PICKERINGTON CITY COUNCIL

TUESDAY, MAY 15, 2007

CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD

 

PUBLIC HEARING

7:15 P.M.

 

 

OPEN DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSED 2008 TAX BUDGET

 

 

Mayor Shaver opened the public hearing at 7:15 P.M. with the following members present:  Mr. Smith, Mr. Hackworth, Mrs. Hammond, and Mayor Shaver.  Others present were:  Judy Gilleland, Lynda Yartin, Chief Michael Taylor, Chris Schornack, Ed Drobina, Rex Myer, Todd Harmon, Rick Palsgrove, and others. 

 

Mayor Shaver ascertained there were no comments from the public regarding the proposed 2008 Tax Budget. 

 

Mayor Shaver ascertained there were no comments or questions from Council members regarding the proposed 2008 Tax Budget.

 

There being no questions or comments, Mayor Shaver closed the public hearing at 7:17 P.M., May 15, 2007.

 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: 

 

 

_______________________________

Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk

 

 

ATTEST:

 

 

_______________________________

David Shaver, Mayor

 

 

PICKERINGTON CITY COUNCIL

TUESDAY, MAY 15, 2007

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, May 15, 2007, at City Hall.  Mayor Shaver called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M.  Roll call was taken as follows:  Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Smith, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sabatino, Mrs. Riggs, and Mayor Shaver were present.  Mr. Fix was absent due to a family obligation and Mr. Wisniewski was absent due to business travel.  Others present were: Judy Gilleland, Lynda Yartin, Chief Taylor, Chris Schornack, Phil Hartmann, Ed Drobina, Brenda VanCleave, Tim Hansley, Rex Myer, Sean Casey, Rick Palsgrove, Harry Myers, Todd Harmon, Carol Carter, Jim Woods, and others. 

 

2.         APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MAY 1, 2007, REGULAR MEETING.  Mr. Smith moved to approve; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Smith, Mr. Hackworth, Mrs. Hammond, and Mrs. Riggs voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 5-0. 

 

3.         APPROVAL OF AGENDA.  Mr. Hackworth moved to approve; Mr. Smith seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Smith, Mrs. Riggs, and Mr. Sabatino voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 5-0. 

 

4.         COMMUNITY COMMENTS: 

 

A.        Mr. Sabatino stated he would like to let everyone know that former Police Chief Don Pruden is in intensive care in the hospital. 

    

5.         APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA:  Mayor Shaver stated there were no consent agenda items this evening. 

 

6.         COMMITTEE REPORTS:   

 

A.        RULES COMMITTEE.  Mr. Hackworth stated Rules Committee met on May 9th, and completed their review of the Administrative Code.  He stated a completed revision would be ready for the Committee to review at their next meeting.  He stated he would be happy to answer any questions. 

 

B.         SAFETY COMMITTEE.  Mr. Sabatino stated Safety Committee met on May 7th, and addressed some concerns of a citizen regarding an incident at Pickerington Central High School.  He stated Chief Taylor is looking into this matter and will report back to Safety Committee.  Mr. Sabatino stated he would be happy to answer any questions. 

 

7.         REPORTS:

 

A.        MAYOR. 

            (1)        Administer Oath of Office to Todd Harmon for the Planning and Zoning Commission.  Mayor Shaver administered the Oath of Office to Mr. Todd Harmon. 

 

B.         LAW DIRECTOR.  Mr. Hartmann stated he had provided Council members with a confidential packet of information this evening and if anyone had any questions, please call him to discuss them.   

 

C.        FINANCE DIRECTOR.  Mr. Schornack stated if anyone had any questions he would be happy to answer them. 

 

D.        SERVICE MANAGER.  Mr. Drobina stated he had nothing to report this evening, but would answer any questions. 

 

E.         MANAGER.  Ms Gilleland stated her report had been distributed and she would be happy to answer any questions.  She stated she would also request an Executive Session at the end of tonight’s meeting for the purpose of discussing pending or imminent court action with the law director.    

 

8.         PROCEDURAL READINGS:

 

            A.        ORDINANCE 2006-73, “AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT AN ANNEXATION OF 316 ACRES IN VIOLET TOWNSHIP, FAIRFIELD COUNTY, TO THE CITY OF PICKERINGTON, STATE OF OHIO,” First Reading, Hackworth.  (TABLED, 08/01/06)

 

            B.         RESOLUTION 2007-09R, “A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 2008 TAX BUDGET TO MEET THE JULY 15, 2007, DEADLINE AS SET FORTH IN THE OHIO REVISED CODE, SECTION 5705.28,” First Reading, Smith.  Mr. Smith moved to adopt; Mrs. Riggs seconded the motion.  Mr. Smith stated this was the subject of tonight’s public hearing and it is a requirement of the ORC to file this budget.  Roll call was taken with Mrs. Hammond, Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. Smith voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 5-0. 

 

            C.        ORDINANCE 2007-21, “AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SHELLY COMPANY FOR PICKERINGTON’S 2007 ANNUAL STREET IMPROVEMENT/REPAVING PROJECT,” Second Reading, Fix.  Mr. Hackworth moved to adopt; Mrs. Riggs seconded the motion.  Mr. Hackworth stated this is for our annual street paving project.    Roll call was taken with Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Smith, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Hackworth voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 5-0. 

 

            D.        ORDINANCE 2007-23, “AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $800,000 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 ENGINEERING AND DESIGN SERVICES FOR PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO THE CITY’S SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT,” Second Reading, Hammond.  Mrs. Hammond moved to adopt; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion.  Mrs. Hammond stated this will start the process for getting the funding for the engineering of our wastewater treatment plant.  Roll call was taken with Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Smith, and Mrs. Hammond voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 5-0. 

 

            E.         ORDINANCE 2007-24, “AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN EXEMPTION TO THE APPLICABILITY OF THE IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE TO EQUITY, INC., FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE TOBIN, MERRIT, INC., PROJECT BASED ON THE DETERMINATION OF THE PICKERINGTON CITY COUNCIL THAT THE PROJECT WILL CREATE AN EXTRAORDINANRY ECONOMIC IMPACT AND/OR EMPLOYMENT GROWTH,” Second Reading, Smith.  Mr. Smith moved to adopt; Mrs. Riggs seconded the motion.  Mr. Smith stated Mr. Hansley, our Economic Development Director, is present this evening to answer any specific questions.  He stated there was a fairly in-depth discussion on this ordinance at the last meeting and he had nothing further to add.  Mr. Hackworth stated he has spoken with Mr. Hansley on both this ordinance and the next one and he will support them tonight, but he would like to see us tighten up what we’re doing on these exemptions because he felt three years might be a little far out.  Mr. Hackworth stated he did not know if using the million dollar payroll would fit all commercial development.  Mr. Hansley stated the formula or guideline that was suggested by staff was based on discussion at the Finance Committee months ago, and it is suggested as a guideline.  He stated this would not be always applied, it would be on a case-by-case basis, with a recommendation to Finance Committee and they could either affirm or deny the recommendation.  Mr. Hansley stated normally we will not be recommending an incentive for retail, and the way he read the ordinance itself, it is designed for extraordinary economic growth and/or job creation and it would normally not apply for a straight retail project.  Mr. Hackworth stated this would be opening the door and that is his issue.  Mayor Shaver stated his dilemma was that these things would be done over time with changing councils, and if we do not have a set of criteria in place but use a case-by-case basis, he had two concerns.  First, that it invites disaster because how would you differentiate one case from another case without a set of firm guidelines.  He stated, secondly, it created the appearance of favoritism and we have a long history of trying to turn this City around and to make sure that all the players felt, when they came to this City, they would get the same deal.  Regardless of who their lawyers were, regardless of who their developers were, regardless of who the players were, it was going to be the same deal.  He continued when you start talking about a case-by-case basis you open the doors to the possibility that someone is going to perceive this as a payback for something.  Mayor Shaver stated it is not the fact that Council wants economic development, it is just that if you are going to do it, come up with an objective basis by which you do it and which we apply across the board.  Mayor Shaver stated the second problem he had was forgiving; he stated he did not mind a system where they paid the impact fee and if they produced, then they will get the money back.  He stated we have run into problems with promises from developers before and our City presently has a big dent in its General Fund because of an economic development that was promised and did not happen.  Mayor Shaver stated if these promises do not come through, the City must pay these monies out of the General Fund into the specific funds so if the monies do not come through from these developments, the City is going to be hurt.  He stated if a business is that confident that it will bring that type of payroll to meet our objective criteria then tell them in a year they will get their money back if they do what they promise, but if they don’t they will be taking the gamble.  Mr. Hansley stated the ordinance almost demands that it be judged case-by-case, and Finance Committee had the exact same concern and said if we have to do it case-by-case and each one must stand on it’s own merits, please give us a guideline.  He stated he did suggest that it be for commercial; that it be for high payroll; that it be for obvious job creation or job retention.  Mr. Smith stated Mayor Shaver brought up two good points and the possibility of a slippery slope was a huge concern for Finance Committee and that is why Mr. Hansley came up with this guideline so the City could be whole in three years.  He further stated there was a concern as well, with the case-by-case issue, however we do that all the time whether it is an exemption from Planning and Zoning, whether it is a zoning or building variance, that is one of the reasons Council is here and there are seven members to use their best judgment at the time, on a case-by-case.  Mr. Smith stated he felt this met that hurdle at least in terms of Finance Committee for these particular two developments.  Mayor Shaver stated he would just remind everyone that in the future there could be seven different people on Council and the more you open on a case-by-case basis, the more they can say it was done in the past and why can’t it be done now.  Mayor Shaver stated he would just like to see the guideline objectified, and make sure it is the guideline Council wants.  Mr. Smith stated he would take Mayor Shaver’s recommendation and see if it is appropriate for our Rules Committee to look at because it is probably not a bad suggestion to codify the guidelines.  Mr. Sabatino stated when the impact fee legislation was working its way through Council he questioned how things would be handled in an extraordinary situation and, Mayor Shaver, you stated things would be handled on a case-by-case basis depending upon the dynamics of what the economic impact would be.  Mayor Shaver stated he just wanted all businesses coming into the City to be treated equally and have an objective guideline that they can look to and see if they meet the criteria for an exemption, he did not want them guessing.  Mayor Shaver stated he felt strongly enough about this issue that he may veto this legislation as he felt it needs more work and in its present form it is premature, although Council can always override his veto.  Roll call was taken with Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Smith, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Hackworth voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 5-0. 

 

            F.         ORDINANCE 2007-25, “AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN EXEMPTION TO THE APPLICABILITY OF THE IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE TO BERRY & MILLER, INC., FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE VOLUNTEER ENERGY SERVICES, INC., PROJECT BASED ON THE DETERMINATION OF THE PICKERINGTON CITY COUNCIL THAT THE PROJECT WILL CREATE AN EXTRAORDINANRY ECONOMIC IMPACT AND/OR EMPLOYMENT GROWTH,” Second Reading, Fix.  Mr. Smith moved to adopt; Mrs. Riggs seconded the motion.  Mr. Smith stated he felt the discussion on this ordinance was the exactly the same as on the previous ordinance.   Roll call was taken with Mr. Smith, Mrs. Riggs, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Hackworth voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 5-0. 

 

            G.        ORDINANCE 2007-26, “AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 2006-163 ENTITLED ‘AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A MASTER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH VIOLET TOWNSHIP REGARDING ANNEXATION AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT’,” Second Reading, Fix.  Mr. Smith moved to adopt; Mrs. Riggs seconded the motion.  Mr. Smith stated two Council members were not present this evening and he felt it might be appropriate to continue this until the next meeting.  Mr. Sabatino stated he would like to deal with it tonight, and Mayor Shaver stated this is simply doing away with something that has no relevance, and he would suggest completing the second reading and have a debate on the third and final reading.  Mr. Smith moved to Table; Mrs. Riggs seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken on the motion to Table with Mr. Smith, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Hackworth, Mrs. Riggs, and Mr. Sabatino voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 5-0.  (TABLED)

 

9.         LEGISLATIVE READINGS:

 

            A.        ORDINANCE 2007-20, “AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 852 OF THE PICKERINGTON CODIFIED ORDINANCES REGULATING PEDDLERS AND SOLICITORS,” Third Reading, Mrs. Riggs.  Mrs. Riggs moved to adopt; Mr. Smith seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mrs. Riggs, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Smith voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 5-0.  

 

10.       OTHER BUSINESS:  No other business was brought forward.   

 

11.       MOTIONS: 

 

            A.        Mr. Smith moved for Executive Session under Section 121.22(G)(3), Conference with Law Director regarding pending or imminent court action; Mrs. Riggs seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Smith, Mrs. Hammond, and Mrs. Riggs voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 5-0. 

 

Council adjourned to Executive Session at 8:25 P.M. and reconvened in open session at 8:45 P.M.

 

Mr. Smith moved to assign the City’s obligation to provide sewer and water services to the Virginia Homes property pursuant to paragraph 3 of the pre-annexation agreement to Fairfield County; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Sabatino abstaining, and Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Smith, Mrs. Hammond, and Mr. Hackworth voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 4-0. 

 

12.       ADJOURNMENT.  There being nothing further, Mr. Smith moved to adjourn; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion.  Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Smith, Mr. Sabatino, and Mrs. Hammond voted “Aye.”  Motion carried, 5-0.  The meeting adjourned at 8:47 P.M., May 15, 2007. 

 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: 

 

 

_______________________________

Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk

 

 

ATTEST:

 

 

 

_______________________________

David Shaver, Mayor