5/21/2019 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Minutes of 5-21-2019 No: Hemann, Glassburn, Brossard, Kearney, Williamson, Limpert Motion failed. Resolution 2018-90 failed 6-1. Councilman Schumann voted yes with comment. It seems to me there are two issues regarding this contract. First, these assets as they are referred to, are anything but. These pipes are at best depreciating assets and at worst are huge potential liability. Doesn't it make sense for the City to be working with CDW proactively to replace these aging water lines as we resurface our streets and let them pay for the pipe and install. The program CDW is engaged in has been doing this with many of our neighbors and right now we are helping to pay for it. Second is the economic development part. I understand how this can be frightening to some of my colleagues, but in my opinion we have more to lose from Cleveland than they do from us. I know that sounds a little backwards, but the reality is today downtown is hot. It is hot right now and businesses are moving into downtown. This is a historically cyclical pattern where city's become renewed from the center out. Just check on the vacancy rates on those big buildings in Independence. Many of those businesses that moved into them in the 70's and 80's have moved back downtown. This was one of the subjects of a planning conference that myself and members of the Planning Commission had an opportunity to attend a few years ago. I have to express disappointment at how this legislation was handled. After six months of sitting on it, we had one meeting with the CDW Commissioner and one two minute meeting with no discussion. I was prepared to continue discussion. I would have liked to bring in Greg Meyers, our economic development manager. We actually pay him for his expertise in these matters. I spoke to him and he told me there would be no impediment to our future development by this agreement. The Planning Director said the same thing, mostly because we do not poach and there is a gentleman's agreement right now through the county that we do not poach. In fact, I took it upon myself to speak to many of the directors and everyone I spoke to was in favor of this. Thank you. Councilman Brossard voted no with comment. I would characterize my vote as a reluctant no as I see a lot of merit to the program, I really do. I do have some concerns over the language in the agreement as well as questions that remain unanswered by Cleveland Water or in my opinion answered vaguely. Part of that is because of that short committee process that Councilman Schumann mentioned. So if the proposal happens to be reintroduced at a future date, I hope that the committee process is a little more inclusive and provides multiple opportunities for Cleveland Water to clarify questions and concerns that many of us still have. Thank you. Councilman Kearney voted no with comment. I have been on Council for over 11 years. The administration never thought this was a great idea or an urgent need. If voted down tonight we can make an agreement anytime down the road, say after the Westlake case. We were told once you sign the agreement it has no bearing on who gets awarded the cash. Thank you. Councilwoman Williamson voted no with comment. My no vote this evening does not mean I am entirely against this project. It simply means I have many additional questions that have not been answered. I would have found it very beneficial to have another committee meeting on this issue with representatives from the water department and our