City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening. Before we get started tonight, um, State Representative Ryan Lamped would like to make a presentation. So, I'll ask him to come forward.

Well, thank you, Mayor. Um I would like to um present a special congratulations to the Beaver Creek Police Department Regional Emergency Response Team. They are unit of the year as voted by the Miami Valley Crimes Stoppers. These are comprised of officers, medics from Beaver Creek, Huber Heights, and Fairborn. been credited for executing multiple high-risk search warrants, responding to critical incidents, and safely resolving volatile situations, and apprehending dangerous offenders. So, on behalf of the Ohio House of Representatives, myself and Speaker Matt Huffman, officers, I believe you're Are you with the right on up here?

I'd like to present this to you and thank you for your service to our community and our region. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Well,

good evening. I'd like to call the meeting to order. Could I have a roll call, please? Council member Curran here. Council member Derer here. Council member Bills here. Council member literal here. Council member Boss here. Vice Mayor Upton here. Mayor Adams here. I'll now turn it over to council member L. Thank you, Mayor. Um, we have a representative here tonight from the Boy Scouts. Oliver, if you'd lead us, begin us with the pledge. To the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Everybody could please continue standing for a moment. I'd like to take a moment of prayer. Heavenly Father, as we gather today, we ask for your guidance and wisdom in our decisions. May we listen attentively to one another with open hearts and minds. Make decisions that reflect your will. Bless our time together and help us work collaboratively for the greater good. Amen. May be seated.

Thank you. Uh, we have an agenda before this any that's what it says.

I'm sorry. It's a miscommunication here. Like to turn it over to Miss McHugh for just a minute.

I was I was asked by M. Landram um because the issue came up but it was the February 9th the last regular meeting where the vote and there was some discussion toward the end and I've made some notes of it. It was at um 1 hour and 1 hour and 36 minutes. Uh so it's approximating that time. It went on a little bit before that, but that's when really there was some discussion going back and forth and um it was really all related to um uh seven brew uh condition 18 and the vote and there was some discussion about what it it was it was frankly got a little confusing. Um so I think procedurally at the time and Mr. the vice mayor asked question, but I think there was either either there was a motion to amend the pending motion. So, I mean, it fell into a couple categories or motion to amend an amendment of a pending motion or certainly at at least it was a motion to amend and and reconsider the main motion. The first two are subsidiary motions. The latter is a main motion. But the point is that all related to condition number 18 and um the first one motion to amend a pending motion um is is uh amendable and and the second one is not. There's also a question about if they're debatable, but I think both in all cases they were they really were debatable and probably should have been some further discussion at that point. So you know in the key in all of these is that all of these are

subject to reconsideration. So, and I think at the at the end of the discussion there, it appears that while there was discussion going back and forth between the vice mayor and and Miss Lansbury, law director and and I've talked to Mansbury, he acknowledges that it got confusing, but really I think what at the bottom line was there was a request to being made to what effectively would have been a motion to reconsider. That being said, tonight being the next meeting, that council still has that opportunity to reconsider what was approved on the 9th. Okay. Procedurally though, in order to do that, I just want to lay it out here. Um, if if there is, there has to be, you know, a motion to reconsider has to be made by someone on the prevailing side. So that's one of the four then it had then it must be seconded because it requires second. Um so but at that point any member of council can second that procedure that's under Robert's rules. This all Robert's rules and this is a process that this is not the first time council's ever done this. You know having served as law director for many many years council did it a number of times. So this is I mean it's not frequent but to say this is original it is not. Um then um at that point it is debatable so there can be further discussion. If it is adopted, pass that motion for reconsideration, then at that point council can reconsider, which then throws open the resolution and any well, not resolution, I'm sorry, motion because this was a motion made. Then that is allowed to be, you know, ultimately council will then have to

decide how they want to vote on that um tonight, but there can be discussion back forth. But the first one is there has to be a motion if council you know if there's going to be any further discussions of it has to be a a motion made by one of the four second it vote then again debatable but then a vote and a majority says let's reconsider this then we go back into the the main discussion of the of the process and at that point if condition 18 is an issue you know which if it gets that point I I have some thoughts on that, too. Um, but you know, first you got to get there. Right now, we're not there. So, anyway, Mr. Mayor, if I could add a couple comments. Um, you know, based off of what Mr. McHugh just said and and I think some of the emails uh that Mr. Lawnsbury shared with us. It might behoove us to to reconsider or reconsider is the wrong word here. Uh to potentially reopen the uh the case uh for a motion. I don't know that any of our intentions were incorrect or wrong. it was procedural that we were um not given bad advice on, but we weren't given uh the appropriate uh guidance on how to uh proceed with the Roberts rules. So, I think just out of respect of the process, we should probably reopen it uh played out as it should and then uh consider any changes from that point. And this motion has to come from one of the

Is it um Yes. Is it an agenda item? Are we amending the agenda? No, because it was this is a procedural issue that really Yeah, it's a cargo from last time. So, didn't want to put on the agenda because we can't really it's not an agenda item till there's a motion at that point. Your honor, I'd move to reconsider. I'll second. All right. I have a motion and a second to reconsider. Um, let's do a roll call.

Now, there's debate. You want to do a debate now or you can debate the the reconsideration, right? This is new territory for me to say. It is debatable. Yeah, it is debatable. The motion itself having been second is debatable. Then the vote. Okay, that's the process, mayor. Okay, then there's debate at this point.

Who wants to go first? So I would be interested to know the um rationale for reconsidering other than the fact that our law director may have given some inappropriate guidance. I would think that's the reason enough right if we didn't follow the proper procedure even at with the wrong advice we should go back and correct it not a lot of debate here so I guess I'll call the motion call the role Let's Let's verify what we're doing here. We're

We're The motion has been made and seconded to reopen. Correct. Reconsider. Yeah. Yes. Which is this is to reopen the seven. Yeah. Reconsider. Yes. Certainly. Reconsider. Council member Kern. Yes. Council member Derer. No. Council member Bills. Yes. Council member Bales. No. Vice Mayor Upton. Yes. Council member Lero. No. Mayor Adams. Yes. What was it? Four to three.

Four to three. Okay. So, we are reconsidering. Now, this is all new territory for me. So, I'm going to ask back open for discussion. Really the again minute one one hour and 36 was really at the point of uh vice mayor was having discussion as to what wanted to have further discussion. So that would at this point mayor I mean you're you're meeting but seems vice mayor if you have reasons it might be a good time to

well I think what what threw us off on a on a a side path or where we didn't want to go down was um you know after the motion was made u with the conditions was it 19 total conditions 18 total

there were 19 total conditions That's right. And there was one that the applicant had some concerns about in number 18. And once the motion was made um and seconded, the applicant informed us that if we were to move forward with it as stated, they had uh further concerns. Um and I think that gave all of us reason to to think about it, right? And I know it did for me. Uh because I do value the applicant's time. Um I think seven brew would be a good fit for that lot. Um so uh um where am I going with that? So you know once the applicant brought that forward I think that gave us a moment to say should we move forward with this but because the motion had already been made and seconded we had to move forward as stated. That's why we got where we are. Um so that being said um you know do we want to have further discussion around uh was it um amendment 18? Yeah I got it here. Yeah, amendment 18 which was the applicant's concern specifically the last question the last sentence which states including the suspension revocation of the certificate of the use of compliance. I don't know if there's if it's worth having further discussion, but because we are where we are through procedure, we're here.

I I just to add that um the applicant provided and I'm I made copies of the council would like um what you know, Mr. Swansonberry and I had a discussion with the applicant and not wanting to rewrite the the wording. Um, they provided what they're looking what they have concerns with and I I'm glad to pass that out. Vice Vice Mayor, I I would just in my recollection of the way it went down was we had uh it was moved forward and then it was seconded and we right before we did the vote, that's when the representative for Seven Brew spoke out and said, "Wait, wait, wait. Are you including 18? Because if you do, we're not doing it."

That's the way I remember it. And that's what caused us to all of a sudden back up. I just want to reme remind everybody that that is the the direction. It wasn't it was a it was an after thing. It wasn't a So there was there was some confusing there.

Yeah. Now I would I would agree. We did not approve it before he the applicant brought those further concerns up. It was that moment between be had between the motion being made and the vote happening. Right. But back to Robert's rules because the motion had been made and seconded we needed to proceed with a vote. I asked the question for clarification. how would we go about amending based off what we just heard? And we weren't given the accurate advice at that moment. Um so that that's what's brought this kind of full circle here. Bringing it back to now we're reconsidering um to to better fulfill the process um procedures and now we're reconsidering it for for discussion. You know, do we want to reconsider 18 or any other motion or parts of the 19 amendments.

I just wanted to because the way I remembered we were all case was closed. We were voting and then the the applicant brought something else up and then it caused turmoil. So, I want to get that out in front of everybody and understand that that was how it happened. We had all kind of affirmed that that was what we were doing. We were we we motioned it forward and we seconded it based on what was in there. I still stand pretty firm on my decision.

Mr. McHugh, can you go through the process of revocation? What does it look like? How does it happen? Because the uh applicant made the assertion that if and he mentioned council member Bales by name. If he's unhappy with something, he reports it, it's revoked, and very quickly shut down. What's what's the process? What does it actually look like in real life? Well, if there is an ongoing issue.

Yeah, I think that I think that's the problem is the way the wording is. And you know, right here. Yeah. Sorry. Let me get out. But the problem is and what the what the what really comes down to and I like I say, I've got copies here. So sounds like I think council may already have some but

yeah but this actually came from the applicant of what what they actually struck out and it's the it's the wording including uh the suspension slashrevocation of the certificate of use compliance. The fact is is that you can't do it by yourself. I mean, if you do it by yourself, you're going to have a unconstitutional taking and you're going to they're going to get a TTRO and you're going to be they're going to be open the next moment and then you'll have a damage claim, too. So, what the top of this and again falling on, you know, look reading this as a lawyer, what this is saying is we have the following rights. You still got to enforce the rights. So removing those words, in my opinion, you're you you're not gaining anything. You're not losing anything because you're saying it's the property owner and business operator's responsibility for actively managing vehicle stacking including but living to any failure within I'm paraphrasing within public right how constit violation of this approval may result in enforcement action by the city. Period. That's your right. You're saying it's it's almost kind of simplification, but if you know if I want to go to church on Sunday, I don't have to say I'm going to church because I have a constitutional right on the United States Constitution. It's assumed. We we know that, right? It's a right. Same thing as I'm going to go in a march have a first amendment right to do that. You have a right to do that. And I think the concern of the applicant is that it makes it look like you're just going to unilaterally take action which you can't. So the applicant I think that's that's where it's unfortunate but a motion for reconsideration you know could have been

done that on the 9th and probably some further discussion of the wording here. The applicant haven't ra raised and I think Mr. on where he probably would have chimed in too and further discussion and maybe there might have been a change. So I think that's really the question about tonight is um it's appropriate if there's going to it's been made second it there's discussion now if it's voted on then you know there can be more discussion if there if and if if it's revised this wording is struck I mean that's fine but I would but tonight again even if there's motion for reconsider you know once this issue is discussed let's say um council I would expect would read the motion and reapprove it but you know might be reapproved with some amendment to it that or it could be reapproved with no amendment to it that's council's right all this is a process to get to that point at this point which unfortunately again going back and looking at the the tape I don't the minutes aren't prepared so I can't put it but you look at It's clear there's a discussion going on and uh vice mayor is asking a question but I think is thinking one thing and vice mayor's asking another question and it didn't click but in the heat of a meeting Robert's rules gets a little confusing. So

would that answer your question? Can you add a little more detail? I mean so you in terms of revocation I none of us can do it unilaterally. So how does it happen? The city would need to file an enforcement action.

Okay. And just as a city would file a public nuisance action against something else the city I mean there's other short of filing revocation there's also and and I discussed this with the applicant said look I mean and I made it clear to him I said you know if the problem is you're going to have cars out on the city street those customers are going to be subject to getting a ticket they probably ought to be ticketed you you know, and the business is not going to like that. But the fact is is, you know, this all comes about as I understand because there's been problems prior. It's it seems like something that can be managed, but if it's not managed, then yeah, you're saying this is a if this occurs, we can it's a failure of it's a condition here and we're going to enforce it. But in reality, whose responsibility is it to manage it?

Them. Theirs.

When the cars go onto the public street? I mean, let's speak practically. I'm not going to ask our police department to start writing tickets for people getting coffee, but I want our public to be safe. So, there's a there's just an issue with that. And and the penalty in my opinion isn't on the driver looking to get coffee. It's on the fact that the applicant and our city council hasn't allowed the space to be utilized well enough to get people through the drive-thru quick enough. it

I I'm just talking practically speaking and it's super evident at their existing location albeit a service road it's still traversed by the public all the time. So that's my biggest heartburn with this. And maybe the last half of the sentence, the last half of the sentence, in my opinion, was never meant to be a knee-jerk reaction. It was meant to really reinforce their commitment to managing the traffic because it's not being managed at all at their existing location even after I brought it up three, four years ago when we first talked about it. And then we asked them months ago at the first time they brought seven brew up to go back to the drawing board, bring us some solutions and they still didn't. So th that's my frustration with it. You know, whether and again I don't expect it to be a knee-jerk reaction. It's just I feel like they need to have an understanding that traffic on the street is not acceptable. And so maybe they need to redo their site plan or something or figure out a way when the traffic gets back to Germany Lane, they wave cars away. I don't know. They gave us nothing. And I feel like if we approve it, it will be treated just like the existing Seven Brew. And what do we do? Start ticketing people getting coffee? It's just in reality, practicality,

that's not what I want. I want the business to survive. I want our citizens to, you know, enjoy it, but it's just not practical without a little bit of teeth here. And they're buying and they have given us nothing in my opinion. Have we ever used this particular sentence before? my knowledge for anyone like I'm I I cannot say yeah I mean I like I like everything down to the including

well I mean does it whether the sentence that part of the sentence is in there or not what does it deprive the city from doing nothing. I mean, we're I

mean, with it or without it, you got the same rights. I think that's what I was trying to say is that all the rights you have, it's like free speech. All the rights you have are what the rights you have whether you say it or not. The city has all the rights. I do think it's I do like the fact that it says um shall constitute a violation of this approval. That's excellent. That's excellent because if there is a violation, you know, and it's not going to be, you know, one time, but if it's an ongoing violation, yeah, I think it gives you you've said that it's not it's not something that they can say, "Oh, we weren't aware of it." Oh, we didn't even know. No, it's in the approval. That's why I like that. And then and like I say, I think my understanding, you know, from is that uh I think they don't I'm not going to say they like this at all. They don't want any word, but I think this is without those wording somehow in their mind they could they could go forward. I'm I don't know. And they never said this, but I'm not I don't know whether it'll go forward or not. So, I don't know. That's

one question, Mr. Matthew. Um, can you tell me what is the the limitations in the very last sentence? If we struck the very end of that, the ending where it states enforcement action by the what is what what would be our enforcement action? What actions is it that we could take? Enforcement action. Enforcement of action. that that's really the only thing there that says because without the def it's kind of like the last part of that sentence is a definition of what the enforcement is is all all that is. So are we capable of still doing the struck out items with the word enforcement?

Yeah. Yes. Because it says it is that violation shall constitute a violation of this approval. So it is a specific condition that stacking on the public street is a violation of this approval. So why the heartache for the last sentence? because I think the perception I think their perception and again I don't have anything really that formal other than a discussion but I think their perception is is that we're that this the city is going to unilaterally do this which the city can't I mean we cannot unilaterally

Is there anything in that sentence that says we could unilaterally do that? No, I think it's their perception. I think it is, but um they you know this is I think it it I don't know what you're really gaining by keeping that in there. What What is the applicant gaining by removing it? Peace of mind. How they feel better about the wording that's out there?

But if it doesn't make a difference if we remove it like Mr. McHugh just said, "With it in or with it out, the city's rights do not change. With it in or with it out, that's what I heard him say. The applicant's rights do not change. I mean, is that a fair statement?"

Well, I think without with it out, the city's enforcement actions are still the city's enforcement actions. the applicant's responsibility not to provide stacking because the last little phrase doesn't address stacking. It's still in there and they still are under an obligation to have no stacking.

Yeah. My question was you you stated with it in or with it out the city's city's rights do not change and I I would contend that with it in or with it out the applicant's rights or expectations do not change and I mean the peace of mind shouldn't play into that because as he said in his first statement we would get a temporary restraining order if we had a knee-jerk reaction on the first time and we just withdrew their certificate of use which is not my intent. We have to build a case. We have to give them due warnings and whatever it might be. The process maybe that's what you were speaking. What's the process of enforcement? Um because

you have a question for that because what I my my question is you know I feel like the applicant is strongarmming us into taking it out because that's what they want when it doesn't matter if it's in or out e for the city or the applicant. If we have to follow a process, which I would definitely do,

I agree with everything everyone's saying up here. Um, regardless if it's in or out, we would have the same rights. We would follow the same process with enforcement. If there was an issue with stacking out on the street, the first line of defense or the first action we would take would be sending a letter to the uh owners saying you were in violation of the PED, you need to get this corrected. And if it's not corrected within a reasonable time frame, couple weeks, we'd send a second loader of violation. And then um and then if it's not corrected, we would look to the the same way we do with private any other private property, we take it to the courts as a criminal violation. And one of the things the courts could do is uh um well they issue fines but we could um after a certain number of um cases I guess could be taken homeowners multiple times for property maintenance issues and this and the fine and the penalty gets steeper and steeper and one of those could be the uh the re rev revocation of their certificate of use compliance.

Could be a civil action too or we could take it to civil courts. That's more what I was thinking slower. But yeah,

the ultimate end would still be there. We just in from the planning department perspective that would be as I've stated the nuclear option that we we avoid going to be u we want to see the businesses do well and but we want to see them do well within the confines of the approval that being that they keep the cars with within the confines of the property. So, as we do with everyone, we would work with them to try to do uh encourage them strenuously to to fall within the guidelines of the approval and then take it to the next step would be the courts if they don't.

Do you have any insight into why planning commission put that last line in the condition? I want to say that I did. You did it. Yeah. Um, knowing the the mentality of the knowing the displeasure of the stacking of the current um site and the and the multiple warnings when we were going through the zoning process. If that service road were a public roadway, would you be going through the um notification to seven brew? Now,

if the existing one, yes, they they would the the police department would be issuing tickets for blocking a right away,

our citizens. And I I think as as what happened at Dunkin Donuts several years ago, instead of the first step wouldn't be and I I don't want to speak for the police, but um would be warnings. And after you give enough warnings and people stop, they realize we're well, we can't stop her. We we'll move on. So it's their behavior was changed based on the warnings rather than specific tickets. Um and I imagine that would be their first their first action would be to warn the the drivers. Hey, you need to move on. move on now. You could get a ticket, but you need to move on now. And then eventually the the behavior would be changed so that they wouldn't be blocking and stopping. I mean, I mean, just like people aren't stopping nearly as often. Every once in a while, you might see a car too on North Fairfield from Dunkin Donuts, but it's not like it was back in 2004. They expanded a parking lot a bit a little bit, too. But, um, you don't see that as you did four or five years ago. I can tell you council after the last meeting I got several text messages thanking me and I also received a text message with two videos. I think council member Derer may have been on that text message as well with the cars stacked all the way up along the service road and all the way back to North Fairfield Road at the existing one thanking me for sticking to my guns. So, while I understand legally it doesn't amount to a hill of beans, it makes me feel better about it. And I think that it's good that we have a process. And if Randy just said that we would start issuing tickets to our residents or to the the people who are waiting on the street, that doesn't put any fuel to the

feet to the fire of Seven Brew at all. except for it might discourage some people to go there. But if I may, we would not that would not be the first step to do that. As he said, we would warn at Duncan was as bad as Duncan was at the time. We never issued one to my knowledge and more or less I was directing the chief when to warnings and if we were going to go with actual tickets to to begin something to give fair warning. Uh but it never got to that. We were luckily able to satisfy that before it got to that point.

So, I'll reiterate what I said in October and on the 9th of February that I really like Seven Brew. I was actually there yesterday. Uh, it did back up a little bit, but in general, the stacking worked pretty well, but it did back up for a time. Um, but I see this as a mechanism to send seven brew a message. to say that uh something needs to be fixed. Uh there was no change between the October and February meetings. Uh virtually every other company in Beaver Creek that's had this type of issue has gone above and beyond to try and solve the issue. There's been very little that's happened in this case. Uh and so I I like this as a mechanism to have some teeth to say something to Seven Brew about it. Again, as as someone that has typically goes quite often and thoroughly enjoys the brand, um I would like to see some change and this gives me some ability to do so. Uh even if um as Mr. McHugh said, there's very little difference. um the fact that the applicant is um you wants it out tells me something even though legally there seems to be no difference. Um that's a key factor for me. So I'll simply leave that as a statement. And procedurally, yeah, I believe I won. Procedurally, and the applicant hasn't said they're going to do this, but just so council's aware of the next step first, we got this motion pending, so that needs to be voted on. But in theory, if if that if at the end of the day, the approval was the approval, um, you know, they they will have a right under 256 256 of their highrise code to file an appeal. So, I would I mean, I'm not

saying they're going to do that, but that that is if I was in their shoes, I would do that because Can I ask for clarification on that? They're going to ask for an appeal on our approval. Oh, yeah. They have that right. Yeah. They didn't like they filed back move forward from planning. Yeah. Yeah. But would it be appealed to us or be appealed to planning?

Common police court. I mean they have legal rights to go common police court with the approval. Yeah, that's what you know that's the legal system. You got to love it. It'd be a unique case if they appealed an approval. Mhm.

But um without furthering the dialogue much further because I think we're we're at that point, right? I guess the one thing I've heard on this discussion um you know is that this was something that was unique uniquely added to this applicant and I have a little concern on that. Um I I know that we as a body have a reserve that right where we can do uh unique um amendments or what am I thinking of not motions um conditions conditions

you know we can add unique conditions um two two items but uh this is this is a unique one uh which causes a little concern for me uh just in how we can enforce it uniformly. I guess I have a couple of issues. I mean, I I either way we can enforce what we have to do regardless. Uh it's not the only company in the in the city where this happens. It is not. I mean, we had Duncan, we had uh Chick-fil-A, it happens at the school. I got stuck at Fairbrook school this morning for 15 minutes for people going in. if we are going to fix the stacking there too, you know, it's just people dropping their kids off and I was backed all the way up to Indian Ripple, you know, and it's that it took about 15 minutes to get through it. And at the high school, you know, I brought this up before. I I I think that they they should control what's happening on in their property. There's no question it's it's our responsibility to control what happens outside that. if it comes to the police issuing warnings and tickets and it comes to that um and I'm I think that the applicant would probably understand that hopefully if that came to that that we have to do something more or whatever maybe not offer as many u specials you know that big special they had to get everybody in there. So, um, but I I just I just have a problem with putting this in here since it's the first time we've ever put it in there and it really doesn't uh I don't know what it really what it gains us to be perfectly honest because we have to follow the same procedure and I know I've been involved with things with Randy uh with homeowners on different things and these these processes regardless of whether that's there or not, they're going to

take forever. Yeah, they really do. And uh that because of the courts involved, as he said, you got to love it, but you don't have to love it. But that's kind of where I am. So anymore, so I'm I'm a little confused at the next step. That's my question. Um, you know, I am inclined to make a motion, but I I I'm inclined to make a motion upholding our decision from last What's the What's the word I use here?

Well, right now though, you have a motion consideration. I thought we already we passed that. We passed on that.

We passed 43. know at this point if there's a if there is no motion made and seconded to do anything right if your motion is I mean you don't need to make a motion because your motion was I want it as is right unless unless someone wants to make a motion to modify something it is what it is as is it was approved on the 9th and Robert and the city process has always at that meeting appropriate and at the very next meeting that is a regular meeting where you vote you couldn't vote at a board session it's appropriate then at that point not done

believe you would need a motion to end the debate right to close conversation and move forward close conversation but that effectively means there's nothing further happening right yeah if there going to be a motion change anything on the 9th. Now is the time to make it, second, debate it, and then vote on it. Mr. McHugh, for um clarification, I will go ahead and make a motion and we can vote on it and move forward in our agenda for the evening. I move for the purpose of taking administrative action approval to amend first.

Oh, we have the motion to amend first. Excuse me. Then if you amend it and that's approved, then do a motion to approve. Okay. I make a motion to amend uh PUD2-3 condition 18 by effectively striking out the last uh half of the sentence as presented on screen. I have a motion to have a second. Second. Okay, I have a motion and a second. You want to do discussion again or you want to just vote?

Be sure this is I know that's where we got confused last time, right? Okay. It's council's call. You can debate if you wish, but vote on two. All right. Is there any more debate on on this? I think we all said pretty much said what we need to say. So, all right. I have a motion and a second on the floor. Uh, roll call, please. Vice Mayor Upton, yes. Council member Bills, yes. Council member Der, no. Council member Literal, no. Council member Bales, no. Council member Curran, yes. Mayor Adams,

yes. So, okay. So, I believe at this point, Mr. McHugh, we need a motion uh for purpose of administrative action. Is that correct? Yes. With the amendment to with the amended conditions.

Yes. I move for purpose of taking administrative action approval of PUB25-3 uh specific site plan number 17 Brew on the basis that city council finds the facts submitted with the application and accompanying materials satisfy the standards and criteria set forth in section 158.0066 approval procedures for specific site plans of the Beaver Beaver Creek zoning code. I further move that this motion with with the following 19 amendments and 18 as amended be fully recorded in the minutes of of this council meeting.

Second. Second. I have a motion and a second. A roll call, please. Vice Mayor Upton, yes. Council member Kern, yes. Council member Bills, yes. Council member Bails, no. Council member literal. No. Council member Derer. No. Mayor Adams. Yes. Okay. Okay. Now we have an agenda before us. Uh any changes, corrections, updates to the agenda? Move we approve the agenda, your honor. Second. Have a motion and a second to approve the agenda. All those in favor signify by saying I.

I. I. opposed. We have a set of minutes before us from February 2nd, 2026 regular meeting. Any changes, corrections, additions? Motion to approve the minutes from February 2nd. Second. I have a motion and a second to approve the minutes from February 2nd. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I.

Opposed. Mr. Graham. Thank you. Good evening. Um, first I apologize to council. You guys are probably tired of hearing from me, but uh we'll go over some of the financial information. So obviously we've had two work sessions uh one on uh January 20th, one on February 17th where we have reviewed future financial data, kind of where we are now, what we expect in the future. um looked at some of our uh uh proposed legislative changes um and um based on those work sessions and and based on those work sessions, we're presenting two uh initiatives here today or two scenarios. Um first real quick we'll review some of the legislative uh changes that directly impact the the city. Um there were really only two that have a direct impact. Uh one is uh caps the um growth of revenue on our inside millillage uh to an index. So historically if your property value went up 20% your revenue from that inside millillage went up 20%. Also um this will now be capped uh under state law to the gross domestic product deflator index. Um so uh the other issue is that the county budget commission um will have now have clear statutory authority um to reduce property tax rates when there is no need shown for that levy in the budget. Um so there was some debate on whether um that was something uh that budget

commission had authority to do throughout the state. Um obviously the the biggest item that we're looking at is the uh proposed constitutional amendment that would eliminate property taxes. So looking at the sources of revenue that the city has um you can see 64% of our uh revenue comes from property taxes. Those property tax dollars allow us to apply for and receive grants. Um uh for the 2026 budget year was $4 million. Um when you combine those two, that's 72% of our total revenue. The other thing to consider is this is our citywide operating revenue. But if if you consider that 80 86% of our revenue is restricted. It can only be used for the specific purpose. So if you consider that's 93% of our property tax revenue, 100% of our grant revenue, and 71% of our intergovernmental revenue. This does is this reduces our flexibility. If the police station had to have a major overhaul or something, there are only two places we could get the funding for doing that. The general fund and the police levy fund. So you know that that doesn't necessarily give us the greatest flexibility. Other thing too, it's important to remember we talked about the limitations on inside millillage. Inside millage makes up 9% of our total millage. That means only 9% of our revenue from property taxes grow because of reappraisal changes. And the other thing to remember is reappraisal changes only occur every three years. It's not an annual thing that people are looking at. every three years you would be subject to getting that bump uh in revenue if values went up. If values went down, the converse is also true. If your values went down 20%, your revenue on those

that village would go down 20%. But now there is a cap on the amount of growth. There's no cap on the decrease though. Um voted levies make up 91% of our property taxes. These are the leveies that grow 1 to 2% per year as a result of new construction. Obviously, one to two% growth does not keep up with the inflationary factors, which is why we have levy cycles. So, the vast majority of the city's levies um do not grow as we just stated except for from new construction. So what the city does is we project out what will we need in the next five years to operate the police, the streets or the parks. And based on those projections, we calculate how much we need in revenue to offset those expenditure increases. Because you know, we're a service organization. Our primary expenditures are uh people and and salaries increase, insurance costs increase and these are all things that we have to build into these models to determine how much money we need and to determine what levy is going to be required in order to provide those services. In the city's case, we generally rely on a five-year levy cycle. So over those next five years. So if you look at this slide, this shows you where we are with our current levy cycles. Um obviously parks is in year seven of its levy cycle and as a result has had to make significant cuts uh eliminating nearly all the capital and uh and reducing some services. Um street capital really doesn't play a major role. It's never been considered a levy fund. That's where we do purely capital projects out of. But you can see it's in year 12. But if you look at both police

and streets in the next two to three years, we will be looking at needing them approaching the end of their levy cycle and seeking additional levies um to get us through that next five years of that cycle. This is just an example of what a levy cycle looks like. You can see our revenues remain relatively consistent represented by the green line. Um the the red line represents our expenditures which due to inflation tend to grow over time and the most telling sign is the blue line which is our cash balance. You can see as you get towards the end of your levy cycle that cash balance decreases and as you get past that uh end of the levy cycle the the decrease becomes more dramatic. So, in projecting what our future needs are, um parks obviously um is in year seven. It's had to uh withstand cuts um in order to restore the cuts that have been made um and retain the existing level of service with those cuts added back in. You know, not saying new staff members or anything, just hey, we're going to start funding our capital and getting uh our operations there. I guess there would be some staff increases just based on getting our service level back up. It would take a 0.55 mil levy. Um streets right now we're projecting that it would be a 1.05 mil levy that would retain existing levels of service. Um and that revenue would need to start in 2028. Police would be looking at a new levy that would start producing revenue in 2029. And we estimate that would be a 1.45 45 mil levy. So if we look at the dollar implications of that, you can see that we would be

looking at new millage over the next three to four years of $3.05 mills would generate an additional $6.3 million in revenue and cost the owner of $100,000 house $106.75 a year. Again, these would be levies um that they aren't on the books now. This is what we would be looking at in order to re retain our existing level of service going forward. So, council has had a long uh standing goal um to diversify uh revenue in order to provide long-term operational and economic stability and sustainability. Um, this has been displayed through a number of income tax initiatives. Uh, in the past, uh, there are only two primary ways the city can produce tax dollars. I I mean, you you have some one-off taxes, but the only way you generate real money is through either property taxes or income taxes. Um so the the um diversifying revenues uh would would provide the city residents with property tax relief. We would not necessarily be seeking additional levies in the future. We would and and one of the proposals you'll see we would actually reduce our existing levies. So why is diversifying revenue important? The benefits of revenue diversification are highlighted in the Miami University study that was conducted in 2025. That study is available on our website. I encourage people to read it. I am not going to outline what the Miami University uh has already presented to us. Um obviously one of the concerns we have is public sentiment regarding uh property taxes. We we've heard continually that property

taxes are too high and the increases that they that people have seen over the last 10 years are not sustainable. Um, this public sentiment has led to a number of legislative proposals, number of which were passed recently, but there are a number of other ones that are still out there and and even a new one that was added. Last week was the first time I I had seen it. So, you know, these are are things we're going to continue to see these issues or or legislation that will limit property taxes. And then of course you know the biggest issue continues to be the constitutional proposed constitutional amendment to eliminate all property taxes. So council's approach to a addressing diversification and the future needs of the city. So um you know done a number of presentations to city council outlining a number of different scenarios. Um, that's why you got to hear me uh two work sessions in a row because you challenged me to say, "Well, what about this? What about that?" Or you challenged us, I guess, not me. Um, so tonight we are going to focus on two primary scenarios. One is a 50% reduction in property taxes based on our existing property tax levies and a 1% income tax. Um, the other is a 2.9% income tax. um that would look at abolishing all of the city's property taxes and would likely also follow with the elimination of all property taxes in the state of Ohio if that constitutional amendment were passed which would mean the city would have to start providing basic services like fire and EMS which is currently provided by the township

through voted property tax levies. So, so this is literally that that scenario where it's this is the only thing we have as an income tax and the township does not have the ability to levy anything but a property tax. So, if property taxes are eliminated, it would be our responsibility to provide that service fire and EMS service to the residents. So, with any analysis there are a number of assumptions. Um the assumptions in this case property tax is assumed to grow about 1% per year. Um and the levies would be eliminated in tax year 26 which means 27 would be the last year of collection we would see from either the tax reduction that we're proposing or in the elimination of property taxes scenario. So, um, with regard to our income tax, um, the estimate was based on the Miami University study, uh, which estimated $ 19.6 million a year. We have adjusted that annually by 3% based on looking at other municipalities income tax growth in this area. Um the other important thing uh the the tax estimate provided by Miami University was validated by the regional income tax authority or REITA. Um and based on information we'd received from RITA. Uh in the first year of an income tax, you would probably collect about 60% of the projection. Year two, you would collect 85% and it would take you till year three before you started to approach though never quite reaching 100% collection. Then you can also see the expenditures. I I think we're conservatively budgeted at 5% increase per year for payroll

related expenditures and between two and 4% for non-payroll expenditures based on historical data. Um and also other incomes other revenue sources uh were based on historical data and assumed to re remain relatively constant. So the important part here is that we are working off estimates and projections. Um results may vary from this model. Unfortunately I I don't have a crystal ball or I don't believe anybody at the city does. Um so um council would continue to have flexibility. So if the income tax were to generate a lot more money, city council would still have the right to eliminate additional property taxes either on an annual basis or on a permanent basis. That is a power that remains with the city council and with the budget commission for that matter. Well, they can't eliminate them permanently. They can only do it annually. But um the other thing is there are a number of projects that are underfunded including our storm water uh maintenance. uh we right now are dedicating about half of the money that uh is needed in order to maintain our storm water uh system uh a year. So um and then always we have road and side path uh resurfacing projects which given the increase in cost for um resurfacing products asphalt. Thank you for for asphalt h has fallen behind. So you know I if there there are flexibilities if you have more revenue than what you actually need. Now if revenues come in less um council would have to look at possible uh cuts to the level of services and um you could

always seek additional tax dollars through a voted voted property or income tax le. So, let's look real quick at eliminating the 50% of the city property tax revenue and replacing it with a 1% income tax. Um, first thing we looked at were the levies uh to be eliminated. So, we tried to focus on those levies that do not qualify for the non-b businessiness or owner occupancy credit. So, a qualifying levy, a levy that does qualify for the state paying 12 and a half% of your liability on your behalf of the property owner is u a levy that was approved prior to 2013. So, in in this scenario, we would be looking at if we eliminate levies that don't qualify, the property owner bears 100% of the burden of those taxes. So we want to keep the ones where the state is paying 12 a.5% of the tax liability on behalf of the property owner. So this and and you'll kind of see the numbers here in a minute as to how that does make a difference. Um we also looked at older levies um that don't generate necessarily a lot of revenue for the city. Um, our goal was to eliminate 50% of our property tax levies. So, this is a list of the levies to be eliminated. You can see the first two levies are qualifying levies where the state is paying 12 a.5% of the tax liability on behalf of the property owner. Um, but if you look at the dollars that they generate, they're relatively small. Um all the other levies, these are leveies where the

property owner is uh paying 100% of that tax. Um if all of these levies were eliminated, this would reduce our property tax levies to pre203 levels or sorry not our property taxes, our property tax levies. The dollars of course have grown over that time, so I apologize. Let me clean that up real quick. So if we do a comparison, you know, right now uh we are generating about $30.7 million in estimated revenue. We would be under this proposal eliminating 15.2 million, giving us a reduced property tax revenue of 50%. Leaving us 15.5 million. The cost to the property owner though would actually re be reduced 52%. That's because council asked that we select levies that get getting rid of the levies where the property owner has to pay a h 100% of that levy. They don't qualify for those roll backs. So one of the important things that we always have to remember is how much of every dollar that a taxpayer spends comes to the city. So you can see that the city receives 19 cents of every dollar paid in property taxes from city residents. Now, one of the things we've heard historically is that we need a greater reduction. Well, when you only control 19 cents, I can't give away the county share of the money. I can't give away the school share of the money. We can only control that 19 cents. And again, our our goal is diversification, not elimination of property taxes to go to income tax. So, um, with that, eliminating 50% of them,

I I think is a a good step in that direction. So if you were to look at what that would look like to the resident in Beaver Creek, so this chart, the revenue from city residents is just that the county gets much more than $21 million from their levies. That's just the portion that comes from city of Zenia prop or city of city of Beaver Creek properties. Um so and you can see, you know, again, we we make up 19% of that revenue. Um the cost per $100,000 currently $4445. So if you were to look at the levy reductions though, we would see a 9.62% reduction in the revenue that's produced within Beaver Creek, which would save a little over 10% of an individual's tax bill in total, assuming there are no additional levies or everything else remains as it is now. So, in looking at the model for what the uh 50% property tax elimination and 1% income tax would look like um with the income tax, again, we're assuming the it would be implemented July 1st of 27, which is really the first realistic time that we would be able to get an income tax put in place. And it assumes the 3% revenue growth per year as well as those percentages I mentioned earlier. Year 1 60% year 2 85 it take us till 2030 before we hit 100% collection. So um the property tax uh uh reductions um you you can see the property taxes do consider that 1% increase. The property

tax reductions also are based on those 1% increases. And you can see that in 2027, we would have a surplus because we're collecting both the property and the income tax. But if you look at what happens in 28 and 29, we would have a deficit of $3.5 million before we ever got to that 100% collection rate. And even in 2030 when we estimate that we're going to be at a 100% collection, we have an $874,000 deficit. Um, so important things to remember. Again, they're all based on estimates. Um, but that's what we would project right now. Now, the other thing we need to consider is how would this how would we compare with other municipalities? So right now we have one of the highest by far one of the highest property tax rates for other cities. Didn't include Bellbrook because again Belb Brook really isn't comparable to the city of Bever Creek but um you can see the property tax rates and uh cost per $100,000 um for the cities listed here. Um now the benefit is we do have the lowest nobody can have a lower income tax rate than what we have currently. So getting more if we didn't have a provision.

So, you can see with the proposal, we would still have one of the higher property tax rates or or cost per $100,000, but we're much more competitive in that area with other cities. Um, but our income tax rate would continue to be significantly less than other municipalities in the area. Um, so now we'll jump into eliminating all property taxes and replacing them with an income tax. Again, I'll highlight this does not address diversification. This is taking all of your eggs out of one basket and putting them in another basket. And so, um, again, council got to review a number of scenarios of what this would look like. Um, and you know, if the constitutional amendment eliminating property taxes were to pass, this would be where I think we would be forced to go. Um this focus this analysis focused on continu continuation of existing service levels and again adding the fire and EMS services that we would be required to provide to our citizenry. So this analysis it follows the same line as the previous one. Um so I won't go through the assumptions again but uh in this case again you see 2027 last year of property tax revenue uh during the implementation uh we would have a $3.8 million deficit. Um but once the income tax would reach full collection um based on this analysis you would have a $936,000 u surplus. But again, when you're taking

on the fact that the township fire expenditures are in there, um it's we received the financial data from the township. They were happy to talk through us talk through them with us and and discuss them, but it's really hard to predict what those expenditures are going to be. Um you know, especially when you start talking about, okay, are we going to provide fire and EMS service to the township area? if we do, is there going to be a contract? If there's a contract, how are they going to pay for it? All of these issues. So, you know, we were fairly conservative in our numbers. Um, but uh you you'll find that uh fire engines and EMS units are not cheap and again they're they are also driven a lot by salaries and benefits. So real quick summary of the uh scenarios that we have presented. Um you can see right now we have uh property tax revenue of about well actually I shouldn't say right now this is in 2030 once the income tax would be fully built out. Uh we project that in 2030 we would have about $32 million of property tax revenue with that additional $6 million need that we discussed earlier. uh bringing our property tax revenues uh of about 38.7 million. The 1% income tax uh would generate 37.8. And of course, the 2.9% income tax would generate 62 million, which again, keep in mind, first of all, the township is in year eight of their 10-year levy cycle. So unlike us where we go fiveyear levy cycles, they have a 10-year levy cycle for their last police levy. It's in year eight, so it's getting towards the end of its life. And there are $22.4 million of expenditures that are not really

accounted for with when you compare that 62 million to the revenues that we either currently have or would have with the revised plan. So, real quick, some statistics to remember. Uh, Miami University study indicated 68% of the income tax revenue the city would receive would be paid by nonresidents, those working in the city but not residents of the city. According to the US Census Bureau on the map, only 12% of the employees in the city are residents of the city. Set another way, 88% of the those who come to the city of Beaver Creek to work are not residents here. So, who would pay the taxes? Property tax um they would be they're paid by everyone who owns property in the city. Period. Uh doesn't matter where they live, where they work, if they work, or what other taxes they might be subject to. you own property, you pay the tax. Um, with the income tax, uh, who would pay it? Um, those 12% of the city workforce who both live and work in the city. The 88% of the city workforce who live outside of the city benefit from the services the city provides without having to pay for those. And just real quick highlight my situation. I do not reside in the city. The city I live in has a 2.25% income tax. And this would not impact me in any way, shape, or form because the city I reside in has a 1.5% credit. That one all it would reside. The only impact it would have is the city I live in would receive less of

my money. Instead of getting the 2.25, they would get 1.25. um residents uh who work somewhere where there is not a municipal income tax. That would include right Patterson Air Force Base or if you work in a township area or the city of Belbrook because that's the only other municipality I can think of without an income tax. So um and then businesses who generate profit uh in the city and this would include rental properties. So, who would not pay a Beaver Creek city income tax? Uh, residents who work outside of the city and are subject to a municipal tax where they work, assuming that there's a 100% credit. Um, and assuming the city's rate is less than what is charged in that municipality. So, if you look at the 2.9% income tax rate, we would be higher than other municipalities. So, they would still be subject to a portion. We can't exempt anything. You know, if my situation 2.25, if if we have a 2.9, I'm sorry, that's my situation's backwards, isn't it? Sorry. Um, but you you get the the idea that that 65% difference. Somebody could have to pay that. But I'm going to tell you, if property taxes are eliminated, every city is going to be on the ballot to increase their income tax. Um it's just not feasible that they they they all rely on it property tax as well just not as heavily as the city of Beaver Creek. Um so you also have the individuals who uh do not have an earned income. So it's important to remember social security, pensions, interest income, dividends, none of that is subject to a municipal income tax. So, um, you know, there there's a long list

of things that would not that these are people who would not be paying a municipal income tax. So, we always like to look at the average citizen, and we've defined the average citizen in Beaver Creek as being someone who owns a property that's worth $300,000 and has a household income of $110,000. Um, you can see the different scenarios. We've got the the resident not subject to an income tax um including that person who both lives and works in Beaver Creek. Um they would have an additional tax liability under this 1% income tax, 50% property tax reduction, they would end up with an additional property tax liability or an additional tax liability of about $74. um those people who work in a city where they already pay an income tax or someone who does not have any earned income would actually uh benefit under these calculations by $1,000. And then um non-resident working in the city, again, this would vary depending on if the city they live in has a a credit or not. Um but you can see that would be $1,100 increase. So if we do this uh same scenario where we look at a 2.9% income tax with the property tax elimination um again following the same scenarios everybody can see what the final conclusions are. Um that you know th this would be a much larger number for those who uh who are going to be fully subject to that income tax. meaning those people who uh don't pay an income tax to another municipality um or that come here to work but don't live here. Now, when looking at an income tax ordinance, there's only going to be a a

a few things that you have control over. That would be the rate. And you can see in this slide, uh we've got the two proposals that are here tonight, 1% and 2.9%. Um the credit uh historically the city has offered a 100% credit um for uh those paying municipal income tax somewhere else. The purpose whether it would be for a general operations or it would have specific purposes police by EMS potentially um the term of the levy whether continuous or for a fixed term. um the effective date. So in all of these models, we assumed an effective date of 712027. Um and the elimination of the which levies would be eliminated. Um you've seen the proposal of the ones uh we've discussed that we would eliminate. Um that would be a 50% reduction obviously in the 2.9% income tax proposal. It would eliminate all property tax levies. And then the effective date that the levies would be eliminated in in both situations and the scenarios uh we assumed they would be eliminated in tax year 26 which would mean August of 27 would be the last year of collection of those revenues. Terms of next steps, there's a public hearing and an ordinance for an income tax code scheduled for the March 9th council meeting. Um the seven items that we just discussed are really the only thing that you will be making choices on. Um the remaining t parts of the tax code are dictated by state statute. Um and we would just seek input from council as to which option. Um and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Mr. For the purposes of our citizens in the audience and watching at home, could you go back to uh slide 27 and could you explain why um we still collect the property tax revenue in 2027? seven even if half of it's voted to you know you know I'm getting

so so what what you end up with is a tax year is different than a collection year taxes are always assessed a year in a rears so the taxes that you're paying in 2026 are for what existed as of January 1st 2025 now I am not a legal scholar but I am of the opinion that even if property taxes were completely eliminated through the Constitution, they couldn't take action prior to January 1st of 2026. So, it'd have to be January 1st of 27. That would be the earliest it could be implemented, and that would affect collections in 2028, right?

Uh can you speak to the legislation that's been introduced that affects continuous levies?

Yes. So this was actually introduced in one of the earlier versions of the bills that the uh legislators passed. Um but what it would do is say every levy has to be put before the voters every so often. Now now right now for most levies it would be a fiveyear. Some levies are 10year. Um, but I I you know, basically what you would end up doing is probably taking all of your police levies so that they all line up at the same time so that you're only having to go for all of them once every five years or once every 10 years. Because otherwise, you're going to be spending so much money at the ballot because every time we put a ballot issue on, we have to pay the part of the cost of that election. And it wouldn't just affect us. This would affect every levy that and I I don't have a firm count, but I would be willing to bet that the number of levies that a citizen in Beaver Creek is subject to right now is in excess of 50. I know it would be in excess of 40. I wish I would have counted those before I came. Um, so, so think about that's that many times everybody's having to go come back to the ballot. Um, and and so to me it it would be more costly than the benefit provided. I I can appreciate legislation that says, well, we ought to periodically review where we stand, but every five years trying to suggest that, well, we might need to eliminate our police department. um just doesn't seem rational.

To those at home or watching this for the first time, can you explain 2.9% rather than 2.5 or three? What's what's the rationale for 2.9%. So really what we were hoping or you know the presentations that we've made and the discussions we've had with council were based on getting close to a break even point. So you know I would say that the 2.9% got us close to that break even point. 2.8% threw us below that break even point on the 1% income tax. we came out the opposite way where the 1.1 threw us over that uh gave us a small surplus where the 1% um gave us a small deficit. But again, because we're working with estimates, it's not like I can predict in 2030 with any great deal of accuracy what that number is going to be, especially when you consider the primary basis we have is that 1% income tax will generate $19.6 million. And I would like to think that that is a wholly accurate number, but I guarantee you, well, I mean, even if you read the study, there's that plus or minus factor within that that they they're they predict 19.6, but I can't rem was it plus or minus 3% or was it Yeah, that's what And so, you know, you're you were looking at that plus or minus. Well, that plus or minus three or five makes a big difference. So,

and that 2.9% though is based on kind of a doomsday scenario if the property taxes all go away.

Absolutely. That's if property taxes all go away. And we are again as a municipality, you're required to provide essential services. And so the fire and EMS estimates are based on what we think the cost would be to provide it to the city as it exists now. That doesn't even include if we had to provide it to the township or go down the rabbit hole of, wow, if the township dissolves, what happens? Who's taking care of all their roads? Who's doing this, that, or the, you know, so, you know, there's a lot more rabbit holes we could go down, but um Pete likes to keep me grounded. I know there's some things talking about capping how property tax stays there, but can you explain and maybe just now you when they're talking like 30 or 40% I hear a lot of people talk about their taxes went up that much. Where does that money go because we only realized about 2%. So the majority,

okay, this goes into some of the other legislation that was passed that doesn't directly impact uh the city, but there's something called the 20 mil floor that school districts operate under. So instead of just having their inside millage directly correlated with property value changes, their floor mill is also directly correlated. So, school districts in the last reappraisal, school districts are the big winner if they are at the 20 mil floor. Um, it's not saying it's good, bad, or indifferent. It's the way we fund schools. But, you know, so they were the big winners because that 20 mil floor creates that level that those levies again, you know, thinking about it when a reappraisal occurs, what happens to all your voted levies? the the rate is reduced so that it generates the same amount of revenue. Well, this creates that floor to where all of those voted millages that make up that 20 mills can't go any lower. So, when values increase that in that floor millage acts just like inside millage and that it starts increasing percentage for percentage.

There was a reason I asked that because we're accused that that money all comes to us the extra and it does not. I mean, it's a very small amount. If you were to look at the city of Beaver Creek's inside millillage, which is 1.9 mills that well I

okay so if you consider that that is really a small inside millillage compared to other municipalities and that's because we weren't formed until 1980. The guarantee for inside millillage existed from what occurred in 1930 to 1933. That's when we went from 15 mills down to 10 mills because the Great Depression. People are being taxed down to their home. So everybody got a proportional share as their guarantee of what they had over that three-year period. Well, city of Beaver Creek didn't exist. So technically, we don't have any guaranteed millillage. What we have is a township that has 1.9 mills of inside millillage that's dedicated to their roads that they can't charge a citizen in the city of Beaver Creek. So, we get that scraps that left over.

Thank you. I think that's something we need to get out there that most people don't understand. And I'm going to guess other municipalities that were formed after 1933 are probably facing a similar situation, but there's not necessarily a lot of them out there. Great presentation. I really appreciate you um kind of the way you stated that if going to the 2.9 compared to the one is not diversification at all. It's just instead of us only relying on property taxes, we just shift over to all income tax, which could in the future be just almost as problematic in the future as the situation we're in right now.

Absolutely. So, if you were going to ask me, you know, there there are benefits and detriments to every type of tax. What does property tax give you? It gives you stability. It doesn't have those wide market changes. um income tax the economy tanks your revenue is going to go down significantly you know so having you know but the benefit of the income tax is that as the economy is doing better you get to grow at a little more than that 1 to 2% rate like I said based on historical data you'd be looking at 3 to 5% depending on you know the particular economy that you're in so you know there are benefits and detriments to both Um, diversification is generally a good thing.

It's interesting watching Ketering where they were able to use their income tax to purchase research park land turn around and get in the real estate business where they got 300 acres of land big hunk they sold to the city of or the school board for the STEM and that's very an interesting aspect. Yeah. So

Question for the Sorry, did you have uh question for the city manager or legal council? So the hypothetical is what happens if property tax is abolished? We have no income tax. What happens to Beaver Creek under that? Sorry, property tax. What did I say? Uh yep, forgive me. Yeah, sorry. No, if there's 0% income tax still and property tax is abolished, what happens under that scenario legally as best you can because that's this is speculation at this point. But that's what we're facing with the property tax evolution is that that's the question ahead of us I think

right and and we do as as discussed with our law director and then Mr. Mchugh. I was telling him we need to have some extensive conversations of legal actions or you know with the township with what you know from uh mergers to uh separation from the township to you know whole bunch of things but bottom line if we have no income tax so let's say in November the abolishment of property tax uh passes and the income tax attempt that we do let's say the 1% % uh would fail. We have the zero income or property taxes. Uh we're left as Mr. Graham had stated with a lot of miscellane well not a lot of very little uh revenue of various types which most are very restrictive in their use. Uh bottom line, David and I have both uh taken the totals of everything left and you heard of a house of cards, right? You remove something and it just fall. It collapses. Uh that's what exactly would happen with the revenues of the city. We have a $35 37 million operating budget, not including regular $50 million as our capital and everything. Uh but say third, let's just call it $35 million operating budget, no income tax, no property tax, you have $2 million to fund it all.

That's it. Just to add on what is saying is that by

Oh, I'm sorry. By law, you're going to have to balance the budget, right? So your first line of defense will be reduction of services which also rec results in reduction of employees under a rift plan reduction force. I mean you really have no choice. um cities and this has been a many many years but when there was that big fiscal issue where cities were investing in all sorts of investments they shouldn't have made right there were some around the country that ended up going into I forget I think might be a chapter nine it's an unusual section of of the bankruptcy code but that ultimate that hap it's happened to cities because at a certain point You can only do what you can do. And if your obligations get so out of whack with what your revenue is, something's going to have to give drastically legally. I mean, it's ugly, but And

does that happen in January of 27 then? And that kind of a doomsday scenario

if the Yeah. If the D doomsday everything fails, I mean the abolishment passes, as David has said, basically the last property tax collections would be in August of 27. After that, that's it. So the that sounds like, oh, okay, we could continue as is, you know, up until August of 27. No, you have to there's so many liabilities, layoffs, unemployment. we'd have to probably be at half force by July 1, probably, and I don't mean to sound that, but by the time you start having to give all the union collective bargainings, uh I think that's at least 90 days notice uh on layoffs. Um you're playing six months of unemployment costs at least, probably six months. You're paying out vacations, you're paying out all all that kind of stuff that you know the other liabilities. Once you start deducting that, um, you got to do that in advance to wind down to have a plan. And that's one thing I know the school districts talked about it, but that's a plan that we would have to come up with um, probably immediately following the elections. I mean, we'll have the template made. Uh but it it is something that we would have to strongly consider and council would immediately um come end of the year or no later in January or something, we'd have to be looking to be on the ballot again to try to get if everything was abolished, you know, we'd have a plan in place that if it doesn't pass, we'll go probably may put on a ballot for probably 2.9% something like that to fund the city. Um if not, then here's the plan. blank percentage of layoffs of fire uh of police of of public service of all workers. Um and you'd have to wind begin to wind down because $2 million that sounds like a lot of money individually in your bank account. But to run a 27.3

square mile city is, you know, who's going to plow in the snow? Who's going to do that? Who's going to fix the potholes? Who's going to it cost uh you know the amount of asphalt and the coverage and drainage? Who's going to patrol the mall? And it's gonna be a free-for-all on crime, you know, if you do something like that. Fire. Who's going to put I guess you have to make sure you get a good fire hose uh water hose for your house because I mean it it's scary. It's scary because 2 million wouldn't would not uh fund hardly anything. And you still have to pay for lights, electric, council. You'd have I I' I'd be gone, but you still have to hire a city manager with the authority under the uh council form of government and under our charter. So, you'd have to hire a part-time or through contract or somebody that has the authority of and you have to keep a finance person because they're going to have to have a magic wand on keeping track of what's going on.

Counting the debt.

Yeah. Counting the debt. Yeah. Uh so yeah, worst case scenario it gets ugly and it gets ugly really fast. The legal aspects of what the township can do. We're all town the township and myself are in discussions. Uh Ryan Rushing as the township administrator, but you know, would would they become their own city? They could declare that so that they could have an income tax authority. But they're 25 point some square miles with only 8,000 residents. It would be very difficult for that math to work out for income tax for them. Uh would we do a merger, create a new city? You know, it's all those kinds of things that would fully be on the table uh at that point in time. Um if but ultimately no matter what form or how you do it, you have to have income, you have to have revenue to provide the services or there's no services.

I think it's a very important for us to realize the unique position that Beaver Creek is in.

Yes. because most all community cities have the diversification in revenue and so the elimination of property tax will hurt all cities but not in the magnitude in which they will destroy Beaver Creek. So, it's critically important that we we make a decision, you know, at the next meeting um to put something on and be able to educate the community about the um the peril in which we face from a property tax perspective, but also the services that they enjoy and that we can provide and everything else for um a a small income tax especially relative to the rest of

right uh the state of Ohio city's income taxes. I mean 1% is is hardly anything even even 2.9 is in the grand scheme of things is is not

right because everyone else would adjust. So, um it's important for us to be able be advocates and uh let our citizens know that um we understand property tax is um a chore and it's it's a burden and it is high in the city of Beaver Creek and uh we're giving them an opportunity to actually reduce that burden and preserve the the things that they the services they really like. So, thank you for your presentation. Thank you very much.

Now you know why I lose sleep a lot. Thank you, David. Appreciate it. I think ordinances, resolutions, and PUDs. Ordinance 26-05. Ordinance 26-05. an ordinance authorizing the city manager to enter into a farm lease agreement with Fairlands, Inc. to farm approximately 39.53 acres of land currently owned by the city of Beaver Creek. And this is a second reading. Anything else? No. No changes. No changes. Your honor, I'd move uh 25 26-5.

Second. Have a motion and a second to approve ordinance 26-05. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. opposed. Ordinance 26-06. Ordinance 26-06, an ordinance amending the land use plan in accordance with chapter 158.171D1 of the city of Beaver Creek zoning code and in accordance with the ordinance 20-15. Mr. Mayor, members of council, I'll try not to go as long as David just did. We'll make an effort here. Appreciate it because we've got coming next. So,

this is uh case PC26-2. Again, as the clerk stated, this is a ordinance to replace the existing land use plan um with plan Beaver Creek that we've been talking about over the last year. Um, and plan Beaver Creek is a a first step of a two-step process that city council authorized uh late in 2024, beginning in 2025 um for both a land use plan update and a zoning code update. And the land use plan is the the policy framework that we established in order to change the zoning code uh to where it would affect that policy um established in the land use plan. So, we've begun the the code update section um from the beginning of the code update section, and we're going to be calling a steering committee with the the first steering committee for that code uh change here in the coming weeks. I think it's March 3rd. It's on a on a Tuesday. Um so, just broadly, what is a land use plan? Again, it's it's a it's a document that the that cities use. Beaver Creek as well. It's establishing our long range land use policies. So, it's where we want to see the city go from today over the next 10 20 years. Um, the intent is to guide decisions uh of the planning commission and city council for future development and redevelopment projects. And it's also um a foundation um it's not regulatory, but it's a foundation of the regulations in the zoning code. Um the land use plan before you has uh various chapters um where it would go over the the land use plan in general. Um dive into the existing conditions that was found with the city. Um an overview of the community engagement

involved with creating the draft plan. Um there is descriptions of the land use plan categories um that are proposed within the land use plan and then an establishment of focus areas. Um the existing condition analysis uh was done in spring of last year. Um just high level um it found that the land use categories in the in the city and the housing mix are not keeping pace with what uh the population um as the demographic changes that we've seen in the city. Um it also found that there's a lack of a general community center and gathering spaces. um that the work base or the workforce in the within the city and the employment base within the city are not aligned. So that's goes back to um big portion of the people who work in the city are not from the city and a big portion of the people who employees of this of the residents who work aren't working in the city. So and those two combined that's where you get traffic congestion. Um it also found that our community assets are strong. We've got a strong number of parks um and should be leveraged more. Um we also have a wide breath of um environmental features with the the the wetlands, the the natural creeks and tributaries that go through the city. And there are many constraints that come along with that. But there are also opportunities that come along with that. And um as pointed out in a future chapter that there are various corridors that um offer many opportunities for uh development and particularly redevelopment. We also did uh quite a bit of community engagement to create this plan. Um there

was a steering committee established at the outset that had 16 members. Um and we had five steering committee meetings with that steering committee. uh as we went through the the different phases of the plan, we had an open house in the in the spring that had we'd say 75 plus, but being there, it seemed that there was well over a hundred. I had 40 50 people at the door before uh I even opened the doors um for the the first open house. And that's where we talked about um in general, where would you like to see the city go? Um we also had um online surveys. We had um different events that we handed out flyers and then we had a second open house that after we created a draft of the land use map, we we presented that to at a second open house and had 50 plus members at that and received a lot of good um feedback and all that information is is within the plan that you have before you this evening. So in order to create the land use categories that you see in the plan, we took the existing conditions, community feedback and also looked at best practices of um planning profession in general, created those future land use um principles and goals and then translated into future land use uh categories. And that's the map you see before you. I know it's kind of hard to see because there's a lot of different colors. Uh but basically instead of having just low density, medium density residential or highdensity residential, we kind of broke it up to where you had traditional neighborhoods such as Nwood, such as um you know, these neighborhoods that were made in the uh constructed in the full 30s and 40s and and kept those as as they are. And then you had suburban residential um with a with slightly higher densities but were developed in the 70s and 80s and you see

those throughout the city. Suburban cluster a little bit more recent development we've seen since the 90s and 2000s where the density is a little bit higher. Um and then we created a rural preserve where we recognized that the the desire to maintain the the the green spaces in the in the rural areas that we have but also not dedicated you you can't just dedicated as open space and undevelopable. So there are opportunities in the rural areas for um condensed development surrounded by large green fields. And so we also um streamline the the the commercial where instead of having just solid commercial corridors really have the opportunity to have those those commercial areas have some residential mixed in whether that be a higher density or a lower density residential depending on the the location and context. The plan did in create four focus or five focus areas. One being Colonel Glenn, two of them being on Dayton Xenior Road, one being at Grange Hall and um Patterson and the other being in Alpha. And the intent here was to create focus areas for future study on how um development could look. We we did have some general ideas of how uh it would look in context to this land use plan. So this is the um Dayton Zenia West corridor where you have the existing residential along the bike path and south of the the main thoroughfare and and transitioning that into mixed use uh commercial along the corridor. So you do have opportunities for both commercial redevelopment and some mixed redevelopment in where you have some residential mixed in with the the commercial areas. But the intent is u to

study these focus areas um in future studies and to to really uh get a a much closer a much more specific design guidelines for each one because each of these corridors have different uh strengths and weaknesses and and different um style of development and and different architectural features that you you don't want to try to fit all that into one regulatory framework. work. Um it the principles that were created by the the land use plan and this in order to uh well the principles that were created so that we could get to the the um the development as we see in the in the future lange plan were to promote sustainable growth and development. uh to protect uh the the and enhance our natural environment uh to support a versatile and resilient economy and to enhance community character. So those are the overall principles and each of those principles have goals more specific goals um and all that can be found in the land use plan. The last chapter dealt with implementation and next steps and a lot of that is future studies that we see and that first one is one we are doing which is the second phase of the project which is updating the zoning code to take the policies established in the land use plan and turn them into regulatory framework. Um but there are several other of course updating your land use plan periodically. Um creating focus plan focus area plans. Um enhance economic development partnerships with other local governments or private entities within the city, the the Beaver Creek Development Corporation. Um and also look at uh potentially doing a economic shock analysis should some major employer in the city close. And we want to be prepared for that. But the those are all future studies not

necessarily included with this and were well beyond the scope of what we had hired the third party consultant to do with the land use plan and zoning code update. There are a few um conditions in the ordinance uh recommending approval of this and that's more housekeeping work but um one is currently in our land use plan there are plan development areas and there are corridor planning areas and those are what trigger the requirement for a property a project to go through in Azra. So such as um projects we see we'll see next month. I don't want to throw that out there yet, but without being in a corridor planning area or a corridor or plan development area on our current land use plan, they wouldn't have to go through the P the Azra. So there's a map included in the ordinance that took all those areas and for the time being stated that those areas will still have to go through the Azra until we can replace that when we do the zoning code update. One thing that planning commission brought forward was that we should change the name from 2025 land use plan to 2026 so it doesn't sound like it's a year old the day we adopt it. Um so I I don't see any problem with that. And then also um given the um age friendly community effort that we embarked on in 2025, we want to to acknowledge that. So, one of the goals or one um include the red text that you see uh where we um enable development patterns that balance economic growth, environmental protection, and community character while also while encouraging age friendly design features in all development where appropriate. So, we wanted to to recognize the the the efforts that went in with that age friendly study that we did last year. Um but all in all, planning commission and staff recommend approval of the the

updated land use plan. We think this this is a a good leap forward into um both future development and more significantly compared to what we have now. Um creating framework for redevelopment of sites um because we're going to see with the dwindling vacant properties in the city, we're going to see more and more develop redevelopment applications come forward. But again, uh, both planning commission and staff recommend approval. This being an ordinance, there is a public hearing. So, we'll be happy to answer any questions following that public hearing. Thanks. As Mr. Burrett said, this is an ordinance. So, there's public hearing. If anyone would like to come forward and speak to this, uh, we'll have three minutes. State your name and address. Everybody's jumping up to speak. Seeing none, I'll close the public portion of it. Uh, input from council. Vice Mayor Upton.

Thank you, Mayor Adams. Um, I just want to pass along my thanks to the committee and Mr. Berquette for the the long trek it took to get to this point. Um, having sat on the charter review commission, I can only imagine the painstaking process it was to go through the land use plan um, and specifically look for areas of updating and uh, things of that nature. So, I appreciate the members uh, efforts um, and dedication because this is what we use going forward uh, to make decisions up you know at this bench. So, thank you Bill. I agree. I have no more comment. Thank you for the effort. That's moved to second reading, your honor.

Well, let's let's get around. You want to go around? I want to make sure everybody has a chance to talk. Oh, wonderful. One bills. Um, also, thank you for the effort. Um, I know it sounds goofy. Enjoyable reading. I actually really enjoy uh pouring through all the information and looking at the maps. I mean, it's the way it's laid out, highly encourage, you know, the public to look at. I mean, it's it's great. Uh, so thank you so much and I'm looking forward to our meeting in March. Council L.

Thank you, Mayor. I fortunate to be part of this and I was what I what I enjoyed most about it was the eye opening experience of how much work you guys do. Um, it was a lot. It was a whole lot. uh the representatives from from Zonco um amazing job. I was impressed across the board. I was impressed and I agree with you. I truly believe that 75 plus number I mean you can still call it plus but I think it was like 125 people or something was at that very first event. There's a lot of people there. Great job. Thanks. It looks good. Counc.

Thank you, Mayor. I'll I'll echo and say uh thank you for the great work uh the longstanding work also appreciate um the academic in me talked about typos at earlier iterations and those have been uh corrected so much much thanks I went straight to those my I guess the only thing I'll say is um that we all need to listen very very carefully on the issue of housing diversity that comes up our residents have time and time again spoken very clearly on this issue and while uh I think it makes a lot of sense in the five specific areas of f focus areas uh we do have to exercise a level of caution um on that topic uh but I I really appreciate your work thank you very much

thank you very much I too just want to echo what's been said up here I appreciate all the efforts gone into I appreciate the two the council members that are sitting on that committee I know it's been a lot of work, but I think it's been worthwhile and uh I don't enjoy reading quite as much as you do. So, uh Mr. Curry, I have one more comment. Sure. I'm sorry.

That's fine. I just wanted to reiterate while I was reading through that document and then thinking about the um financial review document that was presented to us tonight too. The median household income and property average property values and everything they all they all match up. And so, um, I think it's it's wonderful that, you know, our finance department is talking to our planning department and the the consultants that are doing all of their work. It's all reflected in that document. So, we get to make uh really informed decisions.

Thank you very much for that, Council Current. Yeah, your honor. Uh, 26-06 move to the second reading. Second. Have a motion and a second to move ordinance 26-06 to the second reading. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Ordinance 26-07. Ordinance 26-07, an ordinance by Beaver Creek City Council, amending title 11, the business regulations of the codified ordinances of the city of Beaver Creek by enacting a new chapter 119 hotel licensing to regulate hotel services and minimum operating standards in the city of Beaver Creek, Ohio.

Now, you said you weren't going to talk as much as Mr. Mr. Graham. I believe I can get through this and collectively still not speak as much as as Mr. Graham. He's pushing me Q levels now. All right.

Yeah. I won't ask I won't ask the law director any questions here. So that might that might bring down a lot of the time. Um yeah, this is a a proposal to create a new chapter, chapter 119. Um and it's to create regulations that require hotel hotels to um apply for and maintain a license to operate within the city. Um the purpose, the overall purpose is to protect public safety and community welfare. We've seen um most hotels operate on a on a very clean and um safe basis, but that doesn't guarantee they all will. Um and we want to ensure that that they all have standards, minimum standards established that we can enforce. Um, and so the intent is to address any issues that come up before they become a major problem. Um, it is also uh to maintain Beaver Creek's economic vitality and image. A lot of times the fir visitors come into the city, the first place they go to is is where they're staying. And if they don't have family members here, if they're visiting uh to for for work or they're visiting for uh the uh right state or for the museum or any of that, the first place they're going to see is the hotel that they're staying in. So, we want to make sure that their first experience with Beaver Creek is a safe and um good environment to stay in. Um why are we doing this now? you know, as we've discussed in other uh meetings, you know, we've seen certain properties have increased number of of of police calls and fire calls um and become very um worrisome to the neighbors in that area. Um and so we want to establish the baseline so that we can hold everyone all the the hotels to that base uh requirement and to align um hotel

operations with community expectations that we do have safe and um clean neighborhoods and safe and clean commercial areas for these uh businesses to operate. So the requirements involved in chapter 119 um again require hotels to uh apply for and receive a license to operate the the license will be valid for three years. Um there are many hotels in the city now. So we wanted to give some time to uh for them to um apply. So, when this becomes effective, there would be a 30-day period when the hotels do have a chance to apply uh for the license. I don't see it being a very long or cumbersome um application. And it's just contact information and giving them the the sta operating standards and having them sign that they're aware of those operating standards and those being 24 hours um hotel on on site that they comply with all building fire and zoning regulations and that they provide safe sanitary conditions and routine maintenance to their rooms and to their grounds and to the building itself. Um there is a component in the legislation that um uh affords the city the opportunity to come in and perform a compliance review and establish a corrective process if we see serious incidences and those are spelled out in the legislation in a month or five in three months or 12 in a year. um or if there's other there's caveats that if there's something very serious that we can we can go in even before these thresholds are met if it's something um that really affects the health, safety or welfare of the the city or the residents. Um, if that compliance review is triggered, then it gives us the

opportunity to go in and do an inspection um and develop a a corrective action plan with the the police department, with the fire department involved in and with the city uh planning staff. And then it it will spell out a very um stringent timeline to resolve the issues that we would find in that compliance review. Whether that be they have lighting that encourages transient or or you know people se uh congregating in areas they shouldn't be congregating whether they have um smoking areas that are not in compliance with state law. Just there could be several different things um that could be a part of that compliance review but really it be on a case- by case basis. Um then and then there are protections and uh enforcement um criteria and guidelines that get us to be able to enforce these rules and that includes the suspension and revocation of their license. Um that kind of goes without saying though, but I want to reiterate that civil penalties and criminal enforcement for operating um a hotel without a license. And those are spelled out in the legislation about um first day fine, second day fine, and how it increases as as violations continue if they're not abated. And again, as we do with all properties in the city, all houses, all commercial properties, the intent is not to jam up a business. The intent is not to harm a business. It's to ensure that they're operating in a way that the citizens and city council expect um that they are um operating a clean and desirable place. And we're not in the business of shutting businesses down. We're in the businesses of of of compliance. That's what the planning

department's about. Um it also, as with all um legislation, there is an appeals process. If the property owner, the hotel run um owner feels that they have a grievance that they don't think that the staff or um our enforcement is is interpreting the code as written, then they do have a chance to collect for the and appeal to the board of zoning appeals. Uh make sure that we are giving everybody their due process under the law. What it doesn't do is we're not we're not here to target responsible hotel offerers. I I think that most hotels won't see any change to their the way they've been operating. They're just have to fill out a form every 3 years with a minimal application fee. I think it's $60 fee and and move on or they won't hear from us again. Um it doesn't change any zoning uh within any hotels. It doesn't change any of the restrictions what their their restrictions today are going to be the same restrictions they are tomorrow. Um it doesn't regulate room rates. It doesn't change the way they operate business. um so long as they are operating within the the minimum standards found in the regulations. We're not eliminating extended stay hotels. We're just defining it. Um what it does eliminate is people who are using hotels as permanent residents, not as an extended stay. Um but again, it does not remove the due process that every property owner is um guaranteed under the constitution and guaranteed under u Ohio law and city law. Um, city council has seen these regulations. Nothing has really changed since uh the regulations came forward to city council at the last work session. Um, they're all spelled out in the legislation that you received in your packet. Staff recommends approval of the of the ordinance and we'll be happy to answer any questions following the public hearing. Thank you.

And this is an ordinance. So, if there will be public input, I'll open the floor for public input. I would like to come forward and speak to this. Uh, please state your name and address and you'll have three minutes. Adrian, this is Bob Trout 2187 Basset Court. Uh, regarding chapter 119 uh specific.02, O2 which is a definition it indicates that uh extended stay hotel would be considered basically for a rolling 24month period. If you move over to section 119.08 section D sub paragraph B. Uh, no license will be permitted on any guest occupying one or more rooms for 180 day 182 day accumulative days in any 12 month rolling period. And I ask for clarification. So is that uh 24 months or is it 12 months? It is 12 months. Okay, cool. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, I'll close the public portion and we'll start with Counciloman Bills. Any

just to clarify, it is 12 months. I did them at two separate times and that'll be changed for the second reading if it gets to that point. I assume that it would once it was caught. Uh, no, I don't really have much. Uh, thank you for the plan. I think it's well done and um that's it. Let's return. Uh Randy, if you have a question, did you have uh input from the local hotels on this draft as you put it together?

I sent out um I sent out notification before we had the work session and I also sent out um emails to all the hotels that this hearing would be held tonight. Gave them a copy of it and I haven't heard anything.

Okay. Council, mayor. Um I do remember I was having a brief discussion about this. I don't think there was forgive me for not being able to remember it was regarding the term apartment hotel under a definition. Um if you could refresh my memory the term apartment hotel I I I see the definition here. Is that in in what way does that differentiate from an extended stay hotel? An extended stay would not have permanent residents in it. Whereas an apartment hotel, a portion of it would be designated as permanent residents. So you might have a hotel where 10 of the rooms are apartment units and the rest of the the other 90 are transient units. We don't have any apartment hotels in the city. And in speaking with zone co about um the next zoning code change because apartment hotels been in the zoning code since we we became a city. Um I think that given all the mixed use opportunities that the land use plan presents. I I think that to have an apartment hotel is not necessary in the same building or the or it could be spelled out in particular PUD where instead of a instead of a use allowed in a straight zoning district be some part of a PUD where you would have a building have both apartments and a hotel. But I don't think it it's an necessary use in general in the code. I I only ask because reading through the um I'm reading through this and it talks about the st not not the standards but but it's talking about the uh

where was I the actual rules the conditions placed on the standards of operation do the under the standards of operation of all hotels apartment hotels do do you believe that the guest room standards and the common areas and that is listed under there would specifically under D I guess section D would that kind of completely kind of eliminate an apartment hotel pretty much and the reason we define it is so that people know what they can't have okay so to speak

so so I mean it wouldn't hurt to but just so that we make sure the umbrella is wide enough to co cover everything. We we put all hotels, motel, apartment hotels, and extended state hotels in that that first paragraph. Um I don't think it'll make a difference if we strike that other than someone can make the argument if it's not in there then it's not subject to any regulations. It's a completely separate entity. So we wanted to include it. Correct. So that it doesn't become a loophole.

So is is this apartment hotel going could it I guess possibly be brought up during zone zoning code changes. I imagine it will be. So this could be well if we eliminate it then then it would by I guess it would be de facto eliminated from the I don't want to ask Steve for the legal term because it could take a half hour but okay I understand. All right. Thank you. It's by inference it would be uh by reference it would be

I I truly don't believe that any standards here from any hotel that I'd stay at would be of any concern to the hotel at all. And I would probably say because um because of that I'd say that that's probably why you have not heard back anything from the hotels that you probably sent this to. They were probably looked at and said this is nothing. We're already doing all this. So right. Thanks. That's all.

Thank you, mayor. Um so if I just I'm going to tag on to that. If I understand right, we have apartment hotel definition in our current zoning code. And that is the reason why it's in here because it hasn't been addressed in the zoning code revision process yet. Right. And I want to make sure it doesn't become it's not a loophole in one in the time being.

Okay. Okay. Um and are the definitions in this section consistent with what's what we have right now? The reason I ask is um like we define in this section a hotel as having six rooms or more but an extended stay hotel says 10 rooms. I just kind of a strange difference. I can see where the Yeah, I took some of the definitions from the hotel motel tax section and some from our zoning code and I can see where they there's a little bit of conflict. I'll make sure I flush that out for the second reading that they're compatible. It just we don't like we don't we don't define extended stay hotel in the zoning code. So, I'm trying to uh close gaps where they aren't defined, where they're defined twice or they're um defined three times to make sure that they as close as can be can be all the same definition because this doesn't change any of the zoning the definitions in the other sections.

Yeah, it'd be nice if they were uh consistent. Um, and is there is there a rationale for moving forward with this right now as opposed to waiting until the zoning code is rewritten so that it's all kind of consistent or

I think the the rationale is so that we can start enforcing the standards. I mean, the zoning code probably won't go into effect until after the end of this year. um just based on how long it takes to coordinate public meetings and work sessions and and with this with the nonzoning code section planning commission doesn't review it but with zoning code stuff that goes that will go through the planning commission first so that adds in extra complexity and time and then you said that uh the fee was $60 that that it hasn't been I'm not sure if I put it in here or it's not it's not in here but you just mentioned mentioned it as you were.

Yeah, I think that's we looked at that. That's what we charge the the um massage businesses and the um what's another Airbnbs? Airbnb short-term rental. Yeah. But ultimate, it's ultimately the city manager who approves the fee list, right? So, I think 60 was going to be our recommendation. Thank you. You're welcome.

Appreciate it, Mayor. Um Mr. Bquet, I want to commend you on your hard work. I think it's a lot of good information. I think it's commensurate. Um, it threads a needle very nicely um as we did with the massage parlor and Airbnbs. So, I think it does not overly burden anyone in the hotel industry and yet solves problems. So, I'm very grateful. Uh there is one correction that's needed. uh on page 50 of the packet section one uh it says city council hereby finds that the regulation of massage related services and so that's just it's still true but it should be

it is it is true uh but yeah we need to update that one uh it's all I see uh so I'll leave it there thank you mayor are you looking at

vice mayor up thank Uh Mr. Pette, just a question. Um you'd mentioned for the existing hotels, you give them 30 days to file their uh application. Um do we feel 30 days is long enough? And I only ask that because I know when I reach out to a hotel and ask them to make it, you know, a change to my account or uh make up a missing stay that that's been forgotten. uh it can take more than 30 days to get a response out of them. I would say the 30 days is long enough, but because I have local contacts, it's not going through the corporate. Um

that was my followup is if we're working with local franchises or we are going through corporate with the large I'm sure they'll have to run it through their corporate, but um if you have good contacts, I I feel confident you'll handle it. But yeah, and and I'm again I'm not in my department's not in the business of jamming up. So if they if they have a legitimate reason why they need an extra five days, I'm not going to go in and start roadblocking them and putting the shutting the lights off. Thank you. That kind of goes with the question I had was the notification process. How do you plan to notify them other than just mailing or uh We'll probably put together a formal letter that we can that they can have in hand, but I also will email it to them.

Okay. The $60 is for three years. Yeah, it's it's a dimmin it's not a huge fee. I mean, I'm not requiring it per room or making some big outrageous fee. It's not the intent is just to cover administrative costs with the city in terms of filing. My third question is uh serious incidents. How do you define those? Those are actually they're defined in the in the regulations themselves. Um, I would just use the police as how they code the what whatever they went there for and then if it falls within that list then it's a serious list. Okay. All right.

Yeah, because I agree with the what you said the standards of the hotel right now the people are out here they probably are higher than what we would ever put on them. So that's all I have. Anyone else? Second helping say I have a motion. Mayor, I'd like to make a motion to move ordinance 26-07 to a second reading. Second. Have a motion and a second to move ordinance 26-07 to a second reading. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Ordinance 26-08.

Ordinance 26-08, an ordinance by the Beaver Creek City Council establishing a new fund, specifically the grant pass through fund in conformity with federal and state laws and generally accepted accounting principles. Mr. Graham.

Okay. We are here today to recommend approval of fund 206, a grant pass through fund. Um, city applies for and receives a number of grants where uh we never receive the money. The grantor pays the vendor directly. So the money actually never flows through our books, but generally accepted accounting principles and uh um uh the state auditor require us to both budget and book these entries as if we did receive them. So right now these monies are all comingled with our um street operating and street capital funds. Um, and it makes it difficult to track what the available cash is because a lot of these, you know, we will encumber these monies as the grants are received, but it might be two or three years later before that money is fully expended. Just makes that more difficult. So, we're asking to create the separate fund where we would run all of the pass through or um non-cash transactions through this individual fund, allowing us to keep more accurate track of what our operating and capital accounts are that we we actually work out of. Um the we are asking that the second reading be done as an emergency um so that uh we can avoid that 30-day waiting period. Uh Mr. Mormon and his staff have already submitted a number of reimbursement or on behalf payments to uh OGOT and uh so we'd like to get those recorded in the correct fund instead of having to move them later. Um and also in the future we will be requesting a supplemental certification and appropriation so that we can move the 26 budget that was associated with those on behalf payments to this new fund. This is an ordinance, so it's uh open to the public. Again, if someone would like to come forward and speak to this,

please come forward. State your name and address. You have three minutes. All right. Seeing none, I'll close the public portion. I'll just leave it open to everybody if you're willing, whatever you want to say. Rather than call. Uh your honor, I'd move uh 2608. It's the second reading. Second. Now, do we have to say as an emergency? Yes. As an emergency. At the second. Yes. At the second reading. Emergency. At the second reading. That's your emergency. Okay. All right.

At the second reading. Okay. Second. I have a motion and a second to move ordinance 26-08 to a second reading. as an emergency at the second reading. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Resolution 26-15. Resolution 26-15, a resolution authorizing the city manager to enter into a maintenance and administrative service agreement with the Beaver Creek Township Park District.

Good evening, mayor, vice mayor, members of council. uh here tonight seeking this resolution uh to enter into another agreement with Beaver Creek Township Park District for the maintenance of Angel's Pass Park and Owens Place Park. Um we've been operating under an agreement with them since 2018. Uh a few of the small changes uh to this overall pretty much stays the same. We provide restroom cleaning services, trash removal, winterization and startup of their restrooms, playground inspection. Those are the basic services. Uh we also do some repair work uh on an as needed basis for additional fee. But some of the primary changes here and one of the biggest one is uh this the previous agreement was a two-year agreement that renewed for two years. Uh this changes this to a one-year agreement that could renew for three additional one-year terms. The primary reason for that change just with some of the uncertainty for not only the the city budget as a whole but the parks budget over the next couple of years. If we do not have the staffing to uh perform these services in future years, we have an easier way out. Um, also it increases the fee from $4,500 a year to $7,900 a year for the base services. This is just the actual cost for our staff plus payroll taxes uh and cleaning supplies and all of that to perform these services. Um, it also uh additionally it spells out that for any additional work that we do, let's say it's any repair work that we charge the applicable uh opers and BWC and Medicare taxes as well. Um, be happy to answer any questions if you have any, but I recommend approval. input.

The park district uh commissioners have passed their agreement. Yes. Yep. I had legal review this and then we passed this on to the park district commissioners before their last meeting. They reviewed it and they were good with it. Motion. Motion to approve resolution 2615. Second. Have a motion and a second to approve resolution 26-15. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Resolution 26-16. We have Zach. Again,

resolution 26-16, a resolution authorizing submission of an application for the 2026 state capital appropriations budget.

Okay, back again. Uh, every two years the state makes uh capital budget appropriations. Uh last week at the work session I went over these in detail. Uh we are recommending the application for uh projects at Lefino Park. Uh they use the state capital funds. There's no matching uh amount of funds required. Uh but we are recommending uh capital projects at Lfino Park that include the replacement of the playground and safety surfacing, resurfacing the parking lot, uh resurfacing the walking path, and making uh repairs to the skate park. Uh the total estimated project cost is $815,000. I'm recommending we apply for funding in the amount of $765,000. Again, we would not have to uh pro provide any match to that. The remaining 50,000 uh we have budgeted for this year for the repairs of the skate park. That is there. So that shows that we have some skin in the game for some of these improvements at the park. Um if the this grant application is um approved, we would see these funds most likely in 2027. So the one thing we would have to do is the general fund would have to uh front the cost and then we would be reimbursed upon the successful completion of this project. So recommending uh this res approval of this resolution. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer

questions. Process question. Does your honor and the city manager meet with the state senator and the representative personally before you submit this application? You do not. Okay. No. No. But we do kind of advocate behind the scenes. I can tell you I met with Representative Lampton last week. I told him about the project. I asked him if he had had any other submissions from any other communities. He was happy that we submitted for a park project. So great. That's good. We don't do anything official, but you know, unofficially talk to them. I do have one question.

Sure. Um you mentioned that the general fund would uh put the money up front and then would be reimbursed once the grant was received. So is your intent to start pro start the work this year if we are awarded the grant? We could potentially start some of the planning if awarded this year and then have the the project be ready to start next year. Okay. But we would not have the funding this year. We we could appropriate the funds this year. But I think with timing by the time we'd be awarded this grant come you know passage of that bill in July uh 1 of July by the time we get the planning done this project would be completed in 27. Okay. Perfect. Thank you. Anyone else have a motion?

Motion to approve resolution 26-16. Second. I have a motion and a second to approve resolution 26-16. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. opposed. Now we get to the fun stuff.

And for well, Vice Mayor Upton's been through this before, Councilwoman Bales or Bills, you have not. Uh what we do on this for each one of those, you we'll move to open the nominations. It requires a second for each board. And then the nominations do not require a second. And then you'll have to do a uh move to close. I'm gonna have to require a second as well and then we vote on it. So first one up is uh planning commission. All right. We ready?

Let's go. I move to open nominations. I move to open nominations for the planning board. Second. I have a motion and a second to open planning commission. Uh all those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Any nominations? Move to nominate Jonathan Meyer. Second. No, you don't need a second. No. No second on the nominations. Only to open and close. I'll nominate Jane Usher.

Move to close nominations. Second. I have a motion and a second to close nominations. And we had two vacancies and we have two um nominations. So we'll just do it by acclamation. All those in favor signify by saying I. I posted. All right. Move on to the board of zoning appeals. We have two positions there as well. Move to open nominations for board of zoning appeals. Second. We have a motion and a second to open the nominations for board of zoning appeals. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed.

I nominate Heather Best. I nominate Sarah Barh. I move to close nominations for the board of zoning appeals. Second. I have a motion and a second to close the nominations for the board of zoning appeals. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Oppose. We again have two nominations for two positions. So I guess we'll do it by acclamation. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Opposed. Thank you. Now the CRA community reinvestment area and housing council.

I move to open nominations for the community reinvestment area housing council. Second. with a motion and a second to open nominations for the community reinvestment area housing council and a second. All those in favor? I opposed. Nominations. We have uh two regular vacancies there. I'll nominate Jason Scott. Nominate Diane Raglin. Move to close nominations. That's a second. We have a motion and a second to close nominations for the CRA. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed.

And again, we just we have two openings and two nominations. So, we'll do it by acclamation. All those in favor signify by saying I I opposed. Next up is a Turk tax and Senate Review Council. Motion. Go ahead. Move to open nominations for the Turk. Second. Sorry, I was just trying to make it easy on Debbie. Copy and paste. I'd like to nominate Clare Shinsky. Motion to close. Second.

I have a motion and a second to close nominations for the Turk. We have one nomination and one look one position. So do by acclamation. All those in favor signify by saying I. Opposed. Claire. So you stuck around just for that. Second. All right. Parks, Recreation, and Culture Board. Move to open nomination for the parks, recreation, and culture board. Second. I have a motion and a second to open the nomination for parks, recreation, and culture board. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Opposed. We have one regular position available. Nominate Matt Schmidt. Move to close nominations.

Second. I have a motion and a second to close nominations for parks, recreation, and culture board. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed here. Again, we have uh one position and one nomination. All those in favor of matchmitt signify by saying I I opposed. Next up, bikeway advisory. Move to open nominations for the bikeway advisory. Gordon, second. I have a motion and a second to open nominations for the bikeway advisory board. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. We have two positions here. Nominate Dan Don Shipley, please.

Wrong one. Put all three down. Oh, I'm sorry. I went down. Brian Hawk. Brian Hawk. I nominate Katherine Foron. Move to close nominations for the bikeway advisory board. Second. I have a motion and a second to close nominations for the bikeway advisory board. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Again, we have two positions open and two nominations. Uh do it by acclamation. Again, all those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Tree Advisory Board.

Move to open nomination for the Tree Advisory Board. Second. I have a motion and a second to open the nominations tree advisory board. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Oppose. We have two regular positions and one unexpired position. Nominate Don Shipley. We can do them separately. Let's do the two regular positions first. Hold on. Yeah, he said

and then uh Yeah. Yeah, the regular. These are for the regular terms. All right. The unexpired we'll do after that. Believe we're going to close and go back in. I mean, I could nominate Courtney Fields to fill the unexpired term. There you go. That's what I wanted to do to begin with. Motion to close tree advisory board. Second. I have a motion and a second to close nominations for the tree advisory board. And we have uh two positions uh to fill and one unexpired. And we've had three nominations. So Don Shipley, Jenny Kane, and Courtney Fields for the unexpired. All those in favor signify by saying I.

I. Opposed. Good. Beaver Creek Youth Council Advisory Committee. Move to open nominations for the Beaver Creek Youth Council Advisory Committee. Second. Motion in a second to open nominations for Beaver Creek Youth Council Advisory Committee. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Opposed. We have uh two unexpired positions available here. It's only for two years.

Sure. And let me explain a little bit. Uh yeah, youth advisory. We got uh doing a lot of research on this one going into the charter. And so we had these two unexpired. Um there's no limit. Uh we staff is always you know asked that we one time I think we had 25 people on here and it was unmanageable. Um unproductive when you get too many. Uh but there is no limit on how many you can add. Um the one thing we have not done I don't know in a while uh but in research of the charter and Mr. McHugh, you're more than welcome to chime in. Uh, when it starts talking about the positions of Beaver Creek, there should be a representative from the Beaver Creek Parks and Beaver Creek Township, school resource officer, Beaver Creek Schools and Juvenile Court. Um, they do not treat them any different as a council um, appointing them for term and voting on them. So, uh, I don't think we've done that since I've been here. I think they've just continued to be a representative, but really the charter says council should should appoint and they should follow the kind of the same process. So tonight, that's why we got the recommendations on there who we've been in touch. The only one vacant uh that's been vacant for a little bit and Zach W, Mr. W is working on that is the juvenile court. We have not had a position filled in that for a while. uh if we get a name, we'll bring that back to council to appoint. So, just wanted to clarify.

So, I have a qu just a quick question. In um in the nominations, do you want each name associated with the organization that they are being nominated for then? It should be. Okay. All right.

All right. And probably the appointed positions, the specific positions can all be one. will then I'll make a I'll make nominations uh for Amy Klene and William Holmes to the two unexpired terms. Kyle Hill for the Beaver Creek Parks and Recreation Representative. Carol Graph, Beaver Creek Township. Uh Chris Unro as a school resource officer. Lindseay Green from Beaver Creek Schools.

And the juvenile court is vacant for now. And besides the unexpired terms, which are both through only two uh 27, uh the others will be a two-year term. Motion to close nominations for Beaver Creek Youth Council Advisory Committee. Second. Motion and a second to close nominations for the Bever Creek Youth Council Advisory Committee. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. And uh since we have those positions and just those names, we'll go by acclamation. Again, all those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Environmental advisory board.

Move to open nominations for the environmental advisory board. Second. Have a motion and a second to open nominations for the environmental advisory board. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. We have uh three regular positions and one unexpired position. I'd like to nominate Edward Bogdan. Nominate Tim Pritchard. I nominate AdG Baderu. I nominate Autumn Golden to fill the unexpired term. Move to close nominations. Motion in a second to close nominations for the Environmental Advisory Board. All those in favor signify by saying I

I opposed here again. We have three regulars. Well, I'm saying three regulars and one unexpired. Yes. Yeah. Yep. We had a total of four. So again, we have four for four. So uh all those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Next up, personnel board. Move to open nominations for the personnel board. Second. I have a motion and a second to open nominations for personnel board. All those in favor signify by saying I. I.

Opposed. We have one one. I nominate Craig Kgar and then one unexpired term. Nominate Diane Moon to the unexpired term ending in 2027. Right. Correct. Move to close nominations for the uh personnel board. Second. A motion and a second to close nominations for the personnel board. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I. And we have two positions and two nominees. So all those in favor signify by saying I. I.

Opposed. And then have the impact to the appeals board. But I don't think that's

Yeah, the impact fee. Number one, we had no applicants. Number two, we have not had anybody on that board. That's a board that uh well, that's a board I guess everybody would love to be on because that never meets. Uh the impact fee uh when that was set up way back when allowed for uh well specified that there should be an impact fee. Um, city council approves the fee but gives a city manager authority to within, you know, there's some calculations that engineering and things has to be done and that if for whatever reason there's an issue that the developer or whatever does not agree with my assessment or my uh fee that I would propose on them, they have an outlet to go to to an impact fee. It's it's never happened. Usually you guys are approving the development, so it it's it's not been an issue. If there ever would be an issue, we'd immediately form members for it and go through the process.

Okay. Next up is council appointments to local agencies. You all have the form in front of you. U we'll go through it. Uh Ohio One Ohio Region 14. Uh Tiffany Schwarz was the primary on that and David L was secondary. I'm still good at secondary if somebody wants to take primary. I had I only attended one meeting of that and I think we need someone on that read into that. Yeah, we need someone on that uh to do that.

Mr. Mayor, I'd be happy to take that appointment if need be. Okay, next the fourth July committee. We basically need to need a primary and a secondary. Anyone interested in doing that? Maybe four times probably unless as you get closer to Fourth of July. just actually help as an I I've been on that before. I mean, I can I

Yeah, I'm happy to be a secondary. Fourth of July.

You want to take the primary? I'll go ahead and take the primary unless somebody else wants it. You got it. All right. Because I've been there before. So, just the meeting. I usually attend the meetings every once in a while anyway just to be there. Uh Green Cat's board liaison. Uh Councilman Der, your primary and Councilman Lut secondary. Happy to continue. Okay. Green County Family and Children First Council. Yeah. Yeah. I'll be okay on that. I would like to do a secondary on that.

Uh Green County Water Advisory Task Force. We got Councilman Literal as primary and Councilman Der as secondary. Anyone change on that? Happy to continue. Dying to jump up there and do that. All right. That we did that already. that we did that two weeks ago. And then the Greater Dayton Mayors and Managers, obviously I'm going to be primary and Zach would be secondary on that. Uh Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission, uh we've already done that officially

last month. So that's taken care of. Uh Upper Little Miami Valley total max daily load. Councilman Bales is uh primary. Councilman Current is secondary. Ohio Mayor's Alliance. Again, that's one I go to and Zach would be the Yep. Uh Beaver Creek Youth Development Committee. I've used it in the primary on that. I don't mind doing that unless somebody else wants to do it. And the secondary will need someone that might step up and do that. You can put me down secondary for that.

Golf committee, we've had Councilman Bales is primary and Councilman Derer is secondary. Continue. Yep. Happy to continue. And the zoning code land use plan update. Uh, Councilman Litter and I think Councilman Bills, Council Bills, right? All right. Short of reading all of these over again, I hope you all wrote them down. So, I'd like a motion to approve that. Moved as suggested. Second. Motion and a second to approve what we wrote down here is who's doing this. So all those in favor signify by saying I.

I.

Opposed. Thank you very much. Very good. Now we have reached that time of the meeting. We have citizen comments. If you'd like to come up and address council on any subject, please come forward. State your name and address. You have three minutes. Bob Trout 2187 Basset Court and my comments regard back to the seven brew discussion that we had tonight. the vote and approval, but I'm going to put it on the table that I feel that we have violated the open meeting requirements because the ordinances and everything else had to be written and reviewed for public comments before. But now we have changed the document significantly even moving that and it should go back to the public for a public reading and open again for comments. And that is for you, mayor, and for you to our legal representative to address, but that is for you guys to discuss. But I am concerned that we are violating the open meeting requirements. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Anyone else? You're welcome. Talk if you want. No. No. Okay. All right. With that, I'll close the uh public portion and we'll go to Vice Mayor Upton. Thank you, Mayor Adams. Uh nothing for me tonight. Oh, okay. Keep things moving. Councilman Bales.

In the essence of time, I agree. I'm going to just say one thing. Um, we had 43 applicants for boards and commissions and I want to thank everybody. I mean, that was an amazing uh expression of volunteer spirit for for Beaver Creek. And I know we can't accommodate everybody which is unfortunate but um thank you very much for your interest and um keep applying. Thank you. Very good. Councilwoman Bills.

I would second what Councilman Bails just said. I also noticed um that a lot of those people had taken the citizens academy and I think that's wonderful. It led them to want to participate in our city and I think that's great. That's it. Councilman Curran,

just wanted to uh say that the chamber links uh this week was really a nice turnout of people. Uh a lot of small businesses there and uh good input. Glad to see uh the chamber continuing to going to have new facilities on Indian Ripple going to be opening up more room and uh they're looking forward to having more activities at their particular location both indoor and outdoor. Thank you. Yeah, they're talking about a pool now,

Councilman Der. Thank you, Mayor. In the interest of time, I'll uh keep it brief, but I'd like to echo Councilman Bales's sentiments and simply to say thank you to the public and oftent times it's second or third attempt that uh on which someone enters the board and so apologies that we couldn't accept everyone, but uh really thankful for all the applications. Thank you, Mayor Councilman L.

I'm going to even keep it shorter than that. Thanks everybody that came out and stayed through all of this. Thank you. Well, I have a whole list of things, but I won't go through it, but it'll be in the minutes for next year or next month. But I do want to thank public service for being out there and getting the roads cleaned. I was out there at 3:00 this morning, and I went for the Beaver Creek, Fairborn, and Enan, and Springfield. Our roads were clear as there weren't. It's amazing. So, thank you very much to everybody that does their job out there. And then I want to congratulate the police for that award. That's uh it's a that's a huge award to get a state level award for that. So I be sure to pass along our thanks uh chief if you would and the rest of it I'll leave for later. It's it'll be in the minutes. Mr. Landram.

All right, Mr. Mayor. I'll be brief. Uh community conversations is back uh March 18th 8:30 to 9:30 at Lefino Plaza. So come out and join city council. Ask questions, share ideas, learn more about city project. Everyone is welcome. That's the first, I think, of three that are planned so far this year. March 18th, Lefino Plaza uh factory road closure. This is a a project that uh has been in the works for quite some time uh about widening a factory bridge there at 35. It unfortunately with construction comes closure. So, starting Monday, March 2nd, uh, Factory Road will be closed just north of US35 for the replacement of the existing bridge over Little Creek, Little Beaver Creek. The detour will be posted. Um, but the, uh, work zone will not be possible, emergency access. So, uh, project completion on this road reopening hopefully July 26, just later on this year in July. Please contact engineering if you have any further questions. Uh regarding this uh just again our police department doing a RAD self-defense course. Um it's we've had actually former council members. Is she pictured in there? Yep, she's in there. Council former council member Garcia's in there. She's she loved it. Uh really it's a good class for a rape, aggression, and defense is where the RAD comes from from. but a training course on women interested in learning realistic self-defense strategies. Registration will open March 2nd through March 13 or until field and classes are on Wednesdays, April 8th through the 29th, 6:00 to 9:00 p.m. at the senior center. So, please submit an application online at beaver creek.govra if interested. Veteran program, uh, what's the count?

Do we know how far are we so far? 36. We have 62 uh total. We're at 36. Please get them in. Uh we have one more month, basically a month and a week left uh until uh the applications. So, hurry up. Please get them in. This is a great program. Um makes our city look very nice with those banners, plus very proud of our veterans and our military members. So, please get those. That again is also on our website for the application. And that's all I have tonight. Well, that brings us to uh Councilman Curran. Move we adjourn, your honor. Second.

Have a motion and a second to adjurnn. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. We are adjourned.