WEDNESDAY, MARCH 18, 2009

REGULAR MEETING

7:00 P.M.

1. ROLL CALL. Mr. Sabatino called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M., with roll call as follows: Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Sanders, and Mr. Sabatino were present. No members were absent. Others present were Jeff Fix, Brian Wisniewski, Tim Hansley, Lynda Yartin, Chief Mike Taylor, Ed Drobina, Steve Carr, Paul Lane, Don Phillips, Rachel Scofield, Lori Stewart, Cheryl Wright, Karrie Franks, Brian Ellis, Jim Zielinski, Susan Chapman, Ann Chistley, Kathy Vogt, Billy Phillips, and others.

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF February 18, 2009, Regular Meeting. Mr. Sauer moved to approve; Mrs. Sanders seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino, Mrs. Sanders, and Mr. Sauer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

3. COMMUNITY COMMENTS: There were no community comments.

4. COMMUNITY SAFETY CONCERNS: Mr. Sabatino ascertained there were several individuals who wished to speak about safety concerns this evening.

A. Mr. Jim Zielinski stated he was present to address signage issues on Center Street north of Milnor Road. Mr. Sabatino stated he and the staff engineer had gone out and looked at this area and staff was recommending posting a “Resume Legal Speed” sign as well as a “Thank you for visiting the City of Pickerington” sign. Mr. Zielinski stated his concern is from the intersection of Meadows Boulevard, Center Street, and Milnor Road. He stated as you go up the hill toward Stemen Road there is a 25 mph sign and once the driver gets to the top of the hill you would think common sense would still dictate the speed limit was 25 mph. He stated what he has observed over the years is that drivers think that speed limit ends right there and they automatically go back to 45 mph. He stated what he is proposing, from the top of the hill to Stemen Road, which is about 250 yards, is to post a sign indicating the speed limit is still 25 mph and then once they get to Stemen Road post a sign indicating resume normal speed. Mr. Zielinski stated further the speed coming in the opposite direction from Stemen Road, if someone were there policing speeding, you would issue a lot of speeding citations. Mr. Sabatino stated in looking at the area this morning, the signs are adequate coming into town. He stated unless there were objections he would entertain a motion to have staff place the recommended signs in the appropriate location. Mr. Sauer clarified that we do have the resume legal speed sign in other locations in the City. Mr. Sauer moved to approve the Resume Legal Speed sign and the Thank you for visiting the City of Pickerington sign at the appropriate location deemed by staff on Center Street between Milnor Road and Stemen Road; Mrs. Sanders seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Sanders, Mr. Sauer, and Mr. Sabatino voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

B. Ms Lori Stewart, Pickerington. Ms Stewart stated she was present this evening to address the issue of speeding in Fox Glen subdivision. Ms Stewart stated she had attended this meeting about two years ago with speeding concerns in her neighborhood, and since the neighborhood is getting larger more children are there. She stated they have a lot of traffic coming from Diley Road and they have had mailboxes taken out and cars going up in the yards because they are losing control on that curve and they are coming at a great speed from Diley Road. She stated two years ago they had requested speed bumps and that was not done due to snowplows. Ms Stewart stated the police did monitor traffic after that meeting and that slowed the traffic down, however, they know they can’t have a police officer on the corner all the time. She stated they would appreciate anything that could be done. She stated further several of her neighbors were present because they have also experienced things happening in the neighborhood because of the speed.

C. Mr. Brian Ellis, Pickerington. Mr. Ellis stated he also lives in Fox Glen and the speeding is a major concern with a lot of the residents in the area. Mr. Ellis stated they do not want anything to happen to any of the kids in their neighborhood or the community and he felt speed bumps might be a wonderful way to at least solve the increased speed on Fox Glen. He stated from Diley Road to the corner where Ms Stewart lives is approximately one-quarter to one-half a mile, and that allows for a lot of speed in a car. Mr. Ellis stated in addition to speed bumps or speed humps, perhaps some children at play signs could be installed, and further he stated he did not recall any speed limit signs in the neighborhood at all.

D. Chris Pheil, Pickerington. Mr. Pheil stated he also lives in Fox Glen and he has spoken to Mr. Hansley on the speeding issue. He stated he was suggesting the word “Slow” and “25 mph” be painted onto the roadway to try and make people aware of the speed limit. He stated they do realize that the speeders are not necessarily people from outside the neighborhood, but are people who live there. Mr. Pheil stated unless there is some deterrent he did not feel anything was going to happen, so they need something more permanent than the speed trailer. He stated they are trying to prevent something from happen and protect the kids in the neighborhood.

E. Cheryl Wright, Pickerington. Ms Wright stated everyone has some good suggestions, but she would suggest a stop sign. She stated this would at least cause people to slow down and would be effective.

Mr. Fix stated he moved out of a neighborhood in the township for this exact reason. He stated he had asked the Township Trustees to put stop signs up and was told they could not do that by law. Mr. Fix stated however since he moved from that neighborhood they have painted the speed limit and “slow” on the street and they have put in stop signs, and his former neighbors have told him that it is not perfect, but it is much better than it was. Mr. Fix stated knowing how much of an impact this has on the quality of life and your ability to enjoy your home; he would wholly support this committee doing anything they can to slow people down in this neighborhood. Mr. Wisniewski stated the problem with putting in speed bumps, speed humps, etc., is the cost because there are some serious financial considerations for each of those solutions. He stated further the speed bumps break down very quickly as well. Mr. Wisniewski stated it would be nice if we could get a safety grant to try and address this issue and perhaps the City Manager can look into that possibility. Mr. Wisniewski continued that he did not think there would be any objections from any council member regarding painting on the roadway and the City Manager can look into the issue of the stop signs and Council has looked several creative solutions over the past few years because this is an issue of concern in many of the subdivisions in the City. Mr. Sabatino stated he agreed with Mr. Wisniewski, this issue is not unique to Fox Glen and has been discussed in the past. Mr. Sabatino stated he felt Chief Taylor has done a good job of scheduling his personnel in areas where we know problems are happening, and the best thing the residents can do is to call the police department when you have a specific situation and they can have an officer respond. Mrs. Sanders stated she felt the painting on the roadway and the signs could be taken care of pretty quickly, and if we could do this in this subdivision we could see if it works. Mr. Hansley stated with regard to the stop sign, even if we put a stop sign up it would not be legally enforceable because we are mandated to follow the State Uniform Code of Traffic Control Devices and there is very specific language that says you cannot use stop signs to control speed. It is only designed to control the safety of an intersection and must be warranted. Mr. Sauer stated he agreed with Mrs. Sanders that some sort of signage would be appropriate and would be something that could be done fairly quickly. Mr. Hansley stated this idea is relatively inexpensive if you look at one or two subdivisions, the expense would come if every subdivision in town requested it. Mr. Hansley stated he felt Mr. Drobina’s budget could handle additional speed limit signs, pavement markings, and installing over sized stop signs where we have stop signs. He stated some of these ideas could work and some township subdivisions are done that way. Mr. Sabatino inquired if Mr. Hansley would have any issue with utilizing Fox Glen as a test for some of these things, and Mr. Hansley stated he felt we could do that. Mr. Hansley further stated unfortunately if and when we aggressively issue tickets, ninety percent of the time the tickets would be issued to people who live in that same subdivision. He stated if there is a strong civic association or even just neighbor to neighbor, if everyone will just ask for cooperation in slowing down. He stated some impact could be made just by making people aware of the situation. Mr. Hansley stated he understood it was the direction of this Committee for staff to continue to work with the residents of Fox Glen and perhaps have a few more one-on-one meetings, and then he can get with Mr. Drobina and look at what additional signage we can add that will have some impact, and also to try pavement markings. Mr. Hansley further stated he would like the residents to be aware that if you put your house on the market anything we do that indicates there is a speeding problem will make it difficult to sell. Mr. Hansley clarified that if the City was going to put up two signs and the homeowner’s wanted four, the homeowner’s association could provide the funds for the additional two signs. Mr. Hansley stated many traffic calming measures had been discussed by this Committee over the past years and they are willing to listen to any constructive ideas the residents might have. Mr. Sauer moved to authorize the City Manager work with staff and the residents of Fox Glen to determine type of signage, placement of signage, and roadway painting of the speed limit; Mr. Sanders seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Sauer, and Mrs. Sanders voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

F. Susan Chapman, Pickerington. Ms Chapman stated she was present to address this Committee regarding a recent incident in Pickerington Run. She stated this is a great neighborhood, but the entrance is shared by rental properties and she suspects the rental agencies have lowered their standards and they have had problems with some of the kids in the entrance to their development. She stated recently an altercation broke out and one of the people pulled out a gun and shot into a car. She stated the police responded and apprehended the individual, but her concern was that this was too nice of a neighborhood to let it go. Ms Chapman stated she is grateful for our police force, but she was wondering if we could do something to keep these things from escalating into something serious. Ms Chapman stated there are kids that are loitering, hanging out, and walking in the middle of the street. She stated her opinion was “no place, no purpose” and she was asking for help from the police in looking into the loitering laws and breaking up these groups before it escalates into something that could turn ugly. She stated she felt we need to reestablish our boundaries, where people are allowed to be; they shouldn’t be able to just come in and hang out. Mr. Sabatino stated he has driven in that neighborhood and has seen a group of youths stand in the roadway and dare you to come down the street. He stated he really doesn’t know any good answers and this is something that we have not seen in our community until a few years ago. Mr. Sauer inquired if we have a Neighborhood Watch programs in town, and Ms Chapman stated the neighborhood watch issues are things the neighbors are already doing anyway. She stated they are already watching out for each other’s kids, they are already paying attention to strange vehicles, etc. Mr. Sauer stated he knows of a neighborhood that has a program like that and they have a committee set up where they are notified if robberies have occurred, they have relationship with the police department, and they have a database of license plates of individuals that may have caused altercations so if anyone notices a particular vehicle they can notify the police department and someone is sent out. Chief Taylor stated Mr. Sauer’s advice to contact the police if you see a car in your neighborhood that doesn’t seem to belong there or if you see something that looks like it could be trouble. He stated the police are taking measures to introduce themselves to people that appear to be problems, and regardless of where they live, they have the right to walk on the sidewalks. He stated, however, if they are up to trouble and if they see a police presence, that might change their minds. Mr. Sabatino stated the police are aware of what is going on in this area and he was sure they would do everything that they can do. Chief Taylor stated because it did escalate to a shooting in that area, the department is doing quite a few things to help to alleviate the problem. Ms Chapman stated she does appreciate that and if she can provide any more information or anything she would be happy to do that.

5. DEPARTMENT REPORTS:

A. Parks and Recreation:

(1) Director’s Report. Mr. Carr stated he had provided a written report to the Committee and he would be happy to answer any questions. Mrs. Sanders stated she felt the insert in the newspaper regarding parks programs was very good and she has received several positive comments on it.

B. Code Enforcement:

(1) Code Enforcement Officer’s Report. Mr. Sabatino stated the Committee had received a written report from the Code Enforcement Officer and ascertained there were no questions regarding this report.

C. Building Regulations Department:

(1) Building Department Report (Mr. Lane) Mr. Lane stated he had provided a written report and he would be happy to answer any questions. Mr. Wisniewski clarified that the play area at Victory Park should be completed in the next few weeks. Mr. Lane stated they still need to trim a few areas outside the carpet area, put three rows of brick lining the area, and seed and straw the grass area and put in four or five benches. Mr. Wisniewski stated he has heard rave reviews about this project.

Mr. Sabatino stated prior to going into the next agenda item, if there were no objections, Kathy Vogt was present and she had asked to address the Committee regarding a parking problem at the Food Pantry. Ms Vogt stated she apologized for being late but she had to attend another meeting prior to this one. She stated because their client numbers have tripled, they have gone from an average of 35 families per month to about 90 families per month, and this has caused an issue with parking in the small parking lot that is adjacent to the plaza. She stated on Thursday morning the food pantry is open from 10:00 A.M. and 12:00 P.M., and the businesses have become upset with the food pantry asking their clients to use that space. She stated they have always used that space, it is just that now there are more clients. Ms Vogt stated the businesses that use that parking area registered a complaint with the landowner. Ms Vogt continued that she had introduced herself to the businesses and explained the situation to them and while most of them were very understanding, they still want their parking spaces. Ms Vogt stated she understood the City paid to have the parking lot paved with the agreement that some of the spaces would be left for public parking but the business have grown and they have a number of employees so they basically need all of those parking spaces at this point. She stated her question to the Committee was if it would be possible to have some parking spaces painted in to the alley so that the people from the food pantry will have a place to park without worry because something was said that these cars could be ticketed and towed. Ms Vogt stated these people are coming to the food pantry because they cannot put food on the table and now they are being threatened with having to pay a ticket or having their vehicle towed. Ms Vogt stated if something could be done along the lines of opening up some space along the alley to put in three or four spaces that would be very helpful. She stated she also plans to talk to the Fire Chief to see if on Thursday mornings the firemen park across the street at the Grange until the food pantry closes at noon. Mr. Hansley stated Mr. Schultz has been working with the Chamber and other businesses regarding some of those spaces being public before the food pantry had this problem. He stated the City is working to create some additional space in the alley with the cooperation of the schools because their boundary is right to the south of the alley line. He stated the plan is to widen the alley out and put some blacktop down. He further stated in addition to that the Township has purchased the Grange building and their plan is to move the firefighter parking across the street to that area. Mr. Sabatino stated it would be safe to assume then that we will soon be able to create a few more spots, and Mr. Hansley stated we are waiting on permission from the schools, but that should happen within weeks, and then we will move forward. Mr. Wisniewski inquired if it were that much further for the people to park on 256 in the early morning and go to the food pantry and Ms Vogt stated she felt privacy was the issue. She stated the reason the people like to park in the back is so they can get in and get out and if we ask them to park on the main street they would be taking a grocery cart full of groceries and loading it into their vehicles. Mr. Wisniewski stated he understood that. Mrs. Sanders stated she would like to thank Ms Vogt for all of her work because she was not aware that the number of clients had increased that much. Ms Vogt stated further she was just wondering if some of the decorative lights could be replaced in the outside plaza. She stated of 17 lights, 9 are burned out and she wondered if those could be replaced. Mr. Hansley stated he would get that taken care of. Ms Vogt also stated along the cement walkway from the top of the plaza down to the doorway of the food pantry, it appears there used to be some kind of a railing. She stated she did not know how long ago it was taken out, but it would be very helpful if something could be put back up because many of her clients are elderly and disabled and having a handrail would be very helpful. Mr. Hansley stated if there is no reason to not replace it, he could see that it was taken care of. Mr. Hansley stated either he or Mr. Carr would contact Ms Vogt in the next few days regarding the railing.

(2) Chief Building Official’s Report (Mr. Phillips) Mr. Phillips stated he had provided a written report and he would be happy to answer any questions. Mr. Phillips stated Mr. Billy Phillips, the Executive Secretary for the Board of Building Standards for the State of Ohio was also present this evening. Mr. Sabatino ascertained there were no questions on Mr. Phillips’ report.

a. Review and discussion regarding proposed permit fees. Mr. Sabatino stated at the last meeting this Committee asked for a break down of the costs to provide these proposed inspections. Mr. Don Phillips stated he had helped staff create a spreadsheet that broke down the hours and that was included in the Committee packet. Mr. Phillips stated it costs around $60 to $65 for one of these inspections to be conducted and there is an overhead cost, so $85 is a fair approximation for how much it would cost to conduct these inspections. He stated the spreadsheet shows all of the tasks involved from the time someone walks in the door until when the final inspection is conducted and it is signed off as being in compliance with the Code. Mr. Sabatino stated it seemed a lot of the stuff on the spreadsheet is clerical work and Mr. Phillips stated approximately 25 percent is clerical. Mr. Sabatino stated it seemed kind of high to be paying $30 an hour for clerical work. Mr. Lane stated that is the cost that Mrs. Fersch provided him for total compensation for the person in that role. Mr. Sauer clarified the employees are already working 40-hour work weeks for the City and would not be working overtime to do this. He stated then we are already paying their salary and now we would be going out and asking our residents to pay for it again. Mrs. Sanders stated she did not feel that everyone who should bet these inspections done, would be getting them done, so the people that are honest about it are going to have to pay an $85 fee versus the person who either doesn’t know or cares not to apply for the permit. She further clarified that Mr. Phillips had indicated these inspections are state mandated. Mr. Phillips stated it is in the State Building Code. Mr. Sabatino stated he had requested the specific language that created this mandate and what he had received was a code book with someone’s interpretation of it. He stated he would have to see something in a little more detail showing that it is mandated. He stated he had also done an investigative analysis on the Internet and he did not see it as being mandated. Mr. Sauer stated his question would also be if we had a legal opinion that stated this was required. He stated he understood how an inspector might interpret it as being required, but if we were going to enforce it he would like a legal opinion stating it was required. Mr. Sauer continued that in looking at some things since the last meeting, it seemed to him there are still a number of communities that do not enforce this and from the information Mr. Sabatino provided the fees from the ones that do enforce it don’t come close to $85. Mr. Hansley stated Mr. Sabatino’s survey shows they are doing the inspection, they are just charging a lesser fee. Mr. Sabatino stated his search was done on replacement water heaters. Mr. Hansley stated then the list that Mr. Sabatino had provided represents entities that are doing inspections and charging a fee for hot water tank replacement, and Mr. Sabatino stated that was correct. Mr. Hansley stated as he had indicated at the last meeting, this Council can set the fee at any amount they want to, and it may be logical to have tiered system. Mr. Hansley stated it may be that if $85 is to high for water heater replacement, then maybe the $20, $30, or $40 would be more appropriate and he felt staff would support that knowing that based on the analysis staff provided that we would lose money on it compared to the true cost of providing the service. Mr. Hansley stated when this was discussed by the Expense Subcommittee it was indicated that the Building Department was not technically General Fund funded, it is supposed to be a break even at least, if not a profit center. He stated it is supposed to be based on the fees for any and all services that are being provided by a specific level of customer. He further stated the Expense Subcommittee had commented the Building Department is not intended to be funded by income tax or the general taxpayer; it should be funded by the customers of that particular department. Mr. Sauer stated the first thing he wants to know is if this is legally required, who has told us this is legally required. Mr. Phillips stated he is not an attorney but he is a Certified Building Official in the State of Ohio and he enforces the Ohio Building Code and the Residential Code of Ohio. Mr. Sauer stated he understood that, and in reading the code provided he sees a lot of “…as determined by the Residential Building Official” and that seemed to him it would be up to the Building Official whether we do this or not. He stated that is why he was asking the question of who was telling us that it was mandated. Mr. Phillips stated Section 105.1, Approvals, it states that application shall be made to the building official for the required approval. Mr. Sauer stated the approval could be so much as saying we have the application, fine, or it could be sending an inspector out to inspect it and charging a fee. He stated he would like to know where that is defined. Mr. Phillips stated he did not know that was the question, he thought the question was what the supporting language was, and this is the supporting language. Mr. Sauer stated what he wanted was some sort of legal interpretation of what “required approval” means. Mr. Phillips stated he is not an attorney and he cannot provide that legal opinion. Mr. Lane stated the intent of the Building Department is not to force anything they can think of to have permits on to create fees and generate revenue. He stated they are simply interpreting the Code and enforcing the Code. He stated for clarification in 2007 the City of Columbus wrote a letter to the Board of Building Standards asking this same question, are these inspections required. Mr. Lane stated the Board of Building Standards replied that these inspections are required. Mr. Sauer inquired if we had sent the same type letter, and Mr. Phillips stated he had sent an e-mail to the Board of Building Standards last week and the response was that the inspections are required. Mrs. Sanders clarified we did not begin requiring these inspections until February of this year. Mr. Sabatino stated in doing his survey he had spoken to some of the building officials and a couple of them stated they do not charge for windows, doors, siding, and roofs because it is not their interpretation they are mandated to do so. Mr. Phillips stated if there is a safety concern, someone in the community is hurt, he would be guilty of misfeasance and the City of Pickerington would not defend him because that liability has been transferred from the City to him for not enforcing the Building Code. Mr. Hansley stated our law director could give an opinion, but when you engage a CBO it is the CBO’s call as to how he will interpret and enforce the Code, not that of the law director. Mr. Hansley stated the problem is that Mr. Phillips is in charge of doing that. Mr. Sauer stated the point was, if we start down this road where do we stop. At point does the City need to stop coming in your door and making sure that you are doing everything you should be a responsible enough individual to determine if it is being done correctly or not. Mr. Sabatino stated there is no record of any catastrophe being caused by not inspecting any of these units at this point in time. He stated we are creating a perceived potential problem, and if Mr. Phillips had his way he would charge the resident’s of Pickerington $85 every time they did something. Mr. Phillips stated he was not responsible for the budget and he did not care how much the City charged for the permit. Mr. Sauer stated it is his understanding that we are doing these inspections now at no charge so it would not hurt anything if we waited until the next meeting so this Committee could get a copy of the e-mail Mr. Phillips received stating this was mandated. Mr. Sauer stated if it is mandated then there can be discussion about what we are going to charge. Mr. Phillips stated Mr. Billy Phillips is here tonight and he represents the Board of Building Standards so perhaps he can answer that question. Mr. Sabatino further clarified that we have conducted three inspections of hot water heaters so far.

Mr. Billy Phillips stated he is the Executive Secretary of the Ohio Board of Building Standards. He stated the Board of Building Standards is the state agency that certifies building departments throughout the State of Ohio to enforce both the Nonresidential and Commercial Code and the Residential Code. He stated it is really up to the local jurisdiction to make a determination if they want to be the enforcement agent in their particular community. He stated if you choose to do the enforcement on commercial you are required to adopt the Commercial Code. He further stated the Residential Code is not mandatory throughout the State of Ohio, however, if you choose to enforce the Commercial Code then you must be certified by the Board, and if you choose to enforce the Residential Code you must enforce the Code that the State adopts. Mr. Phillips stated Chapter One of the Residential Code requires the type of inspections that you are discussing this evening. Mr. Fix clarified that the answer is yes, these inspections are required. Mr. Wisniewski clarified that any City that accepts the State Building Code and they are doing residential and are not doing these inspections, are not in compliance with the State. Mr. Sauer stated that answered his question. Mr. Sabatino clarified that the State Board of Building Standards has not decertified any building departments at this time. Mr. Sabatino questioned then if all of the other communities that were not doing these inspections were wrong. Mr. Phillips stated the Board knew there were a lot of jurisdictions that have not caught up since this Residential Code was adopted and as they conduct the required training they will be providing information to these jurisdictions. Mr. Sabatino stated while he might concur that inspections are required for a hot water heater, he did not see where it would be required for siding, doors, windows, and roofs. Mr. Wisniewski stated to the answer is that these inspections are required, and the next question would be what fee to charge. Mr. Billy Phillips stated the Building Department of the political subdivision has the authority to set the fees. Mr. Hansley stated he would suggest this Committee make this a two, three or four tiered system, and Mr. Sabatino stated he had asked how we determined that we would pay the inspector $48, and he has not received an answer for that. Mr. Hansley stated when the Expense Subcommittee reviewed this they insisted that we pay per inspection instead of by the day as we were doing, and that inspector’s fee is $48. Mr. Lane stated he would assume that the communities that charge a lower rate are subsidizing providing that service. Mr. Lane stated we are currently under contract with an electrical inspector and a plumbing inspector and he had checked with every organization he could to gather inspection rates. He stated the two gentlemen we currently use gave him the rate of $48 per inspection. Mr. Sauer stated he is curious to see what the tiered system looks like; he would like to see the amounts associated with the different tiers. Mr. Hansley stated the amounts can be anything you want. Mr. Fix stated he would suggest that this Committee tonight adopt recovering our hard costs and at the next Safety Committee create some sort of tiered system so we do not take another month of charging nothing. Mr. Sabatino stated he did not feel that was wise because the hard costs are something that may not be our hard costs particularly if we are considering doing a plumbing inspection contract with the Franklin County Health Department. Mr. Sabatino stated we have only done three inspections and he did not see the need to jump into charging for these inspections until we can get it right from the start. Mr. Wisniewski stated the question was if we want to subsidize the Building Department or do we want to recoup the cost of providing this service that is mandated by the State to the residents. Mr. Sabatino stated the problem was they had not been able to find what a true competitive price should be. Mr. Wisniewski questioned if it were fair for taxpayers to help pay for the cost of their neighbor having an inspection done. Mrs. Sanders questioned then if this Committee wanted to discuss the fee amount at the next meeting. Mr. Sauer moved to have the discussion regarding the amount of the fee for these inspections at the April Safety Committee meeting; Mrs. Sanders seconded the motion. Mr. Sabatino stated he felt we should charge something, but he did not agree at the level proposed by staff. He stated if this Committee wanted to consider a small fee this month that could be done, but if everyone wanted to wait until next month that would be their choice. Mrs. Sanders requested Mr. Hansley to put together an example of the tiered fees for this Committee to look at next month and Mr. Hansley stated that would not be a problem. Mr. Sauer stated he was not comfortable in attaching a dollar figure to this until he has time to go back and look at the budget, see what the line items are for each individual area, and come up with an idea of what he feels is responsible from his point of view. Mr. Sauer stated he did not want to pull a number out of thin air, he wanted to come back with something that he felt was reasonable and fair to the citizens and the City. Mrs. Sanders stated she agreed with Mr. Sauer that she did not want to just pull a number out of thin air, and if an amount were going to be recommended tonight she would want it to be the amount that we are paying for the inspection, and if we are not going to do that she felt it should be held off until next month for further discussion. Mr. Lane stated he would like to make it clear that the amount we are paying for electrical and plumbing inspections right now is $48. Mr. Sabatino clarified that as of today we have a signed contract and Mr. Hansley stated although it is a one-year contract it has a 30-day notice in it so it is a month-to-month contract. Mr. Wisniewski stated he would like Mr. Lane to provide Council with the fees charged by the Franklin County Health Department since that is a consideration as well. Mr. Lane stated he would have that information in the next Committee packet. Mrs. Yartin stated, as she understood the motion, it was to include a review and determination of inspection fees on the next Safety Committee agenda. Mr. Sauer stated that was correct. Mr. Sabatino stated he thought a tiered fee was to be discussed and Mr. Hansley stated that was not included in this motion. Mr. Sauer moved to amend his motion to be that in addition to having a fee review on this he would also like to see an alternate plan with a tiered system as well; Mrs. Sanders seconded the amended motion. Roll call was taken on the motion as amended with Mr. Sabatino, Mrs. Sanders, and Mr. Sauer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0. Mr. Sauer questioned if it was also understood that no fees would be charged for these inspections between now and next month and Mr. Hansley stated that was correct.

D. Service Department:

(1) Review and discussion regarding restricting right turns on red at S.R. 256 and S.R. 204. Mr. Sabatino stated he had spoken to Ms VanCleave today and she has spoken to Mr. Bosch at ODOT and they have some enhanced capabilities of video they have recorded and they are going to have an analysis done and promised that we would have it for this meeting next month.

6. POLICE:

A. Chief’s Report. Chief Taylor stated he had provided his report to the Committee and he would be happy to answer any questions. Chief Taylor stated he had provided the Committee with a handout from the Department of Justice and the City has the opportunity to secure a COPS grant for additional officers, and he was asking for this Committee’s approval to apply for this grant. Chief Taylor stated the grant would pay the total cost of an officer for three years and he would like to try and get two officers. Mr. Sauer stated then Chief Taylor was asking for approval to apply for two officers that would be paid for in full for three years. Chief Taylor stated our only stipulation is that the City has to keep them for an additional year after the three years. Mr. Sauer moved to authorize the City Manager to apply for the COPS grant for two police officers and to forward the appropriate legislation to Council; Mrs. Sanders seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sauer, Mr. Sabatino, and Mrs. Sanders voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 3-0.

7. CHAIRMAN:

A. Review and discussion regarding parking request by the Food Pantry. Mr. Sabatino stated this was dealt with earlier in the meeting.

B. Review and discussion regarding speed limit signs on Center Street north of Milnor Road. Mr. Sabatino stated this was also dealt with earlier in the meeting.

8. OTHER BUSINESS. Mrs. Sanders stated at the last Parks & Recreation Board meeting they had discussed setting up a work session to set some goals, both short term and long term, and they were hoping that either Mr. Sabatino or Mr. Sauer, or both, would attend the next Parks & Recreation Board meeting to help them set that up. Mrs. Sanders stated the next Parks & Recreation Board meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, March 25^th, at 7:00 P.M. Mrs. Yartin stated she would send an e-mail reminder to Safety Committee with the date and time of the Parks & Recreation Board meeting.

9. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, Mr. Sauer moved to adjourn; Mr. Sabatino seconded the motion. Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Sanders, and Mr. Sabatino voted "Aye." Motion carried, 3-0. The Safety Committee adjourned at 9:20 P.M., March 18, 2009.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

________________________________

Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk