Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Legislation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council adopts street‑paving contract; first readings held and two ordinances tabled
Summary
On April 9 the Washington Court House City Council adopted Resolution R17‑2025 to award a 2025 street and alley paving contract and placed several ordinances on first reading; the council also tabled two proposed ordinances for further revision.
Get email alerts on the Municipal Legislation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Washington Court House City Council voted April 9 to adopt a resolution awarding a contract for the city’s 2025 street and alley paving work and conducted first readings or procedural votes on several ordinances, tabling two for further amendment.
By roll call, the council unanimously adopted Resolution R17‑2025 authorizing City Manager Joseph J. Dennen to award a contract to Cox Paving LLC for the 2025 street and alley paving work. The resolution passed on the roll call recorded at the meeting (Blair: yes; Chrisman: yes; Hawk: yes; Johnson: yes; Schultz: yes; Lynch: yes).
On ordinance business, council put Ordinance 4‑20‑25 (amending codified ordinance 114.04 on license fees and terms for door‑to‑door sales and solicitation) on first reading after discussion about how to identify permitted solicitors. Council members said permitted solicitors should carry a copy of their permit and discussed adding a visible identifier such as a lanyard; staff agreed to consider adding identification requirements.
Ordinance 5‑20‑25 (a vacant‑and/or‑abandoned buildings registration system) was placed on first reading and then tabled after committee members requested additional edits. Council members said staff and the city attorney would incorporate suggestions from the vitality committee and the city attorney’s office and return an amended draft. The motion to table carried on roll call.
Ordinance 6‑20‑25 (amending downtown design review standards to allow projecting signage) was placed on first reading; city staff suggested an amendment to permit interior‑illuminated projecting signs and said council could amend the text at the next meeting.
Ordinance 7‑20‑25 was introduced on first reading and then tabled to allow questions to be addressed and for staff to prepare explanatory material.
Committee reports and staff updates accompanied the legislative business. The economic strategies committee reported 43 open industrial development projects, updates on downtown business projects, a downtown matching grant program that approved $10,000 per unit (not to exceed two units), and a potential 2026 ground‑breaking for a Love’s truck stop at State Route 35 and State Route 753. The finance and personnel committee reported routine finance, personnel, and recruitment matters, including an ongoing police contract negotiation and open positions in several departments.
Several items discussed at the meeting did not include dollar amounts or contract totals in the record; the paving resolution’s contract amount was not specified during the meeting and will be in the city manager’s contract award documentation.
Votes at a glance
- Resolution R17‑2025 (award contract to Cox Paving LLC for 2025 street and alley paving): Adopted (Blair: yes; Chrisman: yes; Hawk: yes; Johnson: yes; Schultz: yes; Lynch: yes). - Ordinance 4‑20‑25 (door‑to‑door sales licensing fees/terms): Placed on first reading (roll call recorded as yes votes); council discussed requiring solicitors to carry permits and possibly wear a visible identifier. - Ordinance 5‑20‑25 (vacant/abandoned building registration): Tabled for amendment and further review (motion to table passed on roll call). - Ordinance 6‑20‑25 (downtown projecting signage/design standards): Placed on first reading; staff proposed adding illuminated projecting signs and will return amended language. - Ordinance 7‑20‑25: Tabled for further clarification and staff response.
Council asked the city attorney and relevant committees to prepare amendments and memoranda as needed; where a formal contract amount or other numeric detail was not stated in the meeting record, the article notes that the figure was “not specified.”

