Appeal of ARB Decision Denied by 6 to 1 Vote of City Council

In a 6 to 1 vote City Council allowed the ARB decision on December 12th, previously denied on September 25th, on the 'Old School' to stand as Negotiated.

The complete video in four parts can be viewed at the Active Citizens of Twinsburg website: www.activecitizensoftwinsburg.com under the Council Videos - 2014 tab.  All concerned citizens should invest an hour and witness their city government in action and decide for yourself.  Elections are just around the corner in 2015!

The only dissenting vote came from Council Member, Gary Sorace, who stated he had not been in favor of the approach the City has taken on this issue.  He would rather have had this decision presented to the voters for their consideration.  We applaud the courage and willingness of an elected representative to stand alone for the people and our right to vote on this issue.  When confronted with a major community development issue, it makes common sense to involve the people; it is our community isn't it?  This is an excellent example of a decision which could have far reaching implications for the City of Twinsburg into the future.  Only time will tell whom was really thinking or not!  Benjamin Franklin was fond of saying "If everyone is thinking alike, then no one is thinking."

Peter Hale of the 'Old School Committee' provided multiple issues that he stated should be obvious to City Officials.  First, there is the deed restriction that he argued would not allow the City to demolish the 'Old School', that a procedural flowchart confirmed the ARB was not the first step in the demolition process, and presented accusations that the Mayor and City Council did not provide due diligence in maintaining and protecting the 'Old School'.  Many in town consider the ‘Old School’ a historical gem of the City located on land used for public purposes since 1885 and until last January when Kent State relocated to their new building.  The property had been deeded over to the City in 1998 by the School District with a deed restriction that reads "subject to the school remaining a public building so long as it is owned by the Grantee".  Mr. Hale expounded on a procedural flowchart obtained from the City website that also indicated the ARB was involved but was not the first step; only to be told by Council Member, Ted Yates, that the flowchart was a pretty picture but just because a document is found on the City website, does not make it correct.

Mr. Hale presented Section 1349 of our City Ordinances, passed in 2011, that provided the steps for an applicant making a request for demolition to first submit an application to the Building Commissioner, along with a Demolition Plan and Site Plan that should be reviewed by administrative staff, and then immediately submitted to the ARB for their consideration for a Certificate of Appropriateness, if approved, it should be reviewed then by Planning Commission. 

City Law Director, David Maistros and six members of Council disagreed with Mr. Hales appeal based upon the procedures under Section 1349, saying that the first step was to go before the ARB board first for a Certificate of Appropriateness and then go about the application process with demolition plan and site plans.  Council Member, Ted Yates, said why would anyone spend thousands of dollars just to be turned down by the ARB and waste all that money.  Resident, Mike Turle, said that when he wanted to build his house, he had many plans, site plans, drawings, etc to submit prior to obtaining permission by receiving his building permit.  The President of Council, Maureen Stauffer read a prepared motion to overturn the ARB decision which failed 6 to 1 with Mr. Sorace the only consenting vote to reverse the ARB decision. 

There are several questions puzzling this writer:  Without any  application, demolition plan(s), site plan(s), how the building materials would be recycled, how the asbestos was to be abated, how the underground storage tank(s) would be resolved, and what would be the impact on adjoining property owners; Just exactly on what information did the ARB committee members deny, then reverse their denial  decision and approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for demolition of the 'Old School'?   What were the specific reasons they made their final decision  based upon?  What reasons and information did City Council use in their decision to not reverse the ARB decision?  Under what or who’s authority did the City even go before the ARB committee in the first place?  If no legislation of City Council exists in the City records or journal of Council authorizing such action, then under what authority did the Director of Economic Development, Larry Finch initially approach the ARB committee regarding property owned by the City?  Isn’t City Council the authority in all matters dealing with City property?

If one were to follow the logic of the Law Director and most Council Members, apparently the City can proceed differently and needs no plan, site plan, or application until the ARB approves a Certificate of Appropriateness that is favorable.  Mr. Loren Sengstock, stated that in all his year in government service, every government including the City of Twinsburg provided laws and legal procedures pertaining to acquiring any types of permits, whether it is a building, zoning, demolition, or any type of permit, each requires the applicant to provide plans, site plan, engineering, and architectural drawings and specifications regarding the application and they must be filed prior to any hearing or obtaining any decision to proceed or not proceed with the request put forth in the application. 

The Active Citizens of Twinsburg, Statutory Agent, Sally Gaydosh presented and reiterated the procedural policies in detail as adopted in the law by City Council and confirmed what Mr. Peter Hale had stated.  Sally Gaydosh has championed the people’s right to vote for more than sixty years and won many court cases representing the people’s right to vote on zoning issues, however, her appeal for a reversal of the ARB decision also apparently fell on deaf ears, with the exception of Gary Sorace.  Sally Gaydosh also made a point of order during the meeting, wondering why the Mayor and City Council Members had not raised their right hands to be sworn in, no comments were forthcoming from Law Director, David Maistros and Council President, Maureen Stauffer, simply continued the meeting.  That raises an interesting question, are elected officials not required to be sworn in by swearing an oath?

When all is said and done, there are limited avenues available to the 'Old School Committee', one it appears would be their initiative petition being circulated or they must file a complaint with the courts.  It appeared obvious to this writer that the statements and questions asked by six Council Members indicated that the majority of Council seemed predetermined to follow the Law Directors opinion since the sworn testimony of multiple residents did not apparently impact or change their minds.  Visit the Active Citizens of Twinsburg website: www.activecitizensoftwinsburg.com and you decide.

Loren Sengstock, Trustee
Active Citizens of Twinsburg