City Council Meeting
April 20, 2010
The second meeting in April of Bucyrus City Council was held on Tuesday, April 20, 2010 in the Council Chambers of Bucyrus City Hall, 500 S. Sandusky Ave., Bucyrus.
Roger A. Moore, Council president called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. He led the Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. Flag.
Roll was called. Present were Council members John Walker, Garnet Love, Michael W. Jacobs, Bruce Truka, Norma Hill, Kenneth Emerson, and Steven W. Pifer. Moore presided in the chair.
Walker made a motion, seconded by Love that Council accepts the minutes from the April 6, 2010 Council meeting in their printed form. Motion carried per voice vote.
A number of visitors addressed Council. Subjects in succinct form that were discussed with Council follow each visitor’s name and address. Action of Council is thereinafter.
Walker made a motion, seconded by Hill to accept and file a thank you note received from Joan Truka and family for flowers sent at the time of the death of David Truka. Motion carried per voice vote. David Truka was father to Councilman Bruce Truka.
The Public Lands and Buildings Committee provided an account of its meeting of April 12 attended by committee members John Walker, chairman, Norma Hill and Bruce Truka. Ken Emerson, also member of the committee was absent.
1) Problems with Arrowhead Dr. -- Property owners Scott Langenderfer, and Mike and Vicki Phillips were at the meeting to question the placement of dirt and debris at the rear of their homes. Chairman Walker met with Service-Safety Director Sid Seevers to ask some questions. SSD said we make decisions based on the whole city. Visitors said that the EPA was contacted and will be sending out someone to check it out. They also said this type of debris was more suited for fill and couldn’t be placed there for an extended period of time or couldn’t be seeded. With the possibility of the EPA coming, the committee asked Law Director Crall to keep us in the loop.
2) Progress of Pool Contract -- I had a discussion with SSD Seevers about pool contract. SSD said that city employees will be running the pool. I asked if there will be any overtime involved and he said there would be no overtime. I asked who will be the manager of the pool and at this time SSD Seevers didn’t know who it would be. City Auditor Joyce Schifer said that there is only $32,000-$35,000 in Outside Contractor’s line in the budget.
3) Discuss Railroad Crossings -- The crossing on Sears St. running E-W is leased to CF & E from CSX. SSD Seevers said they have been trying to get them to repair this crossing, but they will not do anything. Councilman Pifer will contact Angels on Crossings. Maybe this can get something done with this crossing. The only other thing we can do is to close this crossing.
4) Cleanup of Watershed Through Town -- SSD Seevers said the city is doing cleanup efforts all the time. He also said that he had not received any notification of any cleanup from the Sandusky River Watershed group. Chairman Walker talked via phone with Cynthia Brooks from the Sandusky River Watershed. She was very happy to hear from the City of Bucyrus and they are more than willing to come into town to help with this. I asked what our involvement would be and she gave me a list:
1) Recruit volunteers
2) Donations (for T-shirts or picnic for volunteers)
3) Place to outlet waste
4) Individual sites to be cleaned up
5) One checkpoint for volunteers
6) Safety talks for volunteers and supervision to be provided by city
7) Transportation for some volunteers
8) Get organizations involved
There will be a preliminary meeting at City Hall Council Chambers at 8:30 A.M. on Friday, April 23. We would like all Council members and city officials to attend this meeting. Also anyone interested in being a part of this project is invited. After the report Jacobs recommended to invite representatives of the Crawford Park District since it has provided cleanup in the past. Public Lands and Committee Chair Walker complied with a request of President Moore to notify the administration concerning the preliminary meeting with the Sandusky River Watershed Group on April 23.
5) Cleanup Week -- Cleanup week will be held May 3 through 7, 2010. The rules are the same as last year.
6) Adjournment -- A motion for adjournment was made by Bruce Truka, seconded by Norma Hill. Motion carried. Time of adjournment was 9:44 A.M.
After the report, discussion revealed a representative of the Bowling Green Office of the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had been contacted. The law director identified the dirt containing brick, concrete, pipe and other contents as clean dirt and there were no problems so far. The underground tank dirt was not taken to that area, but to a separate facility per the law director. Therefore, no violations have been submitted to date. Law Director Crall clarified that bricks and concrete are not considered debris. Discussion continued. President Moore pointed out the dumping issue concerning the Arrowhead Dr. residents would be a continued effort of the Public Lands and Buildings Committee, the law director and the service-safety director. Auditor Schifer noted that ODOT addressed the dumping issue at a meeting on said morning and it is monitoring and making efforts of what is being taken to the area of the Wastewater Treatment Plant. Love discussed the installation of the gas lines.
There were no reports heard from the Economic Development, Health and Safety, Platting, Service, and Finance Committees.
The clerk read a report of the Traffic Commission dated April 13, 2010. The report is below:
The Bucyrus City Traffic Commission met on Tuesday, April 13, 2010 at 2:05 p.m. in Council Chambers at City Hall. Present for the meeting were Commission members Mayor Ross, Service/Safety Director Seevers, Police Chief Ken Teets and Fire Chief Jay Keller. Administrative Assistant Lisa Bores and Bucyrus resident Bill O’Rourke also attended.
Old Business:
With nothing further to come before the Traffic Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 2:27 p.m. with a motion from Teets and a second from Keller.
Emerson made a motion, seconded by Pifer to accept the committee minutes and related committee reports collectively. Motion carried per voice vote.
Law Director Crall advised he did not receive a copy of the Board of Elections’ public hearing report concerning the residency of Mayor Ross. He also indicated that he had not had the opportunity to speak to all Council members about their concerns on the matter, but plans to talk with them following said meeting.
Walker made a motion, seconded by Love to accept the Auditor’s Monthly Statement of Cash Position dated March 31, 2010. Motion carried per voice vote.
The Treasurer’s Cash Report dated March 31, 2010 was submitted for study and held for review.
Police Chief Teets submitted a report for March 2010. It was held for review.
The Police Department Monthly Report for February 2010 was accepted per motion of Pifer, seconded by Hill. Motion carried by voice vote.
Fire Chief Jay Keller submitted a Fire Department Incident Report for March 2010 and Property Code Maintenance Officer Lt. John Schiefer submitted the Property Maintenance Report for April, 2010. Both were held for review.
Jacobs seconded a motion of Love to accept the Property Maintenance Report for March 2010. Motion carried by voice vote.
No reports were submitted by Mayor Ross and Service-Safety Director Sid Seevers. Auditor Schifer had no report.
Emerson moved to accept the reports of the city officers. Love seconded his motion. Motion carried
Visitors were invited to offer input on the reports given by Public Lands and Buildings Committee, Traffic Commission and the city officers. No one responded to the invitation of President Moore.
LEGISLATION: None proposed.
Council recessed at 8:30 P.M. Council called back to order at 8:40 P.M.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: Council members were reminded of two issues:
Truka inquired about a complaint he submitted to the property maintenance code officer regarding a business at 501 E. Mansfield St., but was not included in the April Property Maintenance Report. He reported the bathroom door is open and the building is filling up with discarded tires. Grocery carts filled with empty beer bottles and wooden skids are in the parking lot of the former Clark Gas Station. Council President Moore advised Truka the property maintenance code officer would be notified of Truka’s complaint the following morning.
NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: Many items of new and miscellaneous business were addressed. Some were referred to Council committees for study as shown below:
Council took a brief break at 9:11 P.M. to give the Council members an opportunity to set committee meetings. Council returned to its regular business at 9:15 P.M.
Committee chairpersons announced the following committee meetings:
Economic Development – Friday, April 23, at 10:30 A.M.
Finance Committee – Tuesday, April 27 at 5:45 P.M.
Health and Safety Committee – No meeting scheduled.
Platting Committee – No meeting scheduled.
Public Lands and Buildings Committee – Friday, April 23 at 10 A.M.
Service Committee – Friday, April 23 at 9:30 A.M.
Councilman Pifer volunteered to represent the WBCO Radio Program on the following Wednesday.
There being no further business to come before the Council, Pifer made a motion to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Truka. Motion carried per voice vote. Time of adjournment was 9:17 P.M.
Respectfully Submitted,
_____________________________
Regina H. Zornes,
Clerk of the Council
************************************************************************************************************
City Council Meeting
April 28, 2010
Bucyrus City Council held a special meeting on Wednesday, April 28, 2010 in the Council Chambers of Bucyrus City Hall, 500 S. Sandusky Ave.
Roger A. Moore, Council president called the special meeting to order at 7:34 P.M. The purpose of the special meeting, called by Council members Steven W. Pifer, John Walker and Michael W. Jacobs, was to hold a discussion on the findings of the Crawford County Board of Elections dealing with the residency of the mayor.
Council President Moore, Council members and members of the public audience recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. Flag.
President Moore asked everyone present to turn off cell phones before roll call of Council members. Present were John Walker, Garnet Love, Michael W. Jacobs, Bruce D. Truka, Norma Hill, Kenneth Emerson, and Steven W. Pifer. Moore presided in the chair.
The Council president announced the meeting was a matter strictly of the seven Council members who would talk openly in discussion and would proceed as follows: a) there will be no opportunity for the public audience to speak on said evening; b) there will be an open discussion about the findings of the Crawford County Board of Elections. The Board of Elections ruled on April 14, 2010 that Mayor Daniel Ross does not live at 844 Rogers St. and removed him from the roll of electors. During the public hearing at that time, Mayor Ross admitted that he was residing at 3029 Alan Rd. which is not within the city limits. Council members have been given a packet of information regarding the legalities of this situation. At this time, Council President Moore asked each Council member to comment on this situation or ask any questions. He asked that any or all questions be addressed to the chair but referred to Law Director Matthew Crall.
Lengthy discussion ensued. Facts below are succinct summaries of questions or comments made by either Law Director Crall, Council President Moore and/or Council members:
Emerson – comments were as a result of information from the Crawford County Board of Elections public hearing April 14, 2010: the mayor maintained he lives at 844 Rogers St. since subject first was brought up; Joy Frost testified that the mayor lives with her at 3029 Alan Rd. which is located outside the city limits; the mayor testified that for the last six months he has not kept clothing, bedding or any other personal items used for his day-to-day living at 844 Rogers St.; the County Board of Elections has ruled, for voting purposes, that Ross does not live at 844 Rogers St. and therefore removes Ross as an eligible voter for the purposes of voting at 844 Rogers St.; Chapter 3.15 of the Ohio Revised Code provides that at all times during one’s term of office each person holding an elected office in a political subdivision shall be a resident of that subdivision; any person who fails to meet any of the requirements of said section forfeits the office.
Hill – referring to Emerson’s comments, facts are present and they state the case.
Truka – agreed with Emerson’s comments; more evidence by placing house at 844 Rogers St. for sale with intent to sell the house; the “For Sale” sign is contributing factor; house intended to be rented and not to be lived in by Ross.
Walker – testimony at Election Board hearing taken by young lady living at 844 Rogers St. indicated that Ross does not live there; young lady lives at 844 Rogers St. with her child. Ross admitted at that time that he does not live at the Rogers St. address, but at 3029 Alan Rd.
Love – referred to information she and other Council members received concerning the decision of the Crawford County Board of Elections from the April 14, 2010 public hearing as well as Donald C. Brey of Chester, Willcox and Saxbe, law firm from Columbus in which he advised Law Director Crall that Brey and his law firm have been retained by Mayor Ross to represent him in connection with the efforts of certain members of City Council and others to deprive Mayor Ross of his right to vote at his permanent residence, as part of an apparent plan to force his removal from office. She pointed out Brey’s comments – claims that Ross, at 844 Rogers St., pays the utilities there, has continuously kept some of his personal possessions there, always had the intention of returning to the Rogers St. address once Ayndria Lacy and her child found permanent housing for themselves, continuously received mail there, monitored address for necessary repairs and maintenance, pays the mortgage there; Brey will be filing with Ohio Supreme Court by Thursday, or at the latest, by Friday; not “done deal” answer yet; more questions being raised about Board of Elections and its findings.
Law Director Crall – two separate issues – one is residency for voting that is an issue of Board of Elections and other issue is residency for holding a political elected office. Ohio Revised Code 3.15 requires “that all elected officials at all times during one’s term to be elected”. At Board of Election hearing, residency question testimony showed that Ross was temporarily away. Legally possible that if Ross would prevail on his challenge of his residency for voting purposes, the mayor could still retain his right to vote; however, he is in violation of ORC 3.15 and has not forfeited his office.
Love – would she give up residency here when taking a two-week trip to Florida; does not consider residency a problem when leaving home to take care of ill parent at another home; residency sticky situation in State of Ohio; wants to make sure what Council is doing is not only legal, but what it is doing is the proper thing at the proper time; make sure timing is correct; her biggest issue that she cited was, while under scrutiny by the Ohio Supreme Court, is this the proper time for Council to take these steps; questioned if mayor’s threatened lawsuit and mayor’s re-registration at 844 Rogers St. timed to happen in conjunction with said meeting; information from Board of Elections being challenged on its findings; reiterated statement about the proper time for Council to take the next step or let the law play out as the law needs to play out; mentioned the ability for an appeal process.
Law Director Crall – discussed with Crawford County Stanley Flegm who recommended filing as soon as possible; statute says that mayor has forfeited his political office by moving from the jurisdiction; for that reason the city law director recommended Council holding a special Council meeting; nothing filed with any court; law encourages quicker action; shared details of a case involving State Senator Jon A Husted, who at the time was Speaker of the House; mayor’s case different because no one was away from his residence while on business.
Emerson – why County Prosecutor Flegm is involved in the case?
Law Director Crall – county prosecutor or the attorney general are the only two officers who can file a motion to remove an elected official from office; as law director he is not authorized to file action against an elected official; discussed with Co. Prosecutor Flegm; Flegm agreed to file the motion provided the elected legislative body felt it was appropriate.
Jacobs – elected officials take an oath under the Ohio Revised Code; elected by the people; elected officials are part of the law; cannot violate the law and are expected to enforce the law; if the body is legitimate who has ruled the matter, then believed Council’s responsibility to follow through with action; cannot violate the law; word is your bond; owe the citizens.
Walker – reiterated house at 844 Rogers St. for sale; feels no intent of Mayor Ross to return to that address; tenant who lived there paid the utilities; key point Ross testified that he lives at 3029 Alan Rd. with his girl friend and his infant child.
Pifer – mayor had personal items in the garage at 844 Rogers St.; made very clear on last April 14 that he did not live at the Rogers St. address when asked if there was a toilet and shower in the garage; felt Husted Case Law did not apply to the matter of Mayor Ross because the mayor does not own either property on Rogers St. or Alan Rd.
Love – asked law director for the meaning of action in quo warranto.
Law Director Crall – quo warranto is an action that can be filed at the Appellate Court level or with the Ohio Supreme Court designed to remove public office holders or officers of a corporation that are not in the eyes of the law; discussed with county prosecutor about filing said paperwork with him; county prosecutor makes decision of where paperwork is then filed.
President Moore – asked law director to explain receipt of paperwork and how Sunshine Law pertains to such..
Law Director Crall – provided two packets of information to the Council president and Council members; first packet sent April 26, 2010 containing copies of the decision of the Crawford County Board of Elections regarding the matter of Dan Ross, the rationale for its decision and the evidence it found to be appropriate, Ohio Revised Code Section 3.15 dealing with “Residency Requirements for Public Office in the State of Ohio, Ohio Revised Code Section 733.92 that involves the mayor of the city and requirements of same, Case Law State ex rel. Nichols v. Vinton County Board of Elections that involves Ohio Supreme Court Decision holding that placing home for sale and then renting the property equates intent not to return, and Case Law State ex rel. Husted v. Brunner, et al, involving Ohio Supreme Court decision holding that Section, Article II of the Ohio Constitution must be read in conjunction with ORC Section 3503.02 to allow legislators who are temporarily away from the residences on state business not to effect residency status; second packet included copies of information that was faxed at 3:47 P.M. on said date from the Columbus law firm and having received a phone call at 4:55 P.M. on said date from the mayor to make sure he had received the fax prior to the meeting on said evening, letter from Atty. Brey of the Columbus law firm that included a threatened lawsuit that stated State Ex Rel. Dan Ross vs. Crawford County Board of Elections, Patricia Armstrong, Maggie Barth, Jo Swain, and Joan Dilley, addressed the quasi-judicial bodies that are not covered by the Sunshine Law, elaborated on case law that was provided, and alerted Council of the mayor’s re-registration at 844 Rogers St.
Truka – questioned the date of filing of the Ohio Ethics Commission Financial Disclosure Statement.
Pifer – attempted to secure a copy of the Ohio Ethics Statement but did not do so at present time; also interested in knowing what address he used on same statement.
Love – referred to e-mail from law director regarding a letter addressed to County Prosecutor Flegm to sign letter asking Flegm to file an action in quo warranto; Council asked to sign letter without open discussion on matter; asked law director for comments on letter.
Law Director Crall – does not have authority to tell Council how to act on matters; people who were not Council members were interested in signing the letter; most of people who did sign letter were challengers, some of whom were present in the audience at said meeting.
Love – concerned that Council is following proper procedure and is in tune with all that is happening regarding this case.
President Moore – met with law director who made sure all pertinent information relating to the discussion and case was provided; asked Council what it wanted to do.
Hill – would appear for approval to go forward; received second packet that indicates a threatened lawsuit.
Walker – Council threatened by city official shows little or no compassion for city; stood corrected by President Moore who reminded everyone that Law Director Crall is an elected city official.
Jacobs – sufficient case law justifies what Council is doing; reading case laws from documents provided should go to a body that can make a decision on the matter.
Law Director Crall – addressed due process of law and rights of citizens.
President Moore – pointed out a citizen came forward at a Council meeting and stated facts that came from the decision of the County Board of Elections and that he believed to be correct; Council agreed to turn matter over to City Law Director Crall for investigation; law director provided the information to each.
Law Director Crall – urged matter be referred to the county prosecutor based on the findings of the referral to him.
Love – believes the matter belongs in the courts; decision has to be made there; Board of Elections took the first step; looks forward to seeing it proceed through the courts and being handled there; reiterated her question concerning “the right time”.
Emerson – time to get matter behind Council so it can move on for the sake of the citizens.
Love – asked law director for the steps that would be taken, how it would happen and with whom?
Law Director Crall – county prosecutor would have discretion on procedure; briefs would be filed; opportunity to respond or notice given; quo warranto procedure if that is what Council wants, paperwork sent forth from both sides; explained possible happenings.
Having heard the preceding discussion, Council President Moore asked the decision of Council. Walker, seeing that the Board of Elections has ruled that Dan Ross is not an elector of the City of Bucyrus, the law requires him to live in the city limits and he has not resigned from the position of mayor of the City of Bucyrus, moved that Council take steps to see that he is removed including forwarding this matter to the county prosecutor for appropriate legal action. Council President Moore repeated the motion verbatim, followed by a second from Truka. There being no further discussion, roll call vote was taken: Walker, yea; Truka, yea; Hill, yea; Emerson, yea; Pifer, yea; Love, yea; Jacobs, yea. Nays: None. Moore declared motion carried. The matter was referred to the law director to take information to the county prosecutor.
The purpose of the special meeting having been completed, Truka made a motion to adjourn the special meeting, seconded by Walker. Motion carried per voice vote. Time of adjournment was 8:17 P.M.
Respectfully Submitted,
___________________________
Regina H. Zornes,
Clerk of the Council