President of Council Randy Danbury called Council to order on May 20, 1998 at 7:00 p.m.

The governmental body and those in attendance recited the pledge of allegiance. Mr. Knox gave the invocation. Mr. Danbury asked for a moment of silence for Mr. Jerry Yengling, former Council member who passed away recently.

Mr. Knox took roll call. Present were Council members Galster, Manis, McNear, Pollitt, Vanover, Wilson and Danbury.

The minutes of May 6, 1998 were approved with 6 affirmative votes. Mr. Danbury abstained.

COMMITTEE AND OFFICIAL REPORTS

RULES AND LAWS - no report

PUBLIC RELATIONS - no report

PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE - no report

PUBLIC WORKS Ė Mr. Vanover reported the 1998 street program bids for the following programs were opened on May 12: the 1998 concrete program, the 1998 crack seal program, and the 1998 curb replacement program. The low bid for curb replacement was under $10,000 and a purchase order will be issued for this work. We have ordinances in front of us tonight for the others and Public Works is recommending passage of these tonight.

PUBLIC UTILITIES - no report

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Ė Ms. Manis stated the recommendation on the bid opening for the West Kemper Road storm sewer phase I is before Council tonight. Construction is anticipated for the week of June 1 for Sharon Road. Start of construction anticipated for June 1 for the Public Works facility.

FINANCE COMMITTEE - no report

PLANNING COMMISSION - no report

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Ė Mrs. McNear said the first report is from the meeting of April 21. CMC Properties requested a variance to allow the placement of a directional sign for the Wimbledon Apartments at 11770 Springfield Pike on Rt. 4 past the shopping center towards the Municipal Building. It was not on their property and was almost on top of the stone wall. Basically we do not allow signs that are not on the property of the applicant and this was denied by all six members present.

Kenneth Pelzel, 12066 Benadir Road requested a variance to construct an 8í x 8í utility shed three feet from his property line. The code requires 5 feet. There was a problem with trees and that was granted 6-0.

James and Maxine Carroll, 1115 Silverwood Circle requested a variance to convert a portion of their garage to living space. There was no basement on the property and a one car garage. They did have three cars and we asked them to consider widening their driveway so it could hold two of their vehicles. The applicant asked to have the item tabled so they could look at some alternate plans.

David Smith, 524 Cloverdale Avenue requested a variance to allow the construction of a 12í x 12í utility building in his rear yard. This was a very large yard and not a problem with the neighbors and it was granted 6-0.

Gregory A. Sandford, 591 Observatory Drive requested a variance to allow a truss replacement for his garage to make the height 22í 8". This was going to be used for cars and also for storage. We did request that they change the fascia of the building to include some windows so the aesthetics of the building would be much better. This was approved 4-2.

Rhodes Furniture, 12000 Princeton Pike requested a variance to allow them to float four foot balloons 15 feet in the air along the property line. They wanted to have 10-15 balloons, 6-8 feet apart attached to the fence along Princeton Pike. I believe ODOT would have to approve that as Rhodes does not own the fence. They wanted them up for 52 weeks and they would put them up and down several times. We did not pass that. Apparently they had had the balloons up and the City had asked them to take them down. It was not the first instance that we had had a problem with them putting things on the fence. Prior to that banners had been placed up there.

The next item was revocation of variance for Robert J. Rolfes, 151 Ruskin Drive, granted and not acted upon.

At the May 19 meeting James and Maxine Carroll who were in the previous month, requested a variance to convert their garage. We asked them again to do something other than eliminate the garage. We suggested they convert the covered patio. That was denied 1-5.

Terry Miller, 546 West Kemper Road requested a variance to allow him to tear down an existing garage. In the words of the applicant the garage is in disrepair and is a safety hazard as well as an eyesore. They were going to save a portion of the garage for storage of things such as lawn equipment. We said if that was the case it would have to be brought up to code. It would have to be repaired and match the house. We did require them to rebuild the garage within three years. That passed 6-0.

Maple Knoll Village, 11100 Springfield Pike requested a variance allowing them to hang two banners for a period of one year. People want to keep banners up for an extended period of time and they donít weather well. Maple Knoll always does things in an excellent manner and we know that they would make sure that they didnít have anything up there that didnít look good. They were trying to advertise their 150th anniversary. They do have quite a few special events that theyíd like to advertise. We said we would not allow it for a year. They are allowed two months by the code and we suggested three months. They said that three months would be fine. Itís already up and they are going to have it up through August 19 and that would cover most of the events they are having through the summer. That was granted 6-0.

Sherry Barnett, 736 Smiley Avenue requested a variance to allow three dogs. You cannot have more than 2 dogs, 2 cats or 1 dog and 1 cat. There was a lot of discussion and tearful conversation. The pets have been with the family for 5 Ĺ years. There has been one complaint. Mrs. Barnett did have to go to court which was a traumatic experience and she will have to go back. We will allow them six months to comply with the rules. That was granted 6-0.

Quality Gold, 75 Tri-County Parkway requested a temporary variance until May 24 to allow the use of a temporary trailer. We have seen this applicant in three or four times. The applicant did not appear last night. They continue to ask for extensions to keep a trailer on Tri-County Parkway. They are in violation and I think we should fine them. I think these applicants know that there is really not a whole lot we can do. If we canít fine them I think this type of thing will continue. For the first time everyone was in agreement and there were six dissenting votes.

BOARD OF HEALTH Ė Ms. Pollitt said there is an ad for a part-time nurse. Another item on the agenda is for infant immunizations, which we have not done in the past. The nurse will be working with the physician on the board for input from him. The health fair is June 18 at the Recreation Center from 2-6 p.m. The next meeting will be in September.

CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION Ė Mr. Coleman said they met May 4. There was a letter from Mr. Osborn of 4/27/98 advising that the probationary appointment of Damon Shepherd to the position of maintenance worker in the Parks and Recreation Department was acknowledged and accepted. The commission members checked scores from the property maintenance inspection examination. We then identified who had successfully completed the test and letters have been sent to all individuals who participated in the property maintenance inspector examination. I would also like to acknowledge the permanent appointment of Brian Reed to the position of full-time firefighter/paramedic effective April 28.

O-K-I - no report

MAYORíS REPORT - Mayor Webster read a proclamation proclaiming the observance of National Law Enforcement Week May 11-17, 1998. The Springdale Police Department will hold a law enforcement expo on May 16 and 17 at Tri-County Mall. The police held a mini-marathon on Sunday. This was the third year they had it. The first year they had around 130 participants. This year we had over 200 participants. We also had 25 police agencies that demonstrated their vehicles.

The landscaping awards are coming up. Nominations will be accepted May 20 through June 17; judging will start on June 19 and continue through July 5. Residential landscaping will be judged from the street. There will also be awards for local businesses. If you want to nominate yourself or your neighbor call the City at 346-5700. Awards will be presented at the City Council meeting of July 15. There will be seven divisions and the winners will be awarded a sign to be displayed in their yards for two weeks.

Mayorís Night-In will be May 27.

Last Wednesday was the grand opening of Showcase Cinemas. The only down side of the evening was that we issued Showcase a permit to have fireworks. The schedule we were presented with showed movies at 8:00 and fireworks at 9:30 p.m. to be over before the 10:00 p.m. deadline. The ceremonies did not start until after 8:00 p.m. as Janet Howard got held up coming down from Columbus. The fireworks did not begin until well after 10:00 p.m.. I apologize to any of the residents who were inconvenienced, woken up from their sleep, etc. We did get a lot of calls from residents asking why they were allowed to set off the fireworks that late. In retrospect we would issue the permit again but there would be a stipulation that they must be totally concluded by 10:00 p.m.

I guess you all have been given a special invitation to Saturdayís pool opening with the presentation of the new slide.

Last time we had a DARE ceremony Ms. Manis pointed out that the Council members did not receive an invitation. I know for a fact that all of you got invitations to the last one. I saw Mr. Vanover and Mr. Knox but I didnít see any of the rest of you.

CLERK OF COUNCIL/FINANCE DIRECTORí REPORT Ė Mr. Knox said at the last meeting I had some comments on Ordinance 36-1998 which had to do with adopting the S-7 supplement to the Code of Ordinances of the City. There were errors in there. With the kind assistance of Ms. Rammes we have an agreement with American Legal to make corrections and issue the pages to us. We will collate them in. We will have correct copies so I would recommend Ordinance 36 this evening.

ADMINISTRATORíS REPORT Ė Mr. Osborn said East Alley is a 16 foot piece of right-of-way, undeveloped on the eastern most border of the Baldwin Subdivision. The Baldwin Subdivision is the core of our village. It was platted about 1803. There have been streets in that subdivision that did not get developed and one of those is East Alley. They only public use we have is a storm sewer to carry storm water out of the Kemper Road area. Last year we were approached by one of the residents wanting to know if the City would abandon the right-of-way so that they can use that portion of the right-away immediately behind their home as an extension of their back yard. They wanted to clean it up and make everything look nice. If we were to vacate East Alley because the subdivision was unique and a single entity, the vacation of the right-of-way would not benefit the condominium properties to the east. All of the right-of-way would revert back to the properties on the Baldwin Subdivision. There are nine or ten properties along that right-of-way and we are not certain that all the folks along there would have an interest in the property should we vacate it. In order to address the interest of this one individual and not go through the process of vacation, we have come up with the alternative of issuing a license to any resident along the East Alley part of the subdivision who may want to incorporate it into his/her back yard. The Law Director has drawn that lease document up for us. We would allow the property owner to use that 16 feet extension of their back yard for residential purposes with the understanding that any structure they put on, it like a fence or out building would have to be relocated within a certain period of notice from the City in the event we needed to get in there and work on it. If Council would see the way to agree to this we would propose to send a letter to all of the residents on Walnut who abut East Alley offering them the opportunity for a license that would allow them to use that 16 feet of right-of-way. If we vacated it everybody would have to accept that area we vacate. This way the City retains ownership of this property and should we develop a need for that right-of-way in the future, we have the ability to cancel the licenses we would issue to individual property owners.

Ms. Manis asked if someone didnít want to use the land would we mow in-between?

Mr. Osborn replied we donít maintain it now. It is very thick underbrush. The one resident wants to clean all of that up. He wants to take down dead trees. Now, his next-door neighbor may like it just the way it is because it provides a better buffer for the people towards the condominiums.

Mr. Danbury asked about liability if we still retain ownership.

Mr. Osborn replied that would be part of the license agreement. The City would not suffer responsibility for any actions that might cause damage or injury on their property.

Mr. Galster asked if they clean out this part, how much of a buffer is still left back to the condominiums?

Mr. Osborn responded that it varies. There is a substantial distance between the back of the condos and this alley.

Mr. Galster said I would like to look at just to make sure we are not cutting down a bunch of trees that would open it up for neighbors who may prefer to leave it the way it is.

Mr. Osborn said that would be fine. We have had one person who made a legitimate request and we were trying to find the least invasive way of satisfying their desire and at the same time protecting our interests. Weíll be glad to wait and let you give us some feedback.

LAW DIRECTORíS REPORT - no report

ENGINEERíS REPORT Ė Mr. Shuler said I placed before Council this evening a brief summary of where we are to date on the capital improvement projects. The only project on the list that has not been bid yet is the Police Department HVAC Phase II. If you look at just the totals of each of the three columns you can see four of those projects represented that had an original budget of approximately $1,775,000. Our final estimate of those projects is $1,875,000. If you combine the contract amount for all of those projects it is $1,713,000. So we are approximately $60,000 below budget and about $160,000 below our estimate for these project totals. I think this shows the advantage of getting out early in the year and getting these under contract before summer.

COMMUNICATIONS - none

COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE - none

ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS

ORDINANCE NO. 32-1998 "ADOPTING A PLAN TO ALLOW MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM TO ELECT TO PURCHASE ADDITIONAL SERVICE CREDIT ON A TAX DEFERRED BASIS AND AUTHORIZING THE CLERK OF COUNCIL/FINANCE DIRECTOR TO IMPLEMENT SUCH PLAN AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY"

Mrs. McNear made a motion to adopt and Mr. Wilson seconded. Ordinance 32-1998 passed with 7 affirmative votes.

ORDINANCE NO. 33-1998 "ADOPTING A PLAN TO ALLOW MEMBERS OF THE POLICE AND FIREMEN'S DISABILITY AND PENSION FUND TO ELECT TO PURCHASE ADDITIONAL SERVICE CREDIT ON A TAX DEFERRED BASIS AND AUTHORIZING THE CLERK OF COUNCIL/FINANCE DIRECTOR TO IMPLEMENT SUCH PLAN AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY"

Mr. Galster made a motion to read by title only and Ms. Manis seconded. The motion passed with 7 affirmative votes.

Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mr. Galster seconded. Ordinance 33-1998 passed with 7 affirmative votes.

ORDINANCE NO. 35-1998 "AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF SPRINGDALE, OHIO BY ADOPTION OF NEW ORDINANCES AND THE AMENDMENT OF EXISTING ORDINANCES FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONFORMING THE SPRINGDALE CODE TO NEW AND AMENDED SECTIONS OF THE OHIO REVISED CODE"

Mr. Galster made a motion to read by title only. This is an ordinance that cleans up our ordinances to make us conform to the amendments made to similar provisions of Ohio Revised Code. Ms. Manis seconded. The motion passed with 7 affirmative votes.

Mr. Galster made a motion to adopt and Mr. Vanover seconded. Mr. Danbury said if anybody in the audience is interested in these issues we do have them on record. Ordinance 35-1998 passed with 7 affirmative votes.

ORDINANCE NO. 36-1998 "ENACTING AND ADOPTING THE 1999 S-7 SUPPLEMENT TO THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF SPRINGDALE, OHIO"

Mrs. McNear made a motion to adopt and Mr. Galster seconded. Ordinance 36-1998 passed with 7 affirmative votes.

ORDINANCE NO. 38-1998 "AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF SPRINGDALE'S PARTICIPATION IN THE MIAMI VALLEY RISK MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION'S WORKERS' COMPENSATION GROUP RATING PLAN FOR 1998 AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY"

Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mrs. McNear seconded.

Mr. Parham said the legislation identifies the year as the 1998 plan. That should be the 1999 plan. In the previous Council meeting when I requested legislation as well as via a memo dated May 14, I said this is a process we go through each year. We have been a member of this group since 1993 when the state allowed group rating. It has continued to provide tremendous savings for us through our Workersí Compensation program. Had we stood alone we would be paying a much greater cost. I strongly suggest we participate in this process on an annual basis.

Mrs. McNear made a motion to change the date in the title, Section 1 and Section 2. Mr. Galster seconded. The motion passed with 7 affirmative votes.

Mayor Webster said I would just like to take a moment to express my appreciation to Mr. Parham for all the work he does on not only this insurance program but all the City insurance programs he works so diligently on. He serves on the board of the Miami Valley Risk Management Association and does a marvelous job for us.

Ordinance 38-1998 passed with 7 affirmative votes.

ORDINANCE NO. 39-1998 "AUTHORIZING CDS ASSOCIATES, INC. TO PROVIDE THE INSPECTION SERVICES NECESSARY FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS IN THE CITY OF SPRINGDALE AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY"

Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mrs. McNear seconded.

Ms. Manis asked if last year was the first time we used this. Mr. Osborn said we have used it off and on in the past. Last year we used 732 hours. You can appreciate with the volume of construction we are going to be doing this summer, itís virtually impossible for one inspector, particularly an inspector who is in training, to cover the inspection requirements we will have. This is money well spent because this type of inspection insures the quality of construction, the proper materials being used, etc.

Ms. Manis asked how much we pay the inspector now and Mr. Osborn said I could find out for you. Ms. Manis said so last year we didnít have an inspector and we used 732 hours. This year we have an inspector and we are going to spend $40,000.

Mr. Osborn replied no, mam, last year we also had an inspector, the Assistant Superintendent Of Public Works.

Ordinance 39-1998 passed with 6 affirmative votes. Ms. Manis voted no.

ORDINANCE NO. 40-1998 "ACCEPTING A BID AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CLERK OF COUNCIL/FINANCE DIRECTOR TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH TREND CONSTRUCTION FOR THE WEST KEMPER ROAD STORM SEWER PROJECT PHASE I AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY"

Mrs. McNear made a motion to adopt and Mr. Vanover seconded.

Mayor Webster said I do own a piece of property that this project affects so I will not be signing the legislation on this and Iíll yield to the Law Director as to whether I will sign the contract or not.

Ms. Pollitt asked about the alternate 2, metal pipe substituted for concrete pipe.

Mr. Shuler said when we bid the project we bid an alternate of the utraflow metal pipe. Itís not your standard corrugated metal pipe that you have seen in driveway culverts. Itís a special aluminized metal pipe and has a much longer life than the ordinary metal pipe. We did not know if there would be a cost savings from the contractors. We assumed there would be and we believe it is an acceptable alternative. With a $21,000 savings we are recommending using the alternate on this project.

Mr. Galster asked are all residents now signed off on this.

Mayor Webster replied we still have one resident who has not signed, although he has agreed in principal to what weíre doing. That will not stop the project because CDS has been able to engineer the project around that property owner if he elects not to be a part of the project.

Mr. Danbury said a lot of work has been put into this and I appreciate the efforts of the Administration and Mr. Shulerís part and the residents. A lot of people have been waiting for this for a long time.

Ordinance 40-1998 passed with 7 affirmative votes.

ORDINANCE NO. 41 "ACCEPTING A BID AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CLERK OF COUNCIL/FINANCE DIRECTOR TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH TERRY INDUSTRIES FOR THE 1998 CRACK SEAL PROGRAM AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY"

Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mr. Galster seconded. Ordinance 41-1998 passed with 7 affirmative votes.

ORDINANCE NO. 42-1998 "ACCEPTING A BID AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CLERK OF COUNCIL/FINANCE DIRECTOR TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH R. A. MILLER CONSTRUCTION FOR THE 1998 CONCRETE REPAIR PROGRAM AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY"

Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mr. Galster seconded. Ordinance 42-1998 passed with 7 affirmative votes.

RESOLUTION NO. 7-1998 "COMMENDING CHIEF JAMES FRELAND FOR HIS SERVICE TO THE CITY OF SPRINGDALE"

Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mrs. McNear seconded.

Mr. Danbury said I donít think we could have had a more dedicated person running a very, very difficult department. I have known Jim for a long time and he has the respect of the City, Council, fellow officers and department directors. I hate to see him go but he is taking another challenge with the Princeton School Board and I know heís going to do well. Heís a truly nice individual and a good citizen and very well respected employee.

Resolution 7-1998 passed with 7 affirmative votes. The resolution will be presented to Chief Freland at his retirement party on May 30, 1998.

OLD BUSINESS

Ms. Manis said I thought based on the update memo that the underground fence ordinance would be on the agenda tonight. Since itís not Mr. Galster wants to talk about it some more.

Mr. Galster said my question is about the distance back from the public right-of-way. The ordinance as it states right now says 30 feet. I did have the opportunity to see a fence in operation that allows the homeowner to adjust it ten feet off the public right-of-way. I know ten feet has been brought up in the past and I just wanted to run it by everyone and see if 30 feet is where we are at or if anyone is interested in looking at the ten feet option.

Ms. Manis said you do not know if all fences are like this but going with ten feet would cause a person not have to dig up their fence and re-hook it.

Mr. Galster responded they could actually adjust it to where the barrier is at least ten feet wide which, if the wire is not in the public right-of-way, would give them ten feet off the public right-of-way as a minimum. I have seen that on a couple of them but I donít know what percentage of them have that ability. I did go to one particular corner lot and the 30 foot setback or to the building is an awfully small space to try to contain a medium size dog. I understand the concerns for the change in legislation and still agree with them but also believe that ten feet can help accomplish the same objective.

Mayor Webster said when you say 30 feet, you mean 30 feet or the building lot line. This situation you observed that would be a very small area to confine a medium size dog, if they had an above ground fence they would have the same small area. So we are not imposing any constraints on them that we wouldnít impose on someone who had an above ground fence.

Mr. Vanover said I understand what you are saying, Mr. Galster. If some of the systems are not adaptable to that buffer zone then we have a problem and we may be back to where we started. Ten feet is still close to the public right-of-way. You weigh the argument against what you can do with the above ground fences, I think for the sake of conformity we stick with the building lot lines or the thirty feet.

Mr. Galster responded I believe aesthetics is part of the issue. There are fences in front yards that were grandfathered in because they are existing. What we are asking in the invisible fence arena is to have these fences removed because of a public health, safety and welfare issue. The main argument is for public emergency medical people arriving, etc. Is it better to have the dog inside or outside when the ambulance arrives? What difference does it make? When we look at requiring these people to move them as opposed to grandfathering them in I think there are legitimate differences.

Mr. Vanover replied the other issue besides emergency would be the accidental entry of small children into that area. Without the physical structure of an above ground fence they donít know that they have entered the dogís kingdom. Ten feet is too close to the margin of error to me.

Mr. Galster said I agree with you on the side of caution but I walk and pull a wagon with my little kids and I donít get ten feet off the sidewalk. Now if the dog goes crazy and comes across the invisible fence line -, but they could do that from the side yard or back yard. Iíve tried to pay attention to where these situations are and Iíve tried to pay attention to what I do when Iím out with my kids. Iím pretty attentive to what is going on. Ten feet is a long way up. If they go thirty feet they are going to knock on somebodyís door.

Ms. Pollitt stated when you bring the ordinance back I would suggest you put a ninety day grace period on it if there are requirements to have people move their fences. That would allow them time to make financial arrangements and whatever arrangements are necessary to do this.

Mr. Danbury said I can go either way on this ordinance. I donít think we should regulate everybodyís day-to-day life but fences not only keep things in but they keep things out. You made a good point about small children. They canít read or write. They may go in there and there may be a dog.

Mr. Galster said I know at one point Mrs. Boice had looked into contacting the invisible fence installers and trying to get a feel for how many we had in the City and the cost to move those, and possibly having some City involvement in covering some of the cost if we had to have these moved.

Mayor Webster said the Board of Health is concerned about the amount of dog bites. They were up substantially last year. I know itís an inconvenience and could be a financial drain on some people but I really like Ms. Pollittís suggestion. I would like to see us hold it to thirty feet or the building lot line. I was hoping we would have this on the books for the summer because thatís when you have most of your dog bites. If that's the case now itís going to be mid-July before we have it effective. So I would just like to chuck off this summer, and give the people six months to try to cope with the financial burden that this may cause. Mr. Vanover, you are a licensed electrician, are we talking thousands of dollars or hundreds or dollars?

Mr. Vanover replied you are talking hundreds, maybe less. It depends upon the system they have installed. In most of them the ground is sliced and the cable buried. A few may have trenched it. Itís not that difficult to retrieve and reallocate. They can be spliced.

Ms. Pollitt stated we have been working on this ordinance since November 1997 and I would like Council to note that in the past two months we have had two dog bites.

Ms. Manis asked were they contained by invisible fences? Ms. Pollitt replied no and Ms. Manis said then it doesnít matter.

Ms. Pollitt replied it does matter because dog bites are on the increase and we need to do what we can do to prevent that from happening. One did require some emergency medical treatment for a small child. I would like to see us move on this one way or the other. From November to May is quite a long time to work on this.

Mr. Danbury said it is a long time but this is complex. Itís not cut and dried. There are a lot of issues Rules and Laws has been looking at.

Mr. Danbury said he will make sure the ordinance will be on the agenda for the next meeting.

Ms. Rammes asked if the effective date of 90 days should be added. Mr. Danbury suggested an effective date of January 1, 1999.

Ms. Manis said if weíre going to do it I donít see why we donít do it. As Mr. Vanover said, if itís only $100 or so, then if you are that worried about getting it on the books, we might as well put it on with an emergency clause and make it effective immediately. I donít think people are going to be cited into court right away for not having it done. Itís May. It could be in effect by the first of June.

Mr. Danbury said we could pass it at the next meeting with an emergency clause and give the residents 90 days to comply.

Mayor Webster said if Council is in agreement of making it effective in 90 days why not have two readings on June 3 and June 17 with an effective date of September 3, 1998. That gives anybody who wants to comment on it the opportunity to do so.

Ms. Manis said it was brought up to her about putting changing stations in the bathrooms at the Community Center. Ms. Manis said she told the person we would probably have them when we do the expansion and that person said he/she wonít need it then. Maybe we could look into that.

NEW BUSINESS

Ms. Manis asked for an executive session to talk about land acquisition. No legislation anticipated.

Mr. Knox said our post office is going to raise our rates by .01 and at the same time Iím having a heck of a time finding a post box. They all seem to have disappeared. I called the Post Office and they told me to put it in my own mail box.

MEETINGS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS - none

COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE - none

UPDATE ON LEGISLATION STILL IN DEVELOPMENT

Electronic fences - next meeting

News racks - open

HVAC for P.D. - 17 June

Regulating distribution of advertising materials - open

Presentation on Community Center - next meeting

Mrs. McNear said she would not be at the next meeting as it is Princetonís graduation night.

RECAP OF LEGISLATIVE ITEMS REQUESTED

Electronic fences - next meeting

Mr. Galster made a motion to go into executive session as a committee of the whole to discuss possible land acquisition. Ms. Manis seconded. The motion passed with 7 affirmative votes.

Council went into executive session at 8:30 p.m. Council adjourned at 8:56 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

 

Edward F. Knox

Clerk of Council/Finance Director

Minutes Approved:

Randy Danbury, President of Council

 

 

__________________________, l998