PICKERINGTON CITY COUNCIL

TUESDAY, JULY 19, 2011

CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD

 

REGULAR MEETING

 

7:30 P.M.

 

1.         ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. Council for the City of Pickerington met for a regular session Tuesday, July 19, 2011, at City Hall.  Mayor O’Brien called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M.  Roll call was taken as follows:  Mr. Barletta, Mr. Fix, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Wisniewski, and Mayor O’Brien were present.  Mr. Blair and Mrs. Sanders were absent.  Others present were: Bill Vance, Lynda Yartin, Chris Schornack, Mike Taylor, Phil Hartmann, Greg Bachman, Joe Henderson, Gary Weltlich, Rocco Sabatino, Tom Spreen, Carol Carter, Commander Matt Delp, Commander Steve Annetts, Janet Thiede, Nate Ellis, and others. 

 

Mayor O’Brien administered the Oath of Office to Patrolman Thomas Spreen of the Pickerington Police Department. 

 

2.         A.        APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JUNE 21, 2011, PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING JOINT PLANNING AGREEMENT.  Mr. Fix moved to approve; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Barletta, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Sauer, and Mr. Fix voting “Yes.”  Motion passed, 5-0. 

 

            B.         APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JUNE 21, 2011, REGULAR MEETING.  Mr. Fix moved to approve; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Barletta, Mr. Fix, Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Hammond, and Mr. Wisniewski voting “Yes.”  Motion passed, 5-0.  

 

3.         COMMUNITY COMMENTS.   

 

            A.        Mr. Scott Seaman.  Mr. Seaman stated he was present this evening representing Mr.  Gillilan, the owner of the 5.82 acres discussed in the public hearing earlier and on tonight’s agenda as Ordinance 2011-38.  Mr. Seaman stated he would like to request this ordinance be tabled this evening to allow for some engineering with the stream protection to be worked out before the first reading. 

 

            B.         Mr. Rocco Sabatino.  Mr. Sabatino stated he would like to speak to the Council this evening regarding Resolution 2011-14R, the Joint Planning Agreement with Violet Township.  Mr. Sabatino distributed a suggested amendment to this agreement to allow property owners to opt out.  Mr. Sabatino stated he is a property owner in both the City of Pickerington and in Violet Township and he felt this was an additional layer of bureaucracy that would be put upon property owners.  Mr. Sabatino stated this language was included in the JEDD for property owners that were uncomfortable being included in the JEDD.  Mr. Sabatino stated he owns commercial property in both the City of Pickerington and in Violet Township and his feeling was that if he wanted to deal with the City he just wanted to talk to the City and work with them, and the same thing with the Township.  He stated if there is no provision for an opt out and he was looking to bring in a company that was considering annexing to the City, they would want to be able to talk openly without this information sharing, this joint planning, etc.  He stated if he wanted to talk to the City of Columbus, he was talking to just the City of Columbus, not to Madison Township and Madison Township is not reviewing what the City of Columbus is talking about.  Mr. Sabatino stated without this safety valve, and it is just that, a safety valve, and he would like Council to consider adding that language to this joint planning agreement.  Mr. Sabatino stated he had spoken to Violet Trustee Weltlich and he had indicated he did not have any aversion to an opt out if someone felt more comfortable.  Mr. Sabatino stated he was speaking to non-public information and with regard to public information anyone at any time could still request that information.  Mr. Sabatino stated he was just requesting Council put this language in the agreement, recognize that the investor or land owner is an important part of any deal, and give them that safety valve or level of comfort of knowing that their deal will be held in the strictest of confidence if that is what they are looking to do. 

 

Mayor O’Brien stated this legislation is currently on the Table and it can be removed for further discussion this evening, or if Council would like more information or discussion he could refer it back to Committee or set up a work session or whatever is needed. 

 

4.         COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS.  None.

 

5.         APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA.  Mayor O’Brien stated there was one consent agenda items this evening, Resolution 2011-16R, a “Resolution to accept a donation from Jeffrey and Rosalyn Abrams.”  Mr. Sauer moved to adopt; Mr. Fix seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Barletta, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Fix, Mr. Wisniewski, and Mr. Sauer voting “Yes.”  Motion passed, 5-0.  

 

6.         APPROVAL OF AGENDA.  Mr. Fix moved to approve; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Barletta, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Fix, Mrs. Hammond, and Mr. Wisniewski voting “Yes.”  Motion passed, 5-0. 

 

7.         REPORTS:   

 

A.        MAYOR.  Mayor O’Brien stated the Mayor’s Court Report has been distributed.  Mayor O’Brien stated 2015 is the bicentennial of the founding of Pickerington and he felt we should start thinking at committee level if we were going to have some type of celebration.  He stated if Council is interested in having the planning of this sent to a committee he would be happy to do that.  Council concurred they would like to have this referred to Public Safety and Communications Committee.

 

B.         LAW DIRECTOR.  Mr. Hartmann stated he had no report this evening but would be happy to answer any questions.     

 

C.        FINANCE DIRECTOR.  Mr. Schornack stated he had no additional items to report this evening and he would answer any questions. 

 

            D.         SERVICE MANAGER.  Mayor O’Brien stated Mr. Drobina was on vacation and Mr. Vance stated he had nothing to report on behalf of Mr. Drobina. 

 

E.         CITY ENGINEER.  Mr. Bachman stated he had recently received an award on behalf of the City from the American Consulting Engineers Council for the ACS traffic light system on S.R. 256.    Mr. Bachman stated he had attended a program in Minneapolis last week to study and learn about what they have done to enhance their bicycling and pedestrian facilities.  He stated he was amazed at what the City of Minneapolis has done to make their city accommodate bicycling, and he would like council to think about some alternate transportation and what we can do to make it easier and more healthy for our residents to get around.  Mayor O’Brien stated he would like to thank Scott Seaman for convincing him several years ago that the ACS lights were the way to go, and also former City Manager Judy Gilliland, council members, and the Mayor at the time who saw this project through. 

 

F.         CITY MANAGER.  Mr. Vance stated he had no additions to his report but would answer any questions. 

 

            G.        PUBLIC SAFETY AND COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE (Mrs. Hammond).  Mrs. Hammond stated the Committee met on June 22nd, and there was no legislation on tonight’s agenda from that meeting.  Mrs. Hammond stated she would like to remind everyone that we still have some great programs going on in our parks with the concert series and movies in the park, etc. 

 

            H.        PLANNING, PROJECTS & SERVICES COMMITTEE (Mr. Fix).  Mr. Fix stated they also met on June 22nd, and they forwarded the legislation on tonight’s agenda for the rezoning and final development plan to Council.  He stated he would be happy to answer any questions. 

 

8.         PROCEDURAL READINGS: 

 

            A.        ORDINANCE 2011-35, “AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $1,675,000 OF REVENUE NOTES BY THE CITY OF PICKERINGTON, OHIO, FOR THE PURPOSE OF RENEWING REVENUE NOTES PREVIOUSLY ISSUED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING PART OF THE COST OF CONSTRUCTING STREET IMPROVEMENTS IN THE WINDMILLER/DILEY AREA, INCLUDING CONSTRUCTING WIDENING AND TURN LANE IMPROVEMENTS FOR STATE ROUTE 256 TO ESTABLISH AN EXIT POINT FOR THE REALIGNMENT OF DILEY ROAD,”  First Reading, Finance Committee.    Mr. Sauer moved to waive the requirement in Charter Section 2.05 (C) that the ordinance be read on three separate meeting days; Mr. Fix seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Barletta, Mr. Wisniewski, and Mr. Fix voting “Yes.”  Suspension of Rules passed, 5-0.  Final Reading.  Mr. Sauer moved to adopt; Mr. Fix seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Barletta, Mr. Fix, Mr. Wisniewski, Mrs. Hammond, and Mr. Sauer voting “Yes.”  Motion passed, 5-0. 

 

            B.         ORDINANCE 2011-36, “AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $371,000 OF REVENUE NOTES BY THE CITY OF PICKERINGTON, OHIO, FOR THE PURPOSE OF RENEWING REVENUE NOTES PREVIOUSLY ISSUED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING PART OF THE COST OF CONSTRUCTING (I) STREET IMPROVEMENTS ON HILL ROAD AND BLACKLICK-EASTERN ROAD, INCLUDING WIDENING STREETS, CONSTRUCTING SIDEWALKS, CURBS AND GUTTERS AND INSTALLING TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, AND (II) STREET IMPROVEMENTS KNOWN AS THE HILL ROAD CONNECTOR, INCLUDING CONSTRUCTING STREETS, SIDEWALKS, CURBS AND GUTTERS,”  First Reading, Finance Committee.  Mr. Sauer moved to waive the requirement in Charter Section 2.05 (C) that the ordinance be read on three separate meeting days; Mr. Fix seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Barletta, Mr. Fix, and Mrs. Hammond voting “Yes.”  Suspension of Rules passed, 5-0.  Final Reading.  Mr. Sauer moved to adopt; Mr. Fix seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Fix, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Barletta, and Mr. Sauer voting “Yes.”  Motion passed, 5-0.  

 

            C.        ORDINANCE 2011-37 “AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $43,750 OF REVENUE NOTES BY THE CITY OF PICKERINGTON, OHIO, FOR THE PURPOSE OF RENEWING REVENUE NOTES PREVIOUSLY ISSUED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING PART OF THE COST OF CONSTRUCTING STREET AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS IN THE STATE ROUTE 256/STONECREEK DRIVE AREA,”  First Reading, Finance Committee.  Mr. Sauer moved to waive the requirement in Charter Section 2.05 (C) that the ordinance be read on three separate meeting days; Mr. Fix seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Barletta, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Fix, and Mr. Wisniewski voting “Yes.”  Suspension of Rules passed, 5-0.  Final Reading.  Mr. Sauer moved to adopt; Mr. Fix seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Wisniewski, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Barletta, Mr. Sauer, and Mr. Fix voting “Yes.”  Motion passed, 5-0.  

 

            D.        ORDINANCE 2011-38, “AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE REZONING AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE APPROXIMATE 5.82 ACRE GILLILAN PROPERTY FROM C-3 (COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT) TO PC-3 (PLANNED COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT) LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE REFUGEE ROAD AND MILNOR ROAD INTERSECTION,” First Reading, Planning, Projects & Services Committee.  Mr. Fix moved to Table; Mrs. Hammond seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Barletta, Mr. Fix, Mr. Wisniewski, Mrs. Hammond, and Mr. Sauer voting “Yes.”  Motion passed, 5-0. 

 

            *E.       RESOLUTION 2011-16R, “A RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT A DONATION FROM JEFFREY AND ROSALYN ABRAMS,” First Reading, Finance Committee.  Mr. Sauer moved to adopt; Mr. Fix seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Barletta, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Fix, Mr. Wisniewski, and Mr. Sauer voting “Yes.”  Motion passed, 5-0.   (CONSENT AGENDA ITEM)

 

            F.         RESOLUTION 2011-14R, “A RESOLUTION BETWEEN THE CITY OF PICKERINGTON AND VIOLET TOWNSHIP, OHIO, APPROVING A JOINT PLANNING AGREEMENT AND AREA,” Second Reading, Planning, Projects & Services Committee.  (TABLED, 06/21/11)  Mr. Fix moved to Remove from the Table; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Fix, Mr. Barletta, and Mr. Wisniewski voting “Yes.”  Motion passed, 5-0.  Mr. Fix stated earlier in this meeting Mr. Sabatino offered a proposed amendment that would allow for an opt out, and stated Township Trustee Weltlich had stated he did not have a problem with that.  Mr. Weltlich stated he felt it was a moot point because the confidentiality of anything you want to talk about can be protected by the attorney/client relationship.  He stated he felt that would take away the fear Mr. Sabatino had expressed.  Mr. Weltlich stated he, as a Trustee, was neutral and the important thing to him is that the City do something to enact it because it shows good faith and cooperation on a regional basis.  Mr. Vance stated it was his professional opinion that it was not possible to do an opt out because this is about submitted applications and once an application is formally filed they are open to public inspection and are a public record.  Mr. Sabatino stated as a land owner in both entities, the opt out was important to him because he was not asking to withhold public information, but developers are very touchy about their competition and they want to have a feeling of security that if they come in and talk to the City of Pickerington, they want to know the non-public part of what they talk about will be held in strict confidence.  Mr. Sabatino further stated the only thing this would do is that if someone opted out, the City would not forward the whole packet to this new commission to have discussion on that parcel.  He stated it gave the invested land owner some sense of security that if they came in to talk to the City of Pickerington it would be held in confidence within the City and the packet would not then have to go to that new commission for comment, etc.  He stated this is a new layer of bureaucracy and it could increase time and cost to the land owner and/or developer.  Mr. Sabatino stated he felt it would have a negative effect on some people in the City and some deals may not get done or even be presented here because people are not looking for more bureaucracy.  Mr. Wisniewski stated this agreement refers to the “formal receipt” of any application.  He stated he agreed that this was bureaucracy that did not need to occur, but it was for formal receipt of an application so it would be public information then anyway.  Mr. Wisniewski stated anything being discussed outside of formally submitting the application would be confidential and would not be public record.  Mr. Sabatino stated he felt adding this language would still give an assurance of confidentiality.  Mr. Vance stated we currently have an opt out; in the individual development meetings the City sponsors he has met with many developers who have expressed a desire for the discussions to be confidential and he honors that desire.  Mr. Sabatino stated the opt out would mean that the City did not formally submit the application to this new commission for its comment, review, etc.  He stated that was what he was asking, the applicant could choose to not have his package subject to this new commission.  Mr. Vance stated it would not automatically go to the commission, the City and Township would simply exchange formally submitted applications and if there are no regional issues of interest to either the City or the Township then the Commission does not even come into play.  Mr. Vance stated that would only come into play if there were potential situations such as potential annexation, etc., so this would actually expedite business rather than delay it.  Mr. Vance stated the Township and City have had a history at times of having to solve things legally and this planning agreement is an attempt to settle differences of opinion with the planning agency as opposed to using the judicial system.  Mr. Vance stated the intent here is to direct potential conflicts or items of interest to a commission to be solved informally so that the City and Township can work together to expedite things.  Mr. Vance stated if anyone comes to the City and asks for a confidential meeting, that meeting will be kept confidential.  Mr. Wisniewski stated he did not have a problem with sharing the information or the joint planning agreement, he just did not understand the purpose of the commission and having another layer of bureaucracy.  Mr. Wisniewski stated he felt that by the time something gets to this point, then formal receipt has already been established, so this is another layer being added on after the receipt of the formal application.  Mayor O’Brien asked if this commission would vote to reject the application and Mr. Wisniewski stated he did not know what it did.  Mr. Sauer stated there have been occasions in the past where development that occurs in one entity versus the other has caused some disharmony, and there have been legal expenses with regard to that, and he felt the philosophy on this agreement is that it is always better to have two entities sitting down and discussing face-to-face potential issues.  He stated he saw nothing in the agreement that the City would be mandated by any decision that would come out of this commission, nor would the Township.  He stated the commission does not have the ability to mandate anything, all it basically does is provide a forum for discussing any misunderstanding or something one party does not agree with.  Mr. Sauer stated he felt it was important for developers to know that the community they are coming into is harmonious to the people they are working with and can work well with the neighbors around them.  Mr. Vance stated this only applied to formal applications; if an application is formally submitted in the City the Township is provided a copy of it, and if an application is formally submitted to the Township a copy is provided to the City.  Mr. Sabatino stated his point was that if you could opt out then nobody could say they were stuck with this commission.  Mr. Sauer stated this was just a transfer of public information to the Township and if there is a disagreement the commission could meet but they cannot slow the process down or make any changes to the agreement that is in place.  He stated he understood the argument with regards to the JEDD and he completely supported the opt out because that involved income taxes.  Mr. Sauer stated there was no transfer of funds involved in this whatsoever and he felt that was a major difference between those two things.  Mr. Sabatino stated another concern was that the members of this commission could be individuals who don’t even live in the City or the Township yet would have a say on our properties. 

 

Mayor O’Brien stated if we want further discussion it should be moved back into committee or into its own meeting.  He stated he felt this discussion had been very healthy and very good deliberations.  Mayor O’Brien asked the law director to confirm that this commission would not have any authority it was simply to allow both entities to work things out.  Mr. Vance stated it was an option for the City or the Township to request a meeting of the commission to informally discuss a development proposal.  Mr. Wisniewski stated the joint planning agreement and the transfer of information is not dependent upon the commission structure.  Mr. Vance stated that was correct.  Mr. Wisniewski moved to remove Section 5 of Article II – Definitions, Township/City Planning Agency; Mrs. Hammond seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Sauer, Mr. Barletta, and Mr. Fix voting “No,” and Mr. Wisniewski and Mrs. Hammond voting “Yes.”  Motion failed 3-2.  Mr. Fix moved to add an additional Whereas with the language “the City of Pickerington and Violet Township recognize that the landowner/investor is a crucial element in any development and shall continue to retain their full rights to privacy and expectation of confidentiality of nonpublic information by filing an Opt-Out of the Joint Planning Area form with either entity;” Mr. Wisniewski seconded the motion.  Mrs. Hammond stated that as the Township has already adopted what is before Council this evening, if this amendment passes would it then need to go back to the Township for approval.  Mr. Hartmann stated that would be the case, the Township would need to pass the identical language.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Barletta and Mr. Sauer voting “No,” and Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Wisniewski, and Mr. Fix voting “Yes.”  Motion failed, 3-2.  Mr. Hartmann clarified the motion failed because the Charter requires at least four votes of Council for anything to pass.  Mr. Sauer moved to Table; Mr. Fix seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Sauer, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Fix, Mrs. Hammond, and Mr. Barletta voting “Yes.”  Motion passed, 5-0.  (TABLED)

 

9.         LEGISLATIVE READINGS:  NONE. 

 

10.       DISCUSSION.  There were no discussion items. 

 

11.       REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE.  Mayor O’Brien stated he would like to refer the preliminary investigation of Pickerington’s Bicentennial Celebration top the Public Safety and Community Affairs Committee.  Mr. Wisniewski request the make-up of the Joint Planning Agreement Township/City Planning Agency to the City Administration Committee for discussion.  Mayor O’Brien concurred and referred this item to the City Administration Committee for discussion.  

 

12.       OTHER BUSINESS.  No other business was brought forward. 

 

13.       MOTIONS: 

 

            A.        Mr. Sauer moved for an Executive Session under Section 121.22(G)(1)a, Matters involving an employee or public official’s appointment; Mr. Fix seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Barletta, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Fix, and Mr. Wisniewski voting “Yes.”  Motion passed, 5-0. 

 

Council adjourned into Executive Session at 8:45 P.M., and reconvened in open session at 9:05 P.M.

 

14.       ADJOURNMENT.  There being nothing further, Mr. Sauer moved to adjourn; Mr. Fix seconded the motion.  Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Fix, Mr. Barletta, and Mr. Wisniewski voted “Aye.”  Motion carried, 5-0.  The meeting adjourned at 9:07 P.M., July 19, 2011. 

 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: 

 

 

_______________________________

Lynda D. Yartin, City Clerk

 

ATTEST:

 

 

_______________________________

Mitch O’Brien, Mayor