Episode Five - Council Wrap Up (2/5/26) and Reflections

This episode breaks down last week’s Wilmington City Council meeting with a focus on process, timing, and where decisions actually happen.

Several rezoning ordinances tied to a proposed data center project advanced on second reading. Much of the public discussion blended multiple projects together, creating confusion about what council was deciding and whether there would be future checkpoints.

This wrap-up separates those threads and explains why second reading matters, how ordinances move through council, and when decisions become final.

In this episode:

•Ordinances vs. resolutions

•What first, second, and third readings mean

•When rezoning becomes the effective decision point

•The mayor’s veto window and what it changes

•The 30-day waiting period and public referendum process

•Ohio’s updated signature requirements for referendums

•What emergency language does procedurally

•Why silence and pacing matter in council decisions

•A brief look at Ordinance O-26-01

•What executive session is and what it cannot be used for

This podcast focuses on explaining how the system works, not advocating for outcomes.

The next City Council agenda will be released Wednesday, February 18, ahead of the February 19 meeting. A preview episode will follow.

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:04

This is Wilmington Weekly with Matt Perkey. Welcome back. This is the Sunday wrap-up episode for this week's Wilmington City Council meeting. If you watched the meeting live, attended in person, or caught pieces of it afterward, this episode is meant to help put everything back in order. What was on the agenda, what action council took, what did not happen, and why some of the conversation felt harder to follow than it needed to be. This episode is about clarity, process, understanding, understanding where decisions actually live. At a high level, council considered several zoning related items, including multiple zoning ordinances connected to a proposed data center development. These ordinances were on second reading, meaning they have already passed once and we're moving through the required three-reading process. There was a lot of discussion. There was also a lot of public conversation, both during the meeting and after, about data centers more broadly. And that is where I felt things started to blur. One thing that is important to be very clear about is that there's more than one data center project being discussed in Wilmington right now. The first, by AWS, is in planning commission for site plan review, and it has no council action scheduled at this time. The rezoning ordinances on last night's agenda relate to a second project spearheaded by Ardent Data Centers. The structural details of that project matter for understanding what council is actually deciding, and I'm still working on confirming some of those details. This Ardent project is different in some important ways. It's not seeking a tax abatement. There's also no incentive package attached to the project. There are no negotiated benefits tied to future council action. As the project is currently structured, if the zoning ordinances tied to this project are approved on third reading, council's role is effectively finished. There are no additional agreements coming later. Zoning approval is the green light. That distinction matters, especially on second reading. There was also a moment in the meeting that is worth naming because it didn't involve words at all. Around the one hour twenty-one minute mark, before council moved forward with the second reading, there was a pause. No one spoke, no one rushed to fill the space. It was one of those moments where nothing happened but a lot was decided. Silence can feel responsible in real time. It can feel measured, but in legislative settings, silence is also a form of authority not being exercised out loud. During the broader conversation, another data center project, the AWS project, was referenced repeatedly, even though it was not the subject of the legislation on the agenda. That doesn't mean anyone is acting in bad faith, but it does create a clarity problem. When projects with very different structures are blended together in discussion, it can sound like there will be another checkpoint later, another opportunity to stop or reshape or rethink things. In the case of the Ardent Project, there likely is not. Before moving further into analysis, I want to flag a few upcoming public meetings. Because these continue the conversation in parallel spaces, and I like to make sure that everyone's aware of them. Monday, February 9th, Board of Control meeting will be at 3 p.m. in Council Chambers. On Tuesday, February 10th, the Records Commission meets at 2 p.m. in the community room on the first floor of the city building. There will be another Board of Control meeting on Friday, February 13th at 1 p.m. again in Council Chambers. On Tuesday, February 17th, the Civil Service Commission meets at 4.15 p.m. in Council Chambers. And on Thursday, February 19th, there is a City Council public workshop at 6 p.m., followed immediately by the regular City Council meeting at 7. Agendas and details are available on the city's website, and attending or watching these meetings is one of the best ways to stay grounded in what is actually moving forward and where the decisions are being made. Now I want to slow down and talk about procedure because this is where much of the confusion from Thursday night really lives. Zoning actions move by ordinance, not resolution. An ordinance is a law. It changes the city code and carries long-term effect. A resolution, by contrast, is generally an expression of intent or approval. The difference matters because ordinances carry more process and more consequence. Most ordinances require three readings. The first reading serves to introduce the legislation. The second reading allows for public input and council discussion. And the third final reading is the last step before passage occurs. Council cannot have more than one reading of an ordinance in a single meeting unless it formally suspends the rules, which requires a supermajority vote. With a seven-member council, that's six, assuming all members are present. That safeguard exists to prevent legislation from moving too quickly or without adequate notice or discussion. When readings are spread across meetings, it's intentional. What happens after council passes an ordinance also matters, especially when it comes to timing. In an Ohio statutory city like Wilmington is, once council passes an ordinance, the mayor has ten days, excluding Sundays, to either sign it or return it to council with written objections, which is a veto. If the mayor vetoes the ordinance, that action pauses the process until council either overrides the veto or the ordinance fails. The referendum clock does not meaningfully begin until the ordinance is final. If the mayor takes no action during that window, the ordinance moves forward without a signature, and 30 days, the 30-day waiting period begins. If the mayor takes no action during that window, the ordinance moves forward without a signature and the 30-day waiting period begins. If the ordinance is not passed as an emergency, it does not take effect immediately. As mentioned, there is a 30-day waiting period before it becomes law. During that same 30-day period, the public has an opportunity to pursue a referendum by gathering signatures to place the ordinance on the ballot. It's important to note that Ohio recently changed the threshold required to place an ordinance on the ballot by referendum. Under current law, a referendum now requires signatures equal to 35% of voters in the last gubernatorial election, up from previous 10% threshold. That change significantly affects how realistic the referendum option is in practice, and is part of the procedural landscape residents should understand when thinking about timing and decision points. If an ordinance is passed as an emergency, that entire sequence changes. The ordinance takes effect immediately and is not subject to referendum. The waiting period disappears, and so does that public check. So council can suspend rules and do three readings in one night, but unless the ordinance specifically states it is to be done in an emergency for 30-day waiting periods. When thinking about timing and decision points. During the meeting, one council member stated that council already has plenty of information to make an informed decision and expressed a desire to address what he described as misinformation. In that context, he referenced carbon output, uh, small modular reactors, water levels at Caesars Creek, uh broader national energy needs, framing the discussion beyond just this single local project. Another council member at one hour and 12-minute mark said he did not understand why council could not move forward with rezoning now. He distinguished between rezoning and approval of a data center itself, saying he wanted more concrete information before voting on a project, but felt that zoning could move forward so the city would be ready when the time comes. That distinction is important, and it also highlights where confusion can creep in. In many development scenarios, rezoning is one step in a much longer sequence. There may be development agreements or incentive packages that return to council later. In those cases, it can make sense to deal with zoning now and evaluate the rest when it becomes concrete. I want to be clear about one thing here. I'm still seeking formal clarification on the structure of the Ardent project, but what I'm about to say is based on my current understanding. As I understand it, this project is not seeking a tax abatement. There's no development agreement coming later, there is no subsequent council vote that approves or denies the project itself. If that understanding is correct, then zoning approval is the effective decision point. I hope I'm wrong about that. If there are additional approvals or action points that come back to council later, that that matters. But if they're not, then having clearer answers before another reading occurs is important because there may not be another opportunity for council or the public to meaningfully weigh in. This is also where process knowledge really matters. When council is acting on legislation that is effectively determinative, acting without a clear understanding of what comes next or assuming there will be a chance to revisit a decision later when there may not be one carries real risk. This is not about intent. Misunderstanding the rules or the structure of a decision can turn what feels like a procedural step into an irreversible outcome. That's a dangerous place for any legislative body to be. One other item from the meeting is worth noting here as an example of why second readings matter. Ordinance 02601 advanced on second reading without extended discussion. That ordinance creates a code enforcement manager position and increases the budget of that office. It does also include four other positions as well, one of those being a position that is in place but had been taken off the legislation. And there was brief discussion at a prior meeting about adding the police and fire cadet position and some explanation of the safety director's role and why it had fallen off the uh the legislation. What was not discussed in any detail were the other positions affected by the ordinance or the sequencing of those changes. As it stands today, the city does not currently have a filled code enforcement officer position, which already exists in the code. Creating a management role and expanding a budget before the underlying position is filled may be entirely intentional, but it's that kind of structural change that benefits from explanation on the record. While there is opportunity for discussion at each reading, second reading is typically where those questions get asked. Not because something is wrong, but because clarity up front prevents confusion later. And members of council and the public have had a meeting to digest and examine how these may impact things down the road. One other clarification from the meeting came from the mayor, who emphasized that zoning decisions and the ultimate approval of projects ultimately rest with council. While the planning commission plays an advisory role, the authority to approve or deny ordinances sits squarely with city council. That's where the vote happens, that's where the accountability lives. Before closing, I I want to briefly return to executive session. Executive session is a closed portion of the meeting that is permitted only for specific reasons defined by state law. In Ohio, those reasons are listed in the Ohio Revised Code section 121.22 subsection G. Those reasons include pending or imminent litigation, the purchase or sale of property, certain personnel matters, collective bargaining strategy, security arrangements, and confidential law enforcement or investigatory information. Even when counsel enters executive session for one of those permitted reasons, no votes are taken behind closed doors. Any formal action must occur back in open session on the record. Executive session is meant to protect the city's legal, financial, or negotiating position. It's not meant to shield decisions from public view. When it is used correctly, it's a necessary tool. When it is poorly explained or misunderstood, it can raise understandable concerns. We'll spend more time on executive session in a future episode. As always, a quick reminder about my role here. I'm explaining process and context, and not advocating for a particular outcome, and I'm not speaking for council or the administration. The difference between a procedural step and a final decision is not always obvious in real time, but it becomes very obvious afterward. The next council agenda will be released on Wednesday, February 18th, one day ahead of the Thursday, February 19th council meeting. We will walk through that agenda together in our Wednesday preview episode. Thanks again for listening. I'll talk to you soon.