Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge North Ridgeville council to opt out of Lorain County's urban designation
Summary
More than a dozen residents spoke during the council's public comment period expressing distrust of county commissioners, environmental concerns, and requests for clearer public notice and safeguards if the city joins the county CDBG program.
Dozens of North Ridgeville residents filled the public comment period on Aug. 3 to press council to decline participation in Lorain County's urban-county CDBG designation.
"They came here to speak because they feel very deeply that this legislation is wrong," Susan Olsen told the council, describing fear and distrust among neighbors. Several speakers raised similar points: a perceived lack of transparency from county officials, possible harm to groundwater and farmland, and confusion over what projects would actually be funded if the city opts in.
"I would ask that you opt out," Stephanie Giacovetti said, describing her choice between protecting her current home and future home and questioning whether established HUD rules and procurement requirements would be followed. Elizabeth Rattray, who said she served on local land-use boards, urged council to "use wisdom and ... your authority to stand up for the people that you serve."
Speakers asked for clearer public notice about proposed zoning and the Unified Development Ordinance, with several describing postcard or email communications they found inadequate. Bradley Baker asked for a detailed list of UDO changes and for more robust notification to neighbors about rezoning that could place heavier industrial designations near newly built subdivisions.
County staff and council members acknowledged the public's concerns during the meeting, promised more information and outreach (including public review sessions for the UDO), and debated whether procedural safeguards or indemnifications were possible in the county cooperation agreement. No legal indemnification was recorded as available during the meeting.
The public comment record at the meeting framed much of the council's debate later that evening about whether to authorize participation in the county program.
