if you're going to be able to use it, people are going to need a place to park, the observation was (inaud= ible). Tough to park = there now.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; N. Consider Setting a Public Hearing Date, Time, and Place to hear comments on the Prop= osed Sale of Town property located at 0 Artillery Road and 0 Flintlock Road, 720 Echo Lake Road, and Baldwin School

<= o:p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Mancini, sec. Mr. Walton) to set a Public Hearing to be held on October 15, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. at the Watertown High School Technology Room to hear comm= ents on the proposed sale of Town property located at 0 Artillery Road and 0 Flintlock Road, 720 Echo Lake Road, and Baldwin School.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion:&nbs= p; None

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

&= nbsp; O. Consider an Appropriation from the General Fund for the Emergency Purchase of Five (= 5) Inch Water Supply Hose as required by the Watertown Fire Department (additional information will be available at the meeting)

<= o:p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Mancini, sec. Mr. Walton) to Appropriate $24,628= from the General Fund for an emergency funding of the purchasing of large diamet= er 5 inch fire hose.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion:&nbs= p; Chief Black: We have approximat= ely 40 to 45 links of 5" hoses, this is our primary water supply line for just about any type of structure fire or (inaudible) fire. It comes in 100 foot lengths. We are required to t= est it by ISO, the insurance services organization, and then at (inaudible) which = we do every Fall.&= nbsp; Last week we started testing it, we tested 22 links of 100 foot leng= ths and 16 failed. We have again = (inaudible) older hose on the rest of our trucks which we have not tested yet, we're pr= etty confident on (inaudible) that this bizarre situation is going to continue.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> We talked to the manufacturer, they don't have a real good explanation for us other than to say it should = be replaced every 10 years, which they have never informed us prior to this.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 60

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; We looked at the State contract for a price and then we looked elsewhere at another manufacturer, and found that we could get it for about $10,000 chea= per if we did not use the State contract which is why one of the things we're asking for, we require is if we could get a bid waiver if you do approve th= is purchase so that we could move forward and do this quickly. Right now our water supply line, t= he supply is at half of what we normally have. There is a reference in here about= the prior (inaudible) last year where we used about 3,300 feet of hose and right now we don't have that hose to use if we have another fire in that type of situation. So this is, to us,= an emergency. I don’t have= a good explanation as to why this is happening, other than just (inaudible) d= ry rot, whatever you want to call it. <= /span>There is a liner within a liner on this hose, it's separating, pulling apart; we didn't even bring its test pressure last week and it was leaking, as soon a= s we put 25-50 lbs. of pressure on it; we have to test it at 200 lbs.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: What's the warranty or guaranty?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Chief Black: The warranty on the new hose, from= the supplier where this hose came from is one year; from the company that we're looking at purchasing it from is 2 years.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kane: How often do you test this?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Chief Black: Once a year.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kane: And this is the first time it's ev= er come up?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Chief Black: Last year when we tested it we had= one link that leaked, we had a couple we had a recall on, t= his is the first time we've ever experienced what's happening with the hose rig= ht now.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kane: You also mentioned in here that yo= u had budgeted $12,000 from the firefighting equipment, so aren't you not replaci= ng hose every year?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Chief Black: The large diameter hose we have no= t, we've added a link here, a link there as we had some damaged in fires and that's mostly external damage, cutting through the (inaudible) that type of thing. We had that $12,000 in= the budget this year to begin to replace it, because our oldest hose is 17 years old. The large diameter hose,= although it's 17 years old, we are not as experienced with it as far as life expecta= ncy. Ray could tell you some of our 3&q= uot; hose, 2.5" hose that we use for hand lines is close to 40 years old an= d we test it every year and it's fine, so we have no idea that at 14 years old t= his hose was going to do what has happened.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 61

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Is all of the hose that we have in= this category of the same manufacturer?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Chief Black: Yes, it is.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: So we can expect that this is goin= g to continue to (inaudible)?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Chief Black: That is why we held off testing th= e rest of it although if we use it on a fire and it happens, it's even more catastrophic.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: What's the availability of this ho= se that you're looking for? How = many are you looking for?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Chief Black: 42 lengths of the 100 foot and then there's some shorter (inaudible) that connect the trucks to the hydrants.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: The availability?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Chief Black: I'm told probably 3 or 4 weeks, if= we get it ordered tomorrow.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: And this is manufactured by the subsidiary Mercedes.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Chief Black: Yes, Mercedes Hose.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: We have to Ame= nd the Agenda to Add a Bid Waiver.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Primini: I'll attest to what Larry said abo= ut the Carah's fire, that's the area where we don't have water down there. (Tape #4, Side A ended - may have missed some).

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; MOTION: (Mr. Mancini, sec. Mr. Walton) to Add Agenda Item 10Q, Approve a Bid Waiver for the purchase of a fire hose.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; Discussion: None<= /p>

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

&= nbsp; P. = Consider Setting Goals and Objectives for the Town Manager

<= o:p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: Do you want to put this to the end= so people can go home?

<= o:p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Yea that's a good idea. We'll skip over this for a second.=

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 62

Mr. Pawlak, Chairman, skipped this item as well as Item 11, and proceeded to Ag= enda Item 10Q.

Mr. Pawlak, Chairman, returned to this portion of the meeting after the discuss= ion regarding Executive Session not being needed this evening.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Are you leaving, Elaine?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Adams: Yes. (Time was 11:27 p.m.)

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Goals and Objectives for the Town = Manager. Everybody got a copy of this, I be= lieve?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kane: Do you have any extra copies?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: Okay, I'll tell you what. We're going to really speed this u= p, because some of our members don't have the copies, so we're just going to T= able it until the next session.

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:2'> &= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Mancini, sec. Mr. Walton) to Table the Goals and Objectives for the Town Manager until the next Town Council meeting.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: None<= /p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

&= nbsp; Q. Bid Waiver for the Purchase of a Fire Hose

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Mancini, sec. Mr. Walton) to Approve a Bid Waive= r for $36,628 from Gowans & Knight for a fire hose.

&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion:&nbs= p; None

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

Mr. Pawlak, Chairman, skipped Item 11, and proceeded to Agenda Item 12, Public Participation.

&n= bsp;

11.&n= bsp; Executive Session

Mr. Pawlak, Chairman, returned to this portion of the meeting after Public Participation.

&= nbsp; A. Biello v. Town of Watertown

&= nbsp; B. = John Trumbull School Litigation S= tatus

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 63

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: Mr. Biello left and asked that we = put his item on the next Agenda due to the time. Trumbull School, Atty. Krug is not here.

= ; &n= bsp; Mr. Rinaldi: Mr. Biello wants= to be placed on the next Agenda? Wh= y?

= ; &n= bsp; Mr. Frigon: He wants to plead= his case.

&nbs= p;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Rinaldi: Yea, but is it wise to have the per= son that's suing the Town here to argue his case? That's bad business; that's a no/n= o.

&nbs= p;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Nardelli: Usually if he requests that, it's = in open session.

&nbs= p;

&= nbsp; = ; Mr. Frigon: We can do it in o= pen session as well, or have him here. Well we won't have him here, Paul, we'll = just let him know that . . . .

&nbs= p;

&= nbsp; = ; Mr. Pawlak: And there's nothi= ng on Trumbull School?

&nbs= p;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Frigon: No.

&nbs= p;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Pawlak: So Executive Session is not needed= .

&nbs= p;

&= nbsp; Mr. Pawlak, Chairman, returned to Agenda Item 10P at this time.

<= o:p>

12.&n= bsp; Public Participation

Bob LaBonne, 639 Straits Turnpike,= Watertown, CT 06795=

Mr. LaBonne: I just want to thank you for listen= ing tonight with open ears and it's 11:25 p.m. so I = thank you for volunteering to help make our Town better and doing the right thing= .

Mark Worenko, Platt Road, Watertown, CT <= st1:PostalCode w:st=3D"on">06795

Mr. Worenko: I don’t come to meetings that often, but my God, that's a lot of time you guys donate to Watertown. Thank you very much.

Mr. Pawlak, Chairman, Closed Public Participation at 11:26 p.m.

Mr. Pawlak, Chairman, returned to Agenda Item 11, Executive Session at this tim= e.

Watertown Town Council

Regular Meeting

October 1, 2007

Page 64

13. Adjournment

= ; MOTION: (Mr. = Mancini, sec. Ms. Plowman) to Adjourn the Regular Meeting at 11:29 p.m.

<= /span>Discussion: None<= /p>

<= /span>MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

<= /span>Regular Meeting Adjourned at 11:29 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Joseph Pawlak, Chairman

Watertown Town Cou= ncil

Approved: _______________________________

Lynn M. LaF= orme, Clerk

WATERTOWN HIGH SCHOOL

TECHNOLOGY CENTER

3. Pledge of Allegi= ance