Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-10-20 Council Minutes_RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held CALL TO ORDER August 10, 2020 Mayor Amorose Groomes called the Monday, August 10, 2020 Regular Meeting of Dublin City Council to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present were Mayor Amorose Groomes, Vice Mayor De Rosa, Ms. Alutto, Ms. Fox, Mr. Keeler, Mr. Peterson and Mr. Reiner. Staff members present were Mr. McDaniel, Mr. Rogers, Ms. Readler, Ms. O'Callaghan, Mr. Stiffler, Chief Paez, Mr. Hammersmith, Ms. Rauch, Ms. Gilger, Ms. Ray, Ms. Burness, Mr. O'Brien, Mr. Somerville and Mr. Plouck. ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Amorose Groomes moved to adjourn to executive session for the following purposes: • To consider the purchase of property for public purposes • To discuss personnel matters related to the appointment of a public official. Ms. Alutto seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Fox, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mr. Keeler, yes; Vice Mayor De Rosa, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes. Mayor Amorose Groomes reconvened the regular City Council meeting at 7:00 p.m. She reiterated that, due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the State's emergency declaration, the meeting is being conducted via an online platform and live -streamed at the City's website. This is now allowed as a result of the passage of Am. Sub. H.B. 197, which includes temporary changes to the Ohio Open Meetings Law. She reiterated her previous statement regarding the submission of any comments by the public prior to the meeting by e-mail to the Clerk or during the meeting via the form on the website. She emphasized that Council desires to accommodate public participation and comment ,to the greatest extent possible throughout this Pandemic. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mr. Rogers led the Pledge of Allegiance. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mayor Amorose Groomes noted that Council is in receipt of a letter from a Dublin company, GrooveU. All of Council was copied on this letter in which frustration with the COVID-19 testing accessibility was expressed, requesting the City's help in access. Mr. McDaniel has responded to this company about avenues available to them. There were no other citizen comments submitted regarding items not on tonight's agenda. CONSENT AGENDA • Notice to Legislative Authority for a New D53 Liquor Permit for Business Company Inc., dba Market Bar, 6736 Longshore Street, Dublin, Ohio 43017 Ms. Burness and Ms. Clarke each reported there were no public comments submitted regarding the consent agenda. Hearing no request to remove this item, Mayor Amorose Groomes moved to approve the item on the Consent Agenda. Ms. Alutto seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keeler, yes; Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Vice Mayor De Rosa, yes; Ms. Fox, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes. Form 6101 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO August 10, 2020 Page 2 of 13 Held POSTPONED ITEMS Resolution 41-20 (Amended) Establishing a Community Task Force and a Chief's Advisory Committee to Assist and Advise on Combating and Prohibiting Social Injustice, Inequity, Intolerance, Negative Stereotyping and Discrimination. Mr. McDaniel reported that a redlined version of the resolution was submitted in the packet, reflecting a change in the Chief's Advisory Committee to mirror the appointment of Chair and Vice Chair to the process for the Community Task Force. At this time, he has a list of proposed members to read into the record. If Council is in agreement, Council could by motion amend the resolution to include those recommended for appointment. Mayor Amorose Groomes asked for clarification regarding the amendment to include the text changes submitted in the redlined version in the packet. Are two separate motions needed, or would one suffice to include the new text and the appointees' names? The Clerk responded that this can be done with one motion to amend after the names are read into the record. Mr. McDaniel read the recommended appointees' names into the record: Mr. Stephen White; Ms. Nancy Sofowora; Mr. Kofi Amponsah; Ms. Erica Adams; Ms. Rama Billakanty; Dr. Ajay Satyapriya; Ms. Lynette Mercado; Mr. Isao Shoji; Mr. Vincent Wang; Ms. Deneisha Franklin; a Dublin Chamber Representative to be determined by the Chamber; Ms. Bridgette Mariea; Dr. Todd Hoadley; Ms. Sylvina Smith; and four (4) Dublin Youth representatives as appointed by the City Manager. Mr. McDaniel stated that the recommended appointees for the Chief's Advisory Committee are as follows: Former Judge Dwayne Maynard; Mr. AJmeri Hoque; Mr. Srikanth Gaddam; Mr. Cameron Justice; Ms. Yanling Yin; Ms. Susan Ortega; Mr. Imran Malik; Ms. Cortney Ingram; Mr. Isao Shoji; and Ms. Stella Villalba. Mayor Amorose Groomes thanked Mr. McDaniel and called for any public comments submitted regarding this Resolution. Ms. Burness and Ms. Clarke indicated that comments have not been received regarding this agenda item. Mayor Amorose Groomes invited Council questions/discussion. Mr. Keeler noted he has some suggested changes to the text of the Resolution: • In Section 1B, Term — he suggested the language be revised to indicate that, "The Community Task Force will serve for a period of ne meire..th one (1) year from the date of the passage of this Resolution or until as -City Council determines the Community Task Force has achieved its intended purpose." This provides more flexibility in case the intended purpose has not been achieved. • On Section 1G, item a — after the word "understanding," he suggests inserting the! word "inclusion." The sentence would therefore read, "advise on matters of social justice and promote opportunities to foster understanding, inclusion, positive relationships and a strong sense of community among all community members." In Section F. item c, a period is needed at the end. • In Section F, item c, the last sentence should read, "Community concern including the defeat of social injustice, bias, bigotry, ine ui and racism in the community." Form 6101 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held August 10, 2020 Page 3 of 13 Mayor Amorose Groomes thanked Mr. McDaniel for all of his work on this. She is aware of the large number who were interested in serving, and invited all to provide input at the meetings to be scheduled. Mayor Amorose Groomes moved to amend Resolution 41-20 to include the language amendments as well as the appointee names. Ms. Alutto seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Fox, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Vice Mayor De Rosa, yes; Mr. Keeler, yes; Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes. Vote on the Resolution as amended: Ms. Alutto, yes; Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Keeler, yes; Vice Mayor De Rosa, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Ms. Fox, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. SECOND READING/PUBLIC HEARING — ORDINANCES Ordinance 16-20 Authorizing an Adjustment to the Boundary Line Between the City of Dublin and the City of Columbus on Sawmill Road b A f y Agreement o Both I Municipalities, Pursuant to Ohio Revised Code Section 709.37, Mr. Hammersmith reported that the adjustment of the Sawmill Road boundary began in November of 2018 between then Police Chief von Eckartsberg and Columbus Police leadership and was/still remains rooted in emergency service responses, jurisdiction and life safety. At the last reading, several questions were raised, including potential impacts to property development; overhead utility presence; emergency service responses; and responses to resident inquiries. He reviewed the follow-up memo in the packet: 1. Regarding property development, Dublin will continue to coordinate with Columbus as proposed projects come forward in this corridor. Coordination with Columbus will be required for landscaping enhancements within the right-of- way. Columbus has indicated that, provided they do not conflict with either existing or planned infrastructure or have negative impacts to public health or safety standards, they would be supportive of such enhancements. 2. Regarding overhead utilities, the staff report indicates present placement -- generally speaking, south of 270 along the west side of Sawmill Road; north of 270, along the east side of Sawmill. If there are any additional overhead utilities, expected placement would be in the public right-of-way and that specific utility would be in contact with Dublin, Columbus and other property owners and stakeholders to gather input and comments, as is the practice today. 3. Regarding Police response, Columbus and Dublin Police have indicated there will be no change in the service level or response time for citizens. Calls for emergency service will continue to be routed through NRECC and will be dispatched accordingly. Dublin Police will respond immediately as will Columbus Police and the jurisdiction will not be of concern at that time. The jurisdiction becomes important during investigation and reporting of the incident. If the incident is in the paved roadway — which is primarily what this boundary adjustment will clarify — it will be much more simplified than it is today. The exhibits provided for the first reading show the various areas of the paved roadway that are in various jurisdictions with no consistency. 4. In terms of maintenance responsibility — whether public or private — the maintenance of specialized landscaping such as the shamrock at the northwest corner of Emerald Parkway/Sawmill Road and specialized landscaping behind the stone wall at that intersection and in the right-of-way will remain the responsibility of the property owner just as it is today. What Dublin is maintaining within that right-of-way will continue to be maintained by Dublin. The only concern Columbus has with enhancement is the maintenance of such an enhancement. If Dublin is paying for the maintenance, Columbus has no issue with an enhancement. He noted that, generally, along this 3.2 miles of the corridor, Dublin owns the right-of- way in fee. That ownership is not being given up. It is a matter of the jurisdiction Form 6101 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin City Council August 10, 2020 Page 4 of 13 where that property now lies and adjusting the corporate boundary to the west right- of-way line for consistency sake. If there are areas where it is preferred the City not adjust this boundary line, it could be reviewed. However, the west right-of-way line was selected for the sake of consistency. The intent was to simplify and know the location of the boundary going forward into the future. Staff recommends adoption of this Ordinance. He offered to respond to questions. Mayor Amorose Groomes asked Ms. Burness if public comment has been submitted regarding this legislation. Ms. Burness reported the following five e-mails received today and this evening from residents expressing concern with the legislation. Mayor Amorose Groomes asked her to read these into the record: V Jaya Rao, 3805 Gabrielle Drive, Dublin, OH 43016 stated: I do not support this and am very concerned. Here is what I am seeing ... on the west side, Dublin has completely removed the curb and is laying new curb, which will keep our street looking great for 10+ years, On the east side, Columbus is just patching the worst of the sidewalk and curb, and leaving much of the old curb. Looks like they are not upgrading the curb ramps, which may not even be ADA compliant. Dublin and Columbus have different maintenance standards, and that will leave the boundary of Dublin, thle gateway entrances on the west side of Dublin, at risk of looking more like Columbus,. I paid for the property based on Dublin standards and not Columbus, Diane Plumley, 3813 Gabrielle Drive, Dublin, OH 43016 stated. We just purchased a condo at the Reserve Condos at Scioto Crossing with some hesitancy as we noticed the aesthetic difference between the west and east side of Sawmill Road, Knowing it was Dublin, we felt confident moving forward with our purchase. Learning of this proposed change is disheartening. Please do not vote to turn over the land maintenance to Columbus. Mark Harris, 3807 Gabrielle Drive, Dublin, OH 43016 stated., I do not believe this is to be in the best interest of Dublin residents I don't believe the argument and concerns, i.e, ambiguous police jurisdictions have been expressed in any meaningful, measurable fashion. The ordinance simply speaks of the plan. For the issue of the policing matter, I believe itis prudent to share the jurisdiction issues referenced in the argument and perhaps to address these issues without exposing our city to additional risk or undesired consequence. Moreover, there is already a great deal of neglect by Columbus on Sawmill and this is absolutely visible, quantifiable and should not be ignored. I would urge the Council members to drive the distance of these plans and observe the road and maintenance qualities that Columbus is delivering. The Powell/Columbus border where many of my concerns can quite literally be contrasted exposes the disparity of the standards that Powell and Columbus hold themselves to. Like Powell, I believe that Dublin has historically understood the importance of holding itself to higher standards. I believe these concerns are undeniable and I urge the City to reconsider. Columbus does not have priority for our city, nor should we assume that they even could in these volatile times. Brian Griffith, 3852 Carberry Drive, Dublin, OH 43016 stated: I live in the Reserve Condominiums at Scioto Crossing and serve on the Board of Directors of this association and the Scioto Crossing Park Association, We are 215 residents and taxpayers of Dublin, Ohio and the only residential property directly impacted by this proposed ordinance. I have worked with staff since the last Council meeting, but my concerns have not been resolved. Ultimately, I would like our property to receive the same level of services and defined control as the rest of Dublin and I remain concerned that that will change at some point in the future once Dublin is no longer in control of our boundary. Staff admits there will be changes in the way the property is maintained and the responsibilities of certain maintenance may fall upon the residents under Columbus law where Dublin has previously taken responsibility for the past 15 years. For example, a curb for a driveway at Sawmill Road has been Meeting Form 6101 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Feld August 10, 2020 Page 5 of 13 replaced at Dublin s expense but in Columbus they will require that we pay for and arrange the repair of our own curb. I also think you can see why I am concerned by looking at the east side of Sawmill Road during the current repaving project. On the west side, Dublin has completely removed the curb and is laying new curb which will keep our street looking great for 10 plus years. On the east side, Columbus is just patching the worst of the sidewalk and curb and leaving much of the old curb. They are not upgrading the curb ramps, which may not be ADA compliant and the sidewalk has many weeds. Dublin and Columbus have different maintenance standards that will leave the boundary of Dublin — the gateway entrances on the west side of Dublin — at risk of looking more like Columbus. Staff is hopeful that Columbus and Dublin will continue to cooperate to maintain the character of Sawmill Road but under the annexation, Dublin and the residents will not have any guarantee that we will be treated the same as other Dublin taxpayers in the future. Furthermore, because none of our 215 residents can vote in Columbus we will lack representation to seek changes to the way our boundary is maintained. I urge you to table or vote no on Ordinance 16-20 until these concerns can be adequately addressed. John Sharp, 7837 Breen Circle, Dublin stated; Dear Council, I live in the Estates at Scioto Crossing and serve on the Board of Directors for the Scioto Crossing Park Association. We are 215 residents and taxpayers of Dublin, Ohio and the only residential property directly impacted by this proposed ordinance,. (Ms. Burness noted this e-mail has identical language to the one sent by Mr. Griffith and so the reading of the e-mail was dispensed with.) The Clerk reported no e-mails have been received at her office regarding this topic. Mayor Amorose Groomes invited Council questions and discussion. Ms. Alutto asked Mr. Hammersmith about the concerns voiced by the residents. She shares the same concerns. Mr. Hammersmith responded that a Zoom platform meeting was held last week that included himself, Ms. Willis and Lt. Tabernik and Brian Griffith, President of the homeowners association for Scioto Crossing. Mr. Griffith had previously sent an e-mail at the time of first reading. Discussion focused on emergency service responses, maintenance responsibilities, the work currently underway on Sawmill Road, maintenance of landscape beds and shared -use paths. 1. For shared -use paths, Dublin will continue to maintain the path as it exists today, and Columbus is agreeable to this. An agreement will be done with Columbus to memorialize maintenance of that path. 2. For programming and maintenance of Sawmill Road, it has always been the responsibility of the City of Columbus. Dublin does not do any maintenance on Sawmill Road. The participation by Dublin this time was simply curb replacement as part of the Columbus resurfacing project for Sawmill. That was intended to bring that curb up to good condition as this transfer takes place. The only maintenance difference staff could identify between Columbus and Dublin is in curb replacement at a driveway apron. Columbus is specific about the curb and gutter that goes across the driveway and they expect the property owner to do that as it is part of the apron in their view. Otherwise, the City of Columbus maintains curb and gutter just as Dublin does and does not place the burden on the property owner. The only time Dublin will replace curb and gutter adjacent to an apron is as part of the street maintenance program. If a property owner wants to replace their apron at another time, that responsibility is theirs. He assured Council that Columbus had issues in the past with their ADA ramps, but now, if they do a street project, they bring it into compliance with the ADA standards. It is mandatory with any maintenance project. 3. As far as a difference of standards between the west and east sides of Sawmill Road, he believes it relates to differences in development standards and property maintenance standards more so than maintenance of the right-of-way itself. Dublin does not mow the west side of Sawmill Road and the individual Form 6101 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held August 10, 2020 Page 6 of 13 property owners on the west side do that maintenance just as residents mow the tree lawn in a residential neighborhood. The City owns the tree lawn in fee and owns the right-of-way, yet the property owners maintain that tree lawn. 4. In regard to emergency service response, he defers to Chief Paez. Ms. Alutto referenced the exhibits in the packet — page 15 of 20 — related to the Estates at Scioto Crossing. In the area hashmarked, is that maintained by the Estates? Mr. Hammersmitih responded affirmatively. A recent issue was that their irrigation system was damaged as a result of the curb replacement. They maintain that particular area. Ms. Alutto asked if Dublin or Columbus is doing the curb work in this location. Whose responsibility is this today? Mr. Hammersmith responded that Dublin is paying for this work as it is just within the present boundary and in Dublin's jurisdiction. The total cost for this replacement is just over $90,000. Ms. Alutto stated that the residents' concern is that in ten years or so, when those curbs need to be maintained, Columbus will not do this maintenance as Dublin does. If the Association is already mowing this, it is not an issue. Dublin will continue to maintain the shared -use path. She asked Chief Paez to speak to the jurisdictional issues. Mr. Hammersmith added that if Council desires to continue to maintain that curb in the future, that is an option. Chief Paez stated that this was driven by the desire for clarity on responsibility for emergency response for Police, Fire and EMS along Sawmill Road. The intent is to identify the right organization to take the report. If it is in question, Dublin is certainly ready to respond to any circumstance. However, it is important to have the right entity responding for ultimate reporting purposes. Reconciling whose jurisdiction the roadway is helps to bring clarity to that issue to ensure prompt emergency response from the appropriate jurisdiction when it is necessary. It is a question of what is the right police, fire and EMS response for the members of the public who need the services. It is important to ensure one jurisdictional response for incidents along this corridor of Sawmill Road. Ms. De Rosa asked how it is reconciled currently. Chief Paez responded that for most of his career in Dublin, the assumption was that this portion of Sawmill was entirely within the Columbus jurisdiction. In talking with Mr. Somerville today on the history of this issue, at some point Columbus Police changed their mapping software and programming, giving them an understanding of those pockets where it was not Columbus — after redesigns in the roadway years ago. Therefore, there was a question of jurisdiction for reporting purposes and on occasion, both officers form Dublin and/or Columbus would respond with a question of who would take the report. The direction in Dublin has been if there is any question and officers are on the scene, interacting with the public, it is simpler to take the report and submit it. However, if there is a way to obtain clarity so this is a singular jurisdiction, it cuts down the time it takes for a dispatcher to navigate. When a dispatcher has clarity of the exact location along Sawmill, it is important for the right jurisdiction to respond. Currently, most of the roadway of Sawmill is in Columbus — there are just some pockets that need to be reconciled. Ms. Alutto stated that on page 6 of 20, the section near Dublin Village Center, the new proposed line appears to be be more complicating than simplifying. Mr. Hammersmith responded that this was discussed thoroughly with the surveyor. There were two choices of following the west right-of-way line and staying consistent with every other location along Sawmill Road, or finding a way to jog to the limited access right-of-way line that is part of the interchange. It was decided it was important to be consistent and come across from south to north across that apron to its north side and head west. There was likely a bulb that existed there in the past. The only other alternative was to create a new right-of-way line or some other boundary that Form 6101 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Dublin City Council Meeting August 10, 2020 Page 7 of 13 Held would be more ambiguous in terms of its properly records. He agreed it is unusual looking, but the other alternatives leave out the hashed area —resulting in paved area remaining in Dublin and in Columbus in part. Ms. Fox commented: 1. This is primarily safety driven, but it seems a lot of land is being taken to address a safety issue for just the roadway. What are the options? Staff has indicated that mapping was changed in Columbus and that originally, Columbus always responded to Sawmill Road incidents. Are there options to discuss with Columbus so that the jurisdiction issues can be addressed without this boundary change? Chief Paez responded that he cannot speak to the options. Staff's concern primarily was with the paved roadway, and clarity for the responding jurisdiction would be desirable. 2. In the areas where the Dublin land juts in 25-35 feet into the roadway and there is an accident, and Dublin Police respond to any incident west of the curb, is it possible to have confusion and Columbus will need to report — as the area is actually in their jurisdiction? Will the confusion regarding the curb and the roadway just be shifted to the right-of-way with the proposed changes? Chief Paez responded that anytime there is an adjoining jurisdiction there can be questions of where the event began and who is responsible for it once it crosses over jurisdictions. When the accident is in the roadway, it is easier to manage. Her point is well taken regarding the entanglement of vehicular accidents and potentially other incidents. He shared an example. The jurisdictions do work through who will continue the investigations in these circumstances. If there are other nuances or questions, Mr. Somerville can provide more information. Ms. Fox agreed with clearing up any confusion. Her concern is in creating a larger problem. Mr. Somerville commented that NRECC has been relatively aggressive in being the point of first answer for calls up and down that Sawmill corridor. All wireless calls along Sawmill Road come into NRECC because this was agreed to by Columbus. Ultimately, when there is a crash or incident, it is sometimes difficult for the caller to identify specifically the exact location. The dispatchers use common references about location to help direct the response from NRECC or immediately send it to Columbus to dispatch. The City's GIS department provides mapping. Previously, the Dublin dispatching operated under a CAD system that was all tabular. If we indicated that Sawmill Road was in Columbus, the system indicated it was in Columbus. Now, both Columbus Police and the NRECC dispatchers' visual representation of the area and those boundary lines are apparent every time a call comes in for this area. It still requires the dispatcher oversight, as the caller may not be at the location of the incident. The direction to NRECC dispatchers is two -fold: if it occurred on the roadway under this proposed change and what has been worked out with Columbus temporarily, it goes to Columbus. If it is west of the curb line, Dublin automatically dispatches for it. The most important thing is if there is any confusion or resistance about the exact location, our dispatchers dispatch the Dublin and Washington Township response. The reporting can be sorted out later. Mr. Reiner stated this makes sense to him. His family had an accident on Sawmill Road years ago and there was a lot of confusion in the response. He was not aware that the Sawmill concrete work is the responsibility of Columbus. Visually, looking to the west and east along Sawmill, it is obvious the difference in Columbus and Dublin development. He agrees with Chief Paez that this needs to be resolved and supports this. Mayor Amarose Groomes summarized that there seems to be a lot of interest in resolving the jurisdictional issues relative to fire and safety. It seems more work is needed on determining the right-of-way boundaries for maintenance purposes. Would it be possible to table this ordinance in order to consider the boundary being at the front of the curb versus the back of the curb so that Dublin can maintain that area? Form 6101 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO August 10, 2020 Page 8 of 13 Held The visual perspective begins at the curb. She would like to explore adjusting the boundary lines to the front of the curb. The previous panhandling issues in the Sawmill area were addressed by the private property owners and this change could complicate that. Could we address the jurisdictional issues for police, fire and EMS and reconsider where the easement would be relative to the curb? Mr. Hammersmith shared the exhibit for the boundary adjustment annexation plat, which is the legal document to be acted upon by the Franklin County Commissioners. This will help in responding to the question. There was a tremendous amount of survey work and property owner research that took place for this stretch of roadway to verify ownership of the right-of-way and where property lines were, requiring some reconciling. To change to the back of the curb, it would require creating a line through surveying that would parallel or be a foot off the back of that curb — basically creating a new annexation plat. Perhaps a simpler approach would be a jurisdictional agreement with Columbus that is not set on property boundaries, but more descriptive in nature than it is property line based. That would not require the expense of redoing all of this survey work. It would also create a "line" one foot behind the curb. The only way to change the boundary line is to undergo the legal process of the boundary change at the Franklin County Commissioners, requiring an annexation plat. Mayor Amorose Groomes suggested that this language for maintenance issues be developed and ensure the life safety issues are addressed as well. Staff could continue to work on the aesthetic issues of this. Mr. Keeler stated that in the upcoming Ordinance 17-20, the City is providing real estate to Columbus Gas for $130,000. With Ordinance 16-20, it seems the City is "selling" 13 acres to the City of Columbus at no cost. Would there be a scenario in which the City of Columbus would compensate Dublin for the land they are being given? Mr. Hammersmith responded it might be an issue if the ownership of the right-of-way were being transferred. But Dublin is retaining ownership of the underlying fee as it exists today. The issue is within what corporate boundary that property lies — Dublin or Columbus. Mayor Amorose Groomes asked Ms. Readier about procedural issues, as she understands the City of Columbus has already approved this matter. Ms. Readier suggested an amendment to Ordinance 16-20 to address the issues raised. In Section 2, there is a commitment to maintain the shared -use path. She suggests new language, "Both Dublin and Columbus agree that Dublin will retain responsibility for ensuring maintenance of the right-of-way, including the shared -use path on the west side of Sawmill Road." This would ensure that the responsible private developer/'owner for certain portions continues to take care of this, but that anything in the right-of-way that Dublin continues to own will be maintained by Dublin to ensure compliance. Mr. Hammersmith agreed with this approach. He shared the screen with the annexation exhibit prepared. The areas that Dublin will continue to maintain could be identified within the corridor. Ms. Fox stated it is not simply the maintenance that is her concern. The curb will move as turn lanes are added or other road modifications in the future. To her, to settle the jurisdiction issue, an agreement is needed that anything in the roadway and up to one foot behind the curb is in the Columbus jurisdiction. From a planning perspective, her concern is that much of this proposed annexation area is not even in the roadway. Much is across shared -use path or large swatches of grassy area. The report indicates that Dublin must coordinate new projects with the City of Columbus. She disagrees with adding another layer of coordination for a developer. It would be necessary to coordinate! with Columbus for any new landscaping to be installed in the right-of-way. Currently, Dublin can install gateway features or landscaping in these areas. She is concerned that, going forward, the Columbus jurisdiction for these 3.2 miles will begin to change the corridor of Dublin's entryway. If this can be handled without an Form 6101 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held Dublin City Council August 10, 2020 Page 9 of 13 annexation and achieve jurisdictional boundaries on the roadway that are flexible and move as the roadway changes, it would be in the City's best interests. She cited the example of Piada at Banker Drive and the impact on their property and any future patio. She would prefer this ordinance be tabled to research other options. Ms. Alutto stated that Ms. Readier's suggested amendment addresses a piece of the concerns. But the other aspect of a portion of right-of-way being in another incorporated jurisdiction are problematic in terms of options for the City in the future. She understands the jurisdictional concerns for fire/safety and that needs to be resolved, but not at the cost of losing control of these small pieces of land. Vice Mayor De Rosa stated that tabling this would provide more time for research of options. While Dublin would continue to own the land, it is important to understand what rights remain with Dublin with this transfer. Definition for the residents and for the City is important. If we retain ownership of the land, we should have some rights in regard to some of the issues raised tonight. Clarity and definitions would be important for everyone. Mayor Amorose Groomes moved to table Ordinance 16-20. Ms. Fox seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Alutto, yes; Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes; Vice Mayor De Rosa, yes; Ms. Fox, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Mr. Keeler, yes. Ordinance 17-20 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Necessary Conveyance Documents to Convey Perpetual Gas Line Easements and Temporary Construction Easements to Columbia Gas of Ohio, Inc., and to Accept Payment for the Same. Mr. Hammersmith stated that there is no additional information to report on this item. Staff recommends approval of this Ordinance. Ms. Burness and Ms. Clarke indicated that no comments have been received regarding this matter. Ms. Fox stated this was a short strip of land, but the easement was valued at over $130,000. When we agree to annexation of easements, they may be valuable in the future. It is worthy of consideration. Mayor Amorose Groomes clarified that the difference is that with the proposed Ordinance 16-20, the City is not transferring land, but only changing the jurisdiction. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Reiner, yes; Vice Mayor De Rosa, yes; Mr. Keeler, yes; Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Ms. Fox, yes. Ordinance 18-20 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Real Estate Transfer Agreement for Certain City Owned Property on Crosby Court and Certain Property Owned by Tuttle Emerald LLC on Parkwood Place, and Authorizing the Execution of Related Agreements and Documents. Ms. Ray stated that no changes have been made since first reading. This relates to the exchange of two parcels of land between the City of Dublin and VanTrust Real Estate. Staff recommends approval of the Ordinance. Representatives of the development team are present to respond to questions. Andy Weeks,. Exec. Vice President and Tyler Ford, Development Manager, VanTrust were present in the virtual meeting. Mr. Weeks thanked the City staff for this creative, win/win solution that will result in an economic development opportunity for the City. They can respond to any questions. Ms. Burness and Ms. Clarke reported there were no comments submitted from the public. Meeting Form 6101 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO August 10, 2020 Page 10 of 13 Held Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Fox, yes; Vice Mayor De Rosa, yes; Mr. Keeler, yeas; Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes. Mayor Amorose Groomes thanked Mr. Weeks and Mr. Ford for joining the meeting tonight, adding that the City looks forward to great things as a result of this land exchange. Ordinance 19-20 Authorizing the Provision of Certain Incentives to Quantum Health, Inc., to Induce it to Lease or Purchase a Facility to Retain and Expand its Corporate Headquarters and its Associate Operations and Workforce, All Within the City, and Authorizing the Execution of an Economic Development Agreement. Ms. Ray stated that since the first reading, staff did make a minor amendment to Section 1A of the economic development agreement to clarify the number of jobs committed with this project, over and above the original economic development agreement approved last year. There were no substantive changes to the terms of the agreement. Staff is recommending approval of the Ordinance. She introduced Scott Doolittle, Chief Financial Officer who has joined the meeting. Mr. Doolittle., CFO, Quantum Health noted that they work with self-insured employers and provide a high touch navigation service to members to help them deal with complicated health care issues. Founded in Central Ohio, they moved part of their staff to Dublin in 2019. They experienced wonderful growth and have exceeded the job creation commitment in the first incentive agreement. All employees have not yet relocated to Dublin simply because of the difficulties with COVID and slowdowns with building renovation. This is actually a new agreement to move additional net new jobs to Dublin over the next few years. They are currently in the process of negotiating for a site in Dublin. This would actually be a second location in Dublin for new employees over the coming years. He offered to responded to any questions. Mayor Amorose Groomes expressed Council's appreciation for bringing jobs to Dublin and hopes Dublin will meet their expectations in the future. Ms. Burners and Ms. Clarke reported there were no public comments submitted regarding this matter. Vice Mayor De Rosa echoed her thanks and appreciation! In reviewing the agreement, at their current rate of growth, they will quickly be one of the largest employers in Dublin. The City appreciates their commitment. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Keeler, yes; Vice Mayor De Rosa, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Ms. Fox, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes. Ordinance 20-20 Authorizing the Provision of Certain Incentives to Air Force One, Inc., to Induce it to Purchase a Facility to Retain and Expand its Corporate Headquarters and its Associated Operations and Workforce, All Within the City, and Authorizing the Execution of an Economic Development Agreement. Mr. Gilger stated there have been no substantive changes since first reading. The Econo►mic Development Agreement proposed is a four (4) year, 12% Performance Incentive on withholdings collected (2020-2023), capped at $73,000 for the term of the agreement. The City expects to net approximately $391,000 of income tax over the term of this development agreement. This also requires Air Force One to close on the purchase of the 5800 Shier Rings building to accommodate its expansion. CEO Greg Guy could not be present this evening, but he has sent a notice of appreciation for Council's consideration to them via e-mail earlier today. Form 6101 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held August 10, 2020 Page 11 of 13 Mayor Amorose Groomes asked if the transfer of the 5800 Building has been completed. Ms. Gilger responded this occurred in the last few days. Ms. Burness and Ms. Clarke reported there were no public comments submitted regarding this matter. Mayor Amorose Groomes commented that this company indicated in their letter that they are the oldest, continuously operating business in Dublin. Vote on the Ordinance: Ms. Fox, yes; Vice Mayor De Rosa, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Mr. Keeler, yeas; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes. OTHER • 2021 CIP Revenue Projections & 2021 CIP Debt Presentation Mr. Stiffler reviewed the schedule of meetings related to the CIP: the inventory of staff requested projects provided on August 3; revenue estimates and debt profile discussion tonight; CIP workshop scheduled on August 17; first hearing of the Ordinance adopting the Five -Year CIP is August 24; another workshop on September 8; and, tentatively, approval of the CIP at the September 28 Council meeting. He noted that all department and division representatives will be in attendance at the workshops to respond to any questions regarding specific projects, timing and funding. He proceeded with presentation of the revenue estimates and debt profile for the 2021-2025 CIP. (His presentation was provided in the work session packet and is incorporated herein by reference.) He offered to respond to questions. Questions/D scussion Mayor Amorose Groomes noted that a work session is scheduled on August 17. Does he anticipate having further discussion of what was presented tonight at that time? Mr. Stiffler- stated that the focus for the work session next week is on the specific projects. However, if Council has concerns, generally, with the level of debt, or any of the assumptions used in the revenue projections, it would be best to handle that tonight. Mr. McDaniel added that, as required by City Charter, he is presenting to Council the Five -Year CIP budget going forward. It will significantly reflect what was approved last year for the first four years of the CIP, with one major project for Council's consideration in year five — the proposed promenade on the Riverside Crossing Park. The other major item proposed is a potential roundabout on Emerald Parkway at the Emerald Campus. Aside from these, it is a fairly consistent capital budget and well within the policies on debt and maintaining reserves. In response to the question about why the one percent increase in revenue projections was made,, there are clearly cautions related to the pandemic. However, the monthly reporting reflects resilience of the City's economy and revenues. As Council goes through the CIP and operating budget processes, staff will monitor those revenues daily, as always. If there is any significant change, he will let Council know. Another area of concern is with the 21 -day work rule in terms of tax withholdings. It is a factor that needs to be in the forefront and Dublin and other municipalities will engage as necessary. Ms. Alutto commented she would prefer more time to review the information presented tonight and discuss it at the work session. The debt policy is a fairly recent document and has been reviewed at the Finance Committee. She supports the metrics included upon the recommendation of the Committee last year. Mr. Peterson thanked Mr. Stiffler for all of the work put into this presentation. He commented favorably on his skill and understanding of these matters, and his ability to present to the public in a way that is easily understood. The conservative financial Form 6101 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held August 10, 2020 Page 12 of 13 planning of previous Finance Directors and Councils is being continued in an extraordinary line of highly skilled financial professionals. It was the consensus of Council to have further discussion at the work session on August 17. STAFF COMMENTS Mr Mrn;;niPl 1. Thanked Tom Hirschy and other staff members who were able to secure the Pop -Up COVID-19 testing for the public from Primary0ne. Dublin Schools is also partnering on this. A testing site will be held on Saturday, August 15 from 9-1 at Sells Middle School. More information is available at the City website. 2. Council received a letter from the Auditor of State's Office regarding the completion of the financial audit for the City of Dublin for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2019. They are requesting whether or not Council desires to have an exit conference for a briefing on the findings. A management letter was included with this information. The Auditor of State office also asked that the City sign and return a waiver if the City does not desire an exit conference. He asked that Council review that correspondence in order to make a decision. Mayor Amorose Groomes noted that the audit letter was sent directly to Council members From the Auditor of State. Ms. Fox asked about the pop-up testing. Is it a public testing where the results will be learned in a few days, or an instant one? Is it COVID specific? Mr. McDaniel responded this is the same type of COVID testing taking place at other pop-up sites. The test will detect the presence of COVID-19 and notification will be made within a few days. It is a drive-through process. Ms. Fox stated that anyone can therefore be tested — not just those who have symptoms. Mr. McDaniel responded that is correct. They can process about 400 people over this timeframe. They recently conducted a similar drive-through testing in Westerville. There is no cost for the test. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS Administrative Committee: Vice Mayor De Rosa thanked everyone for the feedback at the work session on August 3 where the Dublin 2035 Framework Plan was kicked off. Council members agreed that individual work, based on areas of focus will occur in the Committee meetings. She will reach out to Committee chairs to begin to coordinate those meetings. The first step is for the Committees to prioritize within each area of focus. Staff is also working on some surveying and putting together the community workshop timelines, etc. Community Development Committee: A meeting is scheduled on Wednesday, September 16 regarding the short-term rental regulations. MORPC: Mayor Amorose Groomes reported the Executive Committee meeting and Commission meetings were held this week. MORK has been working hard to be the voice of communication and networking during this Pandemic. Board of Education: Mr. Peterson stated that the Board meets tonight to determine the plans for the upcoming school year. He is confident that Dr. Hoadley and the Board will be able to make good decisions. Dublin Bridges: Ms. Fox stated they are completing the Student Snack program and are looking forward to working with the School guidance counselors on this challenging school year. She encouraged everyone to support the needs in Dublin. Veterans Committee: Mr. Reiner noted that a meeting is scheduled on Thursday at 3:30 p.m. Form 6101 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Held August 10, 2020 Page 13 of 13 Complete Count Committee: Ms. Alutto stated that the completion rate is now at 80.2 percent. No response households will begin to have visits in October if they do not respond by the end of September. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Vice Mayor De Rosa: 1. Noted that the Pavilion is beginning to take shape at the pedestrian bridge. The North Pool has now been demolished, and she thanked the residents for their patience with the noise and disruption. That work is now underway. There will be some terrific new things to celebrate in the future, and thanks to staff for their ongoing efforts! 2. Thanked Mr. McDaniel for his work on the Community Task Force and for the work that is yet to come on that important activity. Mr. Reiner: 1. Thanked Mr. Stiffler for his report tonight. When the pandemic began, there was a lot of uncertainty about the City finances. Tonight's presentation certainly provided good news about the status. 2. The dining in the streets in Downtown Dublin is very similar to Europe, and all of this with the new bridge and connectivity constitutes a home run! Thanks to the entire staff and Council for this amazing accomplishment. Ms. Fox remarked that in the middle of a pandemic, and with so many restrictions currently, the City is actually beginning to plan for 2035! With all of the activity underway — the new bridge, the park, the Historic District task force work, the diversity task force, the West Innovation District progress, the DCAP at Metro — anyone watching tonight should be thinking about what they want to see in Dublin in 2035. This is an opportunity to share feedback. Mayor Amorose Groomes reminded everyone to pick up their CIP binder from their City mailbox in preparation for the Monday work session. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:03 p.m. Z L � 2s- -'"� Mayor — Presiding Officer Clerk of Council Form 6101