Business

City council committee takes action on several items ahead of Thursday city council meeting

WESTFIELD—Several items came from the city council’s legislative and ordinance committee with recommendations yesterday, just ahead of city council’s Thursday meeting.

Committee members voted on six items heading to city council, including the approval of a lease on a new fire apparatus for the Westfield Fire Department, a donation for field lights at two city parks and changes to abutters’ notifications for zoning changes, the last of which came with a caveat.

Legislative & Ordinance Committee members William Onyski, Ralph J. Figy and Mary O’Connell. (WNG file photo by Amy Porter)

For the fire apparatus, the committee was voting to make a positive recommendation to city council on Thursday to allow Mayor Brian Sullivan to agree to a five-year lease for the vehicle. According to committee chair and ward two councilor Ralph Figy, any leases beyond three years the mayor must get permission from city council.

“If this doesn’t go through then [Westfield Fire Chief Mary Regan] has to go for additional financing,” Tammy Tefft, director of city purchasing, said at the meeting yesterday.

Tammy Tefft, director of purchasing for city of Westfield

Tefft said that the additional financing would come from the changes in interest rates currently negotiated in relation to the lease. More specifically, Tefft said the city had until Friday to get the vehicle at the currently lower rate. The total cost of the vehicle in question was estimated at around $700,000 according to an April 24th article in The Westfield News, with financing coming from the Westfield Fire Department’s ambulance budget.

The committee gave a unanimous positive recommendation to city council for the purchase.

For field lighting, the committee was determining whether they should recommend an acceptance of a donation of field lighting for ball fields at Sadie Knox and Papermill parks. With an OK from city council, an agreement would be made between Westfield Little League and the city to accept the donation. According to Ken Diegel, president of the Westfield Little League who spoke at the meeting on behalf of the acceptance of the motion, said the donation would include installation of the lights, as well as a 25-year warranty, including maintenance, and is transferrable.

The legislative and ordinance committee voted in favor of a positive recommendation unanimously yesterday.

Finally, regarding the abutters’ notifications related to zoning changes, the committee was given a proposal that included two items that were added through the planning board’s previous discussion and vote on the ordinance. These changes were that notices would be sent to all landowners within 300 feet of lot lines of the parcel in question, and a sign being placed on or near the property to also notify residents of a possible zoning change.

While all three members, Figy, ward six councilor Bill Onyski and ward four councilor Mary O’Connell, were in favor of the suggestion of increased notification for abutters, Onyski and Figy fell out of favor with the addition of the sign.

“I am not a fan of the sign, I’m going to come out right now and say that,” Figy said.

Dan Allie

“I’m not a fan of it, the sign could fall down, could get stolen, then it’s against the ordinance,” Onyski said.

At-large councilor Dan Allie however, who was in attendance and was the councilor who initially proposed the change, spoke in favor of the inclusion of the sign. According to Allie, several residents have come out in favor of the sign, claiming that current notifications online, in the newspaper and elsewhere were not enough.

Jay Vinskey, city planner for Westfield

In addition, city planner Jay Vinskey said that signs notifying of the changes would allow for residents of apartment complexes, who may not receive notifications because they are not the landowners, to be privy to any potential changes that may affect them or their neighborhood.

The committee voted two-to-one in favor of making a positive recommendation to city council, with the exclusion of language related to the sign. O’Connell was the lone dissenter, supporting the addition of the sign.

To Top