City Council - Regular Meeting

I'd like to call this meeting to order. This is a duly notice regular meeting of Hudson City Council held in accordance with the Sunshine Laws of the State of Ohio section one twenty one point two two, and the City of Hudson Charter, Article three, section 3.02 for Tuesday, 05/05/2026. It is 07:30PM. I'd like to take a moment and welcome everyone who is here in attendance tonight, well as those who may be watching remotely via the HCTV video feed. We'll close section one and move on to section two for the pledge of allegiance.

Will you please stand and join me? Thank you everyone. We'll close section two and move on to section three for the roll call. Missus Wheeler, will you please call the roll?

Doctor Bird? Here. Mister Brezovic?

Here.

Miss Doramo? Here. Doctor Getz? Here. Mister Sutton? Here. Doctor Weinstein? Here. Mister White?

Here. Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. We do have a quorum tonight with all seven members of council present. We will move on to section four approval of the minutes. Item A is number 26Dash0035. This will include the 04/21/2026 council meeting minutes and the 04/28/2026 council workshop minutes. Do we have a motion from council to accept the minutes?

I move to amend the minutes.

I have a Councilor Brezovich, if we will pass them and then open it up for discussion where we can then take a a motion to So we are looking for a motion to approve the minutes which will allow Move

to approve

the minutes as provided.

Thank you, councilor Brezovich. Do we have a second? Second. Thank you, councilor White. Is there any discussion? Councilor Brezovich, I will offer you the floor.

Thank you, mayor. I move to amend the minutes as provided, specifically April 1 council meeting minutes, correspondence section seven. The dream playground is written as an acronym. It does not stand for anything. It is simply the dream playground. Just a small amendment to those council comments.

Okay, thank you Councilor Brezovic. Do we have a second to Councilor Brezovic's motion to amend the minutes as Second. Thank you Council President Byrd. Is there any further discussion on that motion to amend the minutes? Seeing none, Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote on the motion to amend the minutes from Councilor Brezovich as stated here.

Doctor. Berg? Yes. Mr. Brezovich? Yes. Mr. Ramo? Yes. Doctor. Goetz? Yes. Mr. Sutton? Yes. Doctor Weinstein? Yes. Mister White?

Yes. Thank you, missus Wheeler. The minutes are amended as passed by the motion from councilor Brezovich by a vote of seven two zero. Is there any additional discussion on the minutes as now amended? Seeing none, we will return to the main motion to approve the minutes now as amended. Councilor Brezovic, your motion to pass. I just wanna make sure you are still motioning to pass the minutes now as amended. Yes. And councilor White, you seconded. Just wanna make sure that you are in concurrence. Yes. Thank you. Missus Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote on the motion to accept the amended minutes as open on the floor.

Mr. Brezovich? Yes. Ms. Doremo? Yes. Doctor. Goetz? Yes. Mr. Sutton? Yes. Doctor. Weinstein? Yes. Mr. White? Yes. Doctor. Bird?

Yes. Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. The motion to accept the minutes as amended has passed by a vote of seven in favor, two zero against. Thank you. We will close section four and move on to section five, which is proclamations. We do have a proclamation tonight. I'll read that in its entirety. It's item a number 26Dash0036. This is a proclamation, special recognition of poppy days.

Whereas the poppy can be traced to a single individual, miss Molina Michael, who was moved by Colonel John McCrae's poem In Flanders Fields and spearheaded a campaign to adopt the poppy as a national symbol of sacrifice. And whereas the poppy was named the memorial flower of the American Legion Auxiliary at the nineteen twenty one National Convention in Kansas City. And whereas American Legion poppies are made by veterans in auxiliary sponsored poppy shops, maintained and administered by auxiliary volunteers, which are located in VA medical centers and other veterans facilities. And whereas the city Of Hudson recognizes the American Legion Auxiliary and Legion family who have pledged to remind Americans annually of the debt we owe to those who have served and died in the armed forces for our freedom. And whereas in support of this tradition, the American Legion Auxiliary and Legion distributed poppies or will distribute poppies in Hudson on May 15 and May 16.

Now therefore, I, Jeffrey Al Anzvino, mayor of the City Of Hudson, do hereby proclaim May 2026 to be poppy days in Hudson, and I urge all citizens to wear a memorial poppy to pay tribute to those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for freedom. In witness whereof, I have here onto set my hand and caused the seal of the city of Hudson to be affixed on this May 2026. I will ask for any comments from council if there are any. Any comments from staff? Thank you, everyone.

And we do have members from the auxiliary legion here this evening. If you would please come forward, it'd be my honor to present you officially with the proclamation. Thank you everyone. We will close section five on proclamations and move on to section six, which is for public hearings. There is one on the agenda tonight.

It's item a number two five dash one four six. It is an ordinance amending the official zoning district map of the city of Hudson and chapter one two zero five, chapter one two zero six, and chapter one two one three of the land development code to establish zoning District 11. And this legislation was postponed to May 19 which required an additional public hearing tonight. We will accept additional public comment. I do wanna offer the floor to staff if there is anything in summary that you would like to provide that may help for clarification for counsel or the public.

Yes. Thank you. I can give just a brief orientation to this request.

And mister Hannan, if you'll raise your right hand, I'll square you in first, please. Please raise your right hand. And do you solemnly swear under the penalty of perjury that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth during your testimony this evening? If so, please say I do.

I do.

Thank you, sir. Continue.

Thank you. This proposed land development code text and map amendment would create Zoning District 11 along the South Darrell Road corridor. For brief orientation, this amendment would establish and determine future uses permitted along this corridor. This initiative was commenced by Hudson City Council in February 2025. A brief note, this amendment would not be a development plan.

The city does not own or control this corridor. This is also not a developer led initiative. The developer reviewed the zoning proposals aligned by council subcommittee, but this effort was not requested by or guided by the developer. The proposed District 11 text map amendments does speak to multiple items from the comprehensive plan. It would permit additional commercial uses along the east eastern frontage of Darrow Road to support the surrounding business parks.

It would step down the current District 8 Industrial currently present on both sides of Darrow Road by removing some of the more intensive uses currently permitted. And the additionally, the amendment provides some further development opportunity for the corridor in response to the vacant site at 5555 Darrow Road. However, only within the allowances of a planned development, which does require a higher level of design and approvals through both Planning Commission and City Council. As noted for this public hearing, in recent weeks Council has engaged in further community engagement. There was an open house on April 9 with over 100 attendees and over 50 written comments which are attached to your agenda.

Also, Let's Talk Hudson online engagement has been active for several weeks with the opportunity to review the open house information and leave written comment which are also attached for this evening. And members of the City Council also met with comprehensive plan subcommittee members on April 14. And a brief orientation from last week, staffing council also touched on four revisions that could be considered for further study in connection with potential action on this request for the upcoming May 19 meeting. Thank you.

Thank you, mister Hannon. Is there any additional comment from staff, mister Sheridan? No, mayor. Thank you. Continuing on, I will now offer the floor to anyone here tonight who would like to make a public comment specific only to this public hearing. If so, kindly raise your hand, gain my attention, and as you are verbally called upon, please approach the lectern, state your name and address, and I will swear you in and counsel will hear your remarks. Comments from the public will be subjected to our five minute time limit. And again, this is not up for a vote tonight. Our ordinances and guidelines require that we have another public hearing since this was moved and postponed from prior month. May 19 will be this legislation will be open to be actionable.

But during the public hearing or public comment, we can hear comments from the public. But this opportunity is specific only to public hearing twenty five-one hundred forty six on the proposed District 11. Is there anyone here tonight who would like to comment on this public hearing? Delighter? If you'll state your name and address and then I will swear you in, sir.

It's Philip Leiter. 134 Aurora Street, Hudson.

If you'd please raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear under the penalty of perjury that you would tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth during your testimony this evening? If so, please say I do. I do. The floor is yours, sir.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you for this opportunity once again. And I really dread being on the side of the lectern, but here I am. While creating a District 11 may have started with good intentions, it seems to have transformed into another dense housing scheme with one of those faux small towns surrounding it that the residents clearly don't want.

We've had this fight before. Further, it is an existential threat to our vibrant downtown, which we have all worked so hard to maintain. We simply do not have the population, even if you add 200 more households, to maintain two competing market centers. The comprehensive plan already addresses the lack of amenities on the southern gateway. I think reestablishing a Hudson look, buildings up to the road and parking in the rear along Route 91 corridor as a comprehensive plan suggests makes sense.

According to some discussions in the Urban Planning Forum, Cyberbia, planned developments over the last decade or so have limited success, typically only beneficial to the real estate developers and contractors that put them on communities while failing to deliver the promised tax windfalls and community amenities. Planned developments, they argue, are an excuse to not deal with real zoning issues within the Land Development Code on a granular level. Here's a quote from one of the planners in the group. PUDs, planned urban developments, give communities an excuse to not do the hard work of saying what they mean in zoning and then the hard work of amending the zoning when it needs changing. Some may try to convince you that the comprehensive plan folks were just doing the previous council's bidding, and that would be a reason to disregard it.

But even if that were true, it really doesn't matter. If one watches the meetings, you will discover a very diverse group who, after some initial skirmishes, settled on letting the survey guide their path. That scientific survey is the absolute best guide, gauge of what most Hudson residents want. It also clearly illustrates that those who want townhomes and apartment style housing in a densely compact area are a very, very small minority, 42% respectively. Of course, it would be your prerogative council to ignore the wishes of the residents because you believe helping IRG develop their property is somehow a problem you all were elected to solve.

I would counter that assuring a developer make a return on their investment isn't within any of our purview as a community. One can only find thriving, active small towns with intact historic and walkable downtowns like ours among the former New England colonies and a handful of communities that haven't destroyed their downtowns such as Chagrin Falls. Planned developments like Valor Acres sound exciting with the possibility of seeing those trendy new stores everyone is talking about. But when the novelty fades, we will be left with even more empty buildings on our Southern Gateway and some tough reckoning with those downtown merchants who didn't make it. As always, I truly appreciate your service to the Hudson community.

I hope you accept these comments in a constructive way. Thank you for listening.

Thank you, sir. Is there any additional comment from the public tonight specific only to public hearing 25146? Sir? If you'd state your name and address, I'll swear you in.

Tom Mayer, 7153 Valley View Road.

Please raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear under the penalty of perjury that you would tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth during your testimony this evening? If so, please say I do. I do. The floor is yours, sir.

So when I look at District 11, I see a governance issue in the city of Hudson. We have a charter. The charter very clearly states that the comprehensive plan is the operative policy document for the city. It's intended to have a ten year duration. And if council wants to change it, council is charged to rewrite the comprehensive policy the comprehensive plan, not to pass a zoning amendment that violates it.

Somehow, last February, we launched a subcommittee. Three council members, city staff, in private sessions, not in public forums like this, and they wrote something that clearly violates the comprehensive plans focus area for Darrowville Corridor. In September, the rest of council saw it, and they unanimously voted without questioning its disconnect from the comprehensive plan to pass it through to the planning commission. Real governance problem there. Then for a hundred and twenty plus days, the planning commission got down into the weeds in it.

They ignored the fact that the comprehensive plan didn't allow residential in this area, and they debated 10 units per acre or 15 units per acre or 20 units per acre. And they didn't pick up the fact that the proposed District 11 violated the comprehensive plan until the Heritage Association called them on it in March. It's well past time for council to rein this in and bring d 11 in line with the city's operative policy. You need to eliminate the residential, eliminate the 40,000 square foot grocery, eliminate the 20,000 square foot retail, and bring it back to industrial uses, office uses, warehouse uses, and small footprint retail along the Darrow Corridor. Then I would suggest that you do an after action review to identify how so many failed to follow the charter, failed to test this proposal against the comprehensive plan, and put some controls in place so this doesn't happen again.

Thank you. Thank

you, sir. Is there additional comment from the public tonight in reference only to public hearing two five dash one four six? Missus Curtin. You'll state your name and address and then I'll swear you in.

Cynthia Curtin, 1102 Cutler Lane.

Please raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear under the penalty of perjury that you would tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth during your testimony this evening? If so, please say I do. I do. Thank you. Floor is yours.

Thank you. First of all, I just wanted to thank counsel for allowing citizens additional time to examine this issue and provide input. I know there was seemed to be a rush on it in the February meeting, so I appreciate that that you did listen and that you extended us additional more time to look at this. It seems that based on that, the overwhelming response is a consensus of a sentiment of against what is being proposed. So I hope that you listen to what the comments have been and what the input has been, on this topic, which is clearly against the, proposed legislation.

The biggest issue is, and I just want to highlight a couple things because I know you've heard them and you're going to hear more tonight, but the biggest things is that this whole proposed legislation is contrary to the comprehensive plan. And the comprehensive plan is a blueprint of our for our city. It's a plan for the future. It should not be overlooked. It's to serve as the guide for policies and practices and investments, so it should not be overlooked when considering this legislation.

Specifically, the comprehensive plan mentions nothing about residential development in this district. That's a key component. Second thing is the biggest challenge that the comprehensive plan points out is traffic. What impact will this proposed development? I know you say you don't have a development, but you all have one in mind. What impact will the traffic be? Where's the traffic study? We would like to know about that. Also, there seem to be some inconsistencies about what is being proposed and what is already in the plan. This is another reason why it should go right back to Planning Commission so they can hash out the details and get down to the nitty gritty of it.

I have an issue with the proposed purpose statement that was provided in the handout at the open house, and it says that the district provides the opportunity to create a transformational mixed use district through a plan development. This is a play on words. The vision in the comprehensive plan says that the vision of the Darrow Road is to enhance the mix of commercial and light industrial land use. So, the transpositioning their words was not quite accurate. It seems that the intent of this legislation is to circumvent the charter and the comprehensive plan.

Specifically, if proposal, the legislation were passed now, it would be in violation, in my opinion, in violation of code section 12 o four point o one. There is absolutely no rush to push this through, for a host of reasons, and some of which I've already mentioned. The proper and more responsible thing to do is to vote no when the time comes, to vote no on this legislation, and send it back to planning commission, start again, and create something that everybody can live with, that it feels right, it helps the downtown, and it works for our community. Let Planning Commission hash out the details. Also, I wanted to say a couple more things.

It seems I know that there was a subcommittee on this issue, and from what I can tell, this proposal does not follow any of the recommendations from the subcommittee. So I don't know what happened there and the disconnect, or the transitioning of new people, why the subcommittee isn't isn't being followed. And finally, I just wanna echo what mister Mayer said because I think he said it very well. And thank you so much for your time.

Thank you. Is there additional comment from the public tonight, ma'am, in the light green jacket? Just state your name and address and then I'll swear you in.

Mary Lou Wagner, 7871 Valley View Road.

Thank you. Would you please raise your right hand? Do you solemnly swear under the penalty of perjury that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth during your testimony this evening? If so, please say I do.

I do.

The floor is yours.

Good evening, council and mayor. I wanna take a moment to bring this discussion back to something fundamental, process and governance. Our city charter and zoning code are very clear. The planning commission, as mentioned by Cindy Curtain, is the body charged with reviewing, vetting, and recommending zoning changes. That's not optional.

It's by design. They exist to evaluate alignment with the comprehensive plan, provide technical and planning expertise, and conduct structured public review before legislation is shaped. The process protects residents. It ensures transparency, consistency, and informed decision making. What concerns me is that with proposed District 11, that process has not been followed as intended.

Instead of Planning Commission fully vetting and recommending a proposal, we've seen concepts being shaped at the council level, direct engagement between developers and council during formulation. I understand that the developer attended subcommittee meetings. And a proposal advancing without completing the standard planning commission pathway. That's not how this is supposed to work. This isn't about whether someone supports or opposes the development.

It's about whether we follow the governance structure we committed to as a city. When we bypass our short circuit planning commission, we undermine the purpose of that body, reduce transparency for the residents, and set precedent that process can be ignored when it's inconvenient. That should concern everyone regardless of where they stand on this project. So my ask is simple. Send District 11 back to Planning Commission, allow them to complete their required review and provide a formal recommendation that is consistent with our charter and our comprehensive plan.

That's the process residents expect and it's the process council's obligated to follow.

Thank you, ma'am. Is there additional comment from the public tonight with regard to public hearing two five dash one four six? Mrs. Norman? Please state your name and address, and I'll swear you in.

Sarah Norman, 2212EdgeviewDrive.

Please raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear under the penalty of perjury that you would tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth during your testimony this evening? If so, please say I do.

I do. Thank you. Thank you, mister mayor and council members. I do wanna thank you as others have for extending the time of consideration for this proposal. I do believe it shows the community that you really do want to listen to what they have to say, and you provided that opportunity in making the decision about whether to advance District 11.

The problem is that we are still presented with difficulties, notwithstanding that extension of time. I outlined for all of you an email letter that I sent to all council members and mayor yesterday, an issue that occurred to me, with apologies to Mr. Mayor, last week in the middle of the night, when I realized that suddenly, even though PC hadn't reviewed this yet, there was a very real probability that a planned development in District 11 would immediately trigger the implementation of the growth management allocation for two full years, and I actually had to get up and do the math in the middle of the night. In lieu of reading that entire analysis, I am just incorporating by reference that memo that you got from me and all of the contents, and I sent a copy to the clerk so she can include it, but your decision has consequences that impact the future developments, including Clinton Crossing and other significant subdivisions, because of how the growth management allocation, our new housing start lottery functions. Another item that the Planning Commission has not been able to review yet besides growth management is the traffic study.

I heard staff promise to counsel last week that the information would be available next week, well after tonight's public hearing. This timing is gross and truly an affront to the public and the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission asked for this traffic information and information about infrastructure load over six months ago, and now we'll have no opportunity to review it, neither will the public have an opportunity or a forum available to review and comment on that information, and that completely defeats the otherwise good purposes of this extended public hearing. Your planning commission has been discussing District 11 at pretty much all of its past meetings, generating additional considerations related specifically to your vote on this ordinance, and the text appears in several attachments that you have on your agenda. Won't go through those tonight, but I did bring you visual aids just to drive a couple of the points home.

Here's our land development code, all four fifty pages of it, and of those four fifty pages, these are the two that you, the council, and the planning commission will use to pass judgment on all planned developments in the city of Hudson. As noted in some of our commentary, there are a lot of exceptions contained in those two pages. Secondly, the Planning Commission is moving forward with the review of planned development language in the Land Development Code, and the place we started with is with a very primitive, and now somewhat soggy map showing where planned developments are allowed in the city of Hudson. You are looking at this correctly, it is most of the city. 95% of Hudson allows a planned development as a use by right on five acres, two acres if you're in the red part, not at all if you're in District 4 as a conditional use down here in District 8 overlay, and it's allowed, of course, in the area that would become District 11.

My point and the reason why this map matters to you, when we allow planned development everywhere, it communicates the quirky and absolutely irrational approach that is brought to planned developments by our zoning code. We, you, and the Planning Commission, we are not ready to pass judgment on a very complex proposal. In yesterday's letter to counsel, I offered three cost benefit analyses for the direction that counsel might go. You can approve this District 11 legislation with basically no changes, the way that it's written. You could go forward with it, but remove just the residential aspect, or you could reject this version of District 11 assigning that homework to the Planning Commission.

A vote against it now is not no forever, but it would ensure that when the city does say yes, we have full confidence that we are making the right choices for this city. So please vote no on May 17. Give us a fresh start to get this right. And I brought small copies of the map. I hope you'll put it in a prominent place and be annoyed by it and say, why do we do it this way? Thank you, ma'am. Thank you.

Thank you again. I'll offer the floor back to anyone who would like to speak specifically on public hearing 25Dash146. Sir, you had your hand up first. Ma'am, I'll get to you next. Sir, yes.

If you just state your name and address, then I'll swear you in, sir.

Bill Klausman, 2746 Hudson Drive.

Please raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear under the penalty of perjury that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth during your testimony this evening? If so, please say I do. I do. The floor is yours, sir.

Like others, I thank the the, council for extending this additional period to consider the zoning request. I think the prior five presentations, if I got that number right, are absolutely outstanding and they speak to what is not being done here from what I can tell. I remember one thing that occurred at the last board meeting where this hearing was extended. One council member wanted this hearing to be in June so the planning commission or others could look at this. Another council member did not.

Right away, I become I wonder why. A month? A month? And you got all this property down here, hundreds of thousands of square feet and we're rushing? I mean, this thing looks to me like I mean, I was totally unaware of it. All of a sudden in March, there's this notice that goes out. They're gonna rezone they're gonna rezone that area. And how many people in the city even understand what you're doing? They don't. They don't know.

In fact, that when that something like that one month request which was turned down by the consul happens, I wonder. There's more going on here we don't know about. It seems to me that the city will have no residents of the city will have very little or if any impact on what happens down there if the zoning occurs or in the rest of the city. And I don't it's interesting. Hudson And Maine isn't some big thriving retail area.

It's not. People come to the city for the schools. They don't come because of Hudson And Maine. Hudson And Maine is our place. And just go to the restaurants at night and you'll realize that. Anyway, thank you for considering my statement. Thank you, sir.

Ma'am, you were next in the tan. You just state your name and address, and I'll swear you in.

I'm Susan Newman, 2694 Stonebridge Court.

Please raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear under the penalty of perjury that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth during your testimony this evening? If so, please say I do.

I do.

The floor is yours.

Okay, thank you so much, and thanks for the opportunity to speak again. We've been up a couple of times over the last few months. I'm here representing the Hudson Heritage Association to address the proposed zoning change and adoption of District 11. We respectfully urge you to vote no. This is not just a zoning decision.

It's about preservation. Preservation of Hudson's character, preservation of the thoughtful long term plan, and preservation of a process that gives residents a meaningful voice in shaping their community. And residents have shared their voices through the comprehensive planning process, through serving on planning commission, here tonight, by appearing before council at workshops and in public comments, through feedback on Let's Talk Hudson in person at the city sponsored open house, and the voices have overwhelmingly been opposed to the District 11 proposal. The comprehensive plan that council adopted is the result of nearly two years of work and input from more than 1,500 residents. It is the city's official guide for growth, land use, and investment.

It reflects what the community values and where it wants to go. District 11 moves in a very different direction than what is outlined in the text and maps of the plan. It introduces uses that were not prioritized by residents and were not recommended in the plan. This is not a refinement. It is a departure.

Just as important is the potential impact on Downtown Hudson. A central goal of the comprehensive plan and of prior plans is to protect and maintain a vibrant downtown by avoiding competing retail districts. The scale and mix of potential uses proposed for District 11 risk doing exactly that, pulling activity away from the historic core that defines our community. There

are

also serious concerns about this process. The city charter states that the comprehensive plan shall guide council's decisions and that the planning commission plays a key role in reviewing and recommending changes. In this case, the planning commission requested more time and additional information to fully evaluate this proposal. That request was denied. As a result, a complex and consequential decision is moving forward without the benefit of their full review and expertise.

These advisory rules exist for a reason. When they are bypassed, it undermines the integrity of the system. I have attended both council and planning commission meetings and workshops. In those meetings, I've heard city representatives acknowledge that this proposal has strayed from its original intent. I have heard residents who helped create the comprehensive plan explain how this proposal is not in alignment.

And when asked by Doctor. Goetz during a workshop, Katie Benke, the economic developer manager, shared that business are looking for existing buildings, velocity broadband, and reliable cell phone service. We have two of the three, so we didn't need to work on the cell service. She did not state in that workshop anything about housing, restaurants, and other commercial development. While promoting District 11, at no point has the city shared any studies showing that housing or restaurants drive light industrial businesses to relocate, nor has there been any formal analysis of comparable communities in the impact of similar developments on the historic downtowns.

Instead, we're being asked to rely on assumptions and anecdotes, and this community deserves more than that. In fact, the only statistically valid survey related to this issue is in the comprehensive plan. Preservation is not just about land use. It's about preserving a process that respects planning, expertise, and public input. We are not opposed to development.

We are not against new housing. We do support thoughtful, well planned growth, but that growth must follow the framework the community created, not override it. If we set aside the comprehensive plan so soon after adopting it, we risk undermining public trust. We send the message that even a robust community driven effort can easily be disregarded. This decision will shape Hudson for decades. We ask you to preserve what residents have worked hard to define, a clear plan, a strong downtown, and a balanced approach to growth. Honor the comprehensive plan, honor the public process, please vote no on the zoning change and send this back to the planning commission. Thank you.

Thank you ma'am. Is there additional public comment tonight in reference to public hearing two five dash one four six? Ma'am with the glasses? Behind missus Curtain. Sorry. Couldn't see you back there. You just state your name and address and then I will swear you in.

Nora Jacob Snyder, 34 Division Street, Hudson.

Please raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear under the penalty of perjury that you would tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth during your testimony this evening? If so, please say I do.

I do.

The floor is yours.

Thank you.

I am one of the many residents of Hudson you've heard from who oppose District 11. When we elected you to city council, we expected you to represent the best entrance of our community and not those of outside developers whose ambitions most likely do not align with those of us who live here. I am asking you to vote no on this initiative and place the development of this important parcel in the hands of the Planning Commission where it should be. Those of us who oppose this initiative are not against economic development, as you just heard, but it should be done in context of the city's comprehensive plan, and it should be done in a way that protects the city's most important asset, its historic core, and its heritage of thoughtful growth. This development will have an enormous impact on Hudson and a very long legacy.

I am asking you tonight to make sure it is done right. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. Is there any additional public comment with reference to public hearing 2 five dash one four six tonight. Mister Zidek?

Todd Zidek, 16 Hudson Common.

Please raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear under the penalty of perjury that you would tell the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth during your testimony this evening? If so, please say I do. I do. The floor is yours.

I was irritated when I walked in. Now I'm really kind of angry. All of these people who are not coordinated in any way shape or form are coming up here and telling you what community members over and over and over again have said. This whole district eleven idea is some kind of weird vanity project. I have no idea where it came from, who started it, or why it would even be considered by anybody for any purpose.

It's ridiculous. The comprehensive plan clearly states what the District 8 was supposed to be. If there's a case by case basis for a reason to modify or amend that, there are processes by which it can happen. No one has stated any coherent argument for why this whole thing should even have existed or been acted upon. I haven't heard one person.

We need better cell phone service there? I guess. Do we need some kind of amendment to the zoning to make better cell phone service there? If so, let's get on it. Nothing like that has been proposed.

Nothing like that has been articulated, which is why you see person after person after person coming up here saying, stop what you're doing. Idea of sending this back to the Planning Commission, while I guess a lot of Tory, I think ignores the other option, is to drop it and move on. Let's spend our time in better ways that actually benefit the community, that actually respond to the values of the people who are surveyed and articulated in the comprehensive plan. So yes, I urge you to vote no and to please don't do this again. Drop the whole thing.

Thank you. Thank you, sir.

Is there additional comment from the public tonight on public hearing two five dash one four six? Anybody that I can't see in the back? If there is no other public comment, are there any comments from council on public hearing two five dash one four six? If so, please let me recognize you and assign you the floor. Any council member? Councilor Brezovic?

Thank you. I'd just like to start off by thanking everyone who came out tonight. Those who are here just in support, those who've spoken, not just for their time speaking tonight, but for the effort they put into their thoughts. I'm sure quite a bit of thought was put into quite a few of those those speeches. As the mayor mentioned at the start of this public hearing, this is not actionable tonight.

I we postponed this for sixty days, so it may seem like we're taking no action and and intend maybe to go on as as the feeling might have been two months ago. I I wanna ensure the public that is not the case. We have been listening to all of the the many forms of feedback that have been given over the past two months. A number of amendments have been planned. While I don't know how this council will vote in a week, I do feel that everyone who has spoken has been heard, and I hope we will find a solution in a week that may not make everybody happy, but is palatable to most.

So thank you for your time, and that is all I have.

Thank you, Councilor Brozovic. And just a quick minor correction to your last statement. You referenced a week. This will be actionable in two weeks on Additional the comment from council on public hearing two five dash one four six. Is there anything else from staff?

Councilor Durema?

Yeah. I wrote some things as everyone's speaking and like I echo Kyle, I really do appreciate everyone's comments, all of the emails and everything and I am really glad that we postponed this so we can get the everyone's feedback. I think what we learned from the comprehensive plan is the true intent of district eleven, which is why I do appreciate everyone's input and further discussion. When the comprehensive plan came and discussed with us that you guys can review on our last council, it really helped me to understand what the intent of is of this district is. It's difficult for me with people stating tonight that they are for development but they're against what we are doing.

I think what I am doing and I've stated this before with how I vote and how I interpret information in council as a new city council member is I take the recommendations expertise of the specialists and what they do and that's how I base my vote which is why I really do appreciate the amendments that were made to District 11. You know, furthermore, I do unfortunately, planning commission in their twenty one hundred days did not do their due diligence, and I'm ready to move forward with what the amendments were.

Would you slow down?

Ma'am, please. Miss counselor Duremo has the floor.

I do appreciate what the planning commission did in their one hundred and twenty days. I do feel like we they could have done more due diligence, but I will say that I appreciate all of the amendments made at d 11 and that's just the comments I wanna make tonight. Thank you.

Thank you, councilor Duremo. Is there any additional comment from council tonight on public hearing two five dash one four six? Council President Byrd.

Yeah. Just just a couple comments that I'd like to address. So there was there was a comment that the that this has deviated significantly from the original subcommittee that was formed over a year ago. I think what I've seen is that the initial proposal that was put forward by that subcommittee, it has only gotten more restrictive as time has gone on. And with changes from council from planning commissions.

So, it is actually more restrictive and than was originally proposed by that subcommittee. I think one of the speakers earlier tonight also mentioned that this went through subcommittee council members, planning commission, and then folks realized or somebody came forward and said this is not consistent with the comprehensive plan. So that subcommittee included council members who were liaisons to the comprehensive plan that the council members who all approved it, including some former council members, again, gave their blessing to that. And then members of the planning commission who were also intimately aware of the comprehensive plan. So, while I appreciate everybody's comments, and as Kyle mentioned and Sam, these have been very valuable learning about getting your feedback, hearing more information.

There were a lot of people in the city. Again, people intimately aware of and familiar with the comprehensive plan that were part of this moving forward. And and and at that time, seeing that the desire for economic development for making up for those 800 jobs that we lost, and having the revenue replaced so that our values, things that we value, we've talked about at these meetings as well around safety, around parks. Those need economic development. Those need revenue to make those things happen.

So that was the impetus around District 11. The thinking was that in order for that light industrial to be better utilized for that economic revenue to occur that we needed to make changes with District 11. Many of you heard you don't agree with that, but that was the process that we went through. And again, many people familiar with the comprehensive plan were supportive of moving forward

with that.

Thank you, council president Byrd. Is there any additional comment from council members who have not spoken? And before we close section six on public hearing, there were a few individuals that came in late. I do wanna offer the floor back to any resident who may wish to speak on public hearing 25146. Sir, did you have your hand up back there? Yeah. Please.

I was I was in the election. Was helping out. So

I If you'll state your name and address, then I'll swear you

Mike Chupay. 5734 Williamsburg Circle, Hudson, Ohio.

Would you please raise your right hand? Yep. Do you solemnly swear under the penalty of perjury that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth during your testimony this evening? If so, please say I do.

I do.

The floor is yours.

Thank you so much. I just ran over. So, anyway, my concern really boils down to a couple points. The rezoning of something that was commercial at one time, we know that John was there, and we also know that Terex manufacturing was there from about 1950 to about 1980 or so. My concern really is the best example of why not to change zoning from commercial to residential is right over there at phase two.

Phase two, I think we, Tom Tom knows this, you moved about 350 tons of contaminated soil from there because it contained lead, chromium. There were some benzopyrines, which is a known carcinogen. There were some samples taken eight feet down that still had lead in them, and that's an area that had very light commercial use, not like what what was at Terex. My concern is if you start to dig up asphalt, you start to dig up some dirt, you might find some things that are very inappropriate to have in a residential area. So my concern is what was there?

I guarantee I was in the chemical industry for forty years. And the things that people did, the fifties all the way up to the to the clean the cradle of grave legislations was horrible. They dumped things on the ground. My concern was what was there, what chemicals are in the ground, and is there any underground storage tanks containing benzines and other carcinogenic materials? My concern is I don't think you ever want to take a place where there was a manufacturing location and then turn it into residential use. So that's my concern. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. I'll offer the floor back to the audience if there was anybody else who came in late who would like to speak specific only to public hearing 25146. Was there anyone else? Seeing no one else from the audience, was there any other comment from council tonight? Seeing none, we will close section six on public hearing and move on to section seven, which is our general public comments.

Counsel and myself value and respect comments from the public aligned with the City Of Hudson codified ordinance two two zero point zero three titled rules item g subtitled decorum. Kindly asking everyone to remain professional, respectful of the process, and display courtesy professionalism in order at all times. Therefore, per the City Of Hudson Charter article three section 3.02, there is any resident of the municipality here tonight who would like to speak to city council regarding any topic that's relevant to the City Of Hudson. Kindly raise your hand, gain my attention. And as you are verbally called upon, please approach the lectern, state your name and address, and we will hear your remarks.

I will pause a moment and let the individuals quietly leave the chamber. Thank you, everyone. We will continue. Is there anyone here tonight who would like to make a general public comment and speak to counsel? Mister Rivita?

Just please state your name and address, sir. Anthony Rivita. 1746 Edgar Drive. Guess I'm here, kinda repeat what I said last week is that this, civil suit that I that it has has actually been started by, mister Foster's, false statement, and, it was proven through the police department. The police department did an investigation.

I didn't like it that much that they did it, but they actually proved that it was a false investigation. Now at some point, mister Sheridan then spoke up, and he, told eight lies in thirty nine seconds on that same subject. Now we're in a situation where the case has gone in front of a magistrate, and mister Pitchford has gone for a judgment against me without me fighting for the merits. The judgment was denied. It cost the city $50,000.

That was that's all these bills right here, all the invoices, and mister Sheridan has a signature on every one of them. My suggestion, which was to mister, Pitchford, is that we sign a dual agreement to dispose of this. This is nonsense. This city has far more problems than a fence and far more problems than paying mister Pitchford $50,000 for a judgment that wasn't to be. Mister mister, Pitchford sent me a text, and it says that we're gonna have to meet again in June.

And in June, we're gonna start this whole process all over again. And at some point, what he had put in his text is this is gonna be a long process. So, again, to me, I'm coming to you guys as a point as this has been nonsense from the start. This thing has been passed by the staff. You know, if mister Sheridan wants to ignore his own staff, I have a problem with that.

That's what they're there for. And he's he's instead of, to me, I was a manager of a business. To me, my man as being a manager of business, it was my idea to try to solve the problem. You solve the problem by figuring out what is the best decision for the city. Mister Sheridan has poured gas on everything, and I'm not blaming him.

I like him. I just don't like the fact that my city, which I'm paying taxes for too, I'm paying for mister Pittsford for a $50,000 judgment that got denied. We're starting all over again. This case can be a $100,000. Easy. Just this one case. And I said from the beginning, this case started on false pretenses. Mister mister Foster made a statement that was false. Mister Sheridan made a false statement. Mister Sutton came out, said you got a civil case.

This was all done with not any facts being brought to their attention. When they did an emergency meeting, executive meeting, the decision was already made. And it's a shame that this city has to go through this nonsense for something that was done a long time ago. It was passed. And at some point, somebody has to say, this is enough.

This is nonsense. This city is gonna have a lot more problems legally with this Joanne Fabrics. That's just evident. And whether you decide not to do it or not, that's just my opinion on it. They're get and using the the city funds for a project that was already done and passed. Like I said, this is something that just doesn't seem that it's in the best interest of anybody. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you, mister Ravita.

Is there any additional general public comment tonight? Anyone who would wish to speak to counsel? One last opportunity. Sir, since you came into the room, is there anyone who would like to speak to public counsel during public comment? Not really. Okay. Thank you. We will close section seven on public comment and move on to section eight for correspondence and council comments. If any council member has correspondence that hasn't already been generally distributed and or council comments, we will hear those now. Please gain my attention and allow me to verbally recognize you and assign you the floor. Are there any comments from council tonight?

Councilor Goetz?

I wanna thank the city staff for the meeting that we had with the planning Commission, the BCBA, and the Architectural Historic Review Board. This was a training session, and it talked about the roles and responsibilities of each of these groups, and it also talked about how each member should comport themselves in a civil manner in all of our settings, whether it's city council, whether it's in any of these boards. And it was, an excellent job. There was a lot of discussion, and I think it was a very helpful, meeting. So thank you.

Thank you, councilor Goetz. Is there any additional council comment tonight? Councilor Weinstein?

I just wanna thank staff for the road tour. Very informational. Appreciate the time that everybody took to take us around the city so we can kind of lay our eyes on all the different parts of the city and see different projects that are going on. So appreciate the time you took and thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Weinstein. Additional council comment? Seeing no other council comment, I will add just two quick things from my side. I would like to publicly recognize miss Jane Massey who was selected as the April recipient for my twenty twenty six Kindness Challenge. Jane was nominated by her daughter Riley.

I will be looking to soon meet with Mrs. Massey in the near future to personally congratulate her and present her with one of my recognition certificates and appreciation and gratitude coins. And I do just also wanna again congratulate all of the new firefighters that I had the honor to swear in this past week as well as five additional members who were promoted to the rank of lieutenant for the Hudson Fire Department. Thank you to everyone for your service to the community of Hudson. Those are my comments. Is there anything additional from council tonight? Seeing no additional council comments, we will close section eight and move on to section nine, which is report of the manager. Mister Sheridan, I would like to offer you the floor if there's anything you'd like to provide to council.

Thank you, mayor. A couple of things. One, thank you for the road tour. I appreciate you all taking time out. I think it's always a valuable experience for especially new council to see all the different aspects and all the different projects and economic development items that we do in the city. Also to go with what the mayor mentioned here, We are going to be training those 12 firefighters before August, and we hope to have 20 fourseven by Labor Day of this year for our fire department. So we're still on track for that. And I think you all saw the progress in the building. The dorms are coming along and everything else. A couple of events.

Obviously, always check our calendar on our website for any events coming up. But, a few in particular, communication department asked me to call out tonight was the All About Mom event is this Saturday, May 9 from eleven a. M. To three p. M. On the 1st And Main Green. The second item is Fun at First and Main kicks off for the season on Tuesday, May 19 at ten a. M. On the 1st And Main Green. And then lastly, just a comment on Middleton Park.

We are accepting input and the Park Board would like to hear from the public on what they would like to see at Middleton Park. We will be having a meeting later this month. It'll be held on Thursday, May 28 at 6PM. There's a little pavilion in the back if it has inclement weather, and we're gonna be asking for additional feedback at that meeting on-site. Thank you, mayor. That's all I had to report tonight.

Thank you, mister Sheridan. Are there any questions from counsel for mister Sheridan tonight? Seeing no questions from mister Sheridan, we will close section nine report of the manager and move on to section 10 for appointments. Council president Byrd, do we have any appointments tonight?

There are no appointments tonight, mayor.

Thank you, council president Byrd. Any additional comments on future appointments or openings for boards and commissions?

So a few openings coming up in the next few months.

Thank you, council president Byrd. We will close section 10 and move on to section 11 for the consent agenda. Council members, if there are any items on the consent agenda that you wish to have considered separately, please allow me to read the item, gain my attention, and state your wishes. Item A on consent is number two six dash seven four, a resolution accepting the recommendations of the Tax Incentive Review Council to continue community reinvestment area agreements and job creation grant program agreements with the City of Hudson County of Summit. Item b on consent is number two six dash seven five, a resolution authorizing the city manager to allow door to art to install on the city greens, a birdsong art installation in 2026.

Item c on consent is two six dash seven six. An ordinance authorizing the city manager to accept the donation of Melody from door to art. And d on consent is number 26Dash77. A resolution authorizing the city manager to enter into a professional services contract with the Impact Group for marketing services for the fiber to the home project in an amount not to exceed $54,000.

Use poll item two six seven seven.

But it, counselor Sutton. Those are the items on consent. Therefore, do we have a motion to suspend the rules to allow the passage of the items on the consent agenda less item 26 dash 77?

Suspend the rules for consent agenda less d 26 dash seven seven.

Thank you, council president Byrd. Do we have a second?

Second.

Thank you, councilor Deremo. Missus Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote on the suspension of the rules less item two six dash seven seven.

Miss Deremo? Yes. Doctor. Getz? Yes. Mister Sutton? Yes. Doctor. Weinstein? Yes. Mister White? Yes. Doctor. Bird? Yes. Mister Brozovak?

Yes. Thank you, missus Wheeler. The rules are so suspended by a vote of seven in favor to zero against. Do we have a motion from council to approve the consent agenda less item two six dash seven seven?

I move we approve the consent agenda minus two six seven seven.

Thank you, Councilor Goetz. Do we have a second? Second. Thank you, Council President Byrd. Are there any comments? Seeing none, Mrs. Wheeler, you please roll call a vote on the passage of the consent agenda, last item two six dash seven seven.

Doctor. Goetz? Yes. Mr. Sutton? Yes. Doctor. Weinstein? Yes. Mr. White? Yes. Doctor. Bird? Yes. Mr. Brezovac?

Yes.

Ms. DeRaimo? Yes.

Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. The consent agenda, less item two dash 77 has been approved by a vote of seven in favor, two zero against. And since 26 dash 77 was pulled from consent, we will address that separately. And to do that, we will require another motion to suspend the rules on two six dash seven seven. Does council wish to enter that motion?

I move we suspend the rules.

On item two six dash seven Thank you, Councilor Brezovich. Do we have a second to that motion?

Second.

Thank you, Councilor Gaetz. Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote on the suspension of the rules for item two six dash seven seven.

Mr. Sutton. No. Doctor. Weinstein. Mr. White. Yes. Doctor. Bird. Yes. Mr. Brezovich. Yes. Ms. Doremo. Yes. Doctor. Goetz. Yes.

Thank you Mrs. Wheeler. The rules are so suspended by a vote of six in favor to one against. And again, addressing item two six dash seven seven. Do we have a motion to pass item two six dash seven seven so that we can allow for discussion?

I move to approve item two six dash seven seven.

Thank you, Councilor Brezovich. Do we have a second to that motion to approve two six dash seven seven? Second. Thank you, Council President Byrd. Therefore, we'll move on to discussion. Oh, excuse me. Yes, we will open up 2677 for discussion. And counselor Sutton, since you requested this to be pulled, I will offer you the floor first if you would like to have that. No comment. No comment from Councilor Sutton.

Is there any other discussion on the passage of two six dash seven seven on consent from council members? Councilor Brezovic? I would just say I believe this was the item we discussed at workshop a week ago.

I had a few questions, but it was a need for marketing, not an ongoing cost. It made sense to me. And without any further comment to the contrary, I plan to vote yes.

Thank you, councilor Brezovic. Is there any other discussion on item two six dash seven seven from council members who have not spoken? Councilor Weinstein?

Can I ask for just a clarified question from city staff?

You're looking for a point of information? Yes. Or yes.

Yeah. Can you just, don't know, given that we're here now, can you just explain this marketing amount that we're paying? Can you just explain again what this is for?

Mr. Sheridan, if you could address that or your staff?

I'll let the assistant city manager, he was part of the review team that reviewed all these proposals.

Sure, so this is the marketing. We put out a request for proposals to marketing firms to market the fiber to the home project for the city. And as we all know, we completed the pilot project. We're expanding more aggressively if you will into neighborhoods. And we've been using a one person firm to do the marketing.

It's pivot marketing. It's a single person and they've been helping us over the years on the mainly on the commercial side. And with the large expansion or the aggressive expansion into the for the fiber to the home and a much larger volume, Staff felt very strongly that we needed a larger firm, a more established firm with more resources than what we currently have with the single person consult.

Thank you, Mr. Knobloch. Councilor Weinstein, does that satisfy Is your

this marketing mainly for the residents, to market to residents, is that right? Correct.

Thank you, Councilor Weinstein. Thank you, staff. Is there any additional comment or discussion from council members who have not spoken? Seeing none, the motion on the floor is to pass item two six dash seven seven as motion by councilor Brezovic and seconded by councilor Byrd. If there is no additional discussion from council, we will roll call a vote. Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote on the passage of consent 26 dash 77.

Doctor. Weinstein? Yes. Mr. White? Yes. Doctor. Bird? Yes. Mr. Brezovich?

Yes.

Mr. Ramo? Yes. Doctor. Getz? Yes. Mr. Sutton?

No. You Mrs. Wheeler. Consent item 26 dash 77 does pass by a vote of six in favor to one against. That will close out the consent agenda. We will move on to section 12 for legislation. Item a number two six dash six four is an ordinance amending the codified ordinances to allow the correction of scrivener's heirs by the clerk. This is a third reading and actionable tonight. Therefore, do we have a motion from council to pass legislation item two six dash six four?

Move to pass two six Dash64.

Thank you, council president Byrd. Do we have a second? Second. Thank you, councilor Brezovich. Is there any discussion on passing legislation two six dash six four by council? Councilor Brezovich?

Thank you. I looked into these discriminatory errors, you know, to the best of my ability over the past few weeks. And one thing that kept coming up to me, the most common example of them seemed to be those dealing with numbers. A specific example really seemed common was something that meant to be $100,000 accidentally being entered as $10,000 I know in the original draft, we eliminated the calculation of their mathematical errors along with grammatical errors. I can definitely see the logic behind removing of grammatical errors while most of the time it will probably be t h e r e to t h I r t h e I r, you can argue that grammar is difficult and not always true and obvious.

But the writing of these scrivener errors requires, excuse me while I find the granting the Clerk of Council power to fix obvious clerical mistakes and to ensure efficiency. It requires with the city solicitors written approval. There's a paper trail here. So and I'd love if we could get a little input from the solicitor, but to me, it seems we might be limiting ourselves a bit unnecessarily by having removed a calculation or other mathematical errors from this version.

Thank you, Councilor Bresovic. Mister Pitchford, if you would like to comment.

Oh, yeah. I thank you mayor. Thank you, mister Bresovic. I did prepare the initial draft of this legislation. It had, the issue had come up a couple of different times over the last couple of years where there was a typo or something like that in a resolution or an ordinance.

And, this type of language or this type of rule is common across the state in various communities. I did the research. To me, it was best way to bring simplicity, efficiency to our operations here. With respect specifically to your question about mathematical calculations, I did put that in there. I do agree with you that that was the intent.

That could be a very good example. If you've got six numbers listed and they add up to clearly a wrong number, then that would be what I would deem as a scribner error. But, it is up to counsel to decide what would be permissible and what would not be permissible.

Thank you. Thank you, mister Bitchford. Mayor, if I could finish then my time.

I will allow you to continue that question, mister Breswick.

Thank you very much. In light of the solicitor's information, I'd like to make a motion on the main motion to amend.

You'd like to enter a motion Amend. To amend legislation two six dash six four? Correct.

Yes. I would like to add as number three under section b of Scrivener's errors, three, a calculation or other mathematical error and then renumber numbers three through five to become numbers four through six.

Thank you, Councilor Brezovic. The motion on the floor is to amend legislation two six dash four as stated by Councilor Brezovic. We would require a second from another council member to continue that process. Is there a second by a council member to Councilor Brezovic's motion to amend legislation two six dash six four?

Second.

Thank you, Councilor Weinstein. Is there any additional discussion from council only on that motion to amend? Councilor Sutton.

I will argue that a mathematical error is grossly different from a numerical typo. Mr. Pitchford's example of six numbers that add up to the wrong value, I could easily argue, is the total wrong, or is one of those six numbers wrong? Which is why I think it needs to come

back to the

legislative body clarification. I would agree to something like, phrase like numerical typos, but I think mathematical calculations is incredibly excessive and is just gonna lead to problems and does not have my support.

Thank you, Councillor Sutton. Is there any other discussion on the motion on the floor to amend two six dash six four as stated by councilor Brezovic and seconded by councilor Weinstein. Any additional discussion on that motion? Councilor Brezovic?

In lieu of mister Sutton's statements, I'd like to ask the solicitor if at this time he would feel comfortable knowing he did the research on the wording of a calculation or their mathematical error of that being theoretically amended to a numerical typo.

Mister Pittsford?

I understand the discussion. I understand the debate. I personally would not have a problem with including miscalculation. I have seen it in examples of my research. I've also seen it where it was not included.

So again, it's one of those scenarios where it would be up to counsel to put that in. I would be comfortable with making that inclusion simply because it does have the check and balance that you referred to with respect to we will be working with the administration, the clerk, and the city solicitor will be able to double check the six numbers and clarify that those in fact were correct and obviously fix the mathematical error. But again, it's certainly counsel's prerogative.

Thank you Mr. Pitchford. Councillor Brezovich, did that answer your Just

to clarify, you feel that a numerical typo would be sufficient language for this? Yes. Sorry. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Alright. Miss mister mayor, I I apologize for my lack of total Robert's Rules knowledge. I know there's a way for me to change my amendment, or or do I need to make another formal amendment here?

You can amend your motion. Correct? Yes. And I will give you the floor to make that if you'd like to amend your motion to amend the two six dash four, and I would just ask that you clearly state what you are asking to be changed.

Thank you. I would like to change my proposed amendment of adding number three to section b, Scrivener's errors, to legislation two six dash six four to read three, a numerical typo, and then renumber items current items three through five to become items four through six.

Thank you, councilor Brozovic. And councilor Weinstein, you had seconded that original amendment legislation two six dash six four. Do you agree with the continue on? Okay. The motion on the floor by councilor Brezovic is still to amend legislation two six dash six four as recently stated. Is there any other additional discussion from council on the motion to amend as stated? Seeing no additional discussion, missus Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote on the motion to amend legislation two six dash six four as stated most recently by Councilor Brezovich.

Mr. White? Yes. Doctor. Bird? Yes. Mr. Brezovich? Yes. Mr. Ramo? Yes. Doctor. Goetz? No. Mr. Sutton? Yes. Doctor. Weinstein? Yes.

Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler. That motion to amend legislation two six dash six four as most recently stated by Councilor Brezovich and seconded by Councilor Weinstein does pass by a vote of six in favor to one against. That brings us back to the main motion that we have to pass legislation number two six dash six four. Now as amended per that motion, councilor Byrd, I would ask for your reconfirmation to pass that legislation two six dash six four as now amended.

Yes. Move to pass two six dash six four as amended.

Thank you. And councilor Brezovich, you originally had seconded that. Yes. I would just like you to officially state that you were seconding the motion to pass two six dash six four now as amended.

As amends. I second as amended.

Thank you. Is there any additional discussion now on the motion to pass two six dash six four as amended? Seeing no additional discussion, Mrs. Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote to pass legislation two six dash six four as amended.

Doctor. Byrd? Yes. Mr. Brezovich? Yes. Ms. Doremo? Yes. Doctor. Goetz? Nope. Mr. Sutton? Yes. Doctor. Weinstein? Yes. Mr. White?

Yes. You. Excuse me. Thank you, Mrs. Wheeler.

Legislation 26Dash64 as amended does pass by a vote of six in favor to one against. We'll move on to the next item on legislation which is item b number two six dash seven zero. This is an ordinance to repeal chapter two two six of the codified ordinances relating to campaign finance limits and regulations. This is a second reading tonight. Moving on to item c on legislation is number two six dash seven one, an ordinance amending sections two two zero point zero three, two two zero point zero three one, and two two zero point zero six of the codified ordinances to allow the introduction of ordinances and resolutions on regular and special city council agendas after consideration at a workshop.

This is a second reading tonight. Moving on to item d on legislation is number two six dash seven two. This is an ordinance amending part two of the codified ordinances of the city of Hudson to create chapter two one six public records. This is a second reading tonight. Moving on to item e on legislation is number two six dash seven three.

A resolution authorizing the city manager to adopt and implement a policy on accepting funds from nonprofit organizations for public projects. This is also a second reading tonight. Moving on to item f on legislation is number two six dash seven eight. This is an ordinance amending chapter eight seven six, short term rental operations, and this is a first reading tonight. Moving on to the last item on legislation is item g, number two six dash seven nine, a resolution authorizing the city manager to enter into an agreement with Hudson Community Foundation regarding a senior transportation program and accepting a donation for a passenger van.

This is a first reading this evening. That does conclude everything on our legislative agenda. We will close section 12 and move on to section 13 for executive session. We do have an executive session this evening. There are two groups of items that we will motion separately. Therefore, do

we have a motion from counsel to enter into executive session to discuss the first group of items? Yes. I move to enter into executive session pursuant to Hudson Codified Ordinance two two zero point zero five b one two three and five to consider and discuss imminent and pending court action, the leasing, sale and or transfer of real estate, the appointment and employment of public employees and matters that are required to be kept confidential by law. Invited to this executive session are all members of council, the mayor, the city solicitor, and the city manager.

Thank you, council president Byrd. Do we have a second to that motion? Second. Thank you, councilor Brezovich. Are there any comments? Seeing none, missus Wheeler, will you please roll call a vote on the motion to enter into executive session as stated.

Mister Brozovic? Yes. Miss Duremo? Yes. Doctor Getz? Yes. Mister Sutton? Yes. Doctor Weinstein? Yes. Mister White? Yes. Doctor Bird?

Yes. Thank you, missus Wheeler. Counsel myself, the solicitor and the city manager will now enter into a private closed door executive session which passes by a vote of seven in favor to zero against. Please note at the conclusion of our executive session, there again will be two motions for two different parts. We do not anticipate any further public business other than to officially adjourn our meeting. Thank you.