PICKERINGTON CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY,
APRIL 1, 2003
CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD
REGULAR
MEETING AGENDA
7:30
P.M.
1. ROLL CALL, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, AND INVOCATION. Council for the City of Pickerington met for a regular session Tuesday, April 1, 2003, at City Hall. Mayor Postage called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. Roll call was taken as follows: Mr. Wright, Mr. Shaver, Mr. Parker, Ms. Riggs, Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Fox, and Mayor Postage were present. Mr. Maxey was absent. Others present were: Joyce Bushman, Lynda Yartin, Bob Mapes, Linda Fersch, Chief Mike Taylor, Susan Crotty, Jeff Kraus, Steve Carr, Molly Schwartz, Frank Wiseman, Mike Maurer, Jennifer Wray, Kathy Lucas, Sue Cook, Marguerite Root, Pat Shaver, Kirsten Shaver, George Hallenbrook, Brian Wisniewski, Lisa Reade, Anne Marie Friedman, Robin Wright, Gary Johnson, Michael Armstrong, Carolyn Willis, Dave Houston, Robert Ramsdell, Dorothy Steiger, Patti Spears, Doug Reedy, Halie Marin, Ashley Bramel, Stephanie Dietz, Tammy Barletta, McKensie Wilson, Ben Williams, Rita Ricketts, John Ricketts, Bruce Rigelman, Mitch O’Brien, Dan Oakes, Gail Oakes, Tim Bryant, Jeff Fix, Bob Harding, Pastor Alyce Hardin-Cook, and others. Pastor Hardin-Cook delivered the invocation.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MARCH 18, 2003, REGULAR MEETING. Mr. Sabatino moved to approve; Mr. Wright
seconded the motion. Roll call was
taken with Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Parker, Mr. Wright, Mr. Fox, Mr. Shaver, and Mrs.
Riggs voting “Yea.” Motion passed,
6-0.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA.
Mr. Wright moved to approve; Mr. Fox seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino, Mr.
Wright, Mr. Shaver, Mr. Fox, Mr. Parker, and Mrs. Riggs voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
4. COMMUNITY COMMENTS:
A. Mrs. Yartin stated she had received a letter from Kenneth J. Brown, Pastor of Grace Brethren Church, that he asked to be read into the record. The letter is Attachment 1 to these minutes.
B. Dorothy Steiger, 44 Fancher Street. Mrs. Steiger stated growth is a problem for both our city and schools, and they are trying to deal with this problem. She stated new schools have been built, and the city has set a new program where new houses can be assessed to offset the growth. She stated this is the best community where anyone can live, and she is proud of our city. She continued there is a group of people that would take our city down a different road, and it is a road she does not like, with continuous criticism, secret meetings, and now a recall of our elected officials. Mrs. Steiger stated if you would stand alone, without a crowd behind you, and listen to your elected officials you could do no better than they are doing. She stated they are trying to take the right road for the citizens of Pickerington, and there is very little pay and much time consuming work for these officials. She stated we elected them as our leaders and you must not be so power hungry, but give them a chance. Mrs. Steiger further stated she had asked our new Mayor to set his goals and she was asking everyone to all pull together for Pickerington and she felt our objective is to improve and elevate the character of mankind and to make our community a better place in which to live. She stated she was asking everyone to use common sense and she did not feel we needed a recall.
C. Stephanie Brobst, 7020 Blacklick Eastern Road. Ms Brobst stated she would like to ask that the legislation on growth management be removed from the table and voted on as it is imperative for the well being of this community as a whole. Ms Brobst stated people that live in the unincorporated township are also affected by the growth and she would ask everyone to vote for this plan and move ahead. She stated she would ask that we sit down and talk to the developers and talk amongst ourselves about what we want our community to look like as she did not feel anyone wanted to be the next Hilliard or Dublin.
D. Patti Spears, 124 Hill Road N. Ms Spears it scares her to think how much hatred there is in this community. She stated she has heard that hatred breeds hatred and the cause of hatred is jealousy. She stated if that is true, where does that put this community? Ms Spears stated right now we should all be backing our troops but it seems all some people seem to think about is a recall, and no matter who fills the council seats someone will always find something wrong with what they do. Ms Spears further stated if they want to hate, go somewhere else and let Pickerington be at peace and be the nice community that it once used to be.
E. Carolyn Willis, 440 Hillview Street. Ms Willis stated she was present this evening as she wanted her voice to be heard. She stated as an educator she would support the growth management plan if she felt it would really be good for the schools, however, she did not feel it would make any significant change in the fiscal problems they are experiencing now or in the future. She stated the schools need solutions that will work now and in the future. Ms Willis stated the proposed growth management plan did not give any additional funds to the schools and, in fact, would put a larger tax burden on the residents of Pickerington. Ms Willis stated the school’s problems are only partly due to the development in the district, and partly due to the lack of commercial development. She stated we need solutions from Council that we can control, such as the community authority. She stated these funds would go to the schools. Ms Willis further stated the building industry is one of the largest in Pickerington as it employs people in Pickerington and the workers go to the restaurants, gas stations, etc. She stated those people would be affected by the moratorium and even if you want to blame the big companies for the growth, the small developers will be affected and their voices are not being heard.
F. Michael Armstrong, 538 Warwick Lane. Mr. Armstrong stated it was unanswered as to when and why the Pickerington community at large is not involved in the community authority plan. He questioned if this would be enacted after a couple more hundred building permits are issued or not at all. Mr. Armstrong stated he would ask council to listen to the people that elected them to office, to the people who spoke tonight and at other meetings, and to the people who voted in November sending council a message that they represent the people and not the builders. Mr. Armstrong stated people expect them act, and the time to act is now, and growth should be controlled until such time as a long range plan is put in place for the health of the Pickerington area community.
G. Ben Williams, 337 Colony Park Drive. Mr. Williams stated he had moved to this community about five years ago and had to leave because of a job. He stated he came back and decided to live here because it is a great community, and he has two children in the Pickerington school system as well. Mr. Williams stated what he has observed in the past year and a half is disturbing. He stated there are people with agendas that are personal and vindictive, and the builders were looked at as villains. Mr. Williams stated they were not villains. He stated he has been in the retail real estate business for 15 years, first on the development side and now for a national retailer. Mr. Williams stated there is talk about curbing growth of residential housing in this community, and then there is talk about bringing in retail to cover that tax base. He stated from his experience, you will not get retailers to come to a community that does not have people in it, so if the community is not going to grow, you will not get commercial businesses to come here. Mr. Williams stated the problem is not with the growth, the problem in our schools is with the state funding. He stated it has nothing to do with the people who want to come here, he came here because of the schools and because it is a wonderful community. He stated he was appalled at the views of certain people. Mr. Williams stated there is talk of recalling council and all that would do is throw this community into chaos, it is not constructive. He stated if you do not agree with them, that is fine, you have that right, but to bring in personal agendas and talk about getting rid of people because you do not personally like what they are doing is not constructive. Mr. Williams stated he felt everyone should stop fighting and bickering, step back, and figure out what needs to be done in a cooperative effort. Mr. Williams asked everyone to pull together for the betterment of the community.
H. Lisa Reade, 10416 Wright Road. Ms Reade stated she felt four things have to happen in some fashion. First, Ordinance 2003-17 needs to be passed with three readings tonight as it has been put off long enough, and it should be passed as is, not with a lot of changes. Ms Reade stated our schools need action now, and Mr. Parker had stated when he supported tabling this measure, that it could be enacted quickly when it returned for a vote. Ms Reade stated Mr. Shaver had agreed, in good faith, to table the item and since that time she has seen no effort put forth by Mr. Parker or other council members to come to an agreement that would work and instead Mayor Postage has placed a community authority in front of the city as a solution. Ms. Reade stated she thought it was evident this will not solve our current or future problems and it is time to act on the moratorium. Ms Reade stated the second item she felt was needed was to continue to evaluate the community authority, but move the discovery and development of it to a public arena and out of the back rooms, and to begin meaningful dialogue with Violet Township. Ms Reade stated the community authority does nothing to promote a growth strategy, does not provide funds to solve the current classroom shortage, does not provide funds to solve the current school operating deficit, and the growth it produces will add an additional $2,000 operating deficit per pupil per year. Ms Reade stated the Authority did not include Violet Township and the Township is more than 60 percent of the school’s enrollment. Ms Reade further stated the community authority would require new school construction be in the City and she felt schools needed to be built in the best location to serve the children attending them. Ms Reade stated the Ohio Revised Code states there will be an equal number of citizens representing citizens and citizens representing builders on the Community Authority’s board in addition to a government representative and she felt this meant there was every chance that the board control would remain in the hands of the developers and city council. She further stated it did not provide a repayment guarantee on the bond issue against future growth, so if the housing doesn’t support the bonds the funds will have to come from the rest of the residents. Ms Reade stated in the last election people told council what they wanted and they wanted council to listen and address their concerns.
I. Gary Johnson, 749 North Starr Drive. Mr. Johnson stated he did not want to speak about the state of the community, but about the cause. He stated he felt the cause was obstruction, and obstruction is defined as to stand in the way of or to block something, and he felt an example of this was when, last November, the voters sent a resounding message to slow down growth, yet it is his understanding that last year though the end of November the city had issued 25 building permits. He stated through the end of February this year, 70 have been issued, and that is obstruction. Mr. Johnson stated the Columbus Board of Realtors had sent an e-mail to all the local realtors encouraging them to fight against slow growth efforts. He stated this letter stated they had worked with city staff and the majority of city council who are in support of growth and the building industry association, trying to communicate the value of good managed residential growth. He stated he had no problem with that as they are trade associations, however, he had a problem with the city working with them when the voters so clearly sent their message in November. He stated further, prior to the election in November the city rushed the approval of some 2,000 plats, and he questioned how many students that will add to our schools and what would it do to the resident’s taxes. He stated they knew the initiatives were coming and they acted quickly to protect the developers. Mr. Johnson stated early in 2002 initiative petitions were filed and this council let them die on the table. He stated when they were refiled and went to the ballot, they passed by 70 percent of the voters. Mr. Johnson stated he was moving out of Pickerington in June so he will send his tax dollars to the schools instead of the city. He continued that the city had passed legislation that would mandate R-4 development throughout the city and a broad coalition of voters objected and in a single day collected about 500 signatures to put a repeal of the ordinance on the ballot. He stated City Council repealed the ordinance and denied the citizens their vote. Mr. Johnson stated since that time Council is approving massive development as R-4 by emergency legislation. He stated the emergency status had one legal function, and that is to stop the public from reversing their decision by referendum. Mr. Johnson continued our schools are nearly bankrupt, our infrastructure is horrible, and now he has become one of the sponsors of the recall effort. Mr. Johnson stated he is disappointed as he understood the charter provides for a 200 word written explanation of why you support a recall effort. He stated he could have saved 199 words. Obstruction is all that is necessary.
J. Rita Ricketts, 340 Hill Road North. Mrs. Ricketts stated there has been much discussion about the purchase of Hickory Lakes by the City of Pickerington. She stated she would like to share some facts that are available to her. Mrs. Ricketts stated Hickory Lakes is a delightful place, it is, and has been for some time, a viable commercial venture in Violet Township. She stated if it is purchased by the City that income would be taken from the schools. She further stated Hickory Lakes is said to be going to cost the city in the vicinity of $3,600,000 according to the Ohio Water Pollution Control Loan Fund application filed with the WPCLF, and it is termed a loan on the application. She stated this cost is in addition to the $9,900,000 for the sewer expansion, and a loan for $1,940,000 for a new collector sewer, making a total loan request in the amount of $15,440,000. Mrs. Ricketts stated the present debt of the City of Pickerington is $23,951,944.94, and the borrowing of this $15,440,000 would increase the debt of the residents of the City of Pickerington to $39,391,944.94. She stated of that amount, the $3,600,000 would be a debt which would not be bringing in a great amount of income, but costing a great deal to make it a viable education center as has been proposed. She stated whether the debt is direct or indirect, it is money that has to be repaid by income available. Mrs. Ricketts stated, in addition, the total decision to take an option on this land and go out for the loan was made by the City Manager with the help of Mr. Postage and Mr. Wright. Mrs. Ricketts stated in a review of the minutes available to her, there has never been any discussion in a committee meeting, openly or in executive session, and then a decision made publicly. She stated the purchase or loan of the $3,600,000 was never included in any budgetary process, and in fact, the two reports made by R.D. Zande engineers on Hickory Lakes, which accompanied the application of the loan for the $3,600,000 were never authorized in any public document available to her. Mrs. Ricketts stated further Section 6.08 of the Charter of the City of Pickerington states, “No official, department or agency shall, during any budget or fiscal year, expend or contract to expend any money or incur any liability, or enter into any contract which by its terms involves the expenditure of money on behalf of the Municipality for any purpose in excess of the amounts appropriated for such expenditures or obligations. Any such obligations, oral or written, made in violation hereof shall be void. The officer or employee who knowingly attempts or purports to create such an obligation shall be guilty of a minor misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be removed and shall be disqualified from holding office or employment under the government of the municipality. However, nothing in this section shall prevent the making of contracts not to be fully performed within the fiscal year when specifically authorized by the Council.” Mrs. Ricketts stated she found that never to have been done in any way, shape or form. Mrs. Ricketts continued she would suggest that Mrs. Bushman’s option on Hickory Lakes and the filing of a loan for Hickory Lakes without authorization from Council is in violation of Section 6.08 of the Charter of the City of Pickerington.
K. Kirsten Shaver, 512 Chatham Court. Ms Shaver stated she loved her school but now she thought they were going down hill. She stated she is a Tiger, and the new school is big but it cannot stop the memories of the old school. She stated she would like council to think about what will happen to the schools.
L. Mitch O’Brien, 355 Timber Ridge Drive. Mr. O’Brien stated he was not present to talk about recalls or growth issues, but to ask for assistance on a safety issue for our children. Mr. O’Brien stated he had brought this issue up a year ago and he has not seen any changes. He further stated with the announcement by the School Board that they intend to keep some of the fourth grade students at Heritage Elementary for fifth grade, there is the potential for the population of Heritage to grow by over 100 students. He stated with the increase in the school population there also comes an increase in vehicle traffic on East Street and those streets that connect to it. He stated his observations, and the observations of many of the parents whose children attend Heritage, is that the current traffic flow and parking cannot handle the current vehicle load safely, and an increase will only put more children, parents, and drivers at risk. Mr. O’Brien stated he had approached the School Board about this problem and was told there was nothing they could do, that it was a city matter to handle. Mr. O’Brien stated he did not agree with that assessment, he felt this matter has to be handled jointly. Mr. O’Brien stated doing a traffic flow during and after school hours may be an issue to be addressed by the city, but providing adequate parking on school property is a school issue. Mr. O’Brien stated there is simply not enough room on East Street to handle cars parked on both sides of the street, the delivery vehicles, and the shuttles that move kids to and from day care centers. He stated for the safety of our children it is inherent for the city to study and make changes to the area around Heritage Elementary, and it is incumbent upon the School Board to take measures to offer adequate off street parking to their employees, and to parents for drop off and pick up of their children. He stated he would like to offer some common sense ideas for council to consider, such as one way only traffic flow, and eliminating parking on one or both sides of East Street. Mr. O’Brien continued these items could be considered separately or together, but please consider them soon. He stated it is not to late in this school year to make a positive change, and he would again approach the School Board and request they do their part to ensure safety such as paving a grassy area that is adjacent to their current parking lot and provide the staff with assigned parking and designated visitor parking. He stated many issues in the community that involve the city and the schools do not appear to be addressed jointly, but he believed this was an exception. Mr. O’Brien stated by working on this issue jointly the city could reassure the people of the safety of our children, and the voters that they are doing their part to fully support the School Board’s efforts to best utilize the available space in their buildings.
M. Bruce Rigelman, 12768 Ardine Court. Mr. Rigelman stated at the last council meeting he had stated that the 1,000 acre community authority, built out at 3 houses per acre, could easily add 4,500 new students to the schools. He stated financed at 6 percent over the 20 year life of the authority, the school buildings required to house these 4,500 students could easily cost $150,000,000. He stated to raise that kind of money each community authority household would have to pay more than ten times the $200 to $300 a year that Mayor Postage has proposed to collect. He stated Mayor Postage stated the school district had told the city that the community authority’s school housing needs would be met with $35,000,000. Mr. Rigelman stated the Mayor is wrong and the letter from Mr. Stemen, the acting superintendent of the school district, outlined the estimated costs of school facility needs that could be funded by a community authority. He stated the letter then listed one elementary school, one middle school, another new football stadium, and $1,000,0000 worth of improvements to Pickerington High School Central, Ridgeview Junior High School, and Pickerington Elementary School. Mr. Rigelman stated the letter stated those projects would cost $35,000,000. Mr. Rigelman stated the letter does not say the projects on that list would meet the school building needs for the 3,000 house community authority, it only says what could be built with $35,000,000. Mr. Rigelman further stated one elementary and one middle school are not enough, and room must be made for kids in grades 7 through 12. He continued that Mr. Stemen’s letter did not take that into account and made no allowance for that cost, or took no account of interest expense. He stated although the projects might cost $35,000,000, architects and contractors won’t wait 20 years to be paid, so the projects would have to be financed and that would mean interest costs. Mr. Rigelman stated Mr. Stemen further did not address the additional operating expenses that such a community authority would bring into the school district. Mr. Rigelman stated it was his opinion that the community authority would not come close to paying it’s own way, but would only add to the overcrowding of the schools and the tax burden borne by the rest of the residents. He stated for this reason, although the concept of a community authority may be promising, he felt the current community authority proposal was more an effort to sweep residential growth efforts under the rug than an honest attempt to solve them.
M. Lee Gray, 548 Rambling Brook Drive. Mr. Gray stated he would like to see council find an even playing field for everyone involved in the Pickerington School District. He stated if they can accomplish that, they will really have accomplished something that benefits the community. He stated in all of council’s endeavors he would ask that they try and find a way to make the ground level for everyone. Mr. Gray further stated he had seen in the newspaper there was a recall effort going on. Mr. Gray stated he did not support that effort, there is an election in November, and he believed if people felt strongly they would come out and vote and change the people sitting on council. He further stated it seemed since the initiative petitions took place, this group of people have gone from one perceived extreme to more of a moderate or middle position. He continued it would seem this recall effort has once again gone to an extreme and is not necessary. Mr. Gray stated no matter what happens with the moratorium, the City of Pickerington, Violet Township, and Pickerington schools are still going to be here and people who love this community are still going to be here. He stated when these things are brought down to a level of attacks and emotionalism, that has an impact on the long term well being of our community. Mr. Gray stated he was here to ask the residents of Pickerington to please take a serious look when looking at the recall effort, because even if you feel you want to make a change, go out and vote and make the change. He stated as hard as it may be, he would ask that everyone not bring this down to the level of personal attacks because no one benefits then.
5. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA: Mayor Postage stated we had one consent agenda item this evening, “Resolution 2003-04R, a Resolution honoring and showing full support to the men and women of the armed forces who commit to serve the United States of America overseas and at home.” Mr. Wright moved to adopt; Mr. Fox seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Fox, Mr. Shaver, Mr. Wright, Mr. Parker, and Mrs. Riggs voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
6. COMMITTEE REPORTS:
A. SERVICE. Mr. Parker Service committee had met on March 20th, and the minutes have been distributed. He stated there are a few items from that meeting on tonight’s agenda one of which is the repair of a leak in the Longview Street water tower. Mr. Parker stated this needs to be taken care of as soon as possible and he would be asking for three readings this evening. Mr. Parker stated he would answer any questions anyone might have.
B. FINANCE. Mr. Wright stated Finance Committee met on March 27th, and the minutes have been distributed. Mr. Wright stated he would like to note that our Development Director had been working with a bio tech company and showing them various locations in the city for their business. He stated this company would bring tax revenue to the city, and we are in competition with other cities, but the company’s representatives were impressed with what we showed them.
7. REPORTS:
A. MAYOR. Mayor Postage stated he had also met with the potential business representatives and he hoped they made the decision to come here. Mayor Postage stated he had also attended an Ohio Municipal League luncheon, and the Monthly Mayor’s Court Report had been distributed.
B. LAW DIRECTOR. Mr. Mapes stated with regard to Item 9.F. on tonight’s agenda he would ask council consider tabling that item. He stated the property owner has requested a minor change, but one that council would have to approve, and rather than having to amend the contract after it was passed he would request it be tabled this evening. Mr. Mapes stated Item 8.D., is the repair to the water tower and right now that tower can be shut down without any impact upon the city’s ability to pump water and service the city. He stated if we get into the summer months when usage is up, it could affect not only water pressure, but fire protection. Mr. Mapes stated this is also written as an emergency under the State law that allows council to waive the requirement of competitive bidding. He stated this requires a two-thirds vote to allow it to be acted on immediately. Mr. Mapes stated he had nothing further, but would answer any questions. Mrs. Riggs clarified the water tower leak had just occurred in the past two weeks and it has been shut down.
C. FINANCE DIRECTOR. Mrs. Fersch stated she had nothing to report.
D. MANAGER. Mrs. Bushman stated her report had been distributed and she would answer any questions. She further stated she had accompanied the Development Director when showing the potential business sites to the bio tech company. She stated they were very impressed with the old village and thought it was a wonderful place. Mrs. Bushman stated with reference to the Hickory Lakes project she would like to clear up some confusion. Mrs. Bushman stated the $15,000 given to the owners was to have them take it off the market and allow the city to explore the option of whether or not we would qualify under an EPA program. She stated that amount is within her contract authority, and it has been done in the past when evaluating property. Mrs. Bushman continued she understood how the process can be confusing to someone who does not work with this on a day to day basis. She stated the first step required through the program is a project nomination form, and that form requires you to identify the potential cost of the project and include a development plan that would be involved in what you would do with the site once you got it. She continued there are two governmental agencies involved in the program, one is DEFA, which is the financial arm that manages federal money that comes into the Ohio EPA. Then there is the Ohio Water Pollution Control Loan Fund, which is another financial arm of the Ohio EPA. Mrs. Bushman stated the Water Restoration Reclamation Program requires you to nominate a project, the project must meet specific criteria, it is ranked, and is very scientifically done. She stated what was submitted to the Ohio EPA is almost like being prequalified for a home loan, what we submitted was an Ohio Water Pollution Control Loan Fund Project Nomination Form. This is the form on which you nominate the project. The project is submitted along with a development plan and draft management plan for the site you are nominating. She continued those documents go into the EPA hopper and, like any other grant, you are competing with many other applicants across the state. Mrs. Bushman stated our project was competing with at least another 100 applications. She further stated we made it onto the list and in doing so, that just meant that the project was eligible to participate in the program. Mrs. Bushman stated then, at the time we would begin to borrow for our wastewater treatment plant expansion, which is phase two of a ten year plan, then this project would be eligible. What this project does is, the interest that would be paid over the life of the loan comes back to the community in the form of being able to use that interest to purchase this legacy resource for our community. Mrs. Bushman stated our project was unique by the fact that during the nomination process we met not only the wetlands requirement, because the initial part of the project is to preserve wetlands or expand them, but the other part that is unique about our project is that we have a stormwater management plan that has been on the books for ten years and that area was identified as a major headwater conservation site and a major stormwater detention site for the northern portion of the Violet Township area. Mrs. Bushman stated we met the criteria in two significant areas, and she thought perhaps there might be some confusion in the way the EPA structures the project. She stated they do treat it as a loan, but it is money that would have been paid out anyway because if we do not go to the EPA through this program we would have borrowed it on the open market, like we do any of our borrowings. The last sewer plant borrowing was done on the open market, it was not done through the EPA. Mrs. Bushman stated the next step in the process is preparing the actual application for the loan now that the project is eligible, and that would go through committee and EPA regulations require a motion of approval. Mrs. Bushman stated the city is very excited about this as we win on a lot of fronts with this project, we preserve a major parkland resource for the whole community, it creates a legacy resource, we maintain and preserve a major stormwater detention area, we protect a major headwater area for our streams that come out of there, and it also provides an opportunity, because it abuts a high school and the EPA liked that and we scored extra points, because it then became a potential for an educational resource for the schools being built in that area. Mrs. Bushman stated she felt it was important to explain this process so there is no confusion over what has been submitted and what has been done.
Mr. Shaver inquired when we made it on the list, when were we aware that we were going to use public rather than private funding for the wastewater treatment project? Mrs. Bushman stated we could still chose not to borrow the money through the EPA, all we have done is see if the project qualified. Mr. Shaver inquired if at the time we were making application for the expansion of our water plant to the EPA, were we also involved in this process? Mrs. Bushman stated we were not at the time we submitted for the NPDES permit. Mr. Shaver inquired if at the time the NPDES was approved, were we involved in this process. Mrs. Bushman stated she would have to check because we have been working on the NPDES permit for three years, and she is not sure of the exact approval date of that permit, but there was no relationship between the two projects. Mr. Shaver stated he begged to differ because in the NPDES approval we assured the EPA we were using local funds rather than EPA funds. Mrs. Bushman stated she was not sure what Mr. Shaver’s question was. Mr. Shaver stated at the time we sought expansion of the wastewater treatment plant, and got our NPDES approval, we assured the EPA that we were using local funds for this expansion rather than EPA funds. Mrs. Bushman stated she did not know if that was a correct statement, and she felt he was referencing that they would be looking at our sewer fees that we collect in our capacity fees. Mr. Shaver stated it was very clear that the EPA process wanted to know what was our funding because one of the concerns of the EPA is if you are using EPA funds whether or not you are overlapping other utility districts and providing dual service. Mrs. Bushman stated without pulling out all of the files, the only thing she could tell Mr. Shaver is that the EPA group that was looking at this project was aware that we do have a current NPDES permit. Mr. Shaver asked if she were sure of that and Mrs. Bushman stated she was. Mr. Shaver stated he doubted it, and he agreed with Mrs. Ricketts’ comments about misuse of authority.
8. PROCEDURAL READINGS:
A. ORDINANCE 2003-17, “AN ORDINANCE ENACTING A GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ON THE ISSUING OF HOUSING PERMITS FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR,” First Reading, Shaver. (TABLE, 3-4-03) Mr. Shaver moved to remove from the Table; Mrs. Riggs seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Shaver, Mr. Wright, Mr. Parker, Mr. Fox, and Mrs. Riggs voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0. Mr. Shaver moved to adopt; Mr. Wright seconded the motion. Mr. Shaver stated he has listened to community comments and he was sorely tempted to just plunge ahead and ask for three readings tonight. He stated he did, however, consider himself to be a person of his word and he has told someone he would only do one reading tonight and that is all he would ask for. Mr. Shaver stated it is imperative this legislation be passed and he would object to any amendments to it. Mr. Shaver further stated he hoped we could continue to work with all interested parties to come to a solution that may be acceptable to everyone, but he felt at this point in time we need to act. Mr. Shaver stated he was asking all council members to vote for this because he felt with the condition our schools are in we could not wait any longer. Mr. Fox stated during community comments it was stated that meetings had not been taking place on this issue or other growth issues since this legislation was tabled and that is not the case. Mr. Fox stated Mr. Shaver has been willing to work with all parties involved and table this legislation for the past couple of meetings. Mr. Fox further stated Mr. Shaver has met with people in government, builders, and other people involved in this process, and Mayor Postage has had some meetings involving discussions on this, and it was his understanding that those discussions have been fruitful. Mr. Fox stated he planned to vote for this tonight, although he did not necessarily believe 100 is the correct number, and work should continue to define that number. Mr. Fox stated he believed strongly that some sort of community authority is something that can work for our community, and if we can make this legislation work with a community authority he felt that would help solve many of the problems that our community and the schools are facing. Mr. Fox stated if everyone is willing to give a little and try to find a solution that everyone can be happy with, that is the direction he felt we should go in. He continued he would vote for the legislation this evening, and by the time it came for a final reading he hoped it would be in a form everyone can live with. Mr. Sabatino stated he agreed with Mr. Fox, and he felt this needed to move in the direction of resolution. He stated he did not think in it’s current state it should be the final resolution and he hoped we could reach a common ground to get us where we all know we need to go. Mrs. Riggs stated she felt this was not the answer, but the beginning, as our growth issues did not happen over night, they have happened over years. She stated she would ask that we come together with Violet Township and work together because even if the growth issue is taken care of in the city we still have to deal with the township. Mrs. Riggs stated she would ask we have better communication and work together for the better of this large community and she would vote for the legislation this evening. Mr. Parker stated this evening council has been called obstructionists, and he has never wanted to try to obstruct this from passing. He stated once we vote on a housing moratorium he felt the community authority would fall to pieces since it takes 1,000 contiguous acres for that and it cannot be put together over night. Mr. Parker stated he would vote for this tonight, as it is, but he felt if we passed it without tying it to the township we let them off scott free and if we include the township in this we can hold their feet to the fire even more. Mr. Parker stated he had done some research on the Fairfield County web site, and he had several examples of property taxes that shows the tax rates have increased about one and one-half to two percent over the past five years. Mr. Parker stated he wanted the school levy to pass and if it took the moratorium going through, then he would like to see that happen. Mr. Shaver stated as an educational comment the 1,000 contiguous acres was thrown around and that was not correct. Mr. Shaver stated according to the Ohio Revised Code there are no acreage requirements as long as a community authority is contained within a single political entity. He stated if we contain it within Pickerington it does not matter how many acres we have, however, when you have two or more political entities involved you are required to have 1,000 acres, not contiguous acres, but 1,000 acres. Mr. Shaver stated that is where it might be possible to work to get the township involved with us because he did not know how many acres are within the city, but if we only need to add a couple of acres from the township maybe this community authority can cross political boundaries. Mr. Shaver stated he felt that was one of the goals. Mr. Parker stated he did not care who could contribute to help the situation, whether it is Liberty Township, Violet Township, or the City of Columbus, he was only trying to point out that our tax rates are not out of control. Mr. Wright stated he would like to make it clear that he would vote for this tonight for only one reason, he did not want it to die an early death. Mr. Wright stated this legislation does need to change before it is finally approved as it cannot be effective for the school district in its current form without some type of tie back to the Township. Mr. Wright stated with regard to the community authority, it may not be the absolute solution but he did not want to thumb his nose at $50,000,000 going to the schools when the homes would develop anyway. Mr. Wright stated originally we were talking 1,000 acres, because as everyone is aware, and Mr. Yeaple from the Township has even stated, in order for this to be successful for the city and for the township, the city must go first. The city must have it’s community authority in place for it to be possible for the township to become part of it. He stated the reason for that is because in the township you do have the requirement for 1,000 contiguous acres and in the township you are dealing with farm owners, property owners, a far greater number of people and it will take more time to get that together. Mr. Wright continued that Mr. Yeaple had spoken very well when he stated the community authority of the city should not be slowed down while trying to make it accommodating for the township. Mr. Wright stated we must move forward with the community authority, and this legislation must change before it gets to its final reading because if it does not, it will not solve the problem. Mr. Wright stated everyone is saying the problem is with the schools, but there needs to be an effort at the state level to get the funding mechanism changed. He stated that is the problem with not just Pickerington, but across the state. He continued the state has been held in contempt, they are not following the Ohio Supreme Court’s ruling that it is unconstitutional and it must change. Mr. Wright stated for these reasons he will vote for the legislation this evening, but it must change before it will have his final vote. Mayor Postage stated he felt together we could move forward, and with this legislation and the community authority he felt we could get something that is very workable for all. Roll call was taken with Mr. Shaver, Mr. Fox, Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Parker, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Wright voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
B. ORDINANCE 2003-28, “AN ORDINANCE TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY TO PROVIDE WATER SERVICE TO THE PROPERTIES ON PEARL LANE AND FLORENCE DRIVE,” First Reading, Parker. Mr. Parker moved to adopt; Mr. Wright seconded the motion. Mr. Parker stated in years past, residents of this area did not want to have city water, however, after several polls with the residents a majority of them now would like to have city water service. Mr. Parker stated he would like to point out that no resident would be forced to connect to water, it was entirely voluntary on their part. Roll call was taken with Mr. Parker, Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Shaver, Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Fox, and Mr. Wright voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
C. ORDINANCE 2003-29, “AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT A DEED OF RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR TRAFFIC SIGNALIZATION AT REFUGEE ROAD AND FULLER’S WAY,” First Reading, Parker. Mr. Parker moved to adopt; Mr. Wright seconded the motion. Mr. Parker stated he felt this was very simple and straight forward and if there were questions he would entertain them. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Shaver, Mr. Wright, Mr. Fox, Mr. Parker, and Mrs. Riggs voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
D. ORDINANCE 2003-30, “AN ORDINANCE TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER OT ACCEPT THE PROPOSAL FROM PITTSBURGH TANK AND TOWER CO., INC., FOR REPAIRS TO THE CITY’S LONGVIEW STREET WATER TOWER AND THE DECLARATION OF IMMEDIATE NECESSITY AND EMERENCY IN ORDER TO PROVIDE UNINTERRUPTED WATER SERVICE AND FIRE PROTECTION,” First Reading, Parker. Mr. Parker moved to adopt; Mr. Wright seconded the motion. Mr. Parker stated he and Mr. Mapes had explained this earlier and he would be asking for three readings this evening. Roll call was taken with Mr. Parker, Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Shaver, Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Fox, and Mr. Wright voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0. Mr. Parker moved to suspend the rules for the purpose of three readings; Mr. Wright seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Fox, Mr. Wright, Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Shaver, and Mr. Parker voting “Yea.” Suspension of rules passed, 6-0. Second Reading. Mr. Parker moved to adopt; Mr. Wright seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Wright, Mr. Shaver, Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Parker, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Fox voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0. Third Reading, with emergency. Mr. Parker moved to adopt; Mr. Wright seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Fox, Mr. Wright, Mr. Shaver, Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Parker, and Mrs. Riggs voting “Yea.” Motion passed, with emergency, 6-0.
E. ORDINANCE 2003-31, “AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2003 APPROPRIATION, ORDINANCE 2002-142,” First Reading, Fox. Mr. Fox moved to adopt; Mr. Wright seconded the motion. Mr. Fox stated this was the appropriation for a new roof for the building department facility. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Shaver, Mr. Wright, Mr. Fox, Mr. Parker, and Mrs. Riggs voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
F. ORDINANCE 2003-32, “AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2003 APPROPRIATION, ORDINANCE 2002-142,” First Reading, Fox. Mr. Fox moved to adopt; Mr. Wright seconded the motion. Mr. Fox stated this contained appropriations for the engineering of the Diley Road realignment, the Courtright Road access realignment, and street paving. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Parker, Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Wright, Mr. Fox, and Mr. Shaver voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
G. RESOLUTION 2003-04R, “A RESOLUTION HONORING AND SHOWING FULL SUPPORT TO THE MEN AND WOMEN OF THE ARMED FORCES WHO COMMIT TO SERVE THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA OVERSEAS AND AT HOME,” First Reading, Postage/Parker/Wright/Fox/Shaver/Maxey/Sabatino/Riggs. Mr. Wright moved to adopt; Mr. Fox seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Fox, Mr. Shaver, Mr. Wright, Mr. Parker, and Mrs. Riggs voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0. (CONSENT AGENDA ITEM)
H. ORDINANCE 2003-24, “AN ORDINANCE TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT THE BID OF KELLER FARMS FOR THE CITY’S LANDSCAPING NEEDS FOR 2003,” Second Reading, Wright. Mr. Wright moved to adopt; Mr. Fox seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Wright, Mr. Shaver, Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Parker, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Fox voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
9. LEGISLATIVE READINGS:
A. ORDINANCE 2003-18, “AN ORDINANCE TO APPROVE THE REZONING OF 78 WEST COLUMBUS STREET (KERN PROPERTY) FROM R-4 (RESIDENTIAL) TO C-2 (CENTRAL BUSINESS/MIXED USE),” Third Reading, Maxey. Mr. Parker moved to adopt; Mr. Wright seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Fox, Mr. Shaver, Mr. Wright, Mr. Parker, and Mr. Sabatino voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
B. ORDINANCE 2003-19, “AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF $1,075,000 OF NOTES BY THE CITY OF PICKERINGTON, OHIO, IN ANTICIPATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS, FOR THE PURPOSE OF RENEWING NOTES PREVIOUSLY ISSUED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING PART OF THE COST OF ACQUIRING AND CONSTRUCTING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE WATER SUPPLY AND WATERWORKS SYSTEM OF THE CITY,” Third Reading, Wright. Mr. Wright moved to adopt; Mr. Sabatino seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Shaver, Mr. Fox, Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Parker, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Wright voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
C. ORDINANCE 2003-20, “AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $1,010,000 OF REVENUE NOTES BY THE CITY OF PICKERINGTON, OHIO, FOR THE PURPOSE OF RENEWING REVENUE NOTES ISSUED TO PAY PART OF THE COST OF STREET IMPROVEMENTS,” Third Reading, Wright. Mr. Wright moved to adopt; Mr. Fox seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Fox, Mr. Wright, Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Parker, Mrs. Riggs, and Mr. Shaver voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
D. ORDINANCE 2003-21, “AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING THE 2003 APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE 2002-142,” Third Reading,
Parker. Mr. Parker moved to adopt;
Mr. Wright seconded the motion. Roll
call was taken with Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Fox, Mr. Shaver, Mr. Wright, Mr. Parker,
and Mr. Sabatino voting “Yea.” Motion
passed, 6-0.
E. ORDINANCE 2003-22, “AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2003 APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE 2002-142,” Third Reading, Fox. Mr. Fox moved to adopt; Mr. Wright seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Shaver, Mr. Fox, Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Parker, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Wright voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
F. ORDINANCE 2003-23, “AN ORDINANCE TO APPROVE A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF LAND TO EXPAND THE CITY’S WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY,” Third Reading, Parker. Mr. Wright moved to Table; Mr. Fox seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Fox, Mr. Shaver, Mr. Wright, Mr. Parker, and Mr. Sabatino voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0. (TABLED)
10. MOTIONS:
Mr. Wright moved to move the April 15, 2003, Regular City Council meeting to Tuesday, April 22, 2003, 7:30 P.M., due to the fact there may not be a quorum for the regular meeting as it is Spring Break; Mrs. Riggs seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Shaver, Mr. Fox, Mr. Wright, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Parker voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
Mr. Wright moved for Executive Session under Section 121.22(G)(1)b, Matters involving an employee’s or public official’s employment; Mr. Fox seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Parker, Mr. Fox, Mr. Wright, Mr. Shaver, and Mrs. Riggs voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
Council adjourned for Executive Session at 9:06 P.M., and reconvened in open session at 9:07 P.M. Mr. Wright stated he withdrew his request for executive session.
11. OTHER BUSINESS: No other business was brought forward.
12. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, Mr. Wright moved to adjourn; Mrs. Riggs seconded the motion. Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Parker, Mr. Fox, Mr. Wright, Mr. Shaver, and Mrs. Riggs voted “Aye.” Motion carried, 6-0. The meeting adjourned at 9:10 P.M., April 1, 2003.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
__________________________________
ATTEST:
___________________________________