President of Council Kathy McNear called Council to order on July 5, 2000, at 7:00 p.m.

The governmental body and those in attendance recited the pledge of allegiance.

Mr. Knox took roll call. Present were Council members Danbury, Galster, Pollitt, Vanover, Wilson and McNear. Mr. Squires was absent. Mrs. McNear said Mr. Squires isnít here tonight because he is home recovering from surgery.

The minutes of June 21, 2000 were approved with six affirmative votes.

COMMUNICATIONS

Mr. Knox read part of a letter from the State of Ohio Office of the Auditor directed to Mr. Richard Berg, who was the firm that did our audit. It says "A desk review of the audit has been performed for the City of Springdale for the year ending December 31, 1999. Based on the desk review this audit is acceptable and requires no modifications . . ." Mr. Knox said that the remainder of the letter contained only minor procedural and formatting matters.

COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE - none

CHARTER REVISION - Judy Simmons

Ms. Simmons said Charter Revision is proposing the following changes to allow more flexibility in the redistricting process. In Number 7. Districts we deleted paragraph b. It is the intent that this will allow greater flexibility, but that the spirit of this paragraph will be maintained. In paragraph d. we added additional reasons for redistricting: change in the census tracks and a change in State law. Under the current Charter, even with these census blocks we couldnít redistrict because we met all the conditions. The difference between the largest and smallest districts was less than 10%. In pursuing redistricting, two situations were identified. The signature poll books for the March, 2000 primary showed over 7400 registered voters in the City. The Board of Elections procedures for purging voters is clearly inadequate. We recommend the City work with the Board of Elections to rectify this situation. Traditionally, the at-large members of Council have done the redistricting. When the Committee reviewed one possible redistricting presented by the Board of Elections, the only thing really wrong was that Randy was moved into District 1 and didnít have a district unless he ran against Bob. Everyone of us on the committee had a reaction and we couldnít have been nonpartisan either. With the Board of Elections presenting this redistricting map, we thought maybe we could contract with them or maybe they would do it free of charge. They seem to have the computer facilities and the people who know how to deal with the numbers.

Mrs. McNear said I know we have a time limit for getting this revision to the Board of Elections but most of us have not had a chance to absorb this. Letís put this on the agenda for the next meeting.

Mr. Wilson said you showed us with redistricting that Randy and I were in the same district. Who did that?

Ms. Simmons replied that was just a proposal by the Board of Elections. Legally until this ordinance passes we canít redistrict. They were showing how the districts might be realigned, conform to the census block information and minimize the number of precincts. Iím still not sure what is going to happen in November. We currently have fourteen precincts and have trouble staffing them. Right now, with our current districts, using the census block data, we would theoretically have 40 precincts for the November general election. This was just one proposal to show how it could be done. Of course, there are certain things they try to do, like the Maple Knoll people were promised they would vote at Maple Knoll; the Springdale Knolls people were promised they could vote at the Knolls, so they are trying to adjust precincts to do that. There were adjustments to other districts but they maintain things such as everything within a district had to be contiguous. If we ask the Board of Elections to redraw the districts we have the right to refuse whatever they propose.

ORDINANCE NO. 57-2000 "CONFIRMING THE DESIGNATIONS OF DEPOSITORIES BY THE FINANCE COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL, INCLUDING FIFTH THIRD BANK AS THE DEPOSITORY FOR THE ACTIVE AND/OR INTERIM DEPOSITS AND KEY BANK, BANK ONE, N.A.; PNC BANK, N.A; FIRSTAR BANK, N.A.; AND STAROHIO AS DEPOSITORIES FOR INTERIM DEPOSITS OF THE CITY OF SPRINGDALE, OHIO, DECLARING ALL PUBLIC MONIES COLLECTED OR TO BE COLLECTED DURING THE PERIOD OF DESIGNATION TO BE ACTIVE OR INTERIM DEPOSITS; AND ESTIMATING THE PROBABLE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF MONIES SUBJECT TO DEPOSIT THEREIN AT ANY TIME DURING SAID PERIOD AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY"

Ms. Pollitt made a motion to adopt and Mr. Danbury seconded. Ordinance 57-2000 passed with six affirmative votes.

Mr. Osborn asked for an executive session to discuss Ordinance 59-2000. Mr. Danbury made a motion that Council go into executive session as a committee of the whole to discuss real estate acquisition and possible litigation. Mr. Vanover seconded. The motion passed with six affirmative votes.

Council adjourned for Executive Session at 7:25 p.m. and reconvened at 8:03 p.m.

ORDINANCE NO. 59-2000 "AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING PAYMENT TO THE CLERK OF COURTS FOR THE JUDGMENT IN THE APPROPRIATION OF SAM BURNSí PROPERTY (CASE #A99001067) AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY"

Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mr. Vanover seconded. Ordinance 59-2000 passed with six affirmative votes.

RESOLUTION R12-2000 "COMMENDING MARGE BOICE FOR HER DEDICATION AND SERVICE TO THE CITY OF SPRINGDALE"

Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Ms. Pollitt seconded. Resolution R12-2000 passed with six affirmative votes.

Mayor Webster said I donít want this to pass without Mrs. Boice knowing that we certainly do appreciate her coming out of retirement and getting a job done. The City had its back to the wall and there are several pressing issues that need to be taken care of and Marge, in her usual take no prisoners, no nonsense approach, convened the committee. They met five or six times already this year and got all the issues before Council and hopefully weíll have all this on the ballot for this November. Thank you, Marge, for a job well done.

Public Hearing

RESOLUTION R 13-2001 "ADOPTING THE TAX BUDGET OF THE CITY OF SPRINGDALE FOR THE YEAR JANUARY 1, 2001, THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2001"

Mr. Osborn stated Iíd like to begin by restating some of the things we typically mention about the tax budget. Itís really a planning document that allows a jurisdiction to assess and determine what they think their revenues will be for the next budget year. We are looking at the budget year 2001. We put the numbers in the budget and put down operating costs. We take the 2000 expenses right out of the 2000 budget. We take the 2001 expenses out of the five year budget. We send this document to the County Budget Commission. They look at our estimates and certify our revenue numbers to validate that our predictions about revenues are realistic; that we are not overstating our revenues. If we depended on overstated revenue figures and we actually got into an appropriation based on those and then found out we didnít have that money, it would create a problem. So the State created a County Budget Commission and our responsibility here is to present this document to them. It is in anticipation of our actual budget process that we do later this year.

As I mentioned in the past it does deviate a little bit from our regular budget in that the Insurance Trust Fund and the Health Insurance Trust Fund are treated as operating expenses and combined with the General Fund in reporting under this document. The revenues we are using this year are straightforward. Through May we were running about 9% growth in earnings tax over 1999 so we budgeted the 2000 collections at 5%. We took a conservative approach. We use a 5% figure to predict 2001. There was a reassessment of property tax in 1999 and we have seen a growth as a result of that. Our first settlement for 2000, if annualized, we see a growth of just under 10% over property taxes collected for last year. For 2001 we are showing only a 2% growth in property tax. If you look at the budget overall, the current year revenues are being shown as slightly below 1999. Thatís more a matter of being conservative on our current estimates regarding certain other revenue streams within the budget that we do not want to try to predict to be higher than our budget number. As an example, we typically budget $600,000 for the inheritance tax. Last year we exceeded $1.2 million. Weíre not going to take that trend and build that number up because it would be foolhardy to depend on that number. It is a volatile figure and can go up and down dramatically. We are basing the projection for 2000 and 2001 on a $600,000 income from that line item. Itís certain line items like that that cause us to actually predict revenues for 2000 at slightly less than 1999, but Iíd be surprised if that is the case when we get to the end of the year. For 2001, based on other factors I mentioned earlier, overall revenues for the General Fund are expected to be about 3.88% higher than 2000.

We have taken expenses out of the 2000 budget and the five year budget. An important matter to note is the financing and debt load the City has reflected in this budget. We anticipate rolling the Community Center note in September and at that time we will take it down from a $7 million note to a $6.4 million note. The TIF we are showing as being paid off in 2000 by the issuance of thirty year bonds. These bonds will be in the neighborhood of $2.8 million. We need to work out the final details because we need to cover legal expenses and if there is a short fall in the service payments for the current year, weíll have to get a supplemental service payment but we roll that into the bonds. In 2001 for purposes of this exercise we are showing a $10 million note that would cover the first parking garage and any supplemental public improvements that would be accomplished.

I found an error on page 4, an exhibit that explains the Northwest Business Center TIF. Jeff Williams and I got together this afternoon and he did a corrected page. I will distribute that copy to you. It is an exhibit and doesnít really show the statement of our debt. On page 7 is our projected notes and bonds for the year. This is an accurate representation of debt load that we expect to incur. If Council would indulge us by adopting this tax budget this evening with the understanding that we can substitute a page to correct minor changes, I would appreciate that.

Mr. Danbury asked when we will anticipate looking into design or engineering or anything to do with future traffic? I know the phases are spread out over a possible ten years, but when should Council think about how to deal with the traffic?

Mr. Osborn replied we have a proposal with CDS to do an interchange modification study. We want to add additional lanes on Route 4 and Crescentville Road to feed Route 4. We want to do this in a way to create a second access lane to the interstate so that we would have two access lanes to the interstate, one dedicated to eastbound and one to westbound. We have talked to Fairfield and have a tentative agreement with them to share the cost of this interchange modification study. We have to do this first so that we can get some read from ODOT on whether they will allow us to do this. If they will allow us to put this second lane in and create more traffic for the interstate, then we would become more efficient at feeding the interstate than the interstate would be to accept the traffic. If we cause the level of service on the interstate to drop significantly, they will say you canít make these changes without some modifications to the interchanges as well. Weíre trying now to get a handle on how much are we talking about on impact on the interstate for levels of efficiency and what will the State require us to do that. We are also looking at the engineering side and budget sides of this. If you look at the five year budget, we have money out there to add lanes. Fairfield also has money in their five year budget corresponding with ours. The hurdle we both face right now is getting through this interchange modification so that we know the true latitude we have in doing something on Rt. 4.

Mr. Danbury made a motion to adopt and Mr. Vanover seconded. Resolution R13-2000 passed with six affirmative votes.

OLD BUSINESS

Mr. Osborn said the North/South Initiative which is the I-75 Task Force is starting a series of public scoping meetings to bring the project to the attention of the public by having local meetings throughout the corridor. A document has been distributed to all members of Council and there are copies in the rotunda that list the dates and locations of meetings. The first one will be July 6 at the Lakota West High School. The July 10 meeting will be at Cincinnati City Hall. The one scheduled for July 13 at Evendale has been canceled. Iím certain it will be made up at a later date. This will become a much more high profile topic as we go forward and if any of your residents have an interest or concern about the interstate 75 traffic or alternate means of transportation to move traffic intrastate, they should be encouraged to participate in one of the local scoping meetings. In addition to the scoping meetings of the North/South Initiative, there will be interviews with key stake holders, elected officials and surveys to key members of the business community. The Initiative Steering Committee is recessing through the summer and our next meeting will be in September. In the interim the staff is working on this outreach effort.

Mr. Danbury said I would like to talk about the Community Center staff and the job well done for the fireworks. I think everybody there thought it went over well.

Mayor Webster said I want to compliment Mr. Burton and his entire staff, Sharon Casselman, Greg Karle and Gary Thompson. They did a great job in pulling that entire thing together. I know Mr. Parham and Mr. Osborn spent a good deal of time working with the construction people to get that area cleared out to make this event happen. It was a cooperative effort on a lot of peopleís part, but the Community Center staff deserves a lot of credit for a job well done.

Mayor Webster said also, on the North/South Initiative, I want to acknowledge Mr. Osbornís contribution. He is co-chairman of the study group and Iím sure, as always, he will do a marvelous job.

NEW BUSINESS

 

Mayor Webster announced the winners of the year 2000 landscaping awards:

Area #1

1st Place 12085 Greencastle Drive The Sherry Family

2nd Place 677 Coxbury Circle The White Family

3rd Place 905 Cedarhill Drive The Jones Family

HM 680 Cedarhill Drive The Turner Family

HM 798 Clearfield Lane The Gist Family

HM 12035 Norwell Court The Proctor Family

Area #2

1st Place 12065 Springdale Lake Drive The Turner Family

2nd Place 737 Glensprings Drive The Sinks Family

3rd Place 11850 Fairsprings Court Judy Comptom

HM 667 Glensprings Drive Annie Green

HM 11980 Springdale Lake Drive The Hemani Family

HM 11809 Ashmore Court The Bassett Family

Area #3

1st Place 687 Cloverdale Avenue The Whitaker Family

2nd Place 496 Cloverdale Avenue Harold Burkholder

3rd Place 616 Cloverdale Avenue The Laage Family

HM 672 Cloverdale Avenue The Skirvin Family

HM 516 Smiley Avenue Patricia Vonderhaar

HM 467 Cloverdale Avenue The Reckner Family

HM 665 Cloverdale Avenue The Linkous Family

HM 695 Cloverdale Avenue The Blankship Family

Area #4

1st Place 562 Lafayette Avenue The Clark Family

2nd Place 367 Plum Street The Lutts Family

3rd Place 341 Church Street Donald Lampl

HM 563 Lafayette Avenue Otis Poindexter

HM 519 Lafayette Avenue Kathryn Crockett

HM 595 Observatory Drive The Cain Family

HM 587 Observatory Drive Deborah Miller

Area #5

1st Place 403 Vista Glen The Ketring Family

2nd Place 486 Vista Glen The Swope Family

3rd Place 489 Vista Glen The Wolff Family

HM 10957 Fallstone Drive The Smith Family

HM 263 Centerbury Court The Tholt Family

HM 457 Rockcrest Drive The Hammel Family

HM 374 Cameron Road The Clutts Family

Area #6

1st Place 203 Harter Avenue The Shteiwi Family

2nd Place 11700 Lawnview Avenue The Butrum Family

3rd Place 11823 Van CleveAvenue The Buehler Family

HM 11825 Lawnview Avenue Rachel Bourne

HM 11704 Van Camp Lane The Carr Family

HM 202 Diston Lane ??????

HM 163 Harter Avenue The Woody Family

Area #7

1st Place 1003 Pilgrim Place The Schmidt Family

2nd Place 877 Tivoli Lane The Farmer Family

3rd Place 815 Ledro Street The Dixon Family

HM 903 Ledro Street Flora McMannis

HM 865 Tivoli Lane Ralph Paul

HM 979 Pilgrim Place The Stover Family

HM 12041 Mallet Drive The Stockstill Family

BUSINESS

First Places

Maples Knoll Village 11100 Springfield Pike

New Apostolic Church 326 West Kemper Road

Executive Plaza Three 135 Merchant Street(Managed by Duke)

Honorable Mentions

Dave & Busterís 11775 Commons Drive

OíCharleyís Restaurant 11315 Princeton Pike

Princeton Hill 30 Merchant Street

MEETINGS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS

Planning Commission - July 11, 2000

COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE - none

UPDATE ON LEGISLATION STILL IN DEVELOPMENT

Contract for E. Kemper Rd. Improvement, Phase 1 - July 19

RECAP OF LEGISLATIVE ITEMS REQUESTED

Four Ordinances for Charter Revision - July 19

Resolution for Council Appointment to Charter - July 19

Council adjourned at 8:35 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

 

Edward F. Knox

Clerk of Council/Finance Director

Minutes Approved:

Kathy McNear, President of Council

 

 

__________________________, 2000