05/18/1999 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Minutes of 5/18/99 Ordinance No. 99-33 introduced by Mr. Limpert was given its third reading. An ordinance amending Section 521.08 of Chapter 521 of the General Offenses Code, entitled "Health, Safety and Sanitation," so as to prohibit the outdoor storage of motor vehicles in states of major disassembly or disrepair, and declaring an emergency, as amended. Mr. Limpert moved for adoption; second by Mr. Gareau; motion passed unanimously. Ordinance No. 99-33 adopted. Ordinance No. 99-34 introduced by Mayor Musial and Mr. McKay was given its third reading. An ordinance creating Chapter 172 of the Administrative Code, entitled "Tax Incentive Review Council," in order to establish a Tax Incentive Review Council as provided for in Section 5709.85 of the Ohio Revised Code, and declaring an emergency. Mr. McKay moved for adoption; second by Mr. Gareau; motion passed unanimously. Ordinance No. 99-34 adopted. Ordinance No. 99-37 introduced by Mr. McKay was given its third reading. An ordinance amending Section 741.03 of Chapter 741 of the Business Regulation Code of the City of North Olmsted, entitled "Deliveries to Commercial Establishments," so as to prohibit making or receiving deliveries, or running engines of motor vehicles, near residences between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. and declaring an emergency as amended. Mr. McKay moved for adoption; second by Mr. Nashar; motion passed unanimously. Ordinance No. 99-37 adopted. Ordinance No. 99-51 introduced by Mayor Musial, Mr. O'Grady and Mr. McKay was given its third reading. An ordinance amending Section 171.06 of Chapter 171 of the Administrative Code, entitled "Community Reinvestment," in order to require that property owners who receive tax exemption for commercial or industrial projects, and their contractors and subcontractors, pay prevailing wages in connection with all project construction work, and declaring an emergency. Mr. O'Grady moved for adoption; second by Mr. McKay. Roll call: O'Grady, yes; McKay, yes; Miller, yes; Gareau, no; Kasler, yes; Nashar, yes; Limpert, no, with explanation. As a matter of policy, he is as committed as anyone else on Council to paying prevailing wage on these projects. However, when we legislate this, it sends up a signal to many companies that might come in to take advantage of these programs, which would in fact greatly enhance the treasury of the city, that we do not want to even discuss their situation. When the Corporate Center was being considered, Council felt it was not interested in that development if it was going to do less than prevailing wage. The developer agreed to prevailing wage. When we legislate it as opposed to making it a matter of policy, we send out the wrong signals. And to many people that signal is we are against enhancing the tax docket of the city. Mr. McKay commented he believed there was a misunderstanding of this. We are asking prevailing wage to offset some of the things that have happened to the city in the past, such as when we had a building going up with laborers coming from out of state and out of the country and the police had to go over and investigate individuals and in some cases removed people from the job. He thinks this particular piece of legislation gives a better quality of laborers and contractors to any projects that are endorsed by the city through tax abatement. The motion passed with five affirmative votes and two negative votes. Ordinance No. 99-51 adopted. 7