[0:22] Good afternoon. Before we get started
[0:24] tonight, uh could I have your attention,
[0:26] please,
[0:27] in the room? Thank you. Before we get
[0:30] started tonight, I've got a little
[0:31] certificate of recognition I want to
[0:33] present to a young lady that um stepped
[0:36] up and done a lot of things for our city
[0:38] uh over the past couple of years that
[0:40] I've been involved. So, I asked Victoria
[0:42] to come forward.
[0:45] I put together a certificate of
[0:47] recognition
[0:48] uh presented to Victoria Wilkinson on
[0:51] behalf of the city of Beaver Creek. The
[0:53] mayor proudly recognizes Victoria
[0:55] Wilkinson, a seventh grade student and
[0:58] life scout, serving as a senior patrol
[1:00] leader of troop 269 for her exemplary
[1:04] leadership, service, and dedication to
[1:06] her school, her troop, and her
[1:09] community. Within troop 269, Victoria
[1:12] proudly serves as a bugler, historian,
[1:14] and librarian. She is president of the
[1:17] hearts of and hands 4 club and a girl
[1:20] scout ambassador and she has maintained
[1:22] a place on the academic honor role for
[1:24] four consecutive years. She also
[1:26] volunteers her time in support of the
[1:28] Beaver Creek wetlands. As Troop 269's
[1:31] bugler, Victoria has generously shared
[1:34] her talent with our community, sounding
[1:36] taps and calls of remembrance at the
[1:38] city of Beaver Creek September 11th
[1:40] memorial ceremony, the Green County Flag
[1:43] Retirement Celebration, and the
[1:45] community's Veterans Day and Memorial
[1:47] Day observances. And in recognition of
[1:49] her outstanding service, leadership, and
[1:51] talent, and spirit of giving back, I
[1:53] present you with this certificate.
[1:57] » [applause]
[2:28] » We'll call this meeting to order. Can I
[2:30] have a roll call, please?
[2:31] >> Council member Bales
[2:32] >> here.
[2:33] >> Council member Bills
[2:34] >> here.
[2:34] >> Council member Kern
[2:35] >> here.
[2:36] >> Council member Derer
[2:37] >> here.
[2:37] >> Council member Lit
[2:38] >> here.
[2:39] >> Vice Mayor Upton
[2:40] >> here.
[2:40] >> Mayor Adams
[2:41] >> here. And I'll turn it over to Council
[2:44] Member Der.
[2:46] >> Please join me in standing for the
[2:47] pledge.
[2:51] Victoria, Victoria, would you like to
[2:54] lead us, please?
[2:58] To the flag of the United States of
[3:00] America, and to the republic for which
[3:03] it stands, one nation under God,
[3:07] indivisible, with liberty and justice
[3:09] for all.
[3:13] » It's hard to imagine because it's still
[3:15] some time away. Uh but this is our last
[3:18] uh regular council meeting uh before the
[3:21] 25th anniversary of 911. Uh a fateful
[3:25] day in our nation's history
[3:28] uh and the deaths of 2,977
[3:32] Americans and others uh working across
[3:35] New York and Washington DC and on United
[3:39] Flight 93.
[3:42] Uh it was a day of dastardly terrorism
[3:46] that cut to the heart of civilization.
[3:49] Uh I promised that day that I would
[3:51] never forget and 25 years later uh it is
[3:55] still in my remembrance.
[4:01] I also want to think about and to pray
[4:04] for um the first responders
[4:07] uh several thousand of whom have died
[4:10] from cancer and other uh related uh
[4:13] ailments and injuries uh due to their
[4:16] heroic actions on that day.
[4:19] Please take a moment of silent prayer
[4:21] with me.
[4:30] Thank you.
[4:37] » Thank you. We have an agenda before us.
[4:40] Any changes, corrections?
[4:42] >> Move we approve the agenda for tonight,
[4:44] your honor.
[4:45] >> Second.
[4:46] >> I have a motion and a second to approve
[4:48] the agenda. All those in favor signify
[4:50] by saying I.
[4:51] >> I. I.
[4:51] >> Opposed.
[4:53] >> We have a set of minutes before us as
[4:54] well. August 10th, 2026 regular meeting.
[4:57] Any changes, corrections, updates?
[5:02] » Move to approve.
[5:03] >> Second.
[5:04] >> I have a motion and a second to approve
[5:05] the August 10th meeting minutes. All
[5:07] those in favor signify by saying I.
[5:09] >> I.
[5:10] >> Opposed.
[5:12] First thing up, PUD 8004
[5:21] PD08-4.
[5:23] Amendment, an application filed by Haye
[5:26] Howard and Elizabeth Han, 2084 Prudence
[5:28] Drive, Beaver Creek, Ohio 45434. The
[5:32] applicant requests approval to amend
[5:34] PUD08-4.
[5:37] The applicant requests approval to to
[5:40] place
[5:42] to add a place of religious assembly as
[5:44] permitted use within the PUD. The
[5:46] property is located at 3044 Dayton Xenu
[5:49] Road, further described as book five,
[5:51] page six, partial five and six and book
[5:55] five, page 8, partial 90 on the Green
[5:58] County Property Tax Atlas.
[6:02] Ordinance
[6:05] 2620.
[6:07] An ordinance amending Ordinance 08-46
[6:11] PU08-4
[6:13] comfort keepers to add places of
[6:15] religious assembly as a permitted use.
[6:19] >> Do we have an applicant or nope?
[6:24] » Good evening, Mayor. The um applicant
[6:26] actually reached out to us late this
[6:27] afternoon. Um there's a illness in the
[6:30] family so they weren't able to make the
[6:31] meeting and their their representative
[6:33] had a conflict. Um so I was going to do
[6:37] the presentation for staff. This is an
[6:39] ordinance. So there's the second reading
[6:41] for this. So if there's questions that come up from tonight, um the
[6:44] applicant will make sure that there's
[6:46] someone at the next hearing if this
[6:49] moves on to the second reading to answer
[6:50] any specific questions. But I I'll do my
[6:52] best to answer some of the questions um
[6:55] related to the business. Um, again, this
[6:58] is PUD08-4,
[7:00] um, an amendment from July of this year.
[7:03] Uh, again, as the clerk stated, they're
[7:05] looking to amend the PED to add, uh,
[7:07] places of religious assembly as one of
[7:09] the permitted uses within the PED.
[7:14] Uh, the property is located uh, just off
[7:16] of Dayton Xia Road about 250 ft west of
[7:19] the intersection of Dayton and Hannes.
[7:21] Um it's it's a long
[7:25] very long elongated parcel. Um it's
[7:28] about 1.9 acres. Um it has 120 ft of
[7:33] frontage on Dayton Xiai Road. Um but it
[7:37] sits back the the the principal
[7:40] structure which is the former house of
[7:41] the property uh sits back about 300 380
[7:46] ft or 370 ft from the uh Dayton Xenior
[7:48] Road. Um, the property currently has a
[7:51] 2,000 square foot. It was a former
[7:53] house, but now it's an office because
[7:55] this was reszoned in 2008 from
[7:58] residential to CPU so that a
[8:02] professional office could be run out of
[8:03] the existing house. Um, so it has the
[8:06] 2,000 foot house. It has a a 2100 square
[8:10] foot detached uh barn uh on the property
[8:15] that sits about 530 ft back from Dayton
[8:18] Xia Road and about 13 feet off of the
[8:21] eastern property line.
[8:24] Um these are kind of photos of the
[8:26] structures, the existing structure. The
[8:29] one on the bottom left is the existing
[8:31] office building former house. Uh the top
[8:34] left is exterior of the barn and then
[8:37] the the photo on the right is the
[8:39] interior of the barn. Um the intent
[8:42] would be to uh renovate the the barn so
[8:44] that they could have uh religious
[8:47] assembly events in the barn as well as
[8:49] in the uh the existing office building.
[8:54] Um again the the area highlighted in
[8:57] pink is the the PUD as a whole. Um to
[9:01] the west is an RO1 residential office
[9:03] and that's a professional office
[9:05] building. To the north is a vacant R1A
[9:08] lot owned by the same owners um as the current owners of the of the PED
[9:15] property. And the intent is to sell that
[9:18] from my understanding is to sell that
[9:19] along with the the PUD property all to
[9:22] the uh the applicants. Uh to the east is
[9:27] uh a series of R1A properties. Um many
[9:30] of the houses are set several hundred
[9:33] feet back. These the ones along Hannes
[9:35] Road are also equally
[9:37] elongated, narrow, but very deep
[9:39] properties and the houses are pushed
[9:41] closer to Hannes Road. I believe in the
[9:42] staff report I have a diagram in there
[9:44] showing that distances back from many of
[9:46] the houses.
[9:52] the the the recently approved land use
[9:56] plan um has the property um within the
[9:59] Dayton Zenia uh Dayton Zenia Center uh
[10:03] corridor planning area and that's really
[10:06] a redevelopment plan so that uh uh in
[10:09] this specific area it would be for
[10:11] neighborhood um mixed uses um which a
[10:15] place of religious assembly is very uh
[10:18] especially one of this proposed size is
[10:20] very is compatible with the land use
[10:22] plan. Uh the the slide here is just the
[10:25] site as it exists today. Uh just to show
[10:28] where the parking lot is. And on this
[10:30] particular slide, north is to the right.
[10:32] Um you see the parking lot is south of
[10:34] the uh former house existing office
[10:37] building. There's asphalt in front of
[10:39] the uh the barn area and the intent is
[10:44] to convert that also to parking. um so
[10:48] that they could uh basically what
[10:49] they're they they're looking to do is
[10:51] have about 30 seats in the barn area and
[10:55] um they needed to take that to planning
[10:57] commission and and did that as a minor
[10:59] mod at the meeting two weeks ago and uh
[11:03] planning commission approved that but
[11:05] it's also contingent on this uh zoning
[11:08] amendment case being put forward. So if
[11:09] the if the zoning amendment does not
[11:11] pass, then that minor modification is
[11:15] considered null and void.
[11:21] That's getting challenging.
[11:24] >> That's all right.
[11:28] Okay. Um in terms of proposed
[11:32] conditions, one is uh everything in uh
[11:34] ordinance input 08-4 remain except as
[11:38] modified. Uh one of the conditions is
[11:41] adding the place of religious assembly.
[11:43] One is that it is uh just stating that
[11:45] the their proposed use is compatible
[11:47] with the land use plan. And then in
[11:50] ordinance 0846 condition number eight
[11:53] stated that the only structure that can
[11:56] have a principal use is the existing
[11:58] main structure. So it it um precluded
[12:01] them from doing any principal uses in
[12:03] the existing barn. Um and so in order
[12:06] for them to be able to convert that barn
[12:08] into a place of religious assembly,
[12:11] um condition number eight of that
[12:12] original ordinance needs to be repealed.
[12:14] So that's why it's proposed as condition
[12:16] four in the uh ordinance before you. Um
[12:19] planning commission uh recommended
[12:21] approval of the affle request. Staff has
[12:23] recommended approval of the applicants
[12:25] request. And I'll be happy to answer any
[12:27] questions following the public hearing.
[12:29] Thank you very much. This is a
[12:31] ordinance, so there is public input. If
[12:33] anyone would like to speak to this,
[12:34] please come forward. State your name and
[12:36] address, and you'll have three minutes.
[12:45] My name is Janice Jacobs. I live at 3040
[12:47] Dayton Xenior Road, right next door. I
[12:50] have several questions and
[12:52] unfortunately, they're not here to
[12:53] answer.
[12:55] I am wondering why they wanted to move
[12:58] there where there are so many churches
[13:02] and other places of religious bases that
[13:05] are standing empty everywhere.
[13:08] Why did they want there?
[13:12] And that's not a barn, by the way.
[13:14] That's a garage.
[13:16] When Taylor Plumbing was operating out
[13:20] of there and Ma and her husband were
[13:22] still alive, they built that barn to or
[13:26] that garage, excuse me, to house their
[13:30] heavy equipment. So, it is not a barn.
[13:32] It is a garage.
[13:37] Getting back to the religious assembly
[13:41] part of that,
[13:43] I I I
[13:46] am I'm still baffled by why the why. Who
[13:50] are they? Why do they want to move
[13:52] there? What do they want to do there?
[13:56] Now, religious assembly is such a broad
[14:01] bunch of words.
[14:04] What is their intent there?
[14:07] Are they going to re
[14:11] on the religious part of it? Anyone
[14:13] coming in?
[14:16] I don't see your Muslims coming in
[14:18] there. I don't see Islamic coming in
[14:21] there. Um maybe you're Baptist, maybe
[14:25] you're Methodist, maybe not necessarily
[14:28] you're Jewish. I don't see a broad use
[14:31] for this.
[14:33] Sounds like what they're wanting to do
[14:35] is turn this into a church.
[14:39] It's just a fancy way of saying a
[14:42] church.
[14:46] » That's all I have to say.
[14:47] >> Thank you very much.
[14:59] Anyone else?
[15:02] >> [clears throat]
[15:10] » Bob Trout, 2187 Basset Court. I like the
[15:14] idea of a religious facility, but I do
[15:16] have concerns
[15:18] with the types of uh worship that might
[15:22] go on and also note the close proximity
[15:25] to
[15:26] school here in Beaver Creek. Uh so that
[15:30] would just be an issue that we need to
[15:33] at least be aware of so we can make sure
[15:36] that we
[15:38] choose wisely and do things like that.
[15:40] So that's all I have to say. Thank you.
[15:43] >> Thank you.
[15:59] Anyone else?
[16:06] Did we have any? Uh,
[16:11] » oh, sure.
[16:15] Denny Crouch,
[16:17] 36 to9 Ranchfield Drive, Beaver Creek,
[16:20] Ohio.
[16:22] Uh, just a comment. I had not planned to
[16:25] say anything, but I kind of listened to
[16:28] what was being said here about
[16:31] who are these folks that want to
[16:33] establish a church?
[16:36] What kind of church is that going to be?
[16:39] We have a lot of things going on in our
[16:41] country right now.
[16:44] many attempts
[16:46] to employ Sharia law as part of the
[16:50] Muslim faith.
[16:53] It has been turned down in the state of
[16:55] Texas. Thank God for the the governor
[16:59] stepping forward there about 400 acres.
[17:03] This is quite a bit different than that.
[17:06] But it's something I think that we need
[17:08] to start being considering
[17:11] because I don't think we want that kind
[17:14] of law established within Beaver Creek,
[17:18] Ohio, Ohio or our country. And I just
[17:21] think it's necessary that perhaps we
[17:23] need to understand a little bit more
[17:25] about it before we say, "Yay, verily,
[17:28] let's have a church at this address."
[17:32] It doesn't seem to be very uh evident to
[17:36] me that that we understand where they
[17:39] are trying to head. I'm very amazed that
[17:42] they're not here today to to talk to it.
[17:45] That's quite unusual, I think. So, I
[17:48] think I just want
[17:50] you and the board to consider
[17:53] the possibility of what kind of church
[17:55] we're going to be allowing if we approve
[17:57] PUD 0804. Thank you.
[18:00] >> Thank you.
[18:15] Loren Kip, 3075 Ranchfield Drive next to
[18:18] Denny. Um, my questions have to do with
[18:21] that additional piece of property that
[18:23] they're looking to buy. You know, the
[18:25] Lshape there that's currently zone R1A.
[18:29] Not quite sure what allowed there. But
[18:32] if they're going to buy that, are they
[18:34] going to put like a parking lot in there
[18:36] like other buildings for their church?
[18:38] That was our, you know, in our
[18:39] neighborhood. That's all vacant right
[18:41] now. There is a lot of standing water
[18:43] back there. It hasn't been at Queen
[18:45] Motor. There's a lot of, you know,
[18:47] fallen trees down there, but I was just
[18:49] curious what the applicants their
[18:51] intentions are with the other piece of
[18:53] property once they buy that.
[18:57] >> Thank you.
[19:03] Andrea Oscaly, 3077 Kemp Road. I would
[19:07] like to kind of piggyback on that and
[19:09] just say as an example as to what can
[19:12] happen with a very small little church
[19:14] as University Baptist started as they
[19:17] were just a little corner church and now
[19:19] they're expanding into this. Now they're
[19:21] double the size and their parking lots
[19:22] have grown. They're going to put another
[19:24] building on that property supposedly
[19:26] sometime in the future. So it doesn't
[19:27] just stop with the little building guys.
[19:29] As soon as you start opening the
[19:31] floodgates, they just keep on doing
[19:33] whatever they want to do then. So that's
[19:35] all I have to say on this matter.
[19:37] >> Thank you.
[19:46] Anyone
[19:55] else?
[19:58] Did we have any written input? Debbie,
[20:03] we did get a letter from the physician's
[20:06] office next door that does not want
[20:09] their parking lot used in any way,
[20:11] shape, or form by these people.
[20:14] That was their worry and concern.
[20:22] » Nothing further from the citizens. I
[20:24] will close the uh public input and
[20:26] council.
[20:28] I have a couple of questions for Randy.
[20:37] Uh, one, maybe you can just clarify one
[20:39] of the comments we just heard about
[20:41] buying another parcel or selling
[20:43] another. I thought I heard you say they
[20:45] were going to sell another.
[20:46] >> Uh, well, the the current owners that
[20:48] own the the the narrow strip also own a
[20:51] couple acre property to the north and
[20:54] the intent was just to sell both of
[20:55] those to the uh this current applicant.
[20:58] >> I see.
[20:59] >> That uh that property is zone R1A. it's
[21:02] not being reszoned or it's not part of
[21:04] this PUD. If they wanted to do any kind
[21:07] of religious assembly growth there, they
[21:10] would have to at a minimum go through
[21:12] the conditional use process through
[21:13] planning commission where it would be a
[21:14] public hearing and site plan,
[21:16] >> including a parking lot,
[21:17] >> anything like that. Anything other than
[21:20] putting a single family residential
[21:21] house back there would
[21:22] >> Can you point that out on the map?
[21:24] >> Um, see if I have it on the map. Uh, I
[21:29] zoomed in way too close to get the full
[21:31] property. Um, and that's way too far
[21:34] away. Um,
[21:37] it's basically just north of the end of
[21:40] the the PED, the north side of the PED.
[21:43] It's
[21:45] basically a rectangular uh parcel closer
[21:48] to this one.
[21:53] » I'm sorry. You can see it in your in
[21:54] your
[21:55] >> uh it it probably close to an acre and a
[21:57] half. Yeah.
[22:02] » Okay. Yeah. I didn't
[22:08] » or on Yeah. On the first page of the
[22:11] staff report, you can see the R1A lot
[22:12] just north of the
[22:15] >> Sorry.
[22:16] >> Oh, yeah. That's that's a good
[22:19] Okay. Sorry.
[22:21] So, um I know this is kind of a zoning
[22:25] amendment related to that, but
[22:28] how do they do you know how they plan to
[22:30] address parking?
[22:33] >> Right now, their intent is to only have
[22:35] 30 spaces or 30 30 uh seats in the main
[22:39] auditorium. And that uh the way the
[22:42] parking calculation works out is that
[22:43] they only have to have 10 parking spaces
[22:45] for that. It's like one for every three
[22:46] seats. So they could utilize their
[22:48] existing parking. Um if they want to
[22:51] expand, they're going to expand into the
[22:53] existing asphalt, just stripe in some
[22:55] new parking spaces. There's no intent
[22:57] right now to um change the layout of the
[23:02] site. If they did, it would need to go
[23:04] through the PED modification process,
[23:06] either minor mod, incidental mod, or
[23:07] major mod depending on the scope. Um, so
[23:11] right now there's no no plans to expand
[23:14] the pavement or the building other than
[23:16] re renovate the the U garage barn.
[23:21] And did they provide you any details on
[23:24] their um church?
[23:28] Um, in the in the letter of intent
[23:31] there's they address that they're wanting to run a place of
[23:34] religious assembly, but we have in our
[23:36] zoning code,
[23:38] place of religious assembly is a
[23:41] catchall for any
[23:44] similar I mean any of the the
[23:47] denominations, any of the the religions
[23:50] out there. We don't make a distinction
[23:51] between any of those from a zoning code
[23:54] standpoint.
[23:55] >> Okay, that's all there.
[23:58] Hi, Mr. K.
[23:59] >> Yeah, this is I guess I'm following up
[24:01] on council members. What's the maximum
[24:05] number of parking spaces right now? What are they allowed right now?
[24:11] >> Um that I mean they have 10 parking
[24:13] spaces.
[24:13] >> 10. I saw that.
[24:16] >> And so that would that would allow up to
[24:18] 30 uh seats in the main
[24:20] >> I see
[24:20] >> auditorium. Um or a combination thereof
[24:24] if there's several small ones in the
[24:26] house. Um, if they want to do any more
[24:28] than 30 as a conglomerate, then they'd
[24:31] have to expand parking, create more
[24:33] parking, one for every three seats.
[24:35] >> What What kind of is he angled in
[24:37] parking? What kind of parking?
[24:38] >> Right now, they're they're 90 degree
[24:40] parking right off. They're uh you pull
[24:43] straight in. I mean, there's no it's not
[24:45] angled because there's no loop for them
[24:47] to turn around.
[24:49] >> So, there's there's no ingress and
[24:51] egress lanes. Just one lane.
[24:54] >> It's one lane. Yeah.
[25:04] Thank you.
[25:06] >> I think Councilman Bales has a follow-up
[25:08] question.
[25:08] >> Yeah, excuse me. Um,
[25:11] at what point, if any, would the city,
[25:14] if if this were to be approved, would
[25:16] the city see the building plan and
[25:19] modification plan, or does that go to
[25:22] Green County building?
[25:25] >> In order for them to actually move their
[25:26] business in, they'll have to do a
[25:28] certificate of use compliance. Um,
[25:30] they'd have to do one for the main
[25:31] structure right now. And if they wanted
[25:33] to convert the exist the barn the garage
[25:36] into a new new primary structure, they'd
[25:38] have to do a separate certificate of use
[25:39] compliance for that. And we would
[25:41] require with that to have a minimal
[25:44] construction drawings, but really the
[25:46] construction drawings are approved by
[25:48] the county and the building department.
[25:50] >> But we'll still require it um just to
[25:53] make sure that you know that they're
[25:55] following the uh requirements for added
[25:59] insulation to help dampen sound.
[26:03] Yeah. And then the number of seats I
[26:05] mean it
[26:07] >> yeah that that'd be part of the
[26:08] certificate of use compliance is how
[26:09] many what use how many if it's a
[26:12] particular like place of religious how
[26:15] many seats so we can make sure that they
[26:17] have enough parking to make sure that
[26:18] they they're compliant. Thank you.
[26:21] >> I have a couple questions.
[26:23] >> Sure.
[26:23] >> Um it's unfortunate the applicant's not
[26:26] here. I do have a question regarding the
[26:29] letter of intent that they had sent in
[26:32] regards to that they they make this the assertation that they have no
[26:37] intention to change existing buildings
[26:40] on site um layouts positional other uh I
[26:46] do have concern
[26:48] specifically with utilation the
[26:51] utilization of the garage or barn or
[26:53] whatever we want to call it back there.
[26:55] I don't I don't think that it's
[26:57] adequate. I don't think that it makes
[27:00] sense. Um I would be
[27:05] [snorts]
[27:06] for
[27:07] striking uh in section one uh condition
[27:12] four
[27:15] of the uh that says to strike requesting
[27:18] to strike section eight from the
[27:21] ordinance. to where that structure back
[27:23] there can't be used. Um
[27:28] the the issue of whether or not the
[27:31] property is large enough to hold an
[27:33] entire church services. I mean I
[27:35] understand if it's a small congregation,
[27:37] they're talking 30 people. I but I am
[27:41] concerned and I wish the applicant was
[27:42] here to kind of walk us through what
[27:44] they mean by not changing anything and
[27:46] but they want uh approval. Um, and I
[27:51] want to walk people through what I was
[27:53] saying in uh, section one of the
[27:59] ordinance.
[28:01] Under bullet four, it says condition
[28:05] eight of section two of the ordinance
[28:08] shall hereby be re
[28:11] repealed. I do not want to repeal that.
[28:14] I don't believe that the and if you go
[28:16] down to eight, it says that eight is the
[28:22] it is the uh that would be on page
[28:28] I guess it's page 30 of our or 29. It
[28:32] says the principal principal structure
[28:34] currently on the site in its current
[28:36] location shall be the only main
[28:38] structure allowed. The accessory
[28:41] buildings on the proposed uh property
[28:44] shall be for accessory use to the main
[28:48] business and shall not be converted to
[28:50] allow for another use on the property. I
[28:55] want that to stay in. I don't think we
[28:58] should repeal that.
[29:02] And again, if the applicant was here to
[29:04] kind of walk us through what their
[29:06] intent was, but because of the way that
[29:08] their letter reads, it states that they
[29:10] have no plans to really do anything to
[29:12] that property.
[29:14] Um, I don't think that the garage should
[29:16] be used for the church services or it's
[29:18] close to the back of the people's
[29:21] backyards. Um, and we don't know what
[29:24] kind of services they're going to hold
[29:26] in the in the property.
[29:29] So, I'll let everybody else speak before
[29:31] I make a motion, but that's my two
[29:34] cents. Thanks, Mayor.
[29:37] >> Councilwoman Bills.
[29:39] >> Uh, Randy, I have a question. Um, what's
[29:41] the intent behind only allowing one
[29:43] primary structure and I understand we
[29:45] have some exceptions throughout the
[29:46] city. So, if you could just kind of give
[29:48] me an overview.
[29:49] >> Um, well, then when this was done in
[29:51] 2008, I think that there was concern it
[29:54] was reszoned so that uh they I think it
[29:58] was a
[30:00] elderly care or dementia care facility
[30:02] or or it was senior solutions is what
[30:04] they resent it for. And there was
[30:06] concern that there'd be additional
[30:08] activities in the in the the detached
[30:12] garage. And so when we took it through
[30:14] in 2008, it was that was added so that
[30:17] only the house could be used and and the
[30:19] applicants at the time had no problem
[30:20] with that. So it wasn't really
[30:22] questioned. Um it wasn't it wasn't an
[30:25] issue.
[30:26] >> Okay. And so
[30:29] I think that solved a problem or a
[30:31] question mark back in 2008.
[30:34] Um, and it's still a question mark now.
[30:38] >> So is this something that's allowed
[30:39] widely throughout the city or is this
[30:41] would this be an exception?
[30:42] >> Well, there is I mean there's
[30:45] innumerable number of commercial
[30:47] properties in the city that have more
[30:48] than one business on them. Anywhere in
[30:50] the mall, anywhere any of the strip
[30:51] centers. Um, I know this is a different
[30:54] >> something comparable to this. Um,
[30:59] well, any I'm trying to think of a
[31:01] specific
[31:06] I'm drawing a blank right now, but
[31:08] >> sorry to put you on the
[31:10] >> I mean like um
[31:13] there are a few properties down on date
[31:15] Xia West. I'm trying to think
[31:18] >> and Patterson that have church
[31:21] >> that have Yeah. more than one business
[31:24] operating or or multiple buildings for a
[31:27] church um
[31:29] that operate, you know, out of more than
[31:31] one facility. And I also saw in the um
[31:34] planning commission meeting um that
[31:37] there were there was a discussion around
[31:39] kind of ingress and egress and that kind
[31:42] of situ does you said I think that you
[31:45] had to run that by fire marshall or
[31:47] >> when the fire marshall is going to be
[31:49] more uh when they go through the
[31:51] building if if they're renovating this
[31:53] building this detached garage into a now
[31:57] building that's going to have people in
[31:58] it mass several people they're going to
[32:01] have to go through the fire uh get
[32:03] approval from the fire marshal as part
[32:05] of their building permit approval.
[32:07] >> And also um but was there any concern
[32:09] about like emergency vehicles in and out
[32:12] since it is kind of like a narrow not
[32:14] two lanes limited space to
[32:17] >> it's something we can certainly forward
[32:18] on to the uh fire department to see what
[32:20] their concerns are. there's not really a
[32:23] major change to the site um in terms of
[32:27] the way the ingress egress is being
[32:31] proposed. I mean there it's staying as
[32:34] is. So it's one of those things where
[32:36] fire department didn't say anything
[32:37] about it
[32:38] >> over the last several years. It's it's a
[32:40] more intense use though. So I I get
[32:42] that.
[32:42] >> Well, yeah. Yeah. If they're going to
[32:43] have assemblies of people there, it's
[32:45] different than customers coming I feel
[32:47] like in and out individually. Um,
[32:50] another question was about um ADA
[32:53] compliance because if they're going to
[32:55] be holding services in the church and I
[32:57] know there's I mean are they prepared to
[33:01] comply
[33:03] >> the the existing office house it was
[33:06] when it was converted in 2008 they had
[33:08] to go through a whole bunch of ADA stuff
[33:09] to make the restrooms and indoor
[33:11] facilities ADA compliant. And there's an
[33:14] ADA um parking space out there by the uh
[33:17] existing house. they'll have to do as
[33:19] part of that building permit, they'll
[33:21] have to make sure anything that's in
[33:24] that garage would be ADA compliant. Um,
[33:28] they'll be obligated to follow that.
[33:31] That's more of a function of the county
[33:33] than the city. We we tell how many
[33:34] parking spaces you might need, but
[33:37] >> bathroom sizes, handles, heights, and
[33:39] everything like that is really more of a
[33:41] building department function.
[33:42] >> Yeah. Um I also uh on a side note would
[33:46] like to I had some questions I also
[33:48] wanted to ask um from the applicants and
[33:52] so kind of disappointed that we can't do
[33:54] that. Um I was even considering possibly
[34:00] not moving this forward maybe
[34:02] tableabling it. Is that possible? So
[34:04] that we can allow them to come in and
[34:06] maybe have some of our questions
[34:07] answered.
[34:08] >> I've been listening to this and that was going to be my statement. I'm
[34:11] not comfortable moving forward right now
[34:14] without an applicant here because
[34:15] there's too many unanswered questions
[34:17] and um I would uh I would entertain a
[34:21] motion to table it until we can get the
[34:23] applicant here.
[34:27] » Yeah, perfectly logical.
[34:32] » You're asking whether you can do that.
[34:33] The answer is yes.
[34:37] So, should I
[34:39] >> should I make a motion to table?
[34:41] >> Um,
[34:42] >> I guess it's been done.
[34:44] >> Okay.
[34:44] >> I have a motion and a second to table
[34:46] this until we can have an applicant
[34:48] present. All those in favor signify by
[34:50] saying I
[34:51] >> opposed.
[34:52] >> I
[34:59] » Okay, Randy, if you could contact them
[35:01] and work work out a time that they can
[35:04] be here. Uh, I understand family issues
[35:08] and things like that, but you know, they
[35:10] should have someone else to be able to
[35:11] step up.
[35:15] Ordinances, resolutions, and PUDs.
[35:17] Ordinance 26-9.
[35:20] an ordinance to levy
[35:23] assessments for the improvement of
[35:25] certain streets in the city of Beaver
[35:27] Creek by maintaining currently erected
[35:29] poles and providing electricity for
[35:31] lighting same certain streets and
[35:33] declaring an emergency upon second
[35:35] reading.
[35:37] >> This is a second reading. Anything else
[35:39] from staff
[35:47] council?
[35:55] » Oh, your honor. I'd uh make the motion
[35:58] to approve ordinance uh 2619 as an
[36:02] emergency roll call vote.
[36:04] >> Second.
[36:06] I have a motion and a second to approve
[36:08] uh ordinance 26-9
[36:11] as an emergency. Uh I have a roll call,
[36:14] please.
[36:14] >> Council member Kern,
[36:16] >> yes.
[36:16] >> Council member Lit,
[36:17] >> yes.
[36:18] >> Council member Veos,
[36:19] >> yes.
[36:20] >> Vice Mayor Upton,
[36:21] >> yes.
[36:22] >> Council member Bills,
[36:23] >> yes.
[36:24] >> Council member Derer,
[36:25] >> yes.
[36:25] >> And Mayor Adams,
[36:26] >> yes.
[36:29] >> Resolution 26-38.
[36:36] authorizing the police department to
[36:38] accept the Ohio Attorney General's drug
[36:40] use prevention DARE grants program
[36:43] funding.
[36:44] >> Chief,
[36:45] >> good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of
[36:46] council. So, [clears throat] the
[36:49] department applied for the annual drug
[36:50] use prevention grant to be used towards
[36:53] the DARE officer salary for conducting
[36:56] the drug abuse resistance education
[36:58] program in the schools. The Ohio
[37:01] Attorney General's office reported there
[37:03] was 1.8 million available for all the
[37:06] drug use prevention applicants and
[37:09] requests totaled 2.93 million for the
[37:12] year. On August 4th, we received
[37:15] notification that we were awarded
[37:17] $23,76.73
[37:21] for the 2627 academic school year.
[37:25] staff recommends council approval for
[37:27] the police department to accept the drug
[37:30] use prevention grant.
[37:35] » I'd just like to say I appreciate you
[37:37] presenting this chief. Uh back when I
[37:40] used to teach DARE, my chief and sheriff
[37:43] made me go over and do it myself
[37:46] [laughter]
[37:47] and
[37:47] >> I hate I hated it.
[37:50] >> But I I I really appreciate I know this
[37:52] grant does a lot of good and
[37:55] I'm 100% behind it.
[37:58] >> Chief, my son recently went through the
[38:00] program. Uh, hats off to Officer Pley
[38:03] for an outstanding job and I'm very
[38:06] grateful for this this grant and
[38:08] opportunity. Thank you.
[38:09] >> Thank you.
[38:15] Yeah, I know we've uh had DARE program
[38:18] for a long time and I know there's
[38:19] several adults out there right now that
[38:21] had Sergeant Hmel
[38:22] >> and they still remember that his DARE
[38:24] officer
[38:30] » there's no further comment. I would move
[38:32] for approval of resolution 2638.
[38:34] >> Second.
[38:35] >> I have a motion and a second to approve
[38:36] resolution 26-38. All those in favor
[38:39] signify by saying I. I. I. opposed.
[38:44] Nice to be able to get that.
[38:46] Resolution 26-40.
[38:50] » Resolution 26-40. A resolution
[38:53] authorizing the city manager to enter
[38:55] into an agreement with the Ohio
[38:57] Emergency Management Agency for state
[38:59] funding assistance due to the impacts of
[39:02] the disaster declaration from the
[39:04] January 2026 winter storm event.
[39:07] >> Yes. Uh good evening, mayor, members of
[39:09] city council. As you might remember, the
[39:11] Dayton region experienced a record
[39:13] setting snowfall event in late January
[39:16] 2026. Uh according to the National
[39:19] Weather Service, the uh January 24th
[39:22] through 26 storm, uh the city received
[39:25] uh over 14 inches of snowfall during
[39:27] that that snow event. Uh following the
[39:30] event, the uh governor authorized the uh
[39:32] state disaster relief program to accept
[39:34] applications for reimbursement from
[39:36] local jurisdictions. Uh when that became
[39:38] available, the uh city we gathered all
[39:40] of our costs from the snow event
[39:42] together and submitted those. Uh they
[39:44] have since approved our uh our cost
[39:46] submitt of $149,473.
[39:50] Uh of that amount, a total of 75% is
[39:53] reimburseable back to the city, which
[39:54] equates to $112,15.17.
[39:59] Uh the approval of this resolution will
[40:01] allow for us to formally submit the
[40:03] application and submit and start the uh
[40:05] reimbursement process to the city.
[40:07] With that, be happy to answer any
[40:08] questions.
[40:11] >> Any questions?
[40:13] >> I just want to say nice job keeping all
[40:15] of the data so that we were able to
[40:18] submit the reimbursement grant and uh
[40:21] that'll buy a little bit of salt.
[40:23] >> Absolutely.
[40:25] >> Well, not as much as it would last year.
[40:27] >> That's true.
[40:32] and thank you for uh your team being
[40:34] able to keep up with that large
[40:36] snowfall. I think we had a really good
[40:39] success here in Beaver Creek but with
[40:40] that. So,
[40:41] >> right, it was a tremendous team effort.
[40:42] The guys in the garage [clears throat]
[40:43] are awesome at these kind of events.
[40:46] >> Yeah, thank you.
[40:48] >> I'll move to approve resolution 26-40.
[40:51] Second.
[40:52] >> I have a motion and a second to approve
[40:54] resolution 26-40. All those in favor
[40:57] signify by saying I.
[40:58] >> I. opposed
[41:01] liquor license.
[41:03] Chief, you're back.
[41:05] >> Thank you. All right. The Ohio
[41:07] Department of Commerce, Division of
[41:09] Liquor Control, sent notification of a
[41:11] request for a new liquor permit for Ohio
[41:13] CVS stores LLC, CVS Pharmacy, store 3458
[41:20] at 1331 North Fairfield Road.
[41:23] There were no required record checks on
[41:25] this request and staff does not have any
[41:27] objections or concerns with this permit.
[41:30] Staff is recommending this application
[41:32] request move forward without comment.
[41:38] » Motion motion to motion to accept
[41:41] without comment.
[41:43] >> Second.
[41:44] >> I have a motion and a second to accept
[41:46] without comment. All those in favor
[41:47] signify by saying I.
[41:48] >> I.
[41:49] >> Opposed.
[41:51] And that brings us to citizen comments.
[41:53] If you'd like to come and address
[41:54] council on any issue, please come to the
[41:57] podium, state your name and address, and
[41:59] you'll have three minutes. It can be
[42:00] donated up to six more minutes from
[42:02] other people in the audience.
[42:22] Hello, I'm Summer Shaw. I'd like to
[42:24] donate my time to Kelly Campbell,
[42:26] please.
[42:28] >> What's your address?
[42:29] >> 4229 Ridgcliffe Drive, Beaver Creek,
[42:32] Ohio, 45 440.
[42:37] » Hi, my name is Laura Keller. I live at
[42:39] 3140 Shaker Town Road and I would like
[42:42] to donate my three minutes to Kelly Camp
[42:44] Falls.
[42:50] Hi, I'm Kelly Campbell, 4229 Ridge Cliff
[42:54] Drive. I'm the one that they're speaking
[42:55] about. Um, good evening. I'll be honest,
[42:59] I am a little exhausted standing up here
[43:02] tonight. Um, and I think a lot of the
[43:04] people who have been coming to these
[43:06] meetings are exhausted, too. You guys
[43:08] also might be. We've spent months trying
[43:11] to explain why we oppose this project
[43:13] and I'm not sure that the city
[43:15] understands what we're actually saying.
[43:17] After the last meeting, the message I
[43:19] took away was at this point our efforts
[43:21] are essentially feudal. And I think
[43:23] that's a pretty remarkable message to
[43:25] hear from the people that we are coming
[43:27] to speak to. If the public process is
[43:30] supposed to give residents an
[43:31] opportunity to influence decisions,
[43:33] telling them that their efforts are
[43:35] futile is a pretty discouraging way to
[43:38] conduct the process.
[43:40] I've also been thinking a lot about a
[43:41] conversation I had with C council member
[43:43] Bills at a recent meeting we were both
[43:45] at. She pulled me aside and said
[43:47] somewhat sternly, "Kelly, come here. I
[43:49] want to talk to you." And I asked her,
[43:50] maybe not that harshly, um I asked her,
[43:53] "Hey, why are you giving me the stink
[43:55] eye? Is what's that for?" She admitted
[43:58] she was, but then she asked me
[43:59] essentially, "What do these people even
[44:01] want?"
[44:03] And I thought about I thought the answer
[44:04] was pretty simple. In fact, I was a
[44:06] little surprised that it even still
[44:08] needs to be asked. They've been very
[44:09] clear what they want. They want the city
[44:12] to stop the project. In short of that, I
[44:15] think the biggest problem is that the
[44:16] city and the residents are talking past
[44:18] each other. The city says, "We've
[44:20] reduced the width of the shared use
[44:22] paths. We've scaled back parts of the
[44:24] project. We talked to property owners
[44:26] and we've offered to replace or
[44:28] compensate even for for some of the
[44:30] trees." And I understand that those are
[44:32] changes, but the residents aren't
[44:34] saying, "Hey, we really like the
[44:36] project, but could you make the path a
[44:37] few feet narrower?" They're saying, "We
[44:40] don't believe this project at this scale
[44:42] is necessary." And those are two very
[44:45] different conversations.
[44:47] I don't want to minimize the changes
[44:48] that the city's made. The city has
[44:51] reduced impacts. They've narrowed paths.
[44:53] They've tried to work with individual
[44:55] property owners, and those things
[44:56] matter. I understand why the city would
[44:59] view those as meaningful efforts to
[45:00] respond to public concerns, but those
[45:03] concessions don't answer the central
[45:05] question. They assume that the project
[45:07] is going forward and they ask uh
[45:09] residents how to make it less
[45:10] objectionable. The residents are asking
[45:13] a different question. Why are we doing
[45:15] this project at all? And why does this
[45:17] need to be done so large? When residents
[45:19] get three minutes to speak and then they
[45:22] have to wait two weeks to come back and
[45:23] speak again, that really isn't dialogue.
[45:27] They make their case, council listens,
[45:29] maybe there's a brief response and then
[45:31] everybody goes home and then we rinse
[45:32] and repeat.
[45:34] So when the response becomes, what more
[45:36] do these people want? I think the answer
[45:37] is they want to know that their
[45:39] fundamental objection is actually being
[45:41] considered. And I still haven't heard a
[45:44] compelling explanation for why
[45:45] Shakertown needs to become a three-lane
[45:47] roadway. We keep hearing about grant
[45:49] funding, but I haven't heard enough
[45:51] about the underlying need. What current
[45:53] traffic problem are we solving? What
[45:56] projected demand requires three lanes
[45:58] and what's changed since the original
[46:00] studies that supported the funding? Have
[46:02] we looked at whether the assumptions
[46:04] behind those studies still reflect the
[46:06] re reality of Beaver Creek today? I
[46:08] understand that grant money is available
[46:10] but or or been already made available,
[46:13] but we can get someone else to pay for
[46:15] it isn't the same thing as we need to
[46:17] build it. A grant explains why the city
[46:19] can build the project. It doesn't
[46:21] explain why the city needs to build it.
[46:23] And I think we should be asking a bigger
[46:25] fiscal question. What does the road cost
[46:27] Beaver Creek over its entire useful
[46:29] life? If we build substantially more
[46:32] pavement and infrastructure than we
[46:34] actually need today, we're not
[46:35] eliminating that cost. We're creating a
[46:38] larger maintenance obligation for the
[46:40] future. 30 years from now, someone is
[46:42] going to have to repave this road. And
[46:44] at that point, it won't matter whether
[46:46] the original construction was heavily
[46:48] subsidized by ODOT. Beaver Creek
[46:50] taxpayers will be responsible for
[46:52] maintaining what we build. And a grant
[46:54] that that can make the upfront cost look
[46:57] inexpensive now
[46:59] won't make the infrastructure
[47:01] inexpensive uh inexpensive over its
[47:03] lifetime. If we're building
[47:05] substantially more roadway than we need,
[47:07] we're potentially trading a short-term
[47:09] financial benefit for a long-term
[47:10] maintenance obligation. So, I would ask
[47:13] council to step back from the question
[47:14] of how much money can we save by using
[47:16] this grant and ask the more important
[47:18] question. Does this project at this
[47:20] scale represent the infrastructure that
[47:22] Beaver Creek and that Shaker Town
[47:23] actually needs?
[47:26] There's another cost that doesn't show
[47:27] up neatly on the project spreadsheet.
[47:30] The cost to the people who live along
[47:32] this road. And I'm sorry if I'm boring
[47:34] you.
[47:38] The the project the property is
[47:40] affected. Their trees are affected.
[47:42] Their daily lives are affected. Their
[47:45] peace and quiet is affected. those
[47:48] aren't abstract costs to the people who
[47:50] have been coming here and speaking about
[47:51] them. And I also have to say something
[47:54] about the tone of this process because
[47:55] at this point some of us are feeling not
[47:58] simply unheard but treated with disdain.
[48:00] I don't say that lightly and I don't
[48:02] mean that every council member has
[48:03] treated residents this way. But when
[48:05] residents are repeatedly interrupted,
[48:07] when they're told their efforts are
[48:08] feutal, when the response of months of
[48:11] public opposition is essentially, what
[48:13] do more do these people want? It's
[48:15] difficult not to come away feeling that
[48:17] our participation is being viewed as
[48:18] annoyance rather than as a legitimate
[48:20] part of the public process. And that's
[48:22] particularly frustrating because the
[48:24] people standing at this microphone
[48:26] aren't asking for special treatment.
[48:28] They're asking to be taken seriously
[48:30] when they raise questions about a major
[48:31] expenditure of public resources and a
[48:34] project that will permanently change
[48:35] their neighborhood. Finally, I would ask
[48:39] the city to recognize something that
[48:41] residents opposing this project aren't
[48:43] confused about what the city has
[48:46] changed. They understand the
[48:47] concessions. They just don't believe
[48:49] that those concessions solve the
[48:51] fundamental problem. They don't want a
[48:53] slightly smaller version of a product
[48:55] project that they don't believe is
[48:56] necessary. And I don't think that a
[48:59] appropriate response to that is what
[49:01] more do you want? I think the
[49:03] appropriate response is what are they
[49:04] telling us that we haven't adequately
[49:07] answered because I don't think that
[49:09] residents are failing to understand the
[49:11] city's position. I think the city may be
[49:14] failing to understand the resident's
[49:15] position. There's a difference between
[49:17] saying, "We heard you. We made some
[49:19] changes and being able to explain in
[49:21] concrete terms why this particular
[49:22] project is necessary beyond just the
[49:25] fact that funding is available for it.
[49:28] If the road needs to be repaid, let's
[49:29] talk about the condition of the road. If
[49:31] there's safety problems, let's talk
[49:33] about safety problems. If the current
[49:35] traffic volumes require three lanes,
[49:37] let's talk about current traffic data
[49:38] that demonstrates that need. And if
[49:40] there's future demands that we're
[49:41] playing uh planning for, let's talk
[49:43] about those projections.
[49:46] We have a grant that will pay for this
[49:47] project is a funding explanation. It's
[49:49] not a needs assessment. And honestly, I
[49:52] think we need a different kind of
[49:53] conversation at this point. These
[49:55] council meetings don't seem to be
[49:57] serving anybody particularly well.
[49:59] Residents come here and get a few
[50:01] minutes to speak. Council responds
[50:03] briefly if at all. And then we all come
[50:05] back two weeks later to do it again. And
[50:07] I don't think anybody walks away feeling
[50:09] particularly satisfied. Probably not you
[50:11] guys either. So I'd like to make a
[50:14] simple request. Let's sit down and
[50:15] actually talk to each other. An actual
[50:18] conversation where residents can explain
[50:20] their concern and council can explain
[50:22] the city's reasoning and we can ask
[50:24] questions and response respond to the
[50:25] answers in real time. not asking for a
[50:28] guarantee that we'll get the outcome
[50:29] that we want, but I'm asking for an
[50:30] opportunity to understand each other and
[50:33] to have the kind of dialogue that should
[50:35] have happened in the first place. If
[50:36] there's questions that the residents are
[50:38] raising that haven't been adequately
[50:40] answered, maybe we can address those,
[50:41] too. Because ultimately, I think that's
[50:43] what the public process is supposed to
[50:44] be about, not just giving people a
[50:46] microphone, but actually listening what
[50:48] they have to say. Thank you.
[50:51] >> Thank you very much.
[51:03] Hi, my name is Kimberly Jackson. I live
[51:05] at 427 Green Mount in Oakwood.
[51:09] I come at it from a little different
[51:10] point of view because I'm not a
[51:12] resident, but I was always taught that
[51:14] elected officials should as best they
[51:16] can and within reason govern their area
[51:19] while respecting the wishes of the
[51:20] constituents who elected them. I do not
[51:23] live in Beaver Creek, so I didn't elect
[51:25] to. But I'm sitting amongst people who
[51:27] did elect to, and they are hurting. They
[51:29] live in a beautiful area of Beaver Creek
[51:31] lined with mature trees and green grass.
[51:34] I drive this stretch of road nearly
[51:35] every day, and it's one of my favorite
[51:37] parts. It's very tranquil. It's easy to
[51:40] navigate. Once a week, I walk a dog that
[51:42] lives on this stretch of Shaker Town.
[51:44] So, although I didn't elect you, I'm
[51:46] very invested in the area. As long as
[51:49] I've followed this saga, I've yet to
[51:51] hear any citizens speak in favor of the
[51:53] road widening a or the sidewalk
[51:55] installation project. What I have heard
[51:58] is lots of people opposed to it. They've
[52:00] gathered facts, respectfully come to
[52:02] meeting after meeting to state their
[52:04] case, and they continue to be met with
[52:06] opposition from council to reconsider
[52:08] the project. At the last meeting, one
[52:11] member somewhat sarcastically said
[52:12] something like, "I think we all know the
[52:14] process by now." I found that comment
[52:17] incredibly disrespectful to those who
[52:19] are doing their best to help you
[52:20] understand their concerns. Why do you
[52:23] insist on spending money on a project
[52:25] that doesn't fix an identified problem?
[52:27] Yeah, it's great when the state pays for
[52:29] a portion of a project, but you're still
[52:31] spending a million dollars of your own
[52:33] money to solve a problem that doesn't
[52:35] even exist. I encourage you to spend
[52:37] some time on this stretch of road. Park
[52:39] on one of the side streets. Watch the
[52:41] traffic patterns. Look at how much
[52:43] you're taking from citizens who trusted
[52:44] you to keep their best interest in mind.
[52:47] Once you see the effects of a pro of a
[52:49] proposed project that no one wants, I
[52:51] pray you change your collective minds
[52:53] and cancel this project. Thank you.
[52:55] >> Thank you.
[52:59] [applause]
[53:08] » Bill Keller, 3140 Shaker Town Road.
[53:12] I'm asking you to look at Shaker Town
[53:14] Road based on the traffic and safety
[53:15] problems that actually exist today, not
[53:18] an assumption about what might happen
[53:19] years from now. Before the city takes
[53:22] people's property and spends millions of
[53:24] dollars, I believe residents deserve
[53:26] clear evidence that this project is
[53:28] necessary.
[53:29] Where is the documented traffic problem
[53:31] on the particular section of Shakertown
[53:33] Road that requires widening it from two
[53:35] lanes to three? Where is the congestion
[53:37] that requires a sitter turn line? or is
[53:40] the crash history demonstrating that
[53:42] this turn lane even is necessary? I'm
[53:44] not asking the city to ignore legitimate
[53:46] safety or maintenance problems. If there
[53:49] are specific drainage problems, fix the
[53:51] drainage. If there are specific
[53:52] dangerous locations, fix those
[53:54] locations. If the pavement needs repair, the pavement. But that is very
[53:58] different from reconstructioning the
[54:00] entire corridor with curbs, gutters,
[54:02] storm sewers, and a center turn lane
[54:04] when the existing traffic does not
[54:06] justify that scale of project. And I
[54:08] want to be very clear about the center
[54:10] turning. I don't believe residents
[54:12] should lose property and have their
[54:13] neighborhood changed for a lane that
[54:15] hasn't been demonstrated to be
[54:18] necessarily demonstrated to be
[54:22] necessary by current traffic conditions.
[54:24] If the justification is future
[54:26] development, then show us the
[54:27] development. Show us the traffic
[54:29] projection. Show us the assumptions and
[54:32] show us why residents today should bear
[54:34] the permanent impacts.
[54:36] The same applies to curbs and gutters.
[54:38] If there's an actual drains problem,
[54:40] demonstrate it and address it. But
[54:41] please don't tell residents that an
[54:43] expensive urban style reconstruction is
[54:45] necessary simply because it's part of
[54:47] preferred design. We are asking for
[54:50] smaller, more appropriate solutions.
[54:52] Maintain the existing roadway. Address
[54:54] documented drainage or safety issues
[54:57] where they actually occur. Do not add a
[54:59] center lane unless the traffic and crash
[55:02] data demonstrate that it's needed. and
[55:04] do not install curbs and gutters simply
[55:06] because they included in the current
[55:07] design. Please don't build a road for
[55:09] traffic we don't have. Spend the
[55:11] taxpayers money on problems that
[55:12] actually exist. And before this project
[55:15] moves forward, I respectfully ask
[55:17] councelor to require the city to
[55:19] publicly provide the traffic counts,
[55:21] crash data, traffic projections, cost
[55:23] benefit analysis and analyses and
[55:25] alternative analysis supporting every
[55:28] major component of this project. If the
[55:31] city removes the sitter turnling, curbs,
[55:33] gutters, and unnecessary widening, what
[55:35] documented existing problem would remain
[55:38] unsolved? And what evidence proves that
[55:40] problem requires a larger project?
[55:44] >> That's all I have.
[55:45] >> Thank you.
[55:57] Thank God for God.
[56:00] Mr. Mayor, Council Member Clary Hill,
[56:04] 658 Waverly Drive,
[56:07] I'm against this project. I guess you're
[56:09] getting tired of looking at me, but I'll
[56:13] be here long till we decided on
[56:15] something.
[56:17] But I think we should cancel this.
[56:22] All we're doing is going to make it more
[56:24] dangerous. I've got to go across another
[56:27] lane to go one way or the other.
[56:33] And I think Beaver Creek's beautiful
[56:36] right now.
[56:40] And it seemed to me like it buckers want
[56:44] to steal Beaver Creek and you want to
[56:47] steal my land
[56:50] and I'm against it.
[56:54] You looking good tonight, hun.
[56:57] But I would you take in consideration to
[57:01] disregard this
[57:04] strip of Checker Town Road.
[57:08] I think you're taking my life
[57:12] and putting it in danger.
[57:19] You just don't say nothing to me. It's
[57:22] your comment time.
[57:23] >> Huh?
[57:24] >> This is your time to comment. It's not
[57:25] our time to go back and forth.
[57:26] >> I'd like to hear a little comment. Shut
[57:29] my mouth and sit down or something.
[57:32] >> I'm not asking you to do that. Ask you
[57:34] to.
[57:35] >> But I would I would appreciate the
[57:37] council member, the new mayor that you
[57:40] table this job. We don't need it. All
[57:43] we're doing is creating and going to
[57:45] make
[57:47] they'll change the name if they put that
[57:49] through from Bieber Creek to concrete
[57:53] because they want to put two sidewalks,
[57:56] one on each side of the road
[57:59] and we don't need them. I've lived there
[58:02] 58 years and I see one person maybe once
[58:06] every month or two walk up Checker Town
[58:09] Road. [clears throat]
[58:13] But I wish you would take consideration
[58:16] and cancel this project.
[58:19] I think it's a waste of money.
[58:35] Bob Trout, 2187 Basset Court. And I've
[58:39] been up here many times to talk about
[58:40] this thing, but I'm going to point out a
[58:43] couple of different things. Very
[58:45] disappointed with the way you're
[58:46] handling the city residents money.
[58:50] There's a lack of accountability.
[58:53] And I'm going to talk to some of the
[58:55] residents that we have here and I'm
[58:56] going to recommend that we change the charter to where all levies will go
[59:02] back to a finite period of time defined
[59:05] rather than a open-end perpetual levy.
[59:09] That way we're going to take control
[59:11] back from that. I'm also going to urge
[59:14] and I know I've talked to a lot of folks
[59:16] and a lot of folks have talked to me
[59:18] that they are not in favor of the s the
[59:20] income tax primarily because of what you
[59:23] folks are doing think why are we going
[59:25] to give them more money to do more stuff
[59:27] that we don't want so you need to take
[59:30] heed of that and the other thing I'm
[59:32] going to be talking with some of these
[59:33] folks over here there's a 1-800 number
[59:35] that is available and we can notify the
[59:39] federal government because they can come
[59:42] and do an investigation on the state
[59:45] which gets the federal money and the
[59:47] state will come back and look at you
[59:49] folks and make sure that you are uh
[59:52] looking at everything and listening to
[59:54] the residents. You folks have gone
[59:57] beyond acceptable to this city and I'm
[1:00:01] calling you on it as is everybody else
[1:00:04] that's here and there's a lot of other
[1:00:05] folks that are not here that that are
[1:00:08] not happy with you. There's a lot of
[1:00:10] folks that see this video that goes up
[1:00:12] there and they they said, "We saw you
[1:00:15] talking. We saw everybody up there
[1:00:16] talking. It's getting people's attention
[1:00:19] and it's not getting yours. So, what is
[1:00:21] wrong with you folks?" Mr. Mayor, you're
[1:00:24] sitting in the big chair over there. You
[1:00:26] need to let the folks that go out there
[1:00:29] and look at the projects and everything
[1:00:31] else like that or expect projects to go
[1:00:33] in there and make darn sure that they
[1:00:36] cover everything honestly and accurately
[1:00:38] and go back and talk to the residents in
[1:00:41] there. So, I've said my piece with you
[1:00:44] folks, but I thinking that it's going to
[1:00:47] get a little bit ugly. And oh, by the
[1:00:49] way, this is the first time all of you
[1:00:50] have been looking at me because usually
[1:00:52] you're looking down and not. So that's a
[1:00:55] big improvement. Thank you very much.
[1:00:58] THANK YOU
[1:01:09] after after hearing Oh, wait. First, my
[1:01:12] name is Kathy Bower. 3497 Shaker Town
[1:01:16] Road. um on the the other side of
[1:01:20] Fairfield that's being affected.
[1:01:23] After hearing everybody, I start feeling
[1:01:26] a little bit silly about the things that
[1:01:28] I wrote because I wrote more from a
[1:01:32] let's try to all get along
[1:01:35] kind of thing and I'm going to go ahead
[1:01:36] and read it. Um, but I do agree that if
[1:01:41] the project is not truly needed, which I
[1:01:45] don't feel it is, it shouldn't it should
[1:01:49] be able to be tabled. Um,
[1:01:53] I'm kind of a rule follower
[1:01:56] and as soon as I heard, well, we've
[1:01:59] already invested money, we've already
[1:02:01] got the, you know, everything in
[1:02:04] process, we can't go back. Then I just
[1:02:08] kind of accepted that uh maybe too
[1:02:12] easily. But I'm going to go ahead and
[1:02:15] read my speech.
[1:02:17] It feels like everyone in this room is
[1:02:20] tired of stating their concerns
[1:02:23] and you all must be tired of hearing
[1:02:25] them.
[1:02:27] I hope you have really heard our
[1:02:30] complaints and are working on ways to
[1:02:33] compromise.
[1:02:34] In fact, I believe that you have to some
[1:02:36] degree. I'll be interested to hear your
[1:02:40] suggestions.
[1:02:41] All of us have bought our homes with
[1:02:43] high hopes of creating our homesteads
[1:02:47] and possibly raising our kids on this
[1:02:50] quiet street.
[1:02:52] And for many years, that's just what it
[1:02:54] has been.
[1:02:56] We all signed those papers when we
[1:02:58] bought our properties accepting the fact
[1:03:01] that there's easements and city can come
[1:03:05] in and take a certain amount
[1:03:09] uh of your property. Sometimes it's only
[1:03:13] temporary. We're going to dig here,
[1:03:17] cover it back up, and then go away. Um
[1:03:24] we understood
[1:03:27] Oh, I went off topic. Um, we understood
[1:03:32] that there may be a need for
[1:03:33] right-of-way easements, some of which
[1:03:36] would be just a temporary disruption.
[1:03:41] But this this feels like the city is
[1:03:43] overstepping.
[1:03:45] Some of these houses have are already
[1:03:48] very very close to the road and now
[1:03:51] they're facing the fact that the road
[1:03:52] will be that much closer to their front
[1:03:56] doors.
[1:03:57] It's certainly understandable that this
[1:03:59] situation would offend the sensibilities
[1:04:02] of these families.
[1:04:05] My husband and I have lived on Shaker
[1:04:07] Town Road since 1982.
[1:04:10] We raised our daughters here and always
[1:04:13] reminded them of the dangers of the
[1:04:16] road. More than once, we've had cars
[1:04:19] lose control and end up in our front
[1:04:22] yard.
[1:04:25] Now, imagine how we feel about having
[1:04:27] the road that much closer to our front
[1:04:30] steps.
[1:04:32] Not to mention the road sounds from the
[1:04:34] traffic that much closer,
[1:04:37] that much louder. Of course there will
[1:04:40] be push back.
[1:04:42] >> Do you have much more? I'm I don't want
[1:04:44] to interrupt but
[1:04:45] >> don't donate.
[1:04:46] >> Okay. Come to the
[1:04:49] >> Sorry.
[1:04:51] 97 Shaker Town Road. I donate my time.
[1:04:54] >> Thank you.
[1:04:56] >> Um
[1:04:59] >> Okay.
[1:05:05] My husband and I have lived on Shaker
[1:05:07] Town since 1982. We raised our daughters
[1:05:09] here and always reminded them of the
[1:05:11] dangers of the road. More than once,
[1:05:13] we've had cars lose control and end up
[1:05:16] in our front yard. Now, imagine how we
[1:05:20] feel about having the road that much
[1:05:21] closer to our front steps. Not to
[1:05:24] mention the road sounds from the traffic
[1:05:26] that much closer, that much louder. Of
[1:05:30] course there'll there will be push back
[1:05:33] but we signed those papers
[1:05:37] that we
[1:05:41] not that we had a choice.
[1:05:43] We are just requesting that you limit
[1:05:46] the amount. We understand that
[1:05:48] occasionally we may need to accept these
[1:05:51] changes, but I don't think that this
[1:05:54] plan took into consideration
[1:05:56] just how many beautiful mature trees
[1:05:59] would be destroyed, changing the face of
[1:06:03] our properties.
[1:06:05] Some of us have planted trees and hedges
[1:06:07] in order to better protect our children
[1:06:09] and ourselves.
[1:06:12] I know that you have already invested
[1:06:14] time and money in this program and that
[1:06:16] you can't just back out. I get that.
[1:06:21] All I'm asking is that you adjust your
[1:06:23] plans back a bit. I would like I would
[1:06:27] also like before and after drawings of
[1:06:30] what this would look like. I would love
[1:06:33] to see you allowing
[1:06:35] roundt talks where we can sit and chat
[1:06:40] and brainstorm together.
[1:06:43] Giving people a more intimate setting,
[1:06:47] not like the meetings here where
[1:06:52] you all sit up there and listen and we
[1:06:54] all take our turn standing at the
[1:06:56] microphone. It creates an us and them
[1:07:00] atmosphere.
[1:07:02] You are not our enemy. In the long run,
[1:07:05] change will happen. It's inevitable.
[1:07:08] Some people will be pleased. Some people
[1:07:11] will be appeased.
[1:07:13] And some people will be unhappy.
[1:07:16] But at least people will know that they
[1:07:18] feel or feel that they are truly heard.
[1:07:22] They'll know that they tried. It would
[1:07:25] bring them some sense of control.
[1:07:28] This would go a long way to settling the
[1:07:31] minds and hearts of those affected.
[1:07:34] Thank you.
[1:07:36] >> Thank you.
[1:07:46] » I promise not to take more than three
[1:07:48] minutes.
[1:07:49] My name is Barbara Massie and I live at
[1:07:52] 743 Timberwood Drive in Beaver Creek.
[1:07:56] um
[1:07:58] to leave my home. I take Greer to
[1:08:02] Fairfield.
[1:08:04] More than likely, I take Shaker I take
[1:08:07] Timberwood to Shaker Town and turn left
[1:08:11] or right there because there's less
[1:08:13] traffic.
[1:08:15] Fairfield. And I realize a lot of it is
[1:08:19] because of congestion and backup from
[1:08:21] the ever ongoing construction on
[1:08:25] Fairfield, but there is more traffic on
[1:08:30] Fairfield. I never have a problem
[1:08:32] getting out on Shaker Town. To say we
[1:08:36] need to increase
[1:08:38] the size of Shaker Town, I don't see it.
[1:08:43] to say we need sidewalks.
[1:08:48] I dare you to go out there and count the
[1:08:50] people walking on Shaker Town. You're
[1:08:53] going to be sitting there all day not
[1:08:54] seeing anyone.
[1:08:57] They don't need sidewalks. They don't
[1:08:59] need sidewalks on both sides of the
[1:09:01] street for people who aren't going to
[1:09:03] walk. There's no businesses.
[1:09:07] Yeah, there's a church there
[1:09:09] operating on Sunday mornings, but there
[1:09:12] are not people walking.
[1:09:15] They don't need all of this extra stuff
[1:09:18] going on.
[1:09:22] Consider if you lived on Shaker Town or
[1:09:24] just off Shaker Town. How would you feel
[1:09:28] about all of this land being taken to
[1:09:32] increase the side of a road that
[1:09:36] doesn't have the traffic to support it
[1:09:40] and sidewalks with nobody to walk on
[1:09:42] them?
[1:09:44] They're losing their property
[1:09:48] because of something that I myself
[1:09:51] cannot see
[1:09:54] being needed. Um
[1:09:58] I worked under a government agent for
[1:10:00] many years here. I understand the
[1:10:04] protocol
[1:10:05] and the
[1:10:08] right of dominant domain and stuff but
[1:10:14] you have to consider the lives that are
[1:10:16] being affected at the same time and is
[1:10:20] it worth it? I personally do not feel it
[1:10:23] is and I'm hoping I'll be able to
[1:10:26] continue to go to Shaker Town and get
[1:10:30] out of my development. Thank you.
[1:10:33] >> Thank you.
[1:10:42] » Please come to the microphone if you
[1:10:45] don't mind.
[1:10:48] Joe Volani, 710 Carlsbrook Drive, and
[1:10:51] I'm going to donate my time to Heather.
[1:10:53] Thank you.
[1:10:57] I'll let you
[1:11:03] » Heather Harvey, 3180, Shaker Town. It's
[1:11:06] ironic that I opened up my last comments
[1:11:07] to you all with a line about your
[1:11:09] complete lack of respect for us. Because
[1:11:11] as I'm sure you all remember, just the
[1:11:13] before I spoke, the mayor asked me if I
[1:11:15] received your letter and then proceeded
[1:11:17] to basically tell me, my neighbors, this
[1:11:19] city, and the media that none of this
[1:11:21] mattered. The message was loud and
[1:11:23] clear. Let me let me remind you that we
[1:11:25] are just as tired of coming here as you
[1:11:27] are of listening to us. We all have
[1:11:29] families, too. I could list a thousand
[1:11:31] things I'd rather be doing than standing
[1:11:33] here. But someone has to stick up for
[1:11:35] what it's right. It's a shame it's none
[1:11:36] of you. Aren't several of you at risk of
[1:11:39] losing your seat next year? I heard
[1:11:41] there's an election coming up. Is that
[1:11:43] why none of you are brave enough to
[1:11:45] speak up? Trust me, doing the right
[1:11:47] thing will prove to this city that their
[1:11:48] vote should be for you and not somebody
[1:11:50] new. I would be ashamed to have my name
[1:11:53] associated with approving projects based
[1:11:55] on lies, outdated facts, and just going
[1:11:58] with the flow so as to not rock the
[1:12:00] boat. The only problem is that this boat
[1:12:02] is sinking. Word gets around and people
[1:12:04] are starting to ask more questions. When
[1:12:06] this room continues to fill up week
[1:12:09] after week. Don't say I told you so.
[1:12:12] What would you do if you were in our
[1:12:13] shoes? I'll tell you something that's
[1:12:15] really bothered me. Since I stood right
[1:12:17] there in this room in the PI meeting in
[1:12:19] August of 2025, I stood in a room
[1:12:22] surrounded by tons of i8 people. All but
[1:12:25] one person was in opposition. Anybody
[1:12:27] want to take a stab who that person was?
[1:12:30] She just so happens to be sitting up
[1:12:31] there with you. You can imagine my
[1:12:34] surprise when a few weeks later I found
[1:12:35] out she was elected to council. It's no
[1:12:38] wonder she was cheerleading this
[1:12:39] project. Huh. Something else that didn't
[1:12:42] sit well with me was that there was a
[1:12:43] man from ODOT there who just argued with
[1:12:45] us. He told us that our facts were
[1:12:47] opinions. I guess quoting traffic counts
[1:12:50] from ODOT's very own website and crash
[1:12:53] data obtained from our chief of police.
[1:12:55] Him right there. Those are just matters
[1:12:58] of opinions and not straight facts. Nah,
[1:13:01] it's the cold, hard truth, and it's time
[1:13:03] you guys admit it. Stop perpetuating
[1:13:05] these lies. This is only getting worse
[1:13:07] as time goes on. You're making
[1:13:09] yourselves look even more ridiculous by
[1:13:11] sending us letters with more lies. We
[1:13:13] all know this project won't be done in
[1:13:14] 12 months. So, for every day over a
[1:13:16] year, are we allowed to bill you? Or how
[1:13:19] about the BS statement regarding needing
[1:13:21] to quote support the growing city? Who
[1:13:23] proofread that letter? You do realize
[1:13:25] how stupid it sounds to claim this
[1:13:27] project is needed, right? Because
[1:13:28] despite the fact that this population
[1:13:30] has increased, traffic data doesn't
[1:13:32] support that. Shaker Town has
[1:13:34] maintained. Sounds like you all are the
[1:13:36] ones with the opinions. This project
[1:13:38] isn't built on facts. It's driven by
[1:13:41] opinions. This is a classic version of a
[1:13:43] want and not a need. I'd like to
[1:13:46] publicly acknowledge that one of you
[1:13:48] made a point uh excuse me, to confront
[1:13:51] one of us in a very uncomfortable
[1:13:53] manner. Not only did you abuse your
[1:13:55] quote position of power by humiliating
[1:13:57] my friend, but you dropped my name and
[1:14:00] called me a liar. Let's be real clear
[1:14:02] here. Everything I've said here has been
[1:14:04] factual. It's hilarious that you said
[1:14:06] you were offended we've been calling you
[1:14:07] liars when you literally stood there and
[1:14:09] called me one. Are we in kindergarten?
[1:14:11] How about you come say those words to my
[1:14:13] face and let's have a real conversation.
[1:14:15] How about all of you get your acts
[1:14:16] together and start behaving yourselves
[1:14:18] in public gatherings? Approaching
[1:14:20] someone in public doing what you did is
[1:14:23] not very becoming of a publicly
[1:14:24] appointed official. This city deserves
[1:14:26] better. Shame on you and shame on all of
[1:14:29] you. This is playing out exactly like
[1:14:31] you see on TV. The crooked politicians
[1:14:33] go around town paying people off,
[1:14:35] bullying them to give up and join their
[1:14:37] side. I'm here to tell you, we are not
[1:14:40] giving up or giving in. You can continue
[1:14:42] going around insulting my character and
[1:14:44] my integrity all you want, but if you
[1:14:46] expect I won't be here on Monday nights
[1:14:48] to give it right back, you're mistaken.
[1:14:50] What's clear is you aren't listening.
[1:14:52] And your public humiliation event, you
[1:14:54] had the nerve to ask, quote, "What do
[1:14:56] they want?" As a concerned nurse, I mean
[1:14:58] this with all due respect, are any of
[1:15:00] you deaf? Did you black out during these
[1:15:03] meetings? Have we not been perfectly
[1:15:05] clear? Facts are not lies or opinions.
[1:15:08] This stupid project was created to fix
[1:15:11] two problems that we have time and time
[1:15:13] again proven do not exist. So call it
[1:15:15] what you want. A lie, an oversight, a
[1:15:18] mistake, fraud, irresponsible. It isn't
[1:15:21] too late to stop this project. Quit
[1:15:23] gaslighting us with the penalty you will
[1:15:25] face and accept responsibility for what
[1:15:27] you've done. Start pursuing projects
[1:15:30] that this city actually needs instead of
[1:15:32] what you want. Everyone at home need
[1:15:36] listening needs to hear this. These
[1:15:37] people sitting up here do not care what
[1:15:39] we want. They take credit for one minor
[1:15:42] change in a project that I personally
[1:15:45] spent hours fighting for. I made all the
[1:15:47] calls. I did all the research. I sent
[1:15:50] all the emails. If this bothers you as
[1:15:52] much as it does me, please contact me.
[1:15:55] Show up here next meeting and join us in
[1:15:56] our fight for what's right because
[1:15:58] Beaver Creek deserves better. Oh, and
[1:16:00] PS. Nice try claiming the reduction in
[1:16:02] the shared use path was driven by your
[1:16:04] efforts. You didn't have the money to
[1:16:07] pay m Mr. Whiteiser for the depreciation
[1:16:09] of his property. So you had to tuck your
[1:16:11] tails and find another solution. Backing
[1:16:14] off his land meant you didn't owe him.
[1:16:16] And thus the 8oot path was born. Yeah, I
[1:16:18] get you bet you didn't know that. Bet
[1:16:20] they didn't tell you that. That's what
[1:16:23] happened. You were supposed to pay him
[1:16:25] and you didn't have the money to do it.
[1:16:26] So that's why you had to back off his
[1:16:28] land and that's where you got to the
[1:16:29] eight foot path. Funny you forgot to
[1:16:32] mention that in your letter of lies. I
[1:16:34] guess telling the truth is too hard. I
[1:16:35] guess sitting in those seats give you
[1:16:37] some kind of immunity. And I guess
[1:16:39] Beaver Creek isn't the city I thought it
[1:16:40] was. Yesterday I saw a poster that I
[1:16:43] thought was applies to the situation.
[1:16:45] You can't change the cards you're dealt
[1:16:46] just the way you play the hands. In
[1:16:49] closing, you asked me if I got your
[1:16:51] letter last time. Well, I got a second
[1:16:53] letter from you guys, and I
[1:16:55] wholeheartedly appreciate your efforts
[1:16:56] to silent me. Game on.
[1:17:15] Uh my name is Ian Crow. I live on 2121
[1:17:19] Prudence Drive, Bever Creek, Ohio.
[1:17:22] Uh my um complaint is that these new
[1:17:26] ebikes that are riding around that kids
[1:17:28] love and stuff and I understand because
[1:17:30] I'm a kid at heart, but technically it's
[1:17:33] kind of causing a nuisance. For one, I'm
[1:17:36] afraid that I'm going to get run over by these and get seriously hurt. And
[1:17:41] I've read reports that some of these
[1:17:43] bikes malfunction and blow up and stuff.
[1:17:47] But the re reason why I say this, like
[1:17:50] shouldn't, seeing how these bikes have
[1:17:52] motors, shouldn't you have a license for
[1:17:54] this? Because a moped has a motor, you
[1:17:57] have to ride it on the street with a
[1:18:00] license, but the kids are riding on the
[1:18:03] walk path, which I understand,
[1:18:06] but basically saying is like I see these
[1:18:09] I see kids riding their bike on the
[1:18:11] special needs park that I uh practice
[1:18:14] softball on and there are marks on the
[1:18:16] turf and I'm g and and I'm trying to
[1:18:20] save the taxpayers money by saying, "Why
[1:18:23] are you destroying And these and these
[1:18:25] bikes are kind of made like dirt bikes.
[1:18:28] I mean, you see kids wearing dirt bike
[1:18:31] helmets because then you know that these
[1:18:32] bikes go 20 miles to 28 miles per hour.
[1:18:36] Someone can get seriously hurt.
[1:18:40] And I understand Councilman Upton said
[1:18:43] to me that they they are looking into
[1:18:45] it, but I for one am worried about my
[1:18:48] safety. I mean, I understand I can't
[1:18:50] drive myself because of my um learning
[1:18:54] challenges, but there has to be
[1:18:57] responsibility. I understand kids want
[1:18:58] to have fun. It's like riding a
[1:19:00] motorcycle and stuff, but with great
[1:19:02] power comes great responsibility.
[1:19:05] And like I said, if kids want to ride
[1:19:07] it, then get a license. If the
[1:19:10] insurance, if you need insurance, well,
[1:19:12] that's up to the parents. And that's Oh,
[1:19:15] and one other thing that um When I walk
[1:19:19] on the walk path to my job at Lowe's or
[1:19:22] when I'm walking from there, there are a
[1:19:24] lot of cracks like sideway cracks all
[1:19:27] the way up close to Speedway and I can
[1:19:29] put my whole foot in there. And I would
[1:19:32] ask that uh money would be used to fill
[1:19:35] up those cracks because if I ride my
[1:19:37] regular bike, I'm afraid that I'm going
[1:19:38] to get hurt and seriously hurt and I
[1:19:41] don't want to cause the taxpayers money
[1:19:43] and stuff. I'm looking out for myself
[1:19:46] and others. Thank you. Thank you.
[1:19:57] » Hello, Lori Volani, 710 Carlbrook.
[1:20:02] Um, of course, about Shaker Town. We've
[1:20:05] come before you now repeatedly to ask
[1:20:07] for this project to be cancelled because
[1:20:09] you all are elected, our elected
[1:20:12] representatives. You were elected to
[1:20:14] represent us, not people who might be
[1:20:17] driving on Shaker Town 10 years from
[1:20:19] now, but to represent those who live
[1:20:21] along there now, not drivers in the
[1:20:24] future, um, but us, the current
[1:20:26] residents who have chosen to live on
[1:20:28] Shaker Town or just off the road and
[1:20:30] drive it every day. Um, we see the
[1:20:33] number of vehicles that drive on this
[1:20:35] road. We know that we have little
[1:20:37] difficulty getting on and off of
[1:20:38] Carl'sbrook, on and off of Merrick. We
[1:20:41] see there's a nominal amount of
[1:20:42] driveways and roads which require a left
[1:20:45] turn to enter. On the south side of
[1:20:47] Shaker Town, there's three roads and I
[1:20:49] believe approximately eight driveways.
[1:20:51] Um on the north side of Shaker Town
[1:20:53] where we are, there's only two roads and
[1:20:56] seven driveways.
[1:20:58] In your letter that you sent to us, you
[1:21:00] stated about the growth of Beaver Creek.
[1:21:02] I know Beaver Creek has grown. The
[1:21:04] subdivision on the north side of Shaker
[1:21:06] Town, uh where we live, has has room for
[1:21:08] no more houses. It's built out. The
[1:21:10] housing area on the south side of Shaker
[1:21:13] Town also can't have any more building
[1:21:15] unless there's something that you all
[1:21:16] aren't telling us. So along this route,
[1:21:18] the number of left turns, there really
[1:21:20] can't be any more left turns than there
[1:21:22] already are. Um, we turn left frequently
[1:21:25] off of Shaker Town and it is a rare
[1:21:27] occurrence that there is a car behind us
[1:21:29] that is being delayed because we had to
[1:21:32] slow down to make our turn. So just
[1:21:34] because Beaver Creek is growing and and
[1:21:36] I I grew up in Beaver Creek, it is
[1:21:38] growing, but that doesn't mean it's
[1:21:40] growing around by us because it has not
[1:21:42] been not anymore. Um my understanding is
[1:21:45] that you apply for this grant with uh
[1:21:47] numbers that were based on the
[1:21:49] pre-reconfiguration of Shakertown um and
[1:21:52] 35. If this is not the case, please show
[1:21:54] us that my mother has lived on Shaker
[1:21:57] Town for 55 years. We've lived just off
[1:22:00] Shaker Town for six and we just do not
[1:22:02] see the traffic volume whether we're
[1:22:03] driving or just sitting in our backyard.
[1:22:07] Also, in your letter, you noted that you
[1:22:08] had spent almost a million dollars. But
[1:22:10] if you would have come to us first
[1:22:12] before you spent anything and had a
[1:22:15] meeting with the affected citizens and
[1:22:16] listen to what our concerns were as our
[1:22:19] elected representatives, you could have
[1:22:21] saved that money. Um, I can personally
[1:22:23] tell you that if my husband and I felt
[1:22:25] this project was necessary, we would
[1:22:27] support it. So, I just wonder, I mean,
[1:22:29] do you not hold a meeting because you
[1:22:31] knew we would be against it, and so you
[1:22:33] might not have gotten what you all
[1:22:35] wanted, which was a nice wider road. Um,
[1:22:38] if that's the case, then you're just
[1:22:40] pushing your desires on us.
[1:22:43] The last time the city income tax was on
[1:22:45] the ballot, I voted for it, even though
[1:22:47] it would have negatively affected me
[1:22:49] because at that time, I worked in the
[1:22:51] city. And of course, I live in the city,
[1:22:53] but I'm not going to vote for it this
[1:22:54] time because you're using our money
[1:22:57] against us on pushing this road project
[1:22:59] onto us that we do not want. So my hope
[1:23:02] is um if you go through one little two
[1:23:06] lines, my hope is that if you go through
[1:23:08] with this project, those of you on
[1:23:09] council will drive this project in this
[1:23:12] road a lot because you can then enjoy
[1:23:14] the sterile sterile roadway, the
[1:23:17] wonderful three lanes, curbs, and no
[1:23:19] trees because those of us who live there
[1:23:21] will not be enjoying it. Thank you.
[1:23:23] >> Thank you.
[1:23:35] Hi there. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and
[1:23:37] Council members. Lisa Nybert, 2970
[1:23:39] Shakertown Road. Hi. I'm here again in
[1:23:43] opposition to the road winding project.
[1:23:47] Our city has a responsibility to
[1:23:48] maintain our streets. This area of
[1:23:51] Shaker Town, this 68 miles
[1:23:55] has been neglected for about nine years
[1:23:57] or more. I would like to know why
[1:24:00] officially from documentation.
[1:24:04] I would like to know why when it had
[1:24:07] previously been scheduled for
[1:24:08] reservicing, what the budget was and why
[1:24:11] it was not completed.
[1:24:14] We the residents have provided you
[1:24:16] factual data that you guys cannot
[1:24:19] refute. yet you repudate the data and
[1:24:22] have stated that you are proceeding with
[1:24:23] the project. I think that was
[1:24:26] blatantly clear in our letter we got a
[1:24:28] few weeks ago that it is going forward
[1:24:33] tonight where we are at actually
[1:24:38] this area of Shakertown does need
[1:24:39] maintenance resurfacing and storm sewer
[1:24:42] improvements.
[1:24:44] I believe these things are all covered
[1:24:46] slashfunded by our current street
[1:24:48] levies.
[1:24:50] Project 119964
[1:24:52] is not past the point of no build.
[1:24:57] Beaver Creek has not received the funds,
[1:24:58] the federal funds, so you don't have to
[1:25:00] give it back.
[1:25:03] Your current expenditures are already
[1:25:05] over budget.
[1:25:08] That won't be a total loss as you can
[1:25:10] still use much of the engineering design
[1:25:14] drawings that have been spent that $1
[1:25:16] million on so far towards the necessary
[1:25:19] storm drainage and resurfacing and
[1:25:23] overall traffic needs. Just not this
[1:25:26] particular project.
[1:25:29] The federal funds applied for sadly were
[1:25:32] the wrong funds.
[1:25:35] In my opinion, as a citizen and as a
[1:25:38] business owner who's done government
[1:25:39] contracting for my entire life, what you
[1:25:43] are faced with right now is you need to
[1:25:46] withdraw your application.
[1:25:52] With all the newer information, you can
[1:25:54] apply for a correct grant that will do
[1:25:57] what we need done and ease the burden of
[1:25:59] the taxpayers.
[1:26:02] When I do my job wrong, if I make
[1:26:04] choices for my business and my
[1:26:06] business's future without doing my due
[1:26:08] diligence, I have to accept and manage
[1:26:10] my way through the consequences. And
[1:26:13] that is what I'm expecting Beaver Creek.
[1:26:15] I say Beaver Creek, all parties, you is
[1:26:19] the whole of it. I'm expecting you guys
[1:26:22] to do that. It's not devastating. It
[1:26:25] won't be pleasant experience, but it's
[1:26:28] still good business. Be responsible and
[1:26:30] do what's best for our city. Thank you.
[1:26:52] Rex Turner, 1456 New Way Drive. I know
[1:26:55] you my time to
[1:26:58] >> Thank you.
[1:27:00] >> Um,
[1:27:02] good evening, Mr. Mayor and city council
[1:27:04] members. Uh, my name is Gary Dunl. I
[1:27:06] live at 340 Shakertown Road, and I stand
[1:27:08] before you in 100% opposition to the
[1:27:10] Shakertown Road improvements project ID
[1:27:13] number 119964.
[1:27:15] Uh our group opposes this waste of local
[1:27:17] taxpayer funds and federal funds. Uh and
[1:27:20] we've consistently brought to your all's
[1:27:22] attention multiple times facts that that
[1:27:26] don't support the project and and you've
[1:27:29] heard more of them tonight. So, uh,
[1:27:31] additionally, I'm going to give each of
[1:27:33] you some some hard copy of some stuff
[1:27:38] and
[1:27:42] give you some some something to look at
[1:27:45] and and and so it's just these facts are
[1:27:49] just overwhelmingly um I I don't know
[1:27:52] how you guys as a group can sit here and
[1:27:55] look at these facts and listen to the
[1:27:57] facts that your engineering department
[1:27:59] has given you and have any any clue of why you would even approve this
[1:28:04] thing. It's just absurd. Um so, uh
[1:28:08] number one, uh the MVRP funding
[1:28:11] application, first page of what I gave
[1:28:14] you all, um states on there that that
[1:28:18] the urban major collector, the the third
[1:28:21] highlighted area there is 5,300 vehicles
[1:28:24] per day. And that is not even correct.
[1:28:27] If you'll look on the data that I've
[1:28:28] supplied attached to that, there's no
[1:28:31] 5,300 vehicle per day count on there.
[1:28:35] So, your engineering department is just
[1:28:37] making up numbers and throwing them on
[1:28:38] there. Number one. Number two, that
[1:28:41] whole that whole thing was based on based on
[1:28:46] pre Shaker Town Road 35 access. Um, if
[1:28:51] you look at the counts today, um, our
[1:28:54] counts have gone from like our traffic
[1:28:57] counts have gone from like, you know,
[1:28:59] 6,300 cars a day. Um, back in back in
[1:29:03] 2016 to 2019, 2020, they dropped to
[1:29:07] like, you know, 3,300 uh, per day. So,
[1:29:11] why are we spending $5 million to put in
[1:29:13] a new twothirds of a mile roadway? I
[1:29:16] mean, what sense does that make? Can any
[1:29:19] of you tell me that? I don't think it
[1:29:20] can. Um the facts speak for themselves,
[1:29:24] you know. I mean, and it goes on. Um in
[1:29:28] the data that I have given you all, it
[1:29:30] gives you specific year by year by year
[1:29:33] from 25 all the way back to um
[1:29:38] [clears throat] all the way back to
[1:29:41] 2016.
[1:29:43] Um, this is ODOT information that gives
[1:29:46] you the daily traffic counts of
[1:29:48] Shakertown Road and it's measured right
[1:29:50] there at um um
[1:29:59] » Carthage. Yeah, right there at Carthage.
[1:30:01] That's where the That's where the counts
[1:30:02] are taken. And And it's just I just
[1:30:05] don't
[1:30:07] again half of what it was like six years
[1:30:10] ago. and you all want to spend $5
[1:30:12] million on a road expansion. I mean,
[1:30:15] what sense does that make?
[1:30:18] Can I mean, I'd love to hear an answer
[1:30:20] from you somehow someway. It makes no
[1:30:23] sense whatsoever.
[1:30:25] Um, number two, um, the same application
[1:30:28] is indicated has identified the fund
[1:30:31] source that this project is to be funded
[1:30:33] under is number one. It says again going
[1:30:37] back to the first page that I gave you,
[1:30:39] please identify the fund source you
[1:30:41] anticipate this project to be funded
[1:30:43] under. You're they're saying suggested
[1:30:45] congestion mitigation and air quality.
[1:30:49] What congestion do we have on Shakertown
[1:30:51] Road? And what air quality problems do
[1:30:54] we have on Shaker Town Road? Now, now
[1:30:56] you guys want to take 125 trees out of
[1:30:58] Shakertown Road. Yeah, we're going to
[1:30:59] have some air quality issues, but how
[1:31:02] can you how can you how can you as a
[1:31:04] city council and how can you as a mayor
[1:31:06] allow your engineering department to
[1:31:08] send this kind of crap in? It's false
[1:31:11] information.
[1:31:13] It's absolutely false information.
[1:31:16] I just I it just baffles me that that
[1:31:19] you as a you as a council that are
[1:31:22] responsible for the employees of this
[1:31:24] city can allow this kind of information
[1:31:27] to pass.
[1:31:29] It makes no sense whatsoever. Um
[1:31:33] number three um
[1:31:36] additionally the you know the MBRPC
[1:31:39] application states please or provide a
[1:31:42] short description um of the needs and
[1:31:46] benefits of the project uh and that's
[1:31:49] attached to you go back to like the
[1:31:51] after after the traffic uh reports um I
[1:31:55] think it's like the fifth six page back
[1:31:57] in the space prep below provide a short
[1:31:59] description of the need and benefits of
[1:32:02] this project. So they're saying, your
[1:32:04] engineering department is saying the
[1:32:05] project is needed to provide safe
[1:32:07] passage to the traveling public through
[1:32:10] the corridor of Shakertown Road by
[1:32:12] reducing accidents. We've already been
[1:32:14] through that 10 times. There are no
[1:32:16] accidents on Shakertown Road. There are
[1:32:18] deer strikes, but we don't have
[1:32:20] accidents on Shaker Town Road. But
[1:32:22] they're using that as a basis for $5
[1:32:24] million of expenditure. And what sense
[1:32:27] does that make? Um
[1:32:30] Additionally reading on by reducing
[1:32:32] accidents, reducing congestion. What
[1:32:35] congestion do we have on Shakertown Road
[1:32:38] and improving safety to the general
[1:32:40] public? There's no safety issues. So,
[1:32:42] this is just all being created by your
[1:32:44] engineering department for no reason
[1:32:47] whatsoever other than to spend taxpayers
[1:32:49] money. To spend a million and a half
[1:32:51] dollars of Beaver Creek taxpayer money
[1:32:53] and and $3 million of federal money.
[1:32:56] It's just crazy. How can you guys
[1:32:58] approve this stuff? There's no logic to
[1:33:01] it. There's no facts to it. Uh accidents
[1:33:05] will be reduced. We don't have
[1:33:06] accidents. And safety improved through a
[1:33:09] two two-way turn lane. We don't have
[1:33:12] those issues.
[1:33:14] Um
[1:33:16] number four, um it goes on the next
[1:33:19] page. If you look at project or project
[1:33:21] benefits and complete streets
[1:33:23] discussion, number one project benefits,
[1:33:26] improved traffic flow along Shakertown
[1:33:28] Road. We don't have problems with
[1:33:30] traffic flow. Number two, improved
[1:33:32] safety along Shaker Town Road. We don't
[1:33:34] have safety issues. Improved pedestrian
[1:33:36] access. We don't have pedestrians on
[1:33:38] Chakertown Road. Improved bicycle
[1:33:41] access. We don't have bicycles on Shaker
[1:33:43] Town Road. They are creating all this
[1:33:46] stuff and you guys approve it. How can
[1:33:48] you do that? It's all created. It It's
[1:33:51] just there's no facts to any of this
[1:33:53] stuff. No facts whatsoever. So, um so
[1:33:57] here we are in closing. Uh the facts are
[1:34:00] uh I presented you all again uh to
[1:34:03] reinforce the fact that your engineering
[1:34:04] department has been very very inaccurate
[1:34:07] in the facts that they have used um in
[1:34:10] this application process. And your
[1:34:13] choices are three. You Mr. mayor and you
[1:34:15] city council members do what is
[1:34:18] professionally and ethically correct and
[1:34:20] bring this project to a stop. It's all
[1:34:23] wrong. Number two, if not, you are
[1:34:26] failing in your roles as representatives
[1:34:28] of the citizens of Beaver Creek. We're
[1:34:31] travels fast and I and I suspect that
[1:34:34] many many more citizens of Beaver Creek
[1:34:37] are going to know about your handling of
[1:34:40] this project um if it's not stopped.
[1:34:43] Now, number three,
[1:34:45] you all are are moving us closer to seek
[1:34:48] out alternative means of bringing this
[1:34:50] awful project to anatomy.
[1:34:53] Uh, and I don't want to go there. So,
[1:34:56] uh, I thank you, Mr. Mayor and city
[1:34:58] council members for your time. U, please
[1:35:00] counsel this or cancel this member
[1:35:03] project immediately. It benefits nobody.
[1:35:06] Thank you.
[1:35:06] >> Thank you.
[1:35:19] She's already
[1:35:33] Anyone else?
[1:35:49] again. I am Janice Jacobs, 3040 Dayton
[1:35:52] Xenior Road.
[1:35:55] We've I have just lived through what
[1:35:58] these poor people you're going to make
[1:36:01] live through.
[1:36:04] I've lived through it since the 5th of
[1:36:07] July, 2025
[1:36:11] with the widening
[1:36:13] and the removal and replacement of the
[1:36:17] sidewalks.
[1:36:21] When it started, I believe that
[1:36:25] well, this nightmare is a wonderful
[1:36:26] thing to start going through every
[1:36:29] single day.
[1:36:34] I was paid for five feet of my frontage
[1:36:37] of my yard.
[1:36:40] Next thing I know,
[1:36:43] not only did they take five feet of that
[1:36:45] frontage, they turned around and came up
[1:36:49] my driveway 5T behind what they had paid
[1:36:53] and took out a retaining wall in the
[1:36:56] process.
[1:36:59] I now have water standing in places it
[1:37:03] never has stood before because that dog
[1:37:06] on sidewalk is above grade.
[1:37:10] Every yard just about through that area
[1:37:13] from
[1:37:15] where they started it from the log cabin
[1:37:18] dentistry down to main school all slopes
[1:37:22] down towards the south.
[1:37:25] They built that sidewalk above grade.
[1:37:30] We could at one time before this pull
[1:37:34] directly out onto Dayton Zena
[1:37:38] straight out every house through there
[1:37:40] except for the dentist or not dentist
[1:37:43] but the veterinarian on the hill next to
[1:37:46] me.
[1:37:48] Now we have to go up and over a hump to
[1:37:52] get out on Dayton Zena
[1:37:55] that is acting as a dam.
[1:37:59] On the right side, as I'm facing south,
[1:38:02] on the right side of my driveway, I had
[1:38:05] this lovely
[1:38:07] uh drainage culvert.
[1:38:12] It's now above where the water is
[1:38:15] supposed to be draining.
[1:38:17] Because of this lovely project that you
[1:38:20] guys just finished,
[1:38:22] I now have ponding water in the opposite
[1:38:26] side of the tree that's in my front
[1:38:29] yard,
[1:38:31] big enough that I can put fish in and go
[1:38:33] fishing.
[1:38:34] When it gets overflowing,
[1:38:37] it now runs down and it is cutting a
[1:38:40] gully in my front yard across all of
[1:38:43] that beautiful new black top you put on
[1:38:46] my driveway.
[1:38:48] So, yes, everyone,
[1:38:51] this is what you're going to be looking
[1:38:54] forward to if they pass this and go
[1:38:58] forward with this.
[1:39:01] I hope you don't
[1:39:03] because you've actually ruined Dayton
[1:39:05] Zena through there because of all the
[1:39:08] trees that you've cut down for this
[1:39:11] because of all the construction and the
[1:39:14] destruction of that construction.
[1:39:18] Don't do this. Don't do this to the
[1:39:20] Shaker Town neighborhoods.
[1:39:22] Don't do this to Shaker Town.
[1:39:24] >> Thank you.
[1:39:37] Anyone
[1:39:47] else?
[1:39:55] All right, seeing none, I will close the
[1:39:57] uh citiz comments. Uh council time.
[1:40:01] Councilman LL.
[1:40:03] >> Thank you, mayor.
[1:40:05] Again, thanks for everybody for coming
[1:40:07] out.
[1:40:09] There was uh
[1:40:12] a lot of comments, some new things we
[1:40:15] haven't heard before, but a lot of
[1:40:17] things we've that's been repeated. And I
[1:40:20] understand the desire to have a back and
[1:40:23] forth with us up here.
[1:40:28] This project here was a long-term
[1:40:31] planning goal with the city before I was
[1:40:34] even elected. these
[1:40:37] major throughfair areas.
[1:40:40] Um, we can pretend today that we feel
[1:40:45] the traffic isn't high in that area and
[1:40:49] like it'll never increase in the next
[1:40:53] year or two.
[1:40:55] The city does
[1:40:58] make
[1:41:02] choices and attempts to see into the
[1:41:06] future. We've tried to
[1:41:10] stop projects like the gas station that
[1:41:13] went in because we knew that the
[1:41:15] overpass down there, everybody wants it.
[1:41:20] If a project like that does happen, you
[1:41:23] will see increases in traffic on Shaker
[1:41:26] Town. Absolutely.
[1:41:28] All the projects that are currently
[1:41:30] happening in the township, Beaver Creek
[1:41:33] Township, when those are all completed
[1:41:35] and filled, you will see traffic
[1:41:38] increasing on Shakertown Road.
[1:41:42] The Shakertown Road project isn't
[1:41:47] this section of roadway that we're
[1:41:48] discussing isn't the only section of
[1:41:51] Shakertown Road that has been expanded
[1:41:53] over the years. This is a continuation
[1:41:56] of a project that's been moving forward.
[1:42:04] This roadway
[1:42:06] is in front of your homes and I get that
[1:42:10] and I understand how it directly impacts
[1:42:13] you because you're the residents that
[1:42:15] live there. However, you are not the
[1:42:18] only people that use that road.
[1:42:21] There are people all over the city and
[1:42:24] outside the city that use that road and
[1:42:26] that will continue using that roadway.
[1:42:29] The roadway is being developed by the
[1:42:32] city as a whole. Everybody's paying for
[1:42:35] it, not just the individuals that live
[1:42:38] in that in that area. The property take
[1:42:42] that people have made comments about is
[1:42:45] this project is an anomaly in the fact
[1:42:49] that it does not take
[1:42:53] a lot of people's private property. Most
[1:42:56] of this project is happening in the
[1:42:57] right of way.
[1:43:02] The
[1:43:14] comments that were made regarding
[1:43:17] not being a little 204, I don't know
[1:43:19] where those things came from. I will
[1:43:21] tell you that me personally, I went to
[1:43:24] MBRPC had discussions with with the uh
[1:43:28] grant writers, the approval pro the
[1:43:30] approval and the head of MBRPC in
[1:43:33] regards to this project.
[1:43:35] um calls were made to ODOT to see about
[1:43:39] reducing this sidewalk because that was
[1:43:41] what we were hearing and wanted to do
[1:43:43] something to
[1:43:46] say we understand that a 10-ft sidewalk
[1:43:49] didn't make sense to you. Um they agreed
[1:43:53] didn't have anything to do with payments
[1:43:56] not being able to be afforded. So I
[1:43:58] don't know where that comes from.
[1:44:00] Um, we all hear things and and sometimes
[1:44:04] we hear things that we want to hear. I
[1:44:10] like
[1:44:13] this project
[1:44:15] in the sense that I was on Shakertown
[1:44:18] Road today. I was west of Fairfield
[1:44:23] Road, though. I wasn't all the way down
[1:44:25] where you were today. Um, and cars were
[1:44:28] directly in front of me. Two of them
[1:44:30] moved over to the center lane to turn
[1:44:32] left into driveways, which allowed me to
[1:44:36] continue on in the roadway while they
[1:44:39] stayed in the middle lane and cars
[1:44:40] coming west while they waited. It does
[1:44:45] allow for safer traffic.
[1:44:49] Um, this is an improvement to storm
[1:44:52] water.
[1:44:54] I I hope the the lady from Dayton Zena
[1:44:58] has contacted the engineering
[1:44:59] department. I know you that's the first
[1:45:01] anybody up here has heard anything like
[1:45:03] that. I can promise you and I hope
[1:45:06] you've made contact with the engineering
[1:45:07] department to get something out there to
[1:45:09] get a a resolution to that immediately
[1:45:12] before it goes any further. I do know
[1:45:14] that we've had record rainfall in the in
[1:45:17] the month of August, which is crazy. Um,
[1:45:22] but I hope I hope that you do that the idea
[1:45:28] that this this develop this developing
[1:45:31] this roadway decreases decreases
[1:45:34] property value is unprecedented.
[1:45:38] If if you if if you ladies and gentlemen
[1:45:41] if you increase we
[1:45:44] >> if there was no property taken from an
[1:45:47] individual
[1:45:50] It can't decrease the property value for
[1:45:52] that individual.
[1:45:55] The
[1:46:02] I'm out came out of the line. I do want
[1:46:04] to to to um address Miss Harvey
[1:46:07] specifically.
[1:46:11] » Sir, you've had your time with council
[1:46:14] time. Miss Harvey, you stated when you were making your statements, I I
[1:46:18] thought you were looking at me. I'm I'm
[1:46:20] not sure if you've heard somebody state
[1:46:23] that I said something about you to
[1:46:25] somebody.
[1:46:29] » Okay. I just wanted to make sure you
[1:46:31] knew you knew that I had never
[1:46:33] >> So, I wanted to I wanted to I'm just
[1:46:36] trying to address the things that I
[1:46:38] heard because people say and this is how
[1:46:40] much people wanted to hear the back and
[1:46:43] forth by everybody walking out of the
[1:46:45] room.
[1:46:46] I'm just making statements, ma'am.
[1:46:50] the
[1:46:52] I've heard tonight that there's been no
[1:46:55] accidents and then I heard another
[1:46:56] individual say they've had cars in their
[1:46:58] front yard.
[1:47:00] >> Okay.
[1:47:10] I've heard I've heard
[1:47:13] >> that. That's fine. I I'm okay. I'm not
[1:47:15] mad about I'm not mad at anybody. I'm
[1:47:17] just I'm just making statements no
[1:47:19] different than what you were doing when
[1:47:20] you were standing here. Okay. The comment about
[1:47:28] wanting to go do away with all levies
[1:47:30] and make them in because you don't like
[1:47:32] roads being fixed. That right there
[1:47:35] makes no sense to me. I don't know why
[1:47:37] anybody would make comments like that.
[1:47:40] I I I don't I don't know why anybody
[1:47:41] would say something like that.
[1:47:45] Um and I do want to end by saying that
[1:47:48] and I wish I'd have said this last week
[1:47:49] and I should have said more. Um the
[1:47:53] letter that was sent to everybody was
[1:47:56] signed by the mayor and I did see this
[1:47:58] letter before it went out. I do endorse
[1:48:01] what Mayor Adams had to say in that
[1:48:03] letter. This project is moving forward
[1:48:07] in from my opinion because it is a
[1:48:10] project that we approved last year as
[1:48:13] part of the long-term plan for the city
[1:48:16] of Beaver Creek. Not only for traffic
[1:48:19] that day, but future traffic problems
[1:48:21] that are going to come in the future.
[1:48:23] And I know I've upset some people. It's
[1:48:26] not the first time I've upset people.
[1:48:27] I'm I'm retired law enforcement. I've
[1:48:29] made people mad every day. So, and and I apologize if I hurt feelings. I know
[1:48:36] people stormed out of the room, but
[1:48:39] that's that's just where I stand. And I thank you for my time. I yield my
[1:48:42] time. That's all I have to say.
[1:48:46] >> Thank you, Councilman Der.
[1:48:49] >> Appreciate it, Mayor. And I want to
[1:48:51] thank everyone uh in attendance today. I
[1:48:53] know it's exhausting to come out
[1:48:55] multiple times. Uh we do listen.
[1:48:59] It takes a while to think it through.
[1:49:04] And I want to make a statement to all of
[1:49:07] you today. Um, I don't anticipate that
[1:49:10] I'll change any minds and I don't
[1:49:12] anticipate that I'll assuage anyone. I
[1:49:16] know that there's significant cynicism
[1:49:18] of government and I understand that. Um,
[1:49:20] but I'm a neighbor. I'm a human being.
[1:49:23] Um, and I mean you no harm. I really
[1:49:26] don't. I'm trying to do what's best for
[1:49:27] the city as a whole. Um I'm one of seven
[1:49:31] members of council
[1:49:34] and I haven't discussed my statements
[1:49:36] with anyone. Um
[1:49:39] if we start on a macro level when the
[1:49:43] city started in 1980
[1:49:46] world population was 4.4 billion. Today
[1:49:49] it's 8.1.
[1:49:51] Nationally it was 230 sorry 226 million
[1:49:56] today it is 342
[1:49:58] in the city it was 31,000 it is now
[1:50:02] 47,000
[1:50:04] throughout the entire world we have seen
[1:50:07] growth
[1:50:08] uh the expansion of areas the need for
[1:50:12] upgrades things of that nature and so
[1:50:15] today I really just want to explain some
[1:50:17] of the tradeoffs in my thinking whether
[1:50:20] you agree or disagree here's Here's some
[1:50:22] of the backdrop.
[1:50:23] If we start with a really basic point on
[1:50:28] simply the need to repave, I know
[1:50:31] there's real concern over the amount of
[1:50:34] repaving that we've seen in Beaver
[1:50:36] Creek. Uh, and I've driven the
[1:50:38] congestion myself,
[1:50:41] but what I would like to note to you is
[1:50:43] that imagine the alternative. Imagine
[1:50:47] that your roads didn't get paved.
[1:50:51] Think about cities
[1:50:54] that don't take care or don't plan
[1:50:56] ahead.
[1:50:58] It is something where a city will
[1:51:02] degrade
[1:51:03] and fall in the minds of people quite
[1:51:07] quickly. And so our goal here is to
[1:51:10] upkeep the city.
[1:51:14] Should
[1:51:17] it be paved under the current
[1:51:19] configuration?
[1:51:20] Our tradeoff is that we have a
[1:51:23] thoroughare plan going back to 2019.
[1:51:27] There are similar examples on North
[1:51:30] Fairfield, on Kemp, on Graange Hall, on
[1:51:33] Indian Ripple. And I know that they
[1:51:35] cause upheaval to the residents that
[1:51:37] live there. I've gone through similar
[1:51:39] things in my own life. It's it's not fun
[1:51:42] for a season. Uh but at the same time,
[1:51:45] if we were to look at Shaker Town to its
[1:51:48] east and to its west, we have seen those
[1:51:51] infrastructure improvements. Imagine
[1:51:53] driving through seeing the improvements
[1:51:55] in one area, not in the 6 milesi and
[1:52:00] then seeing it again.
[1:52:04] We and a number of people have correctly
[1:52:06] pointed this out that the thorough play
[1:52:09] thoroughare plan should have been
[1:52:11] updated in 5 years that's 2024.
[1:52:14] Uh we initiated a land use plan and to
[1:52:17] update zoning and so this is something
[1:52:20] that is on our radar and as I noted in a
[1:52:24] previous council meeting our funding is
[1:52:27] peacemeal. We have to do it piece by
[1:52:29] piece. The equivalent is imagine having
[1:52:33] to pay your mortgage all in one payment.
[1:52:36] It's why it has to be this quote unquote
[1:52:38] Frankenstein road and why we have to
[1:52:41] plan it and do it appropriately.
[1:52:46] A great question was raised at a
[1:52:48] previous meeting that is do
[1:52:50] infrastructure changes lead to property
[1:52:52] value decreases?
[1:52:55] Um, I think it's a great question to ask
[1:52:57] and I've spent significant time trying
[1:53:00] to research it. It's one of the reasons
[1:53:01] we don't have a back and forth because
[1:53:03] we all need just time to go research and
[1:53:05] to understand.
[1:53:07] I'm an academic. The best I found in
[1:53:10] general is the answer is no.
[1:53:13] Real estate is almost always a good
[1:53:15] investment, but there are circumstances.
[1:53:20] the great recession of 2008, um subprime
[1:53:24] mortgage issues,
[1:53:26] um
[1:53:28] inflationary issues, uh localized
[1:53:31] concerns. And so what I ask you is this.
[1:53:35] If if there's something that we don't
[1:53:37] know as a council,
[1:53:40] please send me a peer-reviewed paper
[1:53:42] that has studied this. I will read it
[1:53:44] back and forth. uh please
[1:53:48] I I've been through many of these and I
[1:53:50] found
[1:53:55] can we do an econ economist a realtor is
[1:53:59] specialized in a certain way but an
[1:54:02] economist studies wider trends
[1:54:05] so
[1:54:08] » no no it it can be global it you just
[1:54:11] find something so I found two I found
[1:54:14] two I looked at multiple articles.
[1:54:17] There's one from the the Netherlands in
[1:54:19] 2016.
[1:54:24] But if you're looking at the way that
[1:54:25] infrastructure has changed, it's low its
[1:54:28] impact on local a local economy, that's
[1:54:31] what's giving us examples. It happens
[1:54:33] when there's infrastructure around major
[1:54:38] um you know there's a train station as
[1:54:40] one example where the infrastructure was
[1:54:42] upgraded the property values decreased.
[1:54:45] It's things like that that I I'm
[1:54:47] interested in studying and learning
[1:54:49] more.
[1:54:55] What about the traffic counts?
[1:54:58] There's a clear difference of position.
[1:55:02] Uh and let's for a moment take the the
[1:55:06] numbers that were given here. Uh I drive
[1:55:09] Shaker Town very regularly. My wife
[1:55:12] works on Shaker Town.
[1:55:15] You know, I I observed some of the same
[1:55:17] things that you observe. Here's what's
[1:55:19] on the other side of the ledger. And
[1:55:21] some here have rightly said, you know,
[1:55:23] what's happening here and now,
[1:55:26] but we do have to think through
[1:55:29] projections that we've been given.
[1:55:32] And I don't know the answer to these
[1:55:34] things because they're projections.
[1:55:38] One is that there is a proposed
[1:55:40] development of 1600 houses
[1:55:43] in the township. Can I guarantee you
[1:55:46] that there'll be 1,600 houses? I have no
[1:55:48] idea.
[1:55:51] What about a new high school? I have no
[1:55:54] idea.
[1:55:57] But we do need to at least think through
[1:55:59] the tradeoff of an additional several
[1:56:02] thousand cars potentially per day.
[1:56:06] Again, I don't know, but it's what goes
[1:56:07] through my mind in terms of thinking and
[1:56:10] in terms of making a decision.
[1:56:14] The argument was made on sunk costs.
[1:56:19] I thought that was a very good argument.
[1:56:22] It really appealed to me.
[1:56:24] Um, I thought it was very very
[1:56:27] thoughtful.
[1:56:30] The other side of the sunk costs
[1:56:32] argument is that the road still isn't
[1:56:34] paved.
[1:56:36] But on the other side of sunk cost is
[1:56:39] also opportunity cost.
[1:56:42] I don't know what happens
[1:56:46] if we turn this money back.
[1:56:52] How do MVRPCO O do look at us when we
[1:56:57] apply again?
[1:57:01] We don't know is the answer. That's the
[1:57:03] challenge to it because again we're at
[1:57:06] large members. We represent all of
[1:57:08] Beaver Creek. If we say no to this,
[1:57:13] what happens down the line? And we don't
[1:57:15] know. That's I'm explaining the
[1:57:17] tradeoffs that we have to think through.
[1:57:23] I'll leave it there, ma'am. Thank you.
[1:57:25] >> Thank you,
[1:57:27] Counciloman Bills.
[1:57:32] » So, I think out of all of us, I'm the
[1:57:35] only one that actually lives back in
[1:57:36] that neighborhood.
[1:57:40] I've sent my kids
[1:57:43] to go to our church, which is one of the
[1:57:44] churches on Shaker Town, and they have
[1:57:46] to cross from Koi over to the church
[1:57:49] across the street. There's a whole host
[1:57:52] of families back there that go to that
[1:57:54] church. And I can tell you in the almost
[1:57:58] 20 years of living back there that I've
[1:58:00] seen multiple young children almost get
[1:58:03] hit by people in Chakertown.
[1:58:06] And I and that was your first response
[1:58:09] to me when I said that the first time we
[1:58:12] talked about this. I was immediately
[1:58:14] shut down.
[1:58:16] But it's the truth. You want us to
[1:58:19] accept your truth and your feelings
[1:58:22] about things.
[1:58:24] But when there's other truths and other
[1:58:27] experiences, those somehow are not as
[1:58:30] valid.
[1:58:32] I understand Heather how I understand
[1:58:34] your frustration. And I am not trying to
[1:58:36] change your mind. I don't I'm not trying
[1:58:39] to make you like
[1:58:42] the church is fine with the sidewalk.
[1:58:45] Um but I don't have control over that.
[1:58:48] I'm not in that position. But my point
[1:58:52] is Heather is and and for for everybody
[1:58:55] for anybody who lives in a project, Pete
[1:58:57] lives in a project that he doesn't
[1:59:00] particularly enjoy all the time. I mean,
[1:59:02] it it happens to all of us at a point. I
[1:59:05] thought it sucked when the culvert had
[1:59:08] to be replaced. That was a nightmare.
[1:59:10] You know, we all lived with that for
[1:59:11] ages. It seemed like it was unending,
[1:59:14] but it was necessary.
[1:59:16] There are no pedestrians on Shaker Town.
[1:59:19] You are absolutely right because it's
[1:59:21] dangerous.
[1:59:23] I wouldn't walk on Shaker Town as an
[1:59:25] adult and I would never send kids out on
[1:59:28] Shaker Town. I mean, I have pulled my
[1:59:31] car over and like put it in the road so
[1:59:34] kids waiting there can cross. It's
[1:59:36] scary. So, we ab I mean, I have to say I
[1:59:40] am in support of it will make this
[1:59:43] street safer.
[1:59:45] It scares me to even try to go around
[1:59:47] bicyclists. There are just ditches.
[1:59:49] There's not even a shoulder to the road.
[1:59:58] Yeah, there'll be there's two and
[1:59:59] there's one further down on the other.
[2:00:02] Yeah, which is better. But and I I do
[2:00:07] understand. I mean, when the tree oak
[2:00:10] tree issue came up, I was concerned. We
[2:00:13] reached out. We have all had so many
[2:00:15] discussions about your concerns and
[2:00:19] trying to find ways to make things
[2:00:22] better. We have tried to compromise and
[2:00:24] we have achieved some compromises.
[2:00:27] There have been efforts
[2:00:31] and I do look at some of the houses on
[2:00:33] Shaker Town and recognize that you guys
[2:00:35] are I would not be happy either. Your
[2:00:37] houses are closer than I'm sure you wish
[2:00:40] they were. Um
[2:00:43] I get it. But once again,
[2:00:47] we're and I don't want to say that, you
[2:00:49] know, 20 people or even 30 people or
[2:00:51] even 40 people, but compared to almost
[2:00:54] 48,000 people to a city, we have to look
[2:00:58] at the larger picture. We have to think
[2:01:02] about the future.
[2:01:04] And this potential development
[2:01:07] is an issue. There are going to be
[2:01:10] things changing. We are going to see
[2:01:12] more traffic.
[2:01:19] You're you're right. They don't. And
[2:01:21] unfortunately, we have to make
[2:01:26] » we Well, I didn't yell over you when you
[2:01:29] spoke. And I also don't need you to make
[2:01:32] comments about my appearance when you
[2:01:34] come up front either.
[2:01:36] Okay.
[2:01:40] When he came up and said, "Oh, you're
[2:01:41] looking fine today, honey.
[2:01:45] Yeah. Okay.
[2:01:49] Well, now that we've gotten past that,
[2:01:51] anyway,
[2:01:53] truly, no one is trying to hurt any of
[2:01:56] you. I do understand your frustration. I
[2:01:58] don't expect you to love this project. I
[2:02:01] don't expect you to love the experience
[2:02:04] of these repairs. I don't think any of
[2:02:06] us have enjoyed living through the
[2:02:08] things that have happened, you know, in
[2:02:10] our neighborhoods either. I just had a
[2:02:12] tree come through my creek and my yard
[2:02:14] got flooded and my basement's flooded
[2:02:16] and you know, I mean, but it's a moment.
[2:02:20] Things will get fixed. I can wait, you
[2:02:24] know, for the the crews to come to take
[2:02:26] care of my tree. Um, by the way, thank
[2:02:29] you. They came and took care of the
[2:02:30] tree. Um,
[2:02:34] I'm happy to sit down with any of you,
[2:02:37] but I do approve of this project. I also
[2:02:40] read the mayor's letter,
[2:02:42] and while you may not have liked what he
[2:02:46] had to say or perhaps the way it was
[2:02:48] worded,
[2:02:50] our mayor's intentions are endlessly
[2:02:54] kind and endlessly responsible and
[2:02:58] thoughtful.
[2:03:01] He thinks about everybody all the time.
[2:03:03] And I can say that about everybody up
[2:03:05] here.
[2:03:07] These are wonderful people. Our
[2:03:11] employees are wonderful people. No one
[2:03:14] is trying to pull the wool over your
[2:03:15] eyes. No one is lying to you. I'm not
[2:03:20] saying that there may not have been a
[2:03:21] mistake like a a road count that only
[2:03:24] counted one way and didn't count the
[2:03:26] other way or, you know,
[2:03:31] a stake that's a a foot away from where
[2:03:33] it should be or something like that.
[2:03:35] We're all human.
[2:03:37] Everyone is human. You guys are also
[2:03:40] human.
[2:03:41] And all representations from perhaps
[2:03:45] there have been errors on both sides. I
[2:03:49] mean, or maybe we're talking past each
[2:03:51] other, but no one's trying to hurt you.
[2:03:54] Everyone is doing their best. And I
[2:03:57] understand that you don't like the
[2:03:58] project. I'm not going to try to
[2:04:00] convince you to love the project. And
[2:04:01] I'm not going to convince you to stay
[2:04:03] home. You can come and complain about it
[2:04:05] every single meeting until the thing is
[2:04:07] over. And then you can keep coming after
[2:04:09] that. I'm never going to tell you that
[2:04:11] your voice isn't important and that you
[2:04:12] shouldn't come and be heard.
[2:04:15] So, thank you for coming out. I'm sorry
[2:04:18] that you're unhappy.
[2:04:20] And
[2:04:22] I'm happy to talk to any of you. Thanks.
[2:04:26] Oh, and on a happier note, I would like
[2:04:29] to welcome
[2:04:31] um Officer Hunsburgger to the city. Um
[2:04:35] it was great to go to his swearing in
[2:04:38] and I'm looking forward to his time with
[2:04:40] our city. Thank you.
[2:04:44] » Thank you very much, Councilman Bales.
[2:04:50] » Thank you.
[2:04:52] Uh, I too appreciate everyone coming out
[2:04:54] sharing your thoughts. I also appreciate
[2:04:57] listening to council's thoughts on on
[2:04:59] the issue. Um, and I don't think I'm
[2:05:03] going to expound any more than what
[2:05:05] we've already heard and and talked about
[2:05:07] on it. Um, because we've all shared a
[2:05:10] lot tonight and I took a lot of notes
[2:05:13] and and again, I appreciate that. But on
[2:05:16] a uh a happier note as well, like to
[2:05:19] congratulate the uh Beaver Creek Beaver
[2:05:22] football team for their big win over
[2:05:24] >> Zenia.
[2:05:26] Uh and I want
[2:05:29] >> I want to wish everybody a happy Labor
[2:05:31] Day and um look forward to seeing
[2:05:34] everyone at the popcorn festival. I
[2:05:37] yield.
[2:05:39] >> Councelor Kern.
[2:05:41] >> Thank you, your honor. Again, I'd like
[2:05:43] to uh thank the individuals who have
[2:05:46] come up week after week each meeting
[2:05:49] that we've had given your opinion.
[2:05:52] But on the other side, I support the
[2:05:55] wisdom that's been presented by council
[2:05:57] tonight. uh it takes a lot of guts many
[2:06:00] times for people to think long range and
[2:06:04] I think the uh evidence that's presented
[2:06:07] by uh the members of council tonight uh
[2:06:13] was very very very well presented and uh
[2:06:17] I certainly support moving ahead with
[2:06:20] the project realizing that people are
[2:06:23] not going to be totally happy uh as we
[2:06:27] move forward. forward.
[2:06:28] >> Thank you, your honor.
[2:06:30] >> Thank you, Vice Mayor Upton.
[2:06:33] >> Uh, thank you, Mayor Adams. Um, there's
[2:06:36] certainly been a lot of uh emotion and
[2:06:39] passion uh spoken about here tonight and
[2:06:41] I won't get into rehashing similar to
[2:06:44] Council Member Bales. Um, you know, a
[2:06:46] lot has been said and I think all of us
[2:06:48] took a lot of notes. You know, I heard
[2:06:50] tonight obviously a lot of discussion on
[2:06:52] Shakertown Road. Uh we talked a little
[2:06:55] bit about the religious facility that
[2:06:56] was presented tonight and ultimately
[2:06:58] tabled. Uh we heard from about ebikes
[2:07:00] and uh something I learned again tonight
[2:07:02] was about the uh drainage issue there in
[2:07:04] Dayton Zena. So I mean when you all come
[2:07:06] forward and speak about these things
[2:07:08] that does help us form our opinion. Um
[2:07:11] it helps us do our research. Um so you
[2:07:14] know with all sincerity thank you for
[2:07:16] coming out tonight. Um, and you know, I do look forward to hearing more
[2:07:22] because it does bring different points
[2:07:23] up. Um, you know, it was said new things
[2:07:26] were brought up tonight and some things
[2:07:28] were repeated. So, we will go to the
[2:07:30] drawing board and look at some of those
[2:07:31] new things. We will, uh, potentially
[2:07:34] talk about some of those things that
[2:07:35] have been repeated. Uh, but again, you
[2:07:38] know, having the citizen input is part
[2:07:40] of the process, right? None of us would
[2:07:42] be here if we didn't care. None of you
[2:07:45] out there would be here if you didn't
[2:07:47] care. None of us up here would be would
[2:07:49] be here if we didn't care. And that's
[2:07:50] just it. We all care for Beaver Creek in
[2:07:52] our community. Much more than just a a
[2:07:55] symbol of a beaver that we all
[2:07:56] celebrated at our last meeting. Uh so
[2:07:59] with that, I do look forward to more
[2:08:00] dialogue um with everybody um on on any
[2:08:04] of the topics. Um I was going to talk a
[2:08:07] little about the popcorn festival, but I
[2:08:08] see it's in the city manager report, so
[2:08:10] I will uh defer to him on that one. Um,
[2:08:13] I do want to express a quick thank you
[2:08:15] to the school district. Uh, with school
[2:08:17] coming back in session, uh, school buses
[2:08:20] have been running on time. Uh, my kids
[2:08:22] were not excited to go back to school.
[2:08:24] Uh, but, uh, it seems to be, uh,
[2:08:27] everything flowing smoothly with the
[2:08:30] schools and traffic, uh, throughout the
[2:08:31] city. So, I'm appreciative of that. Uh,
[2:08:34] and I appreciate the police department,
[2:08:36] um, everything they're doing to help
[2:08:37] keep everybody safe out there. That's
[2:08:39] all.
[2:08:40] >> Thank you very much. I too would like to
[2:08:42] thank everybody for coming. Um
[2:08:45] first of all and the young man left but
[2:08:48] uh the ebikes and the e-otos there's
[2:08:50] some work being done on ordinances
[2:08:52] throughout where several cities around
[2:08:53] the area are working on that because
[2:08:55] they are becoming very dangerous. Uh
[2:08:58] I've run into that same situation myself
[2:09:01] and uh you know we will do something
[2:09:03] about that and don't know what that'll
[2:09:04] be at this point. But uh something else
[2:09:06] that was brought up by Councilman Litel,
[2:09:09] I spoke with the U Township and there
[2:09:14] are projected 1,600 homes being built
[2:09:16] there at the uh Trabine overpass and
[2:09:20] they will be connected probably through
[2:09:22] Valley Springs Road to Yellow Brick
[2:09:24] Road. And where does that go?
[2:09:27] Right on Shaker Town. So I assume we
[2:09:30] these when we look at things,
[2:09:34] you know, I've been here 60 years. I I
[2:09:36] look back a lot of good things happened
[2:09:38] in the past, really good things. But a
[2:09:41] lot of things have changed in those 60
[2:09:43] years.
[2:09:44] In the next 60 years, we're going to see
[2:09:47] a lot more. Uh we're going to be build
[2:09:50] out in Beaver Creek one day down the
[2:09:51] road, but the township is still growing.
[2:09:53] There's a lot of things happening out
[2:09:55] here. So those are the things that we
[2:09:57] have to look at. We can't say, "Well,
[2:09:59] everything's fine right now." Because if
[2:10:01] we were to stop this project, turn all
[2:10:04] the money back, five years from now when
[2:10:06] all this stuff builds out, we have to do
[2:10:08] it again. It'll cost five times as much.
[2:10:11] Nothing stays the same. It's it's just
[2:10:13] the way it is. Uh and those are some of
[2:10:16] the things that we have to look at. Uh
[2:10:19] so with that, I do want to say thank you
[2:10:22] to uh Councilman Bales for bringing up
[2:10:26] the high school football team. Uh I was
[2:10:29] there Friday night and I was there
[2:10:31] Saturday and gladly accepted the trophy
[2:10:33] back from the mayor of Zenia so I could
[2:10:34] present it to the coach. That's the
[2:10:37] first time in five years that we've been
[2:10:38] able to do that. So that was a that was
[2:10:41] a really fun time. Uh, and I know that
[2:10:43] uh uh Mayor Reynolds was not happy about
[2:10:46] it. In fact, he and I had a little bit
[2:10:49] of a uh a bet going on that I will
[2:10:53] gladly
[2:10:55] accept when he gives me. So,
[2:10:58] with that, I'll turn over to city
[2:11:00] manager.
[2:11:02] >> Hey, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Quickly, the
[2:11:04] manager's report uh summer entertainment
[2:11:07] series will continue free event at a
[2:11:10] party on the patio with DJ
[2:11:14] August 29th. So that's next Saturday
[2:11:16] 6:00 to 9:00 p.m. at the golf club. Next
[2:11:19] one after that, uh party on the golf
[2:11:21] range with Jukebox Apocalypse is
[2:11:24] Wednesday, September 23rd, 5 to 8:00
[2:11:27] p.m. Come and join these free concerts
[2:11:28] and have a good time.
[2:11:30] uh town halls. We have two of them
[2:11:32] coming up. Uh first will be September
[2:11:34] 15th at the Beaver Creek Senior Center.
[2:11:37] These are on finance. This is our third
[2:11:38] year uh doing these. So they've been
[2:11:41] informative. September 15th 6 to8 at the
[2:11:44] senior center and the second town hall
[2:11:46] will be a month later October 15th 6 to
[2:11:49] 8 at the uh golf club.
[2:11:53] Uh our mentioned earlier our offices
[2:11:55] will be closed on Labor Day of course
[2:11:58] and for emergencies uh not emergencies
[2:12:01] contact 911 but for non-emergencies
[2:12:04] something in the road or something of
[2:12:05] that nature uh contact the non-emergency
[2:12:08] number of Beaver Creek Police Dispatch
[2:12:10] 937-4261
[2:12:12] 1225.
[2:12:14] And yes, Beaver Creek Popcorn Festival
[2:12:16] is coming. The city has a tent right
[2:12:18] beside the police tent as well. Uh,
[2:12:21] Saturday, September 12th, 10:00 a.m. to
[2:12:23] 8:00 p.m. and Sunday, September 13th,
[2:12:25] 11:00 a.m. to 6 pm. Uh, usually staff
[2:12:28] and and various council members uh staff
[2:12:32] it. This is something that though the
[2:12:34] entire popcorn festival, if you haven't
[2:12:35] ever been there, you're missing a real
[2:12:37] treat. Uh, there's a 5K run, art, arts
[2:12:40] and crafts, whole bunch of things. So,
[2:12:42] please have a look at that. Uh, Dayton
[2:12:44] Xia Road, I do want to mention, will
[2:12:46] close at 4:00 a.m. September 12th and
[2:12:48] will reopen at midnight on Monday,
[2:12:52] September 14th. So, make be prepared for
[2:12:56] that. Uh, festival is not organized by
[2:12:59] the city. However, the city and police
[2:13:01] will have booths. So, please stop by.
[2:13:04] Shout Park uh fundraiser. Uh, again,
[2:13:07] just want to state this is a continuing
[2:13:09] ongoing so far. for 203 uh donors and
[2:13:12] $19,67
[2:13:14] in funds that have raised up to August
[2:13:17] 24th. So, please uh stop by. Uh you can
[2:13:20] ask about it at the popcorn festival if
[2:13:22] you'd like or online beaver creek.gov
[2:13:25] shout park slide. And that's all I have
[2:13:28] tonight.
[2:13:29] >> Thank you very much, Councilman Curran.
[2:13:32] Move to adjourn, your honor.
[2:13:35] >> Second.
[2:13:36] >> I have a motion and a second to adjurnn.
[2:13:37] And all those in favor signify by saying
[2:13:39] I.
[2:13:39] >> I.
[2:13:40] >> We are adjourned.