Laserfiche WebLink
Council Minutes of 11/19/20(12 <br />Councilman Miller, chairperson of the Intra-Governmental Relations and Legislation; <br />Long-Range Planning Committee: 1) The committee met on November 12 to discuss <br />Ordinance 2002-172. In attendance were committee members Kasler and Miller and Law <br />Director Dubelko Ordinance 2002-172 authorizes the Mayor to accept conveyance of fee <br />simple of certain real property and record same, to then enter deed restrictions upon to <br />run with the development land and then to reconvey the title to Fairview Office <br />Associates, LLC and declaring an emergency. The property is located between <br />Brookpark and I-480 at Clague Road and is being developed with office sites on the <br />Fairview property and North Olmsted is getting the parking lot. The purpose of the deed <br />change was to protect the city's interest in access from Clague Road, the ratio of parking <br />to green space and the maintenance of landscaping and sidewalks on the site. Thanks to a <br />well-written memorandum from the Law Department, there was minimal discussion <br />because it was well explained in the memorandum. The committee recommended <br />approval unanimously. Mr. Miller remarked that he does look forward to the city being <br />in better financial shape so that the position of a planning director can be funded. He is <br />frustrated by this situation where Fairview Park gets the high tax paying office space and <br />North Olmsted gets the parking lot. Councilman Gateau noted that, not only is North <br />Olmsted getting the parking lot, but there is someone interested in putting up a cell tower <br />on the land. Councilman McKay noted that North Olmsted is also getting the retention <br />system for the project. <br />AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION <br />Dentis Lambert, 25057 Carey Lane. He is disturbed about the pending layoffs of city <br />employees. Rhetoric, pandering and finger-pointing are not going to resolve the problem. <br />No one's job is secure. The bottom line is that a lot that should have been done hasn't <br />been done. On Council's part, he has brought to attention through administrations the <br />need of Council to do homework when it passes budgets. He considers it to be a serious <br />issue when positions are abolished. This community delivers 90% of its effort toward <br />safety and security of community and the services it delivers. The other 10% are <br />administrative functions to comply with state and federal governments. The primary job <br />of the community is to dispense services and guarantee a safe, secure environment for <br />residents. A community needs dollars to do that. He has addressed the issue of needing <br />to raise dollars-and not from the taxpayers' pockets but through good planning, zoning <br />and development. When the issue of a Service Director was being considered, he met <br />with the Mayor and gave him a list of guidelines he thought the new Service Director <br />should have: A Service Director should have a good working understanding of organized <br />labor; ability to understand collective bargaining and what is involved; good at marketing <br />because this job would fold nicely into legislation regarding economic development for <br />the community and a director for that; and salesmanship as far as bringing forth new <br />taxpaying entities to the community. He doesn't know if the current Service Director <br />fills that bill ar not. This is a serious issue. He is dismayed it got to this point and is <br />hoping that Council wilt do what it is supposed to do in the next budgetary hearings to <br />find out really where the dollars are and talk to the people that really run the city. <br />Council should stand on their ground as far as where they want the dollars to be allocated <br />and let the Mayor Live by those. The administration needs to move forward. He has a <br />12 <br />