Personnel Advisory & Appeals Board - Regular Meeting

Are you ready?

Yes. We

have two members who aren't here and they're not going to be here. So we have everybody who's going to be here. Good evening, everyone. Tonight is a, regularly scheduled meeting of the City of Hudson, Ohio Charter Review Commission. The date is Wednesday, 04/16/2025. The time is 7PM. I'll call the meeting to order and begin with a roll call. Miss Griffith?

Present.

Mr. Hoover? Here. Miss McCoy? Here. Mr. Ryan? Here. Miss Fiddler? Here. Mr. Trainer? Here. And Mr. Kegler here. Both Mr. Hall and Ms. Norman. Ms. Norman had indicated that they were unable to attend tonight due to conflicts, but we do have a quorum with seven of nine members here. That's item two, roll call. Item three is approval of minutes. You've all received in your packets from Aparna the draft minutes for our last meeting on April 2. Is there a motion to approve those? Motion to approve. Mr. Ryan moves. Second. Mr. Hoover seconds.

Call on that motion, Mr. Trainer. Aye. Ms. Griffith? Aye. Ms. McCoy? Yes. Ms. Pitillary? Aye. Mr. Hoover? Aye. Mr. O'Brien? Yes. Kagler? Yes.

Motion carries unanimously. Next is item, four on the agenda that's correspondence and counsel comments. First for correspondence, in our packets that we received partially on the eleventh, which was Friday. And then, again, a follow-up message today. We had obviously the draft minutes, but in Thursday's packet or Friday's packet rather, we did receive a list, an updated submissions list.

The date on that was April 11, the export date. But this afternoon, we did receive a follow-up email from Aparna, and that included three items. The first was a letter from Hudson Library and Historical Society signed by Basil. Apologies if I'm mispronouncing the name. And that's the first thing that's included.

Second is a copy of an email from council member which summarized her previously and additionally suggested changes and with some additional explanation. And then third was a further updated submissions list. List. So just for what we're going over tonight, this is where it becomes handy. Make sure you're looking at the export date of 04/16 in the bottom left hand corner of each sheet, not the April 11.

Then it is five pages long. I'll go over what the additional items that I noticed on there in a minute. Since we are on it, there were no additional items on Page one. On Page two, Aparna's email message, she mentioned a suggestion from council member gets regarding section 3.1, but I don't see that in what we received unless I missed it. I see one that submitted regarding 3.13.

So I'll get with the Parna on, making sure we track that and have that included if it's not. On page four, line number 30 is new. That's one of the suggestions from council member Getz, and that was regarding her suggestion regarding the income tax and a credit that was in regarding section 6.01, which we have already reviewed, but we can come back to that. Then on page four, there were two new comments. One was from a resident that's on line 40, and that is from an Ashley Kinsvotter.

Apologies if I'm mispronouncing. And that's regarding section seven point o three elections, which I believe we've also reviewed, but we can come back to. And then lastly, the language in the following line, line 41, same page, page four, council woman Gaetz's suggestion regarding an elected city solicitor. The previous version just said an elected solicitor. This one has an expanded explanation.

We have already reviewed that, but we can come back to that if need be. That's the list. A review of where we are. We have reviewed 12 and a half of 16 articles. Again, that's not a great thing, but we'll we'll take it.

Next, we have tonight the remainder of article eight and then hopefully moving on to article nine. And then after that, we would have two articles remaining to do a first pass at, and that's Articles three and four. Three is counsel and four is the mayor. The draft changes that I've noted so far are to seven different sections of the charter. Those include five point o two, six point o three, six point o four, seven point o one, and then all three sections in article twelve, twelve point o one, twelve point o two, and twelve point o three.

I'll be reviewing those with mister Pitchford at a later date once we've completed everything so that he can be on track for what he's gonna draft. This is our sixth meeting. Our next meeting will be on May 7, which is in three weeks. After that, we have three additional meetings scheduled, whichever of those we will need. And then I've already mentioned the three items that were included with the packet. Do any other members have any additional correspondence or comments to share with the group?

Question, so we don't forget about the proposed revision to the preamble?

Yes. And I think I have that listed. I don't. But because we that's right. We

Keep bumping it down the road.

So would be like to do a a first pass through that when we go through articles. For remaining, we would have articles three, four, and the preamble. We did actually discuss it, but we didn't discuss proposed. But so yes. Absolutely. I can mention that. Thank you for that reminder. Anyone else? None. We move on to section five, which is our first of two public comments opportunities on our agenda.

Any member of the public's welcome to address the commission. If you have any suggestions or comments that have not been already submitted, please raise your hand, approach the podium, identify yourself by name and address, and address your comments to the commission. Would anyone like to speak to the commission? Yes, ma'am.

So thank you, guys. First of all, I am Ashley Ginsvotter who submitted the submission. So I don't know if I needed to come in person or not, but I just wanted to come and share with you that I would like and and I also should apologize. I just realized you guys were doing this, so it sounds like you already reviewed the election section.

Can you identify your address?

Oh, I'm sorry. Ashley Kinswatter. 5516 Timberline Trail.

Thank you.

Yep. So, yeah, I just wanted to come today to ask you guys to consider using ranked choice voting for elections here in Hudson. Ranked choice voting or RCV is a nonpartisan election reform effort that would help our community, I think, in several ways. So first, it would ensure candidates receive a true majority to win their election, meaning there would be not a situation where a candidate receives less than 50% of the vote. The instant runoff process used by ranked choice voting would ensure that the most popular candidate really wins.

Second, it would enable voters to truly vote for the candidate they want even if they think that candidate cannot win. So I think this is really empowering as a voter to know that it feels like your vote isn't being thrown out. And lastly, one of the reasons I most support ranked choice voting is because it leads to more civil discourse and less toxic partisan politics. It incentivizes candidates to more broadly appeal to voters in hopes that even if they aren't someone's first choice, they would maybe be someone's second choice. So all that to say, I think it would be really great if Hudson led the way as one of the first cities in Ohio, again, because cities used to use it, but one of the first cities in Ohio to implement this.

So thank you, guys. If you have any questions, I would be happy to try to answer them, but Rank the Vote Ohio also has tons of great resources.

Questions for Ms. Kinsvotter? Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Anyone else from the public? We'll move on to item seven, which was review of charter articles. So item seven a is article eight. I had in my notes well, in the in the minutes, it says that we reviewed article article three and well, we got as far as article four. And we did discuss the issues of residency, staggered terms, and term limits at length.

What I neglected to point out is we did have several suggestions that related to the park board and several other entities that were relating to, like, combination and purpose. I would suggest that that's more of a a larger issue that we once we get through discussing all of the all of the boards themselves, we can cover the big issues like like that, if that's alright. Okay. So if that is the case, then we would move on to article notes in the charter. We finished not only Article three, but Article or Section 8.03, but also Section 8.04. Correct?

Yes. Correct.

Alright. So we would then move on to Section 8.05. We'll start in the other direction tonight. Mister Ryan, would you like to start off? Certainly.

Section eight point o five, municipal parks. The municipality shall operate and maintain public parks and public lands acquired or designated by council. The park board shall make recommendations as to the following matters. The operation of parks in annual budget with the advice of the city manager for the council's approval and appropriation of funds, park expenditures in accordance with the appropriation there therefore, conservation and recreation activities within the park system and it shall perform such other tasks as may be designated by council. Tax levies designated for the operation of the public park system shall be recommended by the park board and may be approved by council for placement on the ballot.

Funds collected and appropriated for park purposes shall be maintained as a special revenue fund by the finance director of the municipality. With the approval of the council, the park board shall provide for lands suitable for park activity and programs and for lands suitable for natural preserves. Land acquisitions for park purposes shall be recommended by the park board and may be approved by council and shall conform to the comprehensive plan and enacting ordinances in effect at the time of the acquisition. Except by a vote of a majority of the electors of the municipality, land owned by the municipality and devoted to public park purposes shall not be sold or otherwise transferred to another owner nor used by the municipality for purposes other than public park purposes, which would result in a net reduction of the land area of the public park. Unless the reduction in land area would be for a public purpose that enhances the function of that particular park for a public right of way for vehicular pedestrian and or utility purposes.

Amended 11/07/2000, 11/02/2010, 11/03/2015.

I checked the list. We for eight section 8.05, there were no suggestions that were received or or comments from anyone. Does anyone have any, questions, concerns, comments about this section? As is okay. Just for context that Park Board prior to merger was a separate entity that was folded into city government as part of the conditions of merger that was previously. Alright. Eight zero five leave as is. Section eight point o six, mister Hoover.

Section 8.06, cemeteries. Public cemeteries within the municipality or owned by the municipality shall be operated and maintained by the municipality. Council shall provide for cemetery board, which shall advise the municipality on cemetery matters. The board shall consist of five or seven qualified electors of the municipality appointed by council and not holding other public office to serve without compensation for staggered four year terms. Each member shall have been a resident of the municipality or territory annexed thereto for a two years preceding appointment and shall continue to remain a resident during the member's term.

In the event of a vacancy, council shall appoint a qualified elector to fill the unexpired term. No member shall serve more than three consecutive full four year terms. Meeting shall be open to the public except as may be provided by the state law. And that was amended 11/07/2000, 11/08/2005, and 11/03/2020.

I see no, suggestions regarding this section. Consistent with the way that I had suggested approaching the seven or eight so boards that are listed in the charter. We had talked about previously an alteration to the, I'll call it, the term limit sentence, the second to last section at eight point o four, And that was to remove consecutive before full and then add reference to the twelve years or the lesser of language. That would to be consistent that would be done here as well. Any other suggestions or questions that anybody had regarding that section?

Out of curiosity, how many public cemeteries do we have in City Of Hudson? Four.

Don't know that. There's the one by Reserve. Probably Old Hudson, Burial Ground, Draper, and then O'Brien, which is down on Hudson Drive. Questions? To section eight point 0 seven, municipality.

Tree Commission. The tree commission shall consist of five or seven qualified electors of the municipality appointed by counsel and not holding other public office to serve without compensation for staggered four year terms. Each member shall have been a resident of the municipality or territory annexed thereto for two years preceding appointment and shall continue to remain a resident during the member's term. In the event of a vacancy, counsel shall appoint a qualified elector to fill the unexpired term. No members shall serve more than three consecutive full four year terms. Meeting shall be open to the public except as may be as may be provided by state law.

Same thing here. Second to last sentence to be changed regarding the term limits. Any questions regarding this section?

This is purely a question.

Yep.

So like with the parks, with the cemeteries, there's kind of a scope of what they cover and don't cover. This is my own personal curiosity only. What's the scope or purview of the tree commission?

A requirement for being like a tree city USA to have a tree commission and enforce a tree ordinance. And then the city, the village before it had a tree commission for years. And then in the nineties at some point in well, it should have been in 2000. That's when that section was added. The the commission had been in place for many years. It was activated more after merger. And then in 2000, it was actually added to the charter. It became a charter. So Mr. Jared, anything else at the Tree Commission? Do you want to give some insight into that?

In Hudson, we use the Tree Commission also for any improvement projects like developments. They review the amount of trees that they take down, the trees they plant, and the landscaping that they do in the new development. So it's very important. I think most people in the community like to see that we restore the trees and try to keep our canopy.

Is there a certified arborist that advises the tree commission?

Yes. We just changed him. One retired in January, we just replaced him.

Thank you.

Again, that was just personal curiosity.

I have

a question about it though. I know there's the environmental awareness committee as well that also deals with, like, the if there's a development with trees, water runoff, all that stuff. How is what's the differentiator between the tree commission, the environmental awareness commission?

Could they be merged? That's actually one of the it was came from Mister mister Bandwagon had suggested among other things Park Board, Environmental Awareness Committee and Tree Commission thinking about the overlapping and whether or not they should be combined in some way. And that was like the larger question that I would suggest that we address at some

The ten second version is just to those two exact questions. There's a lot of overlap. So putting them in one place, it's not to eliminate them. But like if you take EAC and you put tree commission within the Park Board, you have a senior level of leadership. You only have to appoint one board.

Have subcommittees, volunteers as well, so that they can stay aligned and get some efficiency out of a EAC has suggested a number of times that they'd be more involved in the developments in the community. We a planning commission. We have a treatment commission. We already have park boards when it affects parks. So let's get them all in one place because just over the years, there's a lot of redundant, reiterative discussion and it's not always aligned, but it would help if it was coming from a single, like a resource management.

So then I

have a

follow-up question to that. So then if somebody's doing, if there's a builder, right, and they're trying to get through all these commissions, would they have to go to the tree commission and the park board or tree commission and environmental awareness separately, is it combined as one?

They they don't go to environmental awareness, and they don't go to tree commission. They go to planning commission. Planning commission might ask the inside of tree commission or, you know, replace this type tree or this many trees. So it still goes through review just with one. But with the interest in wanting to be more involved, I think it helps to align it to say, look, if it's gonna come in through Planning Commission, Planning Commission then has the opportunity to task it to, hey, within Park Board, you're going to it's going to be reviewed by the Tree Commission.

And I'm speaking a little hypothetically in this process, but that's the idea, to get a little more alignment. Because today, you add the numbers up, this is, you know, 21 board members across three different boards and commissions that do a lot of similar things that are singular in purpose. Like, it's managing the natural resources in our environment. So if we could put that together in thought and plan, we might do better. And again, it doesn't eliminate anything. It just puts them in more place so that they have a singular aligned mission as opposed to their missions, visions and sets of people.

Okay. Thank you.

And it relates to that larger issue. Two of the three, Tree Commission and Park Border Charter in the Charter and Environmental Awareness Committee is not. It's a council initiated committee or council enacted committee. And of the suggestions that we've gotten, they range from looking at the combination of of and duplication of efforts that mister Van Wyck has pointed out to a, councilwoman Kowalski suggesting that environmental the third Environmental Affairs Committee be added as a third, environmental related, charter, border commission or border committee. And then the complete opposite of that, which is Mr.

Sutton's council council member Sutton's suggestion that some of the that that it'd be looked at to reduce the number of boards and commissions that are in the charter or consolidate in some way. So we've kind of gotten a bunch of different suggestions in that regard, but that's the larger issue. And this was the among the sections of the well, it was brought up under eight point o four, the park board, but it relates to Right. Eight point o seven and eight point o eight, which are the tree commission. Absent the larger issue, any other suggested changes to that section eight point o seven?

Hearing none, move on to section eight point o eight. That's tree commission powers and duties. Ms. McCoy.

Consistent with other objectives, the municipality's goal shall be to preserve the environment through proper maintenance of the trees in the municipality. As directed by council, the Hudson Tree Commission shall provide guidance for the establishment and maintenance of municipal trees, shall educate Hudson citizens on the importance of proper tree care, and shall promote development of trees in the municipality and surrounding communities. The commission, upon request of the council, the city manager, city boards such as the Planning Commission, the Architectural and History Historic Board of Review or Park Board shall make recommendations on any matter concerning trees and surrounding landscape. In addition to such other powers and duties provided by council, the Tree Commission may conduct studies and recommend policies to council for issues involving trees in the municipality enacted eleven eight zero five.

This is to mister Ryan's question earlier about the powers and duties and purpose. If you look at section eight point o six for cemeteries, the purpose for the cemetery board is the second sentence of it is the only reference to it that's buried in the in the enactment sentence. For both the park board and the tree commission, there's a second set or second section which specifically relates to purpose. Mhmm. So it's just a different way of handling when the different ports were put into the the charter.

I had I read like two paragraphs ahead. It's okay.

It's a very good question. Any questions, comments, or suggestions regarding eight point o eight? There's nothing in the chart. We move on to Article nine. Article nine is planning. Section 9.01 is planning commission composition and terms. Miss Griffith?

Section 9.01 planning commission composition and terms. The planning commission shall consist of seven qualified electors of the municipality appointed by council and not holding other public office to serve without compensation for staggered four year terms. Each member shall have been a resident of a municipality or territory annexed here too for two years preceding appointment and shall continue to remain a resident during the member's term. At the time of the appointment or reappointment of any member of the planning commission, the planning commission shall have no less than one member from each ward in the municipality. In the event of a vacancy, council shall appoint a qualified elector to fill the unexpired term.

The sitting manager, excuse me, or designee shall serve as ex officio, secretary of the commission. No member of the planning commission shall serve for more than three consecutive full four year terms. Meeting shall be open to the public except as may be provided by state law. And it was amended in ninety five two thousand fifteen and 11/03/2020.

And just for context, five years ago, one of the biggest points of discussion was a suggested requirement that all boards and commissions in the city have, the award representation, at least one member from each ward, on each board and commission. So where the and the commission did discuss it a lot five years ago, where they ended up was putting some we called it aspirational language in article three, the council section, which basically says whenever council is doing appointments to any board and commission, they should make efforts to make sure that every board every ward is represented. And they've done that over the past five years. That was and that aspirational language was built into the overall mass amendments that were presented to the the the voters, which were approved. Separately, the commission felt that it was more important to have as a requirement for planning commission that there be at least one.

And so there was a separate charter amendment on the ballot just for this section to put that third sentence that says at the time of appointment and it references each ward of the municipality, not less than one member. That was put on as a separate amendment and that was approved as well. So that's in here. So this is the only border commission where there's a requirement for ward membership other than council, of course. But the others all have aspiration language, aspirational language, and I think council's completely implemented that.

You'll see when you see vacancies, listed for different boards and commissions, they'll say, we need a ward two representative or we you know, we need a ward four, something like that. So any questions regarding this section? We had one and this is the top of page five, line 49, one thing on the list. This was from councilman Foster. And then this was regarding the term limits issue, which I believe we've he gave several options, and I believe we've already addressed with the, what I assume will be the second to last sentence change, standard change that we've already talked about.

Suggested changes or questions about that section?

Like a comment from some of the discussions that we have had or heard about it in making sure it's appointed or required to have one member per ward. The realistic constraints is we don't always get enough folks who want to do it from different wards. So particular attention was paid to the clinic commission because you can imagine it's a geographic representation of where development happens anyway. But in contrast, a simple example is like the Milter and Veterans Commission. The first representation that we want there is not by board per se, but by service and by type of service.

So whereas we would like to have ward representation, as I consider those appointments, I look for people from the different services and a mix of enlisted and officers. So if they happen to like, two of them are from Ward 4, they don't get one from Ward 3, we're looking at that as council currently through the lens of what's the what's the focus of this border commission? What is the type of makeup that makes it healthy discussion that represents the residents the right way. So we've kicked that round and round over the years, like, do we need it? Do we not need it? Does it hurt us? Does it help us? Where does it hurt us as a city? So that's just a little bit more discussion.

And that was the reason to to not handcuff counsel from having necessary discretion. The only place where it was felt that it was absolutely crucial was on the planning commission. So should the additional insight. Any other comments regarding Section 9.01? Section 9.02 is Planning Commission powers and duties. Mr. Trainer?

Planning Commission powers and duties. All meetings of the commission shall be public except as may be provided by the laws of the state of Ohio. No public building, street, boulevard, parkway, park, playground, bridge, or tunnel shall be constructed or authorized to be constructed in the municipality nor shall any street, avenue, parkway, boulevard, or alley be open for any purpose whatsoever nor shall any street, avenue, parkway, boulevard, or alley be widened, narrowed, relocated, or its use changed, or any ordinance referring to zoning or building codes or any or other regulations controlling the use of development of land be passed unless and until council shall have submitted the same to the Planning Commission for report and recommendation. That's a long

sentence.

Yeah. That's a little bit of run on sentence.

That's like a marathon sentence.

Yeah.

Any foregoing matter shall any foregoing matter so referred to the Planning Commission shall be considered by the Commission at a public hearing except streets and land subdivision within zoning districts where both industrial and offices office uses are permitted. Notice of a public hearing shall be given in the manner provided by ordinance of counsel and thereafter shall be acted upon by the Planning Commission within one hundred twenty days from the date of the regular Planning Commission meeting at which the matter was accepted unless a longer time be allowed by counsel. The planning commission report and recommendation shall be filed with the clerk of council within the prescribed time. Any proposed action by council related to changes of zoning, building codes, or other regulations controlling the use of or development of land shall require five votes of council for passage. No zoning, building, or other regulation controlling the use or development of land shall permit maximum net density in any zoning district for any dwelling type to increase without changing the text of the regulation or the zoning map.

And any such change of the text or map shall require at least six affirmative votes of council for its passage. Four votes by council shall be required to return a recommendation to the Planning Commission for further consideration, and this may be done only once. In addition to the foregoing, the Planning Commission shall be the Planning Commission of the municipalities shall have the power and duty to review, approve, disapprove, or approve subject to conditions all applications for zoning certificates for new nonresidential buildings within zoning districts where both industrial and office uses are permitted and shall have such other powers as are now or may hereafter be conferred upon it by the laws of Ohio by ordinance of council. This one's been amended in 02/1520. O nine's an odd year.

How did that happen?

That was a special year because the in the in the the way it works with zoning certificates, is basically anytime you ever wanna build anything in Hudson, you need a zoning certificate. There's a requirement in the charter that the any anything requiring a zoning certificate has to go to the architectural review board, architectural and historic board of review. There was a lot of discussion ever since merger, of the township and the village about the architectural board and whether or not the architectural board's review criteria should be applied to industrial uses. The architectural board was in place in the village prior to merger and the industrial areas were in the township prior to merger. And there were some who believed at that time that one didn't really apply to the other.

So they talked about it over several years, and, they had a a committee that actually recommended that the council put a charter amendment on the ballot that pull out zoning certificates for, industrial buildings in in districts where industrial uses, are are permitted, which I think it's Districts 8 And 9, something like that. And that those would be pulled out and instead of the architectural review, architectural board review and that those districts those industrial uses would be reviewed by a committee made up of a few members of the Planning Commission and a couple members of the Architectural Board. And that's the Industrial Design Subcommittee of the Planning Commission that exists today. That was put on the ballot in 2009. It was approved separately.

So that was done out. And there's really been very few of those non every five year issues, but that's where that came from. The other thing from five years ago that was done was a number of people actually suggested five years ago that the Charter Commission put on the ballot that all changes in zoning go before the voters. It's called referendum zoning. That basically anytime anybody wanted to change the text or the map of the of the zoning code, land development code, that it would need to go before the voters.

And there are different ways that it could be approved. That was discussed at length by the commission. And at the end, after I would describe it as peeling the onion down to the major issue, which was density and concerns that people had about density increases occurring in districts without, sufficient review and administrative decisions being perceived as going beyond what the council and the planning commission had approved in the land development code. There's a sentence in here. It's about it's six lines.

Well, no. Sorry. You might all not be looking at the same thing, but it is a sentence that starts with no zoning, building, or other regulation controlling the use or development of land. And it references density, and then it references, five votes being required of council.

It's like six lines down page 20. The next one. Sorry. No zoning, building, or other regulation.

Those it's after the five vote sentence and before the four vote sentence. The six vote sentence was put in, and that was a separate, charter amendment, which, so there were two separately voted on charter amendments to this specific and the commission's well, no. One was the pre preceding section about the ward representation and one was to this section regarding the number of votes for density increases. And, they both passed and that's why that section is in the charter. That was the change to that in 2020.

So any and we've received no suggested changes to nine point o two. Does anyone have any questions, comments or suggestions regarding this section? None. We move on to section 9.03. That's the continuing comprehensive plan.

I'll take that. The comprehensive plan in effect shall be the operate operative growth management policy for the municipality and as such shall guide counsel in taking action with respect to the physical development of the municipality and expenditures for capital improvements. The Planning Commission shall make or shall review and make any needed recommendations for the timely modification of updating the continuing comprehensive plan municipality. Of Recommendations for modification or amendment of such plan may be made to counsel at any time. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the plan shall be reviewed by the commission for revisions every ten years or more often if requested by counsel.

When a section has been reviewed by the Planning Commission, the chairperson of the Planning Commission within thirty days of the completion of the review shall submit the text to that section with or without proposed amendments to the council. If any amendment is proposed, council shall hold a public hearing with respect to the section and any proposed amendment and shall thereafter adopt, reject, or modify the amendment. Council shall initiate the review of the comprehensive plan of the municipality for any needed changes or modifications no less than every ten years. Either council or planning commission may make recommendations for revision to the comprehensive plan at any time. Any recommendation for modification or amendment of the comprehensive plan shall receive public hearing by the Planning Commission and within six months following public hearing recommendation shall be made by the Planning Commission to counsel.

Counsel shall hold public hearing a public hearing and take action to adopt, reject, or modify the amendment of the comprehensive plan within six months of receipt of a recommendation from the Planning Commission amended in 02/2010. This is 9.03. No suggestions in the chart. Any comments, questions or suggestions regarding this section? Hearing none, we'll move on to section nine point o four, board of zoning building board of zoning and building appeals composition and terms. Back to mister Ryan.

Board of zoning and building appeals composition and terms. The board of zoning and building appeals shall consist of five qualified electors of the municipality appointed by counsel and not holding other public office to serve without compensation for staggered four year terms. In the event of a vacancy, council shall appoint a qualified elector to fill the unexpired term. Each member shall have been a resident of the municipality or territory annexed thereto for two years preceding appointment and shall continue to remain a resident during the member's term. No members shall serve more than three consecutive full four year terms.

Meeting shall be open to the public except as may be provided by state law. Amended November 2000, November 2020.

Suggestions in the chart regarding this section. The only thing that, to start out I would see is modifying the second to last sentence regarding the term limits consistent with our prior discussions. Any other suggestions, changes, comments regarding this section? None. We move on to section nine point o five, board of zoning and building appeals powers and duties. Mister Hoover?

The board shall have power to hear and determine appeals from refusal of building and zoning permits or certificates and permit exceptions to and variations from the zoning regulations and individual cases as may be required to afford justice and avoid either a practical difficulty or an unnecessary hardship to property owners as applicable and in accordance with standards established by our terms of counsel and such other powers as are now or may hereafter be conferred upon it by the laws of Ohio or by ordinance of council as amended November 2020.

Suggestions in the chart regarding this? Any comments, questions, or suggestions from the commission? No. None. We move on to section 9.06, Architectural and Historic Board of Review, Composition and Terms. Ms. Fiddleri.

The Architectural and Historic Board of Review shall consist of seven qualified electors of the municipality appointed by council and not holding other public office to serve without compensation for staggered four year terms. Each member shall have been a resident of the municipality or territory annexed thereto for two years preceding appointment appointment and shall continue to remain a resident during the member's term. In the event of a vacancy, council shall appoint a qualified elector to fill the unexpired term. No member shall serve more than three consecutive full four year terms.

And we have the it's the it's the last section in last sentence in this section is the term limit sec sentence to be changed. I do see the same section or same sentence, which is the last section last sentence and all the other sections about public meetings is missing here. So if we're making that change, we could add that same sentence as every if everyone is okay. Any other questions, comments, or suggestions regarding this section? None. Section nine point o seven, Architectural and Historic Board of Review Powers and Duties. Ms. McCoy?

All meetings of the Architectural and Historic Board of Review shall be public except as many except as may be provided by the laws of the State of Ohio. The board shall have the power and the duty to review, approve, disapprove, or approve subject to conditions all applications for zoning certificates other than zoning certificates for new non residential buildings within zoning districts where both industrial and office uses are permitted, which shall be reviewed in accordance with the provisions of section 9.02. And other than minor improvements to either residential or nonresidential properties such as fences, small accessory buildings, building additions and signs as specified by council, minor improvements may be administratively reviewed, approved, or approved subject to conditions by the city manager or the manager's designee. With respect to applications to construct, erect, alter, remove, move, or demolish any and all structures, buildings, or landmarks within any historic districts established and defined by counsel. The Board shall also have the power and duty to issue or deny a certificate of appropriateness pursuant to procedures established by counsel.

In the exercise and fulfillment of these specified powers and duties, the Board shall protect and preserve the value, appearance and use of property on which buildings are constructed or altered to maintain a high character of community development to protect the public health, safety, convenience and welfare and to protect real estate within the municipality from impairment or destruction of value. Guidelines for the fulfillment of such duties shall be specified with respect to architectural values and architectural criteria as adopted, and as may be amended by counsel. Any provision of the codified ordinances of Hudson relating to the Architectural and Historic Board of Review existing pursuant to such ordinances at the time of adoption of this section shall continue in effect and shall be applicable to the Board established by this section unless and until modified or repealed by counsel. The Board shall also have such other powers and duties as are now or may hereafter be conferred upon it by the laws of Ohio or the ordinance of counsel. Council, the Planning Commission and the City Manager shall consult with the Architectural and Historic Board of Review on application of the architectural criteria adopted by Council to physical development of the municipality and then in 2000, 2009, and 2015.

No suggestions in the chart regarding this. I do see the first sentence of the whole section related to the public meetings, so I think that's probably why it wasn't I didn't see that before. That may be why it's not in the previous section. And I would suggest rather than amending this section to delete that, just leave leave both of those. Yep. Leave it where it is in nine point o seven. Any other questions, comments, suggestions regarding section 9.07? No. None. We move on to section nine point o eight. This is architectural and historic board of review appeals. Miss Turfath.

Appeals from decisions of the architectural and historic board of review shall be taken to the board of zoning and building appeals in accordance with procedures established by counsel. In hearing such appeals, the board of zoning and building appeals shall be guided by the purposes and principles of the architectural and historic board of review as specified in Section 9.07 of this charter.

And no, suggestions regarding this section in the chart. Any questions, comments, or suggestions from the commission? That takes us to

sorry.

Everything that I hope to accomplish this evening regarding the the two articles, I would suggest moving on, but we don't have it on the agenda. So I would the one thing I would we have a few minutes, would be just to go through the chart, make sure we've And 20. With

this evening? First I think, we'll yeah, maybe checking in, like, since there were so many things on eight, are we good? I mean, most of these were related to composition and terms. So I know we've talked through what we wanna do with term limits, and I think we came to some concurrence if I recall again it was last time. So did we all?

Yes, actually you know what maybe since we have a few minutes that larger issue of there may be a few I think we covered all the boards and commissions. Larger issue of combining

Should we combine which one should be chartered? There's that discussion that is this is probably the right time.

At least to begin it and see what what people think. And just for the sake of starting out the discussion, I'll I'll give you my initial thoughts. I thought it was an interest

Mister Kigler, I'm so sorry to Go ahead. Just to get my mind clear. Yeah. Can you or maybe mister Van Wigg, mister anyone let us know what other boards and commissions aren't Our in the charter.

I think Parna had provided us

Did she okay. I remember talking about it or seeing it somewhere.

There were 19, I different think, boards and commissions.

It's on a Yeah.

It's somewhere. Right? But the only ones and

commissions than any other city around us.

Right. But the and the only ones that we've heard about or got suggestions on either becoming chartered or combining where the military and veterans and the EAC?

For Yes.

For ADDEN. Yeah. Okay.

Yeah. There are a number of economic boards. There were three now through an administrative consolidation to the extent And do So like why aren't they the same people?

It Just as we're discussing, wanted to pay respect to the other comments about the boards that aren't currently chartered.

And to confirm, even if a board is not chartered, there's still a city council representative for each board and commission. So then every meeting, we have a city council member present for those. Okay. Thank All 19. Yeah.

Hold on. It's a laugh.

I know I did see it somewhere. Yeah.

Yeah. It's somewhere. Yeah. Have the architectural historic board of review, board of tax reviews or the BCBA, the Board of Zoning and Building Appeals, the Cemetery Board, we currently have the Charter Re Commission, the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee, the Economic Growth Board, the Environmental Awareness Committee, the Trust Dependence fund board, HCTB advisory committee, military and veterans commission, our board, yeah, personnel advisory and appeals board.

It's this. A part of printed this out.

That's right. It was that.

I didn't know. Yep. But that's what it looks like if you guys are looking for. Remember chartered?

Yeah. The ones in here are chartered, obviously.

But Yeah.

It's not

on the info.

It says that if it is. There's a few that don't have it.

But it that's all. Is that in the back?

You have any receipt that?

It's early, if I remember correctly.

I wanna say, like, February so I have it right next to my February 14.

It's, like, five or six pages in. For the

February 19 meeting. Yep.

So the non chartered or the community TV, the HCTB committee, the economic growth board, the environmental awareness committee, military veterans commission, records commission, volunteer firefighter dependence on board. Got the home board, the state grounds board, the tax incentive review.

What's the home board? Home is

Schools. Our integration of the schools, like, where we meet with the school board. Oh. 10 representatives. They send representatives to talk about things like crossover or

It stands for Hudson something for mutual endeavors. Yes. I don't know what

That safe routes part of that as well for this

Separate committee.

Separate committee, but is it with the schools or is it

They have their own safe routes in the schools, but this is a different committee from that totally.

For mutual endeavors. Thank you.

That started when the city after merger was doing tax abatements and it was important to get the school board members and the council members together to think about things rather than saying, hey, why'd you do that?

Okay. Makes sense. And it it is helpful. I just come up, not frequently. That not a going do

down issue of how thing. Many how many boards and that's commissions do we or should we have in the charter. Then we have the question of why should a board or commission be in the charter or not. And then beyond that, it's the kind of the diagnostic check of the ones that are in. Should they be in and are the ones that not in, should they be in or out and that type of thing?

And as it relates specifically, since we were in article eight to the it was brought up regarding park board and tree commission, mister Bandwake's suggestion was to look at the, call it, the combo or merging of those two plus the environmental affairs committee into something in the charter. Councilwoman Kowalski had suggested simply adding the environmental affairs committee to the charter. And council member Sutton suggested we have too many boards and commissions in the charter. We should be looking at taking some out, not adding more. So those larger those are, like, kind of the issues as I saw them.

With regard to the proposal to to merge that mister Bandwik had suggested, I found that an an intriguing suggestion, and I think it offered a lot of possibilities, and merited some study. But when I first read it, I thought I would I would expect to see that in the charter after the community may be initiated by council had done some sort of study on should we merge these three three boards commissions? And if so, would that require a charter amendment and to have the results of that recommendation be presented to the Charter Review Commission or for that matter, just put onto the the charter rather than kind plopping the issue in the charter commissions charter review commissions lap to figure out if we should do this or not. I thought it's something that, I think if that's something that should it's kind of like the larger issue of do we need a recreation center in Hudson. The the comprehensive plan committee studying that and or studied that.

And now the the council and the and the community are looking into that further along with a number of other issues. Maybe this is a type of issue that should be discussed as well. But I just when I first heard it, despite it being intriguing, I didn't see it as being a as thought through of an issue to be ripe for considering for an amendment to the charter. But I would encourage if if council believes it's something that should be studied to perhaps look into that. Now that was just my observations just when I first heard it.

That was just to start discussion. So what do you all think? Yeah.

You bring up a good point and I guess I'm now looking to see, you know, we are a chartered commission and I'm trying to find now we just reviewed all these other commissions. Where are we? Because now I need to see what are our obligations and our responsibilities as a charter to answer that question because I think that's a fair point. We should not look to overstep, but

To add some color to your comment, mister Kegler, we've been talking about this particular scenario for about three years. Why we would have commission. We didn't do a study, but it has been in public discussion for about three years.

Doesn't It's online. It doesn't go deep. It doesn't say much about what our that's interesting. Our It doesn't it doesn't lay out our scope or powers and duties. It just says there would be a charter commission that's which is how we all got here, and we elect our own chairperson and secretary, and go forth and prosper. So

It's kind of it it is a very interesting observation that all the other chartered boards have powers and duties spelled

out. Part of that is this is a temporary commission, and they're standing like the comprehensive development steering.

I think the the guts of what the Charter Review Commission is supposed to do is at the in the second to last sentence of 13 o two, where we're supposed to recommend to counsel not less than a hundred twenty days before Any revisions and amendments to the charter as in our judgment that we deem or deem advisable, and then that's it.

Alright. So

then That's exactly right.

And and it don't it's only there once every five years?

At minimum. Yes. Yep. It's a it's a required it's kinda like the comprehensive plan is once every ten years at a minimum. And like o nine, it was it was it can be done more often.

Right. Okay. With with that, then I would probably suggest that if the group believes that this is something worthy of making that recommendation, then we should feel obligated and okay with making that recommendation to, to merge boards, to charter boards and so forth. I think we should feel that that is within our scope. I agree with you.

Councilman Bandweg is telling us that they've discussed some of these things in public. I think we should take it as seriously as we've taken all other public comments that, you know, this is what people are saying that they want. So that would be my vote. I don't I can tell you just going in, my initial reaction was simplicity is better let's simplify. So that was my initial hunch.

There clearly be needs seems to be multiple people that are chattering that we have too many boards. So now we don't touch the non chartered boards. I don't think that's what we're supposed to unless we want to bring one on, but we don't make the decision that one of these other volunteer firefighters dependence fund board that's not in our that's out of our limit to be able to say we don't think that's a good board. That's not part of the charter. I think you're accurate in saying you could charter it. We could charter but we can't disband it.

Right.

Firefighters So we deal with the ones that are chartered. I think is how I'm understanding. Okay. So anyway, that's my

Well, I'll say that we would like to ask.

Yeah. That's my fence walking is that I think we should discuss it and if we think that it's we wanna make a recommendation and we agree, then I think we should.

And I just so I'm square. I mean, I'm in agreement. I think we have the ability to make the recommendation on if and which board should consolidate. If I understand the protocol, it would then go to counsel to discuss and say, yay or nay, we agree or disagree. I mean, is that how the process would work?

Like, if we made a recommendation as a Charter Review Commission to say, hey, Boards a, and c should become one board. As chartered. As chartered. Do we have the ability as this group to enact that, or would that recommendation go to counsel for counsel to deliberate and say yay or nay? He had to what we recommend,

basically, counsel has to put on the ballot. So if there's something that we wanna do, we need to be we wanna propose, we need to be pretty specific about it. Okay.

So they don't have the opportunity to be like, oh, charter review. They're crazy. We're not gonna even put this. They have to take a recommendation?

Even their judgment if it seems advisable, it says.

So what what it's talking about is there's the commission, the scope of our authority shall recommend to counsel any revisions or amendments to the charter in its judgment. The commission's judgment would be advisable. And here's the answer to your question. And the council shall submit the same to the electors and that word shall is mandatory.

Okay.

Shall shall versus May, those have two different may means it's in your discretion. We can if we want to, meaning so if if if it said May, council would be able to reject it if they want. Shall, it is nondiscretionary.

They're kind of on the other side of coin. They don't need us to put something on the ballot. They can just pass something like, hey, we wanna take this. We're gonna propose a charter amendment on the ballot. Do they ultimately need us to get get the ball rolling?

Can't change the charter. That's what

we're they can't change it, they can put it on the ballot without us, can't they?

Maybe that was the o '9 thing? Is that what happened in o nine? There was

a special vote? Were no commission at that point. That was a council initiated amendment to the charter and that can be there's the this provision It's right before 13 o one. 13 o one, council can put at any time anything it wishes Okay. On the ballot.

I guess that would be one of my questions then. If it has been discussed of combining these, I guess why hasn't there been a move by council to do it beyond just discussing it

right now?

Easy answer is we want it to be publicly discussed. We I think many of us don't wanna throw things on the ballot if it's not publicly supported or advocated. It's just a principle of representing the people. Like, anything that I have put on here, I've heard probably hundreds of times from residents in our community. It's not like, they're not pet projects of mine.

It's not anything that, you know, I came up with. It's a consolidation feedback, and this puts it So to answer your question for me is I want it to be a public discussion. I want it to represent the interest or the will of what the residents that discussion as opposed to counsel unilaterally putting something out there. There may be a time where that's necessary or beneficial and that we gotta get something done. But I know as we as a collective body have talked about We want to put that through the Charter Commission so that it gets more discussion.

Does that make sense?

Yes. I'm going

to add just one other interesting to answer your prior question about if counsel didn't want something that we were proposing, it actually has the ability to exercise its power under this section. They could and if they are submitted at the same time, whichever one receives more votes. So that's actually happened at the county level, like, where they're creating office or trying to merge offices. They they had two and then the only one that happened. But technically, if counsel didn't like it, that's their option. That would be their tool to combat that. Okay.

Comment I wanted to add on the discussion of the Boards or Commissions. I remembered hearing non chartered Boards or Commissions in his Board Directors of of Directors of the the Charter Boards of It was a good idea when put it on. It lasted five years. His suggestion, if we think it's worthy of being permanent, then the Charter Review Commission should charter it. If we don't, then it's a natural expiration and chart and it doesn't prevent council from reestablishing it, but it it's a mechanism to get rid of the constant growth.

So that was his approach on it.

And you supported that as well. Correct? The expiration after five years on just above that?

I

They should expire every open to it. It wasn't something

That's something that council has the ability to do for the boards and commissions that it creates.

Correct. We could take things off. People generally don't take things off because it takes time. This his suggestion was a mechanism to automatically take it off unless we renew it, essentially. And that would be a chartered change. So as opposed you could chart Charter, like, boards or commissions that weren't chartered would have to be reestablished or they would go away as opposed

to having to do something. It's called a sunset. Yeah. Right? And there's lots of different ways, and the state legislature does it all the time. Even think about, like, the Trump tax cut. It was only good for so many years that it expired. It has to be renewed. It's the same concept. This will make everything mandatory, and it catches there there are some committees, like the records commission, for example, that we have to have that as a matter of state law, but we would we would clarify it.

We will call that out. But it gets rid of everything, and it's a it's a good way of keeping it clean, if you will. And it's we would be thinking ahead or that the administration would watch and check with counsel ahead of time, and they would Just keep what they wanted to. It's a nice way of, you know, staying relevant, right, keeping our commissions relevant.

And that's without that. That was my Park Board scenario is to say it's making it relevant. And part of it is a lot of the discussion has been is there a parks and rec department as if we're looking at a rec center. Having that consolidated board also sets us up to potentially manage that, like gives the city the infrastructure. I I mean, there's a lot of what ifs on the future, but the suggestion today was after a lot of discussion of we're at 20 boards essentially.

I think the next most boards in a city around here is like 12 or 13. So it's a massive difference in the amount of boards and commissions we have. That's just been our chatter for a while. Like, how do we the first step, there was an administrative option, and I consolidated with economic growth. I think we had the economic growth board, economic committees. So we realigned them so that we didn't have to have two still met legal warrants, but we reduced the demand on the population.

I think the the two that are back to the Article eight, Parks, Trees and Environmental Awareness. Parks and Trees are in the Charter already. I do see a lot of overlap with them. They both parks has a they manage infrastructure and, or they they used to manage infrastructure. Now the city manages the infrastructure and the park is more in an advisory capacity.

It used to be that the park board the actual park board ran the parks, and the park board hired a manager. And and after merger, it was folded into the the government and was no longer a separate entity. Cemeteries are the same way. The the cemeteries used to be the union cemeteries of Hudson, which was a completely separate entity, somehow it ended up in the charter. There's no reason why we couldn't have a just a cemetery cemetery department in the city that happened to have an advisory committee that was appointed by council or something like that.

And then you wouldn't need it in in the but parks and trees, I could see that being an easy potential for a combination because you could you you have to have something that serves as the tree commission for specific purposes. And as if you had the park board also serving as that, they could do that. And if they needed a subcommittee to do something like that, then they could, certainly set environmental awareness, that's a completely separate thing beyond. And, that I see is, from what I understand it, is more advocacy and education, some referral from counsel on certain things and events and things like that, all of which are very, important and valuable. I I guess I'm not necessarily I know I know they they both they all deal with natural resources, but I'm I'm not sure.

I'm I'm not I'm just not sure about that. But if they were to be if environmental awareness were to be folded into anything or merged with anything, it in my opinion, it would be the two that you had suggested, which were parks and trees.

And the title of it in the end, my suggestion was parks and resources. And it it's because a lot of those green spaces are the parks. Preserve and advocate the natural resources of the community. The end goal wasn't eliminating any responsibility. You need 14 people to manage or do you need seven people to manage the parks and resources and establish subcommittees, get volunteers as necessary?

It's when you have 20 committees to 20 boards and commissions, you're interviewing three or four people per position, fifteen minutes apiece. It's a metric amount of interviews. So in this particular scenario, for example, if you combine boards and then there's seven positions we're interviewing for, and they're pointing people into subcommittees that don't require the full interview process differentiate, like, if you're on the park board or the EAC. Like, if you're working together, aligned vision, reduced administration Reduced number of official meetings, reduced number of liaisons. Like, if if you're liaison for parks and EAC at the same time.

You're covering the same kind of topics. So a lot of the suggestion around reduction of boards

The other things related that were kinda going on out there that made me made me wonder if the time was right was, number one, all the talk about a recreation center and whether if the city takes on some sort of a larger recreation function, where does that fall? Is it just part of the parks department? Is it another department that the city creates? Or is it part of the responsibility? Should it be parks and recreation or parks and

So not to interrupt you on that, but from the steering committee when I was on the steering committee for that and The

comp plan?

Under the comp plan. Yeah. And so what we recommended that is if we did have something like a rec center, that the city would look into building out a parks and recreation department within the city to help with, you know, scheduling and what and the different things to bring in. So actually building that as part of the city's responsibilities under the city manager. Not necessarily a board to be responsible for the rec center, but literally just hiring members to work for the city.

And to be determined on all the, you know, diagrams of when you think about operational management, definitely in the city, advice on where things goes, park board, like Recreational activities. When you think about the inclusive park today, we're talking about where that goes heavily influenced by interaction with the park board because of the commonality of the resources. You're either gonna buy a new parcel, how you manage it, how you advise it, how you get the public's interest and interaction, some element in the park board. I would from me, I don't want that because I want the public's input to balance operational efficiency led by the city. Right?

So two halves. And that's where, again, it's not written in here to manage the rec center because there's not a rec center. Right. But when we think about all the different recreational fields we have, that's all there as well. Okay. So all those outdoor resources.

So Could I ask a question? Yeah. Regarding this environmental wear awareness committee, where is it right now? It's not a chartered Correct. Committee. So where where does it fall? I mean, is it is it be it part of the planning commission, the steering commission? Know, does it have it's just a totally separate committee.

Totally separate. Created by counsel and appointed by counsel. Okay.

So Has anybody ever served on the cemetery board? Like, couldn't the cemetery board also be rolled up into parks? Like Could be. It's, you know, out the resources, whatever. I mean, seems like all of those things are spaces in our community that need to be managed. Right? You've got you've got your natural resources, you've got your parks, and you've got these cemeteries, these four or five cemeteries that you guys said that were the

comments that I've heard again, we've been having some of these discussions for, like, three years about how to get some efficiency here. The comments that I recall about cemeteries because it is public space, but there's, I think, funding for it, and it's the restoration of, like, headstones, the facts that in the discussion was specific and separate. Now to your point, could it be the same? Could be. A lot of money, oversight, different subcommittee.

You gotta cut the grass. You gotta trim

public spaces.

Work at a cemetery. Spring Grove Cemetery, one of the biggest cemeteries in the

Yeah. So to your point, I don't see anything that would prevent that. I've not heard any big statement, but that has been the nature of the discussion is that it needed itself. So

I think Sarah Norman was on has been on that cemetery Yep.

We can get her

And there's like like I said, there's nothing to say that there has to be a I mean, certainly, you wanted to have a board that helps advise on cemeteries, there's nothing to say you can't, but it doesn't necessarily have to be a separate callout in the charter. You could

And that's what we were going after is what doesn't have to be separate and what should

So I'll throw this out. As the suggestion had been made by mister Bamweg on behalf of others and himself in section eight or arta or excuse me. Article eight, sections eight point o four and eight point o five relate to the park board and section or parks and section eight point o seven and eight point o eight relate to the tree commission. In order to view what is suggested, it there's no way I could see this even being floated unless it were something completely separate as a standalone vote on this issue up or down. But it would be an amendment that would be basically say sections 8.04, 8.05, eight point zero seven and eight point zero eight be in our hereby repealed and a new section 8.04 is created called the parks and whatever commission, or parks, public properties, and natural resources commission or something.

And even, you know, just for the sake of discussion, even section eight point o six into it for cemeteries. And that you you repeal five four or five sections and you create one or two new sections, which create the board. And then in the one section and the section second section, create the state the purp the the purpose. The only thing that frightens me about this whole thing is that the more things you throw into this one board or commission, who the heck is gonna wanna be on it? It's that's it's you'd be if it really needs to be that much being done by that one board, that's a that's a big a lot to shoulder. But board.

Attention to the subcommittees.

Mhmm. Yeah.

And I don't know if this would be possible, but I'd be kind of curious to just get input from people on those boards. I haven't served on those boards. I don't know if what their feelings are. I mean, I feel like, you know, we need us and they won't give give it up. But I'm just I feel like I need more data to really make a decision either way and but to push for consolidating. Okay. So

We would we define the subcommittees as well or no? You would just define the

Purposes and then however, I would say you'd you'd just like with the other boards and commissions, you say the number of members, the terms, the term limits, all that stuff. And then the purposes, it's a number of bullet points and under understanding completely that we would need more information in order to determine whether or not we'd want to put it on the ballot. How does everyone feel about going down a path of even considering that? Are you open to considering that? Yeah.

Park and tree each meet every two months. So I don't know. I haven't right. What I'm yeah. I guess yeah. Park and tree are both different days, but and I don't members can't serve on both. Right? Yeah. You can only be on one. Agree. It's a watch out, like, if we all of a sudden create a monster that can't be managed. But, yes, subcommittees is certainly a solution there. I was just trying to, you know, look if you had the best seven people that were managing that that combination. That would seem an easy combination.

Yeah. And that's actually something I've been just from a purely mechanics perspective. If you have two boards, seven people each, is it like you throw all 14 people into a cage and the seven strongest come out? Like, the the serious question is how do you then, after consolidation of these two boards, select the seven people who, you know, who gets voted off the island and who stays?

You have to counsel.

City counsel. Okay.

When an office is abolished, you don't have a as a member of that board, you don't have a vested right

Okay.

To to that position if it's if it's abolished by vote. Okay. If if there's a charge change, there's case law on it. But because people, like like, the elected officials would get booted out of office and that happened and the case law said, you know, you don't have any right.

Like, we had

a midterm or whatever it was. It was a county office in Congo County, and the lady was two years in the four year term. Sued, and she lost.

Yeah. Okay.

They will be out, and it would be the appointment would be, like, in December, like, hey. Let's pick the new people. It would be effective. Right?

And

So so this is so this is a a challenge that has been dealt with before, and there's precedents and

I know the precedent. I know we've done this before, but Yeah. There's precedent on how to handle it.

So I think by the 20 boards we have, we clearly have not done this. But

Actually, yeah. We It's well, after merger, I mean, you had Oh,

that's bad. Yeah. When the

merger happened. When merger occurred, you had seven council members plus three township trustees who served for six months on a 10 member interim council.

Okay.

And no matter when their terms were going to expire, and they were elected officials. Mhmm. The the charter amendments that were approved said your terms all expire in six months, and there was a new election in six months for seven new council members. Three and all of the former council members before merger were at large. So even the whole it was not only new city.

And separately, as part of merger, there was a five member village planning commission, a five member township zoning commission that became a 10 member. And then two boards of zoning appeals, they became 10 member combined boards, all interim for the six month period. And then once the permanent council was in place, they have appointed all the replacements to the new boards and commissions. So it's it's been done. And maybe if you did something like this, that it's you you could have interim provisions that the interim whatever shall be the combined for a period and then council points new.

But that's that's so back to the the question. We need to get one thing mister Hoover suggested was input from those who are doing the doing the duty right now, but also, are you this something that you you want to even entertain and, further discuss and maybe maybe consider?

It's certainly open to further discussion.

Sorry. You said don't mind?

Yes. I don't mind. Open to further discussion.

Agree. Mhmm. I agree.

Just I'm gonna play devil's advocate and I think you mentioned

this, mister Hoover. It's kinda

like self preservation. You know, if there are seven people who feel they serve a purpose here and seven people who feel they serve a purpose here, I would be I would be pleasantly surprised if any of them or a majority of them said, yeah, we should consolidate. That's my devil's advocate.

A variable could be. Yeah.

And then and I don't know that it was to be determinative to to ask for their input. It's just part of the whole decision process. Right?

Yeah. Understand what they do. Maybe that would be valuable. Again, the cemetery board how There's overlap. Yeah. What's the what's Yeah. What's the work required for the cemetery board as an example? I'd like to know that. And if if think think Norman can work.

I like that because if they're only meeting every other month and the meetings last forty five minutes, thirty minutes, and we can consult that's not a no brainer but it's, you know, at the planning commission sometimes we're there for three hours. Right? And that's a big lift. But other one and I'm not saying that it's not as valuable. I'm just saying that to your exact point consolidating it so they're not having four or five hour meetings that it's a little bit more manageable based on the respecting the people's time as well. Not that their work is not valued. That's not what I'm saying. No. Gotcha. Clarity.

Just clarity. Yeah. And

manageable. Yeah.

Managing. Doing the same thing, just under a different set. Like, you don't need a redundant set of overseers. I I found in some of them, like, the economic side There was, like, hey. Yeah.

I don't need to be here. We we could, you know, face me up or do yeah. And to your point, the interim or the overtime, if we know that this is happening, then there's a staggered one that's right for the timeline so you let things fall off and consolidate it. It's not meant to be, like, there's no big hatchet. Mhmm. But because some people are surveying sometimes painfully because if you're on a board, they know they're trying to serve that they maybe rather wouldn't right now where they're doing too many things. So there are times when individually it's a relief.

So I I would suggest perhaps that we need to do three things, like four. We decide if there are boards that can be merged. We need to decide if boards that are not chartered should be chartered, and we need to decide if there's anything that's chartered that should be unchartered. I don't know if that's the word. And the fourth thing is, do we want this auto expire? I don't remember what you called it, but every five years. The sunset. Do we want a sunset term or a sunset limit? I think that's what we have to decide, and I think we I I would suggest that if we can't make an informed decision, we make no decision. I think that's probably the right approach. So I do think it's important that we get some information.

Four issue you suggested were what could be merged, what could be added, what should be removed From the charter. Yeah. In the sunset. Yep. I would suggest with the sunset, we since that relates only to the council appointed that we address that when we review article three, which is the council section. Because I think there's a section in there without going and looking at it that relates to council's authority to appoint committees for whatever purpose. And if that's something that we wanna do, that would be the place to

Okay.

And what the two ways of looking at it or whether or not you wanna handcuff counsel from from being able to do what it wants to do or if you wanna force the the way mister Fitch for described as almost like the reality check of you're forced to revisit and reaffirm the validity of these things every so often.

Okay.

With the with regard to the other three, Since we're in the April

meeting,

our next meeting is in three weeks on May 7. We wouldn't have a meeting until June. And the the goal of the May meeting in my ideal my ideal goal would be for us to get through articles three and four. I don't know if we're gonna be able to. It's all the suggestions and And the preamble.

And the and the preamble. Then that would be having gotten through everything on the first blush. That would leave us then the at least two meetings, possibly a third in June to review the sections that have been proposed and handle anything else that needs to be handled. So between now and June, we could seek input, from from whoever suggested from wherever, regarding anything that we might suggest. But the question is what what would we suggest?

So if, I mean, I was trying to think out loud. I could just write something very brief. The commission is considering doing x, you know, combining looking at the issue of combining, these three these two or these three parks. And and I'm not even gonna address the one that's not in the charter yet. That's a separate issue.

But parks and trees, and I didn't know if you wanted to include cemeteries in that or not. And then, what input would anybody have regarding those issues and, you know, circulate it to the the community, but also circulate it to the specific boards, and we could also have time to think about it between and then we could also, for when we discuss it, have something in front of us that would show the repeal, repeal, repeal, create, create, how how it would look so that we have something, not just a concept. But my question relating to the merging would be which ones do you want me to include in that? The parks and trees, parks, trees, and cemeteries?

Parks and trees. It'd be interesting to get miss Norman's perspective since she served on the cemetery. I mean, at least she can tell us sort of what their scope is, how much they Yeah. You know, these these these cemeteries are pretty established. Right? So I suspect it's upkeep and it's maintenance and it's things that have to get done. But can the same can a group of or a committee that is doing that for other common outdoor spaces, can they do that? That'd be the question. So or do you Or could

it be just done administratively by the the administration with input from an advisory board Yeah. Or something like that. And not chartered. Right.

That could be another option.

Yeah. As a separate issue?

I think we could handle cemetery with the, know, the insight that we could get from one of our charter members. That would be my suggestion just to, again, keep it simple. But, yeah, maybe getting feedback from trees and parks. Let's find out what what say they. However that makes sense to do.

Parks and trees, potential merger cemetery, either remove or incorporate into Carson trees. Resources. Administration either way.

We're yeah. We're yeah.

Any of the others that are in I mean

What about the environmental awareness committee?

Okay. So then that gets into all the ones that are not in the charter.

Okay. So we're just talking about the charter one?

Well, to start. Okay. I'm just going with what mister, trainer had suggested. Merging first then. Yeah. First. So of the nine or so that are in the charter, the personnel, in my opinion, needs to be separate. It's got a unique duty. Planning, BZBA and architectural board are all specific, in my opinion, cannot should not be combined. And I think that's one plus three plus the three that we're talking about, that's seven?

Seven? Is that seven in the chart? So the only things we're talking about possibly tweaking in any way would be parks, tree in the charter would be parks, trees and cemetery. Okay. So then for others to miss McCoy's question, others that are not in the charter but have been suggested in one way or the other incorporating into the charter, those would be environmental affairs, military and veteran services. I don't know if I got the name correct.

Military Commission and environmental awareness.

If I just those two? Those are the

only two that have been recommended. Okay. The others are economic growth, community TV, board of tax, volunteer firefighters dependence Fund Board Records Commission. And then there's home safe routes and tax incentive review. Nobody had made any recommendations that those should be chartered.

So back to environmental affairs and military. Those have been suggested for adding any input on or reactions to either of those from anyone.

I'm a big proponent of military and veteran

I would support I would as well.

It's just something that's always around. It's always gonna be around. I don't think it would apply to the sunset clause at any point. Just we need them.

Our discussion Against charge. Timeless sentence in nature. Something that you always like Like the the border zoning you're building gets always gonna need to do that. Mhmm. So that's where some made it, some didn't, and that's where in consideration of Do you charge it? Is it timeless, and is it a consistent significant need? Whatever the topic is, that's Yeah. The lens that we've talked about. I don't know if mister.

I would even add, is it integral to a public purpose or function that the city serves?

Very good. I think yeah. And I think military and veterans falls right into that.

Yeah. Absolutely. We're Yeah.

It's our responsibility based on what they've done for us us to make sure that we're doing what we need to do for them.

So they served our country, we can serve them.

Yeah. And

hopefully, you also have veterans. Yeah.

Okay. So we're looking at the question of potentially adding military and veteran commission to the charter, looking separating the issue of the Environmental Awareness Committee from the issue of environmental awareness, in whatever the combined park and tree or natural resources, whatever it would be called, how does everyone feel about integrating the issue and oversight and advocacy for environmental awareness into the, purpose and duties of that expanded merged combined board. Yes.

I think that would make sense.

Yes. So you're saying not charter the EAC, but their duties move it into the chartered?

That was my question. Yeah.

That's prob I that's what I my natural gut is just to go with that, take those duties and put them into the larger chartered. But, again, I need to know don't know the full scope of

it.

Add those duties and purposes into the charter, but within the context of an existing expanded commission. Right.

Yeah. So exactly to Skyler's point instead of just moving things under and still having different like, if those duties yes. Like, trying to consolidate as well as but make sure that that the EAC's duties don't get dropped. They just get rolled into something else that's chartered. I don't know if that makes if if that is even I mean, you

would everything they had and you just flipped it over, you would have a a bureaucratic savings of maybe less meetings, oversight, less meeting minutes. But if at the same time, to your point, mister King, if you looked at the responsibilities and said all of them are relevant, two of them are no longer relevant, your statement is high level and the charter is the charter is, then the park board will continue to evaluate that on a year to year basis. Yeah. We continue this event. We don't continue this event. We change the

I like about continuing the discussion on merging and then including the EAC. I mean, of our current elected city council members have proposed it in one way or another. Miss Kowalski wanted the EAC chartered, I believe. This doesn't exactly do that, but it it does give value to it at a at a different level. Mister Sutton wanted fewer. We're doing that. Mister Bengal wanted to combine. I sounds like we're meeting the needs or proposing to meet the needs of the people. I I like that. I think it's I I mean, I think we move forward absolutely with with the discussion.

Mister Staley, you you relayed that you heard a lot of this from a lot of people and seen a lot of suggestions, and I'm sure other council members have as well. Would it be safe to say that based on what you're seeing, not only your suggestions, but those from the other council members are Things that have come from the public as well, not just from them individually.

Yes. From the public, it's less from a a personal burden. Right? Like, when we talk about it, how do we manage all these things we're doing and do good things with our time as opposed to just paragraph things. But you do get that question a lot about the efficiency of the. Mhmm. It's confusing. Where do I go? They seem redundant, so to speak. Like, there's three bodies that do the same thing. Bodies are not always fully informed, but that just goes to the complexity of the the public. Like, here's three things that touch the environment. Like Which one? Which website? Do I go to? I can't find it. Okay.

And then so we've already talked about combining two or three into one, adding duties adding duties to that potentially combined adding one, which would be military and veterans. I'm assuming based on the discussion, there's not really anything to remove if we're addressing the combination of and the consolidation because I don't see if we consolidated the three that two or three that we talked about, all of the other four of the seven that are in the charter, I can't see a reason So or way to moving on and then we would have the sunset. Discuss. Okay.

May I

ask quick question?

Yeah. When what was the most recently like, what was the most recent board that was set up and how long ago was that?

Military veterans.

It was at

In the chartered or

No. Just at from this list, like Okay.

Not chartered. About two years ago. It was around the same time that we consolidated the tax.

Okay. Okay. Thank you.

How long has the environmental awareness been in existence? 2,000, did you say?

Is that on the chart?

Doesn't say Oh, accounting.

I could probably look it up on Formed.

Okay. Well, I think we have at least the beginnings of a road map to for further discussion.

Can I ask a question that Yep? May rapidly drain our time? Mhmm. Where did we land last session on the terms? Term limits.

It was I know we

had a lot of great discussion. I just I don't recall

where we landed as a group. But it

talking about

council term limits or just the board and commission?

The board and commission term limits.

For the in the in the big chart, bottom of page four. My 48. That was a new section that a new line that I added after the meeting because that was the first board section we discussed other than personnel. Okay. And we talked about removing of consecutive before full. Okay.

Mhmm.

And then adding language regarding service on this board should be for no more than the lesser of twelve years or three full circle.

Yeah. Okay. So that was a So it's like I could serve twelve years on board a. I can go serve twelve years on board b. Right? For those people who want to generate generate contribute

Okay. Plenty of opportunity.

Plenty of opportunity. Okay. So it's more we Limit of twelve years per Period. Right. And whether

it was an

unexpired term or too full and too half. That's true between whether using lesser or or the greater. Right. Right. Okay. Okay. Thank you. That wasn't so bad.

Alright. We won't know for sure till we actually see it. Right. But that was the idea that we discussed. Alright. Thank you. Yep. Let me just make sure. You still have the preamble to discuss? We haven't touched three, which goes on for pages.

We haven't touched four. If you go on to page three, we've already discussed line six. I put this in line six because it was one of, this is line 30, section six point o one. This is councilwoman gets us suggestion regarding the income tax rate and the credit. She suggested it at the meeting, and she she provided the written follow-up.

This was just in today's version. So if you don't have today's version printed out, that's that's what she suggested. When we haven't we discussed the section before she provided the suggestion. My view on this is that the charter provides, that any income tax has to be voted on by the people, and any credit has to be provided is that's up to counsel to provide. And I didn't see where this was something that it needed to be in the charter. I thought that if or is there a mandatory a 100% credit for income tax in the charter. That's something council decides on. Correct? Correct.

Is this different from RETA?

RETA is just the way that the city's authorized income taxes are collected. Right. Yeah. But this was a suggestion that the city raise its income tax to 2.25% and then provide a point 25% credit for anybody who lives and works in Hudson. In other words, to incentivize you to live and work here so the city can collect more income tax from you. And whether that's a valid or invalid suggestion is a side issue. To me, that is not a charter question. That's something that could be that's a counsel. It's a policy

it's a policy question as opposed to a a governance question, like charter charter's governance. And Right. It doesn't have to be. I mean, we have when we look at the higher constitution, they put all kinds of crazy things in there. But at its root, I don't think that the charter should be governance.

So the structure. There's two things that were requested. One, to raise the income tax by a quarter percent and two, to provide a credit. The charter already provides a means to raise the income tax, and that means that's done by sending it to the voters. And, council already has the authority to grant a credit, and so the charter doesn't need to do that. So my suggestion for this suggestion would be that we put in that we've discussed it and and there's no changes. I agree. Agree. Okay. I have to say it can't be done, but it's not really something for the charter. Yep.

Okay.

Let's see what else we missed. Line 40. That was the one of the new ones for tonight. That was it's under section seven point o three for elections. That was for the suggestion regarding ranked choice voting. That was a larger issue. I thought we were gonna address that issue of rank choice voting when we get to article three since it relates to the council members and the the article three zero four, we get the mayor and the council. So no discussion on that tonight. And article oh, I didn't Eight zero three,

I mean, we we discussed that already.

Yeah. It was just added today, so I will add that we I will note that we discussed it on the second and no changes As we suggest that's line 41, the suggestion to have an elected solicitor. We elected to make no

I know we've just discussed this, but I just have to editorialize Macedonia does not have an elected law director. She said that they do. They do not. Okay. Thank you. Alright. Thank you.

All the 8.4 suggestions, I will note that we discussed them all. They're all relate to the same thing, I think. And on I think that's

that's it. We're we're caught up.

Yeah. Well, I think that was a good use of the additional time that we had. Appreciate everybody's time on that. We have come to section eight on the agenda. This is the second opportunity for public comment. Would anyone have any anyone from public have any comments for the commission? And now we move on to section nine on the agenda. It's action items. Next meeting. Our next meeting is on 05/07/2025 at 7PM. That's three weeks from tonight, and I will entertain a moment. I

will also not. I'll be out of town retrieving a child. So no.

Anything else that we know of? Okay. I'll entertain a motion to adjourn.

I move that we adjourn the meeting.

I'll second.

By Ms. Griffith, second by Mr. Trainer. All those in favor, please say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 08:50PM.