Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 09/15/2008CITY COUNCIL 15 SEPTEMBER 2008 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on 15 September 2008, at 7:00 p.m., in the Cafeteria, Orchard School 2 Baldwin Avenue. Members Present: C. Smith, Chair; S. Magowan, M. Boucher, S. Dooley, M. Emery Also Present: C. Hafter, City Manager; D. Gravelin, Assistant City Manager; S. Stitzel, City Attorney, T. Whipple, Chief, Lt. J. Snyder, Police Department; D. Brent, Chief, Fire Department; S. Bradeen, K. Donahue, J. Nadworny, D. Wilbur, M. Mittag, R. Bliss 1. Comments & Questions from the Audience, not related to Agenda items: Ms. Nadworny told the Council that she lives in Oak Creek Village which she recent discovered that there had been an interconnection between her stormwater and sewer drains, and that this is illegal. She did the repairs and then upon investigation learned that nobody in South Burlington inspects homes to be sure they are up to code. She felt that safeguards are needed, and if the City won't do this then they need to inform homeowners to hire someone. She also felt that builders who are building sub-standard homes should not be allowed to do so in South Burlington. Ms. Emery said she felt it was reasonable for the City to tell people that inspections are recommended. Ms. Nadworny said that every homeowner in her neighborhood had some sort of problem (e.g., electric, plumbing, etc.) with the home that was bought. Mr. Hafter noted that it would also have been a problem if Ms. Nadworny had sold her home and the new buyer had discovered the problem. Ms. Nadworny would then have been in the "chain of villains." Mr. Smith asked Mr. Hafter to put together some information and ideas for the Council to consider. 2. Announcements and City Manager's Report: Ms. Emery: Noted that the contract between Channel 17 and Comcast will be up for renewal and this will impact the broadcasting of public meetings under the public access channels. Mr. Magowan reported on an all-day CCTA Board retreat. He noted that the Town of Milton is looking to get commuter service. Mr. Hafter: Distributed the Budget Calendar. He noted the changes that will be resulting from the moving of the annual meeting from May to March in 2009. Members agreed that the Steering Committee scheduled for 5 January 2009 would not be needed. On Arbor Day (9/20), South Burlington will host a tree-pruning clinic. The MPO meeting on 17 September will include discussion of the 3rd lane in front of Staples Plaza. The Town Fair will be held on 10/1-2 in Killington. The Steering Committee will meet on 24 September at 6 p.m., prior to the School Board Meeting in the Middle School Cafeteria. The public Town Meeting on the Police Station Site will be held on 2 October, in the Middle School Cafeteria, from 7-9 p.m. It will be preceded by a "pot luck" supper at 6 p.m. The next Council agenda will include discussion of a Sign Ordinance amendment and the first reading of the new Tree Ordinance. Mr. Hafter advised that from 20-25 September he will be attending the International City Managers' meeting in Virginia. On Friday, 19 September, 4 p.m., the 6 new Fire Cadets will graduate from the Fire Academy. The ceremony will take place at Station #1. 3. Meet with City Attorney to Review Ground Rules for e-mail: Mr. Stitzel said that case law is evolving as legislators have not yet fully figured out how to deal with this issue. It is a case of "efficiency" vs. "openness" in public government. Courts generally recognize e-mail communications between elected officials as being the same as letters. The question is where that e-mail will reside so as to be accessible to the public. Mr. Stitzel said that despite the efficiency of e-mail, he would recommend going back to letter writing. If e-mail is used, 2 "ground rules" should apply: 1. have only one subject per e-mail (in order to avoid subjects that are protected from public disclosure) 2. e-mails should be located at sburl.com. If a commercial server is used, the question arises as to where e-mails can be retrieved that are not on the sburl.com. server. Mr. Stitzel stressed that these are public documents. He recommended all city communication take place through sburl.com. Mr. Magowan suggested all Council members get sburl.com. addresses. Mr. Hafter said he would set that up. Mr. Stitzel noted that most people who use e-mail regard it as a phone call. It isn't. It is part of public record. Councilors should be comfortable seeing their words from an e-mail on the front page of a newspaper. Mr. Stitzel added that grammar and spelling reflect on a Councilor's competence as a public official. He suggested never using adjectives. The most unresolved issue regarding e-mail concerns e-mails received by public officials from members of the public in which inappropriate language is used or where someone is defamed. The question arises as to the city's obligation to disclose these documents, which can put the city in the position of "spreading libel." The public needs to be aware that anything in an e-mail may be subject to public disclosure, and this may lead to actions of libel. Mr. Stitzel noted that cities are having to hire public official's full time to monitor such communications. Regarding the "open meeting law," Mr. Stitzel said that e-mails are the same as phone calls in this regard because they have an element of being "simultaneous." The question arises as to what constitutes a "simultaneous" gathering of the Council and therefore a "meeting" and thus subject to the open meeting law. Mr. Stitzel said it is not yet known how the Vermont State Supreme Court will deal with this, but in other states this seems to be how things are going. He told members that if they are transmitting "factual information," that is not viewed as constituting a meeting. Mr. Stitzel reminded members that 2 Councilors can get together to discuss city business, but if there are 3 members present, that constitutes a meeting. One general problem area is the "reply to all" button which leads to more miscommunication. Attachments also create a problem when members edit the comments of others. Mr. Stitzel urged members to conduct their personal business on a personal server and not to mix city business in on this server as everything on that serve could be subject to public scrutiny. If Councilors communication their thoughts on an upcoming agenda item/decision by telephone, this is not considered subject to disclosure; however, if they do this by e-mail, it is a written document and subject to public disclosure. If the city has a routine procedure to delete all e-mails (e.g., wipe out everything after 10 days), that would withstand scrutiny. Anything you may want to keep should be printed off and filed. There has to be a Council-wide procedure for this. Mr. Hafter suggested that he and the City Attorney come up with a draft policy. Mr. Stitzel said it is his best advice not to use e-mail at all. 3. Continued Discussion on Items Related to Police Facility: a. Finalization of Process for Town Meeting on 2 October 2008: Mr. Hafter said the procedure would be to have a 5-minute introduction and then give each side 20 minutes to make a presentation. There would then be a question and answer period followed by comments from the public. Ms. Dooley suggested limiting the presentations to 15 minutes in the interest of time and to allow for more public comment. Mr. Hafter said the presentation will not include specifics about the facility. Mr. Smith expressed concern with this as after the negative vote the city was told it did not provide enough information. He felt 20 minutes was the minimum amount of time needed. He did not feel the City should tell people "we have no idea what the building will be." Mr. Boucher was concerned that if a price ticket for the building is mentioned, the Calkins vote will go down. Ms. Emery said that wherever the building goes, it will be expensive because that is the nature of a police facility. She felt people have to understand this. Mr. Magowan felt that the only presentation should be the city's position since the aim is to get residents to support the use of the Calkins property. People could then ask questions and make comments. Mr. Boucher agreed and said the Council's job is to lead the community through to the Council's decision. Ms. Emery said she could not say she favors this site, but she supports the judgment of the committee. Eleven people who came to the committee with widely divergent opinions came to this decision unanimously. Mr. Mittag felt it was tradition to hear dissenting viewpoints. He felt that was reasonable and fair. Mr. Bradeen expressed concern with the Council's inability to come to closure on this. He didn't look for a one-sided presentation, but he didn't want to have the city look like it doesn't have its act together. Ms. Emery agreed. She felt there has to be an education process to show people how the committee came to its choice of this site. Mr. Smith noted the Council voted 4-1 in favor of this site and he felt those 4 members have to be behind this. Ms. Emery said there will have to be cost figures as to what it would cost to put the police facility on the current site. Mr. Donahue noted that for less money than the previous bond vote, the city would get 26,000 sq. ft. of space for the Police Department and still save City Hall. Mr. Bradeen offered to sit with Ms. Dooley and Ms. Emery to be sure the presentation that goes before the public includes their concerns. Officer Bliss a member of the Police Department noted that at his previous place of employment, a similar controversy arose and it took from 1981 until the present to get a building done. The original cost would have been $10,000,000. The delay increased the cost to $100,000,000. Mr. Magowan said he would choose Chief Whipple to give the presentation. Mr. Magowan then moved that for the 2 October meeting, Chief Whipple make a presentation of approximately 40 minutes providing appropriate building information. This will be followed by a question/answer session and, if time, by comments. If it appears another meeting is needed, it should be scheduled at that time. Mr. Boucher seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Ms. Emery asked that the moderator provide "ground rules" concerning respectful discourse. b. Discussion of Oak Creek Parcel dedication for open space: Mr. Hafter said the area comes out to 12.01 acres when the line is straightened out. Mr. Hafter noted that the Calkins question will be on a City ballot instead of on the back of the state ballot. c. Continued Review of Police Station Size: Mr. Smith asked Chief Whipple the difference between the 28,000 sq. ft. building and the 24,000 sq. ft. building. Chief Whipple said some of the "growth space" would be reduced in the smaller building as well as public meeting space and locker rooms. The Chief noted that 8500 sq. ft. of the building would be "office space." He also explained the difference between the needs of a community police department and the State Police needs. Chief Whipple said that in projecting building needs, they estimated a 3% annual increase in call volume. They now average about 503 calls per officer (including all personnel, including those who do not respond regularly to calls). The projection for 2025 is 608 calls per officer. As far as meeting space is concerned, the Chief said he needs a space where he can have all of his people in one room (68 people). Mr. Hafter noted that if City Hall can be renovated, there will not be as much need for "community meeting space" in the new Police building. Mr. Boucher asked if would be possible to build a building that could be added onto, since all the space is not needed immediately. Chief Whipple said that would save only $1,000,000. Mr. Bradeen said you would also have to consider how soon you would have to go back to the voters. He added that if it only costs a little more to build for the future, it may not be sound to have to go back to the voters when the cost to build will be higher. Members agreed to continue the discussion at the next meeting in view of the late hour. 4. Consideration of Note for Capital Equipment for the Fire Department: Mr. Hafter said they got a fixed interest rate of 3.05 for 5 years. Mr. Magowan moved to approve the Capital Equipment Note and accompanying documents for Fire Department equipment. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Discussion of Enforcement of City Policy Regarding Political Signs in the Public Right-of-Way: Mr. Hafter explained how much time it takes to enforce this Policy and to do it in a fair manner. Mr. Magowan felt it should be enforced aggressively and in a balanced manner. Mr. Boucher suggested destroying rather than returning signs. Ms. Dooley felt the City should go along with State law and allow signs 2 weeks before the election. After a brief discussion, Ms. Dooley moved to adopt the State law with regard to political signs in the public right-of-way except in instances where the city determines there is a safety issue. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed 3-2 with Messrs. Magowan and Boucher opposing. 6. Discussion of Intent to Warn Public Meeting for Allocation of Rooms & Meals Tax Proceeds for Emergency Repair to City Hall: Mr. Hafter said that meeting would occur as part of the next Council meeting on 6 October. 7. Consideration of Approval of Cooperative Agreement with VTrans for Safety Grant: Mr. Hafter indicated that the roads involved include US 2, Patchen Road, and Rt. 116. Ms. Dooley moved to authorize the City Manager to sign the Agreement with VTrans as presented. Mr. Magowan seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 8. Review Agenda for Development Review Board Meeting to be held on 16 September 2008: No issues were raised. 9. Review and Approve Minutes from City Council Meeting of 2 September 2008: Mr. Magowan moved to approve the Minutes of 2 September 2008 as written. Mr. Boucher seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 10. Executive Session: Ms. Emery moved that the Council meet in Executive Session to discuss personnel issues and real property acquisition and to resume regular session only for the purpose of adjournment. Mr. Boucher seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 11. Regular Session: The Council returned to regular session. Ms. Emery moved adjournment. Mr. Magowan seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 11:30 p.m. Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.