President of Council Marjorie Harlow called Council to order on April 21, 2010, at 7:00 p.m.

    The governmental body and those in attendance recited the pledge of allegiance. Mrs. McNear gave the invocation.

    Mrs. McNear took roll call. Present were Council members Diehl, Emerson, Galster, Hawkins, Squires, Vanover and Harlow.

    The minutes of April 7, 2010 were approved with seven affirmative votes.

    Civil Service Commission – Mr. Thamann stated Civil Service held no meeting in April. The night of the regular Civil Service meeting was held for an employees’ health insurance meeting for all employees.

Rules and Laws – Mr. Hawkins said they are going to have a work session with the entire City Council to go over ideas with regards to amendments, deletions, additions to the current Rules of Council.

Mrs. Harlow stated we will discuss this after our next meeting, May 5th.

Finance Committee - Mr. Diehl said the working committee of the Finance Committee met on April 5th to identify budget items we’d like to review in depth going forward.
Planning Commission – Mr. Galster said the applicant for the wireless communication tower conditional use permit at 11970 Kenn Road requested to continue the public hearing until the July meeting. A monument sign and building signage for Pictoria Tower were approved. Princeton Plaza requested a Phase 1 renovation that included painting all of the buildings, a new dumpster enclosure, and a new electronic message board sign and that was approved. Painting the fašade at Outback was tabled as well as a wall sign for Hoxworth Blood Center. Hoxworth had requested a box sign instead of channel letters.
Board of Zoning Appeals – Mr. Hawkins said Kemper Pond Office Park requested a variance to allow a ground sign to be placed ten feet from another business lot line. That was granted 6-0. The owner of 1152 Terrytown was denied a variance to eliminate the garage.
Board of Health – Mr. Squires reported the Children’s Health Fair will be held May 6th. CDC still encourages people to be vaccinated for H1N1.
O-K-I        -    no report    

Mayor’s Report – Mayor Webster read a proclamation in honor of Arbor Day. The Arbor Day celebration will be held April 30th and a tree will be planted at the Butterfly Garden at the elementary school.

Mayor Webster presented to Council the Frank F. Ferris award that Springdale was awarded by the Hamilton County Regional Planning Commission in recognition of our retail revitalization study. I’d like thank the entire commission, especially chairman David Okum. Mr. Galster is an alternate to the board. Jerry Thamann, Bill McErlane, Jeff Tulloch, Steve Galster, Mr. Okum, and Mr. Dale of McBride Dale Clarion, and I were all in attendance.

Mayor Webster mentioned that SOS is very proud to pull off the Job Club. I pre-announced the Job Club at the last meeting because some erroneous data was going to hit the papers. We had looked at the on-line edition of the Tri-County Press and saw that the date and some other facts were wrong. The date is Wednesday, May 5th at 3:30 p.m. at the Springdale Community Center. The newspaper article says there is free babysitting. We don’t even have a babysitter on duty at that time and we don’t offer that service for free. Since the paper stated we are going to offer it free we may have some people that have already decided to come with their children so we are going to schedule the babysitter to come in, but it will not be free. We are only going to do that for the first two weeks unless we see that it is justified. In general they will talk about how to write your resume, how to fill out a job application on line, interview skills and anything else that goes into trying to seek employment. SOS has talked about this for many months and at one time were talking about having a job fair, but I think this is going to work out well. The funding comes 100% from the SuperJobs Program of the State.

Clerk of Council/Finance Director – Mrs. McNear said our general fund summary as of the end of March was $4.8 million. Receipts for the quarter were $4.1 million. The earnings tax was our number one source of revenue at $3.1 million. We do a variance from 2009 and it was $263,000 less than last year which is a negative eight percent. Coming in second was real estate taxes which was 100% improvement over last year because we didn’t receive that payment until the second quarter last year. Coming in third as a source of income was the estate taxes which was up 37% and came in at $201,000. For 2010 number one was earnings tax and in 2009 it was earnings tax. In 2010 in second place was general property tax versus estate tax in 2009. In third place was estate tax in 2010 versus local government funds for 2009. Local government funds are a subsidy the government gets from the State and it’s derived from the sales tax. A portion of that comes to us directly from the State and another portion is a pass through from the State to Hamilton County to Springdale.

Mrs. McNear said expenditures are down 11% over 2009. In 2010 we expended $3.5 million versus $3.6 million in 2009, a $97,000 difference. We have used 21% of the current budget. We have had a 48% increase in the cinema admission tax which has been going down for years.

Mr. Diehl said expenditures were down 11%. Were there any expenditures that were not expected?

Mrs. McNear replied we normally keep a very close watch on what we are spending and we are keeping an even closer eye now given the fact of the current economic conditions. Earnings tax is down 8% and Ohio’s unemployment is at 11%.

Mr. Parham said if you think about what we talked about during the budget process, we are trying to be more prudent as to expenditures and where we expend those funds. We have cut back on a number of things. Training opportunities will only occur at the expense of the employee or in situations where certification is required. There are a number of things that we have cut back to try to assist in the process. I think the department directors have done an outstanding job.

Mayor Webster said on the revenue side of the report, the earnings tax is down 8% from last year which is not surprising. At the end of March you can take what you’ve earned and multiply that by four and that’s what you get for the year. That’s usually a good indicator and has been for the past ten years. If you use that same barometer about 27% of the revenue is in. What is deceiving there is that we have GE for the entire four quarters. Their first quarter remittance would indicate almost full employment. I think we’ll have to wait until the second quarter results to really predict that. It’s not bad as far as being off budget but I don’t think we’re tracking towards collecting 100% of what we budgeted.

Administrator’s Report – Mr. Parham requested a resolution of appreciation for Lieutenant William Fields who is retiring. He has already left employment with the City effective March 30th. His last day on the books is May 5th. He will be at the meeting on the 5th for the resolution of appreciation and also for Police Week to receive the proclamation.

In other business, Mr. Parham requested an executive session for possible litigation.

Mrs. Harlow said while you were talking about the resolution for Officer Fields, I wanted to make an announcement that I had the opportunity to see Mr. Dave Buschmann at the University of Cincinnati today. They were having a criminal justice career fair and there were quite a few municipalities that had booths set up as well as the State, IRS, and Immigration. It was a well attended event and he did very well as he always does when he goes out like that. I know we don’t have any job openings right now but it’s always good to have our names and images out there among the professionals who will be entering the field.

Law Director’s Report         -     no report

Engineer’s Report –Mr. Shvegzda stated we received comments back from ODOT on the SR 4 southbound lane addition at I-275 and we are addressing those. Construction will probably start in May. The Northland Boulevard repair and resurfacing should start the week of April 26 and be completed in late August. The Beaver Run Creek riparian restoration plans have been submitted to the Corps of Engineers for a nationwide permit for reconstruction. Funding applications will be requested through the Clean Ohio Conservation Fund and the OEPA Clean Water Fund. On April 9th Mr. Parham, Mr. Karle and I made a presentation to the Southwest Ohio Legislative Delegation as part of their budget process for this area for the State Capital Budget funding. There is no change to the SR 4 south repair and resurfacing.

Mr. Vanover asked what’s the purpose of the national permit for the Beaver Run Creek restoration?

Mr. Shvegzda replied that is required for any work that takes place within the waterways of the United States. If it’s below a certain length it goes to them just to make sure it falls within certain constraints of dealing with degradation of water quality, etc.

Mayor Webster asked is that two different funding sources or a combination?

Mr. Shvegzda replied there are two different funding services. The one is basically State funds and the other is Federal funds.

Mr. Diehl asked when are we supposed to get an answer from the State?

Mr. Shvegzda replied I’m not sure. I’ve asked that question but obviously this is one piece that will go to Columbus for debate.


    Mrs. McNear read a letter dated April 6, 2010: “Unless I misread the article, “the City of Springdale is no longer in the critter business” in the April newsletter, it is not totally correct. It appears to me that I can capture a raccoon or skunk in my trap on my property. Since it doesn’t make any sense to me to capture one of those animals on my property just so I can release them on my property while they are still alive so they can come back again, I assume I can let them die in the trap before I release them on my property between the curb and the sidewalk. That said raised some interesting comments from Springdale residents. I would be remiss if I didn’t comment on a letter that Mayor Webster wrote to me on 10/20/09. The City has a very limited budget for animal control and for us to spend $800 for one resident is also unbelievable. So be thankful you were able to use it this year. I must ask what the City is really doing to control nuisance animals other than providing a trap that can be purchased for $40. Fortunately, I don’t have access to the internet so I cannot find a list of preferred animal control companies on the City’s website at I am curious as to if there is a list of non-preferred animal control companies. Hopefully, Rumpke Inc. is one on the lists. The City has funds available, $10,000+? for the improvements that increase individual property values and also enhance the value of the entire community. Interesting. Anyway, my trap is in my garden and on my property. Thanks. Sincerely, Robert A. Rom, 12045 Edgewood Court”




Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mr. Galster seconded.

Mr. Parham stated there are two documents that should have been attached, one is an indemnity agreement and one is the actual public hospital agency agreement.

Mrs. McNear said she did not have those.

Mr. Parham said in the 2007 agreement as well as identified here in the third whereas, where the corporation has indicated that they would indemnify the City, the agreement in 2007 there was a second document attached and signed that does just that, holds the City harmless and indemnifies the City as well as the actual agreement itself. I’m showing a copy here but I’m not sure if it is an old copy and if we did not transfer a copy of the document to your final draft.

Mr. Parham stated we do have the bond counsel, Mr. Abbott Thayer and the Chief Financial Officer for Maple Knoll, Kenn Huff, here in the audience tonight. .

Mr. Huff said we will make sure the City has an executed copy of the indemnity agreement and the public hospital agency agreement.

Mrs. Harlow said we can vote on this this evening but hold off on the Mayor’s signature until we get the required documents.

Mr. Forbes stated it is fine to proceed that way. For what it’s worth, those two documents were provided to us. I’ve reviewed them and they are in perfect order. When the original legislation was provided it did not have any emergency clause. We got a revised piece of legislation to add the emergency clause. My guess is we just didn’t attach the two documents to this revised version. I’ve reviewed both agreements and they are the same as the last time the City addressed this issue.

Mayor Webster asked Mr. Forbes, in your opinion, the City is 100% covered and this is not incurring any liability on the part of the City. Mr. Forbes responded that is correct.

Mayor Webster said in reading through this I see $30 million is spread over five different topics. Two and five are related to Springdale and one, three, four to Oxford. Is there a reason why we weren’t presented with an ordinance just dealing with the Springdale issue and a separate one for Oxford, or was it a matter of economics that you combined them all together?

Mr. Thayer stated over a period of years starting in the 1990s the City of Springdale issued bonds on behalf of Maple Knoll and then in 2002 Butler County refunded those bonds and there was a public hospital agency’s agreement at that time. The purpose of the public hospital agency’s agreement is to enable one political subdivision to issue bonds on behalf of a number of participating subdivisions. You have one issue and it pretty drastically reduces the cost of the issuance of the bonds. In 2002 bonds were issued to refinance new facilities as well as refund the bonds issued in the 1990s. In 2007 additional new bonds were issued to finance facilities both in Butler County and in Springdale. These bonds will refund portions of both the 2002 and 2007 bonds.

Mr. Galster said all the facilities in Springdale have been completed for some time. Is all the construction done in Butler at this time as well?

Mr. Huff said if you are following the numbers that were read, it was up to 65 units at Maple Knoll Village, Springdale and up to 30 units at the Knolls of Oxford. We have built 14 units at the Knolls of Oxford and we have built 40 of what is now currently planed to be 56 units at Maple Knoll Village. We have been caught by the housing market. We are not going to build on speculation. The full project that was designed in 2007 was not built. We are not expecting any construction at either location in the next couple of years.

Ordinance 12-2010 passed with seven affirmative votes.


Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mr. Squires seconded.

Mr. Galster said this ordinance is getting rid of the notification ordinance we passed in 1999. Is there an ordinance we can drop back to that was prior to 35-1999 that gives us any notification or do we have to go back to zero?

Mr. Forbes said it is my understanding there was no ordinance prior to 1999. The 1999 ordinance was adopted in response to what was called Megan’s Law so that the City could have some local notification requirements. That law has been on the books since 1999 but the State law has been changed significantly since that time so our ordinance was already outdated with what the State law requirements were.

Mr. Galster said with this legal challenge was there a change in the description as to how far away or was it fundamentally flawed to where we have to eliminate it totally?

Mr. Forbes responded the flaw in the State law is not based on changes in distance. The State law completely changed the classification system. It has new classes of offenders, different titles for those classes and those classes are based on different offenses. The flaw in the State notification plan, according to the Ohio Supreme Court, was that they tried to retroactively enact notification laws so people who were not subject to the notification law under the old law, all of a sudden became subject to notification requirements. The Supreme Court said that was improper.

Mr. Galster replied there is no way for us to keep an ordinance on the books for everyone who didn’t change.

Mr. Forbes said I don’t know if it’s possible for us to know what their classification was under the prior system as opposed to what it is now. Right now, when you look it up on the Hamilton County Sheriff’s website, it tells you generally what tier of classification they are in. We wouldn’t have a way of knowing what their former classification was if they even had a former classification, because some people are new offenders and just came under the new law. I’m not sure there’s a way for the City to make that determination.

Mr. Galster said it just seems to me that the challenge was that somebody was moved from one tier to another, one designation to a different one, that’s the unconstitutional part of it. But that surely must not make up anywhere near percentage-wise the complete population of sexual offenders.

Mr. Forbes stated that is probably true. I just don’t know how to make that distinction.

Mr. Squires said we’ve said this before but 35-1999 as it’s written, in light of what the Supreme Court of our State has said, just isn’t enforceable, is it?

Mr. Forbes replied on a very basic level, Ordinance 35-1999 didn’t work even before the Ohio Supreme Court decision because the State law classification system was changed. Our ordinance was based on the old classification system so it was rather unworkable.

Mr. Hawkins asked do we have any idea how long it will take before the matter gets resolved?

Mr. Forbes said I’m going to speak cautiously since I’m speaking to a legislative body. The bill has been introduced in the Senate. It’s been referred to committee in the Senate. I can’t guess how long it will take to get out of that Senate committee. I’m not aware of any companion bill that has been introduced in the House. A lot of times they will introduce a similar bill in the Senate and the House so that when it gets to the end they can just reconcile those. It makes the process go a little bit faster. I’m not aware of a House bill on the same track so it will have to go through the Senate, then they will send it to the House and it will likely get referred to a committee there so I would say we’re months away.

Mr. Hawkins asked is it just going to be as simple as striking the retroactive part of this or are they going to do more than that?

Mr. Forbes said I really can’t say at this point because I have not analyzed what’s been included in that Senate bill.

Mr. Vanover said the best advice for the citizens would be to get on the horn and put some fire under their representatives and senators to keep the fuel going. They move at their own pace.

Mayor Webster said we probably need to contact our senator, Bill Seitz and also we have had two people come before us in the last two months, both running in the Republican primary, Mr. Weidman and Mrs. Swissler from Wyoming. That’s a good question to pose to those two people. It’s something that’s a burning issue. If they get elected we want to make sure this thing gets its proper attention. At the same time we contact Mr. Seitz, we contact Mrs. Pillage, our representative. Even though the House hasn’t taken it up yet she needs to be aware of the severe nature of this thing.

Mr. Parham said I would just like to remind the general public that you can access the Hamilton County Sheriff’s Office website through our website at in which you can identify the individuals who have been identified as sexual offenders on their website. You can simply put in the zip code of whatever community you are searching, and they will bring up the entire list. Sometimes it’s multiple pages but that is the ability the residents have at this point outside of the notice going out.

Mrs. Emerson said Mr. Forbes, I know this ordinance removes the ability to inform the public of these offenders. Does it also remove the ability for us to enforce distances from schools and other children, etc.?

Mr. Forbes replied the law that is in place already is okay. The only thing that this case had to do with was the public notification requirements for sex offenders.

Mr. Vanover said taking a cue from what the Mayor brought up, wouldn’t it be prudent for us to get communications out to our elected officials?

Mayor Webster said maybe we should have two resolutions in at the next Council meeting, one for Mrs. Pillage and one for Mr. Seitz expressing our concern for this. Has any other community done that, Jeff?

Mr. Forbes replied I’m not aware of any. I will tell you that Springdale is one of the few communities I’m aware of that actually took the initiative to have their own notification ordinance in place. I’m only aware of maybe one other community that had done that. I don’t know that many other communities are even paying much attention to this.

Mayor Webster said that would certainly get it on the record and carry a little more weight than just a letter from me or Mr. Parham.

Mrs. Harlow said Mrs. McNear commented in an e-mail that was sent out to all the Council members that makes this kind of difficult to swallow. The criminals in this case seem to have more rights than the public and I really hate to see us get to that point where the criminals are better protected than our citizens. I do think we have been very proactive and as Mr. Forbes said, we are one of the few communities that did notify the residents when someone moved into their neighbor and our police took a really proactive approach in making sure that they made contact and kept contact with the offender. That’s one of the reasons that makes this kind of hard to swallow.

Ordinance 13-2010 passed with seven affirmative votes.


Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mr. Squires seconded.

Mr. Thamann stated since 1994 United Medical Resources (UMR) has served as the City’s third party administrator. Also in 2008 UMR provided the City with a two-year rate guarantee for the administration and access services. This rate guarantee will terminate April 30th of this year. The new proposal for 2010 that UMR submitted indicates approximately a seven percent increase in their administration and access fees. The fee will be $38.88 per employee per month. Exhibit A of Ordinance 14 reflects the detailed costs to the City per employee per month. Additionally, the City will be switching from our self-funded program to the Center for Local Government benefits pool beginning August 1st, 2010. However, to make sure all of our claims under the self-funded program are paid, we will continue to utilize UMR services for a three-month run out period through the end of October 2010. We were concerned about an early termination fee since we are only going to be using them from May 1st through July 31st of this year when we switch over to the Center for Local Government’s pool. We were assured there will be no early termination fee because we will be switching to the Center for Local Government’s benefits pool. United Health Care is their network provider and United Health Care owns United Medical Resources. Based on that information I recommend we accept the United Medical Resource proposal effective May 1st, 2010 and respectfully request consideration and adoption of Ordinance 14-2010.

Ordinance 14-2010 passed with seven affirmative votes.


Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mr. Squires seconded.

Mr. Thamann said we have received a few quotes from a couple of stop loss carriers for coverage. Some carriers have elected not to submit quotes because again we are going to have a short term contract period. We will continue this coverage until we join the Center for Local Government on August 1st of this year. However, again we will do a run out through the end of October 2010 for claim processing. I included the rates with Exhibit A of Ordinance 15 that reflects the proposed rates with HCC Benefits per employee per month. That is for a $100,000 specific limit. It is important that we provide a level of stop loss coverage to cap our exposure. We decided with the $100,000 specific limit, we know that exposure is higher than our old specific limit but it’s only for a short period of time. Therefore, based on the rates we received from HCC I recommend City Council to renew its stop loss coverage with HCC Benefits with $100,000 specific limit proposed rates.

Mr. Galster said in your memo you noted that there were a few employees who exceeded that $35,000 specific stop loss limit. How many is a few?

Mr. Thamann stated he thought there were four members.

Mr. Galster said in their quote, did they not quote a smaller specific limit?

Mr. Thamann replied they provided quotes for both the $35,000 specific limit and $40,000 but those rates were significantly increased from our current rates. Knowing that we were just going to have a short period of time we thought it was important that we provide some cap on our exposure but try to reduce the monthly administrative fee.

Mr. Parham added, right now our specific is $35,000. What we have talked about in previous years is that once you hit that number, if we were to stay with this program and hit $40,000, we would never see a quote on $35,000 again. They are trying to get you further and further away from their pockets and to take on more risks. Each time you get renewal rates you don’t see anything less than where you currently are, but you will always see something a bit higher.

Mr. Galster said last time we had a corridor of $35,000 and $50,000. Is there a corridor with this $100,000 as well?

Mr. Parham responded there is no corridor in the $100,000. The last time it was at $35,000 and then we had a $55,000 corridor with our current program today.

Ordinance 15-2010 passed with seven affirmative votes.


    Mr. Squires made a motion to adopt and Mr. Vanover seconded.

    Mr. Parham said this Ordinance 16-2010 replaces Ordinance 11 from the previous meeting. We requested Council adopt legislation to enter into a contract with Mr. Danny Jones. At that time, we were not aware of his departure at the City of Cincinnati and his efforts to retain that position with the City of Cincinnati. After going through a number of discussions with Mr. Jones, realizing, based on the feedback we received from his references as well as the individuals he would have been working with on this particular project, we felt very strongly he probably would receive his job back with the City of Cincinnati. That would have left the City of Springdale in a position we couldn’t afford to place ourselves in. That is, having that construction project continue without a construction engineer. As I pointed out before we cannot use CDS to provide those services. Hence, we did not enter into an agreement with Mr. Jones, and Mr. Shvegzda, along with Mr. Agricola then moved to the next group in line, and it happens to be a firm which eliminates the opportunity if something happens to the primary person assigned, there is backup within their organization. Mr. Shvegzda has indicated that he has worked with this firm before, Quality Construction Management, Inc. as well as the representatives from ODOT have also worked with them. You will see that the figure is $380 more than what we agreed with Mr. Jones and it’s simply four percent of the cost of the project.

    Mayor Webster said Ordinance 11-2010 was never signed by me so it has not become law so we do not need to take any action on that.

    Ordinance 16-2010 passed with seven affirmative votes.

OLD BUSINESS                         -     none


    Mrs. McNear said I would like to ask Council to consider a resolution for some students at Princeton High School who will be the recipients of the scholarships at Princeton this year. There are a number of students and I don’t have the entire list of names that would be provided but I would like to ask that we provide this resolution to these very deserving students at the second meeting of May.

    Mr. Galster asked are these Springdale students?

    Mrs. McNear replied there are Springdale students included but they are from the entire district so I would like all of them to get it because it is our school district even though it’s students beyond just Springdale.

    Mr. Galster asked are these scholarship award winners?

Mrs. McNear responded this is the Princeton High School award. There are many awards but this is the High School Award. There will be fewer than twenty.
    Mrs. McNear said this is something that has been on my mind and I have nagged the Mayor about it a couple of times because it’s near and dear to my heart. It is recycling, especially with paper. We have newspapers and we have a lot of waste from businesses and our homes. I have worked in the insurance industry and banking industry and there is a lot of private information. You read about identity theft all the time. You think about HIPPA. And we never know when to throw away our tax forms and other paper, credit card receipts, statements, etc. I saw this article in the paper and Cintas is honoring Earth Day by trying to collect 400 tons of paper. They’ve opened up their shredding business. You select a date and they will come to your site. I thought we might want to entertain doing this at our community garage sale. People get a booth and we have a truck to take anything that isn’t sold and people want to donate. I thought this might go along with cleaning out your home, getting rid of things, making sure people aren’t throwing away personal information in the trash and they are going to end up having identity theft. I just wanted to see if Council might want to entertain including this as part of our community garage sale this year.

    Mrs. Harlow said I think it’s a great idea. When I clean my files out, rather than just shred them, I’ve put the documents in my fire pit and burn them because it would take me forever to shred them. Our credit union offers a similar service and it’s very well attended. You don’t have to remove staples. You don’t have to remove clips, even the little hinged clasps. They shred it right in front of you. You are not turning them over to someone else where they might get lost.

    Mrs. McNear said it is a free service and if Council would be so inclined I would be happy to make contact with them and see if they can meet our date. Mr. Parham, are you on board with this as well?

    Mr. Parham, replied yes. For us, we can take the article and have the staff at the Community Center, when they are scheduling the program incorporate it in and make the contact.
    Mrs. Harlow said at our next meeting we are going to talk about the Rules of Council. Since most of us have never seen those, if that committee would get that into our mailbox prior to the meeting so we’ll have an opportunity to look it over and make any notations we want to bring forward that evening.

    Mr. Galster asked are we going to get a copy and everybody go through it or are we going to get a recommendation from Rules and Laws as to what they want to change or are we reviewing the whole document?

    Mrs. Harlow replied I think we are reviewing the whole document since we’ve never seen it. My charge to the Rules and Laws Committee was to look at the document and look at how the boards and commissions were set up, the term limits, etc. There were a couple of other issues I brought up and Mr. Hawkins mentioned that there were things that became evident to them as they were looking through this that we aren’t doing. I think it’s a time for us to look at the document that we’ve never seen, to bring forward any concerns we have about it, and address any issues that we want.

    Mr. Galster stated but, if in fact, Rules and Laws Subcommittee has been looking at this for some time, will we have benefit of their findings, suggestions and comments prior to that meeting?

    Mr. Hawkins said the thought process would be getting the document to everybody and then we come in. Mrs. Emerson and I could lead some discussion on things we think are points we need to focus on. There may be some things beyond what Mrs. Emerson and I have talked about that need to be addressed that other members of Council want to talk about. We would definitely give our input with regards to anything that comes up based on the stuff we’ve looked at from our rules as well as the neighboring cities.

    Mr. Galster said I don’t know how big this document is that supposedly makes up the Rules And Laws of Springdale City Council, but if we can have some notation as to whether this is an item that you have reviewed or wish to discuss. I don’t need to have any detail of what that discussion is but just to asterisk the paragraph or particular topic so that we know that research has been done and is available on that particular one. I just hate to have to do a whole lot of additional research on the whole document if we are going to talk about two or three things in that document that you have already done research on. I want to make sure I am focusing my attention where it is that you want us to focus our attention as opposed to reviewing every line, every word in this document.

    Mayor Webster said my recollection is that this is only a two or three page document, isn’t it?

    Mr. Hawkins replied it’s a little longer than that but it’s not huge.

    Mr. Diehl asked when do you anticipate that Council will get this document?

    Mr. Hawkins answered we can probably get it to Council by the end of the week, worst case Monday.

    Mrs. Emerson stated we can get a copy of Rules and Laws as well as an agenda of items we think need discussion and anything that comes in from there we can discuss also.

    Mrs. Harlow said I’m assuming any changes would need to be adopted by Council. Is that correct?

    Mr. Parham said they are titled Rules and Procedures and if you have a copy of your Code, they are on the front pages.

    Mr. Hawkins said it is Chapter 30 and it’s ten pages long.

    Mr. Parham said I believe the majority of things can be changed by the body here but there are other things that may be in there or the committee took a look at that may require a Charter change.

    Mr. Hawkins said the issues that are truly Rules and Procedures of Council can be changed by a vote of 5-2. There are things such as Planning Commission, Board of Zoning Appeals that are controlled by the Charter. If those were changed, they would be changed by the Charter.

    Mrs. Emerson made a motion that Council go into executive session as a committee of the whole to discuss possible legal matters. The motion passed with seven affirmative votes.

    Council went into executive session at 8:27 p.m. and resumed at 9:00 p.m.   




Resolution for Lt. Bill Fields                     -     May 5
Resolution to representative/senator about sexual
offender law                                 -     May 5
Princeton scholarships                         -     May 19

Council adjourned at 9:03 p.m.

                        Respectfully submitted,

                        Kathy McNear
                        Clerk of Council/Finance Director

Minutes Approved:
Marjorie Harlow, President of Council

__________________________, 2010