Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:08]

HI, HOW ARE YOU? I'M DOING OKAY.

I'VE KIND OF WRAPPED UP A WEEK.

I GOT THE COVID NOW, SO, OH, I'M SORRY TO HEAR THAT.

I'VE KIND OF ON THE REBOUND.

I, I TESTED POSITIVE LAST WEEK, BUT UH, HAD A COUPLE OF ROUGH DAYS, BUT, UH, THE, UM, SYMPTOMS HAVE KIND OF GONE AWAY AND, UM, THEY'VE TOLD ME THAT BY THE CRITERIA THAT I'M, I'LL BE CLEARED AS NON-CONTAGIOUS IN THE NEXT FEW DAYS, SO, OKAY.

SO I DIDN'T REALLY HAVE IT AS BAD AS SOME OTHER PEOPLE HAD.

[2. Approval of Minutes]

SO DO YOU TAKE ANOTHER TEST THEN AND ESTABLISH AMITY? I ASKED THAT THINKING THAT WOULD BE THE PROCESS, BUT THEY SAID NOW, BECAUSE I GUESS FOR UP TO THREE MONTHS AFTER YOU'VE BEEN POSITIVE, THEY SAID THAT YOU CAN STILL, IF YOU TAKE A TEST, IT STILL MIGHT COME OUT AS POSITIVE, EVEN THOUGH YOU'RE NOT CONTAGIOUS ANYMORE.

OKAY.

SO HOW DO YOU, HOW DOES ONE KNOW IF THEY ARE CONTAGIOUS? WELL, THEY SAID THAT YOU GO BY THE CDC GUIDELINES.

SO TO KNOW THAT AFTER IF YOU'VE HAD A TASK, A POSITIVE OR YOU SHOW SYMPTOMS, THEN YOU

[ Oath Of Office - Don Webb]

HAVE TO QUARANTINE AND ISOLATE FOR 14 DAYS.

AND IF YOU'VE DONE THAT AND YOUR SYMPTOMS ARE DECREASING, EVEN IF THEY HAVEN'T GONE AWAY AND YOU HAVE NO FEVER WITHOUT THE USE OF MEDICATION, THEN THEY CONSIDER YOU RECOVERED.

UH, OKAY.

FEEL IT BETTER.

SO DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT ANYTHING FOR US TONIGHT AS FAR AS LIKE THE, WHAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH OR, YOU KNOW, THE FORMAT FOR THE MEETING OR NO, I, YOU KNOW, I THINK PROBABLY WHAT I DID WAS I LOOKED AT THE, THE NOTES FROM THE 2011 OR 2010, UH, AND LOOKED AT WHAT WE LOOKED AT AND, YOU KNOW, KIND OF MADE SOME NOTES ON, UH, BECAUSE I THINK A LOT OF THE STUFF, YOU KNOW, THAT WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT TONIGHT, I THINK THAT THE ONE THING THAT I'M GOING TO RECOMMEND THIS WAS THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT, UH, HELLO, HELLO.

HI.

UH, I WAS GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, CITY, CITY ATTORNEY LOOKS AT TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR DEFINITIONS CAN STILL COMPLY WITH THE, UH, HIGHER ADVICE CODE.

RIGHT.

AND I GOT SOME NOTES ON A FEW ITEMS AS WELL, SO I'M JUST GOING TO HIDE

[ City Code - Part One - Administrative Code - Review - Title One - General Provisions - Title Three - Legislative - Title Five - Administrative]

FOR A FEW MINUTES.

OKAY.

NOT A PROBLEM.

WE'LL GET STARTED RIGHT AT SIX 30, AS LONG AS WE HAVE A COURTROOM AND THEN I'LL NEED TO SQUARE IN ON.

RIGHT.

I'M ASSUMING HE'S GOING TO BE HERE TONIGHT OR BE ON HERE EITHER INDICATED WHEN I TALKED TO HIM THE OTHER DAY THAT HE WOULD BE HERE, SO, OKAY.

THAT WAS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS.

I DIDN'T KNOW IF MAYBE IT'S WORN HIM IN DURING THE INTERIM.

I HAVE NOT.

I HAVE NOT BEEN ON SITE.

SO LIKE WE HAVE JERRY, JOHN, BRIAN, JIM, AND ME, WE SHOULD HAVE, UH, THREE OTHERS, GLEN DON, AND, UH, TOM OR, UH, JOSEPH, ANDREW .

WE DID HAVE SOME ISSUES WITH CITY COUNCIL LAST NIGHT WITH THE LIVE STREAM.

SO, UH, WE HAD TO RESCHEDULE THE WORK SESSION FROM LAST NIGHT TO TOMORROW NIGHT.

UM, SO, UH, THEY SUPPOSEDLY REPAIRED IT.

I'M LOOKING AT THE LIVE STREAM NOW.

IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S, IT'S, UH, WORKING.

SO HOPEFULLY THAT CONTINUES FOR THEM.

OKAY.

TECHNOLOGY IS WONDERFUL AND IT WORKS THAT'S RIGHT.

WELL, UH, WITH US NOT HAVING PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE MEETINGS RIGHT NOW, THE LIVE STREAM IS THAT THE METHOD BY WHICH WE PERMIT PUBLIC ACCESS, WE CAN'T DO THAT.

THEN WE CAN'T HAVE THE MEETING.

DARN SUNSHINE LAW.

YEAH.

[00:05:27]

HOW'S EVERYBODY ELSE DOING? WONDERFUL.

HOW ABOUT STAYING SAFE? TRYING TO HERE'S GLEN.

HI, GLEN.

GLEN.

.

HELLO, GOOD EVENING.

SO, JEREMY, I THINK WE'RE JUST MISSING JOSEPH AT THIS POINT.

AND, UM, KAREN IS OUT AT CITY HALL AND HAS INDICATED TO ME SHE'LL, UH, START THE RECORDING, UH, UM, IN A MINUTE OR TWO.

SO, UH, WE'LL BE READY TO GO AT THAT POINT AND JUST LET ME KNOW AND WE CAN GET STARTED OKAY, JIM, WE'RE UP AND RUNNING WHENEVER YOU WANT TO START.

OKAY.

UM, CALL THE MEETING, THE MEETING OF THE CITY HUBER HEIGHTS ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMISSION, NOVEMBER 18, 2020.

IT'S A SIX 30, UH, TONY, IF YOU COULD CALL THE, UH, ROLL, MR. ALICE HERE, MR. .

MR. HENDRIX HERE, MR. MR. KITCHEN FIGURE MUTED HERE.

MR. OTTO HERE, MR. WAMSLEY HERE, MR. WEBB HERE.

OKAY.

THE FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS WOULD BE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM OUR LAST MEETING, UH, WHICH, UH, TONY SENT OUT ABOUT A WEEK OR SO AGO.

I HOPE EVERYBODY'S HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THEM.

UH, AND AT THIS TIME I WOULD ACCEPT A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.

UH, JEREMY WENT SUFFICE TO

[00:10:01]

JUST, UM, SAY THE MINUTES STAND IS APPROVED.

IF THERE'S NO OBJECTIONS FROM ANY MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR ANY OBJECTIONS TO THE MEETING MINUTES? OKAY.

SEEING NONE THEN WILL, UH, THEY WILL BE APPROVED AS PRESENTED.

UM, I GUESS THE NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS IS DON.

WE NEED TO GET YOU SWORN IN.

SO TONY, IF YOU WOULD TAKE OVER AND DO THAT HONOR.

OKAY.

UH, DON, IF YOU WOULD RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND REPEAT AFTER ME, I CAN STATE YOUR NAME.

HI, STATE YOUR NAME, SORRY, TONY.

I COULDN'T HELP ALL ON.

WELL, DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM YOU SAW HIM AND SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO SUPPORT THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES? THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES, THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF OHIO, THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF OHIO, THE CHARTER, AND ALL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF HUBER HEIGHTS, THE CHARTER AND ALL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF HUBER HEIGHTS, AND THAT I WILL FAITHFULLY AND A LOT OF WILL FAITHFULLY, HONESTLY, AND IMPARTIALLY HONESTLY, AND IMPARTIALLY DISCHARGE THE DUTIES OF MY OFFICE, DISCHARGE THE DUTIES OF MY OFFICE TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITIES, TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITIES.

SO HELP ME GOD.

SO HELP ME.

GOD.

CONGRATULATIONS.

WELCOME ABOARD.

THANKS.

OKAY.

MOVING ON TO THE NEXT TOPIC OF DISCUSSION, IT'S A BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS OF THE ORDINANCE REVIEW.

UM, WE'RE LOOKING AT, UH, BASICALLY TONIGHT, I THINK BEFORE US ARE, UH, THREE PARTS OF, OR THREE TYPE TITLES UNDER PART ONE OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE.

AND, UM, I'M NOT REALLY SURE, BASICALLY.

I THINK WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE DO IS, UM, WE CAN GO THROUGH EACH SECTION AND TO THE EXTENT THAT ANYBODY HAS ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS OR INPUT, WE CAN ADDRESS THEM AS WE GO THROUGH.

UM, I'M ANTICIPATING THAT PROBABLY MAJORITY OF THE STUFF IN THESE SECTIONS, UH, PROBABLY IS NOT GOING TO GENERATE A LOT OF COMMENT OR QUESTIONS.

UH, IT'S MORE ADMINISTRATIVE IN NATURE.

UM, BUT I'VE HAD SOME FEW ISSUES.

WHAT I DID WAS I LOOKED IN THE PACKET THAT, UH, TONY HAD SUBMITTED BASED ON WHAT THE REPORT WAS FROM THE ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE OR THE REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMITTEE BACK IN 2011, TO SEE WHAT COMMENTS WERE, YOU KNOW, AN ACTIONS WERE RECOMMENDED VAN, UM, THAT WAY WE'RE NOT REALLY RECREATING THE HORSE TO SOME EXTENT.

UM, SO STARTING WITH SECTION ONE OH 1.1 IS JUST THE DESIGNATION CITATION OF HEADINGS THAT BASICALLY SAYS THAT THE, YOU KNOW, THE HEADINGS ARE PRETTY MUCH FOR THE PURPOSE OF, UH, UH, INFORMATIONAL ONLY.

AND IT'S THE BODY AND CONTENT OF THE ORDINANCE.

THAT IS WHAT IS CONSIDERED THE LAW.

AND SO UNLESS ANYBODY HAS ANY, ANY INPUT ON THAT SECTION, WE CAN KIND OF PUT THAT ONE TO BED, I THINK.

ALL RIGHT.

NOT SEEING ANY COMMENTS, UM, SECTION ONE OH 1.02, JUST THE GENERAL DEFINITIONS.

THE ONLY THING I THINK I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE WOULD DO WOULD BE TO RECOMMEND THAT, UH, JERRY MCDONALD, THE CITY ATTORNEY REVIEW THE DEFINITIONS TO MAKE SURE CAUSE ALL THESE DEFINITIONS ARE TIED TO SECTIONS OF THE OHIO REVISED CODE.

AND I THINK THE INTENT IS THAT OUR DEFINITIONS BE CONSISTENT WITH THOSE PARTICULAR PROVISIONS IN THE OHIO REVISED CODE.

AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE HIGH REVISED CODE HASN'T CHANGED IN SUCH A WAY SO THAT OUR DEFINITIONS AND THE CODES DEFINITIONS AT THE STATE LEVEL ARE DIFFERENT.

UM, YOU KNOW, ABSENT THERE BEING ANY, UH, CORRECTIONS THAT NEED TO BE DONE IN THAT REGARD.

I'M NOT SURE THAT ANY DEFINITIONS, UH, NEED TO BE CHANGED.

UM, I GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ON THE DEFINITIONS.

IT'S IT'S STYLISTIC STUFF, I GUESS, OR GRAMMAR.

UH, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS STUFF, HOW MUCH WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS, BUT UH, IN PUBLIC PLACE, THERE'S A WORD SCHOOL YARD.

THAT'S TECHNICALLY, THAT'S ONE WORD NOT TO, UM, UM, BE CURIOUS IF THIS IS COPIED FROM OHIO REVISED CODE, HOW THEY DO THAT.

AND ON A, UM, LATER ON WITH THIS STREET INCLUDES ALLEYS STREET IS SINGULAR, WHEREAS ALLEYS, AVENUES, BOULEVARDS, AND ALL THAT IS PLURAL.

NORMALLY

[00:15:01]

YOU'D WANT THOSE TO MATCH UP ONE TO BE SINGULAR.

SO A STREET, WOULD IT INCLUDE AN ALLEY, AN AVENUE, A BOULEVARD VERSUS, OR STREETS ARE TO INCLUDE ALLEYS AVENUES BOULEVARDS.

OKAY.

BUT YEAH, YEAH.

I WILL HAVE THE LAW DIRECTOR, UH, REVIEW THE DEFINITIONS.

I WILL TELL YOU THAT ALSO AN ATTORNEY WITH, UH, WITH MUNI CODE, OUR CODIFICATION PROVIDER, THEY DO AN ANNUAL REVIEW OF ANY CHANGES TO THE OHIO REVISED CODE AND A SIDE-BY-SIDE COMPARISON, UH, AS PART OF OUR CONTRACT.

SO THERE'S THAT SECOND LAYER OF REVIEW THAT ALSO TAKES PLACE ON AN ONGOING BASIS IN REGARDS TO THAT.

UM, BUT WE'LL, WE'LL LOOK AT IT.

UH, GENERALLY THESE DEFINITIONS ARE VERBATIM FROM THE OHIO REVISED CODE AND WE, WE JUST, UH, INCORPORATE THEIR, THEIR, UH, DEFINITIONS BY WRAPPER AND EXACTLY AS THEY STAND IN THE CODE.

OKAY.

YEAH.

ONE OTHER 0.2 AND ONE OH 1.3 UNDER A B WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT SINGULAR AND PLURAL THAT THEY'RE INTERCHANGEABLE.

SO SPEEDS STREET WOULD BE, YEAH, YEAH.

I'M JUST SAYING AGAIN, LIKE THE SINGLE SENTENCE DRAMATICALLY.

YOU WOULDN'T SAY LIKE SCHOOLS, I DON'T KNOW YOU WOULDN'T YOU TO, UH, ONE, ONE QUESTION THAT I HAVE, AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S SOMEWHERE ELSE IN HERE.

UM, BUT I'M WONDERING IF, IF WE MIGHT WANT TO THAT, YOU KNOW, THE DEFINITIONS COULD, I KNOW WE REVIEW THEM ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, BUT THE DEFINITIONS AT SAY LEVEL COULD CHANGE DURING THE YEAR.

WOULD IT MAKE SENSE TO, UH, POSSIBLY ADD A PROVISION THAT SAYS THAT OUR DEFINITIONS WILL BE AUTOMATICALLY AMENDED TO REFLECT ANY CHANGES THAT MIGHT OCCUR AT THE STATE LEVEL IN THE SAME DEFINITION, IF, IF OUR DEFINITIONS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE IDENTICAL TO THE STATE AND SAY THE STATE WOULD CHANGE THE DEFINITION OF WHATEVER, UM, DO WE WANT DO, I MEAN, CAUSE OTHERWISE THERE COULD BE A PERIOD OF TIME DURING THE COURSE OF A YEAR WHERE OUR DEFINITION AND THE STATE'S DEFINITION AREN'T THE SAME.

AND DO WE WANT TO COVER THAT? WOULD WE WANT TO SUGGEST THAT MAYBE THAT LOOKED AT AND POSSIBLY COVERED? WE COULD SAY SOMETHING LIKE IF THERE'S A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE, UH, LOCAL DEFINITION AND STATE DEFINITION THAT STATE WOULD TAKE PRECEDENCE.

I LIKE THAT THAT WAY WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THERE.

THE, YOU KNOW, THE COUNCIL DOESN'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT ALWAYS, YOU KNOW, AMENDING OUR CODE EVERY TIME THAT THERE'S A CHANGE IN THE STATEWIDE DEFINITION.

YEAH.

I CAN MENTION THAT TO JERRY.

AND, UH, WHEN THERE IS A CHANGE OF A DEFINITION THAT'S, UH, IDENTIFIED BY THE, UH, COMMUNITY CODE, WHEN THEY, THEY DO THEIR LEGAL REVIEW OF THOSE ISSUES, THEN THEY PRESENT AN ORDINANCE, UH, THAT GOES TO COUNCIL AND IS ADOPTED AS PART OF ONE OF THE SUPPLEMENT UPDATES.

UM, AND THOSE CHANGES ARE INCORPORATED AT THAT TIME.

YEAH.

AND I WOULD JUST BE, MY ONLY CONCERN WAS QUESTION WAS WHETHER OR NOT DURING THE INTERIM PERIOD OF TIME, YOU KNOW, BETWEEN THE YEAR.

SO THAT WOULD BE MY ONLY SUGGESTION WITH REGARD TO THE DEFINITIONAL SECTIONS.

UH, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I THINK MR. WEBB HAS THIS THING LINED UP.

THANK YOU, TONY.

UM, TONY, THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD UNDER DEFINITIONS WAS THE, UM, THROUGHOUT, UM, THROUGHOUT THE LANGUAGE, YOU'LL SEE THE USE OF THE WORD OFFICER, UH, OFFICER OF THE CITY OFFICER INCLUDES EMPLOYEES AND OFFICERS AND OFFICER IS, UH, ISN'T DEFINED WITHIN THE DEFINITIONS.

AND THERE IS A CODE THAT WILL, WE'LL BE GOING OVER A LITTLE LATER THAT, UM, IS A LITTLE AMBIGUOUS AS FAR AS WHEN IT MENTIONS OFFICERS.

SO I WAS THE ONLY THING I WANTED TO ADD TO THAT WAS MAYBE WE NEED TO INCLUDE THE, THE DEFINITION OF AN OFFICER OF THE CITY.

OKAY.

NOTED.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

THAT'S A GOOD POINT.

UH, THE NEXT SECTION IS ONE OH 1.03.

UM, AND THAT'S RULES OF CONSTRUCTION.

AND THAT BASICALLY IS, AGAIN, THOSE PRETTY MUCH I THINK ARE TAKEN VERBATIM OUT OF THE OHIO REVISED CODE, AS I UNDERSTAND IT.

[00:20:01]

SO AGAIN, AS LONG AS YOU KNOW, OUR, UM, I, IN TERMS OF HOW YOU CALCULATE, YOU KNOW, COMPUTATIONAL TIME AND THOSE THINGS, I THINK THOSE ARE IT'S PROBABLY MY OPINION WOULD BE, UH, IT WOULD BE BEST TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE, YOU KNOW, THE STATE STATUTES.

SO I'M NOT SURE ANY OTHER THAN HAVING JERRY REVIEW THAT TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR DEFINITIONS AND, UM, AND OUR RULES OF CONSTRUCTION ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE STATE'S STATUTES THAT ARE REFERENCED THROUGHOUT THAT SECTION.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? OKAY.

UM, ONE OH 1.04.

UM, AGAIN, I THINK IT BASICALLY IS A RESTATEMENT OF WHAT THE OHIO REVISED CODE PROVIDES, UH, IN TERMS OF WHAT HAPPENS IF, UM, AN AMENDMENT PASSES THAT OR, UH, AN ORDINANCE IT'S REPEALED DOES THAT, YOU KNOW, AUTOMATICALLY REVIVE A PRIOR ORDINANCE THAT DEALT WITH THE SAME SUBJECT OR THOSE, YOU KNOW, AND I THINK THE STATE STATUTE, AGAIN, COVERS THAT SITUATION FAIRLY WELL.

AND I'M NOT SURE WE WANT TO, UH, I'M NOT SURE IF WE WANT TO REALLY TAKE ISSUE OR EVEN TRY TO GO BEYOND WHAT THE STATE'S DOING.

SO ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT SECTION? AND LIKE I SAID, I'M THE, I'M THE CHAIR, BUT I DON'T WANT IT TO, YOU KNOW, BE MONOPOLIZING THE CONVERSATION HERE.

SO BE SURE TO CHIME IN, UM, UH, LET'S SEE.

UM, AND AGAIN, I THINK, AND, AND THIS, THE CONFLICTING PROVISIONS THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT MIGHT BE COVERED UNDER ONE OH 1.06.

UM, SO WHEN TONY, YOU KNOW, AND JERRY LOOKS AT WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, THE DEFINITIONS, UM, IT, IT MIGHT THAT THAT PROVISION MIGHT ACTUALLY COVER THAT.

SO WE MAY HAVE, WE MAY HAVE ALREADY BE COVERED IDLE, NO, UH, DETERMINATION OF LEGISLATIVE INTENT.

UM, AGAIN, THAT'S FAIRLY STANDARD, UH, LEGISLATIVE, UH, DOCTRINE IN TERMS OF HOW, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY OUR LAWS NEED TO BE INTERPRETED TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY CAN BE CONSISTENT WITH THE CONSTITUTION IN THE UNITED STATES, THE OHIO CONSTITUTION AND OHIO LAWS.

UM, AND SO THAT KIND OF LAYS OUT HOW, IF THERE IS A DISPUTE OR, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT ARE, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY OUR COUNCIL DOESN'T WANT TO PASS A LAW THAT'S INTENDED TO BEING UNCONSTITUTIONAL OR, UM, IN VIOLATION OF STATE STATUTE.

SO, UM, SO IF THERE'S ANY, NO QUESTIONS ON THAT ON, YEAH, MY, I WAS GOING TO TAKE A LOOK AT THIS.

UH, SO, UM, THE AMBIGUITY OF LAW, I MEAN, IS THAT, I MEAN, IS THERE ANY, LIKE, THINGS LIKE IS, IS LIKE FAIRNESS INCLUDED IN THERE ANYWHERE DOES THAT YEAH, I MEAN, IS THAT PART OF, I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY COUNCIL DIDN'T INTEND TO WRITE AN UNFAIR LAW OR LIKE THAT, SO, I MEAN, IS THAT PART OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE PARTICULAR CONSTRUCTION OR WHERE'S KIND OF FAIRNESS FIGURED INTO THE, IN THE AMBIGUITY? SO SOMEHOW A LAW GOT WRITTEN THAT TURNED OUT TO BE SOMEHOW UNFAIR OR JUST, YOU KNOW, UNFAIRLY BIASED TOWARDS ONE GROUP OF PEOPLE OR ONE PARTICULAR PERSON OVER ANOTHER PERSON IT'S ALREADY KIND OF IT'S ALREADY.

IS THAT ALREADY KIND OF IN THE NUMBER, SECTION FIVE OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF A PARTICULAR CONSTRUCTION OR IS THAT I THINK, AND, AND THEN, UM, I'LL KIND OF PUT MY OWN LAWYER HAT ON HERE FOR A MOMENT SINCE, UM, THAT'S WHAT I DO.

UM, TYPICALLY SPEAKING, IF A STATUTE IS, IS UNAMBIGUOUS, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S, IT'S DEEMED TO BE CORRECT, YOU KNOW, OR RIGHT OR WRONG, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S UNAMBIGUOUS, THEN THE COURT HAS NO CHOICE, BUT TO, UM, TO APPLY THE CLEAR, UH, MEANING OF ANY WORDS AND PHRASES THAT ARE USED, WHERE THE SECTION COMES

[00:25:01]

INTO PLAY IS OKAY, IF YOU HAVE A WORD OR A PHRASE THAT IS, COULD HAVE MORE THAN ONE INTERPRETATION UNDER THAT SCENARIO, BRIAN, THEN THAT'S WHEN THEY WOULD LOOK AT THE VARIOUS FACTORS THAT ARE LISTED UNDER, YOU KNOW, UNDER SECTION C.

AND I THINK THE INTENT, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE OBJECT SOUGHT TO BE ATTAINED, W YOU KNOW, THE IDEA OF FAIRNESS IS PROBABLY IS GOING TO COME INTO PRETTY MUCH ALL OF THOSE THINGS THAT ARE LISTED, YOU KNOW, THE OBJECT, YOU KNOW, THE CIRCUMSTANCES, UM, IF THERE'S ANY LEGISLATIVE HISTORY, UM, BASICALLY THAT WOULD CONSIST OF THE MINUTES OF THE, UM, ANY COMMITTEE THAT REVIEWED THE LEGISLATION, THE, UH, UH, THE, UM, ACTUAL, YOU KNOW, DISCUSSION DURING COUNCIL OF THE APPROVAL OR NOT.

SO I THINK A LOT OF THE FAIRNESS WOULD BE DEVELOPED OUT OF, AND ANY AMBIGUITY WOULD BE LOOKED AT USING THOSE FACTORS.

AND SO, UM, THOSE ARE TYPICALLY THE THINGS THAT COURTS WOULD LOOK AT IN, IN MAKING A DETERMINATION.

OKAY.

IF A WORD CAN HAVE TWO MEANINGS, YOU KNOW, WHAT DID COUNCIL IN T REALLY INTEND IN USING THOSE PARTICULAR WORDS? SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION OR NOT, BUT I MEAN, WE CAN CERTAINLY HAVE, YEAH, I THINK IT DOES.

I JUST, IT WAS JUST, IT JUST STRUCK ME THAT IT MIGHT NOT BE THE, IT NOT NECESSARILY BE BUILT IN THERE.

SO, YEAH.

YEAH.

I THINK IT KIND OF IN THE CONCEPT OF FAIRNESS, AT LEAST I WOULD LIKE TO THINK ANYWAY, IS KIND OF SUPERIMPOSED OVER EVERYTHING THAT, YOU KNOW, COUNCIL AND THE CITY DOES, UH, OR AT LEAST TRIES TO DO.

YEAH.

I THINK, UH, SECTION 83 OF THAT PARTICULAR AREA, IT ALSO SAYS IT'S PRESENTED THEIR ADJUSTED REASONABLE RESULT IS INTENDED BY THE INACTIVATION OF THE ORDINANCE.

AND THAT'S TRUE.

I MEAN, AND YOU KNOW, THAT'S, AGAIN, THE WHOLE IDEA WOULD BE THE CON COUNCIL WOULD NOT INTEND TO BE ARBITRARY OR CAPRICIOUS IN ANY LEGISLATION THAT WOULD PASS.

SO, UM, SEVERAL ABILITY, ONE OH 1.08 THAT BASICALLY JUST SAYS THAT, YOU KNOW, IF ANY ONE SECTION OF THE STATUTES DEEMED TO BE INVALID OR UNCONSTITUTIONAL, TO THE EXTENT THAT THE REST OF THE STATUTE CAN BE INTER YOU KNOW, CAN BE APPLIED AND IS VALID, IT WILL BE, UH, YOU DON'T THROW OUT THE WHOLE WHOLE THING JUST BECAUSE ONE PART OF IT MIGHT BE DETERMINED TO BE INVALID OR UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

AGAIN, THAT'S THE OHIO REVISED CODE BEING IN, YOU KNOW, BEING APPLIED AND THE LANGUAGE THERE.

SO ANY, LIKE I SAY, ANYTHING THAT HAS A REFERENCE TO THE OHIO REVISED CODE TO IT, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE HAVE JERRY LOOK AT AND MAKE SURE THAT IT'S CONSISTENT.

UM, THE GENERAL PENALTY PROVISION ONE OH 1.99.

WE ACTUALLY MODIFIED THAT BACK IN 2000 AND, OR RECOMMENDED THAT IT BE MODIFIED BACK IN 2011.

UM, UH, UH, AND THAT WAS BASICALLY, UH, WE ADDED A PROVISION THAT JUST SAID THAT IT WOULD BE A MINOR MISDEMEANOR BECAUSE PREVIOUSLY I THINK IT HAD A SET DOLLAR PENALTY AND WE, WE JUST WANTED TO HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY OF, WITHOUT, YOU KNOW, IF WE CHANGE, IF THE, THE PENALTY FOR A MINOR MISDEMEANOR CHANGE, WE DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE TO GO BACK AND THEN AMEND THIS CODE SECTION AS WELL.

SO WE, WE JUST TIED IT TO BEING A MINOR MISDEMEANOR AND THEN WHATEVER THAT VIOLATION AND WHATEVER THE PENALTY FOR THAT WITHIN, UM, BE THE PENALTY THAT WOULD BE, OR COULD BE IMPOSED BY A COURT.

UH, ONE QUESTION ON THAT, THIS IS ANOTHER STYLE THING, UH, WHEREIN AS IN, UM, WHERE TO GO AS IN, UH, AND WHERE IN SUCH AS NO SPECIFIC PLD OR OTHERWISE PREVENTED PR PROVIDED WHEREIN I BELIEVE IS SUPPOSED TO BE ONE WORD.

OKAY.

I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

RIGHT.

I DON'T KNOW MY LONG ENOUGH, I DON'T KNOW.

YEAH.

WELL, I, YEAH, I GOT TO GET

[00:30:01]

THROUGH THIS AND IT'S FINE.

I MEAN, YOU KNOW, AND LIKE, YEAH.

I DON'T THINK IT CHANGES THE MEETING, MEANING.

YEAH.

I THINK YOU'RE PROBABLY RIGHT WHEN I'M READING IT.

IT'S OLD TOWN.

IT PROBABLY DOES INTEND TO BE JUST ONE WORD WEARING.

YEAH.

OKAY.

UM, YEAH, WE CAN LOOK AT THEM.

YEAH.

DON HERE, I HAVE A QUESTION WHEN YOU DID MADE THAT, UH, SUGGESTION, UH, FOR THE MODIFICATION, THE FINAL LINE THAT SAYS A SEPARATE, A FUND SHALL BE DEEMED COMMITTED EACH DAY DURING, UH, OR ON WHICH A VIOLATION OCCURS.

DID, WAS THAT A LINE THAT YOU ADDED AT THAT TIME OR WAS THAT IN THEIR PREGNANCY? UH, I'M THINKING THAT THE ONLY THING THAT WE CHANGED WAS WE ELIMINATED THE DOLLAR AMOUNT AND ADDED, UH, THE REFERENCE TO THE, UM, UH, THE PENALTY.

UM, YEAH, I TH I THINK IN LOOKING AT THE NOTES, IT JUST, I DON'T THINK WE ADDRESSED THAT LAST SENTENCE.

THAT WAS MY RECOLLECTION WAS, YEAH.

I DON'T KNOW, GLENN, IF YOU HAVE ANY RECOLLECTION ON THAT, I REMEMBER WE HAD THE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT GETTING RID OF THE DOLLAR AMOUNT.

UM, BUT I, THAT WAS THE ONLY PART THAT I RECALL US TALKING ABOUT.

RIGHT.

HI, I NOTICED THAT IN THE TIMEFRAME DEFINITIONS ABOVE THAT WE, UM, WE DON'T DESIGNATE WHAT CONSTITUTES A DAY, UM, ON FLUX THERE.

YEAH.

I WAS WONDERING, YEAH.

IF SOMEBODY STARTS COMMITTING A CRIME AT 1158 AND FINISHES THAT 1203, THAT TWO DIFFERENT CRIMES.

CAUSE IT TAKES TWO DAYS.

UM, AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS LOOKING AT.

YEAH.

I, I DON'T KNOW IF IN THE, IN THE RULES CONSTRUCTION SECTION, I KNOW IT TALKS ABOUT WEEKS AND IT TALKS ABOUT, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF IT TALKS ABOUT DAYS IN COMPUTATIONAL TIME.

UM, UH, IT DOESN'T SEEM TO TALK, YOU KNOW, DAYS.

UM, YOUR, UM, AND MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WOULD, MAYBE WE OUGHT TO HAVE JERRY LOOK AT TO SEE IF THE IDEA OF WHAT IS A DAY IS ALSO INCLUDED SOMEWHERE IN THE OHIO REVISED CODE.

AND IF NOT, MAYBE WE NEED TO ADD THAT IN THE CONSTRUCTION SECTION OF THE, UH, OF THE CODE THAT TALKS ABOUT, UM, WHEN YOU'RE DEFINING, YOU KNOW, WEEKS AND HOW YOU CAN COMP COMPUTE DAYS.

THAT'S A GOOD POINT.

UM, OKAY.

UH, THEN THE NEXT SECTIONS DEAL WITH THE OFFICIAL SEAL, UH, THE BIRD FLOWER, UM, I DON'T KNOW, IS THERE ANY OTHER, UH, ANY, ANYTHING THAT WE WOULD RUN A RECOMMEND BE CHANGED OR IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE WOULD WANT TO RECOMMEND BE ADDED AS THE OFFICIAL, WHATEVER FOR THE CITY OF HUBER HEIGHTS? WE DO HAVE A FLAG.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING WE PUT THERE.

OKAY.

YEAH.

I MEAN, IS, DOES A FLAG, IS IT JUST SIMPLY THE TONY? IS IT JUST SIMPLY THE CITY SEAL ON THE FLAG OR NO, THERE'S OTHER DESIGN ELEMENTS THAT HAS THE STRIPES THAT REPRESENT A TWO OH ONE AND TWO OH TWO RUNNING THROUGH THE CITY, UH, THE STARS AND SOME OTHER ELEMENTS.

UM, THERE WAS LEGISLATION THAT WAS PASSED THAT I, THAT ADOPTED THE PLAN AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS.

IT WAS ACTUALLY DONE BY A, UM, UH, UH, CONTESTS THROUGH WAYNE HIGH SCHOOL WHERE STUDENTS WERE ASKED TO SUBMIT DESIGNS AND THEN THEY SELECTED IT AS DESIGN, UH, FROM ONE OF THE STUDENTS.

THERE'S A, IF YOU LOOK ON OUR WEBSITE, IF YOU'RE INTERESTED, THERE'S A WHOLE PAGE ON THE BACKGROUND OF THE FLAG AND THE EXPLANATION OF ASSEMBLES AND THAT SORT OF THING.

SO, UM, I'M NOT SURE WHY THAT'S NOT IN HERE, BUT, UM, WE'LL LOOK AT THAT.

THAT'S, THAT'S PROBABLY A GOOD POINT.

IT SHOULD PROBABLY AT LEAST BE INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE BECAUSE

[00:35:01]

IT WAS ADOPTED OFFICIALLY BY THE CITY.

YEAH.

OR IF IT'S, IF IT'S LOCATED SOMEWHERE ELSE IN THE ORDINANCES THAT WE MIGHT BE LOOKING AT, IT, IT MIGHT WANT TO BE MOVED INTO THIS SECTION.

IT WOULD BE A GOOD PLACE TO PUT IT.

OKAY.

UH, ANY OTHER THINGS THAT WE WOULD WANT TO ANY LIKE THE OFFICIAL BREAKFAST CEREAL OR WHATEVER? UM, I MEAN THE NFL SEEMS TO HAVE AN OFFICIAL SOMETHING FOR EVERYTHING.

SO I, UH, SO IF IT COMES TO MIND, THEY GET PAID FOR THAT TOO.

YEAH, YEAH, YEAH.

UM, OKAY.

YEAH.

THAT'S A GOOD POINT ABOUT THE FLAG.

YEAH.

UH, THE NEXT SECTION IS, UM, DEAL WARDS.

AND I'M ASSUMING THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE RECEIVING THE, AT SOME POINT IN TIME COMING UP IN 2021, WE WILL BE RECEIVING THE, UM, UH, CONSENSUS RESULTS.

UM, WHICH, YEAH, WHICH I THINK WILL, YOU KNOW, COULD, COULD RESULT IN THESE WARDS THAT THE JURISDICTIONAL TERRITORY OF THE WARDS POSSIBLY BEING LOOKED AT AND REVIEWED BY COUNCIL LENT.

I SEE YOU, YOU'VE GOT YOUR HAND UP.

YEAH, I WAS, THAT WAS ONE OF THE SECTIONS I WAS GOING TO POINT OUT, UH, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO WITH IT RIGHT.

THIS MOMENT, BUT SHOULD WE, TONY, SHOULD WE BOOKMARK THAT AND BRING IT BACK LATER ON, UH, FOR DISCUSSION AFTER WE'VE GONE THROUGH THAT CENSUS PROCESS, BECAUSE THIS IS ALL GOING TO HAVE TO BE REDEFINED.

I GUARANTEE YOU THERE WILL BE MOVEMENT.

YEAH.

UM, I TOTALLY AGREE.

THAT NEEDS TO BE BOOKMARKED AND REVISITED ONCE WE HAVE THE CENSUS RESULTS.

UM, AS GLEN INDICATED, UH, IT'S LIKELY THAT WE, UH, WE'LL HAVE TO DO, UM, SOME SHIFTING OF THE WARD LINES BASED ON POPULATION SHIFTS WITHIN THE CITY.

UM, THE GOAL, UH, STANDARD THAT HAS BEEN SET FOR FAIRNESS AMONGST, UH, POPULATION DISTRIBUTION IN THE WARDS IS APPROXIMATELY ALL THE WORDS SHOULD BE WITHIN 5% OF EACH OTHER RELATIVE TO POPULATION OR LESS.

SO, UH, WE DID HAVE TO MAKE SOME, UM, UH, SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THE WARDS.

AND, UH, AFTER THE 2010 CENSUS, I ANTICIPATE WE'LL HAVE TO DO THAT AGAIN.

UM, THE LAST TIME THAT PROCESS WAS DONE THROUGH A COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL, UM, AND, UH, COUNCIL WILL HAVE TO DECIDE WHETHER, UH, THAT'S THE COURSE THEY WANT TO TAKE AGAIN, OR, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD BE A TASK THAT WOULD BE DELEGATED, UH, TO THIS GROUP.

OR, UH, THERE MIGHT BE PARALLEL PROCESSES THAT IT'S DONE WITH BOTH.

AND THEN WE TRY TO, UH, BRING SOMETHING TOGETHER.

UM, WHAT YOU HAVE HERE IN THE CODE ITSELF IS WHAT THEY CALL IN LEGAL TERMS, THE MEETS AND BOUNDS, UH, WHICH IS BASICALLY A, A GEOGRAPHICAL DESCRIPTION OF AWARDS BY MEETS AND BOUNDS.

AND, UM, SO ONCE THOSE LINES WOULD BE IDENTIFIED AND THE CHANGES MADE, THEN WE WOULD HAVE AN ATTORNEY WOULD HAVE TO DRAFT THE MEETS AND BOUNDS FOR THE NEW WARD LINES.

AND, UM, THOSE WOULD HAVE TO BE ACCEPTED BY COUNCIL, UH, PRIOR THEIR INCORPORATION, UM, INTO THE CODE.

YEAH, YEAH.

AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, I DON'T KNOW WHO, UH, WHO HAS THE SECOND LARGEST WORD, BUT I CAN ALMOST GUARANTEE YOU, MR. WEBB HERE IS SITTING OVER THE LARGEST WARD IN THE CITY RIGHT NOW, HANDS DOWN, YOU COULD USE SOME HELP.

YEAH.

W IT WAS MAINLY A WARD TWO IN WARD SIX THAT HAD THE POPULATION GROWTH IN 2010.

BUT THEN AS A RESULT TO GET THE ADJUSTMENT, YOU KIND OF HAD TO SHIFT POPULATION SOUTH IN THE CITY AND IT AFFECTED REALLY ALL OF THE WARDS.

ULTIMATELY, UH, WE ALSO HAD AN ISSUE IN 2010 THAT THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBER, AND MORE THAN TWO LIVED IN A POCKET OF, UH, SOUTH OF INTERSTATE SATURDAY, WHERE PRIOR TO THAT, UH, THE LINE HAD KIND OF BEEN MORE CLEANLY DIVIDED WITH THE INTERSTATE AND THE TWO STATE ROUTES.

UM, AND SO, UM, THAT DOESN'T, THAT SITUATION DOESN'T EXIST ANY LONGER, BUT BASICALLY AT THE TIME, UH, THAT LITTLE POCKET WAS LEFT THERE AND MORE TO SOUTH OF INTERSTATE 70 IN ORDER TO ALLOW THE INCUMBENT COUNCIL MEMBER TO REMAIN WITHIN THEIR WARD.

SO, BUT I THINK THAT'S GOING TO GET RE REDRAWN AS WELL AS A RESULT OF THAT.

YEAH.

YEAH.

AND, UM, I'M ASSUMING THAT PROBABLY THE, THE ACTUAL NEEDS AND BOUNCED DESCRIPTIONS WOULD, OR WOULD BE DONE

[00:40:01]

BY A SURVEYOR, UH, UM, YEAH, I THINK IT WAS A COMBINATION OF A SURVEYOR AND, UH, UH, THAT WAS CONTRACTED THROUGH THE LAW DIRECTOR'S OFFICE THAT WROTE THE CURRENT ONES.

AND, OKAY.

SO I THINK PROBABLY BOTH MARKING THIS AND WAITING FOR FURTHER DIRECTION, BASICALLY, PROBABLY FROM COUNCIL AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT US TO LOOK AT THIS, OR IF THEY WANT TO TAKE THIS ON THEMSELVES.

UM, I KNOW IT'D BE A POLITICAL HOT POTATO, SO MIGHT NOT, NOT BE A BAD THING FOR COUNCIL TO DEAL WITH IT THAT RATHER THAN US, BUT YEAH, IT WAS DIFFICULT TO GET TO THE AGREEMENTS.

NO ONE WANTS TO SEE THEIR CERTAIN AREAS OF THEIR WARD GO TO ANOTHER WARD AND, AND, UH, THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO, UH, YEAH.

TAKE SOME DISCUSSION.

YEAH.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

UH, NOW WE'RE MOVING INTO THE SECTION OF ONE OH SEVEN, WHICH DEALS WITH PRIMARY ELECTION PROCEDURES.

UM, UH, I, THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD, I'M TRYING TO FIND IT NOW WITH, UH, UM, IN SECTION ONE OH 7.01.

IT SAYS THAT NONPARTISAN PRIMARY ELECTION SHALL BE HELD FOR THE NOMINATION OF CANDIDATES FOR THE OFFICES OF MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER ON THE SAME DATE ESTABLISHED FOR CONDUCTING PRIMARY ELECTIONS.

UM, AND I'M, I'M ASSUMING THE REFERENCE THERE IS WITHIN THE STATE OF OHIO SO THAT OUR NOT OUR PRIMARY ELECTIONS WOULD BE HELD ON THE SAME DATE THAT THE PRIMARY ELECTIONS ARE IN THE STATE OF OHIO, BUT IT DOESN'T SAY IT DOESN'T REFERENCE, UH, IT'S KIND OF CIRCUITOUS BECAUSE IT TALKS ABOUT NON-POWER PRIMARY ELECTIONS ARE ON THE DATA OF THE PRIMARY ELECTIONS, BUT IT DOESN'T REALLY SAY WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT DATE ARE WE LOOKING AT? SO I THINK THE INTENT PROBABLY IS THAT WE WOULD USE OUR, NOT OUR PRIMARY ELECTIONS, IF WE NEED ONE WOULD BE THE SAME DATE AS THE ONE PRIMARY ELECTION OF THE STATE OF OHIO.

I THINK WE WOULD NEED SOME CLARIFICATION PROBABLY ON THAT.

THAT'S WHAT THE INTENT IS.

I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE ADD THAT TO MAKE IT CLEAR.

OKAY.

YEAH.

I WROTE THAT DOWN AND YOU ARE CORRECT THAT IT'S TIED TO THE STATE OF OHIO'S PRIMARY ELECTIONS.

OKAY.

UM, AND I THINK THE REST OF THE DEAL, UH, UNLESS ANYBODY ELSE HAS ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT, UH, THE PRIMARY, YOU KNOW, HOW THE PRIMARIES ARE HELD AND WHAT HAPPENS IF THERE'S, UH, NO, NOT MORE THAN TWO CANDIDATES FOR A PARTICULAR, UH, POSITION.

SO IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THE REST OF THAT SECTION? I DO HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.

IT'S PROBABLY A STUPID QUESTION.

UM, IS THERE EVER A YEAR WHERE THERE IS NO PRIMARY ELECTION IN OHIO THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE ONE OR IS THAT NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN NOW? THERE'S, THERE'S A PRIMARY ELECTION, UH, HELD EACH YEAR.

OKAY.

OKAY.

OKAY.

AND EVEN IF, EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE AN ELECTION, PER SE, I THINK THE DATE IS SET BY THE STATE BY STATE LEGISLATION.

CAUSE THEY COULD BE IN THE SAME SITUATION THAT WE'RE, THAT WE WOULD BE IN POSSIBLY WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE ANY, YOU DON'T NEED TO HAVE A PRIMARY UNLIKELY, BUT I COULD SEE THAT POSSIBLY HAPPENING AT THE STATE LEVEL TOO.

UM, AND FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO MIGHT NOT BE FAMILIAR WITH THE PRIMARY PROCESS FOR MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS, UH, THE WAY IT WORKS IS THAT ALL THE CANDIDATES FILE IN ADVANCE OF THE PRIMARY ELECTION INDICATING THEY'RE GOING TO RUN.

AND THEN BASED ON THE CITY CHARTER, UH, IF THERE'S TWO OR MORE CANDIDATES FOR ANY, UM, IF THERE'S MORE THAN TWO CANDIDATES, EXCUSE ME, UH, FOR ANY POSITION IN THE CITY GOVERNMENT THAT THEY'RE RUNNING FOR ELECTION, THEN THERE'S A PRIMARY HELD AT THE PRIMARY ELECTION AND THE TOP TWO VOTE GETTERS PROCEED TO THE, UH, GENERAL ELECTION IN THE FALL.

UM, IF THERE'S ONLY TWO CANDIDATES FOR THE ON FILE PRIOR TO THE PRIMARY OR ONE PERSON, UH, FOR THE OFFICE, THEN THERE'S NO PRIMARY HELD IN THOSE CANDIDATES JUST TO ADVANCE TO THE GENERAL ELECTION.

OKAY.

THANKS.

ALL RIGHT.

UH, THE NEXT SECTION IS WHICH, UH, I FOUND, I, I THINK BECAUSE A LOT OF WHAT'S HAPPENED IN OUR COUNTRY, IT MADE THIS

[00:45:01]

SECTION A LITTLE BIT MORE, UH, UH, INTERESTING TO ME TO READ.

UM, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, I WAS SURPRISED WHEN I FOUND, SAW THAT A STATE OF EMERGENCY CAN EXIST WHEN A GROUP OF THREE OR MORE PEOPLE ACT TOGETHER, UH, AND THEIR ACTIONS ARE TO, WITH THE INTENT TO COMMIT A FELONY OR TO COMMIT VIOLENCE ON PERSONS OR PROPERTY.

SO THEORETICALLY I'LL TAKE A REALLY STUPID, STUPID EXAMPLE, BUT THREE PEOPLE GET TOGETHER AND EGG, A HOUSE THAT'S DAN THAT'S DAMAGE, UH, UH, COMMITTING VIOLENCE TO PROPERTY, THEORETICALLY IT COULD CONSTITUTE A STATE EMERGENCY, UH, OR A STATE OF EMERGENCY.

UM, I, I'M NOT SURE THAT ONE, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT WOULD, UH, THAT I DON'T THINK WE WOULD EVER DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT I WAS REALLY SURPRISED WHEN I THOUGHT IT WAS THREE OR, YOU KNOW, IT COULD BE THREE PEOPLE TO CREATE A STATE OF EMERGENCY IN THE CITY.

UM, I'M THINKING MAYBE THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL MIGHT WANT TO LOOK AT TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO SOMEHOW ADDRESS THAT PARTICULAR.

I DON'T KNOW.

I DON'T HAVE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS OR THOUGHTS REALLY ON, YOU KNOW, HOW DO YOU DEFINE, YOU KNOW, WHAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A SUFFICIENT, UM, YOU KNOW, EMERGENCY? UM, BUT IT, I WAS JUST SURPRISED BY THE, IT ONLY TOOK THREE RYAN.

WELL, OKAY.

SO I KIND OF LOOKED AT THAT TOO.

SO LET'S SAY, LET'S JUST ASSUME, EVEN THOUGH IT, YOU KNOW, CAUSE IT'S NOT THAT UNUSUAL NOW TO THINK ABOUT THIS, IF THERE WAS A RIOT NOW YOU WOULD HAVE TO DETERMINE IF MORE THAN THREE PEOPLE INTENDED TO START THE RIOTS OR IF THE, OR WERE INTENDED TO BE IN THE RIOT OR IF THEY JUST HAPPENED TO BE PROTESTING.

SO I WOULD, YEAH.

I MEAN, THREE MIGHT BE A SMALL NUMBER, BUT I BET THEY COULD FIND IT.

SO THAT SAY, FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU HAD VIDEOTAPE OF THE RIOT SCENE THAT YOU AT LEAST SAW THREE PEOPLE DOING SOMETHING THAT WAS OBVIOUSLY AN INTENDED CRIME, SO THAT WOULD BE, THAT'S WHY MAYBE THE LOW WAS THERE BECAUSE OF, YOU KNOW, TO DETERMINE THE INTENT IN A SITUATION LIKE THAT, WHERE THERE'S SOME AMBIGUITY AS TO WHO IS WHO AND WHAT THEY'RE INTENDING TO DO THAT YOU COULD, AT LEAST IF YOU HAD SOME WITNESSES OR SOME VIDEOTAPES SHOWING, OKAY, THESE THREE PEOPLE WERE DOING THIS, THEN THAT WOULD BE, I GUESS, SUFFICIENT.

AND THAT MAY BE WHY THAT'S THE NUMBER.

SO, WELL, YEAH, I MEAN, AND I DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT THE, I MEAN, THIS WAS, THIS WAS THE LAST TIME THAT THIS WAS ACTUALLY PASSED AND ADDRESS WAS BACK IN 1981.

UH, SO, UH, NONE OF US WERE AROUND AT THAT POINT IN TIME AND WE'D BE ABLE TO GIVE ANY KIND OF AN IMPACT YOU INPUT AS TO WHAT WAS INTENDED, BUT I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND I JUST, UH, YOU KNOW, THERE MAY BE A JUSTIFICATION AND GOOD REASON FOR THREE.

THERE MAY NOT DONE.

YOU HAD A COMMENT.

THANK YOU.

YEAH, JOHN, I WAS JUMPING AHEAD TO A ONE 92 OH TWO, THE, UM, PEOPLE WHO ARE ABLE TO CALL THE STATE OF EMERGENCY AND UNDER YOUR SCENARIO, DON'T PEG THE FIRE CHIEF'S HOUSE.

UM, THERE'S THREE KIDS THAT I SAW.

IN OTHER WORDS, I GET WHAT YOUR POINT IS BECAUSE, UH, TECHNICALLY YEAH, THREE KIDS EGGING THE FIRE CHIEF'S HOUSE AND TEXTED HIM OFF.

HE HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DECLARE A STATE OF EMERGENCY THE WAY I'M READING THOSE.

YEAH.

GLENN.

OKAY.

THERE WE GO.

YEAH.

I THOUGHT THAT WAS ODD.

THE NUMBER THREE AS WELL, IT SEEMED KIND OF RANDOM.

UH, WOULDN'T IT BE APPROPRIATE TO RECOMMEND MAYBE THE REMOVAL OF THE WORDS OR MORE, OR I'M SORRY.

UM, THREE OR MORE, AND JUST WHEN A GROUP OF PEOPLE ACT TOGETHER WITH THE INTENT THAT WOULD LOWER IT TO TWO OR MORE BECAUSE PEOPLE WOULD BE TWO OR MORE.

YEAH.

I MEAN, YOU COULD HAVE A GROUP OF TWO, I GUESS YOU COULD.

YEAH.

YEAH.

I MEAN, THREE AGAIN, THREE IS KIND OF SEEMS A BIT RANDOM TO ME AS WELL.

I DON'T, I DIDN'T, I COULDN'T FIGURE WHAT THREE MEN, WHAT I THINK WE MIGHT WANT TO SUGGEST THAT IS THAT HAVE THE MAYBE CITY ATTORNEY LOOK AT WHAT OTHER COMMUNITIES HAVE ADOPTED, UH, FOR

[00:50:01]

THEMSELVES AND KIND OF GET A CANVAS OF WHAT, LIKE, YOU KNOW, KETTERING'S CITY OF DAYTON, SOME OF THE OTHER CITIES THAT MAY HAVE SIMILAR PROVISIONS AND SEE IF THEY'VE GOT SOME SORT OF A, UM, YOU KNOW, THRESHOLD, UH, OR HOW THEY ADDRESS WHAT IS CONSIDERED TO BE A, UM, YOU KNOW, A SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF PEOPLE ACTING TOGETHER.

THANKS, JIM.

YEAH.

NOW THAT I'M READING THIS FOR FIFTH TIME HERE, UM, A PERSON WHO HAS A BIOLOGICAL WEAPON, UH, IN THE MIDDLE OF A PARKING LOT AND IS THREATENING TO USE, IT DOES NOT, UM, DOES NOT CALL FOR AN ACTION OF A STATE OF EMERGENCY UNDER OUR DEFINITION HERE.

SO MY, MY FATHER IN THE SECOND PART WHERE THERE'S A MANMADE DISASTER, WELL, BUT IF YOU READ IT, IT SAYS, UM, UM, MANMADE OR NATURAL DISASTER, WHICH SUBSTANTIALLY DAMAGES PERSONS OR PROPERTY, UM, MAYBE IMPAIRS THE FUNCTIONING OF THE CITY, BUT BASICALLY IT'S JUST A THREAT.

BUT GIVEN THE, UH, ALL THE TIMES WE LIVE IN THE THREAT IS OFTEN ENOUGH WHERE I BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO TRIGGER A STATE OF EMERGENCY, UH, CLARE AND AREA.

SO, YEAH, I'M JUST NOT SURE IF THAT ISN'T SOME LANGUAGE THAT THOSE BEING CLEANED UP A BIT.

YEAH.

I, I THINK, I REALLY THINK PROBABLY THE ENTIRE CODE SECTION OF ONE OH NINE PROBABLY NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT, UM, BECAUSE DOWN IN THE OTHER THING TOO, AND I THINK WE ACTUALLY TALKED ABOUT THIS AND I DON'T KNOW, I, WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT THE ORDER OF WHO CAN DECLARE A STATE OF EMERGENCY, UM, AND GLEN, MAYBE YOU CAN HELP MY MEMORY AND TONY IT'S THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS SLASH HER DESIGNEE.

AND I THINK THAT WAS ADDED THE LAST GO AROUND AND I'M NOT SURE FOR ONE DOES IGNI IS NOT DEFINED ANYWHERE.

SO THE CITY MANAGER THEORETICALLY, COULD DESIGNATE HIS WIFE OR HER, HIS HUSBAND TO BE THE PERSON AND AS LONG AS IT'S DESIGNATED.

UM, AND I THINK SINCE WE HAVE THE ORDER OF PRIORITY, I'M THINKING WE WANT TO TAKE OUT THE DESIGNEE LANGUAGE ALTOGETHER AND JUST HAVE A GO, YOU KNOW, MAYOR, CITY MANAGER, FIRE, CHIEF POLICE, CHIEF.

AND I THINK THAT WOULD COVER PROBABLY PRETTY MUCH, YOU KNOW, THE WHOLE SITUATION.

AND IF NOT, WE CAN ALWAYS CALL ON ALEXANDER HAIG.

I'M DATING MYSELF WITH THAT REFERENCE.

BUT, UM, BUT, UH, BUT YEAH, I, I, LIKE I SAID, I WAS WHEN I SAW DESIGNEE, I SAID, YOU KNOW, CAUSE IT DOESN'T DEFINE THAT, THAT THE, YOU KNOW, TO, TO COME BACK TO THE, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT A FEW MINUTES AGO ABOUT OFFICERS, IT DOESN'T EVEN RELIC, YOU KNOW, MAKE IT TO BE AN OFFICER OF THE CITY OF UBER EYES.

IT COULD BE ANYBODY.

AND, UH, SO I, I THINK THAT WHOLE, PROBABLY THAT WHOLE SECTION NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT AND THE SAME THING WITH LIKE THE PENALTY PROVISION OF THAT.

IT SAYS, YOU KNOW, WHOEVER VIOLATES, YOU KNOW, ANY OF THE ORDERS.

NOW, THE OTHER THING TOO, GETTING BACK TO YOUR COMMENT ON IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN A STATE OF EMERGENCY HAS BEEN DECLARED, IT LIMITS WHAT THE ACTIONS THAT CAN BE TAKEN ARE CURFEW, YOU KNOW, SELL OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES.

UM, UH, I'M THINKING THAT THERE WOULD BE OTHER AVENUES AVAILABLE TO THE POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENT TO BE TAKEN IF SOMEBODY DOES HAVE, YOU KNOW, A BIOLOGICAL WEAPON IN THE PARKING LOT.

UM, SO, YOU KNOW, STATE OF EMERGENCY MAY NOT NECESSARILY BE THE APPROPRIATE RESPONSE TO THAT PARTICULAR SITUATION.

UM, BUT AGAIN, THE VIOLATION, YOU KNOW, WE I'M THINKING WE MIGHT WANT TO TIE IT MORE TOWARDS, UM, YOU KNOW, A, ONE OF THE CRIMINAL LEVELS, YOU KNOW, MINOR MR. MEANER, UM, YOU KNOW, A MAJOR MISDEMEANOR OR FELONY, WHATEVER, AS OPPOSED TO JUST SAY A HUNDRED DOLLAR FINE, NO MORE THAN A HUNDRED DOLLAR FINE.

UH, KIND OF LIKE WHAT WE DID UNDER THE GENERAL OFFENSES PROVISION.

SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE A RECOMMENDATION OF MINE WOULD BE THAT THEY, UH, THAT A CITY ATTORNEY

[00:55:01]

LOOK AT THAT RYAN, OH, I WAS WONDERING MORE ON LIKE SOMETHING LIKE THE A HUNDRED DOLLARS, FINE.

MAYBE THAT'S MORE FOR LIKE A CURFEW VIOLATION.

CAUSE IT SAYS, ESTABLISH A CURFEW OR PROHIBIT THE SALE OF ALCOHOL OR SOMEBODY SOLD ALCOHOL DURING LIKE THE PROHIBITION, THE, YOU KNOW, THE, YOU KNOW, THE, THAT DECLARATION THAT THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED TO SELL ALCOHOL.

MAYBE THAT'S MORE, WHAT THEY MEAN IS THAT THEY VIOLATED THE, SOME OF THE, SOME OF WHAT'S IN ONE OH NINE THREE.

AND THAT'S WHY IT'S A HUNDRED DOLLARS FINE BECAUSE IT'S ONE OF THESE THINGS THAT NOT NORMALLY WOULD NOT BE A FELONY OR A MISDEMEANOR, BUT WOULD JUST BE SOMETHING THAT'S THERE ONLY BECAUSE OF THE, AND THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING WE, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS WE, WE, YOU KNOW, WE, YOU KNOW, THEY MIGHT WANT TO DO, THE COUNCIL MIGHT WANT TO LOOK AT TH YOU KNOW, TYING IT TO A MINOR MISDEMEANOR, UM, WHICH, UH, WE'RE NOT SAYING IT IS A MINOR MISDEMEANOR, BUT THE FINE THEN THE PENALTY WOULD BE THE EQUIVALENT OF A MINOR MISDEMEANOR.

SO I PICKED, THOSE WAS THE ATTEMPT TO DO THAT THROUGHOUT ALL THESE SECTIONS LAST TIME.

AND THIS ONE MUST MUST'VE BEEN A REWARD.

YEAH.

YEAH.

AND I WOULD JUST NOTE THAT THERE IS A PROCESS THAT COUNSEL MUST AFFIRM TO DECLARED STATE OF EMERGENCY.

SO SOMEONE CAN'T JUST DECLARE IT INDEFINITE STATE OF EMERGENCY, UH, ONCE THEY DO.

SO, UH, TH THE PRESIDING OFFICER OF COUNCIL, WHICH WAS THE MAYOR OR SOMEONE SERVING IN THAT POSITION HAS TO BE NOTIFIED AND THEY HAVE TO HAVE AN EMERGENCY MEETING WITHIN 24 HOURS OF THE, UH, EMERGENCY DECLARATION.

AND THEN THREE-FOURTHS OF THE COUNCIL MUST VOTE TO AFFIRM THE CONTINUED STATE OF EMERGENCY.

OTHERWISE IT NO LONGER CONTINUES TO EXIST.

RIGHT.

AND I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE.

I MEAN, THAT, THAT, I THINK THAT PROVISION MAKES SENSE.

SO THERE IS A CHECK AND BALANCE ON IT WITHIN A FAIRLY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.

YEAH.

UM, UH, AND THE OTHER THING TOO, IS, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF EXERCISE, THE POWERS WHEN EMERGENCY DECLARED UNDER 109.3, UM, IS THERE ANY OTHER, UM, PROHIBITED BEHAVIOR THAT WE WOULD WANT TO INCLUDE OR RECOMMEND BE CONSIDERED TO BE INCLUDED IN THAT SECTION OTHER THAN THE FOUR THAT ARE, UM, THAT ARE LISTED? UM, UH, I MEAN, LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN I, AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW, UH, IF THIS WOULD KIND OF FALL WHEN THERE WAS THE, UM, THE PROTEST UP AT, UM, NORTH OF 70 AWHILE BACK IN THERE.

AND, UM, THERE WAS SOME QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE, UM, THE BUSINESSES SHOULD CLOSE, YOU KNOW, AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

UM, AND THE QUESTION THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF, WHETHER OR NOT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE, I SUPPOSE, IN LIGHT OF WHAT GOVERNOR DEWINE DID YESTERDAY THAT MIGHT FALL WITHIN THE DEFINITION OF WHAT A CURFEW IS, WOULD BE THAT, YOU KNOW, BUSINESSES IN A PARTICULAR AREA MUST CLOSE.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS WHAT IS INTENDED BY OUR CURFEW, OR IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, UH, WE WOULD, YOU KNOW, MAYBE WANT TO HAVE COUNCIL CONSIDER AS A POSSIBLE, UM, ADDITIONAL REMEDY IN THAT SECTION.

UM, MAYBE NOT, I DON'T KNOW.

I KNOW, LIKE I SAID, I KNOW THAT THIS WHOLE AREA IS A LITTLE BIT OF A, LIKE I SAY, IT'S A POLITICAL TIME BOMB IN SOME RESPECTS, BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, IT, IT'S, NOW'S A GOOD TIME TO ADDRESS IT BEFORE WE HAVE.

CAUSE LIKE I SAY, THE LAST TIME A LOT OF THIS STUFF WAS LOOKED OUT WITH BACK IN 1981 AND A LOT OF THINGS HAVE CHANGED, UH, DEMOGRAPHICS, UH, SIZE, UH, EVERYTHING ELSE THAT DEALS WITH THE CITY.

HE WRITES, DON, YOU HAD ANOTHER COMMENT JUST ONLY, UM, IN AGREEMENT, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THOSE FOUR SPECIFIC, UM, ACTIONS, IT ALMOST LOOKS THERE NEEDS TO BE ON E THAT IS, UM, OR TAKE OTHER ACTIONS DEEMED APPROPRIATE.

I DON'T DO LABEL LANGUAGE, BUT, UM, IT'S ODD THAT THERE ARE JUST A, B, C AND D THERE, AS FAR AS THE SPECIFIC REMEDIES, UM, ONCE A STATE OF EMERGENCY IS DECLARED.

YEAH.

LIKE I SAID, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S ALL THE, ALL THE THINGS THAT SHOULD BE LOOKED AT.

UM, I JUST THINK THAT FROM AN ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK WE WOULD, I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE THE

[01:00:01]

COUNCIL AND CITY ATTORNEY TO LOOK FURTHER INTO AS TO WHETHER OR NOT IN LIGHT OF THE CURRENT SITUATION THAT IS, DOES THIS NEED TO BE, UM, YOU KNOW, LOOKED AT IT AS AN ENTIRETY AND MAYBE UPDATED BASED ON THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, THE CITY OF HUBER HEIGHTS IN 2020 AS A WHOLE, IT LOOKS A WHOLE LOT DIFFERENT IT'S FOOTPRINTS, A WHOLE LOT DIFFERENT THAN IT WAS IN 1981.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS SECTION? BUT I, I DON'T EXCEPT TO SAY THAT, I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE COULD BE ADDED TO THOSE FOUR ITEMS, BUT I DO FEEL A BLANKET THING MIGHT BE TOO LOOSE AND, AND CREATE SOME LEGAL DIFFICULTIES.

YEAH, YEAH.

IT COULD.

I MEAN, I THINK IT NEEDS TO, THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME THOUGHT PUT INTO THAT AND I THINK THAT'S, AND I, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IF WE WANT TO MAYBE TABLE THAT PARTICULAR SECTION AND THINK ABOUT IT AND THEN COME BACK AND, AND ADDRESS IT A LITTLE BIT FURTHER.

OR IF THAT'S SOMETHING WE WOULD JUST WANT TO, YOU KNOW, KICK UP THE FOOD CHAIN UP TO COUNCIL AND LET THEM LOOK AT IT.

AND YOU KNOW, ALL WE'RE DOING IS RECOMMENDING THAT IT BE REVIEWED TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT IT NEEDS TO BE UPDATED SINCE IT'S BEEN SO LONG SINCE IT'S BEEN LOOKED AT, I HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS AND THEN THEY'RE NOTHING BIG.

UH, WHEN IT SAYS WHEN A GROUP OF THREE OR MORE PEOPLE ACT TOGETHER, I THINK ACT SHOULD BE ACT BECAUSE IT GOES WITH A GROUP ACTS.

UH, THE OTHER ONE I HAVE IS SHOULD WE CHANGE MAN-MADE TO SOMETHING LIKE HUMAN MADE? SURE.

YEAH.

I THINK THAT'S, I, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, UM, THE, AGAIN, THAT ONE PROVISION SAYS THAT ANYTIME YOU USE ONE GENDER, BUT I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT I'M JUST THINKING SOMEBODY MIGHT LIKE, YEAH, THERE'S THAT.

AND THEN SOME PEOPLE MIGHT LOOK AT THAT SECTION AND NOT THINK THE REFERENCE, THE OTHER, SO, YEAH.

AND I'M SURE THAT PHRASE WAS BASICALLY DATED FROM 1981.

OH, OH YEAH.

YEAH.

I JUST ACTUALLY JUST GOOGLED IT THEN PEOPLE SAY THERE'S NO OTHER WAY TO SAY THAT.

RIGHT.

SO I, YEAH.

I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH MAKING THAT RECOMMENDATION.

OKAY.

UH, LET'S SEE.

UM, I CAN SEE WHAT COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO DO WITH THAT.

AND IN THE MEANTIME, ALSO MAYBE SOLICIT SOME, UH, UH, EMERGENCY POLICY, STATE OF EMERGENCY POLICY FROM OTHER LOCAL COMMUNITIES.

LIKE YOU MENTIONED, JIM, AND, UH, HAVE THOSE AVAILABLE FOR SOME CONSIDERATION AS WELL.

UM, ONE OH 9.07 CONTROL OF PUBLIC UTILITIES.

UM, THE ONE QUESTION I HAVE ON THAT SECTION IS IT SEEMS TO BE LIMITED TO THE MAYOR ISSUING EMERGENCY ORDERS DURING A STATE OF EMERGENCY.

UM, AND I, I'M NOT SURE IF THAT WAS INTENDED TO BE LIMITED TO THE MAYOR OR IF IT WAS, SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITHIN THE HIERARCHY OF THE PRIOR CODE SECTION.

IT'S IT LOOKS LIKE THAT'S JUST, WE'RE LOOKING AT CONTROL OF PUBLIC UTILITY THAT LOOKS LIKE THAT SECTION SECTIONS JUST FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES IN FOR INSTANCE, THE CORONAVIRUS THING HIM SAYING, UH, WE CAN'T SHUT WATER OFF.

RIGHT.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, YOU WOULD YOU'D WANT TO GIVE THE POLICE CHIEF POWER FOR, I MEAN, IF IT'S SOMETHING HE WOULD EVEN WANT TO HAVE, IT WOULD BE NECESSARY FOR HIM TO HAVE, WELL, THE ONLY QUESTION THAT I WOULD HAVE WITH, LET'S SAY OUR MAYOR'S OUT OF TOWN AND CAN'T BE, YOU KNOW, THIS JUST LIMITS IT SOLELY TO THE MAYOR AND NO ONE ELSE.

AND IF, IF IT'S NECESSARY TO BE, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, THERE IS A SECTION IN THE CITY CHARTER THAT SAYS IN THE ABSENCE OF THE MAYOR, THE MAYOR IS UNABLE TO PERFORM HIS DUTIES.

THEN THE VICE MAYOR IS ABLE TO EXERCISE THOSE DUTIES.

YEAH.

OKAY.

AND THAT'S FINE.

LIKE I SAID, I WASN'T SURE WHY WE HAD THE HIERARCHY FOR EVERYTHING ELSE AND, BUT LIMITED IT IF, IF THERE WAS ANY, I DON'T, LIKE I SAY, THIS IS BACK AT 82, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS ANY RATIONALE OR IF IT WAS SIMPLY AN OVERSIGHT WHEN THEY LIMITED THIS PARTICULAR AUTHORITY TO THE MAYOR AND THE MAYOR ONLY, I

[01:05:01]

DON'T KNOW.

UH, I GUESS THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION FOR COUNCIL AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY WOULD WANT TO LIMIT THIS SECTION SOLELY TO THE POWER OF THE, UH, YOU KNOW, WITH THE MAYOR AND OR VICE MAYOR, OR DO WANT TO, UH, HAVE THIS SECTION ALSO BE CONTROLLED BY THE HIERARCHY ABOVE.

YEAH, I WOULD AGREE ON THAT.

I THINK IF YOU USE THE HIERARCHY ABOVE, UM, THE SECTION WOULD SIMPLY READ EMERGENCY ORDERS MAY BE ISSUED DURING THE STATE OF EMERGENCY, UNDER SECTIONS FOR THE REGULATION AND CONTROL.

UH, IN OTHER WORDS, I THINK YOU, I DON'T SEE THE NEED TO HAVE, WHO MAY ISSUE THAT, UH, REGULATION CONTROL OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES SINCE WE ALREADY HAVE, WHO CAN DECLARE A STATE OF EMERGENCY UP ABOVE AND A, UM, HIERARCHY.

SO IT IS, IT IS OUT OF A PLACE THAT WE'RE SAYING THE MAYOR HERE WHEN WE DON'T IN THE SECTION.

YEAH.

THE OTHER QUESTION THAT I HAVE TOO WITH THIS SECTION IS, AND AGAIN, THIS IS PROBABLY A QUESTION FOR JERRY AND IS, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY SINCE WE OWN THE WATER COMPANY, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO CONTROL THAT PUBLIC UTILITY, BUT DO WE, DOES THE CITY OF HUBER HEIGHTS HAVE THE ABILITY TO TAKE CONTROL OVER ELECTRIC GAS UNDER EVEN A STATE OF EMERGENCY? SO I'M CURIOUS AS TO WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT PUBLIC UTILITIES, I'M NOT SURE THAT IF THIS, EVEN IF WE EVEN HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO TAKE ACTION OVER THOSE OTHER APPS ABILITIES.

SO LIKE IF WE PULLED THE PNL, DON'T SHUT OFF PEOPLE'S ELECTRICITY AND THEN IT WOULD BE LIKE, WE'RE JUST GOING TO IGNORE YOU AND DO IT ANYWAY.

THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO.

YEAH.

YEAH.

I DON'T, LIKE I SAID, I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS REALLY SOMETHING THAT ARE, WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO CONTROL BRIAN.

YEAH.

I WAS THINKING MORE.

MAYBE THEY MEANT IT LIKE FOR, TO ACTUALLY SET IT OFF, LIKE ON A MORE LOCAL BASIS, LIKE TO LIKE TO SHUT OFF A GAS MAIN OR SOMETHING, OR TO SET OFF SOME WATER MAIN WHERE THERE IS SOMETHING MORE LIKE A NATURAL DISASTER AS OPPOSED TO LIKE A RIOT OR A VIRUS, BUT MORE LIKE A FLOOD OR SOME KIND OF EARTHQUAKE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

I THINK MAYBE THEY WERE THINKING MORE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO EMERGENCY SHUT OFF A GAS MAIN OR SOMETHING LIKE