Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-26-02 Council Meeting MinutesREGULAR MEETING AUGUST 26. 2002 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, August 26, 2002, at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was called to order by Council President Roland Kelly and the Invocation and Pledge to the Flag were given. ROLL CALL Present: Charlotte Pfeifer 2' District Roland Kelly 3rd District Karl King 4t' District David Varner 5th District Sean Coleman At -Large Al `Buddy" Kirsits At -Large Karen L. White At -Large Absent: James Aranowski 1St District Andrew Ujdak 6th District President Chairperson, Committee of the Whole Vice - President REPORT FROM THE SUB- COMMITTEE ON MINUTES To the Common Council of the City of South Bend: The sub - committee has inspected the minutes of the August 12, 2002 meeting of the Council and found them to be correct. Therefore, we recommend the same be approved. s/Roland Kelly s/David Varner Councilmember Coleman made a motion that the minutes of the August -12, 2002 meeting of the Council be accepted and placed on file. Councilmember White seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes. SPECIAL BUSINESS RESOLUTION NO. 3113 -02 A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA ADOPTING A WRITTEN FISCAL PLAN AND ESTABLISHING A POLICY FOR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES TO AN ANNEXATION AREA IN GERMAN TOWNSHIP (THE VILLAS AT LAKE BLACKTHORN ANNEXATION AREA A/K/A VACANT LAND ADJACENT TO THE NORTH AND EAST SIDE OF 24545 BRICK ROAD, ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF THE 31 BYPASS RAMP FROMITO THE CLEVELAND/BRICK ROAD EXIT) WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, an Ordinance and a petition by the sole (100 %) property owner which proposes the annexation of real estate located in German Township, St. Joseph County, Indiana, which is described more particularly in Section I of this Resolution, and; WHEREAS, the territory proposed to be annexed encompasses approximately 38.08 acres of vacant land which is at least 12.5% contiguous to the current City limits, i.e., approximately 41.6% contiguous to the current City limits, which property is located north of Brick Road and east of Orange Road in St. Joseph County, Indiana. This annexation area is intended to be used as a residential subdivision development. Accordingly, the annexation territory will require a basic level REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 26. 2002 of municipal public services, of a non - capital improvement nature, including police and fire protection, street and road maintenance, street sweeping, flushing, snow removal, and sewage collection, as well as services of a capital improvement nature, including street and road construction, street lighting, a storm water system, a sanitary sewer system, and a water distribution system; and WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, now desires to establish and adopt a fiscal plan and establish a definite policy showing: (1) the cost estimates of services of a non - capital nature, including street and road maintenance, police and fire protection, and other non - capital services normally provided within the corporate boundaries, and services of a capital improvement nature, including street and road construction, street lighting, a sanitary sewer extension, a water distribution system, and a storm water system to be furnished to the territory to be annexed; (2) the method (s) of financing those services; (3) the plan for the organization and extension of those services; (4) that services of a non - capital nature will be provided to the annexed area within one (1) year after the effective date of the annexation, and that they will be provided in a manner in standard and scope to similar non - capital services provided to areas within the corporate boundaries of the City of South Bend, regardless of similar topography, patterns of land use, or population density; (5) that the services of a capital improvement nature will be provided to the annexed area within four (4) years after the effective date of the annexation in the same manner as the services are provided to areas within the corporate boundaries of the City of South Bend, regardless of similar topography, patterns of land use, or population density, and in a manner consistent with federal, state and local laws; and (6) the plan for hiring the employees of other governmental entities whose jobs will be eliminated by the proposed annexation; and WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works of the City of South Bend, and the Board of Public Safety of the City of South Bend, have each approved a written fiscal plan and established a policy for the provision of services to the territory proposed to be annexed, which plan and policy the Common Council finds to be appropriate and in the best interest of the City, and, which it desires to adopt; and WHEREAS, this Annexation Area was initially and preliminarily named the Westwood Annexation Area which is how it was identified in Resolutions by the Board of Works and Board of Safety, but has been renamed The Villas at Lake Blackthorn, so that all references to the Westwood Annexation Area shall be deemed to relate to The Villas at Lake Blackthorn Annexation Area. Moreover, when the Petition for Annexation was filed with this Council the annexation area was identified as "vacant land adjacent to the north and east side of 24545 Brick Road, along the west side of the 31 bypass ramp from/to the Cleveland/Brick Road exit." The foregoing description shall be deemed to be the equivalent of the Villas at Lake Blackthorn. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AS FOLLOWS: Section I. It is in the best interest of the City of South Bend and the area proposed to be annexed that the real property located in German Township, St. Joseph County, Indiana, described more particularly as follows, be annexed to the City of South Bend: A part of the Northwest, Southwest, and Southeast Quarters of Section 18, Township 38 North, Range 2 East, German Township, St. Joseph County, Indiana being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast corner of the Southeast Quarter of Section 18, Township 38 North, Range 2 East, 5.8 feet south of a 2" iron monument with a cap labeled "SEC. CORNER "; thence South 89 degrees 49 minutes 49 seconds West, a distance of 2278.97 feet to the east line of the west 160 acres of the south half of said Section 18; thence along said east line, South 0 degrees 45 minutes 39 seconds West, a distance of 80.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing along said east line South 0 degrees 45 minutes 39 seconds West to the northeast corner of land REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 26. 2002 described in Instrument Number 101065, as recorded in the office of said Recorder; thence South 35 degrees 15 minutes 20 seconds West, a distance of 401.95 feet; thence South 2 degrees 36 minutes 09 seconds West, a distance of 256.87 feet; thence South 85 degrees 31 minutes 45 seconds West, a distance of 199.30 feet to the southeast corner of land described in Instrument Number 8717366, as recorded in the office of said Recorder; thence along the east line of said land, North 0 degrees 15 minutes 44 seconds East, a distance of 181.22 feet; thence along the north line of said land, North 89 degrees 48 minutes 51 seconds West, a distance of 323.58 feet; thence North 0 degrees 03 minutes 20 seconds West, a distance of 5 00. 00 feet; thence North 89 degrees 57 minutes 04 seconds West, a distance of 2.00 feet; thence North 0 degrees 03 minutes 20 seconds West, a distance of 100.00 feet; thence South 89 degrees 57 minutes 04 seconds East, a distance of 2.00 feet; thence North 0 degrees 03 minutes 20 seconds West, a distance of 500.00 feet; thence North 89 degrees 57 minutes 04 seconds West, a distance of 2.00 feet; thence North 0 degrees 03 minutes 20 seconds West, a distance of 100.00 feet; thence South 89 degrees 57 minutes 04 seconds East, a distance of 2.00 feet; thence North 0 degrees 03 minutes 20 seconds West, a distance of 800.00 feet to the southwest corner of Lot "A" as depicted in the replat of Righter's Orange Road Minor Subdivision, described in Instrument Number 8525803, as recorded in the office of said Recorder; thence along the south line of said Lot "A ", North 89 degrees 50 minutes 13 seconds East, a distance of 100.00 feet; thence along the east line of said Lot "A ", North 0 degrees 03 minutes 20 seconds West, a distance of 292.71 feet to the point of curvature of a non - tangent curve, being the northerly right -of -way of Orange Road, concave to the North, having a radius of 295.00 feet, a central angle of 22 degrees 31 minutes 44 seconds, and a chord of 115.25 feet bearing North 64 degrees 12 minutes 33 seconds East; thence East along said northerly right -of -way curve, a distance of 115.99 feet; thence South 0 degrees 11 minutes 04 seconds East, a distance of 119.25 feet to the southwest corner of Lot 1 of Bogue's Major Subdivision, described in Instrument Number 8932797, as recorded in the office of said Recorder and the northwest corner of land described in Instrument Number 9331954, as recorded in the office of said Recorder; thence along the boundary of said land the next two (2) courses; (1) South 26 degrees 45 minutes 04 seconds East, a distance of 66.96 feet; (2) thence North 89 degrees 49 minutes 49 seconds East, a distance of 556.25 feet to east line of the west 160 acres of the south half of said Section 18 and the POINT OF BEGINNING. Section II. It shall be and hereby is now declared and established that it is the policy of the City of South Bend, to furnish services to said territory of a non - capital nature, such as police and fire protection, street and road maintenance, street sweeping, flushing, and snow removal, within one (1) year of the effective date of the annexation, in a manner equivalent in standard and scope to the services furnished by the City to other areas of the City regardless of similar topography, patterns of land use, or population density; and to furnish to said territory services of a capital improvement nature, including street and road construction, street lighting, a sanitary sewer extension, a water distribution system, and a storm water system, within four (4) years of the effective date of the annexation in the same manner as those services are provided to areas within the corporate boundaries of the City of South Bend regardless of similar topography, patterns of land use, or population density, and in a manner consistent with federal, state and local laws, procedures, and planning criteria. Section III. The Common Council for the City of South Bend shall and does hereby now establish and adopt the Fiscal Plan described in Exhibit "A ", attached hereto and made apart hereof, for the furnishing of said services to the territory to be annexed, which Fiscal Plan provides among other things, that the City of South Bend will extend at its expense a sewer main line along the north boundary of the proposed development to Orange Road, to be paid from the Tax Incremental Finance Account (TIF) and not from the City's sewer fund, and that all or most other capital improvements required to service the annexation area will be planned, provided, and paid for by the developer subject to compliance with state and local law. REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 26. 2002 Section IV. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its date of adoption by the Common Council and approval by the Mayor. s /Roland Kelly Member, South Bend Common Council Councilmember White reported that the Zoning & Annexation Committee conducted a committee meeting and Public Hearing on this bill and sends it to the full Council with a favorable recommendation. Mr. Larry Magliozzi, Assistant Director, Planning & Neighborhood Development, Community & Economic Development, 121 Floor, County -City Building, South Bend, Indiana, made the presentation for this Resolution. Mr. Magliozzi advised that this Fiscal Plan is in regards to the voluntary annexation of thirty -eight (38) acres of land west of the bypass and north of Brick Road for a single family villa type residential development known as The Villas at Lake Blackthorn. Fire Station #11 will provide full fire coverage and Police Beat #22 will be expanded to incorporate this area into their police beat. The City will be assisting with the extension of a sewer line which will not only service this particular development but will also service additional acreage to the north and south of this development. Mr. Magliozzi noted that the developer is responsible for the balance of all public utilities within the development including streets, sidewalks, curbs and street lights. He noted that none of the City departments that were contacted indicated that there will be any additional monies needed for extra manpower or equipment. In conclusion, Mr. Magliozzi advised that this annexation meets all the requirements of state law for annexation of contiguous property. A Public Hearing was held on the Resolution at this time. There being no one present wishing to speak to the Council either in favor of or in opposition to this Resolution, Councilmember Coleman made a motion to adopt this Resolution. Councilmember King seconded the motion which carried and the Resolution was adopted by a roll call vote of seven (7) ayes. RESOLVE INTO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE At 7:06 p.m. Councilmember Coleman made a motion to resolve into the Committee of the Whole. Councilmember Varner seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes. Chairman King presiding. BILL NO. 57 -02 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, ANNEXING TO AND BRINGING WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, CERTAIN LAND IN GERMAN TOWNSHIP CONTIGUOUS THEREWITH; VACANT LAND ADJACENT TO THE NORTH AND EAST SIDE OF 24545 BRICK ROAD, ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF THE 31 BYPASS RAMP FROM /TO THE CLEVELAND/BRICK ROAD EXIT Councilmember Coleman made a motion to accept the second substitute version of this bill. Councilmember Varner seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes. Councilmember White reported that the Zoning & Annexation Committee conducted a committee meeting and held a Public Hearing on this bill and sends it to the Council with a favorable recommendation. REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 26. 2002 Mr. Steve Cooreman, Cooreman Real Estate Group, Inc., 24545 Brick Road, South Bend, Indiana, made the presentation for this bill. Mr. Cooreman informed the Council that Cooreman Real Estate Group is the developer of The _ Villas at Lake Blackthorn located at Brick Road and the 31 Bypass and is seeking voluntary annexation and extension of City water and sewer. He noted that in addition to the thirty -eight (38) acres being requested for annexation they are in the process of purchasing the contiguous nineteen (19) acres currently owned by the Redevelopment Commission. By putting these two (2) parcels together the Villas will then comprise more than one hundred six (106) high end villas ranging in price from one hundred seventy thousand ($170,000.00) dollars up to three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000.00). This project when fully built will generate more than one -half million dollars of real estate taxes. Some of the features of the development include a nine (9) acre stocked lake in the middle of the project, a large common area, a large gazebo, a deck overlooking the lake which will have a fountain in the middle. Mr. Cooreman stated that it is their belief that this is going to be one of the nicest villa communities built in the City of South Bend. He noted that they will also be seeking residential tax abatement to offer all the homeowners. 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 was no one present wishing to speak to the Council either in favor of or in opposition to this bill. Councilmember Coleman thanked Mr. Cooreman for his commitment to develop this property within the City limits and also thanked the staff of the Economic Development Department who have worked with Mr. Cooreman in this process. Therefore, Councilmember Coleman made a motion that second substitute Bill No. 57 -02 go to the full Council with a favorable recommendation with Third Reading to be held on September 9, 2002. Councilmember Varner seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes. BILL NO. 40 -02 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL TO VACATE THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY: THE FIRST EAST /WEST ALLEY SOUTH OF MISHAWAKA AVENUE FROM 21ST STREET WEST TO THE FIRST NORTH /SOUTH ALLEY; AND THE FIRST NORTH/SOUTH ALLEY WEST OF 21ST STREET FROM THE FIRST EAST /WEST ALLEY SOUTH OF MISHAWAKA AVENUE Councilmember White made a motion to hear the substitute version of this bill. Councilmember Varner seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes. Councilmember Varner reported that the Public Works and Property Vacation Committee conducted a Committee Hearing on this bill, as substituted, and sends it to the Council with a favorable recommendation. Mr. James A. Masters, Nemeth, Feeney & Masters, Suite 600, 215 South St. Joseph Street, South Bend, Indiana, representing the Petitioner, the St. Joseph County Public Library, made the presentation for this bill. Mr. Masters informed the Council that in late 2000 the St. Joseph County Public Library acquired property located south and west of the library. The west lot will be used for future expansion of the building and the south lot ( #45) will be used for parking. He noted that the library is asking to have the alley that runs just north of that lot vacated as well as the north/south alley that is immediately adjacent to the lot on the west for the width of the lot. The reason for this request is because of their concern for library patrons who walk through the parking lot to get to their cars and they do not want through traffic going down the alley. REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 26. 2002 Mr. Masters noted that the situation is compounded by the fact that in 1987 Dr. Proudfit, who has his eye doctor's office to the west of the library, had his portion of the alley vacated but the alley was never closed off. The pavement and the access from 20th Street is still there. The situation is made even more difficult because the parking garage for IUSB is located immediately to the west of Dr. Proudfit's office with the entrance ramp to that parking garage almost directly across from this alley and while traffic is backed up at the stop light at 20th Street, people cut through the alley. Mr. Masters informed the Council that this project was delayed several times in order to resolve some issues with Dr. Proudfit. His attorney, Mr. Ken Cotter, is present this evening to speak to some of these issues and to confirm how they intend to handle the situation. Dr. Proudfit will close off the alley behind his property and will pave his parking lot which is already bounded by a fence so when you enter his parking lot there is no access to the alley behind the library. The library intends to close off the alley, if vacated, and expand their parking lot. It will be closed off so that people coming north in the north/south alley cannot enter upon the library's property and people who are going west along the alley cannot cut through to get behind Dr. Proudfit's property. The entire alley will finally be closed off. Mr. Masters stated that the City Engineer is concerned about continued access to the north/south alley. To resolve this concern, Dr. Proudfit has agreed to give a public easement along the alley which runs to the south of his parking lot which was also vacated some years ago but not closed off. He will dedicate a public easement along the south boundary of his parking lot so that City trash trucks and anyone else who needs to get to the north/south alley can access it that way. In addition, if it becomes necessary, he will also dedicate another seven (7) feet on the south part of that parking lot to give enough width for trash trucks to get through. Mr. Masters advised that when the library purchased the lot to the west of the library building which is between Dr. Proudfit's office and the library they also received an easement that runs through his parking lot. This was apparently something that was given to the owner of that property years ago when Dr. Proudfit came before this Council for the alley vacation. There is an Access Easement that the library now owns which runs through his parking lot. The library is agreeing to vacate that Easement through a Quit Claim Deed. By giving up this Easement, Dr. Proudfit is going to give the City the Easement along the south boundary of his parking lot which gives the access the City Engineer wants and that should resolve all of the issues. Mr. Masters reiterated that the main concern is the safety hazard for both library patrons and for Dr. Proudfit's patients or employees that use his parking lot. In summary, the whole alley will be closed off, Dr. Proudfit's lot will be paved and the library lot will be paved. Once Lot #45 is paved for a parking lot, they will also landscape the south boundary and completely shield off that property from the house that is to the south. He noted that they understand that if the Council approves this vacation tonight there is a two (2) week window between publication before it would take effect and during that two (2) week period of time they will prepare and record the documents that are required to effectuate the Easements that have to be done by both parties in order to conclude this transaction. This being the time heretofore set for the Public Hearing on the above bill, proponents and opponents were given an opportunity to be heard. Mr. Ken Cotter, Tuesley and Hall, 212 East LaSalle Avenue, South Bend, Indiana, advised that he represents Dr. Proudfit and that everything that Mr. Masters has told the Council is correct in that Dr. Proudfit is willing to give the City an Easement for trash pick up. He noted that they have discussed this matter with at least one (1) of the neighbors whose trash may be affected and they are willing to move their trash can from the back to the farthest southern portion of their lot so it should not have an effect on trash pick up. He noted that they do not believe that is going to have any undue effect on any of the neighbors and they will, if this vacation is passed, along with Mr. Masters, prepare the appropriate Easements for the City. There was no one else present wishing to speak to the Council in favor of this bill and there was no one present wishing to speak against this bill. Therefore, Councilmember Coleman made a motion that substitute Bill No. 40 -02 be sent favorably 1 1 1 REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 26. 2002 to full the Council. Councilmember Varner seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes. BILL NO. 60 -02 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA APPROPRIATING $25,000 WITHIN THE COUNTY OPTION INCOME TAX FUND (FUND 404) FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR PROGRAM WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND Councilmember Varner reported that the Personnel & Finance Committee had a Public Hearing and committee meeting on this bill and sends it to the Council with a favorable recommendation. Ms. Pam Meyer, Director, Division of Community Development, 224 West Jefferson Boulevard, South Bend, Indiana, made the presentation for this bill. Ms. Meyer informed the Council that this bill will appropriate twenty -five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) of County Option Income Tax funds for use in the commercial corridor programs specifically the Lincolnway West Corridor. These funds were the result of land sales on the corridor and have been reallocated back into that fund for Lincolnway. Ms. Meyer noted that the request is to use these funds for special police patrols on Lincolnway. 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 being no one present wishing to speak to the Council either in favor of or in opposition to this bill, Councilmember Coleman made a motion for favorable recommendation to full Council concerning this bill. Councilmember Kelly seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes. BILL NO. 42 -02 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AMENDING CHAPTER 13, BY THE INCLUSION OF NEW ARTICLE 1, ENTITLED GANG LOITERING REGULATIONS AND DELETING SECTIONS 13 -55 AND 13 -56 OF THE SOUTH BEND MUNICIPAL CODE Councilmember Coleman made a motion to hear the substitute version of this bill. Councilmember Kelly seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes. Councilmember Pfeifer reported that the Residential Neighborhood Committee and the Health and Public Safety Committee sends this bill to the Council with a favorable recommendation. Councilmember Charlotte Pfeifer, 2nd District, made the presentation for this bill. Councilmember Pfeifer indicated that this is the third of a series of quality of life ordinances which she cosponsored with Councilmember King and is a bill that was initiated by neighbors. About three (3) years ago in the far west side, which is commonly called "the Lake," and on the near west side specifically near the corner of Linden and Johnson Street several eighty (80) year old women approached her and complained about behavior they observed. Sometimes several, or four (4) or five (5) young men would stand in front of their homes and often use bad language and block the sidewalk when someone tried to walk by. They were unable to be out in front of their homes to water their grass or sit on their porches. Sometimes when they came outside these young people might even turn and say nasty and insulting things causing them to go back inside of their homes. The other behavior they sometimes observed was that cars would drive by and they would slow down and the young people would go up to the cars and sometimes an exchange would happen. REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 26. 2002 These older, decent, working class women who worked their whole lives just wanted to have some peace and quiet and they asked her what she was going to do about it. Councilmember Pfeifer advised that the first thing she did about it was talk to neighborhood groups and the South Bend Police Department and ask what could be done. She was informed that there was not anything that could be done because this behavior was taking place on the public sidewalk and without probable cause a police officer was unable to go up to these people who were standing there even if they were engaged in this kind of behavior. She contacted Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski - Farrand, Councilmembers and Police Departments in the area and they decided to have a series of workshops. Two (2) workshops were held at IUSB and were cosponsored by the Criminal Justice Department. Speakers were brought in from Seattle, Washington as well as various Police Departments. A year later another workshop was held and this time it was based on a gang ordinance that had been prepared by the Chicago Police Department. At that time, there were a couple of different municipalities dealing with this kind of behavior. The City of Philadelphia had this type of problem but it was mostly with their homeless. However, Chicago was dealing with issues of gang and criminal behavior which is the kind of behavior that was going on in South Bend. The City of Chicago passed an ordinance which was challenged and taken to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court found it unconstitutional and sent it back to be refined and to be made more behavior specific. There were definite concerns about racial profiling and making sure that people were not stopped and harassed unnecessarily because of their race, sex or ethnic orientation. The Chicago Police Department refined their ordinance with the blueprint that the Supreme Court Justices gave them. South Bend was very interested in the Chicago ordinance and a third loitering conference was held in the evening at the downtown public library. Under the leadership of the Council Attorney an ordinance was put together which was taken to the public for input through nine (9) small group neighborhood workshops. The workshops were held in River Park, Rum Village, the west side, the near west side, at LANA, two (2) at the NNN, at the Boys and Girls Club and at the Charles Black Recreation Center. Councilmember Pfeifer noted that she and Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski Farrand were present at those meetings to address any kinds of issues that anyone might have and they learned some very good things and heard concerns by neighbors. They made the ordinance better. Councilmember Pfeifer reminded members of the Council that she has been before them a couple of times on this issue. The last time a couple of neighbors came forward with additional concerns and at that time she recommended that the vote on this ordinance be tabled in order for continued revisions. Councilmember Pfeifer advised that a delegation from South Bend visited Chicago and met with the individuals there who have been working with this type of ordinance for years and again revisions were made. Some of the public concerns raised earlier were that the ordinance should be City wide and it is City wide. Questions were raised about how hot spots would be designated. She noted that hot spots will be designated through input from neighbors and Councilmembers. The Chief of Police would then simply accept all of the evidence and would accept the area as a hot spot. Councilmember Pfeifer noted that the Chief of Police does not designate hot spots but will receive input from the neighbors, Councilmembers and through calls to service which come from the neighbors. She noted that occasionally, due to increased behavior, there could be some emergency hot spots designated. Councilmember Pfeifer emphasized that the police officers being able to stop and approach a citizen is going to be behavior driven and behavior specific and is behavior that is gang or criminal behavior which is defined by the Indiana state law. A couple young people standing on the corner is not gang behavior and it is not criminal behavior and no officer has any right to approach any person who is engaged in that kind of nonviolent non- criminal, non -gang behavior. If this ordinance is passed tonight, it will not be effective until January of 2003. Councilmember Pfeifer indicated that there will be additional extensive training involving Councilmembers, the Chief of Police, the Mayor and administration. When the Council feels good about it, it will then go to the next level with the Police Department and all the way down to make sure that everyone is clear and on board. Councilmember Pfeifer noted that she has a letter from Police Chief Larry Bennett supporting this ordinance and pointed out that there are a lot of misconceptions about this ordinance and they want to make sure that everyone is clear. She noted REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 26. 2002 that neighbors will also be included in this training to make sure that they are respectful of citizens and to make sure that people understand their rights. Councilmember Pfeifer thanked the City of Chicago and their Police Department and Prosecutor's office. She thanked the people who assisted with the conferences, as well as the South Bend Police Department, the Mayor's office, the City administration and Councilmembers for their assistance and input. She thanked the neighborhood associations and partnership centers and the citizens for being so patient. In conclusion, Councilmember Pfeifer reiterated that this ordinance was initiated by older citizens who expect the Council to do their duty. It was not her creation or the Mayor's creation, it was citizens wanting to enjoy their senior years. Councilmember Pfeifer asked the Council to pass this ordinance. She noted that Councilmember Aranowski, who is out of town this evening, assured her that he would vote in favor of this bill if he were present. Councilmember Pfeifer read Police Chief Bennett's letter into the record as follows: August 26, 2002 Attention: Council Woman, Charlotte Pfeifer Councilman Karl King Honorable Council Members, I am sending this letter in support of Substitute Bill No. 42 -02, Gang Loitering. Myself, along with five other Commanders recently accompanied Council Person Charlotte Pfeifer to Chicago, Illinois to discuss their loitering ordinance. Although the Chicago Ordinance is much stronger with the ability to arrest a violator, our Ordinance will still be of value. The ordinance would become another discretionary tool for an officer to use in dealing with the problems within his /her respective area of assignment. There is some concern by the membership of the department in reference to its enforcement. The department will have the responsibility of training and implementing the proper administrative paperwork flow in order to enforce the ordinance. There are many misconceptions by some of the officers simply because they are not familiar with the total ordinance and how it can be enforced. For the officers who are familiar with their assigned areas and know who the problem people are within their assigned areas, the ordinance gives them an additional tool to help stop certain illegal activities. Sincerely, s /Larry E. Bennett Chief of Police Councilmember Pfeifer noted that this ordinance was never meant to be a silver bullet. It was never meant to be an end all do all. It is another ordinance to help citizens reclaim the streets and continue to fight to make sure that there is quality of life in the City of South Bend. This being the time heretofore set for the Public Hearing on the above bill, proponents and opponents were given an opportunity to be heard. Ms. Lucille Spaulding, President, LaSalle Area Neighborhood Association, no address given, noted that she was present the last time this ordinance was up for Public Hearing and advised that the neighborhood still supports this ordinance. She informed the Council that people should feel safe driving through their neighborhoods and they should feel safe getting in or out of their vehicles to go to or from their residence or while shopping in the neighborhoods. Citizens don't need gangs or drug dealers hanging around or standing or blocking traffic in the neighborhoods. They don't need to be intimidated by verbal language or body language. Gang and drug dealers do not have a place REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 26. 2002 in our neighborhoods. Ms. Spaulding told the Council this ordinance is needed so their neighborhoods have something to fight with. Mr. William Sagendorf, residing on the southeast side of South Bend on Indiana Avenue, indicated that he was curious about this ordinance in that he lives across from Honeymoon Park at the corner of Lebanon and Indiana Avenue. He informed the Council that every spring and summer the park is taken over by gangs with members in the 25 -35 year old age range. He noted that there are anywhere from fifty (50) to two hundred (200) people at a time in that park. They sit along the side of his property drinking beer and throwing their trash on his property. He noted that he sees drug dealing going on in every one of their cars and there is nothing that he has been able to do about it. Mr. Sagendorf stated that he would like to see this ordinance passed because it is a shame that a person cannot come out of their own house. He further noted that these individuals have threatened to burn down his house. In conclusion, Mr. Sagendorf informed the Council that he would appreciate their passing this bill tonight. Mr. Charles Leone, City Attorney, 1400 County -City Building, South Bend, Indiana, informed the Council that the Legal Department has worked with the Council Attorney in designing and revising the language of this bill and he believes that the language makes it more effective now in its substitute fashion. There are a number of provisions in the bill which have been criticized for being not sufficiently strong but he believes that this ordinance needs to be considered as a tool along with many other tools available to the Police Department and neighborhoods in order to effectively enforce the laws in the City. The Legal Department is committed to working with the Police Department on training. He noted that there is a window between now and the effective date of the ordinance and somewhat thereafter because he does not expect this type of behavior in the middle of the winter but they will work together to develop techniques to make sure that the ordinance is enforced appropriately. There was no one else present wishing to speak in favor of this ordinance. The following individuals spoke in opposition to this bill. Ms. Rita Kopala, Lakeville, Indiana, no address given, advised that she is an elderly woman who has worked hard all of her life and owns a one hundred fifty (150) acre farm. Ms. Kopala recounted for the Council her two (2) incidents of being arrested. She advised that she is telling the Council her story because the police of South Bend also picketed the same places she did but did not get arrested. This makes her very angry for someone who has not broken the law. Ms. Kopala stated that she would like to give her opinion of this bill. If a person has done nothing wrong in 1999 and 2001 and was arrested anyway and now has a record she believes the Council should pay attention. She noted that she has talked to many people and she has rights and if the Council thinks that there is anything that is not going to happen to people like her in the future if it happened without this law it can happen again. She stated that too much power to the police force is not good. Mr. John Swanson, 1321 West Washington Street, South Bend, Indiana, informed the Council that he is in favor of law and order but at the same time, being a man of color, he realizes the effect of loitering laws dating back to the Jim Crow era and the type of people that are usually a target. He asked the Council to be careful with the way they handle this ordinance. He stated that he knows that there is a problem but suggested that the City should have a basketball center that was open city wide where individuals had a choice of going to the gym. He stated that people see guys together and they look like gangs and thugs and they are going to act like that because they are trying to impress their peers but they need a place to go. With everyone playing basketball now and with the push of basketball on television there is a lure of it being appealing. If these individuals had an alternative he would be all for it but right now with a good conscience he knows what is going to happen. Mr. Jim Cierzniak, 1156 East Victoria Street, South Bend, Indiana, noted that the phrase quality of life reminds him of feel good legislation and he is skeptical of the fact that this ordinance has supposedly emerged from a handful of eighty (80) year -old women who are complaining about this type of behavior in their neighborhoods. He believes that if they had those concerns and called the police they would probably get some action. Mr. Cierzniak also stated that he is sympathetic to a REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 26. 2002 previous speaker who told of his problems with the park by his house. He asked Councilmember Pfeifer to explain in detail how this ordinance will help that particular problem which is a very real problem. In regards to training, since everyone is going to be trained, are the thugs going to get lessons on deportment or behavior or are just the law- abiding people going to get those lessons. Mr. Cierzniak stated that he does not believe this ordinance will make any difference in the long run. Any elderly person who thinks that this somehow is going to make their life better is just not thinking clearly and he doesn't believe those elderly people think that way at all about this ordinance. There was no one else present wishing to speak in opposition to this bill. In rebuttal, Councilmember Pfeifer advised that the concern valid for her to address is to remind people that this ordinance will address very specific behavior which is gang behavior and criminal behavior that is defined by the Indiana state law. She reiterated that citizens came to her and asked her to do something about the problem and the idea of this loitering law came from several police officers and it is because of that that this ordinance was drafted. She noted that she never said and never will say that this ordinance is going to be a silver bullet and it is not going to take care of all the ills. Councilmember Pfeifer stated that she feels that as a Councilmember she has a certain moral obligation. When she ran for office her pledge to the people who voted for her was that if they had issues going on in their neighborhoods and if there was something that she could do about it that she would. This is the best ordinance that all of the legal minds and the Council could come up with. It is a first step in dealing with inappropriate gang and criminal behavior that is going on in our community. There is no constitutional right to loiter, there is no constitutional right to stand on the sidewalk and use foul language, there is no constitutional right to deal drugs, there is no constitutional right to intimidate a person who wants to come outside and sit by their house and that is what this ordinance addresses. She noted that she is just as concerned about men of color as anyone else and is also concerned about police officers who put their lives on the line to keep citizens safe. Councilmember Pfeifer stated that she has every belief that police officers care about this community just like the Council does and she asked them to please vote for this ordinance. Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski - Farrand noted that she would like to address some issues raised by Mrs. Kopala and Mr. Cierzniak. With regard to Mrs. Kopala's specific example regarding her arrest, a City ordinance was not involved because the City Council is prohibited from having any criminal sanctions with regard to that behavior so it had to be an alleged state law violation of trespass. The only section, in addition to the gang or narcotics related loitering that is addressed in this ordinance, is loitering that would obstruct a public way and is located in Section 13 -7 of the proposed ordinance. This ordinance clarifies what is currently on the books. No person shall loiter or remain in a public place for the purpose of obstructing by vehicular or pedestrian traffic which results in impeding the use of that public way. The conduct referred to by Mrs. Kopala is not covered by this proposed ordinance. In regards to Mr. Cierzniak's request of Councilwoman Pfeifer to give an example of what the police officers would do in the situation described by Mr. Sagendorf, Council Attorney Cekanski - Farrand directed Mr. Cierzniak to Section 13 -4 of the proposed ordinance which is entitled "Narcotics Related Loitering Prohibited" which specifically follows the U.S. Supreme Court guidelines with regard to how a police officer using sight and sound of what that officer is observing then having to inform all such persons that they are engaged in loitering in a targeted area and they would have to order those persons to disperse. Also, they would have to inform them that they would be subject to penalties and if they failed to abide by that order to leave that area that they could be subject to further penalties. She noted that as Councilwoman Pfeifer pointed out the City of Chicago had almost seventeen thousand (17,000) individuals that were moved on and not arrested. This ordinance is intended to take back those areas that are targeted with either gang or drug related loitering. Councilmember Coleman made a motion that substitute Bill No. 42 -02 go favorably to full Council. Councilmember Kelly seconded the motion. Councilmember White noted that she has raised some concerns about this particular ordinance and she would like to thank Councilmembers Pfeifer and King and the City Attorney. She noted that her concerns were that if the City is going to have this type of ordinance then it should be City wide and that is being addressed. She further noted that she is concerned about the enforcement of this REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 26. 2002 ordinance to insure that it is going to be consistently and fairly applied and she will be monitoring that. In regards to training, training can only go to a certain point and she doesn't think that anyone would debate the issue that there is a major challenge in our community and she sees this ordinance as one tool to begin to address that problem. Councilmember White noted that she does support the ordinance as it has been modified, but she still has some concerns and will be working with the City Council as well as the various levels of City government to insure that enforcement does occur and that it is consistently and fairly applied. Councilmember Varner noted that he is fortunate that he does not live in a neighborhood where this type of behavior is a problem. But the reports he gets regarding this type of behavior in numerous parts of the City are something that he believes very much and there are people reaching out and asking for help. Whatever the City may have used to this point may have worked to a degree but it apparently isn't enough. Councilmember Varner stated that if he lived in a neighborhood and had the problem of individuals congregating around his property, he would want the City to do everything possible to help. He noted that he doesn't know if this ordinance is going to work. A lot of good effort and good intention has gone into it and it is his fondest wish that it be the silver bullet. He noted that he doesn't believe that it will be, but it may help and if it doesn't do anything but keep these folks moving along so they cannot congregate in one particular area, than that in itself would be an accomplishment. So, despite the objections from some and recognizing the fact that he doesn't have to deal with this in his personal life, he stated that he is prepared to help those citizens that do deal with this on a daily basis and to that extent he is happy to support this bill and hopes that it has the desired effect and perhaps even more so. Councilmember Kelly indicated that as Councilmember Pfeifer pointed out this ordinance is certainly not a panacea and it is not going to be the end all of problems in the community but it does provide assistance to solve some problems the community has been facing for some time. He also noted that as Councilmember Varner pointed out there are pockets in the community where serious trouble occurs and if some can be prevented by moving people along he believes it will help and he will support the bill. The motion carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes. RISE AND REPORT Councilmember Coleman made motion to rise and report to the full Council. Councilmember White seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes. Loretta J d , City Jerk 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 8:00 p.m. Council President Roland Kelly presided with seven (7) members present. BILLS - THIRD READING ORDINANCE NO. 9345 -02 AN ORDINANCE TO VACATE THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY: THE FIRST EAST /WEST ALLEY SOUTH OF MISHAWAKA AVENUE FROM 21sT STREET WEST TO THE FIRST NORTH/SOUTH ALLEY; THE FIRST NORTH/SOUTH ALLEY WEST OF 21sT STREET FROM THE FIRST EAST /WEST ALLEY SOUTH OF MISHAWAKA AVENUE 1 1 1 REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 26. 2002 This bill had third reading. Councilmember Coleman made a motion to hear the substitute version of this bill as was in the Committee of the Whole. Councilmember Pfeifer seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes. Councilmember Coleman made a motion to pass this bill as substituted. Councilmember Pfeifer seconded the motion which carried. The bill passed by a roll call vote of seven (7) ayes. ORDINANCE NO. 9346 -02 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA APPROPRIATING $25,000 WITHIN THE COUNTY OPTION INCOME TAX FUND (FUND 404) FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR PROGRAM WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND This bill had third reading. Councilmember Coleman made a motion to pass this bill. Councilmember King seconded the motion which carried. The bill passed by a roll call vote of seven (7) ayes. ORDINANCE NO. 9347 -02 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AMENDING CHAPTER 13, BY THE INCLUSION OF NEW ARTICLE 1, ENTITLED GANG LOITERING REGULATIONS AND DELETING SECTIONS 13 -55 AND 13 -56 OF THE SOUTH BEND MUNICIPAL CODE This bill had third reading. Councilmember Coleman made a motion that the Council entertain the substitute verison of this bill as was heard in the Committee of the Whole. Councilmember King seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes. Councilmember Pfeifer made a motion to pass this bill as substituted. Councilmember King seconded the motion which carried by a roll call vote of seven (7) ayes. RESOLUTIONS There were no Resolutions to come before the Council at this time. BILLS - FIRST READING BILL NO. 63 -02 FIRST READING ON A BILL LEVYING TAXES AND FIXING THE RATE OF TAXATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF RAISING REVENUE TO MEET THE NECESSARY EXPENSES OF THE CIVIL CITY OF SOUTH BEND FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2003 This bill had first reading. Councilmember Coleman made a motion to refer this bill to the Personnel and Finance Committee and set it for Second Reading and Public Hearing on September 9, 2002 and Third Reading on September 23, 2002. Councilmember Pfeifer seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes. BILL NO. 64 -02 FIRST READING ON A BILL APPROPRIATING MONIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING THE EXPENSES OF SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS OF THE CIVIL CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2003, AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2003, INCLUDING ALL OUTSTANDING CLAIMS AND OBLIGATIONS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL TAKE EFFECT REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 26. 2002 This bill had first reading. Councilmember Pfeifer made a motion to refer this bill to the Personnel and Finance Committee and set it for Second Reading and Public Hearing on September 9, 2002 and Third Reading on September 23, 2002. Councilmember Coleman seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes. BILL NO. 65 -02 FIRST READING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND APPROPRIATING MONIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING THE EXPENSES OF THE DESIGNATED ENTERPRISE FUNDS OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2003 AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2003, INCLUDING ALL OUTSTANDING CLAIMS AND OBLIGATIONS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL TAKE EFFECT This bill had first reading. Councilmember Coleman made a motion to refer this bill to the Personnel and Finance Committee and set it for Second Reading and Public Hearing on September 9, 2002 and Third Reading on September 23, 2002. Councilmember King seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes. BILL NO. 66 -02 FIRST READING ON A BILL FIXING MAXIMUM SALARIES AND WAGES OF APPOINTED OFFICERS AND NON - BARGAINING EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 2003 This bill had first reading. Councilmember Coleman made a motion to refer this bill to the Personnel and Finance Committee and set it for Second Reading, Public Hearing and Third Reading on September 9, 2002. Councilmember Pfeifer seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes. BILL NO. 67 -02 FIRST READING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, FIXING THE MAXIMUM SALARIES AND WAGES OF TEAMSTER EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, FOR THE CALENDAR YEARS 2003, 2004, 2005, AND 2006 This bill had first reading. Councilmember Coleman made a motion to refer this bill to the Personnel and Finance Committee and set it for Second Reading, Public Hearing and Third Reading on September 9, 2002. Councilmember Varner seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes. BILL NO. 68 -02 FIRST READING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, SETTING THE ANNUAL SALARIES FOR THE MAYOR AND FOR THE CITY CLERK FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2003 This bill had first reading. Councilmember Pfeifer made a motion to refer this bill to the Personnel and Finance Committee and set it for Second Reading, Public Hearing and Third Reading on October 14, 2002. Councilmember Varner seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes. REGULAR MEETING UNFINISHED BUSINESS: AUGUST 26. 2002 REPORTS FROM AREA PLAN COMMISSION: It is noted that the Council is in receipt of recommendations from the Area Plan Commission of St. Joseph County, for the following ordinances based on their Public Hearing held on August 20,2002: BILL NO. 48 -02 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2004 E. EDISON ROAD, IN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA BILL NO. 49 -02 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AS AMENDED FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE 100 BLOCK OF WEST ANGELA BLVD. IN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA Councilmember Coleman made a motion to refer these bills to the Zoning and Annexation Committee and set them for Public Hearing and Third Reading on September 9, 2002. Councilmember Pfeifer seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business to come before the Council at this time. PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR COMMENTS REGARDING RESPONSE TO CONCERNS - RITA KOPALA Ms. Rita Kopala, no address given, noted that she spoke to the Council during the Public Hearing on Bill No. 42 -02, and no one mentioned the fact that the police did their picketing in the same place as she did and asked how anyone could ignore her concerns that completely. She advised that she has pictures and tape recordings and proof for what happened to her which was illegal yet she received no response from the Council. She noted that she grew up in this town and it makes her very ashamed of it. COMMENTS REGARDING MAYOR'S TRIP TO POLAND /COLLEGE FOOTBALL HALL OF FAME - JIM CIERZNIAK Mr. Jim Cierzniak, 1156 East Victoria Street, South Bend, Indiana, informed the Council that yesterday he read in the South Bend Tribune that the Mayor and a ten (10) person delegation will be visiting South Bend's Sister City in Poland. Mr. Cierzniak stated that he resents tax money being used for this type of trip and if individuals want to do this type of thing they should pay their own way. He noted that the article indicated that the Mayor paid for all the other people in the delegation and wondered if this was correct. In regards to the June report from the College Football Hall of Fame, he noted that this report was routed to the Mayor and only two (2) other Councilmembers. He asked why all the Councilmembers were not sent this report as they are responsible for the budget of the City. Mr. Cierzniak informed the Council that he had one question which he asked of Mr. Bernie Kish concerning this report but has not been able to get an answer. The report indicates that the admissions revenue for the first (6) six months was seventy -three thousand three hundred sixty -five dollars ($73,365.00). However, on the next page there is a summary of attendance and it indicates an attendance of twenty -six thousand plus (26,000 +) with revenues of eighty thousand two hundred seven dollars ($80,207.00) which is a difference of about seven thousand dollars ($7,000.00) or ten per cent (10 %). He asked which is correct. Mr. Cierzniak questioned how good Mr. Kish is at his job since he is not responding to questions of a simple nature. REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 26. 2002 COMMENTS REGARDING 24 -HOUR BASKETBALL FACILITY - JOHN SWANSON Mr. John Swanson, 1321 West Washington Street, South Bend, Indiana, informed the Council that he again is asking the Council to build a City wide basketball center so people from different sides of town could congregate somewhere where they are not seen by the public because when they are together as a group of black males the first thing people think is gangs and thugs. He advised that when he has asked these individuals about a gym they said they would like a place to go as they do not have anyplace to go. Mr. Swanson stated that no one wants them anywhere and they get kicked out. They have been using the basketball court in the park behind Marquette School on Sunday mornings but the neighbors are complaining and asking why they don't go to their own neighborhood. He suggested that the City build a City wide gym like most big cities have and then if they don't go there and they are on the streets hanging around they should be locked up because they are up to no good. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, President Kelly adjourned the meeting at 8:15 p.m. ATTEST: i Loretta . D a, Ci Clerk ATTEST: Roland Kelly, President ; 1 1 [J