Nov 12, 2024 City Council

[CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:09]

I WANT TO WELCOME EVERYBODY TO THE NOVEMBER 12TH, 2024 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES. AND WE'RE GOING. I'M SORRY. CITY COUNCIL MEETING. WE'RE GOING TO RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND THEN EVERYBODY WOULD PLEASE STAND FOR THE STAY STANDING FOR THE INVOCATION. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. ALMIGHTY GOD, WE ASK YOU TO GUIDE US THROUGHOUT THIS MEETING AS WE SEEK TO MAKE DECISIONS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY. CITY OF MARYSVILLE AND ITS CITIZENS. AMEN. AMEN. AMEN. ROLL CALL.

ZACH BORDNER. HERE. STEVEN. WOLF. HERE. HANK. BARBEE. DONALD. BURGER. HERE. SCOTT HUNTER. HERE. MARK REAMS. HERE. SIX. YES. EXCUSE. IS THERE ANY CORRECTIONS THAT NEED TO BE MADE

[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]

[APPOINTMENT]

[ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT]

[00:05:07]

SATURDAY, DECEMBER 21ST FROM 12 TO 2 P.M. AND THEN MONDAY, DECEMBER 23RD FROM 5 TO 7 P.M.

AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO PUT THOSE OUT. SO EVERYBODY'S AWARE. WE WILL AGAIN HAVE THE MARION MAIN ICE SKATING IN PARTNERS PARK, WHICH HAS ALWAYS BEEN A VERY POPULAR ACTIVITY. THE SKATING OF PARTNERS PARK WILL BEGIN ON DECEMBER 12TH AND RUN THROUGH JANUARY 5TH. SKATING IS FREE TO RESIDENTS AND VISITORS OF ALL AGES, AND WE GOT BREAKDOWNS OF TIMES HERE THAT AGAIN WE WILL BE POSTING. I WON'T GO THROUGH THEM TONIGHT, BUT STARTING DECEMBER 12TH ALL THE WAY THROUGH JANUARY 5TH, ICELESS ICE SKATING AT PARTNERS PARK. WITH THAT, I'LL SHIFT DOWN TO JEREMY. YEAH.

THANKS, TERRY. SOME UPDATES ON THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS SIDE. CITY CREWS CONTINUE WITH LEAF COLLECTION CITYWIDE. I ENVISION THAT HAPPENING OVER THE NEXT MONTH AS WELL. AS WELL, OVER THE PAST FEW MONTHS, THE CITY CREWS HAVE BEEN PROCESSING SOME RECYCLED MATERIALS. SO AS A RESULT OF THEIR EFFORTS, THEY WERE ABLE TO PROCESS 3500YD■!T F TOPSOIL, 5500 TONS OF 304, WHICH IS GRAVEL AND 3000 TONS OF ASPHALT. MILLINGS, WHICH WILL BE GOOD AS BASE FOR FUTURE TRAIL PROJECTS. THROUGH THEIR EFFORTS, THE CREWS SHOULD BE COMMENDED BECAUSE IT SAVED THE CITY PROBABLY ABOUT $200,000 OF MATERIAL COST. SO KUDOS TO THEM. FROM THE PARKS DIVISION, CITY CREWS CONTINUE TO PREPARE FOR THE SEASON CHANGE, SO WE'RE HANGING SNOWFLAKES IN THE UPTOWN. REMOVING FOUNTAINS, ETC. WINTERIZING THE RESTROOMS. FROM THE WATER DIVISION. CITY CREWS CONTINUE ON THE PARK AVENUE WATER LINE. REPLACEMENT PROJECT. WASTEWATER. THE CITY CREWS CONTINUE TO PERFORM MAINTENANCE ON BOTH THE COLLECTION AND TREATMENT SYSTEMS. AND THEN THE FINAL UPDATE THAT I'VE GOT. SO THE FOLLOWING WORK HAS BEEN COMPLETED ALONG THE JIM SIMMONS TRAIL WITHIN SCHWARZKOPF PARK. SO WE'VE MOWED HONEYSUCKLE ALONG WITH SOME OTHER NON-NATIVE UNDESIRABLES. REMOVAL OF DYING ASH TREES. PLANTING OF SOME NATIVE TREES, INCLUDING SWAMP WHITE OAKS. WITH A HALF DOZEN BALD CYPRESS AT A POINT ALONG MILL CREEK. ADDED SOME TEMPORARY COVER SO THAT'LL BE SOME RYE GRASS AND STRAW FOR THE WINTER. AND THEN ONCE AGAIN, IT'S ANYBODY'S GUESS. BUT ONCE WE FEEL CONFIDENT THAT THE AREA WON'T FLOOD, WHICH WILL PROBABLY BE SOMETIME NEXT SUMMER. WE'LL PLAN ON DOING SOME PERMANENT SEEDING IN THAT AREA. AND THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT. SO I'LL TURN IT OVER TO KYLE FOR SOME UPDATES ON THE ONGOING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS. THANKS, JEREMY. JUST A COUPLE PROJECT UPDATES. THE FIRST IS THE BARRHAVEN STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT. CONSTRUCTION CONTINUES ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF KENNY LANE FOR THAT PROJECT. THE SECOND UPDATE IS THE STATE ROUTE 31 PHASE THREE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT. OUR CONTRACTOR WILL CONTINUE TO WORK ON PLACING TOPSOIL, SEEDING AND LANDSCAPING. THIS WEEK. THE ELMWOOD AVENUE NORTH MAPLE STREET INTERSECTION WILL BE BACK OPEN TO TRAFFIC ON FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 15TH. HOWEVER, THAT INTERSECTION WILL REMAIN A THREE WAY STOP UNTIL OUR TRAFFIC SIGNALS GO UP, SO IT WILL JUST GO BACK INTO THE SAME OPERATION IT WAS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION UNTIL WE GET THOSE TRAFFIC SIGNALS UP. THOSE ARE ALL THE UPDATES WE HAVE AT THIS TIME.

HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY. HEARING NONE. THANK YOU.

REPORT OF CLERK OF COUNCIL. THANK YOU. I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING. THANK YOU. REPORT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. THANK YOU, MISTER PRESIDENT. COUNCIL MEMBERS, I HAVE NO REPORT UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MISTER PHILLIPS? THANK YOU.

[PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION REPORT]

[00:10:03]

ORDINANCES HERE. I'M SORRY. I'M SO SORRY. THIS IS A PART OF THE MEETING WHERE WE HAVE HEARING OF

[HEARING OF CITIZENS]

I RESIDE AT 634 WEST EIGHTH STREET. YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT AN ORDINANCE ORDINANCE N WHICH WILL PROVIDE FOR A TAX ABATEMENT FOR A OPUS. THE OPUS DEVELOPMENT. I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO PASS THAT ORDINANCE TONIGHT. WOULD ANYBODY ELSE LIKE TO COME UP TO THE PODIUM? IT'S NOT THAT SCARY. I PROMISE. OKAY. JUST SAY YOUR FIRST AND LAST NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS, PLEASE.

ALL RIGHT, I'M AARON MORRISON. I LIVE AT 20120 WHITESTONE ROAD. OKAY. I WROTE IT DOWN, SO I HOPE THAT'S OKAY. MY NAME IS AARON MORRISON, AND I'M A RESIDENT OF MARYSVILLE AND PARENT OF TWO STUDENTS IN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. I'M ALSO A FORMER TEACHER OF MARYSVILLE SCHOOLS. I LEFT AT THE END OF LAST YEAR AFTER 18 YEARS IN THE DISTRICT. I'VE GROWN UP IN MARYSVILLE, WAS A GRADUATE OF MHS AND CHOSE TO MOVE BACK AND RAISE MY FAMILY. HERE I AM ABSOLUTELY DEDICATED TO SUPPORTING THE STUDENTS, TEACHERS AND STAFF OF MARYSVILLE SCHOOLS. I REFUSE TO JUST MOVE OUT OF THIS CITY BECAUSE OF THE PROBLEMS THAT WE'RE FACING. I LOVE THIS COMMUNITY AND I WANT TO FIGHT FOR IT. PRIOR TO AND AFTER THE LEVY FAILING, THIS WEEK, I'VE NEVER SEEN OUR CITY MORE DIVIDED. ANGER AND NEGATIVITY IS RUNNING RAMPANT. I'VE HEARD MANY LIFELONG MARYSVILLE RESIDENTS TALK ABOUT HOW OUR CITY HAS LOST ITS SMALL TOWN FEEL DUE TO THE POPULATION GROWTH, AND THAT IT ISN'T THE WAY THAT MARYSVILLE USED TO BE. THERE'S A LOT OF ANGER AND RESENTMENT AROUND THIS, AND MUCH OF THAT ANGER IS BEING DIRECTED UNFAIRLY AT THE SCHOOLS. OVER THE LAST WEEK, IT'S BEEN ENCOURAGING TO SEE THE WAY PEOPLE HAVE STEPPED UP IN THE COMMUNITY FOR MAKING SIGNS FOR TEACHERS AND STAFF MEMBERS, TO CREATING FUNDRAISERS TO HELP OUT WITH PAY TO PLAY FEES. AS AMAZING AS THESE EFFORTS ARE, THERE IS NO AMOUNT OF FUNDRAISING THAT'S GOING TO FIX THE BIGGER ISSUE HERE. OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT SHOULD NOT HAVE TO RELY ON BAKE SALES, RAFFLE SALES, T SHIRT SALES, ETC. TO FUND THE EDUCATION OF OUR CHILDREN. THESE FUND RAISING EFFORTS CAN HELP WITH PAY TO PLAY FEES, HOWEVER NOT SUSTAINABLE OVER TIME, BUT WON'T HELP WITH THE DAY TO DAY IMPACT THAT IS GOING TO BE FELT WITH

[00:15:02]

AND AGAIN, MOVING FORWARD, WE WILL DO YOU KNOW, THIS CITY COUNCIL WILL DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO BENEFIT THE SCHOOL SYSTEM MOVING FORWARD AS WELL. YOU KNOW, BACK IN, I WASN'T EVEN HERE, BUT BACK IN 2004 OR 2005, THE RESIDENTIAL TIFFS WERE CREATED BECAUSE THE CITY WAS UNDER ORDERS THAT THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM HERE IN THE CITY WAS DEFICIENT, AND THE SCHOOLS AT THAT TIME, IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR THEM TO GROW. THEY NEEDED TO BUILD SOME SCHOOL BUILDINGS, AND IT WAS DETERMINED BACK AT THAT TIME. YOU GUYS HAVE PROBABLY HEARD THE STORY, BUT I

[00:20:04]

SO WHAT NEIGHBORHOODS WERE THE TIF AREAS ESTABLISHED BACK AT THAT TIME? IT WAS THE LINKS, WALKER MEADOWS, THE WOODS AT MILL VALLEY, SCOTT FARMS, AND THIS IS PORTIONS OF THESE AREAS.

ADINA POINT, KEYSTONE CROSSING, THE LEGENDS, AND CHESTNUT CROSSING, CHESTNUT PARK. THOSE I THINK JUST ABOUT ALL THOSE AREA. UNLESS SOMEBODY CORRECT ME BECAUSE I ALL THOSE AREAS WERE THOSE DEVELOPMENTS WERE PUT IN WERE WERE FARMLAND AT THAT TIME. SO THEY WERE PROBABLY GENERATING NEXT TO NOTHING IN REGARDS TO ANY INCOME FOR THE SCHOOLS. IT WAS CORVEE TAXED. AND SO IT WAS VERY LITTLE BUT COLLECTION BEGAN ON THE RESIDENTIAL TIFS IN 2007. AND SINCE THAT TIME THAT THOSE RESIDENTIAL TIFS WERE ESTABLISHED, WE HAVE COLLECTED ABOUT ALMOST $50 MILLION IN THOSE RESIDENTIAL TIF AREAS. THE SCHOOL HAS RECEIVED SINCE 2007 FROM THOSE RESIDENTIAL TIFS JUST RIGHT AT ABOUT $17 MILLION, WHICH, YOU KNOW, IF THOSE HOMES WERE ON FARMLAND, OBVIOUSLY. BUT THOSE THOSE AREAS GENERATED STUDENTS AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT. JUST TO CLARIFY, IN 2007, THE MARYSVILLE SCHOOL SYSTEM HAD ABOUT 5200 STUDENTS. AND TODAY THEY'RE JUST OVER 5700 STUDENTS.

SO FROM 2007 TO 2024, THEY'VE GROWN BY JUST OVER ABOUT 500 TO 550 STUDENTS. NOW THERE'S A LOT MORE NEEDS FOR THE STUDENTS TODAY THAN WHAT THERE WAS BACK THEN. WE UNDERSTAND THAT. AND SO THAT THAT IS IMPORTANT AS WELL. BUT THOSE ARE SOME OF THE ASPECTS. NOW WHEN WILL THE TIFS EXPIRE? THEY'LL EXPIRE SOMETIME BETWEEN 2033 AND 2038. IT'S REALLY ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY BECAUSE OF THE DEBT THAT WE HAVE ON THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. WE HAVE TO MAINTAIN. IF THE ONLY OTHER WAY TO DO ANYTHING DIFFERENTLY WOULD JUST BE RAISING RATES TO AN ASTRONOMICAL LEVEL. IT WAS A COMMITMENT THAT WAS MADE THAT WAS AGREED TO BY BOTH PARTIES, BY THE SCHOOL SYSTEM SO THEY COULD BUILD BOND SOLD SO THEY COULD BUILD SOME OF THE NEWER SCHOOL BUILDINGS. SO THEY WOULD HAVE THE SEWER TO BE ABLE TO COVER THAT. SO WHEN YOU AGREE TO SOMETHING LIKE THAT AT THAT TIME, FOR THAT TIME PERIOD, IT'S NOT IT'S NOT SOMETHING YOU CAN JUST THROW AWAY. YOU HAVE OBLIGATIONS TO, TO CARRY THROUGH. AND LIKE I SAY, YOU KNOW, THE 17 MILLION THE SCHOOLS HAVE RECEIVED SINCE 2007 IS NOT THE FULL AMOUNT, BUT IF THAT WOULDN'T HAVE HAPPENED BACK IN 2004, 2005, NONE OF THOSE PEOPLE WOULD BE LIVING IN MARYSVILLE BECAUSE YOU COULDN'T HAVE BUILT IT. WE DIDN'T HAVE THE SEWER SYSTEM TO DO IT. SO THE SO THE PEOPLE WOULDN'T BE LIVING IN THE LINKS. WALKER MEADOWS WOODS AT MILL VALLEY, SCOTT FARMS, ADINA POINT, KEYSTONE CROSSING, THE LEGENDS AND CHESTNUT CROSSING. IT JUST WOULDN'T HAVE HAPPENED.

SO THAT MUTUAL AGREEMENT AND WHAT THEY WERE WORKING ON WAS TO PREPARE FOR THE GROWTH THAT IS

[00:25:07]

THANK YOU FOR THOSE SPEAKING TONIGHT. THANK YOU. AND I'LL JUST PIGGYBACK AND JUST SAY ANY TIME ANYBODY COMES TO PUBLIC RECORD AND SPEAKS IN THE MICROPHONE, IT'S NERVE RACKING.

AND WE WERE ALL RESIDENTS AT ONE TIME BEFORE. AND JUST LIKE YOUR SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS, YOUR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, EVERYBODY WHO SERVES IN SOME CAPACITY WERE RESIDENTS AT ONE TIME, SITTING WHERE YOU ARE AS WELL. AND YOU YOU KNOW, OVER THAT TIME YOU'RE PASSIONATE ABOUT YOUR ISSUES AND THEN YOU RUN FOR PUBLIC OFFICE, YOU WIN SOME. YOU LOSE SOME, YOU KNOW, BUT YOU YOU KEEP THAT PASSION ALIVE KNOWING THAT YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS FOR THE BENEFIT OF ALL RESIDENTS, EVEN IF YOU'RE IN PUBLIC OFFICE OR JUST A RESIDENT. AND I JUST WANT RESIDENTS TO UNDERSTAND IN THE WORLD OF NOISE, AND I CALL THAT FACEBOOK. IT'S VERY HARD TO HAVE DIALOG LEGIT DIALOG, BECAUSE SADLY, THE ADMINS, THEY DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE. SO WHAT IS BEING SPEWED FROM RESIDENTS IS JUST BEING TALKED ABOUT. BUT THERE'S NO CONCRETE EVIDENCE OF WHAT IS ACTUALLY BEING SAID IS THE TRUTH. AND IF RESIDENTS HAVE CONCERNS, ALWAYS GO TO YOUR SCHOOL BOARD MEETINGS OR DO WHAT YOU'RE DOING NOW AND COME TO A CITY COUNCIL MEETING, AND WE WILL TRY TO EDUCATE AND FOSTER AS MUCH OF A RELATIONSHIP WITH THE COMMUNITY AS WE POSSIBLY CAN, BUT WE CANNOT CHASE EVERY COMMENT ON FACEBOOK AND TRY TO EDUCATE. THAT'S NOT THE ROLE OF THE PUBLIC WORLD. ANDO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT I'M GRATEFUL

[00:30:02]

[Ord. Reconsider]

EACH MEMBER OF COUNCIL SHALL BE REQUIRED TO VOTE UPON ALL QUESTIONS BEFORE THE COUNCIL, UNLESS A MEMBER SUSTAINS DUE TO A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. SO ON. YOUR MIKE. MY MIC WAS OFF. DO YOU WANT ME TO REPEAT THAT? NO, I, I LOOKED AT THE RULES AND, YOU KNOW, I, I COPIED VERBATIM WHAT RULE 2.6 SAYS. SO NOW I'M WONDERING IF I'M LOOKING AT AN OLD SET OF RULES. WAS THAT THE OLD RULE 2.6? I IMAGINE IT WAS I CAN WE CAN LOOK AT IT. I CAN LOOK BACK TO SEE WHEN THAT VERSION HAD 2.6 IS WHAT YOU'RE REFERENCING. BUT THE CURRENT PUBLISHED VERSION THAT IS DIFFERENT. IT REFLECTS WHAT TIM REFERENCED. AND I REMEMBER THIS. I MEAN, AS A SIDE POINT, I REMEMBER DISCUSSING THIS VERY RULE AT THE WHEN WE WERE WORKING THROUGH THE WORK SESSION OR THE COMMITTEE GROUP WHEN WE WERE REVIEWING THE RULES, AND, AND WE SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDED THE WORK SESSION AS THE NEXT MEETING. SO BUT I THINK THE MORE IMPORTANT THING IS, IS THAT WE'RE WITHIN THE REFERENDUM PERIOD AND OR WE DON'T HAVE A, YOU KNOW, WE DIDN'T VOTE ON A CONTRACT WHERE THE TERMS HAVE EXPIRED OR EXPIRED OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. THIS IS IT'S NOT A PROBLEM TO DO A RECONSIDERATION TONIGHT. AND MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE. CHAPTER 741.

LET'S MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR ON WHAT THAT MOTION IS. SO THIS IS A MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE VOTE ON THE ORDINANCE ON THE PASSAGE OF THE ORDINANCE THAT WAS MADE AT THE LAST REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING, AND THAT ORDINANCE SPECIFICALLY IS TO AMEND CHAPTER 741, MEDICAL MARIJUANA OF THE CITY OF MARYSVILLE CODIFIED ORDINANCES TO PROHIBIT THE RETAIL DISPENSING OF RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA IN THE CITY OF MARYSVILLE. SO THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER WOULD REQUIRE FOUR VOTES OUT OF SIX MAJORITY PRESENT, AND IF THAT PASSED, WELL, WE CAN MOVE

[00:35:06]

MR. PRESIDENT, I'D LIKE TO HEAR WHAT NEW INFORMATION HAS SURFACED IN THE LAST TWO WEEKS TO WARRANT THIS DISCUSSION. HOW DO WE TAM. HAS THE STATE CHANGED THE RULES? I MEAN, HE'S A HE'S THAT'S I THINK, PERFECTLY, PERFECTLY FAIR QUESTION. HE'S A COUNCIL MEMBER. HE CAN HAVE DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION OR ON THE ON THE STATUS OF THE OF THE LEGISLATION. IT'S BASICALLY JUST UP FOR THIRD READING RIGHT NOW. SO WHY WHAT HAS CHANGED? WHY ARE WE DISCUSSING THIS AGAIN? WE I THINK, YOU KNOW, AT THE, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE HAVE A COUNCIL MEMBER WHO HAS WITHIN HIS LEGAL ABILITY, HAS ONE WANTS TO CHANGE THE WAY THAT THERE WAS A VOTE MADE AND THAT VOTE, WHETHER OR NOT IS AGREED BY FELLOW COUNCIL MEMBERS, SHOULDN'T BE. THE DISCUSSION.

IT'S THE IT'S THE PREROGATIVE OF THAT COUNCIL MEMBER. AND WE SHOULD JUST GO THROUGH THE MOTIONS AND WHAT HAPPENS HAPPENS. THAT'S AS CLEAR AS IT CAN BE. BUT IT'S UP FOR RECONSIDERATION. IT'S NOT JUST ONE PERSON VOTING AGAIN. SO I WOULD I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR WHAT HAS CHANGED. WE'RE ALL BEING ASKED TO RECONSIDER THIS. WELL, WE'RE BEING ASKED TO RECONSIDER.

BUT THE VOTES REALLY AREN'T CHANGING. BETWEEN THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED AGAINST IT OR FOR THAT.

WELL, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN SAY THAT YET. I MEAN, I, I DON'T KNOW. THE BOTTOM LINE IS HERE IS THAT THERE WAS A VOTE MADE AT THE LAST MEETING. IT'S BEEN RECONSIDERED. AND HERE WE ARE AT THIRD READING WITH THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION, AND WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH, WITH EITHER A MOTION TO PASS OR SOMETHING. SO I, MR. REAMES, IS ASKING, I GUESS, WHY IT WAS MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE ASKED THAT WHEN THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER WAS MADE, BUT I THINK YOU'RE ASKING WHY IT WAS RECONSIDERED. THE MOTION'S BEEN MADE, AND I WOULD JUST LIKE AN EXPLANATION. I HAVE TO ADMIT THAT AT THE TIME I SHOULD HAVE SAID YES. WELL, I SAID NO. AND THAT IS MY REASON FOR IT. I MISUNDERSTOOD THE WAY THAT IT WAS THE WAY THAT THE ORDINANCE WAS WRITTEN. I SAID, NO, AND I SHOULD HAVE SAID YES. AND THAT IS MY INTENTION FOR TODAY TO RECTIFY THAT SITUATION. AND THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THAT PARTICULAR RULE IN OUR RULES OF COUNCIL, THAT IT GIVES YOU TIME TO REVIEW WHAT YOU HAVE DONE. AND IF YOU FEEL THAT THAT AN ERROR WAS MADE, THEN YOU ASK FOR RECONSIDERATION. AND THAT'S THE POINT WHERE WE ARE AT THE MOMEN. THE DO I HEAR A MOTION TO PASS THE LEGISLATION? IS THERE OTHER COUNCIL COMMENTS, PERHAPS OTHER COUNCIL COMMENTS, PERHAPS I'LL MAKE A COMMENT. JUST I HAD SPOKE ABOUT MY CONCERNS WITH THE JUST THIS ISSUE REALLY AT HAND, AND I WILL STAND BY THE COMMENTS THAT I HAD STATED IN OUR LAST MEETING IN THIS ROOM WHERE THIS WAS DISCUSSED. SO THAT'S COMMENTS SPOKEN THEN STILL CARRY FORWARD TO TODAY. AND THAT'S THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO SAY. THANK YOU. SO DO I HEAR A MOTION TO PASS THE LEGISLATION? I'LL MAKE THEM GO AHEAD. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO PASS THE LEGISLATION. ROLL CALL. MR. HUNTER. YES. MR. REMES? NO.

MR. YES. MR. WOLF. NO. MR. YES. MR. BURGER YES. FOUR. YES. CAN I GET A NEW COPY OF THE RULES?

[Ord. A]

[00:40:04]

SO WHAT WE ARE LOOKING TO DO. AND THAT WAS A MODIFICATION WE ARE MAKING IS WE ARE MAKING TO MOVE THE CHILD CARE FROM THE PROHIBITED USE TO A PERMITTED USE IN D TWO, WHICH WOULD PERMIT US HOPEFULLY TO PUT A FACILITY HERE IN THAT AREA THERE. SO THAT IS PRETTY MUCH IT. WE'RE JUST YOU KNOW, KNOW THAT THERE'S THE NEED OUT THERE AND WE HAPPEN TO HAVE SOMEBODY THAT'S INTERESTED IN COMING. SO WE THOUGHT WE'D COME BEFORE YOU AND PLANNING COMMISSION TO SAY, HEY, WILL YOU LET US CHANGE THAT USE FROM FROM THERE INTO THAT AND BUILD SOMETHING INTO IN THAT DEVELOPMENT? SO HERE'S WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE TODAY. IF YOU'RE IN THE AERIALS. AND THAT'S KIND OF WHAT OUR SITE PLAN THAT WE ENDED UP DOING FOR THEM. AND EVERYTHING IS A FIT IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY FIT. MAY I ASK A QUESTION? YEAH. DO WE HAVE ANY HISTORY ON WHY THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN A PROHIBITED USE BACK IN 2008, WHEN THE ORIGINAL PD WAS PUT IN PLACE? I'M GUESSING THE ONLY PERSON THAT WAS ON THIS COUNCIL WAS MR. REAMS. I DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD HAVE GONE THROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION AND DISCUSSED AND THEN BROUGHT TO US AS A RECOMMENDATION. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE DISCUSSION WAS BACK THEN AS FAR AS WHY IT WAS PROHIBITED. I AT THE TIME, YOU KNOW, THERE'S BEEN THERE'S BEEN A CHANGE OR TWO SINCE THEN AS WELL IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW,

[00:45:07]

WELL, AND IF YOU REALLY LOOK AT THAT LIST IN THERE, I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE IT. LET'S GO BACK. I JUST HAVE TO. YEAH, JUST THE MAPS. SO WE DON'T HAVE REALLY HAVE THE LIST. IF YOU REALLY GO BACK AND LOOK AT THAT LIST OF PROHIBITED, IT'S A MILE LONG. SO I DON'T KNOW WHEN THEY DEVELOP THAT PUD. IT WASN'T OBVIOUSLY HERE IN PART OF IT. AT THE SAME TIME, WHETHER THEY WENT A LITTLE OVERBOARD AND SAID, HEY, LET'S DO THIS. AND, AND YOU KNOW, AND, AND THEN PUT EVERYTHING ELSE IN PROHIBITED. YOU KNOW, WHICH YOU NORMALLY WHEN YOU'RE DOING THESE PUDS, YOU'RE KIND OF NOT GETTING THAT CRAZY WITH THEM. WHAT HAS ALSO CHANGED IS YOU GOT TO REMEMBER IS THE CITY OF MARYSVILLE. AND I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YEAR THAT THAT ENDED UP HAPPENING, BUT YOUR CODE IS ALSO CHANGED. SO YOU KNOW, NORMALLY WHEN YOU'RE DOING THESE PUDS, YOU KNOW, AND STUFF LIKE THAT, YOU'VE GOT YOUR SUBURBAN COMMERCIAL AND SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, WHICH, YOU KNOW, IT IS ACTUALLY INCLUDED IN THOSE AS BEING A PROHIBITED OR A PERMITTED USE.

YOU KNOW, AND SO YOU DO HAVE THOSE IN THOSE IN THOSE AREAS THAT YOU GUYS HAVE CHANGED YOUR CODE TO INCLUDE THEM IN THERE, TOO. AND SO NORMALLY WHEN YOU COME IN AND DO THAT, YOU WOULD JUST QUOTED, HEY, THE SAME USES THAT ARE IN THE SUBURBAN COMMERCIAL USE. SO THAT WAY IT'S COVERED THEM. YOU DON'T USUALLY GO WRITE A SEPARATE DISTRICT. AND THEY LITERALLY WENT THE FULL BORE OF DETAILING EVERYTHING OUT INTO NUMBERS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, WHICH IS NOT NORMAL. YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'RE DOING THOSE NOW, YOU'RE USUALLY REFERENCING, HEY, THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.

BUT WE WANT TO ADD IN SOMETHING THAT'S ADDITIONAL THAT NOT NORMALLY DONE, YOU KNOW, AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT. LIKE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT YOUR MARIJUANA AND STUFF. YOU WOULD HAVE ADDED THAT IN AND SAY, HEY, WE WANT THAT TO BE AS PART OF THIS PUD, USUALLY NOT WHOLLY ELIMINATING THINGS LIKE THAT. SO THAT'S ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THAT. I KNOW THAT I CAN SAY THAT HOW YOU GUYS HAVE EVOLVED, YOU KNOW, IN NEW CODE, NEW SECTIONS. SO MAYBE AT THAT TIME THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THOSE ITEMS THAT WAS ON THAT LIST AND WASN'T COMPLETELY INCLUDED. MR. PRESIDENT, YOU HAD A QUESTION. SO THANK YOU FOR ASKING THAT QUESTION. MY MIND WAS ON THE SAME SPOT, YOU KNOW, WHAT WAS THE PLAN FOR THIS AREA IN 2008, 2000? I CAN THINK ABOUT 2008.

AND I THINK MAYBE MILL VALLEY WAS A THIRD OR HALF OF WHAT IT IS TODAY. THIS ENTIRE AREA WAS JUST UNDER DEVELOPMENT. I REMEMBER THERE WERE CONVERSATIONS THAT I'VE HEARD PEOPLE SAYING, OH, THERE'S A DEPARTMENT STORE THAT WANTS TO, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS WHAT I READ OR HEARD, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S TRUTH TO IT. BUT I IN OUR ZONING CODE TODAY, WE LIST OUT PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL. AND THEN DO WE SAY BASICALLY IF IT'S NOT PERMITTED OR CONDITIONAL IT'S BY DEFAULT PROHIBITED. IS THAT HOW IT'S WORDED TODAY. AND THEN IT SOUNDS LIKE BACK THEN AND MAYBE IT'S STILL THIS WAY TODAY, BUT MAYBE BACK THEN THERE WAS VERY SPECIFIC OUTLINING OF PROHIBITED. DO WE DO THAT TODAY IN THE SAME WAY IN OUR ZONING CODE, WE DO NOT. BUT THIS WAS A PUD. SO THAT'S HOW THEY THEY OUTLINED THAT VERY SPECIFICALLY WITHIN THEIR TEXT. OKAY. YEAH, I WOULD SAY JUST OVERALL THIS AREA IS WE'RE IN 2024 AND THIS WAS 2008. IT'S NOT THE FIRST TIME THAT I'VE SEEN SOMETHING COME THROUGH WHERE TIMES HAVE MOVED FORWARD AND DEVELOPMENT PLANS HAVE NOT ALWAYS STAYED THE COURSE OF WHAT THEY, THEIR ORIGINAL, YOU KNOW, APPROACH WAS THERE'S COUNTLESS EXAMPLES, I'M SURE, WHERE THAT'S THE CASE AND I KNOW OF A COUPLE, BUT THERE ARE I WOULD IMAGINE THERE'S MORE. SO YEAH, THANKS. ANYBODY ELSE? OH GO AHEAD. YEAH. I'LL SAY AS YOU KNOW, THE WARD MEMBER THERE FOR WARD ONE AND THIS ARE, IT IT'S GROWN QUITE A BIT SINCE I'VE MOVED THERE BACK IN 2013. BUT I APPRECIATE THE PROPERTY OWNER REACHING OUT AND, YOU KNOW, MAKING ME AWARE THAT THIS WAS COMING TO COUNCIL BEFORE PLANNING COMMISSION. BUT THIS IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT IS NEEDED IN THE AREA AND AT LEAST IN MY VIEW, AS THAT CONTINUES TO GROW AND MORE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES COME IN THE AREA, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WILL GET WELL USED AND I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM RESIDENTS THAT LIVE IN THE MILL VALLEY AREA AND LIVE IN THE COOKS POINT APARTMENTS RIGHT THERE AND KIND OF GET THEIR PERSPECTIVES AS WELL. BUT I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS DEFINITELY NEEDED IN MARYSVILLE AND IN THAT AREA IN PARTICULAR. THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE? THANK YOU. HEARING NONE.

THIS WILL BE BACK FOR SECOND READING PUBLIC HEARING ON NOVEMBER 25TH. ORDINANCE BE

[Ord. B]

[00:50:02]

SO THAT WAS ONE OF THEIR DISCUSSION POINTS AS WELL. SO THERE'S NOT A LOT OF VACANT PARCELS AVAILABLE FOR MULTIFAMILY. BUT IF SOMETHING WAS DEMOED, YOU KNOW, THAT COULD OPEN UP A POSSIBILITY ALSO. BUT THEIR THEIR REQUEST AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL WAS TO CHANGE THAT FROM PERMITTED TO CONDITIONAL FOR MULTIFAMILY TO GIVE RESIDENTS SOME CONTEXT TO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. SO FOR INSTANCE OVER THERE BY WALMART. YES. SO IT BEING A PERMITTED USE ZOOM IN A LITTLE BIT THAT'S ALREADY SET IN ZONING THAT AN APARTMENT COMPLEX CAN GO IN. NOW IT'S A CONDITIONAL USE THAT THERE'S JUST. AND CAN YOU EXPLAIN. YES. SO THE CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS THAT THERE WOULD BE AN APPLICATION SUBMITTED. THEY WOULD GO TO PLANNING COMMISSION.

THEY WOULD EXPLAIN WHY THAT USE MAKES SENSE ON THAT SPECIFIC PARCEL. AND PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD EVALUATE THAT AND MAKE A DETERMINATION WHETHER IT IS APPROVED OR NOT. AND FROM THERE, IT WOULD THEN PROCEED ON TO DESIGN REVIEW BOARD FOR THE DETAILS OF WHAT IT WILL LOOK LIKE. YEAH, I THINK THAT AS WE AS WE GROW AND WE CONTINUE TO GROW, IT'S THE PRODUCT OF CENTRAL OHIO BEING THE FASTEST GROWING, YOU KNOW, REGION IN THE UNITED STATES. BUT WE'VE SEEN AN ABUNDANCE OF MULTIFAMILY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS. AND I THINK THAT WE'VE GOT TO BE MORE CONSCIOUS OF HOW WE'RE BUILDING WHAT WE'RE BUILDING, AND THAT THAT CONDITIONAL ASPECT DOESN'T AUTOMATICALLY, YOU KNOW, GIVE FREE, FREE REIGN. BUT IT IT PUTS A LITTLE BIT OF GOVERNANCE ON HOW WE'RE GROWING THAT PARTICULAR AREA. SO I, I DON'T WANT TO RULE ANYTHING OUT. BUT CONDITIONAL IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING TO BE CONSIDERED. SO APPRECIATE THE RECOMMENDATION.

YEAH. SO THEN IF IT DOES HAPPEN AS A CONDITIONAL USE AND YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. SO LET'S SAY IF COUNCIL DOESN'T AGREE WITH A CONDITIONAL USE AND THEN RIGHT WE VOTE ON IT. BUT IT TAKES A SUPERMAJORITY TO OVERRIDE PLANNING COMMISSION. CORRECT. IS THAT HOW IT'S LAID OUT? I THINK YOU WOULD HAVE TO VOTE TO AMEND THE RECOMMENDATION IF YOU WANTED TO, BECAUSE IF YOU VOTED TO DENY THE RECOMMENDATION, IT WOULD JUST TIM, CAN, YOU KNOW, REPHRASE THE QUESTION. LET ME GET WELL, DOES MARK DO YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SO I THINK DONALD IS SAYING IF PLANNING COMMISSION HAD AN APPLICATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE, WOULD COUNCIL THEN VOTE ON IT? AND THE ANSWER IS NO. YOU KNOW, THAT DECISION WOULD BE MADE BY PLANNING. YEAH. THAT'S CORRECT. ARE YOU TO COUNCIL? NO. A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WOULD NOT COME TO COUNCIL. ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THIS SPECIFIC REC? I'M JUST SAYING LIKE IN CONDITIONAL USES IN GENERAL, THEY JUST GO TO PLANNING COMMISSION BECAUSE I THINK THE COMMUNITY SEGMENT IS, IS THAT WE AS A COUNCIL, WE VOTE FOR ALL THE DEVELOPMENT THAT HAPPENS. AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE AS A COUNCIL DON'T ALWAYS VOTE FOR EVERYTHING THAT COMES IN FRONT OF US. SO ONCE IT'S SLATED IN ZONING CODE, WE DON'T HAVE THE TEETH TO SAY WHETHER OR NOT ONCE IT GOES TO PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEY VOTE ON IT, THEN THAT. YEAH. AND THAT BODY THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WAS APPOINTED TO EVALUATE THOSE KIND OF ON BEHALF OF CITY COUNCIL, ULTIMATELY THOSE CONDITIONAL USES, WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THAT UPDATED ZONING CODE, I THINK THAT'S KIND OF WHERE IT WAS EVALUATED BY PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE SURE THEY WERE COMFORTABLE WITH THOSE USES IN EACH DISTRICT, WHETHER THEY WERE PERMITTED OR CONDITIONAL. BUT IF A IF A REQUEST CAME THROUGH FOR A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AND IT WAS A CONDITIONAL USE PLANNING

[00:55:01]

SO IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU HAD, SAY, FOUR MEMBERS PRESENT AT A AT A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AND THREE OF THEM VOTED IN FAVOR AND ONE AGAINST, THAT WOULD NOT BE ENOUGH TO PASS A CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION. OKAY. YEAH. THANKS. AND THAT IS ALL I HAVE ON THIS APPLICATION. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I DID HAVE ONE QUESTION. YOU MENTIONED THE VAST MAJORITY OF THESE HAVE SOMETHING ON THEM ALREADY. YEAH. THE PARCELS MOST. YEAH. THERE'S JUST A FEW VACANT PARCELS. SO THERE WOULD NOT UNLESS SOMETHING WAS DEMOLISHED. THERE WOULD BE A COUPLE AREAS THAT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, WHETHER IT'S MULTI-FAMILY OR COMMERCIAL, WE'RE STARTING TO JUST GET MORE, MORE LIMITED ON SPACE AROUND THE WITHIN THOSE AREAS OF RED UP THERE IN THE REGIONAL MIXED MIXED USE DISTRICT AROUND THE 33 INTERCHANGE. YEAH, I'D BE INTERESTED TO TAKE A LOOK AT KIND OF WHAT EXISTS TODAY. I HAVEN'T, YOU KNOW, STUDIED THIS MAP IN RELATION TO THE PARCELS THAT EXIST. AND WE COULD MAYBE LOOK ALSO AND SHARE SOMETHING WITH COUNCIL THAT SAYS WE COULD PUT A STAR OUT THERE ON, ON THE PARCEL THAT'S VACANT JUST TO SHOW YOU WHAT, WHAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE IF SOMETHING WERE TO COME. GREAT. THANK YOU. WELL, AND I THINK IT'S ALSO JUST, YOU KNOW, LIKE FOR INSTANCE, YOU GO TO JIMMY JOHN'S. NOW, YOU KNOW, THAT STRIP MALL. YEAH. WALMART.

YOU GO TO WALMART, YOU GO TO THOSE HOME DEPOT, YOU GO TO THOSE DEPARTMENT STORES AND WE YOU KNOW, WE GET THE IDEA THAT THOSE ARE ALWAYS GOING TO BE STRIP MALLS. THEY'RE ALWAYS GOING TO BE DEPARTMENT STORES. WALMART'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE THERE. WELL, WE KNOW THAT'S NOT TRUE BECAUSE HISTORY HAS PROVEN THAT THAT'S NOT TRUE, THAT EVENTUALLY THEY MOVE. I MEAN, KROGER KROGER'S MOVED FOUR TIMES. THERE'S THE ONE AT TOWN. THE ONE AT FIVE POINTS. THE ONE RIGHT BY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. AND NOW IT'S OUT THERE BY DOCTOR WHAT USED TO BE DOCTOR MCKEEVER'S PROPERTY. SO, YOU KNOW, WE KNOW THROUGH HISTORY THESE BIG BOX STORES, THEY CHANGE THEIR LOCATIONS. SO FOR INSTANCE, YOU KNOW, WHAT MRS. GABRIEL IS SAYING IS THAT, YOU KNOW, IS THAT LET'S SAY WALMART CELLS AND CELLS ARE DIFFERENT. DEVELOPER. THAT'S A PRIME AREA WHERE IT COULD BE REDEVELOPED, WHERE YOU COULD HAVE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING OR SOMETHING IN THAT AREA. NOT TO SAY THAT, OR IF WALMART EVEN WANTED TO SAY, YOU KNOW, LIKE IN CINCINNATI, KROGER BUILT THEIR KROGER STORE, BUT THERE'S MULTIFAMILY ON TOP OF THAT, ON TOP OF KROGER. SO IT'S NOT TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, THE CONDITIONAL USE. YOU KNOW, THERE'S ALWAYS THAT POSSIBILITY.

BUT, YOU KNOW, SO I'M JUST THAT'S JUST ANOTHER CAVEAT TO WHAT YOU'RE ALREADY SAYING. SO ANYWAY, ANYBODY ELSE. OKAY. HEARING NONE THIS WILL BE BACK FOR SECOND READING PUBLIC

[Ord. C]

[01:00:05]

IT'S NOW PROHIBITED IN OUR BUSINESS REGULATIONS BASED ON ACTION THAT COUNCIL TOOK EARLIER TONIGHT. SO THIS IS UP FOR FIRST READING. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE JUST MOVE IT FORWARD TO SECOND READING WITH THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. THAT'S REQUIRED BY OUR OUR ZONING CODE. AND THEN COUNCIL CAN CAN KILL IT AT THAT POINT. MOTION TO IT HAS TO BE, YOU KNOW, DEFEATED ULTIMATELY SO THAT THE OTHER SO THE COUNCIL CAN ACT ON THE OTHER ZONING ORDINANCE. MR. PRESIDENT, I HAD A QUESTION JUST SO THE THERE WOULD BE A SECOND HEARING, PUBLIC COMMENT. BUT REALLY THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY EFFECT TO THE OUTCOME. ULTIMATELY IT SHOULDN'T. IT'S REALLY JUST AN ADMINISTRATIVE OKAY ACT. AND WE'RE JUST, YOU KNOW, IT'S OBVIOUSLY AN ISSUE THAT COULD BE CONTENTIOUS. AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE BY THE BOOK ON IT. ANYBODY ELSE. SO JUST BE SECOND HEARING AND THEN POTENTIALLY WAIVING THE THIRD AFTER. YEAH HE COULD WAIVE THE THIRD. OR YOU COULD HAVE IF THERE'S SIX VOTES TO WAIVE THE THIRD, YOU COULD WAIVE THE THIRD AND THEN VOTE ON IT. OR YOU COULD HAVE JUST CONTINUE WITH THE THIRD READING AND THEN VOTE ON IT. OKAY. BUT THE ORDINANCE THAT NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED, DELIBERATED AND CONSIDERED IS THE ONE THAT'S COMING UP LATER FOR SECOND READING. WHICH ZONES IN THE PROCESSING AND CULTIVATION AND NOT THE RETAIL DISPENSING. ANYBODY ELSE? SO THIS WILL BE BACK FOR SECOND READING PUBLIC HEARING ON NOVEMBER 25TH. ORDINANCE D SECOND READING PUBLIC HEARING TO

[Ord. D]

[Ord. E]

[01:05:01]

JUST SO YOU KNOW THAT. NO, I'M JUST KIDDING. SO WE THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO FUNDS THAT WE ACTUALLY BREAK DOWN INTO DEPARTMENTS. DEPARTMENTS BEING LIKE IT, ENGINEERING, FINANCE AND SO FORTH. SO THIS BREAKS THOSE DOWN. AND THEN WHAT I DIDN'T PRINT FOR YOU JUST BECAUSE IT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, BE A LOT OF EXTRA PAGES. BUT OF COURSE I CAN PRINT IT. OR AGAIN IT'LL BE ONLINE ARE THE FUND STATEMENTS WHICH WILL AGAIN IT'S EVERYTHING THAT'S IN YOUR EXCEL SPREADSHEET. BUT IT'D BE IN THIS FORMAT BUT BROKEN DOWN BY FUND NOT DEPARTMENT. SO I JUST FELT THIS WAS THE APPROPRIATE TIME TO BRING UP THE BRING UP. THIS ADDITION TO YOUR BOOK, BECAUSE IT IS SPECIFIC IN THE ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET THAT YOU HAVE IT BROKEN DOWN BY DEPARTMENT.

AGAIN, THE EXCEL SPREADSHEET YOU HAD DID THAT. THIS JUST DOES IT BETTER. SO. YEAH, THIS IS NICE.

THE PICTURES ARE A NICE TOUCH. YEAH. I SCOURED THE SUPERINTENDENT. DOESN'T HAVE A PHOTO THOUGH. WELL, IT'LL BE ADDED AND OF COURSE I, I, I, I REALLY TRIED TO FIND A MORE EMBARRASSING PICTURE FOR YOU, DONALD, BUT, YOU KNOW, YOU YOU SCRUBBED YOUR SOCIALS WELL, SO, YOU KNOW, THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT. SO DOES CITIZENS HAVE ANY COMMENTS? COUNCIL. ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANT TO SAY I APPRECIATE THE NEW SUMMARY. THIS EXCELLENT. IT'S CLEAN. IT'S EASY TO COMPREHEND. I WANT TO ECHO THAT SENTIMENT. THIS WHEN WE TALK ABOUT TRANSPARENCY IN GOVERNMENT, THIS IS A STEP FORWARD IN THAT VERY DIRECTION. RIGHT. WE HAVE YOU KNOW, YOU CAN GO ONLINE. YOU'LL BE ABLE TO PULL UP ENGINEERING'S BUDGET. YOU CAN GO SEE WHAT DOLLARS ARE ALLOCATED TO WHAT PROJECTS, WHERE THE MONEY IS BEING SPENT. SO EVERY RESIDENT IN THIS COMMUNITY HAS ACCESS TO SEE HOW THEIR TAX TAX DOLLARS ARE BEING SPENT BY THEIR BY THEIR BY THEIR LEADERS AND CITY STAFF. SO I THINK THAT THIS IS EXCELLENT AND A STEP FORWARD IN TRANSPARENCY. SO THANK YOU, MR. LUTZ. YEAH, I'D EVEN GO ONE STEP FURTHER AND SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, AT THE LOCAL LEVEL, I DO BELIEVE IS THE IS THE MOST TRANSPARENT LEVEL YOU CAN GET, BECAUSE WHEN YOU GET INTO THE STATE AND FEDERAL, IT BECOMES HARDER TO CHASE YOUR DOLLAR AND TO BE ABLE TO RESEARCH WHERE YOUR DOLLAR GOES. BUT IN THE LOCAL LEVEL, EVEN THOUGH WE ALL MIGHT GET HEARTBURN OF HOW OUR DOLLARS ARE SPENT, RIGHT? BUT WE CAN SEE OUR DOLLARS BEING SPENT WHEN THERE'S A SIDEWALK BEING REPLACED OR A TREE BEING PLANTED IN A PARK, OR A STREET BEING PLOWED, OR BEING SALTED, OR A POTHOLE BEING FIXED SO YOU KNOW, AT THE LOCAL LEVEL, I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S THE MOST BANG YOU'RE GOING TO GET FOR YOUR BUCK. SO. OH, I'M SO SORRY, STEVEN. YEAH. I JUST HAD TWO THINGS. AND THE FIRST ONE DEALS WITH THIS. WHAT WE GOT I GREATLY APPRECIATE THIS. I KNOW WORKING AT THE STATE LEVEL AND WORKING WITH OTHER MUNICIPALITIES AND SEEING HOW DIFFICULT IT IS TO ACCESS INFORMATION FROM DIFFERENT SCHOOL DISTRICTS, TOWNSHIPS, CITIES ON THE FINANCES OF THOSE PLACES AND, YOU KNOW, CITIZENS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT'S GOING ON, WHERE THAT MONEY IS GOING. THIS IS AN AMAZING STEP. BUT I APPRECIATE HAVING THIS HERE.

AND, YOU KNOW, I I'M SURE THE CITIZENS WILL ALSO AGREE WHEN THEY HAVE ACCESS TO IT AND CAN GO THROUGH IN DEPTH THE SECOND QUESTION OR KIND OF ITEM I WANTED TO BRING UP. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS ORDINANCE PARTICULAR IS THE BEST ONE, BUT IT REGARDS. AND WE HAD REACHED OUT TO YOU ABOUT THE SRO PROGRAM AND THE SCHOOLS. WE HAD A RESIDENT COME IN EARLIER AND TALK ABOUT THAT. HOW WOULD YOU RECOMMEND IF WE WANTED TO TRY AND PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL FUNDING FROM WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE BUDGETED TO HELP THE SCHOOLS KEEP THE SROS IN SCHOOL? AND I REALIZED WE HAD IT'S A DECENT AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED, BUT WHAT WOULD BE THE BEST WAY FOR US TO GO ABOUT DOING THAT TO KEEP AT LEAST THROUGH THIS SCHOOL YEAR, THE SROS WITHIN THE SCHOOLS. SO, YEAH, EITHER THIS ORDINANCE OR THE NEXT I THINK WOULD HAVE BEEN APPROPRIATE. SO I THINK WE'RE FINE THERE. WHAT I WILL SAY IS THE BUDGET THAT IS CURRENTLY IN FRONT OF YOU HAS ASSUMED THAT THE LEVY WOULD PASS, AND THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THE REVENUE

[01:10:01]

YOU KNOW, THANKFULLY, ASSUMING THERE'S OTHER THINGS THAT PASS, YOU KNOW, THE LAND SALES THAT WE HAVE UPCOMING WILL OFFSET THE, THE PROPERTY PURCHASES. SO I THINK FROM A FUND BALANCE STANDPOINT, WE'RE GOING TO ZERO OUT THERE. BUT WHEN IT COMES TO FINDING, IF YOU WILL, $700,000, IT CERTAINLY CAN BE DONE. BUT IT WOULD REQUIRE SOME CUTTING SOMETHING OR TAKING AWAY SOMETHING FROM ANOTHER PART OF THE BUDGET. THAT IS FUNDED. EMPHASIS ON THAT BY THE GENERAL FUND, BECAUSE AGAIN, THAT'S WHERE THE 232 GETS ITS FUNDING FROM PRIMARILY. SO IN OTHER WORDS, ENTERPRISE FUNDS, SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO BE UTILIZED. SO THANK YOU.

THIS WILL BE BACK FOR THIRD READING. I ONLY LIKE THAT FOR THAT SECOND READING. PUBLIC

[Ord. F]

JUST, YOU KNOW, THIS COULD BE A RESULT OF THINGS THAT WE'VE SEEN PLAY OUT IN THE LAST MONTH AND A HALF, MONTH AND A HALF. BY THE TIME WE GET HERE. OR IT COULD BE A RESULT OF OTHER ITEMS THAT COUNCIL HAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION THAT MAYBE THEY'D LIKE TO SEE MOVED AROUND. SO JUST PLEASE KEEP THAT IN MIND. SO WHAT I WOULD SUSPECT YOU WILL SEE AT THE THIRD READING IS A REQUEST TO, YOU KNOW, CHANGE THE ORDINANCE. I APOLOGIZE TO HIM ON THE EXACT WORDING AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WE'LL COME BACK FOR SECOND READING AND THEN OBVIOUSLY YOU WOULD APPROVE IT AT THAT TIME.

AND REMEMBER, IT DOES NEED TO BE APPROVED AT THAT MEETING BECAUSE IT NEEDS THE 30 DAY REFERENDUM PERIOD, BECAUSE IT HAS TO PASS OR HAS TO BE OUT OF REFERENDUM PERIOD BY DECEMBER 31ST, LEGALLY, TO KIND OF ECHO MR. WOLF'S POINT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S ONGOING DISCUSSIONS REGARDING HOW HOW WE AS THE CITY CAN JOINTLY SUPPORT THE SCHOOL. AND IN A SHORT TERM, RIGHT. WE MET ON FRIDAY. I WAS ON CALLS ALL WEEK LAST WEEK, WEDNESDAY THROUGH FRIDAY EMAILS. SO THERE'S JUST SO EVERYBODY KNOWS THERE'S ACTIVE CONVERSATIONS BEING HAD. AND IT'S AND IT JUST TO BE TRANSPARENT TO MR. LUTZ POINT THE DOLLARS DON'T JUST MAGICALLY APPEAR. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT YOU KNOW, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS AND CONSIDER POSTPONING REDUCING WHETHER THAT'S PAVING OR I KNOW MR. HUANG'S GOT THIS FANTASTIC FIVE POINTS ROUNDABOUT THAT'S ON THE DOCKET FOR 2026. YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE THOSE ARE THINGS THAT HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED. SO JUST SO EVERYBODY KNOWS, THERE'S WE'RE WE'RE ACTIVELY WORKING COLLABORATING TO TRY TO COME TO SOME TO SOME RESOLUTION FOR, FOR THE SHORT TERM. SO THANK YOU. THERE IS A MEETING BETWEEN CITY AND SCHOOLS I THINK ON NOVEMBER 20TH. I THINK IF I REMEMBER OH 18TH MAYBE I KNOW. AND THAT'S AND THAT WAS SET UP BEFORE THE LEVY. SO THAT'S THAT'S JUST CONTINUE THE ONGOING CONVERSATIONS THAT WE'VE BEEN HAVING. YEP. THAT'S MY NEXT. ANYBODY ELSE THIS WE GOT FOR THIRD READING. OKAY. HEARING THE CITIZENS COME BEFORE US ALL. I'LL FORGIVE YOU THIS TIME. THE SEAT THAT I GOT. THAT'S OKAY. KATHY YOUNG, 425 WEST EIGHTH. I HEARD, AND I COULD BE MISTAKEN, BUT I HEARD THAT THE STATE PAYS FOR 50% OF THE RESOURCE OFFICER. GERMAINE MIGHT BE ABLE TO SHED SOME LIGHT ON THAT. I DON'T KNO. I IN ALL FAIRNESS, THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A TIME THAT THAT PROGRAM EXISTED, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER BECAME A POPULAR ADDITION TO SCHOOLS. BUT I CAN SAY WITH CERTAINTY AT THIS TIME THAT THERE IS NO PROGRAM AVAILABLE TO

[01:15:02]

YEAH. LIKE I SAID, I'M VAGUELY AWARE OF THIS MAYBE EXISTING BACK WHEN I WAS EVEN A STATE AUDITOR. I MEAN, IT'S BEEN A LITTLE WHILE, BUT THE POINT IS THAT YES, THOSE AVENUES HAVE BEEN EXAMINED. AND AT THIS TIME IT DOESN'T EXIST. IT'S NOT TO SAY THAT MAYBE THERE'S A BILL CURRENTLY IN FRONT OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY THAT'S IN COMMITTEE. THAT'S BEING CONSIDERED. I DON'T I DON'T HAVE THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL. BUT AS IT STANDS TODAY, IF THERE'S A SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER, IT WOULD NEED TO BE EITHER PAID FOR BY THE SCHOOLS OR SOME COMBINATION OF OTHERWISE. IS THERE ANY OTHER CITIES IN. ANY OTHER COUNTRY? OKAY. GERMAINE FERGUSON, 305 SOUTH WALNUT STREET. FIRST, I JUST WANT TO I'M SPEAKING AS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAPPENS TO SERVE IN YOUR MARYSVILLE SCHOOL BOARD AND IS A I BELIEVE I HAVE GREAT RELATIONSHIPS WITH MEMBER OF THE MEMBER, THE MEMBERS OF THE ADMINISTRATION AND YOU MEMBERS OF COUNCIL. AND I JUST WANT TO FIRST THANK YOU FOR IN YOUR CONVERSATIONS HERE, YOU'VE EXPRESSED SOME WILLINGNESS TO LOOK AT THE SRO PROGRAM AND SEE IF THERE IS A WAY FORWARD.

THAT'S WHAT I HEARD FROM YOU. I HOPE I'M NOT MISSPEAKING OR MISINTERPRETING YOUR WORDS. I WILL SAY ON BEHALF OF MY CONSTITUENTS, OUR FAMILIES, AND OUR PARENTS AND OUR TEACHERS, THAT THERE IS A LOT OF SUPPORT AND EAGERNESS TO TRY TO FIND A SOLUTION TO KEEP SROS IN OUR BUILDINGS. THE SROS HAVE DEVELOPED A GREAT RELATIONSHIP WITH OUR KIDS. THEY LOOK UP TO THEM. THEY ARE A LAYER OF SECURITY AND A LAYER OF PRO-SOCIAL COMMUNITY ACTIVITY.

AND IT'S IMPORTANT. I UNDERSTAND THAT I'M ALSO THE MEMBER OR A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION THAT VOTED FOR THE CONTINGENCY PLAN TO REDUCE SROS. THE REASON WHY WE VOTED TO REDUCE SROS IS BECAUSE WE HAVE A BUDGET DEFICIT, AND WE DO NOT HAVE MONEY TO MEET TO PROVIDE THAT SERVICE. THE ADDITIONALLY, IT IS NOT A REQUIRED SERVICE FROM THE STATE OF OHIO, AND THERE IS NO MONEY FROM THE STATE OF OHIO TO PAY FOR SROS. THERE IS NO REIMBURSEMENT. THERE'S NOTHING YOU MAY MAY HAVE SEEN SOME SAFETY GRANT OR SAFETY, SAFETY AND WELLNESS GRANT DOLLARS. THAT WAS FOR PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE TO HELP OUR BUILDINGS BE SAFE WITH VIDEO, VIDEO, EQUIPMENT, DOOR FEATURES. THAT'S PHYSICAL REQUIREMENTS THAT HAPPENED DURING THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, THANKS TO THE STATE OF OHIO AND THE GOVERNOR, DEWINE'S BUDGET INITIATIVE TO HELP OUR STUDENTS.

BUT IT'S NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE SROS IN OUR BUILDINGS, AND THE STATE DOES NOT CONTRIBUTE ANYTHING TO THAT. HOWEVER, I DO WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR THE CONVERSATIONS THAT I'VE PERSONALLY HAD WITH SOME INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS AND FOR YOUR WILLINGNESS AND YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT STATEMENT. I UNDERSTAND YOU ARE STEWARDS OF THE CITY'S TAX DOLLARS AS WELL. YOU HAVE TO USE THOSE IN THE BEST INTEREST, BUT I DO AS AN AMBASSADOR OF THE SCHOOLS OR MY PARENTS AND STUDENTS, IF WE CAN FIND A SOLUTION, IT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL TO GET US AT LEAST UNTIL MAY AT THE END OF THE SCHOOL YEAR. I THINK THAT WOULD HELP OUR, OUR STAFF AND OUR TEACHERS AND KEEP SOME CONTINUITY AND ALLOW THE TAXPAYERS ANOTHER CHANCE. AGAIN, WE HAVE HOMEWORK TO DO AS THE BOARD OF EDUCATION TO FIGURE OUT HOW DO WE MOVE FORWARD. BUT IT CAN GIVE US SOME TIME TO HELP THAT. SO I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE? OKAY. THIS WILL BE BACK FOR THIRD READING TITLE ONLY ON NOVEMBER 25TH. ORDINANCE G SECOND READING PUBLIC HEARING

[Ord. G]

SO THIS THIS IS ONE THAT DOES NEED TO BE AMENDED. AND I DON'T EXPECT ANOTHER AMENDMENT TO IT.

THERE WERE FIVE ERRORS VOTED ON IT SINCE THEY'RE SHORT AND TO THE POINT. I'LL GO AHEAD AND NOTE THOSE THERE WERE THERE WERE JUST FIVE THAT FOR SOME REASON THE COST OF LIVING INCREASE DIDN'T CARRY FORWARD. AND THEIR SALARIES REMAINED UNCHANGED IN 2025. ONE OF THEM WAS QUITE IRONICALLY. I JUST WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT THE FINANCE DIRECTOR ONE WAS THE CITY ENGINEER. THE OTHER, QUITE APPROPRIATELY, WAS THE POLICE CHIEF. BUT, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER

[01:20:05]

MR. BURBY YES. MR. BURGER YES. MR. HUNTER YES. SIX. YES. SO THE LEGISLATION IS AGAIN AT SECOND READING. YES. AS AMENDED, FOR PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU. WOULD ANY CITIZENS LIKE TO SPEAK? HEARING NONE. THIS BE BACK FOR THIRD READING TITLE ONLY ON NOVEMBER 25TH. OR ORDINANCE H

[Ord. H]

REFUNDING. THANK YOU. MR. PRESIDENT. YEAH. SO AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IF THE RATES ARE SIMILAR NEXT YEAR TO WHAT THEY ARE NOW, WE WILL NOT REFINANCE NOW, MOST LIKELY NOT, BECAUSE THEN THE COST OF ISSUANCE AND SO FORTH WOULD MAKE THAT NOT A FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, A GOOD DEAL. RIGHT? SURE, THERE'S A PROPER FINANCE TERM FOR THAT, BUT IF RATES COME DOWN IN THE NEXT FIVE MONTHS, SIX MONTHS, WE DEFINITELY CONSIDER THAT. EXACTLY. YES. OKAY. AND AGAIN, I'LL KEEP YOU INFORMED OF THAT. I MEAN, WE HAVE UNTIL, YOU KNOW, A FEW MONTHS YET. BUT THIS NEEDED TO GET DONE NOW BECAUSE AGAIN, THERE'S A REFERENDUM PERIOD AND THEN THERE'S A, A PERIOD WHERE THE BANKS DO THEIR RESEARCH. AND SO FORTH. AND IT'S JUST A IT'S A MULTI-WEEK PROCESS. SO BUT WE'LL, WE'LL LET YOU KNOW. CITIZENS HOLD ON. I'LL GO WITH CITIZENS FIRST. WOULD

[01:25:02]

MR. PRESIDENT. MR. LUTZ, I THINK WE SPOKE AT THE LAST MEETING ABOUT IF RIGHT NOW MY GENERAL ASSUMPTION OR UNDERSTANDING OF THE MARKET IS INTEREST RATES ARE UP HERE. SO HOPEFULLY, MAYBE IN THE NEXT 6 OR 12 MONTHS WE SEE A CHANGE. BUT IF WE WERE TO CONSIDER EXTENDING THAT DEBT AT A LOWER INTEREST RATE. WHAT WOULD WE BE ABLE TO DO IF ANYTHING WITH LIKE THE EXCESS CASH BECAUSE WE COULD INVEST IT? OR WOULD WE BE ABLE TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT WITH LIKE THE TIF REVENUES THAT WE ARE GETTING TO PAY THAT, THAT BOND, OR ARE THEY SPECIFICALLY ALLOCATED TO, YOU KNOW, DO WE HAVE ANY PLAY IN THE TIF REVENUES? BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT THOSE REVENUES ARE NO, IT'S A DEDICATED TO FUND THE NOTE. YES.

BUT IF WE IF WE IF WE IF WE REFINANCE REFINANCE. SORRY I COULDN'T GET THAT OUT. IF WE REFINANCE THE NOTE ARE WE ABLE TO POTENTIALLY REDUCE THAT TIF REVENUE AND POTENTIALLY REALLOCATE. I GUESS THAT WOULD BE MY QUESTION. NO, I, I APPRECIATE THE QUESTION. ONCE AGAIN, VERY TIMELY GIVEN THE CONVERSATION. SO ONE OF THE REASONS WHY OUR INTEREST RATE IS, IS AGGRESSIVE WITH THIS DEBT AS IT IS, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE TIME FRAME THAT IT WAS PUT OUT, IF YOU LOOK AT THE INTEREST RATES AT THAT TIME, IS THAT IT IS FUNDED BY BY THE TIF REVENUE.

IT WAS ONE OF THE CONSIDERATIONS MADE WHEN WE DECIDED AT THAT TIME TO NOT ONLY UTILIZE TIF REVENUE TO HELP PAY OFF THIS DEBT, BUT WE DID INCREASE THE SEWER RATES AS WELL IN ORDER TO FACILITATE, SAY, PAYING OFF. IT'S NOT ROUGHLY HALF HALF, BUT THE POINT IS THE OTHER HALF OF IT, THE OTHER PART OF IT, IF WE WERE TO REFINANCE A PORTION OF THIS DEBT, THE ONLY WAY THAT WE COULD REFINANCE IT IS BY KEEPING OUR REVENUE STREAMS INTACT. IF WE WERE TO CHANGE THE REVENUE STREAMS, THAT WOULD CHANGE THE UNDERLYING DEBT BEING THE REVENUES, SORRY, THE UNDERLYING REVENUES BEING USED TO SECURE THE DEBT, WHICH WOULD THEREFORE CHANGE THE INTEREST RATES BECAUSE TO BE HONEST, THAT TIF REVENUE AND OR PROPERTY TAX REVENUE IS CONSIDERED MORE SECURE THAN RATE REVENUE. SO I CAN ALL BUT GUARANTEE THAT IF WE WERE TO TRY TO DO ANYTHING WITH THE TIF REVENUE WHICH KEEP IN MIND, I'M NOT ENTIRELY POSITIVE WE CAN BECAUSE THIS IS SPREAD OUT BETWEEN THREE DIFFERENT DEBT INDENTURES AND I'M NOT POSITIVE THAT WE CAN JUST PICK ONE DEBT INDENTURE AND SAY WE'RE GOING TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN THE OTHER TWO. YOU KNOW, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE DEBT CONSULTANTS AT BROKER OR THAT BROKER THAT COULD HELP US WITH THAT. BUT I CAN ALL BUT GUARANTEE YOU THAT THIS IS FINANCIALLY GOING TO BE A VERY BAD DEAL, BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN INTEREST PAID. WE WOULD HAVE TO SECURE THAT REVENUE THROUGH AN INCREASE IN OUR SEWER RATES, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO BUILD IN THE NEW REVENUE TO SECURE THE DEBT AND PAY FOR THE OPERATIONS THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY PAYING. IF WE WISH TO MAINTAIN THE DEBT RATIO THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE, THAT AFFORDS US THE DEBT INTEREST RATE WE'RE BEING OFFERED. SO I DON'T SEE A PATH WHERE THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULDN'T CAUSE INCREASED COST TO THE CITIZENS. I JUST FROM FROM A PERSONAL STANDPOINT, I THINK THAT WE NEED TO HAVE OPTIONS ON THE, ON THE TABLE IF WE IF WE'RE IF WE'RE AT A CROSSROADS WITH OUR ABILITY TO REFINANCE. TO YOUR POINT, WE HAVE TWO SOURCES TIF REVENUES AND USAGE RATES. YEAH. AND TO FUND THAT NOTE TO THAT BOND. SO IF ONE GOES AWAY, INEVITABLY THE OTHER HAS TO GO UP. RIGHT. SO YES. BUT I HAVE TO EMPHASIZE SO MUCH THAT THIS IS A HUGE ASSUMPTION ON MY PART. I AM NOT A DEBT ATTORNEY. I DON'T WORK IN FINANCE. I'M, YOU KNOW, A GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTANT. SO THIS IS JUST I'M JUST SAYING THAT EVEN IF IT WAS POSSIBLE, MY ASSUMPTION IS TO DO THIS. BUT KEEP IN MIND THAT THIS INQUIRY HAS BEEN MADE PREVIOUSLY, AND I WAS TOLD AT THE TIME THAT THE DEBT COVENANTS WOULD NOT ALLOW US TO DO ANYTHING WITH THE TIF REVENUE IN ORDER TO DO ANYTHING

[01:30:03]

[Ord. I]

PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. PUD AND I DO HAVE A PRESENTATION TO PULL UP. AND ALSO I WANTED TO MAKE A NOTE THAT FOR ORDINANCE I AND ORDINANCE J, THERE WILL BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR CITIZEN CITIZEN COMMENT AT THIS READING. AND THE NEXT ONE, THERE'S A REQUIRED SEVEN DAY NOTICE PERIOD. AND I MISSED THAT SEVEN DAY NOTICE. SO IT WAS POSTED OVER THE WEEKEND. SO TO GIVE THAT SEVEN DAY NOTICE, I'LL DO IT AGAIN AND MEET THE SEVEN DAY NOTICE. BUT IT WILL REQUIRE ALLOWING CITIZEN COMMENTS TWICE. THEN OKAY. THANK YOU MRS. BABER. I WILL GIVE A BRIEF INTRO. JUST KIND OF AN UPDATE FROM THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING AND THEN TURN IT OVER TO CONNECT TO SHARE THEIR POWERPOINT SLIDES AS WELL. COMING OUT OF THE LAST MEETING, STAFF WORKED TO PREPARE A DOCUMENT THAT COMBINED EVERYONE'S COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT TAX. SO WE CAME UP WITH ABOUT 11 DIFFERENT ITEMS AND WE SEPARATED THOSE AND TALKED THROUGH WITH MR. LAMB ON WHAT COULD BE ADDRESSED AT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AND WHAT NEEDS TO ACTUALLY BE AMENDED WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT TEXT. SO JUST TO TOUCH ON A COUPLE OF THOSE POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS WHICH WHICH BOB WILL OUTLINE AS WELL, WE WENT THROUGH THE VEHICLE WASH FACILITY, DISCUSSED SOME TREE REPLACEMENT ITEMS, THE DESCRIPTION, HOW THE POTENTIAL SIGNAGE ON THE SILO IS DESCRIBED AS MARKETING, MAYBE AMENDING THAT DESCRIPTION, THE RETAIL OR SPECIALTY FOOD AT THE BOUTIQUE HOTEL ON THE FIRST FLOOR TALKED ABOUT THE MONUMENT SIGNAGE AND DRIVE THRUS WITHIN WITHIN THE UPTOWN. SO THOSE WERE KIND OF CRITICAL ITEMS, I THINK, RELATED TO THE DEVELOPMENT TEXT. SOME OF THE OTHER ITEMS ON PARKING SPAC, SIZES, SOME OF THE BUFFERS BETWEEN THE PARKING LOT AND MAIN STREET. I THINK THOSE ARE ITEMS THAT WE COULD HANDLE THROUGH DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, WITH THE INTENT THAT WE KNOW YOUR THOUGHTS AND YOUR PREFERENCES COMING OUT OF CITY COUNCIL. SO WITH THAT SAID, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO MR. LAMB AND HE CAN SHARE SOME OF SOME OF HIS THOUGHTS AND REQUESTS AS WELL. MOVING FORWARD. THANK YOU. BOB LAMB CONNECT I BELIEVE WE HAVE JUST REALLY ONE KEY SLIDE OPENING SLIDE SHOWING A RENDERING THAT YOU HAVE SEEN BEFORE. AND THEN IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, IT HIGHLIGHTS SOME OF THE MAIN ITEMS THAT WE'RE IN AGREEMENT WITH. THE CITY STAFF ON. AS WE'VE WORKED THROUGH THE VARIOUS COMMENTS THAT YOU PROVIDED AT OUR LAST MEETING, WHICH WE APPRECIATE THOSE COMMENTS. SO WE ARE IN AGREEMENT ON CHANGING THE LANGUAGE IN THE PUD TO ELIMINATE THAT MARKETING LANGUAGE FOR THE SILO SIGNAGE, THE DRIVE THRUS WERE GOOD WITH MAKING THAT A NON PERMITTED USE IN THAT AREA. PARKING, WORKING THROUGH THAT WITH THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, BUT ALSO AGREEING TO THAT INCREASE IN SIZE FROM EIGHT TO 8.5FT WALKING THROUGH THE PARKING LOT ISLANDS AND THE SOUND WALL AS PART OF THE DESIGN REVIEW. AND THEN LOOKING AT REMOVING OF THAT SOUND WALL ON THE FURTHER NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AND REPLACING THAT WITH TREES. THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT STAFF ASKED ON THE TWO ITEMS THAT YOU DON'T SEE UP HERE THAT WAS REQUESTED OF US. ONE WAS THE WE HAD REQUESTED TO NOT HAVE TO BE HELD TO THE TREE REPLACEMENT PROGRAM WITHIN THE CITY. I DO BELIEVE THAT BY ADDING THE TREES ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THAT PROPERTY, WE MAY HAVE ADDRESSED THAT ISSUE. I'M WORKING WITH OUR ENGINEERING TEAM RIGHT NOW TO SEE IF WE HAVE LIKELY ADDRESSED IT. IF SO, WE'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO REMOVE THAT LANGUAGE FROM THE AGREEMENT BECAUSE WE

[01:35:04]

IS THAT GOING TO GO AWAY. YES. OKAY. SO THERE'LL BE NO DRIVE THROUGH STRUCK THROUGH. AND I DON'T KNOW IF I MISSED THIS LAST TIME, BUT I'M LOOKING AT THE VERY BOTTOM VEHICLE WASH FACILITY. WHERE WOULD WE HAVE A THAT THAT'S STILL SOMETHING THAT WE'RE ASKING AS A CONDITIONAL USE WITHIN OUR AREA. WE DON'T HAVE A DESIGNATED LOCATION, BUT WE'D LIKE TO WORK. WE BELIEVE IT'S A USE THAT COULD BE BENEFICIAL WITHIN THE AREA. SO WE WOULD LIKE TO KEEP IT AS CONDITIONAL. WE DID AGREE TO MOVE IT TO A CONDITIONAL USE PREVIOUSLY. OKAY. YEAH, THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I HAD. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE I WAS LOOKING AT IT, I WAS LIKE, I THOUGHT YOU GOT RID OF IT. SO. I'M STILL GOING TO PUSH ON THE TREE REPLACEMENT PROGRAM. I'M NOT SURE WHAT TREES EXACTLY WOULD BE REMOVED THROUGH THE PROCESS, AND OBVIOUSLY THE SURVEY WOULD ADDRESS THAT. BUT DEPENDING ON WHAT YOU'RE REPLACING, THE TREES WERE PUTTING IN AREN'T GOING TO BE THE TREES THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE THAT ARE GROWN, THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, FULLY GROWN TREES THAT CONTRIBUTE TO THAT AREA. SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO REPLACE THE SOUND WALL WITH TREES AND YOU MEET THAT REQUIREMENT, SO BE IT. BUT IF YOU REPLACE IT WITH TREES AND IT DOESN'T MEET THE REQUIREMENT THAT WE HAVE OR IT IT'S LEFT SOME TO BE DESIRED OF WHAT WE NEED, I STILL WANT TO HAVE IT IN THERE THAT WE EITHER REQUIRE YOU TO REPLACE TREES SOMEWHERE AROUND TOWN, OR PAY INTO THE FUND TO REPLACE THOSE TREES AS WELL. THAT WOULD BE MY REQUEST. I AGREE. AND I THOUGHT I WAS THE ONLY TREE HUGGER ON COUNCIL. WE DIDN'T SAY YOU WEREN'T. LORAX WOULD BE PROUD OF ME. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE COMMENTS? I DON'T NECESSARILY I. I KNOW WHY IT'S A CONDITIONAL USE. I DON'T NECESSARILY LOVE THE IDEA OF HAVING A CAR WASH. YOU KNOW, IN THE UPTOWN AREA AS AN AREA THAT WE WANT TO PROMOTE WALKABILITY AND RECREATE THAT URBAN FEEL. THAT'S THAT'S DEFINITELY A COMMERCIAL SITE THAT'S DEFINITELY FOCUSED ON AUTOMOBILE. YOU KNOW, I DON'T LOVE THE IDEA THAT'S GOING TO CONDITIONAL USE. CONDITIONAL USE IS ALWAYS SCARE ME BECAUSE I'M SUPPOSED TO LEAVE IT UP TO, YOU KNOW, THE PROCESS. BUT SOMETIMES THE PROCESS CAN BE VERY DISAPPOINTING. AND SO I DON'T LOVE CONDITIONAL USES AT ALL. IF IT WAS UP TO ME, I WOULD REMOVE THEM ALL OUT OF OUT OF CODE. BUT SO THAT'S MY TAKE, IS THAT I REALLY WOULD NOT LIKE CAR WASHES AS A CONDITIONAL USE. MR. PRESIDENT, COULD I ASK A QUESTION, SIR? SO YOU GAVE ME A THOUGHT HERE. SO IN TERMS OF YOUR INTENT FOR CAR WASHES. SO I HAVE SOME IN-LAWS THAT LIVE IN AN APARTMENT COMPLEX IN DUBLIN, AND YOU PULL INTO THIS APARTMENT COMPLEX AND YOU WOULD NEVER THINK THERE'S A CAR WASH IN THIS APARTMENT COMPLEX BECAUSE IT'S ADJACENT TO, I THINK, THE KIND OF COMMON ROOM IN, LIKE, THE SMALL LITTLE CLUBHOUSE AREA YOU BARELY HAS A GLASS FRONT DOOR THAT GOES UP AND DOWN, AND THE RESIDENTS OF THIS APARTMENT ARE PRIVY TO USE THAT BAY. AND THERE'S BUSHES AROUND IT. IT'S VERY UNNOTICEABLE. SO I'M JUST WONDERING, IN TERMS OF THE IDEA OF HAVING HAVING A CAR WASH AS A CONDITIONAL USE, WHAT IS YOUR

[01:40:02]

CURRENTLY THEY ARE ON SMALL LOTS TIGHT, AND ONE OF THEM IS BUILT INTO AN EXISTING BUILDING THAT PROVIDES OTHER SERVICES, INCLUDING PARKING, GARAGE AND OFFICE SPACE. SO OUR THOUGHT WOULD BE TO DEVELOP IN A MANNER THAT WOULD BE CONFORMING WITH THE GENERAL AREA AND WORKING WITH YOUR DESIGN TEAM, WHICH IS WHY WE'VE ASKED FOR IT AS A CONDITIONAL USE. YOUR EXAMPLE WOULD BE MUCH MORE SIMILAR TO WHAT WE WOULD BE LOOKING TO DEVELOP THAN WHAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER TO BE ONE OF THE CAR WASHES YOU SEE ALONG A MAJOR COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR THAT'S FIVE LANE IN NATURE, WITH DRYING FACILITIES OUTSIDE AND OTHER TYPE OF ACTIVITIES. OKAY, THANK.

TO THE APARTMENT COMPLEX. IS THAT IN AN UPTOWN HISTORICAL IT IS NOT. YEAH. IT'S A MORE MODERN PROBABLY BUILT, I WOULD SAY IN THE LATE 90S TO 2000 TIME FRAME. SO THANK YOU. SO YEAH, MAYBE YOUR POINT IS, IS THIS AREA IS RIGHT UPTOWN HISTORICAL. IT IS NOT THAT SO? OH YEAH. THANK YOU.

ANYBODY ELSE. SO BASED ON SO I'M IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THE PROCESS BASED ON WHAT WE HEARD TONIGHT, DOES ANY ACTION NEED TO BE MADE OR HAVE YOU HEARD THE COMMENTS AND YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT WITH WHAT YOU HEARD OR TO. I'M TALKING TO CITY STAFF AT THE MOMENT, AND I GUESS I'LL OPEN IT UP TO YOU TO MR. LAMB, BUT I GUESS I'M GOING TO CITY STAFF FIRST. YEAH. SO I THINK WE WOULD NEED TO VOTE TO MAKE AMENDMENTS ON THE ITEMS THAT KINECT HAS ALREADY AGREED UPON, AND THEY CAN COME BACK WITH THAT UPDATED TEXT FOR THE THIRD READING. I THINK THERE'S SOME OUTSTANDING ITEMS RELATED TO THE VEHICLE CAR WASH AND THE TREE REPLACEMENT AND HOW THOSE WILL BE ADDRESSED, WHICH IF YOU WANT TO KIND OF TALK THROUGH THAT MORE TONIGHT OR IF WE WANT TO ADDRESS THAT IN THIRD READING, THAT'S, I THINK, AN OPTION AS WELL. BUT AGAIN, YOU YOU WOULD HAVE TO AMEND THE TEXT IF YOU CAME TO SOME AGREEMENT THAT WAS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT IS CURRENTLY PROPOSED.

SO I'LL MAKE IT EASY THEN. I THINK BASED ON WHAT WE'VE HEARD, IS EVERYONE COMFORTABLE WITH PASSING THOSE AMENDMENTS AND THEN BASED ON THE I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD. THESE. YEAH. THE SIX.

CORRECT. YEAH. SO I THINK IT WOULD BE THE FIRST ONE WITH THE SILO SIGNAGE AND HOW THAT'S DESCRIBED IN THE PUD. THE NEXT ONE WOULD BE NO DRIVE THRUS. OKAY. PARKING SPACES, DIMENSIONS. THAT'S ALREADY WITHIN THERE LISTED AS THE EIGHT AND A HALF. SO I THINK WE'RE OKAY ON THAT. THE ANGLED PARKING WE CAN ADDRESS THAT AT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD PARKING LOT ISLANDS. WE CAN ALSO ADDRESS A DESIGN REVIEW BOARD. AND WHAT THOSE SIZE AND QUANTITY ARE. THE ITEMS RELATED TO THE DESIGN OF THE SOUND WALL CAN BE ADDRESSED AT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AND ALSO JUST ADDING IN THE LANDSCAPE INSTEAD OF THE SOUND WALL FACING THE NORTHERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. SO YOUR CRITICAL ITEMS FOR AMENDMENT ARE THE SILO SIGNAGE LANGUAGE AND NO DRIVE THRUS PERMITTED. I MEAN, IN MY IN MY PERSONAL FEELING BASED ON WHAT WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT, IF YOU KNOW, BASED ON OUR COMMENTS, IF WE WANT TO GIVE MR. LAMB AND CITY STAFF MORE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK AND THEN VOTE ON ANYTHING EXTRA BY THIRD READING, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD MAYBE TONIGHT VOTE ON ONE AND TWO IF WE FEEL COMFORTABLE DOING THAT. IF ANYBODY HAS ANY ANY SUGGESTIONS AND THEN COME BACK TO THE NEXT MEETING WITH THE DETAILS ON THE TREE REPLACEMENT PROGRAM. YEAH.

DIFFERENT THINGS. OKAY. OKAY. SO THEN THERE HAS TO BE AN AMENDMENT MADE. THEN. I LIKE THE MOTION TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO WOULD YOU WANT TO DO THEM INDIVIDUALLY OR JOINTLY? TIM, WHAT DO YOU THINK IS BEST. SHOULD WE DO THEM TOGETHER ONE AND TWO AT THE NEXT? RIGHT NOW.

JUST RIGHT NOW, I WOULD I ALWAYS RECOMMEND DOING THEM INDIVIDUALLY. OKAY. IT'S SAFER THAT WAY OKAY. I DON'T FEEL LIKE I SHOULD MAKE I DON'T FEEL LIKE I SHOULDN'T BE MAKING MR. YEAH.

I CAN MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND THE ZONING TEXT FOR THE SILOS SIGNAGE LANGUAGE. OKAY. SO THEN

[01:45:10]

MR. REMES YES. SIX. YES. OKAY. AND I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND THE DRIVE THRUS NO LONGER BEING PERMITTED IN THE ZONING TEXT ROLL CALL, MR. WOLF. YES. MR. KIRBY? YES. MR. BURGER YES. MR. HUNTER YES. MR. REMES YES. MR. BORDNER YES. THANK YOU SIR, THANK YOU. YOU HAVE IT'S ON FOR SECOND READING. SO AFTER THE AMENDMENT, IT COMES ON AS PUBLIC HEARING AGAIN, AS AMENDED. AND THEN WE JUST MOVE ON TO THIRD READING. OKAY. SO THEN IT GIVES CITIZENS THE ABILITY TO SPEAK ABOUT WHAT WHAT WAS JUST AMENDED ON IF ANY RESIDENTS HAVE ANYTHING THAT'S ANYTHING TO SAY.

HEARING NONE. COUNCIL HEARING NONE. THIS WILL BE BACK FOR THIRD READING TITLE ONLY ON NOVEMBER 25TH. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. SO ORDINANCE J SECOND READING PUBLIC HEARING TO

[Ord. J]

GLOSSARY OF TERMS TO ALLOW FOR THE USE OF CULTIVATION AND OR PROCESSING OF MARIJUANA. I DO HAVE A MAP TO PULL UP IN THE COMMENTS REGARDING CITIZEN COMMENTS. APPLIES TO THIS FOR THE NEXT MEETING AS WELL. OKAY, THANK YOU.

THIS IS. ADMINISTRATION. DO YOU HAVE ANY. SO THIS IS THE SECOND READING PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ZONING OF THE PROCESSORS AND CULTIVATORS. OKAY. DO CITIZENS HAVE ANY COMMENTS? AS COUNCIL.

SO HEARING NONE I DO MR. PRESIDENT. SORRY I WAS I'M GATHERING MY THOUGHTS. YOU KNOW I HAVE A LOT OF CONCERN WITH THE PROCESSING AND CULTIVATION BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT AND FORGIVE MY LACK OF KNOWLEDG. BUT THE MATERIALS GROWN IN LIKE A GREENHOUSE LARGE GREENHOUSE.

AND I WOULD BE CONCERNED WITH THE LIGHTING. I KNOW THAT IN MY FORMER HOMETOWN OF WAPAKONETA, THERE WAS A REALLY LARGE GREENHOUSE THAT WAS PUT IN PLACE, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE A DECADE AGO AND IT'S JUST ABSURDLY BRIGHT AROUND THE CITY. IT ALWAYS FEELS LIKE IT'S, YOU KNOW, NOON AND I WOULD BE REALLY CONCERNED WITH PUTTING SOMETHING OF THAT MAGNITUDE IN THAT AREA.

AND MR. BURR MENTIONED AT THE LAST MEETING, I BELIEVE THAT A LOT OF THE CULTIVATORS AND PROCESSORS ARE DOING THIS INSIDE, LIKE A BUILDING AS OPPOSED TO A WAREHOUSE. AND I DON'T KNOW IF, YOU KNOW, IF A MIDDLE GROUND IS, YOU KNOW, GETTING RID OF THE GREENHOUSE FEATURE BECAUSE IT WOULD BE ABSURD TO HAVE THAT MUCH LIGHT ANYWHERE. HONESTLY, ACTUALLY, I THINK THAT TORNADO HIT IT YEARS BACK, AND PEOPLE OF WAPAKONETA WERE VERY HAPPY FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME BEFORE IT WAS REBUILT. BUT I HAVE CONCERNS WITH THE WITH THE GREENHOUSE, AND MAYBE WE NEED TO CONSIDER YOU KNOW, THE TYPE OF INFRASTRUCTURE THAT THAT THIS PARTICULAR OPERATION WOULD OPERATE WITH. AND YEAH, SO AS PART OF THE PROPOSED TEXT, WE HAVE A SECTION CALLED GENERAL CONDITIONS AND LETTER E UNDER THAT WOULD ADDRESS LIGHTING. AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DO NOT HAVE ANY OF THOSE ISSUES WITH IT CAUSING LIGHT POLLUTION

[01:50:03]

YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LARGE CORPORATION IN THIS IN THIS AREA WHERE THEY THEY DO HAVE A GREENHOUSE THAT IS LIT AND AT NIGHT YOU CAN SEE IT FROM 33, YOU CAN SEE IT WHEN YOU'RE DRIVING PAST THE BEAMS OF LIGHT. GO, YOU KNOW, UP, UP INTO THE ATMOSPHERE REALLY IT'S VERY NOTICEABLE. AND THAT WAS ONE THING THAT WE DID INTERNALLY DISCUSS AS WE WERE PREPARING THIS PROPOSED TEXT AND WANTED TO TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT, THAT WE HELPED TO MODIFY THAT MOVING FORWARD. OKAY. SO I GUESS WE CAN JUST CONTINUE THOSE CONVERSATIONS UNTIL YOU'RE COMFORTABLE. DO WE KNOW WHAT TYPES OF JOBS THIS BRINGS IN OR. I DON'T KNOW, MR. PHILLIPS, IF I'M JUST I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE INDUSTRY, I APOLOGIZE. I'M NOT A GROWER. I'M SORRY. WE HAVE NEVER DONE RESEARCH ON WHAT TYPE OF EMPLOYEES, BUT I WOULD ASSUME THEY'D BE SIMILAR TO MANUFACTURING POSITIONS I WOULD ASSUME, OR SERVICE SOMETIME IN THE MIDDLE, PROBABLY 50 TO 60,000 A YEAR, I WOULD GUESS. BUT THAT'S A THAT'S SOME SORT OF DATA ON LIKE THE ECONOMIC VALUE THAT THIS IS GOING TO BRING TO THE COMMUNITY. WE COULD WE COULD POTENTIALLY BRING TO THE COMMUNITY. I SHOULDN'T SAY IS THAT WE WILL LOOK AND GET SOME DATA FOR YOU, DATA SETS FOR YOU ON THE BASICALLY EXPECTED INCOME FROM EMPLOYEES. WE CAN DO THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU.

IS ANYBODY ELSE? OH GO AHEAD. TWO THINGS. WOULD WE BE ABLE TO TALK WITH SCOTT'S POSSIBLY ABOUT HOW THEY DO THAT PROCESS. IF YOU KNOW I'M SURE THEY HAVE AN INTEREST IN THE CULTIVATION AND PROCESSING OF MARIJUANA. SO POSSIBLY TALKING TO THEM ABOUT HOW THEY GO ABOUT DOING THAT OR WHAT IT WOULD ENTAIL AND JOBS OR WHATEVER WOULD COME WITH THAT. YEAH. TARA AND I HAVE HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM ABOUT THIS ISSUE. WE CAN FOLLOW UP WITH SCOTT'S AS WELL. AND THE SECOND THING I IT'S JUST KIND OF WITH THE PROCESS THAT'S PLAYED OUT WITH THIS. AND THEN THE EARLIER DISPENSARY DISCUSSION, IT FEELS TO ME SLIGHTLY HYPOCRITICAL THAT YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THIS ORDINANCE AND WE DECIDE IF WE DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT, ALLOW FOR THE CULTIVATION AND PROCESSING OF IT HERE WITHIN THE CITY. AND, YOU KNOW, THE CITY BENEFITS FROM THAT IN A WAY. BUT THEN SAYING TO THE RESIDENTS, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO HAVE A DISPENSARY IN TOWN TO GET ACCESS TO THAT HERE, BUT WE'LL ALLOW FOR CULTIVATION AND PROCESSING.

SO IT JUST FEELS SLIGHTLY HYPOCRITICAL TO ME IN THAT REGARD. I, I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT. I, I, YOU KNOW, AND I ALSO WANT TO SAY THAT I THINK, I THINK RESIDENTS ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO GROW AT FIVE PLANTS AT SIX IN THEIR OWN RESIDENCE, IN THEIR OWN HOME, SIX SO I BUT I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT, THOUGH. I MAKE A COMMENT, I UNDERSTAND THE COMMENT AS WELL AND THE PERSPECTIVE I, I HAD MENTIONED THIS AND I'LL REPEAT IT NOW. MAYBE FOR THE THIRD TIME AND BUT I MEAN MY THOUGHT IS IN REGARD TO ISSUE 1 OR 2, WHATEVER IT WAS THAT WAS PASSED IN 2023 AT THE STATE LEVEL IS THAT THE VOTERS OF THE STATE MADE A DECISION ON A AT A MACRO LEVEL TO, SAY, EXPAND ACCESS OF A REGULATED SUBSTANCE AND AT A MACRO LEVEL, THAT WAS WHAT WAS DECIDED. WE, AS COUNCIL HAVE TO CONSIDER AT A MICRO LEVEL, AT A LOCAL LEVEL, HOW DOES THAT MEAN THAT WE NEED TO PUT A RECREATIONAL DISPENSARY IN THE CORNER OF, YOU KNOW, OUR UPTOWN FOR EXAMPLE, THAT THAT'S A DECISION NOW THAT WE'RE FACED WITH MAKING AT THE LOCAL LEVEL, I THINK WHEN WE TALK ABOUT CULTIVATING AND ALL OF THAT, I MEAN, THIS AT A MACRO LEVEL, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE EXPANDED ACCESS ACROSS THE STATE. THAT'S THAT'S WHAT VOTERS DECIDED. AND I THINK THIS IS PART OF THE MACRO LEVEL VIEWPOINT, IS I MEAN, IT'S FARMLAND. NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BIG WIDE AREAS AND HOW THAT'S GOING TO SUPPLY THE MACRO LEVEL. AND I THINK ALSO KIND OF JUST TO REITERATE COMMENTS THAT I HAD MADE, JUST THERE IS A THERE ARE MEDICINAL BENEFITS THAT I WOULD I PERSONALLY RECOGNIZE WITH MARIJUANA. I'VE HAD TESTIMONY BY RESIDENTS IN THIS COMMUNITY KIND OF SAYING IT WAS A GAME CHANGER FOR THEM. I'VE I'VE ALSO HEARD TESTIMONY THAT IT DIDN'T DO ANYTHING, BUT I'VE HEARD TESTIMONY FROM RESIDENTS THAT THIS HAS CHANGED THE WAY THAT I DEAL WITH THIS PAIN. SO I DO THINK THERE IS A VALID CASE FOR USE IN REGARDS TO MEDICAL

[01:55:08]

[Ord. K]

DOES COUNCIL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? JUST. JUST STATE YOUR FIRST AND LAST NAME AND ADDRESS FOR PUBLIC RECORD. THANK YOU. CARLTON DEAN IS 14 711 INDUSTRIAL PARKWAY PERSONAL RESIDENCE 4195 GLEN WATER, HILLIARD, OHIO. I PERSONALLY DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY ELSE HAS ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY. THANK YOU. MR. PRESIDENT, I MOTION WE PASS THIS LEGISLATION. OKAY. ROLL CALL. MR. KIRBY. NO. MR. BURGER, NO. SORRY. WAS THAT. NO. YEAH. OKAY.

SORRY, SORRY. MR. HUNTER. NO. MR. REMES. NO. MR. NO. MR. WOLF. YES, BUT FIVE. NO. ONE. TWO.

[Ord. L]

COUNCIL. DO I HEAR A MOTION TO PASS ADMINISTRATION? PASS THE LEGISLATION? I MAKE A MOTION TO PASS THE LEGISLATION. OKAY. ROLL CALL. MR. BURGER. NO. MR. HUNTER. NO. MR. REMES YES. MR. BORDNER NO. MR. WOLF YES. MR. BURBY NO. FOUR. NO. OR ORDINANCE M THIRD READING TITLE ONLY TO

[Ord. M]

[02:00:07]

I DO HAVE AN APPROPRIATION OF PART TIME EMPLOYEES FOR THE POOL OPERATING FUND THAT JUST, YOU KNOW, FINAL PAYROLLS CAME THROUGH FOR WHEN THE POOL WAS CLOSED FROM WHEN I STARTED THIS APPROPRIATION. SO NO, NO INCREASE IN THE TRANSFER IS BEING MADE IN THE GENERAL FUND.

THE FUND BALANCE CAN HANDLE IT, BUT WE NEED TO APPLY THOSE FUND BALANCES TO THE PART TIME LINE ITEMS. NO CHANGES IN THE FIRE GRANT FUND. THE STREET TREE FUND ACTUALLY WENT AWAY. THE NEED FOR THAT APPROPRIATION, YOU KNOW, WHERE MY ESTIMATES WERE GOING TOOK A TURN. THE OTHER DIRECTION. SO I ACTUALLY PULLED THAT OUT OF THERE. THE ACCRUED LEAVE FUND, OF COURSE, IS STILL IN THERE. THAT AMOUNT DIDN'T CHANGE. I DID ADD THE STREET MAINTENANCE FUND, BUT YOU SEE, WE'RE MOVING MONIES WITHIN THE FUND FROM MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT TO FACILITATE THE PURCHASE OF A CHIPPER. YOU KNOW, THE THING THAT YOU HAVE ON THE BACK THAT YOU PULL AND YOU THROW ALL THE BIG BRANCHES IN AND IT MAKES MULCH THE ONE THAT WE HAVE IS, I BELIEVE, JOE SAID FROM THE LATE AUGHTS SOMETIME. SO IT CERTAINLY LIVED ITS USEFUL LIFE. BUT IS GETTING NEAR, NEAR TO THE END. YOU'LL SEE THAT REFERENCED IN OTHER FUNDS AS WELL, BECAUSE THAT GETS SHARED BETWEEN ENTERPRISE AND ENTERPRISE FUNDS AND THE GENERAL FUND FUNDED DEPARTMENTS. POLICE AND FIRE. ACTUALLY, THIS THIS SHRUNK A LITTLE BIT IN TERMS OF NUMBER OF LINE ITEMS. THE CORPORALS WAS A LINE ITEM I KNEW WE WOULD NEED BECAUSE WHEN WE STARTED THE YEAR, WE WEREN'T SURE HOW QUICKLY THE POLICE CHIEF COULD FILL THOSE POSITIONS, AS WE WERE STILL RAMPING UP THAT PROGRAM, AND OBVIOUSLY HE WAS ABLE TO DO THAT QUICKER THAN WE INITIALLY EXPECTED. SO I ALWAYS KNEW THERE WAS GOING TO NEED TO BE AN APPROPRIATION TOWARDS THE END OF THE YEAR. BUT AGAIN, AS YOU CAN SEE, PART OF THAT WILL BE FUNDED BY THE TRANSFER FROM THE GENERAL FUND. BUT I ALSO SUSPECTED THAT IT WOULD BE THE CASE. SO MY TRANSFER INITIAL TRANSFER WAS SUFFICIENT TO COVER A LOT OF IT, AND THEN A SMALL AMOUNT OF FUEL AND LUBRICANTS AND HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL INSURANCE AND QUITE FRANKLY, THE FACT THAT POLICE, COURT AND FIRE WAS SO CLOSE AND THIS IS THE COURT FUND WITHIN $5,000, THEIR INSURANCE IS PRETTY GOOD. YOU KNOW, WE NORMALLY SEE A LOT MORE INSURANCE CHANGES THROUGH THE YEAR. COMMERCIAL TIF FUND, NO CHANGE FROM WHAT YOU WERE PREVIOUSLY GIVEN. DEBT SERVICE FUND NO CHANGE FROM WHAT YOU WERE PREVIOUSLY GIVEN. THE TIFF CAPITAL FUND DID INCREASE A LITTLE BIT FOR THE LEGAL SERVICES THAT I'M PAYING OUT OF THAT LINE ITEM. OF COURSE, WE HAVE THE TRANSFER IN FOR THE 1.7 GOING INTO THE CAPITAL FUND. MOVING ON TO THE SANITATION FUND, THIS IS ONE WHERE THE ONLY OTHER CHANGE WAS RELATED TO THAT CHIPPER MOVING SOME MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES TO THE SANITATION FUND, CAPITAL FUND, OR CAPITAL LINE ITEM. THE SEWER FUND HAD SOME LINE ITEMS PRIMARILY RELATED TO NON-PAYROLL. AGAIN, THESE WERE JUST ITEMS THAT AS WE GOT CLOSER TO THE END OF THE YEAR, WE SAID, OKAY, WE DO NEED MORE MONEY IN THESE LINE ITEMS. THE BIGGEST CHUNK OF THAT WAS RELATED TO GENERAL FUND SERVICES, WHICH ARE MONIES THAT ARE CHARGED BACK TO THE GENERAL CHARGE, BACK TO THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS FOR SERVICES PROVIDED BY GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENTS. SO THIS COULD BE THINGS LIKE THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT, EVEN MCKINSEY. YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST THERE ARE GENERAL FUND PAID EMPLOYEES THAT

[02:05:03]

BUT THIS IS AGAIN, GENERALLY HOW WE GET TO THE END OF THE YEAR. SO I WOULD JUST ASK COUNCIL IF THEY'RE SO INCLINED TO AMEND AND ULTIMATELY APPROVE THESE SUPPLEMENTALS. EMANCIPATION ROLL CALL. MR. HUNTER. YES. MR. REAMES YES. MR. YES. MR. WOLF. YES. MR. YES. MR. BURGER YES.

MR. WEBB JUST A QUICK PRESENTATION ON PREVIOUS ORDINANCE THAT WE HAD GONE THROUGH. I WANTED TO NOT ON THE MIC IF I COULD, FROM ADMINISTRATION PERHAPS. COULD YOU GIVE CLARITY ON ORDINANCE L? I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM ORDINANCE L IN ITS RELATIONSHIP TO ORDINANCE K, IS THERE A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THOSE TWO ITEMS? K AND IT'S K IS ABOUT THE WASTE STERILIZATION? NO. IF I WERE TO WANT TO RECONSIDER ORDINANCE L WOULD NOW BE AN APPROPRIATE TIME TO MAKE AN A MOTION TO A MOTION TO DO SO. OKAY, I MADE A MISTAKE ON UNDERSTANDING THAT ITEM AND THE PARCEL THAT IT WAS POINTING TO. SO NOW THAT WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE TIME TO DO THAT. WELL, THAT'S UP TO THE PRESIDENT. BUT I MEAN, YOU KNOW, I SUGGEST YOU DO IT SOONER RATHER THAN LATER. YOU CAN WAIT TILL AFTER THE ORDINANCES ARE HEARD OR YOU CAN DO IT NOW. OKA. TO UNDERSTAND ORDINANCE L FOR EVERYBODY TO UNDERSTAND ORDINANCE L CAN WE TALK ABOUT ORDINANCE? ORDINANCE L ONE HERE'S WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST. ARE WE IN THE MIDDLE OF M? YES. OKAY. WHY DON'T WE HANDLE M FIRST. AND THEN MAYBE WHAT YOU CAN DO IS HANDLE IT THEN. OKAY. GO BACK AGAIN. THANK YOU. OKAY. SO SINCE WE SINCE WE MADE THE AMENDMENTS, IS THERE IS THERE A MOTION THEN TO PASS THE LEGISLATION? CITIZENS. SO I WAS OUT OF THE ROOM FOR A MINUTE. SO WE AMENDED ORDINANCE IN CORRECT. YES. OKAY. SO NOW WE HAVE TO GO BACK TO SECOND READING, PUBLIC HEARING. HAS THAT HAPPENED? NO, HE'S DOING IT RIGHT NOW. NO, THAT'S WHAT WE THAT'S WHAT WE CAN DO NOW. RIGHT NOW I KNOW. SO ASKING FOR CITIZEN. YES. SO WOULD CITIZENS LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS TOPIC OKAY. HEARING NONE. NOW WE TAKE A MOTION TO PASS THE PASSAGE. WELL, WE'RE WE'RE STILL AT SECOND, SO YOU'D HAVE TO YOU'D NEED A MOTION TO WAIVE THIRD READING. YEAH. ROLL CALL, MR. REAMES. YES. MR. BORDNER YES. MR. WOLFF. YES. MR. BURBY YES. MR. BURGER YES. MR. HUNTER YES. NOW, MR. MOTIONS YEAH. I MAKE A MOTION OF THE BEST LEGISLATION. THANK YOU. ROLL CALL, MR. BORDNER. YES. MR. WOLFF YES. MR. BURPEE MR. BURGER YES. MR. HUNTER YES. MR. YES. SO NOW, MR. MR. PRESIDENT, DID WE PASS THAT AS AN EMERGENCY OR.

SORRY, WE'RE NOT ON. I'M SORRY, I APOLOGIZE. I'M ON. I'M GOING BACK AND FORTH. I TRY TO GET SORRY. SO WITH PERMISSION THEN FROM THE PRESIDING OFFICER, WE CAN GO BACK. WELL, ARE YOU GOING BACK INTO ORDINANCE L AND MAINTENANCE? IF YOU WANT TO TAKE A LOOK. YEAH. SO BASED ON COUNCILMAN HUNTER. YEAH. I MEAN, WE CAN GO BACK AND AT THIS TIME I WILL, YOU KNOW, HAVE CITY

[02:10:06]

THAT WE HAD ON ORDINANCE L. SO IF THIS IF THIS MOTION PASSES, THEN IT WILL BE BACK. THEN THE LEGISLATION WILL BE BACK BEFORE YOU FOR THIRD READING, FOR DISCUSSION, FOR DISCUSSION.

YEAH. RIGHT. YEAH. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO DO. OKAY. OKAY. MR. WOLF. YEAH. ROLL CALL THEN TO MR. WOLF. YES. MR. BURPEE. YES. MR. BURGER? YES. MR. HUNTER YES. MR. REMES YES. MR. BORDNER YES. OKAY. OKAY. NOW IT IS BACK FOR RECONSIDERATION. YES. NOW, MR. PRESIDENT, SO YES, IF YOU COULD MAYBE ADMINISTRATION GIVE AN EXPLANATION OF THAT PARCEL AND WHAT THE ACTUAL PROPOSED LEGISLATION IS HERE. DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT? YEAH, I APPRECIATE THAT. THE PROJECT ERIC, IS THIS A WOULD YOU JUST BRIEF THEM A LITTLE BIT ON THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION? YEAH. SO THIS LEGISLATION WOULD ALLOW WITH AN OVERLAY SPECIFIC REGULATIONS ON A CERTAIN PARCEL, ABOUT 55.5 ACRES IN THE INNOVATION PARK TO ALLOW DATA PROCESSING IS WHAT THIS BASICALLY WOULD DO. WE DO HAVE A SPECIFIC PROJECT IN MIND. IT'S ALREADY GONE THROUGH A OR B APPROVAL, AND THERE'S BEEN A TON OF WORK DONE ON THIS PROJECT TO THIS POINT. SO THAT'S THE THAT'S WHAT THIS PROJECT IS ABOUT. OKA. NOT ABOUT I MEDICAL WASTE. YEAH, I GUESS HOW DOES THIS PROJECT FIT THE INTENT OF INNOVATION PARK? I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHERE IT FITS WITHIN THE WITHIN THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF INNOVATION PARK. SO COLUMBUS AND I'M GOING TO GO TO A LITTLE BIT OUT GLOBALLY HERE TO COLUMBUS IS A THERE'S OVER 40 DATA CENTER PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN ARE IN PROCESS IN THE COLUMBUS REGION IS CONSIDERED TO BE ONE OF THE FASTEST GROWING DATA PROCESSING. IT, YOU KNOW, REGIONS IN THE COUNTRY. THIS WOULD BE IN KEEPING WITH NUMEROUS OTHER COMMUNITIES IN CENTRAL OHIO WHO HAS MOVED DOWN, MOVED TOWARDS DATA CENTERS OR DATA PROCESSING AS BEING A DESIRED USE IN YOUR COMMUNITY. EVERY TIME WE PICK A PHONE UP AND LOOK AT OUR IPHONE OR WHATEVER, PHONE YOUR ANDROID THAT YOU HAVE, CLOUD COMPUTING IS NEEDED. SO THIS DOES FIT IN FROM A STANDPOINT OF AN IT TECH TYPE OF OPERATION THAT SUPPORTS THAT GOING FORWARD. SO THIS IS I WORK IN THIS INDUSTRY, SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT DATA CENTERS ARE DOING. I HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS WITH POWER, WITH COOLING AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE IN PLACE. AND TO DATE, NOBODY'S REALLY, YOU KNOW, BROUGHT THAT INVESTIGATION FORWARD. SO, SO, SO DATA CENTERS, JUST SO YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY I DATA CENTERS, WE'RE TALKING MEGA MEGA MEGAWATTS OF POWER THAT'S REQUIRED TO, TO SUPPORT THESE FACILITIES. AND FROM A COOLING PERSPECTIVE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A LOT OF WATER. UNLESS YOU KNOW THERE'S LIQUID COOLING DIRECT LIQUID COOLING THAT MAY REDUCE THE, THE WATER CAPACITY. BUT WE'VE HAD THESE DISCUSSIONS IN THE PAST ABOUT, YOU KNOW, TRADITIONAL WATER COOLED DATA CENTER OPERATIONS AND THE IMPACT THAT IT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE ON OUR WATER CAPACITY LEVELS. I THINK.

AND, JEREMY, IF YOU WANT TO YEAH, WE HAVE RESTRICTED THIS USER ON THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT THEY CAN USE. SO, YOU KNOW, TYPICALLY A DATA CENTER WILL COME IN AND ASK FOR A MILLION GALLONS A DAY. AND WE DON'T WE DON'T HAVE THAT, I GUESS, FOR THIS PARTICULAR USE. SO I THINK ON THIS ONE WE'VE RESTRICTED THEM TO 50 000 GALLONS A DAY, WHICH IS ABOUT 10% OF WHAT WE ANTICIPATE THEM ULTIMATELY USING AS IT RELATES TO ELECTRIC. DEFINITELY NOT AN EXPERT, BUT I'VE BEEN IN ENOUGH OF THESE MEETINGS WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO PROMOTE THE INNOVATION, INNOVATION PARK. AND THERE'S A SUBSTATION RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM IT. AND, YOU KNOW, EVERY EVERYTHING THAT ALL THE UTILITY COMPANIES HAVE MENTIONED AS IT RELATES TO THIS SPECIFIC

[02:15:02]

HOW MANY JOBS MIGHT WE BE LOOKING AT FOR THAT FOR THAT SITE? I'M, I DON'T KNOW I WOULD DEFER TO ERIC. I THINK THAT THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION WITH YOU. I KNOW THAT FOR A APPROXIMATE 100 JOBS. YEAH. THAT'S POTENTIALLY THE NUMBER I WAS GOING TO USE WAS 85. BUT THEY ALL THEY ALL ARE ARE OTHER CITIES HAVE DISCOVERED THAT THAT THESE JOBS ARE IN THAT 100 TO 110, $15,000 BANDWIDTH. SO THE TOTAL OF THE GROSS PAYROLL IS ACTUALLY PRETTY BIG. OKAY. SO IF WE ARE LOOKING AT THE IF YOU DON'T MIND ME ADDRESSING IT TO YOU. SO WE BASICALLY BASICALLY WOULD BE LOOKING AT TWO PEOPLE PER ACRE. THAT'S THAT. IF IT'S THE 55, IF THE 55 IS ALL USED.

SO WE DO HAVE AN INCENTIVE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE. AND THESE THESE DISCUSSIONS SHOULD PROBABLY BE AT THAT DISCUSSION POINT WHEN WE BRING IN AN INCENTIVE AGREEMENT TO YOU. BUT YES, OUR OUR GOAL IS TO HAVE SIX JOBS PER ACRE. WE POTENTIALLY HAVE A SOLUTION TO THAT PROBLEM OR THAT ISSUE THAT YOU'RE BRINGING UP THAT WE'D LIKE TO ADDRESS. COUNCIL, AT THAT POINT, WHEN WE BRING THAT INCENTIVE AGREEMENT TO YOU, OKAY, THAT'S POSSIBLE. OKAY.

THANK YOU. OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE? YEP. SO IF THIS IS APPROVED, WE STILL HAVE TO APPROVE THE INCENTIVE PACKAGE. WE GOT TO IMPROVE THE BUSINESS. THIS IS JUST SAYING HEY, IT'S OPENING UP THIS CAPABILITY. CORRECT. PARCEL. YOU STRIVE TO SAY IN THE INCENTIVE AGREEMENT THAT STILL HAS TO GO THROUGH YOU FOR APPROVAL. I THINK THERE'S A FINAL DRB APPROVAL AS WELL.

YEAH. WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD FOR INNOVATION PARK AND THEN FOLLOW THAT UP WITH THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD. SO THEY HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL STEPS RELATED TO THE SITE DESIGN AS WELL. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE? OKAY. THIS IS OR I'LL MAKE A MOTION OKAY. TO

[02:20:06]

[Ord. N]

THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE ABLE TO BUILD BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR OR THE END OF THE SEASON. I SHOULD SAY, BEFORE WINTER. BUT IT ALSO WOULD. IS THERE A FINANCIAL BENEFIT THERE? YES IT WOULD. IT WOULD ENSURE THAT CONSTRUCTION BEGINS PRIOR TO WINTER, WHICH WILL OBVIOUSLY MORE QUICKLY PROVIDE REVENUE TO THE CITY, WHICH WOULD BENEFIT THE HEALTH WELFARE OF THE CITIZENS. OKAY. UNDERSTAND. THANK YOU. AND THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE ELIMINATES THE REFERENDUM PERIOD. SO EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT THIS ONE ALLOWS THEM TO MOVE FORWARD. NOW. YES. INSTEAD OF HAVING A WAIT RIGHT. BECAUSE OTHERWISE THAT WOULD TAKE US INTO DECEMBER. YEAH. SO I WOULD STILL LIKE TO AMEND THE LEGISLATION BY ADDING THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE ROLL CALL, MR. BURGER. YES. MR. HUNTER YES. MR. REMES YES. MR. BORDNER YES. MR. WOLF YES. MR. BURPEE YES. SO NOW, MR. BURGER, THE MOTION, THE LEGISLATION HAS BEEN AMENDED AND IT COMES BACK NOW FOR SECOND READING, PUBLIC HEARING AS AMENDED. SO WOULD RESIDENTS LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS TOPIC? HEARING NONE. MR. PRESIDENT, I MOVE TO PASS THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE. ROLL CALL. MR. HUNTER. YES. MR. REMES YES. MR. BORDNER YES. MR. WOLF YES. MR. BURBEE YES. MR. BURGER YES. I MOVED TO WAIVE THIRD READING. ROLL CALL, MR. REMES YES. MR. BORDNER YES. MR. WOLF. YES. MR. BURBEE YES. MR. BURGER YES. MR. HUNTER YES. ALL RIGHT. I MAKE A MOTION TO PASS THE LEGISLATION, AS AMENDED. ROLL CALL. MR. BORDNER. YES, MR. WOLF. YES. MR. BURBEE. YES. MR. BURGER? YES. MR. HUNTER. YES.

MR. REMES YES, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. COMMENTS FROM CITY MANAGER. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. BOY,

[COMMENTS OF THE CITY MANAGER AND COUNCIL PERSONS AND GENERAL DISCUSSION]

[02:25:02]

[02:30:02]

AND, YOU KNOW, HOW DO WE ENSURE THAT NOT ONLY WHAT WE'RE BUILDING IS UNIQUE TO MARYSVILLE, BUT ALSO WHAT DO WE DOING TO PROTECT THE IDENTITY OF MARYSVILLE? SO IT'S SO MY COMMENTS IS IT'S VERY EASY TO BUILD A CITY. VERY EASY. ALL YOU GOT TO DO IS ELECT SOME GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES AND BUILD SOME ROADS OUT OF A CORNFIELD, THROW UP SOME HOUSES AND YOU BUILD A CITY. IT'S REVENUE FOR EVERYBODY. IF IN A PERFECT WORLD, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO BUILD COMMUNITY, TO ESTABLISH AN UPTOWN CORE THAT SUPPORTS SMALL BUSINESSES, ESTABLISH PRESERVATION, ESTABLISH IDENTIT, ESTABLISH FUTURE PARKS, AND NOT JUST PARKS TO BE MOWED, BUT PARKS THAT ARE ENGAGING THE PROTECTION OF WILDLIFE DESIGN STANDARDS. SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT LETTERS LIKE THESE GIVE ME HOPE AND ENCOURAGEMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, AMERICA'S BRIGHTER DAYS ARE ALWAYS AHEAD OF US AND THEY'RE NEVER BEHIND US. SO I JUST WANTED TO END END WITH THAT LETTER. SO ON THAT NOTE, WE WILL WE THERE'S A POTENTIAL TO ENJOIN AND TO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO CONSIDER CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION RELATED TO SPECIFIC BUSINESS STRATEGY OF AN APPLICANT FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE, AND TO CONSIDER THE EMPLOYMENT OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION. SECOND, I'LL SECOND IT.

ROLL CALL. MR. WOLFF. YES. MR. KIRBY? YES. MR. BURGER? YES. MR. HUNTER YES. MR. REAMES YES.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.