HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BPW-2007-10-17BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS PROCEEDINGS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
Special Meeting 4:45 p.m. October 17, 2007
PRESENT:
Mayor Peterson
Commissioners (4) - Jenkins, Chapman, Tripp, Wykstra
OTHERS PRESENT:
City Attorney - Hoffman
City Controller - Thayer
Superintendent of Public Works - Gray
Assistant Superintendent of Streets and Facilities - Ferrel
Common Council Liaison – Coles
DAC Liaison – Roberts
Information Management Specialist - Myers
EXCUSED:
Commission Schlather
Asst. Supt. Water & Sewer – Whitney
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Mayor Peterson led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the American flag.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Approval of the Minutes of the September 5, 2007 Board of Public Works Meeting-
Resolution
By Commissioner Tripp: Seconded by Commissioner Wykstra
RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the September 5, 2007 Board of Public Works
meeting be approved as published, and be it further
Approval of the Minutes of the September 12, 2007 Board of Public Works
Meeting- Resolution
RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the September 12, 2007 Board of Public Works
meeting be approved as published, and be it further
Approval of the Minutes of the September 19, 2007 Board of Public Works
Meeting- Resolution
RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the September 19, 2007 Board of Public Works
meeting be approved as published.
Carried Unanimously
ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA:
There were no additions or deletions to the agenda.
MAYOR'S COMMUNICATIONS:
Martin Luther King Implementation Committee Update:
Mayor Peterson explained that a presentation was made at the last meeting of the
implementation committee that included recommendations for an educational walkway
and possible dual naming of portions of State Street. The media focused only on the
dual naming of the street and committee members have raised concerns about the
intent of the City.
The Board members agreed that the intent of the City was to create an educational
walkway through the City that would highlight various historical areas.
DEC-Owned Parcel on Inlet Island, City-Owned Festival Lands:
Mayor Peterson distributed a memo dated October 17, 2007 that will be distributed to
Common Council at the Planning & Economic Development meeting regarding her
recommendation to not extend the temporary off-leash law exemption at the Festival
Lands in order to proceed with a collaborative agreement that would facilitate the
implementation of an overall plan for coordinated redevelopment of Inlet Island and its
waterfront and a land use agreement for the Festival Lands.
Board of Public Works – October 17, 2007- Page 2
Discussion followed on the floor regarding the history of the Festival Lands and
meetings that have been taking place between the City, New York State Parks and the
Department of Environmental Conservation.
Further discussion focused on how this decision would affect the current off-leash dog
area and the proposed new location for the off-leash dog area on Cherry Street.
COMMUNICATIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE THE BOARD:
Stuart McDougal, member of TCDog, addressed the Board in support of keeping the
current off-leash dog area available for dog owners and their dogs.
Alicia Plotkin, member of TCDog, addressed the Board in response to the memo that
was distributed by Mayor Peterson concerning the Festival Lands. She further
addressed the Board in support of the current off-leash dog area and urged the Board to
continue to work with TCDog to keep this area available as an off-leash dog area and to
continue to work with them to implement and maintain the proposed composting
program. She requested that the City consider waiving the proposed administrative fee
suggested for the composting program.
Dan Cogan, Common Council Member, addressed the Board regarding the composting
program at the off-leash dog area and urged the Board to pursue implementation of this
program and to work with TCDog to pilot the program. He further urged the Board not
to support the administrative fee proposed by the City for the work associated with the
composting program.
RESPONSE TO THE PUBLIC
Commissioner Tripp responded to comments made regarding the off-leash dog area
and thanked the speakers for their comments.
Superintendent of Public Works Gray responded to comments made regarding waiving
the administrative fee for the implementation of the composting program at the off-leash
dog area.
BUILDINGS, PROPERTIES, REFUSE, AND TRANSIT:
Milstein Hall Site Control Legal Opinion – For your information (see 10-3-07 BPW
agenda)
No action was taken on this item.
Creeks, Bridges, and Parks
Ithaca Motion Picture Project Presentation
Connie Bruce and Diana Riesman addressed the Board to explain their proposal for
establishing a cultural and educational center at the maintenance building in Stewart
Park that formerly housed the Wharton Brothers movie studio. They explained their film
related backgrounds and explained the research they conducted about the existing
buildings at Stewart Park that were used for the Wharton Brothers motion pictures
filmed in Ithaca. They explained that there is still a lot of history left in these buildings
and a lot of the historical structure and fixtures are still in the buildings. Their goal would
be to rediscover the history of the building and give it a new use. They stated that they
have received a great response from the public works staff, Tompkins County Chamber
of Commerce, Ithaca College, and the History Center and they hope to talk to Cornell
University and the Ithaca School District in the near future as well. They feel that this
would be a great destination for visitors and the users of the Waterfront Trail. They
explained that history shows that a lot of people used the park at the turn of the century
and they would like to see that area revitalized to its full potential.
Board of Public Works – October 17, 2007- Page 3
Superintendent Gray stated that it’s hard to contain the enthusiasm and energy of
Connie and Diana for this project and that he would put this item on a future agenda for
further discussion and consideration by the Board.
Mayor Peterson stated that she suggested that Ms. Bruce and Ms. Riesman meet with
the City Attorney after her first meeting with them to discuss competing uses for the
maintenance building with both the Department of Public Works and Youth Bureau
because that would need to be part of the Board’s discussion as well. She further
explained that when the City worked with the Children’s Garden project, it required a lot
of effort to enter into a long-term use agreement because it involves State approval as
well.
Commissioner Wykstra asked what the Department of Public Works uses the building
for now.
Assistant Superintendent of Streets and Ferrel stated that the southside of the building
is used by the parks department and is heated with a wood stove. The crews work in
that space to rebuild benches and work on parts for the carousel. He further stated that
the Youth Bureau uses the northside of the building for storage of summer camp items
and the east side has public restrooms. He offered to give a tour to Board members and
noted that when he toured the building with Ms. Riesman and Ms. Bruce, they pointed
out things about the building that he had never noticed before.
Mayor Peterson stated that discussion has occurred regarding parks containing
museums that are located in New York State and this might be a similar use pending a
decision from the City Attorney’s office.
City Attorney Hoffman stated that there is a possibility of the proposed use of the
building being approved. He further stated that if the proposed space can be made
available for public functions and the current uses could be relocated, it would be
consistent with the competitive bidding process and regulations for leasing city land.
The City could initiate the process by holding a public meeting, posting a legal notice,
etc. He questioned who was the appropriate decision maker for this proposal, the
Board of Public Works or Common Council?
Superintendent Gray explained that the Board should consider input from the Parks
Commission when making any decision and asked that the City Attorney include them
in any discussions. He further explained that Ms. Riesman and Ms. Bruce would also
be meeting with Deputy Director of Planning and Development Cornish and Historic
Planner Chatterton in the near future to discuss their proposal.
DAC Liaison Roberts asked Ms. Bruce and Ms. Riesman to keep in mind ADA
requirements as they proceed with this project.
Off Leash Dog Park Complaint
City Attorney Hoffman reported that the City of Ithaca received a complaint regarding
the off-leash dog area on September 27, 2007. The claimant wrote that it was to serve
notification to the City under City Charter Section C-107 that dangerous conditions exist
surrounding the dog park near Allen Treman Marine Park. The complaint states that
there is no fence around the dog park and as a result there are 50-100 occurrences per
day of dogs off leash between the dog park and the northwest border of the marina and
at times large dogs run loose in the area menacing people and other dogs as well. The
complaint further indicates that the City of Ithaca Police department rarely issues tickets
for dogs off leash in the area which compounds the problem.
City Attorney Hoffman explained that a provision in New York State law allows a
municipality to impart a requirement for a notice of claim before the city can be held
liable that it receives written notice of the defect at least twenty-four hours in advance.
That is a requirement for claims being made against the City of Ithaca. The complaint
that was received on September 27, 2007 supposedly meets that requirement. He
further stated that to his knowledge no notice of claim had been submitted regarding the
off leash dog area at this point. He explained that if someone were attacked while at
the city park, the City as well as the dog’s owner could be pursued and this letter would
Board of Public Works – October 17, 2007- Page 4
serve as prior notice. He further explained that if a claim were received then all these
things would need to be resolved in court.
Authorization of Overhead Fee to be Associated with Dog Waste Contract –
Resolution
By Commissioner Tripp: Seconded by Commissioner Chapman
WHEREAS, in response to reported operational problems associated with the City’s
collection and disposal of an increased volume of dog waste generated at the City’s
Festival Land, following its designation by Common Council as a temporary Off-Leash
Dog Area (OLDA), the Board of Public Works enacted a so-called “carry-in, carry-out”
policy at the Festival Lands, requiring that dog owners make their own, off-site
arrangements for disposal of their dogs’ waste; and
WHEREAS, subsequent to the enactment of that policy, the Tompkins County Dog
Owners’ Group (TCDOG) offered to fund a one-year “pilot” project under which the dog
waste could be deposited in designated receptacles at the OLDA and would be
collected and disposed of (through composting), at an estimated cost of approximately
$3,000; and
WHEREAS, on August 8, 2007, the Board of Public Works authorized the
Superintendent to identify what the cost of such a program would be, including any
associated costs to the City such as for “equipment, signage or overhead normally
associated with similar contracts,” and, provided that an amount equal to such total cost
was received from TCDOG, to enter into a contract for such program; and
WHEREAS, a contingent contract has been negotiated and executed with PNS
Excavating, LLC (d/b/a Cayuga Composting), at a cost of $1,840 for one year, not
including the provision of biodegradable bags as required for successful composting;
and
WHEREAS, the estimated cost to the City of purchasing an adequate supply of
biodegradable bags, for a year, is $1,000; and
WHEREAS, the Superintendent has estimated that the City’s overhead costs
associated with the program (beyond the purchase cost of bags), including staff time,
will be at least $500, and has indicated that an overhead charge representing less than
25% of the total program cost is in line with City overhead charges for similar
arrangements; now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the payment therefore required to be received by the City, from
TCDOG, before such contract may be implemented, is $2,840.
The Board agreed to allow Alicia Plotkin and Katrina Madeiros to participate in the
discussion of this resolution.
City Attorney Hoffman explained that this item follows a resolution that the Board
passed on August 8, 2007 which authorized the Superintendent of Public Works to
identify the costs of the composting program for the off-leash dog area including
equipment, signage, and overhead costs. He stated that city staff followed that directive
and came up with an estimated cost of $3,340.00. Part of the cost is for the purchase of
biodegradable bags that the contractor requires the city to supply. The estimated cost
for a year’s supply of bags is $1,000.00. He further stated that he consulted with the
Superintendent of Public Works about what amount of staff time would be required to
implement this program. The contract includes the city’s responsibility to provide the
bags. The contract further states that if the trash at the park becomes contaminated, the
City must provide another disposal method in order for the contractor to remove the dog
waste. This cost has been estimated. The cost of sixteen hours staff time is
approximately $500.00.
Board of Public Works – October 17, 2007- Page 5
Commissioner Tripp agreed that $500.00 was reasonable, however, she agreed with
TCDog that they had estimated the cost of the program to be $3,000.00 and now the
City is asking for $3,340.00. She stated that she supports moving forward with the
program and deleting the $500.00 administrative fee for the first year only.
Commissioner Chapman stated that he seconded the motion for discussion purposes
only. He further stated that this area benefits dog owners and TCDog agreed to fund
the cost and what the city has determined to be that cost is a small amount. He
explained if that amount were spread out among all the dog users of the park, it
amounts to a minimal user fee. He stated that this program does not benefit the city
and anytime the city has to provide work for a program there is a cost associated with it.
He stated that perhaps the amount could be re-evaluated in the future.
Commissioner Wykstra agreed with Commissioner Chapman’s statements and stated
that he felt that the staff time involved in implementing this program should be
acknowledged.
Commissioner Jenkins concurred with both those statements.
Superintendent Gray stated that the contract includes the city providing the
biodegradable bags and would be re-evaluated after implementation to see if the cost
should be adjusted, but there should be some sort of down payment to initiate the
program.
Ms. Madeiros stated that she had discussions with Superintendent Gray and City
Attorney Hoffman regarding the bag allowance and the fee for testing of the material.
She stated that schedule A of the contract indicates that there is an escrow until the
contractor compiles three months of service and bills the City. She explained that her
understanding was that the contractor was collecting for one year and then testing the
material and the money would be refundable to the extent paid out to the contractor.
She further stated that the amount of waste collected would also be affected depending
on the season so it will affect the use of bags. If fewer bags are used the money would
be returned to TCDog.
Ms. Plotkin stated that she was not sure what projected number was used for the
amount of bags to be used and the cost per bag. The figures TCDog provided to the
City were estimated only and may be less than that.
Mayor Peterson explained that TCDog has not approved the dollar amount proposed by
the City and the resolution reflects what the administrative cost would be to implement
the program. She further explained that TCDog may have misunderstood the original
proposal, as it was presented in a way that appeared that TCDog was partnering with
the City to implement the program and that usually partners don’t charge each other.
She stated that the City has a history of charging for overhead costs in partnerships with
the Town of Ithaca for sewer, fire, and recreational services.
Ms. Plotkin stated that TCDog had been referring to partnerships with not-for-profit
groups such as the Children’s Garden.
City Attorney Hoffman explained a point of procedure explaining that if the Board were
opposed to the waiver that was proposed and moved by Commissioner Tripp, an
amendment would need to be made to revert back to the original version of the
resolution.
Board of Public Works – October 17, 2007- Page 6
Amending Resolution:
By Commissioner Chapman: Seconded by Commissioner Jenkins
RESOLVED, That the following Resolved Clause be inserted into the resolution to
appear as the first Resolved clause in the resolution:
“RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby approves the Superintendent’s
recommended overhead charge of $500, to be associated with the one-year contract for
collection and disposal of dog waste at the OLDA and the cost of City-provided
biodegradable bags; and be it further”
Ayes (4) Chapman, Wykstra, Jenkins, Peterson
Nays (1) Tripp
Abstentions (0)
Carried (4-1)
Main Motion As Amended:
A Vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows:
Ayes (4) Chapman, Wykstra, Jenkins, Peterson
Nays (1) Tripp
Abstentions (0)
Carried (4-1)
Mayor Peterson explained that TCDog would notify the City if they accept this proposal
or not.
Stormwater Local Law Resolution – Power to Act
Request Power to Act at November 7, 2007 Committee of the Whole Meeting
By Commissioner Wykstra: Seconded by Commissioner Jenkins
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby grants itself Power to Act at the
November 7, 2007 Committee of the Whole meeting to consider the Stormwater Local
Law.
Superintendent Gray explained that the City needs to take action on this item before the
end of the year in order to meet New York State requirements.
Scott Gibson Environmental Engineer for the Water and Sewer explained that the storm
water plan is unfunded, required by New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation, and needs to be in place by 2008. A local law had to be developed by
the City to enforce the storm water laws and to manage storm water run-off. He stated
that most municipalities are deficient in their management of storm water and this will
lead to storm water being treated as a utility that needs to be maintained. He further
stated that by acting on this item at the November 7th meeting, it would go onto City
Administration for consideration and approval on November 28th, and then to Common
Council on December 5, 2007.
A vote on the Resolution resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
Milstein Hall and University Avenue
Request Power to Act at the November 7, 2007 Committee of the Whole Meeting
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby grants itself Power to Act at the
November 7, 2007 Committee of the Whole meeting to consider the Milstein Hall and
University Avenue Retention of Public Right of Way Resolution.
No action was taken on this item. It was suggested that it be included on the agenda for
the November 14, 2007 meeting.
Board of Public Works – October 17, 2007- Page 7
HIGHWAYS, STREETS, AND SIDEWALKS:
Brick Application - 115 Orchard Place
By Commissioner Wykstra: Seconded by Commissioner Tripp
WHEREAS, the owners of 115 Orchard Place, Jennifer Wilkins and Graham Kerslick,
have requested the use of State Street bricks for a brick garden path, and
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Committee has approved of the use of
these bricks, and
WHEREAS, staff has indicated that there is an adequate amount of State Street bricks
to allow such a request to be met; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works grants the request for sale of State Street
bricks to the owners of 115 Orchard Pace, Jennifer Wilkins and Graham Kerslick.
Carried Unanimously
East State Street Mill and Pave - Award Resolution
No action was taken on this item.
West End Traffic Update
No action was taken on this item.
Fountain Street Shared Use Agreement – Possible Resolution
Superintendent Gray explained that Fountain Street is a paper street off the south end
of Cayuga Street.
City Attorney Hoffman explained that his office was contacted by Attorney Joy Blumkin,
who represents the owner of a house and lot at 511 Turner Place (on South Hill) and
Attorney Virginia Tesi, who represents the prospective buyers of the same property.
Their clients are hoping to complete the transaction very soon however the buyer’s
lender wants to clarify the status of a strip of land, approximately 40-50 feet wide,
between 511 and 601 Turner Place which is sometimes referred to as an unopened
street called Fountain Street.
City Attorney Hoffman distributed a memo that he had written which explains this as
follows: “At this time, the strip of land in question is occupied by an unpaved driveway
leading from Turner Place to or toward three different garages associated with three
different properties (601, 511 and 509 Turner Place), as well as by steps and
landscaping associated with the two neighboring properties.
I have not been able to locate any solid proof of City ownership, but, apparently, the
adjacent property owners also cannot prove their ownership of the land in question.
BPW records from the 1920s and 1960s indicate an interest on the part of the adjacent
owners at that time, in having the street opened or improved; the City’s lack of action
could be interpreted as evidence either of a denial of City ownership or tacit
abandonment of the putative street.
Attorneys Blumkin and Tesi have asked whether the City would be willing to quit claim
any property interest it might have in “Fountain Street” to the affected, adjacent owners.
Our office inquired of the Mayor, Superintendent and Engineer’s office as to whether
there would be any objection to this. The only concern expressed was by Tim Logue,
the City Traffic Engineer. He notes that “Fountain Street” ends at the boundary of
Emerson Electric, in close proximity to the old railroad bed that constitutes the proposed
route of a bicycle and pedestrian trail, intended to run from Buttermilk Falls State Park
to South Aurora Street, and ideally, to connect with the South Hill Recreation Way
(which starts at Hudson Street).
Board of Public Works – October 17, 2007- Page 8
The only significant obstacle to the proposed trail route appears to be the resistance of
Emerson to allowing the trail to cross certain parts of its property, where the route would
be in close proximity to certain buildings or other facilities. In the absence of an
agreement with Emerson, Tim advocates the pursuit of alternate routes that could
bypass the contested areas. Tim indicates that if the trail were routed through “Fountain
Street,” it could bypass at least one building on the Emerson site. Therefore, he
recommends that the City retain or obtain the right to locate the trail along the “Fountain
Street” strip.
Attorney Blumkin has indicated that her client and the other adjacent or affected owners
(i.e., of 601, as 509 and 511 are owned by the same person, at this time) would be
willing to enter into an agreement with the City to that effect. I envision such an
agreement along the following lines:
1. City would quit claim to the adjacent owners any rights that the City has to
Fountain Street, except that the City would retain the right, within an
approximately 18-foot strip down the center of Fountain Street, to construct and
maintain a bicycle/pedestrian trail, which trail would be shared with the adjacent
property owners, who could use it to access their garages (but who could not
otherwise block it).
2. Adjacent property owners would quit claim or cede to the City any rights they had
in the 18-foot strip, except that they would retain the right to use it as a driveway
(as now), and thus the right of shared use of any trail developed there.
3. City would agree that the City (or its agent or assignee) would maintain any trail it
developed there, such that it was suitable for shared use as a driveway for the
adjacent owners (but that commitment would not extend to snow removal).
4. If the City did not construct the trail within a defined number of years (5? 10?),
the 18-foot-strip would revert to the adjacent owners (i.e., 601 and 511)..
(There would be a separate agreement, among the owners of 601, 511 and 509, giving
the current and future owners of 509 the right of ingress to and egress from the garage
for 509.)
The City’s claim upon “Fountain Street” is very unclear at this point – and possibly
without legal basis. It appears that the City has no need for the property except as a
back-up location for part of a planned bicycle/pedestrian trail. Reaching such an
agreement with the adjacent owners would give the City a clear right to use the land for
the trail (if necessary), while providing those owners clear title to land that they have
treated as part of their yards for many years, as well as assurance that they will have
continued vehicular access to their garages. In addition, this approach would eliminate
the need for anyone to spend time trying (perhaps fruitlessly) to sort out who actually
owns “Fountain Street.”
Authorizing the Mayor to Execute an Agreement Regarding “Fountain Street” (So-
Called)
By Commissioner Chapman: Seconded by Commissioner Tripp
WHEREAS, it appears that the so-called “Fountain Street,” shown on certain maps as
running east from Turner Place, between 601 Turner Place and 511 Turner Place, and
being approximately 40 to 50 feet wide, was never opened as a City street, and
WHEREAS, the current ownership of “Fountain Street” is unclear and cannot be
established with any certainty from readily available City records, and
WHEREAS, the owners of the residential properties adjacent to “Fountain Street”
(including 511 and 601 Turner Place) have acted for many years in reliance on the
assumption that the City had abandoned the street, without objection by the City (e.g.,
by constructing steps and installing landscaping that “encroaches” upon “Fountain
Street”), and
Board of Public Works – October 17, 2007- Page 9
WHEREAS, the owners of 601, 511 and 509 Turner Place are able to access the
existing garages or parking areas at the back of their properties only via shared use of a
driveway that traverses “Fountain Street,” and
WHEREAS, the only interest of the City, from a public works standpoint, in “Fountain
Street,” is as its possible use as an alternate route for the planned bicycle/pedestrian
trail between Buttermilk Falls State Park and South Aurora Street (if the preferred route
is unavailable), and
WHEREAS, the pending sale of 511 Turner Place has resulted in a request by the seller
and prospective buyer for clarification of the respective rights in “Fountain Street,” and
WHEREAS, codification of the City’s right to utilize a portion of “Fountain Street” for the
afore-mentioned trail (if necessary) would be of significant value to the City and the
public, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Mayor, upon the advice of the City Attorney and the
Superintendent of Public Works, is hereby authorized and requested to execute an
agreement (or agreements) with the owners of 511 and 601 Turner Place, by which the
City quit claims to said adjacent owners (at no cost) any rights that the City has to the
so-called “Fountain Street,” in exchange for a quit claim by said owners, to the City (at
no cost), of a strip of land approximately 18 feet wide down the center of “Fountain
Street,” for use by the City (or its assignee) as a bicycle/pedestrian trail, and be it further
RESOLVED, that said agreement(s) shall:
1. Provide for the reversion of said 18-foot strip to the adjoining owners, if
the City does not construct said trail within approximately 8 years,
2. Allow said adjacent owners to continue to use said 18-foot strip, for
ingress and egress (by motor vehicles) to their garages, provided they
do not block any trail constructed there (other than momentarily, during
such transit), and
3. Provide that the trail, if constructed, shall be maintained (except as to
snow or ice removal), by the City or its agent, such that it is suitable for
shared use by the adjacent owners’ motor vehicles.
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Mayor be authorized to execute an agreement regarding
Fountain Street.
Discussion followed on the floor regarding possible future requirements or uses that the
City might need in this area and using the available funds to complete the trail projects
before that time period ends.
A Vote on the Resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (4) Chapman, Jenkins, Tripp, Peterson
Nays (1) Wykstra
Abstentions (0)
Carried
Parking and Traffic
There were no items on the agenda.
Water and Sewer
Request for Waiver of Penalty on Water Bill - 106 Fairgrounds Memorial Parkway
No action was taken on this item.
Water Directional Drilling Bid – Power to Act
Request Power to Act at October 17, 2007 Committee of the Whole Meeting
By Commissioner Tripp: Seconded by Commissioner Wykstra
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby grants itself Power to Act at the November
7, 2007 Committee of the Whole meeting to consider the Water Directional Drilling Project for
the Southwest.
Carried Unanimously
Board of Public Works – October 17, 2007- Page 10
Administration and Communications
Mayor’s 2008 Budgets, Revenue Targets and Board of Public Works Rate Setting,
Initial Discussion, Power to Act
Power To Act – Mayor’s 2008 Budget
By Commissioner : Seconded by Commissioner
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby grants itself power to act at the
October 24, 2007 Committee of the Whole meeting in order to adopt on any rates for
public services required to meet the 2008 budget.
Superintendent Gray explained that he and Asst. Supt. Streets and Facilities Ferrel, and
Asst. Supt. Water and Sewer Whitney met with the budget committee on October 4,
2007. He stated that the Board needs to decide on how to set the various rates before
the end of the year.
Commissioner Tripp stated that she was expecting to see a line by line review of the
budget as had been done in the past and was shocked that this had not taken place yet.
She explained that had always been a major project for the Board and that any budget
cuts required the Board’s authorization. She agreed that it was extremely important that
the Board meet to review and discuss the budget.
Mayor Peterson stated that the Board could use Wednesday October 31st to review the
budget, but that would be problematic as City Controller Thayer and Alderperson Coles
would be meeting with the City Administration Committee to go over the recommended
2008 Mayor’s budget on October 24th. She further stated that because the Board didn’t
meet last week due to lack of quorum time was lost that could have also been spent
reviewing the budget.
Superintendent Gray reported that it was too late for the Board to re-organize any
priorities, but that at some point he would like to see the budget review by the Board
revert back to as it had been done in previous years.
Mayor Peterson reported to the Board that the City is slowly recovering from budget
cutbacks starting in 1991and is starting to bring programs back and increase staffing.
She stated that small, but steady gains are being made.
Mayor Peterson left the meeting at 7:05 p.m.
Alderperson Coles stated that she had never known the previous history of the Board’s
review of the Department of Public Works budgets. She stated that she hoped that the
Board would not make any changes to the budget for 2008 and that the meeting on
October 24th would be the last time that budgets could be finalized for presentation by
the Mayor at the November 7th Common Council meeting. She stated that she would
like to see the previous way that the Board had been involved in reviewing the budgets
implemented in the future.
Superintendent Gray explained that the Mayor had accepted Asst. Supt. Ferrel’s 3%
increase in his budget as well as his alternate budget. He stated that there has been
great effort made to restore public works programs, and explained that the City
Controller is making efforts to de-capitalize items which make the budget more flexible.
Commissioner Tripp stated that she would like to meet on October 24, 2007 to go over
the budget.
Commissioner Wykstra agreed and stated that the Board needs to familiarize
themselves with the budget for the department.
Superintendent Gray stated that he would make that opportunity available for as many
Board members that can attend a meeting. The Department of Public Works has been
making progress with their budgets in the past few years, however it will take years to
turn things completely around and it will be at a cost to tax payers.
Board of Public Works – October 17, 2007- Page 11
City Controller Thayer stated that he could attend a meeting of the Board on October
24th at 4:30 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT
On a motion the meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m.
Sarah L. Myers Carolyn K. Peterson
Information Management Specialist Mayor