COUNCIL COMMITTEES

The Council Committees Meeting was held on August 11, 2003, at 5:30 p.m., with Council President McGlumphy presiding. Members of Council present were Mr. Carey, Mr. Pitts, Mrs. Williams, Mr. Truitt, Mr. Ritter, Mr. Speed, Mr. Salters, and Mr. Ruane.

AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS

Mr. Speed moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Ruane and unanimously carried.

PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE

The Parks and Recreation Committee met with Mr. Pitts presiding. Members present were Mr. Carey, Mrs. Williams, Mr. Davis, and Mrs. Malone.

Consideration of Request for Dog Park - Dr. Dahlia Wasfi

A request was received from Dr. Dahlia Wasfi, 286 Pine Valley Road, for a park to be located in the City of Dover specifically designated for dogs.

Dr. Wasfi stated that a dog park is a designated safe, fenced area where dogs can legally be off-leash under the care of their owners. Unfortunately, all the parks in the Dover area require dogs to be leashed at all times. She briefed members of the benefits, both to the owners and dogs, of having a dog park located in Dover, as well as the items/equipment necessary for a dog park. Dr. Wasfi indicated that she posted petitions at three (3) local veterinarian offices to determine if others shared her interest in a dog park; after six (6) days, over 80 signatures were obtained.

Mrs. Malone indicated that, although she believed this was a good idea, she had many concerns, such as costs, maintenance, and liability. Should this project come to fruition, she requested that the petitions include the addresses of those signing so that it can be determined, if in fact, City of Dover taxpayers are the ones interested.

Mr. DePrima stated that there are several residential properties surrounding the Silver Lake area and suggested that if Council should move forward with this concept, the City would need to reach out to the public and inform the surrounding neighbors of the plan for a dog park.

Mr. Salters and Mr. Davis shared the same concerns previously made by Mrs. Malone in regards to the costs associated with a dog park and did not agree with using tax payers money for a park that only dog owners would utilize.

Mr. Pitts requested that Dr. Wasfi allow the City three (3) to four (4) months to meet with staff and explore possible sites and related costs. In the meantime, he requested Dr. Wasfi to provide the City with copies of the petitions (to include addresses).

Mrs. Malone moved to recommend that Dr. Wasfi gather the petitions to include addresses to be brought back to the Committee within three (3) to (4) four months for further review. The motion was seconded by Mr. Davis and unanimously carried.

Mr. Carey moved for adjournment, seconded by Mrs. Malone and unanimously carried.

Meeting Adjourned at 5:58 P.M.

SAFETY ADVISORY COMMITTEE

The Safety Advisory Committee met with Mr. Truitt presiding. Members present were Mr. Salters, Mrs. Williams, Mr. Tolbert, and Mr. Wolfe.

Proposed Ordinance Amendment - Chapter 14 - Offenses-Miscellaneous, Section 14-13 - Panhandling

During their Regular Meeting of June 9, 2003, members considered correspondence received from Mr. David Louie of 129 S. Governors Avenue (Harry Louie Laundry & Dry Cleaners) regarding pan handling on Loockerman Street.

Police Chief Horvath presented an ordinance which mirrors the existing State of Delaware Law, which can be found in Title 11 Section 1321(4). The ordinance would allow the City of Dover Police to issue a Dover City Ordinance summons to any violators that are witnessed panhandling without requiring a full custody arrest. This would allow the Police Department to focus on potentially more serious complaints. Chief Horvath explained, that although he understood, many people do not want to spend time signing a warrant against a panhandler and further time testifying against them in court, he would not support an ordinance which would allow a police officer to arrest a person without witnessing the violation or without obtaining a signed affidavit from the complainant.

Mrs. Williams moved to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance amendment (Attachment #1), as presented. The motion was seconded by Mr. Wolfe and unanimously carried.

Combative Fighting Licenses - Prohibition of Extreme Violent Events

As requested by Council, City Solicitor Rodriguez provided members with a proposed ordinance amendment that would prohibit “Extreme Death Match Challenges” from taking place in the City of Dover; however, still allowing legitimate professional fights.

Mr. Truitt indicated that there were several details (fee/licences fees) that needed to be determined and included in the proposed ordinance amendment and requested staff to have this information provided when this item is presented to Council during their Regular Meeting of August 25, 2003.

Mr. DePrima reminded members that the City Solicitor recently requested an ordinance to double the fines after a number of days if not paid. He also clarified that events sanctioned by the State of Delaware should not be affected by this proposed ordinance.

Mrs. Williams moved to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance for whatever would exclude professional boxing (Attachment #2), as follows: 1) with an exclusion for those sanctioned by the State of Delaware; and 2) requiring promoters to provide bond money and to have staff provide the fines and licences fees. The motion was seconded by Mr. Salters and unanimously carried.

Mr. Truitt moved for adjournment, seconded by Mrs. Williams and unanimously carried.

Meeting Adjourned at 6:15 P.M.

LEGISLATIVE AND FINANCE COMMITTEE

The Legislative and Finance Committee met with Mr. Speed presiding. Members present were Mr. Ritter, Mr. Ruane, Mr. Gorman, and Mr. Shelton.

Public Discussion of the Public Administration Service (PAS) Study - Compensation and Classification Review (Item tabled during April 28, 2003 Meeting)

Council President McGlumphy indicated that the presentation being made was strictly his points of view of the Compensation and Classification Study.

Several questions were asked by members of Council regarding to the overtime pay related to the Police Department. Chief Horvath was requested to provide members of Council with a breakdown of the overtime.

Responding to Mr. Speed’s invitation for comments from the audience, Dr. Margaret McKay, 54 Rodney Road, suggested the following:

            1.         Return to part-time Mayor system (put the issue to the voters by way of a referendum);

             2.         City Council enforce its statutory responsibility as “guardians of the public purse”, pursue competitive bidding for all contracts, including those of City Auditor and City Attorney;

            3.         Seek outside, truly independent, legal advice concerning the Mayor’s veto power and an independent auditor;

            4.         City Council establish clear and unambiguous rules that determine which expenditures incurred by City staff (elected and appointed) are and are not allowable and those expenditures that are not allowable and should not be reimbursed.

Mr. Ritter moved to recommend acceptance of the PAS Compensation and Classification Review (Attachment #3) as presented, seconded by Mr. Ruane and unanimously carried.

Comptroller/Auditor Review - Mayor’s Budget (Councilman Ritter)

As requested by Council President McGlumphy, the following portion of the minutes have been transcribed verbatim:

Mr. Speed: “Now onto item #2. The Chair recognizes Mr. Ritter.”

Mr. Ritter: “Yes, thank you Mr. Speed, actually we did go into this some already and looking into the past five (5) year budget of expenses that everyone should have a copy of the budget expenses made by the Office of the Mayor is clear that the expenses are not clearly identified as official City of Dover business as outlined in the City Charter Section 12 and City Code Section 2-70; the expenses are not clearly justified and are not clearly business related. If everyone has taken a look at those already, you can clearly see some of the examples that Mrs. McKay has spoken of. What I am declaring is we need an outside auditor or objectively done by an auditor. To go on and give gifts to certain organizations you get into an equity situation also. How is it fair to give to one organization versus the other? I would like to make a motion and then we can discuss the motion and go from there. I would like to move that the City Finance Director have the audit firm that is already engaged to audit the City’s fiscal year 2003 finances analyze the expenses of the Mayor’s Office for the past six (6) years, fiscal year 1998 to fiscal year 2003. The purpose of such an audit would be to: (1) recreate, from an accounting perspective, all accounting related transactions identified in this special purpose engagement; (2) determine the extent in which the transactions described in the engagement were completed or accomplished in compliance with the City Charter and Code, city policy and procedure and applicable federal regulations; and (3) to evaluate the responsibility, appropriateness, and equity of the transactions with respect to the function and purpose and identify internal control weaknesses based on the results of the review performed by the auditor and to make recommendations for internal control enhancements and improvements and policy guidelines.

Mr. Speed: “Is there a second to the motion?”

Mr. Ruane: “I’ll second the motion.”

Mr. Speed: “Alright, discussion? Members of the committee, any questions? Mr. Shelton.”

Mr. Shelton: “Thank you Mr. Chairman. The question I have is do we have any idea what the cost would be to go back and do that for the past six (6) years?”

Mr. Ritter: “I do not have a cost estimate, but basically what it would entail is going back into the next six (6) years, they already have expenditures of it, but what we have is not as broken down as what can possibly be done due to the fact we have credit card expenses all through the year. With the credit card expenses we would have to pull the receipts for each and every one and none of us have the appropriate time to engage into this process, that’s why the outside audit and to have this coincide with the audit firm that we are currently engaged with in the City.”

Mr. Shelton: “I guess I’m trying to understand what the cost would be and why six (6) years, why not three (3) years, why not two (2) years? I don’t know how relevant it is to go back six (6) years.”

Mr. Ritter: “If we go back six (6) years, we’re going back to the first time we have a full-time Mayor.”

Mr. Shelton: “I see.”

Mr. Speed: “Any other mem... Mr. Shelton did you have any more questions?”

Mr. Shelton: “No, not at this time, thank you.”

Mr. Speed: “Any other members of the committee? Mr. Mayor.”

Mayor Hutchison: “Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ritter, members of Council, and Ladies and Gentlemen. First, let me ask Donna Mitchell, our Finance Director, please, do you have a copy of the policy regarding my $5,000 per year expense account that dictates what I am allowed to spend, what I’m not allowed to spend?”

Mrs. Mitchell: “I don’t have it here with me Mayor, but I think that’s the Code Section 2-70 that was cited. Is that correct? I’m not sure.”

Mr. Ritter: “Yes.”

Mayor Hutchison: “So the question is, do we have a policy?”

Mrs. Mitchell: “No.”

Mayor Hutchison: “Thank you. Could you pass them out please? (Requested the City Clerk to distribute information) If you indulge with me just for a couple of minutes. The Mayor’s Office and the duties and responsibilities of my office are, first, in charge of the Police Department. Second, public relations, spokesperson for the City of Dover. Third, economic development. Fourth, building relationships/partnerships with government, federal, state, and county, business, education and citizens. Serve as a lobbyist at Legislative Hall when in session. On call 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Committees in which I serve on:

 

1.     President, Delaware League of Local Governments

2.     Council on Police Training

3.     Livable Delaware Advisory Council

4.     Delaware Emergency Management Agency (charged with allocation of homeland security funds to local municipalities)

5.     Delaware National Guard and Reserve Emergency Assistance Fund Board (allocates funding to needy families of servicemen and women)

6.     Delaware Workforce Investment Board

7.     Central Delaware Chamber of Commerce

8.     Dover Rotary Club (honorary member)

9.     Central Delaware Economic Development Council

10.   Honorary Wing Commander

11.   Kent County Tourism

12.   Department of Public Safety and Homeland Security

13.   Delaware State University Board of Visitors

14.   Delaware Technical & Community College Development Council

15.   Delaware Civic Center

16.   Greater Dover Committee (honorary member)

17. Downtown Dover Development Corporation

Now, let’s talk about what the Mayor’s Office has been involved in. The Garrison Farm which resulted in $2.5M being given to the City of Dover and the last three (3) years that the farm has been under the ownership of this City, that farm has been leased for $60,000. We work very hard with the City of Wilmington to bring the Wilmington College to Dover. Currently, I am proud to say that the construction represents $12.2M. Kent County Levy Court, I am proud to say on September the 9^th they will break ground to build an $18M new building. House Bill 306 and 307 that was passed on the very last day of the General Assembly this year represents a total of $250,000 to $400,000 annually that comes back to this City. We were also able to contact Senator Biden this year because of the four (4) new officers being increased to the Dover City Police Department and we received $350,000. And in the past we worked with Dover Air Force Base, Senator Biden, Senator Roth, Mike Castle, and we received $95M for the infrastructure at Dover Air Force Base. I am proud to say that we worked with Dover Downs when they got ready to expand and build a new hotel. We set up a meeting with the Governor and the task force and I’m proud to say today we have a $60M new hotel. We also worked on the Delaware Air Park and the Schwartz Theater. And currently, today, we are working on two (2) big projects; we are working with our United States Senator Tom Carper dealing with home ownership initiative and downtown Dover. We also are working on Eden Hill.

With that said, let’s talk about expenses for just a minute. In the year 2000, I spent a total of $24.24 on entertaining people for food costs. In the year 2001, it came to $25.79 a week. In the year 2002, $22.07. This year, already, I have spent $13.34 a week. As far as gifts, we give out Dover golf shirts, and I might add we spend a lot money for golf shirts, coins, writing pens, lapel pins. This year I have already spent $1,605.41 for these items. Last year I spent $1,181.76. So whomever you’re going to pay to do the audit, it should be real quick, it shouldn’t take too long. In the year 2001, I spent $2,231.15. In the year 2000, I spent $1,744.61. What I am saying to all of you, economic development in the City of Dover, we done a lot of good things and it was said that the Mayor, no, it’s not about the Mayor, I represent a team effort. And let me assure you, when Dover Air Force Base has a problem, do they call any member of Council, or do they call the City Manager? I don’t think so. Let me ask you, members of Council, including the City Manager, how many of you have been to Proctor and Gamble in the last year, or two (2) years? How many of you know Phil Burns personally, like I do? How many of you have been to Kraft Food to see Brice Link, and talk to him about his issues and concerns? I have. How many of you have been to Dover Air Force Base and sat down with the Commander, personally, to talk about his issues and concerns? None of you have, I have. So I ask all of you, do away with the full time Mayor and I have a suggestion, you either are going to do one (1) or (2) things; you’re going to have a City Manager and an Assistant City Manager and if you look in the PAS Study, go ahead and get one and see what it costs. It’s recommended $95,000. Quite frankly, I personally believe that for $45,000, I think you’re getting a pretty good deal.

Thank you. And by the way before I close, I would welcome an audit, I have no problem with an audit, you are welcome to look at it.”

Mr. Ruane: “I call for the question on the motion.”

Mrs. Williams: “Can I...”

Mr. Speed: “There’s only been a couple of people that have had an opportunity to speak. Mr. Salters.”

Mr. Salters: “My position is, if we do not have clear guidelines, in any direction, regarding the expenditures of the Mayor and how this Council would require the Mayor to spend the funds, then it’s the Council’s fault. Now, I’m not protecting the Mayor, the Mayor just protected himself. What I’m saying is, if we wish to set guidelines and make policies to control the expenditures of the Mayor, that’s our responsibility and we should do it. Another thing is the fuss about what has been spent on various items. I just want to make a statement about the full and part time Mayor. I took a major part of the responsibility for creating a full time Mayor and I’m proud to say that. I think this City deserves a full time Mayor, I think it needs a full time Mayor, and those of you who disagree with me, that’s your position. But I believe every time, and I’m out a lot in the community, I go to a lot of things, and every time I’m out, I see the Mayor. I represent the Mayor on many occasions when he has duplications. Now, I don’t know whether anybody else does that. There are probably other people here that do that. My suggestion, and Dr. McKay made a reference to it, that we need independence in determining what is going on in the City. I don’t know whether we need any auditor other then the ones we have, Mr. Ritter alluded to that. But my position is that we have something that has happened in the past, that’s the past. If we want to correct it, it’s our responsibility. We need to set the guidelines and if the Mayor doesn’t want live by them, he won’t run. And if he does, then he’ll abide by the rules that are set by this Council, expenditures, everything. I don’t know whether we do a ten (10) year study, what is it going to prove? A ten (10) year study on expenditures is going to show a lot of money has been spent. What’s it going to do to prove any point? My point is we need to go forward from today, from this minute and develop a scenario where we will know what the Mayor’s expenditures are going to be and he’ll have to live by it. Let me mention something, in all the expenditures that I have seen come across my desk, I had so many of them, I had to get extra stuff from the Clerk’s Office to keep up with them. We have been inundated with requests and paperwork that comes in. I don’t know whether all this paperwork is worth it. I think Mr. Shelton made a good point when he said, “what’s the audit going to cost?” An audit that goes back ten (10) years will probably cost more than $10,000. I am also of the opinion that maybe some other reason, other than just straightening out the books, that we are making this declaration at this time. If we are on a “witch hunt”, most of us could probably be caught up in it. Those of us that have served in the past have served with diligence. I’ll personally take responsibility if the Mayor has over spent and we let him get away with it, that’s the Council’s fault, that’s the old Council’s fault. All of us who have served in the old Council during this year and in the past. If that is the case, and that is the case, then I think we need to move ahead, set the guidelines, and live by them, and get this out of the way.

Mr. Speed: “Thank you Mr. Salters. Mrs. Williams.”

Mrs. Williams: “I think I’d like to piggyback on something Mr. Shelton was saying. I’m concerned about the cost of this for the taxpayer. I guess I’m directing my question to Mrs. Mitchell; Donna, were the audits of the past, how many audits have you reviewed in the past years?”

Mrs. Mitchell: “Just since I’ve been here. I can go back to prior audits.”

Mrs. Williams: “So that’s two (2) years?”

Mrs. Mitchell: “Yea.”

Mrs. Williams: “Were there any reportable conditions, any findings?”

Mrs. Mitchell: “No.”

Mrs. Williams: “Is the auditing firm used certified in doing municipal audits?”

Mrs. Mitchell: “Yes.”

Mrs. Williams: “Then I don’t know if we want to spend $10,000 maybe $15,000 if you go back six (6) years. I personally, as a taxpayer, don’t want my money spent like that. But, if we’re going to do it, I think we need a good feeling from the public, that that’s what they want. Especially if we have absolutely no documentation from the current auditors that there’s been any reportable conditions or any findings at all.”

Mr. Speed: “Mr. Ruane.”

Mr. Ruane: “I think several things are important to note here; one is that the Mayor has agreed to an audit. I’m pleased to hear that because that shows an openness to let some outside person, if you audit in accordance with appropriate accounting and regulatory procedures. You said it would not take very long. I think by the time this comes to the full Council, we can have a fix on how much it would really cost and people can decide to vote yes or no on it on that basis if they so desire. I do think that the record should not stand that there are no guidelines. I would point out to you that the memorandum that has been cited a couple of times already, and I would be glad to move the adoption of that memorandum since there doesn’t seem to be any dispute about its worthiness as a second motion after this one is completed. That memorandum was addressed to both Mayor and Council, it was not just addressed to Council and it implies and alludes to and actually directs a statement to the effect that there are written guidelines for City employees and the Mayor. I’ve searched and searched and wonder what that must be and what I’ve discovered is that the Charter itself. I think the Litmus Test for any expenditure by any public official, elected official, appointed official, or City employee is within this Charter. There are many of you that are saying how wonderful the Charter is, so let’s look at what the Charter says. Section 12 of the Charter says that the ‘Council shall determine the annual salary and the emollients of the Mayor and Council and other elected and appointed officials by ordinance.’ Good, keep that in mind because the ordinance that has been cited here is being so open ended and discretionary is an ordinance that’s only been put in place regarding the Mayor’s salary and expenses in relationship with this section of the Charter so it has to be interrupted with the Charter an ordinance that is meant to apply the Charter. What does the Charter say further, ‘members of the Council, the Mayor, and other elected or appointed officials shall receive reimbursement for actual and necessary expenses incurred’, and here’s the quote, ‘when on official business’ that’s the key, that’s the Litmus Test to everything here. And the challenge that is being made by a citizen and others that have reviewed this, is that some of these expenditures, some unknown expenses that you all have a copy of, and everybody has received the same documents, you’ve spent time going through it. I believe that if you are honest, you’d have to say that some of the expenditures are not clearly identifiable City of Dover business purposes expenditures. I think further you’d have to agree with Mr. Ritter that when you get in the business of making donations to select groups, or awards to certain individuals, you’re getting into some very difficult areas. You really need to have some set criteria for that, and if you’re not setting one for yourself then I guess somebody else has to set it. Because if you belong to the organization of which you are awarding something, then there’s a possible conflict. And you cannot possibly, Mr. Mayor, or none of us can possibly contribute equitably among all the various community organizations that are good organizations in this City and neither can we give gifts to all the individuals whom one might consider worthy of such recognition. Can’t be done. If it’s going to be done it should be done in open forum and everybody ought to agree that we want to spend taxpayer’s money for that purpose. The fact is, the $5,000 that has been so handedly brought about is open ended, this is discretionary, this is like you look in the mirror one morning and decide how you’re going to spend the $5,000. The fact is the list of expenditures that the auditor will be reviewing and that you’ve all had a chance to review go beyond the $5,000. The expenditures that we are talking about, that could be brought forward to you, the golf expenses, the gifts and so forth do not all come out of the line called $5,000. So what guidelines are in place for the other lines, the normal routine guidelines that are in place for everybody. It has to be something that can be directly, clearly identifiable as a City of Dover business purpose. Furthermore, the $5,000 itself, talks about proper documentation. If you’ve looked at the file on this, and I hope you have, because you’ve had about a month to look at it, some of us have looked at it and some of us may not have looked at it. Let’s let an auditor look at it, the innuendo about people are looking at this because of their hunting or something, or they’re fishing or something, let the auditor fish then, if he finds some smelly fish he can tell us, if he doesn’t find any he’ll tell us that too or she will. The fact is the supporting documentation for some expenses does not appear to have been consistently included. When you take people out to dinner for business purposes, put down what the business purpose is, that’s not identified in any of the material I’ve seen, not that I’ve seen them all. It’s like Mr. Ritter says, you need to spend a lot more time on this then any of us should and probably shouldn’t because you’ll consider bias because we’re doing it. Some of it is very obvious; however, there’s nobody in this room, including the Mayor, that can tell me that the Quarterback Club, as an example, is an obvious business expense. So I move that we have the audit like he has agreed to and that we go forward with the understanding that the auditor will be looking, as I have, for relationship to official business. If it meets that Litmus Test, fine, God Bless it, we’ll continue it. And the other, really, is something that’s deemed responsible and appropriate. Some of the known expenses, such as the non travel related mirrors the $400 and so forth, appears to be an excess of what Council, I think, and the public, would deem responsible and appropriate. It’s a human call, and I think if you look at it yourselves, you’d raise the same question. If the auditor looks at it and says it’s fine, so be it.”

Mr. Speed: “Thank you Mr. Ruane. Mr. Shelton.”

Mr. Shelton: “Thank you Mr. Speed. I think Mr. Salters and Mr. Ruane have made some good points and I think there are some things that could be nailed together to make that happen. I guess one of the concerns I have, and I’ve brought it up before, about the cost of this. Once the audit is completed, and you get the information, what do you do with it? Do we say, oh, we shouldn’t have spent money on the Quarterback Club or we shouldn’t have spent money on this, now let’s start from here and let’s have an official document that says, this is how it’s going to run from now on. So what have we accomplished?”

Mr. Speed: “I think the idea is to help us develop an appropriate policy. It seems like what we have now is ...”

Mayor Hutchison: “If I could, and let me give you my thinking for belonging to the Quarterback Club, and again you may not agree. When I look at Kent County and I think the Quarterback Club each year takes time out four (4) times a year to recognize outstanding football players in Kent County. I joined the Kent County Quarterback Club to represent this City in wanting to be able to personally meet with the individuals, to share with them how proud we are, not only of the talent that they show on the football field, but also to thank them for the leadership in which they have in our schools, in their communities, to thank their parents, the coaches, and the schools. All of us can sit here and say now, we don’t want that. I don’t think because I chose to do that, makes me a bad person. I don’t need four (4) more nights out a year to begin with, but I did it because I thought it was important to take time out to recognize outstanding individuals. I’ll share one other point, you know what’s sad? I personally believe that if all of you would’ve taken the time to ask me personally why I did what I did, on everyone of those vouchers, you wouldn’t personally have a problem. When I take a person from Proctor and Gamble, I took her and her assistant to dinner, you know why I did so? They spent $54M on the Proctor and Gamble Plant; she was being transferred, I took her out to say thanks for a job well done. Now I personally don’t think a single one of you would or citizens in this City would have a problem with me doing that. When I take our State elected officials out, because of a mis-communication between the City of Dover and State elected officials, well guess what, when it was all done we got several hundred thousand dollars, because of them having a clear understanding. All I’m saying is, why don’t you take the time to give me the opportunity to explain why I did what I did, and then if you want an audit, do one. But to waste the taxpayers money for the City of Dover to do an audit, when in fact, not a single one of you, none of you, have ever come to me personally to ask a single question pertaining to any of my expenses. I guarantee you, I can justify every single one of them. You may not like my answer, but I can tell you this, until there is a policy that says I cannot do it, then again, please understand, I am not taking money home. These are things in which I am doing in trying to benefit this City. So I would challenge you first before you do an audit, why don’t you take the time to give me the opportunity to explain why I did what I did. Then if you’re not happy, do your audit.”

Mr. Speed: “Thank you Mr. Mayor. If I could make one quick comment. I think part of the idea here is that there are certain members of Council who disagree with your opinion. Obviously you have your opinion and some members of Council agree with you, and I think there are members of the public that agree, and there are members of the public that disagree. The idea is to have an independent person take a look at it and tell us if any of the expenditures are (inaudible) to determine if the expenditures are in accordance with the Charter and Code that we have now and the policies that are in place, which are minimal. Secondarily, to help us develop an appropriate policy going forward. Mrs. Williams.”

Mrs. Williams: “I have one other question, if you don’t mind, to ask Mrs. Mitchell. Donna when the auditors came in to do the audit, do they check the Charter? Most auditors have a mission statement or corporate mission or a charter in order to do an audit. I know in private non-profit organizations they do. I’m trying to find out if that occurs in municipalities.”

Mrs. Mitchell: “Councilwoman Williams, I don’t know if they sit and go through the Charter and do the audit or compare it to the Charter. I don’t think they do that. When the auditors come in and do their audit, they test a sample of transactions. They can’t go through everything. They take a sample and test that sample of transactions for control procedures and policy and compliance.”

Mrs. Williams: “Okay, thank you. Mr. Speed I would suggest that we contact the auditors that perform the audits and find out what test they did use to check the Charter, because again, I am concerned about the use of taxpayers money for a six (6) year audit, re-audit. Especially if there were no findings or reportable conditions.”

Mr. Speed: “I believe we will get a better number by the time this would come to the full Council to get a better idea on exactly how much it would cost. It is my understanding that we have actually already contacted our current auditor to start to feel out how much it would cost to take a look at specific items, as opposed to the general audit.”

Mrs. Williams: “Council did that?”

Mr. Speed: “No, I believe that the Finance Director did that. Since this was coming up before the Committee and the Council to try to get an idea how much it would cost. But is sounds like we don’t have an answer back yet on exactly how much it would be. Any other questions or comments on the motion that is on the floor? Do we need to have it re-read?”

Mr. Salters: “I think so.”

Mr. Speed: “Madam Clerk did you get it?”

Mrs. Green: “I hope so, that the Finance Director authorize the City’s audit firm to analyze the Mayor’s Office expenses for the past six (6) years.”

Mr. Ruane: “Call the question. Call the question.”

Mr. Salters: “I have a point to make.”

Mr. Speed: “If you can be quick Mr. Salters.”

Mr. Salters: “I’ll be very quick. Now if this comes back and we don’t accept our auditor’s recommendations, what do we do, we’re in another impasse.”

Mr. Speed: “I’m not sure by what you mean by not accept the auditor’s recommendation.”

Mr. Ritter: “... Discuss it after roll call (not audible).”

Mr. Salters: “Well, you’re not in charge of the meeting, so I’m responding to Mr. Speed. My question is, if the audit comes back with recommendations, and that’s our City auditor, and this Council refuses to accept the recommendations, we’re right back.”

Mr. Speed: “Then we have to set the policy in accordance with what we want to accept and what we don’t want to accept.”

Mr. Salters: “And I think that’s to the point, that’s why I’m saying that. Right now if we are displeased with everything we’ve seen, why go on a witch hunt, why don’t we just set the policy of what we want now. Why spend $20,000, I don’t know how much it’s going to cost, why spend anything? Are we looking for criminal activities.”

Mr. Speed: “No, I don’t think we’re looking for criminal activities.”

Mr. Salters: “If we’re not looking for criminal activities, what are we looking for? What’s the purpose?”

Mr. Speed: “I think when Mr. Ritter made the motion and explained his purpose it was pretty detailed. I don’t want to go back into it again.”

Mr. Salters: “I would like for him to say it again, if you don’t mind.”

Mr. Speed: “You can get with him after the meeting. This is a Committee meeting.”

Mr. Salters: “I understand it’s a Committee meeting, but...”

Mr. Ruane: “Point of order Mr. Chair.”

Someone called for the question.

Mr. Salters: not audible

Mr. Ruane: “I’m a member of the Committee and I think I can call point of order.”

Mr. McGlumphy: “The questions been called for.”

Mr. Ruane: “The questions been called.”

Mr. Speed: “If you want some additional information from Mr. Ritter before the Council meeting to discuss the issue, assuming it gets forwarded, I don’t know what the vote’s going to be here in the Committee, then you’ll have an opportunity do to that. Are there any questions on the motion from members of the Committee?” All in favor? All opposed? We have two opposed, Mr. Gorman and Mr. Shelton.”

Mr. Ruane: “Mr. Chairman.”

Mr. Speed: “Mr. Ruane.”

Mr. Salters: “Can we go back to that issue?”

Mr. Ritter: “No, we’re not going back.”

Mr. Speed: “Mr. Ruane had suggested a secondary motion.”

Mr. Ruane: “Since Council seems to be ready for some interim guidance and since the Council has been living with this guidance since at least October 2000. I move that Council adopt, as an interim guideline for both Mayor and Council, the guidance that everyone has a copy of dated October 30, 2000.” Note: Attachment #4

Mr. Salters: “Are you saying everyone has a copy of it?”

Mr. Ruane: “Yes they do.”

Mr. Speed: “It was in your Council Committee Packet.”

Mr. Ruane: “I thought I was talking, now you see, he can do it, right?”

Mr. Speed: “It was in your Council Committee Packet Mr. Salters.”

Mr. Ritter: “Mr. Speed, I’ll seconded that.”

Mr. Speed: “Is there any questions from members of the Committee on this motion, members of Council? Any questions on the motion? All in favor please signify by saying I. Opposed? Motion carries unanimous.”

Note by City Clerk

For clarification, resulting from above, the following motions were made:

1)        Mr. Ritter moved to recommend that the Finance Director authorize the City’s audit firm to analyze the Mayor’s Office expenses for the past six (6) years, seconded by Mr. Ruane and carried with Mr. Gorman and Mr. Shelton voting no.

2)        Mr. Ruane moved to recommend the adoption, as an interim for the Mayor and Council, of the guidelines for approved expenditures indicated in a Memorandum dated October 30, 2000 (Attachment #4). The motion was seconded by Mr. Ritter and unanimously carried.

Discussion - Proposed Ordinance Amendments to Chapter 2 - Administration, Article VIII - Committees (Council Standing Committees)

Due to insufficient time, the above mentioned item was deferred and will be placed on the August 25, 2003 Legislative and Finance Committee Agenda.

Proposed Ordinance Amendments - Doubling of Fines Not Paid Within 14 Days

Due to insufficient time, the above mentioned item was deferred and will be placed on the August 25, 2003 Legislative and Finance Committee Agenda.

Mr. Gorman moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Ruane and unanimously carried.

Meeting Adjourned at 7:22 P.M.

Mr. Speed moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Ritter and unanimously carried.

Meeting Adjourned at 7:23 P.M.

                                                                                    Respectfully submitted,

                                                                                    William P. McGlumphy

                                                                                    Council President