1. business and industrial

W7
I &)
(eit /: C/5
AGENDA
CITY OF EAST CLEVELAND FINANCIAL PLANNING
AND SUPERVISION COMMISSION
JUNE 3, 2015(1:00 P.M.)
/ ‘/2
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. APPROVAL OF PRIOR MEETING’S MINUTES- April 28, 2015
(3
COt’-e4
4. REPORT OF THE FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR
5. REPORTOFTHE MAYOR
6. REPORT OF COUNCIL
,,tg
—
f’
7. OLD BUSINESS
E
2
1
/2(
Di-i
‘‘
8
NEW BUSINESS
a. Status of the Revised Recovery Plan
C-2’
9. DETERMINATION OF NEXT MEETING DATE AND TIME10. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION- Please note that this section of the agenda will be
limited to 15 minutes and the limitation will be strictly adhered to.
11. ADJOURNMENT
&
)
1
*q
L7
/C
up cIMcF 4t
tO c-StD
) n’c
c92t cl-€L //C/c_ ‘
3VSS 4 O-,’ 4et
sf2JélU
,I
(a)
ze
4
//t
Q45C’C’I.
O(iO
/ C)
6L
-
-
d
The City of East Cleveland
Financial Planning and Supervision Commission
Meeting Minutes
Meeting Date
The meeting was held on April 28, 2015 (1:30 PM)
Meeting Venue
The meeting was held at East Cleveland Library, 14101 Euclid Aye, East Cleveland, OH 44112
Meeting Time
The meeting opened at 1:35 PM
Attendance
Members:
Sharon Hanrahan, (Chairperson) Financial Planning Commission, State of Ohio
Rob Frost, Designee of the Treasurer of State Josh Mandel
Floun’say R. Caver, PhD, Governor’s Appointee, Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority
Helen Forbes Fields, Governor’s Appointee, Forbes, Fields, and Associates, Co., L.P.A.
Mary Ann Nowak, Governor’s Appointee, CFO, East Cleveland City Schools
Barbara J. Thomas, Councilor Ward-2, City of East Cleveland
Gary A. Norton, Jr., Mayor, City of East Cleveland
*Treasurer of State designee, Jeff Heinrich stood in for Mr. Frost until he arrived: Ms. Forbes-Fields
arrived soon after the meeting started and Mayor Norton joined the meeting at approximately 1:57pm.
Others in Attendance include:
Hillary Damaser, Principal Assistant Attorney General, State of Ohio
Nita Hendryx, Financial Supervisor, Office of Auditor of State Dave Yost
Tisha Turner, Office of Auditor of State Dave Yost
Apologies
None
Acceptance of Minutes
The minutes of the Financial Planning and Supervision Commission Meeting held on March 25, 2015
were accepted as true
[ Moved: S. 1-lanrahan
Seconded: By All Attended
Approval of prior Meeting’s Minutes on March 25 2015
Chair Hanrahan asked for any additions or deletions to the minutes as presented. Hearing none, she
asked for a motion to approve.
Motion to approve the minutes from March 25, 2015 was made by Council President Thomas and
seconded by Mary Ann Nowak. Motion carried on a roll call vote, with Dr. Caver abstaining.
Report of the Financial Supervisor
Nita Hendryx presented the financial information for the City of East Cleveland.
The bank statements were reconciled through March. At the end of March, the City had a bank balance
of approximately S226,000. The state auditors also received bank statements from the Court as of the
end of March. The bank statement for the Evidence Fund for the police department is dated February
2 8 tlì
As of the end of March ,we had 15 deficit funds, totaling about S3.9 million.
Revenues and expenditures. On page 6, these are the revenues that have not come in as projected yet.
The Chair interrupted and asked a question regarding the $3. 9ni il/ion. iVita pointed out page two of
the packet and explained that those 14’ere the Jimds t’ith deficit balances. The chair had been thinking
of the $3.9million in past due payments. Helen Forbes Fields commented that they had actually
increased since last meeting, again referring to the past due payments.
At this point of the year, the city should be at 25%. A good portion of those are due to transfers.
Remember the City had close a lot of funds last month and the transfers were put in the general fund.
The finance director, hopefully in April will transfer funds out of the general fund into some of these
funds.
On page 7 are the expenditures that have exceeded where they need to be at this time of year (again,
25%). This tells us which departments in the general fund and which funds have exceeded the 25%.
Quite a few of them, particularly those at 100% are due to the transfers out of the closed or inactive
funds into the general fund. The Chair clan/led that the transfers weren ‘tjust cash transfers;
appropriations were used (spending authoniti’,) to make the transfrr and close the fund. Nita agreed,
although there real/v wasn ‘I any cash involved; the iransJ;c were accounting transactions.
1-lelen Forbes Fields: O.K., so what about the fire department, which has an overage?
Nita Hendryx: In that case, they are overspending. If you look at the detail on page 12, some of it is
benefits (health care) and some is overtime. Overall, the department is spending about $2 1 6,000 more.
It was further discussed that the percentages should even out over time unless there was continuous
overspending in a department or fund. The transfer station is over 400% over spending. but in that
case, no more expenditures are planned and at the end of the year, it should be at 100% spent.
t%ita Hendryx: In addition to fire, police is over, refuse, service. Again, it is all driven by salaries and
benefits.
Dr. Caver: So looking at the fire department, is minimum manning a part of the overage?
Nita Hendryx: That is a part of it.
-2-
Tislia Turner: January was a three pay month, so that extra payroll will throw off the percentages
slightly. Some more health care claims were paid and that is a part of these numbers as well.
Dr. Caver asked if the average payroll of the fire department was known. The average per department
was not known, but with salaries and benefits, the City’s payroll averages about $320,000, which is
considerably lower than it had been. Helen Forbes Fields wondered if the Fire Department’s spending
would even out over the year, and Nita commented that it was difficult to determine. Most of the
overspending can be attributed to health care claims which are not easily controlled. This would not
apply to refuse, which is by contract. The line in the budget for refuse does not include the payment of
past due amounts per the agreed upon repayment plan.
Nita Hendryx: The City has met its payroll and pensions. However, we still have a payable listing
and that is in the next packet.
Prior to going onto the payables, Helen Forbes Fields asked about the decrease in income taxes in
March found on page 8 of the first packet. At the end of March, the City is about 1.6% lower overall
than estimated and the state auditors will look to April for evidence of any emerging trend.
Helen also pointed out an amount on in the all remaining revenues category in March. Part of the
larger amount is due to the transfers made, but the remaining numbers in the actual receipts should be
zeros. This will be conected for the next meeting. Ms. Thomas asked if that brought the city to a better
position than expected and the answer was no. The state auditors had estimated about $1.66 million
and the City received $1.4 million.
Dr. Caver requested more information on payroll costs. If not by person, costs per hour per position or
position category per department would be helpful. Information like that would enable us to forecast
for a chosen time (e.g., month, quarter). Any reductions that would be made in the future would likely
be in people, so getting costs per position per department and the number of people or positions in
departments would assist the city in making reductions and also illustrate where reductions could not
be made because of functions of the department.
Nita Hendryx: O.K. The aging reports. The outstanding payables are just over S3.9 million and the
biggest increase is in health care.
Helen Forbes Fields: So we have not paid $787,000 worth of medical claims this year? Tisha
canjuu,ned that these were new c/aims and didn’t include carn’oi’erJivin c/aims payable in 2014.
Ms. Thomas acknowledged that she had weighed in previously on decisions as to what to pay next and
had requested that medical claims be prioritized. Citing a concern about the “people behind the pages.”
she was astonished at how much the payables had grown, and stated that going to self-insured medical
coverage was probably not a good decision.
Citing the balances still owed Kaiser Permanente, helen Forbes Fields asserted that self—insurance
wasn’t the problem. The inability to pay bills was the problem.
Chair Hanrahan: Anything else for the financial supervisors? The Chair then turned the meeting
over to the Mayor.
-3-
Report of the Mayor
Mayor Norton: As far as the options that we have at our disposal, I believe that you all know that
there is a petition circulating to begin the merger process, at least discussions a study thereof a merger
between the cities of Cleveland and East Cleveland. If the petition succeeds it would then be up to the
people of East Cleveland to decide. It could only go forward with the support of the people of East
Cleveland. That would not include a merger of the school district. Under state law there are two
options for a merger. This would not include the school district.
Secondly, the financial recovery plan that is required by this commission. We now have the 2015
budget finalized and a five-year forecast. We are working on a financial recovery plan and we will
have one in the next thirty days and we will submit it to the Council for their consideration.
Chair Han rahan: Any questions for the Mayor? The Chair asked about the time line and amount of
time left in which to get the signatures on the petition. The committee has 120 dais. When asked the
Mayor wasti ‘t sure jf it would make the November ballot, but believed that due to the pace of
collection, it would not take the/u/i 120 dais.
With no further questions, the Chair moved onto the report of Council.
Report of Council
Council President Barbara Thomas: Ms. Thomas stated that she didn’t have too much, since not
too much has happened. Council has passed the budget and it has been passed for quite some time.
The Mayor stated that he has been working on the recovery plan, but every time the question arises to
the Mayor or the financial supervisors, the response is that they have not received anything from the
Mayor. There have been no talks between the Mayor and Council. When asked the Mayor says, “no
comment.” So I’m glad that he is working on something, whether it is petitions or whatever.
Something will transpire.
The Council has engaged.. .1 see it is on your agenda. What has happened is we have engaged
Buckley and King to represent us. Mr. Hughes, who is from Buckley and King, has met with the
Council and has counseled us. Ms. Thomas then proceeded to read part of the engagement letter (see
attachment A). Afterwards, she read the press release (see attachment B). Ms. Thomas added that
Council had passed legislation that permitted them to engage Buckley King.
All of our citizens are waiting to hear from Council. I don’t believe that you need to come out unless
you have something to say backed up by facts and figures provided by experts. The City of East
Cleveland’s Council has never had this before. This is an entire community. You don’t segregate and
decide who to play to. You involve the entire community.
Some of the community still doesn’t understand this. On one of the petitions, it says “study.” But the
petition that our people are signing say annex.” Our people in East Cleveland have been patient and
steadfast and they do deserve the best. I am one of those and I do deserve the best. East Cleveland
has to hear all of the options and weigh all of the options.
Ms. Thomas also spoke about the fire department and the plans they had forwarded to hire part-time
firefighters to reduce department overtime. In addition, she informed the commission that Nick
Mayer/Marshall Ford offered to provide assistance in maintaining the police and fire fleet.
Ms. Thomas called on the audience to refrain from “scll[ingj your city down the drain,”
-4-
She also spoke to the working relationship betxveen herself and the state auditors and how there was no
longer any infighting between council and the administration. The City was vital and important to the
residents. Stating that we should not be so quick to give things away, because you can never get them
back, Ms. Thomas acknowledged that merger could be considered as an option, but did not want it
seen as a priority. She wondered why the mayor was strongly advocating for this option. Ms. Thomas
asked that the audience ask the mayor questions about city finances as Ms. Forbes Fields had done
before signing any petition for merger.
The Chair requested that a copy of the agreement between Buckley King and Council be provided to
the commission. She also commended Nick Mayer Ford for their contribution to the city and
wondered if that also meant that the organization was writing off the amounts owed for services
previously rendered without payment. Ms. Thomas replied that those amounts are small relative to the
services that Nick Mayer would provide, but that it was up to Nick Mayer and totally negotiable. She
also stated that negotiations with other organizations owed should be happening and that she hoped
that this was something that “our financial individuals” would do.
The Chair next asked how Buckley King was chosen; that is, did the organization bring the offer to
Council or did Council seek Buckley King out? Ms. Thomas replied that this was something that
Council had decided together and that Buckley King was suggested by one of the council members.
When asked by the Chair. Ms. Thomas stated that Councilor King had suggested the organization, but
stressed that there was no relationship between the firm and the councilor.
The Chair then asked if a neutral third party was sought for information, what had been thought of the
report of the PFM group. Ms. Thomas stated that most of the items in the PFM report had come from
the recovery plan completed by Council, she really didn’t think much of the report. The Chair then
asked if it was known what type of law Buckley King specialized in and then proceeded to list public
sector and economic development as well as work in bankruptcy and creditor rights. Given their work
in bankruptcy, the Chair wondered if the firm could be truly thought of as neutral. Ms. Thomas
responded that Council’s intentions were to explore all options and if bankruptcy was a viable option,
it should be considered. The Chair said that she looked forward to that report.
Chair Hanrahan: Any questions for Ms. Thomas? Hearing none, she went on to the rest of the
agenda.
Old Business
None
New Business
Resolution to request a revLced recovery plan
Although the Mayor had stated that he would have a recovery plan within 30 days, the Chair brought
forward the resolution in order to follow the letter of the law. She then read the resolution to the
commission. The Mayor moved and Ms. Forbes Fields seconded. The resolution was approved
unanimously on a roll call vote.
-5-
Contract with Buckley King
Covered previously
nd
Funding sourcefor resurface and repair ofE. 152
St.
The Chair stated that the project was brought to the attention of the commission solely to determine its
funding source(s). The Mayor stated that the funding would not come from the street fund, but from
the County since the street was actually a County road. Ms. Nowak wondered how E. 152’ Street was
chosen. The Mayor answered that a limited amount of roads in the City were County roads and thus
subject to consideration. The City had submitted candidates for the work and the County had selected
E. l52c.
Ms. Nowak then asked if Euclid was a state route and if so, were any monies available for repaving.
Since the road had been done less than 15 years ago and state monies were scarce, it would not be
under consideration. Discussion took place regarding the quality of the work that was done on Euclid
Avenue at that time.
Employee raises
First confirming that the city’s cash balance as of March 31, 2015 was approximately $225,000, the
Chair remarked that she was surprised to hear that there was some talk about employee raises.
Appreciating the fact that everyone would like a raise, the Chair pointed out that there were
businesses and other vendors that were owed over $3.9 million by the City and that these entities
would probably like to give their employees or themselves a raise as well.
Noting that the City has been in fiscal emergency since October 2012, the Chair stated that one thing
that you don’t do when you have fiscal problems is give employees raises. She also noted that while
the Court had done so, they had also realigned their budget and their staffing levels to do so. No
additional dollars had been spent as a result of these raises.
The Mayor went on to explain that raises are not given out because an employee wants one, the City
wants to give raises, and so on. There are some very good reasons both financially and human capital
related and he cited an example concerning collective bargaining employees, pay rate, and pay scale.
The Chair agreed that what was done in the Mayor’s example made perfect sense and was similar to
what the court had done in that no additional expenditures were made. The Mayor also stated that he
understood that there was another potential raise that was contemplated of which he knew little. The
Chair replied that she knew of two. When asked by Dr. Caver, the Chair responded that one was the
Clerk of Council and the other was someone who was funded by federal grants. She further went on to
state that she had talked to Mr. [—Tendershott at HUD and he had told her that one of the problems East
Cleveland has traditionally had was the inability to cover or factor in those expenses that were not
covered by the grant but were a part of operating the federally funded program. The point that was
attempted to be made was that federal grants require local money and that any increases in expenses,
such as raises would not necessarily he covered in full by the federal money.
Next Meeting
June 3rd at 1:00
pm.
-6-
Meeting Venue
The East Cleveland Library, 14101 Euclid Aye, East Cleveland, OH 44112
Public Participation
Gerald Strothers (4411 2news.com): Asked if the Chair had received the report from the Mayor that
had been requested at the last meeting. After much confusion on the Chair’s part, it was determined
that Mr. Strothers was referring to the Recovery plan. The Chair explained that she had requested the
formulation of a revised plan, but had not formally requested the plan until today. By passing the
resolution today, the City would be held to the statutory 120 days and the legal penalties for not
submitting the plan. The City had the option of presenting a plan sooner, and as the Mayor had
indicated earlier in the meeting, the City likely would present one either at the next meeting or soon
afterwards.
Mr. Strothers also wanted clarification on the next meeting date. June 31 was agreed upon due to the
difficulties in scheduling with the holiday at the end of the month and the Chair’s schedule.
0. Mays: Relinquished some of his time for the Judge.
Judge Dawson: Informed the Commission that in addition to realigning staffing, the Court was
working with the State Attorney General’s office to secure grants for some of their programs. If the
grants were awarded, this would help to pay for staffing and ease some of the burden on the general
fund.
0. Mays: Asserted that lies were being told about the petition that was being circulated. Mr. Mays
claimed that once annexation takes place everything goes. O.Mays was also baffled with the Chair
stating that she had picked on Council but had not once asked the Mayor about the recovery plan. He
plans to contact the Attorney General as the Commission is under his auspices. 0. Mays further stated
that the Commission was required to be fair and objective, but it was leaning to one side (annexation).
Annexation, he claimed, was not even on the table and the Commission needed to work on the
financial crunch the City was in. Lastly, he accused the Commission (either in whole or part) of a
conflict of interest.
Tern A. Tolefree: stated that if you get rid of the city there is no school district because the taxes
come from the City of East Cleve’and. She does not want to go with the City of Cleveland because
they don’t do anything for their own neighborhoods.
Charles V. Walls: Wanted to know how many signatures the Mayor needed to get annexation on the
ballot, but the Mayor was not in the meeting at that time.
Art McKoy: gave Ms. Nowak credit for asking questions regarding Euclid Avenue paving and stated
that these were the types of questions that the Mayor would ask if he were a good mayor. As 0. Mays
stated, Mr. McKoy stated that he had noticed a definite slant to annexation. Mr. McKoy said that since
it had become known that the Mayor supported annexation, they Commission had been giving the
Mayor a bit of a “break.” While stating that he believed in the integrity of the Commission members,
-7-
Mr. McKoy objected to Ms. Forbes Fields membership, believing that it was a conflict of interest. Mr.
McKoy asked that she be removed from the board.
Council President Barbara Thomas: asked if she could have the opportunity to address Mr.
Strothers question regarding the recovery plan. Ms. Thomas read from the minutes of the previous
meeting. There was discussion among the Chair and Ms. Thomas as to what the expectations were at
that time.
Ms. Thomas also took the opportunity to read the letter she received from the Governor’s Office. Her
letter was being forwarded to the Office of Boards arid Commissions for further review. Ms. Thomas
noted that the correspondence sent to the Governor’s Office pertained to Ms. Forbes Fields
membership on the Commission.
The Chair then addressed the perceived slant of the commission towards annexation. Stating that she
didn’t care what the City decided (annexation or bankruptcy), she only wanted to see them put it in a
plan and follow that plan. Reiterating that the City had $3.9 million in past due accounts, and needed
to pay for important services such as safety, the Chair said that if the City was able to pay expenses
from current revenues and reduce accounts payable, then they should go forward. She just wanted to
see a plan.
,
Starting to ask for a motion to adjourn, she was reminded by the attorney general that the minutes had
not been approved. Seeing that a quorum was now present of those attending the last meeting, the
Chair asked for a motion to approve. Ms. Thomas moved and Ms. Nowak seconded. The minutes were
approved on a roll call vote.
Asking for a motion to adjourn, Ms. Thomas moved and Ms. Nowak seconded. The meeting was
adjourned on a voice vote.
Closing
The meeting closed at approximately 3:06 pm.
-8-
ATTACHMENT B
***
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
***
Press Release
City Council
The City of East Cleveland, Ohio
April 23, 2015
CONTACT: Barbara J. Thomas, Council President at 216-346-6227
Unity. Objectivity. Transparency. Today, City Council has taken action to advance these
goals and to seek the best possible outcome for East Cleveland’s citizens.
East Cleveland is suffering. Her citizens are suffering. For months, all of us heard comments
from the press and elsewhere that the City might file bankruptcy, as Detroit did and as some other
cities have done. Late last year, the Mayor announced that bankruptcy will not work for our city.
More recently, the administration appears to have decided that our citizens have only one alternative
left to be assimilated by our neighbor, The City of Cleveland.
--
The Mayor has touted “annexation” or “merger” as a solution to East Cleveland’s financial
woes. And he has made several speeches about why he believes that East Cleveland cannot survive as
an independent city and why “annexation” or “merger” is the only avenue available. But in all of
those speeches, the Mayor has yet to give our community or even Council a truly comprehensive
explanation of the basis for his analysis and his conclusion. Instead, he is urging citizens to sign a
petition to commence the “annexation” process. He says that “studies” will be conducted in the future
regarding annexation, but he has not explained precisely what annexation issues will be studied. He
has not named who will conduct the studies. And he has not identified by name who will pay for the
studies. On these points, he has offered only generalities and vague promises. Thus far, his approach
lacks transparency.
City Council believes the Mayor has put the cart before the horse. Council perceives that the
Mayor has made his decision, that his decision is for annexation, and that he will be commissioning
“studies” to justify a decision he already has made.
City Council thinks there is a better way. City Council believes that q of the City’s available
options should be examined systematically by legal and financial professionals who are qualified, who
have no pre-conceived notions of which option or options to prefer, and who can provide an objective,
reliable explanation to City Council and to the citizens of East Cleveland regarding which options will
work for East Cleveland and which ones will not. In this way. City Council believes our community
and our government can come together, united behind a single course of action to achieve the best
outcome for East Cleveland’s citizens. That is why, today, City Council has acted.
—
—
-9-
In an effort to help our community better assess all potential options, City Council has engaged
the law firm of Buckley King
at no cost to the City’s current budget
to advise and guide City
Council in seeking the analysis of qualified, municipal finance professionals who can provide the
information that City Council and East Cleveland’s citizens need to decide our City’s future. City
Council intends that the process of selecting those financial professionals, and the arrangements to pay
for their analysis, will be transparent and known to East Cleveland’s citizens.
--
--
The report City Council envisions will be clear and understandable. It will be made available
to all citizens of East Cleveland, so they can understand what the City’s available options really are
and which of those options are or are not reasonably achievable. With this information, City Council
and East Cleveland’s citizens can make a more fully informed decision.
By taking this action today, City Council’s intentions are to:
•
allow the citizens of East Cleveland to receive a report that has been prepared by
disinterested, objective experts, who have no political “ax to grind” and who are not
motivated by any self-interest and whose opinions are not tainted by any pre-conceived
notions;
•
obtain a report that provides a fair and unbiased portrayal of the fiscal issues East
Cleveland faces, a realistic examination of the possible solutions, and a recommendation
on which solution or solutions to pursue and why;
—
•
allow our citizens to finally have an understandable presentation of all of the City’s
options;
•
allow an opportunity for our citizens to be heard;
•
allow City Council to understand the wishes of East Cleveland’s citizens; and
•
do all of this in a fully transparent process, in plain view of our citizens.
East Cleveland’s citizens deserve nothing less than this. The time has come to give them the
information they need to decide which course of action our city should take.
EAST CLEVELAND CITY COUNCIL
Barbara I. Thomas, Council President
Thomas Wheeler, Council Vice-President
Nathaniel Martin, Councilor-at-Large
Mansell Baker, Councilor Ward 4
Brandon King, Councilor-at-Large
-
10-
ATTACHMENT C
RESOLUTION 2015-01
OF
THE FINANCIAL PLANNING AND SUPERVISION COMMISSION FOR
THE CiTY OF EAST CLEVELAND
TO INFORM THE CITY OF EAST CLEVELAND OF THE FAILURE OF THE FINANCIAL
RECOVERY PLAN SUBMITTED ON MAY 16, 2014 TO ACHIEVE FISCAL SOLVENCY
AND TO REQUEST THE CITY OF EAST CLEVELAND TO SUBMIT AN AMENDED
FINANCIAL RECOVERY PLAN
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 118 of the Ohio Revised Code titled Local Fiscal
Emergencies the City of East Cleveland, Cuyahoga County, Ohio was declared to be in a fiscal
emergency condition on October 9, 2012, and;
WHEREAS, section 118.07 of the Ohio Revised Code sets forth the powers, duties and
functions of the Financial Planning and Supervision Commission for the City of East Cleveland (“the
Commission”), and;
WHEREAS, pursuant to section 118.06 of the Ohio Revised Code the mayor of the City of
East Cleveland is required to submit to the Commission a detailed Financial Plan, as approved or
amended and approved by ordinance or resolution of the legislative authority of the City of East
Cleveland during the period of fiscal emergency, and;
WHEREAS, on May 29, 2014, the East Cleveland City Council passed and then (on behalf of
the mayor) submitted to the Commission’s Chairperson a Financial Plan titled Financial Recoveri’
Plan Jir the City of East Cleveland; and,
WHEREAS, on June 3, 2014, the Commission adopted the City of East Cleveland’s Financial
Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the Financial Plan has been found unable to eliminate all fiscal emergency
conditions, satisfy all judgments and past due accounts payable, eliminate the deficits in all deficit
-
II
-
funds, and avoid any fiscal emergency condition in the future as required under division (A)(1)(a-c)
and (A)(1)(f) of section 118.06 of the Ohio Revised Code; and,
WHEREAS, any Financial Plan may be amended subsequent to its adoption in the same
manner as the passage and approval of the initial or subsequent plan pursuant to division (A) to (C) of
section 118.06 of the Ohio Revised Code; and,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Financial Planning and Supervision Commission for the City of East
Cleveland formally requests the City of East Cleveland to submit a revised Financial Plan. Such plan
shall be submitted to the Commission no later than August 26, 2015.
CERTiFiCATION
The undersigned, Sharon Hanrahan, Chairperson of the Commission does hereby certify that
the above resolution is a true and accurate representation of the resolution presented to and passed by a
vote of the Commission on
Sharon Hanrahan, Chairperson,
Financial Planning and Supervision Commission for the
City of East Cleveland
-
12-
ROLL CALL VOTE
YES
1.
MayorNortori
2.
Council President Thomas
3.
Dr. Floun’say Caver
4.
Helen Forbes Fields
5.
Mary Ann Nowak
6.
Rob Frost
7.
Sharon Hanrahan
NO
—
-
13-
>
OE,L]
//
&i S i-€’<2S ,wFyj a>cz c€,ut.m
7LQ
k
Wendy Howard
Wednesday, June 03, 2015 09:24 AM
taturner@ohioauditor.gov; U nice S. Smith (USSmith@ohioauditor.gov); Nita R. Hendryx (NRHendryx@ohioauditor.gov);
angle4564@sbcglobal.net; ‘Thomas Wheeler (tjw777@gmail.com); mansellbaker@gmail.com; bkingou@aol.com;
nathaniel.martin@att.net
judgewilliamdawson@gmaii.com
Replacement Hire
Y-ii S
Court Administrator / Clerk of Court
East Cleveland Municipal Court
216-451-5700 (p)
216-451-3047 (f)
WendY. .qfowan[
Thank you,
Pursuant to our previous communication, the court has a replacement hire for Ronald Greer with the same salary of $30,000.00
annually. Please recall that the court strategically made sure that we provided relief to the city’s budget when we agreed not to
hire a replacement for one of our employees earlier this year. Specifically, we have lost three employees, decided to replace two
s budget. We would appreciate being
T
of the three employees and eliminated one position thereby lowering the overall court
able to start our new employee on Monday June 8, 2015. Please advise so I may submit the proper paperwork.
Good day,
Cc:
Subject:
From:
Sent:
To:
Wendy Howard
0
.4-
U)
C
0
U)
E
E
ov
G)
.
C—
•3
•
Co
U)
w
C
C__
a)c5
C4-
U)
C
C
LI
•.
G)
.2
.0
0
U)
0
0
E
Cu
C
z
0
>.
C
.1
0.
0
U)
cu
0
I