CITY OF SALISBURY, MARYLAND

CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 10, 2000 MEETING #1

PRESENT

Mayor Barrie P. Tilghman
Council President Robert Cannon
Council Vice President Frank Himelright
Councilwoman Lavonzella Siggers
Councilman Palmer Gillis
Councilman William Stacey

IN ATTENDANCE

CONVENING - APPROVAL OF MINUTES - DECEMBER 27, 1999

The Mayor and Council met in regular session at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers. Council President Cannon called the meeting to order. The Lord's Prayer was repeated and the Pledge of Allegiance was recited.

Mr. Himelright moved to amend the December 27, 1999 minutes by adding the following comment to the discussion of Ordinance No. 1745 regarding the extension of the moratorium for group domiciliary care facilities:

     Mr. Himelright expressed that six months was ample time since a
     reminder was sent in October from Rev. Travers requesting a
     status on the issue.

Ms. Siggers indicated that she would abstain from voting on the minutes since she was absent from the December 27, 1999 meeting. Upon a second by Mr. Gillis, all voted in favor of the amendment with the exception of Ms. Siggers who abstained. All voted in favor of approving the minutes of December 27, 1999, as amended, with the exception of Ms. Siggers who abstained.

ORDINANCE NO. 1745 - 2ND READING - EXTENDING MORATORIUM FOR GROUP DOMICILIARY CARE FACILITIES TO MARCH 31, 2000

Mr. Himelright moved and Ms. Siggers seconded to approve Ordinance No. 1745 to bring it on the floor for discussion. Director of Planning & Zoning Kris Hughes presented Ordinance No. 1745, extending the moratorium for group domiciliary care facilities from January 12, 2000 to March 31, 2000. Mr. Hughes reported that no changes were made to the Ordinance since the first reading on December 27, 1999.

Ms. Siggers voiced that she was not in support of any further extension on the moratorium. Ms. Siggers viewed it as a disservice to other members of the community who were looking for an opportunity to better their lives. She was disappointed that the Planning Department, as well as the Council, had chosen to put these people at a disadvantage and not allow them an opportunity to move forward.

Mr. Gillis acknowledged that he agreed with Ms. Siggers in spirit, but the Council could not do anything until a recommendation from Planning & Zoning was received. The City would be put at risk and in violation of its own laws if the moratorium was not extended.

Mr. Hughes reported that the Planning Commission reviewed this issue during their December meeting. Because there had been insufficient time for those who had expressed concerns with the proposed changes, the Commission decided to give everyone one more month so the comments could be received prior to formal action being taken by the Planning Commission. Mr. Hughes related that the report was not delivered to the Planning Commission until December because of severe sickness on his staff.

After further discussion, all voted in favor of Ordinance No. 1745 for second reading with the exception of Ms. Siggers who voted nay.

ORDINANCE NO. 1744 - 1ST READING - BUDGET AMENDMENT TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR THE MARINA RESTAURANT PARKING LOT

Mr. Himelright moved and Mr. Stacey seconded to approve Ordinance No. 1744 to bring it on the floor for discussion. Ordinance No. 1744, as introduced by Director of Procurement and Parking Carol Turner, provides funding from the Parking Authority and other sources for executing the construction of the marina restaurant parking lot. Mrs. Turner reported that the entire Central City District Commission (CCDC) was notified by fax of the proposed funding sources. One verbal and two written responses were received indicating they were in favor of it if it did not seriously impact the parking garage project.

Mayor Tilghman reported that she spoke with Jack Purnell (member of CCDC) today confirming that if the funding did not adversely impact the parking garage expansion, then the CCDC was supportive of the funding proposal.

A discussion ensued concerning the scope of work on the project, the cost of the project and how the cost accelerated from $40,000 to $415,346. Ms. Siggers noted that she would abstain from voting on Ordinance No. 1744 even though she would like to see development and growth in that area. Mr. Himelright reported that, with Mr. Gillis' assistance, the project amount was reduced by approximately $200,000 when it was presented to Council in a work session.

After further discussion, Ordinance No. 1744 for first reading passed with Mr. Gillis, Mr. Himelright and Mr. Cannon voting aye. Mr. Stacey voted nay and Ms. Siggers abstained.

CITY COUNCIL STATUS REPORT

Council President Cannon gave a status report on the following:

     1.  Quality of life and neighborhood issues 
          HotSpots program, trash cans off the street, cars parked in front yards, furniture off of
          front porch, boats off the street, mildew cleaned off houses, shingles same color as house,
          boarded up houses - plywood cut to fit window and painted same color as house or trim,
          pooper scooper law, road maintenance, Salisbury Neighborhood Housing Service,
          recycling, once a week trash pick up, police substations, funding for demolition, SAPOA
          working with Council, Administration and neighborhoods, Architectural Review
          Committee;

     2.  Business issues 
          N.E. Collector, Enterprise Zone expansion, cost allocations, marina restaurant,
          ombudsman (one point of contact), Downtown Salisbury Economic Development
          Committee; and 

     3.   Government improvement issues
           Consolidation issues with County (joint MIS and Human Resources Departments, similar
           800 trunking system and hopes to consolidate Purchasing and Finance), tax differential,
           2% reduction of cable franchise fee, 2› reduction in tax rate, establishment of Moody's
           Fund, changing elections from the Spring to the Fall, and Charter Review Committee
           recommendations.

RESOLUTION NOS. 682 AND 683 - CHARTER AMENDMENTS TO PROVIDE FOR A COUNCIL-MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT

RESOLUTION NO. 685 - CHARTER AMENDMENT TO MODIFY THE PROCEDURE FOR THE OPERATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

RESOLUTION NO. 686 - CHARTER AMENDMENT TO MODIFY THE MAYORAL VETO POWER

Mr. Himelright moved and Mr. Gillis seconded to approve Resolution Nos. 682, 683, 685 and 686 to bring them on the floor for discussion. Mr. Robert Taylor, Vice Chair of the 1999 Charter Review Committee, summarized the activities of the Committee and provided historical data on Council-Manager form of government.

City Solicitor Paul Wilber provided an overview of Resolution Nos. 682, 683, 685 and 686. The Resolutions would be effective in fifty days unless petitioned to referendum in forty days.

The following amendments were made:

Resolution No. 682
Mr. Himelright moved and Mr. Gillis seconded to amend Resolution No. 682 by deleting the introductory paragraph on page one and inserting the following language: A Resolution to amend the Charter to provide for a governmental body composed of an elected mayor and six councilmembers acting as a city council. All voted in favor of the amendment with the exception of Ms. Siggers who did not vote.

Mr. Stacey moved and Mr. Gillis seconded to amend Resolution No. 682, page four, by adding the following sentence after May 2002: Until that date, the Charter shall continue to operate without being affected by this Resolution. All voted in favor of the amendment with the exception of Ms. Siggers who did not vote.

Resolution No. 683
Mr. Himelright moved and Mr. Stacey seconded to amend Resolution No. 683 by deleting item (vi) in the introductory paragraph on page one and insert the word and before (v). All voted in favor of the amendment with the exception of Ms. Siggers who did not vote.

Mr. Stacey moved and Mr. Himelright seconded to amend Resolution No. 683, page thirty-nine (SC20-2, second paragraph) by adding the following sentence after May 2002: Until that date, the Charter shall continue to operate without being affected by this Resolution. All voted in favor of the amendment with the exception of Ms. Siggers who did not vote.

Resolution No. 685
Mr. Stacey moved and Mr. Himelright seconded to amend Resolution No. 685, page two, by adding the following sentence after May 2002: Until that date, the Charter shall continue to operate without being affected by this Resolution. All voted in favor of the amendment with the exception of Ms. Siggers who did not vote.

Resolution No. 686
Ms. Siggers moved and Mr. Himelright seconded to amend Resolution No. 686, page two, seventh line, by changing two (2) business days to six (6) business days. The amendment passed unanimously.

Mr. Himelright moved and Mr. Gillis seconded to amend Resolution No. 686, page two, line ten, by deleting the word the after the words vetoed or. All voted in favor of the amendment with the exception of Ms. Siggers who did not vote.

Mr. Stacey moved and Mr. Himelright seconded to amend Resolution No. 686, page two, by adding the following sentence after May 2002: Until that date, the Charter shall continue to operate without being affected by this Resolution. All voted in favor of the amendment with the exception of Ms. Siggers who did not vote.

Comments, questions and concerns expressed by the citizens who addressed Council on this issue included:

• should be addressed by all the voters of the City by placing it on the ballot;
• Citizens Against Mayor's Elimination Committee challenged Charter Review Committee to obtain 2,000 signatures to initiate the Charter amendments;
• questioned why Council-Manager form of government was not implemented as proposed years ago;
• questioned if the Charter Amendments could be reversed back to Mayor-Council form of government;
• didn't like the idea of Councilmembers making the decision for all the citizens of Salisbury;
• belief that this form of government was proposed because of the conflict between the Mayor and Council, thereby making it difficult for people to evaluate the proposal rationally;
• proposal should be read and an informed decision made instead of based on emotions;
• Council-Manager form of government best for Salisbury;
• no public mandate to change to Council-Manager form of government - Council not acting democratically;
• allow the candidates for the upcoming election to run on this issue; and
• questioned non-binding referendum vs. binding.

City Solicitor Paul Wilber clarified that the City Council can put a non-binding question on the ballot to guide those individuals who are in office after the election. Council is elected by the people to legislate and they legislate by making Charter amendments. According to State law, the people have to petition an amendment to referendum if they want it to be voted on.

Mr. Gillis commented on the difficulty of a councilperson and a mayor being able to do their job with the current organizational structure. Ms. Siggers voiced that she did not want the Council to have total control of the government and expressed her appreciation to the citizens in exercising their rights to speak and petition for referendum. Mr. Himelright felt that Salisbury had grown to the point that a professional was warranted to run the city. Mr. Stacey opined that Salisbury needed a professional to run the city on a day-to-day basis. Mr. Cannon preferred a unified form of government making decisions together rather than two separate branches going in two separate directions. Mr. Cannon also pointed out that he did not hear from anyone in the audience on why a city manager form of government was bad or why it would not work.

After further discussion, all voted in favor of Resolution Nos. 682 as amended, 683 as amended, 685 as amended and 686 as amended with the exception of Ms. Siggers who voted nay.

Mayor Tilghman commented that a referendum petition procedure would begin tomorrow so the electorate could ensure that their decision on this change would be binding.

ORDINANCE NO. 1747 - 1ST READING - PROVIDING A BALLOT QUESTION ON CHANGING FROM A MAYOR-COUNCIL FORM OF GOVERNMENT TO A COUNCIL- MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT IF THE CHARTER AMENDMENT RESOLUTIONS FOR SUCH CHANGE ARE NOT TAKEN TO REFERENDUM ELECTION BY A PETITION

Mr. Himelright moved and Mr. Gillis seconded to add Ordinance No. 1747 to the agenda as an emergency item. Mr. Gillis, Mr. Himelright and Mr. Cannon voted aye. Ms. Siggers and Mr. Stacey voted nay. Mr. Gillis moved and Mr. Himelright seconded to approve Ordinance No. 1747 to bring it on the floor for discussion.

Council President Cannon introduced Ordinance No. 1747 providing for a non-binding ballot question in the May 2000 general election to indicate approval or disapproval of the Council- Manager form of government in the event a referendum election is not required to be held on Resolution Nos. 682, 683, 685 and 686. District I will also be voting on the ballot question.

After a brief discussion, all voted in favor of Ordinance No. 1747 for first reading with the exception of Ms. Siggers who voted nay.

(The City Council took a break at 10:08 p.m. and reconvened at 10:14 p.m.)

RESOLUTION NO. 688 - CHARTER AMENDMENT CHANGING THE DATE OF CITY ELECTIONS TO THE FALL AND AMENDING VARIOUS OTHER SECTIONS TO CONFORM WITH CURRENT PROCEDURES

Mr. Himelright moved and Mr. Stacey seconded to approve Resolution No. 688 to bring it on the floor for discussion. City Solicitor Paul Wilber highlighted Resolution No. 688 which amends the Charter by moving the City elections from the Spring to the Fall, renames the Board of Election Supervisors to City of Salisbury Election Board, removes portions of the Charter so they may be codified in the Code, and renumbers the remaining Charter provisions. Mr. Wilber asked that Council amend Resolution No. 688, upon the suggestion of Ms. Judy Ritter, Election Director for the Wicomico County Board of Supervisors of Elections, as follows:

• SC6-7 Primary elections, third line - change City of Salisbury Election Board to City Clerk; and
• SC6-10 Notice of elections, first line - change City of Salisbury Election Board to City Clerk.

Mr. Cannon mentioned that he received information from Mr. Bob Gladden, a member of the Board of Elections, regarding Baltimore City combining their elections with presidential elections as a means of saving money by eliminating the odd-year city primary and general election and at the same time increasing voter turnout for city elections. With this change, all of Maryland's major elections would be held in even number of years and, unless there is a special election, no county, state or federal election would be held in an odd number year. Mr. Cannon noted that this information was contrary to what the Board of Elections had presented to Council in a work session, and, therefore, questioned whether Resolution No. 688 should be put on hold until further confirmation could be obtained.

Mr. Pick pointed out that other municipalities hold their elections in odd years such as the City of Rockville. Ms. Ritter had previously stated that the odd number of years worked out better for their office. Mr. Gillis recalled that Ms. Ritter also pointed out the cross-jurisdictional problems of city and county. Mr. Cannon acknowledged that Baltimore City was treated like a county rather than a municipality.

Mr. Wilber reported that Resolution No. 688 was set up as though a Council-Manager form of government was adopted. If not adopted, then the procedure would have to be adjusted accordingly.

Ms. Siggers referred to a typo on page seven, SC6-7 Primary elections, second paragraph, first line -- that should be changed to than.

Mr. Gillis moved and Mr. Stacey seconded to amend Resolution No. 688 to incorporate the changes as recommended by Mr. Wilber and Ms. Siggers. The amendments passed unanimously.

Ms. Siggers opined that this Resolution should also be decided by the citizens. After further discussion, all voted in favor of Resolution No. 688, as amended, with the exception of Ms. Siggers who voted nay.

ORDINANCE NO. 1746 - 1ST READING - AMENDING CHAPTER 1.08 OF THE CITY CODE, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ELECTIONS, TO CONFORM WITH THE CHARTER AND CURRENT PROCEDURES

Mr. Himelright moved and Ms. Siggers seconded to approve Ordinance No. 1746 to bring it on the floor for discussion. Ordinance No. 1746, as presented by City Solicitor Paul Wilber, amends Chapter 1.08, Election Board, of the City Codes to coordinate with the Charter and current election procedures. Mr. Wilber recommended the following changes:

• 1.08.020, page four - delete item D;
• 1.08.050, page five, first line - change city clerk to clerk of the Circuit Court; and
• 1.08.270, page nineteen - delete item 5 and renumber remaining items in Section F.

Ms. Siggers moved and Mr. Stacey seconded to incorporate the above changes as recommended. The amendments passed unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. 690 - ACCEPTING GIFT OF A TRUCK FROM PEPSI COLA COMPANY TO BE USED FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RESPONSE TEAM

Council President Cannon withdrew Resolution No. 690 as had been requested by Fire Chief William Higgins.

RESOLUTION NO. 691 - APPROVAL OF LEASE OF EQUIPMENT FOR PUBLIC ACCESS CHANNEL TO SALISBURY STATE UNIVERSITY

Mr. Himelright moved and Mr. Stacey seconded to approve Resolution No. 691 to bring it on the floor for discussion. Executive Officer John Pick presented Resolution No. 691 approving a lease agreement with Salisbury State University for the lease of public access television equipment to be used in the production of public access programming.

After a brief discussion concerning equipment maintenance, Resolution No. 691 passed unanimously.

AWARD OF BIDS

The following items were presented for approval by Director of Procurement & Parking Carol Turner, C.P.M., CPPB:

1. 1. Declaration of Surplus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .-0-
   
2. 2. Enhanced Monitor Scan Tool Set Diagnostic Computer (Unbudgeted Capital) (001-3401-532.70-30)
   Parts Wholesale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1,369.00
   
3. 3. Professional Services - Health Insurance Consultant
   (Account to be determined)
   Bolton, Offutt & Donovan. . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 7,500.00
   
4. 4. Contract No. 4-00-PL REBID
   Marina Restaurant Parking Lot (various accounts)
   I A Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$330,906.50
   

Ms. Siggers disclosed that she would be abstaining from voting on item #4. After discussion, upon a motion by Mr. Himelright and seconded by Mr. Gillis, items #1, 2 and 3 were unanimously approved. Mr. Gillis, Mr. Himelright and Mr. Cannon voted in favor of item #4. Mr. Stacey voted nay and Ms. Siggers abstained.

MAYOR'S COMMENTS

Mayor Tilghman reported that a follow-up trash meeting would be held on Thursday, January 13, 2000 at the Chipman Center.

COUNCIL PRESIDENT'S COMMENTS

Council President Cannon thanked everyone for attending the meeting and those who stayed for the duration.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Ms. Maria Mitchell complimented the Police Department on the swiftness in which they responded to an incident (children fighting around the school on Prince Street) last Saturday.

Mr. Richard Insley expressed his disappointment and embarrassment with some of the events which transpired during the Council-Manager discussion. Mr. Insley also commented on the inadequate public address system in Council Chambers and asked Council to address the problem.

Mr. Robert Ryan commended the police officer for his efforts in controlling the public during the Council-Manager discussion.

Ms. Julia Hancock opined that retirees, such as herself, should be coming to the City Council work sessions to become more informed and to see what the Councilmembers are trying to do for the City.

Mr. Robert Taylor referred to the 1930 Code which provided that the County Commissioners of Wicomico County could levy a special tax on the taxable property in the County. This money would be paid to the City for maintaining the roads in a sum not to exceed $5,000 in any one year.

Councilwoman Siggers presented a Certificate of Appreciation from the Holly Center to Salisbury City Government for the help given to persons with developmental disabilities on Maryland's Eastern Shore.

With no further business, the meeting adjourned at 10:53 p.m.

CITY OF SALISBURY, MARYLAND CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION JANUARY 19, 2000

TIME & PLACE: 10:05 a.m., Room 302 - City/County Government Building
PURPOSE: Discuss possible locations and acquisition of property for new fire station
VOTE TO CLOSE: Unanimous
CITATION: Annotated Code of Maryland Section 10-508(a)(3)
PRESENT: Council President Robert Cannon, Councilwoman Lavonzella Siggers, Councilman William Stacey, City Clerk Brenda Colegrove, Executive Officer John Pick, Fire Chief William Higgins, Deputy Fire Chief Tom Lewis, Acting Public Works Director Chip Messick and Planning and Zoning Director Kris Hughes
ABSENT: Council Vice President Frank Himelright and Councilman Palmer Gillis

At 10:05 a.m. in Room 302 of the City/County Government Building, Ms. Siggers moved to convene in Closed Executive Session to discuss possible locations and acquisition of property for a new fire station as permitted under the Annotated Code of Maryland Section 10-508(a)(3). Mr. Stacey seconded and the vote was unanimous.

Deputy Chief Lewis provided an overview of the twelve possible sites and a recommendation was submitted on the Committee's first choice. After discussion, the Council, as a consensus, gave authorization to move forward with the negotiations on the Committee's recommended site.

Ms. Siggers moved to adjourn the closed session at 10:41 a.m. and reconvene in open session. Mr. Stacey seconded and the vote was unanimous.

City Clerk

Council President