Are They Putting The Cart Before the Horse?

It was a pretty packed agenda at the Committee of the Whole meeting on April 22nd, but the two hot button issues boiled down, once again, to the City Hall church building vs. the old pool house.

This is the second go-round on this issue (see my March blog).

For those who need a reminder, here's the deal with the church building:

According to Bill Hlavin of Bass Energy, he told the city that they needed to buy the church building in order to put a gas well on the city hall property. There is a paper trail showing that the city actively pursued buying the church property after meeting with Hlavin, but the gas drilling deal fell apart before the mayor actually signed a lease to put a gas well there.

So the city bought the church property for the property, not the building.

Council president Scott Mills told residents last year that it was not safe for them to accompany the council members when they toured the building.

The city obtained an estimate from CT Consultants for the cost of removing the building. Based on that estimate, $138,000 was set aside in the budget for that work, with the hope/expectation that the cost could be reduced by selling material inside the building for salvage (i.e. copper piping) and by using the building for a controlled burn fire fighting exercise.

CT Consultant's estimate to renovate the church building? $ 773,000.

Some difference, huh?

I have been told by those who have seen it (remember, the public has been kept out because the building is unsafe) that the church building is not connected to the city sewer system (it has a septic tank), it is riddled with mold, it has remained unheated for the last two years and, given its age, it does not meet ADA accessibility standards and is not at all energy efficient.

In the legal business, it would be dubbed an attractive nuisance.

Council members appeared to agree that the building was in sorry shape and something needed to be done about it, but several council members are dead set against taking it down.

Why? Great question!

Those council members apparently want to use the money to renovate the old pool house instead.

For those who need a reminder, here's the deal with the old pool house building:

The Parks & Recreation Committee (P&R) were tasked last year to come up with a new five year plan. Councilman Pilla specifically asked them to come back with a 1 to 10 list, listing projects by priority.

P&R didnt do that. Instead they grouped things in different clusters, without coming up with a single priorities list to discuss with council.

While there was a good deal of discussion (and agreement) that the park entrance was the # 1 safety issue for the park, the Recreation Director David Ianiro announced that what P&Z really wanted was to renovate the old pool house instead--and they wanted to do it immediately.

The reason given for that decision: they wanted to do it "for the camp kids."

Ianiro said that when it rains, the campers go to Millridge, which is costly and inconvenient. Councilman Anderson later explained that it was a matter of safety. His explanation? " You know when it starts to rain, the kids get scared."

Some data about the camp:

The camp runs 8 weeks in the summer and involves approximately 100 kids a week.

The camp ran at an approximate $ 37,000 deficit last year. This deficit significantly contributed to the Ianiro's submission of a 2009 budget that operates in the red (expenses exceed revenue)--the first time ever in the city's history.

It cost less than $ 200 a year, on average, over the last five years to use Millridge on rainy camp days.

Millridge has a tornado shelter.

The proposed expansion would turn the old pool house into a large building that has a capacity to hold approximately 190 people.

Although P&R estimated, in their five year plan, that it would cost $ 75,000 to renovate the pool house, at this point that estimate looks to be way too low--it looks like the project will cost at least $ 175,000.

To get things started, Mayor Coleman stated that he would exercise his spending authority (he has a $3,000 spending limit) and would hire an architect to do some preliminary drawings, to give council a better idea of the cost/vision for renovating the old pool house. The mayor chose an architect who serves on the city's Architectural Review Board (the body that would have to approve the renovation plan before work could begin).

Mr. Wallis just submitted a bill for $ 3,100 to the city for that work. And it turns out, it appears that he should not have been asked to do that work because Ohio law (Ohio Revised Code 2921.42) and the parallel city ordinance (525.10) ban public employees from:

• Hav(ing) an interest in the profits or benefits of a public contract entered into by or for the use of the political subdivision ...with which the public official is connected.
• Having an interest in the profits or benefits of a public contract that is not let by competitive bidding if required by law and that involves more than one hundred fifty dollars.

Although Mayor Coleman said last December that he supported the plan to renovate the old pool house, he did not put any money in the 2009 budget (which he presented to council) for that work. The money for the renovation would have to come out of the city general (taxpayer provided) fund because the park and recreation budget is already operating in the red.

Apparently choosing to ignore that fact, Councilman Anderson attacked his fellow councilpersons on the Legislative and Finance Committee (Legan, Lombardo, Murphy) --suggesting that they were responsible for the fact that the Mayor did not ask for an allocation of money in the 2009 budget for the old pool house renovation project.

The reality is that Anderson, and the rest of council, approved the 2009 budget unanimously and no one, including Anderson, raised any question or issue with the fact that the budget did not include funding for the old pool house renovation.

Hearing Anderson speak, I was reminded of the scene from Casablanca, when Captain Rinaldi states (as he pockets his own gambling winnings) that he is "shocked, shocked" that gambling is going on at Humphrey Bogart's club (Rick's Place).

One final fact: when the budget was passed last month, revenue exceeded expenses by less than $ 300,000--a thin cushion indeed.

So where do things stand?

Those council members who suggested that other options should be explored, in lieu of demolishing the old church building, were tasked with coming up with some concrete ideas/suggested options before the next Committee of the Whole Meeting.

Fire Chief Turner agreed to gather information about whether the building could be used for a controlled burn.

And Mayor Coleman asked council to approve two items next week, with regard to the old pool house:

1. He asked council to approve a contract for $ 6,900 to have a different architect to come up with more plans and specs for the project (that brings the preliminary drawing costs to a total of $ 10,000).
2. He also wants council to authorize--next week---putting the renovation project out to bid.

Yep, they have no drawings or plans, they have no cost estimates, and there is no money allocated in the budget to renovate the pool house, but the Mayor wants council to authorize putting the project out to bid.

Isn't that putting the cart (or the old pool house) before the horse?

Were they just shooting us through the grease?

After attending a meeting between Cutter Oil, two Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) inspectors, and Highland Heights officials a few weeks ago, I named Fire Chief Bill Turner my hero of the day.

Turner, at that meeting, pushed back against Cutter Oil and ODNR, and insisted that the state fire code had not been preempted with regard to requirements for new access drives to drilling sites in residential neighborhoods.

His concern was to ensure that Highland Heights fire trucks and emergency rescue vehicles will be able to safely and quickly access and egress the site, should something go wrong with a gas well placed in the middle of a residential neighborhood---no doubt he was thinking about the explosion in Bainbridge caused by Ohio Valley Energy's frac drilling in a residential neighborhood.

Unfortunately, Turner was almost immediately beaten back and told, apparently by the ODNR inspectors, that the state fire code requirements "were preempted in 3406.3."

That is not entirely correct.

3406.3 is actually a provision in one specific state fire code regulation. It is found in OAC Ann. 1301:7-7-34(f)(3).

That regulation applies to (and only to) the prevention, control and mitigation of dangerous conditions related to storage, use, dispensing, mixing and handling of flammable and combustible liquids. This is what it says:

(F) Section 3406 Special operations (1) 3406.1 General. This paragraph shall cover the provisions for special operations which include, but are not limited to, storage, use, dispensing, mixing or handling of flammable and combustible liquids.

(3) 3406.3. Well drilling and operating. Facilities and activities that are engaged in the exploration, development and production of crude oil and natural gas and that are regulated under Chapter 1509. of the Revised Code and Chapter 1501. of the Administrative Code are hereby excluded from regulation under the provisions of this code.

The state fire code with regard to access drives if found in an entirely different regulation: OAC Ann 1301:7-7-05. Fire service features.

There is no similar preemption provision in 1301:7-7-05.

1301:7-7-05 is quite specific, as to what the requirements are for constructing access roads that are wide enough and durable enough to accommodate fire trucks and allow sufficient turn-around round room, so that fire trucks and rescue vehicles can safely and quickly access and egress a site.

So, were the ODNR inspectors shooting us all through the grease when they claimed that drilling companies--who want to drill gas wells near sand boxes and swing sets and homes in residential neighborhoods--do not have to build access drives that comply with the state fire codes?

It surely looks like that to me.

ODNR = Oh Do Not Regulate

# # #

Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire

There were at least 100 of us ordinary people packed into a church meeting room in Bainbridge last Tuesday night, April 14th, waiting to hear from the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) director, Sean Logan.

At least half of the crowd were Bainbridge residents, whose homes, water, and lives have been completely and totally disrupted by "urban frac drilling" conducted by Ohio Valley Energy (OVE) in their Bainbridge neighborhood.

As Logan admitted, ODNR doesn't have the staff to actually supervise the drilling of gas wells in residential neighborhoods--or to conduct regular inspections of them either.

According to Logan, OVE violated industry safety standards in drillng the Bainbridge well, which caused gas to travel along the shale and into the acquifer (underground water pool) beneath these residents' homes. The gas has seeped into homes, already causing one house to explode. Others have had to be evacuated, due to the continuing seepages of gas accumulating in homes.

And OVE's take on the situation? In a letter sent to a Highland Heights resident last month, OVE said:

All of Northeast Ohio is aware of the incident in Bainbridge. ODNR has issued a thorough report concluding the invasion of high pressure gas in the surface-production casing. This resulted in a gas eruption in one dwelling with no injuries. Two pages of this report praised OVE for their response and "taking care" of the problem. OVE has not been issued any violations relating to this incident and has been told by ODNR that many operators would have simply "walked away".

A "gas eruption"-- not an explosion? Liar, liar, pants on fire.

An order issued by ODNR on April 16th contains these findings:

The Geauga County Emergency Management Agency notified ODNR, Division of Mineral Resources Management (DMRM) that there had been a explosion that damaged a home (in Bainbridge Township).

After completing an investigation, DMRM determined that accumulation and confinement of deep, high-pressure gas in surface-production casing annulus...resulted in over-pressurization of the annulus...which resulted in the invasion, or migration, of natural gas...into natural fractures in the bedrock...This gas migrated vertically through fractures into the overlying acquifers, discharged or exited the acquifers through local water wells, and entered some inhabited structures in the area...

As a proximate result thereof, a public water well ...was substantially disrupted by contamination, dimunition, or interuption by Ohio Valley Energy Corporation's operation of ...(the) well.

OVE has "taken care" of the problem? Liar, liar, pants on fire.

The Bainbridge house expoded in December 2007. Many residents in that neighborhood have been unable to use their water wells since that time. They have huge water tanks sitting in their garages, with visible and unsightly hoses bringing water into their homes. These residents also live with gas detection monitors placed throughout their homes, and those monitors continue to register at unsafe (and unhealthy) levels. Some residents have to open a window or turn on an exhaust fan every time they take a shower or do laundry--or whenever the gas meters in their basements start registering too high---winter be darned.

This is their life---thanks to OVE and ODNR.

OVE and ODNR have been talking for a year about getting the residents hooked up to city water---a new expense for homeowners who, up until OVE conducted urban frac drilling in their neighborhood, only had to pay the cost of electricity to pump water from their own wells.

Logan's big announcement was that they were about to issue an order, requiring OVE to provide city water to some of the impacted residents.

Maybe OVE and ODNR thinks that is sufficient to "take care" of the "problem." But the Bainbridge residents would disagree.

As one woman pointed out, she is a complete victim of OVE and ODNR. She did not consent to the drilling in her neighborhood; she didnt even know it was happening. Yet, the value of her house has diminished so much, as a result of the damage done by the OVE well, that she can't even refinance her mortgage. He bank told her no, because her home has no marketable value.

When Logan was asked what the State of Ohio intended to do for these Bainbridge residents, whose homes and lives have been so traumatically impacted by the OVE well---which ODNR approved but never supervised---he merely shrugged and said

ODNR was powerless to do anything. It couldn't shut down the OVE Bainbridge well, it couldn't refuse to issue new permits to OVE, and most importantly, it couldn't do anything to make sure that Bainbridge doesn't happen again---in my neighborhood, or in yours.

Liar, liar, pants on fire.

Ohio Revised Code § 1509.02 states:

The division of mineral resources management has sole and exclusive authority to regulate the permitting, location, and spacing of oil and gas wells within the state. The regulation of oil and gas activities is a matter of general statewide interest that requires uniform statewide regulation, and this chapter and rules adopted under it constitute a comprehensive plan with respect to all aspects of the locating, drilling, and operating of oil and gas wells within this state, including site restoration and disposal of wastes from those wells.

As the ODNR inspectors (all 3 of them for the 3000+ wells in Cuyahoga County) repeatedly tell cities and citizens alike, ODNR has complete and total authority over gas drilling and gas wells in the State of Ohio---and there is nothing we ordinary citizens can do about it.

ODNR helpless? Liar, Liar, pants on fire.

ODNR helpless? It gets to write all the rules.

ODNR = Oh Do Not Regulate

# # #