Ashland City Council


MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR SESSION OF COUNCIL
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Council Chambers Conference Room 3rd floor 7:00 p.m.


* Our Law Director is on vacation

Council President Paul Wertz called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.   

ROLL CALL
At-large:      Stephen L. Stuart    Present
            Ward 1:    Robert L. Valentine    Present
Ward 2:    Robert M. Valentine    Present
Ward 3:    Ruth Detrow        Present
Ward 4/President: Paul Wertz    Present

Note: Throughout the minutes, Robert L. Valentine and Robert M. Valentine are designated as to their ward representation, W1 and W2.  

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

PRESENTATION OF MINUTES
(a)    Work Session February 28, 2008
(b)    Regular Session March 4, 2008

Minutes approved, no corrections.

Motion to accept the Minutes by Paul Wertz, moved by Robert L. Valentine W1, seconded by Robert M. Valentine W2.
Ayes: Stephen L. Stuart, Robert L Valentine W1, Robert M. Valentine W2, Ruth Detrow, Paul Wertz.

LEGISLATION:

­    Ordinances:  None

     Resolutions:
Res. No.  4-08
Item  (a)    A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND TO
                 FILE AN APPLICATION AND ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE
                 AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY, OHIO DIVISION, FOR THE PURPOSE OF
                 ACQUIRING FUNDS FOR THE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM; AND
                 DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.

Move for non-reading in full by Ruth Detrow, seconded by Robert L. 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 dispense with at this time.
     Ayes:  Stephen L. Stuart, Robert L. Valentine W1, Robert M. Valentine W2, Ruth Detrow, Paul Wertz.

Ellie Grubb:  This is a Grant that we received a previous year, last year.  It is something that Anna is acquainted with however it is a matching Grant.  It is for $4,000.00 dollars to provide transportation for individuals who are receiving treatment related to Cancer.  Because it is a matching Grant for $4,000.00 dollars, my office has called the agencies here in Ashland to see if they would be willing to contribute to the $4,000.00 dollar matching portion so that the city is not going to be responsible for paying that $4000.00 dollars.  Now if that doesn’t happen; if we should be awarded this Grant, we do not have to accept it.  So all we are doing tonight is approving that agreement to apply for it at this point.

Mayor Stewart:  Ellie, correct me if I am wrong, the reason I am asking Ellie, I learned about this at 4:00 p.m. this afternoon.   It is my understanding that we should go forth with the application and wait for the American Cancer Society to make a determination.  If they determine that we would be awarded a Grant, then it is our obligation of what we are agreeing to do is to go out to the various organizations that actually are the recipients indirectly for this to participate in the matching part of it?

Ellie Grubb:  And Anna and I have discussed the fact that we are not committing the money for $4000.00 dollar matching at this point.  

Anna Tomasek: Yes, that is correct.  It is just the application that we applied for in the past to seek the money to be able to get the Grant and this is for the coordination part of the transportation.  This is for agencies, anyone in the county we take to Wooster, etc., for cancer-related treatment.  

Comments or questions?  None

Moved by Robert L. Valentine W1, seconded by Ruth Detrow that the Resolution be passed on the first reading.
   Ayes:  Stephen L. Stuart, Robert L. Valentine W1, Robert M. Valentine W2, Ruth Detrow, Paul Wertz.

Moved by Ruth Detrow and seconded by Robert L. Valentine W1 that the rules requiring the reading on three separate meetings, three separate nights be suspended and that the Resolution be passed on the second and third readings.
   Ayes:  Stephen L. Stuart, Robert L. Valentine W1, Robert M. Valentine W2, Ruth Detrow, Paul Wertz.

Move the Resolution be passed by Robert L. Valentine W1, seconded by Stephen L. Stuart.
   Ayes:  Stephen L. Stuart, Robert L. Valentine W1, Robert M. Valentine W2, Ruth Detrow, Paul Wertz.

WARD REPORTS:

At- Large:        Stephen L. Stuart
    None.

Ward 1:         Robert L. Valentine
    None.

Ward 2:        Robert M. Valentine
    None

Ward 3        Ruth Detrow

(a)    I received some questions concerning the notification that came with the Electric Bills that refers to the City of Ashland as being a partner in an alternate energy supply for people.  Lots of folks didn’t understand what this means and when I was talking with one man, I was looking at my bill and we were comparing rates and his rate was lower than mine; that was really interesting because he wasn’t in the program and I am.  So I have done a lot of telephoning.  I didn’t give up.  I tried to get this all straightened out in my mind at least.  We do have an agreement with the city that they have worked out with Ohio Edison and the alternate electric supplier is First Energy Solutions.  According to them, they agree to give us a 4% reduction in our rate if we opt into that.  These letters went out, and people were confused about it.  I did call to see why the one gentleman had a different amount.  I have a 6.3 cents per kilowatt hour on my bill.  And I think that is the standard residential  rate.  And I get 4% off of that on my bill because I am a part of this alternate energy electric supplier.  This other gentleman, when I asked about that, I found out that Ohio Edison also gives added reductions for people who have electric heat and people who have electric water heaters.  So that was why his rate was lower than my rate.  If you aren’t in it and don’t want in it, you do not do anything.  If you aren’t in the First Energy Solutions Corp plan and you want to stay with just Ohio Edison, you don’t do a thing.  And if you want to get into it, there are numbers on your bill that you can call.

John Chorpening, 1126 Overlook:  I believe it is the other way around.  You actually have to opt out of it.  You have to send a letter to First Energy so as to opt out of it.  

Ellie Grubb:  This is the electric aggregation that we went to the electric for. They voted that we should participate in an electric aggregation program.  And First Energy is the provider.  The 4% is off your total electric bill each month; so obviously your amount is going to vary so therefore it is just 4% off whatever your electric bill is.  And it is you have to opt out.

Ruth Detrow:  So you can’t join it?  Some people dropped them, said they want to be in it now.  

Ellie Grubb:  Yes you can.

Phil Rafeld, 1039 Oak Hill Circle:  I am not an advocate for First Energy or Ohio Edison but I do this for a living.   In 2007, Ohio Edison used to give you three rates, an A,B, and C rate.  If you had a heat pump and a hot water heater, you got a 33% rate.  If you have all electric you got an even bigger discount.  They now have since decided that they were no longer going to give away free electricity.  January 2007 was the last time you could heat your house with all electric and get any discount through Ohio Edison. So if you build an all electric home today, no matter whether you put a heat pump and a hot water heater, electric heat.  You get no discount through Ohio Edison.  However, the best rate, and I am not an advocate for any of these electric companies, is if you just clear out everything, if you are not in First Energy already, which your gentleman was getting that 5.9% because he was in before 2007, you can no longer get that rate.  The very best rate you can get is 6.3 which is Ohio Edison.  I would stay away from First Energy only for the concept if you go with First Energy, although you get a 4% reduction, you have to pay $12.00 dollars more a month just to be on that list.  If you go with just strictly Ohio Edison right across the board, my bills come in and I live in a gas house with electric, my electric bill runs me about $40.00 dollars per month, take away that First Energy, run strictly Ohio Edison, there is no aggregate for paying for First Energy.  You are only paying one company.  You are not going through a collection and then hand off because your energy actually comes from Ohio Edison.  And if you look at these things, if you study them and I do because that is what I do for a living, you’ll be farther ahead if you just go with Ohio Edison.  You will get your very best rate and your very lowest Kilowatt-hours.

Ruth Detrow: Where does it have the $12.00 dollars extra?  

Phil Rafeld:  Check into it a little bit further; Call Ohio Edison and ask them because First Energy actually goes through Ohio Edison, so they pick up the payment for Ohio Edison.

Ruth Detrow:  But I don’t see any $12.00 dollar charge here.  

Phil Rafeld:  I would be more than happy to bring in my bill to let you see how mine pans out vs yours.   I know yours says 6.3.  I am very well versed with them.  I use to build houses with just all electric.  That was the best thing out there because they give you a discount for having an electric hot water heater.  They give you a discount for having a heat pump.  They put a FM for currency on the side of your house and when your peak load hit 200, they could shut you down for 8 hours.  The hot water heater, that was the trade off.  

Ruth Detrow:  I apologize Mr. Wertz; I don’t know now what in the world is going on because I don’t see anything about $12.00 dollars at all.  That is the end of my Ward report.  

Ward 4/President:         Paul Wertz
(a)    The alley between East 11th and East 12th Street by the Pizza place; there are big chuckholes down there. Jerry Mack if you could go look at it and see what you think?  The 2nd house off of Union Street on 11th Street.

 PUBLIC HEARING:   7:10 p.m.  Request upon the Appropriation Ordinance.

 Motion to move to Public Hearing by Paul Wertz, moved by Ruth Detrow, seconded by Robert L. Valentine W1.
   Ayes:  Stephen L. Stuart, Robert L. Valentine W1, Robert M. Valentine W2, Ruth Detrow, Paul Wertz.

Anna Tomasek:  I do have the 2008 appropriation with details available.  I have a few copies here available tonight and/or in my office for inspection.

Mayor Stewart:  I will share with the general public and Council that this budget is extremely tight and tighter than I have known in the past as a Councilperson. The very first meeting I had with the departments a couple of days after I took office in January, we recognized that the revenues were a bit tighter than we had anticipated.  Tighter than I had anticipated.  As we started our discussion, the discussion arose that, well if we have to live with this, there will be layoffs, and my statement to them, I don’t want to hear anything more about layoffs ladies and gentlemen.  Go back and look at your budgets, get into it like a business-like manner and let’s see if we can’t come within the revenue strain that we have in front of us.  It has been difficult.  And there are areas that I am going to have to manage very diligently.  The personnel issues in almost every department have projections, not budgeted, but projections that they might go over the budget in amount.  That is where the management comes in.  And I know that people will say, well what about overtime?  I can’t answer what about overtime.  I am asking that each of our department heads in that area and as well as the rest of the budget manage as best they can.  They get a monthly report on how much money has been spent, how much they have left.   A percentage of where they are and that is a great management tool that they can all use and I am asking that they look at this budget and this monthly report very diligently so that we don’t come up at the end of the year short.  There is another area that might happen and I was not in a meeting with our Finance Director Anna and others this past Friday.  If the revenue stream should happen to outrun the projected revenue stream, by some significant amount, we can relook at our revenue, our anticipated revenue and make an adjustment; is that correct?  So we are going to go down this road.  We are already into the third month of the first quarter.  We are going to go down this road for six months and at the end of the six month period, we should have a pretty good track record in front of us that will let us look at the crystal ball with more clarity and when we look at that crystal ball, we will know which way we can loosen the shoe lace or tighten it.  I look at that as another business issue to be looked at the six-month period.  But it is tight.  There are areas that quite frankly are; I am not sure how we will manage all of it, but that is why we are here.

Robert L. Valentine W1:  I have a question for Anna.  What did we project the balance was going to be in 2007?

Anna Tomasek:  For which fund?

Robert L. Valentine W1:  For the General Fund.

Anna Tomasek:  Last year when we had the appropriation proposed to Council, the carryover balance for the year 2007 was projected as zero.  And this year we are projecting that at approximately $30,000.00.  

Robert L. Valentine W1:  What did you project it for last year?

Anna Tomasek:  Zero.  

Robert L. Valentine W1:  And we ended up with a balance of $1.8 million dollars, is that correct?

Anna Tomasek:  That is correct.

Robert L. Valentine W1:  Then why are we projecting a $30,000.00 dollar balance?  If we projected a zero balance last year and we came up with $1.8 million?

Anna Tomasek:  It is based upon $ 2 million dollar carryover to 1.8 was our beginning balance, plus our estimated revenues and then it is all the appropriations equals an approximately $30,000.00 dollar carryover.  

Robert L. Valentine W1:  So we are estimating what we are going to take in?

Anna Tomasek:  Correct.

Robert L. Valentine W1:  But, with that much difference though Anna; 1.8 to zero; that concerns me.  I don’t understand why.  Why we are just projecting $30,000.00.

Anna Tomasek:   I can give you a detailed spreadsheet of the history on that; it will be provided at the next council meeting and that way you can compare budgets to budgets and appropriations to appropriations.

Stephen L. Stuart:  The way I look at this, I would be hard pressed to support appropriations that the allocations for expenditures exceed the projected revenues by $1,800,000.00 dollars for just the General Fund.  And total of all funds they projected allocations of appropriations exceed a revenue of about $ 8 million dollars.  As I look at this; if these are legitimate figures, we cannot be going on and doing business as usual.  There has to be a plan in terms of how we are going to address not only this year but for 2009 and I think this should have been started at the July tax budget because if it is here now, it had to be apparent at the tax budget in July.  

Anna Tomasek:  That is correct and that is why a five-year forecast was also placed in the tax budget at that time.  And it would show those numbers as well.

Stephen L. Stuart:  But you are saying that you are projecting now in the General Fund, a carryover balance at the end of 2008 of about $30,000.00 dollars so we are spending all of our carryover that we started out the year and we obviously got negotiated contracts in place; they are going to have increased cost in 2009; there is obviously going to be other costs of doing business in 2009, but you are saying that no we won’t end up with $30,000.00, and that is not a legitimate figure?

Anna Tomasek:  It is the current estimate as the picture as of today.  

Stephen L. Stuart:  Is that the same kind of estimating that we ended up with $1.8 million dollars at the end of 2007, when the estimated carryover was zero?

Anna Tomasek:  There are reasons for the $1.8 million carryover in 2007.  We had Revenues that came in higher than we anticipated with our estimates.  Also the department heads were very efficient with their budgets.  They expended less than what was actually appropriated for last year.  So you had those combinations of effects causing the carryover balance for 2007.  

Robert L. Valentine W1:  How much were they though?  I swear it was $200,000.00 dollars extra that we didn’t anticipate.   Isn’t that right, about $200,000.00 that we didn’t anticipate?  

Anna Tomasek:  The increase in income tax was higher than we anticipated.  We had inheritance tax that was higher than we anticipated.  So the overall revenues came in higher than we anticipated.  

Robert L. Valentine W1:  But how much though Anna?  I understand what you are saying. But how much?  Is it half a million, still it would give us 1.3 million.

Anna Tomasek:  I can give you a report to show you the actual details what we estimated for 2007, and actual what was projected last year.  I don’t have those figures with me right now.  

Mayor Stewart:  I would like to speak to Mr. Stewart’s comment on that.  We do spend carryover and under normal years we plan for a carryover.  It is necessary because the funding stream in many accounts does not start January 1.  The General funds especially are heavily supported by an income tax in that we do have to have some carryover there.  Yes we are spending it and we are spending some balances that were in other accounts that were carried over.  I don’t disagree that we have to look at a longer-term picture and I don’t want to go back to the tax budget last summer.  I frequently say that is water over the dam and out in the ocean and we can’t get it back but we need to put our foresight on it now.  I don’t disagree with you at all.

Ruth Detrow:  I guess I have a couple of questions Paul.  I know that the Mayor has worked long and diligently and has been aided by people who are in his employ to come up with this in the general fund.  My understanding is that the Finance Dept. even though it is a general fund item has no scrutiny and it troubles me.  The Mayor has asked the Police and the Fire and all sorts of really essential departments to cut and I figured percentages on some of them and it was 1.03 and 1.04.  The Finance Dept., Mr. Mayor did you do anything to encourage them to have a lower total amount?  

Mayor Stewart:  The Finance Department is a separate elected office and the Finance Department is as aware as anyone of the financial struggles that we are having.   I am not in the position nor do I want to be in the position to scrutinize how they budget their department.  Likewise with the judges department, although the judicial group came in and did go through the budget and helped out a great deal.  

Ruth Detrow:  I think everyone is aware of what everyone else is doing.  

Anna Tomasek:  Present Council and Mayor, I would like to address that question on the Finance Budget and also income tax budget; that also affects the Income tax.  The Income Tax division is approximately $400,000.00 dollars and actually has spent less and we have been cutting and keeping control of the Finance department as well as the income tax and we have been spending less for each budget than we have compared to any other department.  In fact right now, the appropriations of the Income Tax department is $415,000.00 and it’s been basically very steady and in fact in 2005, it spent only $413,000.00.  So I think 415,000.00 in appropriations is not too much of a demand on the Finance division and also the Finance department’s actual budget in the General fund is very tight.  We have increased audit costs and we are very good stewards of public money.  So if we can cut any further in the Finance Department, we would, but at this point in time, I don’t see how we can do that.  

Ruth Detrow:  You are the expert on what is done in the Finance department but I look at this and for example; Building and Zoning 1.02% of last year and Fire Department was really heavy 1.12%, the Police department was 99% of 2007 and the Finance department was 1.19%.  I don’t see how that can be.  How we can cut the Police that much and the Finance dept. is that much over.   I don’t understand it Anna.  

Anna Tomasek:  Obviously the Finance budget is controlled by mostly personnel services which are set by the Ordinances and there have not been any increases in the personnel in the Finance division at all.  Actually we have lost an employee and have not increased our budget for personnel for some time.  

Ruth Detrow:  Well according to what I have, it went up a little bit and it wasn’t an unreasonable amount, but in personnel services, it went up 1.69%.  

Anna Tomasek:  It is the same number of personnel based upon the Ordinances.  

Ruth Detrow:  No it is in things like fixture and furniture and would you explain GASB for us?

Anna Tomasek:  GASB is Governmental Accounting Standards Board and I can provide you with details.  It is a comprehensive guideline.  It is a Board.  For example, private accounting sectors are implemented by a board and it is called FASB.  We are regulated by GASB.  They set up rules and regulations on what is required for general accounting principles.  It is a lot of detail, but it is basically our principles and guidelines on how we manage finances for the City of Ashland.  They are our regulatory agency.  They basically come up with our auditing standards and a lot of financial principles, for example there is GASB 34 principle on its assets, there are principles on investments, there are principles on every aspect of Finance.  That is what GASB is, our regulatory agency.  

Stephen L. Stuart:  And what is going to increase the cost of that $8,000.00 dollars from the 2007 level?

Anna Tomasek:  We are currently in the process of coming up with more comprehensive financial reports.  That is due to increased auditing costs.  Last year, the city of Ashland had to go out to bid for independent auditors from the State Auditors office and the increased cost of the bid went up.   So that is why the price of the Finance division budget cost is up due to the State contract that went out to bid last year.  

Stephen L. Stuart:  What about furniture and fixtures at $12,000.00 dollars vs actual expenditures; in the past year $906.00 dollars?

Anna Tomasek:  We are planning a brand new project in the Finance Division for safety and confidentiality and other reasons; we are looking at implementing a counter very similar to what was done in the Water office.  Obviously there is a counter in the Engineering dept., HR dept. has a counter and it is plans to actually build a counter to be customer service friendly to prevent confidential reports in the Finance dept. incidents to come up and to protect our documents.  Also safety concerns.  

Ruth Detrow:  I am still not happy with building a counter and bumping it up like that.  I am not happy with that.

Stephen L. Stuart:  A counter cost is also reflective in the maintenance labor reimbursement I think.  It went from $160.00 to $2,000.00 dollars.

Anna Tomasek:  There is also for furniture and fixtures, there is an increase in cost when the Finance Division had to move its records room from the second floor to downstairs.  That has caused a little inconvenience for customer service relations.  When we are on the phone and have to pull records, now we have to go downstairs, so that increase in cost is also to allow us to buy some filing cabinets and some extra storage space for down stairs for our records which is what we need to fulfill our records and to be efficient with our office.

Ruth Detrow:  Is this budget the final word?  Mr. Wertz?

Paul Wertz:  It is up to all of Council to decide what to do here.

Ruth Detrow:  I think something like this ought to wait until we have more income.  There are some things that are important and I will venture to say the Police Department is and there are some things that are important but can wait and I will venture to say that that is the Finance Department.

Paul Wertz:  These figures have to go to the Court House by March 31, 2008.  We have to know what we are going to do and which direction we want to go.  I have a couple of questions Anna.
We all know fund 611 is in trouble, but your figures and the figures for 2007 is scary.  The Electric Bill actual for 2007 was $196,000.00 dollars, you have down $102,000.00 dollars. Is this all the Electric Bill is going to be this year?  I cannot imagine going down that much and the Gas Bill, the actual last year was $23,000.00 dollars and you have it down to $12,000.00.  

Anna Tomasek:  When Mr. Hunter, Ellie Grubb and myself met, we had to fulfill Councils request for a balanced budget in the fund 611.  Mr. Hunter and Ellie made those decisions on what items to be cut.  They made some cuts within that, I cannot really describe that other than we have to fulfill debts payments and we have to fulfill the payroll and salary.  

Paul Wertz:  So what you are saying then, the electric bill and the gas bill are going to come from other accounts later down the line when they run out of money?

Michael Hunter, Director of Water Treatment:  When I came to the meeting on the 10th, I was faced with the responsibility, and I had the budget handed to me and it was $ 27,000.00 dollars over.  My responsibility was to get that to the zero negative balance.  So we went down through our budget and frankly that budget had no real fat in it.  So when we made our cuts, we made cuts that we new were going to go into the flesh to get us to that zero point.  The understanding is we would re-examine as the rest of the city would, the revenue stream to see if we can put some of that money back in.  Clearly these cuts were made with one sole purpose and that was to get that budget down to a zero negative balance so that could indeed get it statutorily on the agenda and pass; so it was a hard decision to make, but at the same time it is with the understanding that we have to re-examine our revenues. To stand here tonight and say that that budget is going to get me through 2008 if there are no changes, would be disingenuous, not to mention untrue.  It is not going to get me through.  But the fact of the matter is, we will be as frugal as we can possibly be; we will manage the budget that we have as long as we possibly can but the understanding is that we need to re-examine that revenue stream when we get a little further into the year.

Paul Wertz:  There are a lot of items like that and those are two that really stuck out.  I am not going to bring the rest of them up but there are a lot of them.   If we add this all up, you are talking bucks, people, and not small bucks, bucks.  So we are going to have to be careful what we are doing.  

Mayor Stewart:  There must be an understanding that the Revenue as it is projected for the Sewer Fund is reasonably accurate.  It does not fluctuate all that much.  The way it might fluctuate would be in the negative manner if in fact some annexation should happen.  I believe we have taken into account some possible reductions in that area.  We have anticipated a possible reduction in Net revenue in the 611 account.  There is one way, there are a couple of ways, but there is one sure way of increasing revenue in the sewer account and that is through the rate structure and what you have heard this evening from Mr. Hunter is that this budget will not get him through the year.  And what you have heard me say is that this Council will have to look at very strenuously a rate adjustment for the sewer fund and may look at a rate adjustment of significance.  This rate was looked at back in 2004, 2005 time frame and a rate study was made that we should have made an adjustment as early as 2006, maybe earlier.  That was not done and now we are faced with some of the consequences.  And I am not blaming anyone; I am sharing with you the facts that I see them in the first 60 days being in office.  There are some very difficult decisions that must be made in the very near future and yes we could pass this budget and it is balanced.  It is not really balanced, it is balanced for part of the year for the sewer fund, that is what it really comes down to, but it meets the criteria for a balanced budget, is that correct?

Anna Tomasek:  That is correct.  

Anthony Watson, 1025 Elmarna Ave.: Wasn’t it a few years ago that you put a rate increase on our sewer/water bills?  And you are saying what in two years you are thinking about adding another increase on top of that yet?   

Paul Wertz:  It was a water increase, not sewer.

Anthony Watson:  Doesn’t the Water affect the sewer rates?

Mayor Stewart:  Water usage dictates the usage of which your sewer rate is figured on.  

Anthony Watson:   You are thinking about increasing just the sewer rate?

Paul Wertz:  Yes, not the water, but the sewer.

Anthony Watson:  Do you know what percentage?

Paul Wertz:  No, we have not discussed it.  

Anthony Watson:  What are your projected projects for this coming year on your sewer system?

Michael Hunter:  There are no projects in this budget. We had some projects before we went through this process, they were all removed.  There are no capital projects in this budget.

Ruth Detrow:  Which is a good way to put us behind and if we do that for a few years.

Anthony Watson:  So you have enough money in the budget to maintain the system right now, but no extras?

Michael Hunter:  No sir, that would not be a fair statement; what I have is a budget and if I can project somewhat of why I am not the Finance Director, it is looking like 6 months, 7 months at the most in some of these line items, not the entire budget of course, but some of these line items, that could extend out possibly if Revenues are higher than we anticipate but chances are they will not be.  I think we looked at this very carefully and that is where we are and that is why the Mayor is mentioning the necessity to consider at this time a rate increase.  That is something that would certainly support it.

Phil Rafeld:  I guess from attending meetings here since August of 2007 and hearing what you have on the agenda for the people who want sidewalks for them.  You want them to be fixing up their houses and yet you guys are running into a budget problem here.  For those of us who have to work for a living and live in the real world and I understand you all do too; this is what we are all facing when it comes to our own personal incomes.  There is only so much we can give because the levy’s go up, city taxes go up, sanitation and water go up and you guys are running against the same hard road we are and for a long time, the middle class was never effected by any of this but I think we are all affected by it and it is amazing to me to hear you guys sit up there and try to figure a way to raise revenue so you can keep the budget just going when there is no way for the average household to find a way to get more money for sidewalks or home repairs and things that they need.  These are the top ten things that you guys put on your list that you would like to see done in this community which is a noble thing because if everybody had money I am sure people don’t just say you know what, the heck with it.  But right now there seems to be a money issue and it is even affecting city hall, it is affecting you right here.  It is affecting the way that you guys are going to have to figure out what you are going to do for the next year and I guess it just seems strange to me that when we put a smiling face on and say we need to get you sidewalks, this is what it is going to do for the community or we need to fix these houses up. City Hall is having that struggle now and having that same difficulty that we are asking those people that they may not have the income to support what you are asking them to do.  

Ruth Detrow:  So your point is?

Phil Rafeld:  My point is, you know when I come here and balance the budget at the end of last year, there were a couple of items that were in the negative.  You just slid funds and zeroed them out at the end of the year and had a balanced budget and we went to a balanced budget on December 28 in a meeting here at noon.  We went on to the next year and it was like everyone was happy and everybody was smiling, we have lots of money; we are two months later, all of a sudden we have no money, there is no money for anything any more.  What happened in those two months?

Paul Wertz:  Well that is what I am saying; It is somewhat like Bear Stearns, they told us all along there was money there; four days later, they are bankrupt.

Ruth Detrow:  I don’t really think the City of Ashland is like Bear Stearns.  But because we are living in the same world, as you are Mr. Rafeld, we are very aware of the problems of unemployment, of not having the money.  We are aware of it every day.  I come to Council with a smile on my face a lot of times.  That doesn’t mean I am not aware of the fact that it is a rough job trying to keep our City solvent.  And we are five very diverse type people who are trying to do that.  We are having this Public Hearing so that we can hear what the public has to say about our budget.  

Phil Rafeld:  Well I think that is my point; the whole time I was here until just recently, there was little inklings of any problems.  

Robert M. Valentine W2:  If you would see the reports we get every meeting.                                                                                                                                                                

Phil Rafeld:  Well that is the thing; I get a paraphrase and you guys pass it.  We don’t really know what is in the report.  

Mayor Stewart:  What would you like to see Mr. Rafeld?   I would like to solve this problem.  Help me solve the problem.  

Phil Rafeld:  Well, you know I guess I am not in your seat where I get to see all of the reports.

Mayor Stewart:   I know, you would like to be, but what would you do if you were in my seat?

Phil Rafeld:  I would probably have to make some tough decisions.

Mayor Stewart:  And that is what we are going to do.  In fact, the fact of the matter is, this budget reflects some very tough decisions that have been made.  The reason this budget is still here and not already passed is because of the difficulty of the decisions that we have had to make.  The department heads have had to make a lot of tough decisions.  

Phil Rafeld:  Then I have to defer to you when you took over office; you said the City was in very healthy shape.

Mayor Stewart:  It appeared to be.

Phil Rafeld:  So in two months!

Mayor Stewart: Wait, time out.  You are not going to back me into a wall to tell you what failed in two months because nothing has failed.  The fact of the matter is that the process has progressed through several years.  We did in fact have a very generous carryover and as one or two of our councilmen have suggested, that maybe this Revenue stream may be a bit too conservative but we don’t know that and we won’t know that until we get some track record into this year.  We have to be conservative.  We cannot knowingly go forward with a negative income.  We cannot do that.  Now I am telling you and have already told you that the sewer fund is in a heap of hurt.  You don’t cut the electric to run that plant 50% and expect you are going to run all year. That is some of the tough decisions that have been made during this past week to bring this budget into a balanced budget.  I don’t have a magic wand for that Mr. Rafeld.

Phil Rafeld:  I don’t think that you do; I think you guys have a very tough road ahead of you.

Mayor Stewart:  And we concur with you.  

Phil Rafeld:  I can see trouble down the road for you very quickly now which was not presented.  Maybe a long time coming? But it was never presented that way.  

Ruth Detrow:  All you have to do is read your newspaper, watch financial things on television.  Our whole country is in trouble.  Our City isn’t in any more trouble than the rest of them, but we are all in financial trouble and anyone who can read or hear knows that.  You cannot blame us for thinking that we are the only ones who are doing it.  We aren’t.  

Comments or questions?

Krystal Estridge, 440 East Liberty St.:  I am just wondering if we are going to hear tonight about any of the other departments and their budget or if the Finance department was just the highlight of the troubles of the budget?  Certainly there are other departments represented in that budget.
When you were asking questions about the Finance dept., is that the only one in trouble?

Ruth Detrow:  It is the only department that is that much over last year.  

Krystal Estridge:  There are no other departments in the City that are?

Ruth Detrow:  No.  Some of them are under last year.  So very important departments like the Police department which is just a tiny bit under what they had last year.  This stuck out like a sore thumb because of the big disparity.  

John Chorpening, 1126 Overlook Drive: Did you say the Finance was 1.19%?

Ruth Detrow:  1.194.

John Chorpening: So that is less than 1.2%.

Ruth Detrow:  119% of last year.

Paul Wertz:  20% over.

John Chorpening:  What is total budget?

Ruth Detrow:  Am I right Anna $411,500.00?

John Chorpening:  And this department was how much?

Ruth Detrow:  It was 99%.  Their budget was $ 2,999,941.00 and they are 1% under the year before which was $3,033,000.00.

Anna Tomasek:  When you talk to the Finance division, you have to take in two departments and there are two budgets.  The income tax division and that is in fund 703 and the general fund finance department.  In the Finance dept., the appropriation proposed is $411,500.00 and in income tax is $415,000.00.  

Ruth Detrow:  Where is the Income Tax?

Anna Tomasek:  Fund 703, it is an Internal service fund.  Our budget has been pretty much steady.  There is no dramatic increases other than contracts required that has been signed that we have to obligate those duties for the State of Ohio on the Auditors fees.  Those are fixed, that is a five-year contract.  We cannot do anything to change that.  The other thing proposed is for safety of the Finance Division employees to create a counter and also increase the Finance office efficiency. By the way,  our office was moved basically in December when the transit office was taken away from Finance, we had to move all of our files immediately downstairs which has created a huge burden and inconvenience to our customers to pay for fees and filing cabinets to make that system more efficient.

Ruth Detrow:  You lost me Anna.  I am sorry.  Back up to about when the transit was taken.

Anna Tomasek:  Okay, in December of 2007, the Finance Division’s records room.

Ruth Detrow:  Slow down Anna.  Anna, please repeat it again.  

Anna Tomasek:  The Finance office had a records room also on the second floor where my office is.  It was right across from the Mayor’s secretary.  We were directed by the Mayor’s office to move all of our files out immediately to downstairs which is the first floor.  That has caused some hardship in our office for getting checks, insurance forms or anything else a citizen would call about.

Ruth Detrow:  That is where I got stuck; you are not doing the transit anymore?  So how do you have a responsibility?

Anna Tomasek:  Files.  It is our filing room, it has been moved.  Our records room, where we keep checks, payroll, W2’s.  

Ruth Detrow:  What does that have to do with the Transit system?

Anna Tomasek:  They are now in our records room.  Our records room has been moved. It is now the office of Nancy Welch.  And now in our budget, we have to get some more filing equipment to fulfill and to make sure we are obligating our requests to the citizens, to make sure we are operating a very efficient department.  There are some expenditures to buy filing cabinets, etc.

Mayor Stewart:  Before anyone brings it up.  The Mayor’s budget went up by 7%. Almost 10% total. Are there any specific departments that you would like to know about maam?

Krystal Estridge:  I was just wondering why the Finance department in general was kind of highlighted and certainly with the City and this many departments; there has got to be other departments that have a little more on their budget or has spent more.

Ellie Grubb:  Most of the budgets are up. We have copies here for anyone who would like them.

Anna Tomasek:  We have them here for anyone to inspect.  The last comment regarding the Finance Dept.  We have delayed projects but for the safety of the city Finance employees, I recommend to Council to consider, definitely for safety concerns, we definitely need a counter built.  It has been delayed in the past and I think it is time we move forward on the Finance Dept.  

Mayor Stewart:  We are not voting on the Budget tonight.  This meeting was to get input for our budget.  I have not scrutinized this budget since I have been back.  I got back into town this afternoon.  

Paul Wertz:  While you are on that, I think the article in the newspaper said that something to the affect that the Mayor picked the wrong time to go on vacation, but when we appointed him Mayor, he stated every year in March, he goes to Florida for two weeks and he has done that forever and we had no problem with him doing that so when this article came out, it made it sounded like he left just to get away from it.  That was not true.  The plans were already set in advance.

Ruth Detrow:  We knew it on Council, all of us.  We wanted him to be our Mayor anyway.  So if you need anybody to blame, you will have to blame the five of us.  The four of us, Mr. Stuart wasn’t here.

John Chorpening:  Doesn’t the City Maintenance department build counters anymore?  I know they did the remodeling in the kitchen at the Fire Station.

Robert M. Valentine W2:  That is what the In-House money is for.  We have really good guys, a couple of good guys.

Paul Wertz:  So Council do we want to set a Work Session?

Comments or Questions?

Robert L. Valentine W1:  Is this budget Anna, going to stay exactly as it is?

Anna Tomasek:   That is up to Council and the Mayor and myself.  We all need to work as a team and you all need to make the final decisions on the budget.  We should give the Mayor definitely some time to review.

Mayor Stewart:  I think all of us need to understand that Revenue projections is the responsibility of the Finance Department, is that accurate?

Anna Tomasek:  That is correct.

Mayor Stewart:  The budgeting and the spending of the money within that revenue is the responsibility of the Mayor and it has been a tough job.  But we are going to get there.  This Council will work with us and the Department heads are going to work with us and we are going to get there. I don’t want to go out of here with the glasses half empty.  The glass is still half full guys and girls.  

Paul Wertz:  How about next Tuesday night, March 25, 2008 at 7:00 p.m. for a Special Session to pass the appropriations?

Motion to move back into Regular Session of Council meeting by Paul Wertz, moved by Robert L. Valentine W1, seconded by Ruth Detrow.
     Ayes:  Stephen L. Stuart, Robert L. Valentine W1, Robert M. Valentine W2, Ruth Detrow, Paul Wertz.

Moved back into Regular session at 7:40 p.m.

Old Business:  None

New Business:
(a)    Ohio Edison:  Special permit for mod-substation.

Jim Cooper:  Ohio Edison has been looking for a location for a mini substation for a considerable period time without much luck and they have presented material for Council to look at that is in your packet.  This material has also been given to the Planning Commission and:  Chapter 1183 gives Council the perrogative to make a special uses situation for among other things mini substations without rezoning and the process is that if Council so chooses to recommend Planning Commission have 60 days to look at the situation.  The location of this particular substation is just off of McKinley on Center Street.  It is staked out on the four corners of the fence.  Council is basically asking the Planning Commission to look at that area to access the traffic, the impact on a Residential area, anything else you want to have accessed, and get back a report to you and then it is up to Council if you want to permit this or not and basically what we are asking tonight is to ask you to send this to the Planning Commission for their review and will report back to you per Chapter 1183.  

Paul Wertz:  This site they picked Jim, it is basically hidden by trees anyway.  We won’t see it right?

Jim Cooper:  Part of it is covered by trees up along the right side of the road as you are going east, yes there are some areas that you can see, again there would be recommendations made to you and you can add to the recommendations whatever you require.  It might make it palatable to you.

Ruth Detrow:  That would be after we get it back from the Planning Commission?

Jim Cooper:  Exactly. If the Planning Commission doesn’t get back to you within 60 days, then it is an automatic pass.   We would like you to make the recommendations tonight to get with the Planning Commission to take a look at it.  We have gotten to them this material so they have plenty of time to take a look at it.   I am sure it will be addressed at the first Monday meeting of the Planning Commission next month.

Move to make the recommendations needed to the Planning Commission for Ohio Edison by Robert L. Valentine W1, seconded by Stephen L. Stuart.
   Ayes:  Stephen L. Stuart, Robert L. Valentine W1, Robert M. Valentine, Ruth Detrow, Paul Wertz.




Mayor’s Comments:
(a)    You have my commitment that my time will be spent on reviewing the budget over the next several days and if I see the need or recommendation for changes, I will contact Mr. Wertz working with Anna and we will get something done.   
(b)    Thank you for your comment Paul that you were all aware and concurred with my vacation time.  It was not the best time to be away but that is the way it was planned and followed through.  I would comment that I appreciate the continued flow of information that came to me and I expected that and asked for that.  It was a vacation but I also got my information on the beach.  That was the good part.

Comments of questions from the Audience: Items that are not included on the Agenda

None.


Motion to adjourn Regular Session by Paul Wertz, moved by Robert L. Valentine W1, seconded by Robert M. Valentine W 2.
      Ayes:  Stephen L. Stuart, Robert L. Valentine W1, Robert M. Valentine W2, Ruth Detrow, Paul Wertz.

Adjourned Regular Session at 8:08



                                               Submitted by
                                        Valarie Bishoff
                                        Clerk of Council