HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-09-23 Government Operations Committee Minutes
Government Operations Committee
September 23, 2008
Minutes
Councilors Attending: Hawes, Blanchette, Farrington, Gratwick
Staff Attending: Farrar, Cammack, Gastia, Nicklas, Hamilton, Comstock, Higgins,
Heitmann
Others Attending: Hussey (EMMC), Gerety (Bangor Mall), several members of Peace &
Justice Center, Cathy Larkin
Council Chair Hawes clarified that voting members of the Committee are herself, Blanchette and
Farrington.
CONSENT
A motion was made and seconded to approve the Consent Agenda items.
1. Resolve 08-312, Accepting and Appropriating a Grant from the Maine Department of
Human Services, Center for Disease Control, in the amount of $458,892 for the Purpose
of Addressing Tobacco, Substance Abuse, Chronic Disease, Nutrition, and Physical
Health through Prevention Strategies
The Maine Center for Disease Control (CDC) recently awarded the Health and
Community Services Department this grant to extend the current project period through
June, 2009. The Resolve will accept and appropriate the grant funds.
2. Resolve 08-313, Accepting and Appropriating a Grant from the Maine Department of
Human Services, Office of Substance Abuse, in the amount of $50,000 to Support an
Overdose Prevention Program
This is a continuation of a State grant aimed at implementing strategies for overdose
prevention. It is for the period July 1, 2008 to June 30, 2009. The Resolve will accept
and appropriate the grant funds.
3. Resolve 08-314, Accepting and Appropriating a $1,000 Grant from the Maine
Department of Health and Human Services, Center for Disease Control, to Work with the
Lead Poison Prevention Fund to Develop Local Infrastructure for Lead Poisoning
Prevention
The Lead Poison Prevention Fund is funded through a 25 cent fee on each gallon of
paint sold in Maine. This grant program is the first step in a coordinated effort to
eradicate lead poisoning in Maine.
4. Proposed Amendment to Personnel Rules and Regulations, Section 7.7.4 Dental
Insurance
This proposed amendment would allow regularly scheduled part-time employees the
opportunity to participate in the City’s voluntary group dental insurance plan at their full
cost. Currently, only full-time employees are allowed to participate at their full cost. By
adding this group of employees as eligible participants, it improves our fringe benefit
offering for part-time employees and there is no cost to the City.
REGULAR AGENDA
5. Request by the Center Street First Baptist Church to Use the City-owned Spring Street
Parking Lot for a Neighborhood Event
Farrar indicated that The First Baptist Church had requested the use of the gravel
parking lot behind the Church (accessed by Spring Street) for a neighborhood outdoor
gathering on a Saturday evening in October. The Church would like to bring area
neighbors together and have requested permission to use this City owned property.
Cathy Larkin, President of First Baptist Church, provided details of some ideas the
church has in order to work with the neighborhood; i.e. a community garden, a
neighborhood watch, activities for children. The Church would like to enable the
neighborhood to get together with a bonfire in the parking lot behind the church. The
request was two fold: a public gathering and a bonfire. Blanchette applauded the
efforts of the Church to bring a neighborhood together. In terms of the process, Farrar
said a license agreement would be put together by the Legal Department. Cammack
said once the bonfire is in place, the Church needs to contact the Fire Department who
will send an engine to the site and a permit will be issued, if it is acceptable. Larkin said
she will contact the Department to find out what is acceptable. Larkin asked if the lot
could be posted for no parking on the date of the event. Gastia said the department
would need a 24-hour advance notice and he provided the contact name/number for
Larkin to contact. A motion was made and seconded to approve the request, subject to
conformance of City regulations. Farrar asked Larkin to contact the City’s Attorney
regarding the license agreement.
6. Council Ordinance 08-298, Amending the Code of the City of Bangor, Chapter 81,
Building Code, by adding Section 81-3 Emergency Service Radio Amplification Systems.
Gastia noted that several years ago the Police, Fire, and other emergency services
personnel realized there was a problem to communicate via radio with dispatch or each
other when in buildings, usually due to the size of the building. This lack of
communication could easily result in increased danger to emergency personnel or those
they are attempting to aid.
The proposed new section of the Code requires certain buildings to install equipment
amplifying emergency radio communications as the buildings are constructed or
modified. Certain buildings greater than 40,000 square feet or with significant space
below street level are affected. The Ordinance provides requirements for the location of
the equipment and outlines testing procedures.
About a year ago, Gastia stated that grant funds were secured for the installation of bi-
directional amplifiers in EMMC and the Bangor Mall. Although it was a great success,
however, it did not solve additional problems with new construction. Through research,
Capt. Higgins has found that municipalities around the country have adopted Ordinances
to require that buildings of a certain square footage with certain construction materials
install the bi-directional amplifiers for the safety of those in the building and emergency
personnel. Gastia asked for the Committee’s support to recommend adoption of the
Ordinance to the full Council.
Cammack noted that at the last Government Operations Committee staff was asked to
provide specific information, including the following: to install the bi-directional
equipment at the Bangor Mall was 6.5 cents per square foot and at EMMC it was
approximately 10 cents per square foot. Staff also put together a best estimate of
$34,675 for installation of the equipment in a building of 40,000 sq. ft., which is 86
cents per square foot. Cammack introduced Mr. Hussey and Mr. Gerety from EMMC and
the Bangor Mall respectively.
Blanchette asked for a number of buildings within the City that would benefit by the
installation and asked if the City is in a position to request compliance. Responding to
Blanchette, Higgins said he does not have a total number of buildings. He is most
concerned about maintaining the current system and working with new construction.
Farrington asked about the cost and its effect on businesses and wondered if it would be
a deterrent to future businesses moving into Bangor. Paul Nicklas had sent a letter to
area businesses about the proposed Ordinance and the date and time of the committee
meeting. Gerety thanked Gastia for including the Mall in the project. He can’t imagine
that other businesses would not be willing to include this as a cost of future
development. Hussey said that EMMC is very appreciative of the project. It was very
well coordinated by the City. He said that before the installations there were many
communication dead spots within the building. He supports it as a necessary
fundamental change.
Gratwick said the proposed Ordinance is reasonable, and he would find it difficult to
think that businesses would not be willing to comply. Responding to Gratwick,
Cammack said other communities have ordinances in place and he felt that the 40,000
sq. ft. was a reasonable cut off number for Bangor. Gastia said that the new police
facility, which is just over 40,000 square feet, has a communication problem and
unfortunately failed to realize this at the time of construction.
Responding to Gratwick, Phil Johnston, the project manager for the new court house
building, said he would like to find out the requirements of the City. After reading the
Ordinance, he asked if specific equipment will be required and who the Court House
would work with on the project to add to the new structure. Higgins said the proposed
Ordinance has certain requirements as to the level of communication. The way a
business reaches that level is not part of the Ordinance. Higgins suggested that
Johnston should speak with EMMC and Bangor Mall officials regarding their experience
with the installation. He provided photos of the two installations.
st
Responding to Johnston, Nicklas thought it would be retro to July 1. Gastia said that
when the original Ordinance change was brought before the Committee it was to make
the installation a requirement for all new construction. However, there was some
interest and concern among the Committee that it should be applicable for buildings
where a Certificate of Occupancy had not yet been obtained. This is one of the reasons
that the item is back before the Committee today. To make all of the buildings
retroactive would place a tremendous burden on businesses and building owners. To
install the equipment during construction is less expensive than to an existing structure.
Nicklas said currently there is no retroactivity provision and the Ordinance should be
made clearer if it were to apply to buildings without Certificate of Occupancy.
Responding to Hawes, Gastia said he would strongly urge the Committee to recommend
the retroactivity clause to the full Council. Higgins agreed and mentioned some of the
larger construction sites in progress.
Blanchette made a motion to approve staff recommendation including retroactivity for
those construction projects without a Certificate of Occupancy to the full Council.
Farrington seconded it but did ask to continue discussion. Farrington discussed his
concern about the retroactivity clause. He agreed with the safety issue involved for
building occupants and for emergency personnel but wants to be fair to the business
and property owner. Blanchette clarified her motion. She stated that if the Ordinance is
passed by the Council, it becomes effective ten days after passage. Any building that is
being constructed and has not received a Certificate of Occupancy at that ten day date
will be required to comply with the Ordinance. She didn’t feel it would be over
burdensome. The City has a responsibility to protect the people that are coming into
the City every day to live and to shop. Safety regulations need to be in place. The
Ordinance can be crafted to the City’s satisfaction without placing roadblocks to
businesses.
Nicklas said that the purpose of the letter he sent to the business and effected property
owners was to notify them of the proposed Ordinance. He noted that only one business
owner was in attendance. He said that further notification might be needed.
Cammack said he understands Farrington’s concern that the City is crafting legislation
that affects businesses that have already established a budget. The original proposal
does not include retroactivity. Cammack urged the Committee to approve the proposal
as it stands for all new construction. It would allow time for staff to visit sites currently
under construction to work with them regarding voluntary compliance. He suggested
that if voluntary compliance does not come on its own then perhaps staff would return
to the Committee and ask approval of the retroactive clause.
Blanchette clarified that it is less expensive to add the equipment during the
construction phase. Cammack agreed.
Gastia said he doesn’t want to delay or end up in a position without a bi-directional
amplification Ordinance. He doesn’t feel that working to obtain voluntary compliance is
an effective method.
Nicklas said that buildings that have a Certificate of Occupancy would not be covered,
and buildings that have not received a permit would be covered. The Ordinance is not
clear about what is in between. He said he would need clarification in order to amend
the Ordinance proposal. Higgins said it is a gray area that needs to be cleared.
Blanchette said that it is the Council’s prerogative to pass an Ordinance and then amend
it at a later date.
Nicklas asked if the Committee wants the Ordinance to apply to any building that does
not have a Certificate of Occupancy by the date that the Ordinance goes into effect.
Blanchette said it is a mandate without giving businesses a chance to voluntary comply.
She would like business to have a chance to comply.
Farrar said if the Committee wants staff to attempt to obtain voluntary compliance, then
the Ordinance before the Committee should be recommended for approval. If the
Committee wants it to be mandatory for any permitted project, then it would need to
amend the Ordinance to include the language that Nicklas indicated would be
appropriate regarding the Certificate of Occupancy. Higgins agreed with Farrar.
Blanchette then moved the Ordinance as originally presented to the Committee on to
the full Council. She wants the Ordinance to be voluntary and not mandatory with
respect to those projects currently permitted but without a Certificate of Occupancy.
Farrington seconded it. It will be moved forward to full Council.
7. Discussion Concerning Whether the City Council Wishes to Support a Resolution
Opposing the United States Entering into a War with Iran
At the request Hawes, Councilor Gratwick introduced the item on behalf of the Peace
and Justice Center.
Gratwick indicated that he is not a voting member of the Committee but was pleased to
be able to bring the item before the Committee. He applauded the desire of local
citizens of Bangor to have their concerns heard. He understands that the group would
like the Committee to move this on to the full Council.
Hawes explained that the request is to ask the City Council to support a Resolve
expressing the Council’s opposition to the United States entering into a war with Iran.
Joe Knox, Forest Avenue, asked those in attendance for this item to stand. He also
presented a petition signed by interested citizens. He said it is not so much a political
issue as it is affirmation of the Constitution. He stated that the current conflict in Iraq
was done without normal Constitutional procedures of Congressional authority and the
declaration of war. The Resolve essentially puts communities on record as affirming the
roles of the Executive and Legislative branches. It does not make a political statement
one way or the other.
Mike Howard, Third Street, stressed that whether the Council ultimately votes on this
issue or not the fact that 20 individuals have attended this meeting and 70-80
individuals have signed a petition should be enough for the Committee to forward this
on to Council for discussion. He feels this is a local as well as a national issue. He read
portions of the proposed Resolution. Local government has a role to represent and to
express concerns of the citizenry to the federal government.
John Hanson, Mountain View Avenue, felt it would be appropriate for citizens to come to
local government asking them to convey a concern to the federal government. It is
expressing a concern, not a position. The full Council should have an opportunity to
review and discuss the Resolution in a public meeting setting.
Carrie Curtis, Langley Street, said that federal dollars should be spent to provide bi-
directional amplification systems for municipalities as opposed to spending dollars
related to war.
Dennis Chenoy, Garland Street, said the Congress and Executive branches gave as much
consideration to war and peace as the Committee has given to local issues this evening
it would be a better place.
A Hammond Street resident said that the Council and citizens have a compelling need to
augment messaging to federal government on this issue.
Blanchette said that under the City Charter the City needs to have a balanced budget.
The City is not allowed to run a deficit. She asked why the group focused your sole
attention on Iran. There is a possibility of the U.S. going to war with Russia. She
doesn’t like to pass Resolves telling another elected body what they need to do. She
suggested that the group contact the federal officials. The City Council does not have
any control over them. She asked that the group focus their attention on effective
leadership in Washington that will represent the views of the citizens. She said she
could not support the proposed Resolve.
Hanson responded to Blanchette. He said that effective leadership is needed at every
level of government. Through the instrumentality of the Resolve they are asking that the
Council express sentiment that Congress be asked to step forward and not do anything
until the whole entire issues has been debated, discussed and citizens have been heard.
Past Bangor Councils have approved similar actions.
Hanson responded to Blanchette. He said that it is frustrating to send a letter to
Congress and received a form letter in response. He thinks it makes a statement, an
extra push if the City Council placed the item on their agenda. Other Maine
municipalities have passed the resolution. Why Iran, he said there is some urgency this
fall in addressing what could be a third front in that region.
Farrington asked for a definition of pre-emptive military action. Someone responded
that it is the initial strike, anticipating a response but striking first and not a response to
an attack. Farrington said there are two broad issues: the desire to be heard and the
Council instructing another body. He said he would be in favor of moving the item to
the City Council for further discussion and to allow the group to be heard. He stated
that he would be voting against it at the City Council level unless he can be convinced
otherwise.
Gratwick said although not a voting member he does appreciate Farrington’s
recommendation to move the item to full Council. If the Committee votes to not
forward the item to full Council, he said he would be sad as a part of democracy would
die.
Regarding advising another elected body, Knox said the purpose of the resolution is not
to tell an elected body what do, but to remind the elected officials of their constitutional
roles to not enter another lengthy conflict without due diligence and debate.
Farrington made a motion to move the item onto the full Council for discussion and
action. Blanchette said she would not second the motion. She further discussed her
thoughts that Dr. Gratwick didn’t use the appropriate process to bring it to the Council.
She feels it was disrespectful to the Council. Responding to Mr. Howard regarding a lack
of an annual town meeting in Bangor, Blanchette said that the Bangor Council meets
twice monthly and discusses items in detail.
Hawes said that due to not receiving a second, the motion did not pass. It will not be
moving forward to Council.
Gratwick explained that he was asked by a group of citizens to bring their concerns forth
to the Council. By cutting off the issue at this point, he feels it is a profound disservice
to the remainder of the Council. He profoundly apologized if he did not appropriately
follow the process. He did not intend to offend.
The meeting adjourned at 6:50 pm