CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

 

AUGUST 9, 2007

 

 

The meeting was called to order by Vice President Burke at 7:00 p.m.

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:  Mr. Marshall, Mr. Fogt, Ms. Sellers, Mr. Burke, Mr. Reams

Excused:  Mr. Pleasant, Mr. Gore

 

OTHERS PRESENT:  Mayor Kruse, Finance Director Morehart, Asst. Law Director Eufinger, Clerk Patterson

 

REPORTERS PRESENT:  Ryan Horns – Journal Tribune

 

CITIZENS PRESENT:  Donald Noblet, Nina Noblet, Myrtle Conrad, Bob Muth, Kelly Dearwester, Bill Kelly, Dave Cook, Rose Penhorwood, Dan Penhorwood, Chris Harrington, Chuck Day, Peter Griffin, Bill Schrader, James Martynowski

 

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:  There being no additions or corrections, the minutes for the meeting on July 26, 2007 were approved as written.

 

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT:  Mayor Kruse, with the assistance of Vice President Burke, presented the Employee of the Quarter Award to Rose Penhorwood, City Income Tax Clerk. During this last quarter (the busiest for the Income Tax staff) the Department found itself without its Income Tax Administrator. Rose was able to coordinate the work with other finance staff maintaining an orderly flow of return processing.  The income tax staff collected $2,209,501 or approximately 28% of the 2007 forecasted income tax revenue.  Rose’s efforts enabled the income tax revenue to be processed in a timely manner while still handling resident problems and questions. Rose took the lead in allocating and prioritizing the work among the income tax staff to make sure it got done properly.  Rose was also able to work well with the income tax software vendor to make sure any system issues were addressed.  Rose also represented the Division in Municipal Court hearing numerous income tax cases, a function which typically is handled by the Income Tax Administrator.

 

Mayor Kruse reported the paving is on schedule.  City is very pleased with the contractor.

 

The Collins Road Project, consisting of concrete removal, will soon go out to bid.  Hope to begin the project in late 2007 or early 2008.

 

August 17th is another Uptown Friday night event.

 

REPORT OF CLERK OF COUNCIL:  No report.

 

REPORT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR:  Mr. Phillips reported that the Balloon Rally will be held August 17 and 18 at the airport.  Mr. Phillips commended Mr. Conley for his hard work to make Honda Homecoming a success.  As part of the proceeds, the Chamber, through the CVB, donated $1,000 to the Parks & Recreation Department.  Mr. Conley, Supt. of Parks & Recreation, accepted a check on behalf of the Parks & Recreation Department.

 

HEARING OF CITIZENS:  No comments.

 

RESOLUTIONS

 

The “RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF MARYSVILLE TO THE OHIO CDBG SMALL CITIES PROGRAM FOR $59,000 OF FY2007 FORMULA GRANT FUNDS AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY” was presented for third reading, title only.  Mr. Marshall moved to pass the legislation and the question put, stood:

 

Mr. Fogt  YES  Mr. Reams  YES  Mr. Marshall  YES  Ms. Sellers  YES  Mr. Burke  YES

 

Resolution 12-07 passed.

 

The resolution “TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY TO ADVERTISE AND SELL A 2000 CORVETTE” was presented as second reading, public hearing.  Mr. Marshall moved to waive reading in full; affirmative voice vote was unanimous.

 

“A RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF MAJOR GENERAL ROBERT S. BEIGHTLER, NAMING FIFTH STREET IN THE CITY OF MARYSVILLE AS THE HONORARY “GENERAL BEIGHTLER WAY,” AND DESIGNATING SEPTEMBER 28, 2007 AS MAJOR GENERAL ROBERT S. BEIGHTLER DAY IN THE CITY OF MARYSVILLE” was presented for first reading, title only.  Mr. Phillips explained that this is a result of the Army.  General Beightler was one of, if not the most, successful National Guard General of all time.  He was born and raised in Marysville, Ohio.  The Armory in Ohio where the Adjutant General is located is actually named the Beightler Armory.  There used to be a sign that read, General Beightler Boulevard that was on E. Fifth Street.  This sign was removed as part of the streetscape.  URT suggested doing a historic marker in Uptown Marysville.  There are only four in Union County; this will the fifth historical marker.  Mr. Phillips applied for a grant, which paid for a portion of the marker, and the rest of the funds came from City, Chamber, URT, American Legion Post 79, VFW Post 3320, Disabled American Veterans Post 55. There were 45 applications in the state of Ohio; only ten were awarded; Marysville was one of those. A resolution was passed on August 14, 1969, which dedicated E. 5th Street, but never officially giving it the honorary name.  The ceremony will be held on September 28, 2007 at 11:00 a.m.

 

ORDINANCES

 

The ordinance “TO AMEND CHAPTER 313, TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, CHAPTER 333, OVI; WILLFUL MISCONDUCT; SPEED, CHAPTER 337, SAFETY AND EQUIPMENT, OF THE CODIFIED ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF MARYSVILLE, OHIO” was presented for third reading, title only.  Mr. Marshall moved to pass the legislation and the question put, stood:

 

Mr. Reams  YES  Mr. Marshall  YES  Ms. Sellers  YES  Mr. Burke  YES  Mr. Fogt  YES

 

Ordinance 40-07 passed.

 

The ordinance “SETTING COMPENSATION FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY” was presented for third reading, title only.  Mr. Reams moved to pass the legislation and the question put, stood:

 

Mr. Marshall  YES  Ms. Sellers  NO  Mr. Burke  NO  Mr. Fogt  NO   Mr. Reams  YES

 

Ordinance was defeated.

 

The ordinance “AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF NOTES IN THE AMOUNT OF NOT TO EXCEED $5,000,000 IN ANTICIPATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, EXPANSION, REHABILITATION, AND IMPROVEMENT OF THE CITY’S MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEM; AND AUTHORIZING, IF NECESSARY, AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT APPROPRIATE FOR THE OFFERING AND SALE OF SUCH NOTES” was presented for third reading, title only.  Mr. Marshall moved to pass the legislation and the question put, stood:

 

Ms. Sellers  YES  Mr. Burke  YES  Mr. Fogt  YES  Mr. Reams  YES  Mr. Marshall  YES

 

Ordinance 41-07 passed.

 

The ordinance “AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING REVENUE NOTES IN ANTICIPATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS IN THE AMOUNT OF NOT TO EXCEED $7,175,000 FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCING CERTAIN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A NOTE PURCHASE AGREEMENT IN CONNECTION WITH THE SALE OF SAID NOTES; APPROVING THE USE OF AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT IN CONNECTION THEREWITH AND RETIRING NOTES PREVIOUSLY ISSUED FOR SUCH PURPOSE” was presented for third reading, title only.  Mr. Marshall moved to pass the legislation and the question put, stood:

 

Mr. Burke  YES  Mr. Fogt  YES  Mr. Reams  YES  Mr. Marshall  YES  Ms. Sellers  YES

 

Ordinance 42-07 passed.

 

“AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF NOT TO EXCEED $25,000,000 WATER SYSTEM MORTGAGE REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2007, OF THE CITY OF MARYSVILLE, OHIO, UNDER SECTION 12 OF ARTICLE XVIII OF THE OHIO CONSTITUTION, FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, EXPANSION, REHABILITATION, AND IMPROVEMENT OF THE CITY OF MARYSVILLE’S MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEM; AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A FOURTH SUPPLEMENTAL INDENTURE OF MORTGAGE TO SECURE SAID SERIES 2007 BONDS, IF NECESSARY; AUTHORIZING THE PURPOSE OF MUNICIPAL BOND INSURANCE OR OTHER FORM OF CREDIT ENHANCEMENT IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, AUTHORIZING A BOND PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT APPROPRIATE FOR THE OFFERING AND SALE OF SUCH SERIES 2007 BONDS; AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A FEDERAL INCOME TAX COMPLIANCE AGREEMENT WITH THE TRUSTEE” was presented for third reading, title only.  Mr. Fogt moved to pass the legislation and the question put, stood:

 

Mr. Fogt  YES  Mr. Reams  YES  Mr. Marshall  YES  Ms. Sellers  YES  Mr. Burke  YES

 

Ordinance 43-07 passed.

 

“AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY CONTAINING 171.531 ACRES IN PARIS TOWNSHIP, UNION COUNTY TO THE CITY OF MARYSVILLE, OHIO” was presented for second reading, public hearing.  Mr. Fogt moved to waive reading in full; affirmative voice vote was unanimous.  Ms. Myrtle Conrad addressed Council. She resides in the Clark Addition.  She expressed concerns about how this annexation will impact their subdivision.  She handed out a copy of a letter that was sent to the County Commissioners from residents of the Clark Addition.  They have a concern with water and sewer.  There is a drain from the Clark Addition through the Marshall property out into the Clark Property.  It’s been there since 1958/1959.  It’s been said in the past that this is not recorded.  She said it is there; it is grandfathered in.  She has papers with the OK to run it through there.  The residents want to make sure it is not cut off in any way and that the developer is notified of that.

 

Ms. Conrad also noted there are two stub easements.  Residents want those to be used solely for utility easements, not for construction traffic or public traffic coming through the subdivision. 

 

Residents would also like consideration of a buffer surrounding the addition. 

 

Ms. Conrad expressed concern for what’s in store for the roads.  Existing traffic is tremendous. 

 

She is concerned about all the empty stores around town.  There are 40+ empty stores in town. 

 

Mr. Bob Muth addressed Council.  He resides in the Clark Addition.  The residents have met with the County Commissioners, and they have deemed to go ahead with the annexation.  Concerns were presented to the County Commissioners.  Cost is a huge concern if Clark Addition is annexed and residents are expected to hook up to city utilities, $700,000 for the trunk line and $10,000 connection fee, all costs to be borne by the residents.  Another concern is the easements into the Clark Addition.  They are currently not being used; they were in the original plat 30 years ago.  Residents fear that the adjacent property, when developed, that those easements will be used and opened and roadways will go through their subdivision.  He requested that in the annexation, a stipulation be made by Council or Administration, that the easements will not be used but for utilities.  Secondly, residents would like some assurance, if the annexation were to go through, that the surrounding area be used as it was requested to be used, that being commercial.  It is not in the best interest of the Clark Addition to have a large residential area in this area.  It is currently being projected to be developed as office buildings and residents are okay with that.  That should be stipulated in the annexation. 

 

The Union County Commissioners requested an opinion from David Phillips, Prosecuting Attorney, and his opinion is that “The property annexed does “create” two “islands” but the territory proposed to be annexed does completely surround the unincorporated area. Rather, “it closes the box.”  Mr. Muth said it doesn’t create an island, it causes an island. 

 

The opinion of Attorney Gottschall, a real estate attorney, is that the proposed annexation will unambiguously result in an island consisting of Clark’s Addition, and the proposed annexation is at best ambiguous in its prohibition on annexation where such annexation will result in an unincorporated island.  No Ohio court has yet ruled in whole or in part, or has otherwise interpreted this language in this legislation’s history.  The purpose of this Section 709.023(E)(5) in the Ohio Revised Code is most likely to preclude annexations that would result in the isolation of township property that will not be annexed by the subject petition.  “Consequently, the apparent interests underlying Section 709.023(E)(5) expressly apply to the proposed annexation at issue, and we kindly request that both the Board of Commissioners and the City Council take such interests into consideration.  Residents would like to have these issued resolved.  They want to understand the costs for utilities; they want to understand TIF dollars involved.  Mr. Muth requested a meeting between Administration, Council and the residents prior to the third reading of this legislation.  Residents have no objection to Mr. Cook and the proposed development, but would like to be held harmless. 

 

Mr. Fogt question Mr. Muth’s comment about TIF money.  He was not aware of this.  Mayor Kruse said the owners and the developer have talked with the City about it.  The response from the City has been basically that the only TIF monies the City is willing to become involved with are for the road connecting Rt. 31 with Rt. 4.  There has been no discussion on anything else in that respect. 

 

Chuck Day addressed Council.  He has lived in Clark Addition for over 30 years.  He talked about the way of life in the Clark Addition.  It’s a wonderful setting in the subdivision.  It’s a great place to raise kids.  Subdivision has had a great relationship with Honda. It’s a very peaceful neighborhood.  He doesn’t want to see any of that change. 

 

Mr. Joseph Whinnery read a letter previously presented to Council regarding concerns with the proposed Cook annexation.  “As the owner of 17578 Echo Drive, Marysville, Ohio, I reviewed with great interest the notice I received in the mail regarding the future development of the land belonging to the Cook Trust.

 

It is obvious that a great amount of effort and planning has gone into making this proposal successful.  It is exciting to see the continuing healthy growth of Marysville.  I think the proposed annexation of the Cook property, and the opportunities that this type of development affords could indeed be a great blessing to the city of Marysville, and to Union County; and I do not want to stand in the way of this proposed development.

 

However, as a resident of Paris Township, and a father of young children, with a property adjacent to the property being considered for annexation, I have a few concerns that I would like to be addressed.

 

We would like to see assurances in writing on how the developer will address the following concerns.

 

1.     First and foremost, adjacent property owners need written assurance that the developer bears the full responsibility for any impact to ground water quality and quantity.

2.     Next are concerns as raised in the Clark’s Addition residents Concerns Document regarding developer responsibility for impacts to sewage treatment systems performance;

3.     Annexation issues regarding costs of water and sewer services;

4.     Developer plans for daily control and minimize construction nuisances such as dust and dirt;

5.     Following approved methods of sediment control including retention, on site, of run-off and debris;

6.     Following approved methods of stormwater runoff and retention;

7.     Guidelines to be followed for providing visual buffers (such as berming and evergreens) between new commercial development and established residential areas;

8.     Plans to keep site lighting below recognized and recommended levels for light pollution/spillover to residential areas;

9.     Plans to route construction traffic so as to minimize the impact on existing residential areas;

10. Plans to manage site trash and refuse as it relates to the developed site flow: for instance: will there be permanent dumpsters at the back of each commercial building?  Will those areas be visible to adjacent residences? Will pickup be scheduled during normal business hours?

 

We have young children with some respiratory difficulties.  I want to make sure their health is safeguarded and protected.  I understand that construction usually involves some short-term pain, hopefully it involves long term gain: “A rising tide floats all boats.”  We look forward to a mutually healthy and successful partnership for strong and healthy growth between Clark Addition residents and the City of Marysville and Union County.  We want to prevent any short-term headaches from becoming long-term liabilities.”

 

Mr. Cook agreed to meet with the City and the residents.  Mr. Day will be the contact point for Clark Addition. 

 

Mr. Fogt asked if the easements are next to the Cook property?  Asst. Law Director Eufinger responded that when that subdivision was originally set up, they dedicated roadways all the way through and they dead-end at the subdivision border.  There are potentially three outlets that would go into the Cook property.  There is a lot of concern and discussion about vacating those stubs, but that created some problems of its own with regards to frontage with a couple properties, etc.  From discussions with Paris Township Trustees, of which he is a member, those roadways are not designed to handle the kind of traffic that would be generated out of any kind of commercial development of the property.  The roads are designed to handle a dozen houses and not anything more.  Regarding concerns about possible access for emergency vehicles, if they were attempted to be integrated into major traffic arteries, it would be a disaster.  The infrastructure is just not there.  

 

Mr. Day complimented Phil Connolly on the infrastructure in City Gate.  He wouldn’t have a problem with the type of emergency access that was put in City Gate. 

 

Mr. Marshall commented that zoning will determine how the property develops.  He has a concern with the creation of an island.  There needs to be a resolution to this island issue.  What’s the solution 10-20 years down the road, annex or not annex? Legally, what kind of liability is the City and County set up with.  He fears Marysville could be a precedent setter.  He’s not real comfortable with that. Residents now have individual wells and septic systems.  They will have a concern when those systems quit functioning.  Mr. Eufinger said there is no quick answer.  Referring to the letter from Mr. Gottschall, the wording of the annexation section does say that an annexed area does not completely surround.  They are trying to avoid ending up with literal islands within the annexation.  There are islands all around Marysville, i.e. Southard Road, Union Rural property where the office was on 5th Street.  Those properties can come in any time by agreement or they can be forced in under certain types of annexations if they are contiguous with others.  There is no precedential action. 

 

Need to get all parties to the table to see what benefits them best.  Mr. Marshall volunteered to help out wherever possible. 

 

Mayor Kruse said it doesn’t make a lot of sense to annex and leave that particular geography outside the City limits.  We should all be part of the annexation and come in together.  He sees the issue as the cost involved in infrastructure for the residents of that area.  He thought that if it was the City’s feeling that it all come in, it would behoove the petitioner to work out some kind of an arrangement with those residents to make that a reality.  The others issued involved then become relatively easily handled through the zoning and planning process beyond that.  At that point, everybody has a place at the table.  His personal feelings on zoning is that there should be some resemblance of permanence to that zoning, because people make very significant life decisions based on the zoning around them.  It seems to him that if zoning becomes an issue to the point that it’s going to disrupt the quality of life at this point, he would not support it.  People have the right to expect that kind of permanence. 

 

Mr. Marshall requested the numbers be laid out so he can educate himself on this issue.  Mayor Kruse said he’d get the numbers together, but felt the City should not be involved in how to pay for it.  That should be discussed between the petitioner and the residents. 

 

Mr. Fogt agreed with some of Mayor Kruse’s comments.  He’d like to see Clark Addition annex into the City and make it a lot easier.  Mr. Muth said the money is the reason residents don’t want to annex into the City. 

 

Mr. Chuck Day said the City is a growing metropolis.  It’s a beautiful city.  He doesn’t have a problem with annexing, but his concern is how we’re going to get there.  He’s not sure he’s ready for it yet. 

 

Mr. Fogt noted that if this gets annexed, it’s also creating an island or finishing an island at the Navin Addition.  If it’s not legal, then the City has two problems.  We need to be very sure we’re doing this right. 

 

The ordinance “TO APPROPRIATE $1,062,250 FROM UNAPPROPRIATED SEWER FUNDS FOR DEBT SERVICE EXPENDITURES, AND MODIFY THE ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET AS A RESULT OF THIS ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION FOR THE PAYMENT OF THESE EXPENSES” was presented for second reading, public hearing.  Mr. Marshall moved to waive reading in full; affirmative voice vote was unanimous.

 

COMMENTS OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL PERSONS AND GENERAL DISCUSSION

 

1.     Parks & Recreation Representative – Mr. Conley reported Concert in the Park will be held this Sunday at 6:30 p.m., JuJuBees will be performing.  The pool is winding down for the season.  It will close on September 3rd.  He received a couple phone calls asking if the pool was going to offer free swimming since the Columbus pools were offering it.  To his knowledge, there would be no free swimming. 

 

Mr. Fogt noted some events happening in Marysville this weekend.  Our Lady of Lourdes Festival, St. John’s Ox Roast and a fundraiser for Nick Golden, a 9-year old boy who has leukemia. 

 

Mr. Phillips announced that on August 21st, there will be a celebration for Honda’s 25 year anniversary for building cars in Marysville.  The 2008 Accord will be unveiled at this event. 

 

Mr. Burke thanked the residents of the Clark Addition for showing up and expressing concerns.  Working together is how things get done. 

 

ADJOURNMENT:  There being no further business to come before Council, the meeting adjourned at 8:07p.m.