Proceedings March 19, 2009

Pages 1 to 4

1

City of Marysville and Jerome Township - Utility

Union County Commissioners Meeting

- - - - -

March 19, 2009

- - - - -

Union County Commissioners 233 6th Street Marysville, Ohio 43040

2

1 ATTENDEES2

Commissioners:3

Tom McCarthy4 Gary Lee

Charles Hall56 Attendees:7 (See attached sign-in sheet.)89

101112131415161718192021222324

3

1 - - - - -

2 P R O C E E D I N G S

3 - - - - -

4 COMMISSIONER McCARTHY: If we can have

5 your attention and call our meeting to order.

6 It's right at 3:33, I guess.

7 The purpose of this meeting is to

8 discuss a proposed service area at southern Union

9 County in Jerome Township. At this point, I'll

10 turn the meeting over to Commissioner Lee.

11 COMMISSIONER LEE: Thank you, Tom.

12 For the record, we are here to review

13 the request for service for the area known as

14 Hall's Corner. And for the record, the auditor's

15 parcel numbers are 146000012000 for the

16 Wirchainski property, and for the Jacquemin

17 property it is 146000010000, so I got all the

18 zeros in. Okay?

19 I think, first of all, we'd like to

20 start by just reviewing the history of requests

21 for service for this area. On July the 14th of

22 '06, the City of Dublin sent Union County

23 Commissioners a letter requesting the right to

24 serve this said area. On the 3rd of February of

4

1 this year, the City of Marysville sent a letter

2 requesting the right to serve this area.

3 Landowners John Wirchainski sent us the first

4 request for service July the 17th of '06, and

5 again followed up in February the 27th of this

6 year with the very same request. And Paul and

7 Mary filed a request with us on the 19th of

8 February of this year. So that's kind of the

9 record and history of when requests were made for

10 service.

11 Back in '06, what spurred those

12 requests, we had the Duke Realty company that was

13 in an option with John Wirchainski, and they had

14 plans for a retail center at that time. Duke

15 Realty had requested for Marysville to serve that

16 project. Somewhere at the end of '07, early '08,

17 the Duke Realty company left the retail

18 development area and let that option expire is my

19 understanding.

20 Early in '08, the Hunter-Casto

21 Development Company got options with both the

22 Wirchainskis and the Jacquemins. Those are

23 current options as of today. And they have asked

24 Marysville to serve.

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Pages 5 to 8

5

1 So that is kind of the history of all

2 of the requests and the companies and the

3 landowners that are involved.

4 So at this point, I guess in order of

5 who requested service, we will ask Dublin for

6 their public comments. And Paul Hammersmith, city

7 engineer for the City of Dublin, I believe, is

8 going to be doing that presentation.

9 MR. HAMMERSMITH: Is it all right to

10 sit back here?

11 COMMISSIONER LEE: As long as you can

12 be heard, you can stay.

13 MR. HAMMERSMITH: With me today I want

14 to introduce our Dublin team. To my left, Steve

15 Smith, who is our law director. And also to my

16 right, Steve Samuels, who is our environmental

17 attorney, also with Schottenstein, Zox & Dunn.

18 And for those of you who don't know me, I'm the

19 director of engineering for the City of Dublin.

20 And I do have for you Commissioners --

21 if Mr. Rhodes could hand those up to the front --

22 I did want to provide some additional

23 documentation that I'll be referring to in a few

24 moments.

6

1 Dublin understands the request the

2 Commissioners are discussing today is with respect

3 to designation of Marysville as a utility provider

4 to the Wirchainski and Jacquemin properties

5 located east of US 33 and adjacent to Dublin.

6 For a variety of reasons, not the least

7 of which is that the two parcels are located in

8 extremely close proximity to Dublin, less than a

9 quarter mile away, while being over 12 miles away

10 from Marysville, the City of Dublin is here today

11 to voice its formal objection to naming Marysville

12 as the utility provider as noted on your agenda.

13 The City of Dublin considers itself to

14 be an important and vital member of Union County

15 with approximately 3,000 of our Dublin residents

16 residing in Union County, approximately 1,000 of

17 which are registered voters. Dublin has been

18 investing in Union County over many years. Most

19 recently it has committed to invest over $7

20 million, approximately half the cost, for the

21 acquisition of the Glacier Ridge Metro Park, one

22 of the major community facilities serving this

23 area, and we are contemplating investing millions

24 of dollars to substantially enhance the roadway

7

1 infrastructure serving the subject parcels. In

2 fact, we question whether the subject parcels are

3 even developable for commercial purposes without

4 the extraordinary investments in infrastructure

5 being considered by Dublin.

6 Have the residents within the adjacent

7 impacted neighborhoods been notified of this

8 pending decision by the Commissioners, and if not,

9 when will their input be sought?

10 The City of Dublin would like to better

11 understand how the Commissioners can entertain

12 this request from Marysville at this time when the

13 City of Dublin has made numerous formal written

14 requests to be designated as the utility provider

15 on July 14, 2006, as Mr. Lee referred to.

16 Subsequently, we also provided requests on April

17 5th of 2007 and June 20th of 2007, with no

18 response from the county whatsoever on our

19 requests dating back to 2007.

20 The City of Dublin would ask the

21 Commissioners to outline the specific criteria

22 that they will be using to determine who should be

23 the provider. We would expect these criteria will

24 fully consider environmental considerations,

8

1 quality of existing sewerage collection

2 facilities, the financial costs to taxpayers, the

3 ability to provide the full range of needed urban

4 facilities and services, et cetera.

5 The City of Dublin strongly objects to

6 the designation of Marysville as the utility

7 provider based on fact that there are significant,

8 well documented environmental issues related to

9 the manner in which the utility service would be

10 provided by Marysville.

11 The City of Dublin also questions this

12 service request by Marysville in consideration of

13 its Wastewater Master Study Update in 2007, which

14 studied the wastewater infrastructure required

15 over the next 40 years to serve the southern

16 Marysville service area. Specifically, Dublin

17 would like to understand when and how the numerous

18 and expensive long-term corrective repairs and

19 improvements recommended in the accepted study

20 will be initiated and funded. Certainly it is

21 recognized that the Marysville proposal to serve

22 this area is completely inconsistent with its own

23 study.

24 The City of Dublin has long been

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Pages 9 to 12

9

1 planning, investing, and in some instances

2 providing service to areas within Union County

3 since the early 1980s. Dublin has already

4 designed, sized, and built its own gravity sewage

5 collection system in this area to serve the

6 subject parcels, and these lines are currently

7 located within approximately 1300 feet of the

8 property lines of the parcels being discussed.

9 Designating Marysville the utility

10 provider to this area, who based on their own

11 study needs to make numerous expensive

12 improvements to their currently substandard pump

13 station and force main collection and conveyance

14 system, constitutes a wasteful duplication of

15 public expenditures and a waste of public dollars

16 during a period of extremely difficult economic

17 circumstances for all public entities.

18 The City of Dublin questions whether

19 Marysville has clearly demonstrated to the

20 Commissioners that it has the financial

21 wherewithal to provide and maintain utility

22 service, again in accordance with the

23 recommendations of its own study, to this area as

24 well as other areas of Union County, given the

10

1 current level of indebtedness of Marysville and

2 its other financial commitments.

3 At what point did the Commissioners

4 give full consideration to the financial benefits

5 Dublin has offered if it is designated the service

6 provider for this are?

7 What assurances, promises, guarantees

8 has Marysville made, if any, to the Commissioners

9 regarding utility service provision, future

10 infrastructure investment, and revenue sharing

11 that would benefit all residents of Union County,

12 not just those residing within the City of

13 Marysville?

14 And lastly, given the investment and

15 infrastructure that Dublin has made, we question

16 the timing and are going to reevaluate that

17 investment in infrastructure should this area not

18 be designated to Dublin and if the service area be

19 removed from that which we intended to provide

20 service over many years.

21 We appreciate the opportunity to make

22 these comments and ask for your full

23 consideration. And, again, thank you for inviting

24 us to the meeting, and we'll be glad to answer any

11

1 questions you might have.

2 COMMISSIONER LEE: Thank you, Paul.

3 I think we'll save the question part

4 till we get to the end of the statements. At this

5 point, I'd ask Marysville, comments?

6 MAYOR SCHMENK: Thank you, sir. My

7 name is Christiane Schmenk. I'm Mayor of

8 Marysville. I'd like to also introduce our city

9 administrator, Jillian Froment. I appreciate the

10 opportunity to be here today and to discuss why

11 the City of Marysville wishes to be designated as

12 the provider of services.

13 We are here today to formally request

14 to be appointed as utility service provider for

15 the parcels of land discussed. And we are

16 requesting this designation for several reasons.

17 First, we built our new water

18 reclamation facility with the intent to be a

19 regional provider.

20 Second, if we serve as a regional

21 provider, it will allow for orderly development of

22 the section of Union County in which the facility

23 is located, southern Union County.

24 Third, we believe that this will allow

12

1 us to foster partnerships within Union County with

2 all the various governmental levels in the county.

3 And fourth, serving that area will help

4 us -- provide us with funding and with the

5 resources to allow for installation of missing

6 pieces of our infrastructure which will open up

7 the rest of that area of Union County for

8 additional services.

9 And fifth, I'm here to represent that

10 the landowners as well as developers engaged in

11 discussions with the landowners wish us to be the

12 provider of service. As well as we believe -- and

13 I don't dare to speak for other entities here, but

14 we believe Jerome Township and others located in

15 the area wish us to be the provider of service.

16 I'm here to represent to you several

17 things also. First, Marysville does have the

18 ability to serve the area. We have the capacity

19 to serve. Obviously, with our new plant opening,

20 we have excess capacity, plenty of ability to

21 serve.

22 Second, we have water and sewer lines

23 currently in the ground in that area on adjacent

24 parcels known as the Hawkins parcel and the

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Pages 13 to 16

13

1 Skilken parcel, so we are there already. And that

2 to me carries a lot of weight and precedent when

3 you're looking at ability and right to serve.

4 We also have filed permits to install

5 within the area with the Ohio EPA, and we believe

6 those will be granted.

7 We have also scoped out the work needed

8 to serve the area. We don't think that it is a

9 burdensome thing to do, and we're ready to get it

10 done. And we have the funding means to do it. We

11 don't have money in the bank today, but we have

12 ongoing good-faith negotiations that we believe

13 will allow us to put the infrastructure in to

14 serve the area.

15 And secondly, we believe that if you

16 grant us, we will have the rightful authority to

17 serve the area. The area in question is within

18 the county's 208 planning area. We believe the

19 county has the authority under the Ohio EPA

20 regulations to designate the service provider and

21 that Marysville is best suited to serve the area.

22 We believe that designating us as the server will

23 be best for the future development of the area,

24 best for building -- fostering partnerships in the

14

1 area, and we believe again it will allow for

2 orderly development. So those are the reasons for

3 our request.

4 We thank you for allowing us to be here

5 today, and we also are available for questions if

6 you wish.

7 COMMISSIONER LEE: Okay.

8 Jerome Township trustees.

9 MR. THOMAS: We're going to make this a

10 little simpler, a little easier. Jerome maintains

11 a position that whoever the county determines to

12 be the service provider -- you know, it's up to

13 you -- but we also feel it's very necessary that

14 annexation is not a necessary item at this point.

15 SPEAKER: One other thing I would like

16 to address is the subject come up about the

17 community services. And as most of you in this

18 room know, that we are probably blessed with some

19 of the best EMS fire and police services in the

20 area. So that is, to us, a moot point. We know

21 that we cannot do that.

22 Just to reiterate what Mr. Thomas says,

23 annexation to us is not an option that we would

24 want to pursue. We would like to maintain our own

15

1 community.

2 COMMISSIONER LEE: Okay. At this time

3 I'd like to call on the Casto-Hunter group. I

4 believe Don Hunter's going to speak.

5 MR. HUNTER: I'm Don Hunter with Hunter

6 Realty Partners. We are in partnership -- my firm

7 is in partnership with Casto organization. Eric

8 Leibowitz from Casto is here with me. We are the

9 developers.

10 Our organizations are in contract with

11 Paul and Peg Jacquemin for their property. We're

12 also in contract with John Wirchainski for his

13 property.

14 And we're excited to be here. We

15 appreciate the consideration that you're giving to

16 the request. And we'd like to emphasize that it

17 is our goal to develop the property with service

18 from the City of Marysville. And we're excited

19 about the opportunity and we appreciate your

20 consideration of it, and we would ask that you

21 award the sewer service rights to the City of

22 Marysville. Thank you.

23 COMMISSIONER LEE: Okay.

24 MR. SMITH: Mr. Lee, could I make a

16

1 couple comments now? Or if you're done with

2 everybody --

3 COMMISSIONER LEE: I was going to allow

4 the public to make some comments, and then we'll

5 go back then to each of the entities for any

6 questions they have, and I have a series of

7 questions also. From the public?

8 MR. SCHULZE: Yes. Dennis Schulze.

9 I'm an attorney, represent a number of landowners

10 and option holders in the area and who would use

11 the same service line. And they have all asked me

12 to speak on behalf of Marysville being the

13 provider. They have a better level of comfort

14 with Marysville at this point in time.

15 COMMISSIONER LEE: Other public

16 comment?

17 MR. HOCHSTETLER: Glenn Hochstetler.

18 We have a small business along the Industrial

19 Parkway corridor. And in December of 2007 we met

20 with the City of Marysville council and provided

21 55 signatures, small businesses that voiced their

22 concern that they like the services with the City

23 of Marysville and would like to continue to do so.

24 We could have gotten very many more, but given

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Pages 17 to 20

17

1 that we had a limited amount of time to do that,

2 that's all we got, but I don't think that's

3 changed since then.

4 COMMISSIONER HALL: What date was that?

5 MR. HOCHSTETLER: That was December the

6 6th of 2007.

7 MR. JACQUEMIN: Paul Jacquemin with

8 Jacquemin Farms. And I guess just the comments

9 that we're very interested in having Marysville

10 supply the sewer and water to our location for

11 basically -- the number one reason is that the --

12 I've worked and been in the Marysville area for 40

13 years. I've worked two, three, and four jobs most

14 of my life. I'm approaching retirement. And we'd

15 like to be able to deal with somebody that's

16 willing to develop our property so that we can

17 retire comfortably. Maybe that's a bad thing at

18 this point in time.

19 SPEAKER: Pardon me. If I could also

20 add -- modify my comments by adding that it is the

21 develop -- some comments from John Wirchainski,

22 the property owner. I spoke with him this

23 morning, and John wanted to again reiterate his

24 letter in reiteration and reaffirmation of his

18

1 desire to be served by Marysville, and asked me to

2 communicate that on his behalf. He also asked

3 that I reference the fact that his family are

4 long-time Jerome Township residents. They've been

5 farmers for generations, multiple generations.

6 And his desire and his goal is to respect the

7 township and honor that township history and to

8 remain in the township and to receive services

9 from Marysville. And they're looking forward to

10 not only obtaining the Jerome Township and Union

11 County ties but to growing that relationship with

12 the City of Marysville.

13 COMMISSIONER LEE: Mr. Smith?

14 MR. SMITH: Okay. I just have a couple

15 quick comments. First of all, as Paul indicated,

16 when we got your notice, I think it was Thursday

17 or Wednesday, whenever it was, we attempted to

18 reach our partners, Columbus, and couldn't get

19 anybody here on such short notice. And I do think

20 that they'll have something to say, and we're

21 hopeful you will schedule a second hearing on this

22 so we'll have that opportunity.

23 Secondly, we think that the residents

24 who live abutting this property, the Dublin

19

1 residents, 3,000-or-so-odd people, there's a

2 couple big homeowners associations that should get

3 some notice so they have the opportunity to come

4 and speak to their commissioners.

5 I just want to point out for the

6 record, I'm sure you know this, in your file, in

7 August of 2006, is a letter from the mayor, then

8 mayor of Marysville, saying, and I quote:

9 Clearly, the City of Marysville has no desire to

10 serve this area with either water or sewer. We

11 feel there are numerous technical problems

12 involved in us serving the area, and the City of

13 Dublin already has facilities and infrastructure

14 in this area more adequate and more easily

15 provided.

16 That was in '06. And then they had a

17 study done, and I understand that the letter that

18 is there today that the mayor has filed or that

19 Marysville has filed said that these have been --

20 I don't know if they've been addressed -- I think

21 it says they've been addressed. I don't know what

22 that means. But I just kind of would like to make

23 that point.

24 And also the mayor has indicated,

20

1 talked about the Skilken property. Jerome

2 indicated that they felt that if somebody -- that

3 annexation may perhaps not be necessary to get

4 service. On file at the EPA is a letter from the

5 Skilken Corporation asking that Dublin be their

6 provider in this area. And we're going to put

7 that in the packet of information that we were

8 going to furnish to you. And also, we would

9 indicate to you that while I appreciate

10 Mr. Schulze has a number of clients, and the other

11 people have a number of clients, the subject

12 matter here today is only these properties, as I

13 understand what is before the commission. So

14 while that's good information to have, I don't

15 think it's pertinent to what you're here to decide

16 today.

17 It would be our -- and we'd also point

18 out to you that we are fully aware that there's

19 been an application, PTI application, filed by

20 Marysville with the EPA, and there are as of today

21 numerous objections filed by the City of Dublin,

22 and we're expecting the same kind of thing from

23 Columbus. And that's from conversations I've had

24 with Columbus.

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Pages 21 to 24

21

1 So we would like the opportunity to put

2 together for you some materials we've talked from

3 today and some other materials for your further

4 consideration, and we'd look forward to presenting

5 those along with our residents and along with the

6 City of Columbus the next time you schedule this

7 for hearing. Thank you very much.

8 COMMISSIONER LEE: Okay. I've got a

9 series of questions for numerous entities. Any

10 other public comment at this point? Okay.

11 I'd like to ask Dublin a series of

12 questions, if I could. Paul, you're probably

13 going to be the best able to answer these, but

14 Steve, you might also, too. And again, some of

15 these questions I know the answers to, but I would

16 like them for the record.

17 MR. SMITH: That's fine.

18 COMMISSIONER LEE: Can Dublin serve

19 this area without annexation?

20 MR. HAMMERSMITH: Currently, no.

21 COMMISSIONER LEE: Would --

22 MR. SMITH: Excuse me. That's not

23 quite accurate. What the EPA has said, without

24 annexation or without an agreement with the

22

1 landowner.

2 MR. HAMMERSMITH: Correct.

3 COMMISSIONER McCARTHY: Can you expand

4 on that? What does that mean?

5 MR. SMITH: That's from the 208 plan.

6 They're quoting the 208 plan to us. And, again,

7 we'd be happy to put that in the materials. It

8 means -- for example, Mr. Skilken has asked us to

9 serve. We intend to annex Mr. Skilken. But if we

10 didn't annex him, he has an agreement in his hands

11 he's going to execute, he has an agreement between

12 the city and Mr. Skilken. And we also expect

13 that, because this is an accurate statement, that

14 the 208 plan currently has that language in it, is

15 currently under review by the State. So --

16 COMMISSIONER LEE: A little further on

17 that, Steve, your current agreement with Columbus,

18 does it require annexation to be able to serve?

19 MR. HAMMERSMITH: That's what I was

20 going to respond or add to my answer is that no,

21 under the current agreement, you're correct. But

22 Dublin and Columbus could choose to amend that

23 agreement and provide service without annexation.

24 That is what the current agreement says. But we

23

1 have the full ability to go back and amend that

2 agreement also because this is within the

3 negotiated area per our agreement, so we have the

4 option to go back and discuss and negotiate how

5 this area gets served.

6 MR. SMITH: That's the other reason we

7 want Columbus here, because there's some things

8 going on you need to be aware of. I'm sorry we

9 couldn't get them here. Couldn't reach them in a

10 couple days.

11 MR. HAMMERSMITH: I think Mr. Samuels

12 has a comment.

13 MR. SAMUELS: Let me add a couple of

14 points to the 208 plan and the circumstances under

15 which Dublin can provide sewer service under the

16 208 plan. One is in accordance with an

17 annexation. Two is if there's an agreement

18 between a property owner who wants service from

19 Dublin or there is by agreement such as this

20 circumstance where Dublin would want to have

21 Dublin -- where Union County would designate

22 Dublin as the service provider. Under any of

23 those three circumstances, my understanding of the

24 208 plan is Ohio EPA would allow Dublin to go

24

1 ahead and provide service under any of those three

2 alternatives.

3 COMMISSIONER McCARTHY: Without

4 annexation?

5 MR. SAMUELS: Correct.

6 COMMISSIONER McCARTHY: As to the

7 agreement with the City of Columbus that you have

8 that actually processes your waste, if I'm

9 understanding Mr. Hammersmith, what he's saying is

10 that the agreement there currently would not allow

11 for it?

12 MR. HAMMERSMITH: It requires it within

13 the exclusive service areas, yes. And negotiated

14 area, it's always considered a consent area, so we

15 need the blessing of one another to serve that

16 area. Currently the practice has been annexation.

17 But that also Mr. Smith indicated we've discussed

18 doing so without annexation. That we would --

19 could mutually agree to not annex and provide

20 service.

21 COMMISSIONER HALL: Have you done that?

22 MR. HAMMERSMITH: Currently we have

23 not, no, sir.

24 MR. SMITH: However, I would point out

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Pages 25 to 28

25

1 that Columbus, the reason we think it's important

2 to be here, that Columbus has allowed that in the

3 last few years in two areas. One being New

4 Albany, the other being down in Pickaway County.

5 And they have another request pending. So again,

6 these are things that you need to be aware of from

7 Columbus.

8 COMMISSIONER LEE: Next question. This

9 one I realize may be a council question, but if

10 you were to be awarded the service area, would

11 Dublin require annexation?

12 MR. SMITH: I'll try to answer that. I

13 think Dublin is open to discussing serving the

14 area without annexing. I mean, I can't speak for

15 the seven of them. I've been there a long time,

16 but I wouldn't presume to speak for them. But

17 that's a question I would be happy to get answered

18 for you on a hypothetical basis.

19 COMMISSIONER LEE: And then follow-up

20 to that, given the current zoning of Jerome

21 Township, would Dublin allow this project to be

22 built as proposed if we were to award you the

23 service area?

24 MR. HAMMERSMITH: The answer to that is

26

1 that the current zoning is not consistent with our

2 existing or recently adopted community plan which

3 shows more of an office/mixed use/research/medical

4 sort of use than strictly a big box retail. And

5 quite honestly, we think that the current zoning

6 is too intense for the area given the traffic that

7 it generates. So that's why we would fall back to

8 a less intense use, predominantly employment-based

9 and not retail-based.

10 COMMISSIONER LEE: And that is --

11 follows up my next question, which Paul, you and I

12 have discussed, but if it were to be annexed, we

13 would expect that it would probably be rezoned to

14 a lesser intensive use?

15 MR. HAMMERSMITH: I guess you would

16 have to define less intense use. Less intense

17 could be traffic, it could be sewage generation.

18 So I guess I would ask you, Mr. Lee, to qualify

19 that.

20 COMMISSIONER LEE: Well, I think in

21 terms of are we talking retail or office or --

22 MR. HAMMERSMITH: Yeah. It would be

23 mixed use. I think it would be a mixed use with

24 an employment emphasis. It would be more intense

27

1 in terms of revenue generation than the retail use

2 would be, retail would probably be. But yet the

3 office might be a wash in terms of sewage

4 generation.

5 COMMISSIONER LEE: What is the current

6 capacity of Dublin to serve this area? I started

7 out when I was looking at these questions to ask,

8 you know, really we're talking in this particular

9 petition 100 acres, give or take. Obviously, you

10 have the capacity to serve that 100 acres.

11 MR. HAMMERSMITH: Correct.

12 COMMISSIONER LEE: Beyond that, what is

13 Dublin's capacity to serve? I'm looking at -- I

14 think this commission is more concerned about the

15 total area in the southeast section of the county

16 than we are specifically this 100 acres. I know

17 that some would like to detach this hearing and

18 say this only deals with 100 acres. In my mind

19 personally, this is not -- this is a decision that

20 is much bigger and has more ramifications than

21 just the 100 acres that would be awarded for the

22 service area.

23 So I guess really what I'm trying to

24 say is, could Dublin be in the position to be the

28

1 regional provider for the southeast section of

2 Union County?

3 MR. HAMMERSMITH: Let me answer that

4 with a couple different responses. Unlike

5 Marysville, we're in a position today to serve 400

6 acres with existing capacity by gravity service

7 with 21-inch sewer that was constructed in 1982.

8 It was extended to this area. So we can provide

9 immediate service with no improvements other than

10 the investment in extending the line, which is --

11 would be no different than Marysville having to

12 extend the line. But we don't have any system

13 improvements to make, unlike Marysville who has

14 substantial system improvements to make.

15 Beyond the 400 acres, we would have to

16 start making some system improvements, which

17 wouldn't be any different than Marysville having

18 to make system improvements also.

19 In terms of being the regional

20 provider, you're talking several million dollars.

21 I think we all have to make a financial impact

22 assessment as to given the land uses and the

23 development area whether -- development of the

24 area, whether that makes sense to invest in that

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Pages 29 to 32

29

1 infrastructure and provide that sort of system not

2 knowing how the area would develop.

3 Could we do that? Yes. We could run

4 an interceptor sewer from the west branch and get

5 to the area. We've actually evaluated that. It's

6 probably a $20 million -- a rough estimate --

7 investment in infrastructure. Probably no

8 different than the $22 million in costs that

9 Marysville would have to expend to get south of

10 an -- extend south to the area. But our system we

11 believe would not include pump stations and force

12 mains and kind of a leapfrog system that exists

13 today.

14 COMMISSIONER LEE: Okay. Thank you.

15 COMMISSIONER HALL: Paul, you presented

16 to LUC these maps and drawings of kind of the

17 planning area that you -- that your city has

18 looked at in that area. Taking this concept here,

19 what kind of an infrastructure would you have to

20 do to meet these kind of needs?

21 MR. HAMMERSMITH: In order to get up in

22 that northwest area, that would really be referred

23 to as an augmentation sewer that would come from

24 the interceptor. We don't have it sized, but we

30

1 know we can get there because it's downhill from

2 42, all the way to historic Dublin. So that's why

3 we are pretty confident that we can serve it by

4 gravity with that augmentation sewer.

5 Mr. Hall, to be able to answer size, we

6 have not done that sort of detailed analysis. But

7 we know that we're in the ballpark of several

8 million dollars. I think that's regardless of who

9 the utility service provider is.

10 COMMISSIONER LEE: Thank you.

11 Some questions for Marysville.

12 Obviously, you physically cannot annex this

13 property because you have no property connecting.

14 So annexation is not an issue for you.

15 MAYOR SCHMENK: No. We have no

16 intention to annex the area.

17 COMMISSIONER LEE: Are you in agreement

18 to serve this project as it was proposed by

19 Hunter-Casto?

20 MAYOR SCHMENK: Yes, we are.

21 COMMISSIONER LEE: And describe to this

22 commission Marysville's capacity and ability to

23 serve the southeast quadrant of the county.

24 MAYOR SCHMENK: As currently nearing

31

1 completion, the water reclamation facility has

2 capacity of 8 million -- of processing 8 million

3 gallons of waste per day, can be easily, quickly

4 expanded to go up to 12 million gallons per day,

5 and ultimately full buildout would be at 24

6 million gallons per day. So there's plenty of

7 capacity there in the plant.

8 We don't agree with Mr. -- with

9 Dublin's characterization that substantial system

10 improvements are needed. We do have work to be

11 done very similar to what Dublin would,

12 installation of some additional lines, but that

13 doesn't in our minds count as substantial system

14 improvements. We also do need to rebuild some

15 pump stations. But any work that needs to be done

16 can be done within a year, probably closer to six

17 months time frame. And the funds are in a very

18 manageable cost range, so we have capacity and we

19 have the ability to do what's needed.

20 COMMISSIONER LEE: Okay. And the

21 follow-up to that, then, is Marysville in position

22 and willing to become the regional provider for

23 southeast Union County?

24 MAYOR SCHMENK: Yes, we are.

32

1 COMMISSIONER LEE: Okay. What -- if

2 you were to be awarded this service area, what

3 does it mean to Marysville as far as your debt

4 structure, debt payments, in those areas?

5 MAYOR SCHMENK: It would, we believe,

6 shore us up or shore up our future to be a

7 regional provider. We believe that this

8 particular couple parcels of land are very

9 important to the development of the region, and

10 based on the agreements that we know can be

11 reached with the landowners and the developers,

12 and we hope with Jerome Township and the county,

13 we believe we will have the mechanisms in place to

14 be able to really finish out the lines that are

15 needed to serve southeast Union County. So this

16 is a critical piece for us. Again, we think it's

17 a critical piece for the region and is very

18 important to orderly development of that part of

19 Union County.

20 COMMISSIONER LEE: Mr. Hunter, what is

21 your commitment to this project?

22 MR. HUNTER: We are absolutely

23 committed to the project. We're actively working

24 with users, and we're fully committed and prepared

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Pages 33 to 36

33

1 to go forward.

2 COMMISSIONER HALL: A question that

3 I've got here and I wrote down earlier,

4 Mr. Hammersmith, related to the study that was

5 done -- when was that study done?

6 MR. HAMMERSMITH: August of 2007 was

7 the update study.

8 COMMISSIONER HALL: What does that

9 study say about this area?

10 SPEAKER: This particular area is not

11 specifically addressed in the study. In --

12 Marysville's development of the wastewater

13 treatment plant, also called the water reclamation

14 facility, has been based to be able to identify

15 necessary funds to get back -- or to build that.

16 We did present the study. We have, since that

17 study has been published over several areas that

18 are outside of the specific area that was analyzed

19 for the water reclamation plant, so this was used

20 simply to be able to show the fee structure that

21 was needed to go forth and build this plant. But

22 it's not considered by our council or the current

23 administration as the line which we will not cross

24 for service, and --

34

1 MAYOR SCHMENK: I guess if I could add,

2 I think maybe what has changed since that 2006

3 letter was sent by the former mayor, when I took

4 office I came in with the view that we really --

5 Marysville wanted to be a regional partner, and I

6 think perhaps that has changed. My outlook from

7 the beginning was to work well with other

8 jurisdictions, and that included Jerome Township,

9 and to find the resolution we believed would help

10 the township and help the county. There was a

11 phrase in that letter I believe referring to

12 technical problems, and those have been looked at.

13 We have solutions. We've costed out what would

14 have to be addressed and we know that it's

15 feasible. We have a different public service

16 director than we did then. Again, different

17 philosophies of our city engineer. And all of our

18 people are on board working as a team to do what's

19 needed to serve the area.

20 COMMISSIONER McCARTHY: I'm just

21 curious, when you took office, did you find that

22 you had to sell city council on the idea of

23 servicing this area, or did you find that council

24 was pretty receptive and excited to hear that

35

1 maybe the mayor was the one that was changing the

2 position of the city?

3 MAYOR SCHMENK: Yes. Council has

4 wanted to serve the area since the date I took

5 office and before, I believe.

6 MR. HAMMERSMITH: I have to

7 respectfully disagree with the city administrator

8 in terms of the August 2007 update study that was

9 provided by Malcolm Pirnie. I would suggest that

10 the commissioners at least read the executive

11 summary of that study. That was not simply a rate

12 study that looked at the financial feasibility.

13 It was a technical study that was looking and was

14 commissioned to understand the infrastructure

15 needed to serve the area over the next 40 years

16 and put a cost to that infrastructure.

17 And I believe if you look at that

18 study, that south of 42, down to State Route 161,

19 was $22 million worth of recommended improvements

20 within that study. It was not a rate analysis.

21 It was a feasibility study commissioned by

22 Marysville for the purposes of understanding how

23 to serve the area because that was not

24 specifically addressed in the initial study of the

36

1 wastewater master plan.

2 And furthermore, if you look at the

3 facility planning area that's an exhibit in that

4 document, and I do suggest once again that the

5 Commissioners look at that, this area was not

6 studied. Yes, the Woods of Labrador and other

7 areas were provided service outside that

8 facility's planning area, but I believe those

9 areas were already under development at the time

10 that that study was commissioned and being

11 finished, but this was not within that facility's

12 planning area. It's not within the exclusive

13 service area defined by the asset purchase

14 agreement that went into effect February 1st of

15 2006 between the county and Marysville. It was

16 never contemplated. So I think that is really a

17 mischaracterization to say that it was an area

18 that was planned to be served, not until just

19 recently.

20 MAYOR SCHMENK: Commissioners, if I

21 could respond to Mr. Hammersmith, again, just to

22 talk about what that Malcolm Pirnie study said and

23 what the City of Marysville has done with it. We

24 all know that outside consultants can say what

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Pages 37 to 40

37

1 they want to and then it is in the client's

2 complete discretion to do what they decide is

3 needed.

4 And frankly, the Malcolm Pirnie study

5 that recommended $22 million of needed

6 improvements has been characterized by our council

7 and others as kind of recommending the Cadillac

8 when perhaps the Ford Escort would do. And we

9 have looked at it and we have definitely decided

10 that we do not need to make all of the

11 improvements recommended. We can make those

12 recommended much more cheaply. And it again was

13 something that was nice to have, not necessary to

14 follow, and we put plans in place that are

15 reasonable and will cost a lot less than $22

16 million.

17 MR. SMITH: I'm glad to hear they've

18 done another study and they have had that study

19 evaluated, and perhaps they could furnish that to

20 the Commissioners and the City of Dublin and

21 Columbus. We've got a park out there we spent $7

22 million on and this study that they commissioned,

23 we didn't commission it. If there's another

24 study, we'd like love to see. We'd love to see

38

1 how they evaluated and decided they didn't need

2 the $22 million worth -- we'd even be happy to

3 take a look at that and comment on it. We have

4 the executive summary here. You have access to

5 the study. And perhaps they could give us all a

6 copy of the new study they have that evaluated the

7 Malcolm Pirnie study. Thank you.

8 COMMISSIONER LEE: Okay. Mr. Hunter,

9 what is the time frame of this project?

10 MR. HUNTER: Our goal would be to be

11 able to break ground within the next 14 to 18

12 months and then deliver the project within 12

13 months from that point in time. We will phase

14 the -- that would be the first phase. Our plan is

15 to phase the 100-acre project over the next about

16 two or three years. And I think I would like --

17 please rule me out of order, Commissioner, but

18 it's interesting to hear the discussion about

19 economic development, about extension of

20 infrastructure.

21 Having been involved in the real estate

22 community here for 20 years, it's almost a

23 question of the chicken or the egg. When you

24 partner with public service entities and you

39

1 partner with communities, and you say we the

2 private sector are willing to invest tens of

3 millions and sometimes hundreds of millions of

4 dollars to be at risk in partnership with the

5 communities in which we serve and where we live,

6 there is a -- that is many times the catalyst for

7 expanding the infrastructure.

8 We clearly as the private sector here,

9 as Casto-Hunter, clearly understand what needs to

10 occur in terms of extension of the utilities. We

11 have looked at the engineering studies. We are

12 absolutely without question comfortable with them.

13 And I think sometimes there's an irony in what

14 people say when you must put the chicken in front

15 of the egg, or the cart in front of the horse.

16 But here what we're saying is we're committed to

17 the community. We're committed to the area.

18 We're willing to invest our hard-earned capital

19 and go at risk in order to not only bring service

20 to the community and to build infrastructure, but

21 we're there to do that to expand the tax base and

22 to help the municipalities expand their revenue

23 base to serve their community.

24 And so I'm not sure of an argument that

40

1 says we ought to have the pipes in the ground

2 first or we ought to have the pipes in the ground

3 second. We're here to work with the community and

4 invest our dollars, and we're confident that we

5 can succeed with the City of Marysville, Jerome

6 Township.

7 COMMISSIONER LEE: In this development,

8 are you willing to make some off-site

9 improvements?

10 MR. HUNTER: We are.

11 MR. HAMMERSMITH: Can I ask what those

12 are and what the dollar amount of those off-site

13 investments would be?

14 MR. HUNTER: We're happy to invest in

15 roads and utilities. We're currently finalizing

16 our agreements and at this point in time I think

17 the specifics of those are yet to be worked out.

18 MR. HAMMERSMITH: Would you be willing

19 to invest in the interchange and the road

20 improvements that Dublin has planned and designed?

21 MR. HUNTER: I've already invested in,

22 as a City of Dublin taxpayer the last 20 years, so

23 I've invested in them --

24 MR. HAMMERSMITH: As a developer, would

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Pages 41 to 44

41

1 you be willing -- not as a resident, but as a

2 developer, would you be willing to invest in the

3 interchange?

4 MR. HUNTER: On this condition. You

5 agree to the partnership that we've proposed with

6 the community, and you agree to our zoning, and

7 you allow us to bring the property in as we've

8 proposed and we've had zoned in Jerome Township,

9 with full agreement -- and full agreement we're

10 not going to put the cart ahead of the horse on

11 this one.

12 MR. SMITH: Excuse me, Don. I want to

13 be sure of something you just said. Did you say

14 that we would consider annexation, what you just

15 said, you just said allow me to bring the property

16 in. What did you mean by that?

17 MR. HUNTER: No. You said this. We

18 are here today fully committed to Union County, to

19 Jerome Township, and to Marysville.

20 MR. SMITH: Thank you.

21 MR. HUNTER: Your question to us was --

22 the question was, would you allow us to develop

23 the property as we planned to develop it, and your

24 answer was no. So we can't come in.

42

1 MR. SMITH: Thank you.

2 COMMISSIONER LEE: Tom, do you have

3 questions?

4 COMMISSIONER McCARTHY: Just a couple.

5 We welcome public input. It's why we had this

6 meeting. And I would assure you that the purpose

7 of this meeting is the start of the fact-finding

8 process. I think we all acknowledge the

9 significant investments Dublin's made into

10 southern Union County, but I also point out

11 there's some other people in this room that have

12 also made fairly significant investments into this

13 county. And I appreciate the fact that Dublin

14 is -- with your significant resources that a

15 planning department have looked at southern Union

16 County and have given us some ideas. And I was

17 encouraged several years ago when primarily on

18 Commissioner Lee's initiative, and some of the

19 other people in this room, there was an effort to

20 try to create a cooperative core. And

21 unfortunately, the reason we're here today, I

22 believe, is because that process broke down. And

23 we're being put in a position like Solomon of

24 assigning half the baby, who's going to get what.

43

1 And at the end of the day I would agree

2 with Commissioner Lee, that we are looking at this

3 not -- at least I'm not -- as an isolated piece of

4 property. There's a much bigger issue in play

5 here, and that is how do we make sure that the

6 entire region gets services that are affordable

7 and can be done in a timely manner.

8 I would just like to also point out to

9 the folks in Dublin that the metro park happened

10 because of a cooperative spirit at that time, and

11 I don't recall Dublin ever at any of their

12 meetings saying we're going to put the most amount

13 of money in this project so we get to call the

14 shots. That was not the spirit then, and I'm a

15 little disappointed to kind of hear some of that

16 creep through today. I understand there's going

17 to be significant resources put in play in

18 southern Union County. But I would just -- I

19 would just encourage people, we're going to get

20 one shot at doing this right. And so instead of

21 trying to nitpick at each other, we need to figure

22 out what's the best use of this property.

23 What I'm hearing from Mr. Hunter, I

24 want to make sure I heard you correctly, and that

44

1 is you have a very clear plan, a business plan to

2 develop this property; is that correct?

3 MR. HUNTER: Yes, sir.

4 COMMISSIONER McCARTHY: What is your

5 expected time line to be able to fulfill that, if

6 services were available?

7 MR. HUNTER: If services were

8 available, we would -- our goal would be to -- our

9 intention is to break ground within a 12-month

10 period, complete construction within another 12

11 months. And that would be the first phase. So we

12 would be delivering buildings within 24 months.

13 And then we proceed orderly through a phased

14 development which we would hope would be completed

15 within another 12- to 24-month time frame. So

16 we're looking at a two- to four-year time frame

17 for completion.

18 COMMISSIONER McCARTHY: Is it fair to

19 ask -- maybe you don't have these numbers today --

20 to give our board some sense of the economic

21 significance of this -- of this project in terms

22 of jobs and tax base and --

23 MR. HUNTER: Let me -- we have prepared

24 much of that. I don't have it off the top of my

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Pages 45 to 48

45

1 head, but I think we can give you an order of

2 magnitude of the investment. And I'm going to

3 check a little bit here with Eric, but -- roughly

4 we would develop from a -- the Wirchainski

5 property first and the Jacquemin property second.

6 Each one of the properties would be a $50 million

7 private investment, with a total of 100 million.

8 And then in terms of the tax revenue, there are

9 very significant -- they come in a couple

10 different avenues. And we can report back to you

11 on that at a later date.

12 COMMISSIONER McCARTHY: I think it

13 would be helpful, as we're trying to balance our

14 revenues and cost, we have some sense of what it

15 means because what I'm also hearing you say is if

16 this project -- if we were to deem this area to be

17 served by Dublin, then it would be your

18 expectation that you would or would not go forward

19 with your project?

20 MR. HUNTER: Our expectation is in

21 response to -- we're reacting to what has been

22 said here today at the table from Dublin and what

23 has been communicated to us outside of this room,

24 is that Dublin does not agree nor will consent to

46

1 our development plan. So by -- you know, from

2 what we've heard from Dublin today -- clearly I

3 don't want to put words in anyone's mouth, but we

4 have a plan to develop the property, get it zoned

5 within Jerome Township, the first phase to be

6 developed. And what I thought we heard today from

7 the City of Dublin, from Mr. Hammersmith, as the

8 engineer, was no. When the question was asked,

9 would you allow this property to be developed as

10 currently zoned, I thought the answer was no.

11 That's what I heard.

12 COMMISSIONER McCARTHY: Would you agree

13 with that assessment, Mr. Hammersmith?

14 MR. HAMMERSMITH: Yeah. I said it's

15 inconsistent with our community plan. Doesn't

16 need to be big box retail purpose. This is within

17 earshot of about 3,000 residents of our community,

18 and we don't believe that's good planning to build

19 a big box retail center adjacent to a residential

20 neighborhood. And that's why we proposed a mixed

21 use with an office and employment emphasis.

22 So to answer Mr. Hunter's question, no,

23 we don't believe that's the best use of the

24 property. And again, it's our residents that are

47

1 impacted by this use, and not those of Marysville,

2 that will have to live with it each day.

3 COMMISSIONER HALL: I've got a question

4 for Jerome Township trustees. When was the land

5 that we're looking at here today zoned for this

6 permit?

7 MR. HAMMERSMITH: May of 2007.

8 SPEAKER: 2007.

9 SPEAKER: You've got to understand that

10 process took about a year.

11 SPEAKER: It was a while for that

12 process to take place, but there was a lot of

13 people that came out, our constituents from the

14 township, not to mention there was people from the

15 development that -- both of them are saying that

16 would be across from the Gorden piece. But as a

17 whole, everything from our zoning board was taken

18 into consideration on that and felt it was the

19 best fit for the use in that area.

20 COMMISSIONER McCARTHY: Correct me if

21 I'm wrong, Andy, but at one point 407 -- the

22 parcel that -- that came into play, I think at one

23 point it was proposed to be an auto dealer or

24 something, but we -- that piece was rezoned and

48

1 then it went to referendum and the voters of

2 Jerome Township upheld the zoning that you had put

3 in place. Is that correct?

4 MR. THOMAS: That's the piece south of

5 the Duke site that actually butts up against to

6 the east with Hyland Croy, to the south would be

7 Post Road, that was supposed to be a dealership at

8 that time.

9 COMMISSIONER McCARTHY: What zones was

10 upheld by your public vote? Do you remember when

11 that was?

12 MR. THOMAS: Seven, eight years ago. I

13 couldn't give you the exact date.

14 COMMISSIONER McCARTHY: It goes back a

15 ways.

16 SPEAKER: It was zoned, and by the time

17 you get the referendum -- we hate to wait. The

18 law said we had to go to the next general, so that

19 put it off a year, a year and a half. But it's

20 been -- every bit of seven years.

21 SPEAKER: It's been around I think

22 2002, 2003. Because there was also a variance

23 issued on that property also.

24 COMMISSIONER McCARTHY: And after that,

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Pages 49 to 52

49

1 if I recall, there was an extension of utilities

2 to that spot.

3 SPEAKER: Yes, there has been.

4 COMMISSIONER McCARTHY: By who?

5 SPEAKER: Marysville.

6 MR. HAMMERSMITH: Union County.

7 SPEAKER: Or Union County. Excuse me.

8 COMMISSIONER LEE: Anyone from the

9 public or the entities that I have called on have

10 any additional questions?

11 MR. SMITH: I just have a suggestion,

12 if I could. Don said he's going to get some

13 materials together to furnish you, and I believe

14 Marysville said they were and we were. We ought

15 to agree that we all exchange those with each

16 other when we furnish them to you, I think that

17 would be appropriate, and to Jerome also.

18 MR. HUNTER: Just a point of

19 clarification. The tax revenue projections we

20 referenced were provided to the City of Dublin

21 already.

22 MR. SMITH: I'm like you. I don't have

23 them with me today. All I'm saying is whatever

24 you're going to give the board we'll give to

50

1 Marysville and Jerome and we should all do that.

2 SPEAKER: One, the massive property

3 referendum was probably about 2004, because I'm

4 the one that initiated it, I double-checked from

5 there.

6 Secondly, when did it get rezoned other

7 than to the PUD that was accepted, which at that

8 time did not incorporate the property from Masa?

9 There was a PUD that was granted, I believe, for a

10 Duke Realty. And I have heard nothing further

11 about any changes to that property other than to

12 the PUD that was designed by Duke Realty. Is this

13 going to be pretty much Duke Realty PUD or -- I

14 believe they were going to try to extend part of

15 their property to Masa, to resolve a traffic

16 problem which I think --

17 SPEAKER: To address that question,

18 there are two separate properties. One is zoned

19 commercial and one is zoned PUD. At this point,

20 we don't have any applications that would

21 incorporate all of them. Everything is like

22 Mr. Dickinson said, he might be confused on being

23 combined together, but it's not. It's two

24 separate properties.

51

1 SPEAKER: I didn't say it was. I said

2 that Masa property was separate, and that PUD was

3 granted at that time for -- the one that I know

4 about was for the Duke Realty property which had a

5 very specific design and character to it. There's

6 two -- in other words, right now it's zoned in two

7 different zonings, PUD, and one I believe a

8 business characteristic.

9 MR. HAMMERSMITH: Honestly, I don't

10 know the answer to this question. The May 2007

11 rezoning was for the Wirchainski property. Did it

12 include the Jacquemin property, that PUD?

13 SPEAKER: No. They're two separate

14 pieces of property.

15 MR. HAMMERSMITH: What's the current

16 zoning on the Jacquemin property?

17 SPEAKER: It is U-1.

18 MR. HAMMERSMITH: It has to be rezoned.

19 SPEAKER: Correct. The discussion

20 dealt with two pieces of property, the Masa

21 property and the Wirchainski property which did

22 not include the Jacquemin property. Three

23 separate zoning --

24 COMMISSIONER LEE: Other questions?

52

1 MR. STOLTE: One comment. Steve

2 Stolte, citizen, private citizen. It seems to me

3 that the -- what's really at issue here is land

4 use and maybe money. When it comes right down to

5 providing water and sewer service, to provide

6 water and sewer service to the whole of southeast

7 Union County will require the expenditure of

8 millions of dollars in private and public dollars,

9 whether it's Marysville or whether it's Dublin.

10 So the 208 plan, what's been approved

11 by Ohio EPA, gives the City of Dublin the

12 authority to serve that area, gives Union County

13 and Marysville the authority to serve that area.

14 So it almost seems to me that you need to put

15 aside the land use issues and look at it strictly

16 from a water and sewer issue, if that's what

17 you're voting on. Forget about the land use

18 issues and vote on just the water and sewer

19 question.

20 COMMISSIONER LEE: Other comments?

21 MR. PAGURA: I'm Steve Pagura, and I

22 represent the Industrial Parkway Association. And

23 obviously, you know, we've developed a lot of

24 property out there, and we're concerned with how

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Pages 53 to 56

53

1 it affects us. We're in the middle of this. You

2 know, if this does get done, are we blanket

3 annexed into Dublin or are we in Union County?

4 What happens to us?

5 COMMISSIONER LEE: To be annexed there

6 would have to be an annexation procedure.

7 MR. SMITH: First of all, you'll always

8 be in Union County. Doesn't matter -- you said

9 would you be in Dublin or Union County. Union

10 County will always be where you'll be. We don't

11 have any power --

12 SPEAKER: I think he meant Jerome

13 Township.

14 SPEAKER: Jerome Township.

15 MR. HAMMERSMITH: Your property isn't

16 the subject of the discussion today. We're not

17 contemplating service to your property at this

18 time. This is about two specific parcels east of

19 33, and I believe yours is west of 33.

20 SPEAKER: When you're showing your

21 master plan, Paul, including the City of Dublin,

22 would you say that you would make these

23 improvements and then you would want that whole

24 area in the City of Dublin?

54

1 MR. HAMMERSMITH: We currently define

2 the area that we like that they have in the city.

3 SPEAKER: So we're in today.

4 MR. HAMMERSMITH: No, you're not.

5 You're not within a 277-acre area that we are

6 interested in having annexed to the city.

7 SPEAKER: Your master plan shows that

8 all the way to the west.

9 MR. HAMMERSMITH: As I said before, we

10 don't necessarily have to require annexation to

11 provide utility service. You as a property owner

12 get to decide whether you want to annex or not.

13 COMMISSIONER HALL: You can't do it

14 unilaterally. It has to be done with the consent

15 of the landowner or the property owner.

16 COMMISSIONER McCARTHY: With all due

17 respect, I want to make sure I understand because

18 I'm hearing -- I'm having a hard time following.

19 What I heard earlier was anything's possible. We

20 can renegotiate with the City of Columbus. We can

21 negotiate with the City of Marysville and get

22 services. But at the present time, the agreement

23 between Dublin and the City of Columbus would not

24 allow you to serve this area without annexation.

55

1 Is that not true?

2 MR. HAMMERSMITH: Unless Columbus would

3 agree differently.

4 MR. SMITH: And we're going to bring

5 them here to talk to you.

6 COMMISSIONER McCARTHY: Anything's

7 possible. But all we can deal with is

8 certainties, and so I appreciate getting that

9 clarification.

10 COMMISSIONER LEE: I guess the question

11 is how long do we need to get this information in

12 everyone's hands. I kind of follow the rule of

13 former Judge Parrott that we're not -- we've dealt

14 with this issue for nearly four years. We've been

15 dealing with it before Dublin requested their

16 first right to serve. And I think that the

17 Commissioners are ready and prepared to analyze

18 the information and make a decision in very

19 short --

20 MR. SMITH: Can I ask when are your

21 scheduled meetings?

22 COMMISSIONER LEE: Every Monday and

23 Thursday.

24 MR. SMITH: I would suggest that we

56

1 pick a time like three weeks out for your next

2 meeting and two weeks out where everybody

3 exchanges information is my suggestion. Only

4 because -- I mean, I'm going to be gone next week.

5 I really don't want to cancel my vacation.

6 MAYOR SCHMENK: Commissioners, I would

7 request that we reconvene next Thursday. We can

8 provide information within a day or two.

9 COMMISSIONER LEE: Mr. Hunter, what

10 about the information that's been requested of

11 you?

12 MR. HUNTER: We've already provided it

13 to all the public bodies. So it's been provided.

14 And we would respectfully support Mayor Schmenk's

15 request. We've been working on the project a

16 great deal of time and would like to have some

17 clarity and move it forward.

18 MR. SMITH: I would suggest to you that

19 a two-week delay on a project we've been working

20 on for five years, when we asked you to look at

21 the Malcolm Pirnie study and we asked them today

22 to furnish us whatever else they've done in terms

23 of a study that says they don't need to do that

24 anymore, I kind of find it difficult to say two

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Pages 57 to 59

57

1 weeks is a long time. But you get to do -- as you

2 say, you're Judge Parrott today, so --

3 COMMISSIONER McCARTHY: I would ask

4 that we have submissions from everybody by next

5 Thursday, and we'll meet two weeks from today.

6 MR. SMITH: That would be fine.

7 COMMISSIONER HALL: I think that's long

8 enough.

9 COMMISSIONER LEE: We will reconvene

10 this hearing then --

11 MR. SMITH: Is that April 2nd? That

12 would be fine. We'll shoot for 9:30 on the 2nd.

13 MR. SMITH: And you'd like the

14 information exchanged?

15 COMMISSIONER LEE: By a week from

16 today.

17 SPEAKER: Will there be additional

18 public comment allowed, or what's the format going

19 to be for that particular meeting?

20 COMMISSIONER McCARTHY: I think we will

21 always welcome public comment, and I would

22 respectfully ask from the folks from Dublin for --

23 there's two homeowner associations, we be given

24 the contact information for both.

58

1 MR. SMITH: We'll get them to you

2 tomorrow. And we'll also tell Columbus that we'd

3 like them to be here so they can talk with you

4 also.

5 COMMISSIONER LEE: Thank you all.

6 - - - - -

7 Thereupon, the foregoing proceedings

8 concluded at 4:37 p.m.

9 - - - - -

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

59

1 State of Ohio : C E R T I F I C A T E

2 County of Franklin: SS

3 I, Barbara Rogers, a Notary Public in and for

4 the State of Ohio, do hereby certify that Cindy

5 Knecht reported the aforementioned proceedings;

6 that it was transcribed by me, and that the

7 foregoing is a true record of the proceedings.

8 I do further certify I am not a relative,

9 employee or attorney of any of the parties hereto,

10 and further I am not a relative or employee of any

11 attorney or counsel employed by the parties

12 hereto, or financially interested in the action.

13 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my

14 hand and affixed my seal of office at Columbus,

15 Ohio, on March 23, 2009.

16 ______________________________________________

17 Barbara Rogers, Notary Public - State of Ohio

18 My commission expires July 10, 2009.

19

20

21

22

23

24

Proceedings March 19, 2009Proceedings March 19, 2009

Page 60

Aability 8:312:18,20 13:323:1 30:2231:19

able 17:15 21:1322:18 30:532:14 33:14,2038:11 44:5

absolutely 32:2239:12

abutting 18:24accepted 8:1950:7

access 38:4accurate 21:2322:13

acknowledge 42:8acquisition 6:21acres 27:9,10,1627:18,21 28:628:15

action 59:12actively 32:23add 17:20 22:2023:13 34:1

adding 17:20additional 5:2212:8 31:1249:10 57:17

address 14:1650:17

addressed 19:2019:21 33:1134:14 35:24

adequate 19:14adjacent 6:5 7:612:23 46:19

administration33:23

administrator11:9 35:7

adopted 26:2affixed 59:14affordable 43:6aforementioned59:5

agenda 6:12ago 42:17 48:12agree 24:19 31:841:5,6 43:145:24 46:1249:15 55:3

agreement 21:2422:10,11,17,2122:23,24 23:223:3,17,1924:7,10 30:1736:14 41:9,954:22

agreements 32:1040:16

ahead 24:1 41:10Albany 25:4allow 11:21,2412:5 13:1314:1 16:323:24 24:1025:21 41:7,1541:22 46:954:24

allowed 25:257:18

allowing 14:4alternatives24:2

amend 22:22 23:1amount 17:140:12 43:12

analysis 30:635:20

analyze 55:17analyzed 33:18Andy 47:21annex 22:9,1024:19 30:12,1654:12

annexation 14:1414:23 20:321:19,24 22:1822:23 23:1724:4,16,1825:11 30:1441:14 53:654:10,24

annexed 26:1253:3,5 54:6

annexing 25:14answer 10:2421:13 22:2025:12,24 28:330:5 41:2446:10,22 51:10

answered 25:17answers 21:15anybody 18:19anymore 56:24anyone's 46:3anything's 54:1955:6

application20:19,19

applications50:20

appointed 11:14appreciate 10:2111:9 15:15,1920:9 42:1355:8

approaching17:14

appropriate49:17

approved 52:10

approximately6:15,16,20 9:7

April 7:16 57:11area 3:8,13,213:24 4:2,186:23 8:16,229:5,10,2310:17,18 12:312:7,15,18,2313:5,8,14,1713:17,18,21,2314:1,20 16:1017:12 19:10,1219:14 20:621:19 23:3,524:14,14,1625:10,14,2326:6 27:6,1527:22 28:8,2328:24 29:2,529:10,17,18,2230:16 32:233:9,10,1834:19,23 35:435:15,23 36:336:5,8,12,1336:17 39:1745:16 47:1952:12,13 53:2454:2,5,24

areas 9:2,2424:13 25:332:4 33:1736:7,9

argument 39:24aside 52:15asked 4:23 16:1118:1,2 22:846:8 56:20,21

asking 20:5assessment 28:2246:13

asset 36:13assigning 42:24Association52:22

associations19:2 57:23

assurances 10:7assure 42:6attached 2:7attempted 18:17Attendees 2:1,6attention 3:5attorney 5:1716:9 59:9,11

auditor's 3:14augmentation29:23 30:4

August 19:7 33:635:8

authority 13:16

13:19 52:12,13auto 47:23available 14:544:6,8

avenues 45:10award 15:2125:22

awarded 25:1027:21 32:2

aware 20:18 23:825:6

Bbaby 42:24back 4:11 5:107:19 16:5 23:123:4 26:733:15 45:1048:14

bad 17:17balance 45:13ballpark 30:7bank 13:11Barbara 59:3,17base 39:21,2344:22

based 8:7 9:1032:10 33:14

basically 17:11basis 25:18beginning 34:7behalf 16:1218:2

believe 5:711:24 12:12,1413:5,12,15,1813:22 14:115:4 29:1132:5,7,1334:11 35:5,1736:8 42:2246:18,23 49:1350:9,14 51:753:19

believed 34:9benefit 10:11benefits 10:4best 13:21,23,2414:19 21:1343:22 46:2347:19

better 7:1016:13

Beyond 27:1228:15

big 19:2 26:446:16,19

bigger 27:2043:4

bit 45:3 48:20blanket 53:2blessed 14:18

blessing 24:15board 34:1844:20 47:1749:24

bodies 56:13box 26:4 46:1646:19

branch 29:4break 38:11 44:9bring 39:19 41:741:15 55:4

broke 42:22build 33:15,2139:20 46:18

building 13:24buildings 44:12buildout 31:5built 9:4 11:1725:22

burdensome 13:9business 16:1844:1 51:8

businesses 16:21butts 48:5

CC 3:2 59:1,1Cadillac 37:7call 3:5 15:343:13

called 33:1349:9

cancel 56:5capacity 12:1812:20 27:6,1027:13 28:630:22 31:2,731:18

capital 39:18carries 13:2cart 39:15 41:10Casto 15:7,8Casto-Hunter15:3 39:9

catalyst 39:6center 4:1446:19

Certainly 8:20certainties 55:8certify 59:4,8cetera 8:4changed 17:334:2,6

changes 50:11changing 35:1character 51:5characteristic51:8

characterization31:9

characterized37:6

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Page 61

Charles 2:4cheaply 37:12check 45:3chicken 38:2339:14

choose 22:22Christiane 11:7Cindy 59:4circumstance23:20

circumstances9:17 23:14,23

citizen 52:2,2city 1:1 3:224:1 5:6,7,196:10,13 7:107:13,20 8:5,118:24 9:1810:12 11:8,1115:18,21 16:2016:22 18:1219:9,12 20:2121:6 22:1224:7 29:1734:17,22 35:235:7 36:2337:20 40:5,2246:7 49:2052:11 53:21,2454:2,6,20,2154:23

clarification49:19 55:9

clarity 56:17clear 44:1clearly 9:1919:9 39:8,946:2

clients 20:10,11client's 37:1close 6:8closer 31:16collection 8:19:5,13

Columbus 18:1820:23,24 21:622:17,22 23:724:7 25:1,2,737:21 54:20,2355:2 58:259:14

combined 50:23come 14:16 19:329:23 41:2445:9

comes 52:4comfort 16:13comfortable39:12

comfortably17:17

comment 16:16

21:10 23:1238:3 52:157:18,21

comments 5:610:22 11:516:1,4 17:8,2017:21 18:1552:20

commercial 7:350:19

commission 20:1327:14 30:2237:23 59:18

commissioned35:14,21 36:1037:22

Commissioner 3:43:10,11 5:1111:2 14:7 15:215:23 16:3,1517:4 18:1321:8,18,2122:3,16 24:3,624:21 25:8,1926:10,20 27:527:12 29:14,1530:10,17,2131:20 32:1,2033:2,8 34:2038:8,17 40:742:2,4,18 43:244:4,18 45:1246:12 47:3,2048:9,14,2449:4,8 51:2452:20 53:554:13,16 55:655:10,22 56:957:3,7,9,15,2058:5

commissioners1:2,22 2:23:23 5:20 6:27:8,11,21 9:2010:3,8 19:435:10 36:5,2037:20 55:1756:6

commitment 32:21commitments 10:2committed 6:1932:23,24 39:1639:17 41:18

communicate 18:2communicated45:23

communities 39:139:5

community 6:2214:17 15:126:2 38:2239:17,20,23

40:3 41:646:15,17

companies 5:2company 4:12,174:21

complete 37:244:10

completed 44:14completely 8:22completion 31:144:17

concept 29:18concern 16:22concerned 27:1452:24

concluded 58:8condition 41:4confident 30:340:4

confused 50:22connecting 30:13consent 24:1445:24 54:14

consider 7:2441:14

consideration8:12 10:4,2315:15,20 21:447:18

considerations7:24

considered 7:524:14 33:22

considers 6:13consistent 26:1constituents47:13

constitutes 9:14constructed 28:7construction44:10

consultants36:24

contact 57:24contemplated36:16

contemplating6:23 53:17

continue 16:23contract 15:1015:12

conversations20:23

conveyance 9:13cooperative42:20 43:10

copy 38:6core 42:20Corner 3:14Corporation 20:5correct 22:2,2124:5 27:11

44:2 47:2048:3 51:19

corrective 8:18correctly 43:24corridor 16:19cost 6:20 31:1835:16 37:1545:14

costed 34:13costs 8:2 29:8council 16:2025:9 33:2234:22,23 35:337:6

counsel 59:11count 31:13county 1:2,223:9,22 6:14,166:18 7:18 9:29:24 10:1111:22,23 12:112:2,7 13:1914:11 18:1123:21 25:427:15 28:230:23 31:2332:12,15,1934:10 36:1541:18 42:10,1342:16 43:1849:6,7 52:7,1253:3,8,9,1059:2

county's 13:18couple 16:118:14 19:223:10,13 28:432:8 42:4 45:9

create 42:20creep 43:16criteria 7:21,23critical 32:1632:17

cross 33:23Croy 48:6curious 34:21current 4:2310:1 22:17,2122:24 25:2026:1,5 27:533:22 51:15

currently 9:6,1212:23 21:2022:14,15 24:1024:16,22 30:2440:15 46:1054:1

DD 3:2dare 12:13date 17:4 35:4

45:11 48:13dating 7:19day 31:3,4,643:1 47:2 56:8

days 23:10deal 17:15 55:756:16

dealer 47:23dealership 48:7dealing 55:15deals 27:18dealt 51:2055:13

debt 32:3,4December 16:1917:5

decide 20:1537:2 54:12

decided 37:938:1

decision 7:827:19 55:18

deem 45:16define 26:1654:1

defined 36:13definitely 37:9delay 56:19deliver 38:12delivering 44:12demonstrated9:19

Dennis 16:8department 42:15describe 30:21design 51:5designate 13:2023:21

designated 7:1410:5,18 11:11

designating 9:913:22

designation 6:38:6 11:16

designed 9:440:20 50:12

desire 18:1,619:9

detach 27:17detailed 30:6determine 7:22determines 14:11develop 15:1717:16,21 29:241:22,23 44:245:4 46:4

developable 7:3developed 46:6,952:23

developer 40:2441:2

developers 12:10

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Page 62

15:9 32:11development 4:184:21 11:2113:23 14:228:23,23 32:932:18 33:1236:9 38:1940:7 44:1446:1 47:15

Dickinson 50:22different 28:428:11,17 29:834:15,16 45:1051:7

differently 55:3difficult 9:1656:24

director 5:15,1934:16

disagree 35:7disappointed43:15

discretion 37:2discuss 3:811:10 23:4

discussed 9:811:15 24:1726:12

discussing 6:225:13

discussion 38:1851:19 53:16

discussions12:11

document 36:4documentation5:23

documented 8:8doing 5:8 24:1843:20

dollar 40:12dollars 6:249:15 28:2030:8 39:4 40:452:8,8

Don 15:4,5 41:1249:12

double-checked50:4

downhill 30:1drawings 29:16Dublin 3:22 5:55:7,14,19 6:16:5,8,10,13,156:17 7:5,10,137:20 8:5,11,168:24 9:3,1810:5,15,1818:24 19:1320:5,21 21:1121:18 22:2223:15,19,20,21

23:22,24 25:1125:13,21 27:627:24 30:231:11 37:2040:20,22 42:1343:9,11 45:1745:22,24 46:246:7 49:2052:9,11 53:3,953:21,24 54:2355:15 57:22

Dublin's 27:1331:9 42:9

due 54:16Duke 4:12,14,1748:5 50:10,1250:13 51:4

Dunn 5:17duplication 9:14

EE 3:2,2 59:1,1earlier 33:354:19

early 4:16,209:3

earshot 46:17easier 14:10easily 19:1431:3

east 6:5 48:653:18

economic 9:1638:19 44:20

effect 36:14effort 42:19egg 38:23 39:15eight 48:12either 19:10emphasis 26:2446:21

emphasize 15:16employed 59:11employee 59:9,10employment 26:2446:21

employment-based26:8

EMS 14:19encourage 43:19encouraged 42:17engaged 12:10engineer 5:734:17 46:8

engineering 5:1939:11

enhance 6:24entertain 7:11entire 43:6entities 9:1712:13 16:521:9 38:24

49:9environmental5:16 7:24 8:8

EPA 13:5,19 20:420:20 21:2323:24 52:11

Eric 15:7 45:3Escort 37:8estate 38:21estimate 29:6et 8:4evaluated 29:537:19 38:1,6

everybody 16:256:2 57:4

everyone's 55:12exact 48:13example 22:8excess 12:20exchange 49:15exchanged 57:14exchanges 56:3excited 15:14,1834:24

exclusive 24:1336:12

Excuse 21:2241:12 49:7

execute 22:11executive 35:1038:4

exhibit 36:3existing 8:126:2 28:6

exists 29:12expand 22:339:21,22

expanded 31:4expanding 39:7expect 7:2322:12 26:13

expectation45:18,20

expected 44:5expecting 20:22expend 29:9expenditure 52:7expenditures9:15

expensive 8:189:11

expire 4:18expires 59:18extend 28:1229:10 50:14

extended 28:8extending 28:10extension 38:1939:10 49:1

extraordinary7:4

extremely 6:8

9:16

FF 59:1facilities 6:228:2,4 19:13

facility 11:1811:22 31:133:14 36:3

facility's 36:836:11

fact 7:2 8:718:3 42:13

fact-finding42:7

fair 44:18fairly 42:12fall 26:7family 18:3far 32:3farmers 18:5Farms 17:8feasibility35:12,21

feasible 34:15February 3:244:5,8 36:14

fee 33:20feel 14:13 19:11feet 9:7felt 20:2 47:18fifth 12:9figure 43:21file 19:6 20:4filed 4:7 13:419:18,19 20:1920:21

finalizing 40:15financial 8:29:20 10:2,428:21 35:12

financially59:12

find 34:9,21,2356:24

fine 21:17 57:657:12

finish 32:14finished 36:11fire 14:19firm 15:6first 3:19 4:311:17 12:1718:15 38:1440:2 44:1145:5 46:5 53:755:16

fit 47:19five 56:20folks 43:9 57:22follow 37:1455:12

followed 4:5following 54:18follows 26:11follow-up 25:1931:21

force 9:13 29:11Ford 37:8foregoing 58:759:7

Forget 52:17formal 6:11 7:13formally 11:13format 57:18former 34:355:13

forth 33:21forward 18:921:4 33:145:18 56:17

foster 12:1fostering 13:24four 17:13 55:14fourth 12:3four-year 44:16frame 31:17 38:944:15,16

Franklin 59:2frankly 37:4Froment 11:9front 5:21 39:1439:15

fulfill 44:5full 8:3 10:4,2223:1 31:5 41:941:9

fully 7:24 20:1832:24 41:18

funded 8:20funding 12:413:10

funds 31:1733:15

furnish 20:837:19 49:13,1656:22

further 21:322:16 50:1059:8,10

furthermore 36:2future 10:913:23 32:6

GG 3:2gallons 31:3,4,6Gary 2:4general 48:18generates 26:7generation 26:1727:1,4

generations 18:518:5

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Page 63

getting 55:8give 10:4 27:938:5 44:2045:1 48:1349:24,24

given 9:24 10:1416:24 25:2026:6 28:2242:16 57:23

gives 52:11,12giving 15:15Glacier 6:21glad 10:24 37:17Glenn 16:17go 16:5 23:1,423:24 31:433:1,21 39:1945:18 48:18

goal 15:17 18:638:10 44:8

goes 48:14going 5:8 10:1614:9 15:4 16:320:6,8 21:1322:11,20 23:841:10 42:2443:12,16,1945:2 49:12,2450:13,14 55:456:4 57:18

good 20:14 46:18good-faith 13:12Gorden 47:16gotten 16:24governmental12:2

grant 13:16granted 13:650:9 51:3

gravity 9:4 28:630:4

great 56:16ground 12:2338:11 40:1,244:9

group 15:3growing 18:11guarantees 10:7guess 3:6 5:417:8 26:15,1827:23 34:155:10

Hhalf 6:20 42:2448:19

Hall 2:4 17:424:21 29:1530:5 33:2,847:3 54:1357:7

Hall's 3:14

Hammersmith 5:65:9,13 21:2022:2,19 23:1124:9,12,2225:24 26:15,2227:11 28:329:21 33:4,635:6 36:2140:11,18,2446:7,13,1447:7 49:6 51:951:15,18 53:1554:1,4,9 55:2

hand 5:21 59:14hands 22:1055:12

happened 43:9happens 53:4happy 22:7 25:1738:2 40:14

hard 54:18hard-earned39:18

hate 48:17Hawkins 12:24head 45:1hear 34:24 37:1738:18 43:15

heard 5:12 43:2446:2,6,1150:10 54:19

hearing 18:2121:7 27:1743:23 45:1554:18 57:10

help 12:3 34:934:10 39:22

helpful 45:13hereto 59:9,12hereunto 59:13historic 30:2history 3:20 4:95:1 18:7

Hochstetler16:17,17 17:5

holders 16:10homeowner 57:23homeowners 19:2honestly 26:551:9

honor 18:7hope 32:12 44:14hopeful 18:21horse 39:1541:10

hundreds 39:3Hunter 15:5,5,532:20,22 38:838:10 40:10,1440:21 41:4,1741:21 43:2344:3,7,23

45:20 49:1856:9,12

Hunter's 15:446:22

Hunter-Casto4:20 30:19

Hyland 48:6hypothetical25:18

Iidea 34:22ideas 42:16identify 33:14immediate 28:9impact 28:21impacted 7:747:1

important 6:1425:1 32:9,18

improvements8:19 9:12 28:928:13,14,16,1831:10,14 35:1937:6,11 40:940:20 53:23

include 29:1151:12,22

included 34:8including 53:21inconsistent8:22 46:15

incorporate 50:850:21

indebtedness10:1

indicate 20:9indicated 18:1519:24 20:224:17

Industrial 16:1852:22

information 20:720:14 55:11,1856:3,8,1057:14,24

infrastructure7:1,4 8:1410:10,15,1712:6 13:1319:13 29:1,729:19 35:14,1638:20 39:7,20

initial 35:24initiated 8:2050:4

initiative 42:18input 7:9 42:5install 13:4installation12:5 31:12

instances 9:1

intend 22:9intended 10:19intense 26:6,826:16,16,24

intensive 26:14intent 11:18intention 30:1644:9

interceptor 29:429:24

interchange40:19 41:3

interested 17:954:6 59:12

interesting38:18

introduce 5:1411:8

invest 6:1928:24 39:2,1840:4,14,1941:2

invested 40:2140:23

investing 6:186:23 9:1

investment 10:1010:14,17 28:1029:7 45:2,7

investments 7:440:13 42:9,12

inviting 10:23involved 5:319:12 38:21

irony 39:13isolated 43:3issue 30:14 43:452:3,16 55:14

issued 48:23issues 8:8 52:1552:18

item 14:14

JJacquemin 3:166:4 15:11 17:717:7,8 45:551:12,16,22

Jacquemins 4:22Jerome 1:1 3:912:14 14:8,1018:4,10 20:125:20 32:1234:8 40:5 41:841:19 46:547:4 48:249:17 50:153:12,14

Jillian 11:9jobs 17:13 44:22John 4:3,1315:12 17:21,23

Judge 55:13 57:2July 3:21 4:47:15 59:18

June 7:17jurisdictions34:8

Kkind 4:8 5:119:22 20:2229:12,16,19,2037:7 43:1555:12 56:24

Knecht 59:5know 5:18 14:1214:18,20 19:619:20,21 21:1527:8,16 30:1,732:10 34:1436:24 46:151:3,10 52:2353:2

knowing 29:2known 3:13 12:24

LLabrador 36:6land 11:15 28:2232:8 47:4 52:352:15,17

landowner 22:154:15

landowners 4:35:3 12:10,1116:9 32:11

language 22:14lastly 10:14law 5:15 48:18leapfrog 29:12Lee 2:4 3:10,115:11 7:15 11:214:7 15:2,2315:24 16:3,1518:13 21:8,1821:21 22:1625:8,19 26:1026:18,20 27:527:12 29:1430:10,17,2131:20 32:1,2038:8 40:7 42:243:2 49:851:24 52:2053:5 55:10,2256:9 57:9,1558:5

Lee's 42:18left 4:17 5:14Leibowitz 15:8lesser 26:14letter 3:23 4:117:24 19:7,17

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Page 64

20:4 34:3,11level 10:1 16:13levels 12:2life 17:14limited 17:1line 16:11 28:1028:12 33:2344:5

lines 9:6,812:22 31:1232:14

little 14:10,1022:16 43:1545:3

live 18:24 39:547:2

located 6:5,79:7 11:2312:14

location 17:10long 5:11 8:2425:15 55:1157:1,7

long-term 8:18long-time 18:4look 21:4 35:1736:2,5 38:352:15 56:20

looked 29:1834:12 35:1237:9 39:1142:15

looking 13:318:9 27:7,1335:13 43:244:16 47:5

lot 13:2 37:1547:12 52:23

love 37:24,24LUC 29:16

Mmagnitude 45:2main 9:13mains 29:12maintain 9:2114:24

maintains 14:10major 6:22making 28:16Malcolm 35:936:22 37:438:7 56:21

manageable 31:18manner 8:9 43:7maps 29:16March 1:6 59:15Mary 4:7Marysville 1:11:24 4:1,15,246:3,10,11 7:128:6,10,12,16

8:21 9:9,1910:1,8,13 11:511:8,11 12:1713:21 15:18,2216:12,14,20,2317:9,12 18:1,918:12 19:8,919:19 20:2028:5,11,13,1729:9 30:1131:21 32:334:5 35:2236:15,23 40:541:19 47:149:5,14 50:152:9,13 54:21

Marysville's30:22 33:12

Masa 50:8,1551:2,20

massive 50:2master 8:13 36:153:21 54:7

materials 21:2,322:7 49:13

matter 20:1253:8

mayor 11:6,719:7,8,18,2430:15,20,2431:24 32:534:1,3 35:1,336:20 56:6,14

McCarthy 2:3 3:422:3 24:3,634:20 42:444:4,18 45:1246:12 47:2048:9,14,2449:4 54:1655:6 57:3,20

mean 22:4 25:1432:3 41:1656:4

means 13:1019:22 22:845:15

meant 53:12mechanisms 32:13meet 29:20 57:5meeting 1:2 3:53:7,10 10:2442:6,7 56:257:19

meetings 43:1255:21

member 6:14mention 47:14met 16:19metro 6:21 43:9middle 53:1mile 6:9

miles 6:9million 6:2028:20 29:6,830:8 31:2,2,431:6 35:1937:5,16,2238:2 45:6,7

millions 6:2339:3,3 52:8

mind 27:18minds 31:13mischaracteri...36:17

missing 12:5mixed 26:23,2346:20

modify 17:20moments 5:24Monday 55:22money 13:1143:13 52:4

months 31:1738:12,13 44:1144:12

moot 14:20morning 17:23mouth 46:3move 56:17multiple 18:5municipalities39:22

mutually 24:19

NN 3:2name 11:7naming 6:11nearing 30:24nearly 55:14necessarily54:10

necessary 14:1314:14 20:333:15 37:13

need 23:8 24:1525:6 31:1437:10 38:143:21 46:1652:14 55:1156:23

needed 8:3 13:731:10,19 32:1533:21 34:1935:15 37:3,5

needs 9:11 29:2031:15 39:9

negotiate 23:454:21

negotiated 23:324:13

negotiations13:12

neighborhood46:20

neighborhoods7:7

never 36:16new 11:17 12:1925:3 38:6

nice 37:13nitpick 43:21northwest 29:22Notary 59:3,17noted 6:12notice 18:16,1919:3

notified 7:7number 16:917:11 20:10,11

numbers 3:1544:19

numerous 7:138:17 9:1119:11 20:2121:9

OO 3:2objection 6:11objections 20:21objects 8:5obtaining 18:10obviously 12:1927:9 30:1252:23

occur 39:10offered 10:5office 26:2127:3 34:4,2135:5 46:2159:14

office/mixed26:3

off-site 40:8,12Ohio 1:24 13:513:19 23:2452:11 59:1,459:15,17

Okay 3:18 14:715:2,23 18:1421:8,10 29:1431:20 32:138:8

once 36:4ongoing 13:12open 12:6 25:13opening 12:19opportunity10:21 11:1015:19 18:2219:3 21:1

option 4:13,1814:23 16:1023:4

options 4:21,23order 3:5 5:429:21 38:1739:19 45:1

orderly 11:2114:2 32:1844:13

organization15:7

organizations15:10

ought 40:1,249:14

outline 7:21outlook 34:6outside 33:1836:7,24 45:23

owner 17:2223:18 54:11,15

PP 3:2packet 20:7Pagura 52:21,21parcel 3:1512:24 13:147:22

parcels 6:7 7:17:2 9:6,811:15 12:2432:8 53:18

Pardon 17:19park 6:21 37:2143:9

Parkway 16:1952:22

Parrott 55:1357:2

part 11:3 32:1850:14

particular 27:832:8 33:1057:19

parties 59:9,11partner 34:538:24 39:1

partners 15:618:18

partnership 15:615:7 39:4 41:5

partnerships12:1 13:24

Paul 4:6 5:611:2 15:1117:7 18:1521:12 26:1129:15 53:21

payments 32:4Peg 15:11pending 7:8 25:5people 19:120:11 34:18

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Page 65

39:14 42:11,1943:19 47:13,14

period 9:1644:10

permit 47:6permits 13:4personally 27:19pertinent 20:15petition 27:9phase 38:13,1438:15 44:1146:5

phased 44:13philosophies34:17

phrase 34:11physically 30:12pick 56:1Pickaway 25:4piece 32:16,1743:3 47:16,2448:4

pieces 12:651:14,20

pipes 40:1,2Pirnie 35:936:22 37:438:7 56:21

place 32:1337:14 47:1248:3

plan 22:5,6,1423:14,16,2426:2 36:138:14 44:1,146:1,4,1552:10 53:2154:7

planned 36:1840:20 41:23

planning 9:113:18 29:1736:3,8,1242:15 46:18

plans 4:14 37:14plant 12:19 31:733:13,19,21

play 43:4,1747:22

please 38:17plenty 12:2031:6

point 3:9 5:410:3 11:514:14,20 16:1417:18 19:5,2320:17 21:1024:24 38:1340:16 42:1043:8 47:21,2349:18 50:19

points 23:14

police 14:19position 14:1127:24 28:531:21 35:242:23

possible 54:1955:7

Post 48:7power 53:11practice 24:16precedent 13:2predominantly26:8

prepared 32:2444:23 55:17

present 33:1654:22

presentation 5:8presented 29:15presenting 21:4presume 25:16pretty 30:334:24 50:13

primarily 42:17private 39:2,845:7 52:2,8

probably 14:1821:12 26:1327:2 29:6,731:16 50:3

problem 50:16problems 19:1134:12

procedure 53:6proceed 44:13proceedings 58:759:5,7

process 42:8,2247:10,12

processes 24:8processing 31:2project 4:1625:21 30:1832:21,23 38:938:12,15 43:1344:21 45:16,1956:15,19

projections49:19

promises 10:7properties 6:420:12 45:650:18,24

property 3:16,179:8 15:11,1315:17 17:16,2218:24 20:123:18 30:13,1341:7,15,2343:4,22 44:245:5,5 46:4,946:24 48:23

50:2,8,11,1551:2,4,11,1251:14,16,20,2151:21,22 52:2453:15,17 54:1154:15

proposal 8:21proposed 3:825:22 30:1841:5,8 46:2047:23

provide 5:22 8:39:21 10:1912:4 22:2323:15 24:1,1928:8 29:1 52:554:11 56:8

provided 7:168:10 16:2019:15 35:936:7 49:2056:12,13

provider 6:3,127:14,23 8:79:10 10:611:12,14,19,2112:12,15 13:2014:12 16:1320:6 23:2228:1,20 30:931:22 32:7

providing 9:252:5

provision 10:9proximity 6:8PTI 20:19public 5:6 9:159:15,17 16:4,716:15 21:1034:15 38:2442:5 48:1049:9 52:856:13 57:18,2159:3,17

published 33:17PUD 50:7,9,12,1350:19 51:2,751:12

pump 9:12 29:1131:15

purchase 36:13purpose 3:7 42:646:16

purposes 7:335:22

pursue 14:24put 13:13 20:621:1 22:735:16 37:1439:14 41:1042:23 43:12,1746:3 48:2,19

52:14p.m 58:8

Qquadrant 30:23qualify 26:18quality 8:1quarter 6:9question 7:210:15 11:313:17 25:8,925:17 26:1133:2 38:2339:12 41:21,2246:8,22 47:350:17 51:1052:19 55:10

questions 8:119:18 11:1 14:516:6,7 21:9,1221:15 27:730:11 42:349:10 51:24

quick 18:15quickly 31:3quite 21:23 26:5quote 19:8quoting 22:6

RR 3:2 59:1ramifications27:20

range 8:3 31:18rate 35:11,20reach 18:18 23:9reached 32:11reacting 45:21read 35:10ready 13:9 55:17reaffirmation17:24

real 38:21realize 25:9really 27:8,2329:22 32:1434:4 36:1652:3 56:5

Realty 4:12,154:17 15:650:10,12,1351:4

reason 17:1123:6 25:142:21

reasonable 37:15reasons 6:611:16 14:2

rebuild 31:14recall 43:1149:1

receive 18:8

receptive 34:24reclamation11:18 31:133:13,19

recognized 8:21recommendations9:23

recommended 8:1935:19 37:5,1137:12

recommending37:7

reconvene 56:757:9

record 3:12,144:9 19:6 21:1659:7

reevaluate 10:16reference 18:3referenced 49:20referendum 48:148:17 50:3

referred 7:1529:22

referring 5:2334:11

regarding 10:9regardless 30:8region 32:9,1743:6

regional 11:1911:20 28:1,1931:22 32:734:5

registered 6:17regulations13:20

reiterate 14:2217:23

reiteration17:24

related 8:8 33:4relationship18:11

relative 59:8,10remain 18:8remember 48:10removed 10:19renegotiate54:20

repairs 8:18report 45:10reported 59:5represent 12:912:16 16:952:22

request 3:13 4:44:6,7 6:1 7:128:12 11:1314:3 15:1625:5 56:7,15

requested 4:15

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Page 66

5:5 55:1556:10

requesting 3:234:2 11:16

requests 3:204:9,12 5:27:14,16,19

require 22:1825:11 52:754:10

required 8:14requires 24:12resident 41:1residential46:19

residents 6:157:6 10:11 18:418:23 19:121:5 46:17,24

residing 6:1610:12

resolution 34:9resolve 50:15resources 12:542:14 43:17

respect 6:2 18:654:17

respectfully35:7 56:1457:22

respond 22:2036:21

response 7:1845:21

responses 28:4rest 12:7retail 4:14,1726:4,21 27:1,246:16,19

retail-based26:9

retire 17:17retirement 17:14revenue 10:1027:1 39:2245:8 49:19

revenues 45:14review 3:1222:15

reviewing 3:20rezoned 26:1347:24 50:651:18

rezoning 51:11Rhodes 5:21Ridge 6:21right 3:6,23 4:25:9,16 13:343:20 51:652:4 55:16

rightful 13:16rights 15:21

risk 39:4,19road 40:19 48:7roads 40:15roadway 6:24Rogers 59:3,17room 14:18 42:1142:19 45:23

rough 29:6roughly 45:3Route 35:18rule 38:17 55:12run 29:3

SS 3:2Samuels 5:1623:11,13 24:5

save 11:3saying 19:8 24:939:16 43:1247:15 49:23

says 14:22 19:2122:24 40:156:23

schedule 18:2121:6

scheduled 55:21Schmenk 11:6,730:15,20,2431:24 32:534:1 35:336:20 56:6

Schmenk's 56:14Schottenstein5:17

Schulze 16:8,820:10

scoped 13:7seal 59:14second 11:2012:22 18:2140:3 45:5

secondly 13:1518:23 50:6

section 11:2227:15 28:1

sector 39:2,8see 2:7 37:24,24sell 34:22sense 28:2444:20 45:14

sent 3:22 4:1,334:3

separate 50:1850:24 51:2,1351:23

series 16:6 21:921:11

serve 3:24 4:24:15,24 8:158:21 9:5 11:2012:18,19,21

13:3,8,14,1713:21 19:1021:18 22:9,1824:15 27:6,1027:13 28:530:3,18,2332:15 34:1935:4,15,2339:5,23 52:1252:13 54:2455:16

served 18:1 23:536:18 45:17

server 13:22service 3:8,133:21 4:4,105:5 8:9,12,169:2,22 10:5,910:18,20 11:1412:12,15 13:2014:12 15:17,2116:11 20:422:23 23:15,1823:22 24:1,1324:20 25:10,2327:22 28:6,930:9 32:233:24 34:1536:7,13 38:2439:19 52:5,653:17 54:11

services 8:411:12 12:814:17,19 16:2218:8 43:6 44:644:7 54:22

servicing 34:23serving 6:22 7:112:3 19:1225:13

set 59:13seven 25:1548:12,20

sewage 9:4 26:1727:3

sewer 12:2215:21 17:1019:10 23:1528:7 29:4,2330:4 52:5,6,1652:18

sewerage 8:1sharing 10:10sheet 2:7shoot 57:12shore 32:6,6short 18:1955:19

shot 43:20shots 43:14show 33:20showing 53:20

shows 26:3 54:7signatures 16:21significance44:21

significant 8:742:9,12,1443:17 45:9

sign-in 2:7similar 31:11simpler 14:10simply 33:2035:11

sir 11:6 24:2344:3

sit 5:10site 48:5six 31:16size 30:5sized 9:4 29:24Skilken 13:120:1,5 22:8,922:12

small 16:18,21Smith 5:15 15:2418:13,14 21:1721:22 22:523:6 24:17,2425:12 37:1741:12,20 42:149:11,22 53:755:4,20,2456:18 57:6,1157:13 58:1

Solomon 42:23solutions 34:13somebody 17:1520:2

sorry 23:8sort 26:4 29:130:6

sought 7:9south 29:9,1035:18 48:4,6

southeast 27:1528:1 30:2331:23 32:1552:6

southern 3:88:15 11:2342:10,15 43:18

speak 12:13 15:416:12 19:425:14,16

SPEAKER 14:1517:19 33:1047:8,9,1148:16,21 49:349:5,7 50:2,1751:1,13,17,1953:12,14,2054:3,7 57:17

specific 7:21

33:18 51:553:18

specifically8:16 27:1633:11 35:24

specifics 40:17spent 37:21spirit 43:10,14spoke 17:22spot 49:2spurred 4:11SS 59:2start 3:20 28:1642:7

started 27:6State 22:1535:18 59:1,459:17

statement 22:13statements 11:4station 9:13stations 29:1131:15

stay 5:12Steve 5:14,1621:14 22:1752:1,21

Stolte 52:1,2Street 1:23strictly 26:452:15

strongly 8:5structure 32:433:20

studied 8:1436:6

studies 39:11study 8:13,19,239:11,23 19:1733:4,5,7,9,1133:16,17 35:835:11,12,13,1835:20,21,2436:10,22 37:437:18,18,22,2438:5,6,7 56:2156:23

subject 7:1,29:6 14:1620:11 53:16

submissions 57:4Subsequently7:16

substandard 9:12substantial28:14 31:9,13

substantially6:24

succeed 40:5suggest 35:936:4 55:2456:18

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Page 67

suggestion 49:1156:3

suited 13:21summary 35:1138:4

supply 17:10support 56:14supposed 48:7sure 19:6 39:2441:13 43:5,2454:17

system 9:5,1428:12,14,16,1829:1,10,1231:9,13

TT 59:1,1table 45:22take 27:9 38:347:12

taken 47:17talk 36:22 55:558:3

talked 20:1 21:2talking 26:2127:8 28:20

tax 39:21 44:2245:8 49:19

taxpayer 40:22taxpayers 8:2team 5:14 34:18technical 19:1134:12 35:13

tell 58:2tens 39:2terms 26:21 27:127:3 28:1935:8 39:1044:21 45:856:22

thank 3:11 10:2311:2,6 14:415:22 21:729:14 30:1038:7 41:2042:1 58:5

thing 13:9 14:1517:17 20:22

things 12:1723:7 25:6

think 3:19 11:313:8 17:218:16,19,2319:20 20:1523:11 25:1,1326:5,20,2327:14 28:2130:8 32:1634:2,6 36:1638:16 39:1340:16 42:8

45:1,12 47:2248:21 49:1650:16 53:1255:16 57:7,20

Third 11:24Thomas 14:9,2248:4,12

thought 46:6,10three 17:1323:23 24:138:16 51:2256:1

Thursday 18:1655:23 56:757:5

ties 18:11till 11:4time 4:14 7:1215:2 16:1417:1,18 21:625:15 31:1736:9 38:9,1340:16 43:1044:5,15,1648:8,16 50:851:3 53:1854:18,22 56:156:16 57:1

timely 43:7times 39:6timing 10:16today 4:23 5:136:2,10 11:1011:13 13:1114:5 19:1820:12,16,2021:3 28:529:13 41:1842:21 43:1644:19 45:2246:2,6 47:549:23 53:1654:3 56:2157:2,5,16

Tom 2:3 3:1142:2

tomorrow 58:2top 44:24total 27:15 45:7township 1:1 3:912:14 14:818:4,7,7,8,1025:21 32:1234:8,10 40:641:8,19 46:547:4,14 48:253:13,14

traffic 26:6,1750:15

transcribed 59:6treatment 33:13true 55:1 59:7

trustees 14:847:4

try 25:12 42:2050:14

trying 27:2343:21 45:13

turn 3:10two 6:7 17:1323:17 25:338:16 44:1650:18,23 51:651:6,13,2053:18 56:2,856:24 57:5,23

two-week 56:19

Uultimately 31:5understand 7:118:17 19:1720:13 35:1439:9 43:1647:9 54:17

understanding4:19 23:2324:9 35:22

understands 6:1unfortunately42:21

unilaterally54:14

Union 1:2,22 3:83:22 6:14,166:18 9:2,2410:11 11:22,2312:1,7 18:1023:21 28:231:23 32:15,1941:18 42:10,1543:18 49:6,752:7,12 53:3,853:9,9

update 8:13 33:735:8

upheld 48:2,10urban 8:3use 16:10 26:4,826:14,16,23,2327:1 43:2246:21,23 47:147:19 52:4,1552:17

users 32:24uses 28:22use/research/...26:3

utilities 39:1040:15 49:1

utility 1:1 6:36:12 7:14 8:68:9 9:9,2110:9 11:14

30:9 54:11U-1 51:17

Vvacation 56:5variance 48:22variety 6:6various 12:2view 34:4vital 6:14voice 6:11voiced 16:21vote 48:10 52:18voters 6:17 48:1voting 52:17

Wwait 48:17want 5:13,2214:24 19:523:7,20 37:141:12 43:2446:3 53:2354:12,17 56:5

wanted 17:2334:5 35:4

wants 23:18wash 27:3waste 9:15 24:831:3

wasteful 9:14wastewater 8:138:14 33:1236:1

water 11:1712:22 17:1019:10 31:133:13,19 52:552:6,16,18

way 30:2 54:8ways 48:15Wednesday 18:17week 56:4 57:15weeks 56:1,257:1,5

weight 13:2welcome 42:557:21

went 36:14 48:1west 29:4 53:1954:8

we'll 10:24 11:316:4 18:2249:24 57:5,1258:1,2

we're 13:9 14:915:11,14,1817:9 18:2020:6,22 27:828:5 30:732:23,24 39:1639:16,17,18,21

40:3,4,14,1541:9 42:21,2343:12,19 44:1645:13,21 47:552:24 53:1,1654:3 55:4,13

we've 21:2 24:1729:5 34:1337:21 41:5,7,846:2 52:2355:13,14 56:1256:15,19

whatsoever 7:18WHEREOF 59:13wherewithal 9:21willing 17:1631:22 39:2,1840:8,18 41:1,2

Wirchainski 3:164:3,13 6:415:12 17:2145:4 51:11,21

Wirchainskis4:22

wish 12:11,1514:6

wishes 11:11WITNESS 59:13Woods 36:6words 46:3 51:6work 13:7 31:1031:15 34:740:3

worked 17:12,1340:17

working 32:2334:18 56:15,19

worth 35:19 38:2wouldn't 25:1628:17

written 7:13wrong 47:21wrote 33:3

YYeah 26:22 46:14year 4:1,6,831:16 47:1048:19,19

years 6:18 8:1510:20 17:1325:3 35:1538:16,22 40:2242:17 48:12,2055:14 56:20

Zzeros 3:18zoned 41:8 46:446:10 47:548:16 50:18,1951:6

Proceedings March 19, 2009

Page 68

zones 48:9zoning 25:2026:1,5 41:647:17 48:251:16,23

zonings 51:7Zox 5:17

$$20 29:6$22 29:8 35:1937:5,15 38:2

$50 45:6$7 6:19 37:21

006 3:22 4:4,1119:16

07 4:1608 4:16,20

11st 36:141,000 6:1610 59:18100 27:9,10,1627:18,21 45:7

100-acre 38:1512 6:9 31:438:12 44:10,15

12-month 44:91300 9:714 7:15 38:1114th 3:211460000100003:17

1460000120003:15

161 35:1817th 4:418 38:1119 1:619th 4:71980s 9:31982 28:7

22nd 57:11,1220 38:22 40:2220th 7:172002 48:222003 48:222004 50:32006 7:15 19:734:2 36:15

2007 7:17,17,198:13 16:1917:6 33:6 35:847:7,8 51:10

2009 1:6 59:1559:18

208 13:18 22:5,6

22:14 23:14,1623:24 52:10

21-inch 28:723 59:15233 1:2324 31:5 44:1224-month 44:1527th 4:5277-acre 54:5

33rd 3:243,000 6:15 46:173,000-or-so-odd19:1

3:33 3:633 6:5 53:19,19

44:37 58:840 8:15 17:1235:15

400 28:5,15407 47:2142 30:2 35:1843040 1:24

55th 7:1755 16:21

66th 1:23 17:6

88 31:2,2

99:30 57:12