FINANCE BOARD WILL CHALLENGE TOWN CHARTER INTERPRETATION

SOUNDS FAMILIAR ...  Finance Board Will Challenge Town Charter Interpretation

By: Leda Quirke 04/14/2010

OXFORD - Saying a recent interpretation by the town attorney of the town's charter could jeopardize the town's bond rating and also damage the town's fiscal health, the Board of Finance last week voted to send a letter advising the Board of Selectmen of its intention to engage an outside attorney to challenge the interpretation in court. Members said that the notion spelled out by Town Attorney Francis Teodosio that selectmen can forward to a town meeting, without a favorable recommendation from the finance board, a resolution to expend up to 1.5 percent of the current town budget was, in their opinion, "dangerous." Based on Attorney Teodosio's interpretation, the Board of Selectmen voted 2-1 last Wednesday to forward to an April 15 town meeting the question of installing a metal roof and solar panels at Great Oak Middle School. The project was recommended by the Great Oak School Roof and Solar Panel Committee and approved subsequently in a resolution by the Board of Selectmen. The finance board, on March 22, rejected the proposal, saying residents should be given a choice between the metal roof, which is projected to cost $1.79 million, and a less-costly asphalt shingle roof. Figuring in grants from the Connecticut Clean Energy Fund, the American Reinvestment Recovery Act and state Board of Education reimbursements, the cost to residents for the metal roof and solar panels will actually be $767,014. At a special Board of Finance meeting last Thursday, member Tom Kelly said Attorney Teodosio, the prior evening, opined that, because the proposed action was a capital expenditure and not an appropriation or bonding issue, it was all right to go to town meeting without finance board approval. Finance board members said they found it odd that Attorney Teodosio would say that the project only needed a recommendation, either favorable or unfavorable, from them. Finance board members said, in their opinion, there is no such thing as an unfavorable recommendation. By definition, the word, "recommendation" implies favor, they said. Mr. Kelly noted also that the call for the town meeting did not identify a source of funding for the project. If residents approve the project, "where will the money come from?" he pondered. "Someone wants to get a project in front of people but I don't know where it's going to go from there," Mr. Kelly added.  Mr. Kelly said, because the town has no line item in the budget for a roof and selectmen do not intend to bond the project, the money may have to come from special taxation. The board agreed that adopting the attorney's interpretation as fact could put the town in jeopardy financially because it would enable selectmen to forward to a town meeting projects costing up to $3.5 million without its approval. "I think this is dangerous because of potential abuse," Mr. Kelly said. The freedom to spend that kind of money without restraint would not be looked on favorably by the town's bond rating company, they surmised. Members agreed that the roof needs to be replaced, but they said they were more concerned with the town's financial health. "We need to protect the town," said Chairman Lila Ferrillo. Under the circumstances, the board voted unanimously to advise selectmen of their intention to hire an attorney to challenge the interpretation. The action was unanimous among the four Republican members who a attended the meeting. Democrats Nancy Schmitt and Michael Lyon did not attend.