741 Colonel Ledyard Highway

Ledyard, Connecticut 06339-1551

(860) 464-3203

TOWN OF LEDYARD

Town Council

council@ledyardct.org

Meeting Minutes

Chairman S. Naomi

Rodriguez

Regular Meeting

Wednesday, February 14, 2024

7:00 PM

Town Hall Council Chambers

CALL TO ORDER

IC.hairman Rodriguez called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. at the Council Chambers,

Town Hall Annex Building.

Chairman Rodriguez welcomed all to the Hybrid Meeting. She stated for the members of

the Town Council and the Public who were participating via video conference that the

remote meeting information was available on the Agenda that was posted on the Town’s

Website - Granicus-Legistar Meeting Portal.

II.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ROLL CALL

III.

Councilor April Brunelle

Councilor Jessica Buhle

Councilor Carmen Garcia-Irizarry

Councilor Gary Paul

Present:

Chairman S. Naomi Rodriguez

Councilor Tim Ryan

Councilor Tony Saccone

Councilor Gary St. Vil

Councilor Kevin Dombrowski

Excused:

IV.

PRESENTATIONS

Martin Luther King Jr. Essay Scholarship Recipients Ledyard High School Students

Mackenzie Hope and Felix Adrian Beltre.

Chairman Rodriguez stated for tonight’s presentations that she was honored and so proud

to recognize Ledyard High School’s Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Scholarship Recipients:

Mackenzie Hope and Felix Adrian Beltre. She stated on the evening of October 19, 2023,

at the Mystic Marriott, the Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Scholarship Fund held its annual

awards ceremony. This program recognizes greatness in high school seniors by awarding

students scholarship money who live and work in the ways of Dr. Martin Luther King’s

legacy. The Ledyard Town Council was honored to have Mackenzie Hope and Adrian

Beltre here this evening to read their winning essays. Chairman Rodriguez invited Adrian

Beltre to come up to the podium to read his essay.

Mr. Adrian Beltre read his essay as follows:

“In today's modern society, we live in a country that values its weapons more than the

lives of innocent children. We live in a country where kids consistently wake up with the

unnerving thought, "Is today the day that my school is going to be shot up next?" We live

in a country where we can only feel anticipation towards another mass shooting, with true

shock becoming rare to find, where teachers plan escape routes more than learning

activities. Will it ever end? That is what I am thinking about. That is what my entire

generation is thinking about. That is what the families of what would have been the Class

of 2024 in Sandy Hook, Connecticut along with other families from Uvalde, Nashville,

and countless other areas are thinking about.

This June I will be graduating from Ledyard High School ready to officially start my life

full of opportunity. All I will hear is the cheering from the families, see the bright smiles

from my classmates, and feel the diploma resting in the grasp of my hands, but what I will

be truly experiencing is nothing but pure guilt. I'll be thinking about the families of the

Sandy Hook victims who were robbed of the joyful experience of seeing their child

graduate in 2024. I'll be thinking about victims of these repeated tragedies and how they

won't be able to take pictures with their graduates, nor brag about how much they love

their child and how proud they are of them. I'll be thinking about the future, where

millions of other families of school shooting victims will never see their child graduate

with the uncertainty of which family's child will fall next to gun violence if we only send

thoughts and prayers. This is not what America stands for.

So, where do we go next? We as a society can change this future, it doesn't have to be full

of anticipation anymore. We must actively support and fund Organizations working to end

gun violence. We must vote at the local, state, and national levels for candidates that will

work tirelessly to place stricter gun laws into effect while drafting our own bills to be sent

to our local legislators. Gun violence must end now, for the sake of our future and future

generations.

Chairman Rodriguez invited Ms. Mackenzie Hope to the podium to read her essay.

Ms. Mackenzie Hope read her essay as follows:

“Florida’s refusal to implement Advanced Placement (AP) African America History has

raised concerns about the state’s commitment to diverse narratives. Because what is

African American History if it was not American History. Finding a solution to this

problem, can teach about equity and equality in an educational setting from the

beginning stages and early years of life. Florida’s resistance to this course of study

perpetuates a void in students understanding of African American experiences. This

decision hinders progress towards an inclusive environment. Governor Ron DeSantos’s

statement about Critical Race Theory teaches kids to hate their country and each other is

very misguided, because Critical Race Theory provides an important lenses to examine

systematic racism and its impact. Promoting a more comprehensive education that

acknowledges the complex realities of our society. Dr. King accurately noted “Nothing in

all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity”.

Efforts should be made by teachers, policy makers, and community members to raise

awareness about the importance of inclusive education, highlighting the significance of

the contributions of African Americans throughout history to avoid any of this ignorance.

Community organizations and schools can collaborate to develop and promote

curriculum frameworks that incorporate African American History and to the broader

narrative of American History. Florida’s refusal of African American History necessitates

a change, it means engaging in meaningful dialogue, challenging misconceptions, and

advocating for more comprehensive education. As Dr. King said: “The time was always

right to do what is right”. Florida must reassess its stance and take steps toward more

inclusive education, that is where we go from here.”

The Town Council and audience applauded the students for a job well done.

Chairman Rodriguez stated that the Ledyard Town Council was so proud of both the

students, and she recognized that their families were immensely proud of them as well.

She stated that their essays were outstanding and that they definitely deserved the

recognition and scholarships. She thanked both Mr. Beltre and Ms. Hope for serving their

community in many different ways and that she knew they both had bright futures ahead.

She thanked the Students for coming out tonight, noting that the Town Council applauded

them.

READ INTO THE RECORD

RESULT:

Due to technology issues with the Owl, the Town Council recessed the meeting:

Entered into Recess at : 7:16 p.m.

Came out of Recess at 7: 28 p.m.

Chairman Rodriguez called the meeting back to order at 7:28 p.m. and thanked everyone,

especially those attending remotely via Zoom, for their patience’s as they worked to get the

equipment back on-line

RESIDENT & PROPERTY OWNERS (COMMENTS LIMITED TO THREE (3)

MINUTES

Ms. Betsy Graham, 72A Long Pond Road, South, Ledyard, thanked the Town Council

for the opportunity to address them this evening. She stated that she was representing the

Lantern Hill Valley Association (LHVA) to appeal to the Town to ask that they include

Five Thousand dollars in the upcoming Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Budget to be used toward

funding a $15,000 PILOT Program to develop a Sustainable Boat Launch Monitoring

Program at the Long Pond State Boat Launch. She stated that the Lantern Hill Valley

Association has also made the same request to the Town of North Stonington.

Mrs. Graham provided some background explaining that Long Pond and Bush Ponds

were valuable public resources shared by both the towns of Ledyard and North

Stonington. She stated that the Connecticut Department of Energy & Environmental

Protection (DEEP) has maintained the Public Boat Launch on Long Pond for over 70

years. She stated in the 1600-1700s the stream which flowed through the three Lantern

Hill Valley glacial kettle ponds was dammed, making our lakes. She stated the stream

that joined these ponds, now known as Whitford Brook, became the border of four towns

as it flows south to the Mystic River. The LHVA has owned the primary dams at Long

Pond and Bush Pond for over fifty years; and the McKee Farm Trust owned a dike on the

east side of Bush Pond.

Ms. Graham continued by noting in 2016 the CT Agricultural Experiment Station

(CAES) identified an aggressive aquatic invasive plant in the Connecticut River, which

was now being referred to as the CT River Hydrilla. She stated using Deoxyribonucleic

Acid (DNA) typing that the CT Agricultural Experiment Station (CAES) identified that

the plant was a new Hydrilla Clade, or subtype. She stated that the CT Agricultural

Experiment Station (CAES) was working with the Army Corp of Engineers to see if

there was an herbicide that would be effective in slowing/stopping the plant’s rapid

growth. The plant was an aggressive grower, outcompeting all aquatic plant life, noting

that it grows in shallow to deep waters, deoxygenating the water it was growing within,

impacting fish and all aquatic life. The plant was also tolerant of salty waters, and was

being found as far south as Essex and as far north up to Agawam, Massachusetts. She

stated locally there was a real worry that the Hydrilla might spread the entire length of

the Connecticut River, noting that initially, it was thought to only be a concern only

locally, however, in the past few years it has been found to be a serious concern for all

Connecticut lakes and rivers because boats have been transporting Hydrilla fragments

between these water bodies.

Mrs. Graham went on to state that there were at least six lakes that have Hydrilla, noting

among those was the Amos Lake which was in our backyard, as it was only 5-miles from

Long Pond. She stated this past fall (2023) Hydrilla was discovered near the Long Pond

State Boat Launch during an Aquatic Plant Survey. She noted that the CT DEEP

Fisheries believe there was a strong correlation with boaters involved in tournaments on

the Connecticut River who also attend tournaments held in local lakes, consequently

transporting Hydrilla fragments between these water bodies. Therefore, she stated the

Lantern Hill Valley Association (LF

HVA) and the Residents of Long Pond and Bush Pond were very concerned about the

environmental and financial impacts the introduction of Hydrilla would have on our

lakes.

Mrs. Graham stated in February, 2024, with the support of the Alliance for the Mystic

River Watershed, they submitted a CT Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) Grant Application

to support a Boat Launch Outreach Program. She stated the Program offered educational

materials and volunteer examinations for invasive plants or animals on boating and

fishing equipment of each boat launch user, which included motorboat or paddle craft,

entering or leaving the water, or fishing from the shore. The Program required Volunteers

to attend a two-hour Invasive Investigator Program conducted through the CT DEEP

Boat Launch Program to learn how to approach boaters, engage them, and help them

learn about the best boating practices. The Volunteers would also learn about the

identification of aquatic invasive plants in a one-hour Invasive Plant Workshop offered

through the Invasive Aquatic Plant Department of CAES.

Mrs. Graham went on to explain in submitting their CT Aquatic Invasive Species Grant

Application that Lantern Hill Valley Association (LHVA) developed a Program that

would provide coverage on weekend and holidays from mid-June to mid-September,

with two five-hour shifts, staffed by two people working together each day. The Program

would be made up of both volunteers and a core of paid staff to work alongside the

volunteers, with a coordinator. She noted that they planned to reach out to the numerous

volunteers of the Alliance for the Mystic River Watershed who expressed interest in

water quality, to our community organizations, youth groups, and fishing groups to

explain what and why we were going to be at the Long Pond State Boat Launch and how

they could support and benefit from the project.

Mrs. Graham explained that the goal of the Program was to present information about

Best Boating Practices to the public, noting that their boating behaviors could either have

a positive or negative impact on the ecology of all our water bodies; and that it was up to

us to protect them. She stated although the Boat Launch Outreach Grant Program was a

startup program; that the Lantern Hill Valley Association’s Plan was to develop

Sustainable Boat Launch Monitoring Program at the Long Pond State Boat Launch;

whether it be this year or next year. She stated that there may be hiccups along the way,

but that she believed by having boat launch monitors on-site that it would send a message

to the public that we care, and it would generate caring in return. She stated that it was

essential for the welfare of our lakes to develop this community-wide endeavor. She

concluded by thanking the Town Council for their time this evening, and she offered to

answer questions.

Chairman Rodriguez questioned whether the $5,000 CT Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS)

Grant Application was different from the Boat Launch Monitoring Program at the Long

Pond State Boat Launch. Mrs. Graham explained that the State collected about $400,000

from the Boat Registration Fees, which included an additional $5.00 for the Aquatic

Invasive Species (AIS) Program, to offer grant funding to lake associations, and

municipalities that were struggling with any component of invasive plants, noting that

the grant funding could be used for: (1) Outreach - to educate the public about invasive

plants; (2) Control or Management - this was typically herbicide treatments; or (3)

Research. Ms. Graham stated the Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) Grant they applied for

was only good for one year; and if received the Lantern Hill Valley Association would

use the funds to start the Boat Launch Monitoring Program this summer. However, she

stated that the Association wanted the Boat Launch Monitoring Program to be sustained,

which was the reason she has come to the Town Council to perhaps have an opportunity

to speak with the Finance Committee to consider including $5,000 for Boat Launch

Monitoring Program in the Town’s General Fund Budget for next year (Fiscal Year

2024/2025).

Chairman Rodriguez noted that the Lantern Valley Hill Association received grant

funding in the past and she questioned how those funds were used. Mrs. Graham stated

the Lantern Hill Valley Association was a volunteer-based group, noting that their

membership fee was $25.00. She stated in 2020 they received a combined total of $2,200

from the Towns of Ledyard and North Stonington to conduct the first Aquatic Plant

Study.

Councilor Ryan stated that Mrs. Graham indicated that the Aquatic Invasive Species

(AIS) Grant was a one-time allotment, therefore, he questioned whether they could

reapply each year for the Grant, noting that the Lantern Hill Valley Association wanted

the Boat Launch Monitoring Program to be an on-going program. Mrs. Graham stated

that the Lantern Hill Valley Association could reapply, however, she stated that there

were a lot of lake associations that apply for these grant funds. She stated the Grant

awards ranged from $10,000 - $75,000, noting that some larger lakes such as

Candlewood Lake located in Fairfield and Litchfield county were always applying for the

Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) Grant, therefore, the $400,000 can be quickly used up.

She stated that the Lantern Hill Valley Association with the Alliance for the Mystic River

Watershed’s support submitted an Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) Grant Application that

was just under $15,000. She noted that there were also other grant opportunities such as

the Community Foundation of Southeastern Connecticut who provide funding for

environmental initiatives. She stated because the receipt of grant funding was always

uncertain, that the Lantern Hill Valley Association thought that it would make sense to

try to secure some funding that was definitive. She stated because they were just

beginning the Boat Launch Monitoring Program that they were not sure how it would

work, noting that some lake associations have hired boat monitors staffing, because they

did not have enough of a volunteer base.

Councilor Ryan noted that Mrs. Graham stated that she has submitted the same $5,000

request to North Stonington, therefore, he stated if both towns (Ledyard and North

Stonington) were to allocate the funds that the Lantern Hill Valley Association would

still have a $4,000 deficit. Mrs. Graham stated that the Lantern Hill Valley Association

was also doing some fundraising efforts and hoped that perhaps other organizations such

as the Lions may provide some funding to support the Boat Launch Monitoring

Program. She stated the Lantern Hill Valley Association was working to apply for a

501(c)3 to be recognized by the Internal Revenue Services (IRS) as being tax-exempt,

and hoped that by next year they would have obtained the 501(c)3 status, noting that

having a 501(c)3 status would change what they would be able to do. Councilor Ryan

stated when Mrs. Graham attended the Finance Committee that the details that she

discussed this evening along with other information would be helpful such as: (1) Does

the grant funding need to be spent right-a-way; (2) Was there an expiration date as to

when the funding needed to be spent; (3) Does the grant funding need to be used for

specific purposes, other than what she presented this evening. He thanked Mrs. Graham

for bringing this information to the Town Council’s attention.

Councilor Saccone questioned the process should the Boat Monitor find a boat or

equipment that was contaminated. Mrs. Graham stated the Invasive Investigator Program

would teach the Boat Monitors how to approach boaters, engage them, and help them

learn about the best boating practices. She stated that if they found invasive fragments

that they were supposed to take them off the boat/equipment and put them on the ground

way above the waterline in a pile where they would defecate. However, she stated if a

boat owner said the Volunteer Boat Monitor could not look at their boat, even if they saw

a plant on the boat, that they would have to step back. She stated there was a $90 fine for

transporting invasive plants, noting that the State had about 12 - 15 paid volunteers that

visit boat launches. However, she noted that the State’s volunteers would most likely be

at the bigger, more popular lakes and would not be visiting Long Pond in Ledyard.

Therefore, she stated that the state was counting on volunteers to help get the message

out, noting that if no one was inspecting the boats that they could not educate the boaters

about the invasive plants or impose the fine. She stated ideally having a boat washdown

station, as they do in the Adirondacks, would be the best approach. However, she stated

they were having a problem in Connecticut with figuring out how boat washdown

stations would work.

Chairman Rodriguez thanked Mrs. Graham for her presentation this evening; and she

referred the Lantern Hill Valley Association’s appeal for the Town to include $5,000 in

the upcoming Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Budget to be used toward funding a $15,000

PILOT Program to develop a Sustainable Boat Launch Monitoring Program at the Long

Pond State Boat Launch to the Finance Committee.

Mr. Eric Treaster, 10 Huntington Way, Ledyard, stated he was present this evening to

express his concerns regarding New Business Item #2 on tonight’s Agenda for which the

Town Council would presumably intend to "acknowledge" increases in the Building

Permit Fees.

Mr. Treaster noted the following four concerns with acknowledges the new Building

Permit Fees:

(1) Underlying Premise:

Mr. Treaster stated the rationale provided for the Permit Fee increase was that the

current fees nolonger accurately reflected today's prices. However, he stated that

this was not true because the cost or price of operating the Town’s Land Use

Department was unrelated to the number of Building Permits it issued.

(2)

Amount of the New Fee:

Mr. Treaster stated the current permit fee was $10.26 per $1,000 of construction

value. However, he stated that home values tend to increase each year, which

would mean that the amount of the Building Permit Fees collected by the Town

would increase by the same percentage. He noted as an example that the Building

Permit Fee on a $300,000 new house was currently $3,078.00. Next year,

assuming a 5% increase in home values due to inflation, the value of an

equivalent new house would be about $315,000, and the amount collected by

the Town would be $3,232.00 under the existing Fee Structure, providing an

increase of $154.00 without changing the Fees.

Mr. Treaster went on to state that the proposed Building Fee for new construction

would increase from $10.26 per $1,000 of value to $15.00 per $1,000 of value.

Therefore, he stated the 50% increase would increase the current $3,078.00 fee on

a $300,000 house to a 4,725.00 fee next year for an equivalent house, which would

be a 46% year-over-year increase. He stated that a 46% increase in government

fees would cause several unintended consequences.

Mr. Treaster stated that people buy less of something when

that

something

becomes more expensive. He stated builders require a reasonable return on

their investment risk, cost, and effort, and that some builders may find that

development in Ledyard would be too costly and decide to build elsewhere. The

fee increase could mean less new construction and less tax revenue coming into

the town coffers, harming all taxpayers.

(3) Fee increase would cause many projects, such as sheds, decks, and kitchen

remodeling, to be built without a permit.

Mr. Treaster stated that improvements must have a building permit to be taxed,

and if they were not taxed; they would not generate tax revenue. He questioned

whether the Town Council was sure that a 50% increasein the Building Permit Fee

Rate would increase town revenue, noting that he would suggest the opposite. He

stated that the Building Permit Fees should be as low as possible to encourage as

many Building Permits as possible, which would result in job creation, town

development, and increased tax revenues.

(4) Town Charter:

Mr. Treaster stated under the Town Charter, the Town Council had the authority to

establish and impose fees, but it does not have the authority to acknowledge fees

proposed by others. He noted specifically, the first paragraph of Chapter III;

Section 4 of the Town Charter stated: "…the legislative power of the Town shall

be vested exclusively in the Town Council…." He noted that the keyword was

"exclusively." stating that the Town Council cannot transfer its authority to

anyone, including town employees.

Mr. Treaster went on to note that the second paragraph of Chapter III; Section 4

stated: "...Town Council shall have the power to enact, amend, or repeal

ordinances." He stated that the Town Charter does not give the Town Council the

authority to "acknowledge" changes to an existing ordinance. He stated if the

Town Council wanted to change the Fees that the Town Council, and no one else,

must amend the ordinance.

Mr. Treaster continued by stating that most importantly, the last sentence of

Section 4 stated: "..Town Council may fix the charges, if any, to be made for

services rendered by the Town..."He noted that this provision meant that the

Town Council was required to establish the fees for services rendered by the

Town. He stated that the Town Council has no authority to "acknowledge" fees

that they did not establish.

Mr. Treaster concluded his remarks by urging the Town Council not to acknowledge the

receipt of the amended ordinance; but to instead use their legislative power under the Town

Charter to amend the ordinance and to adopt Building Permit Fees that would be in the best

interest of all town residents.

Chairman Rodrigeuz thanked Mr. Treaster for his comments.

VI.

COMMITTEE COMMISSION AND BOARD REPORTS

None.

VII. COMMENTS OF TOWN COUNCILORS

Councilor Paul thanked everyone for their coordinated efforts to get the Owl back up and

running this evening.

Councilor Brunelle wished everyone a Happy Valentines Day!; and thanked all those

who were attending tonight’s meeting, instead of being with their loved ones.

Councilor Ryan stated for those who have kids in school that he wanted to wish everyone

a nice February break and a Happy Presidents’ Day (Monday February 19, 2024). He

stated they were expecting to have good weather; and that he hoped everyone would be

safe and return to their daily schedules well rested.

Councilor Saccone recognized the passing of Mr. Mike McKernin (Turtle). He stated that

Mr. McKernin was a long standing- life member of the Ledyard Center Fire Company,

noting that Mr. McKernin was known from here to California. Councilor Saccone stated

that he attended the Fire Academy with Mr. McKernin and when they would walk into a

local establishment that folks would shout out Mike’s name. He stated Mr. McKernin

was an outspoken Fire Chief for the Ledyard Center Fire Department, noting the many

great years he served the Town.

Councilor Buhle Welcomed Home the Sailors of the USS California, who returned to

their families today after a 180-day deployment.

Councilor St. Vil thanked Chairman Rodriguez for inviting the Martin Luther King Jr.

Scholarship Recipients Ledyard High School Students Mackenzie Hope and Felix Adrian

Beltre to read their winning essays at tonight’s meeting. He stated it reminded him of

what President Barack Obama said:

“America is a constant work in progress, what gives each new generation purpose is to

take up the unfinished work of the last and carry it further, to speak out for what is right,

to challenge an unjust status quo, and to imagine a better world”.

Councilor St. Vil stated seeing the young folks come today and share their ideas and

perspectives reinvigorates President Obama’s statement in his mind and in his heart.

Councilor Garcia-Irizarry stated recently she met with Southeastern Connecticut

Resource Recovery Recycling Authority (SCRRRA) Director David Aldridge to discuss

composting as a way to reduce the amount of solid waste going to the landfills, and in an

effort to find solutions that would mitigate the disposal of trash issues that the State was

experiencing since the July, 2022 closing of the East Harford MIRA Facility (Materials

Innovation and Recycling Authority) causing 30 Municipalities to find other facilities.

She stated that SCRRRA has been working toward building Eastern Connecticut’s first

Commercial-Scale Food Scrap Compost Facility which would process about 5,000 tons

of waste. She stated on January 25, 2024, the Town of Preston’s Planning and Zoning

Commission approved SCRRRA’s Compost Facility site plan. She went on to report that

in addition, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) USDA recently

announced that SCRRRA was selected to receive funding through the Composting and

Food Waste Reduction (CFWR) Program. She stated the goal of removing the food

scraps from the waste stream would help to reduce the amount of solid waste tonnage

going to the landfills and help to reduce the tipping fees that municipalities pay. She

suggested the Town Council invite Southeastern Connecticut Resource Recovery

Recycling Authority (SCRRRA) Director David Aldridge to a Town Council meeting to

give a presentation regarding the new Compost Facility.

Councilor Garcia-Irizarry went on to state that she and Councilor Buhle were talking

about the meeting minutes and that they wanted to thank Administrative Assistant

Roxanne Maher for her work in transcribing the minutes. She stated the minutes that Ms.

Maher prepared were detailed and thorough. She stated none of the minutes that she

received from other Committees and Commissions were as detailed or as good as the

minutes Ms. Maher prepares.

Chairman Rodriguez wished everyone a Happy Valentines Day! She thanked everyone

for attending tonight’s meeting and volunteering their time to the community; and to the

Town of Ledyard.

VIII. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES

MOTION to approve the Town Council Regular Meeting Minutes of January 24, 2024

Moved by Councilor Buhle, seconded by Councilor Ryan

VOTE:

8 - 0 Approved and so declared

APPROVED AND SO DECLARED

RESULT:

IX.

COMMUNICATIONS

Communications List - February 14, 2024

Chairman Rodriguez stated a Communications List has been provided on the meeting portal

for tonight’s meeting and she noted there were referrals listed.

REFERALS

XI.

COUNCIL SUB COMMITTEE, LIAISON REPORTS

Administration Committee

Councilor Garcia-Irizarry stated the Administration Committee met earlier this evening and

addressed the following: (1) Proposed “An Ordinance Establishing a Farmers Market for

the Town of Ledyard”; and (2) Several new appointments and reappointments. She noted

these items would be included on the Town Council’s February 28, 2024 Agenda.

RESULT:

Community Relations Committee

Councilor Brunelle stated the Community Relations Committee met on January 17, 2024

and addressed the following: (1) Black History Month Activities/Contest - Councilor

Brunelle stated that Councilor St. Vil was handling the Essay and Poster Contests at the

schools; and that a Poetry Slam would be held at Lucille’s Restaurant in Ledyard Center on

Monday, February 19, 2024.

RESULT:

Finance Committee

Councilor Saccone stated the Finance Committee met on February 7, 2024. He stated in

addition to the one item on tonight’s Agenda the Committee also discussed the following:

(1) Public Act No.21-58 “An Act Concerning Solid Waste Management” in accordance with

“Resolution Regarding Revenues Received from Beverage Container (Nip Bottles)

Surcharges”- Councilor Saccone stated the Finance Committee continued to discuss the

Surcharge Revenues the Town has been and would continue to receive from the State and

ideas on how to use the funds; (2) American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Funding Project

List - Councilor Saccone stated the Committee agreed to be prepared to review the List of

ARPA Projects for the reallocation of surplus funds from completed ARPA Projects for

the consideration and prioritization of “Add-On Projects”; (3) Annual Audit Fiscal Year

Ending June 30, 2023 - Councilor Saccone stated the Town’s Auditors CliftonLarsonAllen,

LLP attended the Finance Committee meeting to deliver their report. He stated the Town

received a good report and that the Auditors made one recommendation.

RESULT:

Land Use/Planning/Public Works Committee

Councilor St. Vil stated the LUPPW Committee met on February 5, 2024 and discussed

the following: (1) Blight Report Updates; (2) Spicer Homestead relative obtaining a

historic designation; and (3) Building Permit Fees - Councilor St. Vil stated the LUPPW

Committee discussed the proposed revisions to the Building Permit Fee Schedule with

Director of Planning & Development Juliet Hodge. He stated that the Committee

approved to forward the Building Permit Fee Schedule to the Town Council for their

acknowledgement later this evening.

RESULT:

Housing Authority

Councilor Paul stated the Ledyard Housing Authority met on February 5, 2024 and

discussed the following: (1) Renovation Project - Councilor Paul stated the renovation

work to all of the apartment units have been completed. He noted that there were a few

Punch List items and warranty issues that were being addressed; (2) Meeting Venue -

Councilor Paul stated the Housing Authority issued a survey to the tenants asking them

how they would like the Board to conduct their meetings. He stated the following three

choices were presented: (1) Kings Corner Manor Community Room with audio (voice)

recording using loaned equipment from the Town, when the equipment was available; (2)

Purchase Zoom to use at

the Kings Corner Manor Community Room for a cost of $1,900+/- and the purchase of a

laptop computer to live stream and record the meeting; or (3) Move the meetings to the

Town Hall Annex and use the Zoom the town has to live stream and record the Meetings.

Councilor Paul stated that the Ballots need to be returned by February 20, 2024; and

would be counted on March 4, 2024, noting that tenants could only vote for one choice.

He stated the rents collected provided the Housing Authority’s money, noting that they

do not receive any subsidies. Therefore, the Board was looking to obtain the tenants input

relative to the cost of implementing each of the meeting options.

RESULT:

Permanent Municipal Building Committee

Councilor Brunelle stated the PMBC met on February 6, 2024 and received presentations

regarding the Juliet W. Long School Heating and Ventilation (HVAV) System from the

following Bidders: (a) Friar; (b) HF Lense; (c) Russell & Davidson; (d) Silver Petrucelli

& Associates. She stated two Bids were disqualified for the following reasons: one

Bidder did not follow the two-envelope stipulation; and the other Bidder did not seem to

understand the scope of the project. She stated because there was a significant difference

in the cost between the remaining two Bids the PMBC has requested clarification.

RESULT:

Gales Ferry Fire Department

Councilor Saccone stated the Digital Sign that was purchased with American Rescue

Plan Act (ARPA) Funding was installed in front of the Gales Ferry Fire Department on

Route 12, Gales Ferry. He stated the sign would be used to post messages for Emergency

Management such as Millstone Nuclear Drills, Impending weather/storms, Road

Closures due to accidents or other events, and the Fire Company’s business. He stated it

was a Town Sign, noting that the message could be changed very quickly, noting that

four people were authorized to change the message on the sign, using and App on their

cellphone.

Chairman Rodriguez questioned whether the Digital Sign in front of the Gales Ferry Fire

Company could be used to notify residents about town of referendums, and other

important town events. Mayor Allyn, III, stated “Yes” explaining that the sign would be

used for municipal purposes such as emergency situations like evacuation routes and to

alert the public of issues that Councilor Saccone noted. He stated the sign could also be

used for referendum votes, budget votes, etc. He stated per the Department of

Transportation (DOT) the sign could not be used for commercial purposes.

RESULT:

Ledyard Center Fire Department

Councilor Saccone stated the Ledyard Center Fire Company was awaiting the delivery of

their new Tanker. He stated the Tanker would hold 3,000 gallons of water, explaining

where they do not have fire hydrants in town that the Fire Departments needed to supply

the water.

RESULT:

Economic Development Commission

Councilor Buhle stated the EDC met on February 6, 2024 and discussed the following:

(1) Opening of Bark & Barley, Gales Ferry - Councilor Buhle stated that they held a soft

opening on Saturday, February 10, 2024 noting that she attended the event and it went

great; and (2) Route 12 Corridor Study - Councilor Buhle stated the Study would be

funded using American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Funding and was needed to later apply

for grant funding to make improvements to the Route 12 Corridor.

RESULT:

Inland Wetland and Water Courses Commission

10.

11.

Councilor St. Vil stated the IWWC met on February 6, 2024 and acknowledged the

receipt of a “Notification of a Timber Harvest” at 101 Sandy Hollow Road.

RESULT:

Planning & Zoning Commission

Councilor St. Vil stated the Planning & Zoning Commission cancelled their February 8,

2024 meeting. However, he noted that the Applicant for the excavation work at the former

Dow-Styrenics Site on Route 12, Gales Ferry, has withdrawn their Application. The Planning

& Zoning Commission would resume their meetings in the Council Chambers, Town Hall

Annex Building

RESULT:

Board of Education

12.

Councilor Garcia-Irizarry stated the Board of Education has held a number of meetings

including a Public Hearing regarding their proposed Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Budget. She

stated most of the Board of Education’s proposed 6.85% increase was contractual and

was related to salaries. She stated due to the snowstorm the Board of Education’s

February 13, 2024 meeting was rescheduled to February 15, 2024.

RESULT:

REPORT OF THE MAYOR:

XII.

Mayor Allyn, III, reported on the following: (1) Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Budget

Preparation - Mayor Allyn stated he conducted Budget Meetings with the Department

Heads in January. He stated based on the General Government’s proposed budget

numbers, as they stand right now, that they were looking at a 1.18 mil tax increase,

without the Board of Education’s proposed budget increase of 7.25%. He stated this was

his least favorite time of year to be in Town Hall because he was cutting all of the

Department’s budgets. However, he stated that they still had a long way to go with

working on the upcoming budget; (2) State Biannual Budget - Mayor Allyn stated

Governor Lamont has made a few adjustments to the second year of the State’s Biannual

Budget. He stated if approved by the Legislature that Ledyard would receive an additional

$280,000 as follows: (a) $110,000 for Education Cost Sharing (ECS); and (b) $130,000

for Motor Vehicle Tax Reimbursement. Mayor Allyn explained when a Municipality’s

mil rate exceeded the State’s Motor Vehicle Tax Cap that the State reimbursed the town

for the amount that was over the amount; (3) ARC of Eastern Connecticut Neighborhood

Assistance Act (NAA) Program - Mayor Allyn stated the Town of Ledyard received a

thank you letter from the ARC of Eastern Connecticut for our part in assisting them to

apply for and successfully receive the Neighborhood Assistance Act (NAA) Program. He

stated the NAA award was in the amount $26,872.00, which was comprised of donations

from Eversource and Jewett City Savings Bank, and allowed ARC to replace all the

windows at their Group Residence located at 1671 Center Groton Road, Ledyard, where

ARC provided assistance to people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. He

explained that the Neighborhood Assistance Act (NAA) Program provided a tax credit to

businesses that make donations to nonprofits for energy assistance related projects that

were approved by their local governments. He stated as part of the NAA Application

process the nonprofit was required to apply to the town in which the project would be

done, and all the Town had to do was hold a Public Hearing and endorse the project. He

stated that he was pleased the Ledyard was able to help ARC and its residents who reside

at 1671 Center Groton Road; (4) Southeastern Connecticut Council of Governments

(SCCOG) Legislative Committee January 29, 2024 Meeting - Mayor Allyn stated he

Chaired the meeting at which ten State Senators and State Representatives along with

fifteen Municipal Leaders were present. He stated although SCCOG had about eight items

on their Legislative Agenda that because the State’s Session was going to be a Short

Session this year, Senator Cathy Osten suggested they select their three top issues.

Therefore, Mayor Allyn stated the three items SCCOG put forward were: (i) Increase the

Heating Assistance Funding - Mayor Allyn stated last year the State had $30 million left

in heating assistance funding that had not been distributed by the end of the Legislative

Session, which people could have used. Therefore, he stated that SCCOG asked the

Legisature to immediately address the heating assistance funds at the beginning of the

Session on February 7, 2024. He stated the Legislation would be considering

appropriating $13 million for heating assistance; and that SCCOG hoped that the

Legislature would act soon, so that the heating assistance funds could be distributed to

those in need during the heating season; (ii) Continued improvements to reduce barriers to

sharing services between municipalities; and (iii) Increasing capacity at Bristol and

Lisbon Waste to Energy facilities. These two facilities were designed for a 2nd incinerator

and that the need was present; (5) February 13, 2024 Snowstorm - Mayor Allyn stated

yesterday’s snowstorm was only the second snowfall this season. He stated because the

Public Works Department had one plow that failed, others to pick up additional routes. He

also noted that there were a number of power outages due to downed trees on Gallup Hill

Road. He stated that Public Works worked quickly with the tree crews and with

Eversource to get the power back on; (6) Ledyard Interchurch Emergency Assistance

Fund (LICEAF) February 8, 2024 Meeting - Mayor Allyn stated LICEAF approved one

grant for energy assistance; (7) Two Bid Openings - Mayor Allyn stated the following bid

openings took place this week: Housing Rehabilitation Revolving Loan; and Bid

#2024-03 for the Nathan Lester House Exterior Rehabilitation; (8) Fiscal Year Ending

June 30, 2024 Annual Audit - Mayor Allyn stated as Councilor Saccone noted during his

Finance Committee report earlier this evening, the Town’s Auditors CliftonLarsonAllen,

LLP attended the Finance Committee’s February 7, 2024 meeting to deliver their report. He

stated the Auditors issued an Unmodified Opinion on the basic financial statements, which

was the best opinion available. He stated there were no internal control issues, no material

weaknesses, and no new deficiencies identified. In their Management Letter, CLA

recommended the town change from tracking capital assets like large trucks and fire

apparatus on Excel spreadsheets, to a capital asset tracking software instead. Mayor Allyn

stated there would not be a big difference in the results between using the Excel spreadsheet

or a capital asset tracking software, except that the capital asset tracking software would cost

the town $10,000 - $20,000 to implement; (9) School(s) Consolidation Improvement Projects

(Middle School & Gallup Hill School) Grant Funding - Mayor Allyn noted he met with

Senator Osten and the Department of Administrative Services (DAS) to discuss the release

of the next Progress Grant Payment in the amount of $8 million. He explained that the

State indicated that they would release the $8 million thirty-days after they received the

final body of evidence for the project that Colliers Project Leaders has been working to

prepare. He stated Colliers Project Leaders had more than 1,100 paid invoices ready to be

included in the town’s submittal packet to the State. He explained after the State released

the last Progress Payment in the amount of $8 million; that the next and final step would

be for the State to conduct their Project Audit before they released the 5% hold back; (11)

American Library Association Grant Application - Round II - Mayor Allyn noted at their

November 8, 2023 meeting the Town Council authorized the submission of Round II of

the Library Grant. He stated the award notifications were expected soon, noting that the

$20,000 would be used to purchase a new circulation and reference desk for the Bill

Library designed to meet ADA requirements and better serve individuals with disabilities.

Questions to the Mayor - None.

XIII. OLD BUSINESS

None.

XIV. NEW BUSINESS

General Business

MOTION to reject the Agreement between the Ledyard Board of Education and the Ledyard

Administrators’ Association, Ledyard, Connecticut for the period of July 1, 2024 through June

30, 2027; in accordance with CGS 10-153d(b).

Moved by Councilor Buhle, seconded by Councilor St. Vil

Discussion: Chairman Rodriguez provided some background regarding tonight’s motion. She

noted that the Ledyard Administrators Association (LAA) negotiated their contract with the

Board of Education’s Negotiation Committee last year, 2023. She explained per Connecticut

General Statute 10-153d(b) that “Within thirty days prior to the date on which the local or

regional board of education is to commence negotiations, such board of education shall

meet and confer with the board of finance in each town or city having a board of finance,

with the board of selectmen in each town having no board of finance and otherwise with the

authority making appropriations therein. A member of such board of finance, such board of

selectmen, or such other authority making appropriations, shall be permitted to be present

during negotiations pursuant to this section and shall provide fiscal information as may be

requested by the board of education”.

Chairman Rodriguez stated in 2023 Superintendent Hartling/Board of Education gave

notification about the LAA Negotiations to former Town Council Chairman Dombrowski.

She stated Chairman Dombrowski then notified the Town Council’s Finance Committee to

see if they would like to observe the LAA Negotiations. No action was taken, and an

observer was not sent. She explained per state statute the Town Council can, or cannot send

an observer, noting that it was the Town Council Chairman and/or the Finance Chairman’s

prerogative to decide.

Chairman Rodriguez continued by stating that the LAA Negotiations finished in 2023 and

the contract was signed at the very first newly elected Board of Education Members meeting

on December 19, 2023. She stated new Board of Education Chairman Alex Rode signed the

letter to Town Council on January 22, 2024; noting the new LAA Contract was submitted

and stamped on January 25, 2024 at the Town Clerk’s office.

Chairman Rodriguez stated in conducting town business going forward, the Town Council

respectfully requests that these types of notifications be provided in writing to ensure there

was a record of such notification, and to provide transparency relative to the opportunity for

a member of the Town Council, as the appropriation authority, to be present and provide

fiscal information during the process. She stated as elected officials working to make fiscally

responsible decisions to provide great schools and services to our residents, that we must be

mindful that in negotiating labor contracts with our dedicated staff, that we were also

committing our taxpayers’ dollars.

Chairman Rodriguez stated for this particular motion a “yes” vote was actually a “no” vote

and a “no” vote was actually a “yes” vote. Therefore, she explained: (1) To reject the

contract the Town Council would vote “yes”; (2) To approve the contract the Town Council

would vote “no”; and (3) If the Town Council does not act at all then the contract would

automatically be approved and go into effect within thirty days of the filing date of the

contract. She stated because the LAA Contract was filed in the Town Clerk’s Office on

January 25, 2024 the Town Council had until February 25, 2024 to act on the contract. She

stated the reason she included the LAA Contract on tonight’s agenda was because she

wanted to provide transparency relative to the Town Council’s participation in the process

and to put on record whether the Town Council agreed with the contract; or that they did not

agree with the contract.

Superintendent of Schools Jason Hartling, attending remotely, thanked Chairman Rodriguez

for explaining the oddity of the Motion. He stated Ledyard was fortunate to have a great

group of Administrators. He stated the Board of Education and Team of Administrators

worked hard to come to an agreement that had the best interest of the town and to

acknowledge the administrators. He stated the Board of Education supported the LAA

Contract and they hoped that the Twon Council would support the contract as well. He stated

the details of the contract were in the January 22, 2024 Transmittal Letter, noting that he

would be happy to answer questions.

Councilor Ryan stated he talked with former Board of Education Members who were

involved in the negotiation process. He stated they gave him confidence that the LAA

Contract was a compromise between the needs of the Administrators Association and the

Town.

By way of background the Terms of the LAA Contract:

Salary

· A total Salary increase of 9% over the three-year contract period:

· Year 1- total negotiated increase 3%

· Year 2- total negotiated increase 3%

· Year 3- total negotiated increase 3%

Insurance

· Year 1- .5% increase Employee share would be 20.5%

· Year 2- .5% increase Employee share would be 21%

· Year 3- 0% increase Employee share would be 21%

VOTE:

0 - 8 Motion Failed

MOTION FAILED

Jessica Buhle

RESULT:

MOVER:

Gary St. Vil

SECONDER:

Brunelle, Buhle, Garcia-Irizarry, Paul, Rodriguez, Ryan, Saccone, and St.

NAY:

Vil

Dombrowski

EXCUSED:

Land Use/Planning/Public Works Committee

MOTION to acknowledge proposed revisions to Appendix pertaining to Ordinance #300-003

“An Ordinance Establishing Permit Fees for New Construction, Alternation, Removal,

Demolition or Other Building Operation in the Town of Ledyard” as presented in the draft dated

January 23, 2024.

DRAFT: 1/23/2024 Ordinance #300-003

APPENDIX

TOWN OF LEDYARD

PERMIT FEE AND INSPECTION FEE SCHEDULE

NEW CONSTRUCTION, ALTERATION, REMOVAL, DEMOLITION OR OTHER

BUILDING OPERATIONS

BUILDING PERMITS & TRADE PERMITS FEES, WHICH INCLUDE ELECTRICAL

PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL

Ten Fifteen Dollars ($15.00) ($10.00) per Thousand Dollars ($1,000), or part thereof, of

estimated value based on the present cost of material and labor. Fee includes the State

Education fee of .26 per $1,000 of construction value.

CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY:

Ten Dollars ($10.00) (For Additions/New Homes/New Bathrooms or Bedrooms/Detached

Garages/Sheds > 200sf - Added to the initial Building Permit Fee at time of submission.)

DEMOLITION PERMITS:

For Residential structures, Two Percent (2%) Ten Dollars ($10.00) per Thousand Dollars

($1,000.00), or any part thereof, of value computed on the Assessor's fair market value of the

structure to be demolished.

For Commercial or Industrial structures Five Percent (5%) of value computed on the

Assessor's fair market value of the structure to be demolished.

APPLICATION FEES WILL NOT BE REFUNDED REGARDLESS OF PERMIT STATUS

OR OUTCOME

Acknowledged by the Ledyard Town Council on: ____________________

S. Naomi Rodriguez, Chairman

**************************************************************************

Revision: Appendix Acknowledged May 23, 1990; Acknowledged on October 28, 2020

History:

2024:

Paragraph 1: Increased Fee $10.00 to $15.00

Added: “Fee includes the State Education fee of .26 per $1,000 of construction value.”

Added New Paragraph: “Certificate Of Occupancy”

Demolition Permits Paragraph: Added the following langue: “For Residential structures,

Two Percent (2%)” “For Commercial or Industrial structures Five Percent (5%) of value

computed on the Assessor's fair market value of the structure to be demolished.”;

“Application fees will not be refunded regardless of permit status or outcome.”

Moved by Councilor Buhle, seconded by Councilor St. Vil

Discussion: Councilor Buhle stated that Ordinance #300-003 “An Ordinance Establishing

Permit Fees for New Construction, Alternation, Removal, Demolition or Other Building

Operation in the Town of Ledyard” prescribed the Establishment of Permit Fees. She also

noted that per Section 3.1 of the Building Code that the Building Official was authorized to

establish, by approved rules, a schedule of unit rates for buildings and structures of all use

groups and types of construction as classified and defined in Articles 1, 3 and 4 of the

Building Code.

Councilor Buhle went on to state as a member of the Land Use/Planning/Public Works

Committee and a member of the Finance Committee that she learned that the increase in the

Building Permit Fees would enable the Building Department to upgrade their software to

allow residents to submit and pay for Permit Applications on-line making the process easier

for residents and contractors, while also streamlining the workflow approval process for

employees. She also stated that Ledyard has not increased their Building Permit Fees in

five-years, and she noted in the past when they raised their fees that other towns followed

suite and raised their fees as well. Therefore, she stated that Ledyard was not increasing their

fees to an unreasonable amount.

Building Official Seumas Quinn, attending remotely, explained that stated the on-line Permit

software would make the process more accessible for residents, noting that they would not be

limited to only Town Hall business hours to apply for Building Permits.

Councilor St. Vil explained the Building Permit Fee Schedule included the following three

components: (1) Increase the Building Permit Fees; (2) Provide a tool that the Building

Department could use to identify appraisals that were not in-line with the actual building

project; and (3) Demolition Permit was being modified from $10.00 per $1,000 to 2% of

value computed on the Assessor's fair market value of the structure to be demolished.

Building Official Mr. Quinn stated that he agreed with Councilor St. Vil’s comments, noting

that the Building Department wanted to make sure that people were being honest when they

pull permits. Therefore, he stated using a square footage-based system would provide a good

guide for all staff.

Councilor Ryan acknowledged Mr. Treaster’s comments (see above VI. Residents And

Property Owners) stating that he also had concerns about keeping Ledyard affordable and

making sure that Ledyard was not pricing themselves out of the market. However, he stated

based on the history Mayor Allyn, III provided at the February 7, 2024 Finance Committee

meeting, that it seemed like Ledyard started at the middle of the pack five-years ago and as

time has gone on that the municipalities around us have increased their Building Permit Fees

in the same manor, putting Ledyard at the bottom once again. Therefore, he stated the

Building Official’s revised Fee Schedule provided in the draft dated January 23, 2024 would

put Ledyard back into the middle of the pack, noting that it would not make Ledyard the

most affordable place to build, however, it does not put them out of reach for anyone who

was planning to build new construction.

Councilor Ryan continued by providing clarification regarding the process, explaining that

the Town Council was not acknowledging Ordinance #300-001 “An Ordinance Establishing

Permit Fees for New Construction, Alternation, Removal, Demolition or Other Building

Operation in the Town of Ledyard”; but that they were acknowledging the Appendix to the

Ordinance, which was the Fee Schedule. He went on to explain the reasons the Building

Permit Fee Schedule was an Appendix was: (1) To allow the Building Official to update the

fees from time to time in accordance itwith the State Building Code, and (2) As an

Appendix they would not have to go through the expense of holding a Public Hearing. He

stated the Ordinance was initially established in 1970 as Ordinance #17; and he noted with

the Town Council’s 2017-2019 Ordinance Update Initiative that Ordinance #17 took on the

new number of #300-001; and the Fee Schedule was removed from the Ordinance itself and

attached as an Appendix. He stated tonight’s motion was not transferring power to the

Building Official, noting that the power had been transferred when the Ordinance was

initially adopted. Therefore, he stated that the Town Council’s action this evening was to

acknowledge the Building Permit Fee Schedule.

Councilor Garcia-Irizarry noted Mr. Treaster’s comment (see above VI. Residents and

Property Owners) pertaining to the assessed value of the home. Building Official Mr. Quinn

stated the Building Permit would be based on the construction cost to build the structure, and

not the assessed value of the home. He explained by using square footage of the structure

that it would help keep people honest when applying for the Building Permit. He noted that it

would provide a checks and balance noting that it would eliminate someone from saying that

a house that cost $150,000 to build was only going to cost $80,000 to build. He went on to

note that in addition to the Building Pemit that other permits pertaining to the electrical,

mechanical, and plumbing would also be required.

Councilor Garcia-Irizarry requested clarification with regard to the assessed value of a home,

noting that it was her understanding that the Town only conducted a revaluation to assess

property every five-years, not every year, as Mr. Treaster alluded to. Mayor Allyn stated that

the Town conducted a revaluation every five-years. However, he stated the assessed value of

a property did not have anything to do with the construction cost to build a new structure. He

also noted that the numbers Mr. Treaster mentioned in his examples were inherently flawed.

He stated most builders come in with a construction cost of $110,000 - $150,000; noting that

no one comes in with a construction cost of $350,000. He continued by addressing Mr.

Treaster’s comment regarding things such as sheds not obtaining a Building Permit. Mayor

Allyn stated if someone bought a shed from Home Depot, Lowes, Klotter Farms, Carefree

Sheds, etc. that the companies would not deliver the shed without an approved Building

Permit. Building Official Mr. Quinn noted a shed under 200 square feet (16X12) would only

require a Zoning Permit and Ledge Light Health District approval if it had septic and a well.

He stated anything over 200 square feet would require a Building Permit.

Councilor Buhle addressed Mr. Treaster’s comment (see above VI. Residents and Property

Owners) pertaining to making Ledyard unaffordable. She noted the background information

provided with the Building Official’s new Building Permit Fees indicated that the fees were

to offset the costs of the Building Department, noting that they were not generating more

revenue than it costs to operate the Department. However, she stated when the town chooses

not to raise fees to cover what that Department costs to operate, that they were then making a

determination for the taxpayers to take on that burden. Therefore, she stated by adjusting the

Building Permit Fee Schedule that they were saying that those using that program were

paying for that burden, not the taxpayers.

VOTE:

8 - 0 Approved and so declared

APPROVED AND SO DECLARED

Jessica Buhle

RESULT:

MOVER:

Gary St. Vil

SECONDER:

Brunelle, Buhle, Garcia-Irizarry, Paul, Rodriguez, Ryan, Saccone, and St.

Vil

AYE: