Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout05-07-2001PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA, MONDAY, MAY 7, 2001 The Common Council of the City of Richmond, Indiana met in regular session at 7:30 p.m. Monday, May 7, 2001, in the Council Chambers in said City. President Karl Sharp presided with the following Councilmembers present: Howard "Jack" Elstro, Etta J. Lundy, Bruce Wissel, Phil Dickman, Bing Welch, Larry Parker, Paul Combs and Sarah "Sally" Hutton. The following business was conducted: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PRAYER BY COUNCILMEMBER HUTTON ROLL CALL Nine present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Following a correction by President Sharp who pointed out that on Page 6 "Amended Ordinance No. 83 — 2001" should be changed to "Amended Ordinance No. 83 — 2000," Councilmember Hutton moved to approve the minutes of the. April 16, 2001 meeting, second by Councilmember Welch and the motion was approved on a voice vote. PRESENTATION OF REMONSTRANCES, PETITIONS, MEMORIALS, INTRODUCTIONS, MOTIONS AND PUBLIC COMMENTS Councilmember Elstro presented a petition from the people on South 6`h Street pertaining to the Recycling Center asking that their trucks refrain from dragging all the mud on their streets, lower their stacks and be better neighbors. He said he has 57 on the list and those presenting the petition said they could get 757 if they are needed. COMMUNICATION FROM THE MAYOR Mayor Shelley Miller commented on the "difficult topics" on the agenda tonight, explaining that Council would be looking at increasing benefits of those who have served the City in the past vs. providing the funding opportunity for those who will provide services to the City today. She said the City has known that the unfunded pension obligations from the 1925 Police Pension Fund and the 1937 Firefighter Pension Fund could eventually impede on its ability to provide current services. She proceeded to explain that without the services of an actuary the City cannot accurately project the long-term effect on the plan, therefore the effects on the City budget and the property tax rate cannot be predicted. On the other side of the agenda, the Mayor said, is the request for the addition of three sworn police officers to the current force. He said the Police Chief has clearly demonstrated to her the need for additional resources for the Police department, adding that the City has not seen an increase in the number of sworn officers in the past 25 years nor an increase in the number of full-time employees, citywide, for the past 5 years. REPORT FROM BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS AND SAFETY President Sharp said the minutes of the meeting of March 29, April 12 and 19, 2001 were included in their packets. REPORTS FROM DEPARTMENT HEADS REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES Councilmember Wissel stated that the Tax Abatement Committee had received a list of companies that had donated 10 percent of their abatement to the City, adding that that money is used for sidewalks and seed money for the Redevelopment Loan Fund. The list included Spartech Plastics, Beard Masonry, Bev's Threads, Benchmark Plastics, Convenience Store Distributors, Gilbert and Alice Clevenger, Color Box, Larry Crye and Richmond Industrial Truck, Marion T. and Ella M. Cummins, Carlos Casket Shell, Contract Industrial Tooling, Devon Realty Corp. doing business as Primex Plastics, Dana Corporation, Fowler Wholesale, Fresh America Corp., Grafcor, E.G. Hill Co., Hospital Bed Remanufacturing Co., IP Acquisition Corp., Mac -Del Inc., Maitlen Heating, Mosey Manufacturing, Oberle & Associates, Jon and Connie Odom, People's Loan & Trust, Plastics Machinery Technology, Primex Plastics, Productivity Fabricators, PSD Inc., Purina Mills Inc., Richmond Casting Company, Sanko Peterson Corp., Fritz and Brenda Shoemaker, Danny Sullivan, Stevens Wire Products, Transilwrap Company, Wayne Dairy Products and the York Group. He said that is about 60 percent who make those contributions, adding that the total request was in the area of $229,000. Common Council Minutes Cont'd May 7, 2001 Page 2 REPORTS FROM SPECIAL COMMITTEES REPORTS FROM ORGANIZATIONS MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS President Sharp said some of the Councilmembers participated in Operation Clean Sweep recently and invited those who might be inclined, to visit Council's designated site which is North West 5`s Street from Main Street to Indiana Avenue, and if they see any trash to pick it up. Councilmember Welch said he visited the City Building recently to talk with the Planning Department and the Inspections Department to pass along some complaints he has had in his district, particularly the greenhouses on Indiana Avenue. He said many people are concerned about why the work is not being done more quickly, and learned that the hold up is because of contamination from asbestos that has caused the contractors to cease work. He commended both City departments for their diligence in keeping on top of that situation and their work with the contractor and the owner of the greenhouses. Councilmember Welch also mentioned the Beechwood Trailer Park on North West 5 h, adding that both departments are working toward doing something about that situation. He said the City had continued to have problems with the trailer park located between Indiana Avenue and North West L Street which is also being looked at by those two departments. ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING Councilmember Elstro moved to suspend the rules and read Ordinance No. 25, 26, 28, and 29, 2001 on first reading by title only, second by Councilmember Dickman and the motion was carried on a voice vote. ORDINANCE NO. 25 — 2001 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 25 — 2001 — AN APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2001 BUDGET Bob Goodwin, chairman of the Board of Works, explained that this ordinance deals with a transfer of funds into a General Supplies category for supplies for the Municipal Building. Councilmember Welch moved to suspend the rules and advance Amended Ordinance No. 25 — 2001 to second reading and read by title only, second by Councilmember Parker and the motion was carried on a voice vote. The Clerk read Amended Ordinance No. 25 — 2001 on second reading. There being no comments either for or against the ordinance, Councilmember Elstro moved for engrossment, second by Councilmember Welch and the motion was carried on a voice vote. Councilmember Lundy moved to suspend the rules on Amended Ordinance No. 25 — 2001 and advance to third and final reading, second by Councilmember Elstro and the motion was carried on a voice vote. The Clerk read Ordinance No. 25 — 2001 on third reading. Ordinance No. 25 — 2001 was adopted on unanimous roll call vote. ORDINANCE NO. 26 — 2001 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 26 — 2001 — AN APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2001 BUDGET City Engineer Bob Wiwi explained that this ordinance deals with a transfer of funds from a Repair and Maintenance Account into four other accounts. He said in last year's budget they anticipated spending about $10,000 to repair an old front end loader at the airport but once they got into the estimates it was more than the amount budgeted. Therefore, he said, they are putting money into Other Equipment out of which they plan to buy a front end loader for another tractor they use for mowing at the airport. He said the other accounts those funds will go into are the General Supplies, Other Office Supplies and some additional per diem for the Board members. He said this is a more effective use of funds. Councilmember Welch moved to suspend the rules and advance Amended Ordinance No. 26 — 2001 to second reading and read by title only, second by Councilmember Combs and the motion was carried on a voice vote. The Clerk read Amended Ordinance No. 26 — 2001 on second reading. There being no comments either for or against the ordinance, Councilmember Wissel moved for engrossment, second by Councilmember Dickman and the motion was carried on a voice vote. Common Council Minutes Cont'd May 7, 2001 Page 3 Councilmember Welch moved to suspend the rules on Amended Ordinance No. 26 — 2001 and advance to third and final reading, second by Councilmember Dickman and the motion was carried on a voice vote. The Clerk read Ordinance No. 26 — 2001 on third reading. Ordinance No. 26 — 2001 was adopted on unanimous roll call vote. ORDINANCE NO.28 — 2001 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 28 — 2001 — A SPECIAL ORDINANCE FIXING CERTAIN BENEFITS UNDER THE 1937 FIREFIGHTER'S PENSION FUND FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND Since there was no one present to bring this ordinance forward, Councilmember Hutton moved to hold it until the next meeting, second by Councilmember Elstro and the motion was carried on a voice vote. ORDINANCE NO. 29 — 2001 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 29 — 2001 — AN APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL, ACCEPTANCE, AND APPROPRIATION OF A GRANT FROM THE US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING SERVICES Police Chief Bill Shake explained what this grant application would mean to the Police Department and to the Richmond community, stating that it would allow the department to add three new officers and place an officer in each of the middle schools which are Test, Hibberd and Dennis. He explained that there were several people present tonight to tell Councilmembers what this grant would mean to the Richmond Community Schools. Speaking in favor of the ordinance on behalf of the schools were Karen Montgomery, Sharon Studebaker -Puckett, Vagas Ferguson, Kevin Porter and Rick Thalls. In answer to a question by Councilmember Hutton, Chief Shake said that at this time the officers who will be assigned to the middle schools are Kevin Wampler, Pam Mertz and Dean Retz. He also added that the three new officers would go to the patrol division. Councilmember Dickman said it would be nice to see some financial help from the schools with this and speaking to that issue was Studebaker -Puckett who said she makes out the budget and within the next three years she felt the school system would be in a much better position to put this on the priority list. Councilmember Elstro moved to suspend the rules and advance Ordinance No. 29 — 2001 to second 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 — 2001 on second reading. There being no comments either for or against the ordinance, Councilmember Elstro moved for engrossment, second by Councilmember Hutton and the motion was carried on a voice vote. Councilmember Lundy moved to suspend the rules on Ordinance No. 29 — 2001 and advance to third and final reading, second by Councilmember Elstro and the motion was carried on a voice vote. The Clerk read Ordinance No. 29 — 2001 on third reading. Ordinance No. 29 — 2001 was adopted on unanimous roll call vote. ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING AND ENGROSSMENT AMENDED ORDINANCE NO. 83 — 2001 The Clerk read Amended Ordinance No. 83 — 2001 — A GENERAL ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 154.43 OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND CODE REGARDING SIGNS Councilmember Hutton, looking at a map of the M-1 zones, pointed out the location of all of them. She questioned City Attorney Bob Bever about the difference between 100 and 300 feet from a residence and he explained the reasoning behind making it 100 feet. Although she disagreed, she said it would be a compromise. Councilmember Combs said he had a question from a resident about the signs on businesses that are no longer in business at that particular site. Bever said this ordinance does address that and found the portion pertaining to that and read it. He explained that the draft of April 27, 2001 has everything in it that Council has amended to date, plus the two items dealing with M-1 zones and V-type billboards not greater than 30 degrees. i Common Council Cont'd May 7, 2001 Page 4 Bever said if Council wishes to add these two items there should be a motion to amend to include those and, hopefully, the ordinance would be ready, as a whole, for consideration. Councilmember Parker moved to include the M-2 zones and the V-type billboards, second by Councilmember Dickman and the motion was carried on a voice vote. These two would be placed in the billboard -restricted areas, Bever said. President Sharp declared Amended Ordinance No. 83 — 2001 on public hearing, saying that comments would be restricted to the two amendments mentioned above. Speaking against the amendments was Russ Peterson, representing Porter Advertising, who commented that he felt the amendment on the M-2 zones was rather inconsistent. He went on to say that he had been in the same business for 44 years and he has yet to encounter a problem with signs located near residences, therefore he does not see the purpose of the amendment. Peterson alluded to all of the changes that have been made to this ordinance in the five months since it was introduced, stating that he felt Council had "overdone the restrictions." Responding to Peterson's comments, Councilmembers Elstro and Welch gave examples of specific instances and locations that caused concern, explaining why several of the changes had come about and are included in this ordinance. There being no further comments either in support or opposition of the ordinance, Councilmember Elstro moved for engrossment, second by Councilmember Parker and the motion was carried on a voice vote. Councilmember Welch moved to suspend the rules and advance Amended Ordinance No. 83 — 2001 to third and final reading and read by title only, second by Councilmember Parker, but the motion died because of a no vote by Councilmember Combs. When asked by President Sharp what his reason was for his vote, Councilmember Combs compared this ordinance with "bad tasting medicine," commenting that it might be necessary to take but he wanted to wait until the last minute to take it. He said he sympathized with both sides and he probably would end up voting for it but he was not in any hurry to do so. President Sharp said Amended Ordinance No. 83 — 2001 would come back on third reading. (Note: see continuation following discussion of Ordinance 15 — 2001) ORDINANCE NO. 15 — 2001 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 15 — 2001 — A SPECIAL ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING MAP AT 230 AND 234 SOUTH 5TH STREET, RICHMOND, INDIANA Speaking in favor of this ordinance was Attorney George Sowers who said the petition was before Council after receiving a recommendation for approval by the Planning Commission to extend the C-2 zoning on South 5`h Street on the west side to encompass two more parcels of real estate. He said it is a natural continuation of the extension of C-2 southward on the west side and is also bounded by C-2 across 5 h Street. He said the zoning changes about half way between those two properties where St. Andrew's parish and the school begin. He said nine or ten notices were sent out and only one response was received and that was in favor and from Father Todd Riebe of the Richmond Catholic Community. Sowers said the purpose for this petition for re -zoning is to enable the owner of 234 to permit a business office in that property and the owner of both 234 and 230 have joined in this petition. After comments by Bob Goodwin, Planning Director, on the vote of the Planning Commission, Councilmember Welch said he had noticed that Council was getting a lot of correspondence from the Commission where the vote was 6-0 or only 6 members present. He asked how many members are supposed to be on that Commission and Goodwin answered that at full complement it is 11. However, he explained, that it is one members short and there are two members who are currently suffering from severe illnesses which causes the lesser amount of votes which is just enough to conduct a meeting. Councilmember Welch said he is concerned with that number, but Goodwin said he felt it would get better. President Sharp declared Ordinance No. 15 — 2001 on public hearing. There being no comments either in support or opposition of the ordinance, Councilmember Elstro moved for engrossment, second by Councilmember Dickman and the motion was carried on a voice vote. Councilmember Welch moved to suspend the rules and advance Ordinance No. 15 — 2001 to third and final reading and read by title only, second by Councilmember Lundy and the motion was carried on a voice vote. The Clerk read Ordinance No. 15 — 2001 on third reading. Ordinance No. 15 — 2001 was adopted on a unanimous voice vote. Common Council Minutes Cont'd May 7, 2001 Page 5 (Amended Ordinance No. 83 — 2001— continuation.) City Attorney Bob Bever, alluding to the vote on Amended Ordinance No. 83 — 2001, said that in looking at his notes he has determined that it is appropriate to go on to third reading "notwithstanding one person's objection." He said Council is within its right to go on to third reading on Amended Ordinance No. 83 — 2001, because second reading had commenced at a prior meeting. After some discussion among Councilmembers and Bever, President Sharp asked the Clerk to read Amended Ordinance No. 83 — 2001 on third and final reading. Councilmember Elstro commented that this ordinance represents about three years of hard work on the part of many people, including Bever. He said he thinks everybody in this room tonight got what they wanted and he was going to vote in favor of the ordinance. Amended Ordinance No. 83 — 2001 was adopted on a unanimous roll call vote. ORDINANCE NO. 16 — 2001 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 16 — 2001 — 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 Wissel said this ordinance deals with a request by Amcast and since some of the members of the Tax Abatement Committee had some questions he asked that this ordinance be held until the next Council meeting. ORDINANCE NO. 17 — 2001 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 17 — 2001 — A SPECIAL ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING MAP AT 1828 EAST MAIN, RICHMOND, INDIANA Speaking in favor of the. ordinance was Bill Williamson and Vicki Stamper who reside at 1828 East Main Street. Williamson explained that they are asking for a special use variance to allow them to operate a Bed & Breakfast at that location. He said it was approved by the Planning Commission and recommended Council's approval. He invited questions from the Councilmembers. Councilmember Welch asked how many guestrooms are being considered at that location and Williamson answered that there would be two. Speaking to the issue of parking, there was some discussion about an agreement with the doctor's office to the east to allow guests to park in the office lot after regular office hours, which are from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Councilmember Welch suggested limitations be added to the ordinance allowing no check -ins prior to 5 p.m. when there would be off-street parking space available. He then asked about checkout time which Williamson said was 11 a.m. and Councilmember Welch said he felt that would pose another problem, especially when patients start to arrive at the doctor's office at 8 a.m. Williamson responded that he had talked with other residents in the area and some were open to further leasing of their areas for the parking which should eliminate any problems in the future. Councilmember Parker said he felt that if Dr. Burkhardt has allowed parking in his office lot that he has taken into consideration these problems which have been brought up. Williamson said he had had several discussions with the doctor as well as Goodwin. President Sharp declared Ordinance No. 17 — 2001 on public hearing. There being no comments either in support or opposition of the ordinance, Councilmember Elstro moved for engrossment, second by Councilmember Parker and the motion was carried on a voice vote. Councilmember Lundy moved to suspend the rules and advance Ordinance No. 17 — 2001 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. 17 — 2001 on third reading. Ordinance No. 17 — 2001 was adopted on a unanimous voice vote. AMENDED ORDINANCE NO. 18 — 2001 The Clerk read Amended Ordinance No. 18 — 2001 — A SPECIAL ORDINANCE FIXING CERTAIN BENEFITS UNDER THE POLICEMAN PENSION FUND FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND Police Chief Bill Shake stated that he is speaking in favor of this ordinance as a representative of the 1925 plan in this presentation. He asked Council to listen to the figures of 27,581 and 18,635, saying he would get back to them at the end of his presentation. Common Council Cont'd May 7, 2001 Page 6 Chief Shake said what he is here to do is try and raise the widow's benefits to those the officer would have received if they were living at that time. He said he feels the request is proper because the spouses allow the officers to perform their job and to work the right amount of years to enable them to obtain the pension, adding that most of the time when the working spouse would have died the widows are too old to work anyplace themselves. Therefore, they need every benefit they can obtain from the City for the service their spouses have earned during their years of service. Going back to the figures, Chief Shake explained that retired Officer Richard Shoemaker passed away several weeks ago and because of his 33 years of service he earned the highest retirement benefit of 74 percent of the base salary. He said the $27,581 was what he was making before his death. Now, Chief Shake said, his widow would draw $18,635, adding that that is a "big deduction" for people to take, especially at the age that most of the people would be when their spouse dies. Through several questions directed to Chief Shake, Councilmember Welch established that the Police Department pays no Social Security to their officers, however, if they have a part-time job during their employment with the City or are employed after retirement from the City they would draw Social Security from those employers. Councilmember Welch said the point he is trying to make is that the widows, at this point, do receive a good benefit by picking up their husband's existing pension at this death. Now, he said, Chief Shake is asking Council to increase that to some degree which adds an additional burden for the taxpayers because the funding for these pensions come right out of the collected tax dollars. Correcting a statement made by Chief Shake, Mayor Miller said when you budget for someone who is eligible to retire or a retiree that is funded for that given year. She said the problem with these funds is that they were never mandated by the State to be funded as the years of service were accrued, so it was only when the Police Department started having retirees that the City began budgeting and at the end of that budget year that money was rolled in to support the ongoing budget of the City, not just the police and fire pension funds. She said it wasn't until 1996 that the City even began setting aside some amount to meet the ongoing expenses. She added that the whole problem with these pension funds is that no money was ever set aside. Councilmember Welch asked if there are death benefits paid to the spouse upon the death of the officer and Mayor Miller responded that that amount is a lump sum of $9,000. Addressing an ongoing insurance program, the Mayor also said that the City would contribute up to $2,000 annually for insurance benefits up to age 65. She said only officers hired after 1985 pay into Medicare and the City then matches that, but those hired before that do not pay into Medicare and the City makes no contribution. Councilmember Welch asked if, at each contract negotiation whether or not those on pensions and drawing retirement are they adjusted accordingly under the new contract terms. Police Chief Shake said only those under the old term of 1925 and they receive 50 percent of whatever the negotiated settlement is as part of their pension. Bever pointed out some discrepancies in the ordinance, noting that some amendments are needed. President Sharp asked if there is any way to try to figure out what this is going to cost in the future. Mayor Miller said this change has a great deal of flexibility because in the case of some spouses there may be a minimal increase, but to another individual in the same circumstances there may be an increase of up to 24 percent. She pointed out that because of that, cases would have to be looked at on an individual basis. She said only a professional actuary could project the long-term effect on the plan. Mayor Miller stated that in looking at the year 2002, if this same ordinance and these same benefits are given to the firefighter retirees and widows the increase would be $76,286. Then, she said, in 2003, the increase would be over $80,000 and the City still has many active firefighters who have not retired under this plan. She said the City couldn't possibly project from the information at hand what it would do to the next 40 years. She added that this does directly affect the City's current employees, many of whom have only received a cost of living adjustment for the past six or seven years. She said the City has been able to provide increased benefits to the widows twice in excess of the ongoing increase they received during contract negotiations. She said it would have an effect on the City's ability to provide for its current employees and to provide the City services. The Mayor pointed out that the Metro Mayors Alliance did work to obtain some amount of relief through the Legislature for a period of 10 years in the form of 50 percent of the expenses for retiree benefits and that leaves a period of 30 years of the unknown. She said those payments would be received current, and now they are received in arrears, and that means the City would receive a double payment which would allow some money to be set aside and receive interest on. She said there was a second bill that was passed in the Legislature that would provide the City with approximately $250,000 over the next two years for the two funds. She said that, however, doesn't begin to address the obligations that the City has to the retirees. Common Council Minutes Cont'd May 7, 2001 Page 7 Mayor Miller said her recommendation to Council, if it wants to consider this issue, is to obtain the services of a professional actuary and to have those numbers calculated. Councilmember Lundy said that she has no idea of what the cost would be to obtain an actuary, but she feels that is the avenue to- pursue since the City needs to know those figures. The Mayor said she did not know what the cost would be. Councilmember Wissel asked how these benefits compare with the widow benefits under the Public Employees Retirement Fund (P.E.R.F.) and Mayor Miller answered that their benefits are at 30 percent. Then, Councilmember Wissel asked Chief Shake if what he was looking at was as high as 74 percent under the old plan, and Chief Shake responded that that would be for those widows whose husbands had worked that many years. The Mayor said they are currently at 50 percent of benefits. Then, Councilmember Wissel stated that the widows of the newer employees are only entitled to 30 percent and this ordinance is asking to jump the old plan up to 74 percent? Councilmember Wissel stated that he felt that seems a little inequitable and Chief Shake responded that he had heard that said within his department and added they are going to approach the Legislature about raising those benefits also. He said that is set by state law so that's the route they would have to take. Councilmember Wissel commented that what concerns him the most is being fiscally sound, adding that he thinks it is more important that the City meets those obligations that it is already committed to before it takes on more. He said that along the way, in the past, as a City the actions have not been taken which have been needed to meet those obligations. In looking over the charts provided to Councilmembers, the Mayor explained that the City only has guaranteed relief from the State for the next 10 years, adding that the Legislature passed that during this last session. The numbers that are projected beyond that which are shown on the charts, the Mayor said, are simply projections and until something is actually passed and included in the State's budget the City cannot predict accurately beyond the next 10 years. But, she said, for the next 10 years the City would receive 50 percent of its expenses. The Mayor said the State is trying to work with the Metro Mayors Alliance to provide an amount of relief that would allow that increase to be manageable by the cities so that they don't provide a great amount of immediate relief leaving a huge increase to go onto the tax rate within a given year. She said there are several different factors dealing with several different levels of relief and different types of relief. Referring to the charts again the Mayor said that basically the City's obligations would grow 500 percent compared to its maximum levy, which grows at 5 percent. She added that Richmond is only behind Indianapolis and New Albany in facing this crisis situation. The Mayor stated that the City's funds are in somewhat different circumstances, because the Police Pension Fund is actually a bit healthier than the Fire Pension Fund, but in 1977 both Police and Fire were offered the opportunity to convert to the new plan. She said there were many more Police officers who converted to the new plan and the state picked up those ongoing obligations so the City's ongoing needs for the Police Pension are less than those of the Fire Pension. But, she said, the two combined do have an impact on the City's maximum levy and tax rate. At the end of all the discussion, President Sharp said that what Council needs is an actuarial study and instructed the Mayor and City Attorney to look into what that cost would be. He said until that happens he feels this ordinance should be held on second reading. ORDINANCE NO. 20 — 2001 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 20 — 2001 — A SPECIAL ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE APPROVAL OF A STATEMENT OF BENEFITS FOR A PROPERTY OWNER APPLYING FOR DEDUCTIONS UNDER I.C. 6-1.1 — 21.1 Explaining this ordinance was Councilmember Combs who said he met with Fred Austerman, vice president of Sanyo Laser Inc. that currently employs 153. He said the primary equipment being purchased is a laser -cutting machine replacing an older model machine that is helping Sanyo to remain competitive and increase the likelihood of their employees keeping their jobs. He said this request is for $1,660,000 for a 10-year period and he is recommending approval of the request. President Sharp declared Ordinance No. 20 — 2001 on public hearing. There being no comments either in support or opposition of the ordinance, Councilmember Parker moved for engrossment, second by Councilmember Combs and the motion was carried on a voice vote. Councilmember Wissel moved to suspend the rules and advance Ordinance No. 20 — 2001 to third and final reading and read by title only, second by Councilmember Parker and the motion was carried on a voice vote. Common Council Minutes Cont'd May 7, 2001 Page 8 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 20 — 2001 on third reading. Ordinance No. 20 — 2001 was adopted on a unanimous voice vote. ORDINANCES ON THIRD READING There were none. UNFINISHED BUSINESS President Sharp acknowledged the birthday of Councilmember Lundy, which will occur later in the week, on May 11. CALL FOR ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, on a motion duly made, seconded and passed, the meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m. ATTEST: Norma Schroeder, Clerk Karl Sharp, President