By Andrew Walsh
awalsh@wbcowqel.com

After some uncertainty as to whether the veto override vote would even take place, Galion City Council decided not to override Mayor Tom O’Leary’s veto concerning contacting the Ohio Attorney General’s office about investigating Prairie State.

Before the agenda was adopted there was discussion of a new draft of the letter that would address the Mayor’s reservations about the original. City Attorney Roberta Wade called this new attempt an “opportunity to work together,” to reach a conclusion. It was then proposed that this new draft be sent to the appropriate committee for review, and the veto override vote be removed from the agenda.

Tom Fellner was against simply removing the vote.

“I’d like to resolve it,” Fellner said, “formally put it to rest.”

The issue of what would happen to the vote if it was removed from the agenda was raised, and it was revealed that council could revisit the vote at a later date if it so chose. This scenario did not sit well with Fellner, as he likened it to “kicking it down the road.” In the end it was decided to keep the vote on the agenda.

After the extensive back and forth, when the vote finally did come to a head, it was not surprising that there was a little confusion. Fellner asked exactly what a “yes” and “no” vote would mean. Clerk Julie Bell clarified that a “yes” vote would be to approve the resolution to override the veto, and a “no” vote would be to turn down the resolution but uphold the veto. It was a slightly counterintuitive instance where yes means no and no means yes.

When the dust finally settled the veto stood, and a new approach would be considered in committee.

A late addition to the agenda involved a rather large amount of appropriations. Wade introduced it at the beginning of the meeting as something that had come through late, but nevertheless needed to be on the agenda. Finance committee chairman Andy Daniels agreed with Wade about the importance of the legislation, adding that this was money that had been previously appropriated (and budgeted) but now needed to be directed to the proper funds to keep the city on time with paying its bills.

Daniels also pointed out part of the legislation that had to do with the paving project for the Heise Park parking lot in which $50,000 had been appropriated. Daniels offered to remove that portion if it would please the council. It was further elaborated by O’Leary that the $50,000 was not what the project would cost, rather that was the sum appropriated by the parks department to ensure that sufficient funds were available for the project. O’Leary estimated the price to be in the region of $14,000.

“It’s not a $50,000 parking lot,” the mayor said wryly.

Parks Department chair Shirley Clark added that this funding had come primarily from the Freese Foundation, and other similar foundations, and as such could not be used on anything other the upgrades to the City’s parks.

In other legislation, more steps were taken to keep the ball rolling on the St. Rt. 598 widening project. The safety service director was given permission to accept easements and acquisitions of property relating to the project, and he was given authorization to enter into an agreement with GPD Group for professional engineering services. These engineering services are being commissioned so that when the steps of the project preceding it are completed, work can continue smoothly.

Revamps to the Zoning Commission took another step toward completion, with the passage of ordinance no. 2013-71 on a second reading. There was also some confusion regarding this ordinance, as Bob Cerrar raised the question of whether the zoning code was being abolished. The answer came back that the zoning code was not being abolished; rather the changes were being made to the commission, not the code.

The mayor will now appoint the members of the commission, and in order for O’Leary to have the ability to meet the deadlines for these appointments, the rules were suspended and a final reading passed.