FEBRUARY 16, 2006

ATTENDANCE: Douglas Sutton, Chair; William Krummel; Douglas Hempstead; Nicholas Kydes; Gwen Briggs; Fred Bondi (8:27).

STAFF: Alan Lo, Director of Facilities

OTHERS: Frank Canoso, Roosevelt Center; Attorney David F. Waters, Lepofsky, Lepofsky & Lang; Raphael Visnizi, Stuart Opdahl, Board of Education; Diane Lauricella, League of Women Voters; Mr. Jean, Mr. Pierre, Mr. Azor, United Haitian American Society of Norwalk; John Hawley, Gilbane; Sharon Cadden; Gerald Foley, Purchasing Agent, City of Norwalk.

Mr. Sutton called the meeting to order at 8:08 p.m.

I. ROLL CALL

The members of the Committee introduced themselves.

II. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING(S)

January 19, 2006

Page 1, Others, Mr. Krummel noted that Soo Gunn should be mentioned as also being from the
Historical Commission, along with Marija Bryant.
Page 5, 142-144 East Avenue – Land Conveyance, paragraph above motion, change last sentence
to read, “…..boardwalk along the edge of the medical building property and developers
would pay for and design the boardwalk in the small parcel being donated to the City.
Mr. Krummel noted that the documents submitted by Mr. Waters did not include the
requested natural resource assessment and Mr. Waters concurred that it did not.”

** MR. SUTTON MOTIONED TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 19, 2006 MEETING AS AMENDED.
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

III. OLD BUSINESS

A. Roosevelt Center – U.S. Academy of Gymnastics lease renewal (Item referred back from the Common Council on January 24, 2006)

“Authorize the Mayor, Richard A. Moccia, to execute a 10-year lease extension with U.S.A.G., Inc. (U.S. Academy of Gymnastics) for the use of portion of Roosevelt Center for its children’s programs.”

Mr. Lo explained that this item came to the Committee at the January meeting and the Committee approved the item and forwarded it to the Common Council. At the Council meeting the item was referred to Executive Committee for further discussion. Mr. Lo said that as he understood it, there was some concern about the amount of rent to be paid. He included some explanation in the information packages given to the Committee members along with some research.

Mr. Lo stated that regulations only allow limited use of the property, so the value of the property is determined by what is allowed to be put into the building. For comparison, Mr. Lo said that on last month’s agenda, the Lockwood House rent is much higher because other uses can be put into that building. Because of the restrictions on the Roosevelt property, the rental amount is limited. The building was built in the 1950s. There have been minimum improvements on the property and the condition is useable but not prime space. This was his justification for the negotiation on the price. During the discussions he consulted with Tom Hamilton from the Finance Dept. and also with a local commercial developer on the value of the space. Mr. Sutton noted that the property owner, Mr. Franklin Canosa, was in attendance if the Committee had questions.

Mr. Krummel stated that those Committee members who were at the Council meeting where this item was returned to Committee made a comparison to Keystone House, where there is a sizeable rent, and the question came up as to why there isn’t an equivalent rent for Roosevelt Center. Mr. Krummel felt that they haven’t answered that question. He was concerned that in returning this back to the Council they will be confronted with that comparison and felt they need a better argument. He stated he understood the reference to the Zoning Regulations, but they need comparison numbers as to the arrangement the City has with U.S. Gymnastics.

Mr. Kydes said that he understands but it wasn’t that kind of comparison. Keystone House is a nonprofit organization and doesn’t have the kind of expenses that U.S. Gymnastics has, such as teachers’ salaries. Keystone House also contributes to a pool of funds, which are basically the City’s funds for major renovations and other improvements. He didn’t feel it was a true comparison to use a nonprofit organization with limited expenses and compare it with a school such as U.S. Gymnastics.

Mr. Hempstead asked if there were any comments that came with this item when the Council returned it. Mr. Lo said there was no comment from the Council, it was just tabled and sent back. Mr. Hempstead said there are no instructions. He stated that Tumble Bugs is also limited; it was not as if they had a tenant who wanted to come in and renovate and knock down walls. The space can only be used in its existing form and Mr. Canosa has to work with what the City is giving him.

There was further discussion about the limited use of the space, the rental payment amounts, and if there was any interaction between the users of Roosevelt Center had any interaction with the seniors living in the senior housing there, as well as the marketability for the pricing of the space.

** MR. HEMPSTEAD MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR, RICHARD A. MOCCIA, TO EXECUTE A 10-YEAR LEASE EXTENSION WITH U.S.A.G. (U.S. ACADEMY OF GYMNASTICS) FOR THE USE OF PORTION OF ROOSEVELT CENTER FOR ITS CHILDREN’S PROGRAMS.
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

B. Review proposal from 142-144 East Avenue LLC to convey land along the edge of their property adjacent to Norwalk River, for public access and refer the following to the Common Council for action:

“Authorize the Mayor, Richard A. Moccia, to execute any and all
documents necessary to accept the conveyance of land and easement(s)
from 142-144 East Avenue LLC, for the development of public access
walkway along the Norwalk River.”

Mr. Lo introduced the item to the Committee and explained why the item was back before the Committee. The item was approved by the Council with some of the wording revised on the Council floor, which reflected that they advised the Law Department to execute an agreement. The general understanding was at the time this appeared before the Common Council there were still a lot of unknowns associated with the project, and they went to the Council at that time in order to give the Law Department the opportunity to refine the details of the terms. Since that time, Mr. Lo, Corporation Counsel and Mike Greene from P&Z have sat down with Attorney Waters and worked out the details to determine all the agreements. Mr. Lo said they have not drafted the agreements but in the backup package for the Committee members, the details are listed; the area to be conveyed to the City has been identified; and the terms are identified. The only issue they haven’t defined is the dollar amount. Attorney Waters is working with the engineers to come up with the estimate, and Mr. Lo will confirm the contractor’s estimate and then will put a two-year projection on the amount. Mr. Lo said the three documents they will be executing are deeds of conveyance, easements and the escrow agreement.

Mr. Sutton indicated that the owners were in attendance for questioning. Mr. Krummel said that the question was, what was the intent of the Council, changing the wording as they did, and having the Land Use Committee review it again. He indicated another item that was referred back to the Committee for the purpose of Committee discussion, and he thinks the same criticism will be made here, that the Committee is supposed to review the Law Department documents before the item goes to the Council and not afterwards, and feels the other item will also be referred back to the Committee. Mr. Lo said that generally speaking, items will go before committee for approval before the Law Department issues agreements. Because of the time involved in preparing and reviewing the documents, they always go before the Committee in case they want to change things before moving on to the Council. It is very unusual for an agreement to go to the Council before going to the Committee.

Discussion continued about whether or not items should go before the Council and then to the Committee, or to the Committee first and then on to the Council, and included discussion of the reasoning for staff sending items to the Council prior to Committee meetings. Mr. Kydes stated that he believed it was staff’s decision to determine which Committee or Council review the information first, and it was the responsibility of staff and not the Legal Department to develop the agreement; the Legal Department should review them afterwards to be sure the City is protected. Mr. Hempstead felt that Mr. Krummel’s question had a point, and further discussion followed between Committee members and Mr. Lo.

Attorney Waters stated that they had received Zoning approval the previous night, and asked for an idea as to when this item would be approved so the applicants could move ahead. Mr. Lo said he would discuss the issue with the Law Department and contact the Committee via email. Mr. Krummel questioned if there was a time limit on the escrow account. Attorney Waters said that was has been agreed to is that they will make this application to DEP on the 4th, within the 120 days after the approvals become final. Typically it takes about two years to get the approvals; sometimes it is less, but the concept is that if the approvals are obtained before completing construction on the site of their section of the boardwalk and the completion of their site, they would undertake the construction of the section of the boardwalk along the property to be given to the City, which would be cheaper than if the City did it. At that point the escrow funds for that would revert back to them. But if they completed the work on the site, obtained the CO’s and have moved on, then at that time the escrow funds revert to the City and it would be the City’s obligation to do the construction. Mr. Krummel said then there was no need for a time limit on the escrow, and Attorney Waters concurred. Discussion followed on the exact wording of the terms in the legal document.

** MR. HEMPSTEAD MOTIONED TO PUT THIS ITEM ON THE NEXT LAND USE AGENDA IN THE MONTH OF MARCH WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE ITEMS BROUGHT FORWARD IN THIS MEMO DATED FEBRUARY 8, 2006 BEFORE THE LAW DEPARTMENT ARE WITH THE INTENT OF DRAFTING AN AGREEMENT FOR THIS COMMITTEE’S REVIEW IN THIRTY (30) DAYS.
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

** MR. KRUMMEL MOTIONED TO APPROVE THE AMENDED ACTION:

“AUTHORIZE THE LAW DEPARTMENT TO PREPARE ANY AND ALL DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO ACCEPT THE CONVEYANCE OF LAND AND PERMANENT EASEMENT OF 142-144 EAST AVENUE LLC, FOR THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC ACCESS ALONG THE NORWALK RIVER FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL.”
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

IV. NEW BUSINESS

A. Board of Education

a. Review proposed computer purchases and refer the following to the Common Council for action:

“Authorize the Purchasing Agent to issue purchase order(s) to Dell Computer for the purchase of computers for Brien McMahon High School for a total not to exceed $104,913.76. Acct. #09045010-5777-C0112”

** MR. KYDES MOTIONED TO AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASING AGENT TO ISSUE PURCHASE ORDERS TO DELL COMPUTER AS STATED.

Mr. Ralph Visnisi, a technology specialist for the Norwalk Public Schools, explained that what was being asked for is a capital expenditure to place computers into all of the newly constructed labs at Brien McMahon High School and indicated they are doing this now for Brien McMahon and will be asking for the same in the 2006-07 capital budget for Norwalk High. Mr. Kydes questioned the operating systems to be used, and Mr. Visnisi stated XP and Office 2003.

Mr. Bondi questioned if these computers are replacing the ones that were stolen. Mr. Visnisi stated they had received some of the stolen computers back. Mr. Bondi asked if the City had been reimbursed for the ones that were damaged, and said it was unfortunate that was not a stipulation made to the individual who stole them.

Mr. Krummel inquired what was being done with the old computers being replaced. Mr. Opdahl said the City has to pay to dispose of the old ones, and that is why they are looking to do a lease/purchase instead of an outright purchase. He explained the environmental issues involved with discarding older computers. Ms. Diane Lauricella indicated there were ways to dispose of old computers that the City should investigate that would be more cost-effective overall.

** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
B. Human Relations and Fair Rent Department

1. Review proposal from United Haitian American Society of Norwalk for the use of Room #124 and refer to the following to the Common Council:

“Authorize the Mayor, Richard A. Moccia, to execute a one-year License Agreement with United Haitian American Society of Norwalk for the periodic use of Room #124 in Norwalk City Hall, to assist local community with Haitian consular business.”

Mr. Lo explained the item has been referred to Committee from the Human Relations and Fair Rent Department and is a request from the United Haitian American Society of Norwalk to use a small room next to the Human Relations office twice a month in conjunction with the Haitian Consulate to do consulate business such as visas and other business. Mr. Sutton indicated Mr. Jean, Mr. Pierre, and Mr. Azor from the United Haitian American Society who were available for questions.

Mr. Azor explained that currently, anyone living anywhere in the State of Connecticut who needed to obtain a visa or a passport had to go to New York to the Consulate, and what they were trying to do was to utilize a room in Norwalk City Hall to act as a satellite consulate office two days a month to speed up the process. Mr. Krummel asked what area they thought Norwalk would serve. Mr. Azor said the entire state, but that would only amount to about ten or fifteen people a day. Mr. Hempstead said there was a definite need for this. Mr. Kydes said the only issue he could see was that if they opened this up to one group, then they might have to open it up to each ethnic group within the City if they are asked. Mr. Krummel said the Haitian group is the first group that has approached them with this idea and they should allow it and see what happens. There was some discussion about whether other groups would then want to do the same thing.

Mr. Hempstead asked if this would be fee-based. Mr. Azor said it would, explaining that they charge fees of $75 for a five-year passport. Mr. Kydes asked if there were any other groups that do this in any other areas of Connecticut. He asked if transportation was an issue. After further discussion, Mr. Kydes said it seemed to be an interesting idea and the City should try it for a period of one year and oversee it. Mr. Krummel said it was not showing any bias or favoritism to make welcome any particular group, although he was concerned about whether there would be any security problems involved, particularly considering the current political situation in Haiti. Mr. Azor assured the Committee there would be no security problems.

Mr. Kydes asked if Stamford had been approached with this request. Mr. Azor said he has an upcoming meeting with Mayor Malloy on the 24th and the Consulate has asked for this opportunity for four days a month, so he will be proposing that Stamford to allow them to operate two days there and two days in Norwalk. Mr. Kydes had concerns that allowing any group to operate inside City Hall would be stepping into Federal government areas and possibly opening the City up to having to follow Federal guidelines such as installing metal detectors or security guards. There was discussion about how many people would be using the services, possible overuse of the facilities, and the availability of the room.

Mr. Bondi said there has been use of a room in City Hall by veterans’ organizations and said City Hall should be open to all citizens, although he suggested that Mr. Azor and his group check with N.E.O.N. or the Carver Center to see if they had space that could be utilized for the same purpose as these spaces might be larger than the one offered at City Hall. Mr. Krummel said the motion is to authorize the Mayor, who might decide not to allow this. Mr. Krummel wanted to welcome the Haitian community and said he was not afraid of overuse of the facilities. Mr. Kydes said he also welcomes them but his concern is to be sure that by allowing this, the City is not stepping into any Federal guideline areas that might pose certain requirements. He suggested that the motion might include a caveat to allow them to rethink the issue and possibly say no in the future.

** MS. BRIGGS MOVED TO APPROVE THE AUTHORIZATION AS STATED, WITH THE CONDITION THAT IF THE CITY IS REQUIRED TO ADHERE TO ANY CURRENTLY UNKNOWN FEDERAL STANDARD OR REGULATION, THE CITY HAS THE RIGHT TO REVISIT THE REQUEST AND CHANGE ITS DECISION.
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

** MR. BONDI MOTIONED TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO TAKE UP ITEMS NOT ON THE REGULAR MEETING AGENDA.
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

1. Presentation on the Amendment of the Schools Facilities Assessment Report on the reallocation of funds within the approved school construction budget limits.

A presentation was given by Mr. Lo to explain why funds need to be reallocated for the ongoing projects. Mr. Opdahl outlined the process to determine where the cuts have been made to reduce costs and reallocate funds. There was discussion about the shortfall for the projects at Columbus and Tracey Schools, problems with bids at Roton School, which may have to go back out to bid again, and the bid process was explained. Mr. Lo indicated that this item was on the agenda for informational purposes and did not require action at this time.

No action was taken on this item.

2. (The following item was referred to the Committee by the Common Council on February 14, 2006)

Review recommendation from NFCC on the acceptance of the Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) with Skanska USA Building Inc. for the Columbus School Renovation Project and refer the following back to the Common Council:

“a. Authorize the Mayor, Richard A. Moccia, to execute an
amendment to Skanska USA Building Inc.’s contract for the
construction phase of the Columbus Elementary School
Renovation Project for a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) in
an amount not to exceed $3,894.418. Acct. #90945010-5777-C0314.

b. Establish an allowance for Owner’s Contingency in the amount of $352,500.

c. Authorize the NFCC to issue change orders on contract for a total not to exceed the Owner’s contingency allowance.”

3. General discussion on procedures in order to provide the Council with
information relating to major construction projects.

Mr. John Hawley, project manager, Gilbane, gave an outline of the recommendations. A very long discussion followed, concerning whether the NFCC should continue to act as if it were a committee of the Common Council, or as an organization needing approval from the Council that first needed to appear before the Committee before taking responsibility for moving ahead with projects and accepting and using funds obtained for that purpose. There were questions concerning other Building Advisory Committees and whether Council reps sat on these committees. Mr. Krummel asked for a list of these Committees and Mr. Hawley indicated a list could be provided but said it had not been updated since the recent election.

** MR. KRUMMEL MOTIONED TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR, RICHARD A. MOCCIA, TO a., EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO SKANSKA USA BUILDING INC.’S CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THE COLUMBUS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL RENOVATION PROJECT FOR A GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE (GMP) IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $3,89,418. ACCT. #09045010-5777-C0314; b., TO ESTABLISH AN ALLOWANCE FOR OWNER’S CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $352,500; AND c., TO AUTHORIZE THE NFCC TO ISSUE CHANGE ORDERS ON CONTRACT FOR A TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED THE OWNER’S CONTINGENCY ALLOWANCE.
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

Mr. Lo requested the Committee return to the original agenda. The Committee agreed.

V. MISCELLANEOUS/DISCUSSION ITEMS

A. Presentation by Gerald Foley, Purchasing Agent, on future purchases of energy commodities.

Mr. Foley gave a presentation in which he described how the City will use the firm Source One for their energy uses. He stated that on January 1, 2007 the State may or may not go through energy deregulation, which would give a municipality or any person the ability to go and buy electricity separately. Currently it is a regulated service issue, and the City uses CL&P but the potential for next year is that the City may be able to purchase electricity from another entity. He wanted to bring the Committee up to date as to what the Purchasing Department is planning to do.

Several months back the City was approached by the City of New Haven to solicit firms to assist them in the process. Norwalk now uses a company called Select Energy for its natural gas and is well versed in purchasing natural gas. Mr. Foley explained that purchasing electricity is much more complicated and many cities don’t want to go that route by themselves, so they are considering hiring a firm that is well versed in this type of commodity which can assist them in preparing an RFP or RFQ for services. Norwalk went with the City of New Haven, there were two submissions, and through that process they selected a company called Source One. He met with them about a month ago, reviewed their submission through a presentation to both the City and the Board of Education, and they decided that Source One is the best bet.

Mr. Krummel stated that, in light of the previous discussion about the NFCC, he thinks it is essential that one member of the Council be involved with the RFQ’s. Mr. Bondi inquired about electricity supplied by the Second and Third Taxing Districts and asked if the City had given thought to purchasing energy from that direction. Mr. Foley indicated that his proposal only concerns the electricity provided by CL&P. Mr. Bondi said, so the Second and Third Districts are not involved in this? Mr. Foley said no. Mr. Hempstead suggested that the Committee invite someone from Source One to a future meeting so questions could be asked. Mr. Krummel said he felt it was a mistake for the City to link itself with New Haven. Mr. Foley said it was only the potential for a link up and that his department has sent information to Stamford as well. Mr. Kydes questioned the need to have the Council involved in the RFP/RFQs. Mr. Lo indicated that this item was on the agenda for informational purposes and no action was needed.

No action was taken on this item.

C. City Property

Review proposed lease extension with Cablevision for the use of the parking lot located across the street from their building.

“Authorize staff to negotiate with Cablevision Systems Corp. for a lease amendment for the parking lot located across the street from Cablevision Cross Street.”

Mr. Lo stated that the City had executed a previous contract with Cablevision for a ten year period with two five-year options. In 1996, an amendment was executed in order to modify the original lease period so that the lease of the parking lot coincided with Cablevision’s lease/ownership of the building. On January 17, 2006, Cablevision submitted a request to extend this lease. Mr. Hempstead asked if this area was where Cablevision stored its trucks. Mr. Krummel said the trucks are usually parked at the back of its building and this parking area was used by Cablevision employees. Discussion followed.

Ms. Diane Lauricella, attending the meeting as a representative of the League of Women Voters, said she had concerns about the area as it related to the Norwalk River and indicated that the League of Women Voters would be interested in partnering with the City to upgrade the parking lot with plantings and a cleanup. She asked that the Committee consider the request, and said that a buffer between the lot and the river should be discussed before the Committee moved ahead with any decision. Mr. Lo asked for the City’s input and negotiation on Cablevision’s request, and said they had sixty days from January 17th in which to respond. He said it was in the City’s interest to continue to lease the space to Cablevision, and would send a letter to Cablevision stating this and will negotiate a price with them.

Ms. Lauricella stated that she felt the Committee should take a little time to review how this parking lot impacts the river and said they should not go forward with the negotiations unless these negotiations include an environmental component. She wanted the Committee to agree to discuss this matter at the Council level and asked that the Committee state that they are definitely willing to negotiate but that they don’t assume that Cablevision is just going to be parking on asphalt. She said there is a chance here for a win-win situation and unless that is part of the negotiating process, she opposes any suggestion of renting City property without considering the resources.

Mr. Krummel left the meeting at 10:55 p.m. He stated that he agreed with Ms. Lauricella and suggested that the Committee talk to Redevelopment and look into it.

Ms. Briggs asked if she could amend the negotiation to include an investigation of environmental considerations. Mr. Sutton said this could be done. Mr. Kydes said he did not approve and wouldn’t vote for it, saying the parking lot has been a parking lot for a number of years, and now we are going to give Cablevision stipulations. Ms. Briggs said this was not the intent of her suggestion. Mr. Kydes disagreed. Ms. Briggs said that the amendment was to include in the negotiating process consideration of pervious surface on the parking lot and to include some kind of an access to the river on that property. Ms. Lauricella began to speak and Mr. Kydes stated that she was not a member of the Committee or the Council and was out of place. Mr. Bondi said this was not a public hearing and they need to move ahead with the agenda and said that Ms. Lauricella could bring her concerns to the Council. Mr. Kydes attempted to move ahead with the discussion and Ms. Lauricella continued to interrupt until the Committee stopped and allowed her to make her statement. Further discussion about Ms. Briggs’ suggestion continued.

** MR. BONDI MOTIONED TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO NEGOTIATE WITH CABLEVISION SYSTEMS CORP. FOR A LEASE AMENDMENT FOR THE PARKING LOT LOCATED ACROSS THE STREET FROM CABLEVISION CROSS STREET, WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE NEGOTIATION INCLUDE ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS INCLUDING A PERVIOUS SURFACE AND ACCESS TO THE RIVER.
** MOTION PASSED WITH ONE OPPOSED (MR. KYDES)

V. MISCELLANEOUS/DISCUSSION ITEMS

B. Review proposal from Silvermine 1 Development, LLC regarding City property on Oakwood Avenue.

Mr. Lo stated that he had received a letter from Mr. Robert Testa requesting permission to purchase a City-owned parcel on Oakwood Avenue measuring approximately 2,500 sq. ft. He was offering a purchase price of $10.00 per sq. ft., or a total of $25,000. Mr. Lo said the proposal was very weak. He was not sure what to do and asked if he should continue talking with Mr. Testa. Ms. Briggs asked if Mr. Testa intended to develop the property. Mr. Lo said he felt that he was. After some discussion Mr. Hempstead asked for a fast in-house appraisal of the property.

No action was taken on this item.

ADJOURNMENT

** MR. KYDES MOTIONED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

The meeting was adjourned at 11:17 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Linda J. Hayes
Telesco Secretarial Services