Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMn-B&A-1991-05-22 BUDGET AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING 7:30 P.M. MAY 22, 1991 MINUTES PRESENT: COMMITTEE MEMBERS: Booth, Peterson, Cummings, Romanowski, Golder OTHER'S PRESENT: City Controller - Cafferillo Deputy Controller - Thayer Acting Superintendent of Public Works/City Engineer - Gray Deputy Planning Director - Sieverding Personnel Administrator - Saul Acting Building Commissioner - Eckstrom BPW Commissioner - Berg Members of the Media 1. Opening Comments Chairperson Booth stated the following changes to the agenda: A. The addition of two additional items from the Board of Public Works meeting held earlier. B. The possible addition of a discussion with respect to the taxable status of the City Hall Annex. C. The tabling of a possible resolution on the Arts Council Funding request until a future date. D. A discussion on Common Council salaries. Members of the public were asked to speak on any topics; no member of the public spoke. 2 . Planning A. Amendment to the Joint Facility Project Deputy Director of Planning Sieverding addressed the Committee regarding the current status of the Joint Transit Facility Project. Deputy Director Sieverding stated that recently the UMTA Administrator decided to reduce UMTA's funding for the Joint Transit Facility to $3, 150, 000. The City had requested $4,489,847 for the project. The reduced funding has created a $1, 339, 847 shortfall in funds for the Joint Transit Facility project. Sieverding stated that the reasons for the decreased funding are as follows: BUDGET & ADMINISTRATION MEETING MINUTES - 5/22/91 A. UMTA had previously encumbered $3, 150, 000 for this project from 1989-90 Section 3 funds. B. The County submitted an application this year for $4,489,847 in Section 3 funds. C. Although the Section 3 budget for 1990-91 was increased by $120 million, proposed projects for the nation totalled three times the Section 3 budget. D. Only two of eight projects for this region were partially funded, at 33% and 50% respectively. The Joint Transit Facility project received no 1990-91 Section 3 funds. However, the 1989-90 encumbered funds were maintained. Deputy Director Sieverding stated that the Joint Design Committee met to discuss possible alternatives to the Transit project such as: A. Reducing the scope of the project. B. Locating alternate sources of funding. C. Determining if certain partially funded projects in this region will drop out allowing the possibility of increased UMTA funding for this project. D. Increasing the local share. The Architect for this project has noted that there are 15 possible areas for cost savings in the current project design, with a total possible savings of $825, 000. The B&A Committee wanted to be sure that if the project were scaled back, the building would be designed for the possibility of future expansion. Deputy Planning Director Sieverding assured the Committee that the Facility would be built with future expansion in mind. Deputy Planning Director Sieverding gave the Committee different scenarios relating to the possible City's total contribution for the project. He stated that the City's cash contribution could range from $110, 000 to $245, 000 based on the actual reductions in the project design. The City is still contributing the value of the land at $346, 000, and this contribution will make up a very large portion of the City's share of this project. Deputy Director Sieverding stated that the schedule for the Joint Transit Facility project is as follows: A. Meet with New York State DOT in June. PAGE 2 BUDGET & ADMINISTRATION MEETING MINUTES - 5/22/91 B. Seek the final UMTA funding determination in August. C. Send out the actual bid proposal for the project in September. Deputy Director Sieverding stated that both the County and Cornell are interested in the Joint Transit Facility project despite the reductions in funding. He stated that Cornell is more hesitant to go ahead with the project until they determine what the annual cost of the project would be on their budget. It was the consensus of the Committee to bring the Joint Transit Facility project, with alternatives, back to the B&A Committee for approval in July, after firm numbers are developed. No formal action was taken on this matter. B. GIAC Pool Architectural Agreement Deputy Planning Director Sieverding presented a request to amend the architectural agreement between the City and HOLT Architects for the GIAC Pool project. Deputy Director Sieverding stated that the City would like to amend the Architectural agreement to include the following: A. Provide Architectural services such as design development, construction documents, bidding and construction. B. Extend the service from 12 months to 30 months. C. Keep the same hourly rates in effect through 12/31/91. D. Start construction by September 1991. E. Set the architectural fee at $44, 390 plus reimbursables for $4, 000. It was noted that the GIAC project has been established as a capital project for $450, 000. The client/budget committee established for this project has stated that, as designed, the pool project would cost approximately $515, 000. Deputy Planning Director Sieverding gave the Committee the project timeline as follows: A. Bid project in August 1991 B. Start construction in September 1991 PAGE 3 BUDGET & ADMINISTRATION MEETING MINUTES - 5/22/91 C. Complete project in May 1992 Alderperson Cummings and the remainder of the Committee stated that the project should be done as close to the established budget amount of $450, 000 as possible. However, it was noted that the budget for this capital project was developed and established in 1988-1989. The Committee requested that Deputy Planning Director Sieverding return next month with a list of possible reductions in the GIAC Pool project. After a brief discussion, the following motion was made: WHEREAS, the Client Committee for the GIAC Pool construction program has selected the architectural firm of Hoffman, O'Brien, Look and Taube, P.C. to provide basic services, including design development, construction documents, bidding and construction, in connection with said project; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Mayor be authorized to execute an agreement with the firm of Hoffman, O'Brien, Look and Taube, P.C. for an amount not to exceed $44,390, plus reimbursable expenses of $4,000 for such purpose. The Committee also requested that the Planning Department negotiate the costs of this contract further with the architect and report the results of these negotiations to the May Committee of the Whole meeting. The motion passed 5-0. 3 . DPW A. Request to Sign Professional Services Contract for Green Street Garage Reconstruction Project Acting Superintendent of Public Works/City Engineer Gray presented a request to contract with the engineering firm of Novelli and Company for professional engineering services in relation to the reconstruction of the Green Street Parking Facility project. Acting Superintendent Gray stated that he has talked with Peter Novelli regarding this project and has asked him to submit a proposal for engineering services regarding the reconstruction of the Green Street Parking Facility project. The reason Peter Novelli was asked to do this project is because he has prior experience with this project. Therefore, he can do the work quickly and will give the City the best price. Acting Superintendent Gray explained that the Board of Public Works has not approved this contract yet because they PAGE 4 F BUDGET & ADMINISTRATION MEETING MINUTES - 5/22/91 did not have all the necessary information regarding the contract. He stated that next week the BPW will act on this contract, and if the B&A Committee approves it at this meeting, contingent on the BPW approval, then the contract can go to Common Council in June. The cost for these services will not exceed $20, 000. Acting Superintendent Gray stated the City would usually perform this project in house; however, because of limited staff and time, the project must be performed by an outside firm. The project should be completed by the summer of 1992 . After a brief discussion, the following motion was made: WHEREAS, Capital Project #224 for the reconstruction of the Green Street Parking Facility was established in 1989, and WHEREAS, the Department of Public Works wishes to contract with the engineering firm of Novelli and Co. for the provision of professional services to complete construction documents and supervise construction; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Mayor be authorized to execute an agreement with Novelli and Co. for an amount not to exceed $20,000.00 for the provision of said services. The motion passed 5-0. The motion is contingent on the BPW' s approval at their next meeting. B. Request to Sign Professional Services Contract for Water Treatment Plant Renovations Project Acting Superintendent of Public Works/City Engineer Gray presented a request to contract with the firm of Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. to provide construction documents and construction supervision relating to the Water Treatment Plant renovations project. Acting Superintendent Gray stated that a capital project for Water Treatment Plant renovations in the amount of $1, 000, 000 was established in 1988 to perform major renovations to the Water Treatment Plant. He stated he would like to do five items relating to this renovation project that can not be put off any longer. A study then can be performed to determine the long-term renovations that need to be done. The major item that needs to be corrected is the chlorine problem the water plant is having currently. Acting Superintendent Gray stated that because Malcolm Pirnie performed the original study for the Water Treatment Plant, they were selected to oversee these new renovations. This contract is expected not to exceed $66, 000. Funding for this project would be derived from an advance of water fund money with the later issuance of BANs. PAGE 5 BUDGET & ADMINISTRATION MEETING MINUTES - 5/22/91 Acting Superintendent Gray again stated that if this contract is approved by B&A, it would be contingent on the BPW action at their next meeting. After a brief discussion, the following motion was made: WHEREAS, Capital project #502 for the reconstruction of the City's Water Treatment Facility was established in 1988, and WHEREAS, the Department of Public Works wishes to contract with the firm of Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. , consulting Environmental Engineers, to provide construction documents and construction supervision in connection with said project; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Mayor be authorized to execute an agreement with Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $66,000.00 for the provision of said services, and be it further RESOLVED, that the City Controller be authorized to advance $66,000.00 from the available water fund moneys to Capital Project #502 Water Treatment Facility Reconstruction pending the issuance of Bond Anticipation Notes for said purpose. The motion passed 5-0. The motion is contingent on the BPW's approval at their next meeting. C. Request to Sign Professional Services Contract for North Cayuga Street at Cascadilla Creek Bridge Acting Superintendent of Public Works Gray stated that he would like to enter into an agreement to contract for Engineering Services relating to- the Cascadilla Creek Bridge on North Cayuga Street. However, at this time he has not established the contract amount or identified the engineering firm that will do this contract. Acting Superintendent Gray stated that he wanted to move this project along because it involved a large grant from New York State. The consensus of the Committee was to have Bill Gray put together the necessary information for Common Council 's Committee of the Whole meeting next week. D. Status Report - 1991 Capital Project Schedule Acting Superintendent of Public Works/City Engineer Gray gave the Committee a Status Report on the 1991 Capital Projects. The following represents the status of the 1991 Capital Projects: 1. Capital Project #242 City Court Facility - This project has a current budget of $2, 600, 000. The project is PAGE 6 f BUDGET & ADMINISTRATION MEETING MINUTES - 5/22/91 proceeding at this time with the initial design phase of the project started. The project is expected to be out to bid late this year. 2 . Capital Project #243 Commons Improvements - This project has a current budget of $163 ,780. The project has been broken out into two phases. The first phase will be the concrete brickwork, which will be performed out of house this summer. The second phase will consist of signage and the playground. The playground, based on the information from the suggestion box, will be basically the same as it was prior to its destruction. 3 . Capital Project #244 Youth Bureau Acoustics - This project has a current budget of $82, 800. Former City Engineer Carlos Laquette was involved with this project. Because he has left the City, this project will not see any attention from the City Engineer's office until this fall. 4. Capital Project #245 DPW Consolidation Study - This project has a current budget of $65, 000. This project is proceeding very slowly. The DPW is waiting to fill some of its open positions before a lot of work is put into this project. 5. Capital Project #247 City Hall HUAC - This project has a current budget of $155,270. No work is currently being done on this project in the City Engineer's office. 6. Capital Project #248 GIAC Renovations - This project has a current budget of $25, 000. This project is currently being handled by the City Planning Department. It was noted that this project was moving slowly. The City Building Department has performed a code review on this project. 7 . Capital Project #249 DPW Sidewalk Program - This project has a current budget of $93 , 170. This project has been advertised and is going out to bid soon. This project, which is normally performed through the operation budget, was moved to the Capital Project program in 1991. The total program cost has been increased from $60, 000 in prior years to $90, 000 this year due to the fact that several retaining walls have been included this year. 8. Capital Project #251 Clinton Street Bridge - This project has a current budget of $30, 000. The contracts for this project have been signed and a preconstruction meeting has been set, with construction to begin at the end of June. The project should be completed by the end of July. 9. Capital Project #252 DPW Equipment Purchase - This project has a current budget of $92, 000. This equipment purchase represents a purchase of a street sweeper for the PAGE 7 BUDGET & ADMINISTRATION MEETING MINUTES - 5/22/91 DPW. The item is currently out to bid, and it is expected to be purchased by July. 10. Capital Project #603 Sewer Collection S stem Renovations - This project has a current budget of $124, 200. This project represents many smaller projects to upgrade sewer systems within the City. These types of projects are performed annually by the City. City Engineer Gray stated that not all of this money will be spent this year because of the lack of manpower and the slow negotiation process with the Town of Ithaca regarding their participation in paying for the City's sewer system. City Engineer Gray stated that a sewer program needs to be developed before the actual sewer upgrade is started. 11. Capital Project #604 Sewer Cleaner Equipment - This project has a current budget of $131, 120. This project represents a purchase of a large sewer cleaner machine that will replace the City's current sewer cleaner machine that is 25 years old. Currently the City is looking at manufacturers for this type of machine, and the bid for this equipment should be going out within the next two weeks. 12 . 1990 Capitol Projects and Other Minor Projects A. Capital Project #240 E. State Street Culvert Repair - This project has a current budget of $300, 000. This project is in its final stages with paving of the street expected within the next two weeks. The total cost of the project will be within the $300, 000 approved budget. B. Seneca Street at State Street - City Engineer Gray stated that he is currently working with the State to improve some of the rough spots on Seneca Street, specifically at the end of State Street. He stated he was hopeful that the State would improve some of the bad areas, but at this time the State would not pave the street completely. C. Handicapped Ramp at Tioga Street and Seneca Street - Alderperson Golder stated that he had many complaints regarding the steep grade of the handicapped ramp at this intersection. City Engineer Gray stated that he is trying to obtain a permit from the State to reduce the grade for that ramp. However, the permit may take two months to obtain. 4 . Building Department A. Request to Purchase Copy Machine Acting Building Commissioner Eckstrom presented a request to purchase a copy machine at a cost of $5,479 . He stated that PAGE 8 BUDGET & ADMINISTRATION MEETING MINUTES - 5/22/91 their current machine, which was purchased in 1984, is currently insufficient for their use at this time. In the originally proposed 1991 Budget, the request from the Building Department was for an $8, 000 copy machine. However, because of the tight budget, that amount was reduced to $3, 000 for the lease of an $8, 000 machine. It has been determined that the $8, 000 copier would be too large for the Building Department's needs. They only need a $5, 500 machine. Funding for the machine would be derived from $3, 000 in the 1991 Budget plus a $2, 500 transfer from Unrestricted Contingency. Acting Building Commissioner Eckstrom stated that the old copier would be transferred to the Mayor's office. The Mayor's office and the City Attorney's office currently use the Building Department' s copier. After a brief discussion, the following motion was made: RESOLVED, that the authorized equipment list for the Building Department be amended to include a Copy Machine to be acquired at a cost not to exceed $5,500. , and be it further RESOLVED, that $3,000 be transferred from Account A3620-470, Equipment Rental, and $2,500 transferred from Account A1990 Unrestricted Contingency, to Account A3620-210, Office Equipment, for such purpose. The motion passed 5-0. B. Request to hire a Plan Review Officer - Public Session Chairperson Booth explained to the Committee that in executive session the Committee needs to discuss hiring a particular individual at step four for the Plan Review Officer position. If the position were recommended to be filled at a step one position, it would not need to come before this Committee. The public session question should address whether the Plan Review Officer position should be approved. Acting Building Commissioner Eckstrom stated that the Building Department needs to improve its public orientation process. He explained that currently only 12 hours during the week are available for the public to come into the office and apply for building permits. He stated that the hours available for permit applications to be filed must be increased. Acting Commissioner Eckstrom stated that this new position corresponds to the Cornell University building boom. Cornell is currently doing more work with renovations to PAGE 9 BUDGET & ADMINISTRATION MEETING MINUTES - 5/22/91 older buildings than they are doing work in building new buildings. The Building Department' s history of positions is as follows: 1980 8 positions 1987 9 positions 1990 11 positions 1991 12 positions Alderpersons Peterson and Golder stated that they were in favor of filling the Plan Review Officer position. Both felt that this position will improve public relations and the organization structure of the Building Department. Chairperson Booth and Alderperson Cummings stated they are against filling this position. Both felt the position is not needed and that the Department needs to improve public relations within the current staff levels. Alderperson Romanowski stated that at this time he was undecided as to whether this position needs to be filled. The following motion was made: RESOLVED, that the Plan Review Officer position in the Building Department should be filled. voting results on the motion were as follows: Ayes (2) Peterson, Golder Nays (2) Booth, Cummings Abstain (1) Romanowski The motion will go to the Common Council 's Committee of the Whole meeting next week. C. Committee to Proceed into Executive Session The Committee voted, 5-0, to move into executive session to discuss the hiring of a particular individual for the Plan Review Officer position at step 4 . D. Report From Executive Session Chairperson Booth stated that the Committee voted on the hiring of a Plan Review Officer at step 4 . He stated the vote was positive on both the individual and the salary recommended, subject to Council 's decision whether or not to fill the position. PAGE 10 BUDGET & ADMINISTRATION MEETING MINUTES - 5/22/91 5. City Attorney - Request for Additional Funds for Central Processing Facility Deputy City Controller Thayer presented a request from the City Attorney's office for additional funding to pay the final bill for litigation regarding the Central Processing Facility. He stated that to date $32, 141 had been allocated by Common Council for the litigation and appeal process. To date $35, 088 had been paid and incurred for the litigation and appeal process. Because $1,749 of the $32, 141 authorized for this project was never encumbered it will need to be re-allocated to pay the remaining portion of the bill. Deputy Controller Thayer stated that the final bill for the appeal process was $4, 466. To pay for this final bill, money needs to be derived from Unrestricted Contingency. Funds Allocated by Common Council: 1989 $12, 141 Original Litigation July 1990 3 , 000 Original Litigation Aug. 1990 7, 000 Original Litigation Sept 1990 10, 000 Appeal $32, 141 Total Funds Allocated to Date Expenditures Paid and Services Incurred: 6/13/90 $ 4,468.79 Original Litigation 6/19/90 7, 672 .21 Original Litigation 9/19/90 10, 230. 02 Original Litigation 12/27/90 8, 250. 60 Appeal 2/25/91 4,466.27 Appeal Services Incurred $35, 087.89 Total Expenditures $ 2 , 946.89 Amount Paid and Incurred to date over the Original Allocation Amount Summary by Activity: Funds Allocated for Litigation $22, 141. 00 Litigation Payments Made to Date ( 22, 371. 02) ( 230. 02 Funds Allocated for Appeal $10, 000. 00 Appeal Payments Made to Date ( 8,250. 60) $ 1,749 . 40 Total Remaining Portion of Funds Allocated (never encumbered) $ 1, 519. 38 PAGE 11 BUDGET & ADMINISTRATION MEETING MINUTES - 5/22/91 Amount of current bill outstanding $ 4,466. 27 After a brief discussion, the following motion was made: WHEREAS, the City has received the final bill regarding the appeal of the Central Processing Facility lawsuit decision, and WHEREAS, the final bill is greater than the original amount estimated for the appeal process; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that $4,500 be transferred from Account A1990, Unrestricted Contingency, to Account A1420-435, City Attorney Contractual Services, to pay the final bill relative to the Central Processing Facility lawsuit appeal. The motion passed 4-1. Alderperson Peterson voted against the motion on the basis that she was against the litigation. 6. Department Roster Review Process The Committee discussed the timeline for departments to review their personnel costs and alternatives for reducing those costs. The consensus of the Committee was that this review process was not moving along quickly enough. The Committee stated that by July 1, 1991 the departments need to- submit initial plans for possible personnel cuts in the remainder of 1991 and through 1992 . It was noted that the NYS Budget has not yet passed and that as soon as it does, the City will be in a better position to determine how bad off the City will be in terms of State Aid for the remainder of 1991. The Committee stressed that just initial plans are due by July lst. After a brief discussion, the following motion was made: RESOLVED, that each Department shall prepare and transmit to the Mayor on or before July 1, 1991, an initial plan, with appropriate alternatives, for adjustments and .reductions to department personnel rosters in the interest of reducing the total budgetary cost for personnel. The motion passed 5-0. 7 . Finance Department A. Chamberlain - Authorize Bank Agreement for Use of Facsimile Signatures City Controller Cafferillo presented a request to authorize a bank agreement for the use of facsimile signatures. This agreement is suggested by the Trust Company to fulfill legal requirements. The agreement authorizes the use of the PAGE 12 BUDGET & ADMINISTRATION MEETING MINUTES - 5/22/91 facsimile signature of the City Chamberlain, Debra Parsons, to be used as a genuine and authorized instrument in the process of City business. The City has been using facsimile signature for a number of years. After a brief discussion, the following motion was made: RESOLVED, that the Tompkins County Trust Company be, and it hereby is, authorized and directed to honor as genuine and authorized instruments of the City of Ithaca and Ithaca Area Waste Water Treatment Plant Joint Activity, and and all checks, drafts and/or other orders for the payment of money drawn in the name of the City of Ithaca and Ithaca Area Waste Water Treatment Plant Joint Activity and signed with the facsimile signature of Debra A. Parsons as City Chamberlain, and be it further RESOLVED, that the City of Ithaca is authorized to and hereby does assume full responsibility for any and all payments made by said Tompkins County Trust Company in reliance upon the facsimile signature of the City Chamberlain and agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the said Tompkins County Trust Company against any and all loss, cost, damage or expense suffered or incurred by said Tompkins County Trust Company arising out of the misuse or unlawful or unauthorized use by any person of such facsimile signature, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Chamberlain of the City of Ithaca be and she hereby is authorized and directed to deliver to the said Tompkins County Trust Company specimens of the facsimile signature. The motion passed 5-0. B. Bond Resolution City Court Facility Project City Controller Cafferillo stated that at last month's meeting the City Court Facility project was increased by $600, 000. A Bond Resolution authorizing the issuance of an additional $570, 0090 in serial bonds and an additional $30, 000 from Capital Reserve Fund monies will be brought to the next Common Council meeting. It was noted that no action was needed at this meeting. C. Update Report on Landfill Costs City Controller Cafferillo presented a report updating the Committee on the status of landfill fees as of April 30, 1991. The following is the status of the landfill fees: PAGE 13 BUDGET & ADMINISTRATION MEETING MINUTES - 5/22/91 Landfill fees incurred to date: $98, 000 Tipping Fees paid to date $63, 435 Tipping Fees encumbered to date: $26, 196 These amounts are on target as far as the budget is concerned. The budgeted expenditure is $320, 000. At the current pace we would spend $322, 000 for landfill costs. The cost of the tags appears to be sufficient to offset the cost of the landfill fees. A discussion on a possible DPW scavenger weekend took place. The Committee wanted to be sure sufficient advertising was done for the scavenger weekend. No action was taken. D. Taxable Status of City Hall Annex City Controller Cafferillo stated that the City has received two notifications from the County Assessment Department regarding two City-owned properties, that heretofore were tax exempt and that have been moved to the taxable portion of the tax roll . The first property is the Route 13 Industrial Park. The County Assessment Department moved the property from tax exempt to taxable status with a assessed value of $965, 000. The City argued that it should be tax exempt because the title was transferred to the IURA. The County, based on our grievance, will be changing this property back to the tax exempt status until the property is leased or sold. The second property is the City Hall Annex. Because the City has declared the Annex surplus, the County, based on Real Property Tax Law, moved this property to a taxable status. The City Attorney felt that the City should file a grievance to change this property back to tax exempt status. The reasons for the grievance are as follows: A. The purchase offer on the building has fallen through. B. The City is using the property for necessary storage and as an employee lounge. C. The City feels the property is still being used for a public purpose. The questions the B&A Committee must decide on are: A. Should the City's legal department pursue the grievance? PAGE 14 BUDGET & ADMINISTRATION MEETING MINUTES - 5/22/91 B. Should the City transfer the property to the IURA? (This would avoid the problem of taxable status in future years. ) The Attorney' s office felt that if the legal department pursued the grievance it would take approximately 20 - 30 hours of staff time. A discussion on the transfer to the IURA followed. It was noted that title did not pass when the IURA was given the authority to take proposals to sell the Annex. The taxes for the City Hall Annex in 1991 would cost approximately $5, 500. After a brief discussion, the following motion was made: WHEREAS, on October 3, 1990 the City of Ithaca transferred authority to sell the City Hall Annex to the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency, and WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 50C of the General Municipal Law, the actual transfer of title of the City Hall Annex property, Tax Map No. 70-50-24, 123 South Cayuga Street, will insure the tax exempt status of such parcel pending the sale or lease thereof; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Mayor is directed, upon advice of the City Attorney, to effectuate the transfer of ownership of the City Hall Annex property to the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency. The motion passed 5-0. The Committee directed the City Attorney to pursue the grievance relating to the taxable status of the City Hall Annex. 8 . Common Council Salaries Alderperson Cummings added this discussion to the meeting. Alderperson Cummings stated that the Council salary levels should he increased to encotira.ge greater participation and a greater number of individuals running for office. A brief discussion followed on Common Council salaries. Council salaries have not been increased since 1987 . No proposals were made at this meeting. This item will be put on the next B&A agenda. No action was taken. 9 . Committee to Proceed into Executive Session Chairperson Booth stated that the Committee voted 5-0 to move into executive session to discuss a possible litigation matter. PAGE 15 BUDGET & ADMINISTRATION MEETING MINUTES - 5/22/91 10. Report From Executive Session Chairperson Booth reported that the Committee discussed a matter dealing with the City Court Facility Project. No action was taken. The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 P.M. NOTE: In many cases the actual texts of the resolutions presented in these minutes were prepared following the Committee's deliberations and decisions on the matters involved. The resolutions presented here are in complete accord with decisions made by the Committee. PAGE 16