Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-25-1999 Admin Com MinutesMinutes of Administrative Committee of Dublin City Council Monday, January 25, 1999 7:00 p.m. -Council Conference Room Attending: Mrs . Boring, Chair Mr. McCash Mr. Peterson Mr. Adamek Mr. Helwig Ms. Crandall Mr. McDaniel Mrs. Boring called the meeting to order at 720 p.m. Transportation 't'ask Force Review Mrs. Boring gave a brief history of the creation of the task force. The TTF appointments were for 3 years with the intent to evaluate the effectiveness of the task force after that period. The Transportation Task Force was an outgrowth of the Retention and Expansion effort done with the Chamber of Commerce. At the time the task force was established, there was some difference of opinion about the need for iC and whether it would be a worthwhile effort. Many of the issues which were reviewed by the Committee are staff issues which do not require Council review and approval. Mr. Helwig reported that Mrs. Boring asked him to submit his comments and recommendation regarding the continuation of the task force. He noted that the Task Force pre-dates his employment with the City. He has served as the staff liaison, and the group is cur7~ently not meeting. They have heard that their future is in doubt. His recommendation as outlined in the report to Council is that the task force be eliminated. In summary, transportation is a very global issue and Dublin staff spends a great deal of time working on the same issues. Traffic improvements have long been a number one priority for Dublin staff. In his view, a task force is generally assembled to focus on a specific tas]< within a specific time period. In this case, the task force approach is not appropriate. He noted that there are some items for which a task force approach would make sense, i.e., a study of the feasibility of a light rail system for this region. Council already provides a great deal of oversight on transportation issues through the CIP process. An extensive update of the Thoroughfare Plan was done within the Community Plan process. The Chamber has intensified the frequency of their "Stake and Eggs" program which provides an effective means to communicate with the business leaders. In addition, Mary Bearden serves on the Chamber Board and is familiar with the concerns raised by the business community about things such as traffic congestion. City staff are daily focusing on traffic concerns. He is recommending that the task force not be continued. Mr. Peterson commented that traffic is a major issue in this City, but the task force approach was not perhaps the best way to address them. He asked if they could possibly focus on regional transportation issues on Council's behalf, or is staff already covering that aspecC with groups such as MORPC. Are there resources -citizens or businesses in Dublin -that would be willing to make the outreach to regional groups, or does staff already have this handled? Mr. Helwig responded that staff is already spread quite thin in view of the large number of CIP projects underway, and the acce]erated schedule for some projects. He agreed that the City can never do enough of reaching out to the regional area for dialogue. It would probably be helpful to create an inventory of groups with which the City should maintain contact. Presently, the City is connected with MORPC, COTA, Che Columbus Chamber of Commerce, the North Outerbelt Widening group. His opinion is Chat this type of activity would be more appropriate for elected officials instead of volunteers. Mr. Peterson stated that the ordinance establishing the task force refen-ed to some broader range issues, but iC seems the task force as it has evolved has probably run its course. Mrs. Boring stated that the task force was established with the idea that in three years, Council would reassess the need for it as well as its effectiveness. Mr. Peterson stated that the trend in government is to streamline boards in order to Cackle more policy issues. Mr. McCash stated that if any organization was destined to fail, it was Che Transportation Task Force. Council struggled with its name, its charge and its purpose. He believes there is still some benefit to having it, provided that specific direction is given from Council to the TTF. He had understood that their mission was to look at Che global, big picture items in the community as well as to make recommendation to Council about items not on the 5-year CIP. The Krier Drive connection was an issue brought to Counci] by TTF member Randy Roth. This is the type of item he has envisioned the TTF handling. Perhaps the TTF could serve as a forum to allow for ciCizen input in the early stages of design for projects -freeing Council up to handle the big picture items. He does agree with streamlining government as much as possible. But the number one concern in Dublin is traffic, and the TTF could be used to help resolve issues. Mr. Peterson noted that his experience has been Chat Council still must spend time with these issues, since Council ultimately makes the decision. Having the TTF and then Council Cackle Che same issues seems like duplication for Council as well as for staff who attend these meetings. Mr. McCash suggested that the board be structured similar to Planning & Zoning Commission where Council would be able to override their recommendation by a super majority vote. Mrs. Boring agreed with Mr. Peterson. She is also uncomfortable with citizens giving advice regarding the 5-year CIP when they don't have the full financial picture of the City. In Cerms of sharing information with residents about projects, she does not believe the task force could receive information at an earlier date than citizens do now. A former member of Che TTF had recommended thaC Council abolish TTF because it was not functional. TTF merely constitutes another layer of government. Council is ultimately responsible to make the call. Mr. Adamek stated that he agrees with Mrs. Boring. This task force merely creates more bureaucracy. Council should deal with the issues which will streamlining the process all the way around. The global issues were considered within the community plan, but in addition, the City has representation on MORPC. He supports abolishing the TTF. Mr. McCash stated that he maintains that the TTF could assist Council and staff in prioritizing roadway projects. Mr. Adamek responded that this would invite a backyard type of approach instead of a comprehensive approach done by a professional staff. Mr. Peterson stated that Council takes a very active role in decision making, and traffic is a very emotional issue for this community. Citizens want Council to address Chis issue. His question is whether Council is adding a different perspective by bringing in another layer of decision makers, or should the job be handled by Council because it is so important to the people Council represents. Mr. McCash stated that this task force was a product of the R&E program and the goal was to give the corporate residents a voice in the decisions about the CIP. Mr. Peterson noted that citizens expect Council to listen to their concerns and to be available to make the site visit to observe Che problem first hand He does not believe another layer is necessary to the decision-making process. Mr. McCash stated thaC many of the issues with the Woerner-Temple extension could have been avoided if concerns were brought up earlier in Che planning process to a group such as TTP. Mrs. Boring suggested the option of directing staff to take Che projects to the citizens at an earlier stage in the planning process. Mr. McCash stated that this message has been given to staff, but he has not seen that occurring. He would propose that the TTF be given this charge of reviewing CIP projects and seeking community input. Perhaps the excessive traffic lights on Post could have been pointed out if that input had occun•ed. Mr. Adamek suggested acheck-off sheet for CIP projects, i.e., has there been a meeting with residents, has Council reviewed the plans, etc., before the design is Coo far along. He does not see the need for this commission. Mr. Peterson stated that the "buck" does stop with Council members and people will call Council. Traffic is a quality of life issue. The TTF has just provided another opportunity Co be heard. Council needs to ensure that the residents' opportunity to be heard is built into the system, but without creating another body. Mr. Adamek stated that a similar process is already in place for park development where staff meets with the residents of the subdivision in the planning stage. Council does make the final decision, however. Mr. Peterson moved Co recommend to Council that TTF be abolished. Mrs. Boring seconded the motion. Vote on the motion -Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Mr. McCash, yes. Mrs. Boring stated that she agrees with Mr. McCash that there are some problems with providing information to the public early in the design process. Mr. McCash moved that the Committee request that Council give the Committee the charge of working with staff to develop policies and procedures for roadway project development. Mrs. Boring seconded the motion. Vote on the motion - Mr. Peterson, yes, Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. McCash, yes. Board and Commission Restructuring Mr. McDaniel stated that this process began back in the mid-90's when Council indicated they would like some streamlining of boards and commissions. After all of the discussions and review, it was determined that the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee would be retained but re-established as the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board for consistency reasons; that the Tree and Landscape Advisory Commission would continue to exist; and that a new board would be established, Irnown as the Community Services Advisory Board, comprised of Che former Cemetery Commission and the Solid Waste Advisory Committee. In all cases, legislation will be needed to effect these changes. The changes include that all members will be residents, that the boards will have the authority with Council's approval to establish task forces for certain purposes, and that with Council approval, they can establish subcommittees when appropriate. For example, the PRAB could establish an advisory subcommittee to focus on child care issues. In response to Mr. Peterson, Mr. McDaniel explained that the Cemetery Commission was created with the original charter. It was a statutory provision that the City have such a commission when a city owned a cemetery. Most recenCly, the Cemetery Commission published a cemetery guidebook, and they have worked on a five-year beautification program for the historic cemetery. The cemetery grounds are maintained by Grounds and Facilities, and the records have now been computerized. So Che Cemetery Commission has made a lot of contribution over the past few years and for this reason, staff is recommending that they continue to exist within a re-established board. The Community Services Advisory Board is Co be a consolidation of Cemetery Board, Solid Waste, and possibly telecommunications issues, public safety, police issues, fire issues, community health, and environmental issues. Parks and Recreation Advisa•v Board Mrs. Boring suggested they focus on the original ordinance establishing the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (Ordinance 95-97). In Ordinance 95-97, there was a concern with the Board advising Council concerning pw~chasing of parkland. There was also concern about the language regarding capital expenditures and priorities. Council had suggested that perhaps Che Board could review the rates for the CRC as one of their duties, and bring a recommendation to Council. Mr. McCash supports removing 2(b) and 2(c). Council prioritizes those issues and makes the decisions. Mr. McDaniel noted that for 2(c), he believes the thought was that the PRAB could help to prioritize recreational needs in the capital budget process. Mr. Peterson suggested modifying the language in 2(c) to "recommend to Council for its approval a plan for the development of parldand and recreational facilities and submit annual or more fi-equent revisions of such plans thereafter". Council can then make the determination of how that plan fits in Che capital budget. He supports removing 2(b). It was the consensus of the Committee to modify 2(c) and to remove 2(b). Following discussion, it was the consensus of the Committee to modify the language from "advise" to "recommend". Mrs. Boring summarized thaC Che language now reads, "recommend to Council policies concerning the rules, regulations and operations and use of parks and recreational facilities." Mrs. Boring then reviewed the recent changes Mr. McDaniel had submitted for this ordinance, including adding language about the CRC in Section One, adding language in Section Two about how the agenda is set, revising the membership composition in Section 3, and providing for creation of task forces in Section 4. Mrs. Boring noted that it will be important to provide for staggering of terms in the revisions to the ordinance in order to provide continuity. Mr. McCash moved to recommend to Council the legislation based upon the changes submitted by Mr. McDaniel and upon Council's discussion tonight. Mr. Peterson seconded the motion. Vote on the motion - Mr. Peterson, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. McCash, yes. 't'ree and Landscape Advisory Committee Mr. McDaniel stated that this is a very active board. The legislation before the Committee basically provides for a similar structure to that of the PRAB in terms of serving in an advisory capacity to Council. The duties have been somewhat broadened Prom when this Committee was first established. Mrs. Boring asked if the language makes their mission very clear. Mr. McCash noted that the word "master" should be removed from this ordinance as well as done in the previous ordinances. Mr. McDaniel stated Chat it will now read, "recommend to Council policies to regulate and control and planting" .... The word "protection" will be changed to "preservation". Mr. McCash suggested that in view of the larger role of the Committee in preservation of the environment and enhancement of the natural beauty of the City as outlined in the Community Plan, wouldn't it make sense to title this a "Natural Environment Advisory Board." In this way, the Committee would also concern itself with river corridors, natural amenities, as well as tree and landscaping. Mr. McDaniel agreed that this title would more adequately reflect the scope of the Committee Mr. Peterson suggested the title, "Natural Resources Advisory Board". It was the consensus of the Committee to retitle Che committee, "Natural Resources Advisory Board. Mr. McDaniel noted that this would be in keeping with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources and the emphasis on the environment across Che state. Mr. McCash suggested that Section C contain Che following language: "recommend to Council policies concerning rules and regulations, regulating the control of planting, transplanting, maintenance and protection of u~ees, shrubs and landscaping in City-owned or controlled property and to develop policies concerning rules and regulations regarding the natural environment." Mrs. Boring asked that Mr. McDaniel make the appropriate revisions to the draft legislation for the Committee's review on Wednesday, February 3 at 6:30 p.m. The emphasis should be that the group recommends policies to Council, not sets administrative rules. The Committee agreed that the Board should have 7 members to be consistent with other boards. At this point, Mr. Adamek left the meeting. Community Services Advisory Board Mrs. Boring noted that the Board will combine the Solid Waste Advisory Committee and the Cemetery Commission. She has some concerns that this Board could have the same kind of difficulties that the TTF experienced with the lack of defined tasks. Perhaps this board could also have oversight of telecommunication issues for the City. This Board could come up with ideas about special programs in areas of safety and service. Mr. McCash stated that the duties for this board in Section 2 be more defined. This board could also be charged with monitoring service levels in the City Co ensure that the high standards are maintained. Mr. Peterson suggested that language be added stating that this board incorporates the functions of SWAC and Cemetery and noting their contributions as well as Council's wish to sU•eamline all of the boards and commissions. Mr. McDaniel will work on modified language for fw-Cher consideration by Council, including ideas for tasks to be assigned to the board. Perhaps overview of utilities can be added as well. ~rplication Form Revision Mr. McCash suggested that more information be requested as far as connections or non- connections between various boards on which Chey may sit, i.e., someone is in business partnership with someone who appoints Co the board, or Che amount of campaign contribution made to the re-election campaign for a Council member. The present language in the application does not cover these situations. There are those in the community who have concerns about the reasons for which some are appointed to boards Mr. Peterson stated that he understands his concerns, but Council to a certain extent has no choice but to rely on the integrity of the other members of Council in this regard. This issue is not a matter of disclosure by the candidates, but goes instead to what Council members are all about. On the other hand, support on a re-election campaign does not necessarily preclude a qualified person of integrity from being appointed to a board. Mr. McCash emphasized that the goal here is informing Council members about relationships which may influence selection of a particular candidate. Mr. Peterson stated that there must be some degree of faith in the process and the honesty of those involved. Ms. Crandall stated that she will contact other cities to obtain samples of the forms which they use. These will be provided to Council for Cheir review. She will ask Community Relations to assist with preparation of an updated form. Mrs. Boring confirmed that legislation will be introduced at the February 16 Council meeting amending the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board ordinance; and creating a new Natural Resource Advisory Board and a Community Services Advisory Board. Other business on the Administrative Committee's agenda in the coming weeks includes the City Manager's evaluation, the ethics policy, and planning the goal setting meeting. Discussion followed about dates for interviews of candidates for boards and commissions. Dates were tentatively set for Wednesday evening, March 10; Saturday, March 20 and Monday, March 22 if needed. Mrs. Boring noted that an executive session for personnel matters will be scheduled at an upcoming Council meeting to discuss reappointments of current board members and the interview schedu]es. Mrs. Boring asked that the Community Relations division include an article in an upcoming publication about the streamlining of boards and commissions in order to generate some public interest.