Council Minutes

March 4, 2003 Meeting Minutes

BETHLEHEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania
Tuesday, March 4, 2003 – 7:30 PM – Town Hall

1. INVOCATION
2. PLEDGE TO THE FLAG
3. ROLL CALL

President Gregory called the meeting to order. Mr. Donchez offered the invocation which was followed by the pledge to the flag. Present were Jean Belinski, John B. Callahan, Robert J. Donchez, J. Michael Schweder, Magdalena F. Szabo, and James S. Gregory, 6. James A. Delgrosso, was absent, 1.

Citation - Honoring Roland Kerchner

President Gregory stated that the Citation honoring Roland Kerchner, on the occasion of his retirement from the Public Works Department after 50 years of service to the City, will be forwarded to him since he was unable to be present at the meeting.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

Prior to the consideration of the regular Agenda items, President Gregory stated that City
Council will conduct two Public Hearings.

First Public Hearing - Transfer of Funds - $70,000 - 2000, 2001 and 2003 CDBG Programs - Stefko Drainage Swale; and Reprogramming - $28,000 - 2003 CDBG Program - Code Enforcement

President Gregory called to order the first Public Hearing to amend the Community Development Block Grant Program for 2000, 2001, and 2003 to reflect the transfer of funds from existing activities to new activities, as follows: decrease the activities Mechanic Street, East Fifth Street, Fiot Avenue, and Housing Rehabilitation to create new activities for Stefko Swale and Code Enforcement.

Dana Grubb, Deputy Director of Community Development, reviewed proposed amendments to the 2000, 2001, and 2003 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Programs for the purpose of creating a new activity titled Stefko Swale in the amount of $70,000. The following adjustments involving closing out three accounts would provide the required funding: decrease Mechanic Street account by $2,297; decrease East Fifth Street account by $59,449; decrease Fiot Avenue account by $8,254. The transfers were initially reviewed at the January 27, 2003 Finance Committee meeting. Mr. Grubb explained that the transfers and creation of the new account would provide for improvements to the Stefko drainage swale, in the vicinity of the SmitHahn company, and will aid in not only retaining existing jobs but also assist in the potential creation of new jobs. The project entails installing a pipe to convey storm water from a sub-region of the City that goes through an existing swale to an existing pipe. The existing swale is deep and prevents SmitHahn from accessing a portion of their property that they would like to be able to utilize. The proposed swale project would allow them to cross over the City swale to gain access to their tract of land that is currently inaccessible. SmitHahn will allow the City storm water conveyance over their property and will request an easement to cross the swale to access their property. Of the estimated $160,000 cost of the project, the City would fund $70,000 for materials while SmitHahn would cover the costs of equipment and labor and complete the drainage swale project. Mr. Grubb noted that Diane Donaher, Deputy Director of Economic Development, as well as representatives of SmitHahn are present at the public hearing to answer any questions.

Mr. Grubb next reviewed a proposed amendment in the 2003 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program for the purpose of creating a new activity titled Code Enforcement in the amount of $28,000. The activity will allow the use of funds in low income areas for enforcement of local codes by City Code officials. The activity will occur primarily in the South Side of the City. Code enforcement, together with other activities funded by the City with CDBG program funds, will help to prevent decline in low income areas. Code enforcement will assist with meeting the goal of providing safe and decent housing. Mr. Grubb recalled that, during the 2003 Budget Hearing process, it had been decided to utilize the services of a Housing Rehabilitation Specialist to also provide support for code inspections. In order to pay the salary and benefits for the time spent by the individual on housing inspections, the City has to amend its Action Plan with HUD for the Code Enforcement activity. Mr. Grubb advised that the City would continue to pay everything out of the Housing Rehabilitation Account in the CDBG Budget. The amount of time the individual provides to housing rehabilitation and to code enforcement will be tracked and, based on the percentages, the amounts would be allocated among the various activities. Mr. Grubb affirmed that the $28,000 amount for code enforcement activities will be expended from the Housing Rehabilitation line item.

Mr. Grubb notified the assembly that the City's preliminary notification of entitlement amounts for the 2003 CDBG Program is $69,000 more than the $2,000,000 anticipated; and, for the 2003 HOME Program about $124,000 more than the $525,000 anticipated.

No one from the Public spoke to the matters of the First Public Hearing.

President Gregory noted that the appropriate Resolutions will be placed on the March 18, 2003 City Council Agenda.

The First Public Hearing was adjourned at 7:40 p.m.

Second Public Hearing - Rezoning Request - West Second Street and Union Station Plaza - HI to CB

President Gregory called to order the Second Public Hearing to consider a request of Lehigh Riverport Development, LLC to rezone from HI - Heavy Industrial District to CB -Commercial Business District a tract of land bounded on the west by Union Station Plaza and lands of Consolidated Rail Corporation, on the north by lands of Consolidated Rail Corporation, on the east by South New Street, and on the south by West Second Street.

7A. Planning Commission – Rezoning Request – West Second Street and Union Station Plaza –
HI to CB

The Clerk read a memorandum dated February 18, 2003 from Darlene L. Heller, Director of Planning and Zoning, which stated that the Planning Commission, at its February 13, 2003 meeting, recommended approval of the rezoning proposal to rezone the Lehigh Riverport property at West Second Street and Union Station Plaza from Heavy Industrial – HI to Commercial Business – CB.

7B. Lehigh Valley Planning Commission – Rezoning Request – West Second Street and Union
Station Plaza – HI to CB

The Clerk read a letter dated January 31, 2003 from Frederic H. Brock, Assistant Director, in which it was advised that the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission reviewed the Zoning map amendment for the rezoning of West Second Street and Union Station Plaza from HI to CB. The Commission believes the selection of zoning districts is a matter of local choice in this case and both zoning classifications are consistent with the plans and policies of the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission.

Planning Director Comments

Darlene Heller, Planning and Zoning Director, noted that the Members of Council received a copy of a memorandum dated February 7, 2003 that was addressed to the Planning Commission as well as a copy of the zoning map showing the location of the property in relation to other zoning districts in the South Side downtown area. Ms. Heller, informing the Members the piece proposed to be rezoned is about 4-1/2 acres, advised that the footprint of the building covers the entire parcel; i.e., the footprint of the lot is the same as the footprint of the building. Previously a Bethlehem Steel Corporation building, Ms. Heller noted although it is still somewhat in use, the building is severely underutilized. The only other property owner in the area presently existing in the HI - Heavy Industrial zoning district is the Weldship Corporation. Ms. Heller notified the Members it is believed that the CB Commercial Business District zoning is appropriate for the property. Prior plans completed by the City in the City's Comprehensive Plan and South Side Master Plan were reviewed, as well as some planning that had been done for the targeted development area. Ms. Heller highlighted the fact that each of those plans takes a close look at reutilization of some of the older industrial properties. Ms. Heller continued on to say "we believe that the CB zoning district is appropriate because it looks for mixed use. We want to have residential uses within our downtown. It creates some 24 hour life in our downtown. The proposal is for market rate apartments and some other mixed use. Although the CB zoning district does not require parking, the proposal also includes enough parking within the building and outside the building to meet the current Zoning Ordinance requirements for the use that is proposed."

President Gregory asked if this is the parking project in which Northampton County is considering investing Bond Issue monies. Ms. Heller replied yes. President Gregory, observing that the sticking point as far as using bond issue money is the fact that it is private parking, inquired whether the public will be able to utilize the parking. Ms. Heller responded "it is proposed to use some shared parking with the public. Some of the parking will be designated for the residences in the building, but there will be some commercial uses within the building as well and so there will be some public parking." President Gregory queried what are the percentages of public and commercial parking. Ms. Heller replied it is about 10% of the building.

Developer's Comments

Duane Wagner, of Lehigh Riverport Development company, explained what is being proposed is an estimated 450 space parking facility. Inside the building there would be approximately 402-403 parking spaces on a three level garage. An adjacent parking lot would house another 50 spaces. The required parking based on the Zoning Ordinance would be 310 spaces, so there would be in excess of at least 150 spaces for transient use throughout the day; i.e., people who come to the retail sites, museums, etc. Mr. Wagner, in further response to President Gregory, restated that the estimate for public parking is about 145-150 spaces. The rest of the parking would be residential, the requirement for which is about 310 parking spaces for the planned number of units.

Mr. Wagner, pointing to a sketch, advised it represents a concept plan to determine the feasibility of the project. It shows the first floor plan view coming in off West Second Street. The grey area is a motor court drop-off that would service the lobby for the retail end and residential uses. From there, people can proceed into the parking garage and go up through three stories of parking. The main entrance into the building would be off West Second Street, with an in and out pattern for drop-offs or parking. The blue area represents the commercial and retail areas that are now estimated to be up to 40,000 square feet of the building. The residential bedrooms and other windows would look out onto the green areas and the center areas of the courtyard. These areas would be exposed with an open roof so that when one goes out on the courtyard one would look up and see trusses and open sky. In addition, there would be landscaping and walking paths. The white areas are the proposed apartment units, of which 177 would be a mix of one and two bedroom and loft style apartments or condominiums. President Gregory asked about the price range. Mr. Wagner, indicating it is probably the upper end of the market at about $1,000-$1,200 per month depending on the size of the unit, advised the rate falls within the guidelines of the two marketing studies that were done for the area. Turning to the second floor elevation, Mr. Wagner noted that shows the parking area in grey and the commercial areas in blue. The orange areas are the walkways around the hallways to get to the units. The green areas show the courtyards that would be open below and above. The third floor plan is all residential with an open courtyard and the final level of parking. The roof plan shows the existing roof and where the roof would be cut away to allow airflow and circulation within the building. The area beneath the Fahy Bridge would be a 50 space parking lot. In addition, there would be 17 on-street parking spaces. Mr. Wagner continued on to demonstrate the elevation from West Second Street showing two openings going into the motor court and an area towards the Fahy Bridge where there would be parking. Everything that fronts on West Second Street would be retail. The residential units would face on Union Station Plaza.

Public Comments

Attorney Timothy Siegfried, of Allentown, representing Weldship Corporation, advised that Bill Angus of Weldship was unable to be at the meeting this evening and wanted Attorney Siegfried to pass on to Council some concerns he has about the rezoning. Attorney Siegfried enumerated that the concerns involve three areas: first, the current use of his property; second, the future uses of his property; and third, the future value of his property. Attorney Siegfried, stating that Mr. Angus does not have any objection to the uses that are being proposed or the rezoning of the property, said Mr. Angus realizes there is a need to have properties reused in a meaningful way. Attorney Siegfried informed the Members that Mr. Angus' concerns are for his property and his business inasmuch as he is "pretty much left as the only property owner with a heavy industrial use. His property is zoned heavy industrial. It's being used in a heavy industrial way. His concern for the present is that…he has approximately 60 employees that frequent the business both to and from work. As you know, he has parking in and about the area, and that type of use may not necessarily be compatible with the uses that are being proposed here. He certainly understands that everybody can get along and do what they need to do. His concern is that there may be complaints or objections raised or pointed towards him because of the use that he has in the area, and a use that's been there since 1979. So, he would just like Council to keep that in mind when they consider the rezoning request. With respect to the future uses of his property, he had very similar type of concerns that it may potentially be difficult to reuse that property considering it's zoned heavy industrial, it's developed heavy industrial, and the most likely candidate to use that property in the future, not that there's any intent to leave at all, but should that time come, the best use for that property is heavy industrial. He certainly appreciates that the property to the east, which is the proposal before you, has gone through the same type of concerns or non-use based upon the structure. So, his concern is if you start rezoning down the block, it potentially, not saying that it is, but, it can potentially effect the future uses of his property. And the third concern for him is the value of his property. He has not done any market studies. He doesn't have any appraisal. His concern, and he just wanted me to voice it to Council, is that, with the potential uses for heavy industrial on his property not being permitted or not being desirable in that area because of the proposed uses of rezoning, that could potentially devalue his property."

President Gregory stated that the appropriate Ordinance will be placed on the March 18, 2003 Council Agenda for First Reading.

The Second Public Hearing was adjourned at 7:55 p.m.

4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

The minutes of February 18, 2003 were approved.

5. COURTESY OF THE FLOOR (for public comment on ordinances and resolutions to be voted on by Council this evening)

None.

6. OLD BUSINESS

Conectiv Energy Plant

Mrs. Belinski, recounting she mentioned at a previous meeting that she had received complaints about the horrendous noise and vibration from the Conectiv Energy Plant, advised she received a follow-up telephone call from the Gardners. The Gardners informed her that on Saturday, March 1, 2003, starting at 10:00 a.m., the noise was so bad they had to leave their house. Mrs. Belinski said it seems that their complaints are being ignored, they feel that they are at the mercy of the company, and they are at their wit's end. Mrs. Belinski advised she promised the Gardners she would bring up the matter this evening to find out if the City is checking up on the matter and looking into the complaints. In response to President Gregory, Mrs. Belinski advised that they did contact the Planning Bureau.

Acting Mayor Dennis Reichard noted he has not received any calls to the Mayor's office as far as he knows. Ms. Heller informed Mrs. Belinski that the Gardners received notice of a prior zoning hearing concerning the Bethlehem Commerce Center. In response to that, Ms. Heller said Mr. Gardner called the Planning office and she spoke to Mr. Gardner yesterday and today and does not believe he has called prior to that. Ms. Heller informed Mr. Gardner that she would look into the issues but she has not yet been able to respond back. Ms. Heller later added she explained to Mr. Gardner that the City could look into buffering or the noise complaints.

Mrs. Belinski, reiterating that the Gardners are being ignored by the company, expressed the hope that the City can somehow reign in the company and have the noise stopped. Mrs. Belinski advised that the Gardners would be happy to move out if Conectiv would buy their property in that it has now been completely devalued. However, Conectiv will not talk to them about it. Mrs. Belinski stressed that the Gardners have no alternative. Mrs. Belinski stated she is being asked by Mr. Gardner how Conectiv got permits to build the very large facility right across the road from their residential home. Ms. Heller, informing Mrs. Belinski that the property has been zoned HI - Heavy Industrial for many years, noted it was never previously developed industrially. Ms. Heller continued on to inform Mrs. Belinski that the land was formerly owned by Bethlehem Steel Corporation. Ms. Heller explained that when the rezoning of the Bethlehem Commerce Center as a whole is reviewed some of the proposed uses would be revised to IR - Industrial Redevelopment and IR - Flexible, and some retail. Turning to the risk management meeting held January 23, 2003 regarding the Conectiv plant, Mrs. Belinski said very few people knew about it. The meeting was to make sure people knew that Conectiv was going to do everything possible to ensure the safety of the operation, especially the ammonia. Mrs. Belinski stressed she found out that on December 11, 2002 there was a diesel fuel leak that contaminated the soil. A follow-up letter from DEP inquired what Conectiv was going to do to clean up the contamination. Mrs. Belinski stated she would like a written statement from the Administration telling her what happened and what was done to follow-through and make sure that Conectiv cleans it up. In response to President Gregory, Mrs. Belinski restated she would like to know what the spill was and what Conectiv is doing to clean it up.

Tony Hanna, Director of Community and Economic Development, indicated he thought all the appropriate parties were notified by DEP of the spill, and he will share with Mrs. Belinski the information on remediation given to DEP.

7. COMMUNICATIONS

C. Records Destruction Resolution - Public Works Department

The Clerk read a memorandum dated February 24, 2003 from William Alexander Karras, Assistant City Solicitor, to which was attached a proposed resolution for Council’s consideration under the previously adopted Municipal Records Retention Act that contains a schedule for the destruction of records. The Department of Public Works requested to destroy the records listed on the attached exhibit. The Law Bureau reviewed the Act and the records fall within categories where destruction is permitted. It was requested that Council pass the resolution so that the records can be destroyed.

President Gregory stated that authorizing Resolution 11 B is listed on the Agenda

D. Planning and Zoning Director – Miscellaneous Zoning Text Amendments

The Clerk read a memorandum dated February 21, 2003 from Darlene L. Heller, Director of Planning and Zoning, which stated that the Planning Commission, at its meeting of February 13, 2003, voted on several text changes to the Zoning Ordinance and recommended approval to the following: (1) including private utility installations as permitted uses in the Light Industrial and Heavy Industrial Zoning districts; (2) adding Section 1301.07 to the ordinance to provide for City and Municipal Authority Exemption; (3) permitting residential uses within existing office buildings in the IR zoning district; and (4) amendments to Section 1326 of the ordinance, Who May Initiate, to allow out of town property owners to submit petitions to amend the zoning ordinance, to increase the filing fee to $200 plus payment by the applicant of the actual costs for advertising the amendment, and requiring 30 days advance written notice to the addresses to which real estate tax bills are sent for all real property located within the area to be rezoned. The Commission also recommended approval of deletion of the requirement in Section 1324.04(i), Flashing and Moving Signs, that signs indicating the time, temperature, date or other public service information shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission.

Mr. Donchez and Mrs. Belinski moved to schedule a Public Hearing on Tuesday, April 15, 2003 at 7:30 PM in Town Hall.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Callahan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Schweder, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Gregory, 6. The motion passed.

E. Records Destruction Resolution - Tax Bureau

The Clerk read a memorandum dated February 25, 2003 from William Alexander Karras, Assistant City Solicitor, to which was attached a proposed resolution for Council’s consideration under the previously adopted Municipal Records Retention Act that contains a schedule for the destruction of records. The Tax Bureau requested to destroy the records listed on the attached exhibit. The Law Bureau reviewed the Act and the records fall within categories where destruction is permitted. It was requested that Council pass the resolution so that the records can be destroyed.

President Gregory stated that authorizing Resolution 11 C is listed on the Agenda

F. Deputy Director of Community Development – 2003 Public Housing/Section 8 Income Limits

The Clerk read a letter dated February 28, 2003 from Dana B. Grubb, Deputy Director of Community Development, to which was attached the latest revised household income limits for Housing and Community Development related activities which are used to determine program benefits according to the federal statutory intent of the Housing and Community Development Act. The letter serves to provide notification and applicability to various CDBG funded activities. The income limits take effect immediately.

President Gregory stated that the item is for information only and no Council action is required.

8 . REPORTS

A. President of Council

President Gregory restated that, as was confirmed at the last Meeting, City Council will hold a Special Meeting next Tuesday, March 11, 2003 at 7:30 PM in Town Hall for the purpose of choosing an individual to fill the vacancy in the Office of Mayor.

B. Mayor

1. Administrative Order – Patricia A. Kandianis – Fine Arts Commission

Acting Mayor Dennis Reichard read the Mayor’s appointment of Patricia A. Kandianis to the Fine Arts Commission, effective until December 2005. Mr. Callahan and Ms. Szabo sponsored Resolution 14,012 to confirm the appointment.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Callahan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Schweder, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Gregory, 6. The Resolution passed.

2. Administrative Order – G. Frederick Bonsall – Board of Historical and Architectural Review

Acting Mayor Dennis Reichard read the Mayor’s appointment of G. Frederick Bonsall to the Board of Historical and Architectural Review, effective until January 2008. Mr. Callahan and Ms. Szabo sponsored Resolution 14,013 to confirm the appointment.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Callahan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Schweder, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Gregory, 6. The Resolution passed.

3. Administrative Order – Holly Sachdev – Board of Historical and Architectural Review

Acting Mayor Dennis Reichard read the Mayor’s appointment of Holly Sachdev to the Board of Historical and Architectural Review, effective until January 2008. Mr. Callahan and Ms. Szabo sponsored Resolution 14,014 to confirm the appointment.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Callahan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Schweder, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Gregory, 6. The Resolution passed.

4. Administrative Order – Sandra Martin Ripa – Fine Arts Commission

Acting Mayor Dennis Reichard read the Mayor’s appointment of Sandra Martin Ripa to the Fine Arts Commission, effective until December 2006. Mr. Callahan and Ms. Szabo sponsored Resolution 14,015 to confirm the appointment.
Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Callahan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Schweder, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Gregory, 6. The Resolution passed.

C. Finance Committee

Mr. Donchez, in Chairman Delgrosso's absence, presented an oral report of the Finance Committee’s meeting held on February 25, 2003 on the following subjects: 2003 Bond Issue – Non-Utility Capital Projects – Equipment – Wrap-Around Debt Service; Amending Non-Utility Capital Budget – Equipment – Information Services and Police Department; and Adjustments to 1999 and 2001 Bond Issue Accounts – Year End Balances.

9. ORDINANCES FOR FINAL PASSAGE

None.

10. NEW ORDINANCES

A. Bill No. 8 – 2003 – Amending Non-Utility Capital Budget – 1999 and 2001 Bond Issues – Year End Figures

The Clerk read Bill No. 8 – 2003, sponsored by Mrs. Belinski and Mr. Donchez, and titled:

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BETHLEHEM,
COUNTIES OF LEHIGH AND NORTHAMPTON,
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, AMENDING
THE 2003 CAPITAL BUDGET FOR NON-UTILITIES.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Callahan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Schweder, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Gregory, 6. Bill No. 8 – 2003 was declared passed on First Reading.

B. Bill No. 9 – 2003 – Bond Issue – Non –Utility Projects and Equipment; 1999 Bond Issue Refunding

The Clerk read Bill No. 9 – 2003, sponsored by Mr. Callahan and Mrs. Belinski, and titled:

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BETHLEHEM, NORTHAMPTON AND LEHIGH COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (THE “CITY”), AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF THE CITY, IN THE AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $8,200,000, AS PERMITTED BY AND PURSUANT TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT DEBT ACT, 53 Pa.C.S. § 8001 ET SEQ., AS AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED, CONSISTING OF (A) GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES A OF 2003, IN THE AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $4,660,000 (THE “SERIES A BONDS”), FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING FUNDS TO BE APPLIED FOR AND TOWARD CERTAIN CAPITAL PROJECTS; AND (B) GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES B OF 2003, IN THE AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $3,540,000 (THE “SERIES B BONDS”, AND TOGETHER WITH THE SERIES A BONDS, COLLECTIVELY, THE “2003 BONDS”), FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING FUNDS TO BE USED FOR AND TOWARD A REFUNDING PROJECT CONSISTING OF THE ADVANCE REFUNDING OF A PORTION OF THE CITY’S OUTSTANDING GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES OF 1999 (SUCH PORTION BEING REFERRED TO HEREIN AS THE “REFUNDED 1999 BONDS”); DETERMINING THAT THE 2003 BONDS SHALL BE SOLD AT PRIVATE SALE BY NEGOTIATION; DETERMINING THAT SUCH DEBT SHALL BE NONELECTORAL DEBT OF THE CITY; ACCEPTING A PROPOSAL FOR PURCHASE OF THE 2003 BONDS, AT PRIVATE SALE, AND AWARDING THE 2003 BONDS; PROVIDING FOR MATURITIES AND INTEREST RATES; APPOINTING A PAYING AGENT, REGISTRAR AND SINKING FUND DEPOSITORY; PROVIDING FOR THE TERMS OF THE 2003 BONDS INCLUDING DENOMINATIONS, DATE, INTEREST PAYMENT DATES AND RECORD DATES; PROVIDING FOR THE REGISTRATION AND TRANSFER OF THE 2003 BONDS; SETTING FORTH REDEMPTION FEATURES AND PROCEDURES; AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND AUTHENTICATION OF THE 2003 BONDS; COVENANTING TO PAY DEBT SERVICE AND PLEDGING THE FULL FAITH, CREDIT AND TAXING POWER FOR THE PAYMENT OF THE 2003 BONDS; CREATING SINKING FUNDS IN CONNECTION WITH THE 2003 BONDS AS REQUIRED BY SUCH ACT; APPROPRIATING PROCEEDS OF THE 2003 BONDS; DESCRIBING THE CAPITAL PROJECTS FOR WHICH DEBT OF THE CITY EVIDENCED BY THE SERIES A BONDS IS TO BE INCURRED AND SPECIFYING A REASONABLE ESTIMATE OF THE USEFUL LIFE OF EACH OF SAID CAPITAL PROJECTS; DESCRIBING THE PROJECT FOR WHICH DEBT OF THE CITY EVIDENCED BY SAID REFUNDED 1999 BONDS WAS ORIGINALLY INCURRED AND REAFFIRMING THE ESTIMATED USEFUL LIFE OF SAID PROJECT; SETTING FORTH CERTAIN COVENANTS RELATING TO THE NON-ARBITRAGE STATUS OF THE 2003 BONDS AND DESIGNATING THE 2003 BONDS AS QUALIFIED TAX-EXEMPT OBLIGATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 265(b)(3) OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986, AS AMENDED; RATIFYING PRIOR ADVERTISEMENT AND DIRECTING FURTHER ADVERTISEMENT; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE PREPARATION, EXECUTION AND FILING OF A TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS, INCLUDING A DEBT STATEMENT AND BORROWING BASE CERTIFICATE, WITH THE PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE OFFICERS AND OFFICIALS OF THE CITY TO EXECUTE AND DELIVER DOCUMENTS AND TO TAKE ACTION AS MAY BE NECESSARY RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE 2003 BONDS; RATIFYING THE PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT AND THE DISTRIBUTION THEREOF AND AUTHORIZING THE APPROVAL AND DISTRIBUTION OF A FINAL OFFICIAL STATEMENT AND THE USE THEREOF IN CONNECTION WITH THE SALE OF THE 2003 BONDS; CREATING CLEARING ACCOUNTS, A PROJECT ACCOUNT AND AN ESCROW FUND; SETTING FORTH CERTAIN COVENANTS RELATING TO PROVISIONS FOR RETIREMENT OF THE REFUNDED 1999 BONDS; DIRECTING THE IRREVOCABLE DEPOSIT AND INVESTMENT OF AN AMOUNT OF PROCEEDS OF THE SERIES B BONDS WHICH, TOGETHER WITH INTEREST TO BE EARNED THEREON, WILL BE SUFFICIENT TO PAY THE PRINCIPAL OF AND INTEREST ON A PORTION OF THE REFUNDED 1999 BONDS WHEN DUE, UPON MATURITY OR REDEMPTION, AS APPLICABLE; APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN ESCROW AGREEMENT; APPOINTING AN ESCROW AGENT; AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF ESCROW INVESTMENTS; AUTHORIZING THE PAYMENT OF EXPENSES; PROVIDING GUIDELINES FOR PERMITTED INVESTMENTS; AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF A POLICY OF MUNICIPAL BOND INSURANCE; PROVIDING FOR THE AUTHORIZATION OF OFFICERS; ADOPTING THE FORMS OF THE SERIES A BONDS AND THE SERIES B BONDS; COVENANTING TO PROVIDE CONTINUING DISCLOSURE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY OF PROVISIONS AND REPEALING INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Callahan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Schweder, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Gregory, 6. Bill No. 9 – 2003 was declared passed on First Reading.

C. Bill No. 10 – 2003 Amending 9-1-1 Fund Budget – Communications Center Upgrade

The Clerk read Bill No. 10 – 2003, sponsored by Mr. Callahan and Ms. Szabo, and titled:

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BETHLEHEM,
COUNTIES OF LEHIGH AND NORTHAMPTON,
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, AMENDING
THE 9-1-1 FUND BUDGET FOR 2003.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Callahan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Schweder, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Gregory, 6. Bill No. 10 – 2003 was declared passed on First Reading.

11. RESOLUTIONS

A. Dissolving Bethlehem Tourism Authority

Mr. Callahan and Mrs. Belinski sponsored Resolution 14,016 that formally and officially dissolved the Bethlehem Tourism Authority, organized pursuant to the Municipality Authorities Act of 1945, as amended, and Resolution 10,806, for the purpose of maintaining, protecting, and promoting the tourism industry and economy of the City of Bethlehem. The Tourism Authority's articles were approved by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania on May 3, 1988. There has been no further activity, or commitments made, or actions taken by the Tourism Authority after August 28, 2001; and its business has been fully completed, all claims settled, and all debts paid.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Callahan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Schweder, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Gregory, 6. The Resolution passed.

B. Authorizing Records Destruction – Public Works Department

Mr. Callahan and Ms. Szabo sponsored Resolution 14,017 which authorized the disposition of records of the Public Works Department, listed in Exhibit A, in accordance with the schedules and procedures for disposition of records set forth in the Municipal Records Manual, in accordance with State Act 428, and Resolution 13,076.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Callahan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Schweder, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Gregory, 6. The Resolution passed.

C. Authorizing Disposition of Records – Tax Bureau

Mr. Callahan and Ms. Szabo sponsored Resolution 14,018 which authorized the disposition of records of the Tax Bureau, listed in Exhibit A, in accordance with the schedules and procedures for disposition of records set forth in the Municipal Records Manual, in accordance with State Act 428, and Resolution 13,076.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Callahan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Schweder, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Gregory, 6. The Resolution passed.

D. Transfer of Funds – Communication Center Upgrade

Mrs. Belinski and Mr. Donchez sponsored Resolution 14,019 which transferred $335,000 in the Non-Utility Capital Budget from the General Pool Repair, Asbestos Monitoring Program, Signage, Restoration Downtown, South Street Scape/Lighting, Ambulance, Mechanical System Upgrade, Street Overlays, and Equipment Police (cruisers) Accounts to the Communications Center Upgrade Account to provide additional funding necessary for the project.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Callahan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Schweder, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Gregory, 6. The Resolution passed.

E. Certificate of Appropriateness – 313 South New Street

Mr. Callahan and Ms. Szabo sponsored Resolution 14,020 that granted a Certificate of Appropriateness to alter the first floor store front of the building at 313 S. New Street.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Callahan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Schweder, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Gregory, 6. The Resolution passed.

F. Transfer of Funds – Bioterrorism Equipment

Mrs. Belinski and Mr. Donchez sponsored Resolution 14,021 that transferred $34,064 in the General Fund Budget from the Health Bureau Temporary Help and Bioterrorism Accounts to the Equipment – Bioterrorism Account to provide additional funding needed in the Account.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Callahan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Schweder, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Gregory, 6. The Resolution passed.

Adding Resolution 11 G - Requesting Northampton County Support - Johnson Machinery Redevelopment Project and Bethlehem Commerce Center - $1 Million Northampton County Bond Issue

Mr. Callahan, focusing on the Lehigh Riverport project that was reviewed for the first time during the Public Hearing this evening, noted there has been controversy related to the project and its need for funding from the Northampton County Bond Issue. Mr. Callahan remarked it is clear to him that Northampton County Council is seriously considering taking back the funding that was previously committed to this important project. Mr. Callahan stressed that, in his view, the project would be "incredibly important to the future development of South Bethlehem and I'm very concerned that the project is in jeopardy. So, to that end, I have taken the liberty to draft a Resolution, which Mr. Spadoni has had an opportunity to review prior to this meeting, urging County Council not to take action against funding this project."

Mr. Callahan and Mr. Donchez moved to add Resolution 11 G to the Agenda.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Callahan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Schweder, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Gregory, 6. The motion passed.

Mr. Callahan and Mr. Donchez sponsored Resolution 14,022 (11 G) in which it was expressed that the parking infrastructure to be funded by Northampton County, through its bond issue, in support of the expansion of the Bethlehem Technology Center and redevelopment of the Johnson Machinery building at West Second Street is essential to the successful completion of that project and the redevelopment of the entire Lehigh River waterfront. The Resolution further expressed that a $1 million investment by Northampton County will leverage $20 million in private investment, and generate hundreds of new jobs, and millions of dollars in new tax revenues. The Resolution urged Northampton County Council to take no action in opposition to the project, and further respectfully requested that Northampton County continue to partner with the City of Bethlehem to successfully redevelop Bethlehem Works and the Bethlehem Commerce Center.

Mrs. Belinski asked whether the matter has been discussed with Northampton County.

Tony Hanna, Director of Community and Economic Development, expressed the belief that the Northampton County Administration is supportive of the project. Mr. Hanna explained that the Northampton County Administration was asked to have bond counsel, who was bond counsel for both Northampton County and the Northampton County General Purpose Authority, render an opinion as to the change in use of the underlying project from what had originally been proposed which was a technology oriented, industrial and mixed use project to a residentially oriented mixed use project. The underlying project being funded by the bond monies is still parking, it was bond counsel's opinion that the underlying project had not changed, and it was felt to be an appropriate use of the County's bond funds. In further response to Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Hanna affirmed that the Northampton County Administration does not want to pull the money back, and has advised the City to proceed with the project. The question that came up was on behalf of Northampton County Council who passed a Resolution asking for an additional opinion from additional counsel to be retained by the Northampton County Council. Mr. Hanna added that is where the issue seems to be at this point. Mr. Hanna clarified that the Northampton County Administration is agreeable, but it is not known what Northampton County Council's position is at this point.

Mr. Schweder asked if Mr. Callahan could share the names of the members of Northampton County Council with whom he has met regarding the matter.

Mr. Callahan, advising he has not met with any of them, stated he has read the stories and has had numerous, extensive conversations with the Northampton County Administration about what the opinion is of Northampton County Council. Mr. Callahan continued on to advise that the Northampton County Administration has expressed to him concern about the future of the project. Mr. Callahan, expressing he is concerned about the future of the project, stressed it is vital to the efforts that have been put forth to redevelop South Bethlehem. Mr. Callahan, observing he thinks it is clear from newspaper stories that at this point Northampton County Council is considering their own bond counsel in order to get a different opinion, communicated he thought it would be appropriate for City Council to put forth a Resolution in support of the project and in support of the redevelopment of South Bethlehem.

Mr. Schweder acknowledged he does not think there is anyone who sits at Council's table or anyone in the Administration who is not supportive of what Mr. Callahan is advocating and that all are in favor of the project. Mr. Schweder explained what concerns him is the answer that Mr. Callahan met with no one or discussed this with no member of Northampton County Council. Mr. Schweder noted that he has spoken with Mr. Hanna who has met with several individuals, and there are meetings that are still scheduled with the City Administration and Northampton County Council. Mr. Schweder communicated the reality is that "we all know that all of us support this and that the Administration of Northampton County supports it, but none of us have a vote and only those nine people [on Northampton County Council] do." Mr. Schweder expressed this is not the best way to handle matters of intergovernmental relations. Mr. Schweder, recalling the same questions were raised with respect to the Commerce Center Boulevard project and Northampton County Council, pointed out there were discussions with the City Administration and Northampton County and the matter was resolved. Mr. Schweder, denoting his concern is that doing things like this when there has not been any discussions with the people who have the final say and who hold the purse strings to the money is a dangerous way to address such matters, said he would hope going forward that "we would not continue along these paths." Reiterating he is very supportive of the Lehigh Riverport project as is everyone who sits here, Mr. Schweder stated "but this is not the best way for us to be handling this."

Mr. Callahan, affirming he has spoken extensively with members of the Northampton County Administration and they are deeply concerned about the future of the project, highlighted the fact that the Resolution simply respectfully requests that Northampton County Council continue to partner with the City of Bethlehem for the successful development of Bethlehem Works and stresses the importance of the Lehigh Riverport project to those efforts.

Ms. Szabo, expressing she is concerned about sending the Resolution, confirmed that, as Mr. Callahan and Mr. Schweder said, every Member of Council is concerned about the future bond issue monies from Northampton County. However, Ms. Szabo stressed that, after spending a couple hundred hours in two years listening to arguments at the Northampton County Council meetings along with Diane Donaher, Deputy Director of Economic Development, and then going to community and economic development committee meetings, it is much more sensible to communicate with the group, especially since a change has been made in the project proposal. Noting that the change is what they are questioning, Ms. Szabo thought an effort should be made to sit down with the proper committees and find out what the situation is, particularly since Northampton County Council will be voting on the matter. Ms. Szabo restated that an effort should be made to communicate with the proper groups before a Resolution is sent. Ms. Szabo asked if the Resolution has been approved by Attorneys Spadoni or Leeson.

Christopher Spadoni, City Council Solicitor, stating that the Resolution was delivered to him this evening by Mr. Callahan, confirmed that he reviewed it for content and it is for Council's consideration. Attorney Spadoni, explaining it was his understanding when he spoke with Mr. Callahan prior to this evening's meeting that he was asking for the Resolution to be added to the Agenda, noted it has been and is before Council for consideration.

Joseph Leeson, Jr., City Solicitor, while noting he has not seen the Resolution, advised that, having heard it read, he has no problem with it.

Ms. Szabo thought that communication would do more than writing something about which people could unfortunately jump to the conclusion that it is a threatening attitude and it could start a problem.

Mr. Callahan commented that if one finds the wording of the Resolution to be threatening in some way then one can feel free not to vote for it. Stating he does not think it is threatening, Mr. Callahan thought that it does send a very clear communication to Northampton County Council about the importance of the project and the City's willingness to continue to partner with them for the future development of South Bethlehem. Mr. Callahan stated it is sensible at this point, given the importance of the project and the jeopardy that the project is in, to send a clear message to Northampton County Council to help support the project. Acknowledging that as Ms. Szabo stated much of this has been worked out through hours and hours of discussion related to the bond issue initially, Mr. Callahan remarked that, at this point, for the funding for this project to be reconsidered and pulled out of the bond issue is an alarming prospect.
Ms. Szabo, clarifying she did not say that she found the Resolution to be threatening, explained some may find it to be as some people may jump to conclusions without knowing it, and denoted that is why she thinks direct communication is a good way to approach things.

President Gregory suggested that, rather than the wording in the Resolution where it is stated that City Council urges Northampton County Council to "take no action in opposition to" the project, the phrase could be reworded to state that City Council urges Northampton County Council to "support" the project.

Amending Resolution 11 G

President Gregory moved to delete the words "take no action in opposition to" and replace them with the word "support". Mr. Schweder seconded the motion.

Mr. Donchez, noting that he was going to say the same thing, stated he has no problem with the Resolution and he supports it. Mr. Donchez agreed that the revised language is more positive than the current wording and affirmed that he would support the change.

Voting AYE on the amendment: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Callahan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Schweder, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Gregory, 6. The amendment passed.

Mr. Schweder asked if Mr. Callahan has any intentions to meet with members of Northampton County Council after the Resolution is passed and to report back to City Council on his meetings.

Mr. Callahan, affirming he certainly does, stressed that having the Resolution passed this evening will make the meetings all the more productive.

Voting AYE on Resolution 14,022 (11 G), as amended: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Callahan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Schweder, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Gregory, 6. The Resolution passed.

12. NEW BUSINESS

None.

13. COURTESY OF THE FLOOR

Parking Authority Executive Director - Accident with Vehicle

Scott Hendershot, 827 Fernwood Street, stating he knows the Bethlehem Parking Authority has their own meetings, said he is at the meeting to discuss his opinion, after what he has read in the newspaper about Hector Nemes, Executive Director of the Bethlehem Parking Authority. Mr. Hendershot remarked that, as a taxpayer, he is voicing his opinion about the misuse of his taxes with the Parking Authority and he thinks it should be brought to Council's attention. Mr. Hendershot, referring to newspaper articles, expressed he feels very upset. While saying he knows that some Parking Authority officials are on 24 hour call, Mr. Hendershot said he feels one should not be able to drink while driving on one's own time a city vehicle that he is insuring and paying for with his taxes. Mr. Hendershot related what he read in the newspaper articles about the incident involving Mr. Nemes.

President Gregory, pointing out that tax dollars do not go directly to the Parking Authority, expressed he understands Mr. Hendershot's concerns as they may be related to how he feels the Police Department might have handled the situation. President Gregory continued on to point out that matters related to whether or not Mr. Nemes should have a car is something that Mr. Hendershot could bring up to the Parking Authority Board in view of the fact that Mr. Nemes is not under Council's direct purview.

Mr. Hendershot said it sounds like there was a cover-up printed in the newspaper. Mr. Hendershot said he was convicted for DUI, he told the officer he felt fine, but the officer said it does not matter if he feels fine since there was an accident involved, and the officer smelled alcohol so Mr. Hendershot had to take the sobriety test. Mr. Hendershot reiterated he feels as a taxpayer that his money was mishandled and he is pointing this out to City Council. Mr. Hendershot related that he called City Hall about the matter.
President Gregory informed Mr. Hendershot that the Parking Authority, rather than the City, would insure its own vehicles so Mr. Hendershot would have to address his concerns to the Parking Authority Board about increases in insurance rates as a result of the accident.

Francis Donchez, Police Commissioner, stated he has no reason to doubt that the officer who handled the situation did so properly. Police Commissioner Donchez said he believes from everything he knows the officer handled it properly. Police Commissioner Donchez, focusing on the fact that Mr. Nemes was not charged, advised that the burden of proof in a criminal matter which DUI would be is proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Police Commissioner Donchez, commenting that no one disputes the fact that Mr. Nemes had a drink after the accident, noted it would be a tough burden for the Police Department in a DUI case to go in front of the court and the jury hears he drank afterwards and questions was he drunk before the accident or was he drunk afterwards. Police Commissioner Donchez said if someone has a drink after the accident "it clouds the picture. Did he or did he not, was he to the point at the time of the accident, and that's where the burden of proof would be, not after the accident." Police Commissioner Donchez, stating he has no reason to believe that Mr. Nemes was intoxicated and noting he was not there, advised that the officer said in the report that the officer observed no signs of intoxication. Continuing on to advise that the officer also indicated on the report that Mr. Nemes had been drinking, Police Commissioner Donchez remarked "had there been this alleged cover-up I would think that the officer would have checked that he had not been drinking at all. He was quite forthcoming."

Mr. Hendershot stressed that in the newspaper articles Mr. Nemes admits by his own words that he was drinking before and after the accident. Mr. Hendershot explained it is difficult for him to attend the Parking Authority meetings that are scheduled at 4:30 p.m.

Mr. Donchez noted it had been stated in a newspaper article that Dennis Reichard, Acting Mayor, would be reviewing the City's policy regarding cars.

Acting Mayor Reichard advised that the City has an alcohol and drug policy for all City employees who have and do not have City cars. Acting Mayor Reichard continued on to advise there are a certain number of City employees who are on call and have cars 24 hours a day. Acting Mayor Reichard affirmed that in the Mayor's staff meeting he made it clear the cars should be strictly used for business and not anything beyond that. Acting Mayor Reichard noted he has not issued anything in writing as of yet.

President Gregory highlighted the fact that the Parking Authority has its own policies separate from the City's.

Acting Mayor Reichard, affirming that President Gregory's statement is correct, explained, however, that the Parking Authority does give money towards the City's budget that keeps taxes down, and the Parking Authority pays its own insurance for its buildings and its vehicles.

Ms. Szabo affirmed that upon her request during the Budget hearings she received from Charles Brown, Director of Parks and Public Property, a list of employees who have City vehicles, and commented she was surprised that those employees take the City vehicles home. Ms. Szabo, denoting that she questioned why the City vehicles are not kept at City Hall, said she hopes that will be considered now.

Acknowledging that he is reviewing the matter, Acting Mayor Reichard pointed out that Mayors have varying directives regarding the policy for City vehicles.

Certificates of Occupancy - Fees

Anthony Spagnola, 325 Spring Street, asking if City Council knows how much a landlord pays per unit for a Certificate of Occupancy, advised it is $35, and it is $125 if the unit is to be sold. Mr. Spagnola, remarking he thinks it is a big discrepancy, stated that he owns 14 units on Keystone Avenue. Mr. Spagnola explained that when a tenant moves out after a year he has to get a clear Certificate of Occupancy that costs $35. If he wants to sell the property he has to pay $125. Mr. Spagnola, stating he does not think that is fair, asked how he can go about getting the fee changed.

President Gregory advised that Mr. Spagnola can speak to Dana Grubb, Deputy Director of Community Development, about the matter.

Preservation of Historic Structures - Former Bethlehem Steel Property

Sally Handlon, 621 Taylor Street, said she is at the meeting on behalf of the South Bethlehem Historical Society. As president of the group, Ms. Handlon stated she has been directed by the board to make it known to City Council and those at the meeting tonight that the group is circulating a petition in support of preservation of the historic structures on the former Bethlehem Steel property. Ms. Handlon, noting she has a petition with her this evening, said she would like to read what it says and solicit signatures for it. Ms. Handlon read that signatures on the petition will acknowledge to Senators Arlen Specter, Rick Santorum, U.S. Representative Pat Toomey, State Representative T. J. Rooney, Governor Ed Rendell, and Mr. James Pepper of the National Park Service that the signatories are concerned and interested in preserving historical facilities on the former Bethlehem Steel property by enlisting the support of the National Park Service and the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission. Ms. Handlon continued on to say that the group is trying to let these individuals know the importance of the matter and to get as many signatures as possible.

Conectiv

Dean Bruch, 625 Hawthorne Road, referring to the meeting held January 23, 2003 in Town Hall pertaining to Conectiv's risk management plan, advised that he asked the vice president who was in attendance at that meeting why Conectiv was selling before the project was built. Mr. Bruch, affirming that Conectiv did sell the property, remarked that Conectiv no longer owns it and is out of town. Mr. Bruch, advising that Conectiv did plan on pushing the issue of clean burning and said they were going to use natural gas, explained how natural gas works. He commented that at a certain point a user may have to switch from gas to oil.

Rezoning Request - West Second Street and Union Station Plaza - HI to CB

Mr. Bruch felt it is wise that the property at West Second Street is not developed for a technology use in view of decrease in the value of technology related stocks. Mr. Bruch thought that the proposed residential and retail development is wise. Mr. Bruch questioned whether tax abatement is applicable for the property in question.

Mr. Hanna responded that residential properties are not tax abated. Advising that the previous proposal for commercial and industrial development would have been eligible for the City's tax abatement program, Mr. Hanna confirmed that the new proposal for residential will not be eligible for tax abatement.

14. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:57 p.m.
ATTEST:

City Clerk