Lakewood City Council Meeting Minutes

MINUTES
OF THE
REGULAR MEETING OF
LAKEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
HELD IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
12650 DETROIT AVENUE
DECEMBER 20, 2004
7:30 P.M.

Regular Meeting of the Lakewood City Council called to order at 7:30 P.M. by President Seelie.
….

Present: Councilmembers Patrick S. Corrigan, Ryan Patrick Demro, Michael W. Dever, Denis P. Dunn, Edward FitzGerald, Mary Louise Madigan, Robert M. Seelie.
….

Also Present: Mayor George, Law Director Corrigan, Finance Director Nogalo, Police Chief Malley, Fire Chief Mroz, Public Works Director Beno, Planning & Development Director Jordon, Project Administrator for New Lakewood Fitzgerald, Human Services Director Buckon, Mayor’s Executive Assistant Novak;
… .
Motion by Mr. Seelie, seconded by Mr. Demro, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of Council held December 6, 2004, without the necessity of a reading.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.

….

Without objection from Council, items 26 , 27 , 28, 29, 38, 39, 40 and item 30 were brought forward respectively read first in the agenda order..

****OLD BUSINESS****

1. Certificate of Results of Election On Issue 43. (Pg. 6)

Motion by Mr. Seelie, seconded by Mr. Dever, to receive and file the certificate.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

2. Committee of the Whole Report regarding Section 121.18 of the Codified Ordinances; Council Rules & Procedures. (Pg. 7)

Motion by Mr. Seelie, seconded by Mr. Corrigan, to receive and file the communication.

Councilmember Dunn stated that he opposed the ordinance because it would weaken the institution of Council. He said that by changing the word, “shall” it would not require a submission to City Council’s consideration to be brought up regularly and reported out to the community. He said that by changing it to “may” it then becomes the discretion of the individual member of Council who is in charge of that Committee to address the issue. He said that the councilmember may bring it out or may not. He said this was similar to you may pay your taxes, you may not, you may drive the speed limit, you may not He said the language compelling Committees to report out is the ideal and should be followed and if something is disagreeable to the Council, then it’s dispensed with, with Council acting as an institution by a four member majority instead of just one, individually elected member. He said he would be voting no on the ordinance.

Councilmember Demro said he would not be voting against receiving and filing the report but would be voting against the Ordinance. He said he brought the issue before Council because he recognized it was something that was not happening. He said he was not looking to indict anyone but that he thought it was the responsibility of government; the Legislative Body to report on legislation in its committees. He said that although it references in the report that the issue will be talked about in the process of three readings, some legislation sits in Committee and never gets a reading and then goes away. He said the language holds Council to task as legislators to only introduce legislation that is intended to be pushed through Council to either get an up or down vote. He said this legislation would allow a chair of a Committee to keep something in Committee, to not have a report. He said if citizens want to know what’s going on, they’re not entitled to it anymore because the ordinance has now changed to “may”. He said he would oppose it, that he thought it was bad for government.

On the motion to receive and file the report.
Motion adopted. Six members voting yea.
Mr. Dunn voting nay.

….

3. ORDINANCE NO. 105-04 – AN ORIDNANCE amending Section 121.18 of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood to change the mandatory rules concerning reports from Council Committees. (Pg. 8)

Motion by Mr. Seelie, seconded by Mr. Corrigan, to suspend the rules requiring this Ordinances be read on three separate days and placing Ordinance No. 105-04 on final reading.

Yeas: Corrigan, Dever, FitzGerald, Madigan, Seelie
Nays: Demro, Dunn
Rules suspend.

Motion by Mr. Seelie, seconded by Mr. Dever, to adopt Ordinance No. 105-04.

Yeas: Corrigan, Dever, FitzGerald, Madigan, Seelie
Nays: Demro, Dunn
Motion adopted. Ordinance No. 105-04 adopted.
… .

4. Committee of the Whole Verbal Report regarding a Resolution to Form a Commission to Explore the Possibility of a Clean Indoor Air Act.

Mr. Seelie submitted the following report:

The Committee of the Whole met this evening, there were some amendments that were made. The one was a recommendation from Councilmember Madigan. Her recommendation is in Section 1. of the Resolution to add in as well, the reason the Commission is being created, she wants to add; “as well as on the economic impact of no smoking ordinance on bar and restaurant industry in the City of Lakewood and to report such findings to the body by February 22, 2005”. Whereas, before, it just had the ramifications of implementing a Clean Indoor Air Act, she wanted to also take a look at that. That was voted on six to one. (Mr. Dunn indicated he voted yes on that issue – meaning unanimous).

The second motion was also in section 1. Originally as written it was each Member of Council was going to appoint a person to this nine member commission and the Mayor is going to appoint two people. It was recommended that the body of Council appoint seven people as opposed to each councilmember. The amendment would read; that the City of Lakewood’s City Council is hereby authorizing a Commission of nine citizens including, it would be inserted, seven members to be appointed by the Body of Council as opposed to each Councilmember. So those were the two amendments that were agreed upon. That was voted on. It was three against and four in favor. Also it was recommended that anyone who wanted to sit on the Commission which we will appoint members at our first meeting in January to have their resume into the City Council Office by Thursday, December 30th which is our docket deadline for the first meeting of the year.

Motion by Mr. Seelie, seconded by Mr. Dunn, to receive and file the verbal report.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

5. RESOLUTION NO. 7950-04 – A RESOLUTION to form a commission to explore the ramifications of implementing a Clean Indoor Air Act to protect the health of workers and families in the City of Lakewood. (REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 12/6/04)(Pg. 10)

Motion by Mr. Seelie, seconded by Mr. Dever, to make the amendments to the Resolution as stated in the prior communication.

Mr. Demro said that as he stated earlier in the Committee meeting, that the thought the wording proper and that the appointment process was proper. He said he would be voting against the amendment but for the Resolution.

Maureen Nolan indicated she was from the Small Business Coalition. She said that if their website SaveClevelandJobs.org is visited there would be a live interview with a Toledo patrolman talking about the enforcement problems of a smoking ban law; She said that a SWAT Team was used against neighbors in the bars because it was illegal to have an ashtray on a bar. She stated that Toledo employers and employees used their own money and put the issue on the ballot and rescinded the legislation.

Councilmember Demro asked if Ms. Nolan’s organization was willing to stand by previous statements made from Gary Nolan that quoted Mayor Ford from Toledo as saying the law was devastating for Toledo. Ms. Nolan stated that the comments were from Tony George but that she agreed it was devastating for Toledo. Ms. Nolan said twenty bars closed in nine months time in Toledo. She said they held an auction to try and sell their licenses there and that nobody came to the auction. She asked if this is where Lakewood was heading, if this is where Council wanted it to go. She said that if a state-wide ban was being looked at that New York and California should be looked at because they have lost many businesses. She said their courts are clogged because of unequal enforcement of the ban. She said they are suing each other because the bar across the street can smoke and they can’t; She said it was determined to be an unfair business practice.

Kevin Smith, resident of Lakewood and owner of Grafton Street Pub on Madison Avenue said he put all his money into opening his business about a year ago and was very concerned about the law. He said he thought the law was well-intentioned but that the debate was not about the merits of smoking in bars but whether the small City of Lakewood should decide to ban smoking in its bars when every other City that borders Lakewood would still have smoking. He said that people who smoke will drive five miles and smoke in bars in other cities, or those with spouses who smoke will go with them. He said young people interested in the vibrant bar scene will not want to live in Lakewood should the smoking ban go into effect. He said rental prices will go down and Lakewood will become just another suburb. He said if Council truly was concerned about second hand smoke that efforts should be made to encourage bars to voluntarily become non-smoking. He said he would personally consider it. He said there was a market out there for two, three, or four non-smoking bars. He said there was not a market for 30 non-smoking bars all compressed in the area. He said there would be some of them forced out of business.

John Granzier, owner of Merry Arts Pub indicated his establishment was the oldest on record in Lakewood. He said that since purchasing Merry Arts, he has done a complete renovation. He said he recently took a run-down storefront next to him and put about $60,000 into it to make for a more enjoyable place for people to come and relax.

He said that Lakewood was a City rich in small business and that a lot of those businesses were eating and drinking establishments. He stated that if the ban was put forth, Lakewood would not only be affected but cities outside of Lakewood would be affected. He said patrons from other cities that come into Lakewood will go elsewhere. He said this would be devastating to Lakewood economically. He said that this would mean more empty storefronts. He said it was an economic issue more than anything. He asked how this would work economically. He said that he understood there were people who did not like smoke but that they had the opportunity not to patronize those establishments or work in those environments.

David Sangree indicated he was a hotel and restaurant consultant. He said that he sent a letter to Council and the Mayor that included a study by Cornell University, School of Hotel Administration where he indicated he attended. He said a number of professors addressed the effect of the smoking ban on hotels and restaurants in the State of New York and a variety of cities in New York. He said that the study concluded that the smoking ban does not produce a negative impact on bars and restaurants rather it produces no net loss or gain for those facilities. He said that the statements by many bar owners that they were going to lose business was a misinformation campaign because Lakewood was not the first City in the country to consider this; many others have done this. He said there was a lot of evidence from New York and California where these types of bans have been implemented. He said that he was strongly in favor of this for health reasons and the benefit for the vast majority of people who are non-smokers, that the law will set Lakewood apart as a City on the go – and as a positive City making some positive movement.

Resident of Lakewood (name inaudible – unable to locate on sign up sheet). She indicated she has worked in Ohio City for the last seven and a half years and has worked across the street from Johnny Mango’s restaurant, the first, voluntarily non-smoking restaurant in Greater Cleveland. She said Johnny Mango’s did a voluntary survey of their customers and got a positive polling response that said to go non-smoking. She said that they have not had a decrease in their business but an expansion. She said they have also received local positive publicity and that state and national publicity for their smoking ban has come their way. She indicated she thought Ohio City had a similar customer base to Lakewood and that she would like to encourage Lakewood City Council to review more factual information on the subject rather that receiving what she termed as outlandish information from advocacy groups. She said that two of her siblings are smokers and work in the bar and restaurant industry in California. She said that both have been delighted with the smoking ban in California indicating that it has increased business in the area. She said that in contrast to the argument that everyone will stop going to bars once told that there is no smoking, that it was not an all or nothing venture. She said it didn’t mean smokers wouldn’t go to a bar.

Cecil Yates, owner of Pannini’s Bar in Lakewood indicated that most of the bar owners discussed previously that they were not against the issue but against it being done incorrectly. He said they thought it was not the right time or the right place for Lakewood to be the first one on the west side or the first in Greater Cleveland to take a stand on this. He said he realized that the a Commission was going to be formed to look at the issue and strongly urged Council to get a balanced Commission. He said that the owners knew the issue was going to be addressed eventually but that they thought collectively it was not the right time for Lakewood to be taking a stand on the issue.

Mr. Demro stated that on Thursday there would be a letter going out to the mayors and to councilmembers of all the west and southside suburbs to Seven Hills, south to the Olmsteds. He said that he would be meeting with mayors and other councilmembers of other cities who have expressed interest in the issue. He added that labor unions had a long history of protecting the health and safety of workers and that there is support by labor unions for the issue in other cities. He said he would be meeting with labor union leaders to discuss the issue as a workplace safety and public health issue in the City of Lakewood.

On the motion to amend the Resolution.

Motion adopted. Six members voting yea.
Mr. Demro voting no.

Motion by Mr. Seelie, seconded by Mr. Dever to adopt Resolution No. 7950-04 as amended.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

6. Finance Committee Verbal Report regarding Purchasing and Contracting Ordinance FY2005. Ordinance No. 99-04.

Mr. FitzGerald submitted the following report:

The Finance Committee met last week and this evening on a whole host of things which we’ll be dealing with this evening. We have before you a contracting ordinance that’s Ordinance 99-04. Let me just make, so it’s crystal clear, about what a contracting ordinance is and what it is not. I may be telling you what you already know but it’s a not-to-exceed amount. It’s not an appropriation for these amounts. I know we have this discussion every year when people come up and say, why are you spending such and such an amount of money when it says this in the contracting authority. It is the permission to ask for an appropriation that would fall under that amount. It isn’t the actual appropriation. We’re going to be going through a process at our Budget Hearings where we’re going to be scrutinizing expenditures but that’s not what contracting authority actually is. With that in mind, and there are many items by the way that I need to mention right now which we will be scrutinizing in Budget Hearings which may be reflected in this contracting authority. That being said, the Committee voted unanimously to adopt Ordinance 99-04 this evening.

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to receive and file the verbal report.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

7. ORDINANCE NO. 99-04 – AN ORDINANCE authorizing the Mayor (Director of Public Safety), the Director of Public Works, the Director of Law, the Director of Finance, and/or the Procurement Officer to enter into contracts for professional services, and to advertise for bids and enter into contracts for the purchase of repair maintenance and operating supplies, services and equipment as authorized by the 2005 Appropriation Ordinance and the Administrative Code of the City of Lakewood with the lowest and best bidder or bidders or as otherwise provided by law. (PLACED ON 1ST READING & REFERRED TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE 11/15/04, 2ND READING 12/6/04)(Pg. 11)

Mr. FitzGerald continued the report to clarify the ordinance. indicating that in Committee a substitute Ordinance was addressed and recommended for adoption.

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald seconded by Mr. Seelie, to substitute Ordinance No. 99-04.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea. Ordinance No. 99-04 substituted..

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to adopt Ordinance No. 99-04 as substituted.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
…

8. Finance Committee Verbal Report regarding Amendment to the FY2004 Appropriations – Ordinance No. 100-04.

Mr. FitzGerald submitted the following report:

Mr. President, we have a substitute ordinance for this. This is 100-04 which everyone has in front of them. This has to do with various increases in the amounts that are appropriated. If any individual Members of Council have a question about it, I can point out a couple items on here – one is the HOME Investment Program Fund. The amount is actually less now because the funds were not expended. There are similar reasons for the other funds that are here. The other biggest item that you might see here is the TIF Capital Improvement Fund which is an increase. Those are not General Obligation dollars, those are monies that are coming in from the execution of the TIF Fund. That being said, the Committee voted unanimously to adopt this evening.

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Mr. Corrigan, to receive and file the verbal report.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

9. ORDINANCE NO. 100-04- AN ORDINANCE to establish additional appropriations for current expenses and other expenditures of the City of Lakewood, State of Ohio, for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2004. (PLACED ON 1ST READING & REFERRED TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE 11/15/04, 2ND READING 12/6/04)(Pg. 15)

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to substitute Ordinance 100-04 with that which was provided that evening.

Yeas: Corrigan, Demro, Dever, Dunn, FitzGerald, Madigan, Seelie
Nays: None
Motion adopted. Ordinance No. 100-04 is substituted.

Motion by Mr. Seelie, seconded by Mr. FitzGerald, to adopt Ordinance No. 100-04 as substituted.

Yeas: Corrigan, Demro, Dever, Dunn, FitzGerald, Madigan, Seelie
Nays: None
Motion adopted. Ordinance No. 100-04 is adopted as substituted.
… .

10. Finance Committee Verbal Report regarding Fund Transfers.

Mr. FitzGerald submitted the following report:

We met this evening before the meeting to discuss the various fund transfers. These are amounts where for various reasons the amount was either slightly adjusted or slightly increased to conform to the reality of what happened over the course of the year. After reviewing the Administration’s explanations of those the Committee unanimously recommended its adoption this evening.

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, second by Mr. Corrigan, to receive and file the verbal report.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

11. ORDINANCE NO. 14-04A – AN ORDINANCE to amend Ordinance 14-04, adopted March 1, 2004 for the purpose of adjusting transfers initially established in the fiscal year appropriations. (PLEASE SUBSTITUTE FOR ORDINANCE NO. 14-04A PLACED ON 1ST READING & REFERRED TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE 11/15/04, 2nd READING 12/6/04)(Pg. 17)

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to substitute Ordinance No. 14-04A.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea. Ordinance No. 14-04A substituted.

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to adopt Ordinance No. 14-04A as amended.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

Finance Director Nogalo asked that Ordinance 99-04 be revisited to address the substituted Ordinance – which included reduced contracting authorities which match the Budget. He said they would like the amended version voted on which had the lesser amounts of contracting authority. (Revised motion)

Mr. Seelie revisits Item No. 7., Ordinances No. 99-04. at this juncture to address a substituted Ordinance.
… ..

12. Finance Committee Verbal Report regarding Temporary Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2005.

Mr. FitzGerald submitted the following report:

These appropriations are for the first three months of the year. They cover salaries and basics, stripped down as possible, for the portion of time. We reviewed them and the only other comment that was made that we have some discussion about whether or not in the future it would make more sense to adopt a full twelve month budget as opposed to doing it piece-meal and we’re going to have discussions on that throughout the year to see if that’s possible. It was discussed a few years ago and didn’t happen but there are some cities that have adopted it. There are advantages and disadvantages. We don’t have time to do this for this year’s Budget proceedings but will be looking into it for the future. But what you have in front of you is the first three months and the Committee voted unanimously for its adoption this evening.

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Mr. Dever, to receive and file the verbal report.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

13. ORDINANCE NO. 101-04 – AN ORDINANCE to establish temporary appropriations for current expenses and other expenditures of the City of Lakewood, State of Ohio, for three months, January 1, 2005 to March 31, 2005 as provided by Ohio Revised Code Section 5705.38. (PLACED ON 1ST READING & REFERRED TO The FINANCE COMMITTEE 11/15/04, 2ND READING 12/6/04)(Pg. 20)

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Mr. Dever, to adopt Ordinance No. 101-04.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

14. Finance Committee Verbal Report regarding Memberships for 2005.

Mr. FitzGerald submitted the following report:

We went through an exhaustive list of various organizations that the City belongs to, we flagged a number of them for further consideration. I’m not going to go through each and every one of them but there were several of them that were flagged for additional consideration. Our basic point, I think was, that we were trying to limit as much as possible to organizations which the City’s required to belong to because of the granting of a license or approval for someone to do their job. There are exceptions to that and there are arguments to be made. There was no way we were able to do that in the time constraint that we had. We were assured by the Finance Director that we would still have time for those that we were questioning and they’re about a dozez or so we asked questions about that we would be able to review those by the time of the first Council Meeting in January and have time to hear arguments for and against those. So I’m trying to forestall an argument here at the end of the year to try and get into the plusses and minuses of each of those but we will have an opportunity for that debate. Director Nogalo represented to me that he was going to have other conversations with Department Directors as far as the necessity of any of those. Several of them, by the way, I should note, the Administration has already knocked out some that have existed previous years, some were what Councilmembers occasionally brought up, some were ones they identified on their own as not being absolutely necessary given the fact we’re going into a Budget process where we’re going to try to absolutely identify any unnecessary expenditure unless we see the justification. With that being said, the Committee’s recommendation was to defer item 15 until next Council Meeting.

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Mr. Dever, to receive and file the verbal report.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

15. RESOLUTION NO. 7944-04 – A RESOLUTION authorizing the Director of Finance to pay the cost of memberships of municipal employees and/or Departments and Divisions in certain associations for the year 2005 and declaring such memberships to be in the public interest. (PLACED ON 1ST READING & REFERRED TO The FINANCE COMMITTEE 11/15/04, 2ND READING 12/6/04)(Pg. 23)

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to defer and refer back to the Finance Committee.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

16. Finance Committee Verbal Report regarding Contracting Authority Amendments. (Pg. 40)

Mr. FitzGerald submitted the following report:

This has to do with a specific amendment request regarding contracting authority for the renovation of the Fire Station because of some damage that had been done to the kitchen area there. We had a long conversation about this. This is the sum and substance of what the Committee wanted to know. They wanted to know what the current status was based on some conversation we had at the last Council Meeting of whether or not there were other parties who might be responsible for any damage or repair that needed to be affected at the Fire Station regarding its construction or design. This goes way back to when it was originally constructed. We had discussions about this at other Council Meetings but we didn’t’ feel that we ever got a definitive answer to that. So we made a request, actually the Law Department wasn’t at that meeting but we made a request to the Law Department to give us a definitive answer to that. We also felt like we asked for that at the last Council meeting but we would like to get an answer to that question and there are a couple possibilities. Either we did explore all the legal options and we’ve already reached an agreement with those parties in which case we want to know what that agreement is or we haven’t done that and if we haven’t done it we need to know whether it’s too late to explore those options or if it isn’t too late that we should explore those options. So those are what I think are the alternative options for the City and we revisited this issue at our Finance Committee meeting, prior to our Council Meeting today. Law Director Corrigan was there. He represented to us that they had identified, I don’t want to misspeak, but they identified documents that they thought would be able to answer those questions but they weren’t able to answer those questions as of this evening. So my next question was, whether or not, if we appropriated the money to effect the repairs, and I was particularly concerned that the situation was getting worse and cause additional damage to the property while we’re sorting out the legal situation, if we appropriated money to effect the repairs, if we would be damaging our rights or infringing on our rights in any way to end up going against hypothetically the contractor or the architect for the original construction. And the opinion that we got this evening was we wouldn’t be damaging our rights to go after them for any additional funds that we were going to be appropriating this evening. And I also appreciated the common sense that was shown because they’re going to be documenting by pictures and in writing any of the repairs they make just in case we still have to preserve our rights against a contractor and against the architect or any other party that might have been responsible for that. So based on that understanding we still urge the Administration to get us that answer as quickly as possible. They’re telling us that they can get us the answer by the next Council Meeting but in the meantime with those assurances and under that understanding to the Law Department we recommended that we appropriate this money because we believe we are protected for a possible recovery. And that was voted on unanimously by the Committee.

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to receive and file the verbal report.

Councilmember Corrigan indicated he wanted the City to note that the Law Department has been responsive to his request for the assembly of documentation and the history of the architectural drawings, the problems and contracts to repair. He said he was invited to come to the Law Department but did not have time to schedule that. He said he stopped in that day to inform the Law Department that he would be stopping in between Christmas and New Years to make sure he had a chance to see the documents. He said he was confident that significant documents were available for his review. He said his only concern was that written notice be served upon the contractors and architects that the City intends to remit repairs and that they are invited to investigate so that they cannot come back and claim that the City did not notify them. He said he was confident that if the City had any rights for subrogation that they could pursue them.

To receive and file the report.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

17. ORDINANCE NO. 18-04A - AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE amending Ordinance 18-04 adopted March 15, 2004, for the purpose of decreasing contracting authority for City Hall Complex Renovations $48,000 and increasing contracting authority for Fire Station Renovations $48,000, and thus authorizing and directing the Director of Public Works to advertise for bids and enter into a contract with the lowest and best bidder for Building and Facilities Improvements in accordance with the Administrative Code of the City of Lakewood, contracts not to exceed the specified amounts shown without separate resolution of Council. (PLEASE SUBSTITUTE FOR ORDINANCE NO. 18-04A PLACED ON 1ST READING & REFERRED TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE 12/6/04) (Pg. 26)

Mr. FitzGerald indicated he wanted the Law Department to respond in reference to Mr. Corrigan’s comments as to if the City can proceed before the funds are actually expended so that the rights are still protected.

Law Director Corrigan responded that they can be put on notice that the City was investigating the contract as it relates to the kitchen.

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to suspend the rules requiring this Ordinance be read on three separate days and placing Ordinance No. 18-04A on final reading .

Yeas: Corrigan, Demro, Dever, Dunn, FitzGerald, Madigan, Seelie
Nays: None
Motion adopted. Rules suspended.

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Mr. Corrigan, to adopt Ordinance No. 18-04A

Colletta Graham, 1286 Chase asked if $25,000 was going to be taken away from City Hall renovations to go to the Fire Department, totaling $48,000.

Finance Director Nogalo indicated this was correct. He said that approximately $25,000 is for the kitchen and the other $20,000 is for a z-tron unit which is computer warning system which will make it possible to not wake up those at every single fire station when every single call is made.

Mr. FitzGerald indicated z-tron unit was also reviewed in Committee.

Mrs. Graham said that she spent days in the Finance Department reviewing the matter and found that there was no written contract. She said that Council should look into what she indicates is an absolute travesty – Fire Department. She indicated that she thought $25,000 to fix up the kitchen was a waste of money and that anyone would want $25,000 to fix up their own kitchen.

Council President Seelie responded that he did not think too many individual’s had as much traffic as kitchen that was used 24 hours a day by the many shifts of the Fire personnel.

Mrs. Graham said to let them pack a lunch. She said that there were pictures that showed the flashing was wrong, that everything was wrong. She said they shoved it aside and just appropriated the money. She said that we were still paying through the nose for this. She said it was ridiculous. She said that somebody else other than the people of Lakewood should be made accountable.

On the motion.

Yeas: Corrigan, Demro, Dever, Dunn, FitzGerald, Madigan, Seelie
Nays: None
Motion adopted. Ordinance No. 18-04A adopted.

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Mr. Seelie to adopt as substituted.

Yeas: Corrigan, Demro, Dever, Dunn, FitzGerald, Madigan, Seelie
Nays: None
Motion adopted. Ordinance No. 18-04A adopted as substituted.
… .

18. Finance Committee Verbal Report regarding Health Care “Opt Out” Program.

Mr. FitzGerald submitted the following report:

This has to do with whether or not employees can turn down health insurance if they have health insurance from their spouse or from another source and receive a payment in lieu of participating in the City’s program. We had a discussion about this and I don’t’ think we have to go further at the last Council Meeting. At this stage it’s an issue for unionized employees that have to be brought up in contracts of union negotiations so this only applies to non-union employees. There’s going to be some experimentation here because we’re going to see what the right dollar amount is but this is a good first step. The Committee unanimously recommended its adoption.

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Ms. Madigan to receive and file the verbal report.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

19. ORDINANCE NO. 104-04 – AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE to amend Section 149.14 Hospitalization Coverage for Employees of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood to authorize the Director of Finance to pay employees a cash payment in lieu of medical benefits in the amount of Seven Hundred Twenty Dollars annually to become effective January 1, 2005 or at the earliest approval of council. (PLACED ON 1ST READING & REFERRED TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE 12/6/04) (Pg. 28)

Mr. FitzGerald indicated that because of the timely nature of the item with health care coverage turning over at the end of the year, at the request of the Administration the Committee asked for suspension of the rules.

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Mr. Dever, to suspend the rules requiring this ordinance be read on three separate days and placing Ordinance No. 104-04 on final reading.

Yeas: Corrigan, Demro, Dever, Dunn, FitzGerald, Madigan, Seelie
Nays: None
Rules suspended

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Mr. Dever to adopt Ordinance No. 104-04.

Yeas: Corrigan, Demro, Dever, Dunn, FitzGerald, Madigan, Seelie
Nays: None
Ordinance No. 1004-04 adopted.
… .

20. Finance Committee Verbal Report regarding 2005 Budget Hearings.

Mr. FitzGerald submitted the following report:

Part of our Finance Committee the other night went through what we hope to establish as practice and procedures and particular background information and a couple other council people showed up, Councilwoman Madigan was there and Councilman Demro was there and I appreciate their participation as well. What we’re asking for is more historical data than what we’ve gotten typically in the past because we all know we’re facing a difficult budget this season and we don’t want to just be dealing with today’s problems, we want Members of Council and also the public to know how we got there and we also want them to know where we’re going, besides just the next year. Some of this by the way, Vic has already done and I have complimented him and his staff, they’ve been extremely professional and helpful. He’s already started collecting some of that data. I asked for data going back twenty years and I’m not talking about every tiny expenditures, I’m talking about general trends of income tax raised, income actual revenue that came in, expenditures, employees, health care costs and so forth going back approximately 20 years and he’s got a lot of that information because he saw this coming.

One of my requests was to have a forecast for the future if present trends continue, where we’re going to be in five years or ten years and Vic already has a lot of that information as well. And I know that Grow Lakewood has requested that information as well which may be why he has it. We’re also going to be asking for a lot of specific information. We believe that we will begin Budget Hearings shortly after January 15th, that’s when all the reports are due from the different directors. We also, and the Administration recorded this, no Member of Council is going to be asked to vote on a Department’s budget or review a Department’s budget until 48 hours or so before they have that Budget in their hands so that they can actually make an informed decision. That was something for whatever reason used to happen on occasion in the past. We haven’t set an exact schedule; is it all Saturdays, or evenings because some people have time conflicts, some of us have a kid’s game to go to. I will be e-mailing around the schedule.

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Mr. Corrigan, to receive and file the verbal report.

Mr. Dunn indicated that he wanted to make sure when Council goes forward on Budget Hearings that it doesn’t fixate on technical issues and instead identify adaptive approaches to make sure that the City is able to provide essential City services to residents recognizing a shrinking economy, a continued tight budget. He said Council should continue to do that. He said he thought there was great benefit to looking backward but that he thought Council had to be very imaginative as it moved forward and look at best practices in other communities.

Mr. FitzGerald indicated that Council should be imaginative, think big, and stated portions of the Budget Hearings where going to be about spending a $1,000 here and $1,000 there. He said the details were not inspiring, big picture things but it would be thorough. He said this has to happen in a year when there’s a tough budget because the public expects it and when the public says, “wait a minute, I want to know why you’re spending $500 for such and such” you have to have an answer for it. He said you can’t just say, “well we’re looking at the global picture”. He said that we’ll look at that too but it will also be detail oriented.

Mayor George indicated that they did have collectively a lot of difficult decisions to make. He said there was truth in what Councilmembers have said. He said it would be difficult to make a case for steps to raise more revenue if in fact the City could not, with a clear conscience, tell the public that every effort was made to scrutinize every expenditure that was made. He said that on the other hand he thought there was an understanding that some of the smaller expenditures aren’t going to get the City where it had to go either in a very lean Budget situation. He said that in every Budget that the Budget is by its very nature subjective in that what may be important to one person may not be as important to another. He said that’s where the political process unfolds and where there is dialogue.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

21. Finance Committee Verbal Report regarding Rental Property Internet Project- Good Neighbors.

Mr. FitzGerald submitted the following report:

When the Finance Committee considered eventually recommending increases in permit fees having to do with inspections of multi-unit dwellings one of the commitments that was made at the time by the Administration was that we would implement what was called at an early stage the Good Neighbor Program. (This was) loosely based on some programs some other cities do where if a land owner is particularly responsible and meets a certain standard that instead of just punishing them when they fail, we will recognize them for succeeding and those properties will be listed on our internet site. It would be a benefit to the apartment owner and it will also be a benefit to the renter who’s looking for a property that is kept to a certain level of excellence. At the time we believed that type of program could be implemented by the fall and it hasn’t happened yet. It fell on Mr. Nogalo to get it done and we’ve talked about that and we weren’t sure why that was because he’s trying to do everything else and he’s caught up in this housing situation. It just hasn’t come to be. There are several interested parties here. There are the land owners, the Chamber of Commerce that has an interest in this, there’s the Apartment Owners Association, there’s also the Tenants Association and there’s interested people who have expressed interest in the potential program. I still believe we can get it done. The caveat is without spending a lot of extra money. In January there will be a meeting convened of all those parties and we’ll go back to the drawing board and try to get this thing done but it’s important that that myth be shown wrong because it was one of the reasons that we reached agreement on the fee increase in the first place.

Mayor George indicated he appreciated the intent of the legislation but that this was one of the situations where there wasn’t the personnel. He said the Building Department should be responsible for the program, they’re down two building inspectors now. He said they are extraordinarily busy at the end of the year. He said that the Administration has made every effort to live within the Budget that’s been provided without any layoffs but that the Administration was as close as it could go with some of the programs. He said that they did not have the personnel to implement some of them.

Councilmember FitzGerald indicated that there were meetings on this and stated that if it couldn’t be done Council should have been told that the Administration couldn’t do it. He said that Council was told that it could be done. He said that we needed to try to get it done and get all the parties together. He said that there was talk about getting the Apartment Owners Association together with a partnership.

Finance Director Nogalo indicated that he would coordinate efforts with Planning & Development Director Tom Jordon to have a meeting to find a person to lead the project.

Councilmember Demro indicated he thought this a worthy project and that if it was not implemented in the immediate future that it be explored and implemented in the near future.

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Mr. Demro, to receive and file the verbal report.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

22. Public Works Committee Verbal Report regarding Erosion Control Measures at 17802 Lake Road, Lakewood, Ohio.

Mr. Dever submitted the following report:

The Public Works Committee met back on December 15th to discuss three issues that were on our agenda, three ordinances and resolutions. Two ordinances concerning RTA bus shelter on 117th. We’re waiting to get some additional information on that and also, the secondary ordinance concerning City Schools, Library Building fees and we’re waiting to get additional information on those two items so we’ll be deferring those two this evening.

The third communication is from Law Director Corrigan regarding erosion control at 17802 Lake Road and the owner of the property has submitted an application to do improvements on her property and in turn she’ll be using submerged land. This Council has to pass a resolution declaring that those submerged lands are not intended for any public improvement and that their use complies with all local waterfront plans. The Body agreed and made the recommendation to adopt that this evening.

Motion by Mr. Dever, seconded by Mr. Demro, to receive and file the verbal report.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

23. RESOLUTION NO. 7951-04 – AN EMERGENCY RESOLUTION approving the use of submerged lands for property located at and abutting 17802 Lake Road in the City of Lakewood, Ohio (a legal description of which is attached hereto as “Exhibit A”) so that the owner can undertake lakeshore protection measures. (PLACED ON 1ST READING & REFERRED TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE 12/6/04)(Pg. 31)

Motion by Mr. Dever, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to adopt Resolution No. 7951-04.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

24. ORDINANCE NO. 102-04 – AN ORDINANCE exempting the Regional Transit Authority from the prohibitions of Section 901.18 of the Streets and Public Service Code of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood in order to permit the placement and/or construction of a glass shelter southbound, nearside on W. 117th at Madison. (PLACED ON 1ST READING & REFERRED TO THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE 12/6/04)(Pg. 33)

Motion by Mr. Dever, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to place Ordinance No. 102-04 on Second Reading and refer back to the Public Works Committee.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

25. ORDINANCE NO. 103-04 – AN ORDINANCE to amend section 1309.02, Building Permit Fees, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of granting discounts to the Lakewood Public Schools and the Lakewood Public Library for major construction projects in consideration of the source of the funds for paying those fees. (PLACED ON 1ST READING & REFERRED TO THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE 12/6/04) (Pg. 34)

Motion by Mr. Dever, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to place Ordinance No. 103-04 on Second Reading and refer it back to the Public Works Committee.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.

****NEW BUSINESS****

26. Communication from Coucnilmember Dunn regarding Resolution Honoring Paul Hunady. (Pg. 36)

Motion by Mr. Dunn, seconded by Mr. Demro, to receive and file the communication.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

27. RESOLUTION NO. 7952-04 – A RESOLUTION to honor Paul Hunady for a lifetime of extraordinary citizen participation in local government, as exhibited by his decades of regular attendance at Lakewood City Council meetings, budget hearings, and charter review meetings, as well as his numerous campaigns for elected office whereby his contributions to our city were not calculated by the number of votes tabulated on Election Day, but rather by the clarity of his voice on numerous issues that have helped shape our common life. (Pg. 37)

Mr. Seelie indicated that Mr. Hunady retired a few years previous and the Council and Mayor refused to accept his retirement.

Mayor George mentioned Mr. Hunady’s diligence in attending Budget Hearings year after year.

Mr. Hunady’s wife was introduced.

Mr. Hunady said that all Council was no good.

Motion by Mr. Seelie, seconded by Mr. Demro, to adopt Resolution No. 7952-04.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

28. Communication from Councilmember Dunn regarding the Lakewood GoGreen Awards and GoGreen Month in Lakewood. (Pg. 39)

Motion by Mr. Dunn, seconded by Mr. Demro, to receive and file the communication.

Mr. Dunn added that Lakewood became the first City in the State of Ohio to adopt a comprehensive green building policy April 7, 2003. He stated that Mayor George followed up with efforts to promote green building as a sustainable development in Lakewood and put together the Green Committee. He said that at the Green Committee’s most recent meeting the members enthusiastically supported the idea. He said the members of the Green Committee think this is a way to recognize people, businesses, city government, civic leadership that have made the effort to promote green in the community. He said this could be in architecture, sustainable development or promote or preserve the ecology. He said that the Committee would administer the program, that he anticipated nominations would be solicited by April and that an awards ceremony would take place at a Council Meeting in May.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

29. RESOLUTION NO. 7953-04 – A RESOLUTION to establish the Lakewood GoGreen Awards and to designate May as annual GoGreen Month in Lakewood, Ohio.

Motion by Mr. Seelie, seconded by Mr. Dever, to adopt Resolution No. 7953-04.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

30. Communication from Councilmember FitzGerald regarding Lakefront Update. (Pg. 41)

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Mr. Corrigan to receive and file the communication.

Mr. FitzGerald referenced the Sunday Plain Dealer article and indicated it was his thought that this was the time to provide a presentation of what the public and Council could expect on the Lakefront project in 2005. He said Council had appropriated money for the project with conceptual plans and that there was hope that construction could start in 2004. He said that it was now hoped that construction would begin in 2005 and that it was an appropriate time for the public and City Council to know what to expect. He said that Lakewood was going to be able to give people access to the Lakefront that they haven’t had before. He said the Administration has been extremely cooperative in making sure to get the project off the ground and spend the approximate $777,000 in grant money received from the State.

Mayor George indicated City Engineer Kilgore had done a wonderful job on the project and would speak on it. He said that the funds that were being used for the improvements were grant funds and were not General Obligation dollars, not Capital dollars. He said their use was extremely restricted and could only be used for the kind of project that is being undertaken. He said many of the City’s funds are in tight situations and that it was important that when construction is seen there that it’s not interpreted that the entire City was flush with revenue. He said it means that the City got the grant for the particular project. He said too that more would be learned in January on the completion of the analysis with Middough and Associates for the project. He said there was a setback relative to the St. Augustine property. He said because of public use of that particular property, costs were estimated to exceed a million dollars to fortify the cliff to make it safe for the public and the project was therefore delayed to re-design and reconfigure. He said that the City was hoping to begin construction by the summer.

City Engineer Kilgore outlined the history of the project. He stated that there was a Master Plan for Lakewood Park that has varying types of items on it. He said that although the concept of the plan began under a previous Administration it was the George administration that truly advanced the project. He said there are three grants that comprise the budget for the project. He said two were from the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, one called NatureWorks and the other called an Ohio Coastal Management Grant. He said there was a third one from the Ohio Public Works Commission; Issue 1. He said that one was for $777,000. He said the total Budget was a little over $1.3 million. He said out of that budget there would be expenditures for architectural and engineering design services, environmental analysis, and some surveying and legal support for interactions with the Sisters of St. Augustine’s. He said that presently there was a contract with Middough and Associates and representatives were there in case of any detailed questions.

He said that three major elements were settled on with the centerpiece being the new fishing pier. He said it was unique and that there were not any of these in northern Ohio presently. He said it was like a free standing structure similar to the shape of a bough of a freighter. He said it would be connected to the shoreline by a 100 foot bridge. He said it is a highly engineered structure and not like what was put in at Lakewood Park in the 1980s which was destroyed after the first winter. He said this was designed to deflect ice and withstand wave action. He said it should be able to accommodate a great number of fishermen. He said the second piece was the handicapped accessible ramp which spans from the top of the bluff to the bottom of the bluff on the eastern side of the park. He said this was a zigzag ramp meeting all of the current ADA requirements. He said there was also a paved path that goes down the parking lot to allow people in wheelchairs access to the ramp. He said there was also a foot path overlook trail. He said it would go along the western corner of the park. He said that would allow for a person to go all the way to the western border of Lakewood Park.

He said the architectural and engineering pieces were divided into two phase. He said the first phase was a conceptual phase. He said the largest element examined was the possibility of a beach along the north side of St. Augustine’s property. He said that after soils analysis and physical examination of the material that made up the bluff on their side it was discovered that it was an unstable and unsafe area. He said that a lot of construction work would have to be done there to be safe for the public and it was budgeted at close to $4 million to stabilize the slope and put in break walls necessary to create a beach.

He said that Mayor George contributed the idea to have a looped jogging trail. He said this would allow someone to jog around the park without being on a sidewalk or crossing a public street or crossing the entrance to the park. He said there was the possibility of it being two to three miles long. He said that will be in final design and bid out on as an alternate if there were good prices on the pier, ramp and foot path trail and other elements and money were left over.

He said the 2005 Program was set and the funding was in place. He said that the drawings were expected to be complete by February of 2005. He said after that, two permits would be needed. He said one was from Ohio EPA because construction would be done on an old landfill. He said there was a larger one called a submerged land lease. He said because the construction of the pier would be out in Lake Erie it was under the purview of other governmental agencies. He said that would come before Council at a future time. He said that that timeline is at the mercy of other agencies and was told it could befrom three months to a year. He said the fishing pier could not be built before the permits were received.

Engineer Kilgore continued stating that the ramp and the trails could be started that year. He said the grants did have requirements and restrictions. He said the deal with coastal land had an element needed regarding public viewing of the land – that the St. Augustine piece made possible. He said the fishing pier for lake contact and handicapped access were also required for the grants. He said that there was also a piece of the budget that goes to the reestablishment of native plant species. He said these would be planted along the bluff, the ramp and towards the fishing pier. He said that there was an educational piece there where school groups could go down and examine what shoreline species consist of in Ohio.

Councilmember FitzGerald indicated that the State goes through a budget process where every couple of years, year, they end up allocating money for this type of access to the water and for expansion of green space. He said that Lakewood is a competitor for those dollars with other cities. He said the reason part of this is a reality was because the City won the competition for the dollars. He said that after it is built the City can go back to the State and in future funding cycles be able to show what the City has already done. He said this would leverage the City for future phases, and referenced the example of a beach possibility.

Councilmember Dunn asked if there was a “use or lose” element to the grant – if the money wasn’t used by a certain date if the City could then lose the money.

City Engineer Kilgore indicated there was a deadline for expending the funds. He said that he was able to get the deadline extended because of the environmental complications; the analysis required by the government agencies working on this. He said he was able to get these extensions through 2005. He said that he has been hardly assured that if it goes any further than that - that they would extend it further.

Councilmember Dunn asked what the anticipated contribution from the City would be. He said that he knew $250,000 was already budgeted.

Engineer Kilgore indicated that in 2003, $400,000 was allocated from the General Fund for the project.

A resident indicated he was a commercial appraiser and stated that if the present plan and a future beach plan were pursued it would mean an increase in property values and would mean an increase in taxes for the City. He said he wanted to support the plan.

Dave Corrigan from the Lakefront Coalition stated he was happy with the progression of the plan and the accessibility element. He said that he was part of the grant writing and wanted to affirm the importance of keeping the project moving to avoid losing the money granted. He thanked Councilmember FitzGerald for embracing the concept and the people at Middough for sketching out the Coalition’s ideas.

Council President Seelie indicated that accessibility for people carrying items and those with strollers require would find an advantage of the universal design.

Mr. Seelie indicated that it was good to see a good idea that began in a previous Administration continue. He stated he was happy the project contained an inter-generational aspect. He thanked the Lakefront Coalition for having a singular purpose of benefiting Lakewood.

Mayor George stated that a huge portion of the project was made possible by grants. He said that to secure those grants, memberships the City has were an integral part. He said that the Mayors and Managers Association as an example have people on the Issue 2 Committee which awards grants for projects like this. He said that the Ohio Municipal League has a position with the Ohio Public Works Commission which also awards grants. He said that the City’s participation in those organizations means more than titles, that they provide real benefits such as these. He said the chances of being awarded a grant are clearly increased when membership is involved.

To receive and file the communication.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

31. Communication from Councilmember FitzGerald regarding Management Structure of Lakewood City Government. (Pg. 42)

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to receive and file the communication.

Councilmember FitzGerald indicated there was going to be debate on the issue and it had to be taken head on to examine the merits of the system. He said that this would be a great opportunity to assess the City’s management structure. He said that he begun to contact individuals who he hoped represented both sides of the issue. He said he talked to Dr. Keller from CSU who had expertise in the area and was an advocate for it. He said he wanted to make sure it was a balanced presentation but wanted to make sure the discussion starts. He said that he anticipated that the auditorium would be used as a free speech forum and that the most he would do would be to set up some rules to make sure both sides (or three) are represented in the issue. He said that he wanted to invite all Members of Council and members of the community to participate. He said he thought this was a time when everything going on in the City was being re-evaluated and that this issue should be part of the discussion.

Councilmember Demro referenced a letter from him that was sent to Committee of the Whole Chair Seelie requesting a meeting to look over the Charter Commission’s Report. He said that beside the City Manager issue, there were other issues to review from the Charter Commission. He said that he sent his letter to the League of Women Voters, the President of Lakewood Alive and to the Chamber of Commerce. He said at least two of the individuals have expressed interest in holding forums and indicated that discussion was already getting started on these subjects.

Council President Seelie indicated that Council would probably start discussions in February depending on how Budget Hearings were going to review the Charter Review report. He said this would be how it related to a Budget and not because someone demanded to have a review on a particular day. He said that he would set up a meeting that everyone could attend and start reviewing the entire Charter.

Mr. Dunn expressed his support of Mr. Seelie’s assertion that the review of the hard work of the Charter Review Commission would be done in the aggregate. He referenced Mr. FitzGerald’s comments about the structure of government. He stated there were benefits and risks to changing to city manager. He said it was good to have people discussing how to do things better and how to structure government better. He said there was a risk relative to the economy of time on the governing agenda. He said that he encouraged the members of the Charter Review Commission to research the concept of a City/Manager form of government. He said he did this not because he believed in it but because he said there were no clear-cut benefits or detractions to the city manager form. He said that it was a difference sometimes without much benefit one way or another. He said the differences between a city manager form of government and strong mayor form of government could be debated but that he did not think this should be a priority as the City goes forward. He said there was no data that showed it decisively benefiting or hurting any community. He said that some communities are changing over to a city manager form of government and other communities are changing back to a strong mayor form of government. He said that an article in the New York Times that day showed Dallas was abandoning their city manager form of government. He said people have a sense that with a city manager form of government that politics can be separated from government. He said that the belief is that a professional would come in and run the City and no politics would be involved. He said this was naïve, that politics and government could not be separated. He said the origins of the city manager form of government were over a 100 years ago and started in the Progressive movement. He said it was aimed at getting rid of corrupt politics from government, because of political machines and patronage were running rampant. He said reform was needed and this resulted in non-partisan elections and city manager forms of government. He said a lot of the issues were cleared up with civil service reform and other reforms. He said that he wanted to make sure time was being used to get focused on what was important. He said that he felt compensation for the Mayor after Tom George leaves office or seeks re-election was a priority. He said it should match the effort in order to attract someone who can give the best years of their life, energy, and who could apply themselves – a professional, who would be able to manage the complexities of city government. He said that this was the hidden issue and that the City needed to go beyond the cap of $65,000 a year for the mayor’s salary. He said that today the City was lucky because there was someone who was experienced, professional, and has shown a commitment to the City of Lakewood. He said that he did not know if that would always be the case.

Council President Seelie indicated he did not have preconceived ideas on what the priority is except that the City had to deal with cutting expenditures and increasing the tax base as all other cities do. He said that forms of governance as it relates to finance is somewhat of a stretch but it was welcome. He said that any councilmember who wanted to have Committee meetings on whatever they wanted, that the room was always open to do that. He said that when looking at a Charter he would agree with Councilmember Dunn that the issue has been around for many years, indicating the last twenty years in his public service experience.

Councilmember Dunn referenced his proposal of Citistat and was interested to hear that the City of Cleveland offered to partner with Lakewood on it. He said that he had an opportunity to meet with their consultants – a Peter O’Malley who was the brother of Martin O’Malley, the Mayor of the City of Baltimore. He said Mr. O’Malley invited a delegation from the City of Lakewood to travel to Baltimore to get a first hand understanding and appreciation of Citistat in order to implement some of those ideas in the Lakewood community. He indicated that he learned that cities that adopt Citistat showed an increase in their bond rating.

Councilmember Demro said that anything that could be done to improve city management was important. He said that while sitting on the Hospital Board of Trustees he was continually amazed at the implementation of technology and changing management structures that were used to keep the Cleveland Clinic and Lakewood Hospital one of the premier health care centers in the nation. He said he thought the City could benefit from looking at other organizations that use different types of structures and tools to increase their efficiency.

Mayor George indicated that Dr. Keller was hired as a consultant in the past to advise Council on the effectiveness in the City Charter. He said it was important to take Dr. Keller’s comments about a City manager form of government in context. He said that Dr. Keller believed that much more education and training needed to take place for all elected officials and that training for municipal officials be greatly enhanced, increased and even made mandatory. He said that in that context a city manager had merit because there was someone well trained professionally as to the managing government. He said it would be disingenuous to select a portion of Dr. Keller’s suggestions and isolate one intention . He said Dr. Keller’s intent was holistic relative to performance in government.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

32. Communication from Councilmember FitzGerald regarding CDBG Funds. (Pg. 43)

Motion by Mr. FitzGerald, seconded by Ms. Madigan, to receive and file the communication.

Councilmember FitzGerald stated that he wanted to acknowledge that in talking with Planning & Development Director Jordon he understood that concerns about these funds were already in his awareness. Mr. FitzGerald indicated that CAC members recognized the restrictions associated with these funds and were frustrated with the many restrictions and obstacles to spending the money for a particular endeavor.

Planning & Development Director Jordon stated that he did want to recognize the fact that the CDBG funds were approximately $2.7 million which the CAC had general recommendations to City Council and that Council affirmed those last month. He said that this was one set of funds and that the HOME program is received in a separate allotment, managed by the Cuyahoga County Consortium which is separate from the HELP Program run by the County Auditor. He said the HOME program is geared to providing homeowners with down payment assistance for low and moderate income people. He said those general goals by HUD are then asked by the Housing Consortium to dispense them to the various communities in Cuyahoga County. He said the CAC does not have any control over the HOME Program restrictions. He said the HOME Program restrictions were recommended and put in place by Lakewood City Council in addition to the restrictions being placed on them by HUD. He said he did not want City Council going into their Budget negotiations believing there is over a million dollars left from everything from social services to street repairs to re-appropriate. He said the HOME program that has had about a $300,000 yearly allotment from HUD has in it from program income approximately $385,000. He said that in addition to that there are $600,000 sitting in the Housing Consortium Fund at Lakewood’s disposal to be drawn down. He said this was for First Time Home Buyer Assistance Programs. He said this was in his awareness and that he has discussed it with Mayor George as a goal for 2005 to identify the restrictions that are preventing people in the current market from utilizing the program to its fullest extent. He said that it was the goal of the George Administration and the Planning & Development Department to try and make the restrictions easier to work through. He said that expected legislation will be put forward in January to City Council to re-direct the funds or move the restrictions that prevent first time home buyers form investing in Lakewood.

Councilmember Dunn asked if a resident who is able to benefit from the County’s HELP program can also be able to pull down CDBG funds to help with home renovation.

Planning & Development Director Jordon indicated there were two different goals with the HELP program is geared to remodeling to historic standards. He said the HOME program was to provide down payment assistance for first time home buyers. He said that that there was an original restriction limiting the program to Lakewood residents. He said that a person had to be a resident for a year. He said this is one of the current hindrances in addition to the low interest rates currently enjoyed. He said people most often opt for the interest rates with no restrictions.

Councilmember FitzGerald asked for clarification on the funds.

Planning & Development Director Jordon indicated that over the years, the Program income (money that the City provided individual homeowners for down payment assistance has been repaid to the City. He said that money is considered Program income as opposed to annual allotments. He said that amount is about $300,000. He said there was an additional $600,000 of annual allotments at the Cuyahoga County Housing Consortium eligible for Lakewood residents to pull down for this program.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

33. Communication from Finance Director Nogalo regarding Property Tax Change.(Pg. 44)

Motion by Mr. Seelie, seconded by Mr. FitzGerald, to receive, file and refer the communication to the Finance Committee.

Mayor George indicated that the Finance Director’s statement; “The City’s ability to budget for non-enterprise capital improvements after fiscal year 2005 will be severely limited”. He said that there was no money Lakewood Park Improvements that were presented that night, for streets programs, for Winterhurst improvements, for City Hall improvements. He said the Capital Fund is depleted. He said unless there are steps to provide revenue the money is not there to undertake a lot of the projects that are necessary to move the City forward. He said ultimately it was up to the voters as to what sort of City they wanted to live in but it was clear the City faced bond limitations, debt limitations and a depleted Capital Improvement Fund unless drastic steps were taken. He said this would be explained in great detail during Budget Hearings.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

34. ORDINANCE NO. 106-04 – AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE declaring the necessity of submitting to the electors of the City of Lakewood the question of expanding the use of two mills currently utilized for only the sewage disposal plant to include financing the capital needs of street infrastructure, municipal buildings, parks and recreation facilities. (Pg. 45)

Motion by Mr. Seelie, seconded by Mr. FitzGerald, to place Ordinance on First Reading and refer it to the Finance Committee.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

35. Communication from Councilmember Demro regarding Committee Referral Ordinance No. 69-04 – Chronic Nuisances. (Pg. 47)

Motion by Mr. Demro, seconded by Mr. Corrigan, to receive, file and refer the communication to the Rules & Ordinances Committee.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

36. Communication from Law Director Corrigan regarding Codification of Ordinances. (Pg. 48)

Motion by Mr. Seelie, seconded by Ms. Madigan, to receive, file and refer the communication to the Rules & Ordinances Committee.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

37. ORDINANCE NO. 107-04 – AN EMERGENCY ORDINANC to approve the editing and inclusion of certain ordinances and resolutions as parts of the various component codes of the Codified Ordinances and to provide for the publication of such new mater. (Pg. 49)

Motion by Mr. Seelie, seconded by Mr. Corrigan, to place Ordinance No. 107-04 on 1st Reading and refer it to the Rules & Ordinances Committee.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

38. Communication from Mayor George regarding Resolutions for Scott Stanaitis and Virginia Fitzgerald. (Pg. 51).

Motion by Mr. Dever, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to receive and file the communication.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… ..

39. RESOLUTION NO. 7954-04 – A RESOLUTION commending Scott Stanaitis for public service as a member of the Lakewood Board of Building Standards/Architectural Board of Review/Sign Review Board from January 1, 1999 through December 31, 2004. (Pg. 52)

Motion by Mr. Seelie, seconded by Mr. Demro, to adopt Resolution No. 7954-04.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

40. RESOLUTION NO. 7955-04 – A RESOLUTION commending Virginia G. Fitzgerald for public service as a member of the Lakewood Planning Commission from January 1, 1994 through December 31, 2004. (Pg. 53)

Motion by Mr. Seelie, seconded by Mr. Demro, to adopt Resolution No. 7955-04.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

41. Liquor Permit Application for a D5 stock to Leedy and Ginnard Inc., d/b/a Martinis Restaurant 15315 Madison Avenue, Lakewood, Ohio 44107. (Pg. 54)

Motion Mr. Corrigan, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to defer action on this item.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
… .

Meeting adjourned at 9:55 P.M.

….

Approved:____________________________ ________________________
CLERK

________________________
PRESIDENT