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 Ayers, Councilmembers Kevin Hartshorne, Jerome Mittman and Thomas Swigart

Absent: None

A. Citizen Comments None

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

Approve City Council Minutes:

Special Meeting of April 7, 2004 (budget session)

Regular Meeting of April 19, 2004

Special Meeting of April 22, 2004 (6:00 p.m. meeting)

Special Meeting of April 22, 2004 (budget session) as amended

Approve Bills List:

Checks #37196 to #37305 and #37306 to #37403

Receive Board and Commission Minutes:

Board of Zoning Appeals: 3/3/04

Downtown Development Authority: 3/16/04

Historic District Commission: 3/17/04

Planning Commission: 3/2/04, 3/16/04, 4/6/04

Receive Departmental Reports: None

Board and Commission Appointments: None

Proclamation / Grand Senior Birthday Celebration

Request for Public Hearing / Reprogramming 2002 Oakland County CDBG Funds

Proclamation / Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Awareness Week

Proclamation / May 2004 as Mental Health Month in Northville

In April 2003, the City Council granted permission for the Parks and Recreation Department to create an Off Leash Recreation Area (Dog Park) behind the Scout and Recreation Building at 215 West Cady Street. The project was approved on a temporary basis until December 31, 2004. The project has been well received by the community and park use occurs daily. Recently, park users presented information to the Northville Township officials regarding the need for additional park space, with Northville Community Park being the preferred site. The Township has not made a decision and the dog park users are concerned about the expiration of the existing site. At its April 14, 2004 meeting, the Parks and Recreation Commission voted unanimously to support the efforts of the Dog Park users to seek continued use of this site beyond the December 31, 2004 deadline, on an indefinite basis.

Fred Shadko, 47040 Timberlane, noted that the Dog Park committee is continuing discussions to secure additional land in Northville Township for a dog park. However, concern had been expressed that a Township dog park would not be ready for at least 12 – 18 months. A permanent City location would ensure that 250 pass holders had uninterrupted use of a dog park.

Council Comments/Discussion: Areas of discussion included:

• Comments expressing concern with mud and the lack of grass as well as questions on the procedures for resting and seeding parks. It was noted that resting and seeding is usually done through two growing seasons, with the peak growing season being in the fall. It was then suggested that this dog park site be rested by taking it out of service in the fall to rest the grass until the following spring.
• Suggestion to consider sand, woodchips, or other suitable material as an alternate groundcover for at least part of the park area.
• A feeling that it is premature to remove or extend the "temporary" designation of the dog park at this time, with a suggestion to wait until December and revisit the extension at that time. It was also suggested that the Dog Park committee return to the City Council in August or September to present a long-term plan and vision for this site.
• Comment voicing concern in delaying the decision until September, with a perception that the Dog Park users are being treated unfairly. It was questioned as to why certain Councilmembers appear to be resistant to lifting the "temporary" designation on a successful park. It was countered that the decision to defer action until September is consistent with the original plan for this site. This would allow sufficient time for the Dog Park committee to develop a proposed long-term plan and vision for this site, including addressing groundcover issues.
• Comment in support of removing deadline for planning purposes; however, it was reiterated that the group should understand that should the "temporary" designation be removed, the first use of the land is for possible future post office expansion.

Linda Dzwigalski, 631 Fairbrook, stated that the Dog Park Committee is trying to be financially responsible to the pass holders; however, it is difficult for the Committee to make long-term decisions without knowing if the Dog Park site will remain beyond December 2004. A final comment noted that Dog Park patrons would like more than one park. Should the Township designate land for a Dog Park, it is the Committee’s desire to have the Dog Park located behind the Scout and Recreation Building remain open as a smaller, second park.

While not unanimous, City Council consensus deferred action on lifting the "temporary" designation until August or September to allow sufficient time to receive additional information from the Dog Park Committee on its long-term plan and vision for the parcel and to address possible alternate groundcovers for this site.

During the FY 2003-2004 budget review process, City staff was directed to review the possibility of entering into a consolidated dispatch operation with Northville Township. At its February 2, 2004 meeting, City Council held a public hearing to receive comment on this issue. Following the comments and subsequent discussion, Staff was directed to obtain additional information and report back to City Council on the following items:

• Cost determination formula for future years/City contribution to joint dispatch operation: The Township proposed that for the first three years, the City would be responsible for the cost of one dispatcher. This would provide two dispatchers for duty on all day and afternoon shifts as well as four midnight shifts. After that time, it is likely the workload would necessitate all shifts be covered with two dispatchers. The City would be expected to pay for two dispatchers and this is the maximum the City would need to contribute to the operation.
• Response priority and policy for City and Township police, fire, and medical runs: Correspondence from the Township Police Chief dated February 18, 2004, stated that "all calls for service in the Northville Community will be dispatched by priority, without regard to jurisdiction."
• Determine whether Township dispatchers have emergency medical dispatcher training and certification: Township dispatchers receive training appropriate to their job function.
• Response time in relation to the dispatch time: Review of Township Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) statistics, indicates a 4.6 minute received-to-dispatch time, which is considerably better than the overall average of 10.4 minutes for CLEMIS CAD agencies. The City has not converted to the CLEMIS CAD. The "received-to-dispatch time" information is recorded manually and any comparison is not likely to be a true representation of the actual response time.
• Arrest Data: Preliminary plans call for City officers to handle the initial "booking" process at the Township station and concern was expressed on the amount of time an officer would be out of the City. Over a three year period, officers spent an average of 21.8 hours per month on activities related to the initial processing of prisoners at the station, with an average of 2.8 hours per month processing blood tests at area hospitals.
• Options for Police Station staffing for evenings, holidays, and special events: A chart showing the costs for various options was presented, with the suggested coverage being daily coverage by a clerical person until 9:00 p.m. as well as coverage for the weekend, holidays, and special events.
• Allen Terrace Alarm (concern raised at staff level): The City dispatch has a direct alarm connection with Allen Terrace. The Township has agreed to accept alarms from Allen Terrace at the dispatch center.

Staffing options, including scenarios which factored in the cost of the additional full-time City dispatcher, were reviewed. Revised cost and savings comparisons and revised Capital Expense projections were provided.

Advantages to moving forward at this time included:

• Both agencies are part of the CLEMIS consortium, which provides the basic records and reporting systems.
• The City does not have the number of dispatchers needed to provide an appropriate level of service required with the technological advances.
• Staff vacancies at the Township would absorb the full-time City dispatcher.
• CLEMIS and Oakland County technology related initiatives require City commitment for participation.

Northville Township Police Chief John Werth and Fire Chief William Zhmendak were available for questions.

Council Comments/Discussion: Extensive discussion ensued, with questions and comments pertaining to:

• A comment on booking prisoners noted that the Township would handle prisoner detail beyond the initial booking process.
• A question on the function of the clerical person after regular office hours. It was responded that the person would perform clerical duties currently performed by dispatchers and officers.
• A question on the benefits of consolidated dispatch to the Township. It was responded that the consolidated effort would increase Township personnel/coverage per shift.
• A comparison on the volume of calls received by the City and the Township. It was responded that the City receives approximately 5,500 – 6,000 calls per year and the Township receives approximately 15,000 calls per year.
• It was questioned whether a national standard formula existed to determine a sufficient number of personnel in relation to the volume of calls for a community of the City’s size. (unknown)
• Questions were raised relative to the advantages of Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) when the Township has a 4.6 minute dispatch/response time compared to the City’s dispatch/response time of less than one minute. It was responded that it was difficult to compare dispatch/response times as the City has not converted to the CAD system. The City uses a paper system to record calls, time-stamping the dispatch card after the run has been dispatched. The Township uses CAD which calculates the dispatch/response time when the call begins.
• The need for the consolidated dispatch contract to include a process for regular reviews, submission of formalized reports, a provision for contract modifications, and a formalized process to resolve issues.
• A history of the consolidated dispatch discussion and the City’s finance position were reviewed, noting:

The City has been unable to fund the full-time dispatcher position that has been in the budget for three years and the City does not wish to go another year without funding dispatch as needed.

Use of patrol officers for dispatch is not reliable. Technology has changed and the need for professionals trained at the level needed to provide an appropriate level of service is necessary.

Budget constraints have forced the City to explore other options as the current staffing level is too low and the City cannot afford the equipment and personnel to keep the dispatch at an appropriate service level.

Further comments supporting the consolidation included:

• High turnover in using part-time dispatch personnel.
• The Township handling the critical area of liability pertaining to lock-up facilities/services.
• The Township’s willingness to absorb the full-time City dispatch position, which would also afford the City the services of two dispatchers.
• The City’s dispatch infrastructure would not be obsolete for about eight years, allowing sufficient time to determine if the consolidation is beneficial to the City.
• The Senior Community Center, Recreation services, and the former library were cited as examples of past successes in joint City/Township services.
• Clear communication from the Township that calls will be prioritized based on call type, not from where the call originated.
• Continued withdrawal of state revenue sharing to cities, townships, and counties has forced municipalities to make funding reductions. It was noted that a recent communication from the Governor encouraged local entities to work together to stretch funds and merge services with other communities.
• A feeling that the City could get the same service from the Township, at a lower cost to the taxpayers, while improving services as a whole.

Further comments opposing the consolidation included:

• A reluctance to enter into a partnership that might be difficult to leave.
• Concern with the City’s ability to monitor and resolve operational and personnel issues.
• A feeling that the current City dispatch operation is an integral contribution to the City’s quality of life.
• Higher comfort level if there were other options to consider, such as subcontracting with a business specializing in dispatch operations.

Susan Hatch, 19836 Irongate, disagreed with the call/time assessment and expressed concern with Township dispatch/response time, feeling that a 4.6 minute dispatch/response time would be unacceptable to City residents. Other concerns included a feeling that the consolidation is actually a contracted service and the City’s lack of authority to address issues and concerns.

Robert Buckhave, 145 N. Center Street, expressed support in retaining the current dispatch operation and expressed concern the unknown future costs to be assessed to the City should the dispatch consolidation occur.

Mary Ellen Patterson Hollis, 114 Walnut, suggested that the City increase taxes, earmarking that increase for the dispatch operation. It was responded that this could only be accomplished through a dedicated millage and that dedicated millages are subject to the Headlee rollback and Proposal A. This prompted further discussion on the City’s unlevied millage.

Cindy Shier, 330 N. Ely, opposed the proposed dispatch consolidation, citing concern with dispatch/response times and dispatcher seniority issues. It was her understanding that a survey of other communities that moved to consolidate dispatch operations revealed that they would not make the same decision today.

Nancy Chiri, 835 W. Main Street, opposed the proposed the dispatch consolidation, citing concern with City officer time spent outside the City limits at the Township for prisoner transport and paperwork.

Marvin Reinholz, 745 Grandview, opposed the consolidated dispatch, expressing concern that this would be the first of many services to be taken over by the Township.

Larry Parks, 632 N. Center Street, expressed support in retaining the current dispatch operation, citing concern with a loss of local control.

Additional discussion ensued relative to City and Township radio systems, operational differences between the City and Township, emergency service district authorities, and the City Council’s intent to continue operating the police and fire department separately from the Township.

Motion Mittman, seconded by Ayers to approve the concept of a consolidated emergency dispatch and lockup services, with police station staffing beyond City Hall business hours, and direct City staff to:

Continue discussions with Northville Township to prepare a detailed proposal for City Council consideration.

Address personnel issues related to dispatch consolidation.

In FY 2004-2005, the City proposes to reconstruct Springfield Drive from Taft Road to Coldspring Drive. The project involves removing and replacing the concrete curb and pavement, reconstruction of the boulevard entrance (Morgan Boulevard from Taft to Springfield), and a sanitary sewer modification. On March 30, 2004, the City received the following bids:

The low bid was submitted by Tiseo Brothers, Inc. At the City’s request, Tiseo Brothers added the reconstruction of Lexington Court to this project at the same unit prices, with a total construction cost of $45,000 for Lexington Court. An engineering oversight fee for Lexington Court of $4,900 for Orchard, Hiltz & McCliment, Inc. is proposed.

Funds for the projects are included in the FY 2004-2005 budget. The combined total of these projects ($510,000 minus $72,000 for previously approved professional services) leaves a remaining budget of $438,000, which is sufficient to cover the construction costs. The total cost for constructing Springfield Drive and Lexington Court, and the Lexington Court engineering fees is $330,254.25. The contract documents permit construction to begin before July 1^st; however, the documents clearly state that progress payments would not be approved or paid until after the start of FY 2004-2005.

Motion Ayers, seconded by Mittman to:

1. Award a construction contract for Springfield Drive in the amount of $280,354.25 and a change order to this contract for the reconstruction of Lexington Court in the amount of $45,000 to Tiseo Brothers, Inc.
2. Approve an increase in professional services fees for the reconstruction of Lexington Court to Orchard, Hiltz & McCliment, Inc. in the amount of $4,900.
3. Authorize the City Manager to sign a construction contract with Tiseo Brothers, Inc. on behalf of the City of Northville.
4. Direct Staff to review and report back to City Council on the possibility of adding another project (within budget) to this contract.

On March 16, 2004, the Planning Commission voted to request that the City Council review tree replacement fees and the Tree Preservation Ordinance. The Planning Commission was concerned that the ordinance may not have the desired effect of preserving trees when payment in lieu of saving trees appears to be more convenient. At the City’s request, Carlisle/Wortman Associates, Inc., the City’s Planning Consultant, offered an estimated proposal in the amount of $700 for developing amendments, public review, and incorporating any adopted amendments into the City’s Code of Ordinances.

Council Comments / Discussion: Comments noting:

• It is the homeowner’s responsibility to obtain a tree removal permit. However, tree removal is often done through the use of a commercial contractor, without obtaining a permit.
• Although it is the homeowner’s responsibility to obtain a tree removal permit, it was suggested that Carlisle/Wortman Associates research an ordinance amendment which would shift that burden to the contractor.
• It was clarified that the Planning Consultant would review the Tree Preservation Ordinance and City Council would review the fee schedule.

Motion Mittman, seconded by Swigart to accept the proposal from Carlisle/Wortman Associates, Inc. in the amount of $700 for a review of the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance. Motion carried unanimously.

City staff was directed to review the tree fee schedule and report back to City Council.

Ayers requested that Staff investigate possible grant opportunities as well as local costs to fund a 2004 mosquito control program for West Nile Virus. Questions were raised pertaining to possible grant opportunities for trees affected by the Emerald Ash Borer. It was responded that the City has already removed most affected trees and the current grant opportunities are not for past projects.

Mittman noted that the Senior Community Center has received $92,000 through their donation program, with June 1, 2004 being the contribution deadline.

B. Staff Communications

The DPW Director stated that it appears that the City has reached an agreement with the homeowners to resolve stormwater drainage and easement concerns relative to the City’s efforts to develop the south six acres of the Rural Hill Cemetery property.

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

Respectfully submitted,

Dianne Massa
City Clerk