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.