Council Meeting

MINUTES OF MEETING INDIAN HILL VILLAGE COUNCIL June 16, 2025 A meeting of the Indian Hill Village Council was held on June 16, 2025 at 6:30 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council Chamber of the Village Administration building. Council present: Mr. Stephen H. Krehbiel, Mayor Mr. Richard J. Hidy, Vice Mayor Mr. Jeffrey G. Gibson, Council member Mrs. Elizabeth C. Isphording, Council member Mr. Shayne O Manning, Council member Mrs. Pat Stern, Council member Council absent: Mr. Andrew A. Byer, Council member Staff present: Ms. TaraLyn M. Riordan, City Clerk of Council Ms. Monique A. Sewell, City Comptroller Mr. Scott D. Phillips, City Solicitor Ms. Dina C. Minneci, City Manager Mr. Jon West, Assistant City Manager Mrs. Jessica Chaney, City Director of Administrative Services Mr. Ron Freson, City Water Works Superintendent Ms. Cindy Klopfenstein, City Engineer / Project Manager Visitors present: Mr. Kim Burke, 6750 Camaridge Ln, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Ms. Kristin Carroll, 6265 Hunters Trail, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Ms. Melissa Cowan, 5816 Miami Rd, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Ms. Yasmin El-Jabsheh, 6155 Hunters Trail, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Ms. Lisa Elliott, 6375 Hunters Trail, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Mrs. Tricia Gottlieb, 7865 Shawnee Run Rd, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Mrs. Mary Guanciale, 7895 Shawnee Run Rd, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Mr. Pat Guanciale, 7895 Shawnee Run Rd, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Mrs. Megan Joy, 6980 Given Rd, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Mr. Mark Longenecker, 7708 Chumani Ln, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Ms. Marslyn Longenecker, 7708 Chumani Ln, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Mr. Wally Lovejoy, 6205 South Clippinger Dr, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Ms. Anne McCarren, 7885 Shawnee Run Rd, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Ms. Donna McMurry, 7809 Shawnee Run Rd, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Ms. Sally More, 6105 Hunters Trail, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Ms. Marla Morse, 7847 Shawnee Run Rd, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Mr. Donald Muller, 5845 Graves Lake Dr, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Mrs. Suzanne Muller, 5845 Graves Lake Dr, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Mrs. Buffie Rixey, 7195 Given Rd, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Mr. Eppa Rixey, 7195 Given Rd, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Mr. Dan Robinett, 7730 Chumani Ln, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Mrs. Lisa Robinett, 7730 Chumani Ln, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Mrs. Ellen Slattery, 7855 Shawnee Run Rd, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Mr. Robert Slattery, 7855 Shawnee Run Rd, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Ms. Christin Spurr, 6435 Hunters Trail, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Mr. Jim Stern, 10340 Carriage Trail, Cincinnati, OH 45242 Mr. Kevin Whitham, 6155 Hunters Trail, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Mr. Jeff Wolff, 7721 Chumani Ln, Cincinnati, OH 45243 Mr. Tim Zaring, 7725 Chumani Ln, Cincinnati, OH 45243 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Krehbiel opened the Council meeting by leading the Pledge of Allegiance. 2. CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL: The Pledge was followed by Mayor Krehbiel’s call to order and a roll call by Clerk Riordan. 3. COUNCIL MINUTES: The Minutes of the regular meeting of May 19, 2025 had previously been distributed to each Council member. Upon confirming that no Council members had Minutes of Council Meeting June 16, 2025 Page 2 submitted change requests to City Manager Minneci, Mayor Krehbiel declared the minutes accepted as issued. 4. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION: Mayor Krehbiel welcomed all visitors in attendance. The Mayor then invited Mr. Kim Burke to deliver a verbal synopsis of “Recommendations re Indian Hill Water Works” that had been prepared by the volunteer Village Advisory Committee (VAC). These recommendations pertained to EPA Standards for PFAS and the construction of a new Water Tower. They had been submitted in writing to City Manager Minneci on June 10, and a copy was included in the Council Meeting Packet. Mr. Burke opened his statements by acknowledging the hard work invested by each of the eleven residents constituting the VAC. He outlined the formal meetings that members attended (e.g. general VAC meetings, community town halls, etc.) and the significant time each had committed to formulating recommendations and preparing the report over the prior seven months. Mr. Burke could not, within the constraints of time, exhaust all details of the report. Instead, he focused his remarks on select topics pertaining to the two main issues examined by the VAC: a. PFAS and its impact on the water system b. Construction of a new Water Tower With regards to PFAS, Mr. Burke shared that the VAC had carefully considered the pros and cons of purchasing water from Greater Cincinnati Water Works (GCWW). However, upon examining available information, the VAC had little appetite to purchase water from GCWW. Water from GCWW would be supplied from the Richard Miller Treatment Center on Kellogg Avenue, where Gen-X PFAS had been detected every month between Oct, 2024 and March, 2025. The fact that the PFAS detected in GCWW water was a different type from that which has been detected in the Little Miami River aquifer, suggests that the City of Cincinnati’s ability to treat Ohio River water through granular activated carbon has limitations, specifically in treating upstream contamination (believed to be from Parkersburg, West Virginia). So, although short-chain Gen-X has less significant health effects than comparative PFAS, PFOS and PFOA, the VAC believes the presence of Gen-X in GCWW water is still an important factor, and that the quality of source water should be a top consideration when the Village proceeds to comply with new EPA standards. Regarding the construction of a new Water Tower, Mr. Burke emphasized the VAC’s efforts to understand the concerns of residents (i.e. the VAC’s analysis included a careful consideration of the tower’s location, appearance and resident impact). He shared that one of the VAC’s recommendations had even been to place greater emphasis on “impact on residents in the vicinity of the proposed locations”. If resident impact was weighted as recommended in their enclosed decision matrix, and all other factors were equal, then the VAC does not believe the Village will find Camp Jim B to be the best choice. Before concluding his remarks, Mr. Burke communicated that he and the VAC would be glad to reconvene and develop a supplemental report once ongoing discussions with Engineers, and assessments of the existing water tower site were completed. Mr. Burke then acknowledged Mr. Wally Lovejoy, Ms. Missy Cowan, Mrs. Megan Joy, and Mr. Eppa Rixey (three of the VAC members in attendance) before thanking all in attendance for their time. On behalf of Council, Mayor Krehbiel thanked Mr. Burke and the entire VAC for their dedicated time, analysis and unique expertise. Council member Gibson then echoed a hearty thanks to all who served on the VAC, and expressed particular gratitude for their matrix suggestions, sharing that weighted criterion (i.e. a tornado matrix) was already under discussion and that the VAC’s recommendations would provide further motivation to move in that direction. Council member Byer also added (via phone) his support for weighted criteria. Minutes of Council Meeting June 16, 2025 Page 3 Vice Mayor Hidy also echoed the gratitude expressed by his fellow Council members, and confirmed that Council understands the high importance of resident impact. He further shared that Council’s sensitivity to resident impact was believed to be understood, but after receiving the VAC’s recommendations, resident impact will be called out more explicitly moving forward as it is front and center of decisions made by Council. Council member Manning then complimented the clarity and quality of the VAC’s report. Mayor Krehbiel encouraged comments and questions from citizen attendees, noting that Council is open to all new ideas. In turn, Mr. Don Muller asked if GCWW has a process to monitor Gen-X and if there is a way to deal with it. Mr. Burke explained that there is a process to monitor for Gen-X and the whole family of synthetic chemicals under discussion. However, it takes 28 days to receive the results of such tests. Also, short-chain Gen-X can be treated with an ion exchange system. However, Indian Hill does not currently have such a system as the contaminates found in Village water are long chain (which require a different treatment). Ms. Anne McCarren asked if an updated project schedule will be published (to reflect future meeting dates, results, etc.) Mayor Krehbiel responded affirmatively, and City Manager Minneci outlined the communication plan that is in place to inform the community, explaining that its activation and certain components would be dependent upon outcomes of tonight’s meeting. Ms. Donna McMurry then inquired about the lack of appetite to switch to GCWW, citing that Village water is more expensive. Mr. Burke explained that her latter statement was incorrect. He clarified that Village water is currently cheaper than GCWW water and GCWW costs would further increase with proposed additional expenditures at various treatment plants. Mr. Burke also explained the VAC’s general consensus that the City of Cincinnati would not provide the same level of service and reliability typically expected by Village of Indian Hill residents of their Public Works and Water Works Departments (citing historical experience with those utilities, water main repairs in particular). Mr. Wally Lovejoy, a VAC member, added that there is no guarantee that the Village would receive priority service compared to the rest of the GCWW system. (i.e. GCWW could turn off the Village’s water supply during a shortage.) Also, purchasing water from GCWW would not address the Village’s need for a new water tower. At this point, several visitors attempted to speak in unison. City Solicitor Phillips announced that the meeting was being recorded, that individuals needed to be recognized by the Chair (before speaking), and that those wishing to speak should state their name for the record. Vice Mayor Hidy then noted the loss of resiliency that would result from going with GCWW. An unnamed, female visitor wished to know when Council vetoed the possibility of going with GCWW. City Manager Minneci explained that the decision had been reached through multiple discussions in 2023 and 2024. Mayor Krehbiel added that Council had come to the same conclusions as the VAC regarding service, resiliency, unknown future costs, etc. Ms. Lisa Robinett shared that she owns two residential properties: one in the Village and one in nearby Kenwood, which is on GCWW. She explained that the Kenwood property’s water bill is $100/month vs. $330/quarter in Indian Hill for like services and utilization. Mr. Tim Zaring shared that he has developed approximately one thousand lots (home sites) around Greater Cincinnati, and that every single one of those (with exception to homes built in Butler County) are on GCWW. To his knowledge, none of these have had problems with GCWW and each has had good quality water. Mr. Ken Whitham voiced doubt that there is a factual gap between services provided by the Village of Indian Hill Water Works and GCWW. He cited that GCWW was rated the number one water utility in the entire Midwest by JD Power in 2025 and 2024. Further, he is not aware Minutes of Council Meeting June 16, 2025 Page 4 of any issues with the water provided by GCWW as far North as Mason. He also commented that GCWW provides higher quality water. Ms. Kristin Carroll shared her belief that GCWW should be engaged more formally, to enable the Village to compare options more properly. City Manager Minneci explained that the Ohio EPA requires the Village to perform a Regionalization Study with GCWW (as part of our PFAS Action Plan), and thus GCWW will be accounted for as part of the Village’s PFAS removal process. Ms. Carroll clarified her desire to understand whether a water tower is required if the Village goes with GCWW, and that further information from GCWW (in the form of a proposal) could help add that clarity. Mayor Krehbiel addressed the scenario of GCWW taking over distribution and ownership of Village lines, including the many complexities and costs of switching. Mr. Zaring suggested that GCWW could run one pipe to the Village’s existing distribution system without causing the issues mentioned by the Mayor. City Water Works Superintendent, Mr. Ron Freson, addressed redundancy requirements that would not be satisfied through Mr. Zaring’s proposed redesign. In summary, he explained that the Village cannot be reliant upon a single pipe to supply water to 15,000 people. As an example, Mr. Freson shared the Village’s experience during last Summer’s drought. At that time, the Village had to operate its water treatment plant concurrent to GCWW’s operations because the Village could not get enough water solely from GCWW. Mr. Zaring then expressed concern that some properties may be devalued by the construction of a new water tower. Mr. Freson communicated that he understands this concern. He also highlighted that for some residents, PFAS is the more concerning issue, while for others, the water tower location is the greater concern. He assured attendees that the Village is trying to respect and address all concerns. Council Member Gibson took the opportunity to revisit Ms. Carrol’s point about GCWW and shed additional light on the mandated Regionalization Study – previously mentioned by City Manager Minneci. Council Member Gibson shared that a group (including several guests) had recently spent considerable time at the Village Water Works facilities, planning the Regionalization Study, which would have additional benefits beyond fulfilling a PFAS Action Plan requirement (i.e. it would also help the Village determine how to evaluate options from GCWW). He estimated that the study would take 90-120 days to complete, and also noted that Council was considering legislation to engage a consultant that would help the Village evaluate multiple options. Mayor Krehbiel again declared that resident impact is front and center in the minds of Council. Vice Mayor Hidy let attendees know that Council was making decisions as quickly as possible, and they will try to communicate as sites are ruled out of consideration. A lady who did not identify herself then asked about the number of options under consideration, seeking specific clarification on whether GCWW was being considered as a supplier and/or a distributor. Vice Mayor Hidy expressed his appreciation for the question and responded, explaining that Council would act upon facts, but also that Council had a preference to continue the Village’s tradition of owning their services and providing their own water. He shared that Council’s preference was based upon similar rationale to that which had been shared by the VAC, projected costs, and issues such as control and resiliency. Mayor Krehbiel also shared a bit of history on how the Village ended up in the water business, as that too reinforced Council’s preference. The same lady asked how many communities in the Greater Cincinnati area operate their own Water Works Departments. Minutes of Council Meeting June 16, 2025 Page 5 The City Solicitor proceeded to name local municipalities that operate their own water services and do not rely upon GCWW. His list included Milford, Glendale, Loveland, Harrison, Kings Island and Wyoming. The Mayor emphasized that the Village is not alone. Council member Gibson then saluted everyone’s participation in the Village Town Halls, which he felt achieved their objectives. He shared that he personally had learned a lot from residents ideas and through the open, intelligent, productive dialogue had at each forum. Mrs. Tricia Gottlieb then asked if Council would revisit the Village Advisory Committee membership, and consider inviting additional community members to join the VAC. She further suggested that a broader set of participant expertise could potentially save the Village money on consultant fees. Mayor Krehbiel touched upon the high level of expertise and knowledge already on the existing VAC (especially in Mr. Kim Burke, a seasoned expert in legal matters pertaining to water), while simultaneously acknowledging that this was a good questions and encouraging Mrs. Gottlieb to bring forward names of anyone she had in mind. Mrs. Gottlieb inquired about a broad-scope invitation to water experts, engineers, land development professionals and other vested members of the community with relevant, specialized expertise who might be willing to donate their time to this cause. Council member Gibson let Mrs. Gottlieb know that Council is open to people who can help them make this 50 to 100-year decision, while also noting that Council’s next few steps will be happening very quickly. Vice Mayor Hidy also noted that the VAC’s work is beginning to narrow, but that additional expertise would always be welcome and appreciated. Mayor Krehbiel urged any resident experts to come forward. Mr. Jeff Wolff expressed his concern over a VAC member that had to disqualify themself due to their proximity to a site under consideration. Mr. Wolff, a resident of Chumani, said that if he was on the VAC, he would lean towards the site on Given Road (vs. Chumani), and he does not believe anyone on the committee should advise if they have a bias. He also commented on research conducted by the public and criticized the sequencing of potential sites listed in presentations delivered at Town Halls. He was glad to see the VAC emphasize resident impact, as he feels this is the number one concern. Mrs. Melissa Cowan, a member of the VAC, shared that several VAC members live close to the South Given site. However, these individuals, who would be most affected by developing at that site, never said anything to deter from developing a water tower at that site. In fact, they even supported language in the VAC report that discourages use of Camp Jim B. Further, she was not aware of anyone on the committee that pushed their personal agenda. Mayor Krehbiel concurred that was his understanding as well. Mr. Wolff said it looked bad that these individuals (who live close to the South Given site) were on the VAC, but it could appear more balanced with a resident from Graves Lake (or other streets near to Camp Jim B). Mayor Krehbiel shared that two of the VAC members in attendance reside in the area indicated by Mr. Wolff (i.e. South Clippinger and Miami). Mr. Wally Lovejoy, a member of the VAC, reminded the room that the VAC is an Advisory Committee but that anyone wishing to file a comment had equal opportunity to do so. He also encouraged everyone (namely those who think it has bias) to read the VAC report – observing that the nature of several comments and questions suggested that some individuals had not yet read its contents. (i.e. The report suggests that 1) Council explain the decision to not use GCWW, 2) resident impact is important, and 3) more information would be helpful for evaluating all options.) Mr. Lovejoy agreed that adding people to the VAC could be useful, but highlighted that there has already been ample opportunity for every affected individual to make formal comment. Minutes of Council Meeting June 16, 2025 Page 6 Ms. Sally More then asked why [Council/VAC members implied] are pushing Camp Jim B, when it impacts so many residents and homes. Mayor Krehbiel suggested, to Mr. Lovejoy’s point, that Ms. More read the report. Ms. More then asked if [Council/VAC members implied] had considered Given and Camargo Roads to the same extent they had considered Camp Jim B. The Mayor and Vice Mayor both clarified that no one is pushing Camp Jim B. Following, a series of comments were vocalized in unison by Mr. Zaring and other attendees. In turn, City Solicitor Phillips made comments to reestablish decorum and respect the process of this public meeting. He again asked individuals wishing to speak, to raise their hand and be recognized by the Chair before speaking. Mr. Mark Longenecker asked why a consultant was being hired at this point in time. Council member Manning replied that a Village resident, who is a Hydraulic Engineer, has recently performed volunteer work to help Village engineers look at alternative options. The consultant is being hired to explore various topics, including a new idea that the volunteer Engineer has come up with. In essence, the consultant will be providing a second opinion on this new idea. Vice Mayor Hidy added that the new idea includes an option to possibly use the exiting water tower for a reasonable and appropriate period of time, and possibly placing a new tower at that same location on Miami. After noting that this is outlined in the Water Works Committee Meeting Minutes, he cited two specific aspects that would be explored: 1) improved resiliency around pumps, distribution and delivery and 2) a better way of having GCWW supplied as a direct backup into our storage at this location. As an aside, Vice Mayor Hidy also shared his view that the Village’s prior consultant (Burgess and Niple) was competent; and he expressed his desire to do the right thing for Village residents. Mayor Krehbiel said this notion was a direct benefit of the Town Halls, and he shared that Council member Manning’s Engineering background had been valuable to the discussion with the volunteer resident. Mr. Longenecker then asked for various specifics about the consultancy under consideration, so he could gain comfort with their capabilities. Council member Manning informed Mr. Longenecker that that consultancy was AECOM, a national firm with a local office that can bring in resources as needed. Mrs. Gottlieb then asked if any other expertise was required (that those in attendance could help identify within the community). Council member Gibson expressed appreciation for Mrs. Gottlieb’s offer to assist, and said Council would be in touch if and when such needs are identified. Vice Mayor Hidy invited anyone in attendance with relevant expertise to reach out to Council, as he wants everyone to have the opportunity to participate (as evidenced by the approach Council has taken to engage public opinion through Town Halls, etc.) Along these same lines, Mayor Krehbiel acknowledged that this is a massive decision for our community that Council has been talking about for years. Before closing the conversation, Council member Manning noted Ms. McCarren’s familiarity with the process that Council is undergoing. Ms. McCarren then expressed appreciation for Council’s engagement of AECOM and stated that she thinks that’s a great step. Council member Gibson thanked all in attendance for their questions and feedback; and Vice Mayor Hidy reconfirmed Council’s commitment to provide transparent updates in a timely manner, as already pledged by City Manager Minneci. Minutes of Council Meeting June 16, 2025 Page 7 Once comments came to a close, Mayor Krehbiel thanked all VAC members for their dedication to this effort. He then welcomed all visitors to stay for the remainder of the Council meeting and thanked Mr. Burke, one final time. 5. FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT: Council member Gibson reported that the Finance Committee met on June 11, 2025. He then directed Council’s attention to the complete meeting minutes in the Council Meeting Packet, noting that Mr. Benny Schwartz and Miss Urvi Garg, two Indian Hill High School “Experienceship” students, had been in attendance and presented about their program / personal interests in government. (See memo titled, “Finance Committee Meeting” alongside financial statements prepared by Comptroller Sewell.) Council member Gibson then shared the following highlights from the Village financial statements dated May 31, 2025: a. Income Tax Receipts: The Village received $209,318 which is approximately $600 less than it received in May 2024. Year to date cash receipts are 87% of budget. b. Operating Disbursements: Operating expenditures equated to a little over $1.22mm which is approximately $61,000 more than May 2024. This is due to timing of payments. c. CIRF: Disbursements totaled $237,445. These expenditures include Public Works roof replacement and landslide corrections. d. Water Works Receipts: Water usage receipts were $279,086 which is approximately $1K more than May 2024. The surcharges for Madeira, Terrace Park and Hamilton County have been placed in separate funds for accounting purposes. e. Water Works Disbursements: Total operating disbursements were $423,557, which is approximately $14,000 less than May 2024. This is due to timing of payments. f. Water Works CRF: Disbursements totaled $213K. This included the first of two interest payments for the 2020 and 2021 bonds. g. Long Term Debt: Included the first of two interest payments for the 2020 bond ($5,148) and 2021 bonds ($52,598). h. Cash and Investments: Total month end cash and investments were about $57.5mm compared to $58.4mm in April 2025 and $53.79mm in May 2024. i. Rowe Funds: The market value as of May 31st is $5,056,601 which is a 0.8% increase since December 31, 2024. The total unrecognized gain is $1,416,745. Total monthly operating receipts, including dividends/interest, were $11,620 with monthly operating expenses totaling $39,622 and net investment gain of $17,401. j. Green Areas Funds: The total market value for investments and cash as of May 31st is $5,362,111. The total unrecognized gain for investments and cash is $3,676,435. Total monthly earnings equate to $465 with monthly expenses totaling $6,784. Council member Gibson then provided an update on the 2026 Tentative Tax Budget. Specifically, he shared that: a. Mr. Gully distributed copies of the draft 2026 Tentative Tax Budget for the Committee members to review and discuss. b. The proposed 2026 Operating & CIRF budget reflects total estimated revenues of $19.05mm against estimated operating expenses of $17.3mm and capital/retirement reserve expenditures of a little less than $3mm. The total ending balance for all 2026 Operating Funds is estimated at a little under $30mm. c. The tax budget process represents a starting point for the preparation of the more encompassing 2026 budget process that we do in the fourth quarter. The formal, detailed budget review process begins in July and continues through the December Appropriation Ordinance. This process includes meetings amongst staff, the Finance Director, Comptroller, City Manager and Council Committees where individual line items are Minutes of Council Meeting June 16, 2025 Page 8 analyzed and adjusted as needed. In addition, Council will hold a Strategic Planning session in August which will evaluate priorities for the upcoming year. Council member Gibson then requested a Public Hearing to review the 2026 Tentative Tax Budget, and Mayor Krehbiel officially opened the Public Hearing. Once the Hearing opened, Council member Gibson explained that the Tentative Tax Budget is a requirement of the County and represents a starting point for the preparation of the more encompassing 2026 budget process. The formal, detailed budget review process begins in July. The process includes another Public Hearing in November and a recommendation of the Appropriation ordinance in December. As previously indicated, he reminded attendees that this process also includes many meetings amongst staff, the Finance Director, Comptroller, City manager and Village Committees where individual line items are thoroughly analyzed and adjusted as needed. Mayor Krehbiel then asked if anyone had questions or comments about the 2026 Tentative Tax Budget. Hearing none, he closed the Public Hearing on the 2026 Tentative Tax Budget. Afterwards, Council member Gibson made a motion to adopt the Tax Budget for the City of the Village of Indian Hill for the Fiscal Year beginning January 1, 2026 and submitting the same to the County Auditor. Vice Mayor Hidy seconded, the motion passed by unanimous voice vote (6-0) and Resolution 10-25 was approved. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE TAX BUDGET OF THE CITY OF THE VILLAGE OF INDIAN HILL FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2026 AND SUBMITTING SAME TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR 6. LAW COMMITTEE REPORT: Vice Mayor Hidy reported that the Law Committee met on June 5, 2025, and directed Council’s attention to detailed minutes in a memo titled, “Law Committee Meeting” included in the Council Meeting Packet. Vice Mayor Hidy then provided the following updates from the Law Committee meeting: a. Mr. West presented a draft Ordinance to amend Chapter 155 Zoning Ordinance, which was previously approved by the Planning Commission. Mr. West noted that most, but not all amendments, were routine in nature and were intended to bring further clarity to our existing code. b. Mr. West also presented an Ordinance to amend Chapter 95 of the Village Code of Ordinances, related to Village Parks. The amendments clarify that our City Manager may maintain regulations related to the use of all Village Parks and to specifically prohibit the use of radio-controlled aircraft, except for use by authorized Village or emergency personnel. After discussion, the Committee agreed to present a first reading of the revised Ordinance (Ordinance 09-25 is attached). c. On motion, with Council present, the Committee convened into Executive Session for the purpose of discussing legal and property related matters. Once discussions were completed, the Law Committee exited their Executive Session. Following his Committee meeting updates, Vice Mayor Hidy then requested a Public Hearing to review recommended changes to Chapter 155 Zoning Ordinance. Mayor Krehbiel officially opened the Public Hearing on changes to Chapter 155 Zoning Ordinance, and invited Mr. Jon West to provide the overview of updates. Mr. West then presented highlights of updates to each section that had been discussed and recommended by Planning Commission at its May 21, 2025 Planning Commission meeting: • Section 2, Purposes and General Standards o Section 2.3 was updated to allow staff to approve additions to non- conforming structures if the addition does not worsen the non-conforming condition. • Section 3, Definitions Minutes of Council Meeting June 16, 2025 Page 9 o Removed terms that are not used in the Ordinance o Added terms that needed defined o Updated definitions that needed clarification • Section 5, Nonconformities, Non-conforming Uses and Nonconforming structures o Clarified language in Section 53 Location of Accessory Structures o Clarified language in Section 57 Off-Street Parking Standards o Section 58 Lighting for Special Exceptions was added • Section 6 o District A and B Use Regulations were clarified and updated Home Occupation Language o Section 61.25 Signs was updated to conform to recent case law on signage to treat commercial and non-commercial signage the same o Added 61.27 Amateur Radio Towers because they are required to be permitted per the Ohio Revised Code o Added 61.3 Prohibited Uses and specifically prohibited short term rentals • Section 7, District C Regulations o Added 71.25 Keeping of Backyard Chickens as an Accessory Use o Added Prohibited Uses to be the same as Districts A and B • Section 86, Green Area Lot Reductions and Green Area Development o Updated to reflect how they have been handled for the last 20 years with City Manager approval of Green Area Lot Reductions and Planning Commission approval of Green Area Development • Section 9, Enforcement o Made minor revisions for clarification • Section 10, Administration o Removed the ability to appeal a Planning Commission decision to Council. All appeals of Planning Commission decisions will go directly to the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas o Clarified language in section 101.3, Special Exceptions. Section 101.431 (11) was added to allow the Planning Commission to review lot coverage for special exceptions on a case-by-case basis (note, this came up with Indian Hill School District in relation to the Field House project) o Updated application requirements for Special Exceptions and Variances and public notification procedures Upon opening the discussion for public questions and comments, Village resident Anne McCarren inquired about the amendment to Section 10. This amendment removes residents’ ability to appeal a Planning Commission decision to Council, and directs all appeals of Planning Commission decisions to the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas. Village Solicitor, Scott Phillips, responded to Ms. McCarren, explaining that this amendment had been his suggestion. Mr. Phillips had proposed this change to align the Village with best practices upheld in similar communities, where Councils are strictly a legislative body and Planning Commissions are an administrative body. In addition to aligning the Village with other jurisdictions and minimizing confusion, Vice Mayor Hidy pointed out that this amendment should expedite the Planning Commission appeals process for residents. As there were no further questions, Mayor Krehbiel closed the Public Hearing. Vice Mayor Hidy then presented the first reading of Ordinance 08-25: ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 155 ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE OF INDIAN HILL CODE OF ORDINANCES Vice Mayor Hidy closed by presenting the first reading of Ordinance 09-25: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 95 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO PREPARE AND MAINTAIN REGULATIONS RELATED TO THE USE OF VILLAGE PARKS AND TO ADD SECTION 95.03 TO ESTABLISH PROHIBITED USE IN PARKS Both Ordinance 08-25 and 09-25 were included in the Council Meeting Packet. Minutes of Council Meeting June 16, 2025 Page 10 Mayor Krehbiel thanked Vice Mayor Hidy for his Law Committee report and turned the conversation to Council member Stern, who was presenting the “Buildings and Grounds Committee Report” on behalf of Council member Byer. 7. BUILDINGS & GROUNDS COMMITTEE REPORT: Council member Stern reported that the Buildings and Grounds Committee met on June 10, 2025. Council member Stern then shared the following from the Buildings and Grounds Departmental Activity Report (included in the Council Meeting Packet). a. Cleaned, repaired and prepped for siding repairs at Livingston Lodge b. Cleaned fountain and fallen tree at Bird Sanctuary c. Trimmed and removed honeysuckle at Shooting Range d. Inspected all playgrounds e. Cleaned and trimmed at all parks f. Replaced irrigation valve at Stephan Park g. Sprayed for hemlock at Rheinstrom Park h. Field maintenance Council member Stern then shared the following from the Buildings and Grounds Project Management Report (included in the Council Meeting Packet). a. Rowe Arboretum: deer fence installation has been completed b. Forestry Management: prepared for invasive regrowth herbicide treatment on green areas adjacent to Rheinstrom Park and Redbird Hollow c. Reforest the Hill: Drake Road in front of Indian Hill School is the 2025 featured area. Thus far, $17,410 in donations have been received. In addition, the Indian Hill Garden Club donated $1,500 for daffodil bulbs to be placed along Indian Hill Road. d. S. Given Stream Restoration Repairs: The City Solicitor is in discussions with Beavercreek Hydrology’s insurance provider. Staff is monitoring the stream during rainstorms. e. Radio Range Picnic Shelter: Building permit has been approved. Concrete slab and foundation work will commence in a few weeks. The shelter components are expected to be shipped late this month. f. Public Works Roof Replacement: Roof panel installation and downspout/gutter replacements are complete. Final trim is nearing completion. g. Stephan Field Basketball Court Replacement & Tennis Court Rehabilitation: Mrs. Klopfenstein applied to ODNR’s Nature Works Program for a $150,000 grant to assist with rehabbing the tennis court and to install new basketball courts. The grant application is accompanied by a commitment of $10,000 from a fundraising effort led by resident Bobby Slattery. The Village is very appreciative of Mr. Slattery’s generous campaign to help with the construction of a new basketball court. Following her reports, Council member Stern presented the third and final reading, plus recommended approval, of Ordinance 06-25: ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 33.10 OF THE CODIFIED ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF THE VILLAGE OF INDIAN HILL REGARDING ESTABLISHMENT, POWERS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE RECREATION COMMISSION Minutes of Council Meeting June 16, 2025 Page 11 Council member Manning seconded the recommendation, and the Ordinance passed by unanimous roll call vote (6-0). Ordinance 06-25 was then enacted. 8. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE REPORT: Council member Stern reported that the Public Works Committee met on June 10, 2025. Council member Stern then proceeded to present highlights from the Public Works Departmental Activity Report (included in the Council Meeting Packet): a. Cleaned and inspected catch basins, gutters, and pipes along Village roadways b. Storm water pipe repairs made on Camp and Spooky Hollow Roads c. Tree work performed on Miami Road and Tupelo Lane d. Cold patching on various roads e. Repaired gate at brush dump Council member Stern then presented highlights from the Public Works Project Management Report (included in the Council Meeting Packet). a. Street Resurfacing Program: Base repairs began in May and milling began in June with Camp Dennison Park. b. Varner Road: Consultant submitted the final design plans which were forwarded to Duke to continue relocation planning for overhead utilities. Duke estimates the relocation will take 3-5 months followed by an additional 3-4 months for other utilities. c. Landslide Contingency: Creek bank erosion was discovered along Walton Creek Road. The contractor will install a metal bracket mounted guardrail on the existing pier wall. Work began this month. Council member Stern concluded by sharing that Hamilton County will be performing sanitary sewer work on Muchmore Road, outside Indian Hill Corporation limits. This work will begin on June 23, 2025 and is expected to conclude by August 3, 2025. An announcement has been placed on the Village website and an email blast will be sent to residents to make them aware. 9. WATER WORKS COMMITTEE & UTILITY DEREGULATION COMMITTEE REPORT: Council member Isphording reported that the Water Works Committee met on June 10, 2025. Council member Isphording then proceeded to present highlights from the Water Works Departmental Activity Report (included in the Council Meeting Packet): a. Repaired 27 water main breaks for the year b. Relocated one tap on Kugler Mill c. Fire hydrant repair generated from flushing program d. Inspections for Madeira’s Camargo Road water main project e. Prepared water meter bid f. Prepped for and participated in Meet the Fleet Council member Isphording then presented two highlights from the Water Works Project Management Report (included in the Council Meeting Packet). Minutes of Council Meeting June 16, 2025 Page 12 a. Water Tower: The Village held the third Town Hall on May 14 and met with the Village Advisory Committee on May 29. Proposals from engineering consultants are being requested for further evaluations of additional options. b. PFAS: OEPA approved the Work Plan for the Rapid Small Scale Column Testing (RSSCT). Barrels of Indian Hill water samples were collected and shipped this week to begin the RSSCT. Council member Isphording also shared the following: a. Mr. Freson indicated that the Village received notification that it will receive approximately $3.3 million from the 3M class settlement. The first tranche has been received in the amount of $661,000. The remaining amounts will be distributed over the next several years. b. The Committee agreed to recommend a third reading and emergency approval of the Ordinance establishing an 8% water rate increase that would commence on July 1, 2025. Please refer to the April 15, 2025 Water Works Committee meeting for details (Ordinance 07-25 attached). c. Staff presented a recommendation to pursue the following scope of services with an outside engineering consultant as it relates to the water tower discussions: 1. Civil engineering evaluation of alternatives to improve the water system features on-site at 5355 Miami Road (the current water tower site). Alternatives include: i. Rehabilitation of existing tower ii. Raising the Hydraulic Grade Line (HGL) on existing tower iii. Increasing storage volume iv. Supplying additional redundancy with increased pumping capacity and back-up power supplies v. Feasibility of constructing new tower alongside existing underground infrastructure vi. Geotechnical evaluation and report of the site and existing tower foundation (e.g., seismic site classification, construction considerations, review of geotechnical information from previous soil borings, coring and compressive strength testing of the existing tower foundation) vii. Other options as recommended by the consultant 2. GIS desktop analysis of potential water storage sites Village-wide (including those currently being evaluated) to help eliminate and/or identify possible locations. Examples of factors to be evaluated include: i. Topography (Elevation and slope) ii. Proximity to center of Village for fire flow purposes iii. Proximity to water mains and roads iv. Hydraulic benefits v. Property ownership, use, acreage, and value data vi. Presence of existing structure d. Staff discussed how the OEPA has mandated that the General Plan, a formal part of the PFAS removal approval process, must include a review of water system regionalization. In the Village’s case, its General Plan would include an overview of regionalization with Greater Cincinnati Water Works. The Village currently has a contract with Tetra Tech to complete the planning phase for PFAS removal which will include the General Plan. The previously mentioned RSSCT is also a portion of the report, used to help determine expected PFAS-removal media life, and estimating operational costs of the proposed system. The General Plan is expected to be completed and submitted to OEPA for review in September/October, 2025. The Village requested that TetraTech share the information anticipated to be used in the General Plan when available. Following her reports, Council member Isphording requested a suspension of the rules and to enter into emergency session. Following a motion by Mayor Krehbiel, Clerk Riordan took a unanimous roll call vote (6-0), and Mayor Krehbiel announced that Council had entered into emergency session. Minutes of Council Meeting June 16, 2025 Page 13 During the emergency session, Council member Isphording presented the third and final reading, plus recommended emergency approval, of Ordinance 07-25: AN ORDINANCE INCREASING RATES BY EIGHT PERCENT (8%) TO BE CHARGED FOR WATER SUPPLIED TO CUSTOMERS BY AMENDING SECTION 51.55 RATES OF THE CITY OF THE VILLAGE OF INDIAN HILL, OHIO CODE OF ORDINANCES Council member Manning seconded the recommendation, and the Ordinance passed by unanimous roll call vote (6-0). Ordinance 07-25 was then enacted. Mayor Krehbiel announced that Council had exited the emergency session. Council member Isphording closed with a motion to approve Resolution 11-25. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH AECOM FOR WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM ENGINEERING SERVICES Council member Manning seconded, the motion passed by unanimous voice vote (6-0), and Resolution 11-25 was approved. Upon these passages, Council member Isphording’s Water Works report concluded. 10. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE REPORT: Mayor Krehbiel reported that the Public Safety Committee met on June 6, 2025, and shared the following updates with Council: a. Chief Oughterson presented the Madeira & Indian Hill Joint Fire District (MIGJFD) Fire/EMS reports (included in the Council Meeting Packet). b. Chief Oughterson presented a video highlighting the fire apparatus industry and the reduction in competition that has caused significant price increases and delays in production for fire vehicles and parts over the last several years. Anti-monopoly lawsuits have been filed; however, determinations may take years. c. Chief Dressell gave an overview of the Ranger’s monthly case report (included in the Council Meeting Packet). d. Chief Dressell highlighted a fraud case, as fraud cases are on the rise. Phishing emails are incorporating themselves into title company home sale transactions to intercept wire transfers. e. Chief Dressell also provided an update on the hiring process. Out of 18 applications, 14 passed the physical training testing. Those 14 applicants will be interviewed this month. 11. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT: Council member Manning shared the outcome of two matters reviewed by the Planning Commission on May 25, 2025. a. The Commission authorized a permit to construct a new single-family residence at 6345 Miami Road, which is a non-conforming lot that already contains a non-conforming home. b. The Commission made a recommendation to City Council on proposed text amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. They recommended approving changes to Chapter 155 of the Code. 12. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT: City Manager Minneci shared two key dates with Council: a. July 4: Independence Day Parade, Festival & Fireworks (@ various locations) b. August 8: Movie Night in the Park (Wicked) (@ Stephan Park) Minutes of Council Meeting June 16, 2025 Page 14 While speaking about the 4th of July celebrations, City Manager Minneci was pleased to announce the parade Grand Marshall, Mrs. Leigh Anne Meurer. She also acknowledge the extremely hard work that Sarah Fink, the Village’s Recreation Program Manager, and her team were investing into planning and executing all 4th of July events. 13. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Mayor Krehbiel requested a motion to go into Executive Session for the purpose of conferencing with attorney for public body concerning disputes involving it that are subject of pending or imminent court action. Vice Mayor Hidy moved that Council go into Executive Session for said purpose. Vice Mayor Hidy’s motion was seconded by Council member Gibson, and passed by unanimous roll call vote (6-0). Council then entered into Executive Session. Council returned from Executive Session. 14. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before Council, Mayor Krehbiel declared the meeting adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Stephen H. Krehbiel, Mayor ATTEST: TaraLyn M. Riordan, Clerk