Loading...
1997-04-21 4 4 Minutes of April 21, 1997 THE MATTABASSETT DISTRICT The monthly meeting of the Board of Directors of The Mattabassett District was held Monday, April 21, 1997 at the Administration Building, Cromwell, Connecticut. Present from the Town of Cromwell was Director Mary Konopka. Present from the Town of Berlin were Directors Livio Dottor, Ed Gentile, and Horace B. Van Dorn. Present from the City of New Britain were Directors Dominic Badolato, Sebastian Cannamela, Walter O'Connor, and Robert Scalise. Also present were William Weber - District Counsel, John Batorski - Operations Manager, Christian Bratina - Executive Director, and Charles Karno from the Town of Berlin. The meeting was called to order at 7:33 pm by Chairman Dominic Badolato. A roll call was taken, a quorum was present. Doug Sienna arrived at 7:35 pm and Dennis Taricani arrived at 7:34 pm. Absent were James Carey and John Wright. Minutes of March 17. 1997 Mrs. Konopka asked, if at another meeting, we could discuss Mr. Wright's suggestion to work with the University of Connecticut's Department of Environmental Science on the odor control system. Mr. Bratina reported that he had received a letter last week from the University of Connecticut asking him to join a Task Force to identify collaborative initiatives between POTW's (Publicly Operated Treatment Works) and the School of Engineering. UCONN apparently had the same thought at the same time. Mr. Dottor moved, seconded by Mr. Cannamela, and the following was unanimously adopted: RESOLVED: That the minutes of the March 17, 1997 meeting be accepted. Treasurer's Report Mr. Bratina reviewed the Treasurer's Report. The revenue year-to-date has exceeded that budgeted. The expenditures this year are ahead of last year's, in part due to the $100,000 in rebates to the constituents. The Sludge Management income and the total income have exceeded that budgeted. Mr. Sienna asked about the status of the EPA audit. Mr. Bratina reported that Cotton and Assoc., the auditor, spent two weeks here on the audit and decided that because of the numerous bankruptcies they needed more time. They requested an extension of their contract from EPA and we expect they will be back in May for another week or two. Once the audit is completed, we can apply for a release of the DEP $450,000 payment. Chairman Badolato asked if that was part of the reason for the audit. Mr. Bratina replied no, that EPA only audits a portion of their grants. Chairman Badolato asked if this is just a random audit. Mr. Bratina reported that it was not purely random; that since we have had two major bankruptcies and the job took much longer than 1 Minutes of April 21, 1997 planned, it was not unexpected that we were chosen. Chairman Badolato stated that he presumed the cost is that of their own. Mr. Bratina responded that EPA is paying for the cost of the audit. Mr. Cannamela moved, seconded by Mr. Taricani, and the following was unanimously adopted: RESOLVED: That the Treasurer's Report dated March 1, 1997 to March 31, 1997 be accepted and placed on file for audit. Budget Statement Mr. Bratina reviewed the Budget Statement. Item 22 and 23, Overtime and Shift Differential, are both going to exceed that budgeted because of the FBI repairs and hauling sludge offsite. Uniforms are going to be slightly over because we did not budget for the increase in the safety toe shoe allowance. Physical Exams, Item 29, is slightly over budget because we use physical exams both for hiring and Workmen's Compensation which we have not adequately budgeted for. Item 35, Incinerator Fuel, is over budget due to the problems we have had with the Primary Heat Exchanger leak and because the sludge is a little wetter than expected. Item 37, Gasoline and Diesel Fuel, is over because we filled our diesel tank. Item 38, Sludge Disposal, was used while we were down for the heat exchanger repairs. For Item 39, Ash Handling, we removed more ash then we had projected. On Page 19 we added a category, Item 92, for the $100,000 transfer of excess income to the towns, which was not part of our planned budget. Mr. Gentile moved, seconded by Mr. Dottor, and the following was unanimously adopted: RESOLVED: That the Budget Statement be approved. Accounts Payable Report Mr. Van Dorn questioned why the rebates don't show as expenditures on the Treasurer's Report. Mr. Bratina responded that it is listed as a bill. Mr. Van Dorn questioned if it has been paid. Mr. Bratina responded that it has been paid and is included in the Expenditures' Bills on Page 13. Mr. Van Dorn suggested showing a separate item, Rebate to Constituents. Mr. Bratina responded that he would do so. Mrs. Konopka asked if we could list the date of Mr. Vernenkar's consultation. Mr. Bratina responded that he would include the date. Mr. Gentile suggested that we list the town of the vendor and that we should buy in New Britain, Cromwell, or Berlin if the quality and price are reasonably the same, in order to support the towns that are members of the District. Mr. Bratina noted that for him to give business within the District a price preference, he would need instruction from the Board. Chairman Badolato suggested that we discuss this as a separate issue at some point. 2 Minutes of April 21, 1997 ,Staff Reports Mr. Bratina reported that he visited the new NETCO/Waterbury fluidized bed incinerator which is having a number of problems. Chairman Badolato and he met with Cromwell and Berlin officials to give them their rebate checks and review the District's performance and future options. The Berlin town manager asked if Mr. Bratina would review the rebate calculation with them, which was scheduled for April 22nd. Tours were given to four engineering firms as part of the solicitation of proposals for the Phase IV odor control project and the backup incinerator study. Mr. Bratina will be preparing Requests for Proposals which will be brought to the Engineering Committee within a few weeks. The proposed bill to have the DPUC regulate waste water treatment plant rates did not move beyond the initial committee referral stage and appears dead. Mr. Bratina reported that we have been interviewing for the Staff Engineering position and we will be setting up an interview with the Personnel Committee shortly. Mr. Bratina noted that he was invited to join the UCONN sponsored task force to identify collaborative initiatives between POTW's and the School of Engineering. Mr. Bratina reported that the plant effluent quality was good during March. However New Britain and Berlin's flows for the month were over their allocations. There were no odor complaints during the month. A new model of packing for the Wet Packed Tower Scrubber in a more durable material was ordered which should be more efficient. The current material becomes embrittled in chlorine solution, breaks up, and then plugs the spray nozzle which can cause odors to escape. Mr. Bratina reported that Corbin Russwin had a cyanide spill. Mattabassett and DEP were called immediately. We both took samples and found it was not a high enough concentration to cause us a problem. DEP also investigated Stan Chem and found a number of violations. DEP will be issuing them a Notice of Violation with direction to clean up their procedures. Mr Bratina reported that a meeting was held with representatives from Arus Andritz, the manufacturer of our existing belt filter presses, to discuss ways of improving the operation of our units and possibly purchasing a new filter press. Andritz then sent their laboratory director, Garen Evans, here for four days of testing at no cost, a value of $5,000. He found that our belt presses are running close to what they would expect for a new machine, which is very remarkable on a machine that is eight years old. The testing indicates that their best belt filter press would give a 4 to 5 point drier cake. This would enable the FBI to run autogenously, which would make it cost effective to replace one of our belt presses. Mr. Van Dorn asked if there was any chance that we would have two units running parallel so you could refurbish one while the other is operating. Mr. Bratina replied, we have four units and we normally only operate two at a time. We would take one of the four out and replace it with a new unit, hopefully selling the old unit for $50,000 to $75,000. 3 Minutes of April 21, 1997 The new belt filter press, costing —$280,000, has a capacity nearly that of two of our units. So we would generally run it alone and at times with one old unit. Thus we will have enough spare capacity. Mr. Evans complimented us very highly for the operation and maintenance of our presses. We are getting 20,000 hours of life on our cloths, which is twice what he had ever heard of before. Mrs. Konopka questioned why we need a new one. Mr. Bratina responded that a newer press will give us a drier cake. Mrs. Konopka replied that she had thought the Montville sludge was giving us all of the problems with the wet cake and the aeration tanks. Mr. Bratina reported that the Montville sludge does make our sludge cake one to two percentage points wetter, though we have seen some improvement in that lately. We are being paid about a half million dollars a year by Montville, which more than pays for the added fuel cost. There are a couple of other sludges that we have had problems with from time to time. The newer belt filter press is designed to provide a drier cake, which would enable us to run the FBI autogenously most of the time. Whereas now we are pushing our presses to their limit all of the time to keep the sludge as dry as we do, the newer model would easily provide a drier cake all the time. We get our sludge much drier than any other treatment plant in the state. Most other facilities are getting between 15 and 22% total solids, whereas we typically get 23 to 26%. Meriden, which has the same press we do, is getting 15%. MDC was getting 20 to 22% with their belt presses and after replacing them with centrifuges is getting 28%. Mr. Bratina reported that the we do have periodic problems with filamentous bacteria in the aeration tanks, which our Chemist believes is generally due to decanting grease. We are going to look at a system to reduce this impact. Mrs. Konopka asked why the Wet Packed Tower Scrubber keeps breaking down, does it have anything to do with the incinerator. Mr. Bratina reported we have had a lot of problems with the Wet Packed Tower Scrubber for years and we have extensively modified it. We changed the packing once and we are changing it again. The packing we are using becomes brittle, so it breaks easily, and we are switching to a new material that shouldn't break as easily. We have also just purchased hydrogen sulfide analyzers which we will tie into our SCADA system. Mrs. Konopka asked if Mr. Bratina is spreading himself to thin with all the committees he is part of. Mr. Bratina stated that he does have to be careful to not overcommit himself, and has declined teaching a class for that reason. The watershed association meets at night. Mr. Bratina advised that he felt it is an important public relations effort on our part to participate in these activities. Part of the purpose of the Mattabassett District was to recover the Mattabesset River from its terrible pollution, which it has done. Mrs. Konopka questioned if Mr. Bratina could appoint people to attend these meetings. Mr. Bratina replied that recently he had Mr. Batorski attend a meeting of the DEP Advisory Group because he was busy. Mr. Van Dorn noted that he thinks it helps us learn and that it is hard to appreciate the value that is derived. Mr. Van Dorn stated that he had come down here several times in the winter and when he got to the stop light at the intersection of Route 9 4 Minutes of April 21, 1997 and 372 he noticed a hydrogen sulfide odor. Yet when he got to the plant the wind was blowing to the plant. Something is causing a very bad odor there. Mr. Van Dorn questioned if we get complaints when the wind is blowing to the plant. Mr. Bratina responded that we do, and noted that you can get that type of odor from a car's bad catalytic converter particularly when stopped. Mr. Scalise noted that Mr. Vernenkar had recommended trying to get a drier cake, around 26%, to decrease our problems with the incinerator. Mr. Bratina reported that he has arranged with another company, Sernagiotto, to bring in a trailer mount Belt Filter Press next week for several days of testing. Once this study is done, we will have enough information to present our options with the Engineering Committee. Mr. Bratina reported that the Swemco venturi scrubber was ordered and is in engineering design which we have reviewed and commented on. We are awaiting one more proposal for the sulfur dioxide analyzer for the FBI. RH White has completed most of the aeration air duct replacement project, and is finishing the punch list. Mr. Van Dorn questioned whether all the raw sewage pumps have variable speed drives. Mr. Bratina reported that four of the raw sewage pumps have variable speed drives and the other two are constant speed, which are actually more efficient. While they are in excellent shape, we will be looking to see if there is a more efficient replacement pump and motor. Mr. Bratina reported that the gas hot water heater in the Admin Building was replaced with a smaller, more efficient unit to correct the code violation. While installing the #1 FBI fluidizing blower, the Maintenance staff realized that its wiring was undersized for the current draw. This was replaced once by the General Contractor while Metcalf & Eddy was on-site, but we had not checked their calculations. We are looking at replacing it. Maintenance gave a tour to a group from Dover, New Hampshire of our odor control system. The Dover personnel were quite impressed by our facility. The Maintenance backlog is going down slowly. Mr. Bratina reported that the Laboratory tested 4% of our solid waste loads and 29% of our liquid waste loads for toxicity. None of them showed any signs of toxicity. A total of 81 samples were tested for pH, total solids, and volatile solids. Mrs. Konopka asked how many is 4% of all the solid waste. Mr. Bratina responded that it is 4% of all of the sludge loads that come in, approximately 400 to 500 per month. Mrs. Konopka asked what the liquid waste was. Mr. Bratina responded that it includes leachate and septage. Mrs. Konopka asked why there is a higher percentage of liquid wastes tested. Mr. Bratina reported that it is because there are fewer liquid loads coming in and the testing is easier because we can use the Microtox instead of the Respirometer. Mrs. Konopka asked if we could test more samples. Mr. Bratina stated that he would review the testing with the Chemist, and that there has been a higher percentage of samples showing signs of toxicity from septage and liquid wastes than from sludges. When we have received these materials, the quantity has not been large enough to cause us problems. Mrs. Konopka requested that the 5 Minutes of April 21, 1997 Chemist list the number of samples on the report. Mr. Taricani asked what percentage we should test. Mr. Bratina stated that he has never done a statistical analysis to determine what percentage to test. We can do this but it will take him several hours to calculate it. Mr. Scalise asked where the Primary Heat Exchanger metallurgist's report stands. Mr. Bratina reported that he had just received a fax of the report from American Schack. Once the hard copy is received it will be brought to the Engineering Committee. Mr. Van Dorn noted that New Britain's flow is over its allocation for the month. Chairman Badolato replied that we should look at all the communities, and over the past six or twelve months, not just one month. Chairman Badolato stated that Mr. Bratina had already sent requests for flow projections to the communities. Mr. Bratina noted that as part of this potential regionalization study we will again be asking all of the communities for their flow needs for the next twenty years. Once the engineering firm is on board we will ask the communities to provide the information by a specific deadline. Mr. Scalise noted that Berlin was over its allocation in two of the last three months. Mr. Scalise moved, seconded by Mrs. Konopka, and the following was unanimously adopted: RESOLVED: That the Staff Reports be accepted as presented. Finance Committee Mr. Bratina reported the Finance Committee reviewed the Fiscal Year 97 audit bids. Solicitations were sent to 13 firms and two bids were received, from Blum Shapiro and Scully & Wolf. Blum Shapiro's price for the audit was $7,000, Scully & Wolf s price was $7,450, and last year's general audit was $7,100. Blum Shapiro's principal auditor visited our facility, reviewing the books and procedures with our Bookkeeper Mrs. Leeman. Mrs. Leeman checked their references and found them quite good. Mr. Bratina reported that the Finance Committee recommended entering into an agreement with Blum Shapiro for the audit for the upcoming fiscal year. Mr. Cannamela moved, seconded by Mr. Van Dorn, and the following was unanimously adopted: RESOLVED: To authorized the Executive Director to enter into a contract with Blum Shapiro for the annual financial audit. Engineering Committee No Report 6 Minutes of April 21, 1997 personnel Committee Mrs. Konopka reported that the Personnel Committee developed an Employment Agreement for the Executive Director with the assistance of Counsel Weber. Mr. Taricani moved, seconded by Mrs. Konopka, and the following was unanimously adopted: RESOLVED: To enter into an Executive Session to discuss personnel matters with Counsel Weber present. The Board entered into Executive Session from 8:26 pm to 9:06 pm. Mr. Gentile moved, seconded by Mr. Cannamela, and the following was unanimously adopted: RESOLVED: To return to Regular Session Mrs. Konopka stated that there was one addition made to the Employment Agreement in Section 5, the second sentence, "Subject to the Board of Directors right to direct otherwise." Mr. Gentile moved, seconded by Mr. Cannamela, and the following was unanimously adopted: RESOLVED: That the Employment Agreement be approved as revised. Mr. Sienna moved, seconded by Mr. Cannamela, and the following was unanimously adopted: RESOLVED: To authorize the Chairman of the Board to sign the Employment Agreement as revised. Real Estate & Insurance Committee Mr. Dottor reported that a Real Estate Committee meeting is being scheduled for next week. Safety. Energy & Publicity Mr. Taricani reported that the Safety, Energy, and Publicity Committee met to review the press releases on rebates and rate reductions. We will be meeting again in a few months to discuss the regionalization study. Mr. Batorski reported that there were no accidents. He noted in the report the routine items handled at the Department level. The Recycle Well access hatch handrail extension was received, as well as the Wet Scrubber ladder and platform. The Andritz representative was here last week running Belt Filter Press tests. Mr. Scalise asked about Old Business, Item 5. Mr. Batorski reported that this was handled by putting a 7 Minutes of April 21, 1997 counterweight on it. Mr. Van Dorn asked the testing to try to even out filter cake on the belt. Mr. Batorski stated that we have worked on that and we may need a mechanical distributor to spread the sludge out. Mr. Scalise moved, seconded by Mr. Van Dorn, and the following unanimously adopted: RESOLVED: To accept the Safety, Energy, & Publicity Report. Counsel's Report Counsel Weber reported that he attended the meeting of the special committee and made revisions to the master trunk sewer License Agreement to reflect the changes requested by the committee. He revised a proposed employment agreement with the Executive Director in accordance with the Personnel Committees' request. He had discussed with the Executive Director land acquisition and the moral agreement with the town of Cromwell. Mr. Gentile moved, seconded by Mr. Dottor, and the following was unanimously adopted: RESOLVED: To accept the Counsel's Report. New Business Chairman Badolato requested that we keep in mind that the Standard License Agreement has a recommendation that is before us without Section 12, which had to do with the fee. The committee determined that this issue would be handled at a later date. Mr. Gentile pointed out that Mr. Charles Karno, the Economic Development Director from the Town of Berlin, is here because of the subject matter of the License Agreement. Mr. Gentile noted that many months ago TCI showed an interest in an easement and the Finance Committee discussed, at numerous meetings, various fee proposals. Mr. Gentile stated that he thought the Finance Committee might be going far afield when they start revising the License Agreement because we are talking about Real Estate and this should be handled by the Real Estate Committee not the Finance Committee. The Finance Committee may be within their rights to talk about the fee but the License Agreement should be a function of the Real Estate Committee. Mr. Gentile stated that there are changes that are going to be detrimental to the economic development of our towns and he urged Directors to review it with their town's corporation counsels. Mr. Gentile asked Counsel Weber to clarify his statement that he cannot participate in this discussion on the License Agreement because of a conflict. Counsel Weber stated that he cannot participate in regards to the Knaus Riverbend Industrial Park to the extent that his License Agreement is at issue. Mr. Gentile asked if Counsel Weber would agree or disagree that under the Charter, Mattabassett is not granted the power to enter into profit making ventures or to purchase and manage real estate for a profit. Counsel Weber responded that the District can make a profit if it purchases land at one price and 8 Minutes of April 21, 1997 after it decided it did not need it, sells it for a higher price. Counsel Weber stated that in terms of the trunk sewer License Agreement, we are releasing our negative covenant, which is an easement, and thus we are giving up right we have in it. As you give up rights we have to determine the value of what you are giving up. You cannot give away public property, you have to try to set a fair value. The question for this Board is what a fair value is. Mr. Gentile asked who conveyed the easement to the District. Counsel Weber replied, in most instances it was the original property owner. Mr. Gentile asked if that property owner who conveyed that easement to us can convey other easements on that same piece. Counsel Weber responded that we have the exclusive easement, we have a negative covenant that says that the owner will not do any construction or other things without the District's approval. This would include other easements that would conflict with your negative covenant. Mr. Gentile stated that he was of the opinion that the Mattabassett District does not own exclusive rights to that right-of-way. Counsel Weber stated that the owner has retained the right to raise cows on it and to walk over it. Mr. Gentile replied that he can provide another easement to another person or party. Counsel Weber responded that he can not provide an easement that conflicts with our negative covenant, which says there shall be no construction or building. Our easement reads "At no time will I the said grantor engage in any manner or form of excavation or construction or cause or suffer or permit any manner or form of excavation or construction or cause, suffer, or permit the maintenance or erection of any structure upon, over, or under the premises without the express written consent of the grantee" (which is the Mattabassett District). Mr. Gentile asked Counsel Weber if he would say that this proposed License Agreement, in its entirety, would be a deterrent to a lending institution. Counsel Weber stated that it would not be marketable. Chairman Badolato asked Counsel Weber if the revised License Agreement was a legal document or not. Counsel Weber responded that it was. Mr. Van Dorn stated that the proposal here is to take the verbiage here and approve it, there is no mention as to what the fees are going to be so we are dividing it into two parts. This is incomplete and we should not be passing something that is not complete. Mr. Van Dorn suggested that we send it back to New Britain, Berlin, and Cromwell in its final form, with numbers included, before we adopt it. Mr. Taricani stated that he brought this item up about six months ago because he felt we needed a consistent License Agreement, and the Board agreed to refer it to the committee composed of the Finance Committee and the Chairman. Chairman Badolato stated that long before TCI came on board looking for a License Agreement, the Board was discussing the question of adopting a License Agreement that would be a uniform policy for every community, not just for New Britain, Berlin, or Cromwell, without favoritism. We are in trouble today with a License Agreement because the party is turning over the License Agreement to somebody else, and this Board doesn't feel that they should have the authority to determine what happens with that pipe. This Board should do it not somebody else. Mr. Gentile asked if we want to become a zoning board. Chairman Badolato stated that this body is everything that a municipality is, this body is a municipality to itself. We hired a lawyer to give us legal opinions only and marketability is not a legal 9 Minutes of April 21, 1997 opinion, it is a policy decision. There isn't much of the trunk sewer left for Berlin to develop. Mr. Scalise asked how marketability of a property is not a legal opinion. He stated that his objection to this License Agreement is in Section 14, assignment and transfer, which says that the Licensee shall not assign this license without the prior written consent of Mattabassett. If you are building a house and your driveway or utilities come across our easement, you have to come to Mattabassett and ask for a license. What this says, is if you go to sell that house, in six months or six years, you have to come back to Mattabassett for a new License Agreement. That means every single piece of property that is affected by this license from this point forward will not be able to be sold without our approval. Chairman Badolato stated that we are not looking to deny them that right, but we need to know and make sure that what it is being used for is a legitimate purpose. Mr. Scalise stated that that should be put in the License Agreement, that you shall not exceed the purpose for which the License Agreement is given. But when you say that the owner can not assign this license, a right that goes with the property, a right to travel over a driveway or to have utility lines come to a home, that is a right I have. If I am going to sell my house I obviously want to sell the right to travel over the driveway, the right to have a sewer run out to a sewer main, or a right to have utilities. If we adopt this language, which means every single property owner from this point forward will have to come back to this Board, it borders on what is known as a taking of property. Mrs. Konopka agreed and asked if there is any other way we can do this. Chairman Badolato stated that we are having a problem right now and this attempts to correct this type of a situation. Mr. Taricani asked Counsel Weber if we could change Section 14 to also give some protection to the person with the easement. Chairman Badolato stated that there is a way out in the License Agreement, that "If Licensee shall make any assignment of this license in anyway or manner without the prior consent of the Mattabassett . . .", all they have to do is come to Mattabassett, get prior consent, and they can do what they want with it. Mr. Van Dorn stated that it is important that we have a contract that is long term and that there is no rush to get this out. To settle these issues will take some time. It should be complete, not piece meal, and we should give the towns the opportunity to comment on the agreement. Chairman Badolato stated that we went to Berlin and Cromwell to explain to them what our plans were for the District. When we went to Berlin we talked about the fee. Cromwell did not express any concerns that day, they expressed the fear of a fee. Mr. Taricani asked in regard to Section 14 if we could put something in there to protect the individual. Chairman Badolato stated that he would question anyone on the Board who may represent property owners who might be going over the line, because they would then have a conflict of interest. Mr. Scalise stated that he no longer represented anyone who might have an easement and that he had no problem bringing up any potential conflicts of interest. Mr. Taricani asked if there was a way to address the concern on Section 14. Mr. Scalise stated that if the concern of the Board was that a subsequent licensee could overburden the existing licensee, by going from a residential to a commercial driveway, you can build language into the agreement that sets forth the existing purpose. It can be one paragraph, that can to be modified for each License 10 Minutes of April 21, 1997 Agreement, of what the purpose of the license is and a statement that it shall not be expanded without the consent of the District. Mrs. Konopka stated if you are going from residential to commercial then you should have to come back to the Board, but if you are selling your house to another homeowner then you wouldn't have to. Mrs. Konopka suggested that we have a tour of the right-of-ways. Mr. Bratina offered that we can drive to most of the License Agreement locations, but we can not readily drive all of the right-of-way. We try to mow the entire trunk sewer once a year. Chairman Badolato stated that the Executive Director will notify the Directors of a date for a tour of the line. Mr. Van Dorn moved, seconded by Mr. Gentile, and the following was unanimously adopted: RESOLVED: To table the Standard License Agreement. Mr. Bratina reported that we have a License Agreement with Knaus Development for Riverbend Industrial Park, and several of the lots have reportedly been sold with some of the License Agreement improvements over them such as driveways, sewers, and water lines. If you have one parcel with a License Agreement and you sell that parcel, the License Agreement is transferred automatically. However, here we have a case where we have one License Agreement and we are breaking it up into several. We have not run into this before and the question to the Board is how should we handle this. Mr. Scalise stated that as a matter of course, whoever bought the property had a title search done and put down the License Agreement as an interest in property, this agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit to the successors and assigns. Chairman Badolato stated that if it is a single License Agreement for five or six passes over the pipe, then they don't have the authority to divide it up. Mr. Scalise noted that it was known as "Lots 7, 8 & 9B and a Portion of Lot 10", Mr. Abrahamian had full knowledge that it affected four lots, and the agreement says it shall inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns. Counsel Weber stated that we have a negative covenant limiting certain kinds of rights and we have a positive covenant to put the trunk sewer in. With a License Agreement, we give up a little bit of the negative covenant. The pieces do not matter, we have less right than we had before. Chairman Badolato stated that that is what we are trying to correct now. Mr. Scalise stated that he did not think we could change it, that we don't have to change, that we could not stop a property owner from doing anything unless they are doing something other than what is in the License Agreement. Chairman Badolato stated that Counsel Weber can not handle this case, so the Board needs to hire another lawyer to deal with this. There is a doubt whether someone who has a License Agreement to go over the pipeline several times, whether that is a single License Agreement or a multiple License Agreement, whether he has the authority to divide it up. Mr. Taricani moved, seconded by Mr. Cannamela, and the following was adopted with Mr. Scalise, Mr. Dottor, and Mrs. Konopka opposed: 11 _ r Minutes of April 21, 1997 RESOLVED: To hire an attorney to get a legal opinion on the transfer of a License Agreement. Mr. Scalise suggested using Stu Bohan, President of Connecticut Attorneys Title Insurance Company, an expert in dealing with these problems. The issue is whether or not any purchasers of the Knaus lots get the benefits of this License Agreement, or whether or not new License Agreements need to be enacted with each of the purchasers. Chairman Badolato asked if the question is whether whoever has that License Agreement can divide it. Mr. Gentile suggested presenting what happened and asking if they have the right to do it. Adjournment Mr. Scalise moved, seconded by Mr. Dottor, and the following was unanimously adopted: RESOLVED: That the meeting adjourn. The meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m.. The next meeting of the Board of Directors will be Monday, May 19, 1997 at 5:30 pm at the Administration Building, Cromwell, Connecticut. 12