Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-11-19 Council Minutes REPORT OF SUB-COMMITTEE ON MINUTES TO THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND: THE SUB-COMMITTEE HAS INSPECTED THE MINUTES OF THE March 11, 2019 MEETING OF THE COUNCIL AND FOUND THEM TO BE CORRECT. THEREFORE, WE RECOMMEND THE SAME BE APPROVED: TIM SCOTT J ICE TESHKA APPROVED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL ON: April 8, 2019 ATTEST: KA' EMAH FOWLER, CITY CLERK REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 Be it remembered that the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana met in the Council Chambers of the County-City Building on Monday, March 11th, 2019 at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was called to order by Council President Tim Scott and the Invocation (Jason Miller, South Bend City Church) and Pledge to the Flag were given. ROLL CALL COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Scott 1st District, President Regina Williams-Preston 2nd District Sharon L. McBride 3rd District Jo M. Broden 4th District Jake Teshka 5th District Oliver J. Davis 6th District John Voorde At-Large, Chairperson Committee of the Whole Karen L. White At-Large, Vice President COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Gavin Ferlic At-Large OTHERS PRESENT: Kareemah Fowler City Clerk Jennifer Coffman Chief Deputy Clerk Bianca Tirado Deputy Clerk Graham Sparks Clerk Executive Assistant Bob Palmer Council Attorney Elivet Navarro Council Intern REPORT FROM THE SUB-COMMITTEE ON MINUTES There was no report from the Sub-Committee on Minutes. SPECIAL BUSINESS Council President Tim Scott recognized, in attendance, students from Andrews University. BILL NO. 19-16 A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA PUBLICLY COMMENDING THE DELTA SIGMA THETA SORORITY, INC SOUTH BEND ALUMNAE CHAPTER FOR THEIR COMMITMENT TO COMMUNITY SERVICE, SCHOLARSHIP AND SOCIAL ACTION FOR THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA. Councilmember Karen White, 1912 Malvern Way, South Bend, IN, served as a presenter for this bill. Councilmember Karen White stated, I'm very pleased to be able to present this resolution in 1 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 conjunction with my fellow presenters. We plan to read into the record this resolution. Resolution Number 4771-19. A Resolution of the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana publicly commending the Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Incorporated South Bend Alumnae Chapter for their commitment to community service, scholarship and social action for the City of South Bend, Indiana. Whereas, Delta Sigma Theta was founded on January 13, 1913 by twenty-two (22) collegiate women at Howard University. These students wanted to use their collective strength to promote academic excellence and to provide assistance to those in need. In March of 1913, the Founders of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Incorporated, performed their first(1st)public act. They participated in the Women's Suffrage March in Washington, D.C. Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Incorporated, was incorporated in 1930; and, City Clerk Kareemah Fowler, offices located on the 4th floor of the County-City Building, South Bend, IN, served as a presenter for this bill. City Clerk Kareemah Fowler stated, Whereas, Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Incorporated, is a private, not-for-profit organization whose purpose is to provide assistance and support through established programs in local communities throughout the world. Since its founding, more than 200,000 women have joined the organization. The organization is a sisterhood of predominantly Black, college educated women. The sorority currently has one-thousand (1,000) collegiate and alumnae chapters located in the United States and abroad; and, Whereas, since its founding in 1913, Delta Sigma Theta Sorority Incorporated has clearly distinguished itself as a public service organization that boldly confronts the challenges of African Americans and, hence, all Americans. Over the years, a wide range of programs addressing education, health, international development, and the strengthening of the African American family have evolved. In realizing its mission,Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Incorporated, provides an extensive array of public service initiatives through its Five (5)-Point Programmatic Thrust of: Educational Development, Economic Development, International Awareness & Involvement, Physical & Mental Health and Political Awareness and Involvement; and, Councilmember Sharon L. McBride, 415 East Broadway Street, South Bend, IN, served as a presenter for this bill. Councilmember Sharon L. McBride stated, Whereas, The South Bend Alumnae Chapter of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority,Incorporated was the first(1st)black Greek letter organization in the Michiana area, chartered on December 3, 1955 at the historic LaSalle Hotel in South Bend, Indiana by nine (9) women who were part of a local group called the "Sorors Club"; and, Whereas, The Charter members include the First (1st) Black woman to graduate from the University of Notre Dame,the First(1st)and only Black woman appointed to the Indiana Women's Prison Parole Board and many other contributions,recognitions, and awards, in the area of human growth, development and welfare; and, Councilmember Oliver Davis, 1801 Nash Street, South Bend, IN, served as a presenter for this bill. Councilmember Oliver Davis stated, Whereas, In 2016 the South Bend Alumnae Chapter established the theme (brand) "Using the Power of our Voices" that has created a consistent message for our Social Action efforts. "Using the Power of our Voices" has allowed the Chapter to bring to the table a number of our citizens and those who, in the past,had not realized the power of their voices; and, Whereas, The Sorority's commitment to civic engagement is clear. During the election cycles, the Chapter has implemented comprehensive voter registration, education and mobilization efforts. A number of"Meet the Candidates" forums were held, Using the Power of the Women Vote was held in recognition of National Women's History Month as well as Super Sundays: Get out the Vote effort; and, Whereas; the South Bend Alumnae Chapter along with St. Joseph Health System,Greater St.John Missionary Baptist Church and other organizations present their annual Community Health and Resource Fair to provide free screenings and valuable resources for youth and adults; and, Councilmember Regina Williams-Preston, 838 North Elmer Street, South Bend, IN, served as a presenter for this bill. Councilmember Regina Williams-Preston stated, Whereas, Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Incorporated, South Bend Alumnae Chapter, The St. Joseph County Democratic African American Coalition and the Martin Luther King Center Senior Men's Club embraced the call for action along with other community partners, resulting in a number of community forums and workshops held in the community to bring attention and awareness regarding the effects of these drugs; and, Now, Therefore, be it resolved, by the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, as follows: Section One (I) The Common Council of the City of South Bend, 2 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 Indiana, publicly honors and congratulates The South Bend Alumnae Chapter of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Incorporated on their outstanding leadership and commitment to social action and community service by following in the footsteps of their Founders and remaining in the forefront of action as a voice for those in need. Councilmember Karen White stated, Section Two (II) The Common Council recognizes Delta Days at the State Capital. Two (2) position papers were presented to our state legislators on Hate Crimes and Redistricting. Sorors also met with their elected officials. Section(III)This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from after its adoption by the Common Council and approval by the Mayor. Councilmember Karen White stated, I would like to let it be known that the Mayor has already approved the resolution. So, we ask for your support of this resolution. Arnez Lee, 1743 North Huey Street, South Bend, IN, served as a presenter for this bill. Ms. Lee stated, I'm the President of the South Bend Alumnae Chapter of Delta Sigma Theta. We would like to thank you for honoring our social activism in our community. We have been serving the South Bend community for sixty-four (64) years. But, we have been serving our country as a National Sorority for one hundred and six (106) years. We really believe in being socially active in our community, so, this is what we do. We would also like to thank our Soror Karen White because she heads our Social Action Committee. So, she keeps us on our toes and keeps us aware and socially active in our community. So, we would like to thank her as well. Thank you. Kimberly Green-Reeves, 50555 Galaxy Drive, Granger, IN,served as a presenter for this bill. Ms. Green-Reeves stated, I served as the Vice President for Delta Sigma Theta Sorority. I, too, just want to second (2nd) what our President has shared. Councilmember Karen White continues to be a leader for us within our sorority and really helps to make sure we are present in the community. That is something that, without her, would not be as easy for us to navigate. I do want to express sincere appreciation for Soror Councilmember Karen White but also the members behind me as well. They have been very instrumental in a lot of things that we do. I can't thank you all enough for your presence and working with us, collaboratively, in the community as well. Council President Tim Scott opened the floor to questions and comments from Council Members. Councilmember Jo M. Broden stated, I get the honors of going first(1st).Nonetheless, your history of leadership, advocacy, awareness on really important issues, empowerment across the community and particularly with women's voices, really is admirable. The longevity both nationally and locally is really remarkable and outstanding. The fact you are here today in such strong numbers, and I know it doesn't represent your entire group because I've had occasions to see your full numbers in the past, but I do think your numbers and the work you've done is really what is attracting people to your cause. Then, in turn, it gives you such an authority on these important issues in our community. I do want to particularly thank you for your very robust engagement on the Hate Crimes issue within the State of Indiana and redistricting. I don't think there are two (2) issues that supersede those in terms of importance in our day and in our time on both an individual basis for the people who live in the state of Indiana but then also collectively, the work and business community as well. I thank you in particular for the timeliness and the work you've been doing most recently on that. I know it's been a long and rich history, but I think your activism, in particular at this time, couldn't be more needed. So, thank you for your leadership on that. Councilmember Jake Teshka stated, I echo a lot of what Councilmember Broden just said. The Resolution itself says a lot. Thank you for your leadership in our community, for being engaged not only in South Bend but in Indianapolis and far beyond. So, thank you for all that you do. Councilmember John Voorde stated, Ladies of the sorority, I know how you feel, Karen keeps us on our toes, too. We are privileged to have your work in this community and appreciate it very much. Thank you. Councilmember Tim Scott stated, Ladies,thank you so much for all you do and what you represent on the national level, too. It seems to me, every time, since I've been on Council, something impressive is happening and there is a little hint of red someone on someone's outfit. Every time I turn around there is something impressive going on and there is that little red somewhere. It is 3 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 just amazing what you've done and what this organization has done over the years. It is truly outstanding, and I appreciate all of you and working with you in the City, as well. This being the time heretofore set for the Public Hearing on the above bill, proponents and opponents were given an opportunity to be heard. Samuel Brown, 222 East Navarre Street, South Bend, IN, stated, These ladies are remarkable. I see them everywhere. I hope their work continues. They do a wonderful job in our community and it is much needed. Thank you. Councilmember John Voorde made a motion to adopt Bill No. 19-16 by acclamation. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded this motion which carried unanimously by a voice vote of eight(8) ayes. REPORTS OF CITY OFFICES Representing the City Administration: Laura O'Sullivan, Chief of Staff Councilmember John Voorde made a motion to suspend the rules to hear Resolutions before Committee of the Whole. Councilmember Karen White seconded this motion which carried by a voice vote of eight(8) ayes. RESOLUTIONS BILL NO. 19-04 A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, APPROVING A PETITION OF THE AREA BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1119 LINCOLNWAY WEST Council President Tim Scott reported the Zoning and Annexation Committee met this afternoon and, due to the lack of quorum and absence of petitioner, send this bill forward with no recommendation. Jordan Wyatt, Planner for the Area Plan Commission with offices located on the 11th floor of the County-City Building, South Bend, IN, served as the presenter for this bill. Mr. Wyatt stated, I do not see the petitioner. Council President Tim Scott called for the attendance of the petitioner three (3) times. The petitioner for this bill was absent. Councilmember Jo M. Broden made a motion continue Bill No. 19-04 to the March 25th, 2019 meeting of the Common Council. Councilmember Karen White seconded this motion which carried by a voice vote of eight(8) ayes. 19-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, APPROVING A PLAN FOR THE CITY ADMINISTRATION TO CREATE A SOUTH BEND PLAN COMMISSION AND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS SEPARATE AND DISTINCT FROM THAT OF THE COUNTY AND TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE IN CONFORMITY WITH THAT PLAN 4 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 Councilmember Karen White made a motion to accept the second (2nd) substitute version of Bill No. 19-15. Councilmember Jo M. Broden seconded this motion which carried by a voice vote of eight(8) ayes. Council President Tim Scott reported the Zoning and Annexation Committee met this afternoon and, due to the lack of quorum, send this bill forward with no recommendation. Tim Corcoran, Director of Planning for the Department of Community Investment with offices located on the 14th floor of the County-City Building, South Bend, IN, served as the presenter for this bill. Mr. Corcoran stated,Thank you,Council Members.This comes back to you after a couple weeks where we went back and looked to answer some of the questions asked at Committee. I hope I can answer some of those questions for you. So, what does this resolution enable us to do? (Referencing a presentation which is available in the City Clerk's Office) It simply allows us to hire two (2) new staff as proposed and outlined in the 2019 budget. These two (2) new staff are critical in helping us work towards the development of a South Bend Plan Commission. The responsibilities of these two (2) new staff members will be to coordinate with the existing Area Plan Commission in terms of knowledge and data transfer, look at the existing processes to understand where we might be able to find some efficiencies and refine those processes and help us continue the quick fixes we've been doing over the last couple of years. Also,they will help us rewrite the zoning ordinance to date. It's really important those people play a role in that because those will be the people who administer it. So, it will be a great way to make sure that, when we get to that point, they are starting with a lot of knowledge behind them. Mr. Corcoran continued, What the resolution does not do is establish the South Bend Plan Commission.That would need to be done through an ordinance and this will be brought to Council later this year and I am estimating approximately around September. Between now and then, we hope to and we plan on working through all the issues that you raise and that we find internally to make sure we meet the critical goal of having a seamless transition making this happen. Why establish a Plan Commission for South Bend? Philosophically, I think South Bend citizens should be making decisions on South Bend issues. We have the right people and wealth of internal experience.There are a lot of people in South Bend,and some of those members are on the existing Plan Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA), who understand planning and the objectives of the City. The South Bend Plan Commission members will have a greater insight into City planning objectives. This is because they understand the goals of the City because they are people who live within the City. We hope for and we expect better communication throughout the zoning process. So, when you get a recommendation, there will be one(1)recommendation and it flows through. There won't be any sort of mismatches in that. We want to streamline the process. So, currently, Strategic Planning, which is my department, we look at neighborhood visions with a lot of citizen engagement. The Building Department does what is called Plan Review. That is when a project is already appropriate in a zone. Currently,we,DCI,don't really see those projects. Finally, on the Economic and Business Development side, which is usually working with the developer. Having all this together really allows us to streamline that process and really work together to help shepherd these projects through the system. Mr. Corcoran went on, We also hope that we can help with zoning code compliance. What I mean by that is,firstly,we want to,and we've been doing this,look at the zoning ordinance and eliminate all unnecessary, overburdensome and out-of-date regulations. You've been helping us do this already. So, this is a positive step that we want to keep taking. But, we want to also stand firm on rules we believe in and that we believe make the City a better place. If we're consistent in the application of the zoning code, especially at the BZA level, be believe this consistency promotes compliance and reduces overall administration time. This is one (1) of the things we hope to accomplish in the future. Mr. Corcoran continued,There were questions about the independence and accountability of these Boards. Well, you know, State Law dictates the criteria these boards must utilize in order to make their decisions. This is the same case when it would become the South Bend Plan Commission. The criteria are clearly defined in State Law and they are the same criteria that the current Board of Zoning Appeals and Area Plan Commission use. We also have been taking an incremental approach to this. So, not only have the quick-fixes been incremental and over-time, but we want to use these two (2) people to incrementally look at all the different things we need to look at in 5 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 order to be sure, come the end of the year and January 1, 2020, when we would like to pull the trigger on this, that we've addressed all those steps. One (1)of the other questions asked a couple weeks ago was about cost. These are the positions (referencing a slide in the presentation). There is a Zoning Administrator, an Administrative Assistant and a Zoning Specialist. First(1St) of all, I should add that one (1) of these positions is already in the budget. It was a rollover from the Building Department. For transparency's sake, the true cost, the maximum salaries that could be paid to these people, plus the fringe benefits, would equal up to $250,000. Now, at the moment, that does not include any potential additional legal costs that might be incurred, but, it might also be for additional staffing and outsourcing. What we have done in the last couple of weeks is we've been able to get South Bend's Corporation Counsel, Stephanie Steele, along with Aladean and Sandra Kennedy,in a room with Mitch Hippenheimer and the lawyers for the BZA,to talk through all of their issues and talk through the time it takes for them to work on these different commissions and boards. I think what we got out to that is that the ramp-up period between today and when we get it all working, that is where a lot of the effort is going to take place. But, once we get up that ramp, the day-to-day, month-to-month operation of these two (2) commission is actually not too onerous. So, what we are hoping to do, if there is some outsourcing we may need to do, for instance, writing new bylaws for these boards and commissions, we might look to use funding we alreadyhave inplace forprofessional services to fill thatgapbetween now and the end of the year. Mr. Corcoran went on, We've also looked to work with our Innovation Team regarding any IT related infrastructure that might be necessary. So,we've already had meetings with our Innovation Team and the Area Plan Commission staff regarding databases, software applications and things like that. We've walked away from those meetings thinking we have a pretty good handle on that side of things. As well as you probably know, you've worked with some of the business analysts for different projects, so I am working with them as well to help map all the processes that are related to zoning and BZA and how those processes interact with the different departments such as the Building Department, Code Enforcement and DCI. Hopefully,what we can do is as we map those out,we will look for efficiencies in how that process might work better.The whole ordinance overhaul is about making sure this works better for everyone. There is also revenue that goes with this. It is not much, at times, and it can be variable. Revenue comes from things like filing fees, improvement location permits, zoning verification letters, fines to zoning violations, subdivision requests and rezoning requests. So, in 2017, there was approximately $25,000 and in 2018 there was $50,000. This is, again, not something we necessarily want to rely on, but it is certainly something that will come in through the process and it varies based on how much development is happening. Mr. Corcoran continued, So, staff capacity. Currently, DCI staff and members of my staff, do recommendations for different zoning related matters. We can continue to do that, but, with the new staff, we won't have to spend that extra time because it will be done in a cohesive way. The quick fixes have helped reduce zoning variances,and so,that has been an administrative efficiency we've been able to implement over time and we hope to keep doing that. The zoning overhaul is also sort of a Thought Leadership role the City has taken. We really do believe our new zoning ordinance is going to be one (1) of the best in the country, according to Mike Divita by the way. He is a little biased,but I think he might be right. In the future, the new staff will help provide that day-to-day administration of the South Bend Plan Commission. It helps free-up existing DCI planning staff to do strategic and neighborhood planning efforts. I think many of you may have seen on the news that we are working on the Near Northwest Plan at the moment. It takes a lot of time and engagement. I've worked all weekend on this plan and what I think is really neat about what we can do with the Plan Commission staff integrated within the City is have them play a direct role in these neighborhood engagement pieces so that when we come to, for instance,remap a neighborhood or look at how plans fit with the Comprehensive Plan and all those other things, everybody has been engaged and well engaged throughout that whole process so it is as cohesive and as clear as possible. Mr. Corcoran went on, I emailed you a broader list of things these people will do but this (referencing a slide in the presentation) is just a short blurb about each staff member and their job description. The Zoning Administrator is primarily tasked with determining the use and how it fits in which zone category or district of a new project or development. Part of that role is dictated in State Law, as well. The Zoning Specialist,we hope, is a person who then does a lot of that day-to- 6 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 day grunt work such as writing some of those reports and helping out the Zoning Administrator to make sure we get all that information in a timely way. Also, when we engage and talk to people who are looking to do things in South Bend, that person will do a lot of that work with them and help them through that process. The Administrative Assistant is actually pretty important as well because there is a lot of engagement that goes on. There are letters that go out. There are a lot of phone calls that happen. We have to make sure to hit those timelines for advertising and get those things right because, as you know, little clerical errors can cause delays and we don't want that either. Mr. Corcoran continued, Councilmember Voorde mentioned working together with other agencies, I don't think that is going to stop. Some of the governmental agencies that we work with, such as MACOG for State and Federal funding opportunities, we worked with them on the Coal Line Trail. They helped work on our bike infrastructure as well. St. Joseph County Parks Department,trail coordination, again,the St. Joseph County Public Library, we worked with them to figure out how the renovations for their building are going to look. I'm on a call with them almost every week to see what their doing and to help make sure that their plans work with us and we move forward in a good direction. Engineering, Portage Avenue Bridge, that was going to be replaced with a guardrail that looked like a highway and we stepped in to make sure there was really good rail there and a wider sidewalk for pedestrian access up to the Martin's Plaza,lighting, and we worked together to make that happen. We still will be working with the Area Plan Commission when it comes to annexations and how development,just outside the City limits may come into the City at a future date. Mishawaka, for instance, we worked with them on Brownfield coordination. So, we really do work with a lot of agencies already and we plan on continuing to work with a lot of these agencies. Mr. Corcoran went on, (Referencing a slide from the presentation) This is familiar with you. This is just the Plan Commission composition. There are nine (9) members on the Plan Commission and this is how they get appointed. Again, State Law dictates the membership of this. The Board of Zoning Appeals, five (5) members, also, the composition is dictated by State Law. There are still some challenges and progress I would like to talk about. We are still working with the Legal Department to determine the exact time and capacity issues and the impacts on current staff but, like I said, we've had these conversations already and I feel we're in a good place to feel good about moving forward with that. The Innovation Team is, again, helping us map processes and determine IT-related impacts. Most importantly, the new staff are critical in the coordination of these efforts. Again, we are trying to do things like the NNN Plan at the moment. There are other things like that coming up, so, these two (2) people will be helping answer a lot of the questions that we have still yet to be able to fully lock down. Mr. Corcoran continued, Progress to date, the quick-fixes, we have a few more to come before the summer. And, the zoning overhaul is in progress and we hope to have a draft by maybe May or June. We are getting that reviewed, currently, by an external legal expert on zoning issues so that when we get that draft back, it's been vetted at least once or twice from a legal perspective as well, so,when we give it to our Legal Department,who we are also sharing it with now,they don't have the full burden of going through it. A lot of it has been tested already. So, we are already trying to do things to reduce the things the Legal Team and the other teams have to do in order to make all of this work. I think we are doing a pretty good job getting all these pieces in line. The timeframe, so,we would like to hire the staff immediately because we want to make sure, as I've said,to reach the goal and have a smooth transition.That takes time.We've been taking an incremental approach on a lot of things I think that is one (1) of the things that has helped us and helped us make sure we are doing things in a good way. We want to have the draft zoning ordinance done by May. That is on time. Our external and internal legal reviews are in progress and we hope to have that finished in April. With the zoning ordinance adoption maybe in September.These are things that we always will, and have in the past, work with you guys to make sure you are comfortable with. Any questions you have, we will do our best to answer. Commissioner selection and training, we think, would best happen between October and December because we want to make sure that those people who are appointed to those boards understand their role, what they need to look at with the criteria used to evaluate projects. Finally, all of this, hopefully, on January 1st, 2020 is when the Plan Commission would start officially and projects, from that point on, would move through a 7 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 South Bend Plan Commission. With that, if you have questions for me I can answer tonight, I would be happy to do so. Council President Tim Scott opened the floor to questions from Council Members. Councilmember Jo M. Broden stated, Everything in Committee. I was fine with the responses and the back and forth. I appreciate it. Councilmember Oliver Davis interjected, I do concur. Councilmember Jake Teshka stated, I apologize, I wasn't in Committee so I'm sorry if this has been answered. So, say you hire the new staff immediately and the plan is that this ordinance gets passed in September. Hypothetically speaking, it doesn't pass, what happens to that new staff? Mr. Corcoran replied, It really is part of the budgeting process at that point. If we feel that we are overstaffed in that capacity, we would just not staff it in the future. But, I do think that we might find there are either reasons to utilize them or they could get reshuffled into other departments as well.Again,Building Department,one(1)of the staff was actually part of the Building Department before, or Code Enforcement, or something like that. I think we would have to work through that during the budget process. Councilmember Oliver Davis stated, A couple of things. I saw the email regarding the resolution and to change the name of this bill. To me,the title doesn't represent what we are doing and, I saw Bob's thing on the way in, the title,to me, doesn't make any sense in terms of why this title versus you are talking about hiring two (2)people. Yet, this title could lead people to think a completely different thing. Mr. Corcoran replied, I agree and that's why we had asked to change the name of the title earlier. There were some issues about advertising, I believe. We wanted to move the resolution through. It is a resolution that only allows us to hire those two (2) new people and I understand that some might be confused about what the title says,but ultimately,it is just about hiring the two(2)people. Councilmember Oliver Davis asked, For the record, is there a way we can change that tonight? Council Attorney Bob Palmer stated, The title has been amended. That is part of the second (2nd) substitute. Councilmember Oliver Davis stated, Ok, cool. I can live with that. And the last piece of it, I understand the philosophy piece of it,but I think in explaining this, first(1st)of all,with Area Plan issues, we are still only having a South Bend voice when it comes down to the final decision, ok? Secondly, it comes down to the issue of, we are working with MACOG and TRANSPO and many of the Mayor's appointees don't have to live in the City of South Bend. BZA, they don't all have to be in South Bend. So, what happens is through our zoning process and other entities we are working with, there is still a non-South Bend voice that is being shared and those kinds of things. Mr. Corcoran replied, I think the appointments the Mayor would make would be people who live in South Bend. Councilmember Oliver Davis interjected, No, no, no, no. no. Not all of his. I'm talking about all of them currently when we are dealing with the City of South Bend right now. Mr. Corcoran replied, I'm not sure where they all live. Councilmember Oliver Davis stated, I understand. My point to you is, the issue of us saying we only hear the South Bend voice, from that standpoint, we still will hear other voices from that standpoint. I just wanted to make that clear. Because you just mentioned MACOG and all those other voices, we will still hear those kinds of things. Mr. Corcoran replied, Oh, yeah, we will continue working with all of those. Yes, of course. Councilmember Oliver Davis stated, And it doesn't change because of the fact that, even if we kept the Area Plan or we don't keep it, the final voice is still the Common Council. Mr. Corcoran replied, Sure. But, for instance, if the Area Board of Zoning Appeals, Mike Keen, a developer who is working the Near Northwest Neighborhood, spoke about how when they were 8 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 looking for a parking variance, sometimes people in the county have a different idea about what a proper amount of parking is versus what it is in an urban area. Now, you have a conflict of philosophy on that Board. This causes unnecessary debate and conflict that just doesn't lead to a good outcome. We've been able to change the rules to help smooth that out but there are always going to be instances when these things come up. I'd rather see people who understand what is trying to happen answer those questions. Councilmember Tim Scott stated, Kathy Schuth from the NNN, also made a comment where there are times when she is making decisions on county issues that she might not have the understanding to make that decision. Councilmember John Voorde stated, You've understood my reluctance to embrace this out of the box because I like to see things moving in the other direction, you know, shared services and that kind of thing. Mostly for efficiency but also for streamlining and making government work better for people. Bigger is not always better. But, I think now that I've had discussions with you and a couple of other folks, this makes sense. So, I'm all for it. I know this is just for the hiring of a couple of people but those couple of people, along with a third (3rd) person will probably start looking at the revision of that zoning ordinance. I was asked that you extend an overture to Mishawaka. Maybe they would be interested in sending someone to these preliminary meetings to talk about how we are going to do things. We could learn from them,perhaps, and they could learn from us. Especially if we're going to have one(1) of the best. Mr. Corcoran stated, Yeah, that's what we are shooting for. Councilmember John Voorde continued, We've gotten blessed with a lot of developers that work regionally and the easier we can make it for them,that is less cumbersome,maybe Mishawaka and the County could pick up on something we design. I think we would all be better off. The other thing I would like to see is if we could somehow isolate the budget for the South Bend Plan Commission, almost like a separate department,rather than get those numbers lost in professional services and all those other things, in CI's budget. That is what I would like to say. This being the time heretofore set for the Public Hearing on the above bill, proponents and opponents were given an opportunity to be heard. There were none. Councilmember Jo M. Broden stated, I, too, was hesitant in moving this to the City of South Bend and walking away from our current structure within the Area Plan Commission. Quite frankly, over the last six (6) months, I've moved to strongly support this. I think while we are just talking about hiring tonight, that is very significant to me because I think this timeframe from now until the end of the year, having someone working the process as we actually redo the ordinance itself at the same time, there is tremendous benefit to that. Once we hit the first (1St) of the year, it is as smooth and as seamless as possible. Not just for the benefit for our developer community but I also see additional benefits with regard to the neighbors,right? Because, in my opinion, all of this comes down to fit and use of a particular property. There is nothing more personal,whether you've purchased a property to build your dreams on, or if you're an existing long-time property owner, there is nothing more personal, I think. So, getting this right is important for the developer, the neighbors and I think, too, in the end, as you've said it comes to Council, everything prior to it coming to us is advisory. I think the better tools we have and the peak we've seen with the zoning ordinance, it looks like it's going to be more user friendly and, frankly, when I first (1St) came on Council, and still,there is a lot that is just outright baffling about our existing ordinance. And, I'm not a developer, but I'm a citizen that just occupies this seat and my ability to understand it at the citizen level, I think, is really critical. I really like this. I appreciate Council asked the smart questions during the budget process and kind of put a hold off on this to flesh this out a little more. I appreciate the timeframe because I would have been a no-vote. So, I love the time that was taken. I think ordinance packs in a couple things with regard to those individuals on these commissions and boards and that they be properly trained, annually, in their duties and that they are properly staffed. Not just with the Zoning Administrator, the Assistant, etcetera and the folks who actually crank out the reports, but that there also be knowledgeable, and at this point I would like to see independent, legal counsel. I think in the end, everything before it comes to us is just a recommendation. It's advisory. I think when it hits us, you know, we have to be ready to go, one (1) way or the other. I think the more we can work this out on the staffing side, as a petitioner 9 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 comes, the more we can, you know, nail it down in the various boards and commissions. The better, I think,it will come to us basically ready to go. I think the smoothness of that process really does benefit the entire community and it makes it understandable what you can do, where you can do, how you can do and the timeframe you can do it. I think that will benefit us entirely as a community. Councilmember Jo M. Broden continued, So, having said that, the question about the budget impact on this. I think with better tools, for instance the ordinance, and proper staffing that is on the ground working with us day-to-day and we have more flexibility at the City-level, I just think it will open up investment opportunities that will be appropriate investment opportunities. And, therefore, good for the City of South Bend and good down to the fine-grade level of the neighborhood. So, I love all the changes that have been made to this and I guess I'm just saying I'm a convert and I look forward to the next whatever months to really get down to the bigger pieces of this ordinance itself. Councilmember Jake Teshka stated, I think I was the one (1) that originally brought up the financial impact of this,right? Tim, thank you for answering that question first(Pt)of all. Second (21'1) of all, I think, in light of this broader explanation of expanding and streamlining what we are doing here and retooling the ordinance, if our only argument would be to have South Bend have a say, South Bend has a say on this body. I also would have been a no-vote but now I believe in it just because of the increased efficiencies. I just wanted to point that out because I brought it up. Councilmember Karen White stated, I would just like to thank the Office of Community Investment and their staff for really working through the issues and for listening to the Council and others as well. This is a great example, in terms of starting the process, through the budget hearings. This process started, I want to say the spring and summer of 2018. I am very grateful we are at this point that we are making changes for the best. At the end of the process, and as we prepare for the month of September,we will have a product that has been fully vetted and a product that will serve the citizens of the City of South Bend and our developers. I want to make sure, though, through the Committee discussion this afternoon, I raised a concern about oversight and enforcement and following through with the written commitments. I would like to have a discussion with some members of Community Investment but also with the Council so that we can have a better sense of what happens after we have taken action. At this point I'm very grateful and I really do like the work that you've done thus far. Councilmember Oliver Davis stated, Finally, I would like to just say I'm grateful that we slowed down this process. It was my recommendation last year in the budget process to delay this part of it. Now you see why I requested that. Because, to have gone through the way we were going to go through, would not have, I believe, resulted in this kind of discussion to look at the pros and cons and help finetune everything that was being put in place. So, I do believe it is a better plan than what we had before us back in October and I am grateful for that. Councilmember Tim Scott stated, I've been all for this from the very start. There are too many times we've had either zoning or APC from the county level come to us that didn't really fit and this body has actually ruled against. There are cutting-edge things happening in this City and it is no disrespect to anybody in the county or Mishawaka, Lakeville or anywhere else, but there are a lot of things happening in the City that are going to move this City forward. Just in my neighborhood alone there are plans for even tiny houses and zero (0) energy efficient homes, compact homes, and then other entities in the City that we haven't seen in a long time. I had a gentleman on the APC that didn't understand a restaurant can exist in a neighborhood where there is street parking and you don't need the slab parking you have in Mishawaka. You go to a lot of cities, I go back home to St. Louis and there are plenty of wonderful restaurants tucked into neighborhoods. It adds character and life to those neighborhoods. Those are some of the things Mr. Corcoran is doing, Mr. Ford had vision for it prior to that, Mike Divita, it is amazing what is going on. NNN right now has forty (40) citizens giving feedback on things they want to see. Mr. Divita and a lawyer are sitting there to write code that makes sense for this City. It might not fit for Lakeville,or Mishawaka,or somewhere else in the county.But,there is that centralized thought and focus. I do believe the customer service will even be better. A lot of this is changing in the country and we are just now catching up to it. 10 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 Councilmember Jo M. Broden stated, Councilmember White mentioned oversight and enforcement. I think, if I heard you correctly, and we did discuss it in Committee, you referenced commitments. I think I want to expand that as an interest, not just relative to commitments, there is just basic need for oversight and enforcement with regard to zoning and development. It's not fair, in my opinion, and gives someone a leg-up where, in one (1) block in a district, you can do whatever you want and then ask for permission later, and then somebody else goes through the entire process asking for the appropriate votes all the way through, the neighbors are well- informed,the rules are abided by,but there is no enforcement relative to the one(1)who did it the right way and the one (1) who didn't. So, I think some consistency in oversight and enforcement would be good. Hopefully,the Building Department,DCI,the Planning Division and this Planning Commission, I think the closeness of that will get at some of these where there is oversight needed or a lack of enforcement. Once you get known for your lack of enforcement, all kinds of stuff follow. That can be difficult for a City. But, when you get the reputation that what is on the books is what we go by, then I think, that word gets out there as well. Councilmember Tim Scott stated,For those who weren't here for Committee, I did say a lot of this is a prelude to what is going to happen between now and the end of the year. So, this body will have a lot of feedback. I'm sure this will come through Councilmember Oliver Davis' Committee. We can't do any of it until we take this first (1St) step. Councilmember John Voorde made a motion to adopt the second (2nd) substitute version of Bill No. 19-15. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded this motion by a roll call voice of eight (8) ayes. RESOLVE INTO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE At 8:05 p.m. Councilmember Karen White made a motion to resolve into the Committee of the Whole. Councilmember Jo M. Broden seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes. Councilmember John Voorde, Chairperson,presiding. Councilmember John Voorde explained the procedures to be followed for tonight's meeting in accordance with Article 1, Section 2-11 of the South Bend Municipal Code. PUBLIC HEARINGS BILL NO. 69-18 PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND SEEKING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2610 EAST JEFFERSON BOULEVARD, COUNCILMANIC DISTRICT NO. 3 IN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA (COUNCIL PORTION ONLY-HAD PUBLIC HEARING ON 2-25-2019) Councilmember John Voorde opened the floor to questions and comments from Council Members. Councilmember Oliver Davis asked,There were a lot of letters written to us in terms of the history of the organization in terms of their legal and other kinds of challenges they had in the State of Michigan. Are you aware of those? Could you please clarify what's going on with that, please? Edward Fisher, 303 East 3`d Street, Mishawaka, IN, represented the petitioner for this legislation. Mr. Fisher replied, I am not aware of it, but I have co-presenters with me who would be able to, who are members of that group, if you would like to hear from them. Councilmember Oliver Davis stated, I would prefer to hear from them,then. 11 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 Patrick Gerrard, 121 Capital Avenue NE, Battle Creek, MI, stated, Good evening, Council. I represent the TIA Corporation. Councilmember Oliver Davis stated, There have been several legal challenges you have had to deal with in the State of Michigan that we were made aware of. What has caused those kinds of things in relationship to the operations there and how does that affect here in South Bend? Mr. Gerrard replied, Councilmember Davis, you say legal challenges. TIA Corporation has been a business over eighteen (18) years. Councilmember Oliver Davis interjected, I understand. Mr. Gerrard continued,Ok.Are you talking about any current legal challenges at this present time? Councilmember Oliver Davis stated, Give me a moment while I bring them up on my phone. I'll come back to it. Mr. Gerrard clarified, Is your question about how we handled those challenges in the State of Michigan versus how we are going to handle those in South Bend? Councilmember Oliver Davis replied, No, that's not my question. I'll come back to it. You want specifics. Councilmember Tim Scott stated, I understand you've submitted written commitments to amend your current bill. To the Council? Mr. Gerrard replied,Yes, we have. Councilmember Tim Scott asked, Clerk Fowler, do we have a copy of all of those? City Clerk Kareemah Fowler replied, We do have a copy of all the written commitments as of Friday but I, as well as some neighbors, met with Alicia and there were a couple of other things they added. That final set of written commitments, I believe,have been approved. We got a verbal agreement from them, Mr. Gerrard, but it has to go through their corporate office to officially add those changes. Councilmember Tim Scott clarified, So,tonight,we are not going to accept the changes? We can't confirm it from their legal. Mr. Gerrard interjected, Yes, you can confirm it. The main change is building a privacy fence on the west side of the property. I told them no problem, I will build the fence. I just don't have it in writing here tonight,but I will supply it to the Council upon its availability. Councilmember Karen White stated, I have a question and, again, what is before us deals with the zoning and whether it is properly zoned for the work that is being asked of with Council. I did ask if this would be an appropriate question. It has been stated that any of the residents that do not meet your requirements, they will go directly to the Upper Room, which is another facility in the City of South Bend. What level of conversation has been held with the leadership of the Upper Room? What agreements have been made, if any? Mr. Gerrard replied, I cannot answer that question, but we will bring somebody up that can. Alicia Brown, 19532 Sunset Lane, South Bend, IN, replied, They wouldn't go straight from our facility to the Upper Room. I apologize if that is what you understood out of that. That is not accurate. The relationship we have, currently, with the Upper Room, is just like a working relationship we have with any other facility in our area. We have sent people to the Upper Room. One (1) client we have taken them over to have interviews. If it doesn't work out there, we look for other places for them to go,just like any other resource here in South Bend. Councilmember Karen White stated, The reason I'm asking that is some of us were at a meeting recently and that issue came up in terms of whether or not there was any type of relationship with Upper Room. Brandon Adolf, 2734 Sampson Street, South Bend, IN, replied, I am the Executive Director for Choices Recovery. I've developed a relationship with them over the past year and a half. I primarily work with Lisa Stuart there. She is the Case Manager and actually the mother-in-law to 12 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 one (1) of my employees. That is how I originally met her. I had a meeting with them at the beginning of 2018 and also about one(1)month ago. In the past year and a half, I can recall about four(4) clients we've sent to them and also a client they have referred to us. We have also shared community resources. Councilmember Sharon L. McBride stated, I want to say thank you for providing me with that documentation because after that meeting, I did follow up with you all. The same thing, with me being a Director, I don't know if my staff has contact with Dismas House or anyone else because that is my down-the-chain. I don't know everybody who communicates with my staff,but you did provide that information. So, thank you for that. Mr. Adolf replied, Just for an example, I would like to add to that, I searched through my email, most of my case managers handle the after-care portion, so I don't always directly work with it, but I just searched Upper Room in my email history today and saw over thirty (30) emails in the last year that have been us communicating with the Upper Room. Ms. Brown stated, To add to that, it is very important in after-care, with any facility, that we are working with other local resources. I think that is super important because when people go to those resources, you just want a working relationship that they know where they can send clients and where we know we can send clients, as well. We have a lot of respect for the Upper Room. Councilmember Jake Teshka clarified, So, the commitment we don't currently have before us is in regard to the 3600 property? Mr. Gerrard replied, Yes, that is our property. 3606 East Jefferson Boulevard. Councilmember Jake Teshka followed up, Not the property that is before us tonight? Mr. Gerrard replied, That is correct, sir. Councilmember Jo M. Broden stated, I would like to spend a bit of my time with getting at your commitments. I assume the record has been established, per your presentation, and we've had feedback from neighbors,but I just want to make sure there is clarity on your formal commitments. Prior to you addressing those, I would also just like to say the privacy fence on the west of a property down the street has absolutely nothing to deal with what we,as Council,are here to decide on tonight. So, you want to make that side deal at some other point, I want to focus everybody on this property and on what you are trying to do. Mr. Gerrard replied, I understand. I do want the Council to know, though, we were asked by our neighbors, ok? Councilmember Jo M. Broden interjected, I really, sir, don't want to hear that at this point. I do want you to go to the March 7th commitment, is that the last, and in sum total, all of your commitments? The dated letter on March 7th, Council received, written commitments, we serve the formal intention to do the following, so, this is it? Ms. Brown replied, Yes. That was our formal written commitment we wanted to make to the Council to clarify any of our meeting from the 25th. Those have been stamped,signed,and are with your Clerk. Councilmember Jo M. Broden stated, So these would be binding with the property. You realize that? Ms. Brown replied, Absolutely. 2610 East Jefferson Boulevard. I just would like to clarify, thank you so much, we were asked for some commitments on both properties,we just want to make sure that was handled. Councilmember Jo M. Broden stated, That is not any part of my decision and, frankly, kind of muddies the situation. These are difficult enough in terms of this rezoning and everything packed into this request. Ms. Brown stated, I understand. Thank you, so much. Councilmember Jo M. Broden continued, I want to get at some certainties here. For the benefit of the community, I guess, a fully installed security system, as well as perimeter cameras. Two (2) 13 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 staff scheduled per shift. Twenty (20) bed maximum capacity. Privacy fence along the southeast property boarder to provide ample privacy for potential clients and neighbors. Considering use of community advisory board to meet quarterly at a community location to gather and disseminate information and handle any related issues. That is your correct understanding of where we stand? Mr. Gerrard replied, Correct. Councilmember Jo M. Broden followed up, How will you file with the State of Indiana, per this property? What filing applications will you file with the State of Indiana on this property? I want specifics. Ms. Brown replied, We defer to our Legal Counsel to answer that question. Eric Bondack, 212 East LaSalle Avenue, South Bend, IN, replied, I am Counsel for the proposed purchaser. There are no State certifications required for a sober living facility. So, there are now State licenses at that level that are required here. Unlike a treatment center, where there would be. But, not for a sober living facility. Councilmember Jo M. Broden then asked, For clarity, unlike a treatment center, actually is the standard and the operating license of the facility down the way? Mr. Bondack replied, That is correct. Councilmember Jo M. Broden stated, So,this is separate and distinct, no certification and no State licensing. However, is there not a regulatory report that must be filed with regard to what you are trying to do at this facility? I'll ask it specifically. Is it considered a supervised group living facility or not? Mr. Bondack clarified, Is there a particular code you are referring to, such as the Indiana Administrative Code? Councilmember Jo M. Broden followed up, This is within the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration, Supervised Group Living Facility or sub-Acute. It is a State form, Form 48160. Mr. Bondack clarified, For sub-Acute? Councilmember Jo M. Broden replied, No, that's or sub-Acute stabilization facility. So, I'm just trying to get what you are trying to do here and what documentation you will file with the State of Indiana with regard to this property. Mr. Bondack replied, My understanding is that there won't be any licensing or reporting to the State of Indiana with respect to the operation of this facility. That is my understanding. Mr. Gerrard replied, That is my understanding, also. Councilmember Jo M. Broden stated, So, second (2nd) question. Under what Fire and Life-Safety standards will you request the State of Indiana to review this and our local Fire Health Safety Inspection? What will be required and what will you be operating under for this facility? Mr. Bondack replied, My understanding is that an architect has been consulted with respect to the layout and that has been informed by the Fire Code and any other applicable regulations. I cannot tell you, specifically, I don't know. If you have a specific regulation in mind, I don't have the answer to that question. Councilmember Jo M. Broden stated, That is the confusion I have right now in terms of what will be required to meet health and safety standards. I am not certain what you are applying for and its distinction. It doesn't fall under a group home, right? Mr. Bondack replied, Well, it's a group of residents. It's not a group home. Councilmember Jo M. Broden replied, I get that. But, it is a group residence and I would like to know the specific Fire and Life Safety Standards that the architect or whoever they consulted with, is reliant on. What actual codes are they reliant on? Mr. Bondack replied, Well, it would be any codes that are applicable to any properties. The use being requested today and before Council,with respect to how many fire alarms or exit doors that 14 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 are required by the Code, that would be a separate consideration but those are things that, obviously,they would have to comply with in order to operate the facility.That would be a separate arm. The Fire Marshal would enforce those. We will be developing the property consistent with all of those applicable laws and regulations. Councilmember Jo M. Broden followed up, Related to that,then,the applicable law and regulation is seventy (70) square feet, per the information you shared, per person for sleeping and habitable space, is that your understanding? Mr. Bondack replied, Yes. Councilmember Jo M. Broden asked, So, that is the current requirement. Mr. Bondack replied, Yeah, the information, I think, was seventy (70) which would allow up to twenty-five (25) in that space but they made a commitment to limit it to twenty(20). Councilmember Jo M. Broden asked, How do you get to the calculation of twenty-five (25)? This does get to occupancy for health and safety reasons, that is why I am going down this line of questioning. How do you get to twenty-five (25)? Mr. Bondack replied,The architect would have to answer that question.That is not a legal question for me to calculate. Mr. Gerrard replied, I did talk to the architect. He took the total square footage of the building, with the information we received from the Fire Marshal here in South Bend, seventy (70) square feet, per person, per head, with the building, came out to twenty-five (25). We reduced that down to twenty(20) and that will be the maximum. Councilmember Jo M.Broden stated,My understanding is that is not just simple math on the entire living space, if you would, or sleeping space, it is on a per-bedroom requirement. Mr. Gerrard replied,You are correct.You have two(2)different coves in the building. It is seventy (70) square feet, per head, per individual, in the sleeping space. Going through the divisional one (1) and divisional two (2) that this type of building and other comparable buildings fall under, in your area, they use one hundred and twenty (120) square feet per head. They use your entire building. They don't take out the common areas, hallways or anything. So, you do have two (2) different sets of standards here. Seventy (70) square feet for sleeping space, one hundred and twenty (120) square feet per the entire building. Both of those delivered twenty-five (25) people maximum. Once again, we backed it down to twenty(20)beds maximum. We know we are under both of those sets of codes we have. Councilmember Jo M. Broden stated, I would contend you are still overstating what you can do in this space in terms of its safe, livability and over-night standards. When you look at the per-room square footage,ok? I'm not talking about the whole. Your occupancy level appears to exceed what the livable overnight space would allow, per person. Mr. Bondack replied, The commitment is for no more than twenty (20). Through the permitting process,the Fire Marshal, if there are any limitations to not allow for twenty(20) occupants,those regulations and laws would kick in and be enforced. Councilmember Jo M. Broden stated, Here is the difficulty I have with the commitment as you've written it. At twenty (20), in some ways, if the Council approves that, there is almost a stamp of approval thinking this is a habitable working situation. So, I guess what I would like to do is rather than you saying you were at twenty-five (25) when you first (1St) started this, came before us and said twenty (20), and now you are firmly at twenty (20), I really think that we should be in agreement on, whatever that per-person space is allowed under Fire and Life-Safety Standards in the State of Indiana. If it is seventy (70) square feet per-person, I would rather be specific about defined habitable overnight sleeping space. The reason I think this is really important to get at is because it has implications for how we review and look at any other space within the State of Indiana. I mean, within our City. So, if you have a bedroom that is measured to be one hundred and thirty-five (135) square feet, that really is not room for two (2) people, it's really only room for one(1)person. I see that consistent within this is just the need to be very specific,not referring to an occupancy high or something that has been moved down in response to public process,but I 15 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 think we have to be very aware of what the Fire Safety Code is. You previously stated it at seventy (70) square feet per-person. I guess I would like to hold you to that, in those terms, instead of your occupancy numbers. I think if we were to really do the math on that, and you provided a plan, but your occupancy would be drastically different than what you have put in your commitment. I would rather focus on what the standards are, and you meeting those standards and not talk about how you configure this or that room. Mr. Bondack replied, I think it has been the intention all along, obviously, to comply with all regulations and rules that apply to this property. So, from the very beginning,there were questions about the number of occupants. Since early on, that has been an issue. So, it was an effort by the petitioners to provide the Council with information. We consulted with the architect and the architect provided that drawing which we provided to the Council. Just trying to provide information based on that concern. All along, the intention is to comply with the law and any requirements. Councilmember Jo M. Broden stated, Thank you for your clarification and I guess I want to state, what you submitted to Council is not binding.That is why I really want to get to,basically,striking away your occupancy commitment in terms of a number and actually get at what is required within the State of Indiana, relative to Fire and Life Safety Standards. So, that is one (1) change in your commitments that I think is needed. So, that is one (1) question and thank you for going through that process because all decisions that we make, while they are to this property, when it's a rezoning,it also has other impact on other decisions that come before us, alright? So,while it may be a little bit burdensome, I think it is important. Councilmember John Voorde excused himself briefly from the meeting at 8:32 p.m. Council President Tim Scott assumed temporary Chairmanship. Councilmember Jo M. Broden continued, So, with accreditation, licensing and accreditation can be one (1) in the same, correct? This does not have any licensing or accreditation requirements, but I heard in our previous meeting that there was an interest in,after a year's operation,you would apply to meet certain standards. Could you clarify what that is. Mr. Bondack replied, Sure,but I think there is a difference between licensing by the State and then accreditation. There is accreditation. Councilmember Jo M. Broden stated, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to lump those together. I do know licensing is on the front end and accreditation is,you know, after,up and running and it's basically a scorecard. Mr. Adolf replied, The accreditation standard we've spoken about in the past and that Choices Recover currently has is CARF Accreditation. That stands for Center of Accreditation for Rehab Facilities. That is something that, like I said, Choices Recovery currently has and would look at adding to this facility once we've been in operation for at least one(1) year. You can't even apply for that until you've been in operation for a least one (1) year. Councilmember Jo M. Broden asked, Is that an appropriate accreditation standard to aim for, though, given the difference in this facility and in what you are trying to do? Mr. Adolf replied, They look at the facilities differently and your facility would be accredited on multiple different levels. For instance, Choices Recovery, currently, it is accredited for detox, residential treatment, PHP treatment, IOP treatment and there are a lot of different steps that go into that accreditation process. It is not just one (1)broad accreditation that covers everything. Councilmember Jo M. Broden followed up, So, with regard to your accreditation that you are hoping to get a year out from this, where would it follow? Is it basically an out-patient level? Mr. Adolf replied,No,there are no services being provided there. To be licensed as an out-patient, you have to actually provide services there. We would look for accreditation for sober living. Councilmember Jo M. Broden stated,Ok. So,this particular property is not a detox,not residential, it is not partial hospitalization, nor is it an intensive out-patient program? 16 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 Mr. Adolf replied, These clients would be attending intensive out-patient classes at Choices Recovery. This building would just be their living space. Councilmember Jo M. Broden asked, So, is it an after-care program? Ms.Brown replied,Yes,it would be very similar to an after-care program,but they would be living and residing there. To break this down for you, in layman's terms, it would be getting an endorsement. The accreditation through CARF tells us we are doing the right thing. It is an endorsement that we are about the right thing. It is having 2,000 questions come at us that we don't necessarily have to answer but we want to, because we want to show we are doing the right thing. It is an endorsement. That is what we want to have. Councilmember Jo M. Broden stated, This is, to me, a satellite, in some regards, right? You are at a main hub and you enumerated what you are serving down the road. This is a satellite of that. Zoning is forever. So, well, forever until someone comes in and does what you are doing. But, to my question, if your main location fails, goes under, and doesn't meet accreditation, what can be or will be fulfilled in terms of services to the community at this stand-alone location? Mr. Gerrard replied, So, the question is if our main operation Choices Recovery, fails, what happens to this building? Well, at that point in time, if I had no clients to put into that building, I would probably have to put the building up for sale. That is the only answer I can give you. Councilmember John Voorde returned to the meeting at 8:38 p.m. He reassumed Chairmanship. Councilmember Sharon L. McBride stated, First (1St) of all, I would like to thank all of you for coming before Council and you have answered whatever we've asked. I'm sorry for the delay but you went back to the community and got additional information. With me, actually building a work-release facility myself, one(1), it is not accredited, nor does it have to be. We fall under the DoC standards. However, I could become accredited,but we fall under the auspice and operate as though we were so. We are evidence-based and perform at the highest level. So, falling under the DoC umbrella, I understand the license to occupy. There is a difference.There is also a difference, I'm in the middle of five(5)lawsuits.Whether they be true or not,it happens.You can sue someone every day and I remember the information we got, I recall there were complaints from 2011 and 2008,prior to your four(4) years. I'm just trying to answer some questions I'm remembering that were thrown out there. Secondly, I would hope that had you known you were asked about square footage and occupancy numbers,beforehand, you could have provided that. Not being an architect or Fire Marshal yourself, that is a hard number to come up with without knowing in advance. I would have tried to be a liaison for you to do so. I know at the last meeting we did have, although we are not talking about your current location, it is reflected in the minutes that the Council did ask for you to make commitments at your current location, as well. I want it to be reflected on the record that was asked of you. I appreciate you providing that information as well. It is a hard number for you to give out when you are not aware of it. What I can say, in my profession, and going to the third (3`d) district and talking to them, they are in support of this and I am in support of this. We have an opioid crisis right now and it is very relevant to what we are doing. Looking at the criteria, in my interpretation, I am in support of the fact that it falls under the auspice of what I am tasked to look at. I appreciate you and I will be in support. Councilmember Regina Williams-Preston stated, Somebody made comments at the last presentation about looking for other sites. Who can speak on that? Mr. Adolf replied, I have our realtor with us. She is from Cressy Everett Realty. I know at the last meeting I talked about her and I having looked for multiple months, three (3) or four (4) months and,thinking back on it,it goes back prior to a year ago. We tried to make a deal go through on an apartment complex here in South Bend over a year ago. So, we've been looking for quite some time. It has been very difficult to find a building that fits our needs and is in our price range. As you can imagine, we are looking for mainly occupancy bedroom space. We don't need a garage, we don't need a full kitchen, and most of those things don't come with a normal property. And the things that don't have those things are,usually, very large apartment complexes that are out of our budget. So, we've been looking for quite some time. Councilmember Oliver Davis stated, While my colleague did reference the fact that some of the legal matters happened in 2011, I think the difference between her location which is out not near 17 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 any neighbors,is different when you are a private facility coming into a neighborhood. So, I would like that to happen and if you're speaking of that, when neighbors and other people send issues to us regarding what happened with TIA Corporation in 2011 and those kind of issues from that standpoint because neighbors take the time to do their homework on you all, too. So, I think it's only fair, I think if someone is moving next to you and there are some legal references, they can literally go to their cellphones and find it, I think it's appropriate that you at least speak to that from that standpoint. This is public record. When they look at the case Narconon Freedom Center, with that, and they list a lot of different things regarding this gentleman and the care that was not given to him as alleged in the plaintiff here and how he was not supervised.You are aware of these kinds of things. How do we respond to neighbors' concerns when they send those to us? What is your response? Mr. Gerrard replied, Can I answer the first(1St)question,Narconon Freedom Center?TIA Holding Corporation is a real estate holding corporation. It is a landlord. It owns the Choices Property on 3606 East Jefferson. TIA leased that building to the Narconon Freedom Center. It had nothing to do with the TIA Corporation. We are the landlord of that particular property. We didn't own the business or operate the business. We were the landlord of it. To go to the second (2"d) question, what am I willing to do here in the neighborhood? We went to every neighborhood group and business group, City Council, we've invited everyone we can into our Center, personally, for a tour and to answer questions. It is no different than this forum we are having here. Make no mistake, we understand the sensitive nature of this. We understand the immediate community around us. We want to make this work. The only way we can, Councilmember Davis, is to bring these people in and find out their concerns. What are the fears and how do I solve that particular problem? I believe we've given it everything we can to accommodate our immediate neighbors. Councilmember Oliver Davis interjected,And so,therefore,in terms of these kind of legal matters, you and your attorneys have responded? Mr. Gerrard replied, Yes, to each and every one of them. There is nothing current at this present time. Councilmember Oliver Davis replied, Ok, I understand. I would like to say, we have to ask all these questions, so with all due respect, to say that you don't have to answer these kinds of questions, you do have to answer these kinds of questions. You made a comment when my colleague was speaking, you don't have to answer all these thousands of questions, so, it was a little disconcerting when you said that. Ms. Brown replied, Sir, I'm sorry, I don't remember stating anything like that and I'm sorry. I do believe these questions are necessary, I just don't think I can personally answer all of them. Councilmember Oliver Davis stated,That's fine. I appreciate that apology. Alright,thank you. Councilmember Jo M. Broden asked, Is there a doctor on this site? I just want clarification from the last meeting. Mr. Adolf replied, No, there will not be a doctor on site there. Councilmember John Voorde then opened the floor to comments from Council Members. Councilmember Regina Williams-Preston stated, This was really interesting deliberation for me. It reminded me of, and I think others possibly, another very highly contested and emotional issue previously. So,there is a lot I have to think about. I think it's really important in these times, as an elected official, to be consistent. I think that is extremely important and that we do our due diligence to think about consistency with the laws. So, thinking about that previous decision, a lot of things seem similar here but there is one(1)important difference. That is why I asked about the issue of other locations. In the previous situation, there was a request for rezoning and one (1) of my real questions was if we have to rezone this particular site.Are there any sites close that already have the zoning they needed? In that particular case there were quite a number of other spaces, very near, to where that particular site was requesting. So, based on that it was, to me, based on zoning, although like I said, that particular issue was also highly emotional. There were moral issues around it and people of long-standing disagreement about a moral issue. But, this decision isn't about a moral issue. It's about zoning. So, for me, the impassioned testimony we got in our 18 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 previous meeting was very impactful and insightful. I learned a lot on both sides. I was moved on both sides. But, again, my decision tonight is really based on the zoning issue, again, and I just feel that while I do agree with the need, as Councilmember White has talked about, we have to live up to our values. If we are seeking solutions to different things like the opioid crisis, we have an opportunity here to open up a facility to at least address it in some manner. I do agree with that. I also understand the concerns from neighbors. We have to take that into consideration because these are the people we are ultimately elected to represent. In this case, what I heard, there are a lot of neighbors for and against this. Again, the decision must be based on zoning. I think one (1) of the really significant things for me, and I'll wrap up because I don't need to platform this, is that it seems as if the petitioners have sought other places and they could not find anything to meet their needs. This is an appropriate use for this site and, therefore, I will be voting in favor of the petitioner's request. Councilmember Sharon L. McBride stated, As I stated before, looking at the five (5) criteria, it meets my definition of a group residence permitted as a special exception. That is defined as a residential facility providing any combination of food, shelter, personal care, social services, counseling services or transportation to residents or residential facility providing common living areas such as kitchen, living, dining room or recreational room. Group residence would include halfway house, work-release houses, or other similar forms of residential facilities for individuals which do not qualify as a family or any other form of residential facility expressly provided for, in this ordinance. That is what I stand to support. Councilmember Jo M. Broden stated, So, looking at the criteria with regard to a rezoning, and specifically related to the comprehensive plan, there are a couple concepts here that I think are important. One (1) is the concept in our existing code, and, relative to adjacent uses, we put in goals of buffering and transitions relative to these uses. We also have some concepts with regard to clustering uses. In this case, I think there is an existing cluster in this square block. It continues down Jefferson and in this particular situation, the current rezoning is Office Buffer. I think the maintenance and the integrity of that district within our Code, separate and distinct from Office, high intense Office use, separate and distinct from Residential use, is a district worth maintaining. It plays an important role in our line-up of uses. This is similar to arguments that I have made before. That gets to the whole concept of compatibility with regard to uses. Also, within our comprehensive plan are the thoughts, and this was actually in the petition and even in the evaluation by the Area Plan Commission on this, having housing and residential options within the district to meet the needs and services. I think there is also sufficient documentation in our comprehensive plan that would suggest sufficient choices in availability. Specifically, a duty to promote healthy and a diversified economy, both at the neighborhood level and the City level. There are distinct benefits that come from that. It fosters competition,it provides opportunities for employment and entrepreneurship, and it also gives us a broader area, a footprint if you would, where existing businesses can be retained and new ones can be recruited. So, the fact that it is an Office Buffer District, and I guess I want to move to the current conditions and character and use in each district, in the application, the petitioners stressed that it is Multi-Family and Residential adjacent uses. That is specifically within the petition. Councilmember Jo M. Broden continued, Not indicated in this whole petition process is that the property adjacent to this, to the west, is an Office Buffer property. In fact, I believe the petitioner even implied that was a residential property. Nonetheless, the zoning is the zoning. What we are being asked to consider is, basically, establishing a use when to the west and the east are Office Buffer properties. I'm very concerned about spot zoning. I know you're asking us for this, but I think the established use, well, there are actually a couple established uses. One (1) is that corner of that block, the corner to the east in that block is Office Buffer, and then the corner adjacent to the railroad track is Office Buffer. That is actually replicated in the next block as you go further east. So, I think there are some established patterns here in terms of Office Buffer and I think they are serving some important functions. It is essentially getting to those concepts in our comprehensive plan in buffering adjacent uses.Then,I think,the reliability of a business that wants to come in and make an investment,or has made an investment,to be able to make good and sound business decisions, you want to be reliant on the property to your left and right at a bare minimum and its current zoning. There are plenty of established uses as Office Buffer. There is also established residential in a variety of residential uses that could fulfill the petitioner's needs in the 19 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 district. I do think moving away from some of these concepts in our comprehensive plan and basically obliterating the Office Buffer District and our reliance on that, it goes down a slope that I don't want to go down. Councilmember Jo M. Broden went on, In terms of most desirable use and the conservation of property values, I know we are to look at the best use for the City and the community as a whole. My opinion on this is, you're asking for a big change here, that we allow residential to be injected into established Office Buffer or small business use area. I guess, within our overall Code,there is a reason that by right,if as petitioners you wanted to do this in a Single-Family area, you wouldn't even have to come before this Council. There is a reason why it's excluded from Office Buffer in our current Code. Outright an office and a special exception in OB, which you as petitioners are here to do. You would have, by right, the ability to locate this in a Single-Family One (1) or a Single-Family Two (2) District. With regard to the proposed use, I do feel it would be injurious to public health, safety and comfort. I'm basing this on the occupancy questions and your responses relative to those. I think the occupancy rule is exceeded per the sleeping space that is in our health and safety codes within the State of Indiana. In terms of adverse effect, I do believe this Council has heard information relative to property values. I'm not talking about perceived, I'm talking about actual. Councilmember Jo M. Broden continued, I'm moving more toward this point of my comments because when we move from the rezoning, we are looking at our decision's impact City-wide. When we look at the special exception, we really take a finer look and really have to look at the adjacent properties. I would say that this Council sufficiently heard information relative to the difficulty of making investments, acquiring loans and the challenge,historically,that this area has encountered. I guess we've also heard the difficulty of attracting employees. I guess my point on this property value is, when you make a business decision in the City of South Bend, to acquire a property, improve the property, my inclination is, again, you buy that property with a certain understanding of what is to your left, your right and maybe behind you. I think, for the various reasons I've indicated,is that if we were to approve this rezoning,it in some ways turns on its head some of the neighbors and neighborhoods and what we know works for our business community. That is not to say I don't appreciate the services or the quality of services as a petitioner. But that, I have to set that aside because that really has no bearing on my decision because, again, zoning is permanent. Councilmember Jo M. Broden went on, My last point is the rezoning would be best retained as a Central Business District and I would not concur favorably with regard to the special exception. Additionally, for the reasons related to occupancy, I think you have overstepped that per-person square footage and I think that does get to safety and health issues that we, as a Council, should be primarily and fundamentally charged with overseeing, especially if there is a lack of regulatory or accreditation services with regard to this type of facility in State Law. Councilmember Jake Teshka stated, As we've heard tonight,this is a zoning issue. Nothing more, nothing less. However, since it was brought up, I would like to just say thank you to Ms. Brown, Mr. Adolf and Mr. Gerrard for being in this business. You're helping addicts and helping people overcome this scourge.A dear loved one(1)of mine,and like so many of ours,need these services. Dozens of detoxes and treatment centers, and at the time,my loved one(1)had no real sober living facility to take them to. Had we, I think he may have found his relationship with sobriety a bit sooner than he did. Also, thank you for going through this process. As Councilmember Broden pointed to during our previous resolution, in the past there has been some disparity about people who go through the process and people who just set up shop and do what they want. I can tell you, right now, in this community there are non-profit organizations setting up shops in our neighborhoods, doing what they want, and they aren't inspected. They are not zoned. They are not staffed. They are not in any way accredited and they are not coming before this body to get any type of approval. It is my understanding that these facilities would be a special exception under the Single-Family District. I have not heard an argument against this that has held up in my mind. The traffic argument was debunked when Mr. Adolf affirmed that these residents would not have vehicles. The idea this corporation has had lawsuits, this realty corporation, well, I've never been involved with an organization or a corporation that has not been sued. I sit on the Board of TRANSPO, I have a business background, everybody gets sued. It happens. If you are out there 20 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 and are doing business, you get sued. The fact this is a for-profit, we are somehow supposed to look less-favorably on it? My doctor giving me radiation for my cancer is making a profit at the end of the day. If he is saving my life, I'm ok with it. The fact that this is an alien or foreign corporation from Michigan? Battle Creek is closer to us than Indianapolis. It makes no sense.They use a local realtor, a local lawyer, they are a part of our community. Councilmember Jake Teshka continued, So, let's be honest,the argument here is the fact we don't want addicts living in this particular building,right? As a Council Member, that is something I'm supposed to be prohibited from viewing. So, when I look at that map, there are three (3) parcels designated Office Buffer in a sea of Multi-Family. When I made a phone call to the planning team last week I asked them, tell me about this Office Buffer. What is the particular reason? The planning team told me there is no particular reason why this group of parcels are zoned OB. OB is really just used as a less-intense office use that tends to keep the facade of residential place, such as a chiropractor's office or a consulting business. Other special exceptions might be a video store or a hobby shop, a music store,those types of things. So, looking just at that tells me we can move this zoning to Multi-Family. In reality,this property was likely a residential property to begin with. In my mind, then we come to the special exception and is where the rubber meets the road here. Again, unless you're looking at the argument of not wanting these types of residents living here, I don't think we can turn this down. I'm in favor of this. Again, thank you for going through the process, being in our community and providing this desperately needed service. Councilmember Oliver Davis stated, In terms of the idea that our zoning staff would say there is no reason why Office Buffer is in place, to have that as a reason, kind of goes against the whole zoning process. If that is no reason, then why do we have zoning? There has to be some reason that was there. I'm sorry that the people who talked to Councilmember Teshka were not able to give him a better understanding of that because to just change things and say there is no reason for it,then they should have come in front of this Council to make that decision. I hope those kinds of decisions will be cleared up as we continue to work on our zoning process. There are reasons why we have our zoning. When they are changed, they have to be changed. Whatever the reasons, we have to look at the conditions like we have up here (referencing a displayed document outlining the five(5) criteria for consideration of a rezone) and what the most desirable use is. I really think the idea of having an Area Plan Commission for South Bend, I hope one (1) of the key things added to that will be the concept of our economic development and helping to find locations that are within the zone. For me to sit up here and say there was not another place available for this in the whole City, it would be shocking to me. If we don't have enough places for this, we have to look at that and look at areas across our City to make sure we don't have to have special exceptions for problems like this every time a program like this comes up. There is something wrong with that if that is the case. So, you now, we need to look at a variety of issues to see that. All these issues here, the most desirable use and everything else, are at risk, in my opinion, if we don't take care of this. So, I will not be supporting this tonight. Councilmember John Voorde stated, Focusing on zoning criteria, after extensive discussions with other Council Members, I tend to agree with Councilmembers Broden and Davis and will not support the petition. Councilmember Karen White stated,Zoning, as I have stated,historically,has really been the most difficult decisions and discussions we've had since I've been on this Council. Looking at what is before us, the decision must be based on land-use consideration and not the characteristics of the potential residents. Again, as we begin to look at the rezoning, the special exceptions, we are looking at if this is the most desirable use of the land before us. No one, I believe, is saying that the services that would be provided are not wanted or that they should not be in our community because that would be a misstatement. The question before us is if this is the most desirable use. As we look at the standards before us, we have now eight(8) present members of the Council and their interpretation of that may vary. As you hear now, you are hearing Council Members state why they are in support or in opposition of this rezoning and special exception. Again, we are looking at the standards given before us. But, I think it is very clear,hopefully,that I don't believe there is a Council Member who is saying that we believe the services you provided are not needed or not wanted. I would like to thank the petitioners for the work you've done and responding to all of the questions and also the passion you have in terms of the work you are doing. I think it's 21 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 unfortunate that another site could not be identified. I also heard it wasn't just about finding a reasonable site but also the cost factor. So, as we move forward, I think that we, as a Council, as we continue to look at zoning and special exceptions, we need to have a different level of conversation to look at all these areas. We may not agree,but hopefully it's not on a personal level. At this time, I will not be supporting the petitioner's request. Councilmember Sharon L. McBride requested Clerk Fowler clarify, for the record, the written commitments. City Clerk Kareemah Fowler stated,Just to clarify,there were two(2)sets of written commitments. The second(2nd) set of written commitments was for Choices and Choices is the primarylocation. So, that is the primary location and a lot of the people that came to the last Council meeting were concerned about the Choices and the current activities going back and forth. That is why there were two (2) sets of written commitments because Council Members asked questions about them. The group of individuals from Walnut Grove and then some of my neighbors, their parents live at Walnut Grove.The separate meeting Alicia had was where the two(2)sets of written commitments came from. They met several times. We met this past Friday. One(1)set of commitments were for Choices and the other set were for the site in question. Alicia and her team met with all of my neighbors and the individuals at Walnut Grove. I think some of this confusion comes from when we ran out of time at the last Committee Meeting. Councilmember Tim Scott stated, I'm going to be consistent with my special exceptions as I have in the past, especially one (1) large one (1) we had last year. I do want to say that I appreciate the petitioners coming forth. If this does not go forward, I suggest you work with DCI as well. Sometimes working with our department of Community Investment can make these things go a lot smoother up front. At times, a lot of expectations are put out before understanding the full process and how things are handled with Council. So, I encourage you to do that if this doesn't go forward. At this point, it is not against anything you are doing. We commend everything that is being done. As I've said, in other special exceptions, if this does not pass, please work with DCI to look at other options. That is crucial because if you continue to work, getting over that hurdle will happen, I'm sure. Councilmember Regina Williams-Preston made a motion to send Bill No. 69-18 to the full Council with a favorable recommendation.Councilmember Jake Teshka seconded this motion which failed by a roll call vote of three(3) ayes and five(5)nays (Councilmember Jo M. Broden, Oliver Davis, John Voorde, Karen White, Tim Scott). Councilmember John Voorde then made a motion to send Bill No. 69-18 to the full Council with an unfavorable recommendation. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded this motion which carried by a roll call voice of five(5)ayes and three(3)nays(Councilmember Jake Teshka,Regina Williams-Preston, Sharon L. McBride). RISE AND REPORT Councilmember Oliver Davis made a motion to rise and report to full Council. Councilmember Regina Williams-Preston seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight(8) ayes. REGULAR MEETING RECONVENED Be it remembered that the Common Council of the City of South Bend reconvened in the Council Chambers on the fourth floor of the County-City building at 9:20 p.m. Council President Tim Scott presided with eight (8)members present. BILLS —THIRD READING BILL NO. 69-18 THIRD READING ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND 22 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 SEEKING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2610 EAST JEFFERSON BOULEVARD, COUNCILMANIC DISTRICT NO. 3 IN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA (COUNCIL PORTION ONLY-HAD PUBLIC HEARING ON 2-25-2019) Councilmember John Voorde made a motion to defeat Bill No. 69-18. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded this motion which carried with a roll call vote of five (5) ayes and three (3) nays (Councilmember Jake Teshka, Regina Williams-Preston, Sharon L. McBride). BILLS ON FIRST READING BILL NO. 07-19 FIRST READING ON AN ORDINANCE OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, FOR BUDGET TRANSFERS FOR VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA FOR THE YEAR 2019 Councilmember Jo M. Broden made a motion to send Bill No. 07-19 to the Personnel and Finance Committee for their March 25th, 2019 meeting for Second Reading and Public Hearing. Councilmember John Voorde seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight(8) ayes. 08-19 FIRST READING ON AN ORDINANCE OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, APPROPRIATING ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR CERTAIN DEPARTMENTAL AND CITY SERVICES OPERATIONS IN 2019 OF $25,000 FROM GENERAL FUND (#101), $3,469 FROM STUDEBAKER-OLIVER REVITALIZATION GRANT FUND (#209), $672,857 FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STATE GRANT (#210), $2,300,000 FROM DCI FEDERAL GRANT FUND (#212), $200,000 FROM LIABILITY INSURANCE PREMIUM RESERVE FUND (#226), $160,000 FROM LOCAL ROAD & STREET(#251), $85,580 FROM IT/INNOVATION/311 CALL CENTER (#279), $24,945 FROM INDIANA RIVER RESCUE (#291), $2,518 FROM COVELESKI BOND DEBT SERVICE RESERVE(#317), $251,475 FROM COUNTY OPTION INCOME TAX(#404), $32,500 FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCOME TAX (#408), $670,001 FROM MAJOR MOVES CONSTRUCTION (#412), $5,117,411 FROM 2018 TIF PARKS BOND CAPITAL (#452), $500,000 FROM 2017 PARKS BOND CAPITAL (#471), AND $415,500 FROM 2015 PARKS BOND CAPITAL (#751). Councilmember John Voorde made a motion to send Bill No. 08-19 to the Personnel and Finance Committee for their March 25th, 2019 meeting for Second Reading and Public Hearing. Councilmember Jake Teshka seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight(8) ayes. 23 REGULAR MEETING March 11, 2019 09-19 FIRST READING ON AN ORDINANCE OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, APPROPRIATING ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR CERTAIN DEPARTMENTAL AND ENTERPRISE OPERATIONS IN 2019 OF $200,000 FROM CONSOLIDATED BUILDING FUND (#600), $1,715,669 FROM WATER WORKS DEBT SERVICE (#625), AND ($600,000) FROM STORM SEWER FUND (#667). Councilmember John Voorde made a motion to send Bill No. 09-19 to the Personnel and Finance Committee and Utilities Committee for their March 25th, 2019 meetings for Second Reading and Public Hearing. Councilmember Jake Teshka seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes. UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business. NEW BUSINESS Council President Tim Scott announced that tomorrow, Tuesday March 12th is the Mayor's State of the City Address at the Morris Performing Arts Center at 6:00 p.m. Councilmember Tim Scott stated, The Near Northwest Neighborhood Association is going through their Master Plan. It is incredible engagement from the citizens,per usual from the NNN. There is a lot of input into what they want. If you have a change, swing by. PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR Samuel Brown, 222 East Navarre Street, South Bend, IN, stated, I come to you tonight, Mr. Scott, I would like for you to draft a letter to the South Bend School Board to try and partner up with the South Bend community. We are requesting to change meetings. You are set by law. It used to be on a different night, so everyone can make the meetings. They need your input to save our schools. Simple as that. They can't do it by themselves. You could give them a lot of knowledge. I went downstate but you veterans would make a difference. I would appreciate it if you did that, Mr. Scott. I want to make sure their nights aren't the same nights as Council. Thank you. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, President Tim Scott adjourned the meeting at 9:27 p.m. 24