City Council - Regular Meeting

At 7.30, we're going to go ahead and get started. Hello and welcome, everyone. We did start early tonight with an executive session to interview applicants for boards and commissions. As such, we will now resume our normally scheduled public meeting. I'd like to take a moment and welcome everyone who is here in attendance tonight, as well as those who may be watching remotely via the HCTV video feed. Therefore, we will resume with Section 3 on the agenda. Will you please stand and join me for the Pledge of Allegiance? Thank you everyone Moving on to section 4 roll call mrs. Wheeler. Will you please call the roll dr. Byrd here?

Mr. Brezevich here. Mr. Rameau here. Dr. Getz here. Mr. Sutton. Dr. Weinstein. Yeah, mr. White here Thank you.

Mrs. Wheeler. We do have a quorum tonight with all seven members of council present. I We will move on to Section 5, Approval of the Minutes. Item A, number 26-0046, will include the May 19, 2026 Council Meeting Minutes and the May 26, 2026 Council Workshop Minutes. Therefore, do we have a motion from Council to accept the minutes as provided?

I move to accept the minutes as provided.

Thank you, Councillor Brzezic. Do we have a second?

Second.

Thank you, Council President Byrd. Is there any discussion on the minutes as provided? Seeing none, Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call the vote on the passage of the minutes as provided? Mr. President?

Yes. Mr. Remo? Yes. Dr. Goetz? Yes. Mr. Sutton? Yes. Dr. Weinstein? Yes. Mr. White?

Yes.

Dr. Byrd?

Yes. Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. The minutes as provided does pass by a vote of seven in favor to zero against. Move on and close section five and move on to section six for proclamations. Item A is number 26-0047. This is a special recognition of Hudson Festival Days. I will read that in its entirety. Proclamations, special recognition of Hudson Festival Days. Whereas Hudson Festival Days spotlight traditional community events that signal the start of summer in the city of Hudson. And whereas the Hudson home and garden tour on June 12th and June 13th is celebrating its 78th year and brings in many visitors annually and benefits community and school projects scholarships and grants provided by the Hudson garden club. And whereas the 61st annual clothesline art show on June 12th and June 13th features original artwork by members of the Hudson society of artists benefiting many local charitable endeavors. And whereas the Ice Cream Social on June 12th, hosted by the Hudson League for Service on the Hudson Green, annually since 1947, is a Hudson tradition. And whereas Screen on the Green, the Leadership Hudson Class of 2011 service project, provides a free, family-friendly outdoor movie experience at dusk on June 12th, screening The Wizard of Oz. And whereas the Hudson Fire Museum and the Visitor Center will be open in the historic Town Hall building during the Ice Cream Social, and whereas Hudson Festival Days events showcase the City of Hudson, bring the community together and support worthy causes. Now, therefore, I, Jeffrey L. Anzovino, Mayor of the City of Hudson, Ohio, do hereby proclaim June 12th and June 13th, 2026, as Hudson Festival Days in Hudson, Ohio. And furthermore, I encourage citizens to enjoy the special events planned during this annual community-wide celebration. And witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and cause the seal of the City of Hudson to be affixed on the second day of June, 2026. Are there any comments from Council on the proclamation tonight? Any comments from staff? I believe we do have a few members from the different organizations here. It would be an honor if you would come forward and officially accept the proclamation.

Some of my words were in the proclamation, like the idea that we have 78 years. I don't know if you know this, but we are one of the longest running tours in the country. When I told someone in Santa Fe, New Mexico, that I was moving to Hudson, Ohio, they said, that's where the Hudson home and garden tour is. So you are known for your garden tour in New Mexico. 1,000 to 1,200 people come to our tour every year. When they come from out of town, which they do, they stop for coffee, eat in a restaurant, and visit our cute stores. And they may even stop for ice cream. We have hundreds of volunteers, but still need more. We've had friends come from Columbus to work as host and hostess. Last year, my brother-in-law got up at 4 a.m. and drove here to do traffic in the rain. This year, I know a couple are flying in from Hawaii to help. with the tour. Whether you bake cookies for the tea room, volunteer as a host or a traffic safety ambassador, or just buy a ticket, you are reinvesting in the city of Hudson. To date, we have given over $1 million earned from this tour alone in the form of scholarships, grants, youth programs, and et cetera, as you said, and trees for the city. We are doing our best to make Hudson, Ohio an even better place to live. Thank you.

Thank you.

Barbara.

And I just happen to have a couple extra posters if you want to put them anywhere. These are our last ones, so they're precious. Tell all your friends. You know, it's June 12th. Good weather, right? We're not going to be rained out this time. It is like amazing because we have so many community groups and just this week, three more groups called and said, can we have a table? Can we be there? We're all there to meet our neighbors. We don't advertise outside of Hudson. We don't let people do political or commercial anything. We want people to meet our neighbors, meet ourselves. So we really hope you come and, all the people that come down for good weather. Thank you so much for the proclamation.

Thank you, Barbara. Do we have those at City Hall?

Oh, I mean, City Hall, Town Hall. Yes, I appreciate it.

Thank you again, and congratulations. Some very long-time traditions here in Hudson that I know the community enjoys. Thank you. We will close Section 6 and move on to Section 7 for public comments. Counsel and myself value and respect comments from the public aligned with the City of Hudson Codified Ordinance 220.03, titled Rules, Item G, subtitled Decorum. I'm kindly asking everyone in attendance to remain respectful of the process and display courtesy, professionalism, and order at all times. Please meet your electronic devices if you have not and also per ordinance to to 0.03 and sub item G public comments are to be kept within 5 minutes. There is a device on the lectern that will flash orange at one minute or excuse me it will turn orange one minute flash at 20 seconds and turn red at the end of that 5 minute time. Therefore per the city of Hudson charter article 3 section 3.0 to if there's any resident of the municipality here tonight would like to speak to City Council. regarding any topic that's relevant to the City of Hudson, kindly raise your hand, gain my attention, and as you are verbally called upon, please approach the lectern, state your name and address, and council will hear your remarks. Is there anyone here tonight who would like to speak to council?

My name is Michael Juppe, 5734 Williamsburg Circle. First, a little housekeeping, I suppose. I was traveling on the week of the last council meeting, but I sent an email to the council on Tuesday, May 19th at 10 a.m. to all council members, including the clerk of council. The Hudson website says if you can't attend, send a letter and it will be read. My letter wasn't read. When I asked why it wasn't read, I was told it's council's discretion to read letters into the records. I'd like to know who decided not to read my letter. So a little background on myself. I started working at a chemical company in New Jersey as a chemist and went to night school and received a master's degree in chemical engineering. I've held various engineering and chemist positions for over 40 years. To set the stage prior to the meeting on election day, I raced over, working at the polls. I got to speak at the very end. I said the best example of why a property zone commercial should never be rezoned to residential would be the phase two project, or now called Clinton's Crossing. There are numerous chemicals of unknown origin, like lead, barium, arsenic, and benzopyrenes, which were found at the site. Well, I have a better example now, and that is Joanne Fabric location, which is formerly GM Terex, or Terex Corporation. GM Terex operated from approximately 1957 to 1988. It's a very large manufacturer of earth-moving equipment. Think Caterpillar. So they built these machines over there, and Terex is still in operation today. The following information was obtained from Hudson. In April 1988, the letter from a vendor on Terex was sent to the Hudson Fire Department. Tarek's asking permission to remove or close 29 underground or above ground storage tanks. These tanks were 1,000 to 8,000 gallons. Seven tanks contained diesel or gasoline, 10 tanks oil, one tank contained ethylene glycol, and five tanks contained hazardous waste. EG is a toxic liquid which is soluble in water. They listed the contents of only 21 tanks to be removed, cleaned, or closed. Not sure if there were 21 or 29 tanks. According to the Hudson Fire Department, Terex was supposed to notify Hudson about the final disposition of all materials from the job. No information available from Hudson on the disposition of these tanks, removal, cleaning, or closure. I'm waiting information from Ohio EPA regarding the disposition and contents of these tanks if known. There's a procedure that a lot of chemical companies use which would document what kind of hazardous waste they had on property. So the citizens would know what types of chemicals these companies were using. One of them is trichloroethane, TCE. as one of the hazardous materials that was used in the paint room. TCE was widely used degreaser back in its day. TCE is a known carcinogen. TCA has been involved with a number of lawsuits nationwide due to the contamination of municipal wells. Books have been written about TCE contamination. In addition to that, PCBs, Polychlorinated biphenyls, which are used in transformers, were also housed at the site. PCBs are highly toxic and are a known carcinogen. By 1985, PCBs had been banned. During Tom's phase two property assessment, Tom had soil samples taken from an area where transformers were housed and nothing was found. Tom also conducted testing of soil two feet to 20 feet, and water samples on several wells. We also hired a firm using ground-penetrating radar to search for one underground tank that was at phase two. When the disposition of only one tank was not known, it was not reported what happened to that one tank on our property over there. Thus far, I've not heard of any soil or warding testing at Tarex, even though amendments have been made to districts District 11 zoning, these can be reversed if need arises.

You have 15 seconds, sir.

Thank you. If Hudson conducted all the testing for Phase 2, should we be as diligent with the Terex-Joann site? We should first start testing the wells for this TCE over there and determine the dispossession of all the previous mentioned tanks. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Is there any additional public comment tonight? Mr. Revita?

Anthony Revita, 1746 Edgar Drive. Just want to let note this council is that the criminal suit that the city had charged me with has been reversed. And it's been reversed because my constitutional rights have been violated. And what I told you last week or two weeks ago is that the civil case was denied. And so at this point, I guess the city would be starting all over after three years. And I don't see that being beneficiary to anybody. I suggested a lawyer, Hal DeSalzer also suggested a lawyer to be the city solicitor. He had gone through the proper channels, did a application, never was called. This guy is a citizen of Hudson. He's been in the law for 30 years. I think Mr. Sheridan picks and selects who he wants, or in some ways I have people that I know that are in construction that don't even bid these jobs anymore in Hudson. The reason they don't bid is because they're never going to get it. This is a fact, and I hate to say it, but that's the way it was. I can tell you that Mr. Pitchford... It's been busy prior to my being around here. A couple things that I pulled up is the I-Team Hudson lawsuit against the ex-city manager, Jane Howeyton, was deemed frivolous and settled for $80,000. Again, poor judgment on the city solicitor. Some Hudson Council members use taxpayer money for personal war. Again, this has been the standard. Mr. Sheridan and Mr. Pitchford, this is personal war. personal war against me I Have two documents that 99% 99.9% of the citizens of Hudson when they present this their project is over With mr. Sheridan in charge he believes his word is more important than this the city staff and mr. Mr. Sheridan's word as far as I'm concerned with two cents is worth two cents He has never been honest. We tried to have a meeting on Friday to mash this out, be done with it. Hal DeSouser went up to where they were at, from what he described to me, said that Joe from the engineering never came to my house, never was a part of it, I had three documents that actually told what the truth really was. This man, I have nothing, I have no axe to grind. I just cannot believe that this guy is in charge of a city with the money that's involved that does these frivolous cases. Another frivolous case, was Mrs. Howington also summarized her discussion. You also indicated that five votes, she was talking to Mr. Foster, for my removal. Howington wrote to Foster and asked why the response was lack of trust. Mr. Foster said there was a lack of trust. That's why we lost Jane Howington. This was Hal DeSouser. He was the attorney. He said this was an abuse of power as the city of Hudson, who represents Howington. It was obvious to me that it became clear that the city did not want it known for what it was doing. This case against Mrs. Howington was put in a way where the city wouldn't discover it. It was hidden away. Mr. Beam last week very much hit it on the head. i would say to you that that position of city solicitor is one of the most uh... important positions in this in the city and it should be well documented that mister pitchforks actions have cost the set city hundreds of thousands of dollars then could have been used for infrastructure or anything else that the city needed you have twenty seconds mister i think i guess at the end of what i'm saying is that I did my permit with the instruction of the staff. How one man can in this city basically have the power to say no and cost the city right now probably somewhere between 50 and $150,000 with all four cases. Now I say at the end of this, let's end this nonsense. Let's come to some conclusion with this and be done. Thank you very much, Mayor.

Thank you, Mr. Rubino. Is there any additional public comment tonight? Seeing no other public comment, we will close Section 7 and move on to Section 8 for correspondence and council comments. If any council member has correspondence that has not already been generally distributed and or council comments, we will hear those now. Please gain my attention and allow me to verbally recognize you and assign you the floor. Are there any comments from council tonight? Councillor Gatz?

I want to tell the city staff that I rode up and down Streetsboro Road a couple of times today near the Acme Plaza, and people were following the new...

Painting that's there and it was really quite remarkable people were doing what they were supposed to so I wanted to let you know that I think it's working Thank You councillor gets additional comment council members tonight That's our white It's mayor attended the EAC meeting last night They're going to continue reviewing the city capital budgets and plan on identifying items in the coming years that may benefit from EAC review recommendations they're also going to be collaborating on in some upcoming events to help support awareness one of those events is the touch a truck event which is on July 25th this is an event this is the first event where they're going to work to participate and generate excitement environmental initiatives they will also be participating in the June 20th community day at the farmers market and speaking of farmers market I just want to remind everyone that farmers market starts again this Saturday from 9 to 1230 My family is very excited to be there, so I hope to see you all out.

Thank you, Councillor White. Any additional comments from council? Councillor Durema?

Yeah, I just wanted to thank Linda Suchesky. We celebrated her retirement for almost 40 years as the director of St. Mary's Preschool, and she started that program and just recently retired and is going to try to spend more time with her grandchildren. So I just want to thank her for her service and commitment to the children of our community.

Thank you, Councillor Duramo. Additional comments from Council? Councillor Brezovic?

Councillor Brezovic I'd just like to address one of the questions raised during a public comment specifically on reading of emails into the record is correct. That is the council's discretion to read any item into the record during their turn during this very section. Correspondence and council comments. I cannot answer on why every member of council may have declined to read a specific email. I can give my general reasoning of we received many emails on District 11 over the previous few months. Some were read into the record and some were not. From the timeline given, when this email was received, being near the end, the amount of information that had already been read into the record, the fact that the decision was likely to fully remove residential at that time, very likely led to the decision that that particular email just between the amount of time and the contents for various reasons among this council and need any one of them decided to choose to read into the record. That's that's the only reason why. And then the final question brought up of why would we not be as diligent on phase two as we are or on Joanne's rather as we were on phase two. simply just because we own phase 2 that is our property we do not own Joanne's we would not Mr. Juppe please sir public comment is closed give you this one morning so we do not own the property and that's the reason thank you thank you councillor Brezovic additional comment councillor Weinstein

The Economic Growth Board met Thursday, May 28th. They are continuing to consider and research how other communities similar to us run their building department to see if there's a more efficient way that we can get the building permits checked off and done. Ms. Banke also informed the board that a large employer was requesting a citywide hiring event So they'll be looking into that. And at public comments, Mr. Kern came and presented a report on business retention and expansion.

Thank you, Councillor Weinstein. Additional comment from council members who have not spoken? Councillor Sutton?

They discussed Earth Day and some changes that they might do to the SAPM giveaway next year. They reviewed the gazebo plantings and the Garden Club give on the garden tour some concerns that Traffic will be bad on Owen Brown City was not able to help them with the traffic concerns. I

Councilor Sutton council president Bert any comments from yourself.

So I drove by the Oak Grove dream playground today, and it's coming along nicely and thanks to the city staff and the playground Nice and then great turnout at the Middleton Park community Thursday lots of good good ideas from the public they really of and cherish their neighborhood park and Gave us lots of lots of good information.

So we see everybody making the effort to come come out for Thank You council president Burt I have just a couple quick things from my side agree with the farmers market looking forward to going to the first day this coming Saturday and I do also want to publicly recognize Mrs. Christy Warner, who was selected as the May recipient for my 2026 Kindness Challenge. I will be reaching out to Christy personally to congratulate her as well as present her with one of my certificates and appreciation and gratitude coins. And I do actually want to... address Mr. Juppe's comments. I do know some of the history on the phase two with core samples and soil and things that we have done. I do not know it all. So out of respect for your comments here tonight, I will personally ask some additional questions and look further into that because it's certainly something that we should do our due diligence on if we have not already. So that is my promise to you. Thank you. Any additional comments from council tonight? Seeing none, we will close Section 8 and move on to Section 9, Report of the City Manager. Mr. Sheridan, I'd like to assign the floor to you so as to provide any updates to the council.

Thank you, Mayor. Just a couple items. June 3rd at 6 p.m. to 7.30 at the library, we will have our first program ever of Meet Your City Staff, and this meeting will be with the Economic Development Manager. So we'll have many more after that, but this will be the first kickoff of that. I also wanted to mention WRA's bicentennial kickoff is Thursday, June 4th, and runs through Saturday, June 6th. That is a big event in town, and we expect to see a lot of people and alumni from that. And lastly, I sent council and the mayor today an email regarding the fire and EMS. As of June 1st, we're trying to tackle a couple of things here in the fire department with reducing, we'll call them nuisance calls, President of Council, Dr. Bird, and one of the assisted livings. We expect to work with several other in the town to hope to get those number of calls, like around 2,600 or down to maybe even half that. So that would be really a great goal to meet. That's the first part. The second part is we look to fire department. We have a fire department, which a lot of them are fire medics down the end of the hallway. Dr. Carter, who is our medical director for the EMS, Chief Varnes and Assistant Chief Vargo put their heads together and came up with a plan where if two trucks go out, they will have two EMS units are out. They'll be able to staff a third unit. And unbelievably, about four minutes after it went into effect, we had a third unit call. But I think getting down those nuisance calls, as I'll call them, down to where we only have half that, We'll be able to better serve the public with two trucks, but it's good to know we have fire medics down the hall, and I just wanted the public to know that. That's all I have, Mayor.

Thank you, Mr. Sheridan. Does Council have any questions for Mr. Sheridan tonight? Seeing no questions for the City Manager, we will close Section 9 and move on to Section 10 for appointments. Item A is listed, number 26-0048. This is looking for a motion to concur with the city manager's appointment of Marshall M. Pitchford as the acting city solicitor and special counsel. And referencing charter article in section 8.03, the city solicitor shall be appointed by the city manager with the concurrence of a majority of the members of council. Therefore, with all seven members of council seated, a motion and a second and at least four affirmative votes are required from council to accept said appointment. Therefore, does council wish to take action on item A26-0048 with any motions?

I do concur with the city manager's appointment of Marshall M. Pitchford as the acting solicitor and special counsel.

Thank you, Council President Byrd. Is there a second to Council President Byrd's motion?

Second.

Thank you, Councillor White. Is there any discussion on the motion on the table? Councillor Gatz?

Yes. Mr. Sheridan had asked Attorney Isayu to give an opinion yesterday about whether the city can appoint the interim solicitor by a motion under the appointment section under the agenda. I do respect his opinion that the city can do this. It says in the charter. But should the city do this? There are lots of things that we can do, but that we don't do. And this is why I am deeply concerned that this council leadership is endorsing a highly unconventional approach by placing TMP 8692 under the appointment process. Traditionally here, City Council, appointments have been reserved for boards, commissions, and subcommittees, not for contracts. Mr. Pitchford had a contract presented to Council on May 19, 2026, that was not presented as an appointment item on the agenda, but as an item on the consent agenda, and that was item 2684. Why is not this on consent tonight? Why not be consistent? Even two years ago, May 7th, 2024, his contract was on consent, not on appointments. On May 19th, 2026, there was a vote on resolution 2684 on consent with emergency language. It did not go the way the majority wanted. There were two votes, so there could not be emergency. Will, in the future, the council leadership use agenda maneuvering to circumvent the will of the minority to achieve their desired outcome? This is a dangerous precedent that's being set here. I appreciate that there's concern about having no solicitor for 17 days. That was what happened because of the emergency clause not passing. But there is a solution. Instead of trying to sidestep TMP 8699, The ordinance amending 2684 support it. If this resolution passes tonight, we would have Mr. Pitchford and his associates for six months as a city solicitor, while the city broadens its search for one to have a one full-time solicitor. That's something that council leadership, Mr. Sheridan, and all the council want. Now, I don't know if I'm allowed to do this, but I will try. Therefore, I move the appointment of TMP 8692. I move that it be moved to item J on the consent agenda, reading a resolution approving the city manager's appointment of Marshall M. Pitchford as the acting city solicitor and special counsel and declaring an emergency.

Councilor Goetz, without a city solicitor to help give us advice on your motion, my understanding is that a valid motion to consider something out of the normal order of events is valid, but what I don't know is you are asking for something to be moved to a different section of the agenda. That I do not believe is valid. You can make a motion to suspend the rules and consider something out of its normal order, which would just bring the consent item up that you're talking about and consider it now out of order and bypassing the other things that are in front of that. That would require suspension of the rules and that would require, my understanding, is a two-thirds vote on council to agree to that movement. You are asking for something to be moved to a separate section, a new section of the agenda, not to consider consent agenda item now versus waiting for its due time in the agenda. So again, without a city solicitor to provide that advice, I do not believe that your motion is valid.

Thank you.

Is there any additional comment, Councillor Gants?

No.

Okay. Thank you. Um, additional discussion on the motion for the appointment as stated in section 10 item eight to six dash zero zero four eight from a council member, councilor Brezovic.

Thank you, ma'am. Um, I have two items I suppose on this. The first one is a question and looking at the legislation text itself, it wasn't clear to me under what exact, you know, payment contract, et cetera. would the solicitor be operating under during this 16-day period until June 18th when the legislation from the previous meeting goes into effect?

Is that something, Mr. Sheridan, you can address based on your knowledge and involvement?

Yes.

We are able to write a purchase order separately for the work during that time frame as we track everything that the law department does

Okay, so it would be essentially billable hours?

Correct. The entire budget for the legal operating budget was approved earlier in the year, so we're only five months in.

Okay. And then my comment is, I suppose, related to Dr. Goetz's earlier point of not wanting this in the appointment section or preferring, you know, the support of her amendment. If we did approve this amendment at its current position or in any position prior to Dr. Goetz's amendment, in Section 5 of her amendment it reads, all prior resolutions and ordinances that relate to or in any way conflict with this message are hereby repealed and rescinded. If we voted for this amendment and then voted for Dr. Goetz's amendment, this appointment would be null and void, essentially, by Section 5. So I guess I want to make that point that you can vote for this, you can vote against it, but if you end up voting and the majority votes for Dr. Goetz's amendment, this appointment is voided, in my opinion.

Councilor Brzezinski, you're referring to 2695 on the consent agenda item I, which is an ordinance amending 26-84, directing the city manager to obtain a professional recruiting firm for the purposes of obtaining in-house counsel and declaring emergency. And to your point within that, there is that statement that says to rescind the prior legislation. And can you read that?

I didn't. Yes. Section 5 of that legislation specifically reads, all prior resolutions and ordinances that relate to or in any way conflict with this measure are hereby repealed and rescinded. So now the question does come to me. Resolutions and ordinances, maybe that does not cover appointments.

That would be my understanding. Okay. Correct. That's very clear in my opinion.

Okay. Then my statement stands corrected and That's very interesting. So the prior, the situation would be that the prior legislation is repealed, but the city solicitor would be in effect until the 18th. However, the legislation itself says that he would now be the special counsel and, ah, this is confusing, okay. This is quite a conundrum.

Yeah, he would be serving as interim, solicitor from June 1. There's a date on there.

Right.

So it would just be...

So it does not be conflicting between the appointment and the legislation.

Council, I guess I will show you some grace. I just want to allow every other council member to speak before members speak again. Councilor Brezovic, my understanding is yes, if we pass the consent agenda item I, it would repeal the previous legislation passed two weeks ago, but I believe if the appointment here that we have the motion on does pass,

And we do need to keep our discussion to this motion that is on. Another idea comes to mind, but I will just say we could amend and add the word appointments alongside of resolutions and ordinances in theory. So we're skirting the line of talking about this. Point of order.

I know they're tied together, so it is a bit tricky to not talk about one without the other because of their direct link. With that, any additional comments, Council President?

Council president bird, so I appreciate the the clarifying questions Having us understand this a little bit better It is not a contract It is not an ordinance. It is not Anything that is involves legislation? So this is this is this? fits well in appointments we are appointing somebody as Tom described it'll be a he'll pay as he goes and it'll be a won't be a contract but He will still be able to get compensated So I don't see this as being outrageous.

I don't see this as setting a dangerous precedent Thank You council president Byrd additional comments from council on the motion that's on the floor which Was made by council president Byrd seconded by council councillor white in regards to accepting the city managers Appointment of Marshall and Pitchford as this acting city solicitor in special counsel item a 2 6-0 0 4 8 under section 10 appointments additional comments from counsel Seeing none mrs. Wheeler. Will you please roll call a vote on that? The motion to approve the appointment from the city manager's recommendation of Marshall and Pitchford as the acting city solicitor and special counsel under item A26-0048.

Ms. Rameau? No. Dr. Goetz? No. Mr. Sutton? No. Dr. Weinstein? Yes. Mr. White?

Yes.

Dr. Byrd?

Yes.

Mr. Brezevik?

Yes.

Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. And again, we only need four affirmative votes per section of the charter that covers this appointment. So therefore, item A26-0048, a motion to concur with the city manager's appointment of Marshall M. Pitchford as acting city solicitor and special counsel does pass by a vote of four in favor to three against. Thank you, counsel. Staying on section 10 for appointments council president bird. Do we have any other appointments for boards and commissions tonight?

Yes, we do. I would like to nominate Steve Lyons to the HC TV board which is a partial term ending in March of 2028 and

Thank you, Council President Byrd. Do we have a motion to accept Council President Byrd's nomination of Steve Lyons to the HCTV Board for a partial term until March 20th, 2028? Does Council wish to make a motion to approve that?

I move to approve the appointment of Steve Lyons.

For the partial term? For the partial term. Until March 20th, 2028, just to be clear. Thank you. Do we have a second to that motion to approve the nomination? Second. Thank you, Councillor Getz. Is there any discussion? Seeing none, Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote on the motion to approve Council President Byrd's nomination of Steve Lyons to the HCTV board for a partial term until March 20th, 2028.

Dr. Getz? Yes. Mr. Sutton?

Abstain.

Dr. Weinstein? Yes. Mr. White? Yes. Dr. Byrd? Yes. Mr. Brezevik? Yes. Mr. Remo? Yes.

Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. That motion to approve the nomination from Council President Byrd to appoint Steve Lyons to the HCTV Board does pass by a vote of six in favor with one abstention. And that, again, is for a partial term until March 20th, 2028. Thank you, Council. Council President Byrd, are there any other appointments to boards and commissions tonight? Not tonight. Thank you, Council President Byrd. We will close Section 10 and move on to Section 11 for the consent agenda. Council members, if there are any items on the consent agenda that you wish to have considered separately, please allow me to read the item, gain my attention, and state your wishes. Item A on consent is number 26-87. Welcome, Mr. Pitchford. This is a resolution authorizing the city manager to advertise for bids and to enter into a contract for fiber construction material and procurement services for the fiber to the home second year build out project with the lowest and best bidder and declaring an emergency. Item B on consent is number 26-88. This is a resolution authorizing the city manager to enter into an amended contract with ZAO for dedicated internet service and increasing bandwidth. Moving on, item C on consent is number 26-89. A resolution amending Resolution 25-183 and authorizing the City Manager to purchase equipment, materials, supplies, and services for the City's velocity broadband operations during the year 2026 and declaring an emergency. Item D on consent is number 26-90, a resolution authorizing the city manager to enter into a professional services contract with Chagrin Valley Engineering Limited for the design of the Darrow Road Park stormwater management pond, phase one. Item E on consent is number 26-91, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AMENDED AGREEMENT WITH THE OHIO RAIL DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FOR THE HINDS HILL ROAD GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT THROUGH THE OHIO GRADE CROSSING ELIMINATION PROGRAM. ITEM F ON CONSENT IS 26-92, A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NUMBER 26-8 TO INCREASE FUNDING FOR THE FRANKLIN STREET WATER LINE PROJECT AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Item G on consent is number 26-93, a resolution affirming acceptance by the City Manager of the Greatest American Cleanup Grant by Keep America Beautiful. Item H on consent is number 26-94. This is a resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into a contract with America Municipal power to participate in a community energy savings smart thermostat program Last item on consent is item I number 2 6-9 5 and ordinance amending 2 6-8 for directing the city manager to obtain a professional recruiting firm for the purposes of obtaining in-house counsel and declaring an emergency please pull That was Councillor Gatz and Councillor Brezovic. I will note that as being pulled by Councillor Gatz. That is the last item on consent. Therefore, do we have a motion to suspend the rules to consider passage of the items on the consent agenda, less item I, number 26-95?

I move to suspend the rules, less item I, 26-95.

Thank you, Councillor Brezovic. Do we have a second? Second. Thank you, Councillor President Byrd. Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote on the suspension of the rules for the consent agenda? Less item I, number 26-95. Mr. Sutton?

Yes. Dr. Weinstein? Yes. Mr. White? Yes. Dr. Byrd? Yes. Mr. Brezovic? Yes. Mr. Rameau? Yes. Dr. Goetz? Yes.

Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. The rules are so suspended by a vote of seven in favor to zero against. Council wish to consider a motion to approve the consent agenda less item I number two six dash nine five approve the consent agenda less item I to six dash nine five Thank You council president bird do we have a second second Thank You councillor Brezovic are there any comments Seeing none, Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote to approve the consent agenda, less item I, number 26-95.

Dr. Weinstein? Yes. Mr. White?

Yes.

Dr. Byrd?

Yes.

Mr. Brezovic?

Yes.

Mr. Rameau? Yes. Dr. Goetz? Yes. Mr. Sutton? Yes.

Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. The consent agenda, less item I, number 26-95, does pass by a vote of seven in favor of to zero against. We will then go back to item I-26-95 and consider that separately. We must first have a motion to suspend the rules on item I-26-95 to consider this for discussion. Does council wish to make a motion to suspend the rules on 26-95?

I move we suspend the rules on item 26-95.

Thank you, Councillor Gatz. Do we have a second? Second. Thank you, Councillor Brezovic. Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call the vote to suspend the rules on item 26-95 on consent?

Mr. White? Yes. Dr. Byrd? Yes. Mr. Brzezik?

Yes.

Mr. Rameau? Yes. Dr. Goetz? Yes. Mr. Sutton? Yes. Dr. Weinstein? Yes.

Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. The rules on item 26-95 are so suspended by a vote of seven in favor to zero against. This then opens this up if council would like to make a motion regarding item I-26-95 on consent. Does council wish to make a motion and take action on 26-95?

I move we take action on item 26-95.

And Councillor Gatz, just for clarification, can you specify what action? Because we could table, we could postpone, we could pass.

I move that we discuss and then pass this motion.

We would have to have a motion to pass to open up discussion.

I move to pass this motion.

Item 26-95 for clarification. Thank you, Councillor Gatz, just trying to make sure we're clear. Do we have a second on Councillor Gatz's motion to pass 26-95? Second. Thank you, Councillor Brezovic. This then does open 2695 up for discussion. Councillor Goetz, I would like to give you the opportunity since you had pulled the item.

So I had talked about this at the workshop, and I'm pretty much going to say the same things, but I will. do it again. I brought up this ordinance forward because I believe the city will be better served financially and operationally by appointing a full-time solicitor. This solicitor would provide daily support to city staff, attend council meetings, help with ordinances, attend BCBA and Planning Commission meetings, ensuring critical continuity. The current ordinance which I'm proposing we amend appoints Pitchford, Ducato, and Yoder as solicitor, assistant city solicitor, and special counsel. This arrangement right now involves multiple attorneys serving city staff four days a week with Mr. Pitchford covering council needs. This arrangement would cost the city $260,000 for the first year and $278,000 for the second year. This would not include any additional special counsel fees. A full-time solicitor would be more cost-effective for Hudson. I do not believe that every avenue was fully explored to find a full-time solicitor. A professional legal recruiting agency such as Bacon Legal Recruiting would be able to hunt for an in-house professional broadening the search. Additionally, professional organizations were not fully tapped, and these groups could yield stronger prospects. I've talked to a few lawyers, and they said that it is possible to have this kind of thing brought to the bar associations. NOTABLY, COUNCIL DID NOT FORM A SUBCOMMITTEE FOR THE SEARCH. IN THE PAST, 2023, THERE WAS A COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE FOR THAT SEARCH. IN THIS MOTION ORDINANCE, THERE WOULD BE AN INTERIM ARRANGEMENTS WITH DECATO, PITCHFORD, AND YODER FOR THE NEXT SIX MONTHS, WHICH WITH SOLICITOR, WITH MR. PITCHFORD AND HIS ASSISTANTS. I WOULD ALSO in this ordinance say that there is a need for special counsel, and in it I would recommend that Mr. Pitchford remain special counsel for the next two years. So this would give us what we really need. I know Mr. Sheridan wants a full-time solicitor. I know he did look, but we've used recruiting firms in the past for other positions, high-level positions, and I think that that would be really necessary. I think looking again for six months makes sense. Maybe we won't find anybody, but at least we would have tried to get what the city really needs is a full-time solicitor. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Goetz. Is there any additional comment from Council tonight on item 26-95? Councilor Brozovic?

Thank you. I do think a lot of this amendment is well-reasoned. I do see a general goal here. My first and probably least consequential question is, do we have any general, you know, we're talking about financial savings, do we have any general idea of the estimated cost of a professional services group doing, you know, managing this for us? How much additional would we pay? And how much you know, savings would we have to realize to make this financially correct approach? I know we've used professional services in the past to find the city's excuse me, our city manager. So I assume we have some amount of estimates on those numbers.

I will answer that, and Mr. Sheridan, you can add comment if you feel necessary. I did ask that exact question, because knowing my world in the professional executive search arena, it's usually 25 percent of the first-year salary. So, depending, I guess I did ask then, Mr. Sheridan, what was our last full-time solicitor's salary? Can we adjust that now for 2026 salary? And I believe that was, Mr. Sheridan, can you remind me of that number?

160,000.

So, 25 percent of 160,000, if that was the required rate today. Pardon, Mr. Sheridan?

That would be 40,000.

Okay. So, that's not an inexpensive cost of an executive recruiter, if that is directionally correct.

It gives me an estimate to work from, so thank you. My next question is, you know, we did our contract negotiation with DPNY with the understanding of the original term of the contract, would DPNY be agreeable to just changing the contract length here to six months by keeping the remainder of the agreements in the contract, you know, the full-time staff or near full-time staff member, you know, all the details as they are, or do we have to renegotiate now that we're changing the term length?

Sure news or anything that you would like to respond to that comment from counselor president under circumstances on all contracts that I deal with from construction if you're renegotiating a contract you're changing the terms but again, I Go that route. I would have a meeting with City solicitor and their team and find out if they do want to renegotiate Because we are changing the length of it. So Thank you.

And then, finally, it kind of goes with that, you know, we're going to ask to kind of renegotiate these terms after we, you know, two weeks ago agreed, though not with emergency language, but agreed to the terms. We, from our original search, felt it was difficult to find a full-time city solicitor from a level of interest, and there could be many reasons for that, you know, be it that we're not a solidly one-side political or another town, and so that leads to less perceived safety for a solicitor. But I can't imagine that pulling out of a contract at the 11th hour would help the desirability of this being a landing spot. So while I understand the purpose of this legislation, I am struggling with voting to kind of in some way go back on our word here. I'd like to hear further discussion from the rest of the council members.

Thank you, Councillor Brezovic. Additional comments from council members? We'll hands up. Councillor White?

Yeah, I mean, I respect the difference of opinion on the issue. I've wrestled with this kind of since it was brought up. And, you know, I do feel strongly that we should be supporting the city or the City managers recommendation and the staff that handled this process. They spent a lot of time and I believe they handled this process professionally I'm pretty aware that the city manager is always looking at ways to bring down costs and he's working to do so and And I feel like he's trying to do that. He's looking out for the city's best interests Secondly, I'd say, you know personally working with the solicitor here and there he's been responsive to me when when necessary and broken down issues for my understanding so I I I'm personally in support of the recommendation of the city manager, and that's where I am.

Thank you, Councillor White. Councillor Duramo, did you have your hand up as well?

Yeah, I was just going to say, kind of pivoting off what Kyle said, you know, and to further negotiate, you know, you can change your terms, and then we'll ask for more money, and that's a valid point.

Thank you, Councillor Duramo. Councillor President Byrd, did you have a comment?

I do. I have several, actually. And I guess I want to make these comments because I think that some partisanship has maybe influenced some of these discussions. And I think we just have to address the element in the room, Marshall. I hope this is okay. i think we should get it out there that that marshall serves in a leadership role with the ohio right to life an organization whose views are not shared by most ohioans as evidenced by the passage of of ohio issue one by 57 percent the right to reproductive freedom with protections for health and safety that was in a constitutional amendment in ohio in 2023 um however Municipal governments like Hudson rarely deal with issues related to abortion or reproductive rights. If a matter involving those issues were ever to come to the City of Hudson, we would ask Marshall to recuse himself and find an alternative to advise us on any such legal matters. Some have also criticized Marshall for lawsuits involving a former city manager, like we heard tonight, and legal action involving a former council member. It's important to remember that those actions were undertaken at the direction of the previous city council majority. Marshall's role was to provide legal advice and carry out directives of his client, the city. As mentioned previously, the city solicitor is a tool for city council to use. A more recent example involves the firearm legislation that was passed last year. The previous council directed Marshall to draft that legislation, allowing city council members to bring firearms into town hall. This council then directed him to modify it with a repeal of the provision, repealing that provision to allow council members to bring firearms into town hall. Marshall did both, carrying out the direction of city council. He helped craft legislation at the direction of council, and that is precisely one of the roles of a city solicitor. Now consider the alternative. Suppose we strive to select this year a city solicitor whose personal affiliations align more closely with a left-leaning political viewpoint, perhaps someone serving on the board of Planned Parenthood of Ohio. Would we expect or condone a future right-leaning council to terminate that solicitor solely because of that affiliation? Would that be best for the city? At some point, the cycle of political partisanship retribution must end, and the retribution train needs to pull into the station and stop now. So most, if not all, of us ran on a platform of nonpartisanship. City council elections in Hudson's are specifically nonpartisan, and our decisions regarding city positions that we have a say in should be based on qualifications, performance, ethics, and evidence, not political affiliations. I have not heard any cogent objections or evidence questioning DPIs or marshals' qualifications, performance, or ethics. So I suggest that we respect and acknowledge And as in his counselor white mentioned the work that the city manager has done in a nonpartisan way very thorough very systematic involving his staff and doing it in a nonpartisan manner and in That's why I'm recommending that we would not vote for this legislation

Thank you, Council President Byrd. Is there any comment from any other member who has not spoken yet? Councillor Gatz, if you'll hold, just allow members who have not spoken yet, Councillor Weinstein, Councillor Sutton, if either of you would like to speak. Councillor Weinstein.

I won't say anything that I haven't already said. My experience working with Mr. Pitchford was that he was always available, and he has worked on a number of pieces of legislation on my request. So if anyone is unhappy with that legislation, the responsibility lies with me and not with Mr. Pitchford. What we heard tonight, I think, is an example of that responsibility blame getting put erroneously on the person who was not responsible for it, and ultimately when council asked Mr. Pitchford to do something, that is our responsibility, that is our ownership in that, not Mr. Pitchford. And I have appreciated working with him. He's worked on all the legislation that I've asked him to. I haven't had any issues. And I think if we want to lay the blame for any type of frivolous case, then the blame goes with the council that directed it, not with Mr. Pitchford.

Thank you, Councillor Weinstein. Councillor Sutton, you're the only member who has not spoken. I'll offer you the floor if you would like to accept. Otherwise, we'll go to round two. Thank you, Councillor Sutton. Councillor Gatz.

I just want to say there was nothing in my comments that had anything to do with anything political. It was we are not getting what the city manager really wanted, which was a full-time solicitor. And my statement was that I think we could have looked in a broader sense. It had nothing to do with any kind of political thing. So I just wanted to make that clear.

Thank you council gets I will take the opportunity to just add a couple of things I do appreciate everything that council has is brought up here from my standpoint and being in this role for a little over 4 years. I believe that the contract that was already passed 2 weeks ago in that legislation. And Mister shared and I'm going to ask you just to reconfirm my understanding here. On the record. That agreement is to have an assistant city solicitor, and my understanding is that that person will be sitting in City Hall five days a week full time, is that correct?

Not five days a week, four days a week. Four days a week. Eight hours a day working exclusively on City of Hudson items.

Okay, thank you for that clarification. So four days a week, full days for those four days a week, sitting in City Hall, able to handle, how much would you estimate an assistant city solicitor could handle to help take that workload that we were looking for for a single full-time solicitor? How much does that allow you to get what you need done?

And we did go back and look at that. I have a printout that staff did for me. going back, I believe, until 2017. But keeping in mind, I'd say 2020 to 2022-ish, somewhere in there, we're averaging around 2,300 hours of legal work from having when Matt Vizzana was here, having him as a full-time city solicitor, and having special counsel, back then was Todd Hunt, having those two, we're around 2,300 hours. The number of hours that the city solicitor and special counsel assistant city solicitor is roughly that same amount. So what we're getting for the 260,000 is basically about 23, 2400 hours a year. That's how much legal work we see. And currently we have budgeted this year, uh, $538,000. It was my goal. And I know the two gentlemen sitting to my left school too, was to hopefully bring this cost down. That's not just DPY's cost. That also includes all of our HR and other different law firms that we use. But I think we are with this plan. It's the best plan we had, having an assistant solicitor in there four days a week, having the solicitor in two days a month just to catch up with staff and make sure that everybody's working toward the same game plan. And then All of the research, everything to do with council, all the legislation, everything you guys need done is all included in his flat rate for city solicitor. I think at this point, this is the best plan we have.

And that was going to be my follow-up question. Based on prior arrangements with this new arrangement that was passed two weeks ago, how significant do you feel that is to have that? assistant city solicitor in the building four days a week for eight hours.

Before this all started, and as I mentioned to council in an executive session a month ago, I went around to all my directors and asked them their opinions on what they are looking for, and they just needed somebody there that we could go and knock on the door and be present. Nothing wrong with consulting. We have consulting engineers working for us also, but we don't know where they're at. It's always good to have engineers like, for example, Mr. Knobloch's working on the fiber to the home. We don't have a lot of room to miss any deadlines with fiber to the home. And we have in-house staff, if you recall. Instead of paying a consultant $1.2 million for four years, we're paying a full-time engineer working for us $400,000. And it's that kind of thing that I think you see all the time from the staff. And the same goes with this. We tried to reduce it, and I believe we did.

Last comment, trying not to monopolize the time here, but there's work that has been done. There's research that has been done. There's discussions that have been done. Can you summarize with your prior search how many times that, what are the metrics, the analytics from what we have found with your prior search? You had a comment. Can you give the summary of that for the public and everybody who has not seen that?

On the 2026th?

In regards to what you did prior to the legislation that passed two weeks ago.

Sure.

We had gone out and there had been so many openings of the application or the job offer, the JD, excuse me. Can you give us some of that?

Sure. As I mentioned, I asked my directors in December, early January what they were looking for. I brought that all to the interview process. We created, you know, and looked at the job description to see if there was any changes we needed to make. Back to the bar associations, last time, two years ago, Mr. Pitchford allowed us to use his licenses or his applications and, you know, what he pays for those bar associations. This year, we decided that, you know, we didn't want to have to do that. We didn't want to feel we should put any consultant on the hook for that. We decided to go look at Cleveland Magazine. They named the top so many, 12 different law firms, and the ones that had municipal law, we sent them direct mail. We sent them to the newspapers, online newspapers, and those newspapers did 12 online job searches with different things like ZipRecruiter, Facebook, LinkedIn, and what have you. We received the applications for the program. individuals we did go out for individuals as dr. gets mentioned you know that was one of our ideas was to try to have a full-time solicitor and firms for a four-person panel was created the clerk of counsel myself the assistant city manager Brian Griffith and the police chief reviewed all the resumes individually and And I do this with everything. It's not just the solicitor. They all review them individually, and they all send their rankings to my office manager. She collects them. They have a certain date to get them by, including me. In this case, I was part of the interview process because this is a direct report to me. But I didn't want to make the decision solely on my own. I wanted all the staff that used the solicitor. Long story short, we had six applicants. Marshall actually applied as an individual and as a firm. So we had seven, if you want to be technical about it. But we had six different individuals. We narrowed it down to four. We brought them in for interviews from the rankings. We interviewed all the applicants. There was one individual, three firms. The one individual came in and did his part. We also look up people on their social media and all those other avenues to see any backgrounds that we have on people. The three firms also... did their part in the interview process. At the end of the interview, we all ranked them again. We had the top two, which Marshall and another firm were the two top two. They were very close. I reached out to Jeremy Ayusu, who I was using as our special counsel in this case because I didn't have a solicitor. And Jeremy, I asked him if I could go get prices because I had two years of data of Marshall's billings. And so basically I took those two years of data, gave them out to both firms, And the one firm came in at $540,000 based on those hours. And Marshall came in with a plan. And knowing what we said to him in the interview was, we have to be more available to any of our staff and our council and our mayor. So basically, he came up with a plan and said, I'm willing to do this this many days of the week in the office and give you full-time staff. And it was $260,000. He didn't know. how much the other firm was, I did, well, that's half the price. And so basically, you know, we all felt comfortable with his qualifications. He was unanimously decided on by all four of us, who I think all of everyone here respects the four and the work they do. And then we brought that candidate to council for approval.

Thank you, Mr. Sheridan. Additional comment from any council member. We are in round two of discussion. Councillor Goetz has spoken. Anyone else would like to speak again? Councillor Brozovic?

My only comment is a question for the city manager. In that process, why was it that no council member was involved as a part of that committee?

I wasn't aware until I just asked Mr. Griffith if we had a council subcommittee on the last one. And he said we did. It wasn't for when we hired Mr. Pitchford. It was when we hired a full-time solicitor who worked here for about seven months.

The goal was hopefully to get a full-time solicitor. So it's not like it would have been unusual to have had a subcommittee of a council member involved.

And again, I didn't realize that we had a subcommittee.

Thank you, Mr. Brezovic. Additional comments from council members? We're in round two. Councillor Gatz and Councillor Brezovic have spoken. Additional comments? Seeing no additional comments, the rules have been suspended on 26-95. The motion on the floor is to pass item 26-95. If there's no additional comments or discussion, we will... Councillor Brezovic?

I would like to move to amend... I think we should amend Section 5 to read all prior resolutions, ordinances, and appointments that relate to or in any way conflict with this measure are hereby repealed and rescinded.

Thank you for that motion, Councillor Brezovic. Do we have a second to that motion to amend Section 5 of the legislation? as Councillor Brezovic has stated, which is essentially to add to rescind appointments, which would rescind the previous appointment that passed earlier today. Do we have a second to that motion? Thank you, Councillor Gatz. Is there additional discussion on this motion on the floor to amend the legislation 26-95? Councillor Brezovic?

I simply would like to put out, you know, I believe this would be, if this legislation were to pass, I believe this would be the best way to do it, to keep things clean. I would love an opinion from the solicitor on if that would be valid to rescind the appointment via this legislation in Section 5.

Thank you, Councillor Brezovic. Mr. Pitchford, since you have joined us, is that It feels a bit odd to have you comment on that. Is that something that is appropriate for you to comment on, Councillor Brzezinski's question?

I'd be happy to comment. If I understand the question, you're saying by including the appointment, does it, or is it needed?

Or just is it proper? Is it going to properly, you know, I am no lawyer. I don't love ad-hoc-ing legislation, but I felt it was necessary in this point in time. And so completely outside of the bounds of this being related to you and just the generic matter of repealing an appointment via legislation, is this all valid?

I listened to the debate and the conversation, the first go-around, when we were reviewing it earlier in the meeting, and I appreciate the question. I don't think that the amendment is necessary to meet the end that you're concerned about. I think that if this particular legislation were to pass, and we used a different word about rescind, the word that came to my mind was it would become moot, because you no longer need an acting city solicitor when you would have a city solicitor. And that is effective not under Section 5, but actually under Section 1 of this particular ordinance. Because what you're really doing here is you're not repealing the resolution 2684 in its entirety. you are changing just specific pieces and then section 5 talks about rescinding those parts that are inconsistent with the intent of this ordinance so it would be my position that 2684 is modified but it would not be extended and then as to the original question about whether or not it impacts the appointment of an acting city solicitor it would simply make that appointment moved thank you very much

Thank you, Mr. Pitchford. Thank you, Councillor Brezovic. Additional comments or questions on the motion on the floor to amend Section 5 to add appointments under the Section 4 resending? Additional comments on the motion on that floor? Seeing no additional comments, we will move that motion to amend to a vote. Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote on the motion from Councillor Brezovic Seconded by councillor gets to amend section 5 of legislation to 6-9 5 as councillor Bozovich stated which is adding to rescind appointments to that sentence of Repealing a previous legislation and ordinances after bird. Nope.

Mr. Brzezinski. No, mr. Remo Yeah, dr. Getz. Yes, mr. Sutton dr. Weinstein Yes?

Mr. White?

No.

Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. That motion by Councillor Brezovic and seconded by Councillor Getz to amend Section 5 of 26-95 does fail by a vote of four against with only three in favor. That brings us back to the motion on the floor to pass legislation item, or excuse me, consent agenda item I-26-95 unless there is any additional discussion or action by Council. Seeing none, Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote on the passage of item 26-95? Mr. President? No.

Mr. Remo?

Yes.

Dr. Goetz? Yes. Mr. Sutton? Yes. Dr. Weinstein? No. Mr. White?

No.

Dr. Byrd?

No. Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. Legislation, or excuse me, consent agenda item I26-95 does fail by a vote of four against with only three in favor. That does then conclude our consent agenda. We will move on to section 12 for legislation. Item A is 26-78. which is a 3rd reading and actionable tonight. This is an ordinance amending chapter, 8, 7, 6, short-term rental operations. This council wish to make a motion or take action on legislation to 6 dash 7, 8 on 3rd reading.

I'd like to move to postpone this to a date certain of September 15th to give us more time for evaluation and analysis.

Thank you, Council President Byrd, and that is September 15, 2026, for clarity. That's correct. Thank you, Council President Byrd. Is there a second to that motion to postpone?

Second.

Thank you, Councilor Brezovic. Is there any discussion on the motion to postpone Legislation 26-78 to a date of September 15, 2026? Discussion by Council. Councilor Sutton?

My understanding is the... The desire to move this to a future date is to evaluate things like fees and if they'll have the impact we want, the operations of the business. And that's a well-intentioned idea. However, the residents didn't ask us to look at fees in the first place. They asked us to protect their residential identities. you know, protect the neighborhood identity, I should say. And I think that this could be passed tonight with meaningful zoning changes, and we could study said fees at a different date. I don't think the entire effort needs to be punted to the fall.

Thank you, Councillor Sutton. Additional comment from Council on the motion to postpone 2-6-78 to September 15, 2026? Councilor Weinstein?

I'll just say I like the idea of moving this to look at this further. Every time we've discussed it, there's been a lot of discussion and more suggestions and amendments thrown out every time. It feels like this is something that we care a lot about and want to get right. And there's a lot to consider. And I think we need more time to consider. I understand the residents' concern about maintaining the identity of their neighborhood and the neighborhood feel. and understanding that that is a negative impact on their neighborhood. Fees are one way that we address a negative impact or a negative externality of an activity happening. So a fee could be one way to address it. There are other ways to address it. There are many different ways that different communities have addressed it. And I think taking a more thorough look at that would be wise.

Thank you, Councillor Weinstein. Additional comments from council on the motion on the floor to postpone? If no additional comments from council, Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote on the motion to postpone legislation item 26-78 to a date certain of September 15, 2026? Mr. Amo?

Yes.

Dr. Goetz? Yes. Mr. Sutton? No. Dr. Weinstein? Yes. Mr. White?

Yes.

Dr. Bird? Yes. Mr. Brezovic?

Yes. Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. The motion to postpone legislation item 26-78 to a date certain of September 15, 2026 does pass by a vote of six in favor with one against. We will then move on to item B on legislation, which is number 26-79. This is a resolution authorizing the city manager to enter into an agreement with Hudson Community Foundation. regarding a senior transportation program and accepting a donation for a passenger van. This is also a third reading tonight and actionable by council. Therefore, does council wish to enter a motion on legislation 26-79?

I move to pass 26-79.

Thank you, Councillor Brzezic. Do we have a second to that motion to pass? Second. Thank you, Councillor White. Is there any comment or discussion on legislation 26-79 from council? Councillor Sutton?

Yeah, I wanted to thank the residents who were working on this, collecting donations, and I wanted to explain to them that my no vote tonight isn't because I don't think there's a need or I don't respect the work they've done. Six months ago, this council decided that our Hudson's finances were in such dire straits that we needed to pause all implementation of the 2026 connectivity plan. As such, adding a new city service would be both fiscally irresponsible and hypocritical, which is the reason I'll be voting no tonight.

Thank you, Councillor Sutton. Additional comment from Council on 26-79 and the motion on the floor to pass. Councillor Brezovic?

Question for the city manager. I assume he has this information more readily available at the moment than I do. I know we had talked about applying for grants for the driver, which would be the main ongoing cost of this program, but what was the estimated cost at the rate we would be paying for a full year, not for this abbreviated year?

I believe it's in the package, but it was roughly $50,000. Approximately $50,000.

My understanding is that one mile of sidewalk generally comes in at approximately a million dollars. Is that a reasonable estimate?

I don't have that top of my head right now.

That is generally what I've understood. I just feel that the differences in expenses are... pretty far apart and not really comparable. And then the pause of the concrete program, I believe, excuse me, not the concrete program, the connectivity plan. I believe Dr. Bird has already mentioned a desire to restart talks in approximately a month on re-implementation now that we have data on our income tax rate post-Joanne for the last six months or so. I feel those are generally reasonable approaches to how this was handled, and I disagree slightly that it's hypocritical. That's all.

Thank you, Councillor Brunswick. Additional comment from any council member on the motion on the floor to pass 26-79? Councillor Weinstein?

I'll just... add to that and just say for our senior citizens when we think about the connectivity for them that this provides essential connectivity for our senior citizens who would like to remain in their homes to essential things like doctor's visits and and that this connectivity is especially for them and as our residents came and spoke much needed connectivity for those senior citizens and so I Also, don't view this as hypocritical. I view it as taking a broader and more holistic look at connectivity for all residents in Hudson.

Thank you, Councillor Weinstein. Additional comment from council members?

Mayor, if I could. Mr. Sheridan? I'd like to correct what I mentioned. In the attachments in 27, which would be a full year, we're operating cost are $33,000. And 28, they'd be 35,000. And 29, they'd be 37,000. I just wanted to correct that 50,000 is a little bit less.

So a reduction from what you had said.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Sheridan, for that correction to previous comments. Additional comment before we move to a vote on the motion on the floor, which is to pass 26-79. Council President Byrd?

Mayor, I would just like to thank you for your role in this, because you've been kind of a champion of it for quite a while.

Appreciate the efforts that you put forth. Thank you, Council President Byrd. Additional comment from Council Member before we move to roll call a vote on the passage of 26-79. Seeing no additional comment from Council, Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote on the motion to pass 26-79? Dr. Goetz?

Yes. Mr. Sutton? No. Dr. Weinstein?

Yes.

Mr. White? Yes. Dr. Byrd? Yes. Mr. Brzezinski?

Yes.

Mr. Rameau? Yes.

Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. Legislation 26-79 does pass by a vote of six in favor to one against. We will move on to item C on legislation, which is 26-85. This is a second of three readings for this evening. An ordinance amending section 206.07 of the codified ordinances for the purpose of updating specific information.

Again, this is a second reading tonight.

Moving on in legislation, item D is number 26-86. This is a resolution authorizing the city manager to advertise for bids and to enter into a contract for the installation of hydrants along Middleton Road and Stowe Road. This is a second reading tonight. The last item on legislation is item E, number 26-96. This is a first reading tonight. This is a resolution authorizing the city manager to enter a lease agreement with North Star Towers to... LLC and again, this is a first reading on legislation tonight That does conclude our legislative agenda in section 12 We will now move on to section 13 on the agenda, which is an additional executive session tonight Therefore does counsel wish to enter a motion for executive session? I

I move to enter into executive session pursuant to Hudson codified ordinance two to 0.05 B two, three and five to discuss to, I'm sorry to consider the sale of real property and to discuss imminent and pending litigation and matters that are required to be kept confidential by law environment. Invited to this session are all members of council, the mayor, the city solicitor, the economic developer development director, the assistant city manager, and the city manager.

Thank you, Council President Byrd. Do we have a second to that motion? Second. Thank you, Councillor White. Are there any comments? Seeing none, Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote on the motion to enter into executive session? Mr. Sutton?

Yes. Dr. Weinstein? Yes. Mr. White, yes. Dr. Byrd, yes. Mr. Brzezinski, yes. Mr. Rameau, yes. Dr. Goetz, yes.

Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. We will now enter into a private closed-door executive session by that motion passing by a vote of seven in favor, two zero against. Please note, at the conclusion of our executive session, we do not anticipate any further public business other than to officially adjourn our meeting. Thank you.