City of Columbus, Ohio - Page 3

          Petitioner bears the burden of proof.  Rule 217(c)(2)(A).  Our              
          decision is based upon the stipulated administrative record,                
          which is incorporated herein by this reference, and additional              
          evidence received pursuant to an Order of this Court.  Rule                 
          217(a).2                                                                    
               Petitioner is the City of Columbus, Ohio (City).  On                   
          December 20, 1993, the City Council of Columbus adopted an                  
          ordinance authorizing the issuance of bonds in a principal amount           
          not to exceed $28 million.  In its ruling request, petitioner               
          anticipated the actual amount of the proposed bonds would be                
          $27,300,000.  Having retired $600,000 in principal amount of its            
          1994 bond anticipation notes (see infra p. 8), petitioner now               
          anticipates the actual amount of the proposed bonds will be                 
          $26,700,000.                                                                
               Petitioner is a home rule municipal corporation and                    
          political subdivision of the State of Ohio (State).  Before 1967,           
          the City maintained two pension funds for its police officers and           
          firefighters (collectively referred to hereinafter as the City              
          Fund).                                                                      
               In 1965, a State law was enacted creating the Police and               
          Firemen's Disability and Pension Fund (the State Fund), a                   

          Respondent objects to what she describes as petitioner's                    
          attempt to admit additional material into evidence, by way of               
          Appendices A and B to petitioner's opening brief.  Appendix A               
          contains an amortization of the City Obligation based on an                 
          exhibit in the stipulated record and is thus not new evidence.              
          Appendix B, however, is an amortization schedule of the proposed            
          bonds and is new evidence as to which we sustain respondent's               
          objection.                                                                  




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011