TOWN OF CANTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN Regular Meeting Agenda

Wednesday, December 11, 2013 at 7:00 pm Community Center, 40 Dyer Avenue, Conference Room F

Consideration of and possible action on the following items

I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

II. PRESENTATIONS A. Presentation of CERT (Community Emergency Response Team) training certificates

III. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (5 minute time limit per speaker on any item) The Board of Selectmen welcomes and encourages the public to speak during the Public Participation portion of the agenda. The purpose of public participation is to communicate to the Board of Selectmen any concerns or comments that members of the public may have. The public may speak on any topic, including items mentioned on the Agenda. There is a time limit of 5 minutes per speaker. The time limit cannot be yielded to another individual. In most circumstances this will be the public’s only opportunity to comment. The Board of Selectmen will discuss the agenda items below with invited public officials and/or guests. It is important that the Selectmen allow this time for its exclusive use so that the agenda items can be properly presented and debated among members of the Board.

Most of the documents reviewed by the Board of Selectmen at tonight’s meeting can be located at http://www.townofcantonct.org/content/6662/default.aspx or by scanning the QR code below.

IV. APPOINTMENTS / RESIGNATIONS A. Appointment of Sergio Benedetti (U) to the Pension Committee for a term to expire on

01/01/2016 B. Reappointment of Arthur Rote (R) to the Canton Housing Authority for a term to expire on

12/31/2017 C. Reappointment of Arthur Blondin (D) to the Commission on Aging for a term to expire on

01/01/2018 D. Reappointment of Margaret Pinton (D) to the Commission on Aging for a term to expire on

01/01/2018

V. CONSIDERATION OF NEW BUSINESS A. Review draft of Collinsville Hydroelectric Request for Proposals B. Approval to release the residual security for Rustle Meadow Subdivision in the amount of

$54,360 C. Approval to submit an Assistance Firefighters Program Grant in the amount of $35,405 for the

purpose of purchasing Rapid Intervention Team (RIT) equipment for the Canton Volunteer Fire Department in lieu of the previously approved micro grant

D. Review proposal for upgrade to the Canton Police Department Dispatch Console

VI. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS A. Board of Selectmen Minutes 11-26-13 Regular Meeting

VII. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE CAO, TOWN AGENCIES, OFFICIALS AND/OR OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES AND OFFICIALS

A. First Selectman’s Report B. CAO Report C. Correspondence

1) Memorandum from Neil Pade to Richard Barlow with comments from the POCD Committee 2) Correspondence regarding removal of BB guns from ordinance

VIII. REMARKS BY SELECTMEN

IX. ADJOURNMENT

To : Board of Selectmen From : Robert Skinner, Chief Administrative Officer Date : 12-6-13 Re : Hydroelectric RFP Attached is a draft of an RFP seeking proposals to construct and operate the hydroelectric plant in Collinsville. The RFP is only in draft format. The goal of the review is not to wordsmith the RFP but to review the general concept of seeking proposals for a joint private/public partnership in the construction and operation of the upper and possibly lower hydroelectric facilities on the Farmington River. It is anticipated that Matt Stone, Chairman of the Energy Committee, will be attending the meeting to discuss the RFP.

TOWN OF CANTON FOUR MARKET STREET

P.O. BOX 168

COLLINSVILLE, CONNECTICUT 06022-0168

OFFICE OF CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER

1

DRAFT

Town of Canton, Connecticut

Canton Energy Committee

Request for Project Development Proposals

For the

Canton Hydroelectric Project

December 15, 2013

PROPOSALS WILL BE RECEIVED in the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer, Canton Town Hall, 2nd Floor, 4 Market Street Collinsville, CT until 12:00 pm local time on March 15, 2014,

2

Scope of Services

A. Overview The Town of Canton, Connecticut, through its Energy Committee, is soliciting proposals to refurbish and operate a small run-of-the-river hydropower facility located on the Farmington River in Collinsville, Connecticut. The Town is seeking qualified developers that can construct, finance, and operate a small-scale hydroelectric facility. The developer would be responsible for all licensing, permitting, development, and interconnection to the grid, and all associated costs. The Town is undertaking the re-activation of the Upper and/or Lower Collins Company Dams on the Farmington River for hydroelectric power generation. The target date for commercial operation is July 1, 2017. The Town applied for and has been granted a Successive Permit No. 13273 on July 1, 2012, by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to undertake the necessary studies to determine if it is feasible and practical to undertake this project. The Commission expects that the permitee will carry out pre-filing consultation and study development leading to the possible development of a license application. The Collins Company generated hydroelectric power at both facilities from the early 1900s until its closure in 1966. At that time, the facilities passed into the ownership of the Hartford Electric Light Company which removed or dismantled the electrical generation capability of both facilities. Shortly thereafter ownership was passed to the State of Connecticut where it remains to this day. The Collins Company operated a single 373-kW Leffel Z Type 2 turbine at the Upper Dam powerhouse (1935 to 1966) and two Allis-Chalmers 500 HP turbines at the Lower Dam powerhouse (1914 to 1966). The Town anticipates that one or both of the Upper and Lower Collins Company Dams will be retrofitted with fish passage as a part of the project. The Upper and Lower Collins Company Dams have been the subject of several FERC applications for hydroelectric power generation over the years. Past applications were filed with FERC by Summit Hydro, LLC of Avon, CT, the Metropolitan District Commission of Hartford, CT, the Collinsville Company of Collinsville, CT, and the Town of Canton, CT. The Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) own the dams and the land associated with the project. DEEP is required by special legislation to cooperate with the Town regarding development of the hydroelectric facilities. See Connecticut September 2009 Special Session Public Act 09-7, section 172.

3

In June of 1979, the Town published a “Feasibility Study Canton Hydroelectric Project Final Report” prepared by Development and Resources Corporation of Sacramento, California. In 2011, with the assistance of a grant from Connecticut’s Clean Energy Finance and Investment Authority (formerly the Connecticut Clean Energy Fund), the Town engaged GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc., to undertake a pre-feasibility study for possible reactivation of the two dams for hydroelectric generation. In a preliminary fashion, the study evaluated the feasibility of reactivating the hydropower facilities and addressed the following issues:

• Physical evaluation of dams and hydropower equipment • River hydraulics and hydrology • Historic and pre-historic aspects • Environmental impacts and licensing • Turbine/generator technology • Electrical interconnection and power sale • Low-Impact Hydropower Institute (LIHI) certification • Project economics • Local, State and Federal permitting and licensing

The study was completed in May of 2011. It showed no fatal flaws and indicated that the project had the potential to produce favorable economic performance. Recent laws and regulations regarding Virtual Net Metering and Renewable Energy Credits have the potential to substantially improve the project economics beyond that indicated in the pre-feasibility study. The study is available for review at the following web link: http://www.townofcantonct.org/content/120/17181/4910/10849.aspx. The Town has considered various project delivery methods and is considering partnering with a developer to execute the project. The specific services of the developer would be defined as the project progresses, but are intended to include all work necessary to take the project from its present state to completion, and then through a period during which the developer will own/operate the facility and sell electricity to the Town and/or other entities. These services would include:

• Further feasibility study • Economic analysis • Project financing • All permitting and licensing efforts • Design for the selected project scope • Equipment procurement • Project construction services • Start-up, commissioning, and verification services • Ownership, operation, and maintenance of the works for a fixed period, after

which the Town would assume ownership

4

The Town’s intent is for the developer to bear all costs for project implementation. The developer would recoup these costs with a reasonable profit through electricity sales to the Town and/or other entities over the life of the contract. This RFP seeks estimates for project costs, long-term electrical purchase rates, and other creative financial arrangements. The Town wishes to evaluate the credentials of, and approach proposed by, potential developers who would be willing to partner with the Town to execute the project. B. General Requirements, Conditions, and Instructions :

• Experience Developers are required to demonstrate project experience and management capability to successfully develop and operate the project. The Town is particularly interested in project teams that have demonstrated success in projects of similar type, size, and technology, and can demonstrate an ability to effectively bring the project to commercial operation in a timely fashion.

Developers must provide a listing of all projects the developer has successfully developed or that are currently under construction.

• Financing The developer must demonstrate that it has the ability to finance the proposed project. The developer must provide a reasonable plan for financing the proposed project, including the funding of further study, development costs, and the ability to acquire the required equipment in the time frame proposed.

The developer should indicate any state or federal grant or loan programs that may be utilized. The developer should indicate how RECs, ZRECs, net metering, or virtual net metering will be used to minimize the cost of power from the facility.

• Agreements

The developer must describe how an agreement might be structured.

• Schedule Developers are required to provide a schedule outline for the project from the notice of selection to the start of commercial operations.

• Team Developers must provide an organizational chart for the project that lists the

project participants and identifies the corporate structure, including general and limited partners. For each of the project participants (including the developer, partners, and proposed contractors), provide statements that list the specific experience of the firm in developing, financing, and constructing and operating hydroelectric generating facilities, other projects of similar type, size, and

5

technology, and any evidence that the project participants have worked jointly on other projects.

• Other Requirements

Provide a description of any current credit issues regarding the developer or affiliated entities raised by rating agencies, banks, or accounting firms. Describe the impact of the Federal Production Tax Credit or Investment Tax Credit (or other incentives) on the viability of the project. Developers must disclose any pending litigation related to projects owned or managed by them or any of their affiliates in the United States.

Disclaimer: This Request for Proposals (hereinafter, “RFP”) is not a contract offer. Pre-Proposal Conference: There will be a non-mandatory pre-proposal conference on January 15, 2014 at 1:00 pm in the second floor conference room at the Canton Town Hall located at 4 Market Street, Collinsville, CT. Respondents are highly encouraged to attend the pre-bid conference. Proposal Submittals: Proposals must be received at the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer no later than Wednesday March 15, 2014, 12:00pm. Respondents must submit one original and five copies. Proposals may not be provided by electronic mail or facsimile. Proposals must be hand delivered or mailed to:

Office of the CAO “Request for Project Development Proposals for the Canton Hydroelectric Project”

4 Market Street P.O. Box 168

Collinsville, CT 06022-0168 RFP Timeline: The timeline for this RFP is listed below and is subject to change:

EVENT DATE

Notice of Request for Proposals December 15, 2013 Pre-Proposal Meeting January 15, 2014 Deadline for the submission of questions February 15, 2014 The Town posts responses to questions February 28, 2014 Due Date for Proposal Submissions March 15, 2014 Short-list and Interviews TBD Selection of Applicants TBD

Questions: Respondents with questions regarding the submission requirements may be sent to Jerome F. Shea via email only at jshea@townofcantonct.org.

6

Addendums: Addendum(s) to the RFP may be issued by the Town. When issued, addendum(s) will be posted on the Town’s website under the “Request for Proposals” link. It is the respondent’s responsibility to check to see if RFP addendum(s) have been issued by the Town and to ensure that its proposal addresses all addendum(s). Proposal Package Form: All proposals shall be typed. Mistakes must be crossed out and corrections typewritten or written in ink adjacent thereto and initialed in ink by the party signing the proposal, or the party’s authorized representative. Late Proposals: Proposals received after the deadline for submission shall be returned unopened. Exceptions to RFP: Any and all exceptions of the respondent(s) to the terms and specifications of this RFP shall be made in writing and submitted in full with the proposal. For all other terms and specifications, submission of a proposal constitutes acceptance by the respondent. The Town reserves the right to reject proposals which contain exceptions that the Town deems to be unacceptable. Review of Proposals: The Town reserves the right to waive informalities, non- material defects, or clerical errors in any proposal. The Town also reserves the right to reject any and all proposals, or any part of a proposal, when said action is deemed to be in the best interest of the Town. The Town reserves the right to negotiate with one or more respondents as it sees fit. Proposals will be evaluated based on what is in the best interests of the Town. Cost will not be the sole factor in evaluating proposals. No contract rights shall accrue to a respondent unless and until the Town and the respondent execute a binding contract. Proposal Costs: All costs incurred in the preparation of the proposals will be borne entirely by the individual/firm submitter. Ownership of Proposals: All proposals submitted become property of the Town. Freedom of Information: All proposals submitted and information contained therein and attached thereto shall be subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. Developers must clearly identify all confidential or proprietary information. If you wish to submit other information to the Town that is of a confidential nature, then please recognize that the Connecticut Freedom of Information Act governs the public’s accessibility to that information Period Commitment: Proposals shall be final and binding and may not be withdrawn or amended for (90) days from the date and time when proposals are due. Irrevocability of Proposals: Respondent(s) may amend or withdraw their Proposals prior to this RFP’s due date and time by submitting a clear and detailed written notice to the Town. Subject to the Period Commitment provision detailed herein, all Proposals become irrevocable after the date and time they are due.

7

Assignment and/or Subcontracting by Selected Respondents: Assignment and/or subcontracting by successful respondent(s) to third party of any contract based on the Request for Proposal or any monies due is prohibited and shall not be recognized by the Town unless approved by the Town in writing. Collusion: Any act or acts of misrepresentation or collusion shall be a basis for disqualification of any proposal or proposals submitted by such person responsible for said misrepresentation or collusion. In the event that the Town enters into a contract with any respondent who is responsible for a misrepresentation or collusion and such conduct is discovered after the execution of said contract, the Town may cancel said contract without incurring liability, penalty, or damages. Workers’ Compensation Insurance: In accordance with the State of Connecticut Workers’ Compensation laws, selected respondent shall carry Workers’ Compensation and Employers’ Liability Insurance for all persons employed in the performance of services under this RFP. Commercial General Liability Insurance: Selected respondent shall carry Commercial General Liability Insurance (Bodily Injury, Property Damage, Products and Completed Operations) in an amount of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence with a two million dollar ($2,000,000) aggregate, combined single limits. Such coverage shall also include coverage for operations, completed operations, products and contractual liability insurance Such policy shall name the town of Canton as additional insured and shall be primary and noncontributory to any valid and collectible insurance carried by the Town. Commercial Automobile Insurance: Selected respondent shall provide commercial automobile insurance for any owned autos (symbol 1 or equivalent) in the amount of ($1,000,000) each accident covering bodily injury and property damage on a combined single limit basis. Such coverage shall also include hired and non-owned automobile coverage. In addition, such coverage shall include the loading and unloading of clients into and from the respondent’s vehicles. Errors & Omissions Liability Insurance: Selected respondent shall provide errors & omissions liability insurance covering the respondent and the Town of Canton against loss for financial damages resulting from legal expenses and costs the Town may incur by fines, and penalties assessed against the Town through administrative or judicial proceedings caused by errors or omission in the billing by the Respondent in the amount of ($1,000,000) each wrongful act and ($1,000,000) in the aggregate. Proof of Insurance: Selected respondent shall provide the Town with a certificate verifying such coverage before commencing services under this RFP. Such policy shall require thirty (30) days notice to the Town in writing prior to alteration, cancellation, termination or expiration of any kind.

8

Defense and Indemnification: Any person contracting with the Town must, to the fullest extent permitted by law, indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the Town and its agents and employees from and against all claims, damages, loss or expense including reasonable attorney’s fees arising out of or resulting from the performance of the contract. Selected respondents shall pay any and all attorneys' fees incurred by the Town, its agents, or its employees, in enforcing any of the selected respondent's defense or indemnification obligations. In any and all claims against the Town, or any of its agents or employees, by any employee of a selected respondent, or anyone directly or indirectly employed by a selected respondent, or anyone for whose acts a selected respondent is liable, the indemnification obligation shall not be limited in any way by any limitation on the amount or type of damages, compensation or benefits payable by or a selected respondent under Workers’ Compensation Acts, disability benefits acts, or other employee benefits acts. Conflict of Interest: By submitting a proposal the respondent certifies that no officer, agent or employee of the Town, who has a pecuniary interest in this request for proposal, neither has nor shall participate in the contract negotiations on the part of the Town, that the proposal is made in good faith without fraud, collusion or connection of any kind with any other respondent of the same call for proposals, and that the respondent is competing solely in its own behalf without connection with or obligation to, any undisclosed person or firm. Respondents must fully disclose, in writing to the Town on or before the closing date of this RFP, the circumstances of any possible conflict of interest or what could be perceived as a possible conflict of interest if the respondent were to become a contracting party pursuant to this RFP. The Town shall review any submissions by respondents under this provision and may reject any Proposals where, in the opinion of the Town, the respondent could be in a conflict of interest or could be perceived to be in a possible conflict of interest position if the respondent were to become a contracting party pursuant to this RFP.

C. Terms and Conditions

At the sole discretion of the Town, the Town may enter into an agreement with the Developer to study the feasibility of power generation from the hydroelectric facility. If after six months the Town and the selected developer conclude that the project is economically and technically viable, then the Town may enter into one or more project-specific agreements with the selected applicant. All costs incurred during the study phase will be the sole responsibility of the selected developer. Either the Town or the developer may end the feasibility contract if they determine that the project is not viable after six months.

ACTIVE/13.104/MSTONE/4391526v1

1

To: Board of Selectmen From: Jerome F. Shea, Project Administrator

Date: December 5, 2013

Cc: Robert Skinner, Chief Administrative Officer

Neil Pade, Director of Planning and Community Development

Amy O’Toole, Finance Officer / Treasurer

Re: Rustle Meadow Subdivision - PC File 498 – Release of Residual Security The Board of Selectmen voted to accept the public improvement associated with the Rustle Meadow Subdivision at their meeting of June 13, 2012. The one year period since acceptance of the roadway and related improvements has expired. I am recommending that the residual security in the amount of $54,360.00 be released to the developer in accordance with Section 621 of the Subdivision Regulations. The public improvements were inspected by the Director of Public Works and the Project Administrator on November 21, 2013 and no defects were observed during the inspection. It is suggested that the Board of Selectmen consider release of the residual security to the developer in the amount of $54,360.00.

TOWN OF CANTON FOUR MARKET STREET

P.O. BOX 168

COLLINSVILLE, CONNECTICUT 06022-0168

OFFICE OF THE PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR

1

Martin, JoAnn

From: Skinner, RobertSent: Monday, December 02, 2013 8:00 AMTo: Richard HutchingsCc: Micheal Yacovino; Boyko, Harriet; Barlow, Richard; Martin, JoAnnSubject: Re: AFG

Rich,

Go ahead and submit the grant and I will seek BOS approval for the difference at their next meeting.

Bob

Sent from Windows Mail

From: Richard Hutchings

Sent: Sunday , December 1 , 2013 8 : 54 PM

To: Robert Skinner

Cc: Micheal Yacovino, Harriet Boyko

Evening Bob-

As I stated earlier the fire grant will be ready for mentors review late tomorrow. The final figures are a total request of

35,405. The grant is a 95 /5 split. So the feds pick up 33,634.75 of the cost and the town has to pay 1,770.25. dollars. We

only have a 5% investment because our population is under 20,000.

This is only a 520 dollar difference in what the town would have to pay if we had gone with the micro grant. That would

have been 5% of 25,000 = 1250. So the full grant is 5% of 35,405 = 1770.25 the difference is 1770.25 – 1250 = 520.25.

So for an increase of only 520.25 we can provide all three stations with RIT equipment/ pay for the classes need for RIT

certification/Pay for the on call pay for the members to attend the class and pay for a Bail out system for each fire

suppression member.

Given this small increase is why the mentors suggested going for the full grant and getting each station this much

needed equipment.

Please keep in mind we went to the board prior to getting a mentor and being able to speak with anyone at the federal

level due to the governmental shutdown. They opened the start date a month later than usual. Instead of starting in

October they opened in early November but did not extend the final date a month.

Had they done that there would be time for me to return to the board to ask for the change. But the closing date is Dec.

6th

.

I am going to submit the application foe review tomorrow and make any changes they suggest then I will wait to hear

from you on how to proceed as far as the board of selectmen are concerned . Given this small amount of difference I

would think we can get approval via a phone vote.

Please advise on how to proceed

Hutch

CANTON POLICE DEPARTMENT 45 River Road (Route 179), Canton, Connecticut 06019

(860) 693-0221 Fax: (860) 693-8493

Christopher G. Arciero Lawrence A. Terra

Chief of Police Captain

Date: December 6, 2013 To: Robert Skinner Chief Administrative Officer From: Chief Christopher Arciero Re: Console Upgrade Pursuant to our discussions, follow-up conversations/emails with the various vendors, and review of significant data concerning the console upgrade issue, I feel we should pursue the upgrade in the following manner:

1. Utilize Northeastern Communications for the console software/firmware upgrade. Use

Northwest Communications for the ongoing maintenance/service.

2. With respect to the console upgrade, Northeastern Communications is on the state

contract list for both of the state radio contracts. During the research phase, they were

quite detailed in their analysis and communication to me about the attendant issues with

the upgrade issues (both pro and con). They also conducted a site visit to the police

department. Their initial estimate for the upgrade was the lowest of the other vendors. I

was impressed with the manner in which the company communicated with me during

this process.

3. While Northeastern was concerned that we were considering splitting the console

upgrade and the ongoing maintenance, they are amenable to such an arrangement as

long as the maintenance/service provider is present when the install takes place.

4. That being said, and based on the foregoing reasons, Northwest Communications

should be considered for the ongoing maintenance/service once the upgrade is

complete:

a. Northwest Communications currently provides service to Canton’s DPW radio

system.

b. Northwest also provides radio service to the Farmington Police Department. In

talking with FPD employees, they were complimentary about Northwest

Communications competency and service to their system.

c. Northwest is located in close proximity to Canton (Harwinton). Northeastern is

located in Naugatuck.

d. Northwest and Northeastern Communications have worked with each other and I

sensed they have a positive relationship that will promote more efficient and

effective resolution to any issues arising from the console upgrade and ongoing

service/maintenance.

e. Previously, Northwest indicated that the software upgrade and availability of

parts could extend the current life of the system up to 6 year.

f. If Northwest is selected, we consolidate our radio service to one company that is

local and competent. Moreover, it makes sense to deal with one company for

more effective and efficient upgrades, new equipment, maintenance scheduling,

consolidation processes and resource sharing.

5. As was referenced in an email on Thursday, Dec. 5, Northeastern suggests that

software/firmware be ordered ‘asap’. (Due to the fact that while the software/firmware has

been officially cancelled, it is still orderable).

CPD RADIO CONSOLE UPGRADE COST COMPARISON

Company Name Console

software

upgrade

Yearly

Maintenance

Agreement

Miscellaneous State

contract

0012

State

Contract

0018

NECS (formerly

WPCS)

(East Hartford)

$23,502 $3,516 • This is our

current

vendor

• Having

significant

e/ee

turnover

Yes Yes

Northwest

Communications

(Harwinton)

$18,950 $3,492 • FPD uses

them

• Canton DPW

uses them

No Yes

Northeastern

Communications

(Naugatuck)

$13,616 $7,752 • Located in

Naugatuck-

not generally

in this area

Yes Yes

Goosetown

(East Hartford)

$118,200

(entirely new

system-due

to current

end of life

Motorola

system)

$3129 • Former NECS

e/ees

• Relatively

new to area

No No

Marcus

(Manchester)

$108,963

(entirely new

system-due

to current

end of life

Motorola

system)

• APD is using

them

Yes Yes

ITZ 0012:

The State is seeking contractors/suppliers to provide new radio (OEM and Non OEM) parts, supplies, and accessories

for various manufacturers and resellers for All Using State Agencies & Political Sub-Divisions. Parts, supplies and

accessories are for two ways radio and radio systems only. This bid is not for whole radios or radio systems. Bidders

must be the Manufacturers, Value Added Resellers (VARS), Resellers, Dealers or Distributors. Entities other than

Manufacturers must be authorized by the Manufacturers/Distributors/Resellars to sell to Connecticut State and Local

Government. Proof of Authorization, letter from the Manufacture must be submitted with the bid response in order to

be considered for an award for that manufacture.

ITZ 0018: This award is only to purchase new two-way radio equipment and services. Any accessories must be purchased with the radio

equipment. This award is not for purchase of accessories. Vendors cannot sell any items that may be in catalog that are not within

the scope of the award. (Of two-way radios to include portable and mobile radios, mobile repeaters, desktop control stations, base

station radios and base station repeaters, accessories and maintenance service)

DRAFT MINUTES CANTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN

Tuesday, November 26, 2013, Regular Meeting Community Center, Conference Room F, 7:00 pm

Selectmen Present: First Selectman Richard Barlow, Selectmen: Deputy Stephen Roberto, David Gilchrist, Lowell

Humphrey and Thomas Sevigny

Also Present: Chief Administrative Officer Robert Skinner and Executive Assistant JoAnn Martin

R. Barlow called the regular meeting of the Board of Selectmen to order at 7:00 pm.

I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.

II. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION – None

III. APPOINTMENTS / RESIGNATIONS A. Appointment of Theresa Barger (D) to the Economic Development Agency for a term to expire on 07/01/2015 – An application and resume was included in the Board’s packet for their review. T. Barger was present. S. Roberto expressed concerns he has received from local businesses regarding T. Barger’s past connections with C.A.R.E. and the perception they are not business friendly. T. Barger stated her goal is to expand the tax base through attracting new businesses to Canton and shared some of her ideas with the Board. MOTION: L. Humphrey moved to appoint T. Barger (D) to the Economic Development Agency for a term to expire on 07/01/2015. D. Gilchrist seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, 5-0-0.

B. Appointment of Diana Boorjian (D) to the Plainville to the Plainville Area Cable Telephone Advisory Council for a term to expire on 06/30/2015 – An application and resume was included in the Board’s packet for their review. T. Boorjian was present. MOTION: D. Gilchrist moved to appoint D. Boorjian to the Plainville Area Cable Telephone Advisory Council for a term to expire on 06/30/2015. T. Sevigny seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, 5-0-0.

R. Skinner swore in T. Barger and D. Boorjian.

IV. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA A. Refund of Taxes pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes 12-129 – MOTION: D. Gilchrist moved to approve the consent agenda items, as presented. T. Sevigny seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, 5-0-0.

V. CONSIDERATION OF NEW BUSINESS A. Presentation of paperless meetings – R. Skinner provided background information regarding his initial research where other towns were going paperless. He reviewed a cost analysis of the savings that could be achieved and summarized some of the advantages such as cost savings, time savings, good for the environment, ability for better presentations with more detail, maps, resources, videos, etc. He stated it will also benefit the public as maps and other detailed items can be displayed on the projector screen. R. Skinner explained after much research it was decided to go with tablets. He then provided technical information and features regarding the tablets such as fast start up, long battery life, quietness, WIFI and Bluetooth compatible. R. Skinner presented short tutorial videos which additional information and instructions for using the tablets and accessing the features. R. Skinner walked the Board through downloading the packets, using specific items such as highlight, notes, etc. He then answered questions and assisted the Board as they became familiar with their use.

VI. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS A. Board of Selectmen Minutes 11-13-13 Regular Meeting – MOTION: T. Sevigny moved to approve the regular meeting minutes dated November 13, 2013 of the Board of Selectmen, as presented. D. Gilchrist seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, 5-0-0.

B. Board of Selectmen Minutes 11-20-13 Special Meeting – MOTION: D. Gilchrist moved to approve the special meeting minutes dated November 20, 2013 of the Board of Selectmen, as presented. L. Humphrey seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, 5-0-0.

VII. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE CAO, TOWN AGENCIES, OFFICIALS AND/OR OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES AND OFFICIALS A. First Selectman’s Report – R. Barlow stated he attended a meeting set up by Senator Witkos with Chairman DiBella and CEO Sheehan from the MDC along with First Selectmen from Colebrook, New Hartford and Barkhamsted regarding ways to better communicate between MDC and the valley towns. R. Barlow stated he and R. Skinner attended the Board of Finance meeting and discussions regarding completing the pool repairs were positive for obtaining additional funding from the unallocated reserve account.

Minutes - Board of Selectmen, November 26, 2013, Page 2 B. CAO Report – None

C. CAO Monthly Report – October 2013 – For informational purposes only.

D. Absentee Record – October 2013 – For informational purposes only.

E. Correspondence 1) Letter from Richard J. Power dated November 11, 2013 – For informational purposes only. 2) Legal Opinion from Halloran & Sage dated November 19, 2013 – For informational purposes only.

VIII. REMARKS BY SELECTMEN – None

IX. EXECUTIVE SESSION A. Pending litigation pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes Section 1-200(6)(B) and (D) MOTION: – D. Gilchrist moved to enter into Executive Session at 8:16 pm to discuss Pending litigation pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes Section 1-200(6)(B) and Real Estate pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes Section 1-200(6)(D) with Chief Administrative Officer Robert Skinner present. T. Sevigny seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, 5-0-0.

B. Real Estate pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes Section 1-200(6)(D)

The Board exited Executive Session at 8:51 pm.

X. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: L. Humphrey moved to adjourn the regular meeting of the Board of Selectmen at 8:52 pm. D. Gilchrist seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, 5-0-0. Respectfully submitted, JoAnn Martin, Executive Assistant

L A N D U S E O F F I C E

Canton, Connecticut INC. 1806

4 Market Street, Canton, Connecticut 06019

TO: Richard Barlow, First Selectman FROM: Neil S. Pade, AICP Director, Planning & Community Development CC: Robert Skinner, Chief Administrative Officer

Jonathan Thiesse, Plan of Conservation and Development Update Committee Chair

SUBJECT: 2014-2024 Plan of Conservation and Development, Draft for Planning

and Zoning Commission Review (December 2013) DATE: December 3, 2013

On November 20, 2013, the Board of Selectman (BOS) forwarded review comments on the

2014-2024 Draft Plan of Conservation and Development (POCD) to the POCD Update

Committee (Committee).

The Committee reviewed the BOS comments at their November 25, 2013 meeting.

Attached please find a summary of edits that have been made (or are in process of being made,

such as edits to the mapping) since the BOS’s review. As you will see, the Committee

incorporated the majority of changes suggested by the BOS (along with a few others).

At the conclusion of this meeting the Committee approved a motion forwarding the Draft

POCD to the Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC). It is anticipated that a December 2013

Draft of the POCD will be distributed at or before the December 18, 2013 meeting of the PZC.

Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns.

1

POCD Strategic and Implementation Plan changes – Final Update Committee Draft

Comments from 11-20-13 Board of Selectman Meeting

Changes Made by POCD Update Committee reflected in italics

General Comments

Board members made general comments with extensive discussion regarding emphasis

on commercial development, mixed use development, economic development and

preserving the character of the Town. Members of the Board expressed their gratitude to

the members of the POCD committee for their many hours of work and thoughtful

consideration in developing the draft POCD. D. Gilchrist expressed his concern that the

plan which would provide for the development of mixed use districts which have not

been specifically defined could cause the Town to lose its rural character. R. Barlow, S.

Roberto and T. Sevigny supported the concept as an opportunity to recognize the ability

to develop areas of mixed use which are represented by Collinsville and an opportunity to

increase the non-residential tax base. It was acknowledged that such concepts for mixed

use areas would only be achieved if future zoning regulation changes are implemented.

L. Humphrey spoke in support of maintaining the character to maintaining existing

neighborhoods. Where changes were made to address general comments they are noted

below in the appropriate location.

Strategic Plan and Implementation Plan Comments

The Board reviewed the Strategic Plan in conjunction with the Implementation Plan

section by section and recommended the following changes after discussion and

clarification to Town Planner Neil Pade and POCD chairman Jonathan Thiesse who

along with other members of the POCD Committee were present:

• Introduction Implementation Plan – “Implementation in Action – Implementation

Committee” page (3) the Board of Selectmen should be the lead rather

than a POCD Implementation Committee; “Legend for Implementation

Tables” page (6) should identify non-Town organizations (Farmington

River Watershed Association, Farmington River Coordinating Committee,

Farmington Valley Trails Council, Canton Main Street Program, etc.) for

clarification purposes.

No change. The Committee feels strongly the recommendation to

establish a PIC is a fundamental commitment towards the implementation

of the Plan. The Committee points out that under the drafted language the

BOS could choose to appoint themselves as the PIC, provided some

process and structure is adopted to ensure implementation is monitored.

2

Other

Title Page

Edited purpose and date.

Organization Table

Identified non-Town government organizations. (Verify how to classify

Fire and EMS)

• Community Character – No comments

• Natural Resources –

Strategic Plan – the following Side Bar was added to address recent comments

received from the FCCC:

“Farmington River Wild and Scenic Designation and the Farmington River

Coordinating Committee (FRCC)

In 1994, 14 miles of the West Branch Farmington River were added by the U.S. Congress

to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. The river received this honor due to its

outstandingly remarkable values (ORVs) including – high quality water, cold water

fisheries, wildlife habitat, recreational opportunities, and historic resources. The

Farmington River is a Partnership Wild and Scenic River - which means that local, state,

and federal governments as well as other stakeholders in the river community are partners

in river management and stewardship. This is a model that other eastern rivers have

followed as they have put together management plans.

The FRCC is mandated by the U.S. Congress to coordinate activities on the 14-mile

upper river and particularly to provide for the protection and enhancement of the ORVs

for which the river was designated. It is guided by the Upper Farmington River

Management Plan referred to in its designation. The Committee is comprised of

appointed representatives from the five riverfront towns (Barkhamsted, Canton,

Colebrook, Hartland and New Hartford), state of Connecticut DEEP, MDC, NPS,

FRWA, and FRAA.

This designation may offer future opportunities for the Town to benefit from. Each year,

the FRCC receives funding from Congress to fulfill its mandate. As part of its effort to

support local endeavors, build awareness, and enhance protection of the Upper

Farmington Wild & Scenic River, the FRCC offers grants, scholarships, and land

protection assistance for applicable projects.”

Implementation Plan – page 10 of 46, section E item NR21 “Limit the use of

pesticides and herbicides” to “Employ best management practices in regards to

use of pesticides and herbicides”

NR 21 now reads:

“Employ best management practices in regards to the use of pesticides and

herbicides on town-owned or maintained lands.”

3

• Open Space – Implementation Plan – page 13 of 46, section B item OS11(a) –

reconsider annual contributions from the operating budget to support open space

purchases because the amount that could be annually funded through the

operating budget would not be significant enough to purchase property, that the

Town attempts to limit resource accounts and the Town has been successful in

obtaining funds from the unallocated reserves when significant land purchase

opportunities have occurred.

OS 11 now reads:

“Encourage the continued availability of funding for acquisition of priority

open space as warranted:

a. Capital funds, reserve funds, and/or bond funding;

b. Governmental Grants;

c. Allow revenue generating, non-destructive/renewable uses on Town-

owned open space lands where appropriate, such as: i) Rental of garden

plots, ii)Limited logging, iii) Rental of certain recreational and other

amenities.”

• Agriculture – Implementation Plan – page 15 of 46, section A item A3 provide

more detail.

A3 now reads:

“Remain cognizant of various requirements for potential grant funding for

protecting farmland, including funding mechanism requirements.”

• Economic Development – o Strategic Plan –

� maps on pages 37 & 39 should have property lines;

The Committee is concerned that property lines are not accurate in

the GIS, and the map is intended to show areas where such

concepts could be considered, and are not hard boundaries/

property line specific. The following note has been added:

“Concept areas (not property line specific)” the sidebar on Page 36

has also been updated to recognize some mixed use areas are

based on present or historical development patterns.

“Possible Mixed Use Opportunity Areas” title renamed to

“Potential/ Historical Mixed Use Areas”, change carried

throughout.

The Potential/ Historical Mixed Use Areas map has been modified

to include a reference to the Side Bar on the facing page (36)

which includes descriptive terms to assist the reader understand

the map.

4

The Side Bar on Page 36 has been modified clarify that the map on

the opposite page identifies areas historically associated with

mixed use as well as areas where mixed use potential should be

considered.

The use of terms on Page 38 (and through-out) has been changed

from “Opportunity Sites” to “Opportunity Locations”.

The Side Bar on Page 38 has been modified to clarify that the

areas shown on the Potential Opportunity Locations map include

areas where there is known development interests.

The map on Page 39 has been modified to show the area including

12 Lawton Road and the Brass Bed as an area where there are

known development interests to reflect the present reality, recent

comments from Trails End residents, and for consistency in

message.

� pages 43-45 rather than “case study” more appropriate would be

“example”;

These terms have been renamed as “conceptual example”

throughout.

o Implementation Plan –

� general comment “does not focus on preserving rural character”; � page 19 of 46, section A. item ED9 additional reference to “after

adoption of appropriate Design Standards and Regulations”; � page 25 of 46 section F., item ED55 “re-educate board members”; � page 26 of 46, item ED69(b) revise wording.

ED5, ED 9, and ED 55 have been reworded as follows:

ED9: “Anticipate and promote development on the opportunity

locations identified in the POCD in accordance with the principles

of this Plan.”

ED55: “Periodically remind and refresh the training of board

members regarding:

a. Their roles in the processes.

b. The role of the POCD in their board’s mission and

deliberations.

c. Their roles as representatives of the Town– both in their

decisions and their interactions with applicants and the

public.”

5

ED69: “Protect areas designated for commercial and industrial use

from encroachment to their permitted and intended uses from

nearby residential development and associated ‘sensibility creep’.

a. Provide appropriate transition uses where possible.

b. Land use board decisions should respect such use

designations and reflect the principles of this POCD with

regards to these uses.”

• Residential Development –

o Implementation Plan –

� page 28 of 46, section A, item R4 remove reference to “blight

ordinance”;

� page 31 of 46, section C. item R22(d) provide clarification that

Town realizes a burden passed on from the State if these types of

multi-purpose septic systems are allowed.

R4 and R21(d) have been modified as follows:

R4: Deleted.

R21(d): “incorporate the use of multi-property septic systems in

common areas and open space, where appropriate, and keeping in

mind that the Town's WPCA becomes responsible for ensuring the

operation and maintenance of such systems.” (Note: This was

measure R22 prior to deletion of R4.)

• Community Facilities and Services –

o Strategic Plan –

� page (59) item C. – Road Conditions – regarding “pavement

management” should reference referral to “Transportation

Section”;

Done

� page (60) item D. remove “(such as the lack of diesel exhaust

systems)” and “Housing the emergency boat at the Collinsville

Station in an exterior shed creates a delay in response time.”

Done

� page (63) item F. remove “Building of a track and artificial turf

field at Canton High/Middle School”;

Done

6

� page (66) item H. remove “replacement of windows and gutters”;

Done

o Implementation Plan –

� page 32 of 46, section A. item F3 – change Lead Agency to BOS

and re-word F3(b) as maintenance line item is part of Selectmen’s

operating budget,

� page 33 of 46, section B. item F8 change “Enhance staffing….”

the strategic plan does not address such needs in other Town

departments and change F8(b) to remove the wording “expanding

Senior/Social Services”. If there is a need to further support mental

health and social needs of an aging population there are other

options to expanding the Department such as use of referral

agencies that provide such services that should be considered,

� page 34 of 46 section D, item F14 should not be limited to only the

Police Department,;

� Page 34 of 46 section D, F18(c) remove “possibility of a separate

facility for EMS”,

� item F19(c) remove “Consider providing additional Teen services

targeted at youth population.”,

� item F22 remove “indoor pool”.

Modifications made as follows:

F3: “Properly maintain our current facilities.

a. Consider capital replacement planning as a tool to

support proper maintenance of existing facilities.

b. Make appropriate funding available to keep maintenance

and rehabilitation reasonably up-to-date.

c. Improve the energy-efficiency of town-owned facilities.”

F8: “Enhance the abilities of Senior and Social Services as

resources allow:

a. To improve efficiency and communications of social

services through the development of a database to track and

manage clients.

b. To help address the changing needs of an aging

population, within the scope of the department.”

F14 & F15: Deleted.

F16(c): Deleted. (Was F18.)

F17(c): “Expanding service options for teenagers.” (Was F19.)

F20: “Removed reference to indoor pool facilities.” (Was F22.)

7

• Transportation –

o Strategic Plan –

� map on page (71) – a future recreational trail on the west side of

the river while such a trail would be an asset without participation

by the existing property owners it is not achievable;

The map has been updated to make it affected areas are privately

owned property. The term “Future Recreational Trail” has been

relabeled to “Potential Trail (Private Property).” Page 3 of the

Preface (POCD Interpretation) has been modified to include the

following side bar – “This plan supports the rights of private

property owners. In any portion of this plan where there may be a

discussion of an improvement or facility pertaining to privately

owned property, this plan does not endorse nor recommend the

taking or condemnation of private property. Any such discussion

is provided on the anticipation that such a property owner may one

day desire to pursue such interests.”

The map on Page 69 has be modified to show location of “Priority

Traffic Calming Areas” that are recommended on Page 43 (T-25)

(and T-17, T-22, T-24, T-15) of Implementation.

The map on Page 69 has been modified to show Intersection

Improvement Areas recommended in the Implementation Chapter

(T-18, T-19, T-21)

The map on Page 71 has been modified to show Lawton Road �

Dry Bridge as a Priority Pedestrian Area

The map on Page 71 has been modified to show SR 177 as a Bike

Route

o Implementation Plan –

� page 42 of 46 section C. item T19 Colonial Road is a private drive

and it will be difficult for the Town to propose a traffic light as it

will not conform to DOT requirements, a left turn lane in both

directions may be a better alternative,

Please note item T19 as originally written does not specify a traffic

light. Rewritten to the following:

T19: “Work with CTDOT for improvements to improve access at

Route 44 and Colonial Road/entrance to Canton Gateway Office

Park.”

8

• Utilities –

o Implementation Plan –

� page 45 of 46, section B. item U10 – the WPCA is a separate entity

and not under control of the BOS. Item should be changed to have

the BOS in conjunction with the EDA work with the WPCA to

achieve this goal.

U10 now reads:

U10: “BOS and EDA to review the connection policies and fees and

system extension/assessment policies of the WPCA for consistency with

the goals and objectives of this Plan; and to promote coordination

between the goals and objectives of this POCD and the goals and

objectives of the WPCA.”

• Districts – No comments –

Language in the second paragraph of Page 91 has been called out to ensure the

presence of single family neighborhoods within the East Gateway is

acknowledged, and to call out the importance to buffer and soften the transition

between such areas and areas of intense commercial activity.

• Future Land Use Plan –

o Strategic Plan –

� page (99) suggest alternative residential photo.

The following photo has been inserted in place:

The Board members again thanked Chairman Thiesse for the hard work of the POCD

Committee.

MOTION: S. Roberto moved to formerly forward all comments to the POCD committee.

L. Humphrey seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, 4-0-0.

Remarks by Selectmen – L. Humphrey expressed to J. Thiesse the great work done on

the document but feels it is 15 years too late. He commented on being careful in

developing residential neighborhoods and the importance of maintaining existing

neighborhoods.

9

Other

Implementation Plan

Page 24, ED 48 – “maybe” = “may be”

Page 25, ED55 – removed box with “?”

Page 41, T-11 – The table was modified to represent the map on Page 71 - Added “the

town should pursue developing bicycle connections/ dedicated routes to New Hartford,

Granby, Barkhamsted, Avon and Simsbury”