Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 01/03/1977CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 3, 1977 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday. January 3, 1977, in the Conference Room, Municipal Office Building, 1175 Williston Road. MEMBERS PRESENT Paul A. Farrar, Chairman; John B. Dinklage, Michael D. Flaherty MEMBERS ABSENT Frank H. Armstrong, Catherine M. Neubert OTHERS PRESENT William J. Szymanski, City Manager; Richard Ward, Zoning Administrator: Bruce O'Neill, Recreation Director: Tom Savrine, Mrs. C. Rubin The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 8:00 p.m. Reading of the Minutes of December 20, 1976 It was moved by Mr. Flaherty, seconded by Mr. Dinklage, and voted unanimously to accept the Minutes of December 20, 1976, as presented. Sign disbursement orders Disbursement orders were distributed to the Council for signatures. Review of Recreation Department's survey format Mr. O'Neill introduced Mr. Tom Savrine of the University of Vermont who has been working with the Recreation Department on this survey. The draft presented to Council was described as a third or fourth draft by Mr. O'Neill and he asked what format Council would like the survey to follow. Mr. Dinklage said he was impressed by the draft and he hoped people in the community would take time to fill it out because it gives people the opportunity they need to make comments. Mr. Dinklage then suggested that because there has been interest expressed in the community for some sort of community newspaper, this might be included in the survey, perhaps under miscellaneous, to determine support for such a newspaper. Mr. O'Neill said all the activities listed in the survey are ones which are envisioned as activities the department could run. In the survey they are asking how people find out about the department's programs and perhaps a question about a newspaper could be included there. Questions on fees for use of a swimming pool and the acquisition of open land were discussed, also the use of the term "strictly confidential" in 1(a). Mr. Savrine said he felt people are very suspicious of anything they fill out and they expect to hear some static about asking what street they live on. Chairman Farrar asked if this information could be kept confidential under the law. Mr. O'Neill explained the results would be publicized but would not refer to any individual's answers. The Chairman said he didn't think that could be guaranteed; if someone wants to see them, they have the right to see them. This is at least a debatable legal question and he would prefer not to get into such a corner unless it was necessary. Mr. Dinklage referred to the school survey, saying it was not handled confidentially. They were passed around and reviewed by many different people but there was no way to identify them and he didn't think in this situation there is any way. Mr. O'Neill said he thought this was just a suggestion made to Tom Savrine by some of the resource people who had been helping. Mr. Dinklage felt that by saying it is strictly confidential, it raises the question as to how it is going to be used. He asked Mr. O'Neill if he felt strongly about it. Mr. O'Neill said they would use a code letter for recreational purposes. Asked how the copies would be distributed, Mr. Savrine said they were not even sure yet if they were going to do a 100% household survey. The leg work involved in going door to door, the money involved in mailing, are considerations. Some of the resource people suggested using a random sample of the community. They could mail for a random sample and also make copies of the survey available in the community, perhaps at the schools or in City buildings or local stores, so other residents can pick them up and fill them out if they want to. This would prevent people from being able to say they were left out. It was also suggested that the survey be mailed out with the water bills, but Mr. O'Neill said that would only hit one-third of the town each month. Mr. Dinklage then recommended getting students to both pick up and distribute the survey, paying them 25¢ or less per copy. He felt students would be happy to do this and it should bring in a 50% return on the survey. Mr. O'Neill said they do have some money budgeted for the survey and the cost of printing is going to be minimal. Chairman Farrar suggested contacting the Free Press to find out if arrangements could be made to have the paper boys deliver the survey along with the Free Press. Mr. O'Neill said ultimately the survey is going to result in some recommendations and asked what Council would feel would be valid in terms of a percentage of return on the survey; what would they as a Council take notice of if the people responded to it. Mr. Dinklage said because this is not a money issue he would hope to have a larger response than the school survey of 21%, although that was actually close to 50% of the people who vote. The Chairman said the answers to the survey will show whether or not there is a situation that is worthwhile to follow up. Mr. O'Neill said they are primarily looking for responses from the adults; they will do a separate survey on interest programs in the schools, and this will be made clear in a covering letter, that it is one survey for residence and not one for each resident. Review Zoning Board of Adjustment Agenda Mr. Ward explained the appeal of Chalet Suisse International is for the properties at 148, 150, and 162 Dorset Street, and is for both a restaurant and a motor lodge. The property is zoned for this now but there may be some problems with Act 250, the usual problem of the intersection. Set permit fees for private burglar alarm systems connected to the police station The City Manager said the cost of installing the system in the police station is going to be around $8,100; they had estimated it would be $12,000. He felt the installation permit should be about $75. There are 36 hooked up now, 30 commercial and 6 residential. These people paid themselves at the time they were hooked up, so in a sense they have already paid the installation fee. Mr. Dinklage asked if they would now be paying an annual fee. Mr. Ward said a $50 fee raises almost $2,000. The Chairman felt $50 was probably adequate. Mr. Dinklage asked if the $8,000 included all the equipment and the hookup. Mr. Szymanski said that was right. In addition to that the City is going to have a maintenance fee of $480 a year under contract. Mr. Dinklage asked what was the Chief's estimate of the number of units that would be hooked on when the system is operational, those now waiting to get on. Mr. Szymanski said there probably half a dozen who will come on very shortly. Mr. Dinklage said if the amortization cost is $2,000 per year, then a $50 annual fee would cover the amortization plus $12 for the maintenance, and he asked how an annual fee of more than $62 could be justified. Mr. Farrar replied that couldn't be justified. In 5 years it would be paid for and at that point would it be called a profit returning venture, or the rates be lowered, or the time period increased. Asked about the maintenance contract, Mr. Szymanski said it is for labor and parts for the first year; after that it is labor only. Mr. Dinklage said he would prefer to operate on the assumption that there would be major work during the five years. Mr. Ward asked if the annual fee is paid in advance and was told it would be. The general consensus of Council was for a fee of $75 for installation, not to apply to those already hooked up, and an annual fee of $50 per year. Mr. Dinklage moved that Council set the initial installation fee at $75.00 for hooking up to the burglar alarm system at the police station, for all new users not presently connected to the system; that a permit be required if a system is expanded, modified, or replaced, such permit to be issued by the Code Officer and approved by the Chief of Police, at a cost of $5.00; and that the annual license fee be set at $50.00 per year to cover depreciation of the installation cost and the maintenance, and the annual license fee will be reviewed after one year of operation. Seconded by Mr. Flaherty and passed unanimously. Sign application for Federal Aid (Urban Systems) for the Dorset Street-Williston Road intersection improvements It was moved by Mr. Flaherty that Council approve the signing of the application for Federal Aid (Urban Systems) for the funding of the improvements at the Dorset Street-Williston Road intersection. Seconded by Mr. Dinklage and voted unanimously. Set date of hearing for amendments to the City Master Plan It was moved by Mr. Flaherty that Council set the date for the hearing on the amendments to the Master Plan for February 7, 1977. Seconded by Mr. Dinklage and voted unanimously for approval. Sign short term loan note for the acquisition of the DeGraff property Mr. Szymanski said this was for 11 acres of land and the City has been negotiating for the purchase of it through BOR. He stated it was in the amount of $46.750 with interest at 3.75 percent. Mr. Flaherty moved that Council sign this short term note for $46,750 at 3.75%, to be paid for out of the annual appropriation for open space funding. Seconded by Mr. Dinklage and voted unanimously. Mr. Flaherty then moved that the meeting be adjourned. Seconded by Mr. Dinklage and voted unanimously. The meeting was declared adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.