1963/09/17Berlin Board of Finance September 17, 1963
~iinutes of ~eeting
A meeting of the Board of Finance was called to order at 7:30 P. M. on Tuesday,
September 17, 1963 at the Town Hall.
Liembers Present: Chairman P. B. Doran and ~[essrs. W. S. Bro%a% T. W. Ward, Jr.,
R. W. Chamberlain and S. J. Pietras.
A Financial Statement for the ~ riod ending August 31, 1963 was received.
The ~inutes of September 3, 1963 were approved.
Communi cations Received:
1. The report of Property Tax Collector for Fisc~ol Year Ending June 30, 1963.
2. A letter dated September lc, 1963 from First Selectman Arthur Powers in re-
ference to this Bca rd's letter of September 6, 1963 with respect to the
storm drainage situation on Wildem Rca d. Copies of his Sept. l0 letter
were separately mailed to all 3card of Finance members by ~r. P~;ers.
3. A letter dated September ll, 1963 from First Selectman Arthur B. P~ers in
answer to this Bcard's letter of September 6, 1963 requesting more specific
information with regard to the ~oposed expenditure of ~3,000. for the com-
pletion of approaches to the Percival Avenue footbridge.
4. A copy of a letter dated September ll, 1963 from Dr. John
Board of Education, to Totem Counsel J~es F. Dawson regarding boiler tubes
in the Percival and Willard Schools.
5. A letter dated SMptember 12, 1963 from First Selectman Arthur P~,~ers on the
subject of a transfer to the Town softball account.
Bills:
1. It was voted to approve for l~ayment from #6, Board of Finance Acct., a bi lll
i n the amount of 4~20.00 for postage for the Finance Board, said bill pre-
sented by D~rs. Graeme Bunce.
2. It was voted to approve for payment from ~6, Board of Finance Acct., a bill
in the amount of ~30.65 presented by the E. R. Hitchcock Co. for printing
and stationery for this Board.
Transfers:
1. In reference to Communication Received ~5, it was voted to approve the
transfer of $92.O0 to Supplies and Other Expenses Adult ?rogram from ~120a,
Supplies and Other Expenses Junior Program, in the Recreation Budget.
Old Business:
1. In reference to Comm. #13~[inutes of Sept. 3, 1963, Police Co~uissior~ers
Patrick Caccavale, Chairman, and R~s,. Renee Hall ~ peared to discuss the
extra patrolman and cruiser situation.
Mr. Caccavale advised that he is requesting this Board to approve the pur-
chase of two cruisers; one to replace the d~aged cruiser and an extra
cruiser to bring the fleet up to four cruisers. He also requests approval
to hire an extra patrolm~nn who would drive the fourth cruiser. He noted
that with the fourth cruiser the extra man would be mandatory in ~der to
drive it and if the cruiser were not approved the extra man %~ould be super-
fhous. In other words, one could not be used without the ~ her.
He explained that the insurance company is paying ~1,335. to the General
Fund for damages to a cruiser ~;hich was demolished. (This cruiser was
slated to be turned in on a new one). The sum of ~2,O00. was sppropriated
in this fiscal year's budget for purchase of a cruiser and because lrices
have increased it is expected that the cost will now be mc~e nearly $2,300.!
Thus $300. is needed. The extra cruiser he requests would also be ~2,300.
and he is asking for ~nother ~l,O00. plus the ~1,335. being returned to the
General Fund for that cruiser. Thus ~r. Caccavale actually requests an
additional $2,600. be appropriated to the Police budget for the purchase
of two cruisers.
He further advised that some of the present cruisers have so much mileage
on them they are really not safe for the police to drive especially when
driving at high speed in pursuit of an offender.
~!r. Caccavale said the Commission feels it needs at ~ ast one extra officer
and the additional cruiser because during the sm~er vacations and also
during any illnesses of present officers the police department is under-
staffed and has to fall back on supernu~eraries. The officer who may be
i~l must still be paid when not ~orking and the supernumerary who ts~es his
place also must be ~aid. He said ~1500. a year would be saved in supernum-
eraries if an extra officer were added.
The Co~mnission requests an extra n~an for 6 months of this year. At a 5 day
rate the annual starting pay ~;ould be ~4,773. and ~5,760. for 6th day. This
would come to ~2~880. for 6 months. There are presently two supern~neraries
working in the Berlin police force either of whom would be acceptable for
the extra officer's job, and both are interested in acquiring the position.
~dr. Caccavale advised that the Co~m~ission also re~iuests the Hot ~.ine service;
said request had been deleted from the requested budget of the police. It
would be a "one-time'~ appropriation of ~)1,300. he advised.
In total ~z~. Caccavale requests:
$2,880. for extra man for 6 months
1,300. for Hot Line
2~600. for two cruisers
~6,780.
No action was taken.
First Selectman Arthur Po~,:ers and Second Selectman Joseph Lanzoni were pre-
sent for discussion ~f the Percival Avenue footbridge and approaches. This
Board had requested a detailed breakdo~m from L'r. Pc~rers of proposed $3,000.
expenditure for approaches in a letter dated September 6, 1963. (See ilin-
rites of Sept. ~, 1963 Con~n. Rec'd. #18 and New Business ~8.) I,ir. l~m,~ers
had responded that he ~ould prefer to appear personally before this Board
rather than put the breakdown in writing.
~,[r. Powers stated that when the State Highway Dept. agreed to build the foo~-
bridge at the time of negotiations on the road swap (June 1962) there ~d
been no mention that the To~.~ would be liable for the construction of the
aoproaches. He stated that the first notification he had of this was through
a letter dated June 14, 1963 front the State Highway Department which also
advised in this same letter that the footbridge was almost control,ted.
He stated that this c~ne too late to include in his 1962-6~ budget proposal
and also that it c~me at a t~ne when the Town Engineer was too busy with
other work to prepare specifications for the a~proaches. He stated that
these specifications have now been prepared ~d then Imesented an outline
sheet for visual inspection which listed the following items as prepared by
the Town Engineer:
Reinforce concrete sidewalk and ~pron
Concrete retaining wall
Concrete curbing
Ironwork~ railin~ repairs, raise fence
Rebuild driveway(excavate gravel and pavement}
Regrade gutter~ excavate
Concrete curb, bitu~inous
l~ Contingency (for possible expense in moving hydrant)
Figures which prest~nably described quantities of material etc. were tabulatJ
ed opposite these items but these details were not readily interpretable.
Est~ated costs were also tabulated for the listed items and totalled close
to .~3,000. lit. Powers retained this outline specification, Asked if it
wouldn't be feasible to construct the approaches at a lower cost~ ~ir. tow-
ers stated that it was the Engineering Department's judgment that the speci-
fied construction was required. ~qr. t~owers stated that the work would be
put out to bid.
It was voted to authorize the Selectmen to call a to~m meeting to act on an
appropriation not to exceed ~,0OO. from ;~127, Contingency, to new capital
item approaches to l:ercival Avenue Footbridge.
In reference to Con~nunication Received ~8-~dinutes of September 3, 1963,
Chairman Doran reputed that C~n. Dennehy of the ?srk and Recreation Comm.
advised hi~n that Mr. La~osa is supplying an extra service to the Tc~n by
supplying his own truck for his work. Thus the question of a $520. raise
rather than a ~200. raise seems to be one of bookkeeping.
First Selectman Arthur Powers who was present advised he had talked with
~.lr. Oennehy also who advised him he had wanted ~4~'. La~osa to have a ~lO.
raise a week which included the us~ of the truck. Then I~[r. Dennehy dropped
the figure to ~400. a year extra. ~.lr. t:owers inquired why this should all
be in i.r. L~osa'$ salary account rather than in two separate accounts---
one for salary and one for truck. Lt. Dennehy advised he would not object
to ~]r. La~osa receiving a special allowance for use of the truck as an item
separate from the regular salary raise.
14r. Powers advised this Board there are not funds available in the salary
account to cover both the raise and the truck allowance and asked that this
Board allow his office to use two separate accounts--one for ~.lr. L~osa's
raise (salary account) and one for truck allowance.
This Board authorized ~[r. Powers to proceed with this in his bookkeeping
department and work it out directly ~.dth Chairman Dennehy.
(ldinutes of Sept. 17, 1963 continued)
Messrs. Powers and Lanzoni were present for discussion of Con~n. Rec'd. ~2
on the Wildem ~oad drainage project.
Mr. Powers stated that there was no recording of a priority list of drainage
projects in the Finance Board minutes and that he considered that the
.~35,000. for drainage reco~,unended by this Board and adopted in the 1963-64
budget was to be administered by the Selectmen independent of any specific
listing of projects. The Board explained that on hearings on budget requests
by all tovna agencies extensive supplementary notes are kept as part of the
Board's records. Specifically the notes on the Board meeting relative to
the drainage appropriation requested by i~2essrs. ?a~ers and Kissane on Feb. 5,
1963 were read in review as follows:
An increase of ~lO,O00. is asked for this Account.
Mr. Kissane listed the following drainage project locations
and their cost in order of prime importance, which he wishes
to initiate in the forthcomin~ fis. cal year:
1. Kenwood & Olenbrook ;~ 8,700.
2. Stanley Chemical (for pipe and catch basins) 2,300.
~. Wildem Ed. 5,100.
4. Robbins Rd. (lower end) These two combined - 6,000.
10. Kensington Rd. (upper end) " " "
5. Berlin St. at ~dildrum Jewel Co. 3,600.
6. Glen & Sheldon 12,700.
7. Crater Lane 393.
8. Seymour Rd. 9,000.
9. Washington St. 4,300.
12. Savage Hill Rd. 1,400.
13. Lincoln St. 3,000.
14. I.~eadow Lane 2,400.
This procedure of maintaining such supplementary notes is followed in an
effort to confine the already voluminous public minutes to matters of record
on cor~unications-received and Bcard actions. The supplementary notes are
Board records %~'hich are used for reference in considering the itemized break-
doves submitted by the toYzn agencies as justification of their budget re-
quo sts. Such records are ]particularly important where, in such cases as
Drainage, the over-all appropriation is submitted for adoption at to~.m meet-
ing ,~i thout itemization in order to simplify the budget presentation. Thus
for years it has been the practice and the responsibility of all town agen-
cies (except Education) in exercising their administrative discretion to
adhere reasonably to the itemized breakdow~s submitted as justification for
their budget proposals. In order to provide a suitable degree of flexibi-
lity in this procedure it has also been t~ long-practised function of this
Board to consider any substantial deviations from these itemized breakdovrns
which a town agency may propose due to chm~ging conditions.
~,%r. Powers stated that he had earlier thought to forego the Wildem Rd.
drainage project this year and to give it a lower priority becsuse of his
re collection of the expressions of Board member brown, a resident oi~ Wildem
Rd., at the meeting of Feb. 5~ 1963 to the effect that the Wildem [~d. projec%
be dropped from the 63-64 budget, i.~r. Bro%~'n stated that he had not expressed
himself in this manner but had only asked if the Selectmen had ever given
any consideration to levying special assessments on property owners benefit-
ing directly from such improvements as is done by some other municipalities.
In any case, regardless of the unresolved validity of the foregoing unrecordl
ed recollections, the Board reiterated that any position on any matter which l
might be taken by any individual Board member was not to be construed as the
position of the Board as a ~,~hole unless recorded as a Board action. In re-
core,ending the over-all budget of ~35,000. for Drainage, the Board had therel
by earlier accepted the i~riority positions of the several drainage projectsl
including the ~,;ildem Rd. project as ~escnted to the Board by tho Selectmen
and the ToYa~ Engineer on Feb. 5, 1963 and that any expression by an individ-
ual member of the Board was sn improper basis upon which to revise the pri-
ority positions as Ireviously presented. Iqr. Powers exDressed concurrence
with this.
Idr. Pot-:ers advised that it was no~.; his expectation that the ]~i!dem Ed.
drainage project %~'ould be done this Fall.
(i~[inutes of Sept. 17, 1963 continued)
5. S~aticn of anticipated extraordinary appropriations.
This %~as reviewed on an open discussion basis ~th the Selectmen present.
The actual and probable items discussed were as follows:
Percival Footbridge ~3,000.
Police request 6,780.
School bus (n~ yet requested) 6,000.
Griswold School (estimated-not yet requested) 17,000.
Schools (possible supplementary requirement-- ?
not yet requested)
Total
It was indicated that tkese ite~s could total to more than %}50,000. or more
than one mill. i~r. Powers was asked if he ¥.~ished to consider supl~le~aentary
funds for the repair and re-building of roads to w.~ich he replied in the
negative, stating his intention to live with the Ir esent appropriation for
this fiscal year.
The meeting adjourned at 11:10 ?. ld.
Respectfully submitted,
Berlin Board of Finsnce October 4, 1963
.~dinut e s
On October 4, 196~ the Board of Finance voted to approve for payment from ~6,
Board of Finance Account, a bill in the ~uount of ~120.00 presented by
Graeme Bunce for clerical services for this Board for the ~onth of September,
1963.
Members voting were Chairman P. D. Doran and Lessrs. W. S. Brovm, R. W. Ch~-
berlain and S. J. S~gis.
Respectfully submitted~
Cl~a '
Berlin Bo~d of Finance October 15, 1963
~inutes of ~.ieeting
A meeting of the Board of Finance was called to order at 7:30 P. I4. on Tuesday,
October 15, 1963 at the Town Hall.
i~iembers Present: were Chairman P. D. Doran and ~.~essrs. W. S. Brown~ T. %$. %Yard,
Jr., S. J. Pietras and ~.Q.D. Coe.
The ~[inutes of September 17, 1963 and October 4~ 1963 were approved.
Co~unications Received:
I. Auditor's Report of the books~ accounts ~d records ~ t~ T~.~n of Berlin
for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1963 from Town Auditor Albert J. Dudzik,
Jr. received October 9, 1963. ~r. Dudzik advised that individual copies
for all Bo~d of Fin~ce members will be forthcoming shortly.
2. A letter received Sept. 19, 1963 from I.~r. Robert D. Casner~ resident of
Percival Avenue, Kensington, relative to the cut-back in school bus trans-
portation.
Mr. Casner's letter was answered by Chairman Doran on September 26~ 1963.
A copy of a letter dated September 20~ 1963 from First Selectman ~th~
Powers to residents of Wildem Road relative to storm draihage work on that
street.
4. A copy of a letter dated September 24, 1963 from First Selectman Arth~
Powers to Chief Assessor Ralph Carter relative to this Board's letter
September 6, 1963 to Town Treasurer Rudnick concerning bills in the a~ount
of .~)77.20 presented by Assessor Carl Scalise.
5. A letter dated Septe~ber 26~ 1963 from First Selectman ~thur Powers advis-
ing of creation of a co~]ittee for the elimination of fire districts and
requesting an ~ount of ~150. for supplies and secretary for said co~m.~it-
tee.