PICKERINGTON CITY COUNCIL

THURSDAY, MAY 3, 2007

CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD

 

SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA

7:30 P.M.

 

1.         ROLL CALL.  Council for the City of Pickerington met for a Special Meeting on Thursday, May 3, 2007, 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: Chief Taylor, Lynda Yartin, Linda Fersch, Phil Hartmann, Jim Woods, Gary Weltlich, Pat Bowen, Dennis Boruszewski, Tony Barletta, David Owen, Bruce Englehardt, Carol Carter, Lee Gray, Craig Maxey, and others. 

 

Mayor Shaver stated some residents have requested to address Council this evening. 

 

A.        Dennis Boruszewski, 542 Warwick Lane.  Mr. Boruszewski stated he would like to speak about spending public money on an information campaign against or for a citizen referendum.  He stated whether this information sheet being proposed tonight, no matter if it is for or against, it is inappropriate to use public funds on a citizen referendum.  He further questioned how Council would spend public funds at the meeting tonight without having three readings.  Mr. Boruszewski stated City tax money should be spent cautiously and this is not the way the citizens expect to have their money spent. 

 

B.         Brian Sauer.  Mr. Sauer stated he is a resident of the City and he would like to refer to the Ohio Revised Code in regards to Economic Development Districts or JEDDs.  Mr. Sauer referred to Chapter 709 of the Ohio Revised Code where it basically states that, by state law, a JEDD agreement prohibits annexation by the City or Village for a minimum of three years and creates a cooperative arrangement with the City or Village.  He stated the Charter amendment, Issue 9, states the rights of the citizens of the City of Pickerington or the Pickerington City Council could change or seek to change township lines in order to make them identical in whole or part with the City’s municipal corporation limits or to erect a new township out of a portion of the township included within the municipal corporation limits or to annex or seek to annex territory to the City shall not be encumbered or relinquished for any period of time by any act of Council.  He stated it seemed to him that by passing Issue 9 it would preclude the City from ever being able to participate in any kind of joint economic venture, including a JEDD. 

 

2.         MOTIONS: 

 

            A.        MOTION TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO IMMEDIATELY PUBLISH THE EDITED VERSION OF A DOCUMENT TO ALL OF THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF PICKERINGTON, AND THAT IT GOES OUT IN THE MAIL NO LATER THAN THIS FRIDAY (TABLED, 05-01-07).  Mr. Fix moved to remove from the Table; Mr. Smith 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. 

 

Mr. Fix moved to authorize the City Manager to immediate publish the edited version of a document to all of the citizens of the City of Pickerington, and that it goes out in the mail no later than this Friday; Mrs. Riggs seconded the motion.  Mr. Hackworth stated he has some concern because the law director issued a confidential memo to members of City Council and the proposed document contains verbatim information from that confidential memo.  He stated he would therefore request that the third paragraph be removed from the second page of the document, as well as the last sentence from the second paragraph as it has nothing to do with Issue 9.  Mr. Hackworth stated further on the last page under the viewpoints in opposition of Issue 9 it stated that if it passed council would not have the ability to agree not to annex the land in any JEDD and he felt that was a false statement and felt it should be removed. 

 

Mr. Sabatino stated he would like to ensure that everyone was working from the same document as there had been different versions distributed.  Mr. Fix stated the document that is to be voted on is the edited version and Mr. Hartmann stated the version being discussed as the edited version has the parenthetical number 916097.1 at the bottom of the page.  Mr. Hartmann further stated the headings “Urging you to vote Yes on Issue 9” and Urging you to vote No on Issue 9” will be changed to “Viewpoint in Favor of Issue 9” and “Viewpoint in Opposition to Issue 9”.  He stated that was just a typographical error in the edited version.  Mr. Wisniewski stated he was not sure how this came about because there was no agreement as to what is being voted on.  He stated this is not the version that was before Council last Tuesday, so he found it premature for Mr. Fix to indicate to Council as to what version was being discussed.  Mr. Fix stated he proposed a document and put it before Council.  He continued that at that Council meeting it was agreed that he, Mr. Wisniewski, and Mr. Hartmann would have conversation as to what should be in the document, that was done and agreement was reached, and the document before Council now is the edited version that was agreed upon as of Tuesday night.  Mr. Sabatino stated if that was the case, why wasn’t this passed on Tuesday night and Mr. Fix stated because it was agreed that in an effort to give everyone time to review the document it would be fair to convene tonight.  Mr. Sabatino stated he left Council with the understanding that this was subject to change because he was not privy to Mr. Wisniewski’s side.  Mr. Hartmann stated the current motion is if this version will be edited or not, however, if someone wants to make another motion to adopt the other version that is fine.  He stated Council is not limited to one motion, and as long as Council stays on the issue that was advertised, there is no problem with multiple motions.  He stated he felt it was easier to work off one version, but however Council wanted to do it was fine.  Mayor Shaver stated the document currently being voted on has the headings “Urging you to Vote” even though that heading will be changed to “Viewpoint”.  Mr. Hartmann stated Council can make additions to this document or if it is voted down a new motion can be made to review any other additional documents. 

 

Several spectators inquired if they could have a copy of the document being discussed and Mr. Hartmann stated his only concern with providing copies is that there are a great deal of portions that were attorney-client privilege.  He stated if Council wanted to waive that attorney-client privilege they could certainly do so.  Mr. Sabatino stated he felt it would be prudent of Council to waive the attorney-client privilege so the public can follow along in the discussion.  Mr. Hartmann stated that privilege can be waived or the paragraphs that came from the privileged memo can be redacted before it is copied for the public.  Mayor Shaver inquired if Council desired to vote for a waiver of attorney-client privilege for the purposes of the material contained in the edited document only.  Mr. Wisniewski moved to waive attorney-client privilege in relation to the viewpoints of Mr. Hartmann and the document being discussed; Mr. Smith seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Fix, Mr. Smith, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Wisniewski, and Mrs. Riggs voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 7-0.  Mayor Shaver requested Mrs. Yartin provide copies of the document to the public. 

 

Council recessed at 7:55 P.M. and reconvened in open session at 8:00 P.M.

 

Mr. Fix moved to amend by substitution, with the changes in the headings, the amended or edited version of the document which is HO916097.1(2); Mr. Smith seconded the motion.  Mr. Wisniewski clarified Council was still discussing the same document that says “urging” but it will actually read “viewpoint.”  Mr. Hartmann stated that was correct.  Roll call was taken on the motion to amend with Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Fix, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Smith, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Sabatino, and Mrs. Hammond voting “Yea.”  Motion to amend by substitution passed, 7-0.  

 

Mr. Sabatino moved to amend the second bullet point under the “urging you to vote no” heading by including at the end of the last sentence the wording “and can be used to facilitate big box development.”; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken on the motion to amend with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Smith, Mr. Fix, Mr. Wisniewski, and Mrs. Riggs voting “Nay,” and Mr. Sabatino and Mr. Hackworth voting “Yea.”  Motion failed 5-2.  

 

Mr. Hackworth stated with regard to that same section, there were comments tonight that the City could not enter into a JEDD and the fourth bullet point states if Issue 9 passes Council will not have the ability to agree not to annex land in any JEDD.  Mr. Hackworth inquired of the law director, from a practical standpoint, was that an accurate statement.  Mr. Hartmann stated with the black letter reading of the amendment, it does prohibit Council, it limits Council’s rights, takes away Council’s authority to negotiate away annexation rights.  He continued, saying that, if, however, a piece of property is so far removed from the City he would say that the City could take a chance and argue that the indicia, the criteria, that are required to annex the property are so far removed that they could negotiate away that right.  He stated, however, it was a risk management decision and it could be challenged in Court by a taxpayer claiming you were violating the Charter amendment issue.  Mr. Fix stated, in fact, Issue 9 does not say that Council foregoes its right to negotiate on annexation, unless the land is really far away.  Mr. Hartmann stated that was correct, from a black letter reading of it, you would be prohibited from negotiating that away.  Mayor Shaver stated then under a strict interpretation the City could not enter into JEDD agreements because we would be in violation of this, and Mr. Hartmann stated that was correct unless the Township that you were entering into the JEDD with would waive that right.  Mr. Fix stated that is how the third bullet point read, and Mr. Hartmann stated that was correct.  Mr. Hackworth stated Mr. Hartmann had stated in his original strict interpretation that Council could not modify this, and the fact was that Council could not modify the Charter, it must be sent to the ballot.  Mr. Hackworth stated if there was a problem and a good opportunity for a JEDD, Council could provide an amendment to the electorate and they could amend it to consider a JEDD.  Mr. Hartmann stated Mr. Hackworth was referring to a memo his office was asked to provide relating to the impact if Issue 9 passes.  He stated the issues that were looked at were the biggest possible issues that could be problematic for Council moving forward.  He stated the one issue, in the last paragraph, the language that is proposed to be passed does have some strict prohibition language relating to Council ever doing anything to act in the future.  He stated someone could interpret that as a basis for saying to put something on the ballot, Council has to approve the ballot language first, so they have done some act to change that.  Mr. Hartmann stated he would argue that you cannot prohibit a future Council and he believed the Courts would favor that.  Mayor Shaver clarified that procedurally there is a petition for a Charter amendment and once that petition is presented, Council has to approve putting that Charter amendment on the ballot, and the hypertechnical concern was that Council would not be able to do that.  Mr. Hartmann stated that was correct. 

 

Mr. Wisniewski inquired if JEDDs could still be entered into with other governmental entities providing it is performed through citizen vote or action.  Mr. Hartmann stated it would have to be an initiative and he felt it would have to amend this Charter section or if it was in complete contradiction of the Charter section, the Court would have to determine which one ruled because he was sure there would be arguments on both sides.  Mr. Hartmann stated with the form of government you have, you elect representatives and the representatives are voted in and out of office based upon how the people like what you do.  He stated you can’t put just anything on the ballot; what can go on the ballot is an initiative like this one, a referendum, and Charter changes that come from a Charter Review Commission.  Mr. Hartmann further stated from what Mr. Wisniewski was saying, it would have to be done as an amendment to the Charter.  Mr. Smith stated if he understood Mr. Wisniewski’s question it was if a citizen petition for a JEDD could be put on the ballot for a general public vote with it never coming before Council and Mr. Wisniewski stated that was correct.  Mayor Shaver stated he thought eventually Council would have to approve the JEDD because a JEDD is an agreement between entities and we would have to enter into an agreement with another entity and we would have to approve that contractual agreement.  Mayor Shaver stated it would still go back to being whether or not a Charter amendment was needed.  Mr. Hartmann stated the initiative would have to come before Council at some point.  Mr. Hartmann stated it would create a conflict that you would end up in Court over because you would have a Charter ballot initiative that would be contrary to a possible JEDD. 

 

Mrs. Riggs inquired if Mr. Hartmann was aware of any city that has language similar to Issue 9 that has passed, and Mr. Hartmann stated he was not.  Mr. Sabatino further questioned if Mr. Hartmann was aware of any city where there was an attempt made to give away their municipal rights to a township, and Mr. Fix stated any city that has entered into a JEDD has done that.  Mr. Hackworth stated that was restricted to the JEDD property.  Mr. Hartmann stated he was not aware of any city that had that broad of an agreement. 

 

Mr. Wisniewski stated there were some other issues that he had recommended in his conversation with Mr. Fix that he would like to inquire if the first bullet point under “Viewpoint in Favor of Issue 9”, the unedited version, was a correct statement.  Mr. Hartmann stated it was.  Mr. Wisniewski moved to amend to include the bullet point “The rights to annexation and conforming of boundaries were attempted to be given away in an Economic Development Agreement with Violet Township but became subject to a Citizen Referendum.” Under the Viewpoint in Favor of Issue 9 section of the edited version; Mr. Sabatino seconded the motion.  Mr. Fix stated he felt it was ridiculous to put this in and not include the fact that three members of Council actually did give away our rights to annex and did give away our rights to conform boundaries and now they are going completely 180 degrees in the opposite direction.  Mr. Wisniewski stated that has expired.  Roll call was taken on the motion to amend with Mr. Fix and Mr. Smith voting “Nay,” and Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Hackworth, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Wisniewski voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 5-2. 

 

Mr. Hackworth moved to delete the last sentence from paragraph 2 on the second page that states, “The city will have to pay the township reparations for the removal of the property for any land annexed in the future;” Mr. Sabatino seconded the motion.  Mr. Hackworth stated that really has nothing to do with Issue 9, it has everything to do with the new annexation law and he felt it was misleading.  Mr. Fix stated that is an issue as a result of Issue 9.  Mr. Sabatino stated the subject of removing property from the township is not just what Issue 9 is about, and Mr. Hartmann stated it was.  Mr. Hartmann stated Issue 9 has two components, first, no boundary adjustments, which is what that talks about, and no annexation.  Mr. Hartmann stated there are currently no annexations where the reparations would be applicable because it all happened under the old law.  He stated, however, if there were any future annexations and the City decided to change it boundaries, there would be reparations.  Mr. Hartmann stated the property remains in the township otherwise and the township gets taxes.  Mayor Shaver stated one of the things Issue 9 is voting on is whether or not you have the ability to conform boundaries.  Roll call was taken with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Smith, Mr. Fix, and Mrs. Riggs voting “Nay,” and Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Wisniewski, and Mr. Hackworth voting “Yea.”  Motion failed 4-3. 

 

Mr. Hackworth moved to modify the wording on the bullet point under Viewpoint in Opposition that states, “If Issue 9 passes Council will not have the ability to agree not to annex the land in any JEDD, by substituting the word “may” for “will;” Mr. Sabatino seconded the motion.  Mr. Fix stated this has been discussed before and the law director has already explained that, according to law, there is no question that we will not have the ability to agree not to annex land in any JEDD.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Smith, Mr. Fix, Mrs. Hammond, Mrs. Riggs, and Mr. Wisniewski voting “Nay,” and Mr. Sabatino and Mr. Hackworth voting “Yea.”  Motion failed, 5-2. 

 

Mr. Sabatino moved to strike the complete bullet point that states, “The City has not given up its right to annex land or conform the boundaries;” Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion.  Mr. Wisniewski stated the City did give up its right to annex land or conform its boundaries, it was not agreed upon and, therefore, is being rescinded.  Mr. Sabatino stated there was a motion made to give those rights away by voting of four members of Council.  He stated the only reason it is not law now is because the Township didn’t accept it.  Mr. Fix stated it is not law now, so the City has not given up its rights.  Roll call was taken with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Smith, Mr. Fix, and Mrs. Riggs voting “Nay,” and Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. Sabatino voting “Yea.”  Motion failed 4-3.

 

Mr. Wisniewski moved to amend the third bullet point that reads, “Does not impact our ability to grow commercially within the current city limits, or land that is currently available for annexation” by removing the word “currently” so the bullet point would read “Does not impact our ability to grow commercially within the current city limits, or land that is available for annexation; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Fix voting “Nay,” and Mr. Sabatino, Mr. HackworthHakworth, Mr. Smith, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Wisniewski, and Mrs. Riggs voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 6-1.

 

Mr. Sabatino moved that with the document a recording of the roll call vote on this motion be included by inserting the language that this motion was voted on by, and indicate the council members names, voted against by, and indicate the council members names, and abstained by, and indicate the council members names; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion.  Mrs. Riggs stated perhaps council members could just list their names next to who is in favor of Issue 9 and who isn’t.  Mr. Sabatino stated he felt the voting record tells the citizens if they get something from the Council that it is approved by others, but maybe not him.  Mr. Fix inquired why you would vote to not give the voters information and Mr. Sabatino stated it was not not giving information, it was the information they were giving them.  Roll call was taken with Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Fix, Mr. Smith, Mrs. Hammond, and Mr. Wisniewski voting “Nay,” and Mr. Hackworth and Mr. Sabatino voting “Yea.”  Motion failed 5-2.  

 

Mr. Wisniewski moved to include under the section for Viewpoint in Favor, the bullet point stating “Does not impact our ability to negotiate with other governmental entities, providing the rights to annexation and conforming of boundaries are protected;” Mr. Sabatino seconded the motion.  Mr. Fix stated this made it more difficult to negotiate with other entities.  Mr. Wisniewski stated we can still negotiate as long as those rights are not given away.  Mr. Fix stated it is a true statement, but it is misleading, because it would leave voters to believe we can still negotiate, when, in fact, the rights to annex in a JEDD, as has already been said, we cannot do.  Mr. Wisniewski stated there are other ways to negotiate that are beyond this.  He stated there are things he would agree to that would make it absolutely impossible for the City to ever financially annex the land that he would be willing to enter into with a JEDD.  Roll call was taken with Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Fix, Mr. Smith, and Mrs. Hammond voting “Nay,” and Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Wisniewski, and Mr. Sabatino voting “Yea.”  Motion failed, 4-3.

 

Mr. Sabatino moved to amend the last bullet point in favor that reads “This amendment simply removes the ability of City Council to give away our rights to annexation and conforming our boundaries” by removing the word “simply” so the bullet point would read, “This amendment removes the ability of City Council to give away our rights to annexation and conforming our boundaries;” Mr. Wisniewski seconded the motion.   Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Smith, Mr. Fix, Mr. Wisniewski, and Mrs. Riggs voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 7-0.  

 

Mrs. Hammond stated she would like clarification on what all of the amendments are and that the motion to be voted on is the original motion that says this will go out in the mail no later than Friday.  Mr. Sabatino stated he agreed with Mrs. Hammond and questioned if it would be possible to get a copy of the document with all of the amendments included before voting on it.  Mayor Shaver stated he would suggest a recess to allow Mrs. Yartin to prepare a clean document and distribute copies to all council members. 

 

Council recessed at 8:45 P.M. and reconvened in open session at 9:10 P.M.

 

Mr. Fix moved to amend the footer on the document to read “Paid for by the City of Pickerington, 100 Lockville Road, Pickerington, Ohio 43147.   For the informational purpose of educating the voters;” Mr. Wisniewski seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino , Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Smith, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Fix, and Mrs. Riggs voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 7-0.  

 

Mr. Wisniewski stated he has received several phone calls on one final issue, and several residents are present tonight that are concerned about it.  He stated the initial impression he had was that this was going to be published on the City’s web site, it was not going to use City resources or tax dollars to mail something out.  He stated as a compromise he would like to amend the motion that is before Council.  Mr. Wisniewski moved to authorize the City Manager to immediately publish the edited version of the revised document before us on the City’s web site no later than this Friday; Mrs. Hammond seconded the motion.  Mayor Shaver stated he would suggest putting it on the web site and also sending out a press release.  Mr. Hackworth stated he did not think there was time to get it in the papers.  Mrs. Riggs stated her only concern with that was if we would reach all of the voters because not everyone has a computer.  Mr. Wisniewski stated he understood that, but he was trying to find a compromise, and this is what he agreed to originally.  Mr. Wisniewski stated this has been in the press for months and it will be in the paper tomorrow most probably.  He stated the information is available and the citizens have a responsibility to be educated about issues they are voting on.  Mr. Sabatino stated getting this out in the mail to everyone is a lot to accomplish in a very short time.  He stated if this is not to the post office by the close of business tomorrow it wouldn’t go and the City would have expended a lot of money with no results.  He stated he felt putting it on the web site does offer a potential compromise to provide some information even if it is not what everyone wants.  Mr. Fix stated he has checked with Chief Taylor, our Acting City Manager, and he was assured that the city staff was fully prepared to do what it takes to get this in the mail by the end of the day tomorrow.  He stated as a matter of principle, it is Council’s responsibility to do what they needed to do to provide the citizens with the information they need to make an educated vote on any proposed change to our Charter.  He stated while putting it on the web site is a less expensive way to do that, it would not accomplish it because the web site does not get the number of hits anywhere near the number of voters that are in the city.  He stated he understood it was a compromise but he felt it nullified all the work done this week in trying to put together a document that would provide the voters with all the information they need.  He stated the cost is about $1,500 and the committee that put this forward has already forced the city to spend about $7,500 on a special election.  He continued that the idea this Council was unwilling to spend a fraction of that amount to get the voters information was unfathomable to him.  Mr. Wisniewski stated this is still Council’s opinion as to what should be in the document.  He stated there were several motions that were voted down, there were amendments to it, and he is trying to find a compromise that will allow the ability to get something out so people can do research and hopefully answer some questions.  Mrs. Riggs stated she felt that transparency was important and she has spoken to citizens that are extremely confused about the language.  She stated when she ran for office she heard that the citizens were not communicated with enough.  She stated whether you agree with the Issue or not there are 3,000 people that have a right to understand what they are going to vote for and she felt it was extremely important to be able to communicate information to them.  Mrs. Riggs stated she felt the $1,500 was a small price for communicating with the citizens. 

 

Mayor Shaver stated he felt that putting the information on the web site was tantamount to not publishing it.  Mr. Wisniewski stated it was published in the Violet Voice that it would be published on the city’s web site, the Columbus Dispatch is here, and a fair amount of citizens are present this evening.  Mr. Fix stated he felt the use of the word “compromise” was misleading in that the compromise would be not to put it out.  He stated the percentage of our voters that read the fourth page of the Dispatch on Friday, who knew what that was.  He stated if we mail it out and they chose not to read it, then that is their option, but it is Council’s responsibility to put the information out there and give them the opportunity to have it in front of them.  Mr. Smith stated he agreed that Council’s responsibility was for widest dissemination, and he would not argue that there is no reason for it not to be on the web site, but only as an adjunct to the mailing.  Mr. Fix stated he agreed if we mailed it out and put it on the web site that was great, but he did not want to rely solely on the web site.  Mrs. Hammond stated it takes the better part of a day to get that many items folded and sent out and she felt we would be asking the staff to devote the entire day to that and she was not sure that was something we wanted to do either.  Mr. Fix stated again he has been assured the staff is prepared and ready to go and he did not feel that to have five to ten people take the better part of a Friday was asking too much.  Mayor Shaver stated either Council just wasted a great deal of time or they were going to actually educate people.  Mayor Shaver stated this is something that will affect the City, one way or the other, in the future and that was something people should know about.  He continued if you were going to do something, he did not feel it was unreasonable to ask the city staff to engage in educational activities on an issue that will affect the city for the foreseeable future.  Mr. Wisniewski stated he understood that, but he started out with this on March 20th, and the Mayor stated at that time that he wanted a neutral statement that would be strictly a motion of Council, not something that would be paid for and distributed to the citizens.  Mr. Wisniewski stated that is what he agreed to, and he is going beyond that in saying he would like it published on the city’s web site, and that is where we are.  Mayor Shaver stated had this been done beforehand, his idea was that it would go out with the utility bills, but it was not done in that timely fashion.  Mr. Fix stated the fact that it has been pushed to this late hour should not affect the fact the information should be out there in the best means possible.  Mr. Sabatino stated he would like to comment that as Mr. Wisniewski indicated, this was first discussed on March 20th and it seemed like it didn’t have a real sense of urgency until this past Tuesday.  He stated his point was, according to the way the motion was written, if the city does attempt to do this, they make the very best effort but there is a problem somewhere along the way, and it can’t happen.  Then, the way the motion is written if it doesn’t make it to the post office by the close of business at 4:00 P.M. on Friday, a lot of the city staff’s time and city money has been wasted.  He stated there has been a lot more opportunity in the past than right now to make this happen, and then Tuesday we created this sense of urgency.  He stated if we were looking to make this happen it should have been earlier.  Mrs. Riggs stated we are talking about communicating with citizens on a very important issue.  She stated we put out a parks survey and she didn’t know how much we spent on that, and this is much more important.  She stated she did not understand why there was a resistance to do it.  Mr. Wisniewski stated there are definitely citizens that do not believe this should be published, and that we would be using city taxpayer money inappropriately.  He stated there are citizens who believe that Council should not get involved with a citizen issue, there are people who believe that it should get mailed.  Mr. Fix stated there are people who disagree with everything Council does so he did not feel that was a valid argument.  He stated the question before Council was did they want people to have the information that they need to vote in an educated way or not.  If you believe they should have the information, mailing it out was the best way to do it.  If you don’t think they need the information, then it can be put on the web site.  Mr. Sabatino stated he felt there was a strong possibility that if this passes this evening to be mailed, but there is the possibility that staff would not be successful in getting it to the post office by 4:00 P.M. with every envelope, which is what this motion says.  He stated if that does not happen, then it doesn’t say it goes on Monday, it says it is done on Friday.  Mrs. Riggs stated then we would still have it on the web site, but she would rather be in a position to tell her constituents that we made every effort to get it done.  She stated she felt there would be more citizens that would thank her than criticize her for communicating what this issue is.  Mr. Fix stated he could not believe that any Council member would want to sit there, if this issue passes, and we are not able to participate in a JEDD, and then say they did not feel it was necessary to give the voters the information that they needed.  Mr. Hackworth stated there have been other issues on the ballot and the City has not done anything to communicate, and you have a citizens group that has initiated this and the perception is that the city is fighting their own citizens. 

 

Roll call was taken on the motion to amend the motion so the document is published on the web site only with Mr. ‘Smith, Mr. Fix, and Mrs. Riggs voting “Nay,” and Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Hackworth, Mrs. Hammond, and Mr. Wisniewski voting “Yea.”  Motion to amend passed, 4-3.  

 

Roll call was taken on the motion as amended with Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Hackworth, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Smith, Mr. Fix, Mrs. Riggs, and Mr. Sabatino voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 7-0.  

 

12.       ADJOURNMENT.  There being nothing further, Mr. Smith moved to adjourn; Mr. Fix seconded the motion.  Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Fix, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Smith, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Sabatino, and Mrs. Hammond voted “Aye.”  Motion carried, 7-0.  The special meeting adjourned at 9:38 P.M., May 3, 2007. 

 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: 

 

 

_______________________________

Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk

 

 

ATTEST:

 

 

_______________________________

David Shaver, Mayor