04/18/2006 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Minutes of 4/18/2006 Law Director Dubelko: 1) Has reviewed and approved the lease for copiers. Recently approved trade contract forms to be used in bidding for the new fire station. 2) With respect to 2006-73, have reviewed Arrow Uniform contract and recommended certain revisions, which have been made. 3) Civil litigation-C & C Realty v. City of North Olmsted Board of Zoning Appeals case had apre-trial today attended by Assistant Law Director O'Malley. In SERB v. IAFF Local 1267 case involving the ULP filed by City of North Olmsted, briefs were filed by each side. 4) Krobaz liquor permit transfer objections hearing was set for April 13, but there was a request to continue it, which was granted for an indefinite date to enable the parties to explore the possibility of a settlement. The proposed new owner has made a proposal to the city; the city has responded with a proposal. If it gets to the point that the city is satisfied it's in the best interests of the city to dismiss its objections and enter into an agreement that would govern conduct of the permit holder in addition to what's required by regulations, then he will report that to Council and ask for authority to settle. 5) Regarding the Charter amendment proposals, he believes all five are good government proposals. Issue 27 will allow Council to change the voting method on all motions before it except for the final votes on resolutions and ordinances. Issue 28 is the Mayor's that went through Charter Review and Council to move the division of Parks & Recreation from Safety to Community Life Services as a place where city government believes it better belongs and also spreads the supervisory workload better between those two departments. He has been trying to speak to as many people as passible on the last three amendments and he thinks there is some misunderstandings as to what these proposals would do and how they came to be proposed. Issues 29, 30, 31, were part of 10 housekeeping amendments to the Charter that he recommended to the Charter Review Commission in January of 2005. Based on his twenty years of experience and additional two years as Law Director, he believed these provisions in the Charter needed to be cleaned up for government to run a little mare efficiently. Eight of the ten approved by Charter Review and Council went on the ballot in November of 2005 and five of eight were passed. Three not passed are now coming back upon his recommendation. He believes the first time around there was an insufficient informational campaign and perhaps language employed far the ballot was confusing and led people to believe the proposals might be something other than what they are. Issue 29 would clarify and provide expressly in the Charter for exceptions to competitive bidding that historically the city has done from time to time. One of those exceptions is the emergency exception. Arguably, an emergency exception is implied in every Charter, but he recommends it be expressly stated. To calm some fears heazd about it being abused, he recommended and language has been added to the proposal that it would only be for real and present emergencies. Language was added to make the proposal more understanding and reasonable to voters. The second part of Issue 29 is the state purchase program exception, which is a wonderful program. The state conducts competitive bidding so more vendors are competing presumably because of the lazger pool, which results in better prices than the city can get at the local level. Issue 30 is simply a statement in the Charter he recommended again because of potential problems in litigation. It was recommended because from time to time contractors who do business with the city have contended the city is bound by state laws regarding the contracting process, which we 3