The Get-Go Question: Are We (Or Are We Not) A “Lifestyle” City?

An Economic Development Committee member recently justified his support of Lance Osborne’s mega Get-Go development plan by proclaiming that Highland Heights is “not a lifestyle city.” His comment goes to the heart of the Get-Go issue.

The Backstory

The four-meetings-a-year Highland Heights Economic Development Committee (EDC) has met 3 times since September to discuss Lance Osborne’s $8 million development proposal for the former Catalano’s grocery store property.
The centerpiece of that project: a mega Giant Eagle/Get-Go gas station, which Osborne plans to install along Wilson Mills Road, near the Bishop/Brainard Road intersection.

Osborne faces a major obstacle: the Catalano’s property is zoned for “local business.” Since gas stations aren’t a permitted use, the Get-Go can’t go in unless Highland Heights voters approve a zoning code change to allow it.

Osborne, who told the EDC that he’d like the Get-Go to be operational within a year, seems to be looking to Council to carry the water for him after his own flawed and untimely initiative petition drive failed to get a zoning issue on the ballot last November.

Osborne told the EDC on December 15^th that a Get-Go zoning issue could appear on the March 6, 2012 primary ballot if Council took appropriate action during its January 3^rd organizational meeting.

That explains the recent flurry of EDC meetings.

Supporters of Osborne’s mega Get-Go development plan apparently hoped to obtain the EDC’s endorsement of the project by year’s end and then use it to pressure Council to take immediate action to push the project forward on January 3^rd.

Finance Director Anthony Ianiro, who heads the EDC, not only backed up Osborne’s primary ballot claim, he told EDC members:  

“I encourage and suggest that you come and that you speak to Council“ on January 3^rd.

Mayor Scott Coleman expressed pessimism but didn’t throw water on the idea that Council could act on January 3^rd to put a Get-Go zoning issue on the March primary ballot:

“For March, an ordinance would have to be passed at the 1^st (Council) meeting in January. I don’t see that as a practical thing. The whole concept of amending the zoning ordinance has not been discussed by council… The 1^st Council meeting on January 3^rd is more an organizational meeting. It’s possible that Council could discuss it if they are willing to do it…They know it’s pending.  They have discussed meaty things at organizational meetings in the past. There’s precedent for doing that.”

Reality Check
Council could theoretically vote on January 3^rd to put an ordinance amending the Highland Heights zoning code on the March 6th primary ballot, but it wouldn’t be legal.

Council would have to ignore state filing deadlines, city ordinances and the Highland Heights Charter to do that.

Council would have to present the new zoning ordinance for a first reading at a January 3^rd special meeting (during which public comment is not allowed), immediately suspend two additional required readings of the ordinance, and then pass it the same night. Council would also have to include language instructing the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections to put the ordinance on the March primary ballot---in violation of state filing deadlines.

•  According to the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections’ 2012 elections calendar, the filing deadline for getting “local issues” (such as a zoning ordinance) on the March 6, 2012 primary ballot expired several weeks ago, on December 7^th. http://www.boe.cuyahogacounty.us/en-US/election-calendar.aspx

•             Highland Heights law requires 3 separate readings before ordinances are adopted (117.01), it prohibits zoning measures from being passed as emergency measures (117.02), and it also mandates that Council provide 30 days notice and hold a public hearing prior to adopting any ordinance amending the city’s zoning code (1115.04). http://www.conwaygreene.com/Hlandhts.htm
  
  
•         Highland Heights Charter 802.02 imposes a waiting period after zoning ordinances are approved, before they can be voted on.  A 60-day waiting period applies to general elections (a primary is not a general election); otherwise a 90-day waiting period applies. http://www.conwaygreene.com/Hlandhts.htm

Osborne, Mayor Coleman, and Finance Director Tony Ianiro clearly misspoke when they told EDC members on December 15^th that Council could act on January 3^rd to put a Get-Go zoning issue on the March primary ballot.
Council can’t do that----not legally, anyway.

While it is expected that developers might, on occasion, spin facts or present a version of reality that serves their own self-interest, it’s disappointing that, rather than setting the record straight, Mayor Coleman and Finance Director Ianiro not only backed up Osborne’s claim, but also “encourage(d) and suggest(ed)” to  EDC members that they should come and pressure Council to do something on January 3^rd which---as the mayor and finance director should know---Council is not legally authorized to do.

 “We Are Not A Lifestyle City”

 Although no formal vote was taken on December 15^th, 7 of the 10 EDC members expressed support for Osborne’s mega Get-Go project. (Maurice Helou abstained, Mayor Scott Coleman didn’t offer an opinion, and Scott Mills was absent).

Their endorsement might have more weight if the EDC’s review of the project hadn’t been so limited.
Members pretty much just listened to Osborne, looked at his conceptual drawings and accepted, without significant analysis, Osborne’s claims regarding traffic impact (“no degradation” of the Wilson Mills/Bishop/Brainard intersection”), job creation (120 mostly part-time, minimum wage jobs) and new tax revenue (approximately $47,000).  

At the December 15^th meeting Osborne again described his traffic study as a “trip generation” traffic study whose projections are based on (generic) use and the square footage of the proposed project. When asked by EDC member Helou whether the traffic study took  into account “the value of the (Giant Eagle/Get-Go) brand and what it might draw in as far as customers,” Osborne replied, "No."

In other words Osborne’s traffic study doesn't consider the effect of Giant Eagle’s gas points program, which will funnel traffic to the Get-Go from surrounding communities. (Mayor Coleman seemingly confirmed this reality when he commented, “They (Giant Eagle) are desperately in need of a location in this corridor.”) Presumably the traffic study also doesn't count traffic that will be diverted as a result of Giant Eagle’s installation of Get-Go exit signs along I-90 and I-271.

Significantly, the EDC did not consider or discuss:  1) the negative impact (including job losses) that the mega Get-Go project could have on currently operating local businesses; 2) zoning issues; or 3) the impact that the proposed mega Get-Go facility will have on residential neighborhoods and residential property values.

No matter. Most of the EDC members still enthusiastically support the project.  Among their comments:

“The project is above what I expected to see. Every day is a day without tax revenue.” Michael DeStefano.(He’s not quite right.  Giant Eagle pays property tax on the $1+ million assessed value of the Catalano’s property each year.)

 “I lived on Millridge. I remember Catalano’s at Christmastime. It was a mess. That’s the way it was. No one complained.” Janet Schiciano.
(It’s interesting that, after having suffered through it herself, Schiciano so easily dismisses the effect that the Get-Go---which will have far worse traffic than “Catalano’s at Christmastime”---will have on her former neighborhood.)

“We are not a lifestyle city.” Dan Greve.
(So, what does that make us, a low-rent, shabby-town?)

I think Greve’s comment cuts to the heart of the Get-Go issue.  

Are we a “lifestyle city”---one that puts high quality residential life at the top of its priority list and is committed to preserving high residential property values, even during times of economic downturn? Or are we some other kind of city---a “non-lifestyle city”----one that is willing to support commercial development at all costs, no matter how it effects our residential neighborhoods?

Fortunately it is Highland Heights residents---not Lance Osborne, Giant Eagle, or the EDC--- who will get to decide that question, once a Get-Go zoning issue finally gets on the ballot.

It just won’t be in March.

The Return of Common Sense

The election is over, which means that there’s a better chance that Highland Heights residents will see common sense prevailing over politics.

FINANCIAL MATTERS

• Item One: Paying for the new rescue squad

Highland Heights Fire Chief Bill Turner waited patiently for several years before getting the green light to replace the city’s oldest rescue squad vehicle (RSV).
It’s great that the city is willing to invest in modern, well-functioning emergency equipment, and it makes financial sense too. Because insurance companies are charged for it, the fire department’s emergency rescue service is actually a moneymaker for the city.

Mayor Scott Coleman included only part of the cost of the new RSV in the 2011 capital improvements budget. Instead of paying for it upfront, he proposed using a five year, rent-to-own arrangement---one that upped the RSV’s total cost (due to interest payments) and encumbered future capital improvement funds through 2015.

Councilman Bob Mastrangelo questioned that decision. He argued that the city had sufficient funds to buy the RSV outright and that there wasn’t a good justification for adding interest costs to the purchase price. 

So why would Coleman want to go the rent-to-own route? 

While Coleman claimed at the time that he wasn’t sure there was enough money in the budget to pay the full purchase price this year, it’s pretty hard to ignore the fact that Coleman used the city’s finances--including the city’s reserve (savings/rainy day) fund balance---as a key part of his recent reelection campaign.  The rent-to-own approach reduced the impact that the RSV purchase had on the 2011 budget---and on the reserve fund balance.

Mastrangelo raised the financing issue again a couple of weeks ago, after the RSV was delivered and the bill came due.

During last week’s Legislative & Finance Committee (L&F) meeting, Coleman conceded that the city could afford to buy the RSV outright and that doing that will save $12,000 in interest costs and free up an additional $44,000 in capital improvement funds for each of the next four years.

No doubt that was music to Mastrangelo’s ears.

• Item Two: Insurance Costs

During the L&F meeting Finance Director Anthony Ianiro reported on the bids submitted for the city’s 2012 medical and dental coverage.
It looks like the dental premiums will remain the same, but the city’s current medical insurance provider proposed a 20% premium increase. Ouch.
 A different company (Signa) is offering a comparable medical insurance plan for only a 5% premium increase. Although the city is still waiting to hear from a couple more insurers, it looks like Signa’s bid might be the winner.

• Item Three: The 2012 Budget

Mayor Scott Coleman told Council last week that he had already met with his department heads, as a kickoff to the 2012 budgeting process.

While it is still too early to know what the 2012 budget will look like, it is likely to include significant capital improvement spending.

During his campaign Coleman promised that he would come up with a plan to address the city’s infastructure needs within 100 days of starting his new term. One of the most pressing needs is the Highland Road water main. The city has been on notice for several years that the water main is failing and must be replaced.

One budget category that is guaranteed to increase across the board next year: salaries.  The labor contracts approved last year call for a 3% pay increase for union employees in 2012. Traditionally city administrators and other exempt employees receive matching pay increases.

• Item Four: Green Task Force Grant Applications

The city’s newest organization---the Highland Heights Green Task Force (GTF)---has already had a positive impact on the city. 

A few months ago the city received a grant to buy recycling bins for the Community Center, thanks to the efforts of the GTF.  

At last week’s Council meeting GTF head Judy Dearden described the latest grant that the group is pursuing. The money (a $5,000 grant from the Fiskars Corporation) would be used to enhance the city’s new green space. 

Good luck and thanks, GTF!

GET-GO UPDATE

Law Director Tim Paluf finally answered the question on many minds: when Lance Osborne’s Get-Go zoning initiative petition issues will be placed on the ballot.

Osborne has been pushing to have the issues put before voters at the earliest opportunity, i.e., during the first special or primary election in 2012.

Although Paluf previously told a Sun Messenger reporter that the issues might be voted on during a spring special election, he changed his mind after looking more closely at the Highland Heights Charter.  Paluf told Council that, pursuant to the Charter, Osborne’s zoning issues could only be voted on during a general or regular municipal election. The next one of those won’t be held until November 2012.

If he’s unwilling to wait that long Osborne could circulate a new petition, although he’d have to collect a lot more signatures in order to get his zoning issues on an earlier ballot. Or Osborne could bypass the Charter’s initiative petition rules entirely by convincing five Council members to put zoning issues on the ballot for him instead.

I’ve been told that, during their recent Sun Messenger endorsement interview, all of the Council-at-large candidates (except for Councilman Frank Legan, who was absent) opposed the idea of putting a mega Get-Go on the Catalano’s property.
If that’s the case, the second option may be a dead end for Osborne.

To be continued…

The More Things Change…

You’ve heard the expression: “The More Things Change, The More They Stay The Same”?
That’s a good way to describe Lance Osborne’s most recent Get-Go pitch. But first...

Back In The Saddle Again

Council got back to work (minus an out-of-town Mayor Scott Coleman) on Tuesday night.  The main topic of discussion: adopting a policy that would allow eligible residents to be reimbursed for the cost of installing backflow preventer devices on their property.

Eligible property owners are ones who regularly experience sewer backups in their basements during rainstorms. The backflow devices aren’t a cure, but if configured and used properly they should prevent sewage from backing up from the city’s sanitary sewers into private homes.
The downside: residents will have to limit the amount of sewage they put into the system during storms; too much sewage flowing from homes will cause the devices to open and allow backups to begin again.

The county, which is responsible for the sanitary and storm sewer systems, has agreed to pay for the backflow preventer devices. The city will act as the financial middleman and perform necessary pre-inspections.

Interested Highland Heights residents should contact the building department (440-442-7403) for more information.

Post-Election Sparring

Council President Scott Mills displayed his usual energy and enthusiasm during the meeting, which surprised some given his election loss.  Mills conducted himself with humor and dignity---a class act, under very difficult circumstances.
In fact, a casual observer wouldn’t have know that there had been a recent election---at least until Finance Director Anthony Ianiro gave his report to council.

One thing Mills has always taken great pride in is bringing a twice-a-year paper shredding service program to the city.  Residents don’t have to pay a fee to participate; the city picks up the tab.
It’s been a popular new service; resident participation has grown steadily since it was launched a couple of years ago.
The city’s most recent shredding event was held on October 1^st. Mills was distressed because six weeks had passed and the shredding company was still waiting for Ianiro to cut a check to pay for its services.

Mills, who clearly assumed that the payment delay was politically-related, told Tony Ianiro, “Now that the campaign season is over, I hope that this (bill) will be taken care of.”
Displaying some of his well-known temper, Ianiro snapped, “What did you say?”
After Mills repeated himself, Ianiro finally responded, “We’ll take care of it.”

Good thing.
It would be a shame if the city’s payment practices---whether politically motivated or not---caused Highland Heights to develop a new nickname: “Deadbeat city”.

Prettier Wrapping Paper/Same Package

Tony Ianiro also serves as head of the city’s Economic Development Committee (EDC). He announced that the EDC was meeting the next night.
On the agenda: an update from Moore Associates, the company helping the city perform an economic development self-assessment; and a follow-up presentation by Lance Osborne on his proposed Get-Go development project.

Osborne brought conceptual drawings showing what the mega Get-Go and rear retail strip would look like. I was relieved to see that the drawings reflected a more “upscale” appearance than the garish blue/red mega Get-Go facility that sits at the Avon/Avon Lake interchange off I-90.

Osborne emphasized that he’s listening to residents and trying to come up with something they like, but he also admitted that nothing about the basic project itself has changed. He still envisions using the Catalano’s parcel for a mega Get-Go gas station, car wash, and alcohol-selling convenience store/café in the front, with a 25,000 square foot retail strip in the back.

The drawings of the retail area show a yoga studio and two restaurants. It’s a nice vision, but since they are “conceptual,” the drawings don’t necessarily have anything to do with reality.  Osborne has made no promises or guarantees as to the quality or type of tenant that will actually end up in the space.

One thing Giant Eagle has made clear in the past: it will not allow anything in the retail area that might possibly compete with any aspect of its business----which would seem to eliminate restaurants and food service-related businesses from the retail space in back.
When I asked him about that, Osborne told me that they could put restaurants in the retail area “with restrictions,” but he didn’t explain what those restrictions would be. 

Osborne also didn’t explain why he dropped his investment estimate for the project.  At a September 15^th EDC meeting, Osborne estimated that the mega Get-Go project would entail an $8 million investment. Two months later he reduced that estimate to $7 million.

As for employment, Osborne estimated that the mega Get-Go would bring 40 jobs—mostly minimum wage, part-time jobs (24)---to the city.  He also claimed that the retail space could mean as many as 80 jobs---- an obviously pie-in-the-sky estimate based on his “conceptual” drawings.  It goes without saying that the actual number of jobs created, and the level of payroll tax that will result, depend entirely on what businesses actually relocate there.

Osborne told the EDC that his job estimates would translate into about $39,000 in additional payroll tax and “almost” $47,000 in additional property tax for the city---a total of $86,000 in claimed new annual revenue for a city whose projected 2011 revenue already exceeds $16 million.

In the end it will be up to residents to decide whether the estimated economic benefits are enough to justify gutting the city’s zoning code and allowing a mega Get-Go to be installed in the primarily residential southwest corner of the city. 

When will that vote take place? Stay tuned.
Law Director Tim Paluf promised to answer that question prior to the November 22^nd Council meeting.

Three Cheers for Civic Involvement and Local Elections

The October 25^th Highland Heights Council meeting left me cheering for two things: civic involvement and frequent local elections.

Hurrah for Civic Involvement

Not much business was transacted at the October 25^th Council meeting, which isn’t really surprising. 

Things usually quiet down right before Council elections--after all, if you were running for reelection, the last thing you’d want to do is cast an unpopular vote or make a controversial decision.

The main event was Mayor Scott Coleman’s acceptance of a $5,000 donation from the Highland Heights Lions Club.

The Lions Club is a civic group dedicated to doing good works in and for our community. They announced last spring that they wanted to make the donation as a way to mark and celebrate their 50^th anniversary this year. It was their wish that the money be used to build a gazebo on the new municipal center green space.

Councilwoman Cathy Murphy, herself a Lions Club member, arranged a small post-meeting reception to celebrate the event.

I was a bit surprised when, over cake, a long time Lions Club member commented, somewhat apologetically, about the size of the donation---he pointed out that it was relatively modest compared to the gazebo’s actual cost.

I told him he was wrong to focus just on the dollar figure.

It was the Lions Club’s donation that kept the gazebo project on track and brought it to fruition this year---a rare accomplishment in a world where decisions sometimes seem to be made at a glacial pace.  (Council deliberated more than 2 years before finally deciding to tear down the decrepit, substandard Old Church Building, thereby creating the new city green space.)

The Lions Club donation provided the inspiration and motivation to make the gazebo a reality.

Ground has been broken. The project is already underway. That timetable would not have been accomplished but for the Lions Club and their generosity.

This just goes to show: civic involvement matters.

Civic involvement can make a big difference in getting things done in our city

Civil involvement is a very good thing.  

Former Mayor Fran Hogg demonstrated positive civic involvement at the Council meeting as well.

Although she’s kept a relatively low profile since leaving office, Hogg came to the Council meeting to share some good news.
When the meeting was opened to the public, she stepped forward to laud one of the city’s good corporate citizens: Phillips Electric. Hogg told Council that Newsweek Magazine just ranked Phillips #9 on its list of global companies that engage in green/sustainable practices---a ranking based on both environmental factors and transparency

Hogg commented,

“We are really lucky to have them here. It's not a U.S. company so they could locate anywhere in world. It’s important that we let them know that we appreciate them.”

Hogg suggested that the city send a letter of appreciation or pass a resolution acknowledging Phillips’ national recognition and commending the company for its good business practices.

A very good suggestion---from another involved citizen who, like the Lions Club, cares deeply about the city and its residents.

Let’s Hear It for Frequent Local Elections

Although Council didn’t do much, the Drainage Committee had a pretty busy night.

Drainage is the least visible---and in some ways least exciting---of all the Council committees, but it serves a very important purpose: it’s responsible for developing and overseeing the city’s storm water management system and it’s a resource for residents with flooding problems.

Needless to say, the committee has been very, very busy this year. 
 

Councilwoman Cathy Murphy, the chair, has served on the Drainage Committee since her first term on Council. She’s very dedicated, but the work can be very frustrating. It can be hard to get things done.

Locally, the Drainage Committee looks to the Service Department and the city engineer for help, but the reality is that drainage issues are added to regular workloads, and the amount earmarked in the city budget to address drainage issues is pretty small.

For the last several years Murphy and the Committee have been working on getting the Jefferson Drive/Highland Road sewer backups addressed. They came close last fall---but the County, who is responsible for the work, rejected the bids. A more modest relining project is currently on the table. Here’s hoping the County moves forward with it this time around.

After sitting in on this week’s Drainage Committee meeting and listening to residents’ horror stories (one couple said they are afraid to go to sleep if it’s raining, for fear of what they might face in the morning) -- I left thinking: Thank goodness for election years. 

There’s nothing like an upcoming local election to motivate the powers that be to pay attention to residents and commit the resources needed to solve their problems.

While Murphy couldn’t promise that it would happen overnight, she was finally able to assure the residents in attendance that their problems were on the city’s radar and that they would absolutely be addressed in the coming year. 

There’s nothing like an upcoming local election to encourage responsiveness to residents’ concerns.

 Given that, wouldn’t it be great if local elections were held every year?

Upcoming Events

• Election Day: Tuesday November 8^th.
• Buddhist Tzu Chi Foundation Open House: Sunday, November 6^th, noon to 3 pm., 1076 Ford Road. There will be a vegetarian food sale, games and activities, craft demonstrations and musical performances.

Gone Fishing

Regular readers may wonder why I haven't blogged recently. I was out of town for several weeks and am just now catching up with everything I missed.
While the mayoral race apparently heated up in my absence, things on the Council side have been pretty quiet.
The Oct. 18 Committee of the Whole meeting was cancelled, so I have nothing to report from last night.
Council will hold its next regular meeting on Oct. 25th. I'll have more on that next week.

Avoiding Hard Decisions And Taking the Easy Way Out

I left the Sept. 13^th Council meeting disappointed and disgusted.
City leaders decided to play Santa Claus, instead of prioritizing needs and making hard decisions about spending public money.

Council’s Cop-Out

As regular readers of this blog know, while Mayor Scott Coleman’s 2011 budget gave short-shrift to road repairs and ignored other significant city infastructure issues---like flooding problems and the failing Highland Road water main---he made sure to include a $175,000 appropriation to build a new Party Barn Pavilion (PBP) in the park.

By all appearances that appropriation fulfills a campaign pledge that Coleman made when first ran for mayor in 2003---a fact seemingly confirmed by City Recreation Director David Ianiro, who told Council at a Sept. 6^th Committee of the Whole meeting, “We’ve been trying to get the building for 8 years”.  

Significantly, the $ 175,000 appropriation was in addition to $629,850 in regular revenue designated for park and recreation use this year. 

Dave Ianiro, who woefully underestimated the cost of an earlier version of the PBP, confidently told Council that the latest PBP building would cost just $45,000 to erect---a real bargain.

Meanwhile, Council questioned whether the PBP was really a top priority park need. It focused its attention on something studiously ignored by Mayor Coleman, Recreation Director Dave Ianiro and the city’s Park & Recreation Commission (P&R)--- something that directly impacts almost every park visitor---the rutted and badly deteriorated park roads.

Council decided to solicit bids for both the PBP and for repaving a portion of the park roads, to get an idea of how much each project would cost.  In a prior meeting, residents were lead to believe that after looking at the bids, Council would decide which project or projects to pursue---while keeping within the mayor’s $175,000 appropriation.

The bids were opened at the end of August.

The repaving bid came in at $261,225. That cost includes (as recommended by the city engineer) repaving the heavily used park entrance road with full depth asphalt and using a cheaper, less durable “chip seal” process on the Woodside access road.

There was only one bid submitted for the PBP. That bid was 128.50%  more than the city engineer’s cost estimate.  The cost for the PBP building alone was $ 68,700 ---152.67% more than the $45,000 figure that Rec Director Dave Ianiro so confidently quoted to Council. With required “observation” fees factored in, the PBP project’s total cost ended up at $117,405.20—a figure that doesn’t include architect’s fees or renovating the Old Pool House bathrooms---work that Ianiro claims must also be done. 

Council acted on the bids at its Sept. 13^th meeting.

That’s where my disgust and disappointment come in.

Councilman Bob Mastrangelo was the only council member to balk at the PBP bid. He pointed out that Council,

“rejected the first greenspace gazebo bid for less of an overage. No one’s discussed that”. 

Mastrangelo was referring to the fact that Council decided to re-advertise the greenspace gazebo project after the only bid submitted exceeded the city engineer’s cost estimate---by a much lower amount than the PBP bid. That decision resulted in a significantly lower gazebo bid the second time around, one within the cost estimates.

Did Mastrangelo’s comments spur Council to re-advertise the PBP project due to the one, wildly overinflated bid it received? No, they did not.

Even worse, instead of considering and prioritizing all of the city’s infastracture needs before making a decision, Council simply took the easy way out----it approved both park projects, at a total cost of $384,000+---more than twice the mayor’s $175,000 appropriation.

Legislative & Finance Committee Chairman, Councilman Leo Lombardo, justified the decision by pointing out that the PBP bid came in under $175,000. He argued that the city could afford to pony up the additional cost to do both projects ($209,000) because the city was raking in income taxes at levels above projected amounts.

Basically the messages sent by Mayor Coleman and Council were these:

1. The city’s got plenty of money, so it’s okay to spend it.
2. It’s okay to spend capital improvement money without considering, discussing or deciding which of the city’s infrastructure needs are most important. 
3. It’s okay to let someone else (down the line) worry about more problematic things, like the city’s crumbling city streets, flooded basements, and the failing Highland Road water main.  
4. It’s definitely okay to be Santa Claus in an election year.

Merry Christmas, Dave Ianiro!

Not surprisingly, Councilman Bob Mastrangelo voted against accepting the bid for the PBP project. He said that he could,

 “not support (the PBP) because there are other capital projects in the city that need more attention.

For example, the new ambulance.  We talked of leasing it (using a five year, lease-to-own arrangement) because we didn’t have the finances to pay for it. We should just pay for it.

We’ve been talking about the park entrance.

We shouldn’t approve any money until P&R gives us a 5 year plan and not just a wish list. I’ve been asking for that for three years.”

Councilman Bob Mastrangelo was willing to prioritize and make hard choices.

 

It’s very disappointing that Mayor Coleman and the rest of Council weren’t willing to do that too.

Get-Go Update

Developer Lance Osborne appeared at the September 13^th Council meeting and asked Council to file his initiative petition with the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections.…Well sort of. 

What Osborne actually did was draft an Ordinance for Council to pass. The Ordinance text was a boiled down version of his proposed zoning law changes---once again packaged together and presented as an all or nothing issue.

Osborne also asked Council to put his proposed zoning laws on the May 201 primary ballot---even though the Highland Heights Charter requires initiative issues to be voted on during general or regular municipal elections, elections that are likely to attract the maximum number of voters from all political parties.

Law Director Tim Paluf told Council that Osborne’s request complied with Charter requirements, but he has remained mum about what happens next.
Although the Charter seems to indicate that Council must file Osborne’s petition with the Board of Elections, Paluf could possibly rule the petition legally insufficient, thereby rendering it ineligible for filing downtown. At a minimum, the city can file a protest, challenging the petition due to its obvious substantive and procedural deficiencies.

Meanwhile, Osborne was the sole presenter at the September 15^th Highland Heights Economic Development Committee (EDC) meeting, armed with drawings and a site plan for the Catalano’s lot.

Osborne told the EDC that his deal to buy the Catalano’s property is contingent on his getting the necessary zoning law changes and permits to operate the proposed mega “Get-Go” at the site.
He stands to make a ton of money from the deal, as it involves a lease-back arrangement with Giant Eagle for the “Get-Go” portion of the property.

Although Council has taken a “hands off” approach to Osborne’s project, Finance Director Anthony Ianiro---who heads the EDC---clearly wasn’t following their lead. He seems to be setting the stage to pit the EDC against Council---something which Osborne’s supporters would undoubtedly relish. Since the finance director is one of Mayor Scott Coleman’s right hand men, Tony Ianiro's actions may very well signal where Coleman stands on the proposed mega “Get-Go”.

The finance director told the EDC members (who normally meet just 4 times a year) that they could expect a follow-up meeting  “in a couple of weeks” to decide “what we want to do” and to “make a recommendation (to support the project) or not.”

Since the EDC is focused solely on development---and not on other things, such as supporting the city’s zoning laws or protecting residential neighborhoods---there is little doubt what will happen when the EDC votes on the Osborne/Giant Eagle mega “Get-Go” plan. 

Osborne told the EDC that he thought the project would generate about 100 jobs---part-time and some fulltime jobs. While at first blush that might seem to be a big deal, in reality it probably won’t mean a whole lot of new income for the city.  A bunch of minimum wage, part-time jobs simply don’t translate into a significant amount of new tax money for the city.

To put it in perspective, consider this.

Tony Ianiro told the EDC that Catalano’s--- which employed more than 100 people,

“wasn’t a huge picture (tax wise). They paid maybe $25,000 to $35,000 in payroll tax”.”

That’s $25,000 to $35,000 out of a $16 million budget.

Based on the city’s experience with Catalano’s, it’s more than likely that the 100 jobs touted by Osborne would similarly be “(not) huge picture” as far as additional payroll tax collections are concerned.

Meanwhile the Catalano’s property continues to generate revenue for the city---in the form of property taxes that Giant Eagle pays each year, based on the property’s $1.3 million appraised value.

As the finance director remarked,

“Property taxes are property taxes. The city always gets property tax whether there’s a business there or not.”

Quick Hits

Candidate No-shows

The Sun Messenger is holding interview sessions with Highland Heights candidates this week. Attending the sessions is important for any candidate who hopes to win a Sun Messenger endorsement.

Ted Anderson--who vehemently pledged to run again after he was soundly defeated by Councilwoman Lisa Stickan for the Ward One council seat two years ago---was a no-show.

It’s unclear whether Anderson lacked interest or was simply too busy to attend the endorsement interview.

Shred That Paper!

The next city paper shredding day is coming up soon.

 The service is free, and there will be helpers on hand to assist in unloading whatever you bring.

Bring your old files and other paper to the Service Center Garage (behind the police station/fire house) on Saturday October 1, from 9 am to 1 pm.

Absentee/Vote-by-Mail Ballots

The Ohio Secretary of State, Jon Husted, has barred the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections (BOE) from sending out postcards inviting voters to vote by mail---something the BOE has done for the past several years.

That means if you want an absentee/vote-by-mail ballot for the November 2011 election, you have to spend your own time and money to get one.

You can call the Board of Elections (216 443-3298) and ask them to send you an absentee/vote-by-mail application or you can go online and download a customized application (http://www.boe.cuyahogacounty.us/en-US/votebymailapplication.aspx).

Or you can ask Council President Scott Mills to deliver an application to you.  

Apparently Mills picked up a bunch of absentee/vote-by-mail applications the last time he was downtown.

He tells me he’s willing to share.

All you have to do is call him (440 477-5883) or e-mail him (smills@highlandhts.com) and he’ll bring one right to your door.

Whatever method you choose, you’ll have to fill out the application and either mail it back or drop it by the BOE office downtown for processing.  Only then will the BOE be allowed to send you an absentee/vote-by-mail ballot.

Any more hoops you want to make us jump through, Mr. Husted?

Waiting for Developer Lance Osborne’s Next Move

Developer Lance Osborne has two options after Council rejected his initiative petition : step back and reassess or continue his campaign to gut Highland Heights’ zoning laws.

A recap

In late June, developer Lance Osborne began spearheading Giant Eagle’s effort to erect a mega “Get-Go” gas station, car wash and convenience store/café on the Catalano’s grocery store property.

One big problem: Highland Heights’ zoning laws don’t allow the Catalano’s property to be used in that fashion.

Osborne seemed to think that his involvement would engender immediate political support for the project. Council, however, balked at putting a Get-Go related rezoning issue on the November 2011 ballot.
Osborne, therefore, came up with his own zoning-related initiative petition and recruited a battalion of non-resident minions, who scoured the city to collect the minimum required number of valid voter signatures (290).

Where Things Stand Now

In a prior blog I described the changes that Osborne wants to make to the Highland Heights' zoning code and explained how Osborne's proposal would operate to effectively gut a significant portion of the city's current zoning code.  

But that’s not the only problem with Osborne's initiative petition.

Ohio courts tend to look favorably on initiative petitions---as long as they comply with applicable procedural and legal requirements and as long as the proposed issues are clear and not confusing to voters.
Osborne’s petition fails on these points as well. For example:

1. To promote clarity and transparency, Ohio law provides that all proposed legislation must be limited to and address a “single subject”.
   Osborne’s petition appears to run afoul of this rule, as it proposes changes to two different city ordinances: Ordinance 1131.04 and Ordinance 1131.05.
   The fact that 1131.04 and 1131.05 both pertain to zoning doesn’t mean they can be lumped together as a “single subject”. Their different numbers is just one indication that the ordinances are, in fact, separate and distinct laws, dealing with separate subjects.  Ordinance 1131.04, entitled “Use Regulations,” details the city’s different non-residential zoning classifications, while Ordinance 1131.05, entitled “Performance Standards,” set out various safety and other standards applicable to all non-residential parcels in the city.
   
   By lumping all of his proposed zoning law changes together in a single petition Osborne is clearly trying to present an “all or nothing” choice to voters----because he needs all of his proposed zoning changes to be approved in order to put a mega “Get-Go” on the Catalano’s property.
   Under the “single subject” rule, however, Highland Heights residents are entitled to vote on each of Osborne’s proposed changes separately, choosing for themselves whether they want to change one, both or neither ordinance.
   
   
2. Petitions are supposed to clearly and fully inform voters what the proposed new law entails by setting out the existing law, with strikethroughs of language to be dropped and bolded text indicating language to be added.
   
   Osborne’s petition showed only what his versions of Ordinances 1131.04 and 1131.05 would look like. He didn’t include the current ordinances or show how his proposed language differs from what is currently there.
   Bottom line, residents were kept in the dark, unable to determine the meaning or significance of Osborne’s proposed zoning law changes.
   
   
3.  Osborne’s petition does not contain any “ballot ready” text.
   
   Instead, it sets out---in three long pages---full of versions of what Ordinance 1131.04 and 1131.05 would look like, if Highland Heights residents approve his proposed changes. 
   Clearly the Board of Elections can’t put the entire 3 page petition on the ballot; there’s no room for it. Unfortunately, because of the way he structured it, Osborne’s petition doesn’t clearly indicate to the Board of Elections---or to anyone else---what particular language the petition-signers agreed could be put on the ballot.

Several sources told me that Law Director Tim Paluf sent a legal memorandum to Council last week, advising them that Osborne’s petition was defective for some of the reasons discussed above.  Following Paluf’s advice, Council unanimously rejected the petition last Tuesday.

The ball is now in Osborne’s court. 

Highland Heights Charter section 8.01 reads:

“If Council fails to pass such proposed ordinance…the petitioners through the Committee named on such petition may at the next regular meeting of Council request in writing that it be submitted to a vote of the electors. Thereupon, Council shall provide for submitting the petitioned ordinance… to the electors at the next general or regular Municipal election occurring more than ninety (90) days after the filing of such petition..”

Even if Osborne’s petitioner committee makes such a request at the regular Council meeting this week, that might not be the end of it.  Law Director Tim Paluf told Council last Tuesday that he may

“determine that the petition is not proper to go to the Board of Elections to be voted on… I’m still determining what will happen, once action is taken tonight.”

Even if developer Lance Osborne exercises his rights under Charter section 8.01 and forces Council to put his initiative issue on the ballot, it is unlikely that the Board of Election will approve submitting his proposed zoning law changes to voters as an “all or nothing” package. It is equally unlikely that any vote will be held this November because less than 90 days remain before the November 2011 election and the petition has not yet been filed with the Board of Elections.

It will be interesting to see what Osborne decides to do tomorrow---press ahead or take a step back and reassess his approach. 

He may have the right to steamroll his petition to get it on the ballot, but if Osborne does that, he’ll be going it alone, without any support from Council.