City Council - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon, everybody. I call this agenda review of Toledo City Council 05/19/2026 to order. Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Com Ives. Here. Kramer. Here. Martinez.

Present.

McPherson. Here. Melden.

Here.

Morris. Here. Sorantu. Here. Williams. Driscoll. Here. Gaddis. Here. Hobbs. Jones. Here. Quorum present?

Thank you so much. Items one and two come from the Department of Public Service. Welcome.

Hi. Good afternoon, council. Thanks having us. I'm Sarah Stacy, commissioner of urban beautification, and I'm here with director Joe Fosner of public service. Item number one is to authorize the expenditure of an amount not to exceed 26,000 from the general fund for the collection, hauling, and processing of materials collected at our twenty twenty six Clean Toledo recycling events and, some additional things that may be collected at the Clean Toledo Center, mostly e waste.

This is to authorize the mayor to accept bids and enter into necessary contracts for recycling disposal services. This ordinance will help cover costs for three scheduled clean to legal recycling events and support a large volume of materials collected by vendors, for proper recycling and disposal. Happy to try to answer any questions, and we're asking for SEP, please.

Council member Gattis.

Thanks. Could you just remind us where the events are going to be?

We will have two events at Central Avenue 1189 Central Avenue, our, transportation building. That's right. And one event is planned at Ravine Park 2.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, chair.

Alright. SEP, it shall be.

Thank you. Item number two, this ordinance is to authorize an expenditure of 75,000 from the general fund as an annual contribution paid to keep Toledo Lucas County beautiful, KTLCB. This is to help cover costs for neighborhood cleanups, their litter league, and recycling programs. KTLCB is a great partner of ours. They provide supplies and logistical support for cleanups in neighborhoods, parks, public spaces, and key corridors, and they annually distribute approximately 9,000 bags, 4,500 pairs of gloves, safety vest, and litter tongs to all help keep Toledo clean and beautiful.

This, service continues to grow, and I believe our commitment to partnering with KTLCV is important, and this work, will help us continue to build safe and vibrant neighborhoods. Pending any questions, we are asking for SEP, please.

I'd like to recognize councilman Hobbs for his attendance, and we'll go SEP. Thank you. Thank you. Items three through eight come to us from the Department of Public Utilities. Welcome.

Good afternoon, members of council. Calvin Harris, commissioner of sewer and drainage services. I'm here today to present items number three, which is proposed legislation authorizing the expenditure from the sanitary sewer replacement loan fund from an from the Ohio Water Development Authority of an amount not to exceed 99,000 for the repair of Maintenance Hole 31234. This structure located near the corner of Sherwood in South Detroit was damaged during the high level sanitary sewer overflow in in the early in late May of last year. This repair is necessary to restore the structure's integrity and for it to continue operating properly. I'm respectfully requesting SCP and happy to answer any questions.

Council member Gaddis. Thank you. Thank you. What's the proposed timeline to get this completed? The manhole? Mhmm.

Hopefully once we get this contract procured, we'll have it done probably in a week.

Okay. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you, chair. Alright.

Councilman Martinez, your recommendation, please. SCP. Thank you.

I'm here today to present item number four, which is proposed legislation authorizing an annual expenditure of an amount not to exceed $40,000 annually, $20,000 from the sewer operating fund, and $20,000 from the water operating fund to provide payment to the Ohio Utility Protection Service, also called OOPS, for an annual membership fee. I'm respectfully requesting SEP and happy to answer any questions.

Councilman Martinez, recommendation. SCP. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks, Calvin. Good

afternoon. Botika Pope Bannister, director of the Department of Public Utilities Public Works. This request is for community gardens to refund the programming that we have. The legislation authorizes the expenditure of up to $50,000 from the water infrastructure fund for the cost of installing water infrastructure community garden locations within the city. So this request allows us to cover the cost of installation up to $5,000 per location.

The location selected will be based on community impact and need. The city will install water usage equipment such as the tap, remote read meters, and backflow prevention devices. The gardeners will be paying for the water usage at the location and we will have a contract for water service in the name of an individual or the organization. Since 2013, we've had 35 community garden locations and we excited to welcome some new gardeners into the program. I will take any questions, and I request SEP.

Councilwoman Jones.

Thank you, Chair. Well I am very glad to hear about this because I mentioned it before of when this will be back online. So will this take place, well when is the expected date for I guess applications to come through for this or you already have a list from last So

we are accepting applications, the application is on the website and we've already started a list of those that are interested I in the mean as of recently.

Okay because I just want to because I've been getting questions so I just really want to put people on to get on at least the list or try to get some priority with that. I guess another question would be about the wording, the wordage. So I know there is a difference between community gardens and urban ag. So I really want that messaging to get a little bit more clear when it comes to that community gardens are usually labeled as the small organization oriented gardens that you would see throughout the neighborhoods. Then you have urban agriculture which is usually for profit.

They take up multiple parcels usually on a bigger stance. So when it comes to that I know that you're saying that up to $5,000 per location. But also keep in mind that if it is a farm there will be more water possibly being used versus a community garden. So I would just want to be prepared for that and with the messaging when you're starting to really advertise this probably separate that out. Community gardens and urban or urban farms.

Because that definitely is a big difference as well. Would you have, so I'm trying to see if there was would be a breakdown. What is like the usual cost that you've seen from the past gardens or farms when it came to water? Do you have like, or would I have to put in a referral as far as just water expenses?

If you put in a referral then I can get that information to you. Because it varies because some of the projects are smaller than others. Right. So we'll sift through and we can give you an average cost.

Okay. And then as far as like metrics because I definitely would want to keep an eye on this depending on like how much water is used, how much is being spent per month for the grower or the farmer. Of course if there was need to be any replacements that would take place, just trying to get a little bit more of a data metrics when it comes to this as well. So we can be prepared for future funding and things of that nature as well too. But I'll put that in referral.

Okay, and

as far as replacements that's the equipment

The equipment.

That we're installing?

Or even and also if they were past gardens and they're not a garden anymore because I know a lot of organizations kinda left that and left it to their own vices and some of the gardens just kind of vanished. But those that were previously installed making sure are they still gonna be installed or are they still gonna be in use? Do they have plans to revisit their garden? Or is there what would you do with that equipment if they're not going to bring back a garden? So that sort of information as well too. But

other than that

I'm just really excited that this is coming back and looking forward to just telling people more about it. And I will be happy to promote this too. So if you have any sort of social media blast that I can share, just trying to get that word out so people can start getting these water taps. But thank you very much for your work as well. Thank you, Chair.

Of course. I'd like to recognize President Williams in attendance as well. Council Member Gaddis.

Thank you. And I'm excited as well. I had a question in the same vein as Doctor. Jones', do we do community garden follow-up check ins to see if they're still continuing? I know throughout my district there's some they've outlived their life cycle and they're no longer being used. So do we check-in to make sure that if we've installed those locations there's still a garden there?

I will take that as a referral. I know we do reach out to make sure that they're winterizing at the end of the season. We have materials that we provide them, and then we have inspectors that will go out and make sure that everything is working well. We do have connection with them after.

Okay. And then it says up to $50,000 How often how much have we spent in previous years? Have we spent the full amount?

I know would have to go back and check our last request, but we have used all the funds from our last

request.

Okay, so you're anticipating the whole 50,000 will be used? Yes. Okay, okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

I just wanna thank you for having the program. I know I've referred a couple of guardians to you in the past, and they're always appreciative. So thanks so much for carrying this on. Councilman Serrantu.

Thank you, mister chairman. Are sewer charges director, are sewer charges also gonna be charged to the people?

It's a water irrigation meter, so no, it's water only.

Just water only. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, mister chair.

Of course. Councilman Martinez, your recommendation?

Thank you Mr. Chair. Actually Councilman Soronte asked my question, so that's good to know. By way of referral, can we have a expectation by district so we know what community gardens are receiving the benefit? And if not, we can make sure that if we're aware of community gardens that are interested we can make sure that they can apply. So SEP.

Thank you.

Item number six please.

Alright, Andy McClure, Commissioner of Plant Operations. I'll be presenting six, seven, and eight. For convenience, I would like to present six and seven at the same time. I'll ask for separate approval at the end. They're essentially for the same project. So Raw Water Main real estate acquisition, the design of the Raw Water Main is essentially complete. There are a lot of real estate services including easement negotiations, property purchase. There may be some easements to have, you know, paid for. And we didn't feel that it was appropriate to try and put this in with the loans. So we're asking to appropriate money from the replacement fund.

And we're also reappropriating monies left over from the Basin 8 project, was bond funded. So item six is the reappropriation for bond funding from Basin 8. I'll take any questions and request SEP.

Your recommendation, Councilman Martinez.

My apologies, sorry. SEP. SEP.

Alright, and then item seven is from the water replacement fund the same project. Again I don't take any questions. I want to request SEP.

SEP.

We will go SEP. I do want to acknowledge that this is no small feat. I'm sure there were, I don't know how many parcels you had to work with for easements on this. And I'm also aware that it's going through a through a landfill. So I know you guys had your work cut out for you, so just want to express my gratitude for how much work it took to make this happen.

Thank you. I'll pass that along to the folks on the project. Awesome. Alright. Item number eight is just goes hand in hand with the previous legislation to accept grants from Ohio EPA for preparation of educational materials related to source water protection.

City of Toledo was asked to participate in this because the Lake Erie Watershed is such a big area and we need to source water protection for HAB, protection against HABs. The previous scope, we were approved previously for an old scope for the grant work, the educational materials, and the granting agency approved larger scope of work. So we need to accept a little bit of more money from them. So it's gonna be an additional $4,841 raising the total amount of the grant to $19,970. We're taking questions and request SEP.

Councilman Hobbs your recommendation? Martinez your recommendation, sorry.

I think I'm not as good looking, but thank you. So what a terrible problem to have. You know we have to accept our money SEP.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Item nine comes to us from the office of the mayor.

Good afternoon, members of council. Simon Nee, commissioner of government affairs. Here with Josh Quinlan from our division of road and bridge maintenance to introduce item nine. Item nine authorizes the mayor to enter into a grant agreement with the Ohio Rail Development Commission for a $5,500,000 grant to complete design engineering of a railroad grade separation or overpass at one of the two railroad crossings on either Manhattan or Summit at the southern end of Point Place. So I'm sure you all know how frequently both of these crossings get blocked by stopped trains.

It's not uncommon to see them both blocked at the same time, which really restricts movement in and out of the neighborhood for our emergency responders in addition to just for the movement of daily traffic. So this grant will allow us to complete the design and engineering necessary to select the preferred location and complete environmental review so that we are ready to apply for federal construction funding in the future with an essentially shovel ready project. So it's a great opportunity to take a real step forward with this project that addresses a longstanding need. I would just emphasize that which of these two locations we select will definitely include public input. ODOT is going to oversee the design process, and there are public input requirements built into that process.

There's no match for this grant. And the commission does need to encumber the funds by June 1 before they expire at the end of the state fiscal year. So for that reason, we respectfully request SEP and are happy take any questions.

Councilwoman Morris.

Thank you chair, and thank you for going after these funds. This is a huge problem for District 4 and for District 6. We had issues just even building a fire department right there. And, if you've ever been stuck in this Bermuda Triangle, it's scary. And, so, I'm really excited about trying to figure out how we can better serve that community.

The fact that Columbus has to be reminded that they actually won Toledo in the Michigan Ohio war is is problematic for me because you are finally able to get some real money into the city of Toledo which is a feat in and of itself. So I'm just thankful that Columbus remembered where we are and that we're gonna get some of that money and however it gets here, however it happens, thank you so much for all of your diligent hard work. Thank you. Councilwoman Kramer.

Thank you chair and thank you so much. This is a huge grant so kudos and this is going to change people's lives. This is going to make it easier for people to get around the city which is important. And I love the public input part. Can you tell us how the residents of Toledo are going to be made aware of opportunities to put in input and are there gonna be meetings or how's that gonna work?

Sure, Josh may be able to speak a little bit more to the details but so this project is gonna be run the same way that we would run an ODOT roadway project and get through the environmental review process for those projects stipulate specific requirements for public involvement depending on the nature of the project, how involved it is and what the potential impacts are. That varies by the nature of the project. And Josh, don't know if you have anything to add to that.

Yeah, I think Simon pretty much hit the nail on the head with the size and scope of the project. So depending on what the size and scope is, ODOT triggers different levels through their environmental process. And as part of their environmental process it will be posted on their site and then usually we reshare those on our site as well. So social media and the local news media would be the best way that they would see.

Okay. And is it going to be kind of a democratic process? So like people vote for which street they want or how will that be decided?

A lot of it comes out of the preliminary engineering report which is part of this process. So there was a feasibility study that was already completed that ODOT so graciously paid for and conducted. And then this process will get more in-depth to see which one of those two options is more feasible and which one and then the public input is part of that. So it's definitely part of it, maybe not fully though.

Okay, all right, thank you so much.

Yep. Councilman Saronte.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, and maybe you already addressed this, but when do you think the project would begin? When do you think it would be completed?

So that is a very good question. So without construction funding being funded, it's kind of unknown. But assuming the design and everything goes through, you're looking at least ten years and potentially even longer than that because right adjacent to it as the people know, there's a very large FirstEnergy substation right there that would have to have work done to that. So the coordination with FirstEnergy and then also the coordination with CSX is gonna be a lengthy process.

Okay, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Of course. President, just kidding, Council Member Melvin.

Thanks, sorry. And thanks. And sorry. Why is it a lengthy process?

So everything with the railroad, the railroad has their process that has to go through, ODOT has their process to go through. We're talking about a federal rail grant that goes through, so they have their process, and then First Energy also has their process to go through. So just lining up the timing of all those is going to be significantly longer than most projects.

Just to add a little bit more on the utility coordination, that particularly would be an issue at the Summit Street location because right next to where that pin is on the map is substations, high mass transmission lines and they just gave us kind of a ballpark estimate of what they thought it would cost to relocate those transmission lines, which is going to be necessary to do the project and a major expense. But there's going be a lot of engineering that goes into even figuring out how to do that. So both of these alternatives are complex from an engineering perspective in different ways, so that's part of the need for a lot of time

as well. So it's more than just the complexity of enormous organizations. It is the complexity, the technicality of the work being done.

It's both, yeah.

Well that's a terrible combination, but it is a relief that it's not just huge organizations not wanting to, I don't know, innovate in processes, which is like kind of a frustration. Well hey, just wanna give you a lot of credit for this. Mentioned shovel ready, so if I'm interpreting this right, mean this is the city of Toledo being ready with this project and being able to catch those dollars when they're available. Is that a fair way of thinking about what is happening here?

Correct, yeah. When we complete this process we'll have all our environmental review will be done, which is a big hurdle to get over, especially in this environment, to be competitive with federal grants. We'll have our preliminary engineering done and we'll be able to apply for these competitive funds and say, if you give us money, we're essentially ready to build this.

Yeah. Well, kudos. I mean, it's just a really great example from Simon, your work and your team. And with your demeanor, I'm not shocked that this is happening. So kudos.

Thank you.

I was wondering how long it would take. Councilman Sarantu.

Thank you, mister chair. You know, this brings to mind what councilwoman Morris and I have discussed publicly, and that is the railroad crossing with no gates on Detroit Avenue near to LaGrange and how dangerous. We had a fatality there not that long ago. So I don't know if you could check with the railroad and just see what their time frame is on that, but we just want to avoid more fatalities at that crossing. Is that something you could look into, or should we just do it ourselves?

You said that was La Grange and Detroit?

Yeah. La Grange and Detroit. There are no gates. I don't think there's even lights there. There are lights? Okay. Yeah. But it's it's very dangerous, and we did have a fatality there a few months ago. So it would be and they did respond. Also, the councilwoman and I contacted PUCO, which oversees that, but we haven't heard anything more. It would be interesting if you could help us get an update on that time frame.

I'll look into that for you.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, mister chair.

Of course. Councilwoman Morris. Just to piggyback on that, I think that they did they they did award some type of security funding for those two intersections both on Detroit Avenue and also on LaGrange just north of Sylvania. That is a different rail line, that's Norfolk Southern. So and this is CSX.

Again, playing with rail companies is not everything. If you think the oil companies are crazy, just hold my beer. But I can tell you that they are allegedly going to secure those locations. I'm not sure on a timeline but perhaps Simon and Abby can get that information to us. Just piggybacking, thank you.

President Williams, your recommendation? SEP. Thank you. Thank you. Item 10 comes from the Department of Transportation. Welcome.

Good afternoon, Kristi Sondkrant, Commissioner Engineering and Construction Management. This resolution gives the city the authority to apply for applications through the Lake Erie West Regional Council to fund future roadway projects. Successful projects are typically awarded grants of 80% of project construction costs with the city responsible for the remaining 20%. Projects have not yet been decided but projects that are applied for will be based on need and will commence construction between 2030 and 2031. Requesting SEP and we'll take questions at this time.

Councilman Driscoll, your recommendation.

SEP, do think that when we know what we're gonna apply for, I think we should meet with the district representatives if it's a project that covers Thank their you.

SEB, thank you.

Thank you.

Yeah. Item number 11 comes from the Department of Housing and Community Development.

Yes. Good afternoon, counsel. I am Colleen Ali, deputy director with the Department of Housing and Community Development. I am asking the authorization or appropriation of a $145,899 from the unappropriated balance of the general fund to provide funding support for the remaining balance of the acquisition and transition costs of the merger of Beach House doing business as Leading Family Homes and Family House. Ordinance five two one dash two five, which was passed in November 2025, authorized that appropriation for the entire amount of $2,291,798 from the general fund.

We had already disbursed 145,899, and just to explain this a little bit further, what we typically do is we don't give people money ahead of time. It's usually and typically reimbursable, you do the work and now we pay you, but because of the nature of this situation of the acquisition and merger, Leading Family Homes was in need of having funds to be able to have that merger happen. They needed to bring on computers, they needed to be able to pay staff, they needed to do a number of things to make this be able to happen. So what we did was instead of paying the entire amount, we put it in half, which we have already paid and they have received it, and then we requested documentation for that half saying did you do what you said you were gonna do? Show us the time sheets, show us how you used this money because we don't wanna get ahead of ourselves where we've given them almost $300,000 and then we're coming back later on saying did you do it, where's the documentation proved that you did what you did?

So they did what they said they were gonna do and now they're requesting the remaining balance because they have spent that money and they need that money and it was appropriated in 2025, it just didn't unfortunately get moved over to 2026 when we had requested it, and so we're asking that this money be appropriated for that so we can do the final installment of that and they can continue on with that merger and acquisition that they have encountered. And we are asking SEP and I will entertain any questions.

Councilman Driscoll.

Thank you, chair. I'm glad these organizations merged, it's a good thing, I'm glad we're encouraging it, I'm happy to vote yes on this. I do kind of wonder why it wasn't in the 2026 budget. And that might be a question for finance. But I don't boy, we took our time and did a lot of work on that budget. And I don't want to undermine it with I mean, once in a while you have expenditures that kind of arise. But if we knew we were going to do this, I'm not really sure why. So I don't know if it's best to handle that question here or by referral. I feel like finance needs to weigh in on that.

Yes, I agree by referral would probably be the best

Okay, then we'll submit a referral for that because I don't wanna, like I said, I don't wanna undermine our budget process. We do that for a reason and we knew about this, right? So I think we got to just tighten up that process, but either way I'm supportive of the expenditure. Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilwoman Jones, recommendation. SEP. Thank you.

Thank you.

There is there is one item likely to be relieved to the water quality committee. That'd be ordinance 60, appropriation from various funds for customer assistance grant program for utility customers, $100,000.

Councilman Martinez.

Thank you, mister chair. Yeah. So last week we had a water quality meeting. We discussed a variety of topics. One of them was the water turn off process. And it sounded like there was a very holistic approach, a very methodal, I can't pronounce the word.

Methodical. Sure. We'll go with that.

A very good process in place, firm but fair. We noticed that the timeline was a bit long from start to finish. So I think if we had any objection if we couldn't truncate that by at least thirty days. But I know the water department has been working very diligently not just with their internal department but also neighborhood organizations. They've been very proactive in getting the word out.

And we had a very good hearing on it. So I am very supportive of relieving this from committee and getting it into productive use. So thank you. Thank you to Director Bannister for all of her assistance in this and having a very robust program. I was very impressed. Thank you.

We have three items likely to be relieved of housing, community development, and public health. Ordinance 200 dash 26, accept fortieth year ESG funds from HUD, submit a one year action plan and appropriate $619,354. Two zero two dash 26, accept the thirty fifth year home funds from HUD and appropriate one million nine hundred and seventy one thousand one hundred and forty seven dollars and eighty six cents for the prior year carryover $57,595,759,009 and $43.02 0 three-twenty 6 except the fifty second year CDBG funds from HUD appropriates $7,026,026 with a prior year carryover of 985,000. We have two resolutions in attendance. We're recognizing the twenty twenty five, twenty twenty six ACES students from councilwoman McPherson and recognizing the winners of the fifty eighth annual cotillion twenty twenty six from president Williams.

We have four second read items. One eighty dash twenty six, we have a dip repealing ordinance four eighty three dash 19 and a grant with Toledo Warehouse District Association for street furnishings for 25,000 from CIP. We have a corrected, we had to get a an account code for that. 185Dash26, a contract for two years, one year renewal option, removal, hauling, and reuse of spent lime, 5,500,000 from the water operating fund.

Councilman Martinez. Thank

you Mr. Chair. And the word is methodical. Thank you Councilwoman Kramer. So we had a hearing last week and we did discuss the spent lime issue.

The vendors were invited. There were a lot of questions and I know we have some referrals up to the administration for a response. And I do have a text amendment to the legislation that we worked with the law office and the clerk of counsel to address. Although I'm not ready to present it as of yet because we are still waiting for the referrals to come back and that'll kind of dictate which direction we go. But basically what it is, is requesting that the administration award the second highest best user based on the issues with our previous vendor.

One of the concerns that we have or is what I'm hearing regarding the other vendors is the capacity issue. So all the vendors were invited to the meeting. So two of the three showed up. We had some public testimony about some of the complaints on console. Some of the recurring issues from Angola Road came up.

So I just want to make sure that whatever we decide to do, number one we have to get this Lyme taken care of. That is a must. What I don't want to do is promote bad behavior and continue having the same constituent complaints in these areas. The pit on Angola Road still has not been taken care of. It sounds like Consol has been cleaned up but for EPA stepping in to make them clean up.

So it sounds like even the number one vendor has capacity issues. So I'm not sure the approach but I am willing to listen to other options. But as of right now what I'm recommending is the second highest or the second lowest bidder. I think they're like 40 to 55¢ difference per per ton or something like that. And then also originally it's I'm willing to just do a one year contract for that to provide everyone the ability to scale up, get correct with either the oversight administration from the OEPA or what have you.

And then also that gives us time to strengthen the debarment language. Debarment language basically is a contracting requirement that says if you're in violation of any rules or regulations laws that you can be, basically you can't bid on the contract anymore. We have that language. Unfortunately it's very weak in my opinion. And I don't know who enforces what.

Because if that was the case based on my interpretation of the current debarment language, Rocky Ridge would not have been allowed to continue their contract. So that's just obviously I'm not an attorney, but that was just my interpretation of the debarment language. So I'm open to other suggestions if any member would like to work with me on this I'm happy to. I am kind of holding this until we get our referral questions answered from the administration. But I'm very concerned that whomever takes this spent line that I do it under responsible manner to our constituents.

So regardless if you're in South Toledo, East Toledo, West Toledo, North Toledo, downtown area, wherever that you don't have to worry about your health or safety because of airborne particulates or any type of leakage because it's drying and just seeping into the sewer system. So more to come on that, but I would just want everyone to know that I did take this very serious. I want to make sure that we're being fair and equitable. It's also my understanding that the whole bid process has been kind of skewed a little bit. There was maybe some mistakes made and I just want to give the administration an opportunity to correct them and make sure that everyone's on a fair playing field.

There's more to this, but I will yield my time at this point. But I just wanted to let everyone know that we need to get this, we need some sort of solution. Thank you.

Thank you. If I may, when do you anticipate sharing the amendment with the rest of council?

You'll have it by Friday, Friday's

packet. Friday's packet, okay. And did you contact the potential awardee about the change in terms?

I have not done anything at this point. Okay. I didn't want to jump the gun.

Sure. You did mention the one year piece, that's why I'm curious because sometimes they will change their pricing if we do a shorter contract. I would just be concerned about that. Councilman Sarantu.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. My understanding is that the CONSOL site has not been totally cleaned up yet. So by way of referral, I'd like our environmental service department to weigh in on this and tell us whether the site has been cleaned up thoroughly or not. Secondly, I do want to reiterate that we did make several referrals on this spent lime issue, and we don't have any answers yet. And I'm not prepared to vote on this next week if we don't have the answers writing from the administration. Thank you, mister chair.

Of course. President Williams.

Thank you. I definitely wanna make sure that we get these referrals answered, but we can't hold this up any longer. So whatever you guys wanna do, we'll do it on Tuesday. Thank you.

Continuing on with the agenda, please.

Let's see where are we.

197Dash26 still under a second read items, contract for five years for the operation of the Toledo Police impound lot with five year renewal, $2,471,617.35 from the municipal toll lot fund. Councilman Sarantu.

Thank you, mister chair. Again, we have made at least a few referrals on this issue. This is an important issue, an important decision for council to address. And again, we need the answers to those referrals before we can intelligently vote on this issue. So I appreciate the administration would speed up the process of answering the referrals on the toll road issue. Thank you, mister chair.

President Williams? I was looking at the chair of the committee, but I encourage everybody to come to the committee hearing May 21 because we're talking about it there. So maybe some referral answers could be answered at that safety meeting on Thursday at four p. M, that's the twenty first.

Thank you. Councilwoman Morris.

Thank you, Chair. I will not be able to be at that meeting, but I did just forward all of Council information about the business that currently holds the tow lot contract, is a district six company. That doesn't mean that they deal with everything with the tow lot, but they work in and it's a three year term contract. Patrick McKinney, is the head of the place and I can't think of the name of it off the top of my head, I'm sorry. U Polar Parts or yeah.

It's the old cherry, cherry picked auto parts and so he will be here on Thursday and I hope that you will give him you know, every courtesy to come up and speak. And then also if you have questions afterwards, again, I just provided his contact information if you do have questions. So thank you.

Course.

Ordinance 204 dash 26, resolution with the intent to vacate Bismarck Street lying north of Swan Creek. We're still waiting on the legal description in a word document. We have seven new items from city council, from councilman Hobbs dedicating Searles Road between Door Street, Nebraska in honor of doctor Crystal Ellis, From council president Williams dedicating the corner of Miami And Wilmot at 11:01 Miami in honor of Kamani Latigue. And from councilwoman McPherson dedicating the corner of Junction in Indiana in honor of Lee and Vernon Liddell. All three of these went through the Board of Honor and were recommended for approval.

Council Member Melvin.

Just a super quick question, I love the Doctor Ellis honor. I'm curious if we can't think of something additional maybe at the Ottawa Park putting green. There's like the legend of Doctor. Ellis, like chipping and taking people's money. There is one of my favorite things in the world. He would just chat people. I mean, he'd make wagers and he would win all the time. And I just think that'd be a fun. I don't know what it is. I mean, a putting green, it's little strange to do, but I'm just telling you, I've heard more about doctor Ellis on that putting green than, than almost anywhere. That's all.

We have amending ordinance four sixty nine dash 25 to change the account code for a d six dip project, $80,000 for a basketball court. Then we have amending ordinance four seventy dash 25 to change the account code for a d six dip project, 175,000 for pickleball courts. And the third, amending ordinance one seventy eight dash 26 to change the account code for a d one dip project, 77,400 for speed back signage. Next, we have declaring a moratorium until 11/30/2026 on issuance of permits for new gas stations or fueling centers. This is from councilman Driscoll, councilman Sorrento, and Councilwoman McPherson.

Thank you. Councilman Driscoll. Thank you,

mister chair. I think we've all probably been aware of the number of gas stations that have come through city council last year. So this is happening all over the country because all the national chains are expanding and they're interested in many new markets. Obviously, Sheetz has been the big one for us locally, but Buc ee's, Wawa, all these major firms are starting to expand. And then also some of the smaller firms are trying to corner the markets. You're seeing Speedway expand, maybe not even because they can make money but because they want to box out. So anyways, we're going to be seeing a lot more of these. And I just want be very clear about the purpose of moratorium. Moratoriums aren't about stopping development. They're about pausing development.

And you have to have a legitimate reason for it. And I think we do because according to our code, we allow gas stations to go into neighborhood commercial zoning district, not just regional commercial or industrial. Neighborhood commercial zoning districts are supposed to be pedestrian oriented, mixed use, the kind of mom and pop stores, small stores that you see. And we still allow gas stations in them. And I think that's incorrect.

That's what's in the legislation that I think I'd like to be studied by the plant commission. Because if we're gonna allow gas stations to go into those districts, we need to understand what it does to the neighborhood, what it does to the future development of that site. I mean, if you I mean, I think we all understand the development potential of the Vistula neighborhood. If you drive down Summit Street, we all anticipate there will be a lot of development going on. But just as you pass the Wonder Bread Lofts where people are paying north of $2 a square foot to live, just as you pass that, there's an old gas station site on Summit Street that that should be a really prime development candidate.

The reason it's not is because it was an old gas station. So you now have an environmentally contaminated site next to some of the some of where some of the wealthiest people in Toledo live. You also could turn if you didn't want to go that direction, you could turn left down La Grange. And just across from the old La Grange school site, there's a gas station that you can barely see because it's mostly covered in trees and weeds half the time. Because these sites, they're not automatically brownfields.

But if there's any environmental contamination from gas, they become brownfields pretty quickly. So we need to be real this is the kind of land use that we need to be really careful about how we regulate. I think what zoning districts we want to put them in is important. I think it's we need to finally get an answer about twenty four hours of operation. And then this isn't necessarily a land use question, but the question about how we license these based on the size of the store is an important one too because a lot of these gas stations, they're bigger than the 10,000 square feet, they're not going to fall under our carryout regulations in terms of licensing.

And a lot of these new national chains are building much bigger stores. So I think there's grounds for what is a six month moratorium, which is pretty short, especially by our standards, to study these three issues, and maybe more. But we've to be careful about this kind of development and what it does to neighborhoods.

Thank you. President Williams.

Thank you. I appreciate my colleagues bringing this forward but I have an issue with it. A few years back we put a moratorium on convenience stores and gas stations and we did a study and the same gentleman that emailed us not too long ago, Mr. Reedy, have much respect for him and his businesses, he emailed us and said stop it, you just were saying let us do it and now he wants us to stop it along with some folks that are associated with him. I have an issue with this legislation, this moratorium because the very places that you mentioned Mac that were Councilman Driscoll that gas stations should be the gas stations again.

We don't have good gas stations in Central City and having good gas stations in Central City is very important. The issue with the moratorium is telling the sheets and the speedways and the small mom and pop gas stations that want to open is we don't want you to open there, we want to study it. We did a study already and we actually put these gas stations and convenience stores through a lot that during that time where Mr. Reedy actually stand up in a public meeting and said, don't do this. We want to do business, you can't be against businesses and here we go putting a moratorium on again.

I literally just asked for Sheets, I found the data for Sheets to go on Monroe and Detroit, like this makes no it just makes no sense to me to put a moratorium on gas stations at this point in time because who doesn't like a Buc ee's? And I'm not even being funny, if we can get Buc ee's here that means that we have arrived and we are welcoming people to come into this city. This council actually said we want more people to come into this city. We need to attract things, this is pushing them away. I am not in favor of this moratorium, especially when we just did this to these businesses, these types of businesses in conjunction with convenience stores.

We just did this a few years back and we put these businesses in turmoil and stress, and here we go doing it again. And it's so crazy because I remember Mr. Reedy stood right here and said, don't do this. He stood right here and then a few years later he tells us, you really should hold off on bringing more gas stations because they're messing it up. We can't zone competition away.

And this is what it feels like. I'm not saying anything about my colleagues, it's just that we can't do this and then expect to get to a population by the mayor standards twenty, thirty to get more people into the city if we're putting. And on top of that, we are in a point where our budget is crazy and we're cutting down someone that actually is paying some of the larger organizations like Ashish are paying livable wages. We need the income tax. So, here I am representing a district that wants good gas stations, wants because one wants good gas stations and has problems with bad gas stations.

So I say no moratorium, I hope my colleagues hear what I'm saying, we did this before, we got a study done, add another piece of the study on there but don't do a moratorium. Thank you.

Councilmember Gaddis. Thanks. Hi, I'm in support. Your March of last year, we looked at we did an update with the administration on the gas station and carryouts, and it was evident that these larger mega gas stations do not fit the confines of the licensing that we fought so hard for because we had so many negative, nasty gas stations. I mean, remember mister councilman Hobbs talking about how the trash blown in my district from one gas station to the other, in fact.

And and that those regulations has stopped that, but the newer ones do not fit in that, and I am I am concerned that as time comes, we'll see the same thing because they are not fitting in the confines of our licensing. The other thing I really wanna stress is that Monsey was working with John Hopkins on the different harms in the neighborhoods. I know that they were doing a study, but I think that looking at the harms of gas stations, we know that there's documentation out there on what they do to walkable neighborhoods, that that might be something that we want to also look as we're look deeper into as we're if this moratorium passes. Thank you.

Thank you. Councilman Martinez. Thank

you Mr. Chair. So I'm kind of at the crossroads here. So certainly understand what my colleague Councilman Driscoll is saying as well as President Williams. And having had one maybe two come in my neighborhood encroaching in neighborhoods in the 24 operations that aren't your traditional, what we would think of mom and pop scale gas stations is concerning.

So I see both sides of this and I would agree that we need to do something because the larger national chains or even regional chains don't fit kind of the whack a mole that we've been playing for the past twenty years with gas stations and convenience stores. So we have a new player in town and the game is kind of different. And I don't know if a one size fits all, that's why we have the SUP in for the review, so we can take it on an individual basis. That being said, the anomalies between what we're accustomed to dealing with versus a regional or national change are very very different. And the twenty four hour operation and the impact in neighborhoods and light pollution and odor and stuff like that play a very big role.

I have a very vocal resident base that have big concerns about these. But in the same respect in the appropriate locations, we've had big success having the sheets in on Reynolds and Southwick. That place is booming. We have it in over on almost on Dorr Street near Springfield. You see people, it's more of a fast casual slash restaurant slash convenience store. It's almost like a mini Buc ee's if you will. And if you've ever been to Buc ee's it's an experience. Let me share that with you. I think the challenge is trying to find that happy medium. I think we have the SUP process for that reason.

That being said as we go through the code change which I think we've pretty close to selecting a candidate to do the code rewrite, this definitely needs to be a point of conversation and community engagement especially in neighborhood commercial areas where it transitioned or what used to be residential is now more commercial just because of flight or disinvestment or what have you. I think we need to think very to my colleague's point very thoughtfully about how do we deal with the new kid in the town with these types of gas stations if you will. So I'm open to hear both sides of this. I'm kind of curious how to

see this all go. Thanks. Councilmember Melvin.

Thank you so much. Yeah, I mean I think it's a really interesting conversation. I guess my bigger question might be for Councilman Driscoll is does it actually matter what the study says? I mean, I'm having deja vu with car washes. It's the same thing with density or kind of saturation of the market. It's the same thing with large brands coming in. It's the same thing with reuse of the site. And we put a study out, and they said we don't have too many. And my feeling was, does it And I respect planning and zoning so much. I respect that profession and that expertise so much.

But it does feel like we're having a lot of different types of conversations that we're hoping a study is kind of like a silver bullet. So I guess my question is does it actually matter what the study says? Because I'm hearing different things about maybe we only allow them where there used to be a gas station. That's a really interesting idea I've never heard before. So I guess my question is what is the study supposed to accomplish? If it says something that we don't want, then what? I mean there's a part of me that says do we just chart our own course here? I don't know. It's just my thought. I mean I don't have a Buckeys in the fight here.

I don't really know anything about any of that stuff. I'm not traveling across country to go get a shirt. I don't do that. But I appreciate, you know, Council President Williams, you saying if there's a big national brand that's gonna come in and pay people a living wage, that matters, right? So it seems complex. My question is maybe, like, so what? What if the study says what we don't want it to say, then what do we do? I don't know.

Councilwoman McPherson.

Thank you. I am in support of the moratorium, and I think it will give us the time to look at all of the things that have just been said. Yes, Sheetz is large, Sheetz comes in and they pay a good wage, but they also bring in a lot of their employees. They're not here, they're not Toledo ones, they bring in, and I know that because I went to grand openings of Sheetz. That's their, that's their take, that's how they do.

Sheetz is not a neighborhood gas station either, and my concern is with the bigger gas stations coming in and again monopolizing. I am in total support of the smaller gas stations and the businesses, and so yes, small is good, big is good also, but it's not in a neighborhood. Sheets cannot be in a neighborhood. Do we need other gas stations in our neighborhoods? Yes, but then there's that about those former gas stations that now we got issues because they were gas stations, now what do we do with them?

Because they're in our neighborhoods. So, this is a good time to look and I get what President Williams is saying that we've had that, but it was really when we had that, it was more so on the small convenience stores and all of that and what how Dollar General and Dollar Tree and Family Dollar was coming in and just taking over in our in our communities, and then not doing and not taking care of the stores and then leaving them high and dry in our communities. That was the main issue. So to have this, I am in total support of it. Six months is not a long time, but we need to look at it and we need to look at it according to our population.

I mean, do we need two more sheets in in in this community, in the city? And yes, they pay a good wage, okay, but we got the issue right now with Speedway and you know they don't want Speedway out there. They didn't want sheets out there. I think it's a conversation that we we need to have and we also need to have it with the citizens of Toledo, as those are the ones that are the taxpayers, they are the ones that pay the taxes, and they're the ones that need to have an input on this totally. What we decide, yes, but we need to first hear from the citizens because those are the ones that we represent and that we serve.

That's all I have.

Councilwoman Kramer.

Thank you. I appreciate the robust discussion here. My question is, would the moratorium affect those gas stations that Councilwoman McPherson just mentioned the ones that are controversial right now? How would that affect those? Okay, I just kind of had to raise

I that because would say put it in as a referral to legal and see or maybe the planning but see where they're at in the process. Mean imagine if they've already gone through the process and have been permitted, they're gonna do what they're gonna do.

Yeah, because I know there's a lot of controversy about some of those right now. Okay, thank you.

Yep. Councilman Driscoll.

Thank you, Chair. I know I already had my turn. I'll just say a few things. Yeah, we'll need to get an answer on that, what will happen to those before. This also only is a ban on issuing the special use permit. So this is a short period of time. And I would entertain the idea of even going to a shorter period of time, like a three or four month period, just so that if the study will only take that long, that's fine with me. But I do think there's some things that we do need to clean up here. Most notably is whether or not we should allow gas stations in neighborhood commercial zoning. I think it's a regional commercial use.

I think it's more like an Arby's with the drive through than it is like the black cut coffee shop. I don't think that to me, that's a neighborhood commercial zoning use. I don't I don't think a gas station is that way. I I also wanna say a few things here. Being friendly to business isn't about chasing whatever dollar we can get.

Being friendly to business is about speaking with clarity and to say to whoever the future developers are, whoever the interested entrepreneurs are, this is where you can do such and such business. Right now our code says you can absolutely do a gas station in neighborhood commercial business unless, of course, a handful of people get riled up about it at a public meeting or a plant commission meeting and get to the ears of city council. We are not speaking with clarity to the business community. We're not speaking with clarity to the gas station community. Because they're they're coming to us and saying, well, says we can put one here.

And we're saying sure, but it could it's all subject to the the political powers that be. And so I I think we do want to speak with clarity with our zoning code. And we have to allow for all sorts of land uses. But we want to be able to say to the gas stations of the world, this is actually where we think you ought to belong. Like I said, the neighborhood commercial zoning district I think is inappropriate for a gas station. And I read the past study. I know we did a study before on this, but it did not address that issue. It did not address the neighborhood commercial zoning district issue. And that's really what the study is about. And like I said, I'd entertain a shorter moratorium if that's necessary.

But I just wanna address whether we're actually being business friendly. Because I I don't think what the business community wants is is is an arbitrary process. I think they wanna be able to know where they can make an investment. Thank you.

President Williams. Thank you chair. I just would get leery on when we do moratoriums versus just asking for the study because we literally were axed, was axed by the largest gas, local gas station owner to do a moratorium. That just doesn't feel right to me. And like I said, I appreciate what Mr.

Reedy brings here but he wrote a letter, a long letter asking us to do a moratorium and it just seems like he just wants to isolate the competition. He could say he's not, but I mean it was, it's concerning to me and I don't want to get into the habit of doing moratoriums simply because a large business owner says do the moratorium so that they're not doing X, Y, or Z to my business. And he didn't say that in the letter at all, it just doesn't feel right to me. And as I said before, income tax comes from businesses and if we are hindering businesses, especially one that we just did this to, it kind of, like are we going to do it again when we don't have enough? Are we going to stop doing it when there's, I mean it's just hindering business and that's where I'm getting concerned at.

That's all I have, Chair.

Councilwoman Jones.

Thank you, Chair. I'm kind of in the crossroads to like Councilman Martinez because on one hand, if you know what President Williams has said with the one person requesting this and their competitor then that's kind of some conflict there. But also doing a moratorium while doing the study I don't know if we need, I would like to see the study. I would like to see some update of the study, but I don't know if a moratorium is necessary if we can just vote no for like zoning and things of that nature. But on the other hand I will be interested in seeing just some update since the last study of these specific objectives of what these gas stations do within the neighborhood.

But I don't know if a moratorium is necessary. That's the only thing I have but I would want to see, I guess I can do it by referral like the objections, what specifically would we want an update on. We also have to consider the timing because if if Councilman Driscoll is considering to like shorten it to three months we're getting into summertime and then we're talking about capacity of the planning department and would this be done in time for that. And also what data do they have on hand right now that can fulfill some of the questions that we have about this study. So I would want to kind of see some objective what specifically what specific metrics are we trying to look at and if we have that data already we can do that and then if not then that's when the planning department can come through with that sort of objective.

But like I said I'm kind of on the fence when it comes to this. I'm just worried about the timeline and then the capacity of it. That's that's really where I'm coming from. And then also just the the interest of how they are affecting the land use and the neighborhood placement as well too. Thank you, Chair.

Councilman Driscoll.

Thank you. Two things, last word I promise. First of all, could, I think we maybe just ought to refer this to committee, have an upcoming zoning and plan so we can get some answers. I think it's tomorrow. So we can talk to the director tomorrow. The other thing, I'm sorry. Yeah. The other thing, I just want to be very clear because you could, so one could be forgiven for inferring that that the letter that was written to the editor and sent to counsel had anything to do with this legislation. The legislation, we began working on this legislation weeks before that letter came in. That did not influence our decision at all. And I don't think that's what anybody on this dais was implying. I hope that's not the case. But just to be very clear, we've we've been working on this legislation for some time. Thank you.

Thank you.

That completes our agenda.

Thank you so much. Seeing no further business before this council, this meeting is adjourned.