Say What? Says Who?

Sometimes just a few quotes will give you a real feel for what went on at a meeting.
Here are some quotes from Council’s July 5th Committee of the Whole Meeting. Can you guess who said them and what they were talking about?

The Quotes

1. “There’s a learning curve that cannot be done in two years. “

2. “We took it seriously and we got it done”

3. “The answer is always more, and not less, communication. It’s a way to communicate with residents. It’s meeting them where they are. It’s a way to communicate better, faster and smarter than we do now.”

4. “(Building Commissioner) Dale Grabfelder says we don’t have to make it ADA…To me it’s a simple job renovating the bathroom... all we have to do is increase a stall.”

5.“The ADA is more than just space to turn around. We need to make sure we comply with the ADA.”

6. “If I wanted to build a deck, I couldn’t just go the building department and say, ”trust me.” We need a plan. It behooves us to have an architect to do it right…I think someone should design it, then we can go out and ask people to help build it….We had someone look at the barn pavilion professionally, we should have someone look at the bathrooms the same way.”

7. “I did give you a paper saying we wanted to renovate the bathrooms…. I spoke to Dale and asked him if we need drawings. He said we did not need architect drawings.”

8. “It’s not just the bathrooms. Don’t forget, we need to purchase picnic tables for the new pavilion.”

9. “There’s more work than we put out to bid…We just stuck to the main roads. We pared down on the repairs that needed to get done in order to get in under the budget.”

Says Who?

1. “There’s a learning curve that cannot be done in two years.”
The speaker: Charter Review Commission (CRC) Chair Dan Dombeck.
The context: Dombeck was explaining that one of the reasons the CRC recommended replacing Council members’ current two year terms with staggered, four year terms was the Commission’s belief that it takes new Council members more than two years to learn how to do their jobs.
Dombeck also reported other CRC-recommended changes that residents will vote on in November: 1) a slight wording change to clear up an internal inconsistency regarding the appointment of the Finance Director; and 2) removing the word “fulltime,” to make clear that no employee—whether full or part-time---can serve as mayor or a Council member while working for the city.

2. “We took it seriously and we got it done.”
The speaker: CRC Chair Dan Dombeck.
The context: Dombeck praised his fellow CRC members, saying, “We met since early February, regularly. We broke it (the Charter) down word by word. We had an excellent balance. Members were from different wards, different backgrounds and had different opinions.”

Although Dombeck did not mention it---perhaps because the CRC was supposed to be an independent citizens’ group---Mayor Scott Coleman was apparently very actively involved with the CRC. During the COW, Coleman took personal credit for at least one of the CRC-approved Charter changes that will appear on the November ballot.

3. “The answer is always more, and not less, communication. It’s a way to communicate with residents. It’s meeting them where they are. It’s a way to communicate better, faster and smarter than we do now.”
The speaker: Councilman Frank Legan.
The context: Last fall Legan started pushing the idea of paying an outside company to provide live, online streaming of Council meetings. The most recent price tag Legan quoted for that service: $400 a month.

Legan insisted on discussing his plan again after Council President Scott Mills indicated that there wasn’t sufficient interest on Council to pursue the matter. Legan made clear that he wanted to use the COW to try to strong-arm and corner his fellow Council members into stating on the record why they didn’t support his plan.

Legan apparently got things into better perspective by the time the COW rolled around. He abandoned his original plan and opted, instead, to read a prepared statement explaining his rationale for pushing the proposal. While Legan used lofty language and quotable quotes to tout the intrinsic value of communicating with residents, he did not address the specifics of his proposal, he did not claim that enough residents would actually listen, so as to justify the cost, nor did he contend that his proposal was the best or most cost-effective way to enhance communication with residents.

4. “(Building Commissioner) Dale Grabfelder says we don’t have to make it (the renovated Old Pool House bathroom) ADA (Americans with Disability Act). …To me it’s a simple job renovating the bathroom…all we have to do is increase a bathroom stall.”
The speaker: Recreation Director David Ianiro.
5. “The ADA is more than just space to turn around. We need to make sure we comply with the ADA.”
The speaker: Councilwoman Cathy Murphy.
The context: Inairo has been trying to get a third pavilion built in the park for several years. His latest proposal involves erecting a barn-type structure (a “Park Barn Pavillion” (PBP)), which would used by the city’s 8 week summer day camp program and rented out as a party barn the rest of the time. The proposal also includes turning the Old Pool House’s (OPH) 40+ year old shower/toilet areas into a modern public bathroom facility.

From the start, Ianiro has focused most of his attention and energy on the PBP and has downplayed the scope and cost of the bathroom renovation—to the point of claiming that it mostly involves cosmetic work. In fact, it entails much more: 1) opening a cinder block wall to install a new door where none existed before; 2) ripping up and removing rubber-coated flooring; 3) repairing and refinishing the underlying cement floor; 4) removing the showers; 5) fashioning a modern bathroom; 6) installing new fixtures; and 7) painting the new space.

Ianiro has resisted the idea that the renovated bathrooms have to meet current handicap accessibility standards, and he has also indicated that he wants to avoid public bidding by subdividing the project into small pieces. Ianiro told Council that he’s been talking to “guys he knows” and that he can get the work done cheaply---if Council would give him the authority to get the project done his way.

Building Commissioner Dale Grabfelder wasn’t present, so couldn’t confirm or explain the statement attributed to him by Ianiro. Regardless, the law (both state and federal) is quite clear: ADA/handicap accessibility standards must be met whenever older, pre-ADA public facilities---such as the OPH shower/toilet rooms---are renovated.

It would be ridiculous to criticize Ianiro for wanting to save taxpayers money by renovating the OPH bathrooms as cheaply as possible. But doing something cheaply is not necessarily the same thing as doing it responsibly, doing it well or doing it right.

As her comments reflect, Councilwoman Murphy, a lawyer, is clearly concerned with doing things right.

6. .“If I wanted to build a deck, I couldn’t just go the building department and say, ”trust me.” We need a plan. It behooves us to have an architect to do it right…I think someone should design it, then we can go out and ask people to help build it… We had someone look at the barn pavilion professionally, we should have someone look at the bathrooms the same way.”
The speaker: Councilman Bob Mastrangelo.

7. “I did give you a paper saying we wanted to renovate the bathrooms…. I spoke to Dale and asked him if we need drawings. He said we did not need architect drawings.”
The Speaker: Recreation Director Dave Ianiro
The context: Handicap-accessibility requirements aside, Ianiro also told Council that he didn’t think it was necessary to hire an architect or obtain detailed plans or drawings to guide the OPH bathroom renovation project. Ianiro suggested that everything could be simply be left to the “guys”—the trades people--that he was talking to.

Ianiro seemed to take offense when Council members told him that they needed to see a design, plan or some sort of formalized detailing of what the project entails.

Ianiro replied that he had already given Council a “paper” describing the bathroom renovation. The “paper” was an informational packet given to Council prior to a May 3rd COW meeting. It consisted of 5 pages, four of which were rough sketches of the proposed PBP. The “Old Pool House Renovation” is referenced at the bottom of the fifth page. The reference, in total reads: “Bathroom Floors; painting of Interior Bathrooms; Interior Lighting; Minor Plumbing Alterations; Possible Fixture Replacement.”

That’s it. That the “writing” that Ianiro apparently thought was a sufficient substitute for an actual design plan.

Councilman Bob Mastrangelo, a longtime member of the city’s Planning & Zoning Commission and someone who frequently injects commonsense into Council discussions, disagreed that winging it---as Ianiro advocated---was the right way to go.

8. “It’s not just the bathrooms. Don’t forget, we need to purchase picnic tables for the new pavilion.”
The speaker: Recreation Director Dave Ianiro.

The context: In the midst of discussing the bathroom renovation project, Ianiro once again turned the conversation to something he really cares about: accessorizing the PBP. Previously he told Council that he’s already picked out picnic tables and a gas grill for the party barn.

9. “There’s more work than we put out to bid…We just stuck to the main roads. We pared down on the repairs that needed to get done in order to get in under the budget.”
The speaker: Brian Mader from the city engineer’s office.

The context: Mayor Scott Coleman set aside only $252,000 in the city’s 2011 budget for street repairs. The contract was just put out to bid.
Brian Mader told Council: that he canvassed the city and determined that the city’s main streets were in most need of repair work; that he pared down the list of needed repairs to stay within budget; and the budget did not allow for any road work to be done on residential streets this year.

Service Director Thom Evans announced the results of the bid opening at the COW meeting. He stated that after taking into account the lowest bid and necessary engineering costs, the road repair budget had $20,000 to spare. Council---concerned that so many infrastructure needs were not being met---asked Mader to recommend additional work that could be done for that $20,000.

Mader’s report to Council brought the mayor’s budget priorities into clear focus once again.

While Mayor Scott Coleman did not set aside enough money in his 2011 budget to fully repair even the city’s main streets (let alone fix any residential streets), he made sure to include $200,000 so Dave Ianiro could build a party barn in the park.
I guess it ‘s really not that surprising that Dave Ianiro would get such preferential treatment. After all, Mayor Coleman once told Council that, “Dave is one of the finest people (I know) on this earth.”
http://www.highlandhts.com/docs/city_council/minutes/2010/01-12-10_council_minutes.htm


One thing that his 2011 budget shows is this:
Mayor Scott Coleman certainly can be counted on to take care of his friends.