SPECIAL MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NOVI

TUESDAY, MAY 30, 1995 AT 7:00 PM EDT

NOVI CIVIC CENTER-ACTIVITIES ROOM-45175 WEST TEN MILE ROAD

The meeting was called to order at 7:10 PM with Mayor McLallen presiding.

ROLL CALL: Council Members Crawford (present), Mason (present), Mitzel (present), Pope (absent-excused), Schmid (present), Toth (present), and Mayor McLallen (present).

Present (6) Absent (1-Pope, absent-excused)

-ooo-

ALSO PRESENT: Edward F. Kriewall - City Manager

Craig Klaver - Assistant City Manager

Anthony Nowicki - Director of Public Services

James Wahl - Director of Community Development

Brenda Evans - Library Director

Les Gibson - Finance Director

Kathy Smith-Roy - Comptroller

Geraldine Stipp - City Clerk

-ooo-

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford,

Seconded by Councilman Schmid,

To approve the agenda as presented.

Yes (4) No (2-Mason, Toth) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

PURPOSE OF SPECIAL MEETING

Mayor McLallen said this was the budget wrap-up session and the budget would be on the agenda for adoption June 5th.

1. Budget Wrap-Up

Mayor McLallen said if they went above Truth in Taxation, the average increase to a homeowner appeared to be less than $25.00 a year.

Mr. Kriewall said since they had heard nothing from the public, he felt the community was supportive of the quality of services. His recommendation was that the budget be adopted as presented at 10.4727 mills.

Les Gibson said the total budget was just over $14 million which represented an increase of less than 3% over last year's budget. The budget included 3% raise, police contract settlement, 9 new staff, and 50 cent increase for paid-on-call; the bulk of the increase was to pay for technology.

Councilwoman Mason asked that they vote separately on the four millage increases.

Councilman Schmid commented that the audience never said anything about the budget. He said he was having trouble going above Truth in Taxation and he felt new growth should fund any increases. His concern was they could have everything in the general fund budget with the possible exception of part of the computers without Truth in Taxation. He said the millage would generate about $380,000 and the computers were $350,000 so really the increase was for computers.

Councilman Schmid asked how much the increased millage would generate for Parks & Recreation, and Mr. Kriewall said about $60,000. He informed Council that the Roller Dek proposal was withdrawn today and members asked if the City could do it. Administration will investigate.

It was noted that the Police & Fire Fund needed $48,000 and the General Fund would have to cover it. Millage at Truth in Taxation would be 10.0907 and above would be 10.4723. There would be $553,000 generated between the four funds by going over Truth in Taxation; total of the four funds would be $19,457,000 and last year was $19,259,000.

Councilman Toth said he had a problem with the Police Academy at $7,845; he also asked what the cap was for Planning. Les Gibson said the same cap was on all departments.

Councilman Mitzel asked if the budget indicated that the $50,000 in sidewalks would be utilized and not rolled into Fund Balance. Les Gibson said that was correct and referred to page 16 which showed that as an expenditure in 1994-95.

Councilwoman Mason asked how they got from a consultant to a permanent person at $55,000. She said they were supposed to get a printout on ordinance officers to see what they are doing now 8 hours a day; she said she couldn't agree to hire a full time weigh master.

Mr. Kriewall said Council agreed to hire a Weigh Master at a meeting when she was absent; a Recreation Coordinator was also added.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Mitzel,

Seconded by Councilman Crawford,

That the budget as proposed for the General Fund be forwarded to the June 5th meeting for Council action to go above Truth in Taxation.

Yes (3-Mitzel, McLallen, No (3-Schmid, Toth, Absent (1-Pope)

Crawford) Mason) Motion failed

Mayor McLallen asked if the no votes would like to put their major issues on the table.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Toth,

Seconded by Councilman Mitzel,

That the Library budget as proposed above Truth in Taxation be forwarded to the June 5th meeting for Council approval.

DISCUSSION:

Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried unanimously

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Mitzel,

Seconded by Councilman Crawford,

To move the Police & Fire budget forward above Truth in Taxation to the June 5th meeting.

DISCUSSION:

Councilwoman Mason said $53,417 for union contract settlement was taken out of the General Fund. She asked if they went above Truth in Taxation, would that money be put back into the General Fund; Administration said it would not.

Mr. Kriewall said the millage was for sworn personnel and did not address clerical support or dispatch; the General Fund would still subsidize police & fire about $200,000.

Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried uninanmously

Councilman Toth said he was not happy with the way the Parks and Recreation budget was presented; there was no justification on line items. He said the problem was he knew they needed more money but would the money be spent properly.

Councilwoman Mason said that Parks and Recreation was a perk and she couldn't vote for additional millage. She said something was wrong with the management of the department and that had to be streamlined before adding personnel. She asked if they had money to develop the park land they purchased or were they going to have another bond issue for that.

Councilman Mitzel said his concern was that they did not have funds for park land development and he felt that was more important than additional personnel. He asked if they went above Truth in Taxation, could the money be directed to contingency and then Council could direct where it would be used. He was told he could include that in a motion if desired.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Mitzel,

Seconded by Councilman Toth,

To move forward with the Parks and Recreation Fund above Truth in Taxation to June 5th with the understanding that the money would be held in contingency.

DISCUSSION:

Councilman Crawford said he agreed with going above Truth in Taxation. He said he did not like eliminating what was presented to them and consensus had agreed to the new position. He said he felt a good case was made for that, and he did not think they should employ the restriction that it would be put in contingency so they would have to rehash Parks and Recreation priorities throughout the year. He said as much as he wanted to go above Truth in Taxation because he thought the funds were justified, he would not support the motion with that provision.

Councilman Schmid said he agreed with Mr. Crawford. He asked about staying under Headlee and Mr. Kriewall explained they were below Headlee. Councilman Crawford said they would generate more money if they went to Headlee than what was proposed under Truth in Taxation.

Mr. Kriewall said if they had kept pace with inflationary costs, the Headlee max would be a full mill and a quarter higher for the General Fund. He said they have been able to do that because of new growth.

Councilman Schmid asked if his proposal was that new growth wasn't sufficient for today, and Mr. Kriewall said the problem was they had not kept pace in areas like police personnel which was why they had to go to a new millage to boost police and fire personnel. He said new construction did not give them that many extra dollars because they had to keep up with inflationary costs. He said what they were saving by rolling that millage back all the time was the eventual problem of having to deal with things in chunks every 5 or 10 years by going to special millage.

Mayor McLallen said the issue on the table was a motion to go over Truth in Taxation in Parks and Recreation with the caveat that the personnel services position be eliminated and that $18,000 in anticipated revenue be taken out of the budget.

Councilman Mitzel said he made the motion in light of the fact that the $18,000 would no longer be available. He said it was no longer possible to utilize what was presented because they were not going to get that much money.

Mayor McLallen said she would not support the motion; she said having talked to the director and the staff, this was a department that ran almost 7 days a week and the programs were heavily utilized by the residents. She said staff was very light in the department and they were putting in a lot of uncompensated hours and she felt the personnel were stretched almost to the breaking point. She said the other alternative was to raise the cost of the programs across the board to fund the position; she said she also agreed with Mr. Mitzel that they needed as much funding as possible for the park land.

Mayor McLallen asked what the millage would have to be to approve both. Les Gibson said $59,000 would take it to the Headlee cap, but they could use $18,000 of the $59,000 to replace what was dropping out.

Councilman Crawford said he agreed with Mr. Mitzel that the $18,000 should be eliminated from the budget but the intent of the motion was still to put the $59,000 in contingency to be later debated by City Council.

Councilman Mitzel said to leave everything the same but eliminate the $18,000 on the revenue side and also $18,000 on the appropriation side which would have to come out of personnel services and the Truth in Tax would stay in contingency just as was proposed and just like the computer money did last year.

Councilman Crawford asked what would then be the status of the Recreation Coordinator that was agreed upon previously by Council.

Councilman Mitzel said he believed that Mr. Gibson said that wouldn't be funded so it would have to be eliminated.

Councilman Crawford asked why it wouldn't be funded if they generated an additional $59,000.

Mr. Mitzel said his motion was to move this forward above Truth in Taxation minus the $18,000 revenue from the Roller Dek proposal which they would no longer get. He said take that $18,000 out of the appropriations side of the new Recreation Coordinator which would not leave enough money for an entire coordinator and take the balance of $19,024 from that position and also put that into contingency. He said they had to take $18,000 out somewhere and he made the motion to take it out of that new position as opposed to the contingency which he believed should be set aside for park land development. He said Council had already taken Community Development Block Funds which were supposed to be for certain areas of the City and moved those and took money they already had and put it into park land development so the funding was important for park land development.

Councilman Crawford said he agreed money was important for park land development, but he was assuming that the priorities of the Parks and Recreation Department and the Commission were to hire another Recreation Coordinator based on what he said before - that was a higher priority than immediate funding of park land development. He said there might be sufficient funds in here for park land development for this year. He questioned why they were changing the priority when it was presented to them several weeks ago and agreed upon and that wasn't an issue at that time. He said the consensus of Council was not to not hire a Recreation Coordinator and put the money into park land development based on what was presented to them; he asked why that changed.

Councilman Mitzel said what had changed was they didn't have the $18,000. He said for him, park land development was a higher priority than additional staff. He said they have owned Rotary Park for five years and they were just seeing development. He said if they had developed that immediately, they could have had tennis courts for people in that part of the City for years now. He said to him if they bought land for park land, development of that land was highest priority. He said staffing was important and Administration was looking at long term staffing plans and in light of the fact they no longer had the $18,000, he felt the choice should be for park land development as opposed to personnel.

Councilman Crawford asked if they could ask Mr. Davis to re-address the question as to the priorities of park land development versus additional staff.

Dan Davis said as far as the issue of development versus staff, they have identified the staffing needs as a more important priority right now and they are studying development needs and addressing a lot of them as they speak. He said Community Sports Park was going out for bids this week. Mr. Davis said they would have those numbers as to how that cost was going to affect the bond issue and how much money was going to be needed to complete the total development of the 72 acres. Rotary Park would be going out to bid shortly and they would be able to solidify those numbers; Mr. Davis noted that was tied to a Michigan DNR grant and a Rotary donation. He said they were 3 to 4 months away from having some recommendations on the tree farm as far as what development schemes could occur at that site and then they would have some ideas as far as development costs. He said right now they didn't even know what was going to happen there so they didn't know if it would cost $2 million or $10 million to develop that piece of property; $19,000 from this year being put into a fund wasn't really going to address anything as far as that site was concerned. He said right now, the staffing level was a concern of his and they have identified that as a top priority.

Mr. Davis said the final component would be maintenance; they had just completed a pretty thorough maintenance analysis and identified what they believed would be their staffing levels for current property and also what burdens all the new properties would put on. That was something they felt could be put off from this fiscal year consideration into future fiscal year considerations, and that was why they had identified staffing levels on the maintenance side and only a minimal amount of capital within the Park Maintenance Division.

Councilwoman Mason said everybody who asked for an increase in millage should be allowed to re-do everything that had been done for the past two months as Mr. Davis did; she said that was not his fault - it was Council's fault. She said they were not here to listen to this tonight; they were here to decide what they were going to do next Monday and not to lobby each other.

Mayor McLallen said the motion on the table was to go for Truth in Taxation at .0409, the personnel position would be eliminated, and $19,000 would go into the contingency fund.

Yes (3) No (3-McLallen, Crawford, Schmid) Absent (1-Pope)

Motion failed

Craig Klaver asked if they would be interested in looking at a mid-year position as a way of making a commitment to personnel.

Councilwoman Mason said she would not because every single year they go further in debt and take more money out of General Fund which told her that somehow they had to reorganize the Parks & Recreation Department. She said they had raised fees and it still did not work. She said there was something wrong and they needed to take a close look at the operation. She wasn't saying that the $19,000 in contingency couldn't be a part time person, but they needed a serious study of that department so they could see why they kept overspending. She said four years ago, they were only spending a little money and the department was taking care of itself. She would be comfortable at having it in contingency and after looking at where the money was going and what the programs were bringing in to see what programs had to be eliminated or subsidized much more by the people.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford,

Seconded by Councilman Schmid,

To go above Truth in Taxation in the Parks & Recreation Fund to .0409 mills.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Mitzel said it was fine to go above Truth in Taxation but they still had to adopt a budget, and the budget was skewed because of $18,000 in revenue that wouldn't be there.

Councilman Crawford said he imagined that would be corrected and didn't know they had to make a proposal to correct it - if it wasn't there, it wasn't there.

Councilman Mitzel said his point was if they were going to adopt the budget, they would have to adopt a corrected budget. There would be $71,000 on that line item instead of $89,000.

Les Gibson said the companion part of that would be to reduce the amount going into contingencies; they could reduce the $59,000 going into contingencies by $18,000 then the numbers would work.

Councilman Mitzel asked how this could be done and that was why he tried to combine his motion to put both issues together.

Councilman Crawford said he tried to address the Truth in Taxation level in priorities set by Parks and Recreation. He said if what Mr. Gibson just said did that then he would be happy to include that in his motion.

Mr. Gibson said the $59,000 being added to contingency would be reduced to $41,000.

Councilman Crawford said the contingency was something that he had not noticed and asked if it was an item that would come back for debate by Council.

Mr. Gibson said nothing could be charged directly to contingencies. He said in order for something to be expended out of contingency it did require a budget item.

Councilman Crawford asked why it was coming to Council in that form as he didn't recall asking for it.

Mr. Gibson said on this fund and the General Fund the information had been presented to Council in narrative form but the numbers had never been presented. He said when it was ready for the public hearing they had to incorporate the change list and the documents being used for the public hearing, the dollar amounts for the additional revenues coming in out of Truth in Taxation. He said the two funds that did not have that information in it, the General Fund and Parks and Recreation, they took the revenues and put them in contingencies.

Councilman Crawford asked if the General Fund was all contingency.

Mr. Gibson said it was.

Councilman Schmid said there was too much money and it had to be put somewhere.

Councilman Crawford said if Council adopted this in the present form they would have to rehash it three months from now when the Parks and Recreation Department came to them and said they had to hire someone. He said then they would get into a debate as to whether they should really hire someone or do park land develop- ment or whatever.

Mr. Gibson said if the changes were made that he suggested, the $18,000 drops out of the revenue side and if that contingency item was not showing being increased by $59,000 and was increased by $41,000 instead, that left personal services of $37,024 intact and that position could be filled. It would be budgeted.

Councilman Crawford said not in contingency.

Mr. Gibson said that was correct.

Councilman Schmid asked what the $14,303 was.

Mr. Gibson said that was the matter of fact of the changes that they had previously. He said it was $12,000 in revenue coming in in additional property taxes because of the income tax calc change. He said there was $18,000 from the Roller Dek coming in as additional revenues.

Councilman Schmid said so they added $30,000 to it.

Mr. Gibson said that was right.

Councilman Schmid said when the budget was put together and went to the public hearing the revenues exceeded the appropriations.

Mr. Gibson said that was correct.

Councilman Schmid said in order to put it some way the contingency was developed.

Mr. Gibson said parked it in contingencies, that's correct.

Councilman Schmid said that could be true of any of the other budget items except Mr. Gibson made them even out.

Mr. Gibson said that was correct and the General Fund was the only other one.

Councilman Schmid said in effect he would not have had this if he had a place for that; it was excess money and there was no where to put it.

Mr. Gibson said that was correct and that it had not been identified yet.

Councilman Schmid said he thought Parks and Recreation was grossly understaffed and felt that it was unfair to the existing staff to make them work under those conditions. He said he had empathy and sympathy for the situation and felt it was important to staff that department one step at a time so they could get on with running the Recreation Department. He agreed with Councilwoman Mason that these were special uses for special people but that was true of all government. He said there were a lot of seniors that would use a lot of things that he would never use even though he was a senior. He said they were always subsidizing various departments and activities that some of them never use. He said they went through the whole City budget and felt it was part of living and being in a City and they did subsidize things such as busses, taxi cabs etc.

Mayor McLallen requested Council compromise because of the concern or deadlock over a portion of it supporting the personnel needs and another portion supporting the development. She asked about removing the words "the increase in taxation going into contingency." She suggested not putting it into contingency at all but directing it into park land development so at least that figure would be firmly committed to park land development.

Councilman Crawford said he would prefer that the department or commission set their own priorities. He said maybe $27,000 of this years budget was not best spent on park land development. He felt that they ought to set their own priorities. He said maybe $10,000 of it was, maybe supplement that $27,000 with more. He didn't know but thought they should set those priorities. He said that he didn't want this in contingency where it would come back for the Council to re-debate whether additional staff persons should be hired. He wanted it in as a line item approved. He said what Mr. Gibson said addressed that and he would accept that as the intent of his motion.

Mr. Gibson said he wanted to indicate that Councilman Crawford had it all detailed. Basically, that $26,697 replaced the $44,697 and that made it work. He said that left the position in and that gets Truth in Taxation.

Mayor McLallen said the essence of the motion was to go to the .0409 over Truth in Taxation benchmark.

Yes (3-Crawford, Schmid, No (3-Mason, Toth, Absent (1-Pope)

McLallen) Mitzel)

Motion failed

Councilman Toth asked Mr. Gibson to explain May 4, 1995 the three negatives under the Planning Commission, $8,836 which was moved to some other account, Lake Quality Assessment Study, $19,806, which was eliminated and $65,000 for the Grand River Corridor design. He said those three total $93,642 and in addition to that there was an add-in of the reduced to 4% cap, $111,742. He said with those in mind, if he goes to page 26 of the budget for the Planning Commission the proposed budget had a reduction to a 4% cap which was a negative $111,742 and the bottom line budget was effectively $136,127. He said they had eliminated $93,642 and those were reflected in the proposed $65,000, $19,806 and the $8,836.

Councilman Toth said what he didn't understand was they were adding $111,742 back into the Planning Commission. He said this took it from $136,127 to $247,869 less the $93,642.

Mr. Gibson said the net effect of the whole process was to restore the planning budget to what was originally requested with the exception of the $19,806 for the Lake Quality Assessment Study that was eliminated. He said the planning budget remained intact and two of those items had been moved out to the Municipal Street Fund. He said all the planning activity was intact either in the General Fund or in the Municipal Street Fund.

Councilman Toth said keeping that in mind let's take the $136,127 and subtract the $65,000 and that left $71,127 and subtracting $19,806 would leave $51,000 and subtracting the $8,836 left $42,485. He said to that would be added $111,742 so in essence they were coming out with $154,227.

Mr. Gibson said that was correct.

Councilman Toth said they were given another $20,000 and he wanted to know why because he felt there was no justification for bringing it up another $18,100.

Mr. Gibson said what that did was bring the budget back to what was originally requested when they arbitrarily took out $111,742 it forced it back down to 4%. He said the net effect was to get that back in there and that did require using some of the new revenue sources to the tune of $18,000 to restore that budget to where it had been originally requested.

Councilman Toth said it still didn't "jive" with him. He told Mr. Gibson if he took out $93,642 from their original request and your adding $111,742 . . .

Mr. Gibson asked him if he had a copy of material that was passed out.

Councilman Toth said he didn't have it.

Mr. Gibson gave him one and asked him to look at page 27. He said the $111,742 showed as a negative and that was the way they forced it down. He said the To Date Column reflected the changes that they had made by basically restoring that $111,742 and leaving everything intact except the $19,806.

Councilman Toth asked how he came up with $18,000 more.

Mr. Gibson said that was the difference between what was either eliminated or moved to another fund and the $111,742.

Councilman Toth said on the sheet of May 4, 1995 Mr. Gibson was proposing $111,742 going back and on sheet 27 he was proposing $73,836.

Mr. Gibson said the $73,836 was the combination of the two items listed above. He said up in the program area he would see the $8,836 and the $65,000 which would ultimately be charged to another fund. He said those total $73,836.

Councilman Crawford asked if it was correct to take the bottom line figure of $136,000 and add in the $111,000 for $247,000 and then reduce that by $93,000, the minus on the other page. He said that came up to what Councilman Toth said $154,000 which was $18,000 more than the original $156,000.

Mrs. Smith-Roy said it wasn't. She said what he said at first was correct; take the $136,127 and add, look at the last line where it said reduced to a 4% cut, that was an Administrative cut. She said they weren't told what programs to cut they just told them to cut that. She said their original request was $247,869. She said they were getting much less then what they originally requested.

Councilman Toth said he understood the $247,869 which was the original request and that was lowered by $111,742 at 4% cap but now on that sheet of May 4 he was proposing again to put the $111,742 back in.

Mr. Gibson said to restore it.

Councilman Toth said to the $247,869.

Mr. Gibson said that was correct.

Councilman Toth said but he was taking out $65,000, $8,836 and also the $19,806.

Mr. Gibson said which got it down to $154,227.

Councilman Toth said which meant that effectively they were at $154,227 or $18,100 over what he figured they should have at 4%.

Mrs. Smith-Roy said Council wanted those programs restored and so they were restored.

Councilman Toth said they had not touched a program. He said when they came in with the original budget they were at $136,127 and lowered by their factor of 4% or $111,000. He said what they had done was totally disregarded the 4% and had taken them back.

Mrs. Smith-Roy said at Council's request.

Mr. Gibson said that was correct.

Councilman Toth said he didn't think Council requested them to touch the 4% at all. He said they talked about three packages being taken out.

Mr. Gibson said the 4% was a force that he made to balance the budget initially. He said the Planning Commission, Planning Department, nobody else had anything to do with it. It was just to force it down to an arbitrary number. He said as Council reviewed the programs the only one that was eliminated was the Lake Quality Assessment Study and everything else remained intact. He said to look on page 27 and it was the end result of the changes.

Councilman Toth said they also took the $65,000 and the $8,836 and said those could come out of other accounts.

Mr. Gibson said that was correct. He said they took the $247,869 which was the original request by the Planning Commission, and subtracted out the $19,806, $65,000 and the $8,836 bringing it was down to $154,227. He said that was what Page 27 showed.

Councilman Toth said that meant they were $18,100 higher then they were the year before.

Mr. Gibson said they were $18,100 higher than the number that they forced them down to.

Councilman Toth said Mr. Gibson said it was based on the previous year.

Mr. Gibson said that was correct.

Councilman Toth said in essence what they did by Council opening their mouths was they ended up with another $18,100. He said he didn't see any justification for that.

Mr. Gibson said the $18,100 was reflected in specific programs with specific line items.

Councilman Crawford said Mr. Gibson took out $111,000 to balance the budget. He said Council only took out $93,000 and there was the difference of $18,000. He said Council took out $93,000 in the funds and that was where the additional $18,000 was for $154,000.

Councilman Toth questioned the justification to bring the $18,000 in. He said there was no justification.

Councilman Crawford said he was right; there was none but Council only took out $93,000. He said Council could take out another $18,000 if he wanted to justify it and bring it back down to $111,000.

Councilman Toth agreed to move on and asked what the Police Department Capital Outlay of $8,400 meant.

Mr. Gibson said it was a Fax machine and someone to service the air conditioning systems.

Mr. Gibson said they were going to Administratively put a hold on those two items because he thought the Fax need would be met by their computer. He said there was concern over contracting for services rather than building their own staff to take care of the air conditioning needs.

Councilman Mitzel said he would like to try to resolve the Parks and Recreation issue. He said they tried Truth in Taxation without the position and Truth in Taxation with the position. He said those were the two that failed. He said there was a concern that the position should be self funding or a justificational position.

Councilman Mitzel said the Administration, this summer, would be studying long range personnel levels and needs and options. He said Mr. Kriewall and Mr. Klaver said they expected to have those results by the end of the calendar year. He said in the General Fund was proposed a Financial Analyst to examine the fee structures and the cost to determine how adjustments could best be made. He said that might help the self funding issue. He said if the Financial Analyst were to be hired July 1 would Parks and Recreation be able to be a priority and did they think that information and those fees and structures could be available by the end of the calendar year in that department. He asked if that was realistic.

Mr. Kriewall said it was.

Mr. Gibson said he thought it was realistic but didn't think the timing would be all that crucial if there was another priority that slid in there because their fee schedule had to be in place, most of their fees were collected in May and June so he suspected a few months ahead of that if the review had been completed.

Councilman Mitzel said his concern was to keep the contingency at $59,000 in case it was needed for park land development. He realized there were staffing needs and his concern was that Council didn't say yes without knowing about the fee structures, long term needs or the options they had. He wanted some assurance that information would be available prior to the hiring of a person so Council, if for some reason their information pointed out that it wasn't necessary, they would have that information first. He said he would then probably be willing to accept a mid year start for the person which would then be able to keep the contingency of $59,000, have the funding for the person without the $18,000 but still get those answers prior to the hiring of that person. He said his concern was how did Council put a check on that. He asked if Council could put something that said "before being given the full authorization to hire that person that that information came forward and Council said OK." He said he didn't know how that was to be done within the budget.

Mr. Kriewall said by a separate motion.

Councilman Mitzel asked if that was acceptable because he really wanted the information prior to having that person start.

Mayor McLallen said she thought it would probably be cleaner to go back to the way he tried it originally.

Councilman Mitzel said which was to put it in the contingency.

Councilwoman Mason said that prior to hiring another person Council should know what programs are making money and standing on their own and what programs are losing a vast amount of money. She thought it was all encompassing; if any programs were losing a vast amount of money they had to be eliminated or people had to pay so that it came close to what it cost to do those programs. She said that was another thing she was concerned about in hiring another person; it's where were they losing this $144,000.

Councilman Crawford said they were not losing $144,000 anymore than they were losing X amount of dollars when they supplement the police budget. He said they were not losing money.

Councilwoman Mason said they were losing $144,000 because they were not bringing it in the door and it's being put out. She said some place the bag had a big leak and it kept coming out of General Fund to subsidize. She said somewhere, some place they were running programs that weren't taking care of themselves or people were being paid that weren't taking care of themselves or doing things that were not taking care of it. She said it was back once again from the Federal Government right down to the City budget that they couldn't over extend themselves. She said there wasn't $144,000 to subsidize Parks and Recreation under the normal circumstances unless taxes were raised. Councilwoman Mason said before someone was hired Council should know what programs should make money and what programs lose money and very seriously what could be done about it.

Councilman Crawford said what programs make money and what programs lose money were of no consequence to how much it costs to run the department. He said if a tree was planted, grass cut or if a truck was bought none of those expenditures bring in money. He said it took X amount of dollars to run the department. He said when park land was bought or developed none of those expenditures bring in money. He said she was talking apples and oranges when talking about what loses and what didn't lose.

Councilman Crawford said the Parks and Recreation Department and the Commission had set a priority for the position and he didn't want to see it eliminated or debated extensively two or three months from now. He understood what Councilman Mitzel was trying to get at with a mid year analysis. He was not sure the budget analyst person they intended to hire would address budget concerns or get into how programs were run and how staffing was done in the City. He didn't know if that was their main job responsibility. He said if Council waited until mid year around January to get a Budget Analyst on board and if that person did what was proposed a report would not be forthcoming until January or February at the earliest. He said at that time the answer would be "pretty close to budget time - let's wait until next year." He said in effect by delaying it until mid year they would not approve that position until next year's budget and then it would become a whole new debate. He said if and when that person ever got put into the Parks and Recreation Department it wouldn't be until next summer or fall. He said that was his concern about doing a mid year evaluation of whether that position was needed or not. He reminded Council that two months ago when Mr. Davis was before Council with his presentation he did justify the need for that person. He said Mr. Davis was present if Council wanted to talk with him.

Mr. Davis approached to speak with Council . . .

Councilwoman Mason said she had nothing against Mr. Davis she liked him but she felt that every staffer that wanted extra money should be present tonight stating their position.

Mayor McLallen said they had made three different attempts to come to some agreement on the Parks and Recreation millage. She said there appeared to be great concern over this particular issue. She said Mr. Davis was present and did appear to have information and would limit his remarks to the very specific things which were programs that were either not funding themselves or under funded. She said he had already stated that he would not restate the issue of priorities for development because they had gone through that. She said the issue appeared to be the personnel.

Mr. Davis said there were two issues. He said for the last ten years the department had received General Fund subsidy between $100,000 to $200,000 a year. He said one year there was extra revenue source from the State because of the decade census and that number dropped down to approximately $91,000. He said for each year, over ten years that he had been a department head, that number went from an annual budget of $800,000 to $1.5 Million. He said that number had stayed consistent from General Fund support at approximately $100,000 to $175,000. Mr. Davis said as far as the issue of where the money was going it was keeping pace with all of the increasing levels of programming that was being done, staffing and maintenance as they added all those things within the department and handled the growth of the City.

Mr. Davis said the other point was dealing with the programs. He said the Commission and the staff, in the last 6 months, just completed a very detailed analysis of all of their programs. He said they had just eliminated, prior to the budget presentation, over a dozen programs they felt were something that could be handled by a private sector such as golf lessons, golf league, etc. He said they also eliminated some programs and consolidated some things to joint programs. He said they had gone through that process trying to pick out the ones that generate revenue or break even and eliminate as many as they could that lost money. He said they analyzed and adjusted the fees appropriately for all the other ones to make up. He said some are inherently going to lose money, Easter Egg Hunts, Christmas programs, Memorial Day Parade. He said all those are losers and could not generate revenues. He said if Council made a decision not to run those programs they could be eliminated but he cautioned Council there would be an upheaval from the community because people demand those things. He said there was a level that could generate revenues from the user fees. He said that magic number was the number people were willing to pay and they could keep pushing the envelope to that level and at some point people would say no and participation would drop. He said they had done that the last two or three years and would continue to do it on an annual basis to evaluate that.

Councilman Mitzel said on Page 35, Parks and Recreation Fund, there was a line called Smart reimbursement and it was zeroed out in the current budget and he was curious as to why. He said he was under the impression that the money would still be coming in to the City regardless of what happened with the vote.

Mrs. Smith-Roy said it was eliminated out of the budget because it was a zeroed out item and it was shown as a receivable. She said it was not shown as a revenue and expense - just as a receivable and as the money came in that receivable was decreased to zero. She said it was an in and out.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilman Schmid

That the Parks and Recreation Fund be moved forward to

Monday, 6-6-95, at the additional millage of .0409 with all

items as presented except that the Recreation Coordinator be

a mid year start date so that line item would be adjusted to

the $18,000 that was no longer received.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Crawford asked if mid year start date meant without Council deliberation and by January 1 they would have a person on board.

Councilman Mitzel said his understanding was that the position was not being posed within the budget itself. He said there would be a separate motion and Administration was already moving forward with the information. He said Council drafted when that information was due and if Council didn't like that information then there would be a Council debate on a lot of things.

Councilman Mitzel said Council had no strategic plan on where they were going and that was a huge debate and would happen sometime, hopefully soon, and this would be a part of it. His motion at this point was that it would be a mid year start date.

Councilman Crawford wanted clarification that the intent would be no earlier than a mid year start date with Council authorization. He said that would not be acceptable to him. He said if the motion was that this was an approved position and the funds would not be available until mid year and the intent of that being that they would proceed to interview or whatever and have that person on board January 1 then he would support it. He asked if the intent was to wait for a Budget Analyst, other reports and have Council discuss whether to expend the funds.

Councilman Mitzel said his intent was to wait until they got the information to justify it and then do a budget amendment to look for contingencies for the position. His motion was to put it into this position for a mid year start date. He said it was his understanding from Mr. Fried's letters on the subject of the budget, once Council did that and the budget was passed 5-2 it was now appropriated. Councilman Mitzel said a mid year start date would be in effect and the only way the start date could be changed was with a 5-2 budget amendment. He said if Council decided after receiving the information this was not justified, it would have to be a 5-2 vote to amend the budget and pull the item out.

Councilman Mitzel said his motion was to put it into the budget, it'd be appropriated and the funds would be available January 1 which was mid year.

Councilman Schmid asked what the total sum saved would be.

Councilman Mitzel said it would be $19,000.

Councilman Schmid said $19,000 put in contingency for Parks and Recreation. He said he thought it was a worthy cause. He thought there was a good case for adding the position. He said if staffing in Parks and Recreation was compared with every other department on a permanent salary basis they were well under any other department yet they service a large percent of the community. He said regardless of whether he was hired at half the year or today that person would be a body that was necessary sometime in 1995-1996. He thought they had justified their position. He thought it was time to move on this position and urged Council to vote on this position. He said it was a relatively minor cost item and he wanted to see the position given to Parks and Recreation this evening so they could get moving on it. He said in January the season was half over and the money, $19,000, would not help the contingency at all but it could help the department significantly.

Councilwoman Mason said she agreed with Councilman Mitzel.

Mayor McLallen restated the motion: That the Parks and Recreation Request for going over Truth in Taxation to the amount of .0409 including everything as presented be approved with the exception of the personnel position held to January.

Councilwoman Mason asked if it would automatically be put in in January or after it was examined more.

Councilman Mitzel said it would be in the budget.

Councilman Crawford said he wanted the position and the compromise would be January. He said he didn't think the intent of the motion would accomplish that and that was what concerned him. He asked if Councilman Mitzel would make a motion after this to establish that Council wait for a Budget Analyst and further justification.

Councilman Mitzel said he wasn't intending to but when and if that information came forward any member of Council at that point could propose a budget amendment.

Councilman Crawford asked if the Parks and Recreation Department had to come back to Council and justify again to take the money out of contingency to hire a person in January.

Councilman Mitzel said that was not his motion. He said the intent was they would have the Recreation Coordinator but it wouldn't go into effect until January 1 and the contingency would remain the same.

Councilman Mitzel said the only difference between this motion and the motion Councilman Crawford offered was the $18,000 came out of the position instead of the contingency. He said Councilman Crawford's motion was to take the $18,000 out of the contingency and keep the position full funded effective July 1.

Councilman Crawford said he was thoroughly confused as to what might happen or what realistically would happen. He thought in reality it would be pushed back to the next years budget because it comes close to budget time.

Councilman Mitzel said last year Council did the same thing for a police officer; it was made effective January 1. He said once it was in the budget it was part of the budget and in order to change it it would take a 5-2 vote to amend the budget like any other budget amendment. He said it was his understanding that once a motion was made for the budget, Council couldn't say it was in the budget contingent on these criteria. He said it was either in the budget or not in the budget.

Councilman Crawford said then Councilman Mitzel's motion was authorizing a half year position period.

Councilman Mitzel said that was correct.

Councilman Crawford said they would not have to come back to Council. He said he understood if Council wanted to call them back they could.

Councilman Mitzel said that was right but they were already working on long range staffing reports and Mr. Kriewall and Mr. Klaver said by the end of the year they would have that information for Council. He said that was for many things such as whether we build up our own department to handle park maintenance and all the other different types of things there are.

Councilman Mitzel said Council was also proposing in General Fund a Financial Analyst who was going to go through and look at these structures such as Parks and Recreation, Building, Water and Sewer, etc. He said that information would still be coming to Council but the motion was not contingent on that information.

Councilman Crawford said the budget would be adopted on Monday and without any further Council discussion or action there could be an additional person in Parks and Recreation Department on January 1.

Councilman Mitzel said that was correct.

Yes (4-Mitzel, Crawford, No (2-Mason, Schmid, Absent (1-Pope)

McLallen, Toth) Motion carried

GENERAL FUND

Mayor McLallen said the next item was the General Fund and the recommendation on the table as amended was to take the General Fund up to 2.652 over Truth in Taxation.

Councilman Toth was concerned with the $65,000 for the Grand River corridor design study and the Thoroughfare Plan for $8,836. He said the funding source for these two projects was to be possible from the road program that Council passed on to Mr. Nowicki. He said when it was listed under this budget a $65,000 entry and an $8,836 entry came from other sources. He asked if that meant that it had to be spent. His concern was if Council put $65,000 into the Planning Commission budget he didn't think it should be listed as a budgeted line item that was coming out of some one else's account. He said his concern was there was $65,000 listed and he didn't fully understand because they were tapping someone else's budget to the tune of $73,836. He said his question was two fold; the technical need might be there and if it was there the person in charge of that road program should be charged with giving that information.

Councilman Toth said his second concern was he didn't want another department feeling they had $73,000 to spend if and when they decided and didn't hold the strings for.

Mr. Gibson said it was gone out of this budget and it would only appear in the Road Program.

Councilman Toth said the next question was about the Merit Plan for $25,125.

Mr. Gibson said it was Merit Plan B.

Councilman Toth said Merit Plan B was basically the one that was coupled with the adjustments or alignments.

Councilman Toth said he could support the changes to the tune of $462,493.

1. Merit Plan, $25,125 - Could not support until all figures were in.

2. $351 dollar coffee cups and $600 toilet seats - $7,845 he would not support.

3. Capital Outlay for the Police Department of $8,400 - He thought this should go back into the Contingency Fund and they could justify that at a later date.

4. He said to reduce the 4% cap, $111,742 to $93,642

5. $5,000 Capital Outlay for Community Development should be taken out.

He said the total reductions were $64,470, total appropriations should be $462,493 and Fund Balance appropriations should be adjusted to reflect that. He said this was what he could support.

Councilman Crawford said as he stated when he was discussing the Parks and Recreation Department, all these were arrived at by general Council consensus. He didn't know the exact vote but they were arrived at and that was why they were there. He said on more than one occasion tonight Council had referenced the Police Academy. He recalled the discussion on that and the Police Chief was directed to have participants contribute to the cost, look for outside funding or grants, look for contributions from the staff, and look for other community organizations to fund it. He thought the comments were inappropriate and he didn't think that funding was going to be spent. He said they all agreed that it was a good program and if needed, the money was there but it would be funded from other sources.

Councilman Crawford said Council had arrived at a consensus and this was what staff was here to present and he wished the Police Chief was present if Council was going to discuss the Police Department. He said that was probably why he was not present because he thought that Council had consensus on this several weeks ago.

Councilman Mitzel said some of the items that Councilman Toth mentioned were more than just a general consensus. He said on May 1 when they had the first wrap up there were several motions that were made. He said Councilman Pope had offered the $8,400 for the Fax, $7,845 for the Academy and $5,000 for the Community Development Capital. He said those all passed at 5-2 or 4-3. He said the alignment Council had resolved that evening by eliminating alignments as presented and instead $25,125 was to be in the Merit Plan line item. He said the plan was to give specific guidelines to Administration on how to develop a plan and they mentioned tonight there would be a preliminary draft in Thursday's packet.

Councilman Mitzel said Council had voted 4-3 to provide FAC 3 for the Administration. He asked if that changed numbers anywhere within the budget.

Mrs. Smith-Roy said it showed up in next years budget.

Councilman Mitzel said he had no problems with supporting the General Fund as presented. He said many of these items for instance the Police Academy, there were concerns expressed and they needed to be addressed. He said this was a "not to exceed budget"

but it didn't mean automatically 78.5 was spent. He hoped that he would take into consideration Council discussion. He said it was similar to the discussion on Parks and Recreation.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

That the General Fund be moved forward to next Monday, June 5 as presented by the Administration which included the

Truth in Taxation additional amount of 0.2652 mils.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Toth said in reply to the Police Academy he would much prefer to see that type of money spent on video cameras in cars. He personally felt it was just a PR effort and the problem he had was the amount of money being spent. He said it was the same amount of money that was spent last year which was a lot more than expected and Council didn't know anything about. He said he thought that money would be better spent put into video cameras for the cars rather than on coffee cups, binders, etc. He said the $8,400 he justified and felt that that figure was something that Council could look at and it's possible there were methods that the Finance Director had talked to Council about. He said the figures that Council had talked about in terms of the $93,642 were basically discussed and talked about.

Councilman Toth said when Council signed in FAC all they were doing was signing in some more of this inflationary stuff for next year. He said it would come back to haunt Council and it was like putting it on a credit card. He said it would have to be paid next year and if the economy went down the tubes then someone would have to be laid off to pay for it. He said he didn't want to do that in this City; either pay the way now and take it over. He said the City had a very good set up for all its employees, they were paid well and had excellent benefits and the City paid through the nose for a lot of them. He said a lot of the benefits that the employees had were greater than the benefits that a lot of the residents had in this City. He said a lot of the residents in the City paid for a part of their benefits and all of this was being covered by the taxpayer.

Yes (3-Crawford, Mitzel, No (3-Mason, Toth, Absent (1-Pope)

McLallen) Schmid) Motion failed

Mayor McLallen asked if there were any other issues in the General Fund that were insurmountable. She said one issue that Councilman Toth pointed out was the issue of the $18,000 in Community Development.

Councilman Mitzel said he would prefer Councilman Toth make motions to change the things that Council would like to try to change. He said he didn't know what motions would be appropriate to bring on board for Council Members Schmid, Mason or Toth.

Councilman Schmid said during the budget discussion tonight he was not in favor of going above Truth in Taxation. He said he could have been swayed. He said the area he had the greatest problem with was the computers and spending 3/4 of a million dollars in two years which would probably be outdated and not usable in 4 or 5 years. He said 3/4 of a million dollars could put a lot of things in this City that were probably needed more than computers. He felt Council should be looking at a little less ambitious program for computers.

Councilman Schmid asked if Council spent 3/4 of a million dollars on the computers what portion of that equipment would be usable 8 years from now.

Councilman Toth said close to 80%. He said 2/3rds of the money would be going for software for the police department. He said there was some minimal hardware involved and some additional computers and training for staff. He said the bulk of the money was for the police department and they would be looking at various software packages to handle the alarm systems, reporting, etc. to stream line the computer process. He said based on Chief Shaeffer's thoughts he estimated that they spent between 35% and 50% of their time on paperwork. He said they would be able to cut that by at least 50%. He said the software would be in place for at least 10 to 15 years and it's estimated at about $250,000. He estimated the life on each terminal to be 5 to 8 years depending on the use.

Councilman Schmid asked what expenses he anticipated over the next budget period.

Councilman Toth said they made the budget out for 5 years for around $250,000 to $260,000. He said the bulk of the cost would be for software packages for the assessing department, GIS and etc. He said they were projecting a 5 year program.

Councilman Schmid asked if by the 6th year the equipment would be obsolete.

Councilman Toth said their projection was based on changing about 10% per year. He said with the 73 computers that were bought they were anticipating changing 7-10 units per year. He said that was fairly typical in the industry right now and some of the change outs would be because of damage or overwork.

Councilman Schmid said supposing the budget stayed where it was how much money went into computers.

Mr. Kriewall said as Councilman Toth indicated 2/3 of that was destined for the Police Department. He said although they supported the computer updating it was those kinds of major cost initiatives that were very prohibitive when Council continued to want to keep the budget under Truth in Taxation levels. He said there was always talk about doing sidewalks, computers, etc. but the additional revenue was never there. He said new initiatives were great but unless the revenue was there new programs could not be taken on unless resources were provided. He said the re-computerization was a very costly undertaking.

Councilman Schmid asked Mr. Kriewall if he supported it.

Mr. Kriewall said he supported it and thought the committee had demonstrated the need to move in that direction but the overriding factor was the concern for Truth in Taxation and that was the way they presented the budget. He said that was the one they said would have to go.

Councilman Schmid said they could have done that with dump trucks.

Mr. Kriewall said that was part of the problem. He said there were a couple of dump truck replacements that ought to be done now. He thought the computer issue was displacing some of the other needs in public works and other areas. He said they had given computers a high priority but had already thrown a couple of dump trucks out and they ought to be replaced. He said he could build a good case that they ought to be doing more then they were doing over there and Council had always balanced the budget with taking out dump trucks and this time for real. He said they were throwing dump trucks out before it got to Council and they usually let Council throw them out. He said there were no throw aways by the time it got to Council.

Councilman Schmid said one of his concerns was that two years from now they would want more computers and that was another $250,000.

Councilman Toth stated that the schools went through a bonding issue for $13 Million for computers and Council didn't go for a bonding issue. He said computers were basically tools and they would wear out and he would be the first one to tell them they had a life to them.

Councilman Schmid said this was a brand new major expense to the City and normally with a brand new major expense there was a return. He said there were no returns here.

Councilman Toth said there would be a tremendous amount of returns. He said what he might not see now was the fact that some of the returns that would come up was a tremendous reduction in paper work at the police department. He said other departments were basically using old equipment that was running at 1/10 the speed of new equipment.

Councilman Schmid asked if it would reduce or maintain staff.

Councilman Toth said it might maintain staff at the current level.

Councilman Schmid asked where he would come up with the other money needed throughout the City when he wanted to spend that kind of money on computers.

Councilman Toth said there were a couple of options. He said if there was better recording there would be a better idea of where the money was going. He said his checking account was highly computerized and he could transfer funds at 2:00 a.m. if he wanted to. He said he thought that was a step in the right direction. He said he knew exactly how much money was in every one of his accounts because he could look at it. He said his big problem was that Council couldn't get good figures from the staff because they didn't have good equipment. He said one of the problems was that a lot of the stuff could be punched out on the computers and be updated automatically.

Mr. Kriewall said he wanted to remind Council that there was a discussion that they could put 2/3 of the computer costs into the potential upcoming Police Bond Issue and millage adjustment. He said they were looking at re-doing the police station and they could actually load the hardware and software costs into the bond issue for re-doing the police station. He said that would be an alternative for Council but it would be a year before it was available.

Councilman Mitzel said the computerization was very important to the efficiency of the City since the City basically dealt with information other than the Department of Public Service which was an infrastructure. He saw a lot of gains being made with the efficiency of that and he liked the way the budget was set up with the computer money going into contingency. He said then there was a possibility that if there was a bond issue for the police station a large chunk of that could be put with the police station. He said instead of using all that money in contingency for computers it could be used for other needs within the City that had been postponed historically. He said that potential was there and he felt it was a very wise proposal to set forth and it was why he made the motion.

Councilman Mitzel said Councilman Toth brought out some points concerning minor line items that Council had already taken consensus on in the past. He thought Councilman Toth did support the computers and it seemed like he supported the idea of going above Truth in Taxation for the computers. He said the safe guard was that the money was in the contingency line item which meant before it was spent it had to be with the agreement of five Council Members. He felt the benefits were there, the safe guards were there and the possibility that some money might be utilized for other City needs.

Councilman Schmid asked Councilman Toth if that was his understanding.

Councilman Toth said no that the understanding was that the money would be something that would be budgeted. He said one thing in the packets tonight was a printer bid. He said this was roughly the cost a of copy machine. He said Council had not seen this kind of detail come in on anything else. He said it had gone out for bids and Council had spent a lot of money and there were one or two figures out there. He said the committee had been very thorough. He said they had given Council a thorough budget, thorough figures and had always come back to the Council. He said they had saved money and Councilman Mitzel could testify to that on the lap top. He said the lap tops bought for the City were bargains, great bargains and he was sorry he couldn't buy one himself. He said that committee had worked long and hard for this and if Council was going to short it he had two concerns. He said one was Council could either keep things going or go back to the dark ages because he didn't think Council could hold the committee together. He said they would lose interest real fast because there were things that had to be done. He said it wasn't a threat he was just saying that these were volunteers who were not being paid and they were putting a lot of their own time into it. Second, Council had to bank on it being in the budget; there was a police department that was anxious to do something. He said at this point Council wanted people to be going in the right direction.

Councilman Schmid asked if the budget was passed with the additional money could Councilman Toth live with the fact that half of that would go into the computer budget. He said the other half would be in contingency and if in fact there could be a police needs assessment that could be included in the bonding issue. He said the remaining money would be used for capital improvements that the City needed probably as bad as it needed computers.

Councilman Toth said that was possible.

Councilman Mitzel said it was currently proposed that all $350,000 was supposed to be in contingency. He asked if that was correct.

Mr. Gibson said it was.

Councilman Mitzel said then the current proposal was that all the computer money went into contingency just like last year with the understanding that the same procedures would be used as last year. He asked if that was the general understanding with the committee. He said it seemed to work with the committee last year and didn't see why it wouldn't work this year.

Councilman Toth said with the understanding they would tap the $350,000 out.

Councilman Mitzel didn't see the committee having a problem if the police station network and computer system was to be made part of a potential bond issue and then not utilize that portion for that $350,000.

Councilman Toth said that was no problem.

Councilman Mitzel said in other words having the contingency available for computer use but also in light that if there was a bond issue or millage for the police station that included a certain amount of money for computers that the committee would look at that as taking care of the police needs. He said then the contingency available for computers would be $350,000 minus X or that balance that was in the police bond.

Councilman Toth said Mr. Gibson could probably do the transfer of funds. He said if the millage went through for police and fire and carried some money for computers then they would charge against the bonding rather than charge against the contingency.

Councilman Mitzel said that could be done once the bonds or millage was collected or sold and the funds were there.

Mr. Gibson said obviously they couldn't spend it ahead of time and then reimburse after the bond issue.

Councilman Mitzel said if it were to go for a bond issue at that point it would be patience on the police department to wait until after November. He said it couldn't be spent ahead of time.

Mr. Gibson said bond receipts could not be spent.

Councilman Schmid said he still had a hang up on the computers. He asked for some assurances that if it could be put into a bonding for the police department that the money would not be spent ahead of time. He asked that there be sufficient time lapse for that to be decided.

Councilman Mitzel said he thought the assurance was there because it was a contingency and took a 5-2 Council vote to allocate that the contingency be spent.

Councilman Schmid said he would like some assurances that there would be a waiting period.

Mayor McLallen said if it was going to the voters in the General Election in November, in approximately 150 days, what were the adequate time frames to package a bond proposal. She said it had to be packaged and ready for campaign sometime in the late summer. She asked Mr. Kriewall if that was correct.

Mrs. Stipp said the wording and the resolutions had to be adopted mid July and no later than the end of July. She said the Charter amendment had to go to the State to be approved and it took a good three months to get it back.

Mayor McLallen said if the Council decided to go to the voters for a bond for the police station that indication would be heard in July. She said to answer Councilman Schmid's concern if the budget approved the money the question of what's going to be spent would come up very quickly.

Councilman Toth said at this point they were reviewing different companies and different software packages and would have them come in and give a demonstration of their product. He said that would probably take another two or three months and it would be then that they would start looking at one or two vendors that were possible. He said they would invite them to bid and get the bid packages in and then come before Council with the bid packages. He said it would probably be four or five months before any bid packages would be presented to Council. He said then if the bonding was in place it would come out of that bonding issue. He said they would come back to Council and tell them the cost, bring the bid in and analyze those bids and have a couple of technical sessions with the suppliers and then come back. He said they did the same thing with the computers - started off real fast gathering information but it took a while before the computers were ordered. Councilman Toth said they would do the same thing and make sure they got the best product at the best price. He said it would not be an overnight situation.

Mr. Kriewall said he didn't necessarily think they had to go for a Charter Amendment. He said they could go for the Headlee override and do the police millage in two phases. He said the millage had to be restored to the Charter Amendment level and then the committee could continue to study and come back with whatever was needed to go above. He said they could have an election on a Headlee override without dealing with the Charter Amendment aspect of it and then come back in 1996 and deal with a Charter Amendment if it was necessary. He said that would give the committee more time. Mr. Kriewall said they could run the Headlee override in November and the Bond issue in November. He said if they had a Headlee override on the existing Charter Amendment that would get them started in the direction of being able to add more police.

Mrs. Stipp asked how much money would be put in the Bond issue. She asked if firmer figures were needed.

Mayor McLallen said the issue before Council was to try to shed a little more light on the mechanics of the computer recommendation. She asked for further discussion or a motion on the General Fund.

Councilman Crawford said he wondered if it would jeopardize a bond issue if it was known that there was $350,000 in contingency for computers sitting in the General Fund. He said what was being said sounded good but would the public vote for it when it was in contingency.

Councilman Schmid said the money goes into the contingency fund and had no title and still needed five votes to get it out.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Schmid

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

That the budget be adopted as presented going above Truth in Taxation in the General Fund.

Yes (5-McLallen, Mitzel, No (1-Mason) Absent (1-Pope)

Schmid, Crawford,

Toth) Motion carried

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Schmid

That an executive session be scheduled for 7:00 p.m. on June 5 to discuss property acquisitions for roads, drains and parks.

Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Toth

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

That the bid for network printers be awarded to

MicroAge in the amount of $18,024.

Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to come before Council, the meeting was adjourned at 11:05 p.m.

MAYOR

CITY CLERK

Date approved: