Ashland City Council
MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR SESSION OF COUNCIL
September 5, 2006
Council President Glen Stewart called the meeting to order at 7:00
p.m.
ROLL CALL
Ward 1: Robert L. Valentine Present
Ward 2: Robert M. Valentine Absent
Ward 3: Ruth Detrow
Present
Ward 4: Paul Wertz
Present
At-large: Glen Stewart
Present
Note: Throughout the minutes, Robert L. Valentine and Robert M.
Valentine are designated as to their ward representation, W1 and W2.
Moved by Stewart and seconded by Valentine W1 to excuse Valentine W2
from the meeting.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
PRESENTATION OF MINUTES
July 18, 2006: Regular session
August 1, 2006 and August 22, 2006: Special sessions
Moved by Wertz and seconded by Detrow to approve the minutes.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM
THE AUDIENCE
(a) Boy Scout Troop 555:
Members of Boy Scout Troop 555 introduced themselves
and explained that they are working on their Citizenship and Community
badges. Attending a City Council session is one of the
requirements for attaining this level of badge.
Stewart spent time explaining the manner of
presenting and voting upon legislation, as well as the fact that the
legislation has been in Council’s hands for several days for
their study. In fact, the legislation is sent to Council members
with a pre-agenda a week ahead of the final agenda. This allows
them to research the items and ask questions of the Mayor and other
Division Directors as they feel the need.
The Scout Master also asked about the usage of the
word “emergency” in the legislation and just what it
means. Law Director Rick Wolfe explained that this is a
procedural matter that enables the legislation to become effective
immediately. Otherwise it would have a thirty-day waiting
period. The word emergency does not imply dire urgency of some
sort and something bad will happen; it means that it becomes effective
immediately upon passage by Council and approval by the Mayor.
For most routine legislation that has been already previewed by
Council, there is no reason for delay.
Stewart further explained that there are occasions
when Council will not pass the legislation in three readings in one
night. Sometimes if there is need for more information from the
community, they may choose to pass it on one reading, one meeting;
second reading, second meeting; and third reading, third meeting,
generally two weeks between meetings. Usually however, they pass it all
in one evening.
To complete the explanation, Wolfe discussed the
rule under state statute and also adopted by Ashland’s Charter
that says legislation must be passed three times, three separate
readings on three separate days. But there is also a provision
that allows suspension of that rule by a three-fourths vote of Council
to do it all in one evening. Though there are times when the
readings should be spread out, there are other times there is no good
reason to do so. When Council votes to pass on first
reading, that is a procedural issue; when they move to suspend the rule
requiring three separate readings three separate nights, again this is
a procedural issue; and then when the motion is made to pass it, that
completes it in one evening.
Legislation could drag on for six weeks plus thirty days from beginning
to end. Sometimes there is reason to do that, but most times
there isn’t, thus leading to ways to accelerate those procedures.
LEGISLATION
Res. 10-06
Item (a) A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE AMOUNTS AND RATES AS DETERMINED BY
THE BUDGET COMMISSION AND AUTHORIZING THE NECESSARY TAX LEVIES AND
CERTIFYING THEM TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR.
Moved by Wertz and seconded by Detrow to invoke Section 113.01 of the
Codified Ordinances as the distribution of this Resolution has
satisfied the requirements of said Section and that a further reading
be dispensed with at this time.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Comments:
Finance Director Anna Tomasek explained that is the
2007 tax rates that were determined by the County Tax Budget
Commission; it is a housekeeping item and establishes City rates.
There is no change in them.
Moved by Detrow and seconded by Valentine W1 that the Resolution be
passed on the first reading.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Moved by Wertz and seconded by Detrow that the rules requiring the
reading on three separate days be suspended and that the Resolution be
passed on the second and third readings.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Moved by Wertz and seconded by Valentine W1 that the Resolution be
passed.
Ayes: Valentine W2, Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Motion carried.
Res. 11-06
Item (b) A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THAT THE CITY OF
ASHLAND MAKE APPLICATION FOR A GRANT FROM THE ASHLAND COUNTY COMMUNITY
FOUNDATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF FUNDING THE BALDRIGE QUALITY INITIATIVE
PROGRAM; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
Moved by Wertz and seconded by Detrow to invoke Section 113.01 of the
Codified Ordinances as the distribution of this Resolution has
satisfied the requirements of said Section and that a further reading
be dispensed with at this time.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Comments:
Valentine W1 asked if at first this was funded
entirely by the Foundation, and Human Resources Director Cheri
Helterbridle responded that the City has always split the cost.
In addition, the City had an initial investment before the splitting of
costs; the City has always invested in the process.
Valentine W1 asked if the $70,000 comes from the
City’s budget; Helterbridle responded that right now the City has
$70,200 budgeted for 2006, and the same amount will be needed for
2007. The City is asking for matching funds on that amount.
Valentine W1 stated then that the total program costs $140,000, and
Helterbridle affirmed that.
Valentine W1 asked what is the City doing for
$140,000. Helterbridle explained that by the time all that
$140,000 is invested, the City will have trained every employee in all
of the divisions under the Mayor and will have a quality initiative
program. Ashland will be the first municipality in the state of
Ohio to put this in place.
Helterbridle added that the City employees would
have measurable standards to know that the City has improved the
quality of its services for the community. The employees are
doing surveys and a myriad of things. She told Council she should
put together a presentation for them similar to what they have done for
divisions to show what is being accomplished. In every division
there are measurable standards that will be tracked, and this has never
before been done; this will be bringing the process of doing business
for the City into the 21st Century.
When this training is finished, the City won’t
stop at that point: the State has a program Ohio Partners for
Excellence, the Ohio quality initiative. With that the City will
be taking part in having on-site people evaluate the City
programs. However, that program is all free through the
state. The City will know how to put the programs together, to
work for greater levels of achievement; it is an ongoing program of
excellence.
Valentine W1 asked what would happen if the
Foundation didn’t fund this, and Mayor Strine told him it is in
the appropriations for next year, which Council would be asked to
approve. The Mayor stated that one of the biggest efforts being
made through this quality inititiative is to find ways to better serve
the public, and to ask them to be involved in that process.
Mayor Strine explained that the City funded the
first year entirely. Helterbridle added that the City is two full
years into the program and has one year to go. Training will be
completed by 2007.
Moved by Detrow and seconded by Valentine W1 that the Resolution be
passed on the first reading.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Moved by Wertz and seconded by Valentine W1 that the rules requiring
the reading on three separate days be suspended and that the Resolution
be passed on the second and third readings.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Moved by Wertz and seconded by Stewart that the Resolution be passed.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Motion carried.
Res. 12-06
Item (c) A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE NECESSITY OF CONSTRUCTING OR
REPAIRING SIDEWALKS IN THE CITY OF ASHLAND, OHIO.
Moved by Wertz and seconded by Valentine W1 to invoke Section 113.01 of
the Codified Ordinances as the distribution of this Resolution has
satisfied the requirements of said Section and that a further reading
be dispensed with at this time.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Comments:
City Engineer Jim Cooper told Council that for the
last several years they have been working towards a plan to repair the
sidewalks in the City of Ashland, and information he handed out to
Council contains the culmination of that work. Phil Diehm and
Kurt Brzyscz worked together to do the inspections; Jerry Mack and his
crews have done the repair work as far as tree related problems in this
area, Area 1. In the packets given out is the basic City sidewalk
program outline that covers the procedural matters. There is a
sample of a sidewalk inspection form; a sidewalk standards form that
will go to each person contacted; a list of owner’s square
footage involved and estimated costs for repairs for everywhere in Area
1. Area 1 includes everything from Walnut Street to the railroad
tracks, and Cottage and Claremont Streets over to Miller Street.
He is asking Council to pass this, and if it is
passed, the procedure is to have certified letters sent to the owners,
who hopefully will have their sidewalks repaired. If not, then
the City will take that responsibility of repair; the costs will be
charged to the owners. If they choose not to pay those, the
charges will go to the county auditor to be put on the owner’s
tax duplicate to be paid off in up to ten years, depending on the price
of the project. Ten years is the maximum allowed by ordinance.
Detrow asked about streamlining and simplifying this
process, but Cooper told her that cannot be done due to the
legalities. Information from the program goes to Council and its
clerk; then between Engineering and Council, certified letters will be
sent out to owners with the information needed to repair their
sidewalks.
Wertz asked about vacant houses and
non-responses. Cooper explained that the list is published in the
newspaper, which is sufficient to give them notice that costs will go
onto the tax books. If that property is ever sold or transferred,
those costs have to be paid to the City with interest before there is a
clean deed to the property.
Wertz asked if the City has to pay for these then,
and Wolfe assured him that would happen: the City is fronting the
money. There may be exceptions to the rule where the City may end
up not collecting the money at all, ever. That is a risk in being
involved in this kind of program on a Citywide basis, but the whole
intent is that the people themselves do the project themselves; second,
if they don’t, the City does it and assesses costs through the
taxes. There may be situations where the City is unable to recoup
those taxes, but he thinks that is the exception to the rule.
Valentine W1 asked how much is allocated in the
budget for this, and Cooper told him it is $100,000.
Valentine W1 commented that this is only the
beginning of the plan, and Cooper told him this is only Step 1 of a
ten-year plan. Wolfe corrected the statement that this is the
beginning by saying that several steps have already proceeded this;
this is more into the plan and a lot of work has already gone into this
before. This is into the plan; this is not the beginning, but
several steps down the road.
Cooper repeated that a lot of work has already been
done in Area 1 by the Street Department repairing tree-related damaged
sidewalks in the last couple of years. Others have already put
sidewalks in after seeing the survey work being done, which is exactly
what they’d like to see happen.
Stewart stated he is a major proponent of upgrading
the sidewalks in this community; the mandate after service of this
letter that they have seven days to ask for appeal, but they have
thirty days to get the sidewalk in. He asked if there are enough
contractors in Ashland to do that in thirty days, and Cooper responded
probably not.
Mayor Strine explained that flexibility would be
needed in this. People who want to have their own constructed and
if it will take 60 days for the contractor to get there, the City can
give them 60 days. Stewart added that is part of the appeal
process. Cooper commented that the weather would be good for
pouring concrete through late October, early November.
Detrow questioned the next step as being sending the
letters, and Wolfe told her that is what is authorized by this
legislation. This is the process.
Moved by Stewart and seconded by Valentine W1 that the Resolution be
passed on the first reading.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Moved by Wertz and seconded by Valentine W1 that the rules requiring
the reading on three separate days be suspended and that the Resolution
be passed on the second and third readings.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Moved by Detrow and seconded by Valentine W1 that the Resolution be
passed.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Motion carried.
Ord. 76-06
Item (d) AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR, DIRECTOR OF
PUBLIC SERVICE, TO ENTER INTO A MODIFICATION OF THE 2006 STREET
RESURFACING PROGRAM CONTRACT AUTHORIZED BY ORDINANCE NO. 22-06; AND
DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
Moved by Wertz and seconded by Stewart to invoke Section 113.01 of the
Codified Ordinances as the distribution of this Ordinance has satisfied
the requirements of said Section and that a further reading be
dispensed with at this time.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Comments:
Cooper noted this is a large change order request. It was a
surprise to Engineering, as this has never been done before. In
Engineering bidding specifications it is written that the City will
follow the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) specification
book. There hasn’t been a situation where oil prices have
gone up as fast as they did early this year. In 401.20 Asphalt
Binder Price Adjustment, there is a formula ODOT comes up with every
month, a binder index and a placing index per month. There is a
formula used to figure out that if the project is 5% above or 5% below
(105% or 95%), there would be adjustments. If it is above 105%,
then the adjustment is positive to the contractor; if it goes below 95%
then the City gets money back.
Primarily due to this price adjustment, which came to about $36,000,
the City ran over the contract bid price. To try to help, Lee
Avenue was eliminated from the program this year to help contain
overruns. As it turns out, there also were major problems with
Foxmoor Lane with the sub grade, which took major work to correct.
When all the plusses and minuses were considered, the change order was
the result.
Valentine W1 said that the point is, when ODOT sets the limitations and
standards, the City abides by their standards, is that correct?
Cooper responded that the City would not anymore: that aspect was
eliminated. ODOT’s specs will still be followed but that
section is being eliminated.
Wolfe explained further that the provision was in there before, but
there was never this much of a variation and adverse effect. Now
that it has hit in this fashion, it will be eliminated from the
specifications in future contracts, so there won’t be this kind
of issue. But the City is bound by this contract just as the
contractors are.
Cooper stated this is the way ODOT operates all the time, and their
spec book is far superior to anything the City has, so this is not to
get rid of the spec book. It is that the City doesn’t want
any more surprises like this.
Stewart summed up the situation by saying this is a significant change
order, $46,189.30, but the City has funds to pay for it.
Moved by Valentine W1 and seconded by Detrow that the Ordinance be
passed on the first reading.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Moved by Wertz and seconded by Stewart that the rules requiring the
reading on three separate days be suspended and that the Ordinance be
passed on the second and third readings.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Moved by Wertz and seconded by Valentine W1 that the Ordinance be
passed.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Motion carried.
Ord. 77-06
Item (e) AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAKING OF THE ANNEXATION OF
CONTIGUOUS TERRITORY AND DIRECTING THE DIRECTOR OF LAW OF THE CITY OF
ASHLAND TO PROSECUTE THE PROCEEDINGS NECESSARY TO EFFECT IT; AND
DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
Moved by Wertz and seconded by Detrow to invoke Section 113.01 of the
Codified Ordinances as the distribution of this Ordinance has satisfied
the requirements of said Section and that a further reading be
dispensed with at this time.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Comments:
Mayor Strine noted this is the property the City
just purchased (Sandusky Street).
Stewart added this still leaves 2 lots west of the
property and 10 lots east of the property that are still not in the
City. Even though that is so, this new property ties into the
golf course, which makes it contiguous to City land.
Moved by Wertz and seconded by Valentine W1 that the Ordinance be
passed on the first reading.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Moved by Wertz and seconded by Detrow that the rules requiring the
reading on three separate days be suspended and that the Ordinance be
passed on the second and third readings.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Moved by Detrow and seconded by Valentine W1 that the Ordinance be
passed.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Motion carried.
WARD REPORTS
Ward 1: Bob Valentine
(a) Katherine Avenue parking:
Valentine W1 reported calls about the high school
students parking cars along the street by the condos there.
Student cars block vision to exiting vehicles.
(b) College Avenue/Grant Street stop signs:
Valentine reported a repeated complaint about the
need for a three-way stop at the intersection of College Avenue and
Grant Street; the complainant does not see a reason for a stop sign on
College Avenue. Wolfe explained there is a lot of pedestrian
traffic in the area, and it helps to slow down traffic for safety.
At-large: Glen Stewart
(a) Unsigned correspondence:
Stewart noted he receives a lot of Council-oriented mail.
However, anytime someone takes the time to write to him but fails to
identify himself or herself, he does not respond to it. He feels
he needs to have two-way communication with someone who has a thought
to share with him. He feels so strongly about this that it would
be very rare that he would bring their topic up for discussion.
People in this community should never feel threatened about talking to
their councilman or anyone else in the community. He would be
pleased to respond if the communication is signed.
OLD BUSINESS
(a) Final Report on City Sidewalk Program, Area 1:
Stewart noted this had been adequately discussed
during the consideration of legislation relating to it earlier in the
meeting.
(b) Downtown parking:
Stewart outlined the history of the issue of
merchants/employees/office workers parking in the Main Street area,
with the problem being that many of them park for the two hour limit,
after which they move their vehicle a space ahead or to another spot in
the area, thus tying up parking areas that could be used by
shoppers. As a result a change in fines for violations has been
instituted.
Still, Council members do not feel the work is done
yet. They have gone out to review the various parking lots, the
varying hours available in the parking lots, numbers of spaces
there. Times vary from 15 minutes, 30 minutes, one, two, three
and eight hours and 24 hours in the various spots throughout the
City. Main, South and Second Streets are basically two- hours.
The question has come to Council about those people
who are working downtown and do not have a convenient place to park
close in downtown. So Council has looked at these areas. He
opened the topic to discussion.
Wertz suggested making a couple rows in Lot J
(Center and Orange Streets) eight hour parking. Detrow added
leaving the row next to Second Street two hour parking and the rest of
the lot eight-hour spots should help. This morning when she
looked at this area, the eight-hour spots were all full.
Valentine W1 stated that Lot B across from the
Municipal Building is never even a third full. Actually, he
stated he doesn’t see a big problem with parking.
Mayor Strine asked for clarification from Council as
to whether their idea is to provide parking for downtown shoppers or
for business.
Stewart’s observation is that the downtown is far different than
it was a few years ago; the major change is that the various
storefronts vacated by retailers have been filled by various
service/professional type businesses who don’t have a lot of in
and out traffic. Even though this problem came to Council by a
retailer, and he doesn’t want to drive retailers away, Stewart is
very pleased that most storefronts have been filled. So where is
the middle of the road to satisfy the needs? The City has bought
buildings and tore them down to expand the parking for retailers: that
was the purpose. But retail isn’t what it was earlier, and
he’s trying to look at this from different viewpoints.
Detrow stated there is a need to establish a balance; she can see why
people do not want to walk all the way up from Parking Lot B. At
any rate, she feels more eight or 10-hour spaces need to be added; the
balance has shifted and parking needs to shift with it. It looks
as though nothing can be done about the people who park and move every
couple of hours.
Mayor Strine stated that today he found out that progress is being made
with these parkers; the meter person has no problem keeping track of
this. That is being done. He said he prefers to leave it
alone for a while and see how it works.
Stewart related his experience seeing a retail proprietor come out of
his establishment, check his vehicle which had no tire chalk marks, and
return to his store, assured of two more hours of parking. This
was a retailer, not a service business person. Detrow commented
that person should be ashamed; the retailers are the ones complaining,
and not only they but also their employees should not be abusing the
parking.
Stewart suggested taking all the parking signs down and letting people
park wherever they want, however they want, as long as they want,
except perhaps for Main Street. He said he is serious.
Mayor Strine responded that would be simple to try that, to put bags
over the signs.
Stewart summed it up saying this problem has all been opened up and
conclusions will have to be made, some recommendations suggested.
Mayor Strine said he would present this again to the Traffic Committee
and see what they think about increasing the eight-hour spots.
Detrow said they should try that, but if the problem continues, it will
have to be revisited.
NEW BUSINESS
(a) Advertising on Private Property Permit Application:
Campaign for Ashland County Commissioner; Petitioner, John Leininger
Moved by Wertz and seconded by Detrow to approve the application.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
MAYOR’S COMMENTS
(a) Work session scheduled:
Mayor Strine requested a work session to discuss two
topics: 1) Sign regulations for the City of Ashland; Chapter 1184 of
the Codified Ordinances; and 2) Changes to the Historical District
Ordinance No. 51-05, Chapter 1191 of the Codified Ordinances.
The work session will be held on Thursday, September
28th at 7:00 p.m. in the Mayor’s Conference Room.
(b) Director’s presentation:
Water Treatment Director Bruce Wiser gave a
PowerPoint presentation as to the workings, plans and projects of the
Water Treatment Plant, the Sewer Maintenance Division and the
Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Wiser answered several questions that came to him
during and after the formal presentation.
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Valentine W1 and seconded by Detrow to adjourn.
Ayes: Detrow, Wertz, Stewart, Valentine W1
Council adjourned the regular
session at 8:34 p.m.
Submitted by
Elaine
C. Hootman
Clerk of
Council