HomeMy Public PortalAbout10-04-1993 _ 7
,_PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE
OITV-OF-RIC-HMONDdNBIANA-MONBAYOCT-OBER-4-4993
1 The Common Council of the City of Richmond, Indiana met in regular session at 7:30 p.m. Monday,October
2 4, 1993, in the Council Chambers in said City. President Lundy presided with the following Councilmembers
3 present: Elstro, Brookbank, Donat, Parker, Allen, Dickman and Hutton. Councilmember McBride was
4 absent.The following business was had to-wit:
5
6 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
7
8 PRAYER BY COUNCILMEMBER LUNDY
9
10 ROLL CALL
11
12 Eight present.
13
14 APPROVAL OF MINUTES OFSEPTEMBER 20.1993
15 -
16 Minutes not available for approval.
17
18 COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE MAYOR
19
20 Mayor Roger Cornett commented on the Indiana Association of Cities and-Towns annual conference held
21 recently in Evansville which he attended along with Earnest Jarvis, Bob Goodwin and Norma Carnes. He
22 noted that it was an excellent conference and used the theme "Building Bridges." He said State Senator
23 Robert Garton spoke on the plight of the local elected officials and added that it was such an excellent
24 speech that he was attempting to get a copy of it to share with Councilmembers.
25
26 Workshops at the conference included topics such as exchanging ideas, annexation, yard waste bans,
27 ethics and conflicts of interest, complyiing with ADA and regulating cable TV. He elaborated on the latter
28 topic,saying that with the new cable act there are things the City needs to be doing that he wasn't aware of.
29 Based on that information he said he will be getting the Telecommunications Council in special session to
30 get everybody educated on what the responsibilities of municipal officials are under the new cable TV
31 regulation act that was passed in Washington, D'.C. a few months ago. He noted that he had some good
32 discussion with other mayors and especially David Dominic of Muncie. He said he had attended a session
33 on municipal liability and had picked that particular one because John Maley, an attorney with Barnes &
34 Thornburg in Indianapolis and son of local attorney Bob Maley was a panelist and the Mayor said he learned
35 from that session that the City is doing a very good job in that area. He commented that IACT is a strong
36 organization and serves municipal officials well in offering them an opportunity to get together and share
37 ideas.
38
39 Councilmember Brookbank commented on the Mayor's show on cable TV recently where he shared the
40 spotlight with former Richmondite Terry Whitesell who explained what Carpenter is trying to do and what
41 direction it is going. She also gave the Mayor and City Attorney Thomas Milligan credit for their work in
42 making Civic Hall a reality.Cornett said he feels Civic Hall will be a source of pride to the community,adding
43 that it is his opinion that the children of today and the future will be well served with that facility. He also
44 commended the Richmond Community Schols Board for its part in helping to make the Civic Hall renovation
45 project a success.
46
47 PRESENTATIONS OF REMONSTRANCES. PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS
48
49 REPORT FROM CITY DEPARTMENTS
50
51 City Attorney Thomas Milligan told the Council that Richard P. Hargreaves of the Indiana-American Water
52 Co. has written to the Mayor explaining that the Muncie City Council has approved on first reading an
53 ordinance that Indiana-American Water Co. shall include in the basic rate for all the customers, which are
54 citizens and residents of the City of Muncie, charges for furnishing water for public fire protection services.
55 He said that ordinance will be considered on final approval on third reading tonight in Muncie. This is
56 consistent, Milligan said, with the law that was passed by the Legislature this year which stated that the
57 legislative body of the largest customer base of any water company in Indiana, which happens to be
58 Muncie,could vote in this particular provision which would require the Water Company to collect the bill from
59 its water customers. In so doing the Indiana-American Water Company has taken the legal position that if
60 Muncie votes it in it will be implemented for all customers that they serve. So, if it is passed in Muncie,they
61 consider it binding on Richmond customers as well. Milligan said Richmond was not in a position to do this.
62 Only Muncie was and does control Richmond's fate in this matter. However, Milligan added, even if this
63 ordinance is passed, then the Water Company has to go before the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission
64 for an increase in its rate structure in order to accommodate the charge and it will be a design of rates not
65 unlike the rate design which is a familiar one with regard to power increases.
348
•
Common Council Minutes Cont'd
October 4, 1993
Page 2
1 As a result, Milligan said, he anticipates it will be a number of months before there will be any new rates and
these will not likely be available in 1994.In answer to Councilmember Lundy's question as to whether or not
it is unusual for one city to control everyone, Milligan said it is the way the Indiana law was written, noting it
was primarily designed to apply to Marion County and those counties surrounding it.These are all served by
the Indianapolis Water Company. After the bill started moving in support of that, other cities were asked to
support it and second class cities were included. There are three,cities served•by the Indiana-American
Water Co.They are Richmond, Kokomo and Muncie,with Muncie having the largest customer base. Milligan
said this is a prime example of a piece of legislation that starts out with a particular objective and as it is
• amended in the process takes on some bizarre qualities. -
1f
11 Councilmember Brookbank expressed her appreciation to Jarvis for his prompt action in helping with a
1- sidewalk problem within her Council district.
1
1, REPORT FROM OTHER OFFICES
1-
1: REPORT FROM BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS AND SAFETY
1
1: Minutes of the September 16 and 23 meetings in the Council packets.
1•
2. REPORTS FROM SPECIAL COMMITTEES
2
2. None were presented.
2
2, REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES
2'
2: None were presented.
2
2: REPORTS FROM OTHER COUNCIL COMMITTEES
2'
34 None were presented.
3
3 ORDINANCES
3
3• ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING •
3.
3: Councilmember Brookbank moved to suspend the rules and read on first reading by title only Ordinances
3 No. 86, 87 and 88- 1993, second by'Councilmember Allen, but President Lundy asked that Ordinance No.
3: 86-1993 be read in its entirety,and the motion was carried on a unanimous voice vote.
3
40 ORDINANCE NO.66-1993
4
4. The Clerk-read Ordinance No. 86 1993 -AN APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY
OF RICHMOND TO RECEIVE A DONATION
•
4' "WHEREAS the City.of Richmond, Indiana,has the option of accepting or rejecting donations for a specific
4: purpose,and
4 •
4: WHEREAS the acceptance of a donation for a specific purpose constitutes the appropriation of such
4• property for the intended purpose,
5• .
5 NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Common Council of the Cityof Richmond, Indiana, that the
5 following donation be gratefully accepted and hereby acknowledged with the heart-felt gratitude of the
5 citizens of Richmond,_to wit:
5 -
5' A. Fire Department for the purchase of the fire detectors to be given to needy citizens.
5• .
5 WaI MartStore-Cash Gift$48.00
5: •
5° Councilmember Brookbank moved to suspend the rules and advance Ordinance No. 86 - 1993 to second
60 reading and read,by title only, second by Councilmember Allen and the motion was carried on a unanimous
6 yoice vote.
6. •
6 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 86-1993 on second reading.
6
6•
•
is
•
349
Common Council Minutes Cont'd
October 4,1993
Page 3.
1 President Lundy declared Ordinance No.86.1993 on public hearing.
2
3 Speaking in support of the ordinance was Wayne Jackson, Chief of Fire Prevention Bureau, who said the
4 department was contacted two weeks ago by Wal Mart and asked to participate in the department store's
5 promotion of a fire safety program. They explained they wanted to have a fire truck on their premises
6 between 4 and 6 p.m.on Friday and Sturday,September 24 and 25, to make it available for parents to bring
7 their children out and have a photograph taken with it.Jackson said the children were not allowed on the fire
8 truck but could stand in front of it. A Wal Mart employee then took photographs of the children and parents,
9 charging $1 for each photo, and the money was passed on to the Fire Department to use for whatever it
10 deemed necessary. Jackson said he was informed by Fire Chief Jim Sticco that the Fire Department is not
11 allowed to accept money directly and that it would have to go through City Council. He said Sticco also
12 recommended that any money be used for smoke detectors for needy families.
13 -
14 Hearing no further comments in favor and none against the ordinance, Councilmember Dickman moved for
15 engrossment,second by Councilmember Parker and the motion was carried on a unanimous voice vote.
16
17 Councilmember Brookbank moved to suspend the rules and advance Ordinance No. 86 - 1993 to third and
18 final reading and read by title only, second by Councilmember Parker and the motion was carried on a
19 unanimous voice vote.
20
21 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 86-1993 on thirdl reading.
22
23 Ordinance No.86-1993 was adopted on the following call of the roll:
24
25 Ayes:Elstro, Brookbank, Donat, Parker,Allen, Dickman, Hutton and Lundy (8)
26 Absent:McBride
27
28 ORDINANCE NO.87-1993
29
30 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 87 - 1993 - A SPECIAL ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE APPROVAL OF
31 STATEMENTS OF BENEFITS FOR PROPERTY OWNERS APPLYING FOR DEDUCTIONS UNDER I.C.
32 6-1.1-12.1
33
34 Councilmember Parker,who said he was unable to attend this meeting, asked City Controller Dennis Grimes
35 to explain the ordinance. Grimes said after review of the applications for statement of benefits it was
36 determined that the applicants do meet the letter of the law in regard to the equipment and real estate for
37 which they are applying for abatement.
38
39 Councilmember Brookbank moved to suspend the rules and advance Ordinance No. 87 - 1993 to second
40 reading and read by title only, second by Councilmember Allen and the motion was carried on a unanimous
41 voice vote.
42
43 The Clerk read Ordinance No.87-1993 on second reading.
44
45 Councilmember Dickman questioned as to why the value of the deduction is not shown. Milligan answered
46 that it is not public record.
47
48 President Lundy declared Ordinance No. 87- 1993 on public hearing.There being no comments either for or
49 against, Councilmember Parker moved for engrossment, second by Councilmember Hutton and the motion
50 was carried on a unanimous voice vote.
51
52 Councilmember Allen moved to suspend the rules and advance Ordinance No. 87 - 1993 to third and final
53 reading and read by title only,second by Councilmember Parker and the motion was carried on a unanimous
54 voice vote.
55
56
57 The Clerk read Ordinance No.87-1993 on third and final reading.
58
59
60 Ordinance No.87-1993 was adopted on the following call of the roll:
61
62
63 Ayes:Elstro, Brookbank, Donat, Parker,Allen, Dickman, Hutton and Lundy(8)
64 Absent:McBride
65
35O
•
Common Council Minutes Cont'd
October 4, 1993 • . " -
Pago-4
1
. ORDINANCE NO.88-1993 : . ,
The Clerk read Ordinance No. 88 -.1993 - AN APPROPRIATION`ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 1993
- BUDGET
Grimes explained that this ordinance deletes $11,800 from the capital equipment budget of the fire
department and adds $11,800 for.supplies. The money, Grimes said, will be used to purchase first aid
• supplies and is in conjunction with an agreement between AID Ambulance and the Richmond Fire
1 i Department. He said it was initially budgeted in in capital equipment along with $7,000 for a defibrillator, but
1 in discussing it with Fire Chief Jim Sticco,Grimes said it was determined it would be more properly classified
1. in other supplies rather than capital equipment.
1
1, In answer to a question by Councilmember Elstro, Chief Sticco said the Fire Department was not buying
1• equipment for AID Ambulance,but for its engine, aerial and rescue squads to make them basic life support.
1. He said that his personnel has responded to more than 30 to 35 incidents involving wrecks with injuries or
1 when AID is tied up. He said his department has trained personnel, 19 EMTs, and they are well trained but
1• don't have the equipment to work:with. He explained that the only iniitial expense will be the buying of
1• supplies and at the end of the time as used, AID will replenish those supplies. He added that this is nothing
20 new and is an enhancement of the quality of life, noting that the department,has been running first aid runs
2 ever since he's been on the fire department and that's been 27 years, and even before that He said it strted
2 out with basic first aid,then moved to multimedia first aid which is more andmore enhanced.He said the
2. reason they did first responder classes earlier in the year was to get that training since his men are called on
2, to do these things more and•more. Chief.Sticco said as soon as the ordinance is approved and the
2• department makes its purchases there is a meeting set up with the state emergency management to say
2° what kind of incidents the fire department will respond to and how much back up AID will need. Chief Sticco
2 said his department has no capability to transport anyone to the hospital but in case of a delay may be able
2: to render service to keep them alive.
2°
30 Councilmember.Brookbank moved to suspend the rules and advance Ordinance No. 88 1993. to second
3 reading and read by title only, second by Councilmember Parker and the: motion was carried on a
3 unanimous voice vote.
3
3, The Clerk read Ordinance No.88-1993 on second reading.
3
3° President Lundy declared Ordinance No. 88 - 1993 on public hearing. Sticco said he was in favor of the
3 ordinance because it is living up to a part of the fire department's mission statement which is to deliver
3: emergency medical service to the best of its capability. He added that they are well trained, all they need is
3° the equipment.
40
4 Nick Aughe, operational supervisor of AID Ambulance, spoke in support of the ordinance, explaining that
4 they do rely on the fire department when they are extremely busy and it is advantageous to the patient
4• expecially in a life threatening situation.
4 Hearing na further comments for and none against the ordinance, Councilmember Parker moved for
4° engrossment second by Councilmember Allen and the motion was carried on a unanimous voice vote.
4
4: Councilmember Allen moved to suspend the rules and advance Ordinance.No.'88 - 1993 to-third and final
4° reading and-,read by title only, second by Councilmember Parker and the motion was carried on a
50 unanimous voice-vote. .. " .
5 . .
5 The Clerk read Ordinance.No.88-.1993 on third reading. -
5
5• Ordinance No.88--1993 was adopted on the following call of the roll: - -
5 ..
5. Ayes:Elstro, Brookbank, Donat, Parker,Allen, Dickman, Hutton and Lundy(8) -
5' Absent:McBride - •
5: .
5' ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING - ' - -
6'+ - - - -
6 .
6° ORDINANCE NO._49.=1993 - _ _
6' .
6 President Lundy said-Council had received several Second Reading Amendments and asked Milligan to
6. explain them. - _
•
851
Common Council Minutes Cont'd
October 4, 1993
P_ge_5
. � f
1 Milligan said Leslie Ducey, secretary of the Street Tree Commission, and Earnest Jarvis, Director of the
2 Department of Public Works and a member of.the Commission, were both in attendance and could answer
3 questions if need be.
4
5 Explaining that this ordinance was adopted in 1986,creating the Street Tree Commission, Milligan said it had
6 been amended in 1987, 1988 and again in 1993. He added that the amendments had been piecemeal and
7 as a result, in order to make the ordinance more readable and more consistent, he has simply introduced in
8 Ordinance No.49- 1993 a complete re-statement of Chapter 97 of the Richmond Code. He said Section 97
9 is essentially what presently goes under the code.
10
11 Going through the ordinance, Milligan said no changes were made in 97.01.One change was made in 97.02,
12 Milligan said, noting that"an employee of the department of parks and recreation having the responsibility of
13 the care of trees who shall be designated by the superintendent of said department" shall sit on the
14 Commission. However, Milligan said,the street trees are now maintained by the Department of Public Works
15 and not the department of parks and recreation. He said the individual who served in that capacity, Dave
16 Gilland, was actually working for the Department of Public Works and continuing to serve on the
17 Commission. At Jarvis's suggestion, Milligan said,that was changed to the individualat Richmond Power&
18 Light who is primarily responsible for the maintenance of the power lines of the City, because RP & L does
19 as much, if not more pruning of street trees than the City's own crew does in their responsibility of keeping
20 the lines free and the potential of damage as well as other complications for power purposes. He added that
21 it is important to have them involved in decisions that are made in regard to street trees and Ducey had
22 suggested earlier this evening that he recommend the following change.To designate the superintendent of
23 the transmission and distribution department of RP & L who happens to be Kerry Vincent and that he shall
24 serve by virtue of holding such office and it could be put in there his title or his designated representative.
25 That would enable him to send his foreman for the actual cutting crews from time to time and give him an
26 opportunity to have representation of an individual more closely involved with it. Milligan said he had put in
27 the supervisory level and Ducey had suggested to give RP&L the option of the designated representative.
28
29 No changes were made to 97.03, 97.04 or 97.05, Milligan said. However,there was a provision in Part A of
30 97.06 of a permit requirement. He said the Commission will issue the permit and he explained the purpose of
31 the provisions. No changes, he said, were made in Part B of 97.06. In 97.07, he said, those areas were
32 designated where the City has a concern and Part B specifies a planning strip of three feet. He added that
33 there are some areas which go down to three feet but most are wider than that. As a practical matter the
34 smaller trees will be planted in the three-foot areas whereas the larger strips would lend themselves more
35 appropriately to the larger trees. In answer to a question by Councilmember Hutton, Ducey said trees will not
36 be planted in any areas with less than three feet mainly because of the health of the trees as well as the
37 maintenance of the City curbs and sidewalks.Jarvis said that Part A of 97.07 speaks to that, noting that the
38 City will try to get the private property owner to allow a tree to be planted if there is one available.
39
40 Milligan said in Section C of 97.08 a$1 permit cost had been eliminated because when working with people
41 the material is often donated and the City wants to encourage that and, he added, administratively it was
42 insignificant. He said in 97.09 instructions are set forth in planting and care. In 97.10, he said, the
43 Commission did a good bit of work in this section in coming up with the spacing. In Section E of 97.10,
44 Milligan said it addresses vision requirements at intersections. Ducey said she had reviewed the changes,
45 noting that the previous amendment was worded as such that would require the Commission to have a
46 surveyor. She added that for practical and economical purposes the intent was to ensure good visibility by
47 pedestrians and motorists at intersections and if there would be an accident at an intersection a tree would
48 not make things worse.The change is that no tree shall be planted within.30 feet of a curb or the edge of the
49 pavement.
50
51 Councilmember Parker asked about Section B of 97.09 in which it states that all material to be planted
52 should be nursery stock, asking if that meant if someone has a proper tree the Commission isn't going to
53 allow them to transplant it. Ducey said that is probably true, explaining that if:people go into the woods and
54 get wild stock it could introduce certain diseases into the street tree population. However, she said,chances
55- are that if somebody had one in their front yard they would like to transplant,the Commission is not going to
56 say anything. Milligan said a permit is involved which could discourage a person from bringing anything
57 unsuitable. Councilmember Parker said that unfortunately there will still be a lot of maple trees that just
58 appear, and Ducey agreed,saying that the City does not have a person designated to roam the streets to tag
59 trees, however, when an inappropriate tree is spotted this ordinance will provide the Commission with the
60 language needed to do something about it. She added that actually the intent behind requiring the permit
61 was to give a certificate of congratulations. Milligan said 97.11 is tracking the present ordinance as is 97.12.
62
63 Beginning with 97.13, Milligan said, is the meat part of the whole ordinance and has to do with putting some
64 teeting into the ordinance. He noted that the members of the Street Tree Commission are very conscientious
65 as is the case with most of the volunteers on,many of the City commissions and committees.
35� .
Common Council Minutes Cont'd. • . . .
O 1ok_e.L4,_t993 -.
Page_b 1 - -
•
•
y •
.
•
1 Milligan explained that 97.13 spells out that there is no liability of.a citi,individual with regard.to keeping
2 . • trees and shrubs upon private property in safe condition,-in other words it: is limiting the City's
responsibilities. In 97.14 is the general_admonishment against carving your initials,wrapping signs,attaching •
_ signs to the street trees. Councilmember Parker asked if 97.13 means the City is-assuming all the liability
° ' for all the street trees. Milligan said it is spelling out that the City and its employees have no duty regarding
trees and shrubs on private property. In answer to another question by Councilmember Parker, Milligan said
prudent pruning of the street trees is the City's responsibility and it has liability insurance to handle that. He
added that is basically a liability insurance problem.
1' Jarvis said the recently installed hot line in the maintenance section is used, quite-a bit and response is
1 I usually on that same day but•it'is based upon the severity of the problem.lt is placed on a priority list and is
1- gradually worked down. In answer to a.comment by President Lundy,Jarvis said that applies to trees that
1 are reported as having a probelm. He added that if,in traveling around a problem is discovered,the City tries
1, to take care of that, too: Councilmember Dickman asked whether or not the liability is any different than it
1- has been in the past and Milligan said it is the same. He said if it is obvious the tree had been injured due to
1; a previous storm and the City didn't do anything about it and some damage is done, it is the City's
1 responsibility and the City has insurance to cover-that.
1: .
1' Milligan said 97.15 .is self explanatory, noting that often trees are damaged by contractors and those
2' involved in construction activity. He said the City now has-it in this ordinance that:these individuals now
2 have a duty to prevent the injury and its asking them to be particularly concerned. He added that it not only
2 involves public streets but alleys as well. In 97.16, Milligan said, it spells_out'the responsibilities of private
2 individuals and the word alleys has been added to streets and sidewalks and applies to renters,or landlords.
2, It states that if limbs are extending out into these areas the individual:shall-prune the trees to prevent
2' obstruction of view and damage to property. He added that this is a significant new provision because the
2 City receives many complaints about trees in alleys as well as trees over sidewalks and this gives an
2 opportunity to issue-letters requesting it be done and it can be backed up by:writing,a ticket and citing the
2: individual.He noted that it is an important step for good tree management in the,City.
2•
3. Councilmember Parker asked whose responsibility it would be to inspect and Milligan answered that the
3 Department of Law,shall continue to enforce all the ordinances and the inspectors and not the Police
3- Department will do the inspection. In answer to Councilmember Parker's question as to how the City can
3 make the individual-pay the-fine, Milligan said the ticket can- be written for a minimum:fine of $25 to a
3, maximum of$250. He explained that the ticket would be written and dismissed if the individual would do the
3- pruning. However,if the pruning was not done they would go ahead and pay the fine. He said this-places the
3. responsibility.on the person who occupies the property because. it doesn't specify owner or tenant. He
3 agreed with Councilmember Parker, •however, that ultimate:y the landowner has the responsibility.
3: Councilmember Hutton asked if this meant that the City is going to keep all the street trees trimmed and
3• Milligan responded that this is the present program,to prune the street trees.
40
4 Councilmember:Dickman asked if would be appropriate under 97.16 which deals with required pruning to
4. include shrubbery. Milligan agreed and added the word shrubbery. Councilmember Parker asked about the
trees extending over South West 1st Street from Miller's on past Hardee's. He said they extend over the
, sidewalk every spring and the high school students have to walk out in the street. In the past, he said,it has
4 been a problem. Milligan said he would know what caused the confusion, that is definitely a City problem
4. because it is City property all the way down in the gorge. In 97.17it deals with the public utilities and notices
4 of rules and regulations regarding them. Milligan said he felt that with the involvement of RP & L on the
4: Street Tree Commission the communication would improve. - .
4°
50 Milligan noted that these sections are new and the fine is not less than $25 and not more than $250 and
5 each act violation constitutes a separate offense._He added that this is an ordinance violation carrying a civil
5 penalty and.is:not part of the,criminal code. He added that the ticket would•be written by one-of.the
5 inspectors and if the ticket is not paid in the Clerk's office then it would be filed_as:a civil violation in.Superior
5-, Court No.'3.by the`Department sof Law. It would be dealt with in the same•way:.asparking tickets and other
5' ordinance_violations.•Councilmember Parker said it was recommended in the discussion in the Committee of
5° the.Whore that the fines which are paid would go to the Commission. Milligan said`that is included in Section
5 D of 9718. And,-under B, Milligan said, replacement of a street tree:is the responsibility of the party in
5: violation in addition to the fine, adding that under C, if the fines aren't working out'-it asks for injunctive relief
5° which would'be a much more costly;route to-go. . . .
6n .
6 Councilmember Dickman moved to.accept the amendments, second:by Councilmember Hutton and the
6 motion-was carried oh a unanimous voice vote. .
6:
6, President Lundy declared Ordinance No.49-1993 on public hearing. . -
6' - .
-53-
Common Council Minutes Cont'd
October 4, 1993
Page 7
1 - -
2 Ducey spoke in favor of the ordinance, thanking the Council for giving the Commission the fines that they
3 didn't ask for but will certainly help replace the trees. She noted that the Commission was formed in 1986
4 and its members are learning more about street trees and city government and is considered a model for the
5 state. -
6
7 Hearing no other comments for and none against, Councilmember Dickman moved for engrossment,second
8 by Councilmember Parker and the motion was carried on a unanimous voice vote.
9
10 Mayor Cornett complimented Ducey and the other members of the Commission and encouraged the support
11 of the Council of the ordinance. He added that it had been a pleasure working with the members of the
12 Commission, noting that he had used them on several occasions to help educate interested citizens.
13
14 Councilmember Brookbank moved to suspend the rules and advance Ordinance No. 49 - 1993 to third and
15 final reading, and read by title only, second by Councilmember Allen and the motion was carried on a
16 unanimous voice vote.
17
18 The Clerk read Ordinance No.49-1993 on third reading.
19
20 Ordinance No.49-1993 was adopted on the following call of the roll:
21
22 Ayes:Elstro, Brookbank, Donat, Parker,Allen, Dickman, Hutton and Lundy(8)
23 Absent:McBride
24
25 Milligan said the ordinance would not become effective until after it has been published because it imposes a
26 fine.
27
28 ORDINANCE NO.56-1993
29
30 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 56 - 1993 - A SPECIAL ORDINANCE VACATING THE FIRST ALLEY
31 NORTH OF SOUTH A STREET BETWEEN SOUTH 2ND STREET AND THE CSX RAILROAD
32
33 Brad Smarelli, President of Smarelli General Contractors, said his company owned the property on both
34 sides of the alley and asked Council to support the ordinance.
35
36 Councilmember Allen reported on the meeting of the Planning Commission votes 10-0 in favor.
37
38 President Lundy declared Ordinance No.56-1993 on public hearing.
39
40 There being no other comments for and none against, Councilmember Parker moved for engrossment,
41 second by Councilmember Hutton and the motion was carried on a unanimous voice vote.
42
43 Councilmember Brookbank moved to suspend the rules and advance Ordinance No. 56 - 1993 to third and
44 final reading and read by title only, second by Councilmember Parker and the motion was carried on a
45 unanimous voice vote.
46
47 The Clerk read Ordinance No.56-1993 on third and final reading.
48
49 Ordinance No.56-1993 was adopted on the following call of the roll:
50
51 Ayes:Elstro, Brookbank, Donat, Parker,Allen, Dickman, Hutton and Lundy(8)
52 Absent: McBride
53
54 ORDINANCE NO.80-1993
55
56 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 80 - 1993 - A GENERAL ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 91 OF THE
57 RICHMOND CODE PERTAINING TO FEES FOR REGISTRATION
58
59 President Lundy announced that this ordinance could go all the way tonight but there are several
60 amendments which she asked Milligan to explain.
61
62 Milligan said this ordinance originally pertained to only dogs and the wording in Section 91.01 C has been
63 changed to the word "animal." That change was necessary due to the adoption last year of the registration
64 law pertaining to cats also. A housekeeping change has been made in B to more correctnly identify the
65 owner. The first sentence is unchanged in C and the second sentence is a housekeeping change to reflect a
more correct definition.
'3 5-4
. Common Council Minutes Cont'd • •• •-
-October 4, 1993 - _:'
• -Pagel' • - '
} .
. .. r
1 He said the third sentence in 91.02 requires certain information be-added to•the information required for
registration and that has to do with reproductive status and the.sex 'of-the dog or cat. .Milligan said he
recalled discussion to develop a differential in fees for neutered add unneutered animals and that is reflected
• : .in 91.02 B and is the principal change. He said the registration fee was$4 across the board for all aninals
• • previously and is now.$10 unless a certificate by a veterinarian stating the dog or cat is neutersd.is furnished
" to the person issuing•the license tag, in which case the fee shall be$4. He said the second sentence,which
provides that$1 of the registration fee may be retained to defray the cost is unchanged.
• Section 91.02 G, Milligan said is a housekpeeing change to clarify definition: Then, in 91.04 is where dogs
11 are treated.special. It reads that dogs shall be kept under restraint as defined in Section 91.01, at all times.
1 That is defined as under the control of the owner or other compettent person by means of a leash or with the
1 owner or other,obedient to that person's command,or confined in a pen,yard, cage, house or other secure
1 enclosure. If the dog will answer to a command it can be let off the leash.
1,
1• , Milligan said 91.05 has been re-written to pertain to other animals as well as dogs. He said in 1992 a total of
1; 833 animals had been picked up.Of these,.530 were dogs, 294 were cats and the balance included one
1 goat and several racoons and others. He added that quite often the animal control officer will pick up a
1: mother and puppies or a litter of kittens and in this situation it will continue to have the period of five days
1 that animals will be held in the shelter before they can be adopted out or disposed of in a humane manner
2+ and it is up to the shelter to do that. He added that the City's responsibility ends when the animal control
2 officer delivers the animal to the shelter. He said the atttempt by the animal control officer to contact the
2: owner is limited to where the telephone number appears on the tag and the officer has an opportunity to call
2 within 48 hours. Otherwise; he said, the shelter shall attempt to contact the owner of any tagged animal a
2• minimum number of three times prior to adopting the animal or humanely disposing of it.
2-•
2. Councilmember Donat asked'if the owner's telephone number has to appear on the animal and Milligan said
2 the shelter will have either its own tag records or it can contact the;City Controller's office and it will have
2: more time to do that in a.five-day period. Under B, he said,the animal control officer may cite•the owner for
2° violation if the ownership,is known when the dog is found and it does not have to be impounded.
30
3 A new provision in 91.05 C states that the animal control officer shall keep a record of all animals found at
3. large and upon the third'such finding in a calendar year the animal shall be neutered prior to its return to the
3• owner or permitting the owner to pick it up at the shelter. He said the cost of neutering must be paid by the
3, owner before the animal may be returned by the animal control officer or released by the shelter. He added
3 that this is the repeat offenders ulitimate punishment and is the problem Councilmember:Donat addressed.
3°
3' Councilmember Donat said Dr. Carolyn. Blaker, President of HELP the Animals, Inc., provided her with
3: different ordinances adopted in different cities and many have the automatic neutering clauses. She added
3° the most effective .ones are those that charged the owners for the neutering prior to the release of the
40 animal,then it was up to the owner to have the dog or cat neutered or not. She added that they would forfeit
4 their money so there wasn't a problem with collecting the bill for neutering and the owner would be solely
4 responsible. She said the ordinance that she felt addressed the issue the best stated that when the owner
came to the animal shelter they paid the money then the dog was neutered;and.then returned to them.
4
4 Councilmember Donat suggested to amend the ordinance further, noting that the City'.does not do the
4• neutering, especially prior to an owner being found, but that the owner would pay for the neutering or
4' spaying of the animal and it would be up to the owner to have the spaying and neutering done.Then, if not,
4: they risk having the animal picked up again. She said in some of the ordinances the fees increased as the
4! animal is picked up; noting that the first offense is $100 and increase to in excess of $500. However, she
5+ added, that these seem extremely steep for this area. Councilmember Hutton said she did not understand
5 the amendment because it was her understanding that the intent is to get the animal spayed or neutered, not
5 just to get the money,and it sounded like Councilmember Donat was suggesting that they be let go.
5' . '.
5, Councilmember;Dona;answered that she thought it would be rather harsh to make owners spay or neuter
5 their animals; however if that is Council's wishes, she said she could go along with:that. President Lundy
5• said she thought the-purpose of the ordinance was to make the owners-of-dogs running loose neuter them
5' and the punishment would be that the City is going to neuter the dog before the owner gets him back from
5: the shelter. Councilmember Brookbank commented that if people really loved.their animals they would keep
5! them:at home or neuter them. . • . : '
6+
6 Milligan said the shelter.would not neuter the animal until they had the':money in handfrom:the owner,
6' adding that the discussion is not about an owner that is unknown because if is the third time around in 12
6: months that owner id going to be a familiar.one. Therefore, the owner will be called and if he Wantsthe
6• animal he's going to;be.neutered and he is going to have to pay for that before it is done. Councilmember
6• Dickman asked if the owners could choose their own veterinarian and Milligan said that could'be worked out
with.the shelter. - . •
355
Common Council Minutes Cont'd
October 4, 1993
P_ager_9
1 Dr. Blakey, President of HELP the Animals Inc., agreed that the money has to be in hand before neutering
2 takes place and rules will be worked out as to how the fee is paid. Milligan said City is not involved in the
3 transfer of any money except the registration tags each year and that is all the money the City is going to
4 receive. He added that it is strictly between the owner and the shelter at that point. He said the City will not
5 be neutering dogs.
6
7 Milligan explained that in 91.06, it states that the animal shall be returned to its owner upon compliance with
8 91.02 which is the registration requirement. And, 91.07 is the rabies control provision which states that the
9 payment for all charges for care and medical treatment incurred by the animal shelter in holding such animal
10 provided that any animal that has bitten a person may not be returned to its owner unless authorized by the
11 health officer. He said that incorporates the present provision of the ordinance and goes back quite a ways.
12 He added that the other provision has been in the ordinance for quite some time and it is stated in B that no
13 animal shall be returned to its owner that the health officer or a licensed veteriarian certifies in writing that
14 such animal should be humanely destroyed for public health consideration.
15
16 Councilmember Donat noted that one of the ordinances she had in hand stipulated that the animals found at
17 large on the third time was within three years rather than a calendar year. She suggested that Council
18 consider the three years instead of the calendar year. Councilmember Dickman said he felt it would be
19 easier to administer on an annual basis but that it could possibly be changed from two offenses intead of
20 three. Councilmember Parker said he likes the section the way it presently reads. Milligan.said 91.06 agrees
21 to the escalation in fees. Councilmember Parker said it is fairly expensive to get an animal back if you
22 consider proper licensing, rabies shot and shelter fees. He added that some people may just get another dog
23 rather than redeem the one in the shelter.At the end of the discussion Councilmember Donat said it was her
24 intention to have an incentive for neutering and spaying and she is willing to cooperate to make this a
25 workable ordinance.
26
27 Councilmember Donat moved to accept the amendments to Ordinance No. 80 - 1993, second by
28 Councilmember Parker and the motion was carried on a unanimous voice vote.
29
30 President Lundy declared Ordinance No.80-1993 on public hearing.
31
32 Dr. Blakey said she was delighted with the$10 fee then added that she had a problem with the very last line,
33 noting she would like to see added that the animals would be able to be destroyed for humane reasons,too.
34 She said sometimes they come into the shelter so sick or injured so badly that euthanasia would be
35 appropriate.Councilmember Brookbank so moved to amend 91.06 H,second by Councilmember Parker and
36 the motion was carried on a unanimous voice vote.
37
38 Councilmember Donat asked if the ordinance had a provision for an animal that is inhumanely treated and if
39 the shelter has the right to refuse release to such an owner.Milligan said that issue is addressed.
40
41 Hearing no other comments in favor and none against, Councilmember Hutton moved for engrossment,
42 second by Councilmember Parker and the motion was carried on a unaninmous voice vote.
43
44 Councilmember Brookbank moved to suspend the rules and advance Ordinance No. 80 - 1993 to third and
45 final reading and read by title only, second by Councilmember Parker and the motion was carried on a
46 unanimous voice vote.
47
48 The Clerk read Ordinance No.80-1993 on third reading.
49
50 Councilmember Hutton asked if the ordinance would go into effect immediately and Milligan answered that it
51 would since there is no change in the fine provisions.
52
53 Ordinance No.80-1993 was adopted on the following call of the roll:
54
55 Ayes:Elstro, Brookbank, Donat, Parker,Allen, Dickman, Hutton and Lundy(8)
56 Absent:McBride
57
58 Councilmember Dickman asked about the time of year the $10 fee would take effect and Grimes said that
59 provision would be enforced June 1, 1994.
60
61 ORDINANCE NO.85-1993
62
63 The Clerk read Ordinance No. 85 - 1993 - A SPECIAL ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING MAP AT
64 4309 WEST NATIONAL ROAD
65
• • •
6 •
•
-•
• . .
•
•
Comrnon Council Minutes Cont'd •
. October 4, 1993 •
Page.10 • .
. .
• , •
, .
. . . ,
•• • . . .
•
1 Councilmember Allen reported that the Planning Commission had voted 10-0 in favor of the ordinance which
2 deals with the request by Gene and Martha Spencer to rezone their property at 4309 National Road West
2 frorri.R-2 one family residence to C-2 commercial district4
•
.
E . President Lundy declared the ordinance on public hearing.
_ -
7 Speaking in support of the ordinance was Gene Spencer, owner of the property, asking for a zoning change
to put in a small gun shop and an outdoor sport shop. He and his wife live in the residence and plan to
• continue to occupy it.
10
1 Hearing no further comments in favor and none against, Councilmember Brookbank moved for
1. engrossment,second by Councilmember Allen and the motion was carried on a unanimous voice vote.
1
1, Councilmember Brookbank moved to suspend the rules and advance Ordinance No. 85 - 1993 to third and
1- final reading and read by title only, second by Councilmember Parker and the motion was carried on a
1 unanimous voice vote.
1
1; The Clerk read Ordinance No.85-1993 on third reading.
1'
2. Ordinance No.85-1993 was adopted on the following gall of the roll:
2
,. 2- Ayes:Elstro, Brookbank, Donat,Parker,Allen, Dickman, Hutton and Lundy(8)
•
2 Absent:McBride
2,
2 ORDINANCES ON THIRD READING
2:
2 There were none.
2:
2 OLD BUSINESS
3,
3 There was none.
3.
3 MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
3,
3' Councilmember Hutton said there is a vacancy on the Urban Enterprise Board, and it is a Council
3. appointment. She moved to appoint Ira Carter to fill that term, second by Councilmember Parker and the
3 motion was carried on a unanimous voice vote.
3:
3° ADJOURNMENT
40
4 There being no further business,on a motion duly made,seconded and passed,the meeting was adjourned.
4:
4
4: Etta J.Lundy,President
4° •
50
5
5.
5
5 ATTEST:
5 Norma.Carnes, City Clerk
5.
5:
5°
60
6
16
6•
6,
6.
•
•
•
•
•