[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6391712,"mediaKeyId","2111213-2f0f3444b775f900f037bed5ccff728e","parentId",2111213,"title","Council adopts multiple emergency ordinances and appropriations, including public health contract and $500,000 transfer","audioSeconds",59,"startMs",1631000,"endMs",1690000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2111213-2f0f3444b775f900f037bed5ccff728e&start=1631&end=1690","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2111213-2f0f3444b775f900f037bed5ccff728e/thumbnail_1631000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6391712/Ohio/Council-adopts-multiple-emergency-ordinances-and-appropriations-including-public-health-contract-and-500000-transfer","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6391712-a1db83368e70e7825e94fb3a59e3bfc9/orig.mp4?Expires=1775572785&Signature=BNM6fCMPmSqKsY0czKGpbIrCB~jBVevO4k4tBaC1toUK4jY2JDIFC~oj~JKDJ-4xArjqD5pSMx~QGm-3Z86HRqB0xILUj34GMpI-Mh5sh6Znd-dKsrz2shuS1Cm2y8~IP3Jw814hTvuZ~59qkfbydad9ahRXNSdnnvqzOJNHG5uwjY9eiiTnDp-qjojIhQQr8xKE8whthXuT7nHrzd5ZpeTZXhMx6ZFW3oGkOzx7-xtstEME0fbn~bMt4gTNoWi6dI6YBKhg8BcP7Rdeb~QTdgZnagY0tkHoJaK-C6cMmLATNt0HRKMFD6ErzKxpiieZTJN80NlmyAjleRdNM1bhpw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Whitehall OH","date","2025-01-15T00:13:41.227Z","article","Whitehall City Council on Jan. 7 adopted a package of emergency ordinances and resolutions that the council said were needed to complete contracts, accept grants and make year-start budget transfers.

Key adoptions at the meeting included:

• Ordinance 1, 2025 — Authorizing the mayor to execute a contract with Franklin County Public Health to provide health services and plumbing inspections for the City of Whitehall and its residents. Motion introduced and adopted with motion by Council Member Brown and second by Council Member Heck. Roll call votes recorded as unanimous (Brown, Elmore, Morrison, Peck, Smith, Harcourt, Dixon); ordinance adopted.

• Ordinance 2, 2025 — Transfer of $500,000 from designated funds to the general fund 101 budget stabilization fund 110. Introduced by motion and adopted after suspension of rules; unanimous roll call indicated.

• Ordinance 3, 2025 — Amendment to prior ordinance 1032024 and related changes to section 161.38; introduced, rules suspended and adopted unanimously.

• Ordinance 4, 2025 — Appropriation transfers totaling $31,476.80 and $16,523.20 between custodian and seasonal service salary accounts; introduced, rules suspended and adopted unanimously.

• Resolution 2, 2025 — Authorizing the mayor to accept an Ohio State Fire Marshall Multi Agency Radio Communications System Marks Grant; introduced and adopted following suspension of rules.

• Ordinance 5, 2025 — Supplement appropriation of $50,000 to the Fire Department Grants Fund for a MARKS grant expense account; introduced and adopted unanimously.

• Ordinance 6, 2025 — Amendment to section 161.39a of codified ordinances; introduced and adopted following suspension of rules.

• Resolution 1, 2025 — Authorization for the mayor to accept a PEP Plus reimbursement grant from Public Entities Pool of Ohio; introduced and adopted following suspension of rules.

All recorded motions to suspend the rules and adopt the measures passed by roll call, with the roll call included in the official meeting record for each item. Council members recorded in the roll calls include Brown, Elmore, Morrison, Peck, Smith, Harcourt and Dixon; the meeting record shows unanimous affirmative tallies for the items adopted that evening.

The meeting also included title-only readings for a package of Fairway Cliffs–related ordinances (CRAs, community authority and TIF) that were not adopted on Jan. 7; those items were returned for committee review and requests for exhibits.

Votes at a glance (selected):
-Ordinance 1 2025 (Franklin County Public Health contract) — Adopted; motion to adopt: Council Member Brown; second: Council Member Heck; vote: unanimous yes (Brown, Elmore, Morrison, Peck, Smith, Harcourt, Dixon).
-Ordinance 2 2025 (Fund transfer $500,000 to budget stabilization fund) — Adopted; mover: Council Member Elmore; second: Council Member Morrison; vote: unanimous yes.
-Ordinance 3 2025 (Amendment to ordinance 1032024 / changes to 161.38) — Adopted; mover: Council Member Smith; second: Council Member Harcourt; vote: unanimous yes.
-Ordinance 4 2025 (Appropriation transfers for custodian & seasonal staff) — Adopted; mover: Council Member Elmore; second: Council Member Brown; vote: unanimous yes.
-Resolution 2 2025 (Ohio State Fire Marshall MARCS grant) — Adopted; mover: Council Member Morrison; second: Council Member Elmore; vote: unanimous yes.
-Ordinance 5 2025 (Supplement appropriation $50,000 Fire Grants Fund) — Adopted; mover: Council Member Elmore; second: Council Member Morrison; vote: unanimous yes.
-Ordinance 6 2025 (Amend 161.39a) — Adopted; mover: Council Member Heck; second: Council Member Harcourt; vote: unanimous yes.
-Resolution 1 2025 (PEP Plus reimbursement grant) — Adopted; mover: Council Member Brown; second: Council Member Dixon; vote: unanimous yes.

What this means: Council used suspension of rules and emergency declarations repeatedly to adopt several measures on Jan. 7; council members said the measures were intended to finalize contracts, accept grants and make needed transfers early in the calendar year. Several adopted items direct staff to implement contracts and accept grant funds; details and implementation tasks will appear in department reports and subsequent meetings.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City Council Meeting 01-07-2025","oneSentenceSummary","On Jan. 7 the Whitehall City Council adopted several emergency measures and appropriations, including a contract with Franklin County Public Health, a $500,000 transfer to the budget stabilization fund, multiple appropriations for custodial and departmental needs, and two grant acceptances.","taxTitle","Whitehall City Council, Whitehall, Franklin County, Ohio","taxId",71203,"location","Ohio","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6391716,"Council considers nuisance deer management ordinance as residents raise safety and process concerns",706,1618000,2324000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2111213-2f0f3444b775f900f037bed5ccff728e&start=1618&end=2324","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2111213-2f0f3444b775f900f037bed5ccff728e/thumbnail_1618000.jpg","/articles/6391716/Ohio/Council-considers-nuisance-deer-management-ordinance-as-residents-raise-safety-and-process-concerns","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6391716-ed32533835ee8f5615bb5068711f8f82/orig.mp4?Expires=1775572785&Signature=i60lv4TA5k7eoUulfTBHW-GFW1bvJq3tMY4WBBBXx69gsa0AYJgrKQs4j~8EVjzGo-wvkQ4CUTwIWHtPkPQfWsrn3bN4yRiYQ~Tz8qrC~7uXj4~yFq~fQxLbloq6RUnmny548F74-Zs-gBv~W6myTBa4tWg1e9k-3oSivifF1T0HQ~3dxfMijVcdHyTRecKCuA3YpKJzpwE6rymGmtN65io6-TAayibnxYgar0~RGkrl0ZEbSbKY1AkI56Oal0sgp-FvARaILxxTu6fm9GmWyIRn1jhjqpYvkDRHlZLTAXrD3qucm51vIenxCYo15oxKXFLi6lg2iZI9r7kbhkpbBQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Whitehall City Council on Jan. 7 read, by title, an ordinance amending Chapter 505 to create a nuisance deer management program and heard several residents urge careful design and stronger safety provisions before any implementation.

The measure was read during the council meeting; council did not adopt the ordinance at that session. Residents used the public-comment periods to press the council for stricter controls, training requirements and limits on where hunts would occur.

Dwayne Stanek, who spoke during the first public comment period, warned about bowhunting risks if the program allowed hunting near homes. “When you hit a deer with bow, it typically does not drop on the spot. It will run,” Stanek said, noting a wounded animal could run into streets or yards where children play. He urged longer buffer distances and stricter oversight.

Tracy Michael, speaking during the second public comment period, said Whitehall could follow examples from neighboring jurisdictions. “When Gahanna did this, the Ohio Department of Natural Resources approved expert hunters … and they only hunted on city property,” Michael said, suggesting the city restrict hunts to public lands and use ODNR-approved hunters.

Council Member Elmore said the deer program was in its infancy and that she was talking with Worthington, which has a nuisance management program. “It was only in its infancy stage to get out there with citizens … to get input,” Elmore said, and invited residents to help form a committee to examine particulars.

No formal action was recorded on Jan. 7; the ordinance was read by title and remains pending further review. Residents asked the council to clarify whether homeowner permission would be required for hunts on private property, to specify training and safety standards for hunters, to set conservative buffer distances from houses and roads, and to consider limiting hunts to city-owned parkland.

What happens next: Council members signaled additional committee work and outreach to other cities with nuisance deer programs. The ordinance remains under further consideration; council directed staff and members to continue public engagement prior to final action.

","The council read an ordinance to create a nuisance deer management program and heard public concerns about bowhunting safety, homeowner permission, and use of city property for hunts; no adoption vote was taken on Jan. 7.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6391721,"Residents protest Fairway Cliffs TIF and creation of community authority; council schedules follow-up",1584,616000,2200000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2111213-2f0f3444b775f900f037bed5ccff728e&start=616&end=2200","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2111213-2f0f3444b775f900f037bed5ccff728e/thumbnail_616000.jpg","/articles/6391721/Ohio/Residents-protest-Fairway-Cliffs-TIF-and-creation-of-community-authority-council-schedules-follow-up","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6391721-628c394a0f4a8ff6342e029b90618eb6/orig.mp4?Expires=1775572785&Signature=dCAcWuxtFI673GstRnBm8YxWeCyi55Xstgf8gewcS1UMNv2~t8H51WLnQkQ73DXjzbBagS76ctvqL09b-Ko0Q0e35WAk7Xl33ARGoW7~-kxTan8aGOFzaS41y2g5iHQ-fO3k-U92HpFSdTbHpqGpVg0KQMzhTSG~acYdDbcI1YUd5ISpY4pWA5jTVU7NNI3F3WUo9zRJUV2YVV3DFBbVm9sLPlOHTwe23ZlFKj0MJmTvBoKnhNI~a04-1N-2fQybknh1Hz-Cugu5-EyHHdiwRGq6Tfz-qWrbZwo5OULrx6vYahaF0WTvQcCKsCSvSUVe8jKbSiwLyhmr405pXBvROg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Dozens of residents urged the Whitehall City Council on Jan. 7 to slow or reject proposals tied to the Fairway Cliffs development, saying tax-increment financing and a new community authority would favor the developer and could be rushed through under emergency declarations.

The comments came as the council read, by title, a package of measures tied to the project — including ordinances to create a Fairway Cliffs Community Authority, set its boundaries and board selection, approve community reinvestment area (CRA) tax-exemption applications, authorize a tax-increment financing (TIF) district on Fairway Boulevard, and related infrastructure and development agreements. Council did not vote on those title-only readings at the meeting.

The issue matters to residents because, speakers said, a TIF diverts tax dollars that otherwise would fund county and local services. “This developer is a for profit developer that is being given essentially your tax dollars as free money,” said Tracy Michael, a resident who addressed the council during the public comment period. Michael and other speakers said the proposed TIF would shift revenue away from schools and services to the developer and could raise the tax burden on other property owners.

The nut of the residents’ complaint was twofold: opposition to higher-density townhomes proposed for a long-established single-family area and objection to use of emergency declarations that would, they said, remove the option for a public referendum. “Each emergency ordinance or resolution shall determine that said ordinance or resolution is necessary for the … immediate preservation of the public peace, health, safety, or welfare,” resident Holly Stein read from the city charter and said later: “There is nothing immediate of the Fairway Cliffs resolutions.” Stein urged council to remove emergency language so the public could pursue referendum rights if desired.

Council read several Fairway-related ordinances by title only, listed in the agenda: a repeal and replacement related to a CRA approval (Ordinance 7, 2025), creation of the Fairway Clifs Community Authority and appointments (Ordinance 8 and 9, 2025), CRA application and infrastructure agreement for Fairway Cliffs LLC (Ordinance 10, 2025), and creation of the Fairway Boulevard TIF incentive district (Ordinance 11, 2025). During the meeting a council member asked that all exhibits referenced in the petition materials be made available to council prior to next week’s committee meeting.

Speakers also raised neighborhood character and zoning concerns. One resident pointed to earlier testimony from a neighbor that opposed replacing single-family lots with townhouse clusters and questioned whether rezoning or spot zoning would be required. James K. Williams III, who said his family lives at 826 Fairway Boulevard, urged fair representation for “both sides” and asked for a workable arrangement that respects neighborhood character. Other speakers warned of potential downstream effects on county services and listed entities they said could be affected if tax increment revenues were diverted.

Council President Potter and staff did not vote on the Fairway package at the Jan. 7 meeting; the ordinances were read by title and will return for committee discussion next week. Several council members and staff referenced the agenda packet and petition exhibits; a council member asked that all referenced exhibits be provided before the next meeting so members can review them.

What happens next: the Fairway Cliffs items were read by title and are scheduled for further committee review. Residents requested full access to exhibits and urged council to avoid emergency declarations that would accelerate enactment and foreclose referendum options.

","Whitehall residents pressed the City Council on Jan. 7 over proposed Fairway Cliffs development, tax-increment financing and creation of a community authority, saying emergency declarations would block referendum rights and asking for full exhibits before further action.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Council adopts multiple emergency ordinances and appropriations, including public health contract and $500,000 transfer

Council considers nuisance deer management ordinance as residents raise safety and process concerns

Residents protest Fairway Cliffs TIF and creation of community authority; council schedules follow-up