Committee of the Whole

Monday, December 8, 2025 Committee of the Whole 6:15 p.m. City Hall Council Chambers 8000 Memphis Avenue 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 2 - 25 November 24, 2025 112425 Comm of Whole DRAFT.docx 112425 Comm of Whole EXHIBIT.pptx 4. RECOMMEND REQUESTS: NEW C-2, C-1 and D-6 liquor control permit ALL FRIENDLY ROCKY RIVER & TIEDEMAN MART LLC 4295 Tiedeman Road D-5 TRANSER liquor control permit Sugarloaf TGIF OH Opco, LLC 10320 Cascade Crossing 5. LEGISLATION RECOMMENDATION OLD BUSINESS 6. INFORMATION/DISCUSSION 7. ADJOURNMENT Committee of the Whole - Brooklyn, Ohio Page 1 of 25 Committee of the Whole November 24, 2025 6:15 p.m. Council President Kathy Pucci called the meeting to order. Present: Andy Celcherts, Aaron Borowski, Kevin Tanski, Kathy Pucci, Steven Coyle Absent: Sue Grodek, Matt Mosley MOTION by Celcherts, second by Coyle to approve the minutes of November 10, 2025. VOTE: Yes: Celcherts, Borowski, Tanski, Pucci, Coyle. No: None. Absent: Mosley, Grodek. (APPROVED) AUTHORIZATION: Authorization to join Fuel Consortium agreement (2026-2027): Pres. Pucci stated that the city of Brooklyn is a member of the Brecksville Purchasing Consortium for fuel. The bid opening was November 7, 2025 and the lowest and best bids were as follows: Petroleum Traders, unleaded 87 octane, transport, Ports Petroleum, ultra- low sulfur #2 diesel, transport. Sample pricing is provided on the bid forms. Pricing is based on the oil price information service OPIS average for the time of the order minus 0.0805 cents for the first and second year for unleaded and minus 0.0503 for diesel. MOTION by Celcherts, second by Tanski to recommend Council approve. VOTE: To recommend Council approve. Yes: Celcherts, Borowski, Tanski, Pucci, Coyle. No: None. Absent: Mosley, Grodek. APPROVAL: Council Representative Kevin Tanski's appointment of Kim Stark to the Connecting and Belonging Commission: MOTION by Tanski, second by Coyle to recommend Council approve. VOTE: To recommend Council approve. Yes: Celcherts, Borowski, Tanski, Pucci, Coyle. No: None. Absent: Mosley, Grodek. LEGISLATION: OLD BUSINESS: ORDINANCE NO. 2025-23 (3rd reading/adoption): AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE UPDATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2026, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Pres. Pucci read the following proposed amendment: Section 2. That due to the lack of responses to competitive procurement proposals and state-term pricing availability with respect to the purchase of city vehicles, and the City's need to procure public safety and other vehicles in a timely manner, Council hereby declares an emergency and authorizes the Mayor to purchase any individual vehicle from any dealership or other source in an amount not exceeding $77,250 the then-current amount specified in Section 9.17 of the Revised Code, or another amount fixed by Council, without the necessity of competitive procurement or state-term pricing, such $77,250 maximum price not to include any added-on and necessary equipment, which may be procured without the necessity of separate Council approval and without the necessity of competitive procurement or state-term pricing. Pres. Pucci stated that Law Dir. Butler explained that this accommodates whether we, as a city, are going with either the state code or if we have a local spending threshold, that this language does accommodate that. We also received confirmation that this only applies to the purchase of the police vehicles because we had such difficulty getting the vehicles on the state contract due to availability; the language was inserted so that the Chief had permission to purchase the vehicles outside of the bidding process or the state purchasing consortiums. 1 Page 2 of 25 MOTION by Celcherts, second by Coyle to amend Ordinance 2025-23 as written. VOTE: Yes: Celcherts, Borowski, Tanski, Pucci, Coyle. No: None. Absent: Mosley, Grodek. (Placed on 3rd reading) ORDINANCE NO. 2025-24 (2nd reading) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING EXHIBIT A OF ORDINANCE 2025-12, “PROVIDING FOR THE COMPENSATION FOR THE PART-TIME, FULL-TIME AND ADMINISTRATIVE EMPLOYEES (NON-BARGAINING AGREEMENT) OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN, OHIO". (Placed on 3rd reading) ORDINANCE NO. 2025-25 (2nd reading): AN ORDINANCE AMENDING EXHIBIT A OF ORDINANCE 2024-27, ENTITLED, "AN ORDINANCE TO MAKE APPROPRIATIONS FOR CURRENT AND OTHER EXPENDITURES OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN, STATE OF OHIO, FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2025 TO DECEMBER 31, 2025". (Placed on 3rd reading) ORDINANCE NO. 2025-26 (2nd reading): AN ORDINANCE TO MAKE APPROPRIATIONS FOR CURRENT AND OTHER EXPENDITURES OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN, STATE OF OHIO, FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2026 TO DECEMBER 31, 2026. (Placed on 3rd reading) ORDINANCE NO. 2025-27 (2nd reading): AN ORDINANCE CREATING THE BROOKLYN MEMPHIS RUN EAST TAX INCREMENT FINANCING INCENTIVE DISTRICT PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 5709.40, 5709.42 AND 5709.43 OF THE OHIO REVISED CODE; DECLARING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PARCELS WITHIN THE INCENTIVE DISTRICT TO BE A PUBLIC PURPOSE AND EXEMPT FROM REAL PROPERTY TAXATION; DESIGNATING PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS TO BE MADE THAT WILL DIRECTLY BENEFIT SUCH PROPERTY; REQUIRING ANNUAL SERVICE PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES; DESIGNATING A MUNICIPAL PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT TAX INCREMENT EQUIVALENT FUND FOR THE DEPOSIT OF SUCH SERVICE PAYMENTS; AND AUTHORIZING COMPENSATION PAYMENTS TO THE BROOKLYN CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT AND POLARIS CAREER CENTER JOINT VOCATIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. (Placed on 3rd reading) ORDINANCE NO. 2025-28 (2nd reading): AN ORDINANCE CREATING THE BROOKLYN MEMPHIS RUN NORTH TAX INCREMENT FINANCING INCENTIVE DISTRICT PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 5709.40, 5709.42 AND 5709.43 OF THE OHIO REVISED CODE; DECLARING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PARCELS WITHIN THE INCENTIVE DISTRICT TO BE A PUBLIC PURPOSE AND EXEMPT FROM REAL PROPERTY TAXATION; DESIGNATING PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS TO BE MADE THAT WILL DIRECTLY BENEFIT SUCH PROPERTY; REQUIRING ANNUAL SERVICE PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES; DESIGNATING A MUNICIPAL PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT TAX INCREMENT EQUIVALENT FUND FOR THE DEPOSIT OF SUCH SERVICE PAYMENTS; AND AUTHORIZING COMPENSATION PAYMENTS TO THE BROOKLYN CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT AND POLARIS CAREER CENTER JOINT VOCATIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. (Placed on 3rd reading) ORDINANCE NO. 2025-29 (2nd reading): AN ORDINANCE CREATING THE BROOKLYN MEMPHIS RUN SOUTH TAX INCREMENT FINANCING INCENTIVE DISTRICT PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 5709.40, 5709.42 AND 5709.43 OF THE OHIO REVISED CODE; DECLARING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PARCELS WITHIN THE INCENTIVE DISTRICT TO BE A PUBLIC PURPOSE AND EXEMPT FROM REAL PROPERTY TAXATION; DESIGNATING PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS TO BE MADE THAT WILL DIRECTLY BENEFIT SUCH PROPERTY; REQUIRING ANNUAL SERVICE PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES; DESIGNATING A MUNICIPAL PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT TAX INCREMENT EQUIVALENT FUND FOR THE DEPOSIT OF SUCH SERVICE PAYMENTS; AND AUTHORIZING COMPENSATION PAYMENTS TO THE BROOKLYN CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT AND POLARIS CAREER CENTER JOINT VOCATIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. (Placed on 3rd reading) 2 Page 3 of 25 NEW BUSINESS: RESOLUTION NO. 2025-30 (1st reading): A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT A CYBERSECURITY PROGRAM PURSUANT TO R.C. 9.64, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Law Dir. Butler stated that the city is still finalizing the cybersecurity protocol. There have been some very high-profile ransomware and other cybersecurity incidents that involved aspects of local, state, and regional governments in Ohio recently; City of Cleveland, Cleveland Municipal Court, and a couple of high-profile incidents that have made the news recently. In response to these kinds of attacks and incidents, the General Assembly, as part of the biennial Budget Bill, required municipalities and other political subdivisions in Ohio to adopt a cybersecurity framework, such as the one that the city will be implementing with the assistance of outside advisors. He stated this is an unusual docket item because it doesn't come with any attachments. It will not come with any attachments ever because the Revised Code and the General Assembly recognize that these protocols are highly sensitive documents and have been exempted from the public records law. The City will not be publishing these online nor publishing redacted versions or paper versions of these. The Administration encourages City Council members to come review the attachments when they are finalized before a final vote is taken; additionally, they are confidential and not to be shared with anyone. There are a handful of employees within the Administration who are responsible for implementing this program and safeguarding it. Mr. Butler stated to the audience that this is not an effort to hide anything. It's an effort, however, to maintain the security of the city systems data, which includes resident data at all times and to do so in a way that's responsible and in compliance with Ohio law. (Placed on 2nd reading) ORDINANCE NO. 2025-30 (1st reading): AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 155 OF THE BROOKLYN CODIFIED ORDINANCES, “BOARD OF CONTROL”, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Pres. Pucci stated in a prior discussion, a member of Council suggested adding the Recreation Commissioner as a member to the Board of Control. However, the reasoning behind having three members of the Administration, is that in case there would need to be an emergency meeting, this would allow the Board to move forward if a Council member was unavailable. Councilman Borowski stated that with the current setup, if the Mayor and Finance Dir. Raguz are there, but the Rec Commissioner and the Council member can't make; you need at least three for quorum? Pres. Pucci stated that if we're going to go with what's in here now, that a quorum is three, then that would be an issue. Councilman Celcherts stated that if the Recreation Commissioner is not present for the meeting, can we pull from somebody else if it's such an emergency? Law Dir. Butler stated that's Council's prerogative. That's perfectly doable. It's lawful. There's some language in in the legislation that creates some flexibility in the event that the Finance Committee member can't attend. Councilman Celcherts asked if the Finance Committee member can't be there and the Recreation Commissioner can't be there, can the mayor allow for alternates in a director level position. Law. Dir. Butler stated that is perfectly lawful and doable. He would just have to write that into the legislation. He stated that there is some language in the current draft legislation that says that if a Finance Committee member couldn't make it, the Finance Committee may have already set up an alternate system; maybe it's by seniority on the Finance committee or on Council. If this were to be adopted in its current form, there are ways to get alternates to attend. This happens mostly in larger cities where statutory appointees to a board are permitted to name designees in their place. Pres. Pucci stated when she and Mr. Butler were working on this, it was mentioned about having the ability to have an alternate from the Finance Committee. Pres. Pucci stated that would be a very good suggestion because we don't want to delay anything or hold anything up at all. She thinks it’s an excellent suggestion to do it from the Administration side as well. 3 Page 4 of 25 ORDINANCE NO. 2025-31 (1st reading): AN ORDINANCE ENACTING SECTION 135.02 OF THE BROOKLYN CODIFIED ORDINANCES, “PURCHASING AND CONTRACTING”, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Pres. Pucci stated the two amounts were the result of the discussions we had, which is for the local spending threshold of $50,000, and then the threshold for the Board of Control raising that from the $5,000, where it currently is up to $40,000. Councilman Borowski asked when it comes to the lowering the threshold to $50,000, which Council has deliberated on, what work could would have been slowed or a certain purchase that had to be made where a special meeting would have had to have been had; just so we have that on the record again. Finance Dir. Raguz stated the equipment from Penchura for the Brock Park Playground project that occurred during the summer; that's when some of the delays would happen, during the summer recess. City Council had already approved the contract to proceed with the project and lowering it to the $50,000, would have caused a delay/special meeting. Councilman Tanski questioned Pres. Pucci on what her reasons are for all of this change. He asked if the Mayor or Council did something or was there an expenditure that wasn't right, that Council didn't know about? He stated that there has been a lot of discussion on this and is there something behind the scenes that Council or the Mayor didn't catch that we lowered it to $50,000. Pres. Pucci stated that Council knows the history; we had a local spending threshold and then Mr. Raguz discovered that we had to follow the State and then the only way to change that was through a Charter change. The residents approved the ability for City Council to have local legislation relating to the finances. Her personal opinion is that Council receives very good updates on timelines, but we are not seeing the contracts. We are not seeing the details of some of the larger projects. Pres. Pucci provided an extensive list to all of Council. She surveyed many municipalities in Cuyahoga County and you'll see there's a wide variety (example: Independence is $15,000). She stated that no one has said that there was anything wrong or that someone did something wrong. Everyone has their own view on this and you're entitled to your view, just like we all are. Mayor Van Kirk stated that two things are getting conflated again: the spending threshold is a conversation, the Board of Control is a conversation, but this Ordinance that's being proposed goes much deeper than lowering the spending threshold to $50,000. This part of the legislation has not been discussed at all at either one of the meetings; that is to take away how we currently do capital projects. Mayor stated in regard to how we do them now, Finance Dir. Raguz sends out information to all the Directors, the Directors put together what would they call their want list or need list for the year. The Administration scores those. We have a dollar amount that we believe is where we should spend in the Capital projects. Those are then prioritized. Then we have a very lengthy Capital Budget meeting where every director is there, walks through every single one of their projects. There's a budget for those projects that is approved. Then once that budget is approved, then as those projects come up to bid, the bid openings take place, the contract is awarded and it moves forward. That's how it reads right now. If this legislation goes into effect, all of that goes out the window. We may still have the Capital Budget process, but no longer would the Administration be able to sign a contract without coming back to Council and that will greatly hinder the ability for the city to do their work. This is very different than the discussions that have taken place before; there was no conversation in a Council meeting that we were going be changing the way that we do the Capital Budget process. Mayor stated he has had Mr. Raguz go through and look at all POs issued over $50,000 and there were 43 of them. Of those, 21 were Capital projects. 17 of those Capital projects, he gave Council multiple updates and information. He would have been happy to provide contracts had everyone been requested, but they were not. And if they were, they were provided. There were 4 items of the 21 that did not give updates because two of them haven't taken place yet. The other one was the roof for the Fire Station, which took place, and then a condenser that was purchased at the Rec Center. There were also 14 items that Council did approve through contracts. Then there were 3 items that were under the spending threshold that were not in the Capital Budget, but were very thoroughly explained and gave multiple updates to Council regarding the relocation of the power line from Cleveland Public Power for the North Amber site; the North Amber sewer that 4 Page 5 of 25 had to be installed as part of the building project. The other project was the painting of the bridges. Mayor stated he does not understand why a system that this Council has praised repeatedly for years with Mr. Raguz and his work is now getting set aside. He is confused as to why that is. This was not discussed at prior meetings. The lowering of the spending threshold was discussed for three items that were talked about for the CPP power line move, the painting of the bridges, that type of stuff that wasn't budgeted for, but the Capital items discussion did not take place. He stated he was somewhat blindsided by this and never knew that there was an issue because none have ever been raised. He stated he is confused as to why this discussion is happening and why this legislation is now being introduced when we talked for two meetings about it, but this was never brought up. Pres. Pucci stated she has said from the beginning what her issue was on it, that Council has financial oversight and she feels like Council is out of the loop in some of the detail. She stated she is not talking about the general updates that we get and not seeing the contracts. She does remember speaking at a committee meeting and the Mayor had said that everything was generally approved through the Capital Improvement Plan. Her position is that there needs to be a plan in regards to the projects, but that her desire was always to have a local spending threshold for all the projects, not just something that would be outside of the Capital Improvement Plan. Finance Dir Raguz stated relating to the Capital Plan Ordinance 2025-23 and going forward, if Ordinance 2025- 31 were to pass in its current form, he doesn’t understand the purpose of Ordinance 2025-23. You're duplicating contract approval, which doesn't make much sense to him. You're approving contract authority within two separate ordinances. Pres. Pucci asked Mr. Raguz if he would see value to this plan for the year and does that not take legislation? Finance Dir Raguz stated that does not take legislation; it would be something we'd agree to through the budgeting; through the appropriation ordinance. Pres. Pucci stated that Brock Park was mentioned and that is the one thing where there could have been a potential issue. She knows that in recent times, we have not had many special meetings of Council in the summer recess period, but there is never a problem with Council agreeing to come in for something that's important. We have the capability right now to have Zoom meetings as well. Council is always open to addressing whatever needs to be addressed and if that requires a special meeting in the summer, that's fine. Mayor Van Kirk gave a presentation on the Big Creek Tunnel that's taking place in the City of Brooklyn (see attached). There being no further business, MOTION by Coyle, second by Borowski to adjourn. VOTE: Yes: Celcherts, Borowski, Tanski, Pucci, Coyle. No: None. Absent: Mosley, Grodek. Meeting adjourned. ____________________________ Dana Schroeder, Clerk of Council Minutes approved: 5 Page 6 of 25  Big Creek Tunnel City of Brooklyn Page 7 of 25  Big Creek Tunnel Project Overview • The Big Creek Tunnel (BCT) project is part of Project Clean Lake and the Federal Consent Decree • Storage tunnel system to capture combined sewage (CSO) from discharging to the Big Creek watershed • Reduce annual CSO volume by approximately 550 million gallons Page 8 of 25  Big Creek Tunnel (BCT) Project Overview • Located in Cleveland, Linndale, and Brooklyn • Alignment primarily along Memphis Ave from W. 130th St to W 24th St • ~4 miles of 20ft diameter storage tunnel constructed in rock • 6 tunnel shafts, consolidation sewers, adits, gate and screening structures. Page 9 of 25  Big Creek Tunnel Project Schedule • Design Phase – Q2 2024 through Q2 2026 • 60% plans were submitted August 2025. • Final plans will be submitted March 2026. • Bid Period – Q2 through Q3 2026 • Construction – Q3/Q4 2026 through Q3 2030 Page 10 of 25  Big Creek Tunnel - Brooklyn Page 11 of 25  NEORSD Project Clean Lake Tunnel Page 12 of 25  Big Creek Tunnel – Profile (Memphis Ave / Ridge Rd) Top of rock is Ridge Rd Approx. 75-ft approx. 35-ft of cover above below the tunnel crown ground surface Big Creek Tunnel Page 13 of 25  Shaft BCT-4 Ridge Rd / Memphis Page 14 of 25  BCT-4 Big Creek Tunnel • 7171 Memphis Ave, Brooklyn, OH 44144 Memphis Ave Existing 66-in Sewer (tributary to CSO-054) • Drop shaft, diversion structure, gate structure BCT-4 Shaft Construction Site Limits Diversion Structure to be constructed within Ridge Rd Big Creek Tunnel Page 15 of 25  Memphis Ave Big Creek Tunnel Existing 66-in Sewer (tributary to CSO-054) Rockland Dr Big Creek Tunnel Existing 66-in Sewer (tributary to CSO-054) Page 16 of 25  Ridge Rd / Memphis Ave BCT-4 Maintenance of Traffic Required Diversion Structure Site Protect Tree Remove Tree Remove Tree Page 17 of 25 Construction Diversion Site Limits Structure Site  Property Acquisition • NEORSD will acquire easements for construction of the Big Creek Tunnel following Ohio Revised Code Chapter 163 & 6119 • Temporary easement for construction • Permanent sewer easement • Property Acquisition Page 18 of 25  Site Easements / Acquirement • Parcels 432-26-001 Options for Temporary and 432-26-002 Parcel to be Acquired Construction Easement or by NEORSD NEORSD Acquirement are owned by the Brooklyn Community 432-26-001 432-26-002 Improvement Corporation. • 2 acquisition options Page 19 of 25  Option 1 • NEORSD acquires Parcels Acquired by NEORSD both PPNs • $47,950 (a) + $22,680 (b) = $70,630 Total 432-26-001 (a) 432-26-002 (b) • NEORSD maintains both parcels long term. • 432-26-001 is restored to trees and grass. Page 20 of 25  Option 2 • PPN 432-26-001: temporary & subterranean easement Temporary Construction Parcel Acquired by Easement NEORSD • PPN 432-26-002 acquired by NEORSD Permanent Subterranean • $21,758 (a) + $22,680 (b) Sewer Easement • $44,438 Total • NEORSD contributes additional funds to enhanced restoration of 432-26-001 (a) 432-26-002 (b) 432-26-001 if Brooklyn maintains the site long term. Page 21 of 25  Restoration What is the City’s Vision for this PPN 432-26-001? 432-26-001 Page 22 of 25  Restoration PPN 432-26-002 • Examples of infrastructure that will be at the ground surface. Page 23 of 25 Electrical Panel Fencing Gooseneck  Enhanced Restoration – Chester & Euclid Ave • Examples of enhanced NEORSD restoration sites. Page 24 of 25 Electrical Panel Fencing Grass Geogrid Drive  Big Creek Tunnel City of Brooklyn Page 25 of 25