MUNICIPALITIES; LEGISLATION;

MUNICIPALITIES - LEGISLATION;

Connecticut laws/regulations;

OLR Research Report


MUNICIPALITIES

SPECIAL SESSION ACTS AFFECTING MUNICIPALITIES

The act requires the Department of Transportation (DOT) to convey two parcels of state property located along the right-of-way for the relocated Route 7 in Norwalk and Wilton to the Connecticut Light and Power Company (CL&P) to construct and maintain electrical transmission facilities. CL&P must pay fair market value for the property.

The conveyances are subject to the State Properties Review Board’s approval. The board must complete its review of the conveyance not later than 30 days after it receives the proposal from DOT. The state treasurer must sign and deliver any deed or other necessary conveyance instrument to CL&P and the DOT commissioner is solely responsible for all other incidents of the conveyance. Any conveyed property reverts back to the state if CL&P does not use it for the stated purpose, does not retain ownership of the entire parcel, or leases any of it.

For FY 2004, the act directs distribution of priority school district grants as follows: (1) $ 20,057,500 for priority school districts; (2) $ 37,576,500 for school readiness; (3) $ 17,858,939 for early reading; (4) $ 3,030,669 for extended school building hours; and (5) $ 2,630,879 for summer school. For FY 2005, the act directs distribution of priority school district grants as follows: (1) $ 20,336,250 for priority school districts; (2) $ 37,576,500 for school readiness; (3) $ 17,647,286 for early reading; (4) $ 2,994,752 for extended school building hours; and (5) $ 2,599,699 for summer school.

Beginning in FY 2004, it allows a town that received a school readiness competitive grant for a priority school but is no longer eligible to receive a grant for that school to receive a phase-out grant for three fiscal years after the year the town received its final grant. For the first, second, and third fiscal year after the year the town received its final grant for the priority school, it may receive a grant up to 75%, 50%, and 25%, respectively, of the grant it received in the school’s final year of eligibility.

The act transfers $ 1. 3 million from funds carried forward by the Transportation Department in PA 03-1 of the June 30 Special Session to the Office of Policy and Management for local aid adjustments. These funds must be disbursed for FY 2004 as follows: (1) $ 150,000 to Griswold, (2) $ 200,000 to Milford, (3) $ 200,000 to Plainfield, (4) $ 150,000 to Plymouth, (5) $ 200,000 to Southington, (6) $ 200,000 to Vernon, and (7) $ 200,000 to Wallingford.

The act makes permanent the existing state reimbursement grants for the health services school districts must provide to Connecticut students attending private schools in the district. Although the budget act (PA 03-01 of the June 30 Special Session) continues the grants for FYs 2004 and 2005, this act eliminates the statutory sunset date of June 30, 2003. As under prior law, reimbursement percentages range from 10% to 90%, based on town wealth. A town must receive a minimum 80% reimbursement if (1) its number of children on welfare was more than 1% of its population in 1997 or (2) it has a wealth ranking below 30 and provides such services to more than 1,500 students who do not live in the town.

The act makes state law conform to federal law by eliminating (1) a prohibition against parents, guardians, or local school boards raising issues at special education due process hearings that they did not previously raise at a meeting of the child’s planning and placement team; (2) a requirement that the mandatory pre-hearing conference for parties to a due process hearing take place at least 10 days before the hearing is to begin; and (3) a local school board’s right to go to a hearing when a parent or guardian refuses to consent to a pre-placement evaluation of the child but expressly allows it to ask for a hearing when a parent refuses to consent to a child’s initial evaluation or his reevaluation.

The act also allows a hearing officer to order only a child’s initial evaluation, reevaluation, or placement in a private school or facility without the consent of his parent or guardian. Under prior law, the hearing officer could order any kind of special education evaluation or placement without that consent. As under prior law, such orders are subject to court appeal.

The act allows a hearing officer to order a child placed in a facility without his parent’s or guardian’s consent only when (1) the parent or guardian agreed to the child’s initial receipt of special education and related services and (2) the local school board seeks a private placement after the child’s initial placement. Finally, it requires the Superior Court, upon appeal of a hearing officers decision, to hear additional evidence at a party’s request. Prior law gave the court discretion to hear additional evidence if it finds certain circumstances exist.

The act makes state law conform to the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act by incorporating references to federal definitions and terms and eliminating redundant and inconsistent state provisions and definitions:

The act requires local and regional boards of education to follow the federal McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act in providing educational services to children who are homeless.

State law requires school districts to provide school accommodations to all children who live in the district. In addition, if a child lives in a temporary shelter, the law allows him go to school in the district where he lives permanently or in the district where the shelter is located.

McKinney-Vento requires local education agencies (LEAs) that receive federal funding to, according to the child’s best interest: (1) continue a homeless child’s education in his original school (the school he attended when he was permanently housed or where he was last enrolled) for the rest of the school year or, if the family becomes homeless between school years, for the following school year or (2) enroll the student in the regular school in the attendance area where he is actually living. It also requires the LEA to comply with the parent or guardian’s request regarding school selection, to the extent feasible, and to make placements regardless of whether the child is living with homeless parents or has been temporarily placed elsewhere (42 U. S. C. 11431 et seq. ).

The act increases the annual charter school grant from $ 7,000 to $ 7,250 per student. It allows the grants to be increased proportionately if the amount appropriated for charter school grants exceeds $ 7,250 per student.

The act delays, from July 1, 2003 to July 1, 2004, implementation of the requirement that a person in each school readiness classroom have at least (1) a credential issued by an organization the education commissioner approves and nine or more credits in early childhood education or child development from an accredited college or university, (2) an associate’s degree in early childhood education or child development, or (3) a four-year degree in early childhood education or child development.

The act allows the education commissioner to grant to RESCs additional amounts from funds remaining for school choice transportation if needed to offset transportation costs exceeding the maximum amount. By law, SDE must provide RESCs and school districts participating in school choice grants for the reasonable cost of transportation, provided the statewide average of the grants does not exceed $ 2,100 per student transported.

The act establishes voter identification and voting procedures for elections for federal office to comply with the requirements of the federal “Help America Vote Act of 2002”. It creates enhanced identification requirements for certain people applying by mail to register to vote and requires proof of identity when appearing to vote

at the polls or voting by absentee ballot or presidential ballot. It establishes a provisional ballot with procedures for voting and counting it.

Regular elections for federal office occur in even-numbered years, and the act applies to elections for the offices of president and vice president and elections and primaries for U. S. senator and representative in Congress.

The act allows municipalities to establish by ordinance decentralized wastewater management districts. It establishes conditions that must be met before a town can create such a district, including approval of an engineering plan by the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) commissioner with concurring approval by the commissioner of the Department of Public Health (DPH). It lists standards, regulations, and criteria that a town can apply to such a district. It requires DPH to conduct any oversight or monitoring of these districts within available appropriations.

The act requires a town water pollution control authority to include in its water pollution control plan the designation and boundary of any decentralized wastewater management district and to describe any programs where the local health director manages subsurface sewage disposal systems. The act requires the authority to ensure the operation and management of any district not owned by the municipality.

It defines a “decentralized wastewater management district” as an area of a municipality designated through a municipal ordinance. The area can be designated when an engineering report determines that existing subsurface sewage disposal systems may be detrimental to public health or the environment and decentralized systems are required and the report is approved by the DEP commissioner with concurring approval by the DPH commissioner after consultation with the local health director.

It defines an “alternative sewage treatment system” as one serving one or more buildings that uses treatment methods other than a subsurface sewage disposal system and discharges into the state’s ground waters.

The act authorizes the Connecticut Resources Recovery Authority (CRRA) to borrow up to $ 22 million from the state to support the repayment of debt CRRA issued on behalf of the Mid-Connecticut project for FY 2003 and FY 2004, provided CRRA repays the principal and interest before June 30, 2012. It reduces by $ 22 million, from $ 115 million to $ 93 million, the amount of money CRRA may borrow temporarily from the state to support the repayment of debt issued for the project for fiscal years after 2004. In both cases, as under current law, such borrowing requires approval of two-thirds of the CRRA board of directors, the state treasurer, and Office of Policy and Management (OPM) secretary. The act requires CRRA to provide collateral for these loans to the extent possible, as determined by the treasurer and secretary.

By law, CRRA must submit a financial mitigation plan to the treasurer and OPM secretary. The act requires that the plan include analysis of the staffing levels, performance and qualifications of CRRA staff and directors. It eliminates the need for the treasurer and secretary to approve the plan.

It requires that CRRA submit, on a quarterly basis, reports detailing the status of its financial mitigation plan to the treasurer, OPM secretary and the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee. It requires the authority to enter into talks with municipal members of the Mid-Connecticut project about their interest in extending their contracts beyond June 30, 2012. It requires that CRRA include the status of those discussions in the quarterly reports.

The act specifies that CRRA submit its proposed budget, three-year financial plan, cash flow analysis, and most recent certified audit annually. The act requires CRRA to produce reports upon any matter of property or finance OPM or the governor requires during the terms of the loans it receives.

It apparently retroactively reduces the membership of the CRRA board of directors from 13 to 12 as of May 31, 2002, removing the OPM secretary as a voting ex-officio member on and before that date. It further reduces the number of directors from 12 to 11 on and after June 1, 2002, removing the treasurer as a voting ex-officio member. It reduces a quorum of the board from seven to six members, and eliminates the requirement that a quorum include at least one ex-officio member or his designee.

This act allows five towns to redevelop certain state-assisted moderate-income rental housing developments, subject to conditions and requirements. It allows:

1. New Britain and its housing authority, in cooperation with the Department of Economic and Community Development (DECD) commissioner and the Connecticut Housing Finance Authority (CHFA), to redevelop Corbin Heights, Corbin Heights Extension, Pinnacle Heights, and Pinnacle Heights Extension;

2. East Hartford, Hartford, and New London and housing authorities and project sponsors in these towns, to redevelop state-assisted moderate-income rental housing, subject to DECD approval; and

3. Stamford to redevelop the Vidal Court housing project.

Under the act, New Britain may redevelop its state-assisted moderate-income rental developments without meeting requirements of certain housing laws, including requirements for one-for-one unit replacement and a resident anti-displacement and relocation plan. East Hartford, Hartford, and New London may request, and the DECD commissioner may grant, a waiver from the certain housing laws, including from requirements for one-for-one unit replacement and a resident displacement and relocation plan. It exempts Stamford from certain housing laws, but not the unit replacement, anti-displacement, and relocation plan requirements.

The act amends the powers and duties of CHFA to include providing assistance, as it sees fit, to a local housing authority or project sponsor connected with the above projects. Under prior law, CHFA was not authorized to provide financial assistance to local housing authorities.

For the October 1, 2002 and 2003 assessment years, the act suspends (1) a mandatory local property tax exemption for up to $ 1,000 worth of property owned by a state resident who is permanently and totally disabled and (2) state reimbursements to towns for revenues lost due to the exemption. The act restores the exemption and the state reimbursement for the October 1, 2004 and subsequent assessment years. To receive the exemption, a property owner must be eligible for Social Security or other comparable federal, state, or local government disability benefits.

This act applies to assessment years beginning on or after October 1, 2002.

Reduction In Reimbursement Grants For Veterans Property Tax Exemption

The act eliminates the state’s reimbursement for revenue municipalities lose due to the partial property tax exemption for veterans who have incomes above the limits specified in CGS § 12-81g(a). It requires, starting in FY 2004, that the grant to municipalities to compensate them for the property tax lost due to the property tax exemption for veterans with incomes below these limits be reduced proportionately if the total amount due to municipalities exceeds the amount appropriated for this provision.

This section requires that grants to municipalities to offset property exemptions (1) for newly acquired manufacturing equipment and commercial motor vehicles and (2) under the circuit breaker program be reduced proportionately if the total amount of such grants exceeds the amount appropriated for these purposes.

The act entitles Branford to $ 100,000 annually to offset the property tax revenue lost due to the tax-exempt status of Connecticut Hospice. The funding must come from the annual General Fund appropriation for reimbursement to towns for loss of taxes on private tax-exempt property. The town does not have to file the property’s assessed value with the OPM, as the law requires for towns seeking reimbursement for lost tax revenues from hospitals and colleges.

The act allows a municipality, by vote of its legislative body, to impose a $ 5 fee on anyone who was delinquent in paying the property tax on a motor vehicle if the municipality notified the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) of the delinquency under the program in which the registration for such vehicles can be denied.

Department Type

Prior Per Capita Funding

Per Capita Funding under the Act

Health District

· Town over 5,000 pop.

· Town under 5,000 pop.

$ 1. 99

$ 2. 32

$ 1. 66

$ 1. 94

Full-time Local Health Dept.

$ 1. 13

$ 0. 94

Part-time Local Health Dept.

$ 0. 59

$ 0. 49

The act expands the powers of the Police Officer Standards and Training (POST) Council by allowing it to (1) develop, adopt, and revise comprehensive accreditation standards for the administration and management of law enforcement units; (2) grant accreditation to those law enforcement units that comply with the standards; and (3) at the request and expense of any law enforcement unit, conduct any surveys necessary to determine compliance.

The bill allows fire fighters, police officers, and emergency medical service personnel who successfully complete training in the use of automatic prefilled cartridge injectors to carry and use injectors containing nerve agent antidote medications for self or unit preservation in case of exposure to any nerve agent. The training must be approved by the Office of Emergency Management director and provided by the Connecticut Fire Academy, Capitol Region Metropolitan Medical Response System, or federal government.

The act exempts any police chief hired by a municipality from the Police Officer Standards and Training (POST) Council’s recertification requirements, but not the prohibition on working as a police officer while his certificate is cancelled or revoked, if (1) he served as a police officer in Connecticut for at least 25 years, (2) served as a deputy chief in Connecticut, and (3) his certificate lapsed while he was serving as a police chief in a contiguous state between July 1, 1997 and April 1, 2000.

By law, a certificate lapses if the officer is not employed by a law enforcement unit in Connecticut for more than two years, unless he is on a leave of absence. A police officer whose certificate lapses needs to be recertified to work as a police officer. He must meet the council's entry-level certification requirements and complete a council-approved police basic training program (POST Reg. § 7-294e2). The regulations allow a waiver of the mandatory training in “unusual cases. ” Historically, waivers have been granted on a case-by-case basis.

Indigent Burials. By statute, when someone in a town, or sent from a town to a licensed institution or state humane institution, dies and does not leave a sufficient estate for a proper burial and funeral, the town provides a burial and is reimbursed by the state for up to $ 1,200. The act that eliminates state reimbursement for the Norwich town GA program continues to require towns to provide such funerals and the state to reimburse them. It transfers this responsibility from the town’s first selectman or public official in charge of the town’s GA program to the town’s chief executive officer. The act also eliminates a minimum $ 25 fine that can be imposed on anyone who buries or causes to be buried any such individual in violation of the law.

GA Audits Eliminated. The act deletes statutory provisions requiring that DSS adopt regulations for audits of GA programs and for recoveries of reimbursements DSS makes to towns based on audit findings and sanctions for noncompliance with standards.