City of Central Falls
Special City Council Meeting
City Hall Council Chambers
Monday, June 4, 2001
At 6:30 p.m.
A Special meeting of the Central Falls City Council was held on the above date in the City Hall Council Chambers at 6:32 p.m.
Councilman Lazieh
Councilman Robichaud
Councilwoman Canavan
Councilman Noury
Quorum present.
Council President Gene Noury presided and led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.
None
A) Councilman Lazieh to Mayor Matthews, Solicitor Briden and Tax Assessor John Gancarski re: Revaluation.
B) James Briden, City Solicitor re:
i) Introduction of Ordinances and Amending Budget in 4th quarter
ii) Introduction of Budget
iii) Application to use Amplification to preach.
iv) Executive Session on May 30, 2001 Meeting Agenda
Motion to accept collectively and place on file was made by Councilwoman Canavan and seconded by Councilman Robichaud.
Councilwoman Canavan questioned the City Solicitor regarding his correspondence that an Ordinance must be in written form at introduction. She stated that this is the way she felt it always should be but asked why after all these years this hasn't been the case.
Mr. Briden stated that the Charter doesn't expressly state that an ordinance must be in written form at introduction, therefore its been subject to many different interpretations over the years. He stated that his interpretation is based on the provision of which indicates that upon request, after introduction, a member of the public may request a copy of the ordinance. He stated therefore if an ordinance is introduced at a meeting of the Council on a Monday night then a member of the public could request a copy of the Ordinance on Tuesday morning and he stated that they would expect to get something more than a title.
Councilwoman Canavan stated that she agreed with that but asked how could it be clarified by ordinance or some other way to set that in stone.
Mr. Briden stated that he would not necessarily recommend enacting an ordinance pertaining to the issue but that it can be based on the charter.
Councilwoman Canavan stated that she would really like to see the ordinances in written form and the Council should perhaps make it a procedure to follow.
Councilman Lazieh stated that he concurred with Mr. Briden's interpretation to a point. That at introduction you can introduce the title then the body has to be supplied to make it available to the public.
Councilman Robichaud stated that maybe the council should not introduce something without the body being included.
On the motion all agreed. So Voted.
There were two bidders for the Audit.
Councilwoman Canavan stated that Cayer Prescott Clune & Chatellier in the total amount of $59,500 and Parmalee, Poirier & Associates in the total amount of $51,000. She stated that there would be an $8,500 savings by retaining Parmalee. She stated that an annual audit for a City is basically a standard procedure and she would recommend Parmalee. Councilman Robichaud stated that he concurs with Councilwoman Canavan.
Council President Noury stated that he would be in favor of awarding a 1-year contract instead of three.
Councilwoman Canavan stated that she would include that in the motion.
Councilman Lazieh stated that he is not satisfied with the bid that has taken place at this point as well as with the two bidders. He stated that he couldn't support awarding the bid to the low bid at this point for reasons that he would have discussed in Executive Session. He stated that he would prefer that the Audit be re-bid. He said that his concern is that the Council receives an audit on time or ahead of time. He stated that Cumberland recently award their bid that required their audit be completed by November.
Councilwoman Canavan stated that there are a limited number of firms perhaps 5 or 6 that does this work and the City only received a response from two of them.
She spoke of what's public about the firm is good, that there are no negatives about the firm and the Council can require the completion of the audit by the end of the year but if the Mayor is not producing the documents until May then the Council cannot hold the auditors responsible. She stated that she thinks the change is good and that she frankly was not happy with the response from Mr. Chatellier when she requested information.
Motion was made by Councilwoman Canavan that Parmalee be awarded the bid on a one-year basis. Seconded by Councilman Robichaud.
Councilman Robichaud stated that he agrees with Councilwoman Canavan and that the City did go out to bid and now its time to act on it.
| Councilman Lazieh | no |
| Councilman Robichaud | yes |
| Councilwoman Canavan | yes |
| Councilman Noury | yes |
Motion carried 3 yes 1 no 1 absent.
1. An Ordinance Amending Section 1 of the Homestead Exemption. (Introduced by Mayor Matthews) So introduced.
2. An Ordinance pertaining to Salaries of Department Heads & Others in unclassified service. So introduced.
3. An Ordinance pertaining to Salaries of Police Officers and Firefighters. So introduced.
4. An Ordinance Amending Wage Schedule Generally. So introduced.
5. An Ordinance Establishing the Maximum Number of Employees in the City Departments FY 2001-2002. So introduced.
6. The Annual Operating Budget Ordinance.
So introduced.
7. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 36, Taxation, Article III, "Property Tax Exemption." (Introduced by Councilman Lazieh)
So introduced.
8. An Ordinance requiring City Council approval on the appropriation of Surplus Funds as revenue in an operating budget.
(Introduced by Councilman Lazieh) So introduced.
1. An Ordinance establishing a restrictive receipt cash, special reserve account. (Introduced by Council President Noury)
Motion to approve was made by Councilwoman Canavan and seconded by Councilman Lazieh.
Councilman Robichaud commented on the Ordinance and asked if this wasn't the same type ordinance that was repealed by the Council a few years ago on the advice of Bond Counsel. He then asked who recommended that this ordinance.
Council President Noury stated that this is at his introduction.
Councilman Robichaud asked who recommended this.
Council President Noury stated that he's recommending this.
Councilman Robichaud asked if any of the auditors of financial advisors recommend that this be enacted.
Council President Noury responded no.
Councilman Lazieh stated that he supports the Ordinance and replied to Councilman Robichaud's questions regarding the previous ordinance. He stated that previously Bond counsel did advise the institution of this fund to put aside funds that could not be spent on the whim of any administration or to pay any expenses without a check and balance. He stated that to go into the bank account and to take money out solely by the signature of the Mayor or Finance Director without a check and balance with City Council he believes is wrong. He said that the last administration established this fund which was withdrawn by this administration and it is freely using these funds without checks and balance and he stated this is wrong. He said to establish and to restrict these funds with the permission of the Mayor to come to the council to utilize these funds he believes this to be prudent and wise for the financial conditions and would be looked upon favorable by the City's financial advisors.
Councilman Robichaud asked how the Council President arrived at $267,000?
Council President Noury stated that this is the use of the Surplus Funds that the Mayor placed in the operating budget.
Council President Noury restated that the City did have a million dollar restricted account which the Administrator went before the previous Council and stated that he was going out to bond and they argued that it would put the City in a better fiscal light for a possible improved bond rating. The bond company didn't give any better rate that the city's is already receiving. He said that in the current fiscal year's budget the Mayor requested the use of $267,000 out of the surplus funds. He stated that if this ordinance were passed then the Mayor would have to fund this out of the current budget. He also stated referring to Councilman Lazieh comments regarding checks and balances which is very important and he said that if the Mayor has good policies the Council would have no problem funding it as has been done in the past. He stated that if the Council thinks that the Mayor has some bad policies then the Council has the legislative authority and right as well as the responsibility to adjust the appropriation in those areas, specifically, as has been argued for over a year, the Mayor's continued use of funding outside legal expenses, this council, he stated, does not agree with that. It's a point for checks and balances.
On motion to approve 4 yes 1 no Councilman Robichaud voting no.
Councilman Robichaud stated that the reason he is voting against this ordinance is that he would like more time to research this by talking with the auditors and see if this is advisable to do. He stated that he would appreciate it if the Council would delay final passage on Friday until he has his questions answered and perhaps this would change his mind.
Council President Noury stated that he isn't sure that is possible since we're coming upon the end of the fiscal year and the Mayor has ten days after he receives the legislation to act on it he stated that he doesn't see the need to delay it but if Councilman Robichaud would like to make a motion the Council will act accordingly.
Councilman Robichaud stated that he sees no reason to have a special meeting on this when the Ordinance can be placed on next Monday's agenda. He said everything is rush, rush, rush with this council. He stated that all he's asking is for a little more time to do some research on this.
Council President Noury responded that Councilman Robichaud has now until Friday to get his research done.
Councilman Robichaud responded that all he's asking for is a little consideration and if it were anyone else on this Council they would be given the time they were asking for.
Council President Noury stated that unfortunately its coming to the end of the fiscal year and again stated that Councilman Robichaud could make a motion to delay and that he would abide the wishes of the Council.
Motion to delay Final Passage of the Ordinance to the next meeting was made by Councilman Robichaud. Seconded by Councilman Lazieh for discussion.
Councilman Robichaud stated that all he is asking for is an extra weekend.
| Councilman Lazieh | no |
| Councilman Robichaud | yes |
| Councilwoman Canavan | no |
| Councilman Noury | no |
Motion dies 3 no 1 yes.
Councilman Lazieh stated that this is a topic he is familiar with for many years and offered to answer questions and review this with Councilman Robichaud between this meeting and Friday.
Councilman Robichaud thanked Councilman Lazieh.
1. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 6 Article III (Bingo) (Introduced by Councilwoman Canavan)
Public Hearing opened. No comments. Public Hearing Closed.
Motion to approve was made by Councilman Lazieh and seconded by Councilwoman Canavan. All Agreed. So Voted.
2. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 6 Article IV "Mechanical & Electronic Amusement Devices, Amusement Centers.
(Introduced by Councilwoman Canavan)
Public Hearing opened. No comments. Public Hearing Closed.
Motion to approve was made by Councilman Lazieh and seconded by Councilwoman Canavan. All Agreed. So Voted.
3. An Ordinance amending Article II Chapter 2 of the revised ordinances entitled "City Solicitor" Section 2-70 establishing the position of Legislative Solicitor. (Introduced by Council President Noury)
Public Hearing opened. No comments. Public Hearing Closed.
Motion to approve was made by Councilwoman Canavan and seconded by Councilman Lazieh.
Councilman Lazieh questioned the City Solicitor regarding the Charter and establishing a new section.
City Solicitor Briden responded that in light of Friday's hearing and the issues that were argued in front of Judge Silverstein he recommended that the Council hold off on final passage until a decision is made on the issue because these issues really have a bearing on the ordinance. He stated that one example if deemed to be an officer by definition.
Councilman Lazieh asked the Solicitor to narrow his discussion to does this Ordinance conform to the Charter requirement to establish ordinances the legal issue in Court is another issue he feels is not directly pertinent to does the Council's authority extend to the establishment of this ordinance. He asked if is it in the authority of the Council to establish this ordinance. He stated that the legal issues in court is another issue and not directly pertinent to the question of whether the City Council has the right to establish this ordinance. He stated that he understands Mr. Briden's point and the court's action and that is something that the Judge will decide. But, he asked, is it in the Council's authority to establish this ordinance. He stated that he understands Mr. Briden's personal desire to delay it.
Mr. Briden responded that he has neither a personal nor a professional desire to delay this. The ordinance has some important issues that are being argued in the courts and will be decided by Judge Silverstein which will have a bearing on the ordinance. One will be to decide if this individual is an officer, because if the court rules that the individual is an officer, then the charter provides that officers serve at the pleasure of the Mayor. He explained the ordinance and its relation to the charter and how one affects the other. He stated that the judge's opinion would lend clarity to the issues. He said that whenever you have something or a decision that is discretionary in nature such as the creating of an additional position he said that he thinks that the record up to this point has really from the point of introduction through first passage has really been lacking for the need of an additional attorney in the legal department. He stated that the City Council has not sought input from the administration whether it necessary in terms of the workload or what the real purpose would be. He said that this issue existed in 1990 when George Muksian addressed the Council for the need of an additional attorney and it existed in 1980 as well where the Mayor, the Administration and the Solicitor had input with regard to that issue.
Council President Noury asked didn't the Solicitor feel that the Council should make that determination whether they feel there is a need to make that determination.
Mr. Briden said that he feels that when decisions are of a discretionary nature that there have to be findings of fact that there have to be something that put on the record, another words, reasons why, why do we need this additional attorney? Otherwise the decision could be deemed as arbitrary or capricious or politically motivated because there is nothing on the record to indicate otherwise.
Council President Noury asked if the Solicitor thought that the Mayor's spending of over $750,000 in outside legal fees in the last 5 years, that maybe the City Council reduce this cost by have this attorney do some of that work? That's a clear need and in his opinion there have been some unlawful opinions coming down from the Solicitor's Office. He stated that this is his personal opinion whether the Solicitor agrees with that or not. He said that there is a clear need that the City Council, because of the inherit conflict of interest, that occurs with the appointments as it's set up now those are all determinations that need to be made by the legislative body by exercising the authority of this ordinance and as far as working for the law department, the primary function of the position would be to represent the Council but the ordinance clearly states in there that the Legislative Solicitor shall assist the Solicitor and the Mayor. He said that there is a clear need.
Mr. Briden stated that what he recalls, was during a budget season, for lack of a better term, last year, he said, where the Mayor repeatedly went on the record that the Council should seek legal advice and counsel with regards to particular decisions. He said that he remembered that distinctly around the third week in June when these amendments started to take place and then later on these final decisions stated being made. He said that he thinks that that process and the lack of communication was unfortunate and then the legal department was left with sorting out and giving a legal opinion with the result, and he said that the result was not a good result and that was unfortunate. He said that he doesn't feel that the creation of another position is necessarily the remedy.
Council President Noury responded that that is Mr. Briden's opinion but the Council feels different and that they are the elected body and that they sit there. He said and the seeking of other legal advice is the direct result of some of the opinions coming out of the legal department.
Mr. Briden responded name one besides the budget issue.
Council President Noury responded that the Council doesn't have the right to amend an ordinance, that the Council doesn't have the right to do an investigation and if he went through his paperwork he would probably find more. He said that when it come to direct conflict between the Administration and the Legislative branch of government the legal department has lost all confidence from the Council.
Mr. Briden responded that if these issues are so clear cut then why is it taking the courts so long to decide and why has it required hours of legal arguments. He stated that there is no bad faith.
Council President Noury responded that that could be that the court has a huge calendar. He said that unless got an answer from the judge he wouldn't speculate on that.
Mr. Briden stated that this suggests bad faith and he doesn't agree with that and he has worked with previous councils in the early 90's and in the Matthews Administration and there was never a problem with the way the legal department functioned with regard to the Council and the administration. He said that he feels often in society people tend the make the lawyers the scapegoats. Two people have a dispute and they blame the problem on the lawyer, maybe the problem exists between the council and the Mayor's office and maybe that should be the focus and he doesn't feel hiring an attorney is the solution. He stated that he doesn't think that the council can point to specific issues where the Council can show bad faith.
Council President Noury responded that he just did.
Mr. Briden replied no he doesn't agree and the judge has not decided the investigative committee issue, has decided the assistant solicitor issue so how can the council presume bad faith. He said that if there were bad faith the judge would have made the decision the first day of the hearing.
Council President Noury responded that Mr. Briden is being presumptuous.
Mr. Briden asked if Mr. Maruzak's arguments were frivolous?
Council President Noury responded that he's not saying that.
Mr. Briden asked they why when Mr. Maruzak makes the arguments they are not frivolous but when he makes them they're in bad faith. He asked what's the difference?
Council President Noury responded that once the decision is handed down we'd have the answer on that. The question is does the Council have the legal right to do this? Council President Noury stated that's the issue. He said that this ordinance is a separate and independent action creating a new position. He said that it has nothing to do with what is before the judge.
Councilwoman Canavan stated that the ordinance specifically states "It is hereby created in the law department". She stated that it is a position in the law department and that she sees no problem with having a third lawyer because the idea of a third lawyer coming in was the idea presented to the Council by the Administration a short while ago.
Mr. Briden stated that he is not saying that the Council lacks the power to create a third legal position. He stated that all he's saying that there are problems with the way the ordinance is written. He stated that he feels that it can be improved in a way as to make it consistent with the charter and that the Council should have the benefit of the Judge's decision. He stated that he thinks this is perfectly rational in light of the issues that he's been reviewing at this time one of which is this individual an officer because if he is then a certain charter provision takes affect and how does section 2-106 impact on this which says that the legal department is the department which give exclusive advice to the City. He said that he sees some problems with this and advises that the Council put the brakes on and allow the decision. He said that it could be that the decision is contrary to what he may think and that the City would deal with that but he said that the Council it really jumping the gun.
Council President Noury stated that for the record Mr. Kelly Sheridan said that this is fine and legal. He said that the Council has a right to create this position and that it's a separate and independent action.
Mr. Briden stated that in seeking legal advice from Mr. Sheridan and if the Council is relying on that advice then the Council is violating Charter section 2-106 because Mr. Sheridan is not a member of the legal department and he hasn't' declined or refused to give legal advice. So lets establish that for the record stated Mr. Briden.
Council President Noury stated that the Council did pass a Resolution asking Mr. Sheridan for what the Council's powers and authorities are under the Charter. That's been passed by the Council and he said he wanted a second opinion whether he takes if officially or not is another answer.
Councilman Robichaud stated that he's in agreement with Mr. Briden. He said that he stated last week that the Council should wait on this Ordinance but again, he said, the Council wants their way their going to rush this through like everything else. He said he feels that this is going to impact on this ordinance. He said that the Solicitors couldn't, by law, give illegal advice or opinions and whether the Council likes the advice or not is one thing but by law they cannot or they would loose their license. He said that he feels that the Council has been given good advice and he said for the record that the opinion or answers from are not those of all the members of the Council. He stated that if he would make a motion to delay he knows that the council will out vote him again. He stated that he does not support this at all.
Council President Noury responded that the Council is going through the budgetary process and if it is going to establish this position it would have to be done during the budgetary process and that is why the Council is acting on this at this time. He said that this would give the City Council insurance that it will have a solicitor on board in the new fiscal year. He stated that as far as Mr. Briden giving a legal opinion, he said that what they are, an opinion.
Councilman Robichaud asked, to rush this through, that all this council does it rush, rush, rush. He said that the Council President should just rush everything through so that he can get his way.
Council President Noury responded that he is not just getting his way.
Councilman Robichaud stated that it is his way or no way, since the Council President is the one who introduced it. He said that he is just stating his opinion whether the President wants to hear it or not and he said that the legal department has been doing their job and apparently the Council President is receiving advice from the lawyer illegally.
Council President Noury stated that he got a second opinion.
Councilman Robichaud responded but he's not an officer of the City and he can't do that.
Mr. Briden stated that he doesn't want to engage in personal attacks and that this shouldn't be personal this should be debated constructively based on the issues this isn't personal. He said that the decision that will come down may be one that this Council does not agree with and he said that he is not presuming that the council or Mr. Sheridan or that the Administration or that even he will fully agree with it all he's saying that all will gain certain insights from this decision because they relate directly with the issues set forth in this ordinance.
Council President Noury stated that he feels that this is a separate issue and that's his position on this ordinance.
Roll Call Voted:
| Councilman Lazieh | yes |
| Councilman Robichaud | no |
| Councilwoman Canavan | yes |
| Councilman Noury | yes |
Motion carried 3 yes 1 no 1 absent.
Motion to adjourn was made by Councilwoman Canavan and seconded by Councilman Robichaud.
All Agreed. So Voted. Time 7:30 p.m.
____________________________________
Elizabeth A. Crowley, CMC
City Clerk