City Council - Regular Meeting

We are 7.30, we're gonna 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. We'd like to take a moment and welcome everyone who is here this evening, as well as those who may be watching remotely via the HCTV video feed. We will then resume with section three, Pledge of Allegiance. Will you please stand and join me? Thank you, everyone. We'll close Section 3 and move on to Section 4 for the roll call. Mrs. Wheeler, will you please call the roll?

Dr. Byrd?

Here.

Mr. Brezovac?

Here.

Mr. Rameau? Here. Dr. Goetz? Here. Mr. Sutton?

Here.

Dr. Weinstein? Here. Mr. White?

Here. Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. We do have a quorum tonight with all seven members of council present. We will close section four and move on to section five, approval of the minutes. Item A is number 26-0049. That will include the June 2nd, 2026 council meeting minutes and the June 9th, 2026 council workshop minutes. Do we have a motion from council to accept the minutes as provided? I move to accept the minutes as provided. Thank you, Councillor Brezovic. 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 a vote on the approval of the minutes as provided?

Mr. Brozovic? Yes. Mr. Rameau? Yes. Dr. Goetz? Yes. Mr. Sutton? Yes. Dr. Weinstein? Yes. Mr. White? Yes. Dr. Byrd?

Yes. Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. The approval of the minutes as provided passes by a vote of seven in favor to zero against. We'll move on to section six on our agenda, which is public comments. Council and myself value and respect comments from the public aligned with the city of Hudson codified ordinance two to 0.03 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 mute your electronic devices if you have not already done so, and if you must leave the room prior to the completion of our meeting, please do so as quietly as possible. Also, per ordinance 220.03 and sub-item G, public comments are to be kept within five minutes. As a continued reminder, there is a device on the lectern That will light up green when your time has started. It will turn orange at one minute remaining. It will begin flashing at 20 seconds remaining before it turns red, signifying the end of that five-minute time limit. Therefore, per the City of Hudson Charter Article 3, Section 3.02, if there is any resident of the municipality here tonight who 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? Mr. Zedak?

My name is Todd Zedak, 16 Hudson Common. I have spent the past two Saturday mornings, somewhat unfortunately, uh... camped out on the crosswalk between main street in the green and a number of people tripped on the brick walkway as it leads to the sidewalk and i wanted to commend uh... our city manager uh... i was unable to get to the three one one area of the website on my phone to register a warning that there was uneven pavement So I sent a message to the only guy I know, Tom, who responded within five minutes with a bag of sand, cones, and five laborers, and they were digging up the bricks. So thank you, Tom, for addressing that right away. I think it's super commendable that he was that responsive. So thank you, sir. The unfortunate reason I was there is because much to my and many of my fellow citizens' chagrin, city council saw fit somehow to continue with this District 11 thing, gutting it in some respects, upsetting the developer, which of course brings me joy, but yet it still exists. And so I and a number of my fellow citizens are forced to spend our weekends and free time collecting signatures to put the item on the ballot to have it removed. When all among you here could do the right thing and simply say, somewhat wrongheaded, take it back, rescind the whole thing, and go through the proper channels, of the Land Development Code, Planning Commission, make amendments, make zoning changes, supported by science, thought, specific needs of a developer to make the property viable. Nobody doesn't want the property to turn into something that's viable. And it's very, very disappointing. And I am asking respectfully for all of you to do the right thing and rescind the legislation and go through the proper channels to make whatever adjustments need to be made. And I can guarantee you that all of the people who traipsed up here week after week telling you it's a bad idea, it's not what they want, are gonna continue coming. Week after week, there will be rallies, signatures, protests, and we'd rather not do it. We have better things to do. I have money to lose on the golf course. I already owe Phil 20 bucks. So, please, take back what was ill-advised in the first place and let the processes that are already in place move forward to make that property more valuable and put it back into service to the community. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. ZDAC. Is there any additional comment from the public tonight? Phil?

Phil Leiter, 134 Aurora Street. Thank you again for an opportunity to share my thoughts. As you may recall, I last spoke to you about your vote on District 11 legislation. I thought, as did many others, that the creation of a new district that allowed for a 50-acre planned development was the next essential threat to our downtown merchants and restaurants. To our surprise, you passed the vote. and a group of citizens organized a committee to gather petitions to place the issue on the November ballot. We feel strongly that the citizens of Hudson should decide whether they want a Pinecrest or Valor Acres type of development on that site. You wisely removed the residential and grocery store allowance in the legislation the developer needs for that to happen, but it still leaves intact the allowance for a minimum 50-acre planned development. Our Planning Commission has pointed out some problems with the wording of our existing planned development zoning code. There are some contradictions. We feel this gives the developer who has strongly indicated they want to build a Valoracres or Pinecrest style development on the site, a fighting chance to get around this, this regulation. In a recent Akron Beacon Journal article, Dr. Goetz stated that she voted for the legislation to keep out a data center. I share her concerns because a data center will not generate the kinds of revenue a typical light industry would provide. My fears were alleviated when I looked at what a data center entails. According to an article in Tech Target newsletter, August of 2025, the typical data center requires a minimum of 200 to 500 acres. The Joann store site has nowhere near that amount available. But the most frustrating thing of all is the challenge we as citizens face if we want to get an important issue on the ballot for voters to decide. Prior to September of 2025, it only required the signatures of 15% of the number of residents who voted in the most recent gubernatorial election. That bar has been raised at 35% in the state of Ohio, which our charter defers to. And we only have 30 days from the time the legislation was passed. Because Ohio is a home rule state, we could, as a community, lower that limit to encourage citizen involvement if we wanted to. For example, in nearby Chagrin Falls, it only requires the signature of 5% to place an issue on the ballot. As we speak, we are still gathering signatures and one of us will be in front of town hall tomorrow morning. If you still want to see this issue on the, if you still want to see this issue on the ballot, we have until June 18th to hand the petitions in. Of course, any of you are able to sign if you like. Thank you so much for listening to us.

Thank you, Mr. Lighter. Is there any additional public comment tonight? Laura.

Good evening, Laura Jones, 1790 Old Tannery Circle. Thank you, Mayor, Council President Byrd, city council members, and city staff members for the opportunity to have my opinion heard. As many of you know, I've been asking for the city for several years to reduce the speed limit on 91 on the north end of town from 45 miles per hour to 35 miles per hour. State Route 91 is 35 miles per hour all through Twinsburg, including on the five-lane section cutting between industrial parks, but increases to 45 miles per hour as it narrows to two lanes in Hudson through areas surrounded by residential neighborhoods, a school, a park, and recently built sidewalks with no buffer between the sidewalk and the street. Significant accidents occur several times per year at the intersection of Hines Hill and 91. I re-approached council about this issue after the road was closed twice in two weeks recently due to accidents. Lowering the speed limit will make this stretch safer and only adds, according to ChatGPT, I didn't want to do the math, 45.7 seconds to the two-mile drive from the border near Oaken Embers to around Markelly St. Mary's Cemetery. I'd like to thank you for considering this, and I'm asking council to pass Ordinance 2698 to help appeal to the state to make this change in an effort to make our city safer. Thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Jones. Is there any additional public comment? I thought I saw a hand over here, ma'am.

Marcia Karsten, 7481 Herrick Park Drive, Hudson, Ohio. As I was gathering signatures along with the rest of them to try to put District 11 on the ballot and give Hudson residents a chance to decide whether this new zoning was the right thing for Hudson, I realized that not one person knew anything about this potentially huge change to the future look of our small city. Steering committee spent a year and a half surveying our residents to ensure that the future land development map and zoning reflected what the people want our city to look like in the future. Surveys repeatedly showed the citizens wanted no new residential save some first floor master senior housing. They wanted little commercial with that only to take place primary in the downtown to keep it strong. And they were concerned with traffic. clogging our city streets. In fact, 94% of them were totally happy with Hudson just the way it is, with its central, quaint downtown, its lovely parks, great schools, and safe streets. But in May, after only a few months of consideration, council voted to rezone a large section of our southern gateway in opposition to the new comprehensive plan at the request of a developer noted for creating large, outsized commercial residential developments, something that the people in Hudson in multiple surveys said they absolutely did not want. Before voting in May, council took out the large scale residential and 40,000 square foot commercial building in this new zone. But although it doesn't mention this on the city website, large scale residential and large commercial buildings could be put back in by the developer, since written in the new zoning, they can apply for a planned development district on 50 of those acres and add back in everything you took out in May. And if council or planning would reject those additions, the developer could go to court and could probably win. This developer does not love Hudson like we love Hudson. They knew how the land was zoned, light, industry flex, when they purchased the property. But from the beginning, they met with city staff and council members trying to change our zoning to fit their desire to make a lot of money at our lovely city's expense. A development of this scope will forever alter the town in ways that citizens do not want. More traffic and large commercial and possibly residential buildings that will forever change the small town feel of our city, bringing with it increased traffic, a large draw in city services, and a possible loss of downtown business. In other words, a second city center a change of this magnitude should have been put on the ballot for people to look at learn about and discuss before voting if this is not rescinded our quaint city that we all fell in love with will look like every other overbuilt commercial suburban area in ohio i know that this council must love this unique city too i urge you to reconsider and to rescind this legislation and restore the d8 zoning that is appropriate for this area and for our wonderful city thank you

Thank you, Mrs. Carson. Additional public comment tonight? Mr. Hall? You are not a resident of the municipality, but as, as our state representative, I will allow you to have a public comment tonight, sir.

Thank you, mayor. Appreciate it. Um, so through the mayor, I want to say through the chair to the representatives here, but, um, but again, through the chair, um, just want to say, um, thanks for having me here at Derek hall. I think he, my address is eight 44 memory road, Akron, Ohio, four, four 303. Um, just my camps will be very brief. Um, I just want to share a quick update. that one of the big issues that I've been hearing about in my first term as a state representative has been the concerns around property tax and the burden that it creates in our communities. And I just want to share with this group that it's something that I've taken very seriously. It has probably spent over 1,000 hours, and we have a draft 250-page bill on property taxes with the goal of really largely solving the problem. What I want to share with this group is that is that I've been meeting with the mayors of Silver Lake and Talmadge and Akron and Stowe, have also had conversations with some of you as well. And we've had several meetings now where we had all the finance directors from all the different cities and villages in our district. And we have been moving forward with a very robust plan that hopefully we'll be able to take for a more public roadshow. Um, the last thing I'll say is I want to thank your finance director, Jeff, uh, non-black because he's been a very key contributor, um, you know, uh, to some of those meetings as well. And so looking forward to, uh, having the next one on July 6th, um, you know, once we get further along and we get more of the analysis, I look forward, uh, I look forward to coming back and, uh, and sharing in a more public forum, uh, some of the results of that. So thank you for your time and appreciate the opportunity, Mr. Mayor. Thanks.

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

Anthony Revita, 1746 Edgar Drive. I just wanted to do an update. Last week I had mentioned that I had spoken to a lawyer to be the city solicitor to actually apply for it. And I was told by him that he never got a phone call back. He never even got a response. Last week, I found out that two other firms had did the same thing. So I'm trying to figure out, you know, if this was a fair proposal. a fair choice of city solicitor or was he just pigeonholed into the position and you guys are making the choice of whether we do Pitchford or we do Pitchford. And that's an unfortunate thing because that position to me is one of the more important things that run this city. The city solicitor, I pulled this up from the dictionary, a legal advisor appointed to represent and provide legal counsel to the municipal government of the city. Last week, my councilman and city council president referred to him as a tool. I didn't quite understand that because when you refer to a person as a tool, that's to me a derogatory type statement. So I looked it up in a dictionary. And I looked up two different points on this. A tool, a derogatory insult directed at a person who is foolish, obnoxious, or easily manipulated. The other part was a tool. A tool. an insecure, pompous, or foolish person who is manipulated by others without realizing it. I don't know if Mr. Byrd meant that particular definition of it, but it's unfortunate that a city solicitor, a law director, is referred to as a tool, because that would mean that our law, our justice, our Our city is ran by somebody that can be manipulated. And in my history, that has been the case. And it's unfortunate. And I'd just like to say again that if you were looking to get a proper... pick for the city solicitor, I would imagine that some type of board can put something together that would fairly pick the city solicitor instead of picking somebody that is advantageous to themselves. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Revita. Is there any additional public comment tonight? Anyone else? Mr. Juppe?

Hi there, Mike Juppe, 5734 Williamsburg Circle. Last time I was here, I discussed the 29 underground or above-ground storage tanks that were located at GM Tarek's property. Sir, I'm going to pause you and just ask you to pull the microphone and just tilt it down towards you. Perfect. There you go. Thank you. All right. So I have been asking the EPA of Ohio to search GM Terex, Terex Corporation, and in various addresses on Terex and Daryl Road to find out what the disposition of these underground storage tanks were, as I had said before. The tanks at one time contained diesel, gasoline, oil, ethylene glycol, and other hazardous waste. They also had generated at the site TCE, trichloroethane, and then PCBs, both known carcinogens. They searched air files, EPA division of water, and ground water. They searched a lot of different files that they have. They've found no record of those 29 tanks ever being removed. My concern, if they proceed with the development, they're going to start ripping up asphalt and I have 40 years of experience in the chemical industry. I have seen personally people bury tanks, bury drums, and then pave over them with asphalt. If they start digging up the asphalt, you're going to get water, rain coming down, and if there is any of those hazardous materials, they're going to go into our groundwater. It was suggested that you can't do anything about it, I would suggest that you look at all the wells in the area, find some wells that you could start to monitor, and find out what is the baseline of those chemicals in our water, in the water in those wells. And then if they start to dig and it starts to go up, you could start to do some kind of remediation. What I don't want to see is that that site becomes a super fund. If it becomes a super fund, all bets are off for Hudson. I can't imagine what would happen to the town. There's an article, and if I can get through it, there's an article about TCA pollution in Michigan. They found somebody was dumping it on the ground. A lot of people in that era dumped things. toxic things on the ground. I've seen it. I've had analysts that had analyzed for these things. People did that. Right or wrong, it's obviously wrong now, but back then, that's what they did. They have a plume, they call it, the world's largest plume of TCA in the world. It's six miles and covers 4,000 acres. It has polluted 13 trillion gallons of water. They have 121 permanent monitoring wells in the area. They had to bring in water from a different city to supply this small town. It's not something that should be taken lightly. I hope you go forward and look at some wells and start to monitor some baseline chemical contamination. Thank you so much.

Thank you, sir. Any additional public comment tonight? Last call. Thank you, everyone. We will close Section 6 on public comments and move on to Section 7 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 allow me to recognize you and verbally assign you the floor. Are there any comments from council tonight? Councilor Gantz?

Tonight, I would like to write a wrong. And this wrong is the censure of Mrs. Nicole Kowalski. The definition of to censure someone is to act officially criticizing or severely publicly condemning someone. So a censure is a disciplinary action. Others have felt it was not, but it truly is. So chapter 220.03 of the rules, section F of the Hudson Ohio Codified Ordinances state, and quotes, the procedures and deliberations of counsel, except as otherwise provided by the charter or an ordinance of the counsel, shall be governed and controlled by the provisions of the most current revision of Robert's Rules of Order. Robert's Rules of Order clearly lays out the correct process for disciplinary action, of which I believe a censure is, stating that, quote, a member or an officer has the right that allegations against his or her good name shall not be made except by charges brought on reasonable ground if thus accused she or he has the right to due process that is to be informed of the charge and given time to prepare his or her defense to prepare and to defend himself or herself and to be treated fairly Chapter 20, section 63.5 on page 620. On December 6th, 2022, and on October 15th, 2024, Hudson City Council entertained motions to censure former City Council member Nicole Kowalski. Mrs. Kowalski was not given prior notice nor time to prepare and present a proper defense to these said allegations. Despite the obvious lack of adherence to Robert's Rules of Order, council proceeded to vote on the censure motions. This prior action of Hudson City Council was clearly in violation of Robert's Rules of Orders, which has been specifically adopted by the codified ordinances of Hudson. Further, said actions by Hudson City Council are inconsistent with the principles of fairness and due process expected of this governing body. Furthermore, the censures imposed on former Councilmember Kowalski stemmed from her diligent questioning of the constitutionality and enforceability of a codified city ordinance. That ordinance has since been amended by this council to acknowledge the deficiencies of the ordinance as it previously existed. And that ordinance was about... It was about how we can the 500 campaign finance limit. So it was brought to the council's attention now by Mrs. Kowalski. We changed it from $100 per person to 500. Thus, in addition to the obvious procedural deficits of the council and the prior actions against Mrs. Kowalski, The actions by the council were also excessive, unwarranted, and likely politically motivated as Kowalski endeavored to take action on an ordinance that was clearly deficient as written. According to that, these are the reasons I am putting forth this resolution. resolution rescinding the prior censures of former city council member nicole kowalski whereas on december 6 2022 and october 15 2024 city council adopted motion censuring former council member kowalski and whereas the council desires to bring final finality to these matters and clarify the status of the prior action and the official records of the city. And whereas subsequent review of the circumstances surrounding the prior censures has caused the council to conclude that the censure actions are procedurally deficient and otherwise inconsistent with the principles of fairness and due process expected by this governing body. And whereas the council finds that taking away the prior censures is appropriate and consistent with the interests of orderly municipal governance. Now therefore, be it resolved by the Hudson City Council as follows. Section one, the council hereby rescinds VACATES, WITHDRAWS, AND NULLIFIES THE CENSURES ADOPTED AGAINST FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER NICOLE KOWALSKI ON DECEMBER 6, 2022, AND OCTOBER 15, 2024. SECTION 2, THE COUNCIL EXPRESSLY DECLARES THAT THE PRIOR CENSURES SHALL HAVE NO CONTINUING FORCE AND EFFECT OR ANY VALUE. Section three, the council further states that it no longer finds the prior actions of council justified and formally withdraws council's prior admonishments of former council member Kowalski. Section four, this resolution shall not constitute A, a determination regarding the truth or falsality of the allegations underlying the prior censures, B, an admission of liability by the city or any person, C, a waiver of any legal rights or defenses or immunities, or D, an endorsement or condemnation of any conduct previously alleged. Section 5, the city clerk is directed to annotate the official records of the council to reflect that the prior censures have been rescinded by formal action of this council. Section 6, this resolution shall take effect immediately upon admission. So I therefore move that we adopt this resolution. And do I have a second?

Point of order. Yes.

Councillor Sutton.

Section 220.06, legislation, ordinances and resolutions generally. Ordinances and resolutions shall be introduced in the council only in printed or written form in a format approved by the city solicitor. Ordinances and resolutions may be originated by the mayor or any council member, but must be first introduced at a workshop for inclusion on a regular or special council meeting agenda.

Thank you, Councillor Sutton. Your point is well taken, and Dr. Goetz, I concur with that. You must introduce legislation at a workshop.

However, this whole censure was introduced at council comments. It wasn't introduced at legislation or anything like that.

Are you looking for a point of information on that topic?

Yes, I'm doing what was done at those two meetings.

And I will respond to that, assuming that was a point of information based on the past. That was a motion of censure. I processed that motion based on council members who brought that, seconded it, and the council members who voted in favor of that. A motion is not legislation, so a motion of censure COULD HAPPEN AT ANY MOMENT. YOU ARE ASKING FOR LEGISLATION TO TAKE CERTAIN ACTION AS YOU HAVE LISTED AND READ HERE TODAY. AS COUNCILOR SUTTON HAS STATED, THAT MUST BE INTRODUCED AT A WORKSHOP AND THIS MEETING IS NOT THE APPROPRIATE TIME TO DISCUSS THAT MATTER FURTHER OTHER THAN YOUR COUNCIL COMMENTS.

MAY I CHANGE THIS TO A MOTION?

I will confer with the city solicitor, if you are asking to change this to a motion to rescind legislation, that can only happen in legislation, correct Mr. Pitchford? We can't rescind legislation by a motion. We have to have, correct me if I'm wrong, that's why I'm pausing and asking for your assistance. This is A proposed resolution, Dr. Goetz is asking for this to be changed to a motion to rescind, and I'm assuming, Dr. Goetz, you're looking for all of that information that you included in your verbal comments this evening. No other council member has received those, to my knowledge. I have not had previous knowledge of this, so it does not feel appropriate, but I will let our solicitor weigh in on that.

So my observation is that a motion would be appropriate at this time. I agree with the point of order, Mr. Sutton, that legislation is not appropriate at this time. But if Dr. Goetz wishes to make a motion along the same lines as your stated comments, I think that would be acceptable. But if it's in a legislative form, which is as you have presented it, we would have to wait to hear that at a workshop.

I REMOVE THAT RESOLUTION AND WOULD PREFER TO GIVE A MOTION.

THEN DR. GATTS, I WOULD ASK THAT YOU CLEARLY STATE YOUR MOTION SUCCINCTLY AND ACCURATELY.

THIS IS A MOTION TO RESCIND. I MOVE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HEREBY RESCINDS AND VACATES THE CENTURES ADOPTED AGAINST FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER NICOLE KOWALSKI ON DECEMBER 6, 2022, AND OCTOBER 15, 2024. FINDINGS. IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION, THE COUNCIL FINDS AS FOLLOWS. The censures were adopted while Kowalski served as a member of the council. Two, subsequent review of the circumstances surrounding the prior censures has caused the council to conclude that the censure actions were procedurally deficient and otherwise inconsistent with the principles of fairness and due process expected of this body. Three, the council no longer finds the prior actions of the council justified. Four, the council further finds that rescinding the prior censures is in the best interest of fairness, institutional finality, and the efficient administration of council affairs. Action, now therefore be it moved that one, Hudson City Council desires to bring finality to these matters and clarify the status of the prior actions and the official records of the city. Two, nothing in this motion shall be construed as A, a determination regarding the truth or falsality of the allegations underlying the prior censures. B, an admission of liability by the city. C, a waiver of any legal rights, defenses, or immunities, or D, an endorsement or condemnation of the conduct previously alleged. Three, the Hudson City Council rescinds and vacates the centers previously adopted against former city council member Nicole Kowalski on December 6th, 2022 and October 15th, 2022. Hudson City Council formally withdraws the council's prior admonishments of former city council member Nicole Kowalski. Hudson City Council directs the city clerk to note in the official records of the council that the censures have been rescinded by the action of the council. That is my motion.

I will ask our city solicitor as well, based on that revised statement and motion, Mr. Pitchford, are you still in agreement that that is a valid motion based on what Councillor Getz had stated? I just want to be clear. And I agree, Councilor Gatz had made many comments of moving to those points versus legislation to rescind. So with that being said, if that is considered a valid motion, which we are stating that it is, we would require a second before that would be open for discussion. So, does council wish to enter a second to Councillor Goetz's motion as stated just now and revised from her prior statement? Does any council member? Thank you, Councillor Duramo has seconded Councillor Goetz's motion as listed in her revised comments. That does open this motion up for discussion by any council member. Therefore does any council member wish to have a comment or discussion on the motion that is on the floor and has been seconded?

That's president Byrd so It was changed to a motion it's still a big mouthful. And that's a lot to ask us to vote on without seeing something in writing and something ahead of time. So I guess if I would ask that it be to just requesting a rescinding of the dates and the name of the former council member

and we sent rescinding the censure and I think that would suffice Thank You council president bird is there any additional comments from council tonight after Brezovic the council president birds point is there any even as it seems like you kind of read a subsection of the original but we deemed legislation as the motion. Do you have a hard copy? I obviously was doing my best to listen to it all.

I don't have a hard copy of the motion. I have a hard copy of the resolution.

It was a subsection of that, was it not, that you made as the motion?

I have the motion on my phone. Okay.

for their comment thank you counselor brezovic is there any additional comment from council members um i have said this before but i will for clarity reference a few POINTS AND SECTIONS WITHIN ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER, AS COUNSELOR GATTS HAD PREVIOUSLY STATED, JUST FOR CLARITY OF THIS COUNCIL. AND, AGAIN, I HAVE STATED THIS BEFORE, AND, AGAIN, I AM DOING THIS JUST FOR CLARITY OF DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF THIS COUNCIL BODY. THE ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER, 12th Chapter 61, or Section 61, Discipline of Members and Guests, 61.2, says punishments that a society can impose generally fall under the headings of censure, with a footnote. Additionally, a fine, if authorized in the bylaws, suspension, or expulsion. The extreme penalty that an organization or society can impose on a member is expulsion. Going down to the footnote that is on that first sentence, and I'll read that first sentence again, punishments that a society can impose generally fall under the headings of censure. That footnote says, in Robert's Rules of Order, 12th edition, footnote one, it is also possible to adopt a motion of censure without formal disciplinary procedures. So therefore, as the chairperson for the meeting, where this censure motion was carried out by another council member who made the motion and seconded and voted and passed by a majority of Councilor Kowalski's peers, Robert's Rules of Order states that you can make a motion of censure without formal disciplinary procedures. And I stated in that motion a vote call during that acceptance of that motion at that time, that there were no penalties being sought. There was no removal from any boards or commissions. There was no suspension or expulsion. There was none of those other penalties that a organization or society could impose. It was clearly stated that it was clearly a motion of censure to state the council who voted in favor of that with regard to their displeasure of actions taken. So I do not personally believe that we did not properly carry that out. I don't believe that we were procedurally deficient. I don't think that there was a lack of adherence to Robert rules of order. I don't believe we were in violation. Again, a motion of censure was brought to the floor It was seconded, it was discussed, and it was voted on. And a majority of the council body at that time voted in favor of that motion for censure without penalty. I again believe that that was, and this is not my personal feelings, this is looking at Robert's Rules of Order and knowing what happened and took place that evening. I do not believe that we did anything, in Dr. Goetz's word, procedurally deficient or lacking adherence to Robert's Rules of Order. So with that being said, I do not think that we should be calling this council or the city's past procedures into question with the language that was brought forward. I believe it does not reflect well upon the city. Thank you. Additional comments from council? Council members who have not spoken? Councillor Byrd and Councillor Brezovic have spoken.

Councillor Weinstein? I will say... When I was on the campaign trail, I heard a lot about civility in our community, including on council. And creating an environment where people could disagree without being punished for that disagreement or treated fairly. I believe the censure that happened shows evidence of someone not being treated very civilly or I hesitate to want to relitigate the past. I would have preferred that this came through a workshop so that we could discuss it in the workshop, have a chance to read the motion, to refer to the ordinance numbers. But I would prefer also as we move forward, that I would hope this council can treat each other with respect and not resort to censures, even if we disagree. So just saying, just kind of putting my thoughts out there. Yeah, that's it.

Thank you, Councillor Weinstein.

Any additional comment from council members who have not spoken? Councillor President Byrd, Councillor Brezovic, and Councillor Weinstein have commented in this discussion. Councillor Deremo?

I just think to kind of second that in a way you know I know she wasn't removed from any council positions but the decisions that were made were very partisan at the time and drug her name a lot for things that I don't think were appropriate for the previous council and how it was handled so in that regard I do agree you know maybe discussing this a little bit more but

There was a reason why I seconded dr. Gats's Statements Thank You councillor Jaremo additional comment from any council member who has not spoken yet Is there any second round of discussions from council members councillor broswick, thank you After hearing everyone's comments

I don't think I really disagree with any of them. I think the mayor's points on procedure itself, I don't think he said anything incorrect there. And that's why I feel that Dr. Byrd's original thoughts on simplifying this motion of instead of trying to give all of this, you know, the reasoning and the various subsections of the motion, a simple rescinding of the censures, the dates, and that way it's very much, in my opinion, as Dr. Weinstein said, it's an acknowledgement of we want to allow for differing of opinions, not using a censure as a weapon, they are generally IN SOME WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM POLITICALLY MOTIVATED. AND I'D JUST LIKE TO WIPE THE SLATE CLEAN, WISH MS. KOLOLSKI ALL THE BEST IN HER FUTURE ENDEAVORS, AND MOVE ON.

THANK YOU, COUNCILOR BRZEVIC. WE ARE IN THE SECOND ROUND OF DISCUSSION. IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENT FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS? COUNCILOR BRZEVIC HAS SPOKEN. ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? COUNCIL PRESIDENT BURKE?

YEAH, JUST KIND OF ECHO THAT. I THINK CENTERS ARE PRETTY MUCH ALWAYS PARTISAN. If somebody does something illegal, they should be charged. If there's an ethics violation, it should go to the Ohio Ethics Commission. If you're not happy with them, complain about it on Facebook or at council meetings. I think censors are always partisan. I'm not going to participate in one, and I think it makes sense to rescind these too. So again, I would request a simplified version that we can understand in our head and not have to get to memory a one-pager.

Thank you, Council President Byrd. Again, we are in the second round of discussion. Councilor Brzezic and Council President Byrd have spoken. Councilor Gatz?

May I shorten my motion?

You may revise your motion, yes.

All right, I'm revising the motion. I move that City Council hereby rescinds and vacates the censures adopted against former Councilmember Nicole Kowalski on December 6, 2022, and October 15, 2024.

Thank you, Councillor Gatz, for that revision. Mr. Pitchford, I would ask this would be an appropriate time to have Councillor Duramo agree to that second since she originally had agreed to the original motion. So, Councilor Doramo, do you continue to provide your second to that revised motion?

I second the revised motion. Thank you, Councilor Doramo.

That revised motion is on the floor, seconded, and open for any additional discussion if council member would like to make any comments or remarks to the revised motion that's on the floor. Any additional comments from council?

Mr. Pitchford, do you have a comment? I'll wait until everybody else does.

Is there any other comment from council on the revised motion on the floor? Seeing none, Mr. Pitchford?

I would just add, I appreciated the, from a legal perspective, I appreciated the affirmative statement that we were not waiving any immunities or any other types of claims in making this particular motion. So I would... that we include at least those subparts of the motion to make sure that the record is clear that the council is not intending to waive any immunities and the other items that you had under subpart A, B, and C. Thank you, Mr. Pitchford.

We are... essentially into a third round of discussion as as our second round had concluded with no additional comments from council we're in the third round of discussion mr pitchford has made that comment the motion on the floor by councillor getz is the revised motion to rescind and vacate the censures on those two dates as noted i will Thank you, Mr. ZDAC. I'm not sure if there's a technical issue. Public comment has ended. I understand your concern, sir. Thank you, sir. So we are in a third round of discussion for the now revised motion that is on the floor from Councilor Goetz to rescind and vacate the two motions of censure for prior Councilor Nicole Kowalski on the two dates as noted. Mr. Pitchford has made a comment with additional language that he would like to be included from a city legal standpoint. And we are in a third round of discussion. Councilor Goetz.

I would like to add to my motion. One, nothing in this motion can be construed as one, a determination regarding the truth or falsivity of the allegations underlying the prior censures. B, an admission of liability by the city. C, a waiver of any legal rights, defenses, or immunities. Or D, an endorsement or condemnation of the conduct previously alleged.

Thank you for that additionally revised motion. Councillor Gatz, Councillor Duramo, the question would come back to you if you would agree to continue to second this now, second revision to the motion on the floor.

Second the second revised motion.

Thank you, Councillor Duramo. We will start a new discussion on the newly revised motion that is on the floor. Does council have any additional comments on the second revision to the motion on the floor made by Councilor Goetz, seconded by Councilor Geramo? Any council comments or discussion? Councilor Sutton?

First, I think this proves the point of why these things need to be introduced in a workshop. They're often complex. They often contain a lot of complex legal language. And we need to understand what we're voting on. Secondly, this is a bit of a rub. So I'm the only one, other than Councilor Goetz, who was present for some of these. And some of the information that the decisions were based on was privileged information, which means I can't discuss why those decisions were made. And that's part of, in my opinion, why the public never responded well to the censures is that they didn't have the full story. They didn't have the full information. And most of the people on this dais don't have the full story and the full information. So unfortunately, I think we're just continuing the disaster that this was by attempting to rescind something that most of you folks don't even understand potentially what you were rescinding.

That's all I'll say because I don't think I legally can say much more without it being an executive session Thank You councillor Sutton additional comments from council The motion on the floor has been seconded and without additional comment. We will move to a vote Is there any additional comment from council? Seeing none, Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call a motion as revised twice now by Councillor Getz? I don't believe, again, since we don't have this in front of us, if I can restate all of the words, but Councillor Getz, it would be your latest revision unless you have a succinct copy that you can restate that motion for clarity. Is that possible?

Yeah, I can restate.

Please do.

Okay. I move that city council hereby rescinds and vacates the censures adopted against former council member Nicole Kowalski on December 6th, 2022 and October 15th, 2024. Nothing in this motion shall be construed as A, a determination regarding the truth or falsity of the allegations underlying the prior censures. B, an admission of liability by the city. C, a waiver of any legal rights, defenses, or immunities. And D, an endorsement or condemnation of the conduct previously alleged.

Thank you, Councillor Getz. Again, that motion has been seconded by Councillor Duramo. There is no further comment from council members. Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote on the motion on the floor as stated just now by Councillor Getz.

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

Yes.

Dr. Bird? Yes. Mr. Brezovic?

Yes. Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. That motion as stated by Dr. Goetz to rescind the censure for Nicole Kowalski with those two dates listed and those additional items A through D does pass this council by a vote of six in favor to one against. Thank you. We are still in the council comment and correspondence section of our agenda, which is section seven. Councilor Goetz has spoken. Is there any additional council member who has correspondence or comments this evening? Councilor Brezovic?

Thank you. Last night, I attended the park board meeting. City staff took the board members on a tour of the parks. It was very informative, both for our... Longstanding board members, as well as our new board members, was able to learn a lot about what their priorities should be, which was very useful as they spent a majority of the meeting discussing the priorities for the upcoming budgeting that Dr. Bird will be going into with the city staff here in the coming months. Additionally, the Oak Grove and Dream, excuse me, the Oak Grove and Dream Playground signs were approved. I do have some copies from that meeting if the council would like to take a look at them. The Dream Playground one will be slightly modified but the new Oak Grove sign was approved as it stands and that will be the kind of template for new park signs going forward. Additionally, there was some discussion on e-bikes. For those who are not aware, no motorized vehicle of any kind is allowed within our parks. So an electric motor is a motor, e-bike is a motorized vehicle. There was some discussion on some more clear signage as the popularity of these e-bikes has grown to help. any and all users understand that you cannot have them in our parks. Um, I did give them the information that, uh, we have received some communication from residents and I do believe we are going to be looking at our current legislation around e-bikes in the city. Um, so we should keep the parks in mind in that and, uh, and then we can clearly communicate if and when we, we moved with some new legislation on e-bikes. Um, The last item I have, they, of course, had a bit of discussion on pickleball. There was some discussion on organized play. One idea was a HCR approach, you know, partnership. They requested my Coming to council to kind of get our blessing on moving forward on that, I discussed with the mayor and the president how best to proceed. President Byrd and I gave direction for them. They are able to have any talks they would like with Meredith, and if they do come up with some sort of plan, it would be best suited for a workshop, at which time we could have a discussion, give direction.

That is all I have. Thank you, Councillor Brezovic. Additional comments from Council tonight? Councillor Duramo? One second.

We are having our second safety committee meeting tomorrow, and we will further discuss e-bikes, so I just wanted to piggyback off of Councillor Brezovic's statement.

Thank you, Councillor Duramo. Councillor President Byrd, you had your hand up.

I think Amanda was first.

Councillor President Byrd has deferred to you. Councillor Weinstein?

I just wanted to say... Dan white and Tom shared in the city manager and I met with village West yesterday and I thought it was a really productive meeting and I think it was a great way to talk about both City issues that affect the entire city and also issues that specifically affect that neighborhood And it was a really nice way to have that conversation Compared to meetings like this where we can't have the dialogue. It was a great way to actually have the dialogue and So I just want to encourage residents. So your HOA doesn't have to be your HOA if you don't have an HOA. I think it was a great way to have a meeting and have a discussion with your neighbors where you might have very similar concerns with your neighbors. Also a great way to meet your neighbors. I've also had coffee with a few different residents about different topics. One about the potential market hall in the Clinton Crossing Phase 2 area. Another about a potential rec center slash sports complex. And just want to say, residents, please feel free and email us or reach out if you'd like to meet for coffee to discuss anything. I think it's also another way to have great conversations about topics that residents care about. And it's also a way, if you want clarifications on anything, it's a great way to get clarification. So there was some of that in the meeting as well. on the kind of spirit of, um, clarifications. Um, I know land development code, um, is complicated. It is long. There's a lot to it. Um, we heard, uh, comments today about land development code, um, which happy to meet with anyone to have more discussions on that. Um, but just to clarify, so land development code and Hudson amendments can actually be initiated by the planning commission. They can also be initiated by council members. Even property owners can petition for amendments. The changes made for District 11, they followed our rules, and the timeline has been made available for quite some time by the city so people can see the rules and the process that District 11 followed, if anyone is curious. So when it was voted on, it had been over a year since the process had started with creating these zoning changes and happy with the town halls that happened and the resident engagement that happened and hope to continue that type of engagement. And I understand that not everybody is going to be happy as we kind of make compromises between what we hear with residents with differing viewpoints. But I'm always happy to have the conversation, even if we don't agree. That's it.

Thank you, Councilor Weinstein. Council President Byrd?

So, Mr. Zedek, thank you for reminding me to speak louder and more closer to the microphone. I will try to do that, keep trying to do that. Usually, Dr. Weinstein reminds me, but she forgot tonight. And then, as far as the definition of a tool that I was thinking of, it was a physical implement software conceptual method used to perform a task achieve an end, simplify work. It bridges the gap between insight and action, allowing humans to accomplish tasks that would be otherwise difficult or impossible. And it also suggests that the tool itself does not do its work by itself. It needs someone or a city council to tell it what to do, and then the tool does it. So it was not at all meant to be a derogatory remark. Thank You Jones for the comment on the speed limit I also received an email I think all of council did from the head of school at Hudson Montessori school who also expressed very similar concerns about speed limit being you know different than what it is right there in Twinsburg they have obviously school hours where the school speed limit is in place down to 20, but they also have cars coming in and out when those are not flashing and they are concerned about the left hand turns and the potential increase of accidents because of the 45 mile an hour speed limit. So they are also in support of going down to 35. And my math, I thought it was 39 seconds, Laura, but I guess you said it's closer to 45, so sorry about that. And then as far as D11 goes, it just seems like there's a big disconnect between what is out there and what we think is in place. So the previous D11 regulation removed several heavy industrial things, RV boat storage, auto repair, to shift from a current industrial district to light industrial flex. Planned developments were allowed or are allowed in D8. However, new zoning significantly reduces allowances for planned developments by increasing the minimum size from five acres to 50 acres. That doesn't mean that it's that it's actually increased it to fix 50 acres. It was four, five was a minimum. Now we're, the plan development is up to, has to start at 50 acres and plan developments also have to abide by all the code rules that are already in the new land development code. So I think it might be helpful if you sent council a, maybe a rubric of, of your scenarios, your concerns. This is what you think will happen in D8. We could tell you the consequences of what will happen if, I'm sorry, this is what you think is going to happen in D11. We can tell you the consequences of what would happen if that was repealed and went back to D8. I think it's worse for you. I think you guys would think it was worse, but that would help maybe with some understanding. And then we can continue further dialogue along that line.

I probably did my time already.

You're fine.

And then just the charrettes that started last week were very good. We had a bunch of stakeholders. And then tomorrow we have two episodes with residents at noon and at 6 o'clock. So looking forward to those. Thank you for the team, all the work that they did to make that happen. That's all.

Thank you, Council President Byrd. Council? Councilor Gantz?

This is on Clinton Crossing also. We are having office hours. We had them last Wednesday from 11 to 1 for anybody to come in and talk about Clinton Crossing. Nobody came in, but we want people to know that that's there. There's going to be one not this Wednesday, the following Wednesday, again from 11 to 1, so it's kind of over a year lunch hour, so city staff and myself will be there. There'll be other times that there'll be other city council members there, but we wanted to try to give everybody as much time as they need to talk about Clinton Crossing.

Thank you, Councillor Goetz, and I do apologize. I am in violation of our rules. Councillor Goetz, you did speak first, and I allowed you to speak again without first offering the floor to Councillor White and Councillor Sutton, so... Councillor White, Councillor Sutton, did you have any council comments? Seeing none, is there any additional council comments from council members who have spoken already? Councillor Brezovic?

Thank you. I just wanted to address one other comment that was made during public comment that kind of got lost in the shuffle of this unusually long council comment period. The rule on the 35 percent of the previous gubernatorial from the state, that's very interesting. I can absolutely empathize with that number. You know, we don't require near that number of signatures to get on the ballot to run for office, so it does strike me as quite a burden, so I would be in favor of looking at legislation for that in the future. That is all.

Thank you, Councillor Brozovic. Second round of comments from any council member who has not spoken? Seeing none, I will just add a few quick comments from my side. We did hold a ribbon-cutting ceremony this past week for Acropolis Health. Uh, they have expanded and moved to a new facility here in Hudson. So I want to congratulate, uh, both of the Dr. Patton's and their staff for continuing to remain here in Hudson, uh, continue to increase their payroll and expand their business here inside Hudson. Um, another reminder for the community that tomorrow, June 17th is the day back in 1799 that David Hudson first stepped foot into this area. at the southwest corner of Range 10, Town 4, which would later be named Hudson in his honor. So that will be a momentous day tomorrow on June 17th. And then I believe it's June 26th that he then stood in the center of town here just north of the clock tower and decided to officially begin a settlement which was the first in Summit County and the rest is history. Third note from my side, I do have a meeting set up with the Young Entrepreneur Institute and their directors there this Thursday to see how we can potentially collaborate further and help to showcase the youth of Hudson that are here doing great things with many businesses and extraordinarily entrepreneurial endeavors. things and businesses that they have set up. An additional note, I'm working on a proclamation for our nation's 250th anniversary. I will be providing more details of that in the near future. Thank you. Before we close section seven, is there any additional comment from council members? Seeing none, we will close section seven and move on to section eight, report of the city manager. I'd like to turn the floor over to Mr. Sheridan to provide any inputs or updates to Council.

Thank you, Mayor. I will try to get this all done in five minutes. I apologize. I have a lot of items tonight. I am pleased to announce that the City of Hudson has secured a $150,000 grant for the Barlow Road Railroad Crossing near Little Tikes. thanks to Senator Weinstein's sponsorship at the Ohio State bill this past week. So we will be looking forward to adding that to that project and taking the funding away from local funds. It's about a million-dollar project, so that was good to hear. Next item, the Hudson Springs parking lot is scheduled for paving on Wednesday and Thursday this week, June 17th and 18th, as part of our planned expansion project. While the park will remain open to visitors, vehicles will not be permitted during these dates. This improvement is being completed just in time for the Friends of Hudson Park's Dog Walk, which will take place on Saturday morning, June 20th, from 8 a.m. to 10 a.m. Next item. We mentioned about the charrettes. The second public meeting for the Brandywine Creek Watershed is scheduled for this Thursday, June 18th, at Hudson High School, beginning at 5.30 p.m. And any residents in that watershed, I believe, were notified to please come out and voice their opinions on anything they see in the watershed. A reminder that the city offices will be closed on Friday, June 19th for Juneteenth holiday. Please note that the trash pickup schedules will remain unchanged in the city of Hudson. The last item is going to be a little bit long one, but Dr. Bird wanted me to read this to all the residents in town regarding last week's disruptions in the gas service, so bear with me. Um, over the past two weeks, multiple water and gas line strikes occurred during the city of Hudson velocity fiber construction. Thankfully, no injuries resulted, and our safety forces acted swiftly to protect residents and workers. After a thorough investigation by the administration, we identified several contributing factors, inaccurate third party markings, misalignment of lines, and the presence of plastic gas pipes lacking tracer wires which complicate the detection of the lines. Additionally the contractor did not utilize visual potholing to verify the lines or use the hydro excavating method which had been used exclusively in our pilot projects and we had no disturbances of any utilities. The engineering department has been instructed to have these inputted back into the fiber construction specifications for all future projects and to resolve the disruptions going forward in Hudson Park Estates and future fiber installations. These bullet points I'll go over. The contractor will begin halting all directional drilling until underground utilities are located physically and visually and confirmed by our inspector before the drilling will proceed. The contractors are now required to switch to hydro excavating using water and vacuums rather than sharp edge tools that punctured the plastic gas lines to safely expose the existing gas power and water utility lines we have added another private inspector to enhance the oversight of the projects and our city project engineer will continue daily utility crossing verifications until no longer needed Enbridge Gas has agreed to provide extra markings and field support when discrepancies are suspected, with response times ranging from one to seven days. And then I want to thank ward council members Dr. Bird and Kyle Brezovic for their assistance with this. It was very helpful, and the staff, I think, got on to it really quickly and came up with a plan of action. That is all I had. Mayor, happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Mr. Sheridan. Does council have any questions for the city manager?

Council President Byrd? Thank you for that update, Tom. I think it's important for us to realize that fiber was number three or two on the community survey of what people wanted the most. because of these safety concerns and what we need to put in place, it's going to take longer. It's not going to happen as fast as we had originally hoped, but this is going to make it a lot safer, and that's what we want to do. I think all of us are supportive of that. There should be no rush to do

Anything unless we're a hundred percent sure about it Any additional comment, mr. Sheridan no, no additional comment any additional questions for the city manager from council members Seeing none we will close section 8 report of the city manager and move on to section 9 on our agenda for Appointments council president bird. Do we have any appointments tonight? I

Yes, I would like to nominate Martin Cardish to the Cemetery Board for a full term.

Thank you, Council President Byrd. Do we have the details? That full term is, do we have dates on that full term, just for clarity?

It ends four years from this month.

That will be sufficient. Thank you for that nomination. Council, do we have a motion to approve the appointment as nominated by Council President Byrd?

I move we approve Council President Byrd's motion.

Thank you for the clarification. Do we have a second to Councilor Kett's motion to approve the nomination by Council President Byrd? Second. Thank you, Councilor Brezovic. Are there any comments on the motion to approve the nomination? Seeing none, Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote on the motion to approve the nomination by Council President Byrd of Martin Kadish or Kardish? Is that correct? Martin Kardish has pointed to the Cemetery Board for a full term as noted.

Dr. Goetz? Yes. Mr. Sutton? Yes, Dean. Dr. Weinstein? Yes. Mr. White? Yes. Dr. Byrd?

Yes.

Mr. Brezevik?

Yes.

Mr. Remo? Yes.

Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. Martin Kardish is hereby appointed to the Cemetery Board for the term as noted, which is a full term beginning this month, and that passes by a vote of six in favor to zero against with one abstention. Thank you, Council President Byrd. Is there any additional appointments tonight or comments on future appointments?

There are no additional ones tonight.

There will be some next month. Thank you, Council President Byrd. We will close Section 9 and move on to Section 10 for our 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, number 26-0050, is a motion to acknowledge the timely receipt of the May 2026 Monthly Financial Report. Item B on consent is number 26-97. This is a resolution authorizing the city manager to enter into an amended contract with Cogent Communications for the provision of an internet circuit for the city's velocity broadband and declaring an emergency. The last item on consent is item C, number 26-98, an ordinance recognizing portions of Darrow Road, State Route 91, as being an urban district under state law and amending the city's traffic code to lower the speed limit from 45 miles per hour to 35 miles per hour on Darrow Road, State Route 91, between Valley View Road and the city's northern corporate line and declaring an emergency.

Please pull 2698.

Thank you, Councillor Sutton. Noted as pulling 2698, which we will handle separately. That is the consent agenda. Therefore, do we have a motion to suspend the rules to consider passage of the items on the consent agenda less item 26-98? I move to suspend the rules less item 26-98. Thank you, Councillor Brezovic. Do we have a second?

Second. Second.

I'll take that as council president bird. This is Wheeler. We please roll call a vote on the suspension of the rules for the consent agenda. Less item two six dash nine eight.

Mr. Sutton.

Yes.

Dr. Weinstein. Yes. Mr. White. Yes. Dr. Bird. Yes. Mr. Brezovic. Yes. Mr. Ramo. Yes. Dr. Getz.

Yes.

Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. The rules are so suspended for the consent agenda, less item 2698, by a vote of seven in favor to zero against. Therefore, do we have a motion to approve the consent agenda, less item 26-98?

Move to pass consent agenda, less 26-98.

Thank you, Council President Byrd. Do we have a second? Second. Thank you, Councillor Brezovic. Is there any comment or notes from Council on the motion to approve the consent agenda, less 26-98?

Councilor Sutton? Oh, we're on. We're not on. Correct.

We're not handling that item. Okay. Disregard. Seeing no comments on the motion to approve the consent agenda less 26-98, Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote?

Dr. Weinstein? Yes. Mr. White? Yes. Dr. Byrd? Yes. Mr. Brezevik? Yes. Mr. Rameau? Yes. Dr. Getz? Yes. Mr. Sutton? Yes.

Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. The consent agenda less item 26-98 does pass by a vote of seven in favor to zero against. Addressing the item that was pulled, which is 26-98, we will handle that separately. We must first start with another motion to suspend the rules on 26-98. Does council wish to enter that motion?

I move we suspend the rules on 26-98.

Thank you. Counselor gets, do we have a second to that motion? Second. Thank you. Counselor Brezovic. This is Wheeler. Will you please roll call a vote on the suspension of the rules for two six dash nine eight sir. White. Yes.

Dr. Bird. Yes. Mr. Brezovic.

Yes.

Mr. Remo. Yes. Dr. Getz. Yes. Mr. Sutton. Yes. Dr. Weinstein.

Yes.

Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. The rules are so suspended on 26-98 by a vote of seven in favor to zero against. Therefore, handling 26-98 separately, this does allow council to make a motion on 26-98. Does council wish to make a motion to take any further action on 26-98? Move to pass 26-98. Thank you, Council President Byrd. Do we have a second to the motion to pass 26-98? Second. Councillor Weinstein, thank you. We will then open up 26-98 for discussion. And since Councillor Sutton had requested this to be pulled, I would like to offer the floor to him first. Councillor Sutton.

Sorry for the hiccup earlier. I was trying to get my notes open. I lost track of where we were. So we've never used the urban district concept before, so I did a bunch of research on it. It's ORC 451101PP, if anyone wants to research it. It has a very specific definition that structures must be at intervals of less than 100 feet. I did some digging around, did a bunch of measurements, By my count, if you use the traditional definition of a structure, a building, if you look at lots that have frontage on that road, only one sixth of the road actually meets that definition. If you use a slightly less traditional definition of structure, which would include driveways, about one fifth of the road meets that definition. And if you use any structure, including buildings that have basically a back facing to that street, you can get yourself to about one third of the road meeting that definition. But I can't find any way that a majority of this road meets that definition, which is very troubling to me. So I called ODOT and I asked them for some examples of other folks who have used urban district definitions. And every example he gave me was either A VERY HEAVY COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR, SOMETHING MORE AKIN TO LIKE OUR DOWNTOWN WHERE YOU HAVE STORES DIRECTLY ON THE SIDEWALK, OR THEY WERE VERY HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS OR BLOCKS, SOMETHING LIKE AN OWEN BROWN STREET WHERE THE LOTS ARE VERY, VERY SMALL. THERE MIGHT ONLY BE 20 FEET BETWEEN THE ACTUAL STRUCTURES. HE COULD NOT GIVE ME ANY EXAMPLES OF ANYTHING like our stretch of road, which would be a more rural, several hundred feet between most of the parcels. So I'm very, very concerned. And I don't think we meet the legal criteria to use urban district. I'm not here to argue whether 45 or 35 is the right speed limit. We have engineers, engineers can do those studies and they can make those determinations for us. It's a slower process. but I think it's the legal and the correct process. I don't think we need to speed run this and stretch the definition of urban district. That's all.

Thank you, Councillor Sutton. Again, the motion on the floor is to pass 26-98, which was seconded by Councillor Weinstein. We are in the discussion phase of that motion to pass. Is there any additional comment or discussion from Council? Councillor Weinstein?

So I think if I could ask maybe city manager a point of clarification. So my understanding is the definition of the urban district, any part of that section can meet the criteria. It doesn't have to be all of it. Is that correct?

Mr. Sheridan? Well, there's a certain distance that you would want to not. You don't want to go from 45 to 35 to 45, like in a couple hundred feet. Um, so does that answer your question?

No. So I mean like for the definition of urban districts. So when we had in the workshop, um, I think, uh, was it the city engineer mentioned that you don't have to have every structure that is within, that is a hundred feet or less that if some portion of the structures with are within a hundred feet or less, it gives us the option to use this to get that lower speed limit.

And he did, he actually, the, the staff and engineering did a map and pulled perpendiculars out from every single know structure as they defined it and as our consultant said that that is considered a structure so they've therefore they came up with that there was a segment that was not 100 feet to my recollection from the city engineer but he said again you didn't want to take it back up to 45 for several hundred feet and then back down to 35 so that was the whole point of that so so i also like the map

that you all provided that shows the different speed limits. And if you look at the crossroads, those speed limits are also lower. And if you also can look outside the map you provide and look on Twinsburg, you also have lower speed limits. I think it helps to have a more consistent speed limit. Even the city engineering member didn't like the quote unquote urban district verbiage. But when I think of a truly rural district, I don't think of a stretch that looks like that with houses, with the school there, with businesses there. It is definitely, you know, clearly not a central city, but not quite rural. And so I see, you know, based on the definitions that we're allowed to use, it's a decent definition of, you know, that space, or at least it's a definition that gets us to really think about how people use or should use a space and a way to lower that speed limit.

Thank you, Councillor Weinstein. Mr. Sheridan, was there any additional comments since some of that was directed towards you? Just wanted to give you the opportunity.

No.

Okay. Councillor Goetz, I believe you had your hand up next.

I just wanted the same information from Mr. Sheridan. Okay. All right.

Thank you. We have had discussion comment from three council members. Additional comment? Councillor Brunswick, did you have your hand up?

Thank you. Just reading through the actual language in the ordinance here, whereas the city engineer has studied the area, consulted with the Ohio Department of Transportation, and determined that a specified portion of State Route 91 north of Valley View Road south of the city's northern corporate limit is an urban district as defined within the Ohio Revised Code. So, you know, this isn't us finding a piece of legislation in the Ohio Revised Code as a council and using it to circumvent the proper approach. As it says here, the city engineer worked with ODOT. We did get to, I don't know if you have the numbers, Mr. Sheridan, but we did get approval that this met the defined criteria by an engineer.

That is my understanding.

Further comment.

Thank you, Councillor Brezovic. Additional comments from council members who have not spoken yet? We've heard from Councillor Sutton, Councillor Weinstein, Councillor Goetz, and Councillor Brezovic. Councillor President Byrd?

Thank you, Kyle. I also appreciate the expertise of the consultant that we got, and I would say that if you looked at the northern border up to 480, very similar to what we've got south of that to Valley View. So I don't have any questions about changing the speed limit with this method.

Thank you, Council President Byrd. Any additional comment from Councillor Duramo or Councillor White who have not spoken yet? Any additional comment from all of council in round two? Councillor Sutton?

My only concern is that the city manager indicated perpendicular measurements. That is not in the definition, because I did have that discussion when I talked to ODOT. They were very clear that the definition is between structures. It is not from the structure to the road. It is from structure to structure. It is meant to be a density measurement, not a proximity measurement.

Thank you, Councillor Sutton. Councillor Duramo, did you have your hand up?

Yes. I just wanted to make a statement. You know, this is about safety, and this has been studied for 10-plus years, and then we discussed it in our workshop. So I don't know. I think this is pinpointing little points about the urban district is irrelevant when we're talking about safety and trying to assess for the city.

Thank you, Councillor Durama. We are in a second round of discussion. Councillor Brezovic?

I don't know if this would be a point of information or a point of clarification, but if a question towards the city solicitor on what would be the fallout, consequences, et cetera, if we were to pass this legislation and somebody felt, whether it's ODOT or A resident on this stretch of road, anyone who has standing, felt that we improperly applied the measurements to get this district. Mr. Pitchford?

A scenario where someone would challenge that The only one that really comes to mind, honestly, is a question of whether someone is speeding and causes an accident, and they would say that they would really need to be digging deep to challenge that. In an academic sense, there might be a taxpayer suit, because those are always available to someone challenging. There's referendums, there's all types of legal MANEUVERS THAT MIGHT PARTICULARLY CHALLENGE IT, BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, THE ENGINEER HAS MADE AN EXPERT ANALYSIS, CONDUCTED THEIR OPINION. WE'VE CONSULTED WITH AN EXPERT CONSULTANT AND HAVE DETERMINED IN THEIR INDUSTRY AND THEIR FIELD THAT WE MEET THE DEFINITION.

THANK YOU, MR. PITCHFORD. MR. PRESIDENT? MY FINAL COMMENTS WOULD JUST BE THAT, ONE, APPLAUD MR. SUTTON'S CONTINUED work on any piece of legislation. He always does his due diligence. I feel we do have the opinion of the city engineer and the consultant who did work with ODOT that this is where it needs to be. Perhaps it doesn't perfectly meet the definition. Perhaps. I can't say that I did the measurements myself. But I do feel that For the number of reasons that have been spoken here tonight, that stretch of road would definitely benefit from being in alignment at 35 miles per hour like the rest of the roadways around it. We have a school on that stretch, many, many houses. It is a safety issue. So I would like to move forward on it.

Thank you, Councillor Brezovic. Again, we are in the second round of discussion. Councillor Sutton, Councillor Duramo, and Councillor Brezovic have spoken. Is there any additional comment? Councillor Weinstein?

I'll just add that should we lower the speed limit from 45 to 35, whatever the change is in the amount of time it takes to get to that stretch rather than 38 seconds or 45 seconds. I have had residents from typically from outside that area who expressed concerns of lowering that speed limit and the additional time it would take. I have also had residents from that specifically live in that area who have concerns about the higher speed limit. I've had people talked to me about it in person over email we heard it here tonight that living in that area and especially now that it has sidewalks in that area we have many more people who are using the sidewalks um and that is a significant concern um for the people that living that in that area and and frankly for you know for most truly rural roads you don't have a sidewalk on that area you don't have the kind of traffic we do in that area For the way that people are currently using that road especially now that we have sidewalks. I think it's a significant safety concern Even just having a school area, so I understand those safety concerns And I you know I wanted a town where we can slow down for our neighbors to ensure their safety Thank You councillor Weinstein additional comment from any council member who has not spoken yet in the second round I

Seeing no additional comment, the motion on the floor is to pass Consent Agenda Item 26-98 that has been seconded by Councillor Weinstein. If there is no additional comment from Council, we will move to a roll call vote. Seeing no additional comment, Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call the vote on the motion on the floor to pass 26-98. Dr. Byrd? Yes.

Mr. Brosevec?

Yes.

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

Yes. Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. Consent agenda item 26-98 does pass by a vote of six in favor to one against, and the emergency language does carry as the requirement is for six of seven affirmative votes with seven council members present, so... Thank you. That will close our consent agenda and we will move on to agenda item 11 for legislation. Item A is number 26-85. This is an ordinance amending section 206.07 of the codified ordinances for the purpose of updating specific information. This is a third reading and actionable tonight. Does council wish to enter a motion on legislation item 26-85?

I move to pass legislative item A26-85.

Thank you, Councillor Brunswick. Do we have a second to that motion? Second. Thank you, Councillor President Byrd. Is there any discussion on legislation 26-85? Seeing none, Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote on the motion to pass legislation item 26-85?

Mr. Brezovac?

Yes.

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

Yes. Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. Legislation item 26-85 passes by a vote of seven in favor to zero against. We'll move on to item B on legislation, which is 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 also a third reading tonight and actionable. Therefore, does council wish to enter a motion on the legislation item 26-86?

Move to pass 26-86.

Thank you, Council President Byrd. Do we have a second to that motion?

Second.

Thank you, Councilor Getz. Is there any discussion on the motion to pass legislation item 26-86? Councilor Sutton?

I support the idea.

Conceptually, I just want to clarify that my no vote tonight is because I believe this exposes the city to a legal liability. Unfortunately, I can't get into details. They're protected information, but I think it comes with a monetary risk that I'm not willing to accept at this time.

Thank you, Councillor Sutton. Is there any other discussion on the motion to pass legislation 26-86? Seeing no additional comment from Council, Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote on the motion to pass legislation item 26-86? Mr. Rameau?

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

Yes.

Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. Legislation 26-86 does pass by a vote of five in favor to two against. We'll move on to item C on legislation, which is number 26-96. This is a resolution authorizing the city manager to enter into a lease agreement with North Star Towers to LLC. This is a second reading tonight. Moving on to item D, our last item on the legislative agenda is number 26-99. This is an ordinance authorizing all actions necessary to affect a governmental natural gas aggregation program with opt-out provisions pursuant to section 4929.26 of the Ohio Revised Code and directing the Summit County Board of Elections to submit a ballot question to the electors and declaring an emergency. This is a first of three readings tonight. Therefore, that will conclude section 11 for our legislative agenda. We'll move on to section 12 for an executive session. We do have a second executive session this evening, which we will cover in two motions due to the individuals involved in the various topics. Therefore, do we have a motion from council to enter into executive session to discuss the topics of security arrangements, and the first items under pending and imminent litigation.

Yes, I move to enter into executive session pursuant to Hudson Codified Ordinance 220.05 and to discuss details of security arrangements and emergency response protocols where disclosure could be expected to jeopardize the security of a public body and public office. to discuss imminent as well as pending litigation, and to discuss matters that are required to be kept confidential by law. Invited to the executive session are all members of council, the mayor, the police chief, the clerk of council, the acting city solicitor, the assistant city manager, and the city manager.

Thank you, Council President Byrd. Do we have a second to that motion? Second. Thank you, Councilor Getz. Is there any comments from council? Seeing none, Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote on the motion to enter into executive session?

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

Yes.

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