Borough Council

MINUTES Stroudsburg Borough Council Meeting Tuesday, February 07, 2017 at 7 p.m. 1. Call Meeting to Order/Roll Call - Present was Council Members Joanne Kochanski, Council Vice President James Smith, Council Member Boyd Weiss, Mayor Tarah Probst, Solicitor Joseph McDonald, Council President Ken Lang, Interim Borough Manager Brian Bond, Council Member Matt Abell, Council Member Mark Connors, and Council Member Patrick Maurath. A Quorum was present. 2. Pledge of Allegiance was recited 3. Public Hearing A. Consideration of a proposed ordinance amending Chapter 27 Zoning, Stroudsburg Borough Code of Ordinances, §27-701 Off Street Parking, Reducing the Off-Street Parking Requirements for Retail Stores and Businesses in the MU-A and MU-B Districts and Other Miscellaneous Amendments. Mr. Kimes advises that Borough Council has authorized changes to the Borough’s zoning ordinances, per the PA municipal planning code, to Part 7 for retail stores and businesses in the MU-A and MU-B districts. The Borough Planning Commission, Eric Koopman, Lead Senior Planner of the Monroe County Planning Commission, and the Zoning Office has reviewed the changes. For retail stores and businesses, the change is from 1 space per 100 square feet in the customer service area to 1 space per 300 square feet. Also to establish a maximum cap of 40% parking in the district. There is also an amendment to a parking category for the removal of ‘neighborhood convenience store’. The other corrections are typographical errors. Motion to close public hearing Mr. Smith, second by Mr. Maurath. Per Solicitor McDonald proper public notice was given for the proposed ordinance amendment in the Pocono Record. Staff has the proofs of publication. Proper notice was also given for potential action on the ordinance should council choose to act on it tonight. All in favor, Motion carries. B. Consideration to approve a proposed ordinance amending Chapter 27 Zoning, Stroudsburg Borough Code of Ordinances, §27-701 Off Street Parking, Reducing the Off-Street Parking Requirements for Retail Stores and Businesses in the MU-A and MU-B Districts and Other Miscellaneous Amendments. Motion to approve Mr. Smith, second by Mr. Weiss. All in favor except Mr. Abell who is a NO. Motion carries. 4. Public Input – Mr. Corey Strubert a resident of Bartonsville and had reached out to Mr. Maurath. I am a social work student through Marywood, also taking classes at ESU, graduate level. Part of the curriculum if to do a change project. I have reached out to Street to Feet and they are willing to help. I am proposing to organize the cleanup of some of the abandoned homeless sites. Particularly behind ESSA, the Ribbon Factory as well as behind K-Mart and Walmart. Anticipating 40-50 bags of trash. Crossroads has agreed we can put some trash in their dumpsters but I am anticipating needing 2 dumpsters. I am reaching out to council to see if any dumpsters are available or is council contracted with the Monroe County Waste Authority. Mr. Bond advises we get our dumpsters from Coslar Sanitation. The site behind the Ribbon Factory along with ESSA is inhabited at this time. How much will you be taking? We will reach out to the individuals inhabiting that area currently. You should contact the property owner. There are a few abandoned sites by Glen Park; down by Claremont Avenue could fill 2 dumpsters (Houston and Claremont on the left). Mr. Lang advises to get together with Street to Feet or your resources and come back to council with your request. Mr. Bond will be your contact. Open Discussion: Mr. Smith asks if Glen Park will be added to your list. Mr. Strubert concerned about dumpster access. Mr. Bond advised dumpsters could fit in the area. Ms. Kochanski wants to make sure if we provide dumpsters it is used for Borough only trash. Mayor Probst suggesting to attend East Stroudsburg Borough council meeting. Motion to close public hearing Mr. Smith, second by Mr. Weiss. All in favor, Motion carries.  5. Approval of Council Meeting Minutes from January 17, 2017. Motion to approve Mr. Weiss, second by Ms. Kochanski. Mr. Connors appreciates the level of detail in the minutes and fully spelling out council names. All in favor with Mr. Lang abstaining. Motion carries. Old Business 6. Discussion of lost tax revenue from the I-80 proposed area of disturbance list. Mr. Bond was directed by council at the last meeting to come up with the tax situation if we lost all these properties. Mr. Bond figured the amount off the full assessed value; since not a being a certified assessor; even if the property is listed at half or three quarter of the property. The tax loss would be $63,891.59 as what the assessment and taxes are today. Mr. Weiss advises for example on Bryant Street, most of the houses on the North side of the street are gone. The remaining houses will be facing a 6 lane highway and would reduce the value of the homes. There is more of a tax loss than the homes you lose. Ms. Kochanksi advises we are losing over a mil of taxes, approximately $55K. Mr. Connors clarifying Mr. Bond’s numbers are based on the 100% cost of the property. Take the next weeks to review. Mr. Bond advising currently our taxes are 40.5 mils and we will be losing 1 mil. Mr. Lang pointed out what Mr. Weiss stated about quality of life and not putting a value on. Mr. Weiss was looking for the cemetery on Dreher Avenue on the North side, it was pointed out the cemetery is on the right side driving out Dreher Avenue. There are 10 houses that will be removed and a swamp will appear from highway runoff. Mr. Lang asks if we should contact Mario Scavello. Mr. Connors has notes from the 1st I-80 task force meeting. To summarize we got organized. We want to maintain our own task force identity but equally important is to coordinate with other townships, organizations, the school district and other stakeholders. Our goals and objectives are to mobilize broad support for legislative action, to lobby local, state and federal legislators for action to direct the best possible project outcome. We won’t stop at a 100% but that we are going to work hard to mitigate negative impact and enhance or suggest new positive impacts for this activity for this project expansion. The details on these 3 pages of notes is what was discussed at the 1st meeting January 30th and the ultimate goal is to mobilize broad support based on Stroud Townships successful action with regard to the Shafer Schoolhouse Road intersection, mobilize that support to put pressure on legislators to craft the best possible outcome. Mr. Lang advises to take the next 2 weeks to review the document. We should keep this as an old business item on the upcoming agenda. Mr. Connors states how do we want to organize, we want to collaborate with other municipalities and stakeholders and at the same time our 5 person appointed task force should our group’s steering committee. We want to involve as many citizens, stakeholders, business owners and property owners as soon as possible. In order to make it work we would have an action committee for people who could and would do things, whatever that may be, like contact people or legislators. Have another category for people who cannot do things but could be excellent advisors and have good input. 3 tiered level of involvement. The next I-80 task force meeting scheduled Monday February 13th at 9:30am. 7. Discussion of the Zoning Officers letter of determination concerning the Shanti House project. Mr. Kimes advised we received a request from Attorney Wolfe in reference to the Shanti House. Mr. Wolfe made a request for action by the zoning officer to respond if residential uses are permitted on the 1st floor level as shown on the plans submitted for the Shanti House Building. Mr. Kimes responded per his understanding of the ordinance that residential uses are allowed on the 1st floor. Mr. Kimes read through section 308.6 – C2 district.  Per section 308.6, Provisions for C-2 zones are “intended to create and enhance the area with centrally located offices and public and quasi-public uses mixed with residential uses primarily above the 1st floor”.  My understanding is this leaves the ordinance susceptible to the reasonable interpretation that the C-2 district does not absolutely prohibit residential uses on the 1st floor, provided the residential uses are “primarily” above the 1st floor.  If the drafters of the ordinance wanted to completely prohibit 1st floor residential uses in the C-2 district, they would have used a modifier in place of “primarily”, such as “only” , would have been used to say “ you can “only” have residential uses on the 1st floor.  The plan right now shows the use of square footage on the Main Street level of residential uses calculates less than the proposed commercial uses which is about 52% commercial use and 48% residential use. My understanding is that this would satisfy the common language of the requirement that residential used be “primarily” above the 1st floor. It is labeled on his plan as the Main Street level off the sidewalk; that is the 1st floor. In my mind there is no doubt the 1st floor is considered right off Main Street. Mr. Lang asks Solicitor McDonald what is the Zoning officer’s determination? That means it’s the law? Per Solicitor McDonald, No, but if you leave it alone it becomes the decision for that use for this finding. Mr. Kimes procedurally did what was asked of him, with the authority for Mr. Kimes to do that; you can say he is required to make that determination upon request in the zoning ordinance. Mr. Kimes has furnished that, if the board, despite everything he just said, chose to disagree with him, you would have to do it formally to preserve the boards right for opinion. If you disagree with Mr. Kimes, you would have to authorize an appeal of his determination. That would go to the Zoning Hearing board to decide. Mr. Kimes original determination letter was early January, we spoke about it January 17th council meeting. We spoke about today being the last scheduled meeting to challenge or appeal Mr. Kimes determination, if you chose to do so. You would have 30 days to appeal Mr. Kimes determination. Otherwise Mr. Kimes determination governs the Shanti House conditional use application coming before you February 28th. Mr. Smith we discussed “primarily use” months ago. Can we change the ordinance? Per Solicitor McDonald you always have the right to consider amending, the same way we handled parking. Mayor Probst can there be a public policy that there has never been residential on 1st floor, can that be used to our advantage off of Main Street. Per Mr. Bond there are current tenants with residential on the 1st floor, Stoeckels Jewelry, about 7-10 tenants who have been there a long time. Mr. Kimes advises specifically in the C-2 district. Mr. Connors 1st floor 52% commercial, 48% residential. On the Main Street facade can you tell how many are residential entrance vs commercial space, since that was the intention of the ordinance. Per Mr. Kimes the plan shows commercial use at the front of Main Street. You want into the vestibule/foyer area; on either side is commercial uses, not identified specifically but commercial. As you walk toward the rear, toward the alleyway there is a doorway which leads to a hallway where you have residential uses at the rear of the building with storage area and laundry. From the Main Street plan, 100% of the facade is a commercial like entrance. Mr. Abell states that is why we need a professional to go over our Zoning and Codes. Several times a year we stumble over a gaping hole in our zoning that someone takes advantage of. We constantly fix these retroactively when it’s too late. We need to be proactive and hire a professional to do a comprehensive review to see what the weaknesses are. Ms. Kochanski agrees, doesn’t the County Planning Commission have funding for this. Mr. Kimes is working on this. The County’s recommendation for off street parking. Zoning use is antiquated and we should seek professional help at looking at those tables. Move council resolve to back up the interpretation of the Zoning officer in this letter and not object Mr. Connors, regretfully second by Mr. Abell. Discussion: Mr. Abell is regretful because fighting this is futile. Anyone can read the ordinance and come up with the same conclusion as Mr. Kimes. I think a smarter tactic would be to approach the developer and try to work out some agreement where we don’t have to resort to the courts to basically re-inforce the findings that Mr. Kimes has already come with. If we challenge this and it goes before a Judge, given the language, it’s clear the intent of the ordinance, I would be very surprised if a Judge didn’t side with Mr. Kimes on this interpretation. Ms. Kochanski agrees with what Mr. Abell is saying but I wonder what the interpretation of “primarily” is. It is 52% commercial of the 1st floor level and 48% residential of the 1st floor level that is not “primarily”. Primarily is not half and half. Mr. Smith doesn’t see this as identifying the 1st floor as primary use, I read it as public uses mixed with residential uses primarily above the 1st floor. Primarily is describing above the 1st floor. Mr. Abell states primarily modifies the word above. Mr. Lang states we never had the intention of making Main Street residential that is the death of a Main Street. The vehicle to fix it is at our disposal. It’s frustrating that we have a Zoning Ordinance that allows it. Mr. Connors agrees we do not want residential uses primarily on the 1st floor or occupying commercial space. Regardless of the grammar, let’s pick our commas carefully and let’s look at our entire Zoning Ordinances. When you say primarily and the majority area is commercial and none of the facade represents a residential look, this is not a battle worth picking. We should back up our Zoning Officer as we are a team; we will get into comprehensive zoning ordinance revision. Mayor Probst asks Mr. Kimes how many times you see “emphasis added”. The last bullet point goes back to the 2nd bullet point. Mr. Smith states we have a Zoning Hearing Board. Mr. Lang feels Mr. Kimes is the Zoning official who solely makes determinations, he has judicial power. Mr. Connors states it says residential uses primarily above the 1st floor, there are 5 floors of residential uses. It doesn’t address the main floor which has primarily commercial use. Mr. Abell states whenever there is a grey area in the ordinance it will favor a developer. Per Solicitor McDonald in 3 weeks from tonight the Shanti House will be here. Which has a height and setback which appears on the surface to satisfy of the ordinance? If you wish to preserve some leverage you could authorize a challenge to Zoning Officer’s decision. In 3 weeks council for Shanti House, witnesses and representatives will be hear under oath on the record giving specific answers to specific questions. If an appeal on the use of the rear of the 1st floor is still in question, perhaps they would be willing to put a stipulation on the record for the scope of use for the 1st floor. You preserve that leverage to see if they are willing to do so. If you do not challenge the decision and it won’t be decided before 3 weeks it won’t be decided until the Zoning Hearing Board takes it up. If there is a stipulation entered 3 weeks from tonight and it’s satisfactory to the council you could withdraw the challenge to the Zoning Officer’s determination. All in favor – YES (Mr. Connors, Mr. Abell, Mr. Lang), NO (Mr. Maurath, Mr. Weiss, Mr. Smith, Ms. Kochanski). Motion Fails. Motion to appeal the Zoning Officer’s determination Mr. Weiss, second by Mr. Smith. Discussion: Mr. Connors states Ms. Kochanski makes and excellent point if we appeal we may maintain some leverage in our discussions with other issues. What would we use that leverage for to get. They have already backed off on 6 stories and the setback on the challenge of where the set beck is. All in favor – YES (Mr. Maurath, Mr. Weiss, Mr. Smith, Ms. Kochanski), NO (Mr. Connors, Mr. Abell, Mr. Lang). Motion carries. Motion to correct moving forward Mr. Smith, second by Mr. Weiss. Motion is withdrawn by Mr. Smith. Motion to table revisions to our Zoning Ordinance until such time as we establish our objectives and process for moving forward with comprehensive revisions Zoning Ordinances Mr. Connors, second by Ms. Kochanski. Discussion: Mr. Lang feels this is an open gap and detrimental. Every retail owner with a poor performance will put college kids on the 1st floor dwelling unit. Mr. Smith states we should correct at the next council meeting. Mr. Connors advises to remove the word primarily. Mr. Bond states to change the word primarily too exclusively. All in favor – YES (Mr. Smith, Mr. Connors, Mr. Maurath), NO (Ms. Kochanski, Mr. Lang, Mr. Abell, Mr. Weiss). Motion fails. Move to advertise to remove the word “primarily” from our ordinance and to advertise for a public hearing Mr. Abell, second by Ms. Kochanski. Discussion: Mr. Connors states removing the word primarily is good but the 1st bullet point on the handout reads “intended to create and enhance the area with centrally located offices and public and quasi-public uses mixes with residential uses “primarily” above the 1st floor. That does not say mixed with residential uses, will be confined to upper floors, it should be confined to floors about the 1st floor. Amended motion to refer the crafting of the language to our Zoning Officer to prepare a revision to our ordinance to reflect the intent of not permitting residences on the 1st floor of new commercials  developments in the C-2 Mr. Abell, second by Ms. Kochanski. That would be a public hearing. Discussion: Mr. Smith asks if we need to identify that Main Street will always be the 1st floor? Mr. Kimes asks when you say 1st floor are you referring to street level? Per Mr. Lang we need to keep residences off of Main Street. Per Mr. Kimes, the C-2 district extends past Main Street. We are speaking of a zoning district, within the district there are multiple streets, it would be really hard to use that language on the 1st floor. We have language currently that states “dwelling units in upper floor areas are permitted in the C2 district. We could have something that states “dwelling is not permitted on the 1st floor level, then you cannot have dwelling units on the 1st floor. Mr. Connors states it needs to be less contradictory. Ms. Kochanski advises you are stating C-2 zone which includes Ann, Sarah, Monroe, residential will always be in those areas. Mr. Connors asks if we can you advertise for an ordinance you don’t have. It would be considered a public hearing. We would have 30 days since its zoning it has to go to the Planning Commission. Per Solicitor McDonald normally we would have a specific text or a pretty good idea of the text of the ordinance before you advertise a public hearing. Mr. Abell will remove the public hearing from the amended motion. New amended motion. We need a definition of a basement level. Even if we had the language today we would not be able to hold a public hearing until March 7th (28 days). To clarify what council is asking of Mr. Kimes, council does not want to permit residential use in the 1st floor of any building in C-2 zoning district. That is not what council wants. Per Solicitor McDonald within a district there can be nuance in regulations, including properties near major thoroughfares, intersections and interchanges. There is some flexibility built into enabling portion of section 605 of the MPC that allows you to treat certain properties of a certain category within a district differently than other properties in that district. We may have some flexibility. Mr. Connors states all existing buildings would be safe but if a building came down or combines a lot or changed the use, you would need to comply. Mr. Kimes will not permit dwelling units on the 1st floor level or below the 1st floor level on Main Street, from 500 block to 900 block. Amended motion to refer the crafting of the language to our Zoning Officer to prepare a revision to our ordinance to reflect the intent of not permitting residences on the 1st floor of new commercials developments in the C-2. All in favor, except Mr. Connors is NO. Motion carries. 8. Discussion of the Barry Isset report prepared by Ron Kimes. The Borough began working with Barry Isset June 2016. They are timely, thorough and professional manner. They will respond back to me within 24 hours. They respond to commercial inspections within 15 days, state requirement is 30 days. Mr. Kimes has spoken to 3 people who dealt with Barry Isset and feedback was the same, courteous and professional. Mr. Bond reviewed the handout and the difference in cost between Barry Isset and John Blick, Mr. Wilkins and Mr. Kimes salaries not included. January 2016 – June 2016 All Permit Fees Mr. Wilkins/Mr. Mr. Wilkins/Mr. Kimes Kimes/John Blick /Barry Isset Total Fees $12,859 $12,859 Fees Paid $1,200 $9,001.30 Total Profit $11,659.00 $3,857.70 Net Loss $7,801.30 July 2016 – December 2016 All Permit Fees Mr. Kimes/John Blick Mr. Kimes /Barry Isset Total Fees $25,624 $25,624 Fees Paid $1,200 $14,780 Total Profit $24,424 $10,844 Net Loss $13,580  Mr. Connors would like Mr. Wilkins and Mr. Kimes salaries added in the calculations. Mr. Blick and Barry Isset both have the same certifications. Mr. Kimes also advises both Barry Isset and John Blick are great to work with. Barry Isset reviews commercial and then approves. Mr. Kimes reviews residential and approves all but electric. Barry Isset collects 70%, the industry standard. Mr. Lang would like to bring Mr. Blick into the office. Need guidance from council to get a proposal from John Blick. New Business 9. Presentation by Virginia M. Romagno of the Monroe Farmers Market. Ms. Romagno would like the 1st Saturday in May through the last Saturday in October for the farmers market. We would like barricades this year and not cones. The only requested change is with parking. Would like to park on Monroe from 6th to 7th. Vendors will have a placard in the window to allow for free parking. Approximately 10 meters in question. Mr. Bond advises there will be no objections from the street department. We’ll leave the barricades in the same spot as last year underneath the fire escape. Signs will be out on 7th and Main. Mr. Kimes advises the Borough will need a liability insurance certificate for the sign. Mr. Lang advises to talk to Mr. Kimes with any issues for the sign. Motion to approve the Monroe Farmers Market for the 2017 season, same setup as previous years with the addition of placard parking on Monroe between 6th and 7th and agreement for assumed liability for any off premise signs Mr. Abell, second by Ms. Kochanski. Discussion: The farmers market will supply the parking placard. All in favor, Motion carries. 10. Consider a resolution appointing Brian Bond as Confidential Liaison to Berkheimer Associates. Motion to approve Ms. Kochanski, second by Mr. Abell. All in favor, Motion Carries. 11. Presentation by Peter Vankoski of Anew Hope for the Homeless Monroe County PA Alliance. Thank you for having me, my name is Peter Vankoski and I am a former member of the homeless community in Stroudsburg. I was fortunate to get housing from the Monroe County Housing Authority Shelter Plus Care program October 2016 after being homeless for 16 months. I decided to pay forward with a volunteer organization in Monroe County, primarily serving Stroudsburg, East Stroudsburg and Mount Pocono. Eventually it will be a nonprofit 501 3C. I am the founder and administrator. We are advocates and voices of the homeless for the homeless. My organization is unique as 35 out of 50 states surveyed by a strategic marketing engineer there is no organization who has an administrator and co-administrator who lived and experienced the homeless life for over 30 months. We know what we had we know what we need, we know what we didn’t have and we know what is needed. My Slogan is a more quality and affordable housing and rents instead of tents. Our mission is to strive for more funding and grants so services and programs can be increased in Monroe County. My vision within 4 years is to have a full time day and activity center and shelter; within 8 years to end homeless on the street in Monroe County. I know about 182 people from the Stroud Mall to UGI Gas Company on lower Main Street who are homeless. Many have serious mental issues along with drug and alcohol conditions. This is a problem for people in town along with business owners. About 85% homeless are not pan handling on Main Street. Several by Goomba’s, the tobacco store because equals cigarettes. Also at Starbucks for cigarettes. Most homeless people pan handling use the money for drugs, heroin and spice (bag of pot- pourri crushed and rolled into a joint). The opiates can kill you. Pan handling by Burger King and the Stroud Mall. I viewed and in 3 hours, 294 people stopped and gave something. I knew the person pan handling and he made $394. I went to Main Street to talk to some of the people who stopped and gave money and to let them know it would be better to buy food or give money to a shelter instead of giving the person money to use for drugs or alcohol. I reached out to the Mayor to set up a meeting, we spoke for 2 hours. We agreed it is inhumane to chase from one area to another. Mayor Probst thought of a coffee mug program. I would possibly donate tea and hot chocolate and partner up with the Mayor to get 100 or more mugs with a logo or symbol. Homeless people could sign for it and use it and get coffee, tea and hot chocolate at The Charcuterie, Wawa, Starbucks, McDonald’s, Burger King or any other places who would like to participate complimentary. If washing the mugs causes a health issue we could go  with disposable boxes with the logo sticker. Another idea is to have drop boxes around to collect money to benefit the homeless. We could also put homeless people to work as volunteers as they are willing to work and need something to do. Provide rolling garbage cans and plastic bags, a broom and dust pan with a logo “Stroudsburg’s Homelessness Homeless Cares”. This would show business owners and residents that homeless people want to work and help make Stroudsburg a cleaner place. We would need for them to sign a waiver so not to sue the Borough in case they fall on the street, in front of a business or a garbage cans runs into a car. I am working on an umbrella program as they are desperately needed. I am looking to obtain a shelter in Stroudsburg or East Stroudsburg, it’s been brought to Mario Scavello’s attention and will be available to stay 6 months to a year based on finding employment. After 3 months of working they pay half to the shelter covering food and lodging. For more information please attend the meet and greet February 16th 6-8pm at the Hughes Library (email the council with the date). 12. Solicitor’s Report. Have 1 personnel item for Executive Session. Have 1 real estate item – draft lease to Monroe County. Completed the rough draft last week, need in writing. Borough is the lessee, the County is the owner for the lot on Quaker & 6th. Borough is working with Mr. Strasser on the 35 X 35 square foot park. Term is 8 years. Basic terms of who is responsible for what then the County will need to review. Currently we are waiting for a sketch from the County. We will submit a draft. Mayor Probst advises this was the most we can get from the commissioner for the beautification space. It may turn into more going forward. Strasser is doing the design. Edy is applying for a grant for the pavers. We will be asking for private donations. Some costs for the legal fees. The Borough is responsible for maintaining the area. Eventually the county will take over. For the Shanti House, in January council authorized me to enter a stipulation with Attorney Wolfe on the original application filed in 2015. That stipulation was accepted by Judge Zulick on January 31, 2017. We would agree to withdraw the appeal, the Commonwealth court appeal, provided we eliminated the stipulation preserves to the Borough its right to enforce the specific height and setback that had been in question. Those were the 2 variances in the 1st application that came in. It’s not quiet finished but will be back in Judge Zulik’s hands. He signed the order on January 31, 2017 and agreed to the stipulation. We have not given anything up. The new hearing will be heard and most likely decided before the original appeal of the 2015 gets finally decided. Appeals or requests for variances come in and go to the Zoning Hearing Board. Todd Weitzman, the new Solicitor and I think it would good for a line of communication for when an application comes in council is aware of the agenda. Mr. Selza is coming in again for a 2nd hearing. Mr. Kimes sends the agenda to the Borough Manager. Prior to me, either the Mayor or Council spoke to Cathy about the proposal for healthcare benefits. Mr. Bond has supplied the document to me. Mr. Bond will go through the document and change the dates and go over the plans prior to contract negotiations of the collective bargaining agreement. The way the contract reads if we make any changes it needs to be approved by the union. We will need to review the RFP’s by summer. Mr. Bond advises by June 30th the union needs to contact us or the contract expires and we no longer have to bargain. 13. Mayor’s Report. Winterfest is February 18th in Courthouse Square, will be a cartoon character theme. Mr. Bond is working with Penn Dot on the sign. Ms. McCabe and I will get together for concerts in the park. Have spoken to WSBG about being the sponsor. Want to thank Mr. Vankoski on what he is doing for the homeless, he is a success story. Thank you for coming in tonight. 14. Council Member Reports  Mr. Maurath – Had the parking Committee Meeting today. Making parking spaces #3 on South 7th and 1 spot on Main and 10th in front of Ralph Materga’s office instead of regular spaces making into a compact space. A lot of compact spaces are a hindrance and we are looking to eliminate them completely. Mr. Maurath will get together with Mr. Bond to present the listing to council. It was a recommendation from the Parking Enforcement Officers. Currently we have fines for booted cars for a 1st, 2nd, 3rd offense ($50, $150. $300). We have 4 people who have been booted 3 times. Need to advise boot fee for a 4th, 5th and 6th offense in order to change the ordinance. County law enforcement officials are parking on Monroe and not paying for the spaces. They are putting a patch in the dashboard. We will send a letter to the District Magistrate and Mr. Eric Kirshner. New parking pay stations, certain locations have different pricing. We will be changing the pricing and timing and will present at the next meeting. Mr. Connors – Have a personnel matter for Executive Session. I was appointed as the alternate for the Open Space and Recreation Committee. Primary representatives are Ceal Yost and Gretchen Rusk. I have only attended 1 meeting in the last year. I unknowingly displaced Wanda Lesher. She is the recording secretary and is always at the meeting. I spoke to her and she is interested in the alternate position. Motion to appoint Wanda Lesher as the Borough’s alternate on the Open Space and Recreation Commission instead of Mr. Connors by Mr. Connors, second by Ms. Kochanski. All in favor except Mr. Maurath who votes NO. Motion Carries. Mr. Abell – There is a lot of litter in the Hill District, especially Scott Street. 608 Thomas Street lost a tree limb, still in the front lawn. Move to authorize staff to hire an outside consultant to review our Zoning Ordinances comprehensively Mr. Abell, second by Ms. Kochanski. All in favor, Motion carries. I have been researching non-discrimination ordinances. There are grant applications are coming up. Mr. Lang - NTR Mr. Weiss – 1 item for Executive Session. Insurance company had 3 claims last month on 4th Street. Mr. Smith – Where are we with Ray Price properties and A/C units. Issue on North 9th is the old trailer sitting behind the dealership and is on Borough land. There are contents in the trailer. Could the Borough use the trailer? If there is use for us, since encroached on our property could they deed over to us for us to use and we can move it. We can scrap the metal in the trailer and get money. Parking lot will be complete around by mid-May. Mr. Bond to look back on past council meetings for Ray Price motion and advise council. Coming up on spring season, sign for barricade ordinances which was rejected last year. Mr. Lang advised the committee made recommendations to council and council acted on the recommendations. What was on the table that failed last time was a percentage of signage. Ms. Kochanski is the chair person and will review again. RFP’s for checking accounts last year. Information to council was thorough. Would council ask Mr. Bond and staff to go back and look at the interest rates, RFP’s listed the accounts differently. Comprehensive look of account balances to compare interest rates. Motion to have staff compare checking accounts with the balances compared to interest rates provided from Wayne Bank and ESSA Mr. Smith, second by Mr. Weiss. Discussion: Mr. Kochanski would like it opened to all area banks in Stroudsburg and to re-send the RFP. Mr. Bond advises RFP’s were sent to all banks in a 5 mile radius. The comprehensive reviews per the RFP’s provided by each bank. Mr. Smith wants to compare the account balances with interest rates. All in favor – YES (Mr. Smith, Mr. Weiss, Mr. Maurath), NO (Ms. Kochanski, Mr. Lang, Mr. Abell, Mr. Connors). Motion fails. Ms. Kochanski – Problems with people coming from Thomas Street to 9th the curbing is yellow, crossing to 10th. It’s painted yellow but there is no sign parking to corner. 15. Manager’s Report – Sent RFP’s to purchase 150 plus LED Cobra fixtures to replace the existing high intensity discharge Cobra fixtures, which will lower the electric bill and give us a better rate from the electric company. We sent to Friedman, All Phase and East Penn Supply. We have received 1 response  for the alternate Solicitor, Planning Commission Solicitor, they have until the 17th to complete and send back. Medical RFP’s will be sent out soon. Special meeting scheduled February 28th 7:00pm for the Shanti House conditional use. The County has a matching fund grant for zoning ordinances, we could apply. 2 personnel issues for Executive Session. Mr. Abell looking for update on grants. Per Mr. Bond filing a cigarette grant, use for education or to purchase towers. We can solicit restaurants and bars to see if they would use them and empty out. We could place in the bump-outs or any place where people are gathering. Also a Growing green grant from DEP to use from the levee and can purchase mowers. Mr. Abell has presented me a few more. 16. Approval of Bills on Warrants 170207. Motion to approve warrant list Mr. Weiss, second by Mr. Abell. All in favor, Motion Carries. 17. Executive Session – Motion to adjourn to Executive Session Mr. Abell, second by Mr. Maurath at 9:15pm. All in favor, Motion carries. Motion to reconvene Executive Session Mr. Smith, second by Mr. Maurath at 9:15pm. All in favor, motion carries. Motion by Mr. Smith, second by Mr. Maurath to adjourn executive session and reconvene public regular session. All in favor, Motion Carries at 9:36.m. Motion to extend Glenn Anthony’s request for FMLA Mr. Smith, second by Mr. Abell. All in favor, Motion carries. Motion to set Mr. Kimes salary to $60,860.80/annual base salary retroactive to January 1, 2017 Ms. Kochanski, second by Mr. Connors. All in favor, Motion carries. 18. Adjournment. Motion to adjourn Mr. Abell, second by Mr. Connors at 9:39pm. All in favor, Motion carries.