Lakewood City Council Meeting Minutes

MINUTES
OF THE
REGULAR MEETING OF
LAKEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
HELD IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
12650 DETROIT AVENUE
FEBRUARY 19, 2002
7:30 P.M.

Regular Meeting of the Lakewood City Council called to order at 7:34 P.M. by President Seelie.

Pledge of Allegiance

Roll Call

Moment of Silence
….
Present: Councilmembers Brian T. Corrigan, Denis P. Dunn, Edward FitzGerald, Thomas J. George, Nancy J. Roth, Robert Mr. Seelie, Michael J. Skindell.
....
Also Present: Mayor Cain, Law Director Spellacy, Police Chief Clark, Fire Chief Mroz, Finance Director Blasko, Public Works Director Boag, Planning & Development Director Pietravoia, Executive Assistant to the Mayor Benjamin, Human Services Director Carey, Assistant Safety Director for the Division of Building & Housing Gallagher.
….
Motion by Mr. George, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to adopt the minutes of January 22, 2002 alone (Omitting the Minutes of February 4, 2002).

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
….
Without objection from Council items 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 were brought forward at this time.

Without objection from Council Public Comment was heard after Items 7,8,9,10,11,12 and 13, and before the regular agenda.

****OLD BUSINESS****

1. Finance Committee Report regarding Ordinance No. 7-02 – 2002 Appropriation Ordinance. (Pg. 9)

Motion by Mr. George, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to receive and file this report.

Ms. Roth referred to the Madison Pool House renovation and stated the Administration sent out six bid packages for which all six received back were over that which was appropriated. She said she would speak further on the issue at the time it is read.
Ms. Roth complimented Mr. George’s work as Finance Chair and the Administration’s work in processing several questions during the Budget process. She described this year’s budget as one of the tightest budgets she’s reviewed since being on Council.

Mr. Dunn said he too wanted to recognize the work of the Finance Chair, the other members of the Finance Committee and also Finance Director Blasko. He mentioned that finalizing a budget with the added restrictions presented by the economy was challenging. He said he was encouraged by the careful and thorough review provided by all concerned and was confident the City would be able to continue to meet the needs of the community. He said citizens should continue to have high expectations in the delivery of services.

Motion was called.
Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
….
2. ORDINANCE NO. 7-02 – AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE to establish permanent appropriations for the City of Lakewood, State of Ohio, for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2002. (PLEASE SUBSTITUTE FOR ORDINANCE NO. 7-02 PLACED ON 1ST READING AND REFERRED TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE 1/22/02. PLACED ON 2ND READING 2/4/02). (Pg. 11)

Mr. Seelie stated that November 14, 2002, Council appropriated $656,000 to provide architectural and engineering services and yesterday Council received a notice requesting an additional $175,000. He said there was a brief amount of time between the time Council appropriated the money with a not-to-exceed amount and the present time of requesting an additional $175,000.

Mr. Seelie supported the Madison Pool House renovation project but termed the process “terrible”. He said he would like further review of contracting wording that allows for an architect to charge a substantial fee up front to draw up architectural drawings and then to be able to charge for further revisions.

He said his recollection was that the Committee of the Whole allocated $20,000 for the concession stand and that it now appeared that cost for the concession stand has climbed to $60,000.

He commented on receiving information on the bids later than he would have liked and encouraged the Administration to find some type of protocol to avoid repeating this type of situation in the future.

Mr. Seelie said he would need for a breakdown of labor costs, material costs and a timeline of ordinances before he felt comfortable adopting the ordinance.

Mayor Cain responded that she too was disappointed with the outcome of the planning process and promised to provide immediate notification if and when bids exceeded the appropriation in the future.

Mayor Cain said it was her understanding the concession stand was a $50,000 endeavor from the beginning and not $20,000 as mentioned. She said the plan originally included a clock tower which was more than decoration because it included space for mechanicals. She said when the clock tower was removed it meant changing some internal design issues as well.

She said she agreed the process needed improvement and that she was committed to doing it better the next time. She said she was still convinced that after public input, help from the Architectural Review Board, and Council intervention, discussion that the project is still a good one.

She mentioned bids would expire within 30 days of the Monday date. She said she hoped Council would consider the amendment tonight in order to move the project forward.

Mr. FitzGerald asked if the Administration got the bids on Monday, why it waited to give Council the information the day before a Council Meeting.

Mayor Cain said she had a conversation late Friday with the Council President and that between Tuesday and Friday her staff was directed to review the project to seek further cuts. She said she had never addressed bids coming in too high before and that she questioned the process along similar lines the Council had.

She said it was explained that making changes at this point would incur additional design costs. The City would also incur additional bidding costs because it would have to go through the bidding process again. .

She said the Administration was trying to do its own due-diligence in order to come before Council with a proposal the Administration felt comfortable with.

Mr. FitzGerald said Council could have used those days too to process questions and review the information. He said he thought a request for $175,000 more in appropriations required more than 24 hours notice. He said he understood the Administration’s dilemma and asked the Administration to see a councilperson’s dilemma when faced with the options provided.

Mr. FitzGerald said that it was his understanding that different drawings existed from the last time Council considered the matter. Planning & Development Director Pietravoia responded that the drawings that were presented at the Committee Hearings were the final drawings and were the ones used to prepare the engineering construction drawings.

Mr. FitzGerald asked if it was true an architectural firm could have an incentive to present plans that would require revisions. Mr. FitzGerald underscored the point that he thought the Architectural Board of Review did change the plan appropriately but asked if City could draft contracts to avoid re-draft fees.

Planning & Development Director Pietravoia commented that the first major change was to remove the clock tower and the glass atrium. He said that accounted for a substantial change and resulted in several other changes as a result. .

Mr. FitzGerald asked if the architectural services are bid out or if they are considered part of the professional services. Mr. Boag responded that the Request for Proposal is bid to a number of firms but that the qualifications narrow the field to the firm that has expertise to bid.

Mr. FitzGerarld asked if $96,450 seemed high.

Mr. Boag responded that his comparisons with other projects including the Refuse Center which he said the architectural drawings were over $100,000 indicated the Pool House plans were on in line with others.

In response to Mr. FitzGerald’s question about when the construction would begin Mr. Boag said one bid choice was to have the project completed before the start of the swimming season and the other to start in September

In response to Mr. FitzGerald’s question about how long the construction period was Mr. Boag said the lowest bid had a September start date. The June completion date bids were higher than the starting in September and finishing later bids. He said if the Administration chose to have the project start earlier, it would had had to come before Council requesting more money.

Mr. FitzGerald asked why the Council needed to pass something in less than twenty-four hours if construction wouldn’t start until September and Mr. Boag responded that the bids were only good until March 8th.

Mr. George asked for the name of the company providing Architectural Services and Mr. Boag responded; FPS Architects & Engineers, Ltd.

Mr. Seelie asked who wrote the RFP and Mayor Cain responded Engineer Kilgore.

Mr. Seelie asked Mr. Kilgore if a “not-to-exceed” amount of $50,000 would have help to eliminate re-draft dues. Mr. Seelie said he worried about a precedent and asked the Law Director and the Engineer if it would be productive to state a not-to-exceed clause routinely in contracting language.

Mr. FitzGerald asked if there was an effect on the General Fund balance and Mayor Cain responded that the money is reflected in the capital budget.

A citizen commented that a meeting should be held to discuss the additional $175,000.

Ms. Roth asked what would happen if the City lost the bid.

Mayor Cain responded that if Council chose not to take action that night, it would require the Administration to come back to Council with a separate appropriations ordinance at the next Council Meeting along with a separate contracting ordinance.

She said that in order to preserve the current bids, the two ordinances would have to pass on first reading with suspension of the rules in two weeks. She said the Board of Control would then meet and award the contract – based on Council action.

She said the issue could be reviewed at a separate meeting. She said she had concerns about what type of information would be referred because the issue was not on the docket separately.

Mr. Seelie said again he thought the project was a good one. He said it benefited more than Ward 4, that it benefited the entire city. He said the funding was a good use of grant resources but maintained the process needed to be permanently changed.

Mr. FitzGerald said he agreed with the Mayor and Council President that the project was good and recognized the pool’s value. He said he would like to postpone action on the legislation for a two weeks to review the architectural services over-runs.

Mr. Dunn agreed with Councilman FitzGerald and said he thought time would benefit the review process. He wanted to make sure postponement would not result in new costs.

Ms. Roth asked to amend her motion.

M. Boag, with concurrence from the Law Director said that if all decisions were made before March 8th, the bids would still be valid.

Law Director Spellacy recommended the motion be to refer the issue of additional appropriations for the Madison Pool House to the Finance Committee.

Motion by Ms. Roth, seconded by Mr. Corrigan, to refer the following amendment to the Finance Committee:

That the permanent capital improvement fund be increased from five million, four hundred thirty-two thousand, seven hundred nineteen dollars ($5,432,719) to five million, six hundred seven thousand, seven hundred and nineteen dollars ($5,607,719.) for the purpose of renovating the Madison Pool House.

Law Director Spellacy suggested the first motion be that the existing ordinance be formally substituted, then the issue of the additional appropriation for the Madison Pool House Project be referred to the Finance Committee. He said the vote on the substitute appropriation ordinance could then be addressed at the next Council Meeting. He said the Law Department would prepare two ordinance that would amend the contracting and appropriations ordinances should those pass that evening.

Motion by Ms. Roth, seconded by Mr. Dunn to withdraw the motion.

Motion by Mr. George, seconded by Mr. Dunn, to substitute Ordinance No. 7-02 as provided.

Yeas:      Corrigan, Dunn, FitzGerald, George, Roth, Seelie, Skindell.
Nays:     None
Motion adopted.   Ordinance No. 7-02 substituted.

Mr. Seelie mentioned that a number of people signed up to talk about item two regarding the dog park.

Motion by Mr. George, seconded by Mr. Seelie to adopt Ordinance No. 7-02 as substituted.

Mr. Skindell said that at a Council Meeting on Saturday, February 2, 2002 – the Finance Committee initially passed a motion which would allow a Consultant to address the citizens group to look at whether St. Charles Green could be used as a dog park. He said that last Monday there was another Finance Committee Meeting and a motion was made to overturn that first motion and not allow the consideration of a dog park at St. Charles Green. He said that motion passed 2-1.

A motion was made.
Motion by Mr. Skindell, seconded by Mr. Dunn, to amend the substituted ordinance in line item 4 – Permanent Capital Improvement Fund - to increase it by $50.00 to read five million, four hundred thirty-two thousand, seven hundred and sixty-nine dollars ($5,432,769) and to also amend the total figure for the Total Capital Projects Funds from $5,488,899 to increase that also by $50.00 to read $5,488,949so both line items would be increased by $50.00 for consideration that funds that had already been appropriated to the St. Charles Green project would allow a consultant to meet with the citizens group to take a full assessment of the St. Charles Green area, to help work through the issues regarding St. Charles Green and to see if a dog park would be appropriate for that region.

Mr. Seelie mentioned the votes from the last meeting indicated St. Charles Green was not to be included in considerations for a dog park. He said the Administration provided information indicating the Railroad owned a third of that property. Mr. Seelie said that it was his opinion that that area was prime property for the City and that a dog park in the middle of the City would not be wise. He said he would rather have a pedestrian park for that area. Mr. Seelie said he believed the Administration agreed to that by bringing the additional information forward at the last meeting.

Mr. Skindell said to Mr. Seelie that it was not a full vote by Council but was the Finance Committee and that that Committee voted 2-1. He said the Administration did not rule out a dog park in that area but only brought forward additional information to consider.

Mr. Dunn asked the Law Director if two members of Council could dictate land use policy to the City and the Law Director responded they could not.

Mr. Dunn said he seconded Mr. Skindell’s motion because he wanted to take a full view, work with the citizens committee, work with other citizen’s input and try to find the absolute best use for that property and did not want to take anything out of the equation. Mr. Dunn said he recognized there were obstacles for having a dog park at that site but wanted all possibilities to be included.

Approximately ten citizens indicated their support of having all areas considered for a dog park including that of St. Charles Green.

Support of an off-leash dog park and was echoed.

One citizen said the Cuyahoga County Auditor’s Office recorded 4,982 dogs licensed in the City of Lakewood. The citizen said The U.S. Census Bureau in 2000 reflected 26,693 households in Lakewood.

Two more citizens echoed the belief that all sites should be remain under consideration.

Mr. Seelie responded that he did not want energy and time to be expended on an area that would eventually prove unacceptable.

Ms. Roth said she would like to see the committee researching dog park areas to continue its work and that she did not want to limit the scope of its consideration. She said it was evident members of the dog park committee were proceeding conscientiously and that she did not want to exclude any areas.

Mr. George said St. Charles Green had been considered for several other projects. He said the Administration had put $75,000 in that area for angle parking and that there was a community-wide plan indicating green space was needed downtown.

Mr. George said he’d anticipate major concerns from restaurants. He said he wanted more representation from members of the Chamber of Commerce, the downtown residents, police and the Parks Department. He said he wouldn’t vote for the dog park if it was in that location from what he said he has heard from residents on the issue. He said he didn’t want to misrepresent to the Committee that the area could be a viable possibility.

Mr. Corrigan said Council had an obligation to give some direction in the review of potential sites and that he didn’t believe the St. Charles Green was appropriate because of its size and location.

Mr. FitzGerald said his immediate reaction to St. Charles Green for a dog park was that it was not ideal but recognized people were willing to commit their energies and finances to thoroughly review areas and felt compelled to allow the process to unfold without restricting the area.

He told the members of the dog park committee he didn’t want it to have a false impression that he agreed with the location but said he supported their work. He said he understood how some members of council would want to steer the review away from an area that did not look promising but said he wanted to have the dog park committee reach its own conclusions without interference. He said he would support the amendment.

Mr. Skindell said that he was looking at the project the same way Mr. FitzGerald was. He said he didn’t know if St. Charles Green was the appropriate place but did feel the citizens group should be allowed to provide input.

Mr. Seelie said four votes were evident and called for a conclusion of the discussion.

Mr. Seelie asked the Law Director if it was necessary to formally add $50.00 to the line of it money in this amount could be taken from the Park Study allocation.

Mr. Skindell said his understanding was that the Administration was tied to the Finance Committee’s vote. He said the $50.00 addition would send a message to the Administration on how to deal with the issue.

Law Director Spellacy said the message was clear from comments – that St. Charles Green would not be excluded as a possibility of a dog park and said he did not think the amendment needed to be formally added.

Mr. Seelie called the vote to add the $50.00 per the motion of amendment.

Yeas:    Dunn, FitzGerald, Roth, Skindell.
Nays:     Corrigan, George, Seelie
Motion adopted.   Ordinance No. 7-02 is amended.

Motion by Mr. George, seconded by Ms. Roth, to adopt Ordinance No. 7-02 as substituted and amended.

Yeas: Corrigan, Dunn, FitzGerald, George, Roth, Seelie, Skindell
Nays: None
Motion adopted. Ordinance No. 7-02 is adopted as amended.
….
Ms. Roth asked if Madison Pool House should be addressed at this time.

Law Director Spellacy responded that a motion could be made to refer the issue of an additional appropriation of $175,000 to the appropriate committee.

Motion by Ms. Roth, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to refer the issue of an additional appropriations of $175,000 for the Madison Pool House to the Finance Committee

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
....
3. Finance Committee Report regarding Ordinance No. 8-02 – Home Investment Partnership Program Federal Grant. (Pg. 13)

Motion by Mr. George, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to receive and file this report.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
….
4. ORDINANCE NO. 8-02 – AN ORDINANCE creating a new section within Chapter 129 of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood entitled HOME Investment Partnerships Program Fund and authorizing the Director of Finance to request permission from the Auditor of the State of Ohio for the establishment of such a fund. (PLACED ON 1ST READING & REFERRED TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE 1/22/02. PLACED ON 2ND READING 2/4/02).(Pg. 14)

Motion by Mr. George, seconded by Ms. Roth, to adopt Ordinance No. 8-02.

Motion adopted. Six members voting yea.
Mr. Skindell absent from table.

….
5. Rules & Ordinances Committee Oral Report regarding Ordinance No. 6-02 – Gas Aggregation with Opt-Out Provisions.

The Rules & Ordinances Committee reported in met Monday, February 11, 2002 to discuss Ordinance No. 6-02 – gas aggregation with opt-out provisions. Committee members George and Skindell were present; Councilmembers Corrigan and Roth also attended. The Committee reported that adoption of the program would allow Lakewood to participate in a gas aggregation program with opt-out provisions similar to the electric opt-out program.

The Committee said the program would allow Lakewood to negotiate the bulk purchase of natural gas for residents. The Committee said the goal would be to seek a lower rate than provided by the default provider; Dominion East Ohio Gas. The Committee reported the gas aggregation program was like the electric opt-out program must be submitted as a ballot question. The Committee indicated that adoption of the Ordinance placed the issue on the is May 7, 2002 ballot.

The Committee said the legislation also authorized the Administration to establish an opt-out gas aggregation program if the ballot issue passed.

The Committee said there were two primary ways Lakewood residents could secure natural gas; by purchasing gas through the default provider, Dominion East Ohio Gas or by opting in a gas aggregation program through NOPEC. Natural gas offered through NOPEC is supplied by Shell Energy. Residents are advised to thoroughly examine all charges for natural gas prior to making a choice. Residents would only be bound by that choice for two years.

The Rules & Ordinances voted unanimously to adopt Ordinance No. 6-02.

Motion by Mr. Skindell, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to receive and file this oral report.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
….
6. ORDINANCE NO. 6-02 – AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE authorizing the Mayor to take all actions necessary to effect a governmental gas aggregation program with opt-out provisions pursuant to Ohio Revised Code §4929.26 and directing the County Board of Elections to submit a ballot question to the electors. (PLEASE SUBSTITUTE FOR ORDINANCE NO. 6-02- PLACED ON 1ST READING AND REFERRED TO THE RULES & ORDINANCES COMMITTEE 1/22/02, PLACED ON SECOND READING 2/4/02)(Pg. 15)

Motion by Mr. Skindell, seconded by Mr. George, to substitute Ordinance No. 6-02.

Mr. Skindell said the substitute would correct the ordinance which originally had “electric aggregation” to read gas aggregation.

Yeas Six members voting yea..
Nays: None
Mr. George absent for vote.
Motion adopted. Ordinance is substituted.

Motion by Mr. Skindell, seconded by Mr. George to adopt Ordinance No. 6-02.

Ms. Roth asked if the Ordinance would bind the City to NOPEC and Mr. Skindell responded that it would not

Yeas:      Corrigan, Dunn, FitzGerald, George, Roth, Seelie, Skindell.
Nays:     None
Motion adopted.   Ordinance No. 6-02 adopted as substituted.

****NEW BUSINESS****

7. Communication from Councilmember Roth regarding Resolutions for Garfield and Harrison Schools. (Pg. 17)

Motion by Ms. Roth, seconded by Mr. Skindell, to receive and file this communication.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
….

8. RESOLUTION NO. 7630-02 – A RESOLUTION recognizing the accomplishments of Garfield Elementary School in receiving the “School Improvement Incentive Award” from the State of Ohio General Assembly. (Pg. 18)

Motion by Ms. Roth, seconded by Mr. George, to adopt Resolution No. 7630-02.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
….
9. RESOLUTION NO. 7631-02 – A RESOLUTION recognizing the accomplishments of Harrison Elementary School in being recognized by the Education Trust, a national organization. (Pg. 19)

Motion by Ms. Roth, seconded by Mr. George, to adopt Resolution No. 7631-02.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
….
10. Communication from Mayor Cain regarding Resolution honoring the memory of Brigadier General Edward M. Sunyak. (Pg. 20)

Motion by Mr. George, seconded by Ms. Roth, to receive and file this communication.
….
Councilmember Dunn spoke about his experience with General Sunyak’s during the annual planning of the Veterans Day Memorial at Lakewood Park He spoke of General Sunyak’s sense of duty which he said continued to be exhibited year after year.

Councilmember Skindell mentioned his sadness in learning of the loss of General Sunyak who he said attended every Veterans service in the community. Councilmember Skindell mentioned his own father had been in the Korean War and that he was grateful for General Sunyak’s dedication to commemorating veterans.

Joseph Mazzarella, veteran, thanked city employees Mary Berryton and Melissa Garrett for their support of veterans affairs in Lakewood. He spoke of General Sunyak as someone who did not require an elaborate display of deference from his fellow veterans commensurate with his rank. Instead he characterized General Sunyak as an approachable person, a kind man and a person who appreciated humor. He recognized Mrs. Sunyak and General Sunyak’s daughter, Debbie Johnson in the audience. He acknowledged the other veterans in the audience who he said shared in the loss of a “kind, considerate and decent man”.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.

11. RESOLUTION NO. 7632-02 – A RESOLUTION honoring the memory of United States Brigadier General Edward M. Sunyak, veteran of the Korean War. (Pg. 21)

Motion by Mr. George, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to adopt Resolution No. 7632-02.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
….
12. Communication from Mayor Cain regarding Honoring Eagle Scout Michael Kinder. (Pg. 22)

Motion by Mr. George, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to receive and file this communication.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
….
13. RESOLUTION NO. 7633-02 – A RESOLUTION to honor Lakewood resident Michael Kinder of Boy Scout Troop #373 of St. Clement’s Church, Lakewood, Ohio as the recipient of the award of Eagle Scout, the highest honor presented by the Boy Scouts of America. (Pg. 23)

Motion by Mr. George, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to adopt Resolution No. 7633-02.

Council President Seelie recognized the difficulties in achieving the rank of Eagle Scout and commended Michael Kinder on his hard work.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
….
14. Communication from Mayor Cain regarding Resolution Honoring Retiree White. (Pg. 24)

Motion by Mr. George, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to receive and file this communication.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
….
15. RESOLUTION NO. 7634-02 – A RESOLUTION to commend Retired Fire Captain William White for his public service as a member of the City’s Division of Fire. (Pg. 25)

Motion by Mr. George, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to adopt Resolution No. 7634-02.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
{Public Comment followed this item}
….
16. Communication from Public Works Director Boag regarding Pool Rate Increase. (Pg. 26)

Motion by Mr. George, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to receive, file and refer this communication to the Finance Committee.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
….
17. ORDINANCE NO. 9-02 – AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE establishing rates of admission to the Lakewood Municipal Swimming Pools located at Lakewood Park and Madison Park, and superseding Ordinance No. 21-91 adopted May 6, 1991 and all other ordinances inconsistent herewith. (Pg. 27)

Motion by Mr. George, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to place Ordinance No. 9-02 on First Reading and refer it to the Finance Committee.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
….

18. Communication from Law Director Spellacy regarding Amendments to the Criminal Code. (Pg. 30)

Motion by Mr. Skindell, seconded by Mr. Seelie, to receive, file and refer this communication to the Rules & Ordinances Committee.

Motion adopted. All members voting yea.
….
*{Each of the following ordinances were individually moved by Mr. George and seconded by Mr. Seelie to place on 1st reading and refer to the Rules & Ordinances Committee. Each motion was adopted and All members voted yea except Ordinances 47-02, 48-02, 49-02, 50-02, and 51-02 where six members voted yea and Mr. Corrigan was absent from the table}

19. ORDINANCE NO. 10-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 501.01, Definitions, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood in order to update and to include new definitions from the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 31) *

20. ORDINANCE NO. 11-02 – AN ORDINANCE to amend section 501.04, Rules of Construction, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of including a general provision that construes a reference to a prior conviction in the Codified Ordinances to also apply to any substantially equivalent offense and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 35)*

21. ORDINANCE NO. 12-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 501.05, Criminal Law Jurisdiction, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of including subject matter jurisdiction for persons disseminating images or information into the municipality, in violation of law, by means of a computer or telecommunications devices, to define such terms and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 37) *

22. ORDINANCE NO. 13-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 501.07, Requirements for Criminal Liability, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of making the section gender neutral, defining intoxication, defining the extent that voluntary intoxication is admissible and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 40)*

23. ORDINANCE NO. 14-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 509.03, Disorderly Conduct; Intoxication, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of elevating the penalty where the offense is committed in the presence of law enforcement or emergency personnel and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 42)

24. ORDINANCE NO. 15-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 509.05, Misconduct at an Emergency, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of making this section gender neutral, escalating the penalty where the violation creates a substantial risk of physical harm, defining emergency medical services person and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 45)

25. ORDINANCE NO. 16-02 - AN ORDINANCE to enact new section 509.11, Inciting to Violence, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of creating a new offense and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 47)

26. ORDINANCE NO. 17-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 513.01, Definitions, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of including new definitions and update existing definitions pursuant to changes in the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 48)

27. ORDINANCE NO. 18-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 513.03, Drug Abuse, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of removing the requirement that a prescription drug be stored in its original container and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 57)

28. ORDINANCE NO. 19-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 517.02(d)(2)C, Gambling, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of allowing the lease of premises by a veteran's or fraternal organization to a charitable organization for a festival involving games of chance where the veteran's or fraternal organization has already leased the premises four times in the preceding year and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 59)

29. ORDINANCE NO. 20-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 517.06(b)(4), Methods of Conducting a Bingo Game; Prohibitions, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of allowing a volunteer firefighter's organization or volunteer rescue service organization to conduct more than two bingo sessions in a seven day period, but not more than five in one year, where the organization notifies the Ohio Attorney General when the sessions will be conducted and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 61)

1. ORDINANCE NO. 21-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 525.01(e), Definitions, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of expanding the definition of "detention" and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 63)

2. ORDINANCE NO. 22-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 525.03, Impersonation of a Peace Officer or Private Policeman, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of including police officers employed by the regional transit authority and special police officers employed by a port authority, to make this section gender neutral and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 65)

3. ORDINANCE NO. 23-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 525.08, Obstructing Justice, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of further defining the crime and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 67)

4. ORDINANCE NO. 24-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 525.09, Resisting Arrest, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of escalating the penalty where an individual causes physical harm to a police officer and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 69)

5. ORDINANCE NO. 25-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 525.11, Soliciting or Receiving Improper Compensation, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of making this section gender neutral and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 70)

6. ORDINANCE NO. 26-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 525.12, Dereliction of Duty, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of defining public servant and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 72)

7. ORDINANCE NO. 27-02 - AN ORDINANCE to enact new section 525.17, False Allegation of Peace Officer Misconduct, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 74)

8. ORDINANCE NO. 28-02 – AN ORDINANCE to amend section 529.04, Liquor Consumption in Motor Vehicle, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of excluding the consumption of liquor in a limousine as permitted by Lakewood Codified Ordinance 529.07 as a violation of this offense and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 75)

9. ORDINANCE NO. 29-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 529.07, Open Container Prohibited, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood to include additional exceptions for persons riding as guests or passengers in the rear compartment of a chauffeured limousine and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 76)

10. ORDINANCE NO. 30-02 - AN ORDINANCE to enact new section 529.11, Low-Alcohol Beverages: Sale to and Purchase by Underage Persons Prohibited, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of remaining consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 78)

11. ORDINANCE NO. 31-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 533.06, Voyeurism, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of expanding the crime, creating new penalties and remaining consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 80)

12. ORDINANCE NO. 32-02 - AN ORDINANCE to enact a new section 533.091, Loitering to Engage in Solicitation, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of remaining consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 82)

13. ORDINANCE NO. 33-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 537.01, Negligent Homicide, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of including the unlawful termination of another's pregnancy and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 84)

14. ORDINANCE NO. 34-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 537.02, Vehicular Homicide and Manslaughter, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of remaining consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 85)

15. ORDINANCE NO. 35-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 537.03, Assault, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of including harm to another's unborn and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 88)

16. ORDINANCE NO. 36-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 537.04, Negligent Assault, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of including harm to another's unborn and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 89)

17. ORDINANCE NO. 37-02 - AN ORDINANCE amending section 537.05, Aggravated Menacing, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of including harm to another's unborn and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 90)

18. ORDINANCE NO. 38-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 537.055(a)(2)A, Menacing by Stalking, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of further defining "pattern of conduct" and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 91)

19. ORDINANCE NO. 39-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 537.10, Telephone Harassment, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of expanding the crime to include any telecommunication and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 92)

20. ORDINANCE NO. 40-02 - AN ORDINANCE to repeal section 537.12, Party Lines to be Yielded in Emergencies, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood as party lines no longer exist. (Pg. 94)

21. ORDINANCE NO. 41-02 - AN ORDINANCE to enact new section 537.12, Misuse of 9-1-1 System, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of remaining consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 95)

22. ORDINANCE NO. 42-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 541.02, Arson, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of making the section gender neutral, raising the value of the property damaged for the crime to remain a misdemeanor and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 96)

23. ORDINANCE NO. 43-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 545.01, Definitions, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of updating existing definitions, creating new definitions and remaining consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 98)

24. ORDINANCE NO. 44-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 545.02, Determining Property Value in Theft Offense, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of remaining consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 102)

25. ORDINANCE NO. 45-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 545.05, Petty Theft, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of increasing the value of the property involved for the crime to remain a misdemeanor, including theft by intimidation and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 104)

26. ORDINANCE NO. 46-02 - AN ORDINANCE to enact new section 545.07, Insurance Fraud, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose remaining consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 106)

27. ORDINANCE NO. 47-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 545.08, Unauthorized Use of Property, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of escalating the penalty where the purpose of committing the offense is to devise or execute a scheme to defraud or obtain property or services and remaining consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 108)

28. ORDINANCE NO. 48-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 545.09(d), Passing Bad Checks, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of increasing the dollar amount of the check or negotiable instrument for the crime to remain a misdemeanor and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 110)

29. ORDINANCE NO. 49-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 545.10(d), Misuse of Credit Cards, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of designating the crime, where the retail value of property obtained with the credit card, is less than five hundred dollars ($500) a misdemeanor and remaining consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 111)

30. ORDINANCE NO. 50-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 545.14, Tampering with Records, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood to set a monetary limit and other restrictions for the crime to remain a misdemeanor and for the purpose of remaining consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 112)

31. ORDINANCE NO. 51-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 545.15, Securing Writings by Deception, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of increasing the value of the property or obligation involved for the crime to remain a misdemeanor and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 114)

32. ORDINANCE NO. 52-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 545.18, Receiving Stolen Property, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of raising the value of the property involved for the crime to remain a misdemeanor and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 115)

33. ORDINANCE NO. 53-02 - AN ORDINANCE to enact a new section 545.20, Criminal Simulation, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of remaining consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 116)

34. ORDINANCE NO. 54-02 - AN ORDINANCE to enact new section 545.21, Taking the Identity of Another, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of remaining Consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 117)

35. ORDINANCE NO. 55-02 - AN ORDINANCE to enact new section 549.120, Possessing Replica Firearm in School, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of remaining consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 119)

36. ORDINANCE NO. 56-02 - AN ORDINANCE to amend section 553.01, Obstructing Streets by Railroad Companies, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of further regulating the obstruction of streets by railroad companies and to remain consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 121)

37. ORDINANCE NO. 57-02 - AN ORDINANCE to enact new section 553.011, Obstructing Streets by Abandoning the Locomotive, of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Lakewood for the purpose of remaining consistent with the Ohio Revised Code. (Pg. 123)

*{Ordinance Nos. 10-02 through and including Ordinance 57-02 were moved by Mr. George, seconded by Mr. Seelie to place on 1st reading and refer to the Rules & Ordinances Committee.

Each motion was adopted and All members voted yea except Ordinance Nos. 47-01, 48-02, 49-02, 50-02 and 51-02 where six members voted yea and Mr. Corrigan was absent from table for the vote}