Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout05-06-2002PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA, MONDAY, MAY 6, 2002 The Common Council of the City of Richmond, Indiana met in regular session at 7:30 p.m., Monday, May 6, 2002, in the Council Chambers in said City. President Bruce Wissel presided with the following Councilmembers present: Howard "Jack" Elstro, Etta J. Lundy, Karl Sharp, Bing Welch, Larry Parker, Paul Combs, Phil Dickman and Sarah "Sally" Hutton. The following business was conducted: PLEDGE OF ALLEGLANCE PRAYER BY COUNCILMEMBER HUTTON ROLL CALL Nine present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of the April 15, 2002 meeting were approved on a motion by Councilmember Welch, second by Councilmember Sharp, and the motion was carried on a voice vote. PRESENTATION OF REMONSTRANCES, PETITIONS, MEMORIALS, INTRODUCTIONS, MOTIONS AND PUBLIC COMMENTS COMMUNICATION FROM THE MAYOR Mayor Shelley Miller stated that recommendations from the fact finding panel in the negotiations with AFSCME would be presented tonight in ordinance form She added that in two or three days Councilmembers would be receiving some additional information containing some background on what has occurred and some documentation that might be helpful in considering the recommendations. The Mayor said that prior to the meeting she had distributed copies of "Workforce Development Phase II," a study that was supported by the Economic Development Corp. and the Wayne County Commissioners, facilitated by the Richmond -Wayne County Chamber of Commerce. She pointed out that she felt it was important that Councilmembers take a lot of time to review the information and consider some of the recommendations. She said it gives a snapshot of Wayne County today, adding that it is not a lot of good news concerning the unemployment rates, adult literacy and the graduation rates for the county. She said she feels that some strong action needs to be taken to change the picture of Wayne County that the survey paints. Following up on those comments, the Mayor called attention to the visioning process that is going on in Wayne County now. She added that last week the vision statement and the themes were presented at a meeting. The statement, she said, is "Wayne County: Real people, Searching for real solutions, Achieving their dreams, Person to person, Neighborhood by Neighborhood, Community by Community. She then read the seven themes that were brought out in the visioning process which include: Wayne County: its people, its organizations, its communities, its governments will be connected through coordination, collaboration, and communication; The people of Wayne County will respect, value, and celebrate the richness of the differences among us and actively work to build a unified community; The people of Wayne County, for enrichment, enjoyment and fun, will have access to diverse cultural and recreational opportunities; The people of Wayne County will be: well, safe and enjoy healthy life styles; The peoples of Wayne County will protect, preserve, and develop our land, our homes, our buildings and our environment to enhance our future while honoring our heritage; The people of Wayne County will have education and training in order to be successful and productive in all parts of their life; and Wayne County's economic environment will support a diverse and sustainable economy that encourages innovation and risk taking. The Mayor said she feels that the next few months are critical in putting together action teams and task forces that can begin putting in place strategies that will take the community where it wants to be in the future. Councilmember Sharp commented that he believes the meetings alluded to by the Mayor were televised and those who did not attend could find them on WCTV. He said he looked at the Work Force Development report as a challenge to better the community as much as possible. Councilmember Combs said he wanted to offer his apology to the Mayor and her administration for the poor job he did in expressing himself clearly in an article which appeared in the Palladium -Item Sunday, May 5. He said he did not make clear the distinction between his mild frustration over the number of issues involved in the collective bargaining coming before Council and his tremendous respect for the Mayor and her administration. He said he felt that this was very important because the article was about collective bargaining and the City wouldn't be at this point, and the employees of the street and sanitary departments wouldn't have the opportunity to go through this process, if it wasn't for this administration. Common Council Minutes Cont'd May 6, 2002 Page 2 FROM BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS AND SAFETY President Wissel said the minutes of the meetings of March 28, April 4, April 8, April 11, and April 18, 2002 were in their packets. REPORTS FROM DEPARTMENT HEADS REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES REPORTS FROM SPECIAL COMMITTEES REPORTS FROM ORGANIZATIONS MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS President Wissel announced that prior to going to the Ordinances on first reading that there are seven ordinances tonight relating to the union contract, adding that Council will be going through all three meetings as stipulated by state statute. He explained that each ordinance would be read and City Attorney Bob Bever would be asked to give an explanation of the issue and there would not be any public comment tonight. He said the second meeting would be where the public hearing .would take place and that is when discussion would take place. Then, he said, the final vote on the ordinances mentioned above would take place during the third meeting. ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING Councilmember Elstro moved to suspend the rules and read Ordinances No. 32, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 and 41 - 2002 by title only, second by Councilmember Welch and the motion was carried on a voice vote. ORDINANCE NO. 32 — 2002 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 32 — 2002 — A SPECIAL ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE APPROVAL OF A STATEMENT OF BENEFITS FOR A PROPERTY OWNER APPLYING FOR DEDUCTIONS UNDER I.C. 6-1.1-12.1 Councilmember Sharp introduced the ordinance stating that this is a tax abatement request made by Wayne Dairy to purchase the Fresh America Building for additional cooler space. He said Councilmember Welch would look into the request and give a report at the next meeting. President Wissel stated that Ordinance No. 32 — 2002 would go to the Tax Abatement Committee for review and return to Council at its next meeting. ORDINANCE NO. 34 — 2002 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 34 — 2002 - A SPECIAL ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE APPROVAL OF A STATEMENT OF BENEFITS FOR A PROPERTY OWNER APPLYING FOR DEDUCTIONS UNDER I.C. 6-1.1-12.1 Councilmember Sharp explained that the ordinance deals with a tax abatement request made by Stevens Wire Products for new manufacturing equipment. President Wissel stated that Ordinance No. 34 — 2002 would also go to the Tax Abatement Committee for review and return to Council at its next meeting. ORDINANCE NO. 35 — 2002 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 35 — 2002 — A GENERAL ORDINANCE APPROVING AND/OR REJECTING RECOMMENDATIONS OF A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING FACT FINDING PANEL Bever explained that as far as the procedure goes, he wanted to remind everyone that the bargaining panel members had been meeting and had resolved 28 of the 39 issues before them and when they reached an impasse the 11 unresolved issues went to the fact finding panel. After fact finding, he said, the parties met again and clearly approved two issues on their own and there are two others which are very close but just in case they are not resolved before the public hearing he said he is providing copies of Ordinances No. 42 and 43 — 2002 tonight. He added that he is 99 percent sure that agreement will be reached on these before Council's next meeting and they are not among the seven issues that are in dispute. 1 Common Council Minutes Cont'd May 6, 2002 Page 3 He reminded Councilmembers that what they will be voting for is either to approve or reject the recommendation of the fact -fording panel. He explained that if a vote for the ordinance would be approving that recommendation it would become a part of the contract and a vote against the ordinance is a rejection of that recommendation. Therefore, that particular issue would go back to the fact -fording panel for re- thought, re -negotiation and that would also then cause the parties to re -negotiate to see if they can come up with something in conjunction with the fact -fording panel. Then, he said, the panel would submit to the Council, absent agreement of the parties, another recommendation either for Council's approval or rejection, and so arguably each issue would be sent back to the fact -fording panel until it came back in a form that was approved by Council. Bever continued, saying that when Council does vote to approve or reject that is all it can do because that is the way t he c ollective b argaining o rdinance i s s et up. E xplaining t he seven i ssues which appear o n the agenda tonight in ordinance form, Bever pointed out that on some of the ordinances there are sub- categories such as a, b, c, d, etc. and in many of these four or five of the 11 paragraphs are in agreement and i t i s j ust o ne o f the s ub-paragraphs that h as s till c aused the d ispute and that will be p ointed out t o Council. Ordinance No. 35 — 2002 regards recognition and simply states what positions would be recognized as part of the bargaining unit; No. 36 is regarding compensatory time; No. 37 regards the grievance procedure and what type of procedure would ultimately be used in case of a grievance by an employee; No. 38 regards time off which includes personal days which is the one that is the direct issue; No. 39 is contracting out when the City administration can contract out labor to organizations or companies outside of workforce that affects the collective bargaining of an employee; No. 40 regards wages, and more specifically wages for someone who is working outside their normal described activity and what pay they would have to get and how long they would have to work to get that higher pay grade; and No. 41 which is a parity issue and that is simply whether if other departments or other city employees would get some sort of benefit greater than those covered by this collective bargaining contract and what effect that would have on the contract regarding street department employees and sanitation department employees. Councilmember Welch suggested that the agenda be amended tonight and add Ordinances No. 42 and 43 — 2002 so they are in Council's consideration and all nine issues can be weighed together and if the issues in those two ordinances are settled before Council's next meeting they can be stricken. He made a motion that those o rdinances b e a dded t onight, s econd b y Councilmember C ombs a nd t he motion was c arried o n a voice vote. ORDINANCE NO.36 — 2002 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 35 — 2002 — A GENERAL ORDINANCE APPROVING AND/OR REJECTING RECOMMENDATIONS OF A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING FACT FINDING PANEL President Wissel said the explanations had already been given by Bever and asked that the ordinances be read in sequence. ORDINANCE NO.37 — 2002 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 35 — 2002 — A GENERAL ORDINANCE APPROVING AND/OR REJECTING RECOMMENDATIONS OF A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING FACT FINDING PANEL ORDINANCE NO.38 — 2002 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 35 — 2002 — A GENERAL ORDINANCE APPROVING AND/OR REJECTING RECOMMENDATIONS OF A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING FACT FINDING PANEL ORDINANCE NO.39 — 2002 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 35 — 2002 — A GENERAL ORDINANCE APPROVING AND/OR REJECTING RECOMMENDATIONS OF A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING FACT FINDING PANEL ORDINANCE NO.40 — 2002' The Clerk read Ordinance No. 35 — 2002 — A GENERAL ORDINANCE APPROVING AND/OR REJECTING RECOMMENDATIONS OF A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING FACT FINDING PANEL ORDINANCE NO. 41— 2002 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 35 — 2002 — A GENERAL ORDINANCE APPROVING AND/OR REJECTING RECOMMENDATIONS OF A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING FACT FINDING PANEL Common Council Minutes Cont'd May 6, 2002 Page 4 ORDINANCE NO. 42 — 2002 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 42— 2002 — A GENERAL ORDINANCE APPROVING AND/OR REJECTING RECOMMENDATIONS OF A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING FACT FINDING PANEL President Wissel asked Bever to give an explanation as to what is included in this ordinance. He said No. 42 is regarding discipline and this is one of the examples where there is only one of the five subsections yet to be resolved. ORDINANCE NO.43 — 2002 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 35 — 2002 — A GENERAL ORDINANCE APPROVING AND/OR REJECTING RECOMMENDATIONS OF A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING FACT FINDING PANEL President Wissel asked Bever to give an explanation as to what is included in this ordinance. He said No. 43 regards drug testing and added that again four of the five subsections have been agreed to in language and the fifth is primarily because they were not all sure about what the fact-finding recommendation said and efforts are being made to try to get some clarification. ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING AND ENGROSSMENT ORDINANCE NO. 24 — 2002 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 24 — 2002 — A SPECIAL ORDINANCE VACATING A PUBLIC WAY President Wissel reported on the public hearing held by the Richmond Advisory Planning Commission on April 25 on this ordinance. He said this is a request to vacate 20 feet of right-of-way along the north side of Woodside Drive, adding that the petitioner amended his petition at the meeting requesting just 20 feet of the right-of-way and agreeing to install curb and gutter along the new frontage to control storm run off water and the paved road surface. He said the Commission voted unanimously 10-0 with one member absent to recommend the vacation of the 20 feet subject to installation of curb and gutter and subject to any necessary easement for any utilities. Planning Director Bob Goodwin apologized for the absence of the petitioner, saying that there was a mix- up as to when this ordinance was coming before Council. He added that if Councihnembers felt they needed someone to give the presentation they could wait until the next meeting. President Wissel said the ordinance. would be held until the next Council meeting at which time it would be on second reading and public hearing. ORDINANCE NO.28 — 2002 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 28 — 2002 — A SPECIAL ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOWN AS ROYAL OAKS APARTMENT COMPLEX Explaining this ordinance was Andy Craig of Beals Surveying Corp., who said he was here tonight to represent Cummings Properties L.L.C. to present a P.U.D. to Council. He said this development started in 1979 and was under county jurisdiction then and since that time the original fringe area has grown to the west and it is now under city jurisdiction. He said there are 19 lots in the development which includes 16 four -unit brick dwellings and one six -unit brick dwelling. He said that leaves two lots, which are Lot 6 where there will be two buildings with two units apiece and Lot 10 with three unit buildings with three apiece which will bring the total to 80 units. He further explained that Lot 6 will be 12 percent building, 24 percent concrete and asphalt and 64 percent would be grass or open area. On Lot 10, he said, 14 percent would be building, 16 percent would be concrete and 70 percent would be grass and open area. He said plans at this time are. to use the 9.921 acre tract to the east of the development of Royal Oaks that exists for drainage and have allowed for the future development of this area. Councilmember Welch questioned that since this was developed originally under a completely different layout 20 some years ago how is it being converted to a P.U.D. Responding to the question, Goodwin said it is being done through ordinance form, stating that because what has been done out there is not recognized as an entity that can be called a subdivision, it was a lot with local structures but was not a P.U.D. but it does not fit into any of the categories that are within the ordinance. He said they want to grow and because they have a private drive through there they can't build these structures unless it fronts for 40 feet on a public street. Therefore, he said, they looked for an avenue to allow them to continue to grow so they needed to identify entity that would allow them to continue what they have done within the past 20 years and he feels the P.U.D. process will do that and the ordinance is the most effective device. Councilmember Welch also asked about the drainage and Goodwin explained that the 9.921 acres had been included in this ordinance and it is an actual part of the development. He said the detention pond is a very small part of that acreage. 1 L� Common Council Minutes Cont'd May 6, 2002 Page 5 President Wissel reported on the public hearing held by the Planning Commission on April 25, saying that it was voted unanimously 10-0 with one member absent to recommend the P.U.D. zoning for this parcel with acceptance of the concept plan and draft development plan as exhibits to the ordinance. In answer to a question by Councilmember Welch as to whether or not there was a drainage plan prepared to accompany this P.U.D. Goodwin said a drainage plan is on file in the office of the City Engineer who has approved the plan. Councilmember Welch moved that the drainage plan be added as part of the plan, second by Councilmember Sharp and the motion was carried on a voice vote. President Wissel declared Ordinance No. 28 — 2002 on public hearing. There being no further comments either for or against the ordinance Councilmember Elstro moved for engrossment, second by Councilmember Combs and the motion was carried on a voice vote. Councilmember Lundy moved to suspend the rules and advance Ordinance No. 28 — 2002 to third and final reading and read by title only, second by Councilmember Elstro and the motion was carried on a voice vote. The Clerk read Ordinance No. 28 — 20,02 on third reading. Ordinance No. 28 — 2002 was adopted on a unanimous roll call vote. ORDINANCE NO.29 — 2002 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 29 — 2002 — A SPECIAL ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 2021 THROUGH 2299 CHESTER BOULEVARD President Wissel reported on the public hearing held by the Planning Commission on April 25, stating that the ordinance is for a commercial P.U.D. for the property involved of 97.37 acres and presently carries a wide range of zoning classifications ranging from residential through commercial and two former P.U.D.'s under the old ordinance. He said the Planning Commission voted unanimously 10-0 with one member absent to recommend a P.U.D. zoning for this parcel for Reid Hospital. Speaking in favor of the ordinance was Barry MacDowell, Reid Hospital President, who introduced other members of the Reid team in the audience. He stated that it was exciting and a bit humbling to consider that as a city, as a Council and a hospital community are doing the very same thing that a number of other community leaders did 100 years ago. He said he believes that Reid is seen as a caring, responsive, community hospital, adding that Reid wants to maintain that image. He talked of the many discussions which have taken place in planning the new Reid which include those with the Mayor, the Planning Department of the City of Richmond, IU East, Ivy Tech, Indiana -American Water Corp. and a productive neighborhood meeting with Reid's "new neighbors" in Crestdale, Oak Park, Berry Field and Saddle brook. He mentioned the public input received through focus groups starting four years ago, through the i nternet web s ite and the new Reid v oice mail, p atient surveys, letters, speaking engagements and in person. He said all of the input received is valued and treasured because the success of the new Reid is only going to occur with that kind of community interest and support. He stated that they want to build something on the new Reid Parkway that will outlive and outlast everyone in this room tonight. He asked for Council's input and welcomed any comments. Councilmember Welch commented on MacDowell alluding to the street east of Chester Boulevard on which the new Reid will be built as "Reid Parkway," and MacDowell responded that it wasn't that Reid has anything against industry, but it was felt that with the healing environment and the nature of what is done at Reid, the thought of a hospital on Industries Road doesn't seem to strike the chord that it would like. With that in mind, he said, at another time and a future, more official time and place, the request will be made to name the street "Reid Parkway." Councilmember Welch asked MacDowell to describe the first parcel which is going to be started on this month and MacDowell said that Reid has acquired the property where the former Cox Supermarket was located and that will be Step 1 of Reid's overall plan. He said it is needed desperately because the hospital's rehab services are currently being offered in five different locations because of the tremendous increase in volume. He added that next fall will see the actual groundbreaking and in the first part of 2006 will come the occupation of buildings. In response to a question by Councilmember Welch, Mayor Miller said the extension of Industries Road would be started this summer and this project will be 80 percent funded by federal money and the state is still on time with issuing the bid. The Mayor said the entire project goes all the way back to Middlefork Reservoir. There being no further comments, Councilmember Elstro moved for engrossment, second by Councilmember Hutton and the motion was carried on a voice vote. Common Council Minutes Cont'd May 6, 2002 Page 6 Councilmember Lundy moved to suspend the rules and advance Ordinance No. 29 — 2002 to third and final reading and read by title only, second by Councilmember Parker and the motion was carried on a voice vote. The Clerk read Ordinance No. 29 — 2002 on third reading. Ordinance No. 29 - 2002 was adopted on a unanimous roll call vote. ORDINANCE NO. 31— 2002 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 31 — 2002 — A SPECIAL ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE APPROVAL OF A STATEMENT OF BENEFITS FOR A PROPERTY OWNER APPLYING FOR DEDUCTIONS UNDER I.C. 6-1.1-12.1 Explaining this ordinance was Councilmember Sharp who said it deals with a tax abatement request by Cinram for machinery with an estimated value of $4,325,000. He said they currently produce audio cassettes and CDs here and the company plans to consolidate all of its CD and cassette operation at its Richmond plant and will be transferring production equipment from its plant in Huntsville, Ala. He said the company will be moving some of its productions and warehousing into the building it owns and used by Vandor when Vandor moves to its own building in the Midwest Industrial Park. He said the company will produce approximately 135 million CDs plus several million cassettes in 2002. He recommended approval by the Council. Councilmember Welch added that this move by Cinram will add 50 new jobs to the local manufacturing community. Councilmember Sharp requested that the ordinance be amended from a 10-year abatement to a 7-year abatement, second by Councilmember Welch and the motion was carried on a voice vote. President Wissel declared the ordinance on public hearing. There being no comments either for or against the ordinance Councilmember Parker moved for engrossment, second by Councilmember Welch and the motion was carried on a voice vote. Councilmember Welch moved to suspend the rules and advance Ordinance No. 31 — 2002 to third and final reading and read by title only, second by Councilmember Parker and the motion was carried on a voice vote. The Clerk read Ordinance No. 31 — 2002 on third reading. Ordinance No. 31 — 2002 was adopted on a unanimous roll call vote. ORDINANCES ON THIRD READING CALL FOR ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, on a motion duly made, seconded and passed, the meeting was adjourned at 8:35 P.M. ATTEST: Norma Schroeder, Clerk Bruce Wissel, President