Council was called to order on May 15, 1996 at 7:30 p.m. by President of Council Randy Danbury.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by the governmental body and those in attendance. The Invocation was given by Mr. Knox.
Roll call was taken by Mr. Knox. Present were Council members Boice, Galster, Manis, McNear, Vanover, Wilson and Danbury.
The minutes of April 17, 1996 were approved with 7 affirmative votes.
The minutes of May 1, 1996 were approved with 7 affirmative votes.
COMMITTEE AND OFFICIAL REPORTS
Rules and Laws - Mr. Galster said the sign ordinances for political signs and temporary window signs were approved at Planning Commission and recommended to Council by a 7-0 vote. They should be ready for a first reading at the next meeting. We also have the final draft for the ordinance on exotic animals and that should also be ready for a first reading at the next meeting.
PUBLIC RELATIONS - no report
PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY & WELFARE - no report
PUBLIC WORKS - Mr. Vanover reported Ordinance 36-1996 is on the agenda this evening and we are recommending approval to award the contract to L. P. Cavett Company. The project came in substantially underbid even after we added some additional items that weren't on the original bid. We got the bids out early and went to work on them quickly. The contractor is in town doing work on St. Rt. 4 already. He had his crews and equipment in place so there is a substantial savings to the City. Ordinance 35-1996 on the Century Boulevard Phase II project is also on the docket tonight and we also recommend passage on that.
PUBLIC UTILITIES - no report
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - Mr. Wilson said all curb and sidewalk apron work has been completed on the Crescentville Road driveways. Also the sidewalk and drainage improvements at the Vineyard Church on Crescentville road are completed. The contractor is now progressing with the sidewalk along Vanarsdale and will move on to the sidewalk along Rt. 4. Ordinance 35-1996 authorizing a contract with Barrett Pavement and Materials Inc. for the reconstruction of part of Century Boulevard and Ordinance 38-1996 authorizing a contract with L. P. Cavett Company for the widening of Ray Norrish Drive and the resurfacing of the Crossings area streets are on the agenda tonight. These projects came in under budget and the Capital Improvement Committee is requesting your support for both of these ordinances this evening.
FINANCE COMMITTEE - Ms. Manis said they are looking at a meeting to go over the budget. We don't have a definite time or date but will let you know at the next meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION - Mr. Galster reported they met last night. Compass Retail was in with Tri County Mall for approval of a modification to their entrance off St. Rt. 747. It was tabled originally in January and that application was denied 5-2. Doug and Arlene Eades requested final plan approval of the Phase I Charing Crossing Estates on Springfield Pike. There were a few contingencies that need to be worked out with staff but that was approved 7-0. The next item was a land use permit for the land that was formerly WalTek off Chesterdale Road. That was approved 7-0. Kerry Ford requested a modification to their building for a new car delivery area. It has changed since the one previously approved so this was a revision. It was approved 7-0 even though the sign issue still needs to come back before Planning. We looked at the political and window sign issues and we also talked about the concrete in people's back yards, trying to find a way to control that a little bit. We're going to do a little research and try to preliminarily base it on a percentage of improved impervious surface. It covers decks, concrete, blacktop, etc. The resident would always have the right to go to the Board of Zoning Appeals if they were trying to come up with something different. We are looking into that in other communities.
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS - no report
Mrs. Boice said the Tax Review Board met this evening and came up with a resolution to the request.
BOARD OF HEALTH - Mr. Vanover stated the Board of Health met last Thursday. Our Health Department is co-sponsoring a seminar on Ohio's new regulations for food service operations to be held June 18 and 19. We trapped and removed one skunk, two squirrels, two raccoons, three opossums and one ferocious groundhog. There is some discussion about that and I think the Mayor is going to bring that up later. As many of you are well aware, we had a fish kill in the creek on April 21. The Health Commissioner, the Ohio EPA and Ohio Department of Natural Resources and Officer Teague walked the creek from Chamberlain Park to behind Princeton Plaza, where they ascertain the point of entry of the toxin was. It was a substantial kill, not only killing the fish but also air breathing animals, snakes. We had a cat in our back yard that either drank the water or ingested the fish. The SPCA treated the cat and it survived and has been put up for adoption. Mr. John Yungbluth of 1079 Pilgrim, called in the fish kill and he obtained a substantial water sample. We found in the water creosol, dursban, acetonitrile benzene. We feel the deadly factor was cyanide. The readings were extremely high. Most water quality readings are in parts per billion. In this case the cyanide readings were in milligrams per liter. It was a fairly substantial concentration. We have rechecked the water quality and there are no traces of cyanide in it. With the weather we have been having by the time we found out about it, it was long gone. We can find out what the agent was but unfortunately the odds of us finding out where, how and who are slim. We now have a good idea of what we can start looking for in our testing program that the Health Commissioner is going to do on a quarterly basis so we are actively monitoring what is going on. We have two figures for the creek samples. The first was April 29 after a big storm. The figures were extremely high as we did have a sewer overflow. The Health Commissioner has been interested in how quickly these figures turn around so two days later he was out again and took what we would call a dry sample. The numbers for the two samples are as follows:
April 29 May 1
Northland & Rt. 4 2,800 200
Rt. 4 and Glensprings 60,000 1,400
Ross Park 66,000 900
Neuss Avenue 160,000 23,000
Chamberlain Park 170,000 11,000
Within a two day time frame the counts are back down so we would recommend everyone staying out of the creek especially after a heavy rain because with the saturation level of the grounds we could suffer another overflow. Usually after a two day period the counts are down but we would recommend keeping exposure to a minimum in the creek until we can get the quality back to where it should be. The Board queried me on the status of the exotic animal ordinance. They had requested that I convey to Council and Rules and Laws that they be supplied with a copy so they could go over it before any Council action since one of the issues with exotic animals was from the health standpoint. With Council's concurrence I would like to bring in a resolution commending Mr. Yungbluth for his quick thinking and his actions on obtaining the water sample.
Ms. Manis said in the paper today it attributed the spill to some place in Forest Park.
Mr. Vanover said there had been some discussion from MSD that there had been some problems with an operation in that area and there is a large line that comes in and feeds that general area. We can't point an accusing finger because it could have been an accident. I hope it wasn't intentional. The legal situation is unless we caught them in the act there is not a whole lot we can do except now they know we are monitoring the creek and I hope they will be more careful. The entry point was behind Princeton Plaza so it went through to Sharonville to the main body of Mill Creek and into the Ohio River. I had talked with people in Sharonville and they had problems with dead fish in their creek. Everybody downstream from that point suffered losses.
Mayor Webster said I did not see the article in the paper. I am surprised at that because that was one of the questions I asked at the Board of Health meeting. There is an operation that uses cyanide in large quantities but if the dump occurred there then we should have some kill from there to Princeton Plaza. There was no kill there. That sort of eliminates them from dumping at their site. They could have taken it from that site and brought it to Springdale, but as Mr. Vanover indicates we certainly are not ready to accuse that operation of doing that. It shouldn't have been in the paper.
Mr. Danbury said this point is usually reserved for the C-I-C. As a member of that I spoke with the Mayor and we are going to suspend that until the C-I-C gets going again. I do want to use this time to ask Council to consider an executive session at the end of this meeting to discuss a real estate issue. In place of this committee report Mr. Webster asked if we could start having Civil Service Commission reports.
Mr. Robert Coleman, chairman of the Civil Service Commission for Springdale introduced himself. In addition to myself, Ted Tarter is vice-chairman and Don Darby is secretary. The activity of the Civil Service Commission at this point involves filling of the thirty-second police officer position. This activity is proceeding and will bring the Police Department up to its full complement of officers. The position of the Account Clerk I in the Finance Department was filled effective 3/18/96 and the person selected was Lisa Hogeback. The Mayor's Court Clerk position was reclassified from Account Clerk I to Violations Bureau Clerk. This was approved by the CSC and moves the position back to the Police Department from the Mayor's Court Clerk position. We certified the names on the Account Clerk I list for the Violations Bureau Clerk vacancy, thereby making these individuals candidates for this particular vacancy. Ten candidates for the fireman's position were submitted for interviews. These interviews were conducted by an independent panel. Nine of the individuals were interviewed and one candidate voluntarily removed himself from the process. The final interviews will conclude on May 20 with hiring recommendations following shortly thereafter. We may have to do some additional advertising for the position of the Violations Bureau Clerk as we are getting close to exhausting our list of candidates.
Mrs. Boice said I am delighted to see you here this evening. It's been a long time since we have had a Civil Service Commission report, something I have requested from time to time. I thank you, Mayor Webster, for reinstating these reports. Congratulations on your chairmanship. Welcome aboard and thank you for this evening's report.
Mr. Wilson also said welcome. How many candidates do we have for the police officer position?
Mr. Coleman replied there is only one candidate that remains. This person is all set to go and will become the thirty-second police officer real soon.
Mayor Webster said the individual has been tentatively offered the position pending his passing a physical. We would hope to have an appointment some time next week.
O-K-I - no report
MAYOR'S REPORT - Mayor Webster reported on the Community Pride campaign. Through last Friday 465 property inspections have been made. In addition we had 43 calls, referrals, or complaints. Twenty-five violation letters were sent. Examples of violations: garbage cans not concealed from view; paint - trim, garage doors, windows; campers, boats, RVs parked in driveway and unlicensed; air conditioners in the side yard not properly screened; gutters, downspouts in need of repair; in some cases shutters totally missing from the house. We kicked the campaign off in Beacon Hill/Oxford Hills and those inspections are almost completed. Last Friday the program moved to Heritage Hill and this week they also started doing some inspections in the Cloverdale - Smiley area. I asked them not to stay in one area. This program is so popular I want to make sure we spread it around the community. On the debris removal program we've had 52 requests for vehicles. We have had a ton of positive comments on that program. I just got a report today from Mr. Burton regarding our park patrol officers. We had two incidences this week at the Center where Mike Smith, our first officer caught two youngsters putting graffiti on walls down there. They were promptly busted for that, asked if they would like to correct the situation and they volunteered to go out with soap and water and wash down the walls. The police were looking for a young man who lives in the neighborhood down there. Fortunately our Recreation Center staff passed that information on to Mike. The guy happened to wander in and Mike asked him to accompany him to the Police Department and promptly turned him over to our Police Department. People have been asked to remove their animals. We've heard some very good comments there. It's going very well and we've had no negative repercussions. There was at least one incident where they had to quiet the language at the basketball court. I would like to bring those two park patrol officers in June 19 and at the same time, introduce you to our new police officer, and hopefully, we'll have our two new firefighters on board at that time. I don't think we'll have our fire inspector but if we do, we'll bring him in also. I have a handout on the animal nuisance program and I would like to talk about some concerns the Board of Health has with that program and get Council's input on that. This is a brief overview of the nuisance animal program. There is no major issue here, only as it relates to some of the calls we are getting. He said we are getting calls from people who see a rabbit in their front yard, squirrels in trees. That is not what the program is intended for. We've gone back and looked at the documentation when the program was initiated and I think we are doing what Council wants done but you need to be aware that we are spending a substantial amount of money. The first full year of the program was 1993 when we spent $7,100. That jumped to $9,500 in 1994 and last year was almost $9,200. We've doubled the appropriations and we are looking at an appropriation of $10,000. We spent $2,800 through April. I checked last April's figures and we had spent $1,500 through the first four months. I hope we can keep the program under $10,000. That is the issue with the Board of Health. They are questioning Mr. Winfough and myself as to whether Council really wants to spend that much money on the program. Are we wasting tax payers dollars? I just want to share their concerns with you and you tell us what you want done. If you want the program administered the way we've been doing we'll be more than happy to continue to do that. We do say no to some people, like rabbits in the front yard or squirrels in trees. We don't send the trapper out. Today we got a call from a lady who just moved into her house. She said something was burrowing under her porch. There was nothing there at all. The previous owners had dropped a flower pot and there was a lot of dirt on the sidewalk so she thought some animal was digging under her porch. We don't just arbitrarily send Trapper John out.
Mr. Danbury said I feel we should go after the major nuisance animals, namely skunks and groundhogs. I think they can cause damage to the whole yard. Unless I think raccoons and opossums are running rampant I would say hold on that a little bit. It's kind of neat having raccoons around and they are not going to hurt that much. That's my personal opinion.
Mr. Vanover said just to remind you, according to state law, any skunks, raccoons, and opossums we trap do have to be euthanized because of the rabies threat. I live down by the creek and the other night there was an opossum in my yard. I'm sharing their territory as much as they are sharing mine. We have to accept the fact that they are going to be there. One of the concerns the Board had is where we have had repeat calls to a property. Not only does Trapper John go out and set up cages, he also provides information to stop this from reoccurring. There have been situations where the recommendations were not complied with and we're going back again. My own personal feeling on that is, if as a property owner they've given me steps to stop it and I don't take those steps I'm as much to blame, especially for an animal getting inside, as anybody. We have had twenty incidences of repeat calls to a property.
Ms. Manis said I think it is a very nice service we do and it is just that - a service. It seems like we're spending public money on private property which we don't do on anything else. Do we send the trapper out when we get a call about a squirrel or about the dirt or do we send somebody from the Health Department?
Mayor Webster replied we send the Health Commissioner out wherever possible. If there is any doubt at all as to whether we need the trapper, the Health Commissioner goes out and evaluates the situation.
Ms. Manis said I think it is nice. We had the big problem with the skunks and I think that's what we started it for. Raccoons may look cute but they can be a problem.
Mr. Danbury replied I agree but I don't want to eliminate all animals if at all possible. We've had people come before us because we have the audacity to try to get rid of rats. We have other people who want to shoot anything that moves. I feel as though once we eliminate a lot of these animals right here, we're going to mess up the local eco system here because by eliminating these, the mice population is going to definitely increase and then we'll have more rats here. I think there is a happy medium. My personal feeling is I would go after skunks, thin out anything else when deemed necessary. You made an excellent point. It's our business to go on private property and take care of everybody's problems. I think we should when there is a problem but just to kill something to kill it, I don't agree with that.
Mrs. Boice asked Mayor Webster if we would only be trapping if the animal is causing a problem such as burrowing. If someone calls and says I got up this morning and saw a raccoon in my back yard, we're not running out there and setting a trap. It has to be a trouble type thing.
Mayor Webster responded for one siting of a raccoon we would not send the trapper out but if one is hanging around and is always there, we would probably call Trapper John and have him evaluate the situation. If he says there is evidence that it had been there several times he'd recommend we put a trap out.
Mrs. Boice stated on occasion I've gotten up in the morning and had a opossum in the back yard and also a raccoon. We didn't have this program at that time and you figured if you had a problem it was your problem, not the City's. I'm asking if we are only dealing with those that are actually causing a problem for the homeowner.
Mayor Webster said there are people in the City who would like us to address that. You're liable to hear from your constituents because they say they called the Health Department and told them they saw a raccoon cross my back yard and the Health Department didn't do anything. Well, it's got to be causing a problem.
Mr. Wilson said it is my understanding that the only time Trapper John comes out is when there is destruction of property by a raccoon, skunk, etc. When a resident can say there is destruction of my property by this animal, then we send Trapper John but not just because one crosses the lawn or is in the neighborhood. I think that was my understanding from way back.
Mayor Webster said I'm not sure if we draw the line at destruction or not. It could be that someone has squirrels in their attic. Is that destroying something? I think there is a danger there and we probably would respond to that. I'm not sure they have damaged the house yet but the potential is there. It's along that line and it's where we want to keep the program.
Mr. Galster said back in 1990 we had a raccoon hanging around the house and then it made its burrow next to the house. Not too much longer she was in the soffit of the second floor of my house having babies. It is not a pleasant thing to try to clean up. We aggressively tried to get the raccoon removed on our own. If this program had been in place at the time, maybe we could have prevented it before it actually got into the attic so to speak. I don't want to trap every animal that is scurrying across the yard but once they take up residency close to your home it can be a real problem.
Ms. Manis said it's a real hard call. We had squirrels in our attic and we got them out ourselves. Where do you draw the line? If somebody's shutters are falling down we don't go out and fix those if the wind knocked them off. I think it's a fine program but I think we ought to continue to watch it and if it continues to increase we have to take some real measures to curb it back.
Mrs. McNear said one thing we have to keep in mind is these animals are coming into our neighborhoods because of the building and development we have done. We as a City have caused some of this problem so I think we are partially responsible for this and we should take a hand in clearing up the problem.
Mr. Danbury said the consensus is we should take care of the problem but with some discretion.
Mayor Webster said so we will continue as we have been doing. We have been using discretion so that's why we want to bring it to you in case you get calls from your constituents as to why the Health Department didn't come out and trap this opossum crossing their back yard.
Mrs. McNear said I know we want the park patrol officers to be a friendly presence in the park. Would you consider having name tags or name badges so people can have name recognition with the people running around in the park? We have a couple of places along the path where people are not permitted to ride bicycles. I think that should go for the park patrol as well. I think they should get off their bikes and walk through that area. I had quite a few comments regarding that topic at the last couple of softball games I've been to.
Mayor Webster replied I think your first suggestion is an excellent one and we will implement that as soon as possible.
Ms. Manis said I saw one of the officers at a softball practice. I called him over, introduced myself and the people who were with me didn't know about the program. I explained it to them. That night I had quite a few people who were interested in the job. The officers look good. The officer was very friendly and polite. Are we still going to hire another?
Mayor Webster replied we have two other candidates who are waiting. I think you will be really impressed when we bring these two fellows in and have Mr. Burton read you their background and qualifications. Michael Smith is a certified police officer. The other one will be May 24. We really haven't had to worry about getting the training for these folks because they have been through all that. Mr. Osborn said Mr. Smith is an EMT. Mayor Webster continued that the third candidate is a police officer also and the other one is a security guard at Princeton High School. We have four super qualified people so if we lose one of these two officers, we have someone waiting in the wings.
CLERK OF COUNCIL/FINANCE DIRECTOR - Mr. Knox said he would check with ICRC as to why there is no camera tonight.
ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT - Mr. Osborn stated there are three ordinances later in the agenda that I would like to comment on at that time, the first being Ordinance 37-1996 regarding the purchase of an ambulance; Ordinance 40-1996 related to the Hamilton County Urban County Community Development Block Grant Program; and the resolution dealing with the setting of a safe and reasonable speed limit on I-275. We would like to request an executive session to discuss a matter related to real estate. Finally, I would like to read a memorandum I sent to the Police Chief and all members of the Springdale Police Department today regarding Law Enforcement Appreciation Week.
On the occasion of Law Enforcement Appreciation Week I would like to take this opportunity to share with you my deep respect for the officers and clerks of the Springdale Police Department individually and your profession in general. It has been my pleasure to be associated with many of you for almost twenty-two years. During that time I have been privileged to observe the professionalism, courage, self-sacrifice routinely displayed by your ranks. I might also add that these characteristics are no accidents. You are an elite group of people who have been selected to perform an incredibly difficult job. You are expected to put your life at risk to protect others, remain cool in confrontational situations, display restraint in the application of force, thrive on stress, work hours that disrupt your family life, routinely associate with some of the worst of humanity, and all the while remain courteous and professional. I am proud to say that you have more than met these challenges. In doing so you have earned the respect of your community many times over. It is often said that the greatest resource an organization has is its people. The members of the Springdale Police Department are living proof of this axiom.
Mr. Osborn said I wanted to read this into the record in recognition of the day in and day out efforts of the Springdale Police Department and particularly in light of the fact that this is Law Enforcement Appreciation Week.
Mayor Webster said I don't want to upstage the Administrator but I also had a document I want to read in regards to Law Enforcement Appreciation Week. It's a letter Chief Freland sent to two of his officers. It really struck a chord with me. I will block out the names and addresses in this report but it's in response to a detail these two individuals had worked.
Letter dated April 25, 1996 to Floyd McKee, Patrol Officer and Charles Harbin, Lieutenant
I reviewed the detail sheets in reference to your response to a trouble run at XXX on April 25 at 0240 hours and again at 0410 hours. At 0240 hours you were able to talk and reason with Mr. X who was despondent and had threatened to shoot himself. You also used common sense and concern for the citizen by removing 2 shotguns and 1 rifle from the residence while calling for Mr. X's best friend to come over to the residence. When you returned at 0410 hours Mr. X had barricaded himself in a bedroom and was armed with a knife and threatening suicide. Your actions in removing the firearms at 0240 hours proved to be pivotal in preventing a suicide or harm to officers. You were able, once again, to talk to Mr. X and subsequently he surrendered the knife and himself and was taken into custody. This event occurred when the majority of Springdale residents, other employees, and officials were safe asleep. No one knew of your actions which directly served in preventing a citizen from killing himself, and perhaps a police officer who might have responded to a call for help. This event did not create any notoriety or fanfare. No thanks or appreciation were asked or expected. No picture was taken or plaque received. It did not generate any revenue, appease a citizen's group, or do something that is popularly described as politically correct. Only the people who work with your, and those have been there and those that do the same thing night after night feel a true sense of appreciation and understanding. It was just a cop doing his job, handling a problem. To both of you; "good job gentlemen!!!" Your efforts and those of "all" of your fellow officers are appreciated in "everything" you do."
Mayor Webster added the squad responded and took the individual to the hospital for psychiatric treatment.
LAW DIRECTOR'S REPORT - Mr. Schneider said one additional suit has been filed against the City in the Steinberg matter. If you recall, there had previously been a filing against the Planning Commission relative to Roberd's construction. The subsequent suit seeks to recall the permits that have been issued and we will defend that and defend our public officials. They have the right to do that. We have advised the City officials to continue to do their job in regard to that project. Nothing has been filed that causes us to do anything.
ENGINEER'S REPORT - Mr. Shuler stated at the beginning of the meeting I passed out a summary sheet of projects that we have bid in the last month. I did that because I think we achieved some dramatic savings over budget in our projects that we have bid and we are going to contract three of those hopefully this evening. I just wanted to say to Council that it was a combination of a number of things. First, the Council committees working early in the year, Council allowing us to get started on the engineering work early in the year so we can get these projects out to bid and probably as importantly as anything, the low bid contractor on both the street program and the Crossings where we are showing substantial savings is because the contractor is already under contract by the Department of Transportation to do the work on St. Rt. 747. He was planning on being in town. Since we were able to get these projects out to bid before his docket was full for the year, he was able to bid these projects substantially lower than the other contractors that were bidding on the job. The City is therefore benefiting from the cost savings by the timely bidding of these projects. There will be some additional costs that doesn't show up here on utility relocations on the Crossings project we found in the intersection of Ray Norrish Drive and Rt. 4 that we are going to have to do some gas, telephone, and underground electrical relocation that we hadn't anticipated earlier. There is going to be some extra cost there but it's not going to be anywhere near the savings we are saving from the summary. We are in the construction season as you all well know. The barrels on Rt. 4 are going to be there a while longer. As long as things dry out and let the contractor go back to work we hope to have that project done. That is one of the ODOT projects where the City provided the design work and ODOT is building that project. They anticipate having that done in June if the weather cooperates. Also we need to report to you, sometime next week the contractor is scheduled to move in and start the repair and resurfacing work of Princeton Pike/St. Rt. 747 from the interstate all the way to Glendale. This is the project we had hoped to have done last year and it didn't get through ODOT's process soon enough. It was contracted for last year but the work is scheduled to begin some time next week. That work will be done at night but even though the work is being done overnight, there will still be areas in the construction that will be barreled off and you will be driving through a construction zone for some time. With the St. Rt. 4, St. Rt. 747 projects, the project already underway on the curb work on Crescentville and the sidewalk work around town plus the three we hopefully will approve this evening, there is going to be a lot of construction going on in town this summer. We just hope everybody will give us a little slack and let us get the work done. It will be much better when we finish but it is going to be disruptive for some time and I hope everyone can bear with us.
The Community Pride program of Springdale is a wonderful program that will improve our city. We especially appreciated the use of the truck over the weekend to remove debris from our yard. We could do the work we wanted to do and the clean up was so much easier. Our thanks to the City for providing this service. Gratefully, Ron and Charlene Reckner, 467 Cloverdale Avenue
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE
William A. Johnson, 1169 Benedict Court, said I had talked to Mr. Sears and Mayor Webster about a basketball goal up at the end of Benedict Court between the sidewalk and the street on City property. It's an eyesore to say the least and an absolute nuisance. I spoke with Mr. Webster and he had sympathy for the kids. I looked out last night and there were six people out there. I would only consider one of them a kid. They are out there yelling in the afternoon. I would like to see it moved. Mayor Webster said maybe we could come to some kind of agreement. I don't know of any kind of agreement. It's either take it out or leave it. It's against the City ordinance. There isn't supposed to be any structure in front of the house. In response to Mrs. Boice, Mr. Johnson said the goal is at 1150 Benedict Court between the street and the sidewalk. It has wheels on it but it is permanent now.
Mrs. Boice said there is one on her street but it is no problem at all. They keep it in the proper place and wheel it back and forth. I'm not quite sure what the problem is. Is it that they leave it there and don't move it?
Mr. Johnson said it would be bad enough if it was just kids. People come from everywhere to play basketball. I love basketball but I'd like to see it in the gym or at the playground. They can go to Heritage Hill School to play.
Mrs. Boice replied if they move it back on their property they have the right to have that. We have others throughout the City. There is one across the street from me. They use it a great deal and I enjoy watching them. It is not an obstruction to the sidewalk in any way.
Mayor Webster said we did have a conversation Monday morning. The situation came to my attention on Friday which is when Mr. Johnson talked to Mr. Sears. I took a tour of the City. I toured 18 cul-de-sacs just to see how widespread this problem was. I missed one that has been permanently erected parallel to the street on one of the cul-de-sacs. I saw three throughout the City. I have some empathy for the kids. I understand where Mr. Johnson is coming from but we hear so much today about parents not being involved with their kids, unsupervised kids, etc. I grew up on the streets. If it hadn't been for playing in the streets I wouldn't have played at all. We will enforce the laws and if the law says it has to come out it will. Unfortunately, we can't just have the one taken out that is a nuisance to Mr. Johnson. We have to take them all out. I'm not ready to do that at this point. That's why I called Mr. Johnson - to see if it was noise, appearance, hours of play. Maybe we could sit down with the parties involved and try to mediate that so we wouldn't have to not only take that goal out but also go to the other two I discovered Saturday and ask those people to remove those. In answer to your question Mrs. Boice, they are semi-mobile. They have a big tank at the bottom which you can fill with sand or water. Once you fill them, they are not easily removed but if you don't have anything in the base they are not as stable, and you can turn them over. There are wheels in front and once you turn them over the wheels meet the ground and you can roll them back in. We could insist that they not be filled with sand or water; keep them mobile and after a certain time of day they have to be removed. That's certainly some middle ground which is what I was trying to explore with Mr. Johnson and the owner of the one on Benedict, Mr. Ed Faulkner. We are researching the law. We are looking at our own ordinance as well as the state code to see if we may want to make some recommendations to Council to have some of our ordinances amended. Right now I cannot say Mr. Faulkner is in direct violation of a City ordinance.
Ms. Manis said I own one of the hoops that sits on Audie Court. It's been there for two years. Jen and Ryan Faulkner used to come down and shoot hoops at the end of our street with everybody. Nobody on our street seems to mind. We have a cul-de-sac full of young kids. I've had to go out and yell at them a few times and tell them to keep it down. Most of our kids are younger too, in elementary school.
Mr. Johnson said Ryan was the only child out there. The rest were adults. I' m not going to get out there and yell. I've lived there 35 years. I've raised my family and i'm not going to raise somebody else's. I understand the ordinance to say no structure in the front yard.
Ms. Manis said I've seen a group of kids out there playing and they talked to me too. I said as long as nobody is complaining on our street I don't think we have a problem. But it is on City property and I don't know if there is anything we can do to keep yours on your street. We might have to look at them individually.
Mr. Osborn said the ordinance about structures in the front yard would deal with items on private property. You still have an issue but that is not the code that would regulate it. That relates to the zoning code. What we are looking at and researching are codes related to the public right of way. There are code sections that have language that talk about regulating the use of the public right of way in different forms, not stockpiling material on the public right of way or dumping or obstructing the right of way, etc. We're trying to find as specific language as possible that deals with the particular issue you're referring to. There is another section of the traffic code which deals with play streets. Under that section of the code it is authorized for the City to designate certain streets as play streets. We would erect signs and put people on notice that the area is considered a play street and children would be playing in the street. This ordinance has been on the books since 1975 and we have not done that. That is another option that is available in this issue. I think it comes back to trying to accommodate the interest of most people. I think you have a legitimate right to voice your concern as what you see as a nuisance to you and the use of your property. It's going to be up to City Council to try to strike a balance and try and to deal with your kind of situation and deal with the situation on Audie Court and be consistent in terms of interpreting the law. What we are doing right now is a comprehensive review of all code sections that deal with this issue. Then we will be coming back to Council and hopefully trying to come up with a solution that will address as many interests as possible but I can't tell you at this point where we are going to come out.
Mr. Johnson said I can understand Mr. Faulkner putting this up. He doesn't own the property. He rents. It doesn't matter what happens in the neighborhood. He'll stay there a couple more years, then move somewhere else. It's an eyesore and a nuisance.
Mr. Danbury said I see a lot of good points here but when you look at the whole picture, if we were to eliminate this right here, then we would have to ban any kind of activity on any City property. Someone could say I don't want someone riding their bicycle in front of my house. I don't want them throwing a softball in a cul-de-sac or playing wiffle ball. Once you lay the groundwork for something we're going to ban everything from kids and I think there's some problems arising. I agree with the Mayor. There was a field next to my house but there were no playgrounds. Council is doing everything we can to involve the children in sports or some type of activity to keep them out of trouble. I think one way to safeguard any inconvenience to you is that we do have a noise ordinance. If it is too noisy maybe we can work with you and try to keep it down. You made a comment that you raised your kids and you don't want to raise someone else's. Back when your kids were young or even when you were young, there still were neighbors whose kids were gone and they had to deal with you as a child and then your children. It's an ongoing thing and I think we all have to be a little more open minded about what's out there. Hopefully there won't be a problem as far as noise or destruction of your property but I think we have to be tolerant of the fact that even though we don't have to deal with this right now, others still have kids and we want to try to keep them on the right path. I think any kind of sporting event is going to keep kids out of trouble.
Mr. Johnson said it's not just kids. It's mostly adults. I keep telling you this but you don't seem to listen.
Mr. Vanover said I also own one of the three in the City. Mr. Osborn and I initiated a discussion more than a year ago because my neighbors came to me and asked if we could go together, buy a backboard and put it up. As per our discussion, we could not affix a permanent one in the right of way. We even checked with CG&E and it's illegal to attach anything to their poles. We have a park at the school but there is not a parent in that neighborhood who is going to turn their children loose in that park because of problems that go on there. We are working to establish a neighborhood watch and curtail some of this. In having two meetings dealing with this there have been several comments about groups of kids coming through. The first comments coming out of people's mouths are where are their parents? I have two small children and there are probably eight on our cul-de-sac. I'm tickled to death they are there. They come down from other parts of the neighborhood and I don't have a problem as long as they are not being destructive and not bothering anybody. We all seem to live with it. We have a mix on our cul-de-sac. There are some people who are empty nesters. We've talked with them and I'd be willing to work out a compromise. I've talked with Mayor Webster. He visited my house and I showed him the mobility. Once that base is filled it takes me and a hard pull to bring it down. You can't use it without weighing it down because the weight of the goal itself will bring it right over. We haven't had any problems. It was down the street through the winter and the crews never had a problem negotiating the cul-de-sac radius. I understand your concern. We have to weigh everybody's rights as property owners and as residents and taxpayers. If I'm in violation I'll act accordingly but I do think we have to work with the parents and with the children. It's their neighborhood too and we need to provide a safe haven for them.
Mr. Wilson said I gather there are two objections you have - it is on public property and it is a noise problem. Mr. Johnson stated it is an eyesore. If they move it onto private property and take care of the damage the stand has done, that takes care of it being on public property.
Mr. Johnson said being an eyesore is more of a nuisance than the noise. And it's adults, not kids.
Mr. Wilson replied if the goal is on private property anybody can play, adults and children. When I get my basketball court up I'll play with my sons as well. I think the major concern is to get the basketball stand away from public property and put it on their property. Then try to control the noise. We cannot stop the players. I think we can do things to help you. I don't want you to leave here thinking we're all against you but rather that we will try to work with you and the other residents as well.
Mr. Johnson said it should be put in the back yard. It's still an eyesore. I own my property.
Mr. Osborn said this problem is particularly acute in Heritage Hill. The driveways are much narrower and in many cases, they are very steep. If you drive around other neighborhoods in Springdale you'll see similar devices but they are typically in the driveway. That's because the driveways are wider and flat, conducive to playing basketball. In Heritage Hill in many cases that's not the case. I think that's why we see the interest more in Heritage Hill. If there is an interest in trying to regulate this area, we could modify the current legislation that deals with play streets into limiting the age or hours, or something of that nature. As for moving the basketball goal onto private property, all over the City they are in the front yards. We're not going to get them out of the front yards. The most we could do is get them off the public street onto the driveway. I don't know if that will solve a lot of Mr. Johnson's problems, just moving it on the driveway in the front of the house. Even if it's on private property it's still going to be an eyesore for him and noise generator. Now that we've turned this rock over we've got to come up with a solution. I would just point out that this is a greater problem for Heritage Hill because of terrain, lot size, etc. We should consider that as well.
Mr. Vanover said to follow up on Mr. Osborn's point, we had a discussion at the last meeting about people wanting to concrete their back yards. If you take it out of the front you are setting yourself for something like that. Is it good, bad or indifferent, I don't know but you're possibly moving one problem to create another one somewhere else. That's also a concern that has to be addressed.
Mr. Knox said I hate to bring this up but if the City allows these items to be on City property does the City assume liability in case of injury? I think that point should also be considered when we discuss this.
ORDINANCE 35-1996 "AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CLERK OF COUNCIL/FINANCE DIRECTOR TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH BARRETT PAVING MATERIALS, INC. AS GENERAL CONTRACTOR FOR PHASE II OF THE CENTURY BOULEVARD/CENTURY CIRCLE RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY"
Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mr. Wilson seconded.
Ordinance 35-1996 passed with 7 affirmative votes.
ORDINANCE 36-1996 "ACCEPTING A BID AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CLERK OF COUNCIL/FINANCE DIRECTOR TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH L. P. CAVETT COMPANY FOR THE 1996 STREET REPAIR PROGRAM AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY"
Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mr. Wilson seconded.
Ordinance 36-1996 passed with 7 affirmative votes.
ORDINANCE 37-1996 "AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CLERK OF COUNCIL/FINANCE DIRECTOR TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH BRAUN INDUSTRIES, INC. FOR THE PURCHASE OF A 1996 TYPE I AMBULANCE AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY"
Mrs. McNear made a motion to adopt and Mr. Vanover seconded.
Mr. Osborn said on the ordinance the stated purchase amount should be $72,807 instead of $73,527. There are three instances; the second whereas, Section I and Section III. That is the bid amount tendered by Braun Industries. The recommendation from the Fire Chief is the unit proposed by Braun Industries. There was a bid that was $441 lower by Burgess Ambulance Sales but after a field check of the two units side by side at our facility, the recommendation of the Fire Department is that the Braun is the superior product and we feel we are more than justified in accepting the second low bid at an additional cost of $441. There is a list of six or seven things that they found in comparing the two ambulances that favor the Braun Industries product so we would recommend the Braun Industries Type I ambulance. The bid amount was $72,807. Our budgeted amount was $72,000 so we're pretty much on the budgeted amount for this purchase.
Mr. Galster said in the bid summary sheet there is a less trade in amount for $4,000. What are we trading in there?
Mr. Osborn replied we are trading in the similar box type ambulance that we're replacing. I think it's a Yankee we are trading in for this unit. It's a replacement vehicle. We found we could not re-chassis the existing box because the requirements now have eliminated using an econo-line chassis for this type of ambulance. You now have to use the Ford F-350 chassis which has a longer dog house type front end on it. Given the fact that you have to go to the 350 chassis now, the old box would not transfer so we had to go to a whole new unit and as a result, we're saving some money by trading in the former unit. It's the econo-line chassis and the box that is on it.
Mr. Galster asked could we not sell this outright for more than that? $4,000 seems low to me.
Mr. Osborn responded it would be difficult because of the history these units have. The econo-line chassis has a very poor record in terms of maintenance, performance. It's frankly very subject to catching on fire. As a result everyone is moving away from them. It's a hard unit to get rid of.
Mrs. Boice made a motion to change the figures from $73,527 to $72,807 and Mr. Wilson seconded.
The motion to amend passed with 7 affirmative votes.
Ordinance 37-1996 passed with 7 affirmative votes.
ORDINANCE 38-1996 "AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CLERK OF COUNCIL/FINANCE DIRECTOR TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH L. P. CAVETT CO. FOR THE CROSSINGS AREA STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY"
Mr. Wilson made a motion to adopt and Mr. Vanover seconded.
Mr. Wilson said I echo the comments that have already been made by Mr. Shuler and Mr. Vanover that when we can get, in this case, L. P. Cavett, already here and get them to bid on projects saving us money, it can't help but make us look good that we're saving the tax payers dollars and we have a qualified contractor. We can just look down the street and see what they are doing.
Ordinance 38-1996 passed with 7 affirmative votes.
ORDINANCE 39-1996 "AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF SPRINGDALE'S PARTICIPATION IN THE MIAMI VALLEY RISK MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION'S WORKERS' COMPENSATION GROUP RATING PLAN FOR 1997"
Mr. Parham said typically we would come to you and ask for this legislation and indicate to you that the agreement is the identical agreement as in previous years with the exception of some date changes, etc. However, there were two changes made to the document for the 1997 group rating plan. The first is changing the benchmark for member communities in Miami Valley to participate from a penalty of 5% to a penalty of 10%. As my memo to the elected officials and Mr. Osborn states in an effort to include as many communities in the association into this program we decided to change that number from a penalty of 5% to 10%. After our third party administrator ran the analysis there were really very little change in the numbers. The second change to this year's document is the inclusion of the administrative charges. In previous years the Ohio Bureau of Workers Compensation would exclude the administrative changes from the group section. Instead what you will receive is your rate for your individual community and then there would be administrative charges assessed against the community on an individual basis. This year they will be including that into the overall group program. I think once again it will be very beneficial for the City of Springdale to participate in this group rating program. Those communities that are not able to be in a group program, whether Miami Valley or some other state agency, will basically carry a great deal of the burden of the cost. The estimated savings for the City of Springdale for 1997 and these are estimates, our individual premium had we not been a part of the group would have been roughly $141,000. By participating in this group we anticipate our premium will be $98,000. There is a savings of roughly $42,000. I strongly encourage Council at the next meeting to support this program.
Mrs. Boice said with the changes you just stated, the 5%, 10% in spreading this out, are our savings about the same as they were under the old rules?
Mr. Parham replied they are the same if you take the 5% and 10% numbers. The savings are pretty much what they would have been if we had left it at 5%. I think the savings will be pretty much the same. It's just that once we receive our numbers back we do a redistribution internally within the group back to those communities that basically carry the association.
Mr. Danbury said in Section 12 it says participants who leave the group agree to allow the representatives to the group to assess their loss experience for a period of three years following the last year the participant's involvement in the group. If we were to leave would we have to reimburse the group.
Mr. Parham said it's out of our control. When the group rating program was established, if you were in the group your experience will remain with that group for a four year period. Your premium will be based upon a four year period. If you leave the group your three years of experience, the one year you were in there and the three that will follow will remain with that group. That language is addressing that issue and it doesn't matter whether it's in there or not the Bureau will assess our experience as a group whether we stay or leave.
Mr. Danbury said then the group will stay strong regardless of whether the membership is there.
Mr. Parham responded you could have a terrible rating. If the City of Springdale had a terrible rating and we fell beyond that 10% and it was damaging the overall group or bringing that number down for the group, and we pulled out, that bad experience stays with the group for another three years whether we're in it or not.
Mr. Osborn said we benefit greatly from the City of Kettering being a member. Their employee population and their very good rating helps the over rating for the group. If Kettering should decide to leave we would enjoy the benefit of Kettering's favorable ratings for three years.
Ms. Manis said if we had a bad year would they kick us out?
Mr. Parham said we have had a bad year. We started off very good at a 42% credit. We've had a bad year the last two years so we've dropped down to a 27% credit. So our number has dropped. If a community drops beyond the 10% penalty by these rules they are not permitted to remain in the group. There are a lot of changes taking place with the Ohio Bureau of Workers Compensation. It now falls under the auspices of the governor. He has appointed an executive director. When we sat down in the Dayton area to talk about the program for 1997 there was a lot of information given to us. A lot of the numbers we are working with are basically estimates. We've been fortunate since we've been in this program that our TPAs have done an excellent job with the estimations. Hopefully, they'll do it again for 1997.
ORDINANCE 40-1996 "AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CLERK OF COUNCIL/FINANCE DIRECTOR TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT OF COOPERATION WITH HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974, AS AMENDED"
Mr. Knox said the emergency measure is necessary for the date it will go into operation. There will be no thirty day delay. It is not necessary to vote on it this evening as Mr. Osborn informed me.
Mr. Osborn said this is a first reading. We would like to have it read with the emergency clause at the next meeting so we can waive the thirty days. This ordinance is a renewal of an agreement we have been a part of since 1974. Over the years it has changed in terms of its contents but essentially as I explained in my memo of May 6, this is an opportunity for non-entitled jurisdictions in Hamilton County to come together as a group and make application for community development block grant funds. We've been able to attract projects over the years but frankly, given our level of per capita income and the good quality of our housing stock we have not been able to attract many grants or projects that would be specific to a neighborhood. At the same time, it is still in our best interest to continue to participate in this type of program because we are advising our residents as part of the Community Pride Program that if they qualify they can seek low interest rate loans. That is under this same program and we direct them to the Hamilton County Community Development Department to access these loans. By participating in this we are making our residents eligible for those programs. Although there is language in the agreement itself which does commit the City to specific obligations relative to fair housing, this is not new language. It is language we have adopted before and I did want to direct Council's attention to that in case there are any questions before we adopt legislation.
Ms. Manis asked wouldn't we always support fair housing.
Mr. Osborn said there is the possibility that a unit of low income housing might be put in a part of the community that residents might not want to see occur. At that point, under this legislation, we would be barred from taking any legal action. What we are doing is consenting to cooperate with the placement of subsidized housing. In the past we have been able to work on this issue with the Hamilton County Community Development Department in terms of site placement. There are a number of homes throughout the community that are qualified on an individual basis. We don't have any major multi-family units that are eligible although that will be changing. We have been successful in the past in raising issues about specific site locations that were considered on an informal basis and we were able to put the City's position forward in that site selection process. We have to put the City's position forward in that site selection process and we have been successful. At the same time though, we have to understand that by adopting this legislation it bars us from taking any formal action to oppose the placement of low income or moderate income housing in our community.
RESOLUTION R18-1996 "DECLARING 60 MILES PER HOUR TO BE A SAFE AND REASONABLE SPEED ON I-275 BETWEEN SPRINGDALE'S EAST CORPORATION BOUNDARY AND SPRINGDALE'S WEST CORPORATION BOUNDARY"
Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mrs. McNear seconded.
Mr. Danbury said I stated at our last meeting that I opposed going to 65 mph. I still think 60 mph is too high due to the amount of traffic we have here. Mr. Osborn, is there any way we could amend this to 55 mph in this area.
Mr. Osborn replied I don't think there is an effective way to do that. We would have to undertake an independent speed study separate from that being proposed by the Ohio Department of Transportation. They have already executed such a study. I think other factors weighing against us is that the design speed of the road is 60 mph, the road was already posted 60 mph before the oil embargo of 1974 and while we have seen increased traffic out there, this has always been a very heavily traveled section of the interstate. I think another factor is we have already been able to extract a concession from the Ohio Department of Transportation. They were going to cause the transition between 60 mph and 65 mph to be at the St. Rt. 4 interchange. We prevailed upon them to move that further west to the Winton Road Interchange in order to get that transition point over that hill that runs between us and the Forest Park corporation line. As you can appreciate, our argument was to have someone transition from 65 mph to 55 mph while coming down a fairly significant gradient that's a couple of miles long is asking a lot. That is an area where we have a fairly high degree of accidents. In fact, we just had another one involving a police cruiser this past week where the police cruiser was struck by an intoxicated driver and did severe damage to the individual's car and some damage to our cruiser. Going back to the point, I think we have received as much concession as we can. They are proposing to run the 60 mph limit all the way over to beyond St. Rt. 42. We would be a rather unique island of 55 mph so I really think we've done the best we can do. We have made it clear to the Ohio Department of Transportation that our preference is not to see it increase to 65 mph but given the weight of the authority and the statistics already generated by ODOT, it would be rather a fruitless effort to try to oppose their proposed speed limits that we've agreed to here.
Mr. Danbury said on I-71 they have construction zones with 45 mph speed limits and the fines are doubled. Is there any way we can designate a certain area?
Mr. Osborn responded it is a state law that you can double fines in a construction area. That's not unique to I-71. Regarding the fines on interstates that is out of my expertise and I would have to defer to the Mayor or Law Director on how you might go about setting rates for fines on the interstates.
Resolution R18-1996 passed 6-1. Mr. Danbury voted no.
Mr. Danbury reminded Council that we had moved the first meeting in July to the first Tuesday, July 2. This is the first meeting where we are going to go over the budget.
Mr. Osborn said Ms. Manis and I have discussed having the work session for Council at the second meeting in June instead of July 2, primarily because everything is going on around that holiday so if it's agreeable to Council we were going to have the budget discussion the second meeting in June.
Mrs. Boice said if you recall I asked you at the last meeting about the history that has been sitting here since 1987. I know the first question out of the box is going to be how much is it going to cost. We have been down to the Historical Society three times and I assure you unless we have a firm commitment I am not going to go down and put these people through this hassle again only to come back and find out that no, we're not going to support this. I think the figures we had at the time were $35,000 to $40,000. To wrap it all up I'm not sure that figure would hold at this point because we again have extended another two year period of updating. We are going into an update of almost ten years. As I said this will be the last time I am going to bring the issue up. I have almost weekly calls from people who were aware that we did have the history. Those of you who have read the script up to 1987 it is an interesting, interesting piece. Is there any interest in pursuing this? I don't see us doing it for less than $40,000 and that may be a low estimate. I would think our approach would be to go with hardback copies. We know what hardbacks sell for in the stores. I think the determination of the run, whether 500 or 1,000 copies, all has to be determined. I would like some type of commitment as to whether you want it pursued or not pursued. I think it's time we either have to move with it or put it on the shelf and let it die there. I don't think we can keep fooling around with the Historical Society, having them make contacts for us for people to do the updating. We have already lost the person who did the original history. She is no longer doing that type of thing. They had recommended another person who would write in the same manner.
Mr. Galster asked if the $35,000 to $40,000 covers the publishing of the book or just the research.
Mrs. Boice said at the time we were discussing this we were talking about paperback and hardback books, and the hourly rate for the updating which no doubt has gone up. I wish I could be more definitive but I simply cannot.
Mr. Osborn said the $40,000 was for the whole thing but I think we should point out that that is a gross cost and our net cost is going to be substantially less than that from the sale of the book and that's going to be determined by how much we want to charge. How easy do we want it to be to buy one of these or how dear do we want it to be and how much of our money do we want to recover? I would think this is a very doable project. It's just a matter of deciding if we want to and entering into a contract with the Historical Society. I think part of that is for Council to make a decision when we have better numbers in front of us as to the cost recovery, what we want to do based upon our gross expenses.
Mr. Galster said maybe I'm just naive because I've lived in Springdale a long time myself but I believe Springdale is a community where you see generations of families who stay and make Springdale their home. I personally would love to see it. Because of the history I think it would be a very nice thing to have. You may be reading about your grandparents in there.
Mrs. Boice said some areas of it talk about the origination of our Fire Department in this City which has long been a great thread of connection and togetherness. It talks about the Ladies Auxiliary, what happened when the railroad went by. It is an extremely interesting piece. The copy I had worked on I had proofed three different times for typos. I've had a lot of requests for the book. The last time Mr. Osborn and I had discussed it I think we had pretty much switched over to go with the hardback. The Historical Society has more pictures we can incorporate. We had even discussed the point that as much as you would love to spread the pictures out throughout the book to go along with what you are talking about, it is much cheaper to put a folder in the center with all the pictures. We had even gone into that type of detail but it was a case that every time we brought it back a decision couldn't seem to be made.
Mr. Galster stated it is something I would like to pass along to my kids and future generations. I'd be willing to place an order. The only concern I have is any time we get into a document like this is to make sure the editing is done outside so we get a total picture of Springdale.
Mrs. Boice said the only thing I did was proofread for spelling. There was never any feed in from any City officials and there better not be on the ten year update as far as I am concerned. In the discussions we have had I think we have to be very limited in what is included as far as pictures in the book. You can't put a picture of every single seated Council so if you can't put everyone in, you can't put any. We have even gone into that detail so there is fairness. I think the historian handled it very well and I would assume anyone the Historical Society picked up to do the update would do it in the same manner. But it is their determination from reading minutes. Now with tapes the digging would not be as deep as it was in the original going way back. As to cost $35,000 to $40,000 is a two year old figure. I don't know how well they will sell. From what I have heard I anticipate they would but again we have to establish a price. How many we are going to run is also a determination which has to be made. Would we run 500, 1,000 copies?
Mr. Galster said I don't want to say I'm comfortable with whatever that number is but I am comfortable with this number adjusted for inflation.
Mr. Danbury stated we have already expended City funds on this. By expending City funds and not continuing on is a waste of money. I share Mr. Galster's concern. I want total autonomy of the person to be able to make the electoral decisions as to what they do. That is not something any of us should have any input on.
Mrs. Boice responded that no one did previously. I think also the selection of photographs will be submitted to the person who puts this volume together. As far as pictures of personal individuals this is something we had already discussed. This a very difficult area and like I said there is no way we could put all the Councils in there; therefore, there will be none.
Mr. Danbury said I am a history buff and I read the initial one about six years ago and I thought it was very interesting. I think we do a lot of things for a lot of different groups here. I know not only the seniors but a lot of people who have been here a long time would buy something like this. My figure would be $45,000 to $50,000. This is our initial cost and I know we will be able to recoup some dollars.
Mayor Webster said I'm pleased everyone seems to be in favor of his thing. What I was going to propose is that we allow Mrs. Boice to go ahead and get a proposal from the National Historical Society to at least do the update. Treat it as two separate projects. We have already invested a lot of money to bring the history up to ten years ago. A lot of rocks have been unturned, etc. Let's get the draft updated through 1995 or 1996 and then see what kind of costs there are in having hardback books printed. Then come back to Council with that proposal. Let's just get it updated before it gets out of our reach again. I think this builds on the investment we've already made and that gives you a better picture. Then we can take that product out for bids and see what we can do printing-wise.
Mr. Osborn said on the editorial control of the document I can tell you that the first segment that was completed had no editorial control outside of Dr. Janet Steinberg who was the writer. The only input the group supporting her, Mrs. Boice, Mr. Bradburn, one or two others and I, had was for spelling, correct titles, errors in fact like Ray Johnson was listed as an engineer when he is a marketing research person. The slant the writer takes on a controversial zoning issue is totally her call. The way she represents it is the way it stayed in the document. The only things we changed were spelling and factual errors we saw in the text. But again that was not editorial so much as accuracy.
Mrs. McNear said I had a conversation with Dean who is the person who wrote our newsletter and tossed around a few ideas with him regarding the printing of the book. He has a few different ideas. I don't know if the hardback is the way to go for the whole project. I personally would have the hardback but maybe some other people would not want to invest in that type of expense in the history but may be interested in having a soft bound book. A lot of people have asked me about this project too. The worst time I had was when I was in a bookstore and a resident wanted to know when he could buy the history from us. I would be comfortable with $50,000 for the update but I would like to see the proposal with some hard figures.
Mr. Wilson said I am a history person also and a business person as well. Is it too late to do a survey? My concern is how many people are actually going to buy this book and what is our actual cost going to be. If Mrs. McNear feels comfortable with $50,000, we're now looking at $40,000 to $50,000. A quick calculation, at $30 a book that's a whole lot book selling just to break even. Are we looking at this as a money making adventure or just to break even or as a goodwill gesture. Who would be interested in this book? I personally feel it would be the older residents who have lived here as Mr. Galster indicates, generations. I'm not sure a goodly portion of our residents who have lived here ten years or less or who come and live in our community 3-5 years and because of a corporate move, move out would buy it. Yet we're using their tax dollars to fund a book to really please a few people, mainly the older people. I think we need to get a survey and find out how many people would want this book. I've been here almost eighteen years and as a history buff I would be interested in knowing about the history of Springdale, but I'm not so sure other residents in my district, District 1 which is a transient district, would be interested, but we're using their tax dollars. I'm hoping I'm wrong and I'm hoping we'll be able to do a survey and maybe of all our residents we have 20-30% who would be interested in a $30 hardback or $15 paperback. We want to find out how we're going to regroup some of this money, but more importantly, how many people would be interested in this. We're getting a few calls here and a few there but how many people are really interested in this project and what is it actually going to cost us? Maybe next time we have a newsletter we have a mail back and find out how many people are willing to purchase this book. Then I'd feel a lot more comfortable pursuing it.
Mr. Danbury said I know we could probably do a survey and get some input pro and con, but I think some of the possible purchasers of this no longer live in Springdale. They may live in surrounding communities and they can't give us input. The market really dictates. Ninety percent of the people responding may say they'll buy it; then when we come out with it, they may not buy it. I wouldn't put a lot of stock in a survey.
Mr. Vanover said we've already invested money into it. All of us realize it can only get more expensive to close that ten year gap. If we don't do it now, it may be a 15-20 year gap we have to close and it would be more expensive then. I think we should go on. I think corporate citizens might be interested in adding this book to their library. I don't have a problem going on. The harder the figures the easier the decision but I don't have a problem with the $40,000 to $50,000 range.
Ms. Manis said I have never had anybody ask me about the history, never, ever. Secondly, I agree with Mayor Webster. I think we decided a couple of years ago that we would update it, then get some figures and research it a little more. That's how I felt last time and I still feel that way. I'm not willing to commit $40,000 to $50,000 on something that I don't even know about yet but I'm willing to get it updated.
Mayor Webster said Mr. Wilson had a good point; we really don't know. I don't know how much stock you can put into a phone or door-to-door survey. I don't think I would make a decision based on a straw survey. As Mr. Osborn pointed out to me, we are going to be bringing to you a proposal later in the year to do a very comprehensive survey of City services, etc. If we wanted to stick that in there as an afterthought maybe we could do it but I would not want to hold up on the first stage of this project waiting for that survey. I think we ought to allow Mrs. Boice to get a proposal and act on getting it updated and getting us a new draft. If we've done the survey at that time we let this tag along with it. If not, we get proposals and see what it's going to cost.
Mrs. Boice said I would like to reply to your comments about spending the taxpayers' money, Mr. Wilson. I think in all reality that there is taxpayers' money spent on various things in this City that not everybody is in favor of or benefits from such as the animal nuisance program we talked about tonight, $10,000 here and $10,000 there. Much of our tax dollar events we have are not just limited to Springdale residents. Other people are coming in and enjoying them. I really could not agree with that comparison. That just happens throughout a City. We are spending the tax dollars on cleaning the streets. A lot of people benefit from that who are not Springdale residents. I would not be able to agree with that theory.
Ms. Manis said like Mayor Webster and everybody said about the survey, unless you actually place orders and get the money I don't think you can count on anything. I think when this comes up to us as a proposal, if it's going to cost $50,000 you have to vote on thinking it will cost $50,000 because you might not sell one book. You can't do it based on we're going to recoup this amount. If you're not comfortable with that then you don't go.
Mr. Wilson said I initially put my light on to agree with Mayor Webster that we could include this comment in the survey we're doing and find out from the residents if they would be agreeable. I'm also in favor of the update. I guess Mrs. Boice and I can debate back and forth about all incidences and what is best in the taxpayers' interest. Just as I respect her opinions I'm sure she respects mine and we can agree to disagree and move on with the business of the City. Let's move on with the update. Let's include it in the survey and then let's make an intelligent decision when the time comes.
Mr. Danbury said everyone is in agreement to get a bid for an update. Then you will report back to us (Mrs. Boice) and come out with more hard figures.
Mr. Galster said if this is included in the survey it would be nice to have a list of people who are interested in it.
Mayor Webster said we have a lot of work to do on the survey. We'll take that under advisement.
Mr. Danbury said we have request for a liquor license transfer. It's for Benihana's and it's staying within the company. There were no objections.
Ms. Manis said she had a resident who lives on Glensprings approached her about semis using the road as a through street. She wanted to know if they could get a sign or some enforcement.
Mr. Wilson said I live on Glensprings. Many times these tractor trailers are making the wrong turn and they'll go up to one of the cul-de-sacs, back in and swing out. It'll happen once or twice a week. I don't know what we can do other than having a policeman posted there. A sign might help.
Mayor Webster said I don't think there is any community in Springdale that is exempt from that. You have them on Glensprings, Ms. Manis has them in Heritage Hill, we have them on Ray Norrish Drive. Drivers make mistakes, get wrong directions. If someone is driving a truck through there on a continuous basis we want to bust them big time. What do we want to do about a driver who makes a wrong turn? Once you start up Glensprings where are you going to turn a big semi around? It's easier to keep going until you get to Kenn Road.
MEETINGS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Board of Zoning Appeals May 21, 7:30 p.m.
District 3 meeting (Mrs. Boice) May 23, 7:00 p.m.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE - none
Mr. Vanover made a motion to go into Executive Session as a meeting of the whole to discuss real estate issues. Mr. Galster seconded.
Council went into executive session at 10:05 p.m.
Council adjourned at 10:18 p.m.
Edward F. Knox
Clerk of Council/Finance Director
Randy Danbury, President of Council