Now calling to order a regular meeting
of City Council Tuesday,
July 8th, 2025 at 7:00 PM Please stand
for the Pledge of Allegiance.
I pledge allegiance. I pledge all to the P. Flag. Flag.
The United States of America, America.
And two to the Republic stands stands. One.
Nation, nation, under God, indivisible. With liberty.
With liberty and justice for all.
Roll call Madam Secretary Councilwoman. Rogan C. Here.
Councilman Dwyer? Here. Councilwoman McGee. Here.
Councilman Bokey. Here. Councilman Noonan.
President Councilman Lafferty. Here.
Councilwoman Moore is present. We have a quorum. Next item.
Next item is adoption of the consent agenda.
So moved with discussion Support, Lafferty.
Discussion Ms. Moore? Yes.
I would like to add as four L uh, adoption
of a resolution, approving extension
and increase of award for cleaning
and inspection of PPE for the fire department.
And as item four M, uh, approval
of the, uh, IRS form seven 20
and the IRS PCORI fee requirement.
And approve the issuance of a $13,880 check,
uh, to be sent
to the IRS makers of the motion.
Except all of those amendments without objection.
Yes. Any other discussion?
Yes. To consent or regular
Consent Item? Consent agenda.
Yes, That's,
we don't talk about it though. Okay. Okay. Just
Regular. I, it's the next one.
Okay. Okay. Uh, 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? Yes. Motion carries.
Next item, next item, adoption of the agenda.
So moved with discussion. Support Lafferty.
Discussion Ms. Moore. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Uh, uh, add, uh, 11 B uh,
lip Coley v Warren settlement as item
12 C.
Um, discussion in Ray boards and commissions
and 12 C ordinance updates.
Madam President, when she's done
Anything further, Madam Secretary?
No. Um,
Oh, are you? First
Discussion. Oh, I would
Like to add Discussion.
Yeah. Discussion.
Discussion item, um, regarding task force and commissions.
Would that be 12 DI dunno.
It'll, it will Be. Okay.
Task force. And, uh, Mr.
You're done? Yes, I am. Okay.
Um, I'd like to add, um, I think under council business,
I'd like to discuss, um, council business in general.
You have to have a item. I have to have an item. Okay.
Um, I have, uh, actually two items, then I have,
um, one second please.
Come on now. Okay. Uh, too many, too many documents up.
Uh, the, uh, possible civic center development
and the city's lobbyist.
I think that's already on the agenda. Is it not?
Or an RFP? It's already on.
So there is an item about the lobbyist on the agenda. Right.
Do you want to discuss it then? Or you want a separate item?
Um, I think I'd, I'd like a separate item also.
Okay. That would be 12 f Those will be 12 e discussion
regarding Civic center and 12 F City lobbyist.
That's separate from the council lobbyist. Sure. Oh, right.
Yep. Okay. Okay. Any other discussion?
Are the makers of the motion
comfortable with those additions?
Yes. Without objection. Okay. I will call the question.
Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr.
Bokey? Yes. Mr. Noonan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes.
Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is six a calendar pending matters.
Motion to receive and file support Labor discussion.
All in favor, aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.
Next item. Next item is seven.
A approval of the bills of the General Revenue Fund.
So moved. Support Lafferty.
Discussion, hearing, and seeing none.
I 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 seven B.
Approval of the bills of the water and sewer system.
So moved. Support Dwyer.
Discussion, Hearing, and scene? None.
I'll call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr.
Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Boy Bokey? Yes. Mr. Newan? Yes.
Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is the audience participation agenda.
Items only audience members who'd like
to address council this evening.
Can, uh, get a form to the left? Is there No one. Okay.
Is is last call for agenda item. Audience. Okay.
Next item. Next item is announcements.
Madam Chair, Ms. Moore. Thank you.
Um, on a sad note, um, Marie Ferris,
Michaels passed away last week.
She was a hundred years old, years old.
She is was the mother of, uh,
chief Assistant Attorney Mary Michaels.
And if everyone has been paying attention the last couple
years, Mary has been a very, very devoted daughter, um,
caring for her mother,
and, uh, everybody should be so lucky
to have a daughter like her.
Um, our sincere condolences to go out to marry
her sister Denise, her brother Tony.
Um, and I would ask for a moment of silence for such a,
a beautiful life.
Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you. Any other announcements? Mr. Lafferty?
Thank you. On Friday, June 27th, uh,
I suppose this is on a heavier note.
The Warren Parks
and Recreation held their first ever bench press
competition, and it was, uh, it was an exciting day,
uh, in the men's division.
Uh, Nolan eta, uh, participated in the 14
to 18 age range, benching 315 pounds,
19 to 34, uh, awarded to Dre Wines at 380 pounds.
Uh, the 35 to 54 range.
Ryan Kathy at 375 pounds
and 55 plus Adam Stevenson with an impressive three 40,
uh, in the women's division.
I was surprised to learn my own daughter took, uh,
took first in the 14 to 18 age range at 120 pounds.
Congrats. And 19 to 34 age range.
Sophia Norway at 45 pounds.
So congratulations to all the winners. Yes.
And it's, uh, if it's wasn't clear
before, that's why I have stopped asking
her to clean her room.
Thank you.
Any other announcements? Hearing
And seeing none.
Next item. Next item, sorry.
Next item is 10 A, which is a public hearing, um,
which was held and tabled on June 24th, 2025.
Consideration and adoption of a resolution
to approve the demolition of a house
and garage located at 21 0 65.
Doer through the nuisance abatement process.
Motion to remove from the table.
Support. Uh, this is a, a vote
to remove the item from the table.
Ms. Moore? Yes. I'm sorry. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Ms. Moore?
Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes.
Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan. He is a yes.
Item is removed from the table.
Uh, motion to approve with discussion
Support. Thank
you. Discussion Mr. Lafferty?
Through the chair to Mr. Lizza.
Hello? Uh, good evening, counsel.
Good evening, sir. At the last time we spoke of this,
the council was ready to move forward,
but the home was occupied
and so this was referred to the city attorney's office.
Correct. Has any progress been made relative to, uh,
the ownership of the home?
Um, I have not seen any, any progress
or any change since the last time we've met two weeks ago.
Um, obviously with the passing and Ms.
Michael's mother, I haven't had a contact with her yet about
what the plan is to relocate the occupant
or what we're gonna do with this.
Okay. Obviously, it's an unusual situation.
We, we've never had this where we had somebody trying
to stay in a home this bad.
Alright. Trying to remain in there.
But this house is done. This house is very unsafe.
Of course, we have holes in the room.
We have electricity there in this house
with somebody living there.
This is disaster waiting to happen.
So I don't know what the next move is,
but it's a definitely a dangerous situation.
Mm-hmm.
Thank you, sir. Uh, through the chair to Ms. Pierce,
has there been any progress in the,
in the city attorney's office that you're aware of?
I wish I, I could answer that.
Um, I know it wasn't assigned to me.
Um, it certainly could have been assigned to someone else
to start eviction proceedings.
Um, if it hasn't,
I can make sure it gets assigned tomorrow morning. Okay.
Alright. Thank you. Uh, Madam Chair. Uh, Mr. Schroeder?
Yes. Um, I did speak with Ms.
Michaels about this last week when we were
going over some other matters.
This just happened to come up.
And so she had mentioned possibly seeking a court order
to remove this individual,
but also simultaneously reaching out
to social services in the area
to make sure this person can be, um, placed somewhere.
Um, so we kind of left it at that.
I know she had a lot on her mind and a lot going on,
but that was what we had discussed.
Okay. Madam Chair, I'm going to, uh, make a motion
that we ret this support,
and I would suggest
probably two weeks is not enough time
for the court order proceedings to the
August 12th meeting.
Okay. There's a tabling motion.
I will call the question. Mr. Lafferty
Yes. To table
Ms. Moore? Yes.
Ms. Dwyer? Yes. To table. Mr. Bokey? Yes.
Mr. Noonan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes.
Item is tabled. Next item. Next item is 11.
A request to approve multiple neighborhood enterprise zone
certificates for the Baker and Associates Realty Group, LLC,
consideration and adoption of a resolution.
So moved with discussion four,
Support Lafferty with discussion.
Um, Ms. McGee said support, uh, discussion Ms. Moore.
Um, thank you. Um,
is there someone here from the legal staff
that could explain what a neighborhood enterprise
zone certificate is, please?
So that the public knows No, no, she doesn't.
Back in 2000 several. Good evening. Sorry.
Um, back in 2017, this council approved, um,
the Patriot Place zone, um, for,
for NEZ certificates.
It's a, it's a tax abatement, um,
which the 2017 resolution said
it could go up to eight years.
Um, it basically gives people, um,
with lower incomes an opportunity to purchase a house
and save on, on taxes while they get themselves settled.
So, um, I, I don't know why I can't think
of what anything stands for. Right,
Right. Now is this like, is this like
payment in lieu of,
excuse me, excuse me.
Neighborhood Enterprise
Zone. Okay. And is,
is this similar to, you know, payment in lieu
of taxes like a pilot program? No.
No, no. No. It's, it's, it's, I mean, it's a state
of Michigan incentive, um,
that local municipalities can adopt.
Um, it, no, it's, it's just a tax abatement
Because I'm wondering, because the Patriot Place
development was a payment in lieu of taxes at the time.
Those, that was 96 properties
or 49 properties several years ago that
that project was abandoned.
So I'm, I'm interested why the Patriot
Place was brought up. Again,
That's the NEZ area
that the council approved back in 2017 is
called Patriot Place.
Right. That was, that was, I think before all of us. But,
Um, counsel approved a couple meetings ago,
maybe two months ago, the NEZ certificates
for the MacArthur properties, which CDBG is building.
Right. Um, so this would be the, the same idea.
I I do have the realtor, Ms. Baker here
to answer any other questions as far as the properties,
the income level, I, they're getting a grant from the state
of Michigan, which will mandate certain
income, income levels.
Um, but the homes can't cost more than a certain amount to,
to qualify for, for lower income buyers.
I'm more interested now in the city's part. Okay.
Um, what that approval process, why we would grant, um,
these certificates for this property,
what was the approval process?
What were the requirements?
Was there a panel that went through this? Who approved it?
What, you know, what department is, was tasked with that?
The district was approved. So any
By by whom? Um,
by counsel back in 2017.
This district that we're dealing with today?
Yes. Okay. Yes. And I mean, it's bigger
And took in 2017, did you say?
Correct. Mm-hmm. Okay. So that was the Patriot Place? Yes.
Okay.
Um, ultimately, any homeowner
who lives in the district, whether it be a, a new purchase
or rehab can apply for the tax abatement
for a certain period of time,
and counsel can grant it for up to eight years.
So we did that in 17. Yes. For eight years.
This is 25. So,
So any home in that district can apply
for the neighborhood enterprise zone tax exemption, um,
or tax abatement.
And ultimately the assessor has to approve
that it's in the zone.
Um, it then has to go to the clerk to meet certain,
make sure all the documents and the application is in place.
Uh, it then has to come before you to approve it,
and then it goes to the state
of Michigan ultimately for final approval.
Okay. I, I'll ask maybe Ms. Baker,
'cause I, I wanna make sure
that this is not gonna be rent any, none.
That none of this will be rental homes.
These will be homes to be purchased.
Oh, Absolutely. Correct. Okay.
That's, that's the only thing I, I'm, I'm done. Thank you.
Oh, okay. Okay. Any other discussion?
Madam Chair, Mr. Lafferty?
Thank you, uh, through the chair to Ms. Pierce. Yes.
Uh, so, uh, Ms. Moore asked a couple of of the questions,
but the, I was curious on the exemption exemption
certificates to piggyback on one
of her last questions about the rentals.
How is the city going to ensure that
for the next eight years, once these homes become occupied,
that, and that that clock begins on the eight years
that these homes do not turn into a rental property?
What are the restrictions that are being placed in,
uh, in the certificate?
It pursuant to life can't be a rental property
Ever. Sorry.
Understood. Sorry. For the next eight years.
I understand that that's, that per per public act 1 47. Yes.
You can't, you can't do that. I
Guess I don't understand your question, then.
How are we gonna ensure that it's not being rented?
Yes. How, how is the city enforcing the certificate?
We have ifts that we give to, you know, larger companies
and they have a laundry list of conditions
and terms that they have to meet.
Otherwise we can pull that back.
So what are we doing in, in this case,
for similar certificates?
I mean, they, they have to meet all the requirements,
and if it becomes a rental
and it's no longer a primary residential exemption,
the the certificate can be revoked.
That it, it still doesn't answer the question, though, as
to how, how are I, is the rental division, are these homes,
is it notated in BSNA?
Is this something that would, would, you know,
hit the assessor's office?
It's an, it's an entirely separate tax rule.
Any, any property that has an any Z certificate is an
entirely separate tax roll.
Alright. So, and what I'm looking for is, you know,
that we, we don't find out, you know, a year into this, uh,
into any one of these homes.
And it's not just these homes in question,
it's anything within the, any properties within the,
within the NEZ that have applied and,
and were successful going through this process,
that they're, they're being flagged properly in the system
and that we're not, I don't know if it's something proactive
that we need to do on our end from the city side
and review
and ensure that none of these homes are being rented
because then they would forego their, their tax exemption.
Correct. And I, I mean, renters are supposed
to register their property as a rental.
Do they always know? Um,
but I mean, I, I would presume there's a, a series
of checks and balances through the assessing office,
through the rental office, um,
through the different offices at City Hall.
That would flag, Hey, this is no longer a primary residence.
Um, the person who's listed as the owner is,
well forget
I suppose they still could own it and be renting it. But
That, that is, that is my ahead pri my primary concern,
and I'm sorry, Ms. Baker, this is a legal question.
No, on behalf of the city, you're,
you're not responsible for this.
And, and I guess I, I cannot make an assumption.
I don't have that luxury. And that's why I want to ensure
that the city has the protections in place.
That if we're going to give an NEZ cert, that we are going
to follow through and ensure
that those certs are being respected
and that, you know, if we're going to give a, um,
an exemption to any homeowner that they have rules
to follow legally.
Well, once the properties, I mean, this is a new project,
the building hasn't even started.
Mm-hmm. But once the properties are sold,
the exemption will be passed on to the home buyer.
They are responsible for bri, excuse me,
for providing a certain number of documents, um, to the city
to, to keep qualified under that exemption.
Okay. Alright.
I, we'll have to, I'll probably end up, uh,
doing a follow up with, with your office.
And I, I want to understand the connection between assessing
and rental and
to understand any other NEZ certs already in effect,
how we're identifying those just to ensure that we're,
we already don't have this problem.
There's only two as of now. Okay.
Um, the MacArthur properties mm-hmm.
That you previously approved.
Um, this would be the, the next batch.
And hopefully the, the area continues to be developed,
but there is an entirely second separate tax rule.
And I, I can assure that assessing
and rental, if they get a, a rental application
or that rental has a list of the, the NEZ tax roll,
which at this point isn't that large.
Right. It shouldn't, I mean, it could become larger,
but at this point, it's not that it's not going
to be that difficult to manage. Yeah.
I I would hope it becomes larger.
It, it covers, uh, 1,422 acres
Yes. Of contiguous
parcels. It's, it, it has a great potential.
So this is a good start. Yes. Very good start.
Uh, the only other item, I guess, uh,
and, and the clock does not start with our approval tonight.
The, the clock starts on the exemption certificate once the,
the home is built and it becomes owner occupied.
Am I correct on that?
I don't wanna misspeak, but I believe it becomes effective
once the state of Michigan approves
it. The state of Michigan
A approved, but by that would be
by the homeowner's application?
No. Okay, because
I, am I saying something wrong?
You wanna correct me? Go ahead. Yeah,
It's, is It okay, Ms. Baker? Yep. Okay.
Go right ahead. Yeah. So it goes to the state
for an approval, but it doesn't become effective
until the homeowner applies.
So basically I do the initial process
to get it approved through you guys.
It goes to the state for approval.
Once the home is built
and it's, um, sold, then the, um, the homeowner then has
to apply, uh, for the NEZ to start.
Okay. And that's when the,
and that's what I wanted to clarify tonight, is that we're,
we're not starting that clock tonight.
It's if, if it, your project isn't built for a year,
and that home isn't occupied for three months
after that, that's a year
and three months of time that is not being wasted on an,
on a certificate sitting in a drawer.
Correct. Thank you.
And my apologies. I, this,
this is all a new process for us.
We're kind of learning as we go along.
Um, oh my gosh. There was one thing I wanted to add.
Sorry, I just forgot
That President. That's
what I wanted to, that's why I wanted to clarify,
because it is somewhat new.
We haven't done a whole lot of work on this,
and the original project fell through.
So thank you, Ms. McGee.
Um, I wanna ask
Questions for, um, the owner.
Now, I live in a, uh, area
where there is an association in the area.
And I don't know if you are gonna require that
to have associated or it's gonna be set up
as an association, but if, so, our requirements is
that we read, um, um, um, instructions on
what we can and cannot do.
We cannot rent out our property, so we have
to sign a document to state that
before anyone moving this property.
As an owner, you cannot rent out this property, um,
without the approval of the association.
Will you consider having something like that?
Or you will be having something like
that happening in your area?
Well, so because of the funding source
that we're using, it's not required.
Uh, the state of Michigan has a, um, a mandate
that the property has to be sold for home ownership,
and it has to be sold to a qualified buyer.
So low to moderate income.
Uh, if they were to, to, to move, then that house has
to then again, be sold.
There will be a deed restriction in
place that prevents that.
So it cannot be a rental. It has to be home ownership. Okay.
Thank you. Mad president.
Mr. Nunan. Mr. Nunan, go ahead.
Yeah, so, um, uh, the lady, Ms.
Ms. Pierce, the lady that you're standing with, I,
I didn't hear, hear you introduce her,
but, uh, I'd like to know who you are
and, um, what, uh, what it takes for people
to take advantage of this if they haven't already been
aware, or does everyone who could take advantage of this,
are they already somehow, have they already been made aware?
When you say take advantage of this,
are you first Faye Baker with Baker
and Associates Realty Group?
When you say take advantage of this, what is the, this
that you're speaking of?
Oh, um, the tax break.
Yes. So when they purchase the home or engage
and purchase in the home, those documents will have
to be signed because they have to be aware
that the tax break is only for eight years
and it's not in perpetuity.
So we do have, they,
there's a document that they have to sign.
So Ms. Baker, you're, you're a developer, is that correct?
That is correct. And so those would be
with new built homes is the whole area.
Do you, are you, um, do you have control of the whole area
that this refers to?
I do not. I have control over, um, two acres
that is off of Peters formerly 2 2 2 3 0 Peters. Okay.
Yeah. Well, I, I, I was there at your, um, groundbreaking
or, or what have your ceremony.
Mm-hmm. And that looked pretty great.
But, so, um, Ms. Pierce, the people could buy homes
that are already in that area,
if they could figure out where those were.
And I'm, I'm, um, curious, uh, is that
what this paperwork was?
No. You don't know. Um, how would we know where those,
where the, those properties are?
My apologies. I don't have the boundary map with me,
um, at, at this time.
Okay. Well, if, if there's any way that, that, that,
that can be, um, determined
and sent to counsel, I think that would be great.
Um, it seems like a lot of people would want
to know in order to take advantage
of this wonderful opportunity to get a tax break.
I understand that they have to be under
a certain level of income.
Yes. Um, for me or her,
Not, not necessarily for the NEZ certificate itself.
Um, for Ms.
Baker's homes that she is building there,
there are some income requirements.
Oh, okay. So people don't even have to be under a certain,
um, level of income in order to buy houses outside of,
of, uh, Ms.
Baker's, um, properties. Correct. Okay.
Uh, that sounds pretty great. I'd love to know about it.
And thank you for indulging me. I appreciate it. I yield,
Thank you. Thank you.
Um, Madam Secretary. Thank you.
So, Ms. Baker, you own two acres at this point,
or your business or whatever owns the two acres, right?
Yeah. You now, um, are responsible
for taxes on that property, correct?
Yeah. And you will be responsible for the taxes until
I no longer own it.
Each parcel as it goes. Yes. Right.
So if you build one, one home,
that person gets a CER certificate.
They take over the, the tax burden, basically,
and then you would pay for the 95% of the rest of it
until all the properties are developed.
Correct. Okay. Thank you. Any other discussion?
Okay. Um, hearing none? I'll call the question. Ms. Moore?
Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer?
Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Noonan? Yes. Rogan C is a yes.
Motion carries. Next item. Next item is 11 B.
Um, I'll just make the motion, um, motion.
The City Council authorizes legal counsel to proceed
with the strategy recommended by the city's legal counsel
and approves of a settlement on terms
discussed in closed session.
Upon execution of the settlement documents,
city council authorizes payment by wire transfer
to a SU group.
Upon receipt of a copy of this resolution, a request
for payment from the insurance division,
and a copy of the invoice for payment so moved,
support Lafferty.
I will call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes.
Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee?
Yes. Grogan C is a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 12.
A consideration and adoption of a resolution
to approve extension of agreement with capital relations
for governmental affairs services,
and request administration to issue a request for proposal
for governmental affairs services.
So, move support Ty. Discussion?
Yes, Mr. Nunan?
Um, I just wanted to, um,
sound off on why I'm not in favor of extending,
uh, this contract.
Uh, to me, it seems that this has been a sweetheart deal,
uh, $76,600 a year.
Um, and as far as I know,
we didn't hear from the guy in the first year.
Um, then that absence was excused, uh,
because the council apparently missed the boat.
And somehow we are supposed to ask him
to go to, to work for us.
He doesn't just do it.
And if we don't ask, you get just skates.
Um, this is not only even if,
even if I overlook that, what's to keep
that from happening in the future?
How are we managing that? It's a lot of money.
I'd if we're not gonna use him, I'd rather
not have him at all.
Right. Why, why waste $76,000 if, if it's,
if we're not getting benefit out of it?
Um, it seems to me that it would've been great
if I had known, um, if, if we had all had known
how we could find out
what was available from the state in that year.
And, um, encouraged him to go after those things.
But I don't know how we would do that.
How we would know what was available
unless he was communicating with us.
And, um, I did try to get together with him, uh,
multiple times, found that he was basically incommunicado.
And, uh, I don't, I I don't get it.
I don't get why we would extend the contract.
So I, I intend to vote.
No, I hope others will join me. Thank you. I'll
Thank you. Mr. Nunan.
Madam Chair. Uh, Ms. McGee, then Ms. Mark.
Um, I, along with, uh, Councilman Newnan,
tried to get in contact with him.
I have not met him as yet.
Um, we had a meeting with, um, we were setting up a meeting
with myself along with, uh, Mr.
Dryer, our Councilman Dryer,
and then we tried to meet up in April.
And, um, our schedule just conflict,
but I wanted to just really set, set aside some time
to really talk to him about what he's doing
and what he's going to do.
But I remember, uh, our president that you, you ask
and requested that we get a monthly update
from the lobbyist, and we still have not received
that information as of yet.
I have not Got it. We have not received it.
You're, you're referencing a report
that Mike sends to all of their clients?
What I was asking for is the work that they do
for us. I've never received
It. We never
received it.
I looked at my emails today, see if I received any reports,
and I had not received it as of yet.
They have sent them
and they delineate who they've met with
and what the meetings are about.
I they've sent 'em to everybody.
Has everyone received it?
What's that? Have you received
reports from the lobbyist
Specific to Report from Mike?
The specific to the city?
Not the General Lansing update, or,
I, I, I received what? I don't know
Those To tell you exactly when, where it was,
but I, if, if I could speak that.
Sure. Yeah. Ms. Ms. Moore. After Ms. McGee. And then Mr.
What? Mr. Bo, you go, go ahead.
I don't know where to breakdown is which, which,
uh, with you.
But I probably met with him eight to 10 times already,
uh, returns, my phone calls promptly.
I have a lot of questions, and sometimes it's a simple
question and they're doing a lot of work.
At least I'm getting answers and, and an update.
I I, I make it a point to ask, you know, what's happening
with our, our grant for the court side?
What, what about the other stuff? Appropriations?
And I get answers every time.
And I also ask him, what could I do to help him?
And like I said, I've, I've got prompt calls back every time
and, uh, we've had meetings
and, um, I can't say anything better about the guy,
Madam Chair.
Um, going back to the first year, I believe Ms.
rogenSi brought Shannon in
and worked on, um, appropriations requests.
The first year we were on council,
I don't think he ever came in.
He did. He, I mean, he was working on things and
'cause he worked on, I know
for sure he worked on the wastewater treatment plant,
because I was very upset about it
because of the time I was not in favor of that request.
But you did bring him in
and you he was working on requests
from the city that first year?
I was not aware of it until much later, but,
and that's when I suggested that we meet
and come up with a strategy
of things we were interested in accomplishing.
And that's why I set up the meeting.
Um, so that's the first year I've met
with several legislators.
Um, the speaker of the house we've had meetings with
and constant communication.
We've had meetings with council, with county people.
We've had meetings, other, um, uh, representatives.
Um, and, um, we have a lot going on right now.
The contract we have can be
either party can end the contract, um, Mr. Schroeder,
it's 30 days, maybe 30 days.
It can be, it can be ended.
Um, you, you ask,
and then I would request then
that the city put together an RFP.
In the meantime, we let the contract continue
and we start RF P's gonna take a long time.
It's gonna take six or eight months, probably, you know,
'cause we're, it takes a long time.
So I'd, I don't wanna have a break in service
where we don't have anyone covering those things we
have in the hopper right now. So that,
That makes sense.
Um, Madam President once,
Ms. Moore, you finish. Yeah.
And I brought up, you know,
this is our first meeting after the Mr. New fiscal year.
That's, that's good. Um,
and I, I, I really have thought that the council had decided
that this position should go out to bid on an RFP.
And so I'm glad to hear you talking about it.
Well, this is what this wrote.
This is the resolution is
to cr ask the city to create an RFP.
But it is an extension for a year, isn't it?
It's an extension for a year.
But we can end that at any time.
If we have an RFP in five months
and we choose someone else, we can end that contract with,
um, capital anytime we want.
Either, either party can end that contract with no penalty.
Okay. We always could. Okay.
And that, that same price has been paid
for 20 over 20 years.
We've paid the same fee to whoever the lobbyist was.
Thank you, Ms. Moore. Mr. Bokey
Put a lot of work into this,
and if another firm came in right now,
it would be totally lost.
And I don't want to start over. Uh, it's continuing.
Uh, like I said, I don't know what the problem is.
If you want, I'll call him
for you have set up a meeting with you.
I don't know. And I'm not gonna answer for him what, what,
what, what he told me.
But obviously there's a communication breakdown
and if I can make it better, I'll put it together.
I'm not saying you're right. I'm not saying he's right.
Right. But obviously there's a problem. Right.
And again, I don't want to start over for me to start over
with all the people we've met with, and it's continuing.
We just shut down the whole program.
I mean, this year's appropriations, money's come,
it's coming up very soon.
And we'll miss that window, bringing a new company in.
They don't give out the appropriations all year long.
They just recessed. They were working on the school budget.
That, which I knew about. They try to get that done.
I don't know if they finished it or not,
but then they're gonna work on the appropriations.
And for someone to come in now
and basically shotgun it, it ain't it, it would've worked.
And I, like I said, I won't. Okay.
You know, I can't do it that way. Okay. I yield back.
Thank you President. Ms. McGee.
My biggest concern is, is that
although you're getting communicated, um, communications
with him, we have not received anything.
I, if, if Madam President requested
that we get a monthly report, we should be receiving
that in our email.
I check my emails. I have not received it.
We requested a RFP months ago
to be put in place months ago.
So the year, it's almost if, if we're at least three
or four months ago into it.
So if we're gonna extend it for a year,
we should cut at least cut it down by six months.
Because we already requested A RFP months ago.
Was that a Majority?
Yes. We all voted on it. We, no, we did. We
Didn't. Melody
has the floor.
I'm done. Any other discussion?
Yeah. Um, Madam President is Mr. Newan.
Um, I'm, I'm fine with, um,
having a, an, a reasonable extension.
I, I don't see a need for a year.
Maybe it would be good to have it
after the appropriations are over so
that we're in the next cycle.
Um, but I, no, I, I just, I can't,
I can't see the, um,
responses that I've had aren't, aren't commensurate
with keeping 'em, and I'm, I'm sorry to hear that.
Other people think you's so great.
I wish I had spotted that,
but I, I don't see it at,
at this point. Thank you. Thank you,
Mr. Newan Madden
Chair. Mr. Lafferty,
Uh, to Mr.
Newan. Uh, to your, your question about the, the term
of the contract, a your extension is, is the,
is the basic, it's the least amount that you would typically
go for between two parties.
So if you have, if, if we already were in the process
and we were narrowing this down, and Mr.
Repa from purchasing was saying, uh, we're, we're two
or three months in, I would say let's give a a six month
renewal, which is, is an entirely short amount of time.
But in, in this case
where we have not even started writing the RFP
and we're several months out, uh, a year is standard.
And as Ms. Moore indicated, we have a, a termination clause,
which I'm very comfortable with if for what?
For any cause whatsoever we can terminate this contract
and with a, a notice sent 30 days ahead
of the termination date.
So I'm very comfortable with that.
The, the extension of a year
really has no bearing on this process.
Since we have an RFP,
we're doing the same thing in the resolution.
Whereas we're, we're enacting two things.
We're extending for a year,
and we're issuing an RFPA request for RFP.
So you're getting, you're getting both.
But a one year extension is, is the minimum.
And with that safety net, as, as we've talked about
before, on previous contracts, that we can,
we can exit at any time.
Does that help?
I, I think it helps, uh, Madam President.
Um, I would,
I would like to see a lobbyist firm
that would, would be communicating with all of us.
Well, and I would like to know that
that was gonna happen if I, um, if I approved this,
and right now I'm getting the sense that, um,
maybe the council overall, the majority prefers to, um,
keep this, uh, this firm indefinitely.
Madam Chair, uh, I'm sorry, Mr. Newton, my question
to you was contractually are, did what I offered
help clarify the situation with the terms
of a one year contract at minimum.
Oh, oh, thank you. I'm not talking about your,
your questions of quality with the, with the vendor.
Right. And, you know, satisfaction here, I'm simply asking
if you had any other questions relative to the term
of the one year extension.
Right. Well, you're saying that it could be canceled
by either party at any time also,
but I don't know that this council would, uh,
would terminate it prior to a year.
Do I,
If, if we went Madam Chair, if we went for our,
if we're going for RFP, right?
And it's determined during the RFP process that a BC
lobbying firm is the best choice,
and they're selected, then we would
vote on that contract.
Right. If that receives an affirmative majority,
then we would then, at the same meeting, issue a letter
of termination for 30 days out from that date.
Okay. Saying that we no longer require the services
of our current lobbying firm.
Okay. That sounds agreeable at
that point. Thank you. You're
Welcome. Any
other discussion, Madam Precedent?
Ms. McGee? My concern is,
do we not have a RFP already in place
from the previous contract?
And if we do, then why would it take a year
if we decide to terminate it at any time within that year?
Why would it take a, a year to put out A RFP
and give someone, um, who would, you know,
bid on this RFP within a, let's say,
a six month period? If you
Can ask that Madam Chair.
Um, there was never an RFP
for lobbying services ever in the history.
Um, when Art Miller retired, um, from the Senate, um,
he was appointed by counsel.
I think I was on council at the time.
Was it, I can't remember. It was ant, RFP. Okay.
I was unfamiliar. Oh, you were? Okay. You explained. I don't
Remember it. I was
a young attorney in the attorney's office,
and they said, would you like to sit on the RFP
for lobbying services?
And, um, the city took a number of bids.
The interviews were actually in this building.
And, um, I remember it vividly, even though it's,
it's been 20 some years.
I think it was 2003 or 2004. Yeah.
And, um, it came back to council
and, um, um, art, art Miller, we knew the lobbyist,
the former senator, but he was actually
part of a lobbying group.
Okay. And it was called Leadership Associates.
And they were recommended for the award at that time.
And, um, Mr. Miller served as a city lobbyist
until his passing in 2020 when there
was, um, COVID.
And we were in court with the prior mayor.
And, um, there were opportunities at the state level.
And, um, the judge in the case called us in
and challenged us to see if we could agree on something.
And we actually did. And, um, uh, as a result
of the court order entered into this, uh, agreement
with the current firm, which has been renewed on an annual
basis, um, I think my memory serves me correctly.
I think the, the, uh, leadership consultants,
the prior lobbyist was, uh, I think they had three
or four year contracts,
or three year contracts that would come every three years.
This has been coming back every year.
And so, um, my recollection is that
the council did not vote on any RFP on this, this council.
It was discussed in a budget session
that there could possibly be this type of deal happening.
Of course, it's up to council what council wants to do.
But, um, that's the history of the matter.
Um, the price in this contract is the same price
that was bid by leadership, um,
consultants back in 2004.
Um, and that was sort of, a lot
of the firms were in that price range.
Incidentally, I just did another RFP process
with one of my other clients.
It's a governmental authority.
And it took, uh, six months, uh,
because what they had to do first is develop the RFP.
You don't just say, we want a lobbyist to put it out there.
You have to develop what you want.
And, and, and the qualification, the skills that you want,
the objectives of the organization put out, the RFP, it has
to be open for a period of time.
And then qualified firms apply.
And, you know, you could get 10
or 15 applications from all kinds
of lobbying firms, big and small.
And then you interview all of the, um, applicants.
And then after the interview process,
they look at price quality.
You could look at communication issues.
You could look at all those issues.
And, and you, you come up with a, a recommendation.
The committee then comes to council,
and Council will look at the recommendation
and then, you know, vote on a new contract at that point
after it's been vetted by the committee.
And that's by ordinance.
The council can't do its own RFP, the council has to rely
on the purchasing division
and the administration to put together this.
RFP council will have input
because council's the requesting department
and the requesting agency.
So council will have the input on that,
but ultimately, the administration has
to run the RFP process, you know, assisting this department,
and then ultimately bring, uh,
whatever recommendation the committee has
after interviewing everybody.
And, you know, it's supposed to be a,
uh, transparent process.
Right. And then the most qualified bidder
counsel will decide.
And it's professional services. So it's not always price.
That's a factor. Right.
So you look at an organization with a $300 million budget,
and one might be 5,000 cheaper or 10,000 cheaper,
but, you know, one, one decision
or one connection of a lobbyist could make a big difference.
That's way beyond that. So it's ultimately up to council.
So Is that helpful?
It was my question. I want to, so with the example
that you have given it sound as if you're saying
that it took six months to get the process completed,
or just six months to, even with the start of RFP
and going back and forth with, uh, those who submitted,
Now I'm, I was talking about another
organization that I work for, right, right.
That has, you know, a purchasing department that,
you know, things are different.
You know, I'm not saying it should be the same here, that,
but it was about six months from the time they put the RFP
out to the time a decision was made.
Okay. And, you know, interestingly, you know, this happens.
It was not agreement. Mm-hmm.
And they had to work through about two months
of disagreement on who that lobbyist was going to be.
And this is normal. This isn't totally normal
for an organization like this, uh,
with everybody bringing their different
viewpoints to the table.
Um, and, uh, but, you know, you work through those things.
So it was, my recollection is about six months from the time
the RFP, what they call hit the street
or hit the, you know, bid net
and all the places where it goes until a decision was made.
Because they have to schedule the interviews and, you know,
and, uh, also review the, review the applications.
There were some, I think there were some that get, you know,
might get disqualified 'cause they
don't meet certain requirements.
So there's a, there's a lot of work to be done there.
Yeah. That, that's what I'm thinking.
That it should take, um, at least six months
to get this done, but not a year.
Well, I, you know, um, I can't speak to that,
um, how long it would take.
Um, I, I can just tell you past experience
Arrest. Mm-hmm.
Mr. Bokey,
Uh, Madam Chair, as a matter for record, uh,
I researched my emails for the last three months.
Um, there are municipal reports that were sent to you.
Uh, Councilman McGee, your name was omitted on one of them.
There's also one that says, uh, city of Warren meetings
and where our lobbyist explains about the Mound Road Project
and the Red Run Dream and everybody's names on it.
And that was May 4th.
And who was that from? Captain, our lobbyist.
I put his name up here. Mike.
Mm-hmm. That's not our lobbyist.
Yes, it is. They're part
of the same firm. He's, he's the owner of the,
He's just Part of the firm. He's the
owner of the firm. He's the head of,
he's the leader of the firm.
Okay. And those, those e emails are there
and they talk about everything.
And, um, like I said, um, Ms. McGee,
Councilman McGee, once, one of those emails,
your name was omitted, you know,
but hell is on every one of them
and they're up to date.
So we didn't get a June one yet.
It, because it probably hasn't been written yet
with the holiday, but I assume it'll be coming
Anything further? No,
nothing further. Okay.
Um, president, I,
I'm gonna call the question 'cause we've belabored this.
Okay. I, I, I'll make my comments.
The municipal updates are from Mike
and in general, updates, they send one from Lansing.
They read, I've not seen any
that are specific to the city of Warren.
I do remember the May 4th update, which is great.
What I just asked for was just a week, a monthly report,
and some accountability to taxpayers for
what folks are doing in Lansing.
I'm no, um, I've made my opinion really clear when I asked
for feedback from a lot
of our state reps, they didn't even know.
And Senators didn't even know that we had a lobbyist.
And there's, those are our greatest advocates in Lansing.
So I am a no.
Um, I will call the question Ms. Moore. Yes. Mr. Lafferty?
Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr.
Newan? No. Ms. McGee? No.
Angela is a no. Motion carries. Next item.
Uh, next item is 12 B,
which is my item on boards and commissions.
Motion to approve support Labor.
Madam Chair Discussion Ms. Moore? Yeah.
Um, so in the last year, two year, year
and a half, um, as the administration is trying to get up
to speed and filling commissions, um,
certain things have come up
and where we've realized that many of the commissions,
their bylaws are totally out of, um, date.
They were written in some si situations in the sixties.
Um, I would like to, number one, be
provided a copy of the bylaws from every board
and commission where they exist.
And those should be kept in a, I would think,
a central repository within the city.
The City Attorney's office, I would think would have each
of those commissions also.
Um, I may think probably one of us could do that.
Or, um, Mr.
Schroder, maybe the legal office of the ordinance
that covers each board or commission
and what the, what the mission is, what its mandate is,
what, um, the requirements are.
Um, another thing that's come up in the last couple
of weeks is there are certain requirements on certain boards
of commissions, and maybe Mr. Schroeder can,
will address planning.
So that we, you, you understand it.
So explain the Planning Enabling Act.
Well, with respect to the Planning Enabling Act,
it describes, uh, the ability of the city
to appoint certain individuals on,
on the Planning Commission.
So, um, our charter references, the, the
Planning Commission, our ordinances represent,
reference the Planning Commission.
And so does, um, the Planning Enabling Act.
But for example, we found out recently
that the Planning Enabling Act says that you have
to be a registered voter, um, in order to, uh,
be on the Planning Commission.
So the requirements are governed by state law.
Some other, uh, commissions, the requirements are governed
by simply the ordinance that's created
or the charter, uh,
which requires you to be a registered voter.
So, um, the ones
that would have state law implications would be planning,
housing, zoning, board of Appeals, DDA, and tfa.
I might be missing some,
but I think those are the main ones
where there's a state law, uh, implication on
how they're appointed the rest, like beautification, um,
and other commissions, uh, like that, the,
the recommending bodies, the ones
that are advisory in nature, um,
they're governed by charter.
But, um, and also I, the, the charter requires
that the clerk be the repository of all bylaws
and governing documents.
So the clerk's office should have that on file.
Um, and if that's not the case,
I also believe our recent open government ordinance
required, um, these types of things to be kept
and available to the public as well.
The other item, um, to follow on with those requirements,
I think we need to know what the requirement is for all
of the boards and commissions.
And there should be, uh, on all the applications
that question should be asked if someone
is a registered voter.
And we probably should check all of the Com boards
and commissions now, especially the ones
that Mr. Schroeder stated.
And I'm sure Ms.
Um, Buffet's office would check to see if the,
for whatever name we submit that they are registered voters.
So we just want to make sure we're in compliance, um,
with all of that, I, you know, I, I, I really think we need
to be diligent about getting these bylaws in order.
There are some that the bylaws are in
contradiction to the charter.
And, you know, I'm not criticizing
people that are on commissions.
I don't think they realize the force
and effect of their bylaws,
that they have to follow certain rules.
They try to put things in to make their commission work.
And maybe it's just not following the, the letter of the law
that we have, we should be following.
So I don't know who we assign all this to.
Um, we don't have access to those documents.
Um, maybe the administration can send out a request
to all the, if we don't have the bylaws, um,
readily available in the clerk's office,
maybe we can round them up somehow.
And I think somebody needs, we need to have a group,
maybe it's a committee or something that goes through
and works on those bylaws,
and we need to go maybe one by one.
We, we had a meeting, I think it's almost a year ago, about
the housing commission and there was written in the sixties.
And that definitely needs to be updated.
And, and we are, you know, we still have not declared
what we are to the state,
and that needs to be done. Mr. Schroeder?
No, I just would add, um, last week, uh, Ms.
Michaels has agreed to have a weekly meeting
between the attorney's office
and myself to discuss items that are outstanding for counsel
that are, are legal in nature.
I think this would fall under that.
So we're gonna have a weekly meeting at a specific time.
Obviously this week, Ms.
Michaels and I are not gonna meet,
but, um, hopefully starting next week
or the following week, we're going to be discussing
that we can put this on that list
and, um, you know, have that discussion on how
to get these things rolling.
I think that would be great. So can you,
um, restate your motion?
My motion would be to have a copy of all
of the bylaws from each of the boards
or commissions if one exists.
Um, the ordinance that was, that forms the basis
of the commission or board.
Um, if there is state law governing that order commission,
I would like to have that information.
Um, and, you know, this is little,
this is still on the subject,
but I looked again on the website.
Um, for instance, we sent over ZBA
and we put the expiration dates and what the term is.
And I think that the public should be able to see
that information, that when we put 'em on the website,
who the members are, it should see their expiration dates.
It's, it's, it, it is required by our ordinance,
but that's not being followed.
Um, and when I looked last time, it was a couple weeks ago,
but the expiration dates,
'cause, you know, a resident might say,
I'm interested in the, um, you know, crime commission
and I see so-and-so's expiring.
Maybe that'll be an opening that I could get.
Or, you know, something like that.
But I, I just think for full transparency
that we should have those.
Um, and it also is an alert to us, just like we've asked for
a, um, a notification when, uh,
contracts are about to expire.
That lets us know too,
because we're out and about in the public.
And we might run into somebody like, wow, you'd be great
with the, you know, the animal welfare, um, commission
or a beautification, or like,
Jonathan's wife should be on the beautification commission
'cause she's got a beautiful yard.
She's already won the awards.
But, um, I, I just think
that's information that we should have.
So that, that is my motion. She's got the green. Okay.
I will call the question, if any,
I should ask any other discussion.
Okay. Hearing and seeing 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 C is a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 12 C uh, ordinance updates from, um, uh,
counsel attorney Mr. Schroeder,
There are four ordinances.
I need a motion. Motion to approve support Lafferty.
Thank you. Discussion. Mr. Uh, Schroeder?
Yes. I apologize. Um,
so there are four ordinances we're currently working on
that council has voted on.
Um, the first one is the Marijuana zoning ordinance.
Um, Councilman Boeke brought that forward, uh,
to remove grow operations from the neighborhood
through zoning restrictions.
Um, again, we're, we have drafts, we're ready to go.
I know Mr. Elli is looking at it.
I know we have, um, Everett Murphy
and Zoning who's looking at it.
And we are going to meet. The plan was to meet this week.
Um, unfortunately, um, Ms.
Michaels couldn't attend the meeting, so, um,
we're gonna wait until she gets back soon
and we're gonna convene that meeting and bring a draft back.
Um, it's very important because, um, uh, Mr.
Bokey provided me with some, um, case law
and some, uh, ordinances from other communities
where they have creatively been able
to use their zoning ordinance
to restrict these grows in the neighborhoods.
In 2008,
the voters when medical marijuana was first promoted
and for medical use, um,
the idea was you could get a caregiver
who grows the marijuana for you if you
had a medical condition.
And now these caregivers are almost like commercial
grow farmers, and they take over residences
and they have dozens of plants growing.
And when those plants flower, it creates an awful smell
and it's a total nuisance to the neighborhood.
And for years, municipalities, like the city
of Warren, had their hands tied.
Um, but now due to some recent court rulings,
we have the ability to come in
and make some zoning restrictions
to restrict this in the neighborhoods
and hopefully eliminate it.
So, um, that's the whole idea behind that ordinance.
Um, we're working on it. So we have a work group created.
We're gonna, we're gonna meet and, and bring that back.
Um, that's the top priority of all these ordinances.
Um, the second one is the council asked
for a special event licensing
and permitting ordinance,
meaning when the city has special events,
there's been some confusion over, um, what's been perceived
as maybe a lack of consistency over who has to pay,
who doesn't, what are the insurance requirements?
And so the idea is to create an ordinance
where everyone's treated equally regardless of any, uh,
group that you're supporting.
Your idea your religion, your ethnicity, any
of those things shouldn't be considered
and that everyone's treated equally.
We have are conducting a survey
of communities in the metro Detroit area,
and I have probably 10 or 15 different communities,
and we're putting a chart together and we're gonna come back
and see what direction we want to go in.
The council did create a work group on that.
Councilman McGee will be on that work group.
When we have those recommendations coming back,
we'll probably set up a little zoom meeting
with our work group and go over those things and,
and have a recommendation.
The third one is also an old one, but it had been lingering
because we didn't have an HR director.
We now have an HR director.
And, um, it's the ethics ordinance amendment.
And, um, the, uh, this, this happened last year
to remind counsel about the ethics ordinance.
We had a situation, Ms. Sanker, where
Ms. Sanker, you have to
take,
you can't take the call, but we're in the meeting.
Go ahead, Mr. Schroer.
Yes. Um, the, um, I lost my train of thought.
Um, no, it's okay. Um, ethics ordinance. Ethics ordinance.
Yes. The HR director, the ethics ordinance.
We now have an HR director. So, um, I actually met with, um,
the HR director and, uh, Ms.
Michaels briefly on this.
Um, the reason the HR director was involved is
because when we discussed this last year, um,
there had been a flurry
of ethics complaints filed with the council office.
A resident was, um, making allegations about the, um,
some members of the administration and some emails
and some conduct that was occurring.
And I came back to council
and said, the council really doesn't have the jurisdiction
to discipline mayor's employees under the ethics ordinance.
You really don't have that jurisdiction.
So we really couldn't take action.
But then we looked further into this ordinance,
and there really wasn't a formal complaint procedure.
There weren't protections against someone
filing a false complaint.
Um, there were a lot of sort of unanswered questions.
And this ethics ordinance has been on the
books since the mid nineties.
Um, and, uh, so we are now, uh, creating a process where
that you can, you know, file a complaint,
there will be standards of conduct.
Um, the HR director, Mr.
Gaos, actually had developed in his prior municipality a
code of conduct and an actual, um, personnel manual,
um, for employees.
It was actually pretty impressive.
Um, I think he did that as part
of a graduate school project, but it's a personnel manual.
There's a code of conduct,
and it had things in there that even, uh,
mayor F didn't think of in terms of things you shouldn't do.
And, um, it was actually very good.
And so we're looking at that.
We're, look, we're, we're gonna bring back a new code
of conduct to propose,
and that if there's an ethics complaint, it needs
to be filed with the, um, HR department.
And as Mr. Lafferty suggested at that meeting a year ago,
perhaps have an independent, uh,
administrator from another county hired to, um,
on a contractual basis, not a permanent employee.
Someone if there's a serious enough complaint
to have them take a look and make a recommendation for that.
So we had a really nice discussion
about how to move this forward.
One thing that I warned about a year ago,
and I'll bring it up again, is, you know, over the years,
these ethics ordinances have been used to sort of, um,
during election season to create like an issue.
We wanna prevent that. And we, we wanna make sure
that if someone's filing a complaint,
they get it notarized, it's under oath.
And if they make a false allegation, they're on the hook
for, for making a false allegation.
So, and there's a way to do that.
And also, finally, the civil service ordinance reform.
Our civil service ordinance hasn't been updated since 1960s.
Actually, the word human resources is not even
in the code of ordinances.
Um, and so we're looking at wholesale reform.
And this one I'm actually excited about.
Um, it's like shooting fish in a barrel.
This one's pretty easy
because there's a lot of reforms that could take place,
and it's actually not complicated.
We're not gonna complicate it.
Sometimes when you hear about reforms,
it's a very complicated, long thing.
This we're not gonna complicate.
So, uh, we have these four things.
We're working on them now.
Um, a lot of them, were waiting on Ms. Michaels to get back.
And like I said earlier, we have a weekly meeting planned.
Um, Ms. Michaels and I got together
and decided that, um, with weekly communication and,
and a to-do list, we can stay on top
of things, make sure they get done.
Uh, because it seems like sometimes council sits up here
and votes on something and it sends off,
it goes in the mail,
and then nobody's taking
responsibility for bringing it back.
So we decided this was a good way to, um, you know,
stay on top of these things so
that counsel can actually get what it asked for.
So that's the update.
Thank you. Um, motion to,
motion to receive and file, if that is so sufficient.
Support. Um, let's see.
I'll call the question. All in favor, aye. Aye. Any opposed?
Motion carries. Next item. Next item is 12 D Ms.
McGee's item, task, force and Commissions. Yes,
I Just motion to motion, motion.
Motion to support. Approve. Thank you. Okay. Support Lty.
Thank you. Mr. Uh, lty discussion. Ms. McGee,
I just want to get an updated list of, um,
the action committees
and task force that the city council is currently on.
Um, I don't know if that would be from, um, Madam Secretary
or, um, Mary Camp.
Just a, a list, a updated list.
We have a list of commissions as of now, um, that's online
that everyone can see.
But I wanted to get a list if you can provide us
with a complete list of those action committees
and task force that we're currently
At. Do you mean like
the FOIA appeals? Oh, we do have a list.
Everybody was provided that list. Okay.
You should have it. Okay.
Okay. Thank you. Yep. I
Appreciate it. We might have added
one or two,
but, um, I, I, it came with the commissions,
but I, we'll get you, we'll get you a copy.
Okay. Thank you. Mm-hmm.
Uh, we'll motion to receive and file that as well.
All in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Next item.
Next item is 12 E Ms. Mr.
Newnan's item, uh, discussion raise, civic Center Motion
to approve Support Lafferty.
Thank you Mr. Lafferty. Thank you. Discussion Mr. Newton.
Okay. So, um, at our previous business meeting, uh,
we had some conversation about getting a feasibility study
done, um, for Warren Civic Center,
um, development.
And in, in my mind, uh, we should be sure to first decide
what we want to have there
before putting lots of money into deciding
how feasible it would be to do that.
Because there are many different ways we could go.
And as far as I know, the city council hasn't collectively,
uh, voted on how we think the the city should go.
Maybe, um, maybe that would be a different process.
But I'm bringing it up
because, um, though I believe that, um,
counselors Moore
and Lafferty are wonderful, that I don't really know
where they're necessarily going with that.
And I wanted to say that, um,
Let's see, that's where I some money to, it's all well good
to have plans for this area,
and it isn't that part of the reason to have a downtown.
And isn't that part of the reason
to have a downtown development authority?
Um, it's already pretty much in the develop, uh,
downtown development authority, I think.
But I would like to see more of a discussion as to
what our Warren City Council envisions,
I believe we're lacking a consolidated at this time
when I was campaigning in 2023.
And the Civic Center is in District five, which I worked
to represent the majority of the people I spoke to
who had an opinion on the matter.
And that was, a lot of people wanted it kept simple,
clean up the property
and make a beautiful, for instance, with native plants,
beautifying, walking paths
and a few bus businesses to make it pleasant
to socialize there, such as a coffee shop
or an ice cream parlor, something like that.
And, um, other con uh, other council members may want, um,
for instance, a conference center
with a big expensive hotel like the Lansing Center has.
That certainly is an attraction.
It's a draw to bring in people to our city.
Um, it could be great. Others.
I, I've been, I've gone to, um,
Michigan Municipal League meetings where I saw
what Troy was doing in other, other cities.
Some great developments also, uh,
went into that quite a lot.
Um, And, uh,
but I also saw very credible research that suggested
that's extremely difficult
to get a strong downtown area built from scratch,
which is basically what we have in the area
around our civic center.
There are a few bus businesses around the sides.
Uh, that's true. But I, I thought
that we should work more on,
not necessarily at this meeting,
but, um, possibly, um, what our collective vision was.
Um, if we're all unified,
then probably the city can do whatever we come up with.
That's my, my And we're not,
it's gonna be hard to get anywhere.
And then we also have to get citizens on board.
So I'm not quite sure what the,
the task force you decided you wanted to form last time
that we all voted unanimously for was really for,
but I was just thinking about it in the,
uh, seceding two weeks.
And, uh, that's, that's, uh, what I had to say about it.
Um, I yield,
Okay, next item.
Next item is 12 F Councilman Newnan discussion
Ray City lobbyist.
Okay. Um, I think I've already,
You need a motion and support?
Oh, uh, I, I make a motion to decline that,
to drop that subject.
'cause we've already discussed it. Really? Oh,
I was my,
I thought you were talking about a city lobbyist,
not a council lobbyist.
I asked you to, if you were clar,
I thought you were differentiating
Separate thing. Oh,
no, I, I, I was working on, okay. The lobbyist.
I, as far as I know, there would only be one lobbyist firm.
Does it have to be? Huh? Let's have a dozen.
Um, do we want to discuss this item?
No, he must, we'll remove it. I yield. We'll remove it.
Thank you. Next item.
Next item is 13
A, which was tabled on June 24th.
Proposed resolution providing public notice of intent
to sell vacant tax reverted property at 28 0 3
Wellington Warren, Michigan, subject to combination
with 2 0 8 0 9 Wellington approving sale following 30 day
notice period, and accepting grant of easement rights.
Okay, next item. Next item is 13 B, which was tabled,
uh, to June.
It was remained tabled on June 24th.
Uh, proposed resolution providing public notice of intent
to sell six tax reverted properties at 23,184 Beerman,
72 75 Dodge 72 79 Dodge 68 98 lore
68 89 Republic, and 68 99 Republic.
Okay, next item. Next item is C.
Request to approve an RFP panel for grant writing services
and to appoint one representative to serve on this panel.
I would make a motion to appoint Mr. Bokey.
I'll support that motion.
Mr. Bokey, do you accept the nomination? Yes,
I do.
Any other discussion or nominations?
Uh, Madam Chair. We need 10 of them.
10. We need 10 grant writers. Oh, yes. At least. Yeah.
So, and just to, just to qualify that, and,
and I don't say that I say that in jest,
but the, the very fact that
grant writing has been so under
underserved within, within the city administration, and it,
and it dates back to the last administration,
we have not had, uh, enough people,
enough attention to it.
And there are hundreds of grants out there
that we should be clamoring for
while our neighboring municipalities
are obtaining them at record speed.
And we are simply not in competition. So that's you.
The reason I say we need 10, we need one, we need another.
We need two more. We need 10. So go get 'em.
Thank you, Mr. Bokey.
Mr. Bokey is a part of that.
I would make sure that there's some, a part of the scope
that there is grant identification,
that they're both skilled in seeking,
like institutional sport, like foundations, state,
federal, across the board.
I I would suspect that RFP would state all
That. I hope so, but
you should flag it if it's cut. Uh, okay.
I will, um, call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty?
Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yep.
Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is D. Request for the engineering division
to award bid and approve contract
for city project WP 24 8 16.
Mavis Irvington, Sheridan, Adler, pavement, construction
and water main replacement ITBW 1 1 54
to Zuniga cement construction in an amount not
to exceed $1,249,653 and 50 cents.
And authorize the mayor
and the clerk to execute a contract consideration
and adoption of a resolution.
So moved Lafferty with discussion.
Support. Anyone. Support, support. Ms. McGee.
Discussion Mr. Lafferty,
Uh, through the chair to Ms.
Gaius. Uh, and just to preface this, Ms.
Gaius and I had a telephone conversation this morning.
Uh, I hadn't signaled my intent to, uh, suggest
that we award the bid to the second bidder on the list.
And we had, we had a, uh, a discussion around that. Ms.
Gaius, good evening. Good evening.
Could you please summarize, uh, some of the items
that we spoke about this morning?
Sure. Um, well, Uh, relative to Zika? Yes.
To Zuniga, yes. So, um,
he's done several projects in the city that are,
have been very good.
Like I mentioned, Chicago Road, west of Van D**e.
I also mentioned, uh, Miller Road.
Um, Barnard, there was an issue. He did take care of it.
He paid for it himself for the grinding of that road.
Um, he's a very responsive contractor.
He a, you know, when there's resident complaints,
he answers, he, I, I don't have, I mean,
there's always issues, small issues
that rise up throughout every project,
but overall, in general, he's done well on the,
on our projects for the city.
And it's also $200,000 less than the second little bidder.
Alright. In comparison to the other con, uh,
the other contractors, uh, similar situations,
have those arisen with, uh, the other bidders on the list
or others that have done work for the city? Yeah,
Of course. There's always situations
that arise through every project,
but all these contractors that a bid are very qualified.
Okay. And how does the city,
how does your department specifically monitor the quality
of the work being performed and,
and the items that you find that, you know, that they didn't
and, and you had to have remedial work done.
What, what's, what does that process look like?
So we have a city inspector out on every construction
site, and they monitor what happens daily basis.
They do a report every day.
Um, we also have testing companies that test the, um, base
before they test the ground, before the sub base goes down.
They test the base, they test the concrete as it arrives.
If the concrete's too hot, they turn trucks away
back to the plant.
So, um, yeah.
Besides our inspectors,
we also have our testing firms that are out there.
Okay. Daily.
And as a city engineer, you know, I'm,
I'm placing my trust in you
and your recommendation with the, the specifications
that are written, the way they're written,
and that your team is enforcing the spec that
is being laid down by, by the, the chosen contractor.
Uh, I, I trust your judgment.
I want to put with, with, given the, the history
so far with Zuniga mm-hmm.
Uh, putting them on, on notice that, you know, I'm not
entirely comfortable despite everything you've, you've said,
and, and again, I I trust you.
Mm-hmm. Uh, I am, I remain skeptical
about Zunigas quality.
And if, you know, going to the next bidder is,
is the right route, then so be it.
But if you are recommending, uh, that we, we go with Zuniga
that, you know, they, they be notified that,
uh, city council is not, uh, well,
at least this councilman is, is not sold
on their commitment to quality.
And that, uh, they should be put on notice that, uh, whether
that's additional inspections
or additional, uh, detail that your, uh,
your department is, uh, engaging with, I guess,
uh, to ensure that we're getting the quality that
we expect that the taxpayers are, are funding here,
and that the next, you know, this job and,
and others are going
to be more heavily scrutinized than in the past to ensure
that, you know, our trust with them is restored.
Yes. That's, that's really where I'm coming from
because my only other choice legislatively, is
to change the resolution
and award the bid to the next highest bidder.
Overruling your recommendation.
Right. I understand. We, we will take, uh,
extra precautions with this contract.
Our inspectors will, we always do with every project.
It's not just this one, of course, but of
Yes. I I know
you, you hold all
of the contractors' feet to the fire Yes.
As you should. Yes. You know, you're the boss. Mm-hmm.
And, but again, Zuniga Hass had some issues.
And, you know, in my professional line of work, uh, I have,
you know, dealt with many different contractors
and there are others that I've taken off the list.
So I can't do business with you any longer
because you're not delivering to the quality
that is expected by my customers.
Right. I don't see that, as I said
before, the issue on Barnard,
he took care of it, pay for it.
So if there are mistakes that are done, as long
as the contractor does something about it
and pays for it out of his own pocket, as far
as I'm concerned, it passed the test afterwards.
Mm-hmm. Uh, the sping situation,
that was just the new con,
the new concrete that was introduced.
Zuniga does get concrete from Hercules,
which has a type two L cement mix.
They get it from Turkey, uh, that has less issues, uh, seems
to have less issues with Sping.
And so, um, I don't really see any, I,
I stick to my recommendation.
Understood. Uh, Madam Chair, I'll, I'll leave the
recommendation to the decision of counsel.
Uh, I've, I've given my, uh, my opinion.
I'm not necessarily, uh, not in favor
of awarding to Zuniga,
but you know, my, again, my, the conditions that I have
for this is that we're putting them on notice.
That we're going to be watching evermore closely
and ensuring that they're doing the job
that they're supposed to be doing.
'cause I do not want to hear, uh, additional complaints.
Uh, that person may be in the audience this evening, uh,
that has spoken about, uh, a particular road.
And I want to ensure that, you know, the issues
that we've encountered on Cosgrove
and others with the Sping, again,
I understand it's a cement issue, not necessarily limited
to one contractor,
but this contractor seemed to have some, some difficulties.
So thank you, Ms. Gaius. I appreciate it. Thank you.
You're welcome. Madam Chair. Ms. Moore.
I mean, this Barnard wasn't the first problem.
We had problems up at Ridge, the Ridgewood area,
um, in the last term.
And, and I think we even put some things into the contract
to protect us a little bit more
because of some of the, um, problems that happen.
And it's great when someone's work isn't
to the quality we expect, and they repair it,
and they fix it, and they make it right.
But when they do that, they're inconveniencing
the businesses in some situations.
Sometimes they have to close down
or they have a hardly any customers coming
because of road projects going to on
residents sometimes have to, you know, deal
with moving their cars onto another street.
And, and they're inconvenienced.
So when there's a mistake, someone is inconvenienced,
even though it may be fixed, it extends the time that
that construction project is going on.
So I'm hoping they can tighten up
their quality a little bit.
Um, and you know, I'm, I'm, I,
I know them, they're nice people.
I, you know, I've known them for 20 years
and I want them to be successful.
They're here. Um,
but they do have to up their quality a little.
And I'm happy to know that you're going to be on it.
I know you do a good job, but thank you very much.
Any other discussion, Mr. Bohi?
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Uh, the last council meeting, we had a discussion about the,
uh, sewer caps, the round ones in the center
of the street on Bunner.
Yes. What is the, are they supposed to be level
or below grade?
The, the top level of the cement?
I mean, they're never exact. Okay.
But Any street you
Can find, I researched it after the last council meeting.
'cause I wanted to get it firsthand.
I went out there and there are numerous round
sew caps at the center,
not the curb drain right there are low.
And when I, I knocked on a door, talked to the people there,
and they said, yeah, we sat on our porch
and all of a sudden you hear cl and making a lot of noise.
Uh, another resident pointed out to me, I got out of my car
and I'll show you my shoe
because I stepped in his g**k, the seal.
Its, and I went around and I looked at all the joint seals
and they were very sloppy.
It seemed like they stopped doing it.
And then you got a puddle. Um, I am not for this company.
Yeah. Uh, after listening to those residents, I,
I can't, there's no way
I understand. So there's
still a three year warranty.
So all these issues will be taken care of at the time
of the three year warranty and anything else that happens,
any cracks or anything like that. So, I mean,
If You, but I'll send an
inspector out again to reach out
Everything. Talk to the neighbors there.
Sure.
The residents there, they're the ones there to stay this.
And they said, sit on my porch. Listen. Yeah.
I mean, there's no reason to lie, you know? Sure.
I Understand. And, uh, I
will send Somebody else.
And I've never seen so much, uh, that black tar,
they used the joint seal, you know, and,
and you know, there's this gobs of it everywhere that,
that's, I can have them go back.
Thank you. Any other discussion, hearing and seeing
Madam Chair? I'm
sorry. I just have one question.
I'm, I'm not certain how the vote is going
to come down here.
So I have a, a clarifying question.
Mr. Schroeder, if counsel
disapproves the resolution as written,
are we in a position to modify the resolution
and award to the second bidder?
Or is that, is, does this, would this matter, go back
to purchasing and require them to resubmit, awarding the bid
and rewriting the resolution?
Well, uh, this doesn't come up that much.
Um, I believe council could award council
as the authority to make the award.
So you don't necessarily have to deny this recommendation.
Um, you could approve the contract
and change out the contractor.
Um, I don't know if that's going to work
with this not to exceed amount.
And I don't know if there's other conditions
that might have to be negotiated.
So ultimately it's counsel's decision.
If counsel believes that the second bidder, um, is better,
of course that would be subject
to the mayor's potential veto and review.
Um, as is any resolution of the council.
Um, but, um, I want
to just check something in the purchasing ordinance.
Um, 'cause this does not ever come up very often.
Yeah. Yeah. So the second lowest bid,
second highest second lowest,
highest doesn't necessarily mean if there were 10 bids
that came in, that that second
based on price alone would've been put in the second spot.
Correct. Do you know what I'm saying?
If A-B-C-C-D-E-E-F-G companies
bid, but maybe the, not the lowest price, the second lowest,
highest price, or I'm saying it wrong,
but the second best price might not be the second best
contractor and that you wouldn't put
them in the second spot.
Does that, am I making sense? Mm-hmm. Mr.
Napp, because it's a more qualified bid. So qualified. Yeah.
Qualified. I mean, that doesn't necessarily mean the most,
they're the second most qualified.
They just have the second lowest bid. Correct?
That's correct. Mm-hmm. So
All the ones that bid are qualified?
They were qualified. Yes. I mean, yeah.
Equally they're the same. They're the bidders
that bid on all the projects.
Are they equally qualified?
Well, I mean, when, I mean, when the rf No,
when your group gets together, I am, I'm sure in mo in most
RFPs, you get, you're gonna get, a lot
of times you get an outlier.
Right? Everybody bids $4 million,
and then somebody else is doing it for 75,000.
You know, I'm gonna get my brother-in-law
to come in here with this pickup truck.
And we got, we got this handled.
Well, you know, they can't do it even
though they're the lowest price.
I mean, do people bid like that, that you just know
Not too often on road projects.
Okay. No. That, that hardly ever happens. Okay.
I know all the contractors that bid, right?
Yeah. Mr.
Go back. Okay, go ahead.
Um, after review, I believe the, the best course of action
for counsel from a legal perspective would be if you're
interested in awarding it to another contractor due
to the issues raised, that you deny this recommendation
and then it come back at the next meeting.
Um, due to the fact that, um, um,
there's some potential unforeseen, uh, circumstances
by awarding this to the second bidder.
And this would give you the opportunity to discuss this
with the, uh, engineering division
and possibly controller's office
and others who would be involved to make sure that we're,
um, you know, there's not some unforeseen circumstance.
And the reason I say that is
because, um, you know, one of the exceptions to, um,
like reconsideration is if it's a contract
and the contractor's notified if something came up Wednesday
or Thursday, we may not be able to use reconsideration.
If we, um, awarded this to the second bidder,
and there's some issue, I feel like, um,
that would be the best course of action to ensure that
unforeseen circumstances are,
aren't causing another legal problem.
I, I can't foresee at this moment, if that makes sense.
So, Mr. Lafferty, presently there's a motion to approve,
uh, this item.
Madam President, I'd like to ask a question before we
Finish discussion. Hold on one second.
Um, sure.
The motion is you, sorry,
you were the maker of the motion.
Mm-hmm. Ms. Moore was the support,
and it's to approve the item.
Just so everyone's clear, Mr. Noonan?
Yes. Um, Ms.
Ghis, I don't have the, uh, bids
and how they came in on my, uh, in my packet today,
but I do recall hearing you say that the, um,
next qualified bidder, the next lowest was $200,000 more.
Yes. And Zuniga has been, um,
on many, many contracts.
And these, these projects are a million
dollars something each.
Are they usually coming in about $200,000 lower?
Yeah, they're usually within
20%, I would say of each other.
Yeah. Yeah. So, But you, when you,
you said Zuniga gets, uh, all the projects.
I mean, I have a wide
No, no, no. I, I didn't
say they got all projects.
I just said they got a lot of projects, which I'm not,
I'm not complaining about exactly.
I'm just saying if they're consistently coming in like 20%
lower than other bidders, and no, that's
Not 20% what, okay.
Uh, no. I'm said there's a 20% spread
between low bit of bitter and high.
Yeah, usually. Okay. Yeah. You'll get that one. Yeah.
Little off one.
If we, if we, uh, if we choose to not go with Sunga
anymore, then um, I think not,
it wouldn't just be this one contract that would be
possibly impacted.
But, uh, many contracts where
the city benefits financially from the,
from the cost difference.
Is that, does that make sense? I mean, if,
if they have 10 contracts
and it's $200,000 difference on each one, then
that would be a million dollar, uh, two 20.
You know, it'd a lot of money council meeting.
Right. Last council meeting,
Zuniga was awarded another contract,
which he's starting Common Defender to Warner.
So he was already awarded one last council meeting.
This council meeting is this one.
And next council meeting is another one
that I'm gonna recommend that he gets an award Sherwood
between eight and Fer.
And it may seem like he's getting a lot of these contracts,
but I listed all my road projects.
I have 13 road projects, and I have eight contractors.
That's, that's a very good distribution. Mm-hmm.
So it's not always one contractor
that's getting these contracts.
And I have a lot of bidders on every single one of my bids,
which I'm very happy about
because that means that people want to bid and warn
and they want to work and warn.
So I, um, I appreciate that.
And, um, it seems, it seems like there are a lot
of complaints against Sunga.
Uh, I hope that they will do better in the future.
I, I, I'm thinking that I should vote for this
because it might be a significant
financial impact on the city to not.
And, um, I, I think in general, uh, Craig Repa,
the purchasing manager
and all the departments are doing a good
job reviewing these.
Um, it'd be nice to live in a perfect world.
Exactly. And I, I, the, i, the things
that Councilman Bokey was referring to sound horrible.
So I certainly hope whoever needs to gets on top of those.
They're fixable, though. They fix real quick.
They're, they're fixable. But it might take a while.
And I, I'm sorry for the inconvenience to anybody, uh,
of someone going back and repairing it.
But I, I glad
To hear there's no road project that's perfect.
And there, there's always gonna be
something with a road project.
And that's why we have that three year warranty.
So we keep track of everything during the three years.
And at the before the warranty ends,
we have the contractor go out there.
So it's like a punch list kind of for the warranty.
They go out there and they fix everything.
I think it's a lot that people admit they were, uh, wrong
and go back and correct themselves.
So I'm, I'm, I'm in favor of that. I yield.
Thank you Madam Chair.
Mr. Lty, Get the floor back. Uh, thank you.
The, and, and the reason I, I, I brought this up
and I, I didn't mean to belabor this,
but it was to ensure that Ms.
Gaius understood that we expect the level
of criticality in review of these projects to be increased,
especially where Zuniga is involved.
Not necessarily a denial.
I asked Mr. Schroeder a clarifying question
because as he stated, this doesn't come up very often.
And what, what would be our legislative best
legislative course of action?
Just to clarify, in, in that event, if that happened?
That's not my intent. My intent is the,
the contractor is put on notice.
They understand that we're watching them a little bit more
closely than we have in the past.
Perhaps Ms. Gtri is already looking at them closely.
She's going to increase that, that acumen,
and we're going to, to move forward.
I do expect that, you know, if Zika continues
to have a poor result, that she will recommend them
a lot less, if at all, for future projects.
That's my expectation coming out of this book.
Okay. Thank
You. Thank you. I'm gonna call
the question Mr. Lafferty?
Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? No.
Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. Moore? Yes. Rogan C is a yes.
Motion carries.
Next item, audience, general members
of the audience who'd like to address city council this
evening may do so under this portion.
Um, by filling out a general audience form located
to the right side of the stage.
Uh, there is only one person, Ms. Sanker, for audience.
So if you wanna speak, you need to get your form in.
Thank you Mr. Watts. You're up. I just am giving Ms.
Sanker a heads up. Usually she waits to the end.
Thank you. Mm-hmm.
Hey, how are you? Gary Watts.
So, wasn't gonna talk about this Inga, but I'm disappointed.
Four. I think if the figures re remind me
that it's about a million dollars a lane
mile, that's $4 million.
We paid for hundred. If any of you seven would like
to see the dash cam video of the motorcycle crashing
because he couldn't stop on the diamond ground pavement
'cause it was too slick last fall.
I'd love to show it to you. It's
too big to send it an email.
Seriously. And now we got the manhole problem
and she assures us that this is gonna get checked.
I wouldn't give them a dimes worth of business.
This is, this is, this is ridiculous.
They can't correct what they did
and now we're gonna give them another million dollars.
And she says another contract coming up,
they don't deserve anything.
So I haven't been at the mike for a while,
so we gotta catch up DDA audit.
During my time on counsel still haven't heard anyth ruling
from Lansing on what they're gonna do about that.
Um, back in November, I FOIAed all the records
of the police commissioner appointment, emails, documents,
who was interviewed, who was denied interviews.
I have not received anything yet.
I've received emails telling me
that I did get it and I did not get it.
I was told I received it at a council meeting.
I didn't get it. And quite frankly, I don't know
what the administration is hiding.
I think I know what they're hiding
and I'm gonna call it if I don't get it.
But I was hoping that maybe council would help us get,
get those documents.
Um, I was out
and about, received some complaints from residents
and some Facebook posts they seen.
So I decided to go look at it.
Nine Mile and Van D**e,
nice homeless encampment set up on the McDonald's lawn.
Really guys we're gonna put up with that.
And we're trying to build a downtown.
We wanna clean the city up.
And we have a homeless encampment set up
on McDonald's front lawn.
I don't even know what's wrong with McDonald's.
They would allow that. Um, absolutely ridiculous.
Um, something I brought up to Mr. Mozzarella.
Unfortunately he left, he's seen the post.
I had it on Facebook, but I know, you know, Mr.
Newnan's hot on this. We planted trees on Hayes
on county, county right away.
One tree fell down. One's dead grass
is a foot long over there.
All the medians in the city,
all the trees have not been trimmed.
They're suckers growing up.
They're suckers growing up from the bottom
of the tree that are higher than the trees.
If we're gonna do this tree thing, maybe,
maybe we should spend some time
getting our own ship in order.
And lastly, every meeting I've heard for, I don't know
how many months poor Mr. Schroeder getting blasted.
And I have to tell you, setting on council with him
for four years, watching the last year
and a half, I dunno
what the city would do without Mr. Schroeder.
He's kept us out of a lot of trouble.
When we had a city attorney that didn't have a clue
what they were doing, he kept us outta trouble.
And he kept everything on the right track.
So Mr. Schroeder keep doing the same great job you're doing.
Thank you.
Thank you. Uh, next is Curtis Osh.
And then after that is Gloria Sanker.
Good evening counsel. Curtis Osh.
Most of you, you probably know who I am,
but apparently Mr. Schroeder doesn't know who I am
because he says
that we couldn't be served if you didn't know.
The city's suing a church harvest time Christian Church
that's been in our city for more than three decades.
That's shameful. I don't know who authorized this,
but this is the kind of lawyering that, uh,
Mr. Schroeder does.
Plunkett Cooney, boom. Here's a lawsuit for harvest time.
Plunkett Cooney. Boom.
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11, 12, 13.
Oh, by the way, they mailed these,
it costs almost 14 bucks a piece to mail.
This
1, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24.
He's gotta send us 24 copies of a lawsuit.
That's what the city's paying for the City of Warren.
On behalf of Mr. Schroeder suing Harvest
time Christian Church.
Our little tree lover hugger over there should
be p****d off about this.
'cause I know I'm a little bit irritated.
You know, not one council member up there has come
to my church, but falsehoods, misinformation lies.
You guys are full of 'em.
You know, Mr. Schroeder, he's a cyber bully.
He uses his little minions and his little operatives.
He's the little puppet master.
They post stuff almost every day about me,
how bad I am on the political page and all over the place.
Now we're into Lawfare.
Look, this is what our city's paying for.
24 copies of the lawsuit. The same lawsuit.
Why would our city attack a church
that's been in this community for more than three decades?
Serving the food insecure, the needy,
the most vulnerable among us?
I went from hero to zero
because the last mayor in August of 23,
gave us a mayoral proclamation telling us how great we were.
Thank you for more than three decades of faithful service
to the city of Warren, to the most needy, the most indigent,
the food insecure, the homeless.
You're at time in South Warren.
Thank you. And this is where we're at.
You're at time. Thank you. Gloria Sanker is next.
And then after Joel,
Your garbage back.
Mr. Osh, if you could please quietly depart my garbage
and res and respect garbage.
And thank you. And respectfully, take a seat.
Thank you, Gloria. You're up.
Wall law. Mr. Osh, please just take a seat. I am.
Thank you.
It was wonderful
to celebrate our freedoms on the 4th of July.
Freedom though can be stripped away from us.
Even rights that were established for a long time
that we often call precedents can be eliminated
by an authority that has no belief in these
rights in our city.
Namely, the mayor taking away our prayer station
and not permitting the National Day of Prayer
to be celebrated as was done for years with great success.
Yes, freedoms can be denied.
We are a government of the people
and not the office of the mayor.
As has been demonstrated in our city,
we see the mayor favor the atheists and the gay community.
This is a major disappointment for the Christian community
also, who should not be passed over.
She's one-sided and not equal for all.
On the 4th of July, we celebrated freedom and justice.
Both are missing and warn by a liberal mayor who wishes
to exclude our Christian beliefs and traditions.
Remember, a few years ago,
the Democratic Party at their national convention voted
to take God out of their platform.
Our mayor is a member of this party.
Perhaps that is why we no longer have the prayer station
and could not celebrate the National Day of Prayer.
While embracing the gaze
and the atheist, she snubs
the Christian tax paying community.
I believe every mayor and Warren has had Christian beliefs,
or at least inclusive beliefs.
This is the first time we had a mayor that boldly
and blatantly snubbed the desires
of the Christian residents.
She is one sided and not equal for all.
But as Christians and tax paying citizens, we will fight
for equality and inclusion, as is our right,
as both citizens of a free country
and tax paying residents here in Warren. Thank you.
Thank you. Next is Joel Vander Lenin.
Joel Leland, longtime worn resident. Mr.
Nunan, you have a house in Royal Oak.
If you hire a contractor and he paints the front side red
and then paints the backside fluorescent orange.
Would you hire that guy again?
No. So when it comes to Zenga,
who is doing a half hearted job,
who is constantly screwing up,
endangering the citizens of Warren,
why would you vote him another contract?
That's absolutely stupid.
My real complaint today is to talk about the fire station,
which is opening up, uh, at the end of the month,
I write things instead to go and take a look.
And there's a little plaque on the wall
that has Mayor Lori Stone's name on it.
It has this council's name on it.
Now I hold no one on this council.
You know, uh, nothing against them,
but most of you have done nothing for this fire station.
It was voted on by the previous council.
It was voted on and put forward by the previous mayor.
If anyone should get any credit for that fire station,
little Jimmy F's name should be under Mayor.
It may be the only thing he did right in his 16 years.
Gary Watts's name should be on there for all the hard work
and dedication he put towards that.
Mindy Moore, even even Angela Jonathan,
even Eddie Kazinski, God help me.
These are the people that put forth the right steps,
direction for that fire station.
And what we gonna get, we're gonna get the people
that didn't work anything for it.
Mugging up the TV cameras, mugging up the, the cameras
to get her photo ops and everything else.
And she's done absolutely nothing.
That's the most asinine thing I can think about.
Her taking credit for that fire station
is like Zuniga saying they did a good job.
Mr. Wicky, I have had
contact. Thank you.
10 seconds Mr. You got outta your way
for me and my family.
Thank you. Have a blessed day. God bless America.
Thank you. That is the end of audience. Next item.
Next item is council response. Madam Chair, Ms. Moore.
Um, to address what Mr. Watts said, um, uh,
about the FOIA re uh, request
that you put in about the details, the hiring of, um,
the police chief, um, police commissioner, excuse me.
Um, I believe our neighbors to the north
who just hired a new, uh, police chief, have
that information on their web website or much of it.
I've been told who the candidates were and,
and how the, what the process was.
Um, and you know, I'm, I'm fully in favor of transparency
and, um, I think we'll probably be discussing that again
because I think you're scheduling a
or asking for another FOIA appeals group. Um, two
Mike. Yeah.
We'll have you two.
Um, there was one other item I was gonna talk about.
No, something else. I'll think about it.
Mr. Schroeder has, um, I'd like him to make, um,
a response to what Mr.
Tash said about the, the lawsuit.
Sure. Certainly. Just to remind
counsel, we've heard about it.
Um, there was a lawsuit filed in Macomb County Circuit Court
with respect to harvest time.
Christian, uh, church.
It's not necessarily suing the church for
what it does on a daily basis,
but in 2018, the city council
approved the sale of a home at 1 1 0 5 5 Jew
for the price of $1.
Um, that purchase agreement to sell this house for $1
was signed by Mr.
Osh and the Harvest Time Christian Fellowship,
the, there was a deal, though.
There was a contract between the city
and the purchaser here.
And the contract said
that harvest time will completely renovate the home
and would use it for a shelter for one
of their neediest clients.
While they help them get on their feet.
This home setting will allow harvest time to help them get
through school or find a job
and get integrated into the community.
Uh, the agreement also stated
that the buyer will renovate the residential structure on
the property and house a low income family.
While it gains financial resources
to sustain home ownership.
The buyer will agree to keep the property maintained
and be responsible for compliance with local ordinances.
This was in 2018 or 2019.
We are now six or so years after that.
There was never any renovations done to the property.
There's never been any certificate of occupancy granted
by the city or building permits pulled.
There have been 70 property maintenance violations at this
location, 70 in the past four to five years.
We have all the reports from public service
and the police department.
It was nice that Mr.
Osh had people previously
that would dismiss these tickets or cases.
But the fact of the matter is, at this house, according
to your city assessor, our city assessor,
this house is worth somewhere between 95
and a hundred thousand dollars on the open market.
And, uh, we filed, uh, uh, a lawsuit stating
that there was a breach of contract, which clearly,
in my opinion as an attorney, a breach of contract here.
Um, we had photos from the home from last year
where there's garbage, debris and junk piled up in the home.
We had testimony that there were dogs
being harbored in this house.
Uh, so none of this, none of these terms
of this agreement were ever met The city.
When it gives away a house for a dollar,
there has to be a public purpose.
We've talked in the past that you can't just give away city
property that's worth a hundred thousand dollars to somebody
and let them do what they want with it.
There has to be a public purpose.
And the public purpose here,
which was a good one at the time,
which is why the council voted unanimously in favor of this,
was that this religious institution will take some
of its needy clients,
house them there, let 'em get on their feet.
It was, it was a great idea. Okay.
Unfortunately, six years later, there's been no intent
by the purchaser to do any of this.
And 70 plus property maintenance violations.
I read through these reports, the photos,
you would be absolutely disgusted
to see what this property looks like.
Um, and the fact of the matter is, if we do nothing,
they could turn around and sell this property, make a lot
of money, and then the city got nothing for,
for giving this property away for a dollar.
And frankly, we were willing
to stand up and bring this case.
There were other law firms that didn't want to do it.
'cause they didn't want to take this constant abuse
here and online and everywhere.
I really don't care. I, I take pride in trying
to do the right thing for my clients.
And in this case, my client is actually the city
of Warren, not the city council.
So we're doing this on behalf of the taxpayers of Warren.
And, and, um, so it's really, um, one
of the most egregious cases I've seen of a breach
of contract with respect to a property like this.
We do have a lien on the property,
so he can't sell that property.
With respect to the documents he was showing you
and is, uh, left on the floor, um,
we hired a very reputable firm to serve him process.
When you're sued, you get served by a server.
It's a very reputable firm.
And, um, and he was working with his, uh, uh, spouse
to avoid service.
We filed an affidavit with the court
that he was avoiding service.
He's been sued many times before. He knows the drill.
So, um, he, he avoided service.
So we filed a court hearing to get him served alternately.
'cause he was just gonna not accept service.
We weren't going to go interrupt his church
service and serve him.
We weren't going to come to the
council meeting and serve him.
Uh, we were going to be professional about it. Mr.
Osh, you don't have the floor.
We were gonna be professional about it.
And, um, so we went to court. Uh, judge Servito was there.
Um, apparently Mr. Osh appeared in court.
I sent, uh, one of my associates to appear in court.
Apparently he showed up for the court hearing.
And, um, the court did, uh,
grant the motion for alternate service.
But the court ordered all of those, uh, versions
of the lawsuit to be mailed to different locations to ensure
that he was properly served.
So I just wanted to make sure that, um, uh,
counsel was advised
and the public, um, that
that's the background to this. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
If I could go back to what I forgot. Mm-hmm.
I wanted to address what ask act actually, um, Mr.
Vander Lin and said about the plaque on the fire station.
I've gotten a lot of calls, um, from active
and retired firefighters, um,
that were particularly upset that Mr.
Watts's name wasn't on there
because we might not have ever had a fire station, had it.
Not in my opinion.
Um, the other last council should be on there as well.
And the former mayor, there's no reason why
they couldn't both been there.
The, I haven't seen the plaque,
but the DDA should be, members should be there as well
because they paid for it.
And the steering committee members aren't even on there.
You know, uh, Gary Watts
and Pat Green were on the steering committee
and their names aren't on there.
And I think there's, there's room for, um, inclusion
and, um, rec
and recognition for everyone that contributed to this.
I think it's a great thing that's happening.
And I think that we could, if we need to,
we put up two plaques.
Um, we find a place for 'em
or, you know, make this one bigger or whatever.
But I think it should include all those people
that contributed to this happening.
And, you know, when the mayor came in,
groundbreaking took place almost immediately, you know,
that everything was in place except
it was starting to be built.
And I'm not, I think everybody on this council find,
you know, is on it because it was built during our term.
But I think the other people
that contributed should also be recognized
for their contributions.
And they should be part because they
are part of the history.
And that foundation plaque states the history
and they should be recognized too.
Thank you,
Madam Chair. Uh, uh, Mr.
Vander Linden,
please do not yell from the audience. Mr. Lafferty.
Thank you. And you mentioned the
grand, the groundbreaking.
Ms. Moore, the previous administration
and all former council members were invited
to the groundbreaking as adjuster of Goodwill
and that foundation that, you know,
we're all contributing members to it.
We were all there together,
and I think at least most of us were, uh,
were there together to celebrate
that grand, that grand opening.
That it's, it's shortsighted that the,
the plaque does not include everyone's name.
And I, I don't know if we need,
the council office sends a letter to the, the mayor's office
indicating that a, a new plaque be procured.
But I think it's, it's just, it's fair.
As, as much as I disagreed with the previous administration,
there is absolutely no reason that Mr.
F's name shouldn't be on there along with all the,
the previous members, just like you mentioned.
Thank you. I mean it, I will tell you
that when we built City Hall, I used
to drive through at night.
I, 'cause I was so proud of what we did,
and everybody that was involved has that same feeling.
And, and I see my name on that plaque.
I get teary eyed every time I see it.
'cause I'm so proud of what we did.
It was a big accomplishment.
It was the biggest thing we'd done here.
And I think everybody should share in that recognition
that contributed.
Thank you. Anything further?
Okay, next item. Motion to adjourn Support. All in favor?
Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? We're adjourned. I.