Norwood City
Council
Council
Chambers
A) CALL TO ORDER
The Council for the City of Norwood met in regular session on the above date with Mr. Keith Moore, President of Council Pro Tempore presiding. The meeting opened with a prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance.
B) PRAYER
C) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
D) ROLL CALL
On roll call, the following members answered present: Mr. Gabbard, Mr. Sanker, Mr. Schneider, Mr. Moore, Ms. Kelly, Mr. Barlow, and Mr. Mumper
E) AMENDMENT OF AGENDA
On a motion by Mr. Mumper, seconded by Mr. Sanker, it was moved to amend the agenda by adding Communication N-13) and by replacing Ordinance H-B). All members present voted YES.
F) requests to address council on agenda items
G) REPORTS OF STANDING COMMITTEES OF COUNCIL
1. Finance & Audit RE: 2007 Appropriations
On a motion by Mr. Schneider,
seconded by Mr. Mumper, it was moved to accept the
report. All members present voted YES.
2. Finance & Audit RE: 2007 Appropriations
On a motion by Mr. Mumper,
seconded by Mr. Barlow, it was moved to accept the
report. All members present voted YES.
3. Community Development RE: Linden Pointe TIF
Mr. Schneider
asked a question to the Mayor and asked what was behind these concessions for
City owned property requested by Norwood City Schools. Mayor Williams responded that this is perhaps
not a question that the City can answer.
This request is certainly not a traditional request from the School
System. The properties in question
include the City parking lots off of Station Avenue and the Waterworks #4 ball
diamond. Aside from all other issues,
this sets a very bad precedent.
Additionally, it is always messy giving up parking spots behind current
businesses particularly as we continue to attempt to entice new business along
the Montgomery Rd. Corridor.
Mr.
Sanker called Mr. Dettmer and Mr. Dobroszi to the podium to answer questions
and to provide history and details behind this request. Mr. Dobroszi mentioned that discussions began
on June 22, 2006 and the first face to face meeting was held on July 7,
2006. Details were given for both the
TIF proposal and the implications if a TIF is not included in the development
agreement. The TIF provides for a
parking garage, improvements to the Montgomery Rd. entrance, Lighting on the
Norwood Lateral overpass and additional office square footage. Financial implications to the School district
were shared for each option. Essentially
the proposal with NO TIF will take the development from a 600,000 square foot
development to less than 300,000 square feet and due to the EPA agreement, a
full abatement for the first 10 years for Phase I. The additional revenue for the schools would
be zero for the first 10 years and a total of $17 Million over a 30 year
period. Under the TIF proposal, the
developer will forego the EPA abatement and make 25% of TIF payments yielding
$21.5 Million over 30 years beginning in year 1. A third approach asked for by the School
District is not feasible and was dropped from consideration.
At this
point the developer has only been able to meet with Mr. Steve Collier and
repeated requests to address the School Board have been denied. In fact, no formal response was given until
recently. According to the recent letter
the School Board will accept the TIF only under the concessions made by the
City. Up until this request, the
negotiations have been between Neyer Inc. and the School District.
Mr.
Sanker asked Mr. Dettmer how this compares to other TIFs. Mr. Dettmer responded that the only other TIF
was for the Cornerstone project and the School District has collected
significantly through this arrangement.
Additionally, the City Schools have received substantial payment from
the other developments the City has worked to bring into the City limits.
Mr.
Moore asked Mr. Dettmer if the City has been a party to these negotiations in
the past. Mr. Dettmer responded that the
City signs off on the agreement, but the City is traditionally not involved in
giving up property or payments directly.
The TIF agreement structure is in place so that the City Schools do not
fund the burden of new developments granted such abatements. In fact, the City Schools are the only party
permitted to negotiate directly with the developer in these situations.
Mr.
Schneider recapped the funding options that net $21.5 Million under the TIF
agreement and asked how much the City Schools are collecting from a blacktop
lot surrounded by fencing. Mr. Dettmer
said that the Schools currently collect approximately $18,000 from the
undeveloped lot. Mr. Dobroszi added that
since this is primarily office space, the development will not place any
increased burden on the School System as opposed to a primarily residential
development.
Mr.
Moore asked if there were any plans in place to meet with the School Board to
fully describe and explain these options.
Mr. Dobroszi responded that there is nothing set. Repeated requests to explain these
complicated financials to the Board have been denied. Quite to the contrary, the School Board
specifically requested that they be given the opportunity to meet and formally
respond prior to hearing from Neyer Inc.
Mr.
Sanker asked Mr. Dobroszi, Mayor Williams, or Mr. Dettmer if in their opinion,
this letter received today is their formal response to the proposal. Mr. Dobroszi responded that he is not sure
how to interpret this letter. Mayor
Williams added that this is bewildering and he doesn’t quite understand why the
City would need to vacate property in order for an agreement to be reached
between the Developer and Norwood City Schools.
This is a bad precedent, if we were to comply and this process
continues, the City won’t have any property before too long.
Mr.
Moore asked Mr. Dobroszi and Mr. Dettmer if they are aware of any other TIF
agreement where similar concessions are requested from the local municipality
in order to proceed with the development.
Both Mr. Dettmer and Mr. Dobroszi responded that they are not aware of
any such arrangements.
Mr.
Gabbard encouraged Mr. Dobroszi to continue to request meetings with the School
Board as this request seems to make little sense.
Mr.
Moore added that it may be worthwhile having a meeting including Neyer, the
Norwood City Schools, and the City. In
essence, we all want this development to proceed and all stand to benefit
greatly from such a development. The
effort to develop this property has been ongoing for the last twenty years and
we must continue to see that this first class development proceeds in the
manner most beneficial to all parties.
On a motion by Mr. Mumper,
seconded by Ms. Kelly, it was moved to accept the
report. All members present voted YES.
As amended, Council then
allowed Donna Laake to address Council and removed
Communication N-5 from Agenda.
Ms.
Donna Laake, Health Commissioner, addressed Council regarding the current
recycling program. Under the current
recycling program, the City of Norwood receives $25 for every ton
recycled. This is very important to the
City and in 2006 this resulted in more than $29,000 most of which went to fund
needed equipment for the City, including a new leaf picker and a new chipper. We are still in the bottom third however, and
under the 2007 plan, we stand to lose a portion of this very important funding
unless we continue to step up our recycling efforts. The base rate would be reduced to $22 per ton
unless we can reach the next threshold in which the rate increases to $26 per
ton. Reaching this level would increase
the City’s return from approximately $28,000 to $37,000. Ms. Laake then described several approaches
to increase recycling in our area, including recognizing streets as honor roll
streets, plans to encouraging large apartments to offer recycling bins, and to
place recycling containers in every Recreation facility.
H) SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
A) ORDINANCE DENYING THE APPLICATION FOR ALTERATIONS AND EXPANSION OF THE RENTWAY STORE LOCATED AT 3855 MONTGOMERY ROAD, NORWOOD, OHIO 45212, PURSUANT TO THE RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION
Mr.
Schneider mentioned that while he is not in favor of expanding rental in this
particular area he will be voting NO to show potential business that Council is
supportive of business.
Mr.
Gabbard added that upon the request made by the gentleman from RentACenter
during the last Council meeting, Mr. Gabbard agreed to check out the location
at Central Parke. When trying to do so,
he noticed a very large speaker outside the retail location blaring music
clearly across the parking lot. If this
was their best example of a retail location, it did not impress as a positive
business for the City of Norwood.
On a motion by Mr. Mumper,
seconded by Mr. Barlow, it was moved to suspend the
rules and hear the second and
third reading of the ordinance. All
members present
voted YES.
On a motion by Mr. Mumper,
seconded by Ms. Kelly, it was moved to pass the
ordinance. The following members voted YES: Mr. Gabbard,
Mr. Sanker, Mr. Moore,
Ms. Kelly, Mr. Barlow and Mr.
Mumper. The following members voted NO:
Mr.
Schneider.
B) ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCES 73-1999, 4-2002, 6-2002, 4-2004 AND 5-2004, CHANGING THE METHOD OF DETERMINING THE RAISES AND COSTS OF LIVING INCREASES OF APPOINTED EMPLOYEES, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY
On a
motion by Mr. Schneider, seconded by Mr. Gabbard, it was moved to hear the
first reading of the ordinance. All
members present voted YES.
I) INTRODUCTORY READING OF ORDINANCE
A) ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A PART-TIME TAX CLERK POSITION, WITHOUT BENEFITS, IN THE CITY OF NORWOOD FOR THE REMAINDER OF CALENDAR YEAR 2007 AND THROUGH APRIL 30TH OF 2008, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY
Mr.
Schneider expressed concern about the duration of this position and possible
issues or conflicts with the Collective Bargaining Units. The contract with 3278 states that part time
seasonal employees are permitted. Mr. Schneider
is concerned that there may be issue with a position greater than four
months. Mr. Schneider asked Mayor
Williams if he sees the same concern.
Mayor Williams stated the intent of the contract and the purpose of the
position in question. This position is
needed as we undertake our first few mandatory filing periods. Once we get a better handle on the workload
we will determine our long term course of action, including the possibility of
adding this as a classified position if warranted. Additionally, the Law Department has not
expressed any concern as they prepared this Ordinance.
Mr.
Moore mentioned that at the last Finance Committee meeting the Treasurer
expressed the urgency and need for this position. He has not heard any objections from that
meeting and wondered why there are concerns at this time. This position is clearly needed for the short
term and should be passed tonight so the Earnings Tax Department is in a good
position as they prepare for the mandatory filings.
Mr.
Schneider responded that he certainly trusts the Law Department’s opinion on
this matter but would like more time to consider this Ordinance.
Mr.
Mumper asked Mr. Kiser, Asst. Law Director, to the podium to answer whether or
not this is a possible infringement on the 3278 contract regarding seasonal
work. Mr. Kiser answered that he does
not see how this could cause an objection.
This does not replace a classified position and the need for the
position is clearly defined as related to the increase workload associated with
the mandatory filings.
Mr.
Schneider asked for further explanation.
Mr. Kiser responded that while the CBA protects its positions,
unclassified positions can be created by Council at any time and is often done. The CBA cannot rewrite the Ohio Revised Code.
Mr.
Sanker asked the Mayor about the plans if this position is determined to be a
long term position. Mayor Williams
responded that we would recommend that the position be classified. But until we know our needs this is the most
conservative approach. The alternative
is to hire this position as a union job, and then lay off if this position is
not needed long term.
On a motion by Mr. Mumper,
seconded by Mr. Sanker, it was moved to suspend the
rules and hear all three
readings of the ordinance. The following
members voted YES:
Mr. Gabbard, Mr. Sanker, Mr.
Moore, Mr. Barlow and Mr. Mumper. The
following
members voted NO: Mr.
Schneider and Ms. Kelly.
On a motion by Mr. Schneider,
seconded by Mr. Gabbard, it was moved to hear the first
reading of the ordinance. All members present voted YES.
J) ADMINISTRATION REPORTS
Mayor
Williams was present and acknowledged the receipt of $4600 from the West
Norwood Neighborhood Association towards the Citizens on Patrol program. It is certainly encouraging to see a
volunteer group put their mind to an initiative and accomplish that
initiative. Mayor Williams urged all
residents to stop in and see the Police Substation.
Mayor Williams
also read a letter from an architecture firm regarding traffic and
environmental studies in the area of the Norwood Plaza. There has been some discussion about possible
office space in that area including the possibility of a relocation of the regional
FBI offices. More to come as these very
early details are developing.
K) OTHER REQUESTS TO ADDRESS COUNCIL
L) UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Mr. Moore mentioned that the recent efforts of the West Norwood Neighborhood Association have been focused on the Police Substation. Now that the substation is complete, they will turn their attention to their other programs including the Citizens on Patrol, Block Watch, Volunteers in Policing, and the Neighborhoods of Choice program. While these efforts have been spearheaded by the WNNA, they are open to all Norwood residents. WNNA meetings are held the third Tuesday of each month at the Community Center.
Mr. Sanker belatedly thanked Public Works for their efforts in placing the decorations along Montgomery Rd. They certainly make a great addition to the Holiday season and we have heard several very positive comments.
M)NEW BUSINESS
Mr.
Schneider reported that he attended the Executive Committee of O.K.I where they
held an orientation for new representatives.
O.K.I has involvement in several very important projects for the
region. More updates to come.
Mr.
Sanker mentioned that Governor Taft has vetoed House Bill 56, which would have
outlawed Red Light Cameras. This was one
item that was recommended by the State Auditor that we may actually be able to
implement. Mr. Sanker asked that the
issue of Red Light Cameras be placed into Committee of the Whole.
Mr.
Moore mentioned that Norwood Knothole and Soccer signups are upcoming. More updates to follow. Mr. Moore also mentioned that as part of the
XU/UC Crosstown HelpOut, floors will be refurbished in the Community Center as
part of this volunteer effort.
Mr.
Moore announced there will be a Law and Ordinance Meeting next Tuesday at
6:30PM in Council Chambers. Issues of
Sexual Predators, Standing Rules of Council, the Draft Ordinance on the budget
information, and vacant property issues will be included on the agenda.
N) COMMUNICATIONS:
1. Letter from Mayor RE: Mayor’s Court Fines for December 2006
On a motion from Mr. Mumper, seconded by Mr. Schneider, it was moved that the letter be received and filed. All members present voted YES.
2. Letter from Donnie Jones RE: Auditor’s Report for December 2006
On a motion by Mr. Mumper, seconded by Ms. Kelly, it was moved that the letter be received and filed. All members present voted YES.
3. Letter from Joe Geers RE: Water/Sewer Rate Increases
On a motion by Mr. Mumper, seconded by Ms. Kelly, it was moved that the letter be received and filed. All members present voted YES.
4. Letter from Jennifer Wallace RE: Norwood Recreation Meetings
Mr. Sanker commented that there has been a recent rebirth of activity at the Community Center, since the Recreation Commission has been relocated to the Community Center. Mr. Sanker commended all on their work.
On a motion by Mr. Schneider, seconded by Ms. Kelly, it was moved that the letter be received and filed. All members present voted YES.
5.
Letter from Donna Laake RE: Residential
Recycling Incentive Funds
As amended, this item was considered previously.
6. Letter from Donna Laake RE: LifeSkills Program
On a motion by Mr. Mumper, seconded by Ms. Kelly, it was moved that the letter be received and filed. All members present voted YES.
7. Letter from Donna Laake RE: LifeSkills Program
On a motion by Mr. Schneider, seconded by Ms. Kelly, it was moved that the letter be received and filed. All members present voted YES.
8. Letter from Liquor Control RE: Hearing for Tropical Bar Transfer
On a motion by Mr. Schneider, seconded by Ms. Kelly, it was moved that the letter be received and filed. All members present voted YES.
9. Letter from Chief Schlie RE: Kkusum – new liquor permit
10. Letter from Mark Reeves RE: Kkusum – new liquor permit
11. Letter from Donna Laake RE: Kkusum – new liquor permit
On a motion by Mr. Sanker, seconded by Mr. Mumper, it was moved that all three letters be received and filed. All members present voted YES.
12. Letter from Liquor Control RE: Kkusum – new liquor permit request
On a motion by Mr. Sanker, seconded by Mr. Mumper, it was moved that the letter be received and filed and to object to the new liquor permit based on objections from Mark Reeves and Donna Laake. All members present voted YES.
As amended, Council then considered the following item:
13. Letter from Rick Gibson RE: Law Director’s 2006 Annual Report
On a motion by Mr. Mumper, seconded by Ms. Kelly, it was moved that the letter be received and filed. All members present voted YES.
O) EXCUSE ABSENT MEMBERS
All
members present.
P) ADJOURNMENT
On a motion by Mr. Mumper, seconded by Ms. Kelly, it was moved to adjourn. All members present voted YES.
______________________________ ______________________________
J. Brian Mumper Jane
M. Grote
Clerk of Council President
of Council