Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-12-17 Personnel and Finance O� PU TH U C w pFA� a ■ a 1865 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK KAREEMAH FOWLER,CITY CLERK PERSONNEL & FINANCE JUNE 12, 2017 4:47 P.M. Committee Members Present: Karen White, Gavin Ferlic, Regina Williams-Preston Committee Members Absent: John Voorde Other Council Present: Dr. David Varner, Tim Scott, Oliver Davis, Jo M. Broden, Randy Kelly Other Council Absent: None Others Present: Aladean DeRose, Bob Palmer, Graham Sparks Presenters: Michael Schmidt, Suzanna Fritzberg, Cristal Brisco Agenda: Bill No. 17-30—Resolution approving parking lot lease at 214-216 Wayne Street Bill No. 17-31 —Resolution approving office lease agreement with Shein Realty, LLC Bill No. 17-32—Resolution approving lease agreement with Zion United Church of Christ Bill No. 17-26—Resolution in support of an appropriation to fund pilot program addressing panhandling Committee Chair Karen White called to order the Personnel and Finance Committee meeting at 4:47 p.m. She introduced members of the committee and opened the floor to main motions. Committeemember Gavin Ferlic made a motion to have the public hearings for Bill No. 17-30, Bill No. 17-31, and Bill No. 17-32 together. Committeemember Regina Williams-Preston seconded this motion which carried unanimously by a voice vote of three (3) ayes. Committee Chair White proceeded to give the floor to the presenters. Bill No. 17-30—Resolution approving parking lot lease at 214-216 Wayne Street Bill No. 17-31 —Resolution approving office lease agreement with Shein Realty,LLC Bill No. 17-32—Resolution approving lease agreement with Zion United Church of Christ 455 County-City Building•227 W.Jefferson Boulevard-South Bend,Indiana 46601 Phone 574-235-9221 •Fax 574-235-9173•TDD 574-235-5567•www.SouthBendrN.gov JENNIFER M.COFFMAN ALKEYNA M.ALDRIDGE JOSEPH MOLNAR CHIEF DEPUTY/DIRECTOR OF DEPUTY/DIRECTOR OF POLICY ORDINANCE VIOLATION CLERK OPERATIONS Michael Schmidt, Assistant City Attorney for Public Works with offices on the 12th floor of the County-City Building, stated, There is a State Statute that requires the City, when it enters into a lease with a structure, to have Council ratify the lease. This is different than ground leases which are not subject to this protocol. We need your approval before we can officially move forward. With that in mind,we had three (3) leases fall in the same window and we thought we could bring them all forward to Council today. The first one (1) up is the parking lot lease. The City has identified an issue with parking. The Shillings lot has shrunk down due to a redevelopment agreement. We have approximately one hundred and thirty (13 0) employees in the County-City Building that need a parking spot and there approximately fifty (50) spots at Shillings. This agreement would provide about seventy (70)parking spots so it would address that need. This lot has been recently paved. It will cost approximately $1,400 per month. The rent goes up three percent (3%)per year going forward. We are not responsible for maintaining or resurfacing the lot. It is a pretty simple agreement and it would be a five (5)year term. This would be a one (1) time approval for all five (5) years. Part of the State Statute requires the resolution to be accompanied by fifty(50) signatures of property-owning citizens in the City. We have those signatures for all three (3) of the proposed leases. Mr. Schmidt continued, The next lease agreement is a long standing agreement that has been in place for about two (2) years but it never received Council approval. It has the exact same terms and conditions as years prior. For the year it will cost$10,175 which is one hundred percent (100%) funded by the ATF. We enter into the lease agreement and they fund it completely. We don't have a lot of responsibilities other than janitorial services and trash removal. This is a one (1) year agreement with the opportunity for renewal and my guess is we will be back here again next year because I think we've been in this agreement for a number of years. My apologies to Council but we've identified it and have now corrected it by going through the correct process. Mr. Schmidt went on, The third lease agreement is for a community space at Zion United Church of Christ. With all the renovations and activities going on at Howard Park, the Parks team identified a desire to get some space for a community room. They wanted to have that space be as close to Howard Park as possible so they could continue on their operation of their senior citizen activities. They also wanted to maintain that continuity as much as possible because there are a number of people that have been going to these programs for years and that is what they are used to. Zion United Church has a large community space room and it would cost one hundred dollars ($100) a month. It would just be to use this room. Under the law there is what's called the LEMON Test to view the relationship between church and state. There are no violations and there is no furtherance of religion. The Council should feel comfortable entering into this agreement. This agreement will be from now through March of 2019 at one hundred dollars ($100) a month. At that point it is the hope that Howard Park will be fully up and running and will have the community center back in place. So as of now,there are no renewal provisions in this lease agreement. Committee Chair White opened the floor to questions from the Committee and Council members. Councilmember Jo M. Broden asked, Will full programming be allowed at the community space in terms of hours and days of the week for senior citizens? 2 Mr. Schmidt replied, My understanding is yes, it would cover the full programming. Committee Chair White asked, Are you anticipating to come back for the activities for the Charles Black Center? Individuals are asking and any time you have miscommunication, things get frustrating. As we move close to the renovation we need to have conversations not only with the Committee and Council, but with the citizens as well. Similar to what you are doing with Leeper Park,that would be very beneficial and appreciated. Mr. Perri confirmed that he would update the Council. Councilmember Broden asked, How does a lease agreement with the Parks Department differ from lease agreements through the Park Board? Mr. Schmidt replied, All of these lease agreements have been approved by the individual boards, whether it is the Parks Board or the Board of Public Works. Truthfully, I found the Parks Statute to be silent with regard to lease agreements and I thought I would ere on the side of caution and bring it to Council to show good practice. The Statute states to have Council approve leases for structures and that applies to this situation. Committee Chair White then opened the floor to members of the public wishing to speak in favor of or in opposition to the items of legislation. There were none. She then turned the floor back to the Committee for further discussion or main motion. Committeemember Gavin Ferlic made a motion to send Bill No. 17-30,Bill No. 17-31, and Bill No. 17-32 to the full Council with a favorable recommendation. Committeemember Williams- Preston seconded this motion which carried unanimously by a voice vote of three (3) ayes. Bill No. 17-26—Resolution in support of an appropriation to fund pilot program addressing panhandling Oliver Davis, Council member representing the 6th Councilmanic District, stated, I would first like to thank Councilmembers White, Williams-Preston and Voorde for co-sponsoring this legislation. We have several supporting documents for this resolution. There is an article from the Washington Post regarding a Republican Mayor, as well as a Mayor in Portland, Maine. Cities all across the country are starting to look at what we can do, especially in light of all the rulings going on that make it illegal to outlaw panhandling. Many cities are having to figure out what is going on. A lot of ideas are going back to Albuquerque. Most of the programs are modeled off of Albuquerque. In section two (2) of the resolution, I've asked Committee Chair Karen White to address some language. Committee Chair White stated, I had reached out to the sponsor of the bill, Councilmember Oliver Davis,to identify a particular dollar amount in the resolution. I would like to offer an amendment at this time for that language to identify financial support, but not identify a particular dollar amount. I think as we work with the Administration and we go through the 3 budget process, we've been very clear with our top priorities and this will be part of the discussion during the budget process. Councilmember Davis accepted this as a friendly amendment and therefore the amendment did not require a vote. Councilmember Davis stated, Each program has started with a different dollar amount. Two (2) videos were played to the Committee and Council. These videos are archived in the City Clerk's Office and are available to the public. Councilmember Davis stated, These videos give the background of the program. There are a tremendous amount of programs and there are other Councils right now looking at implementing these programs. I've talked to people in Fort Wayne this morning on the radio and they are looking at what we are doing. Every city can adapt it to their needs. I came to this City twenty- five (25) years ago to work at Madison Center. When that closed, Oaklawn had taken over the out-patient and Memorial took over the in-patient part. The sustaining care that Madison Center used to provide the community is now the biggest gap in the community. We have many different services but compared to what Madison Center used to do, it is nothing. I didn't even have an issue regarding the dollar figure because a lot of this should be a county-wide issue anyway. The City of South Bend takes care of the homeless of all of St. Joseph County, the City of Mishawaka, Osceola,New Carlisle and the whole area,just like the school system. This is a start to the conversation. DTSB has some initiatives and Suzanna Fritzberg from the Mayor's Office also has some comments, but there are enough people at the table to make sure a dollar figure is present come the budget time. We could also get private dollars. Councilmember Williams-Preston stated, I think it is a great idea. It is progressive and makes sense. Committee Chair White stated, The resolution is non-binding so it is saying we want to have a conversation regarding issues of importance. We recognize there is a lot of great work that needs to be done in terms of addressing the homelessness that we have. This project is very innovative and new. Looking at the video, it is key to surrounding all the different services. It has to take more than just the City, it is going to take everyone coming together. Committee Chair White then opened the floor to questions and comments from the Committee and Council. Councilmember Dr. David Varner stated, In the State of Indiana, welfare is delegated to the County such as the County Health Department. I think if the City is going to get involved with something like this, it is incredibly important that it isn't seen as the City trying to launch a new project and funding something by itself. There is no funding mechanism from the State Legislature for cities to fund welfare or things such as this. We need to find partnerships for this program. 4 Councilmember Tim Scott stated, This has stemmed out of the `Tent City' from last year. DTSB formed a subcommittee, of which I'm a member,to look at what we can do about panhandling and the homeless situation. It wasn't a punitive thing, it was something like this. DTSB is putting out information for shopkeepers and people downtown about how to handle and interact with panhandlers. There was a pilot program called `The Giving Box.' It encouraged instead of giving individuals money,the money would go to the services that help the homeless and panhandlers. There is still discussion about whether that will continue at DTSB but they are committed to hiring a Social Outreach position. It won't be a red-shirt ambassador, it will be someone actually trained for this. They are in the process of interviews and may make a decision this week. It is designed to have this person reach out to these people and help them find a job. There is an expansion of what is going on here. I think this is good synergy between DTSB and the City. Interim Council Attorney Aladean DeRose then interjected to confirm the proper terminology of the resolution. Suzanna Fritzberg, Deputy Chief of Staff to the Mayor with offices on the 14th floor of the County-City Building, stated, We are grateful for the energy and enthusiasm of taking a step toward the panhandling situation. We had a series of conversations a few months ago with members at the Center for the Homeless and they raised a couple of concerns and considerations around how a strategy like this would work here. We are in the midst of an ongoing information gathering process, but there may be some concerns around the size and scale of the program locally. Councilmember Broden asked, Will the resolution include this as an appropriation as a line item in the 2018 budget? Councilmember Davis replied, There is no line item, this would just be an appropriation. Interim Council Attorney DeRose clarified the specific terminology regarding the request of funds for the pilot program. Councilmember Davis and the fellow co-sponsors then discussed with Interim Council Attorney DeRose the proper terminology for the resolution. Councilmember Broden then asked, Having figured that out,will there be sufficient time between now and the budget finalization? Committee Chair White stated, This is just a request and it gives a sense of direction for the Administration to consider. It is part of our priorities. Councilmember Randy Kelly stated, This resolution regards panhandling, but obviously it is the broader issue of homelessness. These are pieces of homelessness. Would it be worth mentioning homelessness in this resolution? Councilmember Davis stated, I don't mind putting that into the resolution. The reason why I didn't put homelessness in there is because a lot of panhandlers do have homes. Homelessness doesn't focus as much on the panhandling side of things and that is why this resolution is trying to address that. I'm open to any thought on that though. 5 Cristal Brisco, Corporation Council with offices on the 12th floor of the County-City Building, stated, Building on panhandling and homelessness, it seems what is being discussed here is poverty as a whole. That is a broad enough word that addresses both issues. If someone is panhandling but has a home, I would think they are on the corner because they are chronically impoverished. Councilmember Davis stated, A lot of that is going to cover a lot of these issues. The Administration will have their discussion, whether it is the poverty piece or the panhandling and homelessness piece. Committee Chair White opened the floor to members of the public wishing to speak in favor of or in opposition to the legislation. Sue Kesim, 4022 Kennedy Dr., stated, I had a little discussion with Councilmember Davis and I have just a few ideas. There is a special projects person at WorkOne, Judy Spigle, she has a team. Al Harriston deals with people that have been convicted. They also have a veteran's specialist. So I was thinking if you're going to partner, move these people into more permanent employment by working with this team that is already in South Bend. And the State may have WorkOne dollars that you can tap by making this a special project with WorkOne. So to move beyond the temporary solution, it would be nice to open this up to teens that don't fit in to regular employment. It would also be a good way to divert their recruitment into gangs. Perhaps we should extend this opportunity to younger people. There is also funding available through the Notre Dame Community Project so that is also a possible partnership. I think this is a problem that needs to be addressed but it is obviously not just panhandlers. It is poverty. With no other members of the public wishing to speak in favor, Committee Chair White opened the floor to members of the public wishing to speak in opposition of the legislation. There were none. She then turned the floor back to the Committee for further discussion or main motion. Committeemember Gavin Ferlic made a motion to send Substitute Bill No. 17-26 to the full Council with a favorable recommendation. Committeemember Williams-Preston seconded the motion which carried unanimously with a voice vote of three (3) ayes. With no other business, Committee Chair White adjourned the Personnel and Finance Committee meeting at 5:34 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, ricer a,46 Karen White, Committee Chair 6