Legislation & Administration Standing Committee of the RTM

FIFTEEN ROPE FERRY ROAD
WATERFORD, CT 06385-2886
PHONE 860-442-0553
www.waterfordct.org
Legislation & Administration Committee of the RTM = a
Meeting Agenda = = uy
March 19, 2026 | 6:00PM > nn
Appleby Room, Waterford Town Hall co ae
U 85
om
1. Confirmation of Quorum and Call to Order = “3
| Oo
2. Public Comment
3. Consideration and Action on Minutes of the February 9, 2026 Committee Meeting
4. Review Committee Report Draft to report out to the RTM the following items:
a. Police Commission expansion to seven members (RTC 10/2/23)
b. Public Act 22-3, AAC Remote Meetings Under FOI Act (RTC 2/6/23)
c. Review of YFSB/Senior Citizens ordinances (RTC 8/5/24)
5. Review of Matters Currently Referred to the Committee
a. Review of Chptr. 3.08 to reflect Public Act 25-92 (RTC 10/6/25)
b. Review ofa “Public Comment Ordinance” (RTC 2/6/23)
c. Review how RTM considers recommendations for committee assignments (RTC 6/6/22)
d. Review of Ethics Ordinance 2.50 (RTC 10/7/24)
6. New Business
7. Next Meeting Schedule
8. Adjournment
Encl: Legislation&Administration_Meeting Minutes_02092026
Draft Committee Report
Edited version of Ordinance 3.08 with proposed changes

FIFTEEN ROPE FERRY ROAD
WATERFORD, CT 06385-2886
PHONE 860-442-0553
woww.waterfordetorg
Legislation & Administration Committee Meeting Minutes . February 9, 2026
Members Present: Erica Casper, Mary Childs, Emnieline Franklin, Paul Goldstein, and Daniélic Steward-Gelinag,
ve 2
Members Absent: None ies
Also Present: Sue Driscoll, RTM moderator
{. Confirmation of Quorum and Call to Order.
Etica Casper called the meeting to order at 6:00pm.
gc
Pecan
vio
2. Public Coiminent 2 a\ = Oy
Public coniment from Helen Kwasniewski regarding appointinents to cominittees and ensuii ng apyeaintees B
have appropriate qualifications.
3. Consideration and Action on Mimites of the January 21, 2026 Committee Meeting
Motion by Mary Childs, seconded by Danielle Steward-Gelinas to approye the minutes. Voice vote
unanimous in favor,
4. Review of Matters Cuivently Referred to the Commitee (enis d-d anticipated for discussion and possible
action; remaining ilems to be reviewed as time allows)
a, Review of Chptr, 3.08 to refleet Public Act 25-92 (RTC I 0/6/25)
Shea Davy, purchasing agent, spoke in favor of raising the formal bid process threshold from twenty-
five thousand to thirty-five thousand dollars. Davy cited rising costs, consistency with neighboring
municipalities, and cost savings to the Town by reducing the need for formal bid advertising. The
Commitee was in agreeinent fo amend the ordinance arid recommend adoption by the RTM, with
direction to consull with Town Counsel and initiate the required public hearing process.
b, Police Cominission expansion to seven menitiers (RTC 10/2/23)
Discussion reflected no demonstrated need to increase the size of the Police Commission, as no
commissioners or stakeholders presented evidence supporting a change, and, to our knowledge, iio
requests for expansion have been made since the item Was referred to coinmittee iti October 2023, The
Committee noted that appointment-rélated concerts were oiitside the scope of this ite and could be
addvessed separately if needed.
Motion by Paul Goldstein, seconded by Steward-Gelinas to report this issue out of committee with a
recommendation that the RTM take no action because underlying concerns about appointments can be
addressed in another format. Voice vote unanimons in favor,
e. Public Act 22-3, AAC Remote Meetings Under FOI Act (RTC 2/6/23)
Conunitice discussion found that no suppatting information or evidence was provided to detiajistrate a
need for Committee or RTM action régarding Public Act 22-3 and remote meetings under the FOI Act,

Motion by Steward-Gelinas, seconded by Goldstein (o report this issue out of committee with a
recommendation that the RTM take no action because insufficient backup was provided. Voice vote
unanimous in favor.
d. Review of a “Public Comment Ordinance” (RTC 2/6/23)
The Committee continued discussion regarding public comment at board and committee meetings.
Members reiterated general agreement that amending ordinances to require public comment al every
meeting was not advisable, noting that such a requirement may be inappropriate in certain
circumstances or inconsistent with state statute. The Committee discussed the alternative approach of
encouraging public comment through a guidance letter to boards and committees, incliding general
best practices to ensure public comment is appropriate and manageable. Emmy Franlkin presented a
draft letter for consideration. Discussion included whether to use a previously issued, attorney-vetted
Jetter or Franklin’s newly drafted, more comprehensive version, as well as the possibility of attaching
Robert’s Rules guidance on public comment and distributing the materials annually or as part of new
member orientation packets. No action was taken, and discussion will continue at a future meeting.
e. Review of YFSB/Senior Citizens ordinances (RTC 8/5/24)
The Committee discussed the combined Director of Youth and Family Services and Director of Senior
Services position. Discussion nated that the First Selectman has authority over staffing decisions and
that the position was created in consultation with advisory groups and the Union, with an MOU in
place covering the joint position. Dani Gorman, director of both positions, spoke in support of leaving
the ordinance as is. The Committee agreed that, because the MOU governs the arrangement, no
ordinance change is needed at this time.
Motion by Steward-Gelinas, seconded by Goldstien, to move the item out of committee with a
recommendation that the RTM take no action because there is a memorandum of understanding that
covers this position. Voice vote unanimous in favor.
Jt Review how RTM considers recommendations for conmittee assignments (RTC 6/6/22)
No discussion or action on this item.
g. Review of Ethics Ordinance 2.50 (RTC 10/7/24)
No discussion or action on this item.
New Business
None.
Next Meeting Schedule
Next meeting date: TBD.
Adjournment
Meeting adjourned at 8:00pm,

} NS PHONE 860-442-0553
FIFTEEN ROPE FERRY ROAD
WATERFORD, CT 06385-2886 S) www.waterfordct.org
LEGISLATION & ADMINISTRATION STANDING COMMITTEE OF THE RTM
COMMITTEE REPORT, March 19, 2026
The following matters were referred to the Legislation & Administration Standing Committee for review. The
Committee discussed these items at its February 9, 2026, regular meeting and makes the following
recommendations to the Representative Town Meeting.
Police Commission Expansion to Seven Members (RTC 10/2/23)
The Committee noted that no commissioners or other stakeholders have presented evidence demonstrating a need to
increase the size of the Police Commission. To the Committee’s knowledge, no requests for expansion have been
made since the item was referred in October 2023. The Committee also noted that appointment-related concerns are
outside the scope of this item and could be addressed separately if necessary.
Recommendation: The Committee voted unanimously to report this item out of committee with the
recommendation that the RTM take no further action because underlying concerns about appointments can be
addressed in another format.
Public Act 22-3, AAC Remote Meetings Under FOI Act (RTC 2/6/23)
This item was referred to the Committee for review of Public Act 22-3, which established state rules governing
remote meetings under the Freedom of Information Act, The Committee determined that no supporting information
or evidence had been presented demonstrating a need for RTM action.
Recommendation: The Committee voted unanimously to report this item out of committee with the
recommendation that the RTM take no further action because insufficient backup was provided.
Review of YFSB/Senior Citizens ordinances (RTC 8/5/24)
The Committee discussed the combined position of Director of Youth and Family Services and Director of Senior
Services. The Committee noted that the First Selectman has authority over staffing decisions and that the joint
position was created in consultation with advisory groups and the union, with a memorandum of understanding
(MOU) governing the arrangement. Dani Gorman, who serves as Director of both departments, spoke in support of
maintaining the current ordinance language. Based on the discussion, the Committee concluded that no ordinance
change is necessary at this time.
Recommendation: The Committee voted unanimously to report this item out of committee with the
recommendation that the RTM take no further action because there is an MOU that covers this position.
Submitted by:
Erica Casper
Chair, Legislation & Administration Standing Committee
Representative Town Meeting
Town of Waterford

1. For purchases exceeding thirtytwenty-five thousand dollars, a formal bid process is
required as authorized in subsection B of Section 3.08.020 and Section 3.08.040.
2. For purchases less than or equal to Under thirtytwenty-five thousand dollars, the
town purchasing agent’s operating rules shall govern att-other the purchasing
transactions, and may allow for local vendor preferences as established under the
operating rules.
1. For purchases exceeding thirty-five thousand dollars, a formal bid process is
required as authorized in subsection B of Section 3.08.020 and Section 3.08.040.
2. For purchases less than or equal to thirty-five thousand dollars, the town purchasing
agent’s operating rules shail govern the purchasing transactions, and may allow for
local vendor preferences as established under the operating rules.
Town Attorney’s notes regarding the changes:
The proposed amendment to subsection (A)(1) is legally sufficient.
The proposed amendment to subsection (A)(2), however, should be further amended to
include purchases both less than and equal to thirty-five thousand. Additionally, | suggest
the following additional amendment for ease of sentence flow because all other seems
misplaced.
The legal reason for the edit to the proposed amendment to subsection (A)(2) is that, as
currently written, the ordinance does not truly align with Conn. Gen. Stat. 7-148v(a). It
currently accounts for transactions of $34,999.99 and less (i.e., under thirty-five thousand
or previously under twenty-five thousand); but neither subsection actually accounts for a
transaction of exactly $35,000 (thirty-five thousand, or previously twenty-five
thousand). Both the PA 25-92, and the current 7-148v(a) section of the statutes are very
carefully crafted to use the phrase “purchases having a value less than or equal to an
amount established by ordinance, which amount shall not be greater than twenty-
five thirty-five thousand dollars.