Council President Mr. D’Ambrosio opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m.



Members of Council in attendance were Mr. Licht, Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins, Mr. Evers, Ms. DePledge, Mr. Hoefle, Ms. Vaughn and Council President Mr. D’Ambrosio. Also attending was Council Clerk Mrs. Cendroski.

Those attending from the Administration were Mayor Morley, Law Director Klammer, Finance Director Slocum, City Engineer Gwydir, Police Chief Reik and Fire Chief Whittington. Service Director Rubertino was absent and excused.


Mayor Morley, Council President D’Ambrosio and Police Chief Reik recognized Ross Shirey who was sworn in by Mayor Morley as Patrolman for the City of Eastlake Police Department.


Mayor Morley and Council President D’Ambrosio recognized the Eastlake Alliance: Helping Hands on its contribution to the City of Eastlake.


There was no Legislation Proposed.


                                                (Placed on second reading 06/24/2014)

06-10-(02): Resolution to Submit: Amendment: Income Tax Rate

Mr. D’Ambrosio: This item was placed on first reading June 10, 2014 and second reading June 24, 2014. This is a resolution to submit to the ballot an increase in the income tax to 2.75%. Mayor, did you have a comment?

Mayor Morley: After the first couple of meetings residents have called the office and a few have come to meetings to speak about the income tax rate. It is my suggestion that we reduce it from .75% to .50%. I know we were looking at the .75% so we would not have to go back to the residents but I believe if we reduce it to .50% it may have a better chance of passing and also it will give us a few years to try to get more businesses in the City. My recommendation is that we reduce the rate to .50%. Mr. Slocum has all the numbers which we have submitted.

Mr. D’Ambrosio: Mr. Slocum do you have anything you would like to add?

Mr. Slocum: Based on the proposal we have it would still give us funds next year to start addressing some of the long term maintenance items. When we get to the final budget we will still not know if there will be heath care increases and things like that which we stated when we proposed the tax budget that it was not included in the $700,000 deficit shown for next year. But, we should have enough to cover everything for the next couple of years with the 2.50%.

Mr. D’Ambrosio: Are there any questions? I will poll Council.

Ms. DePledge: Mr. Slocum, did I hear you correctly when you said the 2.50% would give us enough money for maintenance issues for one year or will it extend beyond one year – in your best estimate.

Mr. Slocum: It will give us additional monies for a couple years above the static that we have right now. We can hopefully start investing where we need to invest in this City which we have not been doing. For example, the proposed budget for next year has one police car.

Ms. DePledge: Typically we would have three or four.

Mr. Slocum: Chief Reik is not going to be happy to hear that and rightfully so. We will face drastic cuts without an increase to 2.50% or 2.75%.

Ms. DePledge: What is the anticipated revenue difference between 2.50% and 2.75%?

Mr. Slocum: Based on what I had provided earlier we had projected that 2.75% would bring in $2.5 million and 2.50% would bring in roughly $1.7 million.

Mr. D’Ambrosio: I will poll Council on whether we want to go with the 2.75% or 2.50%.

Mr. Evers: I am fine with 2.50%.

Mr. Licht: I think we should keep it at 2.75%.

Mr. Hoefle: I am fine with the 2.50%.

Ms. Vaughn: I prefer the 2.75% but will go with the majority if it is 2.50%.

Mr. D’Ambrosio: I am okay with the Mayor’s recommendation of 2.50%.

Ms. DePledge: I would prefer the 2.75% but I can go along majority at 2.50%.

Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins: I think I best abstain – I will abstain.

Mr. D’Ambrosio: It seems like the 2.50% will be the majority so we will add that legislation to the agenda.

There were no further questions or comments.

                                                (Placed on First Reading 06/24/2014)

06-24-(03): Memorandum of Understanding: City of Eastlake & Lake County Board of Commissioners/Stormwater Management Agency

Mr. D’Ambrosio: Right now the residents pay a $6 fee annually for stormwater. The County offers a program at $15 a year. It is an increase of $9 but the money goes into a bigger pool so there are more funds available. When we collect the $6 we really do not collect a lot so we are not able to do anything significant. It was agreed by the Committee to move this forward because in the long run we felt this was better for the residents. This was placed on first reading June 24, 2014. I ask that we read it tonight and vote on it. It could have gone three readings but since we are going to be on Council break I thought why should it sit for a month when we could move it forward this evening.

Mr. Licht: I would like to add – the residential properties will be charged $15 but it will also measure businesses amount of impervious area for each commercial property and they would be charged a different percentage based on the amount of impervious area on their property. The County would handle all that so businesses like WalMart that are currently only paying $6 would pay more depending on how much impervious area they have. So, it would increase not only for the residents but for the commercial properties – which would bring in more money for the City as well.

Mr. D’Ambrosio: The $6 fee originated because the EPA said we had to collect it. The County has more resources than we do and they will comply easier than the City could as they have more personnel to do so. That was another reason we thought this would be better as a whole than just keeping it within the City.


There were no further questions or comments.



Contract: T.C. Construction Co., Inc.: OPWC Kalene Court Improvements: $157,480

Mr. D’Ambrosio: This is a contact for T.C. Construction for the OPWC improvements to Kalene Court in the amount of $157,480. Mr. Gwydir?

Mr. Gwydir: Two bids were received on June 24th for the Kalene Court improvements. We estimated the job at $155,000 and the low bidder T.C. Construction came in at $157,400. 50% of this will be paid by an OPWC grant. We recommend this matter be moved forward at your discretion.

There were no further questions or comments.

Contract: Two Seasons Heating & Cooling, Inc.: Captains Stadium Air Conditioning Unit: $16,812.31

Mr. D’Ambrosio: This is a contract with Two Seasons Heating and Cooling for the Captains stadium air conditioning unit in the amount of $16,812.31. Mr. Slocum?

Mr. Slocum: We received three proposals with this being the lowest. However, we did have one proposal for $11,000 which would have been just to repair the existing air conditioner but the repair would not carry any of the guarantees. We are talking about 12-year old equipment and we feel we need to replace it at this point or we will just be dumping more and more funds into the air conditioner. This will be paid out of the CRIF fund and the Captains have agreed to this. We have a responsibility to replace it.

There were no further questions or comments.


Amendment: Municipal Income Tax Chapter: Section 183.0501, Section 183.0502 and Section 183.1302

Mr. D’Ambrosio: Our current ordinance is a 2% income tax. We need to amend that to 2.50%. This would not take effect unless the increase on the ballot passes. If it does not pass it will remain at 2%. We had to do that before when we originally went with the 2.75%. We will refer the 2.75% ballot issue off the table with no action taken during the regular Council meeting.


There were no further questions or comments.


Resolution to Submit: Amendment: Income Tax Rate

Mr. D’Ambrosio: This legislation will submit the question of the 2.50% income tax to the Board of Elections to get it on the ballot.

There were no further questions or comments.

Union Agreement: City of Eastlake & the Fraternal Order of Police, Ohio Labor Council, Inc.: Civilian Unit, Dispatchers’ Unit, Patrolmen, Sergeants, Lieutenants

Amendment: 155.03 (a) “Holidays”

Mr. D’Ambrosio: This will be discussed in Executive Session later in the Council meeting. A motion will be made to place these on the agenda after the Executive Session to approve them or reject them.


Mr. D’Ambrosio: Several weeks ago having public prayer at Council meetings was brought up. We had a meeting on it about 6-7 weeks ago and really did not discuss it any further. I sent an email to everyone to basically ask everyone’s opinions on if this was something we should pursue or not. Basically through the majority of Council what was decided was being in our positions we need to embrace every religion, every faith, every belief – we have to embrace all of those. And whoever walks through that door whether it be Christian, Muslim, Agnostic, Billy Graham – they have to have the same comfort level walking into this building. So, by the majority of Council it was decided that at this time we are not going to do a public prayer before the Council meeting. Does that pretty much sum up the emails we got?

Responses of “yes” were indicated.


Mr. D’Ambrosio: Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins?

Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins: I did not participate in that email conversation because I honestly – my personal feeling was that though it does not break the sunshine law I felt it broke the spirit of the sunshine law and I felt that we needed to discuss this in an open, public meeting. I believe we should have prayer before meetings. I believe that we had the freedom to do that and also I believe that in our humility we need to understand who God is and what he can do for us. And because we understand the power of God. You know what? We need God in our Community. And I have to say that what if – what if we had these kind of – I have a variety of neutral prayers that are prayed in other communities that are nondenominational. What if we tried it for a short time? What if we had less emergency runs? What if we had …

Mr. D’Ambrosio: Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins, I just want to go by – this is what the majority of Council decided.

Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins: I think I have the right to speak my opinion about this – don’t I in this public meeting?

Mr. D’Ambrosio: You know what Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins? I will give you a couple of minutes to do so but we are going to go by what the majority said because we have always done it that way.

Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins: I appreciate that – fine. The majority is fine but I feel I need to have my turn to say what I feel is right.

Mr. D’Ambrosio: Why didn’t you answer in the email?

Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins: I just said because I felt it was a violation of the spirit of the sunshine law.

Mr. D’Ambrosio: It is not City business.

Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins: I believe it is.

Mr. D’Ambrosio: Mr. Klammer, would you say that it would be City business?

Mr. Klammer: From what I understand it was discussed as part of the agenda at a City Committee meeting in the first place and it does not seem to have been any secret that there was a discussion about it. I don’t find it improper. Everyone has a right to participate or not to participate but if you are on it – it is like an abstention – you decided to not participate. I don’t find it to be a violation of any sunshine law because by its very nature it is an email.

Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins: I understand that the email is a permanent record and a public record but my feeling in that I have been to three of those classes that it violates the spirit of the sunshine law and that our discussions need to be public.

Mr. D’Ambrosio: That is your opinion. I am going to follow Mr. Klammer’s.

Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins: In additional to that – I am not quite done yet.

Mr. D’Ambrosio: You will be soon.

Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins: Referring to the last meeting where it was brought up in miscellaneous as it was brought up in miscellaneous tonight we really had no advance notice that we were going to discuss that. So, personally I felt kind of blindsided that we were discussing prayer and I never knew it in advance.

Mr. D’Ambrosio: I sent an email out during the week.

Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins: No, not about – you put it under miscellaneous. I had no idea you were going to talk about this tonight.

Mr. D’Ambrosio: I said I wanted to read the emails – that I wanted to put this to a close. And, actually I believe some members on Council said let’s put it to a close. Mr. Evers, did you have something you wanted to say?

Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins: I wasn’t really done yet.

Mr. D’Ambrosio: Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins, you are just going to try to showboat and that is okay but I don’t think we are going to change the majority of Council.

Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins: But I am not showboating. I feel like I have a freedom of speech and a right to say what is on my mind. I was elected to do that. Right?

Mr. D’Ambrosio: In regards to City business – absolutely. This is a personal matter I think you are taking it…

Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins: No, it is not a personal matter.

Mr. D’Ambrosio: Yes, this is a personal matter.

Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins: No, it is not.

Mr. D’Ambrosio: And we are going to go by what the majority of Council said. I think you need to respect that.

Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins: I think you need to respect when I have the floor.

Mr. D’Ambrosio: Mr. Evers?

Mr. Evers: Having just attended the recent sunshine law I specifically asked if this would be part of the sunshine laws. The answer from the Attorney General’s office was no. This is not part of your public meeting. It would take place before your meeting. Therefore, sunshine laws do not apply.

Mrs. Quinn-Hopkins: You are saying according to – by having it in an email it doesn’t apply to the sunshine law?

Mr. Evers: It does not violate sunshine laws. It is not part of the public meeting.

Mr. D’Ambrosio: Mr. Licht, did you have something you wanted to say?

Mr. Licht: No, but I will go on record as being one of the ones who said I do not believe we should have public prayer in this meeting.

Mr. D’Ambrosio: Does anyone else on Council – I will go by the majority – want to listen – we had two people who left so I want to bring those people back and let’s continue with City business. That is really what we are here for – is City business.

Ms. DePledge and Ms. Vaughn rejoined the meeting.


There were no further questions or comments.

The meeting was adjourned at 7:26 p.m.



                                                                                    APPROVED: ________________

                                                                                       DATE: __________________

Back to top