City of Meriden, CT - August 18, 2003 Minutes

THIS AGREEMENT, effective July 1, 2003, is entered into by and between the CITY OF MERIDEN, CONNECTICUT, a Municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Connecticut, acting herein through its City Manager, hereinafter referred to as the “CITY”, and HUNTER’S AMBULANCE SERVICE, INC., a Connecticut Corporation having a principal place of business in the City of Meriden, County of New Haven and State of Connecticut, hereinafter referred to as “HUNTER’S”, to provide primary ambulance service to the City of Meriden, upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth.

During the term of this Agreement HUNTER’S agrees to provide two ambulances at the paramedic level and/or EMT level with paramedic intercept services to the CITY to respond to “911” and emergency calls occurring within the boundaries of the CITY. The dispatched level of response shall be subject to principles of closest available unit first, and then by level of certification. The two ambulances shall be equipped and supplied to function at the designated level and shall be dedicated exclusively for service within the boundaries of the City of Meriden, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year. In the event federal or state statutes and/or regulations change with regard to the use of ambulances, HUNTER’S agrees to conform to said statutes and/or regulations.

HUNTER’S shall be responsible for providing suitable locations for said ambulances, subject to the approval of the CITY, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. The two ambulances required by this Agreement shall be available within the geographical limits of the City of Meriden at all times, one on each side, west and east, of the railroad Main Line located in the City, except when said vehicles are required for mutual aid, mass casualty or system status demands. During the term of this Agreement, HUNTER’S shall maintain its headquarters and main base of operations within the geographical limits of the City of Meriden. The City acknowledges and agrees that the present two locations used by HUNTER’S in the City of Meriden comply with the above requirement.

5. HUNTER’S shall provide the CITY with a written statistical analysis for the prior calendar quarter of all its emergency responses within the City of Meriden pursuant to this Agreement. Such quarterly reports shall contain, but not be limited to, the total number of calls for the period, the frequency of Priority 1 Emergency Calls and Priority 2 Emergency Calls during various times of the day, and for each call the response time, level of service provided, date, hour, and type of call. A summary page shall also be provided showing the percentage of total calls that generate a specified response time for the period of each call priority. The fourth quarter data shall also include an annual summary.

When an emergency ambulance is required for the transport of a CITY employee who has had an injury suffered in an accident arising out of or in the course of employment, and the CITY employee is entitled to worker’s compensation benefits from the CITY, the amount of the charge and payment for such emergency ambulance shall be a credit against the payments by the City required by this Article III so long as granting such credit is not in violation, or construed to be a violation, of any state, federal, or local laws, regulations or reimbursement standards. This Agreement contemplates that the CITY shall receive a maximum of ten (10) emergency transport credits per each yearly contract term, and credits shall not apply to the non-emergency transports of such CITY employees.

A CHANGE IN RESPONSE TIME FOR DOWNGRADED RESPONSE. If HUNTER’S has been dispatched on an Emergency Call, but prior to ambulance arrival on scene, an authorized member of the CITY’S Fire or Police Department(s) trained to the Medical Response Technician level or higher who is on-scene as a First Responder notifies the CITY’S dispatcher that the ambulance should proceed “with the flow of traffic,” then that message shall be communicated by the CITY’S dispatcher to HUNTER’S dispatcher who shall communicate directly to the responding ambulance. The responding ambulance shall then proceed without emergency lights and siren, and the response time shall be subject to the Priority Two (2) emergency time standards as defined in Article V, Paragraph B of this Agreement.

CHANGE IN RESPONSE TIME FOR UPGRADED RESPONSE. If HUNTER’S has been dispatched on a Non-Emergency Call, but prior to ambulance arrival on scene either (a) the CITY’S dispatcher receives additional information indicating a life-threatening condition may exist on this call, or (b) an authorized member of the CITY’S Fire or Police Department(s) trained to the Medical Response Technician level or higher who is on-scene as a First Responder notifies the CITY’S dispatcher that the ambulance should proceed in “emergency mode,” then that message shall be communicated by the CITY’S dispatcher to HUNTER’S dispatcher who shall communicate directly to the responding ambulance. The responding ambulance shall then proceed with emergency lights and siren, and the response time limit set out in this agreement shall apply from the time HUNTER’S dispatcher notifies the responding ambulance of the status change for that particular call.

NON-COMMITTED STANDBY SERVICES. HUNTER’S shall respond and provide non-committed standby service within the agreed upon service areas to calls approved in advance by the City Manager and placed by the Director of Health, the City Manager, the Superintendent of Schools, or the Director of Public Works, Parks & Recreation for an ambulance to be present at athletic events, school events, and civic events. A schedule of said events shall be mutually agreed to on a quarterly basis by HUNTER'’ and the CITY not less than thirty (30) days in advance of each calendar quarter.

HUNTER’S agrees to cooperate with the Police, Fire and Health Departments of the CITY to work actively together with such Departments for the benefit of the citizens. So long as it is not in conflict with its service obligations, HUNTER’S agrees to provide periodic orientations with emergency personnel within the CITY, including, but not limited to the Police and Fire Departments; upon the CITY’S request and in conjunction with other CITY resources, HUNTER’S agrees provide, at mutually agreeable locations, dates and times, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) seminars and re-certification courses for CITY employees up to three times per year. HUNTER’S recognizes its role in the community as a public health and safety provider and agrees to host and perform public education events, including but not limited to, tours and ambulance, first aid and CPR demonstrations, so long as they are not in conflict with HUNTER’S service.

HUNTER’S shall designate a management person to respond to complaints filed by users who are residents of or visits to the CITY. A copy of all written complaints relating to service within the CITY, which complaints are filed by users, shall be forwarded to the CITY within ninety-six (96) hours of receipt of same by HUNTER’S, and a report and investigation and response to said complaint shall also be forwarded to the CITY in a reasonably timely manner. HUNTER’S may redact any information necessary to comply with applicable laws regarding patient confidentiality.

HUNTER’S shall procure and maintain for the life of the Contract Statutory Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability Coverage designed to indemnify all HUNTER’s employees in the event of occupational injury and/or disease, with Insurance Carriers licensed and authorized to underwrite such liability in the State of Connecticut. HUNTER’S shall furnish to the CITY photocopies of the State of Connecticut ambulance license and certification. HUNTER’S will present photocopies of renewals of the above documents to the CITY within five days of its receipt of said renewals.

HUNTER’S shall indemnify and save harmless CITY, and all appointed or elected officers, official directors, committee members, employees, volunteer workers, commissioners, and any affiliated, associated, or allied entities and/or bodies of, or as may be participated in by the CITY, or as may now or hereinafter be constituted or established from and against all claims, damages, and losses and expenses arising out of or resulting from the performance of the work under this Contract, provided that any death, or to injury to, or destruction of tangible property, including the loss of use resulting therefrom; and is caused in whole or in part by any negligent or willful act or omission of HUNTER’S, or anyone directly or indirectly employed by HUNTER’S for whose acts they may be liable.

All services furnished by HUNTER’S under this Agreement shall be rendered in full compliance with all applicable Federal, State and Local Laws, Rules, and Regulations. In the event changes occur in Federal, State or Local Laws, Rules, and Regulations affecting HUNTER’S performance under this Agreement, and the nature of such change or changes might reasonably be expected to increase HUNTER’S cost of operations, HUNTER’S may request an equitable adjustment in compensation. If HUNTER’S and the CITY are unable to reach an agreement on said adjustment, HUNTER’S and the CITY agree to refer the matter to Mediation in accordance with Article XIII of this Agreement.

Both parties agree to make a good faith attempt to resolve all disputes regarding the terms and conditions of this Agreement by first using direct oral communication. Upon the request of either party, any dispute that cannot be resolved shall be promptly submitted to mediation for resolution before a sole mediator. The mediator shall be selected by mutual agreement, or by obtaining a list of five qualified arbitrators from the Connecticut State Board of Mediation and Arbitration, and by alternately striking names. Both parties agree that for any dispute submitted to mediation, they will cooperate to insure that the mediator is selected forthwith, that meetings or hearings are promptly held, and that a decision is rendered quickly. Both parties shall share the cost of the mediator equally. Each party shall bear the cost of its own witnesses, attorney’s fees and other expenses presenting the case in mediation. If the parties reach settlement during mediation, the agreement shall be reduced in writing. The existing Agreement between the CITY and HUNTER’S shall be modified in accordance with the parties’ agreement or with any award of the mediator, if necessary.

The CITY may terminate this Agreement in the event that HUNTER’S license to operate an ambulance service in the State of Connecticut is suspended or terminated, unless such suspension or termination is stayed. The CITY may terminate this Agreement in the event that HUNTER’S shall make an assignment for the benefit of creditors or shall file a voluntary petition under the bankruptcy or insolvency laws, or an involuntary petition alleging an act of bankruptcy or insolvency is filed against HUNTER’S seeking any reorganization, arrangement, composition, readjustment, liquidation, dissolution or similar relief under present or any future applicable federal, state or other statute or law, or HUNTER’S shall seek or consent to or acquiesce in the appointment or any trustee, receiver, or liquidator of all or any substantial part of its properties or whenever a permanent or temporary receiver is appointed for it or its property, or if HUNTER’S shall plead bankruptcy or insolvency as a defense in any action or proceeding.

This Agreement shall be conditioned on the receipt by the CITY from HUNTER’S of a copy of its license to conduct an ambulance service in the State of Connecticut, a corporate certificate of good standing , and an opinion letter from HUNTER’S counsel. The opinion letter shall be in a form reasonably satisfactory to the CITY’S counsel stating the following: (a) HUNTER’S is a corporation duly incorporated and organized, validly existing, and in good standing under the laws of the State of Connecticut; (b) HUNTER’S has the requisite corporate power and authority to enter into and perform its obligations under this Agreement; and (c) the transactions contemplated herein have been duly authorized by its Board of Directors, and all other necessary corporate action by HUNTER’S has been taken; and (d) this Agreement has been duly executed and delivered by HUNTER’S and constitutes its legal, valid and binding obligation, enforceable in accordance with its terms.

Michael Rohde, made a motion, seconded by Joseph Galotti, to adopt. Mr. Rohde stated that the Public Works and Parks & Recreation Committee is currently waiting 90 days to see how the program is working. Councilor Clermont stated he was a little concerned about what the study would show us. He stated the study will show how much money has been collected and how many people have utilized each program. He felt that one of things the study wouldn’t show is the public’s perception of the program, how they feel and who can afford it and who can’t. He stated a lot of citizens that he has talked with are disgruntled with the program because they have to pay. Mayor Benigni thanked Councilor Clermont for all the research he has done on bulky waste. Mayor Benigni stated he has always had concerns with this program. He stated in his veto budget that he was uncomfortable with how the program was operating and he still is very uncomfortable. He doesn’t feel that the fee structure is acceptable and he isn’t sure that we should be charging at the landfill while the city sorts through these issues. His biggest concern is that we have already budgeted in the budget $150,000 total bulky waste collection fees and landfill collection fees. If you backed out the bulky waste $20 x 2000 pick-ups, it is $40,000 so that is $110,000 that we budgeted for collecting at the landfill that would be in question. When you do some research one would see from July 2002 through May of 2003 there was $57,000 that we had to pay out at the landfill, dump fees. There was $77,000 from the bulky waste dump fees. That is an 11 month figure and that comes to a total of $134,000. If an extra month was added in it would be $146,000, almost $147,000. We had budgeted in last year’s budget for the dumping fees, $400,000. There would be some hidden expenses in there, like taking freon out of refrigerators and some of the extra expenses down there but very minimal. In last year’s budget alone there was a $250,000 surplus. In this year’s budget the department requested $546,000, city manager brought forward $400,000 and the Council adopted $258,552. The Mayor would like to suspend the fees, stop charging citizens at the landfill as they are being pro-active. He feels that there is probably some flex in this budget line and let the committee sit down and really do their work on this. He feels that we came up with a fee structure too quick. He doesn’t feel that it makes sense that we charge citizens who bring bulky waste to the landfill themselves$20 and charge $20 if the city picks up bulky waste at your doorstep. The Mayor feels we shouldn’t be picking up from people who don’t pay their back taxes. He feels that if the City wants to

Councilor McGoldrick stated that during the budget discussions that the institution of the fees would be a stop gap measure to ensure that the program would continue to function at all. He feels that we would have had more objections had the program ceased to function, as he was equally certain that people would pay more for a private hauler for this service than they are currently paying under the fee structure. The second point was that the fee structure was deliberately instituted as a temporary provision while all these questions that had been raised would be studied. He stated he would not pre-judge the results of this study or what it would include. He feels the study will be very complete. The Mayor stated he feels there are two separate issues, a landfill issue where we are charging for people who bring it themselves and a bulky waste issue where someone is paying to have their bulky waste picked up. Councilor Rohde then stated it would have been good if the people that had researched this had shown up at the Public Works and Parks & Recreation Committee to talk to the committee about this. He stated the committee felt that they had made a decision to do a certain process which needed a certain period of time to assess whether in fact the program is working or not. He didn’t expect that it would be short sided relative to the impact of the feedback that was going to be received. Rohde felt that he felt it was short sided to take one year’s experience and extrapolate that. If one looked at the last 3-5 years you would see a whole different picture in cost. He asked City Manager Kemp to inform the Council relative to that that there was a physical rationale for the number that was put forward and it was based on what we have seen historically with those costs. There are a lot of different approaches to landfill use. We’re under a tremendous pressure from the state on how to use currently. Rohde has talked with others who have used landfills in other communities and they have all kinds of different processes, a lot of discretion at the gate in terms of how much you charge for particular items, ex. television, refrigerator but there is a cost involved. We wind up paying considerable dollars for transferring, dealing with hazardous materials so it is a very complicated issue. It is something you have to look at for a longer period of time than one year because that could be an anomaly. If you based all your decisions on that period of time you could really get short sided. Rohde is a little leery in trying to do something quickly, doesn’t feel all the information is in yet. He wants to see it through to October when the committee will get a full status report on this and come to a sound decision. That is his recommendation, it was the committee’s unanimous decision to stick with the 90 days.

Michael Rohde, made a motion, seconded by Joseph Galotti, to adopt. Councilor Rohde stated that this is a long standing issue for Barr Road. They have a well system there and recently had severe pollution in the wells. He stated that we will be redoing that entire street so the committee wanted to go on record of supporting bringing a water main in for the safety issue and also for the fact that we are going to reconstruct that road so we can do this and won’t have to tear up at some later date. This is the committee’s recommendation to the Public Utilities Commission. Motion carried unanimously.

Michael Rohde, made a motion, seconded by Joseph Galotti, to adopt. Rohde stated that this item received considerable discussion and debate at the committee level. What it came down to was the fact that the Public Works Department is responsible for a lot of repair of various curbing. They have been in the practice of installing temporary curbs when necessary. There is some conflict with the Planning Department who is looking to do permanent concrete curbs when at all possible. The problem is that there is not enough money to do this. We have a practical issue to do temporary curbs when necessary. We have a bigger issue of needing and we agree with the idea of doing permanent concrete sidewalks in the future. This resolution tends to deal with both the practicality of us in a real world situation needing to do temporary curbing as necessary, also recognizing that the long range fix is to have the concrete sidewalks and curbs. It is a practical matter in the short run and a budget issue for this council as the Finance Committee deals with the Sidewalk Account in the future. Rohde also stated that they felt once the City had gotten the streets fairly well taken care of we really should pay attention to the sidewalks. He stated we have some terrible sidewalks in the community that look awful. Those were the elements that were discussed at the committee level and that is why we came up with the resolution to put before you tonight. Motion carried. Councilor Kogut voted Nay.

Joseph Galotti, made a motion, seconded by Michael Rohde, to reconsider. Motion carried unanimously. Councilor Kogut stated that what brought this problem to a head was a situation that happened over on Williams Avenue off of Bradley Avenue. The City had redone the street and actually ripped out the all the existing curbing. In that situation it really isn’t temporary asphalt curbing, it was put back as permanent. They actually removed the concrete sidewalks and curbs that were there and replaced them with asphalt. He asked Councilor Rohde how this would deal with a situation like that. Rohde stated that he believed that the message is this. We are

Councilor McGoldrick stated to Councilor Kogut that he did pursue the removal of the curbs and he was told they were removed due to the condition of the curbs. A judgement was made that the curbs had deteriorated to a point where they had to be removed. He was more concerned and did pursue with the Parks & Recreation Director the question of temporary nature of curbs that are installed. He was told this has been going on for a number of years and this is not the first time that the asphalt curbs have been used. Vote taken on base motion to adopt and carried unanimously.

Michael Rohde, made a motion, seconded by Joseph Galotti, to adopt. Rohde stated that this issue has been before the committee for some time. This is a reaffirmation of a decision that has already been made, in fact to move the linear trail along the Quinnipiac River and to pave it. He stated that this has had a lot of discussion and public debate. Rohde stated this has been well studied and a lot of legitimate issues have been raised by property owners relative to quality of life issues. He stated that the committee has done their very best to address those issues and he credits Councilor Galotti who is chair of the linear trail committee and has diligently worked the process throughout to ensure that we are balancing the quality of life issues for the abutting property owners and the issues of having a trail that is usable by disabled, by senior citizens and others. Rohde stated that he indicated to the committee that he rode his mountain bike there about 3-4 weeks ago. He stated he was covered with mud when he got done, almost fell a couple of times which made him think about how could people traverse this path the way it is now. It is a beautiful setting with the river along one side and the cliffs along the other side. He felt that it was clear to him that we have a treasure here ready to be put to use for all of our citizens and it is an ideal situation for the public. It will be a tremendous asset to the community, to the South Meriden area for years to come. Research done on linear trails throughout the country are almost exclusively positive. They add to the quality of life for community, they add to property values for homes around, they also tend to beautify the area because we have more people interested in keeping it litter free and they are self policing because you have so many people using it all the time. Rohde stated this issue has been very thoroughly

Councilor Galotti made a an amendment to the committee report. Joseph Galotti, made an amendment, seconded by Brian Kogut, that after the second “Be It Further Ordered” there should not be a period after the word agreement. The words to be added after the word agreement are “regarding liability related to the linear trail and also working with the abutters regarding landscaping and other amenities regarding noise abatement”. Motion to amend carried unanimously. Galotti stated to the Council that this item has been before the Council for about 8 years. He stated that we voted on this two years ago to improve this facility at this site. This resolution is a requirement of the state, to report back to them that we have met with the abutters, which we have and have used our best good faith efforts to address their concerns which we have. He hopes that the Council votes unanimously for this. Tonight’s vote is not whether or not this is the location of the linear trail. Tonight’s vote is not about whether or not the linear trail should be paved. Those votes occurred several years ago. Tonight’s vote is an affirmation that we have kept our part of the bargain in terms of the process, in terms of meeting with the abutter, in terms of attempting to meet their concerns. This is the best place for the linear trail. Galotti stated we have an excellent opportunity for a superb linear trail but again, that is not what the vote is about. The vote is about reporting that we have done what we are supposed to do, to continue to go forward with a project that we debated, discussed, analyzed and approved several years ago.

Deputy Mayor Shamock stated he has no problem with the linear trail but he believes that it should remain in its natural state, without paving. We have to preserve some of the last remaining trails without paving for future generations. He feels it will never be the same once it is paved. If the linear trail is paved he believes the natural beauty will be gone forever. He asked a member of the Conservation Commission how they voted. They had voted unanimously not to pave that trail. When you pave a trail you leave it open and vulnerable to motorcycles, all terrain vehicles, roller blades. He feels we will ruin that area for generations to come with a paved trail.

Councilor Gordon stated that Councilor Galotti said tonight that we voted two years ago in favor of this. Councilor Gordon was one that had voted in favor of this proposal. One of the reasons was the original trail was going to go either on Evansville Avenue, two feet in front of someone’s doorstep, Webb Street going through someone’s hot tub or Cutlery Avenue, right through their backyards. As most of you know I said I’d be lying down in front of the steamrollers as they came down and would try to stop that. When the trail along the Quinnipiac came up it looked like a win win situation, it wasn’t in front or behind the houses but he had never looked up at the ridge. Prior to April he also agreed that the path should be paved once it was done, one because of ADA requirements, two having in the past couple of years having had both knees replaced he has had the opportunity to be in a wheelchair and now have more respect for people that are disabled. He feels we all should respect that. There is no reason why someone that has limits to their walking shouldn't be able to enjoy what other people can. Back in April he and Representative Abrams were invited over to a homeowners house on Riverside Drive. He was questioned about who would be cleaning the trail, who is going to patrol it, what were the insurance issues. In regards to maintenance he thought it would be cleaned by the city or the

Kuhn Agency. In regards to security he hopes that the police patrol when necessary. With regards to insurance issues he feels Councilor Galotti came up with the “hold harmless agreement”. Those issues are no different now with the path, ATVs and dirt bikes are down there now. The concern he had was the noise that he heard. The homeowner explained to him that when people are just walking along the riverbank, she could hear the echo of someone’s cell phone and he heard that. The other residents at the meeting stated that they bought this land because it was pristine and they felt they wouldn’t be bothered. Councilor Gordon sympathizes with the homeowners on those issues. Councilor Gordon stated that after speaking with some of the committee members is that we are going to have the opportunity to address the noise issue with buffers, with plantings and possible fencing. After speaking with the architect on the council he believes that will help curtail some of that noise. It doesn’t mean it will be eliminated. Under the circumstances he is in favor of this since the city is going to do the best they can to relieve the noise to the homeowners.

Councilor Zerio thanked Councilor Galotti for bringing this item to closure. Zerio reminded the Council to remember that this is a federally funded project and he will be voting in favor of this resolution especially with the amendments that he feels Councilor Galotti has put in to assist with some of the concerns of the abutters. Zerio is also in favor of paving because of the fact that this is a federally funded project and the ADA requirements would actually point to it, but even beyond the fact that it is federally funded, we could be endangering those dollars, one if we don’t pass this resolution and two, if we didn’t comply with ADA requirements. It is the right thing to do, it is the right thing for all of our citizens to enjoy.

Mayor Benigni reminded the Council that the Commission for Persons with Disabilities did vote unanimously in favor of paving the site and also as Joe Zajac mentioned tonight, the Meriden Transit District also voted in favor of paving it. The Mayor stated if the city were to pave the trails at Guiffrida Park or Hubbard Park he would be against it. He feels that we have a unique opportunity to have a linear trail even though ours will be smaller at this point, it will be a mile and a half up and a mile and a half back, a good place for people to exercise. As the city continue to develop this into a recreational area for South Meriden, he feels that the linear trail will only add value to the property owners and to the residents of South Meriden. He looks at this and sees it as a homerun. The Lions Club did a great job with the Red Bridge Project and many people fish along there, picnic there and feels the linear trail is designed to be able to let everyone use it and it needs to be paved. Benigni stated he participated in the Quinnipiac River Watershed Walk-a-Thon down there and it was sloppy and wet. He feels it can’t be a linear trail under those conditions. He looks forward to jogging the trail. Motion carried to adopt. Councilor Shamock voted Nay.

Brian Kogut, made a motion, seconded by Keith Gordon, to adopt. Councilor Kogut stated that when the final figures came in we were able to avoid projected costs from $250,000 to $200,000. Councilor Kogut believes that these will be up and operational before the football season starts barring some very bad span of weather. These lights have a 10 year warranty and the total life expectancy of these lights is about 25 years. Councilor Feest asked if there was a back up plan in case the lights didn’t get up in time. Councilor Kogut stated that there are back up contingency plans but they basically would be that the teams play at their own schools. There is no back up plan for actual lighting. Councilor Gordon stated that the company Mr. Zebora found for the lights is the same one that put in the lights at Lincoln Middle School. He told Councilor Gordon that those lights are still intact after 11 years because of the quality of the lights. If for any reason the lights have to be changed the company comes and does it for nothing. City Manager Kemp stated that the lights that were going to be used are state of the art and won’t be shining on other peoples’ property and that the off side glare will be minimal. Mayor Benigni asked that the City Manager be directed to stay on top of this project and if there is any delay at all we should know about it immediately. Mayor Benigni feels from what he heard here tonight that the lights will be ready for the football jamboree and if for any reason that is not going to happen we need to be notified immediately. He wants this message to go to Mr. Zebora that if there is a problem the Council needs to know. Mr. Kemp informed the Mayor and Council that Mr. Zebora knows this.

Brian Kogut, made a motion, seconded by Keith Gordon, to adopt. Councilor Kogut stated that this is a union contract with the Supervisor’s Union and there were significant changes in this one. The City Manager and his staff working with the unions were able to realize some real changes in the contract that long term will result in significant savings to the city. Some of the highlights are: required use of comp time for the first 20 hours instead of overtime, estimate in savings of about $8,000 per year; standby pay has been reduced from 2 people per week at 10 hours to 1 person at 8 hours, estimate of savings $26,000. In the past when supervisors sub for their supervisors who are off they receive acting pay which was usually 15% more. This will not kick in until 5 days after they have been serving. Also the union agreed to go to direct deposit which will save the city some payroll costs. Schedules have been changed from a Monday through Friday to a Tuesday through Saturday schedule so we save on overtime on the weekends, estimate savings of $16,600. As far as long term savings the top step has been

eliminated for all individuals hired after 7/1/03 so new employees coming on won’t have as many steps as the current employees. Along the same lines no overtime at the 3 highest ranges for hires after 7/1/03, estimate savings of $20-30,000 per year once all the current employees leave. Vacation time for retirees has been limited to ½ times the annual rate, estimate cost savings of $2,000 per every person that leaves through retirement. The union also agreed that they would switch to a bi-weekly payroll at such time as the other unions agree to do so. With respect to the actual salary increases it is 1.5% the first year, 1.5% in the second year and 3% in the third year. It was a very different contract in that a lot of things were rewritten. Motion carried unanimously.

Brian Kogut, made a motion, seconded by Keith Gordon, to adopt. Kogut stated that this was recommended by the Public Works Committee and earlier this evening voted on by the Council. This is the funding mechanism. Kogut explained that there was approximately $33,000 available in state funds for recreational items. Because of the timing of this the committee is recommending the Contingency Fund for this item and the next item as we also did with the South Meriden League a few meetings ago. It is contemplated that this money will be refunded or reimbursed to the Contingency Fund once the grant funds can be freed up. Motion carried unanimously.

Brian Kogut, made a motion, seconded by Keith Gordon, to adopt. Kogut stated that earlier in the evening we adopted this and this is the funding mechanism. Zerio stated he wanted to commend the boards of the respective leagues, South Meriden, Jack Barry and Ed Walsh as well as the Public Works and Parks & Recreation Committee. He stated that the Mayor had proposed use of these funds several months ago. The Finance Committee supported the use of these funds but wanted to see the specific uses. The leagues went back and prioritized their needs and gave very good plans to the Public Works and Parks & Recreation Committee which upon their approval sent to the Finance Committee. Motion carried unanimously.

Brian Kogut, made a motion, seconded by Keith Gordon, to adopt. Kogut stated that the Finance Committee has had many requests from different departments to fill vacant positions. The Director of Public Works came before the Finance Committee looking to fill 9 positions. The reason the Finance Committee chose to recommend filling these 3 is because these individuals are necessary to keep the Bulky Waste Program going. Due to some retirements and other type of things that have happened they are very short of people so if the committee opted to not fill these there is a chance that the city might not be able to continue that program from a staffing standpoint. The Mayor asked how many positions were requested to be filled and was told 11. Kogut stated that there were several other departments that had openings too, which the Finance Committee has opted to not fill at this time but felt these were necessary. Motion carried unanimously.