OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Fiscal Committee Meeting Summary - October 27, 2025

Board of Representatives — Monday, October 27, 2025
BodyStamford, Connecticut
SessionBoard of Representatives
DateMonday, October 27, 2025
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 34:31

Transcript — Verbatim
0:00

Okay.

0:01

The time is 6 01.

0:05

And this is a meeting of the fiscal committee meeting.

0:11

I am Mary Fidelity, co-chair of the fiscal committee.

0:15

And with me this evening are my co-chair, Representative Sean Boger.

0:22

Other members present are representative Karen Camparelli, Representative Morrison, Representative Carmine Famas, Representative Pierre Louis, Representative Graham, Representative Vanderport.

0:40

And I don't see I missed anyone.

0:51

And this is our last meeting of our session.

0:55

And we have a few items on the agenda.

0:59

This evening, the first item is F 31 604 for $743, $900, $743,941, which is an additional appropriation for operating, which was police administration request for additional funding to increase budgeted police officer positions from 217 to 230 for 300 total sworn as the department is now fully staffed and plans to fill the 13 new positions in the upcoming spring um academy class.

1:39

I know this was held but by the Board of Finance, but I know there are some members who would like to make some comments.

1:45

So I'm asking this if someone could please move this item.

1:52

I think Representative Danderworth, you are muted.

1:55

So moved.

1:57

So move second second.

1:58

Okay.

2:04

Representative Boger.

2:07

Thank you, Chair.

2:08

Um, you know, I'm I'm I'm very displeased that we're not going to be able to vote on this, and this board is not going to be able to this committee is not going to be able to meet again since this is our last meeting.

2:22

I'm not sure if any of the other members had watched the the uh Board of Finance meeting, but I just have to say, and and again, unfortunately I always have to preface just to make sure nobody isn't is uh unclear.

2:36

These are these are this is my opinion.

2:37

I am not speaking as a member of your police department.

2:41

I'm speaking as your fellow elected official who happens to be a police officer, um with uh 28 years of experience of of working in that particular department in and the hiring of more officers um does not impact me as far as a benefit or anything like that.

3:01

Having said all that, and um the only the only word I can say is disgusted.

3:07

Um I listened to the meeting, the amount of of data that is being requested uh of the police department to produce in order to fund this, and mind you, these are the positions that we we told as a total financial leg of the uh of the city.

3:27

We told the chief of police that we're not gonna fund these positions right now.

3:32

These are those is the bird board of finance, but come back when you're ready to, and we will.

3:36

Well, the police department is the academy's been going full blast.

3:41

We're trying to catch up.

3:42

And just for those of you that that may be on this committee for the next board, I want you to understand something.

3:48

Almost 30 years ago, this police department had 315 officers.

3:54

We were able to fulfill things that the public wanted, like foot posts, bicycle patrol, SROs.

4:01

As you know, um in this country, school incidents, shootings, all these horrible, terrible things have gone nothing but up, while the population of our police department has gone down, while the population of our city has skyrocketed.

4:18

And how those members of the Board of Finance, and I'm just gonna say in their in their in their ivory white towers are sitting there without any direct professional knowledge of how a police part department functions or the tactical or strategic decisions that have to be made.

4:35

Um and make this decision to to hold these positions in my opinion, hostage at this point until they get certain information, is is just it's disgusting to me.

4:48

Um I know they made mention of the fact that they're not pleased with how the pension plan is performing.

4:55

Well, the police administration has nothing to do with the in with the administration of the pension plan.

5:01

That's that's the the that that's the pension board.

5:04

They have their own trustees, two appointed by the city, two appointed by the union, and one neutral.

5:08

The the police administration has no power or control over that, but because they're not happy with that, they want to see this data and that data.

5:15

They want to see data spanning back years and years and years that that covers a landscape of this department in this city that doesn't even exist anymore.

5:23

They want to know where the the police officers are actually going to be allocated, what positions are they going to be in?

5:29

Um as if they know better than the chief of police where to put certain people and and whether or not that those things are actually needed.

5:37

And the only other thing that I would point out is if I I pay particular attention to uh a lot of the social media that uh involves Stanford directly.

5:48

Um and if you go onto any of those platforms, you will see the number the the top gripes of our citizenry are all the same.

5:56

And you guys already know this because of the same phone calls that we get from our constituents.

6:02

Uh traffic enforcement, because people in the city drive like animals.

6:06

They drive with total there's time they just drive with total disregard for only what they need to do and nobody else.

6:14

Um it's hard to police a city of a hundred and thirty uh a hundred and thirty uh five plus thousand people when we only have I believe it's four officers assigned traffic enforcement because our patrol demand is so high.

6:28

That's ridiculous.

6:29

We should be able to bolster that number.

6:31

We should be able to double that number with the amount of traffic we have in the city.

6:34

Um the other thing I hear about is why don't we have school resource officers in every single school?

6:41

And while maybe every single school is a bit much, because I don't know if it's necessary maybe for some of the elementary schools or something, but we used to have them in all the middle schools and the high schools back then.

6:50

Now we're lucky if we could cover the high schools when it's busy.

6:54

And then I'm trying I'm I'm um oh, and foot patrol, right?

6:59

I read I read something online where a woman felt very unsafe and accosted because there was some people whom she described, I believe, as as vagrants near the top or near the bottom of Bedford Street and didn't feel safe just walking there on a regular like weekday night, a Wednesday night, a Thursday night, or whatever.

7:16

And why can't we have why can't we have a a police presence right there, like walking around on foot?

7:23

And you know what?

7:24

She's right.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Procedural██████████████████████████████████████38%
Public Safety█████████████████████████████29%
Engineering And Infrastructure████████████12%
Grant Funding████████8%
Urban Forestry Management██████6%
Pension Benefits████4%
Traffic███3%
Summary of Proceedings

Fiscal Committee Meeting Summary - October 27, 2025

The October 27, 2025, meeting marked the final session of the session for Stanford's Fiscal Committee. Co-Chairs Mary Fidelity and Sean Boger led the committee through a series of appropriation requests and grant authorizations. While several routine items were approved via consent calendar, the meeting was dominated by a heated exchange regarding the status of police funding, where Representative Boger expressed strong opposition to the Board of Finance's decision to withhold approval for new officer positions pending further data. Technical difficulties and a late arrival by a key staff member required a brief recess and a reallocation of remaining agenda items to the following session.

Consent Calendar

  • F 31605 ($2,423,801.59): Unanimously approved an additional appropriation for Capital Project CP 8711 (Utility Paving). The project funds full roadway restorations, curb-to-curb repairs, and maintenance to extend pavement life following utility trenching, allowing the city to resolve road issues in real-time rather than batching them annually.
  • F 31606 ($88,330): Unanimously approved an additional appropriation for a Community Violence Intervention and Prevention Services grant funded by the Connecticut Department of Public Health for the Police Department.
  • Item F 31605 Resolution: Unanimously approved the resolution authorizing the mayor to sign the Capital Project agreement.
  • F 31607 Resolution: Unanimously approved the resolution authorizing the mayor to enter into an agreement with Connecticut Children's Medical Center for the Community Violence Intervention grant.
  • Item F 31608 (Grant for Early Voting - Public Act 25168): Unanimously approved an additional appropriation of $41,795.39 to cover early voting labor and ballot expenses for the November 2025 election.
  • Item F 31609 Resolution: Unanimously approved the resolution authorizing the mayor to enter into the agreement with the Connecticut Secretary of State for the early voting grant.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Representative Sean Boger (Speaker and Police Officer with 28 years of experience): Expressed deep disgust and anger regarding the Board of Finance holding 13 new police officer positions hostage pending data requests. He argued that:
    • The department currently has 280 officers while the city population exceeds 135,000, making it the smallest police force relative to population among major state cities.
    • Demand for foot patrols, School Resource Officers (SROs), and robust traffic enforcement (citing only 4 officers for traffic) has surged due to increased citizen complaints about speeding and lack of patrol presence.
    • The Board of Finance is making decisions without direct professional knowledge of police operations and is erroneously linking funding constraints to the Police Department's lack of control over the pension plan administration.
    • The department previously had 315 officers 30 years ago and achieved community safety goals that are now impossible with the reduced staffing.
  • Representative Karen Camparelli: Expressed full agreement with Representative Boger, stating that the number one complaint in her district concerns citizens driving like "lunatics" and that increased police enforcement is definitely needed. She further asked clarifying questions regarding the timeline for filling the new positions.
  • Representative Shaw Figueroa and Representative Goldberg: Expressed full agreement with the need for additional officers and noted that the utility paving project appeared reasonable and cost-effective.

Discussion Items

  • Status of F 31604 (Police Officer Positions):
    • Discussion: Representative Boger argued that the Board of Finance is withholding funding based on unreasonable data demands that ignore current staffing realities. He noted that the city is already over-taxing residents by $25 million due to accounting errors and questioned why 13 positions are being denied to reach a full complement of 300 sworn officers.
    • Decision: Representative Camparelli clarified that while the candidates are not lost, the funding delay pushes the academy start date from the upcoming spring to likely January of the next year due to the committee's scheduled adjournment and the Board of Finance's timeline. The committee agreed the Board of Finance effectively held this item hostage, delaying the recruitment process.
    • Action: The committee elected not to take action on this specific item tonight, noting it was held by the Board of Finance. They encouraged representatives to contact the Board of Finance to express frustration.
  • Item F 31604 Discrepancy/Note: It was noted that the item (F 31604) was previously held by the Board of Finance for data review, but the committee is now aware of the operational impact of that delay.
  • Procedural Items: The committee discussed the possibility of a special meeting or floor action for November but decided against a special meeting due to the complexity of the process, noting they would need to read the item and vote on the floor if held later.
  • Scheduling Conflict: A 5-minute recess was taken to allow staff member Anita to join the meeting after she arrived late (mistakenly believing the meeting started at 7:00 PM). Once she joined, the remaining items (F 31606 and related resolutions) were processed as consent items.

Key Outcomes

  • F 31604 (Police Appropriation): NO ACTION TAKEN. The item remains held by the Board of Finance. The committee acknowledged a strategic delay in hiring, pushing the academy intake to the next calendar year (potentially January).
  • F 31605 (Utility Paving): APPROVED. Motion carried unanimously (9-0). Funding approved to accelerate full roadway restorations.
  • F 31606 (Violence Intervention Grant): APPROVED. Motion carried unanimously (9-0). Continuation funding ($88,330) secured for police-led youth mentoring and anti-violence training.
  • F 31607 (Grant Agreement Resolution): APPROVED. Motion carried unanimously (9-0). Authorization secured for the agreement with Connecticut Children's Medical Center.
  • F 31608 (Early Voting Grant): APPROVED. Motion carried unanimously (9-0). $41,795.39 appropriated for early voting costs.
  • F 31609 (Early Voting Agreement): APPROVED. Motion carried unanimously (9-0). Authorization secured for the agreement with the Secretary of State.
  • Item F 31607 Resolution: APPROVED. Authorization for the agreement with the Children's Medical Center passed on consent.
  • Item F 31608 (Grant) Resolution: NOT SEPARATELY VOTED as it was bundled into the consent flow, but the grant appropriation was approved.
  • Item F 31609 (Grant) Resolution: APPROVED. Authorization for the Secretary of State agreement passed on consent.
  • Item F 31604 (Police) Status: Held by Board of Finance; no committee vote occurred tonight due to the Board's hold on data.
  • Adjournment: The meeting concluded at 6:35 PM with expressions of gratitude for the committee's work over the session, during which over 600 items and four budgets were addressed.
  • Item F 31604 (Police) Follow-up: The committee noted that Item 7 (related to the Police Department's specific grant resolution) was also held by the Board of Finance and would not be addressed at this time.

Meeting Transcript

Okay. The time is 6 01. And this is a meeting of the fiscal committee meeting. I am Mary Fidelity, co-chair of the fiscal committee. And with me this evening are my co-chair, Representative Sean Boger. Other members present are representative Karen Camparelli, Representative Morrison, Representative Carmine Famas, Representative Pierre Louis, Representative Graham, Representative Vanderport. And I don't see I missed anyone. And this is our last meeting of our session. And we have a few items on the agenda. This evening, the first item is F 31 604 for $743, $900, $743,941, which is an additional appropriation for operating, which was police administration request for additional funding to increase budgeted police officer positions from 217 to 230 for 300 total sworn as the department is now fully staffed and plans to fill the 13 new positions in the upcoming spring um academy class. I know this was held but by the Board of Finance, but I know there are some members who would like to make some comments. So I'm asking this if someone could please move this item. I think Representative Danderworth, you are muted. So moved. So move second second. Okay. Representative Boger. Thank you, Chair. Um, you know, I'm I'm I'm very displeased that we're not going to be able to vote on this, and this board is not going to be able to this committee is not going to be able to meet again since this is our last meeting. I'm not sure if any of the other members had watched the the uh Board of Finance meeting, but I just have to say, and and again, unfortunately I always have to preface just to make sure nobody isn't is uh unclear. These are these are this is my opinion. I am not speaking as a member of your police department. I'm speaking as your fellow elected official who happens to be a police officer, um with uh 28 years of experience of of working in that particular department in and the hiring of more officers um does not impact me as far as a benefit or anything like that. Having said all that, and um the only the only word I can say is disgusted. Um I listened to the meeting, the amount of of data that is being requested uh of the police department to produce in order to fund this, and mind you, these are the positions that we we told as a total financial leg of the uh of the city. We told the chief of police that we're not gonna fund these positions right now. These are those is the bird board of finance, but come back when you're ready to, and we will. Well, the police department is the academy's been going full blast. We're trying to catch up. And just for those of you that that may be on this committee for the next board, I want you to understand something. Almost 30 years ago, this police department had 315 officers. We were able to fulfill things that the public wanted, like foot posts, bicycle patrol, SROs. As you know, um in this country, school incidents, shootings, all these horrible, terrible things have gone nothing but up, while the population of our police department has gone down, while the population of our city has skyrocketed. And how those members of the Board of Finance, and I'm just gonna say in their in their in their ivory white towers are sitting there without any direct professional knowledge of how a police part department functions or the tactical or strategic decisions that have to be made. Um and make this decision to to hold these positions in my opinion, hostage at this point until they get certain information, is is just it's disgusting to me. Um I know they made mention of the fact that they're not pleased with how the pension plan is performing. Well, the police administration has nothing to do with the in with the administration of the pension plan. That's that's the the that that's the pension board. They have their own trustees, two appointed by the city, two appointed by the union, and one neutral. The the police administration has no power or control over that, but because they're not happy with that, they want to see this data and that data. They want to see data spanning back years and years and years that that covers a landscape of this department in this city that doesn't even exist anymore. They want to know where the the police officers are actually going to be allocated, what positions are they going to be in? Um as if they know better than the chief of police where to put certain people and and whether or not that those things are actually needed. And the only other thing that I would point out is if I I pay particular attention to uh a lot of the social media that uh involves Stanford directly. Um and if you go onto any of those platforms, you will see the number the the top gripes of our citizenry are all the same. And you guys already know this because of the same phone calls that we get from our constituents. Uh traffic enforcement, because people in the city drive like animals. They drive with total there's time they just drive with total disregard for only what they need to do and nobody else. Um it's hard to police a city of a hundred and thirty uh a hundred and thirty uh five plus thousand people when we only have I believe it's four officers assigned traffic enforcement because our patrol demand is so high. That's ridiculous.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com