Caucus Minutes - March 4th 2013

Monday, March 4, 2013 at 8:00 p.m.
Village Civic Hall

The Council of Mayfield Village met in Caucus Session on Monday, March 4, 2013.  Council President Buckholtz called the meeting to order at approximately 8:00 p.m.

(Click here for a print friendly/PDF document)


Present: Mr. Buckholtz, Mrs. Mills, Mr. Marrie, Mr. Marquardt, Dr. Parker and Mr. Delguyd

Also Present: Mayor Rinker, Mr. Wynne, Ms Calta, Mr. Cappello, Chief Edelman, Acting Chief Shrefler, Mr. Metzung, Mr. Dinardo, Mr. Esborn, Ms. Wolgamuth, and Mrs. Betsa

Absent: Mrs. Cinco, Mr. Marrelli and Mr. Thomas


  • Presentation by Thomas A. Jorgensen of the Cleveland Restoration Society

Mr. Marrie passed out folders containing information about the Heritage Home program.

Mr. Jorgensen stated this is a program that was started by the Cleveland Restoration Society 20 years ago.  If you look in the folder at the back on the right hand side you should see a printed copy of powerpoint slides. 

The Cleveland Restoration Society is in to preserving houses, trying to get rehabs consistent with the history and architecture of the house through services provided by the Society.  The reason we do this is that we view historic preservation as neighborhood development and maintenance.  It results in positive reinvestment in the community, increase in property values, investor confidence and neighborhood stability.

If you go to the top of page 2, that’s what Cleveland State University concluded when it studied our program after about 15 years of operation in the City of Cleveland. They determined that houses that participated in our program had a disproportionate increase in their market value compared with comparable houses in the City of Cleveland.  Not only that, but houses that were within a tenth of a mile of a house that participated in our program also had by ripple effect a disproportionate increase in the market value of that house.  Part of that was the fact that in the City of Cleveland our early focus was to take the worst house on the block and turn it in to the best house on the block.  That had an impact on every house on the block in bringing up the values.

The other thing that Cleveland State University pointed out was the homeowners that participated in the program stayed in their houses longer than was typical in similar housing throughout the City of Cleveland. This also played over because when they did the study they had about 5 years of operation where we had extended the program out in to the interring suburbs.  So they included those in the study as well with the same conclusions. 

There are two components to this program.  One is we provide guidance to homeowners on how to rehab or improve a house more than 50 years old.  It’s guidance that homeowners really appreciate.  The second aspect of the program is that if the homeowner needs to borrow money to make improvements or to maintain the house, we broker that.  It’s in the nature of a low interest loan.

If you turn to page 3 of the handout, at the top you will see the first aspect, technical assistance. This involves discussions over the phone of what the homeowner would like to do.  If we need to come out and take a look at the house, we will come out and look at it and provide guidance on the project.  We do not do any work. The homeowner has to secure estimates from contractors. We will review those and give advice to them.  If they do not have a clue on what kind of contractor to look for, we can provide a list of contractors who we have not heard bad things about.  We recommend things on maintenance issues and energy efficiency.  In recent years, as people’s houses age, they would like their home to be more energy efficient.  We give them partial reviews on products. We neither sell services to the homeowner nor sell products.  Our consulting with the homeowner is free.  It costs the participating city.  There is no barrier to the homeowner using our services. 

At the bottom of page 3, there is a discussion of the low-interest loans.  It is a mortgage loan.  It’s a fixed rate loan. The rates are determined by market conditions at the point the loan is taken out minus a substantial discount.  Right now, the interest rate available through one of our lenders is 1.4%.  The loans are a fixed rate for up to 10 years.  That rate cannot be increased.

Because we are in to historical preservation, if a loan is involved, we will do the construction specifications for any exterior work they have done to the house to make sure the changes appropriate are actually done. We give guidance on the project.

To be eligible for this program, it used to be you had to be a historic house or in a historic district.  Not any more.  The house must be 50 years or older.  It has to be residential.  It has to have no more than three residential units in the structure to qualify for the program. Our theory on that is that the houses that are historic today are ones that survived and were updated and made livable over the years.  We are helping houses now 50 years old get the chance at some future date, 50 or 100 years from now to be considered historic. 

At the bottom of page 4, there is a listing of what type of projects eligible under our program.  We probably give out technical advice to homeowners five times more than we do loans.  For every 5 homeowners we give advice to, we might generate 1 loan out of that.  This program focuses in on free advice to homeowners.  We do additions, roof repair or replacement, painting, porch repair, storm windows, window repair. We have one facility where driveway replacement can be involved.  On the interior, the most popular thing are kitchen and bath remodeling. We do not impose restrictions on what the homeowner can do on the interior of the house.  We do impose restrictions on the exterior that they not harm the historic nature of the house or its original look, appeal or architecture.  We have had projects that reconfigure floor space in a home or apartment unit. 

It is easier to define what is ineligible for the program.  The one we get the most argument about is vinyl siding and vinyl windows because it is not consistent with the materials used when the house was built.  These products did not exist 50 years ago and are environmentally damaging.  We will not allow a loan to be used to pay for that.  Beyond that, we are restricted not to finance luxury items such as swimming pools or hot tubs. We will not finance appliances if they are not built in.   If they are built in, they can be included in in kitchen remodeling.  Obviously, we do not finance incompatible additions or incompatible building materials.

Frequently asked questions can be found on the bottom of page 5.  The loan amount can be anywhere from $3,000 to $200,000.  It is based on equity, but we can lend 90-95% of the after rehabbed appraised value of the house minus any existing encumbrances on the house.  We have loans up to 20 years with fixed rates. We structure them so that there are no out-of-pocket costs to the homeowner. The fees get rolled in to the amount they borrow and pay off over the period of the loan.  Tax deductible is based on current tax law. The homeowner must meet the lending institution’s credit requirements.   The Cleveland Restoration Society does not get involved in that decision. We don’t want to make that decision. The bank is responsible.  It’s their money being lent out.  They lose if someone defaults on the loan. We have done close to 1,000 loans on this program over the past 20 years. We have only had 2 close.  That makes it the best loan portfolio that Key Bank has.

Mr. Delguyd asked, is that the lending institute?  Key Bank?

Mr. Jorgenson replied, that’s one of our two lending institutions.  It’s been with us for the longest period, virtually 20 years.  First Federal Lakewood is just starting up with us.  They are talking about April 1st maybe. 

Pages 6-9 have examples and pictures of some of our projects.  Generally our average size loan would be $25,000.  Nearly 1,000 loans entered the program. We are up to 4,600 instances of helping homeowners with their projects.  Those projects are valued at over $100 million. 

Page 11 talks about why it is a good thing to join the program because our interest rates are the lowest they have ever been.  It went down from 3.50% to 1.4%.  We reduced our fees and enhanced the eligibility by going to old houses built prior to 1964. 

This can be branded as the Mayfield Village Heritage Home Program.  We set up a separate Mayfield Village Heritage Home Program website.  It’s quite a vibrant website.  You click on a house and get ideas as to repairs and color schemes.

There are some fees if the resident actually borrows.  For us to provide it, we need support from the participating city.  In the case of Mayfield Village where you have about 600 houses over 50 years old, the fee would be $700 per year.  That provides the free technical assistance and the low interest loan program for those homeowners.

There are other services that Cleveland Restoration provides. They are listed at the bottom of page 12. We would be happy to talk to you about any of those. They are separately priced. 

Mr. Jorgenson opened the floor to questions.

Dr. Parker asked, when a person goes through this program, obviously we have certain demographics in terms of the economics of our homeowners, are there lighter restrictions in terms of how they qualify for these types of funds or are they pretty similar to a normal bank loan?  Have you done any analysis of the median income of these homes to see if they would actually be eligible?  What do you have to do to get this money?  Is it like a bank or are the restrictions different?

Mr. Jorgenson replied, as far as the homeowner and the bank, it is the same although it is actually easier because of the willingness of the bank to lend on the improved value of the house after rehab.  The typical second mortgage on a house would just be on existing equity based upon the current appraised value without taking in to account improvements.  There is an added burden; we view it as a benefit to the homeowner. They have to deal with the Cleveland Restoration Society and find out the right way to do the rehab or maintenance to the house rather than hearing it from a contractor who has a financial interest in what the homeowner does. We are totally independent and impartial in that regard. 

Mr. Delguyd asked, you have a note in here, 5-20 year term allows homeowner to make larger investments.  Is that just based on the amount of money that they borrow? 

Mr. Jorgenson replied, it is really what they are comfortable paying back and how fast they want to pay back the loan for the work that they want to do.  If they want to do $6,000 worth of work, most homeowners are going to say, let’s not drag that out, let’s have a short term for that, whereas if you have somebody up at the higher end of the spectrum like the $150,000 loan, then that person likely will want to stretch out to 10-20 years. 

Mayor Rinker asked, can the equity mortgage take second place to the existing lender?

Mr. Jorgenson replied, that’s correct.

Council President Buckholtz asked, the $700 fee, is it a one-time or annual fee?

Mr. Jorgenson replied, annual.

Mrs. Mills stated, we have a Historical House in the Village that will be needing a new roof.  Is that an additional cost?

Mr. Delguyd replied, that’s a separate program.

Mr. Jorgenson asked, is this a house owned by the City? 

Mrs. Mills replied, the Historical House owns it, but we sit on public land.

Mr. Jorgenson replied, services related to that situation would be a separate fee. 

Mrs. Mills asked, do you know what that fee is?

Mr. Jorgenson replied, not until we know more about the situation.

Council President Buckholtz stated, it’s not owner-occupied.  It’s like a museum.

Mayor Rinker added, it’s a not-for-profit.

Mr. Jorgenson replied, that would typically be something that is a preservation service that would be a separate fee.  If the non-profit wants to avail itself of the program and loan, then it would fit within this.  We don’t have objections to dealing with non-owner-occupied properties.  That doesn’t bother us.  If it’s not a residential use, then it would probably be outside the program.

Mr. Delguyd asked, what is the start up time?

Mr. Jorgenson replied, a month. We would give marketing materials to the Village, announcement brochures, a Press Release.  We can do that as soon as we have a signed contract and fee in hand.  One of the objectives would be to do a mailing to the 600 houses eligible for the program, a postcard similar to the postcard in your materials.  We would try to get that out before the end of April.

Dr. Parker asked, any other communities surrounding us participating in this right now?

Mr. Jorgenson replied, quite a few.

Dr. Parker asked, can you give us a list of those communities?

Mr. Jorgenson stated, it is available on our website.  University Heights, South Euclid, Shaker, Cleveland Heights and Pepper Pike are some of the participants. 

Mayor Rinker asked, do you inventory the housing stock in any way or is it on a case-by-case basis when people contact you?

Mr. Jorgenson replied, when people contact us.  An inventory would go in to that potential services.

Mayor Rinker stated, that would be something maybe our Building Department would.

Mr. Delguyd asked, the 593 houses, you know that just from County records?

Mr. Jorgenson replied, it comes from the census.  It’s an estimate.  It’s based on the census numbers.  They do it in 10 year increments.

Mayor Rinker asked, is that your only database?  Have you undertaken any kind of collaborative effort with the community or neighborhood?

Mr. Jorgenson we use the census data.  As soon as you sign up and we develop a mailing list, we will have a house by house listing of the houses eligible based on records the County has.

Mayor Rinker stated, so there’s some kind of disclaimer you send out because invariably there are going to be disconnects between the County data.  In other words, someone may think they qualify and you say, no, not exactly. We are sensitive to people’s expectations.

Mr. Jorgenson stated hopefully we will not have too many disconnects there.  They are bound to happen.  Whatever can go wrong, will go wrong.

Mr. Marrie thanked Mr. Jorgenson.  Does anyone have any other questions?

Council President Buckholtz asked, did the Heritage Home Program grow out of something or is it connected federally or through the State? What are your roots?

Mr. Jorgenson replied, 20 years ago, using grant money from Cleveland Foundation and Gund Foundation, Cleveland Restoration Society started this program as a pilot on a single historic district on the near west side and a district on the east side.  At that point, the program was just for houses that were “historical”.  We do not use Federal money.  Cities that participate in it sometimes pay us our fee out of Federal money, but we don’t receive Federal money directly.  The program is supported by payments by participating cities from whatever sources.

Council President Buckholtz asked, it’s basically a local or regional focus?

Mr. Jorgenson replied, right.  This program is really unique to Cleveland.  We are involved with the National Trust for Historic Preservation. We are actually a local partner.  It is really the envy of historic preservation organizations around the country.  At one point the National Trust tried to emulate this and sponsor it on a national basis. They had a change of leadership and that sort of died.  It is a super program, unequal to anywhere in the country.

Council President Buckholtz thanked Mr. Jorgenson.

Mr. Jorgenson thanked Council for their attention.  You have my contact information so if you have questions, feel free to call me anytime.

Mr. Marrie stated, this presentation was made to the Citizen’s Advisory Committee.  It was extremely well received.  In fact, there were 5 or 6 people ready to jump on right now.  One wished it was effective today.  They have been waiting.  They are on Wilson Mills and Joyce. I also threw this out to the Kenwood Homeowner’s Association and it also went over extremely well.  It was well received. In the two groups, a total of 50-60 people, there wasn’t one negative on it.  Some people might not use it, but no one saw fault with it. 

Mrs. Mills stated, I think this would be a good program to include in our Community Day in June to have someone there to explain it to people. I talked to Donna about it.

Ms. Wolgamuth stated, she contacted me about it.

Mrs. Mills stated, good.

Mr. Marrie stated, one of the things brought up at Citizen’s Advisory is you get these things in your mailbox all the time.  It was suggested that if we have this available for the residents of Mayfield Village, the Mayor should send out a letter describing the program.

Mr. Delguyd stated, it should also be put in the Voice of the Village.


  • Dental plan for employees (Delta Dental)

Mr. Wynne reported, our current dental plan with MetLife is up for renewal on April 1st.  MetLife provided us with a 14.5% increase.  We went to market which we would have done anyway and got several quotes and the Health Care Task Force is recommending we go with Delta Dental. It’s a two year contract.  Our rates will pretty much be the same as we are paying right now.  The level of benefits are the same.  The dental network is better than what we currently have.

  • 2013 Budget

Mr. Wynne stated, Council has had the budget. We have had a couple discussions in the past couple Finance meetings.  The process of putting the budget together is the same as we have done in the past. I have taken a very conservative approach on revenue.  Our income tax for 2011 and 2012 were $14.5 and $14.9 million. We only budgeted $13.9 million for 2013.  In putting the budget together, from an expense standpoint, I sat down with all the department heads and reviewed their budgets and personnel costs, operating expenses and capital equipment and project needs they want. 

Council President Buckholtz stated, this would be the time to discuss the budget on the floor. There were a lot of questions and conversation in Finance. 

Mr. Delguyd asked, does anyone else have any questions or comments on the budget? 

Council President Buckholtz asked, do you want to review the points discussed in Finance:?

Mr. Delguyd replied, we talked about paying down debt at a faster rate than what was proposed.  We have a breakdown of the $12 million in debt of which $5 million is unfunded and $7 million is funded through real estate taxes, infrastructure and OWDA loans.  Of those, we are looking at probably doing a refinance to lower the interest rate over the next couple years.

Mr. Wynne added, these are the bonds we have from the police station, fire station and Highland Road underpass. They are not callable until 2014 but we do have a one-time option between date of issuance and the callable date to refinance them at a lower rate. The lower rate still will not kick in until after the callable date, so we would still be paying the same principal and interest rates until the callable date and after that date is when the lower interest rate kicks in. 

Mr. Delguyd asked, you said that date is 2014?

Mr. Wynne replied, yes.  I am currently working with bond counsel and our investment broker to look at the potential savings to do a refinance now versus looking at it later on with the interest rates being as favorable as they are.  Preliminary estimates are a savings of about $20,000-25,000 a year in interest expense.

Mr. Delguyd stated, one of the other things we talked about was possibly pre-paying some of this debt although Ron did mention that there might be a pre-payment penalty. He is going to look into that to see if there was any severe adverse effect at doing that. The last thing we talked about when it comes to debt was possibly pro-rating funds into the debt service fund at a faster pace.  Not necessarily paying down the debt and incurring the pre-payment penalty, but for lack of a better term reserving that cash almost as a rainy day fund at a quicker pace.  The issue there is it’s the act of Council to transfer funds into the debt retirement fund and it would be possibly a court action if we ever had to take it back out, meaning it’s a rainy day fund but then it just becomes a debt rainy day fund not a general rainy day fund so we would hamstring ourselves a little bit at that point.  That’s not something we would have to do every year. We would do it on a year by year basis.  We asked Ron to look into that as well.

Council President Buckholtz stated, I attended the Finance meeting. The concept was to not necessarily, after we heard that you can’t really pay down the bonds, it’s more like still tightening up the budget, perhaps to the tune of a half a million dollars and directing that to a debt reduction fund.

Mr. Wynne replied, it would be transferred into the fund of choice whether that’s the bond retirement fund or sanitary sewer relief fund.  It would just sit there until a point in time that it would be used.

Mr. Delguyd stated, the final comment was if we wanted to do something like that, it doesn’t necessarily have to go into the debt retirement fund, it can go into the sewer fund.  Some of the other budgetary items we talked about, we discussed briefly the restroom and pavilion facilities that you got in your packets this week. The budgeted amount is a half a million dollars.  That’s a total all-in budget number given to us based on a previous bid for bathrooms similar to Metroparks.  That is the only number we have so it’s the number in the budget.  It does not reflect any type of corporate contribution as mentioned in our memos.  Quite frankly, I don’t think that the numbers are going to come in that high, but it’s in there. We don’t have any hard bids to go on other than some of those numbers.  We also talked about the Community Room which is not currently in the budget but I know it is being studied anywhere from remodeling to razing.  Those were our discussions in Finance.  I will leave it open to discussions from the rest of Council that weren’t there.

Council President Buckholtz stated, one of the comments you just made was it doesn’t take into account any corporate participation.  I found it interesting in the memo that it noted that Progressive wanted to participate with materials and labor. 

Mayor Rinker stated, right now it is something that has not been specified. What is significant is that some time ago Diane Wolgamuth established a good line of communication with Progressive, chiefly Ron Marrotto.  We commented on this previously that when East Commons’ discussions were being handled, Progressive communicated to the Village its interest and sensitivity to what would go in across the street. So when we were looking at design elements for two different locations we made sure to contact Progressive. What was totally unexpected and volunteered by Mr. Marrotto was that not only was Progressive interested and appreciated our contacting them to preview the plans for the facilities that would be literally right outside their front door at the soccer fields, but he said, we would like to participate in some way, something significant.  You will recall last year Doug had a really good experience with employees at Progressive who approached the Village for tree planting for beautification at Parkview and North Commons.  This is kind of consistent and it’s unspecified right now, but we did not solicit it, this just came out of the blue. What we are speculating is that as we get more refined and understand the budget better, there may be a component.  Each of these we are looking at not only restroom facilities but pavilions, gathering places, sheltering places, the idea is to have flexibility built into the footprint of these so that they can be modified over time.  We suspect that Progressive may have specific interest in some component but we are very careful not to presume.  There has been no dollar amount specified. There have been no real details.  It’s very very preliminary.  We thought it was significant to say the least that Progressive said, look, we are interested and we want to participate in some significant way. It’s a stay-tuned thing. 

Council President Buckholtz stated, that sounds great. When I am up there working out, I look out the window and think, they could benefit from it.

Mayor Rinker agreed.  They would utilize the facilities.

Council President Buckholtz thinks employees would walk over to the pavilion. 

Mayor Rinker stated, there are also food trucks over there.

Council President Buckholtz stated, that’s something important to Council to know in terms of the finances. 

Mayor Rinker stated, that’s why we put it in the memo.

Council President Buckholtz stated, the memo also says “they gave their approval”.  I don’t remember the original Development Agreement, but did they have anything in the Development Agreement where they have a say on what we develop on that land?

Mayor Rinker replied, no.

Council President Buckholtz stated, I just wanted to be clear that they are giving us their blessing. 

Dr. Parker asked, at what point do we determine what amount of contribution or what role they might play in this?  How do we get a picture of that at this point?

Mayor Rinker replied, we don’t at this point.

Ms. Wolgamuth stated, my thought was that once we had the pricing, Ron Dinardo and Jim McKnight are working on the cost for the building.  Once we have a list of all the costs, I thought we would go back to Progressive at that point so that they could look at what we are paying for versus what we would be asking them to pay for.  I have been told that I will have those costs in the next two weeks.  It should be fairly soon.

Council President Buckholtz asked, was there any further discussion about the Community Room?

Mr. Delguyd replied, no, just that it was studied.

Council President Buckholtz stated, the pictures you drew, one of the things I thought of was how great that would look in the center of town, something along the lines of just expanding.  Like you said, there’s a study underway for the Community Room. That seems to be a point of attention, especially since it is used all year round.

Mayor Rinker agreed.  This is something we have talked about before.  Once we tore down the old Village Hall complex, those buildings, it would really put the Community Room front and center.  Last year John provided an inventory to Council and he has since updated it.  I think that given all of the other capital projects this year, we put that on the back burner, but realistically that’s something that sometime this year there needs to be a decision made with projecting next year’s budget, either there’s going to be a façade or more structural work done and evaluate the useful life, what would the bang for the buck be for that or is it raze and rebuild on site or is there consideration that there be something put on this side of the street?

Council President Buckholtz stated, I think the concept was, I know there’s different priorities here, but it’s like $50,000 for that center of town and Community Room and $550,000 for bathrooms at the field. Not that it isn’t all doable and especially with Progressive’s possible participation.  It’s not really budgeted, we are just starting the study.  Moving in two different paces.

Mayor Rinker stated, part of it too is historically the issue of providing facilities at the soccer fields which is in to its third year I think and in terms of the ballfields, that was something frankly that Bill Thomas and staff had talked about probably 8 years ago. The plans and initial work up looked like it was pretty elaborate, so we parked it for a while. Then with the Rec Board being very concerned about the lack of facilities at the soccer field, last year we had thought we could repurpose the trailers the Police Department had. That turned out not to work, but keeping that process going, and at the end of the day, to provide plumbing, to provide the facilities with power hook-ups, that’s where the budget issues start looking at what those costs could be.  I think Council has to make a decision too whether it makes sense to do one or both of those in one year or split those up. So Council may think, maybe we will do one, and we concentrate on the center of town. Those are all on the table.

Council President Buckholtz asked, any other comments on the budget?  There were none.  We will have it on Second Read during the Special Meeting this evening.

  • Legislation opposing passage of House Bill 5

Mr. Wynne reported, House Bill 5 is down at the State. They are trying to streamline the city income tax process in the State for businesses to make it more uniform. House Bill 5 was originally sold as being somewhat revenue neutral. That is not the case. Some of the proposed changes have a significant impact to a lot of the cities in the area.  The impact to us will be about $35,000-36,000 the first year. In light of the fact that the State has already done away with the Estate Tax and significantly reduced the Local Government Fund and the Commercial Activity Tax and are now proposing in this House Bill other items that impact our revenue, the Mayors and Manager’s Association as a group are requesting that we all join on board and put forth legislation opposing the House Bill.


  • Sale of old police vehicles

Chief Edelman reported, we are requesting approval to advertise for bids for the sale of our old police car.  It’s a 2010 Crown Victoria with 86,000 miles.

In other news, on April 1st, Phase II of the construction on Mayfield Road in Gates Mills will begin.  They will be closing the westbound lanes completely. We can anticipate a challenge during morning rush hour on Wilson Mills.  We will have officers at key intersections, but I can guarantee you that there will be issues. 

Mr. Delguyd asked, will Gates Mills put a police officer down there?  Chief Edelman replied, they are not going to.  They chose not to help us out last year.  I don’t anticipate them helping this year.

Mr. Delguyd asked, we can’t put somebody down there?  Chief Edelman replied, it’s their jurisdiction.  I can’t force it on them.

Council President Buckholtz asked, how long of a period of time?  Chief Edelman replied, we are looking at 12 weeks but who knows?  They almost doubled the time last year because they ran into some issues.  Who knows if they are going to have problems again this year.  There’s no way to tell.

Also, on Saturday, April 27th, we will once again be participating in the prescription drug give-back. We will have an officer at the police station on hand to take back any old prescription medication you might have.  You can just drive up and drop it off. There’s nothing to sign.  No forms to fill out.  It’s a program we have participated in in the past.

K-9 Leo is done with training.  He graduated Friday. He is starting his official duties this week.  I will have him at the Council meeting on the 18th where I will introduce him to everybody. 

Finally, just wanted to share an example with you of why I am proud to be the Police Chief here in Mayfield Village. This past Saturday night, Sergeant Matias was training a new part-time officer and took him up to Hillcrest Hospital to show him the emergency room facilities up there. Coincidentally, while they were there, the BP station at SOM and Mayfield was robbed at gunpoint. They heard the call come in on the radio. They pulled out of the parking lot and saw three people running out of BP and across the street to Walmart. They took off after them, found them in the Walmart parking lot, made the arrest and held them for Mayfield Heights who got there very quickly after that.  This is a great example of how the Area Agency Cooperation works in the SPAN departments.  I was very proud to hear that this morning.


  • Sale of old fire vehicle
  • Purchase of vehicle for Fire Chief

Acting Chief Shrefler reported that he would like to discuss the purchase of a new vehicle to replace the Chief’s car.  It’s a 2004 Crown Victoria. We would like to replace that with a smaller SUV, going from an 8 cylinder to a 6 cylinder. The new vehicle would be an all wheel drive.  It could be used as a secondary response vehicle if needed.  We would like to retain the old Chief’s car until the new vehicle is purchased.

Council President Buckholtz asked if there were any questions. There were none.


  • Authorization to prepare specifications and go to bid for 2013 road program

Mr. Metzung reported, this program will follow the same protocol we have used in the last couple years.  It will include the Thornapple, Kenwood, Oakwood, Walnut, Sandalwood neighborhood and all the areas over there that are concrete.  We anticipate that to be $1.1 million  or so including engineering. We have also added rejuvenation of our asphalt streets of the projects recently done in the Village. As I pointed out in my memo, looking forward to the next couple of years, if we could concentrate on the southeast corner of the Village next year.  We hope to get back to the Kenwood neighborhood the following year which kind of brings us back full circle from when we started back in 2001.

  • Authorization to go out to bid for the construction of the Greenway Trail

Mr. Metzung reported, I will be requesting authorization to go out to bid for the construction of the Greenway Trail. After many years of getting things together, we are very close to having authorization from ODOT to proceed with that project.  I would like to get the authorization to go to construction for that when they give us the green light so we can move forward as soon as possible.

  • Purchase of brackets and sign post for new street sign program (not to exceed $18,000)
  • Street name signs (A & A Safety - not to exceed $8,000)

Mr. Metzung reported, Federal regulations have deemed our street signs to be out of date. It’s time to upgrade our signs.  Lettering and backing is all governed by the Federal regulations.  They need to be 6 inches with upper and lower case letters. We are going to begin to move forward with that project.  We hope to do half the Village this year and the other half next year. We counted 71 posts that we have street names on. This should get us close to 36 signs.

  • Spring Tree Planting

Mr. Metzung reported, we are looking at putting in 92 trees.  Frank Stupczy, our arborist, is beginning to work now with a couple different nurseries to nail down pricing. We are in the $10,000 range. That doesn’t include any trucking of the material yet. We are working with a couple different nurseries to see where we end up with that. We would like to be able to do this this month so he can go out and tag the trees for planting come April.

Mr. Delguyd asked, do we install those?

Mr. Metzung replied, yes.

  • Sale of vehicle

Mr. Metzung reported, we have a 1999 Suburban that we are going to put up for bid and we are going to take one of the old vehicles from the Police Department, an old Explorer, that we will move in to our department for transportation.

Mr. Metzung stated, that’s all I have for this evening.  Does anyone have any questions?

There were none.


  • Safety surfacing for Parkview Pool 0-40” area around play water toys (Aqua-Seal Resurfacing - $22,548.00)

Mr. Wynne reported, this is the foam cushy stuff by the play area of the pool.  We thought as long as we are having the pool sandblasted and painted, we should just take care of everything all at the same time.  The one in there now is fairly worn and needs to be replaced anyway.

Mr. Metzung added, if I can get a sense of Council that that is going to be okay. Service is going to remove that and should we get a couple days where it is nice, we would like to begin to start tearing that up.  If it does not look like there is going to be any objection, we would like to get it started.

Council President Buckholtz asked, does anyone have a problem with that?  There were no concerns.

  • Compensation of Parkview Pool employees – 2013 season
  • Compensation of employees for 2013 Summer Camp Program

Mr. Wynne reported, the only changes to the legislation for this year versus last year was just updating increases to the minimum wage.  Other than that, the ranges all stayed the same.


  • Community Partnership on Aging – Council of Governments Agreement

Ms. Wolgamuth reported, Council has already approved membership in the Community Partnership on Aging for 2013. This legislation is just to allow us a seat on their Council of Governments and also allows a member of our Commission on Aging to be on their Commission on Aging to help with programming.  Ralph Tarsitano will be serving on the Council.


  • Codification Services (Walter Drane - $5,735.00)

Ms. Calta asked Mary Beth to update Council following a telephone discussion she had with Mike Kelly. This is the usual codification from Walter Drane. They update the Code. They will go through the General Offense Code, the Traffic Code and update all that, all of the Ordinances that we have passed within the last year that have been codified, they will update. They will update the website and will provide us with sets of replacement pages.

Mrs. Betsa reported, I spoke to Mike Kelly to see why the pricing was a little higher than last year.  Mr. Kelly advised that there were a number of State law changes, State Codes, in particular traffic, judge and gambling. When we receive the updates, we will see how much has changed.

  • Legislation authorizing Purchase Agreement with Governor’s Village, LLC

Ms. Calta reported, if there are any questions on this, let me know. The Exhibit attached may not be all that clear, but it is the front swath of where they are located now that is owned by the Village.  It’s 1.1 acres. There are some wetlands over here.  If there are any questions on that, let me know.  It’s been appraised. That’s where the $4,500 came from.

Council President Buckholtz asked if there were any questions. There were none.


Council President Buckholtz asked if there were any other matters.

Mr. Metzung stated, regarding our fertilization this year, I will have the prices at the Council meeting. We are going organic.  They are new vendors. We will see where they are at and will have a comparison.

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 9:18 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Mary E. Betsa, Clerk of Council