Untitled Page

Council met in Legislative Review Session as a quasi committee of the whole, chaired by Pres. Arnold, with the following eight members present: Ames, Lester, Malone, Patrick, Proehl, Sharp, Siberell and Trutschel. (Mr. Cross absent.) There were 3 media representatives and 36 other visitors present, in addition to Mayor Sulzer, City Law Director Eddy, and City Auditor Spetnagel.

Pres. Arnold called upon Mrs. Patrick to lead tonight’s discussion on the first topic on the Agenda, the changes proposed to the Council Rules.

Mrs. Patrick indicated that she has distributed copies of the Minutes from the meeting of the Special Committee on March 3, 2010, along with copies of the existing Council Rules. She proceeded to read through the Minutes, indicating what changes are proposed to the rules. She indicated that these were all discussed during the Committee meeting, and that she will request legislation on this.

Mr. Joseph Herlihy requested that his email address be included on future committee meeting announcements.

Mr. Keith Richter requested that the broadcasters of the Council meetings be required to provide copies of the videos of the Council meetings.

Pres. Arnold called upon Mr. Siberell to lead tonight’s discussion on the second topic on the Agenda, the proposed Carlisle Working Group.

Mr. Siberell said that he will ask that the Carlisle owners and their architects speak first on the subject.

An owner representative who failed to identify himself stated that the city definitely has to make a commitment to participate as a tenant in the building, or as an active civic partner. He read in its entirety a letter unsigned from the owners of the Carlisle Building addressed to the City of Chillicothe in which he criticized Mayor Sulzer and the Administration for allegedly sending mixed signals to the owners and giving the owners a negative characterization as being outsiders. He suggested that the owners were mislead by the city into believing that the city wished to see the restoration of the Carlisle Building as a facility for City Administration offices.

Mr. David Carroll then spoke to Council, indicating he is an owner and the counsel to Carlisle Tower, LLC. He stated that they have been consulting with tax experts and that they want to know if there is any interest of the city in putting its administrative offices there. If so, he stated that they need a resolution to that effect by Council. If not, he stated that they will then know that they need to go down another road, which will probably involve different owners.

Mr. Siberell then called upon the preservation groups to provide their input.

Nancy King of the Chillicothe Conservancy spoke to Council, stating that she has provided information to the new members of Council that was previously provided to other members concerning the availability of grant funding. She said that their interest is to support the leadership of the City of Chillicothe in promoting the active reconstruction and rehabilitation of the Carlisle Building. She said that there needs to be a public/private partnership in order to get this project completed.

Mr. Kevin Coleman, President of the Chillicothe Restoration Foundation, then spoke to Council indicating his group’s support of the restoration project.

Mr. Bob Loversich of Schooly Craft Architects spoke about the inadequate City Administration offices that exist today. He said that the solution is to give new life to this old building. He proceeded to discuss the many attributes of the Carlisle Building, stating that it screams out to be Chillicothe’s City Hall.

Mr. Marvin Jones of the Chillicothe Ross Chamber of Council said that the issue is what can City Council do about the Carlisle Building. He said that this is a leadership issue, and that this issue needs to be resolved. He distributed copies of four pages from the Hyett Palma Study, which stated that the government is to set the standard.

Mr. Siberell then called upon representatives of the local media for their comments.

Loren Genson of the Chillicothe Gazette asked what the owners are willing to do without a tenant identified. An owner representative who failed to identify himself stated that they are just willing to meet the minimum safety requirements and to maintain the status quo, indicating that this is a business decision. Ms. Genson asked what the city’s role is concerning the Carlisle Building and the existing building code violations. City Law Director Eddy responded that this is up to the Building Code Enforcement Division of the Administration. She said that there are already fines that are outstanding and that have not been paid, so this is something yet to be seen. She said that first there has to be a complaint before the Law Director’s Office becomes involved. Ms. Genson asked if Council members feel that the city has a responsibility to do something. Mr. Siberell stated that he believes that the government does have a duty to play a role in this, and to keep the dialogue open. Mr. Trutschel said that he agrees that everyone is in favor of seeing this building restored. However, he said that the taxpayers have spoken and that they do not want to see the city restore this private property with public funds. He said that the government does not need to be supporting it, that it is a private building. Mrs. Malone said that these are serious hard times for the city budget. She said that she would like to see the Carlisle Building restored, but that first the owners need to address the issues of public safety. Mrs. Patrick said that it is just not an option at this time for the city to become financially involved. She said that if the city can help to get somebody else interested in locating there, then yes the city has a role in doing this. However, she said that she agrees that the building first needs to be secured and made safe. Mr. Sharp said that he feels that it is our civic duty to get involved in order to find a solution. He said that it may not be our job to fix a private building, but that otherwise Council should do whatever it can. Mr. Proehl said that we would all like to see something done with this building. However, he agrees that the city is in a dire financial situation and cannot take on the fiscal responsibility for this. He said that we need to see an outpouring of public support, which means something more than letters and good wishes. He said that we need to bring in a source of income. Mrs. Lester said that the restoration in this town that has been done to date has been private restoration. She said that she does not know of any public city funding of restoration efforts on private property, and that the city just does not have any money to committ to this project. Mrs. Ames said that until we can come up with a source of money, and somebody steps to the plate with financing, it must be realized that the city itself does not have the money. She said that we can continue to talk about this and look for solutions.

Mr. Sharp asked if Council can pass a resolution and yet not be committed to putting in any money. An unidentified owner representative said that the resolution that they are seeking is a statement that the city wants to go into the Carlisle Building, and that then their finance people will work on the numbers that the city could pay. He suggested that the city should indicate what amount, if any, it is willing to committ.

Mayor Sulzer responded to Mr. Swicklee’s letter, stating that since Carlisle Tower, LLC, has owned the building there have been a lot of promises from the owners, and nothing forthcoming. He said that the letter itself is misleading, and that there have been no meetings with the owners for over four months. He also said that Cindy Henderson attended all of the previous meetings and that contrary to the impression given by this letter, Council was always kept up to date. He indicated that there was a public/private partnership with the initial owners to put $250,000.00 into a roof and stabilizing. He said that the current owners made a business decision to purchase this building, but to not put any more of their money into the building until they have a potential tenant or owner committed. He says that it is just a business decision of the City Administration to not commit the city’s funds to be that owner or tenant.

City Auditor Spetnagel said that the amount that the city is willing to spend is zero, because we do not have the money. He said that it is a waste of time for Council to continue talking about this as if the city were going to finance the project when it cannot do this.

City Law Director Eddy said that the city has tried to play a role in the restoration of the Carlisle Building. She said that after the fire itself, the city withheld insurance money in order to secure the building. She said that this money was released so that the former owner could sell the building to a new owner who promised to go forward with restoration. She said that the city worked with these new owners, helping them to secure emergency funds for them to use. Then, she said that these owners indicated that they had no money to put into the building, so the city again worked with these owners to again get the building sold to the current owners. After that, she said that the city has tried to work with the current owners, but it became necessary to bring code violation charges against them to get the building brought up to minimum standards for safety.

Mr. Siberell then called upon members of the audience to provide their input.

An unidentified lady said that the Lucy Hayes House was restored with public financing through HUD. She took issue with Mrs. Ames’ statement that no public financing was used for previous restoration.

Nancy King said that she has been thrilled to see the improvements of other private properties in the downtown area, and that this was also through public funding of a city grant of $400,000.00. She again stated that she truly believes that there are many grant funds available through proper application.

Mrs. Ames responded, stating that the owners of the private properties that have been restored had to put up 50% of their own matching funds for the downtown revitalization grant fundings, which was applied for by the city but funded through state and federal monies.

Mr. Keith Richter talked about a number of unrelated subjects and concluded by saying that governments are bankrupt.

Mr. Joseph Herlihy said that he has heard a rumor that the City Administration is going to have its new offices located in the Foulke Block and that they are using the same Realtor as involved in the purchase of the AEP Building. He said that there is a negative energy about the downtown, and that the city lacks leadership in the Administration and Council to promote the restoration of the Carlisle Building.

Another unidentified lady spoke to Council, stating that she was planning to run for Council herself at one point, and that she does think that the members of Council are serving the public out of love. She said that she thinks that we all need to agree to love Chillicothe.

Another unidentified lady said that she has been here for three years and that she thinks that it is positive to come together as a community to get this project going.

Carolyn Schafer said that it is clear that the city has no money for this project, and the taxpayers have also already said “no”. She said that it is time for the owners to do something themselves.

No formal action was taken by Council on any matter discussed during the review session, and no roll call votes were taken.

The Legislative Review Session adjourned, by consensus at 8:05 p.m.