WESTFIELD – The City Council met for its first meeting of 2013 last night and, after unanimously electing Brain Sullivan president without discussion, promptly began an extended discussion relative to immediate consideration of items brought to the floor. Councilor Richard Onofrey Jr. moved to suspend the rules so the council could act immediately on a may- oral request to appropriate $55,200 needed to pay a judgment resulting from a lawsuit.
Councilor David A. Flaherty immediately opposed immediate consideration of the appropriation saying “This year I’m going to really try to oppose every- thing for immediate consideration, unless it’s life or death.”
Councilor Mary O’Connell also objected saying that the council was being asked to act immediately without sufficient documentation and said “this is a pattern I don’t like, the immediate consideration of issues involving substantial sums of money.
The money is needed because Verizon had success- fully appealed a decision by the Appellate Tax Board which had ruled that communities had lawfully col- lected taxes on the company’s transmission lines in the Commonwealth.
Councilor Brent B. Bean asked that City Solicitor Susan C. Phillips explain the reason for the request and, when Phillips took the floor, she explained all the communities in the Commonwealth had been parties to the suit and that the judgment had required that Westfield pay $192,364, plus eight per cent interest.
She explained that the city had paid the principal amount owed but said that the appellate court ruling required that the interest on the entire amount would accrue, at a rate of about $1,300 per month, until the entire obligation was met.
She said that when she explained the situation to Mayor Daniel M. Knapik, he suggested that the law depart- ment attempt to reach a settle- ment with Verizon.
She explained that the ensu- ing negotiations resulted in an agreement by which Verizon would accept the interest due at the time of the agreement – $55,200 – provided that the amount was paid by Jan. 31.
If the payment is not made by that time, Phillips explained, the agreement would be voided and interest would be recalculated and continue to accrue.
“I’m really shocked that anybody doesn’t think this is a good deal” she said.
Onofrey, as chair of the council’s finance committee, explained that the result would be that the city would be forced to pay about $5,000 more and that reneging on the agreement would have a ripple effect on other pending nego- tiations with same law firm which represented Verizon.
He pointed out that, since the council’s actions are not “set in stone” until the minutes of the meeting are ratified at the subsequent meeting and signed by the mayor, it would be impossible to meet the deadline without immediate consideration of the matter.
“If we don’t do this tonight, it won’t get done until Feb. 15” Onofrey said. “I think it’s important enough that we save five grand by moving this tonight because this isn’t going away and if we don’t move on this tonight it will not get done by the thirty first.”
Councilor John J. Beltrandi said that he, too, doesn’t like being asked to give issues immediate consideration but also said “If we wait two weeks it’s just going to cost us money. It’s not going to change the decision.”
The council voted to give the issue immediate consider- ation, with only O’Connell opposing and moved on to a vote on the appropriation.
Because the funds were being taken from the city’s stabilization account, the mea- sure needed nine votes for approval.
With the Ward 2 seat vacant and Councilor James R. Adams absent due to illness, only 11 councilors were avail- able to vote but the measure passed 9-2, with only Flaherty and O’Connell casting dis- senting votes.
With the immediate consid- eration issue out of the way, the council made short work of the rest of their agenda, appropriating funds for sever- al agenda items but tabling a measure to authorize a $2,100,000 bond to fund new roofs on Paper Mill and Munger Hill schools.
The council also acted on an unanimous recommendation by the Personal Action Committee to appoint former council member Peter J. Miller to a three year term as the city Community Development Director.
Flaherty said that although he supports Miller’s appoint- ment wholeheartedly “Lately it seems like it’s who you’re related to or you know that
gets good jobs in City Hall here” and said “I think we should all be cautions about the perception we give the public about how we fill some of these jobs.”
Nonetheless, Miller was appointed by a unanimous vote of the council.
