Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Agricultural Districts topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Pataskala hearing reviews three agricultural-district applications; staff objects to one

2338365 · February 19, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At a public hearing in the city of Pataskala, Licking County, Ohio, meeting participants reviewed three applications for agricultural-district designation for parcels within Pataskala.

At a public hearing in the city of Pataskala, Licking County, Ohio, meeting participants reviewed three applications for agricultural-district designation for parcels within Pataskala.

The three applications presented were: applicant Shelley McKee for parcel number 063-141138-01.005 at 12410 Cable Road; applicants Gary L. and Wanda F. Taylor for parcels 063-140712-00 and 063-140718-00 at 7438 Main Street SW; and Southgate Company Limited Partnership for parcel 064-152964-00000 at 14999 West Main Street, Newark. A staff member said of the first two applications, "Staff has no objection," and the agricultural committee likewise said, "no objection." For the Southgate Company Limited Partnership application, a staff member was recorded as saying, "Staff has to object," while the ag committee responded, "Also, no objections."

No members of the public spoke during the public-comment portion of the hearing. After the applications were addressed, a meeting member moved to adjourn; the motion was made by Mister Epperson and seconded by Mister Galick. The roll call recorded affirmative votes from Walter, Epperson, Coleman, Amshire, Galick, Lee and Hight, and the meeting was adjourned.

The transcript excerpt does not record formal motions or final votes specifically approving or denying any of the three agricultural-district applications, nor does it provide details explaining the staff objection to the Southgate Company Limited Partnership filing. No next steps or dates for final decisions were specified in the provided record.