I am now calling to order a regular meeting
of the city council, Tuesday, August 27th at 7:00 PM
Please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.
I pledge. Alle pledge allegiance. Flag to the flag.
Flag of the United States of America,
and to the republic for which
It stands. One nation
Under God, Indivisible.
With liberty. With liberty and justice
For all.
Roll call Madam Secretary Councilman Roy? Here.
Councilman Dwyer? Here. Councilwoman McGee? Here.
Councilman Bokey? Here. Councilman Nunan? Here.
Councilman Lafferty. Here. Councilwoman Moore is present.
We have a form. Uh, next item.
Next item is for adoption of the consent agenda. So moved.
Support Lafferty.
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 CA? Yes.
Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is adoption of the agenda.
So moved with discussion.
Support Ty. Discussion Madam Secretary. Thank you.
I have one item to add as, uh, 12 a, I guess miscellaneous.
Um, it is, uh, for two, uh, members of council
to be on the RFP for potential construction
of the Warren Town Center to be on the steering committee.
I we're putting this last minute,
which I just got this last minute
because their first meeting is the 4th of September.
So thank you.
Any additional discussion makers of the motion?
Support the addition without
Objection. Yes.
Thank you. 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 six.
A calendar of pending matters. Motion to receive and file
Support. Lafferty.
All in favor? Aye. Discussion.
Oh, sorry. Discussion. Thank you.
Did you have a session? Hearing none.
I will call the question. All in favor? Aye.
Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. Sorry.
Next item is seven a approval of the minutes
of the regular meeting of August 13th, 2024.
So moved. Support d wire.
Discussion, hearing none. I'll call the question. Ms. Moore?
Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr.
Noonan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes.
Motion carries. Next item. Next item is eight.
A approval of the bills of the general revenue funds.
So moved Support
Lafferty with discussion.
Discussion. Mr. Lafferty?
Thank you. I'd like
to separate check number 6 7 0 7 6 3
payable to Eddie Banko in the amount of $300.
Okay. So we will vote, support, support
that motion with discussion.
It is my understanding that, uh, now that Mr.
Banko has been removed from the ZBA
From, Or the, the, uh, civil service.
Civil Service, yes. Okay.
We'll vote on the original bill set first
and then we'll vote on, I'm assuming that's a motion
to deny Mr. Lafferty. I'll,
I'll make that motion on the separated item.
Thank you. Okay, so, uh, this is to vote on the bills
with the exception of 6 7 0 7 6 3.
Correct? Uh, Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr.
Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Nunan?
Yes. Uh, Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes.
Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is approval of check 6 7 0 7 6 3.
Motion to deny To Eddie Bagel.
Support, discussion.
Hearing none. I will call the question. Okay, go ahead.
No, go. Go ahead. Call the question. Mr. Lafferty?
Yes. To deny Ms. Moore? Yes. To deny Mr. Dwyer? Yes.
To deny Mr. Bokey? Yes. To deny Mr. Nunan? Yes.
Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is eight B.
Approval of the bills of the water and sewer system.
Motion to approve support. Dwyer. Discussion.
Hearing none. I will call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr.
Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr.
Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is? Yes. Motion carries.
Next item. Next item is eight C.
Uh, receive and file the general fund
revenue report. So moved.
Support Lafferty. Discussion.
Hearing none. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed?
Motion carries. Next item eight D,
general Revenue General Fund expenditure report.
Motion to receive and file
Support. Lafferty
Discussion.
Hearing none. I'll call the question. All in favor, aye.
Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is audience participation.
Thank you. First
is, uh, Lori Harris.
I am sorry. I should have read before. Go ahead, Ms. Harris.
I'm just gonna read my little blurb.
A member of the audience who would like
to address the city council this evening may do so
by filling out a form located
on the right side of the stage.
Uh, this is a reminder that you have to write your name
and address on the audience form.
You have three minutes. There is a clock in front here, uh,
that gives folks, uh, time of how long they have remaining.
And this audience is for agenda items only.
At the end of audience, we have additional, uh,
audience participation for non agenda items.
Ms. Harris, your three minutes.
Hi, uh, greetings to everybody. Hope you guys have power.
I'm glad we have power here so we can get this meeting done.
I wanna talk about, uh, uh, agenda item
11 B, the public hearing.
And I wanna encourage whoever's here for this public hearing
to make sure that you don't have a three minute
limit and a public hearing.
You can talk about what issues you have with this
and make sure you mention whether
or not this company has addressed you,
whether the planning commission
planning department has addressed your concerns.
Um, I, in the past when I've been
to the planning Commission about this issue
or been to the meeting, I was struck by how
the neighbors had valid, very valid concerns,
and I felt like they weren't being addressed.
So I wanna encourage the people that might be here for
that issue, um, to not be afraid to speak.
Um, and I just wanna remind everyone I know there's
something on here about, uh, disabilities.
The a DA is a civil rights law,
and we need to do better in our city with enforcing that.
Thank you.
Thank you. Next is, looks like Ray and Victoria.
You can each get three minutes if you would
like or come up together.
Good evening. Good evening.
We're, uh, residents of, uh, 3 2 7, 1 Ruly, uh,
just off of Tramble.
We've lived there since 1967.
Now, we've been receiving, uh, notices that, uh, there's a,
there's a motion to vacate, uh, a part of an alley, uh,
south of Ru uh, Ruly.
And I think that, I don't know who's supposed to benefit by
that, but I know that there's a development,
uh, being proposed.
The density of that is shocking to us right now.
Uh, when we, when we go to Tremble to go to Van D**e,
the the cars are parked on both sides of the street.
That, that, uh, small, uh, Mexican, uh,
restaurant is, has a lot.
Parking lot is totally inadequate
for their, for their customers.
And, uh, we have a great concern for that.
And, and if those, uh, buildings or apartments
or homes are going to be developed,
the the traffic will be horrendous.
And I don't know that everybody's aware of that.
And also, lastly, with this, with these storms coming up,
we are the last people to get power turned on,
uh, after a, a big storm.
And sometimes it takes three days,
and that little corner is always the last one
to have power. So
I'd like just add, I think that it's illegal for, for the,
uh, parking on both sides of Tramble, just, uh, east
of Van D**e.
I've called the police department a number of times.
I've not seen any, any, any resolution to that problem.
Thank you very much. Thank
You.
That is the end of audience. Next item, Madam Secretary.
Next item, uh, 10 announcements.
Madam Chair, Madam Secretary. Thank you.
Um, we are going to have a vacancy on the ZBA come October.
So anyone that's interested in applying
for the ZBA, you can go online.
There's a form there, or you can call the council office
and they can help you there.
Um, also, uh, this past Saturday was the Birthday Bash
and the, uh, a Polish Day parade.
Um, uh, Councilman Bokey and I were both in the parade
and, uh, one of our, uh, local Polish fellows,
Terry Waki, drove us.
So it was a lot of fun. Um, it was great seeing a lot
of people I hadn't seen in a long time,
and I think people had a lot of fun.
So, that's it for me. Any additional announcements?
Madam President, Mr. Lafferty?
Thank you, Madam President.
Uh, to add onto that, I was there Friday evening
and spectacular performance by, uh,
the Bob Seger impersonator, uh, wowed the crowd.
Uh, I know the wonders were, were very good.
Uh, earlier in the day we had a number of food trucks
and the carnival was going.
And, uh, just fun for all ages.
But I did want to shout out to the Parks
and Recreation Department, the Public Service Department,
uh, the Warren Police Cert.
And all of you did a fantastic job in making sure
that it was a terrific weekend.
Uh, I understand Mr.
Mozza using his, uh, uh, Polish pride,
even held the weather off
and made sure it was a spectacular weekend.
So, uh, well done to, uh, one and all. Thank you.
Thank you. Any additional announcements?
Hearing none, Madam Secretary. Next item. Thank you.
Uh, the next item on the agenda is 11 a.
Um, we've been requested to keep that on the table
for a while.
We'll notify everybody when we're gonna put it back on.
And next item then is 11 B, which is public,
a public hearing, a part of Templeton subdivision vacation,
including Ruly Avenue, public right of way,
and public alley vacating lots.
1 71 to 1 74, including lots.
2 63 to 2 66 lots. Three 19 to 3 21.
The 18 foot wide north south public alley,
located 1 131 0.67 feet west of Linderman Avenue
and the North South, 50 feet wide Rurally Avenue
public right of way.
32 549 Rurally Avenue, section three, city of Warren
Han ha th and coast
to coast U-S-A-L-L-C-P-E-V 24 0 0 0 3.
Uh, motion? Anyone? No public hearing. Hearing. Oh, sorry.
Uh, sit. Thank you. Can I just say one thing first? Sure.
Just to, if, if there you hear a siren.
I know there's really bad weather around all around us.
We need to leave the auditorium
'cause there's really high walls.
So make an exit out this, these doors
and somebody will direct you from there.
But they, we've been told to leave this room.
If there are, if we hear the siren go off. Thanks.
Sorry to interrupt. Uh, Mr.
Wrf, can you summarize the item
before I open the public hearing?
Uh, thank you, uh, Madam Chair and City Council.
And, okay. Did what did you want me to do? Is, uh, just
Summarize the matter.
Summarize the matter. Um, the petitioner has been
working on this for several years,
and finally came to the conclusion that they had to, uh,
in order to make an area for, I believe it's, uh, eight
or nine separate lots.
And these are single family homes, not apartments,
as you heard a little while ago.
Uh, and in order to do that in a
a subdivision, they're all smaller.
Lots you needed, they, they, in the end, needed to
vacate a part of the subdivision.
And the subdivision includes, uh, roadways, alleys, uh,
alley, uh, easements within the alleys.
And that's indeed what, uh, Mr.
Ecker came to the, uh, planning commission, uh, with
that kind of proposal, uh, planning commission, uh,
reviewed it, of course, and, uh, agreed with, uh, with it.
And it's moved on to here.
So it's a, it's an area that's defined.
It's, and, uh, the resolution does define it,
uh, in the very first part.
If you have the resolution in front of you,
it defines it perfectly.
Um, one other thing I will say is, is that part of the, uh,
condition one, one particular condition?
And that's condition number five.
And when, when you're reading it, uh, there's a,
some correction needs to be made where it,
you can see in the first line, uh, the words, uh,
the public utility easement, that's in the first
sentence in the second sentence.
Same words repeated the public utility easements.
Well, that needs to be replaced in both locations
with what you actually see in the first
part of the resolution.
And I'll, I'll read that. It's where it starts.
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 6 lines down.
And I'll, and I'll read it to replace those,
those words lots.
1 71 through 1 74,
including lots 2 63 through 2 66
and lots through 19 through 3 21
of tremble subdivision
and the 18 foot wide north south public alley
located 131.67 feet west
of Linderman Ave.
And the north south, 50 foot wide
Rurally Avenue public right of way.
So that's the change that should be made
and the resolution then will be corrected.
Um, I don't know if you have any other
things, uh, you'd like to hear.
I certainly, uh, Mr.
Eckert has a lot of good things to talk about there too, so,
So I will likely have you come back up once we have a
motion, uh, after we open the public hearing.
Alright, thank you. I will open the public hearing.
Is there anyone from the audience who would like
to speak on this matter?
My name is Glenn Eckert,
2 7 2 4 1 down street, Warren, Michigan.
Uh, I've been working on this for four years.
Uh, I've gone through two mayors and a few council changes.
Uh, the reason I'm here is to basically ask for a signature,
uh, in order to accomplish the end goal, which is to develop
nine property, nine houses on this property.
I've gone through a lot of changes, uh,
and what has transpired here is that there is a quirk
in the subdivision laws in the state of Michigan.
And that quirk is that if it is a subdivision
and it's in a, uh, flood plain area, you cannot
bring, uh, you cannot bring, you have to, you have to bring,
uh, soil into the area in order to raise the grade
of the house to bring it above the floodplain air, uh, uh,
calculation, which is 6 0 9 0.1,
is currently a subdivision.
My first thought was to just replant it as a subdivision,
but when I got involved with the people that are in charge,
um, I don't know if you have a letter copy of this.
They told me you would have one.
It's called the explanation, um, uh, of the,
uh, requirement.
Does anybody, does this look familiar to anyone?
You can give a copy to Ms. Camp if you would like.
I've got plenty of copies.
Okay. First, I talked to, uh, Mr.
Nicholas Cleaver and he is, uh,
land survey specialist office Office of Land Survey in
Renomination, department of Licensing
and Regulation in Lansing.
And he indicated to me that I could not have a subdivision,
uh, uh, unless I brought the,
I couldn't have the houses built on the subdivision
unless I brought the grade up above
that would require bringing soil onto the site.
And after I talked with him, I got involved with Eagle
and Mario Fusco is the local representative there.
He's a supervisor of hydro hydrologic studies
and Floodplain management, uh, unit, uh,
water Resources Division Eagle.
And he's right here in Warren.
And what he explained to me is
that if it is a condominium development, a site,
a site condo development,
the houses can be built on crawl spaces
by building the houses on crawl spaces.
I could bring the floor area above the 6 0 9 0.1 level
and therefore alleviate any flood
conditions for the homeowners.
This also would require the addition of in the crawl space,
what they call floodgates.
In case there was a major rain
or flood, it would move through the house,
through the crawl space and not enter the home itself.
How this actually happened, I don't know
because a site condo development site condo, single family
is basically exactly the same as a subdivision development.
I've developed five subdivisions in my life.
The first three were subdivisions.
The balance of them were site condo developments.
And the site condo was actually easier to do.
But in order to do a site condo development,
I have to remove the plat.
And in order to remove the plat, I have
to take it to circuit court.
And a judge has to declare that the plat has been vacated.
After that plat is vacated, then I can take that information
that vacated plat
and turned that property into a site condo.
And once it's turned into a site, condo
can move forward with development.
Finally. And I'm lucky enough to have a, a young lady here,
uh, representing, uh, coast to coast.
Her name is Quinn Pond, but I also have a number.
I don't know if we have them or not. I was told that.
Do we have some overheads?
So this is audience right now.
We'll have questions since you're the petitioner. Okay.
Uh, once we close the public hearing,
I'm sure we'll have questions.
Alright. Uh, additionally about the matter.
Okay, so basically that's what I'm looking for.
I'm looking for the authorization to sign the document
so the attorney can move forward
because this property is owned by the city.
And unless the city official signs the request
to the attorney and the work on this is going to be paid
for, not by the city, but by the, by the developer.
So there's no additional cost involved to the city.
But without that signature, I cannot move forward.
Thank you. Thanks.
Is there anyone else from the audience who would like
to speak on this matter?
Number one, I think that the public should have the right
to, uh, the public hearing
before the petitioner comes up to defend
and describe all the wonderful things he's gonna do.
And I don't live in that neighborhood,
but I've been going to planning commission meetings,
ex not recently, but for a long time.
And I've watched what, what's happened.
And the planning commission has been a rubber stamp
for anything coming out of that planning office.
So whether or not these residents
have ever had any good feedback
or any, any information that's helpful to them,
I don't really think it's probably happened.
I'd love to hear from them if that has.
But if you just go ahead and approve this
and just give a signature, that's all you have to do.
You are also saying the residents don't really matter.
He may have been working on it for four years,
but those residents have lived there for a long time.
And the same concerns were brought up at a planning
commission meeting that I happened to be at,
that this gentleman
and his, the woman gentleman, uh, presented,
they wouldn't have those same concerns if it had been
addressed in any way.
So I think it's a lack in the planning department,
and I think at the very least it should be tabled
until the proper, uh, evaluation of the situation,
um, is done and proper information is given.
How do we know that's not gonna end up like the condos
off Imperial Drive?
We don't know. They don't know.
But if you're taking that
and you've got already a parking issue,
do you have a problem getting emergency vehicles in there?
So I would just encourage you not
to just rubber stamp things, uh,
because that's not what we need to do in the city.
We need to take care of our residents
and we need to at least listen and answer their questions
and help them understand if there's
something they don't understand.
But don't rubber stamp it. Thank you.
Thank you. Does anyone else from the audience
that would like to speak on the matter,
can you give us your name?
Uh, Tom Beal. Thank you.
Uh, as far as I know, they don't have a
finalized plan yet.
He's still saying nine houses.
I heard that they were in talks with the restaurant, uh,
to use the ninth lot for a parking lot,
but he's still going nine houses.
So is there a final plan
We will ask when we close the public hearing?
'cause I don't know, but we can ask the planning department.
Okay. Thank you. Mm-Hmm. Anyone
else from the audience that wants to speak?
Okay. I will close the public hearing
and turn it over to counsel for action.
Motion to approve with discussion,
Support, Support Mr.
Bokey Discussion. Mr. Lafferty.
Thank you, uh, through the chair to Mr. Wirth.
Please start with you.
Yes, sir. Good evening, sir.
And looking through my notes, uh, I remember this property,
we dealt with this on at our January 9th
meeting to approve the original alley vacation
and the, uh, The purchase agreement
and sale of these tax reverted properties.
There were 11 of them. And so,
and counsel you might recall, uh,
I had filed a reconsideration
after I realized that there was an error in our resolution.
We brought this back, we corrected it.
There was some consideration with the green space,
and that had been eliminated so
that this is the same property that we're, now, this is more
of an, what I would term an administrative function for,
uh, maybe,
maybe you could term it a little better for me, sir.
Uh, the, the signature that we're being asked for tonight
is signing off on the, the legal doctrine.
I believe that's, we're talking about the agreement Yes.
That, uh, uh, Mr. Ecker has referred to.
And, um, yeah.
That needs to be done so that,
and this be approved so they can move forward with a
condominium subdivision.
Not not the, uh, uh, plat
that he initially came forward with.
And, um, that plat will be, uh, retired
that will be, uh, taken back.
And then once this property is a whole property
that they can, uh, create the subdivision,
the condominium subdivision according
to the zoning ordinance, uh, it will simply move forward
with, uh, yeah, we, it is to, uh,
build those, they all these lots,
all face, I believe it's tremble.
Mm-Hmm. And, um, they'll use the utilities that
exist in the road there.
And, uh, so it, it, it,
it's always been simple in that regard, uh,
to, uh, use those utilities
and remove the other utilities that were part
of the original plat.
And those usually fell in the roadways, the alleys,
roadways and alleys basically.
And, uh, uh,
within alleys you have public utility easements.
Same with the right of ways.
You have public utility easements, so you remove them,
you relocate anything that's there at this point.
And, uh, open it up to, uh, making those lots.
Alright. Now, as, as I re
re-look at the, the property.
We had 11 lots that we,
we authorized the purchase agreement for.
And then, and it did not affect the, the green space
on the side that was taken out
and adjacent to Bates Park
and the city owned property along the, along Beaver Creek.
Right. So the site plan
that, has a site plan been submitted for this?
No. Okay. So we don't have a, a formal site plan yet.
Now, I remember at the, the previous meeting
Eight months ago, I have, I have seen proposal,
but, uh, one must do this first before understood.
You have the right, you have the right
to use the property the way they want it to be used.
Of course. And I, what I don't wanna do is
mix, mix the two.
I know that we have a couple of residents here
that have some concerns about traffic parking.
Uh, but I, I think we might be premature on what's being
requested based on what is going
to be built on the property.
'cause at, at this point, if we've, we've sold 11 lots,
if there, there's owned R one, R one P, then you're building
up to 11 homes, which is not in, in my opinion, not
a tremendous stress on the existing
roadway or the neighborhood.
Well re remember that those lots were part
of the original lots in Tru and fund subdivision Mm-Hmm.
So we're removing those and he was reducing it to nine.
Understood. So we're, we're dealing with an even smaller
parcel base, smaller
Density. Yeah.
Mm-Hmm. Actually,
And so with a, with the potential.
So, and I don't know if Mr.
Ecker would like to, to speak to his,
you know, potential plan.
I'm hearing condominiums, uh, or homes perhaps Mr.
Eckert, if you'd like to comment on what your potential, uh,
plan is for the development of this space.
I'd be happy to. Uh, this, uh, existing subdivision was
actually subdivided in the mid thirties.
Okay. Uh,
and the configuration of these lots were
running north and south.
The, the roads were running north and south. Mm-Hmm.
And it was financially impossible to develop those lots
because the, of the cost of putting the infrastructure in
for a roadway, the sewers, the water, all the connections.
So by reducing the amount
of lots in fronting the lots on tremble as opposed
to fronting them unruly or linderman Mm-Hmm.
Uh, it allowed the development to go forward.
And that was going along, uh, rather nicely
until I ran into the problem with the difference
between a subdivision and a condominium.
Uh, the concept of, uh,
developing these lots is valid.
It's a good idea. It was a good idea four years ago,
and it's a good idea today.
Originally the city had agreed to sell me the property from,
uh, from, from tremble all the way to Beaver Creek.
And that amount of property from tremble
to Beaver Creek runs between 353, uh, 300
and 500 feet deep.
And, uh, Mr.
Wirth, uh, we talked about it
and he says, you know, maybe we should keep that
property back there for a park or a park someday.
And I think I've got some pictures of
that somewhere in the, if it's available.
Uh, but, uh, I thought that was a good idea too,
because nobody wants a 50 foot wide lot
that runs 500 feet deep, who wants to cut the grass.
So it was a work, a win-win situation for the city
and for the development.
Uh, I've gone through a few different developers
that were willing to come forward on this,
but the time factors that were brought in involved
because of Covid and the situations that I was running into,
they kept walking away until I found this group
that I'm working with now.
And I really don't want to lose them.
And basically all I'm asking for is the authorization
to take this, uh, petition, the court circuit court
to look at this and say, okay,
we will remove this plat that was designed in 1934.
This plat is so old
that they planted lots over Beaver Creek.
Think about it. Mm-Hmm. They would do anything then.
They didn't care. So it's a great idea.
It's a good concept. Uh, I'm not trying to herd any
of the, uh, the residents.
We are in communication with the owner of the, uh,
Mexican restaurant.
Uh, we are trying to come up with a a
and they, the developer would rather keep
that residential lot,
but in order to satisfy the resident, the residents needs,
uh, they're willing to let enough space go
so they could put in enough parking to satisfy that
requirement, you know, for the restaurant.
And it's good for his business. Mm-Hmm.
It's something that he should do.
So we are talking with him. He's talking with us.
They haven't come to an agreement yet,
but that's part of the plan.
And as far as there being a, uh, a, a site plan,
there is Okay.
And you've probably got it,
but we can't get it on the screen.
Uh, and it's been around for quite a while for, it's been
around for three and a half years.
It's just that now that I'm changing it from a, from a,
a subdivision to a site condo development,
a single family site condo, there are lots.
Alright. And Mr.
Ecker, how approximately how many
of these site condo developments
are you planning on building,
Uh, individual homes?
It'd probably be eight. Because if we work at the deal out
with the, you know, and it's not up to me to do that.
It's about these two individuals.
They've gotta sit down and work it out.
And I, and it's a, it's a win-win for,
you know, the development.
But you know, there would be eight instead of nine
Mm-Hmm. Thank you.
And, and there's originally pla like I said,
for 11, so it's reduced.
And you did agree as part of the purchase agreement
to some strict conditions
that we modified here, uh, back in January.
Yeah. So those are still in place.
That going, uh, taking this additional step does not change
the intent or the conditions that we agreed in in January
or the, uh, uh, the amendment in in early February.
Correct. So that, that stays on.
Uh, I would, I would recommend, uh, to,
to both you and Mr.
Wirth, if you could please communicate with the, uh,
with the neighbors when you do bring your site plan in front
of the, the planning commission.
I know that, uh, uh, requirements are in place for notice,
but go the extra step to communicate
and make sure that the, uh, the concerns re uh, relative
to parking traffic, uh, patterns are, uh,
are laid with them.
And then, uh,
but I, I don't wanna mix those concerns with site plan
and conditions of a site plan relative to this item,
which have their, their
I will have to return.
This has to come back to you.
Understood. But I, what I'm trying to do is,
Is once I get the court to agree
to remove the plat Mm-Hmm.
Then I can bring a drawing forward that can be reviewed
and adjusted if necessary.
And that will be reviewed by the planning commission.
Yeah. And you'll see, you'll get it too.
So, but my, my point here is that the concerns
of the neighborhood need to be addressed
during the site planning process, not
during this particular item, which is me.
Uh, more of a technicality. Correct. Thank you.
Anything further, Mr. Through the chair?
Uh, I yield. Thank you. Um, Mr. Madam Chair. Mr.
Dwyer, and then Mr. Bokey. Mr. Dwyer.
Yeah. Just a couple quick questions.
Um, who will be paying for the relocation
of the, uh, utilities?
Uh, there, that was a little,
that actually is incorrect.
The utilities will remain where they are.
I've already been in contact with, uh, DTE
and I've made adjustments on easements.
Okay. Uh, at
and TDTE originally on that plat
or the, the, the original plat
that we're talking about removing,
there was an alleyway running through that north and south,
and there was a series of DTE poles in that alleyway.
And what I did is I adjusted that alleyway over to the west
because those poles were right on the edge of the alleyway.
So I moved the alleyway into the middle
of a 16 foot easement so that those poles could be surfaced.
And that space on either side,
eight foot on either side can be used
as a side yard setback.
Okay. Later, I found out that there was a, uh, at
and t underground, uh, cable line.
Okay. Uh, fiber optics, uh, that ran
same direction north and south.
And that ran along the street that was never put in rurally.
So I talked to, uh, the at and t people,
and we've come to an agreement
that they want a 12 foot wide easement coming from tremble
down lot four.
And when it gets to the back of lot four behind
where the house would be sitting,
it's basically called the footprint.
Uh, it would widen out to 16 feet
and then go to the back of the property.
So it wouldn't interfere with the at
and t fiber optics cable line that's underground.
All the rest of the utilities, the, the water, the sewer,
they will be connected to, but they won't be moved.
Okay. And one other question.
Um, we're, we're talking 50 foot wide lots,
wasn't it originally the plan 60 foot wide lots?
No. Uh, originally we were trying
to put larger lots in there, but it couldn't make it work.
Uh, and they're a combination, uh, between 45
and 56 foot lots.
They vary because of these easement changes.
But to really understand what it's gonna look like,
you, you'd have to see the photos that we produced prior
to this, because they've got a development,
high tech development, unbelievable housing going in, uh,
that the city will be proud of.
Anything further, Mr. Boyer? No. Thank you, Mr. Bokey.
Good evening. Good evening.
Uh, my questions have to deal
with the paperwork you supplied to us.
Um, will this property have to be brought up, uh,
fill dirt brought up to raise it above the,
uh, flood plate level?
No, that's why I'm doing this.
Okay. If, if it was a subdivision, okay.
I'd have to bring in Phil to raise the grade,
the floor grade of these houses up over that, uh,
6 0 9 0.1.
And that's the only way a subdivision
will allow you to build.
But if it's a side condo,
you can put the houses on crawl spaces.
I can bring the floor pa the floor, the floors up to
that grade without touching. Just so I
Believe my con my concern is if, uh, if you're, uh,
development is higher grade than the surrounding residents,
um, what would be the effect of rainwater
and where's it gonna go?
Uh, the best way to explain this to you is Mr.
Fuco. Okay. At Eagle, uh,
we went over this in detail.
I have a permit request with his office now,
and the reason I'm doing it, the way I'm doing it is that,
so that no fill has to be brought into the site
because the amount of fill that is actually authorized
to bring in is very minimal.
Okay. Always have to do some, uh, some land balancing.
But the, the grade is not gonna change.
Like I said, we're not gonna, they, they, we can't bring
In. My main concern is
that we authorize the development
and then we find out that the grade's not right
and we're flooding out the residents around you.
You know. So that'll be a question
for the planning commission to probably handle,
but I'm very concerned about that.
I understand. Especially after reading what you gave me.
Yeah. And those phone numbers are on there.
You can talk to, they're both very familiar with this site.
Thank you. Yield back
Any additional discussion?
So, just to summarize for the residents
that had some questions, one is there was
a purchase agreement of those 11 properties back in January.
Mr. Lafferty, you can correct me
with some conditions in purchasing
that property from the city.
What we're approving today is the ability,
or what, what we're going to vote on is the ability for Mr.
Eckert. And you can have a seat, Mr. Ecker. Okay. Um, Mr.
Ecker to go to Circuit Court to have the legal definition
of those properties changed from a subdivision
to a condo site.
There will be additional work done from there that will go
through the planning commission maybe to us, uh,
that will develop the full site on
what is permitted on the site,
what is not permitted on the site.
While Mr. Eckert has an idea of what he would like
to have there, it does have to go through another phase
of approvals before that's possible.
So there is, sounds like there is a final plan.
The gentleman that came up, I would ask Mr.
Wirth if you could maybe grab this gentleman's, uh,
contact information, uh, to send him the final plan so
that he can see what that looks like.
And anyone else who would like Mr.
Wirth is the, the person to look at
what has been proposed thus far.
Okay. Uh, any additional discussion? No. Okay.
Hearing none, I will call the question Mr. Lafferty.
Um, point of order. Madam Chair? Yes.
Uh, I want to recognize the fact that Mr.
Wirth read into the record the amended, uh, text
for the resolution for Mary to put into the official record.
Thank You. Thank you. Uh, yes. To approve
Mr. Bokey.
Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes.
Uh, let's see. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Newan?
Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries.
Next item. Next item is 12.
A appointment of two members
to be on the Town Center Steering Committee.
So moved with discussion
Support Lafferty, Uh, discussion Ms. Moore.
Mm-Hmm. Um, so we did received, um, an email
on August 22nd from Mr.
Bato. Um, first off, um,
it says attached is the mayor's authorization.
To begin, begin a steering committee for the town center.
Number one, the DDA is an autonomous board
that doesn't report to the mayor.
Tom Bato doesn't report to the mayor,
except if he's the economic director,
but not as the DDA director.
He is by, um, ordinance
and bylaws, the CEO of the DDA.
So he really doesn't, I suppose he has to get,
if he wanted people outside
of the DDA on the steering committee, he could, would have
to get the mayor's permission for her people to join there.
But Tom has the, Mr.
Bato has the authority to set up a steering committee
and invite members to be at it.
Uh, that came on the 22nd of August. At that time, uh, Mr.
Bato said that he, his intent was
to have our first community involvement as a county,
as a council committee of the whole,
and then move to other engagements in the community.
Um, was we was going to be sending a letter
to have two council members appointed.
Um, that didn't come late today.
Um, I received an email that he just,
that hadn't gotten mailed,
but the invitation, the first meeting is September 4th.
So that's why I'm adding this at the last minute.
Um, I suppose if anybody wants to go to that meeting,
if they're available on the fourth,
um, I think I'm available.
I could, I could certainly do it.
Um, I, I'm probably the only one here who was here actually
and knows the intent of the DDA from the beginning
and what the plan is supposed to be.
Um, so that might be a different perspective,
but we really have to sort of reteach the whole DDA
to get back to what it was supposed to be
and what it should be today according to the, um,
ordinance and the bylaws.
But that's, I think, a discussion to come,
um, in the near future.
So I guess if anybody else wants to be part of
that, I would like to be part of it.
Um, I don't know if anybody else does.
Um, nominate Ms. Moore. Madam Chair? Yes. I volunteer.
I will nominate Ms. Moore and Mr.
Lafferty nominated himself. Um, any discussion?
Madam Chair? Yes. I, I, you, I,
this is gonna be a long process,
so I don't think there's, you know, Mr.
Lafferty and I can go, maybe now to start think,
but I think we could probably rotate people.
This is a very, very, very big undertaking.
It'll be, have a big impact on our community.
So I don't think it should be land in just two people.
Mm-Hmm. Okay. We could do that. I think that's great. Yeah.
Nominate alternatives.
At this point, I'll, okay, Mel and I Okay. Be alternates.
Okay. So the slate of folks
for the steering committee includes Ms. Moore and Ms.
Lafferty, and then Ms. McGee and myself for alternates.
And certainly we can swap people out
and we're gonna have committee meetings a whole,
and I think all kinds of things.
So, yeah. Uh, I need a motion, I suppose, for this item.
Motion. Motion to approve the members
and alternates as discussed
Support. Ty?
All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Thank you.
Next item. Next item is 13, a legal affairs subcommittee.
Discussion, Inre approval of Warren Land Bank Authority,
intergovernmental agreement.
Motion to approve with discussion. Support.
Lafferty Discussion. Ms. Mark?
Madam Chair, if I could just have Mr. Uh, Mr.
Schroder, do you wanna give the background?
I can, I can read your memo,
but certainly otherwise you could
Just, the background to this is, um, earlier this year
in February, a new state law took effect
that would allow the City of Warren to have a land bank
that wasn't possible before.
Another piece of this was, uh, the county of Macomb.
The Macomb County Commissioners rejected having a county
land bank at that time.
So that created the opportunity for Warren.
Um, in fact, the law allowed 10
or 11 new communities in the state of Michigan
to have their own land bank,
but this would be done
through an intergovernmental agreement
with the State Land Bank authority.
So, um, the council voted unanimously to do that.
Had a series of discussions
with the State Land Bank Authority, the director, Mr.
Rivett, um, who grew up in Warren.
So the head of the State Land Bank Authority has a real
interest in Warren getting a land bank as he grew up here,
was involved in, I believe,
local government for a period of time.
Um, I worked with the Land Bank director
and the general counsel, the attorney
for the State Land Bank, uh,
to put together what's
called an intergovernmental agreement.
So this is an agreement between Warren
and the State Land Bank Authority to establish a city
of Warren Land Bank, and, uh, to exercise all powers
and authorities that a land Bank can, can do.
In addition, the State Land Bank Authority
is giving out a lot of grants.
I think this year it was over $70 million worth of grants.
This is to help cities.
Uh, they're calling them like Blight Buster Grants
or Blight Elimination grants.
So when communities have properties in their land bank
and they receive these grants,
they can improve these properties.
And ultimately, the goal isn't
to keep the property in the Land Bank.
The property is the goal is to improve the properties
and then, uh, sell them to bidders
or others who can use them.
End users in proper, you know, residential properties.
So, um, and I know
that there are potential grants available if we get this
done by the end of the year, it's getting close.
So we want to complete this.
So what you see is a result of a, sort
of a template agreement from the State Land Bank Authority.
We had discussions with Legal
Affairs and other council members.
And, uh, if we approve this, um,
and this moves forward, then the city would qualify
for private, local, state, and federal funds.
Um, the city may need to, uh,
discuss some startup costs, uh, to get going.
Um, I know Ms. Moore has had some conversations on that end,
so, um, I can answer any questions,
but I think, um, given that council wanted
to do this in the first place,
we have a great agreement with the state.
Uh, this wasn't even possible a year ago.
This wasn't even possible at last November's election.
It was only possible, uh, you know,
early in the spring this year.
So we're jumping on it
and, uh, certainly, uh, I can answer any questions.
Thank you. Um, just to mention, that sort
of goes along with our thinking.
As you'll remember, back at budget time,
we did allocate about $5 million from the ARPA funds
to invest in the south end by improving properties, um,
you know, be based on income of other things like that.
And this will be a really good tie in to that effort.
Um, you know, and other things I think we'll probably be
talking about that we can do all in an effort
to raise the south end, um, that the homes there, um,
to encourage home ownership, uh, increase the rental,
the decrease the rental properties.
And I think that will be just a, a win-win,
um, for the city.
And I will tell you
that when other people have found out we're doing a
land bank, they're very jealous.
I can tell you Mark Hackle is very jealous.
'cause he thinks they, they really miss the mark
by not doing it in the county,
but their losses is our win, really.
'cause if they had not turned it down,
we would not be able to do it.
So, and thank you for Mr. Mr.
Schroder for all the work you've done.
But now if anybody else has anybody else be quiet,
any additional discussion, I just wanted
to note, uh, that I think this is a incredible opportunity.
I'm really excited about it.
I think for far too long, door knocking,
you would hear residents complain about a vacant piece
of property in their neighborhood
or wanting to start a community garden, uh,
or just not an understanding of how
to purchase property in the city.
And I think we have had a history
of folks not being super transparent with some of that.
We've had folks act aneth unethically around some
of the tax reverted or foreclosed properties.
And I think this is a great step forward
to providing additional transparency
and bringing it, uh, into a local body, uh, to help, uh,
ensure that these properties can be used
and best used based on the folks closest to the ground.
So I'm very excited about this
and commend my colleagues across the board for, uh,
the insight in moving this forward.
So without anything further,
I will call the question, uh, let's see.
Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer?
Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee?
Very much, yes. Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 13 B Council Secretary Mindy Moore discussion
and Ray officials performing duties in acting capacity.
So moved. Support Lafferty. Madam Chair. Discussion.
Thank you. Um, we are, um,
we find ourselves, um, with many positions, uh,
not filled in the city to begin with.
We, um, received some documentation at a committee meeting
the whole, on the 20th, I believe, of August.
And there are approximately 99 positions
that are not filled.
Now, some are in the position of,
or in the, um, process of being filled.
And, you know, they're not, they're not just totally vacant.
Nothing's being done with them.
But that does, you know, cause some, uh,
concern on certainly most of our parts that, um, we need
to get those positions filled.
Um, the other thing that's come up is this thing of acting.
Um, I don't believe may, Mr.
Schroer, I think probably should address this,
but there is no acting except in the city attorney's office.
The chief assistant attorney, according to the UAW contract,
may may be the acting city attorney for up to four weeks.
That is the four, four weeks.
That is the only place for an acting anything.
And, um, there is either there union positions
or there are appointed positions.
And there is, Mr. Schroeder will explain provisional.
I believe he knows it better than I,
but I'm concerned that we have these
positions that aren't filled.
I'm especially concerned about hr that there's a term acting
and that person is supposed to be charged
with finding their replacement.
That's concerning to me.
Um, I don't think, I think that somebody outside
of the acting HR director should be looking
for an HR director.
Uh, the recruiting and the city attorney I think is a huge
problem not having a permanent city attorney.
Um, because as you all know, from hearing me talk for blah,
blah, blah, um, according to the charter, uh,
the city attorney reports to us, right?
So that we have a different relationship
with a city attorney than we would
somebody in the attorney's office.
And that we are, we deserve that so that we know that
that person is going to be working in our best interest
and answer to us.
Um, we got a document last week that, um,
we had asked questions
and sent over for the, uh, the pride event,
um, to get answers.
And it came from the attorney, from Ms.
Michaels didn't come from the administration.
And so that caused me a little concern
because these were things counsel wanted and Ms.
Michaels was answering on behalf of the, the administration.
So we're getting into these really, really gray areas
that I find concerning.
Um, maybe Mr. Schroeder can explain the law.
There is no provision in the charter.
Um, the city charter for acting or interim appointments.
There's something known as a provisional appointment.
And a provisional appointment assumes
that the person was already in the position
and can continue provisionally until a replacement is found.
That requires counsel approval.
The whole concept of acting, it's been used over the years
when there's sort of a short vacancy, um,
in a department head position.
So as we know in the charter, the mayor appoints most
of the, or almost all of the administrative officers
of the city, that 7.6 of the charter,
when the mayor makes such an appointment, either it needs
to be confirmed by the council, that's a limited number.
The assessor, the attorney, uh, some appointments to boards
and commissions, or the mayor makes a formal appointment,
files it with the clerk.
The council's notified,
and the council has two meetings to reject
that appointment for giving a reason.
The whole acting, uh, department head
or administrative officer, uh,
designation over the years has been turned into something
where people for months and months
and longer years,
hold this position in an acting capacity
without having been appointed.
Um, my suggestion is
that's not contemplated under the charters,
not permitted under the charter.
Um, in the case of the city attorney,
there is a union agreement,
a collective bargaining agreement between the city
and the union that says, in the absence of a city attorney,
for periods of time, less than four weeks,
the chief assistant city attorney shall be the
administrative head of the Department of Law.
I'm not aware of this being in other departments.
Maybe it is. Um,
but in this case, there's a time limit on that.
Um, so really if we wanna follow our charter
and our ordinances
and our, this case, a union contract, we need
to read the words and interpret them correctly
and proceed correctly.
And so acting isn't something
that really exists in the past.
The council really wasn't going
to make an issue outta someone who's acting for a month
or two if the mayor's trying to find a replacement.
Um, but you get into 6, 7, 8 months almost a year,
there's really no authority.
So it's certainly the mayor could call someone acting
and file the appointment with the clerk
and send it over to the council.
Um, that would be fine.
Um, as long as that process is being followed.
But just to name someone acting without following the
process of filing it
and sending it to council, just, just no authority for it.
Well, if the mayor wants to call them acting, well,
They could call or they can call,
But it's still appoint. But, but file the appointment
Properly. It would be
an appointment to the position in our eyes.
But if the mayor wanted to say, you're appointed,
but you're not gonna be there for very long.
Right. Well, sometimes an acting, an acting
person is under consideration for the, for,
Right. Right. But there's no,
I mean,
we shouldn't be getting documentation
that says acting city attorney like we did today.
Well, not after four weeks.
Right, right. That's, that's my point. Okay.
I mean, I just don't know how much longer we can go without
having a city attorney.
It's just not, it's not certainly not fair to us.
And if we hadn't been in a position
where we have a council attorney,
I have no idea what we would be doing.
We would have no clue. So I just think that,
you know, we're gonna have to do something about that
and we'll probably, we'll figure out something,
but it's, something's gotta be done.
You can't carry carry on like this.
It's not fair to the resident's. Not fair to us. Certainly.
Any additional discussion?
Yes, Ms. McGee?
My concern is, is that it is taking longer
to fill positions, not just, uh, in the city
of Warren, but all over.
So if it's past that four week, um, at deadline time
than, what would you call it?
If it's, it's not acting, it's not, what is it?
Because it's taking longer to,
to fill the positions nowadays up to six months,
Nine months.
Well, like I said before, um,
I think you were directing that my way.
Mm-Hmm. Um, I was certainly,
the appointments can be made as acting.
Just file the appointment with the clerk, send it
to counsel, call them acting.
The, the charter doesn't say acting.
So you can circumvent the whole charter
by just naming certain individuals acting.
And they're there for the longest time
and the process is unfollowed.
So my suggestion is file the appointments, say
that they're acting, send them over to counsel,
let counsel look at it.
And, uh, you know,
after that, the process take place that way.
Because it doesn't say there's,
there's nothing in the charter that says interim or acting.
Now, another possibility is since it's not addressed,
and certainly if it's silent in the
charter, there's no acting.
Maybe they're an ordinance.
Counsel can look at an ordinance
and under what conditions can someone be an interim
or acting under what conditions?
It's just the charter has a specific power
to make these appointments.
And, um, interim enacting isn't,
wasn't contemplated in 1957, so
to, but to sit there and not appoint folks
that have been sitting in these positions for a long time
that the charter doesn't provide for that
For. Okay, thank
you.
Chair. Yes, Ms.
Bar, just to follow up, Ms. McGee, um, hiring
permanent staff and civil service employees is certainly
different than making an appointment.
The American appoint say she appoints a a fabulous police
commissioner and, you know,
three months later she can just fire that person
and bring somebody else in.
So it's not the same as, um, you know, somebody
that has civil service protection.
Um, she can a appoint anybody in this auditorium, um,
to any position she wants with.
She really doesn't have to have, they don't have any, have
to even have any qualifications.
There's not one appointment that has a qualification
to it except an assessor and a city attorney.
Mm-Hmm. Um, but she could pick anybody off the street
and appoint them if she wanted to.
So, and it doesn't have to last forever.
It's not an appointment forever.
I mean, nothing's gonna be more than now three years
and three months, right.
Or three years and two months.
So it's not gonna, it's not like it's a, you know,
25 year appointment
for somebody's career like you would in a appoint a a,
uh, an employee.
And I know it takes longer for to fill employment positions,
I know that, but appointees should not take that long.
There's, it just shouldn't.
'cause you don't have to go through any of the hoops
that you do have to with the civil service employee.
So I just, I just don't see it there. Whatever.
Madam President, Mr. Lafferty, if Ms. McGee is finished,
I'm Done. Alright.
We shouldn't be having this conversation
on the 27th of August.
I, I don't know any way to put it.
That makes it sound better.
We shouldn't have had this conversation
three months ago like we did,
and a few weeks
after the new mayor took office, uh,
that should have been the time, you know, given a, a,
the honeymoon, the grace period of, of a new, uh,
newly elected executive, uh, to assemble.
But you are supposed to walk into that office
having been elected to the highest office in Warren
with a plan, with an army
of appointees ready and willing to serve.
There is no excuse to walk in
and not have that plan ready.
It's a disservice to the residents.
It's a disservice to this council.
And then on top of it, what did we go through
for the last four years with the previous administration?
Asking, sending letters, filing motions in court,
begging circuit court judges to have the administration
and the former mayor to follow the charter.
And I think this council has been more than gracious
because we absolutely could.
We are within our right to file that in circuit court,
that she is not following the charter
and to compel her to do so in accordance with her oath.
But we haven't done that. We reserve that. Right.
So perhaps that's a good enough reminder,
but at the very least, there should be without delay.
Every single appointee that has not been sent over
to counsel, I don't care if it's provisional, send it over.
If I'm getting a letter that says somebody is the acting,
so-and-So I want a letter of appointment saying,
this person is going to be the acting so
and so until I find someone else, I can accept that.
We can recognize that officially and vote on that.
It's not acceptable to be in this
situation at this point in time.
There is no excuse for it.
And I hope the mayor is listening
and writing letters right now
because I certainly don't want
to have this conversation in two weeks.
Perhaps we'll have a list of appointments by that time,
provisional and otherwise,
and we can finally put this issue to bed.
Thank you.
Any additional discussion? Chair, chair, chair.
Okay, good. Mr. Bokey,
Just to follow up a little bit,
during the budget hearings, uh, we had the mayor
and administration there
and there were questions of, uh,
how many people applied for a position.
We didn't get an answer.
And, you know, they could say what they want to say.
Uh, we don't have enough applicants.
We don't know that we, she won't give us nothing.
So, you know, until we get, uh, uh, answers, you know,
it's, it's just totally unfair, you know,
for the community to suffer this way.
Thank you,
Ms. Moore. Yes, thank
you. I, and just to sort of follow up, um,
we did receive sort of a, a we, a letter from,
um, a memorandum today at noon, um,
the morning of our council meeting, notifying us
of the appointment of police Captain James Wolf
and Paul tis police captain.
Um, you know, we only have two meetings to address this,
so this was too short notice for us to put on the agenda.
So they've cut our window of time to make a decision
now down to only one council meeting.
I don't appreciate that, but, you know,
I suppose it's within the charter.
Um, but to put it to the last meeting
and really cut our time down to do our work,
I think is a little disingenuous.
But, uh, nonetheless, we did get those appointments over
and those are reappointments.
Uh, both, uh, captain Wolf
and Captain Hoods are currently captains.
Um, but we did get those appointments that were sent over.
Um, so they,
they were appointed in the prior administration.
So it's, they were appointed August 27th, so that's what,
almost nine months just to reappoint people
that were already in there.
Um, so anyway, nine months.
Any additional discussion, I will
suppose motion to receive and file is an order.
Yes. All in favor, aye. Aye. Any opposed?
Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is council secretary, uh, Mindy Moore.
Discussion and rate update on policies
and recruitment of police officer hiring Madam Chair.
Motion to approve support to where, uh, Ms. Moore.
Yeah, we've had conversations.
We did have a committee meeting, the whole, um,
discussing, uh, police hiring.
Um, you know, if we have three candidates today,
we're gonna lose three next week that are retiring.
So it's kind of a vicious circle. I think we're, I know Mr.
Schroer has something to add to this.
At the previous meeting, the council asked us
to look into an ordinance on sort of
who does the recruitment process for the police department
and whether that could be directed by ordinance.
Um, been doing research on this, um, since the last meeting.
I know that there's a thought process that, you know,
maybe this is governed by union contract
or other things that might supersede the ordinance.
I think there's a potential way to thread the needle
and have an ordinance that essentially, um, shows
where the police officer hiring takes place.
If you look in the ordinance, now, this is very interesting.
Um, you know, we have a human resources department,
but you look in our ordinances, it says the Department
of Personnel Management.
And, um, for whatever reason, for over 10 years,
the ordinance has never been updated
to properly reflect the name of the department.
But when you look at the Department of Personal Management,
it talks about the duties of
that department and what they do.
And this was an ordinance passed by city Council saying,
here's what your duties are.
That's consistent with the charter.
The council can pass ordinances, creating departments
and explaining what those duties are.
So I'm not convinced that counsel cannot, uh, amend
that ordinance and talk about the police recruitment
and hiring process being in the police department.
I know the city's labor attorneys are concerned about that.
We're in discussions. Um, we certainly don't want to, uh,
um, pass an ordinance that's not gonna be enforceable.
But at the same time, um, this ordinance needs
to be updated, um, not just
to address this police hiring issue,
but it's not even the proper name in our code of ordinances.
Um, so I think that that's one of those, uh,
checkbox items we need to look at.
Then chair, Ms.
Mark, I, and I believe there are a lot of things
that we need to do, and Ms. McGee is well more familiar
with all of this than I am,
but we need to have a better way of applying for jobs.
We should be able to apply for jobs online.
Um, we should be targeting, you know,
the social media aspect of our, our life's lives now instead
of the Detroit News
and the free press that quite frankly, people don't read,
uh, very often, certainly not looking for jobs
through the Want ads, um, for a long time.
So I think there's a lot of improvements we need
to do within the total hiring process.
It just so happens that, you know, it, it, it, it seems
to us at times that the police, um, hiring is sort
of at a crisis situation sometimes
because it's moving so fast and people are retiring.
And, um, um, so
I think that's something we're gonna
talk about down the line.
And Mr. chro continue to do some work,
and I think we're gonna, you know,
we're gonna start probably pretty soon
negotiating contracts.
So, and we're gonna have a CA committee meeting, a,
a closed session probably in the next few weeks, um,
to talk about some of that.
I'll let everybody know when that is.
Any additional discussion, Madam Chair, Mr. Dwyer?
Yeah, I definitely think we should do a, uh, better job
in the recruitment process, social media, newspaper,
Oakland Press, McComb Daily, whatever it takes.
Um, maybe even reaching out to the, uh, local academies,
school of Craft, Oakland Macomb,
and getting the word out that, um, we're looking
for officers, we're actively seeking out officers,
and I think that's a good way to get the word out
and even maybe getting to some job fairs
and getting officers there to try to promote our department
and get hires that way.
So I think those are some other avenues
that we should really consider.
Thank you,
Madam Chair. Mr.
Lafferty. Thank you.
Uh, one last point I'd like to add is a comparison
of the hiring practices of neighboring cities.
Uh, I have heard more often than not that, uh, Warren seems
to be lagging far behind our processes,
several weeks longer than that
of neighboring municipalities.
And by the time these candidates, uh, they're applying
to not just Warren, they're applying to three or four
or five other municipalities and have an offer in hand
and probably a job in hand by the time Warren responds.
And so I'd like to make, uh, make the suggestion that,
you know, we compare what do other cities do?
How have they streamline their process and model after them?
I don't know which, uh, which city does it the best.
I'll leave that to the police department to,
uh, to advise us.
But the, uh, that certainly would seem if we're going
to be competitive, we need to be competitive from day one.
Thank you.
Any additional discussion?
Uh, I also think a motion to receive
and file yes is in order.
All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.
Next item. Next item is consideration
and adoption of a resolution approving the registration
of the City of Warren Recycling Center with the State
of Michigan Department of Environment, great Lakes
and Energy for a five year period in the amount of $750.
So moved. Support,
discussion, hearing none.
I'll call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes.
Uh, Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr.
Bokey? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is? Yes. Motion carries.
Next item 14 B, consideration and adoption of a resolution.
Approving the recommendation from the RFP panel
to award the receiving
and recycling of the city of Warren Recyclables
to waste management of Michigan, Inc.
In an estimated annual cost
of $416,220 at the beginning of the contract.
So moved with discussion,
Support, support Lafferty,
Uh, motion made by Ms. Moore.
Support by, uh, Mr. Bokey. Discussion Mr. Moore? Thank you.
Um, you know, things have changed over the years.
Uh, when we started doing recycling years ago,
we were making money, or we were, we were being paid, uh,
by the recyclers to take our, uh,
recycles recyclables while now we have
to pay them to take it.
Um, this was the only bid we received, um,
but we are still going to be saving money from
what we were being paid previously, so this is a good deal.
And I think they're also gonna build a new recycling
center, um, great Lakes.
So I think we're in good shape. Thank you.
Any additional discussion?
Madam President? Mr. Lafferty?
Just a clarification.
I was looking at, uh, exhibit A, uh,
through the chair to Ms.
Michaels, please.
And Ms. Michaels, your, uh, your letter to us, uh, indicated
that, uh, the city after year four
and prior to the approval of the new term, the city
and waste management will work together
to determine if the hourly rates per
ton need to be modified.
Is, is that a, uh, a misprint, was it just the rate per ton
or are we talking about the, an hourly rate, uh, calculation
for a number of hours worked
in addition to the price per ton?
The rate per ton is my understanding.
I believe there's a composition where we,
we receive a credit and Craig is the expert at this,
but if I could explain it properly, we get a credit.
Mm-Hmm. And I believe the tonnage rate is a factor.
So it would be recalculated and go down.
It would serve to our benefit if it's, if it's recalculated.
Alright. Hopefully. So we're,
we're only talking about determining the, the rate per ton,
not necessarily an hourly rate per ton. You, you might have
Just no rate per ton.
Okay. Alright. I just wanted to make sure the,
the exhibit was consistent with, with your letter.
So, and it's not in the exhibit,
hourly is not listed in the exhibit,
so we're good there, contractually.
Good. Uh, I just wanted to make that clarification.
And so this is a four year agreement with
the standard renewals up to 10 years. Up to
10? Correct.
Alright. Thank you very much.
Thank you. No further questions.
Thank you. Any additional discussion?
Hearing none, I will call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr.
Bokey? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Lafferty?
Yes. Mr. Newnan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes.
Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 14 C Proposed ordinance amendment
to the commission on disabilities enabling ordinance Chapter
two, section two dash 2 65.
First reading. So moved with discussion
Support Lafferty.
Discussion Ms. Moore. Thank you.
Um, we received this amendment.
Um, there's some sort of clunky language in it
that probably should be, um, changed.
Um, it is hereby rec, the commission shall consist of
mayor appointed members.
There is no, that's not really the wording we use.
We use the wording from the charter.
Uh, so that needs to be reworded.
Maybe Mr. Schroeder can do that before the next,
I think, um, I can send a note
to the city attorney's office
that we do it the same way we
did in the Veteran's Ordinance.
That was just amended, uh, the, the last meeting
where it just simply says that they're appointed pursuant
to 7.6 a of the charter.
And, and I think it's a little odd
to have all members shall have demons have a demonstrated
interest in fostering inclusion
and removing barriers for people living with a disability.
I, I, I think
that's a question you would ask somebody when they're
applying to that commission, what their feelings
are about certain things.
I think that's a very odd thing
to put somebody's feelings into a, um, an ordinance.
And so I, I, I I don't think we need that.
I don't have a problem with the staggered three
or whatever the term change is.
It's kind of hard to tell from the way this is written.
But I think we, we will,
we will look at these a little more in between,
but it's just, it's just a little clunky,
uh, how it's worded.
So maybe we can have the attorneys fix it up.
That's all for me. Any additional discussion?
Madam Chair? Mr. Lafferty?
Through the chair to Ms. Moore.
The, that sentence that you're referring to is really,
it's the chartered purpose of the commission
to foster, right.
Foster inclusion and disabilities. And, and Right.
The, like, the, it it had, I agree.
It has no place, no place in, in this,
but that's, if somebody wants to be part of the commission,
they're going to apply.
Of course, they're going to demonstrate an interest.
They wouldn't have applied otherwise. So
You would think It's obvious.
Thank you.
Any additional discussion? I had the same note.
So thank you for bringing it up.
I think everybody has got emails
as it saying the same thing.
Uh, hearing no additional
discussion, I'll call the question.
Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr.
Bokey? Yes. Mr. Newnan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes.
Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 14 D proposed ordinance to amend Chapter two,
article five, division 2.5 of the code of ordinances
of the city of vne entitled Downtown
Development First Reading.
So moved with discussion support. Lafferty.
Discussion Ms. Moore. Um, thank you.
A again, we have this,
um, lemme get back here.
Um, we have the change
to remove the war on consolidated schools portion of the,
um, ordinance.
And I don't think there's anything else
Because we, did you see anything else that we need
to address Mr. Schroeder?
No. No. Yeah. We'll, we'll look at it.
Be, you know, between now and then,
but I don't see any changes that it's, it's keeping, yeah.
Mm-Hmm. It's just taking, uh, that out of there.
I think down the road we're gonna be
redoing the ordinance Totally.
And the bylaws because they're not being followed.
So we, we have to do something about that. Um, so, alright.
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 audience participation for general topics.
Thank you. Members of the audience who would like to
address city council this evening may do so
by filling out an audience form located over here
on the right side of the stage.
This is a reminder that per our council rules
and procedures, you must write your name
and address on the audience form.
Or give your full name and address at the podium.
You have three minutes. Uh, and the timer is up here.
First up is Yvonne pta.
Thank you.
My name's Yvonne PTA 2 7 6 5 1
Campbell Road, Warren, Michigan.
This, um, insuring enforce the city ordinance on section 23
slash six maintaining community park safety.
Can you speak into the microphone a little bit? Oh, okay.
It's harder to hear you. Mm-Hmm.
August 20th, 24. Why this petition matters.
Our cherish community parks
and Warren Michigan has been a beacon of closeness
and camaraderie for many recent, recently,
however, has been a compromised
by those, I'm sorry.
Choose to ignore clear
and signal simple city rules, no motor vehicles
and picnic area.
There has, there is a group
of people riding mini bikes in the Veteran's Park at
27,400 Campbell Road.
This blank disregard
for city ordinance section 23 6 has not only
disturbed the peace during late hours,
but more importantly is endangering the safety of those who
frequently frequent the park to walk, play, or exercise.
This issue is not about inconvenience, it's about safety.
A study of the National Safety Council revealed
that non-traffic motor vehicles accidents re
resulted in approximately 92,000
injuries in recent years.
The National Safety Council 2020.
As these types of accidents continue to rise
every stride towards this enforcement,
this ordinance reflects on the community to safety
of our fellow citizens.
An attempt to restore the, our sense of safety
and tranquility that we once took pride in.
We must call upon the city
of Warrenton Forest ordinance Section 23 6.
Strictly no cars
or other motor vehicles shall be permitted in the park
picnic area by simply using the designated parking lot
streets parked where we can ensure we all continue
to enjoy the park as well as as park
as it was intended to be.
Let us take a stand for the safety of our youth
and for the peace of our seniors,
the tranquility of our community.
I have
107 signatures.
I'm making this petition on the accomplishment assigned
to be installed in the Veteran's Memorial Park at 24 700
Campbell Road, Warren, Michigan.
No mini bikes allowed this way.
There is no ignorance or excuse of park ordinance.
Our community knows that these juveniles by name.
You're, you're at time. Okay. Thank you.
Next is Michelle Nar.
Good evening everybody. My name is Michelle Nar.
I'm the Macomb County Commissioner for District 12.
Uh, I wanna, first I want to talk about the new project, uh,
development that the gentleman was talking about.
I've been here for over 20 years
and it's good to see that somebody's, um, you know,
coming into the city and want to do developments.
As county commissioner for the last three
and a half years, I come across a few developers that wanted
to come and warn and, and they were discouraged
because it was so much red tape that, uh,
and they couldn't get to the people they needed to get to
that they just went elsewhere with their projects.
So it's good to see that somebody is still willing
to come here in the third largest city
and do some kind of development.
'cause there's been none for the last 20 years.
Number two, I wanna speak about the gross
disenfranchisement of voters.
On August the sixth, there were a couple of locations
that were changed and I didn't get a notification about it
and a lot of my residents didn't get a
notification about it.
This is the third largest city.
There's no reason that we don't be proactive
because we know we live in Michigan,
we know we have in Clement weather.
We know that things happen.
So to move a polling location and,
and not, uh, inform the citizens properly is a gross
disenfranchisement and needs to be investigated.
Also, one of the, uh, locations where the
residents were taken to was there was no parking spaces
for, uh, disabled people.
They were all filled by the workers
that were working at the polls.
So that was very, uh, disrespectful to the seniors.
And I sat there for two hours to watch
and see if maybe someone was in there voting,
but there, there that didn't happen.
And I have photographs of it, so I know that that happened.
If anybody disagrees, I will produce that as well.
Then number two, I hear you speaking about the mayor
and everybody, some of you up here championed
for her and voted for her.
And some of you sitting in the audience did the same thing.
And she never once told you that she had a plan.
She never once said
that she had any, anything that she was gonna do.
And none of you ever asked, but you've championed
and you pushed and you asked the residents
to vote this woman in knowing that
for the 14 years she was our state
rep, she didn't do anything.
So now we're sitting up here almost a year
with nothing done.
She never had a plan in the first place.
And, and so instead of criticizing her
and talking about her, why don't somebody help her?
Why are you just sitting and watching her flapping in the
water and drown because the citizens
are being affected by it?
And you all swore that you were gonna look out
for the citizens first and not your political party,
which is what's happening.
If you're not the proper type of Democrat,
which her office is nonpartisan,
then you don't get anywhere in this city, which is wrong.
And if somebody speaks out, you wanna try
to make them look like they're angry or crazy.
But see, that's not gonna go, that's not gonna work.
You mess with the right one this time.
And, and everybody, anybody in here
knows who I'm talking about.
You mess with the right one. Y'all have a good night.
Thank you. Next is Wesley Arnold.
I'm running as fast as I can.
I don't make the mile one hour here.
Good evening. My name is Professor Wesley Arnold, uh,
known as the old historian.
Uh, first I wanna thank you all for your service to our city
and to our citizens.
Thank you very much. I have no complaints, no gripes,
nothing to fish about.
And I'm not in a hurry. How's that?
Am I the, are you the right people to talk to? Okay.
Just a very, very, very short note.
Uh, if you or any citizen, uh, would like
to know about the history of Warren for free,
they can visit Warren history.info
warren history.info
or on your little cards I passed out wise, useful info wise,
useful info.
Uh, it has, uh, over 2000 pictures
of Warren Area history plus the history of Warren.
I recently just published a Facebook thing on the Warren's
oldest cemetery on that Facebook, uh, site,
which is also wise useful info.
So thank you very much. That's all I have.
I just want, want to preserve our local history
and also honor our veterans.
That's it. It's warren history.info. Thank you. Thank
You. Next
is Jerry. Be
Good evening.
Good evening counsel. Who do we see over there?
Don't we see a city attorney?
Mary Michaels, she's our city attorney.
She's been our city attorney.
She's been doing a pretty good job.
Mr. Schroeder is not our city attorney.
Why is he even up there?
Good job. What are we going to do? What's gonna happen?
You guys gonna take the mayor of the court? Sure you are.
Well, some of you rallied around her
to get her voted in the office.
Let's talk about turn code again.
Some of you rallied around her
and now you find yourselves complaining about
what she has not done.
But what didn't you do?
Two to three months into your term,
you should have been addressing this issue.
But now maybe something done went wrong
and something didn't go you guys' way
and now you're all mad.
Now I may have my differences with the mayor
and trust me, there are very little differences.
But what I see right now is a mayor
that could use the help
if she's not producing right now, she needs the help.
So what are you gonna do? What are you gonna do?
Send your tag dog Schroeder after
and put her in court instead of working this out.
Mindy, you like to talk? Come on, answer the question.
Or perhaps you Ms. Roy answer the question.
You guys talk a lot.
Constantly attacked mayor, former Mayor fau.
Now you're attacking our current mayor. What is it gonna be?
You guys want to be mayors?
Uh, Mindy, you want to be the mayor? Uh, I don't think so.
You're not mayor. Quality. So let's try to help this mayor.
Let's place some calls.
I don't care if it's the council,
I don't care if it's you all and audience.
Let's play some calls to her
and see if we can help her get on track here.
I would never serve under her administration.
I have my reasons, But I'd be willing
to help any kinda way I can besides serving.
I'd place a call. Mr. Nunan, you think you'll place a call?
You can't place a call to her.
You can't find it in yourself to do it.
So let's all figure out a way
besides going to court
that we can get this mayor on the right track so we can give
the citizens what they deserve.
Thank you.
Next is Mr. Watts.
It takes a while Tonight. Good evening.
Wasn't gonna speak tonight,
but I don't know if most of you're aware.
You guys are aware of the, the storm out there.
But once again, our CRC team is out in full force
working their butts off.
Guess what? For free.
Free. We talked about that as two budget hearings
when I was on council about paying them something.
We Need to get this done.
Another budget year went by and nothing happened
and these guys are out there four bucks a gallon
for gas, cost of cars.
You know, there's stuff on their cars.
If they were get, if they might get hit
and then it's gonna be a charge on their insurance.
We need to get this taken care of.
We need to get them some money in their pockets.
I had talked to Mr. Fox about this before.
Absolutely willing to pay them something like he
would a reserve officer too.
So I think that's something we need to look at.
Now the other thing, you guys brought it up,
wasn't gonna speak about it tonight,
but since I came to the mic, I thought, well what the heck
come to that committee, the whole meeting last week.
And I listened to that whole line from our
supposed acting HR director.
And believe me, it's an act.
This is the person that holds everything up.
Do you know how many police officers we've had a chance
to hire that have walked because she dragged her feet?
Do you know how many firefighters walked
that were fully certified to another department?
'cause they were tired of waiting. And I'm hearing this week
I just heard about two more people
that have walked from here for a job
because she didn't get back with 'em.
Sure, it's hard to hire police and fire right now.
But you know what? We can do better. We can do a lot better.
We need somebody in there that gets
that process moving and gets some done.
It got done under the previous administration
and now we have this new administration
and nothing's happening
and it takes six months to eight months
to onboard these officers.
And we're 20 short right now. We're nine dispatchers short.
You guys said last week, what if
you don't have enough dispatchers?
What the heck? So anyways, have a good evening. Thank you.
Next is Mr. Vander Lenn.
As for the police officers hiring cops,
when I went to McComb Community College, started
to be a police officer.
They had different cities coming in weekly trying
to get us to come and join their police academies
and we got our degree.
Anybody going to Macomb nowadays? No.
Are all those officers that are getting trained,
getting their education being hired daily?
Why isn't wor 'cause we're stuck in the co we're
stuck in the old days.
Things need to change Now, Mr.
Gokey, you made a good comment about the mayor.
You made a good comment about the, uh,
hiring practices of her.
You made a great comment about, uh, uh,
her not giving you the information that you requested.
Mr uh, excuse me. It's hard to read the names from here.
Mr. Lafferty, did you get your information Mr.
Dwyer? Did you get your information?
Why are we asking all these questions
and making all these comments to the people in the audience
who obviously ain't got an answer?
She doesn't return our phone calls,
so maybe we should subpoena her.
We have that right? We have that power.
Bring her up to the microphone
and make her answer the questions.
Embarrass the hell outta her if you have to.
Not that you want to, but get the answers that you deserve.
Make her show you some damn respect.
And our thing is,
as you should start having someone come in every morning
and make sure she comes in.
'cause as I'm hearing it,
she's doing the same thing she
did when she was in the house.
She's a part-time employee.
What's she doing the other three days? I don't know.
But you would think as a council looking out
for the wellbeing of the citizens of Warren,
that we get our bang for the buck
and make sure the mayor do does her job.
Maybe all these holes will be filled if she was here.
Thank you. Have a blessed day.
Thank you. Next is Maggie Hunton.
Good Luck. Thanks you.
Yeah, I know so much. Sweet. You okay? Yeah, I'm good.
Okay. Hi y'all. I wasn't planning on speaking tonight.
I was planning to meet the director
of the Reasoning Station, Doug Marshall
here, but he hasn't showed up.
So in his stead, um, we just wanted to let you all know, uh,
we are aware that the Reason Station
and all of the, um,
religious stations in the city hall are
being looked at again.
And, um, Doug's point tonight was going to be
that the prayer, the Reason station is only there
because the prayer stations are there.
If they leave City Hall,
the reason station will very quickly follow behind them
and we will not show our faces again
unless the prayer stations show up.
We support the separation of church and state.
We support the, um, right to free speech,
but nothing about the prayer station is about free speech,
except as, as it involves having the reason station there
as a balance to the prayer station.
So please be assured, whatever your research shows you,
that if the prayer stations go,
the reason station will quietly
and quickly follow behind them.
Thank you.
Thank you. Next is, um, Gloria Sanker.
Good evening counsel. At the Democratic Convention in
Chicago, an abortion trailer was parked a couple blocks from
the convention where at least 25
abortions were performed.
Planned Parenthood knows this party is no longer
the party of life.
The women inside the convention were white
to celebrate reproductive freedom.
This is one of the main issues of their campaign.
Abortion often at any time
and through all nine months of pregnancy, paid
by us taxpayers the idea
that abortion should be safe.
And seldom, as noted by then,
president Bill Clinton has been abandoned.
At a prior Democratic convention, they took out God
and now they have embraced abortion
to be a top issue in their campaign.
In fact, Nancy Pelosi recently wanted the words, so help me,
God, taken out of the oath of office words
that were placed in the oath for decades,
the Democratic Party is no longer the party
of President John Kennedy.
It's no longer the par party of Robert Kennedy.
So he is leaving the party
because of its socialistic ideals
that Kamela has brought to it.
In fact, Kamela has introduced a new Democratic party,
one where socialism has been defined
as free stuff from the government.
That the rich pay for Kamela is pushing
for free healthcare driver licenses, housing
for illegal immigrants, et cetera, that will cause
our benefits to go down.
This closely falls on socialism
and not capitalism while free goods sound good, you know,
someone has to pay
and the benefits we have will get depleted by the millions
of illegals coming through our border.
This new Democratic party is less godly.
It surely does not respect life,
nor does it respect the American flag that they allow
to burn during riots without any consequence.
And it no longer follows the ideals of the Constitution
that we had in place for decades.
Her policies will cause premiums to rise
and social security benefits to go down in value.
You choose. These things are no longer hidden.
They are in stark view for all to see.
President Reagan said, if we ever forget,
we are one nation under God,
we will be a nation gone under.
Good to remember when we
Go to vote. Thank
you. Thank you.
Doug Marshall. Doug Marshall.
Hi, I'm Douglas Marshall.
I have been a Warren resident for 38 years.
I'm director of the Reason Station.
The Reason Station is a protest of the city of Warrens,
violation of the First Amendment by allowing a religion
to proselytize in the City Hall.
Part of our mission is to bring the city in compliance
with the First Amendment.
Our presence in the city Hall has been minimal,
has had minimal effects since we started there
in 2015.
But in April of this year, we started using
Blasphemy Table the displays, which seemed
to brought the attention of some
because last week I was told there was talk
of banning all tabling in the city hall.
I will state that none of the reason station's, volunteers
spend want
to spend any time in City Hall sitting at a table,
as have we have other things to
divert our attention.
The only purpose of the reason stationed today is
to take away the respect
and endorsement, which the city gives religion.
By allowing religion to use the city hall in the future,
we will increase the level of blasphemy
until we reach a level which is intolerable
to either the religious who are tabling or the city.
The recent station plans to remain in City Hall
until the city stops allowing religion using it.
As soon as the religion is removed from city property,
the reason station plans
to immediately leave. Thank you.
Thank you. That is the end of audience.
Next item, next item. Council response.
Madam Chair Ms. Moore. Yes.
Um, uh, one of the speakers spoke about mini
bikes in the parks.
I believe we do that is against the law
to have mini bikes in the parks.
City's well aware of the police department's well aware
and we actually have a mini bike problem
because, um, you know, if you've seen these kids try
to get away from the police, they're pretty savvy
and they can go in little areas with their mini bikes.
And I think one night it was reported
that there were 200 mini bikes on eight Mile Road altogether
in sort of a, a show of defiance, I guess.
So it's kind of hard to catch these kids.
And one of the things you have to keep in mind,
where do you think, where are they getting those mini bikes?
Their parents are buying them for them.
So maybe it's the parents we need to educate
that they shouldn't be buying minibikes
that are illegal on every street,
every property in the city.
I don't know Mr. Mm-Hmm. I mean, you know, maybe Mr.
Bokey and Mr. Dwyer would know better than I
where you can ride a minibike,
but it's certainly not in our park.
So pretty limited. Yeah, that's what I think.
But there is a problem 'cause these, these kids are fast.
I hear on scanners sometimes.
I'm trying to catch 'em
and you just can't, you know, they go in between things.
So I think that's something they're
aware of and it is a problem.
Um, and, uh, I would remind everyone that,
um, we are still taking applications
for the election commission.
We have those open until August 30th.
Um, you can go online and fill out an application and
or call the council office and they will help you with that.
Um, and I think that is it for me.
Uh, happy Labor Day, everyone. Thank
You Madam President.
Mr. Uni. Uh, I too have been fielding complaints
about motor, uh, motorbikes driven by kids
who seem to be underage.
They should have, uh, if they're going to be driving them,
they should have a license for them.
The, they're, they're, uh,
they should have a license plate, I believe.
And, um, if they're underage,
then maybe their parents would have to
sign off in order to get a license.
But, uh, I think that you're right that there's,
there are bi uh, motor bicycle, uh, mini bike, uh,
trails up north of from here somewhere.
They're not even in the city of Warren as far as I know.
But, um, they're driving illegally.
Their parents should not let them do that.
Um, they're causing great consternation in the public
and, and that's really bad.
Um, also, I got an anonymous, admittedly anonymous, uh,
report that, um, in the senior housing,
one lady's, um,
apartment has been flooded seven times this year.
And that apparently, uh, the administration there isn't, uh,
doing anything to correct that problem.
One, an option would be to move
that person who's having all those floods
into a dryer apartment.
Then the next time one opens up
or maybe, um, talk to, um, the city engineer
to figure out how to fix it.
Um, I got a lot of complaints from,
from the senior housing, from, from people living there.
But they, uh, they don't want to, um, come out in public
Because they feel that
The Mr. Newnan,
this is the council response to audience.
Ah, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. It's okay.
Do you wanna add it to the agenda
for next meeting to discuss?
I'll, I'll fit it in somewhere. Okay. Thanks.
Thank you. Any other response, audience response?
I wanted to make one note that, uh, there was a number
of folks on election day.
Uh, Michelle spoke about, uh, polling locations.
Unfortunately, city council,
nor the mayor's office really has any
jurisdiction over that.
That comes from the clerk's office.
And it is the clerk's responsibility to plan accordingly
and make sure that voters are aware when
polling locations move.
So we are equally, I think many of us were equally upset.
Mr. Lafferty was out in front of a polling location
for I think a couple of hours redirecting folks.
And so, um, just wanted to make sure that that was clear
that unfortunately we don't have any
of oversight over, uh, elections.
Madam Chair, Mr. Dwyer,
Uh, one last thing just to keep everybody in the loop
regarding the, uh, pride event that took place on,
um, June 29th.
Um, we did get a response from the mayor's office
through the acting city attorney.
There are a couple of things I'm looking
to get clarification on.
So, um, we're staying on top of that
and there will certainly be more to follow.
Thank you.
That's It. Hearing nothing else, I will motion
to adjourn or I will entertain a motion to adjourn.
Motion to adjourn
Support. All
in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Uh, we are adjourned.
Thank you.