Lorain/Elyria, OH
Elyria councilman alleges stealth meeting
Print this story
Read comments and discuss this story
ELYRIA - A resident and a city councilman accused the Utilities and Safety Committee chairman Saturday of deliberately scheduling a last-minute meeting without notifying the public so that residents couldn’t attend to discuss a proposed road widening project that will result in old trees being cut down.
Councilman Garry Gibbs, R-3rd Ward, sent an e-mail to several residents to let them know about the meeting, which is scheduled for 6:45 p.m. Monday, just prior to the 7 p.m. regular Council meeting.
“I sent it so the residents can be informed,” Gibbs said of his e-mail. “I think definitely there’s been issues before Council and committees that we seem to try to hush over and don’t want any discussion in regards to it.”
The committee’s chairman, Councilman Michael Lotko, D-at large, said the meeting will deal with a housekeeping issue and wasn’t intended to be a secret
“There are, I think, four easements that we needed for East River Street,” Lotko said. “The residents signed the easements. The meeting is just a formality. We’re accepting the easements. They’ve all agreed to them.”
At issue is a proposed $1.7 million paving and widening project on East River Street the city will be using federal funds to complete. The road will be widened 2 feet on each side, Lotko said, and new waterlines will be put in, as well.
“I think any time you have any committee meeting 15 minutes before a Council meeting, it’s not giving any issue air time for discussion,” Gibbs said. “I don’t know why Mike Lotko couldn’t hold a regular committee meeting. They know residents want to speak on this, because they’ve spoken on it before.”
Lotko said there really isn’t anything to discuss.
“I got a call the other day from the clerk’s office and they asked if we could do the meeting before Council,” Lotko said. “There’s really no discussion or argument. These people accepted these easements and the offers they were given. We’re just accepting them. There’s no discussion, there’s no debate. We’re accepting the easements. That’s all.”
East River Street resident Joan Unger, one of the recipients of Gibbs’ e-mail, spoke out against the project and removing the trees at a meeting about three weeks ago.
“This sounds like some really dirty pool,” Unger said. “I just want to let people know that this meeting is going on.”
“They don’t want anybody to know about this,” she said. “They’re gonna vote on it, push it through and that’s gonna be that.”
Committee member Donna Mitchell, D-6th Ward, knew nothing about the meeting when contacted Saturday night.
Committee member Kevin Brubaker, D-at large, said he hasn’t picked up his packet of information yet and didn’t know what was on the agenda for Monday’s meeting. He suggested rescheduling the committee meeting if residents are upset.
“If there are residents that are concerned with (no notice), then maybe we need to move that meeting to a date when people can attend,” Brubaker said, adding that accepting the easements doesn’t make the road widening project a done deal.
“There are still several steps that have to be taken before a tree will come down,” Brubaker said. “There’s engineering and planning. It’s not going to happen before the first of the year or even early next spring. Some decisions still have to be made. We’re certainly not going to be cutting trees down Tuesday morning.”
Unger said she’s concerned that the street will look terrible with the loss of the 75- to 100-year-old trees - even if they’re replaced with saplings. She’s also worried about speeding becoming more of an issue on a wider road and questioned whether the project is even necessary.
Brubaker said that if the project moves forward, it won’t be until next year.
“I don’t believe anybody’s trying to be sneaky,” Brubaker said. “It’s just a point of order. If the residents signed off on the easements, it’s now our responsibility as Safety and Utilities to accept those easements. I think there will be more discussion. I think the process will be larger and much longer than was originally anticipated.”
Committee member Mark Craig, I-4th Ward, said he learned about the committee meeting when he picked up his packet Friday afternoon. He said residents can speak at the meeting at the chairman’s discretion.
“They don’t have a right to speak, but if the chairman permits it, they can speak,” Craig said.
Contact Alicia Castelli at 329-7144 or acastelli@chroniclet.com.
Print this story
Report an innappropriate comment
In order to comment, you must agree to our user agreement
and discussion guidelines.
You must be registered and logged in to post a comment. If you aren't already registered,
click here.
If you are registered, click here to log in.
Need help? Email Us.
must be going to construct another RunWay and put up another 1000 light poles
(Report comment)
wait a sec i thought meetings at were where poeple were suposed to say what they think but this guy is saying thta its up to the councel leader to decide if poeple are alloud to speak?
thats stupid
(Report comment)
“This sounds like some really dirty pool,” Unger said. “I just want to let people know that this meeting is going on.”
Joan,
I’m confused, how is this dirty pool when the only thing the city council is doing is accepting the easements? They not making any other decisions on the project. If it was a full meeting reference to dicussing the project or making other decisions on how the project was going to affect the residents, I could see your point.
This is just another inflamatory comment that has no basis or merit to this project.
(Report comment)
There is another meeting that may be a hush & rush that will occur on Wednesday Oct 7th @ 4:30pm 2nd floor Council Chambers, that is to discus income tax, why isn’t this meeting at 6 or 7pm when every one can come?
(Report comment)
This is my opinion, but how come the administration is not taking this $1.7 million and putting it into South Abbey that road has no storm sewers, How many peoples vehicles ended up in the ditches last winter when we had that terrible ice storm? East River already is wide enough. I have never heard anyone complain about the water pressure over there, if there are problems over in that area they are in the Garford, Eastern Heights area. What also happened to the Broad Street widening? if I recall there was money alocalted for a new study awhile back. I think Lotko, Gibbs,Stewart,and Tanner need to get together and table this East River project and worry about South Abbey. Folk come to the meeting tomorrow night. If they do not let you speak, they do not get your vote. This project can be TABLE if OUR elected officials wanted it to be. I still think that this East River project is just for all the people that work for the city and county that live elsewhere but not here and that the way they take to get to State Route 57. Go over there about 4:35 to 4:55, the traffic is backed up all the past Convient Food Marts parking lot. I want to reinstate what I said a few weeks back. That Wal Mart and chestnut coomons was built for them. Long term planing in this county is kept quite. You see that area is going to be the new midway mall and we get more empty buildins out at the mall.
(Report comment)
“They don’t have a right to speak, but if the chairman permits it, they can speak,” Craig said.
Does anyone else have a problem with this statement. As elected officials, I was under the impression that they worked for the people that elected them. People, by any and all means, always, always, always question your elected representatives when they do things that are questionable.
And as “endthecorruption” stated earlier, “If they do not let you speak, they do not get your vote.” Plain and simple.
(Report comment)
Second that Brian! All in favor say I
(Report comment)
pretty much what i said on the seond post in this topic. it sounds fishy to me that poeple only get to speak at the meetings if the chair person lets them
(Report comment)
I wonder why the city, or this paper is not reporting the other frivilous spending going on in Elyria? Chief Medders was found guilty in a Federal Court of violating one of his officers civil rights, which cost the City’s insurance company nearly $1,000,000, of which the city had to pay approximately $56,000 in deductibles. Also, the city found it in it’s heart to pay Chief Medders losing legal fees of approximately $20,000 out of a so called “slush-fund”. So now the city says it has no money and wants to layoff police and firemen and cut services etc. but could afford $76,000 worth of “extras” for Chief Medders. It should also be noted that to this day Chief Medders has not received one bit of punishment, reprimand or censure. How is this fiscally responsible?
(Report comment)
What happened at the council meeting? I would like to get the scoop, I was ill all day and was unable to attend tonight.
(Report comment)