|
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER I d like to welcome all of you to Massillon City Council for Monday, March 17, 2008. We have in attendance with us this evening: Mayor Francis Cicchinelli, Auditor Jayne Ferrero, Law Director Perry Stergios, Engineer Keith Dylewski, Wastewater Treatment Superintendent Joe Ulrich and representing the Parks & Recreation Department Ramier Martin. On the wall to your left are agendas for anyone who wishes to follow the meeting. Also under item #5 on the agenda is where the public can speak on any item that appears on the agenda and then under item #17 is where the public can speak on any item that does not appear on the agenda. I d also like to remind anyone with a cell phone please turn it off or turn it very far down. 1. ROLL CALL Roll call for the evening found the following Council Members present: Kathy Catazaro-Perry, Dave Hersher, Chuck Maier, Ron Mang, Paul Manson, Dave McCune, Donnie Peters, Larry Slagle and Tony Townsend. Thus giving a roll call vote of 9 present. 2. INVOCATION COUNCILMAN MCCUNE – Gave the invocation for tonight. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE COUNCILMAN MCCUNE – Chairman of the Public Utilities Committee led those in attendance in the Pledge of Allegiance. 4. READING OF THE JOURNAL COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER Madame Clerk are the minutes of the previous meeting transcribed and open for public viewing (THEY ARE) Are there any additions or corrections to the minutes. If not the minutes stand approved as written. 5. REMARKS OF DELEGATIONS AND CITIZENS TO MATTERS ON THE AGENDA COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER This is the part of our agenda where we invite the public forward to speak on a topic that appears on the agenda this evening. If anyone would like to do so please come forward to the microphone at this time. 6. INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS ORDINANCE NO. 45 2008 BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Petitioning the Board of County Commissioners of Stark County, Ohio, for a change in the township lines of Massillon and Perry Township, and declaring an emergency. COUNCILMAN MANG Thank you, Mr. President. This piece of legislation deals with the Prophecy Massillon Annexation. It was approved by the commissioners on November 29th was accepted by council on March 3rd and tonight we would like to move the signs around so its officially noted that it is in the city limits of Massillon. So Ordinance No. 45 will do that COUNCILMAN MANG moved for suspension of the rules and passage, seconded by Councilman Hersher. The rules were suspended by a roll call vote of 9 yes. ORDINANCE NO. 45 – 2008 WAS PASSED BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 9 YES. ORDINANCE NO. 46 2008 BY: PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE Repealing CHAPTER 969 “MASSILLON YOUTH CENTER” of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Massillon, Ohio, by deleting existing Sections 696.01 “USER FEE” 969.02 “DEPOSIT FEE” and 969.03 “PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT CONTROL” of CHAPTER 969, and declaring an emergency. COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND Thank you, Mr. President. The passage of Ordinance No. 46 will delete existing chapter 969 and other existing sections of it. This chapter is related to the Massillon Youth Center which it longer exists. So there’s no need to have this chapter in existence. COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND moved for suspension of the rules and passage, seconded by Councilman Maier. The rules were suspended by a roll call vote of 9 yes. ORDINANCE NO. 46 – 2008 WAS PASSED BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 9 YES. ORDINANCE NO. 47 2008 BY: PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE Authorizing the Director of Public Service and Safety of the City of Massillon, Ohio, to accept a grant from the United States Golf Association for the Massillon Parks and Recreation Department, and declaring an emergency. COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND Thank you, Mr. President. Ordinance No. 47 would allow the Parks and Rec. Department to accept a grant that was offered to them by USGA. The amount of that grant is $14,000.00 the uses of the grant money will include instructions, coaching, golf course access, driving range access, golf clubs and bags and transportation. We discussed this a little bit last week at our work sessions. COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND moved for suspension of the rules and passage, seconded by Councilman Peters. The rules were suspended by a roll call vote of 9 yes. ORDINANCE NO. 47 – 2008 WAS PASSED BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 9 YES. ORDINANCE NO. 48 2008 BY: PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMITTEE Authorizing the Director of Public Service and Safety of the City of Massillon, Ohio, to enter into a Non-Surface Development Gas & Oil Lease with Ohio Valley Energy Systems Corporation for a 0.460 acre parcel owned by the City of Massillon, and declaring an emergency. COUNCILMAN MCCUNE As you know from our work session this is another one of those win, win scenarios where get a little bit of money for having owning land within the radius as required. COUNCILMAN MCCUNE moved for suspension of the rules and passage, seconded by Councilman Manson. The rules were suspended by a roll call vote of 9 yes. ORDINANCE NO. 48 – 2008 WAS PASSED BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 9 YES. ORDINANCE NO. 49 2008 BY: RULES, COURTS & CIVIL SERVICE COMMITTEE Establishing a Public Records Policy for use by the City of Massillon, Ohio pursuant to House Bill 9. COUNCILWOMAN CATAZARO-PERRY We are just following the state law putting into place a public records policy. Currently I had our council clerk put out what we use for anyone to come in and request public records. So I wanted to have all council members see what we’re currently using. What it does state in this new law is that we do not the person that request does not have to provide their identity or intended use of their requested materials. You have to have a certain amount of time to prepare to give these items back to the person especially if their volume in this. Currently it has to be done within business hours and that’s going to stay the same and depending on the volume of the items requested is what it accounts for when we have to supply that to the person requesting. If there’s any questions the law director is here we can bring him up. COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER Are there any questions? Mrs. Catazaro-Perry, I have one are you indicating that we need to change the format of our request since we’re asking for the name? COUNCILWOMAN CATAZARO-PERRY It just says that it is not required if someone wants to give their name that’s absolutely fine. But it is not required by law to give the name and we just need to state that and it does state in section 2.2 prior to requesting the written request the requester’s identity and intended use the records custodian will suffice that such information is not required by law. And our council clerk is very aware of that. COUNCILWOMAN CATAZARO-PERRY moved for suspension of the rules and passage, seconded by Councilman Peters. The rules were suspended by a roll call vote of 9 yes. ORDINANCE NO. 49 – 2008 WAS PASSED BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 9 YES. ORDINANCE NO. 50 2008 BY: FINANCE COMMITTEE Making certain appropriations from the unappropriated balance of the Street Fund, Insurance Fund, Muni Motor Vehicle License Plate Fund and the Massillon Police Dept Safety Forces Equipment Fund, for the year ending December 31, 2008, and declaring an emergency. COUNCILMAN MANSON Yes, we’ll go through these one at time we have four parts here. In the first section we have $38,000.00, $5,890.00 and $551.00 that pertain to the same thing. We are proposing that legislation to appropriate from the street fund to the following accounts street salary, Pers Street and Medicare. These amounts are needed to cover the cost of moving an employee from solid waste to the street department. Okay, then the next two are the just a minute here is the $8,603.00 please prepare legislation to appropriate from the unappropriated of the street fund to the following accounts $8,603.00 to workers compensation safety and $1,101.00 workers compensation street. These amounts are needed to cover the cost of workers comp. Section 2, we have $25,000.00 and $3,000.00 prepare legislation to appropriate from the unappropriated balance of the insurance fund to the following accounts $25,000.00 to employee insurance, $3,000.00 to retiree’s insurance. These amounts are needed to cover the miscellaneous insurance costs for retirees and employees. Number 3, this is $20,000.00 storm sewer repair we’ve been approving these on a one at a time basis. We are proposing to put $20,000.00 from the muni motor vehicle license plate fund in an account storm sewer repairs 1206.425. Then $3,000.00 for retiree’s insurance oh I took care of the retiree’s insurance. I read that as part of the okay $25,000.00 employee insurance, $3,000.00 retiree’s insurance this was appropriated from the unappropriated balance of the insurance fund. I’m sure you don’t understand what I’m saying. Then we have $5,000.00 from the Massillon Police Department safety forces equipment fund these funds are needed for jail repair. Even though we don’t operate the jail on a 24 hour basis we do keep people in the jail while they’re awaiting court appearances. Any questions I’ll get the auditor up here to help us out otherwise I’m going to be asking to waive the rules. COUNCILMAN MANSON moved for suspension of the rules and passage, seconded by Councilwoman Catazaro-Perry. The rules were suspended by a roll call vote of 9 yes. ORDINANCE NO. 50 – 2008 WAS PASSED BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 9 YES. ORDINANCE NO. 51 2008 BY: ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE Amending CHAPTER 920 “EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL” of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Massillon, Ohio, by renumbering existing Section 920.10 to 920.11 and enacting a new Section 920.10 “WATER QUALITY”, and declaring an emergency. COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER Does everyone have a copy of the next four ordinances 51 thru 54? Alright, Councilman Hersher, please? COUNCILMAN HERSHER The ordinances came in this afternoon but we did talk about all of these at our work session on Monday. This first one deals with post construction water quality and water quality maintenance procedures. It is necessary to bring us into compliance with OEPA requirements. If there’s any questions I’ll get them answered for you otherwise I plan on moving for suspension and passage tonight. COUNCILMAN HERSHER moved for suspension of the rules and passage, seconded by Councilman Manson. The rules were suspended by a roll call vote of 9 yes. ORDINANCE NO. 51 – 2008 WAS PASSED BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 9 YES. ORDINANCE NO. 52 2008 BY: ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE Amending CHAPTER 925 “SEWERS GENERALLY” of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Massillon, Ohio, by amending the language in said CHAPTER 925 “SEWERS GENERALLY”, and declaring an emergency. COUNCILMAN HERSHER This ordinance amends Chapter 925 it replaces all instances in that chapter of service director with the title of Director of Public Service and Safety and all instances of superintendent with the title of Manager. These changes are to correctly reflect the duties of those two title holders. Again, if there’s any questions we’ll get them answered otherwise I’ll ask for passage this evening. COUNCILMAN HERSHER moved for suspension of the rules and passage, seconded by Councilman Manson. The rules were suspended by a roll call vote of 9 yes. ORDINANCE NO. 52 – 2008 WAS PASSED BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 9 YES. ORDINANCE NO. 53 2008 BY: ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE Enacting CHAPTER 923 “ILLICIT DISCHARGE & ILLEGAL CONNECTION CONTROL” of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Massillon, Ohio, and declaring an emergency. COUNCILMAN HERSHER Again, we discussed this at the work session on Monday. This is also to bring us into compliance with OEPA regulations and it deals with illicit discharge and illegal connection controls. By now you know the drill, questions I’ll get them answered if not I’ll be asking for suspension this evening. COUNCILMAN HERSHER moved for suspension of the rules and passage, seconded by Councilman Manson. The rules were suspended by a roll call vote of 9 yes. ORDINANCE NO. 53 – 2008 WAS PASSED BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 9 YES. ORDINANCE NO. 54 2008 BY: ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE Amending CHAPTER 920 “EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL” of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Massillon, Ohio, by repealing existing Subsections 920.10(b), 920.04(c) and (f), 920.06(a), and 920.07(b), and replacing said Subsections with new Sections 920.10(b), 920.04(c) and (f), 920.06(a), and 920.07(b), and declaring an emergency. COUNCILMAN HERSHER I’m glad that I don’t have to the titles. But this again we talked about at the work session. Again, to bring us into compliance with the OEPA requirements and this deals with the erosion and sediment control. Again if there’s any questions we’ll get them answered if not I’ll ask for passage this evening. COUNCILMAN HERSHER moved for suspension of the rules and passage, seconded by Councilman Manson. The rules were suspended by a roll call vote of 9 yes. ORDINANCE NO. 54 – 2008 WAS PASSED BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 9 YES. RESOLUTION NO. 6 2008 BY: COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Urging a moratorium on home foreclosures and congressional enactment of a Homeowners and Bank Protection Act, and declaring an emergency. COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER This coming through the committee of the whole so I’ll recognize Councilman Mang. COUNCILMAN MANG Mr. President, I’ll refer to Mr. Dave McCune. COUNCILMAN McCUNE – As you know from our conversations last week at the work session along with the information I’ve been providing you on this subject. I’m asking that this resolution be passed in an effort to provide both homeowners and banks some relief from the current financial crisis in a number of foreclosures taking place in the area. If you looked in Sunday’s paper there’s pages upon pages of foreclosures. So I’m asking that we waive the rules for three readings and pass this as an emergency measure tonight. COUNCILMAN MCCUNE moved for suspension of the of the rules and passage, seconded by Councilwoman Catazaro-Perry. COUNCILMAN MANSON Yes, I have some comments I guess it is. I can’t support this resolution myself. I just want to make a couple of points why and I’m not opposed to helping people out. But I think we’re getting in an area that many of us don’t even have the slightest understanding of. Myself, I’ve lived through one freeze in 1971 Nixon did it and I felt it was wrong at that time. I look back on it and it still makes no sense. I don’t believe we’re at the point where we should be taking over state and federal charter banks. It’s not that serious of a position you know it’s not that serious right now. Freezing all mortgages makes no sense to me maybe mortgages of people that are having problems but we’re talking about freezing all mortgages. We look around at Biltmore Estates and Nobles Pond and places like that these people have $500,000.00 mortgages, $750,000.00 and they’re performing, they’re paying off one of the worst things we could do is freeze all this stuff. Right now, there’s a lack of cash moving around and that’s one of the problems. They said today on TV that 92 to 98% of home mortgages are still performing that means they’re making their monthly payments. So if you watch what’s going on in the financial markets now last night they came on about 12:30 at night and they were on till about 2:30 this morning talking about these problems. I think they’re making a lot of moves on that and I just thing this makes no sense. Plus I don’t like the people that referred it to us in the first place. COUNCILMAN MANG Yes, I guess probably this weekend and today has brought an awful lot to our attention about the money situation. The sad part about it is we really don’t understand it. I listened all day, I read all weekend, it’s very difficult to understand what is going on. You know I don’t have a problem with this resolution if we delete section 1 and section 2 or delete all of section 1. And whereas we make them knowledgeable about all the things that we think someone should look into and do something about. But the limited amount of knowledge I have in the banking institute I certainly am not one to be able to them what they need to do. I have enough problems trying to tell myself what I need to do. So the way this resolution reads I have problem I can not support it. But I can support everything else where we’re talking about the quality of life and how this does affect the people in our community. We want the state and feds to understand that we notice it and we want them to do something about it. But to get into basically telling them how to go about doing this I’m sorry I can’t support that part. COUNCILMAN SLAGLE I think this is an appropriate place for the council to express their beliefs from this level of government that the levels above us should be doing. I intend however to agree with Ron Mang that at certain point the legislation becomes a little bit too specific in terms of what needs to be done and not needs to be done. The problem is that when the our society is made that your only value is purchase things of greater value and that’s how you get your purpose in life. We have gone through a time in which that seems to have been evident by people purchasing homes they shouldn’t have purchased because had they had the proper education which we really didn’t give them they have known not to purchase those homes. In which the next problem we’re all going to have is a huge credit card debt that too many people are carrying and I don’t know how we address that either. So this particular piece of legislation I think is a good idea in terms of its time that our government got the grips on this problem. It really will not come about by a president suggesting that $600.00 should be made to spend on more money you know more items. As opposed to paying off the debt we have and while many people that have been involved in these foreclosures have had things happen to them. Because we know from most bankruptcy filings most of those come about due to the problems that people have paying their health bills that came about through an unfortunate circumstance. This particular legislation and we all know where it came from and I don’t know how it tracks with Congressman Frank’s legislation for instance in terms of what he wants to do. I don’t know how it tracks with what had been done in the ‘30’s to overcome the crisis they had back then. But I don’t think we as a council should be that specific in that legislation. Our job is not to make the legislation our job is to indicate to the people above us I believe that because there is this problem and we know the citizens of Massillon there is this problem but they need to address it and fairly quickly. So I tend to agree with Ron though in that fact that I’m not sure that this kind of specific is where we should be going with the legislation as opposed to a general intent. I think it serves the same purpose frankly, we’re still telling the people above us that this needs to change. We need some regulations that the deregulations that have come about in the past have failed because the problem with this country is all based on greed. Many of these mortgages were sold by people that were not interested in the people buying the homes. They were interested in making their commissions off the sale of the mortgage to other people with no real look at what’s going to happen in the future when these balloon mortgage payments came about. That all came about from deregulation, the taxpayers already bought out one deregulation in the ‘80’s. I don’t personally believe that we as taxpayers should buy out another deregulation now. But that doesn’t mean I don’t think that a moratorium is a good idea. A temporary moratorium to get a grasp on the real problem is but once again I’m not sure that this specific legislation is what we should be doing as a city council as opposed to giving a philosophical belief that they need to do this because they have better grasp on what the actual details should be. COUNCILWOMAN CATAZARO-PERRY And I would be willing to amend or suggest to Mr. McCune to amend the ordinance to say that. I think if we’re going to send a message we need to do it as a whole and I think we can still as Larry said complete that process if we amend it and take out the section that’s uncomfortable for some of the members on council. COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND I think we’re kind of losing focus here somewhat we’re focusing on people I know someone stated that you know someone stated that people are going out buying $500,000.00 homes. But I’m looking at the person who has homes that are worth $35,000.00 - $40,000.00 who at the time were working and were able to afford the mortgage and for some reason you know they lose their job. Someone dies or someone gets hurt they can’t no longer pay their mortgages. I just think as a body we at least should show some type of support to the people of Massillon who are in situations like that. For individuals who purchase homes and they knew that they could afford them that’s another story. Bu there are individuals out there who were able to afford their homes and for some unforeseen reason or event cost them to lose their home. I think we need to show the people out there that we you know we’re thinking about them and we support them. If we can make some amend some of this then that’s fine but however you present it Councilman McCune I will support it. That’s it. COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER Is there anyone else before I go back to Mr. McCune? Mr. Hersher? COUNCILMAN HERSHER Just quickly what Councilman Townsend said I didn’t take it there was any discussion of you know concern for people who bought larger houses. Not outweighing anyone else that’s being foreclosed on. I think the issue is to do anything to jeopardize cash moving in and out of the economy right now. I think that’s where the point of the bigger mortgages that may even be performing to jeopardize that freezes those payments and takes that liquidity out of the system is the problem. I would just like I guess you know echo what everyone else has said. That’s basically I fully support something that tells Washington and tells people that we’re aware that there’s a problem and we expect them to act on it. But I don’t know that this particular section 1 is what I would feel comfortable doing. COUNCILMAN McCUNE – Well, I wish we would’ve had these conversations Monday as to amending or resolving some of these things that have come up here. But as I said Monday and as Tony just said my concern wasn’t so much the people that over extended themselves and going out and buying a $500,000.00 home. But its my concern of the common folk of this city and this region that are being impacted detrimentally and are in foreclosure status. Now we’ve already seen the fed reserve come out and basically bail Bear Sterns out which eventually led to a purchase. I have not seen anything other than this vehicle here that is willing to provide any of the common folk of this city of this nation any protection. So rather than just kill the idea of trying to support the people in need I am willing to consider amendment of this so we can at least send a message to DC that we are aware of the problem. That we’re concerned about the problem and that we want to do something to help the people that are finding themselves between a rock and a hard place. You know how I feel about this I feel very strongly that we need to step up and support the people that are being detrimentally impacted by some of these lending practices while the lenders are being protected by the federal government. So yeah, I will set this on the back burner we will at our next work session discuss how we can amend it to send a message I still think we need to send a strong message maybe not as specific a message as Larry said, but I think we need to send a very strong message to DC that council of the City of Massillon cares about the people that are being impacted. We’re number 5 in the nation for foreclosures that’s there’s pages upon pages in that Sunday paper of foreclosures. COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER Mr. McCune, may I suggest that you withdraw your motion to suspend the rules and then just give this first reading. COUNCILMAN McCUNE – And I was getting to that, Mr. President. So I am going to withdraw my emergency measure I’m going to take this back to the work session and see if we can come up something that is palpable to everyone around this half circle. So we can attempt to try to send a message to the people in DC that we want the right thing to be done for everyone. COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER You’re asking for first reading? COUNCILMAN McCUNE – I’m really not sure how we want to go about this, Glenn. COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER Well, you’re either going to make a motion or ask for first reading and you just withdrew the motion. COUNCILMAN McCUNE – First reading. COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER Alright. Mr. Maier, did you have your hand up? COUNCILMAN MAIER I was just going point of order that we had a motion on the floor. So… COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER Okay, alright, the motion has been withdrawn. First reading for Resolution No. 6 – 2008. I would suggest all of you email or get a hold of Mr. McCune what you think you’d like to see changed in this resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 6 – 2008 WAS GIVEN FIRST READING. 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 8. PETITIONS AND GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS LETTER FROM OHIO DIVISION OF LIQUOR CONTROL REGARDING A NEW LIQUOR LICENSE FOR EAST OAK GRILL INC DBA EAST OAK GRILL 872 OAK AVE SE 1ST FL & PATIO MASSILLON OHIO 44646. COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER Alright, Mr. Townsend, that’s in your ward do you have a copy of that? COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND Yes, Mr. President. COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER Alright, for anyone who did not know that has been owned for a long time by Tom Mullane. Mr. Mullane did pass away in fact the calling hours are going on right now for Mr. Mullane. 9. BILLS, ACCOUNTS AND CLAIMS A. CANTON REPOSITORY - $743.21 COUNCILMAN MANSON I move that we pay the bills, seconded by Councilwoman Catazaro-Perry. Roll call of 9 yes to pay the bills. 10. REPORTS FROM CITY OFFICIALS A). POLICE CHIEF SUBMITS MONTHLY REPORT FOR FEBRUARY 2008 COPY FILE 11. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER As far as committee reports we have no committee next Monday because it’s the fourth of five work session will resume on the 31st. Our Council Clerk will take advantage of that off week to take the week off but she will touch base now and then. I do want to mention that this Friday the 21st city offices will be closed. COUNCILMAN MANG Yes, if I may and have you and council’s indulgence we had some things that occurred today I’d like to bring the Mayor up to the microphone and bring council up-to-date. MAYOR CICCHINELLI – Before you, you have a letter that we received today from Visconsi Companies Limited. I know that in previous months Brad Goldberg who’s the director of development has been to this body and has explained the situation. I think all of us understand that projects like this especially when you’re dealing with the retail business community sometimes take awhile to put together. Our due diligence seems to be proceeding pretty well as far as dealing with the federal government and the state government to get a clearance on the Genshaft properties so we can sell the property free of any obstacles. One of the things that Mr. Mang is chairman of the community development committee and we wanted to do I think we accomplished here in that they did send a letter. We feel that it is a pretty strong letter it indicates some of the tenants that they could be negotiating with without getting into specifics. If you know anything about retail you know that most developers are not prematurely going to announce a tenant unless they have at least that tenant’s or multiple tenant’s some sort of commitment whether its in a letter form or a signed lease. So I think this accomplishes at least the administration feels this accomplishes what all of us want to proceeds the project proceeds forward with indicating types of stores that they’re talking about. Also with the idea of additional retailers and restaurants on out lots which surround the site that opens up the potential of even more development. So we think this is good news now I’m sure speculation and rumors are going to run rampant as to who this major tenant is. That really is insignificant we’re not going to participate in those kinds of discussions because it doesn’t serve the purpose. All we know is that the large retailers continue to pursue Massillon and I think that’s certainly a positive sign in the big picture of our retail development. I’m willing to take any questions or comments. COUNCILMAN MCCUNE – Do we have some kind of due date that we can expect the due diligence to be completed on this sale and the affiliated sale of the land? MAYOR CICCHINELLI – Mr. Stergios, has hired Bricker and Eckler out of Columbus to do that work and we check with Bricker and Eckler weekly a couple of times a week to make sure that’s proceeding. We still have a timetable in our mind that and we have said that and the developer has said that, that last summer early fall is what we would like to see happen. There’s no need for this thing to be bogged down in bureaucracy and whatever we have to do to push this along to me its you’re talking a multi million dollar investment and we’re talking I think $75,000.00 or $80,000.00 is the grant we received from the state government 20 plus years ago. So to get through that bureaucracy I don’t think it should be that difficult. So whatever we have to do to push it along we’ll try to do that. As you know financial issues in the Parks and Rec. Department that concerns us all and we would like to see these dollars be given to the city this year. So we’re going to do our best to try to accomplish that unfortunately we are not in for the main control of this. But we do talk to them twice a week we try to push that along and there’s no need for the federal and state government to move any slower on it. COUNCILMAN MCCUNE – Is our agreement with Visconsi an open ended agreement if after our due diligence is complete another developer might want to approach us over that land. Are locked into an open ended agreement with Visconsi? MAYOR CICCHINELLI – We are presently locked into an agreement with Visconsi there are ways that both parties could break the contract. But you know I don’t think we need to do that I think we all agree that the price that they are paying for the property is fair. It’s proceeding as quickly as it can proceed I mean to tie up major retailers like this these things just don’t happen over night. As all of us know on top of everything else the retail business area is flat in some areas and weak in other areas. But it appears that this company as well as other retailers are pursuing Massillon. So I think that goes well for us in the future but I certainly wouldn’t want anyone to do anything that could jeopardize this project. But we have an agreement with them and the land’s not going anywhere. So if something does happen and it does fall through I think we know that this is a pretty valuable piece of ground and could be sold by the city. So lets hope it doesn’t come to that because I do think this is a good a project for the city. I would like to publicly thank Mr. Mang, he’s been in the process of for many weeks trying to get this type of a letter and he was present when we did have the phone call that alluded to in this letter. So I’d like to commend him for being on board and trying to get make council informed as much as possible. COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER Mr. Mayor, Mr. Slagle has a question. COUNCILMAN SLAGLE I was just wondering I haven’t been available today what happened with the were there bids received on the Legends property and were they opened today? MAYOR CICCHINELLI – There were no bids received. We are if I may we’re going to sort of rethink our position and come back to council with some other recommendations. COUNCILMAN SLAGLE Will that be done through a group effort not just with the rec. center and the administration but also with the legislative branch? MAYOR CICCHINELLI – If council certainly wants to become involved in that they would certainly you do have a park and rec. committee. But and we respect that structure of council but we’ll take any suggestions however you have to understand that we need to move forward quickly because of the financial concerns of that department. I think the lack of a bid could have been a couple of things number one, the cost per acre was high and we knew it was high going in sort of testing the waters on that. However, and also if you hear all the real estate pungent they’ll tell you that the real estate market is pretty flat right now. That’s true its worse in other areas compared to other areas but its still pretty flat pretty much across the board. But it is what it is and we have to come up with proposals to deal with the issues at the golf course. One thing that will remain constant and one thing that you’re going to have to understand I don’t think its financially feasible to operate 27 holes. That’s the main driving force of this proposal and that’s something that the administration certainly believes and that’s what motivating these kinds of discussions. I think in this particular market of golf participation is down its going to remain down and I think we’re doing what needs to be done to position our golf course for the future. Once we get over this hump I do think that its going to be better for all of us. But 27 holes is just not going to make it. COUNCILMAN SLAGLE Well, I’m also concerned is the administration going to also consider the fact that the rec. center actually on a day to day operating basis doing worse than the Legends? I mean I’m concerned by the fact that the rec. center is never included in the equation coming out of the administration out of Mr. Kaminski at all that the rec. center which was never supposed to be subsidized on its daily operating expenses by the income tax. MAYOR CICCHINELLI – Well, I think that’s fine to say Mr. Slagle but I think all along when the rec. center was proposed even in the study I don’t think anywhere in that study does it say that the rec. center will pay for itself. It was a very large expenditure of dollars and I guess to talk about a study that was done in ’94 or ’95 and try to move it up-to-date in 2008 I mean things change. If we followed that study 100% there was supposed to be even a couple more years before we even considered building the rec. center. But the rec. board and the legislative authority of the city and the administration all decided to move that timetable up. But I don’t you’re going to find a rec. center and we can argue about these numbers but you’re aren’t going to find a rec. center that’s going to 100% pay for itself on fees. I mean that’s what the whole purpose of the income tax. The other thing and I do believe Mr. Kaminski passed out a large summary of all park and rec. activities and I know in my discussions with him Mr. Slagle or anyone else really has not responded to him on that. I think its important that if you have these concerns and we’re glad you have these concerns you know you need to talk to him about those issues. But no one as of this date has talked to him about that. COUNCILMAN SLAGLE Well, but I emailed him back from the original because it looked to me that he didn’t get to the almost $300,000.00 a year lost in operating expenses that he was the numbers were including members from other rec. departments not just the rec. center. I would just disagree because the master plan which is always thrown up as being the one that was followed always said that the concept of for the project is the entire facility be self supporting. That the center proposed in this report is designed to be self supporting and to operate out of revenues better known as user fees. It’s clear that it hasn’t been and may never be because it looks to me like it was just handed to me in fact the number of membership is in fact declining. As long as there’s the impression that the rec. center should be subsidized by the and I’m not talking about the mortgage debt. I understand the mortgage debt was always going to be financed by the tax. But I don’t the operating expenses were ever intended to be financed by the tax and I think anyone has ever been in business thought that was a good idea. I frankly think of the two pieces of assets the city has that the Legends is the more viable of the two assets that actually covers its operating expenses which it appears to have been doing as opposed to the rec. center which never has. MAYOR CICCHINELLI – Well, and I don’t totally disagree with you. COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER Let me step in for a moment rather than continue back and forth. This is a great topic for a work session work with Mr. Townsend and you know get some of those questions worked out at the committee level. The Mayor’s here to make some points on the Genshaft and answer a couple of questions on the other. MAYOR CICCHINELLI – I’m willing talk to you give me a call we’ll talk about this. 12. RESOLUTIONS AND REQUESTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS 13. CALL OF THE CALENDAR 14. THIRD READING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS ORDINANCE NO. 29 2008 BY: ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE Amending CHAPTER 925 “SEWERS GENERALLY” of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Massillon, Ohio, by amending existing Section 925.12 “SEWER CONNECTION PERMIT REQUIRED; FEE and adding Subsection 925.12(d) to said section. COUNCILMAN HERSHER This is third reading we’ve had three work sessions with this piece of legislation and the one that follows. Ordinance No. 29 – 2008 establishes a $500.00 capacity fee only for new connections to the system not anything having to do with existing connections. That along with the $100.00 permit fee the $600.00 total still puts us anywhere from $400.00 to $1,100.00 below the other communities that were looked in the rate study as far as establishing new connections. This ordinance kind of goes along with Ordinance No. 34 – 2008 from the finance committee that will establish a collection system improvement fund that this money will be used for. You know I’ve stated at the work session I feel that its important that we support both pieces of legislation and if there are questions we’ll of course get them answered tonight otherwise I do expect to ask for passage. I do ask all of you to support it this evening. COUNCILMAN HERSHER moved to bring Ordinance No. 29 – 2008 forward for passage, seconded by Councilman Manson. ORDINANCE NO. 29 – 2008 WAS PASSED BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 5 YES, 4 NO. CATAZARO-PERRY, MAIER, PETERS AND TOWNSEND VOTED NO. ORDINANCE NO. 30 2008 BY: ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE Amending CHAPTER 937 “WASTEWATER TREATMENT REVENUE FUND” of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Massillon, Ohio, by repealing existing Sections 937.05 PAYMENT DATES; PENALTY CHARGE, 937.08 ADMINISTRATION AND DISTRIBUTUION OF FUNDS, 937.09 ANNUAL RATES FOR SEWER SERVICE and 937.10 ADDITIONAL SURCHARGE FOR INDUSTRIAL WASTES and enacting new Sections 937.02 PAYMENT DATES; PENALTY CHARGE, 937.08 ADMINISTRATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS 937.09 ANNUAL RATES FOR SEWER SERVICE and 937.10 ADDITIONAL SURCHARGE FOR INDUSTRIAL WASTES of CHAPTER 937. COUNCILMAN HERSHER I’m sure the Clerk is sorry that this is third reading this evening for this. Again, we’ve dealt with this at three work sessions and three full readings. This legislation establishes the new sewer rates going through October 2009. We know we talked about in our work session that we are mandated to look at these rates and to do a study every two years. You know I do think its important if we’re going to do this study to keep an eye on the plant make sure we don’t’ get too far ahead or too far behind as far as our fees. That we have the strength to act on what’s necessary and what comes out of this study. So again I will be asking for passage tonight and I do urge all of you to support it. COUNCILWOMAN CATAZARO-PERRY I’m completely opposed to this ordinance and I think everyone’s been aware of that. The study was not done because we had to do it, it was done because of the odor, the odor is not even going to be addressed and everyone can say what they want. The odor will not be addressed by increasing these rates I think that’s very unfair to residents and I will be voting no tonight. COUNCILMAN McCUNE – I also have a problem with increasing the sewer rates for the private citizens of the city. I really don’t have a problem at all with increasing the rates for the industrial. But in today’s times the last financial thing I watched on my way out the door is that we’re probably looking at a stiff two year recession. I have a problem supporting increasing people’s monthly outages out flows. So you know like I said I don’t’ have a problem with the industrial portion of this but I do have a problem with the private portion. COUNCILMAN HERSHER moved to bring Ordinance No. 30 – 2008 forward for passage, seconded by Councilman Manson. ORDINANCE NO. 30 – 2008 WAS DEFEATED BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 5 NO., 4 YES. CATAZARO-PERRY, MAIER, MCCUNE, PETERS AND TOWNSEND VOTED NO. ORDINANCE NO. 34 2008 BY: FINANCE COMMITTEE Establishing a fund entitled Collection System Improvement Fund and creating line items within said fund, and declaring an emergency. COUNCILMAN MANSON Yes, this ordinance will set up two accounts were the funds will go from Ordinance No. 29 there will be sewer connection fee permit and sanitary sewer improvement account. Any questions? COUNCILMAN MANSON moved to bring Ordinance No. 34 – 2008 forward for passage, seconded by Councilman Hersher. ORDINANCE NO. 34 – 2008 WAS PASSED BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 9 YES. .SECOND READING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS 16. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER We’re going to go back within our agenda Mr. Manson had his hand up. COUNCILMAN MANSON Yes, as far as new and miscellaneous business the Mayor would like to address us. MAYOR CICCHINELLI – You know I’m a firm believer in three branches of government operating independent. However, in conjunction with one another in order for government to operate smooth. But when I hear statements made that are totally 100% untrue and these statements have an impact on the overall operation of this city government I need to speak out. The legislation before you that this body has been deliberating on concerning rate increases everyone has opinions and that’s fine. But when statements are made like Mrs. Catazaro-Perry made today that the odor is still there and the odor needs to go away and I mean I don’t know about her. But I am in that area constantly the odor is not completely gone away but it has improved tremendously in the last year. But the odor has nothing to do zero to do with these proposed rate increases. In saying it constantly bringing it up is a total miss-service and de-service to the community of Massillon and the people of this community. We are obligated by law to provide a state of the art facility to dispose of waste for all everyone that lives here and everybody that does business here. Unfortunately a part of that our fee structures that were proposed and mandated if you remember this body passed an ordinance asking for the study which is legally being responsive because it’s a requirement that we study these things. In order to study it intelligently you now have spent tax dollars and now you’re really not implementing what the people that studied the entire sanitary sewer systems recommended. No one wants to increase anyone’s fees or rates and we understand all that but there is a responsibility and goes back to a lot of things. You know being a legislator or being an executor or administrative you need to somehow or sometime think of maybe in the future to always have a knee jerk reaction to these things. If its this or if its something like the $5.00 license fee you know its funny we’re talking sanitary sewer rates here but I think being responsive also means you need to have the ability to maybe to look down the road a little bit. Some of the council people that campaigned and or said that they were so much opposed to that $5.00 license fee well I don’t know about you but I know some people of the city who are now getting bills for vehicle license fee they’re paying that $5.00 and then some. Instead of the City of Massillon getting $7.50 to resurface streets the county is getting that $7.50. Maybe a little bit of foresight would have avoided that complication. Now we have another example where we’re going to now jump on the band wagon and say that we’re opposed to rate increases because of the odor. The campaign is over that odor has absolutely nothing to do with what we were talking about today. But we have council members particularly one continuing to say that and its said publicly and I think I have to respond accordingly. It is a responsibility of our government to provide excellent service to our citizens and the businesses that work here and operate here. It’s not just a wish or not just a coincidence that we have the lowest sewer rates in the county and some of those lower sewer rates in the state and we’re going to continue to have those lower rates. So its not that we’re trying gouge anyone but we do have operate that plant and you don’t know what EPA is going to do now because of this action. Hopefully, we can get through this but you not only turned down the fee structure for citizens but you also turned it down for industry and we have to deal with these issues. These issues are very much a concern for us. So we’ll see what happens but in the future you can we can discuss and argue all we want but please base your vote on facts not something that is not true. And the odor has nothing to do with this. 17. REMARKS OF DELEGATIONS AND CITIZENS TO MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA 18. ADJOURNMENT COUNCILMAN McCUNE – I move that we adjourn, seconded by all.
|
©Copyright 1998 - present City of Massillon.
All Rights Reserved
Designed and Maintained by Imaging
2000 Web Design