President of Council Kathy McNear called Council to order on June 6, 2001, 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.

The minutes of May 16, 2001 were approved with six affirmative votes.


Mr. Knox said we have a letter written to the Planning Commission with a copy sent to Council. It reads: "We are unable to attend the Planning Commission meeting on June 12. We will be out of town. We would like to express our opinion about the noise problem in our nice and quiet neighborhood. This has been going on too long and nothing has been done according to the agreement with Planning Commission since 1999. So far they donít plan to do anything. Since we have lived here for 25 years we deserve some consideration. She wonít comply with anything. I agree they should be shut down. Gabi and Ewald Warken"

Mr. Knox said the second letter is from Time-Warner Cable. I will not read the entire letter because it has channel changes on it. It is written to Mayor Webster and reads: "Time Warner is bringing exciting changes to customers in your community July 1, 2001. The family value tier is no longer offered. However, all of our services from that tier will be moved. We will add three channels to our standard level of service. The channels are Disney, SoapNet and Oxygen. While the majority of our customers will not experience an increase, customers who choose to subscribe to the standard service will experience a rate adjustment of $1.99 per month. All of these program changes are part of our continuing effort to bring the widest variety of entertainment choices to our customers while remaining competitive with other video providers. These changes are just in time to beat the summer rerun doldrums. Jennifer Mooney, Vice-President of Public Affairs"



Mr. Danbury made a motion to adopt and Mr. Wilson seconded.

Mr. Danbury said I briefly spoke with Mr. Shvegzda about the situation with the water. There are two creeks coming in, one from Glensprings and one parallel with the ramp. I was wondering if we were to cap that off, would it be a problem down the road? It has to go somewhere.

Mr. Shvegzda said it would not be a problem. There is such a large volume of water running through that area that it would be an infinitesimal difference in that area that will be filled in.

Mr. Danbury asked would todayís rain be classified as a 200-year rain?

Mr. Shvegzda replied weíll check the rain gauge at the Public Works facility. It was certainly very significant.

Mr. Osborn stated we had 1.05 inches of rain in about 35 to 40 minutes. We had flooding on a number of streets where the storm sewer systems are just not built to accommodate that large of a run-off. I went over to the bowling alley. Mr. Gilhart and I walked down to the water, which did not get into the bowling alley. There was no property damage or loss of business there. Part of the parking lot may have been peeled up by the streams. I went over to the Reeds and they had water around their house, in the basement, coming up into the bathtub through the sanitary sewer. They did not have water actually in their house. I had the same concern expressed by Mr. Danbury that that area west of Rt. 4 serves as a detention area. But then it breaks across the low point on Rt. 4 and goes in-between the sub-station and creek area and comes down by the Reeds, etc. If we extend that culvert to the north and unite it with the one that is there now, will that be a physical connection or an open area where that water can still build up to pond on the west side of the street?

Mr. Shvegzda responded it will not be connected with the twin pipes under S.R. 4.

Mr. Osborn said I think thatís why heís saying there is not going to be a problem because there will be a way for that water to build up behind the west side of Rt. 4 before it spills over to the east side.

Ordinance 35-2001 passed with six affirmative votes.


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

Mr. Parham said at the last meeting I informed you that this is our formal request to become a part of the MVRMA group rating program. This year I think it is extremely important that Springdale participate in the process. We had one claim this past year for the officer who was in the automobile accident that has caused our rates to increase enormously. We are very close at this point of not being able to participate in the program. By us not competing means our rates will come close to doubling or tripling. Because of how close we are to that threshold we are required by the association to sign an additional document that sets forth a 10-step program set forth by the bureau. Itís a preventive process to assist you as you move forward. Some other communities have been in that position and they have indicated to me that it is a relatively easy process. There are some safety issues that we would have to engage in, but I donít think itís anything that cannot be accomplished by the group. I would encourage Council that we again participate in this project and that our rate will improve over the next year or so.

Ordinance 36-2001 passed with six affirmative votes.


Ms. Pollitt made a motion to adopt and Mr. Galster seconded.

Mr. Osborn said this is a replacement for an existing piece of equipment that we purchased more than ten years ago. It has served us well but it has outlived its projected life. In fact, there is far better equipment on the market now. We do plan to replace the four defibrillators that we have in the Fire Department, one each over the next four years. This is the first of the four. Fortunately, this year the Fire Department was able to come up with a grant of $7,566 to help us defray that cost. Thatís a reimbursement type grant so we will have to execute a contract for the purchase price of $18,310 and we recommend that you favorably consider this ordinance.

Mr. Danbury asked is the one we are trading in still operational?

Mr. Osborn replied I donít know that much about it. Iím sure itís operational. Iím sure once we trade it in, it will be rehabilitated.

Ordinance 37-2001 passed with six affirmative votes.


Mr. Knox said the liquor license request postponed from last meeting replaces the exact duplicate license. In talking with the people at the facility, the owner thought it was better for him to purchase his own license rather than purchase it from the previous owner of the building. Actually nothing changes. In response to Ms. Pollittís question, they can sell beer and wine for off-premises sales to people who are not residents of the hotel. Thatís true of any D5-A which is in effect at all of the hotels we have in the City.

Mr. Vanover said than we would have to assume that the old license under the old owner would be or could be up for grabs.

Mr. Knox stated that license is specific to that type of facility, a hotel or motel with fifty or more rooms.

Ms. Pollitt asked Mr. Knox, did you have any conversation with the owner in regards to whether they plan to sell this as a carry out?

Mr. Knox replied I talked to the manager on duty. She was surprised I even asked the question. They had never thought of doing that.

Mr. Nick Patel, new owner of the Hampshire Hotel, said the reason we are getting a new license is that when we purchased the hotel back in September of last year, we thought we had plenty of time to get renewed. With the renovations happening we overlooked it and when the time came that the license was in jeopardy, we got a call from the previous owner saying we need to get it renewed or it would expire. Our only choice was to apply for a new license.

Ms. Pollitt said my only concern was that you could sell to people who were not dining in your hotel as carry out. Tell me you are not going to do that.

Mr. Patel said Iíve never seen anybody carry anything out of the hotel.

Council had no objections to the license and Mr. Knox said he would act on it right away.


Mr. Osborn said we have a contract for just under $1.7 million for the improvements on East Kemper Road, Phase I. Weíve had some items come up during construction that were unforeseen. We had $6,500 in changes related to quantities of material. Weíve had an additional cost for the modification of one of the entries to Tri-County Mall, the first one west of Tri-County Parkway. Weíre going to continue to allow left hand traffic turning in there from eastbound Kemper but we are going to restrict left turn movements coming out because we are adding another westbound lane. We felt with that many lanes across there it would be suicidal to try to make a left-hand turn out of there. That will cost $15,800. Finally, the City is building a retaining wall on the Princeton Plaza site. As a result we have to put in some sort of fencing to prevent people from walking over the thing, and a guardrail to prevent cars from driving across the green space and going over the retaining wall. We had Costco put in that nice wrought iron fence on top of their retaining wall. Then because of engineering standards for highways, they had to put a guardrail in. That galvanized guardrail substantially detracts from the wrought iron fence which we caused them to put in. We thought we would pick up that wrought iron fence and put it on the Princeton Plaza site. We challenged the engineers to come up with a way to eliminate that galvanized guardrail. There were some very extreme alternatives that we havenít presented to you because technically they were almost made impossible by the type of wall we built. The option that seems most cost effective involves installing a box beam guardrail that weíd paint black as opposed to the galvanized standard guardrail that we typically put in. I want to send around two drawings. The first one is to scale. The second one is just a schematic drawing. On the first drawing you will see the cross-section of the retaining wall and the fence, then a space to where the guardrail is, and a space to where the sidewalk is. The idea is to put in a cleaner looking guardrail that would be the same color as the fence and soften the look as opposed to the galvanized guardrail that we have at Costco. The additional cost for doing that is $25,946. I know that the issue has come up at Planning Commission and after the fact, I think we all regretted the guardrail going in there. I wanted to provide us an opportunity to avoid that same consequence again. If Council would so agree weíd like to proceed with that work. At the end of the project I will bring in a change order modifying the contract. If you give us the consent tonight we can authorize the work. Itís optional work but we believe it will make an aesthetic difference in the area.

Mr. Galster asked is the guardrail just on Kemper or also on SR 747?

Mr. Shvegzda replied itís just along the area of Kemper Road. By widening the roadway we have moved it closer to the retaining wall.

Mr. Galster asked is there any plan to go back and redo what we have at Costco now?

Mr. Osborn responded that is not part of my proposal. I think we ought to get this up first and see if we think it is a good fix. That guardrail that is out there is not one that we installed so itís not like we have a loss of existing guardrail if we replace it. But we would have significant cost to replace it with new material. I would suggest we try it here first.

Everyone was in agreement to go forward.

Mayor Webster said the schedule for the landscaping awards will be judging late this month through the early part of July. We will announce the winners at the Council meeting of July 18 and have the winners come in for their awards August 15. Last year we had very poor attendance. Thereís a lot of work that goes into that; not just us going around the City but also Dave Butsch and his people, the secretarial work getting the awards printed up. Hopefully we will have more participation by the residents this year.

Mayor Webster said I did want to mention under Old Business the letter from the Civil Service Commission.

Mrs. McNear read a letter from Mr. Parham to Mr. Coleman: "We are in receipt of your letter dated May 4, 2001 requesting a pay increase for the Civil Service Commission. Because your request is outside of my jurisdiction and is determined by City Council, I am forwarding a copy of your letter to the President of Council for Councilís consideration. If you have any other questions or concerns about this matter please feel free to contact me at your earliest convenience."

The letter to Mr. Parham reads: "I would like to take this opportunity to request a pay increase for the members of the Civil Service Commission. The level of activity has increased significantly resulting in more time being required to perform functional responsibilities as Civil Service members. I would request that the City Administration approve pay increases from $150 a month to $300 a month for the Commission Chairperson and from $125 to $200 a month for the other Commission members. Your prompt attention to this matter is greatly appreciated. Bob Coleman"

Mayor Webster said we have done a survey of Sharonville, Blue Ash, St. Bernard, Forest Park , Fairfield and North College Hill. Also, I have a members in attendance chart that I had worked up for all of last year and this year to date. Iíll pass that out to you also. Itís Councilís decision. We looked last year at the salary increases for the elected officials. We took a look at all of the commissions at that time and decided we didnít want to do anything, but just from first-hand knowledge, the Civil Service Commission really plays an integral part in the Cityís work force. Those people put in more hours than any other board or commission in the City hands down. I certainly have some sympathy for their cause here. Weíll give you the information and maybe we can get that on Councilís agenda for next time.

Mr. Danbury said we are talking about a total of three people. These gentlemen put a lot of time in, a lot of Saturdays. They really do a good job. If you look at the ages of some of the workers we have here, thatís not going to decrease. Itís only going to increase over the next couple of years. I donít have a problem with any kind of increase. I think they are some of the most dedicated people we have in the City and I would like to compensate them accordingly.

Mr. Osborn said at the staff meeting in May I asked the department directors to give me information on events coming up for June. The concert in the park will be held in Beacon Hills on June 13 at 7 p.m. Prior to that concert from 5:00 to 6:30 p.m. we will be holding one of our bike safety programs in the park. Safety Town starts June 18 at Tri-County Mall. Thatís a program initiated by the Springdale Police Department years and years ago and supported today by the Springdale Police and Fire Departments and Tri-County Mall. On June 27 there will be a concert in Underwood Park at 7:00 p.m. Again, we will have a bike safety program from 5 to 6:30 p.m. There are other bike safety programs that will occur independent of concerts Ė June 12, 6-7:30 p.m. at Colony Apartments, June 14, 6-7:30 p.m. at Heritage Hill School, June 18, 6-7:30 p.m. at Glenview Subdivision and June 19,6-7:30 p.m. at Mallard Lakes Clubhouse. On June 8 there will be a teen dance and pool party at the Community Center.

Mr. Vanover said we have been at graduation parties at the Rec Center and all the comments are phenomenal. The guests and renters seemed to be very happy. The only request was for a couple more carts to move food in and out.

Mr. Osborn stated I think thatís a valid comment. We had a family function there a few weeks ago and we were the only event that afternoon. Even if you are the only event you have to make a lot of trips to the parking lot. I will take that request to the Recreation Director.


Planning Commission - June 12

BZA - June 19

Mr. Knox said I will notify the local papers that we will not have a meeting on July 4 and August 1.


Mike Sharkey, 355 Naylor Court said at the last Council meeting I was remiss in thanking everyone for your help in the Creative Kids situation behind our property.

Mr. Danbury made a motion that Council go into executive session as a committee of the whole to discuss real estate matters. Mr. Vanover seconded. The motion passed with six affirmative votes.

Council went into executive session at 7:45 p.m. and reconvened at 8:45 p.m.






Council adjourned at 8:48 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,




Edward F. Knox

Clerk of Council/Finance Director

Minutes Approved:

Kathy McNear, President of Council



__________________________, 2001