Mar 02, 2021 Township Board

WE NOW GO TO THE DOWNTOWN OKEMOS AND [INAUDIBLE] DEVELOPMENT AREAS,

[1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER]

AND WE WILL CALL ON OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR [INAUDIBLE] BE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT THAT.

>> GOOD EVENING, [INAUDIBLE] BOARD.

THE FIRST GOAL AND SMALL [INAUDIBLE] THAT WE NEEDED TO COMPLETE THIS YEAR FOR VILLAGE OF OKEMOS WAS DEMOLITION FOR ALL SIX BUILDINGS.

IT WAS INITIALLY PLANNED AND PROPOSED TO BE DONE AND FINISHED BY THE END OF JANUARY.

WE WERE HAPPY TO SEE [INAUDIBLE] WE WERE ABLE TO COMPLETE THAT BEFORE MID-JANUARY.

THE NEXT STEP IN THE PROCESS WILL BE TO WAIT.

AFTER A WONDERFUL FALL, IT LOOKS LIKE SPRING MIGHT COME A LITTLE BIT EARLY THIS YEAR, FINGERS CROSSED.

AT THAT TIME, THEN THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, GREAT LAKES, AND ENERGY WILL HAVE TO DO A FINAL WALK-THROUGH SINCE THEY HAD SOME REIMBURSEMENT AND SOME DOLLARS AND FINANCING TIED UP IN THAT PROJECT.

SO THEY ARE INCENTIVIZED TO [INAUDIBLE] TIMELINE.

FOLLOWING EAGLE'S FINAL WALK-THROUGH, THEY WILL BE PERMITTED TO DO SURFACE PARKING DEMOLITION, THAT'S THE SURFACE PARKING LOT [INAUDIBLE] CURB CUTS AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS, AND BEGIN PREPARING THE SITE FOR SITE PREPARATION, WHICH IS PUTTING THE FOUNDATION FOR THE BIG BUILD.

[4A. 2021 Township Action Plan Work Group Updates]

[INAUDIBLE] WILL BEGIN THEIR DEMOLITION AGAIN, AND THIS IS 1673 HASLETT ROAD.

I WANT TO ADDRESS THAT THERE'S BEEN STIRRING AND CONCERN BECAUSE A LOT OF HASLETT COMMUNITY RESIDENTS [INAUDIBLE] THE BUSINESSES THAT WERE IN THAT BLOCK MOVE, AND THEY PROBABLY DON'T WANT TO STILL BE OCCUPYING THE BUILDING [INAUDIBLE] TEARING IT DOWN.

THE BEAUTY IS THAT ALL OF THE BUSINESSES THAT WERE OCCUPYING THAT SPACE HAVE FOUND A NEW HOME WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP, MANY OF THEM WITHIN HASLETT.

NOT EVERYONE WAS ABLE TO FIND A NEW LOCATION WITHIN HASLETT, BUT THEY DID STILL [INAUDIBLE] MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP THEIR HOME.

I WANT TO REITERATE THAT THEY'RE NOT BEING PUSHED OUT, THAT THE REASON WHY THEY'RE NO LONGER THERE IS BECAUSE WE ARE PREPARING FOR THE SITE.

[INAUDIBLE] WAS ONE OF THE LAST TO FIND A NEW HOME IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP, AND THEY WILL BE PREPARING THEIR ADDITIONAL FINANCING OPTIONS. THAT IS MY REPORT.

BY THE WAY, WE'RE HOLDING OUR QUESTIONS TO THE END IN CASE WE HAVE ANY.

NEXT, WE'RE GOING ON TO DERRICK AGAIN. THE ROADS.

>> [NOISE] WE'RE DOWN [INAUDIBLE].

WITH THE LOCAL ROAD PROGRAM, WE DO ALMOST 80 MILES WORTH OF ROADWORK THIS SUMMER.

CURRENTLY, WE'RE FINISHING UP ALL THE ASSURANCE QUALITY CONTROL, QA/QC, ON THE FINAL DESIGNS.

EXPECT TO HAVE BIDS RECEIVED TO US BY THE END OF MARCH AND ANTICIPATE A MAY START.

APRIL, WE'LL BE DOING THE NOTIFICATIONS TO THE RESIDENTS.

SO THAT'S WHERE WE ARE, OUR TIMELINE.

>> YOU'RE BEING ASSURED. THANK YOU.

WE NOW MOVE ON TO THE BROADBAND GOAL, AND THAT WE'LL CALL MR. DIRECTOR [INAUDIBLE].

>> GOOD EVENING, AND THANK YOU.

THE WORKGROUP HAS MET TO ASSESS BROADBAND OR WHAT'S REFERRED TO AS HIGH-SPEED INTERNET.

IT'S SIMPLE TO SAY THAT WE NEED IT.

IT'S MORE COMPLEX ON THE NUMBER OF ISSUES AND HOW DO WE REACH THAT GOAL.

OUR CONCERN IS SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE WERE GOING TO NEED TO STUDY, WHETHER IT'S THROUGH DATA COLLECTION OR MAPPING, IS HOW [INAUDIBLE] BEING SERVED CURRENTLY.

WHAT TYPE OF ACCESS THEY HAVE TO THE INTERNET, THE SPEED, AND THE TYPE? WHO IS BEING [INAUDIBLE]? ARE THERE AREAS IN THE TOWNSHIP THAT ARE UNDERSERVED OR HAVE NO SERVICE? WHO ARE THE PROVIDERS IN THE TOWNSHIP? THE TYPE OF INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE HAVE AND WHAT COST OR EXPENSE TO USE THAT FOR THE EXPANSION OF BROADBAND.

THESE ARE JUST SOME OF THOSE ISSUES, AND AGAIN, THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES WITH THE COST TO ALL THIS.

SO WE HAD OUR STARTING POINT TO NEED TO KNOW THAT INFORMATION.

THIS IS VIEWED BY MANY COMMUNITIES IN MICHIGAN, AND I KNOW THERE WAS SOME SHARING OF INFORMATION.

COMMUNITIES HAVE REACHED OUT, HIRED CONSULTANTS TO HELP THEM DO THE DATA COLLECTION.

THAT'S OUR STARTING POINT.

THE SECOND THING IS, ONCE WE [INAUDIBLE] ,

[00:05:01]

THEN WE'LL HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING AND BE ABLE TO GO OUT AND ACTUALLY DO A SURVEY OF THE BUSINESSES AND THE RESIDENTS, WHAT THEIR CONCERNS ARE, WHAT THEIR NEEDS ARE TO FINALIZE THAT.

THAT'S A SUMMARY OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT DOING.

>> THANK YOU. BECAUSE WE CAN'T GET ENOUGH OF THEM, WE'RE NOW GOING TO CALL ON DERRICK TO TALK ABOUT THE [INAUDIBLE] LAKE LANSING PATHWAY.

>> YES. ONE MORE INFORMATION WITH THIS ONE.

SO PHASE 1, WE'RE ANTICIPATING FINISHING UP DESIGN AND GOING TO BID ON THAT [INAUDIBLE] FALL.

WE HAVE A SIGNIFICANT TARIFF GRANT FROM THE STATE OF MICHIGAN.

WE EXECUTE THAT IN ORDER TO KEEP THOSE FUNDS.

PHASE 2, LOOKING AT THE MAJORITY OF THAT THIS SUMMER, CONSTRUCTION ON THAT, AND THEN PHASE 2B [INAUDIBLE] SPRING.

SO BREAKING THAT PORTION OF THE PATHWAY AND A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT PIECES IS MANAGEABLE.

WE DO HAVE A PATHWAY MASTER PLAN.

TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION WILL BE MEETING, AND ACTUALLY, THE 18TH THIS MONTH.

[INAUDIBLE] WE'RE GOING TO START THE PROCESS OF THE PATHWAY MASTER PLAN REVIEW.

IT WILL START [INAUDIBLE] BUT I'M SURE IT'LL MATRICULATE TO ALL THE OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THAT WE HAVE [INAUDIBLE] BUT THAT'S WHERE WE'VE DEVELOPED THE PATHWAY MAP FROM THE NEXT [INAUDIBLE].

SO I ENCOURAGE THE PUBLIC TO PAY ATTENTION TO THAT AND PROVIDE US INPUT IN REGARDS TO THAT.

SO WITH THAT, PARKS DEPARTMENT WAS SUCCESSFUL IN ACQUIRING A PIECE OF PROPERTY ON OKEMOS ROAD NEXT TO THE SERVICE CENTER.

THAT'S GOING TO UTILIZED NOT ONLY FOR A NEW ENTRANCE INTO [INAUDIBLE] BUT ALSO AS A MID-TRAIL HUB FOR THE [INAUDIBLE] LAKE LANSING PATHWAY.

ONE OF THE ISSUES WE ALWAYS HEAR ABOUT IS WHERE ARE SOME RESTROOMS AVAILABLE FOR THE PUBLIC? SO WE'VE [INAUDIBLE] SITE IN THERE.

SO LOOK FOR THAT.

THE ACQUISITION SHOULD TAKE PROBABLY THE REST OF THIS YEAR [INAUDIBLE] DESIGN ON THAT.

SO THAT'LL BE A NICE ADDITION TO THE PATHWAY.

ALSO, A PROJECT IS BEING DONE IN CONJUNCTION WITH SOME [INAUDIBLE] COUNTY ON A NEW PATHWAY TRAILS MAP SO THE RESIDENTS CAN HAVE A NICE POCKET MAP TO TAKE OUT AND ABOUT WHEN THEY'RE GOING TO PLAN THEIR BIKE TRIP OR VISIT PARKS.

WE'VE GOT SOME DOLLARS, AGAIN, FROM THE COUNTY FOR THAT TOO.

A LOT OF PROJECTS GOING ON WITH YOUR PATHWAY SYSTEM.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY HIS SPORT CAR IS BETTER THAN HIS BOSS AND MANAGER, WE HAVE, AGAIN, DERRICK.

>> [OVERLAPPING] DAMN. POOR MANAGER [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER] WE'VE CONTRACTED WITH CORBIN DESIGN THEY'RE IN TRAVERSE CITY THEY'RE THE REGIONAL EXPERT IN WAYFINDING SIGNAGE, AND THEY'RE ASSISTING US WITH A [INAUDIBLE] [MUSIC].

>> ACADEMY SO THAT WE CAN FILL THOSE POSITIONS.

WE ALSO HAVE TWO OPENINGS WITH OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT AND THEY'RE LOOKING AT SPONSORING SOME PEOPLE THROUGH THE FIRE ACADEMY ALSO FOR THAT TO TRY TO KEEP OUR NUMBERS UP FOR THEM.

THAT'S IT FOR MY REPORT.

>> THANK YOU BOARD MEMBERS SO WE WENT THROUGH THEM ALL QUICKLY.

YOU KNOW THE TEN GOALS, COVID, SUSTAINABILITY AND DIVERSITY, DOWNTOWN AREAS.

THE BROADBAND, THE PATHWAYS TO SCIENCE, WEBSITE, AND OF COURSE MIRRORS.

ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THEY WANT TO ASK ABOUT THESE? EXPRESS ANY CONCERNS OR ADD ANYTHING [NOISE] I DON'T SEE ANY HANDS SO WE'LL CONTINUE ON WITH OUR AGENDA [NOISE] NEXT ON OUR AGENDA IS CITIZENS ADDRESSING AGENDA AND NON-AGENDA ITEMS. I'D REMIND BOARD MEMBERS RIGHT NOW AND OTHERS PARTICIPATING IN THE MEETING THAT IT'S A GOOD TIME TO TURN YOUR CELL PHONE OFF BECAUSE JUST LIKE WITH THE SUNDAY DINNER TABLE, WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE CELL PHONES INTERFERING WITH WHAT'S GOING ON AND BEING POLITE TO THE SPEAKERS FOR EACH OTHER THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE MEETING.

I WOULD REMIND THE CITIZENS WHO I CALL ON THAT WE TRIED TWO MINUTES, I GUESS I GOT SOME SUBSTANTIAL COMPLAINTS ABOUT THAT SO WE'RE GOING TO STICK WITH THE THREE MINUTES OF TALKING.

WE ASK YOU TO BE POLITE, TO ADDRESS THE BOARD AS A WHOLE, NOT INDIVIDUALS, NOT TO TALK ABOUT INDIVIDUALS BY NAME AND TO TRY AND KEEP YOUR REMARKS ON POINT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

WITH THAT I WOULD ASK MR. GIBBIS, ARE YOU CALLING ANYBODY?

>> YES. WE DO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS BOTH VIA TELEPHONE AND I BELIEVE WE'RE LIKELY BASED ON HANDS

[00:10:02]

IF PEOPLE WANT TO USE THE FEATURE IN THE ATTENDEE AREA, THEY CAN OF COURSE, USE THE RAISE HAND FEATURE AND PUT THEM ONLINE THAT WAY AS WELL.

THE FIRST CALLER IS A TELEPHONE CALL.

SIR, CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD AND THEN YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES TO MAKE YOUR COMMENTS TO THE TOWNSHIP BOARD.

>> YES. MY NAME IS TJ WALLER.

I LIVE AT 5508 OKEMOS ROAD.

I HAVE PREVIOUSLY BEEN THE VERY FIRST CHEF FOR DUSTY'S ENGLISH INN, I ALSO OWN MY OWN RESTAURANT IN OUR GREAT COMMUNITY CALLED GULLIVER'S, NOT TO BE MISTAKEN WITH THE OLD TUBE OF MUSEUM.

I ALSO WAS EXECUTIVE CHEF OF ALBION COLLEGE AND AT PRESENT, I DO A LOT OF PERSONAL CATERING FOR THE STATEWIDE BLUE WAVE FOR GOVERNOR WHITMER, JULIE BRIXIE, DANA NESSEL AND OTHERS IN OUR PARTY AND MY COMMENT RIGHT NOW IS THAT AS OF 2018, WE PASSED UNANIMOUSLY [NOISE] THE RIGHT TO HAVE LEGALIZED MARIJUANA STORES IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

NOW I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT YOU HAVE MUCH TO DO WITH SETTING UP ORDINANCES, TAX BASES, AND EVERYTHING ELSE LIKE THAT, AND SO THAT OF COURSE, WOULD TAKE TIME.

NOW WHAT I DO SERIOUSLY OBJECT TO, BEING A PERSON OF COLOR, I'M ONE OF THE FEW BLACK INDIVIDUALS THAT LIVE IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND AS TO WHY WE HAVE TO HAVE A SURVEY FOR AN AGENDA THAT WAS OVERWHELMINGLY PROPOSED.

SURVEYS IN MY MIND ARE ONLY WHEN YOU HAVE SERIOUS CONTRADICTING SIDES, AND THAT DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE THE FACT THAT 61 PERCENT OF US, EVEN IN OUR COMMUNITY OF ONLY 42,000 OR SO, HAVE OVERWHELMINGLY SAID, WE WANT THESE.

EVEN WITH ME, I DON'T WANT TO GO INTO LANSING IN ORDER TO PURCHASE MARIJUANA. I WANT TO STAY HERE.

I DON'T WANT TO GO INTO AN AREA THAT IS RUN DOWN AND I DON'T KNOW IF I'M GOING TO BE ROBBED OR NOT.

I LIKE FEELING SAFE IN MY COMMUNITY.

ALSO, YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT HERE IN OUR COMMUNITIES, WHEN WE BUILD THESE, THEY WILL BE SAFE, THEY WILL BE REGULATED, HECK I'M PRETTY SURE THEY'RE GOING TO LOOK EVEN BETTER THAN MY PHYSICIAN'S OFFICE BECAUSE WE HAVE REALLY GOOD REGULATIONS IN THIS AREA AND [OVERLAPPING] I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS.

IT SOUNDS AS IF IT'S A SPLITE ON INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE OF COLOR.

I'VE WORKED REALLY HARD TO HAVE LIVED HERE FOR 30 SOMETHING YEARS AND I THINK OF THIS IS NEEDED.

I THINK THAT'S ABOUT ALL I HAVE TO SAY.

>> PERFECT TIMING BECAUSE YOUR TIME JUST RAN OUT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENTS [NOISE]

>> WE HAVE ANOTHER CALLER.

STANDBY PLEASE.

MAKE SURE THAT YOU TURN YOUR VOLUME DOWN IN THE BACKGROUND, BUT PLEASE BEGIN YOUR COMMENTS WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.

>> OKAY. WHEN CAN I START?

>> YOU'RE GOING, BUT YOU'RE GOING TO NEED TO TURN DOWN THE VOLUME OF THE MEETING IN THE BACKGROUND.

>> OKAY. MY NAME IS CAROLINE RAYNETTE.

I LIVE AT 256 WEST GRAND RIVER OKEMOS AND I HAVE BEEN A RESIDENT OF OKEMOS FOR 62 YEARS.

I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THE OTHER PERSONS ON THE BOARD, WHY THEY ARE SUPPORTING , WHAT ARE THEIR VIEWS ON SUPPORTING THIS RETAIL RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA SHOP IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP, AND HOW THEY THINK IT WILL ENHANCE THE LIVING HERE.

I FEEL IT'S GOING TO COST US MORE IN POLICE PROTECTION AND HAVING THIS ISN'T AREAS OF EAST LANSING AND PARTICULARLY [INAUDIBLE] LANSING.

I REALLY DON'T KNOW HOW OKEMOS COULD CALL THEMSELVES THE PRIME LOCATION IF WE ESTABLISH THESE RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA FACILITIES.

[00:15:03]

I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE MEDICAL ONES, BUT THE RECREATIONAL ONES, SEEMS THERE'S PLENTY OF THEM NEAR ENOUGH AND MOST PEOPLE WOULD HAVE TO DRIVE TO THEM ANYWAYS.

I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS, SO NOT THE ONES THAT USUALLY SPEAK ABOUT THIS. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. WE'RE READY FOR OUR NEXT CALLER.

>> NEXT WILL BE TAKING A CALL FROM J-O-F-F-E-T-L-L-C IN ZOOM.

YOU HAVE BEEN ENABLED TO SPEAK AND IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE MUTED.

PLEASE REMEMBER TO UNMUTE YOURSELF BEGINNING YOUR COMMENT WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD. THANK YOU.

>> GOOD EVENING, MEMBERS OF THE TOWNSHIP BOARD.

MY NAME IS OWEN FRANCS AND MY ADDRESS IS 334 EAST WASHINGTON STREET, ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN.

I BELIEVE THAT WITHOUT LETTING RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA ESTABLISHMENTS INTO THE TOWNSHIP, YOU WOULD BE ALLOWING BLACK MARKET PROLIFERATION IN YOUR COMMUNITY.

WHEN YOU HAVE A STATE LICENSE PROVISIONING CENTER OR RETAIL OUTLET, THERE ARE SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS IN PLACE, THE POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENT KNOW THE LAYOUTS AND KNOW THEY HAVE ACCESS TO ANY VIDEO FOOTAGE, AND CRIMINALS KNOW THAT THEY ARE UNDER HEAVY SECURITY.

WHEREAS IF YOU HAVE BLACK MARKET OUTLETS, WHICH GENERALLY OCCUR IN SOMEONE'S HOME OR GARAGE, CUSTOMERS ARE POSSIBLY GETTING THEMSELVES INTO DANGEROUS SITUATIONS AND POLICE DON'T KNOW WHERE THESE DEALS ARE TAKING PLACE.

PERMITTING RECREATIONAL ESTABLISHMENTS WOULD MAKE IT SAFER FOR CONSUMERS AND BUSINESS OWNERS TO BUY AND SELL MARIJUANA PRODUCT.

THE BLACK MARKET ALSO PRODUCES PRODUCT THAT MAY BE LACED WITH HARMFUL SUBSTANCES, IT MAY CONTAIN MOLD, MILDEW OR CHEMICAL, AND EVEN METALS.

CONSUMERS COULD BE ASSURED THAT IF THEY'RE PURCHASING PRODUCTS FROM A STATE LICENSED FACILITY, THE PRODUCT HAS PASSED RIGOROUS TESTING, ENSURING THE SAFEST OUTCOME FOR CONSUMERS.

FINALLY, AS A PREVIOUS CALLER HAD NOTED, THE CITIZENS OF MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP VOTED IN FAVOR OF THE MRTMA AT A RATE OF NEARLY 61 PERCENT.

THE TOWNSHIP SHOULD NOT WANT TO OPPOSE THE WILL OF ITS CONSTITUENTS BY DECLINING TO PERMIT RECREATIONAL ESTABLISHMENTS.

I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS TIME.

>> NEXT WE HAVE A CALLER, MS. [INAUDIBLE] CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD?

>> JOYCE [INAUDIBLE] 582 OKEMOS ROAD.

>> GO AHEAD, MA'AM.

>> SUPERVISORS, WELCOME MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.

I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ABOUT USE OF MARIJUANA AS WELL.

REGARDLESS OF WHICH SIDE OF THE AISLE YOU'RE ON THIS ISSUE, I BELIEVE IT'S CRITICAL THAT WE DO A CITIZEN'S SURVEY.

I'VE SPOKEN TO A NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT AREN'T EVEN AWARE THAT THIS IS UNDER DISCUSSION.

BUT I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE GET MORE INPUT FROM THE COMMUNITY AND I HOPE YOU TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. NEXT WE HAVE MAY IN THE ZOOM AREA, YOU'VE BEEN ENABLED TO SPEAK, PLEASE UNMUTE YOURSELF, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD PLEASE.

>> MY NAME IS MAY YO.

I'M LIVING IN IN 2690 MORNING GLORY DRIVE, OKEMOS.

I'M ALSO WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE TOPIC ABOUT OPENING RECREATION MARIJUANA STORES IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

I'M SO SURPRISED TO HEAR SOME RECENT TALKING ABOUT THE MARIJUANA.

IT'S WACK, IT HURT OUR HEALTH.

IT'S HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED IN THE SCIENTIFIC WORLD.

IF WE GO TO THE WEBSITE OF THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DRUG ABUSE, THERE WERE OVER 100 REFERENCE PAPERS THAT HAS BEEN MENTIONED THAT MARIJUANA COULD IMPAIR OUR TEMPORARY MEMORY AND ALSO IT COULD DISTORT OUR PERCEPTION, WHICH COULD CAUSE DRIVING BE DANGEROUS.

[5. CITIZENS ADDRESS AGENDA ITEMS AND NON-AGENDA ITEMS]

ALSO THERE IS A STUDY SHOWS THAT IF A NON-SMOKER WHO'S EXPOSED THERE FOR OVER AN HOUR OF MARIJUANA IN AN UNVENTILATED ROOM, COULD HAVE POSITIVE TESTS IN THE URINE.

[00:20:04]

THE FOLLOW-UP STUDY DISPLAY THE IMPAIRMENT AND PERFORMANCE MOTOR SKILLS.

THOSE ARE EVIDENCE THAT MARIJUANA COULD BE HURT OUR HEALTH.

WHY BRING THIS KIND OF THINGS TO OUR COMMUNITY? ALSO I WENT TO THE FEBRUARY 16TH BOARD MEETING, IT SEEMS LIKE THIS PURPOSE TO BRING THAT IS A FINANCIAL REASON, BUT IF I COULD REMEMBER A NUMBER CORRECT, IT WILL BE BRINGING OVER 150,000 TAX REVENUES.

BUT CONCERNED ABOUT THE ADMINISTRATION'S ADDITIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT THAT COULD CENTER ITSELF THIS ADDITIONAL FEES COULD EASILY PASS THAT THEY CAUSE.

I JUST DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS NOT A GOOD IDEA TO BRING THE RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA STORES INTO OUR COMMUNITY.

I HAVE TO SAY I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE MEDICAL BECAUSE FOR THOSE SPECIAL NEED PATIENT THAT IS COMPROMISED WITH ALREADY.

BUT FOR HEALTHY PEOPLE, THERE IS NO WING FOR BRING THIS RECREATION MARIJUANA INTO OUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU.

>> MAY WILL BE FOLLOWED BY VANCE.

VANCE, YOU'RE MUTED, BUT UNMUTE YOURSELF AND YOU CAN BEGIN WITH YOUR COMMENTS WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD, PLEASE.

>> ALL RIGHT. VANCE PACKET, 2226 10TH STREET OKEMOS.

I HAVE JUST A COMMENT ON THE RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA.

RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA IS HERE AND HAS BEEN HERE AND WAS APPROVED BY THE TOWNSHIP VOTERS.

NEVERTHELESS, GIVEN THAT THE TOWNSHIP IS PRIMARILY A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY, IT IS IMPORTANT THAT IN MAKING THE BOARD'S DECISION THAT YOU LEAN TOWARDS ADDRESSING THE QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS THAT RESIDENTS HAVE.

THE INCONVENIENCE CREATED BY THE NEED FOR OTHERS TO GO OUTSIDE OF THE TOWNSHIP FOR THEIR RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA USE IS OUTWEIGHED BY THE CONCERNS AND EVEN ANXIETY OF THE RESIDENTS IN THE COMMUNITY.

IN ANY EVENT, THERE IS NO IMMEDIATE NEED FOR RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA FACILITIES IN A TOWNSHIP AT THIS POINT. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER [INAUDIBLE]

>> YES, VANCE WILL BE FOLLOWED BY MARY WALLER, PLEASE.

>> HI, MY NAME'S MARY WALLER.

I LIVE AT 5508 OKEMOS ROAD.

IF I'M TO UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY WHAT IS BEING CONSIDERED THIS EVENING IS WHETHER TO SPEND $10,000 ON A SURVEY OF A RANDOM SAMPLING OF THE TOWNSHIP.

SINCE THIS WAS ALREADY VOTED ON, IT SEEMS THAT HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE PEOPLE.

I'VE SEEN A HOMEWORK THAT THE BOARD HAS BEEN DOING, YOU GUYS ARE DOING A LOT OF REALLY GOOD RESEARCH, A REALLY GOOD HOMEWORK ON THIS.

I SAW THE SURVEY THAT WAS ALREADY DONE BY THE ROYAL OAK.

SOMEBODY ALREADY DID THAT YOU COULD TAKE THEIR FINDINGS WE'RE NOT THAT MUCH DIFFERENT FROM THEM.

AS FAR AS OUR VOTES GO, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE OUR VOTES COUNT.

I DON'T WANT OUR VOTES TO BE DISMISSED BY A SMALL VOCAL GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE WITH SOMETHING THAT THE MAJORITY HAS ALREADY VOTED ON.

WE'VE SEEN THAT HAPPEN A DIFFERENT SCALE.

THANK GOODNESS WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY IN MOOSE HEAD EARS RUNNING AROUND PROTESTING IN FRONT OF THE TOWNSHIP BUILDING.

BUT AT THIS POINT, WHY SPEND THE MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO ON A SURVEY THAT'S BEEN DECIDED.

JUST KEEP DOING YOUR GOOD WORK, CRAFT THE ORDINANCE.

WE TRUST YOU TO DO IT, THAT'S WHAT WE ELECTED YOU TO DO. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. [NOISE]

>> NEXT WE HAVE A TELEPHONE CALLER.

[00:25:01]

MA'AM, PLEASE BEGIN YOUR COMMENTS WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD.

>> HI, MY NAME IS MANUELLA CROSS AND I LIVE AT 1376 [INAUDIBLE].

ONE OF THE REASONS I MOVED TO MY CURRENT HOUSE IS BECAUSE I MOVED OUT OF MY CONDO AT LAKE OF THE HILLS BECAUSE OF MY NEXT-DOOR NEIGHBOR WHO SMOKED POT ALL DAY EVERY DAY.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE CONSIDERING THE SMELL, ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS DRIVE DOWN STREETS IN LANSING AND I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT MY PROPERTY VALUE.

I BOUGHT THE HOUSE IN HASLETT BECAUSE OF THE GOOD SCHOOLS, BECAUSE OF THE NICE NEIGHBORHOOD AND I'M EXTREMELY CONCERNED ABOUT HOW MY PROPERTY VALUE IS GOING TO BE IMPACTED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD SMELLING LIKE SKUNK WEED WHEN SOMEBODY COMES AND LOOKS AT MY HOUSE WHEN I PUT IT ON THE MARKET.

>> THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER?

>> THE NEXT SPEAKER IS MAY, BUT MAY HAS ALREADY SPOKEN.

THAT'S THE LAST HAND WE HAD RAISED.

THERE'S ONLY ONE SHOT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT HERE.

I SEE OTHER HANDS GOING UP AND DOWN.

STANDBY, PLEASE.

THE NEXT SPEAKER WITH KEVIN [INAUDIBLE].

REMEMBER TO UNMUTE YOURSELF AND BEGIN YOUR COMMENT WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD, PLEASE.

>> HI, GOOD EVENING BOARD MEMBERS, THIS IS KEVIN [INAUDIBLE] , 2619 MORNING GLORY.

SO I SENT AN E-MAIL TO THIS BOARD ABOUT AN HOUR AGO, SEND IN MY COMMENTS AND OPINIONS AND THERE ARE SOME LINKS THERE.

I WAS JUST TRYING TO CONFIRM THAT I'M GOING TO POST THE IDEA OF CREATING RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA STORES IN THIS TOWNSHIP.

I'M A LONG-TERM MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP RESIDENT AND I MOVED OVER HERE BECAUSE THIS TOWNSHIP HAS BEEN WELL-KNOWN FOR ITS RICH, SAFE, DIVERSE, AND EDUCATION-FRIENDLY ENVIRONMENT FOR RAISING KIDS.

OBVIOUSLY, THE REAL ESTATE, MY PROPERTY VALUE IS MY MAJOR CONCERN HERE.

MANY OF TIMES, WE'VE REALLY EARNED A PRIME COMMUNITY TITLE AND WE'RE ALL PROUD OF BEING PART OF IT, SO WE WOULD WANT TO KEEP THE HARD WORK AND TO KEEP THE REPUTATION THERE.

IF WE LOOK AT HISTORY, HOW WE MADE THIS COMMITTEE PRIME, IT BECOMES MORE CLEAR, THE VALUE WE VALUE THE MOST FOR THIS COMMITTEE IS NOT BECAUSE OF THE DRUGSTORE, SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

IT IS DEFINITELY NOT BECAUSE WE MAKE IT SUPER EASY FOR PEOPLE TO OBTAIN THE MARIJUANAS.

ALSO BASED ON SOME RELATED RESEARCH, [INAUDIBLE] WITH SOME COLLEGE, BUT NOT A BACHELOR'S DEGREE, MOST LIKELY TO USE MARIJUANA.

I HAVE A LINK IN THE E-MAIL IF YOU IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN IT.

TO ME, THE RIGHT WAY TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM IS TO CREATE EDUCATION-FRIENDLY ENVIRONMENT, TO RAISE OUR KIDS DOING THE RIGHT THING.

THAT'S HOW WE SOLVE THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM.

THE PEOPLE IN THIS COMMITTEE ALREADY KNOW THIS BECAUSE WE WORKED VERY HARD AND EARNED THIS TITLE, THE PRIMARY COMMUNITY TITLE.

WE NEVER NEEDED TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION.

IN THE PAST WHEN WE OPEN A COSTCO STORE, BECAUSE PEOPLE KNOW IT.

BECAUSE WHAT'S WRONG WITH RIGHT? WE'RE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION IS BECAUSE PEOPLE KNOW THIS IS NOT RIGHT THING TO DO.

ALSO, I HAVE LEARNED THE MAJORITY OF OUR REVENUE FROM THE TOWNSHIP IS FROM THE REAL ESTATE TAX [OVERLAPPING] TO ME, THE BEST WAY TO MAINTAIN THIS IS OBVIOUSLY MAKING THIS MORE ATTRACTIVE COMMUNITY, NOT BY PUSHING PEOPLE OUT OF IT.

I HAVE A GREAT CONFIDENCE THE BOARD MEMBERS WILL HELP MAKE THIS PRIME COMMUNITY EVEN BETTER. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS?

>> MR. [INAUDIBLE] WILL BE FOLLOWED BY MS. WEI. I'M SORRY.

>> CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY?

>> YES, SIR. NAME AND RECORD FOR THE PUBLIC [OVERLAPPING].

>> SURE. MY NAME IS WEI LI, I LIVE IN 2565 SOPHIA PARKWAY [INAUDIBLE] [BACKGROUND] AS A [INAUDIBLE] RESIDENT AND A PARENT WITH KIDS IN SCHOOL, I ALSO WANT TO ECHO PEOPLE EARLIER SPOKE BEFORE ME.

I WANT TO UPHOLD THE OPENING OF RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA STORES AND I BELIEVE THE PROPOSALS REALLY BE UNDER TODAY WITHOUT A PUBLIC SURVEY.

[00:30:02]

ONE OF MY CONCERNS IS A [INAUDIBLE] , MAYBE IT'S NOT THE INCREASE OF USING THE USE.

THERE'S A REQUIREMENT FOR THE STORES TO BE FAR AWAY FROM SCHOOL FOR A REASON, A CERTAIN DISTANCE IS THERE FOR OBVIOUS REASON.

AMONG THE TOP PUBLIC SCHOOLS, ONLY ON [INAUDIBLE] AND THE GRAND RAPIDS ARE ONLY TWO DISTRICTS IN MICHIGAN THAT IS HAVING THIS RECREATIONAL USE.

THERE'S REALLY NO GUARANTEE ONCE THE STORES ARE OPENED THAT WILL NOT NEGATIVELY INFLUENCE SOME PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN OUR DISTRICT.

I ALSO FULLY AGREE WITH [INAUDIBLE] AND THE FORMER TOWNSHIP MANAGER AND TERRY RICHARDS.

IT ISN'T TOO RISKY TO OPT-IN AT THIS MOMENT AND [INAUDIBLE] IS NUMBER ONE AND HASLETT IS NUMBER 13, PASSED [INAUDIBLE] TO LIVE IN MICHIGAN.

IT'S TOO RISKY TO PUT THIS IN NOW, [INAUDIBLE] WHAT ARGUMENT I OFTEN HEAR FROM PEOPLE IS IT'S THE SAME THING WITH TOBACCO AND ALCOHOL, BUT IT'S NOT THE SAME THING.

THAT ARGUMENT IS [INAUDIBLE] THE OBVIOUS DIFFERENCE IS THOSE THINGS ARE LEGAL AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, AND ALSO THERE ARE PLENTY OF STORES AROUND US, IN THE SURROUNDING TOWNSHIP LIKE WILLIAMSON AND HART.

MARIJUANA IS OBVIOUSLY VERY DIFFERENT BECAUSE IT IS GOING TO MAKE US SPECIAL IN THE LARGE AREA.

THE NEXT THING I'M GOING TO MENTION IS THE TOWNSHIP BOARD AND [INAUDIBLE] MAKE A PROMISE IN 2019 THAT A TOWNSHIP WANTS TO HAVE ONE YEAR OF EXPERIENCE BEFORE WE OPT IN FOR THIS RECREATIONAL USE.

I CAN TELL NOW THAT PROMISE HAS BEEN HAS BEEN BROKEN IF YOU [INAUDIBLE].

AS OFFICIALS, YOU NEED TO KEEP YOUR OWN WORDS AND SO DON'T BREAK YOUR PROMISE.

ABOUT THE SURVEY ITSELF.

I MEAN, THE SURVEY IS FINE, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THE SURVEY IS FAIR AND BALANCED.

HOW DO WE ENSURE THAT PEOPLE IN THE SURROUNDING DISTRICTS SUCH AS WILLIAMSON, THEY WANT TO USE OUR STORES.

HOW DO WE PREVENT THEM FROM COMMENTING ON THE SURVEY IN FAVOR OF ESTABLISHING THOSE RETAIL STORES? IT IS THE CITY CONCERN AS WELL BECAUSE IT'S ONE THING,

>> HALF A MINUTE.

>> SURE. IT'S GOING TO BE TWO STORES AND THEY HAVE 100 POLICE PERSONNEL AND ALSO MSU HAS A LOT TO ADD TO IT.

WE ONLY HAVE 150-SOMETHING POLICE OFFICERS.

DO YOU HAVE ANY PLAN TO OPEN MORE POSITIONS IN THE POLICE FORCE BEFORE YOU OPEN THOSE STORES? BECAUSE SOME PREVIOUS COMMENT, THERE'S ALSO EMPHASIZE AND SAFETY.

THE SAFETY COMES WITH A COST, SO WITHOUT ANY PERSONNEL IN ADDITION TO WHAT WE HAVE NOW, THERE'S NO REASSURANCE THAT IT WILL BE SAFE [NOISE].

THE LAST MEETING I HEARD PEOPLE SPEAKING ALLOWED TO SUPPORT THIS, BUT THOSE PEOPLE ARE FROM A MARIJUANA INDUSTRY.

YOU'LL HAVE A FINANCIAL INTEREST IN THIS.

WE HAVE TO TAKE THEIR OPINION WITH A GRAIN OF SALT AND [OVERLAPPING] TIME'S UP, SIR.

>> SO WE'LL KEEP [INAUDIBLE] FIRST WHERE YOU'RE PUTTING THE FINANCIAL INTERESTS BEFORE OUR LOCAL [INAUDIBLE] THANK YOU.

>> HE WILL BE FOLLOWED BY LYNN PAGE.

LYNN PAGE, YOU'LL NEED TO UNMUTE YOURSELF TO MAKE YOUR COMMENTS.

>> HI, IT'S LYNN PAGE.

3912, RALEIGH DRIVE IN OKEMOS.

I JUST WANTED TO QUOTE FROM STATEWIDE BALLOT PROPOSAL 18-1 THAT WAS APPROVED BY MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP VOTERS TO DECRIMINALIZE PERSONAL ADULT-USE RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA.

WHAT ACTUALLY APPEARED ON THE BALLOT WAS A BULLET POINT THAT SAID, CREATE THE STATE LICENSING SYSTEM FOR MARIJUANA BUSINESSES AND ALLOW MUNICIPALITIES TO BAN OR RESTRICT THEM.

IN FACT, CLOSE TO 1,400 MUNICIPALITIES IN MICHIGAN HAVE BANNED COMMERCIAL MARIJUANA BUSINESSES.

I BELIEVE USING THE ZONING ORDINANCES ADOPTED FOR MEDICAL MARIJUANA AS A TEMPLATE FOR COMMERCIAL MARIJUANA IS EXCESSIVE AND INAPPROPRIATE.

I DON'T THINK MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP NEEDS 21 COMMERCIAL MARIJUANA FACILITIES INCLUDING SIX PROVISIONING CENTERS.

I BELIEVE THAT, LIKE MOST ISSUES THAT COME BEFORE THE TOWNSHIP BOARD, THIS IS A LAND-USE ISSUE AND IT HAS IMPORTANT ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, PUBLIC SAFETY, AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES.

I BELIEVE RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA BUSINESSES WILL PLACE A HUGE UNNECESSARY BURDEN ON OUR INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE DEMAND FOR PUBLIC SERVICES AND I'VE ASKED YOU TO PLEASE CONTINUE TO

[00:35:04]

PROHIBIT COMMERCIAL RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA BUSINESSES IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

I ALSO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE TIMING OF THIS INITIATIVE DURING A PANDEMIC WHEN RESIDENTS MAY NOT BE AWARE OF THIS ISSUE AND/OR MAY NOT HAVE THE TIME OR RESOURCES NECESSARY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DISCUSSION DUE TO YOUR VIRTUAL MEETINGS.

THE ACCELERATED CONSIDERATION OF THIS INITIATIVE RAISES A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER COMMITMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE TO COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES WITHOUT SEEKING INPUT FROM RESIDENTS AND IN THE ABSENCE OF PREVIOUSLY PROMISED DATA.

THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERING MY INPUT.

>> LYNN PAGE WILL BE FOLLOWED BY MARCUS BALDORI.

HI, CAN YOU HEAR ME?

>> MY NAME IS MARK [INAUDIBLE] AT 567 MOUNT HOPE ROAD, OPENNESS, MICHIGAN.

I'VE LIVED IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP FOR 29 YEARS.

I'M FALLING IN SUPPORT OF RECREATIONAL FACILITIES.

I JUST WANT TO REITERATE WHAT OTHER PARTICIPANTS HAVE STATED ALREADY.

ESSENTIALLY JUST THE COST AND CONTINUED DELAY OF GOING FORWARD WITH A SURVEY.

I THINK IT'S PRETTY CLEAR THAT THE MAJORITY OF MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS DO SUPPORT RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA BEING AVAILABLE.

ANYBODY IN SUPPORT A MEDICAL IN THE COMMUNITY, THOSE FACILITIES WON'T BE VIABLE, AS WAS STATED IN THE LAST MEETING, UNTIL RECREATIONAL IS ALLOWED TO GO ON WITH IT.

I THINK THAT THE TOWNSHIP WOULD BE BETTER SUITED SPENDING TIME CRAFTING AN ORDINANCE THAT IS FAIR AND TAKES EVERYTHING INTO CONSIDERATION.

I UNDERSTAND THERE'S A VARIETY OF CONSIDERATIONS AND ISSUES INVOLVED WITH THAT.

I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE TIME SHOULD BE SPENT.

IN REGARDS TO PEOPLE HAVING ACCESS TO BEING ABLE TO JOIN THIS DISCUSSION.

THAT SEEMS STRANGE.

IT'S PRETTY EASY TO JUST CALL IN.

PEOPLE HAVE A LOT OF TIME ON THEIR HANDS.

I THINK PEOPLE ARE PRETTY WELL AWARE OF THIS ISSUE.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO ADD. THANK YOU.

>> NEXT WILL BE LETS [INAUDIBLE].

>> YOU'RE MUTED.

[OVERLAPPING]. YES. HELLO. MY NAME IS [INAUDIBLE].

I LIVE ON 4568 HAWTHORNE IN OKEMOS.

I'M A LONG TIME RESIDENT OF MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

I HAVE TO SAY THAT I DO AGREE WITH MY PREVIOUS SPEAKER THAT THE LANGUAGE OF THE BALLOT WHERE IT WAS QUITE SPECIFIC ABOUT WHAT WE HAVE VOTED ON.

WE VOTED ON DECRIMINALIZING MARIJUANA, NOT ON BUILDING FACILITIES IN OUR TOWNSHIP.

I KILLED THE LANGUAGE THAT MAJORITY OF MERIDIAN VOTERS, MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS, ARE IN FAVOR OF RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA.

WELL, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT IS THERE.

I'M ACTUALLY AGAINST BUILDING FACILITIES AND KINDLY REQUEST THAT THE TOWNSHIP RUN AN INFORMATION CAMPAIGN ABOUT THE IMPACT ON OUR PEER AND THE SIMILAR COMMUNITIES, AND THAT THEY ORGANIZE CONSULTATION WITH COMMUNITY LEADERS, TEACHERS, LAW ENFORCEMENT LEGAL AUTHORITIES AND EVEN HIGH-SCHOOL STUDENTS BECAUSE MOST LIKELY THOSE WILL BE THE SEGMENT OF POPULATION TARGETED BY MARIJUANA INDUSTRY AND PROVIDE FINANCIAL ANALYSIS, WHICH IS INDEPENDENT OF THE ANALYSIS PROVIDED BY THE INDUSTRY.

FINALLY, AFTER THE COMMUNITY OBTAINS SUCH INFORMATION, I WOULD KINDLY REQUEST AN ADMINISTRATION OF A COMMUNITY SURVEY.

MY RATIONALE IS THAT THE INDUSTRY REPRESENTATIVES PRESENTED A VERY WEAK AND HIGHLY BIASED CASE OF OUR COMMUNITY PROSPERING FINANCIALLY AND INCREASING EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES AND AT THE SAME TIME SOLVING PROBLEMS WITH ILLEGAL STATEMENTS AND AT THE SAME TIME INTRODUCING A COMPLETELY HARMLESS SUBSTANCE IN A SECURE AND SAFE ENVIRONMENT.

I BELIEVE IT IS QUITE UNUSUAL FOR ALL OF THE ABOVE TO BE TRUE FOR CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES.

[00:40:05]

WE'RE ALSO TOLD THAT THERE WOULD BE A BENEFIT OF $150,000 OR WHATEVER DOLLARS IN SALES.

WELL, WHERE EXACTLY WILL THE MONEY COME FROM? LET'S SAY IF I SPEND 100 BUCKS ON MARIJUANA.

>> JUST A MINUTE.

>> THANK YOU, I WILL NOT SPEND THE SAME 100 BUCKS ON FARMER'S MARKET.

I THINK FINANCIAL ANALYSIS IS CRUCIAL.

[BACKGROUND] ON THE PERSONAL NOTE, I JUST REASONED TO WHY BIRDS ARE LIMITED IN THE LANDSCAPE.

I HAD TO DRIVE TO LANDSCAPE BUY STUFF, AND THEY MOVED OUT, WHO MOVED IN? E-CIGARETTES. IT'S SAD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU. [NOISE] WE HAVE NO OTHER HANDS RAISED AT THIS TIME.

THERE ARE NO CALLS COMING IN.

I'M GOING TO SUGGEST YOU WAIT ABOUT A SECOND TO MAKE SURE NO ONE ELSE WANTS TO RAISE THEIR HAND.

SIMPLY BECAUSE WE'VE SEEN A LOT OF HANDS GOING UP AND DOWN THROUGHOUT THE PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT I'M SEEING NO MORE HANDS GO UP, SIR, THE MEETING IS YOURS.

WE NOW GO ON TO TOWNSHIP MANAGERS.

>> THANK YOU, MR. SUPERVISOR AND BOARD. I'LL BE BRIEF.

YOU CAN EXPECT THE PRIME MERIDIAN MAGAZINE, THE FIRST ONE IN A LONG TIME TO BE IN YOUR MAILBOX WITHIN THE NEXT WEEK.

OUR DEAR COUNT IS AT 304, WE HAVE 25 MORE TAGS TO GO, 176 BY THE ARCHIE PROGRAM AND 128 THROUGH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, A WELL-MANAGED PROGRAM WHEN I CREDIT THE LEADERSHIP THAT'S BEEN INVOLVED WITH IT.

THERE'S A MAJOR REZONING COMING UP ON JOLLY ROAD NEXT TO KANSAS.

IT'LL BE IN FRONT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON MARCH 8TH, CHECK IN WITH OUR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OFFICE IF YOU'VE QUESTIONS.

WE'VE HAD WITH THE [INAUDIBLE] LIBRARY AND A FOOD PANTRY ALLOCATION, WE'VE SECURED ALLOCATION FOR ONE.

I BELIEVE GRANT SHOULD BE ANNOUNCED FOR PUBLIC ART, WHICH WE'RE HOPING TO HAVE IT AT THE MARKETPLACE, THAT SHOULD BE ANNOUNCED IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS.

THERE'S A POTENTIAL FOR A REDEVELOPMENT ON GRAND RIVER AND POL THAT'S WHERE ALL OF [INAUDIBLE] CAME IN AND CLEAR CUT, IF YOU REMEMBER.

I GUESS THEY'RE IN A POTENTIAL PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH A DEVELOPER OF SENIOR HOUSING.

WE'RE MEETING WITH THEM TOMORROW OUR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, THE DEVELOPERS ARE OUT OF VIRGINIA AND SOUTH CAROLINA.

I'LL BE SETTING A YOUR POLICY ON PREVAILING WAGES THAT WAS PASSED, I BELIEVE IT WAS A YEAR AGO.

THAT'S BEING CHALLENGED AND WE WILL BE BRINGING THAT TO YOU ON MARCH 16TH TO DISCUSS, BUT I WANT TO GET IT OUT TO YOU SO YOU CAN REVIEW WHAT YOU HAVE TO DECIDE HOW YOU WANT TO GO FORWARD WITH THAT.

THE SMART ZONES, I SENT YOU SOME INFORMATION TODAY ON THAT.

DR. CLARK IS WORKING ON THAT AND YOU CAN EXPECT THAT ALSO COMING UP IN THE NEXT MONTH.

SOME DISCUSSION ON THE LDF, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FINANCE AUTHORITY AND SMART ZONES IN JOINING WITH EAST LANSING.

FINALLY ENDING ON A HIGH NOTE, I WANT TO THANK YOU [INAUDIBLE]. THE [INAUDIBLE] IS ON OUR STAFF.

HE'S ONE OF OUR PES AND HE YESTERDAY CELEBRATED 32 YEARS OF SERVICE WITH THE TOWNSHIP.

HE'S ONE OF THREE THAT HELPED DESIGN THE OKEMOS ROAD BOARDWALK.

WELL, WE SAID THE COST OF TAKING THAT EXTERNALLY AND JADA SPOKE UP, I THINK IT WAS WITH NILE AND MAYBE JAMIE PERRY AND SAID, ''HEY, WE CAN DESIGN THIS OURSELVES,'' AND SO CONGRATULATIONS, I DID SAY TWO OF YOU, NOW YOU'VE GOT NINE YEARS TO CATCH UP WITH DIRECTOR KEITH SLOVAK, AND HE SAID, ''NO, THANK YOU.'' I DON'T EXPECT THEM TO BE HERE ANOTHER NINE YEARS, BUT ANYWAY, HE DOES A GREAT JOB FOR US. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT REPORT.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE MANAGER? ALL MEMBERS? OKAY I DON'T SEE ANY HANDS OR ANYTHING.

WE'LL LAND TO THE APPROVAL ON THE [INAUDIBLE] REPORTS OF ACTIVITIES AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. TREASURER.

>> THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR. QUICK REPORT TONIGHT.

FIRST, THREE MEETINGS I HAVE ATTENDED IN THE PAST TWO WEEKS ON THE 17TH WAS A CATAPULT BOARD MEETING, WHICH I AM NOW THE TOWNSHIP BOARD REPRESENTATIVE FOR CAT IN THE MIDST OF RENEGOTIATING IT'S LABOR CONTRACTS.

THEY [INAUDIBLE] HAVE BEEN GOING FOR A YEAR WITHOUT A CONTRACT.

BOTH SIDES ARE PRETTY DUG IN ON THAT ISSUE BUT THERE WAS SOME FACT-FINDING AND HOPEFULLY A RESOLUTION SOON.

THE 20TH, WE HAD OUR BOARD RETREAT.

WHICH THE ENTIRE BOARD WAS THERE, PRESENT FOR AND MAYBE AT A FUTURE MEETING WE CAN DO A FULL REPORT TO THE COMMUNITY ON THAT.

THEN LAST MONDAY WAS THE DDA MEETING I ATTENDED AS A VISITOR, NOT AS A PARTICIPANT.

TODAY IS MARCH 2, IT WAS THE LAST DAY TO PAY YOUR TAXES HERE IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

IF YOU HAVEN'T PAID YOUR PROPERTY TAXES YET, AFTER TODAY YOU NEED TO PAY THEM IN MASON WITH THE INGHAM COUNTY TREASURE.

FORTUNATELY, OUR NUMBERS FOR TAX PAYMENTS ARE

[00:45:03]

VERY GOOD THIS YEAR DESPITE THE COVID PANDEMIC.

NINETY-NINE PERCENT OF LAST YEAR'S TAX RECEIPTS ARE IN.

THAT'S GOOD NEWS. OUR FINANCIAL POSITION IS STRONGLY THIS YEAR DUE TO OUR RESIDENTS MAKING TAX PAYMENT A PRIORITY. THANK YOU TO OUR RESIDENTS.

>> THANK YOU. OTHER BOARD MEMBERS? MAY REPORTS. YES, [INAUDIBLE] JACKSON.

>> ON THE 23RD OF FEBRUARY, I ATTENDED THE MONTHLY TRI-COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION BOARD MEETING AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE MANAGED TO DO IS AMEND THE CURRENT TIP, TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.

I BELIEVE THAT PARTICULAR SET OF AMENDMENTS INCLUDED THE CHANGES THAT THE TOWNSHIP HAS APPARENTLY SOUGHT AT GRAND RIVER, DOLBY ROAD AND CENTRAL PARK, WHICH INVOLVES TRAFFIC LIKE CHANGES IN TRAFFIC MOVEMENT? THAT IS THE END OF MY REPORT.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS?

>> IT WAS ALREADY MENTIONED I HAD THE DDA MEETING ON MONDAY AND WE ALL ATTENDED OUR RETREAT LAST SATURDAY.

ANYBODY ELSE? YES, [INAUDIBLE]

>> I JUST WANTED TO REMIND THE BOARD AND THE PUBLIC THAT THE LAND PRESERVATION ADVISORY BOARD IS STILL LOOKING AT POSSIBLE RENAMING FOR THE LAND PRESERVED.

IF YOU HAVE ANY INPUT, PLEASE GO TO LAST MONTH'S PACKET FOR THE LAND PRESERVATION ADVISORY BOARD AND REVIEW THE PERSPECTIVE NAMES THAT HAVE BEEN OUTLINED AND FEEL FREE TO GET FEEDBACK ON THAT.

JUST ONE OTHER ISSUE OF NOTE TO [INAUDIBLE] REPORTED ON WITH THE DOLBY CENTRAL PARK AND GRAND RIVER LIGHT.

SPECIFICALLY, THE LIGHT CHANGES HAVING GREEN ARROWS FROM CENTRAL PARK AND DOLBY AND TO GRAND RIVER WHICH A LOT OF RESIDENTS HAVE ASKED FOR QUITE FREQUENTLY.

COUNTY COMMISSIONER MARK PAUL STARTFORD WHO ALSO IS WORKING AT M DOT, REPORTED TO ME LAST WEEK THEY'RE LOOKING AT SEPTEMBER PROSPECTIVELY FOR THAT CONSTRUCTION. THANK YOU.

>> KNOWING HOW THOSE THINGS GO, THAT'S ACTUALLY QUITE FAST.

OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? BOARD MEMBERS? I DON'T SEE ANY MORE HANDS.

WE'LL WILL MOVE ON THEN TO THE APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA, TREASURER.

>> I MOVE THE AGENDA BE APPROVED AS PRESENTED.

>> TRUSTEE JACKSON.

>> [INAUDIBLE]

>> OKAY. MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED.

WE NEED A VOTE DOWN THE APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA.

>> I'VE GOT THREE VOTES, YES.

>> ALL RIGHT. MOTION APPROVED, 7- 0.

>> OKAY [NOISE] OUR FIRST CATEGORY, AREA NUMBER NINE ON OUR AGENDA IS THE CONSENT AGENDA.

THIS INCLUDES COMMUNICATIONS, A MINUTE FOR TWO MEETINGS.

THE FEBRUARY 16 VIRTUAL STUDY SESSION AND THE FEBRUARY 20 VIRTUAL BOARD RETREAT.

OUR GOALS. DISPOSAL OF SURPLUS ITEMS, A REQUEST FOR SECTION 61 REVIEW FOR PROPOSED LAND ACQUISITION FOR PARKS AND ELECTION POLLING LOCATION CHANGES.

WOULD SOMEONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? TRUSTEE WISINSKI.

>> I'M MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.

>> BY THE TREASURER. I MAY NEED TO REMOVE ANYTHING OR RE-MODIFY ANY MINUTES OR ANYTHING? OKAY. WE NEED A VOTE THEN, MISS CATHY.

>> TRUSTEE SIMON?

>> TRUSTEE WISINSKI? YES.

>> SUPERVISOR STYKA?

>> I'VE GOT THREE VOTES, YES. TREASURER DESCHAINE?

>> ALL RIGHT. MOTION CARRIED, 7-0.

>> THANK YOU ALL. ATTORNEY IS HERE, ANY QUESTION TO ATTORNEY THAT'S NOT RELATED TO ITEMS THAT ARE ALREADY ON THE AGENDA BECAUSE I'M SURE HE WILL BE ASKED THOSE AT THAT TIME.

OKAY, I DON'T SEE ANY.

[00:50:03]

WE'LL NOW RUN TO HEARINGS WHICH WE DO NOT HAVE ONE TODAY, AND THEN THE ACTION ITEM.

WE HAVE TWO. THE FIRST ONE IS PAUL WROTE [INAUDIBLE] NUMBER 43, RESOLUTION NUMBER THREE, [INAUDIBLE]

>> GOOD EVENING, SUPERVISOR STYKA, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

AS YOU ARE ALL AWARE, TONIGHT BEFORE YOU IS ESSENTIALLY THE APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION THREE.

THIS IS FOR THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT TO PAVE [INAUDIBLE] ROAD ABOUT 1600 FEET NORTH FROM GRAND RIVER TO THE NORTHERN LINE OF THE [INAUDIBLE] DEVELOPMENT.

PROJECT COST IS $460,000.

OF COURSE, THE DEVELOPERS COST WOULD BE THE 56 PERCENT OF THAT 156 THOUSAND WITH THE REMAINING PERCENTAGE ASSESSED TO PROPERTIES IN THE DISTRICT.

WE HAD THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING THE LAST MEETING AND TONIGHT WOULD BE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE PROJECT TO PROCEED.

>> I NEED A MOTION FROM SOMEONE [INAUDIBLE] PAGE TWO OF PACKET MATERIALS. TREASURER.

>> I MOVE TO APPROVE POWELL ROAD PUBLIC ROAD IMPROVEMENTS, SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 43, RESOLUTION NUMBER 3, TO APPROVE THE IMPROVEMENTS IN GRADE, GRAVEL, AND PAY POWELL ROAD AND BE COMPLETED BY THE OWNER OF [INAUDIBLE] SUBDIVISION, AND TO DEFRAY THE COST THEREOF BY SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGAINST THE PROPERTIES SPECIFICALLY BENEFITED THEREBY IN THE MANNER PREVIOUSLY LISTED.

APPROVE THE TOTAL ESTIMATED COST OF $460,003.62 AND APPROVE THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT.

[6. TOWNSHIP MANAGER REPORT]

>> I'D LIKE TO SECOND THAT [NOISE].

>> REPORT.

>> TRUSTEE JACKSON. TRUSTEE SHANE, ANY COMMENTS?

>> WE DISCUSSED THIS LAST WEEK.

WE GOT SOME PUSH BACK FROM [INAUDIBLE] CANE, BUT THAT FELL ON MOSTLY HOW IT WERE IN THIS BORDER AFTER THE LEVEL OF 400 TREES AND WALKED AWAY FROM THAT PROJECT.

I UNDERSTAND THERE IS A POTENTIAL SALE OF THAT PROPERTY ANYWAY, BUT THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT IS THE RIGHT WAY TO GO.

THE ROAD WOULD BENEFIT PEOPLE IN BUSINESSES ON EACH SIDE.

APOLLO ROAD MAKES SENSE TO PARCEL OUT THE EXPENSE BY THEIR FRONTAGE ON APOLLO ROAD.

>> ANYONE ELSE WANT TO COMMENT? [INAUDIBLE]

>> TECHNICAL MANAGER PERRY, I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION.

IS THERE ANY UPDATE ON THE ONE TREE THAT WE THOUGHT MIGHT BE AT RISK WITH THIS PROJECT AND THE SCOPE OF WORK.

DO WE KNOW IF THE PROJECT WOULD INFRINGE ON THE DRIFT?

>> MR. PERRY?

>> I HAVE NO NEW INFORMATION TO REPORT ON THAT.

I THINK ONCE WE MEET WITH THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPER TOMORROW, WE MAY HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

BUT AGAIN, I UNDERSTAND THE GOAL OF THE BOARD IS TRY TO PRESERVE THOSE TREES AS BEST AS POSSIBLE, BUT IT IS CHALLENGING WITH THOSE GRADES.

IF YOU DRIVE THE ROAD, YOU'LL NOTICE IT'S PRETTY SIGNIFICANT.

BUT WE WILL ATTEMPT TO PRESERVE THEM AS BEST POSSIBLE.

>> THANK YOU. JUST WANTED TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY ANYTHING NEW ON THAT ONE. APPRECIATED.

>> GOOD QUESTION. ANYTHING ELSE? ANY OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE WE VOTE? I DON'T SEE ANYBODY, SO LET'S HAVE A VOTE, MS. GUTHRIE.

>> [INAUDIBLE] VOTES YES, SUPERVISOR STY.

>> I WILL, YES.

>> VOTE IS 7-0.

>> THANK YOU. BUT I'VE COME TO, THIS BEING MARCH.

AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF MY TRAVELS TO ONE-DAY SHARP, THE RESOLUTION CELEBRATING WOMEN'S HISTORY MONTH [NOISE].

THIS IS SOMETHING WE'VE DONE IN OTHER YEARS.

TO WHERE DO YOU THINK TO DO.

WE RECOGNIZE THE BLACK HISTORY MONTH? NOW IT'S CLEMENTS [INAUDIBLE].

>> I MOVE TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION CELEBRATING WOMEN'S HISTORY MONTH.

>> MS. JACKSON.

>> MOST IMPORTANT THERE.

>> RIGHT. DO WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THIS IN DETAIL?

>> IT'S WORTH NOTING THAT WE NOW HAVE WOMEN MAJORITY BOARD.

WHICH WE DIDN'T HAVE IN PREVIOUS BOARDS.

[7. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS OF ACTIVITIES AND ANNOUNCEMENTS]

IT MAKES ME FEEL VERY GOOD ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THIS BOARD AND HOW WELL THIS BOARD IS GOING TO OPERATE.

WE ARE FORTUNATE TO HAVE A LOT OF WOMEN LED ORGANIZATIONS AND BUSINESSES HERE IN MERIDIAN AND AMERINDIAN ARE WOMEN MAJORITY BOARD.

>> AS I LOOK AT THE ASSOCIATE DIRECTORS ARE STILL ON HERE.

[00:55:04]

WE HAVE A NUMBER OF WOMEN DIRECTORS SO THEY HAVE BEEN PROBABLY HANGING IN THERE WITH THE MEETING AS WELL.

YES, WE'RE VERY PLEASED THAT WE'RE WELL-SERVED BY THE WOMEN IN THIS TOWNSHIP.

WHETHER THEY'RE STAY AT HOME MOMS, OR HARD WORKING AT SOME PROFESSION, WE'RE A PART OF THE TOWNSHIP, OUR BOARD'S COMMISSIONS OR EVEN THIS PART, MS. JACKSON?

>> YES. I DIDN'T NOTE AS YOU JUST STATED THAT WE DID NOT INCLUDE DEPARTMENT HEADS AND STAFF MEMBERS IN THE NEXT TO LAST WHEREAS, AND I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT WE INCLUDE THEM IN THE WHEREAS THAT SAYS WOMEN HAVE PLAYED AND CONTINUE TO PLAY A MAJOR ROLE IN THE GOVERNING OF THE TOP CHARTER TOWNSHIP THAT WE WERE READING, SERVING ON NUMEROUS BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS AS THE SUPERVISOR, TREASURER, CLERK, TRUSTEES, AND DEPARTMENT HEADS AND STAFF MEMBERS.

>> EXCELLENT AMENDMENT. IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT AMENDMENT? MS. LOZINSKY, IS THAT A SECOND?

>> I'LL SECOND.

>> ALL RIGHT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF CHANGING THE LANGUAGE TO INCLUDE THE OVERHEADS, ETC. SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> HANDS UP, I CAN SEE THEM. I DON'T SEE ANY NOS. NO, NOS.

OKAY. SO BACK TO THE RESOLUTION AS A WHOLE.

ANYTHING ELSE WITH REGARD TO THIS? MS. LOZINSKY?

>> I JUST WANT TO EXPOUND UPON THE DIRECTORS IN OUR DIVERSITY EQUITY INCLUSION MEETING, LAST MEETING.

WE DID A LITTLE RESEARCH, AND NATIONALLY WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP ROLES AS DIRECTORS IS ABOUT 19 PERCENT.

MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP IS ALMOST AT 50 PERCENT, SO WE'RE LIKE 40 PERCENT.

THAT'S JUST SOMETHING TO RECOGNIZE AND BE VERY PROUD OF.

>> WE ARE PROUD OF THAT. THEY DO A HECK OF A JOB FOR US.

ARE WE READY TO TAKE A VOTE, MS. GUTHRIE?

>> TRUSTEE SHANE?

>> THAT'S THREE VOTES YES. SUPERVISOR STYKA?

>> THANK YOU. IF IT CONCLUDES THE ACTION WE NOW MOVE ON TO DISCUSSION.

THEN OUR FIRST DISCUSSION ITEM IS NUMBER IS 6503 PARK LAKE ROAD OPEN SPACE EASEMENT.

I THINK THIS REQUIRES EXPLANATION FROM STAFF.

>> YES. THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR STYKA.

THIS REQUEST FOR AN OPEN SPACE EASTMENT COMES FROM DAVID AND JOHNSON, [INAUDIBLE] INCORPORATED, 6503 PARK LAKE ROAD.

THIS IS PART OF THE STATE'S FARMLAND IN OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION PROGRAM.

THIS OPEN SPACE EASEMENT IS AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWNSHIP AND THE LANDOWNER THAT THE LAND WILL BE MAINTAINED AS AN OPEN-END SPACE.

IN EXCHANGE FOR THAT, THERE ARE CERTAIN TAX CREDITS AVAILABLE TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AND ALSO

[8. APPROVAL OF AGENDA]

AN EXEMPTION FROM ANY KIND OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS THAT WOULD BE PLACED ON THE PROPERTY.

PRINCIPAL PLANNER MENSER, I THINK IS GOING TO SHARE HIS SCREEN AS WE GO.

JUST TO WANT TO SHOW YOU THE AREA THAT'S PROPOSED.

IT'S LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST PORTION OF THE TOWNSHIP, APPROXIMATELY 57 ACRES.

IT IS BEEN A SIDE FARM IN PREVIOUS TIMES.

MORE CURRENTLY, IT'S BEING USED FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES.

THERE ARE TWO EXISTING HOUSES ON IT AND THREE ACCESSORY BUILDINGS LOCATED ON IT.

[9. CONSENT AGENDA]

ON THE MAP IN YOUR PACKET, YOU'LL SEE AT THE NORTH PORTION OF THIS SITE, THE PROPERTY DOES GO ACROSS AND OUT OF MERIDIAN INTO BATH TOWNSHIP DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTHWEST ARE [OVERLAPPING].

>> BY THE WAY WE'RE NOT SEEING ANY OF THIS.

>> OKAY. [NOISE].

>> I MEAN, I HAVE IT IN HERE IN MY [INAUDIBLE].

>> IF PETER IS ABLE TO SHARE THAT.

>> PAGE SHARING HAS BEEN ENABLED.

>> I'M SORRY, I'M JUST TRYING TO GET MY SCREEN READY. THANK YOU.

[01:00:01]

>> PETER'S WORKING HIS WAY OUT MARK. HANG IN.

>> [LAUGHTER] WE DO WANT PEOPLE TO SEE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

>> OKAY. THERE'S BIRDS, CATS. [LAUGHTER] I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHERE MICROSOFT [INAUDIBLE] HERE IT IS.

>> THE PICTURE YOU HAVE ON YOUR SCREEN, NORTH IS AT THE TOP.

THIS PROPERTY IS WEST PARK LAKE ROAD AND PARK LAKE ROAD IS ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE AND IT'S NORTH WEST TO THE FORMER WALNUT HILLS GOLF COURSE, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE LAYOUT.

THEN DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH IS THE DEAD END OF SKYLINE DRIVE.

[12A. Powell Road PRI SAD #43 – Resolution #3]

AS I MENTIONED THAT NORTH RED LINE THAT'S OUTLINING THE PROPERTY AS YOU CAN SEE IT GOES ACROSS THE FIELD TO THE NORTH OF THAT IS BETH TOWNSHIP.

THEN THAT SOUTHERN PORTION IS LOCATED IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED, THIS IS APPROXIMATELY 57 ACRES, IT'S CURRENTLY BEING USED FOR AGRICULTURAL CROPS ON IT.

THE MASTER PLAN SHOWS THIS IN A RESIDENTIAL CATEGORY, RESIDENTIAL R1 AND THEN ZONING OTHER PROPERTY, THERE'S A SPLIT.

THE EASTERN 17 ACRES IS ZONED RR RURAL RESIDENTIAL.

THE 40 ACRES ON THE WESTERN PORTION OF THE SITE IS R DOUBLE-A AGAIN, A SINGLE-FAMILY CATEGORY.

WELL, LOW DENSITY.

THERE ARE WETLAND AND FLOODPLAIN ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROPERTY.

REGULATED WETLANDS ARE LOCATED ALONG THE WESTERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY AND THEN YOU CAN SEE IT IN THE GREEN HASHED LINES.

THEN THE CENTRAL PORTION OF THE SITE AND THEN TO THE WEST, THAT LARGE GRAY AREA, THAT'S PART OF THE 100-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN.

THEN DIRECTLY SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY, THERE IS THE TOWNSHIP'S LAND PRESERVATION PROPERTY, WHICH IS HIGHLIGHTED IN GREEN ON THE DRAWING SO THAT'S THE DRAWINGS WE HAVE.

NEXT IS THE PROCESS.

THIS APPLICATION, THE WAY THE STATE AT BREEDS IT STARTS WITH THE TOWNSHIP.

THE TOWNSHIP BOARD EITHER HAS TO APPROVE OR DENY THE REQUEST WITHIN 45 DAYS AND AS PART OF THAT REVIEW, THE TOWNSHIP IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THE APPLICATION OR COMMENTS TO TRI-COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE EM CONSERVATION DISTRICT IN THE CITY OF EAST LANSING.

I DID RECEIVE AN EMAIL TODAY FROM THE CONSERVATION DISTRICT'S BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND THEY HAD NO CONCERNS OR COMMENTS RELATED TO THIS PROPERTY BEING PUT INTO AN OPEN SPACE EASEMENT.

IF THE BOARD DOES AGREE TO APPROVE THIS, THE STATE ACT DOES REQUIRE THE TOWNSHIP TO PREPARE AN EASEMENT FOR IT.

THERE'S FIVE BULLET POINTS, I PUT IT IN YOUR MEMO, THOSE ARE ALL FROM THE STATE ACT.

I JUST WANT TO MENTION THE FIRST TWO WHERE NO STRUCTURES CAN BE BUILT ON THIS PROPERTY WITHOUT TOWNSHIP BOARD APPROVAL AND NO IMPROVEMENTS TO THE LAND CAN BE MADE WITHOUT TOWNSHIP BOARD APPROVAL.

IF THE BOARD DOES DECIDE TO DENY REQUEST, THAT HAS TO BE DONE IN WRITING AND THEN THE APPLICANT HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL THE TOWNSHIP BOARD'S DECISION TO THE MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT.

ONE OF THE PARTS OF THIS IS THE LENGTH OF THE EVENT OR THE TIME FRAME THAT THAT'S GOING TO BE IN PLACE, THE MINIMUM IS 10 YEARS, THE MAX IS 90 YEARS.

THE APPLICANT IS ASKED TO PLACE IT IN THE 90 YEAR TIME FRAME.

[NOISE] THE REASON THAT A PROPERTY OWNER OR THE ADVANTAGE TO DO THIS OPEN-SPACE AGREEMENT IS THAT IT DOES

[12B. Resolution Celebrating Women’s History Month]

ALLOW THEM TO CLAIM A MICHIGAN INCOME TAX CREDIT AND IT ALSO EXEMPTS FROM SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT.

[01:05:01]

THOSE THAT WILL BE CURRENT AFTER THE DAY INTO THE PROGRAM SO ANYTHING EXISTING STAYS, ANYTHING YOU AFTER THEY'RE IN THE PROGRAM, THEY WOULD BE EXEMPT AND TYPICALLY THESE ARE FOR SANITARY SEWER, WATER, LIGHT.

IF THE PROPERTY OWNER DID CHOOSE TO BE PART OF THE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR IT.

IF THEY WAIT UNTIL TERMINATION OF THE AGREEMENT, THEN THE SPECIAL SUBSEQUENT COST, THE INITIAL COST, CAN BE CHARGED BACK TO THE PROPERTY OWNER.

NO PENALTIES OR INTERESTS CAN BE CHARGED THAT AND YOU'LL SEE IN YOUR PACK, THERE WAS AN EMAIL FROM THE TOWNSHIP ASSESSOR, DAVE WICK, HE DID DO AN ESTIMATE OF THE MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AND AS PART OF THE APPLICATION HE'S ALSO REQUIRED TO DO AN ESTIMATE OF THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS THAT VALUE.

HE INDICATED THAT HE FELT THERE WAS NO VALUE IN THE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS.

AGAIN, THE TOWNSHIP HAS 45 DAYS TO MAKE THEIR DECISION, THAT GIVES YOU UNTIL YOUR NEXT MEETING, MARCH 16, WHERE YOU WOULD HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISION AND I KNOW THAT MR. JOHNSON WAS PLANNING ON TENDING THIS MEETING SO IF YOU DID HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR HIM, HOPEFULLY, HE'S IN ATTENDANCE AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANYTHING THAT YOU HAVE.

>> I DON'T KNOW, SUCH AS DAVID JOHNSON IN THE ATTENDANCE AREA.

ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR IF YOU WANT TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS? YES, TRUSTEE JACKSON FIRST.

>> YES. MARK, OVER THIS 90-YEAR PERIOD THIS LAND CAN STILL BE USED FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES, IS THAT [OVERLAPPING]

>> RIGHT. YES.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> OTHERS? YES, GUTHRIE.

>> THANK YOU SUPERVISOR STYKA.

DIRECTOR KISOVAC, CAN THIS AGREEMENT BE BROKEN WITHIN THAT 90-DAY PERIOD? CAN THEY COME BACK TO THAT BOARD AND SAY, ''HEY, WE WANT TO TERMINATE THIS.''

>> THE NEW OWNER CAN TERMINATE IT AT HIS CHOICE.

AGAIN, THE IDEA WAS THAT IT'S A MINIMUM OF 10 YEARS, IT HAS TO BE IN THE PROGRAM.

AGAIN, I THINK IF THE BOARD HAS CONCERNS WITH THE 90 DAYS, SOMETHING THAT COULD BE CHANGED.

THE PROPERTY COULD BE SOLD BUT THAT AGREEMENT GOES WITH THE PROPERTY SO ANY FUTURE OWNER WILL BE SUBJECT TO THAT.

>> IF A FUTURE OWNER WANTED TO TERMINATE IT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE BOARD TO DO THAT OR IF THE CURRENT OWNER WANTED TO, THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE BOARD?

>> THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE STATE BECAUSE ONCE THE BOARD APPROVES IT THEN THE STATE HANDLES THE PROGRAM.

>> ANYBODY GOT A GRASP OF [INAUDIBLE] TRUSTEE.

[13A. 6503 Park Lake Road Open Space Easement]

>> THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR. DIRECTOR KISOVAC, IT SAYS HERE ON, WHAT PAGE, OF PAGE FOUR OF THE MEMO THAT, ''PUBLIC ACCESS TO OPEN SPACE LAND MAY BE PROVIDED FOR AGREED UPON BY THE OWNER AND IF THE ACCESS WILL NOT JEOPARDIZE THE CONDITIONS OF THE LAND.'' HAS THERE HAD BEEN DISCUSSIONS WITH THE OWNER REGARDING THAT, KNOWING THAT IT'S JUST NORTH OF SKYLINE?

>> WELL, THEY'D HAVE TO GO THROUGH LAND PRESERVATION PROPERTY.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THE JOHNSONS', IN AT LEAST TO MY DISCUSSION WITH THEM, WE'RE INTERESTED IN GIVING ANY ACCESS TO PEOPLE TO BE ON THEIR PROPERTY.

>> YES, DIRECTOR KISOVAC.

>> TRUSTEE [INAUDIBLE]

PIGGYBACKING OFF OF CLERK GUTHRIE'S QUESTION, WHAT IS THE PROCESS, WITH THE STATE, TO TERMINATE THE AGREEMENT AFTER THAT 10 YEARS? OR EVEN IT'S TURNED OVER TO THE STATE AS SOON AS WE HAD INTO IT, CORRECT?

>> WHAT PROCESS FOR THE STATE FOR CLOSING THE AGREEMENT IF SOMEONE WANTS OUT OF IT?

>> I WOULD HAVE TO DO SOME RESEARCH AND CHECK ON WHAT WE HAVING OR I CAN HAVE THAT FOR THE NEXT MEETING.

>> OKAY. THEN LISTED IN MY PACKET, I DON'T SEE.

DAVE LEE'S ASSESSMENT AND THE FINANCES.

>> IT'S THE VERY LAST ATTACHMENT FOR THE PACKET, I CAN TELL YOU WHERE IT IS.

HIS ESTIMATED MARKET VALUE FOR THE PROPERTY WAS A $154,950,

[01:10:08]

ROUGHLY $3000 PER ACRE AND THEN HE DID AN ESTIMATE OF THE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS AT ZERO.

YOU DIDN'T THINK THAT THIS PROPERTY HAD THAT POTENTIAL FOR DEVELOPMENT OR THE IMPACT OR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.

>> [NOISE] OKAY. MY FINAL CLARIFICATION AND IN THE MEMO AS IT OUTLINES [NOISE] THE INCOME TAX CREDIT THAT CAN BE CLAIMED, THERE'S A PARENTHESIS AND THEN A COMMA AND THEN IT SAYS, ''LESS 3.5 PERCENT OF THE LANDOWNERS TOTAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME. '' I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE OUTLINING THERE.

IT'S AT THE BOTTOM OF PAGE FOUR OF THE MEMO.

>> RIGHT. [NOISE] I HAD TO SAY IT CANNOT BE THAT RIGHT OUT OF THIS DATA ACT FOR THE PROCESS.

FOR THE TAX CREDIT, I'LL HAVE TO PROBABLY TALK WITH [INAUDIBLE] AND GO A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION ON IT.

>> OKAY. JUST GENERAL COMMENTS, I MEAN, WITH THE FLOODPLAIN AND WETLANDS CONSUMING 80-90 PERCENT OF THE SITE, I DO THINK IT'S A GOOD CANDIDATE FOR THIS.

I'M UNFAMILIAR WITH THIS PROCESS.

THIS IS SOMETHING I HAVEN'T SEEN ON THE BOARD BEFORE, AND THEN THE ISLAND THAT WOULD BE CREATED, YOU TAKE THIS IN THE LAND PRESERVE THERE.

THAT SQUARE THAT REMAINS IS LAND THAT THE LAND PRESERVATION ADVISORY BOARD HAS LOOKED AT OBTAINING AND HAS BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THE RESIDENT THAT OWNS THAT LAND.

ALL IN ALL, IT COULD CREATE A REALLY NICE CONTIGUOUS PRESERVATION AREA UP THROUGH THE COUNTY LINE.

I'LL BE AT THIS LAND BUT STILL OPERATE, AT LEAST, IN AGRICULTURAL SETTINGS, RIGHT NOW.

THOSE ARE JUST MY INITIAL THOUGHTS AND I'LL TURN IT BACK OVER. THANK YOU.

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>> I AGREE WITH TRUSTEE OPSOMMER ON THIS.

I THINK THIS IS A GOOD DEAL FOR THE TANGENT [INAUDIBLE] LATTICE MOVING FORWARD.

I'M GUESSING THE 3.5% [INAUDIBLE] DEDUCTION ON THE TAX CREDIT IS AN ATTEMPT TO MAKE THIS AVAILABLE TO MOST OF US, BUT THE ULTRA-RICH PERHAPS WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO CLAIM THIS.

THAT WOULD BE MY GUESS IS NOT UNCOMMON, AND HARD CALCULATIONS AND TO PUT THEM ON PERCENTAGE AGAINST TOTAL INCOME.

IT'S A FORMULA I'M GUESSING TO TARGET WHO GETS FIT THAT THE TAX BREAK FROM THIS BY THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, BUT I'M NOT CERTAIN ABOUT THAT.

BUT ANYWAY, I'M GLAD THIS HAS BEEN BROUGHT BEFORE US, AND GREAT TO HAVE SOME LAND SET ASIDE FOR 90 YEARS FOR OPEN SPACE.

>> HEY, ANY OTHERS? I THINK WE PRETTY MUCH EXHAUSTED [INAUDIBLE] GETTING BACK TO US THAT MARK IT THE NEXT FADING.

>> RIGHT NOW I DON'T HAVE IT READY.

>> OKAY. LOOK FORWARD TO IT.

>> NEXT ITEM IS THE 2021 CITIZEN SURVEY.

IS MS. CLARK LEAVING THIS DISCUSSION?

>> I AM THIS EVENING.

GOOD EVENING, SUPERVISOR AND TOWNSHIP BOARD MEMBERS.

TONIGHT WE ARE AGAIN DISCUSSING THE COMMUNITY SURVEY.

I DON'T WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THE REASON YOU'RE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION IS BECAUSE IT IS A THREE-YEAR SURVEY THAT WE DO IN THE COMMUNITY.

THE LAST TIME WE DID IT, IT WAS 2018, AND SO WE'RE REVAMPING THIS PROGRAM AGAIN.

TYPICALLY, WE DO IT WITH THE NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTER AND THE BOARD IS ENTERTAINING AN IDEA OF DOING THE SURVEY.

OUR CART AND SO SORT OF SPEAK TO SPECIFICALLY ON OUR COMMUNITY NEEDS.

AT THE LAST BOARD MEETING, WE REQUESTED INFORMATION ON REPUTABLE ORGANIZATIONS THAT COULD ASSIST THE TOWNSHIP WITH CREATING AND ADMINISTERING, AND ANALYZING OUR OWN COMMUNITY SURVEY.

THAT THE SURVEY WOULD BE ADMINISTERED AND CREATED ON UNBIASED MANNER AS POSSIBLE.

NOW, DIRECTOR PERRY INTRODUCED ME TO COBALT COMMUNITY RESEARCH OUT OF CHARLOTTE, AND I REACHED OUT TO MSU'S INSTITUTE FOR POLICY AND SOCIAL RESEARCH.

THEY BOTH HAVE EXPERIENCE DEALING WITH MUNICIPALITIES AND LOCAL UNITS OF GOVERNMENT ADMINISTERING SPECIFIC SURVEYS, ESPECIALLY IF IT IS SPECIFICALLY IN OUR STATE.

BOTH ORGANIZATIONS HAVE EXPERIENCE WITH THE TOPIC OF MARIJUANA AND LOCAL COMMUNITIES AS WELL.

THE SURVEY, SO COBALT COMMUNITY RESEARCH, THEY'RE NON-PROFIT.

[01:15:05]

WHAT I LIKED MOST ABOUT THEIR ANALYSIS, I WOULD SAY, IS THAT THEY WILL GIVE YOU A REVIEW OF YOUR COMMUNITIES PROGRESS YEAR TO YEAR, AND A COMPARISON OF YOUR COMMUNITY ACROSS THE STATE AND AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK THE BOARD MEMBERS WERE CONCERNED ABOUT LOSING WITH THE REUSED SURVEYS THAT YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO COMPARE YOURSELF ACROSS THE NATION, BUT YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO GET THAT WITH COBALT.

THEY HAVE PLENTY OF EXPERIENCE WORKING ACROSS THE STATE AND THROUGH CITIES AND TOWNS, AND THEY DID ADMINISTER A MARIJUANA COMMUNITY SURVEY IN ROYAL OAK AND THAT WAS ATTACHED.

THE QUESTIONS CAN BE VERY SPECIFIC AND PULLED APART AND ANALYSIS FOR DEMOGRAPHIC BY AGE, EDUCATION, WHERE THEY'RE LIVING TOTALLY IN THE COMMUNITY.

WHAT REALLY SPECIFICALLY THEY'RE TRYING TO SUPPORT, WHERE THEY'RE SUPPORTING RECREATIONAL ACROSS THE BOARD, OR WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE SUPPORTING RECREATIONAL BUSINESSES THAT EVEN BREAK IT DOWN TO WHERE IN THE COMMUNITY.

THAT COULD BE SOMETHING OF INTEREST.

COBALT CAN DO A ONE-TOPIC SURVEY FOR $10,000 OR A COMMUNITY MULTI TOPICS SURVEY FOR $16,000 WITH A RANDOM SAMPLING AT 1,500 RESIDENTS, $1,000 FOR EVERY 1,000 RESIDENTS WE WOULD INCLUDE IN A RANDOM SAMPLE.

UNFORTUNATELY, WHILST CREATING THIS MEMO, I DID NOT HAVE THAT INFORMATION FOR MSU.

SO YOU PROBABLY GOT SEVERAL EMAILS FRANTICALLY FROM US THIS MORNING TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE THE DOCUMENTATION FROM MSU'S INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY.

ONE THING I REALLY APPRECIATED ABOUT MSU IS THAT IT DOES NOT MATTER IF YOU DO A ONE TOPIC OR MULTIPLE TOPICS SURVEY WITH THEM, THEY WILL BE ABLE TO PROVIDE BOTH AT THE SAME COST.

THEIR SUGGESTION WAS TO PUT IT TOGETHER.

HOWEVER, I REITERATED THAT IF THE BOARD WOULD HAVE VERY SPECIFIC REASONS AS TO WHY THEY WOULD CHOOSE TO DO A SINGLE TOPIC SURVEY OR MULTIPLE TOPICS SURVEY.

THEY DID LET US KNOW THAT YOU COULD DO IT TOGETHER.

THE MSU DOES HAVE AN INDIRECT CHARGES SURCHARGE.

IT'S A PART OF THE MSU'S POLICY, SO IF YOU CHOOSE THE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY FOR OUR SURVEY, WE WOULD HAVE TO ADOPT AN INDIRECT COST POLICY AND MSU WOULD TAKE THAT WHATEVER THAT PERCENT CHARGES, THAT WOULD BE THE INDIRECT ADDITIONAL SURCHARGE.

WE DID DISCUSS VOTER REGISTRATION.

I KNOW SOME COMMUNITIES HAVE A LARGE DISPARITIES BETWEEN THE NUMBER OF POPULATION AND THE NUMBER OF REGISTERED VOTERS.

WE HAVE ALMOST AN 80% OF REGISTERED VOTERS FOR ENTIRE POPULATIONS OF BOTH ENTITIES FEEL VERY SAFE USING A REGISTERED VOTERS SAMPLING AND HAVING THE PROVISION ONLINE.

PEOPLE HAVE ASKED, HOW DO YOU MAINTAIN THE INFORMATION AND VALIDITY IF SOMEBODY OUTSIDE OF THE COMMUNITY HEARD ABOUT OUR SURVEY AND WENT ONLINE TO TAKE IT? THEY WILL BE ABLE TO KEEP THE INFORMATION FROM THE RANDOM SAMPLING AND THE ONLINE SAMPLES OR A SURVEY RESULTS SEPARATE.

BUT WE'LL BE ABLE TO GIVE US A FULL LIST OF VIEW OF THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE BY LOOKING AT BOTH OF THE DATA RESULTS.

I GUESS I'LL JUST LEAVE IT FOR QUESTIONS BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION IN HERE.

[NOISE].

>> LAST SET UP WE MENTIONED A COUPLE THINGS THAT WE, EXCUSE ME [INAUDIBLE] [NOISE] WE DECIDED THAT WE WOULD ACTUALLY GO WITH THE FIRM WE'VE USED IN THE PAST.

WE'RE GOING TO CREATE OUR OWN SORT OF SPEAK.

BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN LITERALLY CREATING OUR OWN.

THAT MEANS WORKING OUT WITH A PROFESSIONAL THEIR SURVEY CALCULATOR. IS THAT RIGHT?

>> THAT'S QUITE.

>> PERHAPS CORRECT.

>> WE WOULDN'T LIKE LITERALLY BE DRAFTING THE QUESTIONS.

WE'D GIVE IT A SUBJECT AREAS OR WE'RE INTERESTED IN ETC, AND THEY WOULD BE DOING THE DRAFTING?

>> YES, THEY WOULD. THEY WILL INTENTIONALLY REQUEST THE INFORMATION WE'RE TRYING TO ASCERTAIN ME AND THEY WANT TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO FIGURE OUT.

THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO ASK ONE QUESTION IN SO MANY WAYS.

WHAT SERVICES DO YOU UTILIZE OUT OF THIS DEPARTMENT? ARE YOU AWARE OF THESE ON OUR RATING SCALE? THEY'VE PROVIDED KIND OF THE RESULTS, AT LEAST COBALT WAS ABLE TO PROVIDE SOME OF THE RESULTS FOR THEIR SURVEYS.

THAT'S HOW THEY CAN BREAK IT DOWN IS ONE QUESTION CAN ANSWER A MULTITUDE OF DEMOGRAPHIC RESULTS.

>> IF YOU'RE LOOKING FURTHER BESIDES THESE TWO FIRMS?

>> I DIDN'T NOT.

>> OKAY. BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER SURVEY COMPANIES OUT THERE, ESPECIALLY IN THE [INAUDIBLE].THE OTHER THING IS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT HAVING PERHAPS

[01:20:01]

EITHER IN ADDITION TO WE'RE SEPARATE FROM THE OVERALL SURVEY THAT WE DO EVERY THREE YEARS TO FIND OUT WHERE RESIDENTS ARE WITH REGARD TO RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA.

YOU INDICATED SOMETHING ABOUT LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, THE INSTITUTE COULD DO BOTH TOGETHER OR SEPARATELY WHEREVER.

DID YOU LOOK INTO THAT GENERAL ISSUES GENERALLY? WITH THESE TWO POTENTIAL SURVEYORS?

>> YES. I SPOKE WITH BOTH OF THEM AND I MENTIONED ONE TOPIC SURVEY.

THAT WAS JUST MY GENERALIZED WAY OF SAYING IT COULD BE THE TOP ROW WE HAVE MARIJUANA.

IF THE BOARD WERE TO CHOOSE TO GO IN THAT DIRECTION.

BOTH ENTITIES ARE CAPABLE OF PREPARING A SURVEY ON SIMPLY JUST ONE TOPIC ON MARIJUANA, AND IT COULD BE MULTIPLE QUESTIONS THAT COULD DISSECT WHERE IF THE COMMUNITY WAS INTERESTED IN PUTTING THEM WHERE THEIR COMMUNITY, WHAT BUSINESS THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN THEIR COMMUNITY OPERATE, AND SO ON.

THEY COULD DO A MULTIPLE TOPIC AS WELL, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE THE PARKS DEPARTMENT INFORMATION, ROAD IMPROVEMENTS, POLICE AND FIRE, AND SO ON.

THAT'S WHAT I MEANT BY MULTIPLE TOPIC COVERING LOTS OF OUR SERVICES AND PROGRAMS THAT'S OFFERED BY THE COMMUNITY.

COBALT COULD DO A ONE TOPIC OR A SURVEY OVER MARIJUANA FOR $10,000, INCLUDING THE COST OF POSTAGE, OR $16,000 TO COVER MULTIPLE TOPICS AND COULD INCLUDE MARIJUANA AS A TOPIC.

MICHIGAN STATE WOULD DO IT FOR A $12,000 FOR ABOUT FOR THE SAME EXACT THEY COULD EITHER INCLUDE IT ALL AS ONE SURVEY OR SEPARATE THEM.

>> IF YOU SAY MICHIGAN HAS TAKEN OVER 12 TWICE OR 12 TOTAL FOR BOTH?

>> 12,768 WAS THEIR FINAL AS ESTIMATED COSTS TO PROVIDE US A SURVEY.

WHETHER WE INCLUDE, WHETHER IT'S A ONE-TOPIC SURVEY OR IT'S MULTIPLE TOPICS.

IF WE DID TWO DIFFERENT SURVEYS, IT WOULD BE TWICE THAT AMOUNT?

>> NOW YOU'VE MOVED ON MY SCREEN, SO I'M LOOKING FOR [LAUGHTER] WHERE YOU ARE.

YOU'RE NOT ACTUALLY BRINGING TO US [INAUDIBLE] , A RECOMMENDATION ON WHICH FIRM THE STAFF THINKS WE SHOULD GO WITH AT THIS POINT.

>> I WANTED TO WAIT FOR ACTION ON WHETHER OR NOT WE WERE GOING WITH ONE OR A MULTIPLE TOPICS SURVEY.

[NOISE] I DO HAVE A RECOMMENDATION OF WHAT I WOULD PREFER BASED OFF OF SUGGESTIONS AND WHAT THE BOARD HAS REQUESTED, BUT THAT'S JUST MY PERSONAL VIEW.

>> OKAY, I WILL THEN GO OUT AND ASK MS. GUTHRIE FOR HER COMMENTS.

>> THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR STYKA.

DOES THIS NOT NEED TO GO THROUGH AN RFP PROCESS? IS IT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN JUST SAY, "OKAY, WE'RE DONE WITH THIS COMPANY, AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO CHOOSE THIS COMPANY WITHOUT GOING THROUGH BIDDING PROCESS."

>> I THINK BECAUSE WE CONSIDER DOING IT, I DON'T KNOW IF WE BID THE NATURAL RESOURCE CENTER.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS A BID THAT WE DID IN 2003 WHEN WE FIRST STARTED DOING THESE SURVEYS.

I WOULD THINK THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO CREATE THIS AND THAT THIS WOULDN'T BE SOMETHING WE WOULD HAVE TO BID OUT OF THE COMMUNITY PROJECT.

>> I THINK EITHER [INAUDIBLE] MADISON COULD ANSWER THAT QUICKLY.

>> YEAH. WELL.

>> OR MR. PERRY.

>> I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY BECAUSE IT'S BELOW $25,000, THE PURCHASING POLICY JUST REQUIRES THREE QUOTATIONS.

WE HAVE THE AMOUNT FOR NRC AND THEN WE HAVE THESE TWO NOW.

AGAIN, IT'S NOT SAYING WE GOT TO CHOOSE ANY ONE OF THESE THREE, BUT WE HAVE THE NEEDED AMOUNT OF QUOTATIONS.

[OVERLAPPING].

>> I'M SORRY.

>> GO AHEAD, MS. GUTHRIE.

>> GIVEN SUPERVISOR STYKA'S COMMENT THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL SURVEY COMPANIES IN THE AREA, I WOULD PREFER TO GET SOME QUOTES FROM PEOPLE.

[13B. 2021 Citizen Survey]

>> MISS JACKSON? YOU'RE MUTED.

>> THANK YOU. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE QUOTES THAT YOU'RE USING DEPEND ON THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE SURVEY.

>> IN EACH CASE, YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE POSSIBILITY OF SURVEYING 1,500 PEOPLE OUT OF OUR POPULATION, 1,500 VOTERS?

>> 1,500, REGISTERED VOTERS FOR THE SAMPLE. YES.

[01:25:02]

>> I DON'T LIKE THE NUMBER, 1,500 FOR 44,000 PEOPLE.

[LAUGHTER] I WOULD BE INCLINED, AND I DON'T KNOW THE SCIENCE OF CHOOSING 1,500 REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE POPULATION IS, TO GET A SENSE OF THE PREFERENCES.

WHAT IS THE DISCUSSION ON THAT STANDARD?

>> WELL, I BASED IT OFF OF THE FACT THAT IN PREVIOUS YEARS THERE WAS A TRADITIONAL THREE-PART MAILING THAT WENT TO A 1,600-RESIDENTS SAMPLE WITH THE NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTER SURVEY.

>> THERE WAS A THREE-PART MAILING? WOULD YOU EXPLAIN HOW THAT WORKED FOR ME?

>> IN 2018, I BELIEVE WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO SAY IT WAS A THREE-PAGE SURVEY, THAT WAS SENT OUT TO A SAMPLE OF 1,600 RESIDENTS IN THE COMMUNITY.

AT THE SAME TIME, THE TOWNSHIP HAD ACCESS FOR RESIDENTS TO BE ABLE TO OPT IN AND TAKE THE SURVEY ONLINE.

>> I DIDN'T KNOW THAT WHEN I WAS HERE IN 2018.

I DIDN'T KNOW THERE WAS AN OPTION TO PARTICIPATE ONLINE, BUT ANYWAY.

I GUESS THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION.

IN SOME CASES, THEY TALKED ABOUT DIFFERENT WAYS OF SURVEYING.

IN SOME CASES THEY ARE USING TELEPHONE CALLS, AND IN OTHER CASES THEY ARE MAILING AND GIVING PEOPLE CODES TO GO TO A WEBSITE.

THE PRICING DOESN'T CHANGE RELATIVE TO WHICH ONE OF THOSE STYLES OF SURVEY THAT YOU CHOOSE?

>> ACCORDING TO BOTH OF THESE ENTITIES, NO.

I DID REQUEST THAT SPECIFICALLY. WOULD IT CHANGE? THE MAILING AND THE POSTAGE MAY CHANGE IF WE INCREASE THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS IN OUR SAMPLE.

BESIDES THOSE SERVICES THEY PROVIDE, COBALT, COMMUNITY RESEARCH, PRIDE THEMSELVES ON BEING ABLE TO DO THESE SERVICES FOR MUNICIPALITIES AT A VERY LOW RATE.

[NOISE] THEY'RE TRYING TO KEEP THEIR COSTS VERY LOW.

MSU, [NOISE] THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY.

THEY'RE TRYING TO KEEP COSTS LOW, BUT THEY HAVE BEEN ABLE TO PROVIDE THE SAME EFFECT FOR $12,760.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> YES, DIRECTOR.

>> YES DIRECTOR CLARK, I HAD ONE QUESTION IN REGARDS TO COBALT IN DOING THE NATIONAL COMPARISONS.

HOW DO THEY COMPARE WITH THE NATIONAL STUDIES AND COMPARE US IF WE'RE DOING CUSTOM SURVEY? OR ARE THEY JUST REPLICATING MUCH OF WHAT'S IN THE NATIONAL SURVEY?

>> WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO IS EQUATE WHAT INFORMATION WE'RE TRYING TO GATHER AND ANALYZE, AND THEN THEY CAN USE THAT AS A GUIDE AGAINST NATIONAL AVERAGES.

THEY ALSO HAVE ACCESS, ARE VERY WELL VERSED IN THE NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTERS ANALYSIS ACROSS THE NATION.

THEY'VE BROKEN IT DOWN TO BE ABLE TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ALL OF THEIR CLIENTS THAT THEY DO ANNUAL SURVEYS FOR AND THEN TAKE INTO THE NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTERS ANALYSIS.

I BELIEVE THAT IS HOW THEY GET THEIR NATIONAL AVERAGE, BECAUSE THEY DO PROVIDE MOST OF THEIR SERVICES FOR OUR COMMUNITIES WITHIN MICHIGAN, BUT THEY DO HAVE SOME PARTNERS OUTSIDE OF THE STATE AS WELL.

I APPRECIATE THE DEPTH OF INFORMATION THAT THEY GO INTO, AND THEIR ANALYSIS IS ALL BASED ON DATA AND WHAT THEY'VE GATHERED FROM THEIR RESEARCH.

THEY ARE NOT ABOUT IMPLEMENTATION, ONLY ABOUT ANALYSIS OF INFORMATION.

>> OKAY. WELL, THEY DO HAVE TO ASK A LOT OF QUESTIONS THAT ARE SIMILAR TO THE NATIONAL SURVEY [NOISE] IN ORDER TO COMPARE, SO THAT THEY WOULD BE COBALT IN TERMS OF REPLACING THE FIRM THAT WE HAVE USED THAT DOES THIS ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

COBALT WILL HAVE TO REPLICATE A LOT OF THAT, AND THEN WE'D HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE DEGREE OF CUSTOMIZATION.

[NOISE] [INAUDIBLE]

>> ALL RIGHT, AND THEY'RE EXPERTISE IN DOING THESE SURVEYS, THEY'LL BE ABLE TO GUIDE US TO SAY, WELL, THIS IS A QUESTION NOW IS ASKED IN A COMMUNITY AND IT WAS ABLE TO BRING THIS KIND OF RESULT.

IS THIS WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR? OKAY, THEN THIS IS HOW YOU'RE GOING TO BREAK DOWN THAT INFORMATION.

>> THEN DO THEY SHARE WHAT THE MARGIN OF ERROR ON THEIR SURVEYING IS?

>> PLUS AND MINUS FIVE PERCENT.

[01:30:02]

>> A SPAN OF 10 PERCENT.

THAT'S A 1,500 SAMPLE?

>> THAT'S A 1,500 SAMPLE.

>> MSU-EPSA, DID THEY SHARE THEIR MARGIN OF ERROR?

>> THEY DID NOT. NOT THAT I HAVE RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME.

I CAN TRY TO GO BACK TO MY PREVIOUS EMAIL.

I BELIEVE IT WAS JUST ABOUT THE SAME WITH THE 25 PERCENT RESPONDENT RATE. [NOISE]

>> THEY'RE ANTICIPATING 25 PERCENT OUT OF THE 1,300 COME BACK.

>> I THINK ACTUALLY LAST.

THEY'RE EXPECTING PROBABLY A 10 PERCENT BUT I TOLD THEM THAT I THINK THAT 25 IS PROBABLY ABOUT RIGHT FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

>> WE GOT 21 PERCENT OF THE NATIONAL.

>>YEAH.

>> IF IT'S 25 SAMPLE SIZE WOULD BE 375 OUT OVER 34,000 REGISTERED VOTERS.

>> THEN POST EDGES $10. [NOISE]

>> THEY HAVE THE ROYAL OAK SURVEY IN HERE, BUT FOR MIDLAND OR TROY, ARE THERE OTHER CLIENTS, DID THEY SHARE ONE OF THEIR BROADER MULTI QUESTION SURVEYS?

>> THEY DID NOT.

THEY REQUESTED THAT INFORMATION FROM THE COMMUNITY, BUT SINCE THAT'S NOT PUBLIC, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT I WAS ABLE TO GET IN TIME.

>> [INAUDIBLE] PUBLISHED THESE?

>> WE DON'T KNOW IF EVERY COMMUNITY OF THE INFORMATION OF EVERY SURVEY THAT THEY HAD WAS GOING TO BE PUBLISHED.

ESPECIALLY IF I WAS GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET PERMISSION IN TIME TO FORWARD IT TO THE BOARD.

>> OKAY. I WOULD.

>> [OVERLAPPING] HAVE BEEN AT ACQUIRED SIDE.

I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU CAN PUSH YOURSELF UP.

>> [OVERLAPPING] IT'S MY MICROPHONE. I'LL TRY TO SPEAK UP.

>> NOW I CAN HEAR YOU BUT WE'RE STILL STRAINING. GO AHEAD.

>> I'D BE INTERESTED IN SEEING AND REVIEWING ONE OF THEIR SURVEYS, ESPECIALLY IF THEY'RE GOING MORE TOWARDS THE MODEL OF REPLICATING WHAT WE'VE ALREADY BEEN DOING.

THANK YOU. [NOISE]

>> OTHERS? [INAUDIBLE]

>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU DIRECTOR CLARK FOR LOOKING INTO THIS.

I'M NOT SURE IF [INAUDIBLE] BUT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE WELL-VERSED.

I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS.

I READ THAT MSU WOULD BE AN ONLINE OR A PHONE SURVEY, AM I CORRECT?

>>YES. IT ACTUALLY WILL BE ONLINE.

I REQUESTED ONLINE TO BOTH OF THEM.

I BELIEVE THEY'RE JUST TELLING US WHAT THEY HAVE BEEN ABLE TO PROVIDE TO OTHER COMMUNITIES.

>> THANK YOU. WE TALK ABOUT THIS VOLUNTARY RESPONDENTS, WE CAN RESTRICT THAT, IF WE ONLY GIVE ACCESS TO THOSE WHO WERE RANDOMLY SAMPLED, CORRECT?

>> CORRECT. THE RANDOM SAMPLE, THAT IS WHY WE WANT TO KEEP THE INFORMATION SEPARATE.

THE DIRECT MAIL REGISTERED VOTERS ALLOWS US TO KNOW THAT THIS IS A PERSON WHO LIVES IN OUR COMMUNITY AND THIS IS EXACTLY HOW THEY FEEL IN RELATION TO THE TOPIC.

THEN PUTTING THE ACCESS ONLINE WILL ALLOW US TO HAVE ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO OPT IN AND HAVE A VOICE AND CONVERSATION.

AT ANY TIME THEY WOULD LIKE TO SAY WHAT THEY WISH.

WE CAN KEEP THE DATA SEPARATE IN THE EVENT THAT SOMEBODY WERE TO GO IN AND TRY TO PUSH A PARTICULAR TOPIC OR A PARTICULAR POINT OF VIEW INAPPROPRIATELY WOULD BE ABLE TO TRACK THAT BY IP [INAUDIBLE] SEE.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO FIND.

>> I GUESS I'M JUST CONFUSED ON OTHER THAN RESIDENT INPUT, BUT IF WE'RE DOING A RANDOM SAMPLE OF NON-BIAS SURVEY, IF WE ALLOW FOR OTHERS TO COMPLETE, THEN IT'S NOT RANDOM ANYMORE.

WHAT WOULD WE DO WITH THAT INFORMATION? WHAT'S THAT INFORMATION GOING TO TELL US? THAT'S JUST QUESTION.

>> GOT IT. I THINK I WANTED TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE AS MANY OPTIONS FOR THE BOARD BECAUSE WE'RE CONSIDERING TWO MAJOR BIG THINGS HERE.

WE'RE CONSIDERING A VERY HEAVY SUBJECT OR WE'RE CONSIDERING FULL COMMUNITY WIDE SUBJECTS.

I WOULD THINK IF WE WERE GOING FULL COMMUNITY WIDE, WE WOULD WANT THE OPTION FOR OTHER COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO MAY NOT GET THE DIRECT MAIL TO PARTICIPATE IN THE SURVEY.

I DID SPEAK WITH SOMEBODY YESTERDAY ON THE PHONE AND SAID THAT THEY'VE LIVED IN THE TOWNSHIP FOR 25 YEARS AND THEY'VE NEVER BEEN ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN A SURVEY.

THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT.

IF WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THIS WE CREATED OURSELVES AS WE SHOULD HAVE AN OPTION FOR PEOPLE TO OPT IN IF THEY'RE OUT OF THE RANDOM SAMPLE.

[OVERLAPPING] YES.

>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT'S STILL UP FOR DISCUSSION.

[NOISE] ANOTHER QUESTION IS,

[01:35:03]

IT WASN'T CLEAR TO ME SO I GOT CONFUSED AND THIS IS PROBABLY JUST ME WORKING ON AN IPAD, SOMETIMES I HAD TO GO BETWEEN, BUT FOR BOTH ORGANIZATIONS, THEY WILL ALSO PROVIDE THE ANALYSIS CRACK NOT JUST A SURVEY IMPLEMENTATION, BUT THE ACTUAL ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS.

THEN I THINK YOU ASKED THE QUESTION POTENTIALLY WAS, WOULD WE WANT A LIKE MSU TO REVIEW COBALTS AND THESE ARE JUST EXAMPLES, BUT WOULD WE WANT AN OUTSIDE AGENCY TO REVIEW THE RESULTS THAT WE GET, DID I SEE THAT CORRECTLY?

>> YES. I ASKED COBALT THAT AND THEY SAID THAT YES, THEY'RE FINE WITH THE CAPABILITIES OF CROSS INFORMATION BETWEEN TWO ENTITIES.

>> YOU WERE JUST LOOKING FOR MORE ACCURACY? EXCELLENT. THEN MY LAST QUESTION IS, AND I PROBABLY SHOULD KNOW THIS, BUT WHY WOULD WE ONLY SOLICIT REGISTERED VOTERS? WHY WOULD REALLY SOLICIT 33,000 OUT OF THE 42,000 WE HAVE, IS THERE A METHODOLOGY BEHIND THAT? [NOISE].

>> WELL, I THINK IT COMES BACK TO VALIDATING WHETHER OR NOT THAT PERSON IS IN OUR COMMUNITY AND THEN THEM HAVING A VOICE ON THE SERVICE, THE LEGISLATION AND ORDINATES, THAT IS THE WAY THAT THIS GOES.

THAT IS WHY THEY SUGGESTED WE'D BE ABLE TO PROVIDE SOMETHING TO VOTERS BY MAIL SO THEY COULD SAY I LIVE HERE AS A RESIDENT.

I'VE LIVED HERE FOR SO MANY YEARS SO THEY CAN FILL IN THE INFORMATION.

THEN DEPENDING ON THE TOPIC, IF IT IS MULTIPLE TOPICS, HAVING AN ONLINE VERSION SO THAT PEOPLE ANYWHERE IT'S A YES, I UTILIZED THESE SERVICES AND I WOULD LIKE TO PARTICIPATE OR NOT.

CONSIDERING THAT WE'RE HAVING THE DISCUSSION OF WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A SURVEY OVER MARIJUANA, I WANTED TO TRY AS BEST AS I COULD.

HOW ACCURATE AND UNBIASED COULD WE DISTRIBUTE A COMMUNITY SURVEY [NOISE] SO THAT AS MANY PEOPLE COULD VOICE THEIR OPINIONS ON SUCH A SENSITIVE TOPIC.

THEN ALSO IF YOU DECIDE TO NOT GO THAT WAY, IF YOU COULD JUST DO A MULTITUDE [NOISE] OF TOPICS AND ALL OF OUR DEPARTMENTS [NOISE] COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS, THE REALLY THINGS THAT CHALLENGE OUR COMMUNITY [NOISE] THAT THEY CAN BE ASKED AND REST.

>> GREAT. THANK YOU I'LL PUSH INTO THAT. [NOISE].

>> TREASURE.

>> THANK YOU DIRECTOR CLARK FOR THESE ANSWERS. THE QUESTIONS BEING ASKED.

LIKE TRUSTEE JACKSON, I THINK THE SAMPLE SIZES A LITTLE SMALL, PARTICULARLY BECAUSE IT'S ABOUT THE SAME SAMPLE SIZE OF 1500 IS WHAT WE'VE GOTTEN FROM THE PREVIOUS FIRM.

WE'VE LOOKED AT THOSE RESULTS AT THE TWO MEETINGS AGO AND WE WERE REALLY NOT HAPPY WITH THE RESULTS.

EITHER THE MARGIN OR ERROR WAS WAY OFF OR WE FELT THAT THEY DIDN'T SAMPLE.

FOR EXAMPLE, THEY SHOWED A DECLINE IN PARK USAGE FROM 2012-2016.

WE KNOW FROM EMPIRICAL DATA THAT'S JUST NOT TRUE.

I WOULD WANT TO LOOK AT A HIGHER SAMPLE SIZE AND FIND OUT IF MARGIN OF ERROR GOES DOWN ACCORDINGLY.

AS YOU MAY BE WORTH IT FOR THIS BOARD TO PAY MORE TO GET MORE ACCURATE RESULTS.

I AGREE WITH TRUSTEE WISINSKI THAT IF WE HAVE AN OPT-IN OPTION EXCUSE THE PUN, TO THIS SURVEY, WE ARE GOING TO CREATE PROBLEMS. WE DIDN'T DO THAT LAST TIME WHEN WE WERE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT IT LAST TIME, WE DIDN'T WANT GROUPS PUSHING FOR A CERTAIN AGENDA TO TRY AND OVERWHELM THE SURVEY BY DIRECTOR DBS TOLD US HOW EASY IT IS TO MANUFACTURE IP ADDRESS AS HE COULD PRODUCE A 100 AND OUR IF YOU, I PAID THEM ENOUGH FOR IT.

THE IP ADDRESSES NOT A UNIQUE IDENTIFIER AND IT CAN BE EASILY HACKED THAT THAT ISN'T UNIQUE IDENTIFIER.

THAT TO MEAN THE ONLY WAY TO GET ACCURATE RESULTS IS TO HAVE A SELECT SET.

THE 2,000 AND 1,500 AND 4,000, WHATEVER NUMBER IS THAT GETS US, A REALLY LOW MARGIN OF ERROR AND PROCEEDING WITH THAT, ME THAT LENDS ITSELF TO US DOING A GLOBAL SURVEY THAT INCLUDES A MARIJUANA QUESTION OR TWO, SO THAT WE CAN INCLUDE THAT BUT GET THE REST OF THE RESULTS RATHER THAN HAVING TO PAY FOR TWO SURVEYS.

THAT'S MY SENSE AT ALL.

I ALSO THINK WE'LL GET BETTER RESULTS IF WE INCLUDE THE MARIJUANA QUESTION WITH OTHER QUESTIONS BECAUSE PEOPLE SEE THIS AS A QUESTION WITHIN THE WHOLE COMMUNITY, RATHER THAN NARROWING DOWN TO JUST MARIJUANA, I'M NOT SURE WE'LL GET THE SAME RESULTS, BUT I WOULD CURE SNOW THERE IF THEY THINK WILL GET A DIFFERENT SELECT SET IF WE DID IT SEPARATELY VERSUS A COMBINED, WE'RE CHARGING YOU WITH A LOT HERE TO PRODUCE THIS FOR US, GET BACK TO US ON THAT.

JUST AS WE START OFF THIS MEETING WITH A STAFF BOARD MEMBER COMMITTEES,

[01:40:01]

I WOULD SUGGEST SUPERVISOR WILL POINT MAYBE A FOUR PERSON COMMITTEE TO STAFF AND TO BOARD MEMBERS THAT CAN INCLUDING DIRECTOR CLARK, THEY CAN WORK WITH HER AND OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS TO BRING BACK SOMETHING TO THE BOARD.

MAYBE MORE COMPANIES, MAYBE SOME MORE IDEAS FOR SAMPLE SIZE.

HE ACTUALLY HAVE A COUPLE MORE MINUTES, I THINK, AND MAKE EXCELLENT FOR THIS.

THERE ARE CLERK AND TRUSTEE WISINSKI.

I CLICKED BECAUSE THIS IS THE BUSINESS OF A QUARK ANYWAY, HAVING THIS INFORMATION AND TRUSTEE WISINSKI, I THINK YOU PROBABLY HAVE THE MOST EXPERIENCE ON THE BOARD WITH THESE KIND OF SCIENTIFIC SURVEYS.

I COULD BE WRONG, BUT THAT'S THE SENSE I'M GETTING RELEASED FROM CONVERSATIONS WE'VE HAD IN THE PAST.

THEN PERHAPS DIRECTOR DEPUTY MANAGER PERRY, WHO'S DONE THIS IN THE PAST ALONG WITH DR. CLARK, WOULD BE A GOOD FOUR-PERSON AT TEAM THAT COULD BRING BACK TO THE BOARD IN TWO WEEKS.

SOME MORE SPECIFIC. IT MAY EVEN GET SOME FEEDBACK FROM THESE COMPANIES ABOUT THE NATURE OF THE QUESTIONS.

WE ALL SEEM TO LIKE THE ST. JOE QUESTION, SURVEY QUESTIONS.

TWO WEEKS AGO, THEY HAVE TALKED ABOUT ALL BROAD RANGE OF ISSUES.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHAT THEY THINK OF A QUESTION SET LIKE THAT.

SINCE WE LIKED HOW THE UNIQUE THOSE WEREN'T THE COMMUNITY AND PERSONALIZED IF YOU WELL, TOWARDS THE COMMUNITY.

THAT I THINK WAS A SELLING POINT FOR THE BOARD WHEN WE DISCUSSED THIS TWO WEEKS AGO OR THREE WEEKS AGO, WHATEVER IT WAS.

THE SOVIETS REVIEW REALLY IMPORTANT THIS YEAR.

WHEN IT QUICKLY IS I THINK ARE GETTING, NOT RUSHING IT, BUT AT HE SAME TIME THAT WAITING ANOTHER MONTH BEFORE WE HAVEN'T HAD A REPORT BACK FROM YOU, BUT RATHER WORKING WITH YOU SO YOU CAN GIVE US SOMETHING IN TWO WEEKS THAT WE CAN GET CLOSE TO ACTING OUT AND MAYBE HAVEN'T FINALIZED BY THE END OF THE MONTH.

TO ME, WE'D BE A GOOD GOAL FOR THIS BOARD TO SHOOT FOR, BUT I THINK IT'S TOO MUCH TO ASK YOU TO THIS AMMONIA.

YOU HAVE A LOT ON YOUR ON YOUR DESKTOP READY.

THERE'S NO REASON WHY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS AND STAFF COULDN'T SHIP THEN I'D BE WILLING TO PAY.

I THINK THERE ARE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS THAT WOULD BE A BETTER GIVE YOU BETTER INPUT ON THAT.

THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. THANK YOU.

>> I JUST SAY THAT I'D PUT YOUR IDEA IN A PARKING LOT FOR NOW.

IT'S A GOOD IDEA BY PUTTING THE PARTY LINE.

I'LL CALL IT MS. GUTHRIE AND A SECOND, BUT I WANT TO MAKE A COUPLE COMMENTS.

I GUESS IT'S NOT A FIRST TIME ON YOU, MS. CLARK, BECAUSE I KNOW THIS IS JUST FOR YOUR FIRST TEST.

YOU'VE SPREAD THIS FROM I DON'T KNOW WHAT SORT OF SPEAK BUT I EXPECTED THEY WOULD GET FROM THE POTENTIAL FIRMS SOMETHING MORE THAN WHAT YOU GOT FROM THEM.

IN OTHER WORDS, AND REALLY MORE REFLECTION I'VE NOW EXPOSED.

THEY ARE PRESENTED WHAT IT IS THEY COULD DO FOR US.

KNOW HOW BIG YOUR SAMPLES WOULD BE.

THEY HAD THIS SIZE SAMPLE, WHAT PERCENTAGE OF WOULD IT BE? IF IT WAS A BIGGER SAMPLE, WHAT WOULD IT GO DOWN TO? SOMETHING MUCH MORE INFORMATIVE THAN THE LITTLE BITS THAT THEY EACH GAVE YOU? I THOUGHT WE WOULD GET SOMETHING MORE.

THE WEAKEST, THICKER TEETH HAD TO DECIDE.

THIS IS THE DIRECTION WE WANT TO GO WITH THIS FIRM.

I DON'T THINK WE'VE GOT THAT YET.

MAYBE THE WAY TO GO IS WHAT WAS MENTIONED BY THE TREASURE, BUT I'M GOING TO CALL THIS GOOD PRE-TAX DISCHARGED.

>> THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR SIKA.

WELL I'M FLATTERED, THAT TURNS [INAUDIBLE] MENTIONED MY NAME TO BE PART OF THIS.

I DON'T FEEL LIKE THE BOARD SHOULD BE PART OF THIS BECAUSE THERE ARE STICKY ISSUES THAT ARE INVOLVED AND I DON'T WANT ANYONE TO THINK IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM THAT I HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH QUESTIONS FORMULATED REGARDING BROADBAND OR MARIJUANA OR ANY OTHER ISSUES LIKE THAT? THE THING STAFF, THOSE HIGHLY CAPABLE.

I THINK DIRECTOR CLARK IS HIGHLY CAPABLE AND DEPUTY MANAGER THEORY WITH THESE PAST KNOWLEDGE, WITH STUFF THAT HE'S DONE AS HIGHLY CAPABLE.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE AND WHAT I HEAR FROM THE BOARD IS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT A MULTIPLE SURVEY.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THREE PROPOSALS WITH QUOTES FROM MS. CLARK AT THE NEXT TOWNSHIP BOARD MEETING THAT THE BOARD CAN REVIEW AND MAKE A DECISION ON.

>> STRETCHED NEW REDUCTION?

I CONCUR WITH THE CLERK ON WHAT SHE'D LIKE TO SEE NEXT [NOISE].

I'D LIKE TO RESPOND TO THE SUPERVISOR'S COMMENTS ABOUT WHAT HE DIDN'T SEE, ALL OF THOSE THINGS THAT YOU DIDN'T SEE, I DID SEE.

THERE WAS ONE PAGE THAT HAD LAKES, FOR EXAMPLE, TO A ROYAL COMMUNITY SURVEY AND WAYS IN

[01:45:06]

WHICH THE COBOL GROUP HAS ANALYZED THAT SURVEY IT IS USE THOSE NUMBERS IN AND INTERPRETED THE RESULTS.

IT'S NOT REALLY A DEFENSE OF MS. CLARK, BUT WHAT YOU SAY YOU'RE MISSING.

I FOUND IN PARTICULARLY THE ROLE OF PRESENTATION PRIOR.

I FIND THAT TODAY, PRACTICALLY I'VE BEEN GETTING THE SAME KIND OF INFORMATION, DON'T KNOW EXAMPLES OF THEIR SURVEYS AS A MATTER OF FACT, FROM THE IMAGE YOU MOVE.

>> YES. I GUESS I MANAGEMENT THAT EXPRESS MYSELF THAT WELL.

I'M REALLY TALKING ABOUT WHERE THEY PRESENT US, WHAT THEY CAN DO IN TERMS OF ACCURACY AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

FOR HOW MUCH MONEY HE HAD, ETC AND HOW BIG A SAMPLE MEAN WE TAKE IT FROM.

I AGREE WITH COMMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE THAT YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE PEOPLE WHO ARE ABLE TO CALL IT YOU.

YOU PICK THE SURVEYOR SO THEY COULD SCIENTIFICALLY SAMPLE THAT COMMUNITY THAT THEY HAD PEOPLE JUST PUT IT IN YOUR INPUT.

[INAUDIBLE] THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR.

WE'RE LOOKING FOR AN HONEST APPRAISAL OF ALL PEOPLE AND SPREADS THE ISSUES IN ALL OF THE OTHER.

FEEL GOOD ABOUT THE ROADS, HOPEFULLY THIS TIME WE WILL HEAR DIFFERENTLY THE ONES THAT THING.

MAYBE IT'S JUST NUANCED AS THE ONE I WAS THE BEFORE VERSUS WHAT WE GOT.

ALTHOUGH I DID NOT GO TO THE LINKS, I WILL ADMIT [LAUGHTER].

>> I FOUND IT AVAILABLE FOR IN THE MATERIALS THAT WOULD SIT.

>> I APOLOGIZE IF I COMPLY TO EDIT IT.

I WASN'T TRYING TO IMPLY THE NEGATIVE.

JUST HAD BAD PEOPLE HERE.

JUST EITHER SUPERIOR COMPANY WHICH FAILING.

OTHER PEOPLE HAVE AS.

WELL, FOR SURE WE NEED TO HAVE THIS COME BACK TO US. YES, MS. CLARK.

>> I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I DO THIS RIGHT BECAUSE I MEAN, OF COURSE THERE'S ALWAYS A CHANCE FOR SOME QUESTION THAT'S NOT ASKED.

I ALSO I DO APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS.

TRUSTEE JACKSON, I TRIED TO FILL IN AS MUCH INFORMATION AS POSSIBLE THAT I COULD GET FROM THE SURVEYORS THAT WE REACHED OUT TO.

I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN VERY QUICKLY.

WE ACTUALLY MET LAST TUESDAY WITH THIS BOARD WAS WE HAD THREE MEETINGS AND FEBRUARY IS A VERY SHORT MONTH.

IT WAS LESS THAN A WEEK FOR ME TO GET THEM TO GIVE ME THEIR ANALYSIS, FOR ME TO REALLY ASK MY QUESTION, PARTICULARLY, WHAT CAN WE PROVIDE TO US IF IT WASN'T ONE TOPIC OR MULTIPLE TOPICS, HOW MUCH WOULD THAT COST? HOW DO YOU BREAK DOWN INFORMATION AND WHAT DO WE DO WITH IT AFTERWARDS? I WILL COME UP WITH SOME ADDITIONAL EXAMPLES.

I BELIEVE THAT THE COSTS ARE NOT GOING TO CHANGE SO MUCH BECAUSE I STARTED THE CONVERSATION WITH THE COMPANIES.

BASICALLY, WE WOULD LIKE TO CREATE AN HOUR CART, BUT UNBIASED AND ACCURATE SURVEY.

THEY SAID THAT'S WHAT WE DO, TELL US WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE.

IF WE WANT THE SAMPLE SIZE TO BE LARGER THAN 5,000 RESIDENTS, IT CAN MOST DEFINITELY BE, IF WE WANT IT TO BE ALL MAILING AND WE DO A WHOLE MAILING TO ALL REGISTERED VOTERS, THEN THAT'S LIKE $40,000.

WE DO ALL MAILING TO ALL REGISTERED VOTERS AND WE GET MULTIPLE TOPICS AND THAT'S IT.

IT'S WHATEVER THE TOWNSHIP WOULD LIKE TO BUDGET FOR THIS AND HOW FAR WE TAKE THIS.

I WANT TO CLARIFY, I AM LOOKING FOR A LARGER SAMPLE SIZES, MARGIN OF ERROR, AND ADDITIONAL PROPOSALS OUTSIDE OF THE TOOTH THAT I'VE RECEIVED TONIGHT.

>>THAT SOUNDS RIGHT.

ANYTHING ELSE WE'RE DIRECTING HER AT? MS. [INAUDIBLE].

>> SORRY FOR COMING LATE. AS FAR AS SAMPLE SIZE AND MARGIN OF ERROR, IT APPEARS THAT BOTH COMPANIES PROVIDED AT A 95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL.

ARE WE LOOKING FOR MAYBE UPWARDS OF A 99 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL BECAUSE THAT WOULD GIVE YOU SOME DIRECTION ON WHAT SAMPLE SIZE ARE WE LOOKING FOR.

YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TELL THEM WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR.

USUALLY IN STATISTICS, WE WORK IN A 95 OR 99 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S HELPFUL OR IF THAT'S EVEN WHAT THE BOARD WANTS, BUT I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF THROW THAT OUT THERE.

>> GOOD INFORMATION. HAS THE BOARD BEEN HAPPY WITH [INAUDIBLE] OR YOU'RE LOOKING FOR SOMETHING MORE THAN 99? MS. JACKSON?

>> I WOULD APPRECIATE THE INFORMATION ON WHAT 99 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL WOULD COST ME AND HOW THAT IS DETERMINED IN TERMS OF THE SAMPLE SIZE.

BUT I THINK PRIMARILY WHAT WE'VE ASKED MS. CLARK TO BRING US BACK IS

[01:50:05]

MORE PRESENTATIONS AND [NOISE] IN TERMS OF COMPANIES TO WORK WITH WITHIN THOSE GUIDELINES.

>> TREASURE.

>> I WOULD AGREE THAT WE DO WANT A HIGH CONFIDENCE LEVEL BE IT 95 OR 99 PERCENT AND THEY'LL COME IN AT DIFFERENT COSTS.

BUT IF THAT IS WHAT WE GET BACK FROM THE COMPANIES THAT AMBER'S GOING TO SOLICIT, IS THERE ANYONE ON THE BOARD THAT WOULD THEN FEEL THAT WE COULD NOT GET AN ACCURATE MEASURE OF THE PUBLIC OPINION ON RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA IF THAT'S WHAT THE SURVEY COMPANIES ARE OFFERING US? IS THERE ANYONE THAT WOULD STILL DOUBT THE RESULTS OF THE SURVEY AS BEING AN ACCURATE MEASURE OF THE TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS SUPPORT OR NON-SUPPORT OF RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA?

>> [INAUDIBLE]

>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS CONFIDENCE.

95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE MEANS THAT THE SURVEY RESULTS WILL FALL WITHIN THE MARGIN OF ERROR OF PLUS OR MINUS FIVE PERCENT, 95 PERCENT OF THE TIME.

THERE'S A FIVE PERCENT CHANCE THAT WE ARE OUTSIDE OF THE MARGIN OF ERROR AND WE HAVE A VERY POOR POLL.

THAT'S IF YOU INCREASE THE CONFIDENCE BUT NOT INCREASE SAMPLE SIZE, ALL YOU'RE DOING IS INCREASING THE MARGIN OF ERROR.

THEN OUR MARGIN OF ERROR BECOMES ROUGHLY PLUS OR MINUS 12 PERCENT FOR THE SAME SAMPLE SIZE.

SO IT'S REALLY THE SAMPLE SIZE THAT IS MOST IMPORTANT.

THEY'RE JUST TELLING US WHAT THE ERROR IS ON THE MARGIN OF ERROR WITH THAT.

BUT I THINK THAT'S JUST IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND.

JUST CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, TRUSTEE JACKSON, I'M WILLING TO BEING ABLE TO FIND OTHER [NOISE] SURVEYS AND REFERENCES TO THE LINK IN THERE TO ROYAL OAK'S PRESENTATION ON THE [NOISE] SURVEY.

>> NO, THAT WAS A REFERENCE TO AN EARLIER DISCUSSION ABOUT LOOKING AT MORE THAN THREE POSSIBLE FIRMS OR COMPANIES TO PROVIDE THE SURVEY SERVICES.

>> OKAY. I THOUGHT I HEARD THAT THERE'S A LINK TO AN ACTUAL SURVEY MULTI-QUESTIONS.

>> THERE IS, IN THE COBALT MATERIAL.

THERE IS A LINK TO AN ACTUAL COMMUNITY-WIDE SURVEY IN ONE OF THE PIECES OF MATERIAL WE GOT FROM THEM.

>> I BELIEVE THAT ROYAL OAK DID A COMMUNITY-WIDE AND IN MARIJUANA, BUT I BELIEVE THEY ARE SEPARATE.

>> AND THE LINKS SHOW THE ONE I INCLUDED THEIR FULL ANALYSIS OF THEIR MARIJUANA BECAUSE THEY PROVIDED THAT.

BUT THERE IS A COMMUNITY-WIDE SURVEY FOR ROYAL OAK.

>> YEAH, I SEE IN THE PRESENTATION.

IT'S LINKED IN THE E-MAIL FROM WILLIAM.

IT SAYS COPY OF BROADER COMMUNITY SURVEY ATTACHED SO THAT I THINK THAT COMMUNITY SURVEY WAS ATTACHED.

BUT THE LINK TAKES YOU TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE RESULTS AND THE FINDINGS.

I JUST CAN'T SEE THEM IN THE PACKET [OVERLAPPING].

>> [INAUDIBLE] THAT'S WHAT MISLED ME, WHEN YOU SAID THE WORD ATTACHED.

>> OKAY. JUST MAKING SURE I'M NOT MISSING SOMETHING IN THERE, BUT THAT'S WHAT I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE IF WE'RE GOING TO SPEND MORE MONEY ON THIS FOR THE NATIONAL FIRM, WHAT IS THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THEIR MULTI QUESTION SURVEY VERSUS WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING.

>> [INAUDIBLE] , YOU'RE THE ONE WHO HAVE THE CASH SO YOU TELL US WHETHER YOU'VE DONE ENOUGH UNDERSTANDING TO GO FORWARD OR YOU NEED MORE FROM US.

>> OKAY, ONE MINUTE.

LET ME SCRATCH DOWN MY CHICKEN SCRATCH HERE.

>> IT'S OKAY.

>> OKAY. I THINK I HAVE WHAT I NEED TO GO FORWARD.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME MORE POSSIBLE OPTIONS FOR SURVEY RESULTS, A BETTER MARGIN OF ERROR, I WILL GO BACK AND ASK MSU TO INCREASE THE SAMPLE SIZE, AND I CAN SEE WHAT THAT DOES TO AFFECT OUR COST, AND WHAT THAT WOULD DO TO AFFECT THEIR MARGIN OF ERROR, AND WHY WE SHOULD POSSIBLY PICK THEM OVER DOING THE NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTER.

WELL YEAH, I GUESS THE NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTER IS LIKE WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO DO AS WELL? DO YOU WANT ME TO DO A FULL ANALYSIS OF DOING THE SAME THING WITH NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTER?

[01:55:01]

TRUSTEE ASKED THE QUESTION.

>> I THOUGHT WE DECIDED AGAINST THE NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTER.

>> I'M SORRY. HE JUST SAID IF WERE GOING TO GO WITH COBOL, WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT NRC WOULD PROVIDE?

>> WE HAVE THAT SURVEY. THAT WAS IN TWO MEETINGS AGO.

THAT WAS THE MEETING THAT SUPERVISOR STYKA MISSED.

WE DO HAVE THAT CHARACTER IN TERMS OF WHAT QUESTIONS THEY ASK US.

>> MS. JACKSON.

>> JUST ONE FINAL QUESTION.

IS SOMEONE ACTUALLY ASKING TO SEE THE SURVEY WITHOUT THE RESULTS? WE WANT TO SEE HOW THE SURVEY IS STRUCTURED.

>> YES. THAT WAS MY QUESTION TO THEM, WAS THE SURVEY ITSELF AND THAT IS WHAT THEY WERE HAVING ISSUE WITH TOTALLY SHARING WITH ME AGAIN WITHIN A WEEK.

SO I ASKED IF THERE IS A POSSIBILITY OF FINDING A WAY TO REDACT MAYBE CERTAIN THINGS THAT THE COMMUNITY DID NOT WANT TO SHARE.

>> I'M WORKING ON THAT.

>> SO WE CAN FIND ANYONE [LAUGHTER].

>> I MEAN, WE STILL NEED TO HAVE TO DEFINE WHAT IT IS WE WANT THEM TO SURVEY.

WE TALK ABOUT THE MARIJUANA, WHICH DOES NOT HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

FOR OVER THREE YEARS I'VE BEEN ASKED BY THE OTHER COMPANY.

ARE THOSE THE QUESTIONS WE WANT TO CONTINUE OR DO WE HAVE SOME DIFFERENT QUESTIONS THAT WE WOULD LIKE OR SOME DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF OUR TOWNSHIP THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT INCLUDING IN THIS SURVEY.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MANAGER ROSS WOULD ALWAYS BRING UP IS THAT HE THOUGHT WE COULD GET BETTER INFORMATION THAT PERTAIN MORE TO US, IF WE DID AT ALL, BECAUSE SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE IN THE OTHER GROUP WERE SO GENERIC.

[INAUDIBLE] I THOUGHT YOU WERE RAISING YOUR HAND.

SORRY. JUST RAISING YOUR PEN. OKAY.

>> IS THAT GOING TO CONFUSE YOU FURTHER?

>> A LITTLE BIT. I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, ARE WE DOING A MULTI TOPICS SURVEY? IF WE ARE DOING A MULTI TOPIC SURVEY, THEN THE PROCESS WILL BE TO GET INPUT FROM STAFF, FROM BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON THE GENERAL TOPICS.

WE WOULD LAY OUT OUR QUESTIONS AND BE ABLE TO GO FROM THERE.

BUT WITHOUT KNOWING WHETHER OR NOT WHEN WE'RE DOING ONE OR A MULTITUDE, I CAN REALLY GO [OVERLAPPING].

>> OKAY. I WILL ASK MS. JACKSON, WHAT SHE WOULD SAY.

>> I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE FOCUS ON A MULTI TOPIC SURVEY.

>> YEAH. MY THOUGHT IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO A MULTI TOPIC SURVEY AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO SUPPLEMENT OR SOMEHOW INCLUDE ISSUES WITH REGARD TO MARIJUANA.

>> OR NOT. [LAUGHTER]

>> WELL, THEN WE NEED TO DECIDE THAT.

>> YES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

MULTI TOPIC SURVEY. ALL RIGHT.

SO THEN THE NEXT QUESTION IS, WILL THE BOARD INCLUDE QUESTIONS ABOUT MARIJUANA?

>> I WILL MAKE MY LITTLE PITCH WITH REGARD TO THAT.

FOR ME, THE MEETING WE DEAL WITH THESE SMALL THINGS, MINIATURE.

THEY'RE NOT MEASURED AT SNUB SENSE, BUT THEY SEEM TO BE AND WE LOSE SIGHT OF THE BIG PICTURE.

THE OVERRIDING PRINCIPLES AND THE TOWNSHIP OF WIDE GOALS.

WHAT I CALL THE BIG THING.

FOR ME THAT BIG THING IS MAINTAINING MERIDIAN AS THE NUMBER ONE PLACE TO LIVE IN MICHIGAN, THE NUMBER ONE PLACE TO RAISE A FAMILY, THE NUMBER ONE PLACE TO GROW UP, TO ENJOY THE MIDDLE YEARS, TO BE A SENIOR CITIZEN, THE NUMBER ONE PLACE TO LIVE AS MUCH AS ONE CAN THESE DAYS IN HARMONY WITH THE ENVIRONMENT.

THAT BIG THING NEEDS TO APPLY TO EVERYONE IN THE TOWNSHIP, THE PEOPLE WITH WEALTHY INCOMES, THE PEOPLE WITH SMALL MEANS, THE PEOPLE OF EVERY COLOR, THE ETHNIC GROUP, EVERY DENOMINATION, POLITICAL PERSUASION, BACKGROUND, ETC.

THAT'S THE ISSUE BEFORE US.

IT'S HOW TO LOCATING RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA BUSINESSES IN MERIDIAN AFFECTS OUR BEARERS ON THAT BIG THING, THEIR OVERRIDING GOAL.

YES, WE THE PEOPLE VOTED TO MAKE RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA LEGAL.

YES. THERE ARE TIMELINE MISCONCEPTIONS OUT THERE ABOUT MARIJUANA.

HOWEVER, OUR ISSUE IS NEITHER THOSE, IT'S DIFFERENT.

WE MUST LOOK AT THE ISSUE AS TO HOW IT AFFECTS OUR OVERRIDING GOAL OF MAINTAINING MERIDIAN AS THE NUMBER ONE PLACE TO LIVE IN MICHIGAN.

REMEMBER HOW THIS CAME TO BE.

HOW RESIDENTS MADE MERIDIAN THE BEST PLACE TO LIVE.

STEP BACK AND TAKE A LOOK AND YOU'LL SEE THAT OUR RESIDENTS CARE ABOUT OTHERS.

THEY CARE ABOUT EDUCATION AND CHILDREN.

THEY CARE ABOUT THEIR PROPERTY.

IT'S COMFORT LEVEL FOR THEM AND IT'S VALUE.

BEFORE WE DO SOMETHING THAT MAY AFFECT THOSE RESIDENTS AND WHAT THEY CARE ABOUT, THAT HELPS MAKE THIS THE COMMUNITY, THE NUMBER ONE PLACE TO LIVE, I BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO ASK THEM,

[02:00:01]

OUR RESIDENTS, WHAT THEY THINK ABOUT THIS ISSUE AND WHAT THEY WANT.

IF ONE THING TO VOTE ON OUR BROADEST PROPOSITION LIKE WHETHER MARIJUANA SHOULD BE LEGAL IN THE STATE.

THERE ARE MANY REASONS TO SAY YES, DECRIMINALIZATION, MEDICAL BENEFITS SUCH AS TWO EXAMPLES.

BUT IT'S ANOTHER THING IS TO WHETHER ONES MARIJUANA IS IN FACT AVAILABLE AS IT IS, INCLUDING ONLY A FEW MINUTES AWAY FROM HERE, WHETHER YOU WANT TO HAVE IT IN THESE FACILITIES IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP, DOWN THE ROAD NEAR YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE OWE IT TO OUR RESIDENTS TO ASK THEM TO GET THEIR INPUT.

HOW DO THEY PERCEIVE THAT AFFECTING THE BIG PICTURE GOAL, THE BIG THING, BEING THE BEST PLACE TO LIVE, SAYING NO TO RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA IN MERIDIAN IS NOT SAYING NO TO RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA? ONE COULD TRAVEL 10 MINUTES OR SO TO MAKE ILLEGAL PURCHASE AND ONE CAN THEN USE IT IN A LEGAL WAY WITHIN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

IT'S NOT ABOUT THAT.

IT'S ABOUT THE BIG THING, THE BIG GOAL, MERIDIAN IS THE NUMBER ONE PLACE TO LIVE TO RAISE A FAMILY.

IN THE END, THE REAL QUESTION BEFORE US IS, IF WE SAY YES TO RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA HERE IN MERIDIAN, DOES IT ADD TO THAT? DOES IT DETRACT FROM THAT? WAS IT NEUTRAL WITH REGARD TO THAT? THAT'S [INAUDIBLE] OVERRIDING GOAL THAT MERIDIAN WOULD WE MADE THE BEST PLACE TO LIVE IN MICHIGAN.

WE OWE IT TO OUR RESIDENTS TO ASK THEM, WE NEED THEIR INPUT ON THIS, AND THAT'S WHY I SAY, IT SHOULD INCLUDE MS. JACKSON THE QUESTIONS ABOUT MARIJUANA.

[INAUDIBLE].

>> I TOTALLY AGREE, THIS IS THE BIGGEST DECISION IN THIS BOARD.

IT'S BIGGER THAN ANYTHING WE'VE FACED IN THE PREVIOUS BOARD TERM.

SINCE THE 11TH OF FEBRUARY, WE'VE GOTTEN 29 LETTERS TO THE BOARD ON THIS TOPIC.

TWENTY-NINE. NO ISSUES COME EVEN CLOSE TO THIS.

THERE'S LOTS OF TALK ON SOCIAL MEDIA AS WELL.

SOCIAL MEDIA IS ALSO THE HOME OF QANON AND OTHER CONSPIRACY THEORIES.

I HONESTLY TAKE BOARD LETTERS MORE SERIOUSLY TODAY THAN SOCIAL MEDIA COMMENTARY.

WE'VE GOTTEN LETTERS, BOTH SIDES OF PEOPLE WHO SAID TO US, "I DON'T WANT TO IDENTIFY MYSELF AS BEING OPPOSED TO THIS BECAUSE I'LL BE BULLIED." OTHER BOARD MEMBERS THAT PEOPLE WHO SUPPORTED THIS ARE AFRAID OF SPEAKING OUT.

I THINK BOTH SIDES HAVE THEIR REASONS, THEY'RE MAYBE NOT SPEAKING OUT, BUT NONETHELESS, WE'VE GOTTEN 29 LETTERS FROM CITIZENS IN THE PAST, ESSENTIALLY TWO AND A HALF WEEKS.

BY THE WAY, THOSE WHO ARE RUNNING 28-1 IN OPPOSITION TO THIS.

I DON'T THINK ANYONE BELIEVES THAT'S A 28-1 SUPPORT OPPOSITION TO IT OVERALL.

WE DON'T KNOW THAT NUMBER.

THERE IS SURVEY GOING ON RIGHT NOW IN MAILS, THEY ARE SENDING US LETTERS, THE PEOPLE OPPOSED TO THIS ARE ORGANIZED AND PEOPLE ARE HEARING ABOUT IT THAT ARE WRITING TO US.

WE NEED TO DO A SCIENTIFIC SURVEY TO FIND OUT WHAT THE EXACT NUMBER IS.

WHAT NUMBERS CITE THE 61 PERCENT THAT SUPPORT FOR IT IN THIS 2018 GUBERNATORIAL ELECTION.

THAT'S TRUE, BUT THAT WAS A DECRIMINALIZATION/LEGALIZATION ISSUE.

AT MOST, 61 PERCENT OF THE VOTERS SUPPORT THE SIX STORES.

WE KNOW FROM THE LETTERS AND WE KNOW FROM OUR OWN EXPERIENCE THAT NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THOSE ALSO SUPPORT STORES.

LET'S SAY 50 PERCENT OF THEM SUPPORT STORES, 50 PERCENT JUST SUPPORT THE IDEA.

WELL, 50 PERCENT OF 61 PERCENT IS ABOUT 30 PERCENT SUPPORT FOR SIX MARIJUANA STORES AND TAKEN UP HIGHER.

LET'S SAY 80 PERCENT SUPPORT IT.

EIGHTY PERCENT OF 61 PERCENT IS ONLY 48 PERCENT, 70 PERCENT IS EVEN LESS.

THAT NUMBER WON'T GO HIGHER BECAUSE ANYONE THAT VOTED AGAINST A RECREATIONAL OR DECRIMINALIZATION IS NOT LIKELY TO VOTE FOR SIX STORES HERE IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

WE NEED TO GET AN ACCURATE NUMBER.

THE STATE BALLOT DIDN'T ASK THAT QUESTION.

DO YOU WANT SIX STORES IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP? THAT'S THE QUESTION TO BE ASKED.

WE'VE GOT SOME INFORMATION.

I WOULD ALSO ARGUE THAT CLERK GUTHRIE'S ELECTION LAST AUGUST IS A REFERENDUM ON RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA.

THERE WAS NO BIGGER SUPPORTER OF MARIJUANA ON THIS BOARD FOR HIS EIGHT-YEAR TERM THAN BRETT DREYFUS.

WE ALL SAW THAT.

HE GOT TALKING ABOUT MARIJUANA AND HE WAS ON FIRE.

HE LOVED THIS TOPIC.

[02:05:01]

HE WOULD TALK AND PROSELYTIZE AND BROWBEAT US AND HE WOULD GO ON, WE HAD TO CALL THE QUESTION A FEW TIMES.

HE WAS PASSIONATE ABOUT WHAT A GREAT THING MARIJUANA WAS FOR MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

IT WAS HIS ISSUE.

AS DEBORAH CLEANING UP THE CLERK'S OFFICE THESE DAYS, WE SEE THAT OTHER ISSUES PROBABLY GOT IGNORED.

BUT THAT WAS HIS ISSUE.

HE LOST 26-74 PERCENT.

I'M SURE NO OTHER INCUMBENT IN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN LOST BY THAT NUMBER LAST YEAR.

A LOT OF IT WAS DEBORAH RAN A GREAT CAMPAIGNING.

SHE HAD GREAT HELP FOR MANY OF US IN THIS MEETING.

SOME OF THAT VOTE WAS A VOTE ON BRETT'S UNBRIDLED SUPPORT FOR MARIJUANA AND MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP, SO THERE'S LOTS OF DATA POINTS HERE, NOT JUST THE STATE REFERENDUM.

I DON'T THINK ANY OF THEM GIVE US THE ACCURATE ANSWER RIGHT NOW.

WE DON'T HAVE THAT ACCURATE ANSWER AND WE'VE GOT TO TAKE THIS TIME TO GET THAT ANSWER.

DIRECTOR CLARK IS ON THE RIGHT TRACK TO GET A SCIENTIFIC SURVEY BEFORE THE BOARD TO APPROVE.

WE DON'T KNOW THAT NUMBER AND WE WILL KNOW IT AND THERE WILL BE A MARGIN OF ERROR WITH IT.

BUT I THINK WE HAVE TO AGREE THAT WE'RE GOING TO ASSUME THAT AND TAKE THE RESULTS AS THEY COME BACK TO US.

IF IT COMES BACK 55-45 [INAUDIBLE] 45 SAYS, "WELL, WITH A MARGIN OF ERROR, WE COULD HAVE HAD 55 PERCENT." IN THAT CASE, YOU'RE BASICALLY GOING TO SAY THERE IS NO RESULTS EXCEPT FOR A HUGE LANDSLIDE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO ACCEPT.

WE'VE GOT TO UNDERSTAND THERE COULD BE A MARGIN OF ERROR HERE, BUT WE'VE GOT TO TAKE THE STEP TO FIND OUT HOW THE PUBLIC FEELS ABOUT THIS ISSUE.

IT'S IMPORTANT AND SHORT OF DOING THAT AND CONTINUE THIS DISCUSSION AND STARTING TO DRAFT THE ORDINANCE IN THE NEXT ITEM ON THE BOARD, I BELIEVE IS PREMATURE.

WE NEED TO GET THIS DATA BEFORE WE TAKE ANY MORE DECISIVE STEPS AND CHANGING OUR ORDINANCE AS A DECISIVE STEP.

TO DO THAT NOW IS TO BE PICKING OUT CARPETING AND FURNITURE FOR A HOUSE AND THE DESIGN ISN'T BACK FROM THE ARCHITECT YET, OR WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM THE BANK IF WE CAN EVEN BUY IT.

IT'S REALLY PREMATURE AND PRESUMPTUOUS.

WE OWE IT TO OUR RESIDENTS BEFORE WE TAKE ANY MORE STEPS TOWARDS THIS ORDINANCE TO FIND OUT WHAT THEY BELIEVE ABOUT IT.

THE LETTERS ARE TELLING US 29-1 THAT THEY'RE OPPOSED TO IT.

IT'S PROBABLY NOT THAT STRONG OF A NUMBER, BUT IT IS.

THE INDICATIONS RIGHT NOW IS THERE'S A LOT OF OPPOSITION TO THIS.

FOR US TO CONTINUE TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE TONIGHT WITHOUT DATA THAT SHOWS OUR RESIDENTS SUPPORT THIS IS AN INVITATION FOR DISASTER FOR THIS WAR, DISASTER.

BECAUSE WHAT CAN HAPPEN IS THEY CAN GO OUT AND COLLECT 1,070 SIGNATURES AND PUT THIS ON THEIR BALLOT.

IF IT'S ON THE BALLOT, THEY'RE YANKING IT AWAY FROM US.

THEY'RE SAYING, WE DON'T TRUST THIS BOARD.

WE'RE GOING TO PUT IT UP FOR A REFERENDUM BECAUSE WE DON'T TRUST THIS BOARD.

THEY DON'T TRUST US ON MARIJUANA.

HOW DO YOU THINK THE BROADBAND ISSUE IS GOING TO GO OVER WITH THAT? THEY WON'T TRUST US ON THAT.

HOW DO YOU THINK THE NEXT POLICE AND FIRE MILLAGE IS GOING TO GO OVER WITH THEM, IF THEY HAVE TO YANK THE MARIJUANA ISSUE AWAY FROM US? THAT ISSUE WON'T GO WELL.

HOW ABOUT THE NEXT TIME WE NEED TO FIX ROADS OR OTHER HUGE INFRASTRUCTURE? IF WE LOSE THE TRUST OF THIS BOARD WHICH WE'VE ENJOYED THE PAST FOUR YEARS, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A VERY DIFFICULT TIME DOING ANYTHING BIG IN THIS TOWNSHIP FOR A LONG, LONG TIME.

TO MOVE AHEAD WITH THIS ORDINANCE UNTIL WE HAVE THE SURVEY BACK IS A HUGE MISTAKE, IN MY OPINION.

WE DO THAT AT RISK OF LOSING THE TRUST OF OUR 43,600 RESIDENTS.

WE CAN HAVE THIS SURVEY BY THE END OF THE SUMMER.

WE'VE GOT 10 GOALS TO WORK ON UNTIL THE END OF THE SUMMER.

TO PROCEED WITH THIS ORDINANCE TONIGHT OR ANYTIME BEFORE THE SURVEY RESULTS BACK IS AN INSULT TO OUR RESIDENTS.

WE OWE IT TO THEM TO FIND OUT HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT MARIJUANA IN A SCIENTIFICALLY CONDUCTED SURVEY AND NOT TO GO BY OUR GUT FEELINGS.

PERSONALLY, YEAH. NO, THIS ISN'T ABOUT PERSONAL FEELINGS.

IT'S ABOUT US ACTING AS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THIS TOWNSHIP AND MAKING THE DECISION BASED ON WHAT IS BEST FOR THE TOWNSHIP.

NOT OUR GUT FEELING, BUT WHAT IS BEST BASED ON THE SCIENCE.

AT OUR BOARD RETREAT, AT LEAST TWO MEMBERS SAID, "I BASE MY DECISIONS ON DATA AND SCIENCE." WELL, I'M CALLING ON THE ENTIRE BOARD TO MAKE THIS DECISION BASED ON DATA AND SCIENCE.

WAIT FOR THE RESULTS FROM THE SURVEY.

FROM THERE, WE CAN TAKE ACTION EITHER TO MOVE FORWARD AND APPROVE AN ORDINANCE OR TO STOP IT, THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE WE'VE GOTTEN A CLEAR MESSAGE THAT OUR RESIDENTS DON'T WANT RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA, SIX STORES AS THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE.

WE'LL HAVE THE DATA AT THE END OF THE SUMMER.

WE DON'T HAVE IT NOW.

THIS IS NO TIME TO BEGIN DRAFTING OUR ORDINANCE FOR SOMETHING WE DON'T HAVE GOOD DATA ON.

[02:10:01]

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> I'LL SAY THAT COULD BE THE END OF THE SUMMER.

IF, [INAUDIBLE].

I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO THIS FOLKLORE WITH TWO DIFFERENT SURVEYS.

WE COULD GO QUICKLY WITH JUST THE MARIJUANA SURVEY IN THE MEANTIME, THEN BE DOING THE OVERALL SURVEY.

I THINK WE ALL ARE TO FIND OUT FROM OUR RESIDENTS, WHETHER THEY THINK THAT THIS WILL ADD TO, DETRACT FROM OR BE NEUTRAL WITH REGARD TO US BEING MERIDIAN, IN THE NUMBER ONE PLACE TO LIVE IN MICHIGAN.

WE WOULD FIND OUT WHAT DO PEOPLE THINK? HOW DID THEY FEEL? THEY ARE THE ONES WHO MADE IT THIS COMMUNITY? [INAUDIBLE]

>>THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR [INAUDIBLE].

I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T NEED TO RAISE MY HAND AND INTERRUPT YOU.

[OVERLAPPING].

I CONCUR WITH PRESSURE TO SHAME, I WANTED TO PASS THE PEOPLE THOSE QUESTION ON THE SURVEY.

SINCE SHE DID MENTION MY CAMPAIGN AND WINNING BY 74 PERCENT IN AUGUST, I WILL MENTION THAT THERE WERE PROBABLY OVER, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE ALMOST 10 THOUSAND PEOPLE THAT I CALLED DURING MY CAMPAIGN.

I HAD ONE PERSON WHO REACHED OUT TO ME ANONYMOUSLY THROUGH TEXTS AND DID NOT WANT TO SHARE WHO THEY ARE WHICH IS FINE.

IT'S NO BIG DEAL TO ME. BUT ONE PERSON REACHED OUT TO ME AND ASKED ME ABOUT MARIJUANA AND THEY WORKED FOR THE MARIJUANA INDUSTRY AND THAT'S FINE.

BUT AS YOU WERE TALKING, TREASURER JUSTIN(PHONETIC), I WROTE DOWN THE THREE TOP ISSUES THAT I HEARD FROM RESIDENTS LAST SUMMER THAT I CONTINUALLY HEAR ON A REGULAR BASIS THAT IS IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP SCHOOLS AND THAT IS ROADS.

FIXING THE ROADS, OF COURSE, BLIGHTS, ELIMINATING BLIGHT FROM OUR DOWNTOWN BUSINESS GESTURES AND REVITALIZING OUR DOWNTOWN BUSINESS DISTRICT AND SOCIAL EQUITY.

THOSE WERE SOCIAL EQUITY OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE OF THE CLIMATE AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL.

I HAD ZERO PEOPLE ASK ME ABOUT MEDICAL MARIJUANA, ABOUT RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA.

I HAD ZERO PEOPLE TELL ME THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT GETTING MARIJUANA, NO ONE SAID ANY OF THAT TO ME.

OUT OF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT I CONTACTED AND INTRODUCED MYSELF TO, AND TALKED ABOUT FIXING THE ELECTION ADMINISTRATION AND MAKING THAT BETTER FOR THE COMMUNITY.

THEY WANTED THEIR ROADS FIXED, BUSINESS DISTRICTS FIXED, AND SOCIAL EQUITY; BE TREATED FAIRLY IN THE COMMUNITY.

I DO THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOT IGNORE RESIDENTS.

I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO ASK THEM, TO LISTEN AND TO HEAR FROM THEM.

WE HAVE RECEIVED A NUMBER OF LETTERS.

WE'VE RECEIVED A NUMBER OF LETTERS TODAY.

YESTERDAY, IN BETWEEN THE PACKET BEING PUBLISHED AND TODAY.

I HOPE ALL BOARD MEMBERS HAVE A CHANCE TO READ THOSE LETTERS AND THEY WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE NEXT [INAUDIBLE] [NOISE] I DON'T THINK THAT IT SHOULD BE DISCLUDED FROM THE SURVEY.

I THINK IT SHOULD BE INCLUDED.

I THINK IT'S A VALID QUESTION.

I THINK THERE ARE MANY VALID QUESTIONS.

I THINK WE HAVE A BOARD, I THINK IN UNISON AS A UNITY, AS A GROUP.

I THINK WE ALL ARE CONCERNED AND CARE ABOUT WHAT OUR RESIDENTS SAY IN THERE.

I THINK ALL OF US VALUE THEM, THINK WE CAN ALL AGREE UPON THAT.

I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE FEELS RUSHED TO MAKE A DECISION.

I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO WHAT I SAID PROBABLY THREE MONTHS AGO AND I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY TO DISCUSS THIS AT NAUSEAM.

I DO WANT TO SEE WHAT THE RESIDENTS WANT TO SAY IN A SURVEY BEFORE WE CONTINUE HAVING A DISCUSSION EVERY SINGLE BOARD MEETING, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEM WEIGH IN ON IT.

>>OKAY. DID THE ROYAL OAK COMMUNITY SURVEY FOR MARIJUANA AND THEY HAVE AN EITH; IT'S AN EIGHT PART QUESTION, WITH EIGHT DIFFERENT QUESTIONS ABOUT MARIJUANA.

[02:15:04]

THAT'S ANOTHER THING THAT THIS BOARD WOULD HAVE TO CONSIDER.

I DON'T IMAGINE YOU ONLY WANT TO ASK JUST ONE QUESTION ABOUT MARIJUANA.

I WOULD IMAGINE YOU WOULD LIKE SOME MORE QUESTIONS ABOUT MARIJUANA.

IF YES, IF YOU APPROVE, WHERE IN THE COMMUNITY THEY WOULD BE, WHAT LICENSING, WHAT TYPE OF LIMITS AND OUR REQUIREMENTS SHOULD THE BUSINESS HAVE? THEN WHETHER OR NOT THEY VOTED IN SUPPORT OF DECRIMINALIZATION ACROSS THE STATE.

I WOULD HOPE THE BOARD WOULD WEIGH IN ON THE NUMBER OF QUESTIONS, SPECIFICITY OF THE QUESTIONS REGARDING MARIJUANA.

>> YES, QUESTIONS MIGHT BE VERY DIFFERENT THAN THIS.

BUT WE'RE STILL DISCUSSING WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE HAVING THOSE QUESTIONS [INAUDIBLE] AND FOR MYSELF AND TWO OTHER BOARD MEMBERS, ANYONE ELSE WANT TO CHIME IN? [NOISE].

[BACKGROUND] I GUESS SILENCE MEANS THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO ASK ANY MARIJUANA QUESTIONS, IS THAT RIGHT?

>> WE DON'T HAVE IT BEFORE US.

>> MISS JACKSON (PHONETIC).

YOU CAN'T HEAR THAT. YOU'RE MUTED.

>>FIRST OF ALL, I DIDN'T KNOW WE WERE AT A POSITION TO START FORMULATING QUESTIONS.

I THOUGHT WE WERE STILL TRYING TO DETERMINE WHO WOULD ASK WHATEVER QUESTIONS WE ASKED.

BUT, IF WHAT YOU WANT IS MY OPINION ON WHETHER OR NOT THERE SHOULD BE MARIJUANA QUESTIONS, I WOULD AGREE IF THEY ARE A PART OF A TOTAL COMMUNITY, A COMPLETE COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT, AS OPPOSED TO ONE SURVEY FOR MARIJUANA, AND ONE SURVEY FOR THE COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT.

>>THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT I HEARD FROM MISS GUTHRIE (PHONETIC) AND [INAUDIBLE] YES.

I STARTED THERE, BUT I SAID WE WOULD BE DOING IT DIFFERENTLY, IF THAT'S WHAT THE BOARD WANTED.

>> BUT STILL, I'M NOT [OVERLAPPING]

>> NO, I WASN'T ASKING YOU TO FORMULATE THE QUESTIONS, I WAS ASKING WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE GOING TO INCLUDE THEM.

IN GENERAL, THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING.

SO YOU'RE RIGHT AND YOUR ANSWER'S CORRECT. MRS. WISINSKI.

>> I WOULD CONCUR WITH TRUSTEE JACKSON.

IT WAS FEELING MORE ABOUT VALIDITY OF A SURVEY OVERALL AS OPPOSED TO THE EXACT QUESTIONS BEING ASKED IN THAT SURVEY AT THIS POINT IN TIME.

I'D STILL HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT INCLUDING MARIJUANA QUESTIONS IN THE SURVEY, NOT TO SAY I'M NOT OPEN TO THAT.

BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE TIME TO TALK ABOUT THOSE CONCERNS.

I DO THINK A MULTI-TOPIC SURVEY IS THE BEST, BUT I THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT.

I THINK LIKE CLERK GUTHRIE SAID, WE DO CARE WHAT OUR CITIZENS HAVE TO SAY.

IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT. DIRECTOR CLARK, I THINK IF WE CAN GET A FEW MORE EXAMPLES, WE CAN, IT'S ESCAPING MY BRAIN RIGHT NOW, REDUCE THE LEVEL OF AIR AND THEN GO ON TO WHAT DO WE INCLUDE.

I THINK THAT'S WHERE I STAND RIGHT NOW.

>> VERY WELL. THANK YOU. MR. OPSOMMER.

>> ONE FUNDAMENTAL DISTINCTION THAT I SEE BETWEEN THE SURVEY THAT THE CITY OF ROYAL OAK DID THROUGH THIS VENDOR THAT DIRECTOR CLARK BROUGHT US IN WHERE WE'RE AT, THEY CONDUCTED THIS BACK IN 2019 BEFORE THEY HAD TAKEN ANY STEP UNDER A MEDICAL [INAUDIBLE].

>> THEY WERE ELICITING FEEDBACK AT A MUCH EASIER CAPACITY BECAUSE THEY WERE OPEN-ENDED.

THEY HAD ALL THE OPTIONS AND TOOLS AVAILABLE TO THEM AT THAT TIME.

THE CRAFT BOTH ORDINANCES OR IN OUR CASE, THERE WILL BE THREE ORDINANCES IS AT MINIMUM, IF WE WERE TO HOP IN UNDER [INAUDIBLE] OUR ADULT USE.

OUR CART IS BEFORE THE HORSE.

MY CONCERN IS HOW YOU DISTILL THE ORDINANCE,

[02:20:04]

WHICH IS IN OUR PACKET TONIGHT, AND IT'S PAGES 99-128, SO IT'S A 29-PAGE ORDINANCE, WITH OVERLAY DISTRICTS INTO A SURVEY.

THAT'S THE OTHER DISTINCTION ON WHAT ROYAL OAK DID.

THEY ACTUALLY DID WHAT OTHER COMMUNITIES ARE DOING AND THEY JUST REGULATED BY ZONING.

WELL, ACTUALLY, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR OUTCOME WAS, BUT THAT'S WHAT THEIR SURVEY ATTENDED.

THEY WERE LOOKING AT, "OKAY, WELL, LET'S JUST REGULATE THIS LIKE ANY OTHER COMMODITY." THOUGH IF YOU HAVE COMMERCIAL ZONING WHERE YOU CAN REZONE TO COMMERCIAL, THEY WERE LOOKING AT THAT KIND OF MODEL, OR INDUSTRIAL, OR PROFESSIONAL AND OFFICE.

WE WENT WAY AND ABOVE THAT AND CREATE AN OVERLAY DISTRICTS WITH A SMALL FRACTION OF OUR INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL PARCELS AND PUT THEM IN THAT, OR PUT THEM INTO THOSE OVERLAY DISTRICTS AND GEOGRAPHICALLY DISPERSED THEM ACROSS THE TOWNSHIP.

JUST RIGHT THERE, WE'RE IN A FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT ROUTE.

I'M STILL PROCESSING HOW AND IF ALL OF THAT CAN BE DISTILLED, AND THEN OF COURSE, WE HAD THE LEGAL MEMORANDUM FROM OUR PREVIOUS MEETING.

I FORGET HOW MANY IT WAS BUT IT WAS QUITE LENGTHY.

I THINK MATT'S MEMORANDUM WAS EIGHT PAGES ON CASE LAW, ESPECIALLY USE PERMITS, THE OTHER JARGON AND LEGAL TERMINOLOGY THAT COME UP.

THE OTHER THING THAT WE HAVE TO REMEMBER IS THAT WE ARE INTO THIS PROCESS.

WE HAVE FOUR SPECIAL USE PERMITS APPROVED.

WHEN THE APPLICANTS WHO WON THE LOTTERY CAME FORWARD AND TO FIGHT FOR THEIR SPECIAL USE PERMIT, THAT IS THE VETTING THAT WE GO THROUGH, WHETHER IT'S A DRIVE-THROUGH WINDOW, WHETHER IT'S LARGE DEVELOPMENT OF 25,000 SQUARE FEET OR MORE, WHETHER IT'S WETLAND USE PERMITS, THAT SPECIAL USE PERMITTING PROCESS IS HOW WE VET THESE ENTITIES AND THEIR ABILITY TO OPERATE.

WE EXERCISE SOLE DISCRETION ON A SPECIAL USE PERMIT.

WE CAN CONDITION IT, WE CAN DENY IT WITHOUT ANY CAUSE, AND WE CAN DENY IT WITH ANY CAUSE.

WE HAVE ABSOLUTE DISCRETION AND THAT'S WHY WE SELECTED THAT PROCESS.

ALL OF THAT IS TO SAY I CAN'T WRAP MY HEAD AROUND HOW YOU SURVEY OUR PROCESS IN THE ORDINANCES THAT WE'VE DEVELOPED AND THE OVERLAY DISTRICTS.

BUT I CAN'T SAY THAT A LOT OF THE PUBLIC HAS ENGAGED THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF THAT DEVELOPMENT., IT WAS A YEAR-LONG PROCESS.

DURING THE COURSE OF THAT, WE HAD MANY RESIDENTS SIT IN IN THE HIGH SIDE, AN OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THEM HAVE NO CONCERN.

WE HAD A LOT OF CONTROVERSIAL DEVELOPMENTS THAT WOULD BRING OUT 50-60 RESIDENTS FROM A SINGLE NEIGHBORHOOD WHILE WE WERE DEVELOPING THAT ORDINANCE.

THEN MY FINAL CONCERN, JUST GENERALLY, THIS IS A DIVISIVE ISSUE.

LET'S JUST ALL BE HONEST.

THIS ISSUE CAUSES DIVISION.

IT'S LIKE ANY SOCIAL ISSUE.

IF WE WERE TALKING ABOUT ABORTION AND PRO-CHOICE VERSUS PRO-LIFE OR ANY OTHER SOCIAL ISSUE, THERE'S GOING TO BE STRONG FEELINGS THAT PEOPLE HAVE HELD SINCE CHILDHOOD.

ANY SOCIAL ISSUE, PEOPLE HAVE VERY LOCKED IN POSITION.

MY CONCERN IS GIVEN HOW DIFFICULT IT IS TO CONSTRUCT A SURVEY THAT REFLECTS WHERE WE'RE AT IN THE PROCESS VERSUS WHERE ROYAL OAK WAS, WHICH WAS STARTING, CAN WE INSTILL PUBLIC TRUST? REGARDLESS OF HOW THE SURVEY COMES OUT, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE DISTRUSTFUL.

IF YOU'RE ON THE YES SIDE OF THE ISSUE, YOU VOTED YES AND YOU PASSIONATELY BELIEVE THE TOWNSHIP SHOULD OPT IN, DOES A SURVEY WITH 350 RESPONDENTS INVALIDATE AN ELECTION IN WHICH 24,000 VOTES WERE CAST AND THE STATE HAD THE HIGHEST TURNOUT IN A GUBERNATORIAL ELECTION EVER? CONVERSELY, IF YOU'RE ON THE NO SIDE AND IT TRACKS CLOSELY, YOU MIGHT FEEL LIKE THE QUESTIONS WERE NOT INTIMATE ENOUGH AND ENOUGH INFORMATION WAS NOT DIVULGED OR YOUR VIEWPOINT WASN'T DIVULGED.

WE HAVE YET TO SEE ANY DATA ON CRIME THAT RESULTS FROM THESE FACILITIES.

IF YOU LOOK AT BRIDGE MAGAZINE TODAY, THERE WAS A STORY PUBLISHED WHERE THE POLICE CHIEF IN POWELL SAID THEY'VE HAD ONE CALL TO THEIR FACILITIES AND THAT WAS AN EMPLOYEE EMBEZZLING.

IT WAS NOT A PATRON OR CRIMINAL ACTIVITY COMING OUT OF THE PROPERTY.

I THINK EITHER WAY, THERE'S GOING TO BE DISTRUST.

I DON'T SEE THE SURVEY RECONCILING THAT BECAUSE I THINK EVERYONE HAS VERY STRONG OPINIONS.

[02:25:01]

I KNOW THAT THIS IS A TOUGH ISSUE, THERE'S NO OTHER WAY TO SAY IT.

I DO THINK LEGALLY, WERE QUITE CONSTRAINED ON WHAT WE CAN DO AND THE SURVEY COULD GIVE A LOT OF FALSE HOPE.

I DON'T WANT TO RAMBLE ON, I WANT TO TURN IT OVER FOR THE REST OF THE BOARD MEMBERS. THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBER WANT TO TALK RIGHT NOW? MS. GUTHRIE.

>> I THINK THE SURVEY TO ME MEANS THAT WE'RE LISTENING, IT MEANS THAT WE CARE.

IT MEANS THAT WE WANT TO HEAR FROM THEM.

I THINK IT SHOWS THAT WE'RE AN OPEN COMMUNICATION BOARD.

CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG WITH ANY OF THESE, I THINK IT SHOWS THAT WE'RE AN OPEN COMMUNICATION BOARD.

I THINK IT SHOWS THAT WE'RE TRANSPARENT.

I THINK IT SHOWS THAT WE WANT TO ENGAGE WITH OUR RESIDENTS.

I THINK IT SHOWS THAT WE WANT TO BE INCLUSIVE.

THAT'S WHAT A SURVEY MEANS TO ME.

WHEN THERE IS A DIVISIVE ISSUE LIKE THIS, IT SHOWS THAT WE CARE ABOUT THESE IMPORTANT TOPICS WITH OUR RESIDENTS, THAT WE'RE TOGETHER, AND THAT IT MATTERS TO US.

THAT'S WHAT ASKING THIS QUESTION TO ME MEANS.

IT IS A TOUGH TOPIC.

I AGREE WITH TRUSTEE OPSOMMER 100 PERCENT THAT IT'S A TOUGH TOPIC.

I ALSO AGREE WITH TRUSTEE WISINSKI AND TRUSTEE JACKSON IN THE STATEMENTS THAT THEY MADE AS WELL.

SO FOR ME, HAVING DIRECTOR CLARK COME BACK WITH THREE OR FOUR PROPOSALS WITH QUOTES THAT SHOW A MULTI-QUESTIONNAIRE AND HOW MUCH THAT COSTS WITH SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS THAT TRUSTEE OPSOMMER AND WISINSKI WERE TALKING ABOUT, AND THEY KNOW WAY MORE THAN I DO ON THIS TOPIC IN REGARDS TO LEVEL OF CONFIDENCE AND SAMPLE SIZE AND THEY'RE EXPERTS IN THAT ARENA.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT AS THE NEXT STEP THAT WE ARE ASKING DIRECTOR CLARK TO PROVIDE TO THE BOARD.

I FEEL BAD FOR DIRECTOR CLARK LISTENING TO US GO ON ABOUT MULTIPLE QUESTIONS ABOUT MARIJUANA AND SHE'S LOOKING TO US AND WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO BRING NEXT TIME? I THINK WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT, I THINK TRUSTEE JACKSON SAID THIS, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THAT WE'RE NOT AT THE DEVELOPING THE QUESTIONS YET AND WHAT THOSE QUESTIONS ARE.

DIRECTOR CLARK IS REALLY LOOKING AT, "AM I DOING A SINGLE SURVEY, AM I DOING A MULTIPLE MULTIPLE SURVEY? WE ALL AGREE TO DO A SURVEY LIKE WE'VE ALWAYS DONE AND THAT WE WOULD LIKE HER TO BRING THIS BACK TO US OPEN AT THE NEXT MEETING.

>> I THINK YOU'VE SUMMARIZED IT WELL.

WE ARE NOT FORMULATING QUESTIONS TONIGHT, AND PULLING OUT QUESTIONS FROM OTHER SURVEYS OR OTHER PEOPLE'S SURVEYS IS NOT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR EITHER.

IF THAT WAS CONFUSING, WE WANT TO UNCONFUSE THAT.

WHAT WE WANT IS TO CHOOSE THE RIGHT COMPANY TO GIVE US THE KIND OF SCIENTIFIC SURVEY WITH THE KIND OF RELIABLE RESULTS THAT WE CAN COUNT ON, AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT.

IT HAD ENCLOSED PRICING AS WELL AS INFORMATION ABOUT THOSE COMPANIES AND THEIR RELIABILITY AND WHAT THEY CAN'T DO FOR US.

MRS. WISINSKI, YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP. OH, YOU DIDN'T? YOU WAVE AT ME A LOT. [LAUGHTER]. MR. DESCHAINE.

>> THANK YOU. I AGREE WITH TRUSTEE OPSOMMER.

COUPLE OF POINTS, ONE IS THAT THIS IS A DIVISIVE ISSUE, AND IT'S GOING TO BE A TOUGH VOTE FOR THIS BOARD TO MAKE BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF OPPOSITION TO WHATEVER VOTE WE TAKE.

AGAIN, DATA BEHIND THAT VOTE WOULD HELP.

I ALSO AGREE WITH HIM THAT WE'VE COME A WAYS ALONG THIS PATH ALREADY.

WE'VE APPROVED SIX MEDICAL MARIJUANA SITES; FOUR OF THEM HAVE GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS, AND THEY'VE DECIDED NOT TO CONTINUE.

NONE OF THEM APPLIED FOR A PERMIT TO OPEN.

THEY'VE STOPPED THE PROCESS BECAUSE THEY HAVE TOLD US THE ECONOMICS OF OPIUM, MEDICAL-ONLY MARIJUANA, MEDICAL MARIJUANA CLINIC DOESN'T WORK FOR THEM.

[02:30:04]

THEY'VE BASICALLY SAID TO US THEY DON'T INTEND TO OPEN WHO JUST HAVE LICENSE; NONETHELESS, THEY ARE APPROVED FOR THAT.

I'M GLAD ATTORNEY KUSCHEL WAS STILL HERE BECAUSE BASED ON WHAT I CLING FROM THE LAST DISCUSSION, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG HERE, MATT, THAT WE APPROVED SIX MEDICAL.

UNLESS WE WANT TO BE SUED BY EVERYBODY AND THEIR BROTHER, WE'RE GOING TO LIKELY HAVE TO APPROVE SIX RECREATIONAL AND THE SIX LOCATIONS THAT WE HAVE NOW.

I THINK WE ALSO HEARD THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GO BACK AND REVAMP THAT MEDICAL ORDINANCE TO MOVE FORWARD IF WE WANT TO GRANDFATHER THEM IN, BUT THIS APPEARS TO BE MOVING TO THREE OR TWO OR ONE OR FIVE ISN'T REALLY FEASIBLE.

WE'VE SET THE NUMBER AT SIX, AND BASED ON WHAT I READ AS CASE LAW, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A HARD TIME CHANGING THAT NUMBER.

THAT ACTUALLY LEADS TO A SURVEY BEING A SIMPLER SURVEY THAN ROYAL OAKS.

AS TRUSTEE OPSOMMER POINTED OUT, THEY HAD A LOT OF QUESTIONS TO ASK.

WE HAVE ONE BASIC QUESTION TO ASK.

DO YOU WISH THE BOARD TO OPT INTO RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA USING THE SIX MEDICAL MARIJUANA OVERLAY PERMITS OR DISTRICTS? IT'S A STRAIGHTFORWARD QUESTION.

DO YOU WANT THE BOARD TO OPT IN USING THE SIX PERMITTED DISTRICTS TO RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA?

>> I'M NOT SURE IF I GOT THE WORDING OF THE QUESTION, [OVERLAPPING] BUT I AGREE THAT IT IS SIMPLE.

IT'S NOT AS COMPLICATED AS IT WAS INDICATED [INAUDIBLE].

>> THAT'S THE ESSENTIAL QUESTION WE'VE GOT TO ASK OUR RESIDENTS.

DO YOU WANT THIS BOARD TO OPT IN AND CONVERT OUR SIX MEDICAL FACILITIES TO RECREATIONAL FACILITIES? THAT'S THE ESSENCE OF THE QUESTION.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO TALK ABOUT FIVE, NOT TALKING ABOUT SEVEN, NOT TALKING ABOUT NEW AREAS.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SIX EXISTING MEDICAL MARIJUANA OVERLAY DISTRICTS CONVERTING THEM TO RECREATIONAL.

THAT'S THE ANSWER I WANT TO HEAR FROM OUR RESIDENTS.

DO YOU WANT US TO DO THAT?

>> BEFORE CALLING ON MR. KUSCHEL, I WILL MENTION THAT I'M NOT SURE YOU READ THAT RIGHT.

I DON'T THINK HE SAID THAT WE'RE STUCK WITH SIX.

I THINK HE SAID WE COULD GO DOWN TO A DIFFERENT NUMBER, BUT WE'LL ASK HIM THAT.

>> SUPERVISOR, MAY I [OVERLAPPING]?

>> YES, GO AHEAD, MS. WISINSKI.

>> THIS IS THE NEXT DISCUSSION ITEM, ISN'T IT? ARE WE MOVING ON TO THE NEXT DISCUSSION?

>> WE'RE SURE TO DO IT BOTH. YEAH, THAT'S THE SAME THING.

>> THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR.

>> MR. KUSCHEL.

IN MY RESPONSE TO THAT QUESTION OF WHETHER YOU CAN REDUCE THE NUMBER OF AVAILABLE MEDICAL MARIJUANA PERMITS.

>> NO, QUESTION IS WHETHER WE CAN REDUCE.

I HAVE A DIFFERENT NUMBER OF RECREATIONAL THAN WE DO MEDICAL.

>> WHETHER YOU CAN HAVE A DIFFERENT NUMBER OF RECREATIONAL PERMITS THAN MEDICAL? YES, BUT IT'S COMPLICATED AND IT DEPENDS ON HOW YOU CHOOSE THAT APPROACH.

THE WAY WE'VE LAID IT OUT IN THE MEMO IS THAT IF THE BOARD ADOPTS A SIMILAR ORDINANCE TO WHAT IT HAS FOR MEDICAL AND SETS A CAP AND SAYS ONLY TWO ARE ONLY FOR RETAILER ESTABLISHMENTS, WHICH IS THE TWIN TO THE PROVISIONING CENTER, WHAT WE'VE SEEN IN OTHER COMMUNITIES IS A HIGH DEGREE OF LITIGATION.

THERE'S A HIGH LITIGATION RISK IF WE ADOPT THE HARD CAP THAT IS LESS THAN SIX.

WE'VE ALSO SEEN THAT IN AT LEAST ONE COMMUNITY, EVEN ADOPTING A PAIR OF SIX TO SIX MAY ALSO STILL YIELD LITIGATION, SO IT'S HARD TO SAY THE RISK DOES COME DOWN SOME BUT NOT ENTIRELY ELIMINATED.

THE OTHER OPTION WOULD BE THE EAST LANSING MODEL AND WHAT TRUSTEE OPSOMMER RAISED IN THE STUDY SESSION USING THE ZONING PROVISIONS AND YOUR SETBACKS TO LIMIT WHERE THOSE ESTABLISHMENTS COULD BE LOCATED AND, THEREFORE, NATURALLY LIMIT THE NUMBER, BUT WE WOULD NOT PUT A SPECIFIC CAP ON AVAILABLE PERMIT.

YES, IT WOULD LIMIT IT BECAUSE THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH COMMERCIAL SPACE WITHIN THOSE OVERLAY DISTRICTS AND WITHIN POTENTIAL SETBACKS TO BE DEVELOPED.

WE WOULDN'T PUT A NUMBER ON IT, SO YOU COULD SEE SOME RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA ESTABLISHMENTS DIFFERENT THAN YOUR MEDICAL PROVISIONING ARE.

>> WHAT MR. OPSOMMER AND ALSO MR. DESCHAINE ALSO SAID, WE'RE LIMITED TO SIX PLACES THAT WE LAY OUT,

[02:35:01]

IT HAD OVERLAYS AND BASICALLY, WITH THE OTHER CRITERIA THAT WE USE, THE ONLY SIX PLACES THAT YOU COULD PUT EITHER RECREATIONAL OR MEDICAL.

THAT MAY COMPLICATE THE ANALYSIS THAT YOU JUST GAVE.

THAT'S WHY I BROUGHT THAT UP. WE KNOW WHERE THINGS HAVE TO GO.

WE DON'T KNOW WHICH STOREFRONT, BUT WE KNOW BASICALLY WHERE THEY HAVE TO GO BECAUSE OF 1,000 FEET, NOW 500 FEET AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE LOOKED AT.

>> THAT'S HOW WE ENDED UP WITH THE SIX PLANS WE DID.

>> RIGHT. I AGREE THAT YOU'RE STILL GOING TO BE OPERATING WITHIN YOUR TOTAL SIX OVERLAYS.

THE QUESTION THEN IS HOW MANY ESTABLISHMENTS END UP GOING WITHIN THOSE?

>> MR. OPSOMMER?

>> YEAH. MATT, IN YOUR MEMORANDUM FROM FEBRUARY 16TH, YOU OUTLINED HOW THE TOWNSHIP THROUGH FIVE OR SIX DIFFERENT PROVISIONS IN THAT SCORING SYSTEM, THAT COULD ALSO COMPLEMENT A SPECIAL USE PERMITTING APPROVAL PROCESS THAT FITS WITHIN THIS EAST LANSING MODEL, HOW WE CAN SCORE AND PRIORITIZE THE EXISTING PERMIT HOLDER STATUS, WHETHER IT BE BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT, THE PERMIT BECAUSE THOSE ARE LEGALLY TWO SEPARATE THINGS.

THERE WERE FIVE OR SIX OF THEM THAT I'M TRYING TO FLIP THROUGH, BUT IF YOU COULD GO THROUGH THOSE, I THINK THAT'S JUST HELPFUL RELATIVE TO THE OVERVIEW THAT YOU JUST GAVE.

>> TO MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING THE QUESTION, YOU'RE ASKING WHAT TYPES OF FACTORS WOULD BE CONSIDERED IN COMPETITIVE REVIEW?

>> YEAH, YOU GUYS HAD A LIST IN THE FEBRUARY 16TH MEMO THAT YOU PUT TOGETHER, BUT SPECIFICALLY, THERE WERE FIVE OR SIX ITEMS THAT DEALT WITH EXISTING RELATIONSHIP STATUS WITH THE COMMUNITY. HERE IT IS, I FOUND IT.

>> RIGHT. YEAH. IT'S AT PAGES 7 AND 8 OF THAT MEMO DATED FEBRUARY 4TH IN YOUR FEBRUARY 16TH PACKET.

YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. THE CURRENT APPLICATION STATUS COULD BE WEIGHED OR CONSIDERED IN A NUMBER OF WAYS AS PART OF THE COMPETITIVE REVIEW PROCESS, WHICH YOU WOULD USE WITH A HARD CAP NUMBER OF PERMITS, THAT'S FOR SURE, AND AS YOU INDICATED COULD ALSO BE POTENTIALLY INCORPORATED INTO OTHER ORDINANCE SCHEMES.

WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT THERE IS FIRST IS WHETHER THEY'VE SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION.

THE TOWNSHIP RECEIVED UPWARDS OF 20 APPLICATIONS INTO THE LOTTERY PROCESS, SO EVEN HAVING SUBMITTED THAT APPLICATION WASN'T COMPLETE, YOU COULD AWARD POINTS FOR THAT.

WHETHER THAT APPLICATION THEN MOVED ONTO AN SUP PROCESS, YOU COULD AWARD POINTS FOR THAT.

WHETHER A MARIJUANA APPLICANT THEN RECEIVES AN SUP PERMIT, YOU COULD AWARD POINTS FOR THAT.

WHETHER THERE ARE OTHER SUPS THAT THAT ENTITY OR POTENTIALLY EVEN PRINCIPLES BECAUSE OFTEN WE'LL SEE LLCS ARE OWNED BY THE SAME FOLKS, WHETHER THEY HAVE OTHER APPLICATIONS OR SUPS THAT HAD BEEN APPLIED FOR OR AWARDED, THE COMPLETENESS OF THOSE APPLICATIONS, HOW WELL THOSE BUSINESSES FUNCTION WITHIN THE COMMUNITY, THOSE ARE ALL DIFFERENT THINGS YOU COULD BRING INTO A COMPETITIVE REVIEW PROCESS AND GIVING SOME ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO.

YES, IF YOU'RE CO-LOCATING A RETAILER ESTABLISHMENT WITH A PROVISIONING CENTER, THEN THAT IS ONE STOREFRONT WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP, WHICH LENDS SYNERGIES TO THAT BUSINESS AND THAT OPERATION.

IT REDUCES TRAFFIC AND DOES DIFFERENT THINGS SO YOU CAN AWARD POINTS TO SAY WE'RE RECOGNIZING NOT ONLY HOW THAT BUSINESS WOULD OPERATE SYNERGISTICALLY, BUT ALSO WE HAVE FAMILIARITY WITH THIS APPLICANT.

THEY'VE ALREADY SHOWN US A SERIOUS ATTEMPT AND EFFORT TO GET IN AND GET AN SUP, AND THAT SHOULD BE AWARDED.

AT THE SAME TIME, THEN YOU'D HAVE ALL THESE OTHER FACTORS THAT WE'VE PUT IN THERE THAT GIVES A NEW APPLICANT WHO EITHER DIDN'T APPLY IN THE LOTTERY OR WASN'T SELECTED IN THE LOTTERY.

THEY STILL GET A FAIR SHOT TO RISE ABOVE THE PERSON WHO DID WIN THAT LOTTERY.

YOU HAVE ALL THOSE OTHER FACTORS AS WELL.

>> TO PUT THAT IN LAY TERMS THESE CRITERIA AND HOW YOU WEIGHT THEM IN A SCORING SYSTEM WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE ADMINISTERED BY THE STAFF AND COULD BE A COMPONENT OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMITTING APPROVAL PROCESS THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE BOARD.

IT'S A WAY THAT CAN INSULATE THE TOWNSHIP FROM PERSPECTIVE LITIGATION BY NOT ALIENATING THOSE EXISTING PERMANENT HOLDERS,

[02:40:01]

WHICH IS OUR NUMBER ONE RISK BASED ON MY READING OF YOUR LEGAL MEMORANDUM FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING ON THE 16TH.

THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT.

THAT IS THE APPROACH THAT I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE, AND I REALLY DON'T SEE MANY OTHER WAYS FORWARD.

I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF DETAILS FOR THEM, HOW YOU CREATE THE SCORING SYSTEM AND HOW YOU WEIGHT IT, BUT I THINK GIVEN YOUR MEMORANDUM, JUST GETTING THAT BULLET-POINTED LIST OF 16 OR 18 CRITERIA THAT WE CAN START USING, IT GIVES US QUITE THE START.

I APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT YOUR FIRM HAS PUT INTO THIS.

THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, MATT, FOR THE EXPLANATION AND GOOD QUESTION.

I APPRECIATE FROM TRUSTEE OPSOMMER.

WE'VE GOT A LOT TO TAKE IN WITH THIS.

WE WENT BACK AND LOOKED AND WE STARTED MEDICAL MARIJUANA IN AUGUST OF 2018, AND WE FINISHED IT IN JUNE OF 2019.

WE SPENT 10-AND-A-HALF MONTHS ON IT.

SOME OF THAT WAS SPENT ON THE OVERLAY DISTRICTS, BUT LOT OF IT WAS SPENT ON THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF THIS ORDINANCE.

IT'S GOING TO TAKE US SOME TIME TO GET THIS RIGHT.

IT WON'T BE AS COMPLICATED IN TERMS OF WHERE TO PUT THEM, BUT IT'LL BE MORE COMPLICATED IN OTHER AREAS.

WE'RE GOING TO REALLY FOCUS ON THIS ONE WHEN WE DO IT AND DO IT RIGHT, AND DO IT SO WE DON'T GET SUED BY EVERYONE AS OTHER COMMUNITIES HAVE HAD.

APPRECIATE YOU MEANT USING THAT WORD, INVITATION TO LITIGATION MAP.

WE DON'T WANT THAT. WE DON'T WANT TO END UP WITH HUNDREDS OF THOUSAND DOLLARS IN LEGAL BILLS. WE WANT TO DO IT RIGHT.

WE WANT TO BE FOCUSED ON IT. BUT I THINK WE WANT TO DO IT KNOWING THAT WE'VE GOT A MAJORITY OF OUR RESIDENTS WHO HAVE SAID, YEAH, GO AHEAD AND DO THIS.

OTHERWISE, WE'RE DOING IT WONDERING IF MORE THAN HALF THE TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS ARE COMPLETELY OPPOSED TO THIS.

IF WE DO IT RIGHT, WE NEED TO DO IT WITH AUTHORITY.

WE NEED TO DO IT WITH AUTHENTICITY THAT WE'VE GOTTEN FROM A SOLID, SCIENTIFICALLY CONDUCTED SURVEY.

SHORT OF THAT, GUESSING, WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THE JOB WE NEED TO DO.

BUT FOR NOT GUESSING, WE KNOW WE HAVE SUPPORT FOR THIS AND THE 61 PERCENT THAT SUPPORTED IT ON THE STATE BALLOT SUPPORTED IT IN SIX STORES AND WE KNOW WE SHOULD MOVE AHEAD.

WITH A VERY DIFFERENT NUMBER, WE MAY HAVE A DIFFERENT DIRECTION TO GO.

WE DON'T KNOW YET. I THINK WE HAVE TO KNOW IT BEFORE WE CAN DO THIS RIGHT.

TO DO IT RIGHT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THESE STORES DO NOT GET TO OPEN IN 2021.

WELL, A LOT OF THE THINGS ARE OPEN IN 2021.

IT'S A RECOVERY YEAR FOR A LOT OF FEW STORES.

I THINK OUR BEST HOPE FOR DOING THIS WOULD BE THAT WE GET THIS DONE BY THE END OF THE YEAR AND THESE STORES THAT ARE APPROVED, IF THAT'S WHAT OUR RESIDENTS SAY, APPROVED THESE SIX STORES, WILL HAVE THE GREEN LIGHT TO OPEN UP AND BREAK GROUND IN THE SPRING OF 2022 AND BE OPENED AT THE FOLLOWING SUMMER.

THAT WOULD BE A REASONABLE, PRUDENT, CAREFUL APPROACH.

WE TALKED ON PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND A DIVISIVE ISSUE, DO WE WEIGH ANYTHING LESS THAN PRUDENT AND CAREFUL AND THOUGHTFUL? I JUST DON'T SEE AN UPSIDE TO MAKE IT TO PROGRESSING WITH THIS ORDINANCE UNTIL WE'VE GOT CLEAR DIRECTION FROM OUR RESIDENTS.

WITHOUT IT, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE, WE GOT FIVE LETTERS TODAY, WE'RE GOING TO GET FIVE LETTERS EVERY DAY FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS WINTER, SPRING, AND SUMMER, IT'S GOING TO CATCH FIRE OUT THERE AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ALL KINDS OF PRO AND CON, PEOPLE COMING AT US.

AS DAN POINTED OUT, PEOPLE ARE DIVIDED ON THIS ISSUE.

LET'S TAKE SOME TIME. LET'S GET A GOOD SURVEY OUT THERE.

LET'S CALM THIS DOWN.

WE ARE PRUDENT PEOPLE.

THIS BOARD HAS MADE GOOD DECISIONS IN THE PAST.

WE ARE ALL EDUCATED.

WE WERE ALL VOTED TO BE A PROFESSIONAL LAW THAT REFLECTED THE PROFESSIONAL AND KIND NATURE OF OUR RESIDENTS.

OUR RESIDENTS AREN'T THE MOB THAT RANSACK THE CAPITAL.

THEY AREN'T PEOPLE THAT LIKE ACT AS A MOB.

THEY ARE PEOPLE THAT ACT THOUGHTFULLY, CAREFULLY, AND WITH A GOOD INFORMATION.

WE NEED TO REFLECT THAT AND TO WAIT THREE OR FOUR MONTHS TILL WE HAVE THIS SURVEY BACK.

IT'S NOT PUTTING UNDUE BURDEN ON ANYONE.

WERE NOT HERE FOR RESIDENTS THAT THIS STORES NEED TO GET OPENED UP RIGHT AWAY.

WE'RE HEARING FROM THE PRODUCERS.

WELL, WE HAVE LOTS OF DEVELOPERS THAT WANT TO BREAK GROUND ON NEW HOUSING ALL THE TIME, BUT WE DON'T SAY, THAT'S YOUR TIMELINE, GO AHEAD AND WE'LL FIGURE IT OUT LATER, OR FIGURE IT OUT AS YOU DO IT.

WE SAY WAIT UNTIL OUR PLANNING COMMISSION AND OUR BOARD HAS LOOKED AT YOUR PROPOSAL FOR A NEW APARTMENTS, FOR NEW HOMES.

THAT'S OUR PROCESS HERE IN MERIDIAN.

[02:45:03]

THAT SHOULD BE OUR PROCESS ON MARIJUANA AS WELL.

WE NEED TO GET ANSWERS FROM OUR RESIDENTS AND THEN DO THIS RIGHT, AND DO IT CAREFULLY, AND DO IT IN A WAY THAT WE GET COMMUNITY SUPPORT BEHIND US FOR THOSE HAVING THE COMMUNITY MISTRUST US BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO PROCEED NOW AND WAIT FOR RESULTS LATER.

AS KURT GUTHRIE POINTS OUT, THAT SENDS THE WRONG MESSAGE TO OUR RESIDENTS.

IT SHOWS WE DON'T CARE WHAT YOU THINK.

SHOWS WE'RE GOING TO GO AND DO WHAT WE WANT TO DO ANYWAY, BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T GOT FEELINGS ON THIS AND WE'RE GOING TO FOLLOW OUR GUT AND NOT THE DATA.

WELL, THIS ISN'T A TIME TO FOLLOW OUR GUT, ITS TIME TO FOLLOW WHEN OUR RESIDENTS ARE GOING TO TELL US WITH A SCIENTIFICALLY CONDUCTED AND ANALYZED SURVEY.

I'M BEING ENCOURAGED THIS BOARD TO PUT OFF DISCUSSION OF THIS ORDINANCE UNTIL WE HAVE GOOD DATA BACK FROM OUR RESIDENTS. IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

>> WE ARE DISCUSSING THE MARIJUANA ORDINANCES.

POTENTIAL MARIJUANA ORDINANCES, I SHOULD SAY. MS. GUTHRIE.

>> I TOO WANT TO THANK TRUSTEE OPSOMMER FOR ASKING THAT QUESTION.

I HAD ONE OF THE BUSINESS OWNERS CONTACT ME TODAY AND ASK THAT VERY QUESTION ABOUT THE VETTING PROCESS.

I PROBABLY NOT SO ELOQUENTLY EXPLAINED TO HIM THAT IT WAS PRESENTED AT THE LAST BOARD MEETING AND THAT OUR TOWNSHIP ATTORNEY SPELLED IT OUT PRETTY WELL, SO THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT.

I TOO THOUGHT IT WAS A WELL THOUGHT OUT AND WELL WRITTEN.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT STATEMENT, SO THANK YOU FOR ASKING THAT QUESTION.

MY QUESTION IS PROBABLY AS A NEW BOARD MEMBER, I HOPE IT'S NOT ORALLY ASKED OR RECEIVED, BUT IN REGARDS TO, AND MAYBE THIS IS SOMETHING I SHOULD KNOW, SO PLEASE DON'T MAKE FUN OF ME FOR ASKING THIS QUESTION.

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>> IN REGARDS TO ORDINANCES, I THOUGHT THEY WERE DONE DIFFERENTLY, MAYBE I'M WRONG.

DO THEY USUALLY COME LIKE I THOUGHT? FOR SOME REASON THEY WENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEN IT WAS SENT TO THE BOARD.

MAYBE I'M COMPLETELY WRONG.

JUST WONDERING ABOUT THE PROCESS OF THE ORDINANCE SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT, BUT WE WANT TO KNOW PEOPLE'S OPINION.

DO WE WEIGH ON IT? I DON'T KNOW WHO TO ASK THIS QUESTION TO.

SOMEONE OTHER THAN ME.

>> MR. [INAUDIBLE] , IF YOU WANT TO ANSWER THAT FOR ME, IT'S STANDPOINT OF VIEW.

>> ONE OF THE THINGS THERE'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT'S CALLED THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE NON ZONING ORDINANCES, THE POLICE POWERS.

THE ZONING ORDINANCES UNDER THE REQUIREMENTS WOULD HAVE TO START AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

IN A PLANNING COMMISSION HAS TO MAKE RECOMMENDATION AND THE NATIONAL BOARD WOULD BE THE ULTIMATE DECISION-MAKER ON ANYTHING THAT'S AMENDED OR CHANGED OR ADDED INTO THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

THE NON ZONING ORDINANCES IS STRICTLY AT THE BOARD LEVEL, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

THEY DON'T HAVE TO GIVE INPUT ON IT.

IT'S SOLELY THE BOARD.

>> RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA IS NOT A ZONING ORDINANCES.

I THOUGHT I WAS HEARING THAT IT WAS.

>> IT CAN BE BASED ON WHAT THE, AND MATT CAN PROBABLY SPEAK TO IT, BUT BASED ON WHAT'S BEEN TALKED ABOUT.

THERE IS A PORTION THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE AMENDED IN THE ZONING ORDINATES IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH A RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA.

>> THAT WOULD GO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

>> PARTLY. THEY WOULD HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING, MAKE RECOMMENDATION AND THEN THE FINAL DECISION COMES BEFORE THE TOWNSHIP BOARD.

>> THE BOARD IS BASICALLY CRAFTING THIS AND THEN IT'S GOING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEN IT COMES BACK TO THE BOARD.

I'M I HEARING THAT CORRECTLY? OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> DO WE STILL DWELL ON THAT, MATT, OR IS IT ALL SETTLED DOWN?

>> NO, THAT'S WELL COVERED.

>> MS. LOZINSKY.

>> WE'RE GOING TO THANK THE CLERK FOR ASKING THE QUESTION.

[LAUGHTER] USUALLY, WE ASK AND OTHER PEOPLE MAY NEED THAT INFORMATION, SO I APPRECIATE THAT, THAT'S HELPFUL.

THAT BRINGS UP SOME WEB TREASURE THAT SHANE SAID,

[02:50:04]

I THINK WE'VE DECIDED THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO A CITIZEN SURVEY, WE HAVEN'T DECIDED ON WHICH QUESTIONS YOU'RE GOING TO BE ASKED, WE HAVEN'T EVEN DECIDED IF THE MARIJUANA QUESTION IS GOING TO BE ASKED.

ALTHOUGH THIS IS DISCUSSION, I DO FEEL LIKE THE CARTS ALL HAVE THE HORSE RIGHT NOW.

BUT I WAS ALSO UNFAMILIAR WITH THE PROCESS.

IT MAY HAVE JUST BEEN A LITTLE BIT OF BOTH THERE.

IT'S A LOT OF INFORMATION RIGHT NOW, SO I APOLOGIZE.

>> IS THERE MORE TO DISCUSS TODAY, MR. OPSOMMER?

>> YEAH. I JUST HAD ONE TECHNICAL QUESTION FOR MATT BASED ON A NEWS STORY THAT I READ.

MATT, I READ A STORY FROM PORT HURON.

THEY HAD A VOTER-INITIATED BALLOT PROPOSAL TO UPDATE UNDER [INAUDIBLE] FOR ADULT USE.

IT WON AND WAS ENACTED AND I HAD A PROVISION IN IT THAT IT COULD NOT BE AMENDED BY THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE LOCAL UNIT FOR TWO YEARS.

HOW HAS THAT REGULATED AND [INAUDIBLE] , IS THERE A CAP ON HOW MANY YEARS THEY CAN PUT INTO THAT PROVISION OR IS THERE A SPECIFIC NUMBER OF YEARS THEY CAN ELECT TO INSERT, HOW DOES THAT WORK WITHIN THE VOTER-INITIATED ACT?

>> THAT'S NOT COVERED UNDER [INAUDIBLE] THE LANGUAGE OF THE TOP MY HEAD IS THAT THE INITIATIVE DECISION IS TO SET THE NUMBER OF MARIJUANA ESTABLISHMENTS WITHIN THE MUNICIPALITY, SO ARGUABLY, A PROVISION THAT THE TOWNSHIP BOARD OR THE MUNICIPALITY BOARD, IN THAT CASE, WOULDN'T AMEND IT, WOULD BE OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF THE [INAUDIBLE] INITIATIVE AUTHORITY.

THE CAVEAT THEN ON TOP OF THAT IS THESE PETITIONS ARE FINALLY GETTING THROUGH AND A FEW OF THEM HAVE PASSED, SO WE'RE ONLY JUST NOW GETTING TO A POINT WHERE THERE'S SOME LITIGATION AND IT'S NOT CLEAR.

THERE HAS NOT YET BEEN A COURT OF APPEALS RULING IN A BINDING DECISION OVER HOW EXPANSIVE THOSE INITIATIVES CAN BE AND HOW MUCH BROWN THEY CAN COVER.

IN A PLAIN READING OF THE STATUTE, YOU LOOK AND YOU SEE THAT IT SAYS, NUMBER OF ESTABLISHMENTS, SO THEN THAT MAKES YOU THINK, WELL, MAYBE THEY CAN'T DO THAT, BUT THE SCOPE OF THAT STILL REMAINS A BIT OF A GRAY AREA.

>> BUT IT WASN'T THE NUMBER OF ESTABLISHMENTS THAT COULDN'T BE CHANGED.

IT WAS THE WHOLE ORDINATES FOR THAT SECTION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE BEING ADDED TO THE EXISTING ZONING ORDINATES FOR THE MUNICIPALITY.

MY READING OF IT WAS THAT LOCAL UNIT OF GOVERNMENT HAD NO ABILITY TO AMEND ANYTHING WITHIN WHAT THE VOTERS PASSED, WHICH DOES MAKE SENSE BECAUSE I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS, AND YOU NEED A TWO-THIRDS SUPER MAJORITY FOR GOOD REASON TO OVERTURN THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.

IS THERE A CASE-LAW OR A DIFFERENT STATUTE THAT GOVERNS THAT IF [INAUDIBLE] DOESN'T?

>> NO. NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.

>> USUALLY, WHAT WE SEE IN THE LOCAL BALLOT PROPOSALS IS LIKE OVERTURNING OR REZONING, THINGS LIKE THAT.

I GUESS YOU GUYS SEE THAT IN OVERTURNING THE REZONING, IT'S LIKE A NUMBER OF YEARS BEFORE A PERSON CAN BE CONSIDERED FOR REZONING?

>> I HAVE SEEN PROVISIONS, PERHAPS GIVING A ONE-YEAR RESTRICTION ON COMING BACK FOR NEW REZONING, BUT TYPICALLY THAT'S SOMETHING ALREADY IN AN ORDINANCE.

>> YEAH, THAT'S WEIRD, THOUGH.

>> RIGHT, I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY PROVISION AND IN GENERAL LAW OR ELECTION LAW THAT WOULD CREATE THAT SAME SET THAT YOU DO SEE IN THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS.

>> OKAY. THAT MAKES SENSE.

I WAS JUST CURIOUS. THANK YOU.

>> YES, SIR. ARE WE ON ITEM C YET, WHICH IS RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA?

>> YES. WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THAT.

>> I'D START WITH THAT WHAT I WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT.

>> YEAH. IT WAS MUCH EARLIER THAN WE HAD MORPHED AND I SAID YES, WE'VE MORPHED INTO BOTH.

>> OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.

THE MOTION IS THIS I MOVED TO DEFER DISCUSSION OF THE RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA ORDINANCE UNTIL AFTER WE HAVE CITIZEN'S SURVEY RESULTS.

>> IS THERE A SECOND?

[02:55:03]

>> I SUPPORT THAT.

>> ALL RIGHT. MS. GUTHRIE'S SUPPORTED IT.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> I THINK SETTING THE ORDINANCE OF SIDE WE CAN CONTINUE DISCUSSING.

THIS TOPIC WAS OUR RESONANCE WITH OUR EDUCATORS, WITH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD LEADERS, OUR PUBLIC HEALTH SPECIALISTS.

WE'D BE DOING THE DATA GATHERING, WE SHOULD HAVE BEFORE WE PROCEED WITH ANY ORDINATES CRAFT, WE HAVEN'T DONE THAT YET.

NEIGHBORHOOD LEADERS IN PARTICULAR INTEREST ME BECAUSE WE WENT TO THEM TWO YEARS AGO AND FOUR YEARS AGO.

WE WANTED TO GET TO ROADS PUBLISHED PAST.

WE TOOK OUR ROADSHOW OUT TO THEM AND TALKED TO THEM ABOUT IT BECAUSE IT WAS A BIG DECISION, ADDING A MILL AND A HALF TO THEIR TAXES IS NO SMALL TAXES.

WE DID IT FOUR YEARS AGO WITH THE POLICE AND FIREBOMB.

WE WENT TOOK THAT MESSAGE TO THEM AS WELL TO SAY, WE ARE WAY UNDERFUNDED IN OUR POLICE AND FIRE MERGE PENSIONS.

WE WERE IN THE 50 PERCENT RANGE, AND WE SHOULD BE IN THE 80S OR 90S BASIC ORDERS BECAUSE OF THAT. WE TOOK IT TO THEM.

I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE THIS AND SHEAR OFF AND GRADE AS WELL, BE IT A ZOOM NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING OR WHATEVER THE WAY WE CAN TALK TO THEM OVER THE NEXT FEW MONTHS.

IF WHILE WE'RE WAITING FOR CITIZEN TO BASE, WE OUGHT TO BE GETTING FEEDBACK FROM OUR COMMUNITY ON THE LIST.

IF WE'RE GOING TO ASK THEM FOR MONEY, WE NEED TO ASK THEM ALSO FOR INPUT ON IMPORTANT ISSUES.

WE NEED TO HEAR, WHAT I WANT, WE NEED TO HEAR THEIR RESPONSES, GOOD AND BAD.

[13C. Recreational Marihuana]

IT'S REALLY OUR OBLIGATION TO TAKE THIS SIM, PARTICULARLY AT A TIME LIKE THIS WHEN PEOPLE ARE NOT IN CIRCULATION OF ABUSE TO BE, WE'VE GOTTEN SEVERAL LETTERS THAT HE SAID, HOW COULD YOU BE DOING THIS, WE'RE IN A PANDEMIC? WELL, IT'S A FAIR QUESTION.

A DIFFICULT TIME FOR PEOPLE TO GET OUT THERE, HAVE BEEN OVERWHELMED BY THINGS.

HOPEFULLY, THINGS ARE GETTING BETTER THAN THE REST OF THIS WINTER ENTERING THE SPRING.

BUT STILL PEOPLE ARE IN A LOCKDOWN MODE.

MOST PUBLIC SPACES ARE CLOSED.

RESTAURANTS ARE 25 PERCENT CAPACITY.

WE NEED TO TAKE THE EXTRA EFFORT THESE NEXT FEW MONTHS TO REACH OUT TO OUR COMMUNITY AND ASK THEM, TYPICALLY OUR NEIGHBOR LEADERS, PARTICULARLY OUR COMMUNITY GROUPS THAT WE CAN TALK TO.

THERE'S LOTS OF SERVICE CLUBS WE CAN GET FEEDBACK FROM.

WE CAN USE THIS TIME TO GATHER MORE INFORMATION, IT DOESN'T MEAN IT STOPS COMPLETELY.

BUT THE ORDINANCE CRAFTING ITSELF, I BELIEVE IS PREMATURE.

AS I SAID EARLIER, IT'S AN INSULT TO OUR VOTERS TO SAY, WE'RE GOING TO SURVEY YOU, BUT WE'RE GOING TO PROCEED ANYWAY BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN TO WHERE YOU WANT US, SO WE'RE GOING TO PROCEED.

LET'S NOT INSULT OUR RESIDENTS.

LET'S PUT A HARD STOP ON THE DISCUSSION, UNTIL WE HAVE SURVEY RESULTS TO ACT ON.

THAT'S MY REASON FOR PROPOSING THIS.

>> WE'VE GOT PARLIAMENTARY MS. SMITH MATT RIGHT NOW.

[LAUGHTER] BECAUSE WE'RE IN A MOTION ON SOMETHING WE'RE NOT INTO THE ACTION PORTION OF THE AGENDA WORK.

THIS WAS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED, SO THAT YOU WOULD NORMALLY HAVE THEM PUSH AND SUSPEND RULES TO MAKE THAT MOTION OR IT WAS MOTION ON THE TABLE WHICH IT COULDN'T BE ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT IT AND I ENDED UP CALLING AND YOU'RE NOT REALIZING WHICH IT WAS AND YOU DISCUSSED IT.

WHERE ARE YOU MR. DUCHENE?

>> THANK YOU FOR THAT FEEDBACK. I'LL LEAVE IT AS A DISCUSSION ITEM AND I'LL ASK FOR YOU TO MOVE TO AN ACTION ITEM FOR NEXT WEEK.

WE ARE MEETING IN TWO WEEKS ON THE 16TH, AND GET MORE TIME TO THINK ABOUT THIS.

IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE DECIDED TONIGHT. [OVERLAPPING]

>> YOU'RE WITHDRAWING THE MOTION.

>> I AM WITHDRAWING THE MOTION.

[OVERLAPPING]

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> I DO WANT TO VOTE ON THIS IN TWO WEEKS.

>> WELL, SPEAK FOR TWO WEEKS.

>> SPEAKING OF THAT, I HAVE SORTED THE IDEA WITH A COUPLE OF MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, BUT NOT MORE THAN THREE, SO WE STAY WITHIN OUR RULES OF A MOTION I'D LIKE TO PROPOSE IN TWO WEEKS AS WELL, THAT WOULD EXPAND OUR READY RIDE RANGE TO TRUSTEES.

TRUSTEE BRZEZINSKI AND JACKSON HAVE BOTH SPOKEN IN FAVOR OF RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA BECAUSE OF THE ACCESS ISSUE, AND THAT'S A VALID ISSUE.

WE CAN FIX THAT AT OUR NEXT MEETING.

WE CAN INSTRUCT READY RIGHT CADA TO EXPAND OUR ALREADY READ BOUNDARIES TO INCLUDE THE PLEASANT TREES MEDICAL AND RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA STORE ON MERIT [INAUDIBLE] WITHIN A HALF-MILE OF THE TOWNSHIP.

WE ALREADY ALLOW THEM TO GO TO COASTAL OVER THERE, WE LET THEM GO TO BE EASTLAND AND AQUATIC CENTER.

WE INSTRUCT THE SUPERVISOR AND THE MANAGER TO REQUEST THIS WITH CADA.

CADA HAS TOLD THAT IF YOU'RE READY, YOU TELL US WHAT ITS LIMITS ARE, SO WE CAN SOLVE THAT ACCESS ISSUE IMMEDIATELY.

[03:00:02]

ANYBODY THAT DOES NOT HAVE A CAR WOULD NOT BE DENIED ACCESS TO MEDICAL OR RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA FOR 250 OR A DOLLAR AND A QUARTER READY RIDE FARE, THEY CAN GET MEDICAL AND RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA, BUT SOME OF THEM A CAR WHICH HAS PROBABLY BEEN POSING MADISON AS A MOTION NEXT MEETING AS WELL.

>> BACK TO OUR DISCUSSION HERE.

WE HAVE NOWHERE ELSE TO GO OVERNIGHT. MS GUTHRIE.

>> FOR THE RECORD, WHEN ROBIN DOES THE MINUTES, NOTHING WAS TABLED, CORRECT?

>> A MOTION WAS MADE, IT WAS SECONDED, IT WAS WITHDRAWN.

>> YES. ALL RIGHT THEN, WE'LL JUST PUT THAT BACK ON THE AGENDA NEXT TIME.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

THE SURVEY MS. PARK WILL BRING TO US, THAT WE ASKED FOR EARLIER, AND WE WILL PUT THAT ON AS DISCUSSION AND HOPEFULLY I'LL BE MOVING ALONG WITH REGARD TO THAT PROCESS, AND THEN WE'LL ALSO PUT ON THE RECORDS FOR MARIJUANA.

[NOISE] [INAUDIBLE] AS AN ACTION ITEM, THE EXPANSION OF RAIL LINE OVER TO THE DRIVE LOCATION.

MRS. WISINSKI.

>> JUST A CLARIFICATION, SUPERVISOR.

SO THE RADIO RIGHTS IS GOING TO ON FOR ACTION NOT FOR DISCUSSION?

>> WE CAN DISCUSS IT RIGHT NOW.

I PERSONALLY THINK IF WE'RE GOING TO DO, WE SHOULD DO IT.

BUT WE CAN HAVE THAT UP FOR DISCUSSION IF YOU'RE FREE.

IT THOUGHT IT WAS A NO-BRAINER.