MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
MASSILLON CITY COUNCIL
HELD, TUESDAY, JANUARY 17, 2012 

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER - I‘d like to welcome all of you to Massillon City Council for Tuesday, January 17, 2012.  We have in attendance with us this evening: Mayor Catazaro-Perry, Safety Service Director Maier, Auditor Ferrero, Engineer Dylewski and Law Director Stergios.  On the wall to your left are agendas for anyone who wishes to follow the meeting.  Also under item #5 on the agenda is where the public can speak on any item that appears on the agenda and then under item #17 is where the public can speak on any item that does not appear on the agenda.  I‘d also like to remind anyone with a cell phone please turn it off or turn it very far down. 

1.  ROLL CALL

Roll call for the evening found the following Council Members present:  Milan Chovan, Sarita Cunningham-Hedderly, Nancy Halter, Ed Lewis, Paul Manson, Donnie Peters, Andrea Scassa, Larry Slagle and Tony Townsend.

Thus giving a roll call vote of 9 present.

2. INVOCATION

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER - I will recognize Councilwoman Andrea Scassa for the invocation and the Pledge of Allegiance. 

COUNCILWOMAN SCASSA – Before I ask you to join me in the Lord’s Prayer I would ask everyone to keep in their thoughts and prayers the residents of the Lincoln Apartments and those that were affected or displaced by the fire Saturday night.  I also ask that you continually keep in your thoughts and your prayers our police and fire and first responder forces Saturday night with another shining example of how bravely they defended our city without hesitation.  So with that being said please join me in the Lord’s Prayer.   

3.  PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

COUNCILWOMAN SCASSA – Chairperson of the Rules, Courts and Civil Service Committee led those in attendance in the Pledge of Allegiance.  

4.  READING OF THE JOURNAL

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER - Madame Clerk, are the minutes of the previous meeting transcribed and open for public viewing?  (Yes, they are)  Are there any additions or corrections to the minutes?  If not the minutes stand approved as written. 

5.  REMARKS OF DELEGATIONS AND CITIZENS TO MATTERS ON THE AGENDA

6.  INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS

ORDINANCE NO. 4 - 2012                        BY:  ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE

Authorizing the Mayor of the City of Massillon, Ohio, to enter into the Recycling Program Grant Agreement with the Stark-Tuscarawas-Wayne Joint Solid Waste Management District, and declaring an emergency.

 

COUNCILMAN LEWIS – Yes, can I call Mr. Maier up?

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Certainly, Mr. Maier?

COUNCILMAN LEWIS – Mr. Maier, we discussed most of this at the work session I just want to kind of review real quickly before we go into the vote.  This is an ordinance asking for our approval to have a grant come out Stark-Tuscarawas-Wayne Joint Solid Waste Management for the purpose of getting rid of the tires.  Am I correct?

SAFETY SERVICE DIRECTOR MAIER – Yes sir, that is correct. 

COUNCILMAN LEWIS – And the grant is to be requested is for about $2,500 and that would be all grant money no actual monies from the city at all.  Correct?

SAFETY SERVICE DIRECTOR MAIER – Yes sir that’s correct it’s just a pass through.

COUNCILMAN LEWIS – Okay, then the last question I personally have is as we’ve discussed you have people in place that will make sure that all the reporting will be taking place and whatever the grant so this Joint Solid Waste Management District whenever they need report wise you guys will have taken care of so that nothing falls back on the city.  Correct?

SAFETY SERVICE DIRECTOR MAIER – We do have the report component already in place as we’ve been doing this for a number of years.  So that is a piece that is already in place for the city.

COUNCILMAN LEWIS – Great and I’m sorry to put you on the spot but this is due by the 31st of the month so we need to kind of move it forward today.  Correct?

SAFETY SERVICE DIRECTOR MAIER – There is a deadline to have the application filed.

COUNCILMAN LEWIS – Thank you.  I have no other questions unless someone else does?

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Is there any questions for Mr. Maier?  Thank you.  Your motion Mr. Lewis?

COUNCILMAN LEWIS moved for suspension of the rules and passage, seconded by Councilman Manson.

The rules were suspended by a roll call vote of 9 yes.

ORDINANCE NO. 4 – 2012 WAS PASSED BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 9 YES.

ORDINANCE NO. 5 - 2012                        BY:   FINANCE COMMITTEE

Making certain appropriations from the unappropriated balance of the 1401 Capital Improvement Fund, for the year ending December 31, 2012, and declaring an emergency.

 

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER – This is an ordinance that we’ll plan on bringing forward tonight it will appropriate the $24,000 that’s needed to purchase the two trucks dump trucks with plows and two Jeeps for the city.  We’ll be buying those used equipment from Jackson Township.  If there aren’t any questions I’ll be bringing this forward tonight.

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Do we have any questions?  Mr. Chovan?

COUNCILMAN CHOVAN –Yes, the only question I have is how many actual working snowplows do we have today?  Do we know that?

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Would you like to call someone forward?

COUNCILMAN CHOVAN – Yes, Mr. Maier, please.

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Mr. Maier?

COUNCILMAN CHOVAN – And I just ask because I’ve heard three, I’ve heard five I really don’t know where we stand.

SAFETY SERVICE DIRECTOR MAIER – That number has fluctuated about a week ago that number was two.  Now we’re up to about four trucks we have two trucks that are in need of some repair, not major repair some minor repair.  So we really will be up to about five or six trucks so these two trucks with a back up truck.  So these two trucks will put in us pretty good shape to get through the winter. 

COUNCILMAN CHOVAN – Okay, thank you. 

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Are there any other questions for the safety service director?  Thank you.  Any other questions on the ordinance?

COUNCILMAN CHOVAN – I just want to make one comment about it if I may.  I personally I don’t know that I have enough information to feel comfortable voting on this thing tonight.  I mean if we have five plows and I know $24,000 doesn’t seem like a lot of money however every time we turn around we’re finding more bills that the city owes to people.  I’m sure there are some small businessmen that locally that money could pay debts that we’ve owed them for quite some time.  So at this point I mean I would I’m going to vote against spending the rule because I just personally feel I need a little bit more time to consider it myself. 

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Mr. Peters?

COUNCILMAN PETERS – I’ll comment also.  I’ve been for this ever since the start of it when I was asked my opinion.  Those that are new there’s a couple of things that the citizens really don’t give a damn what goes on in this town but when they go out there in a snow storm they expect their streets to be plowed then they start giving a damn.  You know those we need those trucks in the scheme of things $24,000 isn’t very much money.  So I’m all for putting this forward tonight.  I’ve got Mr. Graber’s weather report and I know the winter’s not going to be bad we’re not going to need a snowplow but I don’t put much faith in that.  So I say we bring it forward. 

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Mr. Lewis?

COUNCILMAN LEWIS – My only concern is and I understand where Milan is coming from is we’re talking about trying to purchase these off of another entity.  I guess if we keep dragging our feet are we really guaranteed that they’re still going to be there.  I mean they have the right to sell whenever they please.  If they say we’re taking too long then we run the risk of not having this opportunity and then we have to back to the $200,000 just to get updated equipment.  So I don’t really know if we really want to drag our feet or anything of that nature.  So…

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Mrs. Halter?

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER – Just want to make a comment before I suspend the rules. 

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Before you do I think Mr. Peters will have another comment then.

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER – Oh.

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Would you want him to go before you make your motion?

COUNCILMAN PETERS – No, let her go I got to remember what it was.

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER – I just want to say that the money is coming out of the capital improvement fund.  Money in the capital improvement fund I don’t think is used to pay bills.  So you wouldn’t have to worry about that Mr. Chovan because this comes out of a different fund.  I just wanted to make that clear.  Okay?  Thank you.

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Mr. Peters?

COUNCILMAN PETERS – Yeah that was kind of what was along the lines of my comment.  I mean we had the mayor up here and you know we really they could have went out and purchased these without our blessing.  They could you know ;they have the discretionary amount.  They asked for council’s blessing on it and I appreciate that.  So that’s another reason why I think we should move forward. 

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Just to clarify I believe that number is $25,000 is that correct?  Your authority is $25,000 so in the future if that comes up that’s your guideline.  Mrs. Halter, your motion please.

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER moved for suspension of the rules and passage, seconded by Councilman Slagle.

The rules were suspended by a roll call vote of 8 yes, 1 no.  Chovan voted no.

ORDINANCE NO. 5 – 2012 WAS PASSED BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 8 YES, 1 NO.  CHOVAN VOTED NO.

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Again, just for the new folks an abstention if only in the rare case where you are directly involved financially or you get a benefit in some way.  You mentioned that before the vote and then council will excuse you.  But citizens expect you to vote and just to abstain is not permitted.

COUNCILMAN CHOVAN – Okay, thank you.

RESOLUTION NO. 2 - 2012                      BY:   FINANCE COMMITTEE

Requesting the Stark County Auditor and Stark County Treasurer to pay the City’s share of real estate taxes for the 2012 fiscal year.

 

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER – This resolution is self explanatory we’re just going to request that the Stark County Auditor and Treasurer pay the city’s share of real estate taxes soon.  This has been done in previous years so this is just a matter of cleaning that up.  So I will be asking for suspension tonight.

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Mrs. Halter?

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER moved for suspension of the rules and passage, seconded by Councilman Manson.

The rules were suspended by a roll call vote of 9 yes.

RESOLUTION NO. 2 – 2012 WAS PASSED BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 9 YES.

RESOLUTION NO. 3 - 2012                      BY:   FINANCE COMMITTEE

Requesting the Stark County Auditor and Stark County Treasurer to pay the City’s share of 75% of the estate and inheritance taxes for the 2012 fiscal year.

 

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER – Again, this is a resolution similar to the last one we just passed but we’re requesting that they send us the share our share of 75% of estate and inheritance taxes.  Again I will be asking for suspension of the rules this evening.

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Mr. Slagle?

COUNCILMAN SLAGLE – I want to make a comment before hand though.  (Certainly)  I just want to again point out that this again is a fund that will not be available to the City of Massillon.  That it’s a fund that won’t be available to any other municipality, township or other entity that were receiving estate taxes that this was a legislative enactment brought about by the current state government.  The current governor and it was a resolution of a problem that didn’t exist that was I don’t know if it was 99/1 split as they’ve been making issue of.  But certainly something that when they take this money away from us we’ll have to make it up somewhere.  So they took it away from that small percentage of estates that paid estate taxes and every taxpayer in the City of Massillon will now have to make this up somehow because we have to make this money back somewhere.  So when you take away from one place you’ve got to put it back in from another. 

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Mrs. Halter?

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER moved for suspension of the rules and passage, seconded by Councilman Manson.

The rules were suspended by a roll call vote of 9 yes.

ORDINANCE NO. 3 – 2012 WAS PASSED BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 8 YES.

7.  UNFINISHED BUSINESS

8.  PETITIONS AND GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS

9.  BILLS, ACCOUNTS AND CLAIMS

A). KELLER OFFICE - $54.27
B). WALTER DRANE - $360.00

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Mrs. Halter, we need a motion to pay the bills.

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER – I move that we pay the bills, seconded by Councilman Manson.

Roll call vote of 9 yes to pay the bills.

10.  REPORTS FROM CITY OFFICIALS

A). POLICE CHIEF SUBMITS MONTHLY REPORT FOR DECEMBER 2011 B COPY FILE
B). TREASURER SUBMITS MONTHLY REPORT FOR DECEMBER 2011 B COPY FILE
C). FIRE CHIEF SUBMITS MONTHLY REPORT FOR DECEMBER 2011 – COPY FILE
D). INCOME TAX DEPT SUBMITS MONTHLY REPORT FOR DECEMBER 2011 – COPY FILE
E). WASTE DEPT SUBMITS MONTHLY REPORT FOR DECEMBER 2011 – COPY FILE
F). MAYOR SUBMITS MONTHLY REPORT FOR DECEMBER 2011 – COPY FILE
G). MAYOR’S LIST OF APPOINTMENT TO THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION – COPY FILE

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – We have numerous reports from city officials all of which we will put on file.  The final item is the Mayor’s appointment to the Civil Service Commission.  This is something simply that council will accept you don’t really vote on to approve it not.  So I’ll entertain a motion from the Pro-Tem to accept that appointment.

COUNCILMAN PETERS  – I’d like to make a motion that we accept the Mayor’s appointment to the Ohio Civil Service Committee, seconded by Councilman Chovan.

Roll call vote of 9 yes to accept the appointment to the Civil Service Commission.

11.  REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Committee meeting a reminder that the work session will be next Tuesday the 27th because of Christmas.  Then also a reminder that the first council meeting of the New Year will be Tuesday, January the 3rd.

12.  RESOLUTIONS AND REQUESTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS

13.  CALL OF THE CALENDAR

14.  THIRD READING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS

ORDINANCE NO. 151 - 2011                    BY:   FINANCE COMMITTEE

Authorizing the Director of Public Service and Safety of the City of Massillon, Ohio, to enter into Transportation Agreements between the City of Massillon safety forces and other political subdivisions safety forces of Stark County, and declaring an emergency.

 

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER – This is the third reading so we will be voting on this tonight.  This we’ve discussed many times this is when our police department transports prisoners from the Stark County Jail to our courts for court hearings.  I think everybody’s checked out the figures and we’re all in agreement now so I would be bring this forward tonight. 

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Is thee any discussion?  You’re motion Mrs. Halter.

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER moved to bring Ordinance No. 151 – 2011 forward for question of passage, seconded by Councilman Manson.

ORDINANCE NO. 151 – 2011 WAS PASSED BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 9 YES.

RESOLUTION NO. 17 - 2011                    BY:   COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

A Resolution rescinding Ordinance No. 98 – 2011.

 

COUNCILMAN MANSON – Yes, Resolution No. 17 deals with an ordinance from last year Ordinance No. 98 – 2011 which dealt with the annexation of the Bit of Eden.  In Ordinance No. 98 we supported the annexation and we also indicated the services that we would provide.  In late November or early December the commissioners met I believe right here and had a public hearing and listened to different arguments for and against it.  On December 21st I believe they approved this annexation this is was brought forward by a councilman that was on the other side of this last year.  My recommendation is that we defeat this ordinance and that we accept the Bit of Eden into the City of Massillon.  So this what I’m recommending is a no vote. 

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Are there any comments?  Any questions?  Mrs. Halter?

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER – I just have a couple of questions since we were not on council when this occurred.  Is there like its supposed to cost us $16,000 some odd dollars for their sewer.  Is that right for a pumping station or something?  Is there a cap on that so that it wouldn’t cost us any more than that?

COUNCILMAN MANSON – That’s the max.

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER – That’s the max.

COUNCILMAN MANSON – And it could possibly run us less I believe not saying that it will.  But that is the cap.

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER – Is that in writing?

COUNCILMAN MANSON – I believe when we had the agreement at the time in Ordinance No. 98 it did state the what it did say, what the agreement was.

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER – I’d like to call Mr. Maier?

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Mr. Maier?

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER – Do you know Mr. Maier do you know if that’s in writing or?

SAFETY SERVICE DIRECTOR MAIER – I’m not positive I think I would defer that question to our city engineer.

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER – Thank you.  Could we call the city engineer up Mr. Gamber?

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Mr. Dylewski?

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER – Again, the question is when we when the former council annexed the Bit of Eden into the city is there a cap on the spending of the I don’t know if it’s a pumping station or a whatever we’re putting in out there.  We’re helping them to pay for is there a cap on that amount?

ENGINEER DYLEWSKI – Well, I guess a correction to that statement it wasn’t accepted by the city yet it still has to come to council for that to happen.  What was passed this ordinance was the service ordinance it spelled out the services that would be provided to the area.  My recollection of the cap number I don’t believe so I think it just was the generic the city will provide sanitary sewer you know and water to the site. 

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER –  Okay and our police and fire?  (Correct, police and fire)  That sort of thing.  So is the Bit of Eden now annexed into the city or is that still on hold.

ENGINEER DYLEWSKI – Well, its not on hold what happens is once the commissioners approve it there’s a 60 day period a waiting period before it comes to council to accept it.  So once that timeframe is up an ordinance has to come to council and you’ll vote on accepting it at that point.  Now the $32,000 figure that was thrown out there that’s all based on an estimate at this point we haven’t done a final design.  That’s what we’re a preliminary numbers are showing.  Okay, so and it was going to be a 50/50 split I believe that was spelled in the service ordinance.  So you know if council felt comfortable of just capping it at $16,000 we did bring that up to the developer you know the owner of the property and he would be fine with that.  Because we still have to fully design the project, bid it out, you’re not going to know what that exact number is till its bid out anyway.  You know so there’s a good chance that its going to be under that number.  But that’s something that council has the option to do too.  You could amend the service ordinance to cap it at $16,000.  I think Mr. Stergios is looking at the ordinance right now and I don’t know if he could shed some light on it there was a specific number in there. 

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Are there any other questions for the engineer while he’s up here?  Thank you, Mr. Dylewski.  Would you like to call the law director?

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER – Mr. Stergios?

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – While he’s coming forward again for the new members an annexation involves a series of steps after the application is received by the commissioners the local community passes a service ordinance.  Another words it says we will provide the following services and do the following agreements.  After that the commissioners have a hearing, they vote on whether to accept or reject.  If its accepted as the engineer said there’s a 60 day period then another ordinance will come for you all to officially accept it into the city.  Then after that there’s a zoning hearing to apply a zoning.  So what we’re talking about is the service ordinance. 

LAW DIRECTOR STERGIOS – I do have Ordinance No. 98 – 2011 which was the service ordinance we passed.  And it is essentially worded that the estimated cost is $32,000 for the sanitary sewer and the city will contribute 50% of the construction cost to extend that sewer.  I think Mr. Dylewski said it correctly though that is an estimate and I also believe that you still have to appropriate the money when that comes up.  So if its comes in a lot higher than that estimate council could simply say no we’re not going to appropriate that money to that line item to pay that bill.  But I also think we have Mr. Dylewski knows what he’s doing and if you go back two years the cost of what they proposed to do believe was like $68,000.  I won’t go through all that history but the cost has been reduced we’re using money from Aqua Ohio that they pledged to help improve facilities under our contract for water as part of that and the ordinance says we’ll pay 50%.  So I think that answers the question you still have control because there will be more legislation coming forward if its you know way different than what we have now in front in us. 

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER – So you’re speaking about the service ordinance?  (Correct)  So what ordinance are we going to rescind tonight?

LAW DIRECTOR STERGIOS – They want to rescind well not they the service ordinance it would completely rescind the service ordinance which would create a heck of a mess probably.  You still have to accept the annexation like Mr. Gamber said that will be another ordinance forthcoming which also will be discussed. 

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER – Does everybody understand?

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Ms. Scassa?

COUNCILWOMAN SCASSA – That was you sort answered my question but I guess I don’t recall this ever happening but I guess what is the legal effect if we would rescind this ordinance since the commissioners have approved it?

LAW DIRECTOR STERGIOS – I think its within your rights but it would not be fair to the land owner considering that we approved it before.  I don’t know if he would have legal remedy against us.  I don’t think I’ve ever seen it happen.  I have I think seen where a city rejected accepting an annexation and it would have the same practical effect.  But that will be coming before you also.  I think we would be asking for trouble and setting a bad precedent but…

COUNCILWOMAN SCASSA – That was my next question I guess to clarify if this resolution is voted down tonight which means that Ordinance No. 98 is not rescinded we still have the option of rejecting the annexation when it comes before us after the 60 days.  Is that fair to say?  (Yes)

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Mr. Townsend?

COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND – Perry how did we arrive at the $68,000 initially?

LAW DIRECTOR STERGIOS – I think the design was different and a lot more involved and maybe a longer line I’m going a little off of memory but I don’t think there’s any question if there was a lot more involved in the first go around back in 2010.  It may have also been because Tuslaw High School was part of that original proposed annexation in addition to the Bit of Eden property.  But that may not it was definitely a different design and it was a much higher number. 

COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND – So this is still part of the same question so Aqua Ohio how much money are they contributing to this project? 

LAW DIRECTOR STERGIOS – According to Ordinance No. 98 they are contributing approximately $18,900 its not a firm number but a ballpark number. 

COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND – And that’s in addition to what we’re going to pay so its us, Aqua Ohio that makes the total current amount?

LAW DIRECTOR STERGIOS – I believe so.

COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND – Okay,  Thank you.

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Any other questions?  Thank you, Mr. Stergios.  We are back to Mr. Manson.

COUNCILMAN MANSON – Yes, for some more information on this okay.  We did approve the service ordinance like we said the annexation went to the commissioners, the commissioners had a hearing and listened.  They consider you know both sides when they’re deciding whether or not to approve the annexation.  There was some misinformation put out by the councilman that proposed this resolution.  Specifically he said that fire trucks would not be able to get down in there that’s not true our own fire chief said that we took a fire truck out there and went into the Bit of Eden.  Also they talked about our maintenance as far as plowing snow and taking care of the roads we don’t have one dime involved in that.  The properties the roads, the streets in that are maintained by the owner of the Bit of Eden.  If this does not come to us it will probably end up going well it will end up going through the county because EPA is going to stay after them.  They will pay higher fees to the county it will still come to our wastewater treatment plant.  I think there’s probably more to be gained for the payments to directly to Massillon.  Also this is going to permit them to actually add several units to it.  There will be at some point in time some city income tax involved.  I don’t know how much there’s no real way to know that there will be some property tax.  So like I said this was brought forward by a councilman that was on the losing side at the time.  So my recommendation is a no vote against Ordinance No. 98 and this will just continue through the normal process.  I think we’re in the 60 day period waiting right now when the 60 days up it will come back to us for acceptance.  Also once it is bid we will have the right to accept or reject the cost of the project.  Hopefully it will be less than what the numbers are that are proposed.  So…

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Do you have a motion Mr. Manson?

COUNCILMAN MANSON moved to bring Resolution No. 17 – 2011 forward for a vote and a no vote to turn down Resolution No. 17.  Seconded by Councilman Peters.

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Roll call vote on Resolution No. 17 with a recommendation by the chairman for a no vote.

RESOLUTION NO. 17 – 2011 WAS DEFEATED BY A ROLL CALL VOTE OF 8 NO, 1 YES.  TOWNSEND VOTED YES.

15. SECOND READING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS

ORDINANCE NO. 1 - 2012                        BY:  COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

Amending Section 1151.02 of the Massillon Code of 1985 rezoning a certain tract of land from R-1 One Family Residential, RM-Multiple Family Residential, O-1 Office and B-1 Local Business to O-2 Office. 

 

COUNCILMAN MANSON – Yes, as we know this has to do with the expansion of the emergency room area at the hospital.  There will be a public hearing on February 6th at 7:00pm to discuss the zoning.  Then after that lets see that will only be second no this is second reading so that would be third reading then coming that night.  So second reading.

ORDINANCE NO. 1 – 2012 WAS GIVEN SECOND READING.  

16.  NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Mrs. Halter.

COUNCILWOMAN HALTER – I think the mayor would like to speak.

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Madame Mayor?

MAYOR CATAZARO-PERRY – I would like to have a presentation tonight of the two appointments for the Tax Incentive Review Committee.  They are Reverend Robert Lewis and Mr. Tim Bryan.  So I’d like to ask for your approval of those two this evening. 

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Mr. Peters?

COUNCILMAN PETERS  – Are you asking me to make the motion?

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – I’m asking you what you would like to do.

COUNCILMAN PETERS  – I make a motion to accept the appointments.

COUNCIL PRESIDENT GAMBER – Seconded by Councilman Manson.

Roll call vote of 9 yes for the Mayor’s appointments to the Tax Incentive Review Board.

18.  ADJOURNMENT

COUNCILWOMAN SCASSA  – I move that we adjourn, seconded by all.

 

_________________________
MARY BETH BAILEY, CLERK,

______________________________
GLENN E. GAMBER, PRESIDENT

 

©Copyright 1998 - present City of Massillon. All Rights Reserved
Designed and Maintained by Imaging 2000 Web Design