|
|
|
| NORWALK HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES |
| Click
Here for Sept. 25, 2002 Minutes Click Here for Oct. 23, 2002 Minutes |
Click
Here for Nov. 6, 2002 Minutes Click Here for Nov. 20, 2002 Minutes Click Here for Dec. 18, 2002 Minutes |
JANUARY 22, 2003
ATTENDANCE: Chairperson Diane Rochelle, Peter Bondi, Betty Booth, Carol Ann Falasca,
Ralph Bloom, Glenn Iannaccone, Marija Bryant, Linda Fallon.
STAFF: Susan Gunn, Curator
OTHERS: Kevin Poruban, Norwalk Common Council, Fred Bondi, Norwalk Common Council
Richard A. Booth, Pres. Norwalk Historical Society, Elizabeth Montgomery, Lockwood-Mathews Mansion Museum, Diane Lauricella, Norwalk River Watershed Alliance, John Nickerson, reporter, The Advocate, Dirk Perrefort, reporter, The Hour, Eric Trautman, photographer, The Hour.
The meeting was called to order at 7:32 p.m. by Chairman Diane Rochelle. Ms. Rochelle announced that Ms. Deborah Mathies and Ms. Kathleen Morrow were excused and that Ms. Elizabeth Montgomery would represent the LMMM in place of Marjorie St. Aubyn, who was also excused.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The following changes were made to the Minutes of December 18, 2002:
Page 1 – Other Business to Come Before the Board, 3rd Paragraph: Change "April 25, 2002"
to "April 25, 2001".
Page 4 – Mill Hill Buildings; Repairs: Bell Tower & Smith Street: Change "bug filters" to
"filters."
Page 4 – Mill Hill Buildings; Repairs: Bell Tower & Smith Street: Change "did not work" to
"did not work properly".
Page 4 – Motion by Mrs. Morrow: Change account number from "5066" to "5266"
Page 6 – Last Paragraph: Change "Mr. Booth" to "Mr. Bloom."
** MRS. BOOTH MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF DECEMBER 18, 2002 AS CORRECTED.
** MS. BRYANT SECONDED.
** MOTION PASSED.
REPORTS – HISTORICAL COMMISSION
Report from the Nominating Committee
Ms. Rochelle stated that because the nominations for new Commission officers were not recorded on the tape of the December 18, 2002 meeting, she was now requesting the committee to put forth their nominations a second time for the purpose of an accurate record. The nominations are as follows: Diane Rochelle for Chairman and Carol Ann Falasca for Vice Chairman. Ms. Rochelle asked for a motion to accept the nominations.
Historical Commission
January 22, 2003
Page 1
** MS. FALLON MOVED TO ACCEPT THE NOMINATIONS.
** NO SECOND NEEDED PER MS. ROCHELLE.
** MOTION ACCEPTED.
LOCKWOOD MATHEWS MANSION MUSEUM
LMMM report
Marjorie St. Aubyn was not in attendance and the LMMM report was given by Elizabeth Montgomery. Ms. Montgomery reported that the LMMM was closed for public tours until March although tours could be arranged by appointment. The LMMM celebrated "Norwalk Day" in early January with a performance by the Connecticut State Troubador, Kevin Briody. Forty-eight people attended and the event was considered a success. "Norwalk Day" in February will be celebrated by a book signing from 1:00 to 4:00 p.m. Admission is free.
Ms. Montgomery reported that the contract for repair of the south porch has been revised and is awaiting approval. It was determined after a site review that repairs on drainage around the LMMM cannot begin until after the thaw.
Ms. Rochelle asked Ms. Gunn if the bill for the advertisement of the bid for the repairs at LMMM had been paid. Ms. Gunn replied that it had.
HISTORICAL CEMETERIES REPORT
Ms. Rochelle met with Lynn Freedman and Judge DePanfilis. Judge DePanfilis felt that a blanket restoration request was a better way to proceed than a specific restoration request. On his advice Ms. Rochelle asked the Law Dept. to write up a notification which they did and she received it back in under a week. Ms. Rochelle read the notification aloud to the Commissioners.
The notification covers work to be done on the cemeteries for a period of five years and gives the Norwalk Historical Commission the designation of "Norwalk Burial Ground Authority." Ms. Rochelle stated that this notice would be on a sign at each cemetery and must be conspicuously posted within each cemetery where work will occur at least 90 days prior to commencement of the work. Written notice must be sent to the Probate Court within the same time. The written notice must describe the work plans and include photographs of each area or grave marker included in the project. Ms. Rochelle said that Ms. Freedman is out taking general photographs of the cemeteries. Ms. Rochelle requested a motion to approve the sending of this notification to the Probate Court and the Connecticut State Historical Commission for work to be done on Pine Island, Brookside, Mill Hill and Kellogg cemeteries and the signs that would be posted at each cemetery.
** MRS. BOOTH MOVED TO APPROVE THE NOTIFICATION BE SENT TO PROBATE COURT.
** MS. FALASCA SECONDED.
Ms. Rochelle asked for discussion. Mr. Bondi asked if the Kellogg Cemetery was included in the list of cemeteries to be repaired. Ms. Rochelle said that it was, but no work at Kellogg cemetery was planned at this time. Ms. Rochelle explained that if they do not put up a sign including Kellogg Cemetery as part of their five-year plan and decided within the next two years that they wanted to do work at Kellogg Cemetery, without this notification and signage they would not have the ability to do so. Ms. Falasca asked who would provide the sign. Ms. Rochelle stated that she is in the process of going out for estimates on signage, and once she has several quotes on the cost of the signs, she would report to the Commission and the money would come out of the Commission’s $4,000.
** MOTION APPROVED.
Historical Commission
January 22, 2003
Page 2
Ms. Rochelle told the Commission that she had been contacted by Mr. Ray Rumer of Wilton who had directed cleanups at Pine Island Cemetery in the past and who was interested in continuing the cleanup process there. Ms. Rochelle has sent him the blank release forms and Mr. Rumer will work in conjunction with Mr. Michael Mocciae at Rec & Parks to coordinate his trash pickups from the cemetery. Ms. Rochelle called for a motion to approve the continued cleanup of Pine Island Cemetery in 2003 by the Cannon Grange, the Wilton 4-H and the First United Methodist Church under the direction of Ray Rumer. The Commission’s approval will allow Mr. Rumer to move ahead with arrangements for spring.
** MS. BRYANT MOVED TO APPROVE PINE ISLAND CLEANUP
** MS. FALASCA SECONDED.
Ms. Rochelle called for discussion. There was no discussion.
** MOTION APPROVED.
Ms. Falasca asked if the Commission should invite Ray Rumer to a meeting. Ms. Rochelle suggested he be invited to the April or May 2003 meeting.
ROGERS RITCH MERRIT HOUSE
Ms. Rochelle announced the acceptance of a $20,000 grant for the RRM by the Bulkley Foundation. She also announced the RRM was the recipient of a $1000 gift from Mr. & Mrs. Richard Booth, and there was a possibility of a matching gift. Ms. Rochelle also reported that she had attended a bid procedure meeting with Gerald Foley, which was moving along very nicely. Ms. Rochelle called for a motion to advertise the RRM rebuilding bid and application process that would be going forward in the month of February 2003.
Mr. Bondi asked who oversees the bid once it comes in. Ms. Rochelle said there would be a review committee made up of Mr. Alan Lo, Mr. Gerald Foley, Ms. Rochelle, Mr. Sam Gardner and one other commissioner. Mr. Bondi asked if any of these people had a construction background. Ms. Rochelle stated that she believed that Mr. Lo and Mr. Foley have the proper background. Ms. Rochelle stated that the bid, once it is accepted, would be the lowest bid and would go to the Historical Commission, the Land Use Commission and the Common Council for acceptance. Mr. Iannaccone offered to be the additional Historical Commissioner on the review committee and Ms. Rochelle accepted his offer.
Ms. Bryant asked if it would be appropriate for the Commission to view the architect’s plans for the reconstruction of the RRM. Ms. Rochelle said that the plans are being kept at her house. Ms. Rochelle stated that all of the Commissioners had met at her house to view the plans in the past and that Ms. Bryan was welcome to view them at any time. She also stated that the Commission would continue to go over the plans again as things progress with the RRM.
** MR. IANNACCONE MOVED TO ADVERTISE THE BID AND SPECIAL ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION.
** MS. FALLON SECONDED.
** MOTION APPROVED.
MILL HILL BUILDINGS
Norwalk Historical Society Report
Mr. Booth stated that there was not much new to report this month as the NHS was at the end of its membership year so he did not prepare a written report. He announced the NHS’ annual Membership meeting on Sunday February 23 at 2:00-4:00 p.m. in the Norwalk Town House with a talk given on Norwalk Pottery by Mr. Richard Prowse.
Historical Commission
January 22, 2003
Page 3
Town House Stove
Ms. Rochelle stated that the Fire Safety Code for a building that has an assembly useage calls for a commercial stove that would be extremely expensive and also be extremely intrusive to the historical aspect of the building. Ms. Rochelle said that if the Norwalk Historical Society would put a letter on file with the Fire Marshal that the Town House stove would be used for warming, the NHS would be allowed to put a residential stove in the Town House. Ms. Rochelle read the letter aloud to the Commission and asked for a motion to accept the letter from the NHS to the Fire Marshall regarding the stove replacement. Ms. Gunn asked for a copy of the letter for the Town House file. Ms. Rochelle gave Ms. Gunn a copy for the file and asked Ms. Gunn to send her a copy of it.
** MR. BLOOM MOVED TO ACCEPT LETTER.
** MS. BRYANT SECONDED.
** MOTION APPROVED.
Ms. Rochelle was asked who should be paying for the stove installation. Ms. Rochelle said there was $25,000 in the Capital Budget and that at the moment the Bell Tower repair seemed to be coming in at around $5000, which was under budget. She suggested the Commission wait until the Bell Tower repairs are completed but told the Commission that the wording of that Capital Budget request was liberal enough so as not to limit it to just the Bell Tower repair. This would allow the Commission to use some of the excess funds to pay for both the repairs and the stove installation.
Mr. Booth estimated the cost of the installation to be approximately $1000. Ms. Rochelle suggested that the Bell Tower repairs be done before the stove installation takes place. Mr. Booth stated that the NHS could pay for the stove and the installation. Mr. Booth said he would like to see the stove installation completed before the school groups begin their visits in April. Ms. Rochelle said that since the money had been allocated for the Bell Tower repairs specifically, those repairs should be done first before moving on to the stove installation.
Mrs. Booth questioned whether some of the Bell Tower money could be used for other repairs at the Town House such as the trim around the building. Ms. Gunn suggested the flashing around the chimney. Ms. Rochelle said that what she would like to take out of this account is money for the gas water heater to bring the Town House up to code. Ms. Gunn suggested to the Commission that she confer with Mr. Booth regarding the paperwork she had given him as there was some confusion regarding what the Commission planned to do with the money appropriated for the Bell Tower repairs.
Gas Water Heater
Ms. Rochelle said that there was one bid for a gas water heater from "Paul the Plumber" for $2100 and that she needs the George Ellis paperwork so that the installation of the gas water heater could be considered by the Commission for the February meeting. Ms. Rochelle asked Ms. Gunn if the Grubb & Ellis bill for $191.00 had been paid. Ms. Gunn replied that it had. Ms. Rochelle directed Ms. Gunn to work with Mr. Booth on the purchase order for the Mill Hill repairs.
Smith Street
Ms. Rochelle said that she had asked Ms. Gunn to send out letters of renewal for tenant leases on Smith Street as they are due on February 1st. Ms. Gunn said that she had brought copies of the letters with her in case Ms. Rochelle wanted to see them.
Ms. Rochelle asked the Commission if they wanted to consider increasing the rent on the Smith Street apartments by $50.00 in the new leases. Ms. Gunn asked if she could update the Commission on the state of repairs at Smith Street before this discussion. Ms. Gunn told the Commission that the electric component including outside and inside lights was completed at end of November/beginning of December. The staircase repairs including saddle and connecting of gutters to leaders was to have started on December 22nd but was postponed because of weather. These repairs began today. Ms. Gunn stated that there was concern about a rotting bulkhead and that she hoped to
Historical Commission
January 22, 2003
Page 4
have more information on this tomorrow. Ms. Gunn stated that that leaves the appliance installation still to be done. Ms. Gunn was directed to call "Paul the Plumber" by Mr. Foley and is waiting for Paul the Plumber’s return call. Ms. Gunn provided quotes from REO Appliance and Aitoro Appliance for the installation.
Ms. Gunn also reported that she was notified by one of the Smith Street tenants that there were rats in the apartment that may have come up from the river. The Commission suggested that Ms. Gunn direct the tenants to solve the problem by either setting traps or using rat poison. Ms. Gunn wanted clarification as to whether or not she was responsible for removing the rats. Ms. Rochelle said that Ms. Gunn was absolutely not responsible for that.
Ms. Rochelle said that the rent increase had been tabled in 2002 until the repairs were completed, and that now that the repairs were almost completed, she called for a motion to increase the Smith Street rents.
** MR. IANNACCONE MOVED TO INCREASE THE SMITH STREET RENTS BY $50.00 FOR 2003.
** MR. BONDI SECONDED.
** MOTION APPROVED WITH ONE OPPOSED.
Ms. Gunn offered to write a letter to the tenants at Smith Street to advise them of the rent increase. Ms. Rochelle directed Ms. Gunn to get this item on the February 20 Land Use meeting agenda.
NORWALK MUSEUM REPORT
Norwalk Museum Committee
Ms. Falasca stated that there were no questions posed to the Committee; therefore the Committee determined that there was no response. The proposal for the Friends was tabled
Ms. Rochelle stated that the inventory of the Museum was begun several weeks ago and that the next step would be to put this inventory onto a database. Ms. Rochelle plans to begin with the previous inventory and asked that Ms. Gunn provide Ms. Falasca with a list of the current inventory that she has already started and the database the Museum is using so that input of the previous inventory can be accomplished.
Ms. Gunn stated that she believed that they need to clarify the entire issue again, possibly by going to Land Use or the newspapers; and that the Mayor has convened a committee to look into the situation. Ms. Gunn stated that she has told the Commission repeatedly that there was no inventory of the collection that existed at the time she took the job so there is nothing to compare a new inventory to. Ms. Gunn said that there were fractions of inventory that existed and she has been tracking inventory as it is accessioned since she’s been with the Museum. Ms. Rochelle then asked for a list of items that Ms. Gunn has inventoried in the past two years. Ms. Gunn stated that she still believes that her job description has her reporting about the collections and the Museum to the Mayor and Common Council.
Ms. Gunn stated she objected strenuously to the manner in which the Commission came into the Museum and inventoried the silver safe while Ms. Gunn was absent from the building. Ms. Gunn feels the Commission is holding her to a higher standard than Mr. Bloom had been held to when he moved the collections from East Avenue to its present location. Ms. Gunn pointed out that when the collections were transferred from East Avenue there should have been an inventory of everything that was packed up and moved. Ms. Gunn stated that she could not find anything within the Museum to tell her that this was done. More importantly, Ms. Gunn said that there should have been an inventory done as the items were unpacked to check against the packing inventory.
Ms. Gunn said she felt that the Commission had misunderstood Mr. Bromley’s letter, and that there were several points in the minutes from the December 18 meeting that Ms. Gunn missed due to illness that need to be addressed. Ms. Gunn said she was not sure how the Commission wanted to handle that, but that she very much wanted to respond to the points in the minutes because that was the only record Ms. Gunn had, other than the tapes made of the meetings.
Mrs. Booth stated that Ms. Gunn believes she reports to the Mayor and asked how this reporting was done. Ms. Gunn replied that one way she reports to the Mayor was that she copies him with all memos that have to do with the Museum.
Historical Commission
January 22, 2003
Page 5
Ms. Gunn stated that at the time she was hired she asked for a clarification of how her job description would be implemented and how, because it is not perhaps the clearest document ever written, she was told that because these were City assets in the collections, that with her training and as Curator she was in charge of the collections, displaying them and caring for them, and because there was not a database of the collections and because the collections were not stored in a unified or consistent manner from one type of collection item from the next, that this was her job.
Ms. Gunn said that she believed it was Ms. Rochelle who told Ms. Gunn at the time she was hired that according to the Mayor one of her first priorities was to do an inventory of the collections. Ms. Gunn said that was what she herself told the Mayor she wanted to do and that the Mayor told Ms. Gunn that he wanted her to do more exhibits that would put more of the collections on display and out into the public with the intent of increasing the Museum attendance and value of the Museum and its collections to the community. This is what Ms. Gunn felt she has been doing. Ms. Gunn stated that she has not yet heard, although she has requested at different times, anything from the current Mayor about a change in this attitude, so she views Ms. Rochelle’s request to be a change in her job description and as such, if this is what comes forth, she needs to have it in writing and be able to review it in order to make her decision.
Ms. Rochelle responded that she suspected the union would be very helpful to Ms. Gunn in that respect because Ms. Gunn was hired by a union-approved-and-advertised job description. Ms. Gunn stated that her job description says that she takes direction and policy from the Historical Commission. Ms. Rochelle added that Ms. Gunn’s job description also says that she assists the Commission in short and long-term planning for the Museum. Ms. Gunn agreed that the job description said this. Ms. Gunn added that she also oversees the Commission’s other properties for them. Ms. Rochelle stated that Ms. Gunn manages the properties for the Commission and that Ms. Gunn was staff to the Commission. Ms. Gunn stated that she was staff to the Commission and she is also Curator of the Museum. Ms. Gunn said that the way she reads her job description and the way City Hall has told her, indicates that she is in charge of and receives the collection for the City, and that as a City Hall employee she reports to the City Hall frame of government. Ms. Gunn stated that the Historical Commissioners were all very valuable people who volunteer their time but it was described at the meeting that Mr. Bloom, Ms. Rochelle, Diane Beltz-Jacobsen, Sara Letourneau of Personnel and Roger Hanford all attended, which was also reported in an article that appeared in The Hour, that the decision was that Ms. Gunn was in charge of the collections. Ms. Rochelle stated that one could not believe everything one reads in the papers. Ms. Gunn stated that until there is a change and she is told by the Common Council or the Mayor that her job description is different, this was the way she accepted the job and that this was what she was hired to do.
Ms. Rochelle stated that the Commission totally respects Ms. Gunn’s opinion and that everyone is entitled to a point of view. Ms. Rochelle said that this Commission also respects the job description that hired Ms. Gunn. Ms. Gunn replied that she and the Commission appear to have very different views of how the job description is worded and that needs clarification. Ms. Rochelle stated that the clarification would be forthcoming and until it comes they will just have to muddle along.
Ms. Rochelle stated that the particular inventory that was done several weeks ago, the opening of the silver safe, was done under the guidance of the Risk Management Dept., the Mayor, the City Clerk and the Assistant to the Mayor as well as with the help of the Sonitrol System and the Police Dept., and any other services that needed to be notified. Ms. Rochelle stated that the opening of the silver safe was not a Commission project or a Commission-engineered situation but was done under the approval of the City of Norwalk. Ms. Gunn stated that she found it interesting that she did not receive any notification from the City prior to the safe opening. Ms. Rochelle stated that she did not know anything about that, but that Ms. Gunn would have to speak to the City herself.
Mr. Bloom said that everything that was supposed to be at the Museum was there and nothing had ever been found missing whatsoever. Mr. Bloom said that as far as the collections go, the cataloging was done on index cards and photographs and formed a particular file which was ready to be used to form a database but that for the four and a half years that he was working on it, the City of Norwalk refused to fund computers and training and so the cataloging was continued in the old fashioned way. Mr. Bloom pointed out the Museum’s card catalog and told the Commission that the card catalog was a memorial on behalf of the late John Cuneo who preceded Mr. Bloom as historian and that it included over 20 years of cataloging of books, newspapers, photographs and represented a horrific amount of work, and that this was what was available to the public. Mr. Bloom said that first of all, there was a daily log that was kept of everything that came into the collections; being that there was no registrar, the log
Historical Commission
January 22, 2003
Page 6
was kept notebook-style and numbers were assigned to donations. Mr. Bloom said that on everything that was
acquired by him during the years he was at the Museum there was an accession number painted onto the backs of furniture and with special inks onto china. Mr. Bloom said there were thousands and thousands of items in the Museum that are marked.
Mr. Bloom said he had a question for Ms. Gunn in return. He asked her if there were receipts from the artwork that was hanging at City Hall that came from the Museum. Ms. Gunn wanted to know which artwork Mr. Bloom referred to. Mr. Bloom stated the artwork in the Mayor’s office. Ms. Gunn said that there were loan forms on the items. Mr. Bloom then asked how Ms. Gunn was able to loan the items without accession numbers on them, and who authorized her to let something out of the building. Ms. Gunn replied that the Mayor’s office had authorized her. Mr. Bloom asked if the Mayor’s office "went shopping" in the vault. Ms. Gunn tried to respond to Mr. Bloom’s question but was interrupted by Ms. Rochelle, who stated that nothing was to be solved with this line of questioning. Mr. Bloom said he felt he had to defend himself against accusations that there was never any cataloging done.
Ms. Gunn stated that she did not say that nothing in the collection was accessioned; what she did say was that not all of the items were accessioned or catalogued. Mr. Bloom said that when Ms. Gunn was hired there was a five-month hiatus before she began her job. Mr. Bloom said that for five months he had made himself available to assist her and that she did not avail herself of his services. Ms. Gunn said that she had not even been hired to start until July. Ms. Rochelle told Ms. Gunn that she believed that Mr. Bloom was referring to the first five months of Ms. Gunn’s tenure as Curator. Mr. Bloom tried to continue but Ms. Rochelle directed the meeting to move forward.
Ms. Rochelle said that she would like to see the meeting move forward in the spirit of cooperation and communication. She absolutely agreed with both Ms. Gunn and Mr. Bloom that there were clarifications that needed to be established in Ms. Gunn’s job description to make this Commission work smoother. Ms. Rochelle felt that these were not unsolvable problems but would take cooperation and conciliation.
Ms. Rochelle said that the Commission has entertained an inventory in response to allegations that were made in a complaint letter that was received and that the inventory was going forward. What the Commission is proposing to continue is to establish a database of the prior inventory that exists in a binder and card catalog. Ms. Rochelle said the Commissioners are available to list these things into a database to assist Ms. Gunn in her taking of the inventory that she wants to do so it will be in a useable format and so they need the list of all items that Ms. Gunn has accessioned since she’s been with the Museum. Ms. Rochelle said that for the past thirty years it has been written into the Historical Commission ordinance that they accept gifts to the City of Norwalk and that this has not been done for two years. Ms. Rochelle said that the Commission has been remiss in this obligation and will begin this year by living up to their obligation and will need the format of the database Ms. Gunn is using so that any work the Commission does on Ms. Gunn’s behalf would be helpful to her.
Ms. Gunn stated that the manner in which the inventory had been done of the silver safe was incomplete and that she had not seen a copy of it. Ms. Rochelle stated that a copy of the silver safe inventory would be totally useless to Ms. Gunn until the entire inventory was completed. Ms. Gunn objected to the way the storage room had been left open and unattended while the inventory was taking place, that various people were leaning against collection items and that the inventory was not done in a manner that showed care of the collections whatsoever.
Ms. Gunn strenuously objected to the minutes that reported that all of the Commissioners and their friends can come and inventory the collection. She pointed out that the Museum’s collections were valuable property which needs to be handled in a special way and that the volunteers or staff must be trained to handle the collections properly. Ms. Gunn said the minutes were misleading when it said that Ms. Soltesz was the only one that has worked on the collections as it was not true. Ms. Rochelle said that she did not know how that got into the minutes or who said it. Mr. Bondi replied that he had said in the December meeting that he had seen Ms. Soltesz working on the inventory.
Ms. Rochelle stated that certainly the Commissioners were qualified to create a database from prior written materials. Ms. Gunn agreed but said that the Commissioners were not necessarily qualified to identify specific collection items. Ms. Rochelle said that they were not trying to identify collection items. Ms. Gunn explained that when items have accession numbers it is easier to cross-reference them to a previous inventory, which is why the system exists. Ms. Gunn attempted to explain the process for proper cataloging of collection items but was interrupted by Ms. Rochelle who asked Ms. Gunn if she would provide a list of the items that she has already
Historical Commission
January 22, 2003
Page 7
accessioned for the Museum. Ms. Gunn responded by asking Ms. Rochelle to provide a specific letter outlining the Commission’s requests so it can be discussed. Ms. Rochelle said that the item would be tabled until a letter can be written and discussed. Ms. Rochelle then called for any further discussion regarding the Norwalk Museum.
Ms. Gunn announced that the Museum had received an additional grant of $20,000 to be used for paid staff. She also mentioned two grants of $2000 and $3000 respectively. Ms. Gunn said that she felt there was a general misunderstanding by the Commission about the number of hours of staff and volunteers that has been put into effect at the Museum and that for December there were 56 volunteer hours that have been contributed to work on the collections and in the Museum; then there was work by Ms. Gunn’s staff and Ms. Gunn’s own work.
Mrs. Booth asked if Ms. Gunn’s job description includes supervising paid staff. Ms. Gunn said that she believed it did. Ms. Gunn stated that it was stipulated in the way the grants were given and that she has a letter from Mayor Knopp that seems to imply that the grant was accepted in this way. Ms. Rochelle replied that if the Law Dept. has accepted the grants then there was nothing to discuss about it. Mrs. Booth asked if Ms. Gunn’s job description specifically mentions hiring staff with standard City Hall procedure. Ms. Rochelle said she didn’t know anything about that. Ms. Gunn remarked that there was a precedent established in that Mr. Bloom had had a paid staff member while he was Curator. Mr. Bloom stated that his assistant had been a 19-hour paid position and budgeted through the City.
Ms. Falasca asked if the Museum’s volunteers were qualified to work at the Museum. Ms. Gunn replied that she has trained several volunteers who also bring with them various talents. Ms. Rochelle asked Ms. Gunn if she could give the Commission a list of qualifications necessary to volunteer or work at the Museum. Ms. Gunn said that there were many qualifications necessary; as there were many different types of jobs; for example, some people have greeted the public and explained exhibits. She has had volunteers who have been specialists in certain fields and have assisted with the collection; and she has had other volunteers that she works alongside and oversees while training them. Ms. Falasca stated that all museums have volunteers and that without them the museums could not function. Ms. Falasca reminded Mrs. Booth that Mrs. Booth has handled the collections at Mill Hill with volunteers. Mrs. Booth said that she was not speaking of volunteers but was concerned with the Museum’s paid staff and whether Ms. Gunn’s job description stated that she was allowed to supervise them. Ms. Rochelle said that many things were being questioned and that this would be added to the list but that Ms. Gunn was qualified to supervise paid staff based on the acceptance of the grant by the Law Dept. She noted that further discussion could be leading into a sticky situation. Mrs. Booth observed that Ms. Gunn’s job description was not really complete without this information. Ms. Rochelle stated that if it was a good job description and a working job description then the Commission would have a different scenario here. Mr. Bondi suggested that with the current situation maybe this would be clarified. Ms. Rochelle replied that they will find things coming down in aces and spades.
Ms. Rochelle said that the Commission has received a letter from the Friends of the Norwalk Museums to donate a sum of $10,000 to the City of Norwalk for the Rogers-Ritch-Merrit house project; to remove all of the sales materials belonging to the Friends from the Norwalk Museum until a decision is made regarding the Friends’ shop within the Museum, .; and to explore with the Historical Commission’s Museum Committee the repair and restoration of the brick-veneer floor in the Merchants Court area of the Museum which would be a specific fundraising event. Ms. Rochelle said that the removal of the Friends’ sales items will be done on Saturday Dec. 25 at 1:00 p.m. Ms. Rochelle called for a motion from the Commission to allow the Friends of the Norwalk Museum to remove their sales items.
** MS. FALASCA MOVED TO ALLOW THE FRIENDS OF THE NORWALK MUSEUM TO REMOVE THEIR SALES ITEMS FROM THE NORWALK MUSEUM GIFT SHOP ON SATURDAY DEC. 25,
2002 AT 1:00 P.M.
** MRS. BOOTH SECONDED.
Historical Commission
January 22, 2003
Page 8
Ms. Bryant questioned how the sales items would be identified since there is an issue of identification. Ms. Rochelle said that the items to be removed were items that were purchased by the Friends for sale in the gift shop and were not intended as collection items. Ms. Gunn suggested the Friends remove the copier in the Museum office but Mr. Bloom said that this would increase the list and warned Ms. Gunn not to increase the list. Ms. Rochelle said that the list approved by the Friends’ board only concerned the sales items at this time.
Ms. Gunn said that it was reported to her that during the Commission’s opening of the silver safe in
December, Mr. Bloom had said that she was hiding inventory from the Friends. Ms. Gunn explained that when the archives were opened Mr. Bloom went directly to a file drawer and opened it, and announced that Ms. Gunn had hidden sales items belonging to the Friends in the drawer. Ms. Gunn asked that the Friends’ inventory list reflect the items that were downstairs in the shop only, and that they come back with another inventory list for the items found in the archives. Mr. Bloom stated that the material in question is in addition to what is already downstairs and that the Friends did not move the inventory to the downstairs in the first place. Mr. Bondi asked if the Friends have a list of everything the Friends purchased that they plan to remove. Mr. Bloom said that they did have a list but that when they were in the Museum in December they found items upstairs that belonged to the Friends that had not been removed downstairs. Mr. Bloom said the Friends had done an inventory several months earlier as an on-site basis based on where the inventory was located at the time, which was what the current inventory was based on. Ms. Rochelle stated that the items in the vault were not on the Friends’ inventory list because they were only rediscovered last month.
Mr. Bondi questioned that in normal business procedures, when items are purchased, there is an inventory, and wouldn’t these items be on some sort of inventory list. Ms. Rochelle said the Friends inventory was a current account of what they could access a few months ago. Ms. Gunn stated that the only things removed from the vault were boxes of books belonging to the Friends. She said that she was not trying to hold the Friends’ inventory but that she needed to be able to check against what they inventoried to make sure that she was protected. Ms. Rochelle stated that this was not a complicated procedure if everyone worked together.
Ms. Rochelle reminded the Commission of the motion still on the table and called for any further discussion.
** MOTION APPROVED WITH ONE OPPOSED
Ms. Rochelle told Ms. Gunn to expect a letter from the Chairman of the Museum Committee stating that the Committee would like to continue a supervised inventory of the Museum and Ms. Rochelle indicated she would like Ms. Gunn to follow up on the request of that letter as soon as possible.
NORWALK HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY (NHRI)
5 Elmcrest Terrace
Ms. Gunn said that apparently last Thursday the hospital has started the process through Code Enforcement to apply for the demolition and that in last month’s minutes Ms. Rochelle had asked if any paperwork had come through and it had not; and it still has not. Ms. Gunn was informed today that the process is underway. She explained that the process was slightly different when a house is not on the list than when it is and that they expect to bring it to the Commission at the February meeting.
Ms. Bryant asked what happens at that point. Ms. Rochelle said that the Commission refuses to sign and release it and there is another 90-day process. Ms. Gunn said that she had met with Dori Wilson, John Cehi and Liz Suchy. There was concern that the hospital has removed other buildings to create the parking area and there was question whether only the back of the building could be removed and the parking area reconfigured. Ms. Wilson had come up with a plan to remove the back of the building and reconfigure the parking and Ms. Gunn distributed the plans to the Commission.
Ms. Gunn said that there was a question about removing a utility building from the parking lot and the idea was floated that a new building could be built behind the house to support it. They were told in the
Historical Commission
January 22, 2003
Page 9
meeting that the water and electricity conduits could not be moved all the way back, and that when the building was built the utilities are housed in the back portion. From the hospital’s perspective it would be very costly to remove that portion of the building. Ms. Gunn said that it was sort of implied that the hospital’s working staff needed access to their cars quickly which would not be remedied by valet parking. She said that the hospital was asked to look at compact-car parking lot reconfiguration to get more spaces in to save the building. Ms. Bryant asked what ideas the hospital was coming forward with. Ms. Gunn said
the hospital has forwarded nothing, but the meeting had been called with hopes that some options could be explored to save the integrity and character of the building.
Ms. Falasca asked if anyone from the Zoning Commission had visited the building. Ms. Gunn said she didn’t know the answer to that but that Ms. Wilson had visited it. Ms. Rochelle asked if the Commission was going to get any salvage from the house once it was demolished and stated that Ms. Gunn had removed the paragraph requesting salvage from the letter she recently sent to the hospital. Ms. Gunn said that she was saving that particular request for later. Ms. Rochelle said that now "later" has come. Ms. Gunn said that that idea had been discussed at that morning’s meeting.
Ms. Falasca stated that she wished the house at 5 Elmcrest Terrace could be open for public viewing of the interior. Ms. Gunn offered to ask the hospital if such a tour could be arranged. Mr. Bloom suggested the interior of the building be photographed for archival purposes. Ms. Rochelle agreed and called for photographic documentation for the February 26th meeting. Ms. Gunn asked how Ms. Rochelle wanted that implemented. Ms. Rochelle stated that possibly the hospital could shoot a roll of film for the Commission or Ms. Gunn herself could do it.
Mr. Bloom suggested the photos be brought to the public hearing about 5 Elmcrest in order for the public to see them. Ms. Rochelle said that if the hospital would be able to keep the building, they would probably be remodeling or altering it, and the Commission would need the documentation. Mr. Bloom stated that the building had served as a successful office building for many years and that it was amazing how much of the interior was intact.
Ms. Gunn stated that the hospital had said repeatedly that the cost of heating the building was astronomical and that all the windows would have to be replaced. Ms. Gunn stated that she had personally offered to work with the hospital as much as possible, as would the Commission, to find ways that the building could be upgraded without removing the windows.
Ms. Bryant suggested that the Commission should ask the hospital the same type of questions that the Connecticut Historical Commission asks building owners when the building involved is a National Register property because they ask economic balance questions such as has an architect evaluated the structural integrity of the building, or, what is the cost of demolition versus the cost of keeping the building. Ms. Bryant stated that the CHC asks very pointed questions that help to evaluate whether a building really needs demolishing or not. Ms. Rochelle asked if Ms. Bryant had a list of these questions for the Commission. Ms. Bryant agreed to provide the questions to Ms. Rochelle.
Ms. Gunn said that the hospital has had the second architectural report on the existing parking garage, and that they were told the parking garage will have to be torn down and rebuilt. She reported that a member of the public had heard about the building over the past weekend and came in to speak with her. This person had a construction background and suggested that the hospital consider extending the existing levels of parking deck to the westerly portion of the property adjacent to the road, which could create additional parking and might save the house. Ms. Gunn said she has heard that the hospital is planning to reconfigure the building, that as they upgrade to meet the needs of modern medicine they need to change some existing areas and that parking was something that they were considering, but they did not come out and say specifically that they were not going to be building another parking garage. Ms. Gunn stated that unless the public comes out and cries to save the Elmcrest building until it becomes uncomfortable for the
hospital, the hospital was pretty much set to demolish the building.
Ms. Gunn pointed out that the house at 5 Elmcrest was important to the city’s view of its streetscape history by virtue of the fact that it is easily seen from the street and I-95. Mr. Bloom said that the house has the best quality woodwork of its style of any building in the city, because the house is not a
Historical Commission
January 22, 2003
Page 10
copy but an interpretation and especially because the house is a modern 20th Century house with modern facilities done up in a Georgian style. Ms. Falasca said that this house was perfect for a convention center, a meeting center or galleries with changing shows that could be sponsored by the hospital, or could be rented out by the hospital for these purposes.
Ms. Rochelle stated that it was now 10:00 p.m. and that the Commission should move on as the Elmcrest Terrace house would be discussed again next month. She suggested that the Commissioners go
back to the drawing board and think of possible salvation solutions to be brought to the meeting in February. Ms. Gunn suggested the Commissioners also write personal letters to the hospital or to the editor of the newspaper. Ms. Rochelle agreed, saying that the Commissioners should do everything possible to help save the house.
Ms. Gunn reported that letters would be going out to the neighbors in the next week or so to notify them of the house’s pending demolition. Ms. Rochelle asked what letters. Ms. Gunn explained that before a house could be demolished, a blanket letter was sent to the neighbors to notify them of intended demolition. Ms. Rochelle questioned Ms. Gunn’s sending of the letters before the demolition permit was even filed. Mr. Bondi stated that it was a zoning variance that required the letters be sent. Ms. Rochelle said she still didn’t understand why the letters were being sent before the zoning meeting. Ms. Gunn stated that if the property owners in the area could see or read something in the newspapers about the importance of the house and the Commission’s position on this, and help draw the public to understand why the Commission feels this way, it would help the Commission’s cause. Ms. Rochelle said that Ms. Gunn would be a good spokesperson for this issue with the newspapers since Ms. Gunn had been involved in it from the beginning. Ms. Gunn said that although she does not live in Norwalk, she was fully agreeable to speaking up and could advocate for saving the house as an interested person, but suggested if more people from the community and Commission members’ letters could be seen, it would help even more. Ms. Rochelle remarked that because Ms. Gunn had been involved for so long with the Elmcrest Terrace house, Ms. Gunn was so much more knowledgeable about the house than any Commissioner at this time.
Mr. Bondi stated that Ms. Falasca was very involved in this issue as well and asked why Ms. Falasca could not write a letter or two to the newspapers. Ms. Rochelle replied that Ms. Falasca may have done this already. Ms. Falasca said that she would be very willing to write a letter. Ms. Rochelle then suggested that the Commissioners do all that they can to promote saving this house, by discussion and writing and whatever else they could do.
NHRI Updating
Ms. Rochelle stated that the Ordinance Committee meeting would be held the following evening. She said that Mr. William Wrenn had called and asked her to attend the meeting and she asked if the Commissioners and Ms. Gunn attend the meeting as well as the Ordinance Committee would be discussing the newly proposed 90-day demolition delay for all structures over fifty years old. Ms. Rochelle said that she felt the Commission should attend to see what the Ordinance Committee is proposing. Ms. Rochelle said that the Commission has been asked to attend the Land Use meeting on February 20 as Mr. Kimmel wants to discuss updating the NHRI list. She felt that both Ms. Gunn and Mr. Bloom specifically should attend this meeting as they have extensive knowledge on the NHRI.
Ms. Rochelle stated that what the Commission is doing with the NHRI is to ask volunteers and members of the Norwalk Trust for Historic Preservation to take the list and do a second physical review to add any possible houses to the list. The Commissioners have added houses but would like another group to go through as well. Ms. Rochelle said that the Commission would like to get the Connecticut Historical Commission’s forms and obtain the procedure for updating the NHRI list. Once the guidelines have been
determined they will have a baseline for additions and then can advertise to the public for additions to the list. Ms. Rochelle said that once the list is updated it will be published on the city’s database so the public can access it.
Historical Commission
January 22, 2003
Page 11
Carriage House
Ms. Rochelle asked if the temporary patch was done. Ms. Gunn said that it was repaired and paid for. Ms. Falasca stated that she had been there today and there were no leaks. Ms. Gunn said that she had been asked to look into the wood; she had discovered an acquaintance who had done the original restoration of the wood, she had met with him last week and he is getting her a quote.
REPORTS – COMMITTEES
LMMM Restoration Committee
Ms. Falasca stated that the Restoration Committee had met earlier that day and she did not have a chance to write up the minutes from the meeting. She stated that individual signage is going up and that the monumental sign is proceeding; that the bicycle trail is apparently out for bid and is back on the boards for summer. Ms. Gunn asked if there had been any discussion on the granite columns which were discussed to be moved as part of the bike path bid. Ms. Falasca said it was not discussed.
Ms. Falasca said that she had spoken with Mike Mocciae regarding a cement surround which had been around a tree trunk and had been broken for some time. The pieces of the surround had been moved and she wanted to know who gave permission for this to be removed.
Ms. Rochelle asked Ms. Falasca to keep on top of the issue and report back to the Commission.
OLD BUSINESS
There was no old business to discuss.
NEW BUSINESS
Ms. Gunn said that she had written a letter to Michael Mocciae on January 17 requesting that Rec & Parks look into removing a downed tree limb at Brookside Cemetery, and the dead tree that was hanging over the jail at Smith Street. Ms. Rochelle asked if she had received a reply and Ms. Gunn said she had not. Mr. Bondi said that he had spoken with someone at Rec & Parks and that he saw that the limb had been removed when he went to Brookside to see if any stones had been damaged.
ANY OTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION
Ms. Rochelle reported to the Commission that Ernie Wiegand, chairman of the Archaeology Dept. at NCC has been removed because of cuts in the state budget, and she asked if Commissioners would write letters on his behalf and do anything they could do to try to get Mr. Wiegand reinstated.
The meeting was called closed at 10:35 p.m. There was no motion made to adjourn the meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda J. Hayes
Assistant to the Curator
Norwalk Museum
Historical Commission
November 20, 2002
