Findlay Votes Down Loitering Ordinance, Crumbles Over Property Sale For Dietsch

BY JEFF SKINNER 

FINDLAY - Findlay city council met among a mire of controversy for their December 2 meeting where the absence of council member Brian Bauman was definitely felt. Council considered several controversial ordinances, including an anti-loitering provision designed to keep homeless individuals away from businesses. Council additionally erupted in conflict over a provision that would have supported a local Ice Cream distributor, Dietsch Brothers. 

During the meeting, members of the public voiced multiple concerns over a proposed loitering ordinance that sought to take care of the homeless issue around the downtown business area, specifically around  Music Together, a children’s music studio operated by Amanda Sprague, wife of Ohio Treasurer Robert Sprague. Sprague herself spoke during the session to voice her safety concerns over how homeless individuals she believes may have mental health and substance abuse issues are regularly camped out on her doorstep, blocking her entrance, littering and even verbally intimidating her and her young music students. 

The issue many residents felt with the ordinance as written was in its broad and vague language regarding things like mandating individuals have ‘lawful purpose’ to be in the area, which many critics said could be unjustly applied to anything an administration or official wanted. 

During the discussion, council member Beth Warnecke, who has rarely spoken during meetings in her term, spoke in favor of the ordinance, echoing Sprague’s safety concerns as well as stating her skepticism that the vague language in the ordinance would ever be abused by those in power. 

Council member Holly Frische additionally attempted to ask if enforcing laws already on the books, such as trespass, disorderly conduct, sleeping in public, and public intoxication could be more tightly enforced with additional patrolling. Frische attempted to ask Sprague if additional police presence in the morning would or could lead to improvement, however Mayor Muryn interjected, answering for Sprague stating the attempts have been made and nothing has worked. Council voted the ordinance down, with only Warnecke voting in favor of it. 

Additionally, during the meeting, Council considered the sale of two pieces of property to the Blanchard Valley Port Authority. The property sale has been highly controversial as many have argued the prospective buyer of one of the properties, Dietsch Brothers, is seeking to work with the Findlay Mayor’s office to bypass a public auction. Additionally, the proposed sale would involve the city paying for removing the structures on the parcels for the prospective buyer, effectively burdening the taxpayers for the benefits of specific businesses. 

Council member Grant Russel commented that any vote against the sale to bypass public auction is essentially stating ‘you do not support Dietsch Brothers’, implying favoritism and allegiance to the local ice cream distributor was akin to true Findlay patriotism. 

Council member Frische rejected this claim, stating it was out of line and the major factor contributing to her ‘no’ vote was due to a principle of believing the government should not be picking winners and losers and a failure of the Mayor’s office to provide contracts for review of the sale. This motion passed. 

The second property proposed for sale is an old fire station, which is also set for sale to the port authority to avoid public auction. Findlay City Auditor, Jim Staschiak voiced his opposition to the proposal, stating proper due diligence had not been completed to justify the sale. Unfortunately, due to the absence of council member Brian Bauman, council did not have the prerequisite majority votes needed to pass the ordinance.

Despite this failure to pass the ordinance with the vote, the administration scrambled to find a loophole that would allow them to revote at the next council meeting when Bauman was present, with the expectation he would support the sale and change the outcome. The solution to allow a revote is still somewhat muddy, but it is expected either a member of council will need to change their vote, opening the matter up for discussion again or Bauman will be allowed to vote independently without other council reconsideration.

At the end of the meeting, Frische added that the mayor's administration should consider providing some Dietsch products to help inform Bauman's vote.