PICKERINGTON CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, JANUARY 17, 2006
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, January 17, 2006, at City Hall. Mayor Shaver called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. Roll call was taken as follows: Mr. Fix, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Smith, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Sabatino, Mrs. Riggs, and Mayor Shaver were present. No members were absent. Others present were: Judy Gilleland, Lynda Yartin, Phil Hartmann, Ed Drobina, Linda Fersch, Commander Steve Annetts, Patti Wigington, Sean Casey, Tamaria Kulemeka, Shannon Martin, Keely Weaver, Terry Long, Rick Talda, Mark Demarest, Pastor Phil Manson, Christine Brown, Carol Carter, Kirk Richards, Jerry Dailey, and others. Pastor Manson of the Pickerington Church of the Nazarene delivered the invocation.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 3, 2006, REGULAR MEETING. Mr. Smith moved to approve; Mr. Fix seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Smith, Mr. Fix, Mr. Hackworth, Mrs. Hammond, Mrs. Riggs, and Mr. Wisniewski voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA. Mrs. Riggs moved to approve; Mr. Smith seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Hackworth, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Smith, Mr. Fix, Mrs. Riggs, and Mr. Sabatino voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
4. COMMUNITY COMMENTS:
A. Carol Carter, 73 Lakeland Place. Ms Carter stated with regard to the design standards legislation she understood that Mr. Smith was intending to amend that legislation this evening to address her concern about having to re-build a home to these standards rather than the way it was. Ms Carter stated another concern dealt with the number of trees required. She questioned if there would be any limitation on how close the trees would be planted because, if they are to close, as they grow they can do damage and have to be taken down.
B. Keely Weaver, 50 N. Center Street. Ms Weaver stated she was the owner of the property at 194 W. Church Street and was requesting the rezoning of that property from R-4 to P-O. Ms Weaver stated she was present to answer any questions Council may have.
C. Terry Long, 177 W. Borland Street. Ms Long stated she lives to the rear of the property at 194 W. Church and she has concerns about the rezoning. She stated the children walk to and from school and walk to the parks, and she had concerns regarding the patrons going into the business. She stated further she liked her neighborhood because it is a family neighborhood, a lot of the homes on Hill Road have already been turned into offices, and she would like to see old Pickerington stay a family neighborhood rather than becoming more businesses than homes. Ms Long stated she did not have a problem with the insurance business that Ms Weaver was planning on putting there, but she did have concerns about what could happen in the future should she outgrow this location. Ms Long stated she would like to feel safe and secure when her children are playing in their back yard, getting on the school bus, and not have to worry about whatever business happens to be in that home.
D. Mark Demarest, Westerville, Ohio. Mr. Demarest stated he would like to address the residential design standards. He stated Maronda Homes has been quite concerned about the impact this legislation would have on their communities and their buyers. Mr. Demarest stated the implementation of these design standards would negatively impact their buyers in their pursuit of home ownership. He stated their buyers are police officers, fire fighters, teachers, small business, and shop owners, and implementation of these design standards drives the cost of housing beyond the level these people can comfortably afford and, thereby, excludes them from home ownership in the very communities that they serve. Mr. Demarest stated Maronda Homes is committed to providing their buyers with the best value on the largest investment they will ever make, and they will continue to utilize innovative construction techniques so the heart of the population can realize their dream of home ownership, and they will fight for their buyers right to live in the communities where they work and they will always provide more home for less money.
E. Shannon Martin, Dayton, Ohio. Ms Martin stated she believes the application of these design standards against Maronda in two subdivisions is impermissible. She stated the City has granted zoning and subdivision approvals with a process that included a review of the Maronda product and Maronda relied on these approvals in investing significant sums and developing their properties here, in compliance with the plans that were approved already. She stated Ohio courts have set out a framework for analyzing the scope of a City’s power in enforcing regulations retroactively and your authority clearly does not extend to subdivisions where you have previously approve the plans. She stated further her general objection is that the city has not conducted sufficient studies concerning the relative issues of quality that this legislation purports to control. She stated she saw no rational basis for imposing these restrictions against Maronda as she is certain that the exclusions of these products cannot advance the city as articulated in this legislation. Ms Martin continued the stated purpose of the design standards are inconsistent with the text that the design standards purport to advance. She stated in many respects the design standards are vague, unclear, and inconsistent. She stated the lack of detail around the ability to appeal to the Board of Zoning Appeals demonstrates hardship, and Maronda will experience significant damages as a result of these design standards being imposed with respect to the existing subdivisions as it would drive the cost of their homes, on average, up $20,000 to $30,000 per home. She stated that would place them outside of their market, so in addition to the cost that would be added for primarily aesthetic reasons it would place them out of the market with respect to the affordability of homes in the market they try to serve. Ms Martin stated she would ask Council to reconsider the application retroactively to existing subdivisions and allow Maronda to complete its development according to the plans that have been previously approved by the City.
F. Richard Talda, Dayton, Ohio. Mr. Talda stated he would like to thank the City staff for giving them the opportunity to dialogue with the City with respect to the issues Maronda Homes has raised. He stated a number of concerns that were raised by the City Manager and staff was raised about Maronda, their building practices and their ability to maintain value on the houses that are built here in Pickerington. Mr. Talda stated he could not think of a better measure than to look at what happens when a Maronda homeowner, for whatever reason, has to resell their house. He stated they were hard pressed to find any Maronda Homes that were sold by the first owner where those people were not able to make a profit. Mr. Talda stated he has spoken conceptually with staff about different scenarios where they feel an accommodation can be made for both sides, where not only Maronda benefits, but also the City and both present and future homeowners would benefit. He stated they were not asking for any kind of variance from the existing regulations, they were not asking for a reduction in the regulations they are subject to, but they are asking for the City to let them finish what they started. He stated the regulations that are in place now are the regulations that were enforceable at the time they sought final approval and those are the ones that they have already built well over 100 houses subject to. He stated if the new standards were adopted, the cost to their customers and the effect on their business would be dramatic. Mr. Talda stated the adoption of this legislation would leave them few alternatives for protecting their investment. Mr. Talda stated what they were requesting this evening is that there be consideration for tabling the second reading of the ordinance this evening so there can be continuing dialogue between the City and Maronda so a mutually beneficial solution can be worked out.
Mr. Smith clarified the information provided by Maronda regarding the resale of homes was not scientific, and is not a complete listing of all properties sold. Mr. Talda stated this is not a perfect example, and he was not sure how you would get all of the sales for a specific period of time. Mr. Talda continued that Maronda homes builds a house that is a great value to the homeowner and, based on how appraisals are done, there is an immediate positive equity for the homeowner. Mr. Fix inquired what the average profit was on the resale of a Maronda home and Mr. Demarest stated being a private organization he would rather not disclose that. Mr. Fix stated when this legislation was being worked on; the numbers that BIA came up with on incremental costs were dramatically different than the $20,000 to $30,000 that Maronda came up with. He stated he wondered how Maronda came up with that cost rather than the $5,000 projected by the BIA. Mr. Demarest stated that is their competitive advantage over their competitors and that is why the numbers are so significant. Mr. Fix further clarified Maronda is a member of the BIA. Mr. Fix also questioned why the BIA did not bring this up when this was being worked on, and Mr. Demarest stated his assumption would be that the other builders in the BIA are more than happy to let a government entity take away his competitive advantage. Mr. Wisniewski ascertained that to Mr. Demarest’s and Mr. Talda’s knowledge, Maronda has never been suspended from the BIA due to the number of complaints against them.
G. Christine Brown, Lancaster, Ohio. Ms Brown stated she was present this evening to request Council’s assistance on funding to attend a conference. She stated this funding would allow a group to attend a conference in Hammond, Indiana, to learn about what the Lord does. She stated she would provide the cost analysis for Council to look at, and Council could decide if they wanted to help or not. She stated the Church couldn’t help them, so she was just coming to ask Council for help if they could.
5. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA: Mayor Shaver stated there were no consent agenda items this evening.
6. COMMITTEE REPORTS:
A. SAFETY COMMITTEE (Mr. Smith). Mr. Smith stated Safety met on January 9th and they did not move any legislation on for tonight’s agenda, however, he hoped they would start moving some Property Maintenance Task Force recommendations forward in the near future.
B. SERVICE COMMITTEE (Mr. Hackworth). Mr. Hackworth stated Service met on Thursday and the minutes have not been distributed as yet. He stated Service had approved legislation for several easements and three of them are on tonight’s agenda for the Windmiller/Refugee Road traffic signal. He stated the others deal with easements for the D-Line Phase III. Mr. Hackworth stated those easements would be on the agenda for the next meeting. Mr. Hackworth further stated Service had forwarded legislation regarding the increase in the water and sewer capacity fees, as well as, the rezoning of 194 W. Church Street.
7. REPORTS:
A. MAYOR. Mayor Shaver stated the Monthly Mayor’s Court Report had been distributed. Mayor Shaver stated the City lost a valuable member of the community this past week. He stated Toby Daniels was an attorney who had practiced here for many years, and he passed away much to young. Mayor Shaver stated consistent with our policy to honor members of our community who have provided outstanding service over the years, he would like to present a proclamation to Mrs. Daniels in honor of her husband’s contributions to the community.
B. LAW DIRECTOR. Mr. Hartmann stated he had provided Council a memorandum requesting the legislation dealing with the 208 Plan be taken off the table and voted on this evening. He stated he had received a response from Canal Winchester, and he would discuss that in Executive Session.
C. FINANCE DIRECTOR. Mrs. Fersch stated with regard to the notes on tonight’s agenda that are related to our issues of renewal and borrowings for a final reading, she would request Ordinance 2005-116 be tabled this evening. She stated there was some confusion as this was presented to Finance Committee last year and legislation for this borrowing was adopted. She stated that legislation just took effect so we have duplicate legislation on the borrowing of $260,000, so if it can be tabled tonight we will not have to rescind any legislation and this can be cleared off at the next meeting. Mrs. Fersch stated she would answer any questions.
D. MANAGER. Ms Gilleland stated with regard to the design standards, and to answer Ms Carter’s questions regarding trees, four trees are required, however, they can be ornamental trees, shade trees, etc. She stated they would not all be very large trees and a landscaping plan will be required so there will be some control over the trees that are approved. Ms Gilleland stated she appreciated Maronda’s input, and the important thing is to insure the long-term quality and viability of the structures being built in the City, and these are one tool to help the City insure quality of structures. Ms Gilleland stated it is important that home owners profit when selling their residences, however, it is also important to our community that homes being built are quality and do not become maintenance issues for the community in the long term. Ms Gilleland stated she would be happy to answer any questions.
E. SERVICE MANAGER. Mr. Drobina stated he would like to update Council on some project. He stated the D-Line sewer project is on schedule, and they are looking at the second or third week in February to eliminate the lift station. Mr. Drobina stated the Windmiller/Refugee traffic signal was delayed due to South Central Power relocating some lines, however, that should resume in the next week. Mr. Drobina stated he would answer any questions.
8. PROCEDURAL READINGS:
A. ORDINANCE 2006-01, “AN ORDINANCE APPROVING REZONING AT 194 WEST CHURCH STREET FROM R-4 (RESIDENTIAL) TO P-O (PLANNED SUBURBAN OFFICE,)” First Reading, Hackworth. Mr. Hackworth moved to adopt; Mr. Sabatino seconded the motion. Mr. Hackworth stated a public hearing was held earlier this evening on the rezoning. Mr. Hackworth stated the downtown has been a mixture over the past few years, and this request is not inconsistent with what is already there. Mr. Sabatino stated he did not feel that what is being proposed is out of line with what is already there, and he felt it would be a good use for this facility. Mr. Smith stated staff had initially recommended to Planning and Zoning that this not be approved. Ms Gilleland stated staff did not feel justified in supporting this rezoning simply for the fact that there is a plan out there that calls for this area to be residential, and staff did not feel it appropriate to make a recommendation against that plan without a lot of discussion on Planning and Zoning and Council’s part. She stated that discussion has take place. Mr. Sabatino clarified that plan was never adopted by Council. Mr. Smith clarified staff’s concerns have been addressed and staff is comfortable with proceeding with the rezoning at this point. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Fix, Mr. Smith, Mr. Wisniewski, Mrs. Hammond, Mrs. Riggs, and Mr. Hackworth voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
B. ORDINANCE 20056-02, “AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 1048 AND 1058 OF THE CITY OF PICKERINGTON CODIFIED ORDINANCES ESTABLISHING CAPACITY CHARGES FOR THE WATER AND SANITARY SEWER SYSTEMS,” First Reading, Hackworth. Mr. Hackworth moved to adopt; Mr. Wisniewski seconded the motion. Mr. Hackworth stated this would provide for a five percent increase on our water and sewer capacity fees. He stated our water capacity fees are currently $3,115.89 and this would increase it to $3,271.68. He stated that would be for the normal ¾ inch tap that is standard for a new home. He stated the sewer capacity fee for that same size line is currently $3,933.82 and this increase will bring it to $4,130.51. Mr. Sabatino clarified the annual three percent went into effect on January 1, 2006. Mr. Hackworth stated we found we were falling behind surrounding communities and we felt we needed to catch up. Mr. Fix clarified we are projecting 150 new homes this year and the increase was approximately $60 per tap. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino voting “Nay,” and Mrs. Hammond, Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Fix, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. Smith voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-1.
C. ORDINANCE 2006-03, “AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT AND RECEIVE A PEPTUAL NONEXCLUSIVE PERMANENT EASEMENT DONATED BY CME FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, CITY OF PICKERINGTON, COUNTY OF FAIRFIELD, STATE OF OHIO,” First Reading, Hackworth. Mr. Hackworth moved to adopt; Mr. Smith seconded the motion. Mr. Hackworth stated this was a right-of-way easement for the traffic signal at Refugee and Windmiller. Roll call was taken with Mr. Wisniewski, Mrs. Riggs, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Smith, Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. Fix voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
D. ORDINANCE 2006-04, “AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT AND RECEIVE A PEPTUAL NONEXCLUSIVE PERMANENT EASEMENT DONATED BY HILL ROAD PLAZA, LLC, CITY OF PICKERINGTON, COUNTY OF FAIRFIELD, STATE OF OHIO,” First Reading, Hackworth. Mr. Hackworth moved to adopt; Mr. Wisniewski seconded the motion. Mr. Hackworth stated this was also a right-of-way easement for the traffic signal at Refugee and Windmiller. Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mrs. Riggs, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Smith, Mr. Fix, and Mr. Sabatino voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
E. ORDINANCE 2006-05, “AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT AND RECEIVE A PEPTUAL NONEXCLUSIVE PERMANENT EASEMENT DONATED BY SMBC LEASING AND FINANCING (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SUMITOMO BANK LEASING & FINANCE, INC.), CITY OF PICKERINGTON, COUNTY OF FAIRFIELD, STATE OF OHIO,” First Reading, Hackworth. Mr. Hackworth moved to adopt; Mr. Wisniewski seconded the motion. Mr. Hackworth stated this was also a right-of-way easement for the traffic signal at Refugee and Windmiller. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Hammond, Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Fix, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. Smith voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
F. ORDINANCE 2005-92, “AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING PROPOSED CHAPTER 1276.23 OF THE PICKERINGTON CODIFIED ORDINANCES ENTITLED RESIDENTIAL BUILDING DESIGN STANDARDS,” Second Reading, O’Brien. Mr. Wisniewski moved to adopt; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Mr. Smith moved to amend the ordinance by adding under 1276.23 (b) Applicability, the following subparagraph “(5) This section shall not apply to residential buildings existing at the effective date of this ordinance damaged or destroyed by fire, explosion, flood, or other acts of God.”; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Roll call was taken on the motion to amend with Mr. Sabatino voting “Nay,” and Mr. Smith, Mr. Wisniewski, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Hackworth, Mrs. Riggs, and Mr. Fix voting “Yea.” Motion to amend passed, 6-1. Mr. Sabatino stated he had distributed information about his position concerning these design standards to all of Council (Attachment 1 to these minutes.) Mr. Sabatino stated he felt we do need some design standards, however, these are well above what they need to be. He stated in the form they are in he could not, and would not support them. Mr. Fix clarified that Mr. Sabatino had not entered this paper into the record; however, he was asking people to contact him. Mr. Fix further clarified the statements in the paper were his opinion only. Mr. Fix stated he did not understand how the residents would see increased property taxes as Mr. Sabatino had stated, and Mr. Sabatino stated the property values would be more once these design standards are implemented. Mr. Fix stated he still did not understand how an existing homeowner would pay more property taxes. Mr. Sabatino stated in terms of the less demand for the homes we now live in, obviously, if you’ve got a shiny new Cadillac and something that has a few miles on it, the demand would gravitate more towards the newer things and have less demand on the existing homes. He stated further in the text it states the demand and desirability are the real determinate of your property’s value. Mr. Sabatino stated, once again, this is his idea. He felt it was something people should be concerned about and aware of and some people will agree and some won’t. Mr. Fix stated he still did not understand how he, as an existing homeowner, would pay higher property taxes. Mr. Fix further stated he did not understand how the power for you to decide your family’s home appearance can be eventually taken away by force. Mr. Sabatino stated, for example, you are going to have four trees when your house is built and it will be pre-decided for you, by the builder, where those trees are going to be and what kind they are going to be. Mr. Fix stated for an existing homeowner this would not apply, and currently the builder puts three threes on each lot and they determine what kind they are and where they will be. Mr. Smith stated if Mr. Sabatino were going to release this to the public he would ask that he make it clear these are his opinions. He stated when he read this paper it made it appear it is based on fact, and Mr. Sabatino has already made it clear that it is his opinion. Mr. Sabatino stated nowhere in there did he represent that any studies have been undertaken to arrive at his conclusions. Roll call was taken on the second reading, as amended, with Mr. Sabatino voting “Nay,” and Mr. Hackworth, Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Smith, Mr. Fix, and Mrs. Hammond voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-1.
G. ORDINANCE 2005-102, “AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT A 0.4403 ACRE, MORE OR LESS, FEE SIMPLE INTEREST FROM DAVID S. DONLEY, LOCATED AT 150 BORLAND STREET, CITY OF PICKERINGTON, COUNTY OF FAIRFIELD, STATE OF OHIO, AND RECORD DEDICATION PLAT,” Second Reading, Hackworth. (TABLED)
9. LEGISLATIVE READINGS:
A. ORDINANCE 2005-50, “AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING THE FINAL PLAT FOR THE WELLINGTON PARK SUBDIVISION – SECTION 1 (VIRGINIA HOMES),” Third Reading, Hackworth. (TABLED)
B. ORIDNANCE 2005-100, “AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH FAIRFIELD COUNTY DEMONSTRATING COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATEWIDE OEPA 208 PLAN,” Third Reading, Hackworth. (TABLED) Mr. Hackworth moved to Remove from the Table; Mr. Wisniewski seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Smith, Mrs. Riggs, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Fix, and Mr. Hackworth voting “Yea.” Motion to Remove from the Table passed, 7-0. Mr. Hackworth moved to adopt; Mr. Wisniewski seconded the motion. Mr. Hackworth stated this is the EPA 208 Plan and is an agreement between the City of Pickerington and Fairfield County dealing with future sewer districts and where service will be provided in the future. Mr. Hackworth stated we had tabled this legislation to allow Canal Winchester to determine if they wanted to enter the agreement and they have chosen not to. Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Fix, Mrs. Riggs, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Smith voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
C. ORDINANCE 2005-104, “AN ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE FOR CERTAIN WATER SERVICE CONNECTION CONDITIONS AND OPTIONS,” Third Reading, Hackworth. Mr. Hackworth moved to adopt; Mr. Smith seconded the motion. Mr. Hackworth stated this would allow payment options for residents who are not connected to the City’s water system and wish to do so. Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Smith, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Sabatino, Mrs. Hammond, Mrs. Riggs, and Mr. Fix voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
D. ORDINANCE 2005-108, “AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF CERTAIN LAND OWNED BY THE CITY OF PICKERINGTON, MORE COMMONLY KNOWN AS PARCEL NO. 041-05632-00 (LOT NO. 1, WINDMILLER SQUARE COMMERCIAL SUBDIVSION, PICKERINGTON, OHIO) TO BE SOLD IN ACCORDANCE WITH OHIO REVISED CODE 721.01, ET. SEQ. AND TO REPEAL ORDINANCE 2005-11,” Third Reading, Wisniewski. Mr. Wisniewski moved to adopt; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Mr. Wisniewski stated this is the second attempt to sell this property. He stated the last buyer backed out when we would not guarantee access to Refugee Road. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Smith, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Fix, Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. Sabatino voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
E. ORDINANCE 2005-109, “AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $2,800,000 OF REVENUE NOTES BY THE CITY OF PICKERINGTON, OHIO, FOR THE PURPOSE OF RENEWING NOTES PREVIOUSLY ISSUED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING PART OF THE COST OF WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS,” Third Reading, Riggs. Mrs. Riggs moved to adopt; Mr. Fix seconded the motion. Mrs. Riggs stated she had nothing to add, however, she would answer any questions. Roll call was taken with Mr. Fix, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Wisniewski, Mrs. Riggs, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Smith voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
F. ORDINANCE 2005-110, “AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $250,000 OF NOTES BY THE CITY OF PICKERINGTON, OHIO, IN ANTICIPATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS, TO RENEW NOTES PREVIOUSLY ISSUED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING PART OF THE COSTS OF ACQUIRING REAL PROPERTY FOR USE AS PARK LAND,” Third Reading, Riggs. Mrs. Riggs moved to adopt; Mr. Fix seconded the motion. Mr. Sabatino stated he would like to clarify this dealt with the parkland that was purchased via the BIA lawsuit, and Mrs. Riggs stated that was correct. Mr. Sabatino inquired what the acreage of this property was and Mr. Hackworth stated he thought it was seven or eight acres. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino voting “Nay,” and Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Smith, Mr. Wisniewski, Mrs. Hammond, Mrs. Riggs, and Mr. Fix voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-1.
G. ORDINANCE 2005-111, “AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $385,000 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 COSTS OF CONSTRUCTING AND ACQUIRING IMPROVEMENTS AND RENOVATIONS TO THE CITY HALL AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT BUILDING,” Third Reading, Riggs. Mrs. Riggs moved to adopt; Mr. Fix seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Smith, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Fix, Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. Sabatino voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
H. ORDINANCE 2005-112, “AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $1,950,000 OF NOTES BY THE CITY OF PICKERINGTON, OHIO, IN ANTICIPATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS, TO RENEW NOTES PREVIOUSLY ISSUED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING PART OF THE COSTS OF ACQUIRING AND CONSTRUCTING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION AND TREATMENT SYSTEM OF THE CITY, INCLUDING PHASES 2-C, 3, AND 4 OF THE D-LINE SEWER AND ENGINEERING COSTS RELATED TO PHASE 2 OF THE SYCAMORE CREEK E-LINE SEWER,” Third Reading, Riggs. Mrs. Riggs moved to adopt; Mr. Fix seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Fix, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Wisniewski, Mrs. Riggs, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Smith B. ORIDNANCE 2005-100, “AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH FAIRFIELD COUNTY DEMONSTRATING COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATEWIDE OEPA 208 PLAN,” Third Reading, Hackworth. (TABLED) Mr. Hackworth moved to Remove from the Table; Mr. Wisniewski seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Smith, Mrs. Riggs, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Fix, and Mr. Hackworth voting “Yea.” Motion to Remove from the Table passed, 7-0. Mr. Hackworth moved to adopt; Mr. Wisniewski seconded the motion. Mr. Hackworth stated this is the EPA 208 Plan and is an agreement between the City of Pickerington and Fairfield County dealing with future sewer districts and where service will be provided in the future. Mr. Hackworth stated we had tabled this legislation to allow Canal Winchester to determine if they wanted to enter the agreement and they have chosen not to. Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Fix, Mrs. Riggs, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Smith voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
I. ORDINANCE 2005-113, “AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $2,170,000 OF NOTES BY THE CITY OF PICKERINGTON, OHIO, IN ANTICIPATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS, TO RENEW NOTES PREVIOUSLY ISSUED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING PART OF THE COSTS OF CONSTRUCTING STREET IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CITY, INCLUDING IMPROVEMENTS TO DILEY ROAD, STREET IMPROVEMENTS KNOWN AS THE COURTRIGHT ROAD REALIGNMENT, AND STREETS, SIDEWALKS, CURBS AND GUTTERS, AND OTHER STREET IMPROVEMENTS IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA OF THE CITY,” Third Reading, Riggs. Mrs. Riggs moved to adopt; Mr. Fix seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Smith, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Sabatino, Mrs. Hammond, Mrs. Riggs, and Mr. Fix voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
J. ORDINANCE 2005-114, “AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $775,000 OF NOTES BY THE CITY OF PICKERINGTON, OHIO, IN ANTICIPATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS, TO RENEW NOTES PREVIOUSLY ISSUED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING PART OF THE COSTS OF ACQUIRING AND CONSTRUCTING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE WATER SUPPLY AND WATERWORKS SYSTEM OF THE CITY,” Third Reading, Riggs. Mrs. Riggs moved to adopt; Mr. Fix seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Smith, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Fix, Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. Sabatino voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
K. ORDINANCE 2005-115, “AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $315,000 OF NOTES BY THE CITY OF PICKERINGTON, OHIO, IN ANTICIPATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS, TO RENEW NOTES PREVIOUSLY ISSUED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING PART OF THE COSTS OF ACQUIRING, CONSTRUCTING, EQUIPPING AND FURNISHING A POLICE BUILDING,” Third Reading, Riggs. Mrs. Riggs moved to adopt; Mr. Fix seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Fix, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Wisniewski, Mrs. Riggs, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Smith voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
L. ORDINANCE 2005-116, “AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $260,000 OF NOTES BY THE CITY OF PICKERINGTON, OHIO, IN ANTICIPATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS, FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING PART OF THE COSTS OF ACQUIRING AND INSTALLING TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND RELATED STREET IMPROVEMENTS,” Third Reading, Riggs. Mrs. Riggs moved to Table; Mr. Fix seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Smith, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Sabatino, Mrs. Hammond, Mrs. Riggs, and Mr. Fix voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0. (TABLED)
M. ORDINANCE 2005-117, “AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $490,000 OF NOTES BY THE CITY OF PICKERINGTON, OHIO, IN ANTICIPATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS, FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING PART OF THE COSTS OF ACQUIRING REAL PROPERTY FOR PURPOSES OF THE CITY,” Third Reading, Riggs. Mrs. Riggs moved to adopt; Mr. Fix seconded the motion. Mr. Sabatino inquired of the law director if there was a contract on this property as yet, and Mr. Hartmann stated this would be discussed in Executive Session. Mr. Sabatino inquired how they should vote on it before they saw the contract, and Mr. Hartmann stated the contract was provided to Council in their packet. Mr. Sabatino stated this represented approximately three acres, and in the legislation just passed, $250,000 was approved for seven or eight acres. He questioned if this property would be used as parkland as well, and Ms Gilleland stated that was open for discussion. Mr. Sabatino questioned spending $490,000 for property we did not know what we would do with. Ms Gilleland stated this was settling a lawsuit that was started a few years ago, and plans for the property remain open at this point. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino voting “Nay,” and Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Smith, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Fix, and Mr. Hackworth voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-1.
N. ORDINANCE 2005-118, “AN ORDINANCE CONSOLIDATING UP TO EIGHT BOND ANTICIPATION NOTE ISSUES OF THE CITY OF PICKERINGTON, OHIO, INTO A CONSOLIDATED NOTE ISSUE, AND ESTABLISHING THE TERMS OF SUCH CONSOLIDATED NOTE ISSUE,” Third Reading, Riggs. Mrs. Riggs moved to adopt; Mr. Fix seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Fix, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Wisniewski, Mrs. Riggs, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Smith voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
O. ORDINANCE 2005-119, “AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH W. E. STILSON CONSULTING GROUP, LLC, FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES,” Third Reading, Hackworth. Mr. Hackworth moved to Table; Mrs. Hammond seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Smith, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Sabatino, Mrs. Hammond, Mrs. Riggs, and Mr. Fix voting “Yea.” Motion to Table passed, 7-0. (TABLED)
P. RESOLUTION 2005-22R, “A RESOLUTION OF AUTHORIZATION (NATUREWORKS GRANT),” Third Reading, Wisniewski. Mr. Wisniewski moved to adopt; Mr. Fix seconded the motion. Mr. Wisniewski stated this was our annual NatureWorks grant application, and the project we have selected for this application is the replacement of playground equipment at Victory Park. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Smith, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Fix, Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. Sabatino voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
Q. RESOLUTION 2005-23R, “ANNUAL RESOLUTION TO REQUEST ADVANCE DISTRIBUTION OF TAX MONIES OF 5.5 MILL POLICE OPERATING LEVY FROM THE FAIRFIELD COUNTY AUDITOR PURSUANT TO SECTION 321.34, OHIO REVISED CODE,” Third Reading, Wisniewski. Mr. Wisniewski moved to adopt; Mr. Smith seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Fix, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Wisniewski, Mrs. Riggs, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Smith voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
R. RESOLUTION 2005-24R, “ANNUAL RESOLUTION TO REQUEST ADVANCE DISTRIBUTION OF TAX MONIES OF 2.3 MILL GENERAL OPERATING LEVY FROM THE FAIRFIELD COUNTY AUDITOR PURSUANT TO SECTION 321.34, OHIO REVISED CODE,” Third Reading, Wisniewski. Mr. Wisniewski moved to adopt; Mr. Smith seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Smith, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Sabatino, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Fix, and Mrs. Riggs voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
10. OTHER BUSINESS: No other business was brought forward.
11. MOTIONS:
A. MOTION FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION UNDER SECTION 121.22(G)(1)(a), MATTERS INVOLVING AN EMPLOYEE’S OR PUBLIC OFFICIAL’S APPOINTMENT, AND 121.22(G)(3), CONFERENCE WITH LAW DIRECTOR REGARDING PENDING OR IMMINENT COURT ACTION. Mr. Wisniewski moved for Executive Session under the stated Sections; Mr. Smith seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Fix, Mr. Smith, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Wisniewski voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
Council went into Executive Session at 8:55 P.M., and reconvened in open session at 9:50 P.M.
Mr. Wisniewski moved to authorize the City Manager to begin negotiations with Schottenstein Zox and Dunn for law director services; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Mr. Sabatino stated he would like to comment that he felt we could do better with the amount we are paying for legal services other than using the firm of Schottenstein Zox and Dunn and that is why he would not vote for this. Mr. Wisniewski stated he believed this was the best firm out of the four that have been interviewed over the last several months. He stated they have provided excellent legal guidance and services for quite some time, and they have helped settle numerous lawsuits, and he felt they would continue to do so. He stated at the negotiated price of $15,000 per month he felt the would continue to provide excellent services. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino voting “Nay,” and Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Fix, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Smith, Mr. Wisniewski, and Mrs. Hammond voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-1.
12. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, Mr. Wisniewski moved to adjourn; Mr. Fix seconded the motion. Mr. Sabatino, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Smith, Mr. Fix, Mr. Wisniewksi, Mrs. Riggs voted “Aye.” Motion carried, 7-0. The meeting adjourned at 9:54 P.M., January 17, 2006.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
__________________________________
ATTEST:
____________________________________