Uh, I am calling to order a regular meeting
of the City Council, Tuesday,
March 26th, 2024 at 7:00 PM Please stand
for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance, pledge
Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America,
and to the republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with,
with liberty and justice for all.
Roll call Madam Secretary,
President Roy.
Here. Councilman Dwyer? Here. Councilwoman McGee.
Here. Councilman Wiki. Present. Councilman Nunan? Here.
Councilman Lafferty? Here. Councilwoman Moore.
You have a quorum. Madam Chair.
Thank you. Next item. Next item is for adoption
of the consent agenda. So moved.
Support with discussion. Discussion. Councilman
Lafferty? Thank
you. Madam Chair, I'd like
to remove item four, G as in gamma.
And item four, R as in Romeo.
Madam chair? Yes.
I would just, um, like to remind, um, everyone on council
because Friday is, uh, good Friday.
Um, council or, uh, city offices will be closed.
So the reconsideration period will be Thursday at noon.
Where any items taken? Any action taken this evening?
Madam Secretary? Where will 4G and four R go?
Uh, well, that would be on the regular agenda.
We'll do that. We'll do we do that when we get there?
Any additional discussion?
Uh, hearing none. Ms. Moore?
Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes.
Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan sees a yes.
Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is five. Adoption of the agenda.
So moved with discussion
Support. Lafferty
Dis uh, discussion?
Yes. What was item 4G Will now be item
14 G.
And what was four R will now be 14
h Also, um,
adding an update as 13 G.
Uh, Jeffrey Schroeder Discussion, um,
regarding planning commission rules.
Can you repeat Madam Secretary,
can you repeat the items?
Yes. Uh, what was item four?
G is now 14 G.
What was item four?
R is now 14 H
and a new item is 13 G, which is a, um, update
and discussion of planning commission rules.
Okay, thank you.
Any additional discussion? Hearing none?
I'll call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes.
Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Uh, Mr. Nunan?
Yes indeed. Ms. McGee? Yes. Yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is six.
A calendar of pending matters motion to receive
and file with discussion
Support Lafferty.
Uh, discussion Ms. Moore? Thank
You. Um,
as everybody
and council knows, there are, uh, every item
that is on the pending list
of pending matters has not been responded to, uh,
by the administration.
Um, I even when the administration figured
out that they didn't know the procedure
and they now know it still three weeks have gone by
and, um, counsel's requests have not been complied with.
Um, we have a court order that states any item requested
by counsel must be, uh, given to counsel within 10 days
unless it's voluminous, in which case, um, the party that's,
um, been requested
to provide information can contact counsel office
and we can make arrangements to extend that amount of time.
Um, it's very disappointing
that we're starting off on this foot.
It's been five months and, uh, we asked for some
of these items back in December.
Very disappointing. Thank you.
Any additional discussion? Hearing none. All in favor?
Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Next item. Next
Item is eight is seven.
Seven a approval of the minutes of the regular meeting
of March 12th, 2024. So,
Support Dwyer.
Any discussion? Hearing none. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Dwyer?
Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Noonan? Yes.
Mr. McGee? Yes. Rogan sees a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is eight.
A approval of the bills of the General Revenue funds.
So moved with discussion
Support D. Wire
Discussion. Madam Secretary?
Yes. I have a question
regarding check number
6 6 5 0 6 6 2 Zuniga.
My question is whether this involves the
Bunard Street project.
Okay, I'm hearing none. So that's all I needed. Thank you.
Any additional discussion? Hearing none called a question.
Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr.
Bokey? Yes. Uh, Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes.
Rogan sees a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is eight B.
Approval of the bills of the water
and sewer system. So moved.
Support Lafferty. Discussion.
Hearing none Call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr.
Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Noonan?
Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan cz? Yes.
Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is eight C, general Revenue
General Fund revenue report.
Motion to receive and file
Support. Ty.
Discussion. Hearing none. All in favor? Aye. Aye.
Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is eight D General Fund expenditure report.
Motion to receive and file
Support. Lafferty.
Any discussion? All in favor, aye. Aye. Any opposed?
Motion carries. Next item. Next
Item is announcements.
Any participate participation, I'm sorry,
audio participation?
Members of the audience who would like
to address City Council this evening may do
so under the audience portion by filling out a, uh,
form located on the right side of the stage.
This is a reminder, uh, that you must write your name
and address, uh, on the form or give it at the podium.
This portion of audience is for agenda items only.
There is an additional audience at the end
for all other matters.
Everyone has three minutes and we have a new clock, uh,
that we've used one meeting.
So I'd ask folks to, uh, continue to offer some grace
as I get, uh, familiar with it.
First up is, uh, Nick Beand,
hit your mic, uh, the button.
Can you hear me now? Yes. Thank you.
Good evening, counsel. My name is Nicholas Beand
and I, uh, work with Official Towing.
Uh, it's a pleasure to be here tonight.
I'm here to talk about, uh, item, uh, 13 in regards
to the towing subcommittee, uh, recommendation.
Again, I'm here from official towing,
and if you have any questions, concerns,
or anything that you need
to know about official towing, I'm here.
And I'd be more than happy to answer
any questions or concerns.
We have some employees with us.
We have our ownership with us,
and we're happy to be in the city of Warren.
So thank you very much. Have a wonderful evening.
Thank you. Next is
Mr. Michael Holloway.
Good evening counsel. I just wish on as far
as the party agenda, wish
to comment on Council Secretary Moore's agenda item on the
board's and commission as she's gonna be discussing.
Just to let you know, I have applied
to be on the planning commission.
I applied way back in the beginning of February.
I realized our current mayor is busy,
but I wish that in some form, either email
or some other form, she
or somebody in her office could contact me.
See, let me know if I'm still being considered
or if there's, if there are no any
openings on the planning commission.
I'm very interested in what's happening
and trying to get more active in my city
and would like to help in the next step forward.
Thank you very much for your time.
Thank you.
That is it for agenda items related to
or audience related to agenda items. Next item.
Next item is 10 A.
The women of Warren, uh, would like
to make a brief presentation.
And ladies, if you would p please introduce yourselves
when you get to the microphone.
Thank you. And welcome.
Some of us are a little short here.
Um, good evening Counsel. Good evening, all in attendance.
I am Rochelle Kelly. I am the Treasurer for Women of Warren.
I'm Alex Kelly. I'm the graphic designer
on the Board of Women of Warren.
Uh, good evening. I'm Monica Papazian,
secretary for Women of Warren.
Good evening. I'm Rebecca Zinos
and I'm a part of the Women of Warren.
Thank you.
Okay. We are the women of Warren.
We're a nonprofit group that is committed
to empowering women and the community of Warren.
In January, we held a vision board creation event.
This is an event we do each January where we discuss,
where we create our own vision boards.
Uh, basically why don't you turn? Okay.
They've seen turnaround survey.
Vision Board basically sets forth your goals for
a year in a scrapbooking format.
Um, what we did this year, we did a board for the Women
for the City of Warren based on conversations we had at the
meeting about what different things we want
to see for Warren.
Um, and we encompassed our four, the four main points
that we have in our organization.
Um, the first one, and is diversity
and equity making Warren accessible
and enjoyable for everyone.
Uh, then of course, education,
which is very important on all levels,
providing learning opportunities that empower
the community through knowledge.
This includes summer camps, supporting teachers
and students with free or low cost programs.
Um, and we also have our, as far as the schools,
we also do our, uh, supplies event, hopefully this summer.
Again, the other thing,
which I know has been a big thing in Warren lately,
is the revitalizing downtown Warren.
Um, we wanna work with other Warren representatives
to create the downtown that can fill us all with a sense
of pride and prosperity.
We want some family friendly shops, hands-on museum
and walkable spaces.
We don't wanna be the next Royal Oak or Ferndale.
We wanna be Warren, but we wanna have our downtown as well.
We look forward to pursuing this vision
and helping to make Warren wonderful
with all, with all of you.
Thank you all for being here,
and we thank you counsel for the opportunity
to present this board to you
and support your diligent efforts that you are working with
to try to improve Warren along with us. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
Additional announcements.
Um, Madam Chair 10 B tribute to the Lincoln.
Can you hear me if I talk loud? Yep. Oh, there we go.
Um, this is a tribute
to the Lincoln High School basketball 2024 D two Champions.
Uh, motion to approve support
Lafferty Certificate of Recognition.
The Warren City Council wishes
to recognize Lincoln High School Boys basketball
for the first time in Lincoln High School history.
The 2024 Boys basketball team are the Division
two state champions.
The Warren City Council pays tribute to the entire team
and Coach Waal Henry on this great accomplishment.
All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed?
Motion carries Additional announcements.
Next item is 10 C presentation regarding Michigan
Redistricting Commission.
Is Anthony here? Eid?
So I was contacted, uh, Anthony is from the, uh,
citizens Redistricting Commission for the State of Michigan.
As many of you may or may not know, uh, we are impacted
by a lawsuit where, uh, some
of our house districts are being redone as well
as our Senate districts.
And, uh, Anthony had requested to come
and give a presentation, uh, for us on, uh,
what is currently happening.
The floor is yours.
Thank you. And hello Warren City Council.
Thank you for having me here. I very much appreciate it.
My name's Anthony Eid.
I'm one of the 13 members
of the Michigan Independent
Citizens Redistricting Commission.
And, uh, like you said, I'm here today
to talk about the current redistricting
process that is happening.
I'd given somebody a PowerPoint. Is that up or perfect.
Um, is there like a remote or something? Or should I
Just, let me see.
One moment. Patrick,
can you pull up the presentation?
Is it not on your No, no. It was,
Is not, we can't watch this side.
Is it, is it on the screen? It on?
No, no, no. Any it was, it was,
and then it's, it wasn't.
That's okay. I'll just, I can just do it orally. Okay.
If you, if you all want, I don't want to take up too much
of you and the public's time today,
but, um, for 40 years, the state of Michigan
was gerrymandered.
And in 2018, uh, a grassroots organization called Voters,
not politicians, led an amendment to the Constitution
to take the power away from the legislature in doing
redistricting, in doing redistricting,
and gave it to a body of 13 regular everyday citizens.
Uh, about 10,000 people applied to that commission.
And from the 10,000 people that applied,
they were five independents, four Republicans,
and four Democrats selected to serve on it.
And we have been, we've been on this commission, uh,
since 2020 Now.
We originally did this process back in 2020
and 2021, uh, to be done in time for the 2022 election.
After that was done, we were sued, uh,
actually four times by pretty much everyone.
We were sued by Democrats, republicans, advocacy groups,
and, uh, you know, pretty much everybody.
And we won three of those lawsuits,
but lost this fourth one.
And because of that, we are currently in the process
of redrawing some of the districts for the Detroit area.
We had to redraw seven districts for the State House map.
And we have to redraw another seven
for the upcoming Senate districts.
And the city of Warren is part of, uh,
this area in metro Detroit that is likely to be redrawn.
We got done doing the, uh,
the Michigan House redraw about three weeks ago.
Now. We are waiting to hear if the court will accept it.
I I do expect that they will accept it
however they have purview over, if they will choose the map
that the commission drew in public using public input,
or they have another option
of choosing a special master's map that from a guy
who they appointed.
That map was drawn in private.
And we don't, we don't know what that one looks like yet.
So hopefully they picked the one
that at least was drawn in public.
But the main reason I'm here today is to talk to you folks
and to talk to the citizens in this room about how
to participate in the upcoming process
for the Senate districts.
That process is likely to occur towards the end of April
and the beginning of May.
And we need folks to come out from Warren
and from neighboring communities like Center Line,
perhaps Northeast Detroit,
and let us know how you think these districts should be
drawing this commission listens to public input.
We have, all of our meetings are public,
they're all on YouTube, that any and anybody can watch them.
And every line that we draw is made with full transparency.
Transparency is one of the most important things
to the members of this commission.
You can help us by either going to our website,
www.michigan.gov/mirc
and providing public comment there.
You can either submit your own map to us,
or just in a more general sense,
let us know about your community.
How do you see your community?
What is your community of interest?
What special things make Warren a unique place?
And, you know, how should a district that is drawn
for Warren or for Detroit,
or for any of the neighboring cities?
Look, and I'd also invite you folks in the public to come
to our actual hearings that we have.
When we draw the maps. We're gonna be spending about two
to three weeks redoing these Senate districts.
And I don't have those dates currently yet
'cause we're waiting on the court to schedule it for us.
But once I do, I'll, I'll contact y'all
so you can get it out to your constituents.
These districts will are very important
because for the house, they're going to be in play
for the upcoming 2024 election for the Senate.
That's not out for reelection until 2026.
So we have a little bit more time,
but especially on the house side for the maps
that were just adopted by the commission, um, you know,
they're set to be in play for this upcoming election,
for this upcoming August primary.
And, uh, I'll stick around if anyone wants
to see the map after the meeting.
And are there any questions from you
fine folks, about the process?
All right, well, thank you so much for your time.
We really need to hear from Warren.
Um, you know, none
of our commissioners are, are from Warren.
I'm from, I grew up in, in, uh, in West Bloomfield,
but I've lived in Detroit for about the past 10 years.
So I, I know my area right? But none of us know Warren.
So we really need folks to come out, let your people know.
Come see us and let us know
how you think these districts should be drawn so we can, uh,
so we can try to get it right. Thank you.
Thank you so much. Any additional announcements?
Madam Chair? Uh, council member Lafferty.
Thank you. I'd like to extend a congratulations
to the cast and crew of the Warren Civic Theater
and their performance this past weekend of Cinderella.
They were on this stage. They did a terrific job.
The boys and girls, uh, are future actors and actresses,
and the, the singing, the dancing, the, uh,
the acting was outstanding.
They have outdone their selves
and they even left, uh, a few pieces of confetti behind
for us to find, uh, on the floor, uh, to
through the chair to Ms. Moore.
It was even suggested that we add a confetti cannon
at the end of each agenda to adjourn the meetings.
So, uh, Madam President, the role
and responsibility of sweeping the stage would fall
to you as president, of course.
And so very, uh, very much, uh, appreciated going to those,
uh, those shows.
They were, they were terrific sold out audiences, uh,
for several of the shows, which is a good and bad problem
and good because the Civic theater is bringing in a lot
of people, a lot of attention.
And by, by every right, it should bad in the sense
that it does highlight a issue
that we have in the auditorium.
Our auditorium is outdated.
It was intended for a high school auditorium
for high school use.
Now, it was refurbished when this building was purchased in
the very late nineties.
And, uh, it has held up okay, but it does need some work.
And so it does highlight some of the other items that
this council and this new administration needs to address.
And so I will renew, I did bring this up in the prior term.
We need to have a needs analysis by the Parks
and Rec department of the entire Warren Community Center.
If you go into any of the conference rooms,
there are tube televisions hanging on the walls
with VCRs.
These televisions haven't worked in probably a decade.
The carpeting is worn.
The, we need new paint, uh, in all of the rooms, uh,
the lighting is suboptimal.
There are, uh, many items that probably need to be addressed
that I'm not mentioning, but we do need
to have public input.
I believe the Parks and Recreation Department is well aware
of, uh, these, these needs already.
But I'd like to see a proposal come from the administration
to begin seeking public input of
what the Warren Community Center 2.0 looks like.
And so that will also,
and that should also extend
to the Fitzgerald Recreation Center
and to Owen Jacks as we have those two BU buildings
that are very important to, uh, parks
and Rec and our organizations.
So, uh, do want to, you know, bring that to,
to the council's attention.
And then for, uh, all families
and friends here in Warren, happy Easter
to everyone that celebrates. Thank you.
Thank you. Any other announcements?
Uh, I also echo, uh, happy Easter also for those
who observing Raman, uh, the Holy Month
and anyone else who's observing anything, um,
religious this month is a religious month for many folks.
Uh, I would like to, I, I missed Mr. Watts.
Uh, Gary Watts for audience on an agenda item.
So I'd ask counsel to, uh, motion to suspend the rules so
that, uh, Mr. Watts can give his three minutes on
this particular agenda.
Item support,
Motion to suspend the rules Support pal.
Okay, Henry? Okay. Yep. Thank you. Uh, all in favor? Aye.
Aye. Any opposed?
Just this once. Mr. Watts, do you have the floor?
My apologies.
I get six minutes now. It's not a big deal.
Thank you. Um, I come before you tonight.
Number one, as Ms. Moore said earlier,
five months boards and commissions aren't filled.
Meetings are being canceled. Um, talked to Mr.
Beke earlier, downtown
Development authority has been canceled.
Again, maybe council needs to find out
how are those bills being paid?
That's a great question, huh?
So you need to find out about that.
The other thing that's on the agenda tonight,
that's a big concern of mine
'cause I, I actually worked on that.
Sum two was Landmark Estates.
The city administration, the, the attorney's office,
in my opinion, has failed the citizens of this community
by letting Landmark Estates continue in the shape they are.
I hope you guys deal with that tonight.
And lastly, there was a vacant lot for sale
on the consent agenda.
I think you guys pulled it off.
I looked up the place they're gonna sell it to,
and there's appears to be some problems there.
So appreciate your time. Thank you.
Thank you. Uh, we'll resume the meeting.
Any additional announcements? Okay. Next item.
Next item is 11 A, which is a public hearing request
to approve the demolition of House
and Garage, located at 24 1 34.
Loretta through the Nuisance abatement program,
Is there someone from the city, the administration
that can summarize this item briefly
and then we'll have the petitioner come up?
Good evening counsel. We have a house here.
It's been vacant, sitting vacant for probably six years,
since 2018.
It is currently tarped with the roof.
There's a hole in the roof.
The exterior brick is basically failed
around the complete exterior of the home.
I took fresh pictures yesterday. I visited the site.
It has not changed since it was declared, uh,
9 28 23.
It still remains in the same condition.
I believe the owners believe to be deceased.
I have all this information in the, uh, spec sheet.
I think everybody gets this, uh, copy
of this spec sheet on here.
And it still sits there vacant
and exactly the same condition it was
when I was there in September.
And, uh, I believe it is under, in control of the bank.
And nothing's been done with it. It just sits there.
It's still abating same condition.
Thank you. Mr. Lizzie. Is there anyone here, uh,
from the petitioner?
Can you give your name for the record?
Uh, good evening. Uh, Greg McKay.
I represent, uh, one of the, the mortgage company, uh, USAA
that has a future advance mortgage on the property.
Uh, the, there's,
uh, just one correction.
We, we don't have, uh, ownership of the property we're,
I have advised we didn't have, uh,
when there was the hearing back in September,
we hadn't even proceeded with a default or foreclosure,
and they've decided not to proceed with that.
So at this point, we have no interest in the
Property.
Thank you. I will open the public hearing.
Is there anyone from the audience
who would like to speak on the matter?
Okay. We'll close the public hearing
and turn it over to Council for Action. So moved.
Support Lafferty. Any discussion?
Madam Chair? Council Member
Lafferty. Thank you.
Uh, I stopped by this home this weekend
and, uh, also took photos.
The, uh, the condition is exactly the way Mr.
Laze, uh, describes it.
Uh, in fact, of all the homes that we have,
unfortunately had to remove, I have never seen brick
in the condition that this is in the, where the,
the mortar is actually, uh,
worn from water runoff from a failed roof that it,
you can see into the house through the brick.
It's, it's incredible. And it's, it's very unfortunate too.
Uh, but this, this again, highlights some of the needs
that we have from the administration, where we should be
weatherizing poems where we should be, uh,
investing in the small things
so they don't become a large problem like this.
What could have been saved maybe 10, 12 years ago
is now a complete demo.
And you look at that beautiful neighborhood on Loretta, uh,
all ranch, all brick homes,
absolutely beautiful neighborhood.
And to have this eyes source sit for so many years,
you know, it's unfortunate what happened with the owners.
Uh, taxes have not been paid in 17 years.
I was looking at the records on this and,
but this, uh, this does highlight, you know, some
of the needs that we have to address from, uh, uh,
a standpoint perhaps CDBG, economic investment,
and, you know, spreading that, uh, across
for weatherization, new gutters, new roofs, new windows,
and helping people that, uh,
you know, have the, have those needs.
Uh, instead of perhaps pooling all of that money
and building one home,
we can help a dozen homes at the same time.
Uh, the other item that I wanted to bring up is,
and I will ask for in a future agenda item, is
to propose a change to ordinance that I would like
to ask Mr. Schroeder to work on.
And that would be when a home like this is demolished,
and you have all of the homes in that particular area are
of a similar style, shape, size,
and square footage that we enforce the character
of the neighborhood with future development.
We had a, uh, uh, demo in my neighborhood, not too,
uh, not too long ago.
And a, what I can only describe as a container home
was constructed amongst all of the,
the beautiful homes there.
Now yes, the, the property was sold.
It's now, you know, back on the tax rolls,
but it looks nothing like all
of the other homes in the neighborhood.
And I would like to have some consideration, uh, with the,
the building department perhaps, and,
and zoning their input, uh, to help craft, uh, an amendment
that would give us, uh, a little bit of, uh, of teeth
that we can, you know, put into our ordinance
and guide the, the repairs
or, uh, the new construction
to fit the character of the neighborhood.
Thank you.
Any additional discussion? Hearing none.
I'll call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes.
Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Newan? Yes.
Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan sees a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 11 B, which is administrative hearing.
One proposed resolution approving amendment
to planned unit development agreement between Grand Squa
and the City of Warren for the
development of Heritage Village.
Two. Amendment to the Heritage Village PT Agreement for use
and parking requirements located to the west side
of Mound Road, approximately 850 feet north of 12 Mile Road,
commercial Component, sea of Heritage Village,
planned Unit Development Section 8 29 5 0 5 Mound Road.
Matt Levitt, Meyer Inc. Petitioner,
Anyone from the city staff here to summarize this matter?
Good evening, Ms. Michaels. Mad
Chair. Good evening. Mary
Michaels for the City Attorney's Office.
I've worked on this with planning Heritage. Heritage.
Heritage Village, sorry, west of bound between 12
and 13 was intended to be a multi-use development
of residential, commercial
and dates back to 2005.
There's a component of the development
and called commercial C, which would exclude,
originally intended to, to exclude car washes.
There's a mere, currently on the property that would like
to develop a car wash.
We reviewed this with the planning director
and determined that it would be a major amendment,
not a minor amendment, even though a mere typically has
or commonly has a car wash based on our governing documents,
we thought it would be a major change.
So we're, we went to the planning commission
to request a major amendment.
They approved it, the board approved it.
Now we're before council to final to give final approval.
It's a car wash that would include restrictions.
It's a conveyor car wash.
Petitioner is here to give more information,
but the bottom line is it would be there,
there would be vacuuming enclosed within a structure.
There are minimal, um,
res minimal disruptions to the neighborhood.
The closest residence, I believe is 2000 feet away.
So there isn't the same concern that, that there would be
with other car washes.
We're just asking the counsel to approve the car was
as a major amendment to the pod.
There are any questions The petitioner
would is available as well.
Thank you, Ms. Michaels.
Uh, if the petitioner wants to come up,
you have your name for the record, or, hi, Mr.
Name. Bob Kirk. Appearing on behalf
of the original developer, grant Squa, uh, Ms.
Michaels set forth, uh, our proposal tonight.
Uh, we worked with planning, worked with Mary on this.
Uh, we're requesting that this be approved.
We feel, we feel it fills, fits in well
to the commercial component.
Uh, heritage Village has been very successful,
mixed use development and requesting your consideration.
Thank you. I will open the public hearing.
Is there anyone from the audience
who'd like to speak on this matter?
Joel Valent, longtime worn resident.
Please tell me that the mirror can come up
with something better than another car wash.
I mean, really seriously, we have a car wash,
which is just north of 13 Mile Road on Mound Road,
not more than, uh, four blocks away.
We have another car wash at the old McDonald's at 12
Mile Road in Mound.
We have, you know, do we a car wash?
Is that what we really need?
We need something better, more substantial.
Something that's gonna last longer than another car wash.
I mean, we can do better. I I think we should do better.
I expect better than another car wash.
Nothing against these people.
I just three car washes within a mile, uh, air location
that goes besides I, it goes beyond observe.
Absurd. Excuse me.
I hope your votes is down.
I hope you can find better use of that land.
Have something more substantial
that will last and do the city.
Well, thank you.
Thank you. Anyone else from the audience wanna
speak on this item?
Okay. I will close the public hearing
and turn it over to Council for action.
Motion to approve Lafferty with discussion.
Celebrate Support.
Anyone support council member Noonan support
discussion. Mr. Lafferty?
Thank you, uh, through the chair to Ms. Michaels, please.
Good evening, ma'am. Good
Evening, Councilman.
So I am really, my
question surrounds one item,
and it was based on the review of the original PUD
and what you had written was the express prohibition
of a car wash in the original agreement.
And I, I was curious, it piqued my interest is why would we
explicitly call it out in 2005
and why in 2024 should we change it?
I, the, um, original agreement was based on the ordinance.
Our ordinance does exclude car washes.
But our development agreement,
the original development agreement,
was intended to be fluid.
And there are provisions, provisions for modification,
and it specifically states in the agreement that any changes
to the agreement or the agreement would
supersede the ordinance.
Therefore, a major amendment would be permitted
if counsel were so inclined.
Alright, so we have, uh,
We have an ordinance prohibiting it
and the PUD was designed with that in mind
and like all other agreements, the,
the agreement would then supersede the ordinance?
Correct. Alright. Alright.
Now, I've, I've had a couple of phone conversations with,
uh, various residents.
Not one was, uh, in opposition to the car wash,
given the location, the, the, the noise factors
that we typically, uh, that we typically have
with conveyor style vacuums and, and car washes.
Uh, nothing, not, not one, uh,
instance of opposition.
I, I did hear Mr.
Vander Linden's comments,
and I tend to agree with, with him,
but the council's not here to determine the economy
and what businesses should
and should not go into a parcel of land.
If a developer purchases that land, puts it on the tax rolls
and decides we want to make an investment,
and to which the city will benefit from that, that taxable,
uh, property, I do
think we can do better.
I do think we should strive to have something more than
oil changes, car washes, uh,
and dollar stores Warren should be known for,
for things elevated.
Those are all wonderful businesses.
But, you know, again, I think that we, we have,
uh, a responsibility.
Our focus is on does this amendment make sense?
Is it consistent with, uh, the, the recommendation
by the city attorney's office?
We're not here to judge the economy.
Let the, uh, economy, let the consumers decide what's going
to be successful and what won't.
And those consumers will drive the economic factors
that will determine the future of that site.
We can make, uh, can be the impetus and, and start it today.
So I have no, uh, objection to this.
Uh, it's, I've, I shop there often, the,
the property's ready and they can begin putting shovels in
the ground, uh, pretty, uh, would imagine pretty soon.
We're looking at Mr. K Crabtree there. Yes. Got a thumbs up.
Okay. So thank you.
Mad president. Thank You.
Uh, council member Lafferty. Council member Nunan.
Yeah, so, um, I'm exofficio to the Planning commission
and, um, I had a, a question
during the planning commission meeting, uh,
the last planning commission meeting on this, uh,
I think my question was about currently the Meyer parking
lot has an outer lane
that you can bypass the, um, the Meyer entrances
and the people who are trying to get into Meyer.
And I think that that's a good thing for safety.
And I asked, is there, um,
with this plan, is there gonna be a new outer lane
that like goes between the, uh,
the car wash and the Myers?
And I think the answer was basically pretty much no.
But anyways, it, it, it, uh, it was just something
that I, I brought up.
I, I thought I had asked Ron, uh,
where the planning director, whether it was okay for me, me
to, as a city council person to interject a question,
and I thought he had said yes.
But then the next thing I got was, um, a co a,
a letter saying that I had violated the bylaws of,
of the planning commission.
And people were telling me that they thought
that the former city counselor for District five
had been up, um, asking questions
during the planning commission quite a lot.
I don't know, it was, it was, I treated fairly, was I,
it was an unequal treat, uh, treatment.
It doesn't really matter that much.
I would like to say that I thought that the planning
for this car wash is very impressive when it comes
to handling water.
Um, they have a, a recycling of their water.
They clean it and reuse it.
And, um, so I, I don't think that it's going to be adding
to any flooding events in the city.
Um, the sound of the dryers,
I believe that there is something like, um,
cinder block walls or something in the, um, between the, the
vacuums and the, uh, back behind Myers
where the residence would live.
So I, I don't think it's gonna cause
much of a problem with that.
Uh, another thing that I saw there is
that there isn't any direct, um,
special entrance off of Mound Road into
that parking lot for the car wash.
They're not planning on doing any new different, um,
entrances to the parking lot.
So it'd be pretty much like capturing people who I guess,
live behind Myers or, or come to Myers.
But it, it seems like they probably have a good business
plan and it's probably gonna go all right.
And it's a way of having more business
in areas that we already have.
And I think that this is an example of what the planning,
uh, director is, is trying to do,
get more businesses open in Warren.
Um, and I think that this is gonna be better
for our taxes and providing better
services for our citizens.
The, um, van D**e corridor that they were discussing, uh,
last night, they,
they have some very interesting plans for that.
Any real estate developers should be looking at that.
Um, because a, a great deal of thought went into
what would make that an extreme, extremely good place for
businesses, commercial, and, uh, enterprises to get in there
and also to make the, uh, make it more walkable.
And I, and, uh, this is kind of a long, long little,
you know, interlude on this one topic,
but, um, The planning
department's doing a pretty good job here
and it isn't up to us.
I believe that's Jonathan Lafferty, uh,
Councilman John Lafferty had it right.
It's not really up to us to figure out what businesses do
with the property they own once they own it.
And so I think, I believe that we should approve this.
Thank you Council member Newnan. Any other discussion?
So we're gonna break this into two motions.
The first is, uh, one,
and then the second will be two.
So it's 11 B one, and then 11 B two. So 11 B one.
I have a motion from Council member Lafferty
and support from, uh, council member Newan,
uh, Mr. Lafferty
Lafferty? Yes.
Uh, Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes.
Um, oh, sorry. Mr. Newan. I'm Mr. Mr. Newan. Nunan.
It's okay. Uh, yes.
Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries.
Next is 11 B two.
Motion to approve with discussion,
Support, Uh, discussion. Council member Lafferty.
Thank you. Uh, through the chair
to the planning departments.
I see Mr. Crabtree there.
Good evening. David Crabtree, assistant planner.
Thank you, sir. Nice to see you again. You too.
I was looking at the,
the amendments number one specific to the parking spaces.
Now this is only specific to, is this specific only
to the Meyer parking lot or are you adjusting the spaces?
Five spaces per 1000 gross square feet per building area
to one space per 300 gross feet.
Are you, does this only apply to that particular section
or does that apply to the entire PUD
for any other future developments? Well,
I believe that would, uh, affect the entire PUD.
Okay. All right.
The, the follow up I have to, that is, if you drive over to
that parking lot, you will see that
after they resurfaced their lot, which was very needed,
very much needed, uh, they retried all
of the parking spaces in yellow.
All of the accessible parking is also in yellow.
And it was brought to us by a resident.
We went out, verified it, it was, uh,
sent to the administration.
Uh, nothing had been done.
So as, uh, now I know this is not related to this item,
but I'm bringing it up to make sure it gets
the, the proper attention.
While we have the developers here, we have, uh,
representation from Grand Squa.
We expect that, uh, that will also be addressed
and that those spaces will be, uh,
following the Michigan code for a DA compliance
and to be done with, with all expeditious attention.
Appreciate you bringing that up.
Thank you, sir. I have no other questions.
Any further discussion? Sure. Council member Newnan.
Um, so Dave, uh, this change in numbers of,
um, parking lots, uh, parking spaces needed per, per,
uh, square footage of retail space,
that's pretty much a change
for throughout the city, isn't it?
Are You like, like, uh, other, um,
parking lots wouldn't need to have
as many spaces as they used to have?
No, this change is specifically for this PUD agreement.
Oh, okay. So it's not, it's not citywide. It's not
Citywide. Okay.
Thanks
Attorney. Any further discussion?
No. Hearing none.
I will call to question Mr. Lafferty? Yes, Mr. Newan?
Oh, yes. Thank you. Ms. McGee? Yes. Ms. Moore? Yes.
Ms. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes.
Rogan sees a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 12, a consideration
and adoption of a resolution to approve fourth extension
of Metro Act, telecommunications right
of way permit for Michigan Bell.
Telephone Company, DBA at and t Michigan. So moved.
Support Lafferty. Discussion,
Discussion.
Council member Bokey Through the chair of Ms. Michaels.
We've had the original agreement was back in 2006
and it's being renewed every five years.
Correct. Have the rates increased over those five years,
or always the same price?
I'm sorry, there was competing noise. I'm
Sorry. Every time the lease,
the, the, uh,
permits, uh, granite, the, the amount of money that's, uh,
received from the, uh, Metro Acts fund, does
that change every five years?
No. We're in, unfortunately, we are bound by the, um,
by the state law, which is five 5 cents per linear foot.
Okay. That's established by statute. It's non-negotiable.
Okay. And, and just for clarification for me,
what are some of the uses that we use it for?
Telephone service, telecommunication services, internet,
whatever at and t uses its
facilities for in the right of way.
That would obviously be, be part of the
ser whatever facilities they have in our right
of way would be used for telecommunication services.
Okay. Thank you. And that's telephone
and internet for the most part.
Go back to the chair. Thank you. Mad president.
Uh, council member Lafferty.
Thank you. Uh, I would like
to remind the administration when they are sending items
over to us where a contract expiration is,
uh, approaching quickly.
That, and I do know that we receive notice
that contracts are coming up for renewal,
and we get those on a quarterly
basis from the clerk's office.
This contract expires on
Sunday, the 31st.
If this council had questions, you know, if Mr.
Bokey wanted to offer an amendment and Ms.
Michaels had to go back to the MPSC or at
and t or one of the other, uh, whatever the,
the contractee would be, we wouldn't have enough time
to meet the contract renewal deadline.
So this council passed an ordinance to require that notice,
but it, it is in concert
with cooperation from the administration,
the city attorney's office, to ensure
that we have sufficient time to consider these items
that have being brought forward.
So I know that might not, you know,
this issue might not have been, uh, you know, you are doing
and bringing it up to us, uh, this late,
and I just wanted to remind, uh, the administration
that they have a responsibility to bring us items,
especially relative to contract renewals expirations, so
that we have sufficient time to send them back
and amend them should the,
should it be necessary. Yes, Ms. Michael,
If I may duly note to councilman,
but we prepared draft documents, put them in the hands of at
and t, and it took a while to go for those documents
to be reviewed by their
Mm-Hmm.
Corporate chain. And Ms.
Wesson was aware
that it could not be presented until this meeting.
You know, she, I tried
to get them under her approval sooner,
but it was, she understood the delay.
And I'm sorry, I,
I'm not seeking an apology By counsel.
It was coming, but it has been in the hands of at
and TI just got the approval recently.
Okay. Uh, and,
and I don't know what the, what the system is typically
with, uh, when, when I'm reviewing or,
or revising contracts professionally.
Uh, I have a, a system that tells me, you know,
months in advance and, you know,
involving corporation counsel and,
and special attorneys based on the, the type of law
that we're, we're dealing with, uh, to engage early.
That way we do meet those deadlines.
We're never rushed to the last minute,
especially with the municipal
body. I know you understand that.
Duly noted. Thank you. Thank you.
Any further discussion? Hearing none?
I will call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes.
Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes.
Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan sees a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 12 B.
Consideration and adoption
of a resolution approving amendments
to the 20 23 20 24 Hot Boy agreement between
O-L-H-S-A and the City of Warren
for tenant-based rental assistance. So moved.
Support Lafferty.
Any discussion? Hearing none. I'll call the question.
Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr.
Bokey? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes.
Rogan sees a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 13 a, uh, council secretary Mindy Moore.
Discussion in Rea appointment of Nancy Cooper Green
to conduct a license appeals hearing for Beauty Graceful
and Health Spa at 58 19 13 Mile Road, Warren, Michigan,
4 8 0 9 2. So moved
Support Lafferty with discussion.
Discussion Ms. Moore? Yes.
Thank you. Um, there is a, um, uh, a
beauty graceful and health spa lost their license.
Um, the police, um, 'cause of police action
and for, they have applied for a new license
and, um, the, they have to be given a hearing
to reinstate their license.
Counsel has to prove it.
Um, certainly we're not hearing officers here, so, um, we,
um, I'm requesting that we appoint, uh, Nancy Cooper Green.
She was a former Chief Assistant attorney
for many, many years here.
Um, she lives in the community
and I think she would do a, a fine, partial neutral job
of being the hearing officer for, um, this hearing.
We don't have a date yet. She would be in charge of that.
Um, and, uh, it's my anticipation that she would be paid,
you know, what a visiting judge would make,
um, at the district court.
We'll figure that out. If we have money in our contractual
or, um, administrative allocated,
we can work out those details.
Um, when we do a final,
Any additional discussion?
Madam President, Council member Lafferty
Through the chair to Secretary Moore.
Do we have the ability to appoint her
as a standing appointment so that when these come up,
they're just handled so through the chair to Mr. Schroeder?
Perhaps. I'm just wondering.
These, these don't come up very often.
It's twice, twice in the last five years, I think. Okay.
This is the second time.
Mm-Hmm. And the first one was canceled.
Right? I remember that one. This
Was the same issue, I think, or,
or it's the same kind of business.
I'm, and I'm, I'm only seeking from a efficiency
standpoint, if we shouldn't have a standing appointment
for a period of three years
and, you know, maybe bring it up, uh, as, uh,
as an item. Do
You have an answer there, Mr.
Cho? I'm looking at,
I think it's case by case.
I think that's what's
Intended to be. It's a case by case
basis. Okay.
It's okay. So it doesn't come up that often?
It won't, it's not that inconvenient. Fair
Enough. Thank
you.
Can you make the part of the motion that the wage
or the rate would be the same as a
Visiting judge? Yes. I
would make the motion that the rate, um,
she's paid would be the same as Avis Visiting Judge
and 37 District Court.
I'll support that amendment.
Any additional discussion? Hearing none.
I will call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes.
Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee?
Yes. Rogan sees a yes. Motion carries. Next item. Uh,
Next item. MS
13 B. Council Secretary Mindy Moore discussion
and rate boards and commissions. So moved.
Support Dwyer support, uh, or motion.
Moore Dwyer Support. Uh, discussion. Secretary Moore. Thank
You. Uh, we still have a
problem with our boards and commissions.
Um, ongoing problem.
I happen to, uh, um,
attend the library commission meeting last week,
and there is a member who is actually the vice president
of the, uh, commission, um, who's not been appointed, um,
according to the charter provisions.
Um, he's a great board member. I'm not saying that he's not.
Um, but we need to follow the charter on the appointments
to our boards and commissions.
And, um, it's a simple matter of the mayor sending over
that appointment to council and notifying us of it.
Um, there are also still some, um, uh,
discrepancies in the TFA board.
I think there's only two members that have been rightfully,
um, approved through the, uh, charter,
um, procedure.
And there's other boards
and commissions that are, uh, lacking members.
Um, and, you know, I think we need to get rolling.
It's been five months and we have to be functional.
And, um, people are asking us who's appointed?
Am I getting reappointed?
Uh, there were certain people that were appointed,
appointed, um, quote unquote
by the former mayor on his way out between the election
and when the new mayor took office.
And those appointments are not, um, legitimate
because the, the charter wasn't followed.
And, um, so those just need to be sent over
by the current mayor, notify this council just
so we can get everything, um, by the charter
and make sure everything is done appropriately.
Um, I don't, there's, you know,
nobody mo nobody's gonna com complain about the people on
the cultural commission, but they were sent,
they were not sent over and council wasn't notified.
So we would just really like to have the charter followed.
And, um, those people,
and of course if the mayor doesn't wanna appoint them,
that's certainly her prerogative.
She gets to appoint who she wants.
And, um, so, you know, she may not want to appoint some
of those that were made by the mayor
and whether he was going out, but we should clean up the,
the, uh, commission so that we know who's on them,
what their terms are, uh, when their term expired.
And we need to get, of course, their applications for, uh,
the commission, um, so that we can make sure
that they're not in default to the city.
Um, because, uh, as far as I know, um, we are not getting
anything from the administration saying they are,
uh, not in default.
We would like to see that on all
applications for boards and commissions.
We'd like to see a sign off by the city treasurer.
The city treasurer actually has access to information
that we don't have, um, uh, with the county,
so she can find out who's in default once the, that, uh,
liability leaves the city.
So I would just implore the mayor to at least, um, take care
of the, um, members
that are not appointed correctly at this point.
Um, and there's a lot of people
that wanna be on boards and commissions.
I'm getting calls and, you know,
texts all the time that I applied.
I'd really like to be on a board or commission.
And when we have people out there that really,
really wanna serve their community,
we should give them the respect
and the courtesy of at least calling them back.
I have your application, we're looking at it, uh,
or No, we're not interested in you for this commission.
Um, at least let people know, um,
because a lot of people are out there hanging
and not knowing what's going forward.
And maybe they're not right for one commission,
but they could be right for another,
but at least let people know.
I think that would be the, um, courteous thing to do.
Thank you.
Any additional discussion?
Just a motion to receive and file.
Yeah. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed?
Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 13 C Legal counsel Jeffrey Schroeder.
Discussion in Ray recommendations from the
Charter Review Committee. Motion to approve
Support Lafferty Discussion.
Thank you. Um, on November 20th at the council's first
organizational meeting, a number
of committees were appointed by the council.
One of those committees is the, um,
charter Review Committee.
And the job of the Charter review committee is
to look at the charter that was adopted in 1957
and, um, you know, has a lot of provisions
that are outta date and things that don't work.
Um, and so the committee first met on February 6th,
and the committee has looked at a list
of at least 19 different provisions of the charter
that are either outta date or not functioning or vague
or need some attention.
Um, we all know
that the committee can't recommend 19
charter amendments all at once.
It would overwhelm the ballot.
Keep in mind a charter amendment has to be put on the ballot
for the voters to approve.
It has to be approved by five council members.
So the super majority, five council
members have to vote for it.
And if the council votes for it, it has to go
to the Michigan Attorney General
and the governor's office to review the language
to make sure that the language
and the, the amendment that the council's attempting
to propose is in conformity with state law.
So the, the committee discussed a lot of ideas
and came back, uh, at a second meeting on March 11th
and has decided, uh, to make a couple of recommendations.
We're gonna put this in writing
and bring it back for the full council to vote on.
This isn't being recommended
for any substantive action tonight.
It's more of an update so we can bring back some language.
The first recommendation was, um, with respect
to the election commission to change
the election commission composition.
Uh, the election commission is currently consists
of the clerk who's elected the city attorney,
who's appointed, and the city assessor who's appointed.
That has been the case since 1957.
When the city was founded back in 1957, the clerk,
the attorney, and the assessor were all required
to be residents of the city.
They had to live in the city.
That was the case until the year 2000
when then Governor Engler, if you remember him, he signed
a law that allowed attorney, the attorney and assessor
and all employees to not have to live in the city anymore.
And since that time, most of the attorneys
and assessors have not lived in the city.
Uh, so we have a majority of the election commission
that are not city residents.
In addition to the fact that, um,
right now we have a contract city assessor who's not a
full-time appointee of the city.
And I'm not sure exactly
how the election commission is handling that.
So the committee looked at the top 20 cities in Michigan
by population and looked at
how these election commissions are comprised.
And it's really a lot of varying, uh,
approaches by different communities.
Sterling Heights has the city clerk
and two citizens appointed
to sit on the election commission.
Some communities have the assessor like Warren,
and we really focused on the assessor, um, as something
that might need a change.
Um, and the recommendation from the committee moving forward
is to ask the voters if they wanna replace the assessor with
a citizen appointee, uh, to the election commission.
Just a resident who sits on the commission
like they have in Sterling Heights.
Sterling Heights has two. There are a number
of other communities that have this.
There are various other options available.
Um, the reason for this, um, is
that the committee is recommending it for number one,
a majority of the cush members will be city residents,
as I just explained.
Um, currently the city assessor's being contracted,
that would allow, you know,
the city more flexibility in contracting with the county
or a contract assessor without having an assessor
sitting on the committee.
Also, when we come around to the redistricting issue,
which was very contentious, very,
very contentious previously,
it would ensure one more citizen is sitting on the
redistricting commission, um, instead
of an appointed city official.
Um, also we can address the issue of substitution
of election commission members by city staff.
The current charter essentially allows for, um,
the, um, sitting members of the commission to appoint people
to sit in their stead if they're not there.
Um, and that seemed to be an issue at the committee.
We heard from some residents that didn't like
that they show up to an election commission meeting,
and it's not the clerk or the assessor
or the attorney, it's someone else they
appointed to sit in their place.
And that's something I think once they, that needs
to be addressed according to the committee.
So we're looking for a proposed charter amendment
for the August 6th primary ballot,
which would replace the assessor
with a citizen representative, um,
on the election commission.
So that's number one. Number two, um, is an issue dealing
with partial terms.
Um, the, we were in extensive litigation last year,
and, uh, it had to do with partial terms.
It's, it's a little bit unclear in the charter currently,
as we know, the charter says the greater
of three complete terms or 12 years is the limit
for any city elected official in any position.
Um, and it doesn't address partial terms.
So any partial term you serve doesn't count.
So one issue that kept coming up was someone could serve
three years and 11 months and resign at the last minute,
and that whole term wouldn't count for term limits,
and they could keep doing this over and over.
Of course, that hasn't happened yet,
but the door is open for that.
In fact, the Attorney General's office back in 1998 when
term limits was first opposed, wrote a letter saying,
you really should address this as a council.
The council hadn't addressed it. We ended up in litigation.
So the committee really wants to resolve this,
and the recommendation is
that we follow the state law on partial terms,
which is if you serve more than half of that term,
that it counts as a full term for purposes of term limits.
So we have a four year term.
If you serve two years or more, that counts as a full term.
If you serve less than two years, that's a partial term.
It doesn't count for term limits.
We're using the state law model. So that's the second.
Um, and I would strongly recommend that
because we would prevent future litigation over the
ambiguity in the charter third issue that we discussed
that we're recommending no action on right now.
But it's an issue that we're going to monitor,
which is the conflict between the city charter
and state law when it comes to the terms, the ending
of the term of office in the beginning of the new term.
So, uh, historically since 1957, um,
when there's a mayoral election
and a council election, the,
the new officers would take their, their office
the Monday following the election.
So you have an election on Tuesday
and they count the votes, they certify the election,
and the following Monday they're starting their new term.
And it's a really quick turnaround.
And this really came to a head last year in the election
when the new state law, which requires six days
for clerks and county clerks to count military
and overseas ballots, they have to wait six days
after the election to, for these ballots to come in
to make sure military and overseas ballots are counted.
And that conflicted with the charter.
And we had that extra week.
And I know having been around the city for a number
of years, this has always been a concern
because it's such a quick turnaround.
I remember when Mayor Fouts took over,
I was in the city attorney's office
and he didn't like the quick turnaround
because, you know, it's so quick
after the election that you're taking office
that the transition is not smooth.
Um, so I had the opportunity to speak about this
to the state bar of Michigan last month at a conference, uh,
with the government attorneys.
There were 75 government attorneys from all over the state.
And I just brought the issue up
and I suggested that it's really difficult for the council
and the, the city to solve this problem
because you have to extend your own term
of office to solve the problem.
And nobody wants to vote to extend their own term.
I dunno, maybe one, maybe one person does, but I don't know.
But, um, you don't wanna extend your own terms.
So there should be a state law fix.
And after I spoke the, uh, attorney
for the legislature was there,
the Michigan House representative, she approached me
and said she was there to take notes.
And she really liked the suggestion
and wants to take this back to a committee
and the State House to see if they could push a change.
'cause there were other communities there,
I think East Lansing, Troy,
there were other communities where this was a big issue.
So we don't wanna make a,
a propose a charter amendment at this time for that.
But, uh, just move forward
and interact with the state legislature
and see if they can propose a fix so
that we don't have this situation.
Again. I would fear a situation
where we had an election on Tuesday
and there was like a recount.
It was a really close election,
and the recount's still going,
and you're supposed to have already taken
office, you know, the next Monday.
That's a, that's too quick.
So that's the recommendation is to try to
not make a charter amendment out
to see if we can have a state law fixed.
But the other two, uh, the proposal is
to maybe bring back some
language for the council to look at.
Of course, the council will have the final say on the
language for changing the election commission
and for addressing the partial terms.
We have a number of other issues the committee will look
at moving forward.
We talked about the redistricting process,
maybe taking another look at that
and the shape of the districts to see how
that could be changed moving forward.
Something just came up the other day about ex officios
and some issues we can talk about later.
But those are the recommendations for now.
I can answer any questions. Thank you.
Okay. Any questions or discussion?
Just, just one minute.
There was, there was one more. I apologize.
Uh, thanks for the reminder.
Um, and that has to do with the city charter requires, um,
all this, uh, a certain number of bulletin boards
with posting, uh, for meeting notices.
It takes up a lot of effort when we now can use the
internet, uh, to do so.
So we want to come back with a reform for that as well, just
to save some money and, uh, be more efficient.
Any additional discussion? Madam President,
Council member Lafferty?
Uh, just a question through the chair to Mr. Schroeder.
The item number three,
and you talked about the seeking a a state law change.
Are you asking for us to tonight to send a letter
or any correspondence relative to that?
Or is that something we're gonna come back to later?
I would just ask for the council's approval
to move forward with discussions
with the attorney at the legislature to see if they can, um,
uh, come up with a proposal and then we can report back.
Um, and if we don't see any movement on this within a year,
we can, uh, decide other options.
Okay. Yeah, I'd like to see our, uh,
legislative delegation.
Our, uh, uh, our lobbyist, uh,
certainly start working on our behalf to, to help that.
And then, uh, with Mr. Schroder's, uh, uh, guidance,
I think we'll, we'll be successful there.
Thank you.
Any additional discussion?
So I'll motion to receive and file,
unless you need a formal motion to, just
To bring back the language.
Okay. So the motion to bring back the language
and have, uh, Mr. Schroeder continue conversations
with the state legislature.
Uh, Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes.
Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes.
Ms. McGee? Yes. Grogan sees a yes.
Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 13 D Towing subcommittee recommendation
approving the City of Warren Towing List.
So moved with discussion
Support, Lafferty Discussion, uh, council Member
Moore, Madam Chair.
Um, this, uh, towing committee met, um, last week, I guess.
Um, everybody on the, uh, proposed list is, uh, qualified.
Um, we did discuss at, um, that time, um,
just to, for everyone to know, there is a,
an ordinance in the city for towing.
And in that ordinance, it contains the charges
that the towing companies are allowed to charge.
It's been proposed that, um, we increase, um, those rates.
Um, but one of the things we've, um, discussed doing is, uh,
modifying the ordinance.
There's also a, you know, a typo I saw in the ordinance,
but that's, you know, not a big deal,
but to start doing the rates by resolution
as opposed to having
to do a whole new ordinance for the rates.
And that would be easier to do rather than first reading,
second reading on rates.
And there hasn't been a rate increase since 2014 or 2015,
but that's something we'll discuss after today.
Um, I did, um, um,
a little upset about something
that happened a little while ago.
Um, an attorney from one of the, uh,
proposed towing companies, uh, dropped off in
what I perceive as a, an attempt to smear one
of the other companies on the proposed list of a, uh, um,
an arrest record that was dismissed the next day,
or a day or two later.
And there, there was, there was no going forward.
And, and the papers looks like something's been redacted
from it, uh, maybe the rest of the document,
but I think that, that, you know, my first reaction, uh,
when I heard that was to make a proposal tonight to ask that
that company be taken off all three positions off of the,
uh, towing list and not even be considered tonight.
Um, that's not the way we should be doing business.
Uh, we had our meeting, we discussed, um, the items,
and I thought it was a good meeting.
Um, there are some things the towing
companies would like our help on.
Um, you know, maybe not everybody knows, but they go
and pick up abandoned cars
and a lot of times they're stuck with them.
Or vehicles are put on hold for a long time
and they're stuck paying the, uh, um, you know,
storage rates rack up
and then somebody comes and they don't pay it.
And, you know, so they have to get rid of the vehicle.
Usually at auction. Boats are another problem.
We, you know, I think we should put our heads together
and try to come up
with a better answer on how to deal with that.
Um, you know, maybe we can deal with, you know, some
with DPW and some other, uh,
or sanitation, how to come up with a better, um,
because they're losing 'em a lot of money dealing with,
uh, picking up boats.
'cause people are, they just sit them on the
street and then we have to go.
They don't wanna get rid of themselves.
So, um, we have to go and have them removed.
So there's a couple things,
but I think we can deal with those things, um, when we deal
with the, the rate when, if we decide we wanna do an, um,
you know, resolution for the rates as opposed to ordinance.
But that's something we can decide later.
Any additional discussion? I have two items.
Uh, one is, I believe, uh, one
or two of these entities is owned by, uh, Mr.
Nuner who was here and there was a request for him to go
before ZBA and I, I don't know that that happened,
and I don't know what the follow up is.
Um, Ms Camp sent me the result letter from that meeting,
but I don't know that there was any resolution to
what we had requested.
So I, I would love some discussion on how to resolve this.
I would not necessarily wanna continue
to keep them on the eligibility list.
If there is some outstanding item, I don't know
what the legalities are, and maybe Mr.
Schroer can, uh, speak to it
and we can come back to the item if,
or bifurcate if needed.
Sure. Um, you know, at this point,
I think you have a report that they're all qualified
and, um, all companies on the list are qualified.
And I think we'd have to do a little more investigation
to see if that's resolved or not.
And go back through the process. We went through before.
I believe that there were some issues.
There was a suspension of the company, it came back
to council, they were reinstated.
So I think we would have to follow that process.
Um, so I think maybe, um, send it back
to the administration
and police department to follow up on, uh,
where we are with that process.
And if something isn't being done properly, see
what effect it would have on this.
But for now, the report you have in hand
is that they're all qualified.
Okay. Thank you. So a second motion we could make would be
to, uh, send that result letter
and ask for additional inspections
or what the administration would do, uh, for new nurse
and to report back to counsel on where that stands.
Madam Chair, if I may? Yes. Mm-Hmm.
Um, also, uh, Mr. Schroeder can explain this.
Um, any company can be taken off the tow list at the request
of the police commissioner, counsel.
So this is, we are not entering into a
contract, um, with anyone.
We are allowing them to be on the list to be on the call.
This one, call this one, call this one, right? Am I correct?
That's correct. You're establishing an eligibility list
for, you know, it's an active police tow list for the city.
We're not approving a contract.
The mayor and clerk aren't gonna sign a contract.
This is approval to be on a list. They rotate that list.
They're all deemed eligible by the clerk.
So, um, and there's remedies
of suspension from the active tow list.
We saw that in the last year or two.
The police commissioner, um, can, uh, well, first of all,
the police commissioner has to recommend
to the towing C committee for any suspension.
I think that's what they skipped over before.
But, um, it has to come to the towing committee.
And, you know, a first time violation is a suspension
of 21 days, and it goes all the way up to
a lengthy suspension or being barred from, from the list.
I mean, obviously, if there's a problem with anyone on
that list and they do some wrongdoing in the community
or in another community, there are options to suspend them,
remove them, or non-renew them in the next year.
This comes up every single year.
Thank you. Second, uh, item that I have is, uh,
would be a, a third motion to have Mr.
Schroer research a bit about how to make the process
for selecting companies, uh, more equitable.
Uh, there's, we've seen in many communities
where towing contracts have become, uh, hot breads
for corruption and to make the process going forward
as transparent and equitable as proce, uh, possible.
I would love to understand what we can do.
I know it's an eligibility list,
but I think it would be important to try
and provide a bit more, uh, objectivity to the process.
So first motion is, uh, Ms. Moore and Mr.
Lafferty, which is to approve the list of, uh,
as presented by the committee.
Is there any additional discussion about that? Okay,
Madam Chair, could I add to that, that we're going to, um,
also look into an ordinance, uh, for, um,
the a rate increase?
Yes. Mary, should
that be a separate item? No, that's fine. Okay.
I'll accept that as an amendment. You'll
Accept that. Thank you. Um,
makers and the motion. Accept it.
So we're voting on the, the list
and also, uh, an ordinance around fees.
Uh, Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Bokey?
Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes.
Rogan sees a yes. Motion carries.
The next is if I could have someone make a motion in support
for research around ZBA and new nurse.
So moved. Support Lafferty.
Any discussion here?
Discussion? Uh, just a clarification, just exactly
what are you asking for?
So, the result letter that came over when we originally
had was that Nuner had to go
and back in front of, uh, ZBA, uh,
regarding some open storage and some of the existing things.
We had given them somewhat of an extension,
I think six months, if I'm remembering Mary.
And I don't think that has transpired.
These are separate entities,
but obviously under the same ownership.
So would like to know are they compliant with
based on the last inspection
and what are next steps for them to make sure
that they continue to be compliant?
Okay. And I, I do know that, uh, at, at the,
the subcommittee, I did ask each, uh, uh, candidate for,
you know, their, their status and compliance.
We reviewed the packet
that was sent along from the clerk's office,
their certificate of compliance, their inspection reports,
everything was, was up to par, uh,
based on ordinance, what, what is required as Mr.
Schroder has stated. And that, um,
I had also asked if any of them,
because you know, my history with, uh, body by Bruce
and the junkyard, uh, cleanup
that earned me the name junkyard Jonathan, uh,
that I'll proudly wear as a merit badge going forward.
That, uh, they were, uh, specifically Nuner said that they,
you know, were not operating one,
don't have one on the property.
And so I do know, uh, from conversation that, uh,
before his departure, Mr.
Cummins did indicate that that matter had been resolved.
But I will certainly, you know, support a motion to have
official correspondence sent
to the council office with regard to that.
Thank, thank you. Any further discussion?
Uh, Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr.
Bokey? Yes. Mr. Noonan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes.
Grogan C is a yes. Motion carries.
Last motion is for Mr. Schroeder to research
how we might make, uh, towing eligibility
and, uh, work more, uh,
transparent and OB.
Objective.
So moved. Jonathan,
or Council member Lafferty is motion.
Ms. McGee is support. Any other discussion?
Okay, Mr. Lafferty?
Yes. Ms. McGee?
Yes. Uh, Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes.
Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yep. Rogan C is a yes.
Motion carries. Next item. Next
Item is 13 E Council President Angela Rogan's.
Discussion in Ray Landmark Estates update
from the legal department. So moved.
Support Lafferty. Thank you.
Uh, I had a email with, uh, Ms.
Michaels, and she is going to do some research
and bring this item to the next meeting.
She needed a little bit of time to, uh, go
through some files, um, from Mr. Vincent
and make sure she was presenting an update.
Uh, as everyone knows, this is a very important issue to me
and, uh, want, uh, to make sure that those folks, uh,
have legal action taken, if that's what we need to be doing.
So, uh, so I will entertain a motion to table it.
Motion to table Support.
Uh, Mr. Lafferty? Yes. To table.
Ms. Moore? Yes.
Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes.
Uh, Mr. Nunan?
Yes. Mr. Table. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan sees a yes.
Uh, items. Table two. Next meeting. Next item. Next
Item is 13 F Council President Angela Rogan sees
discussion in Ray Harmony Transportation. So moved.
Support Dwyer. Thank you.
Uh, so there is a, a business here in the city of Warren
that operates on Van D**e, uh, that does a variety
of medical services.
I won't try to, uh, describe all of them,
although I've, uh, visited along
with a number of council folks.
Uh, the business is looking to do non-emergency, uh,
transportation, uh, in the city and beyond.
And in order to do that through the state,
they need a mutual aid agreement, uh, with the city.
And apparently months ago, prior to our last election,
there was conversations with, uh,
the police commissioner and the mayor's office.
And it obviously, uh, has not been at the top forefront
of folks mines,
but these folks are, uh, sitting with a number of, uh,
ambulance vehicles that they cannot operate.
And so what I'm asking is they can't operate
'cause they don't have a license, uh, asking just
to bring this to the administration's attention
and give these folks a, uh, an answer one way
or another, whether they're going
to enter into a mutual aid agreement, whether, uh, they need
to find another municipality to do so.
Uh, but just wanting to make sure
that they get an answer one way or another,
and that the appropriate folks have a look at whatever
documentation is needed and bring that then back to counsel,
if that's what they choose for approval.
So it's just most motion to receive and file really,
or a motion to send it over to the administration.
Motion to receive and
file. Okay. Okay.
Support. Okay. With discussion? Yes.
I think we're finding out that we're probably gonna have
to put an item back on the agenda for President.
Neighborhood District concerns. Yeah.
Was it We tried. We did.
Yeah. Any other discussion?
Madam President? Through the chair?
Yeah. Yes. Council member Dwyer.
Um, I, I think the consideration of going
with Harmony Ambulance is really a win-win situation for us.
They've, um, been involved in emergency services
for 17 years.
They've had an office here in Warren
for the past eight years.
They have several advanced life support ambulances,
ambulances with state-of-the-art equipment.
There's really no obligation by the city
to utilize their services.
They would be more as a standby mutual aid type,
as needed situation.
And they are also looking at putting in a new office,
a second office in the south end of Warren.
So I don't see how we could lose. That's all I have.
Thank you. All in favor
to send this to the administration.
Aye. Aye. Motion to receive a file.
Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Whatever you want.
Thank you.
Next item, next item is 13 G, which is, uh,
Jeff Schroeder discussion in rate planning commission rules.
Motion to approve with quick discussion.
Support Lafferty Madam Chair.
Uh, discussion? Yeah, I just want to bring up that,
um, Mr.
Um, Nunan actually brought this item up and, um,
because there was some issues at the Planning
commission, so Mr.
Schroeder's gonna give us an update on
those rules. Thank you
So much.
Yeah, thank you. I did hear about Councilman Newton's
appearance at the Planning Commission
where he was told he couldn't speak on an item.
Um, I looked at the rule, I've reviewed it,
and it's my legal opinion, very strong opinion that this is
unconstitutional and there's case law on point in the state
that would limit that.
So I went and looked at the pending commission,
bylaw section 4.4.
They adopted these bylaws.
And, um, what's interesting is maybe just a little bit
of background, I don't want to drone on too long,
but I think a little background is helpful.
Ex officios are non-voting members in Warren
of the Planning Commission.
They're appointed by this council
to be members of the planning commission.
If you actually look at state law in many communities,
the ex officio is a voting member
of the planning Commission.
It's only because our charter says they're a non-voting
member, that they don't vote.
So you look up the state planning enabling Act,
and it says the ex officios are voting members
unless prohibited by charter.
So our charter says, you're not voting member.
That doesn't mean you can't speak on
behalf of the community.
When you are there as a ex officio appointed by this board,
you're a member of that body.
You just can't vote. So it does say
that ex officios cannot do the following.
There's a list of eight things you can't do.
According to the planning commission, you can't vote. Okay?
I agree with that. You can't make motions.
That's number two. I guess you
can't vote, you can't make motions.
I'm not gonna argue with that. Number three,
you can't speak on an item
that will be voted on by city council.
I completely disagree with that.
There is case law that council members can't appear in front
of, like zoning and planning boards
representing private interests.
So you can't go to the planning commission
and represent a cement batching company
and ask them to approve it.
But I think everybody here knows the bounds of their ethics
and rules that you would never appear on behalf
of a private interest in front of a, the zoning board
where you appoint the members or
even the planning commission.
That's the real issue.
Um, in fact, there was a 2016 case that said, as long
as a council member speaking on behalf
of the public interest, they're allowed to speak.
You're there speaking on behalf of the public
as an elected official.
The fourth thing you can't do is speak on a subject
that's not directly related to the item being discussed.
Of course, I agree with that.
That's Robert's rules of orders.
If you get up there and you want
to talk about something completely irrelevant, that's okay
for the chairperson to
gavel you and say, you're out of order.
This one's interesting.
Number five, you cannot interact
with audience members in the auditorium
while the meeting is taking place.
Now, I lost my glasses in a water slide accident a couple
weeks ago, but I have my contacts in
and I've seen quite a few people interacting
with each other tonight, including staff.
Uh, and I didn't see
that they were disruptive to the meeting.
But to say, you can't speak
to any audience members in the auditorium.
You're elected, you represent a district,
you represent the entire city.
You shouldn't be able to be gagged from talking to people
as long as you're not being disruptive.
If you're being disruptive,
absolutely take it in the hallway.
Um, so I don't understand that one.
The next one is, this is the best.
You cannot leave the meeting before it's adjourned.
So I would hope that if, you know,
sometimes nature calls, I guess
unless you wanna violate the rules, you better sweat it out
because Yes.
Well, that's what I said. If you can't vote,
you can't make motions.
You can't speak on an item, you can't talk
to audience members, and you can't leave.
You're just a prisoner.
So, seriously, that's my take on this.
Um, the next rule number seven,
you can't address commissioner staff
or attorneys on the record
without the chairperson's permission.
I agree. You can't get up and take over the meeting.
There's rule that that's fine.
And number eight, which I totally agree with, you can't
otherwise be disruptive during the meeting.
I think that would cover a lot of it.
So I think that we need to have a, um, a sit down with,
I have an ongoing conversation with Ms.
Michaels. Maybe she'd be willing to entertain bringing this
to the Planning Commission, at least two or three of these,
because they just seem completely unreasonable
and not legal to me.
Any additional discussion?
Yes. Adam, chair a question from Mr. Schroer to the chair.
Yep. Mr. Bokey,
Um, how many appointees do we have on the planning
commission that the council does?
Two. Two. Two. Okay.
Uh, recently we attended a municipal league,
and we had a discussion about that in, in training.
And I, it probably was geared more for a zoning board
where we have more control, uh, to not speak to the,
the panel, uh, planning commission or the, uh, zoning board
because we make the appointments.
And by us standing there,
they're under pressure to do what we say.
Um, could you just
Yes, I did. I
researched that. And that's essentially,
there was a first, there was a case from the 1960s
where a council member was representing their brother
and sister, something along those lines on a land use issue.
And that was considered duress. Okay.
But the 2016 case in Michigan, it's, uh, township
of Coville, uh, Michigan Court of Appeals said, as long
as you're speaking on behalf of the
public interest, you should be allowed to speak.
If you're speaking on behalf of a private interest, uh,
then you're, you're not allowed to speak.
You should be more careful with the zoning board
because the council does appoint the zoning board.
You don't appoint the planning commission.
And in fact, the ex officio,
and there's, I don't, the ex officials,
the planning commission are considered members.
And under state law in many communities, the member, the,
they vote on the planning commission.
And when the item comes back
to council, they're voting on it again.
So this happens in Royal Oak.
Uh, the, the council member is on the planning commission.
It's a lot of work. They have
to go planning commission one night and council the next.
So on the planning commission, they vote,
they make a recommendation,
and they're voting on their own recommendation when they're
sitting on the planning commission.
So the, the idea that you're speaking
and representing the public interest, it should be allowed.
But you wanna be careful. You don't want to, you don't want
to say, Hey, I wanna remind you, I appointed you
and I really want you to vote this way.
That's not necessarily the,
the objective speaking all the time.
Sometimes there's a public
interest question you wanna address.
There's a neighbor concern,
or there's another concern that you want to address.
And so the issue is whether you're speaking on behalf
of the public interest or, or a private interest.
Thank you, Madam Chair,
Back to chair. Thank
you, Madam Chair. Council member, um,
Moore more.
There have been situations also where there's a resident
and not everybody is comfortable coming and speaking
before a, a huge body.
And oftentimes a resident will convey,
you know, I really am against this.
But, you know, and then I think in a situation like that,
you should be able to go up
and say, you know, I talked to Ms. McGee, um,
she lives across the street from this car wash they're gonna
put in and it's going to, she works nights
and, you know, she doesn't want the loud noise or whatever.
So I think that in that situation, we should,
and just to digress, digress a little bit.
I don't know, it's come up here,
but in the past, if any of us have had issues with planning
or, um, something has to go
before ZBA, you know, hire a representative
to go in your place,
and then it doesn't, you're not putting undue
influence directly to somebody,
Adam, president. That's
What, that's you as city officials usually do that too.
They'll get some, a representative. Mm-Hmm.
Tons of member laity.
And to add on just, uh, one item that you brought up,
Mr. Schroeder, I thought was, was abundantly true,
interacting with the, the members of the public.
They get a notice mailed to them saying,
there's something happening within 300 feet of your home
or, you know, specific radius.
And that might be their first
interaction with the planning commission.
They don't know. They don't understand what the process is.
And the ex officios, I can't tell you
how many times over the last four years, uh,
that I proceeded Mr.
Uh, Nunan on as ex-officio.
How many times that I had interacted with members
of the public to explain after a vote had taken place
or before the meeting.
Here's what you're going to see.
Here's when you'll be able to speak
during the public hearing.
You have another item at the end
of the meeting during audience.
And then if the vote was one way or another
and it was going to be tabled, well,
when is that going to happen?
Will we get another notice if it passed?
When does it go to city council?
Or if it does go to city council, what are the next steps?
You play a very important role, both of you, Mr.
Nunan and, and Ms. McGee.
And that's, I think that's, that's part of your role
to facilitate that.
You are wonderful representatives of your community.
And I know from reading the, the comments in the agenda
or in the, in the minutes, you know, Mr.
Nunan, you, you stood up
and you advocated for your community.
You did nothing wrong.
I have spoken at the planning commission only a few times.
I know Mr. Watts, when he was on the council,
and he was ex officio.
He did the same thing. Mr.
Kozinski was well known for going in front of the, uh,
in front of the planning commission in, in his own capacity,
advocating for his community.
So you by, by any stretch,
do not think you did anything wrong.
You did not. You are acting in your capacity
and never, never shirk away from, from doing that.
And I'm glad you brought that up
because this was a very worthwhile, uh, position.
And I hope that, uh, as a result of what you brought us,
brought to our attention, that we
can make some meaningful changes.
Chair to, uh, through the chair to John, uh,
Councilman Lafferty.
Uh, were you ever slapped with the, um, bylaws
of the planning commission?
I, I was never slapped, uh, at you weren't slapped
At all And down, but no, I was never asked
to sit down Uhhuh.
I was never asked to refrain from speaking.
And so when I, when I learned of this, I was quite surprised
that this was being selectively enforced.
Well, I hope, I hope this council does a better job
of being fair and even handed. Thank you so much.
Thank you Mr. Noonan. Any additional discussion?
Hearing none, I will call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr.
Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes.
Mr. Noonan? Yep. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes.
Motion carries. Next item. Next
Item is, is, um, 14 A, which was tabled, um,
to today's date.
Um, I don't believe we have received that informa.
Oh, this is a different one. Yep. This is a
Different one. Motion to remove
from the table. Yep. Sorry.
I have a motion to remove from the table. Anyone? Support.
Support I support.
Um, Mickey. Mickey Support. Uh, all in favor? Aye.
Aye. Any opposed?
Uh, item is removed from the table. Motion to
Motion to approve.
14. A, uh, with discussion,
Support. Anyone
Support Ms. Moore?
Support, uh, discussion. Council member Lafferty.
Thank you. Through the chair to Ms. Gaius.
At the last meeting, we had tabled this
because the, uh, the backup material, uh,
did not indicate if this was a new plant going in
or a renewal of the existing plan, so,
right. That's correct. Ms. G.
Hi. Good evening, counsel. Yes, that's correct.
It was, um, I took the last resolution
and kind of didn't tweak it enough, so I changed it to,
to refer that as an extension of the current batch plan.
Thank you. Just feedback from, uh, the meetings
that I've had at the UAW Hall.
Uh, they're on the same corner. Uh, opposite.
Yes, they do complain, especially in the, the drier weather.
And you'll see on the street
that the particulates are rather, uh, uh,
rather thick on the street.
Uh, both tank and Lorna, where they intersect
and that they're asking if the street sweepers can come
through, or if we can, I, I know we have irrigation on top
of the, on top of the mounds.
They do have a sprinkler system.
I'm just not sure if it's running often
enough to keep the, uh,
The dust down. The
Dust. Yeah.
Uh, I'll talk to the, um, to Mark Anthony
and make sure that they keep the streets swept up.
I have an inspector go out there
and inspect it occasionally.
Um, but I'll have that also happen more often.
Thank you. Mm-Hmm. Any additional discussion?
Hearing none? I'll call the question. Mr. Lafferty? Yes.
Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey?
Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes.
Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 14 B,
which was tabled 3 26 20 24.
Motion to remove from the table.
We don't have the information.
Support. Anyone Support.
Support McGee? All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed?
Uh, item is removed from the table.
Seeking a motion to support or deny. Woo.
We we Madam chair? Yes.
Um, we still, we don't have the answer to C
and I don't think we can vote for B
because C um, is the funding mechanism.
And we don't have the answer about the assessment
of the transfer station because
that was done last year already.
And I don't know, I don't have an answer.
Why it's being done again.
Is anyone from the admission?
Nobody sent that to us.
We didn't get any information that we asked for.
Ms, can you speak to this item? We have
To remove, we have to take, do a vote on B then
motion to approve
Support Lafferty For discussion only.
So, uh, the transfer station, the first, um, study
that was done was a visual.
Um, they used a drones to, uh, inspect the roof.
Um, it was a very preliminary study.
Um, this one is a much more in depth structural study.
They're actually testing the, um, floors.
Uh, the, the strength
of the steel in the floors and the walls.
Uh, they're, they're doing a lot more in depth te um,
testing than the first study.
Madam Chair? Yes. Why?
I mean, because the, I'm curious
because we had nobody, no qualified bidder wants
to use the transfer station.
So we're gonna probably have to go out for bid
or we probably need to entertain selling it.
Uh, and maybe that's why we're doing it, to sell it.
Uh, I, my understanding is we're doing this
to get a cost testimate on what it would take
to bring it back up to, you know, good
Conditions. I just wonder why
we would do it.
Since nobody's interested in it.
It's, You know, it's not
because the condition every, I was out there
for the pre-bed meeting
and everybody there said it looks like every other
transfer station in the world. So,
Well, when I went there that one time, uh,
you can see through the floor.
Um, and then once the, um, GFL was done,
they epoxy coated the floor,
but nobody was there to inspect what they did.
So we don't really know if it, it is strong enough
to withhold trucks, uh, of that mass to,
um, enter into the building.
So that was our, uh, concern was mostly safety.
It is a city owned building. So
Mr. Elli,
you here to speak on this item?
I can, I can show you the documentation.
Over the last four years in the state that GFL left,
that transfer station, it does not look like every other
transfer station you've ever been in.
There's windows missing, the bumpers are gone.
The cement is terrible. Okay.
The hydraulics, I mean, there's, it's it poor condition.
Yeah. Okay. I have pictures and everything.
I hear what you're saying. I hear your words. Okay. Thank
You.
Any additional discussion? Madam President?
Uh, council member Lafferty,
I'm, I'm just curious why the,
why these two items were put together?
There's a purchase of two Dabak
side loader vehicles
and the, the coverage
of the engineering services to provide the assessment.
The engineering services, we're just using them.
We have a contract with them.
This is just moving, um, money around.
It's just moving it from one line item to another.
Okay. So we're, we're a for, we're making the allocation,
I'm sorry. It's allocating
money to sanitation.
Sanitation is actually getting the engineering services done
and buying the trucks.
That's why it was put together. It's both for sanitation.
Oh, okay. I, I see, I see now.
Alright, so we're, we're doing two allocations.
One for the contractual services.
The other for the vehicles. Correct. Alright.
They're both for sanitation. Mr. Lafferty,
I, I yield. Thank
you chair. Thank you for answering my question.
Uh, secretary Moore, I think
that we should have a committee meeting on the whole,
what the plan is for the wastewater
for the transfer station.
Um, I think we need to get a better handle on that,
why we're doing this and what the plan is.
'cause I've heard all kinds of things.
Um, your predecessor, you know, told me a week ago
what the plan was and
of course we were never in on anything there.
Yeah. He's no longer employed to the state.
I Well, I know that. I know,
but, uh, you know, I was told that we were considering
bringing it back in house, which
would be a horrible mistake.
But that's why I wanna have a committee meeting the whole,
so that we can know what the plan is, what the options are,
and all of that until we move forward with that.
Madam, madam chair, I have one question.
Uh, is there any barrier from a time perspective,
if we schedule a meeting to learn more?
Does it hold anything up significant?
It, It's significant.
It's, it withhold, it stops, uh, repairs from happening.
It will hold, it'll hold up repairs
If we're good.
Okay. Thank you. Council member Lafferty,
You, you asked my question,
but I I tend to agree without really understanding.
We can't follow through with repairs
until we get the engineering study back to see
what the repairs are gonna cost and move forward from there.
Understood. But I, I guess from, from Ms.
Moore's perspective, understanding the entire picture
before we're asked to vote on bringing in a consultant
to look at everything and then to Ms.
Rogan's question, if timing is yes,
it will delay it a couple of weeks, is that imperative?
Are we up against a contractual, you know, line item
that we have to meet, that we have
to bring somebody in by a certain date?
Are we, are we bound by other terms and conditions?
If we're not, I, I'm fully in favor
of bringing you in front of us.
Take us through the whole process.
You've got more than enough members that have not, you know,
probably even seen the transfer station much less, you know,
know the inner workings.
I'm certain you could put, put on a, a quality presentation,
bring us all up to speed
and then if a vote is necessary, if we feel that, you know,
a vote is necessary to, you know, amend this, uh,
tear it down, start over, whatever the case might be,
that's your case to make,
I would very much be in favor of doing that.
Okay. So if,
if I don't hear any objection from the timing perspective,
I'm inclined to bifurcate this motion.
Let's, uh, approve the line item for the contractual,
or I'm sorry for the vehicles, the allocation
for the vehicles, and, uh, adjust the,
the fund balance adjustment accordingly.
Madam Chair, for a discussion. If it's still open,
Uh, Ms. Mr. Lafferty,
you yield?
I do. Uh, Mr. Wiki,
The contractual work
to inspect the building has to be done.
Whether we take it over, sell the property, demolish it.
So I, I don't understand why. Hold it up.
Uh, when it has to be done, whether it's two weeks from now,
two months from now, it has to be done.
Uh, engineering department can't even assess the property
what condition it is without that.
And I just can't see holding it up.
And that's how I feel about it. Go back to the chair.
Anyone else have any Other discussion? Madam Chair?
Mm-Hmm. You know, there in the last couple years,
there's some been some real shady stuff going on
with the contracts there.
A lot of stuff. I just wanna know.
I know someone approve something today
until I know what's going on.
This is our way to find out what's going on.
Because if we approve this,
somebody's gonna go ahead and do something.
And I wanna know ahead of time
what the plan is down the road.
Well, what all you're, all you're approving though is
to get an assessment on what's been done. I
Know, I know that, I know that we didn't do it before.
We got the bids for it.
We should have, but We didn't.
I wasn't in charge then.
Well, you know, we should have had a contract last year.
They let, I knew what the deal was.
I know what, you know, everybody's trying
to pull something over on our eyes all the time.
I know that. I, I get that.
I don't think it's too much to ask.
We can have a meeting out, we'll,
18 hours from now, we can schedule it.
I don't know how much that's gonna hold things up
and we'll do a special meeting if it's gonna change
that, the world of Warren.
But I don't know why a little more information is.
I mean, look, if, if, you know, I can be outvoted, it's up
to, you know, everybody on this council.
But, you know, I just think that we, you know,
transparency is,
is not a strong suit of this administration.
And it would, I'd just like to know what's going on. Mm-Hmm.
I'm not saying it's Mr. You, Mr. Elli.
It was up to the last, the last tenant
to leave it the way they found it.
So we are trying to make sure that they left it that way.
They obviously didn't We're in litigation with them
to make sure that they did.
We need to assess the property to move forward.
Well, yeah. And we have, we have not,
um, approved that litigation.
So that will, I was Well, that's another problem. Well, but
Either way you're gonna have to assess
the building. It's a city owned
Property. But what I'm saying
is the,
the council people up here don't even know the background
of council
Property. Just, just made the point
of, of dilapidated properties
and making sure they don't fall further into dilapidation.
Let's get it assessed now, just to make sure
that it doesn't fall further into,
you know, where it's going. Okay.
Before I was interrupted, I did wanna mention that
there was, uh, a, an attempt, um, to super,
to circumvent council authority and have a, what is it?
What Mr. Schroer will know, an administrative action so
that council wouldn't have to vote for it.
'cause there's all kinds of stuff going on.
That's my only point. I want everybody to know
everything that's going on.
Not from this administration.
Pardon me? Not from this administration.
I didn't say that it was from this administration.
Madam Chair. I just so the council's aware,
you mentioned litigation.
There was litigation brought
the council wasn't really part of that decision.
It should have been. There was a case 20 years ago when
prior Mayor Steinberg did the same thing
and the court of appeals slapped him.
And, uh, so I don't know
that this council's ever even had a closed session
with the city attorneys on what the status
of this litigation is.
Um, I think that might be appropriate.
Um, you know, we can maybe put behind us the
charter issue for a minute
and see what the status is of the issue.
Uh, because typically if there's litigation,
especially against a contractor, uh, here,
and I take no position on the merits of this
because we haven't been advised,
but maybe there's great merit to this and, uh,
but the council hasn't even been brought in a closed session
or be given a memo on, on this.
So I think it would be, that might be something to consider.
But we did, we did catch that. We tried to intervene.
The council tried to intervene in that lawsuit
and, um, you know, we, we pulled out of that.
But, um, I don't recommend we get back involved in it,
but it would be good to know what
the status is of the lawsuit.
Right, exactly. So, uh, the two separate issues,
litigation and a closed session,
but also, what is the total amount for the assessment
For the study? 25,000.
So, uh, I don't, my opinion is, I don't have any issue
with approving the assessment.
I think any work or additional work that would need
to be done, from my vantage point, you should have a, uh,
a committee the whole and educate us
on what is actually going on.
But I, I don't have any issue with
$25,000 is reasonable amount of money
to further assess what's happening
with the transfer station, is my opinion.
Yeah. I Madam chair, I don't disagree with you about that.
It's a matter, it's a matter of holding something hostage so
that we actually get information
because we're not getting information when we send
it over to the administration.
I'm not saying it's you,
but I'm not guaranteed we're gonna get information.
That's my only point. We have to come up with another way
to get information and
to work transparently among all of us.
And what you have to do sometimes is hold
something hostage anytime.
Like not pay a bill, something like that.
Anytime you've called me, I've answered
Absolutely. You
Guys want to come out to the transfer station? Let's,
Absolutely. Mr. Zare,
I have no issue with you.
Norm is Gaius no issue at all.
I just wanna know what the plan is
and you know, we will, if we can all make this an agreement,
whatever what everybody votes up here,
but we have an agreement
that we're gonna have a committee meeting the whole, so
that we know what's going on
To create a plan. We need this assessment.
Okay, Adam, share on
March. Uh, you
yield. Yep. Uh, council member Buki,
They came before the council with this request, uh,
to assess the property.
They came before the council.
They told us they needed to protect the property.
They're protecting city property.
Um, they're not talking about a plan.
The plan comes after the assessment of the property.
You can't create a plan when you don't even know
what you're, you're dealing with there.
And that's, that's what I think they're asking.
And sure, they'll come back with a plan
after, you know, what the condition of the building is.
It might, they may say, take it down and there is no plan.
Oh, other than coming, uh, demolishing it.
And that's, so that's, that's my feel.
I don't think we should hold 'em up.
They're here trying to protect city property.
Uh, it's, it, Mr. Schroder is an attorney, uh, protect city.
Uh, uh, uh, the review, the assessment
of the property is very important for any,
any kind of legal action.
You'll back to the chair.
Thank you. Madam Chair. Yes.
Is, is, so the plan is you don't know,
you don't have a plan at this point.
What you're gonna do, it's gonna be totally based on that.
You need, this is not being done in
anticipation of litigation.
This is not being done for litigation.
We need to assess what's, what the building,
what condition it's in before we can facilitate a plan.
If it's, if it's completely demolished
and we can't use it, then that changes everything.
If it's, you know, if it's fixable
and we can move forward, then we create a plan.
Madam Chair, Council member Newnan,
As I understand it, secretary Moore was saying that
this involves the city going
after the, uh, people who had this, this place, um,
and litigating against them.
Is that correct?
I'm asking. I I I only asked if the, is was the purpose
to use the information in litigation or,
and if it is, then we need
to have a closed session about anything about litigation.
That was my only point.
Well, yeah. And I, I think part of that is just
because the city hasn't been the city.
The, uh, city attorney's office has been going for
outside attorneys in some cases without
bringing those fees ahead of us.
Right. So it's not,
we're sorry if this is inconvenient, but Yeah.
And also it's, it's, we have a real reason
to be rather alarmed when something might involve
litigation, I believe
Through the chair. Thank
you. I guess litigation would, I guess that
that term would my fault.
It's a contractual obligation from the prior tenant.
They were supposed to leave it the way they found it. Right.
One more question. Madam Chair. Uh, Mr. Nunan? Oh,
Uh, I, I yield the floor. Thank you.
Madam President is the same.
Is it the same company that's doing both inspections?
No, Two different testing firms. We have them on board.
They're, they have a contract with the city, both a EW
and P-S-I-P-S-I is doing the current one.
Why, why are we switching? Because a w doesn't have the
structural engineers, the qualified people
to do the in-depth study.
PSI does.
So we wasted money. The last money was wasted. Okay.
So there is a Adam President original motion. Sorry.
Council member Lafferty,
One clarifying question through the chair to Mr.
Melli. Can you hold an effective committee of the whole
to educate us on the totality of the plan
without first performing this assessment
And have all the details? No.
Yes. You cannot
Not not have all the details.
Once we find out all the damage to the concrete,
to the building, the missing pieces of roof,
the missing windows, all the, all the damage to the bumpers,
and find out all of that information, then yes,
I'll have a comprehensive, full working, you know,
plan that I can give you guys.
Alright. And,
and my questions of Senator Ms. Moore are absolutely no
reflection on either one of you,
but I have zero trust of the players that were in charge
of this before.
I have zero trust
and that's where, that's where this is coming from.
Alright. I have every trust in, in the two of you
to guide us properly.
But again, this is what we are responsible to do.
And I I do agree 25,000 is, you know, we're not asking
for $2 million here.
Uh, it will give us that assessment,
but I, what I do expect is
that we will have a fully informed counsel on every plan
that you are going to present relative
to the transfer station, it's future, whether we are going
to improve it or we're going to demo it.
Absolutely. Thank you.
Alright. And chair, one more question. Sorry.
Uh, council Miller Laffy. I, I yield
Council Member Moore,
The assessment that's being done, is that going
to include, um, uh, an estimate of
what it will cost to repair if we choose to?
Yes. They said they'd provide an estimate. Okay. Thank you.
So for clarification, as there's a number of items
on this, the current motion we're working on,
our current agenda item is B, which is,
was tabled, is now removed from the table.
Their motion was for, uh, council member
Moore and Lafferty.
Yeah, Moore and Lafferty. To approve. To approve.
And we are approving that item as it is written. Okay.
Uh, council Member Moore? Yes. Council member Lafferty? Yes.
Council Member Dwyer? Yes. Council member Bokey.
Motion approve. Uh, council member Nunan? Yes.
Uh, council member McGee? Yes. Rogan says a Yes.
Motion carries. Next item,
Motion to remove from the table.
Support Lafferty.
Uh, all in favor?
Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.
Item is removed from the table.
Motion to approve.
Support. Anyone? Support.
Support Bokey. Any additional discussion?
Okay, Mr. Lafferty? Yes. To approve. Mr.
Bokey? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes.
Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Ms. Moore? No.
Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries six
to one. Next item. Madam,
Madam, president. Um,
request for, um, uh, was it a break
Recess. A
Recess? Yes. Thanks.
Uh, any mo mo motion for a five minute recess? Support?
Uh, all in favor? Aye. Aye.
Uh, we are on recess for five minutes.
Oh my God. Could
You not do both, but you not do?
Oh,
that's it.
Well, Jonathan and no
Council member Moore
and Lafferty, please report to the stage.
Works out better. Don't.
Good job.
I didn't clear. TSA Oh, gosh.
Oh, sure.
Do do For
The longest.
For the longest
Meeting is resumed.
Next item. Uh, secretary Moore. Next
Item is 14 d notice
of mayoral appointments.
Donna Doki wa Wastewater treatment sanitary engineer.
Motion to approve with discussion
Support. Lafferty
Uh, discussion. Thank you.
Um, yes, I found out she was in that position.
I, uh, called over.
I wasn't sure who was heading up the wastewater treatment.
I just called the old number and I got Donna, um,
Donna was actually the city engineer in my first term
of council and she is just, she's fabulous.
Um, and I think this is a,
an excellent appointment in my opinion.
Again,
Any additional discussion?
Motion to receive and file?
Yes. Motion to receive. That's fine.
It was more in Lafferty.
More in Lafferty. All in favor? Aye.
Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 14 e.
Request of the Parks
and Recreation Director
to approve an increase in budgeted revenues
and appropriations in the amount of $1,500,000.
To account for the receipt of State
of Michigan's community enhancement grant consideration
and adoption of a resolution. So moved.
Support Lafferty with discussion.
Discussion. Council member Lafferty.
I wanted to congratulate Parks
and Rec on a tremendous receipt.
$1.5 million for our parks program. That is terrific.
This is, uh, specifically to replace, remove,
and replace play structures at LCH Park Veterans Memorial.
Uh, they will cover the installation cost
of pickleball courts, uh, that I know have been asked for,
for, uh, several years.
So well done.
Any additional discussion?
It's the next, It's this one. It's
F two.
Uh, without any hearing, any additional discussion?
Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr.
Bokey? Yes. Mr. Noonan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes.
Rogan sees a yes. Motion carries. Next
Item. Next item
is 14 F1.
Request of the Parks
and Recreation Director
to approve an increase in budgeted revenues
and appropriations in the amount of 1,220,000 to account
for American Rescue Plan ARPA funding to be used
for the installation of a splash pad at Wigan Park.
Consideration of and adoption of a gen of a resolution.
Five votes are needed. Do you wanna keep them as one? Yes.
Ma and Madam Chair, I would, um, make a motion
to suspend the rules to allow, um, uh, uh,
uh, Mr.
Parton, Mr. Parton to speak on this item.
He had put in a request before the meeting
and we inadvertently missed it.
Uh, support to suspend the rules.
All in favor? Aye. Aye.
Uh, rules are suspended. You have three minutes, sir.
Thank you. Uh, my name is Jonathan Parton.
I live at 8 4 0 9 Fisher Avenue
and I appreciate you giving me the time
to come up here and speak.
You didn't miss it. I was actually late,
so I wasn't gonna press my issue and just wait till the end.
But, uh, thank you for the time.
Um, I'm just here
because I heard that this was on the agenda.
I haven't heard too much about it,
which is surprising to me.
We're at the community center three times a week.
Um, you know, I, I live right
around the corner from GaN Park.
We go there. And so just, uh, um, I'm, I want
to be very clear that I'm not necessarily opposed
to installing a splash pack at Wiggan Park.
I think that's great, but I don't think that, uh,
as I've seen with a lot of things with the Parks
and Rec, in particular with the director, Dino, there seems
to be doing a lot of things without putting a lot
of thought or action into it.
I just saw a different department up here,
get grilled over, you know, an assessment.
And I hope that, uh, this council will do the same
with things that the park
and rec recreation department do does.
Um, just seeing the amounts of money
that have been talked about in, in this, the, the past
item number, this item number,
and the following item number, uh,
we're talking like two or $3 million.
And I don't think that we should spend
that money frivolously.
I think there should be a plan in place for what,
how is maintenance gonna be done?
How is the upkeep? Because I go
to Wiggan Park on a regular basis,
and that park needs a lot of help.
Um, it needs cleaning.
They have, you know, we,
we've done some cleaning projects there, uh,
but every time I go there, there's fresh glass thrown
through the park, uh, in, in the play structure area.
I will not let my daughter play in the play area.
We go for a walk on the path of my dog.
Um, and so I just think that that park needs some help
and it needs more assessment time in terms of like how
to make that park more successful.
Uh, given the nature it is very large park compared to some
of the other parks that I've been to, other than some
that are, uh, more northern.
But, uh, for the Southern Park, it's a very large park.
And the upkeep, uh, I was hoping to just suggest that
as we're talking about millions of dollars
that we add in some sort of provision, uh, you know,
for a salaried worker, uh, at that park, which,
and, you know, 50, $60,000 a year, uh, as opposed
to we're talking millions of dollars, I think would be
an effective, uh, addition to that plan.
That's all. Thanks.
Thank you. Back to the rules.
Motion to go back into our normal rules. Resume
Support. Lafferty.
All in favor? Aye. Aye.
Any opposed? Okay. Motion to approve. F
Sup. Uh,
So discussion, Support Lafferty.
Discussion Secretary Moore.
Thank you. Um, Mr. Parton had some good points.
Um, and we, we did discuss this at length in the last term.
Um, it's just coming around now
and, um, I, we all understand there are problems
with maintenance at the parks.
Um, and I'm con I'm, I'm sure that, um,
this administration is gonna work very hard to, um,
make sure those, uh, problems that we see now are corrected.
It won't happen overnight,
but I think everybody has the desire
and the intent to make things better.
So, but it takes time.
And I know that other grants have been, um, applied for,
and, you know, one of the reasons we were so happy
to do this is because it is a park in the South end
and that, you know, we know that
that area's been neglected for a long time.
So I think it's a good thing that it's going there.
And, but I share your concerns
and I think that, um, you know,
this administration is committed to making the parks
and, um, better all of them.
So, um, and, you know, um,
we just have to be hopeful about that.
Any additional discussion? Hearing none?
I will call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes.
Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee?
Yes. Grogan sees a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 14 F two.
Request of the Parks
and Recreation Director to approve the purchase
and installation of a new splash pad for Wigan Park
through Great Lakes Recreation Company LLC,
utilizing the source well cooperative contract
with Water Play Solutions Corp in the total amount
of $1,159,770. So moved,
Support Lafferty with discussion.
Discussion. Council member Lafferty.
Thank you, uh, through the chair to Ms. Hensley.
Good evening. Good evening, ma'am.
Uh, I don't recall seeing that we've had a,
an allocation from CDBG for parks before.
And could you, could you add a just a little
color to this, please?
Oh, certainly. Yeah. We, we did, we,
we've had an allocation for, um, for parks for, um,
for the last two years.
A little bit and a little bit. Okay.
And so, um,
when we started this project like three years ago,
thinking about it, um, we thought we could do it
for just what we had in our budget.
And then just as we started putting the project together,
it got bigger and big, not bigger and well, bigger, bigger.
And it got cost, the cost went up, you know,
a lot in the last few years.
So, um,
but yeah, we've always had the allocation there for,
for Parks and Rec.
Okay. Thank you.
And I, I also heard the, you know, the comments by, by Mr.
Parton. Sure. The, and,
and I want to add to that we're, we're hearing the same
information, the same feedback about the new skate park
going in at INE
and some of the current conditions of INE Park, which are,
you know, far from optimal if they're, they're, uh,
you know, it's a disaster in, in some cases.
Uh, but with brand new investment
comes a brand new plan
and attention to these areas.
We've, for, for far too long, we have been, you know, stuck
with old ideas.
Now we finally have these beautiful new plans.
I've, I've seen it. If you haven't been to the,
the community center, there's a depiction of this, uh,
park, the splash pad.
I asked, uh, Mr.
Todo in a future meeting to show us what this is. Like.
Take it, walk us through, uh, what this, uh,
rendering will be and what to expect
because this is, this is groundbreaking for Warren.
This will require attendance, this will require, uh, upkeep
and care constantly.
Mm-Hmm. And so we're, we're going to have the people to,
we're going to need the people to support this.
So we should expect to see, uh,
I would imagine, and since Mr.
Trudo isn't here, I'll, I'll, uh, right.
Uh, and, and he is spending time with family tonight.
Uh, he is, he's not in town.
So I'll ask you, uh, please make sure that we, we have a,
uh, that the budget accurately reflects what we're going
to need in the future to meet Mr.
Parton's concerns. And, you know, what,
what does Day-to-Day operations in our run rate,
how will this impact the Parks and Rec budget? Mm-Hmm.
Yes. We've considered, excuse me, all of that.
So Parks and Rec is ready to go with
maintaining and operating the park.
Okay. Once we're, once we're done.
And our, our, uh, part in it is mostly funding.
And because we're using ARPA funds
and community development block grant funds,
community development is kind of taking charge
of the whole project to make sure that we,
we fulfill all the federal requirements and regulations.
So once we're done building it, then it goes back to Parks
and Rec and they maintain it
and they're gonna do a great job.
They're excited about it. We're all
excited about it, actually.
Yeah. And, and my expectation is, you know, once
these types of brand new facilities go in,
the old problems go away, you're not going to have the,
the drug dealers
and the, you know, the people that are, you know,
hanging out and throwing bottles and breaking glass and,
and, you know, doing the, the less desirable, uh, uh,
things in our parks.
They're gonna go somewhere else
because they're gonna be too many people around
to see what's happening. Right.
And if I may, um, the, the park is designed for younger
children, not older children.
So, um, there's nothing really big to climb on.
Everything is low. You can see
through the water park at all times being a
parent, you know.
Mm-Hmm. You wanna make sure that you could see your kid
wherever they are in the park, that there's
no obstructions and stuff.
So we put a lot of thought into it
and it's, it should be really great for the
Neighborhood. I look forward
to it. This big kid's gonna enjoy it.
I know, right. Alright, thank you.
Thank you. Any additional discussion? Hearing none?
I will call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes.
Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee?
Yes. Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries. Next item. Next
Item is 14 F three.
Consideration and adoption of a resolution
to approve contract ITBW 1 1 13.
For additional park improvements at Wigan Park, be awarded
to Mando Construction in the amount of $354,137.
Support Lafferty or motion? Motion to approve
Support anyone?
So moved. Support. Sorry.
Uh, motion by Lafferty. Support by Moore. Any discussion?
Uh, hearing none. Call the question. Mr. Lafferty?
Yes. Ms. Moore?
Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Vokey? Yes.
Uh, Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes.
Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 14 G, which was 4G.
Consideration and adoption of a resolution
to approve contract modifications.
Number one, to city contract P 22 7 58.
2022.
Large concrete pavement repairs increasing the current
contract amount by $900,000,
resulting in an amended contract amount
of $3,260,888 to Great Lakes
Contracting solution. So moved.
Support Lafferty with discussion.
Discussion. Council member Lafferty.
Thank you. Through the chair to Ms. Gaius. Good evening.
Again. Hello. Had you been $899,000, I would've let it go.
But you had $900,000.
So I had to ask, uh, you're, you're using a 2022 contract
or are we continuing to use a,
a specific agreement with good
pricing? Yes, we're extending. He kept,
He, um, agreed to keep his prices.
So we are extending it, um, through this spring season.
Alright. That, that was the only question I had about it.
Thank you. You're
Welcome.
Any additional discussion? Hearing none?
I'll call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes.
Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Uh, Ms.
Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes.
Uh, Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 14 H, which was
for our proposed resolution, providing public notice
of intent to sell vacant tax reverted property at 1 2 4 6 7
Sherman Warren, Michigan.
Parcel ID number 13.
3 5 3 3 6 0 2 1 4.
$1 subject to combination
with 12 4 75 Sherman approving sale following 30 day notice
period and accepting grant of easement, rights,
consideration, and adoption of a resolution.
Motion to deny support with discussion.
Uh, discussion Mr. Lafferty?
Thank you. Uh, Madam Chair, I'm looking at the tax roll
for Cite the address properly.
1, 2, 4 7 5 Sherman.
And I am seeing, uh, taxes well behind
at the, and they're, they're likely at the county by now,
back from 20 23, 22, 21 as unpaid.
And the last, uh, time we had taxes paid to the city was,
uh, winter of 2020.
So, uh, based on on that alone, I mean, there's some other,
there's a, I don't know if it's a shell company,
a righteous bullies kennel in Lara may have,
uh, may have ownership with a,
with a corporation Here.
I, I am going to, uh, move to deny this
and disqualify this, uh, this, uh, potential, uh,
purchaser or this property
Clarifying question, Mr.
Lafferty? Yes. Which property is, so there's 1, 2, 4, 6, 7,
and 1, 2, 4, 7, 5, which one is
Delinquent? It's,
it's the 1, 2, 4, 7, 5, which is behind,
that's what we're combining this with.
So is that the current vacant lot
or is that the one in which 'cause, uh,
4, 6, 7 1 2, 4 6 7 is the tax reverted property.
It's tax purchaser, right? Yes. The purchaser.
So the purchaser's lot is
4, 7, 5. Yes.
Delinquent. They're delinquent on their
taxes by several years.
And Madam Chair, I have a question.
You might know, can they bring it up
When you're ready, secretary Moore?
I'm, I'm ready. Go ahead. So the what was set over
to us was to sell for a dollar.
Mm-Hmm. Okay, so 1500,
Well, It's, they asked for it, it says a dollar,
but then in the resolution it's 15.
So that is a, now
that is residential property at this point, right?
According to this, yes. So,
So, but a company is buying it, so then that makes it,
that's why they're charging the 1500 for the commercial.
Now I don't, I don't know. It makes no sense to me, but,
So I emailed Mr.
Bato ask, this is what he said.
Just I think I sent it to everyone.
This is a 40 foot tax reverted lot.
The city has been maintaining since 2002.
Uh, the purchaser
who has the LLC owns the vacant lot adjacent.
He would like to purchase the city owned lot, combined it
with his lot, and build a home.
The committee thought it was a good idea to accept his offer
of $1,500.
Since this is a business venture,
the committee did not recommend
selling the lot for a dollar.
So my assumption would be
that they're building a home to sell.
Is my assumption based on that.
Um, Madam President, yes.
They don't, they're not paying their
taxes on time to the city.
Now, I'm, I'm not willing to do business
with somebody who's not doing business in good faith on an
annual basis with us.
Agreed. I, I don't know that I would disqualify them.
I would think if folks can get their taxes up to speed,
then, you know, they, we could reconsider this.
But I fully support our motion to, to deny this
Madam chair. Yes.
Just for everybody's information.
40 foot lots cannot be built on in Warren.
So they have to be combined
to make them able to be built on.
So if a 40 foot lot really means nothing to anybody,
unless it can be combined with something else,
as I understand it, I don't think you can
build on a 40 foot lot.
I think 60 is the minimum.
60 by one. Well, the depth is, I
Think 60, 60 is our standard. Yeah.
I mean, we have a lot of 40 foot lots in the south.
I think based on this, it's combining with a 40 foot lot
so they could build a home, because to your point,
they couldn't build a home on
A 40 foot lot. Right. Right.
But you know, we, we can't enter into
an agreement if somebody's in default to the city,
we're not allowed to do it.
So under the charter,
we have to do a better job of Mm-Hmm. These things,
They can, they can always bring it back.
If they, they bring their taxes up to up to date,
they demonstrate that they're able to, uh, abide by,
you know, the, the same rules that you
and I play by every single, uh, summer and winter.
And if they can do that, um, Ms. Michaels, Mr.
Bato, uh, you know, have them demonstrate that,
bring it back to us,
and, you know, with proof that everything is paid.
And we will, uh, we'll reconsider,
I'll reconsider at least at that point.
Yeah, for sure. So the motion on the floor is
to deny the current request.
You're withdrawing Mr. Lafferty the, uh, disqualifying
Yes. I will withdraw
the disqualification,
but I will, I will, uh, continue with my motion to deny.
Got it. Any other discussion?
Okay. So the motion is to deny Council member Lafferty. Uh,
Do we have support?
Yeah. Uh, yep. Ms. Moore. Okay.
Yes. To deny Ms. Moore. Yes. Uh, Mr. Dwyer? Yes.
Mr. Bokey? Yes. To deny, uh, Mr. Nunan? Yes.
To deny Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes.
Motion carries and denied.
Next item, audience,
uh, members of the audience who want to speak
and have not done so, uh,
please fill out a form if you have three minutes.
Uh, first up is Lori Harris,
and after that is Jeff Gagan.
I am looking at the new note that's down here. Okay.
So please do not touch the microphone,
but I just did so that I could speak into it.
And please wipe the podium for the next speaker.
Haven't seen that before.
Um, I'm glad you're, uh, someone wants, uh,
safety and health here.
So I wanna comment on a few things.
I was listening to the meeting, um, while I was at work
and on my way down here.
And, um, I'm disappointed about the car wash.
I went to the planning meeting when that was all discussed.
And, uh, Mr.
Wirth, uh, made sure to announce that those people wanted
that car wash before the other ones went up.
I got approval on 12 Mile.
And, um, I don't think that makes a, a big difference.
And to put it in a parking lot with no egress
and ingress off of Mound Road.
I don't know if you realize that if any
of you paid attention to that.
Um, it's going to be in the parking lot
of Meyer on the food side,
and it, the, the height will equal
or surpass the Meyer.
Uh, it'll cover the Meyer sign.
So, um, I just think that wasn't a great idea.
I think it, uh, could have been done differently.
But apparently Mr. Wirth, uh, was, um,
moving that right along.
And I've reminded the planning commission that they
Control what the planning department does,
and they are ineffective.
They aren't using their power at all.
And I would love to see an actual powerful
planning commission.
Um, so the second thing is, um,
good for you at not giving away another
$1 property.
Um, even though it's a small lot, um, and I think that Mr.
Lafferty, you shouldn't have withdrawn your, um, uh,
cutting those people out.
Um, someone can go pay their taxes and turn around
and do the same thing again for the next four years.
And, um, I think it shows bad faith.
In fact, some of the other $1 houses have really been
a problem for the city.
Um, neglected not cared for junk sitting
around in the driveway.
Uh, I'm wondering, you know,
how these things are gonna get taken care of.
Taxes aren't paid. Um, this has not been a good program.
Uh, maybe some of the lots
that have been there, you know what?
Dollar lots with someone who's already been taking care
of them is lovely.
Um, and oh, five seconds.
Listen, everyone have a lovely Easter if you celebrate.
Thank you.
Thank you. Jeff.
Gagan
not here.
Going once, going twice. Okay. Uh, Diane Ackerley.
And after that is Mr. Watts.
Thank you. Um, last week was World Water Week
and to, um, a lot of people from southeast Michigan went
to Lansing to talk to our representatives
and senators, um, about our concerns on water.
And one of the things that we hear of, uh, over
and over is they get a lot of calls from residents
complaining about their water bills.
The water bills are too high, they keep going up.
I can't pay these.
So the good thing is that this year, finally
we have a solution.
We have a bill that's in Lansing.
It's finally gotten into committee,
and it proposes to lower the water bills
for low income residents.
Great Lakes Water Authority says
that 60,000 residents in Macomb County alone
are eligible to apply for lower water
and sewer bills once this legislation is passed.
So, um, the low income people
that I'm talking about are those who are 200%
of the poverty level.
So what does that mean? What specifically, what it means is,
in a one person household, they can make up to $29,000
and apply for lower water bills.
Two person household can make up to 39,000.
Three person household can make up to 49,000.
Four person household can make up to 60,000 and on up.
So this bill would really be helpful
for an awful lot of people.
Um, you might not think you know
that you would need it right now,
but maybe, you know, your mom might.
Or if you're gonna be retired soon
and have only one, uh, you gonna rely on social security.
You may need it in a few years.
And if it becomes law, it might be there for you
or your parents, or even your kids who might be renting, um,
renting an apartment while they're going to school.
Um, so passing this water affordability legislation,
the, the way it will change your water bill, it, it's going
to cap the water bill to 3%
of the household income, of low income people,
of anybody who qualifies.
And that may change over the years.
And you may, you know, you all may need it.
And it's basically, it's gonna help everybody
by keeping the bills more stable for the rest
of the population.
Um, and I also just wanna give a shout out
to the high school students in Warren
for putting on this production on Matilda a few days ago.
They really did, uh, a great job. Thank you.
Thank you. Uh, next is Mr. Watts, and
after that is David Mann.
Okay, Mr. Good, good evening again.
Um, I just wanna say, as ex officio
to the Planning Commission, when I was on council,
I questioned those very items
and I was told I had a right to speak
and that I should speak, but I didn't get to vote.
I don't know what's going on with Mr.
Newan, but I'm gonna tell you the last few months
with the planning commission, every one of 'em needs to go.
And we need to have new, have some new management
because they were trying to silence the people
that were coming to the meetings, the residents.
That doesn't need to happen. That's wrong.
Secondly, vacant lot. Thank you Ms. Moore, Mr.
Lafferty, for catching
that everybody should be doing their
homework on these things.
I I'm not on council, I still do homework on every item on
an to see what's going on.
And this item for that lot should have never made it here.
Had Mr. Bato done his job
and the city attorney's office done their
job that shouldn't be here.
Lastly, yesterday I was looking at the M Cole site
and we posted a position
of police commissioner for the City of Warren.
So one thing that caught my eye was the
wages don't match the budget.
Secondly, the job posting was really a police chief,
not a police commissioner.
Now, you know, been here all my life. I followed this.
I called four people that were former commissioners, police
and fire yesterday after this.
To clarify my my point,
the police commissioner is a liaison between the, the, uh,
department firearm police are both liaisons
between the department and the mayor.
It's a suit and tie job.
It's not a uniform job, it's not a certified job
or anything, anything like that.
It's always been that way.
And it's suddenly changed under, under,
under the Fouts administration to where we got rid
of the police chief and we got a commissioner
and a deputy commissioner.
Now, the fire department's being run
properly 'cause they have a chief.
I'm not sure who's running the show over there,
but this needs to be looked at.
Folks, we cannot start off on the wrong foot,
violating the charter over and over and over.
We need to have a police chief, a police commissioner.
We need to have a police chief.
Same thing in the fire department.
They're not union members. They don't wear a uniform.
They're suit and tie. Do what the charter says to do.
This needs to be done right,
and we need to make sure we do it right.
'cause we don't need to hire somebody
and find out we hired somebody we can't use.
So that was, that was disturbing to me.
So, um, and the harmony
situation, as you know, I know a little bit about
that being public safety.
They don't need a mutual agra aid agreement if,
unless they're trying to transport stuff
that the city's calling them for.
MedStar and Universal have, I believe that.
But if they're just doing non-emergency
transports, they only need a license.
I'm gonna do a little more research on that as well.
So thank you.
Next is Douglas Marshall, and after that is, hold
On one minute. I got two seconds.
Mr. Schroeder, you're doing a heck of a job.
Keep it up.
Next is Douglas Marshall.
And then following that is Chris McLaughin.
Good evening. My name is Douglas Marshall.
I've been a resident of the city for 38 years.
The United States was founded as a secular nation.
The opening clause
of the Constitution's First Amendment States Congress shall
make no law respecting the establishment of religion.
This prohibition is passed along to the state
and local governments by the 14th Amendment.
No state shall make
or enforce any law, which a bridges the privileges
and immunities of the citizens of the United States.
The governments non interference with religious issues
and beliefs is one of the immunities of the Bill of Rights.
The reason for the First Amendment was
that our founding father saw the problems caused
by religious differences throughout our history.
We saw the problems in northern island from the sixties
to the nineties, and in the Middle East from the forties
that are still in the news today.
Violence due to religious differences has been a major cause
of death around the world.
The latest Pew survey of religion in America shows
that 28% of Americans have no religious affiliation.
That is more than one in four.
The survey also showed that 19% of Americans,
nearly one in five, do not believe in any deities.
Americans are losing their religious at
The fastest rate in history.
Many of the religious want to put their symbols
and displays on government property to give,
to get the res government respect
and endorsement for their beliefs,
which is one thing the government is forbidden to do.
In 1972, 90% of the Americans believed, uh,
identified as Christian today only 63.
Identifying Christian this downturn is the reason
that they want to put display on public property.
The lemon test states that
to not violate the establishment clause,
all government actions must have a secular non-religious
purpose must not advance
or inhibit religion,
must not promote government entanglements with religion.
The reason station purpose is
to protect the city's violation of the establishment clause.
The city should have never approved a prayer table
or a national day of prayer event.
Mr. Marshall, you're out of time. Thank you.
Thank you
Mr. McLaughlin.
And then Mr. Michael Hall. Hallie.
Hello, uh, my name is Chris McLaughlin.
I am the State Director of the Secular Alliance of Michigan.
It's an alliance of non-religious groups, uh,
that are mostly centered around southeast Michigan here.
Um, we, I represent, my constituents
are the 1.6 million non-religious
people who live in Michigan.
Um, they go by many different names.
Some of them call themselves atheists.
Some of them call themselves agnostics.
Some of them call themselves humanists, uh, others skeptics.
Um, but they all share a naturalistic view
that the natural world is all there is.
Um, the demographics of these people is interesting.
Uh, it turns out that social scientists who study
non-believers, uh, usually people
who are self-described atheists and,
and agnostics find, um, some interesting things.
One of them is that, uh, atheists tend
to be, uh, higher income than religious people,
again, per capita.
Um, they tend to have a higher level of education.
Again, education, income and non-belief are all correlated.
Um, they do as much charity work
as any religious people.
Just, uh, a couple of weeks ago, for example, I took, uh,
uh, food
and clothing items that were, uh, donated at secular group,
uh, meetings out to the, uh, bus stop in, uh, in Pontiac
and gave them to the people who need it there.
Um, it turns out that, uh,
non-religious people make up an exceptionally low percentage
of people in prison per capita.
It's, uh, less than one 10th of 1%
of the prison population according to the Prison Bureau,
or, uh, sorry, the, the Federal Bureau of Prisons, um,
are people who are not religious.
So the question becomes, why is it
that non-religious people get treated the way they do?
They, they, there's this sort of, uh, uh,
Uh, What do we wanna call it?
A, a stigma against non-religious people.
And they don't get treated the same.
They don't get the same, uh, fair treatment by government,
by, uh, corporations, by fellow citizens.
And I think, I know that the reason is, is that,
that the people who are spreading the slander
about non-religious people, that they're somehow not ethical
or not good people are religious leaders
because they've got nothing to lose.
So I would encourage the council here that in your dealings
with religious people who are telling you about people
that they don't know anything about,
that maybe you try something different.
Um, I encourage that you request a policy review
of any city initiatives that are entangled
with religious organizations.
I encourage, uh, opening a dialogue
with the non-religious members of your community.
And, uh, with that said, I want to thank you. Yeah.
And I and others are available for questions. Thank you.
And further discussion. Thank you,
Mr. Awadi.
After that is James Kleiner.
Good evening once again, counsel.
First I want to comment and first thing, few things.
I've heard the past two council meetings.
First, I'm for any money
to be spent on the new district court building
that was heard about a few meetings ago.
The money are using now by the city hall is very unsafe
for all involved.
The presentation was very well done.
Second, my complimenting Commissioner Bernard on her speech
regarding diplomacy, which I wish more
of the outspoken speakers would use.
In my opinion, nothing is ever gained
by being rude or obnoxious.
I agree with the new running clock that is being,
that was put up at the last council meeting
that is being used during the public speaking portion.
That way the speakers will have a clear point of view of
how much time they have left to speak.
I wish there was something that could be done.
Unfortunately, I don't know
how much can be done enforcing our city clerk
and the different departments to do their job, uh,
properly according to the city charter.
Finally, I wanna wish to hand out some kudos
to some of the council people.
First to Councilwoman McGee a few meetings ago when she
ran a meeting in our council president's, uh, absence
and Mindy Moore helping her out.
She was just there helping her out.
Being that McGee was new to the council.
Second, Councilman Lafferty with keeping the citizens
property properly informed about the Bear Creek incident
and other issues as they come up.
Finally, one more time to councilwoman.
We're trying to maintain the quorum
during the council meeting
and make sure, including myself, try
to stay within the three minutes speaking limit
during the council participation.
Thank you very much for, for your, uh, for your time.
May all the council persons have who believe in it,
have a blessed and happy Easter.
Thank you very much.
Thank you. Mr. Kleiner is next. And then Commissioner nad.
Hey guys, my name's James Kleiner, um, another car wash.
And Warren, are you guys serious?
No, but, um, actually a prayer station
inside of government building.
Are you guys serious? Uh, as a former Warren resident,
I was outraged to find this out.
I live in Ferndale now,
and I mentioned this to my city council
and they were taken aback.
Um, from what I know about it, you guys had
to pay out a hundred thousand to,
for this matter, to settle.
And now we have a player, a prayer
station, and a reason station.
It's not the best use of taxpayers money.
I know it was a while ago when it's a previous
administration, but, um, now the Catholics got involved.
So there is a second prayer station, so there's two of 'em,
and then our reason station as well.
Um, how many religions do you guys plan on having up there?
I mean, I know like the Satanic temple would like
to have their fair share of the church
to fly in spaghetti Monster too.
Um, religion and government, they need to be separate.
That's how our government was founded.
Uh, the Pledge of Allegiance didn't even have the line under
God until 1954.
And it was written in, uh, 1892.
It was added after the original author's death.
Uh, money didn't have under God we trust until 1955.
Uh, our forefathers spoke directly about the
separation of church and state.
Uh, John Adams said the government
of the United States is not in any sense
found on a Christian religion.
And Thomas Jefferson said that Christianity, Christianity,
neither is nor ever was part of the common law.
Um, George Washington, Brent Benjamin Franklin
and James Madison also have quotes regarding this topic.
Um, if our forefathers thought it was important
to speak about this while establishing our government,
then it was, and still is very important point to be made.
Um, there are a lot of non-religious people out there,
and it's growing every single year.
Um, hope that we can get our, like, respect,
our non-belief similarly, to respect to those
who do believe, um, you know, you've gotta adopt secularism.
It's keeping government, education,
politics separate from religion.
Um, I want to end by saying
that we're all atheists about most
of the God societies have ever believed in.
Uh, we just take it one God further. So thank you guys.
Next is Commissioner Nar, and
after that is Dolores Panera.
Good evening, everybody. My name is Michelle Nar.
I'm the Macomb County Commissioner for District 12.
And, um, in line with what they're saying,
I wanna talk about democracy and hall halls of freedom.
The voices of the people echo with unwavering resolve.
Let's gather together to celebrate the
cornerstone of our society.
Democracy. It is a form of,
of an unyielding belief in the inherent worth
and dignity of every individual democracy.
The oxygen that fuels our collective aspirations,
empowering us to shape our own destiny.
A beacon in the darkest of times reminding us
that even in the face of adversity, the will
of the people shall prevail.
It is the canvas
upon which we paint the vibrant tapestry of our dreams,
ensuring that every voice is heard,
and every voice has the power to make a difference.
For in the absence of democracy, democracy, we are left
with the tyranny of a few, the silencing of dissent
and the suppression of human rights.
We are left with the world where a world
where Mike makes right
and the voices of the powerless are drowned out by the
deaming roaring of oppression.
But today, we stand on the shoulders of those who fought
and sacrificed for the cause of democracy.
Let us recommit ourselves to its noble ideas.
Let us be guardians of its integrity, the defenders
of its principles, and the torch bearers of its future.
For in the words of Abraham Lincoln,
the the ballot is stronger than the bullet.
Let us weld this powerful wise,
this power wisely using our votes to shape the course
of history, to create a world where the chains
of injustice are shattered.
The barriers of prejudice are torn down,
and the aspirations of
of all are given a fair chance to flourish.
Democracy is not just a concept, it is a living legacy.
An an ongoing experiment of human impossibility.
Let us embrace this legacy
and continue to build a society that is worthy
of the sacrifices made by our ancestors
and worthy of the dreams of generations to come.
And with that comes choices. And people have a choice.
You can, you have a choice to believe
or not to believe to sin or not to sin, but to take away's.
Body voice, no matter what they believe
takes away democracy.
So just as we go forward,
let's just remember when we're making rules and regulations.
Let's remember democracy today. Thank you.
Next is Dolores. And then after that is Curtis Osh.
Good evening counsel. Um, I only came here to say one thing,
but I made a few notes.
Jeff, I think you're doing a great job.
It's good to see you up there assisting,
and I think you're all doing a pretty good job here.
Um, I want to add that when we talked about the parks,
I think, uh, we are all aware of special needs, but, uh,
and what the parks need for them.
And you really become,
I'm a grandparent now of a special needs.
So it's very important to me.
Uh, one other thing, we, um, I just briefly, um,
there's such thing as a grace period
to get some action done here.
I'm a I am quite disappointed in the,
um, planning commission.
I think they, they need to be replaced.
And speaking of that, we don't have
to no longer tolerate the likes of Jim Fouts, Cecil St.
Pierre and Gus Genum.
Why on earth is Sean Clark the part
of the Dark Money Pact, still sitting,
running Stillwell manner he needs to go.
They were to me, those four gang of thugs, Vish,
viciously attacked all of you.
Not everybody survived. And I, I'm glad to see you did.
I I they were brutal in what they did to you,
and he was part one of the heads he needs to go.
Okay. And with that, what I really came here for,
as you see, I am a associate member of Vietnam,
veterans Chapter 1 54, also a member
of Region one B Veterans Council.
And I am bringing you an invitation
to everyone in the city of Warren
and all those who can hear.
Um, chapter Vietnam veterans Chapter
1 54, located in Clinton Township.
The chapter will be at the VFW at 75 73, the
Leke Blackwell, uh,
VFW on 23 Mile Road in New Baltimore.
It's for a welcome home, Vietnam Veterans Day,
which is Friday, March 29th.
From three o'clock to 8:00 PM there'll be food,
beverages, we'll be served.
We invite all veterans, members, associates, family
and friends to come down, enjoy some music and camaraderie,
and commemorate the Vietnam Veterans of America.
Please spread the word.
Everyone's in invited, especially, uh, um,
our Vietnam veterans.
It's a special day. We do this every year.
Um, I'd like to also at, uh, chapter 1 54.
There is help for all veterans.
It's just not for Vietnam veterans.
Any, any timeframe a veteran can come There.
We have, uh, service officers, we have a food pantry.
We can get you help. And also at the county
level, you can get help.
But please, uh, come and cel, uh, celebrate
and honor our Vietnam veterans.
Thank you. Thank you,
Mr. Osh.
Then next will be Michael Howard.
And last is Joel Vander Lemon.
Hello, Curtis Osh, resident
and pastor here in the city.
Um, holy Week and resurrection.
Blessings to all of you who acknowledge, uh, Jesus as,
as Lord, and those who have other faith traditions.
Um, Also a good thing as well, um,
we talked about ARPA funds several times.
And so I was looking at our, uh, our friends
to the South Detroit regarding arpa.
They have a pretty advanced, um, website.
They have a dashboard that tells you exactly
how much money was appropriated,
how much money's programmed, how much money's obligated,
how much money's spent.
Look to the North Sterling Heights.
They have pictures, they have graphics
of the things under ARPA that they wanna accomplish.
They have dollars attached to different things
the city of Detroit does too.
They have videos, they have, um, pictures of all the things
that they wanted to accomplish with ARPA funds.
Then you go to look at our city, Google Warren and arpa.
What do you find? Nothing. Nothing. Absolutely nothing.
I mean, the ARPA money's going
to expire at some point in time.
You know, I just sit there
and laugh every time we talk about transparency and sunshine
and all this wonderful stuff.
And what do we hear as residents? Not much.
And you wonder why there's
so little engagement in the political process.
Um, you know,
and Mindy, you mentioned earlier to follow the charter.
I mean, if we're gonna follow the charter,
why don't we follow all the charter instead
of just the ones you want to cherry pick to follow?
I mean, with our city attorney sitting here,
I mean, did we put out having the council attorney position?
Did we put that out to bid? The charter would demand it.
I mean, was it offered to anybody else
besides your drinking buddy, Mr. Schroeder?
Probably not. I have a problem with this whole thing.
I mean, is there a budget item for how much the hundreds
and hundreds of thousands of dollars we spend
for Mr I'm not saying he's not a competent attorney.
I'm saying how do we get to this point? I wanna find out.
How do we get signed up for this?
I make hundreds and hundreds of thousands
of dollars just tonight.
You guys referred several other things
to 'em to take care of.
Let's write 'em another blank check.
I mean, I think the kumbaya moment
with the administration's over, I mean,
we let so many people go.
We don't even have replacement people.
So big drain brain, just walking out the door.
I mean, I had great hopes for the kumbaya moment.
Doesn't seem like it's working. Thank you.
Have a good night. Thank you. Next is Michael Howard.
I just wanna say thank you. I know several
of you guys are, uh, campaigned on Parks and recs
and I think we live in a time where a lot
of elected officials run for reelection
or run for the first time
and they run on certain things that they campaign on,
and we never see that to fruition.
So I just appreciate you guys' effort in regards
to the Parks and Rec department
and running on those as, uh, my daughter went skating
for the first time with my, or my two daughters,
and my son went skating for the first time.
So we're really excited for the skate park.
Um, just the only caveat as we get ready
to move into the budget season
and other things is, uh, it would be great to be able
to see more community involvement, um, with that.
You know, I, I heard there was some unveiling about 20
minutes ago with the skate park.
I, I knew nothing about it.
Would've loved to be able to be there
to put some kind of input.
Um, I, Wegan Park was talked
about a lot at the Tiff a meeting.
So if you might've missed the TFA meetings,
but Wegan Park was talked a lot about that.
Um, and so,
but residents didn't know
that Wegan Park was even being discussed at the TFA meeting.
So that's like a, a good example of like,
how can we increase resident input and transparency.
And, uh, and so just as we get ready
to talk about the budget season
and you guys are making, um,
you're doing your due diligence, we would love to be able
to see that process as a resident
and see where our tax dollars are going.
'cause even these grants that are coming back,
those are tax dollars that went to the federal government
that are coming back down.
So those are still our tax dollars,
even though it is grant money.
Um, it's not from other businesses.
And so we'd just love to see how that process is going
and a little bit more transparency in there.
I think you guys are doing a great job.
Thank you for fulfilling the things
that you guys said you were gonna do when you got in office.
Last is Joel Vander Lennon.
So
Joel Vander Lenn, longtime worn resident.
I wasn't gonna talk about the planning commission,
but since it's been brought up, uh,
let's talk about the Planning Commission.
I agree most of those people on the
planning commission need to go.
Most of 'em don't have the proper educational tools
to understand what that job consists of.
It was long suggested by Ed Byers
and later on by Ron Wir that anyone recommended for
that position on the commission
could first take the CI citizen planning course
offered online or ABCO Community College
so they can understand the responsibilities of
that position, uh, the present core that you have there.
Now, only two, only two have taken
that citizen course that would aid them greatly
and the people in the future, they should have
that course already completed before consideration.
Mr. Lafferty, you came up
and brought up the, uh, uh,
the thing about the property for a buck.
Uh, I think the city has been
trying to think of a nice way to put it, been hampered
by selling property and land for a dollar.
The last time, uh, we sold a house for a dollar was to, uh,
judge Toya's wife.
And it was supposed to be for a whole nother item.
And then we found out that Judge Toya's wife sold it.
And some of the, uh, wording that this council approved
was changed by then.
Assistant, uh, city Attorney Mary Michaels.
And I still don't understand why Mary Michaels wasn't
properly disciplined and fired for doing that.
Behind the council's back, Some should be considered
and relooked into,
and she shouldn't have the position she has.
We just got done spending
or approving over $3 million for the parks
and recreation, parks
and Recreation, gets $6 million average
a year on their budget.
And yet we had no toilets at any of the parts working
6 million a year.
Why are we approving anything for the parks
and recreation until that 6 million every year, $24 million
since Dino's been improved, uh, been, uh, uh, po put into
that position, not have the toilets fixed
and any of the parks for the kids.
And we can park is a mess.
Before my daughters played baseball
or softball there, part of WVAC, the parents had
to walk the field to pick up all the needles, rubbers,
condoms, items that were left there from the prostitutes
and the drug addicts beforehand.
I have a lot of concerns about that part,
the time I won't allow my grandchildren
to go there in the future.
Have a good evening. Thank you. Hey, Mr. Schroeder,
Mr. Van
And you. Thank you for all the hard
work you've done, Mr. Vander.
I think that all the money that you made, Mr.
Vander Isn't equal to the money. You're out time.
People have embezzled.
Mr. Vander, I am.
You're out of time. I'm completely with my comments.
Thank you very much,
Honor. Next item,
next item. Council response
To audience.
Why is there, because you always have so much to say.
Ms. McGee, Can I call someone up?
Oh, no, I don't.
Any responses? Okay.
Entertain a Motion to adjourn.
Motion to adjourn. Support Dwyer.
All in favor? Aye. Aye.
Getting older.