ATTENDANCE: Michael Coffey, Chairman; Rick McQuaid; Matt Miklave;
Kelly Straniti; Doug Sutton; Carvin Hilliard; Nick Kydes (7:50 p.m.)

STAFF: Katherine Lasberg, Corporation Counsel

OTHER: Doug Hempstead

CALL TO ORDER

Chairman Coffey called the meeting to order at 7:45 p.m. Chairman Coffey said that he sent a copy of the agenda to all the council members.

MINUTES

** CHAIRMAN COFFEY MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 15, 2005.
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

OLD BUSINESS

a. Eminent Domain

Chairman Coffey said that he asked Ms. Lasberg of CCM for copies of the blight information because during the last term, it was one of the topics that they discussed. He distributed copies of that, as well as an analysis of the research report ruling in an eminent domain case. Mr. McQuaid asked if they could use this information to talk about at future meetings. Chairman Coffey said yes, that it could be put on the agenda.

From the standpoint of eminent domain, he said he had presented a series of questions to the City Attorney’s office before the Council changed at the end of last year. They had sent the eminent domain issue back down to the Committee, so they will review the computation scheme and revise it. The computation scheme is what they use to figure out the amount of money people would get if their property was taken by eminent domain. He is still waiting to get some research from CCM. He would also like to discuss if Council would want to put limitations on eminent domain to avoid a Kelo-type situation in Norwalk. That would mean that that they do not seize property just for economic development.

Ms. Straniti asked if Chairman Coffey if he had received any new information on what the State is doing. Chairman Coffey replied no, that they are not in session at this time. It is on for the next legislative session. He is waiting for responses to the list of 24 questions that they submitted. They can then narrow down the focus of the list. The past laws don’t want to have the Kelo-style situation, and he feels they can modify it to get back to a Kelo-style decision.

Mr. Hilliard said he is concerned about the compensation. He said the business owners at the public hearing that night spoke about the compensation issue. He asked what type of form was used to evaluate the property. Perhaps there is another way to look at the evaluation process, rather than have it done strictly by real estate value. Chairman Coffey said he will invite Mr. Tim Sheehan to the next meeting to discuss the computation schematic procedure. Mr. McQuaid suggested that the new members of the committee be given the list of 24 questions that were submitted. Ms. Lasberg said that the list is in the packet.

Chairman Coffey said that Kelo vs. New London in June 2005 approved the use of eminent domain for seizures solely for economic development. Under the State of Connecticut Constitution and the Charter of the State of Connecticut, they have the right to modify that if they so choose. He said it is the Chairperson’s position that they don’t seize personal property for economic development. At the last meeting, they unanimously passed the NHPPO out of Committee, it went up to Council, and it was sent back down. The ordinance seemed restrictive, and Chairman Coffey said they need to determine how restrictive they want it to be. The property owners get 100% of the appraised value of their property. The appraisers will take off for environmental remediation. They held a public hearing with many speakers advising them to read and review the information for next month.

Some discussion followed regarding environmental remediation, fair market value for the property owners, and ultimately, who is responsible for the costs. Chairman Coffey clarified that the compensation is based on the schematic. He said Dick Blumenthal is recommending 150% of fair market value.

Mr. Hilliard said he would like to see some numbers supporting the possibility that the City could be overpaying. He said the people at the public hearing didn’t agree that the money was right. Mr. Miklave said he agrees that they need data in order to evaluate the cost of a piece of property. He thought that the cost of acquisition is just compensation, i.e. the fair market value of the property for its zoned use. That would include an appraisal from a certified appraiser as to what that property could be sold for.

Chairman Coffey said that Mr. Trofa was present at the meeting tonight. He is a prime example of being a business owner for years in Norwalk. His property was seized for fair market value, but he can’t afford to relocate within the City of Norwalk.

Chairman Coffey said that the Maritime Motors case should be heard on January 20, 2006 by the Supreme Court.

Ms. Straniti asked who does the actual appraisal. Chairman Coffey said it’s either the developer or the redevelopment agency does the appraisal. Ms. Straniti thought it would be a good idea in the meantime to get something minimal on the books before a Kelo-type situation happens again. Chairman Coffey said that was a good point, and he will distribute something next month.

Chairman Coffey said he will get a copy from the Redevelopment Agency of how many times eminent domain was used. The Wall Street area used eminent domain to rebuild after the flood.

b. Ethics Code Revisions

Chairman Coffey said Mr. Hilliard asked him to be Chairman of the Ethics Committee, and he agreed. The ethics code revisions pursuant to the Charter will be handled at the Ethics Code Committee Meetings.

** CHAIRMAN COFFEY MOVED TO TABLE THE ETHICS CODE REVISIONS INDEFINITELY.
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

NEW BUSINESS

a. Documents Retention

Chairman Coffey asked Ms. Lasberg of CCM to do some research on document retention, i.e. mayoral changes. The results should be available soon.

b. Municipal Financing and Elections

Chairman Coffey asked Ms. Lasberg of CCM for research about the 12 municipalities in the United States who have fully funded municipal elections. Sec. 48 of the bill that Governor Rell signed will be copied and sent out, in addition to the policies of the other municipalities. Under the way the State statute reads, the State will not be giving them a model ordinance. It is up to the municipality to come up with their own draft ordinance.

Mr. McQuaid said they had requested someone from the State to come down to talk to them. Chairman Coffey said he will invite Mr. Jeff Greenfield, the Chairman of the State Election Enforcement Commission, to come down.

Mr. McQuaid asked if they could have an outdoor dining report for next month’s meeting. Chairman Coffey said that was a good idea. He would invite Mr. Alvord down, and Ms. Lasberg suggested they invite Mr. Greene. Mr. Miklave asked who was the entity that they designated to be responsible for this. Mr. Alvord does some of the process, and Planning & Zoning gives the final approval. Ms. Diane Jacobsen does the contracts for the City. Ms. Lasberg said that Ms. Jacobsen had not received any new applications for outdoor dining.

ADJOURNMENT

** MR. HILLIARD MOVED TO ADJOURN.
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Carolyn Marr
Telesco Secretarial Services

Back to Previous Page	Back to Home Page