Regular Meeting
Regular Meetings
The Perry Township Board of Trustees meets in Regular Meeting format on the first and third Tuesday of every month at 7:00 PM.
The meetings are held at the Township Hall located at
3111 Hilton Street NW
in Massillon. Regular Meetings include reports by Department Heads, the Law Director, and the Township Administrator. The public is welcome to offer comments during the Public Speaks portion of the agenda on township related matters.
Perry Township Board of Trustees
Regular Meeting
September 2, 2014 7:00 pm
Call to Order/ Pledge of Allegiance:
Excused absence:
Additions/Deletions to Agenda:
Public Hearings/Invited Guests:
Communications:
Accept 2014 Road Striping Contract Bids
Road Superintendent Masalko stated that there are three (3) bids that were submitted for the 2014 Road Striping Contract:
|
Company |
Quote |
|
Oglesby Construction Inc. |
$25,417.57 |
|
J. D. Striping & Services, Inc. |
$25,121.00 |
|
American Roadway Logistics |
$24,113.70 |
Mr. Masalko stated that he would like to ask the Board that after reviewing this with the Law Director, we connect on this as soon as possible. Mr. Masalko added that with the leaves already starting to drop, this does affect the striping.
Law Director Hall stated that he would like to have the minutes reflect that this is a quote and not a bid because it is for the statutory bidding requirements. These are quotes with the performance policy.
Trustee Chessler inquired of Road Superintendent Masalko if the bids received were from companies that are reputable in the area that he had familiarity with. Mr. Masalko stated that the Road Department has previously used two (2) of these companies, American Roadway Logistics and J.D. Striping. Mr. Masalko stated that the lowest bid for the 2014 road striping contract was American Roadway Logistics.
Trustee Chessler made a motion that the Board accept all three (3) of the bids and award the road striping contract to American Roadway Logistics for a contract price not to exceed $24,113.70 subject to the further review by the Law Director and the Road Superintendent and their indication that it meets full or substantial compliance with our specifications; Seconded by Trustee Haines.
ROLL CALL: Mr. Laubacher, yes. Mr. Chessler, yes. Mr. Haines, yes.
Public Speaks on items up for Board Approval: None.
Township Business requiring Board Action: None.
Unfinished Business: None.
New Business:
Trustee Laubacher made a motion to approve bills and payroll in the amount of $314,086.01 for the week ending August 26, 2014 and bills in the amount of $13,472.83 for the week ending September 2, 2014 for a combined total of $327,558.84; Seconded by Trustee Haines.
ROLL CALL: Mr. Laubacher, yes. Mr. Chessler, yes. Mr. Haines, yes.
Fiscal Officer:
Trustee Laubacher made a motion to accept the minutes of the August 19, 2014 Regular Meeting; Seconded by Trustee Chessler.
ROLL CALL: Mr. Laubacher, yes. Mr. Chessler, yes. Mr. Haines, yes.
Administration:
Consider Resolution in Support of Stark Tusc Wayne Recycling Plan
Administrator Fetzer stated that the Board is in receipt of documents provided by David Held, Executive Director of the Stark-Tuscarawas-Wayne Joint Solid Waste Management District. Administrator Fetzer stated that Mr. Held is asking for the Board’s support to consider a Resolution to adopt the solid waste management plan for the Stark-Tusc-Wayne Joint Solid Waste Management District.
Administrator Fetzer stated that this is a very standard procedure and added that Mr. Held has provided us with a copy of the solid waste management plan that, periodically in Ohio, every waste management program must have revised and updated. Administrator Fetzer added that this is the content of the documents, attached for the Board’s review, and in addition to that, it was taken into consideration some Ohio EPA reviews and recommendations that were made. Ms. Fetzer stated that Mr. Held is asking for the Board’s support on accepting this new plan and added that Law Director Hall has prepared the Resolution in support for the Board’s approval.
Trustee Chessler inquired of Law Director Hall if he had any further comments or recommendations. Mr. Hall stated that he did not and added that this was a pro form and that it still requires a vote after a recommendation of the membership.
Trustee Laubacher made a motion to adopt the Resolution to adopt the Solid Waste Management Plan for the Stark-Tuscarawas-Wayne Joint Solid Waste Management District; Seconded by Trustee Chessler.
ROLL CALL: Mr. Laubacher, yes. Mr. Chessler, yes. Mr. Haines, yes.
Consider Purchase of Copiers
Administrator Fetzer stated that the current copiers in each of the departments are seven (7) years old and they were purchased from ComDoc and are serviced by them as well.
Administrator Fetzer stated that the Township Department Heads met with three (3) companies for a copier presentation:
|
Company |
Quote |
|
ComDoc |
$29,031.67 |
|
COPECO |
$30,832.00 |
|
Applied Laser Technologies |
$38,190.00 |
Administrator Fetzer stated that the Township Department Heads recommend the Board to consider the purchase of the ComDoc copiers for the Road, Police, Fire and Administration offices in the amount of $29,031.67.
Trustee Laubacher inquired what would happen to the old copiers once they are replaced by the new ones. Administrator Fetzer stated that this would be up to each Department Head since all three (3) of the companies that made a presentation had no interest in buying the current copiers back. The option was to either keep them or sell them on GovDeals.com.
Trustee Haines also inquired if it made sense to keep the current copiers or whether they would be a maintenance nightmare. Administrator Fetzer stated that it was up to each of the Department Heads and added that the Fire Department had kept their secondary copier from the last copier update.
Fire Chief Martin stated that with the current copier going on ten (10) years old and with the technology advancing and changing, it is difficult to find the parts when something is broken.
Trustee Chessler inquired if these were all local companies. Administrator Fetzer stated that Applied Laser Technologies is out of Cleveland, Copeco is out of Wooster and ComDoc has several different locations in the surrounding area. Administrator Fetzer stated that technically the Township can purchase copiers from any company, but the Department Heads were more than impressed with the ComDoc customer service. Administrator Fetzer stated that many times when ComDoc has to come out to service a copier, they have the necessary part(s) with them to repair or replace the problem or they have a help desk to walk through us through the problem, something not all of these other companies have been able to offer.
Trustee Chessler inquired how long this relationship has existed with ComDoc. Administrator Fetzer indicated that it has been for seven (7) years.
Trustee Laubacher inquired if Chief Martin was satisfied with ComDoc at the Fire Administration as well. Chief Martin indicated that ComDoc was great especially when it came to servicing a copier. Chief Martin indicated that when called for a service issue, many times ComDoc is there within twenty-four (24) hours if not sooner.
Trustee Laubacher inquired if Road Superintendent Masalko was satisfied with ComDoc at the Road Department as well. Mr. Masalko indicated that they were.
Trustee Laubacher also inquired if Chief Pomesky was satisfied with ComDoc at the Police Department. Chief Pomesky stated that they were and added that they use their copier primarily as the only source of printing. Chief Pomesky added that if the copier goes down, then the officers are not able to print, but with the ComDoc service, they are generally back up and running within a few hours. Chief Pomesky added that many times they are able to log in through customer service and correct the problem themselves. Trustee Laubacher also inquired if the Police Department would keep their current copier as a backup unit. Chief Pomesky stated that they could do that until something would need serviced but added that an out-of-contract copier is rather expensive to have serviced.
Road Superintendent Masalko stated that the current copier at the Road Department does not get the frequent use as does the copiers at the Fire and Police Departments and could be used as a backup copier if needed.
Trustee Chessler stated that based on the committee’s review and based on the comments received regarding their service records, makes a motion that the Board approve the purchase of copiers from ComDoc in an amount not to exceed $29,031.67; Seconded by Trustee Haines.
ROLL CALL: Mr. Laubacher, yes. Mr. Chessler, yes. Mr. Haines, yes.
Fire Department:
Resignation of Part-Time Firefighter Timothy Rair
Fire Chief Martin stated that the Perry Township Fire Department is requesting that the Board of Trustees accept the resignation of Timothy Rair effective Tuesday, September 2, 2014. Chief Martin stated that Timothy was still operating under a probationary status and is leaving to accept a fulltime firefighter position with a department in Louisiana, letter of resignation attached before the Board.
Trustee Haines made a motion that the Board accepts the resignation of Timothy Rair effective September 2, 2014; Seconded by Trustee Chessler.
ROLL CALL: Mr. Laubacher, yes. Mr. Chessler, yes. Mr. Haines, yes.
Resignation of Part-Time Firefighter Christopher McKibben
Fire Chief Martin stated that the Perry Township Fire Department is requesting that the Board of Trustees accept the resignation of Christopher McKibben effective Tuesday, September 2, 2014. Chief Martin stated that Christopher was also operating under a probationary status and has accepted a fulltime position with a company that requires he work 12 hour shifts which does not leave him adequate time to be a member of the fire department, letter of resignation attached before the Board.
Trustee Chessler made a motion that the Board of Trustees accept the resignation of Christopher McKibben effective Tuesday, September 2, 2014; Seconded by Trustee Haines.
ROLL CALL: Mr. Laubacher, yes. Mr. Chessler, yes. Mr. Haines, yes.
Police Department:
Consider Accepting Resolution of Police Union’s OT/Sick Leave Grievance
Police Chief Pomesky stated that attached before the Board is a receipt of a grievance filed by the Police Union regarding overtime and accrual of sick leave in conjunction with overtime worked. Chief Pomesky stated that also attached is a breakdown of sick time calculation totals based upon the subject of this grievance. Chief Pomesky added that this is an error that was accrued over time. This Resolution resolves the pending grievance equitably in favor of all parties involved and stated that he is asking for the Board’s acceptance of this Resolution.
Trustee Chessler inquired of Law Director Hall if this Resolution was the Board’s way of memorializing our agreement to this, and further inquired, how will the Union evidence their acceptance and agreement to the terms. Law Director Hall stated that they too will send an acknowledgement and with a formal withdrawal of the grievance. Mr. Hall stated that this has been reviewed by their current business manager, Lucy DeNardo. Mr. Hall explained that there was a mutual mistake in the interpretation that has accumulated over two or three department administrations. When this was first brought to Chief Pomesky’s attention earlier this year, it was corrected immediately for the current contract so this is going back to the resulting issue brought by the members of prior contracts. Mr. Hall stated that he agrees with Chief Pomesky in that it is mutually beneficial to both the department and the individual bargaining unit members involved.
Trustee Laubacher made a motion that the Board adopt a recommended settlement to the grievance addressing overtime and sick leave calculation as filed by the FOP/OLC, Inc. on behalf of the all bargained for dispatchers, patrol officers, detectives and sergeants; Seconded by Trustee Chessler.
ROLL CALL: Mr. Laubacher, yes. Mr. Chessler, yes. Mr. Haines, yes.
Road Department: None.
Law Director: None.
Zoning: None.
Parks/Recycling: None.
Executive Session(s): None.
Department Matters Not Requiring Board Action:
Administration: None.
Fire Department: None.
Police Department: None.
Road Department: None.
Parks/Recycling: None.
Zoning: None.
Law Director: None.
Upcoming Events:
~Police Levy Discussion will take place at the beginning of the Tuesday, October 7, 2014 and Tuesday, October 21, 2014 Trustee Meetings at 7:00 pm in conjunction with the November 11, 2014 election date
~Perry Township Bicentennial meeting: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 at 7:00 pm at the Township Hall
~Perry Rotary Bicentennial PARADE and OKTOBERFEST ~ Saturday, September 13, 2014. Visit www.perrytwp.com for details.
Public Speaks-Open Forum:
Dave Pickar, 521 Westland Ave. SW, Massillon, OH 44646 – stated that he has had a problem for approximately three (3) years with the excessive loud music across the street from him. Mr. Pickar stated that he has called the police numerous times in regard to this matter. Mr. Pickar stated that one of the times that he has called the police was when his picture window was broken. Mr. Pickar also stated that the tail lights on his trailer in the back have been broken five (5) times. Mr. Pickar stated that he saw the neighbor next door teaching a boy how to throw things at his house and added that he did make a call to the police about that as well. Mr. Pickar also stated that he recently found stones the size of eggs in his driveway that were thrown at his garage door.
Police Chief Pomesky stated that he would pull all the calls for service from this area so he could determine what has been done so far and determine if something could be readjusted regarding an overlap on shifts. Chief Pomesky stated that if there is a service deficiency in this matter, he would be able to track this. Chief Pomesky inquired if he could obtain Mr. Pickar’s phone number after tonight’s meeting. Mr. Pickar agreed and thanked Chief Pomesky and the Board.
Tom Rook, 297 Denise Circle SW, Massillon – handed the Board some photographs in regard to a business that sits behind many of our backyards, Central Ohio Recovery, Inc. off of Navarre Road. Mr. Rook stated that this business is supposed to be an impound lot and there are cars that have been there for months and months. There are cars stacked on top of flatbed trucks. Mr. Rook stated that along the property line, there is a four (4) foot fence and the cars are right there at the fence. Mr. Rook stated that this is not just an impound lot, there are cars, car parts, wrecked cars, etc. Mr. Rook added that there are many things going on here and stated that he did not know if all of the zoning regulations were being followed. Mr. Rook stated that this is the reason they were here this evening. Mr. Rook stated that they wanted to make sure that these things were being followed since this was a matter of their property value and felt that it was being torn apart.
Law Director Hall stated that he wanted to inform the Board that Zoning Inspector Weckbacher is aware of this. Mr. Hall added that Mr. Weckbacher posted a notice at Central Ohio Recovery last week. Mr. Hall stated that he is representing this business in litigation with competing distance and as a result of this, disqualifies him under the code of professional responsibility from giving either Mr. Weckbacher or Central Ohio Recovery any advice relevant to this matter. Mr. Hall stated that he will suggest to the Board that if Zoning Inspector Weckbacher gets to the point where he would need legal council, the county prosecutor’s office would need to be contacted since they would be the default attorney on this. Mr. Hall indicated that he cannot advise either side in any manner and wanted to make that clear to the Board.
Trustee Chessler stated that he has some prior understanding of this matter and had several conversations with Zoning Inspector Weckbacher in this regard. Trustee Chessler asked Mr. Weckbacher if he would please explain the basics of this situation at this time and of being aware of the existence of this property at Central Ohio Recovery, the zoning regulations and what actions that have been taken by them.
Zoning Inspector Weckbacher explained that the property where Central Ohio Recovery is located has two (2) parcels and on those two (2) parcels they have encroached where the setbacks should be, which is fifty (50) feet. Mr. Weckbacher stated that this was his fault as this has happened over several years. Mr. Weckbacher stated that he sent a letter to Central Ohio Recovery stating that they must conform with that fifty (50) foot setback, and the five (5) ft. area with four (4) ft. fence, trees, or wall and have given them thirty (30) days to comply. Mr. Weckbacher stated that Mr. Hall knew about that letter because they told him. Mr. Weckbacher stated that there is another area that Mr. Nicewater, owner of Central Ohio Recovery is working on, a separate parcel, to increase the size of his lot. Mr. Weckbacher stated that Mr. Nicewater disagrees with him in regard to those setbacks but stated that he has indicated to Mr. Nicewater that in reference to the zoning book, there are ways for him to appeal this decision. Mr. Weckbacher gave a brief explanation of his understanding of Mr. Nicewater working with an engineer to work on these setbacks as well as explaining that Mr. Nicewater has been properly notified of what he has to do to put his property into compliance.
Trustee Laubacher stated that in reference to the paperwork before them, under Section 711.4 yard requirements – it states that a minimum of rear yard depth, 40 feet when adjacent to a residential district otherwise no setback. Trustee Laubacher inquired if this means that there has to be forty (40) feet from that fence before he can put anything.
Zoning Inspector Weckbacher explained that Ohio Recovery, Inc. is zoned industrial. On Denise Circle, and any property behind that is zoned R2 (Single and Two Family Residential). When industrial and residential adjoin, building setback goes to one hundred (100) feet. The first fifty (50) feet has to be maintained as grass or open space and then vehicular parking can start from that fifty (50) to that one hundred (100). This setback in this regard should be fifty (50) feet.
Trustee Chessler inquired if from the property line that these residential owners share with Central Ohio Recovery there has to be fifty (50) feet of grass space and then the parking area can start for another fifty (50) feet to the building. Mr. Weckbacher stated that this was correct. Trustee Chessler inquired if that property is in compliance with this at this time. Mr. Weckbacher stated that there are two (2) parcels that are not in compliance and then there is a third parcel that Mr. Nicewater intends to clear, but there is nothing sitting on this at this time.
Trustee Haines inquired if this third parcel being cleared is to the east of the other two (2) existing parcels. Mr. Weckbacher explained that the letter sent to Mr. Nicewater was in regard to bringing the two (2) existing parcels into compliance.
Trustee Haines inquired if both of these parcels need to have a fifty (50) feet encroachment on them. Mr. Weckbacher stated that was correct and added that even at the first five (5) feet, there must be a fence, wall, or line of trees no less than four (4) feet in height.
Trustee Chessler inquired if the requirement of the fence would need to be opaque. Mr. Weckbacher clarified that it is not required to be but added if placement of a fence, wall or line of trees is instituted, the reason for this is to block their vision for that industrial use.
Trustee Haines inquired of Mr. Weckbacher, for the sake of the residents in the audience here this evening, regarding what the procedure would be in reference to the thirty (30) day compliance letter.
Mr. Chessler further inquired in regard to the given thirty (30) day allowance, how we immediately enforce the rights these people are asking us to look into. Mr. Weckbacher stated that if after thirty (30) days, nothing would be done, a stop order would be next. Mr. Weckbacher explained that if we had to go to court, we could show that we have given the property owner time to bring the property into compliance.
Dan Scury, 913 Vince Ave. SW, Canton Township – Mr. Scury stated that he was here this evening as an interested party in this matter as his daughter and son-in-law reside at 2902 Denise Circle. Mr. Scury stated that what he was concerned about was the way that they have graded this property there is a swell that will force water into all these people’s basements. Mr. Scury stated that he has been around construction his whole life and has represented many, many construction workers and operating engineers that do grading all the time and stated that the way this is graded right now, it will do nothing but force water into these people’s basements. Some of properties have already had basement flooding with costly expense. The other thing he is concerned about is the four (4) foot barrier requirement. Mr. Scury stated that a four (4) foot barrier is nothing between this property and these residences.
Trustee Chessler inquired of Mr. Weckbacher what involvement the Stark County Subdivision Engineer, Joe Underwood would have in disturbing these lands as far as the storm water issues and Julie Berbarri of the Stark County Soil & Water Conservation District. Trustee Chessler also inquired if it was possible to get them involved to make sure there is compliance to this property. Mr. Weckbacher stated that he spoke with Joe Underwood and because this property is gravel, not a blacktop or concrete surface, he would not be involved since the water will soak through the gravel. Mr. Weckbacher also added that Julie Berbarri is already involved in this matter. Mr. Weckbacher stated that a resident from Denise Circle contacted Stark County Soil & Water when this property owner had earth being moved and also added that it is probable why Mr. Dylewski was hired as an engineer to give a plan on how the grading on this property was being completed.
Trustee Laubacher inquired why this property was being graded with a mound as opposed to being graded as flat ground and asked if this was being done to try and use that as a fence barrier. Mr. Weckbacher stated that he did not know.
Mr. Rook referred to Trustee Laubacher’s question and stated that this was just the general layout of the land and when they cleared this, it was how the land was laid out. Mr. Rook stated that in one of the photographs he referenced to the Board, the fence was visible and also stated that the land was way above the fence so the fence does nothing to block the vision.
Mr. Scury stated that if they would have left the tree barriers alone, there probably would not have been as big as an issue as it is now.
Steven Steakle, 2916 Denise Circle – Mr. Steakle stated that he was probably the one who has taken the brunt of what has happened with the secondary piece of land and with the erosion back by the fence on the property line. Mr. Steakle stated that Mr. Nicewater has not followed any of the rules and added that he would invite any one here to come out and look at his yard to see where the fence is and where the creek is. Mr. Steakle stated that he also has other issues besides the fact that the land is eroding or the fact that it all drains into the creek. Mr. Steakle stated that there are vehicles there that are leaking oil, coolant and who knows what else that are leaking into this creek that leads into Petros Lake Park. Mr. Steakle stated that he and his kids fish at Petros Lake Park and this pollution concerns him.
Ken Rook – Stated that he lives next door to Steve Steakle – Mr. Rook stated that his question was to Zoning Inspector Weckbacher and asked why they were in such a hurry to put up a fence on the property line. Mr. Rook stated that they had tapered that land down and they couldn’t wait to put up the addition to the other fence, it seems like they figured that if they went ahead and put this up on the property line, then nobody could do anything about it. Mr. Rook stated that for him personally when he looks out the kitchen window and he sees all the debris like his son was saying piled up so high. Mr. Rook also inquired if it was even legal to put the fence right on the property line.
Mr. Weckbacher stated that it was legal and added that a fence can be constructed right on the property line in Perry Township whether it be residential, commercial or industrial for the purpose of keeping people off their property. Mr. Weckbacher stated that why this was done so fast he did not know, but indicated that Mr. Nicewater did come in to get a permit for that fence. Mr. Weckbacher indicated that there must be five (5) feet that they have to have with a row of trees but the fifty (50) feet has to be grass or open area.
Trustee Laubacher inquired of Zoning Inspector Weckbacher if zoning regulations require that at the fence and within the next five (5) feet, there must be a row of trees. Mr. Weckbacher stated that fence, wall, line of trees, either or, but in that same paragraph it states that it must obscure the vision from the industrial area. If fencing is constructed then some type of screening must be added or plant trees within that five (5) feet.
Trustee Haines inquired if Mr. Nicewater had changed the level of that land and inquired if he brought fill in to bring the level up.
Resident stated that Mr. Nicewater dug it out, filled in the ditches in the front but drained all the water back to all our properties which are getting flooded out. Another resident stated that if there was gravel in there right now, their properties would be flooded.
Mr. Weckbacher stated that all this did not happen overnight and added that when looking over aerial photographs from 2003, on that same parcel where Mr. Nicewater’s building stood, the fence was approximately sixty (60) feet away. Somewhere in between then and 2006, it was moved to the property line. In 2008 the second parcel was purchased and then it was moved to the property line there as well.
Trustee Chessler inquired if we have record of those permits. Mr. Weckbacher stated that there are records for the fence permits but no permit is required for the impound lot.
Law Director Hall stated that he would put Zoning Inspector Weckbacher in contact with the county prosecutor’s office, since he is disqualified in this matter.
Trustee Chessler inquired if any of the residents here this evening had any discussion(s) with the owner of the business, Central Ohio Recovery and what the posture of the owner was on this.
Resident stated that all of them have and it has been a lot of lip service. Another resident stated that Mr. Nicewater tells you what you want to hear but the things that are behind Steve’s yard, resident added that he lives at 2902 Denise Circle on the end of the cul-de-sac, but added that what Mr. Nicewater told him made it seem that that the cars would eventually be moved but that has never happened. Resident indicated that Mr. Nicewater has also told him three different things: originally that he was not going to do anything with the land, then stated that he was going to build an office building, and then again he was going to put another lot on the land. Resident stated that Mr. Nicewater told him that they wouldn’t remove the trees between the properties, but then they were cut down. Resident also complained that at night, the lights from this business shine in their second story bedroom and are so bright, it looks like daylight. This resident also complained that the creek behind their property has so much pollution in it from this business.
Trustee Haines inquired of Zoning Inspector Weckbacher if there were any rules in regard to a repot lot versus a junk yard and about how long the vehicles could remain there. Mr. Weckbacher stated there were no zoning laws in that regard, and added that he was not sure if there were any regulations in this regard according to the Bureau of Motor Vehicles.
Resident indicated that according to page 15 of the Township Zoning Resolution Manual, it states that within the definition of the section on a junk yard it names various things such as motor parts, vehicles, etc. but it indicates that it cannot be for more than fifteen (15) days. Resident also added that in regard to a repot lot, those cars are supposed to come in and go out, they are not supposed to sit there for months or years like they have been.
Another resident added that he believes that Mr. Nicewater uses the title of his company as a repot lot to get away with the company to actually be a junk yard.
Trustee Chessler inquired if any of the residents that live near Central Ohio Recovery know if many or a good portion of the cars at this location are there for more than fifteen (15) days. There was a unanimous reply from all of the residents that this was true of most of the vehicles there.
Trustee Chessler inquired of Mr. Weckbacher if apart from these other zoning issues, we could begin to investigate if this business is in fact being used as something that would meet the definition of a junk yard.
Trustee Chessler stated that with businesses you need to be a good neighbor when you abut a residential area like this and added that it concerned him that this is a business wherein the Township utilizes their services. Trustee Chessler stated that it was his hope that the Township could suspend doing business with Central Ohio Recovery until they can show these residents that they are willing to be a good neighbor to them.
Trustee Chessler made a motion that starting immediately and until further action by the Board we suspend our use of Central Ohio Recovery towing as an impound company with doing business with Perry Township; Seconded by Trustee Haines.
Trustee Laubacher inquired if this was referring to the police department recovery. Trustee Haines indicated that this is in regard to recovery services needed for the police department by the three (3) companies they currently use: Oscar’s, Rupple’s and Central Ohio Recovery. Trustee Laubacher indicated that we would send Central Ohio Recovery a copy of this motion and a letter stating the Board’s decision.
ROLL CALL: Mr. Laubacher, yes. Mr. Chessler, yes. Mr. Haines, yes.
Trustee Laubacher inquired of Trustee Chessler if he would draft a letter to Central Ohio Recovery and have Administrator Fetzer forward that to them. Trustee Chessler stated that he would and also stated that with everything that has come out of the discussion this evening, he will also contact Stark Soil and Water and the EPA to find out if there are other regulations. Trustee Chessler stated that the Township does not enforce these.
Resident indicated that he had already been in contact with the EPA and Stark Soil and Water and they are aware of the situation. Resident also indicated that he has been in contact with Gary Connor from the Stark County Engineer’s Office and he informed me that the ditch on Central Ohio Recovery’s property is not a Perry Township drainage ditch, it is of the Army Corp. of Engineers’ responsibility. In the matter of erosion, they would be the ones to come out and fix that. Trustee Chessler indicated that we would want to reach out along the lines of environmental concerns to indicate if there is run off of these chemicals and leakage to seep into the waterways.
Trustee Chessler stated that we would write the letter with regard to the Board’s action this evening and will also, with the Administrator’s help, draft a letter to our Zoning Commission to look at this requirement of a visual barrier being more than four (4) feet.
The Board thanked everyone for being here this evening.
Another resident inquired of Zoning Inspector Weckbacher if would give him a visual in reference to a fence being right on the property line and asked him to start there and explain how far back, per the zoning requirement. Mr. Weckbacher stated that the first five (5) feet is where they have to have a fence, place a wall or line of trees. This resident also agreed that the lights from Central Ohio Recovery go up way too high instead of being directed down on the cars.
Trustee Laubacher indicated that this is something that they would keep in mind while looking into this matter.
Resident referred to the Zoning Regulation Manual and inquired about the zoning sections and amendments and referenced his question as to the numbering of those sections. Mr. Weckbacher stated that the zoning rules had changed and gave a brief explanation as to how each section belonged to each category of zoning, example, R1, R2, etc.
This same resident had several other comments and also inquired as to the Central Ohio Recovery taxes and if theirs would be greater for the benefit of Perry Township than all of the adjoining properties. Trustee Chessler inquired if this resident meant dollar-wise.
Fiscal Officer Schlegel stated that the tax assessments go by the evaluations that are on the properties and indicated that the Stark County Auditor’s Office would have that information.
Adjournment:
With nothing further to come before the Board, Trustee Chessler made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:58 pm; Seconded by Trustee Laubacher.
ROLL CALL: Mr. Laubacher, yes. Mr. Chessler, yes. Mr. Haines, yes.
Lee Laubacher, President Joe Schlegel, Fiscal Officer