COUNCIL MEETING SUMMARY MAY 19, 2026
Willoughby City Council Meeting Summary
• May 19, 2026 •
Ken Kary • Councilman Ward 2
NOTE
These notes “are not” the official minutes for Willoughby City Council.
The views I express in these Council Meeting Summaries are my own and do not reflect any official view or position of the City of Willoughby.
The “official” Council Minutes are posted on the City of Willoughby Website
https://willoughbyohio.com/city-council/
Committee Meetings:
ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING:
Committee: Ken Kary, Dan Anderson, Dan Garry
*The purpose of the Environmental Planning Committee is to review:
EAS #3-3-26 - Construction of five (5) duplexes located at 1200 Lost Nation Road (Windermere Village).
EAS #3-3-26
Construction of six (6) five (5) duplexes located at 1200 Lost Nation Road (Windermere Village).
Mr. Kary stated that EAS #3-3-26, the Windermere Village project proposing the construction of five duplexes at 1200 Lost Nation Road is being addressed tonight. Mr. Kary explained that the matter had been tabled at the previous Council meeting so that Council and the administration could clarify several questions raised from multiple sources. Mr. Kary then asked the Mayor to summarize what had occurred at the administration’s May 15th meeting with Extended Housing.
Mayor Fiala explained that Council had raised four primary questions. First, regarding the Windermere right-of-way, he stated county mapping appeared to show that the existing Windermere right-of-way extended into the proposed development. Extended Housing acknowledged there could be an encroachment, and the administration’s position was that, if confirmed, the encroachment should be vacated so the roadway would remain private and avoid future disputes over matters such as road repairs and snow plowing. Second, the Mayor clarified that only the preliminary plat had been completed; the final plat could only be submitted for recording by the property owner after the review process and sale were complete, and that final plat would still need approval from both the Planning Commission and Council. Third, he addressed concerns about whether the McKinley Center would remain separate from the proposed development, stating that Extended Housing had confirmed the plat filing would physically separate the major subdivision from the McKinley Center and that ownership of the McKinley Center would remain with the McKinley 501(c)(3). Finally, he stated the City had asked for written confirmation from the current owner that there was no intention to sell the McKinley Center itself, and he noted that when asked whether there were any future development plans for that property, the response was that there were none at this time.
Ms. Rothenberg (legal representative for Extended Housing) stated that the Mayor had summarized the situation well and referenced a letter submitted by Pastor Currier that also addressed the lack of future development plans and the relationship between Extended Housing and the McKinley Center in connection with the intended purchase. She further clarified the issue of the public right-of-way, explaining that Extended Housing had already paid for and submitted a survey to the Planning Commission detailing the existing conditions, including the portion of roadway that had already been vacated in 1947 and that affected approximately two and one-half of the newly formed lots. She stated the remaining portion would require a City resolution to be vacated and confirmed that Extended Housing was willing to maintain the road, including snow plowing and similar responsibilities.
Mr. Kary reviewed several recent changes to the plan that had resulted from discussions at Planning Commission and a public meeting with area residents. He noted that over the years the proposal had been significantly reduced, going from concepts involving apartments and as many as 18 duplexes down to the current proposal of five duplexes, thereby considerably reducing the projected number of residents. He also confirmed that one duplex had been removed from the northwest corner to create additional green space and that the development would now be bordered by a white PVC fence approved by the City. Mr. Kary stated that these changes came directly from requests made by neighborhood residents and stated the applicant had listened to and responded to those concerns.
Mr. Kary revisited the Environmental Assessment Statement discussion from Planning Commission, beginning with traffic impact. He stated that earlier versions of the proposal had generated concerns about connecting the two Windermere streets, speeding, and related traffic issues, but stated those concerns had since been addressed. Under the revised plan, Windermere will consist of a public right-of-way and a private right-of-way entering from Lost Nation Road and ending in the complex with a dead end, landscape berm, and a turnaround feature for Fire Department equipment. Mr. Jennings confirmed that the turnaround was adequate for emergency access. Chief Unger confirmed that it would properly handle fire department apparatus. Mr. Kary stated that the applicant had agreed to install warmer-temperature street lighting rather than bright white or blue LED lighting. Regarding police and fire demands, Mr. Kary stated that the only concern raised had involved the turnaround which had been addressed. Chief Schultz was then asked whether he had any police related concerns about the project. Chief Schultz stated he had no concerns. Mr. Kary stated that no issues had been cited by directors or the Planning Commission regarding noise, water, or air pollution. Regarding the school system, he stated that any children living in the development would likely attend Grant Elementary unless enrolled in a private school and commented that, while school impacts are always worth noting, local education officials had generally expressed a willingness to welcome students. Regarding hazardous materials, Mr. Kary stated that the application indicated no hazardous waste materials would be present on the site.
Mr. Kary stated that stormwater management was one of the major issues in the prior EAS review. He asked City Engineer Lannon to confirm that the updated stormwater management plan complies with City code and would function properly. Mr. Lannon stated that a full stormwater management plan had been submitted and reviewed and it meets City code, and that it includes a retention basin located in the same general area as the emergency vehicle turnaround. He explained that discharge from the retention basin would be directed out along Windermere to Lost Nation Road, as requested. Mr. Kary asked Mr. Lannon whether the EAS now fully met City code and engineering review requirements, Mr. Lannon responded that it did. Mr. Kary asked the applicant to confirm that, if the project were completed and later created stormwater issues affecting Lost Nation Road or Town Creek, the developer would work with the City Engineer to study the cause and, if the problem was related to the development, help remedy it. Ms. McLeod responded that Extended Housing would do so as long as the solution was feasible and reasonable. Mr. Kary asked about the development timeline and Ms. McLeod stated that construction was projected to begin in spring 2027 and be completed sometime between spring and early fall 2028. Mr. Kary stated that the Planning Commission recommended that the City and the developer potentially explore a tax increment financing mechanism to support future infrastructure improvements in the area. Ms. Rothenberg stated that such an initiative would need to begin with the City, but Extended Housing would support whatever the City decided to do with its tax structure. She confirmed that a landscaping maintenance program for the site had already been submitted to both Council and Planning Commission and that the same contractor used at Extended Housing’s existing sites would be responsible for ongoing maintenance.
Ms. Sievers asked about renderings shown on page 2 of the site plans, noting that the images depicted single-family homes on single-family lots and asked how duplexes were similar in nature to the existing neighborhood. Mr. Jennings stated that the total square footage of the two-bedroom duplex units was generally not far off from a single-family home and that the buildings had intentionally been designed as one-story structures to keep their scale and massing closer to neighboring homes rather than constructing larger two-story buildings. Ms. Seivers stated that each duplex still contained two units and therefore four bedrooms total, while some of the homes shown were only two-bedroom houses. Mr. Jennings acknowledged that point but added that the neighborhood already contained a variety of homes of different ages, including some that were larger and smaller.
Mr. Carr thanked the residents for their involvement and described the process as one of the most diligent EAS reviews Council had undertaken. He also thanked the Mayor for summarizing the administration’s follow-up work, Extended Housing for addressing the concerns that had led some members to vote no previously, and Councilman Kary for his thorough representation of Council before the Planning Commission. He noted that, while some residents and Council members may feel duplexes do not fit the character of the neighborhood, two-family dwellings are a permitted use in the R-50 district under the City’s current code. Mr. Lucas confirmed that two-family dwellings are indeed a permitted use in the R-50 district and stated that, because of concerns raised during this process, Council has already requested an amendment to remove that use from the district going forward. He stated that any such change would not affect the current project, which was already in progress and would still need to continue through the existing approval process. Mayor Fiala stated that the code had been changed in 1997 to eliminate two-family homes from every residential district except R-50, suggesting that the decision at that time may have been intended to encourage economic development.
Mr. Kary thanked the audience members with whom he had communicated by phone and email, thanked Extended Housing for listening to residents and accommodating several of their requests.
There were no other comments or concerns. Mr. Kary stated the committee recommends passage of EAS #3-3-26.
The Environmental Planning Committee adjourned at 6:12 p.m.
FINANCE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING:
Committee: John Tomaselli, Dan Garry, Ken Kary
**The purpose of the Finance & Audit Committee meeting is to discuss Capital Budget.
2026 CAPITAL BUDGET
Mr. Tomaselli stated that the purpose of the Finance & Audit meeting was to discuss the capital requests for the capital budget. He explained that, similar to the operating budget process, each director has submitted requests for capital needs, followed by discussion regarding what should and should not be included. He stated that the resulting document before Council reflects those discussions and represented a large overall request compared with prior years, when capital requests had generally been around $1,000,000.
Finance Director Hoffman explained that each director had been asked to submit capital requests to be funded either through the capital fund or, where applicable, through other available funds such as the safety tax levy for police and fire and funds tied to service needs such as NOPEC. She compiled the list of requests and reviewed available funding, emphasizing that the capital fund remained the most important source. She stated that the City has been fortunate to maintain a significant balance, allowing it to address needed purchases. She stated that one of the largest requests was a pumper for the Fire Department, which will be funded through a combination of safety tax levy money and capital funds. She stated that she, Mr. Tomaselli, Mr. Carr and Mayor Fiala met and made reductions so that not every requested item made the final list. She stated the final number was solid and still left the City with a significant balance to address unexpected needs later in the year. Mr. Carr asked whether the approximately $100,000 to $120,000 returned from the Fire Department’s refurbished vehicle project had already been reflected in the remaining capital funds. Ms. Hoffman confirmed that it had and explained that after receiving the final number from Chief Ungar, she adjusted the committed funds downward from roughly $500,000 to about $455,000.
Mr. Tomaselli stated that, unlike the operating budget, the capital budget does not have the same deadline structure and that capital items of $75,000 or more would return to Council later as separate pieces of legislation. Items below $75,000, unless there was objection from Council, could generally move forward for purchase orders after the review tonight.
PARKS & RECREATION
Ms. Keller stated that most of her requests were tied to aging facilities and the need to begin replacing worn or outdated items. She stated that many of the requested items for Osborne Pool involve electronics and related systems and remarked that the “new” pool was already 26 years old. Other requests involve ordinary but necessary maintenance items such as picnic tables, grills, playground equipment, and similar park infrastructure. Mr. Tomaselli asked if the electronic sign for Osborne Park was a message sign. Ms. Keller explained that it would be a message sign and that the City had already received a $43,000 grant for the sign itself. The capital request is for the electrical work to extend power from the pool house to the sign location, as well as for the base, footers, and related installation needs.
Mr. Tomaselli asked about the steps for Todd Field. Ms. Keller explained that the entire structure would be replaced in the same location and configuration, rather than redesigned. Regarding baseball field renovations, she stated the department has a list of improvements, with approximately $12,000 to $15,000 of the request intended for dirt to build up the fields. She added that Buildings and Grounds is exploring use of a contractor with a GPS-equipped skid loader to help level the fields and that the City would eventually replace each backstop; those costs could range from $30,000 to $50,000 depending on size. She stated that this type of field maintenance would likely become an ongoing expense, though not necessarily at the same annual amount, and that the baseball league would also contribute funds.
Ms. Keller stated that the monument sign at Osborne Park was separate from the electronic sign and had already been funded. She is hoping the electronic sign will be ready by June 10th for the first concert, though no work on the signboard itself would begin until a purchase order was issued. She explained that the security cameras requested for the pool were additional cameras, not replacements. Two would be placed on the Lakeshore side, one on the monument sign, and one on the electronic signboard, with coverage extending toward Lakeshore Boulevard. Other cameras will be positioned to correct blind spots inside the pool area where existing multi-directional cameras had obstructed views because of the Funbrellas. Ms. Sievers asked about cameras at the back of the park. Ms. Keller stated cameras would not be placed there at this time.
SERVICE DEPARTMENT
Beginning with the cemetery, Mr. Knecht stated the department would like to replace a 2007 pickup truck with a Ford F-350. The old truck will be shifted into watering duty for another season or two, replacing an even older watering vehicle that has reached the end of its useful life. He stated he has requested a trac vac for the cemeteries to collect leaves and debris. He explained that cleanup at both cemeteries has become labor intensive and that the trailer style unit could be pulled by a utility vehicle or tractor, reducing the need to divert larger leaf collection equipment from City streets. It was noted that the cemetery had requested vehicle replacements in consecutive years. Mr. Knecht acknowledged that and while that could seem excessive for a two-person department, the cemetery had simply ended up with the City’s oldest vehicles after years of departmental reassignment. He stated that the vehicles are not used only within cemetery grounds; they also serve as backup vehicles for other operations, including snow plowing. Mr. Knecht explained the need to replace the brine or beat heat tank at the service garage; the current tank had failed during the winter and reached the end of its useful life. The request would cover a new tank, containment area, and pumping system. Wastewater Pollution Control Center employees will help install the pumping system to save money because they were familiar with that type of work. Regarding the repairs to Street Department plow truck No. 72, which had been damaged in an accident, Mr. Knecht explained that insurance was covering approximately $45,000 of the roughly $62,000 repair cost, with the remainder to come from capital funds.
Mr. Knecht stated he has requested an asphalt patch truck to replace a 1991 unit whose chassis frame and patching unit had deteriorated to the point where continued repairs were no longer cost effective. He noted that the existing patch truck has provided more than 30 years of service but that parts availability has become difficult because original manufacturer parts were no longer readily stocked. Mr. Carr asked if this was a vehicle that is used for in house asphalt projects. Mr. Knecht stated that this truck is one that it used and one that crews favored because it kept asphalt at a constant temperature, allowing them to travel around the City and make repairs without losing the heat of the product. Mr. Knecht stated that while it was useful for larger patch repairs, it would not be used for major paving projects such as parking lots, where a paver would still be needed.
Mr. Knecht stated he is also requesting a landscape trailer for the Street Department so that two mowers could be transported at once, reducing the need for multiple trucks and trailers. Another request is for an air-conditioning maintenance machine for fleet services to allow the City to continue servicing the newest vehicle AC systems in-house rather than outsourcing that work. Mr. Tomaselli asked whether the AC machine was a replacement or a new capability, and Mr. Knecht stated it was new because it was specifically designed for the latest generation of AC systems. He explained that while older units would eventually be retired as older vehicles left service, a dedicated machine for the new standard made more sense than a combination unit. He stated the AC machine should be available during the current season, but the patch truck might not arrive until fall or even winter because manufacturers were already pushing assembly dates back. Councilman Anderson asked which vendor the City intended to use, and Mr. Knecht identified Pro-Patch, noting that it was also the manufacturer of the City’s current unit and had provided excellent service over the years.
Mr. Tomaselli asked about the repairs to the plow truck that was hit. Mr. Knecht stated some repairs, such as frame work and hydraulic repairs, has already been handled externally, while the City is completing the remainder in-house to control costs. Mr. Tomaselli asked whether the accident might shorten the vehicle’s life cycle, Mr. Knecht stated the repairs appeared solid, though unforeseen issues could still arise. He estimated that replacing a truck of that kind would cost about $280,000, making repair is the more practical option.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
Chief Ungar stated he has requested security cameras for both fire stations, noting that neither station currently has security cameras. He stated the proposal from Citywide Solutions was especially favorable because the next lowest quote exceeded the requested amount for just one station, and Citywide already services other City buildings. Second, he stated he has requested replacement of part of the self-contained breathing apparatus air compressor system, explaining that this was not a typical shop compressor but the specialized equipment used to fill the air cylinders firefighters wear on their backs. Referring to a significant fire the previous Sunday, Chief Ungar stated that firefighters had gone through many cylinders because of the heat and interior conditions, and those cylinders had to be shipped elsewhere for filling, leaving one station without its normal supply of filled cylinders during that time.
Chief Ungar stated that the largest and most heavily discussed fire request was for a replacement fire engine for the Lost Nation Road station. Chief Ungar explained that the department was dealing with an aging fleet and had recently improved its ambulance situation through the refurbished ambulance and an additional ambulance already ordered. However, he stated the department’s two oldest fire engines will be 20 years old the following year. Although refurbishing one of them had been considered, he concluded that it was difficult to justify investing a substantial sum in a 20-year-old apparatus. After requesting quotes from several vendors, including one vendor building the City’s ladder truck and another that had built the department’s last three fire engines, Chief Ungar found that all custom orders carried not only high price tags but also build times of roughly 30 to 32 months. Even if the City funded one immediately, he noted, the truck might not arrive for nearly three years, by which time the City’s oldest frontline engine would be 15 years old. He stated that the NFPA’s recommendation is generally 10 years in frontline service followed by 10 years in reserve, and he emphasized that the City had already exceeded the frontline recommendation. He stated that the mechanics at the service garage keep the fleet running well, however, he didn’t want to risk the fire engine fleet falling into the same kind of shortage the ambulance fleet had recently experienced, when the City had been down to only two ambulances. He stated the City has an opportunity to purchase a Sutphen engine already in production, which could be delivered by fall and would cost less than a newly ordered custom unit matching the rest of the fleet.
Mr. Anderson asked if our firefighters would need to learn a new layout with the new truck. Chief Ungar stated that the truck would not require firefighters to learn a dramatically different layout, and in fact its construction and controls were remarkably similar to the department’s newest engine at the Euclid Avenue station. He added that the new truck would actually offer advantages, including a 1,000-gallon water tank rather than the 500-gallon tanks on current engines. Referring again to the recent South Beachview fire, he noted that the larger tank would have doubled the available onboard water supply for the two firefighters who first arrived.
Mr. Carr stated that roughly one-third of the purchase would be covered by safety levy funds and that the City was also working to improve replacement planning in future years. Mr. Tomaselli asked about the delivery timeline for the City’s new ladder truck. Chief Ungar stated the ladder truck is expected in March 2027. The current ladder truck at the Euclid Avenue station is a 1997 model and would be 30 years old the next year. Even so, he stated it would likely remain in reserve because it had no meaningful trade-in value and because maintaining a backup ladder truck will help the City’s ISO rating. He stated there would likely be some trade-in value connected with the proposed fire engine purchase, as the vendor had provided an estimate and another local department had expressed interest.
POLICE DEPARTMENT
Chief Schultz stated he requested several smaller items but recurring items, including replacement AED defibrillators for police cruisers. He explained that the department had invested in cruiser-based AEDs several years earlier so officers could respond with lifesaving equipment before paramedics or firefighters arrived, and that the current units were now about nine years old, out of warranty, and beginning to fail. The replacements would match the units currently used by the Fire Department. He stated another annual request is for ballistic vests, noting that the City typically recovers 50% to 75% of those costs through state and federal grants. Regarding tasers, which he stated the department has used for 20 years and regarded as its most effective less lethal tool for controlling dangerous situations and saving lives. Other requests included ballistic helmets for five officers assigned to the Western Lake County Emergency Response Team. He explained that helmets purchased years earlier were not truly rated for ballistic fire and that officers entering high risk incidents needed protection from both handgun and rifle rounds. He also requested ballistic shields, stating that the City had previously placed such shields in patrol cruisers so officers responding to violent incidents or situations involving possible gunfire would have an immediate means of protection.
Chief Schultz stated he requested two new police cruisers and the associated outfitting equipment. He stated that in recent years he had requested three cruisers annually, which had helped keep the fleet stable, but he had scaled this year’s request back to two even though a third could still be justified. The fleet experiences heavy mileage and wear, though the Service Department does an excellent job maintaining the vehicles.
He stated he is requesting new mobile video camera systems for the cruisers. The department has long relied on dash-camera systems that record traffic stops, crime scenes, crash scenes, and officer interactions, and that they also include audio microphones that continue recording even when an officer moves away from the vehicle, such as into a home or apartment. He stated that these mobile video systems have often proven more useful than body cameras because body cameras can have limited or obstructed views depending on where they are worn. Chief Schultz explained that the request would replace the department’s entire fleet of mobile video units, which consists of approximately 15 to 17 systems. The current units are aging out, many are failing, and all available backup units had already been used. Although the City had purchased a new server the previous year and temporarily patched it to work with the old cameras, the old and new systems could not be effectively mixed on a long-term basis.
GENERAL GOVERNMENT
Mayor Fiala stated that the City’s Christmas decorations were aging and that funding was being requested to begin replacing them citywide because of lamp failures and the increasing difficulty of finding replacement parts. Ms. Keller stated that the request is specifically related to the large tree in Wes Point Park, where staff currently use C9 bulbs and must unscrew and replace them individually at a cost of several dollars each.
Regarding the façade grant program, Mr. Tomaselli noted that the request was listed as an additional amount and asked whether the City typically budgets about $50,000 annually for this purpose. Ms. Hoffman explained that some leftover façade funds remained available and that the additional amount was meant to ensure funds were on hand for businesses that apply through community development. The Mayor stated that the City had no intention of spending any of that money unless applications were submitted and approved through the City process.
Mr. Tomaselli stated that although the total capital request appeared large and was closer to $2,000,000 than the $1,000,000 figure that had caused concern in prior years, he and Mr. Carr felt confident that the requests had been carefully reviewed and reflected responsible planning.
Finance and Audit Committee meeting adjourned at 6:53 p.m.
AGENDA
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING May 19, 2026
MAYOR’S APPOINTMENT (Confirmed by Council)
As noted in his memorandum sent to Council, Mayor Fiala stated the City received applications from 10 highly qualified candidates. Six applicants were interviewed then second interviews were conducted with two finalists. Both finalists were well matched in terms of skills and experience, but believed Mr. McConville was the better overall fit for the City due to his collaborative and thoughtful approach.
Motion made by Mr. Tomaselli and seconded by Mr. Anderson to confirm the Mayor’s
appointment of Luke McConville as Director of Law.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES-
Regular Council Meeting of May 5, 2026
STANDING AND REGULAR COMMITTEE REPORTS
Service Committee, Mr. Anderson – Mr. Carr stated he appreciated the coordination of the stormwater drive-through effort and asked Mr. Anderson to look into the development of a sidewalk maintenance program. Mr. Carr explained that discussion at the previous meeting about sidewalk legislation had caused confusion, and Mr. Knecht later clarified that the legislative change applied only to point-of-sale inspections, not to complaint-driven repairs or other sidewalk replacement situations. Mr. Carr stated the City has relied too long on a complaint-based approach and should move toward a more proactive program by identifying the worst sidewalk areas, including neighborhoods such as Oak Ridge and parts of Ridge Acres, defining what qualifies as a severe trip hazard, estimating the scope and cost of repairs, and creating a long-term plan that may require increasing annual sidewalk funding over several years. Mr. Anderson stated that the first step should be to compare practices in neighboring cities, noting that communities such as Wickliffe and Mentor use different inspection and replacement models, and that Mentor’s rotating inspection program can result in homeowners being required to pay for sidewalk replacement.
CORRESPONDENCE
No correspondence
PUBLIC PORTION
Mr. Carr acknowledged to Mr. Malecki that he is owed two minutes of public comment from the last meeting. He stated that some research was done and that anyone tonight can have an extra two minutes after everyone has been heard.
Mr. Carr read into the record a letter from:
Rick Wagner, 6049 Firwood, Mentor-on-the-Lake - Mayor, Directors, and Council: I was a Ward 1 Councilman for 25 years. I used to live on Elmwood, which backs on the McKinley School. My son still lives there. Some of my friends tell me about the proposal for subsidized housing behind McKinley, 5 buildings, each with two fully furnished apartments, managed by Extended Housing of Painesville. I went on Extended Housing's website to see what their goals are. They house people with severe mental illness, bipolar, deep depression, and schizophrenia. They also have people who are recovering from drugs and/or alcohol addiction. I commend the policy, but not that type of housing in a residential neighborhood. I am a retired Willoughby court bailiff, and I remember defendants coming before the judge who had mental issues but stopped taking the meds, or drugs, who were released and got into trouble for various reasons. This type of housing does not belong in a residential area surrounded by single-family homes. Willoughby is the courtesy city. Let's show the residents some courtesy and vote down this project. If the project is OK there, these units will be here for 20, 40, 60 years or more. Will they still be subsidized housing? Thank you.
Patricia Weiss, 586 Tioga Trail, Willoughby, Ohio -
Ms. Weiss stated she had two questions regarding the proposed two-bedroom units. First, she stated that the project representative avoided directly addressing the square footage, stating only that it was comparable to other homes in the neighborhood. Ms. Weiss asked whether there would be any limit on the number of occupants permitted in the units, expressing concern that while two occupants would be reasonable for a two-bedroom home, additional family members could later move in, resulting in overcrowding. She referenced similar situations on her street, including homes occupied by 11 and 16 individuals, and stated that although those residents had been good neighbors, she believed it was important for the record to reflect that a two-bedroom home should not be occupied by an excessive number of people. Ms. Weiss also raised concerns about potential flooding impacts on neighboring properties. She referred to an earlier statement that assistance with damages or repairs would be provided only “if feasible” and questioned who would determine feasibility in such circumstances. She asked what recourse homeowners would have if the nonprofit developer declined to provide assistance on the grounds that remediation was not financially feasible, emphasizing that affected residents had already experienced significant hardship and deserved a clearer commitment. Mr. Carr asked Mr. Keller whether the code has a limit on the number of people who could reside in a two-bedroom home. Mr. Keller stated that dwellings are limited to four unrelated individuals; however, if the occupants constitute a single family, there is no numerical cap under the code. Regarding Ms. Weiss’s concern about potential flooding in the future, Mr. Lucas stated that any such determination would be fact driven. He further explained that, in the absence of a specific definition, the term “feasible” should be interpreted according to its plain and ordinary meaning, including whether a repair or maintenance item would be considered commercially feasible. Accordingly, he emphasized that each situation would need to be evaluated based on its particular facts.
Norb Sanek, 616 Cherokee Trail, Willoughby, Ohio -
Mr. Sanek stated there are three primary issues of concern: the type of housing proposed, the potential flooding risk, and the future of the McKinley Outreach Center. Regarding the type of housing: Residents have clearly expressed that they do not support subsidized, transitional, or rehabilitation style housing at this location. Willoughby already carries a disproportionate share of subsidized and supportive housing. Residents believe alternative locations and solutions should be thoroughly explored. He urged Council to vote no until this matter is adequately addressed. Regarding the flood risk, Mr. Sanek recognizes that Council has heard concerns about flooding, particularly in light of the relationship between the Mayor and Pastor Mike Currier and the Mayor’s oversight of the Planning Commission. To ensure fairness and public confidence, he believes the most appropriate course of action is to commission an independent, unbiased study agreed upon by all parties including the residents, Pastor Mike Currier, and the City. Because this is a decision with lasting impact, he respectfully requested that Council vote no. Regarding the future of McKinley Outreach, Mr. Sanek stated that McKinley Outreach distributes over 200,000 pounds of food annually, serves more than 2,000 households and over 6,000 individuals, and added 253 new households last year. Its reach extends beyond the immediate community into western Lake County. Mr. Sanek stated he experienced food insecurity growing up. The Outreach Center is located on the same parcel that would be sold if the development proceeds. Therefore, it is essential that there be a firm, legally binding commitment ensuring that it will not be demolished. To accomplish this, the property should be rezoned and separated, allowing Pastor Mike Currier and his church to continue their mission without interruption. He urged Council again to vote no until these issues are fully resolved. Mr. Sanek expressed his appreciation for the professionalism and courtesy shown in his communications with several individuals here tonight. He thanked Council President Carr for his time and responsiveness. He stated that Pastor Mike Currier asked him if he could help ease tensions on the north end. He believes meaningful progress begins with leadership specifically, with a gesture of good faith and a clear commitment to the future of McKinley Outreach and the surrounding neighborhood. Mr. Sanek proposed that Council vote no tonight and establish a working group composed of representatives from the City, Pastor Mike Currier’s church, and local residents. He stated he would be willing to serve on this group and contribute constructively toward a balanced and thoughtful resolution. Mr. Sanek stated he respectfully ask Council to vote no.
For clarification, Mayor Fiala stated that the Mayor or any previous Mayor has no authority, jurisdiction, or direct control over the City’s boards and commissions. These bodies are appointed and operate independently.
David Hudak, 1228 Mohegan Trail, Willoughby, Ohio - Mr. Hudak stated he has lived in his home for approximately 53 years and has been a member of the community for a very long time. He stated he has witnessed a number of development projects come before Council, including one located directly behind his property, the Woodbridge Commons apartments, which have since been renamed. That particular project was ultimately constructed following extended legal disputes, which resulted in significant financial cost to the City. Despite community concerns at the time, the development proceeded. As a neighboring resident, he experienced the direct impact. The removal of all trees from the site created substantial environmental issues, including excessive dust and disruption for years. From that experience, it often felt as though residents had limited input, while developers’ interests were prioritized. With that history in mind, he respectfully asks why the current proposal cannot reflect the character of the existing neighborhood, with traditional single-family homes consistent with the surrounding area. Residents are clearly expressing their concerns, and it is important to remember that Council represents the interests of the community as a whole. The residents are asking to be heard. Mr. Hudak stated his family has been impacted by serious mental illness, which has required him to become educated on the challenges it presents. This is a complex and sensitive issue that affects individuals in different ways, including behavior, perception, and overall well-being. Because of these experiences, he strongly believes that any development involving supportive or specialized housing must be carefully planned, properly resourced, and thoughtfully integrated to ensure safety, stability, and success for both residents and the broader community. He stated he may not know all the details of what is being proposed, but it is essential that any decision prioritizes transparency, due diligence, and the long-term well-being of the neighborhood. For these reasons, he is asking Council to proceed cautiously and ensure that the voices of long-term residents are fully considered before moving forward. He stated there was a murder in California that deeply affected his family due to the disease.
Paul Zawolowycz, 1160 Elmwood Drive, Willoughby, Ohio - Mr. Zawolowycz stated that the residents position on the matter has been clear for some time. The residents believe the property in question should be auctioned by the City to a developer who will construct and sell neighborhood appropriate, owner occupied single family homes on an appropriate number of lots. If the residents input is disregarded, residents may reasonably feel that they are being taxed without meaningful representation. He stated he would also like to share several thoughts on behalf of his neighbors in Ward 1, as well as residents of Willoughby who live outside Ward 1. First, he stated he encourages residents to make it a habit to lock all doors each evening, ensure that vehicles are secure, and avoid leaving valuables visible inside cars. Second, 3M offers a window security film that is virtually invisible and can make glass significantly more difficult and time-consuming to break; it may be worth considering as an added security measure. Third, with respect to security cameras, he recommends working with a smaller contractor who can install a system using standard, off-the-shelf components. This approach may help residents retain greater control over their data rather than relying on a large corporation that may not handle that data responsibly. Fourth, automatic exterior lighting that activates when motion is detected near entryways or patio doors can serve as an effective deterrent. Finally, he would like to note for all Willoughby residents that the challenges affecting Ward 1 are not isolated, and it is important for the broader community to recognize that these concerns can affect the City as a whole.
Lisa Bilinski, 1131 Windermere, Willoughby, Ohio - Ms. Bilinski stated she was unable to attend any of the previous meetings regarding this matter. She asked if the developers are purchasing the entire lot, including McKinley and the property behind it, or only the property behind it? She asked if the individuals involved will be signing leases and living there for a year or longer, or is this intended to be a shorter-term arrangement? For example, would they only be staying for a few months? Mr. Carr stated that would likely be a question for the Extended Housing representatives. Ms. Bilinski stated that if residents are coming and going frequently, that could present additional issues. Mental health challenges have affected her family as well, so that possibility is concerning to her.
Alice Pescrilli, 38387 Shearwater Lane, Willoughby, Ohio – Ms. Pescrilli stated she has lived in north Willoughby her entire life, with the exception of four years, and she made the decision to return here to raise her family because it is a wonderful neighborhood in a great City. She stated she wanted to make clear that she does not oppose helping people. Everyone may need assistance at some point in life, and supporting others is important. However, she does not believe this type of facility belongs in the middle of an established residential community. When the school was built over 100 years ago, it was intended to serve as a school for the children and families of the neighborhood. There is an alternative location at Shankland Road and Route 84, the former South High School parking lot, which is currently vacant. That site offers convenient access to the hospital and the Laketran route and is not located in the center of a residential neighborhood. She urged Council carefully consider the impact of placing this development in the middle of a neighborhood with transient residents. For these reasons, she respectfully asked Council to vote no.
Jeffrey Malecki, 1249 South Beachview Road, Willoughby, Ohio –
Mr. Malecki stated that, in his view, Council is being asked to address matters that should have already been properly handled by the administration, particularly with respect to the application and enforcement of codified ordinances, starting with the Zoning and Building Department. Specifically, he stated he has observed a pattern of incomplete reviews, lack of follow-through, and, in some cases, a failure to respond to important information that has been presented. These issues have contributed to a loss of public confidence. He stated he suggested the involvement of a third party to help ensure transparency and proper oversight. Tonight presents an opportunity to correct course and demonstrate a commitment to doing things properly moving forward. He stated that as elected officials, Council serves as the voice of the community. Residents have entrusted Council with the responsibility to make informed, fair, and consistent decisions. With that responsibility comes the expectation that ordinances will be understood and applied uniformly.
Regarding this specific project, several critical issues remain unresolved. For example, there appears to be no clear delineation of wetlands, despite prior assurances. Mr. Malecki stated he personally consulted with engineers and representatives from the EPA to better understand these concerns, and the lack of clarity is troubling. He stated the project requires rezoning yet these matters do not appear to have been fully addressed. There are discrepancies in zoning designations, including portions categorized as residential that may instead qualify as institutional use. Such classifications typically require conditional use permits, which, based on available records, do not appear to have been obtained in this case. Consistency in enforcement is essential. Other entities in the City have been required to obtain conditional use permits for similar uses, yet that standard does not appear to have been applied uniformly here. This raises concerns about unequal treatment and selective enforcement. The ordinances exist to ensure fairness, transparency, and orderly development. They should be applied equally to all parties, without exception. It is critical that all involved, elected officials and administrative staff alike have a clear understanding of these regulations and uphold them accordingly. Mr. Malecki asked for the resignation of Mr. Keller and Mr. Lannon. He stated he has guided Council with ordinances to try to get Council to see the big pictures and Council has failed.
Gregory Koss, 2409 Bunker Lane, Willoughby, Ohio -
Mr. Koss stated he would like to offer a different perspective this evening. He understands that this issue has generated strong emotions and deeply held opinions, and he respects those sentiments. He has heard ordinances referenced in ways that may not fully reflect their context or intent, which adds to the complexity of the discussion. By way of background, he stated he is an architect with over 50 years of experience. He has served on zoning and planning boards, and is familiar with the types of considerations involved in developments such as this. He stated he had two questions. Mr. Koss asked how many similar developments have been completed in Ohio, and what have been the outcomes? Second, are there any documented studies or statistics over the past several years demonstrating whether developments of this type have negatively impacted property values or surrounding neighborhoods? He stated that in his opinion there is potential for this project to bring positive benefits to the community, including increased property values and tax revenue. While concerns have been raised, he has not seen clear evidence demonstrating that this type of development would have a detrimental impact. Regarding zoning, such as R-50, these designations have been in place for many years, and changes to codes and ordinances must be approached thoughtfully and within established legal frameworks. If there is no substantiated data clearly showing that this development would harm the community, he encouraged Council to consider the potential long-term benefits. It may also be reasonable to allow the project to proceed and evaluate its actual impact over time. With respect to infrastructure, it is his understanding that these matters including sewer and related systems have already been addressed and approved through the appropriate channels. Finally, regarding ongoing management and maintenance, entities associated with extended housing and property management are typically structured to support and maintain developments of this nature.
Daniel Rowan, 38647 Ninadell Avenue, Willoughby, Ohio -
Mr. Rowan stated he wanted to reiterate his concern that this project will significantly change the character of the neighborhood. He stated last year, there was a police presence on Lost Nation Road involving what appeared to be high-powered weapons. He stated he has lived in Willoughby his entire life and had never seen anything like that before. Additionally, the maintenance of the property is concerning. He stated the front area is well-kept, the rear of the property appears neglected. There has been a tree issue in the back for years, and the property has received repeated citations from the City for landscaping and wastewater related concerns. He reiterated that he doesn’t believe this project is appropriate for the neighborhood.
Karen Van Fossen, 525 Tioga Trail, Willoughby, Ohio -
Ms. Van Fossen stated she reached out to a ward representative with a few questions about the potential positive effects of this development. She stated that she responded with several points, including zoning and other considerations, but one statement that stood out to her was that it is also about the character of the area. She stated that that suggests to her that the City believes north Willoughby is the appropriate location for a development like this. She stated her children attended McKinley, grew up spending time at Osborne Park, and participated in programs such as Osborne Camp. She stated she was also among the residents consulted about improvements at Osborne Park, including decisions about the pool. She doesn’t understand why so often north Willoughby becomes the default location for projects like this. She stated she wants to be clear that she supports helping others, and she personally volunteers and contributes where she can. However, she doesn’t understand why north Willoughby consistently feels overlooked. For these reasons she is asking for Council to vote no.
Gino Pescrilli, 38387 Shearwater Lane, Willoughby, Ohio -
Mr. Pescrilli stated that Council may be overlooking that north Willoughby and the Lakeshore area are a hidden asset, communities across Ohio would highly value lakefront property like this. This is an area where, over time, older cottages from the 1930s and 1940s are likely to be replaced with higher-value homes.
He stated he is for the efforts to help individuals in need; the reality is that not every outcome is successful, and that must be considered. In other cities, including Cleveland, certain housing developments have not always produced positive results. In north Willoughby, there is scattered Section 8 housing, and he has personally observed increased police activity, including incidents involving violence and reports of weapons in nearby areas such as apartment complexes and Osborne Park. It includes a historic downtown, lakefront access, and ongoing investments such as improvements to the pier. It is essential that these assets are protected and maintained. Measures such as increased patrol presence have been helpful in the past and should continue to be a priority. Additionally, the proposed location raises practical concerns. It has limited access to public transportation and is not in close proximity to essential services such as hospitals and retail. Individuals who may rely on these services could face challenges accessing them, and emergency services could be placed under additional strain. Alternative locations, such as areas closer to Shankland and Ridge Road, may be more appropriate, given their proximity to a hospital, grocery stores, retail, and public transportation. These resources are important for individuals working to regain stability and independence. He stated the proposed location is constrained and not appropriate. He asked Council to vote no on the proposal.
Cheryl Vincent, 38441 S. Beachview Road, Willoughby, Ohio -
Ms. Vincent stated that her husband served in a capacity dealing with codes and she knows how difficult it can be. One of her husband’s guiding questions was always, “Is it safe?” He would not support anything until he could answer that question. She stated her concern is about protecting the neighborhood. She stated she previously experienced significant flooding from heavy rain, water flowed through the area beyond what the small creek could handle. With the proposed development and the amount of concrete being introduced, she is concerned about where that additional runoff will go. It appears it will drain into the creek and ravine, and her property backs up to that ravine. During the prior flooding, the land was impacted, trees were affected, and she had to take measures to stabilize the property. She stated her concern is who will be responsible for protecting nearby properties from increased runoff and potential flooding. There are only a few homes in that immediate area, and she doesn’t feel this issue has been fully addressed. She stated she is also concerned about safety. In her personal experience with a family member who struggled with mental illness, proper supervision and consistency in care were significant challenges. She stated she was surprised to hear about changes related to R-50 zoning, as she had understood it to require single-family homes. With all of these concerns in mind, she respectfully asked Council to vote no.
Bill Collins, 3849 South Beachview Road, Willoughby, Ohio -
Regarding the separation of the land from the building at McKinley, Mr. Collins stated he understands that it will be separated. However, at the last meeting, he noted that the City was unaware of certain details, and the City acknowledged that this was one of the outstanding questions. He also stated that zoning would need to be completed prior to moving forward. While no one explicitly confirmed this, there were several indications of agreement. He stated he doesn’t understand how the property can proceed without first being formally split and all related matters addressed. Mr. Collins stated he has tremendous respect for Chief Schultz and everything he does. However, he stated he respectfully disagrees with the Chief’s statement that he does not have concerns moving forward. He stated he has lived in Willoughby for 33 years, and referenced what was formerly known as Fox Run, which he would describe as a higher-end development. He stated he has monitored public safety since he was six years old and is involved in emergency response systems as a hobby. He listens to Willoughby communications 24/7, year-round. Based on his observations, police responses to the former Fox Run have increased. Similarly, responses to the low-income housing across from Charlotte’s Ice Cream have increased over time, particularly within the past 15 years. He requested data on increases from Painesville, where they have a similar development but was told they could not provide that information. He stated he has a background in the medical field, and his wife spent her career with the Cuyahoga County Board of MRDD. He stated that based on their experience, he can say there is significant risk associated with the type of development being proposed for the north end.
Hope Raynard, 561 Tioga Trail, Willoughby, Ohio –
Ms. Raynard stated that until this evening there has been no discussion regarding lease terms for these individuals, specifically, how long they will reside there. Will it be 30 days, 90 days, or another duration? What level of commitment or responsibility will they have in exchange for this housing? Along the same lines, she has not heard whether any services will be provided to support these individuals, such as rehabilitation, medical care, assistance with developing job skills, or obtaining part-time employment. She believes these are two important questions that still require answers. She urged Council to vote no.
Sue Stedman, 1196 S. Beachview, Willoughby, Ohio –
Ms. Stedman stated she and her husband have lived in Willoughby for 42 years. She stated she has never felt unsafe in her neighborhood. Incidents have occurred; for example, her daughter’s car was broken into one morning years ago, but that can happen anywhere. She had a recent conversation with a younger neighbor while he was walking his dog; he expressed that he wants to move if this proposal goes through because he is concerned about his fiancée’s safety whether walking alone at night or even during the day. She stated demographics of her area on the north side tend to be older residents. The school is gone, children are grown, and she has remained in the neighborhood for 40 or 50 years because she truly loves the neighborhood and places like Charlotte’s and Jeff Candies are part of that charm. It begins to feel like a shift similar to what occurred with Euclid Beach and the development around Osborne Park. The question then becomes whether younger buyers will be attracted to this neighborhood if this project proceeds. Some residents may choose to sell, but will younger families want to move into the area under these circumstances? She stated this is one of the key issues she is concerned about. She asked Council to vote no.
John Farley, 863 Tioga Trail, Willoughby, Ohio -
Mr. Farley stated he is strongly urging Council to vote no on the Windermere project. While he intended to keep his remarks short, he feels compelled to express that, in his opinion, and he believes that many share this view that the individuals organizing this project do not appear to consider the concerns of those who live in the community, the residents of Willoughby, the potential impact on the environment, or how it may affect crime. He doesn’t believe the residents’ concerns are being adequately considered. He believes the project should be pursued elsewhere, not in Willoughby, as there are other suitable locations.
David Hudak, 1228 Mohegan Trail, Willoughby, Ohio -
Mr. Hudak stated he has firsthand experience with similar residential communities, including one in Santa Ana, California, where his brother has lived under supervision following release from a state institution. In his view, individuals with serious mental illness who are not consistently compliant with treatment can present significant safety concerns. He stated his brother has been involved in multiple altercations, has been arrested several times, and has caused harm to others. These experiences have raised serious concerns for him about whether this proposed community can be operated safely and effectively. He understands there have been efforts to improve the neighborhood, but from what he has observed, conditions have not improved. Problems such as disorderly activity and drug-related concerns remain present, including in nearby public spaces such as Osborne Park. He stated he spends a great deal of time at Osborne Park, often riding his bike there and sitting on the benches. In the evenings, activity frequently continues. He urged Council to vote no. He stated that public officials have a responsibility to consider the safety of the surrounding community. Given the documented concerns and the experiences already described, he doesn’t believe this proposal serves the best interests of residents.
Patricia Weiss, 586 Tioga Trail, Willoughby, Ohio –
Ms. Weiss stated that when an individual with tuberculosis is considered a public health risk, nurses may conduct regular visits to ensure that medications are being taken consistently in order to prevent the spread of the disease. Tuberculosis is a significant concern within the population under discussion. Beyond that, however, even in cases where tuberculosis is not present, is anyone verifying that these individuals are receiving appropriate oversight and support? Or are they simply being placed there without adequate monitoring? Based on what she has heard, there is concern that they are being warehoused rather than properly cared for. What services and support are being provided to them? Mr. Carr stated that Ms. Weiss can ask that question to the Extended Housing representatives.
Jeffrey Malecki, 1249 South Beachview Road, Willoughby, Ohio –
Mr. Malecki stated he wanted to acknowledge that this has been a difficult matter for everyone involved. There have been missteps on multiple sides, and the process has been challenging. He stated that the message has remained consistent and clear. He is aware that a lawsuit had been filed, and it is no secret that once it was dismissed, the matter was brought back before this body. He stated his intention tonight is not to assign blame or single anyone out. However, Council is the final authority in resolving this matter. He stated that the proposed site is within 200 feet of his home. He still hasn’t seen the wetland delineation or the EPA report. He had Chagrin River Watershed Partners at his property for three hours. They will be sending a report to the Mayor, since the City coordinates with them, and he expects to receive a copy as well. He also spoke with the EPA, and was advised that any area exceeding one acre requires a formal delineation.
Bill Collins, 3849 South Beachview Road, Willoughby, Ohio -
Mr. Collins stated he understands that all procedural requirements may have been satisfied and that every technical detail may be in order. However, if Council has truly listened to the concerns expressed over the past three years, Council can still vote no.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-43 – Roll Call 5 yes
2 no (Sievers, Kary) Motion carried 5 to 2
Amended 5/5/26 - Tabled
A resolution approving EAS #3-3-26 for the construction of five (5) duplexes located at 1200 Lost Nation Road {Windermere Village).
Motion made by Ms. Sievers and seconded by Mr. Tomaselli to remove Resolution No. 2026-43 from the table.
Mr. Carr stated this EAS was discussed at the Environmental Planning Committee meeting this evening.
ORDINANCE NO. 2026-47 - Second Reading
An ordinance amending Chapter 913 of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Willoughby, Ohio, titled "Sanitary Sewerage System Charges", specifically, replacing Section 913.14, titled, "Sanitary Sewer Tap-In Fees".
Motion made by Mr. Luciano and seconded by Mr. Garry that the rules of Council requiring three separate readings be suspended and that Ordinance No. 2026-47 be declared an emergency measure.
Motion made by Mr. Luciano and seconded by Mr. Garry to withdraw the previous motion “that the rules of Council requiring three separate readings be suspended and that Ordinance No. 2026-47 be declared an emergency measure”.
Motion made by Mr. Luciano and seconded by Mr. Garry to amend Ordinance No. 2026-47, specifically Section 1, paragraph 913.14 (b)(1) striking the word “properties” in the first sentence, adding the verbiage “new single family homes”, striking the sentence “An equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) is a residential house with up to three (3) bedrooms” and adding the sentence “The sanitary sewer tap-in fee for a mobile home unit shall be 0.80 EDU.”
In paragraph 913.14(b)(3) striking the word “Units”, adding the word “Buildings” in both the heading and in the body of the paragraph.
In paragraph 913.14(b)(4) adding the sentence “The additional pump station fee for any residential unit outside of the City limits that is tributary to a pump station intended to serve a single subdivision shall be $1,000 per one (1) EDU and an additional $2,000 per
(1) EDU for a residential unit that services multiple subdivisions and districts”.
In paragraph 913.14(c)(1) adding the sentence “The sanitary sewer tap-in fee for non-residential properties outside of the City limits shall be 2.5 times the Standard Tap Fee”.
In paragraph 913.14(c)(2) adding the sentence “The additional pump station fee for properties outside of the City limits shall be 3 times the base Additional Pump Station Fee.”
Roll Call 7 yes
0 no Motion carried 7 to 0
Motion made by Mr. Luciano and seconded by Mr. Garry to adopt Ordinance No. 2026-47.
Roll Call 7 yes
0 no Motion carried 7 to 0
Mr. Carr stated there were a lot of questions at the last meeting about the language in this ordinance. He stated that Mr. Lannon had since distributed a detailed memo addressing those concerns and there are a lot of amendments prepared. Mr. Lannon stated he clarified the definition of a tap-in fee, explaining that it applies to all new sewer connections, typically for new housing developments or commercial properties that have never before connected to the sewer system. He stated the purpose of the fee is to reimburse the City and existing system users for infrastructure that has already been built, describing it essentially as a buy-in fee. He explained that the previous residential fee language contained a glitch because it listed homes with up to three bedrooms but did not address larger homes. To simplify the structure, he stated the revised language treats a single-family home as one equivalent dwelling unit regardless of bedroom count and increases the rate from $1,000 per house to $3,500 for properties inside the City and
$4,500 for the rare case of a property outside the City connecting to the system. Mr. Carr then sought confirmation, asking whether a single-family home would be treated the same whether it had two bedrooms or six, Mr. Lannon confirmed that was correct. Mr. Lannon stated that multifamily housing will now be tied to equivalent dwelling units on a bedroom-based scale rather than the former flat $1,000 per unit approach, which is not fair to smaller one-bedroom units. He stated the new structure uses a percentage system beginning at approximately 0.75 equivalent dwelling units and increasing with unit size up to the highest categories for units with three or four or more bedrooms. Mobile homes would be set at 0.8 units and that commercial and industrial properties would be meter- based system, where the size of the water meter will determine the tap-in fee as an indicator of how much sewage could potentially come from the property based on water service size which is a standard approach in the industry. He stated a new feature in the ordinance: an additional fee tied to pump stations that a property connects to. As an example, he referenced the Andrews Ridge subdivision, where a new pump station had been required to serve an initial group of homes with additional homes following, resulting in ongoing maintenance obligations for two pumps. He explained that rather than having those costs fall entirely on the rest of the system’s users, the proposal would impose a
$500 tap-in fee for connection to a local pump station and $1,000 per unit for connections involving larger regional pump stations.
NEW BUSINESS:
ORDINANCE NO. 2026-54 Motion carried 7 to 0
An ordinance repealing Section 913.15 of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Willoughby, Ohio, titled, "Sanitary Sewer Tap-In Fees for Customers Outside the Corporate Lines".
Mr. Carr stated this section of the code will be removed.
ORDINANCE NO. 2026-55 Motion carried 7 to 0
An ordinance authorizing Amendment No. 1 to Ordinance No. 2026-26, the Manning & Payroll Ordinance, relative to overtime pay, uniform maintenance, firearm proficiency allowances, and service weapons, vacations, rate of compensation upon promotion, salaried personnel - non-elected personnel, hourly personnel - part time, and hourly personnel - part time {seasonal), and declaring an emergency.
A memo was sent out by Ms. Hoffman regarding this ordinance. Mr. Carr stated some of this ordinance was connected to the change involving the new Law Director. Ms. Hoffman stated that some of the items are housekeeping items intended to update language and titles. However, the primary change is the reclassification of the Law Director position from full-time to part-time.
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-56
A resolution approving Change Order No. 1 in the River Street Waterline Replacement and Soil Stabilization Project with Fabrizi Trucking & Paving Co., Inc. and declaring an emergency.
First Reading
A resolution approving Change Order No. 1 in the River Street Waterline Replacement and Soil Stabilization Project with Fabrizi Trucking & Paving Co., Inc. and declaring an emergency.
Mr. Carr asked whether the change order stemmed from leftover grant funds related to the recent River Street project. Mr. Lannon confirmed that and explained that after post-construction inspection by the Ohio Emergency Management Agency, the City sought to use approximately $600,000 in remaining funds, originally federal COVID-related money intended to address slope failures. The City first attempted to apply the funds to State Route 84, where there is still about a $1,000,000 local cost outstanding, but that location was deemed too far removed from the original project. However, because another visibly vulnerable section was located nearby, the matter was taken to FEMA. The City then made an official request, and FEMA approved an extension, or “scope change,” allowing the City to extend the retaining wall that had just been completed. Mr. Lannon stated that the City did not yet have a signed version of the change order in hand, which he noted was standard practice. This legislation will be on a first reading. Mr. Lannon stated that anyone driving by can see that this was the next likely failure point. He added that the original grant application had been part of a new program and something of a long shot: the City requested $2,000,000, believed it could justify that amount, received the full
$2,000,000, and now the objective is to make full use of those funds.
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-57 Motion carried 7 to 0
A resolution approving Change Order No. 4 in the Willoughby Police Station Project with Infinity Construction Co., Inc., and declaring an emergency.
Mayor Fiala explained that the change order was driven largely by unforeseen existing conditions, accounting for about 90% of the request. In both cases, the City had initially considered addressing the issues through its deferred maintenance program, but after closer review concluded that it was better to pay for the work through the construction project safety services levy. He noted that the work would never be less expensive than it is now and emphasized that the repairs are invasive, requiring slopes to be cut away and additional related work. The change order covers two distinct items. First, during demolition, the City discovered water penetration along part of the east wall and the south wall that had not been visible beforehand. Remedial measures, including flushing the footer drains and taking other steps to see whether the moisture could be abated, then monitored the area through the winter were taken. Although the problem had not worsened, it had not improved either. The area remained damp and Mayor Fiala believes the work should be completed now while construction is still underway. Second, the project team found two perched water tables near the firing range and the retaining wall, which required dewatering and the installation of LSM, a concrete soil stabilization material used so that the footers could be installed. Mayor Fiala stated that both conditions were unexpected and that the goal was simply to resolve them properly.
Mr. Carr stated that, overall, the project was nearing completion and highlighted that only about 5% of the project funds set aside for these kinds of issues had been used, compared with a contingency budget of 9%. Mayor Fiala confirmed that the contingency had been budgeted at 9.3% and that only 5.23% had been used to date, adding that any remaining contingency funds would return to the safety levy. Mayor Fiala explained that, for renovation work, the normal standard is generally 10% or more in contingency, with 7% to 10% considered good and 10% being average or higher.
Mr. Carr asked whether any additional change orders are still expected. Mayor Fiala stated that more items would likely be forthcoming, noting that several outstanding issues have been identified. Mr. Tomaselli asked if the added work would delay occupancy of the building. Mayor Fiala stated it would not, explaining that the waterproofing work, if left unaddressed, might actually have caused delays later. He stated, however, that the project was facing other delay issues related to product delivery. Specifically, the main switchgear, which had been ordered in May, was still being fabricated by Eaton Corporation. That delay was significant because the air-conditioning system needs to be operating in order to stabilize the interior environment; high humidity would prevent taping and drywall work as well as floor installation from proceeding. He stated the City had only just learned of the issue that week and would need to move quickly to determine whether an alternate switchgear could be obtained or whether delivery of the existing equipment could be expedited.
The Legislative Caucus adjourned at 7:09 p.m
NOTE:
For accuracy, this section has been copied from the council meeting minutes
MAYORS REPORT
Mayor Fiala stated that he’s pleased to announce that, through the hard work of Shana Boyd and IT Administrator, Samantha Reynolds, the City is currently in the beta testing phase of a new wireless emergency notification system. The system will allow residents who choose to enroll to receive timely emergency alerts, including severe weather warnings, road closures, traffic impacts, and other important community updates. Notifications can be delivered via phone call, text message, or email. The City is in the final stages of testing to ensure the system functions properly.
DIRECTOR’S REPORTS
Law Director Lucas – Mr. Lucas stated he would be remiss if he did not take a moment to express his sincere appreciation to everyone here. Without becoming overly sentimental, he stated it has truly been both a joy and an honor to serve as Law Director for the City. He stated that he has been treated with nothing but kindness and respect throughout his tenure. Thank you all very much.
Fire Chief Ungar – No report. He thanked Council for their considerations with regard to his capital requests.
Police Chief Schultz – Chief Schultz thanked Council for their considerations with regard to his capital requests. He stated it was an honor working with Mr. Lucas. Mr. Garry stated he has received calls for speeding and not stopping on Robinhood and Harmony. Chief Schultz stated he would inform his officers.
Chief Building and Zoning Inspector Keller – No report.
Parks & Recreation Director Keller – Ms. Keller stated the rib burn off this past weekend was a success. The car cruise in is June 20th. The pool is opening this coming weekend. Ms. Keller thanked Mr. Lucas for all his help.
Finance Director Hoffman – Ms. Hoffman thanked Council for the passage of Resolution No. 2026-55 and thanked Mr. Tomaselli and Mr. Carr for their help with capital requests. She thanked Mr. Lucas for all his help.
COUNCIL REPORTS
Ms. Sievers – Ms. Sievers congratulated Mr. Lucas on his retirement. She thanked the residents for showing up tonight (regarding the Windermere project) and sharing their voices.
Mr. Kary – Mr. Kary thanked Mr. Lucas for sharing time with him at Planning Commission meetings.
Mr. Tomaselli – No report. Mr. Tomaselli congratulated Mr. Lucas on his retirement.
Mr. Garry – No report. Mr. Garry congratulated Mr. Lucas on his retirement.
Mr. Carr – No report. Mr. Carr thanked Mr. Lucas for his guidance and humor.
The Regular Council Meeting adjourned at 8:41 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT
COMMENTS BY COUNCILMAN KARY
A very very passionate meeting this evening. I need to share to all that my vote on the McKinley Extended Family Project was undoubtedly one of the most difficult decisions in my career as a City Councilman. I truly was torn on so many levels. What I decided was based on what I felt was best for this part of our great city and its residents. I just, from the beginning, struggled with the decision to place these duplex units in this “traditional” R-50 single-family neighborhood.
Also, I truly believe that those professionals that represented the Extended Housing Organization did not truly take the time to answer so many questions that were asked of them by the residents of North Willoughby. I believe that there was a STRONG NEED for better “COMMUNICATION”.
NOTE
The views I express in these Council Meeting Summaries are my own and do not reflect any official view or position of the City of Willoughby. The “official” Council Minutes are posted on the
City of Willoughby Website