Council - Regular Meeting

Call this meeting of the St. Mary's City Council to order. Roll call, please. B here. Lun here. Slater here. Buchanan. Fitzgerald here. Aqua here. Dylan here. All eyes. Please join me in the pledge of allegiance. I aliance 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.

You've all received a copy of the minutes of the last meeting. Are there any questions or comments from council? If not, may I have a motion to accept, please, Mr. Pup, Mr. Luns? All vote to accept, please. All yeses. Uh, next on the petitions and communications, we have a request for zoning change. Uh, dear Mr. Harris, property owners hereby request a zoning change located at 243 South Wayne Street for part of lot 18 in the south edition and the north half of Clinton Street 66 ft right away and the west half of Wayne Street 82 and 1/2 ft deep rightway in the city of St. consisting of approximately 437 acres of land. The property is currently zoned R1, single family residential, and request the property be zone C2, general commercial, which would attach to the existing C2 zone to the south of this property. The request is being made to allow for this property to be utilized for multifamily residential use. Any questions or comments from council? If not, we'll send this on to the planning commission.

Yeah. Um, why are we uh looking at commercial? Why not R5 multifamily? These you were supposed to better fit. Okay. For across the street, um, single family residences on the south side, one duplex. Behind that is a storage place. Um I guess I was just curious. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. Um the planning commission meetings are um open to the public. So if people have concerns, they can address them through the planning commission, but the engineers looked at they feel it's best fit tax. Yeah, that's all. I am not opposing it. I just wanted to know, you know, why it would just be R5 since it's like a triplex. What is it? Is it a duplex? Is it It's a triplex. Yeah. It sold last year as a triplex, but it was always R1. Correct.

Yeah. They want to take it back to multi. Apparently, the upstairs going to be accessed from the outside and so they want to put it back into a duplex. So, it's already multi. It's just not proposed. I I believe it's they haven't they not used it. Yeah, it's not it's not been zoned for it. Yeah, exactly. You can I don't and I think that I think the engineers always try to be conservative. We don't want to necessarily jump to the the the most open zoning. So R5 would allow for everything potentially. Plus, there's got to be some connectivity to it. There's got to be R5 in that area,

right? the islands of zoning and like the the layers of it. Yeah. For it to match. I um I'm sure we can talk to engineers if you have questions about it and see why they thought that that was the best. It probably fits because it's got a it's got to connect. You just can't have R5 in the middle of nowhere. There's no other R5's around. Okay. And that that's probably what maybe that duplex across the street is zone C2. Then that could be possible. That could be. Yeah, it could be. I I just thought that if it was C2, they didn't be open up to do anything versus R5, it still has to be residential multi. Yeah, I can get clarification. I apologize for not having that information now, but I can get clarification to let you know.

You can't have spot zoning. So, I'm guessing it's probably because that matched

right there. That was all. It was just a question. Okay. All right. Now I got everyone confused. Um I was just going to the next planning meeting. Uh we don't have that date yet. Okay. But we can we can get it out there when we have it. Thank you.

Okay. All right. Any other questions? Okay. Send this on the planning and petitions communications. This is the opportunity for anyone from the audience to address council. Does anyone wish to address council as a whole at this time? Okay. Under reports of city officials, meaning the auditor's report, Mr. Reason, I have no corrections or deletions. Any questions or comments from council? Missing page. Missing page. Two sided.

Nope. Nothing on the second side. I apologize. I didn't copy it two sided. Okay. It's usually one-sided. Okay. Any other questions or comments to council? Next, we have the treasurer's report. I have no changes to my report. Any questions or comments from council? Next, we have the director of public service and safety report. Mr. Foxhole.

Uh, Miss Harris, if I could please, just a couple things to add. As Mr. indicated earlier. Uh it was hard to believe this Friday is May 1st. It is the Smarts first first Friday event. Uh that'll be downtown here in St. Mary's. So, you know, come on down, enjoy that. I think the weather so far looks pretty promising. And then the following Friday is another smart event. It's the uh Smart Chocolate Walk, which will be downtown. Uh the city will participate as well as the Veterans Museum will participate those events. So, uh but other than that, I'd be glad to answer any questions anyone has. Any questions? P M

uh engineering uh 19 the the um traffic study kindly and spruce you know are they still in the study phase they have any ideas what they show

no we haven't our concern of course is with the increase with the truck traffic for the for the feed mill um you we all have concerns with the development of that area which is good uh the Dairy Queen's in there out of course and some other potential developments and additional housing. So, we all are concerned about the amount of traffic at that intersection. So, no, they do not have any results yet, but we anticipate and I think they understand an additional 200 trucks per day once that mill is operational. Are they providing a report with recommendations?

They will. Yes. And we we hope that there's some money attached to it somewhere uh to help us. I'm sure there's going to be some changes that have to be made to accommodate that. Even if it's just the uh the turn lane, the storage lane. If we have to make that a little bit longer to accommodate that truck traffic, then we're going to have to do that. You know when it's supposed to be completed? I do not know that. No. You know, the uh we had speaker at Rotary. The production is going to double from 22 million to 44 million a year and not heard. That's what I was asking. Okay.

Any other questions or comments from council? Yes. Greg number four in engineering on the roof is acceptable. Is that as good as it's going to get? Um, acceptable is is probably not the word that I would use. It passed. There are some areas we were concerned about. The inspector was up there. He said we should not be concerned about those areas. So, it it is acceptable. But to us, it's it's passed and it's it's it's where we needed to be. Okay. So, we're not we don't we're not worried about having to put much more money into. No, sir. We're not. Okay.

Any other questions or comments from council? Yes. Um just a question on fire number four. Um a couple years ago I remember Chief Ays talking about doing a program with Tristar. Is he still working on that? Yes, he is. Yes, he is. Yes. Um we do a lot of different things to try to engage the local students to get into the field and so he is still actively looking into that. Yes. I have one other question. Okay. And I have one other question. something that came up I saw on the concerned citizens page, okay,

in regards to, you know, if they had wish lists of what they could ask the city to get accomplished or done or, you know, just what what the status might be. And one thing that that I as I was reviewing that kind of caught my eye is u for the the park facility of Skip Bachmann. And the question was about restrooms or restroom facilities that could eventually get to go there or be considered for there. Has there ever been any any discussion or traction on that at all?

We we've discussed the restroom facility in in at various times. A lot of it of course boils down to funding as you know that whole complex is not ours. The school still has a good portion of it including that old locker room area. So it gets a little dicey working in conjunction with them on that. Not that the school is not easy to work with. They are very easy to work with. Um, so there has been a lot of discussions about it, but it really just boils down to the funding. Um, we don't like the ports being there either. Um, and so it's something that's is it's on our wish list as well. Um, if we could if we could build it, we certainly would because it is a a complex that gets used a lot. Thank you.

Okay. Any other questions or comments for council? That's changing. Okay. Moving on. Reports of committee, city council. We have none. Under readings of ordinances and resolutions. We have third reading or number 202604. An ordinance conducting a 5-year review of the designated outdoor refreshment area and approving the operation of specified public areas of downtown St. Mary's. Any questions or comments from council? If not, this is reading. May I have a motion to pass? Mr. Fitzgerald make a motion to pass 2020604. Motion to pass for Mr. Fitzgerald, second by Mr. Dolan. Council votes to pass. Please all Mr.

What? I Okay, Mr. Aquaro abstains.

Five yeses. Motion passes. We have no second readings. Under new legislation, we have resolution number 20267. May I have a motion to read, please? Mr. LS, Mr. B. Council vote to read, please. All yeses. Resolution 202607, an emergency resolution opposing Enbridge Gas Ohio's request to increase distribution rates and requesting that the public utilities commission of Ohio denied the utilities request. Mr. Fox,

Mr. Harris, I'll start. We were notified by the Ohio Consumers Council a while back in regards to this. uh they sent information want to know if council would consider uh passing legislation to oppose uh Embridge's gas increase. Uh we had done that in the past in previous uh request. Um we asked them to be here tonight. Uh we have a couple I don't know this is Andrew. I don't know if Katherine's going to zoom in. She's up there as well. So we have these folks Katherine and Andrew. They're from the Ohio Consumers Council. So, they're here tonight to just talk about it and answer any question that you might have. Okay. Sir, are you on the floor? Hi. Can everyone hear me?

Yes. Yes.

Hi, my name is Katherine Mets. I'm a senior outreach and education specialist with the Ohio Consumers Council. And here with me tonight is Andrew Tinkum, who is a regulatory analyst at our state agency. Just a little bit of background. The Ohio Consumers Council is the residential utility consumer advocate. We are a uh an independent state agency that advocates for residential utility customers before the public utilities commission of Ohio in the Ohio General Assembly at the Supreme Court of Ohio and at the federal level as well. Uh we are currently representing 1.1 million residential uh Enbridge gas customers in this case and Enbridge has requested to increase their delivery rates um by about $10 a month for the average household. And this specific request would increase the fixed charge on on people's bills. So whether they use any natural gas or not, they'll be paying more money uh if Enbridge um gets what they're asking for. Um and we're particularly concerned about increasing the fixed charge because that hits low-income families especially hard as well as older adults on fixed incomes. Um, and so, you know, in light of the affordability crisis that so many Ohioans are experiencing, um, we are advocating for, uh, Ohioans to to not face this much of an increase. So, I believe you have our consumer alert and, um, you have a a resolution that we sent a draft of. Um, so, we're just here to answer any questions you may have about this case. Um, so let me know if if if you would like any additional information.

Any questions or comments from councel? Ma'am, I have one question. When does this have to be done? This resolution? When? Yes. When? Well, um, we are, let's see, Andy, do you know off the top of your head when Enbridge filed? Was it late 2025?

Yes. Yeah, they filed in late 25. Um the staff report, um the PCO in these RA cases issues a staff report. Um that staff report is scheduled to come out no later than uh July 17th of this year. Um after the staff report, there's a 30-day period where parties, intervening parties, uh could file testimony and objections to the staff report. And then right now the evidence you're hearing um is is scheduled for late September of this year. Um so in terms of when to when I would recommend getting it done um I would say sometime by midsummer at the latest around when the stack report comes out.

So so typically what happens is council reads legislation three times. um they can suspend the rules and pass it as emergency if it's warranted. But what you're saying right now is that there's adequate time to allow them to read it three times. There it is, Michael. Definitely. Like I said, you know, we're still months away from the staff. I mean, it'll come quickly, but we're months away from the staff report. So, um I wouldn't say that it's something that has to be done tomorrow. Um so, yes, I agree with you, Michael. There's plenty of time.

Okay. Because right now under normal rules, we could pass this under normal readings and it would be done in one month. So that you're saying one month is will be plenty of time for you guys. Yeah. If we're looking at if we're looking at m late May, yeah, that that would be perfect. Okay. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions or comments from council? What what is their reasoning for the $10 increase? What why do they want it? Yeah, I'll answer that. Okay, go ahead.

Okay. Yeah, there's multiple things that they're uh reasons for why they're asking for this increase. Um I'm going to get my notes here so I don't mess up everything. Um but uh one one part of it is capital investments and what they're looking to do is increase their revenue by 163 million um in their base rates which is customers who pay that that service charge each month uh that Katherine discussed. you know, the primary drivers of this case is once again there's capital investments. Um, there's a large pension related ADIT issue. Um, that's another big one. Um, insurance cost increase and they want to increase the return on equity up to 10.3%. Just to kind of give you an idea, national average for utilities is about 9.3 I'm sorry, 9.73%. Um, so some of those are some of the reasons why they're coming in for this review.

Thank you. Okay. Any other questions or comments from council? Thank you you two. Uh, we'll run this through the normal readings and check back with us in about a month and we'll go from there. Okay. Thank you for the opportunity to attend and thank you for having us.

Hey Jim, did he stop here? Next legislation we have ordinance number 24605. May I have a motion to read, please? Mr. Miss Slater, I was about to read, please.

Come on, Joie. What? Oh, I'm sorry. I'm all right. All yeses. Thank you. Ordinance is 202605, an emergency ordinance authorizing the director of public service and safety to advertise certain real estate for bids. Mr. Foxhole.

Uh Mr. Harris, this ordinance uh deals with four or parcels of land. Uh there are two residential lots and two uh farm fields. Um I'll try to talk over the the two residential lots. One of the residential lots is along Martin Road. It's now inside the city limits. It's a little over two acres. It's part of the farm property. It's always been residential. We had a house there and out buildings uh that we rented for years and years and years. It got to be in bad shape, so we raised the structures down just bare ground. That's one residential lot. The other residential lot is in Sweepy Hollow. It's on the west side of Keel Drive. It sets just north of our seven plus acres of conservation area. Those are the two residential lots that the the lot in town on Gil Drive is 272 acres. It's the same size as two of the other three lots on the west side of the road. The the farm fields are out there. They were purchased from the layman family. The largest farm field is about 50 plus acres, 53 acres. is located off of Barkley uh road and that was purchased in from the from the layman family in 1999. We refer to it as layman east. There's also a layman west. It's a little over 30 acres and you get to it from St. Mary's River Road that was purchased in 1992. You know, the landfill sits just just north of those properties. Um and I give past administrations a lot of credit for purchasing these when they did. They were good price and they were a good investment and the hopes was to always annex our landfill somehow get the landfill into the city. It is not and probably never will be within the city. So those properties were purchased and right now all we do is we rent them out to a farmer. We we do bids every couple years and we send it out to local

farmers and they bid on it. So the legislation will allow us to auction all four of these properties um through sealed bids. we will handle it internally and we'll just do it ourselves through seal se sealed bids we got advertised for 5 weeks the a little bit of the history again they bought the property it was a good price and it's been a good investment if you'll remember in 2018 I believe we bought the Betty Nelson farm Betty Nelson farm sits just south of there you have the Betty Nelson farm you have road and then you have our our layman property uh we bought the Nelson farm because it was 80 acres it was a good price and we thought it would help us achieve annexation. So, we purchased it. You know, the canal runs close by there. There's some city property there. Uh once we purchased the Nelson farm, uh we had a survey and unfortunately, it did not get us close enough to do the annexation. We just didn't have enough property along the canal area to get get it done. So, we sold it. We sold it in 2023. It was a very profitable sale for us. Uh when we purchased it, there was a house and some outuildings. Those were demoed and the property was cleaned up, sold it through uh public auction. And again, it was very profitable to us. The property out at the landfill no longer serves a municipal purpose. There's no need for us to have it any longer. We we are not going to be able to annex that landfill. It's just not going to happen. Um and so we decided it would be in our best interest financially to sell the property. And so that's what we would like to do. Um, so I can answer any questions that you have. I tried to go through it. The as you as you recall the the landfill closed operations in the late 1990s and then it closed permanently to according to EPA in 2004 and we have to do postclosure monitoring for 30 years and so that's where we're at. Um, so

anyhow, we would like to sell it. Um, hindsight being what it is, we should have I should have asked to have legislation just for the residential lots so we could pass that quickly and get on with our business. Uh, the farm fields we got advertised for 5 weeks. My guess is the crops that are already in the ground and so there's no need to hurry on that part of it. So, it's not controversial. Um, we would request to be passing our suspension the rules, but if you're not comfortable with that, we can read it three times. Uh, as you know, initially we were not going to sell lot number one of Sleepy Hollow. It just seemed to fit in nicely with our conservation area. Uh, but those 13 lots have sold that those sales have netted us over $395,000. Uh, more importantly in the net, it's added 12 homes to our to St. Mary's. Uh, because one lot we them joined together. So, we have 12 homes on 13 lots. So, we just think it'd be good to sell that lot. We looked at it. It's a great size lot. It's wooded. It's on the west side. Uh the other uh west side lot sold very quickly for pretty good money.

Any questions or comments? Council, Mr. Chair, the property, the farmland property when we bought it, was there were there maybe more current than when it was purchased? Was there any plans for doing anything with that property out there other than just as an investment or we I I was told that past administrations had considered maybe even a golf course out there. I don't know if that's true. That's just what I have heard. Was it okay? That was before my time. Was there ever consideration for for a solar field in that area?

We we've talked about it. Um but you know, we need farm fields. we need to eat. Um we looked out there for some of the brownfield area that we have that really is just ground that you can't farm or do anything with. The problem is is there's no substations that are close. And so it got to be very expensive, but yes, we have explored solar options a few times. We would be very reluctant to put solar on good farm fields because again, we we need farm fields to grow our food. Thanks. Any other questions or comments from council? Um, I have a question. You'd mentioned that the lot number one in Sleepy Hollow that you'd held on to it or we'd held on to it because of conservation concerns.

If you if you look at the map and I apologize the math is you probably have what I have. Um, I think I sent it to you. I emailed it to you. If you'll look this this Sleepy Hollow property, if you'll recall, uh, we had a there was a large section that was donated to us. There was a large section that we purchased uh through a grant, clean Ohio grant, and then the city actually had to purchase some of it with cash. And so part of that conservation area, you'll see the way it goes that that lot one sets just north of it. It does tie in nicely with it because just to the south of lot one between lot one and lot two is is part of a conservation area. It was kind of by itself. And so when we looked at it, we thought, well, let's not sell it right away because it does fit in this area nicely. But the homes that are being built, some of the interest that we've had, we've had folks ask us about it. They've asked us about more residential lots. You know, we've developed or we not we've sold the Weston property that is currently being developed. Uh there's a home down on East Spring Street by Maple that's going to be built. So, we need the housing and that's what kind of prompted us to maybe move off of our original position and just leave it part of the conservation area. It's it's not part of the conservation area, but it's right there with it.

Okay. Yeah. Now, that seven plus acres that's in the conservation area can never be developed and so it'll always be that wooded area. Thank you. Any other questions? Yes, sir. Um, just a simple question. the lot the lot one it'll still have to meet the same requirements of that sleepy hollow the same size house same kind of correct

the only thing we did differently and I think we came to council with it on the couple of lots that were on Gordon Grove they were together and we asked if council would be okay if one house was built on those two lots and council was okay with that they weren't really great size lots and so it was good fit so but yes right now that would still fall under the same restrictions Mr. Fox, I know talking with my farmer friend, they've already got seeds in the ground. Yeah.

Yeah. So, hindsight being what it is, I I should have requested Mr. Frell just cut out the the residential lot so we could have moved forward with them sooner. Uh because the fields are they're going to be planted. We have five weeks we have to advertise and we can't do anything until that's done. One of the caveats going to be they're going to either have to pay the farmer or they're going to have to let me harvest the scraps. They're there going to have to be some type of deal and I'll leave that up to the attorneys to work through. But so if council's comfortable with it, we would like it pass tonight, but if you're not comfortable, we understand. Are there any other questions or comments from council? We have a request to suspend the rules. What is council's wishes?

Mr. L. Make a motion that we suspend the rules on ordinance 202605. Motion to suspend by Mr. Luns. Do I have a second? Mr. B. Motion to suspend.

Okay. Uh council vote to suspend rules. All yeses. That being the case, may I have a motion to pass, please? Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. Quarl, council vote to pass, please. All yes. Thank you. That concludes all our legislation. Understanding. I'm going to go ahead and remind you if you haven't already, please fill out your ethics report.

Do it again. It's the same thing already. No, you've already done it. You're used to

Okay. And may I have a motion to excuse uh Mr. King, please? Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. require council vote to excuse this weekend. All yeses. Okay. Uh, anything else coming before council? Mr. B. Motion to adjurnn. Motion to adjurnn by Mr. P.

Second by Mr. Aquaro. Council about to