City Council Minutes

Mayor Johnson called the meeting to order with the Pledge of Allegiance at 7:30 p.m. in the Northville City Hall Council Chambers, 215 West Main Street, Northville, Michigan.

Present: Mayor Christopher Johnson, Mayor Pro Tem Carolann Ayers, Councilmembers Kevin Hartshorne, Jerome Mittman, and Thomas Swigart

Absent: None

A. Citizen Comments None

Historic District Commission Term Expirations was added to the agenda as New Business 9E

Motion Mittman, seconded by Ayers to approve the agenda and consent agenda as amended. Consent agenda as follows:

Approve City Council Minutes:

Regular Meeting of January 20, 2004

Approve Bills List: Checks #35954 to #36086, and #36087 to #36161

Receive Board and Commission Minutes:

Historic District: Training Session 12/17/03, Regular Meeting 12/17/03

Youth Assistance: 12/12/03

Receive Departmental Reports:

Police Department: 12/03

Youth Assistance: 12/03

Arts Commission: Susan Vitali / Appointed to fill vacancy - term expiring on 6/30/05

Bank Depository Resolutions

Establishment of Brokerage Account

Request for Public Hearing / FY 2004 Wayne County CDBG Funds

During the FY 2004 budget hearing process, City staff was directed to review the possibility of entering into a consolidated dispatch operation with Northville Township. City staff held several meetings with Northville Township officials and the Township offered a proposal to provide dispatch and lockup services for $95,000 per year. At their regular meeting on January 20, 2004, City Council reviewed the preliminary study regarding a consolidated dispatch operation and called a public hearing to receive comment regarding this issue. The Police Chief presented an overview of the proposed consolidated dispatch discussion and plan. The presentation offered a historical background on past and current joint dispatch discussions as well as insight on future dispatch operation alternatives. Key areas in the presentation included:

Current City Dispatch: Staffing includes 2 full-time dispatchers, one senior police clerk, 2 – 3 part-time dispatchers, and use of ½ officer position; the radio system frequencies for police and fire are shared with Northville Township; radio base, portable and mobile equipment is dated and will not meet new FCC standards; current lock up facility is in need of repair, lacks new technology, and is a liability risk.

Maintaining Separate City Dispatch: Operation requires 24-hour staffing, a minimum of 4.2 people are needed to staff 24/7, with 4.6 people needed to accommodate for leave time and training; at least one additional full-time dispatcher is needed with the consideration of another additional full or part-time dispatcher to provide for a dispatcher on duty at all times; radio system equipment and lock up facility/equipment upgrades are necessary; liability risk associated with lock up facility remains.

Oakland County Regional PSAP: Initiative by local communities; Oakland County-owned buildings used for dispatch center; dispatch center would not be operated by the County, but instead be a combined effort of communities involved in the regional dispatch operation; concerns with countywide 800 MHz radio project, lock-up location, and service issues.

Oakland County Regional PSAP Advantages/Disadvantages: Advantages included combined resources, cost savings, staffing pool to free up other resources, and the 800 MHz radio project. Disadvantages included less control, loss of identity, unknown and possible increased costs, reduced staff pool for City, concern with dispatcher knowledge of City, lock up location and operation has not been addressed, and other operational and service level consideration.

Northville Township Proposal: $95,000 per year as well as cost recovery for one additional dispatcher, with two dispatchers on all shifts; majority of lock-up and prisoner details handled by the Township; Township willing to absorb two full-time dispatchers and fill one of those positions with a current City dispatcher.

City/Township Joint Dispatch Advantages/Disadvantages: Advantages included combined resources, cost savings, larger staffing pool, freeing up other resources, loss of lock-up liability, dispatcher knowledge of area, and increased dispatch service level. Disadvantages included less control of dispatch operation, loss of identity, loss of facility staffing pool and possible decreased facility service level, dispatcher knowledge of area not as familiar in certain areas of the City, operational considerations and changes in procedures, and uncertainty of future costs.

Oakland County 800 MHz Project: Expansion of county system paid for with 911 revenues, City participation is questionable as it is uncertain if the system can cover portions of Wayne County, FCC regulations do not allow paging so the current radio system would need to be maintained to page paid, on-call City firefighters.

Budget Impact: Current dispatch operation costs $335,000; cost for additional dispatch dispatcher is $45,000 for first year with costs to increase annually; City dispatch operation equates to approximately 1.3 mils; combined dispatch has a potential annual savings of $49,000 to $130,000; capital expenses for equipment upgrades total approximately $119,000 through FY2012.

Sherry Westfall, 310 Yerkes, raised questions on the cost to fund a desk officer verses the cost to fund a dispatcher.

Steve Ott, 402 Randolph, questioned the total annual amount spent by the Township to fund their dispatch operation, and the advantages and disadvantages of having a cost basis or percentage formula to determine the City’s contribution to the consolidated dispatch operation. It was responded that the Township currently spends approximately $750,000 for dispatch services. Cost basis or percentage formula to determine City contribution to consolidated dispatch operation has not been discussed.

Mary Ellen Patterson Hollis, 114 Walnut, commented on a well operated City Police Department, questioned the reasons to consider changing the operation, and noted that the cost to hire an additional City dispatcher is known, while the future costs of participating in a joint dispatch operation is unknown.

Nancy Chiri, 835 W. Main Street, expressed pleasure with the current Police and Fire operations. Concerns expressed relative to the joint operation included a feeling that City runs would fall in priority, and apprehension with officers being out of the City for lock-up purposes, thus increasing the response time for City runs. Final comments noted a comfort level with officers remaining in the City for arrest and lock-up purposes, the advantages of having a fully staffed and operational police department for evening and weekend activities, and support to maintain the City dispatch operation. It was responded that although runs are prioritized by the nature of the call, this area had not yet been addressed in the joint dispatch discussions. It was also noted that the amount of time a City police officer would spend out of the City on a lock-up would depend on the nature of the arrest as opposed to the lock-up location.

Wendy Gutowski, 47271 Battleford, (20 year resident and 6 year City employee) noted that on occasion, her family has needed after hours police service and preferred that the current level of service continue. She felt that the costs and budget impact did not justify the loss of identity and decreased service quality and supported maintaining the City dispatch operation.

Jason Jordan, 650 Grace, (City firefighter, Huntington Woods police officer, and former City of Plymouth dispatcher) commented on his experience with the joint City/Township Plymouth dispatch operation, noting that the service level was lower for Plymouth City runs as Plymouth Township calls were priority, and that City dispatchers were "weeded out" after one year. He spoke of the City of Berkley dispatch operation, which also dispatches for the Huntington Woods Police Department, and commented on the amount of officer time spent outside the community for arrest and lockup purposes. Final comments cited the rising costs to pay Berkley to provide dispatch services, local loss of control over dispatch operations, and the difficulty to go back to providing a City dispatch operation as the capital costs are prohibitive.

Jay Wendt, 317 St. Lawrence Blvd., comments supported continuation of the City dispatch operation, citing the service level, personal service, and Northville identity as important variables. A final comment supported the consideration of a tax or millage increase to maintain the City dispatch operation.

Susan Hatch, 19836 Ironwood, (25 year police department employee) questioned the evening walk-in traffic figures as the police department traffic is much greater than the numbers noted in the preliminary study, especially during the summer months. She also noted that the police department has become a safe haven for court-ordered child visitation/custody exchanges and questioned how this would be addressed after hours.

Mary Rea, 135 N. Center Street, (owner of Starting Gate Saloon) expressed concern with safety and response times. She supported maintaining the City dispatch operation.

Ron Bodnar, 342 E. Main Street, expressed concern with a lack of police contact after hours and the difficulty to go back to providing a City dispatch operation as the capital costs are prohibitive.

Patricia Howard, 203 N. Ely, (20 year resident and 17 year City employee). Commented on the excellent response time for the police department, noted that City staff receives daily compliments on the City police and fire department operations, and expressed concern with increased response time and the overall service loss to the community.

Luree Westfall, 602 Grace, had questions on the radio system and fire department dispatch operations. This prompted discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of the City participating in the 800 MHz radio system project.

Council Comments / Discussions: Lengthy discussion ensued relative to the joint dispatch operation, budget impact, and response times, including policies and procedures. Questions, comments, and discussion included:

Comment on the need to initiate discussions of the cost factors for long range costs.

Comments on the importance of response time, prompting discussion on the risks involved with a slower response time and concern that, at this time, the call/run priority is unknown.

Discussion on critical medical and fire runs and the fact that City dispatchers are certified to provide initial assistance until the fire department arrives at the scene, which led to questions on whether Township dispatchers were certified as well.

Comment noting that advances in technology now require a fully-trained dispatcher as opposed to police officers not as familiar with the equipment, technology, and operation.

Comment noting that during the 2003/04 budget discussions, it was found that budgetary constraints, including the annual increases to benefit costs, made hiring additional staff cost prohibitive, which led to discussion to review the possibility of a joint dispatch operation.

Comment noting that the Township is willing to absorb one full-time dispatcher from the City and concern that a delay in joining the Township joint dispatch operation could result in the loss of a job for a City dispatcher.

Comments on the loss of control over dispatch operations and concern with being able to resolve problems.

Discussion on the Northville community as a whole, as well as the successful history in working with the Township to fund and operate other joint services, including the library, recreation, and senior citizen operations.

Discussion on back up coverage, police station coverage for special events, and an avenue for after-hours direct communication to the joint dispatch operation/center.

Questions and discussion on the costs involved, including capital outlay to upgrade obsolete City Police Department equipment, should the City decide to leave the joint dispatch operation.

Comments from one Councilmember expressing a lower comfort level with a joint dispatch operation, citing concern with the costs involved in going back to providing City dispatch, a feeling that cost savings are not necessarily a positive, and concern with a loss of control, leaving little leverage for the City to make adjustments to the dispatch operation.

Final comments noted that the Governor continues to decrease state-shared revenue, which is the City’s second largest source of revenue. With the significant cuts in the last few years and expected deeper cuts in coming years, along with continued rising expenditure costs, the fact remains that the City cannot continue to maintain services at the current level with the funds at hand. The City is being faced with tough decisions and in order to retain the City dispatch operation, the City will need to eliminate other services or request a tax increase to continue to fund this operation. It was noted that during the "State of the State Address," the Governor suggested that local governments were not doing enough to work together to decrease local costs. As such, a joint dispatch operation partnership with the Township should be considered.

City Council directed the Police Chief to research and report back to the City Council on:

Cost determination formula for future years for City contribution to the joint dispatch operation.

Further research on call response priority and policy for City and Township police, fire, and medical runs.

Determine whether Township dispatchers have emergency medical dispatcher training and certification.

Response time in relation to the dispatch time (the time the call was received to the time dispatched to the responding unit).

City and Township arrest statistics and related data.

Options for Police station staffing for holidays and special events.

In June 2003, the Parks and Recreation Department sponsored the Solstice Run in the Northville community. The 2003 event organizers formed a non-profit organization called the Solstice Group, Inc. and they plan to present the 2004 race through their company. The Solstice Group, Inc. received permission from Parks and Recreation to use Ford Field for their race event on Saturday, June 26, 2004 from 6:00 a.m. until 11:30 a.m. The group is also requesting permission to conduct their event on Northville streets and utilize the services of the Police and Public Works Departments. An additional request has been made for the placement of a "start line" banner on Main Street, south Griswold, from 8:00 a.m. to 8:20 a.m. It is expected that the 2004 event attendance will exceed that of the 2003 event, potentially providing more economic benefit to the community. A donation will be made to the Parks and Recreation Department over and above the costs incurred by using Ford Field and City services. Members of the Solstice Group, Inc. were available to discuss the 2004 Solstice Race Event.

Council Comments/Discussion: Questions were raised relative to the race route, traffic concerns and street closures, parking for race participants, complaints received last year from the downtown businesses relative to parking, the proposed route for the Mustang Mile, and the expanded entertainment planned for the 2004 event. Suggestions to improve parking included better communication with the downtown businesses, utilizing Northville Downs as primary parking, and requesting that race participants use the Cady Street lot as opposed to the busiest lot located behind the Marquis Theatre. The need to minimize street closure time for key access roads was reiterated. Approval of the event concept was discussed with final approval of the race routes and street closures to remain with the Police Department.

Motion Ayers, seconded by Mittman to grant permission to the Solstice Group, Inc. to conduct the Fifth Third Bank Solstice Run event on the streets of Northville on June 26, 2004, in concept, with race routes to be reviewed and approved by the Police Department, and to grant permission to place a "start line" banner on Main Street, south of Griswold, from 8:00 a.m. until 8:20 a.m. Motion carried unanimously.

On April 2, 2001, City Council adopted a resolution requiring the placement of sidewalks "as part of the approval process necessary to obtain a building permit." Though the resolution does not reference "new construction," Staff followed the City Council’s policy and required sidewalks when property owners requested a building permit for new construction.

In response to recent questions regarding the City’s sidewalk placement policy, on January 5, 2004, City Council directed City staff to explore the possibility of expanding the requirements to included not only new construction, but significant additions as well. Staff provided a report that outlined the advantages and disadvantages of requiring sidewalks for new construction only, improvements that increased the SEV by 25% or 50%, improvements that increased the square footage by 25% or 50 %, and elimination of the policy.

Council Comments / Discussion: Discussion ensued pertaining to the advantages and disadvantages of requiring sidewalks for improvements that increased the SEV or square footage by 25 % or 50%, and the appeal process.

Motion Ayers, seconded by Mittman to approve a resolution requiring the placement of sidewalk on adjacent public rights-of-way as part of the building permit process when undertaking "new construction" of a new residential or new commercial building. Motion carried unanimously.

In 2003, the City retained Orchard, Hiltz & McCliment, Inc. (OHM) to design and oversee construction of the Lexington Boulevard Reconstruction Project at a fee of $45,000. OHM exceeded their contract amount by $3,418.38. The actual costs for geotechnical and materials testing, performed by their subcontractor Somat Engineering, required more frequent presence at the project site to allow full-time access to the residents on Lexington Court, full-time access to an adult foster care home on Lexington Boulevard, and to assure the proper repair of the connection of a house drain to the City’s storm sewer. OHM is requesting the additional amount to cover the cost of their subcontractor.

Staff reviewed the request and concurs that the increase is warranted. As the engineering fees for the Springfield Drive Reconstruction Project were under budget, the additional fees for the Lexington Boulevard project could be paid from the funds remaining from the Springfield Drive Project.

Motion Mittman, seconded by Ayers to approve the increased fees of $3,418.38 to Orchard, Hiltz & McCliment, Inc. for professional engineering services on the Lexington Boulevard Reconstruction Project. Motion carried unanimously.

On January 21, 2004, the City received bids to purchase a new 2004 Ford F-150 pick up truck equipped with a front plow. The new truck is a replacement for a vehicle auctioned off in the summer 2003. Bids results were as follows:

McDonald Ford (Northville) $23,309

Jorgensen Ford (Detroit) $24,154

Jorgensen Ford (Detroit) $24,054 (Alternate Bid)

Motion Ayers, seconded by Swigart to approve the purchase of a new 2004 Ford F-150 Pick Up Truck in the amount of $23,309 from McDonald Ford of Northville, Michigan. Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the budget process, City Council schedules three special meetings in the month of April to review the proposed budget.

Motion Mittman, seconded by Hartshorne to set the dates for the fiscal year 2005 budget review meetings, to be held at the Northville City Hall, at 7:30 p.m., as follows: Wednesday, April 7, 2004; Thursday, April 22, 2004; and Monday, April 26, 2004. Motion carried unanimously.

A review of the term expiration dates for the Historic District Commissioners found that four commissioner terms would expire in 2005. The HDC ordinance states that terms for the HDC shall be for three years and must be staggered. As such, two terms should expire each year. A memo from the City Clerk offered a revised appointment term schedule for the Historic District Commission.

Motion Ayers, seconded by Mittman to adopt the staggered term appointment schedule for the Historic District Commission recommended in the January 26, 2004 memo from the City Clerk as follows:

2004 Term Expirations (2 members): No change – appointments/reappointments would be for the regular 3 year terms, with the terms expiring in 2007.

2005 Term Expirations (4 members):

Appoint/reappoint 2 members to the regular 3 year terms, with the terms expiring in 2008.

Appoint/reappoint 2 members to 4 year terms (one time only), with terms expiring in 2009.

One Councilmember requested that the two HDC members, whose terms expired on January 1, 2004, be reappointed this evening. He questioned the boards/commission interview and reappointment processes, the reasoning for re-interviewing current HDC members, and suggested that other HDC representation be involved in the interview process. It was countered that changes in statute, as well as the Historic Preservation Ordinance, have significantly changed the responsibilities and role of the HDC. It was also stated that appointments are processed through the Selection Committee, and interviews and follow up interviews are an appropriate part of the appointment/reappointment process. A final comment questioned the legality of allowing HDC members with an expired term to continue to serve. It was responded that the City Attorney opined that it is acceptable for a commission member to continue serving until they are reappointed or until the term is filled.

Swigart commented on his recent attendance at a job summit meeting hosted by State Representative John Stewart.

B. Staff Communications

The City Manager stated that he would be out of the office February 11 – 13, 2004.

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

Respectfully submitted,

Dianne Massa
City Clerk