MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 1995 AT 7:30 PM




The meeting was called to order at 7:35 PM with Mayor McLallen presiding.


ROLL CALL: Council Members Crawford (present), Mason (absent), Mitzel (present), Pope (present), Schmid (absent-excused), Toth (present), and Mayor McLallen (present).


Present (5) Absent (2-Mason, Schmid)






Mayor McLallen said the purpose of this special meeting was to set the council's agenda and strategy for 1995-96.




Mr. Kriewall said he would like to add Vehicle Purchase to the agenda; he had written permission from the two absent council members.


It was then,


Moved by Councilmember Crawford,

Seconded by Councilmember Toth,


That the Agenda be amended to add discussion of Vehicle Purchase.


Yes (5) Absent (2-Mason, Schmid) Motion carried


It was then,


Moved Councilmember Crawford,

Seconded by Councilmember Pope,


That a 1994-1995 budget amendment be adopted to provide for $1,000 additional cost for a vehicle.





Mayor McLallen said she felt they ought to live within the budget, and Councilman Mitzel said he agreed with that.


Yes (3-Crawford, Pope, Toth) No (2-Mitzel, McLallen)

Absent (2-Mason, Schmid) Motion Failed


Councilman Crawford pointed out that even Oakland County Purchasing was more expensive than this, and Mayor McLallen asked for a moment to read the backup material.


The Mayor asked to reconsider her vote; she noted that all the normal circumstances they usually go through still did not bring them a vehicle at the budgeted price.


Councilman Crawford said he considered the $16,000 budgeted as an estimate and the final number should be within a $1,000 or so.


Councilman Mitzel asked if the manager couldn't find anything for $16,000 or under and Mr. Kriewall said nothing in this category.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Pope,

Seconded by Councilman Toth,


To reconsider the previous question.


Yes (5) Absent (2-Mason, Schmid) Motion carried


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Crawford,

Seconded by Councilman Pope,


To approve the following Budget Resolution:


NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the following 1994-1995 budget amendment is authorized to provide for the additional cost for a vehicle.




City Manager (capital Outlay) $ 1,000


Contingencies (new balance $365,274) (1,000)


Yes (5) Absent (2-Mason, Schmid) Motion carried


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Crawford,

Seconded by Councilman Toth,


That the following Resolution - Vehicle Purchase - be


WHEREAS, the City Manager and Finance Director have reviewed comparable purchase prices on vehicles, and,


WHEREAS, it appears that after reviewing purchase prices on vehicles available through County purchasing, it is advantageous to purchase a year-end vehicle from Southfield Chrysler-Plymouth,


NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Purchasing Department is authorized to purchase a new 1994 Eagle Vision ESI for a price not to exceed $17,000.


Yes (5) Absent (2-Mason, Schmid) Motion carried



Council Goal Session:


Marlene Fluharty said she took council's responses to the questionnaire and listed them; she said she was pleasantly surprised at the common themes, concerns and issues. She said first of all, she wanted to know what they wanted to accomplish tonight.


Councilman Mitzel said he would like them to agree on at least a couple of common goals they all had. Councilman Crawford asked if he meant consensus that all would abide by them whether they agreed with them or not, and Councilman Mitzel said he meant a consensus where they accepted the fact that it was a goal and would work towards it.


Mayor McLallen said her point was if they all agreed that that was the goal, the path they took to get there would obviously vary with each person's perspective on it but she felt that was one of their challenges. She said they have never been a unified voice on what the goals were and tonight she would like them to be able to at least agree on something.


Councilman Crawford said what he meant by consensus was if four people agreed on a goal and three did not, would those three support the majority and everybody work toward accomplishing that goal.


Councilman Pope said detail was where they disagreed; he said he has opposed most of the Main Street Project but that didn't mean he was opposed to it.


Councilman Toth said one of the key things they needed to do was develop a schedule or time frame for their goals; budgets were coming up and funds needed to be earmarked. He said for example, if they agreed they were going to save money for the residents, what would they be looking at to do that.


Marlene Fluharty said her role then as facilitator would be to help them keep on track towards getting to agree on one or more goals by nine o'clock and to agree on what they would do about the two absent members. Members agreed to give tapes of the meeting to those members and to meet one more time for an hour after prioritizing the items.


She referred to the Notes from 1/23/95 and said they may want to spend some time in the future talking about what each of them view as a "quality city" and "improved community". Under Major Challenges, six items were listed with two members stating the first item-retirement of 3 to 5 administrative personnel.


One of the items was - develop understandable accrued time obligation/account. Councilman Toth said one of the problems was the time was being earned at one rate and paid out at a higher rate when that employee retired or quit and this money was never invested to take that into account so potentially this was a loss of funds.


Pages 2 and 3 listed Other Challenges; Ms. Fluharty asked if there was anything they wanted clarification on and Councilman Mitzel said "responsible" budget. She said in remembering the sheet it came from, they were talking about staying within the existing budget and not guesstimating that more money was going to come in and that there was definitely no desire to increase that.


Councilman Mitzel referred to, "resolve conflict between Council and administration goals"; he said he didn't think there was a conflict because Council didn't have any goals.


Councilman Toth said he didn't understand administrative goals because he always thought administrative goals were supposed to be based on legislative action taken by council. He said legislative direction is set by council and the administration is supposed to follow that.


Ms. Fluharty asked if there were clear department goals and members noted that department heads wrote up goals for the budget every year. Councilman Mitzel asked if all those goals stapled together and handed to them were the administrative goals, and Mr. Kriewall said their goals were taken from the council adopted budget while the day-to-day operation of a department was governed by the department heads. He said if there was an overall goal it would be in their prior goal processes where administration really participated with council in their goal setting. Mr. Kriewall said he agreed it hasn't been very fruitful lately but he didn't see where there was a particular conflict.


Councilman Mitzel said to him, administrative goals pretty much fell into the last item - a five year plan for personnel, job descriptions, and funding while the council needed to set goals on what they would like to accomplish.


Ms. Fluharty said she felt what council was really looking at was something they could actually do something about - things that were measurable, had a time line, had some entity responsible for following through and had an implementation plan attached to them. She said they could take something fairly vague - like creating a responsible budget - and the first thing they had to do was define "responsible." She said that could mean creating a budget within XX dollars without increasing taxes and it would be a clear objective to accomplish if that was one they chose in 1995-96. She said then they had to decide who was responsible for developing this budget to make sure it fit the definition - within XX dollars without increasing taxes - and in what time frame through what process step by step.


Councilman Mitzel said then if they said to the city manager they wanted a budget without any increase in taxes, then the first version the manager brought back would be without increasing taxes.


Marlene Fluharty asked what if they adopted "support the Master Plan." Councilman Mitzel said he supposed if they were to adopt that goal it would mean that they wouldn't rezone something if it didn't go with the Master Plan. Council members commented that the master plan was not set in stone and it was as much a philosophy as a plan. Ms. Fluharty said then if this was something they wanted to do, what they first had to decide was what does "support the Master Plan" mean; what are the criteria by which they will note they are supporting the Master Plan.


Marlene Fluharty asked what "make it easier to do business with the city at all levels" meant to them; she said the first thing they needed to know was why it was difficult to do business with the city and how could they make it easier. She asked if easier meant quicker, or less paperwork, etc.; she said they had to define the problem.


Councilman Toth said that was crossing the line; doing business with the city was at an administrative level. He said on the legislative side of the house, council could say make it easier to do business with the city and then it was up to the city manager to implement that. He said if there was a conflict in doing business with the city, council didn't get into the day to day routine.


Councilman Pope said they did get involved; they have a business license fee that was adopted by council and gave direction to administration so they could change that ordinance which would make it easier to do business with the city, or it may be electronic kiosks.


Mr. Kriewall said from the feedback administration got, it was the ordinances, planning requirements, etc. that create the largest problem; it was not how they were cranked through day by day - it was the legislation that has been layered like wetlands and woodlands.


Ms. Fluharty said with whatever goals they chose, they would have to decide whose job it was, who played which role, and as they looked at what had to be accomplished, what can the council do differently to implement this and what did the city administration have to do.


They reviewed Greatest Pride items listed by council and Least Pride items; Ms. Fluharty noted that remarks about council's behavior to each other were mentioned by every member in various parts of the questionnaire.


They reviewed "Changes you'd Make" and Ms. Fluharty asked what were the common themes. Members said lack of direction/directives, council behavior (individually and collectively), lack of distinct policies, Budgets/taxes/revenues, administrative plans, and performance of boards and commissions.


Ms. Fluharty said when council members were asked to list five objectives for 1995 the criteria was to try to make it about things that were clear objectives, easily communicated, precise, offer realistic expectations, could be accomplished within 12 months, was consistent with programs and authority of council and could be accomplished with existing resources. 27 objectives were listed and members categorized them along with Changes, Major Challenges, and Other Challenges as either philosophy, budget, or operations or a combination.


Members decided that topics would be arranged by category and mailed to council members for ranking prior to another meeting. After a brief discussion, there was consensus that council wanted to see a budget brought in with no tax increases.


Meeting adjourned at 10:45 PM.










Date Approved: