Minutes
LAFAYETTE TOWNSHIP BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Special Meeting
Thursday,
March 26, 2009
Meeting called to
order: 10:00
a.m. being properly advertised as required by O.R.C. 121.22 followed
by the Pledge of Allegiance.
Members Present: Trustee Donald Butler, Trustee Lynda Bowers,
Trustee Lee Kehoe, Fiscal Officer Shirley Bailey.
Mr. Butler explained that the main reason for today’s
meeting is to gain clarification on the Community Reinvestment Area (CRA) for
Chippewa. The meeting was turned over to
Ms. Bethany Dentler with the Medina County Economic Development Corporation.
Ms. Dentler reported that on March 7, 2009 she had made a presentation to the
Cloverleaf School Board. She will copy
the Trustees on a clarification letter she will be sending to the School
Superintendent. The school board asked
if new residential construction would be abated. Ms. Denter clarified to them that was not the
intention of Lafayette. Ms. Dentler reported that a discussion was
held with the school board explain that any abatements that would exceed 50%
would be worked with to obtain donations to foundations or scholarships to bring
the difference back to the 50% level.
Ms. Dentler shared with the Trustees information from the
Ohio Revised Code regarding the council make up. These are designed by state law and were
copied in putting together the Lafayette
model. This is Section 7 of the
Lafayette Proposal. “When the area is
located within an unincorporated area of a county, the council shall be
composed of one member appointed by each member of the board of county
commissioners of the county where the area is located and two members appointed
by the county planning commission. The
majority of the foregoing members shall then appoint two additional members who
shall be residents of the political subdivision. Terms of the council shall be for three
years. Unexpired terms shall be filled
in the same manner as the initial appointment was made.” The Tax Incentive Review Council make up was
also copied from the state. The council
has to consist of three representatives appointed by the county commissioners,
two representatives of the township that are appointed by the board of township
trustees, Medina County Auditor or designee, and a representative of the
effective boards of education where at least two of those members have to be
members of Lafayette Township.
Ms. Bowers stated that it has been the policy of the County
Commissioners and Planning
Commission to solicit recommendations from the townships that have CRAs before
making appointments. Ms. Dentler stated
that in her conversations with the Commissioners, they have expressed their
preference to be guided by the township in matters that relate to tax
abatements in a township jurisdiction.
Mr. Kehoe noted that according to the state law, there is
only a requirement for two of the seven members of the board to be township
residents, making them a minority on the board.
Ms. Dentler again stated that she believes it is the intention of the County
Commissioners to work closely with
the township in this matter.
The Board discussed the possibility of having the CRA
include the Technology Park. A housing study would need to be
completed. Ms. Bowers feels there may be
a few properties that would apply for the study. Ms. Dentler stated that a separate CRA would
need to be set up for that area. Ms.
Bowers noted that since the creation of the Technology
Park, there has been zero
businesses, tax revenues and new jobs.
Ms. Dentler stated that her intention would be to take this
piece of proposed legislation to the County
Commissioners on Monday, March 30th
for a vote of their resolution with the Boards approval. It would then need to be published in the
newspaper for two consecutive weeks, during which time Ms. Dentler would gather
the additional pieces needed for the application. Once the binder has been put together, the
application would be signed by Steve Hambley, President of the Board of
Commissioners, and sent to Columbus. It takes approximately a month for the
Department of Development to review.
Once approved, the CRA would be in effect. Ms. Dentler recommends assembling the
application materials (she has samples to utilize) so residents and companies
can begin applying. Residential
abatements have a form to be filled out showing improvements have been made on
their home within the prior six month time period. On new commercial or industrial projects, the
application must be filed and a negotiation begun before ground is broken. Ms. Dentler is working with the state to
clarify the definition of breaking ground.
The Department of Development has been using the definition that any
ground clearing is not considered the beginning of construction. It would be the actual pouring of foundation
or footers. Commercial projects would
need to begin the negotiations, have an agreement approved, notice to the
school board, and legislation approved before construction begins.
Ms. Bowers reported that the Catheter
Building on Lake
Road is going to be abandoned.
Mr. Kehoe asked for clarification of the * in Section
D. Ms. Dentler responded that referred
to the tax exemption schedule on page 4 that describes the percentages for the
abatement years 1 – 15. Division D
refers to a maximum of 50% tax abatement for new commercial or industrial
projects. If the township Trustees deem
a project to be extraordinary, the township could go up to a maximum of 60%
abatement. The Committees would not be
setting the abatements. The Review
Councils would meet once a year to ensure that the company is in compliance
with the promises made and agreed upon.
The Housing Council has the power to recommend to the county that a tax
abatement be rescinded on a company that is not in compliance. The original abatement agreement is negotiated
between the county and the company. The
negotiating team is usually led by the Housing Officer (Ms. Dentler) and is
signed off on by the county and the school board. The township would be included in these
discussions. Mr. Kehoe noted that the township
is not a decision maker in the final negotiations even though it is the
township that is authorizing and approving the project. Ms. Dentler stated that the County
Commissioners have ultimate
approval on the agreement, but during the negotiating process, it is a team
process with Ms. Dentler advocating on behalf of the township.
Mr. Butler expressed discomfort at not having control of the
township properties. Mr. Butler does see
a need for having a CRA at Technology
Park. He does not see a need for Section C and D in
the CRA for Chippewa. The project is
already underway and this will only serve to give up tax revenue. Ms. Bowers stated that the Chippewa Resort
project initially had asked for an incentive.
The CRA would replace the initial incentive but have the same effect,
and have a better benefit for the schools.
The Chippewa project will bring 545 construction jobs, 272 permanent
jobs, and 84 community jobs. Ms. Bowers
stated that this project has always been on the table with an incentive. If this incentive is not approved, the
project will resort back to the prior incentive. If the TIF is not acquired, it is possible
for the project to not go forward.
Ms. Dentler stated that many of the companies that come to
the local community or the State of Ohio
are dependent on the incentives and the assistance of the State to make that
project happen. Projects are courted
away from a particular community quite often.
In this economic climate where liquidity is more and more difficult,
there are no guarantees. Companies count
on incentives as part of their overall financing picture.
Mr. Butler had not understood the project being dependent
upon incentives. Ms. Bowers stated that
the bulk of the funding being spoken about is to the schools. The CRA is a better incentive for the schools
than a TIF (Tax Increment Financing).
Ms. Dentler explained that a TIF is a creative way of financing public
infrastructure projects that would be part of an overall commercial project
where the community agrees to forego the increase in tax revenue and apply that
tax revenue to bonds, money which would be borrowed to pay for that public
infrastructure. The increased value of
the tax revenue would go to repay the bonds as opposed to being collected by
the community. Ms. Dentler explained
that in this case, TIF financing has been tied to a ruling by the State of Ohio,
Department of Commerce, stating that if private developers utilize TIF
financing as part of their financing, the overall project would be subject to
prevailing wage. This has caused
developers to not utilize this type of financing and to abandon projects. Ms. Bowers stated that her concern with a TIF
is that the total valuation is based on the school districts assessment. This affects the foundation money coming to
them from Columbus.
Mr. Kehoe does not recall a request for incentive with this
project. After there was a request for a
TIF and now a request for a CRA. He
agrees that a CRA is better than not having the project. The project would benefit the community by
having jobs created and the township would receive property tax as well as
possible housing that could occur from the employees. Mr. Kehoe is not happy with the law as it
relates to the county taking over the responsibility of the township with
regards to this project, but does not have a problem with the total concept and
Chippewa Partners. Ms. Dentler stated
that her first exposure to the project, last December, came with a need for
incentives.
Mr. Gary Sills clarified that when they contracted to buy
the old park property, as part of the due diligence process, they met with two
of the three County Commissioners, Jim Dowd of the Medina County Economic
Development Corporation, former Superintendent
Bruce Hume, and the Summit County Port Authority to be sure that all
were on board with getting tax incentive financing. All were in favor. This factor induced them to move forward with
the project. The TIF became an issue
when Governor Strickland’s guidelines on Prevailing Wage were issued. The new guidelines could cause the entire
project, not just the financed portion, to be subject to prevailing wage. This scenario did not make sense for them and
they looked to go in another direction.
Ms. Bowers noted that the CRA does require support of the township,
whereas the TIF does not.
The Board of Trustees had approved Resolution 6-2009 on January 20, 2009 to establish a
community reinvestment area within Lafayette
Township. The Board is asked to approve the schedule
that is a part of the Resolution being presented to the Medina County
Commissioners. Ms. Bowers motioned to accept the Tax Exemption Schedule as outlined on
the Resolution for the Commissioners as received on March 26, 2009 (Exhibit A)
– A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AND
DESCRIBING THE BOUNDARIES OF A COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT AREA WITHIN LAFAYETTE
TOWNSHIP AS PERMITTED IN SECTIONS 3735.65 – 3735.70 OF THE OHIO REVISED CODE
AND DESIGNATING A HOUSING OFFICER TO ADMINISTER THE PROGRAM. Mr.
Kehoe seconded the motion. Mr. Kehoe and
Ms. Bowers voting in favor, Mr. Butler voting against. Motion passes. Ms. Dentler thanked the Board for their time
and assistance and assured them that she will continue to work on their behalf
to assist in economic development in Lafayette
Township.
The Board asked Ms. Dentler if she believed there had been
opportunities lost at Technology Park
due to the fact that there are no incentives.
Ms. Dentler does believe that opportunities have either been lost or
delayed. Companies do want to locate
where it makes sense, and many times the lack of an incentive program is a
deciding factor between market areas.
The Board is in agreement that a CRA should be looked at for the Technology
Park area. Ms. Bowers asked if she should start a
housing study and the Board agreed.
RESOLUTION 18-2009 –
RESOLUTION DETERMINING THE NECESSITY TO CLOSE BALLASH ROAD FOR REPAIRS TO CULVERT PIPES. Mr. Figgers explained that there are five
crossover pipes that need replacing on the south end of Ballash. This will be done during Spring Break, April
6-8. Ms. Bowers noted that the Gazette
would need to be notified today to meet the requirements. Ms.
Bowers moved to approve Resolution 18-2009 and seconded by Mr. Kehoe. All voting in favor. The cost for these repairs is approximately
$16,000.00.
Mr. Butler asked Mr. Kehoe to check his schedule to set up a
meeting week after next with the Board, Mr. Thorne and Mr. Bob Arnold to
discuss contractual matters only on the Comprehensive Plan.
Requisitions – Ms.
Bailey reported that a new requisition for the cleaning, buffing and waxing of
the Town Hall has been turned in. A
prior requisition had been approved on March
16, 2009 for John Lanzer to do this work. Mr. Kehoe expressed concerns with using
borrowed equipment to do this work. The
requisition for Mr. Lanzer was for $400.00.
The new requisition is for $836.00 initially and $160.00 quarterly. The Board discussed the equipment and
liability issues. Mr. Figgers explained
that the Town Hall floor had originally been put in very cheaply with many
mistakes. This makes it hard to keep a
wax on the floor. Ms. Bowers reported
that within six months of the floor being installed the company was called back
in and reported that the problems were due to the low grade of flooring
used. Mr. Figgers reported that many
companies have verified this fact. After
the last meeting, there were concerns about the floor as well as the restroom. Mr. Kehoe visited the Service Department and
a discussion was held regarding the mowers, the restrooms, and the town hall
floor. Concerns were raised regarding
insurance, workman’s compensation and why Mr. Lanzer had left the fire
department. Mr. Figgers offered to get
another company if there were concerns.
Mr. Figgers discussed this with Mr. Butler who said to get it done. The new company has given a quote and an
appointment has been set up.
Mr. Figgers reported that he understands that many different
machines are needed to properly get a shine on this floor. He is not sure what equipment Mr. Lanzer has
or utilizes. Mrs. Lanzer reported that
Mr. Lanzer rents his equipment. Mr.
Kehoe stated that he is not questioning the quality of Mr. Lanzer’s work, but
is concerned about insurance / workers’ compensation. Ms. Bowers reported that private contractors
are not required to have worker’s compensation.
The liability insurance would be covered by the Township. Mr. Butler disagrees with the liability issue. An independent contractor would be coming in
on their own accord. Mr. Kehoe again
voiced concerns about the liability issue and reported that he had asked for a
competitive bid. The bid received is for
$863.00 plus a quarterly amount. It is
not known if there is liability coverage for Mr. Lanzer, but Mr. Kehoe feels
that there would be with Marks.
Mr. Butler is more concerned with the quality of the work
that could be done by a professional company than he is about the cost and
feels we may be looking at the same situation again in six months. Mrs. Lanzer offered that Mr. Lanzer’s charge
for quarter upkeep would be $150.00.
The Board agreed that the $400 Requisition had previously
been approved and will stand.
Meeting adjourned at 11:02 a.m.
Approved:________________________ ________________________
Lynda
Bowers, Trustee
________________________
Donald
Butler, Trustee
________________________
Lee
Kehoe, Trustee
_________________________________
Shirley Bailey, Fiscal Officer