WEIRTON CITY COUNCIL
COUNCIL MEETING - REGULAR
MONDAY, DECEMBER 7, 2009 7:00 P.M.
A regular meeting of the Common Council of the City of Weirton, Hancock and Brooke Counties, West Virginia was held on Monday, December 7, 2009 at 7:00 P.M. in Council Chambers of the Weirton City Building.
Councilmembers in Attendance: George Ash Councilmember Ward 4 Ronnie Jones Councilmember Ward 1 Fred Marsh Councilmember Ward 3 Harold Miller Councilmember Ward 2 David Dalrymple Councilmember Ward 6 Max Fijewski Councilmember Ward 7 George Kondik Councilmember Ward 5
City Officials in Attendance: John Brown Public Works Director Gary DuFour City Manager Vincent Gurrera City Attorney Dave Lashhorn Fire Chief Nicole Davis City Clerk A.D. Mastrantoni Sanitary/Water Bruce Marshall Police Chief Thomas Maher, Jr. Finance Director Terry Weigel Parks and Recreation Director John Serafini Inspections Rik Rekowski Library
Mayor Harris led everyone in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion was made by Councilmember Marsh and second by Councilmember Ash to approve the minutes of the: November 9, 2009 –Regular Council MeetingThe motion carried by majority, 6/0/1 with Councilman Fijewski abstaining.
MAYOR’S AWARDS AND PROCLAMATIONS
CITIZEN’S REMARKS
There were no citizen’s remarks.
COMMUNICATIONS
Councilman Marsh called Brenda Hall before council to thank her and her organization for all of they work they have done with the lights downtown, the display on Three Springs, the lights, garland and strings on Penco Road, and the parade.
Mayor Harris congratulated the Weir High Boys and Girls soccer teams being the WV State Class AA/A runner up, Brooke High School Football team for a record of 13-1 this season, Jr. Dons for winning the championship, and A State Champions Madonna football for all of their athletic achievements stating that the teams have brought notoriety to the community. The mayor stated that at the next month’s council meeting awards will be handed put to celebrate the team’s achievements.
Councilman Miller stated that the third annual Seeing Beyond Foundation will be conducting a Christmas lighting contest. Councilman Miller thanked the local businesses for donating gift certificates for the prize winners. Councilman Miller asked that all of the councilmen be judges again this year
OLD BUSINESS
Second reading of Ordinance No. 1666, Amendment No. 729 to establish a yellow “No Parking” curb line on the West side of Bell Street starting at Concord Court and extending 160 feet to the driveway at 120 Bell Street. (Traffic Commission Recommendation. Based upon the request of Councilman Dalrymple.) Motion was made by Councilman Dalrymple, second by Councilman Fijewski. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Second reading of Ordinance No. 1667, Amendment No. 730 to establish yellow “No Parking” curb line on the East side of Bell Street starting at Concord Court and extending 110 feet North toward School Street and another 43 feet on the East side of Bell Street starting at the alley and ending at the driveway of 127 Bell Blvd. (Traffic Commission Recommendation. Based upon the request of Councilman Dalrymple.) Motion was made by Councilman Dalrymple, second by Councilman Fijewski. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Second reading of Ordinance No. 1668, Amendment No. 731 to establish parking restrictions within Ward II regarding Country Club Blvd. (Traffic Commission Recommendation. Based upon the request of the Director of Transportation for Hancock County Schools and Councilman Miller. Motion was made by Councilman Miller, second by Councilman Ash. Councilman Miller stated, “I appreciate council’s support of this at the last meeting. I was not able to attend the council meeting, and I appreciate the support and also the support of Chief Marshall who brought all of this to our attention. I know it’s been a problem for a number of years. We have been working with the county, and I want to thank you. It’s been a real nuisance down in the Country Club area.” The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
NEW BUSINESSResolution to authorize the purchase of bunker gear for the Weirton Fire Department. (City Manager) Motion was made by Councilman Marsh, second by Councilman Ash. Councilman Kondik stated, “This was approved at the finance committee meeting.”
The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Resolution to enter into agreement for the renewal of Health Insurance Coverage for the City of Weirton employees. (City Manager) Motion was made by Councilman Fijewski, second by Councilman Jones. Councilman Fijewski stated, “I want to say to Gary DuFour, Nate (Mazur) this was a lot of work that went in to this. This is a unique plan for the city of Weirton. It’s a first time approach to using this health care system. Based upon what I’ve read and saw a lot of work went into it. It’s innovative, it’s something not a lot of people are doing. I wanted to extend my congratulations to everybody that worked on it. It’s a real nice thing to see that we’re able to maintain 100% coverage for our employees. I really think it’s something we should try to do. The good news is that by taking this approach there’s a potential for a savings here. I want to congratulate everyone on it. It’s great to see that we do things out of the box, and I am sure that the city employees appreciate the fact that they have first class health care program.”
The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Resolution to enter into agreement for Vision Insurance Coverage for the City of Weirton employees. (City Manager) Motion was made by Councilman Ash, second by Councilman Jones. Councilman Fijewski stated, “I’d like to repeat the comment that I made last year and the year before. I would like to request that the city manager look into bringing all of those benefits to expire or start at the same time. Basically January 1 so we can deal with all of these things at one time rather than throughout the course of the year.”
The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Resolution to enter into agreement for HRA Direct-pay health insurance coverage for the City of Weirton employees. (City Manager) Motion was made by Councilman Ash, second by Councilman Fijewski.
The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Resolution to enter into contract for the purchase of garage doors for the Public Works Department. (City Manager) Motion was made by Councilman Ash, second by Councilman Marsh.
The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Ordinance amending Section 10 of Ordinance No. 1317 reducing the percentage of members of Council necessary to amend or repeal Ordinance No. 1317. (Councilman Fijewski) Motion was made by Councilman Fijewski, second by Councilman Ash. Councilman Fijewski stated, “I just want to explain the reason I put this forth. In reviewing that ordinance, there is a section of that ordinance which states nothing within that ordinance can be changed without a 75% approval from council. If you multiply 75% times 7 council people it comes out to 5.25. Clearly we don’t have a part time, or half or quarter of a council person. In my ignorance I made an assumption that when you have a fraction of a whole number if it’s less than 5 it goes to 5 if it’s greater than 5 it goes to 6. I discussed it with legal council and was informed that my assumption was incorrect. The truth of the matter is that 5.25 actually means that it automatically goes to 6, which means that it is no longer a 75% requirement on this council. It is an 85 ½% requirement on this council before any change can occur within that ordinance. 85% is unheard of in any legislative body. I went back and did a little research on the internet, and according to what I found out the house votes on an article of presidential impeachment and the house only requires a majority vote, that’s it. For both the senate and the house to impeach the president of the United States requires a 66 2/3% vote. We as council, in this case, have to have an 85% before we can change anything in regards to the current structure of that ordinance. Congress, both houses, can over-ride a presidential veto. They’re only required to have a 66 2/3% to over-ride a presidential veto, and we’re being required 85 ½%. I don’t understand the logic in that. I don’t think the state of West Virginia, I could not find anything, that the state legislators are required to have a 85% approval of anything to change or do anything. Both the supreme courts of the country only requires a simple majority to change constitutional law. I’ve talked with George (Ash) and former mayor Dean Harris to find out the thinking that was going in to it. Quite honestly, Dean Harris indicated he didn’t have too much recollection of it. I just can’t believe that any one member of council at that time was aware of the fact that approving the 75% was in essence requiring an 85%. If they knew that, then why didn’t they change the ordinance to 85%? Were they trying to get something on there that they didn’t want to make public? I don’t think so. I think they all were doing their fiduciary duties, and I think they voted they thought was the right thing to do. I would implore my fellow councilmen, this really is an intended ordinance to correct something. It’s not up there to try to do anything other than to correct something that needs to be corrected. The truth of the matter is if this ordinance is approved at 70%, which is being suggested from the 75%, that’s only a change of 3.5%. 70% equals 4.90, so you have to round it up to 5. I’ve talked to some council people and I appreciate their thoughts that you can’t have umm, you need to have a super majority so that the water department doesn’t get jerked around every four years by a different group of people, and I understand that. This is a representative government. The suggestion that it takes 85% of this community’s leadership to change anything, to me is not a representative of government. We all just went thorough raising the water rates, and what was the requirement for raising the water rate? A simple majority. So it’s OK to raise the water rates with a simple majority, but in order to make any other change within that ordinance it takes an 85% approval of this council. To me that’s counter-intuitive, and it is wrong. I do understand that there are some people that might have some political reasons why they would not necessarily want to vote for this, but this is the right thing to do in my opinion for the citizens of this community. This corrects what I believe is a wrong. I don’t know of any other autonomous board, committee, or commission that this council is required to have an 85% ruling before this council can amend of change any of their structures.” Council Kondik stated, “I was on council in 02. I had talked to Dean Harris and I talked to legal council about: a. if I did anything wrong by voting for it, and the feedback was no. What I understand about the super majority is something like this. Compared to everything else that was pointed out that we don’t need a super majority, and I realize why we did it is the fact of the bonds. The bond participants that are involved with this, when they see that council again politics is not involved with the everyday operation, the water board is an autonomous board. It does what they do, and we are not involved politically gives them more strength and more of a trust that our council is doing the right thing with the super majority. We don’t have to have a super majority to vote for the water rate now, but this is more complex than that.” Councilman Fijewski stated, “30% of the water boards in the state of West Virginia are still under city councils’ jurisdictions, they are not autonomous boards. They also have to sell their bonds, and they sell their bonds to the state the same way we do. I don’t recall at any point in time there being any discussion that we would be unable to sell our bonds without having an 85% ruling. If anyone here can tell me that impeaching the president of the United States, that somehow 66% of the elected officials can do that, but in the city of Weirton 85% of council is required before we change anything that happens in the water department and make any sense of that I will happy to withdraw the ordinance. It just does not make sense.” Councilman Miller stated, “I have flip-flopped back and forth on this issue. I had the clerk send the ordinance to me and went over it. I talked to Max and he knew that I was totally against bringing the water board back under council. I’m not in favor of micro-management. I’m not in favor of bringing an autonomous board back under council. I told him (Councilman Fijewski) that I would consider this. I did consider it and told him I was leaning towards voting for it, but for the life of me I can’t figure out why this would be coming up. If we had the support from council to bring the water board back under council it wouldn’t be an issue if you had 6 votes or you had 7 votes. Why it came up or it’s that serious of an issue we might be heading in the wrong direction. I can’t find a legitimate reason why we would go back in and change this ordinance just so the numbers look better when you need to make a change like that you need your total council to be supportive of it. I never wanted to be on city council when they had these boards answer to city council. They sat down here till 1 o’clock in the morning, and I couldn’t figure out why anybody would want to go through all of that. If the council feels that strongly about taking away the autonomy of the board, they should be able to come together as a strength.” Councilman Ash stated, “I would like to ask the city attorney what vote has to be done with this? Every other vote that we rule on is city council by majority. Does this have to be a 6-1 vote?” Mr. Guerra stated, “According to the ordinance, it has to be 6 or 7. Every legislative interpretation I have basically says that even if it’s 5.0001 it carries it up to 6. You have to have at least that amount. If you have 5 votes you don’t have 5.25%. I spoke to an attorney in Weirton that has nothing to do with the city of Weirton and asked him how to interpret 5.25, and he said up to 6. I talked to an attorney out of Wheeling, and he said the same thing. Everyone that I’ve talked to believes that 5.25 is a total of 6.” Councilman Ash stated, “I also want to bring up that I was on council in 2001 when this was passed, and there was a 6-1 vote and I was against it then and I will vote against it today. Everybody knows how I feel about autonomous boards, there’s no secret there. I don’t like the fact that the autonomous boards do whatever they want to do until they need a rate increase, and then we’re the ones that have to take a beating for it. I am asking the city attorney to go back to the information that I received from the ethics commission, and the current ethics commission to ask them to re-consider their ruling about Mr. Jones voting on these issues. The reason was back in 2001 I wrote a letter to the ethics commission about the employees of Weirton Steel voting on issues pertaining to the mill. They came back stating that if there is an appearance of impropriety they can not do it. Mr. DiBartolomeo, who was the city attorney at the time, specifically said West Virginia code 6b 1 2c says the public officials may not take action on matters that are of personal interest. The commissioners’ interest is defined as when the person has an interest directly or indirectly or in a manner that may influence their vote or give the appearance of impropriety. In my opinion, I believe there is an appearance of impropriety here and there may be some influence because Mr. Jones works for the water department. I’m not accusing him of anything, I’m just making my opinion known. I still think that he should not be allowed to vote on any of these issues. Mr. DiBartolomeo also explained that council is subject to sanctions if it votes in violations of the ethics commission. Therefore, once again, I don’t believe Mr. Jones will abstain from voting even though I’m asking him to, but I am going to ask other council members to speak up. We might talk to each other once in awhile about different things, and I’ve talked to one or two other council members about this and they feel the same way I do. I would like to have the city attorney write a strong letter based on the 2001 ruling and the 2008 ruling that differs. This is completely different than what it was in 2001, and I want to know why. The mayor of the city of Weirton, Dean Harris, and Mr. Moore who was retired from Weirton Steel, Mr. Cline, Mr. Mitchell, and Mr. Minella all had to get up and leave the room when we discussed anything about the mill. Myself, Kondik, and Chris Fletcher were the only ones allowed to sit here, discuss the issue, and vote on the issue. So I don’t know what’s the difference between 2001 and 2009.” Mr. Guerra stated that Councilman Jones took it upon himself to contact the ethics commission, and they decided that he could vote on the issues that he’s voting on. Councilman Jones stated, “I have the letters from the ethics commission, and I plan on voting today.” Councilman Dalrymple questioned who happened to be on the ethics board. The Mayor requested that the City Manager find out who is on the ethics commission. Councilman Dalrymple questioned whether there was anyone local serving on the ethics appeals board. Mr. Guerra stated that on the appeal division of the ethics area, and believed attorney Dan Guida serves. Councilman Dalrymple questioned whether Mr. Guida was the attorney for the water board. Mr. Guerra stated that he was. Councilman Fijewski stated, “I would like to respond to Councilman Ash’s statement. I share your frustration, and I’m not talking about anything with Councilman Jones. I’m talking about the ethics commission. When the issue came up as to whether we could put a council person on all of the autonomous boards, I contacted the ethics commission and asked them whether or not Councilman Jones voting on that would be a problem in terms of the ethics. The answer that I received from them was that it was not an issue because of the fact that there was no money involved. The ethics commission told me that if there was any money involved then it would be in fact an ethics violation. In anticipation of what we may or may not do as a council, I called a second time because quite honestly I believe that the water board belongs back under council. So when I ran that by them, given that scenario if I were to introduce an ordinance putting that forth, would Councilman Jones be allowed to vote on it. I was told at that time the answer was yes. So I challenged them and said you told me there would only be a violation if it involved money, and because the water board gets paid and if that water board would go away not you’re looking at a loss because under the ordinance there are allowed to get paid $50-$150 a month for special meetings and what not. So you’re looking at a minimum of $600 to whatever, and when I put that out there to the ethics commission they did indicate that was enough to support their position that involved money. So I understand it and share your frustrations. It has nothing to do with Councilman Jones per say, it has to do with what we do as a council, whether or not we’re following the appropriate requirements and whether we can or cannot be doing certain things. It has nothing to do with Councilman Jones in my opinion. The motivation of doing this is righting a wrong. I don’t believe anyone in 2001 believed that the 75% meant 85%. That’s all this is about right now, and if they did then they should have put 85% in the ordinance so that everybody in the community, and all future councils, would know exactly what their intentions and desires were. To suggest that you put it in at 75% so it doesn’t appear as though it’s 85% and then people don’t question it, I don’t believe council did it with that motivation. I think this was a misstep on their part, not appreciating the rounding approach and I wouldn’t George or anybody of doing anything illegally. I see it as righting a wrong.” Councilman Kondik stated, “It was always brought to our attention that a super majority vote needs 6 votes by our mayor.”
Roll call vote: Councilman Kondik No Councilman Fijewski Yes Councilman Dalrymple No Councilman Miller No Councilman Marsh Yes Councilman Jones No Councilman Ash Yes
The motion was defeated by majority, 4/3.
Resolution authorizing the employee incentive program. (City Manger) Motion was made by Councilman Marsh, second by Councilman Fijewski.
The motion passed by majority, 7/0
Ordinance modifying Ordinance No. 1313 as amended by revising the job title of the Weirton Municipal Employee Union Position. (Councilman Ash) Motion was made by Councilman Ash, second by Councilman Jones. Councilman Kondik stated, “Just a clarification John Brown. This gentleman will be assisting Eddie Grace.” Mr. Brown confirmed Councilman Kondik’s inquiry. The Mayor asked Councilman Ash if he was the one that part the ordinance together. Councilman Ash stated that he was and asked that the ordinance be read as an emergency.
The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
APPOINTMENTS TO VARIOUS BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
Mary H. Weir Library Board: Dennis Jones 1/1/2010-12/31/2014 A motion was made by Councilman Ash, second by Councilman Marsh. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Board of Zoning: Vince Azzarello 1/1/2010-12/31/2012 A motion was made by Councilman Kondik, second by Councilman Jones. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Mike Simon 1/1/2010-12/31/2012 A motion was made by Councilman Miller, second by Councilman Ash. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Citizens with Disabilities: Jason Miller 6/1/2009-5/30-2012 A motion was made by Councilman Marsh, second by Councilman Ash. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Joe Sligar 6/1/2009-5/30/2011 A motion was made by Councilman Ash, second by Councilman Miller. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Millicent Gerbo 6/1/2009-5/30/2012 A motion was made by Councilman Marsh, second by Councilman Miller. The motion passed by majority, 7/0
Harold Miller 6/1/2009-5/30/2011 A motion was made by Councilman Ash, second by Councilman Jones. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Kimberly Laposta 6/1/2009-5/30/2011 A motion was made by Councilman Marsh, second by Councilman Ash. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Nancy Turkaley 6/1/2009-5/30/2012 A motion was made by Councilman Ash, second by Councilman Jones. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Tom Hagg Chairman
Weirton Municipal Hospital Building Commission: Elaine Castillo 6/1/2005-5/30/2010 A motion was made by Councilman Fijewski, second by Councilman Ash. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Disruptive Activity Board: John Simakis 1/1/2010-12/31/2012 A motion was made by Councilman Dalrymple, second by Councilman Ash. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Elaine Onstott 1/1/2010-12/31/2012 A motion was made by Councilman Dalrymple, second by Councilman Ash. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Paul Swiger 1/1/2010-12/31/2012 A motion was made by Councilman Dalrymple, second by Councilman Ash. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Weirton Port Authority: Art Miser 1/1/2010-12/31/2010 A motion was made by Councilman Kondik, second by Councilman Jones. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Rick Antol 1/1/2010-12/31/2011 A motion was made by Councilman Marsh, second by Councilman Ash. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
B.J. DeFelice 1/1/2010-12/31/2012 A motion was made by Councilman Fijewski, second by Councilman Ash. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Dr. John Brown 1/1/2010-12/31/2012 A motion was made by Councilman Marsh, second by Councilman Miller. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Councilman Fijewski 1/1/2010-12/31/2011 A motion was made by Councilman Marsh, second by Councilman Ash. The motion passed by majority, 6/0/1 with Councilman Fijewski abstaining.
Building Code Appeals Board: Mike Gianni At will and pleasure of Mayor Lou Bernardi At will and pleasure of Mayor Councilman Ash At will and pleasure of Mayor John Simikis(Alternate) At will and pleasure of Mayor
Weirton Municipal Building Commission: George Romage 1/1/2010-12/31/2010 A motion was made by Councilman Marsh, second by Councilman Ash. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Planning Commission: John Mihalyo 1/1/2010-12/31/2012 A motion was made by Councilman Marsh, second by Councilman Fijewski. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
Eli Dragisich 1/1/2010-12/31/2012 A motion was made by Councilman Marsh, second by Councilman Miller. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS:
PUBLIC WORKS-
Mr. Brown stated that public works was starting night turn starting Sunday.
PARKS AND RECREATION-
Mr. Weigel thanked the chamber for the Christmas parade and Gus’s goodies for donating cookies for the Christmas concert for all the kids after the parade. It was a real nice day and all around event. Mr. Weigel also stated that the city had a Christmas tree in the rose room if any wanted to vote.
FIRE-
Chief Lashhorn thanked the members of council and everyone else involved in renewing the insurance and appreciated the fact that money didn’t have to come out of is pocket. The matro rescue equipment that was purchased a few months ago has been installed in the trucks. The Chief stated that beginning tomorrow they would be holding a training session, some classroom stuff and some live demonstration.
POLICE –
Chief Marshall stated that he had nothing further to add.
CODE-
Mr. Serafini stated that he had nothing further to report.
LIBRARY-
Mr. Rekowski stated the film for December is the 16th and it will be How the Grinch Stole Christmas and it’s free.
LIBRARY-
Mr. Rekowski stated that the film for December is “How the Grinch Stole Christmas” which will be shown on December 16 and is free to the public.
WATER-
Mr. Mastrantoni stated that he had nothing further to report.
FINANCE DEPARTMENT-
Mr. Maher stated: General Fund cash report for November 2009:
Beginning Cash Balance: $1,321,646.58 Interest on Checking: $454.85 Deposits: $1,040,215.75 Draw-downs on Investment: N/A Disbursements: $(1,857,315.21) Cash Balance: $505,001.97
Beginning Investment $2,783,748.12 Balance: Interest on Investments: N/A Withdraws: N/A Ending Investment $2,783,748.12 Balance: Petty Cash: $800.00
Total Cash and Investments $3,289.550.09 Available:
The Mayor called for a motion to pay any bills and accept administrative reports from all of the departments. Motion was made by Councilman Kondik, second by Councilman Fijewski. The motion carried by majority, 7/0.
ADJOURNMENT
The mayor called for a motion to adjourn. Motion was made by Councilman Dalrymple, second by Councilman Marsh. The motion passed by majority, 7/0.
With no further business before this December 7, 2009 regular session of the Weirton City Council the meeting was adjourned after the closing prayer.
|