PICKERINGTON CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, AUGUST 21, 2007
COUNCIL WORK
SESSION
6:00 P.M.
1. CALL TO ORDER: Mr. Smith opened the Council Work Session at
6:00 P.M., with the following council members present: Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Fix, Mr. Smith, Mr.
Hackworth, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sabatino, and Mr. Wisniewski. Others present were: Judy Gilleland, Lynda Yartin, Linda Fersch,
Phil Hartmann, Brian Sauer, and others.
2. SCHEDULED
MATTERS:
A. Discussion
regarding proposed revisions to Administrative Code. Mr. Smith stated this work session was called
for the purpose of continuing the review of the proposed revisions to the
Administrative Code. He stated the
review would begin with Section 220.05, Schedule of Council Affairs;
Responsibility of Clerk. Mr. Sabatino
stated at the last work session some concerns were expressed regarding things
that might be in conflict with the Charter and Mr. Hartmann was going to check
on those. Mr. Hartmann stated when he
looked through the draft he did not see any conflicts to the charter. Mr. Smith verified that everyone had received
a copy of the draft Administrative Code with the changes that have been
recommended to date. Mr. Sabatino stated
in 220.05 a change had been recommended to add language that the Clerk would
provide information to Council members at no charge, and Mr. Hartmann stated a
new Section had been added later in the Code to reflect duties of the Clerk and
that had been added in that section.
Mr. Smith clarified that in Section 220.06,
Council Meetings. Mr. Hackworth stated
he felt the wording in this appeared that we would meet only once a month. Mr. Smith stated he agreed with Mr. Hackworth
and he felt it should read that Council normally met on the first and third
Tuesdays. Mr. Smith stated in his experience
we normally only cancel the first meeting in July and Mr. Sabatino stated that
is not always cancelled, it is sometimes rescheduled. Mr. Smith stated he felt it should just
document our normal practice of meeting on the first and third Tuesdays. Mr. Sabatino stated he did not see rewriting
the section if there was no need. Mr.
Fix stated he felt the word “shall” could be replaced with “normally” and then
it would be correct. Mr. Hartmann stated
he would prepare new language for this section.
Mr. Wisniewski stated with regard to cancellation of meetings, he felt
the power to cancel a meeting should be by the majority of council and not the
Mayor. Mr. Hackworth clarified the
section requiring all regular and special meetings be held at 7:30 p.m. was
being removed in order to allow for flexibility.
Section 220.07, Agenda. Mr. Smith stated most of the changes
recommended were to reflect how things are actually done. Mr. Sabatino clarified that if something
needed to be added to the agenda after the 5:00 p.m. deadline, this change
would allow that to happen. In the order
of business on the agenda, in Community Comments, Mr. Smith stated he felt it
should reflect that comments may be limited by the Mayor or presiding officer
because sometimes the Mayor is not present.
Mrs. Hammond stated she was not sure we should remove the time limit,
and Mr. Fix stated it did not remove the time limit, just left the option of
enforcing it. Mrs. Hammond stated she
still felt a time limit should be included because there could be times when
the presiding officer would let people talk about an issue that he was in favor
of, but limit those who were against that issue. Mrs. Riggs stated the way it is written now
we have flexibility because it states the time “may” be limited. Mr. Sabatino stated he did not feel there
should be a time limit at all. Mr.
Hackworth stated he did not agree with that because the purpose of the meeting
is to conduct the City’s business, it is not to allow people to talk
forever. He stated if people talk for
five or ten minutes, that is fine, but there should be the capability of
limiting it. Mr. Wisniewski stated he
agreed, he did not want someone to come in and filibuster. Mr. Hackworth stated he agreed with removing
the language that the Mayor limits the time and changing it to presiding
officer. Mr. Hackworth inquired how we
handled someone who wanted to make a long presentation to Council, and Mr.
Smith stated that is normally listed as an agenda item and not handled under
community comments. Mrs. Hammond stated
on issues where there is strong public feeling, a public hearing should be
scheduled for that specific issue and not handle the discussion under community
comments. Mr. Smith stated then the
consensus is to leave this item as recommended, just replacing the “by the
Mayor” with “by the presiding officer.”
Ms Gilleland stated we do not use the Communications section, however,
that could be used by council members to comment on letters or e-mails they
have received or whatever. Ms Gilleland
stated this could be changed to “Council Communications” and could be at the
end of the meeting. Mr. Sabatino stated
a lot of times Council wants to comment on items that are coming up on the
agenda. Mr. Wisniewski stated he
concurred, he would like this left at this point in the agenda and changed to
Council Communications. Mr. Smith stated
Referral to Committee has been added to the agenda, and Ms Gilleland stated if
anyone wants to bring legislation up on the floor, this provides a vehicle to
do that and it can be referred to a Committee at that time. Mr. Sabatino stated Other Business and
Motions are not included, and Mr. Hartmann stated it would be a good idea to
add those items in as we do use them on the agenda. Mr. Hartmann stated Discussion is not used
and is basically the same as the Council Communication added in earlier and the
Other Business item so could be removed.
Ms Gilleland pointed out the order of the agenda is directory in
nature. Mr. Sabatino questioned if there
was a way the legislation did not have to be read after the suspension of rules
has been voted on. Ms Gilleland stated
three readings are required by the Charter.
Mr. Smith stated in his research of how other Councils in Ohio do this,
if you do three readings, the only full reading was the third reading. Mrs. Riggs stated Mr. Hartmann had talked
about that. Mr. Hartmann stated that was
correct, very few councils do vote on a first and second reading. Mr. Sabatino clarified that even if there are
three readings, very few councils vote until the third reading. Mr. Smith stated the purpose of the first two
readings are more or less public notice.
Mr. Wisniewski stated he would rather leave it the way it is because
something could fail on the first or second reading. Mr. Hackworth stated by waiting until the
third reading to vote, when the public reads about what is going on they don’t
understand the issue. Mr. Sabatino state
also they did not know where council stood on issues without having the vote. Mr. Wisniewski stated that was not going to
be changed, and Mr. Hartmann stated without changing that, he did not see how
three readings could be avoided. Mr.
Wisniewski stated he was speaking to having the three readings after the
suspension of the rules has been passed.
Mr. Hartmann stated the Charter requires the third reading, but this is
something that everyone can think about and perhaps some changes in this
procedure can be recommended when the Charter review is done.
In Section 220.09, Legislation, Mr. Smith the
change has been made to reflect the name of the referring committee rather than
an individual sponsor. Mr. Hackworth
stated he still felt an ordinance could be placed on the agenda and have two
readings prior to a committee ever reviewing it because you need the committee
waiver prior to the third reading. Mr.
Hartmann stated the sponsorship of an ordinance is totally different than
someone proposing legislation. Mr.
Hartmann stated the Charter states any member of council or the Mayor may
introduce legislation, but that doesn’t have anything to do with a
sponsor. Mr. Hackworth stated he just
didn’t want to make it harder for anyone to introduce legislation and Mr.
Hartmann stated with the proposed changes it would probably be easier.
Mr. Smith stated on Mayoral proclamations
they always read “with the consent of Council” and he questioned how that
consent was reached. He stated he always
hears that read and generally that is the first time Council is hearing about
it. Mr. Sabatino clarified those
proclamations come out of the Mayor’s office.
Mrs. Riggs stated that language could just be removed from the
proclamation, and Mrs. Hammond stated she concurred it could just read it was
presented “on behalf of the City” or something.
Mrs. Yartin stated she would talk to the Mayor’s office and ensure that
language removed from proclamations.
With regard to ordinances and resolutions
that are placed on the Table, Mr. Wisniewski
stated he would recommend the time limit for remaining on the table be
changed to six months instead of twelve.
Mr. Fix stated he thought that was a good idea because if we can’t
resolve it in six months it should be removed.
All council members concurred with the recommended change.
Mr. Smith stated unless there were other
comments he would recommend the work session close at this time and at the next
work session begin with Section 220.10.
3. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, the Council Work
Session closed at 7:15 P.M., August 21, 2007.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
______________________________
Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Keith Smith, Council President Pro Tempore