A moment of silence was observed in memory of retired Sgt. Ulys Gunnels

Approval of Minutes - February 12, 2007
Copley moved to approve, all Yeas on roll call and motion carried.

Workshop
Discussion of Water Distribution Analysis
Interim City Manager Larry Boggs advised they were looking for guidance from Council as to whether or not they wished to proceed with this study.
Utilities Director Cary Metcalf advised the last water distribution study was done in 1983 and there have been a lot of changes in the distribution system since that time. Metcalf advised in order to determine what capital improvement projects should take priority in improving the water system. He advised he contacted three engineering firms and asked for budgetary quotes and they ranged from $12,000. to $23,000. depending on how much work they do themselves in-house. Metcalf advised they would do pressure and flow tests and evaluate storage and what lines needed replaced and a complete inventory of the system and he felt the study would be beneficial with upgrading the water distribution system. Metcalf advised they have done a substantial amount of waterline replacements although he didn’t have exact percentages and there were some additions with new housing allotments.
Discussion included where to locate an additional water tower if one were determined to be necessary.
Metcalf advised currently there was a water tower and a standpipe on top of the hill which feeds the upper part of town from Fifth St. west and there was an underground reservoir at Metzger which feeds the lower part of town. He advised the lower part of town is where they would need the most improvement with regards to pressure and flow and there were some dead-end areas where the city has expanded outward which were remote in relation to the underground storage system.
Discussion included the wide range of cost quotes from one firm to the other and it was noted, there would not be a difference in the service provided and it was believed these quotes would be close to the actual costs. It was noted, the study would be citywide.

Citizens Forum
Craig Horbus, attorney with the law firm Witschey, Witschey & Firestine representing C&C Excavating regarding the acceptance of the dedication of Oak Hill Estates under Ord. No. 7434. Horbus read a letter sent to Council via email and U.S. mail dated 2-22-07 and attached herein. Horbus advised he nor his clients or the citizens created the law, but rather the General Assembly of the State of Ohio and the Ohio Supreme Court. Horbus advised they were simply trying to follow the law and they were asking for the city’s support by following the law. He advised the City of Rittman obviously wanted to see growth and money coming into the city and schools by creating new housing developments. Horbus advised these developers and residents have done so and they were asking the City of Rittman to look at the big picture. He advised his clients have spent a lot of money putting in this development and have complied with all the regulations as outlined and required by city code. Horbus advised it was approved by the city and recorded and to be recorded a plat had to be approved by the city. Horbus advised (former) City Manager Robert Kellogg and other officials signed off on the plat on November 2, 2004. He advised the developers did not want it to come to the point of the courts having to decide the issue, but would like the city to take it upon themselves regarding the obligation and comply with the laws as outlined. Horbus advised they had some charts regarding the topography of the area. Horbus advised he and the developers and the residents of the area were present in support of this resolution and they were asking for this Council to pass this resolution and accept once and for all the dedication of the Oak Hill Estates.
Council Member Lapehn advised he would like clarification as on the recorded plat it states, “This plat is accepted by Ordinance No. N/A (not applicable) by City Council on November 2, 2004.” and inquired that there was no ordinance or vote of City Council required and the President of Council and the City Manager may sign on behalf of Council?
Horbus advised it was his understanding that the plat was approved by the city and signed off by the city which allowed that plat to be recorded and under Ohio Revised Code that in and of itself triggers provisions.

Lapehn advised he thought there had to be an ordinance.
Horbus advised under the Ohio Revised Code as long as the plat was approved and built to city specifications, a resolution or ordinance could be passed such as Ord. No. 7434 here tonight, or the city engineer can simply sign off on the approved plat as meeting city specifications which would officially dedicate.
Lapehn advised given there was no city engineer, it would have to go to an ordinance.
Horbus advised which was why they were here tonight to officially and formally get that resolution as we feel obligated under the code. He advised he looked at meeting minutes of Council of November 20, 2003 where Mr. Kellogg stated to Telford’s inquiry that the developer came in with the preliminary plan and Kellogg advised they had final approval. Horbus advised the signature does indicate the plat was approved by the city and the plat was recorded which triggers requirements under the law.
Council Member Steve Johnson inquired as to what was represented to the people buying lots as to what was public or private.
Tom Csapo, developer advised when people inquire about the lots, they were told it was not dedicated, but it was designed that way and they were going for dedication on it.
Steve advised in the Planning Commission approval on March 4, 2004, the specific motion made stated it was approved as private. Steve inquired as to why the people who bought lots were not made aware of that (being private).
Csapo advised there was a misunderstanding in that it was private as far as lawn care and things of that nature and not for the street.
Steve read the exact motion from the Planning Commission minutes of March 4, 2004 which stated, “Motion to Deny the Request to Make the Development Public, but to Allow for Tax Exemption on the Portions of the Project which would Ultimately be Turned Over to the City as Public Improvements such as Water, Sewer and Storm Sewer”. Steve advised that was the motion and it was pretty clear to them on the Planning Commission that it was a private development and he didn’t understand how he could take away from that meeting and sell it to someone that it was not (private).
Csapo advised he believed there was some miscommunication because between April of 2004 and November of 2004 there were some significant changes made and issues such as grade were addressed and taken care of prior to the final approval and actual plat being recorded. He advised what happened at the Planning Commission meeting previously and what was changed ultimately resulting in this approved plat, which was approved for public dedication, he couldn’t answer that question. He advised all he knows is what is here and what was approved as a public development regardless of initial issues discussed as the plat as approved was built to city specifications.
Steve advised they built it to city specifications, but they didn’t come back to Planning Commission and tell us that and ask for our approval, but just assumed they could make the improvements and sell them as public without coming and getting approval. Steve advised he was on Planning Commission then, and he never approved it and he wasn’t sure it was ever approved other than for private.
Horbus advised Mr. Kellogg signed off on the plat as publicly dedicated dated November 2, 2004.
Csapo advised the meeting (March 2004) when the grading issue was brought up and Mr. Kellogg said it could not be dedicated publicly, but had to be a private road because they were more than 10% road grade. Csapo indicated he couldn’t dispute the road grade at the time because he didn’t have the plans with him that night. Csapo advised it was misrepresented in that meeting of not meeting specifications as it actually did.
Steve advised he wasn’t arguing about the specifications, but it was never approved and it should have come back to them and been approved. Steve advised he didn’t remember it ever coming back to Planning Commission and his point was, the last he knew, it was a private (development) and inquired how did he sell it and on what basis did he sell it to the people who live there.
Horbus advised it was presented to those people as a public development because that is what the developers always intended it to be (designated). He advised they would not have spent an enormous amount of engineering costs to create the development up to the standards of the city if it was always going to remain private. He advised the developers would never have spent the additional funds without that being their intent (to dedicate publicly). Horbus advised he didn’t create the law he was just trying to follow the law and they were asking for the obligation to be met.
Council Member Russell advised the only thing they have to go on were the minutes from the Planning Commission meeting in 2004.
Horbus advised he didn’t know what happened between that 2004 meeting (March) and what was eventually approved, but he could only point to what was on the record and what was recorded with the Wayne County Recorder’s Office which was this plat and it was a publicly approved and dedicated plat.
It was noted, the city already pays for the street lighting service in this development.

Lapehn inquired if no ordinance were required to file with the county recorder, on what basis was it recorded.
Horbus advised the resolution was a separate function under section 723.03 which states one way for the municipality to formally accept an actual dedication is by passing an ordinance or resolution. He advised the approval by the signature on the plat is what is required to approve the plat and the Planning Commission and the city have to approve it in order for it to be recorded and for the development to go forward. Horbus advised a resolution was not necessary for the plat to be approved however, it was necessary for the plat to be accepted as a dedication.
Council Member Telford inquired as to when it was approved by Planning Commission.
Horbus advised November 2, 2004 (evidenced by the date on the recorded plat).
Council Member James Johnson advised his question was how was it approved by the city when City Council did not meet until November 8, 2004.
Horbus advised he could not answer that question as he was not here, but he didn’t believe a member of the municipality would sign their name to something without the authority to do so.
James advised he didn’t believe there had ever been approval by City Council from what he could find in the minutes other than a City Manager who would follow where a city engineer could sign it, but our city does not have an engineer.
T. Csapo advised a lot of the confusion of the project was they were told if they built it to city specifications it could be a dedicated public street and they came to Planning Commission Meeting and were told it did not meet city specifications and were denied, but it was to specifications. T. Csapo advised he felt there was some misrepresentation by the former City Manager about this project. He advised the street lights have been paid for by the city since day one and parking tickets on the street have been issued. Csapo advised if they didn’t want it to be publicly dedicated, they could have saved a whole lot of money, but that was not the intent from the very beginning and they were here to follow through with their plan and with the residents. He advised everything has been met (according to city specifications).
Council Member Copley advised at the most recent Planning Commission Meeting, it (Oak Hill Estates) was recommended to the city to approve it based on the specifications. Copley advised the only concern the Planning Commission had were economics and the Planning Commission’s job was to look at the specifications and not economics. He advised the plan was approved to come to Council by the Planning Commission and recommended they accept it based upon the specifications at the most recent Planning Commission Meeting (1/18/07).
Telford inquired if the Street Department snow plows could handle this (additional maintenance).
Boggs advised he didn’t believe the street plowing and cleaning was the main concern, but the ongoing maintenance of the retention basin and how do they access that basin after all the houses were built. Boggs advised it was a very steep grade and they weren’t sure how they would access it.
Service Director Dave Simpson advised from day one he was told this was a private development subdivision. Simpson advised prior to this March 4, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting, Mr. Kellogg indicated the developers were going to request the development become public. Simpson advised he was opposed to it at that point and told Mr. Kellogg verbally he was opposed to it because of the grades and the detention basin. Simpson advised he informed Mr. Kellogg with both the utilities and service departments being downsized, the last thing he needed was a detention basin to maintain. Simpson advised the snow plowing and street sweeping was minimal compared to the maintenance on that detention basin. He advised there was a twenty foot storm sewer easement that squeaks between two houses and there was no way to get to it and maintain it from that direction, but they would have to build a road off Sterling Avenue up through the Metzger Avenue right of way.
Tom Csapo, Matt Csapo and Travis Wertz, developers showed topography maps of the area and explained the access from the Metzger Avenue easement and advised they believed the wash out from the city owned Metzger Avenue easement was where a lot of the water and sediment and debris was coming from during a rain.
Russell advised a big concern was they had no way to get into to clean the detention basin and they were trying to avoid problems in the future and he felt these things needed to be addressed.
Discussion continued regarding the detention basin and how the developers have cleaned it up to this point and access to the detention basin.
Russell advised when he visited the site from a heavy rain the water at the foot of the hill when it was coming down Oak Hill where the storm sewer was located was running over top of the trees stumps down onto Sterling Avenue.
Robert Snyder of Oak Hill Drive advised there have been two big rains since he has lived here 57 years and one was just a couple years ago. He advised when that rain hit and was coming down over the curb at the end of Metzger and jumped over and went down into the gully. He advised it did not come down the Oak Hill Drive cul-de-sac.
Russell advised there was water coming off the allotment down into the turn around.
Snyder advised it didn’t.
Russell advised it was coming off the allotment and coming down as there was water coming off the hill down on Sterling Avenue.

Debate continued as to just where the water runoff was coming from during a rain.
T. Csapo advised they have not received any complaints of flooding down below at Sterling Avenue.
Russell advised several homeowners have complained.
T. Csapo indicated there was a situation where a tree fell on a storage shed and it was determined the tree belonged to the same property owner on which the shed was damaged and that situation was addressed.
Russell advised there were three homes on Metzger Avenue where the bank was cut rather high and stones were placed part of the way over, but they (developers) didn’t complete it the rest of the way and his concern was if there was a lot of water and that bank gets soft, it was going to come down on someone’s lawn.
Wertz advised there was a retaining wall located there and it was sound. Wertz used the map to describe the situation with the retaining wall and its grade.
Tennison Fannin of Olds Avenue advised he has lived in Broadview Hts. in a condo and in Fairlawn and Parma where there was heavy commercial development. He advised after looking at several neighboring locations, they decided to move to Rittman because of the small town environment, friendly people, the recreation center, the library and the elements of this cluster home development. He advised in the past he been involved with several boards where decisions had to be made in the best interest of the (realm) in which he served and he would expect the same from City Council when they consider a decision in the best interest of the city. Fannin advised he assumed that was true in consideration of the recreation center, the school system and supporting city developments. He advised at the last City Council Meeting the discussion centered around the desire for planned business development and the cost in initiating such development. Fannin advised they consider the Oak Hill Complex a financial development such as was discussed. He advised here was a new development many consider an improvement for the City of Rittman. He advised they pay taxes to support the city and support the schools and buy products at drug stores and gas stations, dollar stores, restaurants, banks which also support the city. He advised they feel they contribute more to the city than it would ever cost the city to dedicate the street and he implored the Council to make their decision in the best interest of the city and consider the residents whom they represent. Fannin advised they must look to the future and be positive as indicated by the Mayor in his weekly column rather than being negative especially since it has been approved and recommended to the Council by the Planning Commission. He advised since all regulations and laws have been met in the development, your (Council) positive vote and approval would be appreciated.
Telford inquired regarding an easement being given for access to the detention basin.
It was noted, the city owns a fifty foot right of way at the end of Metzger down to Sterling Avenue.
Wertz advised if they look at where the Metzger easement comes in behind Mr. Snyder’s house and the one currently being built, the area was mainly wooded. Wertz advised right behind Snyder’s house the grade was not as steep as it is on the west side of the easement and some small trees could be taken out easily for access to the detention basin especially on the east side of the basin. Wertz advised during most months it takes him ten minutes walking down the hill to clean it out every few weeks.
Simpson advised once the homes were built there would be lawns and the detention basin would be grassed in and people want these detention basins to look like how they mow their lawns. He advised it was his departments responsibility to keep that mowed and it would be very difficult and he didn’t have a mower at this point other than a hand mower that he could use on those grades in that detention basin. Simpson indicated there was also the issue of trekking through yards with large equipment to get back there and people don’t want dump truck ruts in their yard and his department would be back repairing ruts. Simpson advised it was not just a maintenance issue, he was looking long term, if we do become owners of this maintenance problem, he would create a road at Sterling Avenue up the fifty foot right of way mentioned earlier to be able to clean it from the downhill side and not travel through peoples yards although it would still be a headache.
Wertz explained how he planted a matting vegetation in the detention basin area which never grows higher than six inches and never needs cut to help alleviate mowing access issues.
Steve inquired if the city had any engineering input on the project.
Simpson advised after the Planning Meeting of March 4, 2004, the engineers reviewed the plans to verify everything would be built to specifications although he didn’t understand why as he was told it would be private, but it was built to city specifications. Simpson advised storm drainage calculations were submitted by their engineers and reviewed by our in-house consultants and those things did take place.
Dave Strader of Wooster advised he was a businessman and he was requesting City Council’s permission to open a Bingo room and a skill game room in the city. Strader advised he would like to be located in the downtown area, but he didn’t want to take up a lot of the street parking which was limited. He advised he was open to suggestions.

Boggs indicated he visited some other locations in the city with Mr. Strader he thought might be more conducive to his business. Boggs advised those locations he didn’t believe were going to work and he (Boggs) didn’t know if the community would want (this business), but (Mr. Strader) was asking Council...
Strader advised his business would begin around 3:00 in the afternoon and most of his customers were age 30 to 60. He advised there would be no smoking and noone under 21 would admitted. Strader advised Monday-Thursday they would stay open until 9 pm and Friday and Saturday they would stay open until midnight or 11pm. He advised Sunday could be a short day or not open at all according to what the community requested. Strader advised the games were more skill than chance and were not slot machines, but similar to tic tac toe. He advised the player knows ahead of time what they could win and thus they were not considered gambling. Strader indicated the money was placed into the game and a points were accumulated to collect cash prize from a cashier. It was noted, the money does not come out of the machine. Strader informed Council of other establishments which were similar to the one he hoped to open in Rittman several of which were in Wooster and other cities.
The Mayor noted, his concern was with the downtown parking or lack thereof.
Strader indicated with the bingo there would be 8 or 9 employees possibly up to a dozen.
Copley noted that was more employees than most of the other businesses downtown.
Strader indicated the bingo would be a couple nights a week and that would be when the bulk of the employees would be working. He noted, he runs a pretty tight ship and nothing illegal would be going on.

Old Business

1. Res. No. 7432 A Resolution of the Council of the City of Rittman, Wayne and Medina Counties, Ohio, to Provide a General Election to Accept or Reject the Guilford Township Annexation and Declaring an Emergency. Third Reading.
Res. No. 7432 was read on third reading. James moved to adopt, all Yeas on roll call and motion carried.

2. Ord. No. 7434 An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Rittman, Wayne and Medina Counties, Ohio, Accepting the Dedication of Oak Hill Estates and Declaring an Emergency. Second Reading.
Ord. No. 7434 was read on second reading, It was noted, there was time for Council to review and research some issues for clarification before third reading at the next regular meeting. Copley moved to place on third, all Yeas on roll call and motion carried.

3. Ord. No. 7437 An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Rittman, Wayne and Medina Counties and Stat e of Ohio, Authorizing a Contract with the Board of Wayne County Commissioners for Administration and Enforcement of the Ohio Manufactured Homes Installation Standards by the Wayne County Building Department and Authorizing an Application to the Ohio Manufactured Homes Commission for the Certification of the Building Department through a Certified Building Department. Second Reading.
Ord. No. 7437 was read on second reading. It was noted, the words Mayor were replaced with the words City Manager as previously discussed. Telford moved to place on third, all Yeas on roll call and motion carried.

New Business
1. Ord. No. 7438 An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Rittman, Wayne and Medina Counties, Ohio, Vacating a Portion of First Street and Declaring an Emergency. Three Readings.
Ord. No. 7438 was read on first reading. Copley advised he was not against the vacation, but wished to give the public opportunity to know about it and discuss it and thus he would not be in favor of suspending the rules. James concurred with Copley. Steve inquired if this would be holding up the project (to have 3 readings at separate meetings). Superintendent Ullman advised it would as they would like to get the bid in so we can get the visitor bleachers in place before the fall sports season starts. James inquired (of Ullman) if he felt it should be necessary for the citizens to be given the right to express their concerns before Council makes the passage of this sort of a decision. Ullman advised most of the community has thought the street has been vacated for years and the city has not maintained that section for years and all city officials have told us it was our (school) street and he believed it was an oversight in the recording of the vacation. James advised you didn’t answer my question Mr. Ullman, do you think the citizens of the City of Rittman should be given the right now knowing a vacation will be taking place to express their opinions before this Council. Ullman advised with all due respect, I said most citizens of this city already believe that street has been vacated. James advised and now they know otherwise. Ullman advised I believe I answered your questions. James advised no you did not sir. Russell moved to suspend the rules and have second and third reading, upon roll call; Telford-Yes, Lapehn-Yes, James-No, Copley-No, Russell-Yes, Steve-Yes and motion to suspend failed and Ord. No. 7438 advanced to second.
James advised Fire Chief Sweigert did submit a letter to Mr. Boggs regarding this vacation and fire truck access and that it would not be a problem and inquired if it meant ladder 56 could approach from both ways.
Boggs advised he assumed as he has not spoken directly to Sweigert yet regarding this issue.
James advised he would like clarification on that at the next meeting if he could.

City Manager’s Remarks
Interim City Manager Larry Boggs advised he has been working on a couple of grants, one he hopes to obtain funding to revise the city website, which he felt was in dire need. Boggs advised the other grant would be for the police department and he hoped they would look favorably on these two grant applications.
Boggs advised he met with the architects for the recreation center and it was up and running and we should hear from them in 30 days or so for phase II.
He advised the owner of the shopping center was desiring to purchase a piece of property beside the shopping center on the other side (north) of the creek. Boggs advised he (Nieto) owns the rear portion of this property and wishes to obtain the frontage portion and it was his understanding they have to have formal discussion and inquired if it was Council’s desire to place it on a future agenda for selling said lot.
James indicated he would like to hold off until the water distribution analysis study was complete as he didn’t want to sell the property if it was determined that was the best location for a water tower.
Boggs inquired if it was Council’s desire to find a location other than downtown for Mr. Strader’s business or did it matter.
Copley inquired if Council was really in a position to say yes or no if he was applying with state law and they didn’t have any ordinances against such a business. He advised he didn’t believe it was there place to say he can’t go here or there.
Boggs advised Mr. Strader was asking for Council’s blessing. Boggs indicated he was getting mixed reactions from Council and didn’t know what direction they wanted him to take.
James advised he would like to have a chance to talk with some citizens and see how they feel about it downtown or other locations away from the square area.
Lapehn indicated in order to employ twelve people, there was going to be a big crowd on a regular basis, and it would require amply parking and there wasn’t that many available on the street.
Discussion included a couple of other locations in the city with empty buildings currently.
Boggs inquired if Council wished to proceed with the water distribution analysis study.
Council was in general agreement it would be necessary and it had been around 25 years since it was done last and felt it would be good to see where we were at with our water system.

1. Finance Director’s Remarks
Finance Director Lucinda Mann had no remarks

Council Remarks
Council Member Faye Telford thanked everyone for coming and she welcomed the residents of Oak Hill to Rittman and maybe when the weather was warmer and her knees were better she could come for a visit. Telford advised she hoped they understood it was their concern for the city and nothing against the residents.
Council Member James Johnson thanked everyone for coming. He concurred with Telford and advised a lot of these issues took place before he was on Council and he was just trying to get clarification for actions which took place before he was a member of Council and the reason for his questions. He advised it was nothing against the development, but he had to look out for the best interest of the city as a whole. James advised after trying for a little over a year, the parks and recreation committee was scheduled to meet on Tuesday, March 6, 2007 at 7pm in Council Chambers. He advised hopefully, we can address some issues with the local parks and get them spruced up and get the city going in a positive direction park wise. James inquired if the K-9 dog “Primo” was still being used.
Boggs advised yes, when that part-time officer was working. He advised there was another part-time officer who was K-9 certified and they were in the process of hiring another part-time officer who was K-9 certified and they would have 3 dogs working periodically.
Council Member Charles Copley thanked everyone for coming. He thanked Mr. Ullman for forwarding information to him regarding the bleacher project. He advised he was not against the project, but against having three readings in one night. Copley asked President of Council Glen Russell to get some confirmation on quotes received earlier on the City Manager search from consulting firms. Copley advised if he could find out if those quotes were still valid or did they need to resubmit quotes as he felt they needed to move forward on that aspect.
Council Member Richard Lapehn thanked Chief Baillis for the wonderful report on EMS and advised they were doing wonderful things in the city and they appreciate all the good work they were doing in representing the city and caring for so many people.
Council Member Steve Johnson thanked everyone for coming. He advised he would do some more investigating into the Oak Hill development.

Council Member Glen Russell thanked everyone for coming. He advised the Oak Hill residents had a nice development and the items he brought out were things he felt ought to be corrected so they don’t have a problem down the road once it was dedicated publicly. He advised he appreciates Mr. Ullman with trying to improve the stadium as he felt it was needed for fifty years. Russell thanked the EMS for their good report and it appeared as if they had a busy year.

1. Approval of Vouchers 45452 thru 45579 Including Then and Now Certificates Questions were asked regarding #’s 45532, 45551, & 45574
Copley moved to approve, all Yeas on roll call and motion carried.

Motion to Adjourn - 8:43 p.m.
Russell so moved, all Yeas on roll call and motion carried.