Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[1. Call to Order]

[4a. Proposed 2021 Operating Budget & Five-Year Forecast]

[00:13:22]

BREAK DOIB. THEN THE ESTIMATE, 500 RIGHT

[00:14:17]

NOW. THIS IS A 1.5 PERCENT INCREASE

[00:14:20]

OVER THE 20 PERCENT ESTIMATE AND ENCOURAGING TO THINK OF IT AS MARE THAN AND SO JUST -- JUST -- JUST MORE ON THIS THE ESTIMATES TOGETHER, IT IS HAPPENING FROM THE FOURTH QUARTER AND THEY FINALIZE THESE INCOME TAX PROJECTIONS AND WE DON'T HAVE THE RECEIPTS FROM OCTOBER, NOVEMBER, DECEMBER. AND I PUT TOGETHER THE ESTIMATE FOR 2020, WE IT FOURTH QUARTER AND OUR 2020 ESTIMATE AND A

[00:15:02]

QUARTER PERCENT UNDER 2019 AND BRING IT BACK IN LINE.

AND THEN WE REFER TO THIS AS STAGNANT INCOME TAX SINCE 20 2018-2019-2020. THEN AGAIN 1.5 PERCENT IN 2022.

PARKS AND REC FEES ARE EXTRAORDINARY MY DIFFICULT TO ANTICIPATE FOR 2021. SO WE TOOK THE APPROACH OF A RETURN TO 2019 WITH THIS AS WELL.

AND WE DISCUSSED ON INCOME TAX PROJECTIONS THAT REFLECT 2019 LEVELS OF PROJECTIONS. THIS IS THE EXACT NUMBER IN PARK AND REC FEES. SO AGAIN THIS IS GOING TO BE DEPENDENT ON WHEN WE CAN RETURN TO A FULL PROGRAM AND NOT ANTICIPATE -- NOT ANTICIPATE, PART D ON JANUARY 1ST BUT THIS IS WHERE IT SET RIGHT NOW. AND EMS TRANSPORT FEES 700,000.

>> WE THINK THAT'S OPTIMISTIC. >> CORRECT.

>> FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES, WE GOT THAT ESTIMATED AT 500,000 RIGHT NOW. AND 2021 PROTECTION AND CONTRACT WAS -- WAS -- WAS PROPOSED TO BE AT 83,234 DOLLARS AND AN INCREASE THERE. PROPERTY TAX ANOTHER SOURCE FOR THE CITY. 2021 PROPERTY TAX ESTIMATE AND BREAK DOWN BETWEEN THE GENERAL FUND AND THE POLICE PENSION FUND AND THE GENERAL BOND RETIREMENT FUND.

THEY RECEIVE REVENUE FROM THE PROPERTY TAX.

THIS IS AN 8 PERCENT INCREASE AND WHAT WE THINK WILL BE AN INCREASE FROM 2021. GAS TAX AND LICENSE TAX AND THE ESTIMATE REMAINING IN 2020-2021 AND ONE MILLION 195,000 BETWEEN THE TWO. SO THAT GETS US TO THE FIVE-YEAR FORECAST GENERAL UND REVENUE. 2020, YOU COULD SEE A BIG DROP THERE IN 2019, Y'ALL REMEMBER. LIKE ONE-TIME EVENTS FROM THE REVOLVING FUND. AND A DROP IN 2020 IS -- IS -- IS -- IS -- IS OPERATED ESTIMATES OF THE PARKS REVENUE DROPPING IT 50 PERCENT. THAT'S A PRETTY BIG DROP.

AND THAT DROP LAST YEAR, 2021 AND 2019 LEVELS, AND PARKS AND 3 REC LEVEL AND ABOUT 2019 LEVELS OF INCOME TAX.

YOU YOU CAN SEE THE INCREASE OF UP TO 20 MILLION AND ON OUT.

THEN WE HAVE A GRADUAL INCREASES.

ON EXPENDITURE SIDE, 2019-20, THAT'S A BIG JUMP.

THAT COMPARISON, WE ALWAYS HAVE MORE BUDGED THAN WE HAVE SPENT.

WE HAVE EXPENDITURES THAT CARRY INTO THE NEXT YEAR AS ENCUMBRANCES. AND 2020 AND WE HAVE CALLING IT.

AND THAT INTERACT AND CAUSE YOUS A SPIKE IN 2020.

2021 IS A -- IS A SMALL DROP FROM 2020 EXPENDITURES.

AND THEN 2021 IS A LITTLE BIT OF A DROP AS WELL.

WE DON'T HAVE THE ONE-TIME EXPENDITURES AND THE IOC FOR DEVELOPMENT. WE DO HAVE A 27TH POLL THAT WE PARTIALLY ACCOUNTED FOR THREE YEARS AGO BY ESTABLISHING THE 27TH PAY FUND AND TRANSFERRING 50,000 DOLLARS TO THAT EACH WOULD WOULD NOT ACCOUNT FOR THE EXPENSE AND WE WORRY ABOUT THE OFF SET OF SOME OF IT AND THEN THE NEXT YEAR WE'LL BEGIN THE 50,000 DOLLAR TRANSFER AND 11TH YEARS WHEN THIS OCCURS WE SHOULD HAVE THE FULL AMOUNT COVERED. THIS IS THE GENERAL FUND FUND

[00:20:03]

BALANCE FROM 2010 TO 2025. IN EACH OF THE YEARS WE ARE DEFICIT SPENDING. SO 2021 IT IS PROJECTED 335,000 DOLLARS OF EXPENDITURES EXCEEDING REVENUES THAT'S WITH UNEXPENDED APPROPRIATIONS AND STARTS THE DIFFERENCE FUND BALANCE FOR 2021 AND WE ANTICIPATE IT COMING DOWN FOR 2020. EACH OF THE OUT YEARS WE DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE THEM. WE DON'T CURRENTLY BALANCE.

THEY HAVE DEFICITING SPENDING IN EACH OF THE OUT YEARS, 350 AND 500,000 IN THE OUT YEARS AND WE HAVE STRONG FUND BALANCES WE PROBABLY END IN 2025 AND THE 25 PERCENT CURRENTLY PROJECTED.

WE ADOPTED THE FUND BALANCE POLICY THAT CALLS FOR 35 PERCENT OF EXPENDITURES TO BE ABOUT MINIMUM FUND BALANCE.

I WANTED IT SURFACE THIS ISSUE, SWITCHING GEARS A BIT.

WE HAVE A CONVENTION AND BUREAU FUND FOR 66 PERCENT OF -- OF HOTEL-MOTEL TAX REVENUE HAS RECEDED TO.

IT DID RECEIVE A SIGNIFICANT ONE-TIME RETURN OF MONEY FROM THE OLD CBD AND PARTIALLY THAT THEY REDISTRIBUTE TO THE NEW CDB. AND WE ANTICIPATE 51,000 TO BE IN THE FUND AND AVAILABLE FOR DISTR DISTRIBUTION. WE THINK A DECISION WILL BE MADE NO MATTER HOW THAT CONTINUES TO BE FUNDED GOING FORWARD.

>> AND THEN CHANGING TO THE C.I.P. AND THE TOP OF THE SLIDE HERE AS WELL. BACK IN THE END OF THE OCTOBER TIME, APRIL OR MAY, WE ISSUED A -- A COUNSEL AND NOTIFYING OF VARIOUS CHANGES TO C.I.P. ITEMS THAT WERE GOING TO BE CONSIDERING UNTIL IT COULD BE BETTER TO SSESS THE IMPACT OF THE PANDEMIC. AND -- AND NOW THAT WE CAN SEE OUR INCOME TAX REVENUE IS GOING TO BE DIFFERENT THAN ORIGINALLY ANTICIPATED, WE REINSTATE THESE ITEMS DELAYED.

WE MAY HAVE THIS REDUCED BY RETURNING THAT TO THE FULL ALLOCATION AND THE PROGRAM R REDUCED FROM 50,000 TO 100,000.

MOVING THE REMAKESMENT FORWARD AND THEN -- THEN SERVING A NETWORK WHEN ANTICIPATE -- PARTIALLY REINSTATING ALLOCATION. SO A LOT OF INFORMATION, BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

>> MR. MURRAY. >> MR. ROBINSON.

>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. >> THANK YOU.

QUESTIONS. CROSSING, INCLUDING THE -- THE TRAFFIC SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM?

>> IT IS A SEPARATE PROJECT OUT OF THE PEDESTRIAN FROM 2019, IT IS ALLOCATED BUT IS SEPARATE MONEY ROM THE TRAFFIC PARTNER.

>> SO -- SO CAN YOU CLARIFY PLEASE WILL BE THE FUND BE

AVAILABLE NEXT YEAR OR NOT? >> THEY'RE GOING NOBODY AVAILABLE THIS YEAR TO MOVE FORWARD.

>> OKAY. GREAT.

AND THE SECOND, WHAT ASSUMPTIONS WERE YOU -- ARE YOU MAKING IN YOUR PROJECTIONS REGARDING ANTHEM AND POTENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT AND

>> I HAVE NOT MADE ANY SPECIFIC FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS. I THINK AS WE REFLECT WHAT WE DID LAST YEAR AND I DID A 5 PERCENT INCREASE BECAUSE I WAS CONFIDENT THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE RETURNED TO ITS FULL YOU KNOW, PRODUCTION OF INCOME TAX, AND -- AND THAT MATERIALIZED, I THINK IT WASN'T -- IT WASN'T THE BEST PRACTICE TO SAY FROM WHAT -- WHAT TO INCREASE FROM 5 PERCENT AND IN THE HAVE IT MATERIALIZE. I THINK IF ANY OF THOSE YOU KNOW COME BACK AND MAKE ADJUSTMENTS, IT IS NOT CALLED OUT FOR.

>> ANYTHING IN PARTICULAR, ZEROED OUT FOR THE COMING YEAR

[00:25:04]

THAT IS CURRENTLY PROJECTED? >> I THINK ANTHEM, I THINK -- I THINK WHAT IT HAS BEEN IS THAT WE HAVEN'T SEEN ANY GROWTH.

WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO MAINTAIN INCOME TAX LEVELS AND WE JUST HAVEN'T SEEN GROWTH. ANYTHING THAT MIGHT -- THAT MIGHT BE IF THERE WERE O BE SOME FORWARD TURN TO -- TO -- TO THREE-QUARTERS OF A MILLION DOLLARS AND PAYROLL TAX GENERATED FROM THAT SITE THAT WOULD BE IN ADDITION.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> ANYONE ELSE WITH QUESTIONS.

>> MEMBERS OF COUNCIL WE TALK ABOUT THE C.I.P. NEXT WEEK AND TALK ABOUT THE SCHEDULE. BUT SCOTT HIGHLIGHTED A FEW OF THE PROJECTS THAT WE THINK WE CAN KIND OF RESTORE THE FUNDING AND GET MOVING ON. DID YOU WANT TO TOUCH ON ANYTHING ELSE RELATED TO C.I.P. OR SAVE IT OR NEXT WEEK?

>> I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING PREPARED OR THIS WEEK, I WAS

ANTICIPATING NEXT WEEK. >> WE CAN GO OVER WHAT I WOULD CALL THE -- I'M CALLING IT THE STALLED LST, A LITTLE PORE DETAIL NEXT WEEK. AND SO THAT YOU NOT ONLY CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE PROPROCEEDING FOR THE C.I.P. BUT THOSE THAT ARE FROZEN AND PRODUCED AND IT SOUNDS HIKE YOU'RE INTERESTED IN THE BIKE PAD AND PREPARED TO ADDRESS

THAT. >> I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO KNOW WHAT IS STALLED. I LIKE MORE THINGS TO MOVE FORWARD. I DON'T THINK ANYTHING SUGGESTED IS BAD BUT I LIKE TO KNOW WHAT IS STALLED SO WE HAVE THE

ABILITY TO MAKE THE DECISION. >> WE COULD GO BACK THROUGH THE LIST THAT WE PROVIDED IN -- IN -- I GUESS IT IS MAY NOW.

AND HIGHLIGHT THAT. WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD ANYTHING ON THIS? OR ADD TO THE ONES I ALREADY

HIGHLIGHTED. >> I HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME.

SOME OF THE THINGS AND RESURFACING CAN'T MOVE FORWARD IN 2020 BECAUSE WE NEED DOWN TIME.

IT IS PROBABLY 2021 WHEN THERE'S A SUGGEST DOWN AGAIN.

BUT SO -- SO -- SO SOME OF THE TEXTBOOK NOTIFIES YOU ALL MAY 4TH. THERE'S JUST CHANGES IN AMOUNTS DUE TO COST ESTIMATES. SO LIKE THE POLICE JUST PROVIDED UPDATE AND COST ESTIMATES ON THOSE PARTICULAR ITEMS AND SAME AS WORTHING WAY AND STORM DRAINAGE.

SO WE CAN. >> WHY DON'T WE GO THROUGH THE LIST NEXT WEEK SO WE HAVE IT AND EVERYTHING YOU PRESENTED AND MAY 4TH WE'LL GO THROUGH WHAT HAPPENED.

>> GOOD. >> DOES THAT WORK?

>> YES. >> OKAY.

>> LASTLY, WE'LL START -- I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE ABLE TO PULL UP THE BUDGET CALENDAR, BUT 3 LET'S GO THROUGH THAT AND WE NEED A C.I.P. NEXT WEEK AND THEN IN THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER E UNDERTAKE THE DEPARTMENTAL PRESENTATIONS AND AND SPECIAL GROUPS, WITH ALWAYS THE GOAL OF TRYING TO ADOPT A BUDGET IN THE

FIRST MEETING IN DECEMBER. >> SOUNDS GOOD.

>> ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING, REGARDING THE BUDGET, THE BUDGET PROCESS, THE TIMELINE.

>> DID WE HAVE THE INFORMATION MADE AVAILABLE TO OUR CITIZENS AND GOING OUT ABOUT THE BUDGET PROCESS?

>> YEAH, INDEED. WE'RE GLAD TO ANSWER THAT.

WE HAVE WRITTEN A COLUMN. THAT WAS PUBLISHED I THINK ONLINE AS WELL AS THIS WEEK THAT HIGHLIGHTED THE -- THE BUDGET SEASON HAS ARRIVED AND HOW PEOPLE GET ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE.

IT HAS -- IT IS -- IT IS OBVIOUSLY ONLINE AND AVAVAILABL.

[00:30:06]

AND WE ALSO, WE CAN TALK TALKA IT, WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT BALANCING ACT, IN WHICH PEOPLE HAVE AN INTERACTIVE EXPERIENCE, ATTEMPTING TO BALANCE THE BUDGET THEMSELVES, AND EXPRESSING THEIR PRIORITIES AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE'LL DO IS WE'LL LOOK AT THE COMMENTS WE RECEIVE THROUGH THAT PROCESS AND SHARE THEM WITH YOU.

MR. BARR YOU WANT TO TALK BOUT THAT?

>> SURE. BALANCES ACT IS A SOFTWARE WHERE WE UPLOAD. WE'RE WORKING ON THAT.

AND WE PROVIDE FEEDBACK THROUGH THIS LINK, AND MOVE THE BUDGET, IT IS LIKE A SLIDE, YOU COULD DO LOTS OF ONE THING AND IT WILL HAVE X IMPACT AND YOU DO MORE OF SOMETHING AND IT GENERATES REVENUE. IT IS INTERESTING TO SEE HOW MUCH TIME THEY TAKE WITH THAT AND HOW MUCH TIME.

WE ISSUED THE PUBLIC NOTICE THAT IS REQUIRED.

THAT WENT OUT FRIDAY ON THE BUDGET HEARINGS AND THEN WE OF COURSE HAVE THE SCRIPTS WRITTEN AND BEING PRODUCED FOR FOUR DIFFERENT BUDGET AND FINANCE VIDEOS.

THOSE WILL BE HOPEFULLY DONE BY THE END OF THE MONTH.

THE FINAL PRODUCT, THEY'RE IN THE WORKS.

>> GOOD. >> SO EITHER FOR A CRYPT FOR

ALL OF THAT. >> SAW THE PART FOR BUDGETING.

>> AUTOMATED. INTERESTING.

AND PICK OUT NARRATERS. AND

>> SOUNDS GOOD. >> YES, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION, WHEN I GO BACK TO THE C.I.P.

CASH FUND FLOW ON 43 OF THE C.I.P. WHAT DOES BOWL MEAN?

[4b. Financial Report - September]

>> THAT'S -- THAT'S A PROJECTS BEGINNING FUNDED WITH

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS REGARDING THE -- THE BUDGET? OKAY.

HEARING NONE WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE FINANCIAL REPORT FOR SEPTEMBER. MR. GREISEN?

>> I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO MR. PORTER.

TEAM, ALL OF THE DEPARTMENT - DIRECTORS AND POLICE STEWART AND PARTICULARLY MR. BARTERS OFFICE AND SARAH IN PARTICULAR, REMARKABLE JOB, THEY PUT LOTS AND LOTS OF HOURS INTO DEVELOPING THE DOCUMENTS THAT YOU'RE GOING TO DIVE INTO IN GREAT DETAIL IN THE COMING WEEKS.

AND THEN IN THE END.BEGINNING - THEY PUT HOURS INTO THIS.

IN ADDITION TO FIGURING OUT HOW WE WOULD PACKAGE NEW PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT STRATEGIES AROUND THE BUDGET.

I TURN IT OVER TO MR. BARTER AND HE COULD GIVE THE FINANCIAL

REPORT. >> THANK YOU.

MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, SEPTEMBER 2020 FINANCIAL REPORT.

WE DID ISSUE THE MEETING AND MAYBE BEFORE THAT, 815,000 TO REPLACE THE 219 NOTES AND THE POLICE BUILDING. THOSE WERE ISSUED AND EFFECTIVE RATE OF 0.78 PERCENT. HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.

IF THERE ARE NONE, PLEASE HAVE A MOTION TO SEPTEMBER.

[5a. Sharon Township Fire Contract]

>> ANY QUESTIONS? >> MR. BOOKER MOVES THAT WE SEPTEMBER THE REPORT AS PRESENTED SECONDED BY MISS KOWALCZYK. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YEA.

>> YEA. >> OPPOSED LIKE SIGN.

>> YOUR REPORT HAS BEEN ACCEPTED.

OF FIRE CONTRACT.HE DISCUSSION - >> MEMBERS OF COUNCIL BEFORE I TURN IT OVER TO MR. STEWART, 3 WE'RE CONSTANTLY TRYING TO IM IMPROVE, ONE THING THAT IT IS IMPORTANT TO DO IS ASSESS OUR CHARGES FOR SERVICES.

IN THIS INSTANCE WE PROVIDE FIRE AND EMS SERVICES TO SHARON TOWNSHIP. YOU ALSO KNOW WE PROVIDE SIMILAR

[00:35:04]

SERVICES TO PERRY TOWNSHIP AND WE PROVIDE POLICE SERVICES TO RIVERLY. IT IS IMPORTANT TO -- TO ENGAGE PERIODICALLY IN ASSESSING WHETHER THOSE SERVICES ARE ADEQUATELY -- WHETHER THE COSTS OF THOSE SERVICES ARE BEING ADEQUATELY CHARGED TO THE RECIPIENT OF THEM AND WE QUITE FRANKLY HAVEN'T DONE THAT FREQUENTLY ENOUGH OR AT ALL WITH THE SHARON TOWNSHIP FIRE AGREEMENT SINCE ITS INCEPTION.

SO WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS PROVIDE A PRESENTATION THAT OVERVIEWS THE CURRENT STATE OF THE SHARON TOWNSHIP AGREEMENT AND AT THE END OF IT, WE'RE GOING TO SEEK AUTHORIZATION FOR CONSULTATION FOR FIRE SERVICES. WE VALUE OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM, THE TOWNSHIP. WE ENJOY WORKING WITH THE TRUSTEES AND ALL OF THE STAFF THERE AND SERVING THEIR CITIZENS. SO IT HAS BEEN A LONG AND VALUED PARTNERSHIP AND RELATIONSHIP BUT WE DO BELIEVE IT IS TIME TO LOOK CLOSELY AT AND RENEGOTIATE THE PARTICULAR FINANCE THE UNDERPINNINGS OF IT. IF YOU COULD WALK THROUGH THE PRESENTATION, I WOULD APPRECIATE IT.

>> THANK YOU. PRESIDENT, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, MR. BARBER IN HIS PREVIOUS PRESENTATION MENTIONED REVENUE FOR FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES. SO THAT IS COMPRISED IN PART OF THE TOWNSHIP AND EMS SERVICES AS WELL AS HE MENTIONED A CONTRACT WITH PERRY TOWNSHIP FOR PROVIDING THESE SERVICES.

SO WE HAVE DONE N ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION OF THE CURRENT STATUS OF THE CONTRACT AND THE REVENUE THAT IS RECEIVED VIA IN CONTRACT. JUST WANTED TO WALK THROUGH SOME OF THE ANALYSIS THAT STAFF HAS DONE ON THIS.

PRIOR TO 1994, THE DIVISION OF FIRE AND EMS IT RESIDED WITH SHARON TOWNSHIP. HOWEVER, IN 1993 THE CITY AND TOWNSHIP BECAME A PART OF THE CITY.

THAT OFFICIAL TRANSITION OCCURRED ON JANUARY 1ST OF 1994.

IN PREPARATION FOR THAT TRANSFER, AND THE CITY SAW AND RECEIVED APPROVAL FROM THE ELECTORATE AND INCREASE IN THE INCOME TAX RATES IN 1993. THAT WENT FROM 1 PERCENT TO 6.5 PERCENT. AT THE SAME TIME A TOWNSHIP FORMED A TOWNSHIP FIRE DISTRICT WHICH ALSO INCLUDES RIVERLY AND PAYING FOR THE TOWNSHIP. AT THAT POINT IT WAS CONSIDERING A SIX MILL PROPERTY TAX LEVY FOR FIRE SERVICES AND AT THAT TIME THAT SIX MILL LEVY HAD AN EFFECTIVE RATE OF A LITTLE OVER FOUR MILLS. IT WAS THE TOWNSHIP THAT DROPPED OFF AT THAT TIME. ACCORDING TO THE CURRENT AGREEMENT THAT HAS BEEN IN PLACE SINCE 1983, WE CAN SEEK INCREASE IN PLACE BY THE FIRE DISTRICT IF THE CITY INCREASES ITS TAXES THROUGH PROPERTY TAX OR INCOME TAX.

THE INCREASE IS ONLY IF THE TOWNSHIP, FIRE DISTRICT, ONLY NEEDS TO BE EQUITABLE BY THE INCREASES IN TAXES BY THE CITY.

SINCE THIS CAME INTO THE CITY GOVERNMENT, THE CITY HAS ACTUALLY RAISED TAXES THREE TIMES.

THE INCOME TAX IN 2004 AND 2010 AND 2007.

HOWEVER, TAXES HAVE NOT BEEN INCREASED.

THE EFFECTIVE RATE HAS DECREASED SINCE 1994 WHICH RELATES FOR LESS PER DAY IN ACTUAL DOLLARS IN 1994.

YOU SEE 1994, THEY GENERATED 147,000 DOLLARS AND THEN THEY

[00:40:06]

GENERATED 138 AND THEN 139. THE COST OF UPGRADING THE DIVISION OF FIRE HAS ALMOST DOUBLED.

WE ANNOUNCE THE PERCENTAGE OF ONES.

THE ONES THAT ARE MADE WITHIN OUR SERVICE AREA HICH INCLUDES THE CITY OF WORTHINGTON AND SHARING AND ALL OF THOSE, SHARON TOWNSHIP IS 50 PERCENT OF THE LINES HOWEVER, THE REVENUE COVERS ABOUT 2 PERCENT OF THE DIVISION OF FIRE.

ADDITIONALLY, WE LOOK AT THEIR SERVICE AREA, THEY HAD HAZARDS AND THEY'RE RESOURCE INTENSIVE. THOSE HAZARDS ARE I270 AND 315 AND ACCIDENTS THAT OCCUR ON THOSE FREEWAYS TYPICALLY REQUIRE QUITE A FREE RESOURCES TO RESPOND AS WELL AS THE RIVER AND THE INCIDENTS THAT OCCUR ON THE RIVER.

FINALLY, THE ANALYSIS, WE DID LOOK AT WHAT SHARON TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS PAY IF FIRE SERVICE AS COMPARED TO OTHER TOWNSHIPS.

YOU COULD SEE BASED ON THIS CHART, THE RESIDENTS PAY SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN MANY OTHER TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS PAY FOR FIRE AND AND EMS SERVICES. THIS ANALYSIS ULTIMATELY LED TO THE STAFF SAYING, WE OUGHT TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH SHARON TOWNSHIP ABOUT THE COST OF PROVIDING FIRE AND EMS SERVICES TO THEM WITH AN INTEREST IN SEEKING HIGHER REVENUE RECOVERY FROM SHARON TOWNSHIP. I WOULD BE HAPPY IT ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS IF ANYBODY HAS THEM. >> ANYBODY HAVE QUESTIONS?

>> YEAH. YOU SAID WE WOULD FIRST RAISE OUR TAXES BEFORE WE MAKE THE REQUEST.

>> YES. THE CITY WOULD RAISE TAXES BEFORE ASKING THE TOWNSHIP TO DO SO.

AND THEY HAVE DONE THAT. >> SO THIS PAST INCREASES WOULD QUALIFY IN THE CONTRACT, AS -- AS INCREASES?

>> THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. I INVITE MR. LINDSEY TO COMMENT, HE'S BEEN LOOKING AT THE CONTRACT AND CRITERIA OF IT.

>> YES. I CONCUR WITH MISS STEWART THAT THE PRIOR INCREASES DO FALL WITHIN THE CONTRACTUAL LANGUAGE AND THERE IS NO LANGUAGE WITHIN THE CONTRACT AND THERE'S A TIME FRAME WITH WHICH WE APPROVE THE REQUEST BY THE TOWNSHIP.

WE DO BELIEVE THOSE THREE PRIOR INCREASES DO SUPPORT THE CITY REQUESTING THAT THE TOWNSHIP SEEK A TEXAS INCREASE FROM ITS

RESIDENTS. >> THAT WAS MY NEXT QUESTION.

THEY WOULD HAVE TO THEN RAISE THE RATE ON THEIR -- ON THEIR

FIRE LEVY, CORRECT? >> RIGHT.

>> THAT'S ALL I HVE. >> WHAT TIMELINE IS ON? A CERTAIN DATE UNLESS WE REVISE IT OR WHAT?

>> THE CONTRACT IS ESSENTIALLY FOR EVER.

THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO TERMINATE THE CONTRACT AND ESSENTIALLY THE CONTRACT IS WRITTEN THAT THE CITY, THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE INDEPENDENT ABILITY TO TERMINATE THE CONTRACT AND IT DOESN'T SPECIFY THEIR ACTUAL ABILITY IN CASE OF BREACH.

>> OKAY. ANYONE ELSE?

>> ANY INFORMAL DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS?

>> I MADE A COUPLE OF CONVERSATIONS OVER -- OVER -- OVER MONTHS AND RECENTLY AS LAST WEEK WITH MR. OVERLY TO MAKE HIM AWARE THAT WE WERE CONDUCTING THE ANALYSIS AND LAST WEEK TO MAKE HIM AWARE OF THE PRESENTATION THAT WE HAD PUT TOGETHER AND THAT WE WOULD BE SEEKING AUTHORIZATION TO TO ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS. THAT SHOULD NOT BE -- BE OF A SURPRISE BUT WE HAVEN'T DELVED INTO THE -- INTO THE THE

[00:45:01]

SUBSTANCE OF THE MATTER IF YOU WILL AND -- AND HAD THE OPPORTUNITY FOR FULLY ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT THEY AY HAVE REGARDING THE ANALYSIS OR AD DISCUSSIONS ABOUT WHAT MIGHT BE A FAIR -- A FAIR COMPENSATION AND SO ALL OF THAT WILL BE OR US AND I KNOW BECAUSE IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE REQUIRE PLACEMENT OF A TAX INCREASE ON THE BALLOT IT WILL BE ONE THAT IS SENSITIVE AND IMPORTANT TO THEM.

>> CONTRACT HAVE TERMS RELATED TO WHETHER -- IF THERE IS NO INCREASE WE CAN'T GET AN INCREASE?

>> THERE'S A MEDIATION PROCESS IF WE CAN'T ARRIVE AT CONCLUSION AT THE TABLE IN THE EVENT THAT VOTERS DON'T APPROVE IT, I WOULD

DEFER TO MR. LINDSEY ON THAT. >> THE PROCESS, IT IS STILL REVIEWING THE DETAILS OF THAT. I'M NOT PREPARED TO SPEAK SPECIFICALLY AS TO THE OPTIONS WE HAVE LATELY, PUT THE LEVY ON THE BALLOT OR THE PUBLIC'S REFUSAL IT APPROVE THE LEVY.

THAT WOULD BE IN PART OUR NEGOTIATION, AND ALSO SUBJECT TO WHATEVER -- TO WHATEVER -- TO WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE RAISED SUBSEQUENT TO THAT -- TO THAT. SORT F BASED ON OUR REVIEW, WE A RIGHT TO REQUEST IT AND WE'RE GOING TO PURSUE AUTHORIZATION,

IN THAT COURSE. >> NEGOTIATIONS, AND PROBABLY COME BACK IN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS DETAILS OF POTENTIAL CONTRACT, BECAUSE IT WOULD BE

LEGAL AND BINDING CONTRACT. >> TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED, WE WILL EITHER SPEAK TO HER IN EXECUTIVE SESSION OR -- OR SEEK DIRECTION TO -- THROUGH COUNCIL LEADERSHIP.

>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

THE STATUS OF THE DISCUSSIONS. >> YES.

>> AND NY OTHER QUESTIONS? HEARING NONE, MR. SMITH MOVES THAT WE AUTHORIZE CITY STAFF TO BEGIN NEGOTIATIONS WITH SHARON

[5b. In-Person Council Meetings]

TOWNSHIP REGARDING THE FIRE CONTRACT.

SECOND BY MR. MYERS. AN FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY. YEA.

>> OPPOSED LIKE SIGN. >> WELL MR. GREISEN AND MISS ROBINS HAVE YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE FORWARD.

>> AND NEXT WE DISCUSS IN-PERSON COUNCIL MEETINGS.

MR. GREISEN WANTED TO DISCUSS THIS A BIT.

THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF THOSE TIMES.

>> AND THE LAST TIME WE TALKED ABOUT THIS.

IT WAS MORE CONCEPTUAL AND WE HAD NOT WRITTEN OUR DETAILED PLAN SURROUNDING THIS ISSUE, SUBSEQUENTLY WE DISTRICTED A MORE -- A MORE DETAILED OUTLINE ON HOW WE WOULD ACCOMPLISH THIS IN THE EVENT, IN THE EVENT THAT YOU DESIRE TO RETURN TO IN-PERSON MEETINGS OR THE LEGISLATURE DOESN'T RENEW OUR AUTHORITY TO DO THAT WHICH COULD COME AS EARLY AS DECEMBER, I BELIEVE. IN LINDSEY IT EXPIRES IN DECEMBER. I'M NOT AWARE WE CAN EXTEND THAT. YOU CAN REPORT ON THAT IF YOU

LIKE. >> MR. GREISEN, YOU'RE CORRECT, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION THAT WAS CREATED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, IT EXPIRES ON DECEMBER 1ST, WHICH MEANS AT THAT POINT THAT WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO HAVE VIRTUAL MEETINGS WITHOUT VIOLATING THE -- THE -- THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW.

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY LAST WEEK HAD NOT HAD A RECENT BILL ADDRESSING THIS. THERE WAS A BILL THAT WAS INTRODUCED LAST SPRING THAT NEVER RECEIVED ACTION ECAUSE THE ESSENCE OF THE EXCEPTION WAS CRAFTED TO THE -- TO THE ON THE

[00:50:03]

LAST BILL THAT WAS PASSED TO DEAL WITH THE CORONAVIRUS.

THERE REALLY ISN'T AN ACTIVE BILL ON THIS ISSUE.

I DID REACH OUT TO GARY HUNTER, THE COUNCIL NOT MUNICIPAL LEAGUE MAKING SURE HE WAS AWARE OF THIS CONCERN AND COUNCIL MEMBERS AND STAFF HAD CONCERNS GIVEN THE MORE GLOBALLY IN THE CITY OF WORTHINGTON BUT THROUGHOUT THE STATE DUE TO INCREASING NUMBERS AND LACK OF VACCINE AND THE CDC'S RECENT INFORMATION ABOUT AIRBORNE TRANSITION. THAT SORT OF IN THIS COURT.

HE INDICATED AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THAT -- THAT WE NEEDED TO -- TO GET THE EXCEPTION. AND HE WOULD DO WHAT HE COULD.

IN TERMS OF SPECIFICS, IT WON'T TAKE A LOT OF POSITION ON THIS.

THAT'S MY REPORT. >> PRESIDENT.

THANK YOU. THE INTENT OF THIS INFORMATION REALLY IS FOR DISCUSSION ITEM, I SHOULD SAY, IS TO BE PREPARED IN THE EVENT THAT WE'RE -- WE'RE -- WE'RE REQUIRED TO RETURN OR YOU DECIDE TO RETURN, WE WANT WELL THOUGHT OUT MEASURES IN PLACE BASED ON CURRENT HEALTH INFORMATION.

WE'RE PREPARED TO IMPLEMENT AND WE'RE NOT ADVOCATING TO RETURN NOW. AND CERTAINLY I THINK IN TALKING TO MANY OF YOU, YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH OUR CONTINUED APPROACH DOING THIS VIRTUALLY. WE DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE A PLAN IN PLACE. AND MR. OLIVER, WHEN HAS BEEN MANAGING OUR LOGISTICS COMMAND OF OUR STRUCTURE AND I.T.

DIRECTOR HAS PUT TOGETHER A STRATEGY AND HAS MODIFIED IT -- IT IN THE LAST FEW DAYS, BASED ON THE CDC GUIDELINES AND CHUM B -- COLUMBUS PUBLIC HEALTH AND KOWALCZYK ASKED US A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS TO IMPROVE THE PLAN.

I TURN IT OVER TO MR. OLIVER AND HAVE HIM GO OVER IT.

>> THANK YOU.

GUIDELINES THAT WOULD BE IN PLACE FOR IN PERSON COUNCIL.

SEVEN MEMBERS OF COUNCIL. MR. VINCENT AND MISS CROSS.

AT THE COMPANY SURVEY, WE HAVE THEM ADJACENT TO MISS CROSS AND THEN THE SECOND -- THE SECOND AND THEY WOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR GUESTS. AND PODIUM. WE HAD SINCE BASED ON WHAT WE DID TODAY AND WOULD HAVE A SCREEN IN FRONT AND ONE ON BOTH SIDES AND WE WOULD HAVE SCREENING FOR TO SHOW HERE FROM THE -- FROM THE WE RE COMMITTED TO PUBLIC HEALTH AND SHARE THE USE OF THIS, INCLUDING HAVING PUT AWAY MASKS AND WE HAVE PEOPLE WEAR MASKS EVEN WITH -- WITH -- WITH TIMES. AND THEN WE HAVE AUDIO AND THE THE

[00:55:03]

OTHER ITEMS, WE BEEN ASSESSING AN OPTION FOR IMPROVING THE TRAP WITH SOME SORT OF FILTER AND EXPECTATION SYSTEM WHERE -- FOR SYSTEM FOR -- FOR -- FOR -- FOR TRAINING AND -- AND IMPROVING THE SOLUTIONS FOR STAFF AND

ANY QUESTIONS? >> I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR LOOKING INTO THAT, CONSIDERING THE RECENT GUIDANCE FROM CDC.

I THINK THE SCHOOLS HAVE BEEN TRYING IT IMPROVE THE CONDITIONS THERE. LOST MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT.

THANK YOU FOR LOOKING INTO THAT. WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT.

I'M ON THE CARES COMMAND. WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE SPENDING POTENTIAL AND I THINK THESE ARE THINGS THAT F THERE IS A PRICE TAG, WE MEET PER PERSON AS A RESULT OF COVID THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY USE THOSE DOLLARS TO PAY FOR THAT.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE THINKING ABOUT SPECIFIC THINGS THAT MIGHT NEED TO HAPPEN, WE SHOULD KEEP THAT IN MIND AS WELL.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANYBODY ELSE WITH QUESTIONS

OR COMMENTS? >> I HAVE A QUICK COMMENT.

I'M VERY ANXIOUS TO GET BACK AND SEE YOUR SMILING FACES AGAIN.

I THINK IT IS MUCH EASIER TO LEGISLATE WHEN WE'RE IN PERSON BUT PARTICULAR MY GIVEN THE NUMBERS FROM THIS WEEKEND AND WITH THE HOLIDAY SEASON COMING UP, I'M SCARED TO DEATH THAT IN JANUARY WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ANOTHER WHOLESALE LOCKDOWN AGAIN. I JUST DON'T SEE THINGS IMPROVING. AS MUCH AS I WANT TO GET BACK AND I APPRECIATE THE WORK YOU'VE DONE, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU COULD CREATE A MORE SAFE ENVIRONMENT THAN WHAT YOU CREATED.

I THINK AT THIS POINT WE JUST HAVE TO TAKE A WAIT AND SEE.

I THINK THANKSGIVING IS GOING TO BE A BIG TEST.

I THINK THAT OUR VIRTUAL MEETING FORMAT IS GOING TO BE INCREDIBLY WELL TESTED IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS, WITH THE PENDING APPLICATION AT AIR BNB AND SEE IF WE COULD GET A THOUSAND PEOPLE AT A MEETING AND SEE IF THE SYSTEM WORKS PAST 1 IN THE MORNING. YOU KNOW, I LIKE TO REVISIT THIS AGAIN WHEN WE GET CLOSER TO THE FIRST OF DECEMBER.

>> WE WILL PUT THAT BACK ON THE AGENDA.

I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING TO KEEP OUR EYES OPEN FOR.

>> OKAY, ANYBODY ELSE HAVE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.

[6a. Architectural Review Board Appeal Process]

THEN WE WANT TO THANK YOU AND YOUR STAFF FOR ALL OF THE HARD WORK. IT IS TECHNICAL AND I KNOW THERE'S MORE BEHIND WHAT YOU'RE DOING.

AND WE BEGIN TO NDERSTAND AND WE WANT TO THANK YOU SO MUCH TO TAKING THE TIME AND THE ENERGY AND EXPERTISE TO HELP PUT THIS

TOGETHER FOR US. >>

WELCOME. >> OKAY.

MOVING ON TO THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD APPEAL PROCESS.

MR. GREISEN, IT HAS BEEN A WHILE SINCE WE HAD ONE OF THESE.

>> MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, AS YOU'RE AWARE, WE HAVE A REVIEW BOARD RELATED TO SOLAR PANELS AND SINCE WE DO NOT OFTEN THESE, I WOULDN'T SAY NEVER, BUT PERIODICALLY WE DO UT THEY'RE USUALLY FEW AND FAR BETWEEN, SOMETIMES -- SOMETIMES AIER OR TWO YEARS OR MORE BETWEEN APPEAL, BETWEEN -- BETWEEN HANDLING APPEALS. I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE PREP YET IF WE SPENT A LITTLE TIME HAVING MR. LINDSEY REVIEW THE APPEAL PROCESS. AND ESSENTIALLY PRACTICING BEFORE YOU PLAY IF YOU WILL AND MAKING SURE THAT WE PROVIDE APPROPRIATE DUE PROCESS AND HANDLE THE APPEAL IN ACCORDANCE

[01:00:02]

WITH -- WITH THE RULES AND REGULATIONS.

I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO MR. LINDSEY SO HE COULD HELP --

HELP GUIDE YOU. >> THANK YOU.

THIS IS GOING TO BE RELATIVELY SHORT BUT WE THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO REVIEW IT BECAUSE MR. GREISEN SAID WE DON'T DO IT OFTEN. I'M GOING TO ATTEMPT TO SHARE.

HOPEFULLY HAS WORKED. HERE'S THE SECTION OF THE WORTHING CITY CODE PROVIDES FOR THE APPEAL OF THE PROVISION AND SECTION B OF HAT SAYS THAT COUNCIL MAY HAVE BEEN ELECTED TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE APPEAL BY A MAJORITY OF VOTE OF MEMBERS OR FAILING TO VOTE WILL REJECT THE APPLICATION FOR APPEAL. IT IS A DISCRETIONARY APPEAL.

IT IS NOT AN APPEAL OF RIGHT THAT ANYONE HAS IN TERMS OF THAT APPEAL BEING ACTUALLY HEARD BY CITY COUNCIL.

BUT IT IS -- IT IS THEREFORE A -- A PROCESS BY WHICH COUNCIL DECIDES WHETHER IT WANTS TO HEAR THE APPEAL.

IN THE EVENT THE COUNCIL DECIDES TO HEAR THIS, IT HAS A HEARING AND THAT HEARING HAS TO BE DONE WITHIN 60 DAYS OF THE FINAL DECISION OF THE BOARD. A LEGAL DECISION FROM LEGAL STANDPOINT IS USUALLY BASED ON 3 THE SIGNING OF A BOARD ORDER OR APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF AN ORAL DECISION AT A BOARD HEARING.

SO THE CLOCK DOESN'T START IMMEDIATELY.

THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING IF COUNCIL WERE TO DECIDE TO GRANT THAT REQUEST FOR APPEAL.

THIS IS THE CODE WE HAVE. IT DOESN'T PROVIDE GUIDANCE ON HOW COUNCIL SHOULD CONSIDER THAT REVIEW.

I CAN SHARE. THE RIGHT SCREEN THERE.

ARE NOTING OFF OF TWO. I'M GOING TO STOP SHARING THAT ONE AND I'M GOING TO SHARE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I THINK WOULD BE BENEFICIAL IN OUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS MOVE THAT JUST A LITTLE BIT. IN THE PAST AND -- AND THOSE OF YOU MAY RECALL SOME PRIOR DISCUSSIONS, THE CLOSEST ANALOGY THAT WE FIND TO THIS SORT OF DISCRETIONARY APPEAL COMES FROM THE -- FROM THE OHIO SUPPORT OR THE U.S. SUPREME COURT, BOTH HAVE DISCRETIONARY APPEAL NOT EVERY CASE WITH APPELLATE STATE OR FEDERAL LEVEL AS A RIT IT BE HEARD AT THE SUPPORT.

THE STANDARD FOR THE OHIO SUPREME COURT.

THERE'S A COUPLE OF DIRECT RIGHTS OF APPEAL BUT IN GENERAL THE ISCRETIONARY APPEAL DOES IT HAVE A GREAT GENERAL OR PUBLIC INTEREST. IT MAY NOT JUST BE LIKE A JUDGMENT CALL. IT IS WHETHER OR NOT IT CALLS A GREAT QUESTION OF PUBLIC INTEREST.

FOR THE U.S. SUPREME COURT THERE'S A VARIETY OF WAYS THEY COME ABOUT, BUT THIS IS SOME THAT MAY BE COMPARABLE TO OUR SITUATION IS WHETHER THE COURT OF APPEALS IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE RULE IS SO FAR DEPARTED. A SIGNIFICANT DEPARTURE FROM THE ACCEPTED AND USUAL COURTS OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS AND THE COURT AKING A SUPERVISORY ROLE BY HEARING THAT CASE.

SO THAT WOULD BE THE COURT -- THE COURT TAKING A SUPERVISORY REVIEW AND IN THIS CASE, IF A -- IF A -- IF IN THIS CASE IF THE -- IF THEY WERE TO NOT HOLD THE DUE PROCESS TYPE HEARINGS THAT THEY ROUTINELY HOLD AND THEREFORE BOUNCE -- BOUNCE WITH

[01:05:02]

THE APPLE AND DEPRIVED OF A PROPER HEARING AND AS FAR AS THAT WOULD BE THE ANALOGY BUT MIGHT PROMPT YOU TO CONSIDER THIS. THE SECOND LINE WITH THE SUPREME COURT IS WHETHER OR NOT AN IMPORTANT QUESTION HAS NOT BEEN DECIDED BY A COURT AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN DECIDED.

BY ANALOGY, IF -- IF THEY'RE -- IF YOU'RE HAVING TO MAKE A DECISION IN AN AREA THAT WAS NOT PROVIDED CLEAR GUIDANCE BY THE -- BY THE -- BY THE CODE AND THEREFORE DETERMINATION THAT PERHAPS THERE WOULD BE -- IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER IT. SO IT WOULD NEED TO BE IMPORTANT QUESTION THAT -- THAT SHOULD BE DECIDED BY THE COUNCIL AS OPPOSED TO LEFT TO THE NORMAL PROCESS OF CONSIDERATION BY ALB.

THE LAST ONE WOULD BE A DECISION, A DECISION THAT ACTUALLY CONFLICTS WITH DECISIONS OF THE HIGHER COURT.

AS YOU KNOW FROM YOUR CIVICS CLASS, LOWER COURTS, AND THEN HIGHER COURTS FOLLOW THEIR DECISIONS.

SO THAT IS -- THAT IS KIND OF THE PROCESS BY WHICH IF COUNCIL HAD HAD A SITUATION IN WHICH BY SPECIFIC ADOPTION OF A -- OF A -- AFTER A PROVISION IN THE ARB WAS COMPLETELY CONTRARY TO THE CODE HAS DECIDED LEGISLATIVE BY CITY COUNCIL THAT WOULD PERHAPS BE ANOTHER BASIS. WHAT IS INTERESTING IN THE U.S.

SUPREME COURT RULES IS THAT THIS STATEMENT REGARDING -- IT IS -- IT IS GRANTED BY THE U.S. SUPREME COURT SO IT IS -- IT IS A WONDERFUL REVEALING A LOWER COURT. IT IS A MANDATE TO THE LOWER COURT TO SEND THEM THE RECORD SO THEY CAN REVIEW IT.

THEY ISSUE A GRANT WHICH IS AN ORDER FOR THE LOWER COURT.

SO IT IS -- THIS IS IN THE FINDINGS OR THE MISAPPLICATION OF AN IMPROPERLY STATED RULE OF LAW. IT IS NOT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THEIR CORRECTION. BUT MORE AS A MATTER OF POLICY IN DECIDING IMPORTANT QUESTIONS OR USING THE OHIO SUPREME COURT LANGUAGES AND GREAT PUBLIC INTEREST.

IT IS NOT JUST THAT THE COURT THE ARB CAME TO A DIFFERENT DECISION, IT WAS A DIFFERENT JOB.

I THINK THAT'S IN THE ROUGH STANDARD AS IN THE PAST.

WE DISCUSSED MR. GREISEN AND THE STAFF OF -- AND STAFF HAVE DISCUSSED HEARING THIS TONIGHT SO THAT -- THAT COUNCIL IS FAMILIAR WITH THE PROCESS AS A -- HAS A CHANCE TO EITHER ASK QUESTIONS TONIGHT OR CONSIDER THIS IF ADVANCE OF RECEIVING THE APPEAL THAT -- THAT WAS 3 ANTICIPATED TO FOLLOW THE -- THE -- THE -- FOLLOW THE PART OF NOVEMBER, I BELIEVE IT WAS THE TIMING BASED ON APPROVAL THE MINUTES.

THAT'S MY QUICK OVERVIEW. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> ANYBODY HAVE QUESTIONS? >> I HAVE ONE.

>> MR. LINDSEY, ECAUSE IT WAS A DENIAL OF CERTIFICATE, THERE WOULD BE NO ORDER TO COME OUT OF ARB AND THE DATE WOULD BE THE

ADOPTION OF -- OF THE MINUTES? >> CORRECT.

YEAH. FOR THAT -- FOR THAT -- THIS SITUATION, YOU'RE CORRECT, IT WOULDN'T BE AN ORDER GRANTING SOMETHING, IT WOULD BE THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.

IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING LAST WEEK THAT THEY WERE STILL WORKING TOWARDS GETTING THOSE MINUTES PREPARED SO THAT THE BOARD COULD REVIEW IT AND MR. BROWN HAD TO GIVE US MORE INSIGHT INTO THE SPECIFIC TIMETABLE THAT HE EXPECT.

>> SO ANY ACTION WE WOULD TAKE WOULD -- UNTIL THOSE MINUTES ARE APPROVED WOULD BE PREMATURE AND MORE THAN LIKELY INAPPROPRIATE.

[01:10:07]

>> CORRECT. AS YOU'RE FAMILIAR IN YOUR LINE OF WORK, THE COURTS HAVE TREATED -- TREATED PREMATURE APPEALS IN DEFENDANT WAYS. IN MY DAYS IT WAS AUTOMATIC DISMISSAL OF A CASE IF A NOTICE OF APPEAL WAS FILED BEFORE A FINAL JUDGMENT ENTERED BY THE TRIAL COURT.

AND COURTS HAVE MOVED TOWARD HOLDING THOSE IN ABEYANCE AND WAITING UNTIL THE FINAL ORDER OR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT IS PROVIDED AND I THINK THAT'S THE YOU VIEW THEY'RE TAKING THE MOST -- THE MODUS OF APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED AND ONCE THERE'S A FINAL ORDER IN THE SENSE OF -- OF APPROVAL AND MINUTES, THEN WE WOULD PROCEED FORWARD WITH BRINGING IT TO COUNCIL.

THAT'S WHEN THE CLOCK WOULD START.

IT IS THE 60 DAYS IN WHICH YOU'RE REQUIRED TO HOLD A HEARING IF YOU DECIDE TO HOLD A HEARING.

>> ONE OTHER QUESTION. I'M THINKING OF TIMING, ASSUMING THEY'RE HERE TO VOTE THE APPEAL. ASSUMING THE NEXT ARB MEETING THEY APPROVE THE MINUTES WE COULD LOOK AT THIS HAPPENING EITHER IN THE MIDDLE OF BUDGET OR OUR LAST MEETING IN DECEMBER.

IS THERE ANY WAY THAT THE PARTIES CAN EXTEND THAT 60 DAYS? IT IS STATUTORY AS OPPOSED TO -- TO -- TO ORDINANCE AS OPPOSED TO CONSTITUTION SO BY AGREEMENT OF THE PARTIES, COULD YOU PUT IT OFF UNTIL THE FIRST OF THE YEAR, WHAT DO YOU THINK?

>> IN DIRECTING YOUR QUESTION, I WOULD SAY, I BELIEVE YOU COULD. IN CLARIFICATION IF ARB DOES NOT APPROVE THOSE MINUTES AND UNTIL, I KNOW MR. BROWN IS THERE TO TELL ME THE EXACT ROUTE AND -- BUT -- BUT WE WOULD HAVE 60 DAYS FROM THAT DATE WE OULD HAVE TO HOLD THE HEARING.

SO ASSUMING IT IS DECIDED THE MINUTES GET APPROVED IN NOVEMBER, YOU WOULD THEN HAVE UNTIL SOME DATE IN JANUARY UNTIL

THE 60 DAYS WOULD EXPIRE. >> THEY GET APPROVED IN

OCTOBER? >> MR. BROWN, WHY DON'T YOU

GIVE US AN ANSWER? >> THANK YOU.

THEY WERE APPROVED LAST THURSDAY.

>> OKAY. AND WHAT --

>> AND -- >> MR. LINDSEY.

>> SO THEY HAVE THE INFORMATION READY TO GO TO HAVE A DISCUSSION TO SET IT UP. AND WE DIDN'T THINK THE MINUTES WOULD GET DONE BUT THEY WERE CONSIDERED BEFORE AND SENT OUT

TO THE BOARD. >> THIS IS WE WILL NEED TO HAVE, IF YOU DECIDE TO HAVE THE HEARING

SOMETIME IN DECEMBER. >> OKAY.

THAT'S -- IF IT WASN'T PAINFULLY OBVIOUS, THAT'S THE ONE MEETING I MISSED THIS YEAR.

I SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT THOSE MINUTES WERE LATER OFF.

>> OKAY. SO WE'RE GOING TO AGENDA THIS

FOR -- >> NEXT MEETING?

>> YEAH. >>

>> WE TALK ABOUT THE STANDARD OF REVIEW AGAIN.

I DON'T KNOW THAT'S HELPFUL FOR LAY PERSON TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT IN ORDER TO MAKE A DECISION IN TERMS OF WHETHER TO HEAR AN APPEAL.

>> LET ME -- I APOLOGIZE. THE STANDARD BY WHICH PEOPLE DECIDE THINGS, AND THEY REACH A DISCUSSION.

I SUPPOSE, THEY TO CHU WHAT COULD COUNCIL BE CONSIDERING FOR PURPOSES OF APPLYING THAT STANDARD TO.

AT LEAST HISTORICALLY THAT HAS INCLUDED THE MINUTES OF THE ORB AND SO YOU YOU CAN HAVE A BENEFIT OF WHAT ARB HAS AND IT COULD INCLUDE A STAFF MEMO EXPLAINING THE -- THE -- THE 3 ISSUE THAT WAS BEFORE ARB AND -- AND IN THE RELEVANT FACTS PRESENTED AT THAT HEARING AND ANY OTHER RELEVANT CODE SECTIONS THAT WOULD APPLY. SO WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION.

[01:15:06]

YOU HAVE THE NOTICE OF APPEAL BY THE PERSON REQUESTING THE APPEAL BE HEARD. BUT YOU WOULD NOT HAVE A HEARING IN THE FORM OF THE -- OF THE APPLICANT TESTIFYING OR YOU KNOW, THE PROPERTY OWNERS TESTIF TESTIFYING, SO IT IS REVIEW BASED ON HAT THE DELAY OF COURT DECIDES AND -- AND WHAT INFORMATION MUST BE BEFORE IT

AND THE CODE SECTIONS. >> ALSO INCLUDES PRECEDENT ON THIS TOPIC, WHAT HAS BEEN RULED OR DETERMINED IN THE PAST AS PRECEDENT AND IN THIS CASE THE AREA OF SOLAR PANELS IN THE

HISTORIC AREA. >> GENERALLY THE STAFF MEMO WOULD INCLUDE THAT IN THIS CASE WHERE THERE IS SOME RELEVANT PAST HE ISARY PRECEDENT THAT WOULD COME FORWARD.

>> SO WE'RE LOOKING AT -- E'RE NOT LOOKING AT REVIEWING ALL FACTS FRESH, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE DECISION MADE BY ARB AND WHETHER WE NEED TO TAKE IT ON APPEAL AND CONSIDER A DIFFERENT DECISION SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE. AND WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT BECAUSE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU OUTLINED BECAUSE THE DECISION DOESN'T MEET THIS -- IN THE -- IN THE -- IN THE -- IN THE -- IN THE CODE THAT HAS BEEN SET FORTH OR WE SEE SPECIAL INTEREST IN THE ISSUE? IS THAT ACCURATE? AM I STATING IT CORRECTLY TO PUT IT IN THE RIGHT FRAME OF MIND?

>> I THINK SO. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING.

I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER. THERE'S BEEN ONE OF THESE THAT I HANDLED IN THE PAST THREE YEARS THAT WE DISCUSSED TO THE SAME NIGHT AND WHETHER TO HAVE THE HEARING OR NOT.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS -- IS THAT -- IS THAT PRIOR TO THAT THIS HAS ALWAYS BEEN A CHALLENGE TO -- TO -- TO GO ABOUT IT IN A WAY THAT DOESN'T RESULT IN HOLDING THE HEARING ITSELF.

COURTS ARE USED TO DOING THIS IN A WAY THAT SHOULD THEY HEAR IT.

AND BOTH THE SUPREME COURT AND U.S. SUPREME COURT.

THE BRIEFING IS DONE TWICE. THERE'S THE EXPLANATION OF WHY YOU THINK THEY SHOULD HEAR THE COURT AND WHY THE COURT SHOULDN'T HEAR YOUR CASE AND THEN IF THE COURT TAKES THE CASE THEN IT IS REALLY THE BRIEFING ON THE MERITS.

THAT'S MUCH MORE EXTENSIVE, WOULD INCLUDE MUCH MORE DETAILS FROM THE RECORD. THAT'S THE PROCESS THAT I BELIEVE IS MOST SIMILAR TO WHAT COUNCIL IN THE ADOPTION OF IN ORDINANCE HAD ESTABLISHED. BECAUSE THIS IS BY ORDINANCE AND NOT CHARTER, IT IS CERTAINLY THE PROGRES PREROGATIVE OF COUNCIL TO CLARIFY THAT PROCESS.

MOST -- MOST -- I SHOULDN'T SAY MOST.

MOST OF THEM TO THE EXTENT I'M AWARE ARE ALL OR NOTHING.

YOU EITHER GRANT A REVIEW BY THE CITY COUNCIL OR YOU'RE LEAVELING -- LEAVING IT TO COUNCIL AND THEY MAY DECIDE TO DO IT.

BUT ISN'T REQUIRED TO. >> THEN WHAT IS THE PROCESS IF WE DECIDE NOT? IS THERE APPEAL?

ANOTHER STEP? >> THE -- IF WE WERE TO NOT HEAR IT, IT IS MY -- I DON'T THINK SO A PARTY WOULD SEEK ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW IN THE COURTS AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

I WOULD SAY THE CODE PROVIDES THAT IF YOU DO HAVE THE HEARING YOUR DECISION SHALL BE FINAL. IT IS A BETTER DECISION IF IT IS FINAL IF IT IS ADMINISTRATIVE TYPE HEARING AND WOULD TRIGGER

THE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW. >> OKAY.

THIS WILL BE MY THIRD APPEAL. AND I HAVE SOME VERY DEFINITE

[01:20:03]

IDEAS ABOUT THIS -- ABOUT THIS AS -- AS WE WOULD WOULD SAY, AN APPELLANT OURT IS NOT A COURT OF ERROR, IT IS A COURT OF LAW.

WE'RE NOT SITTING TO CORRECT WHAT WE THINK IS A MISTAKE.

AS I SAID AT THE ARB MEETING WHEN THIS WAS DECIDED, I PERSONALLY THINK UNDER OUR CURRENT GUIDELINES ARB'S DECISION WAS PROBABLY CORRECT. IT IS -- IT IS THE ISSUE OF TWO COMPETING PRIORITIES IN WORTHINGTON.

YOU HAVE THE ARCHITECTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE DISTRICT AND THE GOAL OF SUSTAINABILITY AS EXPRESSED THROUGH SOLAR PANELS.

I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER, WAS IT FOUR YEARS AGO THAT WE HAD AMENDMENT TO THE GUIDELINES WHICH WAS A COMPROMISE AFTER MONTHS OF DELIBERATION AND INPUT AND SO I THINK REALLY THE QUESTION HERE IS, DO WE WANT TO REVISIT THAT AND WE DO HAVE PRECEDENT THAT WE WOULD BE COMMENTS ON? WE WOULD BE COMMENTS ON IT. TO ME THAT'S THE ISUE.

IT IS NOT WHETHER ARB GOT THIS RIGHT OR WRONG, IT IS HAVE E CHANGED OUR POSITION N -- ON WHAT THE DESIGN GUIDELINES SAY?

>> I UNDERSTAND THAT. I'M TRYING TO EXTEND A PROCESS AND WHAT WE'RE DECIDING FOR THEM AND IN OUR PURVIEW AS PART OF THE DISCUSSION, IF WE LOOK AT PO POLICY DECISION OR DO WE TAKE STEPS.

I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW THAT WOULD WORK.

ONE MAY BE ONE ANSWER AND THEN THE POLICY DECISION COULD BE ANOTHER ISSUE. IF I MAY.

NOT A LOT OF STUFF YOU FOR YOU YOU TO LOOK AT, I SHORT CIRCUITED THE RULE. LET ME -- LET ME -- LET ME.

THAT'S NOT THE IGHT ONE. I NEED TO STOP THAT.

MY APOLOGIES HERE.

LET ME TELL YOU NDER THE OHIO SUPREME COURT RULE, FORMALLY THE COUPLE THAT I RELATE TO, HAVE NONS AND FELONIES. ONE THAT IS INTERESTING AND IT DOESN'T FIT WITH THE RULES RIGHT OUT IN TERMS OF THE COURT MAKING ITS DECISION BUT DOES INCLUDE A CATCH-ALL FOR THE SUPREME COURT TO MAKE ANOTHER ACTION. THEY MAY NOT HEAR THE APPEAL BUT TAKE SOME OTHER ACTION IN THAT REGARD, I SUPPOSE, AND COUNCIL IN LIGHT OF THIS MIGHT DECIDE THAT ARB DID ITS OB ACCORDING TO THE CODE AS WRITTEN AND NOT A NEED TO HEAR THE APPEAL BUT TAKE

UP THE ISSUE. >> FOR NEXT WEEK WE HEAR A SUCCINCT SUMMARY AS PART OF OUR COUNCIL PACKET.

I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL, IN ADDITION TO AN APPEAL COMING FORWARD, AND SUCCINCT MAYBE ONE

[01:25:07]

PAGE, PAGE AND A HALF AND WHAT WE WOULD LOOK AT AS WE DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT TO HEAR THE APPEAL AND IT COULD BE IN THE COUNCIL PACKET FOR NEXT WEEK, I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

>> WE PREPARE SOMETHING ON THE -- ON THE ISSUE THAT IS BEING PRESENTED BUT WE CAN PROVIDE YOU INFORMATION REGARDING THE STANDARD REVIEW I SPOKE OF EARLIER.

>> THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING POTENTIAL REVIEW? MR. CARSON, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE?

>> YEAH. A COUPLE OF THINGS.

FIRST OF ALL WE NOTED REAL BRIEFLY OR SOMEBODY NOTED, I BELIEVE IT WAS MR. MERS MAYBE THE -- THE UPTICK IN CORONAVIRUS CASES AND -- AND THE -- THIS WEEKEND, WE PUT OUT INFORMATION AS A RESULT OF THE EPIDEMIOLOGICAL REPORTS THAT THE COLUMBUS PUBLIC HEALTH PROVIDES US AND -- AND -- AND THE NUMBER OF CASES AND WORTHINGTON WHEN WE REPORTED ON SATURDAY HAD RISEN BY 15 IN THE PAST WEEK. THOSE CASES, PREVIOUSLY MAJORITY OF NEW CASES WERE LONG-TERM CARE FACILITY.

THAT'S NOT THE CASE. THIS INCREASE IN NUMBER OF CASES IS MAINLY DUE TO THE SPREAD IN THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE.

AND -- AND WE WANT TO -- WE WANT IT ALERT YOU YOU TO THAT AND POINT YOU TO -- TO THE INFORMATION THAT WE PUT OUT THAT ENCOURAGES PEOPLE TO REMAIN VIGILANT IN THAT YOU ARE EFFORTS TO -- -- IN THEIR EFFORTS TO BATTLE COVID-19 BY MAINTAINING SOCIAL DISTANCE WEARING MASKS AND WASHING THEIR HAND.

I'M EADY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. I THINK THE TOTAL -- PULL UP THE -- UP THE DEPUTY REPORT HERE. I THINK THE TOTAL, THE CASES CONFIRMED AND PROBABLE IN WORTHINGTON AS OF TODAY ARE -- ARE 310. GLAD TO ANSWER QUESTIONS TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY ABOUT THAT. THE SECOND THING IS I WANTED TO PROVIDE UPDATE ON DIVERSITY INCLUSION.

>> WAIT LET'S SEE IF ANYONE HAS QUESTIONS BEFORE WE OVE ON?

>> HEARING NONE. >> WHAT IS THAT NUMBER?

IS THAT THE WEEK OF LL TIME? >> NO, THAT WOULD BE TOTAL.

WE'RE STILL ACROSS TIME. BUT WE'VE INCREASED 15 IN THE

PAST WEEK. >> SO 15 COMMUNITIES IN THE PAST WEEK. OKAY.

THANK YOU. >> NEXT.

MR. ROBINSON WAS NOT FEELING WELL AND TEXTED ME HE STEPPED OFF THE CALL. HE'S NOT FEELING WELL.

I WANT YOU TO CALL ON HIM AND HE'S NOT GOING TO BE HERE.

>> WE CAN PROBABLY TOUCH ON THINGS HE'S INTERESTED IN TALKING ABOUT NEXT WEEK. I DID WANT TO POINT OUT A FEW OF OUR DIVERSITY EQUITY INCLUSION EFFORTS THAT WE'RE WORKING ON.

SOME IN COLLABORATION WITH COMMUNITY PARTNERS.

FIRST, YOU MAY HAVE SEEN BUT I'M GOING TO HIGHLIGHT IT IF YOU HAVEN'T THE COMMUNITY RELATIONS COMMISSION.

AS YOU KNOW THEY SPONSORED A VIRTUAL PROGRAM ON MAKING OF METROPOLITAN INEQUITY ON AUGUST 22ND.

THEY ALSO BEEN PARTNERING WITH THE WORTHINGTON LIBRARIES AND IT WOULD BE PILOTING A LEARNING CIRCLES PROGRAM TO FOCUS ON RACIAL EQUITY TOPICS STARTING IN OCTOBER.

THIS IS A 21-DAY RACIAL JUSTICE AND SOCIAL EQUITY WHERE PARTICIPANTS WILL SPEND TIME WATCHING ABOUT ISSUES AND RELATING TO VOTING AND EDUCATION AND CRIMINAL JUS JUSTICEEFORM A

[01:30:04]

PUBLIC EALTH A WEEKLY ZOOM DISCUSSION GROUPS WITH PARTICIPANTS BEING LED BY LIBRARY STAFF. THOSE WILL BE LIMITED TO 15 PARTICIPANTS. THE MATERIALS FOR THE 21-DAY CHALLENGE WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR ANYONE.

BUT THE GROUPS WILL BE LIMITED TO 15 AS I SID.

IF IT IS SUCCESSFUL THEY MAY REPEAT IT IF IT IS WELL ECEIVED AND HELPFUL. ADDITIONALLY, I WOULD NOTE SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THE CRC ARE GATHERING RESEARCH MATERIALS ON ISSUES LIKE SOURCE OF INCOME LEGISLATION, THINGS LIKE ACCESSORY DWELLING -- DWELLING UNITS, AND THEN THEY SHARE SOME OF THAT RESEARCH WITH US BOTH STAFF AND COUNCIL IN THE COMING WEEKS. I WOULD BE SHARING WITH YOU OME OF THE -- SOME OF THE -- IN TRYING TO SET UP -- UP OPPORTUNITIES TO -- TO BRIEF YOU ON SOME OF THE WORK THAT WE'VE DONE WITH MR. WHITE IN THE COMING WEEK OR SO AND TALK TO YOU ABOUT THAT. MUCH OF THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH HIS THOUGHTS ABOUT TRYING TO PROVIDE OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMMUNITY EDUCATION. ADDITIONALLY, I TALKED ABOUT -- ABOUT -- ABOUT WE STOOD UP OR HAD FORUMED OUR DIVERSITY EQUITY INCLUSION COMMITTEE AND REORGANIZATION AND MR. ALVER AND RIGO ARE LEADING THAT. I'M PLEASED TO REPORT WE HAD 14 MEMBERS OF OUR ORGANIZATION THAT VOLUNTEERED TO BE A PART OF THAT. IF YOU GO BACK TO YOUR BUDGET SLIDE AND REMEMBER HOW MANY FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES THAT IS, THAT'S OVER TEN PERCENT OF OUR EMPLOYEES VOLUNTEERING TO WORK ON EQUITY AND DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION DEPARTMENTS IN OUR DEPARTMENTS AND ORGANIZATIONS. WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT THAT.

THEY'RE IN THE FORMATION STATION WORKING ON MEETINGS AND WOULD BE DEVELOPING THEIR CAPACITY AND THE TRAINING AND OTHER ISSUES OVER TIME. LASTLY, WE'VE BEEN SPENDING A LOT OF TIME WORKING TO SUPPORT SOME OF THE EFFORTS OF -- OF -- OF OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO -- WHO YOU KNOW POLICE ISSUES, AND WHAT -- WHAT I WAS GOING TO DO AT THIS TIME PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BRIEF YOU ON THOSE EFFORTS BUT -- BUT IT MAY BE MORE APPROPRIATE TO DEFER THAT.

>> A FEW COMMENTS. I KNOW MR. ROBERTSON HAD A BIT MORE TO SAY BASED ON THE HINGS THAT HE'S INITIATING.

WE HAVE MET WITH SOME PROTESTERS RECENT MY TO HEAR THEIR THOUGHTS AND YOU KNOW AND TAKE THEIR FEEDBACK AND SHARE WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON WITH THEM AND WEN WE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY THIS MORNING WITH R. MYERS AND MR. GREISEN AND CHIEF WEBB MET WITH OFFICERS. SO, HEARING WHAT THEIR FEEDBACK IS AND THEY'RE EXPERIENCING. I APPRECIATE VERY MUCH HEARING FROM ALL OF THE STAKE HOLDERS AND PARTICULAR POLICE OFFICERS IN -- IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS DISCUSSION.

I THINK WE'RE -- WE'RE DEFINITELY GATHERING INFORMATION AND HAVE SOME IDEAS. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WOULD -- TWO THINGS EM INTERESTED IN IS TRYING TO GET HANDLE ON DATA AS A SOURCE OF MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY AND IN TERMS OF OOKING AT RACIAL EQUITY TYPE DATA, WHERE IT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE A LOT NATIONALLY THAT HAS BEEN FORMALLY INITIATED. I KNOW THERE'S RECENT REQUIREMENTS ON THAT HERE IN -- IN OHIO AND -- AND OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT. IT IS SOMETHING I'M INTERESTED IN LOOKING AT AS WE MOVE FORWARD AND THEN I MENTIONED THIS BEFORE, LOOKING AT HOW WE -- WE -- WE REALLY PRIORITIZE SOCIAL SERVICE INTERVENTIONS IN A MORE FORMAL WAY.

[01:35:02]

WE HAVE GREAT COORDINATION WITH OUR COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS.

TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF THERE'S MORE TO DO BOTH TO SUPPORT THE OFFICERS IN THE FIELD AND DEALING WITH THESE NONCRIMINAL SITUATIONS. THESE THINGS COULD RESULT N MORE DIFFICULT INTERACTIONS. CONNECTING PEOPLE UP TO SERVICES THEY NEED. THOSE ARE THINGS I'M INTERESTED IN PURSUPURSUING. THEY SEEM WORTH WHILE.

I KNOW MR. ROBERTSON HAS IDEAS. THANK YOU FOR THE OTHER THOUGHTS

ON THESE ISSUES AS WELL. >> MR. MYERS, DID YOU WANT TO

ADD ANYTHING? >> NO.

OTHER THAN MR. ROBERTSON HAS MADE FAIRLY CONCRETE PROPOSALS IN WRITING. I HOPE WE GET TO THAT FAIRLY SOON. I THINK IT BRINGS OUT PRETTY CORE ISSUES. I THINK IT IS THINGS THATTER T-- THAT COUNCIL NEEDS TO DISCUSS.

I THINK WE'RE ON THE WAY TO DISCUSSING THOSE ISSUES THIS MORNING. AND MISS KOWALCZYK CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. I THINK WE'RE IN A POSITION TO HAVE A ROBUST DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT TO DO NEXT.

>> OKAY. >> AGENDA, AND UPCOMING AGENDA.

[Reports of Council Members]

>> YEAH. >> WE'LL -- WE CONTINUE WORKING WITH THEM TO HELP FRAME AND SHAPE THAT INFORMATION AND AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME GET IT DISTRICTED TO ALL COUNCIL

MEMBERS. >> OKAY.

ANYTHING ELSE ON -- ANYTHING ELSE ON THIS TOPIC FROM ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS? MR. GEISEN, ANYTHING ELSE FOR

YOUR CITY REPORT? >> NO MA'AM.

>> OKAY. I'M GOING TO MOVE ON TO REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS. AND WE'LL -- WE'LL START WITH --

WITH MISS DOROTHY. >> I WANT TO THANK MR. INTERVALS IN WORTHINGTON. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY THERE ARE, BUT I KNOW I WENT ACROSS AND AT -- WHERE WITH ELSE DID I GO?

AT SOUTHERN OUR SOUTHY. >> I THINK IT IS SOUTHY.

>> SOUTHY. YEAH.

SO THAT WAS -- I

WHAT ARE YOU SCREAMING ABOUT? >> JUST A HABIT FOR US.

>> I DEFINITELY NOTICED A COUPLE OF OTHER IN WORTHINGTON,

VERY APPRECIATIVE. >> YEAH.

I'LL PASS IT ON. >> MR. WHITE IS NOT ABLE TO BE ON THIS EVENING, BUT -- BUT I'LL -- I'LL PASS THAT ON AND MAYBE HE COULD GIVE YOU AN UPDATE NEXT TIME ON -- ON THE -- ON HOW MANY WE'VE DONE. OUR GOAL IS TO PUT AS MANY OF

THOSE IN AS POSSIBLE. >> APPRECIATED THE BIKING PAD COMMITTEE AND THE -- AND THE OUTDOOR BIKE -- BIKE THIS PAST WEEKEND AND THEN -- THEN THE SUPPORT FOR ALL OF THE STAFF THAT -- THAT HELPED TOO. SO JUST WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT ALSO. BUT THAT'S MY REPORT.

THANK YOU. >> GREAT.

MR. MYERS? >> I HAVE NOTHING, THANK YOU.

>> MR. SMITH? >> YEAH, THANK YOU, I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE SOME SORT OF CONVERSATION ABOUT THE PROPOSAL SINCE WE HAD THE CONVERSATION FIVE YEARS AGO AND HAD CONVERSATION AND IF THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE THIS WEEK OR NEXT WEEK BUT I THINK IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE GIVE DIRECTION TO THE BOARDS?

>> OKAY. MOVING ON TO MISS KOWALCZYK?

>> I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING. THANK YOU.

>> AND MR. BOOKER? >> YEAH, I JUST BRIEFLY WANTED TO TOUCH ON THE -- THE MAIL BALLOTS THAT WERE INCORRECT IN

[01:40:01]

THE COUNTY. COUNTY WIDE THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS IS REPORTING UNDER 50,000 INCORRECT INCLUDING THE TWO AT OUR HOUSE AND WANTED TO MAKE URE THAT THE INFORMATION IS OUT THERE. I'VE SEEN DIFFERENT ANSWERS ONLINE AND FROM ONBOARD, WE GOT THE ONE.

AND NEW YOU COULD GO AND VOTE BEFORE ELECTION DAY OR YOU CAN VOTE PROVISIONALLY ON POLLING PLACE ON ELECTION DAY.

MAKE SURE THAT GETS OUT THERE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

>> A LOT OF US HAVE SEEN THINGS ABOUT THAT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT.

WE WANT PEOPLE TO VOTE. THAT'S IMPORTANT.

IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE COUNCIL?

MR. GREISEN, EXECUTIVE SESSION? >> NOT AT THIS TIME.

>> OKAY. THAT SAID, THEN MR. MYERS MOVES WE ADJOURN, SECONDED BY MR. SMITH.

ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY. YEA.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.