Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCM-08-17-98Cityo£ Carmel AMENDED CARMEL CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MONDAY, AUGUST 17, 1998 --7 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS / CITY HALL / ONE CIVIC SQUARE MEETING CALLED TO ORDER 2. 3. 4. 6. 7. 8. INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE RECOGNITINO OF CITY EMPLOYEES AND OUTSTANDING CITIZENS APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. July 16, 1998, Budget Heating (*tabled from August 3 meeting) b. July 30, 1998, Special Meeting c. August 3, 1998, Regular Meeting RECOGNITION OF PERSONS WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL COUNCIL, MAYORAL AND CLERK-TREASURER COMMENTS/OBSERVATIONS ACTION ON MAYORAL VETOS CLAIMS · Payroll · General Claims · Retirement COMMITTEE REPORTS OLD BUSINESS a. Permission to Use Additional Funds from EMS and Fire Capital Fund ($215.000); Chief Douglas Callahan, Fire Department b. Third Reading Ordinance D-1374-98/Adoption ora Supplement to the Carmel City Code; Diana L. Cordray, Clerk-Treasurer *tabled from 8/3/98 meeting c. Second Reading Ordinance D-1376-98/Amendment to Section 2-42 of the Carmel City Code (Sick Leave); Barbara Lamb, Human Resources ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571-2400 11. Second Reading Ordinance D-1377-98/Amendment to Section 2-38 of the Carmel City Code (Medical Insurance Premiums); Barbara Lamb, Human Resources Second Reading Ordinance D-1378-98/Repeal of Sections 2-66 through 2-71 and Addition of Section 2-40 of the Carmel City Code (Civilian Disability Plan); Barbara Lamb, Human Resources PUBLIC HEARING a. First Reading Ordinance C-192/Annexation of Brooks Landing, Section 4; Kenneth Alexander, Brenwick Development *published in The Daily Ledger on August 6, 1998 b. First Reading Ordinances D-1382-98 to D-1392-98/1999 City_ of Carmel Budgets Ordinance D-1382-98/General Fund: ~ a. Police Department $6,117,001 b. Communications Cente~ $1,357,485 c. Fire Department $8,735,240 d. Board of Public Works $9,141,308 e. Mayor's Office $265,544 f. Department of Law $247,864 g. Plan Commission $190,312 h. Dept. of Community Services $809,269 i. Department of Administration $799,832 j. City Court $310,803 k. City Council $4,050,338 1. Clerk-Treasurer's Office $369,595 Ordinance D-1383-98/MVIt Fund: a. City Engineer's Office b. Street Department $3.026.658 $297,007 $2,729,651 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Ordinance D-1384-98/Local Road & Street $1,124,000 Ordinance D-1385-98/Cum Cap Improvement $169,800 Ordinance D-1386-98/Cum Cap Sewer $733,600 Ordinance D-1387-98/Law Enf Cont Education $33,000 Ordinance D-1388-98/Cum Cap Development $2,258,000 Ordinance D- 1389-98/Lease/Rental $1,218,350 Ordinance D-1390-98/Police Pension $294,774 Ordinance D-1391-98/Fire Pension $335,716 Ordinance D-1392-98/Law Enf Aid Fund IX $309,500 Total $41,897,989 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. NEW BUSINESS a. Resolution CC-08-17-98-01/Resolution Approving Payment of Construction Costs for Hazel Dell Parkway ($713,358.44); Kate Boyle, City Engineer OTHER BUSINESS ANNOUNCEMENTS EXECUTION OF DOCUMENTS ADJOURNMENT CARMEL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MONDAY, AUGUST 17, 1998 --7 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS / CITY HALL / ONE CIVIC SQUARE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor James Brainard, Council President Robert Battreall; Councilors Kevin Kirby, Jim Miller, Norm Rundle, Luci Snyder, Ron Carter and Billy Walker. Clerk-Treasurer Diana Cordray and Deputy Clerk Rebecca Martin also attended. Mayor Brainard called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Councilor Miller gave the invocation. Mayor Brainard led the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Councilor Rundle moved to approve the July 16, 1998, budget hearing minutes. Councilor Walker seconded. Councilor Battreall moved to amend the total listed for Board of Public Works Budget from $8,041,308 to $9,141,308 and to replace the phrase according to his Curt Coonrod, his fiscal advisor with the phrase according to his fiscal advisor, Curt Coonrod. The amendment was approved 7-0. The July 16 minutes, as amended, were approved 7-0. Councilor Battreall moved to approve the July 30 and August 3, 1998, meeting minutes. Councilor Rundle seconded. Councilor Battreall moved to amend the minutes to correct a statement Barbara Lamb, the Human Resources director, had accidentally made in response to a question by Councilor Carter. Councilor Carter had asked Ms. Lamb about the differences in pay among Administrative Assistants I, II and III, but Ms. Lamb responded to Councilor Carter as if he had asked only about differences in pay among Administrative Assistant I's. Councilor Miller seconded. Councilor Snyder asked for clarification of the amendment. Councilor Battreall explained Ms. Lamb's request. Councilor Carter stated he preferred to leave the minutes as they were because the minutes were supposed to be an accurate record of what was spoken at the meetings, not of what was meant to be spoken. He stated that he would rather have a councilor clarify the issue under Agenda Item 6--Council, Mayoral and Clerk-Treasurer Comments/Observations than amend the minutes. Councilor Battreall withdrew his motion. Councilor Miller withdrew his second. The July 30 and August 3 minutes were a_nproved 7-0. RECOGNITION OF PERSONS WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL: Thomas Harleman. 11080 Willowrnere Drive, stated the mayor lied to several television stations by teliing them the City had held 70 public information meetings for the Monon when the City had held only three, criticized an IUPUI study on the wants and needs of Carmel Clay residents and stated he was against the Mounn railway line being converted into a linear park. He also stated the City had not solicited adequate input from homeowners along the trail. Sallie Nyhart Peeler, 1136 Hialea Court, handed a letter to Clerk-Treasurer Curdray to be attached to the minutes (Ex~l~i~it A), asked the mayor to respond in writing to the letter, and criticized the City for not prowdmg t~ith the master plan for parks. Peggy Box. 130 First Street NW, stated she and her family were looking forward to the development of the Monon railway into a linear park and that the Monon Trail was part of why they bought their house. Lance Hatting, 641 First Avenue N-W, stated he was in favor of the Morion Trail. Paul Bolin, 1217 Donnybrook Drive, stated his property was adjacent to the proposed Central Park site and that he was in favor of its development and the development of other parks in Cannel. Amy Harting, 641 First Avenue NW, stated she was in favor of the Monon Trail. Dolly Croft, 4988 St. Charles Place, stated she was an avid cyclist who used the Indianapolis portion of the Monon Trail quite often and was looking forward to cycling on the Monon Trail in Carmel. ELECTED OFFICIALS' COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS: Councilor Carter stated he had bicycled on the Monon Trail to the State Fair and had talked to other families from Carmel who had done the same. He stated the Monon was an appropriate use of commnnity money, and that Mr. Harleman had had many opportunities to participate in the Monon planning process. Councilor Carter explained that the master plan for parks that Ms. Peeler discovered this past weekend was put together publicly. He also stated that linear trails were accepted nationwide. Councilor Battreall stated he had talked to several residents who had bought their homes in Old Town Cannel specifically so they could live near the Morion Trail. Councilor Snyder stated the City had held more than three public information sessions regarding the Monon because she had attended five of them. Councilor Miller stated that his constituents were in favor of the Monon Trail. Councilor Kirby stated that any forward-thinking community was going to have a master plan and that it was the homeowner's responsibility to know what was going on in the City. Mayor Brainard addressed Mr. Harleman, who had been repeatedly asking for an opportunity to address the council a second time, that this was not the time for public comment, but was the agenda item for council, mayoral and clerk-treasurer comment. Mayor Brainard explained that he did not tell the media the City had held 70 public information sessions specifically for the Monon Trail, but that anyone wishing to comment about the Monon Trail had had 70 opportunities to address the issue. He also stated the local newspaper had been printing articles about the idea of developing the Morion Trail for about six or seven years, and that homeowners carried the burden to stay abreast of the City's actions. CLAIMS: Councilor Snyder moved to approve claims in the amount of $534,233.91. Councilor Rundle seconded. Claims were approved 7-0. COMMITTEE REPORTS: Councilor Battreall gave an update on the Year 2000 (Y2K) Assessment Committee's findings. He stated the committee should have an idea by next week of the costs to ensure the City will be Y2K compatible. Councilor Kirby stated he had been attending the Central Indiana Regional Transportation Vision Plan meetings at the request of Council President Battreall and had been asked to serve as vice co-chairman of the group. He stated he would keep the council updated on the committee's accomplishments. Councilor Snyder announced several items listed as public hearings on the next several Plan Commission agendas. Clerk-Treasurer Cordray stated the computerized inventory the City had put together last year was a great help to the Y2K consultanm She commended department directors for helping her and her staff assimilate the inventory. OLD BUSINESS: Mayor Brainard announced the Fire Chief's request for Permission to Use Additional Funds from the EMS and Fire Capital Fund to pay for twO squad vehicles ($215.000) and stated the chief requested the item to be tabled because he was still investigating his options. Councilor Miller moved to table the request. Councilor Battreall seconded. The request was tabled 7-0. Councilor Walker moved to introduce Ordinance D-1374-98. adoption of a supplement to the Carmel City Code. Councilor Snyder seconded. Councilor Rundle read a memo from the city attorney recommending the council approve the ordinance. The city attorney stated in his recommendation that he had received the corrected pages from the codification company, and they now conformed to the ordinances passed by the council. Ordinance D-1374-98 was approved 7-0. Mayor Brainard announced Ordinance D-1376-98. an amendme~at to Section 2-42 of the Carmel City Code (Sick Leave). There was no discussion. Ordinance D-1376-98 was approved 7-0. Mayor Brainard announced Ordinance D-1377-98. an amendment to Section 2r38 of the Cannel City Code (Medical Insurance Premiums). Councilor Rundle asked if the mayor would explain the intent of these ordinances for the public. The mayor asked Barbara Lamb, Human Resources director, to address the council. Ms. Lamb explained that Ordinance D-1376-98 changed the sick leave policy for City employees in a way that would reward those who didn't use their sick time, but wouldn't hurt those who needed to use sick days because of illness. Ms. Lamb also explained the b~nefits of the disability plan approved in ordinance D-1378-98, and talked about Ordinance D-1377-98, an ordinance causing the City to pay part of medical insurance premiums for retired City employees who have worked for the City for at least 20 years. Councilor Rundle stated the City's actions in Ordinance D-1377-98 were consistent with changes occundng in private business. Councilor Kirby stated the City was trying to provide increased benefits to employees by these ordinances and that most employees viewed these implications of these ordinances positively. Ordinance D-1377-98 was a_nproved 7-0. Mayor Brainard announced Ordinance D-1378-98. repeal of Sections 2-66 through 2-71 and addition of Section 2-40 to the Carmel City Code (Civilian Disability Plan]. There was no discussion. Ordinance D- 1378-98 was approved 7-0. ~.~: Councilor Walker moved to introduce Ordinance G-192. annexation of Brooks I,~i~g~. Councilor Rundle seconded. Ken Alexander of Brenwick development described the parcel requested to be annexed. He explained that the piece of land was surrounded on all sides by the City. Mayor Brainard opened the public hearing at 8:02 p.m. Seeing no one from the public who wished to speak, the mayor closed the hearing at the same time. Councilor Walker stated he was glad to see a property owner who wasn't opposed to being annexed or condenmed. Ordinance C-192 was carded over to the next meeting. Mayor Brainard relinquished the chair to Council President Battreall. Councilor Battreall asked for a motion to introduce the 1999 budgets. Ordinances D-1382-98 through D-! 392-98. Councilor Snyder moved to introduce the budgets. Councilor Walker seconded. Mayor Brainard stepped down to the podium to address the council. The mayor explained he was going to propose a resolution at the September 14 meeting that would cap the 1999 tax rate at 8 percent less than the 1998 rate. He stated he had reviewed the history of the surplus in all City funds and had projected what the surplus would be in later years. He stated that if council approved the budget being discussed tonight, the City's operating balance would fall to about $2.5 million. He stated the other City funds would maintain a surplus of $20 million. The mayor explained that the amounts in the funds fluctuated but that the City currently had a balance of $27 millions-S5.5 million of which was in pension funds. The mayor explained that inflation had increased about 3 percent and that the City had grown about 6 percent according to the 1996 Special U.S. Census. He explained that the "daytime" population also had increased. The mayor stated the proposed operations budget had increased less than 9 percent. As for the large increase in the overall budget, he stated this was because of increased transportation projects and money for a central park. The mayor explained the public would have an opportunity to comment tonight and at the next meeting on September 14. Councilor Battreall opened the public heating at 8:12 p.m. Seeing no one from the public who wished to speak, Councilor Battreall closed the heating at 8:13 p.m. Councilor Miller stated he believed infrastructure projects were a good idea. He stated the budget had almost doubled in two years. Councilor Snyder explained that this mayor and council had implemented many of the studies and finished others that had been started during the previous administration. She explained that most of the City departments' budgets came out of the General Fund budget ($32,394,591) and that the council had to approve all of the budgets or none of them. Councilor Snyder stated that now was the time to begin many of the infrastructure projects included in the Board of Public Works budget. She explained that in previous years the council had approved small budgets and allowed for many appropriations throughout the year, but that this year the council was looking to approve bigger budgets, limiting appropriations. She stated she was concerned the council would not be able to track expenditures without having projects come before them as appropriations. Councilor Snyder also stated she was concerned about credibility, citing the secret tax increase of 1996 and the $32 million bond issue in which councilors were incorrectly told they could not have control over the project once they approved the bond issue. She explained she was concerned with approving the Board of Public Works budget for $9 million and the council budget that included $4 million for parks. She stated she wanted to keep a handle on large pools of money. Councilor Snyder also criticized the mayor for spending $1.2 to $1.4 million to accelerate the completion date of Hazel Dell Parkway and adding roundabouts to the design without informing most members of the council. Councilor Kirby stated he also was concerned about approving a large budget, even though he supported the $4 million for parks. In regard to the small increase in the operations part of the budget, he stated he hadn't expected those costs to increase proportionate with inflation and the growth of the City because of economies of scale and the probability that local inflation wasn't 3 percent. Councilor Kirby stated he also felt like he was misled about some of the projects undertaken by the City. He stated he didn't think some of the projects scheduled for next year would get finished. He suggested putting line items in the budgets for specific projects to help track money spent on them. Councilor Kirby stated he wanted to see a more thorough explanation of road projects and a breakdown of the budget into operation and capital expenditures. Councilor Carter stated that in 1995, the previous council approved the 1996 budget, but then rescinded it and replaced it with a smaller budget. He stated that the secret tax increase made in 1996 to which Councilor Snyder referred was not an increase f~om the original budget passed by the previous council. Councilor Carter stated that Councilor Kirby had talked in favor of lower tax rates. He asked Councilor Kirby how he expected the City to pay for some of the projects he was recommending be pulled from this budget and put into the following year's budget--would the City have to raise taxes the following year to get the projects back on line? Councilor Kirby stated he was in favor of lower property tax rates, but believed the City could save money if it planned properly instead of rushing the projects. Councilor Carter again asked if the City would have to raise taxes next year. Councilor Kirby said taxes would not need to be raised, the City would pay as it went, and would maintain a larger surplus than the $2.5 million. Mayor Brainard addressed Councilor Snyder's concern about roundabouts being placed at two intersections in Hazel Dell Parkway. He explained that in January 1997 at a public meeting at Cherry Tree School, a member of the public asked if roundabouts could be placed at every intersection in Hazel Dell Parkway. He stated the engineer for the project began working them into the design immediately. The engineer recommended roundabouts be placed at 126~ Street and 131st Street because the roundabouts were cheaper and superior to traffic lights at these intersections, but not at 96% 116~ or 146~ streets. The mayor explained the roundabouts were incorporated into the plans prior to the vote on the bond, and stated the Indianapolis Star published a story referring to them as circular intersections. He stated the roundabouts were not meant to be a secret. Councilor Snyder explained that several of the councilors didn't know about the roundabouts. Councilors continued to discuss their knowledge of various infrastructure projects and the amount of input they should have in regard to them. Councilor Rundle stated he was unaware of the roundabouts and wished he had been informed of them since they were in his district. He stated he wasn't sure if he was comfortable with a budget that left only $2.5 million in the operating balance. He suggested taking the middle ground in regard to the size of the budget, but stated the budget was developed with fiscal prudence. Councilor Walker stated he didn't see anything wrong with the budget or with the projects included in it. He stated the City should keep the tax rate low, but needed to maintain Carmel at a level taxpayers expected. Councilor Walker also stated that 116th Street south of Merchants Square should be expanded immediately. Councilor B attreall stated the mayor always has been available to discuss projects and the council shouldn't try to micromanage his office. He agreed the budget could probably be cut. The !999 budgets. Ordinances D-1382-98 through D-1392-98 were carded over to the next meeting. NEW BUSINESS: Councilor Miller moved to approve Resolution CC-08-17-98-01. a resolution approving pa_vment 0f construction costs for Hazel Dell Parkway ($713.358.44). Councilor Rundle seconded. Resolution CC-08-17-98-0! was approved 7-0. Councilor Miller recommended the City contact NetCom to help organize the City's LAN system and handed a copy of a letter regarding NetCom's work for the City of Noblesville to councilors, the mayor and the clerk-treasurer. Councilor Carter stated he was concerned the City's web site was not very good and that the City needed to get it running. Mayor Brainard announced the web site's address and stated that it was up and running. Councilor Kirby commended the mayor on how he handled the situation at the Carmel Motel. The mayor commended City employees for their dedication and work during the incident. Councilor Kirby moved to adjourn the meeting. Councilor Battreall seconded. The meeting was adjourned 5-0 after the execution of documents at 9:08 p.m. CoUncilor Rundle and Walker had left the room. Respectfully submitted~, clerk-Treasure~rdray, IAMC Attest: Clerk-Treasurer Diana L. Cord~ay, yayor James Brainard BRADLEY ALLEN PEELER AND SALLIE NYHART PEELER TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: MAYOR J2kM~ES BRMNARD 2kND ME,MlSERS OF THE CARMEL CITY COUNCIL SALLIE NYHART PEELER PROPERTY RIGHTS CONCERNING THE PROPOSED MONON TRAIL PROJECT 05/04/98 MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL: MY HUSBAND BRAD AND MYSELF ARE NOT AGAINST PARKS! I AM HERE AS A VOICE OF MY FAMILY TO PROTECT OUR PROPERTY RIGHTS AND TO PUBLICALLY REQUEST YOU TO STOP OR POSTPONE THE "PROPOSED MONON TRAIL PROJECT". The city of Carmel and its council Mr. Herin/ Price and Fils associates have sent erroneous and misleading information to the media and us. In some instances, they have sent no information at all. Our demands as property owners have not been met or not addressed. This did not start yesterday. It started the day we read Micbelle Barbercheck's amde in the "Indianapolis Star/News, Inside Section" Wednesday, December 4, 1996(copy enclosed), where Mayor Brainaxd was quoted as saying "the wheels are in morion to offer adjacent landowners cash for their parcels at $22,399.76/acre. A judge determined that price to be fair." No surname was attached to the tide of judge. The article goes on to say that "Indianapolis attorney Henry Price is working for the City of Carmel, on the Morion Trail Project" and that he xvas working to lind out whom indeed owned the abandoned railroad right of way. Judy Hagan, Carmel Parks Board President, was also quoted as saying: "an entire community is sitting waiting for this to be done. tt is probably the #I priority in the community." That article gave my husband and me great pause. We cut out the article for future reference. Not one person had contacted us regarding this fantastic project, which was in such demand, and certainly, we thought, someone would contact us shordy. The article stated that Mayor Brainard hoped the buy-out would be completed in the first few months of 1997. We also thought the article must be in error. Certainly, no one would offer us far less for our property than its original purchase price in 1988. We also assumed the raikoad property would revert to us as well, because nothing was mentioned at the closing of our property as to CSX owning adjacent property, through a title search. Therefore, it would be just a matter of time before someone from the Carmel Parks Board would call on us to tell us about this wonderful project. Not one person came, only legal documents. The first one that came was an "Order on Joint Motion for Approving Entry upon Land by Registered Land Surveyor". We received this document, on aprox. 24 Feb, 1997(Copy enclosed). Certainly, we thought, contact from The City of Carmel would be soon forthcoming, as they would be su~eyiug our land and find out that our land was womb far more than the above stated amount. Not one person contacted us. In early November 1997, "Legal Notice of Public Hearing" was sent to, us (copy enclosed). This document stated that" the purpose of the public hearing was to discuss environmental impact incident to the acqnisirion of real estate for a proposed bike/pedestrian tra/l on the abandoned CSX railroad line in Hamilton County, Cry Township". My husband and I xvere both employed full-me and caring for our very young child with Special Needs. We could not attend this meeting. If this meeting proved to be important, we probably would hear the results of their "Environmental" discussions. We did not receive any results fi:om that "Public Hearing" and no one still bad contacted us as to this proposed project, except by this Legal Document. On about March 7, 1997, we received the OFFICAL NOTICE OF CLASS ACTION, sent to us by Henry Price, Esq. of Price and Findling. (Copy enclosed). This document identified us as members of a subclass, to "quiet" ride against CSX Transportation, Inc. and to recover money dan~ges for hndowners whose fide, was allegedly slandered by CSX. This is where our confusion and frustration really begins. This legal document mentioned above sent to us by Henry Price, describes many things, in particular, it states 2 independent appraisals had been received where our collective properties along the trail were valued at approximately $23,000.00/acre. This "Notice of Chss Action" went on to say that they wanted one third of any money we were to receive from the City of Carmel, because of all the ~vork they bad done on "our" behalf. That ~vould mean they would receive aprox. $7660.67 an acre. This troubled my husband and myself, because in the previously mentioned article, in the Indianapolis Star/News, Mr. Price was quoted to be "legal Council" for the City of Carmel. In the same article, he said, "if a hndowner declines the dries offer, they will have to handle the dispute on their own." It seemed to us at the time and still to this day unusual that Mr. Price could represent the City of Camael and the landowners. Was this a conflict of interest? We thought so, Perhaps the Mayor and the Carmel City Council need to ask their legal council to took into why or how an attorney could represent the owners of land and an entity that wants to take it away. We gave the City of Carmel and Mr., Price time, perhaps someone; maybe Judy Hagan witl contact the landowners regarding the "Proposed Morion Project". Not one person contacted us, not the City of Carmel, The City ptannmg Commission or The Department of Parks and Recreation where Judy Hagan is the President and seemingly so anxious for this project to proceed, as it was the #1 community priority. Why we wondered had they not contacted us, this project directly affected us. We continued to wait. The SECOND OFFICIAL NOTICE OF CLASS ACTION(copy enclosed) arrived by certified mail, May of 1997. Questions were to be addressed to Henry Price, Greg Gordon or Deborah Pook of Price & Findling or Nels Ackerson, Lyxm Bulan or Gabriel Cairo of The Ackerson Group, Chartered in Washington, D.C. This document stated that the first notice was sent to us on December 31, 1996, that is not the case, the first document from Mr. Price is dated March 7, 1997 as per an accompanying letter, with that document (enclosed). This document has similar information as the first document of notice, regarding payment for land, but also gave us the option to refuse the City of Carmel's $23,000.00/acre offer. We hired Frederick D. Emhardt, Esq. of Plews Shadley Racher & Braun on 8 May 1997 to refuse the City of Carmel's Offer to buy our land. Written notice was sent by Mr. Emhardt on 8 May 1997 before the last date to notify refusal of 9 May 1997(Copy enclosed). We thought this will be great, the City of Carmel will have to send information to Mr. Emhardt and we wilt finally figure out some things. The legal mumbo-jumbo will come clear because our council will have legal papers first and explain it to us. We still receive letters from Mr. Price and his law firn~ Still to this day, it has not registered to him or the City of Carmel that we have independent legal council concerning the acquisition of our property to the City of Carmel. Enclosed are all the pieces of correspondence to and from the Price Law Firm, The City of Carmel and us as landowncrs. The most amaZing letter enclosed is a letter to us from Mr. Price's law firm. Where it states, "This is to acknowledge receipt of your letter and/or post card indicating your willingness to consider conveying the portion of your property that is part of the abandoned raikoad corridor to the City of Carmel once certain conditions are met." I have to tell you t almost fainted in disbelief when I read that. I called my husband; he said, "No such letter and or post card was ever sent to them with that conveyance." I just could not believe it. I had now concluded that these peopte were just not aware of what was going on around them, I sent a letter back to Mr. Price's firm stating I wanted to have a copy of that letter/and or post card, as I did not send anything like that to them, I do not believe they can lind that mail, as it does not exist. Other landowners have received this strange letter too; again, it might be wise to look into this matter. It seems you need to get together with Mr. Price's office and the Parks Board and put together a "time Line" where you can compare what has been sent out, received and sent out again. Does that seem to be unreasonable? Perhaps you can sense that a level of frustration is mounting. This whole thing is a mess! You folks do not seem to have your act together. The Parks Board has seemed to be the dhviug force behind this project; doesn't it seem reasonable of us to ask The Parks Board, The City of Carmel and the Cry Township Board to furnish us with information in a "reasonable and timely" manor, as xvell as advise us as to where and when concerns or questions could be addressed? I do not believe it is my phce to be "proactive" ia this action. It is YOUR collective responsibility, The City of Carmel, its Council, The Parks Board and the Cry Township Board's job to resolve situations that seem to be in conflict. The landowners that abut this so-called "Proposed Munun Trail" are not in the wrong. You are. If you had phyed your cards right you could have had help resolving some issues but Judy Hagan and her friends never contacted us, not once! It nmkes you wonder how effective she would be as Cry Township Trustee. Certainly not one that puts much thought into planning things or contacting citizens regarding things that affect them direrfly, that is clear. We have contacted them though to get information. We, as a group of property owners who own the land where you want to put this park initiated the informational meeting in March. I wonder where our invitations were to the plarmmg parties that involved completing the Munun Project design, that is to be in our backyards. Maybe, it did not matter to Mrs. Hagan and the other members of the Parks Board, because she was going to get this Proposed Park done. The Mayor wanted it and it does not matter what it costs, or the lives of landowners that will have a 24-honr a day change, forever. It seems strange that all the landowners have received is legal papers not answers as to xvhat this proiect is really about. In closing, I want to remind you of what I stated at the begirming of this statement. WE ARE NOT AGAINST PARKS. We are against the way you are going about this project. Be responsible government leaders and accountable for your actions. When was the last time you walked the entire length of the "Proposed Monon Trail"? Perhaps you did before your election in 1995, but I am asking you to walk it now, the entire length. Why don't you do this just yourselves, The Mayor, the City Council and Advisory Board, you are our elected officials, the ones that can md should put a halt to tiffs project. Walk the whole 50 blocks from 96~ Street to 146ts Street. Ask yourselves is the whole 66 feet needed? Look at how the 33 feet of property taken on either side will impact the folks that live there. Hoxv would only 20 dedicated parking spots affect parking along the "Proposed Park"? Will that be a problem? Ask questions of yourselves and the property owners. You need to listen. Prove to us that you can listen and put this project on hold until you have made solid plans with the citizens most effected. Follow the Clay Township Board's lead and put a stop on this project now. Why are you in such a hurry? Is careful planning with citizen input not important? It is mandatory, it is our tax dollars. A park now, at any price, is ludicrous! Thank-you