I.          CONSENT CALENDAR

A.        APPROVAL OF COUNCIL JOURNALS

February 15, 2005 – Regular Meeting

February 15, 2005 – Closed Meeting Re: Negotiations

B.        CANCELLATION/ABATEMENTS (Requested by Tax Assessor)

C.        BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVIEW

Requested adjustments for hardships and residential Tax Board of Review

D.        RESOLUTION – Town of Burrillville, Rhode Island:  Resolution supporting legislation requiring utilities to pay for relocation of infrastructure.

On motion of Councilman Miranda, seconded by Councilwoman Perry, and on a roll call vote, it is unanimously voted to have the Closed Session of the February 15, 2005 Meeting remain closed. 

On motion of Councilman Caine, seconded by Councilman Miranda, and on a roll call vote, it is unanimously voted to approve the Consent Calendar.

II.        APPOINTMENTS

Mayor Larisa asks for unanimous consent to appoint Councilman Patrick Caine to the Narragansett Bay Commission. 

On motion of Councilman Miranda, seconded by Councilwoman Perry, and on a roll call vote, it is unanimously voted to approve.

Harbor Management Commission (by Councilman Miranda)

Anthony Perry (reappointment)

119 Lyon Avenue (02914)

Mayor Larisa states the members of the Harbor Management Commission would like to discuss the dual appointment issue of Harbormaster and Assistant Harbormasters on the Harbor Management Commission.

David Murray, chairman of the Harbor Management Commission, is sworn in by the City Solicitor. 

Mr. Murray discusses the commission’s position that the Harbormaster and/or Assistant Harbormasters should not be members of the Harbor Management Commission.  Although our role is advisory in nature, some of our tasks include recommending candidates for the Harbormasters position, hearing grievances against the Harbormaster and his assistants, recommending approval and/or changes to the Harbormaster’s budget, and placing limits on the number of available mooring spaces in each mooring.  We also believe that the recommendation from the Harbormaster should be taken into consideration by the Council when appointing Assistant Harbormasters.

Mayor Larisa asks if this was the consensus of the commission and Mr. Murray states that it was by a 4-1 vote.  The Mayor asks how long Mr. Perry has been on Harbor Management Commission and Mr. Murray states since 1994.  The Mayor asks how long Mr. Perry has been an assistant harbormaster and Mr. Murray states since June 2003.  The Mayor asks why the move to assistant harbormaster.  Mr. Murray states Mr. Perry owns a marina and was in a position to be up in the upper Seekonk River and Bold Point area since his marina is located there; and this way, he is able to regulate traffic and speeding in this area. 

The Mayor asks why the commission didn’t oppose this back in June 2003.  Mr. Murray states that the commission discussed this and in hindsight, issues have been raised that there is a possibility of having 4 assistant harbormasters on the commission.  This could potentially cause a situation that could dilute the abilities of the harbormaster to oversee his assistants.  It was an error that shouldn’t have been overlooked back in June 2003 when he was appointed assistant harbormaster.

Councilman Miranda doesn’t understand why this wasn’t brought to anyone’s attention until now.  Is there a problem between the harbormaster and Mr. Perry?  Mr. Murray says that there isn’t any problem between them.  Councilman Miranda states he will appoint whoever he feels will do a good job.  That’s why I appointed Mr. Perry.  Whatever the rest of the council decides to do, my vote will stay here. 

Councilman Miranda asks if you can prove that there is a conflict of interest here.  Mr. Murray states that legally, there is not a conflict of interest here.  Councilman Miranda states he went to the City Solicitor and there is no conflict of interest here.  I will not allow a commission to tell the council whom they can or can’t appoint.  Mr. Murray states they should have asked harbormaster not to forward the recommendation to the commission back in June 2003.  Mr. Murray also states that all assistant harbormasters are supposed to have training required prior to being appointed.  His understanding is that the council has appointed people that haven’t had the appropriate training.  Councilman Miranda asks if you know for sure that Mr. Perry doesn’t have the proper training.  Mr. Murray states no, he does not know for sure.

Councilman Caine asks if in June 2003 had they raised this concern and Mr. Murray states that they had.  He says that Mr. Perry served as an assistant for that boating season and that the harbormasters report shows he actually logged in no hours.  Councilman Caine is confused by Mr. Murray’s letter dated December 7, 2004 recommending reappointment of Mr. Perry with no discussion in it of this conflict issue at all.  Is very surprised that it has become this large of an issue.  He states that the commission is basically an advisory body to the Council.  The commission can create certain duties of harbormaster, but subject to the approval of the City Manager.  Councilman Caine asks if anyone has contacted the Ethics Commission to see if this is a violation.  Mr. Murray states they have been contacted, but there is no financial conflict, so it doesn’t fall under their jurisdiction. 

Councilman Caine states there have been no conflicts and Mr. Perry has done a great job so far so I don’t understand why this is such a big deal. Not a fan of taking ordinances that have been around for a while and making them exclusionary as opposed to inclusionary.  If seven members are not enough, maybe should modify ordinance to increase it to 11 members.  He states that Mr. Perry is taking care of that part of the waterway and believes it is well worth having him as an assistant harbormaster that is not paid.  He has no objection to appointing Mr. Perry to the commission.  Thinks that maybe we should look at the ordinance to modify the number of members on the commission so you can have more people to draw experience from.  In his view, believes that good people are everything and it is well worth having Mr. Perry on there.  Will also give me the opportunity to watch to see how the commission operates and if there are any concerns or issues from a conflict prospective over the next two years.

Councilwoman Perry asked that Mr. Perry logged in no hours as assistant harbormaster and Mr. Murray stated that was correct.  Councilwoman Perry asks what are the duties of the assistant harbormaster.  Mr. Murray states that they report to the harbormaster and are empowered with the same duties of the harbormaster, they oversee the waterways of the City. 

Councilman Miranda asks why was everyone on the council but him was notified of these issues.  He states he is an elected official and deserves the courtesy of being notified by you.  Mr. Murray apologizes and says he sent information via e-mail so that’s why he didn’t get notified.

Mayor Larisa states he believes the commission feels Mr. Perry is a good person for either commission, but not both.  You let it slide, but now realize there could be a potential for 4 assistant harbormasters on commission.  That there is not a legal conflict of interest, but it is a policy conflict of interest and that this isn’t a good policy for the City to have.  Mr. Murray states this is correct.  It is not a good policy for checks and balances and how the voters perceive us.  Right now, the harbormaster and the assistants are doing a great job. We have a good synergy with everyone and don’t want to dilute the effectiveness of the commission.

Mayor Larisa asks if the commission is telling the council who to appoint or are you saying appoint anyone that is qualified, but don’t appoint them to both positions at the same time.  Mr. Murray states they are not telling the council whom to appoint, just not to both positions at the same time.

Mayor Larisa states he believes it is a policy conflict of interest, not a legal conflict.  If the harbor management commission weren’t advisory in nature, then it would be a legal conflict of interest.  In his view, the harbor management commissions view, and the harbormaster’s view, it is a policy conflict. 

Councilman Caine asks if Mr. Perry has participated in any interviews of harbormasters.  Mr. Murray states Mr. Perry has, but prior to him being an assistant harbormaster.  Councilman Caine states Mr. Perry could recluse himself from the process.  Mr. Murray states that yes, he could recluse himself from this process, but you could have potentially up to 4 assistants on the commission reclusing themselves and on a 7-member commission, this will dilute the functionality of the commission. Councilman Caine understands the commissions concerns and right now is only looking at Mr. Perry’s appointment.  It’s actually a reappointment, not a new appointment.  He believes Mr. Perry will add value to both positions.  Will look at any other appointments that come in the future and will remember the commissions concerns when that time comes.

S. Bruce Dufresne is sworn in by the City Solicitor.  Mr. Dufresne states he is the harbormaster and wants to address Councilwoman Perry’s questions.  Mr. Perry is an unpaid assistant harbormaster.  He requires only the paid assistants to fill out log sheets.  Mr. Perry goes out with the paid guys, not by himself.  Mr. Znosko is unpaid as well, but he fills out a log sheet anyway, but he’s not required to.  Mr. Perry is aware that he won’t get credit on the yearly report for his hours put in.  He has his own business at Bold Point.  His main appointment is to take care of the Seekonk River and Bold Point.  He is there 365 days a year even though I can’t give him credit officially.  As to the training, harbormaster training ten years ago was run 2-3 times a year.  Now, it’s held only once a year.  Put in for 5 spots and only got 2 so couldn’t send them all.  This year, we put in for 5 spots, but haven’t been told how may spots we’re going to get this year.  If I don’t get enough spots to send Mr. Perry, I’m not going to worry about it.  Well aware that he knows what he’s doing out there.  He has 50 years of boating experience. Has done an excellent job in taking care of that area of the City.

Mayor Larisa asks he position on the dual positions.  Mr. Dufresne states he’s gone back and forth with the issue.  Mr. Perry has been on it since 2003.  Didn’t seem to be a problem up until now.  Does understand the commission’s opinion that if someone complained to the commission about the harbormaster, then the assistants would be on the commission and understands this where they are coming from.  Does want to keep Mr. Perry as an assistant.  He does an excellent job. 

The Mayor asks what if more than one assistant was on the commission.  Mr. Dufresne states could have a situation now where his subordinates our on a commission that governs him in certain areas.  They could recluse themselves, but then there would be less people to vote.  Suggested to the commission that maybe they should increase members to 11.  Then if any assistants are appointed, make them Ex-Officio members like the Harbormaster.  They can go to meetings and give their opinions, but just can’t vote.

Councilman Midgley asks what the commission thought of the assistants being Ex-Officio members.  Mr. Dufresne states they didn’t agree with that idea.

Anthony Perry is sworn in by the City Solicitor.  Mr. Perry states he has been on the commission for 8 years.  The harbormaster we have now is one of the best we’ve ever had.  Have had difficulties with some harbormasters in the past.  I was on the commission during that time.  Have always looked at the position I have and by being in both positions, I can see how the harbormaster runs his entire operation and if there are any problems, I would be a great help to them.  If we ever lose him, we’ll never get another to replace him.  He took the job over 2 years ago and has brought it to where we could compete with any harbormaster in the State of RI.  He has done a great job.  I don’t believe being on both will be a conflict.  I’ve been on commission for 8 years and never have had a problem.  Don’t know why this was ever brought up.

Mayor Larisa states again there is no legal, but a policy conflict, this doesn’t’ involve ethics.  There is no claim that Mr. Perry or anyone else appointed to these dual positions have any kind of ethical conflict whatsoever.   Doesn’t in anyway involve ethics or anyone’s integrity on either position.  And everyone is in agreement that we have a great harbormaster, great assistants, and a great commission.

Councilman Midgley states he was originally on the harbor management commission.  Does not believe any other commission serves with the time, effort, and energy that they do.  They take their jobs seriously, put in a lot of time and effort, and are an asset to the City.  What we have here is not an ethical problem, it is a difference in philosophy.  I don’t believe there is a conflict.  I think when the Council puts people on boards and commissions, we pick the best candidates possible.  They reflect the council’s views.  They represent us and our appointment is our vote.  Do not believe we would intentionally try to destroy any commission in the City.  I think Anthony Perry is an asset to the community, to the commission, and as assistant harbormaster.  I understand the commission’s point of view.  It’s just a difference in philosophy, not an ethical problem.  I believe Mr. Perry will serve honorably and efficiently.  When we did have problems with former harbormasters and/or assistants, we knew about it.  We didn’t have to hear it from the commission, but we did.  We heard about it from everyone in the City.  It was a problem and the Council took the appropriate action.  If there are any problems in the future with any commission, the Council will act responsibly and that will eliminate the problem.  The harbor management commission is an outspoken group of people.  They are out here in public saying they don’t think you should appoint this man, they like him, but don’t think he should serve on both.  That’s how they feel.  They way I feel is that Mr. Perry will be an asset to both positions and I will support him in his reappointment.  He’s been on for 2 years as an assistant and there are no incidents on record to say that this is a bad idea.  It would not be in the best interest of the City or the Council to appoint a bunch of assistants to the commission, but will support Mr. Perry in his reappointment.

Councilwoman Perry states she has dealt with the commission and has respect for all the members.  They are professional and have done a wonderful job with the commission.  Have also dealt with the harbormaster as well.  He did a wonderful job with the waterfront tour along with his assistants.  I respect him for the job he’s done.  He’s brought the records up to date and thing are done very well.  I had a belief there may have been a conflict.  Still feel torn, but after listening to everyone on both sides saying Mr. Perry has done an excellent job. Even though made to believe he didn’t log in any hours, but according to the harbormaster, that wasn’t the case.  He has put in a lot of time and effort there.  I’ve known Mr. Perry for many years and support his appointment.

Mayor Larisa states that personalities and people over principal is not something I’ve been guided towards.  All the years with the separation of powers issue at the State level and that was a constitutional issue.  Was a legal conflict and the people voted on that.  One or two legislators on a board of 11 not a problem.  Under the federal constitution, Jefferson and the framers said that it is, not even one is all right.  The legislature cannot in anyway execute the laws anymore than the Governor can make a law.  Often argued if only one or two on a commission of 13, that’s ok, they’re doing a great job, they have unique knowledge and provide oversight when actually, the opposite was true because one or two infiltrated the commission, the entire General Assembly deferred to the one or two.  Can you point to any scandal or crisis, no, but the principal that was set forth since the Governor can’t make one law, there are about 600 laws passed each year.  Why not give the Governor ten laws.  The General Assembly said no. 

The same principal applies here.  He does a great job, we can all agree on that.  Part of the reason we’re here and ran for office was to show that reasonable people can disagree reasonably.  We don’t have to yell and scream at each other.  We’ve seen a sophisticated discussion here tonight with pros and cons on this very difficult issue and that’s a credit to professional council manager government.  No argument was left out on either side of whether it’s a good idea or a bad idea and goes to show that people can disagree reasonably and have intelligent discussions and I’m very pleased that has happened tonight.

On motion of Councilman Miranda, seconded by Councilman Caine, a roll-call vote is taken:

Library Board of Trustees (by Councilwoman Perry)

Janet Seals (reappointment)

30 Stephen Street (02915)

On motion of Councilman Miranda, seconded by Councilman Caine, and on a roll call vote, it is unanimously voted to approve.

III.       CITY COUNCIL SITTING AS LICENSING COMMISSIONERS

LICENSES REQUIRING PUBLIC HEARING

Additional Hours

Simon Karam, S. Karam, Inc., d/b/a Broadway Mart, 1049 South Broadway

Simon Karam, 811 Rock Street, Fall River, MA, is present and sworn in by the City Solicitor.

Councilman Miranda states that he and Councilwoman Perry have received calls stating that trucks are being off loaded early in the morning at this store.  Mayor Larisa states to put in a restriction on the license that no deliveries can occur between the hours of 10pm –7am     

Robert Henderson, 394 Mauran Avenue, is present and sworn in by the City Solicitor.  He has lived here for 50 years now and trucks come in at all hours of the morning, 12am, 2am, 5am, etc.  These are refrigerator vans and trailer trucks.  Can’t even open the windows in the summer because of the noise and the fumes.  They leave engines running in the summer and winter.  Filed a complaint February 2004 with the Police Dept., complained to the Zoning Office, and City Solicitor’s Office and haven’t gotten any results.  Would like this taken care of.  Mayor Larisa states the stipulation will now be on the license that no deliveries allowed between the hours of 10pm – 7am.

On motion of Councilman Miranda, seconded by Councilman Caine, and on a roll-call vote, it is unanimously voted to approve, subject to approvals from the Chief of Police, Building Inspector, Health Inspector and Fire Marshall and a restriction on the license that no deliveries allowed between the hours of 10PM-7AM.

LICENSES NOT REQUIRING PUBLIC HEARING

Sunday/Holiday Sales

Simon Karam, S. Karam, Inc., d/b/a Broadway Mart, 1049 South Broadway

On motion of Councilman Caine, seconded by Councilman Miranda, and on a roll-call vote, it is unanimously voted to approve, subject to approvals from the Chief of Police, Building Inspector, Health Inspector and Fire Marshall and a restriction on the license that no deliveries allowed between the hours of 10PM-7AM. 

Victualing/Not Over 25

Simon Karam, S. Karam, Inc., d/b/a Broadway Mart, 1049 South Broadway

On motion of Councilman Caine, seconded by Councilman Miranda, and on a roll-call vote, it is unanimously voted to approve, subject to approvals from the Chief of Police, Building Inspector, Health Inspector and Fire Marshall and a restriction on the license that no deliveries allowed between the hours of 10PM-7AM.

LICENSING COMMISSIONERS RESUME SITTING AS CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING

IV.       PUBLIC HEARINGS

HIGHWAY ABANDONMENT – OREGON AVENUE

Petition for highway abandonment on Oregon Avenue

Petitioners:  Steven J. Najas & Kellie A. Swider, 111 Miles Avenue, East Providence, RI

Attorney:  Robert J. Murray, Esq., Taft & McSally, LLP, 21 Garden City Drive, Cranston, RI

Advertised:  East Providence Post – February 12, 19, & 26, 2005

Notices sent to Utility Company:  January 28, 2005

Notices served on abutters: January 29, February 1, 2, & 15, 2005

Robert J. Murray, Esq. is present.  He speaks on behalf of the petitioners.

There is no one from the public wishing to be heard.

On motion of Councilman Midgley, seconded by Councilwoman Perry, it is unanimously voted to approve.

ORDINANCES - FINAL PASSAGE  (Given first passage February 15, 2005.  Advertised – Providence Journal Feb. 18, 2005)

1.  This ordinance establishes the fines for false alarms.

SECTION I.  Subsection (b) of Sec. 8-337 entitled “False alarms.” of Article XII entitled “Police and Fire Alarms” of Chapter 8 of the Revised Ordinances of the City of East Providence, Rhode Island, 1998, as amended, entitled “Licenses and Business Regulations” is amended to read as follows:

(b)  A uniform false alarm fee shall be established by the city council.  Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be penalized as follows:

            (1)  First 3 offenses – No charge.

            (2)  4^th offense - $100.00.

            (3)  5^th offense - $250.00.

            (4)  6^th offense - $500.00

SECTION II.  This ordinance shall take effect upon its second passage and all ordinances or parts of ordinances inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed.  (Requested by: City Manager)

The City Solicitor states the ordinance is to be amended that as of January 1^st of each year, at the discretion of the Police and Fire Chief, a good faith exception can be given so long as the owner of the property takes remedial action appropriate to the false alarm, and then the counting of the offense will start over again.  This will be put on the next docket for final passage if approved as amended.

On motion by Councilman Caine, seconded by Councilman Miranda, and on a roll-call vote, it is unanimously voted to approve for First Passage with amendments.

V.        NEW BUSINESS

A.        CITY MANAGER’S REPORT

2004 Police & Fire Actuarial Report

Mr. Fazioli states that Mike Fallon from Fallon Pension Actuaries, Inc., is here to present report regarding the police & fire pension fund.  Fund last year had a 9% return.  Contributions increased by the City and the employees.  Despite this, the unfounded liability has grown. 

Jim McDonald, Finance Director, states the police & fire pension board separate unit of the City.  Administers the plan for police and fire.  We hire professionals to advise us.  Have an actual CPA firm that audits the books and various managers who manage 100% of our investment money.  Introduces Mike Fallon from Fallon Pension Actuaries, Inc. to discuss.

Mr. Fallon states he is an actuary.  Has worked with the City over the last 15 years.  Will give a report on the status of the police & fire pension fund.  Different message from last time he was here.  The circumstances for the last 3-4 years that have affected the financial markets and the security of our country have had an effect on the pension fund.  All pension funds have similar situation and difficulties.  Discusses the assets and liabilities from 1989 through the present. 

In 2001, significant occurrences in September led to some very severe financial difficulties in stock and financial markets in general.  These occurred through 2002 as well.  Problem is that the performance in 2001 was a negative number. We’re not alone in this situation; about 95% of large public pension funds in the United States had negative returns in 2001 & 2002 as well, it is not unique to East Providence, it’s happening universally.  The pension fund has shifted.  Suggests it requires priority and the attention of the City. 

One area that is important is to maintain investment performance.  City is engaged in professional money managers and investment consultants who monitor and review performance of managers.  Most important thing is to maintain performance and be sure assets of 71 million as of the end of February get as high of a rate of return as possible.  Other influx to pension fund comes from contributions of police and fire fighters and the City to the plan. 

If you’re unable to secure a higher level of return, more contributions will be required.  That is the concern I’m voicing to the Council is that there is a significant requirement to maintain contributions by the City to the plan to maintain it’s funded status in the absence of better investment returns and other sources. 

The other side is the benefits paid out of the plan.  Current program includes 250 former police and fire fighters who are retired and their beneficiaries who are receiving benefits.  The total benefit payout as of October 2004 was 5.7 million.  Plan is paying out on an annual basis approximately 5.7 million.  With the cost of living adjustments and additional retirements, in 2005, approximate payout of 6 million from the plan.  Suggest that 8% of assets need to be paid in benefits to participants.  This is a significant burden on the plan to payout.  Program a significant financial obligation of the City and pays to retirees and beneficiaries substantial amounts.  The average benefit paid out approximately 27,000-28,000 per year.  The plan provides automatic cost of living adjustments of 3% per year to about 2/3 of the participants.  City has provided to retirees not automatic, but a one-time granting of increase of pension of $25, $50, or $75 per month depending on the status of the retiree or beneficiary, which has happened about 6 or 7 times with the performance of funds

and assets on hand, the plan was well-funded and the committee and the Council was generous to offer these increases. 

A formal report has been prepared that’s done once a year.  Calculations are done through end of October.  The year runs from Nov. 1^st – Oct. 31^st.  Receive asset information from audit firm, payout register from the custodian, Bank of America, and census information on all participants from Finance Department.

The Mayor asks do financial markets look at any funding issue in respect to pension plans, isn’t there a benchmark about 80% liabilities to assets that you are ok.  Mr. Fallon states yes, between 80-100% you can have a comfortable feeling that the plan is well funded.  We were at 78% at the end of October.

The Mayor states we are no worse off and they fluctuate all the time.  Trouble is we were at 78.7 million in 1999 and 68.5 million in 2004, but base our projection on an 8.25% per year rate of return.  Mr. Fallon states the interest assumption is actually 8.50%, this is what the expectation of earnings on the portfolio is.

The Mayor asks if we exceed that, we’ll be back over 80%.  Mr. Fallon states that is correct.  The return for the 5 years between 1995-1999, the average compounded term was 15.6%.  The next 5 years, the compounded return was 3.6%.  Not nearly sufficient enough compared to the 8.5% of what is needed to fund the plan so the assets went from 79 million to 68.5 million in October.

The Mayor asks if we’ve done anything the State does, such as reamortizing the liability over 30 years again and other things that they do to get out of a pension mess.  Mr. Fallon states that no, we haven’t done anything like the State does.

The Mayor asks did the City make a drastic increase in funding and the unions increase 1% last year.  Mr. Fazioli says yes, actually doubled them.  Fiscal year 2003, went from 325,000 to 755,000.  Increased in 2004 as well.  This is the nature of these plans, you do the right thing and they can still work against you.  Mr. Fallon states liabilities draw quicker that what our expectations were, even at 8.5%, you’d have to have 3-4 years of returning to double digits, 10% plus, to catch up to the liabilities or raise contributions from the City substantially, even though they were doubled last year.

The Mayor asks if there is any reason to believe that it might happen again this year.  Mr. Fallon states no, that this was a gradual increase.  Liabilities have been going along progressively from year to year.  What happened with investment is performance liabilities went up, assets went up and then dropped off.  Mr. Fazioli states look at payouts in 2004, there were 215 retirees collected 5.7 million.  In 2000, 209 retirees collected 4.7 million.  Mr. Fallon states there was a turnover in retiree pool, older people who pass on and newer people coming in.  Had 2-3 police and fire chiefs go into retiree status and had influx at higher levels than usual. Mayor states this was unplanned and unaccounted for situation.  It can happen, but shouldn’t have a fire or police chief retiring in the next 2 years at a higher rate of pay. Would be more concerned if we were in a lot worse shape than we are.  Would not recommend the Council right now put in any more money than that right now.  Assume the City Manager is going to say we have to continue at this level for the foreseeable future.  Mr. Fallon states would put this on list of priorities for City Council.  In financing, I know that the priority list is a long one; and if this is in the middle or bottom of list because in the past it has done well, it should be moved up to the top 10% of the list, perhaps as to priorities for purposes of resources in the City to maintain the program.  If assets go to 74-77 million in the next year or two, than can move it back down on the list to the middle.  Don’t know what stock market will do.  It seems to be moving ahead.  The economy is doing well.  Expectations are that this will be another good year. 

Councilman Caine concerned that liabilities are always there and grow.  Salaries increase over time and retirement benefits continue to grow.  Seeing negative trending.  Although we’re putting in more contributions, funding ratio continues to dip.  Need to take a closer look at the report to see if there is anything we need to do.  Should take a look at it to see where we need to go.  From an economy perspective, what is our asset return mix, where are we invested?  Mr. Fazioli states 60% bonds, 40% stocks.

Mr. McDonald states we used to be at 50-50 and allowed for 5% either way so it was 55-45.  Now at 60-40 and could end up at either 55-45 or 65-35 depending on whether investments go north or south.  Liabilities have grown about 5% per year and investments have lost value so that has compounded the problem.

On motion by Councilwoman Perry, seconded by Councilman Caine, and on a roll-call vote, it is unanimously voted to accept the report.

National Guard Duty

Mr. Fazioli has been working with the Human Resources Office regarding National Guard Duty.  We have about a dozen employees over the last two years serving National Guard Duty.  Give them credit for doing that.  We don’t have a policy that while they are on duty, relative to their pay, in some instances, employees are losing money.  Other communities have taken steps to identify policies to not have them suffer financially while they are serving our country.  Over the next month or two, will come to the Council with policy based on what other communities have done to ensure that they do not suffer financially.  We currently hold their benefits and hold job for them, but in some instances, they are suffering financial consequences for what they’re ordered to do.

Pierce Stadium Lights

Mr. Fazioli states there was an incident where one of the stadium light poles snapped in two during Blizzard of 2005 in high winds.  Broke in the middle of the night.  Didn’t hit anyone or anything and landed on fence.  Advise it is a hazard and poles are 70 years old and suffering from fatigue.  Director Crook has looked into replacing light poles and what the costs are.

Director Crook steps up and states the poles are 65 years old.  They are metal poles, hollow inside and were contracted when stadium was built in 1939.  In 1985 during phase 1 or the rehabilitation of the stadium, the stadium lighting was upgraded and the poles left in place.  Put in new electrical wiring and lights on poles. 

About 3 years ago, a representative from Musco Sports Lighting came and evaluated the poles.  They are the people that put the lighting system in.  After review of the poles, the representative said that the concrete paths themselves where the poles sit on were disintegrating and the concrete was falling apart causing gaps between base of pole and concrete itself causing the poles to sway.  Even though gap only ¼ inch – ¾ inch, by the time it worked its way up around 9 feet, the pole was swinging 5 or 6 feet.  This over time has caused metal fatigue on pole itself.  Poles are hollow and rusted.  Need to be replaced for safety reasons.  Money was not available 3 years ago to do this. 

Jan. 1^st, Mike Bartlett was at a conference about Parks and Recreation, and the Musco rep. came up to him and said when you see Joe, make sure you tell him he needs to do something about these poles.  One week later, we had the storm and one snapped in half and came down.  Very lucky it snapped in half.  If it had come down from the base, it would have taken out the house across the street.  No question that one has to be fixed and the other 7 need to be replaced.  Had Musco work up a price to replace the existing light on pole that fell down completely, and use existing lights and replace 7 additional poles, redo the wiring, and set new bases for poles.  The cost is $149,600 to do this work.   My opinion you don’t need to do this, but do need to take down what is there.  The poles have to come down.

Mayor Larisa asks if there is any scientific study that was done to show the metal is fatigued to justify spending the money.  Mr. Crook states there is no study.  The Mayor asks why we just didn’t fix the gap.  Mr. Crook said the gap wasn’t fixed, but the concrete is still disintegrating.  With the new technology, the new bases slide the pole right over it.  Construction of new pole and base are much safer and more efficient. 

The Mayor asks why we just didn’t fix the concrete and use the old poles or was life on old poles going to be less that ten years.  Mr. Crook can’t answer that, but assumption is that if one cracked in half and the others are the same age, that it’s probable the others in similar condition.

The Mayor asks about non-city entities using field.  What about a pole surcharge over next 5 years to help pay for this.  Mr. Crook states we do that now, but money goes to other things Annually, have revenue of approximately $35,000 – $40,000 that generates from rental of stadium.  Stadium pays for itself with the exception of labor.  The water, electricity, equipment, fertilizer, and grass seed, all the things to run as it as a recreational facility is taken from rental fees.  Does not come out of City budget. 

Mayor Larisa states maybe upping the fees or maybe possibility of grants.  Mr. Crook states probably could up the fees, but some clients are already shopping around looking for other venues.  As for grants, do not know, it may be an option.  Mayor states if we had a report, we could have put this in the recreation bond issue.

Councilman Caine asks about using the poles from Glenlyon Park.  Mr. Crook states those are different poles and are not high enough for the stadium.

Mr. Fazioli states this is an emergency situation.  He walks by there everyday.  Imagine what damage would have been to a person or car at the receiving end of this.  These are 90-foot high poles with huge lighting fixtures on them.  Not a budget item in general fund, but some money is available as well as in the recreation fund, not the full amount, but can add to Master Lease to buy the poles and as other money becomes available, use it to pay down the portion of the lease related to light fixtures.  Think it is a life safety issue.  We were told 3 years ago that they needed to be replaced and now one has snapped in half.  Cannot imagine not fixing them right away.  If it had hit a house, it would have been done sooner.  Consider amending or adding this to Master Lease and at least get funds to put poles in place before spring starts. 

Councilman Caine asks about the cost for just taking down the poles.  Mr. Crook states could get an estimate on that, probably would be significantly less.  But then you need to store all the lights and you take a chance of having them break.  About $250,000 in lights alone.  Need to have them done around the first of May.  Have Heritage Festival, fireworks, and band concerts.

The Mayor receives unanimous consents and on motion by Councilman Midgley, seconded by Councilman Caine, and on a roll-call vote, it is unanimously voted to authorize the City Manager to add this to Master Lease.

B.        REPORTS OF OTHER CITY OFFICIALS

CLAIMS COMMITTEE (By William J. Conley, Jr. City Solicitor)

On motion of Councilman Caine, seconded by Councilwoman Perry, and on a roll-call vote, it is unanimously voted to accept as presented.

C.        COUNCIL MEMBERS (by Mayor Larisa)

Request to Draft Collective Bargaining Fiscal Impact Ordinance.

Mayor Larisa states when the Council makes decisions affecting public fiscal, it knows how much it is costing.  When the Council is trying to balance the budget, it knows how much every item costs.  Except in biggest item in budget, salaries containing collective bargaining agreements. 

We know how much we pay the City Manager and individuals, but when we enter into collective bargaining agreements with the police, fire, schools, and technical, we’ve talked about it, but never know how much this is costing on an annual basis.  These are costs we have every year.  For instance, if there is an increase in a collective bargaining agreement for 200,000, that will stay in the budget for the next year and so on. 

Would like the City Manager to work with the City Solicitor and Finance Director over the next week to let Council and public know the fiscal impact of every collective bargaining agreement.  Other communities have done this.  It means knowing what fiscal impact will be on an annual basis of any increases.  Take models from other communities and put something together for the council so that both council and the public will be aware before it votes on any collective bargaining agreements. 

When I was first on Council back in 1993 & 1994, had to fight to get that type of analysis in respect to the firefighters contract.  We were able to get it and it was quite useful when we got it done because it showed the difference between a 2,  2+2, 3, vacation day, an added sick day, and so forth.  It shows what it will cost the taxpayers for each of the changes. 

Received a lot of requests from constituents.  They like our website and asked for collective bargaining agreements to be put on webpage and they are there.  Now, we’ll be able to have fiscal impact of changes to collective bargaining agreements also on the webpage. 

Ask that the City Manager, Solicitor, and Finance Director to come up with something in the next week that we can review and will put in on the next docket.

Mayor Larisa asks for Unanimous Consent on Office Parkway issue to announce an agreement we’ve reached with the State on this matter.  Dept. of Transportation owns the land and the Council’s position is that it is the State’s responsibility.  Asked that members should contact their state representatives hopefully to get some type of grant to help pay for the cost of snow removal or some other type of action.  The State took the position that it is the City’s responsibility.  Wanted to get this resolved.  Councilman Caine and I were speaking to the Director of Transportation, Jim Capaldi, and we discussed fixing the problem.  Neither side admits to it being their responsibility.  The City will do them, but the DOT will pay us the labor to do them.  It just went into action today.  City employees went out and plowed the sidewalk at issue.  DOT justifies this as being the only DOT property in the State of RI where DOT owns it, but it is not for a road.  On every other property, the road is already built, or it is awaiting a road.  This one has been waiting for decades and is not in the 20-year plan ever to be connected as a road.  Yet, the DOT doesn’t want to get rid of it because someday, it may be a road.  So they will continue to own it and based on that, they were willing to assist in paying for it.  Now we have an agreement and the problem is solved.

D.        INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES (If given first passage, can be referred to the next  regular Council Meeting to be held on March 15, 2005 for a public hearing and consideration of Final Passage).