16) To study feasibility of hiring ‘headhunter’ to follow through with results of Buxton report. (06/07)

• Eng. Div. and Parks & Rec Dept to work on flooding issues at Admore and Suzanne Drives (3/06)

Streets, Sidewalks & Utilities committee, March 8, 2006:

• Possible increase in fines/penalties against frat & sor. houses in locations where not permitted (8/06)

Land Use Committee - Aug. 2, 2006

Motion made by Mr. Schultz, seconded by Ms. Oswitch.

Mr. Bargerstock said it is an interesting situation that they continually ignore zoning enforcement with this issue. He said a landlord from Kent visited him, and expressed his disgust at a boarding house next door to him. He said he cannot prove it, nor can he get quality tenants in his rental, and does not know what to do. He said the landlord claims to have visited the zoning and building departments. He said it is an outrage that this occurs repeatedly, with no teeth in their enforcement.

Ms. Oswitch said her neighborhood has gone around with this for a long time. She said they should follow the existing ordinances, and if they do not do so, the City needs to do something about it. Ms. Oswitch said another comment made by the Planning Commission was that the location was okay since it was not a residential neighborhood as it was located on Main Street. Ms. Oswitch pointed out that all of the backyards abut single-family residential homes. She said they did not care, nor did they care about the staff’s recommendations. Ms. Oswitch said they have to help the neighbors in the neighborhood.

Mr. Wilson said he has to defend staff at this time. He said a set of letters grew up on a Saturday, and on the following Monday, when the City visited, the letters were removed. He said they move very quickly, and do try to correct the problem.

The motion carried by a voice vote of 8-0-1, with Mr. Ferrara abstaining.

• Pickups other than during Spring Cleanup (08/06)

Motion made by Ms. Oswitch, seconded by Ms. Gavriloff.

Ms. Oswitch said at her neighborhood meeting, the point was made that the ends of the leases occur at the end of June and/or in July, which does not coincide with Spring Cleanup. She explained that because of the law, they are unable to do anything right away, and the trash may be there for two to three weeks. Ms. Oswitch said the residents do not want to look at it and/or get rodents from it, and the Service Director thought they could analyze whether a change would be feasible.

Mr. Bargerstock said he has seen as similar problem in his neighborhood. He said that he assumed they were billed on the amount of tonnage, and suggested if it was not of a cost to the City they may be able to schedule trash pickup two or three times annually.

Mr. Kuhar said he knows there is a problem, adding that he was not aware that the annual spring clean up was designed to be a free trash service. He said it is nice to take advantage of it, but there are times when he has to pay for the removal of couches.

At this time, the motion carried by a voice vote of 6-0.

• Law Director to provide options for penalties for unlicensed houses and occupants. (09/06)

Land Use Committee, Sept. 6, 2006

Motion made by Mr. Bargerstock. He said they should be able to cite the perpetrators, and the motion was seconded by Ms. Gavriloff.

Hearing no discussion, the motion carried by a voice vote.

• Home occupation possible revisions for econ. dev. purposes (09/06)

Regular Council, Sept. 20, 2006

MOTION TO REFER TO THE ADMINISTRATION THE ISSUE OF THE HOME OCCUPATION ORDINANCE FOR REVIEW AND SUGGESTED CHANGES WITH RESPECT TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE COMMUNITY.

Motion made by Mr. Schultz, seconded by Mr. Ferrara.

Mr. Schultz said in the last two weeks, he has seen shows on television. He said a lot of the jobs that went to India are coming back to housewives. He said their ordinances should reflect and allow this kind of employment, adding his motion was saying it is up to the Administration to see if there is anything they would recommend.

Mr. Wilson said he would vote against the motion. He said he did not want every garage to become a business or an apartment. He said using a main structure is fine, but he does not agree with secondary buildings. Mr. Wilson said the next thing it will be would be dog houses and sheds. He said he does not agree that it is legitimate economic development in Kent. He said they need real jobs, not backyard jobs.

Ms. Oswitch said she would be voting against the motion. She said they discussed it at length previously, and she saw no reason to revisit it.

Mr. Kuhar said that Mr. Wilson believes that everyone will be doing backyard repairs. He said that home occupations are far beyond that scope, adding it deals with all types of businesses, which is the trend of today and tomorrow.

At this time, the Clerk restated the motion.

The motion carried by a hand vote of 6-3, with Ms. Oswitch, Mr. Wilson, and Ms. Gavriloff dissenting.

• Research on the revocation of boarding houses licenses with respect to health/safety issues or nuisance ordinance violations.(10/06)

All of the above items were the result of a discussion held in the Health and Safety Committee on Oct. 25, 2006.

This meeting of the Health & Safety Committee of Kent City Council was called to order by Chair Carrie Gavriloff at 7:00 p.m. on Wed., Oct. 25, 2006.

Chair Gavriloff explained the first item on their agenda dealt with neighborhood issues and possible solutions.

Dave Ruller, City Manager, explained that this issue was referred by Council member Oswitch at their last Council meeting. He said it is a well-known issue, adding that they have had a few sessions on this issue during his tenure. Mr. Ruller said there was no formal presentation from staff. He said in their packet, he forwarded information from the University of Connecticut on their quality of life initiative, adding that other college towns have the same problems. He said he hoped to show some of the tactics used.

Mr. Ruller said he was approached by a group who invited him to the public coffee. He said they have reached out to area churches, a fraternity, a sorority, and Greg Jarvie from the University. He said there is a grass root’s effort to initiate again the neighborhood watches. He said it is at some grass roots level, but it would help to have another set of eyes and ears. He said this group has volunteered to help with graffiti and trash issues, and appears to be another resource emerging.

Mr. Fender said he thought the Safety Director was going to be present, and said he was wondering if the south end neighborhood watch had been successful. Mr. Wilson said it was very successful, adding that when the problems started to decrease, people became disinterested and quit doing the watch. He commented that he believed they were going to start back up. Mr. Fender asked why it was successful, and Mr. Wilson said it was because of the people. He said that Robin Turner and Robert Wright shared the responsibility of running the program.

Ms. Gavriloff suggested they review Mr. Lillich’s report point by point, adding they would start with regulations for keg parties.

Mr. Bargerstock said they needed to tie into specific issues. He said a keg is not a disruption to a neighborhood, adding the problem is when a boarding house becomes an unlicensed bar, which is where they are having the problems. He said Wards 5 and 6 are experiencing these problems. Mr. Bargerstock said he had no problem with lawful drinking, but the unlicensed bars are a problem. He said it is a strain on the Police Department to deal with the under age drinkers, and the City is doing a lousy job resolving the problem. He asked if they regulate the kegs or the size of the functions. Ms. Gavriloff suggested they speak to the issue of the keg parties.

Mr. DeLeone asked if, before going through the report item by item, they could ask the Police Chief if there is anything he would like that would help his department. Ms. Gavriloff agreed with Mr. DeLeone, and said they would also hear from Mr. Ferlito, Health Commissioner.

Jim Peach, Police Chief: Chief Peach explained he is quite familiar with the material from the Safety Director, as they have had ongoing discussion for the last few years. He said they are close in their thoughts, and Mr. Lillich just presents them in a kinder way.

Chief Peach said that various municipalities in Ohio have the regulation on keg parties, adding that it is easy to circumvent. He said some require registration or notification if there would be three or more kegs. He said they get around this by having one keg, with other neighbors getting a keg. He said the reason for the problems a few years earlier at the Town Homes was because they were "Bring Your Own Bottles" parties. He said they could have this regulation on the books, but would have to deal with the administration, which is intensive, ineffective, and time consuming according to feedback received from other communities.

Chief Peach said they could require large party permits, which would require a lot of personnel, time, and resources, and it would have to be applied universally. He said fifty people in a house is common at a wedding, gradation, or confirmation. He questioned if they would subject the whole community, adding it would be counter productive. Chief Peach said the problem is not with the numbers, but, instead, with the behaviors. He said they could have a wedding or a gradation with a few hundred people, because the right behavior is not a problem.

Chief Peach said the issue regarding expanded noise regulations had some merit, as they could prohibit live performances. He said they do have situations where people have bands, adding the nosie can carry more than one or two blocks. He said that life entertainment is detrimental to any neighborhood, no matter how well intended. He said they may wish to explore this option.

Chief Peach said the occupancy limits for licensed housing has a lot of merit. He said they would need to dedicate hours for enforcement and follow up based on complaints, and it would require additional personnel. He said with the current duties and responsibilities in the Building and Community Development Departments, he is unsure they can deal effectively. He said that regardless of the enforcement, they must commit time and resources of the City.

Chief Peach said the issue of solid waste management and litter control has merit. He said this would prevent trash on the curbs seven days a week, and would restrict the trash in the right-of-way, particularly at the end of the school year. He said this would be a quality of life issue. He said there are some neighborhoods that resent the end of the year, as there is trash at their curb for two weeks.

Chief Peach said the neighborhood councils would require Council members to take ownership. He said they need to encourage residents to take back their neighborhoods. He said in larger cities, this has worked when people take the initiative. He explained it is hard work, but people would do it if they are concerned with the well being of their families and neighborhoods. He said they have started neighborhood watches, with the help of the administrative lieutenant. He said when the problem seems to abate, the group disbands, and there is no more communication. He said there can also be a lot of divisiveness if people come from different backgrounds, adding they would have greater challenges in the university neighborhoods. He said people have to step forward and take charge, and must do it in spite of other neighbors. He said it is a matter of people wanting to be active and get involved. He said it has a lot of merit, but the City cannot legislate the quality of life. He said it takes the residents to change the quality of life in their neighborhood.

Chief Peach said the idea of portable web-based security cameras is a future option, as it requires a lot of work and finances. He said they need to get to the grass roots, getting people involved first.

Chief Peach said there are times they seem to lose awareness of what has been done previously. He said he wished to remind them of ordinances passed previously by Council that seemed to work.

Chief Peach said the unlawful noise ordinance is not a common ordinance throughout the state, adding it helps university communities deal with those issues in their neighborhoods, such as noise, disruptions, and parties. He said the criminal activity nuisance ordinance has been very effective, but its administration is time consuming. He said it requires approximately six to eight hours a week.

Chief Peach said this is a good forum to tell them how effective it has been since its inception since September 2004. He said they have declared 144 properties as a nuisance. He said that only thirty-three of those 144 properties are still on the list. He said that forty-five have been assessed, with eighteen property owners appealing the assessment. He said that seven appeals were granted as they took appropriate steps which were reasonable and effective. He said that ten appeals were denied. Chief Peach said one appeal is pending, based on whether an eviction takes place. Chief Peach said that twenty-five assessments have been paid, and have averaged $90.04. He said the largest assessment was $269, and the lowest was $38.11.

Chief Peach said the Police Department took the initiative several years earlier to start an apartment managers’ meeting three to four times annually, and coordinated by their administrative lieutenant. He said there are fifty-four complexes involved. He said they explain items like unlawful noise, and how to do thorough background checks. He said they also guide them on the eviction process. Chief Peach said networking is important, because often, one may be evicted from one complex and attempt to move into another. He said this prevents people from moving back and forth between the complexes. He said a lot of credit for the success goes to Lt. Michelle Lee, who has been very effective in her communications.

Chief Peach explained that when someone is arrested for underage drinking, regardless of whether they are emancipated, the Police Department sends a letter to their parents, advising of the child’s arrest and asks the parents for their assistance. He said in the past five years they have done this, thirty to thirty-five parents have called, thanking the Police for letting them know. He said he has not received a phone call from a parent who did not like this. He said most college communities are adopting this practice, adding they were considered mavericks at one time when this was started.

Chief Peach said they have been contacted by other municipalities who want copies of their criminal activity nuisance. He said they either have adopted it or are in the process of adopting the ordinance. He said they are on the cutting edge with respect to dealing with the problems. He said he is not looking for more programs, adding they have plenty of ordinances, but just need people to enforce them.

Mr. DeLeone asked what policies the Council can adopt to help him, and he said they need staffing. He said they also need support, but the issue is staffing. He said that more people would be more effective. Chief Peach said he is guarded about creating more ordinances, because the question is how many they can enforce. He said with more ordinances, they have less enforcement.

Chief Peach explained they will see less parties after Halloween, and then the cycle starts again in the spring. He said neighborhood councils and live music prohibitions would be effective.

Ms. Gavriloff asked the Chief how many officers he needs, and he responded that he would need twelve additional officers.

Mr. Hawksley said that some of the assessments seem very low, adding that the least amount was about $35.00, and it would seem the hourly rate is higher. Chief Peach said they are not on the scene too long, adding that the lowest was probably just a citation. He said it is prorated on the number of officers and time spent. He said the larger the disturbance, the more people are involved.

Mr. Schultz said he had no problem with recommending the solid waste and large party issues, adding that the neighborhood councils historically have gone up and down. He said if they had the cameras, would it be possible to have streaming video to allow residents or Council members to call in. He said getting people to walk the streets is the hard part, and if they could do it from home, it would be more viable. Chief Peach said he could see having them downtown, but was unsure about residential cameras. He said cameras are only as good as those who want them. He said they hesitate to place their speed trailer in the neighborhoods, because of vandalism. He said they recently spent $1800 to repair weather-related issues, so they are guarded where they place it.

Mr. Schultz said they know where the problems are, adding some are in the south end and others are around the university. Chief Peach said the problem they experience is that a lot of people do not want to get involved, and want to remain anonymous. He said with the cameras, the person viewing it may not wish to be a witness. He said the question is how much the neighborhood wants to be involved, and whether they want to be a part of the solution.

Chief Peach said they mentioned the issue of the south end, adding it was a very small group of residents that really wanted to improve the area. He said they cannot get others involved, as no one seems to care. He said a lot of people think it is easier to complain than to take an active role. He said the south end neighborhood watch will not be successful, without more involvement. Mr. Wilson said that Michelle Lee did the training, adding they just asked people to look out their windows. He said another problem was when residents saw someone that appeared to be suspicious, and called the police, if an officer did not appear immediately, they were disappointed.

Mr. Schultz said another problem that occurs is they have a lot of vandalism from people walking home from the bars. He said that cameras can spot this, adding they cannot patrol and cover everything. He said he learned that a long time ago, adding he cannot put anything past his porch. He said he used to have a sign, three feet in the ground, and it was taken.

Chief Peach said the cameras have to be of excellent resolution for identification. He said they must be able to identify the people, as that is the hardest part. He said it takes a lot of work to identify people and to get people willing to testify. He said unless someone is personally known, it does not do any good. He said they have the expense of the cameras, also. Chief Peach said that prosecution can be difficult unless people can identify them.

Mr. Kuhar said they hear that people are appealing under the criminal nuisance law. He said if he recalls the Ohio Tenant Landlords’ law if they notify a tenant under their lease that they would be evicted if they did not cease making noise and they ceased, there is no grounds for evictions. Chief peach said they can make it a condition of the lease. He said they are not insisting on eviction, but look at the steps taken by the property owner to insure the noise is reduced or what will happen if it continues. He said there are a lot of variables, adding it is a legal issue that relates to the landlord and lessee.

Mr. Kuhar said he did not believe they could write something that violates state law. He said they always direct the nuisance to the landlord. Mr. Kuhar asked what the police do when they arrive at the scene for a noise violation, and the Chief said they try to find the property owner who is responsible. He said they are often told that no one on the lease is present. He said they can close down the party at that point, advising the partiers that they are trespassing. He said they have experienced all types of scenarios.

Mr. Kuhar said the lessee has the same rights as the owner, adding the citation should go to the person who is responsible. Chief Peach said they have to prove that person knew the party was going on. He questioned what happens if they are out of town. He said before they issue a citation, they must have probable cause, and must be able to get a conviction. He said it is the landlord’s responsibility, ultimately, under the ordinance. He said it is a separate issue from the criminal nuisance activity.

Mr. Kuhar suggested they increase the fine, tripling it on the second offense, and quadruplimg it on the third offense. He said they are going to the person making the noise, not the one who is supposed to be in control. He said if a tenant pays a $300 fine, they will think twice.

Chief Peach said they cannot be cited if they are not on the premise. He said those people responsible for the noise can be cited, whether or not they live at the residence. He said the person committing the noise is held responsible. He said they know who is actively committing the criminal offense.

Mr. Kuhar said they are saying they can cite the landlord, who is not present, for the noise ordinance, but not the person in the house. Chief Peach said they can cite as many as six people in one location. He said that no just residents are committing the infraction. Chief Peach said whether or not one is on the lease is not relevant, adding it would be relevant if it were a criminal activity.

Mr. Silver said for a loud nosie citation, they must give the ticket to someone who is present. He said they cannot cite the landlord. Mr. Silver said if it is a civil issue, they can cite landlord. He said the standards are different.

Ms. Oswitch asked if the issue of live entertainments deals with radios, and the Chief said if they deal with bands, they should be very specific. He said there is a difference between electric bass and stereos or CDs. Chief Peach said that live bands do not belong in residential areas, adding they can go to a park or a hall.

Ms. Oswitch said she had her neighborhood meeting the previous night, and one of the people present appealed his nuisance ordinance citation on Linden Street and lost. She said he explained that the first two citations came from one group that was subsequently evicted. She said the new group received a third citation, resulted in the landlord being cited. She said he explained that he cannot make the new group pay, as it is was the first group that had the first two citations. She said her comment is that his next door neighbor did not care who was responsible, as they had to deal with the issues three times.

Chief Peach said they cannot have an ordinance that addresses all of the move ins and move outs, as they may have six or eight people in the house. He said their ordinance holds the property owner accountable, and whether he chooses to pass it on is his choice. He said ultimately, if a property has three or more violations, he will be cited. He said many times, the tenants pass the hat. Ms. Oswitch said she had not thought about this particular situation, until the property owner raised it.

Ms. Oswitch said with the neighborhood councils, she noticed that her neighborhood meetings are bringing in the elderly. She said she has students, a large population of elderly, single parents, or people who have to work. She said she talked to Mr. Wilson previously about the south end watch, adding the need better communications to interact and so they know they can call. Chief Peach said they must have improved communications to identify the problems. He said they do not have to actually walk, but can just look out the front windows. He said they have found in Detroit and Chicago that with the assistance of phone calls, the people who caused the problems moved elsewhere.

Ms. Oswitch said her concern is that things seem to be getting bolder and there is a lack of respect. She said that a fear factor has occurred, adding that they know that one man was physically abused. She said they need to find a common ground, without the fear and abuse. Ms. Oswitch said everyone is leery to become involved.

Chief Peach said they have found that some young people are confrontational and threatening the elderly. He said some elderly refuse to look out their windows. He said they see it, as do the parents and the schools. He said they can let things go, do nothing, and adapt to those changes. He said he is recommending they can accomplish things if they work with their councils. Chief Peach said until they start the communications, they will never know the difference it will make.

John Ferlito: Mr. Ferlito said he must give offenders forty-eight hours to clean up the trash. He said if they fail to do so, he hires someone to clean the trash, bills them, and unpaid bills go on the property tax bill. He said they must give them the opportunity to clean up their own mess. He said he would like to see the forty-eight-hour requirement change to twenty-four hours, and to be allowed to post it on the door for faster notice. He said their main problems are in May and August with groups moving in and out. He said they end up with large piles of trash, that take two to three days for lawful pickup. He said he has proposed previously that the City should control trash pick up. He said he has no law at this time that says residents must have pickup other than licensed landlords. He said he has problems with people using dumpsters, adding it would be nice to control the trash. He said they would still have problems, adding that it takes a while to clean trash problems. He said another problem is improper storage of the trash. Mr. Ferlito said he knocks on doors, following large parties, where there are cups and beer bottles all over the yard. He said they usually pick them up, after he talks to them. He said he tries to educate them. Mr. Ferlito said he tries to talk to new freshmen about being good citizens, so they do not realize it is an us vs. them situation. He said he explains to them they must pick up their trash and store it properly. Mr. Ferlito said he would like to cut the notification down to twenty-four hours, adding they cite both tenants and owners. He said it is easier to put the bill on the property taxes.

Ms. Gavriloff said the Board of Health has discussed specific days for trash pickup. Mr. Ferlito suggested they have specific days, adding they have seven licensed companies in Kent picking up trash. He said if they go down the streets in Kent, there are always cans on the curb for pickup. He suggested they do it like recycling with specific days.

Mr. Bargerstock said he has a group of citizens who have called regularly, and are planning to move because they feel there is no serious effort by the City when dealing with the problem. He said one resident was beaten up by the "drunk and disorderly" parade, adding this occurs three nights a week and is cell phone organized. He said the Chief said something important, adding there is no need for more ordinances. He said he has lived in "Ground Zero" for twenty-seven years, offering ideas with most being rejected. He said neighborhood plans have been formulated and rejected. He said he has heard from the Chief, Law Director, and Safety Director that plans are too costly or they may not have the ability.

Mr. Bargerstock said he has no answers for these people. He thanked Chief Peach for being present, adding that he knows his department is doing the best the possible can. He asked if the problem is a lack of enforcement or a lack of laws, adding the problem is still there. He questioned why it is still happening.

Chief Peach said they have the laws on the books, adding they are more rigid than 95% of the communities around Kent. He acknowledged that enforcement is an issue, but it also requires behavior modification. He said it takes more than officers in cruisers, adding it will take those wanting to make changes to be responsible, and willing to take the offenders to court. Chief Peach said they need the landlords to be more accountable. He said it is also a matter of having enough people to enforce the laws. He told Council he appreciated that they recognize the officers are doing the best they can, adding that twelve additional officers would give them two to three per shift. He said they could enforce more. He said if they look at their annual report, their enforcement is down. Chief Peach said this is not because of less problems, but instead, less people to enforce. He said they are spending long amounts of times on calls, especially if there are a lot of people. He said they must do all of the paperwork. Chief Peach said the officers have to go to court the following day, adding it is taking its toll on the department’s officers, dispatchers, and detention officers. He said he does not know a solution. He said changing the behavior is a bigger question, adding that is why they are present. Chief peach said the maliciousness is increasing, and they do not know how to stop it.

Mr. Bargerstock said he witnessed the police breaking up a party next door to him, and there were people screaming on their cell phones that the police were breaking up the party. He asked what they tell the resident who have made their living in Kent. He said they are telling the residents they cannot solve the problem.

Mr. Bargerstock suggested they close parking lots during non-business hours, and asked how he would feel about closing the parking lot at City Hall as one solution during non business hours. He asked if that is a solution. Chief Peach said he was unsure how effective it would be, adding they may see them move to another location. He said he was unsure that was the problem. He said at one point, the University closed a parking lot on Lincoln Street, near the Robin Hood, when it was in "full bloom". He said once the parking was prohibited, the problems stopped completely. He said if they cannot park in a location, they will not gather there. Chief Peach said they need to look at the locations and the dynamics.

Mr. Bargerstock said the DuBois parking lot was a perfect example, until the family started towing cars. He said another lot would be the Fashion Museum parking lot, adding they would need the cooperation of the University. Chief Peach said it could be positive, but he was unsure of its effectiveness.

Mr. Bargerstock said the issue of the kegs was discussed, adding that he has found most of the problems come from boarding houses, not gradation or confirmation parties. He asked why they could not prohibit the keg activity that occurs, as it amounts to an unlicensed bar. Chief Peach deferred to Mr. Silver. Mr. Silver said they must do it citywide, adding that means no one could serve wine to their guests. Mr. Bargerstock said they could restrict to licensed boarding houses. Mr. Silver said they cannot pick and choose, as they would be violating the 14^th amendment. Mr. Bargerstock asked if he was saying the boarding houses could have any activity, and Mr. Silver said it was the same as his house.

Mr. Bargerstock asked the Chief for his thoughts on occupancy requirements with respect to boarding houses only, and Ms. Gavriloff said that Mr. Silver already said it was a 14^th amendment issue. Mr. Bargerstock said he was asking the Chief. Chief Peach said they have safety, health and fire issues, adding there would need to be a direct relationship with the safety and well being of the people. He said that more people cause problems, but the question is whether there is a risk to the people because of the numbers. Mr. Bargerstock said they have limits on commercial buildings, hotels, and motels. He said that boarding houses are unique, and asked the Chief if he saw a problem with occupancy limits. Chief Peach said that less people means less behavior. He said he was unsure about the legalities, but it seemed like a good idea.

Mr. Bargerstock said they are approaching a new phase between 1:00 a.m. to 3:00 a.m., where the partiers throw beer bottles in the middle of the road. Chief Peach said that is littering, which is enforced when they see it. He said it is rare they see who actually does it, adding they do not know who is responsible. He said if they could catch them, they would be charged without hesitation.

Mr. Bargerstock said the big problem deals with the "drunk and disorderly parade," which are large groups that erupt quickly walking to and from the campus, carrying large quantities of alcohol. He said that a number of them are under the age of 21. Chief Peach said that is the result of unlawful noise calls, adding more groups are doing assaults. He said they do not have the flexibility of proactive patrols, adding that on Thursday, Fridays, and Saturdays, they are reactive only and do not touch the other parts of the City, like N. Mantua St., Franklin Ave., Fairchild Ave., or South Water Street. He said he can assure them no one would like more arrests and enforcement that the officers.

Chief Peach said that with response to Mr. Bargerstock’s question about what they say to the people, is that they are doing the best they can with the resources and people they have. He said that sometimes a community may have to make tough decisions.

Mr. Bargerstock said one problem they have deals with sofas being burned, adding these are regular events. He asked if something can be done. Mr. Ferlito said they bring the sofas out and burn them, adding if they see sofas on the porches, the occupants are cited. He asked Mr. Bargerstock to call him if he sees them, adding he goes down University and College Streets. He said there are no problems at 5:30 p.m. on Fridays. He said he has been told that some bring them in their pickup trucks, just to burn them.

Mr. Bargerstock said some of the trash complaints have to do with the containers, and asked if there is something he would suggest. He noted that some are thrown in the streets by the trash haulers. Mr. Ferlito said that some are dumped by people. He said he can pick them up, and they are dumped one hour earlier. He said he was unsure how they would stop that from happening, adding they have been talking to the trash companies with some success.

Mr. Bargerstock asked if Mr. Ferlito needs more ordinances or enforcement, and Mr. Ferlito said he would like better trash control. He stressed that people need to call, adding that their complaint form is on the website. He said they do not have enough people to check every day, and the residents must help him.

Mr. Kuhar said they are looking at two separate issues regarding the trash problems. He said one is the accumulated trash on the curbs, while the other deals with the sporadic trash from the parties. He said if he is thinking correctly, they could coordinate the litter laws with the Ohio tenant landlord’s law. He said the Ohio law requires tenants to keep their residence in a safe, clean manner, adding it is a state statute. He said the trash will be there, but there is no reason to see cups and cans in the yard. He said it is littering, and questioned why they must wait forty-eight hours. He asked if there is some way to act on the cups, adding a tenant should keep his yard clean. He asked if there are immediate action or citations that may be issued, and Mr. Ferlito said they can cite them. He said if they clean up, he cannot bill them. He said if they are cited, it is one of the criminal activities listed in the ordinance. He said they do bill the landlords, adding it takes a while to clean up the mess.

Mr. Silver said that most of the Ohio Tenant Landlord law is between the landlord and the tenant and does not involve the City, which is why we have our separate ordinances to deal with violations. He said if the landlord complains about tenants destroying his place that is between him and the tenant. Mr. Kuhar asked if there is no way to stop people from throwing cups and bottles in the yard, and Mr. Silver said if the police see it, they can write a littering ticket. Chief Peach said it is not littering if it is on private property. He said it is not a criminal violation, and is only littering on public property. He said they are looking at civil issues, rather than criminal issues.

Mr. Kuhar said that years ago, the University worked with the community and business people regarding disciplinary actions. He said they dealt with students making financial and behavioral problems. Chief Peach said they have to be selective, adding that they may have crimes of violence of felonies. He said they must pick their poison. Chief Peach said serious crimes are rarely done by the students, but instead are those attracted to the area because of the university or night life.

Mr. Kuhar asked if a live band restriction would include Djs, and Chief Peach said it would be anything with a sound system.

Mr. Kuhar said there must be times in Kent when their officers are not worked to death, and asked the possibility of swapping people from the slower periods. Chief Peach said they must be aware of the Fair Labor Standards, as it prohibits much of the flexibility need. He said they also have contractual issues. Chief Peach said what may be slow one day may not be a slow period the next day. He said every shift has different needs and demands. He said that while people this the day shift does not have serious offenses, they must go to court, deal with Family Services, and Kevin Coleman issues. He said they have to deal with reports. He said that each shift has a different environment and demands, adding they do their staffing based on experience and the need for services.

Mr. Kuhar asked if rotating officers is not possible, and Chief Peach said they already do that. He said they have considered their staffing, adding that Safety Director Lillich has been instrumental in finding the best answer.

Mr. Kuhar asked if the Kent State police department is fairly well pressed, and Chief peach said they have less officers now than they had in 1970. He said the needs are greater now then they were at that time. Mr. Kuhar asked if they cannot contribute, and Chief Peach said they do have mutual aid. He said when the City has emergency calls and cannot break away, KSU will handle accidents, fights, etc. He said the City rarely assists them. He said it is definitely a one way street with the university.

Mr. Fender said he did not want to belabor a point, adding it was mentioned they have enough laws. He asked if it would help to have the Administration work with the University. He said they had a nice task force three years earlier that did a good job, and he would like to see something similar occur now.

Mr. Fender said the Chief mentioned some of the different laws, and how some affect landlords while others affect residents. He asked if there is any value to pulling these together into a comprehensive nuisance law. Chief Peach said that within their abilities, and with what they are able to do under the statutes they have addressed the issues. He said if they could declare a property a nuisance in a timely manner, it would be helpful. He said that does, however, require changes from their state legislature.

Mr. Fender said in the University of Connecticut report, they speak of a community/university liaison position. He said he understands it takes money, and asked if it has merit. Chief Peach said there is ongoing constant communication with the University’s police and Administration to correct the situation. He said they have as much invested in Kent as the City, and he can assure them there is constant communication. He questioned what they can do to make it a better resource.

Ms. Oswitch said when they discussed the issue of the cups in the front yard, she had distributed pictures from the following day. She asked if they need better zoning, and Chief Peach said whatever is thrown in one’s front yard is not a criminal office nor is it police enforceable. He said he knows what they are discussing with respect to junk in the yard, adding that Mr. Ferlito is as proactive as anyone he has seen. He said that some places, like Ohio State, have had some resolution in dealing with these types of issues.

Ms. Oswitch said that some people have talked about DUI checkpoints, and Chief Peach said that it takes twenty-three officers for a proper check point. Ms. Oswitch commented that could solve their budget issues.

Mr. Bargerstock said they have issues of boarding houses having all day parties, with kegs and open bars. He said when the neighbors call the police, they are told no laws are being broken. He asked what they tell them, to move or put up with it? Chief Peach said it has to be a sound violation, as it is a violation of the city ordinance. He said they will take enforcement action, adding on the second offense they will close it down. He s aid if it is underage drinking, they confiscate the kegs, adding they have a lot of kegs they are holding for evidence.

Mr. Bargerstock said there were at least twelve such parties in his ward on Homecoming weekend, adding the police drove by and did nothing. He said there was no music, but a lot of beer. Chief Peach said they can do something about unlawful noise, adding with illegal beer drinking, they confiscate the kegs. He said if the officers drove past, it may have been on their way to a call.

Chair Gavriloff called for audience comment at this time.

Walt Adams. 336 High Street: Mr. Adams said that operating of a rooming house is not a right. He said it is a conditional use and a privilege, much like a driver’s license. He said if there is a consistent pattern of law breaking, there must be a process where the license can be revoked. He said other activities in Kent are based upon licensing, adding they can lift the license, as they have the authority. Mr. Adams said the legislation is not there, and could be enacted, thus providing the necessary pressure. He said he would like it to be considered.

Mr. Silver said they have looked at that process, and two other states passed similar regulations. He said that one was declared unconstitutional, and he is not a fan of passing something that will later be declared unconstitutional. Mr. Adams suggested they could use other language, and Mr. Silver said he has not seen any language that could meet the constitutionality issue. Mr. Adams said he would like to see further investigation of the issue. He said it depends on how the licensing is applied and who gives the license. He said the Health Commissioner could speak to the violations of the health code, and the license can be lifted. He said if other laws are broken, it should be a reason for revoking this privilege. He said despite it has not been successful previously, he would like this looked into more carefully.

(Name unclear), 333 Crain Avenue: He said the noise ordinance seems like it is not that big of a deal, adding he does not sleep at night. He said one house has a party three or four times a week. He said they call, and the officers talk to the offenders, give them a citation, while twenty to thirty more are still partying. He said this repeats nightly, and asked when he is to get some sleep. He suggested stiffer penalties, adding if they received a $500 fine, they would listen. He said the penalties increase with each driving infraction he has, and suggested with stiffer penalties, they could see less problems. He said he is tired of being afraid to live in his own house.

Ms. Gavriloff asked if they could raise our fines, adding it does not matter if the court system will not impose them. Mr. Silver agreed. He said they may be able to raise the fines.

Karen, Crain Avenue: Karen thanked those willing to listen and thanked those who have helped them. She said it is very frustrating and disheartening. Karen said she does not sit with her head on the door with a glass. She said when she is feeding her daughter, she hears language they would be upset if their family heard. She said there is retaliation if they do call.

Karen said she does not make her own college schedule. She said she is up at 5:00 to go to work and to get her child to the sitter. She said they are at their wit’s end. Karen said they appreciated the efforts of Capt. Goodlet and had a big "thank you" for the attention from Lt. Lee and the Council members who are true believers and have similar complaints.

Kori Marsinek, 324 High Street. Ms. Marsinek explained she has lived on High Street for six years. She said the parties on her street start at 10:00 p.m. She said the neighbors watch out for each other’s properties. She said she has had damage to her house, and trespassing. She said her two children have been awakened by the parties and have seen the behavior of the students. She said she was unsure what they can do. She said she has been told they have one officer for their end of town, so it takes a while to have a response to their calls.

Camille Park, North Willow St: She asked if they have to provide free on-street parking, all night long, for the parties, because that is what is happening. She said she would like to see parking as a privilege, and banned all night. She said they come in carloads, with the street providing the parking. She said they can put a stop to it, and it would strangle some of the problems. She said it is not that expensive, and as a ban, they do not need to chalk the cars. She said they are draining their energy and mental health. She said the parking spaces are being abused.

John Bard, 435 Francis St: Mr. Bard said he grew up on Summit Street, adding he is old enough to know how the neighborhood got to its present state. He said his ten year old stayed with his grandmother on Summit Street during the summer, and described an incident he witnessed with a girl. He said he doubted his son, until the next day, when he found panties in the front yard, next to a tree.

He said they have a Council member is afraid to put anything off his porch. He said his mother lives on Summit Street, adding they constantly see the cruisers. He said they must take the town back, and may need more police. Mr. Bard said he did not know the answer, but they are losing control.

Mr. Bard said his grandparents moved into the house because it was four blocks from the railroad, where his grandfather worked. He said they did not move there because it was a college town. He said when the student housing was a problem, they were booted off campus. He said parking is now a problem, and they want to shove it on the City. He said the University keeps shoving their problems on the City since they have no solution, and it is up to the City to find the solution. Mr. Bard said the University should do more, as should the City.

Mr. Bard said he called for his eighty-four year old mother because of cars parked illegally. He said the cars were ticketed. He said the cruisers had been driving by all day, and asked why he had to call and give his name when the violation is on the street. He said he could understand if they were elsewhere, using the Jaws of Life to safe someone. He said they have little old ladies who are afraid to do anything. He told Council it is their responsibility to take care of the people and it is their responsibility to take back the neighborhood.

Julie Bargerstock, 138 S. Water Street: Ms. Bargerstock said she has heard Mr. Ferlito and Chief Peach speak about the parties. She said they talked about graduation parties, adding she is sure those parties do not start at midnight. She said she counted, from her window, seventy-eight kids running out of the back door of a house when the police arrived at the front door. She said they should do something with an occupancy permit. She said for those members who appear bored or do not want to deal with this issue, they should care. She said the comment was made that Mr. Ferrara lives in Mayberry RFD, and it was questioned why he cares. She said they should care.

Ms. Bargerstock said she heard the Chief comment that the officers are made to be the bad guys. She asked if he would rather the residents be the bad guys, and questioned if they are supposed to call the cops. She said they get threatened when they do. She said it is sad for Kent and sad they do not have enough money to hire more police officers.

Hearing no further audience comment, Ms. Gavriloff returned to the Committee at this time.

Motion made by Mr. Schultz, seconded by Mr. Bargerstock.

Ms. Gavriloff asked, for clarification, if he meant the expansion in the limitations on noise, and Mr. Schultz said he meant the ban on live entertainment. She asked if he meant the solid waste management and litter control, and he said he meant all aspects. She asked if he meant the neighborhood councils, and he said that was correct.

Mr. Bargerstock said it is only the tip of the iceberg, adding he has served on Council for three years. He said he has brought forward recommendations, only to be told "sorry, we can’t do that". He said it is still not enough, adding he agreed with Mr. Schultz. He said it is just the tip of the iceberg, and they are not doing enough to control what is going on. He said they had better get their act together.

Motion made by Ms. Oswitch, seconded by Mr. Ferrara.

Ms. Gavriloff asked if she meant all university areas or citywide, and Ms. Oswitch said she meant every area the administration felt needed attention.

Ms. Oswitch, maker, and Mr. Ferrara, seconder, had no comments at this time.

Mr. Schultz said he will oppose this. He said when they start doing entire areas, not every street agrees. He said if people want the parking changed on their streets, they can circulate a petition. He said the motion would be overstepping their bounds.

Mr. Ferrara disagreed, adding they were calling for a referral to the administration. He said if they need to change parking on one or two streets, it would have to go back to the residents for their input. He said they are hurting nothing by exploring the issue.

Mr. Bargerstock asked if this including the city and University parking lots, and Ms. Oswitch said they were not included Mr. Bargerstock said they should not be telling individual streets what is good for them, adding they should listen. He said the procedures are in place, and they have serious abuse with the parking lots. He said DuBois did a good job solving the problem, but they could change their mind the next day.

Mr. Hawksley said it is a good idea, adding they did it on their street about thirteen years earlier, on a temporary basis, but Council forgot about it. He said they restricted parking after 10:00 p.m., and it cleaned up their street. He said he would like to see the same process with the Administration talking to those people having problems. He said he realizes that some must park overnight on the street.

Mr. Kuhar said he thought they already had an ordinance about overnight parking, and Mr. Silver disagreed.

Ms. Oswitch spoke about people getting awakened, and seeing people puking and peeing in their yards. She said it is getting old. She said she hoped they could curtail the parking, because half of the problem would leave.

The amendment failed by a hand count of 2-6-1, with only Ms. Oswitch and Mr. Ferrara supporting the motion. Ms. Gavriloff abstained.

At this time, Ms. Gavriloff restated the motion, which carried by a voice vote of 8-0-1, with Ms. Gavriloff abstaining.

Motion made by Mr. Bargerstock, seconded by Ms. Oswitch.

Mr. Bargerstock said he has been recommending this for three years. He said he understands the burden if they attempt to put occupancy limits in place, but it is a preventive burden. He said they have unusual circumstances, with dense living, for health or safety purposes, and should adopt regulations that meet fire and safety codes. He said people are getting hurt, burned, etc. He urged the Committee to agree so as to allow the proper research.

Ms. Oswitch said she is asking the administration to research this for health and safety reasons. She said a deck collapsed this past summer, although it was not widely publicized. She said they often hear about college houses burning down, and she did not want Kent to be another statistic.

Mr. Hawksley said he would support this going to the Administration, but his assumption is that it would have to be citywide. He said there are obviously some concerns, adding he would be willing to let the Law Director provide those reasons.

Mr. Schultz opposed the motion. He said they can license boarding houses, currently, based on the occupancy of the residents. He said they do not have the right to dictate the number of guests in any other residential building. He said it is unconstitutional, and there are times when they have to listen to the law. He said they cannot discriminate between who visits those in a boarding house versus other homes, and said it is unconstitutional.

Mr. Wilson agreed with Mr. Schultz for different reasons. He said when they limit the number of people in a home, they are putting them into a driveway or the yard. He said they currently tell them to move inside or close it down. He said they were trying to get rid of a bar in the Kinko’s plaza years ago, and the police would have to stand, counting for the occupancy permit, thus shortchanging the rest of the city on protection. He said he would vote against the motion.

Mr. Kuhar said he did not think they could restrict just rental properties, adding he has mixed feelings on the motion. He said they do have concerns with health and safety issues, adding one hundred people in a house that caught on fire would be devastating. He said in some of the houses he has seen, the floors would not hold that many people. He said it would have to be all or nothing, adding there is nothing keeping people from having yard parties. Mr. Kuhar said it is a tough nut to crack. He said he will probably abstain, as he would like to vote both ways.

Mr. Bargerstock said that some of his colleagues either are confused or are purposely trying to confuse others. He said his motion is for boarding houses only, not duplexes, triplexes, or apartment complexes. He said with respect to the constitutionality issue, it is the same as the law that allows them to license the houses. He said the motion is to let the administration research it, adding there is no reason they cannot go forward. Mr. Bargerstock said if the results are not satisfactory, they can debate it again. He said it is a problem Kent has had since they allowed boarding houses, adding they need to deal with it or it will keep biting them. He said they can create big bureaucracies or fix the problem, and he was suggesting they fix the damn problem.

The motion carried by a hand vote of 5-3-1, with Mr. Schultz, Mr. DeLeone and Mr. Wilson dissenting. Ms. Gavriloff abstained.

Motion made by Ms. Oswitch, seconded by Mr. Hawksley.

Mr. Bargerstock said they have had this discussion previously, with the Law Director telling them there is nothing they can do. He said they have boarding houses operating as unlicensed bars, and there must be some way to change the licensing law or to provide an ordinance that would allow the license to be revoked. He said if the licensing law does not meet a constitutional muster, they need to change the law. He said they cannot allow bars in the front yards.

The motion carried by a hand count of 5-3-1, with Mr. Schultz, Mr. Wilson, and Mr. Kuhar dissenting. Ms. Gavriloff abstained.

Motion made by Ms. Oswitch, seconded by Mr. Bargerstock.

Ms. Oswitch said the people in the audience brought up a good point that they are tired of it. She said people have moved from Ward 6, and are tired of the parties and being harassed. She said it is very frustrating. Ms. Oswitch said that Mr. Ferlito goes well beyond the means of his job, adding she cannot tell him how much the neighborhoods appreciate him.

Mr. Bargerstock said they need a means to cite the offender, quickly, immediately, and efficiently. He said they do not need bureaucracy. He asked if municipalities can cite for high grass, why they cannot cite the knucklehead with forty-eight dixie cups in his front yard. Ms. Gavriloff commented that even the grass offenses get forty-eight hours to remedy the problem.

The motion failed by a hand count of 3-5-1, with Mr. DeLeone, Ms. Oswitch, and Mr. Bargerstock supporting the motion. Ms. Gavriloff abstained.

Mr. Hawksley asked if they previously referred to the administration an increase in nuisance ordinance fines, and Mr. Ferrara said it was part of the original motion.

 Further development of the solid waste notification ordinance.(02/07)

 Continued research on the issues regarding trash, returning with recommendation based on these discussions.(02/07)

Health & Safety Committee, Feb. 28, 2007:

Mr. Lillich said the next item is a "work in progress". He said in October, they discussed the expansion of solid waste management on private properties. He said the ordinance will include some clean up responsibilities, giving notice to the occupants of the property, and a reasonable time period to clean them up. He said if a party is contacted, they have two hours. He said if a notice is left on the property, they have eight hours. He said if the litter is not cleaned, a citation can be issued as a minor misdemeanor. He said the current ordinance prohibits the Health Department from taking any action until forty-eight hours have passed. He said this would change the time delay, empowering the Health Department to do clean up more quickly and to assess the occupancy. He said if the occupant fails to pay the bill, it is given to the property owner. He said it empowers the property owner to hold the occupancy responsible for any fine.

Mr. Kuhar asked what steps they take to find the occupants, and Mr. Lillich said it is somewhat labor intensive, and he was reticent to create new tasks. He said that staff could knock on doors and issue the notice. He said if they cannot rouse the occupant, they can put a notice on the property, giving them eight hours to clean it up. He said if they make contact, they give them two hours.

Mr. Kuhar asked if the eight hours applied to weekends or weekdays, and Mr. Kuhar said it applied to all days. He said if the trash is located at 5:30 a.m. that is when the clock starts to tick.

Mr. Bargerstock said he liked this, but questioned whey it was only the Health Commissioner and not the police, and Mr. Lillich said the police are mentioned. He said they need to work out the logistics.

Mr. Bargerstock said their parking enforcement officer is excellent, and could double in that capacity. Mr. Lillich suggested it would be one day every two weeks, but could be one component.

Motion made by Ms. Oswitch, seconded by Mr. Bargerstock.

Ms. Oswitch thanked Mr. Lillich, adding she lives in an area where they have this issue a lot of times. She said the people are fed up, and are glad this is being developed.

Mr. Hawksley said it is good work. He expressed concern about staffing, adding he is being told they cannot enforce the sidewalk ordinance for that reason. He said he was concerned with another unenforceable ordinance. Mr. Hawksley said he can understand they deal with it with the nuisance activity. Ms. Gavriloff said the Health Commissioner tours the neighborhoods on his way to church.

The motion carried by a voice vote of 8-0-1, with Ms. Gavriloff abstaining.

Motion made by Mr. Ferrara, seconded by Ms. Oswitch.

Mr. Ferrara said they sometimes lose sight of an issue. He said the other issues are important, but they want a recommendation about trash cans every day of the week on the street.

Mr. Schultz said he liked the idea of options, and would like to see the options. He said he would hope they include information in the next newsletter, as he hates to surprise people. He said Ms. Hintz is right, and they should have discussions with the solid waste agency to coordinate the pickups. He said in the student areas, the recycling bids are just as trashy as the trash cans.

The motion carried by a voice vote of 8-0-1, with Ms. Gavriloff abstaining.

Neighborhood councils (02/07)

Health & Safety Committee, Feb. 28, 2007:

Mr. Lillich said the next issue is the one about neighborhood councils, as they try to lay out general ideas. He said they take a lot of work to organize, and require a lot of initiative on the part of the people in the neighborhoods. He said there is a lot of research needed to draft participants. Mr. Lillich said this is best done by Council members who know their neighborhoods and the people in those neighborhoods better.

Mr. Lillich introduced Paul Myers from the Rock Café. He said that Mr. Myers has a lot of interest in community activities. He said that he is working to organize some neighborhood work in the spring through his group and with some Greek organizations. He said the University Student Senate has renewed their desire to work with them in the spring. He said Mr. Myers is also working to organize graffiti cleanup efforts. He said that Mr. Myers has an interest and desire in participating with neighborhood council organization efforts.

Paul Myers, Rock Café: Mr. Myers explained he took over the building owned by Kent State University and hoped to get it cleaned up. He said he fights with graffiti weekly, and has been working with some members of the administration. He said he is impassioned about the community and community awareness. He said they are discussing three areas, including graffiti, party problems with young adults, and neighborhood watches and associations. He said they handed off a lot of the party patrol issues to the Police Department. He said that Greg Jarvie was present with some students from the Student Senate, but had to leave. HE said they are providing information at every orientation in the fall, and will share the laws and the consequences. He said other issues discussed are giving the neighborhood responsibility. He said that most neighborhood watches are responding to problems that occurred, and once the problem is solved, the group is not seen again. He said they can deal with those issues by pulling people together and dealing with the issues.

Mr. Schultz asked if he was responsible for the event at the Rec Center in the Fall, and Mr. Myers said he was, adding it was a great activity and worked well. Mr. Myers said they had about 150 people, with free food and a lot of fun. Mr. Schultz said they need activities like that with a neighborhood council. He said once problems disappear, they lose people. He said one or two meetings and functions a year would be successful.

Mr. Wilson agreed with MR. Schultz 100%. He said he was associated with four different neighborhood groups. He said they are present when angry, and need an activity to associate with them. He said he heard the activity at the Rec Center was fantastic.

Mr. Hawksley asked if it would be possible to develop a grant program, whether block grant or otherwise. Mr. Myers said it does not have to be a city burden, as there are state and federal programs offering grants. He said they do not have to be involved as a city, and his idea is to get people in the neighborhoods instead of thinking it is the City’s responsibility. He said they have their Greek community and other organizations. He said they will have a two-week blitz on cleaning up graffiti. He said they are famous for their graffiti problem on Channel 19. He said the station will be involved with the graffiti clean up also. Mr. Myers said that people need to be involved to make a difference. He said there are monies available on the neighborhood level. He said the Rock Café was done by the young adults who provided the labor and keep it open with volunteers.

Ms. Oswitch said she likes neighborhood councils, but has some concerns. She said that she and Ms. Gavriloff are concerned with traffic calming meetings. She said that everyone complains, but the core groups are little. Ms. Oswitch said it is hard to get people involved, as they look at Council to do everything. She said the idea of parties are great, adding they have a lot of elderly in her area. She said one lady on Lake Street started her own neighborhood group, and is going to take back their neighborhood. She asked how they would get seniors in the towers to help, adding that too many people look to someone else to take care of their problems.

Mr. Lillich said what they are asking them to think about is what areas are the most critical to begin with, adding that Mr. Myers has priorities, and may not be able to jump into the issue immediately. He suggested they talk to their constituents and see their opinions. He asked they give thought to target areas.

Mr. Myers said the Greek community has mandated that their brothers or sisters do these activities near where they live to continue to be involved in fraternity or sorority. He said it includes things like painting homes. He said when they do the graffiti and get attention, they are educating everyone. He suggested they keep it going so it does not die.

Chair Gavriloff called for audience comments at this time.

Julie Bargerstock, 404 S. Willow St: Ms. Bargerstock said it is nice to educate people, but they are teaching the young people that someone will clean their graffiti. She said they were taught responsibility. She said sh