Aug 15, 2022 Township Board

[00:02:37]

MIC] GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO THE AUGUST 15, 2022 REGULAR MEETING OF

[1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER]

IF YOU WOULD JOIN ME, WE WILL HAVE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.

I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

THANK YOU, MR. LEMASTER. WE HAVE A ROLL CALL.

ALL PRESENT. THANK YOU.

ITEM WE HAVE NO PRESENTATIONS TONIGHT.

ITEM FOUR ON OUR AGENDA.

AND SO WE'LL GO TO ITEM FIVE.

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

THE FIRST IS FOR CHERYL PAGE AND AS YOU COME TO THE PODIUM, I WILL RECITE OUR PUBLIC COMMENT POLICY.

THERE ARE TWO OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

CITIZENS WHO WISH TO ADDRESS AGENDA OR NON AGENDA ITEMS WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING AND NEAR THE END.

INDIVIDUALS WHO WISH THE BOARD MUST COMPLETE A GREEN FORM LOCATED WITH THE AGENDAS NEAR THE ROOM ENTRANCE.

CITIZENS ARE REQUIRED TO LIMIT COMMENTS TO 3 MINUTES, EXCEPT WHEN THIS REQUIREMENT IS WAIVED IN ADVANCE BY THE SUPERVISOR.

A TIMEKEEPER WILL COMMUNICATE TO THE INDIVIDUAL WHO IS ADDRESSING THE BOARD AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE 3 MINUTES OF THEIR 3 MINUTES.

THE BOARD HIGHLY VALUES PUBLIC COMMENT AND INPUT.

HOWEVER, THE BOARD MEETING FORMAT IS DESIGNED TO FACILITATE THE EVENING'S AGENDA AND THEREFORE RESTRICTS BOARD MEMBERS FROM ENGAGING IN CONVERSATION WITH SPEAKERS OR IMMEDIATELY RESPONDING TO QUESTIONS.

IN ORDER TO FOSTER THE ORDERLY CONDUCT OF THE BOARD'S BUSINESS ON BEHALF OF THE COMMUNITY, PLEASE REFRAIN FROM RUDE OR DISCOURTEOUS BEHAVIOR.

[00:05:02]

MS. PAIGE. ALL RIGHT.

I THINK I CAN STICK TO ALL THAT AND I THINK I CAN DO IT IN LESS THAN 3 MINUTES.

SO WE'LL SEE. MY NAME IS CHERYL PAGE AND MY HOME IS AT 3888 RALEIGH DRIVE IN OKEMOS.

AND MY COMMENT TONIGHT IS REGARDING THE AUGUST 2ND RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA BALLOT PROPOSAL.

IT WAS A VERY CLOSE ELECTION AND THE PROPOSAL WAS DEFEATED BY A NOW A CERTIFIED TOTAL OF ONLY 12 VOTES, LESS THAN 0.1%.

BY COMPLETELY PROHIBITING RETAIL RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA WAS NOT APPROVED.

I THINK WE CAN ALL AGREE THIS IS A VERY, VERY CLOSE OUTCOME.

THIS NOW BEGS THE QUESTION OF WHAT COMES NEXT.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT WE MOVE VERY SLOWLY ON THIS.

I REALIZE THERE ARE SOME WHO ARE VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF THESE BUSINESSES AND MAY BE VERY EXCITED ABOUT JUMPING IN.

BUT THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE RUSHED.

AND THIS VOTE WAS NOT AN OVERWHELMING MANDATE TO PUSH FORWARD QUICKLY.

GIVEN STRONG OPPOSING OPINIONS ON THE SITUATION IN THE COMMUNITY AND THE CLOSE VOTE.

IT'S APPARENT THAT THERE ARE LARGE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS WHO DON'T AGREE, IF AND I THINK IT'S A BIG IF SUCH BUSINESSES ARE GOING FORWARD, IT NEEDS TO BE DONE WITH MODERATION, DELIBERATE PLANNING AND CAREFUL ZONING.

NOTHING SHOULD BE DONE UNTIL IT'S CLEAR, BOTH PRACTICALLY AND LEGALLY, WHERE THE STOP POINT WILL BE.

AND I THINK THIS POINT IS VERY IMPORTANT.

I DON'T BELIEVE THAT EVEN VOTERS WHO WERE IN FAVOR OF STORES EXPECT THE FLOODGATES TO OPEN IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP AND AN UNLIMITED NUMBER OF BUSINESSES TO BE BROUGHT IN.

I DON'T THINK THAT IS THE VIEW OF THE AVERAGE TOWNSHIP RESIDENT REGARDLESS OF THEIR VOTE.

IT'S A VERY DELICATE BALANCING ACT TO ENSURE THAT THE VIEWPOINT OF HALF THE CITIZENRY ISN'T IGNORED IN THIS AND THAT IRREPARABLE DECISIONS AREN'T MADE THAT WILL BE REGRETTED LATER, AND IT'S GOING TO TAKE TIME TO WORK THROUGH IT.

LET'S KEEP THE OLD ADAGE IN MIND ACT IN HASTE, REPENT AT LEISURE.

I THINK IT'S HIGHLY APPROPRIATE TO THIS SITUATION.

AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TONIGHT.

I HAVE A SECOND GREEN CARD FROM KEVIN SCHOEN.

IS IT POSSIBLE TO USE THIS PROJECTOR TO PROJECT ON THE SCREEN? STEVENS COMING TO HELP YOU.

ALL RIGHT. YOU TURNED OFF OUR TV.

HELLO, EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS KEVIN SHANE.

I LIVE AT 6102 COLUMBIA STREET, JUST NORTH OF LANSING PARK, SOUTH 11.

I HAPPEN TO BE ONE OF THE FORTUNATE RESIDENTS OF MERIDIAN TO LIVE ON THE LAKE.

OBVIOUSLY, DURING THE COVID PANDEMIC, WE HAD AN INCREASE IN LAKE TRAFFIC, WHICH IS TO BE EXPECTED.

PEOPLE WERE ABLE TO USE PARKS AND THE LAKE A WHOLE LOT MORE.

AND AS LAKE TRAFFIC CONTINUES TO GROW AND CHANGE AND EVOLVE AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, YOU KNOW, A BUNCH OF US WHO LIVE ON THE LAKE HANG OUT AND WE DRINK BEERS AND WE KIND OF COMPLAIN ABOUT THINGS THAT WE SEE ON THE LAKE ON OCCASION THAT ARE MOSTLY SAFETY RELATED.

SO OUR THOUGHT WAS, RATHER THAN COMPLAIN, HOW ABOUT WE PUT UP SOME SIGNAGE DURING THE, YOU KNOW, NEAR THE MAJOR ENTRANCE POINTS TO THE LAKE, YOU KNOW, SO OUR THOUGHT WAS, WAS RUNNING DOWN THE STREET, WHO IS ONE OF OUR BEER DRINKING BUDDIES IS A VERY GOOD GRAPHICS DESIGNER.

SO I ASKED HIM TO PUT TOGETHER A DRAFT OF SOME SIGNAGE THAT WE WOULD PROPOSE TO PUT ON THE ENTRANCE AREAS TO THE LAKE. AND WE DIDN'T WANT TO MAKE IT ALL LIKE, YOU KNOW, LAY DOWN THE LAW TYPE OF STUFF.

WE KNOW MANY OF THESE THINGS THAT HAPPEN TEND TO HAPPEN ON THE LAKE ARE AGAINST THE LAW, BUT THEY'RE KIND OF HARD TO ENFORCE BECAUSE LAW ENFORCEMENT IS OUT THERE A WHOLE LOT.

THIS IS A LITTLE BIT HARD TO SEE, BUT I'LL I'VE GOT SOME PRINTOUTS OVER THERE AS WELL AS SOME LARGE FORMAT POSTERS.

I INCLUDED FOUR OR FIVE OF THEM.

IF YOU WANT TO HAND THEM OUT LATER ON, YOU CAN READ SOME OF THE COMMENTS.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE SEE OFTEN IS BOATERS CHASING WILDLIFE.

IT TENDS TO HAPPEN.

I PROBABLY FLAGGED DOWN FOUR OR FIVE BOATERS A YEAR AND I KNOW OTHER RESIDENTS DO.

AND YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WITH NEW BOATS DON'T HAVE TO TAKE THE TEST TO OPERATE THEIR WATERCRAFT.

SO THEY ARE NOT ALWAYS VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE BASIC RULES AND REGULATIONS SUCH AS KEEP 100 FEET AWAY AT ALL TIMES FROM OTHER WATERCRAFT, MAINTAIN SUFFICIENT SEPARATION OF A COUPLE OF HUNDRED FEET IF YOU'RE DOING HIGH SPEED BOATING.

DON'T CHASE ANY OF THE WATERFOWL.

PEOPLE THINK IT'S FUNNY TO MAKE ALL THE SEAGULLS FLY AROUND, BUT THEY KIND OF GET TIRED OF IT AFTER.

[00:10:02]

WE TELL THEM, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ILLEGAL.

YOU KNOW, WE USUALLY JUST SAY THINGS LIKE, HEY, BE NICE TO THE BIRDS.

THEY LIKE TO ENJOY THE LAKE AND THEY USUALLY KEEP, YOU KNOW, ANYTHING CRAZY.

THINGS ARE GOING ON AND EVERYBODY'S BOATING.

THEY TEND TO KEEP IN THE CENTER OF THE LAKE 75% OF THE TIME THAT'S EFFECTIVE 25% OF THE TIME YOU HAVE TO SAY TO THEM, LIKE THINGS LIKE, HEY, WE ALL TOOK VIDEOS OF YOU, YOU KNOW, AND THERE'S ONLY ONE WAY OFF THE LAKE.

AND THE DNR GUY, WE'VE GOT A CELL PHONE AND HE'LL BE HERE IN ABOUT 15 MINUTES, WHICH IS PROBABLY QUICKER THAN YOU CAN GET OFF THE LAKE.

AND SO IF YOU DON'T WANT TO A TICKET, PLEASE STOP CHASING THE BIRDS.

AND THEN USUALLY THAT SOLVES THE PROBLEM.

THE OTHER THING THAT WE SOMETIMES SEE IS DISABLED BOATERS I'VE SEEN SO FAR IN THE LAST EIGHT OR NINE YEARS OF LIVING OUT OF THE LAKE WHERE VOTERS HAVE RAN INTO THE SANDBAR AND TORE OFF OR TORE UP THEIR ENGINE AND BECAME DISABLED.

SO ANYWAYS, THAT'S MY COMMENTS.

IF ANYBODY HAS ANY COMMENTS, FEEL FREE TO EMAIL ME AT OR EMAIL BRIAN COWLES AT THESE EMAIL ADDRESSES.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

WELL, THANKS FOR YOUR TIME. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD AT THIS TIME? ITEM SIX ON OUR AGENDA IS THE TOWNSHIP MANAGER'S REPORT.

[6. TOWNSHIP MANAGER REPORT]

WE'RE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BUDGET SEASON.

THE BUDGET UNDER STATE LAW HAS TO BE TO YOU 120 DAYS BEFORE THE END OF THE CALENDAR YEAR.

SO YOU CAN EXPECT TO RECEIVE A COPY OF THE DRAFT BUDGET A WEEK FROM FRIDAY ON THE 26TH THAT WE DELIVERED TO YOU.

WE EXPECT IT TO BE SOMEWHERE IN THE RANGE OF A $55 MILLION SPENDING PLAN.

I DID GO OVER THE GENERAL FUND THIS AFTERNOON WITH SUPERVISOR JACKSON AND OUR FINANCE TEAM.

WE SPENT ABOUT AN HOUR AND A HALF GOING OVER AND FINALIZING THE GENERAL FUND.

AS YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE OPERATIONAL PART OF THE BUDGET.

THAT'S HOW WE OPERATE. POLICE AND FIRE AND ALL OF OUR DEPARTMENTS AND THE GENERAL FUND OF REVENUES INCLUDED IN THERE.

THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BUDGET'S ANOTHER $25 MILLION, AND THAT THE MAINSTAYS OF THAT WOULD BE THE MOTOR POOL, HOW WE BUY EQUIPMENT AND THE WATER AND SEWER FUND.

AND WE'LL HAVE ALL OF THAT TO YOU NEXT FRIDAY.

AND THEN, OF COURSE, ON SEPTEMBER 6TH, I BELIEVE, IS YOUR FIRST BOARD MEETING IN SEPTEMBER.

AND THAT'S WHEN WE'LL HAVE THE BUDGET HEARING AND GO OVER IT AND RESPOND TO ANY OF YOUR QUESTIONS.

KEEPING UP ON THE UNION NEGOTIATIONS.

WE HAVE FOUR BARGAINING GROUPS THAT WE'RE NEGOTIATING WITH, AND WE'VE HAD SOME GOOD, SOLID DISCUSSIONS WITH THOSE TEAMS. AS YOU KNOW, WE'VE MADE A SUBSTANTIAL WAGE OFFER TO THEM AND WE THINK WE'RE MAKING PROGRESS.

AND I WOULD EXPECT IN SEPTEMBER WE'LL BE POTENTIALLY MOVING FORWARD.

THOSE CONTRACTS ALL EXPIRE IN DECEMBER.

I WOULD SAY THE NEGOTIATIONS HAVE BEEN FRUITFUL AT THIS TIME, BUT THERE'S STILL SOME WORK TO DO.

AND DIRECTOR T HOFF AND I ARE VERY MUCH INVOLVED WITH THAT.

WE SEND $3 MILLION A YEAR TO CATTLE AND WE HAVE, OF COURSE, THE HASLETT AND OKEMOS LIBRARIES TO SHOW FOR THAT.

ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE LOOKING AT IS THE LIBRARY ROOF AT THE OKEMOS LIBRARY.

IT'S A WE BUDGETED AROUND $90 TO $95,000 FOR THAT.

IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GOING TO COME IN.

WE'RE REBIDDING IT.

I WON'T GO INTO THE DETAILS OF THAT, BUT LOOKS LIKE IT MIGHT COME IN BETWEEN $130 AND $150,000 FOR THE ROOF.

WE'RE MEETING WITH CATTLE NOT THIS WEEK, BUT NEXT WEEK TO SAY, CAN YOU HELP US? YOU KNOW, WE'RE SENDING $3 MILLION A YEAR TO YOU.

AND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF COMMUNITIES AROUND MICHIGAN WHO HAVE REALLY NICE LIBRARIES, REALLY HIGH END LIBRARIES, AND THEY DON'T SPEND NEARLY $3 MILLION A YEAR.

SO HELPING CATTLE CONTINUES OUR GOOD RELATIONSHIP AND STEPS UP AND HELPS US WITH THAT AND WE'LL KEEP YOU POSTED ON THAT.

THURSDAY'S A BIG DAY FOR US.

FIVE FIVE OF OUR OFFICERS, POTENTIAL OFFICERS START THE ACADEMY ON THURSDAY.

SO WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT THAT.

IN FACT, WE THAT WILL GET US TO 37, 38 AND THEN WE HAVE POTENTIAL OF AN OFFICER FROM SOUTHWEST MICHIGAN WHO WANTS TO COME AND JOIN US POTENTIALLY.

AND WE'RE MEETING WITH HER THIS WEEK.

SO CHIEF PLAGA HAS ARRANGED FOR THAT.

LOCAL ROADS CONTINUE TO WORK THROUGHOUT THE TOWNSHIP.

AND OF COURSE, WITH THAT WE HAVE THE GRAND RIVER PROJECT, WE HAVE THE OKEMOS BRIDGE PROJECT.

IT'S BEEN A TOUGH SUMMER.

SCHOOL IS GOING TO BE STARTING.

[00:15:01]

IT'S GOING TO GET TOUGHER.

WE'VE YOU KNOW, SO WE JUST HAVE TO CONTINUE TO WORK AND BE POSITIVE AND HOPEFULLY GET THROUGH THIS.

BROWNFIELD BOARD MEETS THURSDAY MORNING TWO ISSUES ON THE BROWNFIELD BOARD.

ONE IS THE REDO A RELOOK MODIFICATIONS OF THE VILLAGE OF OKEMOS BROWNFIELD PLAN AND THE SECOND WOULD BE A REDUCTION IN THE BROWNFIELD REQUEST FROM THE AMERICAN HOMES OF MERIDIAN, WHICH IS THE FOUR STORY TEN ACRE PARCEL ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE HASLETT VILLAGE SQUARE PROPERTY. THE ORIGINAL BROWNFIELD INCLUDED THE [INAUDIBLE] BUILDING DEMOLITION.

OF COURSE THAT'S NOT DID NOT COME TO FRUITION UNDER THEIR BROWNFIELD PLAN.

IT'S SWITCHED OVER TO THE OTHER DEVELOPMENT ON THE 20 ACRES ON THE EAST SIDE.

SO THEIR REQUEST IS TO REMOVE THAT.

IT'S IT'LL REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF THEIR BROWNFIELD REQUEST.

THOSE TWO ISSUES ARE BEFORE THE BROWNFIELD THURSDAY MORNING AT 8 A.M.

ART FESTIVAL THIS FRIDAY FROM 11 TO 6.

IF YOU'RE AROUND, COME OVER TO THE MARKETPLACE AND ENJOY A WONDERFUL EVENT WITH FOOD TRUCKS AND ART AND ALL KINDS OF STUFF THAT'S GOING TO BE HAPPENING.

AND FINALLY, I WOULD LET YOU KNOW THAT WE SOLD WE WENT TO TO ACQUIRE A TRIPLE A BOND RATING.

WE FELL JUST SHORT OF THAT, WHICH WOULD PUT US IN THE TOP 6% IN THE STATE.

WE ARE A WE ARE A TRIPLE-A RATED COMMUNITY.

I MEAN, I KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT OTHER COMMUNITIES IN MICHIGAN WHO HAPPEN TO BE TRIPLE-A, AND I WOULD COMPARE OUR FINANCES AND OUR LEGACY COST AGAINST ANY OF THEM.

THE GOOD NEWS IS TRIPLE-A, TRIPLE-A COMMUNITIES ARE SEEING BONDS GOING OUT FOR BOND RATINGS, ARE SEEING BOND RATES BETWEEN 1 5 AND 182 1.52182 IS WHAT TRIPLE-A COMMUNITIES ARE SEEING IF YOU LOOK AT THEIR INTEREST RATES THAT THEY HAVE ARE PAYING.

IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS, WE JUST SOLD $12 MILLION WORTH OF BONDS FOR OUR LOCAL ROADS, AND WE CAME IN AT 179.

SO WE'RE ON THE HIGHER END OF A TRIPLE A BOND RATING.

SO ALTHOUGH WE DIDN'T GET IT, WE PERHAPS ON STANDARD AND POOR'S, WE PROBABLY HAD THE LAST LAUGH BECAUSE WE DID GET A TRIPLE-A BOND RATE, INTEREST RATE, WHICH IS ACTUALLY THE MOST IMPORTANT THING.

IT'S A HUGE SAVING TO OUR RESIDENTS, AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO MARVEL AT HOW WELL WE DID.

THAT CONCLUDES MY REPORT THIS EVENING, UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

QUESTIONS? THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ITEM SEVEN ON OUR AGENDA BOARD MEMBER REPORTS OF ACTIVITIES AND ANNOUNCEMENTS.

[7. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS OF ACTIVITIES AND ANNOUNCEMENTS]

I'M JUST A COUPLE THINGS.

SUPERVISOR LAMB PRESERVATION ADVISORY BOARD MET THIS PAST WEEK, AND THEY DID A VISIT TO TOWER FOREST PRESERVE, A 125 ACRE SITE.

APPARENTLY, IT HAS BEEN CUDDLED TOGETHER OVER TIME, AND THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT GROUP OF VOLUNTEERS THAT HAVE SPENT A LOT OF TIME THERE REMOVING INVASIVE SPECIES AND PLANTING TREES.

SO THEY MET WITH THE ADVISORY BOARD TO GO OVER THEIR PLANS FOR CONTINUED STEWARDSHIP, AND THEY WILL BE HAVING A TREE PLANTING EVENT ON NOVEMBER 5TH FROM 9:30 TO 12, IF ANYBODY IS WILLING.

ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION IS FINALIZING THEIR CLIMATE SUSTAINABILITY PLAN AND STILL WORKING ON THAT.

AND THERE IS AN ELECTRONIC RECYCLING EVENT ON OCTOBER 8TH.

GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT BOARD DID NOT MEET DUE TO DO NOT HAVE A QUORUM.

SO WE'LL HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING COMING UP.

AND NOTHING TO REPORT ON ELECTION COMMISSION.

THANK YOU. OTHERS.

ALL RIGHT. WE'LL MOVE ON THEN TO APPROVAL OF OUR AGENDA.

[8. APPROVAL OF AGENDA]

I MOVE TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED.

SUPPORT SUPPORTED BY TRUSTEE WILSON FOR THE DISCUSSION.

ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA.

PLEASE SAY YES.

YES. OPPOSE NO.

CHAIR VOTES. YES.

AND THE MOTION, I BELIEVE, IS UNANIMOUS.

[9. CONSENT AGENDA (SALMON)]

CONSENT AGENDA INCLUDES COMMUNICATIONS THAT RELATE TO THE SALE OF ROAD IMPROVEMENT BONDS, A SUMMER CONCERT SERIES AT THE MARKETPLACE, AND A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE EAST LANSING MERIDIAN WATER SEWER AUTHORITY THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE HELD ON AUGUST THE 12TH.

WE HAVE MINUTES FROM JULY 26 REGULAR MEETING.

[00:20:04]

WE ALSO HAVE AN OUTDOOR ASSEMBLY LICENSE REQUESTS FROM HIGH CALIBER KARTING FOR AN EVENT ON SEPTEMBER THE 4TH. AND WE HAVE ITEMS E, F, AND G IN THE CONSENT AGENDA, A CALL REQUESTS FOR THE BOARD TO SET THREE PUBLIC HEARINGS, ONE FOR THE TOWNSHIP BUDGET, ONE FOR APPROVAL OF THE COMMERCIAL REHABILITATION ACT APPLICATION AND HAS THE VILLAGE SQUARE AND ONE FOR THE BROWNFIELD PLAN AND THE HASLETT SQUARE.

SO THAT LOOKS LIKE SEPTEMBER THE 6TH.

THERE ARE AT LEAST THREE PUBLIC HEARINGS REQUESTED.

DO I HAVE A MOTION? TRUSTEE HENDRICKSON.

THANK YOU, MADAM SUPERVISOR.

I MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED.

MR. DESCHAINE SUPPORTS.

ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION OF TRUSTEE HENDRICKSON.

I'M SORRY, TRUSTEE WISINSKI.

I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

SURE. SUPERVISOR.

WITH RESPECT TO 9 D, WHICH IS THE HIGH CALIBER CAR SHOW, I WAS READING THROUGH THAT AND IN THEIR APPLICATION, AND I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THESE TYPES OF APPLICATIONS. IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE COMPLETE SPECIFICALLY ON PAGE TWO WHEN THERE'S REQUESTING AN EXPLANATION ON HOW THEY'RE GOING TO ADDRESS THESE PARTICULAR ITEMS. AND GIVEN THE MAP, IT APPEARS THAT IT'S NOT JUST A CAR SHOW, THAT THEY'VE GOT SOME MONSTER TRUCKS, THEY'VE GOT A SMASH AREA.

IT LOOKS REALLY FUN. HOWEVER, THAT BRINGS ME BACK TO I'M NOT SEEING THEIR PLAN FOR MEDICAL FACILITIES, GIVEN THAT THERE COULD BE INJURIES AND THEN NOISE CONTROL AND ABATEMENT AND THEN FACILITY CLEANUP AMONGST THE OTHER THINGS THERE.

SO I JUST I DON'T KNOW WHO TO ASK.

I'M NOT SURE.

MR. WELL, LET'S FIRST HEAR WHO APPROVES THIS.

OKAY. SO CAN CAN YOU ANSWER SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS.

WE'RE GOING TO INVITE THE OWNER AND OPERATOR TO COME ON UP.

OKAY. JORDAN MONSTER, SOME HIGH CALIBER KARTING AND THEN THEY ARE WONDERFUL.

OWNER AND OPERATOR DID MEET WITH STAFF, SO THEY HAVE HAD QUITE A FEW DISCUSSIONS ABOUT SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

SO I'LL DO MY BEST ON THIS.

SO LAST YEAR WE DID THIS.

YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

I AM SO SORRY, JORDAN MONSTERS.

AND I'M THE OWNER OF HIGH CALIBER CARD ENTERTAINMENT.

OKAY, SO WE DID THIS CAR SHOW LAST YEAR RAISING MONEY.

WE DID [INAUDIBLE] LAST YEAR FOR THIS YEAR.

WE MADE IT A LITTLE BIT LARGER.

I CAN SEE THE CORRELATION, THE CRUSHED CAR MONSTER TRUCK THING.

SO TWO SEPARATE THINGS, SMASH CARS LIKE OUR RAGE ROOMS. SO PEOPLE COME OUT WHEN THEY CAN, THEY GET TO SMASH A CAR.

THEY HAVE ALL THE PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT, SAME STUFF THEY USE AT OUR RAGE ROOMS AND A CONFINED AREA.

THE MONSTER TRUCK IS ACTUALLY A RIDE TRUCK, SO IT'S REALLY JUST A BIG JACKED UP VEHICLE WITH A BUNCH OF SEATS IN THE BACK WITH A PROFESSIONAL DRIVER THAT CAN GIVE RIDES TO CHILDREN AND THINGS. AND SO WE HIRED THAT COMPANY.

WE SPONSORED THEM BEFORE THE MIDWEST MONSTER TRUCKS HAVE BEEN IN BUSINESS FOR 20 YEARS DOING THIS STUFF AND SO THAT KIDS CAN GET FREE RIDES AND MONSTER TRUCKS JUST SOUNDS FUN.

SO AS FAR AS SOUND, OBVIOUSLY, YES, THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME NOISE WITH THAT.

NOT ANYTHING THAT WE CAN REALLY KEEP THAT INSIDE, HONESTLY.

IT'S NOT A FACILITY WE HAVE LEASED A LOT.

IT'S ALL THROUGH THE MALL. EVERYTHING OVER THERE IS ALL CLEAN UP.

THE MALL DOES THAT. WE DO IT AND THEN WE WE'RE WORKING WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE WE'VE DISCUSSED STAFFING FOR IT AND MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE TAKING CARE OF COSTS AND EVERYTHING ASSOCIATED WITH THAT SAME THING, WORKING WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, MAKING SURE THAT THEY HAVE BELIEVE THAT WE MAY EVEN HAVE A FIRE TRUCK AT THE SITE FOR KIND OF LIKE THE KIDS TO CLIMB ALL OVER AND BE ABLE TO MESS WITH AIR PRESSURES AND STUFF.

BUT YEAH, SO JUST PUTTING FORTH THE EFFORT UP FRONT, WE HAVE 15 DIFFERENT PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BE WORKING THE EVENT, INCLUDING PEOPLE WITH HIGH CALIBER AND VOLUNTEERS MAKING SURE THAT PEOPLE ARE RESPONSIBLE.

BUT IT'S A GOOD COMMUNITY. THE PEOPLE RESPECT ONE ANOTHER AND IT'S KIND OF A PEER PRESSURE THING.

OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU.

SO WHEN IT COMES TO THE APPLICATION, IS ANY OF THAT GOING TO BE IN WRITTEN PROCEDURE? WHAT SPECIFIC WRITTEN PROCEDURES AS FAR AS? SO I MEAN, THEY HAVE A LIST HERE THAT LIKE POLICE AND FIRE PROTECTION SAY YOU'RE WORKING WITH OUR CHIEFS.

LIKE, IS THAT GOING TO BE IN A WRITTEN FORM OR IS THAT JUST DISCUSSIONS AMONGST STAFF? I'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS AMONG STAFF.

IF THERE'S PREFERENCE TO HAVE SOME LEVEL OF WRITTEN FORM, I'M REALLY LEANING ON THEIR EXPERTISE TO IT OF WHAT THEY WANT TO SEE TO MAKE SURE I'M RESPECTING THE TOWNSHIP.

[00:25:09]

BUT THANK YOU.

I'M ALWAYS AVAILABLE IF YOU GUYS NEED TO REACH OUT.

WHAT WE'LL DO IS ONCE WE GET EVERYTHING WORKED OUT, WE'LL DO A SITE SAFETY PLAN.

TAVIS WILL HAVE TO GO OUT IF THERE'S ANY TYPE OF FOOD TRUCKS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT JUST TO SIGN OFF ON THEM.

AND THEN WE'LL LOOK AT A SITE SAFETY PLAN BETWEEN CHIEF PLAGA AND MYSELF TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL SET AND EVERYTHING'S IN PLACE.

WE'RE IN GOOD HANDS. YEAH.

THANK YOU. SO MAY I ASK MAYBE AMBER.

SO THE INCLUSION OF THIS APPLICATION IN THE CONSENT AGENDA MEANS THAT STAFF HAS DECIDED THAT THE OWNERS OF THIS EVENT HAVE SATISFIED MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP REQUIREMENTS.

AND EXCEPT FOR THE APPROVAL BY THE BOARD FOR THAT LICENSE.

IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT, YEAH.

IT'S GOOD OUR MEETING LAST WEEK TO GO THROUGH THOSE DETAILS.

OK THANK YOU.

CLERK GUTHRIE THANK YOU, MADAM SUPERVISOR.

SO I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO THESE QUESTIONS.

THESE WILL BE FILLED OUT AND SUBMITTED AND FILED PRIOR TO THE EVENT.

IS THAT CORRECT? 100%. WE WILL FILE THE SAFETY PLAN FROM THE POLICE AND FIRE TO THE.

I CAN SEND A COPY TO MANAGER WALSH AND TO THE TOWNSHIP BOARD TO INCLUDE WITH THE PACKET AND THE APPLICATION, APPROVE THIS AND CONSENT TO IT.

TONIGHT IT WILL BE FILED BEFORE THE EVENT.

OK THANK YOU.

OK OTHER QUESTIONS COMMENTS.

SO I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE.

I'M SORRY. FORGIVE ME.

ROLL CALL, PLEASE MR. LEMASTER.

MOTION CARRIED SEVEN ZERO.

THANK YOU. WE MOVE TO ITEM TEN QUESTIONS FOR THE ATTORNEY.

[10. QUESTIONS FOR THE ATTORNEY]

I BELIEVE WE WILL.

AND SO ITEM 11.

WE HAVE NO PUBLIC HEARINGS TONIGHT.

ITEM 12 A UNDER ACTION ITEMS IS THE FUND BALANCE RESERVE POWER RESERVE POLICY.

[12.A. Fund Balance Reserve Policy]

GOOD EVENING, SUPERVISOR JACKSON AND BOARD MEMBERS.

SO AT OUR LAST MEETING WE DID HAVE DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM.

I DID HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO MANAGER WALSH ABOUT THIS.

WE BOTH AGREE THAT 25% WOULD BE THE PRUDENT NUMBER TO PUT IN THE POLICY.

THE BOARD DID REQUEST TWO ITEMS OR TWO QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION.

THE FIRST BEING HOW IS OUR FUND BALANCE GROWN BASED ON PRIOR YEARS? SO I DO HAVE OUR OUR NUMBERS FOR 2015 THROUGH 2021 BASED ON OUR ANNUAL AUDITS.

IN YOUR BOARD PACKET THIS EVENING AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THE FUND BALANCE HAS BEEN GROWING STEADILY SINCE 2017 AS A PERCENTAGE OF OUR GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES.

AND THE OTHER QUESTION WAS PERTAINING TO HOW DOES THE FUND BALANCE FLUCTUATE WITHIN A CALENDAR YEAR? OUR PROPERTY TAX COLLECTION IS ON THE WINTER TAX BILL, SO OUR FUND BALANCE STARTS HIGH AND THEN WE START SPENDING DOWN INCREMENTALLY OVER THE YEAR BASED ON OUR SPENDING HABITS, WHICH CAN BE CYCLICAL, BASED ON THE BUDGET OR THE ACCOUNT AND THE PURPOSE.

SO THAT IS REALLY ALL THE INFORMATION BEFORE YOU.

AGAIN, MOST COMMUNITIES WOULD GO WITH A 20 OR 25%.

WE FELT THAT THIS MIGHT BE SLIGHTLY MORE IMPRESSIVE.

IT'S NOT GOING TO MAKE OR BREAK A CREDIT RATING IN THE FUTURE.

BUT AGAIN, HOUSEKEEPING MAKING SURE THAT WE DO HAVE A FORMALLY ADOPTED WRITTEN POLICY.

AND IN THE PAST WE HAVE ALWAYS MEMORIALIZED THE PREVIOUS POLICY IN THE ANNUAL BUDGET.

I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE.

CAN WE GET A MOTION FIRST? TRUSTEE HENDRICKSON. SURE.

I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE THE MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP FUND BALANCE RESERVE POLICY, I SUPPORT.

ALL RIGHT, TRUSTEE.

THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THE FOLLOW UP IN THE ANSWERS THAT OUR ASSISTANT TOWNSHIP MANAGER HAS BEEN ABLE TO PROVIDE HERE.

OUT OF CURIOSITY, DO YOU RECALL WHY IT WAS IN 2017 WE SAW SUCH A DIP IN THE END

[00:30:05]

I'M JUST CURIOUS BECAUSE WE'RE SITTING MAY HAVE BEEN SAVING FOR THE HVAC PROJECT, BUT BECAUSE I WASN'T INTIMATELY INVOLVED IN THAT BUDGET, I WOULD LOOK TO THE TOWNSHIP MANAGER FOR GUIDANCE ON THAT. BUT WE DID SAVE UP AND HE'S NODDING HIS HEAD.

THAT WAS SLIGHTLY OVER $2 MILLION.

THAT PROJECT ENDED UP ACTUALLY OCCURRING THE CAPITAL OUTLAY ITSELF.

THE PROJECT OCCURRED IN 2020, WHICH WAS UNFORTUNATE TIMING WITH THE PANDEMIC, BUT WE SAVED UP THROUGH THE CAPITAL OUTLAY FOR TWO YEARS PRIOR TO THAT.

AND SO I THINK IT WOULD HAVE BEEN DUE TO THE HVAC SAVING.

GOT IT. AND WE ALSO DID HAVE ONE YEAR WHERE WE DID $500,000 FOR GENERAL FUND ROADS.

THAT MAY HAVE BEEN THE YEAR.

THERE WAS ONE YEAR WE FLUCTUATED ANYWHERE FROM $200,000 GENERAL FUND FOR LOCAL ROADS.

AND THERE WAS ONE YEAR WHERE WE WENT UP TO HALF A MILLION.

AND THAT HAD A SIZABLE IMPACT AS WELL.

SURE. SO I ASK THAT BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T FIND OURSELVES, YOU KNOW, DIPPING DANGEROUSLY CLOSE TO THAT 25% NUMBER IF WE SET THAT, I DON'T WANT TO TIE THE HANDS OF THE FOLKS WHO ARE WATCHING THIS EACH AND EVERY DAY.

SOUNDS LIKE THESE WERE RELATIVELY UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WITH A FORMALIZED POLICY IN PLACE, COULD BE PLANNED AND BUDGETED AROUND SO THAT WE DON'T FIND OURSELVES IN A SITUATION WHERE WE'D BE EVER IN DANGER OF FALLING BELOW THAT NUMBER AND WE ARE PROJECTING TO GO UP YET AGAIN.

SO NOW WE'RE FORECASTING IN THE 47-48% FUND BALANCE OF EXPENDITURES AS WE LOOK TO THE 2023 BUDGET.

SO THOSE NUMBERS HAVEN'T OFFICIALLY BEEN PUT TOGETHER TO COME BEFORE THE BOARD, BUT THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT TODAY.

SO WE CONTINUE TO SEE THAT FUND BALANCE GROW.

SO WE'RE GETTING TO THE POINT WHERE WE'RE ALMOST DOUBLE WHAT THE POLICY WOULD PROVIDE FOR.

SO WE FEEL PRETTY COMFORTABLE WITH WHERE WE'RE AT THERE.

SURE. BUT I THINK A LOT OF THAT ALSO THERE'S A LOT OF FACTORS REALLY THAT KIND OF SHOW WHY WE'VE BEEN PROGRESSING IN THAT ORDER, BECAUSE WE HAD WE HAD THE POLICE AND FIRE MILLAGE PASS IN AUGUST OF 2017 AND THAT ALSO FUNDS THE MOTOR POOL.

WE HAD NO DEDICATED MOTOR.

WE JUST KIND OF COBBLED TOGETHER WHAT WE COULD OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND, AND THAT WAS THE MOTOR POOL.

SO NOW THAT WE HAVE A DEDICATED REVENUE STREAM THAT DID FREE UP SOME GENERAL FUND, I REMEMBER ONE MEMBER OF THE COMMUNITY ASKING WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE FREED UP GENERAL FUND WHEN WE PROPOSED THAT POLICE AND FIRE MILLAGE AND WE HAVE A HEALTHIER FUND BALANCE AS A RESULT AND WE AREN'T TRYING TO SCRAPE IT UP, SCRAPE TOGETHER DOLLARS FOR THE MOTOR POOL, LOCAL ROAD PROGRAM, EVERYTHING LIKE THAT.

AND JUST FOR YOU TO PUT IT INTO THE CONTEXT THAT I THINK WOULD BE HELPFUL JUST AS A AS A PERSON IN THEIR FINANCES.

RIGHT. THIS IS ESSENTIALLY THE EQUIVALENT OF SAYING IF WE GET TO 50% FUND BALANCE AS A PERCENTAGE OF GENERAL FUND, THAT'S MORE OR LESS THE SAME THING AS SIX MONTHS OF OPERATING EXPENSES. PRECISELY.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

TRUSTEE WILSON DO YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I WOULD ONLY LIKE TO SAY THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO MEMORIALIZE THESE PROCEDURES FORMALLY AND IN WRITING, EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE BEEN FOLLOWED FOR A LONG TIME.

SO I THINK THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE ACTION.

OTHER QUESTIONS.

COMMENTS. TREASURER DESCHAINE YOU'RE BACKING UP WHAT [INAUDIBLE] WILSON JUST SAID BY MORE THEM HAVING THEM IN OUR POLICY, WE CAN DO MORE WITH THIS MONEY AS WELL, KNOWING WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS AS A MINIMUM, MAYBE MORE IN A CURRENT RATE ENVIRONMENT.

THAT 25% WILL GENERATE A GOOD DEAL OF INTEREST INCOME AND WE CAN LOCK IT AWAY FOR LONGER PERIODS AND GET GREATER INTEREST. TWO OR THREE YEARS AGO WOULD HAVE GOTTEN 1/10 OF THAT.

SO IN THIS ERA, HOPEFULLY LAST AN ERA OF HIGHER RATES, WE'LL BE ABLE TO DO SOMETHING WITH THIS MONEY AS WELL.

NO FURTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS.

MR. LEMASTER, I BELIEVE I NEED A ROLL CALL VOTE HERE.

MOTION CARRIED SEVEN ZERO.

THANK YOU. MR. OPSOMMER IS UP AGAIN TO FOUR.

ITEM 12 BE THE 2022 ORDER TO MAINTAIN SIDEWALKS, I BELIEVE.

[12.B. 2022 Order to Maintain Resolutions #1 & #2]

MR. OPSOMMER.

[00:35:01]

SO WE JUST CONCLUDED THE 2021 ORDER TO MAINTAIN A FEW MONTHS AGO AND NOW WE ARE ALREADY SET TO BEGIN THE 2022 ORDER TO MAINTAIN.

JUST A REMINDER THAT THIS IS A PROGRAM THAT WE ESTABLISHED BEGINNING IN 1999 FOR AN ANNUAL MAINTENANCE PROGRAM FOR SIDEWALKS.

WE HAVE MISSED A FEW YEARS HERE AND THERE, BUT TRADITIONALLY WE TRY TO DO IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN EVERY CALENDAR YEAR WE HAVE IDENTIFIED THE LIST OF NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE RESPECTIVE SLABS OF CONCRETE OUTLINED IN THE ASSESSMENT ROLL OR THE INITIAL DRAFT ASSESSMENT RULE IN YOUR PACKET.

WE ARE JUST AT RESOLUTION ONE AND TWO.

THIS IS A FIVE RESOLUTION PROCESS AND A TWO PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS.

SO TONIGHT WE ARE JUST TENTATIVELY APPROVING THESE IMPROVEMENTS AND THEN SETTING THE PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR SEPTEMBER 6TH.

THEN NOTICES WILL BE MAILED OUT TO ALL THE PROPERTY OWNERS.

THEY DO HAVE TIME IN WHICH THEY CAN MAKE THE REPAIR THEMSELVES.

AND AFTER THAT PERIOD OF TIME, THE TOWNSHIP WILL ACT AND THEY WILL BE ASSESSED.

SO ALL THE PROPERTY OWNERS DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO HIRE THEIR OWN CONTRACTOR OR EVEN DO THE WORK THEMSELVES.

IT IS REQUIRED THAT THEY PULL A PERMIT IF THEY WISH TO DO SO.

AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE ABOUT THE 2022 ORDER TO MAINTAIN.

TREASURER DESCHAINE? YES.

DO OUR OWN STAFF DO THESE SITE INSPECTIONS AND MAKE THESE DETERMINATIONS? YES. SO IF THE IF THE SLAB DIFFERENTIAL RAISES TO A HALF INCH OR GREATER, WE REMOVE THE TWO SLABS, EVEN THEM OUT.

USUALLY IT'S THE ROOT STRUCTURE [INAUDIBLE] THE SLAB THAT'S TRADITIONALLY THE PROBLEM.

AND THEN FOR CRACKS, IF THEY GROW A QUARTER INCH OR GREATER, WE ALSO REPLACE THEM.

AS A FOLLOW UP ONCE WE PUBLISH THIS LIST, DO WE GET CALLS FROM HOMEOWNERS ASKING YOU TO COME OUT AND RE INSPECT IT ONCE THE NOTICE GOES OUT? USUALLY PEOPLE JUST HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE JARGON AND THE TERMINOLOGY.

FOR INSTANCE, SUPERVISOR JACKSON GOT AN EMAIL LAST WEEK.

WE'VE ALREADY GONE OUT AND INVESTIGATED IT.

WE GAVE THAT PROPERTY OWNER FOUR OPTIONS JUST BEFORE THIS THIS EVENING'S MEETING.

AND WHAT I TRIED TO DO WAS TAKE ALL THE JARGON.

WHAT IS A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT? NOBODY KNOWS WHAT THAT MEANS.

YOU KNOW, I TRIED TO TAKE ALL THE JARGON OUT AND PUT IT IN PLAIN ENGLISH SO THAT THE PERSON COULD EASILY UNDERSTAND WHAT I WAS EXPLAINING AND MAKE A DECISION THAT'S BEST FOR THEM. REALLY IN ACTUALITY, SINCE THE PROPERTY OWNERS PAY IT, THEY SHOULD BE PRETTY THANKFUL THAT THEY'RE ON THIS YEAR BECAUSE IF THEY'RE ON NEXT YEAR, THEY'RE JUST GOING TO SEE THAT INTEREST THAT WE'RE SEEING, ESPECIALLY IN CONSTRUCTION COMPOUNDS.

SO THAT WAS MORE OR LESS MY MESSAGE TO THE RESIDENT WHO CONTACTED THE SUPERVISOR LAST WEEK.

THIS EVENING, RIGHT BEFORE THE BOARD MEETING IS RIGHT NOW, IT WOULD COST YOU ABOUT $191.81 TO REPLACE THESE TWO SLABS NEXT YEAR.

IT COULD BE $220. IT COULD BE $270.

IT'S SCARY OUT THERE RIGHT NOW.

SO THAT'S MORE OR LESS WHAT IT REALLY BOILS DOWN TO IS COST, RIGHT? TRUSTEE WILSON I HAVE ANOTHER COMMENT SLASH QUESTION.

IF THE HOMEOWNER ELECTS TO DO THEIR OWN RECONSTRUCTION OF THE SIDEWALK, IT HAS TO BE BUILT TO THE SAME STANDARDS AS THE SIDEWALK THAT WE ARE REPLACING AS THE TOWNSHIP. CORRECT.

CORRECT. THE VERY LAST ATTACHMENT TO YOUR MEMO IS THE BROCHURE, AND IT SPELLS THAT OUT.

SO WE WOULD PROVIDE THE STANDARDS THAT THEY HAVE TO ADHERE TO.

SO THE DEPTH, IF IT'S A DRIVEWAY APPROACH, IT DOES HAVE TO BE SEVEN INCHES.

SO IT HAS TO BE THICKER CONCRETE FOR THE DRIVEWAY.

AND THEN WE DO INSPECT ONCE THEY FRAME IT OFF AND WHEN THEY POUR THE CONCRETE.

SO TWO INSPECTIONS.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? TRUSTEE WISINSKI WHY? FOR ME, AND I THINK SOME OTHER RESIDENTS.

WHY ARE WE HAVING A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT OR SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLE AS OPPOSED TO THAT JUST BEING COVERED BY TAXES? YEAH, EXACTLY. GOOD QUESTION.

THANK YOU. TRUSTEE WISINSKI.

SO WITH THE PATHWAY MILLAGE WE DO HAVE, THE PATHWAY MILLAGE IS USUALLY A THIRD OF A MILL AND THAT FUNDS ALL THE PATHWAYS ON MAJOR ROADWAYS.

SO THINK MARSH, GREEN RIVER, OKEMOS, ETC..

THAT'S BECAUSE THOSE PATHWAY SYSTEMS ARE REALLY USED BY ALL OF US RIGHT THERE REALLY FOR COMMUTER ROUTES, RIGHT.

IF YOU'RE COMMUTING ON BIKE OR YOU'RE TAKING A LONG WALK OR A LONG JOG.

SO EVERYONE UTILIZES THOSE.

SO WE PAY BY A MILLAGE ASSESSED ACROSS THE ENTIRE TOWNSHIP, WHEREAS NEIGHBORHOODS CONTAINED WITHIN SIDEWALKS, CONTAINED WITHIN NEIGHBORHOODS ARE PREDOMINANTLY AND ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY USED BY THE RESIDENTS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

[00:40:02]

GREAT. THANK YOU MR. OPSOMMER I WOULD ASK FOR NEWBIES LIKE TRUSTEE WISINSKI IF YOU WOULD VERY SUCCINCTLY EXPLAIN THE PROCESS THAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH AND INFORM THE PUBLIC WHO MAY BE INTERESTED WHEN TO EXPECT AND WHAT THEY EXPECT IN THE PROCESS.

SO AT THIS POINT, NOTICES WILL GO OUT TO ALL THE PROPERTY OWNERS.

THEN WE WILL SET A SECOND PUBLIC HEARING.

THAT'S USUALLY WHEN ANY PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WE ACTUALLY WOULD HAVE WOULD OCCUR.

BUT USUALLY PEOPLE WILL CALL IN AND [INAUDIBLE] QUESTION IS, WHAT'S A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT? WHAT AM I GOING TO BE BILLED? HOW AM I GOING TO PAY IT? THE ANSWER IS THAT THEY WON'T HAVE TO PAY UNTIL NEXT SUMMER.

IT'LL GO ON THE SUMMER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLE IN 2023.

BUT THE WORK WILL OCCUR THIS FALL, SO OUR CONCRETE CONTRACT WILL COVER THE WORK WHICH WILL OCCUR THIS FALL.

SO RESOLUTIONS THREE AND FOUR, I'LL PROBABLY BRING TO YOU IN NOVEMBER OR DECEMBER.

THEN RESOLUTION FIVE IS WHEN WE ACTUALLY SET THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLE.

SO RESIDENTS SHOULD WATCH FOR THAT NOTICE AND THEY SHOULD DOUBLE CHECK TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVEN'T MADE ANY ERRORS IN CALCULATING ITS THE COST PER SLAB OR PER SQUARE YARD.

I GUESS WE DO HAVE SOME DIFFERENTIAL AND SIDEWALK WIDTH DEPENDING ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT IT'S USUALLY PRETTY STANDARD, SO IT'S USUALLY JUST BY THE SLAB AND SO THEY CAN DOUBLE CHECK OUR MATH IF THERE'S THREE SLABS TIMES BY THE UNIT COST PER SLAB AND MAKE SURE THAT OUR MATH IS CORRECT.

AND IF THERE'S AN ERROR THERE, WE WOULD, OF COURSE, CORRECT IT AND WE WILL FINALIZE IT, FINALIZE THE ASSESSMENT ROLE AFTER THE WORK IS DONE.

AND AFTER ALL THAT NOTICE AND THAT SECOND PUBLIC HEARING HAS OCCURRED PROBABLY IN JANUARY OR FEBRUARY 2023.

THANK YOU, TREASURER DESCHAINE.

JUST FOR CLARIFICATION ON WHEN SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ARE BUILT, THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP.

THEY ARE BUILT ON JUNE 1ST AND THEY'RE DUE JULY 1ST.

ON JULY 1ST, THE SUMMER TAX BILLS GOES OUT.

SEPARATE BILL FROM THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT BILL.

CERTAIN LARGE SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS LIKE A DRAIN ASSESSMENT.

DANIELS DRAIN IS BROKEN UP INTO 20 YEAR PAYMENTS IF THE HOMEOWNER LIKES IT.

THESE ARE NOT THESE ARE DUE.

THE FULL AMOUNT IS DUE.

ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT WILL BE THE LAKE LANSING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, WHERE TIER ONE AND TIER TWO HOMES ON THE LAKE ARE JUST OFF THE LAKE.

THAT SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR LAKE LAKE OWNERS IS BUILT IN JUNE, DUE ON JULY ONE, AND THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR STREETLIGHTS ARE BUILT IN THE WINTER. SO IT'S KIND OF ALL OVER THE PLACE.

BUT WE ARE WORKING ON THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLE FOR THIS WINTER RIGHT NOW AND WE WERE JUST REVIEWING OUR UTILITY COSTS.

GOOD NEWS IS WE'RE NOT SEEING THE UTILITY COSTS ARE REMAINING PRETTY FLAT.

SO WE COULD ALL USE A BIT OF GOOD NEWS ON THE FINANCIAL FRONT.

TRUSTEE HENDERICKSON. ONLY HAVING SEEN THE TAIL END OF THIS SO FAR AND NOW AT THE BEGINNING, CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT THE WHY A FIVE RESOLUTION PROCESS WHAT'S THE WHAT'S THE VIRTUE OF THAT? IS THAT A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT MANDATE? IT'S GOVERNED BY A PUBLIC ACT 188, WHICH PROVIDES FOR THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS.

I THINK THE DRAFTERS IN THE LEGISLATURE VIEWED IT AS A CONSUMER PROTECTION.

IT'S KIND OF LIKE A SURPRISE BILLING CONSUMER PROTECTION ELEMENT, RIGHT? SO YOU CAN'T SPRING THIS ON ANYONE HAPHAZARDLY.

I THINK YOU SAW IT PLAY OUT, ALBEIT YOU'RE ONLY THERE FOR THE TAIL END WITH THE DANIELS DRAIN.

RIGHT. BUT MANY OF THE RESIDENTS WHO CAME TO HEARING NUMBER TWO AND SHARED THEIR PERSPECTIVES WHEN YOU WERE ON THE BOARD ALSO SPOKE AT HEARING NUMBER ONE.

AND SO IT KIND OF GIVES PEOPLE TWO OPPORTUNITIES TO BE HEARD.

EVEN IF THEY MISSED THE FIRST NOTICE AND MISSED THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING, THEY STILL GET THAT OPPORTUNITY TO COME OUT.

SO WE'LL MAIL NOTICES OUT BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON SEPTEMBER 6TH AND PEOPLE CAN COME.

BUT AGAIN, I IMAGINE THEY'LL ALL CALL.

MY DEPARTMENT WILL ANSWER THEIR QUESTIONS AND THEY WON'T ARRIVE AT THE PODIUM AND THEN WE'LL MAIL NOTICES OUT AFTER THE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING IF WE TWEAK ANY OF THE NUMBERS.

SO USUALLY [INAUDIBLE] IS VERY GOOD AT HIS ESTIMATES.

USUALLY THE COSTS COME IN LOWER.

WE END UP MOVING THE COST DOWN.

[INAUDIBLE] JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION BECAUSE I READ THIS IN THE NOTES THAT WE HAD INSTRUCTIONS TO THOSE WHO WILL BE SUBJECT TO A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR SIDEWALKS.

IT SAYS THAT THE ASSESSMENT MAY BE PAID IN FULL IN ONE YEAR IN 2023, BUT IT CAN BE PAID OVER FIVE YEARS AT 5% INTEREST PER YEAR.

IS THAT ACCURATE? THAT IS CORRECT. AND 5% IS THE STANDARD FOR OUR TURF, WHICH IS OUR REVOLVING FUND FOR IMPROVEMENTS LIKE THIS OR ROADS IF WE'RE DOING AN

[00:45:06]

I DON'T THINK IT'S UTILIZED VERY OFTEN IN THIS IN THIS CASE.

BUT YES, RESIDENTS WOULD HAVE UP TO FIVE YEARS TO PAY IT SO THEY COULD BREAK IT OUT INTO VERY, VERY, VERY LOW, REASONABLE ANNUAL PAYMENTS.

TREASURER DESCHAINE YOU'VE IDENTIFIED THESE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT YOU'RE FOCUSING ON.

WHAT IF YOU SOMEONE ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD HAS A SIDEWALK THAT'S A HUGE DIFFERENTIAL.

IT'S A REAL SAFETY HAZARD.

WHAT DO WE DO IN THOSE CASES WHEN THEY'RE OUTSIDE THE DISTRICT? BUT CLEARLY, IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE FOR THE NEIGHBORS.

WELL, THE FIRST THING I'M GOING TO DO IS FORWARD IT OFF TO OUR DPW CREW AND WE'RE GOING TO GET ASPHALT TO DO OUR BEST TO ELIMINATE THE HAZARD.

OBVIOUSLY, THERE'S NO NOTHING PERFECT, BUT WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO PUT A RAMP IN THERE TO ELIMINATE THAT TRIP HAZARD AS BEST AS POSSIBLE.

AND THEN WE WOULD WORK WITH THEM TO SEE IF THEY WANT TO BE INCLUDED.

THE ONLY THING IS THAT IF THEY WANT TO BE INCLUDED AT THIS POINT, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WAIVE THEIR RIGHT TO APPEAL THE ASSESSMENT BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY INITIATED THE NOTICE AND SO THEY CAN'T APPEAL THE ASSESSMENT UNDER THE GROUNDS THAT THEY DIDN'T RECEIVE THE INITIAL NOTICE.

SO WE JUST ENTER INTO A BASIC AGREEMENT WITH THEM.

IT WOULD BE WISE FOR THEM TO CONTACT US IF THEY DO WANT THE WORK BECAUSE IT WILL BE CHEAPER THIS YEAR.

OKAY. THANK YOU. USUALLY THEY CONTACT US BECAUSE THEY ASSUME THEIR TAXES PAY FOR IT.

OF COURSE. AND I HAVE THE GOOD FORTUNE OF INFORMING THEM IT DOESN'T.

SO THEY'RE USUALLY VERY HAPPY TO CONTACT US, THINKING THAT THEY'RE GOING TO GET A FREE FIX.

THEN THEY REALIZE. BUT REALLY THE COST IS VERY AFFORDABLE RELATIVE TO OTHER THINGS.

AND AS YOU KNOW, YOU ACTUALLY WENT OUT AND GOT TWO OR THREE BIDS AND YOU WERE ABLE TO DO IT AT A CHEAPER COST.

BECAUSE THE ONE THING IS WE WHEN WE BID OUR PROJECTS, LIKE WHEN WE GO OUT TO SECURE OUR CONCRETE CONTRACT THAT COVERS A WHOLE HOST OF THINGS, OUR LOCAL ROAD PROGRAM, PATHWAY PROJECT, SIDEWALK, SIDEWALK PROJECTS.

THERE'S BID BOND REQUIREMENTS AND BID PERFORMANCE GUARANTEES THAT THEY HAVE TO PUT UP.

SMALL CONTRACTORS DON'T HAVE CAPITAL TO START DOING BID BONDS, AND THAT'S NOT THEIR BALL THEIR BALL GAME.

SO, YOU KNOW, HIRING A SMALLER CONCRETE CONTRACTOR THAT DOES RESIDENTIAL WORK, PRIMARILY SOME SMALL COMMERCIAL WORK IS GOING TO GET YOU A BETTER RATE USUALLY. WE HAVE A MOTION.

WE DON'T HAVE A MOTION TO MOVE YOU.

TRUSTEE WILSON HAS MOVED.

I CAN KEEP MY PAD UP.

I WILL. WE'LL MOVE.

ONE MOMENT, PLEASE.

I HAVE LOST MY PLACE.

PAGE 46.

HERE WE GO. MOVE TO APPROVE THE 2022 ORDER TO MAINTAIN SIDEWALKS SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 20 RESOLUTIONS NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER TWO, WHICH TENTATIVELY APPROVES THE IMPROVEMENTS AND THE COST ESTIMATES OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND SETS THE DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON SEPTEMBER 6TH, 2022.

SUPPORT SUPPORTED BY TRUSTEE WISINSKI.

OTHER COMMENTS. QUESTIONS.

MR. LEMASTER COULD WE HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THIS ISSUE? MOTION CARRIED SEVEN ZERO.

THANK YOU. ITEM 12 C IS RECREATIONAL

[12.C. Recreational Marihuana Petition]

MR. WALSH WILL INTRODUCE THIS SUBJECT.

THANK YOU. BEFORE DOING THAT, I JUST WANTED TO TAKE A MOMENT.

AND BECAUSE YOU JUST WENT OVER THE FUND BALANCE POLICY.

BUT OF COURSE, WHEN WE ALL STARTED THIS TEN YEARS AGO, I DON'T THINK ANY OF YOU WERE ON THE BOARD AT THAT TIME.

SO JUST KIND OF RECAP OF WHERE WE'VE BEEN TO WHERE WE ARE, IF YOU DON'T MIND, FOR JUST A MOMENT.

I DON'T IT'S INFORMATION THAT ALL OF YOU SHOULD HAVE.

SO BACK IN TEN YEARS AGO, IN 2013, OUR FUND BALANCE WAS JUST OVER $5 MILLION.

TODAY IT'S $12.2 MILLION.

OUR RETIREE HEALTH CARE AT THAT TIME WAS $4.9 MILLION IN DEBT.

TODAY, IT'S PAID OFF.

OUR PENSION FUND WAS $1,000,008 UNDERWATER.

TODAY, IT'S 100% FUNDED.

AND OUR MERGED PENSION, WHICH IS OUR LARGE ONE, POLICE AND FIRE, WAS AT 54% FUNDED AND TODAY IT'S 72% FUNDED.

AT THE SAME TIME, WE PAID $2 MILLION IN CASH FOR OUR HVAC AND ALL OF OUR POLICE AND FIRE APPARATUS HAS BEEN PAID FOR IN CASH.

WE COMMITTED $4 MILLION IN CASH TO THE MARKETPLACE.

AND SO I COULD GO ON AND ON TONIGHT.

I WON'T. I'LL SAVE IT FOR A BUDGET NIGHT.

BUT JUST TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF DO ENCAPSULATE WHERE WE'RE AT, NOT ONLY WE ADD IT TO THE FUND BALANCE, WE HAVE SUCCESSFULLY

[00:50:06]

BUT I'M HERE TONIGHT TO TALK REALLY BRIEFLY ABOUT THE RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA.

APPROXIMATELY TWO OR THREE WEEKS AGO, WE RECEIVED A PETITION AND CORRECT ME [INAUDIBLE] CLERK GUTHRIE BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN JUST TOTALLY INVOLVED WITH THIS ISSUE. AND I WANT TO APPLAUD THE CLERK BECAUSE IT'S NOT SHE JUST HASN'T HAD A PETITION TO DEAL WITH.

SHE'S HAD AN ELECTION TO DEAL WITH.

AND SO WE RECEIVED THAT PETITION AT THE LAST HOUR RIGHT BEFORE THE PRIMARY ELECTION SATURDAY.

THE CLERK AND HER OFFICE ARE REQUIRED TO BE HERE TO BE OPEN.

I THINK IT'S [INAUDIBLE].

AND THEN WE GET INTO MONDAY, THE DAY BEFORE THE ELECTION.

THEN WE GET INTO TUESDAY, THE ELECTION DAY AND THE DAYS THAT FOLLOW OUR ELECTION CLEAN UP CERTIFICATION AND ALL OF THAT.

AND SO AT THE POINT AND THERE WAS A SCHEDULE ALL LAID OUT TO VALIDATE THE PETITIONS, IT WAS THURSDAY, FRIDAY, SATURDAY, SUNDAY OF LAST WEEK.

YES, IT WOULD HAVE OCCURRED OVER THE WEEKEND.

BUT WHEN YOU GET A PETITION OF 2000 VOTES, THIS WAS ALL LAID OUT BY CLERK GUTHRIE FROM DAY 1 TO 13 DAYS.

WHAT WE HAD TO DO AND IT WAS ALL COMPUTERIZED.

THEN APPROXIMATELY AND THIS WAS A PETITION THAT WAS RECEIVED 2000 ROUGHLY SIGNATURES TO PLACE THE QUESTION OF RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA ON THE BALLOT FOR NOVEMBER 8TH.

KNOWING FULL WELL THAT WE HAD THIS NOT THE SAME QUESTION BUT THE SAME ISSUE ON THE BALLOT ON AUGUST 2ND.

AND WE ALL KNOW NOW THAT OVER 12,000, 12 AND A HALF THOUSAND PEOPLE VOTED AND THE DIFFERENCE IS JUST OVER TEN VOTES.

IT'S A VERY SPLIT ISSUE.

TAKING AWAY FROM THAT THE ISSUE IS TWO THINGS OCCURRED IN THE LAST JUST FEW DAYS AS THE CLERK WAS JUST PREPARING.

IN FACT, SHE HAD THE STAFF IN THE BUILDING.

I THINK, IN FACT, WE PAID THEM FOR THE FIRST DAY.

I HAD A FULL STAFF HERE TO GO OVER ALL THE PETITIONS TO START VALIDATING THEM RIGHT ON SCHEDULE, AS SHE LAID OUT.

AND THEN WE GOT WORD FROM OUR COUNSEL WHO REVIEWED THE PETITIONS.

ALMOST WITHIN 24 HOURS WE RECEIVED TWO NEWS.

ONE, THE PETITIONERS WHO SUBMITTED THE BALLOT LANGUAGE FOR NOVEMBER 8TH TO ASK THE QUESTION ABOUT RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA.

ASKED FOR THE PETITION TO BE WITHDRAWN, ALL THAT COUNSEL REFER TO THAT.

I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY. WE'LL LET THE COUNCIL TALK ABOUT.

CAN THAT JUST HAPPEN? CAN THEY. CAN WE JUST WITHDRAW? HAVE THE PETITION WITHDRAW.

THAT'S QUESTION NUMBER ONE.

QUESTION NUMBER TWO IS THE PETITION.

DUE TO A NUMBER OF REASONS WHICH I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO.

ATTORNEY [INAUDIBLE] WE'LL GET INTO THAT WITH YOU THIS EVENING, WHATEVER.

HOW YOU'D LIKE TO PROCEED. SUPERVISOR SO TWO THINGS.

ONE, THE PETITIONERS ASKED TO HAVE THE PETITION WITHDRAWN.

AND NUMBER TWO, THE PETITION WAS DETERMINED TO BE INVALID.

SO THOSE ARE THE TWO THINGS BEFORE YOU TONIGHT.

SO YOU HAVE A RESOLUTION BEFORE YOU TO IF IT'S APPROVED TONIGHT, THAT THE PETITION THAT WAS SUBMITTED, THE QUESTION OF RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA ON THE NOVEMBER 8 BALLOT WILL NOT HAPPEN FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS.

AND SO AT THIS POINT, I WON'T EVEN TRY TO ATTEMPT TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS BECAUSE IT'S NOT MY BAILIWICK AND I PREFER NOT TO GET INTO THE LEGALITY OF IT, BUT THAT'S ALL THE WORK THAT'S HAPPENED. SO I WILL TELL YOU ONE OTHER THING.

THAT'S A PIECE OF INFORMATION.

YOU SHOULD ALSO ON THE ROUND THURSDAY OF LAST WEEK, CLERK HAS HER STAFF IN HERE JUST LIKE SHE PLANNED TEN DAYS AGO.

I THINK BEFORE THAT, TO HAVE THREE DAYS OF A THREE DAYS OF VALIDATION FOR THE 2000 SIGNATURES WE DEEM TOGETHER THAT COUNCIL HAS RULED THE PETITION INVALID.

THE PETITIONERS HAVE ASKED TO HAVE IT WITHDRAWN.

WHY ARE WE GOING TO SPEND ALL THIS TIME, ALL THIS EFFORT, ALL THIS TAXPAYER COST TO GO THROUGH AND VALIDATE 2000 SIGNATURES WHEN IT'S INVALID.

SO THE DECISION WAS MADE.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO TAKE THAT STEP.

IT WOULD BE FOOLISH TO SPEND FIVE OR $10,000 OR MORE TO DO THAT.

SO THAT'S ALL THE INFORMATION I HAVE.

I'VE BEEN INTIMATELY INVOLVED IN THIS ISSUE ONLY FOR SINCE THE ELECTION DAY.

I'M NOT THE CLERK, BUT THAT'S KIND OF WALKS THROUGH WHAT WE OCCURRED OVER THE LAST 8 TO 10 DAYS.

AND AT THIS TIME I'D ASK COUNCIL TO COME UP SO COUNCIL CAN ASK ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MR. KUSHEL.

YOU GOT IT, MADAM SUPERVISOR.

SO JUST TWO THINGS THAT I WANT TO ADDRESS REALLY BRIEFLY, AND THEN I'M HAPPY TO FIELD YOUR QUESTIONS.

FIRST IS THE THE COUNTING OF THE SIGNATURES, AS THE MANAGER MENTIONED.

SO THERE'S SEVERAL DIFFERENT PIECES THAT THE TOWNSHIP AND THE CLERK'S OFFICE HAVE TO LOOK AT ON WHETHER OR NOT A PETITION IS VALID AND NEEDS TO GO FORWARD.

NOW, OF COURSE, ONE VERY IMPORTANT ONE OF THOSE IS DO THEY HAVE ENOUGH SIGNATURES?

[00:55:03]

AND IF ANY OF THOSE AREN'T MET, THEN THE PETITION IS GOING TO BE INVALID.

SO WHETHER SHE KNEW RIGHT AWAY THAT IT ONLY HAD 500 SIGNATURES AND THAT WASN'T ENOUGH, EVEN IF ALL OF THEM WERE VALID, OR WHETHER WE CAN SEE RIGHT AWAY FROM THE FACE OF THE PETITION THAT IT'S DEFECTIVE, ANY ONE OF THOSE DEFICIENCIES IS GOING TO INVALIDATE THAT PETITION, WHICH IS THE RECOMMENDATION.

SO THAT'S WHY THERE IS AGAIN, THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THE LUXURY, SO TO SAY, OF BEING ABLE TO CONSERVE OUR RESOURCES IN ORDER TO THEN NOT HAVE TO NECESSARILY CANVASS ALL THOSE PETITIONS SIGNATURES.

AND THEN THE OTHER PIECE IS JUST TO SORT OF TIP OFF KIND OF THE BOARD ACTION TONIGHT.

SO AGAIN, IT IS A RESOLUTION THAT WE'VE PUT TOGETHER FOR THE BOARD TO REVIEW.

AND GIVEN THE BACKGROUND AND THE HISTORY THAT THE MANAGER WALKED THROUGH FOR YOU, I CAN GET INTO A LOT OF DETAILS IF YOU WANT, IF YOU WOULD LIKE.

BUT IN ESSENCE, AS WITH MANY OF OUR COMMUNITIES, WE'D LIKE TO SEE SUPPORT.

AND OF COURSE, ALL MEMBERS OF THEIR OFFICES LIKE TO BE ABLE TO DISCUSS MATTERS WITH THEIR BOARD AND HAVE SUPPORT FROM THEIR BOARD, YOU KNOW, EVEN IF THEY'RE IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A UNANIMOUS VOTE, BUT AT LEAST YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO TO RAISE IT AND BRING IT AS A BOARD.

SO WITH THOSE KIND OF QUALIFYING SORT OF PROCEDURAL STEPS TO ADD A LITTLE FLAVOR TO WHAT THE MANAGER MENTIONED, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY OF YOUR QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU. MR. HENDRICKSON HAS QUESTIONS.

SO I HAVE A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT QUESTIONS ON A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT FRONTS.

SO FIRST OF ALL, I THINK A COUPLE OF THESE HAVE BEEN ANSWERED.

I HAVE SOME NOTES HERE.

IS THERE A MECHANISM BY WHICH UNDER OR ELECTION LAW, THE PETITIONER CAN WITHDRAW A PETITION RATHER THAN HAVE IT JUDGED FACIALLY DEFECTIVE OR THE SIGNATURES BECOME INVALID? NO, THERE'S NO STATUTORY MECHANISM TO DO THAT.

SO SOME SOME STATUTES DO HAVE CLEAR WITHDRAWAL PROVISIONS.

NEITHER VERMONT NOR AN ELECTION LAW FOR THIS TYPE OF PETITION CONTAINS THAT WITHDRAWAL RIGHT.

SO THEN THERE IS SOME SOME OF THE CASE LAW THAT WE LOOKED AT AND I DID PREPARE A LEGAL OPINION THAT WAS PROVIDED THAT KIND OF GOES THROUGH SOME OF THAT.

SO THERE'S SOME PRACTICAL CONSIDERATION THERE.

AND I THINK THAT'S SORT OF THE NEXT SECOND STEP THAT WE DON'T HAVE A CLEAR THERE'S NO STATUTORY RIGHT.

SO THE PETITIONER DOES NOT NOW BIND THE HANDS OF THE TOWNSHIP.

THE TOWNSHIP IS STILL FREE TO ACT AS IT SEES IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CITIZENRY.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME AS FROM A PRACTICAL VIEW, IF YOU HAVE A PETITIONER SEEKING TO WITHDRAW THE PETITION, THEN THAT WEIGHS IN FAVOR.

THAT'S GOING TO CARRY SOME WEIGHT, PARTICULARLY THAN IF THERE ARE OTHER CONCERNS WITH THE WITH THE PETITION OR NOT A STRONG PUBLIC POLICY NEED TO PROCEED FORWARD.

THEN THERE'S JUST A SIMPLE PRACTICAL CONSIDERATION OF IF THEY'RE ASKING TO WITHDRAW THEIR THEIR ISSUE, DO WE REALLY NEED TO PUT IT ON THE BALLOT.

IT OCCURS TO ME AS A AS A A WATCHER OF THESE SORTS OF ISSUES THAT AT THE STATE LEVEL, OFTENTIMES, THOSE WHO ARE PETITIONING FOR BALLOT INITIATIVES TO BE PLACED ON THE BALLOT WILL COME BEFORE THE STATE BOARD OF CANVASSERS FOR PRE APPROVAL OF THE LANGUAGE SO THAT THEY DON'T GO OUT AND SAY WASTE THEIR OWN TIME AND COLLECT 2000 SIGNATURES ONLY TO FIND OUT THAT IT WOULD BE DEEMED DEFECTIVE.

IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE COULD HAVE OR SHOULD HAVE DONE IN THIS CASE AT THE LOCAL ELECTION COMMISSION LEVEL? OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT IS NOT COMMON PRACTICE AT THE LOCAL LEVEL? THAT IS NOT COMMON PRACTICE? AND I DO NOT BELIEVE THERE'S ANY ROLE FOR THE ELECTION COMMISSION, THE TOWNSHIP ELECTION COMMISSION, SPECIFICALLY IN A BALLOT QUESTION OF THIS TYPE.

OKAY. AND THEN LASTLY, I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS REGARDING THE WAY WE'RE GOING ABOUT ACTING THIS EVENING.

SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE RULING AT THE END OF THE DAY ON WHETHER SOMETHING IS FACIALLY DEFICIENT BELONGS IN THE. HANDS OF THE CLERK.

IS THAT ACCURATE? I BELIEVE THAT IS ACCURATE.

OKAY. AND SO WHAT WE HAVE HERE IN TERMS OF THE RESOLUTION THAT'S IN FRONT OF US IS TO REJECT THE PETITION, WHICH FEELS LIKE A DETERMINATIVE ACTION ON THIS PETITION, WHEN, IN FACT, YOU JUST TOLD US THAT IT'S THE CLERK'S RESPONSIBILITY TO ACT.

[01:00:02]

I THINK THAT WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE ALTERNATE MECHANISM.

I THINK YOU COULD DO IT THAT WAY.

THE INTERESTING TENSION HERE IS THAT THE STATUTE JUST SIMPLY ISN'T CLEAR IN SOME STATUTES AND THE SPECIFICALLY WE HAVE VERY GOOD LANGUAGE. THE STATUTE IS VERY CLEAR PLACES THAT DETERMINATION SQUARELY ON THE CLERK'S OFFICE.

IT'S HER JOB UNDER AN EPA PETITION TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT IT'S ADEQUATE.

THAT LANGUAGE DOES NOT APPEAR IN THE [INAUDIBLE] AND IT DOES NOT APPEAR IN THE ELECTION LAW.

SO THEN THE QUESTION BECOMES HOW MUCH OF THAT DO WE THEN CAN WE READ INTO THAT AS A SIMILAR STATUTE? BECAUSE IT'S IT'S A SIMILAR TYPE OF PETITION.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LOCAL, LOCAL CITIZEN PETITIONS.

WHEN WE LOOK THEN AT THE WAY THE COURT OF APPEALS HAS ADDRESSED THESE PETITIONS, BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN A HANDFUL NOW THAT HAVE BEEN REJECTED AND AND OR APPEALED AT INTO THE APPELLATE COURT.

OFTEN THEY'RE TALKING DIRECTLY TO THE CLERK RATHER THAN TALKING TO A GOVERNMENTAL BODY.

SO THAT SUPPORTS SORT OF AN AIR READING.

BUT AS I SAY, IT'S NOT A CLEAR STATUTORY DIRECTIVE THAT THAT IT FALLS SIMPLY TO ONE OFFICE.

AND I THINK THAT CREATES THE POSSIBILITY IN THE OPENING FOR THIS BOARD TO ACT AS A BODY AGAIN, TO COME AROUND AND COALESCE ON THE ISSUE AND MAKE A DETERMINATION TOGETHER TO TO REJECT THAT PETITION.

SO I THINK FUNCTIONALLY, WE END UP GETTING TO THE SAME SPOT, WHICH IS WHY I THINK WE PROCEDURALLY I CAN DEFEND OR THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS YOU CAN STRESS DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF THE LEGAL LANGUAGE ABOUT WHY YOU WOULD PICK ONE ROUTE OVER ANOTHER ROUTE.

SO I CERTAINLY SEE THE ARGUMENT YOU'RE MAKING, BUT I'M ALSO VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THE PROCESS THAT WE'VE PROPOSED HERE FOR YOU.

YEAH, I'LL LET THE CLERK SPEAK FOR HERSELF, OF COURSE.

BUT I GENERALLY WOULD BE MORE IN SUPPORT OF THE METHODOLOGY THAT WOULD ALLOW THE CLERK THE AUTONOMY TO MAKE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS AS THE EXPERT IN THIS MATTER AND, YOU KNOW, AND ALLOW THE BOARD TO AFFIRM VIA RESOLUTION, IF NEEDED, OUR SUPPORT FOR THAT DECISION.

THAT'S ME PERSONALLY.

WELL, WE'LL, I'M SURE, HAVE A GOOD DISCUSSION ON THIS, BUT THAT'S MORE OR LESS WHERE I'M AT.

THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT. THANK YOU.

TREASURER DESCHAINE [INAUDIBLE] YOUR OPENING WORDS THIS ENDS JUNE 29TH.

DID YOU MEAN ON JULY 29TH? I DID, YES. GET THAT IN THE RECORD.

AND SECONDLY, YOU MAKE IT CLEAR HERE THAT THERE'S REALLY THREE ISSUES.

THE THIRD ONE IN MY MIND IS THAT THEY REQUESTED THE WITHDRAWAL.

AND I THINK THAT'S KIND OF A NON ISSUE THAT THE PETITIONS WERE SIGNED, THEY WERE PRESENTED TO US, THEY MIGHT HAVE CHANGED THEIR MIND, BUT IF THEY'RE VALID PETITIONS, SIGNATURES, THEN WE NEED TO LOOK AT THEM.

BUT YOU'RE POINTING OUT THAT THE ORDINANCE ENCOMPASSED MORE THAN PROVIDING FOR THE NUMBER OF MARIJUANA ESTABLISHMENTS, THEREFORE RENDERING IT INVALID, AND SECONDLY, THEY DID NOT CONFORM TO THE LANGUAGE OF MCL 168482 REGARDING THE PLACEMENT OF WARNING OF A WARNING TO PETITION SIGNERS THAT THEIR SIGNATURES COULD BE INVALIDATED, THOSE TWO REASONS ALONE TO ME ARE ENOUGH FOR US TO ACT.

AND FOR THAT REASON I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION.

I MOVE TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION REJECTING THE PETITION, WHICH WOULD INITIATE AN ORDINANCE TO ALLOW ADULT USE MARIJUANA ESTABLISHMENTS IN THE TOWNSHIP.

YOU KNOW, I'VE MADE MY SUPPORTING COMMENTS BEFORE I MADE THE MOTION.

THOSE ARE MY TWO REASONS.

THANK YOU, CLERK GUTHRIE.

I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL COMMENTS EXCEPT FOR IT WAS CLEAR THAT THE THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE COMMITTEE WHO OVERSAW THE PETITIONS AND THAT THE PETITIONER WANTED TO REMOVE THE PETITION AND WITHDRAW AND NOT HAVE IT ON THE BALLOT.

HE WAS VERY CLEAR.

HE WANTED ALL OF THE SIGNATURES BACK.

HE HE SIGNED A DOCUMENT.

HE SUBMITTED A DOCUMENT TO MY OFFICE.

IT'S IN THE OFFICE.

IT'S ON RECORD. IT'S ON FILE THAT HE DID NOT WANT THIS TO MOVE FORWARD AND AND BE ON THE BALLOT.

I MIGHT NOTE, THOUGH, THAT THAT CAN THAT DESIRE TO REMOVE IT AND WITHDRAW IT IS NOT

[01:05:10]

OTHER COMMENTS.

MR. HENDRICKSON.

SO NOW THAT THE MOTION HAS BEEN MADE, I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.

OBVIOUSLY, THERE ARE FACIAL DEFICIENCIES ON THE PETITION SIGNATURE THAT MAKE THIS A VERY EASY DECISION TO TO REJECT THE PETITION.

I DO DISAGREE ON PRINCIPLE WITH THE METHODOLOGY THAT WE'RE USING HERE, BUT I ACCEPT THAT THAT'S THE CHOSEN PATH IN THIS CASE.

I THINK IN THE FUTURE, I WOULD I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS IN THE HANDS OF THE CLERK AND BE ABLE TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION IN CONSULTATION WITH THE ATTORNEYS. AND I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO AFFIRM THAT DECISION BY THE CLERK IN THE FUTURE.

BUT IN THIS CASE, THIS PATH IS THE PATH THAT HAS BEEN CHOSEN, AND I CAN SUPPORT IT, AT LEAST FOR NOW.

OKAY. OTHER COMMENTS.

TRUSTEE WISINSKI. THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR.

I'M ALSO IN A POSITION TO SUPPORT THIS BASED ON THE VALIDITY OF THE PETITION ITSELF.

I WOULD SUPPORT TRUSTEE HENDRICKSONS TWO COMMENTS.

ONE BEING MOVING THROUGH THE CLERK'S OFFICE GOING FORWARD WITH THESE PETITIONS.

I WOULD ALSO SUPPORT HAVING A A PRE-APPROVAL PROCESS, IF IN FACT THAT HELPS.

I SAY THAT BECAUSE THE PREVIOUS PETITION THAT WAS ON THE AUGUST 2ND BALLOT ALSO WENT THROUGH SOME OF THE LANGUAGE.

I WAS A VALIDITY CONCERNS TOO.

SO I BELIEVE THEY HAD TO RESUBMIT BASED ON JUST SOME OF THOSE FORMALITIES WITHIN THAT FORM.

SO I THINK A PRE-APPROVAL PROCESS SHOULD BE OPTIONAL BUT AVAILABLE.

ANYONE ELSE? SEEING NONE. MR. WALSH? YEAH.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SOMETHING CLEAR HERE.

MAYBE I WASN'T CLEAR ENOUGH.

I UNDERSTAND THE ARGUMENT, THE DISCUSSION BETWEEN ALL OF YOU.

BUT I DON'T WANT YOU TO THINK THAT THIS DECISION WAS MADE IN A VACUUM.

THAT IT WAS MADE DOWN ON OKEMOS ROAD AT THE LAW OFFICE.

IT WASN'T. THE CLERK WAS INVOLVED IN ALL THESE DISCUSSIONS.

THE CLERK WAS INFORMED, YOU KNOW, NONE OF US ARE TRUE EXPERTS, AND THAT'S WHY WE ALL WORK AS A TEAM.

AND IT WAS DETERMINED IN THESE DISCUSSIONS THAT IT WASN'T VALID.

AND SO I WAS ACTUALLY TOGETHER IN A MEETING WHEN THE COUNSEL AND CLERK BOTH DECIDED IT'S INVALID.

SO I DON'T WANT TO LEAVE ANY OF YOU WITH THE IMPRESSION THAT THE CLERK WASN'T INTIMATELY INVOLVED IN THE DECISION THAT THIS WAS INVALID.

THERE MIGHT BE OTHER WAYS TO DO IT, BUT SHE HERSELF WITH COUNSEL'S ADVICE, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING, GETTING COUNSEL'S ADVICE BEFORE WE MAKE SOME DECISION LIKE THIS. BUT SHE WAS VERY MUCH INVOLVED AND VERY MUCH IN TUNE WITH DECLARING THAT THIS IS AN INVALID PETITION.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

OK. NO FURTHER COMMENTS.

QUESTIONS. MR. LEMASTER COULD WE HAVE A ROLL CALL? MOTION CARRIED SEVEN ZERO.

THANK YOU. ITEM 13 ON OUR AGENDA IS BOARD DISCUSSION ITEMS AND THERE ARE NONE TONIGHT WE HAVE THUS REACHED ITEM 14, WHICH IS COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC.

IF THERE ARE OTHER COMMENTS THE PUBLIC WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AT THIS TIME, OR ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WITH US TONIGHT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE, NOW WOULD BE THE TIME TO DO SO.

SEEING NO TAKERS.

WE MOVE ON TO ITEM 15 OTHER MATTERS AND BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS.

[15. OTHER MATTERS AND BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS]

THEN ITEM 16 ON OUR AGENDA IS THE CLOSED SESSION.

[16. CLOSED SESSION- Motion to enter into closed session to consider confidential written legal opinion regarding personnel matter]

TRUSTEE WISINSKI.

I'LL MOTION TO ENTER CLOSED SESSION TO CONSIDER CONFIDENTIAL WRITTEN LEGAL OPINION REGARDING PERSONAL MATTER.

PERSONNEL MATTER. SUPPORTED, SUPPORTED BY TRUSTEE WILSON.

I NEED A ROLL CALL VOTE TO ENTER INTO CLOSED SESSION MR.

[01:10:05]

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.