Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-22-08 Common Council Minutes REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 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, September 22, 2008 at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was called to order by Council President Rouse and the Invocation and Pledge to the Flag were given. ROLL CALL COUNCILMEMBERS: Present: Derek D. Dieter 1st District, Chairperson Committee of the Whole Henry Davis, Jr. 2nd District Thomas LaFountain 3rd District Ann Puzzello 4th District David Varner 5th District Oliver Davis 6th District Vice-President Timothy Rouse At-Large President Karen L. White At-Large Al “Buddy” Kirsits At-Large OTHERS PRESENT: John Voorde City Clerk Mary Beth Wisniewski Chief Deputy Janice I. Talboom Deputy City Clerk Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand Council Attorney 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 September 8, 2008, meetings of the Council and found them to be correct. Therefore, we recommend the same be approved. s/Timothy A. Rouse s/David Varner Councilmember Puzzello made a motion that the minutes of the September 8, 2008 meeting of the Council be accepted and placed on file. Councilmember Dieter seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. SPECIAL BUSINESS WELCOMED BOY SCOUT TROOP #444 NORTHWEST UNITED METHODIST Council President Timothy Rouse welcomed Boy Scout Troop #444 from Northwest United Methodist. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CANCELLATION OF THE OCTOBER 13, 2008 MEETING Council President Timothy Rouse advised that the October 13, 2008 meeting of the Council will be canceled due to the City of South Bend hosting the Indiana Association of Cities and Towns Conference, October 12 – 15, 2008. He stated that the next meeting of the Council will be October 27, 2008. 1 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 RESOLUTION NO. 3905-08 A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA PUBLICLY COMMENDING AND HONORING HOMETOWN HERO LEROY DIXON FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE 2008 SUMMER OLYMPICS HELD IN BEIJING, CHINA Whereas, the 2008 Summer Olympic Games, officially known as the Games of th the XXIX Olympiad, took place in Beijing, People’s Republic of China from August 6 through August 24, 2008; with a total of 10,500 athletes participating who represented 204 nations in 302 events; and Whereas, the United States of America was represented in the 2008 Summer Olympics by 596 athletes, one of which included our own hometown hero, Leroy Dixon; and Whereas, the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, is especially proud to recognize that on June 20, 1983, Leroy Dixon was born in South Bend to Sherlyn and Leroy Dixon, Sr., and graduated from LaSalle High School in 2002 where he lettered in track, basketball and football; and Whereas, Leroy Dixon went on to study at the Kansas City Community College and at the University of South Carolina, where he earned his first All-American certificate in the 2005 NCAA Outdoor Championships; and Whereas, in 2007, Leroy Dixon was the World Outdoor 4 x 100m gold medalist and earned a spot on the Team USA 4 x 100m relay pool for the 2007 World Outdoor Championships in Osaka, Japan, where he earned a gold medal by running the anchor leg for Team USA during the opening round of competition in Osaka and in the final, carrying the baton across the finish line and stopping the clocks in 37.78 seconds, which was the fastest time in the world in 2007; and Whereas, the Common Council acknowledges that the United States of America won 110 medals in this year’s Olympics with 36 being bronze, 38 being silver, and 36 being gold; and is especially proud to further acknowledge that Leroy Dixon, as a member of the USA 4 x 100m Men’s Relay Team. Now, Therefore, be it resolved, by the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, as follows: Section I. On behalf of all of the citizens of the City of South Bend, Indiana, the Common Council hereby publicly commends and honors our own hometown hero, Leroy , Dixon for his excellent work ethics, his dedication and discipline, and his superior athletic abilities as evidenced by participating in the Summer Olympics held in Beijing, China. Section II. The South Bend Common Council is especially proud to recognize , and honor Leroy Dixonwho has brought the highest of honors to himself; his family and friends; and the City of South Bend, Indiana. The Common Council sincerely wishes Leroy Dixon continued success. Section III. This resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption by the Common Council and approval by the Mayor. st s/Derek D. Dieter, 1 District s/Al “Buddy” Kirsits, At Large nd s/Henry Davis, Jr., 2 District s/Timothy A. Rouse, At Large rd s/Thomas LaFountain , 3 District s/Karen L. White, At-Large th s/Ann Puzzello, 4 District th s/Dr. David Varner, 5 District 2 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 th s/Oliver J. Davis 6 District s/Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand, Council Attorney nd Attest: Adopted this 22 day of September, 2008 s/John Voorde, City Clerk s/Stephen J. Luecke, Mayor of South Bend Councilmember Henry Davis, Jr., 5117 Idlewood Drive, South Bend, Indiana, made the presentation for the Resolution by first offering his comments and then reading the Resolution in its entirety and stating that he will present this Resolution to Mr. Leroy Dixon when he will be in South Bend the week of October 13, 2008. A Public Hearing was held on the Resolution at this time. There was no one present wishing to speak to the Council either in favor of or in opposition to this Resolution. Councilmember Puzzello made a motion to adopt this Resolution by acclamation. Councilmember Varner seconded the motion which carried. RESOLVE INTO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE At 7:10 p.m. Councilmember White made a motion to resolve into the Committee of the Whole. Councilmember Dieter seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes. Councilmember Dieter, Chairperson, presiding. Councilmember Dieter explained the procedures to be followed for tonight’s meeting in accordance with Article 1, Section 2-11 of the South Bend Municipal Code. Councilmember Dieter stated that a brochure may be found on the railing in the Council Chambers explaining those procedures. PUBLIC HEARINGS BILL NO. 50-08 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL TO VACATE THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY: THE FIRST NORTH/SOUTH ALLEY WEST OF DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING BLVD. FROM W. WASHINGTON STREET NORTH TO THE FIRST EAST/WEST ALLEY FOR A DISTANCE OF 198 FEET, MORE OR LESS, AND A WIDTH OF 8 FEET, MORE OR LESS. BEING A PART OF DUNBAR’S SUBDIVISION OF BANK OUTLOTS 31 AND 32, CITY OF SOUTH BEND, PORTAGE TOWNSHIP, ST. JOSEPH COUNTY, INDIANA Councilmember Puzzello made a motion to continue this bill until the October 27, 2008 meeting of the Council. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. BILL NO. 56-08 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, FIXING THE ANNUAL PAY AND MONETARY FRINGE BENEFITS OF POLICE OFFICERS OF THE SOUTH BEND POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2009 3 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 Councilmember Varner made a motion to hear the substitute version of this bill. Councilmember LaFountain seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. Councilmember White, Chairperson, Health and Public Safety Committee and Tom LaFountain, Chairperson, Personnel and Finance Committee, reported that these committee’s held a joint Public Hearing on this bill this afternoon and it was the consensus of the committees to send this substitute bill to the full Council with a favorable recommendation. Councilmember Dieter disclosed that he is a member of the South Bend Police Department and that after discussion with Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand it was determined that there is no conflict of interest. Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand, Council Agent, advised that as the agent for the Council she has been in negotiations with the FOP #36. She stated that she was honored to be part of a City Advisory Team that was made up of five (5) Councilmember’s (Tom LaFountain, Chairperson, Personnel & Finance Committee, Karen L. White, Chairperson, Health & Public Safety Committee, Oliver Davis, Ann Puzzello, Vice-Chairperson, Health & Public Safety Committee, Henry Davis, Member of the Personnel & Finance Committee), along with members from the City Administration as well as the Police Department. Ms. Cekanski-Farrand stated that the City Council is required to take action in setting annual salaries for the Police Department by September 30, 2008. The proposed substitute bill would bring the City of South Bend in compliance with that state law. The joint City Advisory Team reached a one (1) year salary and monetary fringe benefit package with the FOP Team, who is represented this evening by Scott Ruszkowski, President FOP #36, who will be giving later this evening comments as to the ratification process that the FOP went through. She noted that the one-year agreement does several things. The salary before the Council tonight would eliminate the operations safe neighborhoods program which has been in existence for the City of South Bend for several years. The programs allowed officers are given a modest amount if they live in designated high crime areas of the City. Both the Fire Department and well as the Police Department were asked to review all current programs to see if any of those should be reprogrammed, modified or cease and in this case they agreed to discontinue that program and use those monies to help fund their overall wage and benefit increases. In this particular case, it funds the increase that they are recommended for the uniform allowance of two-hundred dollars ($200.00.) Ms. Cekanski-Farrand stated that they also recommend modest increases in the longevity program which has been on the books for several years. They made recommendations with regard to shift incentive as well as seniority shift incentive so that there are more senior officers on the midnight and afternoon shifts along with the younger officers. Overall the sworn members of the police department would receive a base salary increase of 2.2%, which if the Council passes this evening it would take effect January 1, 2009. All of the other monetary fringe benefit would be frozen at their current rates. She stated that as the Agent working with Chuck Leone as the Agent for the Board of Public Safety and the entire team, it was indeed a very educational and productive process that they went through with Mr. Leo Blackwell who was the agent for the FOP and Mr. Ruszkowski and the other members of the FOP. She welcomed any of the other Councilmember’s or Members of the City Administration to give comments and would be pleased to answer any questions that the Council may have. She added one item for both the Police and Fire. Ms. Cekanski-Farrand noted that they gave an ongoing commitment to both teams representing the unions that they would continue the lines of communication after final passage by the Council this evening, with regard to working collaboratively on any new ordinances or adjustments in fees that are currently being charged for public safety services or new areas that perhaps fees maybe warranted to help off-set the unknown of HB 1001. She stated that they have also made the commitment that they will continue to have meetings with the State Senators and State Representatives the luncheon meetings that were held in the past that were very productive and also with the County Commissioners and County Council Members. She stated that the FOP was very open to that and in fact Mr. Blackwell and Mr. Ruszkowski offered to work with the team if any lobbying has to take place and the state level for any alternative funding sources. 4 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 Councilmember Oliver Davis asked Ms. Cekanski-Farrand to share any job reductions for the Police Department. Ms. Cekanski-Farrand state that again they way that this was structured have attempted by having various dates of implementation that they would be able to have as much funding available and keep the manpower at complete numbers as they are today as long as possible in 2009. Again, there are so many unknowns, but she felt that they have done the best that they could in cooperation with the FOP Union to have that as their overall goal. Councilmember Rouse asked Ms. Cekanski-Farrand that as the Chief Negotiator appointed by this Council, was City Plan’s mandate on crime taken into consideration when the consideration of eliminating the safe neighborhood program? Councilmember Rouse noted that on page 111 of City Plan states that the “City would try it’s very best to continue research on the reason for the crime in the cities across the country.” He reiterated his question: Did the negotiating team consider the impact upon this great community what the elimination or the recline of police officers in the neighborhood, note in that same document it talks about three reason why crime escalates and it talks about persons who have a propensity to commit crime, take an opportunity, but it also gets down to the bottom line where it says and the absence of someone able to prevent it. The research shows that the presence of Police Officer’s living in our neighborhoods has a tendency and the propensity to reduce crime. He stated that he hears as the Chief Negotiator and the negotiating team recommending, and he appreciates all the hard work, but is concerned that some very vital areas of the past and is asking if that was really considered in the negotiations. He stated that he knows several of the members were alternates, two or three that were at all of the meetings, but what he is asking is was that point discussed in those elaborations? Ms. Cekanski-Farrand responded that it was discussed and again visibility of police officers throughout the City of South Bend is key to public safety. She stated that she believes that Scott Ruszkowski, President FOP #36, perhaps can give additional comments on that. She stated that she did attend both of the meetings that the FOP #36 held which were informational meetings prior to the ratification vote and had discussion with regard to the elimination of this program. Of the officers that raised that question with her, two of them did say that they would continue to live in the City of South Bend, even without the stipend. So, again she thinks that the commitment to public safety is that they understand very well the visibility that has to present in all of the neighborhoods. Again, that was discussed. Councilmember Rouse stated that his concern is and he believes that he has had this discussion before, is that there is a disproportionate amount of our public safety persons who don’t live in the city and he would hope that in some point they would find ways to enhance programs to encourage them to live in the city. Councilmember LaFountain stated that he served on the Negotiating Team this summer. He advised that only Councilmember Puzzello attended more meetings than he did during negotiations. All of these issues came up before the team and all of these issues were discussed. He noted that Councilmember Rouse mentioned that a modest amount of money that was put into this program, even though it was a modest amount it might be more effective to actually put officers out on the street in visible uniforms and units. Generally, the amount of crime that can be prevented is usually done by the police officers having a presence out on the street itself. He stated that the negotiating team goal was to keep as many police officers as possible. Also, his profession is teaching Criminal Justice at Bethel College, he gets to see a lot of statistics involved with police operations. He stated that we then run into a problem, we tend to train them and tend to loose them. Councilmember LaFountain stated that they want to stop that lose of police officers. That was one of the reasons that the team tried to come up with a wage situation so that the officers can be maintained and would not leave the City to go to work for other places. During the course of a school year he gets numerous flyers from police forces across the country, where they are offering money and signing bonuses etc. to have veteran police officers come there. He stated that the City cannot afford to loose police 5 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 officers; we need to train them and keep them here and those are the goals that the negotiating team was aiming for. Catherine Fanello, City Controller, stated that the negotiating team worked really hard to try and stay within the restraints that were talked about during the Executive Sessions. She stated that we are all cognizant that the City is going to face a financial Armageddon if things do not change within the next few months. She stated that they would like to keep as many police officers and firefighters on staff as possible. Ms. Fanello stated that she was not aware that she had not thoroughly answered Councilmember Rouse’s question regarding that if the team did not give raises how many people could the City keep on staff. She stated that she went back and crunched the numbers and the City could maybe keep about twelve to fifteen people on staff between the Public Safety Department if the City did not give any raises or salary adjustments. Council Member Rouse stated that response did not clearly answer his question. He asked Ms. Fanello with the lack of a 2% increase the City would loose 80% of the police department? He asked Ms. Fanello to explain keeping only twelve (12) people. Ms. Fanello stated that she may have not understood Councilmember Rouse’s question correctly. She stated that if the City did not give raises at all how many people would the City be able to keep. Councilmember Rouse stated that was opposed to the forty that Ms. Fanello stated earlier that if the City does not get any new money, the City is going to have to lay-off. So if he understands correctly that would reduce the number to twenty-eight (28) if the City did not give the raises. Ms. Fanello stated between Police and Fire. Councilmember Rouse stated that the 2% is going impact the budget to the point that they would be able to keep rather than lay-off forty (40) people, they would only have to lay- off twenty-eight (28). Ms. Fanello reiterated between Police and Fire total. She figured an average salary of $50,000 plus benefits, because you have to count in the total cost. th Mr. Charles Leone, City Attorney, 14 Floor County-City Building, South Bend, Indiana, advised that he served as the Representative and Chief Negotiator for the Board of Safety in the combined negotiations for the FOP #36. He stated that he was pleased with the result as it was a difficult year. But as they worked through the process there was a genuine problem solving approach and creative solutions. He stated that he believes that there was a very positive result and process based on the relationship that had been built up over the past years. He stated that the working agreement going forward is only for one (1) year as is the wage package. He believes that it is workable for 2009 and that is really what the negotiating team’s goal was and did not even want to look one year beyond that because it was just too uncertain at this point. The team does feel good about the result and will be recommending it to the Board of Safety. Scott Ruszkowski, President, FOP #36, stated that he is here tonight as President of the FOP #36 to speak in favor of this bill concerning the Police Department’s Wage and Benefit Package. The FOP #36 passed the ratification proposal as recommended by their Labor and Wage Teams. The ballots also passed floor motion, discussion and subsequent vote. He thanked the Negotiation Team for time and effort in this endeavor. He personally thanked Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand, the Common Council Attorney, for being at the presentations to the FOP members. She attended one meeting at 10:00 p.m. and also the 1:00 p.m. earlier that day. At both presentations she was put on the spot to say the least and handle herself very professionally. She fielded more questions than he did as FOP President. For three months the FOP #36 negotiated with the City Council, Mayor’s Office, and the Board of Public Safety. For three months they got to know each other very well, from one Councilmember bringing large bags of snacks at each session, not mentioning any names. To an attorney telling them that Notre Dame would no longer have home games if they ask them to pay for police services. Again, he did not mention 6 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 any names, but it was not Chuck Leone, or Kathy or Leo. He stated that they worked together well, quite frankly the most cordial and accomplished bargaining sessions in many years, twenty (20) that he could remember, through a proverbial tennis match of ideas and thoughts, they came to a tentative agreement, the one that is before the Council tonight. One that the FOP passed by a majority ballot. Mr. Ruszkowski stated that they are in very trying times to say the least and they as police officers feel as much of the pinch if not more than anyone else. The issue is that they have been feeling that pinch for many, many years and unfortunately this year and 2009 will be no different. He stated that he hoped that someday they will be placed on the scale where they should be if not for any other reason let it be because they have earned it. Despite the constant dangers at any minute that the officers remain diligent and professional and are recognized throughout the state as a top notch police department. He stated that they are ranked in the 60’s out of 143 municipalities. Mr. Ruszkowski advised that they are still nowhere near the fourth largest city in the state category that they have held for many years. Nearly eighteen years ago, then Mayor Kernan stated “Officer’s tighten your belts, step up to the plate” once COIT and CEDIT kick in you’ll be where you should be. Well they cannot tighten their belts any further and they are still at the plate waiting for a pitch. There never seems to be a good time to give the officer’s a raise that would place them in th the number 4 spot. Unfortunately, we all know that 2009 isn’t the best time either and have sadly accepted that fact. On a high note however, they will continue to do what ever they can with ideas and actions to help the department and the City of South Bend to move forward and pass this most recent setback that we all know as HB1001. He stated that the FOP appreciates all the time and effort that the Council, Mayor, Board of Safety has put forth and hope to continue the correspondence and talks through labor management sessions and would like to specifically invite Councilmember White because they do miss her input at those sessions. He stated that they look forward to sitting down again in 2009 to discussion a future contract, wage and benefits proposals and hope that the Council and Administration feel the same. Councilmember Varner asked Mr. Ruszkowski in his experience was he aware and supportive of the elimination of the Safe Neighborhood Program. Mr. Ruszkowski stated that it is a “Catch 22” situation. Without putting the cart before the horse, he has a family that he has to worry about. The priority at that time and this time is the family. Which he is not speaking for every officer in the FOP capacity, but personally, he lives outside of the city limits not very far, but is one of the reasons that he moved out of the city. There were a variety of reasons, one there was a very low number of officers receiving the safe neighborhood stipend, because the boundaries were so tight there were officers literally living across the street from each other and one was outside the boundaries and not able to receive the stipend. That was one of the contributing factors to the elimination of the program. He stated that some of the officers were upset about the elimination and rightfully so, however, the majority of the officers said, hey, we are willing to give that up, as long as everyone can get a “slice of the pie” so to speak. That is how it was determined to put that $200 toward the uniform allowance, per officer. Councilmember Varner asked Mr. Ruszkowski how does the idea strike him of an incentive to keep police officers or to encourage them to reside within the City? He stated that Mr. Ruszkowski could speak personally or as a representative of the FOP #36. Mr. Ruszkowski stated that he could probably speak for both. He advised that every police officer would not do this job if they did not have the heart to be here. He is just saying from the prospective, it does not matter if it is a police officer or himself personally, just like everyone else in this room they have a family to think about. They are doing everything that they can why there are there, and believe him, it’s not just 9-5 punch in and punch out. It is never, ever, for any officer from the Chief all the way to the newest hire. He stated that they give what they can when they can and how they can when they are doing the job. The problem is when do you draw the line? When do you say, I’m putting the gun and badge away, I am now a Dad, I am now a Mom, or whatever the case maybe. Mr. Ruszkowski stated that personally that it is the decision to move out. He advised that when this program was in effect he missed the residency cut-off by not more than half a block. He stated that wasn’t the point, it wasn’t a money luring thing, but he thinks that there are a variety of options on the table so to speak and could 7 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 be sat down and discussed through labor management sessions and try to find some kind of way to do this. There are a lot of bright officers and citizens in this city that could come up with some good ideas. Councilmember Henry Davis stated that he was a part of the negotiating team, but was never able to make any sessions. He has a regular 9-5 that he has to show up at everyday, so he wasn’t able to come. But he kept abreast of what was going on during the negotiations because of the notes and the Council talking and people talking to people and different kinds of things that they do as Councilmember’s. He stated that he echoed the sentiments about being able to become himself or a public servant. But more than half of the time he thinks to himself that is what he signed up for. He stated that when he nd ran for office, he ran to become 2 District City Councilmen. He stated that’s what he wanted to be the City Councilmen, so he really doesn’t get a break. He stated that he could be at Franky’s Barbeque or at Wal-Mart and someone comes up to him and says hey Henry can you do this or do that. He stated that he can’t say no or say don’t talk to me because I am with my family. He stated that he gives them a card and tell them to call him or try taking care of the problem at hand. But again he stated that he understands that a police officer doesn’t get a break either. This is what was signed up for, being public servants, civil servants and there is really no way around it. Councilmember Henry Davis stated that he had a question about the safe neighborhood program by that being something great for a community and building a community, when you have more pastors living in a neighborhood when you have more police officers, more firemen, you know that tends to trickle down to the children because then they want to become more like you and see what you do. They basically want to basically mirror the images that they see on a daily basis. He stated that he has to continually think about the times being out in the City of South Bend and would just sometimes just pull a police officer’s over and ask how he is doing or ask what is going on and introduce himself. He does that more with a lot of officer’s that don’t necessarily look like him. What is being done as far as negotiations and working with a budget and minority recruitment? Getting more African American Police Officers whether they are male or female and how is that nd working for us? Because the 2 District has a lot of officers who are not African American, actually none that he has seen since he has been here. He stated that he thinks Chuck Stokes who lives right around the corner from him and that is not his beat, he is somewhere else, but again his car is parked out in front of his house, so again he lives in a safe neighborhood program right. So what is the City doing to attract and retain African American as police officers. Mr. Ruszkowski stated that he does not and won’t speak on behalf of the Chief Boykins, however, he is aware of some different type of program since he has taken over in January and of course as always they are willing to sit down and what ever they can throw in two cents or more to do that they will. And that is not just for minority hiring, minority recruiting or anything; they have plenty of officers who are out there all of the time. The problem that the officers have now is and the Council if fully aware of this is that how as police officers or firefighters for that matter who used to be the role models when we were all kids how do you compete now with the easy buck. With the millions of dollars that the athletes are making when in reality very, very few are going to make to that level. When you don’t need that type of display to be a police officer, you have to have a good heart, honesty, things of that nature, things that we were brought up with and kids should be brought up with. The problem is how do you compete, how do you compete with a drug dealer offering a kid $500 bucks cash to ride his bike and be on the look out for police. Instant money and then try to explain why a police officer has to work two, three, four part-time jobs and how they have to sit for three months in negotiations with Councilmember’s and the City of South Bend or what ever the case maybe to try to make ends meet. This isn’t a woe me story, this is reality. How do you compete with that? If any Councilmember can give an answer to that, the FOP is very receptive to that. One thing that he wanted to comment on is and with all due respect is that trying to distinguish from being a Councilmember versus a Police Officer is that when a Councilmember gets stopped wherever you are it’s a lot different than when a police officer gets stopped wherever they are because 24 hours earlier, that officer may have arrested that person now that person wants to kill him. There is a big difference! 8 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 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 on one present wishing to speak to the Council either in favor of or in opposition to this bill, Councilmember White made a motion for favorable recommendation to full Council concerning this bill as substituted. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes and one (1) nay. Councilmember Rouse stated that he certainly agrees with the intent of 56-08 as well as 57-08 that will be heard shortly. He stated that they must and agrees with Mr. Ruszkowski and all of the commentary that the City must maintain and find ways to enhance the programs for the public safety sector of the city. Even though right now it is 75% of the operational budget is being spent. They have to find ways to even enlarge that, more money, and better opportunities. But at the same time, he doesn’t think that what this particular proposal is proposing is good for the City and is the right answer. What is being proposed is a comprehensive financial commitment at a time when the City does not have money; it is not known what is available in the life of this contract. The City is facing now, per the administration projections a lay-off of 52 firefighters, 40 police officers and the elimination of crossing guards, closing of parks and recreation centers and today coming up with this proposal of a comprehensive compounded financial obligation. He stated that he would possibly be in support of a bonus for the same amount of monies that is being talked about annually, but to come before this City and to make a proposal of that kind of financial commitment when as has been openly admitted to not having. He finds that something that he cannot personally support. He reiterated again that he does appreciate the work but he is viewing this from a different paradigm. He stated that new ways need to be found to bring that public safety sector back into the City. He stated that if we keep climbing on the back of the residents who support public safety and the public safety is moving out into the county who is going to pay for those wonderful benefits that they want. He stated that ways need to be found to come together collectively to find better answers to the problems. He agrees with the problems but he certainly does not agree with a comprehensive and compounded financial obligation when the budget is stretched and nobody knows was HB 1001 is going to do to the City, so that is the reason for his nay vote. BILL NO. 57-08 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, FIXING THE ANNUAL PAY AND MONETARY FRINGE BENEFITS FOR FIREFIGHTERS OF THE SOUTH BEND FIRE DEPARTMENT FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2009 Councilmember Puzzello made a motion to hear the substitute version of this bill. Councilmember LaFountain seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. Councilmember LaFountain, Chairperson, Personnel & Finance Committee, reported that this committee held a joint committee meeting with the Health and Public Safety Committee and it was the consensus of the committees to send this substitute bill to the full Council with a favorable recommendation. Councilmember Kirsits advised that he is a member of the South Bend Fire Department and has his disclosure form on file in the Office of the City Clerk. He noted that after discussion with Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand it was determined that no conflict of interest exists and he will be able to vote on this bill this evening. Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand, Council Attorney and Council Agent for bargaining with the Union Representing the South Bend Fire Department. She stated that she would be remiss not to acknowledge the hard work of Police Chief Darryl Boykins and also Chief Walters throughout the Fire Negotiations. They were instrumental to addressing many things that the Council will be seeing at a later date in the collective bargaining 9 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 agreement which the Board of Public Safety will act upon and then approved by the Council. In light of the Chief’s being present this evening, she wanted to give them a special note of recognition. The fire negotiations were again a joint effort between the Common Council, Board of Public Safety, Fire Administration and the City Administration. The teams reached a one year agreement with regard to the fiscal nature only. Those items are addressed in the proposed ordinance before the Council tonight. They address wage and monetary fringe benefits. Again, both teams work under difficult financial situations as have been highlighted by members of the team as well as the Council President. She stated that it is important to point out however, both the police union and the fire union to the best of her knowledge are the only unions in the City of South Bend that have repeatedly offered to give up programs that are funding services and programs within their individual departments and to use those monies to help fund wage or fringe benefit increases. Again, the City Team applauded those efforts and repeatedly asked creative ideas based on the guidelines that were given through the executive sessions of the Council and City Administration. The proposal this evening is within the guidelines which were given to the team. One of the items that the fire union agreed to work on is to have the education tuition reimbursement program, which again has been in effect for about five years, that the funding for that would be cut by 50% for next year with those monies being used to help pay for some of the monetary fringe benefits. Across the board the sworn members of the fire department they are recommended a 1.65% increase which would not take effect until April 3, 2009. Again, by staggering the increases it allow the opportunity for more firefighters to stay employed with the City of South Bend for a longer period of time. The only difference in rank st would be the firefighter 1 class, who would receive a 2% increase effective January 1, 2009. All of the other monetary fringe benefits that are currently in this year’s ordinance would remain frozen at their current rates. The key objective of the fire union was to implement a program which was in effective for almost all of the nineteen other second class cities in the State of Indiana, but is not currently in place for the South Bend Fire Department and that was a longevity program. They discussed this for many, many sessions and again as she eluded to in the joint committee meeting they did have a longevity program back in the 60’s and 70’s which was terminated due to financial situations where the engineer rank only had a longevity amount in it. They are proposing as part of the ordinance this evening to begin again a modest longevity program which would start in the fifth year of continuous service as a sworn member of the South Bend Fire Department. Again, under the leadership of Ken Marks and Todd Skwarcan, the President and Vice-President, respectively of the Fire Union #362, they have also made the commitment to continue to work with the City Administration as well as the Common Council with regard to new ordinances. One of the ordinances is projected preliminarily to bring in perhaps and additional $100,000.00 in its first year. They have set up a meeting with the City Controller for Wednesday of this week to begin those discussion and again the Union will be involved and the Health and Public Safety Committee and also Council Member LaFountain’s committee Personnel & Finance will be working diligently to make sure that they are looking all additional areas of potential revenue. Councilmember Dieter asked for more information on the ordinance that would generate $100,000 additional revenue. Ms. Cekanski-Farrand stated that would be for fire inspections. Again, in the preliminary research they have found over a dozen Indiana communities that do charge as part of the licensing for in many instances for example the scrap/junkyard/metal ordinance they will be acting upon a Resolution later this evening that requires inspections of the fire department to make sure that there is property ingress/egress. Those services now are not being compensated for the fees that are being charge currently. So, that is just one example. Councilmember Oliver Davis stated that as a member of the negotiating team they recognized that the numbers are not as tight as they would like for them to be. But neither based upon working with the teams this summer they did not go into that hap- hazard nor was it voted on that way either. He stated that they worked together with both the Police and Fire Unions to say that they don’t know all the numbers so therefore we are going to take this on a one year basis. Instead of doing two, three or four years out and get the City caught up in that and do it on a one year basis, if they had not done that 10 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 and with both Unions working their contract would have rolled over anyway. To rollover the contract would have cost the City more money and could have caused a lot of many more issues. So doing what is being done tonight is not irresponsible at all. It would help if both side would recognized that and talked about that on several occasions and so therefore he stated that he has no problem in supporting this bill. They have taken the best numbers that could possibly have been taken given all the legal ramifications that they have to deal with. He thinks that when it comes to other issues that will have to be talked about with the budget that will be heard later on there are provisions in place so that they don’t necessarily have to cut everybody. He is clarifying the idea out there that they are making some decisions that are irresponsible concern him greatly because the teams spent a lot of time, the unions spent a lot of time, there was leadership to understand where we are and came across from both aisle to understand those numbers. The Controller presented them and they held many meetings to go over and over the numbers. These are very conservative things that make sense and feel safe for one year, not two, three, or four. He stated that the staggering of the contract was a great idea so that the City can see where it is in April of 2009 and that gives a chance for everything to be looked at and then if they need to make adjustments for the next year 2010, the year that everyone is scared about, 2009 should be able to be gotten through okay. Credit is due to those who made the effort to attend those negotiation sessions and get through those to get where we are tonight. Councilmember Puzzello stated that she was very impressed this summer and spent a lot of time attending the negotiations. She noted that she is the only member of the Council who is fully retired from a regular job. So that allows her more time to commit to the grueling schedule of negotiations, which she enjoyed thoroughly. She stated that it was a big job this summer. Both unions worked in a very professional way. She stated that she did not thing that she ever went to a meeting concerning finances for the City of South Bend, that there were not representatives from both the Police and Fire Unions there and they had done their homework and they knew what they were doing and they knew what was happening as much as any of us know. They worked in good faith, and one of the ways that you can tell that is that when you negotiate in good faith you listen to the union representatives and it’s something that Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski- Farrand does very well and she thinks that the Unions would agree with that assessment. The end result is not the same for both unions, because that is not what the unions wanted, they wanted it the way it came out. She was very impressed with all the professionalism by both unions, they ratified, even those the raise is not a very good one and did not bring them up in the standing very far, but they ratified because they knew that they had done the best that they could do and the representatives of both unions had done the best that they could do. She stated that they were concerned with the public’s safety and they reiterated that many, many times. The main issue was the public safety of the citizens of South Bend. That was one of the things that they work toward doing the best job for the people of South Bend at all times. Councilmember Rouse stated that he doesn’t disagree with the intent and the hard work. But, Ladies and Gentlemen, you cannot get around the fact that if he was to give a 2% raise, it is going to be compounded whereas if he does the same thing and make sure you have the money, and do it for a bonus, when he doesn’t know what his financial situation is next year, it is just more responsible. He stated that he doesn’t mean to offend any Councilmember or any person of the Administration or the Negotiating Team, but the reality is that HB 1001 has a burden on all of us as an unknown area that they simply don’t know where it is. To give compounded raises and that’s what it is, you cannot go back next year and start from step one. The Council has an obligation to everyone including the hard working taxpayers of this city. He is saying yes, give them all that you can give them, make sure that they are taken care of, provide the financial resources for the Fire and the Police, but do it in a responsible way which he says he considers differently, in a way that they are responsible for what they don’t know in the future. He stated that they can always go back and give them a 4% increase next year, if they have the money. But to compound it now, he personally thinks that it can be done better. He stated that this is not something that he started talking about tonight, he put an e-mail out to everyone of the Councilmember’s several weeks ago while negotiations were being undergone and no one ever came back and said Rouse look at this, this is what we are 11 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 doing, they simply went on their way. He has had this concern for several weeks and have expressed it the best he knew how to every Councilmember. Kenneth Marks, President, Local #362, 4025 Lincoln Way West, South Bend, Indiana spoke in favor of this bill. Mr. Marks commended those folks from the City that worked with them. Mr. Marks advised that under no circumstances did the Members of Local #362 approach this negotiation thinking that they would get their pockets fatter. Face it they are firefighters, they don’t make a lot of money and they knew coming in here that they would not get rich doing this job. But it is a job that they all feel committed to; the biggest commitment for any firefighter is that community that he/she serves. A 1.65% increase for the members isn’t a lot, but it was something that they could take back to the members a way to decide if they were going to have stake on Monday, bologna on Wednesday, with cheese on Friday. That’s fine, they chose that, under no circumstances do they want the citizens of South Bend to feel that they are trying to get more by giving them less, under no circumstances. They will continue to do their job the dog honest everyday, every hour, every second, that’s what they are all about. First and foremost the citizens of South Bend, they come first, its how they make their peanuts, this is how they feed those peanuts to their sons, daughters, and make their wives a little bit happy when they bring those home. These teams did a really excellent job; it was not easy, because it was a very difficult three months. He did not like it most of the time, most of the time he would have felt better if they would have just put them all in a big pit and let’s beat each other half to death, and see who walked away! That’s how he felt about a lot of the process, it was not a friendly process, but they were professional about it and remained professional about it. That 2% that the members will be receiving in January, it’s not going to benefit those folks that are still doing a lot of the job. Ever person working is working to do one thing if he lives to do it or she lives to do it “retire.” That 2% going on the pension base means a lot to those pensioners. That determines whether or not that they are going to take their medication today, whether they will eat today, or whether they will pay their NIPSCO bill today. Those things are extremely important. They are not getting rich trying to do this thing; they knew that, they knew that they were not going to get a whole lot of money. They did not push for a lot of money. What they did was, use a strategy that all could walk away from the table agreeing that they had done their best for the time and will see what happens in the future. They know that HB 1001 in 2010 is going to be difficult, but let’s not continue to hide behind 1001. Those things that are necessary to be done will be necessary to be done today, necessary to be done tomorrow. Being upset about the process won’t make anyone feel any better, it just won’t and there is no two ways to say that. But these folks did, they committed, they were there everyday, they sat down and got angry everyday, they took breaks, came back and put their shoulders to the grindstone and push forward. Mr. Marks reiterated that they are not trying to get rich under any circumstance. They took what they could get to continue to do the job that they have been sworn to do and that is to protect the citizens of the city. They do that day in and day out and they will do it for 1.65% of a wage increase and would have done it had they only walked away with 1% unfortunately, that is the way the game is played sometimes, but they do what they need to do to get the job. Mr. Marks commended them first and foremost and thanked everyone that put in all the hard work this summer. Mr. Todd Skwarcan, Vice-President, Local #362, 425 Lincolnway West, South Bend, Indiana, echoed what President Marks stated and thanked all the Council Members who participated this summer actively. Mr. Skwarcan addressed President Rouse’s comments on the bonuses. He stated that when he got on the Fire Department 14 almost 15 years ago, when the City was in the low 90’s as Mr. Ruszkowski stated for pension base, is because bonuses were offered and taken and that is what happened. A bonus is not a sellable negotiating option. He addresses Councilmember LaFountain’s comments. He pointed out that the members of Local #362 are being recruited. He gets mailing to his house as a paramedic, he could move to Texas and bring a friend and get a signing bonus. He was born in South Bend and staying in South Bend, but that is not the case for all of the members of Local #362 any more, the labor force is more mobile. The package that was put together was designed to retain the highly trained personnel. 12 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 th Mr. Charles Leone, City Attorney, 14 Floor County-City Building, South Bend, Indiana, stated that he represented the Board of Safety on the joint City Bargaining Team. He stated that he would like to say that he is not willing to get into a pit with Kenny Marks to work things out. Kenny is correct in stating that it was a difficult process. He thinks that everybody had the same goals in mind and that is the safety for the citizens of the City of South Bend, safety for the firefighters, but at the same time understanding that they were under difficult circumstances that were not of their choosing. He stated that they did have to work through a number of issues. On the Board of Safety side with the working agreement they did not reach an agreement on a new agreement going forward, but they agreed to disagree and will have a letter of understanding that will be in effect for 2009 that they have come to terms on. Mr. Leone stated that what he thinks that will do is allow the City to get through 2009 under terms that both sides were okay with and allow the City to make some decisions next year for 2010. He stated that all in all it was a positive result and looks forward to working things together going forward. He urged the Council’s support of this ordinance. Councilmember Kirsits stated that in the Police contract they actually have a signed contract besides the monetary component. Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand stated that they have an agreement with regard to a working agreement which will go before the Board of Public Safety separately and then will come to the Council. Councilmember Kirsits advised that with the Firefighters Union there is only a monetary agreement and that there is no agreement with the contract as he understands. Will that contract continue to go on even without ratification? Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand stated yes that is correct and the current contract will roll for one year, pursuant to what Mr. Leone mentioned, there is a letter of understanding which the Board will act upon. Councilmember Kirsits asked that after that one year will they be working without a contract. Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand stated that they will be going back to the bargaining table again next year with both Fire and Police, so it’s just a one year. Councilmember Kirsits asked if that is kind of a scary area, going into not having a contract. Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand stated that the commitments made again as the Councilmember’s and the Administrators have mentioned, she thinks that there is a real commitment. The issues are real, the problems are real, as are the fiscal challenges that are not only facing the City, but every City in the State of Indiana is real. The Unions have a real understanding of that also. She stated that she is confident that again, whether in the pit with Kenny or not, they will work it out. Councilmember Kirsits commended President Marks, and Vice-President Skwarcan, who both actually live in the City of South Bend and are employed by them. He stated that he knows one thing that is real close to President Marks heart and he worries that he too is close to the situation, is the paramedic incentive pay. He stated that one of the toughest jobs in this City is being a paramedic on the South Bend Fire Department. He noted that the burn out factor is tremendous, the amount of training and they haven’t done anything to increase that. He stated that it is getting thin in the paramedic ranks, very thin. They may come a day very soon that they don’t meet the requirements of the ALS committee set down by St. Joseph County and that would be rather difficult to deal with. Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand advised that issue was an item that again, President Marks will address but, that was an issue that they spent a lot of time on, because if you recall several years ago, South Bend became a training service basically, once the paramedics made it through all the credentials here they would go to Elkhart where they could make five, six, seven thousand dollars more than the City of South Bend. That is why they 13 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 implemented the $5,000.00 several years ago, but as was mentioned it has been kept it flat at that point. Councilmember Kirsits stated that what he hears from many of the firefighters is that it isn’t worth $5,000.00 for the tremendous amount of time going 24/7 it wears them out and takes three days to recover. Mr. Marks stated that as Mr. Skwarcan had mentioned, they get letters on numerous occasions from various Departments looking for folks. Recently, they received a letter from a city south of Indianapolis looking to recruit three members of the Fire Department and they were offering to allow a lateral transfer, keeping their rank and status, so they would not loose anything by going down there. He stated that South Bend cannot continue to be a training facility for other departments. They have good folks and it’s hard to keep them and the paramedic field is getting very thin and there is absolutely no doubt about that, but they are looking at ways to keep their paramedics. They are of great value to this community. There are dedicated folks and had they not had dedicated folks, they would be three short, because the door was open for three of them to walk away. He stated those are the kind of things that need to keep an eye on when they talk about numbers, personnel and how to keep good people in this City on this department. They did not loose any of their members because of the commitment here. He wanted the Council to keep those kinds of things in mind when deliberations come up again. Of course, support this ordinance, it’s not the best but it works. There was no one else present wishing to speak to the Council either in favor or in opposition to this bill, Councilmember Puzzello made a motion for favorable recommendation to full Council concerning this bill as substituted. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes and one (1) nay (Councilmember Rouse) BILL NO. 58-08 PUBLIC HEARING 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, 2009 BILL NO. 59-08 PUBLIC HEARING 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, 2009, AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2009, INCLUDING ALL OUTSTANDING CLAIMS AND OBLIGATIONS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL TAKE EFFECT BILL NO. 60-08 PUBLIC HEARING 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, 2009 AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2009, INCLUDING ALL OUTSTANDING CLAIMS AND OBLIGATIONS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL TAKE EFFECT 14 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 Councilmember White made a motion to combine these bills for purposes of Public Hearing. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. Councilmember LaFountain, Chairperson, Personnel and Finance Committee reported that this committee held a public hearing on these bills this afternoon and voted to send them to the full Council with favorable recommendation. th Mayor Stephen Luecke, 14 Floor County-City Building, 227 W. Jefferson Blvd., South Bend, Indiana, made the presentation for these bills. Mayor Luecke thanked everyone for all the hours that were put in over the summer in budget committee hearings to look at not only a base line budget for 2009 but also a potential spending plans for 2009 and 2010 that will become clearer as they get more information about the impact of House Enrolled Act (HEA) 1001. As the City awaits understanding the full impact of that act, he is submitted this proposed base line 2009 budget. This base line budget is formulated upon the anticipated receipt of the full revenue that enabled South Bend’s 67.3 million dollar general fund budget in 2008. In the wake of the property tax caps the City will not receive the full revenue that it has historically depended on to provide basic services of Public Safety, Parks and Recreation, Neighborhood Revitalization and Infrastructure Investment. That is why he asked Departments to develop spending plans for 2009 and 2010 that will outline how the City will live within our means if revenue reductions of more than 27% are fully realized by the year 2010. Until all of the issues related to the changing revenue picture are resolved, he urged the Council to pass this base line budget. This budget provides the City with maximum flexibility and continuing the services on which the residents and businesses depend. If new sources of revenue are found this base line budget will enable the City to continue providing services at essentially the same level as in 2008. If there are no additional revenue sources 2009, they will return to the Council with a reduced appropriation that will reflect a spending plan outlined during this summer’s budget presentations. He stated that he looks forward to working in partnership with the Council to continue looking for ways to continue these vital services to the residents as the Nation faces troubled economic times and local governments in Indiana face new uncertainty in their ability to fund those services. He stated that he is asking for approval of the base line budget at a time when there continues to be a void of information. He stated that they do not know what the certified assessed value is for the City of South Bend, they do not have a certified tax rate not only for 2009 but 2008 yet. He stated that they do not know what property taxes they will receive in 2008. All of that complicates the picture, so given that they have decided to present this baseline budget for the Council consideration and approval. th Catherine Fanello, City Controller, 12 Floor County-City Building, South Bend, Indiana Ms. Fanello advised that this coming budget year is very different and uncertain in light of the property tax reform passed by the Indiana General Assembly. Departments were asked to create a baseline budget and create a proposed spending plan to reduce the budget by $18.2 million over the next 2 years. She noted that the spending plans were discussed during the summer Personnel & Finance committee hearings and that they need further discussion before being adopted in 2009. She noted that levy growth is calculated by the Department of Local Government Finance (DLGF). The allowed levy growth for 2009 is 4.0% compared to 3.7% in 2008. Ms. Fanello stated that budget assumptions for 2009 are a 96% collection rate and using 2007 assed values since 2008 assed values are still unknown. The history of city property tax rates for the last four years are in 2006 the rate was $2.1795 with a 3.1% growth and a 3.2% inflation rate; 2007 $2.1046, -3.4% and 2.8%; 2008 $2.1800 (est.) 3.00% 5.4% (August) and 2009 $2.2500 (est.) 3.21% and an unknown inflation rate. She noted that in 2009 estimated levy budgeted is General Fund $52,174,381; Park Fund $8,804,427; Police Pension $1,392,498; Fire Pension $1,567,740; Cumulative Capital Development $1,160,880 for a total of $65,099,926. She noted that the 2008 Project Levy (budgeted) General Fund $52,245,227; Park Fund $8,816,382; Police Pension $1,449,805; Fire Pension $1,632,663; Cumulative Capital Development $1,162,456 for a total of $65,306,533. The 2009 Decrease in Budgeted 15 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 Levy is: General Fund $70,846; Park Fund $11,955; Police Pension $57,307; Fire Pension; Cumulative Capital Development 1.576 for a total of $206,607. Ms. Fanello advised that total tax collections are a % of the current tax levy in 2004 the percentage collected was 98.45% with an outstanding delinquent tax of $6,189,942; in 2005 the percentage collected was 96.08% with an outstanding delinquent tax of $8,093,237; 2006, 101.03% collected with $5,495,442 outstanding delinquent tax; 2007 95.12% collected with $7,411,505 outstanding delinquent tax. She noted examples of revenue are: Enterprise Fund dollars consist of Utilities, Building Department Fees, Century Center Revenue, Parking Garage Revenue and make up 26%; Special Revenue Funds consist of Park Department, Motor Vehicle Highway and Local Road & Street Dollars and make up 12%; Trust/Agency dollars are pension funds for Police and Fire and make up 5%; Capital and Debt Funds consist mainly of County Option Income Tax and Economic Development and make up 9%; Internal Service Funds make up 11%; and General Fund makes up the balance at 37%. Ms. Fanello stated that total revenue sources from budgeted funds are project to increase $3.2 million (1.72%) over 2008 budgeted revenue, sewer rates $1.6 million, property, income, other taxes 1.4 million. She noted that the City receives no sales tax from the state or local. She also noted that the tax rates in St. Joseph County are .8% and in Elkhart there are 1.5%. The remaining increase is due to user fees, administrative fees, and self insurance increases to city fund. She noted that the money comes from property taxes that make up approximately $66,699,926 or 37%; other taxes $4,634,396.00 or 2%; Income Taxes $10,264,378.00 or 5%; Hotel/Motel Tax $1,878,309.00 or 1%; Intergovernmental Grants $19,418,648.00 or 10%; Charges for Services $58,849,773.00 or 32%; Fines $607,001.00 0%; Other Financing Sources $18,184,897.00 or 10%; Miscellaneous $4,564,442.00 or 2% and Licenses & Permits, $1,701,175.00 or 1%. Ms. Fanello stated that the General Fund Budget is a .39% increase of $263,732. The total citywide budgeted operating funds increased only by 1.49% overall compared to the 2008 budget. This excludes capital funds. Capital fund costs are unique from year to year and do not figure into the operating budget increase/decrease. No significant capital included. Ms. Fanello noted that the money goes to General Government, $9,965,001 or 6%; Utilities $29,034,657 or 16%; Public Works $19,383,339 or 11%; Community & Economic Development $3,990,950 or 2%; Liability & Health Self-Insurance $16,472,048 or 9%; Debt Service, $17,880,329 or 10%; Public Safety $64,611,643 or 36%; and Culture & Recreation $18,739,306 or 10%. She noted that General Government includes the Building Department and Century Center. Ms. Fanello stated that salaries and benefits make of 53% of Citywide expenditures; services make up 31%; supplies 5%; other 11%. She noted that services and other include debt and capital lease payments. She stated that salaries & benefits for non-bargaining personnel include a 2% increase; bargaining personnel Police 2.2%; Fire 1.65% plus a longevity program; and Teamsters 2%. Ms. Fanello noted that citywide costs for salaries & benefits for 2009 are $95,482,441 as compared to in 2008 at $95,830,185. That is a decrease of $347,744, and due to a combination of changes in the health insurance budget and decreases in full-time positions. She stated that there is a reduction of 23 positions in 2009, 15 in 2008; 25.5 in 2007; 6.0 in 2006; 4.0 in 2005; and 11.0 in 2004 for an overall salary reduction for the past six years of 85.0. She noted that in 2009 transfers between funds/departments extracted. Departments eliminating positions are Administration & Finance, 2; Legal 1; Parks & Recreation .5; Community & Economic Development 4.5; Public Works 11; Building Department 2; Police (civilian) 2. Ms. Fanello stated that the City Health Insurance budget decreased by $1.3 (or 11%) million due to performance of health insurance plan. No health insurance premium increases expected in 2009 for City Employees. She advised not to be misled by this because they have been able to stabilize increases and take advantage of Anthem’s network pricing. This does not mean that there won’t be increases in the future. Ms. Fanello advised that they are always at risk for large catastrophic claims and health care costs continue to rise nationwide in excess of 15%. She noted other expenditures fuel costs have been budgeted at $3.90 a gallon compared to the $2.90 in 2008. That equates to a 39% increase or $748,550. Pension costs for PERF employer share for non police and fire employees remains at 6.0% and PERF for active Police and Fire was reduced by the State to 19.5%. In 2008 Citywide Pension Costs (Active) were $6,017,852 (Public Safety $4.33 million) and project for 2009 $5,919,307 (Public safety $4.49 million) a decrease of $98,545. She noted that 209 projected bond payments of $18.9 million, excluding TIF bonds compared to 2008 projected payments of $20.2 million. Property tax funds only one debt (Hall of Fame) 16 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 and some equipment leases. She noted that a Sewer Bond will be issued later this year and no equipment leases paid for by property tax dollars will be issued in 2009. There will be no police, cars, no street equipment, no equipment for other general fund departments unless other funding sources can be identified. Ms. Fanello advised that if the County is unable to collect enough taxes before the end of 2008, they will have to issue another loan to pay off the current loan and borrow additional to carry us through the end of 2008 and beginning of 2009. Ms. Fanello reiterated that this budget is only a baseline and should not be deemed to be the complete actual working budget as adjustments will have to be made for HEA 1001. 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 Varner made a motion to continue Bill No. 58-08 in the Council portion and set for Third Reading on October 27, 2008. Councilmember Rouse seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. Councilmember Rouse made a motion to continue Bill No. 59-08 in the Council portion and set for Third Reading on October 27, 2008. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. Councilmember Rouse made a motion to continue Bill No. 60-08 in the Council portion and set for Third Reading on October 27, 2008. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. RISE AND REPORT Councilmember Oliver Davis made a motion to rise and report to the full Council. Councilmember David Varner seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. ATTEST: ATTEST: _________________________ _________________________ John Voorde, City Clerk Derek D. Dieter, Chairperson Committee of the Whole 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 8:35 p.m. Council President Tim Rouse presided with nine (9) members present. BILLS, THIRD READING ORDINANCE NO. 9865-08 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, FIXING THE ANNUAL PAY AND MONETARY FRINGE BENEFITS OF POLICE OFFICERS OF THE SOUTH BEND POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2009 17 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 This bill had third reading. Councilmember Puzzello made a motion to amend this bill as in the Committee of the Whole. Councilmember Dieter seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. Additionally, Councilmember Dieter made a motion to pass this bill as substituted. Councilmember Varner seconded the motion which carried. The bill passed by a roll call vote of eight (8) ayes and one (1) nay (Councilmember Rouse) ORDINANCE NO. 9866-08 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, FIXING THE ANNUAL PAY AND MONETARY FRINGE BENEFITS FOR FIREFIGHTERS OF THE SOUTH BEND FIRE DEPARTMENT FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2009 This bill had third reading. Councilmember Dieter made a motion to amend this bill as in the Committee of the Whole. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. Additionally, Councilmember Dieter made a motion to pass this bill as substituted. Councilmember Varner seconded the motion which carried. The bill passed by a roll call vote of eight (8) ayes and one (1) nay. RESOLUTIONS BILL NO. 08-83 A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING THE ADOPTION OF A DECLARATORY RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CERTAIN AREAS WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AN ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA FOR PURPOSES OF A TEN (10) YEAR REAL PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT FOR UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME DU LAC, AND INNOVATION PARK AT NOTRE DAME, INC. BILL NO. 08-84 A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING THE ADOPTION OF A DECLARATORY RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CERTAIN AREAS WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AS AN ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA FOR PURPOSES OF A FIVE (5) YEAR PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT FOR UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME DU LAC, AND INNOVATION PARK AT NOTRE DAME, INC. Councilmember White made a motion to combine Bill Nos. 08-83 and 08-84 for purpose of Public Hearing. Councilmember Varner seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. RESOLUTION NO. 3906-08 A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING THE ADOPTION OF A DECLARATORY RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CERTAIN AREAS WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AN ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA FOR PURPOSES OF A TEN (10) YEAR REAL PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT FOR UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME DU LAC, AND INNOVATION PARK AT NOTRE DAME, INC. 18 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, has adopted a Declaratory Resolution designating certain areas within the City as Economic Revitalization Areas for the purpose of tax abatement consideration; and WHEREAS, a Declaratory Resolution designated the following area: “Parcel 1: A Parcel of land in the Northwest Quarter of Section 6, Township 37 North, Range 3 East of the Second Principal Meridian, St. Joseph County, Indiana, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast Corner of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 6; thence South 00°43'29" East (this and all subsequent bearings based on the Indiana State Plane Coordinate System, East Zone), 460.85 feet along the East line of said Northwest Quarter to the northwesterly line of a parcel of land conveyed to the State of Indiana for right-of-way purposes along State Road 23 (South Bend Avenue) recorded October 5, 1991 as Document Number 9129497 in the Office of the Recorder of St. Joseph County, Indiana; thence South 53°08'24” West, 123.83 feet along said northwesterly line to the POINT OF BEGINNING of this description; thence continuing along said line South 53°08'24” West 58.42 feet; thence South 50°14'48” West, 250.32 feet along said line to the northwesterly boundary of S.R. 23; thence South 52°50'49” West, 338.01 feet along said boundary; thence North 36°50'07” West, 588.23 feet to the south line of a parcel of land designated as parcel number 3 for relocated Edison Road and Twyckenham Drive extension on a Right-of-Way plat recorded August 16, 2005 as Document Number 0537239 in said Recorder's Office; thence along the southerly and westerly lines of said parcel number 3 the following 6 courses and distances: 1) northeasterly 241.94 feet along a curve to the left having a radius of 1190.00 feet and subtended by a long chord bearing North 56°00'19” East, a distance of 241.52 feet; 2) northeasterly 591.36 feet along a curve to the right having a radius of 1070.00 feet and subtended by a long chord bearing North 66°00'50" East, a distance of 583.86 feet; 3) South 58°26'38” East, 68.74 feet; 4) South 00°47'43” West, 10.96 feet; 5) southerly 265.73 feet along a curve to the left having a radius of 960.00 feet and subtended by a long chord bearing South 07°08'04" East, a distance of 264.89 feet; 6) South 15°03'52” East, 139.03 feet to the point of beginning, and containing 9.446 acres more or less. and Parcel 2: A Parcel of land partly in the Northwest Quarter and partly in the Northeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 37 North, Range 3 East of the Second Principal Meridian, St. Joseph County, Indiana, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast Corner of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 6; thence South 00°43'29" East (this and all subsequent bearings based on the Indiana State Plane Coordinate System, East Zone), 460.85 feet along the East line of said Northwest Quarter to the northwesterly line of a parcel of land conveyed to the State of Indiana for right-of-way purposes along State Road 23 (South Bend Avenue) recorded October 5, 1991 as Document Number 9129497 in the Office of the Recorder of St. Joseph County, Indiana; thence South 53°08'24” West, 5.36 feet along said northwesterly line to the easterly line of a parcel of land designated as parcel number 3 for Twyckenham Drive extension and relocated Edison Road on a Right-of-Way plat recorded August 16, 2005 as Document 19 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 Number 0537239 in said Recorder's Office and to the POINT OF BEGINNING of this description; thence along the easterly and northerly lines of said parcel number 3 the following 5 courses and distances: 1) North 15°03'52” West, 80.12 feet; 2) North 09°12'15” West, 142.01 feet; 3) North 00°09'24” West, 106.80 feet; 4) North 21°13'12” East, 64.63 feet; 5) North 89°10'21” East, 182.11 feet to the west boundary of vacated Ivy Road; thence South 00°46'11” East, 250.94 feet along said vacated Ivy Road to the northerly corner of the aforementioned parcel conveyed to the State of Indiana for right-of-way purposes; thence South 31°35'38” West, 27.44 feet along the northwesterly line of said parcel; thence South 53°08'24” West, 188.28 feet along the northwesterly line of said parcel to the point of beginning, and containing 1.490 acres more or less, and which has Key Numbers 17-1017-0406 and 18-5102-3579, as an Economic Revitalization Area; and WHEREAS, notice of the adoption of a Declaratory Resolution and the public hearing before the Council has been published pursuant to Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1-2.5; and WHEREAS, the Council held a public hearing for the purposes of hearing all remonstrances and objections from interested persons; and WHEREAS, the Council has determined that the qualifications for an economic revitalization area have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, as follows: SECTION I. The Common Council hereby confirms its Declaratory Resolution designating the area described herein as an Economic Revitalization Area for the purposes of tax abatement. Such designation is for real property tax abatement and is limited to ten (10) calendar years from the date of adoption of the Declaratory Resolution by the Common Council. SECTION II. The Common Council hereby determines that the property owner is qualified for and is granted real property tax deduction for a period of ten (10) years, and further determines that the petition, the Memorandum of Agreement between the Petitioner and the City of South Bend, and the Statement of Benefits comply with Chapter 2, Article 6, of the Municipal Code of the City of South Bend and Indiana Code 6-1.1-12 et seq. SECTION III. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption by the Common Council and approved by the Mayor. s/Timothy A. Rouse Member of the Common Council RESOLUTION NO. 3907-08 A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING THE ADOPTION OF A DECLARATORY RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CERTAIN AREAS WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AS AN ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA FOR PURPOSES OF A FIVE (5) YEAR PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT FOR UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME DU LAC, AND INNOVATION PARK AT NOTRE DAME, INC. 20 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, has adopted a Declaratory Resolution designating certain areas within the City as Economic Revitalization Areas for the purpose of tax abatement consideration; and WHEREAS, a Declaratory Resolution designated the following area: “Parcel 1: A Parcel of land in the Northwest Quarter of Section 6, Township 37 North, Range 3 East of the Second Principal Meridian, St. Joseph County, Indiana, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast Corner of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 6; thence South 00°43'29" East (this and all subsequent bearings based on the Indiana State Plane Coordinate System, East Zone), 460.85 feet along the East line of said Northwest Quarter to the northwesterly line of a parcel of land conveyed to the State of Indiana for right-of-way purposes along State Road 23 (South Bend Avenue) recorded October 5, 1991 as Document Number 9129497 in the Office of the Recorder of St. Joseph County, Indiana; thence South 53°08'24” West, 123.83 feet along said northwesterly line to the POINT OF BEGINNING of this description; thence continuing along said line South 53°08'24” West 58.42 feet; thence South 50°14'48” West, 250.32 feet along said line to the northwesterly boundary of S.R. 23; thence South 52°50'49” West, 338.01 feet along said boundary; thence North 36°50'07” West, 588.23 feet to the south line of a parcel of land designated as parcel number 3 for relocated Edison Road and Twyckenham Drive extension on a Right-of-Way plat recorded August 16, 2005 as Document Number 0537239 in said Recorder's Office; thence along the southerly and westerly lines of said parcel number 3 the following 6 courses and distances: 1) northeasterly 241.94 feet along a curve to the left having a radius of 1190.00 feet and subtended by a long chord bearing North 56°00'19” East, a distance of 241.52 feet; 2) northeasterly 591.36 feet along a curve to the right having a radius of 1070.00 feet and subtended by a long chord bearing North 66°00'50" East, a distance of 583.86 feet; 3) South 58°26'38” East, 68.74 feet; 4) South 00°47'43” West, 10.96 feet; 5) southerly 265.73 feet along a curve to the left having a radius of 960.00 feet and subtended by a long chord bearing South 07°08'04" East, a distance of 264.89 feet; 6) South 15°03'52” East, 139.03 feet to the point of beginning, and containing 9.446 acres more or less. and Parcel 2: A Parcel of land partly in the Northwest Quarter and partly in the Northeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 37 North, Range 3 East of the Second Principal Meridian, St. Joseph County, Indiana, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast Corner of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 6; thence South 00°43'29" East (this and all subsequent bearings based on the Indiana State Plane Coordinate System, East Zone), 460.85 feet along the East line of said Northwest Quarter to the northwesterly line of a parcel of land conveyed to the State of Indiana for right-of-way purposes along State Road 23 (South Bend Avenue) recorded October 5, 1991 as Document Number 9129497 in the Office of the Recorder of St. Joseph County, Indiana; thence South 53°08'24” West, 5.36 feet along said northwesterly line to the easterly line of a parcel of land designated as parcel number 3 for Twyckenham Drive extension and relocated Edison Road on a Right-of-Way plat recorded August 16, 2005 as Document 21 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 Number 0537239 in said Recorder's Office and to the POINT OF BEGINNING of this description; thence along the easterly and northerly lines of said parcel number 3 the following 5 courses and distances: 1) North 15°03'52” West, 80.12 feet; 2) North 09°12'15” West, 142.01 feet; 3) North 00°09'24” West, 106.80 feet; 4) North 21°13'12” East, 64.63 feet; 5) North 89°10'21” East, 182.11 feet to the west boundary of vacated Ivy Road; thence South 00°46'11” East, 250.94 feet along said vacated Ivy Road to the northerly corner of the aforementioned parcel conveyed to the State of Indiana for right-of-way purposes; thence South 31°35'38” West, 27.44 feet along the northwesterly line of said parcel; thence South 53°08'24” West, 188.28 feet along the northwesterly line of said parcel to the point of beginning, and containing 1.490 acres more or less, and which has Key Numbers 17-1017-0406 and 18-5102-3579, as an Economic Revitalization Area; and WHEREAS, notice of the adoption of a Declaratory Resolution and the public hearing before the Council has been published pursuant to Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1-2.5; and WHEREAS, the Council held a public hearing for the purposes of hearing all remonstrance’s and objections from interested persons; and WHEREAS, the Council has determined that the qualifications for an economic revitalization area have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, as follows: SECTION I. The Common Council hereby confirms its Declaratory Resolution designating the area described herein as an Economic Revitalization Area for the purposes of tax abatement. Such designation is for personal property tax abatement and is limited to ten (10) calendar years from the date of adoption of the Declaratory Resolution by the Common Council. SECTION II. The Common Council hereby determines that the property owner and future tenants located within the economic revitalization area are qualified for and granted personal property tax deductions for a period of five (5) years, and further determines that the petition complies with Chapter 2, Article 6, of the Municipal Code of the City of South Bend and Indiana Code 6-1.1-12 et seq.; provided however, that neither the Petitioner nor any tenants may receive an economic revitalization area deduction if it receives an enterprise zone investment deduction under I.C. 6-1.1-45 for the same property. SECTION III. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption by the Common Council and approved by the Mayor. s/Timothy A. Rouse Member of the Common Council Councilmember Dieter, Chairperson, Community and Economic Development Committee, reported that this committee held a Public Hearing on these bills this afternoon and voted to send them to the full Council with a favorable recommendation. Mr. Richard Deahl, Barnes & Thornburg, 100 N. Michigan Street, South Bend, Indiana, made the presentation for these bills. Mr. Deahl advised that he is here tonight with Mr. David Brenner, Director, Innovation Park, and Mr. Rich Belis, Director of Treasury Services for Notre Dame, to request the 22 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 Council’s favorable consideration and approval of both of the Resolutions before the Council tonight. Mr. Deahl stated that at the Declaratory stage a number of weeks ago and earlier today at the committee meetings that this project relates to a request for a ten (10) year real property tax abatement and a five (5) year personal property tax abatement on the development of a new technology park to be known as Innovation Park at Notre Dame. The purpose of this innovation park is to convene innovators in a facility that has the resources necessary to leverage intellectual property assets or inventions of innovators and use research and resources of Notre Dame and other colleges and universities to transforms these technology platforms into marketable products. Ideally, this park is applied to be one of two certified tech parks in the City of South Bend. This park would be the initial stage for new companies that are going to use technology and develop applications that are going to be commercialized and then have a resource that they could transplant into manufacturing in other places in the Michiana Area. The first stage of this project involves an investment of approximately ten million dollars in the construction of the first of what is anticipated to be four buildings. These buildings at least the first one will house training centers, conference centers, offices, and wet and dry labs to be leased out to tenants who will use the research and conduct other research activities in the park. The personal property investments will be at least initially in the first year an investment of no less than five hundred thousand in the lab equipment that will be used inside the research park. Mr. Deahl stated that they would greatly appreciate the Council’s support. He thanked the Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand, who has worked together with them to come to terms on a final memorandum of agreement that explains the commitments of Innovation Park at Notre Dame and the University of Notre Dame related to this park and they are all very hopeful that this will be a successful venture and bring new and innovative businesses to the area. A Public Hearing was held on the Resolution at this time. th Mayor Stephen Luecke, 14 Floor County-City Building, spoke in favor of this bill. He stated that he appreciates the opportunity to rise in support of these two resolutions for tax abatement for the new research park. He stated that they have been working on this for many, many years and it really provides a new nexus between the University of Notre Dame and the City of South Bend for an opportunity and a reality that the University is investing in the community in a new way that will bear significant benefits for all of us in the long run. The impact for the City of South Bend is the opportunity for new jobs and new additional investment, not necessarily at the Innovation Park site, but at the Old Studebaker site elsewhere in the community as companies grow and create new jobs and new product. He supports them in this effort, and the tax abatement comes at a critical time for start up companies a time when money is often very thin as they are working to prove a concept, an idea, to show that it has commercial applications and that the company can grow and expand the systems that the University has in place to identify, recruit and accept companies into Innovation Park are very through and will see an extraordinary success rate for companies at the Innovation Park. This is an additional opportunity on the part of the City of South Bend to say that they want these companies to plant here, grow here, and to succeed here, to create new jobs and investment for the community. He urged the Council for their favorable support. He clarified two points, the first is that any tax abatement that takes effect, the benefits will roll through to the tenants of the building, the tax abatement is not for the benefit of the University of Notre Dame, but like any developer, the tax abatement rolls through to tenants who will be investing and creating jobs in the community. Secondly, obviously, Eddy Street Commons is also moving forward at this time, a terrific development project and as they looked at projections for paying for the public infrastructure in Eddy Street Commons there was no revenue anticipated to come from the research park to assist with that development, so granting tax abatement for the research park does not in any way impact the Eddy Street Commons development as that moves forward. Councilmember Varner stated that he certainly wishes the University all the success and like Mayor Luecke recognize the enormous potential here, but he tends to let his imagination and hopes to run not quite as far. The reality is that as it stands and he had read the application of the City on behalf of the University on the creation of the technology park, there will be generated out of this revenue stream for the University through licensing agreements and through development agreements and things like that. 23 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 The plan that exists that is proposed is going to take a tax abated circumstance for the buildings and hopefully attempt to move them to a TIF district which is the Studebaker Corridor. He stated that he wonders as he sees the Crossing Guards sitting here before the Council tonight where is the revenue stream to the City of South Bend. If it is in a TIF area it cannot be used, if it’s in a tax abated area from a tax exempt organization it cannot be used either. He stated that he says this not because he doesn’t wish anything but the best for this project, because he does see it’s potential, but realistically they have to look at someway and will probably have to take it to the legislature to generate some sort of revenue to help pay the bills. The TIF district will receive police and fire protection that will not be supported with TIF dollars. The technology park will be supported by Police and Fire which is now as most everyone knows is the largest part of the City Budget which will not receive any contribution for their support because it is in a tax abated area in a special redevelopment district. All these things are a concern that the city needs to be cognitive of and turn to the legislature to look for some help so that in one way shape or form some of these monies could be made available. Otherwise the rest of the citizens of the City of South Bend pick up the bills for this. Councilmember Varner reiterated his comments of wishing the University the best of luck and hope that it is more than it is suggested to be, but at some point and time the City needs to see some revenue stream. Councilmember Rouse stated that what Councilmember Varner is proposing is close to Hometown Matters. Councilmember Varner stated that he could make some improvements to Hometown Matters, but he doesn’t think anyone will ask him. There was no one else present wishing to speak either in favor or in opposition to these Resolutions, Councilmember Dieter made a motion to adopt Bill No. 08-83. Councilmember Varner seconded the motion which carried and the Resolution was adopted by a roll call vote of eight (8) ayes, and one (1) nay (Councilmember Henry Davis.) Councilmember Dieter made a motion to adopt Bill No. 08-87. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried and the Resolution was adopted by a roll call vote of eight (8) ayes, and one (1) nay (Councilmember Henry Davis.) RESOLUTION NO. 3908-08 A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING THE ADOPTION OF A DECLARATORY RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CERTAIN AREAS WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, COMMONLY KNOWN AS LOT NUMBERS 1 THROUGH 141 ALL IN SOUTHFIELD LAKE AS RESIDENTIALLY DISTRESSED AREAS FOR PURPOSES OF A (5) FIVE-YEAR RESIDENTIAL REAL PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT FOR LLE REAL ESTATE, LLP WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, has adopted a Declaratory Resolution designating certain areas within the City as Residentially Distressed Areas for the purpose of tax abatement consideration; and WHEREAS, a Declaratory Resolution designated the area commonly known as Lot # Address Tax # 1 6602 Deerfield Trail UNKNOWN 2 6608 Deerfield Trail UNKNOWN 3 6614 Deerfield Trail UNKNOWN 4 6629 Forest Trail UNKNOWN 24 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 Lot # Address Tax # 5 6623 Forest Trail UNKNOWN 6 1419 Forest Trail UNKNOWN 7 1425 Forest Trail UNKNOWN 8 1431 Forest Trail UNKNOWN 9 1437 Forest Trail UNKNOWN 10 1443 Forest Trail UNKNOWN 11 6606 Forest Edge UNKNOWN 12 1436 Forest Trail UNKNOWN 13 1430 Forest Trail UNKNOWN 14 1424 Forest Trail UNKNOWN 15 1425 Lake Trail North UNKNOWN 16 1433 Lake Trail North UNKNOWN 17 1439 Lake Trail North UNKNOWN 18 6612 Forest Edge UNKNOWN 19 6618 Forest Edge UNKNOWN 20 1513 Lake Trail North UNKNOWN 21 6610 Fox Lane UNKNOWN 22 6618 Fox Lane UNKNOWN 23 6624 Fox Lane UNKNOWN 24 6806 Fox Lane UNKNOWN 25 6814 Fox Lane UNKNOWN 26 1518 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 27 1510 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 28 1502 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 29 1432 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 30 1424 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 31 1418 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 32 1410 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 33 1384 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 34 1378 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 35 1370 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 36 1326 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 37 1354 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 38 1346 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 39 1338 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 40 1330 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 41 1322 Lake Ridge Court UNKNOWN 42 1312 Lake Ridge Court UNKNOWN 43 1304 Lake Ridge Court UNKNOWN 44 1250 Lake Ridge Court UNKNOWN 45 1424 Lake Ridge Court UNKNOWN 46 1228 Lake Ridge Court UNKNOWN 47 1220 Lake Ridge Court UNKNOWN 48 1219 Lake Ridge Court UNKNOWN 49 1231 Lake Ridge Court UNKNOWN 50 1245 Lake Ridge Court UNKNOWN 51 1305 Lake Ridge Court UNKNOWN 52 1324 Lake Ridge Court UNKNOWN 53 6816 Beaver Trail UNKNOWN 54 1337 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 55 1345 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 56 1353 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 57 1361 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 58 1369 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 59 1377 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 60 1403 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 25 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 Lot # Address Tax # 61 1411 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 62 1419 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 63 1427 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 64 1505 Lake Trail South UNKNOWN 65 6802 Fox Lane UNKNOWN 66 6720 Fox Lane UNKNOWN 67 1514 Lake Trail North UNKNOWN 68 1506 Lake Trail North UNKNOWN 69 1428 Lake Trail North UNKNOWN 70 14 Lake Trail North UNKNOWN 71 1412 Lake Trail North UNKNOWN 72 1404 Lake Trail North UNKNOWN 73 1382 Lake Trail North UNKNOWN 74 1374 Lake Trail North UNKNOWN 75 1366 Lake Trail North UNKNOWN 76 1358 Lake Trail North UNKNOWN 77 1350 Lake Trail North UNKNOWN 78 1342 Lake Trail North UNKNOWN 79 6732 Beaver Trail UNKNOWN 80 1324 Southfield Lake Trail UNKNOWN 81 1306 Southfield Lake Trail UNKNOWN 82 1248 Southfield Lake Trail UNKNOWN 83 1236 Southfield Lake Trail UNKNOWN 84 1222 Southfield Lake Trail UNKNOWN 85 6604 Blue Bird Trail UNKNOWN 86 6610 Blue Bird Trail UNKNOWN 87 6616 Blue Bird Trail UNKNOWN 88 6622 Blue Bird Trail UNKNOWN 89 6628 Blue Bird Trail UNKNOWN 90 1112 Red Bird Trail UNKNOWN 91 1118 Red Bird Trail UNKNOWN 92 1124 Red Bird Trail UNKNOWN 93 1204 Red Bird Trail UNKNOWN 94 1210 Red Bird Trail UNKNOWN 95 1113 Southfield Lake Trail UNKNOWN 96 1119 Southfield Lake Trail UNKNOWN 97 1125 Southfield Lake Trail UNKNOWN 98 1205 Southfield Lake Trail UNKNOWN 99 1211 Southfield Lake Trail UNKNOWN 100 1222 Red Bird Trail UNKNOWN 101 1228 Red Bird Trail UNKNOWN 102 1234 Red Bird Trail UNKNOWN 103 1240 Red Bird Trail UNKNOWN 104 1246 Red Bird Trail UNKNOWN 105 1252 Red Bird Trail UNKNOWN 106 1223 Southfield Lake Trail UNKNOWN 107 1229 Southfield Lake Trail UNKNOWN 108 1235 Southfield Lake Trail UNKNOWN 109 1241 Southfield Lake Trail UNKNOWN 110 1247 Southfield Lake Trail UNKNOWN 111 1253 Southfield Lake Trail UNKNOWN 112 1305 Garden Way UNKNOWN 113 1311 Garden Way UNKNOWN 114 1317 Garden Way UNKNOWN 115 1321 Garden Way UNKNOWN 116 1327 Garden Way UNKNOWN 26 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 Lot # Address Tax # 117 1333 Garden Way UNKNOWN 118 1339 Garden Way UNKNOWN 119 1345 Garden Way UNKNOWN 120 1351 Garden Way UNKNOWN 121 1357 Garden Way UNKNOWN 122 1361 Garden Way UNKNOWN 123 1367 Garden Way UNKNOWN 124 1371 Garden Way UNKNOWN 125 1317 Garden Way UNKNOWN 126 1304 Garden Way UNKNOWN 127 1310 Garden Way UNKNOWN 128 1316 Garden Way UNKNOWN 129 1322 Garden Way UNKNOWN 130 1328 Garden Way UNKNOWN 131 1334 Garden Way UNKNOWN 132 1340 Garden Way UNKNOWN 133 1346 Garden Way UNKNOWN 134 1352 Garden Way UNKNOWN 135 1358 Garden Way UNKNOWN 136 1364 Garden Way UNKNOWN 137 1370 Garden Way UNKNOWN 138 1375 Garden Way UNKNOWN 139 1381 Garden Way UNKNOWN 140 1339 Lake Trail North UNKNOWN 141 1325 Lake Trail North UNKNOWN all in South Bend, Indiana, and which is more particularly described as follows: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SOUTHFIELD LAKE A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 36 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, CITY OF SOUTH BEND, CENTRE TOWNSHIP, ST. JOSEPH COUNTY, INDIANA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT A NAIL WITH DISC MARKING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 6; THENCE NORTH 00°08’59” WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 6 A DISTANCE OF 701.00 FEET TO A NAIL WITH DISC, THE “POINT OF BEGINNING” OF SAID PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE NORTH 00°08’59” WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 6 A DISTANCE OF 337.13 FEET (CITED IN PRIOR DEED AS 336.83 FEET) TO A NAIL WITH DISC MARKING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SOUTHFIELD SUBDIVISION SECTION THREE WHICH IS RECORDED AS INTRUMENT NO. 9853561 IN THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF ST. JOSEPH COUNTY, INDIANA; THENCE SOUTH 89°49’32” EAST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHFIELD SUBDIVISION SECTION THREE, THE SOUTH LINE OF SOUTHFIELD SUBDIVISION SECTION FOUR WHICH IS RECORDED AS INSTRUMENT NO. 9925490 IN THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF ST. JOSEPH COUNTY, INDIANA AND THE SOUTH LINE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN RECORDED INSTRUMENT NO. 9661170 IN THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF ST. JOSEPH COUNTY, INDIANA, A DISTANCE OF 2618.98 FEET (CITED IN PRIOR DEED AS 2628.00 FEET) TO A 5/8” IRON BAR WITH CAP ON THE NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SECTION 6; THENCE SOUTH 00°35’04” WEST, ALONG THE NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SECTION 6 A DISTANCE OF 1025.28 FEET (CITED IN PRIOR DEED AS 1035.20 FEET) TO A 5/8” IRON BAR WITH CAP MARKING THE CENTER OF SECTION 6; THENCE SOUTH 89°53’30” 27 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 WEST, ALONG THE EAST-WEST CENTERLINE OF SECTION 6 A DISTANCE OF 2171.43 FEET (CITED IN PRIOR DEED AS 2172.30 FEET) TO A 5/8” IRON BAR WITH CAP ON THE EAST LINE OF LOT 1 OF BAILEY’S MIAMI ROAD MINOR SUBDIVISION WHICH IS RECORDED AS INSTRUMENT NO. 8406190 IN THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF ST. JOSEPH COUNTY, INDIANA; THENCE NORTH 00°38’57” EAST, ALONG SAID EAST LINE A DISTANCE OF 197.38 FEET TO A 5/8” IRON BAR WITH CAP MARKING THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 1; THENCE NORTH 89°58’31” EAST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN RECORDED INSTRUMENT NO. 8826863 IN THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF ST. JOSEPH COUNTY, INDIANA A DISTANCE OF 14.56 FEET TO A 5/8” IRON BAR WITH CAP; THENCE NORTH 00°20’24” WEST A DISTANCE OF 503.01 FEET TO A 5/8” IRON BAR WITH CAP ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL DESCRIBED IN RECORDED INSTRUMENT NO. 8826863; THENCE SOUTH 89°58’31” WEST, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE A DISTANCE OF 450.01 FEET TO THE “POINT OF BEGINNING”. CONTAINING 54.688 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. and this property which has Tax Key Numbers 23-1010-0187; 23-1010-018601 and 23- 1010-018602 (partial) (approximate east half),be designated as a Residentially Distressed Area under the provisions of Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1 et seq., and South Bend Municipal Code Sections 2-76 et seq., and; WHEREAS, notice of the adoption of a Declaratory Resolution and the public hearing before the Council has been published pursuant to Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1-2.5; and WHEREAS, the Council held a public hearing for the purposes of hearing all remonstrance’s and objections from interested persons; and WHEREAS, the Council has determined that the qualifications for a residentially distressed area have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, as follows: SECTION I. The Common Council hereby determines and finds that the petition for real property tax abatement and the Statement of Benefits form meet the requirements of Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1 et seq., for tax abatement. SECTION II. The Common Council hereby determines and finds that the area meets one of the following conditions as formally established in Ordinance No. 9394-03, which was passed on February 10, 2003: A. The area is comprised of parcels that are either unimproved or contain only one (1) or two (2) family dwellings designed for up to four (4) families, including accessory buildings for those dwellings; or B. Any dwellings in the area are not permanently occupied and are: i. the subject of an order issued under IC 36-7-9; or ii. evidencing significant building deficiencies; or C. Parcels of property in the area: i. have been sold and not redeemed under IC 6-1.1-24 and IC 6-1.1-25; or ii. are owned by a unit of local government; or D. A significant number of dwelling units within the area are not permanently occupied or a significant number of parcels in the area are vacant land; or E. A significant number of dwelling units within the area are: i. the subject of an order issued under IC 36-7-9; or ii. evidencing significant building deficiencies; or F. The area has experienced a net loss in the number of dwelling units, as 28 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 documented by census information, local building and demolition permits, or certificates of occupancy, or the areas are owned by Indiana or the United States; or G. The area (plus any areas previously designated under this subsection) will not exceed ten percent (10%) of the total area within the Council’s jurisdiction. SECTION III. The Common Council also hereby determines and finds the following: A. That the description of the proposed redevelopment meets the applicable standards for such development. B. That the estimate of the value of the redevelopment is reasonable for projects of this nature; C. That the other benefits about which information was requested are benefits that can be reasonably expected to result from the proposed described redevelopment; and D. That the totality of benefits is sufficient to justify the requested deduction, all of which satisfy the requirements of Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1-3. E. The deduction will not be allowed unless the dwelling is rehabilitated to meet local code standards for habitability. F. The deduction will not be allowed unless the dwelling rehabilitation is completed within five (5) calendar years from the date of the adoption of this Resolution by the Common Council. SECTION IV. The Common Council hereby confirms its Declaratory Resolution designating the area described herein as a Residentially Distressed Area for the purposes of tax abatement. Such designation is for Real property tax abatement only and is limited to five (5) calendar years from the date of the adoption of the Declaratory Resolution by the Common Council. SECTION V. The Common Council hereby determines that the property owner is qualified for and is granted Real property tax deduction for a period of five (5) years, and further determines that the petition complies with Chapter 2, Article 6, of the Municipal Code of the City of South Bend and Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1 et seq. SECTION VI. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption by the Common Council and approval by the Mayor. s/Timothy A. Rouse Member of the Common Council Mr. John Leszczynski, The Troyer Group, 550 Union Street, Mishawaka, Indiana, made the presentation for this bill on behalf of the LLE Real Estate, LLP, the owners of the property. Mr. Leszczynski advised that the Southfield Lake sub-division is located approximately one-quarter mile south of the intersection of Miami and Kern Roads on the east side of Miami. The project involves the construction of 141 single family residential units. Each home will be approximately 1500 to 2400 square feet in size and contain multiple bedrooms, baths, a den, kitchen, living space and attached garage. Construction will be wood frame with vinyl siding and exterior brick/stone accents or all brick or stone exterior construction. Mr. Leszczynski stated that the price for each home will range between $160,000 and $240,000. 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 Varner made a motion to adopt this Resolution. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried and the 29 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 Resolution was adopted by a roll call vote of seven (7) ayes and two (2) nays (Councilmember’s Dieter and Henry Davis.) RESOLUTION NO. 3909-08 A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF SCRAP METAL/JUNK DEALERS/RECYCLING OPERATION LICENSES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2008 PURSUANT TO SECTION 4-51 OF THE SOUTH BEND MUNICIPAL CODE WHEREAS, Section 4-51 of the South Bend Municipal Code sets forth the regulations addressing the licensing of scrap metal dealers, junk dealers and recycling operations; and WHEREAS, on September 17, 2008 the City Business Licensing Auditor provided written notice to the City Clerk that the following businesses had been approved for Scrap Metal Dealer, Junk Dealer, Valuable Metal Dealer and Recycling Operations Licenses for the 2008 licensing year; and Alternative Two, LLC, 700 W. Chippewa Ave. OmniSource Corporation. 1305 Prairie Ave. South Bend Iron & Metal, 429 W. Indiana Ave. Treadstone, LLC; 445 N. Sheridan U.S. Scrap & Recycling, 1610 Circle Ave. U.S. Scrap & Recycling, 1700 W. Washington St. U.S. Scrap & Recycling, 2016 W. Washington St. WHEREAS, the license applications for all above-referenced businesses received favorable recommendations from the Department of Code Enforcement, Fire Prevention Bureau, Department of Water Works, and the Building Department. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, as follows: Section I. The license applications for the following businesses are approved in conformity with South Bend Municipal Code Section 4-51 and based upon the satisfactory review and inspection of the properties by the Department of Code Enforcement, Fire Prevention Bureau, Department of Water Works, and the Building Department as evidenced by the Business Licensing Auditor’s communication to the City Clerk dated September 17, 2008: Alternative Two, LLC, 700 W. Chippewa Ave. OmniSource Corporation. 1305 Prairie Ave. South Bend Iron & Metal, 429 W. Indiana Ave. Treadstone, LLC; 445 N. Sheridan U.S. Scrap & Recycling, 1610 Circle Ave. U.S. Scrap & Recycling, 1700 W. Washington St. U.S. Scrap & Recycling, 2016 W. Washington St. Section II. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption by the Council and approval by the Mayor. s/Timothy A. Rouse Member of the Common Council Councilmember LaFountain, Chairperson, Personnel and Finance Committee, reported that this committee held a Public Hearing on this bill this afternoon and voted to send it to the full Council with a favorable recommendation. 30 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 th Mr. Charles Clark, License Auditor, Department of Administration and Finance, 12 Floor County-City Building, South Bend, Indiana, made the presentation for this bill. Mr. Clark advised that in accordance with the procedure for the renewal of City Business/Occupational licenses for the operation of Scrap Metal/Junk Dealers/Recycling Operations, applications for seven (7) businesses were submitted to the Police Department, Fire Inspection Bureau, Water Works, Department of Code Enforcement and Building Department. Included in the seven were applications for two (2) new businesses Alternative Two, LLC and Omni Source Corporation, both of which are located on sites previously licensed and used for this purpose. Mr. Clark noted that the properties were inspected for Fire Code violations, environmental violations, proper maintenance of the premises and areas outside the fences, the height and condition of the surrounding fencing and, compliance with record keeping and security requirements. All applications received favorable recommendation from all departments. Mr. Clark stated that the applicants have met all of the technical requirements of the ordinance. A Public Hearing was held on the Resolution at this time. There being no on present wishing to speak to the Council either in favor of or in opposition to this Resolution, Councilmember Dieter made a motion to adopt this Resolution. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried and the Resolution was adopted by a roll call vote of nine (9) ayes. RESOLUTION NO. 3910-08 A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, TRANSFERRING TO MADISON CENTER $43,656.00 OF UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT SHELTER PLUS CARE GRANT FUNDS WITHIN FUND NO. 212 WHEREAS, on May 27, 2008 this Council passed Ordinance No. 9840-08 which appropriated a total of $178,320.00 in United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) grant funds of which $43,656.00 was designated for AIDS Ministries/AIDS Assist and the balance for Madison Center; and WHEREAS, The South Bend Division of Community Development has recently learned that AIDS Ministries/AIDS Assist cannot accept the funds appropriated for its use in Ordinance No. 9840-08; and WHEREAS, the sum of $43,656.00 designated for distribution to AIDS Ministries/AIDS Assist by Ordinance No. 9840-08, should be transferred to Madison Center. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, as follows: Section I. The sum of $43,656.00 within Fund 212 previously appropriated by Ordinance 9840-08 for distribution to AIDS Ministries/AIDS Assist shall be transferred to Madison Center, the other sub grantee of HUD funds in Ordinance 9840-08, to be administered by the Division of Community Development. Section II. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption by the Council and approval by the Mayor. s/Timothy A. Rouse Member of the Common Council 31 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 Councilmember Dieter, Chairperson, Community & Economic Development, reported that this committee held a Public Hearing on this bill this afternoon and voted to send it to the full Council with a favorable recommendation. th Pamela Meyer, Director, Community & Economic Development, 12 Floor County-City Building, South Bend, Indiana, made the presentation for this bill. Ms. Meyer advised that this bill would allow the transfer of previously appropriated Shelter Plus Care Funds (SPC) from Aids Ministries to Madison Center. She stated that in May of this year the Council approved an appropriation ordinance for the SPC funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to Aids Ministries and Madison Center. Since that time, Aids Ministries has conveyed to HUD and the City that they will not be in a position to administer these funds. Communication between the City and HUD resulted in discussion with Madison Center. Both the City and HUD concur that Madison Center is the appropriate agency and can manage the program/funds. Ms. Meyer stated that the City serves as the fiscal agent and recipient of the funds for the eligible agencies. SPC funds support housing for the severely mentally ill and homeless population. 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 Dieter made a motion to adopt this Resolution. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried and the Resolution was adopted by a roll call vote of eight (8) ayes and one 1) nay (Councilmember Henry Davis). BILLS, FIRST READING BILL NO. 61-08 FIRST READING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AMENDING CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 14 OF THE SOUTH BEND MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH A NEW NONREVERTING, PRIVATE GIFT, DONATION AND BEQUEST FUND This bill had first reading. Councilmember Puzzello made a motion to refer this bill to the Personnel & Finance Committee and set it for Public Hearing and Third Reading on October 27, 2008. Councilmember LaFountain seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. UNFINISHED BUSINESS REPORT FROM AREA PLAN COMMISSION BILL NO. 48-08 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, AND AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN CLAY TOWNSHIP CONTIGUOUS THEREWITH: COUNCILMANIC DISTRICT #4, JOHN ROY, 54700 BLOCK OF BURDETTE STREET, SOUTH BEND, INDIANA 32 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 Councilmember Puzzello made a motion to refer this bill to the Zoning and Annexation Committee and set this bill for Public Hearing and Third Reading on October 27, 2008. Councilmember Dieter seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. NEW BUSINESS Councilmember Rouse stated that he attended a Code Enforcement Hearing on Tuesday, September 16, 2008, because of some on the issues that he has been receiving calls from some constituents complaining about vacant property and houses. He stated that what he discovered by just sitting in on this meeting was that Code Enforcement has quite a process to go through legally and sometimes the hearing is prolonged because the persons are not responding to the notifications to appear. One of the problems that they have is being able to locate the owners of these vacant homes. He stated that hopefully in the future there will be some ways to resolve that problem. Sometimes it’s a matter of keeping track of these people because they move around quite frequently. Councilmember Rouse stated that there needs to stricter enforcement on those individuals who do not register their home as a vacant property. Councilmember Oliver Davis reminded everyone that he is holding two “The Heart of the Matter District-Wide Meetings.” The first will be held September 25, 2008 from 6:00 p.m. until 7:00 p.m. at the West Side Democratic & Civic Club, 617 S. Warrant St., South Bend, Indiana 46619 and the second will be held on October 16, 2008 from 6:00 p.m. until 7:00 p.m. at the Rum Village Nature Center, 2626 S. Gertrude Street, South Bend, Indiana, 46614. He encourage all to attend. Councilmember Oliver Davis acknowledged two of his students from Andrew’s University: Ms. Jennifer Dozier and Ms. Sharon Sarosstimus. He advised that part of their assignments were to attend local government meetings and observe how those bodies of government conduct business. PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR Ms. Sharon Lula, 55428 Meadowview, South Bend, Indiana, stated that she is here to talk about the LaSalle Square Redevelopment Project. She thanked everyone involved in the revitalization plan. She stated that she has lived there most of her life and to look at that area and how run down it has become. This project is welcomed but with one concern and that is with the proposed senior housing project. She stated that she attended the planning committee meetings and it was noted that the senior housing project was not a welcomed idea. She stated that she understands from the City’s prospective it is a taxable project, and understands why those tax dollars need to be generated. From the homeowner’s standpoint, she feels that a senior living area could turn into another high crime area, like the Beacon Heights Apartment Complex. She asked the Council what kinds of guarantees would be in place so that doesn’t happen. Councilmember Rouse assigned this topic to Councilmember Henry Davis, Jr. who is the nd Council representative for the 2 District where the LaSalle Square Redevelopment Project is located. He noted that Councilmember Henry Davis has attended those planning meetings. COMMENTS REGARDING SCHOOL CROSSING GUARDS Ms. Sandy Dreibelbeis, 203 E. Eckman, South Bend, Indiana, stated that she is the spokesperson for the South Bend School Crossing Guards. She stated that she had a speech written, but some of the questions that were in that speech were answered under the Budget portion of the meeting. She stated that they are in attendance tonight to defend themselves and feel like they have no one to go to, they are not union. She stated that they have asked the Police Department questions, and are told that this topic is not open for discussion, no one will talk to them, no one will answer any of their questions, 33 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 so that is why they are here tonight. She stated that they feel their jobs are just as important as everyone else for the safety of the school children and they use their cars, gas. Two people have PERF, that’s it, and very few carry the insurance, so it’s not like they are rich. She stated that she has been a crossing guard for twenty-five years and there are some other ladies that have been on for quite awhile. She stated that they are dedicated to their jobs. She stated that they have heard people say to volunteer, that’s fine, but she questioned whether the Council would volunteer for their jobs. She stated that they have bills to pay. She stated that they have a great care for the school children and if they didn’t they wouldn’t be doing this job. She stated that they would have other careers; she did have another career, but decided that she wanted to spend more time with her children and took this job so she could do that. She stated that she is not rich, but is not sorry that she made the decision. She pleaded with the Council to try to find some funds to keep the Crossing Guards. Councilmember Oliver Davis questioned whether or not the Crossing Guards have attended a School Board Meeting? Ms. Dreibelbeis stated no they had not and why would they? She stated that they are employed by the South Bend Police Department not the School Corporation. Councilmember Oliver Davis stated that they should not put all their eggs in one basket, but put them in several and meet with the SBCSC School Board to see if they can help come up with some funds along with the City to try to find a resolution to help find funding for the Crossing Guards. Ms. Christine Woolrich, 734 N. Twyckenham, South Bend, Indiana, stated that she is a retired Vice-President for Key Bank. She stated that at the present time she is teaching at James Madison Primary Center. For 47 years the school crossing guards have made an adequate and diligent commitment to preserve safety for the children. She stated that she is witness to this every school day. She stated that at 7:15 a.m. every morning they are at their respective schools, in the dark, in the rain, in the snow, and in the sunshine to take care of the school children on the South Bend Community School Corporation. She urged the Council to finds some funds to take care of these school crossing guards. She stated that Council needs to find the funds, not the School Corporation; she stated that the school barely has enough to cover raises for the teachers. She stated that this is a matter safety for the school children. Mr. Bob Steinmetz, SBCSC Teacher, Room #144, Harrison Primary Center, South Bend, Indiana, stated he has been a resident of South Bend since he graduated from college and a third grade teacher at Harrison for 39 years and a supervisor of student patrols for the last 15 years. He stated that he has had the privilege of working with three of the crossing guards in the audience tonight, Ms. McKinney, Ms. Anderson and Ms. Gunn. He stated that he would like to speak in favor of retaining all of the school crossing guards from two points of view. First the logical approach. Who would cross the elementary school students if there were no more crossing guards? Some argue that parent volunteers could be enlisted, that might work for awhile until the weather gets cold or there is a family emergency or there are important errands to run. Volunteers no matter how well intentioned, simply would not be at their post every single morning and afternoon on a consistent basis. Most volunteers rightfully or wrongfully believe that other obligations supersede a non-paying job. Would teachers fulfill this obligation to be crossing guards? That might sound like a workable solution, until they realize that teacher’s by contract have hall and classroom duty starting at 8:00 a.m. and that there are still some stragglers that cross the intersections going to school around 8:05 or 8:10 or even later. Most teachers arrive at least one-half hour before school begins to prepare for the day and would not have the time before school to be on crossing guard duty. What about after school? There are meetings, bus duty, hall duty again, all of which are contractual obligations and prevent them from taking on other obligations. What about having students fill in as crossing guards? That is the worst of these three options, th because the elementary school only goes up to the 4 grade and the reality of the society today is that cars barely stop for the adult crossing guards in full uniform with a stop sign. He student patrols are only there to hold the students back while the adults enter the intersection to hold up traffic. He noted that his student patrols have specifically trained 34 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 and told never to enter into an intersection to stop traffic at any time. Having ten year olds do the work of adults is a recipe for disaster. Lastly, the emotional approach or perhaps better called an approach from the heart. They are continuing to legislate and institute programs for the children’s safety especially for those at the elementary level. They require seatbelts for everyone and require the younger children to sit in the back of a car. They have drug resistant programs, anti-bullying programs; anti-gang programs and locks on the school doors to prevent stranger danger. He stated that the program has been initiated to put yard signs in the community to alert drivers that children dart! There are warning signs and flashing lights in school zones to remind drivers when children are present. He stated that without crossing guards the only flashing lights that will be around his school are those from ambulances, police and fire vehicles rushing to an accident between a child and a distracted driver. Some children do not have the luxury of a bus or car for transportation if they live within a certain distance of the school and do not have enough money for a working car. He stated that cutting crossing guards out of the budget is just not an option for him. The only option should be to cut somewhere else. As the Governor of Indiana states in his recent campaign ad, something else needs to be cut, our children are just too important. Ms. Sharon Howse, 2013 Gertrude, South Bend, Indiana, stated that she realizes that this is an election year and it has been a very tough year on everyone. But one of these days we may have a President come out of South Bend, Indiana. With that do we want a President that comes in on crutches without a leg, without an arm, without a hand? Does the Council want this? Everyone will ask what happened, and they will say that they went to school in South Bend and because of budget cuts they eliminated the school crossing guards and got hit by a car, truck, or bus. She urged the Council to think about this, the children of the South Bend Community are very important and could very well be one of our next President’s of the United States of America. Councilmember Rouse assigned the topic of Crossing Guards to the Chairperson’s of the Health and Public Safety Committee and the Personnel & Finance Committee, those being Karen L. White and Thomas LaFountain to help find a resolution to this issue. Ms. Marlene Lowe, 59670 Thornberry Ct., South Bend, Indiana, questioned when the City Controller was talking about laying off police personnel, who was she referring to. And why was the number only two (2) people? Ms. Lowe stated that they are employed through the South Bend Police Department and wondered why Ms. Fanello stated that there were only two employees being laid-off and why the crossing guards were not mentioned. Councilmember Rouse stated that he also noticed in the statement from the Controller that the number of people being laid-off was two (2). He reiterated that Councilmember Karen White, Chairperson Health and Public Safety and Councilmember Tom LaFountain, Chairperson, Personnel and Finance will address that question. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the President Timothy Rouse adjourned the meeting at 9:22 p.m. ATTEST: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ John Voorde, City Clerk Timothy Rouse, President 35