Regular Meeting Minutes

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE AVON LAKE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 27, 2026 The regular meeting of the Avon Lake City Council was called to order on April 27, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber with Council President Smith presiding. Mrs. Goodwin led Council, staff, and the public in the Pledge of Allegiance. Present: Councilmembers Jennifer Fenderbosch, Amy Gentry, Kayla Goodwin, David Kos, Matthew Reynolds, Rob Shahmir, and Geoff Smith; Mayor Mark Spaetzel; Law Director Gary Ebert; Finance Director Beth Krosse; Public Works Director Jon Liskovec; and Clerk of Council Valerie Rosmarin. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the regular Council Meeting held on April 13, 2026, were approved as prepared and published. CORRESPONDENCE Mr. Shahmir reported on correspondence he received from residents on Handford Boulevard and Liberty Rose Drive concerning continued construction traffic. He stated that residents believed the City had committed to addressing construction traffic, but they had not seen any improvement. He also received correspondence from residents of Meadow Vistas Apartments on Lear Road, describing concerns about the condition of the road and accessibility for residents who use wheelchairs or otherwise require accessible housing. PUBLIC HEARINGS The public hearing began at 7:05 p.m. 1. Upon the Planning and Zoning Code Text Amendments to enact Avon Lake Code of Ordinances Chapter 1219: Lakefront Mixed-Use Overlay District. Todd Hunt, attorney for Avon Lake Environmental Redevelopment Group, LLC (ALERG), spoke in support of the proposed text amendment. He emphasized that the matter before Council was a zoning text amendment, not final approval of a specific development plan. He stated that, in his experience, the proper sequence for development is to establish zoning regulations first, followed by a specific development plan under those regulations. He summarized that the proposed Chapter 1219 includes permitted uses, prohibited uses, public park requirements, setbacks, building-height controls, density limits, parking requirements, viewshed protections, pedestrian and bicycle connections, and review procedures.

April 27, 2026, Council Meeting 2 Attorney Hunt highlighted the proposed requirement for at least 20 contiguous acres of publicly accessible lakefront parkland and noted that a purchase agreement contemplated 23 acres of public parkland. The Lakefront Mixed-Use Overlay (LMU-O) district had been narrowed at Planning Commission’s request to apply only to the 43-acre ALERG-owned property. He also stated that the 60 residential units per acre limit would apply only to the non-park acreage, producing a maximum of 1,200 residential units, and that any future development plan would still require Planning Commission and Council review. Gerald Phillips, Avon Lake, voiced his opposition to moving forward with the current draft of Chapter 1219. He stated that Chapter 1219 was part of earlier agreements with ALERG without review through the proper public process, and he argued that Planning Commission had not sufficiently reviewed the text. He distributed a copy of the proposed additions and revisions he drafted, including provisions to make a traffic impact analysis mandatory, clarify sign standards, require landscaping and screening plans, clarify parking references, establish maximum building and impervious-surface coverage, require minimum open space, specify accessory and temporary uses, require impact studies, and treat parking lots as conditional uses. He also argued that the text amendment had not been properly initiated under the City’s Code of Ordinances, and he urged Council to refer Chapter 1219 back to Planning Commission so it could be properly reviewed and improved. Len Lieber, Avon Lake, urged Council to consider the long-term quality of life of residents and warned against development that would significantly increase density and congestion. He discussed broader population shifts toward the Midwest and the growing appeal of lakefront communities but cautioned that growth must be planned carefully. He cited Westlake and Crocker Park as examples of development that, in his view, increased congestion and changed community character. He urged Council to consider smaller-scale development, preservation of Avon Lake’s small-town character, traffic impacts on Lake Road and Moore Road, and the risks of overbuilding. Mary Schneider, Avon Lake, voiced her opposition to the proposed Chapter 1219. She questioned whether the proposed LMU-O district could compete with other regional developments, including the planned Brook Park stadium area. She stated that 1,200 residential units could add approximately 2,400 residents and 2,400 vehicles, increasing Avon Lake’s population and traffic. She raised concerns about Lake Road capacity, traffic signals, infrastructure costs, and the absence of visible public parking for the proposed lakefront park. She argued that the park could become an amenity primarily for adjacent residents, particularly if public access and parking were not addressed, rather than serving the broader public. She also objected to the potential use of public funds, including Tax Increment Financing (TIF), for infrastructure or park costs without clearer cost estimates and obligations.

April 27, 2026, Council Meeting 3 Malachi Witt, Avon Lake, stated that he is not opposed to lakefront development or to private parties making money, but he is opposed to moving forward without more planning. He argued that the central issue was the City’s potential long-term tax burden. He raised concerns about environmental costs, park maintenance, infrastructure, roads, and the City’s ability to pay for current road needs. He cited legal principles under which municipalities may require developer contributions or improvements if supported by adequate individualized analysis, and he argued that the City should complete due diligence before approving zoning changes. He urged Council to vote no, to send the matter back to Planning Commission, and to obtain an independent analysis. Beth Wallace, Avon Lake, stated that Chapter 1219 appeared to be vague and raised many questions that she believed remained unanswered. She questioned why the City was considering the zoning text if important elements were missing and asked whether those working on it were qualified. She expressed concern that the number of units would change the small-town character that attracted many residents to Avon Lake. She asked who Council was listening to and why developers appeared to have significant influence. She compared the current discussion with earlier public visions for the power plant site that emphasized parks and public amenities. Council President Smith responded that the City did have a plan, had retained professionals, and that Council would decide whether the plan aligned with the community’s best interests. Mike Sherban, Vice President of the School Board, asked about the impact of 1,200 units on the school district. He stated that if one-quarter of the units had one school-aged child, the City could add approximately 300 students, which is comparable to a large graduating class. He expressed concern that the schools could be asked to absorb additional students while also being asked to give up tax revenue through a TIF for generations. He noted that the School Board has not received information on Chapter 1219, nor has there been any substantive discussion with the district. Glenn Schneider, Avon Lake, stated that title transfer alone does not eliminate responsibility for contamination and asked about core samples, contamination levels, shoreline impacts, beach use, and remediation. He urged Council to pause Chapter 1219 until there was a better understanding of the environmental conditions, associated costs, and responsible parties. William Zimmerman, Avon Lake, criticized Planning Commission’s decision to advance Chapter 1219, and stated that it should have remained at Planning Commission for additional public discussion. He disapproved of the use of a Non- Disclosure Agreement (NDA), and he stated that the public has been kept from information. He further raised concerns about remediation, shoreline access, water access, traffic, density, and the risk that a large development could fail or

April 27, 2026, Council Meeting 4 remain underoccupied. He urged Council to stop the process and reassess. Richard Shields, Development Executive for Charah’s Environmental Development Group, representing ALERG, voiced his support of the proposed LMU-O district. He stated that ALERG has been working with the City for approximately five years, beginning with the City’s stated goals of cleaning up the site and securing access to the lake. He said ALERG had invested tens of millions of dollars in engineering, studies, planning, remediation, demolition, shoreline and infrastructure analysis, and marketing. He stated that traffic and engineering studies had been performed and that the plan had evolved as market conditions changed, including a reduced emphasis on office use. He described the overlay as a framework that allows developers to understand what uses are possible and would allow real plans to come forward. He stated that zoning is needed before developers will commit to purchasing the land and that the TIF analysis depends on the zoning framework. He also discussed potential tax-base growth, prior discussions with Lorain County Metro Parks, the park as an investment, and the 1,200-unit figure as a maximum cap rather than a guaranteed buildout. Tracy Wakeman, Avon Lake, stated that residents were asking legitimate questions about studies, abatement, traffic, and the need for more information. She objected to nonresidents and business interests influencing local zoning decisions, and she stated that residents should drive zoning. Debbie Rutan, Avon Lake, stated that she moved to the City because she was drawn to its small-town character. She said she had listened carefully to residents and Council and believed the community wants Avon Lake to remain great. She asked whether height limits existed, whether there would be public parking at the proposed park, and warned that a park without parking could effectively limit access for nearby residents. She urged Council to know its plan and to understand how it would affect residents. Jordan Berns of Berns, Ockner & Greenberger, outside counsel for the City, stated that he and his partner represent the City regarding the proposed zoning (Chapter 1219), despite ALERG paying his legal fees under an arrangement with the City; however, their duty is to the City. He stated that ALERG was the applicant and property owner and had the right under the City’s Code of Ordinances to request the text amendment. He further stated that the City’s consultants reviewed and recommended changes to the text to address building height, corridor views, building massing, access, and, most importantly, the requirement that the LMU-O district not be applied unless there is at least 20 acres of publicly accessible lakefront parkland. Attorney Berns further emphasized that the matter before Council was a zoning text amendment, not approval of a development plan, financing, or environmental acquisition. He stated that Avon Lake’s Planning and Zoning Code already includes separate chapters addressing accessory uses, parking requirements, landscaping,

April 27, 2026, Council Meeting 5 traffic impact studies, and development plan review. He explained that any future LMU-O development would still have to go through development plan review under Chapter 1218, including staff review, Planning Commission review, public hearings, infrastructure review, subdivision review, developer agreements, and construction approvals. He stated that detailed engineering analysis requires an actual plan rather than conceptual ideas, and that future subdivision agreements would address infrastructure-payment obligations. Clerk Rosmarin read correspondence from Marianne Hocking, who was unable to attend this hearing. Ms. Hocking does not object to changing zoning to allow redevelopment, but she was concerned about permitting 60 units per acre. She wrote that such density could destroy public views of the lake and asked whether the view belongs only to those who can pay for it or to the public generally. She urged a compromise that meets aesthetic and economic-development goals. Council President Smith directed that the correspondence, along with Mr. Phillips’ proposed Code revisions to Chapter 1219, be included in the record. Mr. Shahmir stated that he did not oppose lakefront development and understood ALERG’s business position, but disagreed with the sequence being proposed. He argued that the City should first have an infrastructure plan, development economics, and fiscal structure before adopting zoning. He compared the existing Chapter 1218 mixed-use overlay, which he said would allow 18 units per acre, to the proposed Chapter 1219, which would allow up to 60 units per acre on approximately 20 acres, or 1,200 units. He also raised concerns about the proposed TIF structure, including costs for park acquisition, park development, professional fees, remediation, and infrastructure. Mr. Shahmir stated that he had repeatedly requested infrastructure and economic information for approximately 27 months and believed Council had not been given the information needed for informed decision-making. He urged that Chapter 1219 be returned to Planning Commission for reevaluation, supported by infrastructure and economic assessments. Mrs. Fenderbosch stated that the public’s questions were legitimate but that many related to the broader development plan rather than the text amendment before Council. She explained that the hearing concerned the LMU-O District, which she described as a set of guardrails. She summarized potential uses under the overlay, including multifamily dwellings, offices, cultural facilities, residential community centers, commercial services, financial institutions, microbreweries, mixed-use buildings, public parks, marinas, restaurants, boutique retail, recreational facilities, and hotels. She noted that future site development plans would be reviewed by staff, Planning Commission, and Council, and that issues such as traffic, infrastructure, lighting, architecture, landscaping, screening, and parking would be addressed at that stage. She also stated that the City could not purchase parkland unless it had been remediated to park standards, and that rezoning to B-3 would remove industrial uses.

April 27, 2026, Council Meeting 6 Ms. Gentry stated that Council is voting on a zoning framework for the property. She said she needed an economic plan before a final vote, particularly regarding the cost of maintaining a 23-acre lakefront park. She stated that preliminary research suggested park maintenance could cost approximately $410,000 per year, with additional costs for infrastructure, police, fire, and roads. She noted that the City is currently seeking an income tax increase from residents for road funding and said she wanted to understand whether the City could afford the park before voting. Mr. Kos stated that he supported Mr. Shahmir’s request that any materials given by ALERG to the City and held at City Hall be made available to Council under the NDA, even if reviewed in hard-copy form. He asked whether Planning Commission and Council could reject an application if a developer submitted a plan that failed to satisfy parking, infrastructure, sewer, road, or traffic requirements until those concerns were addressed. In response, Law Director Ebert stated that the application could be denied for any of those deficiencies. Mr. Kos also suggested revising the phrase “Retail Boutique Businesses” to “Retail and Boutique Businesses” to avoid unintentionally limiting retail uses. He further asked what would happen to the LMU-O if the TIF did not proceed or if the City could not acquire the parkland. In response, Todd Davis, outside counsel for the City, clarified that the TIF and park acquisition are tied together. Mr. Kos asked whether language could be added to protect the City if the purchase fell through, with 48% of the property being privately developed and the remaining 52% no longer acquired by the City. Attorney Berns responded that if the park did not come to fruition, then the LMU-O zoning provisions would not apply. He explained that the proposed amendment is a text amendment allowing certain development only if specified conditions are met. One of those conditions is the existence of publicly accessible parkland adjacent to Lake Erie within the LMU-O district consisting of at least 20 contiguous acres. Therefore, if the City does not acquire the required public parkland, the property could not be developed under the LMU-O provisions because Chapter 1219 requires at least 20 acres of publicly accessible lakefront parkland. The property could still be developed under its underlying zoning, whether the current I-2 zoning (if approved) or B-3 zoning. Mr. Reynolds stated that he agreed with many of Mr. Shahmir’s concerns about transparency and trust. He said that when a Councilmember requests information, it should be provided if that member believes it is necessary for their vote. He stated that he was inclined to support the overlay but that his position could

April 27, 2026, Council Meeting 7 change if he felt information was being withheld. He asked whether information supporting the 1,000-to-1,200-unit feasibility range would be provided. In response, Mr. Shields stated that the information would be available to Council by Wednesday, April 29, 2026. Mrs. Goodwin stated that, without a clear citywide economic or infrastructure plan, residents lacked a comprehensive long-term vision beyond the project immediately before them. She said the City had been reviewing projects on a case-by-case basis rather than through a broader long-term vision, and she commented that the lakefront project should represent a culminating enhancement to Avon Lake rather than merely a stepping stone for future development. Mayor Spaetzel reiterated that the matter is a text amendment and that many concerns expressed by residents would be addressed later if a developer came forward. He stated that some information discussed by Council was proprietary to ALERG and not owned by the City, but that ALERG had agreed to release information to Council by Wednesday. Attorney Hunt stated that the information was proprietary, confidential business information, and trade-secret material, but that an NDA was in place and ALERG was willing to share information with Council. Council President Smith stated that Council was also under the NDA and would abide by it, and that Council wanted the information. Mrs. Fenderbosch stated that trust and transparency needed to begin immediately, and that Council should move forward once the information was provided. The first public hearing closed at 9:24 p.m. The second public hearing began at 9:24 p.m. 2. Upon the proposed rezoning of a 43.23-acre parcel owned by Avon Lake Redevelopment Group, LLC, located at 33570 Lake Road, and designated by the County Auditor as PPN 04-00-006-101-085, PPN 04-00-006-101-023 (Parcel 6), and PPN 04-00-006-101-022 (Parcel 7) from General Industrial (I-2) District and Single-Family Residence (R-1A) District to Special Commerce District (B-3). Community Development Director Ted Esborn explained that the site has long been zoned industrial and that, beginning in 2021, City officials determined industrial zoning was not consistent with new lake access or new ways to enjoy the lakefront. He stated that the City did not want another industrial use to come onto the property. He said B-3 was selected because it is a commercial district that is consistent with creating new ways to enjoy the lake, and that it generally

April 27, 2026, Council Meeting 8 allows retail, office, restaurant, and passive park uses, with limited residential- related uses, such as skilled nursing, as a conditional use. Gerald Phillips, Avon Lake, stated that rezoning must be evaluated under Section 1214.02(E), including conformance with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. He argued that the correct process is to create or change the base zoning district, then apply the overlay district, then consider a development plan. He also disputed the view that existing code provisions fully addressed the additions he had proposed for Chapter 1219, stating that certain standards should be made mandatory within the overlay chapter itself. Regarding B-3, he argued that multi- tenant or mixed-use provisions may permit residential uses and disagreed with the characterization that B-3 does not include residential development. He also stated that no preliminary subdivision plan had been submitted and argued that developers would need environmental assurances, such as a no-further-action letter and covenant not to sue, before proceeding. Finally, he asserted that the B-3 application had not been properly initiated and urged Council to refer both matters back to Planning Commission. Malachi Witt, Avon Lake, asked how Council would evaluate confidential financial information under the NDA, particularly whether they would be able to obtain third-party professional assistance and discuss it within sunshine-law constraints. He reiterated his concern that, before zoning changes are made, the City must perform its own due diligence to preserve leverage and meet any burden of proof required to obligate developers to pay for infrastructure improvements such as road widening or traffic signals. Mike Sherban, Avon Lake, asked whether the TIF failure would affect the B-3 rezoning. Council President Smith responded that, once the property is rezoned B-3, it would remain B-3, and that the B-3 rezoning and TIF were separate issues. Williams Zimmerman, Avon Lake, stated that earlier versions of the proposed district appeared to include a broader area beyond ALERG’s property and that the current version reduced the portion involving ALERG’s property. He stated that residents who do not attend meetings miss important information, and he again criticized the use of NDAs. He urged more public access to committee discussions and information. Mr. Shahmir clarified that an NDA is a necessary mechanism for sharing proprietary information and that ALERG is entitled to protect confidential information. He stated that his concern was not the existence of the NDA, but the failure to share information with Council, who were already bound by it. On the B-3 rezoning, he stated that moving away from industrial zoning could be positive, but that the City should still understand the financial and economic implications of the change, including best-case, worst-case, and risk analyses.

April 27, 2026, Council Meeting 9 Mrs. Goodwin stated that the B-3 rezoning helped her focus on the fact that the large power plant and its immediate environmental and health risks were gone, and that the City was now considering what should replace it. She said that removing industrial zoning was an important component for future development. Mrs. Fenderbosch summarized the types of uses available in a B-3 district and described the code’s structure of permitted uses, permitted uses with standards, and conditional uses. She listed examples including skilled nursing or personal care facilities, recreational facilities, cultural facilities, essential services, clubs, government offices, passive parks and open space, places of worship, utilities, wireless telecommunications facilities, business and professional offices, animal clinics, assembly halls, boat rental and charter uses, financial institutions, fueling stations, funeral homes, hotels, medical and dental clinics, microbreweries, multi- tenant uses, daycare facilities, parking lots, personal services, restaurants, retail businesses, and taverns or bars, depending on applicable standards and conditions. Beth Wallace, Avon Lake, asked whether environmental reports had been shared with Council and whether the public would receive more information about remediation. Mrs. Goodwin responded in her role as Environmental Committee Chair, and stated that Verdantas was evaluating the environmental information and communicating with Mr. Shahmir. She stated that when information becomes available in a digestible public format, it would be reviewed by the Environmental Committee as appropriate. The second public hearing closed at 9:54 p.m. Mr. Kos moved to recess the Council Meeting. Yes: Kos, Reynolds, Shahmir, Smith, Fenderbosch, Gentry, Goodwin No: None Motion passed. The Council Meeting recessed at 9:54 p.m. The Council Meeting reconvened at 10:01 p.m. PUBLIC INPUT 1. Gerald Phillips, Avon Lake, addressed Council regarding the power plant redevelopment. He stated that public beach access had repeatedly been described as a critical component of the redevelopment, and he asserted that the Purchase and Sale Agreement (PSA) with ALERG did not include the

April 27, 2026, Council Meeting 10 acquisition of the submerged land lease that he believed would be necessary for beach access. He argued that if beach access were critical, it should have been included in the agreement. He also questioned why the proposed Chapter 1219 had been attached to earlier agreements before going through Council and Planning Commission procedures, calling that process improper. He criticized the PSA and interim development agreement as unfavorable to the City, questioned the role of outside negotiators, objected to the City paying for park planning, and raised concerns about ALERG’s tax practices and trustworthiness. He urged Council to send Chapter 1219 back to Planning Commission for further work. 2. Malachi Witt, Avon Lake, addressed the submerged land lease issue. He stated that he had reviewed documents and spoken with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) and was concerned that the submerged land lease was not part of Council’s discussion. He said the lease had been attached to the property before ALERG purchased it and transferred with ownership. He questioned whether, if the parkland is separated from the development parcel and the parkland abuts the submerged land lease, the lease might automatically transfer to the new parkland owner. He further questioned whether a change in land use could affect the validity of the lease and whether the City could become responsible for restoring the submerged land or addressing environmental liabilities if the lease expires or is terminated. He asked whether the City would be covered by environmental protections, including any covenant not to sue, and he characterized the lease issue as a potential liability that needed to be addressed. 3. William Zimmerman, Avon Lake, addressed aspects of the proposed power plant redevelopment and overlay he opposed. He asserted that requiring first-floor commercial uses rather than residential uses could lower applicable Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) remediation standards. He also voiced his concerns about the shoreline and submerged land lease, neither of which was included in the agreements, and the City could end up paying for remediation. He alleged that four Councilmembers had been together in a room before the meeting and asserted that this constituted a Sunshine Law issue. Council President Smith interrupted to state that no public business was being discussed, the door was open, and no meeting had occurred. Mr. Zimmerman also raised concerns about public records requests involving Avon Lake Regional Water, questioning why Law Director Ebert was reviewing or redacting documents if the water entity and the City are separate. He characterized that as a conflict of interest.

April 27, 2026, Council Meeting 11 MAYOR’S REPORT Mayor Spaetzel reported on the following: 1. The League of Women Voters hosted a panel discussion on the power plant site on April 22, 2026. The City asked the League to provide responses to unanswered questions from the event for posting on the City’s website. 2. The formal opening of Avon Lake Play Space (ALPS) was held on April 24, 2026. Mayor Spaetzel thanked everyone involved in the project’s success and noted that feedback received from parents, grandparents, and children regarding ALPS has been very positive. City Events  Tuesday, May 5, 2026, Primary Election Day.  Monday, May 25, 2026, Memorial Day Parade. Other Items  Issue 13, which proposes to increase the City’s income tax from 1.5% to 1.9%, is on the May 5 ballot. The funds generated from the increase will be designated for the City’s Roads and Capital Improvement Program. Additional information on Issue 13 is available on the City’s website. Mayor Spaetzel and Finance Director Krosse are available for further discussion.  There is a vacancy on the Community Improvement Corporation (CIC) and the Civil Service Commission. COUNCIL PRESIDENT’S REPORT Council President Smith reported on the following: 1. The CIC appointment is a Council appointment, and Council will conduct interviews. He asked Mr. Shahmir and Mrs. Fenderbosch to participate in interviews and instructed Clerk Rosmarin to schedule interviews. 2. Residents have expressed their concerns to him about the lack of helmet use when riding scooters, along with helmets for minors, and he asked Mr. Kos to include these issues at the next Public Safety and Health Committee meeting. 3. He thanked the residents who attended the public hearing earlier and reiterated that public input remained important. He encouraged residents watching live or later to email Council with their comments. He also noted that, while the power plant redevelopment was a major item, the City had many other business matters requiring attention.

April 27, 2026, Council Meeting 12 FINANCE DIRECTOR’S REPORT Finance Director Krosse reported on Ordinance No. 26-38, which was on first reading tonight, involving the issuance and sale of bonds for road improvements. She presented the fiscal officer’s certificate to Council President Smith. The certificate stated that the estimated useful life of the improvement is at least five years and the estimated maximum maturity of the bonds under Ohio Revised Code Section 133.20 is at least 15 years. Council President Smith acknowledged receipt of the certificate and gave it to Clerk Rosmarin for inclusion with the meeting record. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR’S REPORT Public Works Director Liskovec reported on the following: 1. The Miller Road Park Boat Launch officially opened for the season on Saturday, April 25, 2026, and experienced a good opening weekend despite the weather. 2. Reseeding work will occur on Stoney Brook Drive and Brunswick Drive over the next couple of weeks by the contractor. In response to Mrs. Fenderbosch, Public Works Director Liskovec confirmed that branch pickup is ongoing, and the turnaround time is typically two to three weeks. BUILDING AND UTILITIES COMMITTEE REPORT Ms. Gentry reported on the Building and Utilities Committee as follows: • The next Committee meeting is Monday, May 4, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber. In response to Mr. Shahmir, Ms. Gentry stated that she is coordinating a date for FirstEnergy representatives to attend a future Committee meeting. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT Mr. Shahmir reported on the Economic Development Committee as follows: 1. The next Committee meeting is Monday, May 18, 2026, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber. 2. The next CIC meeting is Wednesday, May 13, 2026, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber.

April 27, 2026, Council Meeting 13 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE REPORT Mrs. Goodwin reported on the Environmental Committee as follows: • The next Committee meeting is Monday, May 4, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber. FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT Council President Smith reported on the Finance Committee as follows: 1. The next Committee meeting is Monday, May 4, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber. 2. Suspension of the rule requiring three readings on an emergency basis will be requested for Ordinance No. 26-33, authorizing the purchase of Moore Road, and Ordinance No. 26-38, regarding the issuance of bonds. HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE REPORT Mr. Reynolds reported on the Human Resources Committee as follows: • Second-round interviews have concluded for the City Engineer position. Mayor Spaetzel said the City was still processing background information and would move as quickly as possible before making an offer. PUBLIC SAFETY AND HEALTH COMMITTEE REPORT Mr. Kos reported on the Public Safety and Health Committee as follows: 1. The Committee met on April 15, 2026.  The agenda included the retirement of Lorain County Health Commissioner Mark Adams and the new helmet law requiring anyone under 18 years of age operating a Class 1, Class 2, or Class 3 e-bike in the City to wear a helmet.  The City, local businesses, and safety forces are developing a program to distribute helmets and promote safe e-bike riding. 2. The Avon Lake Police recently stopped an individual operating on what was effectively an electric motorcycle on Jaycox Road, traveling 42 miles per hour. The rider was 14 years old. Mr. Kos emphasized that electric vehicles without pedals are not all e-bikes and are not legal to operate on City streets. The Police Department confiscated the vehicle and contacted the parents, who reportedly did not know it was illegal. The City must continue educating the

April 27, 2026, Council Meeting 14 public. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMITTEE REPORT Mrs. Fenderbosch reported on the Public Service Committee as follows: 1. The next Committee meeting is Wednesday, May 6, 2026, at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber. 2. Suspension of the rule requiring three readings on an emergency basis will be requested for Ordinance No. 26-35, authorizing a professional services agreement, and Ordinance No. 26-40, authorizing a Memorandum of Understanding. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT Mr. Reynolds reported on Planning Commission as follows: • The next Commission meeting is Tuesday, May 5, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS REPORT Mayor Spaetzel reported on the Zoning Board of Appeals as follows: 1. The Board met on April 22, 2026.  An area variance increasing the rear yard maximum coverage allowance for accessory structures at 540 Lear Road was denied.  An area variance permitting a parking lot addition to encroach into the front yard along Lear Road at 127 Lear Road was approved.  An area variance reducing the number of end row islands for a parking lot addition at 127 Lear Road was approved; and  An area variance permitting a 4-foot fence in the front yard alongside Gardenside Drive at 565 Parkside Drive was approved. 2. The next Board meeting is Wednesday, May 27, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION REPORT Mrs. Goodwin reported on the Parks and Recreation Commission as follows: • The next Commission meeting is Wednesday, May 27, 2026, at 5:30 p.m. in the First Floor Conference Room. TREE COMMISSION REPORT

April 27, 2026, Council Meeting 15 Mrs. Fenderbosch reported on the Tree Commission as follows: 1. The Commission will pot seedlings on Thursday, April 30, 2026, in preparation for the Avon-on-the-Lake Garden Club Plant Sale on Saturday, May 9, 2026, at the Goddard School, 430 Avon Belden Road, Avon Lake. 2. The Commission will also grow seedlings for the Kiwanis Scholarship Foundation auction, which happens during Fall Fest. 3. The next Commission meeting is Wednesday, May 13, 2026, at 6:00 p.m. at the Old Firehouse and Community Center. COMMUNICATIONS AND TECHNOLOGY COMMISSION REPORT Ms. Gentry reported on the Communications and Technology Commission as follows: • The next Commission meeting is Thursday, May 21, 2026, at 6:00 p.m. at the Avon Lake Public Library. MOTION Council President Smith moved to designate Valerie Rosmarin as the Council Representative for public records training. Yes: Kos, Reynolds, Shahmir, Smith, Fenderbosch, Gentry, Goodwin No: None Motion passed. LEGISLATION Third Reading: Ordinance No. 26-31, AN ORDINANCE ALLOWING BEER AND WINE TO BE SOLD, SERVED, DISPENSED, AND CONSUMED FOR ONE DAY AT SUMMERFEST, TO BE HELD AT MILLER ROAD PARK ON JUNE 20, 2026, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY, was read by title only. Mr. Kos moved for passage of Ordinance No. 26-31. This legislation will allow beer and wine to be sold, served, dispensed, and consumed for one day at Summerfest in Miller Road Park on June 20, 2026. Summerfest is an event sponsored by the Friends of the Park in Avon Lake, Inc. Mr. Kos noted that this is the second year of Summerfest. Since there were no prior issues, the Police Department had no objections to the issuance of a one-day liquor permit.

April 27, 2026, Council Meeting 16 Yes: Kos, Reynolds, Shahmir, Smith, Fenderbosch, Gentry, Goodwin No: None Motion passed. Ordinance No. 26-31 adopted. Second Readings: Ordinance No. 26-33, AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR LORAIN COUNTY PERMANENT PARCEL NO. 04-00-005-000- 107, LOCATED AT MOORE ROAD, AVON LAKE, OHIO, FROM SCHIBLEY SOLVENTS & CHEMICALS CO., INC., AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Council President Smith moved for suspension of the rule requiring three readings. Yes: Kos, Reynolds, Shahmir, Smith, Fenderbosch, Gentry, Goodwin No: None Motion passed. Council President Smith moved for passage of Ordinance No. 26-33. This legislation will authorize the Mayor to execute a purchase agreement for property located on Moore Road, adjacent to 720 Moore Road, on behalf of ALRW, for $700,000. Yes: Kos, Reynolds, Shahmir, Smith, Fenderbosch, Gentry, Goodwin No: None Motion passed. Ordinance No. 26-33 adopted. Ordinance No. 26-34, AN ORDINANCE ALLOWING BEER TO BE SOLD, SERVED, DISPENSED, AND CONSUMED FOR ONE DAY FOR AVON LAKE’S BIRTHDAY PARTY FIELD GAMES CHAMPIONSHIP, TO BE HELD AT MILLER ROAD PARK ON JUNE 6, 2026, FROM 10:00 A.M. TO 3:00 P.M., AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Mr. Kos moved for suspension of the rule requiring three readings. Yes: Kos, Reynolds, Shahmir, Smith, Fenderbosch, Gentry, Goodwin No: None Motion passed. Mr. Kos moved for passage of Ordinance No. 26-34. This legislation will allow beer to be sold, served, dispensed, and consumed for one day from 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. for Avon Lake’s Birthday Party Field Games Championship at Miller Road Park on June 6, 2026. This event is sponsored by the 250 Jubilee Committee of Avon Lake, Ohio. Yes: Kos, Reynolds, Shahmir, Smith, Fenderbosch, Gentry, Goodwin No: None Motion passed. Ordinance No. 26-34 adopted.

April 27, 2026, Council Meeting 17 Ordinance No. 26-35, AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH AMERICAN STRUCTUREPOINT, INC., AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Mrs. Fenderbosch moved for suspension of the rule requiring three readings. Yes: Kos, Reynolds, Shahmir, Smith, Fenderbosch, Gentry, Goodwin No: None Motion passed. Mrs. Fenderbosch moved for passage of Ordinance No. 26-35. This legislation will authorize the Mayor to execute a professional services agreement with American Structurepoint, Inc., of Cleveland, Ohio, for the engineering design services for the bridge replacement structure at Country Club Drive over Heider Ditch for an amount not to exceed $158,726.96. Yes: Kos, Reynolds, Shahmir, Smith, Fenderbosch, Gentry, Goodwin No: None Motion passed. Ordinance No. 26-35 adopted. Ordinance No. 26-36, AN ORDINANCE ENACTING AVON LAKE CODE OF ORDINANCES CHAPTER 1219: LAKEFRONT MIXED-USE OVERLAY DISTRICT. This legislation will enact Avon Lake Code of Ordinances Chapter 1219: Lakefront Mixed-Use Overlay District as recommended by Planning Commission on March 24, 2026. The text amendments proposed in Chapter 1219 were requested by Avon Lake Environmental Redevelopment Group, LLC (ALERG) to support the redevelopment of former industrial and commercial lakefront properties along the Lake Road corridor through mixed-use standards that align with the City’s 2019 Comprehensive Plan and promote reinvestment, walkability, and public access to Lake Erie. At the request of Mayor Spaetzel, Attorney Davis addressed concerns about the submerged land lease. He stated that the submerged land lease was specifically excluded from the PSA. He stated the exclusion was intended to ensure the City was not acquiring environmental liability associated with that property. He said the agreement provides for due diligence and discussions with ODNR and others to evaluate possible future opportunities to include the submerged land lease in a later phase. Regarding beach access, Attorney Davis said a land planner would be needed to determine where a beach would be feasible on the lakefront property. He said the City was applying for EPA grant funding to begin environmental due diligence below the ordinary high-water mark. He stated that the land being purchased would be described by survey and that the City would not be acquiring property below the ordinary high-water mark. Attorney Davis also addressed questions about park planning and parking. He stated

April 27, 2026, Council Meeting 18 that if the park becomes a City asset, a land planner and park planner would determine layout and public access parking. He said parking is anticipated, even if it was not shown on preliminary sketches. He cautioned that public review of preliminary plans can create assumptions about features that are not final. Attorney Davis further addressed questions about information provided by ALERG to City professionals. He stated that ALERG specifically asked that certain preliminary information not be shared yet because it was subject to change. He said the rationale was not an effort by the Mayor to shield Council from information but rather a commitment to the developer not to share preliminary information until it was more fully developed. Attorney Berns added that preliminary development information can become a benchmark against which future information may be judged, even when it is not final. He stated that specific development features, economic impacts, or infrastructure information may change significantly, and that meaningful evaluation is not possible until a development plan is formally presented. He noted that 1,200 residential units had been described as a ceiling, and that actual development at 600, 900, or another number of units would change infrastructure and tax-impact analysis. Council President Smith questioned whether counsel was saying Council was not entitled to preliminary information. Attorney Davis clarified that ALERG had instructed that certain information not be shared beyond the Administration. Mrs. Fenderbosch addressed Mr. Davis directly. She stated that Councilmembers are experienced in reviewing large, multimillion-dollar projects and understand that preliminary information is subject to change as projects develop. She said Council may have viewed the matter differently had it been included earlier in the process and urged that Council be kept informed as projects evolve. Mrs. Fenderbosch also discussed submerged land leases, stating her understanding that such leases are administered through the ODNR and transfer with the adjacent property. She questioned how the City could own shoreline property without also holding the submerged land lease. Based on conversations she had with ODNR, she stated that, as a tax-collecting entity, the City’s lease cost would be one dollar. She further noted that previous grant opportunities involving Lorain County Metro Parks and the City had been affected because ownership of the property had not yet been secured. Mr. Shahmir expressed concern that information submitted to the City Administration had not been shared with Council. He stated that determining whether preliminary information is useful should not rest solely with hired professionals and that elected officials have the right to review information submitted to the City.

April 27, 2026, Council Meeting 19 MOTION Council President Smith moved to allow the Mayor to leave the dais briefly to turn off an alarm. Yes: Kos, Reynolds, Shahmir, Smith, Fenderbosch, Gentry, Goodwin No: None Motion passed. Ordinance No. 26-37, AN ORDINANCE REZONING A 43.23-ACRE SITE AT 33570 LAKE ROAD FROM GENERAL INDUSTRIAL (I-2) AND SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE (R-1A) TO SPECIAL COMMERCE DISTRICT (B-3). This legislation will rezone 33570 Lake Road from General Industrial (I-2) and Single- Family Residence (R-1A) to Special Commerce District (B-3) as recommended by Planning Commission on March 24, 2026. First Readings: Ordinance No. 26-38, AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF BONDS IN THE MAXIMUM PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $1,665,000 FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING COSTS OF IMPROVING STREETS BY RECONSTRUCTING, RESURFACING, GRADING, DRAINING, CURBING AND PAVING, CONSTRUCTING WATER SUPPLY, SANITARY AND DRAINAGE FACILITIES, CONSTRUCTING BRIDGE IMPROVEMENTS, AND MAKING OTHER IMPROVEMENTS AS DESIGNATED IN THE PLANS APPROVED OR TO BE APPROVED BY COUNCIL, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Council President Smith moved for suspension of the rule requiring three readings. Yes: Kos, Reynolds, Shahmir, Smith, Fenderbosch, Gentry, Goodwin No: None Motion passed. Council President Smith moved for passage of Ordinance No. 26-38. This legislation will provide for the issuance and sale of $1,665,000 in bonds to fund the Walker Road Paving Project, Phase 6, and the Electric Boulevard bridge replacement. Finance Director Krosse noted that the Ohio Public Works Commission (OPWC) will partially fund the Walker Road Paving Project, and the Electric Boulevard bridge replacement is part of a bundled project with Avon Lake Regional Water. Yes: Kos, Reynolds, Shahmir, Smith, Fenderbosch, Gentry, Goodwin No: None Motion passed.

April 27, 2026, Council Meeting 20 Ordinance No. 26-38 adopted. Resolution No. 26-39, A RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING ACCEPTANCE OF A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT COMMUNITY PARK, RECREATION/CONSERVATION PROJECT PASS- THROUGH GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE OHIO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (ODNR) AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. This legislation will authorize the acceptance of a pass-through grant from ODNR. House Bill No. 2 of the 135th General Assembly appropriated $50,000 for the construction of a park and recreation conservation facility, also referred to as the Avon Lake Veterans Park Gazebo. ODNR retains $1,000 for administrative costs, leaving $49,000 available for reimbursement. Ordinance No. 26-40, AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE CUYAHOGA SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT FOR PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND PUBLIC EDUCATION SERVICES AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Mrs. Fenderbosch moved for suspension of the rule requiring three readings. Yes: Kos, Reynolds, Shahmir, Smith, Fenderbosch, Gentry, Goodwin No: None Motion passed. Mrs. Fenderbosch moved for passage of Ordinance No. 26-40. This legislation will authorize the Mayor to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The Ohio EPA’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Phase II Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System permit requires minimum control measures for public education, outreach, and participation. Cuyahoga Soil and Water Conservation District has expertise in education, outreach, public involvement, stormwater management, and environmental stewardship. The MOU covers January 1, 2026, through December 31, 2030, and supports the City’s Public Involvement and Public Education program, often referred to as PIPE, at an annual cost of $6,600. Yes: Kos, Reynolds, Shahmir, Smith, Fenderbosch, Gentry, Goodwin No: None Motion passed. Ordinance No. 26-40 adopted. Mr. Kos moved for adjournment. Yes: Goodwin, Kos, Reynolds, Shahmir, Smith, Fenderbosch, Gentry No: None Motion passed. Adjournment: 11:06 p.m.

April 27, 2026, Council Meeting 21 Approved: Attest: Council President Clerk of Council