REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NOVI
 MONDAY, APRIL 3, 2006 AT 7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS – NOVI CIVIC CENTER – 45175 W. TEN MILE ROAD

Mayor Landry called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.

ROLL CALL: Mayor Landry, Mayor Pro Tem Capello, Council Members Gatt, Margolis, Mutch, *Nagy-absent, Paul

*Member Nagy arrived at 7:01 P.M.

ALSO PRESENT: Clay Pearson, Interim City Manager

Tom Schultz, City Attorney

Kathy Smith-Roy, Finance Director

Barbara Mc Beth, Planning Director

Glenn Lemmon, City Assessor

Mayor Landry presented a proclamation to Michael Harris of the Novi Chapter proclaiming the week of April 9th through April 15th, 2006 as Paralyzed Veterans of America Awareness Week in the City of Novi. He encouraged the community to honor Novi’s paralyzed veterans because they personify the highest ideals of service to County, sacrifice of self, and perseverance in overcoming adversity. Their stories of hardship and triumph provide life affirming lessons for everyone. Mayor Landry also encouraged the citizens of Novi to observe and participate in the activities associated with Paralyzed Veterans of America Awareness Week, and reflect on the sacrifices endured by Novi’s veterans who are paralyzed. There are many local community service organizations, particularly those serving our youth that seek involvement in worthy projects, and Paralyzed Veterans of America Awareness Week meets and surpasses that standard.

Mr. Harris thanked the Mayor, City Council and the residents of Novi for the proclamation.

Paralyzed Veterans of America Awareness Week is about recognizing the achievements of paralyzed veterans. He said they have been in existence at the National level since 1946, and in Michigan since 1961. This week allows them to go to VA Hospitals and thank the veterans for service to their country. Some veterans have been in VA Hospitals for 20 and 25 years. It also allows them to thank the community for their support. On April 13^th there will be an open house from 10 A.M. to 3 P.M. The public is invited and they would love to have Council there if their schedules permit. Mr. Harris said they are located on Grand River between Meadowbrook and Haggerty. They are across the street from Glenda’s Nursery.

Mr. Harris said their goal has always been to go out of business, which would mean that a cure had been found for spinal cord injury, but that is not going to happen tomorrow. On a bright note, during this current conflict they have not had one new member because of the conflict. It

is important to realize that soldiers are dying, and as of March 25^th approximately 80 soldiers from Michigan have died serving our Country, and 500 have been severely injured. He asked, on behalf of their membership, that we keep the soldiers currently serving, and those that have served, and their families, in our prayers and thoughts.

Mayor Landry presented a proclamation for National Library Week 2006 to be the week of April 2^nd through 8^th, 2006 in the City of Novi. He encouraged all residents to take advantage of all the Novi Public Library had to offer and discover all the ways you can change your world at the Library.

Laura Casey, Trustee for the Library, said she appreciated accepting the proclamation on behalf of the Library, staff, Trustees, and all the citizens of Novi who use the Novi Public Library. She said they are looking forward to an expansion of the Library, and were looking for Council’s support to make it a reality.

Mayor Landry said the Ordinance Review Committee has been meeting for the last six weeks. Mayor Landry, Mayor Pro Tem Capello and Member Mutch are going through the Sign ordinance line by line and word by word. He said they were half way through the ordinance, and would bring something back to Council when they are finished. Then the Administration would look at it, weigh in with their thoughts, and then it would come back to Council for consideration.

Mr. Pearson said last Friday night with help from staff throughout the organization they published the proposed budget, and the kick off budget session with Council would be Saturday, April 8^th at 10 A.M. in Council Chambers.

3. DEPARTMENTAL

Mr. Pearson said the Natural Features Expo was a community outreach special event, and there would be various display booths from a number of different agencies and resources. It would be an opportunity for residents to learn what they can do to help the environment in their own backyards, and what the City was doing with woodlands and wetlands protections. This event will be held in the Civic Center April 4^th from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.

Dick Faulkner was present to introduce to Council the new Board of Directors for the City of Novi Retirees Association. Mr. Faulkner, the outgoing President, introduced Kathy Crawford as the President, Gerry Stipp as the Secretary, Jack Grubb as Treasurer, Member at Large Ed Kriewall, and members Bill Charles, Evelyn Natzel and John Zimmer.

Kathy Crawford, President, presented Council with a coffee mug on behalf of the Novi Retirees, and hoped they would think of them when they use it. She said, to Council, as you look at this cup remember that the City of Novi Retirees have given decades of employed service to this City helping to make it the dynamic place it is today. Many of Novi’s Retirees continue to live and work as volunteers in this City. The great accomplishments in Novi would have never been possible without the thousands and hundreds of volunteers that serve this City every single day on boards, commissions and committees. Many volunteers have full time jobs, families, and another life. We retirees are here to thank Council for all they do, because without the continued dedication and passion of volunteers everyone loses. Novi Retirees, like Council, are forever dedicated to the City of Novi, and are very optimistic about its future.

Member Paul removed items G and J

A. Approve Minutes of:

1. March 20, 2006 – Regular Meeting

B. Enter Executive Session immediately following the regular meeting of April 3, 2006 in the Council Annex to review confidential applications for employment.

C. Approval of request to renew the Arcade Business License for Buffalo Wild Wings, located at 44375 Twelve Mile Road, with 12 machines.

D. Approval of request to renew Arcade Business License for Soccer Zone, located at 41550 Grand River, with 10 machines.

E. Approval of request to renew the Arcade Business License for The Putting Edge, located at 44225 Twelve Mile, Space C-100, with 6 machines.

F. Approval of request to renew the Arcade Business License for Novi Bowl and Recreation, located at 21700 Novi Road, with 10 machines.

H. Approval of request to renew the Massage Business License for Visions Spa Salon, located at 26800 Beck Road.

I. Approval of the storm drainage facility maintenance easement agreement and warranty deed for additional dedicated right-of-way along Grand River Avenue for the National City Bank site located at 48648 Grand River Avenue.

K. Approval of Authorizing Resolution for Memorial Day Parade Road Closure Permit on Monday, May 29, 2006. Location will be on Ten Mile Road at Karim Blvd. proceeding west to the Novi Civic Center.

L. Acceptance of water main as a public utility for the Paramount Parcel No. 13 site located at 46620 Ryan Court.

M. Acceptance of Wixom Road right-of-way adjacent to the Huntington National Bank site located at 27250 Wixom Road; and, approval of the Huntington National Bank site storm drainage facility maintenance easement agreement.

N. Approval of final Change Order No. 1 and final Pay Estimate No. 2 to MDS Excavating for the SAD 171 – Woodham Drive Water Main Extension project in the amount of $14,034.70.

O. Approval to award the street tree inventory and management plan bid to Davey Resource Group, the low bidder, in the amount of $61,700.

P. Approval of the request of Brian Sharrak for Sharrak Gas and Convenience Center, Site Plan 04-32, for approval of a one year Final Site Plan extension. The subject project is located in Section 11 on the southeast corner of Thirteen Mile and Novi Road. The applicant proposes a gasoline station and convenience store, with accessory office space, as part of the Sandstone consent judgment. The applicant received a final site plan approval from City Council on April 18, 2005.

Q. Approval of non-standard water and sewer monitoring agreement with Providence Hospital.

R. Approval of Claims and Accounts – Warrant No. 718

Mr. Quinn was present representing the applicant and the owner Sam Chuang. Mr. Quinn said he was talking about the Main Street Court building, which is where Red, Hot and Blue and Fifth Avenue Billiards are. In the middle is a spot that has been empty for two years, and it used to be a fireplace retail sales store. Mr. Quinn said Joseph Chuang, the owner of the building, which is a $3.5 million investment made five or six years ago, would like to continue his investment in the City of Novi. This new restaurant, Jo-Bee, is unique to the City, and is coming to Novi from New York City. It is an Asian fusion restaurant. They are going to put another $500,000 into the fixtures and equipment in this restaurant as well as another $50,000 for the original inventory of alcohol, food and the other things that food service brings. Mr. Quinn said this New York family has come to Novi, made a significant investment in the City, and they are asking for a little investment back to make the new Jo-Bee restaurant the most unique and one of a kind restaurant in this entire area.

Asian fusion is the best of Asian, Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese and Thai food, but the different flare was to make it something that was more American. It’s not old Chinese or Japanese, but a fusion, something new and different. It’s very healthy and unique in that they don’t use a lot of the heavy sauces. It’s a lighter sauce fare, and trying to get more of the unique flavors out of the oriental food. Mr. Quinn said he and Mr. Chuang had talked about creating a Novi Roll and a Michigan Roll using local ingredients.

Mr. Quinn said when talking about how the alcohol was related to this, they would bring the top grade of Saki to this restaurant, and it would not be what Americans normally get, as Americans get the cheaper Saki from Japan. In this restaurant there will be a variety of Saki and patrons would be able to seek the finer Saki and the finer ingredients. Also, available would be all of the Chinese wines and liquors. In this type of restaurant the wines and the flavor of the foods play off each other so there’s the melding and blending together of those ingredients. Mr. Quinn commented that there was nothing like it around here. However, some might mention P.F. Chang’s, but it’s commercial, broad based, and not into the finer ingredients of the food and comparing it to the alcohols and wines. He said the bigger shops in Fountain Walk, etc., again are totally different. This type of fusion is new to New York and Mr. Chuang and his family want to bring it to Novi.

Mr. Quinn said Sam Chuang would be the owner and manager of the restaurant. He has a restaurant in New York, is a lawyer and has a law practice. He is looking forward to coming to Novi to get this project started.

Mr. Quinn noted the City was going to have a mid decade census, and one of the reasons for doing a census was to obtain more quota liquor licenses. He said for every 1,500 residents, the City would get one more liquor license added to its quota. He said Council might think this is the last available liquor license, but in two years Novi would have one to three more to use for economic development purposes in the City.

Member Paul said she was looking forward to Mr. Chuang’s restaurant, was in support of the Class C Liquor License, and very much in favor of this project. Member Paul asked Ms. Cornelius what the liquor license would cost as this was not directly applicable to this application, because it’s already been applied for under our current Liquor License. She asked what would happen if there was a new liquor license, what was the cost that would go through to our staff. Ms. Cornelius replied that once the applicant filled out the paperwork, and submitted it to the Clerk’s Office, it was routed to the Police, Fire, Building, and Finance Departments. Each department reviewed the application, and prepared the packet material. The timing for that involved quite a few more hours at the Police and Building Department level because of additional inspections, etc. The applicant currently pays $200 for the application plus $100 for each applicant with a financial interest. If an applicant was the sole owner and submitted an application, it would be a $300 fee. Ms. Cornelius said she had proposed, and would be bringing forward some additional fee adjustments, for items such as this, not for the City to profit by fees, but to at least cover the administrative costs involved with the review and preparation. Member Paul asked how much that would be. Ms. Cornelius said, for information purposes, it would be conservative to say $900 to $1,000; she would bring this forward as soon as possible.

Member Paul said regarding economic development, an applicant of this caliber would be beneficial to the City, and Novi had a large Asian population. She thought it would serve a lot of people Asian and American. She looked forward to his business and wished him luck.

Member Gatt commented he also looked forward to Mr. Chuang’s restaurant, and thought it would be a wonderful addition to the choices already available. Unfortunately, he said he could not vote in favor of this tonight. Member Gatt said being the last liquor license and coupled with the parking lot problem, he would have to say no. He encouraged Mr. Chuang to look into transferring a license into the City.

Mayor Pro Tem Capello thought the menu looked unique, but it was not enough to get his vote for the last liquor license. He said Council had turned down a couple other oriental restaurants, and he didn’t feel comfortable granting the last license. Mayor Pro Tem Capello stated he wanted the applicant to come to Novi and hoped his business was successful. The parking lot didn’t bother him as the rest of Main Street was all supposed to be part of the shared parking concept, and not just the individual ownership parcels of land. He didn’t see a major problem.

Member Nagy said the menu looked wonderful and she would support the liquor license. She would support it, because the ordinance allowed the Council conditional approval. She liked the restaurant because it was nothing like anything else in Novi, and thought it was unique in comparison to other Asian restaurants that have applied for liquor licenses. She believed it was more of an upscale restaurant than some of the ordinary Asian cuisine in Novi. Member Nagy said it was a great idea and was happy they wanted to come to and invest in Novi. She said she had made the motion to conduct a mid decade census, and Novi would receive approximately six additional liquor licenses; she didn’t see why Council should wait.

and the occupancy issues. Also, subject to the provision that

Member Margolis agreed that this looked like a great restaurant, her major concern was the parking issues. She noted she was not aware of the history of turning down liquor licenses for other restaurants of this type, as it was prior to her service on Council. She said her major issue was the parking issue. A problem she saw was that Council did not have control of the variance on this parking issue. Mr. Schultz said as it stood now, it was a Planning

Commission approval, it’s less than five acres. Mr. Schultz commented that an issue had been raised whether it should be considered as part of the whole Main Street. He said their position was, right now, that it was a Planning Commission or ZBA function, and more than likely ZBA. Member Margolis said Council could approve the liquor license but if it got hung up on the parking issue beyond Council’s control, Council would be hanging up the last liquor license. She said unfortunately, she would not be able to support the liquor license tonight. Member Margolis appreciated that they came to Novi, and thought it was a wonderful idea, and didn’t want to discourage them from coming to Novi. However, she was unsure about holding up the last liquor license.

Mayor Landry said he would not support the motion. He welcomed them to the City and said he saw nothing that told him they couldn’t handle a liquor license, and would approve the transfer of a liquor license. However, the proposed use, Asian upscale, is not unique, as currently there are so many in Novi. Mayor Landry noted that Council had turned down quota liquor licenses for three Asian restaurants, and it would be inconsistent to grant a quota liquor license to an Asian restaurant at this time.

Member Paul said in regard to the ordinance, it had been changed. If a business were to get a Class C liquor license and were not in Novi in three years, the City would get that license back. Mr. Schultz suggested an amendment to the motion, as there was an anti profiteering provision in the ordinance that was relatively recent. It required the applicant, upon approval, to actually sign an agreement with the City that laid out conditions for what they could do if there was a transfer of ownership within the three years. So, he would hope that any approval would have that subject to that provision, and the motion to approve would have it attached to it that the agreement needed to be signed. There are some conditions in terms of going forward, it would revert back. Member Paul asked if the maker of the motion was amenable.

Member Nagy said she was amenable to adding to the motion that the applicant sign an agreement with the City if there was a transfer of ownership at the end of three years.

Member Mutch asked Ms. Cornelius what the time line was on receiving additional liquor licenses from the State, pending the completion of the mid decade census. Ms. Cornelius said by the time the census was finished and certified to the State, it would be a minimum of nine months. Member Mutch said whether they get the liquor license or not they would have to go to Planning Commission to have the parking addressed. Ms. Mc Beth stated she wasn’t sure that was correct and would rely on the advice of the City Attorney. She said they would be interested in knowing the Council’s position on this to determining whether a modification to the parking study would be needed. Then, depending on the advice of the attorney, it would go to the Planning Commission or Zoning Board of Appeals. Member Mutch said that was separate from the liquor license discussion. She said yes. Member Mutch asked Mr. Schultz to illuminate the issue. Mr. Schultz said separate but remember, like the Whirly Ball, being able to use the facility for the intended and represented purpose was one of the many criteria that Council takes into consideration. Mr. Schultz said their position right now was that there was a lot of confusion by virtue of the fact that there are a lot of property transfers, splits, etc. He said they thought this would be a Planning Commission approval or the applicant would be free to go to the ZBA and get a variance from the parking requirements. It would be permitted for them to go to either place.

Member Mutch asked what Mr. Quinn reasonably expected. Mr. Quinn said they submitted their plans to the Building Department in December. They have a half million dollar loan that they took out in December to cover those costs. He said the Building Department had approved the interior plans, and it was in February that this supposed parking problem rose

its ugly head. Mr. Quinn said it was not a problem, and he didn’t know where OHM was coming from in the letter they sent. It’s totally wrong, and there isn’t a parking problem. He told Council they were still under the numbers in the shared parking study done when this building was originally developed. He said they didn’t think they had to go anywhere, but if told to they would be there tomorrow. Mr. Quinn noted that there was money sitting out there, and they are paying interest because they can’t get a little plan approved to come in. Mr. Quinn didn’t want Member Margolis to vote no on this because of parking, as it was not an issue. He said they have the parking so please don’t make your decision on parking, that’s not proper for this. Mr. Quinn said it was a valid investment in the City of Novi, and the Council should reward that investment. He said everyone agreed it was unique, nothing like the other Asian restaurants in the City, and that there’s no comparison. He commented that they were asking for the granting of the license, the building would be built, and he thought there would be more liquor licenses available within two years.

Member Mutch stated he would be willing to table this item to address the parking concern. He commented that his vote would not make or break this issue. So he would defer to Member Margolis whether the parking concern was the only item, and whether it was worth tabling to bring that back. Otherwise, he didn’t see any point in prolonging this process if Council wasn’t going to have the votes for this. Member Mutch said, regarding the parking issue, he was of the same mind set as Mayor Pro Tem Capello. This was how this development was planned, to have these kinds of uses, it was appropriate for this area of town, and he thought that was what was intended for the Main Street development. Member Mutch commented he understood the parking concerns, but this wasn’t the typical commercial development and parking had been treated differently in this area. He thought the points Mr. Quinn made were appropriate. He would be willing to table this if there’s going to be support if the parking is addressed, if not he would vote to deny it.

Member Margolis said she had concerns about consistency regarding the other liquor licenses being denied. She said although everyone thought their restaurant was unique, she thought that the people who run those restaurants also thought their restaurants were unique. Member Margolis thought they would have a question as to why Council would make that difference between the two. Her concern about the parking was an additional piece, and it wasn’t necessarily whether she had an issue with the parking or not, but an issue that Council doesn’t have control. She said she was not in favor of this liquor license, and didn’t know if it would make any sense to table it.

Mayor Pro Tem Capello said if there was a provision in the ordinance, regarding the size of the developments, that gave the Planning Commission the decision making powers as opposed to Council, it was a glitch in the ordinance. When the Main Street project came in it included the Local Color Building, the Vic’s building, the Court building and the 200-300 building that was in existence. He said Council always thought that project would develop all at once, and understood the project would be condominiums. He said they always anticipated a change of ownership, but never anticipated that a change of ownership would then take the decision making power of each individual unit owned by a different owner, and bring some of it to the Planning Commission and some of it to Council. Council always envisioned that entire project would come to them for approvals. He thought approval of the parking, if needed, should come to Council where it was always intended to come, and not piecemeal it off building by building, owner by owner, to the Planning Commission.

Mr. Schultz said, for clarification, that he was not necessarily in disagreement with that. He commented that what the language in the Off Street Parking provision of the ordinance was "Planning Commission approves shared parking". The TC District, a separate provision, says "site plan for developments goes to the Planning Commission unless "the site under development" is more than five acres. He said he was open to look into the history of that language and do the kind of inquiry Council was talking about. He didn’t know that it had to be decided tonight, and he didn’t think that the City had resolved the administrative question that Mr. Quinn is passionately arguing, which is this can be done administratively. It is not resolved because it is a complicated question, they’re here, it’s a factor, but it can be a condition to an approval if Council desires. It’s an issue but it doesn’t have to be the deciding issue.

Mayor Pro Tem Capello said it was his opinion that it was always meant to be one parcel, and not to be piecemealed out based upon future ownerships.

Member Nagy noted that she didn’t think parking was an issue, because that area was to be shared parking. She said if not this applicant, what it would take and what would have to come in for the last liquor license to be given out. She agreed Novi had various Asian restaurants, but they are not the same as this one. A liquor license was given to a family restaurant that had been in town for a long time, because they wanted to go upscale. She commented that this was not the same as going to P.F. Chang’s or Happy Sushi, this was definitely new. She felt it was ridiculous to hold up one liquor license because it wasn’t unique enough, and no one had defined the word "unique" for her. Member Nagy thought Council would be making an unfair mistake, and that she would still support her motion.

Mr. Schultz said a motion to approve did not pass. He thought Council should consider a motion to deny with some attached findings of fact. He elaborated on two of the items in the ordinance. Section 3-14 H-11, which talks about "whether the applicant has demonstrated the public need or convenience for issuance of a liquor license for this facility considering the following factors:

A) The total number of licenses for similar establishments and/or operations in the City considered both in terms of whether such number of similar establishments is needed.

B) The proximity of this establishment to other licensed establishments in the area."

Mr. Schultz said number 12, under that Section, is the language about uniqueness, which says "the uniqueness of a proposed facility when contrasted against other existing or proposed facilities." He thought the Council, as part of a positive motion in favor of denial, would need to make some further elaboration on some of the comments.

Member Mutch said he would support the motion to give clear direction to the applicant, but would not support a provision that talked about the proximity, because if the applicant comes back in with a transfer license Council would be contradicting themselves. He didn’t think Council said they didn’t want them to have a liquor license. He would support a motion that didn’t include that provision. Member Mutch said he did support the business, but it was obvious that the votes weren’t there. Member Mutch didn’t want the applicant to be held up, but did want them to look at their alternatives.

Patrick Howell, of Plunkett and Clooney, was present representing EPOCH Catering, LLC. Mr. Howell said the purpose of this request was to conform to the Michigan Liquor Control Commission guidelines, and allow more flexible profit sharing. EPOCH Catering, LLC, is a subsidiary of EPOCH Restaurant Group, which is the owner of Too Chez’s, which is currently closed, and to be opened as Four Seasons Restaurant. They are also the owner of Tribute, a very fine restaurant in Farmington, Forte in Birmingham, and Latitude and Not Just A Bar in Bay Harbor. They are a well respected restaurant group in Michigan and he believed they would comply with the Michigan Liquor Control Commission guidelines, as well as the City of Novi guidelines.

Member Paul asked the City Clerk, if when the co-licensee was catering could they use the license off site. Ms. Cornelius replied the way the resolution read was "it is strictly for a 2003 Class C Licensed business". However, she did note in the application that the applicant had applied for a Class C/SDM. If the SDM portion of the license were granted, which was not in the resolution, it would allow them to cater off site and serve beer and wine but not liquor. Member Paul said if they were allowed to do that then the people that held the license, both owners, plus the facility where they were serving would be held responsible. Ms. Cornelius responded she was correct, as co-licensee as well as the facility. If they were to cater an event off site they would be able to serve beer and wine that had been purchased by a third party, but not liquor. Member Paul asked if the owner would have two liquor licenses, a co-license and a liquor license at Too Chez also. Ms. Cornelius said her understanding was that they would maintain the license from Too Chez. Ms. Cornelius believed there were others because they had one through Tribute, etc.

Mr. Howell said regarding the SDM license, this was just for a co-license of the Class C License currently held at the establishment. In regard to Too Chez, it’s a current licensee at that establishment and would be added as a co-licensee at this establishment. Member Paul thanked him for the clarification, and stated she would be supporting the motion.

Nays: None

Michael Rupert of Art Van Furniture said they were requesting the vacation of Karevich Drive so they could develop the corner parcel they bought from the City, and add a few more parking spaces to their present site.

Mr. Pearson said he would highlight some of the findings in the staff report that Council asked for. Traffic counts were generated, which were relatively low amounts and currently at a high of 700 vehicles on the access road on a Saturday. The Art Van Company owns property on both sides of Karevich Drive. They have provided a conceptual site plan, which hasn’t had a thorough review, but showed what they envisioned if the road was vacated for construction of a new stand alone facility, which would also add some tax revenue to the City. Mr. Pearson thought that would be one of Council’s considerations. He commented they didn’t have a firm

recommendation, and said a service road could be done contiguous to the property to the south. However, he thought the opportunity for that was gone at this point. He said it seemed like it was a remnant of an idea to have that kind of a service road, but it was never fully developed. If Council asked that it be vacated he suggested asking the City Attorney to look into this in depth in terms of how this property came to be. His understanding was the road was built with a Special Assessment District so he would want to be sure that the City was safe on all that. Also, whether there would be any monetary value to be gained by a vacation. It sounded like a vacation of a road, split off to the adjoining property owners, but didn’t sound like right-of-way would be sold; so we’d want to look at that a little more.

Member Gatt said he wouldn’t be in favor of this unless the Administration could show the gain the City would garner by this action; if there was no gain, he didn’t see a reason to do it. Secondly, Pat Karevich was the Mayor of Novi for a few years, and that road was named in her honor, and to vacate that road would not do Mrs. Karevich justice.

Member Mutch said from what he had read the right-of-way was acquired by the City. It was not a subdivision street dedicated for that public purpose. So, he assumed that even if the street was vacated the City would still retain its ownership rights of the property. Mr. Schultz said he was not sure he could give that answer tonight, but would be happy to provide it at the next meeting. He said there certainly was some legal support for the argument that ownership transfers, and it was something he would have to look into to render a definitive position. Mr. Schultz said it appeared that the City acquired the property to do utility type improvements. It wasn’t bought for investment purposes. So, the question becomes what do the cases say about vacation of City improvements. It’s an open question and he would like to leave it at that tonight. If direction was of interest on the part of the Council, he would like to give a much longer opinion.

Member Mutch said he would like to see this go forward, because it was clear, looking at how that area had developed, whatever the initial plan was to have frontage roads through West Oaks and the surrounding properties, never fully developed. It seemed unlikely that would develop in any significant way, and it was hindering the development of the two parcels that the City sold to Art Van. He understood they had the right to develop those properties, there had been a five year restriction, but it made much more sense that it be developed as a block. The only thing he would like to see explored was a wider right-of-way or buffer along Novi Road. He said this was addressed in the comments from Administration, that now there’s a little green open space there, and maybe through the trading or selling of the properties the City could acquire additional right-of-way along Novi Road, this would allow more landscaping to soften it up. He was willing to support the concept once all the legal issues were addressed. He agreed with Member Gatt that he would be looking to see a situation where the City is selling the property. If the City was vacating to give up the property, that would be a different situation for him.

Member Margolis stated her thoughts were similar. The thing that appealed to her was the opportunity to enhance some of that with landscaping for the frontage on Novi Road. That would be the benefit the City would derive from this. She would also be interested in selling it rather than just vacating it, but certainly didn’t feel that the road brought any benefit to the City sitting there as pavement and unused. She said in reference to connecting it up to a ring road in the development, since it wasn’t even in the long term plans for the City, her question would be when the City would be able to do it. Member Margolis said she would be interested in looking at it further.

Member Nagy agreed with the two previous speakers. She asked Mr. Lemmon, City Assessor, if he could shed light on this regarding the ownership. She would not move forward on this if the ownership rights were not established. Mr. Lemmon said he had not looked into how the City acquired it, and the chain of ownership before that. Member Nagy said she would like to see this item tabled until the legal questions could be answered with regard to ownership, and whether the City would receive financial gain.

Mr. Schultz advised the City owns the property, and had bought the property around it, which was conveyed to Art Van. He said it is surrounded by property owned by Art Van. The question he couldn’t answer for Member Mutch was, if the City merely vacated it what would that do in terms of transferring ownership to Art Van or would the City retain ownership.

Mayor Pro Tem Capello said if there was a vacation he would rather see a sale so the City could collect some money. He was not in favor of vacating Karevich Drive in front of Art Van, because he didn’t want to move the parking closer to the road, and wanted to maintain green space there. He would also require no parking directly on West Oaks. He thought they could work it so the parking was between the new building and Art Van, and he would want a larger green space on the corner than was shown on their plan so the entranceway would be presentable. Mayor Pro Tem Capello thought when they had come before Council years ago for the Scott Shuptrine building, Council made some concessions and talked about the additional open space, particularly the open space that’s directly north of the ABC building. So, he asked that when Mr. Pearson comes back with the research that Mr. Schultz was going to do could they give Council the minutes of what happened with Scott Shuptrine, and the ownership and restrictions on the vacant piece directly north of ABC Warehouse.

Mayor Landry said before the discussion on the motion to postpone does the Administration have sufficient direction, and they did. He asked the applicant if they understood what the concerns of Council were at this time and if he had any questions for Council. Mr. Rupert said no.

Nays: None

Rob Casalou, Providence Park Hospital, commented that he knew their project had created a strain on the staff, the City and other projects, and Council was going to be considering solutions on how to solve that. Mr. Casalou said they had been working very well with staff,

and appreciated the attention this project received, and they are moving at a pace he felt would bring them up on time. Mr. Casalou said they are now almost ready to submit their final building design and other parts of the campus. There will be medical office buildings, a hotel and other pieces of this. Mr. Casalou requested, that whatever Council’s solution was, that there be some continuity on the whole campus. What he would hate to see was that they work with people on parts of the campus, and someone else on the hospital, because they were looking at this as a continuing community. He said it would make a lot of sense for them if Council could resource it as such. Mr. Casalou said they have been delighted thus far with Mr. Pearson, staff, Ms. Mc Beth, but he understood that the City had other challenges to deal with and he could appreciate that. He said they weren’t presenting a solution, but a request that they have some continuity with whoever Council chose to work with them.

Mark Adler of Jamestown Subdivision said he was appointed to the Public Access Promotions Committee during the transition so he wanted to introduce himself to the new Council members. He was directed to attend this Council meeting by the Director of the committee to tell Council what was going on with their committee. The main thing was that they were short one person from Novi on this committee, and were short one person from each City. He said they would like to remedy that situation, and hoped that being on television tonight would reach anyone interested in participating to assist public access television. Also, there are continuing workshops and other activities that prove the value of public access as the only place that an individual can get on television and express their views in an unedited form.

Mayor Landry advised Mr. Adler of the Special/Committee Reports section on the agenda, and said any time his committee wanted to make a presentation to Council, they would be more than happy to entertain it.

Mr. Pearson said the International Code Council was the only proposal they had the last time this came up, and was the group they brought forward last time. He requested that be postponed as they hadn’t received any direction. In the meantime, they received another proposal from the Sikich Group, and after review he thought they did a better job. Mr. Pearson said their proposal was attached for Council’s consideration to see if they would be interested in having a process review completed of our current operations, as far as the Building Department plan and permit review. Also, how the handoff was done from site plan to the Building Department and what happens after that. The proposal was appealing as they would spend time documenting what was being done now that Administration has not had time to write out the steps on how the Building Permits are handled. Mr. Pearson said the Sikich Group was committed, had experience with asking the customers, builders and developers their experiences, what their perceptions were, and what their expectations in a small group format would be. They would also meet with our staff that knew the process very well, and had good suggestions on how to improve things. Mr. Pearson said they put all the information to paper, and give the City a series of recommendations on how to make some continuous improvements. They would also be able to provide some benchmarks, in terms of other communities, and how to determine time frames so Council could decide if they want to have or target a three week turn around for building permits, or four or five weeks. He thought they had to ask the building community what their expectations were, because if Council thought four weeks would be great and the builder thought three weeks was great, whatever Council decided they wanted to target, we would need to staff up for that. It’s a whole process and it has the advantage of involving staff, the building community, and at the same time bringing in some fresh eyes and outside expertise that could guide us through the whole process. Mr. Pearson said that kind of process expertise was not in house, and he knew they didn’t have the time to devote to improve it while doing the work. He asked for Council’s consideration as he thought this would be valuable information, whatever happens down the road in terms of continual improvements.

Member Margolis commended staff and the Building Department for moving forward on something like this. She said this was a major step forward for the City. We were here about a month ago discussing economic development goals, and the Council agreed that process had to be looked at, and we needed to take our first step toward making Novi an easier place to do business with. She said that would help our economic development goals both for the businesses that are in Novi and the ones coming in, and the idea that time was money for this City. She said she had reviewed the proposal and was very familiar with these concepts, and it was an excellent proposal. A couple of things to look for in a proposal like this are benchmarks. It was one thing to get anecdotal evidence of how long something took here or somewhere else, but in order to really look at our process we have to look at what the benchmarks are in other communities, and what’s going on in the current state in our own community or whatever process we are looking at. She said it helped to set performance expectations, and understand what kind of performance expectations Council should expect. It took a look at what other communities are paying for service at certain levels, as Council had to decide what they wanted to pay for a certain amount of service, and set that up ahead of time. It looked at it from the point of view of bringing value to the customers, as Mr. Pearson talked about, which was an excellent point. Also, it’s process improvement that involved the staff. There are too many process consultants that come in, hand a report over to the staff, and say here’s what you need to do, which was her concern about the previous one. This group actually comes in and works with the staff, to use their expertise on the processes that they are working with all the time, to design a better process. She thought the expertise of

the people involved in this proposal were wonderful. They have been involved in Baldridge Awards for Quality, which are outstanding. Member Margolis would highly endorse this.

Member Margolis made a recommendation that one of our largest customers, Mr. Casalou, had a request about consistency, and she felt he needed to be involved in the focus groups if this proposal was passed.

Member Paul said she was in support of looking at the Building Department, and appreciated the ideas of timelines and benchmarks. Unfortunately, she would not support this proposal at this time. She said $32,700 was something that Council would be discussing in regard to items in budget for the whole City this Saturday. She felt this was pushing it forward a little early. She would like to put it on as a budget discussion item, and would like to look at all departments not just one. Member Paul said there was also the question of who would be the City Manager, and this might be their expertise. She said she didn’t know who they would have, and so those things were important to her, and she didn’t want to move forward at this time.

Member Gatt asked if the $32,700 was coming out of the budget or out of Building fees. Mr. Pearson said it would come out of the budget but would be paid for by Building fees. It’s funneled through the General Fund, but was essentially set aside. He said they account for ins and outs to the Building Fund, and would be wholly supported by existing Building Permit fees.

Member Mutch asked if the scope of the proposal was limited to the Building Department, and was there any review beyond that into Planning as far as the overlap of those two departments? Mr. Pearson replied it would involve the Building permit process, and would be the handoff from the site plan to the building permit, and then to the field operations, and the inspections after the fact. Member Mutch said he definitely wanted to see Council have an analysis of the Building Department, but thought, as we’ve heard from applicants and discussed at our meeting, that it’s a two part process. There’s the whole Planning Department and their review process, then the Building Department taking the handoff and handling all of those activities. Member Mutch thought they needed to broaden the scope of the kind of review being done and not just look at a single department. He said at minimum, look at both the Planning and Building Departments in terms of how they interrelate, the processes that flow between those two departments, and processes specific to the Planning Department itself. Because that’s an area where there have been concerns expressed by applicants and Council members as well. He supported the concept but didn’t think the scope addressed all the areas that Council wanted addressed. He said regarding the issue of the budget, Council had a policy they adopted dealing with these kinds of items that come forward during the budget year, outside of things that have been approved. He said as far as he could tell, based on that policy, this doesn’t fall within the scope of those proposals. Member Mutch would be willing to look at this within the scope of the budget discussions, which start Saturday, and would be open to not only looking at this, but a broader study of other departments. He didn’t think it was appropriate to move forward on this now.

Mayor Pro Tem Capello disagreed with Member Mutch. He said Council does have to look at the entire scope, and understood that the Planning process needed to be reviewed as well as the Building process. However, even if they are done in a piecemeal fashion, he thought they had to be done separately, and then figure out the handoff from the Planning Department to the Building Department. Mayor Pro Tem Capello didn’t think it was a study that could do both departments at the same time as part of one study. Regardless, it would be two independent studies. Mayor Pro Tem Capello said he would agree 100% with Member Mutch to wait to do both of these at budget time, and he was glad to see that the study for the Planning Department and Planning process was not being brought forth now out of last year’s budgeted money. He said he was in favor of it because it was coming out of Building fees. He would not be in favor of taking regular budgeted money and allocating it to this study, or taking Building Funds and Fees and allocating it to do the study for the Planning Department. He wanted to look at the study for the Planning Department in our current budget, but would prefer to move forward just on this part now with the understanding to do the second phase of this as soon as the budget was completed. Then move forward with the Planning Department and have both of these come back to Council with the results at about the same time. Then Council could look at the handoff, merger or the overlap between the two departments. He said that was the only reason he was in favor of doing this now.

Member Nagy asked if there was anyone from this company that could answer the question whether or not they do these studies one department at a time or two departments that overlap each other. Mr. Pearson replied that no one was present tonight, but the St. Charles report that Council had showed it could be done either way. He said it was the nature of the work to have overlap. This proposal would involve looking at the Building permit process and how it worked with Engineering and Planning. Mr. Pearson said the site plan review could certainly be done as a phase II, if Council was comfortable and liked the results of this study and how this company operated. Council could talk to them about expanding that as a separate General Fund item, as it could be done either way. Member Nagy believed that if this was going to be done then Council should have a comprehensive study involving the Planning, Building, and Engineering Departments. Those are the three critical departments with regard to development within the City. She said she would like to see if funds could be found to expand into those other departments at Saturday’s budget session. There is overlap and she assumed that they would be looking at the areas that overlap already, so why not just expand the study and do the three departments. Member Nagy was having mixed feelings about this. She understood what Member Mutch said to Council and was thinking about waiting until Saturday, but she wished Council would look at this comprehensively.

Mayor Landry said he had listened to all the comments and was not opposed to looking on a grander scale to other departments, whether Engineering or Planning. However, he didn’t think it was a reason to not go forward with this. He said if you talk to any builders they love to bash the Building Department, because everybody’s building can’t get built fast enough. So, everyone wants permits faster. If Council was going to be a responsible Council and a responsible City, he thought they had to look at their own departments and review them. He said the Planning Department was in favor of this, wanted to be reviewed, and would be willing to implement changes in running the department. He thought that Council did have an obligation to do that, look at some benchmarks of other communities, and take a look at how to improve our process. Mayor Landry thought they owed it to the residents, and to the Building Department. He said if this was approved tonight, he saw no reason why Council couldn’t ask this group to enlarge it, and give us a budget for Planning or Engineering. He said approving this tonight does not mean that Council is locked into the Building Department. Mayor Landry said he would probably support looking at other departments, but didn’t think that was a reason to not go forward at this time. Mayor Landry said Council might want to do them piecemeal and stagger them a couple of months behind each other. He said this was part of a responsible City government, to look at the departments, have an outside company come in, review them, and make suggestions. Mayor Landry said the amount of money doesn’t bother him, because it would be paid for by revenue generated by the Building Department. He said he would whole heartedly support this matter.

Member Margolis wanted to address a couple of the thoughts about scope. She said this was not merely a study, and that was something to consider. This would be a study and a process improvement program. She said when doing process improvement the scope of process improvement had to be limited. To do process improvement in multiple areas at the same time was not possible in an organization. She said reading the proposal, one of the things they would do with the staff was to ask what the scope was of this particular process improvement. In lean office work, which was what they would be doing; the scope was set and then we’d work around that particular scope. She said the handoffs to other areas are then a part of the study, because that would be the secondary step. Member Margolis thought to increase the scope that large, at the beginning, would really be a recipe for failure, because what she expected to see out of this was not just this is where we are and this is where we should be, but this is where we are and here’s how we are going to get there. Member Margolis was concerned when Council talked about the budget being Saturday, because Council was not passing a budget Saturday. She said it would be another month before Council passed a budget. She thought the more Council delayed the more trouble they would get into, in terms of moving forward. Council also had two huge projects coming on line they needed to be ready for, and they had questions about staffing levels in the Building Department and what kind of staffing levels were needed. This study would allow us to have experts take a look and tell us what staffing would be needed as those two projects come on board. She commented that she was much more comfortable moving ahead with that project if we get some clear information based on this report. She urged Council to consider moving ahead with this so the process wasn’t delayed anymore.

Member Nagy commented she understood this study would be funded by the fees that are generated in the Building Department, however if Council were to look at studying the Engineering Department and/or the Planning Department where would the money be generated for that. Mr. Pearson said other General Fund proceeds. He said there are State laws that Building permit fees can be used for specific purposes generally related to that process. So, this would be an eligible expense if Council wanted to do some sort of work with site plan review, etc. Mr. Pearson said they don’t pay for the Planning Department and other kinds of things out of building fees, which would be a separate operation. Member Nagy said if Council wanted to generate a study regarding process in the Engineering Department would the money come from the General Fund; Mr. Pearson said it would. Member Nagy said she understood previous comments that Council would start the budget process on Saturday and it would take a month to pass. She said she was torn as to whether to vote for this or not, but had decided to change her mind. The reason for changing her mind was because this would come out of fees generated by the Building Department, and there are two huge projects coming up. She said the entire process took about six weeks and delaying this through the budget process meant they wouldn’t be able to complete the project study until probably the fall. So, she thought she would support the motion.

Member Paul asked what year was it that the Building Department was in the red at the end of the year. Ms. Smith-Roy replied in 2003-2004 there was a negative balance, and in 2004-2005 there was a positive balance. Member Paul asked how she figured that out by the end of the year. Ms. Smith-Roy responded they start out with the building revenue for the beginning of the calculation, and from that they subtract the direct expenses from the department, and then allocated a certain amount of overhead items to the department. Whatever that balance was, it was reported in the budget document. Member Paul asked in what month would Council have that information for this year. Ms. Smith-Roy said in July or August. Member Paul said Council was looking at possibly having a building expansion at the Fire Department as well as this study, and they don’t know where they are in regards to fees. Ms. Smith-Roy said we don’t, but they do anticipate an increase in the fees for this year, and they anticipate funds being available, and have allowed for that in the budget document presented to Council. Member Paul asked if that was an estimate, and Ms. Smith-Roy said it was.

Member Paul said when she first became a Council member we were behind approximately $32,000 or $34,000 in 2003-2004. Ms. Smith-Roy agreed. Member Paul said we were recouped the following year. At this time, we don’t know exactly where we are with our Building Department fees, and also want to do an improvement at the Fire Station on Beck and Eleven Mile. She said without knowing all that information, and without having the budget discussed and approved, she thought they were putting the cart before the horse. She said she would not support this because we did have an actual commitment to the taxpayers saying what the money would be spent on, and this was not part of it. She knew that we have had some people discuss many of the problems with our timeliness in the Building Department, as well as looking for more staff for the Building Department. She thought those were a lot of fees that were unknown. Member Paul noted that they were talking about possibly three new employees, a Building Department expansion and office improvements at the Beck and Eleven Mile Fire Station, and also this study. She said there is a very likely possibility that she would support this at budget time, but until then she would like more analysis done of where we are in our fees for this year before spending money for this department.

Mayor Pro Tem Capello said he didn’t know where the we didn’t commit to the taxpayers to review this process was coming from, but it wasn’t coming from this table. He said he did and knew several other Council members committed to the taxpayers that Council would review this process, the Planning process, and make some changes.

Mayor Landry followed up on a comment made by Member Nagy. He said Council had two massive projects moving through this City, two projects the size of which would completely engulf many other municipalities, a major hospital and a major mall expansion. People would use those facilities for a long time, and Council had an obligation to make sure it was done right. Mayor Landry thought the time was now to make sure that as all the plans are coming in Novi has the best and most efficient Building Department. As Mr. Casalou said, they are moving forward with all kinds of areas of the hospital that need to be integrated. The Finance Director said in her opinion there would be enough fees this year, so he thought the time was very crucial to do this now to make sure Novi has the best and most efficient Building Department as the process moves through.

Member Mutch said this wasn’t an issue of the cost of the study, outside of the fact that he thought it would be more appropriately addressed through the budget process. He said he would defer to fellow Council members expertise when there was discussion about the scope of these kinds of projects. However, having served on the Planning Commission for 3 ½ years, and seeing that side of the process, it was clear that there’s a lot of interaction between those departments. Member Mutch said decisions made through the planning process definitely impact the Building Department and how they do their job. If Council was going to go forward on this item then he would like Council to give direction to the City Administration to bring back a similar kind of proposal for the Planning and Engineering Departments, and incorporate that into the budget process, although he knew the information wouldn’t be available by Saturday, but the direction of Council would be clear. Member Mutch said he had a hard time seeing a review of the Planning Department processes that wouldn’t impact other departments. He said while they might have a way of addressing those it made sense to him that there be a single group of consultants looking at that again. It doesn’t mean it would all take place at the same time, but we need to have someone looking at the entire picture, and not looking at it on a piecemeal basis. He felt that was where they were right now. Member Mutch said as long as Council was willing to give support to looking at the other departments as well, and incorporating them into the budget process he would be more comfortable with this proposal.

Mayor Landry asked if that was acceptable to the maker and seconder of the motion. They agreed.

Mr. Pearson commented Council had seen this item but they had to bring it back because there were some items included involving grants and equipment in the Police Department. They, also, have better numbers regarding space at Fire Station #4, and there was at least one comment at the last meeting about having a comprehensive package. He said Council just

dealt with the process analysis, and another part of that was the satellite office recommendation, which was included here with updated numbers. Mr. Pearson said there was also the element of Human Resources, and it seemed that it was logical that it be held in abeyance in terms of actually going forward. He said additional material had been provided to Council, and their commitment and agreement not to recommend the hiring of permanent full time staff for a short term need. He said instead they would go with some other kind of combination, and would have better information for Council when they got the report back. He said the lead time for some of these elements for the satellite facility was, for the longest item, two months. Mr. Pearson requested Council’s consideration; they were not trying to force this, but were trying to answer some of the questions brought up previously.

Member Nagy stated she was disappointed, because when she asked for a cost analysis regarding leasing, she thought the Administration would give specific examples of offices, square footage and cost per month. Secondly, she felt they were doing this in reverse. In regard to the employees or consultants, she said there was a group called City Municipal Services that would allow the contracting of qualified inspectors. She thought that would save on some of the dilemma regarding full time, part time, and union. She noted she would like to see something like that done. She said if this was approved what would the City do with Fire Station #4 after its three year use. Mr. Pearson answered after the utilities it would be an approved City building on City sewer. Now, the building had been used for storage of equipment, and there was a budget proposal to move some of the parks equipment down to the sports complex. He thought it would still be used as a storage facility. There’s a restroom there, and he thought Council would want to have the facility on City sewer, and avoid the ongoing payment for the pump and haul operation that’s now being paid. He said the furniture would be ours and could be resold or reused. The phone equipment might be able to be reused, the wiring to the facility would not be reusable, and the copier would be leased annually so there wouldn’t be a retained asset for that. Member Nagy commented that the proposal said $25,000 was for furniture. If we are going to use the satellite office, and sub-contract inspection services out, these people would be located at this facility and could go to Providence or to the mall. She asked if it had to be new furniture or could it be used, because she thought this was expensive. Mr. Pearson said there was no doubt the office furniture would be expensive whether new or used. One of the issues with this location was that it was very small, and there wasn’t a lot of flexibility for equipment to fit and accommodate the work stations that would be needed. He said they can’t just go to a used office equipment store and pick something out because it wouldn’t fit together physically in order to get all the stations needed. Mr. Pearson said the City had a relationship with a vendor that designed this and would spec it out and make it fit. They weren’t looking to make it a palace, but did want to give people in this small confined space for the better part of two years elbow room, filing space, drafting tables, etc. Member Nagy said the computers would be leased through the State of Michigan joint contract with EDS. Mr. Pearson said the computers would be purchased. She asked if those computers, even though they would be obsolete in three years, would they be better than some of the computers she had seen in the City. Mr. Pearson said possibly, and if after three years they were still better, he was sure there would be people who would take them. Member Nagy asked if a conclusion had been made regarding the staffing. Mr. Pearson said he no, and his recommendation for Council to consider was that they are committed, with Council, to not have full time personnel. He didn’t know how yet or how personnel would be assigned, and thought that would be decided later, but Council had Administrations commitment that full timers would not be hired.

Member Nagy requested that Administration contact City Municipal Services to see what was available through their service. She knew they had inspectors who were sub-contracted. She would like to look at the cost of that as well, and then a time frame regarding the sub-contracting and the number of hours per week they would be doing inspections.

Member Mutch said he had voiced a couple of concerns the last time this was before Council. One of his concerns was the staffing, because he felt Council should set some direction or at least establish direction for City Administration. He asked what timeline he was expecting for additional staff, and was that incorporated in the budget received by Council. Mr. Pearson said money had been set aside in the budget allocated towards additional staffing. As for the time frame, with the process analysis and the six weeks, he would try to start that process tomorrow. He thought they would have the report in 60 to 90 days, and they would make some decisions and recommendations. He said they would talk to the firm Member Nagy referenced to see if they have the resources, ability and interest to work with the City, and anyone else they could find. He said they could start that now to get some choices. Member Mutch asked if that was his plan then that Council won’t be making any decisions about staff until they get that process completed. Mr. Pearson said yes. Member Mutch had concerns about the costs involved. He said some of the information provided to Council since the last meeting helped address some of his concerns. He said based on the information he had it seemed like there wasn’t anywhere else in the City they could get the space required for the cost projected in the budget. He said there was one offer for office space, and he didn’t know if it was an apples to apples comparison, but looking at some of the lease rates in town it was pretty clear to him that they would be hard pressed to match this proposal. He said the demolition and construction would take out the Fire Department office space and create a new office space. He asked if he was correct, and Mr. Pearson said he was. He asked if the phone system would be a duplicate system, and whether they had looked at anything like voice over IP options as it seemed like a lot for a satellite location. Mr. Pearson said he couldn’t answer that, but did know that whenever hardware was bought it would be expensive, and they wanted it for integrated with the existing system for efficiency. He didn’t know if the voice over would be compatible, but it was an option. This would be to bring it into the City system like the Fire Station, DPW, etc. so that they have the same voice mail, etc. Member Mutch asked if that was the same set up as the other out buildings, completely separate. Mr. Pearson said yes. Member Mutch said an integrated but separate package; Mr. Pearson agreed. Member Mutch asked, in terms of the network data, had they looked at point to point wireless or something in that frame. Mr. Pearson said Rob Petty, IT Manager, was always looking at those kinds of solutions, and when the DPW and those kinds of facilities were upgraded they had not done wireless. Mr. Pearson didn’t know if it was because of liability concerns or costing up, and whether the same money would be spent on another option. Member Mutch thought it was something to look at, and that AT&T had everyone over a barrel when it comes to these contracts. He asked how many staff people would be in the satellite office, because Mr. Pearson had been talking about adding four people; so Member Mutch was thinking it would be a one to one shift. However, based on the furniture and the number of computers being bought he thought there would be more than four out there. Mr. Pearson thought they could wait to see how they would staff it. He said they were trying to give Council the whole picture for budget purposes. Mr. Pearson said it would be a fairly quick turn around, so he wasn’t as concerned with ordering now and having it sit.

Member Mutch said Member Capello noted the expense of the sewer and it is significant. However, he thought Mr. Pearson had made the point that it was an investment in the property, and whether used as a satellite office for the next ten years or sold, the value would be higher with the sewer tap and connection charge paid. He said in light of that he would support those additions and the addition of the operational review, and was willing to support the budget amendments.

Mayor Pro Tem Capello said he would be against pumping and hauling, because it would be money thrown away. He said a little less than 25% of this budget was money going from one pocket of the City to the other. We are basically paying ourselves to hook up the sewer, and didn’t see that as an expense, and felt the amount was really closer to $80,000 rather than $104,000. He stated he was in favor of it before and is still in favor of it.

Member Paul noted, for record, that she was looking for the money to be allocated during the budget session and, to find out where they were at in regard to the Building Department fees. She felt $187,000 was a lot to spend at this time, and said she would not support the motion.

Member Nagy congratulated and thanked Steve Printz, City Forester, on the acquisition of a $20,000 grant for the Tree Fund.

Mayor Landry commented he would support this, but wanted it on record that he would not support adding full time staff, and it was his understanding that they were going forward with this with the commitment that they would achieve the additional staffing by contractors, part time or a combination of both. Also, he understood that the Administration would get right on this and bring information back to Council.

Mayor Pro Tem Capello noted that part of the bid was for Village Oaks finished grade and seeding. He said when looking around the City, it seemed that whatever was seeded it ended up with weeds instead of grass, and if bids come in with sod instead of seed at a reasonable price, he would prefer the sod. Mr. Pearson replied he would try to get an alternate quote and build that into this.

CONSENT AGENDA REMOVALS FOR COUNCIL ACTION: Consent Agenda items which have been removed for discussion and/or action.

Member Paul said it was brought to her attention by a parent that their child had their finger stuck in one of the arcade machines at Lucky Strike, and a portion of the finger was removed. She said before renewing the license she wanted to be sure this was rectified. She asked that this item be postponed until Council heard that the machine had either been removed or repaired.

Mayor Landry believed that was an inquiry of the Administration, and asked if they had any knowledge of this. Mr. Pearson said, personally, he did not. Member Paul asked the applicant for an explanation and what had been done.

Eddie Bourque, General Manager, said it had been repaired. Member Paul asked what happened to the child. Mr. Bourque said the child walked behind the game, which was a foot away from the wall. Mr. Bourque didn’t know where the parent was at the time. The machine had been under repair, and the mechanic walked away for a minute to get a tool and that’s when it happened. He said they have had no incidents since then and had none before. Member Paul said when a machine was under repair she thought it should be roped off with no access to it. Mr. Bourque agreed.

Member Mutch asked if the arcade business license inspections, done by City staff, were physical, mechanical inspections of the games. Mr. Bourque said it was more about how many machines there were, and where they were located. Mr. Pearson said it was not an operational inspection. Member Mutch said he had contacted the City Manager about getting out of the business of arcade license renewals, which were probably appropriate in the day. However, there are at least four different staff people that have to fill out paperwork to complete the license, and to what purpose. It doesn’t sound like anything in our process addresses this situation. There are times when we do need to do license inspections, massage licenses are a good example, but he thought the time for these arcade licenses had passed.

Mayor Pro Tem Capello asked if Mr. Schultz could look into other municipalities to see what they are doing with the arcade licenses. There was Council consensus to do this.

Member Paul asked, regarding the Conservation Easement, what the difference was between the Conservation Easement before and now. Ms. Mc Beth said the first Conservation Easement was for the Phase I part of the development and was approved previously. This is

for the amendment, which included Phase II, which is 62 units on about 56 acres on the north part of the site. She said the cover sheet enumerates how much of the land was being preserved under that RUD agreement that was approved previously.

Council entered into Executive Session at 9:00 P.M.

Mayor Landry called the regular meeting of Council back to order at 9:30 P.M., and said he would entertain a motion regarding the City Manager search process.

Mayor Landry asked if the times needed to be stated that Council anticipated interviewing them. Mr. Schultz said it wasn’t needed in the motion, but could be stated for the record.

Mayor Landry said Council anticipated inviting a group of applicants in for an interview on

Saturday, May 6^th at 9 A.M., and a group of them on Thursday, May 11^th at 7 P.M.

There being no further business to come before Council, the meeting was adjourned at

9:32 P.M.

_______________________________ _____________________________

David Landry, Mayor Maryanne Cornelius, City Clerk

_______________________________ Date approved: April 17, 2006

Transcribed by Charlene Mc Lean