Jun 18, 2024 Township Board

[00:00:26]

[INAUDIBLE].

[1. CALL MEETING TOORDER]

IT IS 6:01 P.M.

AND WE WILL CALL THIS REGULAR MEETING OF THE TOWNSHIP BOARD OF THE CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF MERIDIAN TO ORDER IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE, IF YOU'RE ABLE, PLEASE RISE TO JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.

ALLEGIANCE].

OKAY. THANK YOU.

NEXT UP ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM THREE.

ROLL CALL FOR THE CLERK GUTHRIE.

PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

BOARD MEMBERS ARE PRESENT.

THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK.

[4. PRESENTATION]

WE HAVE A PRESENTATION THIS EVENING ABOUT OUR 2023 TOWNSHIP AUDIT FROM ALI BARNES, OF YEO & YEO.

IF YOU WOULD PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM.

GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE, AND THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME THIS EVENING TO PRESENT YOUR 2023 AUDIT RESULTS.

ALL RIGHT, HERE WE GO.

SO OUR FIRM, YEO & YEO, WAS HIRED TO COME IN AND DO THE ANNUAL AUDIT FOR THE TOWNSHIP, WHICH IS REQUIRED BY THE STATE TO MEET YOUR STATE FILING DEADLINE.

SO AS A PART OF THE AUDIT, WE ISSUE AN AUDIT OPINION, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY US COMING IN LOOKING AT THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, LOOKING AT INTERNAL CONTROLS AND COMPLIANCE AND SAYING, ARE THINGS OKAY OR ARE THEY NOT? AND SO THIS YEAR WE ISSUED AN UNMODIFIED OR CLEAN AUDIT OPINION TO THE TOWNSHIP.

SO THAT MEANS WE BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT IS PRESENTED IN YOUR FINANCIAL STATEMENTS HAS BEEN DONE SO ACCURATELY.

WHEN WE TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE RULES YOU'RE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW AND MATERIALITY.

SO EXCELLENT ON THAT REGARD.

WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE NUMBERS HERE, STARTING WITH THE GENERAL FUND.

HERE YOU CAN SEE FOR THE PAST FIVE FISCAL YEARS THE GENERAL FUND REVENUE IN TOTAL FOR 2023 REVENUE CAME IN AT ROUGHLY 28 MILLION. YOU CAN SEE MOST CATEGORIES OF YOUR REVENUE STAY CONSISTENT YEAR TO YEAR.

PROPERTY TAXES KIND OF GOES UP GRADUALLY.

THIS YEAR IT WAS ABOUT A 44.

1% INCREASE IN REVENUE IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA AND THE REST STAYED CONSISTENT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THIS ALL OTHER CATEGORY.

YOU CAN SEE IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR THAT NUMBER WAS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER AND IT DROPPED BACK DOWN THIS YEAR IN 2022.

FOR THOSE THAT MAY OR MAY NOT REMEMBER, THERE WERE SOME DRAIN ASSESSMENTS THAT WERE BONDED FOR AND SO THOSE PROCEEDS KIND OF COME IN THAT ALL OTHER CATEGORY. SO WE DIDN'T EXPECT THAT TO STAY THERE FOR MULTIPLE YEARS.

IT CAME DOWN AS, AS IS INTENDED ON THE EXPENDITURE SIDE.

THEN TOTAL EXPENDITURES WERE ABOUT 28.9 MILLION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR.

YOU'LL SEE GENERAL GOVERNMENT HAS KIND OF GONE UP AND DOWN SOMETIMES WITHIN THAT CATEGORY.

IF YOU HAVE SPECIAL ITEMS THAT YOU'RE PAYING FOR, YOU'LL SEE AN INCREASE.

THAT WAS THE CASE IN 2022.

THAT'S THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THOSE SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS.

THAT'S WHERE SOME OF THAT WORK WAS ACTUALLY DONE IN.

THAT CAPITAL OUTLAY WAS.

SO THAT ALSO DECREASED BACK DOWN TO ABOUT THAT 2021 LEVEL, WHICH IS WHAT WE HAD ANTICIPATED ON THE PUBLIC SAFETY SIDE, WHICH IS YOUR MOST

[00:05:01]

THAT WAS UP ABOUT 6.8% AND THE MAJORITY OF THAT IS GOING TO BE RELATED TO WAGES AND THEN SUBSEQUENTLY, ANY OF THE FRINGE BENEFITS OR PAYROLL TAXES THAT INCREASE, ALONG WITH THOSE DRIVE THAT UP.

YOUR ALL OTHER CATEGORIES STAYED RELATIVELY CONSISTENT.

YOUR OPERATING TRANSFERS WAS MORE FOR 2023.

THAT CAME IN AT JUST OVER $4 MILLION.

THE MAJORITY OF THAT 3.5 MILLION WAS A TRANSFER OUT OF GENERAL FUND INTO A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND.

SO YOU'RE SETTING THAT MONEY ASIDE TO WORK ON SOME CAPITAL PROJECTS HERE IN FUTURE YEARS.

OKAY. SO AFTER WE TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT COMES IN AND WHAT GOES OUT THAT TELLS US WHAT ARE WE LEFT WITH, THAT'S OUR FUND BALANCE.

SO FOR 2023, YOUR TOTAL FUND BALANCE WAS ABOUT 14.4 MILLION, WHICH IS AT TOP KIND OF BLACK LINE THERE. THAT WAS DOWN SLIGHTLY JUST OVER 800,000 FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR.

BUT AGAIN, REMEMBER YOU PURPOSELY CHOSE TO SET ASIDE THAT 3.5 MILLION IN CAPITAL PROJECTS.

SO THAT WAS A PLANNED DECREASE IN THAT FUND WITHIN FUND BALANCE.

THE UNASSIGNED PORTION COMES IN AT ABOUT 12 MILLION, OR ROUGHLY 48% OF EXPENDITURES, EXCLUDING TRANSFERS.

SO YOUR FUND BALANCE WITHIN GENERAL FUND IS LOOKING HEALTHY AT THE END OF 2023 AND EVEN BETTER THAT YOU SET THE CAPITAL PROJECTS MONEY ASIDE.

SO REALLY WELL DONE.

HERE ARE THE COMPONENTS OF FUND BALANCE.

THIS VARIES FROM YEAR TO YEAR.

THE MAJORITY, AS I SAID IS IN THE UNASSIGNED CATEGORY, THE 12 MILLION.

SO THAT'S GOING TO BE THE BOTTOM PIECE OF THAT BUILDING BLOCK.

THE NEXT ONE UP IN THE LIGHTER BLUE.

THERE'S JUST OVER $2 MILLION IN PENSION STABILIZATION.

SO AGAIN, THIS WAS MONEY THAT WAS SET ASIDE AND COMMITTED SPECIFICALLY FOR PAYING DOWN PENSION OBLIGATIONS.

SHOULD YOU SO CHOOSE TO DO THAT AND THEN A MINOR AMOUNT LEFT IN A NON SPENDABLE CATEGORY.

SO. SWITCHING GEARS, WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS, THE FIRST ONE BEING THE WATER FUND.

SO HERE I HAVE FOR YOU YOUR OPERATING REVENUE VERSUS OPERATING EXPENSES.

SO REVENUES COME IN AT ABOUT 6.5 MILLION VERSUS ABOUT 7 MILLION ON THE EXPENSE SIDE.

SO WHAT I LOOK FOR WITHIN THESE ENTERPRISE FUNDS IS THE OPERATING REVENUE OUTPACING OPERATING EXPENSES, BECAUSE THAT TELLS ME WE'RE CHARGING A SUFFICIENT AMOUNT TO COVER AT LEAST OUR ANNUAL EXPENSES.

SO YOU WILL SEE FOR THE PAST FEW YEARS THAT OPERATING EXPENSES HAVE OUTPACED THOSE OPERATING REVENUES.

SO THAT TELLS ME THAT IT COULD BE TIME TO LOOK AT YOUR WATER RATES AND DECIDE IF THERE'S AN INCREASE NEEDED THERE TO GET THAT MORE LEVEL.

YOU CAN CARRY AN OPERATING LOSS FOR A PERIOD OF TIME, BUT YOU CAN'T DO IT INDEFINITELY.

SO I DEFINITELY ENCOURAGE YOU TO LOOK AT THAT AND THEN THAT GIVES US KIND OF WHAT WE HAVE LEFT OVER, WHICH IS OUR UNRESTRICTED NET POSITION.

THAT WAS DOWN SOME THIS YEAR COMES IN AT ABOUT 5 MILLION.

IF YOU COMPARE THAT TO WHAT IS IN YOUR AUDIT REPORT, YOU WOULD SAY, HEY, WAIT A MINUTE, THERE'S MORE IN THE AUDIT REPORT, BUT YOU HAVE SOMETHING CALLED AN INVESTMENT IN A JOINT VENTURE AND I LIKE TO BACK THAT OUT BECAUSE IT'S NOT AS USEFUL AS INFORMATION FOR YOU.

WHEN YOU SEE THAT NUMBER IN TOTAL, IT'S BETTER TO COMPARE YOUR UNRESTRICTED LESS THAT JOINT VENTURE.

ON THE SEWER SIDE THEN A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT OF A STORY HERE.

YOU'LL SEE THAT OPERATING REVENUES ARE OUTPACING THOSE OPERATING EXPENSES.

SO ABOUT 6.9 MILLION IN OPERATING REVENUE FOR 2023 VERSUS 5.3 MILLION IN OPERATING EXPENSES.

SO THIS TELLS ME THAT YOUR RATES ARE AT LEAST COVERING YOUR SHORT TERM COSTS.

LONG TERM COSTS OF THESE SYSTEMS IS A DIFFERENT STORY.

ON THE UNRESTRICTED NET POSITION SIDE, YOU'LL SEE THAT DID DECREASE THIS YEAR.

THAT IS DOWN TO 7 MILLION, BUT STILL A GOOD DECENT AMOUNT.

SITTING THERE IN YOUR NET POSITION NUMBER FOR THIS FUND AND ITS ACTIVITY TYPE.

OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF YOUR LONGER TERM OBLIGATIONS THAT AREN'T LONG TERM DEBT.

SO BONDED DEBT THE FIRST ITEM WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT IS THE EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT PENSION PLAN.

THIS IS A CLOSED PLAN AND HERE YOU CAN SEE THE BLACK LINE TELLS US WHAT IS EITHER OUR NET PENSION LIABILITY OR

[00:10:07]

SO THIS LIABILITY ACTUALLY DECREASED FOR THE YEAR AND IS NOW DOWN TO 246,000.

SO THAT GAP BETWEEN WHAT YOU HAVE SET ASIDE IN ASSETS AND WHAT THE TOTAL LIABILITY IS, IS SHRINKING.

AGAIN, WHEN WE TAKE A LOOK AT THE MERS SYSTEM.

SO THIS IS GOING TO BE ANOTHER RETIREMENT PENSION SYSTEM AND YOU CAN SEE THAT OUR BLACK LINE IN THIS PLAN ACTUALLY INCREASED THIS YEAR. SO OUR NET PENSION LIABILITY INCREASED UP TO 29.2 MILLION.

NOW THIS IS A WEIRD PLAN.

SO YOU'D THINK THAT BECAUSE WE'RE AUDITING THE 2023 FISCAL YEAR, YOU WOULD SEE 2023 NUMBERS FOR THIS PLAN REPORTED.

BUT THIS IS THE ODD DUCK OUT IN THAT IT'S ACTUALLY REPORTING THE 2022 LIABILITY AND ASSET VALUATION.

SO WE ALWAYS HAVE TO KEEP THAT IN MIND WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS PARTICULAR PLAN.

BECAUSE IF WE REMEMBER BACK TO DECEMBER OF 2022, THAT WAS NOT A GREAT YEAR FOR THE STOCK MARKET.

IT WAS DOWN CONSIDERABLY AND THAT WAS NO DIFFERENT FOR THE ASSETS HELD IN THE MERS PLAN.

THEY'RE ALLOCATED WITHIN THE MARKET GIVEN THEIR INVESTMENT POLICY AND SO YOUR OVERALL ASSETS WITHIN THIS PLAN HAD DECREASED.

ON TOP OF THAT, YOUR TOTAL LIABILITY DID INCREASE SLIGHTLY.

SO WHEN OUR ASSETS GO DOWN AND OUR TOTAL LIABILITY GOES UP, THAT MEANS OUR NET LIABILITY THAT WE'RE RECORDING IN OUR STATEMENTS IS ALSO GOING TO GO UP.

NOW THE 2023 VALUATIONS WERE ACTUALLY I THINK JUST RELEASED LAST WEEK.

SO WHEN WE LOOK AT THOSE FOR NEXT YEAR, YOUR NET PENSION LIABILITY IS GOING TO DECREASE.

SO IT'S GOING TO GO DOWN TO ABOUT 27 MILLION WILL BE NEXT YEAR'S NUMBER.

SO YOU CAN LOOK FORWARD TO TO SEEING THAT GO BACK DOWN AND IF 2024 IS MARKET CONTINUES TO DO WELL, YOU'LL CONTINUE TO SEE POSITIVE RESULTS THERE AND THEN LASTLY IN THIS SECTION IS THE OPEB.

SO THESE ARE THE HEALTH CARE BENEFITS THAT ARE DUE TO CERTAIN EMPLOYEES UPON RETIREMENT.

SO AGAIN WE HAVE ASSETS SET ASIDE AND WE HAVE A LIABILITY THAT GETS CALCULATED IN.

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THOSE IS OUR NET OPEB LIABILITY.

THAT COMES IN AT ABOUT 670,000 AT THE END OF 2023.

SO AGAIN THAT DECREASED FROM 2022.

THIS IS ACTUALLY CALCULATED AT 2023.

SO THAT'S WHY THIS YEAR GOT BETTER FOR THIS PLAN THAN IT WAS LAST YEAR.

OKAY. INTERNAL CONTROLS AND COMPLIANCE.

SO AS A PART OF THE AUDIT WE ARE NOT LOOKING AT JUST THE NUMBERS.

WE ALSO TAKE A LOOK AT THE SYSTEMS IN PLACE WHO'S INVOLVED AND GET A FEEL FOR THAT.

WE ALSO HAVE TO LOOK AT VARIOUS COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS.

YOU HAVE A SINGLE AUDIT.

SO WE TAKE A LOOK AT FEDERAL DOLLARS MORE IN-DEPTH.

WE LOOKED AT ARPA FUNDING FOR YOUR TOWNSHIP AND WHEN WE GET TO THE END OF THE DAY FOR YOUR TOWNSHIP, WE HAD NO MATERIAL WEAKNESS, NO SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCIES AND NO FEDERAL AWARD FINDINGS.

SO THAT TELLS US THAT YOUR SYSTEM OF INTERNAL CONTROLS AND MAINTAINING COMPLIANCE IS LOOKING REALLY GOOD.

SO WE'RE REALLY HAPPY TO SEE THAT YOUR TEAM HERE, THEY REALLY DO A FABULOUS JOB.

THEY'RE SO WELL PREPARED FOR THE AUDIT.

THIS YEAR, YOU KNOW ANY TIME THERE'S A CHANGEOVER IN FINANCE DIRECTOR, WE ALWAYS KIND OF HOLD OUR BREATH AND LIKE.

HEY, WAIT AND SEE.

BUT FINANCE DIRECTOR YANNI DID A FABULOUS JOB.

WAS VERY WELL PREPARED.

REACHES OUT WITH QUESTIONS SINCE HE'S BEEN HERE JUST TO DOUBLE CHECK THINGS AND GET OUR OPINION.

SO THAT IS EXCELLENT AND THE RESULTS HERE SPEAK TO THAT.

WE DID HAVE A COUPLE OF MANAGEMENT COMMENTS AREAS TO MAKE SOME IMPROVEMENTS, FOLLOW SOME BEST PRACTICES.

SO THERE WERE A FEW AUDIT ADJUSTMENTS THAT WE DID PROPOSE, BUT NONE OF THEM WERE MATERIAL AND THERE WAS NOT A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF THEM.

SO WE'VE WORKED WITH THE FINANCE TEAM TO MAKE SURE THEY KIND OF UNDERSTAND WHAT THOSE ENTRIES WERE FOR AND WHAT THEY CAN DO TO MAKE SURE THEY GET THEM POSTED ON THEIR END NEXT YEAR. PRIOR TO THE AUDIT, WE ALSO WITHIN THE INVENTORY FOUND AN ITEM THAT WE THINK THE VALUATION IS OFF.

WE THOUGHT IT WAS TOO HIGH.

THE FINANCE TEAM ACTUALLY AGREED.

SO IT'S ANOTHER AREA THAT THEY'RE GOING TO KIND OF DIG INTO AND MAKE SURE THAT WHEN THEY'RE VALUING INVENTORY ON YOUR BALANCE SHEETS, THAT THEY'RE USING THE CORRECT NUMBERS AND THEN THE LAST PIECE IS CAPITAL ASSET MANAGEMENT.

[00:15:02]

WE'RE USING IT.

NO WE DON'T. WE NEED TO TAKE IT OFF AND JUST DOING SOME CLEANUP WORK IN THIS AREA.

IT'S ONE OF THOSE THAT DOESN'T ALWAYS MAKE THE IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT LIST.

IT'S NOT LIKE THE BUDGET, BUT IT IS A GOOD AREA TO KEEP CLEAN UP.

IT WILL MAKE IT EASIER FOR YOUR FINANCE TEAM MOVING FORWARD IF THIS IS A VERY CLEAN AREA.

THE OTHER PIECE WITHIN THIS IS FOR TOWNSHIP OF YOUR SIZE.

YOUR CAPITAL ASSET THRESHOLD IS PRETTY LOW.

IT'S AT 5000 RIGHT NOW AND SO PART OF OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TAKING A LOOK AT THAT AND CONSIDERING INCREASING THAT TO A HIGHER THRESHOLD.

SO WE'VE TALKED TO THE TEAM ABOUT THAT AND MAYBE A WAY TO APPROACH THAT AND POSSIBLY COME TO YOU WITH A RECOMMENDATION FOR A POLICY CHANGE.

BUT WE DO SUPPORT A POLICY CHANGE AND WE'RE HAPPY TO TALK ABOUT THE AMOUNT WHEN THAT'S KIND OF SETTLED ON AND WITH THAT, I WOULD TAKE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.

TYPICALLY WE HOLD OUR QUESTIONS UNTIL THE ACTION ITEM.

OH, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WERE GOING TO BE ABLE TO STICK AROUND TO THAT POINT.

IF YOU WANT ME TO STAY, I WILL OTHERWISE, WE COULD TAKE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS IF THERE WERE ANY FROM THE BOARD.

NOW, JUST SO WE CAN LET OUR AUDITOR, I THINK, HEAD HOME FOR THE EVENING.

IT MIGHT BE A LONG NIGHT.

YES, IT MIGHT BE. ALL RIGHT, LET'S OPEN THINGS UP, THEN, FOR A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

IF ANYONE HAS ANY BOARD MEMBERS.

TREASURER DESCHAINE. YES.

THANK YOU FOR THE GRAPHS AND THE VERY READABLE REPORT YOU'VE GIVEN US.

YOU BROKE OUT FROM THE GENERAL FUND OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN INTO A SEPARATE FUND.

BUT YOU DIDN'T DO THAT WITH THE PENSION STABILIZATION FUND.

WHEN WE DID THIS A YEAR AGO, WE WOULD HAVE THOUGHT OF THEM NOW AS THREE SEPARATE POTS OF MONEY.

ANY REASON WHY ONE GOT ITS OWN ACCOUNT AND ONE DIDN'T? ABSOLUTELY. SO THE CAPITAL PROJECTS YOU ARE ALLOWED TO SET MONEY ASIDE FOR A CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND AND ASSIGN THAT FUND BALANCE WITHIN A COMPLETELY SEPARATE FUND ITSELF.

WHEN IT COMES TO THE PENSION STABILIZATION FUND, IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.

IT'S CONSIDERED A SPECIAL REVENUE FUND.

AND BECAUSE OF THAT, YOU YOU CAN'T PUT IT AS A SEPARATE FUND WITHIN YOUR EXTERNALLY ISSUED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS BECAUSE IT'S NOT SUPPORTED BY EXTERNAL RESOURCES.

SO BECAUSE YOU'RE BASICALLY 100% FUNDING THAT INTERNAL FUND WITH INTERNAL DOLLARS, IT GETS ROLLED UP INTO THE GENERAL FUND ANYWAYS AT THE END OF THE YEAR.

BUT THAT'S WHY WE BREAK OUT THE FUND BALANCE THAT'S IN THERE AND CALL THAT THE ASSIGNED FUND OR COMMITTED FUND BALANCE.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

YOU'RE WELCOME. OTHER QUESTIONS.

WELL THEN I WILL SIMPLY ADD MY THANKS TO YOU FOR THE HARD WORK THAT YOU DID, AS WELL AS TO DIRECTOR IONE AND THE ENTIRE FINANCE TEAM FOR PUTTING TOGETHER WHAT TURNED OUT TO BE A RELATIVELY STERLING AUDIT.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

NEXT ON OUR. AGENDA IS ITEM FIVE.

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

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WISH TO ADDRESS OUR AGENDA OR ANY ITEM NOT ON OUR AGENDA, HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO.

AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING AND TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS ON SPECIFIC ISSUES THROUGHOUT THE MIDDLE OF THE MEETING.

AGENDA ITEM 11 A AND B, AND AT THE END OF THE MEETING, THOSE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE BOARD MUST COMPLETE A GREEN CARD LOCATED AT THE TABLE NEAR THE DOOR.

IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE SO AND WISH TO SPEAK, NOW WOULD BE A GOOD TIME TO START FILLING THAT OUT.

YOU CAN GIVE YOUR COMPLETED CARDS TO A MEMBER OF THE TOWNSHIP STAFF WHO ARE LOCATED ALONG THE BACK OF THE ROOM THERE AND THEY'LL GET THOSE TO US.

WHEN IT'S YOUR TURN. THE SUPERVISOR.

THAT'S ME. WE'LL CALL YOU.

WE'LL CALL YOU UP TO THE PODIUM TO SPEAK ON THE TOPICS THAT YOU'VE INDICATED.

WHILE IT'S NOT REQUIRED, IT'S HELPFUL FOR OUR MINUTES TAKER TO PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

FOR THE RECORD, AT THE BEGINNING OF YOUR REMARKS, CITIZENS ARE REQUIRED TO LIMIT COMMENTS TO THREE MINUTES.

AN AUTOMATED SYSTEM KEEPS TRACK OF THE TIME, AND AN INDICATOR LIGHT AND AUDIBLE BEEP WILL ALERT YOU WHEN YOU HAVE 30S REMAINING AND WHEN YOUR TIME IS EXPIRED.

[00:20:02]

HOWEVER, THE MEETING FORMAT AND RULES RESTRICT OUR MEMBERS FROM ENGAGING IN CONVERSATION WITH COMMENTERS OR ANSWERING QUESTIONS DIRECTLY DURING PUBLIC COMMENT.

QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS MAY BE ADDRESSED BY BOARD MEMBERS AT A LATER TIME, OR BE REFERRED TO A MEMBER OF THE TOWNSHIP STAFF TO FOLLOW UP ON, PLEASE REMEMBER TO ADDRESS ALL COMMENTS TO THE BOARD AND OR THE BOARD'S CHAIR.

ONCE AGAIN, THAT'S ME AND NOT THE INDIVIDUAL BOARD MEMBERS OR TO OTHERS IN THE AUDIENCE AND WITH THAT OUR FIRST PUBLIC COMMENT THIS EVENING IS REX HARRINGTON AND THEN NEXT ON DECK IS DAVID [INAUDIBLE].

IF YOU COULD PLEASE BE READY.

GOOD EVENING. I'M RX HARRINGTON AND I LIVE AT 820 PIPER ROAD IN HASLETT.

I HAD THE MOST INCREDIBLE DISCOVERY LAST WEEK, AND I WANTED TO SHARE IT WITH THE PUBLIC AND YOURSELVES AND IT HAS TO DO WITH THE STATE OF MICHIGAN.

AT THE SAME TIME, I'D LIKE TO MAKE THIS A PUBLIC RECORD OF THIS, OF A DISCOVERY.

I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE STATE OF MICHIGAN.

I HOPE YOU CAN SEE THIS.

IF YOU LOOK AT THIS MAP INCLUDES THE HUDSON BAY.

YOU'LL SEE HERE A LARGE CIRCLE AND THAT CIRCLE, IF YOU PUT A COMPASS ON, IT IS PERFECTLY ROUND.

SO THIS IS A METEOR STRIKE AND THIS AREA OF THE CONTINENT HERE IS THE CANADIAN SHIELD IS SOLID GRANITE.

SO WHEN THIS STRUCK HERE, IT TOOK OUT PART OF THAT GRANITE AND THIS THE DIAMETER OF THAT IS 300 MILES AND WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT THAT, I SAW ANOTHER PERFECTLY CIRCLE.

CIRCLE CIRCULAR AND THAT HERE IS ON MICHIGAN, IN MICHIGAN.

AND IF YOU PUT YOUR COMPASS HERE ABOUT 25 MILES NORTH OF MIDLAND, AND YOU STRIKE AN ARC, IT'LL GO STRAIGHT AROUND ALL THE WAY AROUND MICHIGAN.

SO WHAT HAD HAPPENED? THIS IS ANOTHER METEOR STRIKE.

THIS METEOR STRUCK MICHIGAN COMING FROM THE SOUTHEAST AND HIT IT AND WHEN IT COLLIDED, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A METEOR 200 MILES IN DIAMETER, SOLID IRON WITH NICKEL AND MAYBE COPPER.

IT HIT THE AMOUNT OF MOMENTUM IS SO GREAT, AND THE TRANSFER OF ENERGY TO HEAT MELTED ALL THE IRON AND THE COPPER AND THE STONE, AND IT ALL FLEW UP AND LANDED IN THE U.P.

AND THIS IS ACTUALLY JUST THE SLOP THAT CAME OUT OF THE CRATER OF MICHIGAN.

SO MICHIGAN WAS AN ENTIRE BASIN, A BIG CRATER.

THIS IS 3.9 BILLION YEARS AGO, A LONG TIME AGO AND THEN WHAT HAPPENED WAS THAT OVER THE TIME NOW THE CANADIAN SHIELD ONLY COMES DOWN THIS FAR BELOW THAT, WHERE IT WAS A SHALLOW SEA FOR MANY, MANY EONS OF TIME AND SO WHAT HAPPENED WAS THAT GRADUALLY OVER TIME, THE WATER FLOWED IN AND CARRIED ALLUVIAL DEPOSITS AND FILLED IN THE CRATER AND THAT'S WHAT YOU HAVE HERE IN MICHIGAN.

YOU HAVE A GREAT DEPOSIT OF ALLUVIAL MATTER.

SO THAT I THOUGHT WAS INTERESTING.

I HOPE YOU ENJOYED IT.

AS FAR AS I KNOW, I'M THE FIRST ONE TO DISCOVER IT.

THAT'S GREAT.

THANK YOU. DAVID [INAUDIBLE] AND THEN MARVIN [INAUDIBLE], YOU'RE ON DECK.

HI. MY NAME IS DAVE [INAUDIBLE].

I'VE AS YOU KNOW, I'VE SPOKE BEFORE IN FRONT OF THE BOARD AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF TALK ABOUT HOW THE DECISIONS HAVE BEEN MADE ABOUT THE DISPENSARY AND AS I'VE BEEN RESEARCHING THIS AND WATCHING THIS, YOU KNOW, QUALITY DECISIONS, QUALITY LEADERS MAKE QUALITY DECISIONS USING QUALITY INFORMATION AND AS I'VE WATCHED HOW THE DECISIONS ARE BEING MADE ON THE DISPENSARY AT OKEMOS AND JOLLY, I SEE THAT YOU GUYS HAVE MADE QUALITY. YOU'VE REALLY SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON MAKING QUALITY DECISIONS ABOUT THE GOVERNMENTAL ASPECTS OF THIS, AND YOU'VE ALSO MADE PRETTY QUALITY DECISIONS ABOUT THE LEGAL ASPECTS OF THIS.

BUT WHAT'S BEEN AMAZING IS I HAVE NOT NOTICED MUCH TIME SPENT ON THE QUALITY OF YOUR TIME AND YOUR RESEARCH ON THE PRODUCT THAT'S GOING TO BE DISPENSED OUT OF THIS DISPENSARY.

THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF MISNOMERS ABOUT IT BEING AS SAFE AS ALCOHOL AND NOT AS ADDICTIVE AS ALCOHOL AND ALL THIS, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, I DON'T THINK YOU GUYS HAVE SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON REALLY RESEARCHING THIS PRODUCT AND SO WHAT I'M ASKING YOU IS OVER THE NEXT MONTH, YOU SPEND THREE TIMES AS

[00:25:06]

BECAUSE EVERYTHING YOU'RE HEARING BY A LOT OF THE LITERATURE YOU'RE READING, IN THE RESEARCH YOU'RE READING, IS FUNDED BY THOSE WITH INTEREST FOR MAKING MONEY.

I HAVE NO INTEREST IN MAKING MONEY.

I JUST WANT TO KEEP OUR KIDS SAFE AND I REALLY ASK ALL OF YOU TO SPEND A LOT OF THE TIME, ALL YOUR TIME SPENDING NOW OVER THE NEXT MONTH, STUDYING THE DANGERS OF THIS AND THEN THROUGH THAT.

IF YOU MAKE THE TRAGIC DECISION TO GO THROUGH WITH THIS, THEN.

REALLY START TO PLAN HOW YOU'RE GOING TO KEEP OUR KIDS SAFE.

I SUGGEST THAT YOU SPEND TIME WITH AN ADDICTION SPECIALIST.

I SUGGEST YOU SPEND TIME WITH A PUBLIC HEALTH SPECIALIST.

I SUGGEST YOU SPEND TIME WITH PSYCHIATRISTS, PSYCHOLOGISTS, EDUCATIONAL SPECIALISTS, AND PUBLIC SAFETY SPECIALISTS.

NO MORE TIME ON THE LEGAL ASPECTS.

NO MORE TIME ON THE GOVERNMENTAL ASPECTS.

THINK ABOUT OUR KIDS.

THINK ABOUT THE SAFETY ALL THE REST OF YOUR TIME BEFORE YOU MAKE THIS DECISION SHOULD BE ON THE SAFETY AND IF YOU MAKE THE TRAGIC DECISION TO DO THIS, THEN I HIGHLY RECOMMEND AND WOULD REALLY LIKE THAT.

YOU ALL SPEND TIME ON HOW, AFTER YOU MAKE THIS TRAGIC DECISION, HOW YOU'RE GOING TO CLEAN UP THE MESS OF ALL THE DISASTROUS IMPLICATIONS FOR WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, BECAUSE THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE RESEARCH COMING OUT, THIS IS NOT JUST YOUR GOOD OLD ALCOHOL WITH A LITTLE FLASK IN THE SCHOOL.

THIS STUFF IS HIGHLY POTENT AND IT'S VERY DANGEROUS TO THOSE CHILDREN.

GO READ WHAT THE CDC IS SAYING ABOUT THIS.

THIS IS NOT ME JUST SAYING THIS.

THIS IS WHAT THE CDC IS SAYING.

IF CHILDREN GET AHOLD OF THIS, THERE'S GREAT IMPLICATIONS TO THESE CHILDREN.

SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU. MARVIN TURNER AND THEN KEVIN BLAZE, YOU'RE UP ON DECK.

GOOD EVENING, BOARD MEMBERS. MY NAME IS MARVIN [INAUDIBLE] .

I'M ONE OF THE OWNERS AND ATTORNEY OF [INAUDIBLE] LLC, ONE OF THE APPLICANTS FOR DISTRICT THREE.

I APPRECIATE THE BOARD CONSIDERING OUR APPLICATION.

I'LL ALSO LIKE TO THANK THE REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR RECOMMENDING OUR APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL.

I JUST WANT TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO HIGHLIGHT A FEW IMPORTANT FACTS OUT OF OUR APPLICATION.

STARTING OFF WITH EMPLOYEES, WE ARE PROPOSING TO HIRE AT LEAST 15 EMPLOYEES WITH A MINIMUM WAGE OF $18 AN HOUR.

THAT MEANS OUR LOW LEVEL EMPLOYEES WILL BE RECEIVING AT LEAST $18 AN HOUR AND THE PRIORITY OF OUR EMPLOYMENT GOES TO MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS.

AS WE GET CLOSER TO OPENING DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS, WE'LL START HOSTING JOB FAIRS AND MAKE ANNOUNCEMENTS AND AGAIN, THAT PRIORITY IS GIVEN TO MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS. WE DO ALSO OFFER OTHER BENEFITS LIKE PAID VACATION TIME, MATERNITY LEAVE, HEALTH CARE AND AGAIN, ALL THOSE BENEFITS WILL ALSO GO TO MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS.

AS FAR AS OUR SITE, IT IS A NEW DEVELOPMENT SITE.

WE SUBMITTED FINANCIALS AND TAX RETURNS EVIDENCING THAT WE DO HAVE ENOUGH CASH IN THE BANK TO GET THE PROJECT AND SEE IT THROUGH.

WE ARE THE ONLY NEW CONSTRUCTION SITE OUT OF ALL THE APPLICANTS.

OUT OF ALL THE DISTRICTS, THIS VACANT LAND COULD GO UNDEVELOPED FOR QUITE SOME TIME.

WE'RE HOPING WITH OUR DEVELOPMENT IT WILL ATTRACT NEW BUSINESSES TO THE PROPERTY AND THE GRAND RIVER CORRIDOR.

IT'LL ALSO GENERATE PROPERTY TAX REVENUES AND OTHER ANCILLARY BENEFITS TO THE TOWNSHIP.

AS FAR AS THE COMMUNITY GOES, WE TRY TO WORK VERY CLOSELY WITH THE COMMUNITY AS WE TRY TO FIT SEAMLESSLY IN AS POSSIBLE.

WE SUBMIT A VERY THOROUGH COMMUNITY IMPACT PLAN.

WE ENCOURAGE AND INCENTIVIZE OUR EMPLOYEES TO PARTICIPATE IN LOCAL CHARITIES AND LOCAL EVENTS.

FOR EXAMPLE, FOR EVERY EIGHT HOURS AN EMPLOYEE SPENDS VOLUNTEERING, THEY WILL RECEIVE ONE PAID VACATION DAY.

THE OWNERS OURSELVES WILL ALSO BE PARTICIPATING.

WE WILL ALSO CONTRIBUTE MORE THAN MONEY.

AS I SAID, OUR TIME.

THERE'S MANY OTHER PROGRAMS IN OUR COMMUNITY PLAN.

IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THAT, YOU CAN SEE AS FAR AS SECURITY GOES, WE WORK WITH A [INAUDIBLE] SECURITY COMPANY CALLED THE DYER GROUP.

THEY ALSO CONSULT FOR LITTLE CAESARS ARENA.

WE WILL HAVE A SECURITY GUARD ON SITE.

WE HAVE A CAMERA SYSTEM THAT GOES ABOVE AND BEYOND THE STATE REQUIREMENTS THAT COULD BE ACCESSIBLE TO THE LOCAL POLICE DEPARTMENT AT ANY TIME, IN ADDITION TO SECURITY.

AS I MENTIONED, THIS IS A NEW CONSTRUCTION SITE, SO THEREFORE WE COULD HAVE SECURITY IN MIND WHILE WE GO THROUGH THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS.

FOR EXAMPLE, WE WILL BE BUILDING A VAULT ROOM AND A SAFE ROOM.

WE'LL ALSO HAVE A SECURE GARAGE WHICH IS UNIQUE.

THIS ALLOWS ARMORED CAR OR SECURE TRANSPORT THAT DELIVERS A PRODUCT TO ACTUALLY ENTER THE BUILDING.

THE GARAGE CLOSES AND FROM THERE THE TRANSACTION HAPPENS, WHETHER IT'S A DELIVERY OR A CASH PICKUP.

IN ADDITION, WE DO HAVE CANNABIS BANKING.

WE ARE APPROVED FOR CANNABIS BANKING THROUGH COMMUNITY CHOICE CREDIT UNION.

THIS ALLOWS FOR MINIMAL CASH POSSIBLE AT THE FACILITY, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY A LESS SECURITY RISK AS FAR AS ODOR GOES.

WE DO HAVE ODOR MITIGATION, THE MAJORITY, SO THERE'S NOT MUCH ODOR THAT COMES IN, BUT WE DO INSTALL CARBON FILTERS AND A PH FILTER.

[00:30:05]

SO THAT LIMITS THE SMOKE.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE. I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION OF OUR APPLICATION.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, KEVIN BLADES AND THEN SAVINDER SINGH, YOU'RE ON DECK.

GOOD EVENING.

KEVIN BLAIR, I'M AN ATTORNEY.

REPRESENT TNVK.

PARDON ME.

NO PROBLEM. IT WAS PROBABLY MY CHICKEN SCRATCH ON THE FORM THERE.

I TRUST THE BOARD GOT MY LETTER.

I WANT TO START WITH A MEA CULPA.

THERE'S A TYPO IN THERE THAT TALKS ABOUT MAKING A DECISION TOMORROW.

AS I DISCUSSED WITH YOUR ATTORNEY, MR. KUSCHEL. IT'S BEEN A KIND OF A WHIRLWIND COUPLE DAYS.

PLANES, TRAINS AND AUTOMOBILES.

I MADE IT HERE IN TIME, BUT ANYWAY, THAT WAS A TYPO.

I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU INTEND TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION AND MAKE A DECISION TONIGHT.

AND AS MR. [INAUDIBLE] JUST SPOKE ABOUT, IS VERY EXCITED TO BE HERE.

BE A GREAT COMMUNITY PARTNER HERE IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

I FIRST WANTED TO CLARIFY.

THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION AT THE MAY 9TH MEETING ABOUT WHETHER NVK WILL OPEN, INTENDS TO OPEN AS A MEDICAL PROVISIONING CENTER OR JUST OFFER CERTAIN PRODUCTS AT A DISCOUNT TO MEDICAL CARD HOLDERS.

I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT NVK DOES INTEND TO OPERATE BOTH A MEDICAL AND A CO-LOCATED ADULT USE RETAILER AT THAT LOCATION, AS CONTEMPLATED IN STATE LAW AND I UNDERSTAND YOU'LL BE GOING THROUGH THE APPLICATIONS TONIGHT AND GOING THROUGH THAT CHART.

THE NVK IS HUMBLED AND HONORED THAT THE REVIEW COMMITTEE DETERMINED THAT NVK IS THE BEST SUITED TO OPERATE IN COMPLIANCE WITHIN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP IN ZONE THREE.

AS MR. [INAUDIBLE] MENTIONED, THEY'RE THE ONLY GROUND UP BUILD.

THEY HAD THE HIGHEST AMOUNT FOR STARTING WAGES AND AS OUTLINED IN THE AGENDA PACKET FOR THE MAY 9TH MEETING, THE REVIEW COMMITTEE FOUND THAT NVK APPLICATION WAS SUPERIOR TO AMSTERDAM'S IN EVERY SINGLE CATEGORY.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY'VE SUBMITTED SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION SINCE THEN, AND YOUR ATTORNEY HAS INDICATED THAT YOU MAY CONSIDER THAT.

I WOULD RESPECTFULLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO FOLLOW THE REVIEW COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION, THOUGH, FOR AT LEAST TWO REASONS ONE, TO HONOR THE TIME AND EFFORT THAT THEY PUT INTO THEIR COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW AND FORMULATING THOSE, RECOMMENDATIONS AND TWO, BOTH STATE LAW AND MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP'S LOCAL ORDINANCE REQUIRE YOU TO AWARD THE LICENSE AND ZONE THREE TO THE APPLICANT THAT'S BEST SUITED TO OPERATE IN COMPLIANCE WITH AND MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP LAW WITHIN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

AND THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION AT THE MAY 9TH MEETING ABOUT HOW MUCH TO WEIGH WHAT WAS INITIALLY SUBMITTED VERSUS WHAT WAS SUPPLEMENTAL AND ONE OF THE SPEAKERS WHO WAS SUPPORTING AMSTERDAM COMPARED IT TO A SITUATION WHERE YOU FORGET TO ATTACH SOMETHING TO AN EMAIL.

I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT IS NOT WHAT HAPPENED AT ALL.

THEY DID SUBMIT A PLAN AND IT WAS SO WOEFULLY INADEQUATE THAT THE CHIEF OF POLICE WAS VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT AND WHILE I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S DISPOSITIVE.

IT'S CERTAINLY RELEVANT THAT THEY HAD TO BE ASKED TWICE TO SUBMIT A SECURITY PLAN, WHICH IS ARGUABLY THE MOST CONNECTED TO THE REQUIRED METHODOLOGY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU, SAVINDER SINGH AND THEN JAY MAYER.

YOU'RE UP AFTER THAT.

HELLO. GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY.

THIS IS SETH SAYING FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR TAKING TIME TO REVIEWING OUR APPLICATION AND I WANT TO PREFACE IT WITH SAYING THAT I LIVE IN AMBER OAKS, I LIVE IN OKEMOS, AND I PAY PROPERTY TAXES ALREADY.

THIS IS NOT SOMETHING WHICH IS GOING TO HAPPEN.

I'M ALREADY DOING IT.

I HAVE TWO CHILDREN WHO GO TO MSU.

I HAVE TWO SUCCESSFUL DISPENSARIES LICENSED BY MICHIGAN STATE.

I HAVE A CULTIVATION FACILITY WHERE WE PROVIDE WHERE WE PRODUCE PRODUCTS.

SO WE ARE FULLY LEGITIMATE AS FAR AS OUR APPLICATION IS CONCERNED.

WE SUBMITTED THE APPLICATION ACCORDING TO THE FORMAT WE DID FOR THE PREVIOUS APPLICATION.

BUT ONCE WE FOUND OUT THAT IT WAS LACKING IN CERTAIN THINGS AND WE COMPLETED THAT AND WE GOT A RESPONSE FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT IT IS SUFFICIENT AND IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE LOOKING FOR A SECOND CHANCE.

THAT WAS THE ONLY ISSUE WITH THE APPLICATION AND AS I SAID IT'S NOT JUST US TOWNSHIP.

[00:35:02]

IT IS AN EXISTING BUILDING.

IT'S A BANK.

IT ALREADY HAS A SECURE TRANSPORT, YOU KNOW, PLACES.

IT IS NOT SOMETHING WHICH IS GOING TO BE BUILT.

OUR BUSINESS IF WE ARE AWARDED A LICENSE, WE WILL BE OPENING IN THE NEXT 3 TO 6 MONTHS SOONER THAN LATER AND I DO NOT WANT TO THROW THE KITCHEN SINK WHERE I'M SAYING I'M GOING TO DO BETTER THAN THIS.

BETTER THAN THAT. YOU KNOW, ANYBODY CAN SAY ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, LIKE 20 EMPLOYEES OR THIS OR THAT.

I DO WANT. I THINK YOUR TIME IS MORE VALUABLE.

I JUST WANT YOU TO CONSIDER THAT I'M A LOCAL RESIDENT AND I HAVE EXISTING CANNABIS BUSINESSES AND I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TIME TO COMPLY WITH THE APPLICATION AND REVIEWING MY APPLICATION THOROUGHLY.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THANK YOU.

JAY MAIER AND THEN BILL MUELLER, YOU ARE LISTED HERE ABOUT THE STREET LIGHTS.

ARE YOU INTENDING TO SPEAK AT PUBLIC COMMENT OR ABOUT THE PUBLIC HEARING LATER? GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY.

MY NAME IS JAY MAIER.

I AM A PODIATRIST.

I'VE LIVED IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP SINCE 1987.

THIS IS A WONDERFUL PLACE TO LIVE.

WE RAISED THREE KIDS HERE WHO DID UNBELIEVABLE THROUGH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT HERE.

IT'S THE PLACE THAT WE SET OUR ROOTS AND WE WOULD LOVE TO CONTINUE TO LIVE HERE.

I LIVE AT 3720 AUTUMN WOOD LANE.

I ALSO HAVE A BUSINESS OFF THE CORNER OF JOLLY AND OKEMOS ROAD.

BOTH ARE WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE TO THE PROPOSED MARIJUANA DISPENSARY THAT I TAKE ISSUE WITH.

I COULD SPEND HOURS TALKING ABOUT THE SCIENTIFIC REASONS WHY YOU SHOULD BE VERY CAREFUL IN YOUR DECISION MAKING.

I WANT TO GO IN A DIFFERENT TANGENT.

I THINK THE VOTERS OF MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP SHOULD BE PROVIDED WITH THE LOCATION WHERE THIS DISPENSARY WILL BE PLACED.

I THINK THAT MANY VOTERS THOUGHT THAT THIS WAS GOING TO BE MEDICAL AND NOT MEDICAL AND THEN RECREATIONAL.

I THINK THERE'S A PROBLEM THERE.

I ALSO WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE COMMON ARGUMENT THAT I HEAR FROM COLLEAGUES AND FRIENDS THAT THIS IS NO DIFFERENT THAN ALCOHOL.

WELL, IF I SIT NEXT TO A FRIEND WHO'S HAD SEVERAL DRINKS, THERE IS NO WAY BY OSMOSIS I'M GETTING ALCOHOL IN MY SYSTEM.

HOWEVER, IF I GO TO 7/11 OR I GO TO A COFFEE SHOP BY ONE OF THESE LOCATIONS, THERE'S A GOOD CHANCE I'M GOING TO GET SECONDHAND THC IN MY SYSTEM.

I REALLY DON'T WANT TO DO THAT.

I WANT YOU TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION.

I THINK THAT IMPACTS ALL OF US.

GIVEN THE VOTES, NARROW MARGIN.

I UNDERSTAND IT WAS SIX VOTES AFTER A RECOUNT.

MY GOODNESS, THAT'S NO MANDATE, FOLKS.

NO MANDATE AT ALL AND I WANT YOU TO REALLY CLEARLY CONSIDER WHAT DAVE [INAUDIBLE] SAID ABOUT LOOKING AT THE SCIENTIFIC REASONS WHY YOU MIGHT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS. I'M GOING TO GO IN A DIFFERENT TANGENT.

I IMPLORE THE BOARD TO TABLE THIS.

I IMPLORE THE BOARD TO OFFER A SPECIAL ELECTION.

LET THE VOTERS OF MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP DECIDE WHETHER THEY WANT THIS IN FRONT OF THEIR HOMES, IN FRONT OF THEIR KIDS, IN FRONT OF THEIR SCHOOLS. I THINK THAT THERE'S A BIG PROBLEM WITH RESPECT TO THAT.

PUT THAT IN CLEAR WRITING.

IT IMPACTS EVERYONE.

YOU GUYS LOOK AT THE IMPACTS OF OFFENSE.

YOU LOOK AT THE IMPACTS OF AN APARTMENT BUILDING AS TO THE LONG TERM EFFECTS ON THE MISSION STATEMENT OF MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP, I IMPLORE YOU TO LOOK AT THE 30 YEAR POSSIBILITY OF WHAT THIS IS GOING TO DO TO OUR TOWNSHIP, PUTTING A DISPENSARY LIKE THIS AT OKEMOS AND JOLLY ROAD.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

BILL MUELLER YOU HAVE ON HERE YOU'RE LOOKING TO SPEAK ABOUT THE STREET LIGHTS.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO WAIT UNTIL YOU'RE UNTIL THAT TOPIC COMES UP.

OKAY. THEN [INAUDIBLE].

YOU SEEM TO BE ON THE SAME ISSUE.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO WAIT FOR THAT AS WELL? YES. OKAY.

THEN I HAVE JOHN EBERT AND THEN MARLENE STOVER.

YOU'RE UP ON DECK.

THANK YOU. FIRST OF ALL I'LL GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

OH. I'M SORRY. EXCUSE ME.

JOHN Q EBERT, 1710 THRUSHWOOD CIRCLE IN OKEMOS.

WE'VE BEEN RESIDENTS FOR ABOUT 40 YEARS, AND THIS IS MY FIRST TIME TO SPEAK TO YOU ALL ON A SUBJECT, BUT THIS ONE WHEN WE HEARD ABOUT IT REALLY JUMPED TO OUR AWARENESS AND AND SENSES.

[00:40:04]

I'LL SAY POTENTIAL BECAUSE UNTIL YOU'VE STUDIED IT AND LOOKED AT OTHER CASE STUDIES OF REALLY SEVERELY AFFECTING YOUR REAL ESTATE VALUES, AND IT'S ALMOST LIKE A WAVE, AN ECONOMIC WAVE OR AN EFFECT THAT GOES ACROSS AN AREA AND IT CAN BE TO THE IMMEDIATE AREA, SMELLING DISTANCE OR VISUAL DISTANCE, BUT IT ALSO CAN BE TO AN EXTENDED AREA THAT AFFECTS REAL ESTATE VALUES AND THE VALUES. THE EFFECTS DON'T SHOW UP IMMEDIATELY.

IT TAKES A LITTLE TIME IN TERMS OF LISTINGS, IN TERMS OF FAMILIES DECIDING TO MOVE ELSEWHERE IN TERMS OF, EXCUSE ME THE NATURAL EFFECT ON REAL ESTATE VALUES AND NOT JUST RESIDENTIAL, BECAUSE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL VALUES ARE INTERCONNECTED, SOMETIMES COMMERCIAL LEADS THE WAY, SOMETIMES RESIDENTIAL LEADS THE WAY, BUT IN AN ECONOMIC EFFECT, SOMETIMES IT'S A REPUTATION.

MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP, BACK IN MY EARLY DAYS, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE MOVED HERE, HAD A REPUTATION FOR LIVING STYLE AND AMENITIES AND SCHOOLS AND LIFESTYLE, ETC.

THAT INCLUDES THE ASPECT OF COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES AND TRAFFIC AND, YOU KNOW, RECREATION AND OTHER KINDS OF THINGS.

ECOLOGICAL ATTENTION AND THIS CAN SEVERELY AFFECT THAT REPUTATION IMMEDIATELY IN TERMS OF THE REAL ESTATE VALUES, BUT ALSO AS THAT WAVE OF INTERPRETATION OR UNDERSTANDING STARTS TO GAIN MOMENTUM IN THE LISTING PRICES AND IN THE SALE PRICES AND IN THE NATURE OF PROPERTIES.

IT MUST BE A TIME THING.

YES. THANK YOU. ALSO THE I'LL QUICKLY SAY THAT THE ASPECT OF WELL I'LL JUST LEAVE THAT TO OTHERS.

BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT THERE IS AN IMPENDING EFFECT THAT WILL COME FROM THIS THAT SHOULD BE STUDIED AND ANALYZED.

FIRST. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

BYE. MARLENE STOVER AND THEN CLARA RIEGER.

YOU'RE UP AFTER THAT. GOOD EVENING.

I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT OF.

SORRY. CAN YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE? WELL, I'D RATHER NOT.

OKAY. I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT OF MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP FOR 20 YEARS.

HAVE THREE CHILDREN WHO HAVE GONE THROUGH THE SCHOOLS.

YOU KNOW, OKEMOS IS ONE OF THE TOP SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN THE COUNTRY AND WHEN PEOPLE COME IN OFF OF THE HIGHWAY, OKEMOS AND JOLLY AND THEY SEE MARIJUANA DISPENSARY AT THE CORNER, I THINK THAT'S GOING TO TURN PEOPLE OFF.

IT'S GOING TO HAVE AN EFFECT ON PROPERTY VALUES.

I THINK REAL ESTATE PROPERTY TAXES WILL GO DOWN.

YOU'LL BE GETTING IN LESS REVENUE.

YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO INCREASE THE BUDGET FOR POLICE BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE INCREASED CRIME AND BURGLARY.

THAT CORNER IS ALREADY DANGEROUS, JOLLY AND OKEMOS AND YOU'RE JUST BRINGING INCREASED TRAFFIC, PLUS PEOPLE DRIVING AROUND HIGH.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT WE WANT FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

THIS IS A FAMILY FRIENDLY COMMUNITY.

YOU'VE GOT KIDS WALKING FROM HIGHSCHOOL.

PAST THAT INTERSECTION.

GOING TO PRACTICES, RIDING THEIR BIKES.

GOING TO 7-ELEVEN, GETTING A SLURPEE.

YOU'VE GOT CHIPPEWA MIDDLE SCHOOL RIGHT DOWN THE STREET.

YOU'VE GOT HIAWATHA AND OKEMOS HIGH SCHOOL.

I MEAN, IT'S A BAD MESSAGE TO SEND TO KIDS.

OTHER COMMENTS I WANTED TO MAKE WAS THERE'S PLENTY OF OTHER NEARBY LOCATIONS IF PEOPLE WANT TO GO GET THEIR MEDICAL MARIJUANA. I DON'T THINK THIS IS SOMETHING WE WANT IN OUR COMMUNITY.

IT'S REALLY GOING TO AFFECT, YOU KNOW, THE PERCEPTION.

IT'S GOING TO TARNISH THE PERCEPTION.

THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST PLACES IN THE STATE.

I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU'D WANT TO RUIN IT BY BRINGING THIS IN.

IT'S JUST TO ME IT'S TRASH.

LIKE, WHO IS IT GOING TO ATTRACT? AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S A SHORT TERM TIME HORIZON.

IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE MONEY THE BUSINESS IS GOING TO BRING IN, WHAT'S IT GOING TO DO LONG TERM TO PROPERTY VALUES TO, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WHO ARE USING IT?

[00:45:02]

THERE'S ALWAYS KIDS WALKING AND RIDING THEIR BIKES, YOU KNOW, GOING TO SUBWAY, GOING TO BIGGBY.

IT'S ALL RIGHT THERE.

IT'S JUST TO ME, IT'S DANGEROUS AND IT'S NOT WORTH IT AND ANOTHER FRIEND OF MINE WHO USED TO LIVE IN HOLT JUST BROUGHT UP THE POINT.

YOU KNOW, THE SMELL.

SO IT'S JUST TO ME, IT'S A DIRTY, UGLY BUSINESS, AND WE DON'T WANT IT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

SARAH RIEGLE AND THEN MARY KINZER.

YOU'RE UP ON DECK.

IF ANYONE HAS NOT WISHED, HAS NOT TURNED IN A GREEN CARD BUT WISHES TO SPEAK, THIS WOULD BE THE TIME TO DO SO.

PLEASE GO AHEAD.

HI, I'M DOCTOR CLAIRE [INAUDIBLE].

THIS IS THE THIRD TIME THAT I'VE ACTUALLY SPOKEN IN FRONT OF THE BOARD AND ALSO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AND THE FIRST TIME I REFERENCED OUR MISSION STATEMENT, WHICH SAYS THAT WE ARE A PRIME COMMUNITY.

AND IT'S IRONIC, BECAUSE I'M STANDING NEXT TO A BILLBOARD THAT SAYS WE HAVE PRIME PARKS, PRIME BUSINESSES, PRIME SCHOOLS.

WE ARE A PRIME COMMUNITY THAT DOES NOT FIT A MARIJUANA DISPENSARY IN THE CORNER OF OKEMOS AND JOLLY AND WE TAKE SPECIFIC OBJECTION TO THAT LOCATION.

WE HAVE A PETITION THAT'S OUT ON CHANGE.ORG THAT CURRENTLY HAS 800 SIGNATURES.

PLEASE DON'T IGNORE THOSE SIGNATURES.

IF EVERY VOTE COUNTS, THEN EVERY CONCERN SHOULD ALSO COUNT AND THE BIGGEST CONCERN THAT'S ON THOSE, IF YOU PLEASE READ THE COMMENTS, IS THAT IT'S TOO CLOSE TO THE SCHOOLS, EVEN THOUGH IT MAY MEET THE MINIMUM SPECIFICATIONS FOR DISTANCE, IT IS TOO CLOSE.

EVERY CHILD GOES THROUGH THAT INTERSECTION, WHETHER ON THE BUS TO OKEMOS HIGH SCHOOL, ON THE BUS TO THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS, OR ON THE BUS TO THE MIDDLE SCHOOLS.

THAT IS A VERY BUSY INTERSECTION.

THOSE KIDS WILL BE ASSAULTED WITH THAT EVERY SINGLE DAY.

WE HAVE TO LEARN OUR LESSONS FROM ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO.

WE'VE ALREADY GONE THAT ROUTE.

SECONDLY, THEY STATE THAT IT'S UNSAFE.

THAT INTERSECTION IS THE BUSIEST INTERSECTION IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

IT'S GOING TO POTENTIALLY INCREASE THE TRAFFIC IN THAT AREA.

POTENTIALLY IMPAIRED DRIVERS, POTENTIALLY INCREASED TRAFFIC OFF OF THE HIGHWAY WITH PEOPLE THAT MAY HAVE NEFARIOUS REASONS TO BE THERE.

THAT IS A FAMILY FRIENDLY COMMUNITY PARK OR COMMERCIAL PARK.

WE HAVE THE BIG BEES.

WE HAVE THE SUPERCUTS, WE HAVE THE JUICE BAR.

KIDS GO ALL THERE ALL THE TIME.

WHEN I WAS INTERVIEWED BY THE NEWS, THERE WERE KIDS WAS THE LAST DAY OF SCHOOL AND KIDS WERE ALL OVER THE PLACE WITH THEIR SLURPEES AND THEIR COFFEES AND WHAT KIND OF A MESSAGE ARE WE SENDING THEM? PLEASE, THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT DECISION.

LET'S CONSIDER IT SLOWLY.

LET'S CONSIDER ALL THE RAMIFICATIONS AS EVERYONE HAS BEEN POINTING OUT.

THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU.

MARCY KINZER AND THEN JULIE LAWTON ESSEL.

THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING.

I'M MARCY KINZER. I LIVE AT 4232SANDRIDGE DRIVE, AND I WANT TO BEGIN BY JUST THANKING ALL OF YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE AND YOUR TIME TO OUR COMMUNITY.

I DIDN'T COME HERE TONIGHT WITH AN INTENTION TO SPEAK.

I WANTED TO LEARN MORE.

BUT AFTER HEARING DOCTOR [INAUDIBLE] SPEAK, I JUST COULDN'T HELP BUT WANT TO SAY A FEW WORDS TO YOU.

BASED ON MY EXPERIENCE AND CERTAINLY MY PASSION FOR THIS COMMUNITY, THE IMPACT ON OUR CHILDREN'S HEALTH, BOTH PHYSICAL AND MENTAL, JUST THEIR OVERALL WELL-BEING IS SO IMPACTED BY DRUG USE.

IT'S JUST AS A FORMER HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER AND ADMINISTRATOR, IT IS DEPLORABLE WHAT IT DOES TO THEIR OVERALL MOTIVATION AND WHAT IT CAN BE AS A GATEWAY DRUG TO OTHER SUBSTANCE ABUSE.

WHY WE WOULD SELECTIVELY PLACE THE ACCESS TO THESE TO THIS DRUG IN FRONT OF THEM IS BEYOND ME.

WHY? WE WOULD NOT BE THOUGHTFUL IN ADVANCE OF PUTTING IT RIGHT THERE.

IN THE ABSENCE OF A REAL DOWNTOWN GATHERING SPACE, WE KNOW THERE ISN'T ONE IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

THAT STRIP MALL AT THE CORNER OF OKEMOS AND JOLLY IS THE GATHERING SPACE, AS DOCTOR REGAL AND OTHERS HAVE MENTIONED.

SO NOW WE HAVE AN IDENTIFIED GATHERING SPACE IN THE ABSENCE OF ANYWHERE ELSE TO REALLY HAVE A TRUE DOWNTOWN AND WE'RE GOING TO PLACE INTENTIONALLY ACCESS AND REALLY MARKETING MATERIAL AROUND PROMOTING ACCESS TO MARIJUANA.

[00:50:05]

I AM HERE TO SAY TO YOU, WHY WOULD WE INTENTIONALLY PUT IT IN A SPOT THAT IS OF THE UTMOST VISIBILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY TO THE KIDS IN OUR COMMUNITY? I JUST I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU DO, BUT I WOULD ASK YOU TO ASK YOURSELF THE QUESTION, HOW DOES THIS ENHANCE OUR COMMUNITY? HOW DOES IT ENHANCE THE EXPERIENCE FOR FAMILIES AND CHILDREN? AND I JUST CAN'T THINK OF ANY REASON OF HOW IT COULD.

REGARDING SAFETY, REGARDING ACCESSIBILITY, I JUST WOULD ASK THAT YOU WOULD ASK YOURSELF THAT QUESTION BEFORE YOU RUBBER STAMP THE APPROVAL OF PLACING A MARIJUANA DISPENSARY RIGHT IN THAT LOCATION.

THANK YOU.

JULIE. GOOD EVENING, JULIE LAWTON ESSEL.

I LIVE AT 3591 AUTUMN WOOD LANE.

MARCY, I THINK YOU SAID A LOT OF WHAT I WOULD SAY.

I WANTED TO ASK THE BOARD IF YOU EVEN KNEW THE NICKNAME FOR THE OKEMOS HIGH SCHOOL.

DOES ANYBODY KNOW IT'S CALLED SMOKE MISS AND I CAN SAY THAT BECAUSE I HAVE TWO KIDS THAT GRADUATED FROM OKEMOS.

SO I KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON OVER THERE.

SO ACCORDING TO WHAT THE GENTLEMAN SPOKE ABOUT BEFORE, WHY WOULD WE IF WE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH OUR KIDS ALREADY, WHY WOULD YOU BRING SOMETHING RIGHT IN FRONT OF THEM THAT'S GOING TO ENDANGER THEM? AND HOW ARE YOU GOING TO TAKE CARE OF THEM? WHAT'S ONCE THE DISPENSARY IS THERE? I AM FOR LEGAL MARIJUANA.

I THINK IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S FINE, BUT I THINK THAT THE RIGHT LAND USE IS NOT THE CORNER OF OKEMOS AND JOLLY ROAD.

THESE GUYS CAN GO AND FIND SOMETHING ELSE.

THEY CAN CERTAINLY AFFORD TO PAY THE COST FOR ANOTHER PIECE OF LAND OR ANOTHER PROPERTY TO REDEVELOP, BUT IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE AT THE CORNER OF OKEMOS AND JOLLY ROAD.

THE SECOND THING I'D LIKE TO ASK IS IF YOU HAVE THE GENTLEMAN COMMENTED ON THE GOVERNMENT RESEARCH THAT YOU DID, THE LEGALITY RESEARCH THAT YOU DID. HAVE YOU DONE YOUR DUE DILIGENCE TO BE ABLE TO ASSURE THE PROPERTY OWNERS THAT IT IS NOT GOING TO AFFECT OUR PROPERTY VALUES? LIKE THIS GENTLEMAN HERE, MY HUSBAND IS A COMMERCIAL APPRAISER.

HE HAS 44 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE.

HE HAS AN MAI, WHICH IS THE HIGHEST DESIGNATION THAT YOU CAN HAVE IN COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE.

HE HAS AN LLM IN TAXATION FROM WAYNE STATE.

HE KNOWS WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT, AND HE CAN ASSURE YOU THAT IT WILL REDUCE THE PROPERTY VALUES AND I THINK THAT YOU FOLKS ARE THE STEWARDS OF OUR PROPERTIES AND THE HEALTH OF THIS COMMUNITY.

SO I WOULD IMPLORE YOU TO APPROVE A LICENSE, BUT DO NOT APPROVE IT IN THE LOCATION THAT YOU'RE THAT IS BEING CONSIDERED.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD AT THIS TIME? WE'LL DECLARE PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED AT 6:53 P.M.

I WILL JUST POINT OUT AS A POINT OF PRIVILEGE BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM.

WE DO HAVE AN AGENDA ITEM ABOUT RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA THIS EVENING AT ITEM 12A.

IT IS NOT THE FACILITY AT OKEMOS AND JOLLY THAT MANY OF THE PUBLIC COMMENTERS HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT.

SO IF YOU WERE WAITING TO HEAR A DECISION ON THAT THIS EVENING, IT WILL NOT BE UP ON OUR AGENDA THIS EVENING.

SO JUST BE AWARE OF THAT SO THAT YOU DON'T IF YOU'RE STICKING AROUND FOR THAT, KNOW THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT.

WITH THAT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM SIX, WHICH IS INTERIM TOWNSHIP MANAGER REPORT.

[6. INTERIM TOWNSHIP MANAGER REPORT]

THANK YOU, MR. SUPERVISOR.

I'LL BE BRIEF. GIVEN THE AGENDA THIS EVENING.

LET ME START BY THANKING ALI AND THE YOU KNOW, TEAM, ALONG WITH DIRECTOR FINANCE DIRECTOR, FOR THEIR EXCELLENT WORK ON THE ON THE AUDIT.

THIS IS THE FIRST AUDIT I HAVE READ THROUGH FRONT TO BACK IN DETAIL, AND IT WAS EXCELLENT READING.

I WILL SAY ON TO OTHER NEWS YOU MAY RECALL THE ABLEIST PROJECT THE COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT'S BEEN WORKING ON FOR SOME TIME NOW.

WE DID DELAY THAT FROM 23 TO 24, WAITING TO THE RENOVATIONS WERE DONE TO THE BUILDING AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT INFORMATION IS NOW LIVE ON OUR WEBSITE.

AND I WILL SHOW YOU WHERE IT IS, WHERE IT LIVES, ACTUALLY, WHILE I'M STANDING HERE, IF YOU'RE ON THE FRONT PAGE OF OUR WEBSITE AND YOU HOVER OVER THE ABOUT US, THERE IS VIRTUAL TOURS RIGHT HERE AND IF YOU CLICK ON THAT WILL LEAD YOU TO ALL OF THE ABLEIST LINKS FOR THE BUILDINGS.

CURRENTLY WE HAVE DONE THE MAIN FIRE STATION, THE HARRIS NATURE CENTER, THE SERVICE CENTER, AND THE MAIN TOWNSHIP MUNICIPAL BUILDING.

SO WE'RE PRETTY HAPPY WITH THAT PROJECT IS DONE.

ALL CREDIT TO COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER DEAL FOR GETTING US OVER THE FINISH LINE.

I'M GOING TO STEAL JUST A LITTLE TINY BIT OF THE CLERK'S THUNDER AND LET YOU KNOW THAT AS OF FRIDAY, OVER 11,000 BALLOTS WERE ISSUED AND READY TO GO AND SHE'S GOING TO GIVE YOU A

[00:55:06]

WE DID RECEIVE THE MERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION FOR 2023 LATE LAST WEEK, AND WE WILL GET THAT TO THE BOARD AND GET THAT POSTED TO THE WEBSITE.

ONCE WE GET THROUGH THE AUDIT.

THE TOP LINE THAT I CAN REPORT IS OUR PERCENT FUNDED REMAINS AT 74% AS IT WAS LAST YEAR AND LASTLY, I JUST WANT TO TALK ABOUT ROAD CONSTRUCTION AS DEPUTY MANAGER OPSOMMER YOU KNOW, CANDIDLY, KIND OF GOT THIS PROGRAM FIGURED OUT THIS YEAR AND GOT US OUT TO BID EARLY AND GOT GOOD ENGINEERS ON THIS, AND WE ARE ALMOST DONE FOR THE YEAR, INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH.

THE NORTH SIDE OF THE SO PAVING AROUND THE NORTH SIDE OF THE LAKE IS COMPLETE.

THE PAVING IN THE RIVERWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD IS COMPLETE.

THERE'S STILL RESTORATION AND SOME DRAINAGE ISSUES, BUT THE PAVING ITSELF IS DONE.

THE TOWER GARDENS NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE CREST NEIGHBORHOOD WILL BE PAVING THIS WEEK AND THE OTHER AREA AROUND THE LAKE WILL HAPPEN AFTER TOWER AND CREST.

THE ONE THING THAT I WILL POINT OUT THAT I DIDN'T MENTION IS WOOD VALLEY.

THAT WAS THE LAST NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WAS INTENDED TO BE DONE THIS YEAR.

IT IS UNLIKELY WE WILL DO THAT THIS YEAR.

IT IS GOING. THERE IS A BETTER THAN A NEAR CERTAINTY THAT WE ARE GOING TO POSTPONE THAT DUE TO THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE.

WE SENT THEM PLANS MANY MONTHS AGO HEARD NOTHING BACK, AND WE DECIDED TO FOLLOW UP, AND THEY ALL OF A SUDDEN HAVE A PROJECT IN THE AREA WHICH WOULD ESSENTIALLY RIP OUT THE MAJORITY OF WHAT WE'RE PLANNING ON DOING.

SO RATHER THAN WASTE THAT MONEY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THEM AND LOOK INTO WHETHER OR NOT WE CAN REPROGRAM THOSE FUNDS TO ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR THIS EVENING.

I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF THE BOARD HAS ANY.

SORRY, WHICH WAS BEING DELAYED? DID YOU SAY WOOD VALLEY? WHERE'S THAT AT? I'M SORRY. NORTHEAST PORTION OF THE TOWNSHIP.

GOT IT AND CARLTON AND THAT'S THE LAST ONE THAT'S GOING TO BE DONE.

THAT AREA STILL IS TO BE PAVED.

ONCE WE FINISH TOWER GARDENS AND CROSS, THEY'LL MOVE INTO THAT ONE.

GOT IT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS WITH QUESTIONS FOR INTERIM MANAGER SCHMIDT CLERK GUTHRIE? THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR HENDRICKSON.

IN THE CONSENT AGENDA.

YES, MA'AM. UNDER 9E, IT TALKS ABOUT DONATED LAND FROM MAYBERRY FOR PERMANENT PRESERVATION.

DOES THE LAND PRESERVATION ADVISORY BOARD OR THEIR STEWARDSHIP COORDINATOR COORDINATOR HAVE ANY PLANS FOR NAMING THAT OR.

NOT AT THIS TIME. IT IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO AN EXISTING LAND PRIZE.

SO WILL IT BE INCORPORATED? THE SUBMISSION IS THAT WILL BE INCORPORATED, BUT THAT I WILL LEAVE THAT UP TO THE LAND PRESERVATION ADVISORY AND AND DIRECTOR WISINSKI TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.

OKAY. IF YOU COULD JUST GET BACK WITH A CONFIRMATION AT THE NEXT.

MEETING ABOUT WHAT'S THE DIRECTION THAT'S GOING.

WE'LL LET EVERYBODY KNOW. OKAY.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU. NEXT UP ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM SEVEN.

[7. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS OF ACTIVITIES ANDANNOUNCEMENTS]

ANY BOARD MEMBERS WITH ACTIVITIES AND ANNOUNCEMENTS TO REPORT TREASURER DESCHAINE.

THANK YOU. I AM PASSING OUT TO THE BOARD A INSERT THAT WILL BE INCLUDED IN EVERYONE'S TAX BILL.

ARRIVING ON JULY 1ST.

IT IS HOW TO PAY YOUR TAXES ONLINE.

IT IS ACTUALLY NOT GOING TO EVERYONE.

IT'S GOING TO ALL OF THOSE HOMEOWNERS WHO PAY THEIR TAXES DIRECTLY.

IF YOUR MORTGAGE COMPANY PAYS YOUR TAX BILL DOESN'T MAKE MUCH SENSE TO GIVE YOU THESE INSTRUCTIONS, ALTHOUGH THESE INSTRUCTIONS ALSO WILL HELP YOU TO PAY YOUR UTILITY BILLS ONLINE AS WELL.

WE'VE HAD MORE AND MORE REQUESTS FOR ONLINE PAYMENTS, AND BY THIS TIME NEXT YEAR WE WILL TAKE MORE PAYMENT TYPES, INCLUDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS, WHICH COME OUT IN JUNE AND ARE DUE JULY 1ST. AS I REFERENCED A MINUTE AGO, TAX BILLS GO OUT JULY 1ST AND THEY'RE DUE SEPTEMBER 14TH OF THIS YEAR.

IF YOU DON'T HAVE A TAX BILL IN HAND BY THE 7TH, PLEASE CALL MY OFFICE.

WE'LL BE GLAD TO SEND YOU AN EMAIL YOU ONE OR SEND YOU A PAPER COPY, BUT THEY SHOULD ALL ARRIVE ON OR ABOUT JULY 1ST OF THIS YEAR.

THAT'S MY REPORT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

OTHER BOARD MEMBERS, KATHY WILSON I HAD THE PLEASURE OF ATTENDING THE JUNETEENTH CELEBRATION LAST SATURDAY AND LISTENING TO GLOBAL VILLAGE AND I KNEW MOST OF THE WORDS AND IT WAS PRETTY FABULOUS AND SUCH A BEAUTIFUL SETTING.

I ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO GET OUT TO THE BANDSHELL AND TO ANY EVENTS THAT ARE HAPPENING AT LAKE LANSING PARK SOUTH.

IT'S REALLY GORGEOUS.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, BOARD MEMBERS.

CLERK GUTHRIE I'LL TRY TO BE QUICK.

THANK YOU. ABSENTEE BALLOTS HAVE BEEN ORDERED.

THANK YOU INTERIM MANAGER SCHMITT FOR MENTIONING BALLOTS AND THEY WILL BE MAILED OUT ON JUNE 27TH, WHICH IS NEXT WEEK.

[01:00:05]

WE ARE CLOSE TOMORROW IN HONOR OF JUNETEENTH AND THEN THE SUMMER CONCERT SERIES CONTINUES AT MARKETPLACE ON THE GREEN TOMORROW NIGHT AT 6 P.M., REARVIEW MIRRORS PLAYING, AND THEY HAVE HITS FROM THE 60S, 70S, 80S, 90S LIKE A VARIETY OF STUFF.

SO IF YOU WANT TO GET OUT IN THE HEAT AND SUPPORT THEM, PLEASE DO AND THEN I DON'T KNOW IF TRUSTEE TREZISE WAS GOING TO GIVE A POLICY REVIEW UPDATE OR NOT, I WASN'T, BUT GO AHEAD, I CAN T YOU OFF IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO OKAY.

I WILL MENTION THAT WE HAVE MET A NUMBER OF TIMES.

I DON'T REMEMBER HOW MANY, BUT WE'VE EXTENDED OUR MEETINGS FROM AN HOUR A WEEK TO TWO HOURS.

WE'RE THROUGH A FIRST READING OF THE EMPLOYEE MANUAL, AND IT'S OUT TO ATTORNEYS TO DO SOME ROUGH DRAFTS DEALING WITH SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT WE IDENTIFIED AND THEN WE'RE PLANNING ON MEETING WITH GROUPS OF EMPLOYEES TO GET THEIR INPUT, BECAUSE, FRANKLY, WE MAY HAVE MISSED SOMETHING.

PROBABLY DID.

SO THE PROCESS IS GOING FORWARD.

NOW, WE'RE STARTING TO WORK ON THE POLICY MANUAL GOVERNING THE BOARD AND SUPERVISOR AND OUR INTERACTIONS HERE WITH THE STAFF AND HOW WE INTERACT AMONGST OURSELVES.

SO WE'RE STILL PROGRESSING, AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL HAVE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN BRING BACK TO THE BOARD IN THE NOT TOO DISTANT FUTURE.

ALTHOUGH IT'S TAKING A LOT MORE TIME THAN WE ANTICIPATED.

THEY'RE BOTH LONG POLICIES AND LOTS OF WORDS.

SURE. SOMETIMES TOO MANY.

YEAH. YEP.

SO BUT THE PROGRESS IS GOING FORWARD.

IT'S BEEN A VERY ENLIGHTENING AND ENJOYABLE PROCESS WORKING WITH OUR HR DIRECTOR, ABBY AND DAVE AND I. SO WE'RE PLODDING THROUGH.

TERRIFIC. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS? TREASURER DESCHAINE.

ONE MORE THING. I DID ATTEND THE INGHAM COUNTY MEETING LAST NIGHT, AND THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS ANNOUNCED THAT WITH THE HEAT WAVE, ALL ENTRANCE FEES TO COUNTY PARKS WILL BE WAIVED THROUGH THIS FRIDAY.

SO YOU CAN GO TO LAKE LANSING PARK SOUTH AND WITHOUT A PASS AND COOL OFF IN THIS HEAT.

ALTHOUGH THEY ALSO MENTIONED THAT PARKING IS LIMITED BECAUSE OF THE HORRENDOUS RAIN WE GOT SUNDAY EVENING, MONDAY MORNING.

BUT IF YOU CAN FIND A PLACE TO PARK, IT'S FREE ADMISSION THIS WEEK UNTIL SATURDAY.

NICE. THANK YOU.

I WILL REPORT THAT I WAS ONE OF THOSE MEETINGS THAT THE POLICY REVIEW COMMITTEE HAD A WEEK AGO FRIDAY AND HAD A VERY THOUGHTFUL DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW WE HANDLE CERTAIN ASPECTS OF CREATING THE AGENDA AND OTHER INTERACTIONS BETWEEN THE TOWNSHIP SUPERVISOR AND OTHERS AND THAT WAS VERY HELPFUL THERE.

I ALSO ATTENDED THE JUNETEENTH CELEBRATION THAT DIRECTOR CLARK HELPED TO ORGANIZE.

THANK YOU FOR THAT. THAT WAS WONDERFUL.

GOT A CHANCE TO WALK BY THE MARSHALL PARK PLAYGROUND, WHICH WILL BE HOLDING A RIBBON CUTTING FOR NEXT MONTH.

THAT WAS THE RESULT OF OUR LISTENING SESSIONS THAT WE HELD BACK IN THE FALL, AND IT'S BEEN A TREMENDOUS SUCCESS, AND WE'RE VERY EXCITED TO SEE THAT PROJECT OPEN UP SOON AND SPEAKING OF LISTENING SESSIONS, ALL OF US HERE ATTENDED THE LISTENING SESSION ON JUNE 11TH AT 6:00 AND WE HEARD FROM ABOUT THREE DOZEN OF OUR RESIDENTS WHO CAME TO TALK TO US.

WE GAVE A BRIEF UPDATE ON A COUPLE OF TOPICS AND TOOK A LOT OF VERY INTERESTING QUESTIONS.

LEARNED A LOT ABOUT SOME NEW TOPICS, ESPECIALLY GARLIC MUSTARD, WHICH I DID NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT, BUT NOW I KNOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT AND JUST AS A REMINDER, SINCE THERE WON'T BE ANY MEETINGS BETWEEN NOW AND THEN, WE DO HAVE TWO ADDITIONAL LISTENING SESSIONS ON THE CALENDAR FOR ANYONE WATCHING AT HOME OR IN THE AUDIENCE AND THOSE WILL BE JUNE 25TH, FROM 6 TO 7:30 IN THIS ROOM, AND JUNE 27TH FROM 6 TO 7:30 IN THIS ROOM. THOSE WILL BE OPEN.

THE LETTERS HAVE BEEN SENT OUT TO ALL OF OUR RESIDENTS INVITING THEM TO THOSE SESSIONS.

IF YOU CAN'T MAKE THE SESSION THAT YOU WERE INVITED TO, YOU'RE WELCOME TO COME TO ANY OF THEM, SO PLEASE DO.

YOU'LL BE DOING A LOT OF INTERESTING INFORMATION AND BRING YOUR QUESTIONS, BECAUSE WE ARE HERE TO LISTEN TO YOU AND ANSWER ANYTHING THAT WE CAN.

SO WITH THAT SAID, WE WILL MOVE.

OH, I'M SORRY, ONE MORE ITEM.

COMING UP ON JUNE 28TH AND 29TH IS CELEBRATE MERIDIAN.

SO I BELIEVE THE 28TH, WE HAVE A TEEN NIGHT ON THE FRIDAY EVENING.

BEFORE THE SATURDAY MAIN EVENT AND SO MAKE SURE YOU COME OUT.

[01:05:05]

FARMERS MARKET IN THE MORNING.

WE'VE GOT FOOD TRUCKS AND ALL KINDS OF ACTIVITIES FOR ALL AGES THROUGHOUT THE DAY.

ON SATURDAY. THERE WILL, OF COURSE, BE NOW, I THINK, TWO BEER TENTS AT THE CELEBRATE MERIDIAN EVENT.

YOU CAN THANK OUR PARKS AND REC DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT FOR ADDING THAT SO WE CAN HAVE ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR THOSE AND THEN, OF COURSE, CAPPING THE EVENING OFF WITH FIREWORKS.

ALWAYS A GOOD TIME.

SO PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU COME OUT ON THE 28TH AND 29TH OF JUNE FOR THAT.

I'LL ALSO MENTION THAT WE ARE HAVING A RIBBON CUTTING FOR THE STYKA MEMORIAL PATHWAY COMING UP ON JUNE 28TH.

THAT'S OFF OF EAST SUNDLAND DRIVE.

THERE'S A TRAILHEAD THERE.

THE TRAIL GOES FROM OKEMOS ROAD TO HEWLETT ROAD.

JUST NORTH OF BENNETT.

SO IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME JOIN US FOR THAT, THAT'S AT 1:00 PM.

WE'LL BE MUSTERING AT THE SUN WIND ENTRANCE TO THAT PATH.

IT'S BACK IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THERE AND IT GIVES AN OPPORTUNITY TO CELEBRATE THE LEGACY OF FORMER SUPERVISOR RON STYKA.

SO THAT'S. THAT WILL BE A GOOD EVENT, I'M SURE.

OKAY, THAT WAS A LOT.

[8. APPROVAL OF AGENDA]

DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE OUR AGENDA? TRUSTEE. WILSON, MOVE TO APPROVE THE AGENDA.

SUPPORT. MOVE BY TRUSTEE WILSON, SUPPORTED BY TRUSTEE TREZISE.

ANY COMMENTS ON THE AGENDA? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE AGENDA SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AND THE AGENDA CARRIES. NEXT UP ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM NUMBER NINE, OUR CONSENT AGENDA.

[9. CONSENT AGENDA]

THE BILLS AND APPOINTMENTS TO OUR PLANNING COMMISSION.

A PROPERTY DONATION AS A PART OF THE SILVERLEAF DEVELOPMENT WHICH WE DISCUSSED A LITTLE BIT EARLIER IN RELATION TO NEW SUBDIVISIONS COMING IN OFF OF BENNETT ROAD.

JUST NORTH OF BENNETT AND EAST, SORRY, WEST OF HEWLETT.

WHICH AS A PART OF THAT DEVELOPMENT, WAS PROMISED A DONATION OF 20 ACRES ADDED TO OUR LAND PRESERVES.

WE ALSO HAVE DISPOSAL OF SOME SURPLUS FIRE EQUIPMENT, AS WELL AS THE POTENTIAL APPROVAL OF A CHARITABLE GAMING LICENSE FOR THE CONSTELLATION CAT CAFÉ.

DO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA THIS EVENING? MOVE THE APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.

TRUSTEE WILSON.

TRUSTEE WILSON MOVES THE CONSENT AGENDA.

DO WE HAVE A SUPPORT? SUPPORT. SUPPORTED BY TRUSTEE DESCHAINE.

ANY DISCUSSION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLERK GUTHRIE.

PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

THANK YOU. CLERK GUTHRIE.

NEXT UP ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM NUMBER TEN.

QUESTIONS FOR THE ATTORNEY. WE HAVE NONE.

ITEM NUMBER 11, A IS OUR FIRST OF TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS THIS EVENING AND LET'S SEE, GET MYSELF ORGANIZED

[11.A. Whitehills Lakes South #1 – Streetlight SAD Public Hearing]

WHITE HILLS, LAKES SOUTH.

NUMBER ONE, PUBLIC STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS, SPECIAL ASSESSMENT, DISTRICT NUMBER 4, 2, 8 AND WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:08 P.M.

WE DO HAVE ONE MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC.

SO THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.

SO RIGHT NOW WE HAVE JANET [INAUDIBLE].

IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK, PLEASE COME UP TO THE PODIUM.

YOU CAN GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, AND YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK ON THIS.

GOOD EVENING, ALL OF YOU.

MY NAME IS [INAUDIBLE] AND I LIVE IN FENWAY COURT.

I MOVED THERE FIVE YEARS AGO, AND JIM JAGGER BUILT MY HOUSE AND IT WAS DARK AT NIGHT.

I ASKED HIM, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO STREET LIGHT AT NIGHT.

HE SAID, THERE IS A HERE BETWEEN THE THIRD AND FOURTH ELECTRIC OUTLET.

THEY'RE GOING TO DO THAT, I SAID, WHEN I DON'T REMEMBER EXACTLY WHAT HE SAID.

BUT NOW, RIGHT NOW, THERE IS A ONCE LIGHT AT PINE HOLLOW STREET AND FENWAY COURT ON SOUTH SIDE OF THE STREET ON PINE HOLLOW.

[01:10:03]

FENWAY COURT LAST TWO, AND IS THE DEAD END.

THEN THERE IS NO LIGHT.

I HEARD THAT THEY ARE PUTTING TWO.

MY QUESTION IS THIS IS MY SUGGESTION THAT MY.

I AM IN THE SECOND HOUSE AND BETWEEN SECOND AND THIRD AND FIRST HOUSE IS DARK THERE ALSO, IF YOU THINK THERE IS DARK ON THE FOURTH, FIFTH, SIXTH HOUSE, MY SUGGESTION IS THIS THING SOMEBODY SHOULD EVALUATE MAYBE THIS THOSE THAT STREET.

ONE POLE IS BETWEEN FIFTH AND SIXTH HALL, AND THE SECOND ONE WILL BE BETWEEN THE THIRD AND FOURTH.

IF THEY CAN RELOCATE, MOVE THIS THING OVER THERE SO THAT ON MY HOUSE WILL ALSO LIE.

OTHERWISE I DON'T HAVE ANY OBJECTION.

STILL, I AM READY TO PAY WHETHER YOU MOVE OR WHETHER YOU PUT ANOTHER LIGHT OR NOT AS LONG AS OTHER.

BUT SOMEBODY.

WE NEED THEIR LIGHT.

I WILL PAY FOR.

I WILL SUPPORT THAT.

BUT LOOK INTO THAT.

WHAT IS ABOUT THIS SIDE? THERE IS NOT ENOUGH LIGHT THERE.

SO THAT IS MY QUESTIONS.

SORRY IF I SAID ANYTHING WRONG.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND THEN MR. MUELLER, I THINK THE FENWICK COURT.

THAT'S THE SECOND IS THE SECOND ONE WE'RE TAKING UP THIS EVENING.

HE'S MY NEIGHBOR. I LIVE IN SAGINAW.

HE LIVES IN THE FIRST HOUSE.

OKAY, THEN PERHAPS I MAY HAVE.

I MAY HAVE MISTAKEN AND CALLED YOU UP AT ONE AGENDA ITEM EARLY.

BUT WE APPRECIATE YOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS ANYWAY AND WE'LL INCORPORATE THAT I WILL APOLOGIZE.

NO WORRIES. THAT'S WE'LL KEEP YOU THERE FOR THE NEXT ONE THEN.

OKAY. SO THIS WAS I'M SORRY.

I SCROLLED DOWN TO SEE WHAT THE ADDRESS IS INVOLVED, AND NOW I'M ON THE WRONG PAGE.

OKAY. SO WE DO HAVE, I BELIEVE, DEPUTY MANAGER OPSOMMER HERE WITH US AND I WILL ASK HIM TO PLEASE COME UP AND JUST GIVE US IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER.

BEFORE WE ADDRESS THIS ITEM LATER.

I BELIEVE THIS IS JUST THE PUBLIC HEARING, SO WE'LL HAVE TO WAIT LIKELY OR NOT.

CORRECT. GOOD EVENING.

SUPERVISOR HENDRICKSON AND BOARD MEMBERS.

SO BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING, UNDER ACTION WILL BE RESOLUTION NUMBER THREE, WHICH WILL BE THE THIRD AND FINAL RESOLUTION TO COMPLETE THE SAD PROCESS FOR THE STREETLIGHTS FOR BOTH DISTRICTS.

I DID MAKE A NOTE OF THE PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WE JUST RECEIVED DURING THE HEARING AND THAT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT WE CAN EXPLORE WITH CONSUMERS ENERGY, BUT I DO NOT KNOW SPECIFICALLY WHY THEY CHOSE THE LOCATIONS.

THERE COULD BE UTILITY CONFLICTS.

COULD ALSO BE HYDRANTS OR OTHER APPURTENANCES THAT COULD BE IN THE WAY.

BUT THAT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING WE CAN EXPLORE AND WE DO HAVE CONTACT INFORMATION FOR THE HOA'S PROPERTY OWNERSHIP OR REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNERS SO WE CAN GET IN TOUCH WITH THE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT AND SO IF WE WERE GOING, IF, YOU KNOW, THE EVENTUAL SUGGESTION WOULD BE TO ADD ANOTHER LIGHT, LET'S JUST SAY THAT WOULD NECESSITATE A CHANGE TO THE ASSESSMENT.

YES. THAT WOULD COME BACK BEFORE US AT A LATER TIME.

IT'S NOT A DONE DEAL. IF WE SAY YES TONIGHT, ALL THE NUMBERS WOULD INCREASE BY 50%.

SO WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND PERHAPS WE COULD TABLE THE FENWICK ONE, WHICH IS THE SECOND ON YOUR AGENDA, WHICH WOULD BE, I THINK, 12 F, IF I RECALL CORRECTLY.

SO WE COULD TABLE THAT ONE.

IF THE AND HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE, WE'LL THEN GO BACK TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS.

BUT WE WOULD FIRST JUST EXPLORE WHETHER OR NOT IT'S POSSIBLE TO STAGGER THE TWO LIGHTS DIFFERENTLY BASED ON ALL THE ASPECTS FOR THE AREA.

THANK YOU. ABSOLUTELY.

OKAY WITH THAT, WE'LL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM 11 A AT 7:14 P.M.

NEXT UP ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM 11 B, WHICH IS OUR SECOND OF TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS.

[11.B. Whitehills Lakes Subdivision #7 – Streetlight SAD Public Hearing]

DISTRICT NUMBER 429, OUR PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:14 P.M.

AND NOW, MR. MUELLER, IF YOU'D LIKE, YOU CAN PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM AND IF YOU COULD GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.

GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS BILL MUELLER.

EXCUSE ME, BILL MUELLER.

I LIVE AT 6241 FENWICK COURT AND I'M HERE TO DISCUSS A PROPOSED PROJECT ON OUR STREET OF TWO

[01:15:02]

THERE ARE SIX HOUSES ON THE STREET.

WE WERE TOLD BY MAIL THAT IT WOULD BE A THOUSAND BUCKS, APPROXIMATELY A PIECE FOR EACH HOUSE.

SO SIX GRAND.

MY WIFE AND I WERE A LITTLE TAKEN ABACK.

I GUESS THE FIRST THING A QUESTION FROM US IS HOW THE PREVIOUS STREET LIGHTS WERE FUNDED.

WERE THEY ASSESSED? DID THE TOWNSHIP PAY FOR THEM THAT THE BUILDER PAID FOR THEM? WERE THEY ASSESSED? AND HOW MUCH MAINTENANCE ARE THOSE FOLKS PAYING FOR THEIR LIGHTS? WE WERE GOING TO BE CHARGED $60 A YEAR, WHICH IS NO PROBLEM.

BUT I JUST WANT TO KNOW HOW THEY PAY.

WE'VE LIVED THERE.

MY WIFE AND I, FLORA, HAVE LIVED ON THAT STREET 17 YEARS NOW.

NEVER HAD A PROBLEM.

THE STREET LIGHTS WOULD ALLEVIATE.

WE'VE JUST NEVER HAD A PROBLEM ON THE STREET, SO WE QUESTIONED THE NEED FOR STREET LIGHTS.

SO WHAT WE QUESTION MORE IS THE NEED FOR $1,000 TO PAY FOR WHEN THE STREET LIGHTS INVOLVE THE PLACEMENT OF THEM? IF YOU CAN IMAGINE, SIX HOUSES ON A STREET, YOU KNOW, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, THE STREET LIGHTS ARE GOING TO BE PLACED BETWEEN HOUSES 3 AND 4, WHICH IS DOWN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET AND THE EXTREME EAST END OF THE STREET, WHICH BACKS UP TO A WETLANDS.

SO THAT'S THE PLACEMENT OF THE STREET LIGHTS RIGHT NOW.

WE DON'T SEE THE NEED FOR IT.

IT'S NOT GOOD.

GOOD FOR US.

INITIALLY, SEVERAL YEARS AGO, I WAS CANVASED AND ASKED ABOUT THIS PROJECT, AND I SAID, YEAH, IT'S OKAY WITH ME AND AT THE TIME, I WAS NOT TOLD HOW IT WAS GOING TO BE PAID FOR, AND I DIDN'T.

FIRST TIME HOMEOWNER.

I DIDN'T ASK HOW IT WAS GOING TO BE PAID FOR.

I DIDN'T KNOW I THOUGHT SOMEBODY WOULD PUT HIM IN, BUT WE HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT NOW AND WE THINK OUR TAX BILLS ARE ALREADY QUITE ADEQUATE.

SO. OH THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH VERY MUCH.

I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU. IT SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE SUGGESTION FROM OUR STAFF THAT WE TABLE THIS ITEM LATER WHEN IT COMES UP FOR ACTION SO THAT WE CAN EXPLORE SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP DURING PUBLIC COMMENT THIS EVENING.

SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR FOR BRINGING THAT UP.

ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTERS ON THIS PUBLIC HEARING? SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:18 P.M.

NEXT UP ON OUR AGENDA.

ACTUALLY, WE'VE BEEN AT THIS FOR A LITTLE BIT.

I ASKED FOR ABOUT A FIVE MINUTE RECESS, IF WE COULD.

IT'S 7:18 NOW, SO WE'LL STAND AT EASE UNTIL 7:23 P.M..

WE'LL VOTE ON IT.

ALL RIGHT. IT IS 7:23, AND WE'RE KEEPING IT TO A TIGHT FIVE MINUTE BREAK.

SO NEXT UP ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM 12, A RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA LICENSE APPLICATION IN ZONE 3, MARSH AND GRAND RIVER AREA AND WE WILL TURN THINGS

[12.A. Recreational Marijuana License Application in Zone 3 – Marsh and Grand River Area]

SO THIS AS EVERYONE'S AWARE, THIS IS ZONE THREE, WHICH, IF I CAN JUST.

I NEED TO MOVE THIS.

YOU'RE FINE. THIS IS ZONE THREE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.

SO THIS IS THE AREA ROUGHLY BOUNDED BY MARSH ROAD, GRAND RIVER, AND CENTRAL PARK.

WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THESE THREE PROPERTIES THAT ARE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF CENTRAL PARK AND I POINT THAT OUT BECAUSE ONE OF THE APPLICATIONS WE HAVE IS ON ONE OF THOSE PARCELS.

PARCELS AND SO WHAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU THIS EVENING IS A HAVING GONE THROUGH THE LICENSE PROCESS UP TO THE POINT OF DECISION AND SO, JUST TO RECAP, THE BOARD ESTABLISHED GUIDELINES FOR HOW THEY WOULD ACCEPT APPLICATIONS FOR LICENSES, AND THEN THEY ESTABLISHED GUIDELINES FOR HOW THEY WOULD REVIEW LICENSES.

A WINDOW WAS OPENED IN JANUARY.

WE RECEIVED TWO SUBMITTALS THAT WERE COMPLETE SUBMITTALS FOR THIS ZONE, ONE LOCATED JUST BETWEEN THE C3 AND THE PO

[01:20:07]

HAVING GONE THROUGH THIS PROCESS PREVIOUSLY, DIRECTOR CLARKE AND MYSELF REVIEWED THE TWO APPLICATIONS IN THIS DISTRICT, MADE A RECOMMENDATION FOR THE APPLICANT AT 1614 GRAND RIVER AVENUE D AND VK4 THE OTHER APPLICANT, AMSTERDAM CC AT 4792 MARSH ROAD.

VERY GOOD APPLICANT AS WELL, BUT THE INITIAL APPLICATION WAS SUBSTANTIALLY BETTER.

AMSTERDAM SUBSEQUENTLY SUBMITTED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

WE HAVE SHARED ALL THIS INFORMATION WITH THE BOARD.

THE BOARD PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED THIS AT THEIR MAY 9TH MEETING AND AT THAT MEETING, ASKED AFTER A ROBUST DISCUSSION, ASKED THE TOWNSHIP ATTORNEY TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE AND THIS IS THE POINT AT WHICH I TURN IT OVER TO MR. KUSCHEL TO GO THROUGH THAT DISCUSSION WITH YOU SO THAT YOU CAN MOVE TOWARDS A DECISION.

I WILL LASTLY POINT OUT, IF YOU DO CHOOSE TO MOVE FORWARD THIS EVENING, THE MOTION THAT WE PROVIDED WITH YOU IS A CHOOSE YOUR OWN ADVENTURE MOTION.

YOU DO NEED TO SELECT EITHER EVERYTHING BEFORE THE OR EVERYTHING AFTER THE OR WHEN READING THE MOTION.

SO MISTER KUSCHEL WILL TAKE OVER ONE OF MY FAVORITE BOOK SERIES.

THANK YOU FOR THE REFERENCE.

SO LOOKING AT THE COMPETITIVE REVIEW PROCEDURES WE'LL START THERE AFTER THE REVIEW COMMITTEE SUBMITS THEIR RECOMMENDATION.

IT COMES TO THIS BOARD.

THE BOARD CONSIDERS THE INITIAL APPLICATIONS AND HERE I'M ON PAGES THREE AND FOUR OF THE COMPETITIVE REVIEW PROCEDURES.

AND THEN THE TOWNSHIP BOARD CONSIDERS EACH COMPETITIVE REVIEW FACTOR AND CONSIDERING THOSE FACTORS, THE BOARD IS SHALL CONSIDER THE INITIAL APPLICATIONS AND THEN MAY CONSIDER THE REVIEW COMMITTEE SUMMARY, THE RECOMMENDATION, PUBLIC COMMENTS, ANY LEGAL OPINIONS, AND ANY OTHER INFORMATION RELEVANT.

AS DIRECTOR SCHMITT NOTED, WE HAVE THE SOME SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM AMSTERDAM AND THEN, OF COURSE, THE APPLICANTS HAVE SPOKEN TONIGHT AS WELL AS THEIR COUNSEL, AND ALSO SUBMITTED A SUPPLEMENTAL LETTER, AGAIN RESPONDING TO THE OTHER APPLICATION AND THE PROCESS THUS FAR.

SO THEN WHAT WE'VE PUT TOGETHER FOR YOUR USE HERE FOLLOWING THE PREVIOUS MEETING, WE DID THEN EVALUATE AGAIN AND REVIEW THE APPLICATIONS AGAIN.

THE QUESTION WAS RAISED WHETHER IT COULD THE SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION AND HOW THAT IMPACTED THE REVIEW COMMITTEE.

SO RATHER THAN GO BACK TO THE REVIEW COMMITTEE, WE'VE GONE THROUGH AND TRIED TO HELP THE BOARD IDENTIFY WHERE THAT SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION IS.

WHAT'S THE INITIAL APPLICATION VERSUS SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION, HOW TO HELP PARSE OUT HOW THAT POTENTIALLY IMPACTS ANY BOARD MEMBERS CONSIDERATION. SO THEN THE REVIEW WORKSHEET THAT WE'VE PROVIDED IS A STEP BY STEP THAT A BOARD MEMBER CAN OR CAN USE TO JUST IDENTIFY THEIR THINKING OR GUIDE THEIR DISCUSSION.

SO WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION BY THE BOARD FOR EACH OF THE KEY CRITERIA THAT ARE LAID OUT IN THAT WORKSHEET AND THEN WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE ACTUAL COMPETITIVE REVIEW CRITERIA YOU KNOW, THERE'S MORE DEPTH THERE.

SO OF COURSE, DIFFERENT MEMBERS MIGHT KEY IN ON DIFFERENT PARTICULAR PIECES OF ANY ONE PIECE NOT NECESSARILY NOT NECESSARY TO REPEAT WHAT A PREVIOUS BOARD MEMBER HAS SAID.

IF, YOU KNOW, IF TRUSTEE TREZISE SAID EXACTLY WHAT TRUSTEE WILSON WAS GOING TO SAY, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN SUPPORT THE SAME APPLICANT FOR THAT REASON FOR THE REASONS STATED SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT GETTING THE THINKING OF THE BOARD MEMBERS SO THAT WE HAVE THAT ROBUST DISCUSSION.

WHETHER THERE'S A, YOU KNOW, UNANIMOUS AGREEMENT FOR ONE APPLICATION OR WHETHER THERE'S, YOU KNOW, SOME DIFFERING VIEWPOINTS AND THEN ULTIMATELY RESOLVING THAT INTO A VOTE.

WE DID ALSO INCLUDE A HIGH EMPHASIS SLASH IMPORTANT CATEGORY.

THAT'S NOT SOMETHING YOU NEED TO USE.

[01:25:02]

WELL, IN CITIES, WHEN THE COURT OF APPEALS HAS REVIEWED THEIR APPLICATION PROCESS THEY PUT PARTICULAR EMPHASIS ON GREEN DEVELOPMENT OR REDEVELOPMENT AND THE COURT SAID, THAT'S FINE.

IF YOU WANT TO PUT PARTICULAR EMPHASIS ON A CRITERIA, THE COMMUNITY CAN DO THAT.

SO WE'VE JUST PROVIDED A SIMPLE WAY, SLASH REMINDER THAT IF A BOARD MEMBER WANTS TO PUT PARTICULAR EMPHASIS ON A CRITERIA, THEN THAT'S THERE AGAIN FOR YOU TO BE ABLE TO DO SO.

SO I'M HAPPY TO KIND OF GO THROUGH THE DIFFERENT CRITERIA AND THEN LEAVE IT TO THE BOARD TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION AND OTHERWISE TAKE DIRECTION.

THANK YOU. I PERSONALLY I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY SINCE IT'S IN THE PUBLIC MATERIAL THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED BOTH TO THE BOARD AND THE PUBLIC.

I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO GO THROUGH EACH INDIVIDUAL ONE AHEAD OF TIME, BUT I DO THANK YOU FOR A THOROUGH LIST AND FOR AND HELPING TO SORT OF FRAME THE DISCUSSION FOR US.

SO I APPRECIATE THAT.

I DO THINK THAT IT WOULD BE PRUDENT AT THIS POINT TO TURN THINGS OVER TO OUR BOARD MEMBERS FOR ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS TOPIC AS WE SORT OF EVALUATE THE TWO APPLICATIONS THAT ARE BEFORE US, THE BOARD MEMBERS WANTING TO LEAP IN FIRST.

TREASURER DESCHAINE I WILL, AND I'LL BEGIN WITH ASKING THE FOLKS FROM TNVK.

WE DID SEE AN APPLICATION FOR THERE WAS A PUT BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED BY THEM TO REALLY DEVELOP THREE DIFFERENT PARCELS IN THIS LOCATION.

ONE WAS THE THREE STORY STORAGE FACILITY, AND THE MARIJUANA FACILITY WAS IN FRONT.

IS THERE ANY CONNECTION BETWEEN THE OWNERSHIP OF THE STORAGE FACILITY AND THE PROPERTY OWNER WHO OWNED THE DISPENSARY, OR WERE THEY COMPLETELY SEPARATE LEGAL ENTITIES? SO AT THIS POINT, THE PROPERTIES ARE ALL OWNED BY THE SAME PERSON.

FUTURE OWNERSHIP IS, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE THAT NECESSARILY HAVE THAT INFORMATION AT THIS POINT.

OKAY. SO THE SAME OWNER THAT PROPOSED THE THREE STORY HIGH RISE STORAGE UNIT, THE SAME GROUP HAS PROPOSED BOTH AT THIS POINT.

YES. GOOD. THAT LEADS ME TO MY BACK TO MY POINT EARLIER.

I LIKE AMSTERDAM.

THEY ARE LOCAL.

I DON'T THINK THEY WOULD EVER PROPOSE A THREE STORY STORAGE FACILITY, AS THIS OWNER HAS ONE THAT WE ALL FOUND OBJECTIONABLE, TO PUT IT MILDLY, CLEARLY TO SUGGEST THAT ON GRAND RIVER, RIGHT NEXT TO THE NEW GRAND RESERVE DOES NOT TO ME SEEM TO BE A COMPANY THAT HAS ANY IDEA WHAT OUR VALUE IS, OUR MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP, THAT WE WOULD BUILD HALF $1 MILLION HOMES IN THE SHADOW OF A THREE STORY OPEN 24 HOURS, 990 UNIT STORAGE UNIT IS COMPLETELY CONSISTENT WITH OUR SENSE OF NEIGHBORHOOD AND WHAT IS RIGHT FOR THIS COMMUNITY.

AMSTERDAM, ON THE OTHER HAND, IS A LOCAL OWNER.

AS WE HEARD EARLIER, KIDS WENT TO SCHOOL HERE, MSU HERE, ONE OF THE CO-OWNERS IS A PERSON WE'VE ALSO BEEN WORKING WITH ON A POSSIBLE LAND ACQUISITION FOR A COMMUNITY CENTER SENIOR CENTER, WHICH PRESENTED US WITH FAVORABLE TERMS FOR REDEVELOPMENT.

WE KNOW A LOT ABOUT THE FOLKS AT AMSTERDAM AND WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT D AND VK, QUITE HONESTLY, ISN'T GOOD.

IT TOOK ME TO THIS MEETING TO SEE THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE TWO, BUT WE WERE ALL SHOCKED BY THAT THREE STORY STORAGE UNIT BEING PUT RIGHT THERE NEXT TO THE GRAND RESERVE RIGHT OFF OF CENTRAL PARK DRIVE.

THIS HERE'S AN APPLICANT TELLING US WHO THEY ARE, THAT WHAT THEY WANT AND WHAT'S HIGHLY PROFITABLE FOR THEM IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING. VERY LITTLE CONCERN FOR THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, VERY LITTLE CONCERN FOR THE ESTHETICS OF IT.

JUST WE OWN THIS PROPERTY.

WE WANT TO PUT THIS HERE AND IF IT'S BIG AND TALL AND UGLY, THAT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER TO THEM.

THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT MAKING AS MUCH MONEY IN THIS PARCEL AS THEY CAN.

NOW, WE ARE NOT A NONPROFIT COMMUNITY.

WE DO ALLOW FOR PROFIT, BUT WE HAVE OUR LIMITS AND I TO ME, THIS MAKES ME WANT TO GO WITH A LOCAL AMSTERDAM CC FAR MORE THAN BEFORE, KNOWING THAT THIS IS THE SAME COMPANY THAT PROPOSED THAT THREE STORY, HORRENDOUSLY UNATTRACTIVE STORAGE

[01:30:03]

BUT EVEN MORE TO THE POINT, AMSTERDAM IS LOCAL OWNERSHIP.

WE KNOW THESE PEOPLE.

WE'VE WORKED WITH THEM ON OTHER PROJECTS BEFORE.

I ALSO LIKE THE LOCATION BETTER.

THERE'S NO NEED TO CUT DOWN ANY TREES HERE.

THERE'S NO NEED TO DIG A BIG HOLE IN THE GROUND.

THERE'S NO NEED TO HAVE A BIG CARBON IMPACT ON THIS.

THIS IS AN EXISTING BANK.

WE TALK ABOUT REDEVELOPMENT IN THIS TOWNSHIP.

THIS IS A CHANCE FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF OF EXISTING LOCATION.

THE IMPACT IN TERMS OF OUR ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY IS POSITIVE.

FOR ONE TO REUSE AN EXISTING BUILDING, IT'S NEGATIVE FOR THE OTHER TO CLEAR WOODED AREA AND PUT A NEW BUILDING THERE.

WE TALK ABOUT OUR ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND OUR GOALS AND REDEVELOPMENT AND HOW IMPORTANT IT IS.

HERE'S A CHANCE TO STAND BY WHAT WE SAY.

THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS ON THIS, THESE TWO APPLICATIONS.

THANK YOU. TREASURER DESCHAINE.

IF I COULD JUST FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES YOU KNOW, WE DID RECEIVE CORRESPONDENCE FROM ONE OF THE APPLICANT'S ATTORNEYS THIS AFTERNOON.

THIS MORNING, I DON'T KNOW, TODAY'S FLOWN BY REGARDING LOCAL PREFERENCE, CAN YOU CLARIFY FOR US, PLEASE, ATTORNEY KUSCHEL, WHAT WE ARE ABLE TO CONSIDER IN THAT WAY OR NOT CONSIDER.

YEAH. GOOD QUESTION.

THE LEGAL PERSPECTIVE TURNS MORE ON RESIDENCY THAN IT DOES ON LOCAL PREFERENCE.

SO IF THE CRITERIA REQUIRED OR PREFERRED A RESIDENT OVER A NON RESIDENT THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE MORE LIKELY TO TRIGGER THOSE LEGAL CONCERNS OF EQUAL PROTECTION.

RIGHT TO TRAVEL.

COMMERCE CLAUSE QUESTIONS.

DETROIT RAN INTO THAT WITH THE WAY THEY TRIED TO STRUCTURE THEIR THEIR LICENSING SCHEME.

WE DON'T HAVE THAT HERE.

RESIDENCY IT'S NOT AN APPLICATION REQUIREMENT.

IT'S NOT A REVIEW CRITERIA.

WE LOOK AT THE REVIEW CRITERIA WE DO HAVE IS DEMONSTRATED DEDICATION TO MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP AND THE COMMUNITY.

SO TO THE EXTENT AN INDIVIDUAL IS A LOCAL RESIDENT, YOU'VE KNOWN THEM BEFORE, YOU'VE WORKED WITH THEM BEFORE.

YOU KNOW, THAT MAY SHOW THEM SOME DEDICATION TO THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE YOU'VE HAD THOSE PRIOR CONTACTS, AND YOU'RE ABLE TO HAVE SOME BACKGROUND ON THAT.

BUT AGAIN, LOOKING AT THE REVIEW CRITERIA, IT'S MORE ECONOMIC FOCUSED IN TERMS OF FULL TIME EMPLOYEES, THE STAFFING PLAN, HOW COMPLETE IT IS, THE WAGES AND QUALIFICATIONS THERE HOW THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD IN TERMS OF USING, AGAIN, LOCAL BUSINESSES AND THE HISTORY FROM AN OPERATIONAL PERSPECTIVE, WHETHER THEY COULD BE A NON RESIDENT, THEY COULD OWN THREE BUSINESSES IN THE TOWNSHIP.

THAT'S THE SAME DEDICATION TO THE COMMUNITY.

AS A RESIDENT WHO HAS THREE BUSINESSES IN THE COMMUNITY.

RIGHT. THOSE WOULD BE EVALUATED THE SAME.

SO I WOULDN'T THINK OF IT AS A RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT OR RESIDENCY QUALIFICATION, BUT I WOULD THINK OF IT AS DEDICATION TO THE COMMUNITY AND AS PHIL MENTIONED YOU KNOW, THEY WORK WITH THE INDIVIDUAL BEFORE HE KNEW MORE ABOUT THEM.

SO HE HAD THE LOCAL CONTACTS THAT TO HIM DEMONSTRATED THAT DEDICATION.

SURE. THANK YOU.

I ALSO JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT I BELIEVE, YOU KNOW, ON THE ISSUE OF THE SELF-STORAGE FACILITY THAT WAS BROUGHT UP BY TREASURER DESCHAINE.

THAT IS A SEPARATE ISSUE THAT WE BOTH HEARD, HEARD ABOUT AND WEIGHED IN ON.

I THINK OUR THOUGHTS WERE, YOU KNOW, RELATIVELY CLEAR ON THAT.

TO ME, IT HAS NO BEARING ON THIS APPLICATION OR THIS DECISION AHEAD OF US.

I UNDERSTAND THE, YOU KNOW, THE JOINT OWNERSHIP OF THAT PROPERTY AND HOW THAT MAY, YOU KNOW, MAY SIT IN THE MIND, HOWEVER CERTAINLY, I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE CAN EVALUATE THIS APPLICATION, THESE APPLICATIONS ON THEIR MERITS, SEPARATE FROM ANY OTHER USE OF THAT LAND THAT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED IN THE PAST.

CERTAINLY. THAT'S WHERE I'M COMING FROM.

TRUSTEE. WILSON, WHEN I LOOK AT THIS WE LOOK TO THE EXPERTISE OF INDIVIDUALS WHO WERE INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS AHEAD OF US.

SO THOSE WERE OUR STAFF MEMBERS AND OUR REVIEW COMMITTEE AND WHEN WE SET A DEADLINE FOR APPLICATIONS TO BE COMPLETED AND SUBMITTED, THAT WAS A HARD DEADLINE AND AT THAT POINT, WE ACCEPTED WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO US FROM BOTH COMPANIES.

[01:35:09]

SO IT DIDN'T EVEN HAVE THAT SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION, DIDN'T EVEN HAVE A REVIEW BY THE BODY THAT WAS DETERMINED TO BE OUR AVENUE TO GIVE US THE RECOMMENDATIONS AS TO WHAT WOULD HAPPEN.

WE STILL ARE LACKING INFORMATION FROM AMSTERDAM TO THIS DAY AND THAT IS WHERE I DRAW THE LINE.

IF WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A TRUE COMPETITIVE PROCESS, THEN EVERYBODY HAS TO FOLLOW THE RULES AND DV, D AND VK FOLLOWED THE RULES AND PRESENTED A SOLID PROPOSAL TO US THAT WE COULD JUDGE AND THE REVIEW COMMITTEE DEEMED IT THE BUSINESS THAT THEY WOULD RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD.

SO I AM GOING WITH THE ADVICE OF OUR REVIEW COMMITTEE, AND I WILL BE SUPPORTING DV AND K, D AND VK.

THANK YOU. OTHER BOARD MEMBERS.

TRUSTEE TREZISE.

YEAH, I AGREE WITH MUCH OF WHAT TRUSTEE WILSON SAID.

I THINK ONE OF THE KEY ELEMENTS IN THE APPLICATIONS WAS THE STATED COMMITMENT TO THE COMMUNITY BY D AND K, AS FAR AS FURTHER DEVELOPMENT AND SUPPORT OF EMPLOYEES, WHATEVER AND THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE IS THERE CALL ME A CYNIC, BUT WE'VE BEEN PROMISED THINGS BY DEVELOPERS BEFORE THAT DIDN'T QUITE COME TO PASS.

SO I'M WONDERING IF THERE IS ANY WAY THAT WE CAN ENFORCE THOSE COMMITMENTS BASED ON THEIR APPLICATION.

YES. THE PERMIT IS ISSUED ON THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED.

SO TO THE EXTENT THE OPERATION DOESN'T COMPLY WITH THE APPLICATION, THAT'S GROUNDS FOR A CITATION OR A WARNING LETTER.

NOW THAT'S CLEAREST IN AN OPERATIONAL CONTEXT, RIGHT.

IF THEY SAID THEY'RE GOING TO INSTALL ODOR AND THEY DIDN'T, OR THEY SAID THEY WERE GOING TO CHANGE THIS ABOUT THE PARKING AND THEY DIDN'T.

WHEN YOU GET INTO THE GRAYER PIECES OF THE USING COMMUNITY CONTRACTORS WHERE THERE'S A LOT OF FACTORS ABOUT THEIR AVAILABILITY, WHETHER YOU CAN GET THE RIGHT PEOPLE OR HOW THEIR STAFFING ENDS UP WORKING OUT, IF THEY HIRE AS MANY AS THEY THOUGHT THEY NEEDED OR THEY NEED LESS STAFFING, YOU KNOW, THAT GETS GRAYER IN TERMS OF AN ENFORCEMENT PIECE.

BUT IT IS PART OF THEIR APPLICATION AND THESE PERMITS ARE RENEWED AS WELL.

THEY'RE ONLY ANNUAL PERMITS.

THIS ISN'T ISSUED IN YOUR AND YOU'RE READY TO GO.

SO EVEN IF THERE ISN'T AN ENFORCEMENT PIECE FROM AN ACTUAL CITATION PERSPECTIVE, IF THERE'S CONCERNS ABOUT COMMITMENT AND FOLLOWING THROUGH ON COMMITMENT, THAT IS SOMETHING THE BOARD CAN REVIEW ON THE ANNUAL BASIS AND IF THERE'S A DEMONSTRATED FAILURE TO DO WHAT YOU SAID YOU WERE GOING TO DO.

THAT POTENTIALLY CREATES GROUNDS TO NOT RENEW A PERMIT.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

BECAUSE MUCH OF WHAT THEY PROMISED IS NOT A STRUCTURE.

IT'S GOING TO SUPPORT THE COMMUNITY.

WE'RE GOING TO CERTAIN AMOUNT OF DONATIONS OR FINANCIAL HELP IN THE COMMUNITY, WHICH IS NOT SUBJECT TO CITATION, AS FAR AS I CAN TELL, BECAUSE IT'S NOT AN ORDINANCE ISSUE.

IT'S JUST A COMMITMENT THEY'RE MAKING TO US AND IF WE HAVE, EVEN IF IT'S WE HAD A YEAR TO REVIEW IT AND IF THEY DIDN'T COME THROUGH, THEN WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENT DECISION. I THINK THAT'S ENOUGH ENFORCEMENT AND TO HOLD THEM TO WHAT THEY PROMISED, OR AT LEAST A REASONABLE FACSIMILE OF THAT. BUT THAT WAS CLEARLY DIFFERENT IN THEIR APPLICATION THAN THE OTHER ONE, AND WAS SUBSTANTIAL IN MY VIEWING THAT FAVORABLY.

SO I WOULD SUPPORT THEM ALSO, AS WELL AS THE COMMITTEE THAT REVIEWED IT IN THE FIRST PLACE.

OTHER BOARD MEMBERS CLERK GUTHRIE.

THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR HENDRICKSON.

IF THEY DON'T FOLLOW THROUGH ON COMMITMENTS, HOW STRONG IS THAT FOR THE BOARD TO SAY WE'RE NOT GOING TO RENEW IT?

[01:40:04]

I MEAN, WHAT'S THE SUITABILITY AND THE LEGALITY AND ALL THAT KIND OF THING? I'LL START BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE TWO CATEGORIES OF THINGS HERE.

I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THINGS RELATED TO THE PHYSICAL NATURE, ODOR, TRASH, LAYOUT, SIGN, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

THOSE ARE EASY SITE PLAN RELATED ISSUES.

WE'LL BE ABLE TO HANDLE THOSE VERY SIMPLY UNDER OUR CURRENT STRUCTURE.

THE MORE BIGGER PICTURE THINGS THAT TRUSTEE MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, STAFF IS GOING TO HAVE TO ESTABLISH AN AUDITING PROCEDURE FOR ALL OF THE LICENSEES IN THE UPCOMING MONTHS HERE AS WE BEGIN TO MOVE FORWARD ON THESE, FOR US TO BE ABLE TO REPORT BACK TO YOU ON AN ANNUAL BASIS DURING RENEWAL SEASON AND AT THAT POINT, I WOULD TURN IT OVER TO ATTORNEY KUSCHEL AS TO HOW WE WOULD ADDRESS VIOLATIONS UNDER THE THE SORT OF NONPHYSICAL ITEMS DOES IT FALL UNDER [INAUDIBLE] THAT KIND OF THING? YES.

IT'S ALL GOING TO FALL UNDER [INAUDIBLE].

WE HAVEN'T SEEN IN THE STATE AN A CONTESTED REVOCATION OF A LOCAL PERMIT.

SO POTENTIALLY NEW-ISH TERRITORY.

BUT AGAIN, AS WE'VE DONE BEFORE, WE LOOK BACK AT THE ALCOHOL CONTEXT AND THE LIQUOR LICENSING SCHEME EVEN IF THIS PERMIT IS CONSIDERED A PROPERTY INTEREST, WHICH THE CRA DOESN'T SEEM TO THINK SO.

WE DON'T THINK SO.

BUT EVEN IF IT WERE CONSIDERED A PROPERTY INTEREST, THE REQUIREMENT THEN OF THE TOWNSHIP IS TO HAVE A HEARING HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD, ALLOW ALLOW THE PARTY TO COME AND EXPLAIN, YOU KNOW, WHY THIS OR THAT HAPPENED OR DIDN'T HAPPEN.

AND THEN THE BOARD WOULD THEN MAKE A DECISION.

SO YES, IT'S ENFORCEABLE AND THE PROCESS IS LEGITIMATE THAT IF THEY MADE A COMMITMENT ON THEIR APPLICATION, WE APPROVE THE ISSUANCE OF THE PERMIT BASED ON THOSE COMMITMENTS AND THEN THEY'RE NOT FOLLOWED THROUGH.

THEN IT CREATES A LEGITIMATE BASIS TO THEN NOT RENEW THAT PERMIT, AND YOU USE THAT HEARING AND REVIEW PROCESS TO BOTH, YOU KNOW, HAVE THE DISCUSSION, POTENTIALLY PUT THEM ON NOTICE OF FIRST YEAR, HAVE A PROBATIONARY PERIOD, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE A NEXT YEAR.

SO IF THAT COMES UP THEN WE CAN WORK THROUGH ALL THOSE, YOU KNOW, POTENTIAL ISSUES OF PROCESS.

YOU KNOW, WHAT THEY'RE SAYING VERSUS HOW LARGE THE COMMITMENT IS, ETC..

BUT AND WHO IS THE ENFORCEABLE UPON WHEN THERE'S SEVERAL ENTITIES INVOLVED? IS IT THE NAME ON THE APPLICATION, LIKE WHERE DOES THAT GO TO WHEN YOU HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE AND IT WOULD BE THE NAME ON THE APPLICATION. FUNCTIONALLY THAT'S THE ENTITY HOLDING THE PERMIT THAT'S ALLOWED TO THEN OPERATE IN THAT SPACE.

SO BY NOT RENEWING THE PERMIT, THEY WOULD NO LONGER BE ABLE TO OPERATE IN THAT SPACE AND THEN IF THEY CONTINUE TO OPERATE, THEN YOU'D HAVE A BIG PROBLEM. BUT SO IF THERE WERE CODE VIOLATIONS, YOU'RE SENT.

I WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE CONNECTION IS.

AND THE FOLLOW UP.

I WAS JUST GOING TO ADD ON ENTITIES.

THERE'S GOING TO BE A TWO PARTER HERE IF IT'S A PHYSICAL CODE RELATED ISSUE, BECAUSE WE'RE ALSO GOING TO ADDRESS THE PROPERTY OWNER AS WELL.

THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT GO STRAIGHT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AND IF WE.

YOU NEED TO GET THE SENATE INVOLVED.

WE DO. IN THIS CASE, WE WILL.

BUT IF IT WAS TALL GRASS, RIGHT.

THE FIRST THING WE DO IS REACH OUT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AND SO FROM A CODE PERSPECTIVE, FROM A PHYSICAL PERSPECTIVE, WE'RE GOING TO TACKLE IT BOTH WAYS.

WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS BOTH THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THE LICENSE HOLDER IN THE END.

OKAY AND WHAT IF THE BOARD DOESN'T LIKE EITHER APPLICATIONS.

WHAT HAPPENS? THE BOARD IS NOT REQUIRED TO ISSUE A PERMIT.

SO IF THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT NEITHER APPLICANT IS WELL QUALIFIED TO OPERATE IN THE TOWNSHIP, THEN IT'S NOT REQUIRED TO ISSUE A PERMIT.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

CLERK GUTHRIE, OTHER BOARD MEMBERS.

IT'S TRUSTEE MCCURTIS.

I JUST WANTED TO SAY JUST REAL QUICKLY THAT WHEN TO ME, WHEN YOU ARE NOT TURNING IN YOUR MATERIALS ON TIME TO BE REVIEWED, THAT'S ALMOST A REFLECTION OF HOW, JUST FOR ME, HOW THAT COMPANY WOULD IT MAKES ME WONDER HOW THEY WOULD RUN THEIR ESTABLISHMENT AND THAT'S QUESTIONABLE.

[01:45:02]

AND BECAUSE AMSTERDAM DID NOT DO THAT, ESPECIALLY TO GET IT BEFORE, YOU KNOW, OUR REVIEW COMMITTEE, REVIEW BOARD. THAT GIVES ME PAUSE.

THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO SAY.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? I'LL SIMPLY ADD THAT YOU KNOW, I WAS LEFT WITH A LOT OF QUESTIONS FOR MYSELF IN REVIEWING THESE TWO APPLICATIONS AFTER OUR LAST MEETING AND SO I THANK BOTH THE APPLICANTS AND OUR ATTORNEYS AND STAFF FOR GIVING US A LITTLE TIME TO CHEW ON THESE TWO APPLICATIONS.

AS I'VE THOUGHT ABOUT IT AND GIVEN IT A WHOLE LOT OF CONSIDERATION.

I COME DOWN TO THE FACT THAT DNVK HAS ACROSS THE BOARD, EVEN WITH THE SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL PRESENTED TO US, A BETTER AND MORE COMPLETE APPLICATION THAT MEETS OUR COMPETITIVE REVIEW CRITERIA.

THE FINANCIAL PLAN THAT THEY PROVIDED WAS FAR MORE SOUND THAN THE FINANCIAL PLAN OF AMSTERDAM.

THE SECURITY PLAN, WHICH COMPARED TO THE ALMOST NOTHING THAT WE RECEIVED IN THE INITIAL APPLICATION, BUT EVEN WITH THE UPDATED APPLICATION FROM AMSTERDAM, WAS, I THINK, IN BETTER CONDITION.

THEY HAD A MORE ROBUST COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT PLAN, WHICH I KNOW THAT WE'VE HAS BEEN THE SUBJECT OF SOME DISCUSSION THIS EVENING.

THE ODOR MITIGATION WAS STRONG IN THEIR APPLICATION.

FOR THOSE REASONS, I BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE A MORE SUITABLE APPLICANT FOR OUR TOWNSHIP THAN THE AMSTERDAM APPLICANT.

AND SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE NVK APPLICATION THIS EVENING.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION.

SEEING NONE, IT APPEARS AS THOUGH IT MAY BE TIME FOR A MOTION.

TRUSTEE TREZISE. IMOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION CREATING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF THE RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA LICENSE APPLICATION TO DVNK INC.

FOR THE PROPOSED MARIJUANA RETAILER LOCATION AT 1614 GRAND RIVER AVENUE.

PROPERTY IS ZONED C2 AND IS LOCATED WITHIN MARIJUANA FACILITIES OVERLAY DISTRICT.

DO WE HAVE A SUPPORT? SUPPORT. SUPPORTED BY TRUSTEE MCCURTIS.

I THINK WE CHOSE OUR OWN ADVENTURE CORRECTLY THERE.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS? SEEING NONE, THE MOTION IS TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF THE RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA LICENSE APPLICATION TO DVNK4 K FOUR FOR THE PROPOSED MARIJUANA RETAIL LOCATION AT 1614 GRAND RIVER AVENUE.

PROPERTY IS ZONED C2 COMMERCIAL AND IS LOCATED WITHIN THE MARIJUANA FACILITIES OVERLAY DISTRICT.

I'M SORRY. DVNK SORRY, I HAD TYPO THAT SO MANY TIMES LAST YEAR, AND FOR THAT WE'LL ASSUME THAT'S WHAT TRUSTEE TREZISE MEANT AND TRUSTEE MCCURTIS SUPPORTED.

VERY GOOD. EXACTLY WHAT I MEANT.

WE SEE NODS IN AFFIRMATIVE FOR BOTH OF THOSE, FOR THE RECORD.

SEEING THAT CLERK GUTHRIE, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? MOTION CARRIES SIX ONE.

OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH TO BOTH APPLICANTS.

WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND FOR COMING OUT THIS EVENING AND WE WILL LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING YOU AT THE NEXT STEP OF THIS PROCESS.

NEXT UP ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM 12 B, ACCEPTANCE OF THE TOWNSHIP OF THE 2023 TOWNSHIP AUDIT FINDINGS AND WE HAVE BEFORE US INTERIM

[12.B. Acceptance of 2023 Township Audit Findings]

YES. SO HAPPY TO DISCUSS THE AUDIT FURTHER.

FINANCE DIRECTOR IS HERE THIS EVENING, BUT WE ARE EXTREMELY PLEASED WITH THE WAY THE AUDIT TURNED OUT.

IN FACT DIRECTOR JANI AND I ALREADY ARE HAVE DIRECTOR MASSEY HELPING US WORK THROUGH THE INVENTORY QUESTION.

THAT WAS A COMMENT FROM ALI BARNES AT YOU KNOW,.

SO WE ARE GOING TO MAKE PROGRESS ON THE MANAGEMENT COMMENTS AND TRY TO GET THOSE DOWN TO ZERO NEXT YEAR IF WE CAN.

SO BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND AGAIN, DIRECTOR ANNIE IS HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AS WELL.

BOARD MEMBERS, ANY QUESTIONS ON THE AUDIT OR OUR STAFF AND TEAM.

[01:50:05]

THANK YOU. I WAS CURIOUS ABOUT ONE OF THE COMMENTS FROM THE AUDITOR WITH REGARD TO FOREGOING RECORDING LESSEE FINANCES. I WILL ABSOLUTELY TURN OVER THE TECHNICAL DISCUSSIONS TO MY EX [INAUDIBLE] THOUGHT YOU WOULD.

ALTHOUGH I THINK I HAVE NOTES ABOUT THAT IN MY RIGHT THROUGH YOU HAD THE SAME QUESTION.

PROBABLY. I GUESS I DON'T LIE OR THE PRONOUNCEMENTS THAT CAME OUT LAST YEAR FROM THE GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARD REQUIRES CAPITAL CAPITALIZATION OF CERTAIN LEASES.

LAST YEAR, IT WAS BELOW THE TRIVIAL AMOUNTS THAT WAS USUALLY CONSIDER IT.

THIS YEAR, OUR LEASES WERE SLIGHTLY ABOVE TRIVIAL.

SO THEY HAD INCLUDED IN THE LETTER, BUT IT WASN'T MATERIAL.

SO RATHER THAN A [INAUDIBLE] FORWARD AND CREATE ADDITIONAL PROCEDURES, WE DECIDED TO JUST PASSED ON MAKING IT RECORDING IT BECAUSE IT MATERIAL DIDN'T IMPACT OUR HEART AT ALL.

IT JUST SEEMS KIND OF STRANGE THAT THEY POINTED OUT IF IT'S ABOVE TRIVIAL, SO IT'LL BE IN THE LETTER, BUT IT WAS A RECOMMENDATION OF THE AUDITORS THAT WE ALSO PASS ON IT, AND MOST COMMUNITIES WILL ALSO DO THAT.

SO THE MATERIAL AMOUNT, IF IT'S A MATERIAL THAT COULD IMPACT YOUR AUDIT OPINION BECAUSE IT WAS JUST SLIGHTLY ABOVE TRIVIAL, WE JUST DECIDED TO PASS ON IT TO PASS ON MAKING ADDITIONAL PROCEDURES.

WHY WOULD YOU LEAVE IT OUT? WELL, IT DOES REQUIRE SOME ADDITIONAL WORK THROUGHOUT THE YEAR IN TERMS OF LIKE MONITORING LEASES AND THE WAY YOU RECORD THEM.

THERE'S SOME ADDITIONAL WORK THROUGHOUT THE YEAR WHEN YOU DO THAT AND THERE'S A RECOMMENDATION TO AUDITORS THAT WE JUST PASS ON IT AND WE AGREE WITH THAT JUST BASED ON WHAT OTHER COMMUNITIES ARE DOING AND THE FACT THAT IT WAS A VERY SMALL AMOUNT.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME.

TRUSTEE WILSON, I JUST WANTED TO COMMENT THAT GIVEN YOUR SHORT TENURE WITH US DIRECTOR IONE, I'M REALLY PLEASED.

I KNOW HOW MUCH WORK GOES IN TO THIS AUDIT.

AND I ECHO DIRECTOR SCHMITT COMMENTS THAT WE ARE VERY GRATEFUL THAT YOU DID SUCH A WONDERFUL JOB WITH US.

THANK YOU. I'M HAPPY TO BE HERE.

GREAT. OTHER BOARD MEMBERS, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I'LL ADD MY THANKS TO DIRECTOR IONE AND YOUR WHOLE TEAM FOR WORKING TO PUT THIS TOGETHER, AS WELL AS ALL OF OUR FORMER MEMBERS OF THE STAFF WHO CONTRIBUTED TO ENSURING THAT WE HAVE A TOWNSHIP THAT IS THEIR FINANCIAL HOUSE, WELL, IN ORDER.

SO THANK YOU.

THANK YOU TO MR. SCHMITT AND EVERYONE WHO CAME BEFORE FOR ENSURING THAT WE HAVE OURSELVES A CLEAN BILL OF FINANCIAL HEALTH.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

WITH THAT SAID, WE WILL NEED A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE AUDIT.

WELL, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT MOTION THIS EVENING.

TREASURER DESCHAINE. I MOVE TO APPROVE THE 2023 AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS IN THE 2023 SINGLE AUDIT AS PRESENTED BY YEO & YEO.

SUPPORT. MOVED BY TREASURER DESCHAINE SUPPORTED BY TRUSTEE WILSON, AND ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS TOPIC.

SEEING NONE, I DON'T BELIEVE THIS REQUIRES A ROLL CALL VOTE, SO WE'LL JUST GO AHEAD AND DO IT BY VOICE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES.

ALL RIGHT. NEXT UP IS AGENDA ITEM 12 C THE TOWNSHIP LEGAL SERVICES CONTRACT AND BACK BEFORE US AGAIN IS INTERIM TOWNSHIP MANAGER.

[12.C. Township Legal Services Contract]

IT'S YOUR JUNE 4TH MEETING.

WE HAD AN INITIAL CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS AND WE SETTLED ON TWO YEARS FAHEY SCHULTZ BURZYCH RHODES.

IS HAPPY TO EXTEND FOR TWO YEAR.

AND SO THAT IS THE CONTRACT THAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU THIS EVENING.

SLIGHT CHANGES IN THE RATE STRUCTURE.

BUT OVERALL WE'RE STILL GETTING EXCELLENT RETURN ON OUR INVESTMENT HERE.

OKAY. ANY DISCUSSION FROM THE BOARD? CLERK GUTHRIE, I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR HENDRICKSON, CAN YOU OR THE ATTORNEYS GIVE AN EXAMPLE OF FEES THAT GO BEYOND THE MONTHLY RATE THAT WE READ IN THE CONTRACT? YOU KNOW, SO OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT HAVE POPPED UP RECENTLY ARE TO WORK ON.

THE LIQUOR LICENSING WAS SORT OF BILLED SEPARATELY AND SO THE WAY THEY DO IT, I'M GOING TO DUMB THIS DOWN A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE I'M LEARNING IT AS WELL.

BUT THERE'S A CERTAIN AMOUNT THAT'S WRITTEN DOWN BASED ON THE CONTRACT, AND THEN IT'S BILLED ON AN HOURLY BASIS FOR THESE ITEMS THAT ARE OUTSIDE OF SPECIFIC LANES, LIKE THERE'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND CLERK'S OFFICE AND MANAGER'S OFFICE AND SO THESE UNIQUE TOPICS THAT COME UP, THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT ARE TYPICALLY BILLED MORE ON AN HOURLY BASIS ABOVE AND BEYOND THE RETAINER.

BUT THERE'S A MARKED DOWN THROUGHOUT EACH OF THOSE BASED ON THE RETAINER FOR HOW MUCH IS LIKE X DOLLARS IS AUTOMATICALLY FOR THAT DEPARTMENT THAT MONTH KIND OF THING.

SO IT'S NOT A BASIC QUESTION.

IT'S WHEN THAT BASIC, BASIC QUESTION TURNS INTO ADDITIONAL WORK, LIKE THAT'S THE CEMETERY ORDINANCE OR LIQUOR LICENSING.

[01:55:02]

YEAH OKAY.

ALL RIGHT AND THEN DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE TOTAL COST OF SERVICES WAS IN 2023? I DON'T BUT I'M HAPPY TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT NUMBER FOR YOU.

OKAY AND THEN IN THE DOCUMENT IT TALKS ABOUT A IN THE CONTRACT.

IT TALKS ABOUT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST DOCUMENT AND HAVING ONE SIGNED.

IF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST IS PRESENTED, HAVE WE HAD THAT.

HAVE WE EVER HAD A CONFLICT OF INTEREST AGREEMENT SIGNED WITH FAHEY SCHULTZ BEFORE? I'M NOT AWARE OF ONE. THERE WAS A PREVIOUS CLAUSE IN THE CONTRACT GIVEN THAT THE PREVIOUS MANAGER'S SON IN LAW, SON IN LAW WORKED THERE AND THAT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED IN THE CONTRACT.

BUT I DO NOT BELIEVE THERE WAS A FORMAL WASN'T A SEPARATE DOCUMENT, IT WAS JUST A CLAUSE WITHIN IT.

CORRECT? OKAY. I'M NOT AWARE OF AN ACTUAL CONFLICT DOCUMENT WE'VE EVER HAD.

UNLESS YOU CAN THINK OF ONE.

CLERK GUTHRIE. I'M ALSO NOT AWARE OF A CONFLICT DOCUMENT WHAT MAY ARISE OR WHAT ARISES IN SOME OTHER COMMUNITIES.

FOR EXAMPLE, WE MIGHT REPRESENT A TOWNSHIP AND THAT TOWNSHIP MIGHT BE PART OF A FIRE AUTHORITY.

THEN THE FIRE AUTHORITY WANTS US TO REPRESENT THEM AS WELL.

SO WE WOULD SAY, WELL, CAN WE FAIRLY REPRESENT THE INDIVIDUAL INTERESTS OF THAT AUTHORITY AND THAT INDIVIDUAL TOWNSHIP AND IF SO, THEN WE CAN PROCEED THROUGH A AND GIVE A CONFLICT WAIVER FOR THAT HERE IN MERIDIAN.

THE OTHER CONTEXT THAT COMES UP A LOT IS IN THE DRAIN WORLD BECAUSE WE HAVE ONE OF THE MOST ROBUST WELL, WE HAVE THE MOST ROBUST DRAIN, WORK UNDER THE DRAIN CODE.

AND WE REPRESENT THE MAJORITY OF DRAIN COMMISSIONERS IN THE STATE.

SO IF THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER IS DOING A PROJECT THAT'S IMPACTING A TOWNSHIP THAT CAN SOMETIMES LEAD TO A JUST CONFLICT CONCERNS, JUST LETTING FOLKS KNOW THAT WE'RE IN DIFFERENT PIECES OF THE PIE OR PROJECTS, SO TO SPEAK, WE DO NOT REPRESENT THE INGHAM COUNTY DRAIN COMMISSIONER.

SO THAT IS ONE PLACE WHERE YOU MAY HAVE SEEN CONFLICT LETTERS AND JUST GIVEN THE REPRESENTATION, IT HASN'T ARISEN AND SO I'M NOT AWARE OF IT EITHER.

SO IF SOMETHING DOES ARISE, WHAT YOU WOULD ALERT THE MANAGER AND THEN THE MANAGER WOULD ALERT THE BOARD AND THEN SOMETHING WOULD BE DONE ABOUT IT IF NEEDED. CORRECT? OKAY. THANK YOU.

THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I HAVE A SMALL TECHNICAL QUESTION.

IN THE JUNE 4TH PACKET THAT YOU PROVIDED, YOU GAVE US THE CONTRACT THAT WAS SIGNED ON MAY OF 2021 AND IT APPEARS AS THOUGH THAT CONTRACT WAS SIGNED BY FORMER SUPERVISOR STYKA.

THE CONTRACT PROVIDED IN OUR PACKET THIS EVENING IS ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED TO BY OUR TOWNSHIP MANAGER.

I'M CURIOUS THE RATIONALE FOR CHANGING THAT.

YOU KNOW, IT'S INTERESTING. I THINK I WENT BACK THROUGH THIS AND THEY BOUNCED BACK AND FORTH DEPENDING ON WHICH EXTENSION IT WAS AND SO WE'RE HAPPY TO SWITCH IT BACK TO THE SUPERVISOR. NOT A PROBLEM.

I THINK THEY PROBABLY JUST PULLED THE TEMPLATE FROM THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT.

OKAY. SO I THINK THIS IS THE THIRD EXTENSION, I BELIEVE AND I THINK TWO ONE HAS BEEN SUPERVISOR AND ONE HAS BEEN MANAGER EACH TIME.

SO WE'LL MAKE THAT CHANGE AND HAVE THE SUPERVISOR SIGN IT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.

SEEING NONE WE'LL NEED A MOTION.

TRUSTEE WILSON.

MOVE TO APPROVE A TWO YEAR EXTENSION OF THE LEGAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH FAHEY SCHULTZ BURZYCH RHODES UNTIL JULY 1ST, 2026. SUPPORT SUPPORTED BY CLERK GUTHRIE.

MOVED BY TRUSTEE WILSON.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? [INAUDIBLE].

MOTION CARRIES SEVEN ZERO.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

NEXT UP ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM 12 D DRAFT LIQUOR LIKE.

[12.D. Draft Liquor License Ordinance-Introduction]

IT'S ACTUALLY D ON THE AGENDA.

DRAFT LIQUOR LICENSE ORDINANCE FOR INTRODUCTION 2020 4-05 AND BEFORE US THIS EVENING WE HAVE NEIGHBORHOODS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GETTING TONGUE TIED TONIGHT.

NEIGHBORHOOD AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR AMBER CLARK.

GOOD EVENING.

OH, WE ARE BRINGING IT BACK.

SO AT OUR MAY, OUR LAST MAY 21ST MEETING OF THIS YEAR, THE BOARD GAVE US AN EXTENSION ON THE MORATORIUM FOR LIQUOR LICENSE.

[02:00:02]

THANK YOU TO MISTER KUSCHEL HERE.

SO TONIGHT WE ARE INTRODUCING THE LIQUOR LICENSE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED.

THERE WERE SOME CHANGES, AND AT THE LAST BOARD MEETING, YOU ASKED FOR A RESOLUTION FOR FEE STRUCTURES TO SEE THE FEES ASSOCIATED WITH THE LICENSES.

HERE TO ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS WHEN YOU HAVE THEM.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DIRECTOR, CLERK, BOARD MEMBERS, WE HAVE A NICE SHINY NEW ORDINANCE TO REVIEW AS WELL AS A FEE RESOLUTION TO FOLLOW.

THAT WAS DOWN A LITTLE BIT FURTHER.

DO WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR DISCUSSION ON THE NEW ORDINANCE? CLERK GUTHRIE. THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR HENDRICKSON.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY? I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND.

I LOOKED AT THE FEES THE COMPARISONS THAT YOU HAD AND THE HIGH AND THE LOW, AND IT SEEMS LIKE YOU LANDED IN THE MIDDLE.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY IT'S NOT THE HIGHER END RATHER THAN IN THE MIDDLE? I WILL DEFINITELY LET MR KUSCHEL JOIN IN FOR ANY OF THE LEGAL THINGS.

BUT ESSENTIALLY, FEES IN GOVERNMENT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE TIME SPENT IN ORDER TO PROCESS THAT FOR AN ENTITY OR AN INDIVIDUAL. SO AS MUCH AS MY HEART DESIRED TO HAVE A LICENSE FEE THAT WAS CLOSE TO THE MARKET PRICE OF THE LICENSE, BECAUSE I VIEW IT AS AN ASSET IS A THING THAT THE TOWNSHIP OWNS.

IF WE HAD A TOWNSHIP VEHICLE, WE WOULDN'T SELL IT FOR VERY FAR LESS THAN WHAT THE MARKET WOULD TAKE.

BUT IN THIS CASE, THAT'S NOT LEGAL SO.

I'M NOT ALLOWED TO DO THAT.

I AM ONLY REALLY ALLOWED TO ASSOCIATE FEES WITH THE WORK IT TAKES IN ORDER TO PROCESS.

SO WE SAT DOWN WITH COMMUNITY PLANNING POLICE AND FIRE ITSELF AND WENT THROUGH ESSENTIALLY KIND OF LIKE, HOW MUCH TIME DOES IT TAKE INDIVIDUALS TO DO THE WORK TO PROCESS? AND THEN TOOK THE ESSENTIAL LIKE HOURLY RATE AND RATES OF POLICE OFFICERS.

RATES FOR MYSELF CAME UP WITH A MIDDLE COST.

OKAY AND I HAVE SEVERAL QUESTIONS AROUND PROXIMITY.

IT SEEMS LIKE PROXIMITY OF WHERE THE LIQUOR LICENSES ARE IN SEVERAL DIFFERENT AREAS AND BUT NONE OF THEM REALLY SPECIFY DISTANCE AND NONE OF AND THERE'S ONLY ONE AREA WHERE ONE SECTION WHERE IT MENTIONS SCHOOLS.

SO I FELT LIKE THE WORD PROXIMITY WAS LOOSE IN REGARDS TO SOMEONE'S INTERPRETATION OF WHAT PROXIMITY IS, UNLESS I DID NOT SEE IT, A SPECIFIC PROXIMITY TO SCHOOLS AND SO I FELT CONFUSED WITH PROXIMITY BECAUSE IT APPEARED IN SEVERAL DIFFERENT LOCATIONS, AND I FELT LIKE IT COULD HAVE JUST APPEARED IN ONE AREA DEFINING WHAT PROXIMITY IS AND PUTTING ALL OF THAT INTO ONE SECTION AND IN REGARDS TO SCHOOLS, I'M GOING TO USE THIS AS AN EXAMPLE.

THERE'S A LIQUOR STORE NEXT TO THE HIGH SCHOOL.

THE HIGH SCHOOL MOVED OVER THERE.

THE LIQUOR STORE WAS THERE FIRST.

IF THE LIQUOR STORE GOES BELLY UP AND THAT LICENSE IS AVAILABLE, I'D RATHER NOT SEE THE LICENSE BE REISSUED AT THAT STORE THAT'S NEXT TO THE HIGH SCHOOL.

I'D RATHER SEE IT BE ISSUED AWAY FROM A PROXIMITY THAT'S MORE APPROPRIATE WITHIN THE DISTANCE OF A SCHOOL DISTRICT.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S POSSIBLE.

I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING LIKE THAT IN THIS ORDINANCE.

HOW IF THAT CHANGE CAN HAPPEN AT ALL.

SO I THINK STATE LAW REQUIRES A SPECIFIC DISTANCE FROM ANY LICENSED HOLDER FROM A SCHOOL.

I BELIEVE IT'S 500FT, BUT I'M NOT EXACTLY OKAY.

SO IT'S I BELIEVE IT'S 500FT.

SO ANYONE WHO IS GOING TO APPLY FOR A LIQUOR LICENSE IN MERIDIAN, THAT WOULD APPLY TO, NO MATTER WHAT, THE CLASSIFICATION OF LICENSE.

SO IF THE BIG TEN PARTY STORE DID GO AWAY, OR THE PARTY STORE AT THE CORNER OF JOLLY AND HAGADORN DID GO AWAY, AND AN APPLICANT WERE TO COME FORWARD AND SAY THEY WANTED TO PUT AN ESTABLISHMENT HERE, IT'S CLOSER THAN 500FT.

[02:05:01]

CAN THE TOWNSHIP HAVE A GREATER PROXIMITY OR DISTANCE BETWEEN A LIQUOR LICENSE AND THE SCHOOL, OR IS THAT NOT PERMISSIBLE BY LAW? I DON'T KNOW. PRECISELY.

I SUSPECT THE ANSWER IS YES.

IF WE'RE ISSUING A NEW LICENSE.

IN THIS HYPOTHETICAL, THAT'S CONSIDERED THE OWNERSHIP OR THE BUSINESS BEHIND BIG TEN MIGHT CHANGE, BUT THE LOCATION WOULD STAY THE SAME.

SO THERE YOU WOULDN'T HAVE THAT LICENSE EXPIRING AND BECOMING A NEW QUARTER LICENSE.

THAT'S ONE CAVEAT OR SITUATION TO KEEP IN MIND IN THAT HYPOTHETICAL.

SO THE REASON WE DIDN'T USE A SPECIFIC BUFFER.

FOR DISTANCE IS THAT IS BECAUSE WE USE PROXIMITY IN A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT CONTEXTS.

SO WE USE IT FOR THE SCHOOLS, AND THEN WE USE IT WITH OTHER COMPATIBLE USES OR OTHER BUSINESS FACILITIES.

SO I SEE YOUR POINT THAT IT HAS A BIT OF SQUISHINESS TO IT.

BUT THAT ALLOWS DIFFERENT PROXIMITY TO BE EVALUATED IN THOSE DIFFERENT CONTEXTS.

SO HOW CLOSE YOU WANT THEM TO BE TO OTHER COMPATIBLE USES IS DIFFERENT THAN HOW FAR AWAY YOU WANT THEM TO BE FROM SCHOOLS.

WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK AT THAT AND DEVELOP A MORE ROBUST AND RIGID EVALUATION FOR THOSE DISTANCES.

IT WOULD JUST GO BACK AND LOOK AT IT SPECIFICALLY AND PRECISELY BECAUSE TECHNICALLY, THE WAY I READ THIS, IT COULD HAPPEN THAT A LIQUOR LICENSE IS ISSUED ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE HIGH SCHOOL, BECAUSE THAT'S 500FT.

CORRECT. ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE HIGH SCHOOL, 500FT SOUTH.

YEAH. THAT LITTLE STRIP AREA RIGHT THERE.

I MEAN, THAT'S BASICALLY 500FT.

THAT WOULD BE IN A DIFFERENT COMMUNITY.

WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO AS THIS IS HYPOTHETICAL.

WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT'S A 500 FOOT DISTANCE.

CORRECT. IS IT I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT JUST TO IS IT 500FT FROM THE CLOSEST POINT ON THE PROPERTY OWNED BY THAT SCHOOL? I ASSUME CHURCH OR CHURCH? OKAY. SO IF IT'S, YOU KNOW, IF THE PROPERTY EXTENDS TO THE ROAD, FOR EXAMPLE, BUT IT'S MEASURED ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF THE STREET OF THE ADDRESS. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT AND SO YOU JUST SAID OR CHURCH SO IS THE PRACTICE AND I DIDN'T REALLY I DON'T REMEMBER SEEING THAT IN THE ORDINANCE EITHER.

ABOUT CHURCHES.

SO IF YOU TAKE THE OKEMOS CHURCH IN DOWNTOWN OKEMOS, THAT WOULD BE HARD PRESSED, DEPENDING ON HOW THE PROXIMITY LANGUAGE IS.

IF YOU PUT IT IN DETAIL TO BE ABLE TO GIVE A ISSUE A LIQUOR LICENSE THAT CLOSE TO THE CHURCH, IS THAT CORRECT? AM I THINKING OF THAT CORRECTLY? THE REVIEW CRITERIA AT THE BOTTOM OF PAGE SIX DOES ADDRESS THE EFFECT OF THE BUSINESS FACILITY AND IMPACTS UPON RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND CHURCHES AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS.

WHAT PAGE IS THAT IN THE PACKET? DO YOU KNOW THE OVERALL PACKET? 293. THANK YOU.

THIS IS OF THE NEW PACKET, RIGHT? YEAH AND IT'S PAGE SIX OF 13, ITEM 2D ON THAT PAGE.

WELL, I GUESS HISTORY HAS SHOWN US THAT HASN'T BEEN A TOTAL REASON TO DENY SOMEONE.

I MEAN, EVERYONE'S FAVORITE THING TO TALK ABOUT IN THAT AREA IS, OF COURSE, THE TUBA MUSEUM, WHICH SERVED ALCOHOL AND THAT WAS IN THAT DISTRICT, CERTAINLY WITHIN 500FT OF THE CHURCH.

SO IT IS POSSIBLE.

IT'S NOT A, YOU KNOW, DIRECT.

IT DOESN'T, IT'S NOT A, THE SOLE THING THAT CAN KNOCK SOMEONE OFF.

I ACTUALLY BELIEVE THAT THE ENTITY CAN REACH OUT TO THE CHURCH OR SCHOOL AND IF THEY'RE GRANTED PERMISSION THEN THE LICENSE CAN BE ISSUED.

BECAUSE WE HAD THE CONVERSATION IN HASLETT WHEN A POTENTIAL PROPERTY OWNER WANTED TO DO A BAR NEAR RALEIGH ELEMENTARY.

AND SO THE PROCESS THEN IS FOR THEM TO GET A LETTER OF APPROVAL OR SOME SORT OF KIND OF CONDITIONAL YES, FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER BEFORE THEY WOULD COME TO THE TOWNSHIP FOR A REQUEST.

SO THE ONUS IS ON THEM.

YEP. SO IF THE CHURCH OR THE SCHOOL WERE TO SAY YES IN THAT SENSE, THEN THAT WOULD NEGATE THAT WHOLE PROXIMITY.

[02:10:01]

HIGH CALIBER HAS TWO LIQUOR LICENSES.

WE ISSUED ANOTHER ONE TO THE NEW GOLF PLACE, BUT WE HAVE AN EMPTY RESTAURANT.

SO HOW MANY MORE LIQUOR LICENSES SHOULD WE BE GRANTING TO ESSENTIALLY LIKE THE CBL PROPERTY FOR THAT ACREAGE, WITHOUT THINKING ABOUT WHAT KIND OF BUSINESS IS ACTUALLY GOING TO ATTRACT, HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE GOING TO HIRE, AND HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE GOING TO COME TO THAT ESTABLISHMENT THAT'S GOING TO CONTINUE TO BOLSTER THE ECONOMICS.

SO I THINK AND THANK YOU, MATT, FOR LETTING ME GET ON MY SOAPBOX QUITE A FEW TIMES.

BUT THIS ORDINANCE ALLOWS ME TO TAKE KIND OF AN ECONOMIC APPROACH WHEN LOOKING AS A COMPETITIVE REVIEW, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE LICENSES JUST TO KEEP COMING. WE HAVE A LIMITED NUMBER, AND THAT NUMBER IS LIMITED BY OUR POPULATION.

EVEN IF OUR POPULATION WERE TO GO UP AN ADDITIONAL 10,000, THAT'S ONLY FOR NEW LICENSES.

SO IT STILL KEEPS US IN A VERY COMPETITIVE NUMBER OF LICENSES TO ISSUE.

SO I NEEDED A MORE IN DEPTH CRITERIA TO BE ABLE TO COMPARE ONE LICENSE REQUEST TO ANOTHER, AND TO BE ABLE TO SEE THAT I'M NOT MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO ISSUE THE SAME TYPES OF LICENSES IN THE SAME AREAS AND JUST TO FURTHER BOLSTER AMBER'S POINT, I WAS CHATTING WITH BILL FAHEY ABOUT WHAT WE HAD GOING ON IN THE TOWNSHIP, AND HE RECALLED PUTTING TOGETHER THE FIRST ORDINANCE AND INDICATED THAT THERE WERE NO NEW PERMITS AT THAT TIME.

SO THAT WASN'T REALLY A CONSIDERATION OF THE BOARD WHEN IT PUT TOGETHER THAT FIRST FRAMEWORK, WHICH, AGAIN, IS ANOTHER REASON WHY THIS ORDINANCE IS MORE ROBUST, HAS THOSE ADDITIONAL REVIEW CRITERIA AND FACTORS FOR THE TOWNSHIP TO CONSIDER.

OKAY. YEAH.

I STILL FEEL LIKE IN THIS ORDINANCE, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PROXIMITY, I STILL I FEEL LIKE IT'S A LITTLE BIT DISJOINTED AND ALL OVER THE PLACE, AND I FEEL LIKE IT COULD BE CLEARER AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, AND I GET YOU WANT TO SPREAD THE LICENSES OUT EVENLY AROUND THE TOWNSHIP AND IF IT'S IN PROXIMITY OF X, Y, AND Z, THEN THEY POSSIBLY HAVE TO GET PERMISSION FROM SOMEONE TO.

I FEEL LIKE HOW YOU SET IT IS BETTER THAN HOW I READ IT, IF THAT MAKES ANY SENSE.

LIKE IT WAS MUCH MORE UNDERSTANDABLE HOW YOU EXPLAINED IT TO ME TONIGHT THAN THE DIFFERENT AREAS WHERE I KEPT SEEING PROXIMITY IN THE DOCUMENT.

SO I JUST WISH IT WERE MORE IN ONE AREA THAN SPREAD THROUGHOUT AND ME TRYING TO FIGURE OUT PROXIMITY FOR THIS, PROXIMITY FOR THAT. OKAY, NOW ON THIS PAGE IS PROXIMITY FOR THIS THING.

YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? LIKE YOU EXPLAINED IT SO MUCH MORE ELOQUENTLY, I JUST THOUGHT TONIGHT, THANK YOU.

I THINK WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE WE HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL AGREEMENTS TO MAKE.

WE COULD POSSIBLY EVEN MAKE AN ADDITIONAL POLICY.

THAT KIND OF EXPLAINS THE THOUGHT PROCESSES BEHIND THIS IS VERY LEGAL JARGON, AND I'M NO LAWYER, SO THAT'S PROBABLY WHY IT SOUNDED LIKE A NORMAL PERSON SAID, I MEAN, SORRY, A AVERAGE JOE SAID IT.

SORRY. TOTALLY NORMAL.

OTHER BOARD MEMBERS.

WELL, I THINK JUST TO ADD TO THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE PROXIMITY, I THINK THE SECTION THAT YOU WERE REFERRING TO THAT RELATES TO SCHOOLS, I THINK YOU HAVE TO READ THAT SORT OF AS A WHOLE PARAGRAPH.

RIGHT. WHAT THE TOWNSHIP BOARD DETERMINES THAT THE PROPOSED LOCATION IS INAPPROPRIATE BECAUSE OF SEVEN OTHER CRITERIA PROXIMITY TO SCHOOLS BEING ONE OF THEM AND SO, YOU KNOW, MY QUESTION IS, YOU KNOW, THE QUESTION I THINK COMES BEFORE US IS, DO WE TRUST THIS BOARD AND FUTURE BOARDS TO LOOK INDEPENDENTLY AT EACH ONE OF THESE THAT COMES BEFORE US AND MAKE THAT DETERMINATION BASED ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES.

I THINK THE MINUTE YOU DEFINE IT AS A SPECIFIC NUMBER OF FEET FROM X OR A SPECIFIC NUMBER OF, YOU KNOW, DISTANCE FROM OTHER LICENSES, YOU RUN INTO A SITUATION WHERE YOU COULD HAVE THE POSSIBILITY OF HAVING INADVERTENT CONSEQUENCES THAT ARE NOT SITUATIONALLY SPECIFIC.

RIGHT. WHAT IF WE DECIDE THAT WE WANT, YOU KNOW, THE DOWNTOWN ALCHEMIST AREA TO BE A PLACE WHERE, YOU KNOW, SEVERAL MICROBREWERIES OPEN? IT'S A HAVEN FOR BEER LOVERS, YOU KNOW, LIKE GRAND RAPIDS IS IF WE RESTRICT OURSELVES TOO MUCH BY SPECIFICALLY DEFINING IN THE ORDINANCE, WE WILL

[02:15:08]

JUST SPITBALLING. THAT'S NOT A PLAN THAT WE'VE HEARD.

BUT AS A HYPOTHETICAL, IT'S SOMETHING THAT COULD POSSIBLY HAPPEN.

RIGHT AND SO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A DELICATE BALANCE.

I'M SURE ATTORNEY KUSCHEL WOULD TELL YOU BETWEEN DEFINING SOMETHING STRICTLY IN THE ORDINANCE AND LEAVING IT OPEN FOR THE POSSIBILITY OF SITUATIONAL DECISION MAKING BY THE TOWNSHIP BOARD IN THE FUTURE.

SO I'M IN FAVOR OF THE CURRENT LANGUAGE, BECAUSE IT DOES GIVE US THAT FLEXIBILITY TO CONSIDER EACH APPLICATION INDIVIDUALLY AND BASE THAT ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPLICATION IN ITS ENTIRETY.

BUT I APPRECIATE THE COMMENT BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE ARE VERY CAREFUL TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CONSIDER THAT PROXIMITY TO OUR EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS, TO OUR CHURCHES, ETC.

AND I THINK THIS ORDINANCE, AS IT'S DRAFTED TODAY, GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO WELL, KNOWING THE 500FT RULE IS IMPORTANT TO. ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS.

OKAY. YEAH.

I'M SORRY. I BELIEVE THAT THE 500 FOOT FROM SCHOOLS IS STATE LAW.

YES. RIGHT. YEAH AND SO THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN'T CHANGE AND THIS GIVES US THE FLEXIBILITY TO CONSIDER PROXIMITY OF MORE OR LESS FROM OTHER FACILITIES TO DETERMINE WHETHER THAT'S A GOOD FIT FOR PLACEMENT.

IT'S AN EVALUATION SITUATION, NOT AN ELIGIBILITY SITUATION.

SO I THINK THAT'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO TERMS AS THEY'RE USED HERE.

THANK YOU. GOOD POINT.

SO I AM LOOKING AND IT APPEARS AS THOUGH WE DO NOT HAVE A MOTION BEFORE US THIS EVENING.

LOOKS LIKE I UNLESS I MISSED IT SOMEWHERE IN HERE.

YOU DIDN'T. IT'S FOR INTRODUCTION.

I'M SORRY. I THOUGHT I COULD NOT HAVE A MOTION, SO I BELIEVE WE STILL HAVE TO HAVE A MOTION FOR ORDINANCE.

INTRODUCTION. OH THAT'S GENERALLY HOW WE'VE INTRODUCED ORDINANCE CHANGES IN THE PAST.

SO AND I FEAR THAT THIS IS A RELATIVELY TECHNICAL MOTION.

SO IT MAY BE ONE THAT WE MAY WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT HERE AND LET OUR STAFF HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO CRAFT A MOTION THAT WILL ALLOW US, AFFORD US THE ABILITY TO DO THIS RIGHT, SO THAT WE DON'T GET SUED DOWN THE ROAD FOR SOME RIDICULOUS TECHNICALITY.

SO WITH THAT SAID, WE'LL RECESS FOR 5 MINUTES AND WE'LL COME BACK AT 8:27.

WE STAND AT EASE.

[INAUDIBLE]

[02:22:23]

B RING US BACK TO ORDER AT 8:28 AND IT SOUNDS LIKE WE MIGHT HAVE A MOTION TO GO FORWARD WITH I APOLOGIZE.

SO THE MOTION FOR THIS FOR ITEM 12 D IS MOTION TO INTRODUCE ORDINANCE 2024-05 TO REGULATE LIQUOR LICENSES AS PRESENTED FOR FIRST READING AND SUBSEQUENT ADOPTION.

I DON'T SUPPOSE YOU HAVE THAT IN AN EMAIL OR ON PAPER THAT YOU CAN HAND TO SOMEONE.

I DO HAVE IT.

OKAY, PERFECT.

WORST HANDWRITING.

BUT IT'S THE ONES WITH THE [INAUDIBLE].

YEAH, NOT THE WORST AND AS THE CLOSEST IN PROXIMITY TO DIRECTOR CLARK, WE'LL GO TO TRUSTEE TREZISE.

I MOVE TO INTRODUCE ORDINANCE 2024-05 TO REGULATE LIQUOR LICENSES AS PRESENTED FOR THE FIRST READING AND SUBSEQUENT ADOPTION SUPPORT.

MOVE BY TRUSTEE TREZISE SUPPORTED BY TRUSTEE WILSON.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

MOTION CARRIES SEVEN ZERO.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR HARD WORK ON THIS.

[02:25:02]

I COULDN'T WRITE FAST ENOUGH.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU TO TEAM DRAFTING MOTIONS ON THE FLY.

NEXT UP IS AGENDA ITEM 12 E WHITE HILLS LAKES SOUTH.

NUMBER ONE, STREET LIGHTS.

[12.E. Whitehills Lakes South #1 – Streetlight SAD Resolution #3]

WE HAD A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS TOPIC AND WE HAVE BEFORE US A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS DISTRICT.

THIS IS THE ONE WE ARE OKAY WITH MOVING FORWARD BECAUSE WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ANY DISCUSSION FROM THE BOARD SEEING NONE.

DO WE HAVE A MOTION THIS EVENING? IT'S WAY BACK UP.

NOW GO BACK UP.

YES, I'LL. IT'S A PAGE 61 OF THE 12.

RIGHT. YES.

OKAY. MOVE TO APPROVE THE WHITE HILLS LAKE SOUTH.

NUMBER ONE, PUBLIC STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT.

SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. DISTRICT NUMBER 428, RESOLUTION NUMBER THREE, WHICH APPROVES THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, THE ESTIMATE OF COST AND DEFRAYING THE COST BY SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DETERMINES THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AND DIRECTS THE MAKING OF AN ASSESSMENT ROLL.

IT'S BEEN MOVED BY CLERK GUTHRIE.

DOES IT HAVE A SUPPORT? SUPPORT SUPPORTED BY TREASURER DESCHAINE.

ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS MOTION? TRUSTEE. ARE WE SURE THAT'S THE RIGHT? IT IS.

I WAS FOLLOWING ALONG.

OKAY. I'M TRYING TO GET BACK TO THE RIGHT SECTION TO FIGURE OUT WHICH ONE WE'RE OKAY.

YEP. SO THIS IS WHITE HILLS LAKE SOUTH NUMBER ONE.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE THE WHITE HILLS LAKE SOUTH NUMBER ONE, PUBLIC STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT, SPECIAL ASSESSMENT, DISTRICT NUMBER 4 TO 8, RESOLUTION NUMBER THREE, WITH THE REST OF THAT CAME AFTER IT.

WILL CLERK GUTHRIE PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

MOTION CARRIES SEVEN ZERO.

THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK.

NEXT ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM 12 F WHITE HILLS LAKE SUBDIVISION NUMBER SEVEN, STREET LIGHTS.

[12.F. Whitehills Lakes Subdivision #7 – Streetlight SAD Resolution #3]

WE DID HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING THIS EARLIER THIS EVENING ON THIS TOPIC AND RECEIVED SOME PUBLIC COMMENT, WHICH IT SOUNDS LIKE WE MAY WANT TO GO BACK AND ADDRESS THE PRIOR TO BRINGING THIS FORWARD FOR PASSAGE AND SO THERE'S BEEN A SUGGESTION BY OUR STAFF TO INTRODUCE A MOTION TO TABLE AGENDA ITEM 12 F AND BEFORE WE DO SO, WE WILL HAND THINGS BACK TO DEPUTY MANAGER DAN OPSOMMER.

THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR HENDRICKSON AND BOARD MEMBERS.

SO JUST BRIEFLY BEFORE YOU TABLE IT, BECAUSE THAT WILL CEASE ALL DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM.

WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE YOU AWARE OF IS THERE WAS A MISCOMMUNICATION BETWEEN CONSUMERS AND THE DEVELOPER BACK IN THE DAY AS IT RELATES TO THIS STREETLIGHT.

SAD. SO THE PEDESTALS WHERE THE STREETLIGHTS WOULD BE LOCATED ARE IN THE GROUND TODAY.

THE DEVELOPER REQUESTED THAT OF CONSUMERS, DID NOT VERIFY WITH THE TOWNSHIP AS TO WHERE WE WERE WITH THE PROCESS.

HOWEVER, THAT BEING SAID, I WILL TALK TO CONSUMERS AND SEE IF IT WOULDN'T BE POSSIBLE TO RELOCATE THOSE WITHOUT ANY ADDITIONAL COST.

KNOWING THAT THE TOWNSHIP DID NOT GET ANY NOTICE FROM CONSUMERS.

SO I WILL ATTEMPT TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION AND THEN THE OTHER THING THAT I WOULD JUST MAKE YOU AWARE OF I WILL I DID TAKE A PICTURE OF THE GREEN CARD IN QUESTION FROM THE ONE MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WHO COMMENTED WITH QUESTIONS, AND I WILL GIVE HIM A PHONE CALL TOMORROW OR AN EMAIL AND JUST EXPLAIN GIVE HIM AN EXPLANATION FOR EACH QUESTION.

PREDOMINANTLY, HIS QUESTIONS WERE OVERARCHING FOR ALL STREET LIGHTS, AND THEY'RE ALL FUNDED THROUGH THIS SAME EXACT MECHANISM.

THE FUNDING IS GENERALLY THE SAME AFTER YEAR ONE.

BUT OF COURSE, THE YEAR ONE COSTS, AS WE DISCUSSED AT YOUR PREVIOUS MEETING, ARE HIGHER FOR THIS STREETLIGHT.

SAD, BECAUSE THEY CHOSE PERHAPS, WELL, AMONG THE MOST EXPENSIVE POLES AND FIXTURES.

NOW, THERE WAS A REASON FOR THAT.

I DO BELIEVE THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS WANT THEM TO MIRROR THE STREET LIGHTS ON PINE HOLLOW DRIVE AND THAT'S WHAT THESE TWO STREETLIGHTS DO WITH THAT.

HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE YOU TABLE THIS, AND WE WILL BRING THIS BACK AT YOUR NEXT BOARD MEETING.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR DEPUTY MANAGER OPSOMMER? SEEING NONE, THEN THE SUGGESTION IS TO MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE THIS AGENDA ITEM 12 F DO WE HAVE A MOTION? I MOVE THE PROPOSED MOTION FOR 12F THE WHITE HILLS

[02:30:02]

UNTIL WE CAN BRING IT OFF THE TABLE AT THE NEXT MEETING.

SUPPORT. SUPPORTED BY CLERK GUTHRIE.

ANY DISCUSSION? MAYBE A NON-DEBATABLE MOTION, ACTUALLY, NOW THAT I THINK ABOUT IT.

SO THERE WILL BE NO DISCUSSION ON THIS MOTION.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF LAYING ITEM 12 F ON THE TABLE UNTIL OUR NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING, PLEASE SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES.

ALL RIGHT.

ARE ROBERT'S RULES WAS WORTH SOMETHING? YES. ALL RIGHT.

AGENDA ITEM. WE DON'T HAVE TO TALK ABOUT THIS AT ALL.

AGENDA ITEM 13 A IS THE 2024 COMMUNITY SURVEY DRAFT APPROVAL AND FOR THIS WE HAVE ONCE AGAIN BEFORE

[13.A. Community Survey]

DIRECTOR CLARKE, WE'RE ALL THESE TALL PEOPLE WHO I WORK WITH.

NOT ME.

WELL, THEY CERTAINLY WANT A PODIUM THAT GOES UP AND DOWN.

I SAID, HOW MUCH IS THAT GOING TO BE USED? A LOT. THAT FUNCTIONALITY WE SHOULD HAVE BOUGHT.

WE COULD HAVE GOT A STOOL A LOT CHEAPER.

YEAH, FOR ME.

YEAH, FOR SURE.

I DEFINITELY NEED IT.

OKAY, SO FOR SOME OF YOU, THIS MIGHT BE YOUR FIRST TIME GOING THROUGH A COMMUNITY SURVEY.

MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP ISSUES A COMMUNITY SURVEY EVERY THREE YEARS.

THE LAST ONE WE ISSUED WAS 2021, AND I WAS PROJECT LEAD ON THAT.

HAPPY TO BRING THIS BACK.

2024. SOMETIMES THE BOARD ELECTS TO CHOOSE A CONSULTING FIRM THAT'S GOING TO DO THE COMMUNITY SURVEY FOR US THIS YEAR.

THE BOARD HAS ELECTED TO CONTINUE WITH COBALT.

COBALT COMMUNITY RESEARCHED IT 2021 SURVEY AND I THINK THE BOARD REALLY LIKED THAT.

THE SELECTED SAMPLE GROUP WERE NOT THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO COULD PARTICIPATE IN THE SURVEY.

SOME RESIDENTS TALKED ABOUT BEING A RESIDENT, LIVING IN THE COMMUNITY, AND NOT EVER BEING ABLE TO PUT THEIR VOICE TO THEIR COMMENTS ABOUT THINGS THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE.

SO COBALT ALLOWS FOR THE SURVEY TO BE TAKEN THROUGH THE SAMPLE SIZE OF PEOPLE WHO ARE DIRECTLY BY DIRECT MAIL, BUT THEN ALSO THEY CREATE AN ONLINE LINK. SO ANYBODY IN THE COMMUNITY THAT'S INTERESTED IN GIVING THEIR COMMENTS CAN, CAN STILL GIVE THEIR COMMENTS.

WE DO HAVE MR. SAINT AMOUR ON OUR ZOOM TODAY.

SO HE'S HERE WITH US, BUT VIRTUAL TO ANSWER ANY OF YOUR QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SCHEDULE.

ALL THE THINGS THAT COBALT IS GOING TO DO, THE QUANTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION, THE REPORT COMING BACK TO THE COMMUNITY, ALL OF THOSE THINGS.

BUT IN GENERAL, THE DRAFTED ATTACHED SURVEY WILL BE SENT FIRST.

THERE IS A LETTER THAT'S SENT OUT TO THE COMMUNITY.

SO THE THE SAMPLED RESIDENTS, THE LIST COMES FROM A REGISTERED VOTER LIST.

HAPPY TO KNOW WITH THE GREAT WORK FROM THE CLERK'S OFFICE THAT 90% OF MERIDIAN RESIDENTS ARE INCLUDED ON THIS VOTER REGISTRATION LIST.

SO WE'VE GOT A PRETTY GOOD SAMPLE OF ACTUAL REGISTERED VOTERS AND THE LETTER GOES OUT TO THE HOUSEHOLD OCCUPANT AND SAYS PLEASE NOTE, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A NOTIFICATION.

YOU'RE GOING TO RECEIVE A SURVEY.

WE'D LIKE YOU TO TAKE IT AND THEN A FEW WEEKS LATER, THE ACTUAL LETTER, ANOTHER LETTER WITH THE ACTUAL SURVEY IS SUBMITTED TO THE RESIDENT.

THE RESIDENT TAKES IT PAID POSTAGE, SLIPS IT BACK INTO THE MAIL, AND IT'S SENT OVER TO COBALT.

THEY OPEN THEM, QUANTIFY ALL OF THOSE MAILED IN VERSIONS AT THE SAME TIME.

THE SURVEY WILL BE LIVE, SO ANY ONLINE WILL BE TAKEN AT THAT POINT.

IN THE END, THEY WILL REVIEW ALL OF THE SURVEY RESPONSES AND GIVE US METRICS THAT ARE THERE.

SO MANY CROSS TABS OF METRICS, RIGHT? AGE GROUPS, MEN, WOMEN, CHILDREN, HOUSEHOLD SIZE, INCOME, EDUCATION, ALL OF THOSE PARAMETERS.

SO TODAY, TYPICALLY THE BOARD LIKES TO DIG DOWN DEEP INTO THE QUESTIONS.

STAFF HAS PRESENTED QUESTIONS ONE THROUGH 12.

WELL 12 AND THEN WE HAVE 24, 25 AND 26.

BUT QUESTIONS ONE THROUGH 12 FOR ALL THE DEPARTMENTS ARE ESSENTIALLY COVERED AND THE LAST THREE QUESTIONS ARE TOWNSHIP BOARD QUESTIONS SPECIFICALLY AND THEN WE HAVE DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONS TO KIND OF HELP US THROUGH THOSE CROSS TABS.

SO I WILL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW FOR ANYONE? TRUSTEE WILSON. SO WHERE ARE QUESTIONS 13 THROUGH 23? YEAH. WAS IT JUST A MISTYPE ON THE FINAL THREE QUESTIONS? THESE WERE THE FINAL THREE QUESTIONS.

THOSE. SO THESE THREE QUESTIONS ARE THE BOARD THREE QUESTIONS.

RIGHT. I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY'RE LABELED 24-25 I THINK WE DID SOME SHIFTING WITH THIS BOARD PACKET ON THE SURVEY.

THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS PRESENTED, I THINK, FROM THE ADVISORY BOARD COMMITTEE THAT WE THOUGHT WERE BOARD QUESTIONS.

SO WE CHANGED THOSE OUT.

[02:35:01]

THAT WAS CONFUSING UNDER 12.

I WONDER WHAT COBALT'S WORK IS.

WHAT ACTION DID THEY TAKE? DO THEY CLEAN UP THE SURVEY? DO THEY MAKE ANY ADJUSTMENTS TO IT? DO THEY FIX TYPOS? DO THEY DO THAT SORT OF WORK? YES. THEY WILL DO A FINAL REVIEW TO MAKE SURE ANY.

MISSPELLED WORDS ARE CHECKED.

BUT AS FAR AS THE ACTUAL QUESTION STRUCTURE, IF WE HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT, OR WE WANT THE QUESTION TO BE CLARIFIED, WE SHOULD LET THEM KNOW.

SO I PAY PARTICULAR ATTENTION TO THE THREE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SENIOR CENTER IMMEDIATELY ABOVE THAT.

QUESTION 12.

THE SECOND BOX DOWN ON THE LEFT, SMALL BUSINESSES, EXPANSION OF MEDIUM BUSINESSES.

YOU'RE MISSING AN AND IN THERE.

OKAY. OR SLASH OR SLASH OR SOMETHING.

OKAY, AND THEN QUESTION NINE.

WHAT USE WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE IN THE REIMAGINED MERIDIAN MALL SPACE? IT HAS NO RELEVANCE TO QUESTION EIGHT.

IT HAS NO RELEVANCE TO QUESTION TEN AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE REIMAGINED MERIDIAN MALL SPACE IS AND WHY WE'RE ASKING A QUESTION ABOUT THAT.

SO WE'RE ASKING A QUESTION.

YEAH. WE'RE LOOKING FOR COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE OTHER MIXED USES AS THE MALL.

SO WE WANT TO DEFINE IT AS COMMERCIAL BECAUSE THE MALL IS ALREADY COMMERCIAL, AND WE THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE TOO BROAD.

WE WANTED TO KIND OF BREAK IT DOWN INTO WHAT OTHER POSSIBLE USES OUTSIDE OF COMMERCIAL WOULD BE SOMETHING THE COMMUNITY WAS LOOKING FORWARD TO, BUT WE HAVE NO CONTROL OVER THAT PROPERTY, SO WHY WOULD WE ASK A QUESTION ABOUT THAT? IT'S IN OUR CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY DISTRICT AND SO WE WILL END UP BEING PARTNERS HOPEFULLY WITH THE MALL ON REDEVELOPMENT.

SO THEN YOU HAVE TO REFRAME THAT QUESTION BECAUSE IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

OKAY. WHAT USE WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE IN THE REIMAGINED? IT NEEDS A CLAUSE BEFORE IT THAT EXPLAINS WHAT THIS QUESTION IS ABOUT.

OKAY, BECAUSE IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE THERE.

THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS.

THANK YOU.

YEAH, I THINK YOU'RE MEETING US.

WELL, THIS IS DISCUSSION.

WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY APPROVING THIS TONIGHT.

SO AT THE VERY LEAST I AGREE THAT QUESTION WAS CONFUSING.

VERY I THINK WHAT WOULD YOU WHAT THE WAY I FRAMED IT, BECAUSE I SORT OF, I THINK I UNDERSTOOD WHERE IT WAS GOING.

I THINK YOU MIGHT BETTER SAY.

WHAT USE WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE IN A REIMAGINING OF THE MERIDIAN MALL SPACE? THAT AT LEAST MAKES IT GRAMMATICALLY SOUND AND PUTS US IN A PLACE WHERE IT'S LESS CONFUSING BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IT POSTULATES THE POSSIBILITY OF A REIMAGINING OF THE SPACE AS OPPOSED TO THERE BEING A PLAN AND THEREFORE, WHAT IS THE PLAN? WE'LL GO BACK TO THE YEAH, WE'LL GO BACK TO THAT AND CLEAN THAT UP.

SURE. SIMILARLY, THE LIST OF ITEMS AFTER RESEARCH PARK.

PRETTY BROAD AND IT MAY BE THAT SHOULD BE BROKEN DOWN IN DIFFERENT WAYS.

YEAH. BECAUSE A BREWERY AND A LABORATORY I COULD SEE THAT THOSE ARE I UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HAVING OFFICE SPACE AND HAVING A BREWERY.

I MEAN, IT MAY BE ALLOWED FROM A ZONING STANDPOINT, IT DOESN'T MAKE AS MUCH SENSE TO CLUMP THEM TOGETHER AND AN ANSWER TO A YEAH, .

IT'S NOT THAT THEY DON'T BELONG UNDER RESEARCH PARK.

IT'S JUST THAT DOESN'T COME ACROSS VERY SENSIBLY IN THAT GROUP.

OKAY AND WHILE YOU'RE ADDING BUTTONS, WHY NOT PUT RESIDENTIAL IN THERE.

SOME MALLS HAVE BEEN REPURPOSED FOR RESIDENTIAL.

SO WE LEFT RESIDENTIAL OUT BECAUSE WE FIGURED THAT WAS A GIVEN.

I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT WOULD BE GIVEN.

I DON'T THINK, I THINK SINCE IT'S TRADITIONALLY BEEN COMMERCIAL SPACE, I DON'T KNOW THAT ANYONE OUTSIDE OF THIS ROOM WHO DOESN'T DEAL WITH ZONING ON A DAILY BASIS MIGHT MAKE THAT LEAP. IT MIGHT BE WORTH BRINGING THAT IN SINCE RESIDENTIAL.

YEAH, I STRUGGLED WITH BREWERY AND LAB TWO.

THE BEST I COULD THINK IS THAT THEY BOTH INVOLVED GLASSWARE.

TREASURER DESCHAINE. I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY BECAUSE PARTICULARLY AS IT PERTAINS TO THE COMMUNITY CENTER.

BUT I THINK WE'RE MISSING AN IMPORTANT QUESTION THERE.

DO YOU 24, 25 AND 26 ARE GOOD QUESTIONS? I THINK WE COULD COMBINE.

I THINK 25 IS SORT OF DUPLICATIVE.

[02:40:03]

I THINK WE NEED TO ADD A NEW QUESTION, THOUGH, WHICH IS WOULD YOU SUPPORT A SMALL TAX INCREASE TO PAY FOR A NEW COMMUNITY CENTER? WE DID THIS BEFORE WHEN WE PUT THE ROAD QUESTION BEFORE VOTERS AND IT'S EASY TO FOR PEOPLE TO SAY, YES, I WANT THIS.

BUT ANOTHER QUESTION ENTIRELY TO SAY, YES, I WANT THIS, AND I'M WILLING TO TO PAY SOMETHING FOR IT BECAUSE THERE IS A COST FOR IT.

THERE WILL BE A COST FOR A NEW COMMUNITY SENIOR CENTER.

WE DON'T KNOW THAT AMOUNT YET, BUT WE KNOW THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE FREE.

AND WE KNOW THAT WE'VE GOT $5 MILLION NOW AND IT'S LIKELY TO NEED MANY TIMES THAT TO BUILD THIS AND WE ALSO HAVE OPERATIONAL COSTS.

THIS IS NOT THIS IS GOING TO COST US A FAIR AMOUNT TO RUN HEAT, COOL, SECURE AND OPERATE THIS NEW FACILITY AND SO PEOPLE MIGHT LOVE THE CONCEPT, BUT IF THEY'RE NOT WILLING TO PAY FOR IT, WE NEED TO FIND THAT OUT NOW OR AS SOON AS WE CAN BEFORE WE MOVE ANY FORWARD, ANY MORE FORWARD WITH IT. I CAN TELL YOU AT THE COUNTER.

I AM EXPERIENCING A LOT OF TAX FATIGUE BY OUR RESIDENTS.

WE HAD A 5% INCREASE THIS YEAR, 5% LAST YEAR, AND 3.5% THE YEAR BEFORE, SO IT'S 13%, ALMOST $1,000 PER HOUSEHOLD OVER THREE YEARS.

SO BUT THIS IS ALSO A REALLY GREAT IDEA AND I THINK IT COULD BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY.

SO MAYBE THAT TAX FATIGUE ISN'T SO GREAT THAT THEY'RE NOT WILLING TO SUPPORT A COMMUNITY CENTER.

BUT WE DON'T KNOW THAT UNLESS WE ASK THEM THAT QUESTION.

I THINK WE'VE GOT TO ASK THEM THAT QUESTION.

TRUSTEE WILSON. PHIL, YOU AND I DISCUSSED THIS YESTERDAY.

WE REALIZE THAT WE HAVE TO ASSESS INTEREST FIRST.

BECAUSE IF THERE IF OUR THE RESPONSES TO THIS QUESTION TO THESE QUESTIONS ARE NO, WE DON'T WANT THIS KIND OF A PROJECT.

WE ARE NOT INTERESTED IN IT.

THAT'S THE FIRST THING WE HAVE TO ASSESS.

IN DISCUSSION WITH.

AND PHIL, DID YOU TALK WITH OUR CONSULTANTS ABOUT THIS? I DID TALK ABOUT IT. YEAH.

OKAY AND OUR CONSULTANTS HAVE SAID IF YOU PUT IN A QUESTION THAT SAYS, WILL YOU ACCEPT A SMALL MILLAGE, YOU IMMEDIATELY RAISE THE SPECTER OF, OH, THIS COULD COST ME HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS A YEAR AND PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE ANY PERSPECTIVE BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE NUMBER IS.

WE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT KIND OF MILLAGE WE'RE GOING TO ASK FOR, BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT YET ASSESSED WHAT THE COMMUNITY WANTS IN THIS CENTER AND WHAT IT'S GOING TO COST US.

THERE ARE NOT COST ESTIMATES YET.

SO I WHAT OUR CONSULTANT HAS TOLD US IS IF YOU PUT IN A QUESTION ABOUT A SMALL MILLAGE WITH NO EXPLANATION OF WHAT THAT MILLAGE WILL BE, ALL THE ANSWERS HERE WILL BE NO, BECAUSE ALL THEY'LL SEE IS THE TAXATION QUESTION.

SO I STRONGLY DISAGREE WITH YOU, AND I WOULD NOT LIKE TO SEE A QUESTION ABOUT THERE.

THERE WILL BE A SMALL MILLAGE ATTACHED TO THAT.

ARE YOU WILLING TO PAY FOR IT? TRUSTEE I AGREE WITH TRUSTEE WILSON AND FURTHERMORE, TO ASK THE QUESTION WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT YOU'RE GETTING IS ASKING FOR SOMETHING.

DO YOU WANT TO PAY MORE TAXES AND YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET FROM IT? BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE PLANS, WE DON'T HAVE THE PUBLICATIONS OUT THERE.

IF I'M ASKED, DO YOU WANT TO PAY MORE TAXES? I'M GOING TO SAY NO EXACTLY.

IF I'M ASKED, DO I WANT TO SUPPORT THIS DEVELOPMENT AND THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GET AND THIS IS WHAT IT'S GOING TO COST.

THAT'S A DIFFERENT QUESTION ENTIRELY.

SO I DON'T THINK WE'RE TO THE POINT OF BEING ABLE TO ASK IF YOU'RE WILLING TO PAY A SMALL MILLAGE, BECAUSE IT MAY NOT BE WE MAY BE ABLE TO DO IT WITHOUT ANY MILLAGE, DEPENDING ON WHAT THE DESIGN IS.

SO I JUST THINK THAT IS A BAD QUESTION TO ASK.

IN THE ABSENCE OF INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC IN GENERAL AS TO WHAT THEY'RE GETTING FOR THAT POTENTIAL.

TREASURER DESCHAINE. DEBORAH HASN'T SPOKEN YET.

CLERK GUTHRIE THANK YOU.

WELL, I AGREE WITH TREASURER DESCHAINE.

IN 2018, WE DID ASK THE QUESTION WE SPECIFICALLY ASKED IF RESIDENTS WOULD SUPPORT AN INCREASED MILLAGE TO FIX AND MAINTAIN ROADS.

BUT WE ALSO IN THAT SAME VEIN, THE VERY NEXT QUESTION WAS WOULD YOU SUPPORT A DECREASE IN THE LAND PRESERVE MILLAGE AND MAYBE THAT AFFECTED HOW PEOPLE RESPONDED TO A ROAD MILLAGE, KNOWING THAT THERE WAS A DECREASE IN THE LAND PRESERVE MILLAGE?

[02:45:06]

NOT ASKING THE QUESTION IS NOT BEING FORTHRIGHT AND IF WE THINK THERE IS GOING TO BE A SMALL KNOWLEDGE.

IF YOU'RE 90% SURE THERE'S GOING TO BE A SMALL MILLAGE THAT WE COULD BE ASKING RESIDENTS, I THINK WE SHOULD ASK THEM IF THEY'RE WILLING TO PAY A SMALL MILLAGE TOWARDS US, BECAUSE IF BECAUSE IF WE REALLY NEED IT AND THEY DON'T WANT TO PAY FOR IT, ARE WE SPINNING OUR WHEELS? ARE WE WASTING OUR TIME? OR DO WE NEED TO LOOK ELSEWHERE AND KNOWING IF WE KNOW, NOPE, WE'RE NOT GOING TO PAY A MILLAGE, THEN WE KNOW, OKAY, WE HAVE TO FIND THIS MONEY ELSEWHERE. WE ARE NOT GOING TO GET IT FROM RESIDENTS.

SO I THINK IT'S OKAY TO FIND OUT WHETHER THEY'RE WILLING TO PAY FOR A MILLAGE OR WHETHER THEY'RE NOT WILLING, BECAUSE THEN WE AT LEAST KNOW WE GOT TO GET THIS MONEY FROM SOMEWHERE.

TREASURER DESCHAINE I'M SORRY, TRUSTEE MCCURTIS HASN'T GONE YET.

YEAH, I SEE THE LISTENING SESSION THAT WE HAD.

I THINK THERE WERE 2 OR 3 RESIDENTS.

FIRST THING THEY ASKED AFTER TRUSTEE WILSON MADE THE PROPOSAL WAS, HOW ARE WE GOING TO PAY FOR IT, HOW IT'S GOING TO BE PAID FOR.

A COLLEAGUE OF MINE AT WHERE I WORK ASKED ME THE SAME QUESTION LAST WEEK.

YOU KNOW, THEY WANT TO THE TOWNSHIP WANTS TO HAVE A COMMUNITY CENTER.

HOUSING WILL BE PAID FOR. SO I THINK THAT QUESTION IS GOING TO BE ON RESIDENTS MINDS, WHETHER WE ASK THEM OR NOT.

THAT'S WHAT TO NOT ASK IS ALMOST LIKE AVOIDING THE INEVITABLE.

BECAUSE THAT'S THE FIRST THING PEOPLE ARE GOING TO ASK.

HOW ARE WE GOING TO PAY FOR IT? DO WE HAVE TO PAY FOR THROUGH TAXES.

THAT'S THE FIRST THING RESIDENTS THINK ANYWAY.

IS IT GOING TO BE PAID FOR THROUGH TAXES? BECAUSE THAT'S ONE OF THE BIGGEST WAYS YOU GENERATE REVENUE TO PAY FOR A PUBLIC, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC BUILDING, A PUBLIC CENTER OR WHAT HAVE YOU.

SO I THINK THAT IT IS I THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO ASK THE QUESTION, BECAUSE FOR US, IT'S ABOUT BEING TRANSPARENT AND OKAY, LET'S SAY IF THEY YOU KNOW, WE ASKED THE QUESTION, BUT IT TURNS OUT THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A MILITIA IF THAT'S ICING ON THE CAKE.

BUT WE DO HAVE TO, I THINK, HAVE TO ASK THAT QUESTION, BECAUSE THAT'S THE FIRST THING THAT'S IN THE RESIDENTS MIND.

TRUSTEE SUNDLAND.

YES AND I ECHO WHAT MR. MCCURTIS SAID IS THAT TRANSPARENCY, I THINK IS REALLY THE ISSUE AND ONE ELSE, COULD WE ASK THE QUESTION, YOU KNOW, IT'S THREE YEARS FROM NOW THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE ANOTHER SURVEY.

SO, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, TRANSPARENCY, I THINK IS THE ISSUE.

IF WE'RE GOING TO AT ALL THINK ABOUT INCREASING SOME TAXES TO HELP MOVE THIS COMMUNITY CENTER ALONG, I THINK WE NEED TO BE TRANSPARENT.

TREASURER DESCHAINE. WELL, I AGREE WE DON'T LEAVE AN OPEN ENDED QUESTION ABOUT A MIL.

I THINK WE ASKED A SPECIFIC QUESTION.

WE KNOW THAT IT'S GOING TO COST WE'RE GOING TO NEED CAPITAL TO BUILD THIS.

THERE'S A FUNDING GAP THERE.

WE'VE GOT $5 MILLION WE'RE GOING TO NEED MAYBE, WHO KNOWS, 15 MILLION MORE.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE OPERATIONAL COSTS AS WELL.

SO I WOULD SUGGEST THIS QUESTION.

WOULD YOU SUPPORT A ONE MIL INCREASE AVERAGING $105 PER AVERAGE, $105 PER RESIDENTS TO PAY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF THE COMMUNITY CENTER GIVES THEM A VERY PRECISE NUMBER AND THAT NUMBER, THAT ONE MIL WOULD GENERATE ABOUT $2 MILLION A YEAR IN REVENUE.

THAT'S A NUMBER THAT WE COULD THEN WORK WITH IN TERMS OF A PLANNING OF WHAT WE CAN BUILD AND WHAT WE CAN MAINTAIN.

WE'RE NOT SUGGESTING RAISE TAXES.

WE WOULD NOT DO THAT.

WE WOULD PUT THIS BEFORE THE VOTERS, BUT BEFORE WE CAN PUT IT BEFORE THE VOTERS, WE SHOULD KNOW IF THERE IS AT ALL AN APPETITE FOR A ONE MIL INCREASE, BECAUSE IT'S ESSENTIALLY GOING TO BE THAT WE DON'T HAVE EXACT NUMBERS, BUT WE HAVE APPROXIMATE NUMBERS, AND ONE MIL GENERATES $2 MILLION IN A YEAR, WHICH WOULD PROBABLY BE ENOUGH TO BUILD THE FACILITY WE'VE IMAGINED SO FAR AND PAY FOR THE OPERATION OF IT.

SO I WOULDN'T SAY ANY MILLAGE.

I WOULD SAY, HERE'S A SPECIFIC AMOUNT, HERE'S THE AVERAGE AMOUNT PER HOUSEHOLD AND WHAT IT WOULD GO FOR.

I WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT BEFORE, BECAUSE I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO WEIGH IN ON THIS.

[02:50:06]

WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PUBLIC WANTS TO SEE FROM THIS FACILITY.

RIGHT. WE DON'T HAVE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET FROM FEDERAL GRANTS.

WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET FROM COUNTY GRANTS AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GET FROM PHILANTHROPIC EFFORTS.

RIGHT, AND SO.

RIGHT NOW WE HAVE $5 MILLION FROM THE STATE.

THAT'S ABOUT WHAT WE KNOW.

WE'VE GOT SOMEWHERE IN THE BALLPARK OF 150 OR $200,000 LEFT IN ARPA FUNDING THAT WE HAVE DEDICATED, THAT WE HAVEN'T USED WITH OUR CONSULTANTS.

WE HAVE AN APPLICATION THAT WE KNOW HAS BEEN SHORT LISTED WITH CONGRESSWOMAN SLOTKIN THAT IS UP TO $7.5 MILLION.

WE KNOW THAT THERE IS INTEREST IN THE COMMUNITY FROM SOME OF OUR VERY WEALTHY CITIZENS WHO ARE LIKE TO CONTRIBUTE TO A COMMUNITY CENTER AND SO ALL OF THAT, AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE TOTAL PRICE TAG OF THIS SUCH A FACILITY WOULD BE.

WE ALSO KNOW THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL VILLAGES THAT ARE FALLING OFF THAT COULD BE REPURPOSED.

YOU KNOW, SO IT WOULD BE NOT A TAX INCREASE, BUT A TAX NEUTRAL VALUE IF WE WERE TO REALLOCATE THE MILLS THAT WERE IN THOSE FUNDS FOR AN OPERATIONAL AND DEBT MILLAGE FOR THIS PURPOSE.

RIGHT. WE COULD VERY EASILY SEE THE FIRE STATION MILLAGE FALLING OFF IN A YEAR OR TWO.

PERHAPS WE'RE NOT PAYING FOR READY RIDE FOR THAT REASON.

PERHAPS WE'RE MAKING A DEAL FOR THAT AND WE'VE GOT A SENIOR CENTER MILLAGE THAT WE ALREADY HAVE ON THE BOOKS.

THOSE THREE COMBINED, ONCE THEY FALL OFF, COULD VERY WELL COVER OUR OPERATIONAL COSTS.

WE DON'T KNOW. THERE ARE SO MANY UNKNOWNS THAT TO PUT A CONCRETE NUMBER IN FRONT OF PEOPLE IS GOING TO BE HOW THEY WILL JUDGE THIS, AND THEY WILL NOT SEE ANYTHING BEYOND IT, I FEAR.

I MEAN, RIGHT NOW, ONE OF THE BIGGEST EXPENSES IN THE WHAT I'VE SEEN FROM THE PROPOSED PLAN FOR A COMMUNITY AND SENIOR CENTER IS A MASSIVE GYMNASIUM WITH BASKETBALL COURTS AND PICKLEBALL COURTS.

WE BELIEVE THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE A MAJOR DRAW OF THIS FACILITY.

BUT THERE'S A QUESTION ON OUR SURVEY, AND WE MAY FIND FROM OUR RESIDENTS WHEN THEY FILL THAT OUT, THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THEY'RE INTERESTED IN AND TO REMOVE THAT FROM THE PROJECT WOULD DRAMATICALLY DECREASE OUR COSTS DRAMATICALLY.

WE'D BE ABLE TO DO A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PROJECT AND SO I WORRY THAT, YOU KNOW, IF WE THINK IT'S SEVERAL TIMES MORE THAN THE $5 MILLION, THAT VERY WELL MAY BE, BUT IT MAY NOT BE THAT MANY MORE TIMES, AND WE MAY BE ABLE TO COVER IT WITH SOME COMBINATION OF STATE GRANTS, FEDERAL GRANTS, PHILANTHROPIC EFFORTS, CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS, AND REDEDICATION TO MILLAGE.

WE DON'T KNOW YET WHAT THE TOTAL COST IS.

I SAW TRUSTEE WILSON AND TRUSTEE MCCURTIS.

I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO MENTION THAT AT NO TIME AT THE TASK FORCE HAVE WE DISCUSSED A CONCRETE NUMBER OF ONE MILL.

IN FACT, ONE MILL IS NOT IT.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT HAS EVEN BEEN DISCUSSED.

SO PUTTING A HARD NUMBER LIKE THAT IN FRONT OF PEOPLE IS NOT GOING TO HELP US IN ANY WAY.

IF WE CHOOSE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CENTER, I WILL TELL YOU THAT WE AND AT THE TASK FORCE ARE AT THE POINT WHERE WE HAVE A CONCEPTUAL PLAN.

ALL WE HAVE IS A CONCEPTUAL PLAN.

WE DON'T KNOW WHAT PEOPLE WANT IN THAT CONCEPTUAL PLAN.

WE DON'T KNOW IF PEOPLE WANT A COMMUNITY CENTER, ALTHOUGH WE'RE GETTING A LOT OF POSITIVE INPUT OUTSIDE.

NOW IS THE TIME TO ASK THE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN AND IF INDEED OUR RESULTS COME BACK AND THEY SAY PEOPLE WANT THESE THINGS. AS SCOTT WAS DISCUSSING WHAT AMENITIES THEY WANT IN THE FACILITY, WHETHER THEY'LL USE THE FACILITY AND WHETHER THEY WOULD SUPPORT IT, THOSE ARE THE QUESTIONS WE NEED TO ASK AT THIS TIME, IF INDEED IT ENDS UP BEING A PROPOSAL THAT WE OUR SURVEY RESULTS SUPPORT THE FACT THAT THIS COMMUNITY WANTS IT, WANTS A COMMUNITY CENTER THAT DOES HAVE A DEDICATED SENIOR CENTER WITHIN IT.

THEN WE WILL MOVE AHEAD TO GET THE NUMBERS, AND IT WILL BE FULLY TRANSPARENT BECAUSE WE WOULD PUT A QUESTION ON THE BALLOT AND THAT QUESTION WOULD BE HOW BASED ON WHETHER MILLS FALL OFF HERE IS THE FINAL NUMBER.

[02:55:06]

AND SO IT'S THE SECOND OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMUNITY TO TELL US HOW THEY FEEL.

I ALSO FEEL STRONGLY, BASED ON OUR CONSULTANTS RECOMMENDATIONS, THAT WE SHOULD NOT PUT THIS QUESTION ABOUT ATTACKS IN THERE, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE FACTS TO SUPPORT.

IT IN FACT, THEY SAID IT WAS A TERRIBLE IDEA.

SO I'M VERY CONCERNED THAT WE WILL HALT THE PROCESS OF LOOKING INTO ADDING THIS FANTASTIC AMENITY TO OUR COMMUNITY IF WE PUT A TAXATION QUESTION ON THE SURVEY.

TRUSTEE MCCURTIS. YEAH.

SO WHAT? I DON'T WANT TO SHOOT DOWN THE IDEA OF A COMMUNITY CENTER.

I'M GOING TO DIVERT A LITTLE BIT.

I THINK A QUESTION ABOUT FINANCIAL SUPPORT SHOULD BE ASKED.

I AM AGAINST HAVING A HARD NUMBER BECAUSE WITH A HARD NUMBER, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO SAY, WELL, WHERE DID YOU GET THAT FROM? AND, YOU KNOW, OTHER QUESTIONS WILL FOLLOW AND THERE HASN'T BEEN A STUDY OR ANY OF THOSE THINGS THAT'S BEEN YOU KNOW, THAT'S BEEN DONE IN ORDER TO DETERMINE THAT NUMBER.

BUT I DO THINK.

A GENERAL QUESTION OF ARE YOU WILLING TO, YOU KNOW, PAY FOR IT, WHETHER IT'S THROUGH WELL, TAXES IS PROBABLY THE ONLY WAY RESIDENTS COULD DO THAT AND I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION FORMULATED IN MY HEAD RIGHT NOW.

YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD TAKE SOMETHING, BUT I JUST I THINK THE QUESTION SHOULD BE ASKED IF YOU'RE WILLING TO PAY FOR IT, BECAUSE YOU CAN OFFER ME, YOU KNOW, A BRAND NEW HOUSE.

AND I SAY, YES, HOW MUCH YOU'RE GOING TO PAY? OH, I THOUGHT YOU WERE JUST GOING TO GIVE IT TO ME.

SO I THINK THAT WE SHOULD, LIKE I SAID, THE RESIDENTS AT THE LISTENING SESSION, YOU KNOW, LAST WEEK THAT LIKE, I REMEMBER 2 OR 3 PEOPLE ASKING HOW IT WAS GOING TO BE PAID FOR, AND YOU ANSWERED THEIR QUESTION, YOU KNOW, THE WAY THAT YOU DID JUST NOW AND A COLLEAGUE OF MINE WHO LIVES IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP WHERE I WORK, ASKED ME THE SAME THING HOW, YOU KNOW, THEY, YOU KNOW, THE BOARD IS TALKING ABOUT A NEW CENTER. HOW IS IT GOING TO BE PAID FOR? BECAUSE I JUST THINK THAT'S IN THE FOREFRONT OF PEOPLE'S MINDS.

YOU MIGHT NOT HAVE A SPECIFIC RIGHT NOW, BUT I THINK A GENERAL QUESTION JUST TO GET A FEELER ON IF YOU'RE WILLING TO PAY FOR IT.

TREASURER DESCHAINE AND CLERK GUTHRIE, WE'RE UNDER A TIMELINE HERE BECAUSE WE'VE GOT TO COMMIT TO $5 MILLION BY THE END OF NEXT YEAR, SO WE'RE NOT REALLY GOING TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESURVEY OUR RESIDENTS ON THIS ISSUE AND THIS BOARD IS LIKELY TO FACE PRESSURE IN EARLY AUGUST TO PUT THIS ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT, BECAUSE WE ONLY HAVE ONE MEETING IN AUGUST TO DO THAT.

MY FEAR IS WE'RE GOING TO PUT THIS QUESTION BEFORE THE PUBLIC WITHOUT ANY FEEDBACK FROM THE PUBLIC AND IT WILL, LIKE THE MERIDIAN LIBRARY OF 2000 WENT OUT.

IT'LL GET SHOT DOWN, AND WE'LL LOOK REALLY BAD AS A BOARD FOR PUTTING A MILLAGE QUESTION WITHOUT GAUGING BEFORE THE VOTERS, WITHOUT GAUGING WHAT KIND OF SUPPORT THERE IS FOR AN INCREASE TO PAY FOR THIS.

SO WE'LL PUT IT ON THE BALLOT IN EARLY AUGUST AND THEN COME NOVEMBER, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO FIND TAX FATIGUE DOESN'T SUPPORT IT, OR MAYBE IT DOES SUPPORT IT.

BUT I WANT TO KNOW WITH THIS SURVEY QUESTION AND WE'LL GET IMMEDIATE RESULTS FROM THE ONLINE VERSION OF THAT QUESTIONNAIRE.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE OUR FINAL RESULTS BACK FROM THE SURVEY QUESTION.

WE'LL HAVE DAY TO DAY DATA DATA THAT WE COULD ASK THEM FOR.

SO I WANT TO GET AS MUCH DATA AS WE CAN BEFORE WE MAKE A DECISION ABOUT PUTTING THIS ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT, SINCE THE MONEY HAS TO BE COMMITTED IN 20 BY THE FALL OF 2025, WE DON'T HAVE THE TIME.

IT'S TWICE SIX.

IT HAS NO, IT'S 25.

IT WAS BROUGHT UP, NUMBERED, EVEN ENCUMBERED BY 2025.

WE NEED A PLAN.

THE VOTERS AREN'T GOING TO SUPPORT A COMMUNITY CENTER THEN.

THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO ENCUMBER IT FOR A SENIOR CENTER.

WE DON'T WANT TO SQUEEZE ALL THOSE DECISIONS INTO A FEW MONTHS IN 2025.

THE COMMUNITY MIGHT SUPPORT THIS AND SUPPORT A SMALL TAX INCREASE TO PAY FOR IT.

THIS IS THE TIME TO FIND OUT IF THERE ISN'T SUPPORT.

THIS IS THE TIME TO REFOCUS ON SPENDING THE $5 MILLION AS WISELY AS WE CAN.

THIS GIVES US A CHANCE TO GET US THE FEEDBACK FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT GOING TO SURVEY THEM AGAIN, QUITE HONESTLY, EXCEPT FOR THE VOTERS.

IF WE PUT IT FOR THE VOTERS AND THEY SHOOT IT DOWN, THIS BOARD DOES NOT LOOK LIKE IT'S IN SYNC WITH ITS COMMUNITY, THAT WE'RE PUTTING A PROPOSAL THAT THEY'RE GOING TO VOTE DOWN.

[03:00:01]

I AGREE 100% WITH TRUSTEE MCCURTIS WE NEED A QUESTION ON THERE.

WE CAN'T HIDE FROM THIS.

WE CAN'T RUN FROM IT.

WE NEED TO ASK A GENERAL QUESTION IF NEEDED.

ARE YOU WILLING TO PAY A SMALL MILLAGE TO OFFSET THE COST OF A SENIOR CENTER, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

SOME KIND OF GENERAL, YOU KNOW, QUESTION? BECAUSE WE NEED TO KNOW.

WE NEED TO KNOW WHERE WE STAND WITH THIS.

SO I 100% AGREE THAT WE I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO DEVELOP A QUESTION TONIGHT, BUT I THINK IF WE GIVE STAFF DIRECTION TO COME UP WITH A GENERAL QUESTION WE CAN DECIDE ON AT THE NEXT MEETING.

BUT I THINK WE DEFINITELY NEED TO ASK THE QUESTION AND WE NEED TO BE TRANSPARENT.

I AGREE 100% WITH THE TRUSTEE SUNDLAND THAT WE NEED TO BE TRANSPARENT.

WE'VE BEEN HIT HARD WITH HOW THE COURT HAS NOT BEEN TRANSPARENT AND WE NEED TO BE TRANSPARENT.

THANK YOU. CLERK GUTHRIE TRUSTEE TREZISE I GUESS MY QUESTION IS WHAT DO YOU DO IF THE SURVEY COMES BACK? NO. AND AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, THE ONLINE SURVEY RESPONSES, THEY'RE ANECDOTAL, RIGHT? THEY ARE NOT SCIENTIFICALLY SELECTED.

THEY AREN'T REPRESENTATIVE OF THE COMMUNITY.

SO THERE'S JUST PEOPLE WHO WANT TO REGISTER THEIR, OPINIONS.

SO I DON'T PUT A LOT OF WEIGHT IN THE DAY TO DAY RESPONSES ONLINE AS MUCH AS I DO TO THE SELECTED INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT.

BUT I GUESS THE QUESTION IS IF THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE BUYING AND I'M NOT EVEN TALKING THE AMOUNT IF THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GETTING OUT OF THIS, HOW ARE THEY GOING TO VOTE RATIONALLY? AND IF WE SAY IF YOU VOTE NO, WE'RE NOT WILLING TO PAY ANY MILLAGE ON THIS ARE WE GOING TO JUST THROW OUR HANDS UP AND SAY IT'S OUT OF THE QUESTION? OR DO WE DEVELOP SOMETHING AND TRY TO SELL IT TO THEM? I THINK IT'S TOO EARLY TO BE TALKING ABOUT.

NEBULOUS OR INEXACT NUMBERS OR JUST SORT OF FEEL TYPE QUESTIONS ABOUT WILL YOU SUPPORT THIS WITHOUT HAVING A STRONG PLAN AS TO WHAT THEY'RE SUPPORTING? AND AGAIN, AS TRUSTEE WILSON SAID, IT WILL ALL HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE PUBLIC.

ONCE THE PLAN IS DESIGNED, THE FINANCES ARE CALCULATED.

WE FIGURE OUT WHERE OUR SOURCES OF MONEY ARE THAT DON'T INCREASE TAXES, AND THEN WE CAN GIVE THEM A FULL PLAN.

I DON'T WANT TO KEEP IT A SECRET, BUT WE'RE NOT THERE TO KNOW WHAT THE NUMBER IS, OR EVEN CLOSE TO KNOWING WHAT THE NUMBER IS.

THANK YOU, TRUSTEE CLERK GUTHRIE AND IN RESPONSE, THANK YOU.

WE WILL KNOW IF WE CAN TAKE IT BACK TO THE PUBLIC OR IF WE HAVE TO TAKE IT ELSEWHERE AND I WANT, I THINK THE BOARD SHOULD KNOW THAT.

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? TAKE IT ELSEWHERE.

SO I CAN'T SAY THAT PHILANTHROPIC THANK YOU EFFORTS MORE GRANTS OTHER PLACES.

BUT I THINK IT'S INCUMBENT UPON THIS BOARD I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

WE'RE NOT REALLY SURE WHAT'S GOING TO BE IN IT, BUT WE'RE NOT STUPID PEOPLE.

WE ALL KNOW WHAT A COMMUNITY SENIOR CENTER IS.

WE CAN ENVISION A COMMUNITY CENTER AS A GATHERING SPACE WHERE YOU DO STUFF, AND THERE'S GOING TO BE STUFF THERE AND THERE'S A QUESTION IN HERE THAT HAS IDEAS OF WHAT THAT STUFF IS GOING TO BE.

SAME WITH THE SENIOR CENTER.

SO WE KNOW SENIOR CENTER DOES THIS, COMMUNITY CENTER DOES THIS.

WE PRETTY MUCH HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT IT IS.

MAYBE WE DON'T CONCRETELY KNOW IF IT'S GOING TO BE A PICKLEBALL COURT OR A BASKETBALL COURT, OR HOW BIG A STAGE IS GOING TO BE, BUT WE PRETTY MUCH HAVE A GENERIC IDEA OF WHAT A COMMUNITY CENTER IS.

THE PUBLIC PRETTY MUCH KNOWS THAT WE DON'T HAVE 100% OF THE FUNDS TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN, AND THEY PRETTY MUCH KNOW THAT WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO ASK THEM.

SO WE SHOULD PUT IT IN THE SURVEY.

LIKE TRUSTEE SUNDLAND SAID, WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SURVEY THEM AGAIN AND ASK THEM THIS QUESTION.

TREASURER DESCHAINE I THINK THAT WE QUESTION 24, WE ASK THEM, WOULD YOU WOULD THE TOWNSHIP BENEFIT FROM A MULTI-GENERATIONAL COMMUNITY CENTER? AND WHERE IT WOULD GO? QUESTION 26 SHOWS THE FEATURES OF IT.

LET'S GET EIGHT OF THEM THERE.

RECREATIONAL FACILITIES, LOW IMPACT WORKOUT, LARGE AUDITORIUM, COMMUNITY MEETING SPACE.

DEDICATED SENIOR AREA, DEDICATED YOUTH SPACE.

WARMING KITCHEN, MULTI-PURPOSE SPACE.

SO WE GIVE THEM VERY SPECIFIC IDEA WHAT THIS CENTER WOULD BE.

WE'D ALL BUT GIVE THEM THE GRAPHIC AND THE GRAPHICS WERE PASSING OUT AT OUR LISTENING SESSIONS.

SO BY ELIMINATING QUESTION 25 AND THEN I'M OPEN TO OTHER QUESTIONS THAT WE JUST ASK, WOULD YOU SUPPORT A SMALL TAX INCREASE

[03:05:08]

YOU KNOW, OUR CURRENT MILLAGE AFTER THE HOMESTEAD IS ABOUT 60 MILLS.

OKAY. SO ONE MILL IS A SMALL INCREASE COMPARED TO THE 60 THAT OUR RESIDENTS ARE ALREADY PAYING.

IT WOULD BE A SMALL INCREASE OR THREE QUARTERS OF A MILL OR A HALF A MILL OR A MILL AND A HALF, WHATEVER IT HAPPENS TO BE, IT IS HONESTLY DESCRIBED AS A SMALL MILLAGE INCREASE.

I THINK WE SHOULD ASK THAT QUESTION WITH THE SURVEY, AND IF NOT, OUR NEXT SURVEY WILL BE TO PUT IT ON THE BALLOT AND MY FEAR IS WE'RE WALKING INTO AN UNKNOWN ANSWER THERE AND WE CAN CLOBBER IT OVER THE HEAD BY PEOPLE WHO ARE REALLY EXPERIENCING TAX FATIGUE RIGHT NOW.

OR MAYBE IT'S SUCH A GREAT IDEA THAT THEY'RE WILLING TO PAY A LITTLE MORE FOR IT.

WE DON'T KNOW IT. THIS SURVEY QUESTION WOULD GIVE US REALLY GOOD DATA BEFORE WE COMMIT IT TO THE BALLOT.

OKAY SO IF I'M UNDERSTANDING WHERE IT SOUNDS LIKE THE TENOR OF THE BOARD IS, IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S A SLIM MAJORITY IN FAVOR OF PUTTING THIS QUESTION ON THE BALLOT, WHICH AGAIN ON THE SURVEY.

PARDON ME. THANK YOU.

DON'T JUMP OUT HERE ON THE BEHRENDS.

IT'S MY DAY JOB. I'M SORRY.

I DISAGREE WITH IT, AND I THINK IT'S TOTALLY IRRESPONSIBLE TO PUT A NUMBER, A NUMERICAL VALUE TO IT WHEN WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE COST WILL BE, AND I WITHDREW THAT.

SO BE THAT AS IT MAY, IF WE ARE GOING TO INSTRUCT OUR STAFF OR ASK OUR STAFF TO CRAFT A QUESTION REGARDING THE FINANCIALS OF THIS.

PROJECT. I WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND THAT WE INCLUDE SEVERAL CAVEATS IN THAT QUESTION.

THAT WILL BETTER INFORM THE PUBLIC ABOUT THE NATURE OF HOW WE ARE PLANNING TO FINANCE THIS PROJECT.

SO SOMETHING THAT I'M JUST SPITBALLING, SO PLEASE FORGIVE MY POOR WORDSMITHING, BUT SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE WILL BE SOME INCREASED COST TO THE TOWNSHIP TO BOTH CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A COMMUNITY AND SENIOR CENTER, AND ALSO UNDERSTANDING THAT THE TOWNSHIP WILL SEEK TO DEFRAY THE COST TO OUR TOWN, TO OUR RESIDENTS THROUGH STATE GRANTS, FEDERAL GRANTS, PHILANTHROPIC EFFORTS, AND THE REPURPOSING OF EXISTING MILLAGE FUNDS.

AFTER ALL OF THAT, WOULD YOU SUPPORT A SMALL INCREASE IN TAXES TO COVER ANY REMAINING? COSTS, IF I MAY, YOU CAN EVEN SAY, AFTER ALL THAT, WOULD YOU SUPPORT A POSSIBLE, BECAUSE IT MIGHT NOT, I MEAN, WE IT JUST GIVES US.

I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK OUT OF TURN.

NO, NO. YOU'RE FINE. IT JUST GIVES I THINK GIVES US AS A BOARD AN IDEA OF WHERE WHAT PEOPLE ARE THINKING AND WHERE THEY ARE AND I THINK THAT'S A I SUPPORT THAT COMPROMISE.

SAME. I THINK IT'S YOUR QUESTION.

SO I'M VERY USED TO THIS LAST ROUND.

YEAH. I'LL ACTUALLY GO AND LISTEN TO THE BOARD MEETING TO GET YOUR EXACT WORD FOR WORD ONCE YOU.

I MEAN, IF YOU'RE GOING TO WANT TO FIND A WAY TO DO IT AGAIN.

OH, GOSH. YOU'RE ASKING A LOT NOW.

I COULD PROBABLY BE BENEFICIAL.

MY CONCERN IS GOING TO BE A PARAGRAPH AND NOT A QUESTION AND THE LONGER THE QUESTION IS, THE LESS LIKELY THEY ARE TO ANSWER OR TO GET GOOD DATA.

AGREED AND I THINK AT THIS POINT IT'D PROBABLY BE BENEFICIAL FOR US TO.

WE'VE GOT THE TENOR OF THE BOARD.

WE HAVE THE RECORDING ROUGH LANGUAGE FROM TREASURER DESCHAINE, ROUGH LANGUAGE FROM SUPERVISOR HENDRICKSON.

THE OTHER CONVERSATIONS HAVE SPRINKLED IN, AND I THINK AT THIS POINT, DIRECTOR CLARK CAN WORK WITH OUR SURVEY TEAM TO CRAFT SOMETHING WITHIN THAT BANDWIDTH TO BRING BACK FOR FINALIZATION AT THE NEXT MEETING.

YEAH. OKAY. FOR I ALSO, I GUESS, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTION THAT WERE DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT TOPIC OF THAT QUESTION? I DON'T MIND, BY THE WAY, GETTING RID OF QUESTION 25 IF TO MAKE ROOM FOR IT.

IS THE BOARD OKAY? EVERYONE IS OKAY TO MOVE 25.

I DON'T NECESSARILY QUESTION.

OH, YOU THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT ONE? I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S LIKE A LIMIT.

SO THIS IS NOT A VERY LONG SURVEY.

OUR OTHER ONE WAS SO LIKE IT COULD STAY IF THAT'S IF YOU WANTED IT REMOVED BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T LIKE IT AS FAR AS CONTENT OR THE QUESTION ITSELF, DEFINITELY.

BUT IF YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT SPACE, I THINK IT'S I THINK IT'S ACCEPTABLE TO ADD.

SO IT WOULD BE 15, 16 QUESTION.

YES. THE 16 IS UNDER 20 IS PERFECTLY FINE.

[03:10:04]

THEN WE'LL KEEP IT KEEP IT, KEEPING IT.

THEN WE'LL KEEP 25.

ALL RIGHT. AND THEN ANYTHING THAT WE DO WITH FINANCES I WOULD LIKE TO BE AFTER AT THE END, RIGHT AFTER THE WHAT DO YOU WANT TO SEE IN THIS THING SO THAT THE MONEY DOESN'T COLOR WHAT PEOPLE ARE AND THAT'S THE ADVICE OF OUR CONSULTANTS TO EXPLAIN TO THEM THE CONCEPT AND THEN YOU CAN TALK ABOUT THE MONEY.IF YOU JUST LEAVE WITH MONEY, THEY'RE GOING TO SAY NO. BUT IF YOU EXPLAIN THE CONCEPT AND THEN INTRODUCE THE COST TO IT, THAT IS WHAT THE CONSULTANTS RECOMMENDED OUR CONSULTANTS RECOMMEND.

WELL, HANG ON PLEASE, ONE AT A TIME AND THEY ALSO RECOMMENDED TO DO IT IN A SEPARATE SURVEY.

WE DON'T HAVE TIME FOR A SEPARATE SURVEY.

THAT'S THE PROBLEM. WE HAVE TO ASK THESE IN THE SAME SURVEY.

THANK YOU, TRUSTEE WILSON.

I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS SAID TODAY.

YOU TALKED TO THE CONSULTANTS TODAY.

YEAH AND WHAT WAS THE CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS INTRODUCED THE CONCEPT AND THEN YOU INTRODUCED THE COST IN SEPARATE SURVEYS IF POSSIBLE.

WE DON'T HAVE THAT LUXURY.

SO HE SAID THAT WE SHOULD INTRODUCE THE COST.

WELL, I ASKED HIM ABOUT INTRODUCING THE COST.

HE SAID YOU SHOULD DISCUSS THE CONCEPT FIRST, THEN DISCUSS THE COST.

HE TALKED ABOUT THE ORDER OF IT.

DISCUSS THE CONCEPT, THEN DISCUSS THE COST AND HE WAS REFERRING TO THE SAME, AS FAR AS I KNOW.

SURVEY I THAT IS NOT THE MESSAGE THAT I HEARD, BUT.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

COBALT DOES PROVIDE THE COMMUNITY WITH A SECONDARY SURVEY.

I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT YOUR TIMELINE TO TRY TO SEE IF IT COULD BE USEFUL.

IT KIND OF SEEMS LIKE THE SECONDARY SURVEY WOULD COME AFTER THE NOVEMBER ELECTION AND IF THAT IS NOT USEFUL TO YOU, THEN IT WOULDN'T BE.

BUT THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASK ANOTHER QUESTION.

IF I'M BEING HONEST, I DON'T.

I PERSONALLY DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS QUESTION WILL HELP US ON THIS SURVEY EITHER, BECAUSE, AS TRUSTEE TREZISE POINTED OUT, THE BEST WE COULD DO IS UNOFFICIAL, UNSCIENTIFIC ONLINE SURVEY RESULTS WHICH, IF YOU'VE EVER SPENT ANY TIME IN THE COMMENTS SECTION ON A NEWS ARTICLE OR ON SOCIAL MEDIA, YOU WILL KNOW IT IS.

NOT VALUABLE DATA AND SO AGAIN, I OPPOSE THIS AS A CONCEPT.

HOWEVER, IF WE'RE GOING TO DO IT, LET'S AT LEAST DO IT IN A WAY THAT REFLECTS THE EFFORT THAT THE TOWNSHIP WILL PUT IN TO DEFRAY THE COST OF THIS TO OUR RESIDENTS.

SURE. OKAY, I DID HAVE A FOLLOW UP QUESTION ON THIS TOPIC ON THE METHODOLOGY, BECAUSE WE SKIPPED RIGHT PAST THE METHODOLOGY AND WENT RIGHT TO THE MEAT.

OKAY. SO IF I AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE METHODOLOGY FOR THE SCIENTIFIC SURVEY RESULTS IS THEY TAKE THE VOTER LIST, THEY SELECT A CHOSEN 400 OR WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS OUT OF THAT LIST, AND THEY MAIL THEM A LETTER AND THAT LETTER SAYS A FUTURE LETTER WILL COME WITH A SURVEY.

AND THEN SOMETIME DOWN THE ROAD, THEY MAIL THEM A SECOND LETTER WITH A SURVEY INCLUDED IN THERE ON PAPER, WHICH THAT PERSON MUST THEN FILL OUT, CLOSE STAMP AND RETURN TO COBALT.

NOT US.

CORRECT. THEY DON'T HAVE TO STAMP.

IT'S PREPAID.

OKAY, WELL THAT'S GOOD BECAUSE THAT'S ONE OF MY CONCERNS IS THAT PEOPLE OF A CERTAIN GENERATION, THEY DON'T KNOW HOW TO SEND A LETTER.

RIGHT AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S HUMOROUS A LITTLE BIT, BUT IT'S TRUE.

I WORK IN AN OFFICE THAT PRIMARILY HAD BEEN RECEIVING THINGS LIKE MAIL.

I CAN TELL YOU PEOPLE SCREW THAT UP ALL THE TIME.

YES AND SO THERE IS A METHOD THAT I UNDERSTAND IS AVAILABLE FOR PEOPLE TO, DO THIS ONLINE.

IS THERE A WAY FOR COBALT TO PROVIDE THE SAME SERVICE AS A LINK OR A QR CODE WHERE THEY COULD HAVE A UNIQUE IDENTIFIER? THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WAS DONE IN THE CENSUS, AS I RECALL, EVEN OR MAYBE THERE WERE OTHER SURVEYS OR ACS SURVEYS THAT WE GET SENT OUT FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

THERE'S A WAY FOR PEOPLE TO DO A SECURE ONLINE AND UNIQUE SURVEY SUCH THAT, AND WE GET THE RESULTS MUCH QUICKER THAT WAY THAN WAITING FOR IT'S IN THE LETTER. IF YOU LOOK AT THE SAMPLE LETTER, IT'S THE FIFTH PARAGRAPH.

BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WAS EXPLAINED TO US TONIGHT.

WHAT WAS EXPLAINED TO US TONIGHT WAS WE'RE WAITING FOR PEOPLE TO MAIL IT BACK IN.

OKAY. BUT COBALT LETTER, THEIR THE SAMPLE LETTER WHICH IS PAGE 306.

YOU'LL SEE THEY HAD THE SURVEY.

PLEASE RETURN THE POSTAGE I SEE IT, I'M LOOKING AT IT OR IT MAY BE COMPLETED ONLINE HERE AND THEN IT GIVES THEM THE I'M GUESSING IT GIVES THEM THE CODE SOMEWHERE IN THERE.

SO EACH LETTER THAT'S MAILED TO A REGISTERED VOTER THAT'S IN THE SAMPLE LIST, THEY HAVE A SPECIFIC VOTER OR SURVEY ID NUMBER. YEP AND THAT PERSON CAN TAKE THE SURVEY AS A SAMPLE PERSON ONLINE AND THEN THEIR

[03:15:11]

SO THEORETICALLY, EVERYONE WHO GETS THIS SURVEY COULD JUST GO TO THIS LINK, FILL IT OUT, AND WE COULD HAVE THE DATA MUCH QUICKER THAN THEY'RE PROMISING.

IF THE YES, IF THAT IS THEIR PREFERRED METHOD.

THE LAST TIME WE DID THIS, ACTUALLY ALL OF THE MOST OF THE LETTERS I'VE COBALT ON THE LINE, BUT MOST OF THE IMPRINT LETTERS WERE SENT BACK THAT WAY.

THEY OPENED IT UP.

SO, YOU KNOW, I WE RECEIVED A SURVEY AT MY HOUSE.

I OPENED IT UP. IT'S MUCH LIKE THE ELECTION VOTER REGISTRATION.

IT'S GOT THE ADDRESS ON THE BACK.

SO ONCE YOU FILL IT OUT, YOU STICK IT IN THE MAIL.

THERE'S NOTHING ELSE TO DO.

IT'S VERY SIMPLE THAT WAY.

SO, I MEAN, I COULD HAVE CHOSE TO GO ONLINE, BUT I WAS LIKE, WELL, I'M RIGHT HERE.

AND I GOT A PEN AND PAPER, SO I JUST FILL IT OUT IN BOTH ASPECTS.

THEY ACTUALLY SHOWED THERE WASN'T A HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RESULTS OF PEOPLE THAT DID THE MAIL IN VERSION, TO THOSE WHO ELECTED TO GO ONLINE WITH THEIR ID, OR TO GO ONLINE TO THE OPEN LINK.

DEMOGRAPHICALLY, THERE'S THAT MUCH DIFFERENCE.

THE RESULTS? YEP.

THE RESULTS FROM OUR 2021 SURVEY SHOWED THAT ESSENTIALLY WHAT PEOPLE WERE SAYING, WHETHER OR NOT THEY TOOK THE SURVEY ON THE PAPER OR THEY TOOK THE SURVEY ONLINE, IS ACROSS THE BOARD, PEOPLE OF THE SAME AGE, PEOPLE OF THE SIMILAR INCOME.

THE RESULTS ARE COMPARABLE.

OKAY AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT IT WILL TAKE US SOMEWHERE IN THE YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE HEARING ABOUT THE SCIENTIFIC RESULTS LIKELIER THAN NOT UNTIL WHAT, SEPTEMBER THEREABOUTS.

SO IT DOES TAKE A FEW WEEKS IN BETWEEN RESULTS, HOWEVER.

COBALT REALLY QUICKLY.

YOU HAD A FEW QUESTIONS, SO I SENT THEM A QUICK EMAIL AND IT SAID THAT IF THERE ARE RESIDENTS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RANDOM SAMPLE THEY PARTICIPATE.

THEY'LL TYPE IN MERIDIAN IN THE ID FIELD PROMPT, THOSE ARE NON SAMPLE SOURCES.

BUT THEY CAN ESSENTIALLY QUANTIFY THE ONLINE RESULTS AND GIVE THEM TO US WHEN THEY RECEIVE THEM.

BUT THAT'S JUST ONLINE NOT THE PAPER BUT THEN PAPER AND ONLINE KIND OF LOOK THE SIMILAR ESPECIALLY BASED OFF THE 2021 RESULTS.

FOR THE SCIENTIFIC SAMPLE.

CORRECT. RIGHT.

SO I'M BIFURCATING.

YOU'RE BIFURCATING. YES. YOU'RE SO THE SCIENTIFIC SAMPLE TAKING IT ONLINE VERSUS TAKING IT ON.

LET'S STRIP IT DOWN TO ITS BASE OF THE QUESTION WHEN WILL WE BE GETTING THE SCIENTIFIC SAMPLE RESULTS.

SEPTEMBER. OKAY.

THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT.

SEPTEMBER. OKAY.

YEAH. TREASURER DESCHAINE, GREAT QUESTION.

HAVE THEY DONE ANY ANALYSIS TO THE OPEN SURVEY AND THE SCIENTIFIC SURVEY IN 2021? HOW THOSE ANSWERS DIFFER? YES. SO THAT WAS WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO WHEN COBALT IF YOU GO BACK AND YOU LOOK AT 2021 THEIR REPORT SHOWS THAT THOSE THAT TOOK THE RESULTS ONLINE TOOK THE SURVEY ONLINE, COMPARABLE ACROSS CROSS TABS.

RIGHT. FEMALES THAT TOOK IT ONLINE VERSUS TAKING PAPER.

SAME AGE GROUPS.

THE ANSWERS WERE JUST ABOUT THE SAME.

OKAY. SO IT'S NOT THAT SOMEONE CAME IN AND GAMED THE SYSTEM.

CORRECT. THEY WERE IT WAS SCIENTIFICALLY VALID.

IT WASN'T SCIENTIFICALLY VALID, BUT IT MATCHED THE SCIENTIFIC RESULTS.

SURE AND THEY ALSO CHECK IP'S.

THEY DO ALL OF THE TESTING TO MAKE SURE THAT NO ONE'S GOING IN AND TRYING TO RACK UP ON THE SURVEY, WHICH IS WHY THEY SPLIT IT THAT WAY.

GOTCHA. SO THAT THEY COULD HAVE A CONTROL, I GUESS THE SAMPLE TO SAY, OKAY, IF THERE'S A ONE VERY CONTENTIOUS QUESTION, THE LAST TIME WE DID THE SURVEY, WE HAD RECREATIONAL AND MARIJUANA ON THE SURVEY RESULTS.

WE ALSO HAD THE DEER CALL ON THE SURVEY RESULTS.

THAT WAS, YEAH, VERY INTENSE.

WE ACTUALLY DIDN'T PUT THE RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA QUESTION ON THE SURVEY.

WE HAD A LONG DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT AND CLERK GUTHRIE SUPERVISOR STYKA AND I ALL SUPPORTED THAT.

INFORMED BOARD MEMBERS DID NOT SUPPORT IT.

YEAH. SO WE WENT AHEAD WITHOUT THAT INFORMATION AND WE HAD A ROOM FULL OF PEOPLE HERE TONIGHT AS A RESULT OF THAT.

CLERK GUTHRIE. THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR HENDRICKSON.

I FEEL LIKE WE ARE MISSING A CHUNK OF QUESTIONS.

IN 2021, WE ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS. AM I MISSING THAT? [INAUDIBLE]. SO THIS THIS ROUND, WHEN WE FIRST STARTED DOING THIS SURVEY I WAS KIND OF INSTRUCTED THAT THERE WOULDN'T BE A LOT OF OPPORTUNITY FOR DEPARTMENTS TO ASK A LOT OF OTHER QUESTIONS, SO THAT USUALLY THE SURVEY IS ABOUT 30.

MOST DEPARTMENTS GET MAYBE 2 TO 3 QUESTIONS AND SO WE SUBMITTED THIS OUT TO ALL DEPARTMENT HEADS AND SAID PLEASE PICK YOUR PRIORITY QUESTIONS.

WE WERE OPERATING UNDERNEATH THE THOUGHT THAT THERE WOULD BE MORE QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE SENIOR CENTER THAT WOULD TAKE UP SPACE FOR THE SURVEY.

[03:20:08]

IT'S SO IT'S HARD TO WHEN YOU GATHER DATA AND YOU DO SURVEYS AND YOU SEE AND WE LOOK AT SO IN 2021 AS AN EXAMPLE, IF WE LOOK AT HOW THEY RATED THE FARMER'S MARKET OR THEIR HISTORICAL VILLAGE OR THE HARRIS NATURE CENTER, AND THEY GAVE A ALMOST FIVE AND A HALF OUT OF SIX IT'S HARD TO KNOW IF WE ARE DOING A BETTER JOB IN CREATING GREATER SERVICES.

IF WE DON'T CONTINUE TO ASK THE SAME QUESTIONS.

IT'S HARD TO HAVE A OVERALL METRIC MOVING FORWARD AND SO I UNDERSTAND THE SENIOR CENTER COMMUNITY CENTER QUESTIONS.

THOSE ARE BOARD QUESTIONS THAT SHOULDN'T TAKE AWAY FROM DEPARTMENT QUESTIONS, BECAUSE THIS SURVEY RIGHT NOW IS VOID OF PARKS AND RECREATION AND THAT'S A BIG A LOT OF PEOPLE MOVE HERE FOR SCHOOLS AND THE PARKS AND I FEEL LIKE WE SHOULD PUT THOSE QUESTIONS BACK IN THERE ABOUT PARKS AND WHAT ALARMED ME FOR THE LACK OF PARKS AND RECREATION QUESTIONS IN HERE IS NUMBER SIX, BECAUSE WE ASKED THEM TO PLEASE RATE THE MAINTENANCE OF MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP FACILITIES AND GROUNDS IN THE.

THE RANKING IS FOR THE TOWNSHIP HALL, THE OKEMOS CATALOG, LIBRARY, CATTLE BRANCH, THE HASLETT LIBRARY, CATTLE BRANCH, GLENDALE CEMETERY, AND RECYCLING AND TRANSFER STATION.

NOTHING ABOUT PARKS, NOTHING ABOUT THE HISTORICAL VILLAGE, NOTHING ABOUT THE HARRIS NATURE CENTER AND FACILITIES AND GROUNDS AND THE WAY THIS QUESTION READS.

IT READS AS IF THESE ARE THE ONLY GROUNDS THAT WE HAVE IN THE TOWNSHIP, AND THIS IS ALL THAT WE MAINTAIN AND SO THAT QUESTION MADE ME LOOK IN HERE.

WELL, WHERE'S THE PARKS AND RECREATION QUESTIONS? AND SO THEN WHEN I THINK IT WAS TRUSTEE WILSON POINTED OUT, THERE'S A CHUNK MISSING 13 THROUGH 23.

MAYBE THAT'S WHERE THE PARKS AND RECREATION QUESTIONS WERE FOR 13 THROUGH 23, I DON'T KNOW, BUT I FEEL LIKE WE SHOULD PUT THOSE WE SHOULD ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT PARKS AND RECREATION. OKAY.

THAT'S MY OPINION.

I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD LEAVE OUT A LARGE CHUNK OF WHAT WE OFFER TO THE COMMUNITY OUT OF THE SURVEY.

SO THERE WERE SEVERAL QUESTIONS THAT WERE REMOVED FROM THE 2021 SURVEY.

AGAIN, WE WERE TRYING TO HOLD SPACE FOR THE POTENTIAL OF 15 QUESTIONS.

WE WERE TOLD THE POTENTIAL OF 15 QUESTIONS FOR THE COMMUNITY SURVEY.

SO IT'S TRYING TO MAKE IT AS PARED DOWN AND AS BEST AS IT COULD, JUST FOLLOWING INSTRUCTIONS.

SO I THINK SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS DECIDED TO FOREGO SOME OF THOSE STANDARD QUESTIONS, BECAUSE WE THOUGHT THAT THE PRIORITY FOR THE COMMUNITY CENTER QUESTIONS SHOULD TAKE PRECEDENT. TREASURER DESCHAINE.

WELL, SINCE WE HAVE NOW 11 QUESTION OPPORTUNITIES, I WOULD STRONGLY ENCOURAGE SUPPORT.

CLERK GUTHRIE THOUGHT WE SHOULD BRING THESE QUESTIONS BACK.

WE'LL GET LONGITUDINAL DATA FROM WHAT WE GOT IN 2021, 2018 AND SO FORTH.

SO I WOULD STRONGLY SUGGEST WE GET 11 OF THOSE QUESTIONS BACK.

LET STAFF DECIDE WHICH ARE THE MOST VALUABLE.

BUT WE NEED TO KNOW HOW PEOPLE ARE RANKING VALUE IN OUR PARKS ARE WHICH ONES THEY VALUE THE HIGHEST.

THAT'S GOOD INFORMATION AND CLERK GUTHRIE IS CORRECT.

PEOPLE MOVE HERE FOR OUR PARKS, SO WE NEED TO FIND OUT HOW WELL WE'RE MAINTAINING THEM, HOW MUCH PEOPLE ARE VALUING THEM OR VALUING THEM LESS THAN IN THE PAST AS WELL AS FACILITIES. HOW ARE WE DOING MAINTAINING THE LIBRARIES? HOW ARE WE TOWN HALL AND OTHER FACILITIES? OKAY. ARE WE IN RELATIVE AGREEMENT ON THAT? YES. OKAY.

THERE'S SOME THERE'S CONCRETE DIRECTION.

THEY'RE LIMITED.

I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE.

YOU DON'T WANT A SURVEY WITH 35 QUESTIONS? NO, I AGREE, BUT SHE MENTIONED SHE HAD 15 QUESTIONS HELD OUT FOR THE COMMUNITY CENTER.

WE USE FOUR OF THEM.

THAT LEAVES 11 QUESTIONS.

NO, IT WASN'T 15 QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SENIOR CENTER.

I DON'T THINK IT WAS THAT'S WHAT SHE SAID.

NOPE. HOLD SOME SPACE.

I MEAN, SO WE TYPICALLY GO ABOUT 30 QUESTIONS FOR THE COMMUNITY CENTER.

WHEN I FIRST SURVEY, SORRY SURVEY AND WHEN WE FIRST, WHEN I WAS FIRST BROUGHT BACK TO DO THE 2024 ROUND THE FORMER MANAGER SAID WE NEEDED TO LEAVE AN OPTION FOR ABOUT 15 QUESTIONS FOR THE COMMUNITY SURVEY TO REALLY PARE IT DOWN.

SO THIS IS WHERE WE ARE.

I DID TELL THE STAFF THAT MULTIPLE TIMES AND SO THAT'S WHY STAFF QUESTIONS FROM DEPARTMENTS ARE VERY SMALL AND THERE'S NOT VERY MUCH IN DEPTH TO THOSE QUESTIONS.

I THINK YOU'VE HEARD THAT WE CAN BRING THEM BACK.

WE CAN BRING THEM BACK. SO WE'LL BRING THOSE BACK.

THANK YOU. I HAVE TWO TECHNICAL THINGS TO MENTION IN THE DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION THAT COMES AT THE END,

[03:25:03]

YEAH. SO AN ADDITIONAL ONE.

YEAH. THERE'S ALSO A PERIOD INSTEAD OF A COMMA IN 72,900.

THAT'S IN THE THIRD BOX, THE MIDDLE BOX AND TWO QUESTIONS BELOW THAT MARK THE BOXES THAT DESCRIBE THE PEOPLE LIVING IN THIS HOUSE.

WE THERE'S AN OPTION FOR CHILDREN AGED 12 OR UNDER AND CHILDREN AGED 12 TO 17 SHOULD PROBABLY BE CHILDREN AGED 13 TO 17.

SO WE DON'T HAVE PEOPLE WITH 12 YEAR OLDS NOT KNOWING WHICH BOX TO CHECK.

TRUSTEE WILSON. I'M GUESSING WE WANT TO SEE THE SURVEY AGAIN WHEN WE GET THOSE NEW MACHINES IN, AND TAKE A LOOK AT ALL THE DETAILS OF IT.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BECAUSE THIS IS DISCUSSION TONIGHT.

SO YEAH.

CLERK GUTHRIE. I ALSO HAVE A QUESTION.

THANK YOU. NUMBER 11.

DID WE ASK THIS QUESTION BEFORE? LIKE I'M WONDERING WHY ARE WE SPECIFICALLY ASKING ABOUT REDEVELOPMENT OF EXISTING BUILDINGS INTO HIGHER DENSITY USES? WHAT ABOUT LOWER DENSITY OR OTHER USES? LIKE WHY SPECIFICALLY HIGHER DENSITY? SPECIFICALLY HIGHER DENSITY.

SO THIS IS AGAIN ANOTHER REDEVELOPMENT QUESTION.

THE ECONOMIC AND REDEVELOPMENT QUESTIONS CHANGE THERE REALLY NECESSARILY A STANDARD TO THAT.

SO WE'RE HOPING THAT THE COMMUNITY CHANGES WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT AND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

SO THIS ONE IS A QUESTION ABOUT REDEVELOPMENT.

SO INFILL, WHAT TYPE OF DENSITIES AS FAR AS RESIDENTIAL WOULD PEOPLE LIKE TO SEE? BECAUSE WE MENTIONED CONDOS, APARTMENTS, ESSENTIALLY COMPLEXES, WE ARE FOCUSED ON A RESIDENTIAL DENSITY.

SO I CAN ADD THE WORD RESIDENTIAL TO THAT.

AS A COROLLARY, SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS QUESTION, DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? I JUST DON'T NECESSARILY SEE THAT I'M LOOKING FOR INFORMATION TO SEE IF PEOPLE WANT HIGHER DENSITY.

PEOPLE WANT APARTMENTS IN THE MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

I DON'T THINK PEOPLE MAYBE I'M WRONG.

I MEAN, MAYBE THEY DO.

I THINK IT'S GOOD INFORMATION TO FIND OUT.

HOWEVER, I THINK I QUESTION THE EFFICACY OF THIS KIND OF ANSWER BOX FOR THIS QUESTION BECAUSE IF I'M JOE RESIDENT, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SAY IN THERE EXCEPT HASLETT OKEMOS. RIGHT.

A SPECIFIC NEIGHBORHOOD PLACE IN TOWN IS ALSO AND THERE'S ALSO AND THIS COULDN'T MATTER LESS, BUT THERE'S ALSO A PARENTHESES, A CLOSE PARENTHESES MISSING.

BUT I FEEL LIKE WITH AN OPEN ENDED TEXT BOX ANSWER TO A QUESTION LIKE THIS, YOU'RE GOING TO RECEIVE RESULTS THAT ARE ALL OVER THE MAP AND NOT IN THE WAY YOU'RE EXPECTING.

WE SHOULD MAYBE TRY TO IDENTIFY PLACES AND MAYBE EVEN OTHER SO THAT WE SO THAT PEOPLE CAN PROVIDE ADDITIONAL ANSWERS THAT WE DON'T THINK ABOUT.

BUT THIS I UNDERSTAND THE RATIONALE FOR THE QUESTION, BUT PERHAPS.

EITHER FINDING A WAY TO PRESENT AREAS THAT WERE SUGGESTING AND LEAVE AN OPEN ENDED OR.

YOU KNOW, DO YOU SUPPORT INCREASING THE DENSITY OF DUPLEXES? DO YOU SUPPORT INCREASING THE DENSITY OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL AND OR COMMERCIAL AREAS TO INCLUDE HIGHER DENSITY USES LIKE APARTMENT BUILDINGS OR TOWNHOMES? YES, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

BECAUSE WHERE DO YOU WANT IT PRESUMES THAT THEY WANT IT AND YOU'RE ALSO NOT CAPTURING THAT INFORMATION.

YES. SO MAYBE SPLIT IT INTO TWO QUESTIONS AND SAY DO YOU WANT IT? AND IF SO, IN THESE DISCRETE PLACES, YES OR NO? LET ME. MY THOUGHT. I CONCUR.

ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THAT? NO. ALL RIGHT.

ANYTHING ELSE ON THE COMMUNITY SURVEY? SOUNDS LIKE WE WILL HAVE A SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE OF DRAFT LANGUAGE BY THE TIME WE SEE IT IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS.

DO WE FEEL THAT IT IS RIPE AT THIS POINT TO BRING IT BACK FOR ACTION ON OUR NEXT MEETING, ASSUMING THAT THESE CHANGES, AS WE'VE DISCUSSED, ARE GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTED, OR

[03:30:08]

I THINK WE SHOULD PLAN ON ACTING ON IT.

EVERYONE ELSE, I AGREE.

WE'VE BEEN IN DISCUSSION FOR, WHAT, 45 MINUTES? IF WE HAVE ANOTHER DISCUSSION LIKE THIS, IT WON'T BE RIGHT.

SO CAN WE.

CAN WE POSSIBLY GET THESE QUESTIONS AHEAD OF TIME SO THAT WE CAN GO INTO THIS DEPTH OF DISCUSSION AND GIVE FEEDBACK TO YOU IN ADVANCE? SO WE END UP WITH A DOCUMENT THAT WE WILL APPROVE AT THE NEXT MEETING.

I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ALLOWED TO DO THAT FROM OPEN MEETINGS ACT PERSPECTIVE.

THAT'D BE A VERY TRICKY THING TO PULL OFF.

NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT INDIVIDUALLY.

IF WE COULD TAKE A LOOK AT IT INDIVIDUALLY AND GIVE YOU FEEDBACK.

I'M NOT SAYING I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD DO THAT.

I THINK WE SHOULD DISCUSS IT AND LET US GET THE DRAFT REDONE AND MY SUGGESTION IS PROBABLY THAT WE WILL PUT IT ON FOR ACTION, BUT YOU'RE UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO TAKE ACTION IF THIS DISCUSSION OCCURS AGAIN, JUST LIKE ANY OTHER ITEM, WE CAN SIMPLY PUT IT IN DISCUSSION.

YES, YOU COULD SIMPLY CHOOSE NOT TO TAKE ACTION AT THE END OF THE DISCUSSION AND OKAY, WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO YOU AT THE NEXT MEETING, AS WE DID WITH THE ZONE THREE MARIJUANA LAST MONTH. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

ANYTHING ELSE ON THIS TOPIC BEFORE WE MOVE ON? THANK YOU, DIRECTOR CLARK.

YOU'RE WELCOME. NEXT UP, WHAT IS SURE TO BE ANOTHER BARNBURNER OF A DISCUSSION, THE 2025 BUDGET PRIORITIES

[13.B. 2025 Township Budget Priorities]

I HAVE NO NUMBERS ASSOCIATED WITH THESE AND CANDIDLY, I DON'T EVEN NEED YOU TO TELL ME THAT'S A TERRIBLE IDEA BECAUSE I'M GOING TO GRIM REAPER A LOT OF THESE AS WE DEVELOP THE BUDGET.

OBVIOUSLY, IF YOU ABSOLUTELY HATE SOMETHING, PLEASE TELL ME NOW.

BUT WHAT WE'RE SHOWING YOU HERE IS REALLY THE DREAM WORLD, THE BARBIE DREAM HOUSE.

BEST POSSIBLE SCENARIO THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAD A MILLION, $100 MILLION DROP OUT OF THE OUT OF THE SKY ONTO OUR LAPS.

WHAT I'M HOPING TO GET FROM YOU IS IDEA IS ANY CONCEPT OF PRIORITIES THAT BOARD MEMBERS HAVE, SO THAT WE CAN START WORKING THOSE IN OR IF YOU THINK LIKE THE TRACKED SKID STEER IS THE GREATEST IDEA SINCE SLICED BREAD, THAT'D BE GOOD TO KNOW.

SO WE CAN PUT A LITTLE WEIGHT AGAINST THAT.

REALLY WOULD LIKE TO KEEP IT MORE ON THE WHAT DO WE LIKE AS OPPOSED TO WHAT DO WE DON'T? BECAUSE I THINK, CANDIDLY, THE BUDGET PROCESS IS GOING TO TAKE OUT A LOT OF THE WHAT DO WE DON'TS.

SO I AM OPEN TO DISCUSSION.

I'M HAPPY TO TALK ABOUT ANY OF THESE, BUT I'D RATHER JUST HEAR FEEDBACK AT THIS POINT AND I'LL BE SCRIBBLING FURIOUSLY.

ALL RIGHT. WELL, BOARD MEMBERS, HERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE BUDGET LONG BEFORE WE EVER HAVE.

WE'LL START, I SUPPOSE, BECAUSE THE FIRST HAND I SEE IS TRUSTEEWILSON'S.

WE'LL START THEIR TASERS.

SO THE TASER SYSTEM, THE TASER COMPANY IS DISCONTINUING THEIR CURRENT MODEL OF SALES, AND THEY WE WILL BE FORCED TO MOVE OVER TO A SUBSCRIPTION BASED MODEL.

STAFF HAS LOOKED INTO ALTERNATIVES.

THERE IS NO REASONABLE ALTERNATIVE IN THE MARKETPLACE.

WE DON'T WANT TO BUY THE GENERIC VERSION OF SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

WE DO HAVE SOME THOUGHTS OF HOW THIS WILL GET FUNDED ON AN ONGOING BASIS, WHICH WE'LL BRING FORWARD.

BUT IT'S NOT A BIG AMOUNT.

BUT WHAT IT DOES IS IT CHANGES FROM A YOU KNOW, IT CHANGES THAT REPLACEMENT MODEL AND JUST SORT OF BECOMES A FLAT LINE FROM HERE TO THE POINT AT WHICH THE GENERIC ALTERNATIVE BECOMES PALATABLE.

WELL, WHAT I UNDERSTAND IS THE SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE IS MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE.

I WOULDN'T NECESSARILY SAY MUCH MORE, BUT IT IS MORE EXPENSIVE.

BUT IT'S AN ESSENTIAL TOOL.

SO I'M PUTTING IN A PLUG FOR TASERS.

ABSOLUTELY. TREASURER DESCHAINE.

I LIKE YOUR POLICE PRIORITIES.

I LIKE THE IDEA OF BRINGING UP TWO SWORN OFFICERS, BRINGING THE NUMBER TO 44, AND THEY FELL SO LOW IN THE PAST AND WE WERE LUCKY BAD THINGS DIDN'T HAPPEN WHEN THEY WERE DOWN TO 30 OFFICERS.

I MEAN, EVEN AT 42, WHICH IS NUMBER THEY HOPE TO BE AT BY THE END OF THE YEAR, THAT WOULD BE 2020 10 STAFFING LEVELS, AS I RECALL.

[03:35:03]

YES AND OUR POPULATION IS INCREASED 15% SINCE 2010.

THE SAME WOULD BE TRUE WITH THE FIRE.

OUR FIRE WAS 36 FIREFIGHTERS, EMTS.

BUT THEN THAT'S 2010 LEVELS AND WE'VE HAD A HUGE INCREASE IN THE POPULATION SINCE THEN.

I'M GLAD WE'RE GOING TO ADD ONE FIRE INSPECTOR.

BUT DO WE ALSO NEED TO LOOK AT THE POSSIBILITY OF ADDITIONAL FIREFIGHTER? DEPENDING ON CALL VOLUME, THEIR CALL VOLUME HAS BEEN REALLY HIGH AND SO AND I LIKE THE WAY YOU PUT THESE OUT HERE. POLICE, FIRE, PARKS AND RECREATION.

OUR SURVEY RESULTS EVERY TIME.

TELL US, PLEASE. FIRE AND PARKS OUR RESIDENTS VALUE.

SO YOU'RE FOCUSING THE BOARD ON WHAT THE RESIDENTS CARE ABOUT MOST.

I WAS JUST PUTTING MYSELF AT THE END.

SO THOSE ARE GOOD.

THOSE ARE THE WE CAN FOCUS ON THOSE THREE.

WE'VE DONE 90% OF OUR JOB HERE.

SO ANYWAY, I LIKE THE IDEA OF TWO DIFFERENT ONE OFFICERS, AND I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT THE POSSIBILITY OF 1 OR 2 ADDITIONAL FIREFIGHTERS TO BASED ON CALL VOLUMES.

OTHER BOARD MEMBERS.

CLERK GUTHRIE. THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR HENDRICKSON.

I DON'T THINK YOU NEED TO HAVE THE SPECIAL SCHOOL ELECTION COSTS IN 2025 IN THERE.

BECAUSE WE'LL GET REIMBURSED.

SO IT'S NOT REALLY AN EXPENSE.

I MEAN, WE'RE GOING TO WE'LL BUDGET FOR IT AND LIKE WE NORMALLY DO.

SO IT'S NOT SOMETHING ADDITIONAL AND WE WILL GET REIMBURSED 100% IF WE HAVE IT.

SO IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S GOING TO TAKE AWAY FROM THE BUDGET AT ALL AND THEN I DON'T KNOW WHAT PUBLIC WORKS IS GOING TO DO WITH ALL THEIR REQUESTS FOR PEOPLE, BUT I CAN'T SEE THAT HAPPENING.

GETTING FOUR PEOPLE IN ONE DEPARTMENT, I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND EVERY DEPARTMENT NEEDS AN INCREASED STAFF PERSON.

THERE'S PROBABLY NOT ONE DEPARTMENT THAT DOESN'T NEED THAT AND IT'S NOT AND DOESN'T HAVE JUSTIFICATION FOR GETTING INTO ADDITIONAL PERSON.

SO GOOD LUCK WITH THAT AND I DO.

SO I CAN'T WAIT TO SEE WHAT YOU COME UP WITH AND I DO WANT TO REMIND THE BOARD THAT WE DID TAKE THE CEILING OFF.

THE BUDGET LAST TIME, AND WE TALKED ABOUT PUTTING IT IN THERE AND GETTING A NEW CEILING IN THE MUNICIPAL BUILDING.

IT DON'T KNOW IF IT BELONGS ON HERE AND WHERE IT WOULD GO, BUT THAT IS A DISCUSSION THAT WE HAVE.

I THINK IT WAS LAST FALL, I DON'T REMEMBER.

DEPUTY MANAGER OPSOMMER AND I HAVE HAD THE CONVERSATION ABOUT SORT OF THE REMAINING WORK IN THIS BUILDING.

I'VE PLUGGED THE FURNITURE AT THE SERVICE CENTER, BECAUSE THAT IS THE LAST REMAINING FURNITURE THAT REALLY HASN'T BEEN UPDATED.

I THINK WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THIS IS I THINK THE CIP IS GOING TO HAVE SEVERAL NEW THINGS THIS YEAR OF BUILDING MAINTENANCE BECAUSE, YEAH, WE'RE WE HAVE SOME DEFERRED MAINTENANCE IN OUR BUILDINGS AND WE NEED TO GET CAUGHT UP.

WHEN DOES THAT COME BEFORE THE BOARD? SO THAT PROCESS WOULD HAVE STARTED RIGHT ABOUT APRIL EARLY APRIL.

UNFORTUNATELY, THE COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DID NOT GET THAT BALL ROLLING.

HE WAS OTHERWISE INDISPOSED AND SO WE ARE GOING TO GET THAT BALL ROLLING NOW.

IT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE PART OF THE BUDGET.

I KNOW THAT PREVIOUSLY.

THAT IS HOW WE'VE DONE IT HERE.

I HAVE ALWAYS PREVIOUSLY IN MY CAREER, IT'S ALWAYS BEEN A SEPARATE DOCUMENT.

BUT WE WILL GET THAT BALL ROLLING WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION THIS SUMMER, BECAUSE THAT IS A DOCUMENT THAT UNDER STATE ENABLING LEGISLATION, GOES TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

IN THEORY FOR APPROVAL.

BUT OUR CHARTER, OUR ORDINANCES THEN BRING IT TO THE BOARD FOR FINAL APPROVAL.

I'M SORRY, WHICH DOCUMENT THE CIP? I DON'T THINK THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS EVER WEIGHED IN ON THAT.

THEY HAVE IN MY THREE YEARS HERE.

REALLY? YES.

IT'S USUALLY THE FIRST MEETING IN JUNE.

WE DID NOT MAKE IT THIS YEAR, FOR OBVIOUS REASONS.

BUT THEY WILL BE GETTING THE CIP HOPEFULLY IN JULY FOR DISCUSSION.

THEY HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON IT AS WELL.

EXCELLENT. THANK YOU.

OTHER BOARD MEMBERS.

OKAY, LET EVERYONE HAVE A CHANCE FIRST.

TRUSTEE TREZISE. I HAD A QUESTION.

PUBLIC WORKS IS LOOKING AT A SUPERINTENDENT OF UTILITY BUILDING AND IT OR.

I'M SORRY. FINANCE IS LOOKING FOR A BUILDING SUPERVISOR.

ARE THOSE DUPLICATIVE? ARE THEY NO PEOPLE.

THEY ARE TWO PEOPLE.

OKAY CANDIDLY, WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF TRYING TO GET OUR UTILITY BILLING BACK ON TWO FEET.

[03:40:01]

IT'S THROUGH NOBODY'S FAULT THAT CURRENTLY WORKS HERE AND WE'RE TRYING TO WORK WITH WHAT WE GOT.

PREVIOUSLY, THERE WAS A UTILITY BILLING SUPERVISOR.

THAT POSITION WAS ELIMINATED, I BELIEVE, DURING THE GREAT RECESSION.

BUT I COULD BE WRONG ON THE EXACT TIMING OF IT.

SO THAT WOULD BE MORE OF A OFFICE FUNCTION DEALING WITH BILLING AND PEOPLE AND COUNTING THE SUPERINTENDENT OF UTILITY, THE SUPERINTENDENT.

IT'S NOT NECESSARILY OF UTILITY BILLING.

WE'RE JUST USING THAT AS SHORTHAND RIGHT NOW.

OKAY. FUNCTIONALLY WE HAVE TWO SUPERINTENDENTS RIGHT NOW THAT COVER PARKS AND CEMETERIES AND ROADS AND WATER AND UTILITIES, ALL OF THAT.

WE HAVE GROWN ENOUGH THAT WE REALLY ARE GETTING CLOSE TO THE POINT OF NEEDING A THIRD SUPERINTENDENT AND THEN REDISTRIBUTING HOW THOSE SUPERINTENDENTS FUNCTION AND SO THAT'S PROBABLY NOT GOING TO BE THE ONE THAT GETS FUNDED THIS YEAR.

BUT A LOT OF THIS IS ALSO TO LAY THE GROUNDWORK SO THAT THIS BOARD KNOWSAND FUTURE BOARDS KNOW A LOT OF THESE THINGS ARE COMING BECAUSE AS WE'VE GROWN, WE HAVE NOT NECESSARILY, ESPECIALLY IN PEOPLE.

I MEAN, WE'RE SHORT PEOPLE.

I THINK EVERYONE CAN SEE THAT IN THIS BUDGET, THESE PRIORITIES AND SO THAT'S ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE THAT'S PROBABLY COMING SOONER RATHER THAN LATER, BECAUSE ESPECIALLY IF WE GET TO THE POINT. HEAVEN FORBID SOMEBODY RETIRES AND WE HAVEN'T HAD THE CONVERSATION.

WE HAVE A REALLY HARD TIME THAT SO WE NEED TO GET A THIRD BODY IN THERE AT SOME POINT AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD WAS IN HUMAN RESOURCES, YOU'VE GOT NON POLICE AND FIRE SALARIES AND I'M SURE WHAT THAT AND IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE A NEW PERSON.

SO IT'S NOT A NEW PERSON NECESSARILY.

THAT WAS IT WAS PERSONNEL RELATED.

THAT WAS I DIDN'T KNOW HOW TO HIGHLIGHT THAT ONE.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. BUT THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT CAME UP FROM MULTIPLE DEPARTMENT HEADS THAT, YOU KNOW, SOME OF OUR SALARIES HAVE JUST ARE LAGGING BEHIND AND SO THAT'S NOT A SALARY ISSUE OR THAT'S NOT A IT'S NOT AN EMPLOYMENT HISTORY PERSON ISSUE.

OKAY. WELL, IT'S A PERSON.

IT'S AN HR PERSONNEL ISSUE BUT NOT INVOLVING HIRING NEW PEOPLE.

CORRECT. OKAY.

THAT EXPLAINS IT.

IS THERE ANYTHING BUILT? I'M TRYING TO THINK. I GUESS THERE ARE NO CONTRACTS UP FOR NEGOTIATION THIS YEAR.

THEY'RE NOT. NO, THAT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE BUILT IN.

CORRECT. OKAY.

WELL, I'LL GO NEXT, I SUPPOSE.

ONE QUICK QUESTION. YEAH.

GO AHEAD. THANK YOU.

SO IN FOLLOW UP TO THAT, IS HR LOOKING TO DO A WAGE STUDY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

IS THAT THIS IS ADDITIVE? I DON'T THINK WE'VE GOTTEN TO THE POINT OF DETERMINING HOW THAT'S GOING TO WORK.

I JUST HAVE HAD MULTIPLE DEPARTMENT HEADS SAY, WE'VE GOT SOME POSITIONS THAT ARE BEHIND MARKET AT THIS POINT.

OKAY AND SO THAT WAS JUST RATHER THAN LIST ALL OF THOSE OUT, THAT WAS JUST MY WAY OF TRYING TO SAY, OKAY, THIS IS FLOATING AROUND.

SO NOT A WAGE STUDY.

JUST WE GOT AN ISSUE.

WE NEED TO LOOK AT IT.

YEAH OKAY. THANK YOU.

SUPERVISOR. YEAH.

SO THANK YOU, BRINGING THIS FORWARD.

ABSOLUTELY. I LOVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN EARLY.

SO SORT OF GOING DOWN THE LIST HERE.

I'M NOT YET SURE I AGREE ON ADDING TWO OFFICERS TO THE POLICE FORCE AND THE REASON IS THAT WE HAVEN'T HAD 42 OFFICERS ON THE POLICE FORCE IN AN INCREDIBLY LONG PERIOD OF TIME AND AT THIS POINT, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US SURVIVE AT THAT LEVEL AND WITH FULL STAFFING FOR A LITTLE WHILE BEFORE WE INCREASE THE NUMBER BEYOND WHAT WE WERE EVEN CAPABLE OF ATTRACTING PREVIOUSLY.

I'M NOT SAYING THAT THIS IS NOT SOMETHING WE LOOK AT A YEAR FROM NOW.

BUT I THINK IN THE SHORT TERM, LET'S FOCUS ON GETTING UP TO THAT 42 SEEING IF THAT MEETS OUR COMMUNITY'S NEEDS, AND THEN MAKE A DETERMINATION ABOUT WHETHER TO INCREASE THE UP ABOVE AND BEYOND THAT.

BECAUSE THAT, YOU KNOW, POLICE AND FIRE, THEY'RE GOING TO COME AT A PREMIUM IN TERMS OF COST AND THOSE COSTS DON'T GO AWAY OVER TIME AND THE LAST THING WE WANT TO DO IS EXPAND BEYOND WHAT WE NEED AND HAVE TO CUT POLICE AND FIRE.

THAT'S NOT SOMETHING I'M INTERESTED IN DOING.

SO I THINK A MORE CAUTIOUS, SLOWER APPROACH TO THIS.

LET US SEE WHERE WE'RE AT AND THEN MOVE FORWARD.

THE HUMAN RESOURCES BIT.

WE REOPENED THE CONTRACTS IN 2022.

BEFORE THEY WERE DUE, AND THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO COME DUE THIS YEAR, I BELIEVE, AND WE OPENED THEM TWO YEARS EARLY.

AS A RESULT OF THE INCREASE IN INFLATION AND GAVE A RELATIVELY SIGNIFICANT INCREASE.

NOW, IT COULD BE THAT WE ARE STILL BEHIND THE EIGHT BALL ON THAT.

BUT I THINK THE TIME TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS IS WHEN THE CONTRACTS REOPEN IN 2026.

[03:45:02]

THAT'S MY THOUGHT ON THAT.

I HAVE THE SAME QUESTION ABOUT SUPERINTENDENT VERSUS SUPERVISOR, SO THANK YOU.

IT MAKES SENSE.

YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF USERS FOR IT'S A THREE PERSON DEPARTMENT, RIGHT? AND A LOT OF USERS AND A LOT OF TECHNOLOGY AND A LOT OF FACILITIES TO MANAGE WITH A THREE PERSON DEPARTMENT.

AT THIS POINT, YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE ONE PERSON PER FACILITY.

SO I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THE NEED FOR THAT AND THEN I WANT TO PUT A PLUG IN FOR A COUPLE OF ITEMS THAT WERE ON THE CIP, INCLUDING OUR COMMITMENT TO OUR PLAN TO EXIT OURSELVES FROM THE FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY BY INCORPORATING ENERGY SAVING SOLAR ARRAYS AT OUR FACILITIES IN THE CIP THAT WE SAW LAST YEAR'S BUDGET.

WE HAD, I BELIEVE, 250,000 IN THERE FOR NEXT YEAR'S THE 2025 BUDGET FOR THE CENTRAL FIRE STATION AND WE ALSO HAVE, I THINK, $150,000 IN THE BUDGET FOR EV STATIONS AT THIS FACILITY FOR, I PRESUME, FOR OUR RESIDENTS.

I NOTICED THAT 3 OR 4 YEARS OUT, THERE'S A SOLAR ARRAY PLANNED FOR HARRIS NATURE CENTER.

THAT'S $125,000.

MY THOUGHT IS, PERHAPS WE DELAY THE EV IMPLEMENTATION AND INCORPORATE THE HARRIS NATURE CENTER SOLAR SITE INSTEAD.

THAT'LL SAVE US $25,000 IN THE CIP THIS YEAR, AND ALSO BEGIN THE PROCESS OF SAVING US MONEY ON OUR UTILITIES A LITTLE BIT EARLIER ON TWO OF OUR FACILITIES, AND THAT WILL EVENTUALLY SAVE US MORE OVER THE LIFESPAN THAN I THINK WE WOULD WITH THE EVS HERE AT THE MUNICIPAL COMPLEX. ABSOLUTELY.

SO THAT WOULD BE ONE THING AND THEN I THINK I'M SURE THIS WILL MAKE IT INTO THE CIP, BUT I DO WANT TO JUST PLUG THE MSU DELAY LANSING PATHWAY PARTY. LET ME MAKE SURE THAT'S INCLUDED.

I THINK THAT'S THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN A GALLOPING SUCCESS FOR OUR RESIDENTS, ESPECIALLY THROUGH PHASE ONE.

JUST NOTICED IT'S ON GOOGLE MAPS ALREADY, BY THE WAY.

THAT'S PRETTY COOL.

I'VE GOT A LITTLE TRAIL AND TRAILHEADS AND WHATNOT.

SUPER WORK BY WHOEVER WAS, YOU KNOW, RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING THAT HAPPEN.

BUT I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT OUR RESIDENTS ARE REALLY GOING TO APPROVE OF AND ALSO BENEFIT FROM.

SO MAKING SURE THAT WE GET THAT IN AND SEE THAT THROUGH.

SO A COUPLE OF MY THOUGHTS.

ANYWAY, OTHER BOARD MEMBERS.

SO I APPRECIATE THE FEEDBACK.

WE'LL GET TO GET TO HARD WORK HERE AND OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, GIVEN THE PREVIOUS CONVERSATION YOU HAD I MEAN WE THERE IS A THERE'S ALSO THE DISCUSSION OF THE SENIOR CENTER, SENIOR COMMUNITY CENTER AND HOW THAT FITS INTO THINGS AS WELL AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, AS I'VE SAID MULTIPLE TIMES, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKELY THAT'S GOING TO BE MORE OF A DISCUSSION IN THIS BUDGET BECAUSE WE WON'T HAVE ALL THE FUNDING AND NUMBERS LINED UP.

BUT CERTAINLY WE NEED TO BE PLANNING FOR THAT AND SO IN LIGHT OF JUST KEEPING THAT IN THE BACK OF YOUR HEAD, THAT IT MAY IF THAT WASN'T HERE, I COULD PROBABLY FUND A LOT OF THIS.

SO WE'RE GOING TO DO OUR BEST AND OUR GOAL.

RIGHT. SO PART OF THE REASON WE BROUGHT THIS FORWARD NOW IS TO START THIS CONVERSATION.

DIRECTOR ANTHONY AND I WILL NOW START WORKING WITH THE DEPARTMENT HEADS ON THE SPECIFIC NUMBERS AND SEEING WHERE WE'RE AT, WHAT WE'VE GOT, WHAT WE'RE FUNDING AND THEN WE WILL COME BACK IN AUGUST WITH SOME MORE SPECIFICS AND HAVE A LITTLE MORE NOT NECESSARILY DEEPER DIVE, BUT.

OKAY, THIS IS PRETTY MUCH WHERE WE'RE AT.

TAKE THE TEMPERATURE OF EVERYBODY AND THEN GO INTO THE ACTUAL PUBLIC HEARINGS.

IN THE FALL. I WILL SAY, THE OTHER THING THAT'S FLOATING AROUND OUT THERE IS THE ENGINE REPLACEMENT TO REPLACE THE TRUCK THAT IS CURRENTLY PARKED.

WE HAVE HAD SOME INTERNAL CONVERSATIONS, GIVEN INTEREST RATES ARE AS STICKY AS THEY ARE ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS A SCENARIO THAT WE PAY FOR THAT IN CASH AS OPPOSED TO FINANCING IT, BECAUSE WE DID THE NUMBERS ON FINANCING IT.

IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S $250,000 AT A MINIMUM AND SO IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY COST THERE FOR US TO PAY FOR IT NOW? AND JUST GET IT TAKEN CARE OF BECAUSE THE LONG TERM FINANCING SOMETHING AND PAYING FOR IT OUT OF THE MOTOR POOL IS GOING TO HURT THE MOTOR POOL BAD FOR A FEW YEARS, BECAUSE THIS WAS AN ANTICIPATED 28 EXPENSE, NOT A 24 EXPENSE.

SO JUST WANTED TO GIVE EVERYBODY A HEADS UP THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT AND WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO BRING A FINAL ANSWER FORWARD HOPEFULLY AT OUR NEXT MEETING.

SO WE REALLY APPRECIATE THIS FEEDBACK.

WE'LL GET TO WORK NOW AND WE WILL HAVE A BUDGET.

BACK TO YOU IN A COUPLE MONTHS.

THANK YOU.

ITEM 14 IS COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC.

IT APPEARS AS THOUGH WE'VE LOST OUR PUBLIC SAD.

[14. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC]

[03:50:03]

ON BEHALF OF THE ENTIRE TEAM AT FSBR, WE WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE EXTENSION OF OUR SERVICES, AND WE DO TRULY APPRECIATE THE CONFIDENCE YOU'VE PUT IN OUR SERVICES, AND WE ARE HAPPY TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF SERVICE TO THE TOWNSHIP.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC? SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENT IS CLOSED AT 9:55.

LAST ONE. NEXT ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM 15.

OTHER MATTERS AND BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS.

[15. OTHER MATTERS AND BOARD MEMBERCOMMENTS]

ADJOURNMENT. WE NEED A MOTION TO ADJOURN.

SO MOVED. SECOND.

MOVED BY TREASURER DESCHAINE. SUPPORTED BY TRUSTEE MCCURTIS.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF A GERMAN SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED? WE STAND ADJOURNED AT 9:55 P.M.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.