City Council

October 14, 2014 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Fairmont was held at 7:00 p.m. on the 14th day of October, 2014, at the Public Safety Building located at 500 Quincy Street in Fairmont, West Virginia. Mayor Straight called the meeting to order. Councilmembers present were: First District Robert D. (Bob) Gribben Second District Frank G. Yann Third District Deborah D. (Debbie) Seifrit Fourth District William H. (Bill) Burdick Fifth District Charles E. (Chuck) Warner Sixth District Daniel K. (Dan) Weber Seventh District James B. (Jamie) Greene Eighth District Robin W. Smith Ninth District Ronald J. (Ron) Straight, Sr. Also present were: City Manager Jay Rogers City Clerk Janet L. Keller City Attorney Kevin V. Sansalone Finance Director Eileen Layman IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES Rev. D.D. Meighen gave the invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag led by Councilmember Weber. A moment of silence was held in memory of Norman Kronjaeger and Oce Smith who recently passed away. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mayor Straight noted that each member of Council had received a copy of the minutes from the Regular Meeting held on September 23, 2014. He asked if there were any corrections, deletions, or amendments. Councilmember Seifrit moved to approve the minutes as submitted. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Warner. 1 The Mayor declared the minutes approved as submitted by voice vote of Council. PUBLIC HEARINGS IN RE: AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF FAIRMONT’S 2014-2015 ANNUAL BUDGET: GENERAL FUND Pursuant to a notice duly published in the Times-West Virginian on September 29, 2014, a public hearing was convened to obtain citizen input on an ordinance providing for a General Fund Budget Revision. The Mayor asked if anyone present desired to speak to the proposed ordinance. EILEEN LAYMAN, Finance Director, spoke in favor of the proposed ordinance. She went over the highlights of the budget revision. There being no one else to speak, the public hearing was called to a close at 7:06 p.m. ANNOUNCEMENTS IN RE: STEVEN SHINE Mayor Straight introduced Lt. Steve Shine who was in attendance. He noted that he was the police officer that was injured in a motorcycle accident earlier this summer. IN RE: CONDOLENCES TO NORMAN KRONJAEGER FAMILY Councilmember Weber expressed condolences to the family of Norman Kronjaeger. He noted that the County may always replace Norm Kronjaeger, the Surveyor, but they will never replace Norm Kronjaeger, the man. Councilmember Warner noted that it was a loss for Fairmont with the passing of Norm Kronjaeger. 2 Mayor Straight extended his thoughts and prayers to the Kronjaeger family on the recent passing of Norman. IN RE: CONDOLENCES TO OCE SMITH FAMILY Councilmember Weber said that he did not know about the passing of Oce Smith until the Mayor just mentioned it. He said that sympathies go out to his family. The Mayor also extended condolences to the Smith family. IN RE: RETREAT FOR CITY COUNCILMEMBERS Councilmember Weber asked the City Manager to schedule several retreats for the City Council in the future with the current City Council and to schedule another one early after the coming election for the newest members of Council at that time. He noted that there are many issues that Council needs to discuss without voting and he thought it was imperative that Council sit down and discuss these various topics. IN RE: NEWSPAPER ADS REGARDING MAYOR STRAIGHT Councilmember Weber noted that everyone knows how he is a big supporter of the Constitution especially with the first, second, fourth and fourteenth amendments. He went on to say that when one of his colleagues character and integrity is taken into question without proof and placed in an ad in the local newspaper, he will defend this person’s right to speak out and buy an ad but he will say that this ad becomes, in his opinion, a defamation of this person’s character. He noted that one has to show proof of defamation and that harm will come from what someone says or does. He stated that the harm that he sees belongs to this person who is the defamer and he should publicly apologize and privately apologize and if he doesn’t, he is at best a coward and at worst a jackass. Councilmember Seifrit noted that she agreed with Councilmember Weber and this person does owe Mayor Straight an apology. 3 IN RE: PARKED VEHICLES AT THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING Councilmember Seifrit stated that there is a parking problem in the lot at the Public Safety Building. She noted that it is the same police cars parked in the same spot every day. She asked if they could be moved to Minor Avenue. Mr. Rogers replied that those cars may be assigned to officers that are not to the point where they have been assigned a take-home vehicle so that vehicle stays here and rotates through the shifts. He noted that he will talk to the Police Chief about the vehicles. IN RE: CONDOLENCES TO KEVIN CARNEY FAMILY Councilmember Burdick extended condolences to the family of Kevin Carney. He noted that Kevin was part of the soccer family and continued the work at the soccer complex. IN RE: PURPLE HEART COMMERATIVE EVENT Mayor Straight reported that he had the privilege to be the master of ceremonies at the Purple Heart commemorative event. CITIZENS PETITIONS IN RE: NORMAN KRONJAEGER LAURA KRONJAEGER-BAKER addressed Council on the recent passing of her father, Norman Kronjaeger. She thanked Council and staff for expressing their condolences in person by attending the visitation and funeral service. IN RE: DRAINAGE SITUATE ON EAST PARK AVENUE WILLARD FARRELL, owner of the Subway on East Park Avenue, addressed Council regarding the condition of East Park Avenue. He reported that he has not received any contact from the State Department of Highways regarding the drop inlet in front of his store. IN RE: ALLEY ABANDONMENT BETWEEN HAMPTON ROAD AND CELIA STREET 4 TIM HADDOX addressed Council regarding the proposed alley abandonment between Hampton Road and Celia Street. Mr. Haddox spoke against the abandonment. He said that it was important to them that if she would get it abandoned, she will then have to get all three of her lots conveyed into one lot, which she will never do. He then said that she has a “hunting cabin” on the lot that she illegally put on there to start with. He said that he has a petition signed by 15 people that are against the abandonment. STEVE SHINE also spoke against the proposed abandonment. He said that he and his wife own rental property next to the property in question. He noted that this alley runs between Celia Street and Hampton Road and it has not been one of the most up kept pieces of property that Debra Miller’s family has lived in. He said that he didn’t even know there was an alley there or maybe he would have used it at some point until this all became an issue. He said that the issue was that whenever she moved the “hunting cabin” or large Amish building right in behind his rental property. He noted that this shed was put up on sticks and somebody was living there for a certain period of time. He went on to say that the whole catalyst for the abandonment is the fact that Debbie Miller wants to have that little building there and there is no doubt that she will have somebody else move back in there once the decision is made on it. He noted that he was more upset that she did not receive a variance, and maybe is not allowed to have a variance, because of the way the property is designed. He then mentioned that he was more concerned about getting that building out of there and why hasn’t it been removed. He said that we have this building there that shouldn’t be there and that it was moved in and a driveway has been established and now this abandonment is just because of the situation and it doesn’t mean that we should abandon the property for that reason. He closed by saying that his fear is that it is going to be nothing more than an eyesore and basically since June this hunting cabin has been sitting behind their house upon blocks with people living in and out of it. He then said that if the ordinance is set for public hearing on October 28th, he will be back to echo these same complaints at the public hearing. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT IN RE: SYMPATHY TO KRONJAEGER FAMILY 5 Mr. Rogers expressed his sympathy to Laura Kronjaeger-Baker and her family. He noted that Norman will be greatly missed but we will continue to see his touch for years. IN RE: STREET PAVING PROJECT The City Manager reported that there are three streets left in the West Side area and then they will be moving to the Watson area for the final streets to be paved. He noted that they were right on budget. IN RE: STREET MAINTENANCE CHARGE UPDATE Mr. Rogers presented the quarterly report for the Street Maintenance Charge for the period ending September 30, 2014. IN RE: CUSTOMER APPRECIATION DAY The Manager reported that the Times-West Virginian will be hosting a Customer Appreciation Day and open house on Tuesday, October 21 st. He noted that the open house will be held from 4:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. IN RE: HOME RULE Mr. Rogers stated that the City is grateful that we were selected as one of the 16 new cities into the Home Rule program. He said that we are in the process of hearing from the Home Rule Board about our proposals and to find out if all of those proposals were accepted and then the procedures that we will have to go through next. He said just like in the plan, we will be required to draft those ordinances and have those available for public comment, hold a public hearing, then send those ordinances to the Home Rule Board, meet with the Home Rule Board, have the Home Rule Board approve those ordinances and then bring those back to go through our regular ordinance process. He noted that just because the City was accepted, the plan doesn’t automatically get blessed and it all starts tomorrow. Mr. Rogers then explained to Council that one of the things they are working on is to build a page on our new website about Home Rule and the education process. He said this will get people to understand that Home Rule isn’t something new, not new to Fairmont, and not new to West Virginia. He 6 noted that there are 39 states across our country that operate under a Home Rule form of government in municipal government. He said this will get people to understand here’s what is in the plan, here is the presentation that we made before the Board, and here are some of the facts that are out there. The City Manager mentioned that he received information today about the City’s scoring sheet. He noted that Fairmont had the third highest application from that board which shows that our process was done the appropriate way and the committee took the application as a strong application. CONSIDERATION OF COUNCIL BUSINESS IN RE: ADOPTION, AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF FAIRMONT’S 2014-2015 ANNUAL BUDGET: GENERAL FUND Mayor Straight entertained a motion for the adoption of an ordinance providing for a General Fund Budget Revision. Motion: Councilmember Greene moved for the adoption of the proposed ordinance. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Smith. Roll call was taken by the Clerk. The Mayor declared the ordinance adopted by unanimous vote of Council and the ordinance designated as Ordinance No. 1628 was duly adopted. IN RE: INTRODUCTION, FIRST READING, SET PUBLIC HEARING, AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE VACATION AND ABANDONMENT OF PORTIONS OF UNOPENED ALLEY WAY, IN THE CITY OF FAIRMONT, FAIRMONT CITY DISTRICT, MARION COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA, AND BEING THAT CERTAIN PORTION OF RIGHT OF WAY WITHIN AN UNAMED ALLEY LYING BETWEEN HAMPTON ROAD AND CELIA STREET AND BETWEEN PARCELS 47.1 THROUGH 49 AND 87 THROUGH 94 OF SAID TAX MAP 03- 32.; RESERVING ALL UTILITY RIGHTS, INCLUDING AN EASEMENT AT LEAST 20’ FEET IN WIDTH FOR DOMINION HOPE, INC., FOR THE OPERATION, MAINTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT OF AN EXISTING GAS PIPELINE, FOLLOWING REMAND 7 Mayor Straight entertained a motion and a second for the introduction of this ordinance and to set the public hearing for October 28, 2014 to abandon a portion of an unopened alley way between Hampton Road and Celia Street. Councilmember Greene moved for the introduction of the proposed ordinance and the reading of a synopsis in lieu of the entire ordinance. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. The Clerk read the proposed ordinance by synopsis for the first time. Discussion: Councilmember Warner stated that it seems to him that we have had, even though the Planning Commission did not have a response, enough response here to indicate that this is a wish of one at the cost of several. He then said that he saw no reason to take it any further. Councilmember Burdick asked the City Attorney if Council would vote “no” to set the public hearing, would it go away. Mr. Sansalone said that he believed if the motion to set it for public hearing would be voted down then the matter would die. He added that it would not have a public hearing and there would be no further action on the ordinance. Councilmember Weber stated that he, Councilmember Greene and Mayor Straight is on the Planning Commission and it has come back to them twice and he thought there were other issues other than the abandonment. He went on to say that he thought there was some code enforcement problems that we are dealing with other than the abandonment. He said that seems to be the issue. Councilmember Weber mentioned that he and Councilmember Greene have been up by that way and he thought it had to do with code enforcement rather than the abandonment. Mr. Sansalone said that he is not familiar with the entirety of the situation but his understanding just from knowledge of the general codes of the city is that you cannot have an accessory structure on an independent lot without a primary structure and this particular instance the alley divides what would be considered the rear yard for the accessory structure which is located from the primary structure and this would be the first step in correcting that. He 8 noted that he was not advocating one way or the other. He added that if the alley was abandoned then the next step that the property owner would have to take would be to apply to the Planning Commission to have the lot combined into one lot so that the pending structure which is what Mr. Shine and Mr. Haddox indicated would then become an accessory structure to the main house and being located in the rear yard would then be a permitted use. He mentioned that he has not been there or been asked by code enforcement to review the situation but that is what he has gathered from the discussions here and with the City Planner. Councilmember Weber said that the only thing the Planning Commission was basically adjudicated to do was to decide whether to abandon the alley and that was it. He said that they had no other interest in the issue other than the abandonment of the property. Mr. Sansalone said that if you look at the prerequisites of the abandonment, they are satisfied in this instance which is what the Planning Commission found on both occasions that they considered it because it was not necessary for a public travel and never been opened and it’s overgrown and no one at this point has suggested that it be opened or that it is used by anybody and there are several of these alleys in the City and the Planning Commission generally takes the same stance that they need to be abandoned and the reservation of the utility rights, he thought was appropriate. He went on to say that he thought there was communication with Dominion Hope and other utilities that they have the gas line right of way that is necessary to preserve that for their use and maintenance and operation of that gas line for themselves and anyone who they would subsequently assign their interest in. Councilmember Warner said that he did not think there was any advantage or disadvantage to the City one way or the other in this action. He said that the neighbors have expressed their wishes and they are asking us as City Council to act on their behalf as a group and not grant the wishes of a single person. He said that he thought their voices speak loud. Councilmember Gribben noted that he agreed with Councilmember Warner. He said that he spoke to another source about this and what he was hearing was the same kind of comments that Mr. Haddox was speaking of in the other session we had. 9 Councilmember Greene said that from the Planning Commission’s point of view and he wanted to say at this forum is that at least two members of the Planning Commission felt that the approval of the decision to abandon felt like we were rewarding bad behavior as a Commission. He then said that when the Planning Commission was looking at that alley, they were looking specifically at a public right of way that has not, does not, or will not in the future serve in public purpose. He noted that he appreciates Mr. Shine coming in and saying that he didn’t know it was there and might use it now that he knows it’s there. Mr. Rogers then said that for clarification purpose, Councilmember Weber is right, there is a code enforcement issue there but we have to remember that when that individual didn’t have a permit and were cited by the Code Enforcement Department that their appeal for their application to the Planning Commission for the right of way abandonment stayed that process of enforcement on that. He said that they are entitled to due process and their due process is because there was the alternative to try to have it abandoned, once that case has run its course, then the enforcement action of having the structure illegally placed there will go through the enforcement process. He noted that they are two different issues. Councilmember Weber noted that the abandonment is one issue and the building is another issue that the Planning Commission has no purview over. He said that the only thing we were to do was to decide about the abandonment for the unopened alley way. He mentioned that the Planning Commission has been over this issue several times and he agreed that there are other people, like Mr. Shine and Mr. Haddox, who oppose the opening of this but he did not know whether they oppose the opening of the alley way or is it the building that is on the alley way. He noted that the building seems to be the problem with the neighbors, it is not the alley way, it’s the building that sits there and we don’t have any control over that. He said that the only people to have control over the building is code enforcement and all we were asked to do was to abandon the alley way and under the rules, we can open up any alley way like that there is. The Mayor said if there are no other comments, the question is to set the item for a public hearing or to not set it for a public hearing. Mayor Straight asked for all of those in favor of the motion to set the item for the public hearing. The following votes were recorded: 10 Councilmember Burdick No Councilmember Smith No Councilmember Seifrit No Councilmember Weber No Councilmember Yann No Councilmember Greene No Councilmember Gribben Yes Mayor Straight No Councilmember Warner No The Mayor declared the motion to set the public hearing failed by a majority vote of Council. IN RE: INTRODUCTION, FIRST READING, SET PUBLIC HEARING, AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF FAIRMONT, AMENDING AND SUPPLEMENTING ORDINANCE NO. 1366, MORE PARTICULARLY, CHAPTER 3 DISTRICTS AND REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 1319, SPECIAL USE DISTRICTS, SECTION 1319.05 TECHNOLOGY DISTRICT THEREOF, TO EXPAND LIMITED MANUFACTURING FACILITIES WITHIN THE DISTRICT Mayor Straight entertained a motion and a second for the introduction of this ordinance and to set the public hearing for October 28, 2014 to amend Ordinance No. 1366 to expand limited manufacturing facilities within the Technology District. Councilmember Warner moved for the introduction of the proposed ordinance and the reading of a synopsis in lieu of the entire ordinance. Councilmember Greene seconded the motion. The Clerk read the proposed ordinance by synopsis for the first time. The Mayor declared the public hearing set for October 28, 2014 by voice vote of Council. IN RE: INTRODUCTION, FIRST READING, SET PUBLIC HEARING, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FAIRMONT PROVIDING FOR THE RE-NAMING OF A PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN STREET IDENTIFIED AS BUSINESS PARK DRIVE SITUATE IN THE CITY OF FAIRMONT, GRANT DISTRICT, MARION COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA, IN WHAT IS COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE MARION REGIONAL BUSINESS PARK, FROM BUSINESS PARK DRIVE TO EPIC CIRCLE DRIVE 11 Mayor Straight entertained a motion and a second for the introduction of this ordinance and to set the public hearing for October 28, 2014 to rename a portion of a certain street identified as Business Park Drive to Epic Circle Drive. Councilmember Warner moved for the introduction of the proposed ordinance and the reading of a synopsis in lieu of the entire ordinance. Councilmember Greene seconded the motion. The Clerk read the proposed ordinance by synopsis for the first time. The Mayor declared the public hearing set for October 28, 2014 by voice vote of Council. IN RE: TWO RE-APPOINTMENTS, FAIRMONT PARKING AUTHORITY, THREE-YEAR TERMS TO END SEPTEMBER 30, 2017 Mayor Straight entertained a motion for two re-appointments to the Fairmont Parking Authority for three-year terms to end September 30, 2017. Motion: Councilmember Warner moved to re-appoint Karen Gribben and Nick Cinalli to the Fairmont Parking Authority for three-year terms to end September 30, 2017. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Yann. Roll call was taken by the Clerk. The Mayor declared Karen Gribben and Nick Cinalli re-appointed to the Fairmont Parking Authority for three-year terms to end September 30, 2017 by unanimous vote of Council. ADJOURNMENT The Mayor entertained a motion for adjournment. Motion: Councilmember Smith moved to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Warner. The Mayor declared the meeting adjourned by voice vote of Council at 8:07 12 p.m. 13