Council’s Recess Meeting

Council President Scott Mills scheduled a Committee of the Whole (COW) meeting on August 17th to review and discuss the bid specifications for demolishing the decrepit, substandard Old Church Building (OCB) that sits on the city hall property.

According to the city engineer’s office, Mayor Coleman’s earlier foot-dragging with regard to a necessary asbestos study of the building delayed development of the bid specs before council adjourned for its normal August recess.

While council usually tries to avoid meeting during the recess, the issue of what to do with the Old Church Building has dragged on for more than two years already. In scheduling a mid-recess COW, Council President Mills was clearly hoping to move the process along. Council needs this last piece of information---how much it would actually cost to take the building down—in order to make a final decision about the OCB.

Mayor Coleman apparently decided to take advantage of situation by scheduling a special meeting for the same night (council can't take any official action during COW meetings, but it can take action during special meetings).

After I arrived and collected the agendas for both meetings I was informed that the special meeting had just been cancelled. It turned out that two council members (Councilman Ed Hargate and Councilwoman Lisa Stickan) weren't able to attend the August 17th meeting.

I was left wondering: Why did the mayor schedule the special meeting in the first place? Was he hoping to get council to take some action during the recess---when few people would be watching? Or did Mayor Coleman simply not bother to consult with Council President Mills to find out about attendance at the COW meeting, before he scheduled the special meeting?

The Bid Specs for Demolishing the OCB

Brian Mader, a representative from the city engineer’s office, seemed startled when Council President Mills asked him to present the bid specifications (which presumably Mader had developed) to council. While he was present to answer questions, Mader apparently assumed that the specifications (consisting of a schematic drawing and a description of the work to be performed) spoke for themselves.

Mader finally spoke up after several promptings from council. He stated:

1. that the advertising for bids could take place next week and that the bids would be opened on September 10th;
2. that he is still trying to confirm that the OCB is connected to a private septic system rather than the municipal sanitary sewer;
3. that the septic system did not have to be removed, but could be sealed off instead;
4. that it was not necessary to put an explicit provision awarding salvage rights to the contractor (there is copper piping and other salvageable material in the building) as the bidders would know that “anything the city doesn’t want salvaged would become the property of the contractor” and that the “contractors can reflect that in their bids”;
5. that the city might claim the removable concrete curbing that lines the west drive for reuse by the Service Department; and
6. that the building (which has only 7,500 feet of useable space) would probably be demolished in a day.

While Mader said, based on the 2008 structural engineer’s report, that he thought the bids might come in at the $120,000 range, City Engineer Steve Hovancsek disagreed. Hovancsek told council that the bids would probably be much less: “Things are slow. There is not that much work out there.”

The one issue that Mader asked for direction from council about was the OCB’s east drive and parking lot. Although he had included their removal in the bid specs, Mader told council that the drive and parking lot were in “decent shape” and “in fairly good condition” and that it was his personal opinion that they could continue to “serve a purpose” as an overflow parking area for city hall and the community center right now and that they would be needed if a new building was erected on the property in the future.

All council members in attendance--except for Councilman Frank Legan, who is dead set against taking the building down--agreed with Mader’s assessment and recommendation to leave removal of the east driveway and parking lot out of the bid specifications.

I got the impression that Councilman Legan would have liked to sit there with his hands over his ears--if he could have gotten away with it.
 
When asked whether he agreed that the east driveway and parking lot were worth saving, and should be removed from the demolition specs, Councilman Frank Legan replied:

"Without identifying a use for the property, I think the entire conversation is premature. I am not sure what we are preparing for. I am not sure what it’s going to be. Until we identify a use for the building, I’m not sure whether we should keep the parking lot or not.”

In other words:

If I don’t get my way, I don’t want to play.

Off-duty Police Shooting

Several weeks ago, an off-duty Highland Heights police officer used his gun, attempting to protect himself and a friend from an early morning robbery attempt in Cleveland’s Tremont area.

Police Chief Cook presented a “morals” claim from a woman whose property was damaged by the officer’s bullets---one of the bullets went through the woman’s second floor window and into an interior second floor wall.

Chief Cook explained that the officer is allowed to carry a gun and bullets while off-duty and that department policy requires police officers to take action when certain crimes are committed, in this case an attempted aggravated robbery.

Although the city is not legally obligated to pay for repairing the woman’s property, Mayor Coleman and council’s Risk Management Committee agreed to pay the very modest ($350) cost of repairing the woman’s property.

I could think of only one thing during the discussion:

How very fortunate we all are that the only consequence of the officer’s decision to fire his handgun that night is that some property got damaged. The consequences could have been far, far worse.

The end.