Invocation was given by: Dr. Richard Lapehn, Pastor followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.

Approval of Minutes – April 14, 2008
Copley moved to approve, all Yeas on roll call and motion carried.

Workshop

a. Discussion of Cost Saving Measures for the Recreation Center
Recreation Director Garrick DiSalvo presented a list of cost saving items for the recreation
center as follows:

• Disinfectant – Savings of $25.44 per case by changing to one disinfectant.
• Pool Hours – By closing the pool 12-3 on school days it saved $7.00/hr. for those hours, as this was the slowest time for use of the pool saving almost $4,000 a year.
• New Basketballs – Purchased through the men’s league fees and the old ones were being circulated to the general ball bin.
• CPR & Lifeguard Training – Lifeguard training is done onsite by a certified employee saving $450 for 3 new lifeguards. DiSalvo advised they also saved by doing their own CPR and AED training.
• Fundraisers – Selling Akron Aeros tickets through the youth baseball and softball leagues earns $4 per ticket sold to help with the cost of the leagues. Also the center gets a $1 back for every picture package ordered from Color Graphics and free team pictures for the sponsors.
• Sponsorship Campaign – Raised $1,300 through a youth sponsorship campaign and purchased 25 tons of ball field dirt for 7 fields. They were also able to purchase new brackets for the bases, a snow fence and official baseballs and softballs for the teams. He advised the donations would also help with food and drink and the party given each team at the end of the year.
• Donation – DiSalvo advised the Rittman Recreation Center received a $5,000 donation last year and so far they have used some of the funds to purchase lifeguard uniforms and rescue tubes for the pool. He advised plans also were to get new lockers with these funds.
• Volunteer Services – The Boys Scouts and Key Club volunteered their time to help spread mulch and plant flowers in the front and back of the facility saving employee wages to do this service.

City Manager Larry Boggs inquired if the CPR and Lifeguard certification training was opened up to outside groups.
DiSalvo advised yes, Tom Leatherman has taught the water safety course to a couple of hospitals for their employees. He advised Leatherman would also be teaching the school bus drivers in first aid and CPR and they could be bringing money in through those (avenues) as well.
Council Member Richard Lapehn inquired if swim lessons went well over the winter.
DiSalvo advised swim lessons went great and they had a real big turn out. He advised they
held two or three sessions and every time the classes were filled. DiSalvo advised people were actually signing up for the next session if they couldn’t get into the current one, which was great.
Lapehn inquired if the new lockers would be the same style as the current ones.
DiSalvo advised there was a system they were looking into which integrates with the existing.
Council Member Lynn Beaumont inquired if there was an adult softball league.
DiSalvo advised it looked as if they would have a pretty good turn out for one. He advised he has asked anyone interested to come to the captain’s meeting on May 15th and they would be discussing rules and fees. He advised the interest was good and it appeared there were about 6 or 7 team captains.
Beaumont inquired if there has been any interest in a church league. He advised they (community) used to have a church league that played every Friday night.
DiSalvo advised it has never been brought up to him before, but he could definitely look into it and there was still time to do it for this season.
Beaumont advised the park would be filled on a Friday night and the concession stand would be open at that time. He inquired if DiSalvo planned on having the concession stand open.
Di Salvo advised yes, between the girls softball and the boys baseball leagues, he felt the concession stand would get some good mileage and it looked as if they would have parent volunteers to work it too, which was great.
Beaumont inquired as to how many members the rec center had now. Beaumont inquired as to what was the goal and how many members would they like to have, as they wanted to increase the number of members each year. He inquired as to what was his plan and how much would they like to increase (membership) every year.
DiSalvo advised he would take 20% every year, but the more they could bring in the better. He advised he didn’t have exact numbers, but he could provide them to him. He advised they have seen a big increase in memberships especially over the winter with the pool opening and the programs that the center offers have been very successful. He advised the Finance Director could tell you they had a very profitable winter and it was nice to see people coming in (to the center).
DiSalvo advised they were bringing families in which seemed to be a big help. He advised if mom and dad were working out then they were putting their kids in the programs or kids corner. He advised the center has been booming just about every night especially on weekends.
Beaumont inquired at what point in the year did they assess the equipment they might need for the next year.
DiSalvo advised he believed they looked at equipment in the weight room in September to see what they would like to bring in for new as well as replacement. He advised they were able to bring in some new things such as the Cardiowave by Technogym that simulates in-line skating movement (rollerblading) and those have been great. DiSalvo advised they also brought in Adaptive Motion Trainers (AMT), which were elliptical like and stair stepper like and were featured in Shape Magazine a couple of months ago as an up and coming piece of cardio equipment. He advised Rittman was one of the few centers in the area to have these and they were used constantly. DiSalvo advised they also purchased some new spin bikes, which the new spin class has really taken off and collectively there were about ten ladies in the spin class regularly and they have lost a total of over 270 pounds. He advised he would begin to look at about September again to see what equipment they would like to update or bring in new to the facility.
Council Member Charles Copley inquired if they have seen many of the members come back who might have left when the pool closed.
DiSalvo advised yes they definitely have seen people come back. He advised everyone seems to love the rec center because of how much we offer. He advised there were different (facilities) in the area, but it seemed as if there was at least one thing (those facilities) didn’t offer that those members were looking for. DiSalvo advised members have told him they were extremely happy about the pool and the updates in the workout room and the gymnasium being open for free gym time as much as possible.
No further comments.

Citizens Forum
Tony Thompson of Thompson Services advised previously Council discussed granting tax abatement on new (residential) construction and he wanted to build on Frederick Street. Thompson advised he came to try to get an answer on this issue as he needed to start construction on that home and he needed to know if Council was going to work with him on the (CRA) abatement. Thompson advised he knew the Gish farm and some other things were involved in some of the discussions, but this particular lot was on its own and he would really like to get approval for it especially since the CRA Committee approved it and it has already gone through two meetings with them (CRA Committee) and he really needed to know if (Council) was going to work with him on that so they could progress with the house. Thompson advised he was looking at some other properties in that area and he wanted to make sure this was going to work out before he started investing money in trying to sell a home in that area and those were his concerns.
City Manager Boggs advised he started a little bit of research on how much property might be available using the GIS mapping program we have from Wayne County. Boggs advised it was hard to tell from the map, but he felt he could give a fairly decent estimate. He advised he wasn’t prepared to give (Council) a full report yet, but he felt one answer was to only look at what zoning (the property was located within) and this (Thompson) property was in an R-2 (one & two family residential) zone. Boggs advised as an example, if they take the R-2 section this property was located within and say the R-2 zone in the floodplain would be eligible for a certain percentage of abatement this would eliminate all the R-E sections, which include the Gish farm. He advised he didn’t have a chance to get it out to Council yet, but that would be one idea he had to eliminate (Council’s) concern of having a “floodgate” of property available (for CRA abatement) on residential (areas).

Rick Hanlon of Olds Avenue advised under new business item (b) he was opposed to having his vehicles taxed for road repairs. He advised he felt compared to other jurisdictions such as Orrville, Wooster, Akron that (Rittman’s) roads were in good shape. Hanlon advised he didn’t want to spend $5.00 (more) for license plates just because we had a couple roads in bad shape. Hanlon advised he also wanted to bring up that at the last meeting the (Fire) Chief said he was making somewhere around $6.40/hr. and he wanted to make Council aware that the state minimum wage law was $6.85/hr. Hanlon suggested Council look at paying the Fire Chief on an hourly bases so we wouldn’t be in violation of any kind of state regulation or don’t work him so much.

Old Business

a. Ord. No. 7482 An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Rittman, Wayne
and Medina Counties, Ohio Authorizing the Municipal Manager to Enter into a Cell Tower Ground Lease Agreement with Verizon Wireless for Use of Cellular Services and Declaring an Emergency. Second Reading.
Ord. No. 7482 was read on second reading.

Copley inquired if they had Exhibit A yet at this point.
Boggs advised not yet, but in approximately 3-4 weeks he expected to receive a proposed contract for review.
Copley moved to table until they have something in writing so they weren’t passing it on third reading without really seeing what the contract says.
Beaumont advised he felt they could wait until third reading although he didn’t understand what was taking so long.
Boggs advised possibly there was some miscommunication between him and the law director, as he only wanted an ordinance to authorize him to be in negotiations and he believed a previous ordinance had this language from a similar contract. Boggs advised he could attach a preliminary contract, but it would not be the final contract.
Lapehn advised the purpose of this (legislation) was that the municipal manager would be authorized to enter into a lease agreement although it does say copy attached. Lapehn advised the purpose he sees was that they were saying to Larry ok we’re authorizing you to do the best job for the City of Rittman that you could possibly do to receive the best income for the city.
Russell advised he felt they could advance it to the next reading and they could table it at the next meeting if they didn’t have (the contract) by that point. Russell advised he felt that would give the City Manager a little leeway to call and press them for a copy. He advised he felt that was better than postponing it and at the next meeting have second and third reading.
Beaumont concurred.
Copley withdrew his motion to table.
Lapehn moved to place on third, all Yeas on roll call and motion carried.

New Business

a. Ord. No.7484 An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Rittman, Ohio, Wayne and Medina Counties, Declaring it Necessary to Establish a Municipal Motor Vehicle License Tax Upon Municipal Residents who have Registered Motor Vehicles in Medina County. First Reading.
Ord No. 7484 was read on first reading.
Copley inquired if it was possible to do these two codes sections under separate ordinances so they could be voted on separately.
Bower advised he didn’t know why they couldn’t, but then they wouldn’t have parity if we passed the other one for the Rittman residents in Wayne County.
Copley advised he would like to see them read and voted on separately if possible.
Mayor Robertson inquired if both of these would be for Medina County.
Copley advised yes, but one was identical to one they would be doing for Wayne County and one was to basically bring it up to the standards of Wayne County and the reason he was requesting them done separately.
Beaumont inquired as to his reasoning for requesting such.
Copley advised at this time he was in favor of the one, but not the other and that was the benefit to him.
Lapehn advised presently if you were a Medina County resident of the City of Rittman you are paying less than the Rittman resident who lives in Wayne County for your license plate. He advised so separating them allows them to make equal, but not raise…
Copley concurred and advised that was his thought.
Russell inquired as to what was the benefit.
Lapehn reiterated that they could bring the Rittman resident who lives in Medina County up to the same (fee charged) that the Rittman resident of Wayne County was already paying presently without raising what Mr. Hanlon opposed which was the other $5 fee on top of everybody. Lapehn advised so if you live in Medina County in the City of Rittman you were paying less than Wayne County in the City of Rittman right now.
Copley advised his goal was to give Council the option of bringing it up to the (Wayne County) standard or raising it, whichever they may choose to do without tying their hands after passing the Medina (County) one.
Bower advised if Council wished to generate this money in 2009, as it could not be passed as an emergency piece of legislation and it must to the BMV by July 1, 2008.
Copley inquired if they could vote on the second ORC Section 4504.172 tonight if they have the language.
Bower advised they could do so if the amendment passes. Bower advised he wanted to make Council aware that if they wished to do this and generate the money next year the timing wasn’t there unless Council held a Special Meeting. He advised the emergency clause was impermissible on this legislation.
Lapehn inquired if they could split them and still vote on all three.
Bower advised they could yes.
Russell inquired if the tax for Medina County was lower or higher than for Wayne County.
Copley advised (currently) a Medina County resident in Rittman pays $10 whereas a Wayne County resident in Rittman pays $15.
Lapehn indicated Wayne County Rittman residents pay $5 more currently.
Copley advised that was because Medina County has not enacted the same countywide local taxes that Wayne County has (enacted).
Russell inquired as to what kind of revenue that would bring in.
Lapehn advised the City Manager’s memo explained that there were 109 vehicles registered in Rittman to those who live in Medina County that collects $272.50 per year (Rittman’s portion).
Copley moved to amend Section One by removing ORC Section 4504.172 and request said section on a separate ordinance and voting on ORC Section 4504.06 only for this Ordinance, all Yeas on roll call and motion carried.
Beaumont moved to place on second as amended, all Yeas on roll call and motion carried.

b. Ord. No. 7492 An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Rittman, Wayne and Medina Counties, Declaring it Necessary to Establish a Municipal Motor Vehicle License Tax Upon Municipal Residents who have Registered Motor Vehicles in Medina County. First Reading.
Ord. No. 7492 was read on first reading.
It should be noted this ordinance was for ORC Section 4504.172.
Copley advised the reason he requested they be split was because he was not in favor of increasing the tax at this time with the economy and gas prices skyrocketing he didn’t feel it was the appropriate time to be raising taxes for this purpose. Furthermore, Copley advised he didn’t feel by doing this we were going to be able to get away from doing the assessments on the property owners anyway so, he didn’t feel it would help to alleviate that. He advised if they could do this in lieu of doing the assessments he would be in favor it, but this would not generate the revenue in order to avoid the assessments.
Russell advised he doesn’t really feel doing the $5 assessment to Medina and Wayne County is being fair to the people. He advised he felt it was bad timing, but in the future he felt it would be great. He advised he realized $5 was not very much, but there were a lot of senior citizens out there and a lot of families out there that $5 means a lot to them and whether or not they could put some groceries on the table. Russell advised he didn’t feel they should take $5 from the church funds to be able to do this therefore he felt it was bad timing to do this. He advised instead of doing the amendments and doing it all separate they might have been better off voting on this to begin with on the original ordinance.
Beaumont advised in reading the information given to us this was for next year (2009) as this would not go into affect until next year.
Bower concurred.
Beaumont advised it was also his understanding that we (Rittman) were the only municipality that doesn’t impose this tax.
Bower advised that’s correct.
Beaumont advised he believed it was their responsibility to look out for all the citizens and not particular groups of citizens and he certainly didn’t want to have to pay any more taxes, but as a body they were empowered to do what was best for the entire city. He advised they were handcuffed by money whereas all other municipalities around us take advantage of what the law allows. He advised we wouldn’t be posing a tax upon our citizenry simply because we want to, but the legislature has allowed us to do this for this purpose. He advised he realized things were very expensive right now, but he also believed it was their responsibility to look out for the entire city and what we are able to do for the city. Beaumont advised he realized this may be a burden, but we were talking about a lot of families that have one vehicle and we were talking about an additional $5. He advised if you take that $5 and amortize that amount over a 12-month period and he realized that when you add all the other costs that people have increased costs, but he felt we (Rittman) need the money and this was an avenue for us to get it and he didn’t feel it was an egregious tax as he felt it was fair to everyone. He advised it wasn’t like assessing people on one street and not assessing someone on another street. He advised this was a tax upon everyone. He advised it didn’t matter who you were or what your economic status was or where you live or what street you live on or the condition of your street…you were going to pay this tax just like everybody else does. Beaumont advised for that reason he believed that it was fair for them to do this although he certainly didn’t want to do this, but he felt it was their responsibility to look out for the city we represent and we do need the money and we have the ability to get it and it was a fair tax. He advised we weren’t hitting one particular economic group, but we’re hitting everybody. Beaumont advised that was the purpose of the legislation and that is what the law was for and he didn’t feel they were really doing their job if we don’t. He advised he felt we have to look out for the whole city and that was his position.
Russell advised he wasn’t saying they don’t need the money as he felt they could always use the money. Russell advised he guessed he was speaking for all the residents of Rittman that if it was just $5 it would be a different story, as he would realize that was fair. Russell advised with the price of gasoline, the price of groceries and everything else it was adding (up) everyday and he didn’t feel at this time that they could do that.
Lapehn inquired how the money from this proposed license tax was (budgeted) if there was a separate category or license (fund).
Boggs advised he believed Council could put it anywhere they wanted to, but we discussed it would go strictly into a road repair fund.
Solicitor Bower advised it was for road matters by statute. He advised they couldn’t put it in the recreation fund or anything else.
Boggs advised he wanted to remind Council that when they were discussing (this issue) that even with assessing the roads we (city) were very tight (budget) with what we were trying to do this year. Boggs reminded Council to take a look at the roads, as it wasn’t just the roads they were planning on doing this year, as next year they would probably have twice as many (streets) to do and he wasn’t sure they would have the money. Boggs advised remember what the Finance Director said that we were within a few thousand dollars of being able to do this (street paving this year) even with the potential assessments and that was his concern. Boggs advised he understood (Copley’s) and (Russell’s) issues, but he didn’t know what else to say. Boggs advised we were going to have a very tough time next year without raising additional revenues. He advised he had a list of cities, villages and townships that were (implementing) this (tax). Boggs advised it has been quite a few years since this tax was (introduced) and they (Rittman) were the only ones who haven’t done it.
Mayor Robertson inquired if there was already $15 of Permissive Tax on Rittman residents.
Boggs advised of the $15 levied for the license plates they (Rittman) get a whopping $2.50.
Robertson advised so other public entities have invoked the (additional) $5.
Boggs concurred.
Lapehn inquired if the county was restricted in how they use that money.
It was noted they would have the same restrictions.
Robertson advised something the Finance Director has talked about was that they were using, in the road repair plan for this year, our Permissive Tax, which was $2.50 we have been accumulating over the years and it would be drained out this year.
Russell inquired as to why they had to raise it $5 and why couldn’t they get more than the $2.5 back.
Robertson advised they (state) have already (allocated) that money. He advised the state allows the amount to be put into Permissive Tax.
Beaumont advised if we wait and pass this next year we would not get the money until 2010. He advised if we do it now we would begin to get the money in 2009. Beaumont advised he felt they really needed to do this, as we all listened to Cindy (Mann) tell us we were tapped out. He advised if we have the same thing happen to major streets next year and inquired as to where they would get the money. He advised this wasn’t a cure all, but a fair tax to everybody. He advised everybody benefits from this (tax). He advised we are going to fix the streets.
Robertson advised it seemed as if the $5 was easier to swallow than the assessments that get put on the property.
Russell advised even if this increased they were still going to be assessed.
Robertson agreed and advised it would not take care of all of it
Copley advised that was his point and if it was a matter of the tax or the assessment he would be in favor of the tax. Copley advised he could not be in favor of the tax when he knew down the road they were still going to have to assess the property owner.
Lapehn advised he was in favor of it and the reason being it was a progressive tax. He advised if he owned one vehicle he paid $5, but if he owned five vehicles he would pay $25 and he felt (someone) with five vehicles could afford $25. Lapehn advised if he could only afford one vehicle then $5 over the course of a year he could probably swing. He advised the other thing about the Perm Tax used to do this and their hope was to do this was not that we would assess the homeowner along that street, but that it would be a static amount from year to year. He advised their hope would be it wouldn’t skyrocket with the price of oil and asphalt. He advised they would still be required to continue to assess property owners whose streets are repaved, but with this additional Perm Tax paid by everyone owns or plates a vehicle that the assessment would be a reasonable amount each year and in that sense it would come back to the homeowner.
Beaumont moved to place on second, upon roll call; Lapehn-Yes, Beaumont-Yes, Russell-No, Copley-No and motion failed.

c. Ord. No. 7485 An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Rittman, Wayne and Medina Counties, Declaring it Necessary to Establish a Municipal Motor Vehicle License Tax Upon Municipal Residents who have Registered Motor Vehicles in Wayne County. First Reading.
Ord. No. 7485 was read on first reading. Beaumont moved to place on second, upon roll call; Russell-No, Lapehn-Yes, Beaumont-Yes, Copley-No and motion failed.

d. Ord. No.7486 An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Rittman, Wayne and Medina Counties, Ohio, Authorizing the Municipal Manager to Obtain the Release of Permissive Tax Funds from the Wayne County Engineer for the Improvements of West Sunset Drive and DeCourcey Road and Declaring an Emergency. First Reading.
Ord. No. 7486 was read on first reading. Russell moved to place on second, all Yeas on roll call and motion carried.

e. Res. No. 7487 A Resolution of the Council of the City of Rittman, Wayne and Medina Counties and State of Ohio, Declaring it Necessary to Improve Gish Road, DeCourcey Road, College Street, and Part of West Sunset Drive by Motor Paving the Existing Surface, All Together with the Necessary Appurtenances Thereto and Declaring an Emergency. First Reading.
Res. No. 7487 was read on first reading.
Beaumont inquired as to the discussions with the Township Trustees owning half of DeCourcey Road.
Boggs advised the Trustees haven’t met yet regarding the letter he sent. He advised they meet the same night as Council and hopefully they would know something tomorrow.
Russell moved to place on second, all Yeas on roll call and motion carried.

f. Res. No. 7488 A Resolution of the Council of the City of Rittman, Wayne and Medina Counties and State of Ohio, Declaring it Necessary to Improve Part of Ohio Avenue by Planing and Milling the Existing Surface and Installing a New Asphalt Surface, All Together with the Necessary Appurtenances Thereto and Declaring an Emergency. First Reading.
Res. No. 7488 was read on first reading.
Lapehn inquired as to what part of Ohio Avenue was being paved.
Service Director Simpson advised from Fourth Street to Metzger Avenue.
Lapehn inquired as to the estimated cost.
Simpson advised $37,000 and some change. He advised it would be approximately $6.12 per lineal foot at this point.
Russell inquired if there was any idea when they could get it (paving) done.
Simpson advised once the legislation was passed he could probably have a contractor here in six weeks after it was bid.
Lapehn moved to place on second, all Yeas on roll call and motion carried.

g. Ord. No. 7489 An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Rittman, Ohio, Authorizing the Municipal Manager to Accept the Rates of Hatcher Insurance Agency, Agent for Principal, Plan 1274, Rittman, Ohio, for Employee and Dependent Hospitalization, Surgical and Major Medical Coverage for a Period of One (1) Year Commencing June 1, 2008 and Declaring an Emergency. First Reading.
Ord. No. 7489 was read on first reading.
After some discussion it was noted there must be five members of Council present to suspend the rules.
Copley moved to place on second, all Yeas on roll call and motion carried.

h. Ord. No. 7490 An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Rittman, Wayne and Medina Counties and State of Ohio, Amending the Salary and Wage Ordinance No. 7467, Pursuant to the Attached Exhibit and Declaring an Emergency. First Reading.
Ord. No. 7490 was read on first reading.
Copley moved to amend page 3 of the attachment and change the word week to hour, all Yeas on roll call and motion carried.
Beaumont advised he would once again say that he didn’t think the (fire) chief was paid enough although he understood the necessity of getting this legislation in place to provide some uniformity. He advised he just wanted to get on record that this was an issue he felt would have to be addressed in the very near future.
Russell advised he wasn’t here for the pros and cons of the arguments of why this began, but he believed a couple of years ago there was a Charter Amendment (committee) that looked at these things and apparently they didn’t notice it and we voted on it. He advised he felt in the future this might be alright, but he felt they should leave things as is and keep this in mind when the charter change comes up then we could insert that in there as a recommendation.
Copley advised the purpose of this legislation was to make sure that if changes were made to the codified ordinances whether it be the fire department pay, police department pay, any city employee pay then that change only has to be made in the codified and did not have to affect the pay ordinance unless they were changing the pay ranges. Copley advised the issue came up because of some housekeeping issues brought up by the (fire) chief, as the codified ordinance and the pay ordinance did not match.
Russell advised it could be coming down the line some place where the pay rates could change.
Copley advised that was fine.
Russell advised the thing of it was we haven’t had, to his knowledge, any problem with the pay ordinance or the auditor or the Finance Director hasn’t had any problem with the employees being paid and he hasn’t heard anybody complain.
Copley advised currently as long as nothing changes we would be o.k., but he felt going forward if either the pay ordinance was changed or a section in the codified ordinance was changed and the other was not they would not be in line just as they were not in line before with the fire department. He advised the purpose of this was so that any changes that are made are done to the codified portion and other than pay rates the pay ordinance does not have to be touched. Copley advised there were references in the pay ordinance in this (new) format that goes back to the codified ordinances so there was only one source of information and it eliminates being off track.
Lapehn advised this does not change the rates of pay for any firefighters for their call-outs or for their additional hours. He advised it strictly calls their attention back to 153.07 regarding the fire chief. He advised his opposition to the other amendment (Ord. No. 7481), which he voted against was because he didn’t feel it was quite right and he agreed with Mr. Beaumont that we needed to address it posthaste. Lapehn advised but he didn’t see a big change in Ord. No. 7467 or it being directed at the (fire) chief’s position.
Bower concurred.
Copley advised looking through the pay ordinance (attachment) as it stood and going back to sections of the codified ordinances that reference the same language basically they were in there verbatim and the idea was just to get rid of that duplication.
Copley moved to place on second as amended, upon roll call; Lapehn-Yes, Russell-No, Beaumont-Yes, Copley-Yes and motion carried.

i. Ord. No. 7491 An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Rittman, Wayne
and Medina Counties and State of Ohio, Amending Section 1329 Flood Control and to Provide for the Renumbering of the Subsequent Sections Pursuant to the Attached Exhibit “A” and Declaring an Emergency. First Reading.
Ord. No. 7491 was read on first reading.
Russell inquired if this (legislation) would take care of an answer to Mr. Thompson’s question.
Robertson advised no.
Russell inquired if it was addressed at all.
Robertson advised no.
Boggs advised this was the minimum that was required by ODNR and FEMA that the City of Rittman has to have in place. Boggs advised these minimum standards have to be in place within six months or the threat was they would pull the flood insurance availability option for residents (in the floodplain).
Copley moved to place on second, all Yeas on roll call and motion carried.

City Manager’s Remarks
City Manager Larry Boggs had no remarks.

a. Finance Director’s Remarks
Finance Director Lucinda Mann was on vacation

Council Remarks
Council Member Lynn Beaumont thanked the fire department for attending the meeting. He advised he understood why they were here and he felt he made his position pretty well known on the salary of the (fire) chief issue. He advised he would make sure that issue was addressed in the very near future. Beaumont advised he felt they bounced Tony Thompson around long enough as the man has been to four straight meetings and we haven’t given him an answer and he felt that wasn’t fair. Beaumont advised we need to tell him (Thompson) yes or we need to tell him no. Beaumont advised for professional reasons he could not vote on that situation, but he felt they should give the man an answer as he has taken his time to come here and he wants to do something for the city and we should tell him he could or he couldn’t. Beaumont advised he had to let his disappointment be known that we did not approve those (license) tax issues tonight. He advised we needed to have some foresight here and we needed to be able to look forward. He advised noone on Council last year could project that Ohio Avenue was going to turn into a gravel road. He advised it was hard to stay on your own side of the road and they were talking until September/October before they could even fix it. Beaumont advised they turned down a tax tonight that was fair to everybody who lives in Rittman for $5…$5. He advised he didn’t believe that was responsible legislatively on their part. Beaumont advised they needed to look forward when (Service Director) Dave Simpson comes to us next year and says he doesn’t have any money and we need to fix one of our main thoroughfares he inquired as to how they would come up with the money. He advised we all saw Cindy’s (Finance Director) report and we are tapped out. He advised he really felt we made a mistake tonight and he wanted to let his disappointment be known. Beaumont advised we want Rittman to grow and have people move into this town and they would be bringing vehicles. He advised if people move here from Wadsworth, Wooster and Orrville they would be paying $5 to get their license tags here and they don’t even realize it, but everyone in town would realize the benefit of that $5 because that money goes straight into a road repair fund. He advised it might not seem like a lot of money when they were talking about a $7 million dollar budget, but they lost 3 times what they bring in and we lost the opportunity to bring $54,000 into the city next year and he doesn’t feel that was very responsible on our part tonight.
Council Member Glen Russell advised he was on Council last year and he has been on for several years and he believed it was two years he brought it up that Ohio Avenue needed to be repaired and he was snuffed off. Russell advised he agreed they should give Tony (Thompson) some kind of an answer. He advised he was sure this was holding him up and if we are going to approve (we should) if not we should tell him what he could do so he could move on to other issues. Russell advised he appreciates the fire department being here as well as the other residents and he invited them to please come back. Russell thanked the Recreation Director for being here and he felt he did a good job with the cost savings and he appreciated it and encouraged him to continue to do a good job.
Council Member Richard Lapehn advised instead of hemming and hawing around the myrtle bush why don’t they talk about Mr. Thompson’s request. Lapehn inquired of Mr. Thompson if he was able to get a loan to build the house without the abatement.
Thompson advised he has a construction line of credit and he could get a loan regardless of where they build. He advised the biggest issue was the resale to invest this kind of money in a home.
Lapehn advised he was a private contractor whose purpose was to build a home for the sole purpose of selling the home.
Thompson advised or if it doesn’t sell he would have to turn it into an investment property as he has also done in the past on Erie Street. He advised he has interest in repairing some lots/homes on Thonen Street and Frederick Street. He advised he was wanting to do this house on Frederick Street first and then he would look at buying other homes in that end of town to rehab and use this program that includes future buyers to help the community in that area.
Robertson advised the abatement on your (property) taxes would help offset the extremely high cost of flood insurance.
Thompson advised flood insurance was mandatory.
Lapehn inquired as to the cost of flood insurance.
Thompson advised it was anywhere from $400 to $1,000 a year on top of homeowners insurance. He advised if you were approaching us to buy a home it would make a huge difference in what you can afford on a house payment. He advised if he could tell them they didn’t have to pay any (property) tax on it for ten years it would help offset those costs and someone would have more interest in purchasing the property.
Lapehn advised he wasn’t sure he was ready to give an opinion tonight although he knew the feeling was let’s move on this one way or the other. He advised he didn’t know what other communities do and he didn’t know what people along the Mississippi River do who get flooded out every year and we bail them out and build their home back. Lapehn inquired if they (Mississippi residents) get abatements from their…
Thompson advised he felt this abatement, as he knew a lot of other cities were offering these abatements as he has seen it, but he felt this was really just an individual thing for Rittman to help repair the homes in the area and keep it desirable to get more people in town.
Lapehn inquired if he knew of cities in the floodplain areas…
Thompson advised he would have to research that (issue).
Robertson reminded Council they would be abating in the CRA.
Boggs advised he didn’t believe Council had any concern over businesses or renovation (of residential), but he felt the issue was new (residential) homes under the CRA program. Boggs advised it was approved 100% for 15 years by the CRA Committee. He advised the CRA Committee initially passed (this request) for the first homeowner only and Council requested he go back and ask the (committee) why. Boggs advised the CRA Committee again passed it and this time they allowed it for a 15-year period (regardless of the owner) thinking that was what Council wanted. Boggs advise it was tabled again with the concern of how many lots were (available in the CRA zone). He advised in looking at the map he saw very little vacant lots in this area. He advised if (Council) has a concern about everyone rushing to try to (apply for abatement) he felt they might be safe in saying an R-1 or R-2 in the floodplain areas (in the CRA zone) were the only ones who would be eligible for (abatement) on new residential construction. He advised if that was what Council’s concern was. Boggs advised the property had to be in the CRA zone to be (eligible) for abatement. He advised it just so happens that the CRA zone and the floodplain areas comingle.
Robertson inquired if they would be limiting (the abatement) to lots in the CRA that are also in the floodplain.
Boggs advised as far as the CRA regulations go there was no limitation (that it had to also be in the floodplain). He advised if you are in the CRA zone you were eligible. He advised he thought some of Council’s concerns were on new residential construction. Boggs advised the CRA (Committee) passed it because it was in the floodplain and he sensed there were other issues with new residential on what Council wanted (to approve). He advised his suggestion is if we limit it to that particular (zoning) area, which he believed was an R-2 that might be an answer for Council if they were worried about for example the Gish farm if it (were to be developed residential) would every lot be eligible for this (abatement program) and he felt the answer would be to restrict it to the floodplain and to a certain zoning (classification). Boggs advised the Gish farm right now was R-E (residential estates/agricultural) and would probably be changed to an R-1(single family residential) or an R-2 (one and two family residential), but not all of the Gish property is in the floodplain as an example. Boggs advised he just needed to know what direction to go if they receive another inquiry.
Lapehn advised presently if Mr. Thompson were to own another property down the street still in the floodplain and the CRA zone and he decides to add to (an existing) and fix up the whole place and inquired if that would qualify for the abatement.
Boggs advised yes as that was what the CRA was primarily for was to renovate a lower income or blighted area, as that was one of the original intentions was to revitalize those particular areas.
Copley advised the biggest difference he felt for renovation versus a new build would be the dollar amount that they would be abating. Copley advised for a renovation the abatement would be for the additional value of the home whereas when building a new home the additional value would include the whole house. He advised with a renovation it was going to increase the value of the property, but probably wouldn’t be for more than what you put into it.
Boggs advised that was another (option) Council would have, as there was nothing that said the CRA had to recommend 100% (abatement), as Council could reduce that (amount). He advised he just needed guidelines.
Thompson advised with this particular lot it was the only empty lot on Frederick Street that he knew of and he felt he needed (to offer) some kind of incentive (for buyers) because the houses surrounding this lot were not new. He advised there were some newer homes on Beech Street, but nothing new on Frederick Street and it was difficult to even do comparables. He advised this was a large investment for a new house in the floodplain with the state of the economy and inquired if he could get some kind of backing to ease some of the burden of the cost.
Robertson inquired if Council wanted the City Manager to bring something to the table at the next meeting.
Lapehn advised he agreed they needed to get something and he would like to discuss options of different levels of abatement for a renovation versus new construction perhaps 50% (abatement). He advised for new construction they were talking about the home itself and not the land. He advised if there was a $70,000 home on a $25,000 piece of property the $70,000 would be abated, but not the property.
Copley advised basically what it would come down to was taking the value of the property currently plus the value once construction was complete and the difference would be the (portion considered for the abatement) for whatever percentage of abatement granted. Copley advised the current value of the lot would not be abated.
Lapehn advised in his mind that would encourage the building, but it would also be fair to homeowners in the area and the community making an abatement incentive, but not a 100% abatement.
Thompson inquired if he rehabs a house in that area was that house under the 100% abatement plan.
Boggs advised it could be, but it would be for a lesser number of years.
Robertson clarified it was only on the increased valuation and was not on the total (house).
Boggs concurred and advised if he had a $50,000 house and put another $100,000 into it he could ask for the abatement on the $100,000.
Copley advised the other benefit he saw to Lapehn’s suggestion was that it would encourage rehabilitation as opposed to a new building. Copley advised in his mind rehabilitating an area was better than taking an empty lot and building a new house. He advised he felt it improves a neighborhood more if they take an existing building and rehabilitate it. He advised he felt that idea would encourage the rehab versus the buying an empty lot and filling up the hole.
Beaumont inquired if they could make a commitment to give Mr. Thompson an answer at the next meeting.
Russell advised he doesn’t have a problem with him doing what he’s doing, but also he felt we needed to make the rules we are talking about and not drag our feet. Russell advised that hopefully in two weeks we would have something worked out or at least for discussion so he could see what we were talking about. He advised he realized the weather was breaking and he needed to get on with the work, but he felt they needed to get this behind them so we know what everybody was doing.
Robertson inquired if they wanted the City Manager to bring legislation.
Russell advised yes.
Boggs advised they already had legislation they could just bring it back on (the agenda) with recommended ideas like his theory on the particular zoning. He advised he would try to get some options together.
Robertson inquired if Council wanted an opinion provided from Jon Ritchie, Superintendant of the schools, as this mostly would affect the schools.
Copley advised that would be a good idea.
Boggs advised they were sent notification from the CRA Committee because by law they were permitted to comment and we received no comment.
Robertson advised in all his years on the (school) board they never opposed any abatements.
Russell advised the school normally hasn’t fought anything. He advised he felt in a couple of weeks Tony (Thompson) should have a yes or a no.
Lapehn inquired regarding Ord. No. 7481 (fire department salaries) as to how many hours the Police Chief was required to work for his salaried position.
Boggs advised they sorta work off the forty hours. He advised they were always told with a salaried position if it takes sixty hours a week too bad or if you could get it done in thirty and you want to take comp time that was fine as long as you get your duties done.
Lapehn advised Chief Burg was at his job for forty hours a week.
Boggs advised that was correct.
Lapehn advised let’s say (Burg) was off-duty and a triple murder happens and he is called in and he inquired if (police chief) was compensated for that (extra time put in).
Boggs advised no overtime and no recorded comp time.
Lapehn inquired as to how he would get comp time.
Boggs advised salary does not get comp time, but they could always take off a day with notice. Boggs advised he believed if they recorded comp time they could be liable with a salaried position. He advised a salaried position was just that and they were expected to get their job done so, if they get called out on an investigation they “technically” weren’t compensated. Boggs advised if that particular department head wants to take a day off and doesn’t want to burn a day of vacation they also allow that.
Lapehn advised “Technically” he was not getting comp time, but if he wants to take a day off and arranges so with scheduling he could in light of the fact he worked an extra twelve hours the day before. Lapehn advised it sounded like an unwritten comp time…
Boggs advised exactly.
Lapehn inquired if it would apply to the EMS Director as well.
Boggs advised yes. He advised the difference he believed was the EMS Chief was paid for runs after hours by ordinance.
Lapehn advised the EMS Chief works forty hours a week and gets called in because of three cars and a train wreck and works an extra thirty-six hours; those extra thirty-six hours were all compensated.
Boggs advised he believed so outside of his normal schedule.
Lapehn inquired as to how many hours the fire chief by ordinance was scheduled to work.
Fire Chief Don Sweigert advised his paycheck says eighty, but that has to do with PERS.
Lapehn advised so he was part-time working forty hours a week according to PERS.
Sweigert advised it was whatever hours it took to get the job done. He advised the last three weeks he has been in insurance class and he probably only worked 10-12 hours a week.
Lapehn advised his thinking was that if he hired someone for a job he would say these are the hours whether they were 10-12 hours a week or full-time and the EMS Chief when he does extra runs would get compensated because he was a forty hour employee. Lapehn advised the Fire Chief should be compensated for those runs as he said a couple of weeks ago (Ord. No. 7481). He advised right now it was an odd arrangement to have a part-time salaried employee with this kind of compensation. He advised basically what he was saying was that Ord. No. 7481 needed more work. He advised they needed to hash this out a little better and get the number of hours per week and extra hours would be compensated. He advised or if we can’t do that he would suggest we just compensate for call-outs like the EMS Chief or something that is equitable for the time and responsibility involved. Lapehn advised he wanted to thank Larry (City Manager) for his good work with the health insurance saving the city over $24,732.00 next year and for working with the insurance companies and he appreciated it and it was time well spent.
Boggs advised he wanted to thank the employee committee who put in a lot of time and effort and work. He advised we have some healthy employees so we were close to the top as far as rating, which allowed us to get a very good quote. Boggs advised they were astounded as in this day and age everything usually goes up and that went down for a change.
Council Member Charles Copley thanked everyone for coming. He inquired as to how many county and state roads actually pass through the city and were in the city limits.
Service Director Dave Simpson advised once a county road gets to the city limits it becomes a city road. Simpson advised at St. Rte. 57 the State of Ohio have been wanting us to take care of all the maintenance on it and he has skirted the issue because he doesn’t want to spend our money out there, but eventually he believed they would force them to do so.
Copley advised the reason he was asking was the discussion regarding the money for the (license) levy that most of the money goes to the county and it was just a thought that the county roads that pass through the city, but it sounded as if we didn’t have a prayer getting any assistance on that (idea).
Boggs advised the other thing with St. Rte. 57 was there was some correspondence from the City Manager’s Association where in the City of Milan the State of Ohio declared (57) was in very bad condition and the state assessed Milan and it was thousands of dollars that they couldn’t afford. Boggs advised he knew it was being appealed and under a lot of political pressure and he didn’t know the outcome, but we have been lucky.
It was noted, (Rittman) had to pay for striping when they repaved the road (57) previously.
Copley advised as far as state roads (were concerned) maintaining them at this point was…
Boggs advised the only thing he was aware of that we could try to go after on the main thoroughfares was Issue II (funds). He advised he was going to try to (provide) Council in the next couple of meetings the end result of the water study and there was some good news and some bad news. Boggs advised some of the good news was that potentially the State of Ohio released an additional economic stimulus program and part of that was for water and sewer rehabilitation. He advised he felt it might be a good time to apply for (funds for) the additional water tower if it was needed. Boggs advised his concern was if they apply for that (water tower) they probably couldn’t apply for roads and water funding (Issue II). He advised he was very concerned about how we were going to fund the future to fix these roads.
Mayor William Robertson had no remarks.

a. Approval of Vouchers 48424 thru 48548 Including Then and Now
Certificates Russell moved to approve, all Yeas on roll call and motion carried.

Motion to Adjourn – 8:45 p.m.
Copley so moved, all Yeas on roll call and motion carried.