Misc. Meeting Notes

June 29, 2015:  Miscellaneous from tonight’s meeting: “Compensation for officers and employees of general administration department” (those not covered by a labor contract) was on third reading. Councilwoman Karen Lieske asked for the job descriptions. Law Director Ebert said he would not hold up compensation waiting for job descriptions. This has been an ongoing issue with council members asking for job descriptions and never receiving them. In December 2014, Councilman Henderson expressed disappointment regarding job descriptions - in particular for the new Human Resource position. He was told they were being worked on.

No one, including the mayor has any idea when the new Panorama Deli will open. The owners did file for a liquor license on June 19. I go by almost every day trying to catch someone there. Tables and chairs are there so it must be close.

The League of Women Voters did present a check this evening for $10,000 toward better microphone, etc. equipment. The mayor asked Council President Koomar to do the honors in accepting the check. The mayor did accept the check presented from Eric Eakin, Bay Fireworks Committee for the Fourth of July Fireworks.

Fireworks and Rain Dates

June 27, 2015:  Close enough to the 4th of July so let’s talk fireworks. You may be seeing an end to fireworks rain dates - one of the things that made Bay unique. But, first I want to say thank you to everyone that works on the Bay Days Fireworks Fund.

Bay always opts to use the same vendor. There was some question at a recent meeting about the mayor’s loyalty with American Fireworks considering we may be able to get bigger and better, but the mayor is loyal to American Fireworks. Fire Chief Lyons believes they are the safest.

Meeting minutes June 1: “Mrs. Lieske asked how the rain date for the fireworks can be scheduled for Sunday, July 5, 2015. Mr. Ebert stated that there is no prohibition in the Cahoon Will about having fireworks on a Sunday in Cahoon Memorial Park.”

Meeting minutes June 15: “Mrs. Lieske stated that she raised the question about the rain date for the fireworks this year being listed on the contract as Sunday, July 5, 2015. The Kiwanis has it posted for Monday, July 6, 2015, which Mr. Ebert noted is the day approved by the trustees for the rain date.”

Mayor Sutherland stated that they are trying to work around that and it was just a glitch with the contract. However, the Mayor wants Council to be thinking about the fact that the administration does not want to continue the practice of having a rain date. They have never had to cancel the fireworks; nobody else does rain dates. It will cost $3,000 just for the Service Department. The biggest problem is scheduling people to work. The date for the fireworks requires a heavy police presence and it is planned out months in advance. When you go to a rain date you cannot get the same people to come back the next night or two nights later. When we had 140 people working for the City maybe it wasn’t as big of an issue, but now that we have 92 or 93 it is really problematic, especially being so shorthanded right now in the Police Department.

Mr. Henderson stated that in Bay Village some of the funding for the fireworks is from private donations. Mr. Ebert stated that the Kiwanis and organizations that sponsor Bay Day always get the most carnival traffic on fireworks day. This year there is nothing going on for Bay Days on Monday, July 6. Mayor Sutherland stated that if the fireworks are cancelled because of weather, the funds will be flipped into the following year. Mr. Vincent asked how the contract addresses the issue. The Mayor stated that there is a 50% fee but you put that against overtime and the fact that we don’t have the personnel. Mr. Ebert noted that there is no prohibition in the Cahoon Will about fireworks on Sundays. Mayor Sutherland stated that they will get back to Council. The contract says that the rain date is Sunday, and she doesn’t even know if they are available on Monday.”

Residents Want to Know

June 24, 2015:  The message residents want the mayor to receive: If you can't knock on my door now - don't knock during campaign time either.

While many in the city are beginning to rise above yesterday’s flooding issues, I have been hearing the outcry – where is the mayor?

In times like this, people want to see the face of the city. Answering phones, walking the neighborhoods or at the very least taking the home page of the city website and making a statement acknowledging the resident’s concerns - would be the right thing to do. Instead, it is neighbors and families coming together to continue to make Bay Village what it is - it is not the city administration.

Supporters are saying the flooding is not the fault of anyone or anything that the city has or has not done. That does not change the fact that people need to hear from their mayor. Those whose basements flood when there is a small storm or have experienced problems for years, this is the straw that broke their back. Regardless of fault or blame, it is an emotional time and people feel they have been abandoned by the city.

While the mayor is busy with her own flooding and not personally answering the phones at city hall, she did advise that you call (440) 871-1221. The service department will add you to the list for the sewer crew to come out to your property. You can also contact your council representative to learn if there are other things you can do, or to voice your concerns.

Mayor Responds to Flooding

June 24 at 3:55pm:  Bay Village Mayor Sutherland Responds to Flood Concerns

Bay Village Mayor Debbie Sutherland has released the following statement in response to wide-spread flooding in the city.

http://www.thevillagernewspaper.com/2015/06/24/bay-village-mayor-sutherland-responds-to-flood-concerns/

(facebook comments)

… It took her 36 hrs......but yes, she finally responded.

…Seemed like a good response albeit a late one.

…Seems like a generic response to rain flooding not sanitary sewers. Interesting we called again yesterday and told a city official social media was frustrated with a few rumors...

More Microphone Stall

June 22, 2015:  The microphone/recording issue and the constant iteration that we need more than one bid: “For $20,000 we need more than one” Renee Mahoney can be heard saying at last Monday’s meeting and in previous meetings. Yet the city was not paying a full $20,000 – remember? $10,000 was to be a gift from the LWV and the bid came in around $18,000.

When a fiber optic system was investigated for the city in the fall of 2014, only one bid was submitted; until council insisted we get another. The original bid was approximately $48,000. The project was worked on by Ruth Popovich, Asst. Finance Director. I remember the meeting when this was discussed and Renee Mahoney, Finance Director did not want to obtain a second bid because Ruth had worked long and hard on this project to get the first bid together. When questioned, she stated that bids under $50,000 did not need to go out to more than one vendor. Suddenly, a second bid becomes the utmost important point of stalling the microphone project?

Additionally, the Mayor and Mrs. Mahoney are looking to add a better system to the Dwyer Center even though this is not in agreement with the League’s donation. At last Monday’s meeting the Mayor wasn’t too positive that this would be in place by September, since they are waiting for that second proposal. She also stated “It doesn’t sound like video would be a viable option for us” because a person is needed to run the equipment. Understandably she does not want to hire someone for that, but maybe she could ask for civic organization help, community volunteers or high school students or school groups before nixing videotaping of the meetings.

(facebook notes) Someone asked me if I was criticizing Renee for doing due diligence. My response:  Renee Mahoney has turned the finance department around for the better. She is honest and does her due diligence – which is why the extreme becomes distinct.

The recording issue has been over a year in the works. Meetings with the League and discussions with council and a vendor, Renee had been apprised of. Finally the announcement, May 4, 2015 – Councilman Vincent announces the League donation. The Mayor is not at this meeting but Renee says the mayor does not want microphones in the conference room. She does not mention due diligence. When council states they appropriate the funds Renee states “but I sign the purchase order and I answer to the mayor.” Renee still does not mention getting more than one estimate. Renee continues “the mayor’s thought is to have all the meetings in council chambers.” There is no mention of getting additional vendor quotes.

May 18 – I question the mayor regarding the delay. Renee is seated next to her. The mayor says her problem is the hard wiring of the conference room. I question more “To be clear then, if you have any other concerns you should let everyone know now”. The mayor does not mention a problem with only one quote. Renee does not mention a problem with only one quote. No one mentions a second vendor or a desire for due diligence.

May 19 – Cleveland.com article – the mayor never mentions a problem with only one quote. Her only concerns are hard wiring the conference room and a desire to add video.

In this particular case due diligence was an afterthought in an attempt to postpone the inevitable.

Deer Culling

June 22, 2015:  Deer culling was discussed during last Monday’s meeting. There is a July 31st deadline to apply for a culling permit for Walker Road Park. Avon Lake and Bay will partner in the culling. No one knew definite costs and the cost will be shared between Avon Lake and Bay. During the April 21st Walker Road Ad Hoc Committee Meeting, Avon Lake President of Council Marty O’Donnell stated the cost for deer culling at Walker Road Park would be a little less than $6,000. A resident asked what that expense would cover. Avon Lake Chief of Police Duane Streator responded that the $6,000 is the fee paid to the Department of Agriculture for the permit. There were additional costs for safety forces and other expenses.

The Mayor stated last Monday that she thought the cost of culling ran about $1,000 to $1,500 per deer. However, the reality was Avon Lake “signed an initial service agreement with the USDA to spend up to $15,960 for sharpshooting services, but the actual cost came in at $8,557 for the 19 deer that were killed between Feb. 27 and April 11. That total amounts to an average of slightly more than $450 per deer, which at-large Councilman John Shondel, who has been preparing a 10-year deer management program to present to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources in July, said was worthwhile. USDA sharpshooters killed 16 deer at Weiss Field and volunteer archers killed three deer at the city landfill.”

Council Raises

June 9, 2015:  Council voted on council raises last night. Karen Lieske and Tom Henderson held fast to their beliefs. Lieske cited people in our city struggling and she remains opposed to the increases as she did 2 years ago. Henderson was opposed to the way the entire issue was handled. Dave Tadych was visibly upset by the opposition.

The ordinance on first read June 1, had to be decided on emergency reading June 8 because of the filing deadline for council candidates, which is tomorrow, Wednesday June 10.

2 council members were absent. Henderson called for discussion. There had to be 4 in favor for the ordinance to pass. Once we had the clarification Henderson said “In that case I move to amend by reading…” He put together a secondary motion on top of the primary motion proposing a 1.5% increase instead of 2%. The vote on this motion to amend failed.

The Mayor stated that Law Director Ebert recommended the 2% be approved. After approval, individual council members would be allowed to decide to reduce the amount on their own or council could collectively decide to reduce the amounts. This was advised being sensitive to Mrs. Lieske and Mr. Henderson’s point of view, yet, not to penalize the other council members.

Ordinance 15-44 – Fixing the Salary of the President and Members of Council was voted down. Clark, Lee and Tadych vote yes. Lieske and Henderson vote no.

The Mayor places a call to Ebert. Tadych can be heard asking “Can I introduce one for 1.75?” The amendment could not be reconsidered at this meeting and by the next meeting it would be too late – past the June 10 deadline. Once the Mayor’s call with Ebert ends, Tadych announces he is going to introduce an amendment to that. Mr. Henderson tells him he cannot, but he wants to and Mr. Henderson calls “point of order”*. There can be no further motion because it has already been voted on and there is nothing else on the agenda. Mr. Tadych is heard saying “This is ridiculous.”

Karen Lieske and Tom Henderson were a joy to watch and listen to. If you were among those that did not want council to receive increases, thank them when you see them.

(*point of order - A point of order can be raised at any time when any member notices a violation of the rules. – Robert’s Rules of Order)

June 22, 2015: To elaborate on Mr. Henderson and Mrs. Lieske’s points regarding the 2% pay increase for council (which did not pass): “The people on Social Security are getting 1.7%; I just can’t vote for a 2% raise for the next four years in this environment under those conditions. I would welcome a 1.5% series of numbers.” “Mr. Henderson stated that it is his opinion that we have market rates, just like these $100 rates that nobody is willing to bid less than to do these jobs of mowing. That is a market set rate.”

Mrs. Lieske: “In terms of looking at residents and some of the issues our residents are facing that could be costing them some money in terms of fees and what happens in the Bruce/Douglas area. We have the other area where the homes are in need of help and rehabilitation. Those aren’t even in my ward but I look at what our residents are facing. It is part time, even though it is a lot of time, I just can’t accept additional revenue when I am looking at what they are having to face.”

(Taken from Committee Session Minutes 6/8/15)