REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING · 5/16/2016 · Fodor explained the . budget process and the request by the DPO for the 2 yearpast s, finances, and the City’s support of the DPO. Two

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, MAY 16, 2016 - 7:30 PM

EXECUTIVE SESSION IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING President Paul Hach called the regular meeting to order. City Council convened in a regular meeting in

Council Chambers, with the following in attendance: Paul Hach, Christine Shoop, Mike DeLeone, Katie Jenkins, Jim Fodor, Lori DiNallo, City Manager Anthony Carson, Assistant City Manager Doug Lewis, Law Director Joseph Gurley, Fire Chief Mark Mlachak, Lieutenant Dan Waterman, Finance Director Andy Unetic, Water Superintendent George Ginnis, Public Works Director Brian Belfiore, Electric Supervisor Jeff McHugh, Economic Development Director Cathy Bieterman, City Planner Lynn White, City Engineer Leanne Exum, Parks and Recreation Director Michelle LaPuma and Clerk of Council, Tara Grimm. Tom Fitzgerald was absent.

President Hach requested visitors please turn off their cell phones and other electronic devices.

Councilman Mike DeLeone gave the invocation. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. Motion by Mr. DeLeone, seconded by Mrs. Shoop to approve the meeting minutes for May 2, 2016 and

May 5, 2016 as submitted. All members answered “Yes”. Motion carried. Motion by Mr. DeLeone, seconded by Mrs. Jenkins to Appoint Ms. Randi Turner to the Housing Task

Force. All members answered “Yes”. Motion carried. Mr. Hach stated “we will now recognize Visitors and to please raise your hand if you wish to speak.

When called upon, please use the podium, clearly state your name and address into the microphone, and limit your comments to 3 minutes. Any dialogue must be conducted through me as President of Council, although your comments or questions can be addressed to Council, the Administration, or both.” Six people wished to speak.

Mr. Ray Sternot of 346 Birchwood Lane read from his email to Council and also thanked Chief Powalie

for the police presence that his officers provided at the Heisley Park Yard Sale this past week (See Attachment #1)

Mr. Andrew Deleal of Rockwood Drive spoke about the garbage pickup with the new contractor and the

effects it would have on him as a landlord. Mr. Angelo Cimaglio of 477 Owego Street complimented the Cemetery Department on how nice the

cemeteries are looking; he questioned the process of voting during Executive Sessions; asked about the status of Ohio Checkbook, and the contract between the Senior Center and the YMCA; and mentioned how switching to Republic Service for garbage will save a resident $60.00 a year.

Charles Stenn of 60 Chester Street, President of the Lake Metropolitan Housing Authority (LMHA) and

Commander of the American Legion offered a solution to the Senior Center issue by placing a levy on the ballot and/or combining the Parks and Recreation Department with the Senior Center.

Arlene Becks of 321 W. Eagle Street expressed her concerns with Channel 12 and offered information

and a contact for AT&T Uverse; questioned the City’s choice of going with Republic Services vs. Waste Management; requested an update on the City changing over to the County for telephone services; expressed her concerns with the Chicago Title building being an eyesore; and also had concerns about the Senior Center joining up with the YMCA.

Vince Crawford of Waste Management at 12340 Auburn Road explain the pick-up procedure for toter

collection, discussed their lowered bag service, the new contractor not including yard waste and grass clippings, thanked the City for years they were the City’s waste provider, and thanked members of Council.

Mr. Carson gave a presentation regarding the new refuse contractor, the bid results and the bidding

process, as well as his disappointment in Waste Management’s professionalism post-bid. (See Attachment #2) Both Mr. Fodor and Mr. DeLeone commented on the transparency of the entire process of finding a new

waste hauler, including numerous discussions during Council meetings. There was no Legislation presented this evening.

Under Unfinished Business were three (3) items: (1) Sidewalk Replacement Program – Mrs. DiNallo referred to Mrs. Jenkins who stated the Housing Task Force will be presenting a recommendation to Council at the next meeting. (2) Channel 12 - Mrs. Jenkins updated residents that a gentleman from GeaugaTV reached out to us and worked with Mrs. Grimm to troubleshoot our issue since he too had experienced the same issue with TWC’s PEG Channel. Council is discussing the purchase of an inexpensive piece of equipment which will help the sound quality for now, but does not fix the issue of the older, irreplaceable piece of broadcasting equipment

2 5.16.16

should it fail. (3) Council Procedures - Mike DeLeone asked we wait until full Council is available to discuss this matter further. Under New Business was the Downtown Painesville Organization. Mr. Fodor explained the budget process and the request by the DPO for the past 2 years, finances, and the City’s support of the DPO. Two years ago, the DPO requested a $6,000 increase to the City’s contribution to the DPO, from $22,000/ year to $28,000/year. The City pays for this expense from the General Fund. Mr. DeLeone requested Mr. David Polakowski give a quick presentation regarding the DPO and the reason for the increase and then asked that a Resolution be brought forward at the next Council meeting in order for Council to vote on the increase. The Presentation to Council was given by Fire Chief Mark Mlachak regarding the increase in number of calls due to heroine overdosing. (See Attachment #3) Mr. Gurley did not have an Administrative Report. Mr. Carson gave a brief Administrative Report. He commended the 2 road crews who have been working on patching the roads. He also referred to Mr. Unetic for an update on the Ohio Checkbook program. Mr. Unetic stated our financials were sent to the State Treasurer for uploading, which should take about 2-3 weeks for the State to complete. Under Clerk of Council Correspondences, Mrs. Grimm stated the next regular Council meeting will be held on Monday, June 6, 7:30 pm; DPO’s Friday Night Car Cruises began May 13th in Veteran’s Park at 5:00 pm and go through the end of September; Farmer’s Market begins Thursday, May 19th in Veterans Park from 12pm – 4:00 pm, MotorMouth food truck will be serving lunch; Bathtub Races are Friday May 27th on Main Street from 5:00 pm – 8:00 pm; The Economic Development Department is accepting applications for the photography contest and Art in the Park. Contact Barb Monacelli for more details. Mrs. Grimm also clarified and updated the upcoming committee meetings:

• Housing Task Force Meeting Tuesday, June 14th at 6:15 pm in 2nd Floor Conf. Rm.

The Clerk of Council asked Mr. Hach for permission to discuss Council Rules of Procedures Rule 7 & 8, which are posted on the podium in regards to Visitors. Closing Comments.

Mrs. Jenkins made a Motion to Excuse Mr. Fitzgerald from tonight’s meeting, seconded by Mr. DeLeone.

All members answered “Yes”. Motion carried. She congratulated the graduating class of 2016 and reminded residents to be cautious of the children now that school is out of session for the summer.

Mrs. DiNallo also reminded residents to not only watch for children playing but also be mindful of the

adults out playing within the City as well. Mrs. Shoop stated she has not received any emails yet from any residents, including those in her Ward,

regarding the scheduling of a 2nd Town Hall meeting with Mr. DeLeone Mr. DeLeone reminded residents he will be announcing the next co-hosted Town Hall meeting at the next

Council meeting. Mr. Fodor discussed the opening of the new Painesville Dekhockey rink in Kiwanis Recreation Park. Mr. Hach expressed his pride in presenting Proclamations and letters of recognition to the Valedictorians

of Harvey High School at their awards ceremony last Wednesday.

At 8:40 p.m., hearing no further business, President Hach asked for a motion to convene to Executive Session. Mrs. Shoop made a Motion to Adjourn to Executive Session in accordance with the City’s Charter Article II, Section 6, Item 1: to consider the appointment, employment, dismissal, discipline, promotion, demotion or compensation of an employee or official of the city, seconded by Mr. Fitzgerald.

On roll call, Mrs. Shoop, Mrs. DiNallo, Mrs. Jenkins, Mr. DeLeone, Mr. Fodor, and Mr. Hach answered

“Yes”. Motion carried. Mr. Fitzgerald was absent. At 9:39 p.m., President Hach asked for a Motion to Adjourn from Executive Session and reconvene the

Regular meeting. Motion to Adjourn from Executive Session by Mr. DeLeone, seconded by Mrs. Shoop. On roll call, Mrs. DiNallo, Mrs. Jenkins, Mr. DeLeone, Mr. Fodor, Mrs. Shoop, and Mr. Hach answered

“Yes”. Motion carried. Mr. Fitzgerald was absent.

3 5.16.16

Motion to Adjourn made by Mrs. Jenkins seconded by Mr. DeLeone. All members answered “yes”.

Motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m.

__________________________ ________________________________ Tara Grimm, CMC Paul W. Hach II Clerk of Council President of Council

1

Grimm, Tara

From: Ray Sternot <[email protected]>Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 5:57 PMTo: Grimm, TaraSubject: Proposed Comments

Tara, Here are my proposed comments for the meeting this evening. I believe them to be less than 3 minutes. Ray Sternot 346 Birchwood Lane Painesville, Ohio 44077-6136 [email protected] 440-376-7068 Cell 440-352-7218 Office

Comments to Council May 16, 2016

Ray Sternot

346 Birchwood Lane

Painesville

As a Painesville resident I am disappointed with the process and transparency surrounding the

trash bid. I believe that there could have been more of an open forum for residents to provide

input on the bid creation and, once received, comment on the bid details prior to the actual bid

winner’s selection.

Members of Council have said that they asked for resident’s input at the council meeting. But

was that sufficient? In the past members of Council have held town hall meetings on a variety

of other issues. But was there any informative town hall meetings held for the trash

bid? Why not? Wouldn’t that have made the process more transparent? Likewise, there was

ATTACHMENT #1

Page 1 of 2

2

no town hall meeting prior to any acceptance. Is that adequate transparency and did it provide

for sufficient input by residents?

On one positive note, I understand that tonight residents will be able to see the bid results and

hear why one bid might be better than another. But, it’s after the fact and I believe a bit

late! That being the case, I don’t believe it will provide a whole lot of value to residents!.

Why? I suspect that any comments/complaints that residents will provide will fall on deaf ears

because the contract is a done deal. For me, I’m disappointed that the yard/grass waste won’t

be collected weekly like it has in the past. Others may not like that the price of bag service for

company A’s bag service will be twice as much as company B’s proposal! And, others may

question why bulk client costs are so low!

So, residents will pay the resulting trash bills and live with the contract for the next 7 years

without having any real the ability to comment before it is finalized! We are being served

roast beef and we’ll like it! Is this process transparent enough? Or should this type of contract

process be changed to provide for resident comments prior to being cast in concrete?

ATTACHMENT #1

Page 2 of 2

COMPANY

Republic Unlimited Price

Bag Price

Recycling Price

Unlimited & Recycling Price

Alternate 1 Unlimited (Bulk Once a Month)

Individual Customer Cost Unlimited Price

Bag Price


Total Customer Unlimited Price

(20 Accounts)

Bag Price

(351 Accounts)


(4,268 Accounts)

Total Contract Earnings

_R_e~p_ub_l_ic _______ 7 Year Contract Total Earnings

10 Year Contract Total Earnings

City of Painesville

2016 Refuse Collection and Disposal Bids

April 25, 2016 Bid Opening

Year 1

15.04

4.25

2.25

17.29

16.54

Year 1

180.48

51.00

207.48

3,609.60

17,901.00

885,524.64

907,035.24

$ 6,965,491.68

$ 10,358,907.00

Year 2 Year 3

15.49 15.96

4.35 4.50

2.32 2.39

17.81 18.35

17.04 17.55

Year 2 Year 3

185.88 191.52

52.20 54.00

213.72 220.20

3,717.60 3,830.40

18,322.20 18,954.00

912,156.96 939,813.60

934,196.76 962,598.00

Price Per Month

Year4 Years Year 6

16.43 16.93 17.52

4.65 4.80 4.95

2.46 2.53 2.62

18.89 19.46 20.14

18.07 18.62 19.27

Price Per Year

Year4 Year 5 Year 6

197.16 203.16 210.24

55.80 57.60 59.40

226.68 233.52 241.68

3,943.20 4,063.20 4,204.80

19,585.80 20,217.60 20,849.40

967,470.24 996,663.36 1,031,490.24

990,999.24 1,020,944.16 1,056,544.44

Option Option Option

Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10

18.13 18.86 19.61 20.40

5.10 5.30 5.50 5.75

2.71 2.82 2.93 3.05

20.84 21.68 22.54 23.45

19.94 20.74 21.57 22.43


Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10

217.56 226.32 235.32 244.80

61.20 63.60 66.00 69.00

250.08 260.16 270.48 281.40

4,351.20 4,526.40 4,706.40 4,896.00

21,481.20 22,323.60 23,166.00 24,219.00

1,067,341.44 1,110,362.88 1,154,408.64 1,044,806.40

1,093,173.84 1,137,212.88 1,182,281.04 1,073,921.40

ATTACHMENT #2

Page 1 of 5

COMPANY

Waste Management Unlimited Price

Bag Price

Recycling Price




Bag Price



{20 Accounts)

Bag Price

(351 Accounts)


(4,268 Accounts)


Waste Management 7 Year Contract Total Earnings


City of Painesville



Year 1

14.99

2.25

3.00

17.99

22.00

Yearl

179.88

27.00

215.88

3,597.60

9,477.00

921,375.84

934,450.44

$ 7,052,267.28

$ 10,401,306.96

Year 2 Year 3

15.36 15.75

2.31 2.36

3.08 3.15

18.44 18.90

23.00 24.00

Year 2 Year 3

184.32 189.00

27.72 28.32

221.28 226.80

3,686.40 3,780.00

9,729.72 9,940.32

944,423.04 967,982.40

957,839.16 981,702.72

Price Per Month

Year4 Year 5 Year6

16.14 16.55 16.96

2.42 2.48 2.55

3.23 3.31 3.39

19.37 19.86 20.35

25.00 26.00 27.00

Price Per Year

Year4 Year 5 Year 6

193.68 198.60 203.52

29.04 29.76 30.60

232.44 238.32 244.20

3,873.60 3,972.00 4,070.40

10,193.04 10,445.76 10,740.60

992,053.92 1,017,149.76 1,042,245.60

1,006,120.56 1,031,567.52 1,057,056.60


Year7 Year 8 Year9 Year 10

17.38 18.16 18.97 19.83

2.61 2.72 3.00 3.20

3.48 3.63 3.80 3.97

20.86 21.79 22.77 23.80

28.00 29.00 30.00 31.00


Year 7 Years Year9 Year 10

208.56 217.92 227.64 237.96

31.32 32.64 36.00 38.40

250.32 261.48 273.24 285.60

4,171.20 4,358.40 4,552.80 4,759.20

10,993.32 11,456.64 12,636.00 13,478.40

1,068,365.76 1,115,996.64 1,166,188.32 1,015,613.28

1,083,530.28 1,131,811.68 1,183,377.12 1,033,850.88

ATTACHMENT #2

Page 2 of 5

COMPANY Year 1

Rumpke Unlimited Price 16.82

Bag Price 1.75

Recycling Price 4.67

Unlimited & Recycling Price 21.49


I Year 1

Individual Customer Cost Unlimited Price 201.84

Bag Price 21.00

Unlimited & Recycling Price 257.88


(20 Accounts) 4,036.80

Bag Price

{351 Accounts) 7,371.00


(4,268 Accounts) 1,100,631.84

Total Contract Earnings 1,112,039.64

Rumpke 7 Year Contract Total Earnings $ 8,520,088.80

City of Painesville



Price Per Month

Year 2 Year 3 Year4 Year 5 Year 6

17.32 17.85 18.38 18.93 19.50

1.80 1.85 1.91 1.97 2.03

4.81 4.95 5.10 5.25 5.41

22.13 22.80 23.48 24.18 24.91

NO BID

Price Per Year

Year 2 Year 3 Year4 Year 5 Year 6

207.84 214.20 220.56 227.16 234.00

21.60 22.20 22.92 23.64 24.36

265.56 273.60 281.76 290.16 298.92

4,156.80 4,284.00 4,411.20 4,543.20 4,680.00

7,581.60 7,792.20 8,044.92 8,297.64 8,550.36

1,133,410.08 1,167,724.80 1,202,551.68 1,238,402.88 1,275, 790.56

1,145,148.48 1,179,801.00 1,215,007.80 1,251,243. 72 1,289,020.92


Year 7 Year 8 Year9 YearlO

20.09 Negotiated Negotiated Negotiated





Year7 Year 8 Year9 Year 10

241.08 N/A N/A N/A

25.08 N/A N/A N/A

307.92 N/A N/A N/A

4,821.60 N/A N/A N/A

8,803.08 N/A N/A N/A

1,314,202.56 N/A N/A N/A

1,327,827.24 . N/A N/A N/A

ATTACHMENT #2

Page 3 of 5

COMPANY

Kimble Unlimited Price

Bag Price

Recycling Price




Bag Price



(20 Accounts)

Bag Price

(351 Accounts)


(4,268 Accounts)


Kimble 7 Year Contract Total Earnings


Year 1

24.99

5.86

24.99

25.4S

Year 1

299.88

70.32

299.88

5,997.60

24,682.32

1,279,887.84 .

1,310,567.76

$ 10,033,554.36

$ 15,200,853.36

City of Painesville



Price Per Month

Year 2 Year 3 Year4 Years Year 6

25.68 26.38 27.11 28.06 29.04

6.02 6.19 6.36 6.58 6.81

INCLUDED IN PRICES ABOVE

25.68 26.38 27.11 28.06 29.04

26.15 26.87 27.61 28.57 29.57

Price Per Year

Year 2 Year 3 Year4 Years Year 6

308.16 316.56 325.32 336.72 348.48

72.24 74.28 76.32 78.96 81.72

308.16 316.56 325.32 336.72 348.48

6,163.20 6,331.20 6,506.40 6,734.40 6,969.60

25,356.24 26,072.28 26,788.32 27,714.96 28,683.72

1,315,226.88 1,351,078.08 1,388,465.76 1,437,120.96 1,487,312.64

1,346,746.32 1,383,481.56 1,421, 760.48 1,471,570.32 1,522,965.96


Year7 Year 8 Year 9 YearlO

30.06 31.41 32.82 34.30

7.05 7.37 7.70 8.04

30.06 31.41 32.82 34.30

30.61 31.99 33.43 34.93


Year7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10

360.72 376.92 393.84 411.60

84.60 88.44 92.40 96.48

360.72 376.92 393.84 411.60

7,214.40 7,538.40 7,876.80 8,232.00

29,694.60 31,042.44 32,432.40 33,864.48

1,539,552.96 1,608,694.56 1,680,909.12 1, 756, 708.80

1,576,461.96 1,647,275.40 1,721,218.32 1,798,805.28

ATTACHMENT #2

Page 4 of 5

City of Painesville Total Bid Specs7 year Contract Total Earnings

Republic $ 6,965,491.68Waste Management $ 7,052,267.28Rumpke $ 8,520,088.80Kimble $ 10,033,554.36

ATTACHMENT #2

Page 5 of 5

ATTACHMENT #3

Page 1 of 7

ATTACHMENT #3

Page 2 of 7

24 36 23 28

825 833880

975

2013 2014 2015 2016

ATTACHMENT #3

Page 3 of 7

13

24

18

77

2013 2014 2015 2016

ATTACHMENT #3

Page 4 of 7

ATTACHMENT #3

Page 5 of 7

www.lakeopiatetaskforce.orgwww.helpthatworks.us

www.na.orgwww.drugabuse.gov

ATTACHMENT #3

Page 6 of 7

http://www.lakeopiatetaskforce.org/

http://www.helpthatworks.us/

http://www.na.org/

http://www.drugabuse.gov/

ATTACHMENT #3

Page 7 of 7

Documents

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING · 5/16/2016 · Fodor explained the . budget process and the request by the DPO for the 2 yearpast s, finances, and the City’s support of the DPO. Two