Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF COUNCIL <br />Monday, August 16, 2010 - 8:00 p.m. <br />Mayfield Village Civic Hall <br />The Council of Mayfield Village met in regular session on Monday, August 16, 2010, at <br />approximately 8:00 p.m. in the Mayfield Village Civic Hall. Council President Buckholtz called <br />the meeting to order. <br />ROLL CALL: Present: Mr. Buckholtz, Mrs. Cinco, Mr. Marquardt, Mr. Marrie, <br />Mrs. Mills and Mr. Saponaro <br />Absent: Dr. Parker <br />Also Present: Mayor Rinker, Mr. Wynne, Mr. Diemert, Mr. Cappello, <br />Chief Dearden, Mr. Marrelli, Mr. Metzung, Chief Mohr, <br />Mr. Dinardo, Mr. Thomas, Mrs. Kalina, Mr. Esborn <br />and Mrs. Betsa <br />The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was given. <br />OPEN PORTION <br />5-minute limit imposed by Chair. Those who wish to speak must first state their name and address. <br />Council President Buckholtz stated that the public is invited to step up to the podium and address <br />Council. We ask that you give your name and address and speak into the microphone. Would <br />anyone like to address Council at this .time? <br />Brenda Bodnar <br />Bonneview Road <br />I just wanted to address Council and the Mayor briefly on the proposed zoning and referendum <br />Charter amendments. Specifically at last week's meeting, the Costco case and how it cost the City of <br />Mayfield Heights a lot of money and they ended up losing in the long run, was tallced about. I have <br />looked at that case, in fact I have looked at those cases, there are several of them, and if you would <br />take a close look at those cases, they would more persuade us to rely on the individual voters and <br />maybe less on Council. <br />What happened in the Costco case and this case I am referring to, Shemo v. Mayfield Heights, a <br />February 2000 Supreme Court decision, what got Mayfield Heights in trouble in that case was action <br />that was taken by Council and by the Mayor. It had nothing to do with the vote of the taxpayers or <br />any referendum rights that were exercised by the taxpapers. That case did not concern those issues.