Laserfiche WebLink
Council Minutes of 6/6/2000 <br />:., call continued: Limpert, yes, with comment. First of all, he, as everyone on this <br />;;,,~ Council, has not been happy with the way certain organizations have portrayed this. All <br />Council members have received various endorsements from individuals and <br />organizations. Those groups and individuals endorse because they believe that Council <br />members will do what is best for the residents of this community. Ordinance 99-54 is a <br />divisive issue. Pendulums tend to swing both ways. If a Council could come in here and <br />shut out one segment of our population, another Council can come in and later shut out <br />the other segment of that population. He does not want to see anybody in this room shut <br />out. This- purpose of the ordinance is to prevent problems that the city has never had. If a <br />project makes sense for a PLA, this administration and this Council can enter into one <br />without having this ordinance in place. Unions enjoy the vast majority of the city's <br />contracts. The playing field has remained level and will remain level through our <br />community's commitment to prevailing wage so that individuals working for the City of <br />North Olmsted can afford to live in the City of North Olmsted. It has been written in the <br />Plain Dealer no other city in Ohio has this sort of ordinance. To quote an ex-president of <br />the United States, pioneers catch all the arrows. He does not believe the taxpayers of <br />North Olmsted, union and non-union alike, want Council defending this sort of untested <br />legislation with their hard-earned tax dollars. The vote was taken early because it is a <br />divisive issue, and he knows there are people in the audience who will be mad at those <br />who vote yes tonight or mad at those who vote no. The motion passed with four <br />affirmative votes and three negative votes. Ordinance No. 99-54 was tabled. <br />Mayor Musial commented that he was in favor of Ordinance 99-54. A lot of work has <br />been put in on the ordinance, and he concurs with the responses made by Mr. Miller, Mrs. <br />Kasler and Mr. O'Grady. He did not hear that this was a bad ordinance, but that there are <br />items that should be modified in order to make it a good ordinance. He will take the <br />initiative and work with Council to try and make sure that those specific items are <br />addressed so that an ordinance can be passed in the future. There were comments made <br />that the Mayor has the opportunity to put PLAs in various contracts, and he said Council <br />has the same power to do that. <br />REPORTS <br />Mayor Musial deferred his report until the next Council meeting. <br />(As Law Director Gareau began his report, there was a commotion as members of the <br />audience were leaving the room. Mr. Limpert moved that Council take a short recess; the <br />motion was seconded by Mr. Miller and unanimously passed. Council recessed at <br />9:03 p.m. and reconvened at 9:10 p.m.) <br />Law Director Gareau: 1) On the agenda this evening is an ordinance dealing with the <br />issue of annexation of land in Olmsted Township. This issue was the subject matter of a <br />lawsuit. The Common Pleas Court refused to issue a restraining order, and that was <br />appealed to the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals stayed the matter, which in <br />effect prohibited the city from enacting an ordinance such as the one on the agenda this <br />evening. Since that time, the Court of Appeals has removed the stay and sent it back to <br />5 <br /> <br />