VILLAGE OF GRANVILLE
COUNCIL MINUTES
July 10, 2002
CALL TO ORDER (by Mayor McGowan at 7:30pm)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
Those responding to the Roll Call were Councilmembers
Bellman, Crais, Hartfield, and Robertson; Vice Mayor
Moore, Mayor McGowan; Manager Hickman, Law Director
Crites. Councilmember Crais moved to excuse Councilmember
Main; second by Councilmember Hartfield. Motion carried, 6-
0.
CITIZENS’ COMMENTS (7:32pm)
All Topics
None
Boy Scouts
Councilmember Crais moved that Council produce a letter
signed by all members of Council to thank the Boy Scouts
for their great efforts to roll and tie the Declaration
copies for July 4th. Second by Councilmember Robertson,
who noted that the Scouts would be in attendance at next
week’s meeting. Motion carried 6-0.
Mayor McGowan closed Citizens’ Comments at 7:33pm.
PUBLIC HEARING (7:34pm)
None scheduled.
NEW BUSINESS (7:34pm)
None scheduled.
OLD BUSINESS (7:34pm)
Work Session – Kendal Sewer Extension
Manager Hickman reviewed the four options, noting that the
route of the line in each option makes a critical
difference (i.e., whether the line goes through private
property, through a right-of-way or roadway area, through
state property, etc.). The private- property routes do not
involve the expensive granular compacted backfill required
on state right-of-way land; they do, however, involve
easement-acquisition costs that are not an issue with the
public routes.
Project A is a complete forced-main system. Best estimate:
$658,445, including a 15% contingency, constructed to
Village standards. Kendal would own, operate, and maintain
the lift station at Manhole #19, located on Kendal
property on the south side of S.R. 16. This system allows
the addition of other users only from its terminus at
Manhole #19. If at any time the Village were to grant an
end-of-the-line connection to any other entity, additional
construction (e.g., line and/or wet well and/or lift
station) would be required to take the service up to S.R.
16 for the new connection. It has not been determined
which party/parties would stand the cost of the extension.
If and when multiple users are added to the line, the
Village would assume the operation and maintenance of the
lift station(s) and the full system. This option runs
entirely through the State right-of-way. Kendal believes
the forced-main system can be constructed quickly and
cleanly, has the lowest installation cost, and is the most
controllable (i.e., has the most known factors). Manager
Hickman believes it is the most mechanically complicated
and most expensive to operate.
Project B is a hybrid system—forced-main from
Manhole #19 to a designated point on Weaver Drive, then
gravity-fed from that point to the treatment plant. Best
estimate: $898,095, including a 15% contingency,
constructed to Village standards. This route is the same
as the Project A route. The model for this option was
designed in the late 70s/early 80s and was intended to
drain the entire south part of the Granville community.
Project C is completely gravity-fed and, except
for road crossings, is routed entirely through private
property. Best estimate: $618,405, including a 15%
contingency, constructed to Village standards. The same
crossing point at S.R. 16 is used but the route runs
further north before it turns east to cross Cherry Street,
then Main Street. While the affected property owners have
responded favorably so far, easement costs are unknown at
this time, as are property owners’ inclinations to ask for
a tap or taps. Gravity-fed systems can be tapped at any
point along the line, meaning that area development
pursuant to either a JEDD or a CEDA could have sewer
service. If the Village can obtain the required easements
within stated guidelines, this is Manager Hickman’s
preferred option since gravity systems are the easiest to
maintain. If Project C were not available, Manager
Hickman’s next choice would be Project A (though he is
concerned that “A” wouldn’t be able to serve the Weaver
Drive area at all). He also would prefer that the Village
not take on another lift station.
Project D is also a hybrid—gravity-fed for the most part
but requiring a section of forced-main line as the route
drops south to Weaver Drive after crossing Cherry Street.
Best estimate: $800,000-plus, including a 15% contingency,
constructed to Village standards.
Responding to various questions from members of Council,
Manager Hickman noted the following:
• Capacity is determined by the sizing of the wet
well and the gallon-per-minute pumps installed.
• “Unintended consequences” might include mechanical
problems, requests for tap-ins, growth we might not want,
etc.
• The Village already has 8 lift stations;
experience shows they are maintenance-intensive. Virtually
all lines in town are 8”; the main line on Pearl Street is
30”.
• The Village would build the gravity system if they
were building this on their own, partly because it
provides the Village with more options in the long run.
• If Owens-Corning were to request a tap, the
Village would look for the “lowest best point” to drain
to. The first choice would be for Owens to build a line to
Manhole #19. If they couldn’t do that, they could run a
line down the valley and the lift station would be moved
to a more appropriate spot.
• The gravity-feed system is higher capital cost but
lower operating cost; the forced-main system is lower
capital cost but higher operating cost, especially once
additional users tap in. Fees for the add-on users could
compensate for the increased operating costs.
Councilmember Robertson pointed out that extension without
annexation—the basic premise of these discussions—needs to
be done really carefully. It may well be that a JEDD
and/or a CEDA can help us do that in a way that serves our
needs but we can’t continually step over that line without
a formal vote to change the policy.
Councilmember Bellman stated that in order to properly
size the line in either Project C or Project D, we need to
decide whether or not we want the properties on Cherry
Street to be developed. If we do, what kind of development
would we want to see and under what conditions would we
give tap-ins? He strongly opposed the granting of a tap in
exchange for the granting of an easement, especially for
properties adjacent to Village property. Vice Mayor Moore
noted that she had been operating under the premise that
we are still requiring either annexation or that the
property in question be part of a JEDD or a CEDA in order
to get a tap.
Councilmember Crais felt a JEDD was not workable in this
instance and a CEDA provides little to the Village while
creating its own set of problems. He favors Project A.
Vice Mayor Moore agreed that a JEDD would not be available
to Kendal but noted that all other property in the area
would be eligible. In short, if we’re going to have a
sewer line out there, it should be one we can tap into.
Mayor McGowan added that we also need to keep potential
users from heading west to the Southwest Licking district
for their services. He favors Project C and urged Council
to continue working on a CEDA, a JEDD, and Kendal’s
contract terms.
Councilmember Bellman also favors Project C, even though
we don’t yet know if the needed easements will be
obtainable. He agreed that we should not give tap-ins to
those outside the Village without annexation and/or a
JEDD/CEDA arrangement. If Project C will not work, he
favors a modified version of Project B. He added, however,
that it was premature to actually choose the route at this
meeting since we don’t have enough information yet.
Rob Drake, Counsel for Kendal, noted that Kendal is most
appreciative of Council’s actions to date. He then
summarized six points, as follows: 1) All Projects under
discussion are about $100,000 short of Kendal’s total
cost, given that they will need to extend the line
southward from Manhole #19 to their facility. 2) Kendal
was also surprised in the increase in the cost of Project
A. 3) Project C is preferable in lots of ways, but issues
already mentioned (e.g., easements, etc.) run Kendal too
close to their deadlines. Additionally, a “yes” on Project
C is illusory at this point since so many issues remain
unsettled. 4) Re a CEDA, Kendal didn’t hear anything at
the meeting earlier this week that indicated they should
be concerned about unknown costs in that process. Project
A allows for development of a CEDA or a JEDD farther along
Columbus Road through taps at the terminus of the force-
feed line; areas closer to the Village are excluded unless
a series of wet wells and pumps is added. 5) If Council
were to say it was willing to look at Project A, Kendal
would have contractors investigate it to refine the
pricing estimates and enable them to make an informed
decision (i.e., say “OK” or “Thanks but no thanks.”). 6)
Project C is intriguing but there are too many questions
to answer in the time frame they have.
Kendal noted that if nothing had been worked out by July
31st (the bonding deadline), they would commence work with
the EPA to gain approval for a private system.
Councilmember Crais proposed some sort of conditional
approval (e.g., If not “C”, then “A”) to buy both parties
time to continue factual exploration on both Projects.
Vice Mayor Moore asked for a copy of the bond document; it
will be re-sent, not having arrived previously.
Councilmember Robertson reiterated her caution about
maintaining the leverage of being able to extend. There
was consensus that a tap-in, if and when requested,
basically would equal an agreement to annexation.
Councilmember Bellman raised the issues of rates,
multipliers, tap fees, and operating costs. Kendal noted
that the lift station for Project A would be on the land
and their electric bill. They also noted it was premature
to talk rates at this meeting. Tonight, they want the
clearest statement possible of Council’s willingness, to
the extent that we can narrow down needed factual
explorations. Something a little stronger than a letter of
intent would be very helpful. Based on Kendal’s past
experience with Council, they trust that a reasonable
solution can be reached.
At 9:04pm, to facilitate producing a statement that would
move the process along for Kendal, Vice Mayor Moore moved
to take a brief break to allow language for a motion to be
drafted. Second by Councilmember Robertson. Motion
carried, 6-0. At 9:20pm, Council reconvened.
Councilmember Bellman moved as follows: Council agrees in
principle to extend sewer to Kendal under the proposal set
forth in Project C, if feasible, or a modification
thereof, or Project A, contingent upon the Village and
Kendal being able to agree to terms and conditions, said
terms including, but not limited to, rates, multipliers, a
CEDA, payment in lieu of income tax, tap-in fees, and any
further extension to be done in conjunction with a JEDD or
CEDA agreement. Second by Vice Mayor Moore.
Discussion:
Councilmember Hartfield, not having participated in any of
the previous discussion on this topic, formally recused
herself from any further discussion as well as the vote on
the motion on the floor.
By voice vote, Motion carried (4 affirmative, 1 negative,
1 abstention).
MINUTES (9:37pm)
Regularly Scheduled Meeting of June 19, 2002
The following additions/corrections were requested: 1) Law
Director Crites, p. 2, “Manager’s Report,” line 2 –
“Manager Hickman reported thant one officer….”; 2) Law
Director Crites, p. 4, “Executive Session,” line 1 – “ORC
121.22, G-2, (G2) to consider….” Vice Mayor Moore moved to
accept the minutes as amended; second by Councilmember
Hartfield. Motion carried, 6-0.
Special Meeting of June 26, 2002
Vice Mayor Moore moved to accept the minutes as submitted.
Second by Councilmember Hartfield. Motion carried, 6-0.
COMMITTEE REPORTS (9:40pm)
Economic Development Committee (Crais, Moore Robertson)
No report.
Finance Liaison (Moore)
No report.
Granville Foundation (Main)
No report.
JEDD (Bellman, Crais)
No report.
Newark/Granville Committee (Bellman, Main)
No report.
Personnel (Hartfield, McGowan, Robertson)
No report.
Planning (Main)
No report.
Recreation Commission (McGowan)
No report.
Senior Citizen Committee (Moore, Robertson)
Councilmember Robertson reported she and Trudy Knox had
attended the meeting of the Licking County Task Force on
Aging. The Task Force would like to have someone from
Granville attend their monthly meetings (9:00am, 2nd
Wednesday each month); their chair will attend the
Committee’s next meeting.
Strategic Land Acquisition Committee (Bellman, Crais,
Moore)
No report.
Street Light Committee (McGowan)
No report.
Streets/Sidewalks/Utilities Committee (Bellman, Hartfield,
McGowan)
Councilmember Bellman reported the Committee had discussed
the JEDD/CEDA issue at their meeting last Monday,
including many of the issues still on the table re Kendal.
Tree & Landscape Committee (Moore)
No report.
Union Cemetery Board (Main)
No report.
OTHER COUNCIL MATTERS (9:44:pm)
OPWC Grant (S/R 16 & Cherry Valley Road Intersection)
Manager Hickman reported we are now in possession of
$181,000 for intersection improvements. Design work and
engineering have begun and members of Council will have
plans in their packets for the next meeting. The work
needs to be completed by March 1, 2003 and so must be
begun as quickly as possible. Mayor McGowan noted that the
Streets, Sidewalks & Utilities Committee had agreed,
though not unanimously, on the five-lane plan. The
completed intersection will have 3 southbound/2 northbound
lanes on the north side (to match the 3 northbound/2
southbound lanes on the south).
Resignation – Sandy Ellinger
Manager Hickman reported that Ms. Ellinger had resigned
due to a promotion at Denison to the post of Director of
Alumni Affairs. Next week’s meeting will be her last.
Fourth of July
Councilmember Robertson asked what purview Council has
over Fourth of July activities. She had been disturbed by
the inclusion of a “burning cross” in this year’s
fireworks—a use of religious symbolism in a secular
connection. Manager Hickman responded that permission for
the entire Fourth of July celebration is granted through
his office. Mayor McGowan raised the issue of songs that
include references to God (e.g., “God Bless America”) and
wondered if we needed to address that as well. Both he and
Manager Hickman suggested we could offer guidelines for
next year. Vice Mayor Moore asked about the current state
of the law on this issue; Law Director Crites said it was
a First Amendment issue. Mayor McGowan reminded everyone
this is a Kiwanis event, not a Village one. Councilmember
Bellman agreed but said he was concerned that the
perception is that the event is sanctioned by the Village.
Councilmember Crais expressed concern about a carnival
booth selling cigarette lighters and suggested we might
want to elicit a little more information from the vendors
next year. Law Director Crites noted that selling
cigarette lighters is not unlawful but may point out some
insensitivity that might need to be addressed. He will
check into the matter to see what recourse we might have.
Vice Mayor Moore noted that we can’t legislate
sensitivity. On another topic, she noted it had been
difficult for some seniors and disabled residents to get
to the fireworks. Manager Hickman and Mayor McGowan will
look into it.
MEETING ANNOUNCEMENTS
11 July 2002 7:00pm BZBA
17 July 2002 7:30pm Village Council
18 July 2002 8:30am Senior Citizen Committee
22 July 2002 7:30pm Planning Commission
EXECUTIVE SESSION (9:58pm)
Councilmember Crais moved to enter into Executive Session
pursuant to ORC 121.22 (G)(2) to consider the purchase of
property for public purpose. Second by Vice Mayor Moore. A
Roll Call vote yielded six (6) affirmative votes
(Councilmembers Bellman, Crais, Hartfield, and Robertson;
Vice Mayor Moore, Mayor McGowan). Motion carried, 6-0.
Thereafter, Council entered into Executive Session and a
discussion considering the purchase of property for public
purposes was had.
At 10:14pm, Councilmember Hartfield moved to return to
regular session. Second by Councilmember Crais. A Roll
Call vote yielded six (6) affirmative votes
(Councilmembers Crais, Hartfield, and Robertson; Vice
Mayor Moore, Mayor McGowan; Councilmember Bellman). Motion
carried, 6-0.
ADJOURNMENT
At 10:15pm, Councilmember Bellman moved to adjourn the
meeting. Second by Councilmember Hartfield. Motion
carried, 6-0. Meeting adjourned.
TRANSCRIPT OF DISCUSSION FROM JULY 10, 2002 re FOURTH OF
JULY
Page 6, “Fourth of July”
Robertson: “Matt…Matt, I have one more item to bring up.”
McGowan: “Okay. Any other Council matters? Okay.”
Robertson: “Um…I guess…I want to ask what purview the
Council has over the Fourth of July activities. Because I
was not present…um, I watched the fireworks from another
position but it’s been told to me by numerous people that
there was…as part of the fireworks display, that there was
a burning cross. Um, I…I…for all kinds of reasons I find
that offensive, um, the most obvious one being that the
KKK uses burning crosses. And I…you know…and then of
course the obvious religious symbolism, um, in a secular
celebration is a problem. So I…I want to bring that up
because I…I don’t know who…who planned that and I don’t
whether Council is responsible but somehow I think we do
give a blessing to Kiwanis to do what they do out in the
street and I’m guessing we give our…our…it’s funny
that “blessing” is the word that comes to my mind, isn’t
it?…but we, uh…but I…I think that somehow we’r…you know,
we give permission for the fireworks to happen and I…I
don’t think that that’s appropriate.”
Hickman: “Really, permission is granted…uh, your
permission is granted through the Village Manager so it’s
my responsibility. I wasn’t aware of anything…was this at
Wildwood Park? Was it…?”
Robertson: “That’s what I’ve been told. Yeah.”
Hartfield: “It was…it was a…I was there. It was a, uh,
cross that lit up like a firework and I don’t think it was
KKK oriented. I think it was…(Robertson interrupted; rest
of Hartfield’s sentence is unintelligible).”
Robertson: “Well, I’m sure it wasn’t meant that way but…
(Moore interrupted; rest of Robertson’s sentence is
unintelligible).”
Moore: “The ‘Battle Hymn of the Republic’ was playing.”
Hartfield: “Right. They were playing more…I think it was
more like they were going for like some sort of
inspirational kind of a thing.”
Crais: “Who’s they?”
Hartfield: “I guess whoever put on the fireworks. I don’t
know who they is but whoever [unintelligible words]
because there was…(Robertson interrupted; rest of
Hartfield’s sentence is unintelligible).”
Robertson: “Well, but I’m not implying that they meant it …
Hartfield (in background while Robertson is
speaking): “Right.”
Robertson: “…as a KKK cross but…but that is such a…a vivid
symbol in our country’s history…”
Hartfield (in background while Robertson is
speaking): “Oh, I…I agree.”
Robertson: “…that I…I would not want us to associate
ourselves with that. But…but even if…if they meant it in a…
as an inspirational symbol…(pause)…”
Hartfield: “I don’t think anybody….” (Robertson continued
her point; Hartfield’s words become unintelligible}.
Robertson: “…it’s still not appropriate.”
Hartfield: “…I think people, I would certainly hope, had
the sense enough to realize that that’s not what was
intended.”
Crais: “A lot of people…
Robertson: “Well, but a lot of people… (Crais continued
his point; Robertson stopped speaking).”
Crais: “…not the KKK…(unintelligible words)…when it was
founded…(unintelligible words)…very troublesome.”
McGowan: “Because of the cross…. Again, I’ll interject,
the Kiwanis, to my knowledge...
Crais: (interrupting) “If you’re Jewish…”
McGowan: “Well, I’m a member of Kiwanis and I’ll speak if
I’m not interrupted. But the Kiwanis, I think, got
sponsorship of $5,000 from each to put that on. Uh, I do
think the Kiwanis…someone…I’m not on the committee but
there’s a committee of two. Uh, this year it was, uh, Jim
Weaver and, uh, Fred Wolfe. And again, I…I think…you,
know, if we’re gonna tread down that line, again, I would
probably not have done the cross myself but I wasn’t on
that committee. But if we’re going to address those
issues, should we have any songs that have any reference
to God or anything? Because they played “God Bless
America.” They played a number of songs down there and
again, the way I look at it from a legal standpoint, I
think the community gives them a permit, lack thereof…of a
way of doing it, to do that. And again, we can make
suggestions for next year. But, uh, I…I think that a lot
of the Fourth of July celebrations, are…are…are we going
to make a stance of Council that we want to take away any
song that has a reference to God?”
Robertson: “Well, I’m…I didn’t bring up songs. I brought
up the cross, and….”
McGowan (interrupting): “You brought up God and things
like that. I mean…it’s a whole issue of where do we go
with that. I mean, I can understand the cross. And I’m
being a little defensive because perhaps I’m in the
Kiwanis…I don’t think that was their intent at all. It was
a firework display and they lit it up just like they…they
lit up, you know, the flags.”
Robertson: “Well, …”
McGowan: “And they weren’t burning the flags.”
Robertson: “Well, I think if we go one step with it, we’ve
got to go all the steps with it. And it is a secular, um,
sort of celebration. And I think it’s clear in this
country that…that we have alw… we’ve always stood for a
separation of church and state. So if it means that we
also have to take on the songs, maybe that’s what it
means. But I…I just think that it…we need to do what’s
appropriate here. And….”
McGowan (interrupting): “But we don’t have anything to do
with that except…[interrupted; words unintelligible].”
Robertson (interrupting): “Well, that…my first question,
Matt, was ‘What purview do we have over the celebration?’
And…and….”
McGowan (interrupting): “Granting a permit….” (Robertson
continued her point; the rest of McGowan’s words become
unintelligible.)
Robertson: “…that was answered, that Joe said that we…
that, through him, we do.
Hickman: “And I’ll make sure that next year they don’t
have such a display.”
Robertson: “Such a display. Yeah.”
Moore: “My question is…(words unintelligible)…what the
current state of the law is, Mike.
I mean…Cincinnati…didn’t they have to allow the KKK to put
up their cross in the public square?”
Crites: “Yeah, about two years ago.
Moore: “About two years ago.
Crites: “In Fountain Square.”
Moore: “I mean, we have a permit process for speakers and
we have a religious speaker up here ev…throughout the
Fourth of July. So I’m not sure that…I guess I’m not clear
what limits we can put on it.”
Crites: “And…and…and I’m not…(interrupted; words become
unintelligible).”
Moore (interrupting): “And it’s a freedom-of-speech issue,
also.”
Robertson: “Yes. I would agree to this. But…(words
unintelligible).”
Bellman: “I’m particularly concerned about distinguishing…
(words unintelligible)…there’s at least a perception…
(words unintelligible)…Kiwanis…(words unintelligible)…
sanction…(words unintelligible)…it’s a Granville
celebration; it’s not just a Kiwanis celebration.”
McGowan: “The only suggestion I would say is do what
Columbus does. And they…they have a permit fee and, again,
all you do is approve it and you just need to let people
know they’re in charge of the event because…again, Joe you
can, you know, address some other issues. But the Village
really doesn’t…overall…Council, I mean, it’s…most of
that’s put up by Kiwanis money and sponsorship.”
Hickman: “I can let them know that this has been a sensive…
sensitive issue. And I’ve got to believe that it was a…I
would hope that it was an honest mistake and that, you
know, it would not happen again. So….”
***
THIS CONCLUDES THE PART OF THE DISCUSSION THAT DEALT WITH
THE BURNING CROSS AND SONGS THAT MENTION “GOD.” THE
BALANCE OF THE DISCUSSION COVERS COUNCILMEMBER CRAIS’
POINT ABOUT THE SALE OF CIGARETTE LIGHTERS AND VICE MAYOR
MOORE’S POINT ABOUT IT HAVING BEEN DIFFICULT FOR SOME
SENIORS AND DISABLED RESIDENTS TO GET TO THE FIREWORKS.
Monday, January 23, 2012 at 11:14AM