09-26-77 Council Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 26 1977 REGULAR MEETING RECONVENED CONTINUED) Miss Barbara Schankerman, 1615 Rockne, presented a petition with 2,100 signatures. She read the following statement: "My position regarding the proposed Downtown mall is well known: I support the concept of a revitalized Downtown. I firmly believe this revitalization can be accomplished WITHOUT the tearing down of sound buildings. Therefore, I strongly oppose the demolition of sound buildings to make way for the proposed mall. Also, I oppose publicly financed construction and maintenance of parking garages for the proposed mall. It has been my impression that the recommendations of the Redevelopmen- Commission are a prime consideration as this Council makes it decisions regarding this proposed mall. Therefore, I feel it is im- perative that I tell this Council about the Redevelopment Commission's passing of Resolution 541. Allow me to quote from the statement I presented to the Redevelopment Commission on September 16th, 1977: 'I strongly object to your passing of resolutions without making them public prior to your vote. Passing resolutions without making them public prior to your vote does not allow a citizen any time to prepare and file a remonstrance.' Yesterday, at approximate 4:30 p.m., I requested from the Redevelopment Secretary a copy of the three items - two resolu- tions and an agreement - on the Redevelopment Commission's agenda that concern the proposed Downtown mall. The Secretary explained to me that these documents were still at the lawyers and, hence, were unavilable. She went on to say, after I questioned her, that the Redevelopment Commissioners, also, will not have read the documents prior to commencing the meeting. These items are very important governmental business. They concern the proposed Downtown mall project The documents explaining these items in detail should have been available to the public several days before the scheduled vote. The public has the right to scrutinize if it so desires. You Commissioners have a responsibility of voting intelligently and in the best interests of the citizenry. No one can make a sound decision by glancing at the documents for the first time a few minutes before the vote. You should get and study copies of all resolutions, agreements, etc. in advance of the voting day so that you can be prepared for your vote. Regardless of the legality of not having the resolution available to the Commissioners, the press, and concerned citizens until just before the vote, not having the resolution available for the public's in- spection is BAD politics. It suggests to me "What are they trying to hide ?. As to the answers I received from the Redevelopment Commission, please note the following quote from the Minutes of this Redevelopment Commission Meeting: 'Ms. Schankerman asked to see the legal verification that states that it is not proper to have anybody able to see the resolution prior to vote, this was the purpose of her statement and the answer she wanted to hear. Mr. Brownell told her that he did not believe we are required to prepare resolutions in advance, that the resolution was in Mr. Butler's office and he did bring the resolution in question into this office prior to the beginning of this meeting. The members of the Commission were fully aware of the at- torneys working on this resolution. Mr. Butler also answered Ms. Schankerman's question by stating that there is no requirement under the "sunshine law" or any other law that requires resolutions be made available prior to the meeting.' "Mr. Kline asked how could the commission vote affirmative on this resolution without having seen the resolution prior to its vote this morning. Mr. Nimtz replied that this is possible because of the great confidence held in the legal counsel of this Commission. And also: Mr. Butler is speaking. Anderson is a respected attorney in town. As far as the resolution is concerned it was not unavailable for any reason other than it had not been prepared ... Mr. Anderson interrupted by saying that "perhaps if pre- paration takes that long there should be a delay in bringing it before the Commission and afford the public an opportunity to hear it. Mr. Butler added that when the item was under discussion by the Commissioners, when the people from the audience had an opportunity to discuss the res- olution... Mr. Anderson interrupted... "Mr. Butler if it takes you until the last minutes to prepare the resolution, how long do you think it takes layman to inquire into the meaning of its legality, its pertinence do you think it will take them 30 seconds ?... Mr. Butler answered No, the Resolution was available about 15 minutes before the meeting. Specifically, regarding Item 4c of Attachment A to the Resolution - Hud's requirement that the South Bend City Council agree to cover any cost overruns to the extended project from Block Grant Entitlement alloca- tions and Section III of the Resolution with the agenda number 9A that so provides: I quote from the Minutes of this SEptember 16th, 1977 Redevelopment Commission Meeting. Mr. Anderson asked if there was any guarantee that involved the City of South Bend to make up any deficits thi might arise? Mr. Brownell added that he didn't think so...Mr. Anderson added that "while you may not think so, Mr. Brownell it is not a fact that if this program goes through, the City has to guarantee to make up any deficits and over -costs of the project? Mr. Brownell answered you are talking about another thing, we are talking about the close out of Project R -66, a Section 112B Financial Settlement." Mr. Anderson asked what were the previous over -runs on our earlier projects the City had to pick up? Mr. Brownell didn't know of any. Mr. Anderson said, you don't know of any, would an audit reveal such costs? Mr. Brownell said an audit would. Mr. Anderson said, were you ever audited? Mr. Brownell said we have to have an audit every two years. Mr. Anderson asked, were you ever audited specifically for the purpose of determining the costs that the City had to pick up? Mr. Brownell added that if there were, the audit would reveal it. Mr. Anderson asked if those records existed, are they available to the public? Mr. Brownell said yes they existed, and he did not know if they would be public informa tion. Mr. Anderson said if I asked for them would you refuse to let me see them. Mr. Brownell said he did not know the answer to that. Mr. Anderson said I would constitute that to be a refusal if you don't know the answer. Mr. Brownell said you can constitute anything you want I don't really care what you constitute. Mr. Anderson said I know you don't really care. Mr. Brownell added he didn't like Mr. Anderson's attitute. County Councilman Chris Overgaard summed it up quite well at that meeting: Now if we operated our County government in the same manner as this whole procedure is handled, then you better throw me out of office. As you consider the recommendations of the Redevelopment Commission, think of how they conduct the business before them. The absence of binding commitment forcing the developers to build if the City acquires and.clears the land frightens me. As was so aptly said in the South Bend Tribune editorial yesterday: Before more downtown buildings .are razed to make room for Century Mall, Redevelopment should have written assurance backed up by a substantial surety payment from the developers that they not only will purchase the newly cleared property from Redevelopment, but will proceed to build the mall within a relatively brief specified time period. Interestingly, Mayor Nemeth once held this view too. I quote from May 4, 1975, South Bend Tribune. Councilman Peter J. Nemeth, seeking the Democratic nomination for mayor, Saturday presented a four -point plan for "emergency interium relief "in the downtown. He called for a firm legal commitment such as a performance bond from First Bank and Trust Co. for its proposed downtown development. Also Associates.give the Redevelopment Commission a letter of credit for $160,000 when the corpora- tion announced its plans. Nemeth said Associates tied up the land for the proposed Superblock at the north end of the plaza for two years, yet Associates may not have to forfeit the $160,OOOI and: Many downtown merchants, Nemeth continued, are troubled by the lack of accessibility to the city administration.