Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-11-88 Committee of the Whole alD nndttu Nowt A • COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Wu tilt Mommun tdotuuil if Opt Whig of IMO link The meeting of the Committee of the Whole was called to order by Chairman Councilman Thomas Zakrzewski at 4:05 pm, January 11, 1988 in the Council informal meeting room. • Persons in attendance included Councilmen and Councilwomen: Luecke, Niezgodski, Coleman, Soderberg, Puzzello, , Slavinskas, Zakrzewski, Duda, and Voorde; Katherine Humphreys, William Dunfee, Mike Danch, Dave Behr, Jim Wensits, Dick Maginot, Joann Harper, Irene Gammon, Jerry Ujdak, Kevin Burke, Doug Carpenter, and Kathleen Cekanski- Farrand. Councilman Zakrzewski noted that the purpose of the meeting was to review all bills set for public hearing, namely, bill nos. 100-87, 101-87, 114-87, 110-87 and 131-87. Councilman Zakrzewski noted that the first item to review was bill no. 100-87 which would annex certain land located at Centre township into the city of South Bend. Michael Danch of SLD Partnership made a request _to withdraw the bill on behalf of the petitioner. This bill would have annexed into the city approximately 11.4 acres in Centre township. Councilman Zakrzewski noted that because of the unique nature that all bills were sent to the Committee of the Whole since the regular committee structure was not in- place, that there would not be formal votes or recommendations made this afternoon. Councilman Zakrzewski then noted that the next item on the agenda was to review bill no. 101-87 which is a rezoning ordinance for property located at the southwest corner of Miami Road and Jackson Road. Michael Danch of SLD Partnership noted that there was an amended bill heard before the Area Plan Commission at its meeting of December 15, 1987. Originally the bill was for 22 acres and now the substitute bill is for less than one acre on the southwest corner of Miami and Jackson Roads. It was noted that the overall purpose for the rezoning was so that a banking establishment can be built at the location. The amended bill was filed with the City Clerk on November 25, 1987 and was properly advertised before the Area Plan meeting of December 15. Jerry Ujdak of 5240 Miami Road and Chairman of the South Miami Neighborhood Association then read a letter in opposition to the proposed rezoning into the record (copy .w.. .0... • .V.".wIMC CO attached) . He noted that there are currently 11 banks in the area south of Ewing Avenue. He also noted that approximately 1100 homes are located south of Jackson Road. He stated that this shows the strong residential character of the area in question. Councilman Slavinskas, the district's councilman, noted that he has received overwhelming opposition to the proposed rezoning. He recommended that there be development but it not be commercial in nature. Councilwoman Duda stated that she had received several telephone calls and letters against the proposed rezoning. She stated that she had attended meetings of residents, one of which had over 200 people in attendance which again showed the strong opposition to the commercial rezoning proposal. She stated that the area should be developed but it should be single family or condominiums. William Dunfee stated that with the advent of the traffic light and the multi-lane highway it is not believed that the proposed area would be appropriate for single family home. He believes that the proposed commercial development would be in tune with the area. The Committee then reviewed bill no. 114-87 which would amend the zoning for the property located at 115-119 East Navarre Street. David Behr of the Holladay Corporation with offices at 100 East Wayne presented the bill on behalf of the petitioner. He noted that at the Area Plan meeting of December 15, 1987 that the original bill did receive an unfavorable recommendation and that there were three residents who remonstrated against the proposed rezoning. He presented to the Council, a substitute bill no. 114-87 which would change the proposed "height and area" designation from "F" to "E" . This change would be a downgrade with "F" height and area allowing a seven story building and the proposed amendment of "E" height and area to allow a three story building. He further noted that he had talked to two of the three remonstrators who agreed with the proposed "E" height and area designation. Mr. Behr also circulated a proposed preliminary site plan which showed a development of the office structure. Councilman Luecke had several questions regarding the proposed rezoning. The Council Attorney noted that if the Council desired at the Common Council meeting this evening to accept the substitute bill that this will be a formal amendment to the original rezoning. Typically amendments are proposed and advertised prior to the Area Plan public hearing. Since the amendment is being proposed directly to the City Council, 3 the City Council could take final action this evening by accepting the substitute bill downgrading the height and area to an "E" designation and by attaching the preliminary site plan as an exhibit to the substitute bill. That documentation would then be sent to the staff of the Area Plan Commission so that they would be apprised of the final action taken by the Common Council. Councilman Zakrzewski noted that bill no. 110-87 which is a rezoning ordinance for the property located at the intersection of Portage and Cleveland Road would be fo rmally continued at the Council's meeting this evening since notice was given to the residents in the area that the public hearing would not go forward. The bill was initiated by the Area Plan Commission since it was dealing with annexed property into the city of South Bend. The Committee then reviewed bill no. 131-87 which would created a new section 2-124 entitled "Retiring Police Officers and Service Revolvers. " Councilman Zakrzewski, the sponsor of the bill, then briefly reviewed the overall purpose and background of it. He noted that he had been in contact with Chief Hurley as well as various police officers who were in favor of the proposed bill. He requested the Council Attorney last fall to do the research for the bill and to draft it. Councilman Zakrzewski noted that several communities have had a similar bill in effect. Those communities included: Mishawaka since 1971, Elkhart since 1980, Seymour since 1984, Evansville, Fort Wayne, Berrien County, Allen County, the Indiana State Police, as well as the Park Department of the State of Indiana. He noted that Fort Wayne requires that a retiring officer pay $1 for a receipt of his or her service revolver. The Council Attorney noted that once the city would declare through the proper board that the service revolver is no longer useful and obsolete to the city and upon transfer of ownership to the retiring officer, that there would be no liability on the part of the city thereafter for said service revolver. She also noted that if a question of whether the officer is in fact retiring in good standing, that this would not be a role for the Common Council but instead the proper board involving the Board of Public Safety and or the Police Pension Board. Councilman Niezgodski stated that currently the South Bend Police Department is using a Smith & Wesson 38 Magnum model 66 stainless steel with a 2 and 1/2" barrel and an adjustable sight. A new issue was made in 1982 of all service revolvers. He noted that typically if a service revolver is maintained in good condition it will last at least twenty years. He further noted that the South Bend Police Department requires at least "six shoots" per year. He also noted that in talking with members of the Fire • 4 Department that he did not find opposition from that Department. Councilman Coleman voiced concern regarding the book value of the service revolver and the possibility that their life was almost unlimited if maintained in good condition. He voiced philosophical concerns regarding the bill and stated that perhaps it should be a department policy. he saw it as an item which might impact negotiations and would impact the budgetary procedure. He also voiced strong concern of whether the should be getting into the "handgun giveaway business. " He did note that fire fighters receive a pewter mug badge and key to the City upon their retirement. Councilman Soderberg raised issue with the value of the service revolver both to the City and also to the officer. He favored doing something as a City regarding the dedicated service given by a police officer perhaps by paying better wages and benefits and questioned whether the bill was the proper approach. In response to the above questions, it was noted that the police department has eight additional handguns for service at all times and that 54 officers could retire in 1988. Between six and ten officers retire on a yearly basis from the police deparment. Councilman Neizgodski noted that upon a police officer retiring in good standing, he or she may apply for a lifetime license to carry a handgun. Councilman Slavinskas noted that the bill posed a "double- edged sword. " He, like Councilman Soderberg, stated that officers should be rewarded for their service to the City, however, he received negative feedback from constituents on the bill. He suggested that a nominal amount of money should be considered for the officer to purchase the weapon upon retiring in good standing. Councilwoman Duda questioned the ammunition for the service revolver is special. She was informed that it is not. She also noted that in a poll she took the overwhelming response opposed the proposal. She questioned what other City retirees would want if this was established for the Police Department. She suggested that an officer could purchase it for its appraised value upon retirement. Councilwoman Puzzello stated that the situation is unique and that bill is good for police morale and is a good measure to show the respect of the City for officers who have placed their life on the line for twenty or more years. Councilman Zakrzewski stated that if a figure of approximately $2,000 would be the cost on an annual basis, 5 that it would be nominal in comparison to the goodwill effect it would have on the entire department. Following further discussion, Councilman Coleman made a motion seconded by Councilman Slavinskas that the meeting be adjourned. The motion passed. The meeting was adjourned at 5:25pm. Respectfully submitted, Thomas Zakrzewski Chairman Committee of the Whole