001All right. Thank you very much everyone. Uh tonight's special meeting of September 22nd, we only have a couple items. The first one is one of the favorite parts of this job is uh appointing a police officer and I think I'm the chief is behind the podium but or the lectern. Do you want to say a few words before we entertain a motion? >> Yes, of course. >> Appointing is the favorite thing, not necessarily the hiring process. >> Yeah. >> Uh I see that >> second to talking to the council on >> Yes. tongue and cheek. Um this is a very special occasion. And I I by my count, this is the 15th person that I've hired uh that we have hired together uh to be a police officer for the town of Planeville uh in
002in just over three and a half years. So, uh that tells you the type of movement uh that we've had. Um but I'm very very happy and proud of of the people that have uh wanted to be here to serve our citizens. Uh and Officer Kyle Porter is no exception. What's also special about Officer Porter is he's a certified officer. uh currently uh well he's working for us but he had last job he worked for University of Connecticut at stores as a campus police officer uh so he comes to us fully certified and happy to announce that he's going to be start starting work uh tomorrow uh on his field training which will be a modified field training so it won't be the full 400 hours um it's really up to him to how how
003he gets up to speed with our systems but uh it's a it's a great asset to us um Kyle uh was born in Cookville, Tennessee. Uh moved when he was younger to Bristol, uh Connecticut. Attended Bristol Eastern High School where he was a football and wrestling standout. He also joined uh the military and active duty and then is uh was in the Connecticut Army National Guard. He attended Western Connecticut State University in Tungstus Community College where he earned an associates degree in criminal justice. For about three years, he worked his way up. He worked as a corrections officer assigned to the Garner Correctional Institution in New Town. Then after that moved up to becoming a police officer with uh the University of Connecticut uh and now is joining us uh in the town of Plainville
004uh where he has family and he has roots. Uh and talking to Kyle, he has a deep desire uh to be here in Planeville. That's something I always look for when I'm hiring is somebody who wants to be a part of this town, somebody who wants to uh be a servant to the community. Um, and Kyle um is I think just going to knock it out of the park. So, he's starting his service uh for Planeville tomorrow. And so, uh I respectfully request that the council appoint Officer Kyle Porter as the next police officer for the town of Planeville. And on another note, that'll make uh our 42nd officer, which will bring us up to full strength and knock on wood, we stay there for a good long time. >> Thank you very much. >>
005All right. Thank you. Um is there a motion, >> Mr. Chair? >> Yes. Go ahead. >> Like to make a motion to appoint Kyle Porter to the position of police officer effective September 23, 2025. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Any comments or questions? All those in favor? >> I. Any opposed? Congratulations. Welcome. Very happy to have you. Now, let's be swearing in. And do we have do we have a badge? Oh, there we're all You guys are way ahead of me. Great. >> Raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear that you will support the Constitution of the State of Connecticut and of the United States, the laws, ordinances of the town of Plainville, obey the rules, regulations, and orders of the police department, and that you will discharge the
006duties as police officer with the town of Planeville according to the best of your knowledge and ability. >> I swear. >> Congratulations. >> Right, you're on. >> And take your time. And we like to get a lot of pictures for these. >> So will the family. I'm sure. Right. >> Drop it. >> Well, congratulations again. Do you want to say a few words? You don't have to. You could say a lot. You could say a little. It's up to you. >> Yeah. I mean, uh, just first off, thank you all for coming here today. I know it's out of the ordinary, a special meeting. Makes me feel special. Thank you. Um, and yeah, you guys, I'm going to give my all, my pride, my passion to the town of Planeville. I can't wait to, you
007know, hit the ground running and learn everything I can learn from my FTO's and the other officers at the department. Just super excited to be here and, uh, thank you guys again for the opportunity. Uh, it's going to be a great run. >> Good. We're looking forward to it. Congratulations and welcome to Planeville. Yes. >> Thank you. Did uh family everybody got pictures that you wanted? >> Yeah, we'll get them. >> So, we're going to move on to our other item of business tonight. I understand if you don't want to stick around and sewer user rates are probably our second least favorite thing to do. what I came for. >> We're not offended if you need to leave. >> Bye, guys. Thank you. >> Thanks. Turn this off. >> Thank you again. >> Thank you.
008>> All right. So, the second item for tonight's special meeting is to set the sewer user rate. >> Um I don't know if Mr. Town Manager, is there any setting up? I know we talked about this a couple meetings. >> Yeah, everyone should have a a sheet before them. We talked about a across the board proposed increase for 3% on the standard charge, minimum charge, welluser charge, and the affluent discharge. So, um those items and numbers are calculated uh in the yellow box to the far right on the new proposed rate. The current rate is on the left and the proposed increase of 3%. So, That's what's on the table. >> All right. And I know um a question came up regarding the well users and why they are charged what they are charged. I
009don't know if we were able to. >> Yes. Um I do have an answer for you. Um um comes by way of the engineer that um the um formula was established way back uh early 80s I think when they did the rates. uh essentially uh an equation based on the estimate of what four people would use in a in a home. Uh so there's really no way of knowing uh how much a well user uses, right? So that's the formula they they came up with. They've been using that formula since since the 80s. So, you know, if there's a if there's an issue, I could I could offer as a as a way as a as an option if the if the council felt strongly enough that well users at $100 more than the minimum
010charge is maybe antiquated uh or maybe just out of date, uh that you could make a motion with a caveat. I I would think that you could um talk about uh revisiting the formula and I could instruct the engineer to go through that process and then um if there should be an adjustment downward then uh we could likely do a refund in the secondear payment potentially. I know Rob's in he's not going to >> don't listen Rob you didn't hear that >> like that and uh but that's an option right uh in in in the in the totality just so you know the scope of it um there we estimate there about 20 maybe 25 on on on wells that would be affected on this so >> you know that >> and I guess the
011like because I I don't know why I blanked on this but essentially we charge sewer rates based on your water usage >> and that's Why? Well, water, you know, obviously they don't use water the way most of the town does and we have to estimate their usage and therefore that's how we back into the sewer user rate for them. >> Right. >> Okay. >> Essentially, that's it. Right. So, they had to come up with a formula and they just said, "Okay, family of four." >> And I imagine this is an old like something that's been around for a long time. >> Yeah. Uh I think John said it goes back to the to the 80s at least when they when they >> Okay. I the race >> maybe, >> Mr. Chairman. >> Yeah, go ahead.
012>> Can we uh have the engineer take a look at it? And please >> and um I'll make that motion if somebody wants to second it. >> Second it. >> And so I guess when we make the motion for the sewer user fees, we just with the caveat that we're going to take a look at the well water charge. >> Yeah. that I would think that you you know reserve the the right to adjust um in in ahead of this the second payment uh any type of adjustment for well users. >> Is there any chance instead of having to do refunds is there any chance by October 6th meeting we can make this decision and that way will bills have already gone out by then? >> Yeah, I we're should I go up there? Yeah,
013you might want to just so you get on camera. >> Oh, great. >> Have a face for radio. >> Um, yeah, I mean, we're trying to move up this process because of the changes we've had in our department and the fact that we have to review almost every single one of these bills versus tax bills where we do not have to cuz we create the calculation. For this, we're getting information from >> Aquarian. Yeah. >> And we then have to kind of recalculate everything. >> Okay. Um what you as a council have done in the past is not change some of the rates or change them at different percentages. So you always have that option as well if you wanted to you know punt on the well users for now um make it whatever you
014want versus 3%. >> And then maybe or maybe not have to issue refund subsequent to that >> or even just say punt to next year. >> Yeah, >> it's up to you. So I guess you know in that thinking I mean you know I don't know if we want to consider even you know with well users a 0% increase and leave it where it is for now and then after determining whether or not a bigger adjustment needs to be made we can make that I mean it I don't know what you guys your preference >> Mr. Chairman, I I have just one problem. Even if we left it the way it is, >> there still >> it still has to be higher than higher than everybody else's. Now, give me an education here, if you
015will. It says minimum charge is going to be $447.88. Is the well users minimum charge going to be 555? Is that the way I'm looking at this? And if that's true, it's $100 more. They >> correct you. And guaranteed they use less water, >> right? Well, I I I personally like and and if there isn't four people in the house, there's only two people in the house, why are they being charged for four people in the house? >> Well, >> and I understand it's hard to figure that out, >> right? From a time I think that I would recommend the best path path forward is a look revisiting the formula because the other the other think about this 1980 well before any water restriction as well. So a lot of water restriction on on on
016the appliances, toilets and you name it. So um you know that factor might be a formula that back in the day in the 80s was was accurate but might not be at this point in time. So I think it >> so warrants a review and a recalculation. I'm thinking that if we just let this go through at three for now >> and then make the >> revisit it and if there is a change they'll be refunded the the difference >> or we leave the current rate at we set the new rate as what the current rate is >> and then if there and then re and then look into it. I don't I don't feel it's warranted to give them give them a 3% increase. >> I don't either. Well, I think it it sounds
017like if there is a a downward adjustment to this that it doesn't seem to make sense to add 3% >> right >> tonight if we're just going to then refund that back to them at a later date. I >> you know it just I guess they would get to keep $16 until we make the final judgment after we take a look at it. I mean it's >> Mr. Chairman, how many people are we talking about? >> 25. >> 20 to 25 people. I I don't see I don't see a problem at all with financially or anything just to keep the same price that they've been charged and and just stay right there. >> Yes, Rob. >> Mr. Chairman, if I can. It um it is only 25 or so individuals. It's not a lot of
018leg work. However, it is administratively easier to keep it at zero if you're planning on making a change somewhere down the road. And then if we need to change something, >> um, you know, >> maybe putting that into effect next year at this time instead of, you know, because we only send out one bill. It's like a carpet. We only send out one bill a year. We we would have to manually adjust >> 25 or so second half bills for this. >> Um, so really, if you're thinking about looking at the formula, making a change somewhere down the road, >> I would suggest zero for the year and then adjust it again as necessary after we have all the information. Zero increase for the year >> for the well for the well users only. >>
019Zero increase, not zero. >> Zero increase for the well users. Yes, only. >> So, let's change the motion to um >> Hold on. Hold on one second. Let me >> Why Why is there a difference between wells and the minimum use people that are >> because they're guessing on how much they're using? >> There's no meter to to give them a price. Uh, Danny, >> it doesn't it doesn't make sense that the wells are are are getting charged $100 more. >> Well, maybe back in ' 85 it did, but I think that's the point is maybe it doesn't make sense and taking a look at it again and making an adjustment. >> That's something we should do. But in the meantime, >> and I agree. Well, and I think that's the thing is, you know,
020even if we go ahead and approve a zero increase tonight for wellwater users, I think we're still going to go, the feedback I'm hearing is we're still going to go back, take a look at that and make any necessary downward adjustment if the numbers, you know, bear that out. >> Or how how about scrapping the welluser rate altogether and just having them do the minimum charge, >> Mr. Chair? Yes. >> And that would take effect now. >> That would take effect now. And as I think we've all agreed too that there's a very minimum financial impact if we were to do that because of the low number of oil users >> and that minimum charge would be less than what they were being charged uh >> last night. Yeah. >> So what's the downside to
021that other than we have no >> 25 time $555? >> No time it differs between 44 >> 108 or I'm sorry times the 48. >> Yeah. Mhm. >> So you're you're not talking a a big financial hit >> I mean again if if your study comes out that it really should be higher you know then again you are taking somewhat of a hit but it's not financially >> I can tell you four people in my house and I only pay the minimum charge. >> Yeah. I think it's an antiquated again no water restrictions back in the day and now there are. So I think more than likely the well users are probably using less water. >> A lot less. Yeah. Well, I mean that's something to discuss. I I don't know if town manager assistant
022like want to weigh in if that's too big of a step tonight or >> Well, yeah, I think that I think as part of the analysis we want to take a look at minimum charge and and well, right or we'll take a look at all of all of it. But, um, yeah, I I think the recommendation of of a flatten zero makes the most sense until you get until we get data u on on the formula and what makes sense. And I'm not, you know, again, I don't want to put John on the the hot seat, but you know, we'll we'll move as quickly as we can. Okay. >> Um and and again, I think it's just >> whatever the council wants to do, it's not it's not going to be a a major financial
023impact to the >> Mr. Chairman. >> Yes. >> Um just a question. We're not operating in the red. >> No. >> Okay. So the reason we're raising the rate is >> well we're not operating in the red but we're operating as you know with honor heights coming on at a deficit there that and also future uh expansion and other issues that we have within the sewer sewer fund. So this is just a progression to to stay in pace in line with what we have in terms of projections and the >> and I think Joe talked about some of the potential capital projects coming up that they were trying to >> beef up. I know that's probably the wrong way to say it, but >> yes, >> I I've it's $2,500 we're talking about, >> and
024I don't see any problem with it if we we deduct it and just put these people at the same price as the as the uh the minimum minimum charge. >> I mean, that's >> and then investigate and find out. But 25 people are not going to make that big a difference in in the overall picture here, >> Mr. Chairman. >> Yes. >> Or scrap scrap the well users charge. Everyone gets charged the minimum. There's one minimum charge for septic or well or city water >> and then it saves our engineering department a lot of time and effort. >> How what would this study cost John? Cost cost us to do 2500. It's a wash. >> Yeah, Mr. Chairman, >> I had gotten that far with revisiting the the formula with John. I I um interpret
025it as an internal review that I don't think he'd be going outside uh for consult. That was something internal uh that he was I could be wrong, but um that he was going to take a a stab at it internally try to look at historic data, whatever he could get his hands on. >> And Mr. Chairman, >> yes. >> I believe that in 1980 there were a lot more wells than 40 or 40, whatever the number is. And 25 >> that might have been why they established a suburb rate because of the amount of wells. I think today, what what did I just hear? There's 40 >> 25. Okay. 25 wells. I mean, >> back in the 80s, there were probably many, many more. So, I agree with everybody else. I think we should just
026establish the minimum charge for everybody well users and get it over with tonight. And there's no uh there's no study that can be done on it. The 25 people, it'd be ridiculous. >> Yeah. Question for Rob. If we were to do just, you know, strictly do the minimum charge for all users, would that make it harder, more difficult or easier for you? >> No. I mean, again, you're talking about 25 changes. >> Yeah. 25 >> from from well users to minimum charge. >> So, I'm thinking of, you know, the time saved on the finance department end as well the time saved on the engineering department end. And um I think it's worth the $25 $2,500. Yeah. >> On our part to just give everybody the same minimum charge. >> Yeah. I mean, I'm fine. I
027Yeah. I I wasn't prepared to go that far tonight, but I mean I I I like to see the numbers. I would like to still see a study done just to see, you know, are we although I, you know, I don't know if everybody is at the at least the minimum charge at this point if what the study would do. Well, I'd give them time to study till next year's bill comes out. In the meantime, give them the same bill as the >> the 447. >> I mean, we could always make adjustments. I mean, that's we are allowed that. I mean, I don't know what everyone I mean, clearly we have three or four who are okay with setting the wellwater or well users to the minimum charge. What is is everyone comfortable with that?
028>> Yeah. Um yeah, Mr. Chair, should we talk if we should ask the town manager too in terms of should there be a a first motion >> um addressing the um making the minimum charge standard for the well users and then go ahead and do with the 3% increase. I don't know what the exact best procedure would be. >> Finance directors nodding yes. >> Yeah. So what we'll do is it sounds like if we want to go that direction, we should add a motion that would set the well wellusers rate to the minimum charge rate. >> Yes. >> Well users rate to the minimum >> charge rate which would then become um motion two and then motion two will become motion three. Does that make sense to everybody? >> Yeah. Two-step two two motion process.
029Okay. Cindy. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> And then then increase everybody. >> Is it the consensus of the >> Well, why don't we uh go ahead. Why don't someone make a motion to add >> Mr. Chair? >> On item two. Yes. Go ahead. >> I'd like to make a motion to add item two to the recommended motions. Motion to set well users rates to the minimum charge rate. >> Second that. That that gets us what we need. All right. So, we have a motion and a second. Any more comments or questions? All those in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? All right. And now what is now item three? Unless there's other questions or comments before we entertain a motion. Okay. Someone cares to make a motion. >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes. Go ahead. A motion
030for the town council acting as a water pollution control authority to approve a 3% increase to the sewer user rate for the period November 1st, 2025 to October 31st, 2026. >> Second. >> All right. Motion and a second. Any comments or questions? All those in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? >> Motion carries. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Chairman. Yes. For just for clarification, I I I think if we could have the record, >> yes, >> Ben's Ben's motion include the same language acting as a water pollution control authority for the for the period. Yeah. >> So, why don't we go back to >> So, back to item two. >> Item two, >> if you could amend your motion to include acting as the water pollution control authority, >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes. I would
031like to amend my motion to say motion for the town council acting as the water pollution control authority to set well users rates to the minimum charge rate >> for the period. >> And I amend my second. >> Okay. >> So I think and we don't need the dates in there, right? That's that's okay. >> Okay. >> All right. So all in favor to the amended motion I I >> Any opposed? Thank you for that. like to make sure we're doing things the right way. >> No more motions for me tonight. >> Could you have a spirited discussion on the >> No, this is >> I don't want this about sewer rates, but >> very important. Very important. Yeah. >> Um All right. Any other questions, comments, anything else? I know that's all that's on
032the agenda. Everybody's all set. The motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. >> Second. >> All those in favor? >> I. >> All right. We will uh be back October 6th.