Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br />3. Sewer lateral program was opened for discussion only. <br />Ms. Feier stated that the administrative cost has been lessened and feels it has <br />the right balance with services that are being performed. She said it has been <br />successful and the City does have a little reserves remaining. <br /> <br />Ms. Ricci stated for the record that she is concerned about using money that the <br />citizens have dedicated for a specific purpose and filling it out for general <br />administrative expenses. The ordinance specifically states that it needs to be <br />used for any cost that is originally associated with or necessary to administer to <br />carry out a sewer lateral. Any other use she felt would be inappropriate. Ms. <br />Ricci did not understand why the City Manager no longer needed the Council’s <br />guidance on how to proceed with the program. Ms. Feier stated she was not <br />making any recommendations at this time for any changes in the sewer lateral <br />program and therefore did not ask for any recommendations. <br /> <br />4. Presentation of a draft budget for Fiscal Year 2010. Mr. Mulligan stated that the <br />question was does the Council have any discretion to extend the dead line for the <br />draft budget. He said the Charter is pretty clear that there is no such discretion, <br />that the City Manager must summit for the Council a draft budget for the next <br />fiscal year by May 1. Thereafter a Public Hearing will be held. The Council can <br />increase or decrease any line item as they deem fit except for the fixed <br />expenditures stated in Section 35 of the Charter. Ms. Feier asked to be able to <br />present a pared down draft budget by the May 1 deadline. <br /> <br />Ms. Ricci moved that draft budget would encompass the recommendation in the <br />City Manager’s memo with the following changes: remove the Economic <br />Development Sales Tax of $100,000, remove reducing the level of inspections at <br />$143,000 and in their stead add a parking program in the Loop and lastly to not <br />dip into the City’s reserve. Mr. Wagner seconded the motion. A voice vote led to <br />its defeat with Nays from Mr. Price, Mr. Crow, Mr. Sharpe and Mayor Adams. <br /> <br />Mr. Price moved that a draft budget be presented with the true deficit, seconded <br />by Mr. Wagner. The motion was passed by voice vote with two Nays from Ms. <br />Ricci and Mr. Glickert. <br /> <br />J. UNFINISHED BUSINESS <br />1. BILL 9026 - An ordinance amending Title 15 of the University City Municipal <br />Code, relating to buildings and construction, by repealing Chapter 15.01 thereof, <br />relating to the residential code, and enacting in lieu thereof a new chapter to be <br />known as “Chapter 15.01 Residential Code”; thereby amending Chapter 15.01 so <br />as to adopt the International Residential Code, 2006 edition, with certain changes <br />thereto; containing a savings clause and providing a penalty <br /> <br />Mr. Wagner moved to approve Bill 9026 and was seconded by Mr. Glickert. <br /> <br />Roll Call Vote was: <br />AYES: Mr. Price, Ms. Ricci, Mr. Wagner, Mr. Crow, Mr. Glickert, Mr. Sharpe, Jr., <br />and Mayor Adams <br />NAYS: none <br /> <br />