Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sidewalk Assessments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Gahanna council adopts sidewalk special-assessments after residents raise billing errors and seek clarity
Summary
Council approved two ordinances to levy special assessments for the 2025 sidewalk maintenance and look‑back programs after residents questioned invoices and staff pledged re-visits and clearer letters to reconcile quantities and owner cost calculations.
Gahanna City Council voted to adopt Ordinances 0024‑20‑26 and 0025‑20‑26, which levy special assessments under the city sidewalk maintenance and look‑back programs, after several residents raised concerns about invoice amounts and how the city calculated owner cost shares.
Residents told council they received multiple letters and differing cost figures. Scott Pardo, who said he received three notices, told council the letter listed almost $3,000 for a single block replacement and five ground‑down areas and asked for ‘‘a little transparency as to how these numbers were come about.’’ Director of Engineering Hussein Nurigi acknowledged confusion in some letters and described staff action: ‘‘all parcels … were field visited in quantities verified on all 300 plus properties across both programs … The spreadsheet was updated. Another letter was sent.’’ He said the billing spreadsheet contains three columns—total cost of all work performed, owner defect aggregate cost (the middle column used for the 50% share), and the owner cost (half of owner defect)—and pledged additional on‑site verification for flagged properties.
Council discussed procedural options for residents with account‑specific issues and staff encouraged those property owners to meet with the engineering team after the public hearing. The administration said many owner bills are modest when converted to a five‑year, interest‑free payment plan. After discussion and a substitute exhibit to clarify quantities, council approved the ordinances; staff said they will re‑visit properties identified by residents and issue a clarified map and follow‑up communication.
The item drew sustained public comment from multiple property owners who questioned whether utility work, tree roots, or inconsistent letters produced inflated owner charges. Council members emphasized the need for clearer letters and one‑on‑one follow up; Director Nurigi said the city would re‑verify quantities and correct any remaining errors before final billing.
