DRAFT MINUTES COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE OF WADSWORTH CITY COUNCIL Administrative Conference Room May 16, 2017, 6:30 P.M. President of Council Bob Thurber

Transcription

1 DRAFT MINUTES COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE OF WADSWORTH CITY COUNCIL Administrative Conference Room May 16, 2017, 6:30 P.M. PRESIDING: MEMBERS PRESENT: OFFICIALS PRESENT: PRESS REPRESENTATIVES: VISITORS SPEAKING: President of Council Bob Thurber Bruce Darlington, Patty Haskins, David Williams, John Sharkey, Bob Titus, Tom Stugmyer Mayor Robin Laubaugh, Director of Public Service Robert Patrick, Assistant Director of Public Service Harry Stark, Auditor Catherine Fix, Safety Director Matt Hiscock, L aw Director Norman Brague, Human Resources Manager Jim Kovacs*, Clerk of Council Tammy Guenther Emily Canning Dean, The Post None Mr. Thurber called the meeting of May 16, 2017 to order at 6:30 p.m. I. ROLL CALL: The Clerk called the roll. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mr. Williams made a motion, seconded by Ms. Haskins, to approve the minutes of May 3, An all in favor vote was taken and all Council members present voted in favor of the motion. The minutes for Committee of the Whole, May 3, 2017, were approved. III. EXECUTIVE SESSION: COMPENSATION (Supplemental Appropriation): Ms. Haskins made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Sharkey, to hold an executive session to consider the compensation of City employees and officials. A roll call vote was taken. Ayes: Darlington, Haskins, Sharkey, Stugmyer, Williams. Nays: None. Committee of the Whole entered executive session at approximately 6:32 p.m. The executive session was adjourned and the regular meeting of the Committee of the Whole resumed at 6:37 p.m. (*Mr. Kovacs departed after the executive session.) IV. SPEEDWAY PRESENTATION: Mr. Thurber encouraged questions of Council as they went forward with the presentation. He told the presenters that it was not unlike a Council meeting where information was presented but there was no back and forth, however. He asked that they all proceed decently and in order, without cross-talking. Mr. Patrick first gave a quick summary. They d had a Council public hearing on the zoning ordinance on May 3. All of them were well aware; the Speedway property was annexed into the City in March, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE May 16, 2017 Page 1 of 10

2 2016. In June, 2016, the City s zoning classification was adopted by way of Council ordinance. During the summer and fall that year, there were formal discussions with the City about site plans. In December, a site plan and additional zoning application was placed on the Planning Commission s agenda. In January, the public hearing was scheduled but then removed at the applicant s request. It came back in February this year. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 13 for the zoning amendment. It was unanimously recommended that Council adopt and rezone the entire dual jurisdiction lot 9856 to C-3 Commercial. Mr. Patrick pointed to the lot they were talking about, at Akron Road (SR-261) and Interstate 76. He showed the parcel owned by Speedway Corporation and the one next door, also owned by them. When it came to Planning Commission last year, early, it was requested that one of the lots be split, with one side as C-3 and the other R- Residential. Located next to it was also C-3 zoning. The Service Director showed all the zoning in the area. He pointed to the area that was Wadsworth Crossings, which was all C-3. The Restored Church of God located there (near Giant Eagle and Interstate 76) was C-5. It was C-3 on the southwest side of the interstate. Across the interstate was the Speedway property with the split zoning. The area was C-3 consistent with the lot next door. The parcel in the back was R-1 and the adjoining lot, which was in the City, was also R-1. The areas around were R-1 Township. The red line in the drawing (on the Smart Board) represented the City land. That was the overview of the land around and the current zoning. As he said earlier, the Planning Commission thought C-3 was appropriate for that lot to be consistent with what was next door and across the street. The question that Council had before them was the zoning for a part of the parcel. Currently, again, it was R-1 and the application was to make it C-3, consistent with the rest of the parcel. They needed to decide what should the area be into the future, and should it be R-1 as it was currently? With that, they would anticipate for residential to stay that way for some of those properties. Would they anticipate in the future, for the surrounding R-1 to annex into the City, and that the R-1 would stay. They had some conversations, and as they knew, the Economic Development Director had been approached by developers and commercial businesses and companies. So there was some interest in the area. Mr. Patrick had also seen some sketches and some plans thrown around that showed a lot of commercial up in that area. Mr. Darlington asked what the cross-hatch on the map designated. Mr. Patrick said it was the zoning applied for and given last year. Speedway owned a property, which was C-3 and the Speedway purchased another parcel, which was R-1. So, last year, they said they wanted to split the one property with joint zoning, with C-3 in one area, consistent with the abutting area. It was approved. At that point, the other side remained (R-2). Mr. Darlington asked the significance of the red line. Mr. Patrick said it indicated the City limits. Mr. Darlington asked whether the property last rezoned has the red line in the middle between the other two red lines. Ms. Haskins said the property in question was the trapezoid shape. It (the trapezoid area or shape) was rezoned last year, Mr. Darlington understood, and was the area they were asked to rezone. Mr. Titus asked how they would make sure the property behind it, which was currently zoned R-1, was not landlocked, since there was no frontage, no easement, no commercial easement. How would that COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE May 16, 2017 Page 2 of 10

3 property still be viable for that landowner? Mr. Sharkey asked if that was their responsibility. Mr. Titus thought so. Mr. Sharkey stated that he wanted to know the people in the room and asked if they could go around the room and say names. Mr. Williams interjected a question while the map was still up. He confirmed that the area in the blue was Speedway s property. In their hand-outs, it did not state that, so he asked whether it was in the deed, or was it just a letter of intent. The response from Speedway representatives was that the deed had transferred. Mr. Williams thanked them. Mr. Thurber said individuals who spoke, other than Council and officials should go ahead and give their names and where they were from, as was needed for the record. Mr. Titus reiterated his question about accessing the R-1 zoned property behind Speedway s. Mr. Patrick said the property was right now not in the City, but in the Township. It had frontage at Medina Line Road. Mr. Titus wanted to know how they would make sure it could be accessed from SR-261. Mr. Sharkey wanted to share his perspective with Mr. Titus, but Mr. Titus said he would like to finish with his question first. Mr. Patrick continued by showing where the R-1 property in question had frontage on Medina Line, and where the other properties had frontage. He was not sure how one could get frontage on SR-261, for the property that Mr. Titus spoke about. Mr. Titus said he understood there was there now an easement. Was that correct? Mr. Patrick thought he might be referring to another parcel in the back. He believed that particular parcel had an easement for access to 261. Mr. Sharkey believed it was where the sign or big billboard was located. Ms. Haskins said it was already C-3 and belonged to Speedway, but Mr. Patrick said it was not Speedway s. Mr. Titus said where the easement was, Speedway owned right now. Would there be an access to SR-261 there for the land behind Speedway? Mr. Patrick did not know how they would give access at that point. The property that was situated back there did not have any frontage on 261. He supposed if the property owner purchased land to give themselves access, it could be a way to do that. That was not the City s decision. Mr. Patrick wanted to note that there had been some talk about a traditional truck stop coming out in the area. The City zoning code did not allow for a traditional truck stop, so that could not happen in that area. The developer would submit plans to site and engineering plans and would go through a process, internally. Discussions would ensue with the engineering firm and traffic studies would be done. ODOT (Ohio Department of Transportation) would get involved because it was a state route with the expressway right there. All of that happened when the developer submitted plans to the Planning Commission; it would go through the Planning Commission process. There had been some questions about curb cuts and other items. Those would be talked about later. Mr. Darlington thought the Master Plan showed the area to be commercial, correct? Mr. Patrick believed that it did. And residential, Mr. Williams added. It was both. It was mixed on the Master Plan, he said. Mr. Patrick said this would be direction for them to know what they wanted the future of the area to be. As they knew, the term spot zoning came up as something that was frowned upon. With the residential there, it would not be consistent if any of the other areas were looked at as commercial. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE May 16, 2017 Page 3 of 10

4 Mr. Sharkey referred to some maps that he brought to the meeting and asked why they had not been included in their discussion. Mr. Patrick said he d seen them. One of the property owners was asking for their property to be rezoned. Mr. Sharkey said that was in line with what he was told Mr. Titus, regarding Mr. Titus worry. Mr. Sharkey thought if people saw the maps, they would have a different idea. They needed to have the whole story brought out. Mr. Patrick said, again, the decision, that they had, was the property owner who did come to them for something, a zoning change. What other folks around considered preliminarily, the City did not have any site plans on any other property around that area. No one had come forward and asked for anything different. Mr. Sharkey said, when that s the real reason they don t want the property zoned that way yet. Mr. Patrick said he could not speak to that. Mr. Patrick asked for any other questions individuals would have. Mr. Darlington referred to the area to the north. One was R-1 and another one was R-1. Were those one lot, or individual lots? He was asking about the area at the T. Mr. Patrick said the lines representing the property lines, and that map, was taken off of the Medina County Tax Maps site. They were parcel boundaries. He was not familiar with ownership of those parcels and how they connected. But, they were individual lots in the Township, Mr. Darlington surmised. Mr. Patrick said, yes, the lines did represent property lines. He did not know who the owners were. Mr. Darlington said it was not like it made any difference, he just wondered how big the parcels were. Mr. Titus confirmed they were all zoned R-1 in the Township. That was correct, said Mr. Patrick. Mr. Darlington had another question, though realized they might now know: how long, or many years ago, had they been R-1. Mr. Patrick assumed it was the original zoning classification (many individuals started talking at once). Mr. Darlington thought it would have been before I-76 was even built. Mr. Sharkey thought it was about Mr. Thurber asked the Speedway representatives for their comments if there were no other questions for Mr. Patrick. Mr. Kumerer introduced himself as the New Build / Rebuilt Construction Department Manager for Speedway. He d had the chance to briefly talk with them a month ago, when they had the initial discussion. He appreciated the opportunity now. The biggest thing that they wanted to portray was that they were extremely excited about the project. Both he and (his cohort) Mark were co-ops for Speedway in the late nineties. They initiated their first geo-tech test in 1999 to start developing this property. In looking at the map, Mr. Kumerer said they could see the area was the next place for development for Wadsworth. They had been a member of the community for a long time, and it was the kind of community they loved to be in. Speedway had grown quite a bit. They had 2,700 stores now, and out of those 2,700, still, in Ohio, was the corporate headquarters, and where they had the most number of stores, with just under 500. When they saw this type of opportunity, that they had an existing store, it would get their new image out there. In this way, Speedway could also benefit the community. Rick (Sams), their region manager, hosted a couple of folks who had the ability to go to Berea, which was a very similar type store. He appreciated the folks who went there. With what Speedway was trying to do with image, they were excited about it and the communities they went to were really excited. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE May 16, 2017 Page 4 of 10

5 Today, they were going on 17 years of commitment, and that was not just people s time, but also a significant amount of financial investment in getting this thing up. They were excited for the ability to be able to start building off of what they d invested so far. He appreciated the introduction from Mr. Patrick, and as he d said, (the zoning) was the first step. They knew they would have continued dialogue on how they could address all of the concerns. Rob (Sweet) would talk about some of the specific concerns. Mr. Thurber mentioned the time constraint and said they had six to eight more minutes. Mr. Kumerer said that was perfect. He just wanted the group to know that they went through this all the time, and had been extremely successful in putting together projects that benefitted the community, Speedway, and the residents around it. He was one hundred percent confident that they could come up with a resolution to benefit to everyone. Mr. Sweet of McBride, Dale, Clarion, said they d seen his face at least a dozen times. He said Andy (Kumerer) had run through the mission statement and vision for Speedway. Mr. Sweet referred to the café, which was the new style store that Speedway was building. Back to the beginning, though, he emphasized they were at the first step in the process. They still had a conditional use permit that they needed to go through, along with a site plan approval and architectural review. They still had variances and technical permits to obtain, in order to build. There was some talk from the previous meeting and he apologized because they probably should have talked a little more about the concerns, but they were focused on the rezoning aspects. They knew the site plan had some modifications and changes. Whatever they heard about still more concerns, they wanted to get it right. They heard a lot about existing driveways. Eight driveways were counted between I-76 and Medina Line Road. Three were associated with Speedway. Their redevelopment proposed eliminate one, so they would have two driveways associated with the Speedway project. They did have a traffic study that supported their layout, which had been reviewed by ODOT and the City Engineer. He would get to the traffic data a bit later. They had received a copy of an executive summary for a traffic study. There was a lot of data that would probably go over people s heads. The big thing to look at was the level of service and how that level of service acted both currently and once the store was built. As they would see in the executive summary, the level of service did not change. They d heard a lot about a truck stop. Truck stops were not permitted in the City. Speedway knew that. Speedway as a company did not offer long term parking, nor did they offer laundry services, or shower facilities and sleeping accommodations. They did not provide emergency repair facilities, vehicles scales or truck washings. They did provide the ability for local commerce to easily fill diesel vehicles and to go into the convenience store and utilize it the way it should be. Mr. Sweet showed a copy of their floor plan, which he produced to prove that they were not a truck stop. He walked quickly through the plan, first showing the location of restrooms. He was sure they all travelled and had been into a truck stop, where they would see a dozen stalls in the men s and women s restrooms. His plan showed two stalls in the men s and two urinals and two stalls in the women s. Again, there was not a place to put a shower or sleeping accommodations, or anything typically found at a truck shop. He pointed to the storage and cooler area with the freezer doors, storage rack, check out area, café, office, backroom, seating area, coffee bar, and main entrances in front and back. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE May 16, 2017 Page 5 of 10

6 Types of vehicles: Mr. Sweet said they d heard a lot of comments about that. Speedway was proposing about 70 percent of their traffic would come from local commerce, not the over the road trucks. These would the FedEx trucks, and the DHL-type delivery trucks. Everybody liked packages and everybody liked Amazon. Landscape vehicles were mentioned, both the diesel trucks that pulled the vehicles and the vehicles themselves; construction support vehicles; governmental vehicles; and then day trippers folks who dropped off cars or perhaps livestock and came back the same day. They anticipated about five vehicles per hour using the truck lanes. This equated to using the 70 percent of that number, which equated to one to one and a half tracker trailers per hour, over a 24 hour time span. He could almost guarantee that their operations department would say the majority of that traffic would happen between 5:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. They might have seen the concept plan and asked why do you have to go so big? It was a good point, said Mr. Sweet. They had to design for the largest, potential user. They did not want any one getting stuck or damaging vehicles, and they did not want the camp being damaged by someone who could not maneuver the site. It would create traffic issues. With the gas station industry, people passed by and they captured trips. They were trip capturers, not trip generators. So, they proposed improvements with the proposed redevelopment. They proposed widening both sides of Akron Road, to install a 50 foot taper and a 125 foot right turning lane, for traffic heading westbound. For traffic heading eastbound and making a left going toward Medina Line Road, they proposed about a 500 foot, left turn lane that would service both entrances into the new development. Mr. Sweet showed a site plan of the area on the Smart Board, areas in red were the proposed improvements. To the east as, traffic moved west, there would be a dedicated right turn lane to dump traffic into the store. He noted that the site plan was older and a little outdated. They were working with staff on a new one, to fix some of the other issues that they had. He showed the truck lane entrances, with a right turn coming in and following through the site and then pick up into the automobile entrances. He showed the left turn coming eastbound, so traffic coming down Akron Road would be able to get into the left turn lanes and get into their driveways. They were taking their traffic and putting it into the dedicated turn lanes. Mr. Sweet said they did not want I-71 or I-76 (traffic). The City did want it and neither did they. He asked them to look at the major interstates. He showed I-76 route from here to New Jersey or NYC. I- 71 went from Cleveland to Louisville. That was a lot of trucks. The areas out there were designed to handle a lot of trucks. They would see, how they built their site, was not designed to accommodate that. Mr. Sweet wanted to take a look at the TA, at the west corner of Lake Road and Route 224. It was a 30-acre property on which the TA sat. Speedway was a four acre property. TA was a 7.5 larger site. There was a full area in the back dedicated to truck parking. There were nine truck lanes. Speedway was offering three. TA had a hotel, which was as Google showed it. Mr. Sweet went to the site earlier that day, and it was a TA-operated hotel with sleeping accommodations. Speedway was not offering that. At TA, there was a Burger King and Starbucks. Again, Speedway was not offering that either. He showed the TA service bays the scales; Speedway was not offering those. The Pilot on the southwest corner had the same kind of set-up, with a large area for truck parking. The property was 16.6 acres, which was four times the size of the Speedway site. It had 11 truck lanes, a scale, CNG fueling, and pedestrian connections, where folks could park their trucks, spend the night at the Super 8 and hit a McDonalds or Arby s and get back on the road. It was not what Speedway was in to and not COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE May 16, 2017 Page 6 of 10

7 what Speedway proposed to do here. They looked to have a place simply for fueling, to get the diesel to the customer and back out on the road. With regard to access to adjoining property, Mr. Sweet said they knew 9074 was landlocked. They also knew that the property to the east was owned by the property exactly to the east of Speedway. It was owned by the same people that owned He pointed out that Beech Tree owned a property here and the property there. Mr. Sweet believed they helped them annex that property into the City when they went through the annexation. Any new development behind Speedway was required to go through the same process as they did the annexation and rezoning. They would also have to do traffic studies and an interstate modification study because they were adding additional trips. ODOT had said to them (Speedway) that they did not have to do an interchange medication study, as it was a redevelopment project. Any kind of development that happened behind them, they would have to go through an interchange modification study, and to make sure they could get utilities services to them as well. Mr. Sweet went through the positives. They would remove a facility that was old, tired and outdated. They hoped it would be a catalyst for new development as seen in other areas. They felt it conformed with the Comprehensive Plan. It proposed new jobs. It provided another option for foods on the side of the entry. It would provide 24-hour operation. Hopefully, they would cater to first responders, people in the medical field, third shift employees, and other folks who might work quirky hours. They looked to have increased tax revenue. In conclusion, they felt the proposed rezoning conformed to City of Wadsworth Comprehensive Plan. The felt it was not a truck stop based on evidence provided in the presentation. They felt the development would meet the needs of families in Wadsworth and the needs of local commerce. Mr. Sweet said they were happy to answer any questions and respectfully requested a rezoning of the area. Mr. Thurber asked for any Council questions of Mr. Sweet or Mr. Kumerer. Mr. Williams had a general question that did not have to do with the zoning. Looking at their plan, he said they compared it to the truck stops in Lodi. Wouldn t it be better to compare to Interstate 71 and Route 83, where those were diesel refueling stations that had convenience stores, gas pumps out front; where Pilot was so successful that Love came in a little bit later. They had traffic lights to maneuver traffic into their stations. Mr. Sweet said they brought up 71 and 76 because they heard a lot of that, and wanted to show why they did not conform with that. Mr. Williams understood, but the other was a diesel refueling station. Mr. Kumerer asked how many acres it was. Mr. Williams did not know, but he had stopped there a lot. Mr. Sharkey said he d used as a refueling stop when he was a driver. They had showers there and a person could get work done on a truck. They had showers there. Mr. Williams said that Love did and Pilot did. Mr. Kumerer did not know if they saw, but Speedway had purchased past convenience stores along the east coast, three years ago. As part of that, they obtained a number of travel centers (that s what he said he would call them instead of truck stops) along the east coast. They recently sold those to Pilot because that was not the business they were in. Mr. Williams understood, but he was just comparing that an interstate location for a diesel refueling that model that he was saying they were. Mr. Kumerer guessed that was what he was saying: this was not that model; from what he heard Mr. Williams saying, it was a traditional truck stop. That was not the model that they were in. And neither COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE May 16, 2017 Page 7 of 10

8 was Pilot, replied Mr. Williams. It was a refueling station. They refueled diesel trucks behind, and there was a bathroom and no facilities for showers. Mr. Darlington asked how many acres was the Berea Speedway site. Someone said it was probably four acres. Mr. Darlington said that he and Mr. Stugmyer went to Berea and saw it. They only thing he saw about Berea that they did not have here, was that the trucks had access off of two roads. With this one, everything was accessed by SR-261. Was that going to be a problem? Mr. Kumerer said it shouldn t be, with the way they had the onsite traffic routing to where they could come in and out, and to be accommodated with the roadway improvements by making the road wider. Mr. Thurber had a question that might be for the area, or Mr. Patrick. How far, when getting off the interstate it didn t matter which way towards their last driveway or curb cut. Mr. Patrick did not recall that, but the traffic study summary that he saw and sent out to all of them, showed that the new driveways would be further east than the current driveways. Mr. Sweet thought it might be 500 feet, but he was not entirely sure about that. Mr. Williams asked if they had a number on the I-76 traffic. Mr. Stark said he did not have a number off the top of his head. Mr. Sharkey asked where he was going with his line of thought. Mr. Williams said he travelled the interstate quite a bit in his career, and a lot of tractor trailers went by. He was not so sure it had anything to do with the zoning, but in the traffic study and in order for ODOT to give them a rebuild, instead of looking at a new slate when adding diesel refueling stations, was questionable. Mr. Thurber asked for any other questions. Mr. Patrick commented that Mr. Williams had mentioned ODOT, and he believed they would have to approve. Mr. Williams understood that. Mr. Sharkey said there were some really good ideas about what could happen in that area. He hoped that the developers had time to discuss it with Marathon and had the opportunity to purchase whatever properties they needed, to make it work together. However, that was not their concern right now. Their concern was one single property, and whether or not it should be. He for one saw absolutely no problem with it. There were some good ideas with the area, but that was something for the developer. Mr. Thurber said if there was nothing further, they would close the discussion. He thanked everyone. He welcomed the visitors to stay or leave as they wished.. V. DRAFT LEGISLATION: Supplemental Appropriation The ordinance was discussed in concert with the executive session. It was numbered for the Council agenda: Ms. Haskins would handle the legislation, and move it to a second reading. VI. LEGISLATIVE REVIEW: Includes three items to be added to the Council Agenda A. Resolution No (Discussed, May 9 Public Service Committee) COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE May 16, 2017 Page 8 of 10

9 Mr. Darlington, as sponsor, said it was to appoint the Director of Public Service to represent to the Board of Trustees to American Municipal Power, Inc. He believed Mr. Patrick already served in that capacity. It would continue. B. Resolution No (Discussed, May 9 Public Service Committee) The second resolution would appoint the Mayor to the Board of the Ohio Municipal Electric Association. Mr. Thurber asked if there was any reason to not get them off their plate. Mr. Darlington wanted to call the question and get it off the agenda, if no one had an objection. There were no objections. C. Ordinance No (Forwarded, May 10 Public Ways Committee) The ordinance was sponsored by Mr. Williams, who said it was part of the Street Improvement Program. He asked Mr. Patrick to comment. Mr. Patrick said that Seville Road was on schedule to be completed. After taking a look at it, the contractor recommended a different treatment there that cost a little bit more money, but would complete the section for long term. They planned to do repairs on some of the areas that were need with the large, deep repairs, and then doing one-inch overall of the other areas. It would bring the roadway up to an acceptable level. The contractor suggested that if the City wanted to take the whole top and do an inch-and-half mill and fill, it would be this amount more. The original amount was in the $60,000 range, and this treatment would add $45,000 to it. Mr. Williams added that they d saved enough in their bidding process. Mr. Williams wanted to suspend and call the question, in order to get it done while the contractor was there, as they were paving other areas in town. On the regular Council agenda, Mr. Thurber went to Ordinance No on first reading. It authorized the purchase of snow and ice control equipment, and was sponsored by Mr. Williams. The Council member said it was a truck they would do through state contract. It took a long time to get these ordered and built, so Mr. Williams wished to suspend the three reading rule to move the process along. The items were in the budget. Mr. Thurber noted that the Township did a similar order this time last year and would have missed the snow if they hadn t had so little that year. Ordinance No was on second reading and sponsored by Mr. Copley, to sell a pumper truck. Mr. Titus offered to handle it. He thought they should go and sell it, and so would suspend and call the question. Ordinance No was on second reading, as well, and provided for the allocation of income tax receipts. Ms. Haskins asked Mr. Thurber if he would like it to be suspended. Mr. Thurber believed so. Ordinance No was on third reading, with regard to the sale of beer and wine at the Octoberfest in town. Mr. Stugmyer would call the question. Ordinance No was on third reading, which was a supplemental appropriation. Mr. Titus would call the question. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE May 16, 2017 Page 9 of 10

10 Ordinance No was on fifth reading. Mr. Titus wanted to know if they wanted to take it to sixth reading. Ms. Haskins thought they were voting on it. Mr. Williams noted that they had a Council member missing. Mr. Sharkey thought they should vote. Mr. Williams recalled that they had postponed in the past. Mr. Darlington was ready to vote. Ms. Haskin was ready to vote, but asked who had done that, and Mr. Williams answered that he did. Mr. Thurber started to ask a question, but Mr. Williams stated that he preferred that they were all present for something like this. Ms. Haskins did not think it would make any difference. Mr. Sharkey said they should move on. Mr. Thurber asked whether Mr. Williams wanted to handle the legislation, or have someone else do it. Mr. Williams said he would do it. Ms. Haskins asked if he would call the question. Mr. Williams wanted to know if that s what they wanted to do. The answers were affirmative. VII. OTHER BUSINESS TO CONSIDER: No other business was considered. VIII. ADJOURNMENT: Mr. Thurber entertained a motion to adjourn. Mr. Titus made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Darlington. All were in favor. M E E T I N G A D J O U R N E D a t a p p r o x i m a t e l y 7 : 1 8 P M. Chairperson Date Approved COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE May 16, 2017 Page 10 of 10