e
e e
welcome everyone to the February 25th
2025 Beckley city council meeting if
there's anyone in attendance tonight
that would like to turn in a speaker
slip slip I ask that you please do that
to auditor M at this
time uh and Mr mCP would you please call
the
role Mr Marcelino present Mr Hurley here
miss vible I'm here miss sad miss lamkey
here Mr Markham here and Mr Silverman
here Council uh Miss sad is unable to
join us this evening I would move to
excuse her absence could I please get a
second second second by Mr Marcelino all
in favor say I I anyone opposed right
she is excused please rise for the
Pledge of
Allegiance
indivisible andice
all right Council we are in for several
treats this evening we have a number of
presentations and updates uh many of
which concern our infrastructure here in
Bexley so with that we are going to
start with um agenda item number four
ordinances special guests Mr official do
you need to read that ordinance yeah I
think this is third reading 0525 to
approve the let me start over with the
microphone thank
you third reading of ordinance 0525 to
approve the supplier for the city of
Bexley electric aggregation program int
introduced by Miss sad thank you I'm
filling in for missad this evening uh
you may recall that at a prior meeting
we had um a presentation on this and U I
understand there may still be some
questions or additional information that
Council may be seeking I'm going to turn
it over to the mayor because I see we
have two uh guests joining us who are
available tonight to answer questions um
and just so council's aware I sensed
from our last meeting that based on
tonight's discussion we may not
necessarily vote we may need some
additional time so um I will look for
your input on whether or not we move to
table it or we proceed with a
Mr Mayor thank you madam president um so
I want to thank John and Jay for being
here again tonight uh from Aspen energy
um we got a couple of questions as
followup to the last reading and
presentation that had to do with
timing and uh so Megan put together the
slide uh for us that gives some
information on that so we would need to
either pass the ordinance tonight or by
March 7th which would require I think a
special council meeting I think right
On's On's our Mar yeah um in order to
have no laps in program coverage um the
rates that we've seen so far as sample
rates aren't going to be the final rates
until the date of contract
execution um we've had some refreshed
rates uh longer term rates dropped a
little bit but um I think the shorter
term were up slightly is that right um
and if we
don't continue the program if it's
lapsed then Bexley household holds that
are currently with d would return to the
standard AAP rate in June um if we wait
to find out what A's price to compare in
June will be then the new program
wouldn't be able to begin until August
or September because the timeline would
start in June basically we would see oh
that's the new price to compare you know
we would have an ordinance tabled it
would be this is a theory would be voed
on it if it were to go forward um and so
we there would be a lapse outside of the
aggregation where our households will go
to the standard a rate we anticipate
they will see an increase in their
summer electrical rates with the revised
a price to compare um and we can't fully
predict what happens if we wait to go to
market until the summer rates could go
up and I'll let you guys talk a little
bit about what those indications look
like I will tell you where my head is at
the more that I've um heard from you
guys and thought about what it would be
like uh talked with staff about the
types of questions that we answer
through the aggregation
process I am a little wary of a scenario
where we go from our current aggregation
into a new aggregation where the
community gets opted into a higher rate
than what AE is
at in you know in May is in may actually
right am I getting my facts wrong here
end of May is the you guys can come on
up by the way and and Pitch it they're
like ah um so I'm a little warri of what
would happen if as we go out and say hey
we've signed up for a new aggregation
program the rates are going up from what
you've been paying before but trust us
they'll also go up with AAP the
community is not going to have the
benefit of the actual numbers and we
won't know the actual numbers we're
gonna have to be really careful about
the way that we talk about what aap's
future price to compare is going to be I
feel more comfortable with a scenario
where we send a letter to every Beckley
residents and we say
here's how much the community saved
through aggregation over the past 18
months it's been very
successful um we are eyeing closely when
we are going to next
aggregate we expect that the AAP rate is
going to increase in the summer uh and
we will be monitoring the new AAP rate
and determining if a second round of
aggregation makes sense for our
community based upon
that I think that answering those
questions are much much easier than
trying to ask staff than any of us to
have a total crystal ball about what
that future price to compare is going to
be and then what our rate would be next
to that the risk of waiting is that the
market could continue to shift and we
could end up paying more than we're
looking at today and John and Jay were
so kind as to be here to continue to
think through this with us so my
proposal would be letting aggregation
laps watching keep putting this on the
table
seeing what the new price to compare is
and being ready to move very quickly
once we see what that is uh in the
market that could end up being the wrong
decision and that's why we're all making
it together
so with that is there anything you want
to clarify further from what we just
talked
about uh just so the thing that we do
know we do know 50% has been purchased
by a already we have those results right
and we're having another one come next
week where the market is now it's even
going to be higher um and that's why we
feel very confident of whatever program
you guys do kick in I mean it's going to
be savings right away come June 2025 yes
we're GNA have that one month but as you
can see the difference of pricing from
May to
June uh goes up couple tenents of a cent
so that's basically the difference we're
seeing but we do know some the actual
information what a has gone out and
purchased their uh Tron is at uh for the
next following year so we do have an
idea of kind of where they're going to
be because we don't know exactly where
they're going to be but we have a range
when is the next auction date uh March
4th we'll probably know a week comes a
week after that okay so after after
March
7th probably last time it took us yeah
it took us following week to actually
get it so they release it whenever they
decide to post
it Mr Hurley did you have a question
yeah um couple questions first for b or
for May or you may know this gentlemen
um what percentage it's probably been T
before what percentage of Bey households
are in so what percentage are covered by
Diner G now I said 70 or 80 last time
but do you remember the number of
households exactly what percentage I was
looking for percentage if you if you
tell me households I can give you
percentage I think it's roughly
80% that last if you tell me percentage
I can give you percentage
about
8,000
3,472 um okay second question um so
under your scenario mayor we're going to
let the program
lapse wait a few months assess likely re
restart the program if I'm a resident am
I going to be getting you know a bunch
of communication from a or D energy I'm
just I'm thinking through like citizen
confusion if they start getting well now
we're op now you're opted back out now
you're opted back in if you want to you
know yeah so under the proposal first
off residents would receive something
from us just voluntarily it's just a
communication piece that we would send
sometime between whenever we make this
decision and the lapsing uh or or not
just the lapsing or Dage but when we
expect a to send that later because AP
would send a letter saying you're back
to a price to compare it's part of the
process but it's only one letter right
at that point correct they get back in
so they've received a letter from us
saying here's why we're putting this on
PA you'll get a letter from AP if in the
meantime you would like to you know look
into options for renewable energy here's
how you can you know purchase your own
but but we might be coming back with
aggregation they would get a letter from
a saying you're back on A's price to
compare and then if we choose to
aggregate again they would it would be
the whole process we already had and at
that point staff is answering all the
questions is like well why did I just
get a letter from AP why did I get this
letter I feel like we've weighed just
like the communication challenge of
explaining the rate versus
AP and also authentically the risk I
mean there is risk you go in I
understand that got a lot of good data
to support higher prices but there is
some risk we don't know what that price
to compare is going to be um and so I
mean we don't know what's going to
happen well I don't we just don't we
don't know what that price comparison
being so we don't really exactly know
what we're communicating
out yeah that answer your questions Mr
Harley okay Mr Silverman had his hand up
next thank you I believe 13 months was
the shortest term if we were to sign on
for aggregation is that correct so we
could do 12 months as well um however
we'd really like to align it with June
June is when new capacity um numbers
come out for all the data centers and
how that's driven up the price each year
in June that's when those numbers come
out so ideally we eventually align your
contract with that so we can know hey
capacity prices are this the auction
numbers are X and we can then quantify
potential savings for customers so
that's really why we wanted it to be
that that term thank you and then just
to walk through so March 7th would need
to be the date to agree to an aggregate
plan if it lapses when does that lapse
occur from the current aggregated plan
to going back to a what date would that
be so it's different based on meter
reads based based upon different folks
meter reads um it was a may start last
time
correct so it goes through May was
September last time it was it was 20
months September yeah that's correct
20thth I guess how long would residents
be switched over to AP if it
lapsed before we before we reviewed to
aggregate back yeah it would be until
that's that slide here it talks about
until August or September so May June
July at least three months so roughly if
we if we let it lapse we're going to
have three months where it's going to be
on the standard a plan but if we sign
into an aggregate those prices would
start up at a higher rate for those
three months starting in May it'd be
higher in May um and then June we're
projecting that it would be lower um
than where the utilities at but again
half of the tranches haven't been
auctioned off yet so we don't know
exactly what the prices are going to be
on that other half of the load we expect
them to be higher rates have moved
higher it's honestly it's not a great
time to buy today in my opinion so it
might
coincide reasonably with putting it on
pause waiting watching the market and
striking at the right time I think
having dexterity to move would be great
if we can figure out as we approach June
when we know what that number is having
dexterity to be able to have mer Kessler
move quickly would help at that point in
time but I understand putting it on
hold Miss spib I think you had your hand
up next so let's say we follow your
suggestion
will the rules about going back to
agregation be the same as they were we
went into it before so will they well
will our will our uh residents be
allowed to if they decide to opt out no
no fees no I mean how's that going to
work yeah so when we bid this out it's
under the same sort of framework is our
current plan so if we were to go back
into aggregation it would be the same
concept ccept where they are opted in
they can't opt out no fees it's a uh all
that
communication and I want to be clear
like this is where my head's at it's
also like it's a hard decision to make
and if ultimately through conversation
we're like hey we should really just go
for this
then we'll make it happen Mr Marcelino
yes thank you very much um in regards to
your bargaining chip out there how how
much strength you have doesn't matter
whether we're signed up or not when you
go in there to purchase this no okay and
so is there
any I guess I just want it's all in
projections I mean is there a concern
that you may never get lower than a or
are you very confident if so you're
confident why yeah I think I think we
beat the utility because we have that
dexterity and buying power we're able to
move on different days go to different
suppliers and and really watch the
market strike when the Futures markets
are low um if we have the flexibility of
the mayor having authorization to sign
um today sometimes we come to councils
with the price at one evening it's not
good the next day so the market has been
moving so much that having that
flexibility would be good but yeah I
believe we'll be below a either way you
guys go if you do it now and and decide
to move and just do a traditional
renewal I think we'll beat a starting in
June we would have the one month that we
would lapse if you wait and we can get
something back up and going say in
August I think we beat him then as well
so yeah I think it's going to save folks
money either way so it's a potential
for uh for roughly 11 months you're
basically you're telling us at 11 months
you're going to be a in your in your
mind it's going to be one big month and
that's fine and I get that but then
overall over the course of this term it
is your belief that this will save
people money but there will be a higher
month
corre Mr mCP haven't had a chance to ask
any questions yet so what I'm trying to
do is like understand the
numbers because to uh Sam's Point um and
what we all know is that if we were to
renew right away we'd be underwater for
one month but what I'm trying to
understand is what can we essentially
lock into
today which would serve as effectively
confidence and
savings so when I look at this if we do
nothing that one month we're going to
pay what is it six six cents or whatever
the the number is
um the last time we met it was for 13
months are these current rates right now
those look like old old okay new
ones low bid today was n 9.3 cents per
kilowatt hour for 13 months D the
incumbent
and then what what are what's your
crystal ball say if we waited it would
be I mean I wish I had crystal ball
um
so if if we wait I mean we of course
we're subject to the market what we are
right now um what we have seen in market
conditions of what's happening with ap
and also with March March last four
years has been one one month uh March
and last four years have gone up every
other time March has gone down so we're
actually hoping maybe next couple weeks
it does go down we can probably pull a
trigger but again we don't really
anything could really happen cold front
through the country anything that could
kind throw out of whack we really don't
know kind of where our markets are we
just know where we stand now and we know
that we can be AP per year through that
2025 Jam start the other thing I think
that say that last comment again we know
we can beat a J
2025 their floating rate
right okay one other thing I think that
you should take into account is that if
we do wait and say we buy in June we're
in peak season then so in peak season
typically prices Elevate so um you know
people are heating their homes demand is
up we're actually dealing right now with
a deficit of natural gas instead of
having extra natural gas we've now
burned through it all most of it and and
more more than what we've had
historically last year and at the
fiveyear look back so we're not in a
great place right now on the supply and
demand um model if you look at it on gas
and that's what we follow for electric
as well that's the proxy market for
electric so um I don't think prices are
are going to be great either way we do
it to be honest with you it's really
just what you're comfortable with in
your communication and you know what you
guys feel comfortable with overall
either way we could do it and I think
we'll save folks money either way Mr
Markham yes I see mCP over here with his
calculator and I know that I'm sitting
at the poker table and I see MC peek and
Kessler sit down I know I'm getting up
uh I'm just curious like you know what
we're doing here is we're kind
of pitting a race against
uh the alternate now with the alternate
later with the the confidence that we're
going to beat the a floater no matter
what right
so say go I would say that what what I'm
most interested in sorry is
beating the rate that we could get today
for 13 months yeah when we get the ex
when we do the 12 month I mean to me
that's that's but we don't have that
crystal ball so I mean I think it's a
foregone conclusion to your point that
we will likely be a floating rate when
we renew but
what I think we need what we should have
is some informed decision of what do we
what do we think the markets are going
to be like because what I what I'm what
I'm mindful of is we could lock in a
rate
today um and somebody's GNA pay $300
more a month or $122 a month that's
probably more realistic in their um
first bill but if
but over the remaining 11 months of that
agreement we could save folks hundreds
of dollars compared to the to the to the
Future rate if the rates go up in in May
or June but then that's also coupled
with the fact that that delay where we
wait for that is going to create that
that's going to increase the size of
that sandbag ex that we're going to
start off that's where it's like I I
mean I think of this is two it's we've
got one period where we know we're going
to be underwater and then we've got a
much much longer period where
we which is what we need to to solve for
and that that's there is no crystal ball
so I guess that's where I'm trying to
understand is can we buy that that's
where I'm struggling are you getting a
sense of the size of what that sandbag
is compared to what the you know what we
would I know we're just you know
whatever the savings would be over that
long term because that to me is where
the decision really is if I'm
interpreting your sandbag correctly it
look the're we're increasing the months
we're going to be under a so that would
be um right well let me start with month
one
may um if we went like with the point or
9.3 Cent rate and apie price compared
seven eight 7.8 cents right so it's a
difference of like 1.5 cents which is
about $15 per 1,000 kilowatts I think
and 1,000 kilowatts is probably kind of
an average consumption in May maybe it's
a little higher than that so it's it's
about a
$15 extra that people would pay by being
on our program in May as compared to A's
price to compare so we're not talking
about huge difference in cost and then
essentially they would start saving in
June which is great that's if we hit the
button right now right but if we wait um
and
we're the problem is we don't know what
A's price compare is going to be in June
you guys are think you're think it's GNA
be in the T right 10 and a half 11 cents
okay
versus 9.3 and so the similar difference
about you know 15 bucks or whatever
except now it's the summer you're using
more energy um so I just what we're
talking about that it's not going to be
a huge huge swing I am pretty wary you
know we did quite well their current
plan we waited you know we we sat for a
while we waited till the time was right
um I want to make sure that we're
building trust in the community I want
to use this
tool um
you know when we know that what we're
doing is to the best I mean to the best
of our ability to predict we know that
we're in really good territory and that
we can communicate it clearly to
customers one thing we learned from the
first round is no matter how much we
talked about aggregation there are some
consumers and some of our residents who
just couldn't sink their teeth into the
idea of like you're saving us money and
so the flip side of that would be like
wait you're costing us more money and I
think they'll have a similarly hard time
getting away from that so it'll just be
a challenge and I don't want to erode
the trust that we have have created
through this and I want to just be very
choosy about how we use this tool I
think everyone on Council except me
asked at least one round of questions um
let me ask you this suppose we choose
option two and we table this we see what
happens to AP pricing in June what if
that rate is not at all what we expected
do we actually have to move forward at
that time I mean could we hold it and
maybe wait for competitive rates the
choice is yours on this you you
definitely control when you want to move
how you want to move if we sign cont
clear sign a contract have yes yes
you're in that contract folks can opt
out individually but the community as a
whole is in for that term okay and then
my second question is if I understand
both of you correctly you can't tell us
tonight which one of those options is
going to save our residents more money
because we simply don't know
right there's some variables in this
discussion so for us to say definitively
one way or another it wouldn't be
true okay can you predict the political
climate two months
from just wanted to make sure your I
think your answer is the same for both
options it's that we simply don't know
one's not guaranteed all right Council I
see some of you with your hands up again
um let's go around a second time Mr
Silverman did you have some additional
questions I got a question for Ben and a
question for you first question Ben is
there suspicion on your end that the
June pricing could be in favor of a to
hold or are you just not comfortable
risking it now to lock into it uh a rate
I want to say this very clearly I'm not
an expert on the energy
markets um am I worried that a will and
you know March 4th get a lower rate and
therefore have better June rates than we
think I I just don't I I I trust John
and Jay and they're saying that's
probably not going to be the case like
to a high level of certainty I think
you're saying that but I think what's
tricky is we won't even if we know what
the auction results are we we we'll be
able to say well based
upon the past knowing what the auction
rates are ap's rate will probably be 10
and a half or 11% and that's a very
tricky communication
Challenge and you you mentioned
flexibility to be able to strike when
the iron's hot that flexibility is from
what I can tell between those two
options because March 7th expires but
then we have flexibility up until June
to negotiate better pricing so there's
another option here we we can still
strike when iron's hot that doesn't have
us waiting until June so my
recommendation would be that to enter
into legislation that would give the
mayor authorization to move when it's
right when it when it when it looks
right and feels right and and everything
aligns and I I would like
to just differ a little bit from that if
that's okay Madam president I wouldn't
if if you CH if we chose to go that
route so we have flexibility I
understand the logic of that because you
have to to act quickly I would ask that
we have that we do a board of control
sort of emergency meeting in that case
I'm not going to own that decision on my
own sorry
guys that'll be a that'll be a quick
turnaround joint decision
that's a third option now that's being
talked about when you talk about
flexibility that's right Mr Silverman
did you have any more questions okay um
Mr Marcelino you had your hand up as
well yes I guess it's kind of for the
mayor um if you go to buy a car and you
go to dealership a and they tell you
this is the best deal if you go down the
street it's going to be $1,000 more um
are you going to call the second
dealership and see whether that's true
or not or are you just going to take
dealership a for their word and my
question is can we get a here to give us
potential insight to this as to what
they're projecting and what they see or
is that for some odd reason not
possible or they don't have interest we
have a broker for that reason I mean I
think our broker is the one that's
looking at the market and we have ap's
price in front of us that's what they're
giving that's what they're giving for us
to enter into aggregation I don't think
that a
is um I don't think no one at APAP knows
what they're going to end up paying on
March 4th for
energy so okay my experience we did have
a deep bench of experience with a prior
to going a broker model yeah and I we
did not get more reliable information
out of that okay Mr Hurley um just real
a couple real quick questions first we
have missed the window for a May renewal
correct no we just need to execute an
agreement by March 7th for there to be a
May renewal and that and that would then
would that avoid any kind of laps on
consumer bills or is there I guess I'm
asking is there any way to avoid that
one month yeah we would have to go into
contract by March 7th there would be no
laps yeah new new series of letters
would go out same process as we had
before the difference being that we're
going to have to be
more uh we're gonna have to really amp
up all of our communication skills to
try to
explain the difference in
rates um and then gentlemen uh is your
recommendation a 13-month as well start
in may yes it makes sense for me to
align with the
capacity schedule yeah the yearly
calendar that starts every June but you
don't have a recommendation yet for a
June start because we're not seeing
those numbers is
that a June or an August start I
understand is that what's your what's
your recommendation for term on a June I
would probably do it either in May or
after we know the price to compare if
the decision is hey let's see what the
price to compare is try and get
flexibility to be able to to secure rate
when we see a buying opportunity when
the Futures Market is low so a June
start is not something you recommend
your your option A is may start option b
is the August September start which is
what we're being recommended am
I I don't I'm going off the update yeah
no that's true that's a good point I as
I'm sitting here and we're through this
I mean so a June start would look like
this we would need to execute a
agreement by April early April we would
know what a had paid in the
auction we would we would know what the
final price to compare is because
there's a lot of ancillary fees that go
on right but there's not no further
auctioning happening right
so we would have a lot more security and
and in that instance we would probably
still send a letter to the community
saying these 18 20 months have been
great here's what you saved um you're
going to get a letter from AP you're
going to go back to the standard price
to compare because that's cheaper than
we were able to secure in the market but
in June you're gonna you're gonna have
the ability to to join a new aggregation
program which is at this price and all
of the indicators are that A's price
will be in the range of and I think that
is a third way to do it
that would entail more letters but
and I'm understanding so so basically
let's just say you know may start June
start August start 13mon periods each
you're gonna you're going to come in
lower we're going to save our citizens
money no matter what over the a rate I
mean that's a pretty safe assumption it
seems like we're trying to figure out
between a may start a June start and
August start which is going to give us
the most savings real quick just real
quick the 13mon recommendation would be
for a may start so you can align with
June if we did a June start it would be
a 12 or you know 24 month term to look
at really and if we looked at August
maybe we do you know maybe we look at
you know 22 months to start aligning
with make sense so so in your mind then
ideally we should get to a point where
we're doing a June start in the future
because that seems to be where we get
the most we have the most intelligence
and probably the best no doubt about it
that's when the most information's going
to be known heading into it and we can
prepare plan and make the best
recommendations for you and last last
question just just more of a
philosophical one you know yes there's a
lot of volatility there's changes at
state level new data centers coming
online you know is there a case to be
made for just doing like a two or three
year you know just saying okay let's
lock a price in that in the near term is
not the best deal we could get but we're
kind of hedging against future Market
disruptions that we can't predict is
that mean you know sort of like
refinancing your house you know yeah the
rates might go lower but they might get
higher I'm going to refine now lock in
that rate and then at least I'm
insulated somewhat from some of that
near-term market turmoil there could be
a case made to be made for that for sure
however these rates
are historically High I mean they're
they're really high if you look at at
historically behind a on aggregations
and rates historically have been six to
eight cents not 9.3 cents so I mean I
would feel better going longterm at a
lower rate y than where we're at right
now and my last question and I I know
peak's going to have some really good in
I just so just so I'm very very clear in
this the basic the statement of the case
for shooting for an August September
start and maybe trying to sync that up
to June in the future is the rates will
theoretically could theoretically be
lower than if we did a may start is
that that's the belief based on your
years of expertise they could be but
again we're going into peak season so in
Peak demand season rates on on the
prompt months go up Futures Market
sometimes can go up so it could be a
higher rate when we come and talk about
this again okay Mr M yeah so I think
this is really hard when we do not
actually think about how is it going to
impact a citizen's or our electricity
bill okay so what I'm looking to you
guys to confirm this is
today all you all we do is basically
take the rate of six what is it six 6
686 times the Watts that people are
using or whatever the number is right so
if in this scenario I've got 3,000
whatever that number is that that
equates to a $25 electricity bill if the
rates go to 9.3% if we locked in today
at
99.3% their their bill is going to go up
to $275 that's a $73 increase per month
okay so this there is no way to avoid my
is my right this is a
substantial
yeah well I mean during the summer
couple hundred do electricity bill is
not uncommon so I guess what I want so
let me okay we gotta clarify something
yeah but but this is going to lead to a
31 35% increase in folks electricity
bills
okay what we're also looking at is the
projected renewal at 10 cents that would
take that bill from 205 to
315 an increase of $210 I mean unless my
math is off but 110 what did I say yeah
so so we are fa our our community will
be facing a a substantial increase in
their electricity bills so what we're
trying to do is ultimately figure out
how can we minimize that increase um at
the time when it renews and that's where
we just don't have that crystal ball and
it's brutally difficult because markets
are Dynamic but what I what I want to
make sure that everybody walks out of
here is understanding is that we are
definitely not going to save people
money from their current rate I think
that is all understood what we're trying
to do is avoid an increase when we when
when the Market opens up again in June
that's that's beyond where we are um so
that that's what I just want folks to
understand this is going to be a
substantial increase to everybody
electricity bill because of the rate
changes no matter what we do well said
and just real quick to respond to that
but for the past 20 months we've we've
insulated people from some of those
higher rates through the aggregation I
mean that's that's the the flip side
right is yeah yeah but you always got to
live forward I mean like like nobody's
gonna remember they be like well what
have you done for me lately is is so I
don't mean to
sorry and and just to remind youall that
we're talking about the the electricity
that would be purchased at the rate
which is about 40% of the electric bill
the rest of it is transmission charges
and other okay pieces thank you so that
that's fair yeah so there's a huge chunk
of that that's pretty
fixed so got it that 40% is what floats
which has been going up as well the
trans yeah it definitely has Mr
Silverman did you have H one last
question not last but one other question
it's not really it's not so much of a
question it's more of a statement I mean
the if if March 4th is when an auction
is and by the 14th of March you should
have a better
picture and I think everybody here wants
to get the best rate possible for the
residents in my mind that flexibility
option would grant that ability for the
board of control and the mayor to jump
when the kettles the right moment based
off of your advice to lock in a rate
rather than wait in peak season and buy
when the Market's the highest um I think
that to me makes more sense to be able
to be flexible but also capture that
lower cost for the residents rather than
wait and and get stuck with a higher
rate because everyone in peak season is
going to get a higher rate um but that's
just my my opinion on this thank you I
give you more
options the first one would give us more
option be able to to to give the board
of control authorization to move when
the iron is hot to me makes sense
because it gives you more option than
you can move if we see a good buying op
opportunity or you can
wait so yeah that would give
optionality all right Council what are
we uh what are we wanting to do here um
it is a third reading so uh we need to
either uh Vote or table
this let me let me get some guidance
from everyone here miss uh Mr Hurley you
have your hand up just want to make sure
restate what is being recommended by the
consultants and also by the mayor is we
table and then possibly rework this so
that the mayor is authorized to execute
a contract with Board of control
approval at a time when the market
forces seem to dictate doing so is
that well but just saying we as being
asked the table official would we need
Board of control approval
anyway no we
don't spendy no but if you'd like
additional Buy in we could have a yeah
we we could discuss it at
yeah yeah so so the recommendation is to
is again to table is that correct
gentlemen to wait hit
pause not suggesting I what I'm hearing
I
mean I I I think what I'm hearing is
that there is a scenario where our
Brokers you could confirm if I'm right
or wrong think we should still try to
move forward and you know execute as
soon as possible and have flexibility to
do that what you're hearing from me is
I'm not super
comfortable doing that without knowing
at least what a is going to pay pay at
auction which unfortunately puts us a
little past the post for the March 7th
execution date and honestly we've been
here before like it's the the worst case
scenarios that our residents go
to the same rate everyone else has in
the region and they have the ability if
they want to opt into their own separate
program on you know price to compare
apples to apples whatever PCO website so
I think that is a while it's stinks that
everyone's rate's going to go up that's
a macro Force that's at work you know
that we're we're we're all adults and we
know that that happens I just don't want
the city to be stuck in a position where
we are upside down Visa V our residents
and I have one more and this may be
something for Mr official way and so the
way this ordinance is ordered now it's
an emergency measure so if we pass it
tonight you have to execute the contract
to the earliest term
if we remove that emergency declaration
does that give you any amount of
flexibility or I I would ask the City
attorney to see if he agrees but it
gives me the right to enter into an
agreement it doesn't require me to so I
mean the upcoming term is not defined
number one and number two if you remove
the emergency though then he can't do it
for 30 days okay which would then take
purose and you could add the language
you could add the language you know very
easily on Amendment you know subject to
board of
control approval of the or just
approval love your thoughts way wa so
what I'm hearing is that there is an
very unlikely scenario where we're going
to come back and something is going to
happen before March 14th is that
that you guys are going to come back and
say oh you should enter into this that's
really unlikely
right or or with the flex or does the
flexibility that you're talking about
should that just start from today it'd
be great if it could okay that then that
we would amend it but that scenario is
one where you managed to talk us into
signing by March
4th to us it did honestly it doesn't
matter we just want you to do what you
guys feel is right we'll we'll we'll
make it work either way we'll be here to
answer people's questions if they have
them like we take calls all the time
from back it's it's not going to be a
problem either way if the messaging
works better that way and it makes more
sense to you all yeah let's do it that
way but if we could have may Kesler and
have the ability and the board of
control to move when we see time and not
have to move right this second but to be
able to have that right that would help
that would really help us a lot but
again so I'm understanding this then if
the city moves to prior to March 7th
then what we would have is a situation
where you're locking in a price an
aggregation price that is going to be at
least for one month higher than the AE
price and that has nothing to do with
whether we legally want to do that or
not you just have to worry about the
messaging we could do a June start oh
you could still do a June start because
you know the prices it could take okay
I'm
sorry you could take a one month break
where folks would get that notification
you would let them know hey we're
putting a pause on the program pay more
for this month and then yeah we could
potentially start it right back up in
June we would have to work with the
messaging on it but yes we can do that
so then that that my my my point was
going to be why don't you just table us
and well word Smith it but we don't have
to I think the best sounds like the
advice from the experts is if council is
so inclined is to pay pass this tonight
with the amendment that gives the board
of the mayor The Authority with the
approval of the board of control to lock
in all right I'm seeing some more hands
come up um not sure who had their hands
up first go ahead go
ahead I just think seems like a
compromise to to get this amendment in I
think that I mean at that I I feel like
our experts are saying if they were they
would do that and if I were just
deciding to do it just for my family it
totally would gamble on that
but I don't think it's the right message
to say to our community just trust us
just trust us it's going to be okay just
trust us I don't think that will feel
good and I think that a lot of our
community will be wary of that that
being said there will be some people on
the other side of the coin saying
your experts
said that it was going to go down so why
didn't you do it right away the experts
said that's you know they came in you
had them come in they came in twice and
they told you that's what was going to
happen and and this is this is this is
greener energy correct am I right this
is y okay and and and I want to you know
I I I'm willing to for green to do
that so I really feel like we're between
a rock and a firplace I really do and I
understand that but I think the best
thing we can do is
say we're going to give the mayor
Authority with the rest of
um control FL control thank you to jump
on it as fast as we can because I'm
thinking the auditor is more on my
saying yeah I think that we should save
people money bottom line but I just
don't
would there be any action that you are
just proposing or not actually moving
but walk us through what potential
action you you would
recommend approve this uh ordinance with
the amendment that RC attorney okay so
your suggestion would be we amend and
then approve it as amended okay
um thoughts on that is there anyone here
who feels strongly in table in favor of
just trying to table
it because I I'm I'm sensing that maybe
there's a good compromise that has been
suggested tonight and Madam president
the way that would kind of look is if if
you were to pass this tonight we would
keep in touch with Aspen we would see
what the what happens with the
auction and when in our March meeting we
wouldn't have to take action at that
point we wouldn't have to and till April
but we might find some reason that it
makes sense to do that prior to April so
maybe that's something we're discussing
in our March meeting it's not an
ordinance we're just giving an update
here's where things stand and and that
would be still be in time to potentially
start in June if we do that y all right
Council we liken
that Mr Mr markam is that a yes
or yeah I was just GNA say I I I think
we do kind of need to reframe this for a
second like the way that uh the mayor
was saying and it's like whatever we are
doing here we are saving the people
Beckley money we are whichever one of
these you know what whatever rates we
end up we are looking to take action
that would save them money from being at
that floating rate or whatever so like
how much can we save them and you
know Mr Happy
cheery I will say you know this versus
that it's going to be a substantial
increase because because that's the
market or whatever but but you know I
think the take home message here is
we're trying to make the best decision
but we are saving saving money for for
the people here uh with whatever
decisions we do there and you know Danny
and I campaign differently than mCP does
we tell people we've been saving you
money all all year too by the way with
what we we did before and that's
important or whatever so I would support
I think being as Nimble as we can with
as much information as we can and I like
I you know I I feel you know the auditor
the president and the mayor you know
with that board of control probably you
know I trust them to make this a good
decision on that as well so if if we can
get make it a little bit speedier by by
enabling that I think that makes sense
to me too okay makes sense Mr Hurley I
would just add to Mr markham's point I
mean if
residents don't want to trust us or
don't feel that this is being done with
the best of itions they they can opt out
and they can have that AE rate no
problem but our goal here is to save
people money we cannot handle those
macro forces and you know I'm I'm my
mind I'm drawing these comparisons to
like going to the health insurance
Market which is a you know my day job is
health advocacy and you know you can you
can switch from a small group plan to a
miwa and get a better rate but health
care cost for it's all going up no
matter what you do and you can only take
you know you can only do what's best for
your group and in this case our group is
the city of Bexley so I um I'm
comfortable with what's been outlined
and this is you know what I'm proud of
this Council and City leadership for
kind of coming up with maybe an
additional uh option so with that I move
to
amend ordinance
5-25 to add the language under section
one as shown which reads subject to
board of control approval could I please
get a second second second by Mr
Marcelino um any further discussion on
the motion to amend Mr MC would you call
the role on the motion to amend Miss
fible yes Mr Silverman yes Mr Markham
yes Mr Hurley yes Mr Marcelino yes Miss
lampy yes motion to amend passes right
Council I move to approve amended
ordinance five if I may um just point of
order since it is the third reading
should we allow for public testimony yes
when I do the um when I right before we
call role on the motion to adopt
absolutely we will do that okay um I
move to approve amended ordinance 5-25
could I please get a second second
second by Mr Marcelino any further
discussion from
Council um are there any public
comments um Miss Lewis if you wouldn't
mind step up please um please give us
your name and your address Constance
Lewis 663 CL I want to say that I really
appreciate all the discussion that
Council has done over this very
challenging situation um as a resident
we automatically assume that
our uh electric bill will go up in the
summer uh so there will be an increase
and through this discussion it looks as
though you've uh landed on something
that that will make an unknown a little
more knowable if that's
possible and uh and I appreciate the
opportunity for the mayor to have the
the uh be able to to take take the time
to learn a little bit more about what
the cost is going to be to give it a a
little more time and then make a more um
knowledgeable decision with the
acceptance of the board of control we
like that and uh that getss you out of a
sticky situation may and uh and then I
appreciate um the decisions that you've
made and I think you've done a really
good one so thank you thank you for your
comments Miss Lewis U Mr mCP would you
please call the RO on the motion to
approve Miss lampy yes Mr Hurley yes Mr
Markham yes Mr Marcelino yes Mr
Silverman yes and Miss vial yes amended
ordinance 525 passes well done Council
mayor our speakers thank you everyone
for your uh for your input thank you so
much
appreciate
okay a lot going on there Council um we
are now to public comments regarding
items not on the agenda Mr PE do we have
any speaker slips I have a speaker
slip lost our speaker we lost our
speaker I'll be back okay um we'll give
it a
second okay we we do not have any
speaker slips moving on to um the
president's report um I had the
opportunity to uh attend the new
Resident welcome on Sunday I wanted to
thank the mayor and uh Miss sad Mr
Marcelino Mr Silverman for joining me it
was a great turnout lots of residents um
and their youngest residents also
attending but also a very special thank
you to Natalie for a tremendous
tremendous
event um I I did want to note that one
resident who just moved to Bexley last
week told me um that he loves local
government and I looked at him and I
said why it sounds like Mr Marcelino
also talked to him and he said it's
because um local government gets to
touch and see and feel what matters to
their residents so I wanted to pass that
along with you uh to you uh Mr Marcelino
you also talked to that same resident
share I just want to confirm I actually
overheard this that there is somebody
here that loves local government you are
not making that up and I was amazed I
was intrigued
myself well Mr Marcelino was my witness
which I
appreciate um I also wanted to uh share
that the Bexley Community Foundation um
is um in its process of reviewing Grant
applications they are also uh helping to
sponsor Jeffrey Woods Festival this
weekend um so I hope that you all all
consider attending um we also are in our
last week of Black History Month um
please do what you can to support um um
all the efforts of Black History Month
um I also wanted to ask Council if you
noticed that the Beckley blast after our
February 11th it included a summary of
what we had voted on at Council um did
anyone see that besides me who wrote it
no okay everyone saw that um that was uh
discussed at our last council meeting
and I want to thank Megan and Natalie
and the mayor for including that and
then finally Council um has everyone had
a chance to review the recommendation of
the council working group that was
circulated at the last
meeting I know we did kind of an
overview at that time um we explained
the rationale for our
recommendations um and we put into Pro
play really quickly um the Bey blast to
summarize what we have done at uh
Council meetings and going forward uh I
will keep doing that so that our
community is aware of what we're doing
um any further concerns or discussion on
the recommendation of working groups for
Council
Communications um I would like to ask
you for a a Voice vote just to support
that for um for this recommendation um
all in favor say I I is anyone opposed
thank you so much to council member
fibble and Silverman for working with me
um to help improve Communications with
our residents and I
think that's all I got all right Mr City
attorney over to you I have no report to
see all right Mr auditor over to you
please no
report Mr Mayor you want to walk us
through your administrative updates
please wish I could say no report I will
say I'm G to try to be fast and I would
I would C I would counsel counsil to not
ask I mean ask any questions you want
but just know we have two very beefy
presentations coming up so choose our
time carefully how we wish um first off
I want to take a moment to brag on the
employees that we have here uh in the
room um Carrie Martin uh facing a change
in uh the staff that she's working with
right now worked with Kiana to get out
three payrolls at this point
uh a a career first for her uh and so
the last time you guys got paid for your
your your Hefty Council stien know that
that was because Carrie Martin pulled
off a successful payroll with Kiana so
Kudos Carry's working really hard there
we
go here at City Hall we do two claps so
we'd say two claps for carrye that's how
we do that um Andy um I we may or may
not be out of a pretty busy snow and ice
season but uh the Warriors in the
service department uh did a fantastic
job you guys were out on the spot right
away you were uh you were cheerful uh
and you were thorough you did a great
job and you did us proud so two claps
for Annie and crew and then um this is
fun uh Megan as you will find out very
soon at the council retreat has been
hard at work uh with both the police
department annual report and the overall
City annual report and prepping uh
with the state of the community coming
up uh the annual reports look amazing
really good work you're about to see
them yourself but in the meantime two
claps for
Megan and Natalie of course is a Dynamo
always doing all sorts of things but
that new Resident welcome event was
fantastic I know that you already
recognized but you get two claps
too um I do want to let Council know
there was a gentleman at the last
council meeting who came in uh talked
about the a labor contract that we had
in in in front of us I did meet with him
and so followed up and gave him some
more answered some questions we had a
great
conversation um the Jeffrey Woods
Festival is this Saturday uh it is
expanded it is encompassing a lot of our
Arbor Day activities so it especially
has a lot of great activities for kids
including like Russell Tree Service
will'll be there with a a a harness and
they can climb a tree with a harness
it's going to be pretty cool um lots of
new crafts and activities some nature
walks you can sign up for so take a look
at that and please do consider Jo
joining um we have tomorrow night here
uh in case you hear about it the
Roosevelt medians North of Broad they're
not new medians they exist uh but the
tree commission has taken some interest
in refreshing the landscape on those so
there's going to be a workshop with
residents in the
area uh Elizabeth Elman helped to host a
Ohio women in government uh get together
here at City Hall and I know that Jess
sad and Jo pickerel were on a panel for
that and I hear it went well although I
was not invited um and we had a great
boarding commission member orientation
with uh new board and commission members
and some uh existing board and
commission members last week um talked
through Sunan law ethics what's quasi
judicial uh you know it was it was a it
was a a great time um and I do want to
say Sam you can see Sam is in the middle
of a joke right there uh and I'm sure it
was very funny
but uh that little cute baby is my niece
one of the one of the newest be one of
the newest additions to uh to Bexley and
finally uh on President's Day I was able
to take the kids to the Garfield
Homestead and I want to note for you
guys not only are my kids the cutest of
course but if you look closely the beard
and the hairline of James Garfield are
not too different than mine so Ben
Franklin might have a run for his money
when James A Garfield shows up at the
next Community event
nice well
done
okay who needs enemies when you have
friends like Lori and fibble in the
order that they appear on my screen
Carrie Martin has uh K Martin your
update all right thank you so um my
report is a little different than what
you're used to seeing um I'm just
providing the income tax for this month
um and you will see that we are 20 $
6,867 less than what was expected and
about 58,000 less than what we received
in
2024 um this is to be expected um we
have seen a little bit of a decline over
the past year um but 2023 was I think
abnormally high and I think a lot of its
people are back to work in the office
versus working from home so um then I
want to just have a little fill you in a
little bit on what's going on with our
department we do have a payroll
coordinator position that has been
posted as the mayor said we successfully
did submit three payrolls within a week
and a half so um we've had some really
great applicants so hopefully um that
position gets filled soon um we're
currently due to the unforeseen
circumstances working on the December
Bank crack and once that is updated
we'll be able to get the year closed get
timely reports again um and then once
that's completed we have to start
working on the annual Financial reports
so um and then with that we're also
working on continued internal audits
they're looking at all the revenue and
receipts um that is kind of on a hold
though until we get caught up but that
is um in the works um as we're learning
and experiencing these new challenges we
are updating all of our um documents um
for continued accuracy and efficiency
within the department and then finally
tomorrow which I know that we passed
this in the budget um we have a meeting
to discuss um the new analytic software
that has to do with um budgeting and
Reporting as well as um updating the
finance chart of account numbers so with
that if anybody has any
questions perfect thank you
I am guilty for one of those beefy
presentations later um so I will be
giving you a pretty hefty background on
where we are in the selection and
recommendation of a comprehensive sewer
study um as the mayor uh suggested you
are going to get a preview of the city's
annual report um for 2024 at your
upcoming um Retreat this week but uh
we'll have printed copies of that
actually available at the state of the
community and then of course they'll be
here at City Hall and online um TCB I
don't know if uh director Clinger has
also been updating you on this um but
both sets of plans did have their second
round of review at ARB this month um
both will be returning and going to be
zap in March or at least that's what's
anticipated at this point um do want to
make sure that you all save the date uh
for the newly rescheduled grand opening
for cohatch they are starting to move in
tenets in March um and do anticipate a
April 2nd uh ribbon cutting um beyond
that um kind of the big news is that
odod if if you didn't see releases about
this um they did open the grant period
for the remaining $50 million in the
state's Brownfield remediation grant
program and the city submitted two
applications directly one is for the
Ferndale Mayfield um environmental
remediation that we discussed at the
last council meeting we also um I think
it was just maybe a couple months after
I began we submitted um the clerk
station um gas station remediation Grant
um the reason that they waited that long
is because the uh Grant periods only
open annually and we kind of submitted
that last one right after the last one
had closed um we're also aware of two
applications made for the same program
by TCB so beex is a community has four
applications in um odod has not made any
um implication of when they plan to make
award announcements uh but they have
said that they will close the grant
period as soon as they receive $150
million in requests um and so I assume
that'll be pretty quickly $50 million by
the way is a very low number compared to
what has um been um set aside previously
it's because it's the third and final
year of the program there's also no
dedicated County set aside which is
important to note um in the past there
were multiple rounds because of that
County set aside that has gone away for
this round with that I'll take any
questions
I have nothing to add tonight but happy
to take any
questions thank you madam president that
concludes our administer great uh Mr
official over to you for consent agenda
agend agenda as the meeting minutes from
February 11th
2025 right um council is there any
discussion on the proposed um meeting
minutes all right seeing none I move to
adopt the consent agenda could I please
have a second second second by Mr
Marcelino no questions from Council any
comments from the
public Mr mCP would you please call the
role on the motion to adopt the consent
agenda Mr Silverman yes Miss fibel yes
Miss lamkey yes Mr Hurley yes Mr
Marcelino yes and Mr Markham yes consent
agenda
passes all right moving on to the third
reading of ordinance
0625 to create the Bey galvanized water
s service line replacement Loan program
introduced originally by m
sad thank you so much uh we have um a
presentation on this one um mayor you've
got that pulled up uh I'm going to turn
it over to you or is this going to
Andy no um Andy Andy yeah I I'll I'll
walk you through it and Andy and I will
kind of Pitch hit as we need to um but
first off I want to reiterate that the
expectation tonight is that this will be
tabled so we're not asking for vote I'm
about to hit you with lots of
information and you're going to feel
pummeled by this information and then
we're going to hit you if either more
information with the sewer presentation
coming up so I think it's actually
fitting that we're talking about these
topics together tonight um because while
they're not this you know they're not in
structurally truly related they they do
apply overall to
our infrastructure systems that all need
upgraded and um we'll give you a preview
of Coming Attractions so this
presentation started off as a talking
about the lead service line Loan program
um but I thought before we go deep into
the Loan program we should have an
update as to why are we even talking
about lead service lines um andly what's
going on exactly and give you the full
context and it turns out that the full
context is a much larger portion of of
the presentation so um bear with me
buckle up okay so as a a quick refresh
um this diagram shows you at kind of a
high level uh the infrastructure that
brings water to Residents homes once
once the water shows up in our Mains so
the city um maintains water mains
throughout the city um and then we own a
service line that runs from the water
main and into the resident shut off
valve we call it the curb box it's
typically located at the curb or near
the curb uh often in the tree laon uh
sometimes slightly different than that
but that's the the primary condition uh
that's at the property line or or near
the property line and once uh past the
curve box between the curve box and the
house or the valve box or the valve uh
that is owned by the resident that is
the private service line so today we'll
be talking about public service lines
and private service lines when we're
talking about public service lines we're
talking about the service line on this
side private service line we're talking
about the service line on this
side quick little primer on some Pro
prominent types of service lines um we
don't really see many lead actual lead
service lines on on the private side but
there are lead service lines on the city
Side between the water mains and the
curb box
um copper is a common uh waterline
material brass not so much in our
community uh plastic is common and then
galvanized piping is quite common as
well and what's important to know
about galvanized piping is well we're
about to get there before we get there
we're going to be talking about lead for
this whole presentation and I want to
talk about what we do today in terms of
testing for lead and how much we're
being impacted by lead in the water in
the in the in our water supply based
upon the types of lines that we have so
we do actually we have gone above and
beyond in testing for lead we
voluntarily test annually as opposed to
the previously was um required every
other year and we also test Beyond um
our required sample set um the last
final test results that we have in were
from 2023 we had a total 33 samples
taken um there was no detectable lead in
any of our samples um that's because
uh even though some of those samples
were taken in properties where there was
a lead service line serving in
galvanized pipe uh city of Columbus
treats all of the water supply with an
anti-corrosion uh chemical that is safe
but it also kind of traps lead on those
pipes and that is a condition throughout
the entire Columbus water system and in
fact as we talk about our water
infrastructure it is not very different
from other older neighborhoods
throughout Columbus beex is not very
unique and having either lead service
lines or galvinized lines it's what
we're about to get to so previously the
EPA would talk about lead service lines
as service lines that are actually made
out of lead and we've been we have been
Ste steadily and consistently replacing
those lead service lines on the city
side but new in 2024 the EPA started for
the first time ever defining galvanized
service lines when they were connected
to lead service lines as a lead service
line even though it doesn't have lead in
it because it has been exposed in the
system to lead and galvanized can absorb
lead galvanized is now classified as a
lead service line and the reason that's
really significant is that somewhere
between
30ish 40% of our residents have
galvanized service lines that at least
one at one point in history were
attached to lead service lines and so
now in the eyes of the EPA for the first
time ever as of
October 2024 those galvanized service
lines are now being called lead service
lines um that's a big change and if
you'll remember we had some
communication out about that in late
2024 so that's all part of an EPA
revision to their lead and coppera rule
that occurred on October
8th and part of that revision also said
that the city needs to take steps to
make sure that all lead service lines
including these newly classified
galvanized service lines need to be
fully replaced within 13 years
what's extraordinary about this is that
in the past we've always talked about
replacing our infrastructure what we own
between the main and the valve now the
EPA is saying you need to go out and
make sure that every home that has a
galvanized service line that was once
attached to lead in this instance or lad
but we don't have this is replaced
within 13
years and there's a little quote a
fantastic quote from the national law
review about how different this is you
can read that on your own time later um
so this is roughly what the timeline
looks like in in October that new rule
was launched in late 2024 we began our
private service line identification
program we hope in 2025 by the way this
is not the scale is this is not to scale
so sorry about that if that's bothering
you it didn't really work out well to
put it to scale in 2025 we hope to
launch a pilot Loan program and we'll
get to that in a second which is what
this ordinance is about by
2027 we need to have completed our
inventory so know for sure every single
line is identified and and and reported
back to the EPA and have a 10-year plan
due for the replacement El of el service
lines and then by 2037 we will need to
have completed doing this I want to note
that like there is some uncertainty of
as to how well this will stick it's an
unfunded mandate we'll get it into it in
a second I'm not 100% confident that
there won't be some change in policy
coming down the line line that would
impact this timeline most likely easing
the
timeline major asterisk there is in the
EPA code a deferred deadline option that
can apply to communities with a high
proportion of lead and galvanized
service lines the catch is we don't
really know if that's us until we've
completed our inventory so we're still
that's still unknown um and then upon as
we continue to research that we may or
may not find that we wouldn't even ever
qualify for it so that's that is an as
risk so what are we doing to replace
lead service lines well we've been doing
that we have been replacing them for
years every time we've done a water main
project we've re we've replaced lead
service lines I think anytime we've
opened up a service line we've replaced
it if it's lead and so because of that
we have a pretty strong lead on
replacing the city's lead service
lines we're also working on the
inventory program
and we're trying to find ways to
incentivize residents to replace their
lines so where we are in the process
we've been we've been doing replacement
we've launched the inventory program
we've started the private inventory
process we're developing programs to
incentivize private Le service land
replacement which is what this ordinance
is we hope to finalize the inventory by
late 2027 and create uh that 10-year
plan by that
date so what have we found so far we
have ever since we launched our
inventory program we have
um I'm sorry the
percentages are on another version some
reason didn't come through on the PDF uh
We've launched U the inventory program
and we've inspected ourselves a little
over 300 um I believe uh properties and
then we've had self-report in in in a
similar kind of quantity and they've
found that the percentage of galvanized
that have been reported through this are
somewhere in the 25 to
28% um so that's about 500 households 5
or 600 households which is um you know
about a fifth of our
overall I'm sorry that's not right about
a seventh or an eighth of our overall um
household
base I think this is I'm going to switch
out to the actual presentation one
second
guys my are you am I still with are you
guys still with me okay
cool um so this looks a little man okay
so how many private galvanized lines do
we have we had some new information that
came in while we were crafting this
today so it's a little
uh based upon the current
ratios uh we are in sort of the Arena of
1227 private galvanized service
lines um and then within our city owned
we have approximately
1,800 um and we've already replaced
approximately 2600 so I said the good
news is we're ahead of the curve a
little bit the ordinance that's in front
of you is a way to help start to Spur
residents to replace their galvanized
service lines and we'll talk about some
other tools that we might have after
this and the way that's structured is
that a property owner would need to be
known or occupant they would need to
have a service line that is a galvanized
requiring replacement for the EPA
maximum loan of
$4,000 and and no more than 80% of the
total cost of the
replacement the interest rate would be
based on the Ohio Water Development
Authority Benchmark and would be set by
the auditor it would be a 10-year loan
period the contractor would be one that
the city selects based upon competitive
bidding and bulk formula pric and the
reason for that is that um we just know
from experience now with our Loan
program that having a city selected
contractor allows us to work much more
smoothly the contractor could be paid by
the city under a pre-arranged agreement
and so that there wouldn't be an issue
where we had to have the resident pay
and then get
reimbursed and then it would be subject
to fund Avail fund availability in a
first come first serve basis so we
budgeted for this in
2025 uh out of our infrastructure fund
and we budgeted based upon what we
thought would perhaps be opted for by
our residents assuming that most
residents that could do this would do it
and here's what that might look like so
North Columbia based upon the surveys
that we have back only about 8% of the
service lines on North Columbia are
galvanized um that could be for a
variety of factors most likely because
they've just had more waterline
Replacements over the years um some
those water services are larger they
might be more prone to Breaking because
of pressure and that sort of thing so
um based upon that if that's correct and
by the way you know we're still
developing this inventory it would be
about a
$20,000 loan out if everyone on North
Columbia opted to do it and we don't
think they
will Remington between Maine and
Livingston is also going to have a water
main
project um there are approximately 140
service lines Remington has a higher
percentage galvanized
lines we use the number 40% because
that's what we discovered on Chelsea
last summer but we don't know that for
sure on Remington but that would be a a
higher uh loan amount we we still
believe that um the combined 244,000
potential loan
amount because not everyone would opt
for it that the $200,000 we have
encumbered for this year will be
adequate for that Loan
program over time how however if
everyone were to use the program again
we don't think everyone were but if
everyone were going to do it uh we would
see a loan out of around just under $5
million for all of our residents to
replace their
lines the pilot program will help us
answer what percentage of people
actually do use the
program what works about the structure
what doesn't and long term based upon uh
uptake and usage can we sell fund the
program or would Bond financing be
appropriate pref of coming to tractions
bond financing would probably be
appropriate if we were to continue to go
beyond uh year one um additional
considerations uh we should consider and
this is something for Council to start
thinking about because it would require
an ordinance requiring private Leed
service line replacement whenever we
replace a main or Cityside service line
and
so what we mean by this is if we're in
the process of replacing our own line
and we discover that it's connected to a
galvanized service
line um we should consider if we should
require residents at that time to
replace their line or replace it within
a certain period of time some cities
have also passed ordinances that require
replacement of those private Lines
within a set period of time of Discovery
so I came across some ordinances um
where within one year of knowing that
you have a galvanized line you need to
replace it and so we could C couple an
ordinance like that with a funding
mechanism um there are lots of other
ways to do this but long story
short if the EPA guidelines rules stick
then we do have to figure out how to get
all of this galvanized service lines
replaced over a uh you know 13-year
period with the clock having already
started not something I didn't address
in this presentation is how are we
paying for our own City
Replacements and um quite honestly we're
continuing to assess all of these
numbers as they come in we believe that
we have the capacity to do much of that
replacement ourselves as we have been
doing over the years um but we're still
ascertaining how feasible that really is
over that 13-year timeline and it's very
possible that we come back to council uh
with you know some
additional uh with an additional plan
after we've really hammered that all out
again this is all pretty fresh this was
the uh October of 2024 when this was
finalized so with that I'm happy to
answer any questions questions or Andy
Andy is there anything you want to add
to
that okay than you're good questions Mr
Silverman you have your hand
up assuming assuming nothing changes
with the Federal Regulations are we
going to have to eventually have a
complete stock of every house whether
they voluntarily sign up so like the
window right now is voluntary and at
some point it's going to switch over to
inspections from the city on everybody's
house so yeah we already are there we
have have to we have to report back to
the EPA by
2027 what everybody has which will
require inspections so has that you said
that started I thought currently we're
voluntary stage it is Vol it is
voluntary yeah we haven't gotten to the
point we will eventually head to a part
where everybody's house will have to be
inspected and then yep at that point if
we know that they have a leadline you're
saying that there's uh capabilities for
Council to then put an ordinance in
place that once discovered from that
mandatory inspection we are they going
to require replacement and we could put
a time frame if we want it to that's
possible and I think part of part of the
reason of talking about this pilot is
it's helpful to to see and
experience what happens when you provide
a really good funding mechanism how
what's the percentage of voluntary
uptake into that plan and that program
and then we would need to spread it
Beyond just our own water main
Replacements right now we're talking
about coinciding with watermain
Replacements but in order to hit that
Target we would have to go beyond that
had to go bigger yep Mr Hurley did you
have your hand up yeah um remind me how
much we appropriated in the budget to
for the pilot
$200,000,000
um could this theoretically be
structured like a revolving Loan Fund
where we have sort of a seed amount that
gets loaned out then as the principal is
paid back we can then reloan that out
sort of thinking lines like the old
clean Ohio fund where it's we can but
the payback over 10 years it's going to
need a big up front yeah and so I think
um we probably will it'll probably be a
little bit more like we end up with a
either a source of funding and I need to
find out more about Matt and I need to
find out more about Ohio Water
Development Authority funding which is
appropriate for
this and if there is almost like a
revolving loan option with that so
that's kind of our Master source and
then it's you know payb over time um and
then so we finish our inventory in 2027
then is it's a 10 clock to get all the
lines replaced currently yep okay yeah I
mean obviously we're in a different
Administration and and you know day-to-
day it's different um what about rental
properties I know you said that for the
Loan program it needs to be owner
occupied how are we gonna are we going
to or how are we going to provide
assistance to whether they be R home
rentals or some of the apartment
complexes um again I think we we thought
of this as a a beginning volum into this
to see kind of what experience we have
um council could choose to change the
language of that ordinance so it isn't
confine just to owner occupants okay and
lastly this is more of just a um just a
thought that I'm kicking around here I
appreciate we're going to table this
um you know I would be interested in
exploring either uh like a income limit
household income limit or maybe for
lower income residents like a loan for
foress program just recognizing you know
you use the example of North Columbia
mean I don't think anyone on North
Columbia really needs a low loan you
know to cover the cost of this whereas
there are other surprised you'd be
surprised I just I just put that out
there as you know some as as food for
thought if others other members of
council are interested either like I
said you know some type of threshold you
know it's 4,000 but up to x amount of
household income or household value or
maybe for lower residents you know under
a certain threshold we you know we
forgive the loan if certain conditions
are met just as a way to try to help
defay the cost of it what I don't want
to you know I guess what I'm worried
about is you know someone who you know
doesn't have a lot of means being stuck
you know we come in we replace the water
M and now they're stuck with this
expense you know if they're living on a
tight budget that can you know that can
be a real challenge for them so just
thinking of ways to maybe Target a
little differently thank you Mr Hurley
Mr Marcelina
yeah uh just two questions and or
thoughts I guess uh I guess
first is it appropriate to even move
forward with this type of planning at
this time given the current political
climate and how it seems like every
order that was put in place is being
upended just a thought um and then
secondary to that if there could be a
way to uh shorten that loan period as a
whole as 10 years just seems uh like a
long time and then third to this I would
have an interest in the type of program
that councilman Hurley's referring to
for uh residents in need um to assist
should this be enforced and I'll just
leave it okay so um is it appropriate
one one thing I would point out is that
galvanized lines in general are tiing
time bombs and they are a
problem regardless of the fact that
they're being treated with
anti-corrosion you know they're they are
still corroding and uh while they're not
leeching lead what they're doing is they
are failing and right now anything
that's a galvanized line is pretty old
at this point and it's failing at a
pretty high rate so it's in our best
interest to get those lines replaced no
matter what because when a line
breaks and leaks some of those leaks
aren't necessarily detectable right away
over time that's costing the city money
because we're Master metered and we're
not capturing that on the on the
resident side of the meter so even if
the standards were to change like let's
say next year and we've already done a
year of this I would say that wasn't a
bad idea because we got those galvanized
lines replaced through the program um I
you did make that comment before about
like a fiveyear period maybe I think
that makes sense I think it's fine I me
then you're talking about $800 a month
$400 per half on your property tax
duplicate and we're getting money back
faster so that the revolving loan fund
of Hurley Works a little bit better I
would be really cautious about the uh
concept of having a subsidized rate for
this it's
a you know when you purchase a home in
Bexley you are dealing with water lines
and and and internal gas lines and your
own internal plumbing and your roof and
all sorts of things it's just a there's
a cost of ownership that's involved and
I feel like fundamentally like I'm not
sure that we should be subsidizing that
overarching cost of ownership that is a
requirement of even having a house in
the first place just just a thought I
think it's a little different than like
a short-term fiscal issue that people
might have can I just make one comment
back just on that one the only thought
process in my mind is that when you do
buy the house often times it is one of
the things that's inspected I know when
I recently sold a property that's about
all they were concerned with was the the
line itself um and so I just am thinking
that if we are to some degree forcing
people to comply before that emergency
takes place that we should maybe
consider some relief that's my only
thought process is that otherwise you
might buy that house they tell you the
line's in good shape and if you can own
that house for 15 years without that
line going well that wasn't an expected
cost but now we are I shouldn't say
enforcing but compelling residents to so
that's where I S A little bit but just a
statement outside of that thank you Mr
markam you had your hand up next uh just
mediate reaction to that I think that's
going to be a very complicated tricky
thing to come up with a formula that you
know we're going to feel is Equitable
around here not that I'm saying that we
couldn't or shouldn't try but I it could
be a pretty slippery slope I am curious
um is there a water main going down the
middle of every street in Beckley north
and south east and
west not every street uh but there andy
why don't answer that I'm about to make
something that I think is right
you want me to
try okay all
right there are water mains and easement
and alleys not just in
streets yep but every but
everyone yeah I mean I think every every
yeah and so they're so they're running
like that's a grid too then GD it's
similar like so you know we have 40 some
odd road miles we have a similar
footprint for water
interesting is it is it fair to say then
that like when you're looking
at I mean certain portions of the city
then when you say galvanized lead and
you're seeing a percentage that there
that then at one time conception or
whatever that number was 100% And then
it's only receded because they have been
replaced over time in
various it's more complicated than that
is it it it is
yeah depends on data of construction
yeah but certainly those houses are
clustered we're all constructed at the
same time or
[Music]
within that's not true well so there are
newer homes that were constructed more
recently that would not be galvanized
and then there was we were having some
debate about like the very old
homes
but I think the general wisdom is that
most of them are galvanized but they're
so old that they have broken and so
they've been replaced at some point in
time it's it's not really feasible then
to be like okay well here we have this
section we know is all constructed 100%
And then then we have records of the
ones that have been replaced into sort
of
back yeah no okay it's not that simple
also I mean I point this out but we've
talked before we we're in the process of
a water meter replacement program as if
we don't have enough things going on
right now and in the process of
replacing the water meter our crews are
able to quickly ascertain what the
service line is and so that'll be a less
impactful way of learning what those
service lines are than like having to
separately schedule those
inspections um I had a quick question I
know that we're intending to table this
tonight um we do have some proposed
amendments my suggestion would be that
we not amend prior to tabling because
we've heard so much information tonight
and I would like to have time to digest
it but if you could pull up the proposed
amendments and just walk us through um
what they are I think they have more to
do with the
auditor um yeah
that they do
um not a lot of changes but I wanted
Council just to be aware that uh um when
this does come back these are the
proposed amendments so there's a little
bit of a checks and balanced the
auditor's uncontrolled loan rate
creation Powers um but it also initially
it read that it would be a yearly rate
that's set this allows the rate to get
um
set um based on a published rate at the
time the loan is
granted and it makes sure that the
auditor is gender neutral so it's just
to add an additional check and balance
and to have our brilliant
auditor give some input pretty much yeah
all right uh Mr auditor what do you what
do you think of um of this proposed
ordinance well I um about the amendment
or the overall ordinance I mean so I
guess so just tied to the amendment what
what this is all about really is just
ease of operations so that the rate's
not constantly being set and we're just
using a published rate um you know I
mean I will answer it from just an oper
operationalizing it standpoint so I mean
if if city council chooses to to deploy
this type of program um to the mayor's
Point what we will do is look for
funding sources if
necessary um you know to
me whether it's um you know this
galvanized Loan program where we're
going to talk about the sewer study you
know I I'll say this playfully we're
we're we're heading into
not the year of the parks but the years
of infrastructure y okay so what what
we've been here all
along but yeah yeah and again I don't so
I gotta be careful about what I say
because I my implication is not that we
aren't working on the infrastructure
because we are but what we are doing is
looking at step increases potential step
increases and how we're using our
dollars and putting it towards the
infrastructure so from my standpoint
strictly about operationalizing it what
I just want to do is make certain that
our um ratings with public and with
moodies and and all stay where we are
which is essentially as good as you can
get given our our infrastructure or and
our um tax base so you know you know
should city council look to implement
this that is exactly what the auditor
will do is confirm that we have funding
sources that that help fund it and
Ensure that our debt ratings stay the
way in which we want them to which gives
us access to you know good cost of
capital and all that kind of stuff so
from my standpoint it's really just
about operationalizing it and making
sure that we do so in a way that doesn't
inadvertently impact the city okay thank
you for answering that um who else Mr
Hurley you had your hand up again and
wait before we get to you anyone who
hasn't had a chance to um ask questions
yet okay Mr Hurley go ahead uh just a
one question of clarity um you you keep
saying galvanized and I saw in the um
the presentation so we the loan is
eligible for galvanized steel or lead or
is it just the galvanized steel as
declared by the EPA 2004 change um the
reality is that there aren't lead
service lines okay on the private side
okay anywhere that we've ever found okay
but the galvanized service lines are the
ones that are being targeted um I think
that the way this is
worded uh that
yeah yeah that's that clarifies it I
just yeah wanted to make sure I was
understanding that um I I need mentioned
you know trying to initially at least
tie this to where the city's doing water
main Replacements a question for you or
for Andy is geographically if we're
doing say we're doing a pilot of
$200,000 where is there a geographic
kind of area where that might be
concentrated like a handful of streets
or so that that that is uh for 20 25
that is Remington between Main and
Livingston and that's North Columbia
okay okay
um all right thank you all right Council
any other further discussion before I
ask if we have any public comments
before a motion is
made right seeing none uh any comments
from the
public please step on
up Miss Lewis I was remiss earlier but I
know that you are familiar with our
public speaker um policy uh for the
thousands of folks who are listening to
us uh online I would like to just
briefly revisit that policy public
comments are the Public's chance to
share their thoughts as to matters
involving City business or ordinance or
resolution this is not a back and forth
process nor is it a debate but rather we
will respectfully listen to your
comments comments that violate our
policy may result in the termination of
comments
the policy is available online and also
available on the speaker slips just
outside council chambers each speaker
can speak up to five minutes and of
course if there are questions asked
during public comment I will do my best
to write those down and once comment is
concluded I will refer the matter to the
appropriate council member or the city
Administration for a response as soon as
possible if there are no questions asked
please know that we appreciate and thank
you for your comments with that would
you please State your full legal uh
legal name and address pleas please
consant Lewis 663 you Clair and I I do
have a speaker slip in but I don't need
it for this one right correct okay good
um is this
going if this is put into place would it
require all of the residents that have
galvanized
pipes from the water main to their house
to be
replaced and if the resident chooses not
to do that or participate in this
process of of loan um would the city
take it upon themselves to make that
change and then Bill back to the
resident the
cost of that
replacement then another question is a
galvanized pipe can it be sleeved or can
something be shoved into
it so that that nothing needs to be dug
up but whatever is there the galvanized
pipe if it's there maybe there's a
lining that can go through so that the
Lawn
isn't torn up and our plantings are
remaining to be beautiful um and how
long would that process
be uh I think those are most of my
questions and thank you for tabling this
thank you Miss Lewis for your comments
um Mr Mayor I'm going to ask youber Mr
bashore to answer those questions if you
can I did write them down um I'm GNA let
Andy talk about sleeving but before that
um the ordinance that's before you does
not require anybody to replace their um
lead service lines or galvanized
requiring replacement lines um but what
we did talk about is that the federal
the the federal EPA is requiring us to
make sure that they get replaced over
this period of time and so as time goes
on we will need to come up with a
solution that results in the replacement
of those lines this doesn't commit us to
any solution we don't know what that is
right now this is the carrot like
offering offering an incentive or a
source of funding for it um sleeving of
water lines Mr bore second question is
over to you I wish we could do that um
that's a very similar process to like
sewer lining and lateral lining but with
the service lines they're just not big
enough and there's nothing to sleeve
inside the line just due to the size and
diameter also I think a lot of the
galvanized lines um are so uh fragile
that uh sleeping could be problematic um
I will say that uh when water lines are
replaced um often you know it's not the
old style of like digging out the whole
yard there's a boring occurring so that
while there might be a hole near the
house and know and know and a hole dug
near the the valve box most of the yard
is undisturbed by uh modern waterline
Replacements thank that's actually
cheaper too yeah and cheaper all right
thank you so much for answering those
questions all right Council um any
further discussion before I move to
table this all right seeing none I move
to table ordinance
6-25 could I please have a second second
second by Mr Marcelino Mr mCP would you
please call the rule on the motion to
table
Mr Hurley yes Mr Markham yes Mr
Marcelino yes Miss fibble yes Mr
Silverman yes Miss ly yes ordinance is
tabled Mr official back to you no second
readings moving on to a first reading of
ordinance 0725 to create chapter 1473
maintenance of elevators requiring
landlords who rent residential units
with access to an operational passenger
elevator to keep the elevator maintained
and operational for the duration of the
rental term Mr Marcelino uh elevator
serves uh important purposes for uh many
properties to allow uh any Resident to
get up and down between floors uh EV
elevators are best when they actually
work and are maintained as such I think
uh this ordinance is geared towards
ensuring that all uh owners of uh
residential units um maintain and keep
those uh elevators operational so uh we
would uh leave at that it is a first
reading but please take a look um let me
know if you have any questions I would
also leave it to the mayor if there's
anything he would like to add to
this no uh thank you well
summarized I have a question for the
City attorney is there anything in the
Ada that speaks to um elevators and
access well there could be some things
in the Americans with Disabilities Act
that would require a an individual
tenant to bring a lawsuit or bring a
claim or but nothing but nothing on the
owner well that yeah the that but but
the city doesn't have any standing to
force the Ada against the
right let's you know apartment owner and
I I spoke too soon so just if I can
explain disor contextualize where this
is coming from Beyond you know kind of
the obvious function of an ordinance
like this we have had a couple apartment
complexes where elevators have gone down
and residents have been um stranded in
higher floors without with mobility
issues and we've had instances like that
where the landlord hasn't repaired the
elevator for many weeks um and you know
that happened again more recently and uh
you know it just feels like after having
experienced this several different times
and and getting to hear and from
residents who have the hardship of being
homebound because an elevator isn't
functioning when they rented a unit with
the understanding that they had access
to an
elevator felt like this would be
something worthy of exploring thank you
for that background any uh additional
questions from Council Mr
Silverman what's the enforcement is it
is it fine based yes so this is um this
can be a uh fine based enforcement
um in chapter
1430 uh there is an organizational
penalty that's provided for a uh like a
corporation that might own property
there could be a criminal penalty if
it's an individual um which just depends
on the context but it is important to
note that there is an
organizational
um option in chapter
1430 and what I mean by that is U I
don't know if you guys recall we had
some issues with going after a company
you can't site a company criminally um
so we've been slowly adding in
organizational penalties when they have
where they haven't existed um so that if
a company has is not in compliance
there's a pretty stiff Financial penalty
against the
company thank you Mr
Hurley just two questions um the first
do we have a sense of how many buildings
in Bexley how many properties this would
apply to just going to try to do the
math in my head of how many multi-tenant
apartment buildings we have elevators
maybe yeah um not not many not many with
elevators maybe three um and then I you
know obviously it deals with um
residential but I I know we do have a
couple buildings that I think are
commercial only that have elevators do
we need to take into account those
situations where there's not a
residential unit but you know business
owners and their customers could
nevertheless be adversely impacted
certainly worth conversation just subm
Mr marcelino's ordinance so yeah you
know I I agree with you and but also I
think as uh you know as a business owner
I think that's something that I would
factor into when starting my business
and putting my business on a certain
floor and you make your own choice at
that's in in that sense whereas a place
to live at a reasonable cost is more of
an just a thought process but I'll
certainly talk to you about that more
before we vote on this and I can only
think of two buildings that
that would apply to where there's I
think office only or commercial only and
no residential but I could be wrong on
that it's also I mean we we have
discussed this at length but we do have
developments coming forth um in the
community so it's also to protect
against the future a bit so I think it's
it's worth discussing a bit more
Danny sorry I was looking over here is
this is this a hand raised Mr MC peek
okay I me just when I'm looking at the
enforcement piece um for or seems
logical because we can do injunctions
and administrative penalties but
it can you help me understand how this
ordinance would allow an individual to I
mean they can already seek abatement and
termination it won't is the answer okay
that's under legal review right now okay
okay there These are nice words landlord
T okay thank you right Mr Markham so the
way I read that also is so they have to
I'm looking at
my without my glasses my small print
here so they have to initiate within 24
hours but doesn't that just leave open
the possibility of calling an elevator
repair company and getting a diagnostic
and then not doing anything for two to
three weeks or or whatever is that will
still be in compliance with this it says
try and reasonably timely but then
that's not a that's not an enforcable
time period
either
yeah
um uh you know you can't do more than
that if there's better language then
let's talk about it but is that right I
just think there are too many vagaries I
mean look the the library recently had
issues with with its elevator and had to
wait a long time before they could get
the parts and everything yeah sure so I
think the point here is to make sure
that the El that that it get fix it's
fixed as soon as possible and that the
landlord the the owner is moving forward
in fixing it and if there you know if
it's going to take two weeks that really
stinks but I don't think there's
anything you could do about it if that's
truly the case we had a very analogous
situation recently where there's a
boiler down in an apartment complex and
uh there is some language um about
maintenance of um hot water in
residential buildings so our building
department was involved in that and
intimately familiar with and talking to
the contractor like what else can you do
really teasing out all the different
options that they had and ensuring that
they were truly you know urgent in the
way that they were treating the issue
and that they were going as quickly as
they could it would be a really similar
situation I would think with this
ordinance where if there's a complaint
that is taking too long building
Department's reaching out to the
property owner the contractor hey what's
your reason for delay like and exploring
the different options and if they found
that it was really an insincere effort
they could start enforcement and so in
and the way that I'm interpreting what
you're saying then is so if this if this
was enacted or had been enacted those
instances that you're talking about
before uh would been we would be able to
act on on
that perhaps okay I mean I don't know
enough about the exact fact pattern as
like what was the widget that was
ordered where was it coming from and um
I I know that at least one story it did
seem like the landlord kind of was like
well it's sorry it's no guarantee this
going to work we'll get to it when we'll
get to it that's good feedback Mr
Markham um any other discussion it is
just a first reading it's going to come
back to us again um all right seeing
none U Mr mCP do we have any speaker
slips on this
one no speaker
slips moving on all right first reading
of res solution 01 1-25 to support to
support the ongoing investment in the
repair and replacement of sewer
infrastructure and to support the
planned refresh of the city's sewer
study and Sewer Plan introduced by Miss
uh Council you are in for a real treat
tonight this is the third but very
important infrastructure update um I
will share with you that uh this is
coming to you because your board of
control myself the mayor and our auditor
felt it was important to do kind of a
deeper dive with Council um to kind of
update you on current situation um maybe
some of the historical process a lot of
that predated most of us who uh are just
recently on Council I know that uh Megan
and the mayor worked really hard to put
this together but as we've discussed
lots of times during financial budget
season our infrastructure and Bexley is
in um is always a high priority for so
many different reasons um so please keep
an open mind feel free to ask questions
uh this is just a first reading but
please know that um there is um some
context and a reason that we are
bringing this forward because it is such
a complex but important issue so that
being said do it come in to you or to
I'll ke it up Megan you'll get the Megan
will show the pretty pictures I'm going
to point out a page and a half of
recital for you guys to read um these
recital uh provide deep historic context
to where we currently stand with our
water sorry with our
sewer infrastructure updates long story
short um and Megan I don't want to
overlap with anything you're about to
say but uh the process that brings us
today to talking about updating our
sewer plan has been ongoing for many
years Council previously authorized a
26e sewer plan um during which and I'm
Wonder to show wait until uh Sam
okay okay I'll talk slowly uh a 26-year
plan that would in 2014 cost somewhere
between 13 million and $22 million we've
been in the process of executing that
plan over the ensuing
decade and the Plan called for updating
the study uh which we're looking into
but with the Twist and
so with that mysterious lead
in Megan uh can take it away all right
and if you don't mind go ahead and pull
up those slides while you do I do just
want to take a step back and than
president ly auditor mCP um I think this
will be the fourth time you hear um
about this probably the third time you
heard this presentation specifically
also thank you to council member
Silverman and sad um who also reviewed
this in their capacity as various
committee heads um I think it's a really
good thing to take a big step back not
just because of the way that it impacts
Council and our Budget moving forward
but also the community at large and so
hopefully we can cover this with a broad
brush but dive into specifics as you
desire um so to the next slide what are
we going to cover um going to give you
50,000 foot view of what's included in
our sewer infrastructure a history of
the studies that have been completed to
date what we've done since um the key
study that we're going to talk about
tonight um I'm going to refer to it a
lot as the dffo I'll explain what that
means in a second but what's been done
since that was adopted in 2014 how do we
fund our SE projects currently the
purpose of a study moving forward how
did we go about selecting and proposing
um the engineer that I'll I'll speak to
here shortly um the budget impact for
2025 and what we anticipate to come in
in the years to come so Brad brush
50,000 foot view what do we have for
sanitarian storm the mayor already
mentioned that water lines we have about
40 miles that's actually pretty similar
to sanitary and storm sanitary that's
approximately 48 miles and storm that's
about 42 miles of city-owned line um on
an ongoing basis um we do quite a bit of
Maintenance um so there spot repair and
replacement is needed sometimes that's
unanticipated it comes up during other
projects or because of some kind of
backlog St lining um to miss Lewis's
question that is something that you can
do on S lines because of that diameter
and is something that we do do and
actually is um known to really help
reduce inflow and infiltration which
we'll also talk about um we do ongoing
inspection of uh manholes and catch
basins and stormw water enls and then
after we do all of that and some of the
other major projects that I'll talk
about here um we test to see if they
made an impact our improvements how did
they do on the impact of the overall
system so going forward um this was in
the recital but to help give it a little
bit more flavor um this all started back
in 2002 if you're not currently aware um
the city of Bexley sewer system flows
all to the city of Columbus um there is
one minor uh portion in which the
Columbus feeds into us first and then
that flows into Columbus but for the
most part it's us flowing to Columbus um
back in 200 into the EPA said to
Columbus that they needed to stop
illegally discharging their waste into
our Rivers um so that's probably a good
choice to stop doing that but what that
did mean is that there was a kind of a a
staggered backup um and a realization
that the current systems actually were
not at capacity um and designed um if
that discharge were not an option so in
2009 the EPA told satellite communities
to Columbus that they had to fix that
problem
um that they had to ensure that their
independent sewer systems could handle
both base flow so that's just kind of on
everyday dry weather and Peak flows um
during High rainfall so if you think
back to the March and may flooding
events that we had that would be a peak
flow and we know that our system could
not actually anticipate or handle that
um to reduce the overall ini inflow and
infiltration into the systems what does
that mean it just means unwanted water
and either the storm or sanitary system
um to reduce the impact of sanitar to
overflows in water and basements which
we're all familiar with to help notify
people better when that does occur um
and then kind of the meat of that entire
order from um the Ohio EPA was that we
had to do a plan we had to do a
comprehensive study and report back to
them exactly how we were going to go
about all of those things I'll refer to
that plan later is the dffo summary
report um so that's the big history um
so what have we done in the past um even
before uh we were ordered to by the Ohio
EPA we did have some evaluation going on
of our system 2004 there was a partial
study completed um we also have had some
tributary specific um uh testing done
that's the gold Road flow monitoring
that you see and I'm seeing a typo I'm
so sorry um and then moving forward 2009
is when that study um in response to the
dffo began um we employed an outside
engineering firm at that time EMH andt a
very reputable firm in the Columbus area
to conduct that for us um and they did
that over a 5year term um it involved a
number of things that we would like to
update and repeat and so I want to point
that out um there is a lot of useful
information that came out of the study
um a lot of information that has guided
improvements over the last 10 years um
and so it's a basis but it needs updated
moving forward and so they did flow
monitoring they did smoke testing die
testing they did visual inspections they
did CCTV inspections of lines um and a
number of other things they also looked
back at
independent um resident reports of water
and basements anything you could kind of
think of to try to determine where are
pain points and how might you improve
those level of service across the
community um meanwhile C council did
take action twice related to that study
um so while that study was going on from
2009 2014 in 2013 Council adopted the
first ever Water and Sewer Capital fee
the idea behind that was to generate
Revenue to then in the future fund um
improvements both on the Water and Sewer
side and so that was done in advance of
that full study coming out and then in
2014 um the council I'm sorry the mayor
mentioned 26-year funding plan um so
from let's see 2015 to 2040 is the time
frame we're talking about um that was
formally um adopted and approved by city
council by way of a resolution in 2014
and then shortly thereafter it was
submitted formally to the Ohio EPA again
called the dffo summary report so what
was included um so I know this is hard
to see and we'll go to a summary page so
you you can kind of crunch the numbers a
little bit more if you're having trouble
viewing them um that top blue line um is
what the dffo implementation schedule
suggested we do in terms of improvements
they had specific subbase and
recommendations which I left off just
for ease of readability but I gave you
the totals for each of these grouped
years that they had um so all the way
from 2015 to 2040 um what's below that
what's in white and blue below that are
actual improvements that the city has
made since that time um and so what we
were hoping to be able to show you we
can go to the next slide here is how are
we tracking against what was recommended
in 2014 um so again that top blue line
that ffo implementation schedule and all
summarized up the actual project totals
looks like in the 2015 to 2018 time
frame we fell just a couple hundred,
short um we're certainly making up for
it in the current time frame that we're
in 2020 to 2035 if you average it out
which is certainly not the way these
programs are designed each individual
project is varying costs but if you
average it out on an annual basis the
dffo recommended about
$439,000 a year in improvements in the
last four years we've done over
$700,000 um and if we go to the next
slide um what is important to note while
we're doing all of those improvements is
that and I'm sorry go two slides back
real quick the number of the
improvements that were actually made
here from
2015 um to 2018 were made in line with
what came out of the dffo it was around
that time in 2018 um that our contracted
engineer David Coke and our service
department really started to question
some of the findings of the reports why
were they questioning that we can go
back to that other slide um they were
starting to do improvements um in areas
and then finding that reports weren't
aligning um with where those
improvements were being made um so for
instance there was a major um project
done on Parkview
and I'm looking to
you where the water and basements didn't
match the
project yeah sorry um so essentially
they were doing projects and realizing
that it was differing from the data that
we were having come out of that study um
so they also began to question the fact
that certain some basins didn't have
complete information um and then some of
the flow monitoring that we're doing
post project um is differing from study
results um also not included in that um
$1 million number that I showed you
earlier that was recommended by the dffo
was the recommendation to put in relief
sewers throughout the community so
essentially what is that it's a giant
tank for when there is a heavy rainfall
event um the reason that it was never
included in the dffo and in not in the
information that you've seen here is
because the city did not seem to find
that a viable solution in fact now we're
almost certain the Ohio apaa and the
City of Columbus would not allow for
such a thing to occur um so it's no
longer a feasible option to increase
capacity um also you know there's um a
project um pretty well known in this
nerdy engineering World um related to
sewers um called PL project blueprint
the city of Columbus is done um and
that's been going on for years now and
out of that project they have found that
there are better ways to reduce inflow
and INF infl infiltration than the way
we've been doing it before and a lot of
it has to do with the way you approach
private lines um and so that's something
that we would like to be studied further
um we also do not have a current storm
sewer Atlas or modeling um we haven't
done a full study since 2014 and I'll
show you here in a moment we are seeing
a heavily decreasing balance in the
sewer
fund um so how are sewer improvements
currently funded these are select line
items that I actually pulled out of the
2025 budget um so some costs that you
can expect to come out of the sewer fund
so just a reminder the sewer fund is
completely separate from the general
fund um in recent years we've not
subsidized um the sewer fund with a
general fund transfer it is funded
specifically through those um fees that
we're receiving from residents by way of
their Ann or quarterly bill um so what
does that fund we have a contract with
the city of Columbus and then we do have
some expenses that we are paying
directly from that fund towards the
improvements um if you just quickly sum
those up year-over-year you're going to
realize they don't match up with what
we've invested back into our sewer if
you want to go to the next slide um and
that's because thanks to the service
department and engineer David kooch
we've been very aggressive in pursuing
outside funding fund those projects um
so in that time frame we did about $4.1
million and improvements and over that
time 62% were actually not funded by the
city directly um so I think that is
noteworthy um so even with that heavy
investment from outside funds we're
seeing a steady decrease and by Steady I
mean fairly aggressive decrease in the
sewer fund balance um so
2022 and those are opwc loans and grants
and okay so that I just you I just want
to make sure that we talk about the loan
Mo the loans primarily ACR to sewer and
water okay Grants Street I just it
wasn't that portion of it so so what
we're seeing then I'll amend my
statement 62% of that is coming from
Debt Service payments zero zero interest
yeah and and then just to augment this
chart here you know this this the draw
down and the sewer fund is happening
both because of actual Improvement
dollars coming from the sewer fund as
well as Debt Service so Debt Service is
is starting to accelerate and I don't I
think you're going to go where I was
about to go so I'll stop talking yeah
well and that's what I wanted to get to
was despite doing our best to seek
outside assistance with this Improvement
program um we are seeing a steady
decrease um for a number of reasons of
course the uh projects are increasing in
costs due to labor and construction
costs um our contract with the city of
Columbus has continued to increase um
for similar reasons um and at the same
time we've not recently increased our
Capital fee so for all those reasons you
were seeing the study decrease in the
fund
balance um so can you go back up I'm so
sorry there was a slide that had the
year-over-year okay um so how does this
study that we're going to recommend
impact the 2025 budget it was something
that was anticipated um during the
budget process a phase one study um and
so if you're looking to see where it was
budgeted for it is in the sewer fund um
there are two categories of spending in
the sewer fund Administration and
service and so you would want to look
under service and in the sewer study
section and so that's where you see the
550,000
suggested this what we're suggesting
tonight is going to be 500,000 of that
um how does that offset in the fund um
if you see in 2024 projected that's
essentially a switch out for what was
previously spent on Improvement projects
the year prior so it's not necessarily
an increase in spending out of the fund
but it is a study in lie of
improvement um but how would that impact
the following year um so what we so I'm
going to back up to the RFP process
first um yeah sorry these slides are a
little out of order but anyway so so
long story short all of that is to say
that we've come to the conclusion in the
last few years that we do not feel
confident in the full results of that
dffo study and that we would like to
make data driven decisions moving
forward to make sure that the next 10
years of investment are as methodical as
possible this is all about strategy and
making sure that we're not just you know
putting a dime in a bucket but that
we're making meaningful improvements to
reduce that I um so in 2014 we did do a
formal RFP process it was bid in line
with State contract requirements
although it was for Professional
Services which means we didn't have to
do any of that we just did that out of
an abundance of caution and hopefully to
get the best possible ideas back um we
issued an RFP in may we did receive
three responses um Burgess and nle
you'll hear is our preferred uh vendor
EP feris and arcadis um when we issued
that RFP it was fairly open-ended we
wanted engineering firms to come to us
with their ideas for how to best
approach updating and refining the data
we have um and so after that we we
realize pretty quickly um and there is a
document in your packet that shows just
how disparate those responses were um so
what we did after receiving that first
line of response by way of an internal
committee we did a pretty hefty
evaluation we had everybody in for
one-on-one interviews we did of force
reference checks each of these
communities has I'm sorry each of these
firms has experience with surrounding
communities whether that be city of
Columbus gahana Upper Arlington all of
whom we called and talked to um
obviously those individual interviews we
then also took what could be very
differentl looking responses and asked
them to fill out a standardized form to
help us to compare as like to like as
possible and then after all of that we
looked at it again and thought that what
Burgess and nle proposed for us was too
much of a lift for one year and so we
both reduced the scope and asked them to
split it over a two-year um program and
so that is what we are
recommending so what we brought to board
Board of control last month um was a
proposed contract um with Burgess and
nple for phase one of a two-phase study
phase one would be the $500,000 that we
had budgeted in the 2025 budget the
future phase is estimated um a little
bit closer to 600,000 in their actual
proposal but we've been told that it's
fairly flexible and will be completely
dependent on what happens this year in
their study so a placeholder of about
$500,000 moving forward um what would we
get out of that we would get higher
confidence in the data we have to tell
us how to strategically invest over the
next 10 years um just as the dffo
suggested uh you know a $12 million
investment over the 26- year period we
would anti anticipate at least that much
probably more at this point especially
considering Rising costs um and so we
want to make sure that as we invest
those dollars it's done as well as
possible um and with that information
the work would not be done we would take
all of that data and then turn around
and begin a very thorough analysis of
how to fund such a program um so whether
that be adjusting and user Capital fees
for our residents looking into bonds
opwc loans and other sources um and so
that is where we are at today um this
was brought to council as a whole uh
because of its future implications um
its Gravity the fact that we are talking
about a large sum of money for a study
um and the fact that this this is
spanning a multi-year process um project
spanning a multi-year process is fairly
common in local government that is why
we have five 10year Capital Improvement
plans so this is not uncommon um but we
do think it is
necessary and I would supplement a
little bit of what you're saying and and
just in in line with what wagan was just
saying not only are we required to
continue to study and report back to the
EPA as part of that consent decree that
we had with them so this is consistent
with that requirement we're required to
make these Investments going forward so
you know this multi-million dollar
investment annually or whatever it is um
is going to be the modern revisit of
what 2014 recommended but it's a
requirement we are required to complete
this work it also so happens we really
need to complete the work because this
is the same these improvements that
we're making are all improvements that
ultimately will reduce water in
basements reduce flooding and Bexley so
it's 100% consistent with our own values
and interests in um in improving our
infrastructure the only difference is
there is a uh there is a hammer on the
other side attached to it from the EPA
so it's a you know it just so happens to
be consistent with what we're looking
for one of the reasons we paused and
started talking about reinvesting in a
study not only is it required by the
dffo not to as rigorous an extent as
we're talking about here is that we know
seeing the trending in the in the fund
that we are and OT MC PE and I have been
talking about this for a couple years
now we know that we need to rightsize
our sewer fund we also need to right
siize our water fund you almost can't
talk about the two separately you can't
talk about the two separately because
they're filtered to the same bill and so
in order to look at the overall solution
financially that's going to make the
most sense for the community we're going
to need to have a really crisp strategic
plan on the sewers we felt um as Megan
said we felt that the prior study we
knew the prior study was not giving us
the guidance that we needed and the
blueprint that we needed to move forward
we need better information and a better
strategy and from that we're not only
looking at the sewer fund we will also
be looking at the water fund it just so
happens the water fund requires a whole
lot less study you know we have X miles
of water line we haven't yet replaced we
know what it cost to replace them you
know we can we can quickly sort of turn
that out in a spreadsheet this is a much
more complicated um situation Andy would
you like to add anything to what we've
talked
about okay um that was excellent auditor
mCP you want to weigh in as well you
beta um first I got to say this
presentation is fabulous um I mean we to
give some historical context uh it was
probably a month ago we had our first
Board Of Control meeting and um for
those of you that um I know all of you
go home and listen to them but um you
know the board of control meetings are
typically pretty straightforward it is
um you know we typically get five to six
bids we typically are are recommended to
go with the lowest cost option um and
you know this was one where it came to
us and it was a service agreement very
different than anything we've ever
looked at before in a border control and
the holistic cost of this study with
being
um was you know I'll just roundly say 2x
what the lowest cost option was so when
I looked at it I said gosh we go out
there and as as Megan said we we go and
we ask people to say how are you going
to help us with this issue and we got
two three desperately different quotes
so it was really difficult at that time
to really understand why are we going to
pay more if three different companies
came with very different
um solutions to our RFP so over these
meetings um we've we've kind of gone
through it all can really
identify um what's driving the cost
variance so you know I have a much
better understanding of what's driving
that cost variance um so you know from
my
view what what was important to me was
that you know there there was a lot of
lot of things that I learned but when I
would would took a step back and we
we've talked about this what did come to
city council was a half a million
$550,000 ask to have um in the budget to
to have studies done what we have here
is that really now we have a a million
one investment but we've spread it over
two years okay so to me I wanted to make
certain that city council understood
that what was approved in the budget
really is Phase One of of of a second
year of investment then we get into um
you we'll call it the total cost of
ownership for lack of a description or
better description of of this this study
which is if we are going to pay $1.1
million in total for a
study we you know it is it is really
important that we we are committed to
using the insights that we get from that
study and investing in our
infrastructure appropriately um so what
we don't know is the output of that
study we don't know if they're going to
come back and say you know what that
that original plan and that original
spend was fine which you know with some
tweaks that we need to make Within These
funds we will be able to maintain with
you know for the most part modest
changes to our overall spend in the
upcoming years but this study could come
back and say and again I'm
just exaggerate we have a significant
issue and we have to spend $20 million
in the next 10 years
and you know if we get that kind of um
output from the study that is something
that this city council and future city
councils are going to have to be
committed to invest in so to me it was
just really important
that um you know and I say this often
it's like when we're talking about these
types of things no surprises and I know
the mayor and the administration do not
want Surprises with city council or the
community so wanted to make certain that
this presentation um came before city
council and that you know as we head
down on this journey while all of your
predecessors were aware of this and this
long-term plan many of you are new to it
including myself so it was important to
us that this city council really
understood we'll call it the shortterm
one twoyear commitment we're making
towards um a study and then ultimately
the the the tagal on cost that will come
along with it and it could be a step
increase to what we're experiencing
today there a few more things that I
would add to that uh first and foremost
um if Council maybe before the second or
the third reading um if you want to look
at the attachment that's labeled border
of control sewer study fee
analysis uh the city went back and kind
of looked at the three proposals because
they were not Apples to Apples but this
is their best attempt going through
things thoroughly to tell you how the
three bids compared um um the one that
uh has been recommended that we accept
is Burgess and nle um I will share with
you that they have also done quite a bit
of work for Columbus and you have to
remember that our sewers tie into
Columbus so not only will we get the
benefit of some of that Columbus data
which is going to interplay with the
Bexley data we need but they've also
done work in the past it's been good and
then just to Matt's Point um you know
the the money for phase one is already
in the 2025 budget but we would need to
keep in mind when we do budget here um
just in you know six or 7 months uh
we're going to have to be have cognizant
of that additional five or $600,000 for
phase two um and we didn't want to bring
that to you at that time with all this
information we wanted to get you in on
the ground floor so that uh when our
budget season comes up in the fall that
you were not caught by surprised um
questions Mr Marcelino just a couple
questions just so I can make sure I'm
conceptualizing what I'm being asked to
vote on correctly here um also from the
presentation great presentation thank
you it helps a lot it was excellent um
we had a higher spend I saw a figure for
400 uh expected average and we at 700
something along those lines that's
because we were working a little bit
quicker through this is that accurate we
I think we agreed to do that y yeah okay
making sure I understood that difference
um so generally this request for for the
new evaluation is essentially to
redirect a 10-year-old plan and make
sure that we are being the most
efficient with the money being spent out
of the city correct yes okay I mean that
that seems to me I'll just make the
comment on what I'm thinking that makes
sense nobody could conceptualize where
we would be at in 2024 vers 2014 with
all that's changed in that time so that
makes sense did the original plan ever
call for a second evaluation if anybody
knows that yeah it called for um in 2019
I think uh second evaluation but it was
more of like a gut check like do some
flow monitoring to see if what you've
done is is correct we found that the
original plan not only did
it fail to capture some geographical
areas that needed to be captured it just
what they were modeling didn't track
with what we were experiencing and it
was such a defect and such a disconnect
that um we felt and looking at the
defects from the previous plan we really
needed to address them
so this new plan is more rigorous than
the in the old inspection process it's a
it's a larger scope than we had before
okay and then just the final question
but I don't need an answer tonight but
maybe uh by a second or third reading um
the difference between the quotes is
clearly significant and it seems as
though that you all have decided that
it's the best way to go and I'm okay
spending more money if it's the best way
to go but for our purposes so we can
help uh communicate this uh could you
potentially give us uh examples tangible
differences between these um in the
future that may set them apart from the
other ones and again it doesn't have to
come right now just in the future um and
and yes and if you don't mind flipping
back to that summary table I won't get
into it now because I do think that's a
great idea for future conversation um
but if you happen to want to do some
light reading in the two- week uh break
if you keep continuing through you can
see that we've kind of broken out each
of the proposals into three main
categories modeling fieldwork and plan
development um and when it comes to
modeling really the um proposals aren't
that different um it's really in the
field work that you really start to see
the variations come out um and then also
in the plan development um it's kind of
hard to imagine why in a plan
development they would be so different
but if you go to each subsequent page
there's kind of like a checklist of what
was included and not included in the
study um so for instance for plan
development if you look at that you can
see the number of hours that was
suggested in terms of man time um to
each of those various categories so if
you're just like why would one plan be
so much more expensive well one firm was
recommending 1100 hours versus 255 hours
so the the deliverable will be very
different um and so I really hope that
helps explain it yeah and I and this was
the Crux of like I think our second or
third meeting which is understand the
difference and I'm going to look at you
because I'm going to say what my memory
serves but the two differences really
were W around this concept that the
original studies did not look
at private residences as a potential
source of sewer so it's it's looking at
the vast majority of our population and
understanding how that influences our
sewer infrastructure corre right so so
that that that
was how the two other studies ex seem to
exclude that influence to our sewer
infrastructure and then the second
component was
um you know I can't help it but uh well
I think of a Tommy Boy reference um
movie where he talks about you can
either take somebody's opinion or you
can actually stick your head in the
sewer lines and actually see what's
happening and in this case in this case
what what bnn's recommending is not Tak
a sample of our manholes they they are
actually going into I believe every
single one of them and having eyes on
the sewer system to to assess it so to
me th those were essentially a half
million dollar that that's what will
make this study of a higher
quality and that is broken down in the
fieldwork category and thank you for
pointing those things out um and that is
exactly right so when we're talking
about this we're talking both about the
public side and the private side and as
I was mentioning with the um columbus'
project blueprint they were realizing
that they had to address both to have
any significant reduction in inii and
what we have right now um is truly just
water and basement reports and not much
else that will help us completely model
out how can we best approach and design
a program around the private side um it
might not be too dissimilar to what
we're talking about um on the you know
lead service line replacement it might
be some kind of incentive we have to
offer or some kind of explanation that
we have to prep for residents to tell
them why they have to make improvements
on their property or what can the city
do actually to do part of it um and all
of that is information that we do not
yet have but we want to have the best
data possible to make that decision can
I just ask one F just towards that with
the um field work so just explaining it
to me like I'm five years old Bexley has
a unique uh setup or Geographic however
you want to look at and the plan that
she got was specially tailored towards
our needs the other plans were more
General towards their history of
reviewing communities that not
necessarily tailored to Bexley is that
fair well um I think perhaps but I think
more specifically one involved a a
desktop exercise well two involved EP
ferres and arcadas were true modeling
exercises EP feris was just modeling
arcadas had some light fieldwork they
were recommending to do the sampling
that auditor mCP suggested um but as you
can see if you go um to the number of
manholes being inspected where is that
listed uh here we go so um so the number
of manholes you know nearly goes up um
by five um I'm sorry for the
digitizing then for the super structures
and wow I can't read this this far away
that's terrible the quantity of manholes
is I don't know how many more s that
is anyway it's a significantly different
sample no no person hole left unturned
thank you very
much all right Council any more
questions or comments it is just a first
reading I do encourage you all to look
at all of the materials online yeah and
come next time with additional questions
uh the mayor and Megan are available to
answer so also in that folder to your
point we have former resolutions
ordinances our our letter of response
this is the old dffo report um that went
to the EPA this was the presentation
that Council got back in 2013 when the
capital fee was created and this is the
presentation that Council got in 2014
leading up to the publishing of the dffo
so you get to take a take a look back in
time at what was being said then yes
very helpful
information um Mr mCP any speaker slips
on resolution
1-25 no and I just want to say again
thank you to everybody uh I have no no
idea how many dozens if not hundreds of
hours you have into this and how many
more dozens of hours were created over
the past month but this is a really
really well laid out um story on on
again what I think is a very important
investment in our infrastructure so
thank you thank you much
appreciated all right um
all right we are now to tabled
ordinances uh I will move to remove from
the table ordinance
2-25 could I please get a
second second second by Mr Marcelino Mr
mCP would you please call the
role Mr Markham yes Miss F yes Mr
Silverman yes Miss Lamy yes Mr
Hurley and I'm sorry Mr Marcelino yes um
ordinances removed from the table
thank you U Mr Hurley did have to leave
at 8:00 um Council I'm bringing this
back to you um we've had a chance to
look at it just one last time to make
sure that the numbers were accurate uh
mayor we don't have any updates to this
one right that is correct it was
actually and the other thing we were
double- checking was that we had
properly noticed yes that and I want to
thank the City attorney for his crack
legal
analysis which says we we did in fact
properly notice them perfect perfect um
if Council wants to just take a moment
look at it one last time uh but it would
be my intention tonight to uh put it up
for a vote given that the information
seems accurate and we have properly
complied
any questions from
Council okay all right seeing none I
move to adopt ordinance 2-25 can I
please get a second second second by Mr
Marcelino any discussion from Council
any comments from the
public seeing none Mr mCP would you
please oh I'm sorry come on up Mrs Lewis
I wasn't sure if if you were indicating
I was sure either con 663 you cair yeah
I'm still curious as to why 603 Sheridan
is not part of this
ordinance is that your only question or
did you have some others well I just I
don't understand why the city can go
ahead and do the do the work that the
property owner has not done and then
assess the property owner for those
services that have been taken care of
and yet we have properties one
particular property in the city of
Bexley 603 Sheridan Avenue that is is in
uh it's it it's terrible there are holes
in the in the roof uh it's a slate roof
their part of the building is is falling
down in the back it's it's a nuisance
and uh I know it's it's uh a difficult
situation because the property is owned
by Capitol University and I know that
they have uh uh their master plan that
they have to deal with and the city then
has our rules and
regulations that come into play when it
comes to the demolition of properties so
um I just don't know how all of that
fits together because our community is
suffering because of capital
universities lack of taking care of this
property and bringing it up to code
because it they really want to get rid
of the property but they can't demolish
it until they have a plan in place and
they can't do that until they have their
um their their campus plan together so
it's it's uh it's a challenging
situation and yet it's difficult for
residents who try to keep their
properties up to code and and we get
notifications and we try to do the best
we can and if not this kind of thing
comes into play um
so I would like to
see I would like to see Council enact
something that can protect
um protect our community protect our
housing stock um where where maybe you
can Implement some kind of a fee or a a
a something that would that would
enhance uh a property owner to bring
their property up to code something a
little stronger than what this ordinance
does or what other other rules and reg
relations that we have on the books to
help that's my concern thank you thank
you Miss Lewis for your comment uh Mr
Mayor I'm going to direct it over to you
I think at the last meeting you had um
spoken about 603 um right Shar is there
anything additional that you'd like to
add only that ordinance 225 is for
properties that did have work done and
are being incessed we have a lot of
properties throughout the city where
code enforcement is working with
property owners for a variety of reasons
um
you know some the the property un shared
is a a good example of one such property
but they are you know I can think of a
handful of properties throughout the
community where for a variety of reasons
they are kind of in in between uh in the
process with code uh we have the tools
that we need uh if we have to throw the
book at a property owner um
and the assessment process is not
appropriate for a situation where where
you know a slate roof would need to be
replaced but a property owner is seeking
demolition um and I I am happy to talk
to Miss Lewis offline because there's
more context it has nothing to do withb
capital I mean it hasn't the the the way
in which it has to do with fbm Capital
University is that there's a very
specific zoning text to Capital that
dictates the way that they would have to
go about going forward with Demolition
and there's you know there's more
background to it and I'm happy to
discuss it offline um and to that point
you know I can think of other examples
that aren't Capital throughout the
community where whether it's um personal
issues or financial issues where our
code enforcement has chosen not to take
this extra step especially in some of
the more you know real highly expensive
fixes and is working methodically with
those Property Owners to try to bring
them up to compliance great thank you
for answering that um a second time U Mr
mCP I think you were going to call the
role on the motion to adopt ordinance
2-25 Mr
Marcelino yes Miss F yes slam key yes Mr
Markham yes and Mr svin yes
ordinance
2-25 passes or do we remove it from this
I'm already lost track of where we pass
passes thank you yes thank you so much
um if there's any additional speaker
slips to be turned in please turn them
in at this time all right moving on to
committee report reports uh Mr Markham
for
safety just a report from campus that
looking out my office window I see the
NHL constructing a regulation siiz ice
hockey rink in the middle of Ohio
stadium and it it appears to be uh ready
and is this connected to why Jess saw is
not here
tonight
know nicely done uh Mr Silverman from
service and
environmental yes thank you um excuse me
just wanted to recognize as February
closes out the Black History Month
Banner program and the success we've had
on Main Street uh we now have another
community on Main Street Reynoldsburg
that's put up banners I think it's great
and the bmpa community reception for
minority District staff is this Thursday
the 27th from 4 to 6 at the PEX Public
Library thank you great thank you so
much um Miss side did not have a report
evening and Mr Hurley had to leave early
but he did ask me to share with Council
again that our Retreat is scheduled for
this Thursday uh Miss water if you have
um the capitol alumni house mayor does
that sound right yes alumni house is
right across from the athletic center on
Mount Street yes I think parking is
available on Mound uh we will start at
4M or the Louis's driveway or the
Louis's driveway that's correct U Miss
vder if we haven't already shared the
agenda from the website with council
could you please send us out this
evening um Mr Hurley has uh come up with
a great agenda and we look forward to um
discussing many things with everybody uh
Miss Bible Recreation and
Parks two things when our bre Department
our bre board meets next Wednesday 5:30
at the senior center um and a big
congratulations and I'd love it if we
might think about recognizing them our
um St Charles Cardinals swim team W
States over St Xavier last week and it's
their absolute first ever so I know that
they'd be tickled if we recognize them
just as an FYI I believe Bexley also has
a state champion diver am I correct and
maybe a freestyler I thought so so maybe
we could have a swim night
sounds good U Mr Marcelino zoning and
development there's an AED up on Main
Street thanks to the mayor service
department for getting that up it's a
great step for heart space
section um Lee
Nathan Lee Nathan's worked very hard to
uh to yeah absolutely too clad um but
it's it's great to see and I think a
great step towards uh that program
there's a beex cic meeting at 5:30 on
March 3rd 2025th and also I would like
some marketing materials for years of
the infrastructure coming up perhaps
stickers in a hard hat thank you of
course all right Council our next
meeting is Tuesday March 11 with that I
move to adjourn can I please have a
second second second by Mr Marcelino all
in favor say I I we are adjourned