Council MInutes
December 1, 2009
1. INVOCATION
2. PLEDGE TO THE FLAG
3. ROLL CALL
President Donchez called the meeting to order. Pastor Gerry
Hartman, El Shaddai Bethlehem Ministries, offered the invocation
which was followed by the pledge to the flag. Present were
Jean Belinski, Karen Dolan, Joseph F. Leeson, Jr., Gordon
B. Mowrer, J. William Reynolds, J. Michael Schweder, and Robert
J. Donchez, 7.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Minutes of November 17, 2009 were approved.
5. COURTESY OF THE FLOOR (for public comment on Ordinances
and Resolutions to be voted on by Council this evening –
5 Minute Time Limit)
Bill No. 37 – 2009 – Amending Article 721 –
Streets and Sidewalks – Vendor Ordinance
Lynn Logue, 5464 Jaclyn Lane, Vice President of Bethlehem
Initiatives for the Greater Lehigh Valley Chamber of Commerce,
spoke on behalf of the Historic District members of the Downtown
Bethlehem Association that is a council of the Bethlehem Chamber
of Commerce. Ms. Logue communicated that during the past decade
the City has encouraged entrepreneurs to locate restaurants
and specialty shops in the downtown, and the City has largely
succeeded where other cities have failed because of the restaurants
and shops that have located in the downtown areas. Ms. Logue
pointed out that success continues as the private sector continues
to invest in Bethlehem despite a national recession. She highlighted
the fact that business and property owners have invested millions
of dollars to maintain the unique and historic charm and atmosphere
of Main Street, Broad Street, and beyond. The Historic District
members of the Downtown Bethlehem Association do not believe
there is a need for food or merchandise vendors on the streets
of the historic district. Ms. Logue noted that visitors can
find something to eat, buy flowers, a gift or variety of items
on every block. The proposed Ordinance for cart vendors creates
an unlevel playing field between these new proposed vendors
and the existing merchants and property owners, many of which
are long-standing businesses which pay rent, taxes, utilities,
and create jobs. Under the proposed Ordinance cart vendors
would only pay a fraction of the cost and overhead that existing
businesses incur. Business owners spend a great deal of money
as well as countless hours promoting, decorating, and producing
events that bring thousands of people to downtown each year.
Emphasizing that merchants are invested in Bethlehem, Ms.
Logue said because of their efforts along with investments
made by the City of Bethlehem, the Historic District is known
far and wide for its charming shops, fine restaurants and
cafés, and diverse festivals. Communicating that businesses
choose to be in the historic area as opposed to a mall, Ms.
Logue pointed out that is why they go through the process
of the HARB restrictions. Expressing that people do not want
to lose that charm, Ms. Logue noted there is some concern
that the presence of street vendors may change the look and
the feel of the downtown that visitors have come to enjoy.
The members of the group expect that cart vendors would have
to comply with the same strict historic standards that have
been properly created to establish and maintain the charm
of the historic district. The membership believes that the
organization needs to be much more involved in helping to
develop a policy and approach on an issue that could directly
affect the investments, businesses, and atmosphere of the
downtown.
Dana Grubb, 2420 Henderson Place, thought that people who
are the most impacted by the proposed Ordinance should have
the most say. Mr. Grubb said anything that is implemented
needs to be a fair and incorruptible process, needs to respect
the community’s wishes, should necessitate review by
the appropriate historic review board, and fees should be
reasonable. Mr. Grubb expressed the opinion that the determinations
should be made only by City residents, not City employees
or administrators who do not reside in the City of Bethlehem.
Mr. Grubb stated that City Council should have the final say
on the process developed, in view of the fact that people
will come before City Council with their concerns or problems.
Mr. Grubb noted he has heard comments reflecting concern about
sidewalk café furniture including styles and condition.
Mr. Grubb thought that perhaps consideration should be given
to creating some standards. Turning to Bill No. 36 - 2009
for a line of credit in the amount of $12.6 million for sewer
and water capital projects, Mr. Grubb remarked it is incumbent
on Council to receive assurance that the proceeds from the
line of credit will only be used for the express purposes.
Mr. Grubb said for too long the City has been acting like
a consumer who takes cash from one credit card to make payments
on another. Noting that the 2010 Budget message touts the
paying down of existing debt, Mr. Grubb stressed that even
before the 2010 Budget has been approved residents and rate
payers are being asked to guarantee and pay back another $12.6
million in additional debt. Mr. Grubb said it is time to get
the City’s fiscal house in order and not continue to
pile on more debt.
Patrick Wilson, 64 E. Wall Street, noted he received a flyer
regarding the issue of vending, and wrote to Ms. Dolan concerning
the matter. Mr. Wilson, explaining that he must obtain approval
to make changes to his house that is in the historic district,
advised that he moved to Bethlehem because he loves Historic
Bethlehem. He observed that other cities in the area have
experienced a downturn and people who cared about their properties
left. Agreeing there is a place for many kinds of businesses,
Mr. Wilson did not think that a vending cart could be dressed
up to bring beauty and ambience to the area. Mr. Wilson expressed
that he and his neighbors take a lot of pride in their properties
and he believes in what the Historic and Architectural Review
Board is doing to keep it that way. Mr. Wilson thought that
homeowners and business owners in the City should have a weightier
say in what happens with the issue. Mr. Wilson noted that
some of his friends own small businesses in the area and they
are struggling but pay their rent and put money into their
stores. Mr. Wilson stated he has nothing against those who
have a vending cart but he thought there is a place for the
carts and it is not in historic Bethlehem.
Lisa Ronca, 1110 Spring Street, owner of Cutter’s
Bike Shop at 418 E. Third Street, explained that she and her
husband will lose everything if their business does not succeed,
and they did everything on their own without loans, and worked
very hard. Ms. Ronca, advising that parking was a large part
of choosing the site for their business, expressed she did
not feel it was fair to find someone taking up parking spaces
in front of her store that should be where her customers or
customers of other shops in the vicinity could park. Ms. Ronca,
agreeing there should be a place for vendors, said she does
not think it adds ambiance. Ms. Ronca pointed out there are
many rules and regulations to follow in order for a business
to open. Ms. Ronca, expressing that the South Side has come
a long way, said she is anxious for the Greenway and would
like to see more people on bicycles. Ms. Ronca hoped that
a happy medium can be found, and said she would like to see
the vendors make a living. Adding that she and her husband
work very hard to make a living, Ms. Ronca said everyone should
have to follow the same suits. Ms. Ronca notified the assembly
that, because of the many rules the merchants had to follow
in preparing food for the dessert event that was to be held
as a fundraiser on the South Side, the event was cancelled
and yet it is not known where the vendors’ food is prepared.
Tina Kowalski, merchant at 5 E. Fourth Street, asking who
will see to it that the vendors comply with the Ordinance,
said the City has allowed the vendors to operate illegally
all summer long, taking up two to four parking spaces, disrupting
merchants property, disrespecting the merchants, blocking
the right of way, disrupting traffic, and leaving garbage.
Stressing that the City should enforce the law, Ms. Kowalski
questioned who should the merchants call if a vendor is breaking
the rules in front of a merchant’s property, and what
will be the response time. She remarked that the merchants
have called the City, the Parking Authority, and the Police
all summer long but the merchants did not receive help. Ms.
Kowalski stressed that the hot dog man was made legal but
he is operating illegally. Ms. Kowalski asserted that if the
Ordinance would have been enforced then the merchants would
not have had to go through this all summer.
Expressing that putting a vendor in front of a merchant’s
business will create animosity between the merchant and the
vendor, Ms. Kowalski queried what merchant would welcome a
five foot by six foot metal cart on a trailer, with propane
tank, grill, umbrella, garbage can, cooler, lawn chairs, and
a karaoke machine in front of their storefront. She stressed
this is not local income, entry level entrepreneurs. Ms. Kowalski,
asserting that targeting New and Fourth Streets with three
of the five vending sites is biased and discriminatory, pointed
out there are other areas in Bethlehem with the same amount
of foot traffic if not more. Ms. Kowalski said vendors should
be spread out throughout the City in appropriate areas. The
merchants of both business districts work very hard, and are
small businesses that all work together to better the business
districts and neighborhoods. Ms. Kowalski stated that littering
the streets and sidewalks with unwanted vendors is not positive.
Ms. Kowalski expressed that the City should concentrate more
on picking up garbage and keeping the streets clean in the
business districts and leave the merchants alone.
Tabitha Petrecz, stating that she resides in Bethlehem and
is a business owner at 22 W. Fourth Street, advised there
was bagged meter parking across the street from her business
last week, and a vendor parked there. Observing that vendors
want to be treated like the merchants, Ms. Petrecz said she
would like to be treated the same way as the vendors and be
entitled to bagged parking as well that her customers could
use when they get takeout meals, for deliveries, or a special
feature to give to her customers. Ms. Petrecz, expressing
that parking spaces are like gold, communicated it does not
make sense. She advised that she did get bagged meters for
a week for her customers who were ecstatic.
Jim Krisovitch, 284 Brodhead Road, partner of Ms. Petrecz
in the Blue Sky Café, noted he operates another business
in Bethlehem. Mr. Krisovitch related that last Saturday when
he had breakfast at the café he had to search for a
parking spot and noticed two bagged meters with no parking
and was told it was for the food vendor. He continued on to
say the two bagged spots directly across from the café
are reserved 24 hours a day for the vendor who is not there
all the time. About 10:30-11:00 a.m. the vendor came and then
left, and moved to the corner of Fourth and New Streets where
there was more foot traffic. Mr. Krisovitch advised there
were four parking spaces on Fourth Street tied up for the
food vendor. Advising that on Sunday morning he had to go
to the café to fix a machine and stayed for breakfast
during which time the vendor was not at the two spots across
the street, Mr. Krisovitch informed the assembly that is the
busiest day and customers could not use those spaces. He was
told by his staff that the vendor was not there throughout
the day on Sunday. Mr. Krisovitch challenged the City to make
policies and decisions that are fair to all the businesses
and residents in Bethlehem.
Janice Katowitz, 860 E. Macada Road, thought that Bethlehem
is big enough for both the vendors and the merchants. She
noted that her son frequented vendors in Philadelphia between
classes, and they go to vendors when visiting New York City.
Tom Morganelli, 807 W. Broad Street, noted that vendors
are located in many sections in big cities, they fit in well,
and they are successful. Recalling a vendor on Third Street
in the 1950’s, Mr. Morganelli pointed out that something
permitted it. Mr. Morganelli observed that sidewalk dining
is successful but was not allowed years ago. Mr. Morganelli
thought the vendors are another thing that a City the size
of Bethlehem can handle and people appreciate them.
Rod Holt, 519 11th Avenue, an owner of the Apollo Grill
on Broad Street, affirmed that yesterday he submitted to City
Council a petition signed by 42 of the 43 businesses that
he visited who are opposed to street cart vendors in downtown
Bethlehem. Mr. Holt, expressing that vendors have a right
to make a living, recalled that the City had a bidding process
for a restaurateur at the Golf Course. Noting that the application
of Dave Rank was chosen who spent hundreds of thousands of
dollars on the restaurant, Mr. Holt did not think it would
be fair to allow a food vendor to be located there. Mr. Holt,
while expressing it is commendable that vending allows an
individual to become entry-level entrepreneurs, thought a
business person would suggest that these entrepreneurs would
be better served by referring them to the many existing programs
for entrepreneurs, including at Lehigh University, Northampton
and Lehigh County Community Colleges, in addition to financial
assistance programs provided through the City. Mr. Holt, advising
he has been in business for 30 years, pointed out he sought
the advice of Lehigh University when he opened the Apollo
restaurant. Mr. Holt informed the assembly that the owner
of Billy’s Downtown Diner is teaching a class at Northampton
Community College on how to start a restaurant, and the third
group of students from Lehigh Community College will come
to his restaurant and he and his wife will talk to them about
becoming an entrepreneur. Mr. Holt did not think that Bethlehem
could be compared to cities in foreign countries or to New
York, Philadelphia or Washington since what works in those
cities does not work in Bethlehem.
Dyanne Holt, 519 11th Avenue, an owner of the Apollo Grill
at 85 W. Broad Street, communicated that she would not interfere
in an issue that concerned other streets in the City because
what is decided there would not affect her. However, Ms. Holt
expressed that when it is where she lives and works those
voices should be taken seriously. Ms. Holt communicated that
business and property owners in the North and South Side business
districts would advise what is vital to success is keeping
the areas clean, safe, charming, historical, and vibrant.
Ms. Holt stressed that, without business owners who have put
everything they have into downtown Bethlehem, the City would
go the way of neighboring cities. Ms. Holt informed the assembly
that the Apollo Grill brings between 300-600 people to downtown
every day, employs 50 people, pays thousands of dollars in
taxes and fees, and gives back to the community. She exemplified
that the restaurant has raised more than $250,000 in the past
ten years for local organizations in need, including the Bethlehem
Public Library. Ms. Holt said if someone wants to work and
make a living in downtown Bethlehem then they should stand
with the other business owners, make a serious commitment,
rent an empty storefront, and the business owners will help
any way they can.
Fred Bonsall, resident of Historic Bethlehem, did not think
the vendor carts will contribute any ambiance to the Historic
District. Mr. Bonsall, affirming he has been the Chairman
of the Historic and Architectural Review Board (HARB) for
24 years, said he is proud of what HARB has done for the district.
Mr. Bonsall felt if vendors are permitted to be in Historic
Bethlehem they should at least follow and be responsible for
all the guidelines set forth by the HARB for the rest of the
merchants.
Jan Kleckner, 1423 Montrose Avenue, expressed she is sad
to see a group of hard-working business people squelch out
one of their own who is Edwin Padilla, the Bethlehem hot dog
vendor. Ms. Kleckner continued on to say she is sad that her
tax dollars support a bureaucracy that finances solicitors
to construct a ten page document to overregulate an honorable
man who just wants to make a living. Ms. Kleckner challenged
barkeeps or restaurateurs present to stand in support of Mr.
Padilla, street vendors, and a free market, competitive economy
that benefits everyone.
T. J. Walker, 250 Flagstone Drive, stating that the public
has been overwhelmingly in support of Edwin Padilla and vendors
in general, said the group he helped to form in June had close
to 100% positive postings and currently has over 3,000 members.
Mr. Walker remarked that almost all of the naysayers were
owners of South Side businesses or one of their friends. Mr.
Walker, noting that merchants have complained that vendors
do not have the same overhead or expenses, said Mr. Padilla
has paid all the fees required, cost of equipment, and serve-safe
certification, and his volume of sales is a fraction of the
other businesses. Mr. Walker pointed out that there are vendor
carts at Independence Hall in Philadelphia where there is
no auction and vendors who do not follow the rules are not
permitted to vend. Mr. Walker stressed that a vendor is not
going to take business away but rather will draw foot traffic
and bring exposure to businesses that people may not have
been aware of. Remarking that vendors are not parasites, Mr.
Walker stated that Mr. Padilla did not depend on society,
did what he could to take care of his family, and his entrepreneurial
spirit should be applauded. Mr. Walker expressed the hope
that Mr. Padilla and a few select others will be allowed to
operate their vending businesses in a professional and respectable
manner.
Ellen Larmer, 1721 W. Highland Street, Allentown, noted
she is the director of the Community Action Development Corporation
(CADC) of Bethlehem that promotes social and economic change
in South Bethlehem, and provides training, classes and technical
assistance for people who want to start a business. Ms. Larmer
advised she assists and trains people in starting businesses.
Ms. Larmer confirmed that CADC sent a letter to the Members
of Council in support of vending activities, noting that food
and flower vendors are the most desirable for urban development,
and that regulated vending provides an opportunity for entrepreneurship.
Ms. Larmer enumerated that many cities in the United States
and in Europe have found that urban food establishments enhance
rather than detract from a city’s eating experiences
for various reasons including price and convenience. Ms. Larmer
informed the assembly that studies show that vendors do not
compete with stores because they offer entirely different
products, and also present the opportunity for customers to
see stores they may have otherwise missed. Further pointing
out that food vendors add vibrancy and generate foot traffic,
Ms. Larmer communicated that the interests of street vendors
and store owners are the same that is to increase foot traffic.
Food vendors and businesses together can create synergy, a
gathering point, and increase the number of people in a commercial
area thereby deterring crime. She added that food vendors
give the opportunity to eat locally and avoid chain restaurants.
Ms. Larmer stated that a regulatory system is requested to
encourage urban food vending where the emphasis is on quality
and entrepreneurship. She noted it is a positive opportunity
for women, immigrants, and others with aspirations to succeed
and add to the vibrancy of downtowns.
Tim Dodge, 950 Wedgewood Road, said not all of the South
Side business owners are opposed to vendors, while acknowledging
it seems there are legitimate concerns regarding parking and
bagging meters. Mr. Dodge thought that locating vendors on
the South Side may make a little more sense than on the North
Side. Mr. Dodge stated he supports the hot dog vendor.
Edwin Padilla, 602 Wyandotte Street, recounting that the
issue regarding vendors started last November, affirmed that
he came to the City and asked how he could get a permit to
vend hot dogs on the street. Mr. Padilla, relating that the
City mistakenly gave him the permits, explained that a few
weeks after he started operating it turned out the City was
wrong and so was he. Mr. Padilla communicated that the City
was gracious to let him operate for a few months, and now
he is operating totally legally. Mr. Padilla notified the
assembly that he pays to have meters bagged, and the Parking
Authority knows what days he operates. Mr. Padilla agreed
that the aesthetics of his vending cart are not historic.
Noting that the concept of vending is historic, Mr. Padilla
said just because there have not been vendors in Bethlehem
for a while is not a reason not to have them now. Mr. Padilla
advised he pays taxes, he has a place where he cooks and stores
his food that is approved by the Health Bureau, he pays the
Parking Authority and for right of way permits, gas, propane,
etc. Mr. Padilla questioned how he could be taking business
away from merchants when what he sells is a hot dog that costs
$1.50 from a cart. Mr. Padilla informed the Members that he
has a petition signed by hundreds of people who support him.
Tim Finnegan, 618 Turner Street, said it seems there are
plenty of spaces for vendors, particularly on the South Side.
While acknowledging it must be aggravating for a business
owner to see a hot dog vendor in front of their business,
Mr. Finnegan thought there must be a solution to the matter.
Noting he is a customer of Mr. Padilla, Mr. Finnegan related
that he saw Mr. Padilla run across the street to pick up garbage.
Mr. Finnegan observed that the marketplace dictates the number
and types of vendors. Mr. Finnegan pointed out that no matter
what the cost Mr. Padilla still made an investment in his
business, and with the understanding that he was doing everything
within the law.
Bruce Haines, 65 W. Market Street, managing partner and
an owner of the Hotel Bethlehem, addressed the Ordinance as
it relates to the North Side and the Historic District. Mr.
Haines stated he made an investment in the City as a resident
and business owner because of the Historic District, and the
ambiance of Main Street. Mr. Haines thought that street vendors
as outlined in the Ordinance are incompatible in the North
Side Historic District. Mr. Haines did not think vendors should
be on the street and taking parking places away from businesses
that invested in the downtown and knowing the limited street
parking. Turning to Section 721.06 of the Ordinance that addresses
outdoor dining that he noted has been positive for the historic
district, Mr. Haines observed the Ordinance does not have
any regulations pertaining to any standards for the outdoor
dining furnishings such as tables and chairs, and noted that
businesses have to adhere to the historic and architectural
review standards for whatever is attached to their buildings.
Mr. Haines asked for increased standards for outdoor dining.
Mr. Haines thought the Ordinance is counter to the interests
of the Historic District and is lacking in standards. Mr.
Haines added that once vending is permitted anywhere on the
North Side it will promulgate.
Edward Luque, 552 Benner Avenue, said the vendor is trying
to live like everyone else. While expressing his understanding
of the point of view of business owners who have spent a lot
of money, Mr. Luque stated there are a lot of people unemployed
during this economy and people have to be creative in doing
the best they can to make money. Mr. Luque expressed the hope
that people will be as courteous as possible with Mr. Padilla.
Stephen Antalics, 737 Ridge Street, communicated that the
issue of vending is a very polarizing issue. Mr. Antalics
stated there have been street vendors on the South Side for
75 years, and in the 1930’s and 1940’s vendors
sold chestnuts. Mr. Antalics noted there are vendors at Campus
Square and at Morton Street but there is no complaint because
they are dispensing vegetables and baked goods. Mr. Antalics
thought the City should introduce variety through street vendors,
and observed that areas in New York City have many vendors,
with a variety of products, and they are well accepted. Mr.
Antalics further enumerated cities where there are vendors,
and commented it is an eclectic feeling for the area. He thought
an issue is the food preparers in establishments versus vendors
on the street. Mr. Antalics expressed that if done properly
street vendors can add dynamically to the community by creating
street traffic that would enhance the restaurants and other
traffic.
Charles Lyman, 444 N. New Street, noted that of the proposed
locations of the two sites on the North Side one is within
the Historic District and the other borders it within a half
block. Mr. Lyman spoke about the residential part of the Historic
District on the North Side and pointed out that one of the
proposed sites at New and Church Streets is two blocks within
the residential area. Mr. Lyman pointed out that vending areas
in other cities are within a business area rather than a residential
area. Mr. Lyman communicated that people say that downtown
Bethlehem is very special because the residential area and
the commercial area are so close, residents walk and visitors
tour in the area. Mr. Lyman observed that having a street
vendor not governed by HARB as to what the selling device
looks like in the Historic District is quite different from
what people have been talking about. Mr. Lyman, explaining
that the street vending carts would be located two blocks
within the residential part of the Historic District, did
not think it fits many of the streets near the Historic District
on the North Side, the ambiance of which many people worked
hard to create over many years. Mr. Lyman commented there
is the opportunity to change the locations so that they are
not in the Historic District, and expressed the hope that
the locations on the North Side will be considered very carefully.
Mary Pongracz, 321 W. Fourth Street, commented that no one
is against vendors per se, but people are against vendors
because they are encroaching upon a business establishment,
or have not followed the rules. Ms. Pongracz stated that vendors
would not be able to be placed in the Historic Districts without
the consent of the HARB or the Historic Conservation Commission
– South Bethlehem and Mount Airy. Ms. Pongracz asserted
that the Ordinance should not be voted on because it is incomplete
and does not contain everything needed. Ms. Pongracz expressed
her opinion that street vendors without access to hot water
would lead to flu and contagious diseases. Ms. Pongracz questioned
if a vendor has enough insurance to cover an action as a result
of salmonella, for example. Ms. Pongracz noted that members
of the public have said they do not want vendors in the City
at this time, but it does not mean they will not be welcomed
at another time.
Kate Cipolle, 933 Wyandotte Street, noted she is a volunteer
of the community garden, and she is speaking in support of
vendors. Ms. Cipolle noted by supporting someone local who
is bringing in local food the business person is being given
money that can be spent in the local area, versus giving money
to a large chain. Ms. Cipolle related that in one of the most
historic cities in Spain there are street vendors and public
space is used, and communicated it creates well-being in the
space. Commenting on the economic challenges, Ms. Cipolle
thought that issues should be looked at openly and creatively.
Ms. Cipolle observed that antiseptic soaps could be used.
Ms. Cipolle did not think there is a competition between business
owners and vendors, and thought that parking issues could
be dealt with. She added that vendors are investing in Bethlehem
but in a smaller way. Ms. Cipolle observed that if rules can
be created for historic places then it should be easy to create
regulations for vendors.
Olga Negron, 1306 E. Fifth Street, remarked it seems funny
that a $1.50 hot dog would take anybody else’s business
away. Ms. Negron observed that many people do not have the
time or money to go to a restaurant. Ms. Negron noted that
vending is an opportunity, and added that many individuals
need and want it. Ms. Negron advised she is president of Community
Action Development Corporation in Bethlehem that has talked
about the issue and is in support of it. Ms. Negron commented
there is a lot of room for everybody.
Slain Police Officer
Dave Griffiths, 2830 Linden Street, pointing out that, as
the newspapers reported, Police Sergeant Mark Renninger, formerly
of Bethlehem and who moved to Washington, has died because
he was shot, asked what is the City’s policy in honoring
slain Police Officers.
President Donchez advised that Mr. Griffiths could meet
with the Deputy Police Commissioner regarding the matter.
Mayor Callahan, advising that the matter was discussed at
the staff meeting today, explained that a representative of
the FOP and Deputy Police Commissioner Bedics will fly to
Washington for the services.
Vendors
Don McRae, 418 High Street, noting that he moved to Bethlehem
40 years ago because of its beauty, remarked it did not take
long for the City to be destroyed in view of the historic
buildings that were razed including tearing down numerous
buildings on Broad Street such as Dennis Drug Store that had
a soda fountain, and the Nile Theatre that was in the art
deco style. Mr. McRae said the problem he has seen is with
trying to restore the historic dimension to Bethlehem, and
an overzealous direction towards reestablishing the historic
dimension such as ambiance and uniformity of outdoor seating.
Mr. McRae encouraged people to expand their horizons as far
as possibilities of a more eclectic view of the City.
Michelle Ryder, 514 W. Third Street, commented that vending
stands in other cities are not usually attached to pick-up
trucks or other vehicles parked with a bagged meter, and wondered
if that is the best way to approach the issue of vendors.
Ms. Ryder expressed she is in favor of push-type carts but
aesthetically did not know whether the vending carts currently
in the City are the best way to do it. Mr. Ryder said she
sees more litter from McDonald’s restaurant than from
vendors.
Debbie Groth, 528 Main Street, communicated her concern about
the animosity that the issue of vendors is creating in the
community. She thought that the downtown is changing for the
better, and there has to be a happy medium. Ms. Groth pointed
out that the vendor is trying to make a living like everyone.
Ms. Groth commented there has to be a way for the vendor’s
business to be appealing in a location where people can get
a hot dog. Ms. Groth highlighted the fact that antibacterial
soaps can be used for sanitation.
James Holliman, 817 Lynn Avenue, suggested that the word
designated be added in section 721.05 (b).
Robert Virgilio, business owner of 518 Long Street, noted
there is a vendor Ordinance now that allows vendors with the
permission of the property owner. Mr. Virgilio observed that
the proposed Ordinance states that there can be five vendor
locations decided by the City, and did not think the City
has any property involved in the proposal. Mr. Virgilio questioned
whether the proposed Ordinance requires a property owner to
place a vendor on their property. Mr. Virgilio expressed a
lot of trouble could have been saved if the vendor could have
asked someone for permission to be on their property; and,
if the vendor has not, Mr. Virgilio thought there are a lot
of people who would give him permission. Mr. Virgilio wondered
why the Ordinance is even being proposed. Mr. Virgilio stated
that perhaps there could be some requirements put in place
that would address some of the questions.
Bill Scheirer, 1890 Eaton Avenue, informed the assembly
that in Washington, D.C. there are vendors on the National
Mall serving mainly the tourists, and on the city streets.
Mr. Scheirer observed that vendors are less of a problem in
larger cities because there is more foot traffic, and wider
sidewalks. Mr. Scheirer stated that if there were a vendor
at the proposed New and Church Streets site who sold food
it would compete with the teen café being planned by
the Library.
6. OLD BUSINESS.
A. Tabled Items
None.
B. Unfinished Business
1. Bill No. 28 - 2008 – Amending Zoning Ordinance –
Various Sections
2. Establishing Article 1716 – Landmarks and Properties
of Historical Interest
C. Old Business – Members of Council
None.
7. COMMUNICATIONS
A. Director of Public Works – PennDot Utility Relocation
Reimbursement Request
The Clerk read a memorandum dated November 18, 2009 from
Michael Alkhal, Director of Public Works, to which was attached
a proposed Resolution and the Utility Relocation Reimbursement
Request for the S.R. 378 Section RMP project for reimbursement
of the costs to relocate the City’s water facilities
in connection with the project that is part of the overall
Route 412 Improvement project. The City will be required to
reimburse PennDot 50% of the total estimated cost of $102,410.
President Donchez stated that the authorizing Resolution
is listed on this evening’s Agenda.
8. REPORTS
A. President of Council
President Donchez announced that City Council will hold the
next Budget Hearing tomorrow, Wednesday, December 2, 2009
at 7:00 PM in Town Hall on the following Budgets:
Civic Expenses; Council; Mayor; Treasurer; Controller; Law
Bureau; Department of Administration; Parks and Public Property;
Golf Course Enterprise Fund; General Fund Revenue; General
Fund Expenditures; General Expenses; and Debt Service.
President Donchez stated that the Final Budget Meeting will
be held on Tuesday, December 15, 2009 at 7:00 PM in Town Hall.
The last Council Meeting in December will be held on Tuesday,
December 22, 2009 at 7:00 PM in Town Hall.
B. Mayor
1. Administrative Order – Jessica L. Lee – Fine
Arts Commission
Mayor Callahan reappointed Jessica L. Lee to membership
on the Fine Arts Commission effective until December 2012.
Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Mowrer sponsored Resolution 2009-202
to confirm the appointment.
Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer,
Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Schweder, and Mr. Donchez, 7.
2. Administrative Order – Michael D. Recchiuti –
Bethlehem Parking Authority
Mayor Callahan appointed Michael D. Recchiuti to membership
on the Bethlehem Parking Authority effective until March 2010.
Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Mowrer sponsored Resolution 2009-203
to confirm the appointment.
Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer,
Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Schweder, and Mr. Donchez, 7.
9. ORDINANCES FOR FINAL PASSAGE
None.
10. NEW ORDINANCES
A. Bill No. 36 – 2009 – General Obligation Note
(Line of Credit) – Sewer Capital and Water Capital Funds
The Clerk read Bill No. 36 – 2009 – Line of
Credit – Sewer Capital and Water Capital Funds, sponsored
by Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Leeson, and titled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BETHLEHEM, LEHIGH
AND NORTHAMPTON COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE
OF ITS GENERAL OBLIGATION NOTE, SERIES A OF 2010 (THE “
2010A NOTE”) IN THE AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $10,000,000
AND THE GENERAL OBLIGATION NOTE, SERIES B OF 2010 (THE “2010B
NOTE”) IN THE AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $2,600,000
(TOGETHER THE “NOTES”); SETTING FORTH THE PURPOSE
OF THE ISSUANCE OF THE NOTES, TO FUND CERTAIN CAPITAL PROJECTS
OF THE CITY OF BETHLEHEM PURSUANT TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT
UNIT DEBT ACT; DETERMINING THAT THE NOTES SHALL BE SOLD AT
PRIVATE SALE; DETERMINING THE PROJECTS AND ESTABLISHING THEIR
USEFUL LIFE; DETERMINING THAT THE DEBT EVIDENCED BY THE NOTES
SHALL BE NONELECTORAL DEBT; SETTING FORTH THE INTEREST RATES,
INTEREST AND PRINCIPAL PAYMENT DATES AND FINAL MATURITY OF
THE NOTES AND THE PREPAYMENT PRIVILEGES; ACCEPTING A PROPOSAL
FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE NOTES; DESIGNATING A PAYING AGENT
FOR THE NOTES; SETTING FORTH THE METHOD AND PLACE OF PAYMENT
OF THE NOTES; APPROVING THE FORM OF THE NOTES; AUTHORIZING
THE EXECUTION OF THE NOTES; ENTERING INTO A COVENANT WITH
RESPECT TO THE NOTES AND PLEDGING THE CITY'S FULL FAITH, CREDIT
AND TAXING POWER THEREFORE, AND ESTABLISHING A SINKING FUNDS
FOR THE NOTES; DESIGNATING A SINKING FUND DEPOSITORY; SETTING
FORTH CERTAIN ADDITIONAL TERMS WITH RESPECT TO THE NOTES;
AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATE OFFICERS TO FILE UNDER SECTION 8110
OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT DEBT ACT WITH THE DEPARTMENT
OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING PROCEEDINGS
UNDER SECTION 8024 OR 8026 OF THE ACT MAKING CERTAIN FEDERAL
TAX COVENANTS AND DECLARING THE NOTES TO BE QUALIFIED TAX-EXEMPT
OBLIGATIONS; DECLARING THE DEBT EVIDENCED BY THE NOTES TO
BE WITHIN THE LIMITATIONS OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT DEBT
ACT MAKING CERTAIN FEDERAL TAX COVENANTS AND DECLARING THE
NOTES TO BE QUALIFIED TAX-EXEMPT OBLIGATIONS; AUTHORIZING
DELIVERY OF THE NOTES; AUTHORIZING INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS
OF THE NOTES; PROVIDING FOR INVALID PROVISIONS; PROVIDING
FOR INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES; PROVIDING WHEN THE ORDINANCES
SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer,
Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Schweder, and Mr. Donchez, 7. Bill No. 36
– 2009 was declared passed on First Reading.
B. Bill No. 37 – 2009 – Amending Article 721
– Streets and Sidewalks – Vendor Ordinance
The Clerk read Bill No. 37 – 2009 – Amending
Article 721 – Streets and Sidewalks – Vendor Ordinance,
sponsored by Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Leeson, and titled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BETHLEHEM,
COUNTIES OF LEHIGH AND NORTHAMPTON,
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, AMENDING
ARTICLE 721 OF THE CODIFIED ORDINANCES
ENTITLED STREETS AND SIDEWALKS.
Amendment 1
Ms. Dolan moved the following amendment:
That the following paragraph in Section 721.05, Street and
Sidewalk Vendors, be amended to read as follows:
(3) Operation Standards
(f) Use and maintenance of sidewalk or street. All sales
and related activity shall be conducted from the vending stand
during which times the vending stand shall not be moved from
the assigned vending location. No products shall be stored
or displayed nor trash receptacles placed on the sidewalk,
street, or any adjacent outside area by the vendor. The sidewalk
and street in the immediate vicinity of the vending stand
shall be kept and maintained free of trash, recyclables, litter,
debris or spillage by the stand vendor. Vendor shall supply
a recycling container approved by the Recycling Bureau.
Mr. Reynolds seconded the motion.
Ms. Dolan noted that Thomas Marshall, Director of Recycling,
is in agreement with the proposed provision. Ms. Dolan affirmed
the intent is that there should be the same rules for vendors
as for business establishments and homeowners regarding recycling,
and encouraging customers to recycle.
Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer,
Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Schweder, and Mr. Donchez, 7. Amendment
1 passed.
Amendment 2
Ms. Dolan moved the following amendment in Section 721.05,
Street and Sidewalk Vendors:
(4) License Selection
(b) Review of applications. Not less than 15 days prior the
selection of qualified applicants, the Director shall complete
the review of all applications filed and notify the applicants
of the results thereof, in writing.
(1) An application shall be denied and the applicant ineligible
to participate in
the vending [ license auction ] selection if:
(i) The application proposes the sale of anything other than
food,
[ non-alcoholic ] beverages, or fresh flowers.
Mr. Reynolds seconded the motion.
Mr. Reynolds inquired where in the Ordinance is the conflicting
language. Ms. Dolan, replying it is on page 8 of the Ordinance
under Section 721.06, Sidewalk Sales and Outdoor Dining, paragraph
(c), noted that according to State law alcohol cannot be sold
unless there is a license given to do so, and other references
in the Ordinance simply state the word beverages.
Mr. Schweder thought that there should be a vote against
the amendment because it double-covers what is being attempted
to do, and street vendors are handled differently under the
Ordinance than those who obtain licenses for other events
as enumerated by Ms. Dolan.
Voting AYE: Ms. Dolan, 1. Voting NAY: Mrs. Belinski, Mr.
Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Schweder, and Mr. Donchez,
6. Amendment 2 failed.
Amendment 3
Ms. Dolan moved the following Amendment in Section 721.05,
Street and Sidewalk Vendors:
(c) Award of license by committee
(1) To ensure vendors operate as a complement to the [ downtown
] City, a committee will be chosen by the Director of Public
Works and individually appointed by a vote of City Council
to examine and [ score ], assess vendors on their applications,
products, and carts. The Committee [should ] shall be comprised
of a representative of the Department of Community and Economic
Development, the Bethlehem Health Bureau, a member of each
or all of the local merchant associations closest to the vendors’
sites, and a knowledgeable representative of a non-profit
business [development organization ] advisory group, and one
member of the HARB and one member of the Historic Conservation
Commission – South Bethlehem and Mount Airy. Members
should be chosen who have an understanding of tourism, the
food industry, architecture, and business development.
There was no second to the Amendment, and the amendment died.
Amendment 4
Ms. Dolan moved the following Amendment in Section 721.05,
Street and Sidewalk Vendors:
(2) All vendor applicants [ should ] shall appear before
the committee for a public interview. [ All committee business
shall be public. ] The committee will [ score ] assess vendor
applications on the viability of their business idea, their
personal presentation, knowledge of local health and hygiene
laws, sales experience and/or ability.
There was no second to the Amendment, and the amendment
died.
Amendment 5
Ms. Dolan moved the following Amendment in Section 721.05,
Street and Sidewalk Vendors:
(3) Applicants who [ wish ] desire to sell food, should bring
a sample of their product(s) for the committee’s review.
Applicants [ will ] shall be [scored] evaluated on the quality
and desirability of their product and the manner in which
the product will enhance the overall food experience of Bethlehem.
[ Applicants whose food reflects the city’s immigrant
history will be given preference, and v ] Vendors will be
chosen to increase the variety and convenience of [ ethnically
diverse specialties ] food purchasing opportunities in the
City. If the committee is not presented with sufficient applications
to achieve the aforestated objective, the committee shall
have the right to choose fewer than five vendors.
There was no second to the Amendment, and the amendment
died.
Amendment 6
Mr. Schweder moved the following amendment, and Mrs. Belinski
seconded the motion:
That Section 721.05 be amended to read as follows:
721.05 [ STREET AND ] SIDEWALK VENDORS.
A. [ Purpose. The City Council finds that the authorization
and underlying regulation of street vending in the City will
enhance the vitality, charm, ambiance and economic stability
of Bethlehem’s two downtowns, and it is the purpose
and intent of this ordinance to further these objectives while
maintaining and preserving traditional community character,
and promoting the general public safety, health, welfare and
morals, and protecting the rights of its citizens to the quiet
and productive enjoyment of their neighborhoods and property.
For any vending activity in excess of twenty-one (21) days
in any given calendar year, it shall be unlawful to sell or
offer for sale any food, beverage, service or merchandise
on any City street, sidewalk, lane, alley, pavement, footway
or right-of-way from any wagon, truck, auto, push cart, stand
or vehicle or in any other manner whatsoever if not duly licensed
pursuant to this section to operate in any area designated
by the Committee as an area for vending.
B. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Director of Public
Works shall establish the location of not more than 5 sites
available on public right of way for street and sidewalk vendors.
These sites shall be the only place where any street and sidewalk
vending is permitted with the exception of sidewalk sales
discussed in Section 721.06 and during Municipal Sanctioned
or Sponsored Events.
C. It shall be unlawful to sell or offer for sale any food,
beverage, service or merchandise on any City street, sidewalk,
lane, alley, pavement, footway or right-of-way from any wagon,
truck, auto, push cart, stand or vehicle or in any other manner
whatsoever if not duly licensed pursuant to this section to
operate in any area designated by the Director of Public Works
as an area for vending. ]
[ D. ] B. Standards and Requirements
(1) License Requirements
The application for a vendor’s license shall be filed
with the
[ Director of Public Works ] Committee and include the following:
(a) The name, home and business address of the applicant and
the name and address of the owner and/or operator, if other
than the applicant, of the vending business.
(b) A description of the type of food, beverage or fresh
flowers to be sold. Only applications for sales of food, beverage
or fresh flowers will be accepted.
(c) The place or places where applicant proposes to operate,
which shall be limited to a commercial zoning district within
the City of Bethlehem.
(d) A description and photograph of any stand, cart, vehicle
or equipment to be used in the operation of the business,
including the license and registration number of any motor
vehicle used in the operation of the business. Photograph
shall be of stand, cart, vehicle, or equipment in operational
mode.
(e) Three (3) two-inch (2”) by two-inch (2”)
prints of a full-
face photograph, taken not more than thirty (30) days prior
to the date of the application, of any person who will sell,
or offer for sale, any food, service, or merchandise on any
street or sidewalk within the City.
(f) [ A non-refundable application fee of Fifty Dollars ($50.00)
from all applicants. ] Applicant must provide a criminal record
check and child abuse check for himself and any employee.
[(g) Applicant must provide a criminal record check and child
abuse check for himself and any employee. ]
(2) Stand Design Standards / Vending Cart Design Standards
All stands and carts must be clean, sanitary, attractive
and be designed consistent with guidelines promulgated by
the [Director ] Committee.
(3) Operation Standards
(a) Days and hours of operation. All vendor activities involving
arrival on site, unloading, setup, sales, breakdown and departure
must be confined to the hours [ of 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.
daily ] established by the Committee.
(b) Daily removal. Vending stands and all related equipment,
supplies and packaging materials used or resulting from the
vending activities shall be removed daily.
(c) Safe and sanitary condition. Vending stands shall be maintained
in a safe, clean and sanitary condition at all times. Vending
stands licensed hereunder to sell food products shall:
(1) Be subject to inspection at any time by the Health Officer
and/or his inspectors and shall at all times be licensed under
and be in compliance with the Health Code of the city.
(2) If using portable heating or cooking facilities, be subject
to inspection at all times by the Fire Marshal and shall comply
with all applicable requirements of the Fire Code of the city.
(d) Quiet operations. Vending shall be conducted in a quiet
and peaceable manner, and there shall be no hawking of merchandise
or solicitation of pedestrians or motorists.
(e) Sign. No sign shall be permitted except an identification
of the vendor’s business name.
(f) Use and maintenance of sidewalk [ or street ]. All sales
and related activity shall be conducted from the vending stand
during which times the vending stand shall not be moved from
the assigned vending location. No products shall be stored
or displayed nor trash receptacles placed on the sidewalk,
street, or any adjacent outside area by the vendor. The sidewalk
and street in the immediate vicinity of the vending stand
shall be kept and maintained free of trash, litter, debris
or spillage by the stand vendor.
(g) Vendor shall provide a Certificate of Insurance from
a company acceptable to the [ Director ] Law Bureau providing
liability coverage to the vendor and naming of the City as
an additional insured. The amount of the insurance coverage
shall be One Million Dollars ($1,000,000);
(h) [ Street and ] [s ] Sidewalk vendors will be required
to obtain a Business License prior to opening and will be
required to pay Occupational Privilege Tax for all employees.
Those selling food will be required to obtain a Health License.
(i) No person not a legal title owner or lessee to the premises
utilized shall be permitted to conduct any activities as permitted
by this Section.
(4) License Selection.
(a) Notice of license availability. At such time as a vending
license shall become available either through failure to renew,
creation of a new location, expiration or early voluntary
or involuntary termination, the [ Director ] Committee shall
give public notice thereof by advertising such availability
two times in a newspaper of general circulation in the City
and on the City website not less than 45 nor more than 60
days prior to the date of license selection. The advertisement
shall specify the number and type (food or natural products)
of vending license(s) available, the vending location, that
the license(s) shall be awarded to selected qualified applicants
and where and by when applications for a license shall be
filed. Not less than 30 days shall be allowed for the filing
of applications.
(b) Review of applications. Not less than 15 days prior the
selection of qualified applicants, the [ Director ] Committee
shall complete the review of all applications filed and notify
the applicants of the results thereof, in writing.
(1) An application shall be denied and the applicant ineligible
to participate in the vending [ license auction ] selection
if:
(i) The application proposes the sale of anything other than
food, non-alcoholic beverages, or fresh flowers.
[ (ii) The application is incomplete in any material respect;
]
[(iii)] (ii) The proposed vending stand does not comply with
the applicable design criteria, standards or specifications
and/or applicable health codes;
[(iv)] (iii) The applicant, or any natural person having
not less than a thirty-three-percent interest in the entity
making application has:
(1) An interest in another vending license;
(2) Within the past five years held or had an interest in
a vending license that had been revoked;
(3) Any city tax liability being more than 10 days overdue;
or
(4) Within the past 10 years been convicted of selling, offering
to sell or possession with intent to sell a controlled substance.
[ (v) ] (iv) Non-compliance with regulations.
(2) If an application is denied, the applicant shall be notified,
in writing, of the reason therefor.
(c) Award of license [ by committee ].
(1) [ To ensure vendors operate as a complement to the downtown,
a committee will be chosen by the Director of Public Works
and individually appointed by a vote of City Council, to examine
and score vendors on their applications, products, and carts.
The committee should be comprised of a representative of the
Department of Community and Economic Development, the Bethlehem
Health Bureau, a member of each or all of the local merchant
associations closest to the vendor sites, and a knowledgeable
representative of a business development organization. Members
should be chosen who have an understanding of tourism, the
food industry, architecture, and business development. ] The
carts should be designed of quality materials that enhance
the integrity of Bethlehem and the activities, location, and
appearance of the carts shall be subject to the review of
a committee comprised of the Historic Review Officer, the
members of the HARB or the members of the Historic Conservation
Commission – South Bethlehem and Mount Airy depending
upon the applicant’s location. All applications in City
Wards 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, and 17 shall be reviewed
by the committee comprised of members of the Historic Conservation
Commission – South Bethlehem and Mount Airy and City
Wards 6, 7, 8, 9, 14, and 15 shall be reviewed by the committee
and members of HARB.
[ (2) All vendor applicants should appear before the committee
for a public interview. All committee business shall be public.
The committee will score vendor applications on the viability
of their business idea, their personal presentation, knowledge
of local health and hygiene laws, sales experience and/or
ability. ]
[ (3) Applicants who wish to sell food, should bring a sample
of their product(s) for the committee’s review. Applicants
will be scored on the quality and desirability of their product
and the manner in which the product will enhance the overall
food experience of Bethlehem. Applicants whose food reflects
the city’s immigrant history will be given preference,
and vendors will be chosen to increase the variety of ethnically
diverse specialties.
(4) The committee will also review photos of the applicant
vendor’s cart in its current condition, or the cart
they will purchase if selected. The carts should be designed
of quality materials that enhance the integrity of our downtowns.
([ 5 ] ) (2) The committee [ will notify the Director of
the committee’s selections, and the Director ] shall
notify Council which shall place the item on the next upcoming
agenda for a vote. The [ Director ] Committee [will ] shall
award licenses to any of those approved by Council after the
vendor pays his/her first annual fee of $250.00.
(5) Suspension or Revocation of License.
(a) Grounds. A vending license shall be subject to suspension
or revocation by the [ Director ]Committee for any of the
following causes:
(1) The violation of any provision of this article, the regulations
promulgated hereunder or the orders of the [ Director ] Committee
issued pursuant thereto;
(2) Where the license holder has knowingly made a false, misleading
or fraudulent statement of material fact in the application
for a license;
(3) When the license holder fails to renew or pay the annual
fee within 10 days of the anniversary date of license issuance;
or
(4) If the vending license is for sale of food products, when
the vendor violates the provisions of or fails to maintain
any license or permit required by any applicable city or state
health codes;
(5) When the license holder violates any conditions of the
license; or
(6) Abandonment, neglect, or such lack of regular occupancy
and use of the license as is inconsistent with the purposes
of this section.
(7) Fees shall be non-refundable.
(b) Procedure, notice and hearing.
(1) Prior to the suspension or revocation of a vending license
becoming effective, the [ Director ] Committee shall notify
the licensee, in writing, of the suspension or revocation,
the reasons therefor, his right to a hearing before the [
Director ] Committee if desired and that unless a request
for a hearing is filed in writing within 15 days of the date
of the notice of suspension or revocation, the suspension
or revocation shall then become effective without further
action. Such notice shall be served upon the licensee by delivering
the same personally or by registered mail, postage fully prepaid,
addressed to the licensee at his or her place of business
or residence as shown on the license application.
(2) If a hearing is requested before the [ Director ] Committee,
it shall be conducted by the [ Director or his designee] Committee
within 20 days of the request and shall be conducted in accordance
with the Local Agency Law (2 Pa.C.S.A. § 105). If following
the hearing the suspension or revocation is upheld, the reasons
therefor shall be set forth in writing and delivered to the
licensee by ordinary mail. A decision upholding or sustaining
the suspension or revocation shall result in such suspension
or revocation becoming effective and not subject to further
stay except upon order of court.
(6) Renewal.
A license issued under this section shall be valid for a
period of one (1) year from the date of issuance of the license.
Each licensee is eligible to renew his license an indefinite
number of times, but annual fee will increase to $400, upon
the application of vendor’s second and subsequent years,
and is subject to review by City Council at any time. Vendor’s
fees may not change except upon the date of their re-application.
If no substantial changes are made to the application and
revocation is not under consideration, the [ Director ] Committee
may approve the re-application. If any substantial changes
are made in the application, as assessed by the[ Director
] Committee, the application shall be submitted before the
[selection] Committee [ and judged using the same criteria
as other potential applicants ] .
(7) Regulations.
(a) The [ Director ] Committee may promulgate such regulations
as are necessary for the proper administration and enforcement
of this Article.
E. Ice Cream Trucks and non-stationary vendors that need
only to stop their vehicles from time to time to sell goods
shall be required to obtain a permit, pay a One Hundred Dollar
($100.00) fee, and provide a Certificate of Insurance from
a company acceptable to the [ Director ] Law Bureau providing
liability coverage to the applicant and naming of the City
as an additional insured. The amount of the insurance coverage
shall be One Million Dollars ($1,000,000).
F. No person shall conduct any vending activity unless first
having obtained a license or permit provided for by this section.
Each day that anyone continues to operate without a license
after having received notice of a violation either in person
or by posting at the site of the violation shall be a separate
violation punishable in accordance with Section 721.99.
Mr. Schweder recounted there have been three meetings and
hours of testimony about the proposal. Mr. Schweder noted
that after the last meeting he reviewed with Christopher Spadoni,
City Council Solicitor, a number of concerns raised by various
individuals. Mr. Schweder, commenting that if it could be
done legally he would ban vending carts from the City but
that cannot be done, pointed out there is a process that must
take place. Advising that Mr. Padilla is still not operating
legally, Mr. Schweder stated that today he looked at the application
and the dates are not correct under current law. Mr. Schweder
observed that among the concerns are that there are double
standards. Mr. Schweder stressed that under the proposed Ordinance,
the five locations for the vending carts are being arbitrarily
decided, and four of the locations are in the Historic Districts
and yet there is no review by the historic boards and the
same standards are not required of the vendors as are required
of everyone else in the Historic Districts. Mr. Schweder,
highlighting the fact that there is a way for vendors to be
legal today under current law, affirmed that section of the
Ordinance is not being amended by the proposal he is presenting.
He added that under current law there is one other vendor
who is legal because it was in the correct time span. Mr.
Schweder, explaining that under the amendment vending activity
for 21 days or less stays the same as it has always been,
pointed out that covers Musikfest, Celtic Fest, farmers market,
and so on.
Mr. Schweder advised that under the amendment there is a
committee that would derive its authority from the Ordinance
and would be comprised of the Historic Officer of the City,
the members of the Historic and Architectural Review Board
(HARB), or the members of the Historic Conservation Commission
– South Side and Mt. Airy. It defines that anyone seeking
a vending license in the wards 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 11, 12,
13, 16, and 17 of South Bethlehem and West Bethlehem goes
to the committee comprised of the Historic Officer and a board
that is made up of members of the Historic Conservation Commission
– South Side and Mt. Airy. Those seeking to place vending
carts in wards, 6, 7, 8, 9, 14, and 15 would go to a board
comprised of the Historic Officer of the City and individuals
who serve on the HARB. The criteria and all the responsibilities
for the location of the vending facilities would rest with
that committee, and the recommendation from the committee
comes back to City Council for approval. Mr. Schweder notified
the Members that, under the amendment, the responsibility
is taken away from the Director of Public Works, and it is
not limited to the five sites stated in the proposed Ordinance.
Mr. Schweder asserted that to create an Ordinance with arbitrary
numbers creates more problems than it solves. Mr. Schweder,
explaining that the amendment sets up a procedure by which
vendors will go before a board established under the amendment,
advised that vendors will be required to be in Commercial
Districts. Under current law, vendors are eligible to be anywhere
in the City under any zoning.
Mr. Schweder added that the insurance requirements will be
determined by the Law Bureau. Mr. Schweder continued on to
advise that the amendment requires a vendor to secure the
approval of the property owner, as is the case under current
law. The location and appearance of the cart, and so on must
be approved by the committee that is formed under the amendment,
and it is finally approved by City Council after that point.
Mr. Schweder, informing the Members this would apply to anyone
who presently has a vending cart, pointed out those vendors
would have to go before the committee. He noted that is according
to case law from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. Mr. Schweder
stated that the amendment offers equity to everyone and there
should not be an advantage given to those vendors who are
here, and the same standards should apply to all.
President Donchez inquired whether the other sections of
the Ordinance that was presented by the Administration are
being kept as is, and that changes are being made only in
Section 721.05. Mr. Schweder replied that is correct.
Ms. Dolan turning to Section 721.05, paragraph (a) of the
amendment, questioned whether both the Historic and Architectural
Review Board and the Historic Conservation Commission –
South Side and Mt. Airy will together choose the commercial
area where vendors can operate. Mr. Schweder, replying no,
advised that page 6 lists the wards where each committee would
have responsibility. He added that those who are on the HARB
would cover the North Side and the Northampton County sections
of the City, the Mt. Airy board would cover West Bethlehem
and Lehigh County, and the South Side in Northampton County
would be covered by the board that oversees that area. Mr.
Schweder affirmed it is not a combined board and it depends
on what location in the City the vendor is requesting to be
located. Ms. Dolan asked if either of the committees, independent
of City Council or the Administration, could designate in
any commercial area on the North Side or South Side where
vendors can be located. Mr. Schweder responded no, and affirmed
that the vendor has to first get the approval of a property
owner to locate there. In the absence of approval from a property
owner a vendor could not get a license. Mr. Dolan asked what
is meant by the word area. Mr. Schweder explained that if
a property owner on Wyandotte Street agreed to allow a vendor
to locate in front of the store, that designated area is in
Ward 1 and that board would oversee the request. However,
if a vendor does not get the approval of a property owner
then they cannot proceed. Mr. Schweder noted that the committee
on its own cannot establish any locations anywhere in the
City unilaterally. Ms. Dolan observed the amendment would
open it up to anyplace where anyone gives a vendor permission
to be located there. Mr. Schweder pointed out that is already
the case under current law. Ms. Dolan commented that she thought
the intent was to try to change that. Mr. Schweder advised
that, in accordance with his discussions with Attorney Spadoni,
if it were attempted to limit this then the City would open
itself up to legal challenge. He continued on to communicate
that with the five locations the question is how does the
committee determine when the sixth vendor makes a request
that the sixth vendor is not allowed. Mr. Schweder noted there
will probably be less vendors under the amendment but it does
not run the legal risk of having arbitrarily established a
number of vendors and locations for them to go.
Ms. Dolan asked if the five locations were chosen randomly
by the Administration. Michael Alkhal, Director of Public
Works, stating they were not chosen randomly, said the Department
first sent the engineers and inspectors to look at the sidewalks
in the downtown areas to see where it would be suitable to
conduct vending on the sidewalk if there was ample room so
that it would not interfere with pedestrians, utilities, traffic,
and so on. Numerous sites were identified on the South Side
and North Side, meetings were held with various Departments
and the sites evaluated. Based on interest that had been expressed
in vending along with the other criteria, the five sites were
selected. Mr. Alkhal, stressing these are the initial five
sites that were selected, stated they are subject to change
if the City becomes aware of other data or conditions that
would preclude staying with one or more sites, and having
to alter a location. He added that some flexibility was provided
in the event a site was inappropriately selected so that another
site could be selected. Mr. Schweder thought the concern when
reading the proposed Ordinance for the designation of specific
sites and numbers of vendors was that it is not just these
five sites since the Department found 37 sites acceptable
for vendors. Mr. Schweder continued on to say the Department
could move a site without obtaining any other authority or
having to come back to City Council. Then, if a sixth vendor
makes a request then the City would simply say they cannot
be there and that will not stand up. Mr. Schweder said he
is trying to make it a very stringent process but one that
is legal.
Ms. Dolan, affirming that copies of vending ordinances from
other cities were received, advised there are many cities
that choose the vending sites based on similar criteria including
plaza type areas. Mr. Schweder pointed out that the amendment
as it pertains to around the year vending for more than 21
days requires the removal of the vehicle that brought the
vending cart and the cart must be placed on the sidewalk.
For the special events that occur in the City including Musikfest,
or Sidewalk Art Show, since they are under 21 days they are
covered under current law, and the streets are closed during
those events.
Mr. Schweder observed that presently it is not just one parking
space that a vendor is taking up but it is two. Mr. Schweder
informed the assembly that he went to the parking lot across
from Cutters Bike Shop and saw a hot dog cart attached to
a pickup truck, another truck parked behind it with a karaoke
machine, the meters were bagged, and there were folding lawn
chairs. Mr. Schweder restated that the amendment requires
the cart to be removed from the vehicle and has to be removed
from the street since parking should not be taken away from
people who go downtown to shop.
Ms. Dolan, turning to section 2 of Standards and Requirements,
observed it would give complete oversight to a committee for
everything from the look of the vending carts, where they
operate, the cleanliness, the criminal record check of the
vendor, and so on, and the design of the carts would have
to be consistent with guidelines created by the committee.
Ms. Dolan pointed out the committee is essentially the historic
boards that will have total control. The only time City Council
enters into the equation is at the very end of the process.
Ms. Dolan highlighted the fact that a part of her proposal,
that was just turned down, gave some oversight to merchants,
the City, and experts in certain areas. Mr. Schweder informed
Ms. Dolan that the Members of Council decide all of that,
since under his amendment the recommendation comes back to
City Council the same way it does for a resident of the historic
district who wants to change a doorknob, for example. While
affirming that the committee will promulgate rules and regulations,
Mr. Schweder pointed out that the ultimate decision comes
back to City Council. President Donchez observed that in a
sense it is similar to the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness.
Mr. Schweder, while confirming it is not under that legislation,
agreed that President Donchez is right in that it is the same
type of review by a historic board as has been in existence
in the City since 1962. Ms. Dolan asked does it not give the
responsibility and the power to regulate every aspect of vending,
aside from the final vote of Council, to the committee which
has total control to take all the responsibility, create all
the regulations, analyze them, implement them, to determine
whether vending operations are quiet, how sidewalks are maintained,
monitor whether the vendor gets a certificate of insurance,
a business license, and so on. Ms. Dolan stressed that the
control for everything that was formerly done by City Departments
who are trained in the various laws is now turned over to
a committee and whose members do not necessarily have any
training, expertise, or experience with any of this. Mr. Schweder,
replying no, restated that the control rests with City Council
as it always has. Mr. Schweder added that the same people
who review the various matters in historic areas are going
to establish the criteria the way they do under current law.
Ms. Dolan queried whether Mr. Schweder believes that the members
of the historic boards who were chosen for their knowledge
and commitment to the historic district, and whose expertise
is in architecture and history will have an equal understanding
of every commercial area in the City from Pembroke Road to
Broad Street and are qualified to do everything from checking
criminal records, to safety operations, to appropriateness
of neighborhoods. Mr. Schweder, replying yes, said he thinks
they are the fairest people to do this with respect to bringing
uniformity to what is done in the City. Ms. Dolan inquired
whether under the amendment in a Commercial District where
the owner of the building or premises is also the owner of
the restaurant every restaurant could have a vending cart
if approval was given by the committee. Mr. Schweder noted
they can do that now. Ms. Dolan observed they can do that
now by going through the City Departments. Mr. Schweder advised
he is not changing that.
In response to Ms. Dolan, Mr. Schweder advised that current
law does not change and the filing of an application with
the committee is for vendors not covered under Section 721.06.
Mr. Schweder affirmed to President Donchez that the certificate
of insurance is to be submitted to the Law Bureau, as is the
case with all certificates of insurance for festivals and
events, etc. Ms. Dolan asked if the committee can determine
where businesses wish to operate. Mr. Schweder, replying no,
said the responsibility rests with the seven Members of Council
as it does in the other proposals that come before the City.
Mr. Schweder notified Ms. Dolan that the committee derives
its authority from the Ordinance, and there will be uniformity.
The same people who make the determinations in the neighborhoods
with regard to Certificates of Appropriateness are going to
continue to do so under the Ordinance. Mr. Schweder explained
to Ms. Dolan that the committee members will be chosen by
City Council from those who are already members of the HARB
or the Historic Conservation Commission – South Bethlehem
and Mt. Airy. Ms. Dolan pointed out that members of the HARB
stated they are against vending. Mr. Schweder commented that
is not relevant to what is before Council.
Ms. Dolan, turning to Operation Standards, questioned whether
the committee will establish the hours of the vendors until
Council gives their approval. Mr. Schweder stated the committee
has the right to make a determination to send to City Council
for review and approval, and Council can make changes to the
recommendation as is current procedure. Mr. Schweder continued
on to affirm that once the committee makes their recommendation,
they report it to Council, and Council has to put a Resolution
on the Agenda. Ms. Dolan asked how does Council have any say
over the regulations. Mr. Schweder explained that the rules
are promulgated and made by the committee, and a recommendation
comes to Council, and Council decides on the vendor. The committee
can only grant the license after it is approved by Council.
President Donchez added that City Council has the final say.
Ms. Dolan, turning to Operations Standards, paragraph (3)
(i) was informed by Mr. Schweder that the language in the
paragraph that was added is current law.
Ms. Dolan inquired about the meaning of the word premises.
Attorney Spadoni explained that it means the area, it does
not necessarily have to be a building, and it could mean lot.
Attorney Spadoni added that the language tracts Section 721.06.
Ms. Dolan asked if lessee means someone who has permission
or who is renting and paying money to the legal title owner
to operate in front of the premises. Attorney Spadoni, indicating
that is correct, stated it is people who have the authority,
whether apparent or expressed, and the permission of the property
owner. Ms. Dolan queried whether passage of the amendment
means that someone can vend in any Commercial area as long
as an individual knows someone in a Commercial area, or owns
a commercial property, someone gives the individual permission,
or the individual is willing to pay money to do so. Attorney
Spadoni, responding yes, said he does not think there is any
indication it must be tied to compensation but the person
must have the permission of the fee owner of the property.
Mr. Schweder, commenting that he would have made it more stringent,
noted that in the two vendor applications the approval came
from the renter of the building but the renter did not ask
the owner of the building. Mr. Schweder continued on to point
out that section of current law is not changing.
Ms. Dolan, turning to paragraph (4) License Selection, paragraph
(b) (1) (4) pertaining to denial of an application if within
the past 10 years the applicant has been convicted of selling,
offering to sell or possession with intent to sell a controlled
substance, asked if the members of the committees have access
to this information. Attorney Spadoni, replying they would
receive that information from the applicant, noted it could
be a question posed by the committee to the applicant, and
part of the application. Mr. Schweder stated that is the language
in the current Ordinance. Ms. Dolan explained she is asking
the question because the people who will be doing this work
as proposed in the amendment are different than those who
would have been doing the work under the current Ordinance
and revised proposal. In the past, the work of figuring out
if someone were convicted of a crime was the job of City workers
and not the job of members of the HARB or of the Historic
Conservation Commission. Mr. Schweder stated this language
is part of how an applicant applies for a license so they
have to show the background checks. Mr. Schweder, continuing
on to say this will not be a day to day operation of the committee,
observed this is not something that will have a large number
of applicants. Mr. Schweder advised those are requirements
in the proposal that was forwarded by the Law Bureau. Mr.
Schweder affirmed to President Donchez that it would be part
of the application process.
Ms. Dolan expressed her belief that the amendment will make
it practically impossible or improbable for anyone to vend.
Ms. Dolan continued on to observe it could also have a different
result, if the economy continues as it is and more people
want to start a vending business because they lost their jobs,
in a huge number of applications. Ms. Dolan pointed out, in
that case, all of the work that would have been done by City
staff who have education and years of experience related to
the standards would instead be done through the process of
a committee comprised of members of the HARB or of the Historic
Conservation Commission chosen by Council based solely on
their experience with historical review in very specific neighborhoods.
Ms. Dolan highlighted the fact that this is a committee that
is not the HARB or the Historic Conservation Commission but
is made up of members of the HARB or the Historic Conservation
Commission. Consequently, Ms. Dolan said City Council does
not get a vote on who is on the committee, unless when voting
on the members of the HARB or Historic Conservation Commission
there is an understanding and it is written into the Ordinance
and it is known that Council is also voting on the committee
that is in charge of every aspect, except for the final vote,
of establishing, choosing, and regulating the sidewalk vendors.
Ms. Dolan continued on to say every single ward of the City
could potentially be impacted. Ms. Dolan thought this is a
very drastic move on what could be discussed instead, if the
amendment does not pass, that is the locations. Ms. Dolan
wanted City Council to go back and look again at the chosen
locations based on what has been heard from the citizens.
Mr. Mowrer called for the question.
Mr. Schweder stated that if the amendment passes then Ms.
Dolan and anyone else can debate it again tonight on First
Reading of the Ordinance and then again on consideration of
the Bill on Final Passage.
Mr. Schweder seconded Mr. Mowrer’s motion to vote
on the amendment, and end debate.
Voting AYE on the motion: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Leeson, Mr.
Mowrer, Mr. Schweder, Mr. Donchez, 5. Voting NAY: Ms. Dolan
and Mr. Reynolds, 2. The motion passed.
Voting AYE on the Amendment: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Leeson,
Mr. Mowrer, Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Schweder, and Mr. Donchez, 6.
Voting NAY: Ms. Dolan, 1. Amendment 6 passed.
Ms. Dolan, expressing that this is dangerous, said she does
not think this is what the merchants wanted. Ms. Dolan advised
that in her proposal, she had the involvement of the business
district, merchants, and Historic and Architectural Review
Board on the committee. Ms. Dolan stressed if the amended
Bill becomes law then everyone is shut out except for members
of the HARB and the Historic Conservation Commission –
South Bethlehem and Mt. Airy, and at the very end City Council,
although she thought it was unclear as to exactly what City
Council can actually approve. Ms. Dolan expressed her belief
that Council can only approve the vendor choices, since the
amendment says nothing about City Council approving the regulations,
or other matters, and stressed there is no oversight. Ms.
Dolan wondered whether the HARB and the Historic Conservation
Commission – South Bethlehem and Mt. Airy knows what
it is getting itself into. Ms. Dolan, emphasizing it would
be better to look at the locations, stated to her that is
the issue. Ms. Dolan communicated that, rather than having
a committee that gives a voice to the merchants and the business
districts, and utilizing the services of City workers who
are paid a salary to review such matters, the amendment takes
them out of the process. Ms. Dolan remarked that the amendment
leaves the two historic boards to be involved in the process,
and Council votes yes or no on the recommended choices.
Mr. Reynolds did not necessarily think the amendment would
end vending in the City but it would end unregulated vending.
Mr. Reynolds thought that, as with other matters that go before
the Historic Board or Historic Conservation Commission, if
the Board or Commission decided to recommend or not recommend
something and it comes before City Council, then it still
gives the opportunity for the Members of Council to make changes.
Mr. Reynolds communicated that other solutions to solving
the problem were fraught with different problems, whether
auction, lottery or committee, for example. Mr. Reynolds observed
that the compromise that Mr. Schweder and Attorney Spadoni
tried to reach is one that allows for entrepreneurship in
the City while still maintaining the character and dignity
of the downtown historic districts. Mr. Reynolds continued
on to say that all believe in the idea of entrepreneurship,
and pointed out that the Mayor has often talked about the
support from the City of those who invest here. Mr. Reynolds
highlighted the fact that there are not a lot of chain stores
in the downtowns since there are a lot of people who live
and operate their businesses in the City. Mr. Reynolds stated
that the amendment is a compromise that allows people to enter
the vending business, and gives some responsibility to the
HARB and the Historic Conservation Commission – South
Bethlehem and Mt. Airy, but at the same time giving responsibility
and the final say to City Council as to whether or not it
is something that will fit with what the downtowns want. Mr.
Reynolds, stating he will be voting yes, said he is happy
to hear that, in this case, business owners are amenable to
government regulation.
President Donchez, acknowledging that the issue has been
debated for many hours over the past months, observed there
is not a perfect Bill. However, President Donchez communicated
that the amendment in Section 721.05 improves upon the Bill.
President Donchez thought the amendment still permits vendors,
and gives the responsibility to the HARB and the Historic
Conservation Commission – South Bethlehem and Mt. Airy
versus the committee that was discussed previously in the
amendment that did not pass, and the final decision is still
with City Council. President Donchez did not think the Historic
Board and Commission will consider as many vendor licenses
as historic and architectural review issues over a period
of twelve months. President Donchez expressed that the amendment
tightens up the existing Ordinance. President Donchez, commenting
that he is looking at what is best for Bethlehem as opposed
to other cities, thought the proposed law will be a better
law for Bethlehem.
Voting AYE on Bill No. 37 – 2009, as Amended: Mrs.
Belinski, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Schweder,
and Mr. Donchez, 6. Voting NAY: Ms. Dolan, 1. Bill No. 37
– 2009 was declared passed on First Reading.
11. RESOLUTIONS
A. Approving Auditors – 2009, 2010, and 2011 Audits
Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Leeson sponsored Resolution No. 2009-204
that approved Maher Duessel to provide the following audits
at the listed rates for 2009, 2010 and 2011: General Purpose
Financial Statements, Single Audit Reports, Water Fund, Sewer
Fund, Bethlehem Area Public Library, Bethlehem Parking Authority,
Bethlehem Authority, and 911 Fund.
Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer,
Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Schweder, and Mr. Donchez, 7. The Resolution
passed.
B. Authorizing Utility Relocation Reimbursement Request
– PennDot – Route 378
Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Leeson sponsored Resolution No. 2009-205
that, in accordance with the requirements of the Pennsylvania
Department of Transportation Design Manual – Part 5,
Chapter 3.2, authorized the submission of a Utility Relocation
Reimbursement Request for the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation
to provide a fixed per centum reimbursement to the City of
Bethlehem for all costs incurred in relocating the City’s
water facilities located in the public right of way and affected
by S.R. 378 Section RMP necessitated by the Pennsylvania Department
of Transportation Highway Improvement in Northampton County.
The Resolution also authorized the execution of the Utility
Reimbursement Agreement.
Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer,
Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Schweder, and Mr. Donchez, 7. The Resolution
passed.
Considering Resolutions as a Group
Mr. Mowrer and Mr. Reynolds moved to consider Resolutions
11 C through 11 E as a group. Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms.
Dolan, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Schweder,
and Mr. Donchez, 7. The motion passed.
C. Certificate of Appropriateness – 359 Tenth Avenue
Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Mowrer sponsored Resolution No. 2009-206
that granted a Certificate of Appropriateness to install two
bronze historic plaques at 359 Tenth Avenue.
D. Certificate of Appropriateness – 1112 Prospect Avenue
Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Mowrer sponsored Resolution No. 2009-207
that granted a Certificate of Appropriateness to construct
a small addition at 1112 Prospect Avenue.
E. Certificate of Appropriateness – 819-831 East Fourth
Street
Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Mowrer sponsored Resolution No. 2009-208
that granted a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a
sign above the storefronts at 819-831 East Fourth Street.
Voting AYE on Resolutions 11 C through 11 E: Mrs. Belinski,
Ms. Dolan, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Schweder,
and Mr. Donchez, 7. The Resolutions passed.
12. NEW BUSINESS.
Committee Meeting Announcement
Chairman Leeson announced a Finance Committee meeting on
Wednesday, December 9, 2009 at 4:30 PM in the Mayor’s
Conference Room on the following: Line of Credit – Sewer
Capital Fund and Water Capital Fund; Refinancing 1998 Bond
Issue; Transfer of Funds – Sewer General – Professional
Services; and other matters.
13. COURTESY OF THE FLOOR
2010 Budget Revenues; Subsidizing Loop Bus
Robert Pfenning, 2830 Linden Street, affirming that he distributed
to the Members of Council a copy of page 6 of the Proposed
2010 Budget that lists Miscellaneous Revenues, requested that
a Member of Council ask questions on his behalf at the Budget
Hearing on December 2, 2009 about the following: $382,460
Cash Transfer to Water Fund to clarify how it is a revenue
if it is an expense; Total of the amount to be paid under
the Suburban Stakeholder’s Agreement; and why the Escrow
fund must be used. Mr. Pfenning, referring to the amendment
proposed by Mr. Leeson that was passed pertaining to use of
additional Host Fees that were not budgeted, noted the City
received about $335,000 extra this year. Mr. Pfenning, commenting
he does not think Council has been approached about spending
the additional funds, said perhaps that could reduce this
year’s Escrow account. Mr. Pfenning, noting that City
Council is being asked to approve the expenditure of $180,000
for the Loop shuttle bus, said he is not sure what the bus
line is supposed to accomplish, and communicated it is important
as a matter of public policy that there is a clear public
purpose for subsidizing the bus line.
Vendor Ordinance; Outdoor Dining in Historic Districts
Bruce Haines, 65 W. Market Street, thought a good compromise
solution was reached by involving the HARB Board and the Historic
Conservation Commission in the process of the vending applications.
Mr. Haines, turning to Section 721.06 - Sidewalk Sales and
Outdoor Dining, suggested that the HARB Board be involved
in the process of outdoor dining because there are currently
no standards for facilities for outdoor dining. Pointing out
that it is not unlike looking at architectural standards for
buildings, signs, and paint, etc., Mr. Haines said it seems
there should be a review for outdoor dining furniture and
encouraged Council to look into the matter.
Choses In Action
Bill Scheirer, 1890 Eaton Avenue, recalled that the phrase
choses in action was discussed previously and informed the
assembly that he researched the matter, including the history
of the phrase. He said the meaning of the phrase is that it
is a thing that could be litigated.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:25 p.m.
|
