Council Minutes

December 19, 2006 Meeting Minutes

BETHLEHEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Town Hall – 10 East Church Street
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania
Tuesday, December 19, 2006 – 7:30 PM – Town Hall

1. INVOCATION
2. PLEDGE TO THE FLAG
3. ROLL CALL

President J. Michael Schweder called the meeting to order. Pastor Ernest Fuller, of Holy Bethel Pentecostal Church, offered the invocation which was followed by the pledge to the flag. Present were Jean Belinski, Karen Dolan, Robert J. Donchez, Joseph F. Leeson, Jr., Gordon B. Mowrer, Magdalena F. Szabo and J. Michael Schweder, 7.

4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

The Minutes of September 19, November 14, and December 5, 2006 were approved.

5. COURTESY OF THE FLOOR (for public comment on ordinances and resolutions to be voted on by Council this evening)

North Street Land Sale – CDBG Funds

Dana Grubb, 2420 Henderson Place, referring to a newspaper article today about a land deal at North Street involving the Parking Authority, asked if the cash has been received and if the money was included in the 2007 CDBG Action Plan.

Tony Hanna, Director of Community and Economic Development, responded yes to both questions.

Mr. Grubb stated that the program income was not discussed or revealed at the meetings that were held on the Action Plan, and was not reflected in the letter dated September 28, 2006 submitted to City Council that outlined revenue sources and proposed expenditures. Asserting the public participation process was compromised, Mr. Grubb stressed the program income should have been discussed. Mr. Grubb questioned why it would have been included in the Plan if it had not been received, and what the effect on the CDBG Program would have been if the sale had not been closed with the particular buyer. Mr. Grubb advised he will be taking up the matter with the Federal Government. Mr. Grubb said Mr. Hanna’s representation in today’s Morning Call that the parcel was purchased to boost the number of parking spaces should be clarified. Continuing on to say the legal justification for the use of CDBG funds over a two year period at $150,000 each year to acquire the property was the potential creation of low and moderate income jobs, Mr. Grubb pointed out that purchasing land for parking using CDBG funds in and of itself would not meet the requirements. Mr. Grubb restated no one was informed that the $300,000 was a part of the 2007 CDBG Program.

Bach Choir – Civic Expenses

Bridgette George, of the Bach Choir, 423 Heckewelder Place, said she would like to address City Council again in support of keeping the $5,000 that had been included in the Proposed 2007 Budget under Civic Expenses for the Bach Choir for its 100th anniversary festival and its community and economic development initiatives with its Bach at Noon program. Ms. George communicated she would also like to support the movement from some Members of Council to address the need for guidelines for Civic Expenses. She expressed that keeping the funding for the Bach Choir’s 100th anniversary festival in Civic Expenses would be a good example for the formation of guidelines. Ms. George pointed out that many communities use taxpayer money in a proactive way in support of arts and culture initiatives. Ms. George thought that initiatives like the Bach Choir taken by organizations that are so integral to the City’s history and what the City is known for have just as significant a role in the City life as the Halloween Parade or Fireworks, have a proven positive effect on the downtown, and are very appropriate civic expenses.

Bethlehem Authority – Finances

John Tallarico, member of the Bethlehem Authority Board, stated that the Bethlehem Authority’s plan for financial restructuring is a long-term fix, and it will not impact the taxpayers going forward. Mr. Tallarico continued on to say the Board’s concern is for the ratepayers as well and the bondholders. Stressing that a lot of effort was put into the financial restructuring plan, Mr. Tallarico stated the Board thinks it is the right thing to do in order to give finality to the issue so that the Board does not have to come back again next year and discuss the same issues. Mr. Tallarico reiterated that the Board thinks a solid plan has been put together with Public Resources Advisory Group (PRAG), the Authority’s financial advisors.

City of Bethlehem Environmental Advisory Council

Addison Bross, 258 East Market Street, said he was proud to be a citizen when he heard that an Environmental Advisory Council was being considered. Mr. Bross, stating it makes a lot of sense monetarily, remarked the City is stepping into a gap that the Federal government has been slow to fill and fulfill its responsibility for making the environment safe for citizens. Mr. Bross remarked he finds the amendment to the Ordinance troubling since it states that future funding requests will be denied for expenses incurred in the operation of the Environmental Advisory Council. Mr. Bross, informing the members he has lived in New Orleans, noted he followed the news of the hurricane there and the shameful performance of government in coming to the rescue of its citizens in that crucial disaster. Mr. Bross, noting the amendment means an unfunded environmental policy for the City, stressed one can look at New Orleans and see what an unfunded environmental policy does. Mr. Bross thought it would be better if Council rejected the proposal outright rather than believing that environmental advice comes free. Mr. Bross stressed he would not like to see City Council create an unfunded arm of City government of this sort, and added he would find that very troubling practically and for Bethlehem’s image.

Peter Crownfield, 569 Brighton Street, spoke in support of the formation of an Environmental Advisory Council and against the proposed amendment. Expressing that the Environmental Advisory Council will provide the Administration and City Council with advice and counsel on environmental issues, Mr. Crownfield said although it may cost something it will not cost anything like it might cost if environmental consultants had to be hired. Mr. Crownfield highlighted the fact that environmental issues do not start or stop within municipal lines. He continued on to enumerate some of the environmental and related issues facing Bethlehem including water quality, commuting, parking, walkability, greenways, watershed, stormwater, and transportation, and added they may affect planning or zoning issues. Mr. Crownfield pointed out that Mayor Callahan along with the Mayors of Allentown and Easton signed a Climate Protection Agreement, joining more than 340 cities in saying that environmental issues are of extreme importance. In addition, Lehigh and Northampton County Executives signed similar agreements, and the Bethlehem Area School District adopted it as a position of the Board. Mr. Crownfield, noting he provided copies of articles for the Members of Council regarding the issue, emphasized that the U. S. Conference of Mayors also adopted a Climate Protection Agreement, a 2030 Building Challenge, and Green Infrastructure Challenge. Mr. Crownfield showed a book from the U. S. Department of Agriculture that illustrates what happens when a city ignores the importance of environmental policy.

Bethlehem Authority – Finances

Stephen Repasch, Executive Director of the Bethlehem Authority, denoted there were many hours of presentations, discussions, and meetings on the Bethlehem Authority’s financial restructuring plan. Mr. Repasch summarized the difference between the Authority’s financial plan and the plan proposed by the Finance Committee. Mr. Repasch affirmed that Members of Council received a letter from Richard Master, Chairman of the Bethlehem Authority, regarding the Bethlehem Authority’s position on the matter. In addition, correspondence from Public Resources Advisory Group (PRAG), the Bethlehem Authority’s financial consultant, was provided to the Members of Council. Mr. Repasch stated that the Authority’s plan calls for a long term restructuring and stability of the water system’s future with regard to capital expenditures. The Authority’s plan generates $17.5 million of capital over time at a present value cost of approximately $249,000. Mr. Repasch commented as he understands it the current Finance Committee plan proposal calls for an $800,000 fix of the water system’s situation for one year and basically covers the Authority’s cash shortfall, and will cost approximately $70,000 per year for 15 years for a total of $1 million as part of the City’s General Obligation Bond. Mr. Repasch noted in the other scenario that PRAG has laid out there are two bond issues, one that could be proposed which would equate to 20 times the cost of the Authority’s. Mr. Repasch said, on the chance that Council does not support the Authority’s plan, the Authority highly recommends scenario 3 contained in the correspondence from PRAG that is a bond issue for $3.34 million to cover 2007 and 2008 capital expenditures. While not equal to the Authority’s plan, the Authority feels this bond issue supports the long term scenario at a greater cost than the Authority’s plan but at least at a minimum is more than the one year fix of the Finance Committee’s proposal.

City of Bethlehem Environmental Advisory Council

Pratima Agrawal, 4008 Killarney Drive, expressed she does not see how a result can come from creating an Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) when the EAC does not have any funding access, and contradicts the creation of an EAC. Observing an EAC would not require an enormous budget, Ms. Agrawal said at least the possibility of a budget would be very important. Ms. Agrawal encouraged City Council to support having funding for an Environmental Advisory Council.

Rezoning 625-633 Montclair Avenue – I to RM

Mary Pongracz, 321 West Fourth Street, advised the property on Montclair Avenue that is requested to be rezoned from I – Institutional District to RM – Residential District is presently owned by Lehigh University. Ms. Pongracz explained, once the rezoning is accomplished, the Housing Opportunity Movement, Inc. (HOM) of which she is President will buy the property because Lehigh University was interested in having a non-profit acquire the property. The parcel will be used to develop housing for low-moderate income families that is needed in the City.

City of Bethlehem Environmental Advisory Council

Joris Rosse, 1966 Creek Road, said the idea of an EAC is long overdue and a phase is being entered when climate issues are going to be more important and vastly bigger in scale than in the past because there has been a policy vacuum on the Federal level. Mr. Rosse expressed that people have to be different kinds of individuals in a country where everyone needs to become energy self-sufficient and carbon-free, and have to learn to get to a new way of being that is sustainable. Mr. Rosse emphasized people do not realize that if everyone is not sustainable they will not be here. Mr. Rosse, asking Council to go with the EAC, pointed out this is not the stage to be penny-pinching.

Bach Choir – Request for Funding

Bruce Haines, 65 West Market Street, expressed his support as a local business owner of the request of Bach Choir for funding under Civic Expenses. He communicated it is for a very unique economic development opportunity for the City that is a one-time request that represents a unique marketing opportunity for businesses in downtown Bethlehem, and for Bethlehem to promote itself in the character the City has had since its founding and historical routes. Mr. Haines denoted that he highly endorses putting the item back in the Budget.

Visitor’s Center

Mr. Haines said at the Pennsylvania Gaming Board hearing on December 6, 2006, Mr. Krauss, counsel for the Sands, stated they have four contractual arrangements with the National Museum of Industrial History, ArtsQuest, PBS 39, and a visitor’s center with the City. Referring to a newspaper article this morning, Mr. Haines asked where the planning money for the visitor’s center is identified in the Budget.

Mayor Callahan responded no money was spent on planning and there is no money to be spent in 2007 on a visitor’s center.

Increasing Police Force

William Scheirer, 1890 Eaton Avenue, thanked the Mayor and City Council for funding four additional Police Officers in the 2007 Budget. He recounted it is the desire of the Bethlehem Citizens Association to have 20 additional Police Officers hired over a five year period. Mr. Scheirer communicated that the additional Police Officers needed on the street will already be recruited and trained when the pressures get worse. Mr. Scheirer wondered whether it would be possible for City Council to require that a certain percentage of the Police force be working on the streets. Stating that violence is knocking on the door, Mr. Scheirer remarked the City should adopt an attitude towards violence of no way, not now, not here, not in our back yard, and the perpetrators will go elsewhere.

6. OLD BUSINESS

None.

7. COMMUNICATIONS

A. Director of Planning and Zoning – Amending Article 1714 – Adding Mount Airy National Register Historic District

The Clerk read a memorandum dated December 7, 2006 from Darlene L. Heller, Director of Planning and Zoning, to which was attached a proposed Ordinance to include the Mount Airy National Register Historic District in the Historic Conservation District, which currently only includes the South Bethlehem District.

President Schweder referred the matter to the Community Development Committee.

B. Superintendent of Water Supply and Treatment – Central Park West

The Clerk read a memorandum dated December 8, 2006 from Jeffrey A. Andrews, Superintendent, Water Supply and Treatment, to which was attached a proposed Resolution and Intermunicipal Water Service Agreement between the City of Allentown and the City of Bethlehem for the purpose of obtaining a sufficient quantity of drinking water from the City of Allentown to be redistributed by the City of Bethlehem to serve and fill the needs of all of the residential customers to be connected to a water distribution system in the area to be known and defined as Central Park West in the City of Bethlehem.

President Schweder referred the matter to the Public Works Committee.

C. Director of Planning and Zoning – Stefko Boulevard/Pembroke Road Corridor Study and Plan

The Clerk read a memorandum dated December 15, 2006 from Darlene Heller, Director of Planning and Zoning, to which was attached a copy of the Stefko Boulevard/Pembroke Road Corridor Study and Plan, that the Planning Commission, at their December 14 meeting, voted unanimously to recommend approval and adoption by City Council.

President Schweder referred the matter to the Community Development Committee.

8. REPORTS

A. President of Council

1. Councilmanic Appointment – Robert J. Donchez – Library Board

President Schweder reappointed Robert J. Donchez, 377 Devonshire Drive, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18017, to membership on the Library Board, effective until January 2010. Ms. Dolan and Mrs. Belinski sponsored Resolution 14,974 to confirm the appointment.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Resolution passed.

2. Councilmanic Appointment – Janet E. Greenleaf – Library Board

President Schweder reappointed Janet E. Greenleaf, 309 Pine Top Trail, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18017, to membership on the Library Board, effective until January 2010. Mr. Donchez and Ms. Dolan sponsored Resolution 14,975 to confirm the appointment.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Resolution passed.

B. Mayor

1. Administrative Order – Iris Linares – Bethlehem Housing Authority
Mayor John B. Callahan appointed Iris Linares to the Bethlehem Housing Authority effective until October 2011. Mr. Donchez and Ms. Dolan sponsored Resolution 14,976 to confirm the appointment.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Resolution passed.

2. Administrative Order – Stephen Chanitz – Officers' and Employees' Retirement Board

Mayor John B. Callahan reappointed Stephen Chanitz to the Officers' and Employees' Retirement Board effective until November 2010. Mr. Donchez and Ms. Dolan sponsored Resolution 14,977 to confirm the appointment.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Resolution passed.

3. Administrative Order – Charles Shoemaker – Codes Board of Appeals

Mayor Callahan reappointed Charles Shoemaker to the Codes Board of Appeals effective until October 2009. Ms. Dolan and Mrs. Belinski sponsored Resolution 14,978 to confirm the appointment.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Resolution passed.

4. Administrative Order – Lee Snyder – Codes Board of Appeals

Mayor Callahan reappointed Lee Snyder to the Codes Board of Appeals effective until October 2009. Ms. Dolan and Mrs. Belinski sponsored Resolution 14,979 to confirm the appointment.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Resolution passed.

5. Administrative Order – Jessica L. Lee – Fine Arts Commission

Mayor Callahan reappointed Jessica L. Lee to the Fine Arts Commission effective until December 2009. Mr. Donchez and Ms. Dolan sponsored Resolution 14,980 to confirm the appointment.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Resolution passed.

State Grants

Mayor Callahan affirmed that Governor Rendell came to Bethlehem yesterday with grants for various projects, congratulated the organizations and thanked them for their efforts. Mayor Callahan informed the assembly that from 1993 to the present the City had received $12 million over the last 13 years in State capital assistance of $4.5 million for the National Museum for Industrial History, $5 million for construction of Zoellner Arts Center, and $2.5 million for Riverport. Mayor Callahan highlighted the fact that yesterday the City received $14 million that was more than during the entire past 13 years. Mayor Callahan enumerated that the grants presented yesterday were $5 million for Northampton Community College for the Fowler Center on the South Side, $5 million for ArtsQuest and PBS 39 to begin the SteelStax project, $2.5 million for Historic Bethlehem Partnership for capital projects, and $1.5 million for the Technology Center at LVIP VII. Mayor Callahan pointed out that the projects will help bring jobs and will support a lot of different areas in the City. Mayor Callahan publicly thanked the Governor and everyone who had a part in the effort.

C. Finance Committee

Mr. Leeson, Chairman of the Finance Committee, presented an oral report of the Committee’s meeting held December 5, 2006 on the following subject: Bethlehem Authority – Finances, and noted the appropriate 2007 Budget amendments will be voted on this evening.

C. Human Resources and Environment Committee

Ms. Dolan, Chairwoman of the Human Resources and Environment Committee, presented an oral report of the Committee's meeting held this evening, December 19, 2006, prior to the City Council Meeting on the following subjects: MIPP Quality Control Coordinator – Upgrade, and Water Quality Manager – Upgrade.

9. ORDINANCES FOR FINAL PASSAGE

A. Bill No. 43 – 2006 – Adopting the 2007 General Fund Budget

The Clerk read Bill No. 43 – 2006 – Adopting the General Fund Budget, on Final Reading.

Amendment No. 1 to Bill No. 43 – 2006

The Clerk read Amendment No. 1 to Bill No. 43 – 2006, sponsored by Ms. Dolan and Mrs. Belinski, as follows:

That the following sections which read as follows:
SECTION 2. Appropriations in the sum of Fifty-Eight Million, Two Hundred Sixty-Two Thousand ($58,262,000) Dollars are hereby made from the General Fund as follows:

To the Council:
Personal Services $ 163,480
Purchase of Services 95,885
Materials and Supplies 0
Equipment 0

TOTAL $ 259,365

To the Mayor:
Personal Services $ 155,534
Purchase of Services 5,535
Materials and Supplies 1,400
Equipment 0

TOTAL $ 162,469

To the Controller:
Personal Services $ 196,982
Purchase of Services 4,270
Materials and Supplies 0
Equipment 0

TOTAL $ 201,252

To the Treasurer:
Personal Services $ 1,000
Purchase of Services 0
Materials and Supplies 0
Equipment 0

TOTAL $ 1,000

To the Bureau of Law:
Personal Services $ 214,886
Purchase of Services 6,000
Materials and Supplies 0
Equipment 0

TOTAL $ 220,886

To the Department of Administration:
Personal Services $ 1,570,968
Purchase of Services 290,267
Materials and Supplies 94,850
Equipment 64,900

TOTAL $ 2,020,985

To the Department of Community and
Economic Development:
Personal Services $ 3,155,887
Purchase of Services 2,282,530
Materials and Supplies 127,912
Equipment 388,540

TOTAL $ 5,954,869

To the Department of Parks and
Public Property:
Personal Services $ 2,730,811
Purchase of Services 1,382,275
Materials and Supplies 195,200
Equipment 43,095

TOTAL $ 4,351,381

To the Department of Public Works:
Personal Services $ 2,369,674
Purchase of Services 1,784,170
Materials and Supplies 209,697
Equipment 15,370

TOTAL $ 4,378,911

To the Department of Police:
Personal Services $ 9,262,224
Purchase of Services 238,043
Materials and Supplies 514,252
Equipment 0

TOTAL $10,014,519

To the Department of Fire:
Personal Services $ 7,383,626
Purchase of Services 158,980
Materials and Supplies 272,820
Equipment 70,600

TOTAL $ 7,886,026

To General and Civic Expenses:
Office Supplies, Postage, Equipment
Maintenance, and Communications $ 254,500

Insurance, Social Security,
Unemployment Comp., Workers Comp.,
Pensions, Accumulated Sick Leave,
Heart and Lung Act, Trust Payments,
Defined Contribution Plan Match $12,681,575

Landfill Transfer $ 883,482
Refunds and Prior Year's Encumbrances $ 85,000

Unforeseen Contingencies,
Professional Services Expenses $ 954,421

Memorial Day Decorations, Fourth of
July Celebration, Halloween Parade,
Music Fund $ 60,900

U.S. Conference of Mayors 5,500

Senior Citizens, PA League
of Cities Dues, Fine Arts Commission
[Bach Choir] $ 73,400
Library $ 1,095,000
Debt Service $ 6,716,559
TOTAL $ 22,810,337

shall be amended to read as follows:

SECTION 2. Appropriations in the sum of Fifty Eight Million, Three Hundred Sixty-Two Thousand ($58,362,000) Dollars are hereby made from the General Fund as follows:

To the Council:
Personal Services $ 167,480
Purchase of Services 87,385
Materials and Supplies 0
Equipment 0

TOTAL $ 254,865

To the Mayor:
Personal Services $ 155,534
Purchase of Services 5,535
Materials and Supplies 1,400
Equipment 0

TOTAL $ 162,469

To the Controller:
Personal Services $ 149,662
Purchase of Services 4,270
Materials and Supplies 0
Equipment 0

TOTAL $ 153,932

To the Treasurer:
Personal Services $ 1,000
Purchase of Services 0
Materials and Supplies 0
Equipment 0

TOTAL $ 1,000

To the Bureau of Law:
Personal Services $ 214,886
Purchase of Services 6,000
Materials and Supplies 0
Equipment 0

TOTAL $ 220,886

To the Department of Administration:
Personal Services $ 1,582,771
Purchase of Services 288,267
Materials and Supplies 93,450
Equipment 64,900

TOTAL $ 2,029,388
To the Department of Community and
Economic Development:
Personal Services $ 3,147,887
Purchase of Services 2,266,995
Materials and Supplies 127,412
Equipment 388,540

TOTAL $ 5,930,834

To the Department of Parks and
Public Property:
Personal Services $ 2,726,811
Purchase of Services 1,382,275
Materials and Supplies 193,700
Equipment 43,095

TOTAL $ 4,345,881

To the Department of Public Works:
Personal Services $ 2,338,674
Purchase of Services 1,782,170
Materials and Supplies 208,197
Equipment 15,370

TOTAL $ 4,344,411

To the Department of Police:
Personal Services $ 9,328,502
Purchase of Services 238,043
Materials and Supplies 514,252
Equipment 0

TOTAL $10,080,797

To the Department of Fire:
Personal Services $ 7,252,356
Purchase of Services 158,980
Materials and Supplies 268,320
Equipment 70,600

TOTAL $ 7,750,256

To General and Civic Expenses:
Office Supplies, Postage, Equipment
Maintenance, and Communications $ 254,500

Insurance, Social Security,
Unemployment Comp., Workers Comp.,
Pensions, Accumulated Sick Leave,
Heart and Lung Act, Trust Payments,
Defined Contribution Plan Match $12,760,749
Landfill Transfer $ 883,482
Refunds and Prior Year's Encumbrances $ 85,000

Unforeseen Contingencies,
Professional Services Expenses $ 1,157,191

Memorial Day Decorations, Fourth of
July Celebration, Halloween Parade,
Music Fund $ 60,900

U.S. Conference of Mayors 5,500

Senior Citizens, PA League
of Cities Dues, Fine Arts Commission $ 68,400
Library $ 1,095,000
Debt Service $ 6,716,559
TOTAL $ 23,087,281

Ms. Dolan affirmed she was in the minority in voting on an amendment at the Final Budget meeting on December 12 that cut the $5,000 in funding for the Bach Choir’s 100th anniversary celebration from the Proposed 2007 Budget. As a result, Ms. Dolan noted she would need to ask someone else to make the motion to reconsider the cut.

President Schweder, confirming that only Members who voted on the prevailing side may move and second a motion for reconsideration, asked if any Members who voted in the affirmative have a reconsideration motion at this time. No Members of Council made a motion.

Voting AYE on Amendment No. 1 to Bill No. 43 – 2006: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Amendment passed.

Amendment No. 2 to Bill No. 43 – 2006

The Clerk read Amendment No. 2 to Bill No. 43 – 2006, sponsored by Mr. Donchez and Ms. Dolan, as follows:

That the following sections which read as follows:

SECTION 2. Appropriations in the sum of Fifty-Eight Million, Three Hundred Sixty-Two Thousand ($58,362,000) Dollars are hereby made from the General Fund as follows:

To the Department of Administration:
Personal Services $[1,582,771]
Purchase of Services 288,267
Materials and Supplies 93,450
Equipment 64,900
TOTAL $[2,029,388]

To the Department of Fire:
Personal Services $ 7,252,356
Purchase of Services 158,980
Materials and Supplies 268,320
Equipment 70,600
TOTAL $ 7,750,256

Insurance, Social Security, Unemployment
Comp., Workers Comp.,
Pensions, Accumulated Sick Leave,
Heart and Lung Act, Trust Payments,
Defined Contribution Plan Match $[12,760,749]

Shall be amended to read as follows:

SECTION 2. Appropriations in the sum of Fifty-Eight Million, Three Hundred Sixty-Two Thousand ($58,362,000) Dollars are hereby made from the General Fund as follows:

To the Department of Administration:
Personal Services $ 1,585,158
Purchase of Services 290,267
Materials and Supplies 94,850
Equipment 64,900
TOTAL $ 2,031,775

To the Department of Fire:
Personal Services $ 7,383,626
Purchase of Services 158,980
Materials and Supplies 270,820
Equipment 70,600
TOTAL $ 7,752,756

Insurance, Social Security, Unemployment
Comp., Workers Comp.,
Pensions, Accumulated Sick Leave,
Heart and Lung Act, Trust Payments,
Defined Contribution Plan Match $12,755,862

Mr. Donchez first clarified that when he proposed amendments at the Final Budget Meeting on December 12 in order to provide funding for an additional Police Officer he did not intend to make any cuts in the Water Fund and Sewer Fund. Mr. Donchez further advised at that time he did not realize a decrease he had proposed in the Human Resources Bureau was actually a portion of the salary of the Compliance Officer, and the amendment will reinstate the amount. In addition, Mr. Donchez informed the Members that he spoke with the Fire Commissioner concerning supplies that were planned to be purchased that would not be possible as a result of the decrease he had proposed in the Fire Department’s budget. Mr. Donchez notified the Members that the amendment will reinstate that amount as well. Mr. Donchez confirmed there will still be sufficient funding for an additional Police Officer following reinstatements in the Human Resources Bureau and Fire Department budgets.

Voting AYE on Amendment No. 2 to Bill No. 43 – 2006: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Amendment passed.

Amendment No. 3 to Bill No. 43 – 2006

The Clerk read Amendment No. 3 to Bill No. 43 – 2006, sponsored by Mrs. Belinski and Mr. Leeson, as follows:

That the following sections which read as follows:

SECTION 2. Appropriations in the sum of Fifty-Eight Million, Three Hundred Sixty-Two Thousand ($58,362,000) Dollars are hereby made from the General Fund as follows:

To the Department of Community and
Economic Development:
Personal Services $ 3,147,887
Purchase of Services 2,266,995
Materials and Supplies 127,412
Equipment 388,540

TOTAL $ 5,930,834

Insurance, Social Security, Unemployment
Comp., Workers Comp.,
Pensions, Accumulated Sick Leave,
Heart and Lung Act, Trust Payments,
Defined Contribution Plan Match $12,755,862

Unforeseen Contingencies, 1,157,191
Professional Services Expenses

Shall be amended to read as follows:

SECTION 2. Appropriations in the sum of Fifty-Eight Million, Three Hundred Sixty-Two Thousand ($58,362,000) Dollars are hereby made from the General Fund as follows:

To the Department of Community and
Economic Development:
Personal Services $ 3,147,887
Purchase of Services 2,266,995
Materials and Supplies 127,412
Equipment 418,540

TOTAL $ 5,960,834

Insurance, Social Security, Unemployment
Comp., Workers Comp.,
Pensions, Accumulated Sick Leave,
Heart and Lung Act, Trust Payments,
Defined Contribution Plan Match $12,725,862

Unforeseen Contingencies,
Professional Services Expenses 1,133,156

Voting AYE on Amendment No. 3 to Bill No. 43 – 2006: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Amendment passed.

Voting AYE on Bill No. 43 – 2006, as Amended: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, and Ms. Szabo, 6. Voting NAY: Mr. Schweder, 1. Bill No. 43 – 2006, hereafter to be known as Ordinance 4407, was declared adopted.

B. Bill No. 44 – 2006 – Adopting the 2007 Water Fund Budget

The Clerk read Bill No. 44 – 2006 – Adopting the Water Fund Budget, on Final Reading.

Amendment No. 1 to Bill No. 44 – 2006

The Clerk read Amendment No. 1 to Bill No. 44 – 2006, sponsored by Mrs. Belinski and Mr. Leeson, as follows:

That the following amendment be made:

That the following line items under Purchase of Services which read as follows:

Purchase of Services 13,945,779
Notes Payable [717,593]
Lease Rental [6,217,109]
Capital Appropriation [588,868]

Shall be amended to read as follows:

Purchase of Services 13,945,779
Notes Payable 1,388,000
Lease Rental 6,135,520
Capital Appropriation 0

Mr. Leeson observed there have been some interesting exchanges of numbers over the last week. Turning to a comment made earlier that the Bethlehem Authority would like to avoid having to come back and review various items with City Council in the next 12 months, Mr. Leeson stated he cannot accept that viewpoint. Mr. Leeson remarked that is what led to the problems being faced now with the water system, the absence of funds that were there and intended for this purpose, the poor decisions made years ago concerning the original design and construction of the Water Filtration Plant, and absence of adequate oversight by City Council. He expressed that the issue is now on the right track to adequately fund the system, and on the other hand have the Bethlehem Authority justify what they want to do. Mr. Leeson noted that currently not only do they not know what they want to do but they do not know the cost to fix the Water Filtration Plant. Mr. Leeson restated he feels the proposal puts the matter on the right track for Council to exercise oversight with respect to management of the system and finances. Mr. Leeson said the $15 million in additional debt proposed by the Bethlehem Authority is a series of balloon payments that is the single most expensive form of debt financing since the interest is postponed to the end of the loan. Mr. Leeson highlighted the fact that the City’s estimated overall debt burden is high at $3,317 per person in the City. Until the options to fix the Water Filtration Plant are clarified, Mr. Leeson communicated that City Council will look forward to working with the Bethlehem Authority on the problem but needs to exercise oversight. Mr. Leeson encouraged the Members of Council to support the amendment.

Ms. Dolan stated the proposal from the Bethlehem Authority and its advisors was months in the planning, created by expert, independent consultants and City employees who are paid to advise Council, that took two and a half hours to explain and justify, and nearly all in attendance agreed the proposal was clear and understood by Council. Ms. Dolan stressed that no one expressed concerns at the end of the two and a half hours that they were not clear on the proposal. Ms. Dolan noted the proposal of the Finance Committee was reactionary, only weeks in the planning, created by a Council Committee Chair and approved by a City Council Committee, took roughly ten minutes to explain and justify, that she has yet to see in writing, and was limited in discussion to under one hour. Highlighting the fact that the proposal has not been looked at outside of City Council and has not been examined by anyone outside of City Council, Ms. Dolan observed all the people who are hired, paid, and who are relied on tell the Members it is a bad idea. Remarking she would not have surgery based on those odds, Ms. Dolan noted she would probably consult more than one expert. Ms. Dolan said in her position as a teacher and a Member of Council for a year, she is not comfortable going with a proposal she has never seen in writing and only heard discussed for under an hour.

President Schweder thought it is important for everyone to understand the voodoo economics that went through with the proposal sent to City Council and what has occurred over the last week. President Schweder pointed out he reviewed the proposal for an hour this morning trying to determine the figure that the Bethlehem Authority said they needed for their program because it changed twice within the last 36 hours. President Schweder credited Alan Blair, City Controller, for working last night and this morning in looking at the figures. President Schweder noted that Mrs. Belinski shared with the Members a copy of correspondence from PRAG, the financial advisor to the Authority, alerting the Board to be careful because figures that had been presented in the past by Mr. Brong and the City were inaccurate. The figure of what was needed went from $800,000 to $1.1 million and then back to $800,000 tonight. President Schweder communicated what Council had been told through the entire process was this was to be done for certain reasons and he is convinced that it is not. President Schweder remarked the interest that would go into the Bond Redemption and Improvement Fund is money being moved around and is again being turned over to the City for operating expenses. President Schweder stressed the $250,000 giveback is nothing more than a shell game. President Schweder pointed out that the door is not being closed on anything under Mr. Leeson’s proposal. Rather, a decision will be made over the next month or two before the Bond Issue is finalized on how Council wants to go about this matter. President Schweder expressed the belief that Council has the responsibility to do so and to review the matter going forward. Commenting he is not sure anyone at the table can adequately defend what was presented by the Bethlehem Authority, President Schweder noted perhaps at some point they will but tonight is not the time for that. In light of long discussions that Councilwoman Szabo had with Richard Master, Chairman of the Bethlehem Authority, President Schweder suggested that the discussions continue, and all the figures should be looked at again. Among the questions are why the BRIF does not have the level of funding it had years ago when there was $8-$10 million in the account, how the current situation was reached, and what should be done to ensure that the system is solvent but that the same predicament is not faced in a year or two. President Schweder stressed there are no provisions in the program advanced by the Bethlehem Authority to prevent them from doing the same things all over again. President Schweder, expressing the belief that of the Bills that are passed tonight there is nothing in them at least for now that would be any part of the restructuring, queried if that is a fair statement.

Dennis Reichard, Business Administrator, replied yes.

President Schweder suggested that Mr. Leeson’s proposal makes perfect sense at this point because the numbers submitted to City Council have changed over the last two or three days.

Ms. Dolan asked that a number of things be taken into consideration as the matter moves forward beyond this evening. Ms. Dolan requested if a plan is going to be put forth that it be given to the Members of Council in writing, that equal amounts of time be given, that any proposal put forth be looked at independently, and that the Members be given as much information as needed to make wise decisions. Ms. Dolan expressed she felt the Members had that information, and realizes the door is not being shut. Ms. Dolan said in principle, because she cannot make a decision based on an option about which she knows so little, she will be voting against it. Ms. Dolan expressed her hope that the second opportunity is handled differently than this one.

President Schweder denoted that the timing used by Mr. Leeson is appropriate under Robert’s Rules and Council’s Rules.

Voting AYE on Amendment No. 1 to Bill No. 44 - 2006: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 5. Voting NAY: Ms. Dolan, and Mr. Mowrer, 2. The Amendment passed.

Ms. Szabo, affirming she met for a very long time with Mr. Master and was appreciative of that opportunity, said she learned a lot from talking to him. Ms. Szabo, expressing that the discussion phase of the relationship has been opened, stated it should continue very rapidly to see that it does not stop and there is communication with the Bethlehem Authority, and the issue is worked on in a timely way before any rash decisions are made about rate increases and other matters. Ms. Szabo requested that this conversation continue with the Bethlehem Authority and others involved. Ms. Szabo stressed because of the information received in the last couple of days she is very concerned.

Mr. Mowrer commented he was going to vote against the Amendment because he felt the Bethlehem Authority had made the recommendation, the experts have made the recommendation as well as the Administration, and he felt an obligation to go along with them.

Amendment No. 2 to Bill No. 44 – 2006

The Clerk read Amendment No. 2 to Bill No. 44 – 2006, sponsored by Mrs. Belinski and Mr. Leeson, as follows:

That the following amendment be made:

From: Water Quality Manager – 32 T - $67,440

To: Water Quality Manager – 30 T - $ 61,164

Mrs. Belinski advised she has investigated the matter and the person promoted into the position does not have a Class A license in water. Stating that Council is being asked to take a leap of faith when it is known there are six employees under the position and the budget is $545,000, Mrs. Belinski contrasted the position with other grade 32 positions who have numbers of employees ranging from 24 to 43 and budgets exceeding a low of $988,000. Mrs. Belinski noted the savings are $6,276 in the Water Department as a result of the personnel reorganization. Mrs. Belinski informed the Members that she would like the position brought back to grade 30 from the grade 32 level.

Mr. Leeson inquired about the reasoning behind the recommendation of the Human Resources and Environment Committee that met prior to this evening’s Council Meeting on the matter.

Chairwoman Dolan explained the Human Resources and Environment Committee was given information that expressed the cost benefits. Ms. Dolan noted that, since the salary upgrade was part of a restructuring plan, the matter initially went before the Public Works Committee. Affirming the reorganization would result in a cost savings to the City, Ms. Dolan stated it was accomplished partly through attrition and putting together various positions. Focusing on concerns about qualifications, Ms. Dolan expressed the belief that since that time the educational issues and certifications are no longer an issue. Ms. Dolan continued on to say it was her understanding that the individuals actually have for two and a half years already been doing the duties that have greatly increased over the former duties. Ms. Dolan advised the comments from the Committee members were to pass the matter forward to City Council for approval, and there were no negative comments. Ms. Dolan stated based on what was explained to the Committee she thinks it is justified.

Mrs. Belinski, pointing out that for years the City’s policy was upgrades are not proposed to be given until budget time, asserted these promotions were pushed through under the guise of restructuring. She continued on to say the only restructuring was the increase in these two salaries. Mrs. Belinski informed the Members that the individual has a Class A license in wastewater but still does not have a Class A license in water yet the individual is in charge of the water quality bureau. Mrs. Belinski, insisting the individual has not been doing the work all along, advised the hiring of the person in the settlement of the Lawrence case was done to make sure everything was accomplished and all the paperwork was processed, and she is not certain this individual understands that person’s job let alone is qualified to do it.

Voting AYE on Amendment No. 2 to Bill No. 44 - 2006: Mrs. Belinski and Mr. Schweder, 2. Voting NAY: Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, and Ms. Szabo, 5. The Amendment failed.

Voting AYE on Bill No. 44 – 2006, as Amended: Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, and Ms. Szabo, 5. Voting NAY: Mrs. Belinski and Mr. Schweder, 2. Bill No. 44 – 2006, hereafter to be known as Ordinance 4408, was declared adopted.

C. Bill No. 45 – 2006 – Adopting the 2007 Sewer Fund Budget

The Clerk read Bill No. 45 – 2006 – Adopting the 2007 Sewer Fund Budget, on Final Reading.

Amendment to Bill No. 45 – 2006

The Clerk read the Amendment to Bill No. 45 – 2006, sponsored by Mrs. Belinski and Mr. Leeson , as follows:

That the following amendment be made:

From: MIPP Coordinator/Quality Control Coordinator – 30 T - $ 61,164

To: MIPP Coordinator – 28 T - $ 55,508

Mrs. Belinski stated she would like the MIPP Coordinator position moved from grade 30 back to grade 28. Mrs. Belinski advised she asked Mr. Brong how he justifies the upgrade and he explained the additional responsibilities that the individual would take over. Continuing on to say she questioned how the individual can do the MIPP Coordinator job and take on the former quality control coordinator’s position, Mrs. Belinski related the response was there is a new setup, streamlining of duties, and elimination of data. Mrs. Belinski remarked basically what the individual is going to do is push a button. Mrs. Belinski, advising she asked who is really going to do the work, noted it will be divided among other people in the lab. Mrs. Belinski, wondering why they are not getting a raise, stressed this is not fair.

Ms. Dolan noted that when she was asked the question earlier by Mr. Leeson about the Committee’s review she was responding to both positions.

Mrs. Belinski pointed out the upgrade will give the person an additional $5,656 and employees at the sewer plant would get only 2%.

Voting AYE on the Amendment to Bill No. 45 - 2006: Mrs. Belinski and Mr. Schweder, 2. Voting NAY: Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, and Ms. Szabo, 5. The Amendment failed.

Voting AYE on Bill No. 45 – 2006: Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, 5. Voting NAY: Mrs. Belinski and Mr. Schweder, 2. Bill No. 45 – 2006, hereafter to be known as Ordinance 4409, was declared adopted.

D. Bill No. 46 – 2006 – Adopting the 2007 Golf Course Enterprise Fund Budget

The Clerk read Bill No. 46 – 2006 – Adopting the 2007 Golf Course Enterprise Fund Budget, on Final Reading.

Voting AYE on Bill No. 46 – 2006: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. Bill No. 46 – 2006, hereafter to be known as Ordinance 4410, was declared adopted.

E. Bill No. 47 – 2006 – Adopting the 2007 Liquid Fuels Fund Budget

The Clerk read Bill No. 47 – 2006 – Adopting the 2007 Liquid Fuels Fund Budget, on Final Reading.

Voting AYE on Bill No. 47 – 2006: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. Bill No. 47 – 2006, hereafter to be known as Ordinance 4411, was declared adopted.

F. Bill No. 48 – 2006 – Adopting the 2007 Capital Budget for Non-Utilities

The Clerk read Bill No. 48 – 2006 – Adopting the 2007 Capital Budget for Non-Utilities, on Final Reading.

Amendment to Bill No. 48 – 2006

The Clerk read the Amendment to Bill No. 45 – 2006, sponsored by Mr. Leeson and Mr. Mowrer, as follows:

That the following sections which read as follows:

SECTION 2. Appropriations in the sum of Twelve Million, Ninety Thousand, Two Hundred Twenty ($12,090,220) Dollars are hereby made from the sources indicated in Section 3 hereof as follows:

Public Safety:
Ambulance Replacement Plan $ 150,000
Fire Apparatus Replacement Plan 419,000
Police Equipment 41,800
Vehicle Purchases 368,810
Trunking Radio System 4,600,000

Total Public Safety $ 5,579,610

SECTION 3. The expenditures listed in Section 2 hereof shall be made from the following sources:

2007 Bond $ 8,879,610
2005 Bond 590,431
2003 Bond 21,700
2001 Bond 110,400
Federal & PA Grants 1,479,813
County Grants 80,000
Cash/Misc. 928,266

TOTAL $ 12,090,220

Shall be amended to read as follows:

SECTION 2. Appropriations in the sum of Twelve Million, Sixty Thousand, Two Hundred Twenty ($12,060,220) Dollars are hereby made from the sources indicated in Section 3 hereof as follows:

Public Safety:
Ambulance Replacement Plan $ 150,000
Fire Apparatus Replacement Plan 419,000
Police Equipment 41,800
Vehicle Purchases 338,810
Trunking Radio System 4,600,000

Total Public Safety $ 5,549,610

SECTION 3. The expenditures listed in Section 2 hereof shall be made from the following sources:

2007 Bond $ 8,849,610
2005 Bond 590,431
2003 Bond 21,700
2001 Bond 110,400
Federal & PA Grants 1,479,813
County Grants 80,000
Cash/Misc. 928,266

TOTAL $ 12,060,220

Voting AYE on the Amendment to Bill No. 48 – 2006: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Amendment passed.

Voting AYE on Bill No. 48 – 2006, as Amended: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. Bill No. 48 – 2006, hereafter to be known as Ordinance 4412, was declared adopted.

G. Bill No. 49 – 2006 – Adopting the 2007 Capital Budget for Water Utilities

The Clerk read Bill No. 49 – 2006 – Adopting the 2007 Capital Budget for Water Utilities, on Final Reading.

Amendment to Bill No. 49 – 2006

The Clerk read the Amendment to Bill No. 49 – 2006, sponsored by Mrs. Belinski and Mr. Leeson, as follows:

That Section 3 which reads as follows:

SECTION 3. The expenditures listed in Section 2 hereof shall be made from the following
sources:

Bond Redemption and Improvement Fund - Bethlehem Authority [3,803,409]
Water Budget Operating Fund (Non-Bethlehem Authority Funded) 0
Land Sale 0
Capital Appropriations [588,868]

TOTAL 4,392,277

Shall be amended to read as follows:

SECTION 3. The expenditures listed in Section 2 hereof shall be made from the following
sources:

Bond Redemption and Improvement Fund - Bethlehem Authority 3,200,000
Water Budget Operating Fund (Non-Bethlehem Authority Funded) 0
Land Sale 0
Capital Appropriations 0
General Obligation Bond Issue - 2007 1,192,277

TOTAL 4,392,277

Voting AYE on the Amendment to Bill No. 49 – 2006: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Amendment passed.

Voting AYE on Bill No. 49 – 2006, as Amended: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. Bill No. 49 – 2006, hereafter to be known as Ordinance 4413, was declared adopted.

H. Bill No. 50 – 2006 – Adopting the 2007 Capital Budget for Sewer Utilities

The Clerk read Bill No. 50 – 2006 – Adopting the 2007 Capital Budget for Sewer Utilities, on Final Reading.

Voting AYE on Bill No. 50 – 2006: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. Bill No. 50 – 2006, hereafter to be known as Ordinance 4414, was declared adopted.

I. Bill No. 51 – 2006 – Adopting the 2007 Community Development Budget

The Clerk read Bill No. 51 – 2006 – Adopting the 2007 Community Development Budget, on Final Reading.

Voting AYE on Bill No. 51 – 2006: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. Bill No. 51 – 2006, hereafter to be known as Ordinance 4415, was declared adopted.

J. Bill No. 52 – 2006 – Adopting the 2007 9-1-1 Fund Budget

The Clerk read Bill No. 52 – 2006 – Adopting the 2007 9-1-1 Fund Budget, on Final Reading.

Voting AYE on Bill No. 52 – 2006: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. Bill No. 52 – 2006, hereafter to be known as Ordinance 4416, was declared adopted.

K. Bill No. 53 – 2006 – Fixing the 2007 Tax Rate for All City Purposes

The Clerk read Bill No. 53 – 2006 – Fixing the 2007 Tax Rate for All City Purposes, on Final Reading.

President Schweder stated he will vote against the Bill because he cannot believe the numbers that appear in these proposals, and over the long run they could have devastating effects to the financial well-being of the City.

Voting AYE on Bill No. 53 – 2006: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, and Ms. Szabo, 6. Voting NAY: Mr. Schweder, 1. Bill No. 53 – 2006, hereafter to be known as Ordinance 4417, was declared adopted.

L. Bill No. 55 – 2006 – Establishing City of Bethlehem Environmental Advisory Council (EAC)

The Clerk read Bill No. 55 – 2006 – Establishing City of Bethlehem Environmental Advisory Council (EAC), on Final Reading.

Amendments to Section 4 and Section 9 of Bill No. 55 – 2006

The Clerk read Amendments to Section 4 and Section 9 of Bill No. 55 – 2006, sponsored by Mr. Leeson and Mr. Mowrer, as follows:

That Section 4 which reads as follows:

Section 4. Environmental Advisory Council members shall receive no compensation for their services [, but may be reimbursed for the expenses actually and necessarily incurred by them in the performance of their duties] .

Shall be amended to read as follows:

Section 4. Environmental Advisory Council members shall receive no compensation for their services.

That Section 9 which reads as follows:

Section 9. [Bethlehem City Council may, from time to time, appropriate funds for the expenses incurred by the Environmental Advisory Council.]

Shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

Section 9. Three years from the date of enactment of this Ordinance, a review shall be conducted by City Council of the work of the Environmental Advisory Council
and a determination shall be made concerning renewal or non-renewal of the Environmental Advisory Council for another three year period.

President Schweder, recalling Ms. Dolan had raised the question at the last City Council Meeting as to whether the amendments to Section 4 and Section 9 of the Bill could each be considered as separate votes, stated it would be the Chair’s ruling they are divisible.

Mr. Leeson, noting he had suggested the two amendments, explained the proposal to amend Section 4 is to delete the reference to reimbursing Environmental Advisory Council members for their expenses. Mr. Leeson noted to the best of his recollection that is not done for any other municipal body. Turning to comments made this evening that a good environmental policy costs money, Mr. Leeson said that is correct. He emphasized the amendment does not rule out or preclude the option of the Environmental Advisory Council coming forth in the budgetary cycle to justify expenditures on items, but it does not automatically provide for reimbursing the members for their expenses. Mr. Leeson explained another of his concerns is that, in observing this type of language in the operation of other government agencies, sometimes the agencies will consider the language an implied endorsement for incurring expenses without obtaining prior approval and oversight by the legislature. Mr. Leeson restated it is not his intent to prevent the body from coming forward at a future date and justifying expenses for a particular study, for example.

Ms. Dolan clarified that the current language in Section 4 does not authorize reimbursement because it simply says the members may be reimbursed for expenses in the performance of their duties. Ms. Dolan argued by striking the language the opportunity is not given to perhaps reimburse the members. Ms. Dolan pointed out the 2007 Budget contains funding for continuing education for Communications Bureau personnel and other examples for reimbursement of expenses incurred in the performance of duties. Ms. Dolan observed, if the Ordinance were passed, it is quite possible that a small number of expenditures may be incurred and would have to come before City Council on which there is the option of voting yes or no. Ms. Dolan stated by cutting off that option it sends both a negative message and denies Council the opportunity from time to time to appropriate funds for expenses.

Mr. Mowrer inquired if the members of the Bethlehem Authority Board have expense accounts or are reimbursed for going to meetings. Mr. Tallarico, Board member, replied no. Mr. Mowrer, expressing that is the way he is looking at it, noted he is not convinced any of the other Authorities or the Fine Arts Commission, for example, receive reimbursement.

Mr. Donchez thought the only board members that receive reimbursement are the members of the Zoning Hearing Board.

Ms. Dolan pointed out the situation is unique in that the language utilized in the Ordinance was language drafted at the State level. Recounting that she and Ms. Szabo attended a regional EAC meeting, Ms. Dolan explained the regional EAC’s were budgeted by their municipalities amounts ranging from $1,000 to $20,000. The larger expenditures occurred where there were no recycling facilities, and the average reimbursements for expenditures for EAC’s were $1,000 to $5,000. Ms. Dolan reiterated the language contained in the Bill leaves open the opportunity for reimbursement of requested expenses in service to the community.

President Schweder thought what Mr. Leeson was equating the matter to was the Historic Board who are advisory. President Schweder, highlighting the fact that the EAC will not be an arm of City government, affirmed it is going to be an advisory board. President Schweder questioned who may reimburse the EAC.

Ms. Dolan, commenting it would probably have to be worked out in the by-laws that would have to be approved by City Council, observed a Member of Council will be on the EAC.

President Schweder observed no other board would have by-laws by which they could determine what were actually or necessary expenses incurred. President Schweder again questioned who within City government may reimburse the EAC, and asked where in the City Ordinances are definitions of expenses actually and necessarily incurred.

Ms. Dolan thought the problem comes down to Civic Expenses which is probably where the EAC eventually should be budgeted, but that cannot be done at this point for next year because the 2007 Budget has already been approved. Ms. Dolan said her recommendation would be that next year the EAC submit a budget under Civic Expenses. Ms. Dolan stated the language would carry through just for the first year.

President Schweder communicated that, while the arguments are meritorious, they are not accurate or legal since there is no line item in the budget that provides for it. President Schweder explained if this is what Ms. Dolan would envision doing next year then probably all would be supportive after a year’s study. He thought the language at least for the next year as Mr. Leeson envisions it would make sense.

Ms. Szabo pointed out there is no description of what the expenses may be, and the amount of money. Ms. Szabo noted the two Historic Boards are good examples in that they do not have a specified budget; however, as they have needs for printing, for example, the City takes care of that but it is not written in their duties or agreement, there is no set amount, and no budget. It has to be a specified request and approved through the system.

Vote on Amendment to Section 4 of Bill No. 55 – 2006

Voting AYE on the Amendment to Section 4 of Bill No. 55 – 2006: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 6. Voting NAY: Ms. Dolan, 1. The Amendment to Section 4 passed.

Amendment to Section 9 of Bill No. 55 – 2006

Mr. Leeson, commenting that Section 9 was somewhat duplicative of Section 4 and needed to be addressed as well, explained new Section 9 is to put a sunset provision on the Environmental Advisory Council which he thought was something that needs to start being done with new City agencies. Mr. Leeson noted he has observed that when new government agencies are created, even if advisory, their work needs to be reviewed periodically, they need to justify their existence, and need to show they are making a positive contribution. Mr. Leeson communicated it is a good provision to have not just with the EAC but with any other bodies that are created in the future.

Ms. Dolan expressed the sunset provision is a good idea and is something that should be done across the board. Ms. Dolan continued on to exemplify that the funding provision is for appropriate expenses such as a newsletter, or a conference. Ms. Dolan highlighted the fact that there will be no source of funding for the EAC from now until the next budget process. Pointing out an Environmental Advisory Council will be launched if so voted with zero funds, Ms. Dolan thought that was shortsighted in view of the small amount of funds they may request. Ms. Dolan advised she will be voting against the Amendment although in general she is pleased with the second part of the amendment.

Vote on Amendment to Section 9 of Bill No. 55 – 2006

Voting AYE on the Amendment to Section 9 of Bill No. 55 – 2006: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 6. Voting NAY: Ms. Dolan, 1. The Amendment to Section 9 passed.

Ms. Dolan affirmed to President Schweder that seven people will serve on the EAC. President Schweder asked how would the members be nominated and by whom. Ms. Dolan, noting people could send resumes and letters of interest, suggested that nominees be forwarded first to the Human Resources and Environment Committee for consideration and a recommendation to City Council. Ms. Dolan noted the State law that establishes EAC’s in Pennsylvania took root mostly in boroughs and townships, and Bethlehem would be the third city in the northeastern section of the State to adopt an EAC. Ms. Dolan added that the group would be guided by Jeanne Barrett Ortiz, Director of the EAC Network, who has a tremendous amount of experience in the formation of EAC’s, and can answer questions regarding the issue.

Additional Amendments to Bill No. 55 - 2006

President Schweder moved the following Amendments: each Member of Council shall appoint a member of the Environmental Advisory Council; and, that the language be removed that a Member of City Council be a member of the EAC as well as dictating any staff positions. President Schweder further moved that qualified individuals submit to the Members of Council their requests to be considered for appointment to the EAC, and that the terms of the EAC be staggered in relationship to the terms of office served by Members of City Council. Mr. Leeson seconded the Amendment.

Ms. Szabo, remarking it makes it very complicated, asked why it cannot be done by a majority as usual.

President Schweder noted his understanding is that the proposal is not by majority but that candidates be reviewed by the Human Resources and Environment Committee that would send a recommendation to City Council.

Ms. Dolan elucidated that was just a suggestion.

President Schweder commented there are too many open-ended parts to the proposal. President Schweder restated that recommendations should come from individual Members of Council, and then candidates would be appointed by the affirmative vote of Council.

Mr. Mowrer, questioning whether Council is ready to vote on the matter, thought the Committee should come out with some details on what they recommend. Mr. Mowrer moved to send the matter back to Committee for more details, on how it would work, how people would be nominated, and what the process would be. Mr. Donchez seconded the motion.

Ms. Dolan, affirming the matter has been to Committee twice already and these discussions have been held already, pointed out that every other EAC in Pennsylvania follows the proposed language mostly verbatim, manages to get off the ground and operate. She continued on to say some have been in operation for 30 years, and they do it with guidance from the State. Ms. Dolan asked that City Council let the Pennsylvania Environmental Council guide it through the process as it is followed consistently throughout the State and outlined in great detail in The EAC Handbook that was given to every Member of Council. Ms. Dolan noted all those issues are handled and are outlined in the book. Ms. Dolan observed what is needed is for City Council to allow the process to begin. Ms. Dolan observed what would happen in Committee is the members would again look at the book and Ms. Ortiz would say the same thing which is those are the details that are handled by the EAC itself as it forms its own by-laws. Ms. Dolan added there are examples in the book of by-laws that have been uniformly adopted across the State.

President Schweder expressed his concern is that Bills are not passed and details worked out after they become law. Observing there are too many things that are open-ended, President Schweder said he would particularly like to draw attention to the fact that Bethlehem is only the third city to adopt the legislation because it does concern him that most of the other communities that have done this are townships that do not have planning commissions, economic development departments, and all the other things that have been ceded to these groups. President Schweder continued on to communicate he is hesitant at this point, no matter how meritorious he thinks the proposal is in principle, because there are serious areas of conflict that could develop as the Bill is written now. President Schweder stated he would prefer, rather than seeing the matter fail now, that the proposal go back to Committee. President Schweder added he would be happy to work with the Chairwoman to address the issues and have the Bill back to Council quickly.

Ms. Dolan recounted during her meetings with Christopher Spadoni, City Council Solicitor, when the language was being drafted there was great emphasis on not being too specific and utilizing the language that was provided by the State since it had 30 years of success. Ms. Dolan, recalling she had various items to add to make the provisions more specific, noted both Ms. Barrett Ortiz and Attorney Spadoni felt that following the language that had been successful across the State nearly verbatim was the preferable approach.

Attorney Spadoni noted there were several amendments given to him by Mr. Crownfield and others that provided input for the redrafting of the proposal and he then redrafted it with Mr. Leeson’s comments. Attorney Spadoni, observing everyone wants it to be done right, commented it is an issue at present as to the formation and not the operation of the EAC. He stated that, given the discussion, the matter needs to be worked out.

Ms. Dolan inquired whether President Schweder’s proposed amendment to have each Member of City Council appoint a member to the EAC would be worked out in Committee.

President Schweder replied that his amendment as offered is withdrawn, and the proposal as it appears is re-referred to the Human Resources and Environment Committee. President Schweder continued on to say the Committee can work with other Members of Council to formulate approved language before the Bill comes back to Council. President Schweder affirmed that when it comes back it is still subject to amendment on Final Reading.

Ms. Dolan said she will vote against sending it back to Committee because she feels the Bill is suitable the way it is. However, Ms. Dolan respectfully asked if the Members of Council could attend the Committee meeting, and get their suggestions to her in writing so it is known as much in advance what Council’s concerns are and so that the time can be taken to look at the concerns of Council to avoid considering the matter one more time and at the last minute trying to answer questions.

Voting AYE on the motion to re-refer the Bill back to Human Resources and Environment Committee: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 6. Voting NAY: Ms. Dolan. 1. The motion passed.

10. NEW ORDINANCES

A. Bill No. 56 – 2006 – Rezoning 625-633 Montclair Avenue – I to RM

The Clerk read Bill No. 56 – 2006 – Rezoning 625-633 Montclair Avenue – I to RM, sponsored by Mr. Leeson and Mr. Mowrer, and titled:

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PART 13 OF THE CODIFIED ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA,
AS AMENDED, KNOWN AS THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA, BY AMENDING THE
CITY ZONING MAP.

Voting AYE on Bill No. 56 - 2006: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. Bill No. 56 – 2006 was declared passed on First Reading.

11. RESOLUTIONS

A. Authorizing Traffic Signal at Lynn Avenue and East Fourth Street

Mr. Donchez and Ms. Dolan sponsored Resolution 14,981 that authorized the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of East Fourth Street and Lynn Avenue, subject to the approval of the Department of Transportation and in accordance with the Pennsylvania Vehicle Code and the regulations for traffic signs, signals, and markings of the Department of Transportation.

Ms. Szabo expressed her gratitude for the installation that addresses the issue of the lack of a traffic light about which she has been inquiring and many people have been complaining in view of the difficulty in traveling in the area.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Resolution passed.

Motion – Considering Resolutions as a Group

Mr. Donchez and Mr. Mowrer moved to consider Resolutions 11 B through D as a group. Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The motion passed.

B. Certificate of Appropriateness – 424 Center Street

Ms. Dolan and Mrs. Belinski sponsored Resolution 14,982 that granted a Certificate of Appropriateness to install exterior lighting at 424 Center Street.

C. Certificate of Appropriateness – 38 West Market Street

Ms. Dolan and Mrs. Belinski sponsored Resolution 14,983 that granted a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the existing front porch and brick steps at 38 West Market Street.

D. Certificate of Appropriateness – 458 Main Street

Ms. Dolan and Mrs. Belinski sponsored Resolution 14,984 that granted a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a double-sided projecting sign at 458 Main Street.

Voting AYE on Resolutions 11 B through 11 D: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Resolutions passed.

12. NEW BUSINESS

Grants - Historic Bethlehem Partnership

Ms. Szabo asked if the Historic Bethlehem Partnership ever received an allotment from the grants program since it is for history and tourism, and the Bach Choir is for history and tourism.

Local Redevelopment Authority

Ms. Szabo, inquiring if the Local Redevelopment Authority has had any meetings, and where the groups stands, said as a member she has never been contacted.

Tony Hanna, Director of Community and Economic Development, responded there has not yet been a meeting.

President Schweder asked when and who will be calling a meeting.

Mr. Hanna replied that a meeting will be called sometime after the first of the year.

13. COURTESY OF THE FLOOR

International Music Awards

Artie Curatola, 813 Laufer Street, observed there has never been an international music awards and suggested that Bethlehem could be the first one to hold such a ceremony at Stabler Arena. Mr. Curatola continued on to say it would enhance Lehigh University, the arts, and the City, and enhance jobs in the City and neighboring cities. Mr. Curatola, remarking it is a win-win situation, said he has contacts to make things happen and suggested it could be held during Musikfest, could draw international acts, could enhance Musikfest and business.

Various Issues

Dean Bruch, 555 Spring Street, focusing on the Bethlehem Authority, wondered if Council would vote for an operating authority if given the opportunity tonight. Mr. Bruch, turning to the earlier discussions about employee credentials, suggested that Human Resources should describe the job and make sure the individuals have the proper credentials. Mr. Bruch requested a citizens review board to attend meetings of the Bethlehem Authority to find out what is wrong. Mr. Bruch observed the Police have the authority to go into a place and do something but then cannot act as part of the job they are required to perform because of laws protecting individuals. He further suggested that pictures be taken in the performance of Police duty.

Edwin Rodriquez, 1845 Linden Street, requested that the microphones be positioned so the public can hear what is said. Mr. Rodriquez said he would like to see surveillance cameras in the City to try to curtail crime, violence, and drug activity that he stressed is very bad. Mr. Rodriquez asked that the traffic light be fixed on East Fourth Street westbound at Hayes Street. Mr. Rodriquez communicated that some City staff do not do an efficient job. He exemplified he does not want to see a City truck go back over an area that has already been cleaned in view of the fact that there are a lot of areas in the City that need to be cleaned. Mr. Rodriquez added that litter needs to be picked up throughout the City.

Funding for Arts and Tourism

Dana Grubb, 2420 Henderson Place, responded to Ms. Szabo’s earlier question as to whether the Historic Bethlehem Partnership ever received an allotment from the grants program since it is for history and tourism. Mr. Grubb said that many non-profits involved in the arts and tourism have received Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding. However, none received funding for programs, and Mr. Grubb recalled the thinking was that program type needs should be funded out of the United Way and private fund raising. Noting that under Council’s Resolution CDBG funds were designed to provide assistance towards the physical property of an agency, Mr. Grubb enumerated that certain criteria had to be met including low-moderate income or slum/blight. Mr. Grubb pointed out it would not be appropriate to use CDBG funds for the Bach Choir’s programming.

Commerce Center Boulevard – Northampton County Funding

Robert Pfenning, 2830 Linden Street, said currently there is no legislation pending before Northampton County Council to fund the Commerce Center Boulevard project. Mr. Pfenning observed there is support on Northampton County Council for the idea of sharing funds that the City Administration and the County have worked out. Mr. Pfenning noted the Northampton County Solicitor pointed out in his ruling that the unexpended funds can only be used for approved projects under the County’s bond issue. Mr. Pfenning said there is nothing that Northampton County Council can do to move funds out of the bond fund treasury back into the Commerce Center Boulevard project because it is not part of the approved projects.

Pennsylvania Gaming Board Hearings

Mr. Pfenning, noting he attended the Pennsylvania Gaming Board Hearings, thought the Board members tried hard to look at the issues and reach a decision.

Planning Commission

Mr. Pfenning, expressing his concern that processes be followed, stated that a matter that came out of the Planning Commission was passed on to the Pennsylvania Gaming Board but is not what he heard at the October 31, 2006 Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Pfenning said he read in the newspaper that an attempt to correct the minutes was defeated.

Recreational Vehicle - Parking

Curtis Muschock, 1516-1530 Geraldine Street, advised there is a recreational vehicle parked in front of his apartment building since September that is about a foot short of the City Ordinance. Mr. Muschock exemplified anybody from anywhere can park their recreational vehicle in the City and do what they want to do such as drug dealers, rapists, etc. and harm someone living in his apartment building. Mr. Muschock informed the assembly that children who live in the apartments are afraid to play in the park across the street. Mr. Muschock said he would like a new Ordinance to be passed requiring recreational vehicles to be kept at the owner’s property or at a storage facility.

Garbage at Park

Mr. Muschock stated that at the park across from his apartment building nothing is being done with the garbage. Noting he wrote a letter to the Mayor, Mr. Muschock said there is not enough funding in the budget to erect a chain link fence to stop garbage from going into his yard. Mr. Muschock, communicating he would greatly appreciate it if something could be done, pointed out he has to spend money for someone to pick up the garbage.

City Council Meeting Minutes - September 19, 2006

Martin Romeril, 26 West Market Street, expressed his disappointment that his remarks made at the September 19, 2006 City Council Meeting were not included in those minutes approved this evening. Mr. Romeril, recounting he spoke about the safety of children and public playgrounds in relationship to the Zoning Ordinance text amendments addressing Licensed Gaming Facilities in the IR – Industrial Redevelopment District, felt that not including the comments of the public in the September 19, 2006 minutes gives the false impression that the people who spoke all said the same thing which is not an accurate record.

Planning Commission Meeting - October 31, 2006

Mr. Romeril, stating that at the December 5, 2006 City Council Meeting he mentioned his concern that the special Planning Commission meeting was scheduled on October 31, 2006 in order to make it difficult for the public to participate, queried if anything was found out about the matter. Asking what was the hurry for the October 31, 2006 Planning Commission meeting in view of the fact that there was a regularly scheduled meeting nine days later, Mr. Romeril thought it was so that there could be short notice and the public might not find out about the meeting and participate. Referring to the Planning Bureau’s webpage, Mr. Romeril pointed out it states that plans must be submitted 30 days before consideration at a meeting and wondered whether that time period was statutory or could be waived administratively. Stating that is a specific question, Mr. Romeril said the subject of the October 31, 2006 Planning Commission meeting was dated October 6 which is 25 days. Mr. Romeril noted his understanding is that the subject of the October 31, 2006 meeting was to vote on a preliminary land development plan and building plans from Sands-BethWorks dated October 6, 2006. Mr. Romeril quoted that the actual plans before the Commission were preliminary proposed architectural sketches rather than land development plans. Advising that at the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board hearing on December 6, 2006 Mr. Krauss said under oath that the group has preliminary site plan approval from the City of Bethlehem, Mr. Romeril asserted that is not what the Planning Commission voted on. Mr. Romeril related that at the last Planning Commission meeting he asked the Chairman why the Commission could not change the heading, and the Planning Commission Solicitor said the title is not substantive. Mr. Romeril stressed that people would be misled into believing Sands-Beth Works had received preliminary site approval. Mr. Romeril, expressing his frustration that this happened with this particular subject, questioned is everything the Sands brings up going to be put in a special meeting with 24 hours notice, or was there a particular reason that a special meeting was needed. Mr. Romeril wondered if this is going to be a continuing policy of the Administration and if Council is going to fight for public participation and notice of meetings.

President Schweder informed Mr. Romeril that the City Clerk did speak with Darlene Heller, Director of Planning, with respect to Mr. Romeril’s question raised at the December 5, 2006 City Council Meeting and a verbal response was provided. President Schweder informed Mr. Romeril that a response will be put in writing and forwarded to him. President Schweder notified Mr. Romeril it was at his direction that the September 19, 2006 City Council Meeting minutes be reduced.

Bruce Haines, 65 West Market Street, asked what oversight City Council has in regard to the Planning Commission, and said this is a clear misrepresentation of facts. Mr. Haines highlighted the fact that the Planning Commission would not revise their own minutes when a member of the Planning Commission pointed out that the title preliminary land development plan was not what was approved. Mr. Haines, referring to the Planning Commission minutes, noted the Solicitor stated there is no provision in the City for preliminary land development plan approval. Consequently, Mr. Haines questioned why would the Solicitor not want the words preliminary land development plan and building plans stricken from the minutes.

North Street and Guetter Street – Building Project

Mr. Haines noted an article in today’s Morning Call indicated that the building planned at North Street and Guetter Street has a ten year tax abatement for the hotel and retail complex, but not for the condominiums. Mr. Haines asked is that true.

Mayor Callahan replied yes.

Mr. Haines, asking did that change recently, questioned was it always intended to have a ten year tax abatement for that construction project.

Mayor Callahan, noting the question would be better answered by Tony Hanna, Director of Community and Economic Development, or Darlene Heller, Director of Planning and Zoning, stated he cannot tell Mr. Haines specifically how long LERTA has been in existence on that property.

Mr. Haines, referring to the June 21, 2006 City Council Meeting minutes, pointed out it was observed by Mayor Callahan that the $50 million project would bring upwards of $1.5 million in tax revenues, including the school district and county, and the City’s share would be about $300,000 a year of new revenue. Mr. Haines noted the Mayor added there is no tax abatement and no economic incentives in terms of governmental financing involved in the project.

Mayor Callahan, stating that he misspoke, explained a portion of the project is not tax abated.

Mr. Haines, further referring to the June 21, 2006 City Council Meeting minutes, noted Mrs. Belinski had asked if the project was in an Enterprise Zone and Mayor Callahan responded he does not believe it is and the City will get the full amount of tax. Mr. Haines questioned is it prudent to provide ten year tax abatement on the major part of the project, including for the hotel component.

Various Issues

Mary Pongracz, 321 West Fourth Street, applauded the Members of Council and the Administration for the fine job they have done this year, and commented it has been a difficult year and many things have happened in the City.

Ms. Pongracz, remarking she has never seen so much time spent establishing a committee, insisted the demands being made have nothing to do with the establishment of a committee. Ms. Pongracz, asserting that a City committee cannot stipulate the money they want in the authorizing legislation, said then everyone would demand the amount of money they want when establishing a new committee. She felt that the time of the public should not be spent ironing out problems that should have been solved before.

Ms. Pongracz observed that the Christmas lights this year are gorgeous. Asking for money for the Christmas lighting committee sponsored by the Chamber of Commerce, Ms. Pongracz said they need to raise money so there are Christmas lights which benefit everyone.

Ms. Pongracz communicated that the merits of funding that should have been debated in a Finance Committee meeting should not be debated at a Council Meeting. She added it is not fair to try to place items in a budget that has already taken many hours of work.

14. ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m.