Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Government topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge fixes to narrow road plans, raise homelessness concerns; council adopts budget ordinance and passes two resolutions
Summary
During audience participation residents warned that planned street narrowing on Thomas and Cliff streets would endanger traffic and emergency access and asked about homelessness services; the council adopted Ordinance 24‑39 (budget amendment), suspended rules on Ordinance 24‑38 (addressing public‑property camping), and passed Resolutions 24‑40 and 24‑41 before moving to executive session on real estate.
Ironton residents used the council’s audience‑participation period on Oct. 10 to press the council on street‑reconstruction plans and homelessness, and the council adopted a budget amendment and two resolutions before adjourning into executive session.
Jim Birchway (1744 Kevin Street) raised detailed objections to proposed work on Thomas and Cliff streets, saying planned curb and storm‑drain placements would effectively narrow some blocks from roughly 21–22 feet to about 18 feet and leave no room for two cars to pass. “There’s no way two cars can pass… the fire truck, I don’t think they can get through there and turn their corners,” Birchway said, warning of safety hazards, daily police presence and potential liability claims if designs are not adjusted.
Council members acknowledged the concern, said the city had funded the work and had engineers and consultants involved, and asked staff to follow up. The mayor and other members said they rely on information from department heads and partners such as Arcadis to resolve technical questions.
Carol Carter (Barrington) urged the council to address homelessness and suggested vacant buildings could be used for people without addresses. The council said the City Mission (not a city agency) provides shelter services, noted that some people decline rules or have other issues such as mental health or substance use, and pointed to ongoing discussions of related ordinance changes. A council member said the concerns dovetail with the city’s work on amended Ordinance 24‑38, which the council discussed during the meeting.
Votes at a glance
- Ordinance 24‑39 (amend permanent operating budget for fiscal year ending 12/31/2024; emergency): rules suspended for second/third readings and the ordinance was adopted by roll call (all members recorded “Aye”).
- Amended Ordinance 24‑38 (title read as a public‑property/anti‑camping measure, declared emergency): council moved to suspend rules and advanced the ordinance to further reading by title.
- Resolution 24‑40 (authorize mayor to apply for/accept/enter a water pollution control loan/assistance agreement): passed on roll call.
- Resolution 24‑41 (accept amounts and authorize necessary tax levies to be served upon the Budget Commission): passed on roll call.
At the end of the meeting a motion to enter an executive session to discuss real estate with the solicitor, mayor, finance director and invited staff carried, and the council adjourned into that closed session.
Why it matters: The comments underscore residents’ concerns about safety and the local impacts of engineering decisions during street reconstruction and raise community expectations that the council and staff will reconcile design choices with resident needs. Separately, adoption of a budget amendment (Ordinance 24‑39) and passage of two resolutions move specific fiscal and grant actions forward.
What’s next: Council members asked staff for follow‑up on curb/drain placement and said the clerk would circulate the amended ordinance language; the council moved into an executive session on real estate at the meeting’s close.
