May 06, 2019 City Council

[1. Call To Order]

[00:00:04]

>> I'M GOING TO CALL THE MEETING OF THE WORTHINGTON CITY COUNCIL TO ORDER. MS. THRESS CAN YOU PLEASE CALL

THE ROLL FOR THIS MEETING? >> D. KAY THRESS:

>> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: OKAY. WE'VE DONE THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. SO I'M GOING TO SUSPEND DOING IT A SECOND TIME SINCE IT'S BEEN LESS THAN A HALF HOUR.

[5. Approval of the Minutes]

ALL THOSE OPPOSED, LIKE SIGN. THE MINUTES HAVE BEEN APPROVED.

[6. Public Hearings on Legislation]

>> M. GREESON: PRESIDENT MICHAEE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING CHANGES IN ORDINANCE 15 TO THE BUILDING CODE AND 16 IN THE PLANNING AND ZONING CODE. I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO MRF PLANNING AND BUILDING AND HE'S GOING TO O OVER THE RECOMMENDED CHANGES FOR ORDINANCE 15, 2019 AND THEN AFTER YOU HOLD THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THAT ONE, HE'LL CONTINUE WITH AND VOTE HE'LL CONTINUE ON AND BE AVAILABLE TO PRESENT THE NEXT ONE AS WELL. MR. BROWN.

>> THANK YOU, MR. GREESON, MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL.

AS YOU KNOW, THAT WAS A MOUTHFUL, I THINK WITH THE CODE CHANGES, YOU CAN SEE HOW THE BUILDING CODE CHANGES IMPACT THE PLANNING AND CODE CHANGES. USUALLY I'M HERE BEFORE YOU WITH ANYTHING RELATED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING SIDE OF THE OFFICE.

TONIGHT, WE'RE HERE MAINLY FOR THE BUILDING SIDE OF THE OFFICE BUT HOW IT IMPACTS CERTAIN SECTIONS WITHIN THE PLANNING AND ZONING ODE. AS YOU KNOW, DON PHILLIPS IS THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL, WORKED ON TRYING TO UPDATE THE CODES TO THE CURRENT FOR THE OHIO RESIDENTIAL CODE AND THE STATE BUILDING CODE. DON WAS UNABLE TO BE HERE TONIGHT. FAMILY EMERGENCY SO I'M GOING TO DO APPLY BEST TO GET AACROSS WHAT HE'S BEEN WORKING ON.

HE'S ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND THE OHIO BUILDING ASSOCIATION. PAST PRESIDENTS AND HAS WORKED DILIGENTLY WITH THE CODE COMMITTEE ON A LOT OF THE CHANGES YOU WILL SEE TONIGHT. QUICKLY GOING THROUGH, WE'RE GOING TO FOCUS ON PART 13, WHICH IS THE BUILDING SECTION OF THE OFFICE. CURRENTLY IN PART 13, THERE IS NO REQUIREMENTS FOR DEMOLITION. EXPECT MINOR LANGUAGE IN THE OHIO BUILDING CODE. AND NOTHING IN THE RESIDENTIAL CODE OF OHIO, FOR EXAMPLE ONE OF THE THINGS E HAVE NOTICED, AT LEAST OVER THE PAST YEAR WE HAD RESIDENTS DEMOLISHED AS WE GO THROUGH PUTTING TIMEFRAMES AND SITE REDEVELOPMENT WITH THE TIMEFRAME THAT WOULD GO WITH THAT.

ALSO, THE TATE OF OHIO ADOPTED NEW RESIDENTIAL BUILDING CODE THAT GOES INTO AFFECT FOR 1, 2, 3, BUILDING FAMILY JULY 1.

SINCE WE'RE MAKING CHANGES TO THE BUILDING CODE, ANY CHANGE OR MODIFICATION TO THE PLANNING OR ZONING CODE REQUIRES A 60-DAY WAITING PERIOD. WE'RE TRYING TO BALANCE THE TWO.

AS MR. GREESON MENTIONED EARLIER, WE'RE ONE OF THE ONLY JURISDICTIONS IN CENTRAL OHIO WITH AN 6-FOOT BARRIER REQUIREMENT FOR SWIMMING POOLS. WE WANTED TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION AS WE MOVE FORWARD. ONE OF THE THINGS WE HAVE DONE IS OUT OF THE SIX MONTH EXPIRATION PERIOD FOR PERMITS, WHEN YOU APPLY FOR A PERMIT NOW, IT DOES NOT EXPIRE.

WE WANTED TO ADD A SIX-MONTH PEXPIRATION AND DELETED DRIVEWAY

[00:05:04]

ONE REASON IS THAT IT IS COVERED IN THE SERVICE AND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND OTHER CODES THROUGHOUT THE CODIFIED ORDINANCES. WE RAISED THE FEES FROM $50 TO $200 FOR A DEMOLITION PERMIT. AND ADDED SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS INCLUDING HOW THE SITE WILL BE RESTORED, AND I THINK THE KEY THING IS THAT TIMEFRAME, IF WE KNOW IT'S GOING TO BE SIX MONTHS OR 60 DAYS, THAT THAT WOULD BE PART OF THAT APPLICATION PROCESS. IN ADDING A SECTION FOR A DEMOLITION AND THE TIMEFRAME ASSOCIATED, WE NEEDED TO ADD POWERS TO THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, IF THEY WANTED EXTENDED TIMEFRAME, THE BOARD COULD HEAR THE CASE AND ALLOW FOR AN EXTENSION AND/OR FOR A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME THAN WHAT IS RECOMMENDED. ONE OF THE THINGS WE'VE ALSO DONE IS THROUGHOUT THE CODE IS TRY TO CLEAN UP REFERENCES IN THE OHIO RESIDENTIAL CODE, DELETED REFERENCE TO ADDENDX H RELATED TO PATIO COVERS SINCE THEY ARE COVERED BY THE NEW CODE WE'RE PROPOSED TO ADOPT. ADD A 6-MONTH PERIOD ON THE PERMITS. THE SEWER CONNECTION IS HANDLE ELSEWHERE. ONE OF THE BIG CHANGES WE DID IS DELETED THE PERMIT REQUIREMENT FOR SMALL ITEMS LIKE A SHED.

STILL REQUIRES A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE BUT NO BUILDING PERMIT. IF YOU CAME IN FOR A SHED WE CHECK FOR SET BACKS, WE CHARGE YOU A $75 FEE PLUS THE CERTIFICATE OF APPLIANCE FEE. THIS WOULD REQUIRE YOU TO GET A CERTIFICATE OF ZONING COMPLIANCE BUT IT IS NOT REGULATED BY THE BUILDING CODE. WE WERE HAVING A PERMIT.

WE RAISED THE FEE FROM $5 TO $2. AND SUGGESTED $10 TO $50 FOR COMMERCIAL. ONE OF THE BIG CHANGES WE DISCUSSED WAS A CHANGE IN THE BARRIER REQUIREMENT FROM 6 TO 4 FEET WITH SWIMMING POOLS. REGULATED IN THE STATE BUILDING CODE IS FOUR FEET, THAT IS A STATEWIDE RECOMMENDATION IS FOUR FEET. WE COULDN'T FIND IN THE PAST HISTORY OF WHY WE WENT TO SIX VERSUS FOUR.

ONE OF THE GREAT EXAMPLES FOR THIS ONE IS WE RECENTLY HAD A NEW FENCE BEING INSTALLED AROUND THE APARTMENTS ON CHROCK ROAD NEAR THE RAILROAD TRACKS AND COLUMBUS WAS INVOLVED WITH THIS BECAUSE THEY STARTED TO INSTALL A FOUR FOOT FENCE AND REQUIRED WORTHINGTON'S REQUIREMENT WAS SIX.

SO THEY THEY ARE INSTALLING A SIX.

WE DELETED A SECTION ON BED AND BREAKFAST.

IT'S REGULATED IN THE OHIO BUILDING CODE WITH SIMILAR REQUIREMENTS WHAT WE HAD AND OUR REGLATIONS AND ADDED DETAILED REQUIREMENTS FOR DEMOLITION, DEMOLITION AND THE KEY THING WAS THE TIMEFRAME A FEW CHANGES IN 11 DEALT A CROWDING AND TIED IT BACK TO THE PROPERTY CODE. NEW REQUIREMENTS.

THERE WAS A -- MAINTENANCE, ALREADY BEING COVERED BY OTHER ORDINANCE THIS COUNCIL ADOPTED WITHIN WORTHINGTON.

AND IN THE MAJORITY OF THE CHANGES, THE INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE INCLUDE NEW MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRE RESISTANCE READY CONSTRUCTION, TYPICALLY FOUND IN THE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS. NOT NEW FOR WORTHINGTON.

THE OHIO BUILDING AND FIRE CODES CURRENTLY USE THEM FOR ENFORCEMENT. 11 NEEDING TO BE AMENDED.

RAISING THE FEE FOR CERTIFICATE OF ZONING, BOARD OF APPEALS RIGHT TO HEAR DEMOLITIONS AND THE BARRIER REQUIREMENT RECOMMENDS SIX VERSUS FOUR FEET. WHERE THEY MEASURE THE DEPTH OF WWHAT WAS CONSIDERED A POOL, IT IS 2 FEET SIX INCHES, BUT THE RECOMMENDATION IS 24 INCHES. STAFF FELT IF IT MATCHED UP WITH THE DESIGN GUIDELINES, WE FELT IT WAS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THAT.

AGAIN, APPENDIX G RELATED TO SWIMMING POOLS, SPAS, HOT TUBS

[00:10:02]

>> R. DOROTHY: YOU TALKED ABOUT ADDING AN EXPIRATION DATE.

IS THERE A PARTICULAR REASON WHY WE NEED THAT? DO WE HAVE EXPERIENCE IN WHY THAT WOULD BE PROPOSED?

>> WE HAVE HAD A COUPLE INSTANCES OVER THE HOUSE IN WORTHINGTON ESTATES AND THE HOUSE OFF OF LINCOLN, AND HOLIDAY INN WHERE DEMOLITION PERMITS WERE ISSUED AND ALL THE WORK WAS NOT COMPLETED IN A TIMELY MANNER WE HAD TO THEN START AN ENFORCEMENT TO WORK WITH THEM.

ONE OF THE IDEAS WITH ADDING A EXPIRATION TO THE DEMOLITION PERMIT, IS ONE, IF THEY HAVE NOT COMPLETED IT IT EXPIRES.

OR IF THEY GO FOR A DEMOLITION PERMIT THEY HAVE TO HAVE WITHIN 60 DAYS THE SITE, AS A PLAN OF HOW IT WILL BE RESTORED.

YOU HAVE 60 DAYS TO DO THE DEMOLITION AND GET IT BACK INTO PRODUCTION, READY FOR ANOTHER HOUSE OR BUILDING OR LEAVE IT AS A LEVELED BUILDING SITE FOR FUTURE USE.

THOSE ARE PROBABLY THE THREE EXAMPLES WE HAD HAD RECENTLY WHERE I THINK THIS WOULD BENEFIT.

>> B. KOWALCZYK: IF THE PERMIT EXPIRES YOU WOULD APPLY AND PAY

FOR THE PERMIT? >> CORRECT.

THEY WOULD APPLY FOR ANOTHER PERMIT.

AGAIN, KIND OF THE REQUIREMENT, IF THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO DO IT WITHIN 60 DAYS AFTER RECEIVING THE DEMOLITION PERMIT THEY WOULD THEN NEED TO GO BEFORE THE BOARD TO ASK FOR AN EXTENSION.

ONCE THEY ACTUALLY START THE DEMOLITION O DEMOLITION IT, 90 DAYS WOULD BE SUFFICIENT. THE HOLIDAY INN, LATER THIS SUMMER THEY WILL START CONSTRUCTION.

WHERE WE COULD GO TO THE BOARD INSTEAD OF GOING FOR THE THEY CAN'T MEET THEP 90 DAYS TIMEFRAME THAT WE COULD SAY SIX OR NINE MONTHS DEPENDING ON THE SITUATIONS.

IF THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO DO THAT, THEY CAN COME BACK TO TELL US WHY THEY CAN'T MEET THE TIMEFRAME AND ASK FOR AN EXTENSION. THAT LED TO CHANGES IN PART 13, WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING CODE, IT WAS GIVING THAT BOARD

THE OWER TO HEAR THESE ITEMS. >> B. KOWALCZYK: THIS IS DUE TO MY IGNORANCE IN THE BUILDING CODE BUT A REFERENCE TO OVERCROWDING. WHAT DOES THAT SECTION REFER TO?

>> I KNOW IN DISCUSSION ON IT, SO THAT'S WHAT IT, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE A THREE-BEDROOM HOUSE WITH EIGHT PEOPLE SLEEPING IN ONE ROOM. IT GOES TOWARDS THAT.

>> D. SMITH: THIS QUESTION IS GEARED TOWARD MR. LINDSAY.

I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH ANYTHING YOU HAVE PROPOSED TONIGHT.

MR. MEYERS, I MAY ASK FOR YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS AS WELL.

A LOT OF THESE CODES ARE DEFAULTING TO AWAY FROM SAYING, HEY, OUR LOCAL CODES DON'T NEED TO EXIST ANYMORE.

PROBLEMS OR US IN THE FUTURE WITH ALL THE HOME ROLE ISSUES GOING ON. AND SETTING OURSELVES UP FOR, HEY, YOU ARE DOING AWAY WITH YOUR LOCAL RULES ANYWAY.

>> I THINK IT'S AN INTERESTING QUESTION.

MY INITIAL RESPONSE WOULD BE, NO.

I DON'T BELIEVE THAT OUR AUTHORITY IN A PARTICULAR INSTANCE IN ANYWAY SUGGESTS THAT WE ARE GIVING UP HOME RULE AUTHORITY. TO THE EXTENT OF THE RESIDENTIAL CODE, THE STATE CHOSE TO IMPOSE THAT ON CITIES AND IN THAT

[00:15:01]

THEY HAVE DONE IT PREVIOUSLY WITH THE BUILDING CODE OR THOSE THAT ARE MORE THAN THREE FAMILY UNITS.

IN THAT REGARD, WAS A CONTINUATION.

BUT I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT OUR ACTION IN ADOPTING THESE CODES, SORT OF ACKNOWLEDGING WHAT THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY HAS ONE.

WOULD EFFECTIVELY BAR US IN THE FUTURE FROM EXERCISING OUR HOME

RULE IF WE CHOSE TO. >> PRO TEM S. MYERS: FOR US TO BE-- TO ENFORCE A BUILDING CODE WE HAVE TO ADOPT OR WE LOST OR ENFORCEMENT ABILITY. I THOUGHT THAT IS WHAT GOT IT

STARTED. >> IN THE SENSE WE ENFORCE THE BUILDING CODE AND THAT IS THE AUTHORITY UNDER WHEN MR. PHILLIPS TAKES ACTION IN REVIEWING AND ENFORCING THE CODE. IT IS BY THE STATE HAVING DECLARED THAT IS THE CODE AND THAT IT IS OF STATEWIDE CONCERN THAT ALL BUILDING REQUIREMENTS BE UNIFORM THROUGHOUT THE STATE BOTH FOR ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES AND FOR CONTRACTORS AND BUILDERS TO NOT BE SUBJECT TO 647 DIFFERENT CODES IN TERMS OF HOW ONE CONSTRUCTS A BUILDING SAFELY.

>> ONE OF THE ADDITIONAL THINGS TO ADD, WITH THE STATE, THEY SET THE CODE AND Y YOU ARE ALLOWED O MAKE MODIFICATIONS THAT CAN'T BE IN CONFLICT. WE THOUGHT ADDING THE DEMOLITION SECTION TO THE CODE WOULD BE A BENEFIT TO US AND OUR RESIDENTS AND FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO DO THAT, WHAT TO EXPECT.

>> PRO TEM S. MYERS: ARE FOR THE MOST PART, THE AMENDMENT YOU ARE PROPOSING BRING US UP TO CURRENT OHIO BUILDING CODE?

>> TALKING ABOUT CODE AND THE REASON FOR IT, I WANT O MENTION IT'S USUALLY FOR LIFE, SAFETY AND THE MINIMUM STANDARD.

I MEAN, SO WHAT -- LIKE, TO SEE THOSE FENCES FOUR FEET OR SIX FEET. I APPRECIATE THE FACT WE DO AN ARCHITECTURAL -- FOR LOWER FENCES.

GOING WITH THE DEFAULT OF FOUR. MAYBE IN THE FUTURE WE MIGHT WANT O LOOK AT, SUCH AS HAVING A REQUIREMENT FOR SOUND ACTINNUATION IN MULTIFAMILY UNITS SO YOU HAVE LESS NOISE OR BETTER REGULATIONS OF MAKING SURE THE ASSEMBLY WORKS PROPERLY. AS A DRIVER WHY PEOPLE DO NOT LIVING THEM THEMSELVES YOU CAN HEAR YOUR NEIGHBORS, THAT WOULD BE A SUGGESTION TO RAISE OUR MINIMUM STANDARD FROM THE OHIO CODE. IN GENERAL CODES ARE GREAT TO MAINTENANCE THE SAFETY F -- MAINTAIN THE SAFETY OF EVERYONE

IN THE COMMUNITY. >> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: OKAY.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS. IF NOT, MS. THRESS, COULD YOU PLEASE THE ROLL ON THIS ORDINANCE? ORDINANCE 15-2019 IS PASSED. ORDINANCE 16-2019, TO AMEND SECTIONS 1125.02, 1129.05 AND 117 3.05 OF THE CODIFIED ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF WORTHINGTON RELATED TO THE COORDINATION WITH THE STATE OF OHIO BUILDING CODES, THE ESTABLISHMENT OF DEMOLITION STANDARDS, MODIFYING POOL BARRIER REQUIREMENTS AND ADJUSTING FEES.

MR. GREESON. >> M. GREESON: MR. BROWN, IF YOU

HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? >> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: QUESTI? IF NOT, MS. THRESS, COULD YOU PLEASE THE ROLL ON THIS ORDER? ORDINANCE 16-2019 IS PASSED. NEW LEGISLATION, RESOLUTION 2

[7.A. Resolution No. 24-2019 Eligible Depository - FC Bank]

[00:20:02]

MR. GREESON. >> M. GREESON: MAYOR AND MEMB ERS OF COUNCIL, WHEN WE WANT TO ADD, IT REQUIRES WE DO THAT WITH FC BANK.

GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL:

>> PRO TEM S. MYERS: WHAT EXACTLY ARE INACTIVE FUNDS AS

OPPOSED TO ALL HE OTHERS? >> M. GREESON: I'M SO GLAD YOU ASKED. INTERIM FUNDS FROM 14 DAYS TO LESS THAN A YEAR. THAT WOULD BE FROM A YEAR, OVER.

>> PRO TEM S. MYERS: THAT'S EVERYTHING.

>> M. GREESON: WELL, THERE IS ACTIVE, WHICH WE ANTICIPATE

WITHIN 14 DAYS. >> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: ALL TH.

[7.B. Resolution No. 25-2019 Transfer of Funds]

RESOLUTION 25-2019. ADJUSTING THE ANNUAL BUDGET BY PROVIDING FOR A TRANSFER OF PREVIOUSLY APPROPRIATED FUNDS, INTRODUCED BY MS. KOWALCZYK, MOVED FOR ADOPTION BY MS. DOROTHY, SECONDED BY MR. MEYERS.

MR. GREESON. >> M. GREESON: MAYOR AND MEMB ERS OF COUNCIL, I'M GOING TO ASK MRS

TRANSFER RESOLUTION. >> THANK YOU, MR. GREESON, MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL. FOLLOWING TRANSFERS ARE REQUESTED WITHIN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

AS YOU KNOW WE RELIED MORE HEAVILY ON PART-TIME LABOR FROM FULL-TIME TO THE PART-TIME WAGE LINE.

THE SECOND ONE REALLOCATES FROM FULL-TIME BECAUSE WE'RE OPERATING WITH THE USE OF FULL-TIME AND PART-TIME LABOR.

>> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: ALL TH. ALL THOSE OPPOSED, LIKE SIGN.

RESOLUTION 25-2019 PASSES. RESOLUTION 26-2019, DECLARATION

[7.C. Resolution No. 26-2019 Declaration of Necessity of Appropriating Parcels - Northeast Gateway Project]

MR. GREESON. >> M. GREESON: MAYOR AND MEMB ERS OF COUNCIL, AS YOU KNOW WE'RE DILIGENTLY MOVING FORWARD ON ALL ASPECTS OF THE NORTHEAST GATEWAY PROJECT. THIS IS AN IMPORTANT COMPONENT RELATED TO ACQUIRING PARCELS. EXPLAIN WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE.

>> THANK YOU, MR. GREESON. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, AS MR. GREESON INDICATED, THIS IS A NECESSARY STEP WITHIN THE ACQUISITION OF THE PARCELS NECESSARY FOR THE NORTHEAST GATEWAY PROJECT. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING TOWARDS THE ACQUISITION OF THAT FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME OVER SIX MONTHS BY WHICH OUR CONSULTANT TRANSSYSTEMS HAS BEEN OUT NOTIFYING THE PROPERTY OWNERS, PROVIDING AN APPRAISAL, ATTEMPTING TO NEGOTIATE A PURCHASE OF THOSE PROPERTIES.

AND WE'RE AT THE POINT THAT WE WILL NEED TO PROCEED IF NEGOTIATIONS OVER THE UPCOMING WEEKS DO NOT PROVE SUCCESSFUL, THAT WE WILL NEED TO PROCEED BY EMINENT DOMAIN THROUGH THE COURT PROCESS. THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS CERTAIN RIGHTS WITHIN THAT PROCESS IN TERMS F PRICE ND VALUATION AND DETERMINATION OF TRIAL. I WILL SAY THAT WE ULLY INTENT TO CONTINUE THE PROCESS OF VOLUNTARY NEGOTIATIONS PRIOR TO THE FILING OF THE ACTUAL COMPLAINTS.

IN ORDER TO MEET THE TIMELINES AND PROCEED WITH THE ROJECT IN A TIMELY FASHION, WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT FILING THOSE APPROPRIATION PROCEEDINGS AROUND JULY 1 OF THIS YEAR IF WE'RE NOT

[00:25:02]

>> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: HOW MANY PARCELS ARE WE INCL INCLUDN

THIS? >> 15 AT THIS POINT.

TWO OF THOSE PROPERTIES ARE REQUIRED TO BE IN THE PROCESS BECAUSE THEY INVOLVE ESTATES ESTATES.WE NEED TO HAVE A COURTE DETERMINATION BECAUSE THERE IS NOT A KNOWN PROPERTY OWNER TO SIGN OVER. A NUMBER ARE REPRESENTED AND MOST INSTANCES REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL AND CERTAIN COUNSEL HAVE ATTENDANCY TO WANT THE PROCESS TO GO FORWARD OF AT LEAST FILING THE PROCEEDING. THOSE WHO DEAL WITH THIS REGULARLY ARE ACCUSTOMED TO THE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF REVIEW AND AUTHORITY PERMITTED TO ODOT IN TERMS OF APPROVING RECOMMENDED PURCHASE PRICE AS A RESULT. THERE IS A TENDENCY FOR SOME TO SORT OF NOT NEGOTIATE UNTIL WE FILE THE COMPLAINT.

A NUMBER OF THESE FALL INTO THAT CATEGORY.

THERE IS PROBABLY FOUR OF THEM THAT WE STILL ARE HOPING WE WILL BE RESOLVING PRIOR TO NEGOTIATING OR PRIOR TO THE NEED TO FILE. ONE OF THE PROPERTIES IS OFF A RESIDENCE THAT IS GOING TO REQUIRE RELOCATION.

AND THE JULY 1 DEADLINE IS NECESSARY BECAUSE IF THAT ONE DOES NOT RESOLVE VOLUNTARILY, THE PROCEEDINGS NOT ONLY TO APPROPRIATE THE PROPERTY, BUT ALSO TO MOVE FORWARD ITH EVICTION, WHICH IS A REQUIRED STEP, REQUIRES MORE TIME.

THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THIS TIMEFRAME.

SO THIS IS THE FIRST STEP OF TWO.

I WILL EXPLAIN THE OTHER ONE THAT IS COMING UP IN A A LITTLE BIT. THIS RESOLUTION IS THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENT THAT WE DECLARE THE NECESSITY OF APPROPRIATING THEM.

YOU ESSENTIALLY DID THAT WHEN YOU STARTED THIS PROJECT, KNOWING THAT IT REQUIRED THE ACQUISITION OF OVER 100 SEPARATE PARCELS INVOLVING 40 PROPERTY OWNERS.

YOU SORT OF ALREADY STARTED THE PROCESS.

BUT THIS IS THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENT YOU DECLARE THE NECESSITY AND YOUR INTENT TO PROCEED IN THIS FASHION.

THE CITY MANAGER WILL SEND OUT THE FORMAL NOTIFICATION TO NOTIFY THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS. A SERIOUS OPPOSITION TO THE PROJECT ITSELF, DIRECTOR -- IN FACT EVEN HIS PREDECESSOR IN THE INITIAL DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS. THE PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE BEEN WELL AWARE. THIS IS A POINT OF GOING THROUGHOUT PROCESS OF DETERMINING THE APPROPRIATE PRICE FOR PURCHASE OF THOSE PARCELS.

SO THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE THE ACTUAL AUTHORIZATION.

THE NEXT ONE THAT COMES UP IN A COUPLE OF MOMENTS ON YOUR AGENDA. AND THAT WOULD BE THE ACTUAL AUTHORIZATION OF THAT, THAT WOULD BE INTRODUCED TONIGHT FOR

PASSAGE IN TWO WEEKS. >> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: ANY QUESTIONS? MR. MEYERS?

>> PRO TEM S. MYERS: WE'RE STILL IN THE NEGOTIATIONS WITH THESE PROPERTIES. WE AT THIS POINT, HOW MANY WOULD GO TO EMINENT DOMAIN AND HOW MANY WON'T?

>> IF PRIOR TO THE 20TH WE HAVE 12 ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES, I WILL TAKE THEM OFF OF THE AUTHORIZATION.

IF WE HAVE REACHED AN AGREEMENT, I DON'T FEEL -- OFF IN CASE

THERE IS A PROBLEM. >> PRO TEM S. MYERS: WILL YOU COME BACK -- ILL THERE BE ANOTHER AUTHORIZATION ACTUALLY FILED? OR DOES THIS GIVE THE

AUTHORIZATION TO FILE? >> THE WAY WE STRUCTURED THIS IS THIS WOULD BE YOUR AUTHORIZING US TO PROCEED WITH THOSE

PARCELS. >> PRO TEM S. MYERS: I WOULD ASK IF YOU -- AND I'M SURE YOU WOULD INFORM US PRIOR TO THE JULY FILING DATE HOW MANY YOU THINK WE'LL HAVE TO FILE AND WHO THEY

ARE AT THAT POINT. >> I WOULD BE HAPPY.

>> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: ALL THG NIFY BY SAYING AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED, LIKE SIGN.

OKAY, RESOLUTION 26-2019 HAS PASSED.

WE'RE INTRODUCING NEW ORDINANCE, 14, 2019, TO ENACT NEW CHAPTER

[7.D. Ordinance No. 14-2019 New Code Chapter 539 - Prohibition of Discriminatory Practices]

[00:30:03]

INTRODUCED BY S. KOWALCZYK. ORDINANCE 17-2019, AUTHORIZING

[7.E. Ordinance No. 17-2019 Establish 27th Pay Fund]

[7.F. Ordinance No. 18-2019 Additional Appropriations]

[7.G. Ordinance No. 19-2019 Appropriation - Huntley Road Waterline Project]

AND RELATED EXPENSES AND DETERMINING TO PROCEED WITH SAID PROJECT, PROJECT 02-14, INTRODUCED BY MR. MEYERS.

[7.H. Ordinance No. 20-2019 Appropriation Authorization for Property and Easements - Northeast Gateway Project]

SPECIFICALLY FOR THE FRA-C FRA-CR84-1.36 NORTHEAST GATEWAY PROJECT. WITH SUCH ROADWAY SHALL BE OPENED TO THE PUBLIC WITHOUT CHARGE, INTRODUCED BY MS. DOROTHY. GOING ONTO CITY OFFICIAL

[8.A.I. Sale of Surplus Property]

MR. GREESON. >> M. GREESON: YEAH.

PRESIDENT MICHAEL. >>.

>> THANK YOU. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, SECTION 111.09B, CITY COUNCIL MUST APPROVE THE SALE OF A VALUE WITHIN EXCESS -- WE SOLD A BUS. WE DID NOT ANTICIPATE THE PRICE WOULD GO VER $5,000 BUT IT DID SO WE'RE SEEKING BY MOTION YOUR APPROVAL TO TRANSFER THE TITLE OF THE BUS.

THE WINNING BID WAS TO FOUNDATION CHRISTIAN ACADEMY.

>> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: MOVED BY MS. KOWALCZYK.

SECONDED BY MR. FOUST. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? GOT MORE MONEY THAN WE THAT. THAT'S WONDERFUL.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED, LIKE SIGN.

OKAY. THE NEXT ONE IS PERMISSION TO THIS IS FOR RETROFITTING STREETLIGHTS WITH L.E.D. LAMPS.

>> M. GREESON: BEFORE WE DO THAT, WE DO A LOT OF THESE THINGS BY DEALS WHICH IS AN ONLINE BIDDING FORUM.

AND $5,000 IS AN AWFULLY LOW LIMIT TO COME BACK FOR APPROVAL.

WE MAY AT SOME POINT DO RESEARCH AND SUGGEST THAT BEING RAISED.

SINCE IT HASN'T BEEN MODIFIED FOR PROBABLY DECADES.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU -- IF YOU DO, LET ME KNOW.

ON THE COMMUNITY VISIONING PROCESS, I THINK IT IS PROBABLY MORE APPROPRIATE THAT I TURN IT OVER --

>> I WANTED TO MENTION SOMETHING ABOUT THE RETROFIT.

>> M. GREESON: I APOLOGIZE. >> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: I KNOW WHO WANTS TO MOVE ON THIS ONE, RACHEL.

>> M. GREESON: I APOLOGIZE, I SKIPPED OVER IT.

YOU INCLUDED IN YOUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND PROGRAM ANY NUMBER OF SUSTAINABILITY INITIATIVES, WHICH BOTH HAVE THE DUAL BENEFIT OF BEING MORE SUSTAINABLE USING LESS ENERGY BUT ALSO SAVING US DOLLARS AND INVESTING IN ORDER INFRASTRUCTURE. THIS IS ONE OF THOSE PROJECTS RETOFITTING OUR DOWNTOWN STREETLIGHTS.

I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO MR. >> THANK YOU, MR. GREESON, YOU PRETTY MUCH COVERED. THIS IS A SUSTAINABILITY PROJECT. AND WE DID AN INORDINATE AMOUNT OF RESEARCH TO FIND THE RIGHT FIXTURES FOR THE LIGHTS.

BUT WE CAME UP WITH APPROPRIATE SPECIFICATIONS AND READY TO BID

[00:35:03]

COST WILL BE IN THE -- SHOULD BE IN THE 160-$180,000 RANGE.

WE'LL SEE WHERE IT COMES IN. WE'LL MAY END UP DOING SOME OF THE WORK OURSELVES. WE'RE EXCITING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT TO IMPLEMENT THE SAVINGS IN POWER AND CARBON FOOTPRINT. WE WON'T SEE MUCH OF IT BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT METERED BUT THERE WILL BE A REDUCTION IN POWER USAGE. NOT NECESSARILY IN BILLING BECAUSE WE HAVE AN ODD STRUCTURE OF BEING CONNECTED TO THOSE LIGHTS. THEY ARE NOT NECESSARY, MOST OF THEM ARE NOT METERED. WE PAY A BILL.

SCOTT, YOU WANT TO -- >> I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS THE

QUESTION? >> THE WAY WE PAY OUR A.E.P.

BILLS. >> ONCE WE GET THE LIGHTS RETROFITTED, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ESTIMATE THE SAVINGS AND THEY ARE GOING TO TELL US A NEW AMOUNT IT WILL BE.

WE'RE WORKING WITH OUR ENERGY PEOPLE TO WORK WITH A.E.P. TO

GET THAT FIGURED OUT. >> R. DOROTHY: I'M SO GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP, EXACTLY. I WANTED TO KNOW THE PAY BACK.

I WANTED TO TRACK THIS SO WE HAVE AN ESTIMATE OF THE ENERGY WE'RE REDUCING, WHICH LEADS TO HOPEFULLY REDUCTION IN COST IF WE NEGOTIATE THAT CORRECTLY. ALSO, THE LIFE CYCLE, HOW LONG LONG WILL THE L.E.D. LIGHTS LAST?

>> I'M NOT SURE ON THESE PARTICULAR LIGHTS BUT

SIGNIFICANTLY MORE. >> R. DOROTHY: USUALLY L.E.D. IS SIGNIFICANTLY LONGER. DO WE KNOW WHAT COLOR?

SIMILAR TO WHAT WE HAVE? >> SIMILAR HUE, SLIGHTLY BRIGHTER. IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO GET AN EXACT MATCH BUT IT IS AS SIMILAR AS WE CAN TO MATCH THE EXISTING

LIGHTING. >> R. DOROTHY: I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. THERE IS DIFFERENT COLORS OF

LAMPS RIGHT NOW. >> THE ONES AT THE GRIDS, THERE IS A FEW NEW ONES, THEY ARE THE LIGHT COLOR THESE ARE.

IF YOU WANT TO GO DOWN THERE, THEY RE IN THE FRONT ART OF THE PARKING LOT, THAT WILL BE THE COLOR THESE WILL BE.

>> R. DOROTHY: WE DID HAVE SOME PEOPLE WERE CONCERNED THE LIGHTS WEREN'T TURNING OFF. IN GENERAL THESE WILL BE ON SOME SORT OF PHOTO CELL OR ATOMIC CLOCK?

>> THEY WILL BE ON A PHOTO CELL. THEY ARE HICCUPS, BUT HOPEFULLY THEY WILL BE NEWER AND HIGHER-LEVEL TECHNOLOGY.

>> R. DOROTHY: I WOULD APPRECIATE IF WE COULD TRACK HOW MUCH ENERGY WE ESTIMATE WE'RE GOING TO SAVE FOR THIS.

AND IF WE FINALIZE WHAT LIGHTS WE'RE GOING TO GET IF WE CAN FIND OUT WHAT THE LIFESPAN, THE MANUFACTURE SAYS IT IS.

>> WE CAN EASILY DO THAT. AND THAT WILL BE PART AND PARCEL

OF OUR BID. >> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL:

>> B. KOWALCZYK: FOR L.E.D. LIGHTS ARE THEY SMART LIGHTS? DO THEY OTHER TECHNOLOGICAL OPPORTUNITIES?

>> WE HAVE NOT INVESTED IN THAT LEVEL F GETTING SMART LIGHTS.

THEY ARE TRADITIONAL LIGHTING FIXTURES.

>> PRESIDENT MICHAEL, I KNOW IT PREDATES, BUT THE GLOBES HAVE BEEN SUBJECT TO DISCUSSION OVER THE YEARS.

ARE WE REPLICATING THE EXACT GLOBE DESIGN?

IS THAT GOING EFORE A.R.B.? >> THEY MATCH THE EXISTING GLOBES. MR. TENANT TEXTED ME AND TOLD ME THE LIGHTS WE HAVE SPECKED HAVE A 10-YEAR LIFE CYCLE SPAN.

>> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT, MS. DOROTHY MOVES THAT WE APPROVE GOING FORWARD TO BID FOR RETROFITTING THE STREETLIGHTS, SECONDED BY MR. SMITH. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIF Y BY SAYING AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED, LIKE SIGN.

[8.B.I. Community Visioning - Facilitators]

[00:40:01]

>> M. GREESON: MAYOR AND MEMBERE ISSUED REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR FACILITATORS FOR THE COMMUNITY VISIONING PROCESS.

WE RECEIVED, I BELIEVE, 10 PROPOSALS.

AND A DILIGENT COMMITTEE MADE UP OF COUNCILMEMBERS SMITH, FOUST AND COUNCILMEMBER KOWALCZYK, MET.

REVIEWED THE PROPOSALS AT THE FULL COUNCIL'S REQUEST.

ABEALY SUPPORTED BY MS. STUART AND MADE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE FIRMS THAT THEY DESIRE OR RECOMMEND UN YOU INTERVIEW AS A FULL COUNCIL. I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO

THEM. >> D. SMITH: WE, AS A COMMITTEE WITH THE HELP OF MS. STEWARD, WE HAD EVALUATION AND PUTTING WEIGHTS AND CRITERIA AND TWEAKED THAT A LITTLE BIT.

CAME BACK AND HAD IN-PERSON GROUP MEETING.

PRIOR TO THAT WE INDIVIDUALLY RANKED THE 10 PROPOSALS SEPARATE FROM EACH OTHER AND BROUGHT THE EVALUATIONS TO THE GROUP MEETING WHERE WE DISCUSSED THOSE EVALUATIONS.

AND WE TRIED TO GET TO DOWN TO THREE, BUT FOUR ROSE TO THE TOP.

AND WE THOUGHT WE WOULD THROW IT OUT TO THE REST OF COUNCIL TO LOOK AT OUR MATRIX AND USE SOME OF THE SIMILAR CRITERIA AS THE CONVERSATION EVOLVES AS THE GROUP GETS BIGGER, THE CONVERSATION HOPEFULLY WILL EVOLVE TO A POSITIVE AND WHETHER THAT IS BRINGING FOLKS IN FOR INTERVIEWS OR SETTING UP FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS FOR THEM TO TWEAK THEIR PROPOSALS A LITTLE BIT BETTER IS UP OR DISCUSSION AT THIS POINT.

THE FOUR WE DID SELECT TO BRING TO COUNCIL, FUTURE I.Q., JACKSON CLARK, PLANNING NEXT A AND OPEN MORE.

>> PRO TEM S. MYERS: I THOUGHT THE THREE OF US HAD A SMOOTH PROCESS. I WAS PLEASED HOW WE WERE ABLE TO COME TO VERY SIMILAR CONCLUSIONS.

I THINK THAT SPEAKS WELL OF WHAT WE DID TOGETHER.

>> D. FOUST: -- >> B. KOWALCZYK: I WOULD AGREE.

I THOUGHT IT WAS A GREAT PROCESS.

THE 10 PROPOSALS WERE INTERESTING COMING FROM DDIFFERENTPERSPECTIVES. SOME FROM PLANNING, SOME FROM CREATIVE ENGAGEMENT, STRATEGIC PLANNING.

THE FOUR WE HAVE SELECTED HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF ALL OF THAT FOR YOU TO CONSIDER. AND THEY KIND OF ROSE TO THE TOP. WE THINK THEY HAD THE BEST FIT.

BUT THEY WERE ALL VERY INTERESTING TO READ.

FOR FUTURE PROJECTS WE MAY HAVE OPPORTUNITIES.

>> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: WHICH WAY DO WE WANT TO GO FROM HERE? DO WE WANT TO DO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS TO FLESH IT DOWN OR SET UP FOUR INTERVIEWS? I'M ASKING THE COMMITTEE BECAUSE YOU WORKED WITH IT MORE THAN THE REST OF US.

>> D. SMITH: THE GENERAL FEELING OF THE COMMITTEE WAS TO ASK THE FOLKS TO INTERVIEW. UNLESS COUNCIL HAD ADDITIONAL OR DIFFERENT GROUPS THEY WANTED TO INCLUDE ON THIS LIST THAT ARE NOT ON THE LIST. IF YOU TRUST OUR FOUR WE PUT ON THE LIST, THEN LET'S INVITE HEM FOR INTERVIEWS.

I WAS GOING TO ASK YOU THAT QUESTION.

>> SESSION WITH THE PRINCIPAL BACK IN THE ROOM.

>> D. SMITH: I THINK WE DISCUSSED EXECUTIVE SESSION WAS NOT AN OPTION BASED ON THE PROPOSALS AND NOT BEING A

COMMITTEE-TYPE OF APPOINTMENT. >> PRO TEM S. MYERS: GUESS MY -- LET'S SCHEDULE IT THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE OR SEVERAL COMMITTEES OF THE WHOLE OR HOWEVER WE WANT TO DO IT.

I HAVE NEVER BEEN IN A BIG RUSH TO PUSH IT THROUGH.

I WANT TO TAKE OUR TIME. HAVE THEM COME IN AND ALLOW US TO QUESTION THEM IN A PUBLIC SESSION.

I THINK THAT WILL GIVE US AN OPPORTUNITY, ONCE TO FLESH OUT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE ABOUT WHAT WE EXPECT FROM

THE WHOLE PROCESS. >> M. GREESON: YOU COULD CHOOSE TO DO IT BY SPECIAL MEETING OR IN A LESS-FORMAL SETTING IF YOU

[00:45:05]

>> PRO TEM S. MYERS: ALSO, I THINK SOME PEOPLE ARE COMING

FROM -- >> R. DOROTHY: I WAS GOING TO

ASK ABOUT THE GEOGRAPHY. >> D. SMITH: FUTURE I.Q. FOR MINNESOTA. BOWLING GREEN IS POGAMIER.

I WOULDN'T SAY SO. >> PRO TEM S. MYERS:

>> WE DO IN THE IRE TRAINING ROOM.

MY EXPERIENCE WITH MANY OF THE CONSULTANTS IS THEY WANT TO DO IT IN PERSON. AND -- YOU AY WANT TO REQUIRE THAT AND I THINK IT'S PERFECTLY APPROPRIATE IF IT IS YOUR

DESIRE. >> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: IF THEY ARE PLANNING ON WORKING FOR WORTHINGTON I WOULD LIKE THEM TO SEE WORTHINGTON. IF THEY ARE COMING FROM SOMEPLACE ELSE, I WOULD LIKE THEM TO SEE THE TOWN AND LAYOUT.

>> PRO TEM S. MYERS: THE NEXT QUESTION IS, DO WE WANT TO SAY DO THIS OVER TWO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLES OR CALL A SPECIAL MEETING ON A WEDNESDAY NIGHT OR SATURDAY MORNING AND HAVE THEM

COME IN AT ONCE? >> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: YES?

>> D. FOUST: THAT IS DRIVEN IN PART BY THE LENGTH OF TIME YOU WANT TO GIVE TO EACH. IN PAST EXPERIENCE IT'S BEEN AS LITTLE AS 35 MINUTES OF A FORMAL PRESENTATION WITH 15 FOR Q. AND A. WE COULD DO FOUR ON A SATURDAY

MID-MORNING OR AFTERNOON. >> PRO TEM S. MYERS: I WOULD THINK IT WOULD TAKE AT LEAST AN HOUR EACH.

AND I'M FINE WITH -- WELL, BEFORE I COMMIT, I NEED TO TALK TO MY BOSS. TO SEE IF I'M AVAILABLE.

AND WHAT SATURDAY MORNING I'M AVAILABLE.

WE ARE GETTING INTO SUMMER AND SATURDAYS ARE, YOU START WEDDING SEASON HERE PRETTY SOON. SATURDAYS ARE HARDER AND HARDER

TO COME BY. >> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: DO WE WANT TO HAVE STAFF TO FIGURE OUT A SATURDAY THAT WORKS? OR DO WE WANT TO DO WO THER WEEK DAY NIGHTS OR COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE? WE HAVE SEVERAL OPTIONS WE CAN LOOK AT. OR TWO ON A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE NIGHT AND TWO ON A WEDNESDAY NIGHT OR SOMETHING.

TWO ON A MONDAY, TWO ON A WEDNESDAY.

>> D. SMITH: I LIKE THE OPTION TO KEEP IT FLEXIBLE.

IF WE'RE SPREADING THEM OUT TWO WEEKS, THREE WEEKS FOR ALL FOUR, I THINK THAT'S -- GOING TO MUDDY THE WATER.

>> PRO TEM S. MYERS:

>> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: MAYBE TWO ON A MONDAY AND TWO ON A WEDNESDAY SO WE CAN HAVE IT DONE IN THE SAME WEEK.

GET IT TOGETHER. AND TWO PRESENTATIONS, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE PLENTY TO DIGEST IN ONE NIGHT.

>> D. FOUST: CLOSER TOGETHER MAKES IT EASIER FOR COMPARISON.

THE OTHER COMMENT -- I'M SORRY. >> PRO TEM S. MYERS: WEDNESDAY

AND SATURDAY OF THE SAME WEEK. >> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: OR

MONDAY AND WEDNESDAY OR -- >> M. GREESON: YOU WANT US TO EXPLORE THE FOURTH WEDNESDAY? I MEAN THE FOURTH MONDAY, NO,

YOUR -- >> D. SMITH: MEMORIAL DAY?

>> R. DOROTHY: I WILL BE OUT OF TOWN.

>> M. GREESON: RIGHT. THAT DOESN'T WORK.

>> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: WE CAN DO IT AT THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. WHAT DO WE HAVE FOR THIS MONTH? THAT'S TOO SOON. NEVERMIND.

THAT'S NEXT WEEK. THAT'S TOO SOON.

>> M. GREESON: WE'LL WORK WITH YOUR SCHEDULES.

>> D. FOUST: WE EXPECT THAT WE MUST FIND DATES WHEN ALL SEVEN ARE AVAILABLE. I KNOW WE'RE ALL INTERESTED IN BEING HERE. IF IT GETS TO BE-- I MEAN, IF FOR EXAMPLE, I WAS THE HOLD UP ON A PARTICULAR DATE AND I FELT THE OTHER SIX WERE GOING TO BE HERE, I MIGHT AGREE TO WAIVE ON THAT. IF WE HOLD OUT FOR SEVEN PEOPLE FOR THESE DATES, WE COULD BE A COUPLE OF MONTHS GETTING THIS DONE. THAT'S A CONCERN.

>> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: LET'S TRY TO SEE IF -- LET'S REACH OUT AND SEE WHERE IT GOES. THE NEXT QUESTION YOU MENTIONED

[00:50:04]

TIME? >> D. FOUST: 9:30 OR 10:00 AND THEN ANOTHER AT 11:00. TAKE A BREAK FOR LUNCH AND COME BACK AT IT OR WHATEVER. THE OTHER REQUEST I MIGHT MAKE OF STAFF AS YOU SET THESE UP, I KNOW A LOT OF TIMES IN THESE KINDS OF EXERCISES THERE IS THE SALES GROUP AND THERE IS THE ONES WHO ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO EXECUTE ON THE COMMITMENT.

AND IN THAT WORLD WHERE SALES TENDS TO OVER PROMISE AND THE OPERATIONS FOLKS HAVE TO DELIVER, I WOULD ASK THE PERSON OR PERSONS WHO ARE GOING TO BE OUT FRONT ACTUALLY BE HERE PRESENT. THE ONES YOU ARE GOING TO LEAD THE LOCAL MEETINGS, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT PERSON WAS PART

OF THE PRESENTATION. >> M. GREESON: I THINK THAT'S A FAIR REQUEST. WE CAN CERTAINLY COMMUNICATE

THAT. >> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: OKAY.

I THINK WE MADE REAL PROGRESS AGAIN.

AND LET'S SEE. I THINK AT THIS POINT, IS THERE

[9. Reports of Council Members]

>> M. GREESON: PRESIDENT MICHAEL, A BRIEF REPORT AND THEN IF YOU CAN TOLERATE IT, A REQUEST FOR SORT EXECUTIVE SESSION. WE PUT BEFORE YOU AN UPDATED MEMO. AS I THINK WE REPORTED PREVIOUSLY, WE HAVE A RESEARCH MEMO ON DEER MANAGEMENT ISSUES WE PERIODICALLY UPDATE OVER THE YEARS.

AND MR. BARNHARDT ATTENDED O.D.N.R. SYMPOSIUM, AND TOOK THE TASK OF PDATING A MEMO WRITTEN BY MS. STEWART.

THAT IS AT YOUR PLACE. THE OPT-OUT LETTERS FOR THE ELECTRICAL AGGREGATION PROGRAM ARE OUT.

AND YOU SHOULD HAVE SEEN THOSE IF YOU ARE ELIGIBLE, IN YOUR MAILBOXES. AND I WOULD BE CURIOUS TO MAKE SURE EACH OF YOU DID. I CERTAINLY RECEIVED MINE.

WE ARE WORKING REALLY HARD ON PUBLIC OUTREACH REGARDING THE DISPATCH CENTER, 911 RECOMMENDATION.

THIS EVENING, WE HELD A PUBLIC MEETING AT LINWORTH HIGH SCHOOL AT 5:30, PRIOR TO THE COUNCIL MEETING.

LAST WEEK, THERE WAS ONE AT THE GRISWOLD CENTER.

ALSO COFFEE WITH THE CHIEFS. PRESENTATIONS HAVE BEEN MADE AT VARIOUS FORUMS, INCLUDING THE CHAMBER COMMITTEE WE MEET WITH PERIODICALLY. INFORMATION PROVIDED TO OUR POLICE ASSISTANCE ACADEMY, TO THE LION'S CLUB, ET CETERA. I BELIEVE WE HAVE A PRESENTATION TO THE ROTARY CLUB SOON AS WELL.

NEXT, THE NEXT STEPS ARE THERE IS A COFFEE WITH THE CHIEFS THIS WEDNESDAY AT NOON. AND THEN WE PLAN ON NEXT WEEK CONDUCTING A TELEPHONE TOWN HALL MEETING.

ONCE WE COMPLETE THESE ACTIVITIES, WHICH WE'RE ON SCHEDULE TO DO, WE'RE ANTICIPATING BRINGING THE RECOMMENDATION FORWARD TO YOU AROUND THE MAY 20 MEETING.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE ABOUT THAT PROCESS OR ANY

CONCERNS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE? >> R. DOROTHY: I WANTED TO SAY I ATTENDED THE SESSION AT THE GRISWOLD AND EVERYONE DID AN EXCELLENT JOB WITH THEIR PRESENTATIONS, INCLUDING MS. STEWART. THERE WERE GOOD QUESTIONS AND THINGS I LEARNED. I THINK THE IDEA OF DOING THE OUTREACH IS REALLY IMPORTANT. IT IS SERVING A GREAT PURPOSE AND EASING PEOPLE'S, I'M NOT SURE IF THEY ARE CONCERNED.

JUST CURIOSITY ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON.

I THINK IT'S BEEN WELL-DONE SO FAR.

>> M. GREESON: THANK YOU. APPRECIATE THAT.

LASTLY, LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO YOU IN EXECUTIVE SCISSION ABOUT THE APPOINTMENT AND COMP SCISSION OF PERSONNEL AND PENDING LEGISLATION. -- COMPENSATION.

>> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: OKAY. NOTHING ELSE, MR. GREESON?

MS. THRESS? >> D. KAY THRESS: ONE OF THE ITEMS AT YOUR PLACE PACKETS IS A NOTICE OF APPEAL THAT WAS FILED LAST WEEK. SO PLEASE LOOK AT THAT AND DISCUSS WHETHER OR NOT YOU WISH TO HEAR THAT.

IT HAS TO DO WITH THE EVENING STREET MODULAR CLASSROOMS.

>> M. GREESON: I THANK YOU, MS. THRESS.

I THINK WE WILL AGENDA THAT FOR NEXT WEEK.

AND PUT THAT ON YOUR AGENDA. YOU WILL NEED TO VOTE TO DECIDE WHETHER TO HEAR THAT APPEAL OR NOT.

[00:55:03]

YOU WILL HAVE TIME TO HEAR IT. >> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: MR. LI?

>> NOTHING THIS EVENING, THANK >> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: MR. FOU

[10. Other]

>> D. SMITH: I HAVE FIVE THINGS. [CHUCKLING] R. WHITED, THE FIRST TOWARDS YOU. THE GRANDVILLE PARK, 161 PROCESS WITH THE ENGINEERS, HAD A COUPLE OF NEIGHBORS REACH OUT TO ME WHO THINK THEY MIGHT BE IMPACTED.

THEY WANTED TO BE INVOLVED IF I CAN FORWARD THEM TO YOU SO THEY CAN BE INVOLVED IN THAT CONVERSATION.

WE HAD, I'M SORRY TO SEE MR. MINOR LEFT, BECAUSE HE'S PART OF THIS. THE GRANT FUND WE ANNUALLY GIVE TO LOCAL ORGANIZATIONS, MS. KOWALCZYK, YOU REMEMBER OUR CONVERSATION UPSTAIRS ABOUT BRINGING BACK IN MAY, WHAT E'RE GOING TO DO WITH NO BED TAX MONEY AND NO SPECIFIC UNDING LINE-ITEITEMED FOR THIS UPCOMING BUDGET FOR THE 2020 BUDGET CYCLE. I WANT TO DROP THAT SEED IN YOUR HEADS. MAYBE NOT TALK ABOUT IT NOW BUT THINK ABOUT HOW MUCH, IF ANY AND HOW, WE GIVE GRANT MONEY TOWARDS THE LOCAL ENTITIES THAT ASK US FOR GRANT FUNDS.

AND ALSO, ALONG WITH THAT, THE PRIORITIES THAT WE CAME UP WITH THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO WITH THE MATRIX FOR WHAT OUR PRIORITIES ARE FOR THOSE GRANT MONIES AND WHETHER OR NOT WE WANTED TO CHANGE THE MATRIX OR IF PRIORITIES ARE CONSISTENT FROM THAT POINT UNTIL NOW. SO FOOD FOR THOUGHT THERE.

MR. GREESON, SINCE MR. HURLEY IS NOT HERE, WILSON HILL PARK, THAT IS MY NEIGHBORHOOD PARK. I HAD A FEW FOLKS REACH OUT ABOUT THE CLEARING, APPLAUDING THE EFFORTS FOR CLEARING HONEY SUCKLE AND CONCERNED ABOUT ONE OPENING HUGE AMOUNTS OF VISIBILITY TO NEIGHBORS, AND TWO TEARING TOWN KIDS' NATURAL STRUCTURES FOR PLAY. I DIDN'T KNOW IF WE HAD A PLAN TO PLANT NEW TREES OR IF THAT'S A MR. HURLEY QUESTION, I CAN

REACH OUT. >> M. GREESON: I CAN GET AN ANSWER FOR YOU. I DON'T KNOW SPECIFICALLY IN THE WILSON HILL PARK WHAT OUR PLANS ARE.

I KNOW WE'VE BEEN DOING LOTS OF EFFORTS WITH OUR PARTNERS.

>> D. SMITH: VOLUNTEER FOR BAMBOO OVER HERE, WHICH WOULD BE APPRECIATED BY THERE CHILDREN, MAYBE NOT THE

RESIDENTS. >> M. GREESON: WE HAVE DONE GREAT WORK WITH A NUMBER OF VOLUNTEER PARTNERS AT PERRY PARK REMOVING HONEY SUCKLE ALONG THE CREEK.

BUT WE'LL GET AN ANSWER. >> D. SMITH: I APPRECIATE THAT.

WE HAVE A LOT OF CHILDREN, INCLUDING MY OWN, WHO ARE WONDERING WHO WILL HAPPEN NEXT. WITH THE DEER MANAGEMENT EVENT, MR. BARNHARDT WENT, I WAS THERE WITH HIM.

REALLY INTERESTING. THANKS FOR UPDATING THIS. I'M READING THROUGH IT AND SEEING A FEW YEARS AGO, A DIFFERENCE.

ONE POINT I WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE KNOWS THAT I DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT DEER WAS BY 1903 IN OHIO THERE WERE ZERO DEER POPULATION UNTIL THE '50S. THEY WERE REINTRODUCED AND WE HAVE OVER A MILLION DEER ACCOUNTED FOR BY POPULATION.

I'M NOT SAYING THAT FOR ANY PARTICULAR AGENDA.

JUST A POINT OF FACT, REALLY INTERESTING.

THEY WERE VERY CLEAR ABOUT WHAT THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS WERE FROM O.D.R. THEY KEPT PUSHING ONE SPECIFIC THING THAT MAY OR MAY NOT WORK IN WORTHINGTON.

WE MAY WANT TO DISCUSS THAT TO SOME DEGREE, AGAIN, NOT RIGHT NOW. FINALLY, WE HAVE GENERATION OF TALK ON SOCIAL MEDIA AND ON THE NEWS WITH THE ELECTRIC AGGREGATION ABOUT THE OPT-OUT LETTER WE FORWARDED TO OUR CONSULTANT. GENERALLY POSITIVE THOUGH.

JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU FEEDBACK ON THAT.

>> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: OKAY. >> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: MS. DOR

OTHY. >> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: MS. KOW

ALCZYK. >> B. KOWALCZYK: I WANTED TO THANK EVERYONE WHO ATTENDED THE OLD WORTHINGTON PARTNERSHIP ANNUAL MEETING. IT WAS A REALLY GREAT MEETING.

[01:00:02]

WHICH INCLUDE PUBLIC ART FOCUSING FORWARD AND WORKING WITH THE MCCONNELL ART CENTER. I THOUGHT IT WAS A GREAT MEETING AND GREAT IDEAS TO DISCUSS FOR THE FUTURE.

THE OTHER THING IS THAT I HAVE BEEN MEETING WITH FOLKS ABOUT FLESHING OUT OUR PLANS FOR MOVING FORWARD WITH AN AGE-FRIENDLY WORTHINGTON INITIATIVE.

AND TALKED WITH MR. GREESON AND I'M HOPEFUL THAT SOON WE'LL HAVE SOME CONCRETE STEPS THAT WE CAN PRESENT TO COUNCIL FOR

CONSIDERATION. >> R. DOROTHY: I FORGOT I ATTENDED THE MCCONNELL ART CENTER BOARD EETING.

THIS IS GOING TO BE THE 10-YEAR CELEBRATION.

YOU SHOULD LOOK FOR A ROLL-OUT CELEBRATION.

THAT WAS BIG NEWS. 10 YEARS ALREADY.

YOU SHOULD BE SEEING A LOT OF INFORMATION ABOUT A BIG CELEBRATION, ONGOING CELEBRATION FOR 10 YEARS.

>> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: I WANTED TO MENTION, IF ANYBODY IS INTERESTED IN DOING THE MEMORIAL DAY PARADE, BE SURE TO GET YOUR APPLICATIONS IN AND MENTION THAT YOU ARE WITH CITY COUNCIL BECAUSE THEY TRY TO PUT US ALL TOGETHER NEAR THE BEGINNING.

I PUT THAT REQUEST, THANKING THEM VERY MUCH.

PUTTING OUR CITY COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR UP AT THE FRONT TOGETHER.

THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU DO. IF YOU ARE INTERESTED, I WANTED TO PUT THAT AS A REMINDER. I HAVE NOTHING ELSE TO BRING

[11. Executive Session]

MS. THRESS, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL N EXECUTIVE

SESSION? >> D. KAY THRESS:

>> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: YES. >> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: MS. DOR OTHY MOVES WE COME OUT OF EXECUTIVE SESSIONS, SECONDED BY MR. SMITH. CALL THE ROLL ON COMING OUT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION.

>> R. DOROTHY: YES. >> D. SMITH: YES.

>> D. FOUST: YES. >> PRESIDENT B. MICHAEL: OKAY.

MR. FOUST MOVES WE ADJOURN, SECONDED BY R. MEYERS, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.