Granville Community Calendar

Council Minutes 6/6/01

 CALL TO ORDER (by Vice Mayor Wernet at 7:30pm)

ROLL CALL (7:30pm) Those responding to the Roll Call were Councilmembers Crais, Lucier, and McGowan; Vice Mayor Wernet; Law Director Crites. Councilmember Bellman arrived at 7:33pm, Manager Hickman at 7:44pm, Mayor Robertson at 7:47pm. Councilmember Moore had previously informed Council of her inability to attend the meeting.

CITIZENS’ COMMENTS (7:33pm) All Topics Constance Barsky, 221 E. Elm Street. Ms. Barsky brought forward the concerns of Citizens for Sensible Growth (CSG), expressed at a meeting held two weeks ago for members of Council and the Township Trustees. CSG feel it is important to bring together area townships (i.e., Harrison, St. Albans, and Union) with Granville and Granville Township to discuss their common interests in preserving the nature of our communities. She noted that, if asked, CSG would assist in facilitating such a meeting but wanted a firm commitment from both Council and the Township Trustees that this would be worthwhile before moving forward. She noted that the Granville Land Conservancy is considering changing its name to reflect the fact that it represents a larger constituency.

Scott Harmon Surveying – Copyright Infringements [Councilmember Crais abstained from the discussion due to a previous professional relationship with Mr. Harmon.

Scott Harmon (55 Margaret Lane; professional surveyor and lifetime Granville resident). Mr. Harmon emphasized that surveying points are incorrect in Granville in many, if not all, instances. He noted his objection to having one of his drawings accepted by the BZBA as a definitive plot plan even though such use was specifically prohibited in writing on the drawing and the homeowner had not obtained Mr. Harmon’s permission to use the drawing. He urged the Village to require an accurate survey depicting existing and proposed buildings prior to any development—a practice that would insulate the surveyor from liability that may arise through the use of an unauthorized and/or informal document. To illustrate, he said that the BZBA and/or Planning Commission would never grant building permits based on xerographic copies of plans but would insist on working from the originals. He then asked that the surveying profession be treated with equal respect. He suggested that Council review ordinances from other municipalities.

Bob Malcuit, 526 W. Broadway (formerly 126 West Elm). Mr. Malcuit spoke in support of Mr. Harmon, reporting that the real estate agent involved in the sale of his home on West Elm Street “laughed” when asked for an accurate survey. [Many people present at the meeting reported similar reactions resulting from discussion about, or requests for, accurate surveys. Attorney Robert Drake, with 30 years’ experience in the title business, concurred that “the whole village is off.”] Mr. Harmon stated that the common practice of relying on surveying pins, contractors’ nails or stakes with orange tape, or even neighbors’ word-of- mouth has, over the years, led to the current state of confusion. Since one misplaced or misread corner pin can throw the survey of a whole block out of kilter, Mr. Harmon suggested that, as a community, we should do something about it. Specifically, he asked that a survey committee be formed to discuss a possible re-platting of the Village. He has already surveyed a lot of the village and offered to contribute “years and years of work” to the project. He suggested that the re-platting could be done one block at a time, with each individual property owner signing a quit- claim deed for all lots on the block. The block is then considered as a single entity and subdivided into the pro- rated number of lots specified. Mr. Harmon noted that Buckeye Lake had already done a re-plat. It involved “some hesitation” from landowners, but the lots are now pro-rated and corrected and all the owners now have actual lines established.

Councilmember Bellman urged Council to wait until they had some feedback from the public on this issue (i.e., “if there’s no groundswell for fixing this, it might be time wasted.”). Manager Hickman suggested the committee come up with some alternatives about what might make sense and bring their ideas back to Council. There was a consensus among members of Council to proceed. Mr. Malcuit was asked to chair the committee, Mr. Drake to be a member. Both agreed. Mr. Harmon asked that they review Grove City’s zoning requirements for construction as to site plans and staking procedures. There was some question as to the advisability of Mr. Harmon serving on the committee (which he offered to do) since he might have a conflict of interest if he ended up doing any work requested. Mr. Malcuit said he could certainly form a survey committee without any surveyor on it but would eventually need detailed information. He and Manager Hickman will work it out.

Mr. Harmon urged Council to take seriously the danger of litigation arising from the BZBA ignoring copyright violations, stating that he might well have pursued it already if this were not his hometown. He added that, regardless of whether or not the re-plat goes through, we should ensure that our regulations reflect as much respect for the land itself as for historical details on the buildings. He reiterated his point that architects and builders are not surveyors and cannot legally represent accurate depictions of a lot.

Vice Mayor Wernet asked Mr. Harmon to give copies of the Grove City regulations to Manager Hickman. Councilmember Lucier asked Law Director Crites to determine whether the Village has legal liability in this instance.

Vice Mayor Wernet turned the gavel over to Mayor Robertson at 8:59pm. TOWNSHIP/VILLAGE JOINT MEETING (7:59pm) Mayor Robertson expressed her appreciation to the Trustees for being willing to delay the start-time of the meeting from 7:35 so she could attend a memorial service. She then called the joint meeting to order. Members of Council responding to the Roll Call were Councilmembers Bellman, Crais, Lucier, and McGowan; Vice Mayor Wernet, Mayor Robertson; Manager Hickman; Law Director Crites. Members of the Township Trustees responding to the Roll Call were Trustees Havens, Jones, and King; Clerk Kennedy.

Both bodies reviewed the agenda. There was some confusion about who had and had not received it in advance. Mayor Robertson and Trustee Havens agreed to meet before the next joint meeting to confer about the agenda before it is distributed and ensure that everyone receives it in a timely manner. No changes were made to the agenda for this meeting.

UPDATE OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Charlie Metzger (81 Maplewood Drive; chair of the Review Committee) reported that the Committee has begun its work and has identified three tasks: 1) an analysis of the implementation of the 1998 plan; 2) an analysis of the plan in terms of its effectiveness in light of today’s circumstances; and 3) recommendations to Council and the Township Trustees. Mr. Metzger asked that both bodies, as a group and/or individually, convey their primary areas of concern to him so the Committee can focus its efforts effectively. He will make the same request of the Land Conservancy, the Township Zoning Commission, and the Village Planning Commission. Trustee Havens stated that he had already prepared a memo from the Trustees outlining what they feel needs to be looked at. Trustee Jones commented on the broad scope of the review and asked if Mr. Metzger felt the Committee could meet the stated 60-day deadline. Mr. Metzger said that would be difficult but felt that having a set date created helpful parameters to keep the Committee on track. He did, however, reserve the right to extend the deadline if necessary. Trustee Havens thanked Mr. Metzger for volunteering his time for this project.

UPDATE ON USE OF TOWNSHIP and VILLAGE FUNDS TO OBTAIN PROPERTY Trustee Havens stated the Township objectives on this issue were in place and being acted on. He asked where the Village sees itself fitting into that process and whether it is willing to commit funds. He noted that the Township’s ability to acquire property outside Township limits is limited and that, when such property is strategic, Village assistance would be helpful. The Village could also partner in certain other kinds of sites, especially if its willingness to do so were known in advance. Manager Hickman reported that Council had formed a Strategic Lands Committee. Councilmember Crais, noting that the Committee’s first meeting is scheduled for early July, said that pre- meeting discussions have centered on general principles and objectives in the context of Council’s intent in passing the resolution to form the committee. Council, recognizing that there are not vast sums of money available for this purpose, wrote into their resolution a mechanism to identify property and price as well as the ability to go to the voters if necessary. Council also committed to considering land outside the Village and/or the Township. Trustee Havens added that bond issues might be a helpful tool. Vice Mayor Wernet, after confirming with Trustee Havens that Councilmember Moore had informed him of the two specific properties being looked at by Council, noted that both bodies were interested in moving with all deliberate speed. He added that Council could use “other funds where that would be permissible.” Councilmember Crais urged members of both bodies to keep good channels of communication open with each other and with their varied constituencies. Vice Mayor Wernet thanked the Trustees for working so hard to make this joint effort happen. Trustee Havens, responding to a question from Councilmember Crais about an impending purchase of the Rader property, explained how the Trustees try to “recycle” or leverage their open-space monies (which come with strict rules) by purchasing development rights. For example, with the Showman property, they purchased a development easement allowing one house per 30 acres—an option that can then be sold to recover some of the purchase price. The Rader land could yield three parcels of 30-50 acres each. The Van Winkle land fits that pattern as well—development rights purchased with open space money. The next 2.5 mil levy will raise $2.5 million over the next five years—not nearly enough to fund a comprehensive plan of strategic land purchases, hence the need to constantly recycle those funds. Clerk Kennedy added that the whole key to their decisions is limiting density.

RESOURCE SHARING Clerk Kennedy reported that he had met with Manager Hickman and Molly Roberts. They compared vendor lists and discovered that the budgets are too small to accrue much benefit from shared purchasing. Roadwork sharing is possible but not likely. The Village usually bids its work in January for the coming “season” and combines major infrastructure work with paving projects. The Township does a road survey in March, after the spring thaw, to see what needs attention. However, even though the timing is off, we will continue to try and join forces whenever possible. Emergency usage of each other’s specialized equipment, which has been done informally in the past, will continue on a more formal basis. As for major equipment, much of the Village’s equipment is either not needed or not applicable in the Township, or is fully scheduled by the Village. All parties felt the meeting and discussions were good just in terms of open communication.

JEDD PRESENTATION Attorney Jim Jump was present, at the request of Mayor Robertson, to “get everyone—Trustees, Council, and the public—on the same page” as to a common understanding of the terms and definitions being used.

Mr. Jump explained that a JEDD is a contract between or among municipalities for economic development. The participating parties get their zoning and other regulations in place, develop plans for the kind of economic development they want, and put it all together in a contract. They appoint a board to oversee ongoing issues, create an income tax to fund their goals, and, hopefully, produce the kind of economic growth they want, where they want it. A JEDD may be a smaller part of a larger entity. Councilmember Bellman added that a JEDD’s purpose is commercial and/or industrial development; it does not encompass residential areas.

Mr. Jump reported that he is chairing the subcommittee on economic development of the Comprehensive Plan Review (and is also concerned about the 60-day deadline). It is his intention to staff his sub-committee with people who have business and development experience so as to produce helpful information about joint and regional cooperation under the aegis of the Comprehensive Plan.

The subsequent Q&A by Council and the Trustees yielded the following information: 1) The “district” of a JEDD does not have to geographically contiguous. 2) Each participating entity has to contribute something, tangible or intangible. 3) All signatories to a JEDD contract agree to at least a three-year moratorium on annexations. 4) A JEDD is not a means of protecting borderland but is rather a positive strategy to help with growth issues. In short, it should be viewed not as a bar to Newark but as a means of promoting desired development and thereby eliminating motivations to annex to another community. 5) A JEDD has to be approved in the Township by a vote of Township residents. However, if there is unanimous agreement among the Trustees and the land is zoned appropriately and a majority of the landowners support the issue, the need for a vote is obviated. 6) A JEDD, contrary to any regular committee, has the ability to affect the future. It can levy a tax, impose an annexation moratorium, and bind its members by contract— including new Trustees and/or Council members. While it can’t bargain away sovereignty, it can limit rights. Southwest Licking’s agreement, for example, limits their right to enter Granville or Union Townships. 7) The issue of extending utilities doesn’t have to be included in the JEDD contract but “any sensible JEDD” (Mr. Jump’s phrase) would do so. In fact, the extension of water and sewer could well be a natural consideration to be offered in the contract. 8) Establishing a JEDD is not a quick process. In the Village, the contract would have to be introduced by Council, then sit for 30 days while comments are received via public hearings or other avenues before a vote could be taken. If a vote were to be required in the Township, notice must be given 75 days prior to the election. 9) A CEDA (Cooperative Economic Development Agreement), which seems to work more to provide services with cooperative agreements, could be considered as well to provide a legal mechanism for implementing some cooperative goals. Mr. Jump stated that he envisions an umbrella organization or regional council—with the Village, the Township, the School District, and perhaps even Newark—out of which would emerge a CEDA and/or a JEDD and “whatever else might rise up” in the way of community-improvement corporations. All would be designed to address economic development on a continuing rather than an ad hoc basis.

Discussion: Mr. Jump noted that a JEDD works best when the signatories know what they want and are in substantial agreement before they attempt to work out the financing. Trustee Havens cautioned that a JEDD would involve “significant challenges to cooperation” between the Village and the Township (i.e., past acrimony needs to be worked out).

Councilmember Lucier wondered whether Kendal might be an appropriate test circumstance for both bodies. That would, however, require a definitive determination of whether Kendal is residential or commercial. Robert Drake, attorney for Kendal, stated that Kendal would be “averse to anything that delays what they’re doing.” Vice Mayor Wernet suggested Kendal could be pursued as a parallel effort (i.e., each body proceeding independently of the other, knowing that a decision may be made later).

Trustee Havens noted that the Trustees are already in discussions with Union Township and are willing to engage other townships as well if there is an indication of interest. He also emphasized that any vision for what a JEDD might accomplish must be “absent special interests.” For example, if we determine that the southeast portion of the Township is a problem and we want to promote community- friendly development there, chaos could ensue when citizens or entities with their own special interests make proposals. A JEDD or any other entity, and the parties thereto, have to set policy and then implement it. Having recommendations come from a bi-partisan, non-special- interest group is the only way to keep us from being paralyzed later.

Mayor Robertson asked if part of the goal was to create revenue for schools based on commercial development and/or the real estate base. Trustee Havens responded that we shouldn’t promote residential development in either the Village or the Township. In other words, even though the end goal is to raise revenue for the schools, we should do so by putting in place the kind of development the community might want to implement rather than defend. Mayor Robertson suggested that the OSU graduate program might help us suggest what a coherent/cohesive plan might be, adding that it is focused on downtown at this point but could well deal with the larger picture over time. Vice Mayor Wernet said he envisioned office buildings, research facilities and the like. Trustee Havens followed up by saying we need to get specific about what constitutes “sensible development,” then implement policies that permit the specified desired growth to happen. In short, “Don’t just talk about it!” We must be pre-emptive and proactive to avoid being put on the defensive. Mayor Robertson echoed Trustee Havens’ concerns about the issue of trust between the two bodies. Trustee Havens noted that the Township has been very transparent in its actions and said if the Village would articulate the policies it’s willing to pursue, the two bodies could demonstrate their ability to cooperate. Vice Mayor Wernet stated that Council had already done that and wanted to use whatever tools it reasonably could to fend off hostile annexation

Councilmember Bellman said he was interested in pursuing the JEDD discussion as it might apply to the southeast quadrant and S.R. 16. He added that, if something effective could be worked out, it might provide a model for the rest of the Licking County community.

Mr. Jump stated he and Jim Murr would meet to determine how many people they want on this committee. The Trustees and Council would then constitute the board. The committee will address types of development, locations, and CEDA possibilities. Mr. Metzger noted that he was not happy with having two sub-committees (i.e., having the Comprehensive Plan Review Committee between the Jump/Murr group and their report to Council and the Trustees). The consensus was to take the JEDD sub-committee out of the Comprehensive Plan Review agenda.

Mr. Havens proposed that he and a member of Council sit down with Mr. Jump and Mr. Murr to prepare a proposed resolution establishing the committee and drafting its charge. Vice Mayor Wernet will join the group as Council’s representative. Their proposal will be brought to the next joint meeting.

CITIZENS’ COMMENTS Scott Harmon (55 Margaret Lane). Mr. Harmon congratulated everyone on working together to maintain our way of life and trying to keep adverse annexations from happening.

Constance Barsky (221 E. Elm Street). Ms. Barsky reiterated her earlier remarks about involving a broader group of townships in these discussions. Mr. Havens responded that other township trustees would be invited to the resolution- drafting meeting. Whether or not they elected to participate is out of our control.

SCHEDULE NEXT MEETING The Township Trustees will host the next Village/Township joint meeting in the course of the next regular meeting of the Township Trustees—Wednesday, August 8th. Mayor Robertson and Trustee Havens will determine the meeting place.

Mayor Robertson adjourned the Joint Meeting at 9:14pm. 


Council took a brief recess and reconvened the regular meeting at 9:21pm, at which time Mayor Robertson welcomed Brian Miller, the new representative of the press.

NEW BUSINESS (9:21pm) 2001 County Tax Budget Mayor Robertson acknowledged receipt of the budget and scheduled the public hearing for June 20, 2001.

Ordinance No. 15-01, An Ordinance To Amend Section 351.17 (a) Of The Granville Codified Ordinances, Making the 100 Block of W. College Street A Residential Permit Parking Zone And Making The Ordinance Effective All Year Long, was introduced by Councilmember Crais. Second by Councilmember Lucier. Mayor Robertson set the public hearing for June 20, 2001. [Councilmember Bellman asked for citizen input at the next meeting before the vote is taken.]

Ordinance No. 16-01, An Ordinance To Amend Ordinance No. 25- 00 Providing For Adjustments Of The Annual Budget For The Fiscal Year 2001 And Revising Sums For Operating Expenses, was introduced by Councilmember Crais. Second by Vice Mayor Wernet.

Discussion: Councilmember Crais, referring to the OSU study mentioned in the ordinance, noted that the students would like to use Granville as their “community of the quarter” and asked for a commitment of $4,500 for printing, binding, etc. of their report. They need to know Council’s intent tomorrow so they can find another community if Council is not interested. All agreed that Manager Hickman could convey Council’s support to OSU. Mayor Robertson asked if there were any chance the parameters could be extended beyond the Village. Manager Hickman stated that the downtown study was the first priority but an extended survey was possible. Re the summer intern, Manager Hickman explained that this is the same money originally agreed to; it is simply being moved from salaries to contractual services.

Mayor Robertson set the public hearing for June 20, 2001.

Ordinance No. 17-01, An Ordinance To Amend Chapter 1189 Of The Codified Ordinances Of Granville, Ohio, was introduced by Councilmember Vice Mayor Wernet. Second by Councilmember Crais. Mayor Robertson set the public hearing for June 20, 2001.

Ordinance No. 18-01, An Ordinance To Amend Ordinance No. 25- 00 Providing For Adjustments Of The Annual Budget For The Fiscal Year 2001 And Revising Sums For Operating Expenses, was introduced by Vice Mayor Wernet. Second by Councilmember Crais. Mayor Robertson set the public hearing for June 20, 2001.

Resolution No. 01-41, A Resolution To Appoint Ex-Officio Members To The Granville Tree And Landscape Commission, was introduced by Vice Mayor Wernet. Second by Councilmember Crais.

Discussion: Manager Hickman reported he has reviewed the record of this group with Jim Siegel though the matter has not yet had legal review. The names brought forward come with the recommendation of the members of the Tree & Landscape Commission. The commission, described under 1193, is under the authority of the Planning Commission. Councilmember Lucier asked for a delay in seating the new members until Council could decide the parameters of this commission since so little exists in writing (i.e., “What does it mean to be ‘ex officio’ to a group that has no authority?”). Mayor Robertson felt the Commission really wanted the ex officio members seated quickly, something that could be done without clearing up the ambiguities. Both Mayor Robertson and Vice Mayor Wernet publicly acknowledged how much time the Tree & Landscape members contribute and recognized their contribution to the life of the Village. Councilmember McGowan pointed out that a lot of people—often with a majority of township residents in the crew—work on the Broadway Beds. The question is how to recognize them since they can’t all be members of the Tree & Landscape Commission. Vice Mayor Wernet asked about the “unique qualifications” of Mr. Flood and Mrs. Yaekle. Manager Hickman responded that Mrs. Yaekle brings a connection to many of the Broadway-Bed people who no longer live in the area. Mr. Flood brings technical expertise. He also added that he thought the Tree & Landscape Commission should be an advisory group. Councilmember Lucier reiterated her concern that this remains an amorphous group that needs a coherent structure—as does much of the Village government organization. Manager Hickman suggested there should be a Councilmember on the group since it’s on the list of council committee assignments. Mayor Robertson proposed that 1193 be clarified. Councilmember McGowan moved to add a Section 3 to the Resolution, specifying that the terms of the two new people expire January 31, 2003. Second by Vice Mayor Wernet. Motion-to-amend carried. Motion-as-amended carried.

OLD BUSINESS (9:58pm) None.

REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES (9:58pm) Regularly Scheduled Meeting, 16 May 2001. Councilmember Lucier did not receive a copy of the Minutes in advance so the review was tabled until the next meeting.

COMMITTEE REPORTS (9:43pm) Economic Development Committee (Councilmembers Crais, Moore; Mayor Robertson) No report. 

Finance Liaison (Councilmember Moore) No report.

Newark-Granville Committee (Councilmember Bellman, Mayor Robertson) No report.

Personnel Committee (Councilmember McGowan) No report.

Planning Commission (Councilmember Lucier) Councilmember Lucier reported that the Planning Commission, which was scheduled to hear an application from the schools, did not do so because the application was incomplete.

Recreation Commission (Councilmember McGowan) No report.

Streetlight Committee (Councilmember McGowan) Councilmember McGowan and Manager Hickman reported there are only six lights left to be installed.

Streets/Sidewalks/Utilities Committee (Councilmembers Bellman, Crais; Vice Mayor Wernet) No report.

Tree & Landscape Committee (Councilmember Moore) No report. 

Union Cemetery Board (Councilmember Lucier). Councilmember Lucier reported that the Board is considering installing a fence around the cemetery. The expense of the project means it will probably be done in phases.

Strategic Land Acquisition & Smart Development Committee (Councilmembers Bellman, Crais, Moore) No report.

Recreation Center Task Force (Robertson) Mayor Robertson reported on the June 5th meeting, at which Ruth Owen proposed that each constituency (the schools, rec commission, township, village, Granville Fellowship, Kendal) consult its own constituency and make a list of what it desires in a community recreational center. The results of the individual surveys would then pooled to see if there is a meeting of the minds. Council needs to put the word out quickly.

OTHER (9:54pm) Resolution No. 01-39, A Resolution To Amend The Village of Granville Rules Of The Village Council, was not addressed at this meeting. 

EXECUTIVE SESSION (9:54pm) Councilmember Crais moved to go into executive session for the discussion of acquisition of land; second by Vice Mayor Wernet. A Roll Call vote yielded six (6) affirmative votes: Councilmembers Bellman, Crais, Lucier, and McGowan; Vice Mayor Wernet, Mayor Robertson.

At the conclusion of the executive session, Councilmember Crais moved to adjourn it. Second by Vice Mayor Wernet. A Roll Call vote yielded six (6) affirmative votes: Councilmembers Bellman, Crais, Lucier, and McGowan; Vice Mayor Wernet, Mayor Robertson. The session was adjourned at 10:47pm.

MEETING ANNOUNCEMENTS (10:47pm) June 11, 2001 – Planning Commission June 12, 2001 – Charter Review Commission June 12, 2001 – Tree & Landscape Commission June 14, 2001 – Board of Zoning and Building Appeals June 20, 2001 – Village Council June 25, 2001 – Planning Commission 

ADJOURNMENT Councilmember McGowan made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:47pm. Second by Vice Mayor Wernet. Meeting adjourned. 

Employee Payroll / Compensation

The Village has thirty-six (36) full-time employees, 16 regular part-time employees and seaonal employees. Village Personnel Policy

Go to My Pay Stub and login.