Oswegatchie Fire Station Building Committee - Minutes - 08/20/2026

PHONE: 860-442°0553
FIFTEEN ROPE FERRY ROAD
www.waterfordct.org
WATERFORD, CT 06385-2886
m~ 
Ee)
Oswegatchie Fire Station Building Committee 
Fete
= 
bs
August 20, 2026 
& faa
iB 
, 
th 
DO
Seog
23
U Sa
; 
Gel
Pledge of Allegiance 
- 
nN 
39
Meeting called to order at 6:30 pm. 
a 
3S
Members Present:
Robert Tuneski, Ursula Moreshead, Richard Muckle, Wayne Gilpin, Kathleen Elbaum, Timothy Sullivan
Members Absent: 
.
Paul Rafuse, Rocco Barcciale, Matthew Blankenship.
Guests:
Susan Driscoll, Steve Smith, Eric Cantar, Kimberly Allen, Finance Director; Nick Kepple, Town Attorney,
Chris Haley, Director Fire Services, Helen Kwasniewski,
Public Comment:
Tim Condon, RTM member: You all have a copy of a letter that | wrote about the subcommittee that
was or wasn’t.formed on the basis of looking at the change orders. It is my belief that the ordinance
specifically states that the change orders rest with this committee. By going to a subcommittee, if you
were to sign over even a small portion to change orders, the only thing left for you to debate is change
orders and this body has already spent a'lot of time debating heated floors, garage doors and traffic’
lights. When you move that to a subcommittee, that subcommittee even ona 
smaller value amount,
would bind the larger committee. If they made an appropriation, this body would not have the right to
override it, which | think is against the spirit and intent of the RTM and of the ordinance. It was not
meant to be inflammatory, it was just a part of a larger body that constituted this, and | felt that when it
was reported to us that | bring this to your attention subverts some authority by other members. |am
here tonight because | did not want to write a letter and not show up and see you and if you would like
to ask me questions later on feel free.
Helen Kwasniewski, resident. 
| agree with the gentleman on the change orders and | would like to see
someone from the Town or this committee handle the change orders, not a project manager. You are
spending tax payers’ money, especially the seniors, we watch our pennies and then some.
Opening Remarks:
None.

Review and Approve Minutes:
Motion: by Ursula Moreshead and Kathleen Elbaum to approve the minutes of August 6, 2026.
For: Yes (5), Abstain (1 — Timothy Sullivan)
Invoice Payments:
Motion: by Kathleen Elbaum and Rich Muckle to approve N. Kepple Law invoice #367 in the
amount of $120.00.
For: Unanimous.
Motion: by Timothy Sullivan and Ursula Moreshead to approve Barton & Loguidice invoice
#14777 in the amount of $9,165.20.
For: Unanimous.
Steve Smith: they have been doing the soil management work and testing. This is all part of the
$29,000 approval that you completed for the testing of the soil, come up witha 
soil
management plan and recommendations. This is part of that process.
Motion: by Timothy Sullivan and Rich Muckle to approve Barton and Loguidice invoice #14188
in the amount of $5,160.50,
For: Unanimous.
Motion: by Wayne Gilpin and Timothy Sullivan to approve Special Testing Laboratories invoice
#40316 in the amount of $7,721.00
For: Unanimous.
Steve Smith: Special Test Laboratories is the third party materials tester that we hired, for the
project. That just happens to be compaction, soil testing for the general contractor's work out
there.
Old Business:
None,
Current Business:
Request from Barton and Loguidice for additional funds for Phase Ili Soll Investigation/Soil Management
Plan. Steve Smith - we responded to their questions for that and asked some questions and some
additional information, which they provided. This prompted more questions and additional information
requests from Downes. We can’t make the recommendation to accept this yet. No action will be taken
on this tonight.
Status of subcommittee.
Construction Schedule:
Construction schedule review: Eric Cantar stated that things are progressing smoothly and things are
moving well. Our traffic engineer still has not heard anything from CT DOT, so they are going to the next
level to expedite a response as to the comments that they are supposed to be receiving back. There is
also a utility pole, which is part of the encroachment permit for this project which we have gotten
comments back on our application for and we are working on responding to. We are working with a
representative from Frontier to try to get him to send us a letter stating that they own the pole, which is

DOT's main issue with the encroachment permit. The Frontier pole more than the traffic light pole may
risk impacting the schedule.
Steve Smith: they are doing footings and walls and expect to have steel onsite October 1* to start
putting the structure up. Between now and then they will finish up foundation work and start on
underground piping work within the building and then we will put the steel up and pour the slab. They
are in line with the schedule that they have right now.
New Business:
A request from Barton & Loguidice for Additional Funds for Phase It! Soil Investigation/Soil Management
Plan. That is also being represented by Steve Smith, there is no action on this tonight.
Steve Smith: the contractor received the analytical testing samples back. In between, he sent a note to
Shea Davey, Purchasing Agent, that they will have additional services coming up. Shea forwarded that
to me and | returned that back to him for additional information, which | did receive. 
| went through it, |
do have additional questions for the contractor. That is what ! want to clarify with him and come to a
number that makes sense. Probably next meeting, ! will be presenting this to the committee asa
recommendation to pay.
Ursula Moreshead introduced a letter written by Tim Condon and sent to the First Selectman, Kim Allen,
Bob Tuneski, and Attorney Kristi Kelly.
Attorney Nick Kepple: in light of the fact that this item is not on the agenda care needs to be taken to
be mindful that it was not on the agenda and not noticed and in my view there can be a discussion
about it. 
| think the discussion should be limited and certainly notable. 
| received this letter yesterday,
from Dave Campo. {na word, Tim’s raising the question of propriety of the change order subcommittee.
He questions whether under the ordinance such a delegation of authority to a sub group is proper. He
also raises concerns about FOL. He expresses, in strong sentiment, that the RTM took pains to appoint
balanced representatives of nine people they delegated to that group, they didn’t delegate to have
certain parts of the building committee’s authority further delegated to a sub unit of the committee. 
|
did just receive this yesterday and | have not had a lot of time to do a lot of research on it. What you
will have to do is take this up at another meeting when everyone has had a chance to review Tim's letter
and then | will give you a more complete analysis. Maryellen will send out a copy of the letter to the
committee tomorrow morning. Bob Tuneski: so no action tonight and is it reasonable to ask you for a
legal opinion at the next meeting that we can work off of and base our decision making on this?
Attorney Kepple: yes.
Ursula Moreshead: Tim Condon reached out to me because he knew that { was the lone “no” in the
room, as | was talking to him today to get some clarification there are things that | want to say | would
like reflected in the minutes. Where he is coming from is where { am coming from. 
| understand that
subcommittees are used regularly for large projects, as an RTM member | have to remind myself that
this project is being funded by tax payers. My concern was that would it be $50,000 per total or per
problem, which was not clear. Also, there was no definition of what constitutes an emergency, which |
agree with Tim in this. There was no establishment of who takes minutes, who submits them to the
Clerk and finally the thing that | was thinking of the most was that the subcommittee takes away votes
from all the members, | can attend, but | have not voting power, {t is not a full committee vote, even if
I'm the only “no” vote, 
| have no say. Those were the thoughts | was having after talking with Tim

before and after. | am speaking out because | do not want money spent frivolousty, ) think we are all
doing this in a fiscally responsible way. Whether it is 
a committee meeting or a subcommittee meeting
you still need 24 hours for a public notice, | find it very hard to believe that we couldn’t get a quorum for
a special meeting to approve additional funds. Bob Tuneski: Would you entertain a telecom meeting
for that? Ursula Moreshead: absolutely!
Bob Tuneski: so we did vote on what the committee looks like, we did talk about a dollar amount. Steve
at a prior meet submitted a potential procedure for doing it. We have not voted on that, so in my mind
that was an open aspect of whole thing. How are we going to do it, what constitutes an emergency,
what’s going to enact this. 
| asked Steve to send a copy to Attorney Kepple and let him weigh in on what
he thought it should look like if it is going to be. Hopefully, if we decide to go down this path after you
rendered a legal opinion, the loop holes you are talking about are addressed.
Steve Smith: coming back to contaminated soil with B&L. We have to register the project with DEEP, as
we do have issues with soil onsite that requires a point of contact to be filled out in a form by B&L to
DEEP. The First Selectman is in DEEP’s system as he was the point of contact for the DPW project and |
am looking for guidance as to who that person should be. Bob Tuneski: We will list this on the next
agenda and vote on it for the next meeting.
The next meeting will be held on Thursday, August 20, 2026 at 6:30pm at the Police Station.
Motion: to adjourn by Ursula Moreshead and Wayne Gilpin.
For: Unanimous
Meeting adjourned at 6:55pm
nespecttun bitte by:
Maryellen McConnell, Recording Secretary