PATA History Pages

Diley Road Saga continues 2/17 addition

This page will be assembled using minutes and press articles

I will post updated minutes as they are available on the web.

PICKERINGTON CITY COUNCIL

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 2005

CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD



SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA

7:30 P.M.



1. ROLL CALL. Council for the City of Pickerington met for a special meeting, Wednesday, February 9, 2005, at City Hall. Mayor Shaver called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. Roll call was taken as follows: Mr. Wright, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. parker, Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Sabatino, Mrs. Riggs, and Mayor Shaver were present. No members were absent. Others present were: Judy Gilleland, Lynda Yartin, Phil Hartmann, Chief Taylor, Patti Wigington, Kirk Richards, Jack Sowers, Tamaria Liddell, and others.



2. SCHEDULED MATTERS:



A. RESOLUTION 2005-02R, “A RESOLUTION ORDERING A SPECIAL ADVISORY ELECTION TO BE HELD ON MAY 3, 2005, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY,” First Reading, Sabatino/Wright/Parker. Mr. Sabatino moved to adopt; Mr. Wright seconded the motion. Mr. Sabatino requested the law director, Mr. Hartmann, provide a briefing on this resolution. Mr. Hartmann stated he had been requested to put together legislation that would allow a ballot to be voted on by the public relating to Diley Road. Mr. Hartmann stated under the law there is only one way this can be heard, it would be an advisory election. He stated this meant it had no binding effect on Council, but would take a poll of the public on where the public stands and what they would like to see. Mr. Hartmann stated if you are not authorized by statute to put anything on the ballot, then the only other way to do it is by an advisory election. Mr. Hartmann stated that is the resolution before Council this evening. Mr. Hartmann stated further the issue had been raised regarding a conflict of interest with Mr. Sabatino at the last meeting. He stated he had the opportunity to review the law relating to that. He stated there are obviously numerous opinions on this, however, in this situation since it is an advisory election and has no binding effect, there is no conflict of interest. He stated this is because there is no direct benefit or direct detriment that can occur to Mr. Sabatino or to his family members involved. Mr. Hartmann stated he would be happy to answer any questions, however, he found as to the issue before Council tonight there is no conflict for Mr. Sabatino to be involved in the deliberations and the voting. Roll call was taken with Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Wisniewski, Mrs. Riggs, and Mr. Hackworth voting “Nay,” and Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Wright, and Mr. Parker voting “Yea.” Motion failed, 4-3.



3. MOTIONS:



A. Motion for Executive Session under Section 121.22(G)(3), conference with law director regarding pending or imminent court action. Mr. O’Brien moved for Executive Session under Section 121.22(G)(3); Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Riggs, Mr. Parker, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Wright, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. O’Brien, and Mr. Sabatino voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.



Council went into Executive Session at 7:34 P.M., and reconvened in open session at 8:15 P.M.



4. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, Mr. O’Brien moved to adjourn; Mr. Wisniewski seconded the motion. Mr. Sabatino, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Wright, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Parker, Mr. O’Brien, and Mrs. Riggs voted “Aye.” Motion carried, 7-0. The meeting adjourned at 8:16 P.M., February 9, 2005.



RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:





__________________________________

Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk


ATTEST:





___________________________________

David Shaver, Mayor

From the Columbus Dispatch

Pickerington road project hits another curve
Let voters choose if they want to pay to widen Diley Road, council member says
Friday, February 11, 2005
Kirk D . Richards
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH



A plan to widen a Pickerington road took another turn last night when a city councilman proposed a ballot issue that would put the project’s fate — and perhaps its cost — in taxpayers’ hands.

City Councilman Mitch O’Brien said last night that he would seek to let voters decide how much Diley Road will be widened, a day after voting down a proposal from a political rival that would have put the issue on the May primary ballot.

O’Brien, who made the new proposal last night at a Service Committee meeting, said the difference is his plan would require the public to pay more taxes if their preference is a three-lane project.

The council majority has decided that a five-lane project is best because most of the $13 million price would be covered by the Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission and the Ohio Department of Transportation.

A three-lane project, which a number of Diley Road area residents would prefer, would require the city to cover the entire $10 million cost.

Wednesday night, Councilman Michael Sabatino’s effort to place an advisory election on the ballot was defeated 4-3.

An advisory election essentially would have been a poll of residents’ opinions on the issue.

O’Brien said his proposal would be binding.

He said he would ask the county auditor’s office what millage would be necessary to pay for a three-lane project over seven years.

O’Brien said his proposal was in response to a perception that the council was not listening to residents’ concerns.

"My personal opinion is that we have listened and acted appropriately," O’Brien said.

Councilman Brian Wisniewski, part of the narrow majority that struck down Sabatino’s proposal, said last night that he supported O’Brien’s proposal.

"If the residents want three lanes, it’ll have to come out of their pockets," Wisniewski said. "If this passes, then we’ll re-engineer it for three lanes, but as far as I’m concerned, this is a five-lane project."

Councilman Doug Parker, who had supported Sabatino’s proposal along with Councilman William Wright, questioned the timing of the new effort.

He said his colleagues should have mentioned the alternative proposal when they were considering Sabatino’s.

"They didn’t have the guts to say this to their faces when they had the residents right in front of them," Parker said. "This is completely reactionary to save their political butts."

From This Week in Pickerington

Diley Road
O'Brien proposes bond issue to pay for 3-lane expansion

Thursday, February 17, 2005

By MACKENZIE FRY
ThisWeek Staff Writer

Voters may get their say on the widening of Diley Road after all, but they may end up paying for the project.

The day after Pickerington City Council narrowly voted against putting the project on the ballot as a special advisory election, one councilman said he thinks the issue should go before voters as a bond issue.

"For all these months now, all they've done is ask us to kill the project or to go to three lanes," said Mitch O'Brien, who said in a statement at the Feb. 10 service committee meeting that council should pursue an $11-million bond issue to pay for the expansion of Diley Road from two lanes to three, rather then the five lanes planned.

O'Brien said his message is, "OK, we'll put it on the ballot and here's how you're going to have to pay for it -- through taxes."

The statement Feb. 10 came a day after council voted 4-3 in special session against a resolution that would have sent the issue to voters in May as an advisory election. The city would not have been required to comply with the result of the election; it would have essentially been a poll of voters.

Council President Heidi Riggs and Councilmen Brian Wisnieski and Ted Hackworth joined O'Brien in voting against the resolution; Doug Parker, Mike Sabatino and Bill Wright voted in favor.

Following the vote, angry residents said they would attempt a recall of Mayor David Shaver and some council members.

"If they're not going to do what the people want, we got to get somebody in there who will," Diley Road resident Cindy Darby said. She said, however, that a recall would likely be a last resort.

"I think we'll give council an opportunity to redeem themselves," she said.

Parker wondered Feb. 10 why O'Brien had not spoken up before.

"He didn't have the guts to say this in front of the residents when they were here (Wednesday) night, and this is nothing more than trying to cover their butts from a political fallout," he said.

O'Brien said he had planned to introduce his suggestion at the service committee meeting because the special session agenda had not originally included the resolution.

The Ohio Department of Transportation and the Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission would pay about 80 percent of the $14-million cost to expand Diley Road to five lanes.

City officials have said that funding will be lost if the city does not proceed with plans to widen the road to five lanes.

O'Brien said the city will not tell MORPC or ODOT to halt or change current plans until council has a "better feel" for the opinions of residents as a whole. He said appraisals and engineering for the project will continue as planned.

"If they are going to do it on their own, certainly MORPC and ODOT would want to know," said MORPC spokesperson Marilyn Brown. "We are aware of what's going on out there, so we are in touch with them."

Hackworth, who chairs the service committee, said the same type of initial work must be done to expand the road, whether it is to three lanes or five. Adding two more lanes would be the least-expensive part of the project, he said.

The city's legal counsel, Philip Hartmann, of Schottenstein, Zox & Dunn, said he is not aware of anything, from a legal standpoint, that would prevent council from being able to place the bond issue on the ballot.

"It appears that they'd be able to do that," he said.

Hartmann said the city has been working with attorney Dennis Schwallie, of Peck, Shaffer & Williams LLP, on the matter. Schwallie, whose area of expertise includes municipal bonds, could not be reached for comment by press time.

O'Brien said a five-lane road is inevitable.

"We're going to have to widen it (again) after seven years," he said.

It is too late for the bond issue to go on the May ballot. O'Brien said that it likely would go before voters in August, unless the $36-million Pickerington Local School District bond issue fails in May and is on the August ballot. O'Brien said he does not want the Diley Road issue to be up against the schools.

"We're doing it through a structured and orderly manner," he said.

The Columbus Dispatch

Diley Road
This Week in Pickerington