HomeMy WebLinkAbout27-05 Ordinance RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Da ton Le al Blank, Inc. Form No. 30043 11
Ordinance No. 27-~5 Passed . 20
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 79-04 TO REVISE THE FEES FOR ANNUAL
PASSES TO THE DUBLIN COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER IN APPENDIX A OF
THE SCHEDULE OF FEES AND SERVICE; CHARGES FOR CITY OF DUBLIN
SERVICES.
- w i h
I WHEREAS, the City of Dublin, Ohio has adopted Ordinance 79 04 on December 13, 2004 h c
established its policies as to the recovery of costs and. more particularly the percentage of full costs to i~
be recovered from users of the City services and established a schedule of fees and charges for City
services which complied with the policy set forth in that Ordinance; and, ~I
WHEREAS, the fee for annual passes to the Dublin Community Recreation Center (DCRC) was 'I
adopted in Ordinance 79-04 in Appendix A, however, further review of these fees was referred to the 'I
Finance Committee of City Council; and
WHEREAS, after further review and consideration by the Finance Committee of City Council in its
~I, meeting on February 22, 2005 it was recommended that a five percent increase in user fees for annual
passes to the DCRC be effective on January 1, 2006.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Dublin, State of Ohio,
~I ~ members of the elected officials concurring that:
Section 1. Appendix A of the Ordinance in effect at January 1, 2006 for Fees and Service Charges for
City of Dublin Services is hereby amended to read as follows:
I
APPENDIX A -SCHEDULE OF FEES AND SERVICE CHARGES
APPENDIX A-1
I
S-161 COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER (DCRC) ANNUAL PASSES
The fees for annual pass holders to the Community Recreation Center (DCRC) shall be as follows:
Family of Family of Family of Family of Five ~
Individual Two Three Four or Lamer
Resident $200 $ 345 $ 455 $ 520 $ 555
~I School District (SD) Resident $300 $ 540 $ 710 $ 850 $ 920
Non-Resident $580 $1,020 $1,355 $1,530 $1,655
Dublin Based
Employees $240
Senior:
Resident $100
' SD Resident $130
Non-Resident $195
70 Visit Annual Pass for College Students 25 years of age and under w/valid student identification, and
proof of current class enrollment or be a High School Student who has graduated in the current year,
and is between High School graduation and College admission (w/valid identification):
j Resident $100
SD Resident $145
Non-Resident $295
I, Note: For annual pass holders who wish to have a monthly automatic deduction from a savings or
checking account, there is a $1 monthly service fee.
~ Daily Passes:
Adults (ages 18 yrs. & up) $8
Child (ages 3-17 yrs.) $4
I, Infant (ages 2 & under) no charge
City of Dublin residents may receive a discounted daily pass with their City of Dublin LD. card. These photo LD.
i, cards may be purchased at the DCRC for $2/person/card. Proof of residency and age are required to purchase a
resident card. Individuals under the age of 18 years must have a parent or guardian complete registration.
Discounted daily pass rate for City of Dublin residents with a resident LD. card is $4/adult and $3/child.
I
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blank, Inc. Form No. 30043
- ~
- Ordinance No. 27-05 _ PG~ssed , 20
I
Section 2. That the fee schedule identified in section of this Ordinance be effective pursuant to the
policies and procedures identified in Ordinance 79-04 but not take effect until January 1, 2006 so that
sufficient notification of the fee increase can be given to the passholders of the DCRC.
Section 3. EFFECTIVE DATE I'
~ That this Ordinance shall take effect and be in force on the earliest date permitted by law.
Passed this ! ~P day of , 2005.
i
. r ~
Mayor -Presiding Officer
i
ATTEST:
~
Clerk of Council
I hereby certify that copies of this
Ordinance/Resolution were posted in the
r nce with Section
lin in acco da
Cit of Dub
Y
ode.
h Ohio Revised C
.2 oft e
731 5
De Clerk of Council Dublin Ohio
ty
2
Department of Finance
5200 Emerald Parkway • Dublin, Ohio 43017-1006
Phone: (614) 410-4400 • Fax: (614) 410-4490 M e m o
CITY OF DUBLIN
To: Members of the Dublin City Council
From: Jane S. Brautigam, City Manager 5, (3~,.~,a..,.v
Date: May 16, 2005
tiated Marsha Grigsby, Deputy City Manager/Director of Finance
by: Melody Kennedy, Financial Analyst
Ordinance 27-05: Five Percent Increase in Annual Pass Fees to the Dublin
Re: Community Recreation Center (Effective January 1, 2006)
SUMMARY:
Ordinance #27-05 was first read on May 2, 2005. Pursuant to that reading, City Council asked when the
fees for annual passes to the DCRC were last increased. The fees were last increased in Ordinance
#126-03 with an effective date of July 1, 2004. At that time, the increase was also 5%.
There was also a request for clarification with regard to the college student pass option. The college
student pass rate was intended for college students who live away from home, but who come back to
town during holidays and breaks, and wish to use the facility. Prior to adoption of this rate, college
students, whose parents did not have household family memberships, were either charged the
"individual" rate (currently $190 for a resident) or the daily pass rate of $4 (resident). The college student
rate (currently $95) was intended as a discounted "individual" rate. The pass allows for 70 visits to the
DCRC per year for a college student 25 years of age or under, or a high school graduate between high
school and college. This is not comparable to the household family annual pass where a dependent
child (regardless of student status) up to the aqe of 23 nears of aqe maybe included on a parent's pass.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the Ordinance, with an effective date of January 1, 2006. Notification of
the fee increase will be given to residents and DCRC passholders in the upcoming Fall brochure, which is
in production in June and July and distributed to residents and passholders in early August. Additional
notification will be given in the Winter 2006 brochure that goes to residents and DCRC passholders in
mid-December 2005 shortly before the increase takes effect.
Department of Finance
5200 Emerald Parkway • Dublin, Ohio 43017-1006
Phone: (614) 410-4400 • Fax: (614) 410-4490 M e m o
CITY OF DUBLIN
To: Members of the Dublin City Council
S. ~
From: Jane S. Brautigam, City Manager ~c~.~--
Date: May 2, 2005
Initiated Marsha Grigsby, Deputy City Manager/Director of Finance
by: Melody Kennedy, Financial Analyst
Ordinance 27-05: Five Percent Increase in Annual Pass Fees to the Dublin
Re: Community Recreation Center (Effective January 1, 2006)
SUMMARY:
On December 13, 2004, City Council approved Ordinance 79-04, the legislation for the City's
fee schedule effective on January 1, 2005. The last pending item to be addressed pursuant to
passage of that Ordinance was a review of the Dublin Community Recreation Center (DCRC)
annual pass fees. On February 22, 2005, the Finance Committee of City Council met to
discuss the annual pass fees. Please find attached the pertinent excerpts from the Council
Meeting minutes from December 13, 2004 and February 22, 2005 for your reference.
After review and consideration, the Finance Committee of City Council, on February 22, 2005,
by a 2-1 vote, recommended a five percent increase across the board, effective on January 1,
2006 for DCRC annual pass fees. No change in the tier structure was recommended. The
Committee's report was approved by City Council on the same evening by a 4-2 vote.
Ordinance 27-05 attached, reflects the five percent increase as directed by City Council.
Based on actual 2004 receipts from DCRC annual passes, it is projected that the five percent
increase will generate approximately $78,000 in additional receipts. Future increases, possibly
based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) will be discussed this Fall.
Notification of the fee increase will be given to residents and DCRC passholders in the
upcoming Fall brochure, which is in production in June and July and distributed to residents
and passholders in early August. Additional notification will be given in the Winter 2006
brochure that goes to residents and DCRC passholders in mid-December 2005 shortly before
the increase takes effect.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends holding this Ordinance for a second reading on May 16, 2005.
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blank Inc _ Foe n No "+OOJz
27-05 -
Ordinance Na Yusaecl 20
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 79-04 TO REVISE THE FEES FOR
ANNUAL PASSES TO THE DUBLIN COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER IN
APPENDIX A OF THE SCHEDULE OF FEES AND SERVICE CHARGES FOR CITY OF
' DUBLIN SERVICES.
WHEREAS, the City of Dublin, Ohio has adopted Ordinance 79-04 on December 13, 2004 which
established its policies as to the recovery of costs and more particularly the percentage of full costs
' to be recovered from users of the City services and established a schedule of fees and charges for
City services which complied with the policy set forth in that Ordinance; and,
i',
WHEREAS, the fee for annual passes to the Dublin Community Recreation Center (DCRC) was
adopted in Ordinance 79-04 in Appendix A, however, further review of these fees was referred to
the Finance Committee of City Council; and
I
WHEREAS, afrer further review and consideration by the Finance Committee of City Council in
I its meeting on February 22, 2005 it was recommended that a five percent increase in user fees for
annual passes to the DCRC be effective on January 1, 2006.
' NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Dublin, State of Ohio,
members of the elected officials concurring that: i
Section 1. Appendix A of the Ordinance in effect at January 1, 2006 for Fees and Service Charges
for City of Dublin Services is hereby amended to read as follows:
APPENDIX A -SCHEDULE OF FEES AND SERVICE CHARGES
APPENDIX A-1
S-161 COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER. (DCRC) ANNUAL PASSES
The fees for annual pass holders to the Community Recreation Center (DCRC) shall be as follows:
Family of Family of Family of Family of Five
Individual Two Three Four or Larger
Resident $-1-99 200 $338 345 $433- 455 $49-5- 520 $~39 555
I School Dist. Res $~85 300 $5-1-5 540 $~5 710 $8~1-0 850 $8~S 920
Non-Resident $559 580 $9~9 1,020 $-1-,2s~A 1,355 $1;4531,530 $1-5?3 1,655
Dublin Based
Employees $339 240
Senior:
Resident $93 100
SD Resident $~-5 130
Non-Res. $~-8-5 195
70 Visit Annual Pass for College Students 25 years of age and under w/valid student identification, ~
and proof of current class enrollment or be a High School Student who has graduated in the current
year, and is between High School graduation and College admission (w/valid identification):
Resident $93 100
SD Resident $-140 145
Non-Res. $2-89 295
Note: For annual pass holders who wish to have a monthly automatic deduction from a savings or
checking account, there is a $1 monthly service fee.
' Daily Passes:
Adults (ages 18 yrs. & up) $8
Child (ages 3-17 yrs.) $4
Infant (ages 2 & under) no charge
I', City of Dublin residents may receive a discounted daily pass with their City of Dublin LD. card.
~I These photo LD. cards may be purchased at the DCRC for $2/person/card. Proof of residency and
age are required to purchase a resident card. Individuals under the age of 18 years must have a
' parent or guardian complete registration. Discounted daily pass rate for City of Dublin residents ~
with a resident LD. card is $4/adult and $3/child.
1
RECORD OF ORDINANCES
D~ vi Legat Blk ik Inc For n Nu 3U(ti17
Ordinance No. 27-0$ Passed 20
Section 2. That the fee schedule identified in section 1 of this Ordinance be effective pursuant to the
policies and procedures identified in Ordinance 79-04 but not take effect until January 1, 2006 so that
sufficient notification of the fee increase can be given to the passholders of the DCRC.
Section 3. EFFECTIVE DATE
That this Ordinance shall take effect and be in force on the earliest date permitted by law.
Passed this day of , 2(105. I
I
Mayor -Presiding Officer
i
ATTEST:
I
Clerk of Council
i
I
~I
i
I
2
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting
.~AVtON LEGA_LBUNN, INC.. FORM N010168 _
February 22, 2005 Page 22 I
~I Held ~0
Mr. McCash commented that it would be more beneficial to the overall public good I
,III to install the crosswalk and light at Earlington and Coffman and take the sidewalk
down to the high school versus this individualized approach.
Mr. Keenan responded that it would not be utilized, in his opinion. His overall
Il'I concern is with the 150 children who cross in this location.
d that staff is re uestin Council's su port to send
rcher note P
hinnici-Zue q 9
Mayor C
r Will staff return with a re uest for the study funding?
the response lette . q III
these t es of studies. 'I
Mr. Hammersmith responded that funds are budgE.ted for yp
There was no objection from Council to the staff response letter and to proceeding
with the study.
Mrs, Boring asked if the church would be requested to share in the costs of the I
study.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher responded that the policy at this time is not to have the 'I'I
costs of the study shared with the party requesting it. If she is proposing a change
to the policy, that can be considered.
Mrs. Boring stated that she would request a change to this policy in the future. III
Northeast Quad Park Name i,
~ Mr. Hahn reported that the memo outlines the process that staff will follow in this
naming, based on the policy approved by Council. He confirmed that the "Kids l
Vote" process would be used for the final selection, after review by PRAC and ~
Council.
There was no objection to the process as proposed. II
CITY MANAGER/STAFF REPORTS ~'I
Proposed 2005 Street Maintenance Program II
Mr. Hammersmith highlighted the key areas of the proposed program. Aside from III
street reconstruction and resurfacing, some of the notable areas are Earlington
Parkway, River Forest neighborhood and Dunniker Park Drive. There will be some III
limited curb improvements just off of Memorial Drive. Some streets were added
I i
due to accelerated deterioration from the weather: Avery Road near Tuswe I,
portions of Frantz Road, Parkcenter Avenue and Dublin Road south. Other
ro'ects of interest are the Brand Road shoulder improvement, bike path III
P 1
'I~ connection along the library in Historic Dublin, and northeast area bikepath
connections as outlined in the memo. The sidewalk program will continue this year
i~ nd
k e is estimated at $2.2 million a l
;I with $125,000 programmed. The total pac ag
staff anticipates a bid award on April 4. I
I III ~
Illl COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTSICOUNCIL ROUNDTABLE 'I,
Mr Keenan, Finance Chair reported that the Committee met this evening at 6 p.m.
to review the Rec Center annual pass fees. The recommendation of the II,
Committee, approved 2-1 was for a five percent across the board increase,
lil effective January 1, 2006 and for no change in the tier structure. At the fall I,
operating budget meeting, discussion would take place regarding a cost of living II,
adjustment for each year. I'
Mr. Keenan moved aNNroval of the Committee report. II
Mr. Lecklider seconded the motion. it
Mrs. Boring stated that each year, the cost study is updated which includes the
fees for the Rec Center. At the time the issue was referred to the Finance III
Committee, the direction was to review different options for the Rec Center pass !I
tiers. She opposes the recommendation of a five percent across the board j~
increase because she does not believe it is justified. The cost study is the process ~1
the City has used to justify increases.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council _ Meetin~__
DAV70N LEGALBUNK, INC., FORM N0. 101 a9 _
February 22, 2005 Page 23
Held 20 I
Mr, Keenan responded that the last fee increase for the Rec Center passes was in
July of 2004, and the Committee felt that the five percent increase was in line with
current inflation rates.
Mrs. Boring emphasized that the cost study analysis was not done to justify an ,I
across the board increase for all tiers of membership. ~I
Ms. Grigsby responded that the cost of services sl:udy is done annually. The last
~ fee increase for the Rec Center passes was based upon that study. Based upon
the information gathered this year, the need for an increase was borderline, and so
staff did not make a recommendation for an increase. Staff is confident that they
would recommend some type of increase next year.
Ma or Chinnici-Zuercher noted that she had understood at the meeting that staff III!
Y
was antici atin recommendin at least a five percent increase next year.
P g 9 i
II s stated that staff would normal) im lement any increase on July 1 of
Ms. Gng by Y P
each year, versus January 1.
I
Vote on the motion: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs.
I
Boring, no; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. McCash, no.
(Motion carried 4-2)
that he will be out of the county Burin the interviews for board ,III
Mr. Reiner noted Y g .
ve a s no sis of those
and commission candidates and asked if Council could ha y p
Id
interviews before the 7 p.m. Council meeting on March 7 so that he cou ','~i
participate in the discussion regarding final selection.
Mrs. Boring noted that she, too, will not be in attendance at the interviews and
would appreciate this opportunity for discussion.
II
"I It was the consensus of Council to meet at 6 p.m. on Monday, March 7 in executive
~j session to discuss the results of the interviews,
L~. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher reminded Council Members that Wednesday, March 2 is !i
the State of the City presentation at the Abbey Theater and everyone should RSVP j
II to the City Manager. The St. Patrick's Day Parade forms should be sent to the
Community Relations division.
ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION
There being no further business, Mayor Chinnici-:Zuercher moved to adjourn to
executive session for discussion of land, legal and personnel matters.
Mr. Reiner seconded the motion.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher announced that the meeting would be reconvened only to I,
formally adjourn. No further action will be taken.
Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mayor ~I
Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes.
i
The meeting was adjourned to executive session at 10:00 p.m.
The meeting was reconvened and formally adjourned at 11:00 p.m. fill
( A`.'_ _ I
Mayor- Presiding Officer ~I~
~ II
Clerk of Council
I I~,
I
I,
ii
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council _ Meeting,______
DAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INO„FORM NO. tO1N _
December 13, 2004 Page 8 -T'~
i Held 20 ~ ~'~i
compensation that Council Members receive. There have been no
changes to the compensation for Council Members since 1996, even
though Council now attends many more meetings, including study 'l
sessions, than in previous years. In preparing the budget for 2005 '
and after discussion with the Finance Director, shoe felt it appropriate
to bring forward a proposal for increase to the compensation of I~
Council Members. Staff recommends approval.
Mr. Lecklider commented that he feels somewhat uncomfortable with
this proposal. While he feels that a good argument can be made for
an average 3 percent per year raise, personally, voting on his own
raise causes some discomfort. He would propose that for him, any
voted raise not take effect until the beginning of tF~e next new term for
his Council position.
There were no other comments. ~I''
~ Vote on the Ordinance: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan,
yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider,
no; Mr. McCash, no.
COST OF SERVICES UPDATE ',i
Ordinance 79-04
Amending Chapter 35 of the Codified Ordinances to Revise the Fee and
Service Charge Revenue/Cost Comparison System and Establishing a
Schedule of Fees and Service Charges for City of Dublin Services, and
Declaring an Emergency.
Ms. Brautigam stated that the Finance Committee reviewed this ordinance and the
recommended minor modifications have been incorporated into the ordinance. 'j
There was an extensive discussion of Rec Center fees at the meeting, and Finance
''l staff is present to respond to any questions.
Mr. Keenan, Finance Chair noted that the Committee met on December 1 and
I' I
minutes were provided to Council. He highlighted some of the changes:
1. The recovery percentage for conditional use applications were changed
to 50 percent, thereby reducing the fee to $1,360.
2. Residents felt that the $170 fee for residents for right-of-way permits to
replace driveway aprons was prohibitive. The Committee is therefore
recommending a $50 flat fee, consistent with the permit fee for basement I
remodeling.
3, For utilities, staff has recommended an increase of $100 increase for a
three-fourths inch water tap and $200 increase for a sewer tap fee,
~ effective July 1, 2005.
4. For recreation, staff recommended an increase in the daily pass rate for
the outdoor pools to $7. After discussion, the Committee is
recommending a fee of $6.
Ms. Salay asked for clarification about the fees for passes purchased after 6 p.m.
Ms. Grigsby responded that there had previously been a differential in cost after 6
p.m. between children and adults and it was recoimmended that the fee be a flat $4
Ali for both groups.
I Mr, Lecklider stated that there was concern by the Committee about raising the
daily rates to $7, and the compromise was fora $6 rate. The key issue was
whether the City wants to subsidize the outdoor pools to a greater extent than has
been the policy in the past. His recollection is that Ms. Heal indicated that some of
the additional operating costs for the pool related to significant infrastructure I'
improvements done recently.
Ms. Grigsby clarified that prior to 1999, the outdoor pool was supported entirely
through the fees collected. As the pool began to age, improvements were needed.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council _ _ Meeting
DAYTON lEOA~ BLANK, INC., FORM NO. tOt aB _ _
December 13, 2004 Page 9
Held 20
Since 2000, the City has been subsidizing a portion of the operation for the outdoor
pool due to these improvements. With the second outdoor pool coming on line, I,
there was a subsidy of $150,000 needed to support the operation of both pools.
Mr. Lecklider asked for clarification of the City's existing policy for subsidy of all it
recreation. ~i
Ms. Grigsby responded that for recreation prograrnming, the subsidy has been at a I
50 percent level. For the outdoor pools, traditionally, the recovery attempt has
been at 100 percent of the costs or a significant recovery of the operating costs. In
2000, there were some issues with filtration and significant repairs were needed,
resulting in subsidy from the general fund. For Phase One of the Rec Center, the
fees were established to substantially recover the operating costs. With Phase
I Two opening in 2000, the subsidy from the general fund was increased, based
upon the fact that the services provided in Phase Two required more of a subsidy, ~
as they do not generate the same level of revenue as those in Phase One.
I~ Mr. Lecklider asked if staff anticipates that the fee increases for the outdoor pool
will result in revenues, which will fully account for the operational costs.
Ms. Grigsby responded that the hope is that less of a general fund subsidy will be
required. At this fee level, she cannot predict that 100 percent of the operating
costs will be recovered. An issue with outdoor pools is that the weather is a
variable each year and impacts the revenues.
Ms. Salay noted that it is really important to keep the outdoor pool affordable. She ~
would have concerns with attempting to subsidize the capital expenses for an
aging pool with admission fees. She noted that last year, patrons purchased
passes which were valid for either outdoor pool. Will that practice continue? ~
Ms. Grigsby responded that she is not aware of any policy change in this regard.
Mr. Keenan stated that there is also the ability to combine a Rec Center pass with
an outdoor pool pass with the discount offered.
Ms. Grigsby stated that a discount has been offered for purchase of both, but the
discount will be reduced this year. In the past, there was concern about the impact
of the opening of the Rec Center upon outdoor pool membership and therefore a
discount was offered to give an incentive for purchase of both passes.
Ms. Grigsby noted in regard to capital costs, in the years where the general fund
provided a subsidy to the swimming pool fund, this subsidy generally offset the cost
of those capital replacements. The current fees are based upon recovering the i
operating costs. Both outdoor pools were built with 100 percent income tax
revenues retiring the debt. The membership and admission fees are to cover the
costs of operating the facilities. The capital costs that relate to the outdoor pool are III
~ charged to those funds, and there were some transfers made from the general !I
~ fund in some years for filter and heating unit repair to offset what would have been
a deficit in the swimming pool fund.
it
Ms. Salay asked about the practice of verifying that the people using the pool are
Dublin residents. She is aware from personal experience that many Hilliard
residents were using the pool each day and no one was checking on residency. In
previous years, utility bills or driver's licenses were checked to verify residency, but
this is not being done.
~ Ms. Grigsby responded that she discussed this issue with Ms. Heal and she will
follow-upon this to ensure that the policy is enforced.
tin enters in the Columbus area
' Mrs. Boren has reviewed fees for other recrea o c
9
and has found that Dublin's non-resident fees at the Rec Center are extremely low.
' 'ti n increase would
In view of the small number of non-residents using the facile es, a II I'
~I not negatively impact a large group. On the other hand, Dublin residents could be
made aware of Council's intent to have this facility available for Dublin residents.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council _ Meetin¢
DAYTON LEOAL BUNK, INC., FORM NO. 10tH _
December 13, 2004 Page 10
Held
She therefore is proposing that Council consider a 20 percent fee increase for non-
I residents for the Rec Center.
Mr. Keenan asked what this 20 percent increase would equate to in terms of
revenues.
' Mrs. Boring noted that she does not know. She commented that the current fee
schedule is graduated and benefits larger families.
Mr. Keenan asked if she is proposing this for the f2ec Center only or for the outdoor
pools as well.
Mrs. Boring responded that she is focusing on the Rec Center at this time, but she
would be interested in discussion of outdoor pool fees as well, compared with other
communities. iI
Ms, Salay stated that her understanding is that there is a window of time in the I~
spring where a Dublin school district resident would be able to purchase a season
pass for the outdoor pool. When that window of time ends, only Dublin residents
can purchase pool passes and only Dublin residents or guests of Dublin residents
can purchase a daily pass to the pool, Is that correct? ~I,
' Ms. Grigsby responded that this is accurate. There are timeframes established to
ensure that Dublin residents can purchase passes. The cap on memberships,
however, no longer exists due to the additional capacity provided with the second
outdoor pool.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked for confirmation that Mrs. Boring is proposing a 20
I~, percent increase for non-residents at the Rec Center.
oncurred. Ili1ll
Mrs. Boring c
~j Ms. Salay agreed, noting that these rates should be made as attractive as possible
for Dublin residents in order to serve Dublin residents. If non-residents want to use
the facilities, they can purchase passes. Currently, the rates for non-residents are
so attractive that the City may be subsidizing these too heavily.
I~ Mr. Keenan asked if she is distinguishing between school district residents and III
non-residents in that scenario.
I Mrs. Boring responded that she is distinguishing only between resident and non-
resident.
Mr. McCash pointed out that a school district rate is not available for Hilliard School
district residents, although there are portions of the Hilliard School District within
the City of Dublin. It does not seem fair overall. Dublin should provide a school
district rate to all districts within the City's borders or to none of them. If one lives
~ in Columbus and attends Dublin Schools, a lower rate is available to them than to
someone who live in Columbus and attends Hilliard Schools, although in both 'i,
cases, they are non-residents of Dublin.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that those who live in Ballantrae qualify as Dublin
residents, although they attend Hilliard Schools.
i~~ Mr. McCash stated that one school district is being treated differently than others
within Dublin's borders for purposes of recreation. The school district resident rate
!i~ should also apply to Hilliard and Jonathan Alder Iistrict residents under this logic.
The Schools and the City are separate entities, so students in Dublin School
~ District should not receive a financial benefit from the City of Dublin unless the
other districts receive the same. It would make rnore sense to have simply a
resident and anon-resident category in view of the three school districts within ~,I
Dublin's borders. Currently, the City is in essence discriminating against some of
I'~ the other districts by offering a lower rate to only one.
I
~ Mrs, Boring stated that the name of the school district, "Dublin City Schools" is a
misnomer. They should be named, "Washington Local Schools."
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council. _ Meetin~__
pgttON LEGALBLANK, INC„FORM NO. 101 dB
December 13, 2004 Page 11
Held - 20
Discussion continued.
Ms. Salay stated that when the Rec Center was opened and the distinction was
drawn between Dublin residents and school district residents, there were no
students attending Hilliard Schools living in Dublin.
Mr. Keenan stated that perhaps another study session is needed for this particular
e crate from the consideration of the fee ordinance tonight.
issue, s p
rt han in to a resident and
uld su o c
r tated that she co
~I~ Ma or Chinnici-Zuerche s pp 9 9
Y I
non-resident rate structure in view of the expansion of the City into other school
j districts.
I
Mr. Keenan stated that there was a letter sent to council from a senior citizen who
resides in the Dublin school district. They indicatE;d that they are involved in the
Dublin community and pay real estate taxes to support the schools. He would
support taking a closer look at the rates for seniors in a future discussion. I!
Mrs. Boring stated that there are many facilities available for seniors throughout the
area. In view of the growth of the City and the limited capacity of the Rec Center, i
the resident and non-resident rates should be implemented.
Mr. Lecklider stated that something to consider is the common denominator of
those who pay taxes to the Dublin School district.
Ij Ms. Grigsby stated that when the Rec Center was first opened, staff was aware 'I!
that future changes would occur. There were no Dublin residents in the Hilliard 'j
School district at the time, and a decision was made to follow the existing policy of 'I
all recreational programming where the City used the schools to provide services
absent a facility. This was the basis for the resident and school district resident I~
rate, and it was recognized that this was subject to change in the future.
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked if staff could provide some figures on the impacts ~I
of having a resident and non-resident category as proposed. Does staff feel i'
comfortable with this modification, should Council) want to introduce such an
' amendment? i
Ms. Grigsby stated that staff would need some tirne to review this, Generally, staff
has provided asix-month period before implementing new rates, with i
!i implementation of new rates generally on July 1 of each year. Staff could II
I assemble information for Council to consider early in 2005. ;j
Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher asked staff recommends that Council consider the
legislation as drafted, with the intent of reviewing the Rec Center fees in early
2005. ~
Ms. Grigsby agreed that this would be staff's recommendation. i~l
~I~ Mr. McCash stated that the school district residents comprise only 13 percent of
I ass sales so the im act will not be rent. III
the tots p p g i
Mr. Lecklider pointed out that the City does utilizE; the school facilities for some of it
~ the City programs.
Mrs. Boring pointed out that when a Hilliard School is built in Dublin, the City may
also use those facilities. Personally, she is prepared to move forward tonight to
establish a resident and non-resident category. 'the negative impacts are minimal i
' and this sends a positive message to Dublin residents
I
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Dublin City Council _ Meetine
pAYTON LEGAL BLANK, INC.. FORM NO. IafN
December 13, 2004 Page 12
Held 20
Mr. Keenan commented that there is no harm in having the numbers reviewed. It
can be modified in January or February if desired. He would prefer to consider this
carefully.
Mr. Keenan moved for emergency passage of the ordinance.
Mr. Lecklider seconded the motion. '~I~I
Vote on the motion; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner„ yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher,
yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes.
ease the Dublin School District reside ,III
nt and non-resident
Mrs. Boring moved to mcr
fees by 20 percent, keeping the three-tiered system in place at this time. ;i
Mr. McCash seconded the motion,
Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, no; Mr. Lecklider, no; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr.
McCash, no; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, no; Mr. Reiner, no; Mr. Keenan, no. ~!I!
(The Council Members voting against the motion indicated a desire to review the
!ail figures and projections prior to making this change.
Mr. Keenan moved to approve the ordinance as recommended by the Finance III'
Committee and for Council to revisit the fee schedule for the DCRC in the
! January/February 2005 timeframe.
! Mr. Lecklider seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring,
yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes.
I!'. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
Ordinance 80-04
Authorizing the Provision of Certain Incentives for Purposes of Encouraging
Frank Gates Corporation to Retain Its Workforce Within the City, and
Authorizing the Execution of an Economic Development Agreement.
Ms. Gilger stated that the Frank Gates Company is a holding company with
~ numerous subsidiaries, seven of which are located in Dublin. Frank Gates employs
people nationwide, and combined with another locally headquartered subsidiary,
CareWorks, there are over 900 employed in Dublin. Frank Gates has been located 'l~
at 5000 Bradenton for over a decade and as its fifteen-year lease nears expiration,
the company is exploring options. They have determined that upgrades to the
building are necessary to continue viable operations at that location. In order to III
sustain the company's viability at that location, the City is proposing an economic
! development agreement which includes an eight year, 16 percent income tax rebate
I to offset the cost of the building renovations, which include a $300,000 generator
upgrade. The incentive is tied to job retention and a 15-year lease extension.
Present tonight is CEO/Chairman Niles Overly and CFO Greg Smith.
I~,
I Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher noted that Council appreciates their interest in staying in
Dublin and appreciates the opportunity to work with them to arrange for this
~I incentive, There were no further questions from Council.
Ij Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; :Mr. McCash, yes; Ms.
Salay, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes.
I
INTRODUCTION/FIRST READING -ORDINANCES
APPROPRIATIONS
Ordinance 81-04 ~
Amending the Annual Appropriations Ordinance for the Fiscal Year Ending
December 31, 2004. (Request to dispense with public hearing) 'i
Ms, Salay introduced the ordinance.
Ms. Brautigam stated that this is essentially ayear-end ordinance necessary to
make appropriations for certain items. Staff is requesting that Council dispense ~
with the public hearing.