|
|
|
| NORWALK HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES |
| Click
Here for Sept. 25, 2002 Minutes |
Click Here for Oct. 23, 2002 Minutes |
BUDGET MEETING
NOVEMBER 6, 2002
ATTENDANCE: Chairperson Diane Rochelle, Betty Booth, Carol Ann Falasca, Linda Fallon, Ralph Bloom, John Federici
STAFF: Susan Gunn, Curator
OTHERS: Peter Bondi
The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Chairperson Diane Rochelle, who informed the Commission that Glenn Iannaccone, Deborah Mathies and Kathleen Morrow would not be in attendance and were excused.
Ms. Rochelle stated that the purpose of the meeting was to address the Operating Budget of the Norwalk Historical Commission for 2003-2004.
Budget Projections
Ms. Rochelle told the Committee that she and Ms. Gunn had worked on the budget very diligently together for a long time and had increased it up from $180,000 to $230,000. Using the pro forma, Ms. Rochelle pointed out that the City is offering the Commission $180,875.44 to run on. She stated that what Ms. Gunn had given the Commission is what Ms. Gunn and Ms. Rochelle came up with in terms of additions and changes which totals $230,000.
Ms. Gunn explained the pro forma sheet that had been created, stating that she had put the items down in the same order in which they were created. Ms. Rochelle explained that when looking at the sheet, the very first column was what was spent by the Commission in 2001-2002. There were two columns of budgets for the current year, and then a column of the year-to-date actual for the current year, which would be 2002-2003. The next column was a projection of 2002-2003 and the last column was the proposed budget for 2003-2004. Ms. Rochelle said the actual of a year ago was the only real numbers for a year’s worth of running the Commission that the Commission had. The year-to-date actuals were only covering three and a half months of expenses.
Ms. Rochelle said that the City has been generous in its way with three percent raises here and there; the wage column was increased by five percent which was contractual; the postage had been bumped up five percent; the printing was left at the same number. Ms. Rochelle stated that she and Ms. Gunn felt that the City’s numbers were pretty good with the exception of the changes that she and Ms. Gunn made.
PROJECTED BUDGET INCREASE
Telephone
Ms. Gunn explained that the increase in the telephone budget would be a good place to add charges for obtaining Internet access for the Norwalk Museum. She and Ms. Rochelle had figured the charges to be approximately $1100 dollars for service and hookup, based on quotes that came from Gerald Foley and John Silbert of the City’s Data Processing Dept. It was explained that the hookup charge was approx. $150 dollars and the monthly charge would be approx. $65 dollars. Ms. Falasca questioned the charges. Ms. Gunn replied that this was a cheap quote and that she had had other quotes that were much higher. Ms. Rochelle remarked that there was no discount for being a nonprofit entity.
Buildings
Ms. Gunn stated that the Buildings budget was increased to $4000 because there are a lot of little miscellaneous repairs; that the Museum often has to go begging for money to make the repairs and that the amount was realistic. The $4000 below it in "Other" was a line item for the Norwalk Museum and was asking for $1000 again. This was what the Museum was given last year for operating expenses, including paper, office supplies, etc.. Ms. Gunn was also requesting $3000 to get started with installation of inside storm windows for the Museum.
She explained that with this amount she could get two to four windows completed to begin the project. The reason stated for the storm windows was that it was necessary for the care and conservation of the collection. Ms. Gunn explained that there were two areas that were the most drafty and caused cold, heat and dust problems. These areas included the two front windows in the storage area off the Oakhill Room which was important because of the dropped ceiling and the cooling/heating problems in the area; and the two windows in the second floor archives area where there was also extreme heat/cold conditions and a heavy dust problem. The repairs were needed to keep the collections safe and the heat-and-humidity controlled as much as possible. Ms. Gunn explained that this was something the Museum needed to do and that she did not expect the City to complete all of the windows, but that this appropriation would help the Museum get started, and that these were crucial areas to begin the installation with.
Mrs. Booth asked where the money would come from to continue installing storm windows for the rest of the building. Ms. Rochelle replied that the #5266 line item "Buildings" had been increased to $4000 for all of the 11 properties the Commission oversees and that that was the repair budget for all of the 11 properties. Ms. Rochelle pointed out that in 2001 the Commission had requested another line item, #5269, called "Other Repairs," specifically for the Norwalk Museum so that the small repairs, collections and whatever expenses that might be incurred for this Museum would not come out of the NHC repair budget that the City owns. Ms. Fallon remarked that this was a request and that the Commission knew that installing storm windows in the entire Museum would cost more than just $4000. Ms. Fallon said that she wanted to be as conservative as everyone else, but that she also wanted to be realistic and that she didn’t want to go for a special appropriation. She asked how many windows total would need to be done. Ms. Gunn replied that there were fifteen windows to do, and that she planned to raise money by other means to continue with the other windows.
Ms. Fallon questioned that since the $4000 was allocated for all the other properties, maybe the Commission should be more thoughtful about the amount, saying that the Commission knows these are the things that need to be addressed in these other properties, and that she just thought the Commission should possibly ask for more than just $4000. Ms. Gunn noted that the Commission would be putting quotes into the Capital Budget for the roof of the Carriage House and that should just about take care of the Carriage House problems that she was aware of. Ms. Gunn asked if anyone knew of any other problems with the Carriage House. Ms. Rochelle remarked that this was why they had a "Buildings" budget for things they don’t know about ahead of time and that, theoretically, none of the other buildings should have repairs. Ms. Gunn reminded Ms. Rochelle that they were going to talk about the barn and Smith Street a little bit later.
HISTORIC COMMISSION ASSISTANT
Ms. Rochelle informed the Commission that a new request for an Assistant to work with Ms. Gunn on NHC business was being added to the budget. The assistant would work 12 hours per week and be paid $10 per hour to assist Ms. Gunn with Commission work that she was too busy to get to on her own. Ms. Fallon wanted to know what the assistant would do to earn the $10 per hour. Ms. Rochelle said that asking for an assistant concerned her because it could be construed as commingling duties between Museum and Commission work. Ms. Gunn suggested that inventorying the Museum’s collections would be one of the projects the assistant would take on. Ms. Fallon agreed that certain duties would be necessary. Ms. Rochelle said that the idea of an assistant would have to be sold to the City. Ms. Fallon questioned whether the assistant would be coming in to work on a daily basis or just when needed, and asked if there would be enough work to justify the request to the City. Ms. Gunn remarked that there was always Commission business to be done, and that she could utilize the assistant at least one hour per day. Ms. Rochelle admitted that every other City department has staff secretarial assistance as well as other assistance, and that the Commission as a department did not have any at this time.
LOCKWOOD-MATHEWS MANSION MUSEUM
Conservatory
Ms. Rochelle said that they should now look at the Lockwood Mathews Mansion Museum, and stated that the LMMM should not have any small repairs. Ms. Gunn said that unless there was a real problem with the Conservatory, she agreed. Ms. Falasca said that she didn’t know how long they could wait on the Conservatory, and other Commission members assented. Ms. Rochelle said that the Commission did have money in the Capital Budget, a million-dollar allocation, which could be used for Conservatory repairs. Ms. Gunn said that she had just gotten the package from Alan Lo about the drain spout pipe. Ms. Falasca asked what was the response time for that. Ms. Rochelle and Mr. Bloom stated usually two or three weeks, with Mr. Bloom stating that he saw the notice in the paper two days earlier. Ms. Gunn said that her concern with the LMMM, as far as she knew about, was the Conservatory. Ms. Falasca said that this was one of the complaints heard this past weekend and that there had been a problem with the Junior League rental of the LMMM that she wanted to address later in the meeting.
Gate Lodge/Gardener’s Cottage/Barn
Ms. Gunn mentioned that the Gate Lodge building porch needed replacing but that until the Gate Lodge was rented to someone, the repairs could wait. Ms. Fallon again questioned whether the Commission should be so conservative with its budget requests since to her it seemed that with all the other buildings that seemed to need repair, the Commission should possibly ask for more funds. Ms. Gunn suggested the Commission prepare a list of the buildings, beginning with the Gardener’s Cottage which the Commission was not being held responsible for economically. Ms. Falasca asked if Graystone was taking care of repairs for that building since the City doesn’t help at all. Ms. Gunn replied that the City doesn’t have any money, and the City’s involvement depended on the way the lease was worded. Ms. Gunn said that there was a potential problem with the stone wall near the Gardener’s Cottage and that might pose a problem that would come back to the Commission later. Ms. Gunn said that the jail, after the current repairs were completed, was fine.
Ms. Rochelle questioned if the cost was under $10,000 it stays in the Operating Budget and if it was over $10,000 it goes to the Capital Budget. Mr. Bloom said that originally the
amount was under $7000 and the City has upped it a little bit, but that the City prefers to pay for things out of the Operating Budget if they can so they don’t have to borrow money. Ms. Rochelle said that the reason the Commission was asking was that they were discussing the barn, that they’ve been carrying $15,000 for the barn stabilization which was also for repair of the door and enclosing it. Ms. Gunn interjected that the siding was rotting. Mr. Bloom said it was now a case of the door and total siding. Ms. Rochelle said that it was now really a Capital project, which could not come out of Operating. Mr. Bloom said that to do the entire exterior the last estimate was $100,000. Ms. Rochelle said that the amount was for complete residing, not stabilization. Mr. Bloom said that what appears to be siding is now door after door after door and that they have all been cut through the walls so that there is not a hard surface on any one side of that building. Ms. Rochelle remarked that the barn shouldn’t really mean a small repair, and that the garage door was stabilized with a couple of broom handles. Ms. Gunn stated that the quote for the barn comes to, in round numbers, $64,000.
Ms. Rochelle said that they could decide in two weeks whether they want to address the barn next year, saying that the Commission knows they are in for the Carriage House, the sprinkler system at the LMMM and at least $10,000 for the cemeteries. Ms. Gunn said that she had a quote for two different types of shingling for $14,985 for an architectural shingle which would be esthetically better and is what the Commission asked for the Gardener’s Cottage which was $12,000 more. Total quote was $15,795. When Ms. Gunn went back to the roofing quotes to see if they would hold for budget purposes, she was told that they would hold for the balance of 2002 but that they couldn’t determine what would happen to the price of shingles next year, and that they would pass the costs onto the Commission next year. One of the companies quoted said to add 7 to 10 percent to the quote for next year, which was not guaranteed, for work which could begin in January 2003. Ms. Gunn said that on tarping the Carriage House and the Summer Kitchen, two roofers told her that tarping the Carriage House would be almost impossible to do a
Good job due to the location of the leaks. The roofers recommended temporary patch jobs instead of tarping, but Ms. Gunn did not have time to obtain those quotes at the time of the budget meeting. She did get a quote for tarping the Summer Kitchen, which was approx. $1800.
Ms. Rochelle remarked that Alan Lo informed her that all the wood was being taken off the Summer Kitchen laundry right down to the stone and that it would be going out to bid at the first of the year. Mr. Bloom said that what bothered him was that this was supposed to be the Commission’s jurisdiction and that someone else was calling the shots. Ms. Rochelle said that that particular project had bothered the Commission for the past two years, that the Commission has had no handle whatsoever on what was being done.
Ms. Rochelle asked Ms. Gunn if the Carriage House roofing quotes incorporated cornice restoration. Ms. Gunn said that some do, some don’t, and that some of the roofers are not cornice people. Ms. Rochelle said that there should be a 10 percent contingency put into the Capitol budget for restoration or whatever is needed. Ms. Gunn mentioned that the quotes do include gutter repair. Ms. Rochelle said that all that was left was to determine whether to add the barn repairs into the budget. Mrs. Booth asked what use the Commission was planning to put the barn to at some point. Mr. Bloom said that at one time art workshops had been looked into but the cost of repairs was so extensive that it was decided to just utilize the barn for storage purposes. He said that even though the building seems shabby from the outside, the building is steel-reinforced inside and that the stairs have been rebuilt twice.
Summer Kitchen
Ms. Falasca asked what about the summer kitchen and asked if this was an abandoned project. Ms. Rochelle replied no, that it was going out to re-bid in the next month. Ms. Falasca
asked why. Ms. Rochelle stated that they didn’t like the bids that came in, that the bids were too high and they reworked the bid documents. Ms. Falasca asked if the roof was going to be taken care of even though the building will still remain on the repairs list. Ms. Rochelle said that it was going out to bid for bathrooms in 2003 and that the addition of handicapped bathrooms was something the Commission should definitely continue to pursue. There was some question by other Commission members as to whether this project had been abandoned but it was determined that it had not.
Ms. Rochelle asked if there was any further discussion regarding the LMMM. Ms. Falasca said that she was unsure of how far the Commission’s jurisdiction went but that she wanted to discuss the past weekend’s rental of the LMMM by the Junior League and the list of very preliminary damages done to the LMMM at that time. Ms. Falasca stated that there was damage done to the LMMM and a great deal of arrogance on the part of the members of the Junior League involved in the antique show. Ms. Falasca said that the Fire Inspector had noted a table in front of the exit and had asked a woman to move it, and that the woman told the Fire Inspector to go away and leave her alone. His answer was for her to move it or he would close her down. The table was moved at that time but moved back again a few hours later. The Junior League wanted to have the heat blasting, the doors were taped so that the lock wouldn’t close at all, varnish was removed from the doors when the tape was removed later. The Fire Inspector reminded them to unplug all the tables; nothing was unplugged. There were candles with open flames all around even though they were told not to have them lit. Other complaints included moldings pulled off. Ms. Rochelle said that the Historical Commission did not rent the LMMM to the Junior League, it was the Mansion Board that leased the building, and the Commission would not have jurisdiction over what the Mansion Board did. Ms. Falasca said that based on the arrogance of the Junior League, the Commission needed to write a letter to the
Mansion Board regarding the use of the building as the LMMM is under the Commission’s jurisdiction. Ms. Gunn stated that the LMMM had had problems with the Junior League every time they rent the LMMM. Ms. Falasca was extremely concerned as the Junior League has a two-year rental agreement with the LMMM and that they are trying to obtain use of the Gate House as their headquarters, and wanted the Commission to take some kind of action. She said that she would provide a full list of damages at the next Commission meeting on November 20th. Mr. Bloom concurred with Ms. Falasca as this has been an ongoing problem with the rental by the Junior League and that the LMMM has had many problems with them in the past. Ms. Rochelle asked if Ms. Falasca had a copy of the Mansion’s lease with the League and that the lease should be reviewed for any language that would allow the Commission to write a letter addressing this particular issue. Mr. Bloom said that there was nothing wrong in the Commission’s writing a letter of displeasure due to the commercial use of the building and that he thought it was a good idea.
MILL HILL BUILDINGS
Bell Tower
Ms. Fallon brought up discussion of the Mill Hill buildings, reminding the Commission that they had discussed many matters in the past year that they could not begin due to lack of funds and noting that now they had the opportunity to get some of these things done, particularly with the Bell Tower. Ms. Rochelle said that there was $25,000 in the current year Capital Budget for the Bell Tower including the roof. She said that there was a potential moisture problem in the Fitch building. Mrs. Booth agreed, stating that the problem had been there for a very long time. Ms. Rochelle said that perhaps the extra $2000 dollars the Commission was asking for could be used towards that end. Ms. Gunn said that one of the things that the Commission had decided to do with the Fitch building was to table it until the Rogers Ritch Merritt house foundation was dug and the house put up as the excavation might possibly change the water table. She also noted that the Commission intended to put up drainage galleries up behind the law office and whether that would have any impact on moisture from the dirt floor and stone walls, she couldn’t say at this time.
Ms. Rochelle said that this year the Commission had spent $1300 for termite extermination and that the cost of extermination had just about decimated the $2000. Ms. Fallon expressed some reservations that the Commission still wasn’t asking for enough money, using the termite situation as her example. Ms. Rochelle replied that when she and Ms. Fallon had spoken earlier that afternoon the $4000 seemed adequate at that time, and reminded Ms. Fallon that it was $200 above what they had last year. Mr. Federici thought that they could go much higher than that if they needed to. (There was some discussion between several members of the Commission talking over each other at this point with several views being expressed that could not be determined on the tape.) Ms. Fallon said that there were no roof leaks and no buildings needing painting.
Jail
Ms. Fallon asked if any other Mill Hill buildings would need painting. Mr. Bloom remarked that the jail could use a consistent coat of paint as visitors could plainly see several different layers of color in different shades of brown, and that the window sills were probably quite dry by now as that particular paint job was quite old. Mr. Bloom stated that it was no major job as it was just trim, but would make a big difference as far as preserving the exterior of the building. Mrs. Booth said that SONICC was doing the painting on the schoolhouse but the Historical Society paid for the paint. Ms. Gunn remarked that SONICC was doing a wonderful job. Ms. Falasca wondered if SONICC could be engaged to paint the jail. Ms. Gunn remarked that the jail building was tall and might present problems for the SONICC people due to its height. Mr. Bloom said that the jail was a full three stories off the ground. Ms. Falasca asked if SONICC carried insurance. Ms. Gunn replied that they do, but she wasn’t sure about it as she had only talked to them about it once or twice.
Ms. Rochelle asked if the paint job could be estimated at three or four thousand dollars. Mr. Bloom said that the painters would be doing the two gabled ends plus approx. twelve to fourteen windows and door trims that needed to be scraped, re-primed and painted, plus the gable that needed painting also. He remarked that the biggest problem is requiring the bucket truck to go up and do the whole gable at one time. He felt that the priming and scraping would go very quickly. A short discussion followed about the procedure being used to paint the Town House doors. Ms. Falasca said that instead of asking for $4000, maybe the Commission should ask for $6000.
Apartment Rentals
Ms. Rochelle stated that the two apartment rents would stay the same for 2003. Ms. Falasca questioned the $50 increase in rents that had been added to the fees to cover repairs and maintenance. Mr. Bloom suggested that the Commission ask for $1200 up front with the idea that the money would be going into an account every month. Ms. Rochelle said that the idea of the rent increase was to accrue money until several thousand dollars was in the account and then the Commission could do something with the money. Mr. Bloom suggested that it be a special account. Ms. Fallon said that Land Use wanted the money allocated for a repairs allocation to be used as a reserve account. Ms. Gunn said the rent raise may not even go through. Mr. Federici asked if the rent raise was supposed to have gone through already once repairs have been done. Ms. Rochelle said that the eases were to be year-to year. Ms. Fallon said that she would be surprised if they could carry the rent increase from year to year.
CEMETERIES
Ms. Rochelle said that the Commission had asked for $1500 towards the cemeteries in the 2002 budget but received nothing. She asked the Commission to think over and come up with an amount to discuss at the November 20th Commission meeting.
ROGERS RITCH MERRIT HOUSE
Ms. Rochelle remarked that the Historical Commission had attempted to obtain a grant from the state and that the Commission had hoped to ask the City for $60,000, but since the grant had not come through, they could not ask the City for the money.
Ms. Rochelle and Ms. Gunn went over the requested budget amounts again in preparation for a motion. It was determined that the total amount being requested for the year 2002-2003 would be $231, 495.94. Ms. Rochelle called for a motion to accept the budget as it stood now.
Any other business to come before the Commission.
There was no other business.
** MR. FEDERICI MOVED TO ACCEPT THE BUDGET.
** MR. BLOOM SECONDED.
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Ms. Rochelle called for a motion to adjourn the meeting.
** MR. BLOOM MOVED TO ADJOURN.
** MRS. BOOTH SECONDED.
** MOTION PASSED.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda J. Hayes Assistant to the Curator
Norwalk Museum
Historical Commission
November 6, 2002
