11/15/2005 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Minutes of 11/15/2005 Planning and Design Commission, which the Mayor has referred to, and which has prompted tonight's introduction of Ordinance 2005-165 which will eliminate the Architectural Review Board and fold its powers and duties into the new Planning & Design Commission. Three proposals, however, involving Civil Service Commission procedure, exercise of home rule powers to vary from state laws and competitive bidding exceptions were defeated. Regardless of whether or not the people received sufficient information to fully understand the significance and need for these three proposals, as some believe, the fact of the matter is that each was defeated. It's his obligation as the city's Director of Law to sort out the significance of those defeats and provide appropriate counsel to Mayor, the administration, this Council and the boards and commissions of the city to ensure that the city complies with the will of the people as expressed by their vote. To that end, the Civil Service Commission will be advised by the Law Dept. to conduct its affairs in accordance with state law unless the Charter specifically provides otherwise. Further, the Law Dept. will continue to provide appropriate advice to the Mayor, Council, and administrative officials regarding new state laws that purported to impose obligations upon municipal corporations and the effects of those new laws, if any, upon the city and its operations. The Law Dept. will continue to keep a close eye on proposed city expenditures that exceed $25,000, which is the current threshold amount for mandatory, competitive bidding. Some of this may make it a little more difficult to do business as usual at City Hall. However, difficulty complying with the Charter as written is not a legal excuse for not complying with the Charter. If the Mayor and/or Council believe that one or more of these defeated proposals was defeated because the electorate was not sufficiently informed of the merits of the proposal or the need for the proposal, then he would certainly encourage the introduction of new legislation to submit these proposals again to the voters. The city should perhaps provide better information to the people regarding the history, the substance and the effects of these proposals. 3) Litigation update: State ex rel. Musial v. the City of North Olmsted was decided by the Ohio Supreme Court on November 2. The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Cuyahoga County Court of Appeals which had held that confidential law enforcement records in the North Olmsted Police Dept. are not subject to release to the public in the absence of a charge or arrest. 4) On November 2, he spent most of the day along with the Mayor and Assistant Law Director O'Malley and others with the fire fighters in an attempt to resolve two motions to vacate arbitration awards that remain pending in Common Pleas Court. A former Common Pleas judge is serving as mediator to the two groups. Progress was made, but the cases are certainly not yet resolved. 5) On November 7, 10 and 15 attended Board of Control and/or directors' meetings at City Hall. 6) November 7, he reviewed the current contract for the consultant for the Recreation Plan and made recommended revisions. 7) November 9, he attended a telephone conference with HUD officials, and officials from other FHAP agencies (Fair Housing Assistance Programs) regarding new HUD case management policies to be followed by these agencies in administering fair housing laws. 8) November 11, he attended the Veterans' Day ceremony at City Hall. It was a very good job by the Mayor and President Kennedy. 5 ~~ ~ ~ ro ,