October 26, 2020, City Council Meeting (held virtually)

Note: links to the video recording and the council packet can be found at the bottom of this post

Meeting:

Introduction by City Manager Smith. Referred to Senate Bill #1108 allowing virtual meetings under the Open Meetings Act from March 18, 2020 through December 31, 2020. Smith read through the general rules for participating in an open meeting. (Video time mark 0:00:05)

Agenda item #1, Call to Order (Video time mark 0:01:43):

Meeting called to order by Haven.

Agenda item #2, Pledge of Allegiance (Video time mark 0:01:48):

Pledge of Allegiance said.

Agenda item #3, Roll Call (Video time mark 0:02:11):

All present (Haven, Avery, Bonser, Casey, Kniesc, Luginski, and Wylie).

Agenda item #4, Approval of Agenda (Video time mark 0:02:58):

Agenda was approved unanimously.

Agenda item #5, Public Comments (Video time mark 0:04:00):

Citizen Pardee extensively discussed the 18 documents withheld by Clarkston in connection with the Bisio lawsuit, with particular emphasis on the underground plume of contamination at 148 N. Main Street.

Curt Catallo and Neil Wallace (Union Joints attorney) were present and said:

• • No one asked them for the documents the city withheld. They would have shared them.
  • They said that things were mischaracterized because the site has environmental closure. The issue has remnants of contamination from underground gasoline tanks. Scientists believe that the plume has been shrinking dramatically and will eventually dissipate. They spent $250,000 to repurpose the building. The hold harmless agreement the city proposed did not protect Union Joints. The city engineer and city attorney asked Union Joints to indemnify the city and the engineer before approval would be given to the stormwater retention system. The city attorney would not produce an example of a similar hold harmless agreement. The reason that there is no coffee shop there is because the city engineer made demands that were not in the contract between the city and the property owner. The city needs to find closure in all of this.

Haven wanted to move on because this was taking too much time.

Public comments were closed.

Agenda Item #6, FYI (Video time mark 0:15:47):

No items.

Agenda Item #7, City Manager’s Report (Video time mark 0:15:54; page 4/92 of the council packet):

Wylie asked for details regarding the rain garden and how the city obtained the plants. Smith said that the city is buying them with the help of Jim Brueck. The existing rain garden isn’t deep enough. They are spending money that was set aside.

Wylie asked about the new DPW employee. Smith said that he is currently working for Independence Township Parks and Recreation but is scheduled to be laid off. We are offering him a pay increase and hope that we can retain him. Though he has accepted the employment offer, Smith will not name him until his paperwork is signed.

Luginski asked about speed signs on Main Street. Smith is looking for the right vendor on breakaway posts and will need to show MDOT that they have been installed per MDOT specifications. We have the specifications and still need to purchase the signs. The cost isn’t expected to exceed $500, so Smith doesn’t expect to bring this back to council. Smith wants to get them installed before winter, and it only takes an afternoon to install them. He still needs to procure the posts, install them, and get approval from MDOT.

Agenda Item #8, Acceptance of the Consent Agenda (Video time mark 0:20:33)

• • 9/14/2020 Final Minutes, page 5/92 of the council packet
  • 9/28/2020 Final Minutes, page 7/92 of the council packet
  • 10/12/2020 Draft Minutes, page 9/92 of the council packet
  • Treasurer’s report at page 11/92 of the council packet
  • Carlisle Wortman invoices at page 23/92 of the council packet
  • Hubble Roth & Clark invoices at page 24/92 of the council packet

Motion for acceptance of consent agenda.

Wylie questioned the HRC bill that referenced a downtown parking study. Smith said that he is unhappy with the way that HRC codes their bills, but the entry has to do with handicapped parking near the Mason Lodge. The issue has been going on for a year now, and they are trying for at least one but possibly two handicapped parking spots. It’s taking some time, and the costs are to make them ADA compliant.

Wylie asked about the Depot Park gazebo restoration. Smith said that they are in the final stages of developing a site plan from the Friends of Depot Park. It’s taking a long time because there are a lot of aspects to it. The site plan will be brought to city council for approval.

Consent agenda approved unanimously.

Agenda Item #9, Old Business

Item 9a, Resolution for the Oakland-Macomb Interceptor Drain Repair Assessment (Video time mark 0:25:56; page 26/92 of the council packet):

The resolution is made to make corrections, changing it to a resolution and changing the ordinance number. Citizen Pardee asked about costs, and Haven said it was in the resolution. Smith said that the city’s share was calculated by dividing the REUs in the city, dividing that by four, and calculating $44.25 over four payments to be charged. Smith said that there are unknown administrative costs that will be added to the four payments. There will be many additional steps, including a public hearing and city council approval. This resolution is just to get the process started.

The resolution was approved unanimously.

Item 9b, Motion for a Social District (Video time mark 0:31:17):

• • Presentation at page 27/92 of the council packet
  • Planning Commission recommendation at page 39/92 of the council packet
  • Resolution at page 42/92 of the council packet)

 Presentation regarding a social district:

• • Discussed with the Planning commission on October 5^th.
  • Social District Committee members – Kniesc, Wylie, and Frank Schoebel.
  • A social district is defined as a geographical area that contains common areas that are not part of a licensed premises, e.g., a sidewalk.
  • History – COVID restricts the use of indoor space. HB 5781 allows for social districts. Church Street was closed while they were researching HB 5781. Consumer concerns about being in indoor spaces continue, and the committee believed that the creation of a social district was the next logical step to keep city businesses competitive.
  • The presentation included a map of the social district. Church Street is not part of the social district.
  • Conditions for a social district – must contain a common area, have management and maintenance plans, and clearly mark the area. Road closures must receive advance approval, common areas must be maintained to protect community health and safety, at least one public hearing must be held, and the designation must be filed with the Michigan Liquor Control Commission. The committee has done the things that need to be done for an application.
  • Retailer feedback has been positive, though some will have to change their business hours. They want to help restaurants and keep people circulating with a drink. If the restaurants go away, other business will suffer. Depot Park and Church Street are not part of the proposed social district.
  • The management and maintenance plan was discussed. Permission is required for amplified sound, but the city has ordinances that address that. There were some blanks that needed to be filled in. They aren’t sure if everyone thinks this is a great idea.
  • Expenses need to be prorated between the licensees (the business owners), such as signs, trash cans, and cleaning the trash cans.
  • There was a concern about regular Sheriff patrols and keeping people from wandering into the residential areas with drinks. This concern was discussed the most. We will have to see how it works. You need a special cup to walk outside. If the social district doesn’t work, the city will revoke it.
  • HB5781 requires street closures prior to designating a social district. They thought that Church Street would be great, and they want to close it permanently and eventually transition it into a common area with green space. They aren’t ready to address this, but the recommendation is to keep Church Street permanently closed when the current closure ends on 10/31/20.
  • The Planning Commission is going to recommend a permanent closure of Church Street and to recommend a social district. The city will submit an application and hope to get things up and running by mid-November to help the retailers. Michigan government is moving fast on these requests.
  • Discussed whether the city was at risk if someone was drinking and stepped out into traffic on a busy road. This is no different than someone walking out of Honcho without a drink and walking into traffic. The reward is higher than the risk.
  • The Parsonage was discussed. They don’t mind the social district at all, but when the businesses were surveyed, they didn’t discuss the closure of Church Street. The Parsonage isn’t a retail store any longer, though they did sell flowers this summer to Honcho patrons. They do mostly party planning.
  • Hill said that the Sheriff patrols the downtown area regularly and would pay more attention to the social district. Most sellers will sell a single open cup. People will probably police themselves. If they don’t, and people start complaining, the Sheriff will respond to every call. Response time averages a couple of minutes or less. Lt. Hill didn’t think this would be a frequent issue. If it becomes an issue, patrols could be increased under the contract, but the licensees would have to pay for that. The licensees will probably police themselves because they have the most to lose. “To go” alcohol can’t be served after 11:00 p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays.
  • There wouldn’t be coexistence of cars and alcohol. Lt. Hill said that district would be clearly marked and not include any parking areas. It will not be fenced off, but there will be signage.
  • They don’t think that MDOT needs to be involved in establishing a social district.
  • The phrase “common area” means any area that is in the social district but not owned by licensees in the social district. There are no planned places for people to sit and chat.
  • The item was on the agenda as a motion, but it needs to be a resolution.
  • The State has made it simple – we only need to submit a drawing and a maintenance management plan to get a social district.
  • The maintenance and management plan in the presentation includes blanks, but the word “licensee” will be put in. The hours could be changed at a later date.
  • The reason that the social district doesn’t include all of Clarkston is because they didn’t want to include residential areas.
  • The Mills Mall wants to be included in the social district.

The resolution passed unanimously.

Item 9c, Election Update (Video time mark 1:24:43):

The deadline for write-in candidates was 4:00 p.m. on Friday. Cory Johnston will be a write-in for Mayor against Haven, and Steven McLean will be a write-in candidate for a two-year council term against Luginski, Wylie, and Avery. Spelling doesn’t matter for write-ins; the Clerk will keep track of different name spelling. Johnston and Johnson would still qualify as a vote for Johnston. Ballots were printed more than 30 days ago.

The Clerk sent out 386 absentee ballots and received 262 back. If someone has already voted and wants to change his/her mind, a new ballot can be mailed or picked up in person. Friday is the cut off for mailing. The Clerk will be in the office on Friday from 9:00-5:00 and on Saturday from 8:00-4:00. The website has been updated.

Early voting means voting absentee in the office. Ballots are kept in a lockbox until election day, but the location is confidential. Write-ins will be noted at the poling place.

Newly elected members are sworn in at the next meeting.

Though the Secretary of State notes that there are two ballot boxes – one in Clarkston and one in Independence Township – there is only one for Clarkston. This resulted in confusion, but the State’s website has been corrected. The correct address is on the return envelope. The deadline for returning absentee balltos is 8:00 p.m. on Tuesday, 11/3 (election day).

Item 9d, Resolution for Continued Outdoor Dining on E. Church Street (Video time mark 1:34:13):

The Planning Commission resolution was in the packet. Union Joints representatives were there to answer questions. Catallo said he lost 500 seats throughout his businesses and 200 were in Clarkston. Eating outside is generally safer than eating inside. He wants Church Street closed a little longer before the decision is made on the social district. After COVID, Catallo would be honored to have played a part in a green space on Church Street.

The Planning Commission recommends that outdoor dining on Church continue until May 2, 2021.

A citizen expressed concern that the Catallo restaurants were favored over others. Why just that particular restaurant? Why not all restaurants? Luginski demanded that the citizen identify himself, and he did. Several minutes later, attorney Ryan noted that no one has to state his/her name or address to make a comment at a public meeting.

Catallo said the idea was brought to them in June by Wylie and Smith, and the idea was brought to everyone. It took Catallo a month to reply, and they had the “bandwith and courage” to do it. They are more concerned with keeping their employees employed. It only works for Honcho. It is not a good idea as a straight business move, and other restaurants may be smarter than they are, but that’s not their mission.

The resolution allows all restaurants to utilize outside dining and closes Church until May 2, 2021.

The concern was putting indoor diners into a tent where the transmission of the virus is also likely, but they are assured that the Honcho plan offers plenty of ventilation. Catallo said the issue is allowing air to move through, they can heat it, and have socially distant tables. The igloos are fogged between seating. Their “mess tent” will sit on Church until the community activates it as a community space in May.

The resolution for the continued operation of temporary outdoor dining regulations and continued closing of Church Street passed unanimously.

Item 9e, Amendment to the Open Meetings Act (Video time mark 1:51:31; page 48/92 of the city council packet):

Ryan prepared a memo that is in the packet. The change to the Open Meetings Act was signed by the Governor and made retroactive to March 18. We can have virtual meetings until 12/31/20 and then we will go back to in-person meetings. Virtual attendance after 12/31/20 will only be allowed for those on military duty, those who have health-related concerns, or if there is another state-wide emergency. A state-wide emergency would only occur if the Legislature and Governor worked together.

Agenda Item #10, New Business

Item 10a, Clarkston Community Awards (Time mark 1:54:21; page 53/92 of the council packet):

While the awards were given in-person in years past, this year they are virtual. Copies of the awards are included in the council packet beginning at page 54/92. The motion to bestow the awards was passed unanimously.

Item 10b, Resolution for East Washington Tree Removal (Time mark 1:57:28; page 62/92 of the city council packet):

East Washington tree removal for $1,850. Owens Tree Service evaluated trees at high risk of falling, along with fertilization and trimming recommendations. Two trees were identified for immediate removal – two unhealthy silver maple trees at 44 East Washington. Shiver Tree Service has consistently had the lowest bids for tree removal over a three-year period and they perform quality work. Smith asked that Shiver Tree Service be approved as a preferred vendor. There is only one other preferred vendor – Hutchinson Electric. Hutchinson Electric is a preferred vendor because the city wanted someone to know the history of what has been done in the city before. Most tree cutters won’t return Smith’s calls because they can’t bid as low as Shiver Tree Service. Bonser thought it would still be good to get additional bids, and Haven said that if Bonser feels strongly, he should oppose the motion.

The motion to cut the trees and approve Shiver Tree Service as a preferred vendor passed unanimously.

Item 10c, Resolution for Tree Stump Removal (Time mark 2:04:42; page 64/92 of the city council packet):

Tree stump grinding for $1,098. We have more than 20 tree stumps that need grinding and rented equipment doesn’t do the job as well as a contractor’s equipment when the trunks are 36” or larger. It can take an hour and a half to remove a stump with a portable grinder. There were three different prices – $915, $2,465, and $32,000. Smith explained why the $32,000 quote was so expensive – they remove the sidewalk slabs, grind four feet down to completely remove the stump, and then repour the slabs – but it’s not something the city would consider. Smith proposed hiring Elite Stump Grinding for $915 + 20% of the estimated price to grind stumps for the two additional trees. The recommended vendor, Elite Stump Grinding, is a hometown vendor and very conscientious.

The motion to hire Elite Stump Grinding for $915 + 20% ($1,098) passed unanimously.

Item 10d, Depot Park Bollards (Time mark 2:09:40; page 86/92 of the city council packet):

Depot Park bollards for $2,640. At least once a week, someone drives down the Depot Park asphalt walkways which is dangerous to the children on the playgrounds. The proposed bollards are removable and lockable. They are “high end” because Depot Park is “high end.” There were five quotes, but the fifth and recommended quote came in too late to add to the packet. JP Sign and Safety would provide six black bollards. They would be at each end of the two pathways. The remaining two bollards would be used to replace the iron gate at the west end of Depot Park. It’s dangerous and not reparable. Installing bollards would allow vehicles to go in if necessary. DPW will install the bollards with Smith’s help. Kniesc asked if the city could consider something at Depot and Holcomb to be uniform, and Smith liked that idea. Wylie noted that the city needs to watch spending and should consider something temporary and less expensive this year.

The motion to buy the six bollards carried, with Avery and Wylie voting no.

Agenda Item #11, Request for a Closed Session (Video time mark 2:19:40; page 92/92 of the city council packet):

Smith requested a closed session to discuss a personnel issue. Ryan noted that the vote to go into closed session required a 2/3 vote, and the meeting request was being made under MCL 15.268(a). Smith requested the closed session to discuss a personnel evaluation. The request can be rescinded at any time. There will be no decision at the closed session, just discussion, evaluation, and then adjournment into an open session again. No votes were anticipated at the open session. They plan to open the meeting and immediately adjourn.

Note: the recording did not continue after the closed session ended, which means that there is no recording of the return to the open meeting, discussion that occurred (if any), or the adjournment.

Resources:

• • Link to video recording – http://216.11.46.126/VOD/3299-CityCouncil-10-26-2020-v1/vod.mp4
  • 20201026 – City council packet