Note: links to the video recording and the council packet can be found at the bottom of this post. Please note any errors or omissions in the comments. Anything noted between brackets was inserted by Clarkston Sunshine.
Agenda item #1, Call to Order (Video time mark 0:00:01):
Eric Haven said it was 7:00. He called the meeting to order and asked everyone to say the Pledge of Allegiance.
Agenda item #2, Pledge of Allegiance (Video time mark 0:00:08):
Pledge said.
Agenda item #3, Roll Call (Video time mark 0:00:22):
Eric Haven, Al Avery, Gary Casey, Joe Luginski, and Laura Rodgers were present. Bruce Fuller and Sue Wylie were absent.
Agenda item #4, Motion: Approval of Agenda (Video time mark 0:00:39):
Motion to approve the agenda as presented by Avery; Luginski second.
No discussion.
Motion to approve the agenda passed unanimously by voice vote.
Agenda Item #5, Public Comments (Video time mark 0:01:00):
Haven read the rules for public comments.
Chet Pardee:
Pardee said that after the January 10th city council meeting, the mayor suggested that he replace his criticisms with suggestions for improvement. At the following council meeting, Pardee said he made a series of suggestions for council, and for city officials, including suggested timing that followed the council’s usual calendar for February through June. Although Pardee had hoped that the suggestions would be implemented, both the mayor and the city manager have not followed the suggestions made for their February implementation. For reference, Pardee said that he included the suggestions made on January 24th at the end of his comments tonight.
Tonight’s agenda includes a resolution to amend the budget in accordance with the budget laws of the State of Michigan. It’s encouraging that the city manager is closely following both the law and the city’s expenses. Pardee suggested that council thoroughly discuss what particular actions have caused these specific amendments to be required.
There are opportunities to improve the effectiveness of Clarkston city operations by implementing 20th century management tools. Pardee suggested one tool for the city to adopt is management by objectives. There are not enough funds, time, and energy for city employees to do everything required and expected by various constituencies. The city’s Master Plan is an excellent starting point. Determining annual priorities is critical to management by objectives. City council and the city manager should publicly discuss and determine what should be the priorities for the city annually. Pardee said that he previously suggested a facilitated workshop for this purpose.
The city’s priorities should drive specific objectives for the city manager and each employee. Pardee suggested annual appraisals and employee reviews be implemented where the achievement of each employee’s objectives becomes the basis for salary changes.
Pardee will suggest additional 20th century management tools for improving city operations in future public comments.
Pardee thanked the council.
[Pardee’s referenced January 24th suggestions follow below. They were provided by Mr. Pardee but not included in the recorded meeting comments.]
I suggest the Mayor provide in a February council [meeting] the listing of city commission positions and city council positions with terms expiring in 2022. I suggest in a June council meeting the mayor provide the listing of city commission members with expiring terms who do not wish to be reappointed. This should provide to city officials and city residents an awareness of upcoming commission appointments.
I suggest the city manager present in a February council meeting the result of the audit completed in December of the actual fund balance on 6/30/21 ($196,000 was assumed for the current budget) and his recommendation for changes to the current capital project budget items.
I suggest the city manager present in a March council meeting his recommended priority for city streets needing repair and the number of sidewalk sections requiring repair and the estimated repair costs of both streets and sidewalks.
I suggest Sue Wylie present in a March council meeting the Planning Commission’s updated status of the city’s Capital Improvement Plan.
I suggest the city manager present in a March council meeting the updated cost of the East Washington Street sewer repair and any other known city sewer repair projects which have been postponed.
I suggest the city manager present in a March council meeting the status of the grant for Miller Road repair, any updated consideration for improving safety for those walking on the intended blacktop sidewalk, and information on water levels and the water health of Upper and Lower Mill Ponds and Parke Lake after the Miller Road culvert is replaced.
I suggest the council’s liaison to the Oakland County Drain Commission Interceptor Sewer project present any timing and estimated costs for Interceptor Sewer repairs applicable to Clarkston.
I suggest the city manager and treasurer present in an April council meeting the dates of the expiring bond issues, when elections would be required to replace the expiring millage with similar millage amounts, and the estimated timing and amounts of dollars that could be provided for potential use for sidewalk and street repairs without an increase in cost to taxpayers above the current millage levels.
I suggest the city manager present to council in a May meeting a listing of the capital improvement projects and costs which were discussed for the 2022-23 budget but could not be accommodated because of expected revenue constraints.
Haven thanked Pardee. Haven said he wanted to make a general comment that as he told Pardee before, they will be bringing reports on these items timely as they get to them. Haven didn’t know if Pardee’s months align specifically with those reports, but they are in budget season now and so on, and so many of Pardee’s questions will be answered relative to priorities and so on. Haven would like Pardee’s attention to the fact they are hearing what he has to say and will be reporting in a timely manner on those things.
Pardee thanked Haven.
Haven asked if anyone else had any public comments.
No other public comments.
Public comments were closed.
Agenda Item #6, FYI (Video time mark 0:04:35):
Haven said he didn’t have “For Your Information” items and asked if anyone else had any announcements they would like to make.
No additional comments.
Agenda Item #7, Sheriff Report (Video time mark 0:04:42; page 3/25 of the council packet):
Haven said that Lieutenant Rich Cummins was there and welcomed him. This is the first time they’ve seen him in person; he was online last time.
Lieutenant Cummins said yes, he was, and he’s now over COVID. He said he shouldn’t say that he’s gotten over it; he still has some problems with it (unintelligible). Haven said that they are glad that he’s better, for sure.
Haven said that they had Lieutenant Cummins’ report in front of them and asked if anyone had any questions or comments based on his report.
No comments.
Haven said OK and he thinks that Lieutenant Cummins did a good job. Haven thanked Lieutenant Cummins for coming.
Agenda Item #8, City Manager Report (Video time mark 0:05:29; page 4/25 of the council packet):
Haven said that that the city manager’s report is in the packet, and that’s the information about what Jonathan [Smith, city manager] is working on. Haven asked if there were any questions or comments for Smith relative to his report.
No questions or comments.
Haven said that everyone is doing a good job tonight. There were no questions at all for Smith to answer.
Luginski said that he had a question for Smith that isn’t part of the city manager’s report, and the insurance competitive bid kind of sparked his memory of this. Many, many, many months ago, they talked about looking at garbage collection, having it uniform in the city so that the city only has one garbage day instead of having garbage out in the street three, four, and five days a week, and have a contract with the city to do that. Luginski said he was just curious if any kind of discussions have happened. Luginski said he knows that it’s not in the report, but that kind of triggered his thought. Smith said that was fine.
Smith said that they talked with Pat Kittle [former Independence Township supervisor] about joining forces with Independence Township and doing this as a joint investigation with the township. With Pat’s leaving, it kind of took a setback, and COVID as well, but now that Jerry Fisher [new Independence Township supervisor] is there, they are starting to have those discussions again, and they are looking at when the meetings will be called. Smith said they are trying again on that, he expects there will be a meeting scheduled within the next month or so, and more importantly, a committee established that will do the research. Smith said that he and Haven met with Fisher a couple of weeks ago, and the joint agreement was that they would investigate this. No telling what the outcome will be. It may be that there is no interest in pursuing this. Smith didn’t think that would be the outcome, but it could be. It’s still on (unintelligible) as a project they want to do, but it took a little bit of a setback.
Luginski said that Smith was right, they need to find out what it means from a commercial standpoint and everything, but they talked about it, and the city is small enough so that the entire city could be done in one day. Smith agreed. Luginski said every day [week?] on a Monday, pick a day, whatever day it is. Luginski said that on Main Street, and he’s sure it’s on every street in the city, there are garbage cans out there at least three if not four days a week because everybody has a different service, right? So there seems to be garbage cans and garbage out there all the time. It’s not a big deal, but it would be nice if it made sense to consolidate that. Smith agreed, especially on the smaller streets. Those trucks are probably going to be going up and down Main Street anyway, but the smaller streets, they don’t necessarily have to be on those streets if they don’t service those homes. Luginski agreed. Smith said it would take the wear and tear off the streets.
Haven said (unintelligible) if a lot of the preliminary work could be done and hearings and so forth before the November elections, it could be stuck on the ballot and a decision made. Just a thought. Smith agreed. Smith thought it would have to be submitted by August and asked Jennifer [Speagle, city clerk] if that was correct. Smith was pretty sure that it had to be by August.
Luginski asked if it was something that would have to go on the ballot. Smith said he wasn’t sure. Tom Ryan [city attorney] asked if they were going to try to levy a mill, because they can levy up to three mills without a vote for refuse. Ryan said he thought it would depend on what the cost is. Luginski agreed and said that they need to find out, so it depends on the commercials. Ryan said they really can’t do an advisory vote; that’s not what the ballot box is for. Luginski agreed and asked if we could find that out. He’s not sure if they wanted to try do it this year or not. (Directly his comments to Ryan), Haven said so it would be council action, not a public input/vote. Ryan said that what he’s saying is that the state law allows up to three mills without a vote of the people if it’s a refuse collection/removal. He doesn’t know what the cost would be. Luginski said yes, they would have to find that out for sure. He’s on Advanced Disposal, which is now Waste Management, and he knows that (unintelligible), and he knows that his bill has gone up considerably over the last couple of years to where he doesn’t know if they could get a better deal by having everybody in the city on the same contract – Smith said we better – Luginski said yeah, that’s the goal, right, with the same company, aggregate all those dollars together. Ryan said spoiler alert, they would probably get a few surcharges in the contract because of what’s going on in the world. Haven agreed. Luginski said we would get that anyway without that. Luginski said anyway, he was just asking. Haven said it was an interesting comment on the subject.
Haven asked if anyone else had any comments about the city manager’s report.
No additional comments.
Agenda Item #9, Motion: Acceptance of the Consent Agenda as Presented (Video time mark 0:11:01):
-
- 02-14-2022 – Final Minutes (page 5/25 of the council packet)
- 02-28-2022 – Draft Minutes (page 6/25 of the council packet)
- 03-14-2022 – Treasurer’s Report (page 8/25 of the council packet)
- 03-05-2022 – Check Disbursement Report, 02-01-2022 – 02-28-2022 (page 9/25 of the council packet)
- February 2022 Invoices, Carlisle/Wortman (page 12/25 of the council packet)
- February 2022 Invoices, Thomas J. Ryan, P.C. (page 14/25 of the council packet)
Haven said he would ask for a motion to accept the consent agenda. It’s in their packet and combines the minutes and treasurer’s report – the final minutes from 2-14, the draft minutes from 2-28, and the treasurer’s report. Haven said he would entertain a motion to accept the consent agenda as it has been given to them.
Motion by Casey; second Rodgers.
Haven asked if there was any discussion.
Pardee said that he had a question. He saw that the code enforcement bill is in the packet. He thought it would be helpful for council and the public to hear the progress that the code enforcement person has made in essentially four or five months for two things. One, to be sure that we understand what we are getting for our money, and two, to alert other citizens to the sort of violations that the code enforcement officer is seeing.
Haven asked if Smith wanted to wing that or come back later with an update. Smith said that he thought that it was a fair question, and he will ask Stacey [Kingsbury] to provide an update and give them a sense for the type of notices, warnings, and citations that she’s issued. Haven said generalities, OK. Smith agreed. Smith said that they issue warnings first. They like not to issue citations. They will issue warnings first and try to get people to correct just on the warning. Smith said that he can get an update from Kingsbury and provide that at the next council meeting. Haven said it was a fair question and thanked Pardee.
Haven asked if there were any other questions or comments about the consent agenda.
No additional questions or comments.
Motion to accept the consent agenda passed by unanimous voice vote.
Agenda Item #10, Old Business
Item 10a – Resolution/Discussion CDBG [Community Development Block Grant] 2022 PY Funds (Video time mark 0:13:06)
-
- Resolution for CDBG Allocation PY 2022 of Approximately $8,000 (page 16/25 of the council packet)
Haven said they’ve talked about this before, a discussion about where they are going to spend their roughly $8,000 of CDBG [Community Development Block Grant] funds. Haven said he understands that Mr. Mike Pucher from Oakland County Neighborhood Housing and Development is online to give them a little update regarding how they could spend the money and what the categories are. Haven asked Smith if that was correct. Smith said yes, Pucher was online. Pucher is the expert, at least in Smith’s mind, on everything CDBG-related. Smith said he would let Pucher introduce himself and give them kind of the introductory level of what the mission of CDBG is and what kinds of things should the council be considering when they are making a decision on where to allocate the funds.
Mike Pucher:
Pucher thanked the city council and mayor for having him. He said he was with Oakland County Neighborhood Housing and Development as they indicated. Pucher said that CDBG is the Community Development Block Grant. It’s a grant that comes down from HUD [the federal government’s Housing and Urban Development] to the county. It’s a formula-allocated grant, and it’s disbursed out to the 53 communities in the county that participate in their urban county program. So, the grant comes in, they take 20% for administration right off the top, they take 1/3 of the grant for their home improvement program which is offered to all residents in Oakland County to participate in, and then the other 2/3 is divided up among the 53 participating communities by an income and population formula. The primary objective of the grant is to benefit low- and moderate-income residents, to clean up slums and blight, and to help with an urgent community need. For example, when Katrina hit, the President authorized CDBG funds to help out the citizens of New Orleans. That was an example of an urgent community need. In the City of Pontiac, they use a lot of the funds for cleaning up slums and blight. In other major cities, they use it for that also.
Pucher thought that Clarkston only received $7,000 or $8,000. Smith said he thought it was $8,000. Pucher said that in the past, the city has done projects with Independence Township, which Pucher thought was a good idea. Several years ago, Clarkston partnered with them. They ran a minor home repair program, they helped out some residents within the village that helped out Clarkston residents, and they administered it all for Clarkston. In the past, Clarkston has also run a van transportation program. Independence Township has a successful van transportation program to move its seniors around the area or to the Senior Center, and they would come by and pick up Clarkston residents as well. Pucher said that frankly, he thought that either one of those is a good idea for Clarkston to go forward. It’s seamless, the township takes on all of the administrative burden, and Clarkston doesn’t have to do anything except write one check. They will send one bill once a year, and Clarkston writes one check. It benefits your community, and it helps Oakland County out too. It helps their spending. They are always on the hook for a spending performance ratio from HUD. They have to be at a 1.5 ratio overall, and that helps them out. If you can get one bill in, it’s a good spend, and it helps out some residents, then it’s a win/win for everybody.
The application for 2022 was due last December. Pucher knows that Clarkston has had some internal challenges over the last few months getting that submitted to the county, but they need to have it submitted as soon as possible because Oakland County has to submit the application to HUD on behalf of the whole county, all 53. They have to review all the applications and environmental concerns and get that into HUD.
Those would be the two things that Pucher would recommend. If Clarkston could get that in as soon as possible, they would appreciate it.
Pucher thanked the council.
Haven said that was a pretty good explanation and was thinking about what Pucher said. The city has worked with Independence Township at one juncture for some cleanup. They administered or had some assistance to do it or something that. Clarkston utilized those funds for the betterment of its citizens. Haven asked Pucher if he recalled that there were some property issues or property cleanup involved in that. Pucher said no, unless it was done under minor home repair, maybe they possibility got some dumpsters – is that what Haven is thinking about? Haven said no, he didn’t have any first-hand awareness of this until Pucher mentioned it just a minute ago that they had done that. Haven said that he knew about the Senior Center, transportation, as well as he thought they’ve done some work with Youth Assistance; they’ve helped Youth Assistance a time or two. Pucher agreed.
Haven said that we do have some increasing areas where there are some homes that need some help. Haven is sympathetic to some of the situations there and perhaps they could come alongside some of them and help some of the citizens under that category of blight improvement. Haven is interested in Independence Township, but if they’ve cooperated with Dave McKee or someone on getting that administrated in the past, he doesn’t know. Smith said it’s usually handled through their Parks and Rec[reation] group.
Smith told Pucher that he thought that was a good cue, and Pucher told Smith that given that the county has a program for low-income home repairs, Pucher suggested that Clarkston not use its CDBG funds for home repair, since there’s already an existing Oakland County program out there.
Smith asked Pucher if he would reiterate that point. Pucher said that as he mentioned at the beginning, 1/3 of their grant goes into a pool for home improvements, and low-income residents of the County in the 53 communities can income-qualify based on Section 8 [HUD program] income limits for an $18,000 loan. So that would be a lien put on the property for $18,000 for home improvements. At one time, when Clarkston was partnering with Independence Township and giving them Clarkston’s approximately $8,000 for, they ran a minor home repair program, which is a grant program, and that could help a couple residents. As everyone knows, everything has gone up in cost so $7,000 or $8,000 doesn’t go really far. You could help maybe two people put in furnaces or something, and those would be grants through the township. Pucher didn’t think that Clarkston needed to duplicate the program that they already have running with the county program, which is a lien program up to $18,000, and plus if you get into doing windows and doors, if the house is older than 1978, you could have lead paint issues that you might end up getting involved in. You have to use a state-licensed risk assessor to test for lead paint, and then use lead abatement contractors. It’s a lot of logistics and a lot of administrative burden on Clarkston’s part to go down that path when Oakland County already has that all set up at their end.
Rodgers asked Pucher what the income level of people that would qualify for the county program. Pucher said he didn’t have it right in front of him, it’s Section 8, it’s on their website, but a family four can make up to $52,000.
Haven said in that light, they always talk about grants and applying for grants, what is the application process, and might the city be helpful to some of its citizens in making applications for some of those funds to be spent here – what’s that like? Haven said he didn’t know if Smith had experience with it or not – has he applied? Smith said no. Haven said it’s a third of the money they get, and they distribute it. Smith said he doesn’t know if there are a lot of families in the city, quite frankly, who would be qualified for it, but they can definitely work with them to guide them to the county program, get them the application or whatever is needed to get this in process.
Smith said that when Pucher told him that it would kind of be a shame to use our funds to replicate what the county is already doing, that kind of resonated with him. Let’s let the county use that 1/3 portion for low-income needs for home loans, and let’s use ours for something that can make a difference in other ways.
Rodgers asked Smith if the $8,000 was a loan, and Smith said no. Rodgers said it’s a grant, so for somebody that is low income, to take out a loan to put in a new furnace in their house is different than them having $7,000 or $8,000 for a furnace that they don’t have to pay back. They are two totally different things. Avery said that he thought that Pucher’s point was that they can do that through the county and Clarkston doesn’t have to use its CDBG funds. Rodgers said she gets that, but they have to pay the county back, it’s a loan, it’s not a gift is what he’s saying. Pucher said it’s a loan. Avery said OK, he sees the difference. Rodgers said that’s the grant. If they give the people the money as a loan, they have to pay that back. Avery said it’s his sense that with the cost of repairs and things, we could help one, maybe two people in the whole village – Rodgers agreed – Avery said versus giving it to the Senior Center and transportation. We know that their buses go up and down our streets for needs in the community, and Avery thinks that we get more bang for our buck that way.
Pucher said that Clarkston would have to administer its own minor repair program, whereas in the past, the township already has an existing one and Clarkston just partnered with them; they just did all the work for Clarkston. Like the councilmember was saying, if a homeowner, and they do this in other communities, say they qualified for $18,000 of work, and they were in a community that had a minor repair program, they could transfer the $5,000 over, or whatever amount you want, back over to the county, and the county would offset the loan. So, the $18,000 would only be $13,000. Clarkston could do that through Independence also if they wanted. Then you don’t have to duplicate the same program.
Avery said if we were talking about $80,000, then we would have something to play around with, but $8,000, we are really talking about one, maybe two homes. Luginski said it depends on the project; $8,000 would get you a furnace. Avery said he knows. Haven said he was thinking about paint. (Unintelligible crosstalk.) Rodgers said Haven is paying $6,000 for that, right? (Haven made an unintelligible comment.)
Haven said it was surprising that they didn’t see the Senior Center here, but Smith made a comment to Haven that they felt it was really critical for their budget. Smith said that the Senior Center did send an email and they did specify that they were hopeful that they would direct the funds to them again this year because it’s a critical part of their budget. Smith said he hasn’t heard from Youth Assistance this year.
Luginski said that he knows that they have been kind of remiss in making this decision. Are they looking for a decision tonight, or when do they need to do this? Pucher said yesterday, really. Luginski said he gets it.
Haven said that it’s a resolution/discussion. He asked if there was a resolution, and Smith said that there is a resolution attached if the council wishes to make one.
Avery said that he would resolve to have the funds go to the Senior Center for their transportation program. Luginski asked if it was 100%. Avery said yes. Second Casey.
Haven asked if there was any discussion.
Luginski said he’s OK with that but asked if the city had heard from Youth Assistance. Smith said no, not this year. Luginski said OK.
Haven asked if there were any questions or comments.
Pardee said that he had a comment. He thinks that no one in the Village of Clarkston knows about the program that Pucher was talking about that maxes out at $18,000 and literally does not need to be repaid until the home is sold. Avery and Rodgers asked if that was true. Someone [Speagle?] indicated it was. Haven said that’s what he said. Speagle said there’s a lien on the house. Pucher said that they’ve done houses in the village in the past, though not a ton of them. He can bring some more brochures for the city’s kiosk if they want. It’s all on the county’s website. Pucher doesn’t know if the city has a cable channel to help promote it. They have flyers, they used to do mail outs, and they can do lots of things to help market it if that would help Clarkston out. Haven said that would help; any marketing they have, Clarkston would like to have. Smith could put it periodically in his weekly (unintelligible).
Pardee said he doesn’t disagree with the Senior Center at all, but he just wants to be sure that the council understands that almost nobody in the community knows about this program. Speagle said that they have an application. Pardee said what Pucher is suggesting in terms of helping us would be beneficial. Haven agreed.
Haven said that there is a motion and second and asked if there was any further discussion.
Smith said just to add to the point that Speagle just made is that they do have the applications in the information kiosk in the lobby. Haven said that there is public information, it’s just better awareness.
Haven, Avery, Casey, Luginski, and Rodgers voted yes.
Haven said that was unanimous and thanked Pucher for coming. He asked Pucher to keep in touch and not to be a stranger. If Pucher sees any way that Clarkston can help people here, help us help them.
Pucher thanked everyone for having him and told everyone to have a good evening.
Item 10b – Discussion: Parking Revenue Update for January and February 2022 (Video time mark 0:29:56)
-
- 2022 Parking Fees & Parking Tickets (page 17/25 of the council packet)
Haven said that there is a report/spreadsheet in the packet, and he asked if Smith wanted to point anything out. Smith said that he would let Speagle speak to it, since she’s the keeper of the data.
Speagle said everything is going as scheduled on the parking. As a refresher, the city does have a program that if anyone parks at Main and Washington, if they pay their ticket within ten days, they get $10 off, so they get the discount. That is reflected in there now, which is different than last year, when those rows weren’t in there.
Speagle said that she thought the report spoke for itself and asked if anyone had any questions.
Haven said he had a question. When he saw the parking ticket issued by zone, Speagle had four zones listed, which is interesting to him, she kind of prepared the form for future eventualities maybe. Speagle said no, they are done in four zones because we have issued tickets before in the Depot lot where you have someone parked in a handicapped spot that doesn’t have a handicapped sticker. Or at the top of this row, there are some people who will make their own spot, that center row, they will make their own spot at the top, which blocks all emergency vehicles from being able to maneuver, so they’ve done tickets in there.
Speagle said that city street parking in the Mill Street lot is 30 minutes, and there is a two-hour max for city street parking during certain times of the day, so they have issued tickets in those areas. Haven asked Speagle to forgive his ignorance but is the Mill Street lot between Rudy’s and – Speagle said yes – Haven asked if there was metering. Smith said it’s not a paid lot. Speagle said it’s a timed lot. Smith said it’s a two-hour maximum. Haven said so it’s posted. Speagle said Mill Street was actually 30 minutes; she didn’t know if we changed that. Smith said we did change it; it’s now two hours. Speagle said that was 30 minutes to allow for – (interrupting Speagle), Haven asked Smith if it was now two hours. Smith said it was 30 minutes when Rudy’s was open. They were trying to support Rudy’s. Haven said right, for their turnover. Smith said that now that he’s closed, they’ve changed it back to two-hour parking. Luginski asked what we are going to do when he reopens. Smith said we’ll see. If he’s a restaurant, Smith didn’t know why it couldn’t stay at two hours. The 30 minutes was really intended to get people in and out to get milk and bread. Speagle said it was also for other patrons who wanted to go across the street to Essence, grab a carry out, just something central for people to come and go, pick up or carry out, go into Rudy’s, pick up their pizza, pick up the stuff that they need. Haven said for carry-outs.
Rodgers asked what the city street parking is. Speagle said that city street parking is like Main Street, and we have two-hour parking until 5:00, 8:00-5:00. Haven asked if we marked tires. Speagle said we can’t mark tires. Haven said that’s against the law now, right? Speagle said that was correct, but the app that our parking enforcer uses has a tire marker itself. It’s digital. She opens that up, and it’s a like a circle with tires in it, and she just hits the section where the air stem is. Then she can come back around in a couple of hours. Haven said to see if the stem moved. Speagle said yes. The chances of someone driving away, coming back, parking in the same spot, and that stem being in the same spot are slim to none. (Unintelligible crosstalk.)
Speagle said that they also have the spots in front of Health Plus. Haven asked if that’s commercial. Luginski said that’s for loading. Speagle said that it’s loading until 3:00, and a lot of people will park there. It’s timing on whether Clarkston gives them a ticket or Oakland County gives them a ticket. Sometimes, they’ve both ended up there at the same time.
Casey asked if there are time limits on the side streets. Smith said Washington up to Buffalo, but not beyond. Speagle said East Church, not all the way to Buffalo, East Church to around Health Plus, Honchos.
Rodgers asked if there were street signs. Smith and Speagle said yes. Rodgers said she’s seen the Health Plus one, but she hasn’t seen other signs. Speagle said yes.
Haven said it’s a very interesting discussion because there’s a revenue question (unintelligible). They have the parking turned back on again for raising revenue. They turned it off for a few months, whatever. Smith said right, and in fact he was going to comment that the 2021 column only represents six months of data because they were turned off for six months. So, that’s only half a year shown there.
Smith said he thought it was important to note that they really don’t try to make money on parking. If someone comes in, or they call, they are disputing these tickets every day. Speagle handles these things; Smith thanked Speagle. Smith said Speagle handles these every day, and if anyone has a legitimate reason why (unintelligible). They take them at face value. Maybe they’re just throwing one and hoping that they’ll buy it. Generally, they start to see a pattern in these. If it’s a legitimate reason, they will void the citation. They’re not trying to be punitive.
Speagle said that a lot of the voiding they see is people who punched in the wrong license plate number, so when the enforcer goes around and punches in the license plate numbers, it doesn’t pop up. So, if you put in ABC123 as your license plate, but it’s ABC345, she’s going to punch in 345 and it’s not going to show that you paid. So, some of those, they can email the rate in the system, and appeal and show that they paid, and it’s just a matter of looking through all of the reports and saying OK, they see where the incorrect license plate is listed, and the person was paid. Or they give them a copy of a paid receipt. So, most of the voids that they see are those.
Haven asked if there was any further discussion or questions about the parking revenue.
Pardee said he would like to emphasize that the parking revenue is the only source of revenue that the city has to repair sidewalks and streets and parking lots, or at least that’s the way it’s been used since paid parking has been implemented. Haven agreed.
Item 10c – Election Update (Video time mark 0:37:38)
Haven asked Speagle to speak on this item.
Speagle said they’ve closed the primary. Mike Harris and Kent Douglas will be on the special general election coming up on May 3rd. She had Evelyn Bihl, Toni Smith, and Lauren Luginski working a very long and boring election. They had 34 people come in. They had a total of 139 voters, that is 105 absentee and 34 walk-in.
They did a great job. They kept themselves busy. It was kind of a long day because there wasn’t much going on, but it resulted in Kent Douglas and Mike Harris, again for the special election, which will be May 3rd. Absentee ballots will start going out on March 24th. They have to be delivered to Speagle, but after March 24th, they will start going out.
The one good thing about these two elections is when people received their absentee ballot application, they were able to check for one or both of the elections, so Speagle doesn’t have to send out all those applications again. She will automatically send out the absentee ballots to anybody who checked for both.
Speagle said that the other thing, and she knows that it’s kind of far off, she does want to state that November’s election for here [city council], there are three seats – mayor, Avery, and Luginski. The deadline to get in their intent is July 21st. She knows that it’s kind of far off, but she wanted to mention it. Haven asked if she said the 31st; Speagle said January 21st. Avery and Rodgers said July 21st. Speagle corrected her comment and said that it was July 21st.
Speagle asked if they had any questions. She will be open the Saturday before, which she thinks is the last day of April. She will be open again for anybody who wants to come in and do their last-minute absentee ballots the Saturday before the May 3rd election.
Speagle said if anybody has any questions, they can give her a call or send her an email at any time.
Haven thanked Speagle.
Agenda Item #11, New Business
Item 11a – Motion: Meeting Rules of Procedure (Video time mark 0:40:25)
-
- Motion – Meeting Rules of Procedure (page 18/25 of the council packet)
- Meeting Rules of Procedure (page 19/25 of the council packet)
Haven said that there is a nice piece of work that Smith did in their packet on the Rules of Procedure to help them update what has been there for several years and probably needs some sprucing up. Smith did a pretty good job of that as Haven can see, and Haven is sure they’ve read through that. It’s here for a motion to accept.
Smith said he wanted to clarify because this was kind of sprung on them. Smith wasn’t looking for a motion to approve, just a motion to work on this further. This is very much a draft document, and he won’t take credit for preparing much of it. Smith did make some modifications to it, but much of it was prepared by Sue Wylie and Speagle who were working on these Rules of Procedure for maybe a year and a half or so ago, before COVID. This is largely their work. They got the real start on this, and Smith is just trying to update it.
Smith said that there have been a lot of questions about this – do they do this, do they do that, and shouldn’t this be done before that. Smith thinks that the Rules of Procedure is a good document for helping with that. If there’s something that’s not in here, and they realize it two months from now, or a year from now they realize that we should have a rule that specifies that this is when somebody can talk on this, this is when a motion can be made, this is how, whatever it is. They can always modify this document very easily. It doesn’t require a vote of people, it’s not an ordinance, it’s really just a Word document with rules in it that they all follow.
Smith said it’s a very simple thing to implement. A lot of municipalities across the state have these in practice and in place. In fact, Smith downloaded about seven or eight rules of procedure documents from several cities because he wanted to compare and contrast what Speagle and Wylie had prepared. Smith made some additions based on what he was finding in these other municipalities. There were a lot of examples to draw from. It’s commonly used, and it’s a good method for kind of controlling the operation of the council meeting.
Haven said it’s appreciated. He wanted to get the ball rolling here in terms of entertaining a motion for this resolution, which is to have Smith proceed, which is really what they are voting for Smith to do. Smith agreed.
Haven said he would move to adopt the resolution; second Casey.
Haven asked if there was any discussion or feedback for Smith relative to preparing to come back to them.
Casey said he was looking at 1.1, meeting on the second and fourth Monday. They’ve gotten flack in the past for canceling the second meeting in December. Casey thought that there ought to be something in there that gives them the flexibility to cancel meetings instead of stating flat out that they are going to do two per month. Avery said that’s part of the charter. Haven agreed. Smith said that the charter does state that, but Smith found that other municipalities have a cancellation sentence in their rules. Smith said that 2.11 on page five has that. He did put one in there. Again, this can stay or leave, depending on what the council’s preference is. (Reading from the document), Smith said that “[m]eetings may be cancelled for lack of quorum, inclement weather, or lack of agenda topics.” So, if, for example, in December, they don’t have agenda topics that are really burning issues in theory, and Ryan can weigh in on this on what other cities have done, that would potentially be a legitimate reason for cancelling a meeting. Ryan agreed and said you don’t want to cancel things lightly, but if there are no, if there is some issue such that you’ve stated, just because the charter says something, there’s flexibility here. You don’t have to meet just to meet. There’s some discretion, as long as it’s put on the record what the reason is so that people know why the meeting has been cancelled. Haven asked where 2.11 was on the document and was directed to page five. Ryan said that he was going to say that this was a good idea, but not everybody is here tonight, and they should have a full council to vote on this.
[See Clarkston Sunshine Comment #1.]
Ryan asked Smith about 2.5 concerning the agenda format. Ryan thought that needed to be clarified because a published agenda can only be changed at a public meeting by a unanimous vote of council, not a majority. When a published agenda is made, and a lot of people rely on that, that’s why it’s not good, you start adding things, and they’ve talked about this in the past. If they’re going to add something, they need to have a unanimous vote of council. Speagle said that she and Wylie questioned that the last time Ryan brought this up, whether it was majority or unanimous. Ryan said that he knows that things come up, but the idea is that once they get that agenda published, and they have guidelines regarding when information is supposed to be in to get it on the agenda, they don’t want to be adding stuff, showing up here on Monday and adding stuff that the public won’t know about. So, it should be unanimous and sparingly done. (Unintelligible) to mention that.
Avery asked if there was anything in there that’s really different than what they do now, anything that really steers them differently as far as operating the meeting. Smith said really, no. It really just formalizes some of the things that they’ve already done, and it really is documenting the fact that – Smith said he wanted to back up and asked Ryan if these Meeting Rules and Procedures can be used by their other commissions and boards. Ryan said sure.
Smith said that the question has come up, and they want to be consistent. The question has come up relative to the recording of certain discussions, or submissions, documents that have been submitted. Do those need to be in the minutes? This makes it very clear, as other cities have made it clear, that the purpose of the minutes is to record the actions taken. If the council wishes to add something that’s not an action but just thinks it’s a very important discussion that should be reflected in the minutes, then they can always say, Clerk, I would like this recorded in the minutes. Ryan said by a vote of council. Smith agreed. Smith said but other than that, the purpose of the minutes, whether it’s of council or a board or commission meeting, is to capture the actions taken. Ryan said by the governing body, whichever body that is. Haven agreed.
[See Clarkston Sunshine Comment #2.]
Luginski had a question about the voting, and this may be bigger than them. In today’s world, everything is video, everything is remote, everything is virtual. Is there an opportunity for them to put in there that even if someone is not in attendance at the meeting, but all these meetings are on a video basis, virtual, that a council member who might be traveling for whatever reason in another state, as long as they’re in and on and there’s a picture and they’re logged in with their camera on, could they vote? Ryan said that ship has sailed, unless someone is in active military service. The legislature had a chance to extend virtual meetings, and they didn’t, so right now, for the next year, the only exception is if someone is in active military service, they can attend and vote remotely. Otherwise, someone can attend remotely, but they can’t vote by state law. Luginski said OK, fair enough. Luginski said he thought it was bigger than Clarkston. Ryan said that he thinks that the legislature got worried that people were going to be down in Florida or at their vacation property somewhere, and they weren’t going to be in touch with their home base, their home community, going to all these virtual meetings, and just kind of phoning it in. Whether that’s true or not, Ryan didn’t know, but there’s a lot of scuttlebutt about that, that they wanted people to be boots on the ground, in the meeting, voting in their community where they live.
Haven said he had one reflection on Smith’s thought about being consistent. He agrees with that. If they adopt a set of guidelines, they should try to make it as consistent as possible. Haven said that he understands relative to not putting public comment in here, to fill the meeting minutes with a lot of public comment, which wouldn’t really necessarily be germane to the decision that gets made. The decision is straightforward.
The one exception that Haven sees to that, that he thinks is really important, is with the Historic District Commission [HDC] because some of the decisions they make, it’s important for reasons or perhaps a decision being disputed in court that they reference their standard, their guidelines, the Interior Department standards in that decision, and that becomes part of the reason for the decision they make. Smith agreed and said absolutely, that should be part of their motion. Ryan said it is, and the same with the Zoning Board of Appeals because they are also a final body, and their decision could be taken to court. So, they have got to list why the factors, why variance, the four factors for a non-use variance have been made or not, so those are separate, discrete, those two bodies are a little bit different. Haven said it really doesn’t apply to Planning so much, because their role is advisory, basically, to council. Avery said that it is up to those particular bodies to create their own rules and vote on them. It’s not within council’s purview to – interrupting Avery, Haven said that they are trying to give them a guideline. Ryan said that they have to have public comments at the end of the meeting, and they should allow public comments on each discussion item, and that sort of thing. Haven said sure.
Haven asked if Cara Catallo would like to make a comment. Catallo said yes. Since they brought up the HDC, she feels like it’s important too that when they make a motion that they include their standards in the motion and don’t add them later. It’s important that if it’s going to be represented in a meeting that it should happen at the meeting and not as an afterthought and drafted independently, individually. That’s something that Catallo has found a little at fault with the current HDC and she thinks that’s something that could be rectified. Catallo said she wondered, and maybe Ryan would be able to answer this, but at a recent meeting, she was told that she couldn’t make a comment except at a specific time and the chair didn’t tell her when that time was. So, it was sort of a little bit like huh, and basically they said as soon as she started talking about the specific topic, it would be cut off. Then at the next meeting when she no longer had anything to say because the topic was already over, he said oh no, they’ve changed it back. So, as a resident of this community, she would love something standard that the different commissions and boards should sort of follow. She knows that it’s important to be able to make their own guidelines in these different groups, but she thinks that as far as community being included in an open meeting session that it would be wise to have standards, like this is the process and the procedure that they’ll follow, just to make sure that residents don’t feel as though they’re being silenced.
Haven said he understands, and the standards should be called out in the meeting – (unintelligible crosstalk between Haven and Catallo). Catallo said it’s been something that she’s brought up that she thinks is critical that it be included. Haven said it’s interesting that Catallo brings this up because there is a state at which the meeting is concluded and the secretary takes the minutes of that meeting and they formalize them into a draft, right? Catallo agreed. Haven said that they are not really the meeting minutes until the body reconvenes and approves those minutes. Then they become actual. So, that’s where Haven thinks maybe some of that modification takes place, between the meeting itself, the drafting of the minutes, and then formalization of that in the next meeting. Catallo said that she begs to differ, but that sounds incredibly inappropriate to her. She thinks that what happens is the minutes should reflect what happens in the meeting and that there shouldn’t be independent crafting of like “we’ll say that it was Standard 6 and 7.” If that wasn’t voiced at the meeting, she doesn’t think that it should be represented in the minutes.
Haven said he gets Catallo’s point. His own point was that it’s not official until it’s actually approved – Catallo agreed – Haven continued and said that doesn’t happen until a subsequent meeting. Haven said he gets Catallo’s point. Catallo said she didn’t think it should be official if it’s something that didn’t occur in the meeting, even if the board decides to approve the minutes, if they’re approving something that they’re like “yeah, that sounds OK to me.” Catallo thinks that there is something a little bit unseemly about adding things after the fact because (unintelligible) need more time, need to think about it, but if somebody is adding that a unicorn walked in to the room and that’s why they are approving something – Catallo said that she just feels that it’s critical for minutes to reflect what happens in a meeting and that you don’t add elements that didn’t happen at the meeting. She said that she guesses that they can disagree on what minutes should be, but it just seems as though minutes should be things that occur in a meeting. Haven said they should reflect the meeting actual proceedings. Catallo agreed.
Smith said that he wanted to comment on these two that he has on the screen, these two additions, video recording and being able to connect virtually to a meeting. So, since COVID, they’ve relied on these very heavily, and they use Independence Television behind him here to do the video recording of the council meetings. In council meetings, Smith has been connecting them using GoToMeeting so that people can call in. Again, to Luginski’s point, (unintelligible) they could listen in, but they can’t vote. Smith thought that it was an important way to show their transparency to allow the general public to connect to their meetings. Smith said that he knows they were doing it primarily because of COVID, but now that that is largely, hopefully, behind them, it’s a fact and kind of the world now that people rely on the ability to connect virtually to some of these events. Smith said that he put it into the draft as something they should consider that they do this going forward, and then to his point earlier about boards and commissions adopting this set of rules, Smith wanted to know if they do the same for our other commissions. This is a question that comes up quite a bit, “I couldn’t attend the Planning Commission last night, is there a recording of it. No, I’m sorry there’s not.” If they did this, either the virtual connection with GoToMeeting, or they worked with Independence Television to record the other boards and commission meetings. They don’t have to vote on it tonight. Smith just wanted to put it out there for them to noodle over the possibility of other boards and commission meetings being either televised or virtually connected, or both.
Luginski said they used to do that years ago, and in a virtual meeting like that, they can record those meetings right on a laptop and then just download that file onto the city’s website. Smith said that’s what he’s doing here tonight. Even though Independence Television’s record button is on there, Smith is recording this as well. Luginski said Independence Television goes onto the local channel, the cable TV station. Smith agreed. Luginski said that for purposes of having it for the general public, if you just record it on your laptop and just put that file on the website, people will be able to go to it. Smith agreed. Luginski said it’s pretty easy to do. Smith agreed that it would be pretty easy to do. Smith said that he did reach out just to ask Independence Television if this is something they might be able to do. They said they would try to support us, but they would have some budgetary concerns about doing that. Luginski and Haven agreed.
Smith said again, he was just trying to put these ideas in front of them and over the next couple of weeks they can think about them. If there are any modifications, Smith will put those in, and he thanked Ryan for his comment.
Haven said that he had a question about what Smith just said relative to the other three, two commissions, one board. It’s a recording function. Smith does it for the council here. Sometimes, Smith appears at another meeting, but that would quadruple Smith’s attendance. Smith agreed. Haven said that if Smith is going to be the one to do this, or posting on the website, and there’s a cost factor probably if they had to hire someone to do this, but Haven thinks they need to consider that as part of the decision-making. Luginski said that the chair of each committee – are all these meetings today, and he should know this, but he doesn’t, are any of them being done virtually or have the option of virtual? Smith said no. Luginski said so they stopped the virtual on all of those. Rodgers said they are all in-person. Smith agreed. Luginski said it wouldn’t be that difficult to put a link to make them virtual, and the chair of that committee, Smith wouldn’t have to be there, they could record that meeting as the chair of the committee and then just send the file to Smith. Speagle said that they could send it to Smith or to her. (Haven made an unintelligible comment as Speagle was talking.) Luginski said it’s not that hard. There’s a record button, this meeting is being recorded, you hit record in the meeting, you click on that button, and it stops recording. Haven said he was saying it’s an audio file, not a video file. Speagle and Luginski said no, it’s a video. Luginski said that you take that file, and as Speagle said, they could either download it or send it to somebody here, but Smith would not have to be present at all those meetings to make that happen.
Haven asked where Smith has his video recording. Is it on his computer, is that the camera? Smith showed Haven where the camera was. Haven said that it’s part of the laptop. Smith said that if the presenter didn’t have a camera facing the board, it would probably just be whoever is speaking. If there are people that call in, you generally don’t have a camera facing the board.
Luginski said that they do this in business all the time. He records a lot of his virtual video with Zoom or whatever they’re using, and it records all of the audio, any presentation that’s there, the slides in the presentation, and you can have it set up so that it focuses on the person who is speaking at the time as well, so it is there. Haven asked if you could do it without an operator. Luginski said yes, the operation is “record” (gesturing by pushing his finger down). You click the button that says “record.” Haven said so it’s not going to move, it’s not going to scan. Rodgers and Smith said no. Smith said that they would have, if there’s a document they discuss, they would have to bring it up and share it on their screen. Haven said that’s what he’s saying. Luginski agreed.
Rodgers said it would help so much with all the questions that come afterwards from these meetings. Haven said he agreed. Rodgers said you know, that whole transparency issue, to be able to, even if it is just audio, to be able to hear, if there’s any documents, they could also upload those as an adjunct to the recording itself. She’s had numerous people ask her why they have to go in-person, and she thinks that the whole world is so much now like Luginski was saying, so much of everything is virtual. They want that option now, for either good or bad coming from COVID, that’s one thing that came from that period was that they want to have that option of sitting in their jammies and listening to all of this.
Haven said he just wanted to understand the do-ability of it, because he wouldn’t want to sit here as chairman of this and try to run the meeting and work the mechanics. He thinks that’s a burden that’s not fair to the chairperson.
Avery said that’s one, and number two, they get a relatively modest stipend for every meeting that they show up to, but a lot of these boards and commissions get paid nothing. Haven said exactly. Avery said that you are just adding more on. Luginski said that you are adding on clicking a button that says “record.” Avery said that it sounds simple enough, but you do it for your business and you get paid to do that. If they put it in the rules that it has to happen, and when it doesn’t happen, then they’re going to hear about it. Haven said exactly.
Avery said that this isn’t a town of 100,000 or 10,000. It’s 800 people, and if it’s important enough, come on down. Ryan said or look on (gesturing toward the television). Avery asked who is coming to the Planning Commission meetings? People who have business in front of the Planning Commission, generally speaking. The same with the HDC. It’s not like it’s must-see TV for folks. He appreciates the fact that it’s convenient for them, and in a perfect world, we would have people that are tech-savvy and are able to press buttons. Haven said the AV department.
Rodgers said she thinks it’s just more than convenience. There are a lot of people that are intimidated by coming to this meeting. You wouldn’t think that would be the case, but there is, and especially the historical commission. There are a lot of questions about what we can and what we cannot do, right? They’ve talked about that, and if they could, maybe somebody interested in buying here might go to a website and watch it to hear. She doesn’t know. She just thinks that the opportunity to make everything as out in the open as possible (unintelligible).
Haven thinks Avery’s point is well-taken. He agrees with what they are saying about we have to make sure it will happen. If you put it in the rules, it’s got to happen. Rodgers said absolutely. Haven said it would be dependent on who is sitting at the board table on a given night for it to happen. Luginski said he’s just saying that this is easy to do. They don’t have to do it virtually. They don’t have to put it out there with a link to make it a Zoom call. They just record it, because this past year, they had a lot people in here with a lot of complaints about the HDC and things that were said and not said and done, and if they’d had those meetings recorded, they probably could have gone back and had a little bit more exact information. So, even if they don’t put them out in a Zoom call or GoToMeeting or whatever service they use, just to record the audio, which is what they used to do, just record the audio and have it available.
Haven asked Smith to advise them as part of his process as to what he would recommend if they go in this direction. Smith said that he would like idea via GoToMeeting, but Luginski is right, Smith doesn’t want to attend more meetings every month. Luginski agreed. Smith said maybe set up an audio recorder of some sort, or he can go back to Independence Television and get an actual dollar cost of what it would take to do two more meetings a month. The ZBA [Zoning Board of Appeals] meets so infrequently. Luginski and Haven agreed. Luginski said primarily HDC and Planning. Smith agreed. Smith said if they recorded those two, let him get a cost figure. Smith knows what Luginski is saying, it is just pushing a record button, but it’s also setting up the meeting, making sure it’s running, you’re trying to have a discussion if you’re the chairperson, run the meeting, and also make sure that nothing is getting missed on the screen. Smith said to let him at least get that cost figure. He will come back to council at the next meeting with those numbers and they can try to make a good decision.
Haven asked if it was paragraph 1.14. Smith said it was also 1.15. Both of those. Haven said OK.
[See Clarkston Sunshine Comment #3.]
Haven asked if there were any other questions or thoughts for Smith to help him prepare.
Luginski said he had a question about what they are voting on tonight. Ryan said it was just to have Smith go forward. Avery said that there is a resolution. Ryan said to continue that process. Luginski said they don’t need a resolution. (Unintelligible crosstalk.) Luginski asked if it was just to keep the process moving.
Haven said that they have a motion and a second. Haven moved, and Casey seconded. Casey said that it was to request the approval of city council to complete the necessary updates (unintelligible). Luginski said OK, he just wanted to make sure they aren’t voting on this (gesturing to the document). Haven said no. Luginski said OK, it’s been a while (unintelligible). Haven said that they would take a roll call. Speagle asked for confirmation of the first and second; Haven said that he made the motion and Casey seconded.
Avery, Casey, Haven, Luginski, and Rodgers voted yes. Haven said that the motion carries.
Item 11b – Resolution: Budget Amendment (Video time mark 1:06:49)
-
- Resolution – 21/22 FY Budget Amendment (page 24/25 of the council packet)
- 21/22 FY Budget Amendment Request – March 14, 2022 (page 25/25 of the council packet)
Haven asked Smith to explain this budget item. Smith said that as we get down to the last three months of the fiscal year, and April 1st will be the start of the last quarter of the fiscal year, it’s not uncommon that we have to start moving monies around. As council knows, the city’s budget is largely based on previous activity. We don’t have a Ouija board or a crystal ball that they’re using; past history suggests what the future needs might be. So, they put that together in a best effort to make the numbers as exact as possible, but it’s not always possible. So, for example, the election. Speagle was just updating them on the special election. Those are two elections that weren’t even on their scope when they did the budget last year because of course they didn’t know that our house of representatives’ rep would pass away, and that the governor would suggest that we need a special election to replace her. So, that was not even known when they did the original budget, so they had to move some monies, those are lines three and four for $600, into the supplies budget and into the election workers’ budget to offset the fact that they had elections that they weren’t planning on.
Smith said that he wanted to back up to the top [of the budget amendment request, page 25/25 of the council packet]. That first item, and a large chunk of this budget amendment, is to take the $5,200 that they gained from selling used signs last year. You know, they had the auction and Smith was amazed that they sold $5,200 worth of signs. Smith said at the time that he would really like to use this money to buy more sign poles because they want to do the changes that everyone is seeing on the street corner throughout the city. So, all the stop signs of course, but also all the no parking signs, all the yield signs, speed limit signs, anything that has these old four by fours. They’d like to have a consistent look of the black poles with the nice sign art. Smith said let’s take the $5,200 for the new signs and let’s move that over to the capital improvement budget. So that’s number one.
Smith said that with regard to item #2, the cost of poles is higher than you think, and it’s even gotten higher in the last couple of months. Aluminum is not cheap. Smith said that he’s asking to take $2,000 that they had allocated for the Depot Park gazebo repair, they are done with the repair, so there was some extra monies there and there will still be some extra monies, but he’s taking $2,000 of that to augment the $5,200. That gives him $7,200 to buy sign poles, and he will spend every penny of that. In fact, he’ll back into how many poles he can get for $7,200.
That’s items #1 and #2. Smith said he already explained items #3 and #4 about the election. Items #5 and #6 are some small $86 ones. The Historic District Commission went a little bit over budget when they printed some brochures, no big deal. The same with the property insurance, the Errors and Omissions came in at $86 higher, but many of the other line items in that insurance budget were way under, so there’s plenty of room to realign some monies there.
Smith said that’s also what happened on line #7. The workers compensation insurance has gone up, and they will just basically realign some of their liability insurance to offset that increase. Again, in total, the insurance budget is under year over year, but they just had to do some movements between the six different line items that make up the insurance budget.
Haven said there’s no additions here, it’s just reallocations. Smith said it’s just reallocations.
Haven asked if there were any thoughts or comments for Smith.
Luginski said that Smith kind of alluded to it, for $7,200, how many poles do they need, and how many does that get them? Smith said that will get the city about 31-32 poles, and that should finish the job. In fact, that should give the city about eight extras. Smith said that he would like to have a little more – Luginski said in case somebody hits them – Smith said they are getting hit all the time. (Unintelligible) Glenburie got taken out a couple of weeks ago in a snowstorm. Luginski said he just wanted to make sure. If they’re going to do it, do them all, and that’s enough money to do them all. Smith said that will finish the job and give the city about eight or ten extras. Luginski said OK.
Avery said it was a resolution and would be a motion. He said that he would resolve to approve the budget amendments as listed in the packet; second Luginski.
Haven asked if there was any further discussion.
No additional discussion.
Avery, Haven, Rodgers, Casey, and Luginski voted yes.
Agenda Item #12, Adjourn (Video time mark 1:12:58):
Motion by adjourn by Luginski; second Rodgers.
No discussion.
Motion to adjourn by unanimous voice vote.
Resources: