Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-12-04 Finance Committee Minutes ' IFINANCE COMMITTEE December 4, 2006 ' Minutes Councilor Attendance: Stone, Allen, D'Errico, Gratwick, Farrington � Staff Attendance: Barrett, Cyr, Sheriff, Dawes, Cammack Others: Charles Birkel � 1. Minivan Lease — WIC —Varney GMC - $10,431 , Sheriff explained that the current lease is expiring. Eleven bids were issued and 7 responses received. Staff recommends a three year lease with Varney GMC, the low bidder. Dawes said that the WIC program currently uses the ' van to transport nurses. It is federally granted dollars. The City pays for insurance, registration and maintenance. A motion was made and seconded to approve staff recommendation. � 2. Donation of 1982 Pierce Arrow Fire Truck to UTC Cammack said that the Fire Department retires a fire engine every 7-8 years. � United Technology Center has expressed an interest in the 1982 Pierce Arrow for their public safety program. Staff asked Council's permission to donate � the equipment to UTC. From staff research, the best price available if the City were to sell the equipment is $5,000. Staff feels that UTC's planned purpose of hands on experience is an appropriate use. Responding to ' Gratwick, Cammack said the last engine was around $300,000. The next replacement will take place in 3-4 years. Cyr said the Fire Department has a separate vehicle replacement policy. A motion was made and seconded to � approve staff recommendation. 3. Discussion of School Committee Election � Barrett explained that at last Monday's Council Workshop there was discussion of a possible special election. Barrett said that two dates for a proposed eledion have been proposed (March and June 2007) and two , Orders will appear before the Council at their December 11"' meeting. The second part of the discussion, which was not concluded at that Workshop ' Session, was whether there was an interest on the part of the Council in doing some form of a review of this past November's election and the � circumstances surrounding it. In particular, the Council indicated that, should such a review be undertaken, a plan should be developed to outline its scope. Staff has started to develop a candidate guide that will be provided to future � candidates for the Council and the School Committee that will outline the qualifications and disqualifications for running for and holding these o�ces. , � , This is intended to avoid situations such as was experienced in the School , Committee election in the future. Stone asked the Legal staff about the Council's legal obligations. Following, ' Stone asked that each Councilor speak addressing their inclinations and then he would ask the audience members to speak. Heitmann said the obligations � of the City and School are governed by both State Law and the City Charter, with State Law taking precedent. There are only two things the Council can do with the School Board. One, it interacts on the issue of the budget in that ` the Council approves or disapproves the gross budget, not the line item budget. Two, in situations such as this, the Council can decide whether to ' call a special election or leave the vacancy open until the next general election. This is the Council's decision and not the School Board's. In all other respect, both the City Charter and State Law provide that the operation , and maintenance of the school, the buildings, the personnel, etc. is governed by the School Committee. The School Committee hires the Superintendent for a term which cannot exceed 5-years by charter. Obviously, the City runs � the election, which is based on our ordinances and City Charter and which is consistent with State Law. Stone said that, if the School Department wishes, they could review this current situation within their own department. � Heitmann said yes. Farrington said there is sincere concern and frustration about the situation. It ' is clear to him that the Council has the responsibility to make sure the elections are appropriately run and an obligation to see that individuals are , qualified to run. Mr. Tremble was qualified to run, but the issue is with his qualifications to serve — his spouse's employment at the Bangor School Department. The question Farrington hears from the public is who should � have known that, when they should have known that, and when that information should have been passed on. He was pleased that conversation has taken place at staff level indicating that the Council will look at elected � positions and appointed positions to make certain candidates are aware of requirements and limitations (a candidate's guide). This situation should not happen again. Farrington said that both of the Trembles are valuable to the , School Department, and it is unfortunate that the State Law is such that it prevents them from concurrently serving. He suggested that perhaps this , should be reviewed in light of having the State Law changed. Stone mentioned a letter from the Superintendent and asked Barrett to read ' it. Barrett distributed copies. Barrett said it was received late Friday afternoon. The letter addresses steps being taken to try to ensure that there would not be a reoccurrence of the November situation. The School � Committee is going to look at a conflict of interest policy and put together something to address these recently raised concerns. � ' r � Farrington said he is satisfied that the process under which the City has to , operate has been followed. He is not happy with the process and would like the process reexamined by those that are elected. 1 Gratwick asked about the origin of separation of powers between the Council and the School Board. Heitmann said there has always been a separation of , powers in terms of responsibility. In 1896, it was State Law that the School Committee shall be not less than three and not more than 7 and shall be appointed by City Council. That was changed in 1932 by the Charter, which , provided 5 members appointed by the City Council. That was changed in . 1971 with a subsequent Charter change when the School Committee members became elected by the voters. In 1990, by way of a Charter I ' change and by way of State Legislation, the number of School Board members was changed from five to seven. Gratwick asked the details of a citizen recall as well as the history of such in Bangor. Heitmann said the � recall provisions are included in the City Charter. They affed both the School Board and Council. A recall took place in response to the Council's � participating in the cost of baseball field improvements at Husson College. A petition was taken out, but an insufficient number of signatures were gathered. Regarding the new police station, there were numerous petition ' drives by citizens. A recall is a petition drive. The only successful petition drive was for the police station. It would require 2,203 signatures to place this recall on a ballot. After an affidavit is returned with ten signatures, ' petitions with the 2,203 valid signatures must be returned within 60 business days. The Clerk would validate the signatures and then bring it to the Council. The Council would be required, within ten days, to set an election Idate for the recall — no sooner than 40 days but no later than 60 days. Stone asked that discussion return to the issue at hand which is whether the � Council will review the School Board election process, not the special election, and not the recall election. ' Barrett said the Council needs to discuss a special election at its next meeting. Staff will put all of the information together prior to that meeting for Council review. � Gratwick agrees with the way the process is heading and concurs that a ' candidate's guide is needed for both Council and School Board. He agrees with a new election, sooner rather than later. He also agrees that the State Law needs to be changed. � , � � D'Errico said that the School Department is prepared to look into the , procedures for the candidates, according to the letter provided by the i Superintendent ' ' Barrett spoke about putting together information on qualifications and disqualifications for candidates to follow. The School Department is looking � at a more general conflict of interest policy. Heitmann will provide a copy of the City's Code of Ethics and the Personnel Policy to the School Department ' to use as they wish. D'Errico said the responses he has received concern questions of ethical behavior. Heitmann said that any behavior issues associated with the School Department are a personnel matter for the School ' Board. D'Errico said he understands and supports that situation. Stone asked where the City stands on whether the Council should undertake � a review on its own or if it should be left within the purview of the School Department. Heitmann said School Department. Allen said she is appalled at the process in place. It lacks full interactive � discussion. To start a process and then to be interrupted with more of a memorandum does not address the actual issue that is going on for the , voters and citizens of Bangor. It is inappropriate and unfortunate and disrespectful to the citizens and to this committee. She expressed concern , that an individual was allowed to run, was allowed to serve on a committee and no one has taken the stand to investigate the actual actions as to what led up to this situation. She doesn't feel that the SuperintendenYs memo , addresses this concern in a way that is truly independent. She said that once again City staff is taking action and eliminating the voice of the citizens. The citizens are angry and have concerns. She believes that an impartial ' investigation is necessary, it is what people are asking for, and she supports it. Stone asked if Allen was suggesting that the Council do a review. Allen said she is suggesting that the Council do a review and set up a process for , an independent body to do a review of exactly what happened. Farrington said that Allen has address what is of concern. He understands � that the School Committee is the only body that can investigate this matter, and, if it chooses not to, the Council can call all the investigation it wishes but � the School Committee does not have to partake in the investigations. Heitmann said the Council could ask a third party to look at an issue; i.e. Mall/Marsh Commission. Gratwick said there is a sense of outrage, but even ' if the Councii appoints an independent body to investigate this matter, that body has virtually no authority or power because of State Law. Allen said the Council should not be intimidated but should be responsive to , the citizens of Bangor. There is an outcry for some type of a review. Since , � r , being on the Council, she has found it difficult to put forth legislation that fully recognizes the interests of the citizens of Bangor. If a commission was � set up for WalMart, why not for a school election, she asked. Stone said he has heard more concern about the personnel policies of the , School Department than on the recent election issue. , � Regarding the School Committee meeting which she attended with Farrington and D'Errico on Nov. 13, Allen said that another member on the School Committee is not going to alter any votes, but she feels it is important that , the citizens are heard. A lot of questions were raised at the meeting, which � warrants a review. It will take several elections to change the makeup of the School Committee. ' Charlie Birkel addressed the Committee. He spoke about the history of the School Committee as well as the current situation with Dan Tremble. The � Council members are the only official elected officers of the City. The School Department is a department of the City of Bangor, he said. One of the Council Members disagreed. Heitmann said the School is a department of the 1 City of Bangor, but that is not relevant to the issue of what the School Board can and cannot do. Birkel said it is important to preclude this situation from occurring in the future. In the future, when individuals take out paperwork � for candidacy, this type of information should be available in the City Clerk's Office. In summary, Birkel asked what happened, why did it happen, who ' was involved, and what can be done to preclude it from happening again. Farrington said a department of the City is one over which the City has � control. The City's only control over the School Department is an overall say in the budget. The City cannot tell the School Committee how to conduct its business. The City can recommend and suggest. Birkel said that the City 1 Charter needs to be reviewed in terms of the School Committee. It is needed. Stone asked the City Manager to check with other municipalities regarding Birkel's suggestion. Stone suggested giving the School Department � a copy of the City's hiring policy. Barrett has asked Farrar to provide them with a copy of the City's Personnel Rules and Regulations, particularly dealing with nepotism. ' The followina is a more detailed summary of Committee discussion per ' request of the City Manager• ' Allen: Coming back to your procedure, I just want to say that I support what Charlie Birkel said and really what has happened is that the voice of the voter has been taken away from them. When they elected Dan Tremble to the School Board, they really ' , � thought that their vote was going to count. My concern is that in recognizing what the , voter has done is that at least we recognize the anguish they are feeling and the fact that they are realizing their vote not only didn't count but that the issue around it is not ' being recognized. And so I guess this piece of paper put in front of us regarding this conflict of interest policy really is kind of like an internal glossing to an outside situation and if this is at least the way the committee is going to go than at least recognize , individuals from the community that could sit on this committee as well to address the conflict of interest policy and what has happened, how it happened and where we are � going to go from here. Thanks. D'Errico: This has been one of my major concerns: He continued to speak about the � formation of a committee to review the conflict and felt it would be impossible to find impartial individuals without an agenda to serve on such a committee. Allen: Can I respond to that? I don't believe people coming forward will have an , agenda. You know, one can question whether the staff doesn't have an agenda. If you sat in on that School Committee meeting and listened to a lot of unanswered questions , or unanswered statements that were made at that meeting. All I'm saying is that we open it up. I'm sure you are going to find, that really kind of denigrates the Bangor citizens. I believe it is wrong and I know in this community there are many t professionals, many impartial people that would come forward just out of concern for their community to sit on this committee and it would be far more productive and far , more satisfying to the citizens than what is being done here by this piece of paper. Stone: He spoke about citizen's wishes, who want an election process that works and to , hire people in the School Department that aren't there because they have a cousin, first cousin, it doesn't mean they aren't qualified. He is not convinced a special review will solve the problems. Solving the problem is to the best of our ability holding their feet � to the fire and moving forward to resolve some of the issues. At this point, we need a show of hands as to the pleasure of this Committee. Allen: I have a question. So our vote automatically accepts this conflict of interest � policy as stated that this is how, what, staff is going to determine what the policy is and where the policy is going to go. � Barrett and Heitmann: (spoke about the code of ethics and nepotism policies of the , City) Allen: Thank you. Am I to understand that the "our" as far as the Council is concerned , is the City Manager and the City Solicitor along with the Supt. of Schools. Am I to understand that in looking at this piece of paper, as far as the council is concerned it will be an agreement that will be reached between the City Manager, Ciry Solicitor and ' the Superintendent of Schools? ' � � , Heitmann: No, we are just providing the information to the School Supt. They asked for a copy of our Personnel Rules and our Ethics Ordinance. � Aflen: As I understand it there was a meeting held on Friday with Councilor Greene, City Manager and Superintendent of Schools and there was supposed to be more of a ' , joint, a follow up, that would involve more of a, at least a Council or an elected participation as to where the meeting was going to go. The only person at the meeting as I understand it was the Chair of the School Board. � Barrett: The Chair of the School Board was not there. � Allen: She was not there. Can we be briefed on where that meeting went and what actually happened with that meeting? � Barrett: (brief discussion of the meeting) ' Allen: I don't want to belabor this but I was under the impression that the School Department did feel that a review was, would be responsive to the anger that was out there with the voters. ' Gratwick: (spoke about procedures) ' Stone: The item before us tonight is whether or not the Council is going to approve setting up a structure to do a review of these circumstances surrounding the election. We need a show of hands one way or the other on whether we are going to work with ' the City Manager to set up an appropriate forum to review that. ' Gratwick: I so move. Stone: We can't direct the School Committee to do anything. The issue before us is � do we as a Council want to direct the City Manager to get back to us a process to review these circumstances surrounding the election. That is the item we are voting on tonight. ' Gratwick: My motion is to return this to the staff to come up with a candidate's guide and then return to us with a draft. � Stone: Ed has notes on that and is going to do that. The issue before us is do we want to direct Ed to come back to us with a recommended process to review the � circumstances surrounding the election or do we just want to say it is the School Committee's obligation and we're done, have a nice day. Strictly to review the process ' surrounding the election. ThaYs the only item we need to vote on. � � i Barrett: We need to talk about the structure. You need to ask the Council Chair to do , that as opposed to somebody on staff. Stone: I'll entertain a motion one way or the other. � Alien: What is the motion? , Stone: Either to ..... Ed? Barrett: To begin the process of initiating a review of what happened in the November � 2006 School Board election and the circumstances surrounding it. � Stone: For the City Council to have a hand in the review. Barrett: Yes, for the City Council to initiate it. � Allen: That does fall to where I want to go but I would have other players to ' participate to work with staff on the various issue. I would rather have outside players to work with staff on that very issue. Stone: It won't be the City Manager. It will be the Chairman of the City Council to set � up a process if this gets voted on. Allen: I would support that with the idea that maybe two citizens or three citizens work � with the Chair, work with the Council to review the process and to set up a policy so this doesn't happen again. , Stone: We are confusing two different issues. , Allen: We are not. Stone: Set up a process so it won't happen again is something that Ed has already i indicated is going to come back to the Council for review. The item before us tonight is do we want to go to the Council Chair and ask him to put together a process for us to , review the election that just happened in November. Allen: I would like to add an amendment to that that in order to review that process , that it involve some type of citizen input. Stone: Well, I am going to assume the Mayor is smart enough to come back and say � here is what I am proposing tnat we do. Allen: As a Committee, I am adding, asking for a friendly amendment to be put forth to , the proposal. � � , 1 Stone: There is no motion. No one even moved it. Ed made the recommendation. , Allen: I'll move the motion with the amendment. ' Stone: The motion before us is to recommend that the Council Chair put together a group with citizens and staff which will then become public meeting. � Allen: Absolutely. ' �Stone: Is there a second on that? There does not appear to be a second so the motion dies for lack of a second. � Stone: I move that we adjourn. Allen: Second. , Stone: I'm sorry, Councilor Farrington? 1 Allen: We've adjourned; it's been seconded. Stone: We could give him the courtesy to speak. � Allen: In the past we haven't. fStone: I feel as Chair that you or anybody else has a right if they want to add something. Better here than out in the hallway. ' Farrington: It would be nice to have an investigation but it is my understanding of the type of investigation we need to define the type of investigation. We can set it up, we � can have non-staff people, we can have outside people, we can have citizens, but I think we need some definition of what it is they are to do and what the purpose of this committee is. We need to do that unless I have misinterpreted or misheard what has � been said by the Solicitor there is nothing we can direct to be done that the School Committee has to have anything to do with because of the way the State Law is set up. I am not comfortable with the State Law that as long as it is the state law we have no, � nothing we can do about that. It would be nice if we want to have an investigation and people investigate if it makes everybody feel good, but I question how effect it will be without defining what is supposed to be done. At the minimum though on the conflict ' of interest issue and this is, I'm going to speak unless you gavel me down. We have a pretty good conflict of interest policy in the City and apparently the School Department � does not, if I read what the State Statute is, and in our system, and it would have to go through the Legislature, I would like to see why we can't have a conflict of interest whereby at a committee level if I feel I have a conflict I have to disclose it but the , , � Committee decides whether there is a conflict. If there is, there is; if there isn't, there , isn't. This way we would allow peop►e to serve and just not speak if there is a conflict in a certain thing. I think it should be part of our deliberations. � Heitmann: The Ethics Ordinance does apply to the School Board. Our Ethics Ordinance that you have me go through at least once a month on various issues that come before ' the Council applies to every board in the city. It includes the School Board. The state Law does not prohibit us from having a conflict of interest rules that apply to City Boards and the School Board is a City Board. � Barrett: The State Law goes further than our Code of Ethics does in that it specifically ' prohibits a School Board Member from being a member of the School Board if the spouse is employed by the School Dept. There is nothing on the City side that would prohibit any member of the City Council from having a relative employed by the Ciry. , For example, Pat Blanchette's son worked for us at one point, actually before she was even elected to the Council. All that is required from that circumstance is that if an issue comes before the council that could have a specific financial or special interest to � that Council member involving that relative, that they have to disclose it and then the Council has to vote on whether that person can vote on that or not. For example, if Geoff's daughter was a firefighter and the Union contract with the firefighters was � coming forward, Dr. Gratwick would have to declare that he had a potential conflict, indicate what that conflict was, and the Council would have to vote on whether he could participate in that decision or not. � Allen: Excuse me, I thought this meeting was adjourned. Stone: There is nothing wrong with having free discussion. IYs good for the soul, the � people sitting at home, it's an important enough issue that I hate to walk out the door � with some having a question. Allen: Well, then I think we need to make a decision on whether we are going to ' continue the meeting without adjournment or adjourn it. Stone:The item before us did not pass for lack of a second so that item is off the table. � Right now we are just having a general discussion. Farrington: Did we vote on adjournment? I don't recall voting. , Heitmann: I can send you an update of what I have or do a new memo on how our Ethics Ordinance works as well as how it applies. It may answer some of your , questions. Farrington: Maybe we could recommend to the legislature that they change the state � law so that, it might be a good fit for us. , , , � Heitmann: When we come back with qualifications on both positions, School Board and , City Council, it may point out several strengths and weaknesses both in law and in ordinance and that might a time to deal with something like that. � Stone: In the interest of time, Allen: Back to discussion, it still comes back to who are the ones who are going to ' determine what will come back and how it's going to come back to the Council and who these players are. Thanks. � Gratwick: How do we request that the Legislature re-look at this issue? I ' Barrett: There are a number of things — you can pass a resolve that requests that that state law be relooked at. If you wish to do that, I would like a bit more clarity as to what you want done with it. If you want that prohibition against spouses expanded to , first degree relatives, if you want it eliminated, I'm not clear where people are going there. Alternatively, I know Councilor Blanchette, who is in the Legislature, already has indicated that she intends to do something, but I don't know exactly what. , Gratwick: I would like Legal to get together Councilor Blanchette and to bring it back to this committee or whichever committee. ' Farrington: I would move that we adjourn. ' Stone: All those in favor. We are adjourned. � ' � ' , , � '