Click above to View Action History

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 6, 2003

 

ATTENDANCE: Bruce Kimmel, Chairman; Carvin Hilliard, Ken Baker

Doug Sutton

STAFF: Lisa Biagiarelli, Tax Collector; Sal Iannacone, Principal

Accountant

OTHER: Gerald Foley, Purchasing Agent

 

CALL TO ORDER

The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. Mr. Kimmel stated that Mr. Miklave was on vacation and that Mr. Perone was in New York.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR JULY 2, 2003

**MR. BAKER MOVED TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES AS DISTRIBUTED.

**MOTION PASSED WITH ONE ABSTENTION (MR.HILLIARD).

Claims Committee: receive the monthly Claims report; review and approve claims as required for Claims Report dated August 6, 2003.

Mr. Kimmel stated that there is a certificate of corrections by the assessors that needs to be voted on in order to give money back.

**MR. KIMMEL MOVED TO APPROVE THE REPORT AND SPECIAL REQUEST.

**MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

Mr. Kimmel asked whether any claim over $5,000 can be brought to the Finance Claims Committee. Ms. Biagiarelli said that she did not know. She added that she only deals with the cases brought to her office. Mr. Kimmel asked Mr. Iannacone the same. He said that, as far as he knew, they have basically been the claims from the tax collector’s office coming through there.

Delinquent Tax Report: receive report and discuss

Ms. Biagiarelli stated that she had ran the report and that she is still posting payments. She said that she had not included the billing that just went out and that Calvin Murphy was not on the report. She further stated that Mr. Murphy paid the day before the sale and that his attorney came in and presented them with the check. She said that the report has items that were in the tax sale that did not sell and that there were others that did not consummate the purchase. Ms. Biagiarelli stated that collections went very well and that it was not busy at the end of the month. She added that she was just a little bit behind with the mail and that she had no report for the end of June. She stated that she was giving a 6/30/03 Delinquent Report.

Ms. Biagiarelli said that this report shows that as of the end of June 2003, on last year’s current levy (2001 grand list), they collected 98.37% of the levy, or nearly $173m in current taxes, as well as $8.5m in sewer use fees, and an additional $5.4m in past due taxes and interest. She stated that both current and past due collections exceeded the prior fiscal years’ numbers and that current collections rose a third of a percent, form 98.04 to 98.37, and delinquent collections were $1.2m ahead of last year. Ms. Biagiarelli further stated that last year was a very good year and that a 98.37% current collection rate on a levy of $176m is excellent and once again gives Norwalk the highest collection rate among the state’s six largest cities.

Mr. Kimmel asked what the rate was last year. Ms. Biagiarelli said 98.4% and that they are 1.2 million ahead of last year. She stated that she has no way of breaking out a sewer report, though there are some items on the list pertaining to the sewer. Mr. Kimmel stated that he was very surprised with the sewer uses. Ms. Biagiarelli said thank you and that she would send the $5,000 claim to the full council.

Recommend the Re-Appointment of Kenneth Whitman to another term as Tax Assessor

Mr. Kimmel stated that he had Mr. Whitman’s resume with him. Mr. Baker said that he was concerned and questioned whether there was a way that they can make sure that the term does not coincide with the revaluation. Mr. Whitman stated that the term does fall on the July of the completion of the revaluation. Mr. Kimmel said that it goes back to July 1^st and would be retroactive regardless. He added that it would be more than five years. Mr. Baker suggested to go back and change the ordinance to four years. He said that three years would probably make more sense. Mr. Hilliard said that three to four sounds like it will work. Mr. Whitman stated that they would probably want to make it upon completion of the re-evaluation. Mr. Kimmel stated that this is a long process and that he would want the future person in early enough. He questioned whether they could make a recommendation to refer to the finance department to discuss the two versus five years. He said that they will be done by this Tuesday. He said that can leave this council issue for the second council meeting in August.

Mr. Whitman stated that the problem with all this is that there is no guarantee that the revaluation schedule will not be changed. Mr. Kimmel said that he understood and felt comfortable sending this to the ordinance committee for the meeting in the second week on August. He stated that the recommendation was listed as an action item.

Mr. Baker said that they were recommending reappointment. Mr. Kimmel stated that the reappointment issue would be separate after the ordinance issue. He said that the objective is to deal with the ordinance before they deal with the reappointment.

**MR. KIMMEL MOVED TO SEND ITEM TO THE ORDINANCE COMMITTEE.

**MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

Discuss Proposed Procurement Guidelines. Action Item: Vote to send item to Public Hearing.

Mr. Baker asked Mr. Foley why there had not been any changes to the guidelines since 1993. Mr. Foley stated that the 1993 version was bits and pieces cobbled together. He said that he had tried to amend the 1993 version, though it was hard since there was no real "rhyme or reason." He stated that he had obtained the formats of others in order to have some sort of guidance as to where to go. He stated that he had eventually contacted the CCA for help. He said that now the set up is in a chapter format. Mr. Baker questioned whether it was really a contract issue. Mr. Foley said that it was sort of a contract issue, though most is in regards to the structural changes. He said that the back page lists all the new changes to the guidelines. He said that chapters one and two have the most changes. He said that he made it so that people can follow it. He said that the original book was close to about 100 pages and that they had to take it and pull out the areas that they thought did not apply, in order to make it a more manageable guide. He stated that the version that everyone sees is about their tenth or eleventh draft. Mr. Foley stated that he had tried to bring the guide as up to date as possible and that it is pretty current. He also said that the "bid threshold" probably has the biggest changes made. He said that he has the informal price quotes. He stated that the old guide was never formally adopted and that he was not there yet in 1993, therefore he was not aware of what went on. He said that the "Peer Review" and the "Bid Threshold" probably have the biggest changes.

Mr. Kimmel asked Mr. Foley whether he was comfortable with the bid threshold at $10,000. Mr. Foley said that he thought it was reasonable given the current climate. He said that he would not like to see it go higher and that he did not think there would be much of a difference. He stated that if the administration wants to centralize everything, they might have to do higher bidding. Mr. Kimmel said for instance that an $11,000 cleanup job would have to go to bid. Mr. Foley stated that something needs to be done.

Mr. Kimmel asked Mr. Foley whether "single source" can be defined. Mr. Foley said that someone else had questioned whether the terminology should be "single source" or "soul source." He stated that they could probably go both ways. Mr. Kimmel asked what would happen if it were $15,000. Mr. Foley said that it would not be considered a single or soul source. Mr. Kimmel asked whether single or soul basically defines the primary source, meaning one cannot go to anyone else. Mr. Foley said that he was correct.

Mr. Kimmel referred to "Extensions" at the bottom of page 16 and questioned whether the threshold would apply there. Mr. Foley replied yes, stating that they would have to go to bid for the item in order for it to come out.

Mr. Kimmel questioned what the average contract was. Mr. Foley said one to two years and that it really depends on commodity.

Mr. Kimmel asked if there were any more further questions or comments. Mr. Hilliard referred to Chapter 11, page 26 and asked if there was any way they could determine who exactly the disadvantaged businesses are and whether there is someone available to identify these types of businesses. Mr. Foley said no. He said that they do have a bid or vender registry on their website. Mr. Hilliard said that sometimes businesses pose as underprivileged in order to get contracts. Mr. Foley said that he would check into this.

Mr. Kimmel asked if there were any further questions about this matter. Hearing none, he stated that the issue now is whether or not to have a joint hearing of the finance and ordinance committee on August 28.

**MR. KIMMEL MOVED TO ACCEPT THE REQUEST TO HAVE A JOINT

FINANCE AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE ON AUGUST 28, 2003.

**MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

**MR. BAKER MOVED TO ADJOURN.

**MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

The meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted,

Michelle Joseph

Telesco Secretarial Services