|
Special Council Minutes of 5/26/2004
<br />be fair, several weeks ago she asked fora "drop-dead date" from the Gamey side with
<br />regard to Volkswagen's requirement of them regarding this project's timeline. She
<br />believes, if that date were, for example, two months out and, although she respects the
<br />tremendous number of hours that have been put into this by many people, that we could
<br />continue to hold as many meetings as necessary to address every issue which adversely
<br />affects the residents, their property, their quality of life in the city. She has not yet heard
<br />that date. As it turns out, even this evening some issues arose that, although they came
<br />up before, came up in a different perspective and they remain unanswered. Further,
<br />presentations made tonight and on prior occasions by Ganley represent cleazly to her that
<br />Gamey representatives made some changes somewhat reluctantly and that they will be
<br />reluctant to make further changes and that there is, to use their language, "a void in
<br />understanding" on their part regarding Council's authority to require such items as
<br />additional mounding, fencing, landscaping, drainage and other items which could
<br />adversely affect residents if not enforced. She believes, if the rezoning is approved
<br />tonight, there will be even more difficulty exacting any further changes. Therefore, it
<br />was her request before and it is her continued request that the rezoning issue be
<br />postponed as long as it takes-however many meetings it takes, however many more
<br />hours it may take within the Gamey "drop-dead" deadline to address issues that affect the
<br />life of the residents involved. Roll call continued: Dailey, yes, with comment that he
<br />does not like split zoning. If it's commercial, it's commercial. If it's residential, it's
<br />residential. In this case, it is commercial property and should be zoned as such. With this
<br />in mind, he would have expected and demanded that Ganley continue to be a good
<br />neighbor and become an even better neighbor, being cognizant of resident concerns and
<br />doing what is reasonable to meet and perhaps exceed what is expected from the
<br />community. The motion to approve Ordinance 2004-39 failed with three yeas and four
<br />nays. President O'Grady noted that, since the previous vote on the site plan was
<br />conditional upon the passage of this ordinance, that vote similarly fails.
<br />Resolution No. 2004-95 was introduced and, placed on first reading by Councilman
<br />Gareau. A resolution authorizing the Director of Law to retain outside counsel to
<br />represent the City of North Olmsted and its individually named city officials in the
<br />lawsuit styled as State, ex rel. Musial v. City of North Olmsted, et al., Cuyahoga County
<br />Court of Appeals Case No. 04084201, and declaring an emergency. Councilman Gareau
<br />moved for suspension of the rules requiring three readings and formal committee review,
<br />and the motion was seconded by Councilman McKay. Roll call: Gazeau, yes; McKay,
<br />yes; Limpert, no; Kasler, yes; Dailey, yes; Miller, yes with comment that he would prefer
<br />this to have been done at a regularly scheduled Council meeting, but he understands the
<br />need to move along promptly. Roll call continued: Nashar, yes. The motion passed with
<br />six yeas and one nay. Charles Dial, 27959 Gazdenia, asked why there had been a change
<br />in the decision to hire outside counsel. What is the reason? Law Director Dubelko
<br />answered that this is difficult because this is a lawsuit by the Mayor, even though it is
<br />primarily in his individual capacity, against the city. It caused him concern from the
<br />start. Also, there are a number of named defendants: the city itself, plus now three
<br />individually named officials. So that gives the potential for conflict because of the
<br />multiple representation, and that is something about which every lawyer always has to be
<br />`~`` concerned. He spoke with Council in executive session, and the end result of that was
<br />7
<br />
|