200 South Hamilton Road

Gahanna, Ohio 43230

City of Gahanna

Meeting Minutes

Committee of the Whole

Jamille Jones, Chair

Merisa K. Bowers

Nancy R. McGregor

Kaylee Padova

Stephen A. Renner

Michael Schnetzer

Trenton I. Weaver

Jeremy A. VanMeter, Clerk of Council

Monday, April 6, 2026

City Hall, Council Chambers

Immediately following the regular City Council meeting beginning at 7:00 PM

CALL TO ORDER:

Gahanna City Council met for Committee of the Whole on Monday,

April 6, 2026, in Council Chambers. Vice President of Council Jamille

Jones, Chair, called the meeting to order at 7:51 p.m. The agenda was

published on Friday, April 3, 2026. All members were present for the

meeting. There were no additions or corrections to the agenda.

ITEMS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION:

CC-0001-2026

To recommend approval to City Council, changes to Part Eleven - Zoning

Code, Chapters 1103, 1105, 1107, 1109, 1111, 1113, 1117, and 1123

of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Gahanna.

Director of Planning Michael Blackford addressed the Council and stated

that he would present proposed code changes. He explained that he

would provide a brief overview of approximately 12 sections of code that

changed. He stated that although the changes were important to move

forward, staff did not request a waiver or emergency and remained

willing to return in May 2026, to allow Council additional time for review.

Director Blackford reminded Council that the new zoning code reached

its two-year anniversary and noted that this marked the second set of

changes presented, with the first occurring in the fourth quarter of 2024.

He stated that the limited number and nature of the changes indicated

that the zoning code aligned well with the community and development

community, as most changes involved cleanup and clarification rather

than significant revisions. Director Blackford explained that the proposed

changes fell into three categories: old code, revised code, and new

code. He stated that the old code category involved restoring language

inadvertently omitted from the previous zoning code. He provided an

example involving prohibited signs, where the omission of the phrase

“attention getting devices” excluded items such as inflatable tube figures

commonly used for advertising, which contributed to distracted driving.

He stated that staff proposed to restore this language to maintain the

previous standard. He explained that revised code changes involved

clarifications and organizational improvements to the 2024 code. He

provided examples, including relocating “portable modular structures”

from the temporary section to the appropriate alphabetical section and

adding electric vehicle charging stations to the use table for clarity, noting

that such uses were already permitted as accessory uses in all zoning

districts.

Director Blackford then described a proposed new code section

affecting the Creekside Mixed-Use (CMU) district. He identified the

geographic boundaries of the district and stated that staff did not

propose to change those boundaries. Instead, he explained that staff

proposed to modify how projects within the district were evaluated in

order to better align zoning with the recently adopted strategic plan and

economic development strategy. He stated that existing zoning already

aligned well with prior plans, but emphasized that plans contained

broader goals and aspirations, while the zoning code imposed specific

requirements. He explained that staff sought to incorporate plan-based

criteria into project evaluation without making those elements mandatory

requirements in the code. He stated that when projects advanced

desired goals, such as mixed-use development or structured parking,

developers often required variances from strict zoning standards.

Director Blackford explained that the current variance process limited

consideration primarily to property-specific hardships, which made it

difficult to approve variances for high-quality projects that advanced

community goals. He referenced examples such as the library and City

Hall projects, which required multiple variances despite their positive

contributions to the built environment. He stated that the proposed

changes would allow the Planning Commission to evaluate requests for

zoning relief based on how well a project advanced the vision and goals

for the district. He added that this approach would prioritize project

quality over strict adherence to code and would better integrate land use

plans into decision-making. He also stated that the change would reduce

reliance on variances that could unintentionally establish precedents and

instead focus evaluation on the merits of each project. Director Blackford

concluded by noting that his presentation provided only a brief overview

and offered to return later or answer any questions from the Council.

Questions from the Council

President Weaver stated that he watched the Planning Commission

discussion and asked Director Blackford to address the proposed

setback change from 10 feet to 5 feet. He asked how many variance

requests staff received for reducing the setback from 10 feet to 5 feet

and noted that he did not oppose the 5-foot requirement. Director

Blackford responded that the proposed change involved the R1 zoning

district for accessory structures, typically sheds, where the current code

required a 10-foot setback. He explained that the current R1 district did

not align exactly with the previous SF1 and SF2 districts, one of which

required a 10-foot setback and the other 5 feet, and staff originally

selected 10 feet. He estimated that staff received approximately six

variance requests for reduced setbacks, all of which were approved. He

stated that this volume and approval rate suggested that a lower

minimum standard, such as 5 feet, might be more appropriate, though

some cases might warrant 3 feet or 7 feet. He added that most other

zoning districts required a 5-foot setback and noted that the Planning

Commission specifically requested this change. President Weaver

asked whether staff often received requests for even greater reductions,

such as 2.5 feet. Director Blackford replied that staff did receive

requests for zero setbacks and typically advised against placing

structures directly on property lines while encouraging a balanced

approach. He stated that the proposed changes remained modular and

could be adjusted or removed if Council had concerns, emphasizing that

he did not want future regret regarding these decisions. President

Weaver stated that he sought to understand the impact of variance

requests handled by staff and commented that a 10-foot setback in the

R1 district seemed excessive for backyard sheds. Director Blackford

agreed, noting that residents often did not favor that requirement.

Councilmember McGregor stated that a 5-foot setback seemed too

close and suggested a compromise of 7 or 8 feet. She observed that

many variance requests stemmed from unique property conditions, such

as hills, corner lots, or drainage issues, rather than standard rectangular

lots. Director Blackford acknowledged Councilmember McGregor’s point

but stated that some conditions might be overstated to justify variance

requests. He stated that many requests stemmed from a desire to

maximize usable yard space. He noted that a 7.5-foot setback

represented a common standard in many zoning codes and could reduce

the number of variance requests. He added that Council could remove

the change and address requests individually if necessary, noting that

while the city processed a relatively high number of variances compared

to other communities, handling one every few months did not create a

significant burden.

Councilmember Schnetzer thanked Director Blackford and stated that he

reviewed the redline copy, which spanned nearly 70 pages. He noted that

he had not completed a detailed review and asked about several

references to funeral homes, requesting clarification on why the code

specifically addressed that use. Director Blackford explained that staff

received approximately three inquiries regarding funeral homes and

discovered that the current zoning code did not list them, although the

previous code included them with a specific parking calculation. He

stated that during the transition to the new zoning code, staff

consolidated use references and removed many specific classifications

tied to national systems, which resulted in the omission of funeral homes.

Director Blackford explained that without a specific reference, the code

either prohibited the use or required him to assign it to a comparable

category. He stated that funeral homes aligned with several zoning

districts, including office, general commercial, restricted institutional, and

innovation and manufacturing, which reflected their placement under the

previous code. He emphasized that the proposed change would not

introduce funeral homes into new areas but would clarify that they

constituted an allowed use. He added that one facility located in the city

prior to the adoption of the new code and that staff received at least two

additional inquiries, likely in the Taylor Station Road area, though those

projects did not proceed. Councilmember Schnetzer acknowledged the

explanation and thanked Director Blackford.

Vice President Jones stated that zoning changes required a Public

Hearing and proposed scheduling it for April 27, 2026. Director

Blackford informed the Council that he would not attend the April 27,

2026, meeting because he would attend the National Planning

Conference, where he would present on the city’s zoning code changes

as part of a panel discussion. He stated that he would share his

experience and noted that the process produced positive outcomes.

Vice President Jones wished him well and stated that Council would

proceed with the Public Hearing on April 27, 2026, which already

received public notice. She proposed conducting the First Reading that

evening and scheduling the adoption on May 4, 2026. She asked

Councilmembers whether they preferred to bring the matter back to

Committee of the Whole, due to a full agenda that night. President

Weaver stated that he preferred to continue the item if Director Blackford

would be absent on April 27, 2026. Director Blackford stated that he

agreed with continuing the item and reiterated that while the changes

should move forward, he remained available to return in May 2026, to

continue the discussion. He noted that May 4 or May 18, 2026, could

serve as possible dates. Vice President Jones asked whether the

Council wished to proceed with the First Reading on April 27, 2026, and

delay the Second Reading. President Weaver suggested holding the

Public Hearing and First Reading on April 27, 2026, then discussing the

item at the Committee of the Whole on May 11, 2026, when Director

Blackford would be present, followed by a Second Reading and potential

Adoption on May 18, 2026. Councilmember Bowers asked for

clarification regarding the timing of the Second Reading and whether

Council would need to table it if they followed that schedule. She

suggested an alternative of holding the Public Hearing on April 27, 2026,

First Reading on May 4, 2026, and Adoption on May 18, 2026. President

Weaver acknowledged Clerk VanMeter, who indicated agreement with

the proposed schedule. Vice President Jones asked for clarification

regarding the agreement. Clerk VanMeter confirmed that Council could

hold the Public Hearing on April 27, 2026, and conduct the First Reading

on May 4, 2026. Councilmember Bowers stated that this approach would

eliminate the need to postpone the vote and would allow Council to

proceed with a standard Second Reading and Adoption on May 18,

2026. Vice President Jones confirmed that the item would appear before

the Committee of the Whole on May 11, 2026, and thanked those

present.

Recommendation: Public Hearing Scheduled on Regular Agenda on 4/27/2026;

Introduction/First Reading on Regular Agenda on 5/4/2026; Return to

Committee of the Whole for Further Discussion 5/11/2026; Second Reading/Vote

on Regular Agenda on 5/18/2026.

ITEMS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING:

ORD-0013-2026

AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO A

CONTRACT WITH DECKER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR THE

2026 SIDEWALK LOOKBACK PROGRAM (ST-1123/TR-CM-03)

Senior Director of Operations Kevin Schultz stated that he would present

two items before Council, beginning with the 2026 Sidewalk Lookback

Program. He stated that bids were opened and reviewed on March 17,

2026, and that staff received a total of four bids. He explained that the

situation resembled a recent item in which the apparent low bidder was

deemed non-responsive and non-responsible. He stated that staff

determined the bidder was non-responsive because the bid package

lacked required financial information, which automatically disqualified the

bid. He further stated that staff determined the bidder was

non-responsible due to the limited scope and breadth of the company’s

prior work, noting that the company was only incorporated for one year

and had not demonstrated experience comparable to the project

requirements. Director Schultz stated that staff recommended

proceeding with the second lowest bidder, Decker Construction, as the

lowest responsive and responsible bidder. He stated that staff requested

authorization for Mayor Jadwin to enter into a contract with Decker

Construction in the amount of approximately $663,000, which included a

10 percent contingency. Director Schultz also noted that the project would

include a separate construction administration and inspection contract

outside the base scope, bringing the total project cost to approximately

$738,000. He stated that the administration requested an ordinance

authorizing Mayor Jadwin to enter into a contract with Decker

Construction for the 2026 Sidewalk Lookback Program.

Recommendation: Introduction/First Reading on Regular Agenda on 4/27/2026;

Second Reading/Vote on Consent Agenda on 5/4/2026.

ORD-0014-2026

AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO A

CONTRACT WITH DECKER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR THE

2026 STREET

AND

SIDEWALK

MAINTENANCE

PROGRAM

(ST-1122/TR-CM-01)

Director Schultz stated that the next item involved the 2026 Street and

Sidewalk Maintenance Program and the award of a contract. He stated

that bids were opened on March 17, 2026, and that staff received a total

of three bids. He explained that staff evaluated the bids and

recommended authorizing Mayor Jadwin to enter into a contract with

Decker Construction in the amount of approximately $1,428,000 to

complete the program. Director Schultz stated that, similar to the

previous item, the project would include a separate construction

administration and inspection contract outside the base contract,

estimated at approximately 10 percent of the contract total, bringing the

overall project cost to about $1.7 million. He stated that the

administration requested an ordinance authorizing Mayor Jadwin to enter

into a contract with Decker Construction for the 2026 Street and

Sidewalk Maintenance Program.

Recommendation: Introduction/First Reading on Regular Agenda on 4/27/2026;

Second Reading/Vote on Consent Agenda on 5/4/2026.

ITEMS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE:

ORD-0015-2026

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF GAHANNA CODIFIED

ORDINANCE SECTION 133.02 - PURCHASING PROCEDURES

Finance Director Joann Bury introduced the first action item regarding

revisions to the procurement ordinance. She recapped that on March 2,

2026, Council approved several updates, including mayoral authorization

for executing contracts with City Attorney approval as to form, the

addition of a pre-qualification process, acceptance of electronic notice

for bids, and the establishment of retainage percentages aligned with the

Ohio Revised Code. Director Bury stated that the current proposal

represented a second set of requested changes. She explained that staff

proposed cleanup language to remove references to federal uniform

guidance where it no longer applied. She stated that staff reduced the

small purchase threshold from $250,000 to $149,999. She added that

staff included change order authorization for small purchases that

exceeded that threshold. Director Bury further stated that staff set both

competitive sealed bids and competitive proposals at $150,000 and

added corresponding change order language. She explained that,

because the city no longer followed Ohio Revised Code 735, staff

needed to establish procedures for handling change orders. She

respectfully requested approval of the proposed amendments.

Vice President Jones asked whether the Council had any questions or

discussion. She then thanked staff for prior discussions and review of the

redline edits and stated that Council would place the item on the May 4,

2026, Consent Agenda. The ordinance would receive a First Reading on

April 27, 2026, and a Second Reading on May 4, 2026.

Recommendation: Introduction/First Reading on Regular Agenda on 4/27/2026;

Second Reading/Vote on Consent Agenda on 5/4/2026.

ORD-0016-2026

A N

O R D I N A N C E

A U T H O R I Z I N G

S U P P L E M E N T A L

Capital

APPROPRIATIONS; AND WAIVING SECOND READING

Improvement Fund for Bond Interest Related to the Gahanna Civic Center

Project

Finance Director Joann Bury presented a request for supplemental

appropriations related to interest earned on bond proceeds for the 825

Tech Center Drive project. She explained that while the City of Gahanna

awaited invoices, staff invested the bond proceeds without certainty

regarding the timing of expenditures or future interest rate conditions,

and therefore did not include an estimate of interest earnings in the

original appropriation. She stated that arbitrage rules required the city to

treat interest earned on bond proceeds the same as the proceeds

themselves and to spend those funds within the same limitations. She

reported that, as expenditures neared completion, staff estimated

approximately $3 million in interest earnings and requested

appropriation of those funds to allow expenditure within arbitrage time

constraints.

Councilmember Schnetzer stated that he had no concerns with the

request and asked about the arbitrage rate. Director Bury responded that

she believed the arbitrage yield was approximately 4.25 percent, though

she noted she might be confusing it with the actual interest rate earned

and offered to provide confirmation. Councilmember Schnetzer stated

that his question was for informational purposes and asked whether Red

Tree managed the investments to remain below the arbitrage rate.

Director Bury stated that the city did not use Red Tree for investing the

bond proceeds and instead placed the funds in STAR Ohio to maintain

liquidity and stability, given uncertainty regarding the timing and size of

payment applications. Councilmember Schnetzer acknowledged the

explanation and concluded his questions.

Councilmember Bowers asked whether the city had earned significantly

more interest than originally anticipated. Director Bury responded that

original projections aligned with the $3 million estimate but had initially

projected slightly higher earnings. She explained that the city spent

proceeds more quickly than expected and processed larger payment

applications than originally modeled, which reduced the total interest

earned.

Vice President Jones noted the waiver requested for the Second

Reading and recommended the ordinance to be placed on the Regular

Agenda for April 27, 2026.

Recommendation: Introduction/First Reading with Waiver of Second

Reading/Vote on Regular Agenda on 4/27/2026.

ITEMS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT:

ORD-0017-2026

AN ORDINANCE TO REPEAL ORD-0045-2021 RELATED TO TAX

INCREMENT FINANCING FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF

GAHANNA

Director of Economic Development Jeff Gottke described the requested

ordinance as a minor cleanup for clarity in city records. He stated that

Council authorized the addition of the Crescent property to the Central

Park Tax Increment Financing (TIF) twice, once in 2018 and again in

2021, in connection with a development agreement. He explained that

Franklin County had no record of receiving those applications and that

they were not recognized. He stated that staff worked with the City

Attorney to resolve the issue by submitting the application to the County

to recognize the 2018 TIF, and the County acknowledged receipt and

approved the settlement terms for the TIF funds. He stated that the

remaining action involved repealing the 2021 TIF so future officials would

not misinterpret it as the active legislation.

Vice President Jones asked City Attorney Tamilarasan if she had

anything to add. City Attorney Tamilarasan stated that Director Gottke

had fully summarized the matter and expressed her support for the

legislation as a necessary step to clean up records. Vice President

Jones asked for questions or discussion.

President Weaver asked how far back the County would honor the TIF

and whether it would apply back to the 2018 ordinance. Director Gottke

responded that the County applied a three-year look-back period from

when improvements began and clarified that if no increment existed

during a period, there would be nothing to collect.

Vice President Jones asked whether the delay in County recognition

created any risk. Director Gottke confirmed that staff addressed the

issue in time and that it created no effect. Vice President Jones stated

that Council would place the item on the May 4, 2026, Consent Agenda.

Recommendation: Introduction/First Reading on Regular Agenda on 4/27/2026;

Second Reading/Vote on Consent Agenda on 5/4/2026.

ADJOURNMENT:

With no further business before the Committee of the Whole, the Chair

adjourned the meeting at 8:26 p.m.