Loading...
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