Trash Plan OK’d, With Sunset Clause
by Melissa Bailey | March 25, 2008 8:10 AM | Permalink | Comments (9)
In a rare move amid a spirited debate, Aldermanic President Carl Goldfield stepped down from his throne to try to save the city’s new trash plan from what he called the “kiss of death.”
From his perch at the front of the Aldermanic Chambers at a full board meeting Monday night, Goldfield had a rare vantage point: He could see the city’s bond counsel “turn green” in the face.
What was turning the man green, Goldfield said, was a proposal on the table from Hill Alderman Jorge Perez to sunset the city’s new trash plan after three years.
The new trash plan, which eventually gained approval Monday after some unusually spirited public sparring, calls for the city to create a public, independent authority to manage the city’s trash and recyclables. The city says the plan would help plug a $17 million budget shortfall and save millions of dollars in operating costs in the long run. (Click here and here for background).
The plan would help plug the budget gap by selling the leasing rights of the city transfer station to the new authority, for a projected $6 million, as well as fobbing off $2.8 million in existing city debt to the new agency.
Aldermen have generally welcomed the effort to improve an operation that has been running up serious budget overruns for the past three fiscal years. The plan got approval from the Finance Committee after a two-hour Feb. 25 public hearing. But some said the proposal is too “rushed” and details need more vetting. Some concerns have been raised about the city’s practice of plugging budget holes with one-time revenues and of privatizing public functions.
In a pre-meeting powwow before the vote, several aldermen protested that their decision was being made in too much “haste,” and that too many questions still swirled around the proposal.
“I feel like it’s being rushed. It seems like an awful lot of information now,” said Hill Alderwoman Dolores Colon. “I feel the pressure to vote for this, the pressure to vote for this.”
Frank D’Ercole (pictured), the city’s bond counsel, said the trash authority board of directors needed to be sitting next week for the bond-rating process to be done in time to make the transfer station switch in January.
Perez was in part addressing those concerns as he made an amendment on the aldermanic floor that Goldfield called the “kiss of death.”
Perez proposed adding a sunset clause for the trash plan, so that the new agency would be reviewed in three years, and would be dissolved unless aldermen choose to prolong its existence. Perez’s amendment didn’t give alders any new powers; the city already had the power to dissolve the authority any time it wanted, taking back ownership of the transfer station and agency debt.
The proposal would make sure the new agency gets proper scrutiny, Perez explained.
As Perez pitched the sunset idea, Goldfield said he watched D’Ercole change color. Goldfield, the board president, left his high-backed seat to go down to his Ward 29 microphone and speak as a member of the board.
Sunset Warning
“Let’s not kill this,” warned Goldfield. He relayed the bond counsel’s fear that the sunset clause would spell doom for the new agency as it knocked on rating agency’s doors. The agency aims to bond out up to $10.5 million to finance capital improvements and its newly assumed debt.
Specific language that emphasizes aldermen’s ability to dissolve the agency would have a psychological effect on bondholders and rating agencies, Goldfield argued: The amendment would be a “restrictive covenant” that might make bond-holders shake in their boots.
“Anything that makes bond holders nervous that they’re not going to be paid back is the kiss of death,” he said. Beaver Hills Alderman Moti Sandman backed him up, saying aldermen could simply review or dissolve the agency anyway, without spelling it out in this ominous amendment.
Goldfield’s efforts, however, failed to rescue the trash plan from the grim reaper’s lips. Aldermen like Alex Rhodeen of Fair Haven Heights argued the three-year review would be healthy. (“We’ll still be here in three years at this meeting,” so it’ll be easy to review, he quipped.)
Perez’s sunset clause passed in a suspenseful 14-13 vote, with two passes and one absentee. So then Newhallville Alderman Charles Blango, a mayoral loyalist who voted for Perez’s amendment, got pulled into the hall by Chief Administrative Officer Rob Smuts.
In attempt to mitigate the psychological damage of the impending sunset, Sandman added an amendment to emphasize that in the event that the agency is dissolved, the city would be on the hook for the bonds.
City Budget Director Larry Rusconi said Sandman’s effort “mitigates some” the damage, but that the sunset clause “will make it much more difficult” to secure a rating from rating agencies and issue the bonds. He said he didn’t know if the “kiss of death” had really been smacked; only time would tell. But in the meantime, “we have to go to the rating agencies and sell the idea, and it’s going to be tough.”
Some other highlights of the evening’s trash activity:
East Rock Alderman Allan Brison (pictured) moved to table the item to give aldermen more time to think over the big decision.
Many of the trash plan’s touted benefits — increased recycling, better management, more efficient methods of collection, more business due to a new mandate — might be attained without having to sell a city asset and create an independent agency, he argued.
Click here to read his outstanding concerns on the plan.
• Some of the transfer station revenue will go towards recycling outreach and education, according to an amendment posed by Alderwoman Erin Sturgis-Pascale and approved unanimously.
• The waste authority board of directors was expanded from five to seven to include two neighborhood representatives from nearby wards. All directors must be city residents. Six will be chosen by the mayor, one by the aldermen.
The first five directors were approved Monday:
-Alderman Gerald Antunes, in whose the ward the transfer station sits.
-Joseph Dolan, Chief Financial Officer of the Town of Wilton.
-Konstantine Drakonakis, who has a Masters in Environmental Management and works at the CT Clean Energy Fund.
-Anika Singh, an attorney with Wiggin and Dana.
-Donald Walker, who teaches accounting at two local colleges.
The remaining two will be decided by the mayor.
The final ordinance to create the solid waste authority, with the several amendments tacked on, was approved by a 17 to 7 vote, with one pass by Newhallville Alderwoman Alfreda Edwards. Alders also approved a separate ordinance to mandate that all trash created in New Haven be processed at the municipal transfer station.
Comments
Posted by: toomanytaxes
| March 25, 2008 8:28 AM
ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON
Posted by: Gary Doyens | March 25, 2008 9:58 AM
Goldfield and Sandman are incorrect - having a sunset would provide greater accountability and insure that the entire process is reviewed. Second, there are companies who specialize in bond insurance - buy it - to provide assurance to bondholders they'll be repaid. Third, if the authority fails, the bonds will have to be repaid by the citizens of New Haven. They are borrowing on our credit, not the new authority. It has none. Fourth, I listen to how this new authority will operate more efficiently - how? Based on what projections, what study? There is no evidence that in fact will be true. If the authority runs a deficit - as this operation has in the past - it will simply pass on higher fees to the city which will raise our taxes to cover it.
It is disturbing to say the least, to have a complicated and potentially negative decision being driven by the bond counsel and the city's need for money. However, it does provide clear evidence of the real truth.
Bottom line: This is not about efficiency or putting the best intersts of the taxpayers first. It's about preserving a pattern of overspending and lack of controls without making any sacrifice at the City Hall level. The only sacrifice comes from the property tax payers twice a year who will be forced once again to eliminate family activities, family time and benefits to our children to keep funding a lack of courage and leadership by this administration.
Posted by: Webblog 1 | March 25, 2008 1:46 PM
Finally the BOA congers up the courage to provide a limited form of check and balance. In this instance there appears to be a check, the balance remains to be seen (in three years).
For years the city has operated the transfer station at a loss. Only now, the full ramifications is being realized. Every year the taxpayers are being billed for losses by way of the Debt service,(now at 169M city only) for this poorly operated and never monitored public utility.
The taxpayers are entitled to a report via a public hearing as to the purpose and justification for this "fast tracked" venture.
Nevertheless, an effort is being made to make a bad deal worse.
The Sandman amendment is the most foolish of all the amendments passed.
Why should the city back the bonded sale of this questionable under performing utility, only to guarantee we will buy it back plus interest, should the private entity fail. The fact is, it is failing now. The city should fix the problem in place, then too, since Perf is not making a recommendation on how to accomplish the fix, MAYBE NOT.
Voters will not tolerate Aldermen, including Alfreda Edwards, mentioned in the article, to pass on critical votes such as this one. She's there to vote, not pass the buck.
Posted by: cedarhillresident
| March 25, 2008 3:45 PM
What I want to know is WHY were some so resistant on the sunset clause??? Why why why? Would you not want to make sure this IS the best thing for the city?? What were the alders that argued against this arguing for....really can someone tell me??
Posted by: Andy Ross | March 25, 2008 3:53 PM
I do not think we should sell it. I know it can be operated at a profit or at very least no cost us the tax payer. If a private firm is prepared to come in and pay money for it, run and make a profit out of it, we can too.
Selling assets to gap the budget is selling this cities future. We are not only tax and spending now, rather we are taxing, selling off good assets and spending. What ever happen to the concept of a balanced budget
Posted by: CRAZY | March 25, 2008 3:59 PM
Melissa or Paul,
Can you PLEASE tell us who were the alders who voted no to the sunset amendment
Posted by: Melissa Bailey | March 25, 2008 9:54 PM
Here's the vote on the sunset amendment:
Yes: Perez, Colon, Clark, Smart, Brison, Antunes, Rhodeen, Joey Rodriguez, Castro, Paolillo, DePino, Edwards, Blango, McCormack
No: Plattus, Calder, Lemar, Sturgis-Pascale, Jones, Morehead, Shah, Silverman, Sergio Rodriguez, Lehtonen, Sandman, Goldfield, Sepulveda.
Absent: Jackson-Brooks
Didn't vote: James, Lee
Posted by: cedarhillresident
| March 26, 2008 10:53 AM
Well all I can say is they are all just doing what there constituents want.....right? You guys voted them in to represent you right?
Posted by: ROBN | March 26, 2008 8:36 PM
ENRON
Post a comment
Sections
Neighborhood News
Special Sections
Some Favorite Sites
- African independent
- At Risk for HD
- Branford Eagle
- Brian's Commentaries
- Business NH
- CT Energy Blog
- CT Green Scene
- CT Law Tribune
- CT Local Politics
- CT News Junkie
- CTV
- ChiTown Daily News
- Conn Art Scene
- Crosscut
- Design New Haven
- Folk Alley
- Gina Coggio
- Gotham Gazette
- Hamden Daily News
- Josiah Brown
- La Voz Hispana
- Len's Lens
- Magrisso Forte
- Media Attache
- Medical Intelligence
- Metrocrawl
- MinnPost
- My Left Nutmeg
- NBC 30
- NH Advocate
- NH Register
- NH Review of Books
- OneWorld
- Only In Bridgeport
- Oral History Project
- Pittsburgh Dish
- See Click Fix
- Smartpill Design
- SoWhay Sonata
- Some Stuff To Do Today
- St. Louis Beacon
- Voice of SD
- WFSB-TV
- WPKN Today
- WTNH
- Yale Daily News
- barista
Government/ Community Links
- Advocate Calendar
- Ald. Meetings
- Arts & Ideas
- Arts Council
- Artspace
- Beth El Keser Israel
- Bioregional Group
- Boys & Girls Club
- CTRIBAT
- Chamber of Commerce
- Children's Museum
- City of New Haven
- CitySeed
- Citywide Youth
- Columbus House
- Community Loan Fund
- Community Mediation
- ConnCAN
- DESK
- Dariba Referrals
- Data Haven
- Domestic Violence Srvcs.
- Election Volunteers
- Elm City Cycling
- Empower NH
- Ezra Academy
- GAVA
- Habitat For Humanity
- Hill Health
- Hilltop Brigade
- IRIS
- Info New Haven
- Jewish Federation
- Job Finder
- Junta
- LEAP
- Leeway
- Mary Wade
- NH Land Trust
- NH Safe Streets
- NH/ Leon Sister City
- NHCAN
- New Haven 828
- New Life Corp.
- Parents Available to Help
- Planned Parenthood
- Police
- Preservation Trust
- Public Allies CT
- Public Library
- Public Schools
- Public Works
- Register Calendar
- SAMA
- STRIVE-New Haven
- Solar Youth
- Soul-O-Ettes
- United Way
- Urban Design League
- Urban Resources Initiative
- W'ville Synagogue
- Westville Chabad
- Westville Renaissance
- Wooster Sq MT
- Workforce Alliance
- Yale Events
- Youth Continuum
Legal Notices
Flyerboard
Sponsors
N.H.I. Site Design & Development
NHI Store
Buy New Haven Independent Stuff
News Feed
Movable Type 3.35