July 8, 2024, City Council Meeting

Introduction:

Links to the video recording and the council packet are at the bottom of this post. Please note any errors or omissions in the comments. Anything noted in brackets was inserted by Clarkston Sunshine.

Agenda Item #1, Call to Order (Video time mark 0:00:04):

Sue Wylie said okay, it’s seven o’clock. It’s seven o’clock, I’m going to call the meeting to order at seven o’clock.

Agenda Item #2, Pledge of Allegiance (Video time mark 0:00:09):

Wylie said and if everybody would rise, we will say the Pledge of Allegiance.

Pledge said.

Agenda Item #3, Roll Call (Video time mark 0:00:27):

Wylie said welcome, everybody. We are, if you have an agenda, we are on Item #3, the roll call, and we have a new clerk, Catherine Ashley. Welcome. Ashley said thank you.

Wylie said and do we have to swear her? You’ve already sworn her. She’s already been sworn in. Okay. (To Ashley), Wylie said if you’d take the roll call, please.

Peg Roth, Laura Rodgers, Ted Quisenberry, and Sue Wylie were present.

Mark Lamphier, Amanda Forte, and Gary Casey were absent.

Wylie thanked Ashley.

Agenda Item #4, Approval of Agenda (Video time mark 0:01:09):

On Item #4 we have approval of the agenda, and I’d like to have a motion to approve the agenda as it’s presented. Roth said don’t you have to amend it? Wylie said do we have to amend the agenda? City attorney Tom Ryan said yes (unintelligible). Wylie said I’m sorry. Oh, we do.

(Council member Amanda Forte walked into the room and sat at the council table.)

Ryan said you’ll need five votes (unintelligible) affirmative (unintelligible). Wylie said we have five votes now. Ryan said yes. Wylie said well, we have five people present.

Wylie said and just to change the roll call, we now have Forte here. It’s okay.

Wylie said okay, so we do have to amend the agenda, and I need a motion to amend the agenda, and it would be to amend the agenda to have, is it two closed meetings? Ryan said no, just one. Wylie said just one closed meeting. And we would make that, I guess, Item 10C, or make it 11 and move adjournment back to 12. Ryan said 11. Wylie said okay, so it’s going to be Item 11, and the adjournment would be Item 12. So, I need somebody to amend the agenda to include a closed session as item 11 on the agenda.

(Holding up paperwork), Roth said covering both of these. Ryan said no, just the one. Roth said just the one. Ryan said the attorney-client privilege memorandum from today regarding the Independence Township issue. Wylie and Roth said okay.

Motion by Roth. Wylie said so, Peg Roth makes a motion to amend the agenda to include a closed meeting regarding attorney-client privilege and Independence Township concerns. And I need a second. Second Rodgers.

Wylie asked is there any discussion from council?

No discussion.

Wylie asked any discussion from anybody else?

No discussion.

Wylie said then roll call. (To Ashley) Wylie said oh, we’ll need a roll call.

Wylie, Forte (said here and voted), Quisenberry, Roth, and Rodgers voted yes.

Wylie said okay, so we’ve got one, two, three, four, five people voted yes, so we can amend the agenda to add the closed session. It’s going to be Item #11 on the agenda.

Wylie said so, now going back to that agenda, I need a motion to approve the agenda as it’s been amended.

Motion by Rodgers; second Roth.

Wylie asked any discussion from council?

No discussion.

Wylie asked any discussion from anybody else?

No discussion.

Motion to accept the amended agenda passed by unanimous voice vote.

Wylie said so, the agenda is approved.

Agenda Item #5, Public Comments (Video time mark 0:03:48):

[Though public comments can sometimes irritate the city council, there is value to both the council and the public in hearing them. While they can’t eliminate public comments entirely without violating the Open Meetings Act, your city council has occasionally decided not to acknowledge public comments during a city council meeting unless the person submitting the comments also appears at the meeting (in-person or electronically) to personally read them. In the past, members of the public have been cut off for exceeding the city council’s arbitrary three-minute time limit (it’s arbitrary because no time limits are required by the Open Meetings Act).

If your public comments were submitted to the council but not read, or if you tried to make public comments but your comments were cut short, please email them to clarkstonsunshine@gmail.com and I will include them in my informal meeting summaries either under public comments or under the specific agenda item that you want to speak to.]

Moving on to item number five, we have public comments.

(Wylie read the rules for public comments.)

David Delasco said the street light at Church and Holcomb is out, is out at night, the streetlight. Wylie said the streetlight at Holcomb and what was it? Delasco said Church Street. Wylie said and Church Street. Okay and thanked Delasco.

Wylie asked if anybody else like to make a public comment?

Wylie recognized a man in the audience and said yes, sir. I’ve got a gentleman in the back with his hand up, and then we’ll go to you. And if you don’t mind coming to the podium, you can say your name if you wish. You don’t have to. You don’t have to say your address, but it’s nice if we get at least a first name.

The man said yeah, I’m Drew Frazel (spelling?) and provided his address. Frazel said we bought the house three years ago. Right outside of the driveway and on the street, the sidewalk has risen. This is causing our cars to bottom out and also a tripping hazard. We’ve talked to Jon Smith (city manager), and we just want to have it fixed. Don’t know what it will entail, but we just need to get that fixed as soon as possible.

Frazel said and then, also, we’ve had signs from the parking lot in between Honcho and our house be pushed into our siding. So, however, we don’t know who owns the parking lot, whoever is responsible. We had to get our fence replaced, got that replaced, and so we just want to make sure that plowing going forward isn’t pushing anything else. And, also, we’d love to know who owns the parking lot and who’s in charge of plowing that parking lot so that we can take care of the siding. An unidentified man said it’s Honcho. Frazel said OK. (The unidentified man in the audience made an unintelligible comment.) Frazel said oh, yeah. Okay. Okay. That’d be great. Thank you.

Wylie said so, you got one of your questions answered. Frazel said yeah. Wylie said all right. Frazel said but, yeah, other than that, it would be the sidewalk outside the house. Okay. Smith said they are working on doing two-step (unintelligible). Step one would be cutting. Any heaved slabs that were otherwise solid concrete, we’re (unintelligible) cutting. We did that last month. Wylie said just last month, yeah. Smith said and now, we’re moving into phase two which anything that was not a candidate for cutting will be torn out and replaced (unintelligible). Frazel said okay. Smith said we will take care of it. It will be either, we’re already the 7^th or 8^th of June, or July, so it will probably be the end of August. Frazel said okay. That’s great. (Smith made an unintelligible comment). Frazel said all right. Thank you. Wylie and Rodgers thanked Frazel.

Wylie recognized another man in the audience and said and, yes, sir, you said you would like to make a comment. Again, if you don’t mind coming up to the podium. The unidentified man said I don’t mind. Wylie said your name and introducing yourself is optional.

The man said his name is Leslie Haight and he provided his address. Haight said as long as somebody brought up streetlights, I’d like to complain that the streetlight on the corner of Main Street and Robertson Court is too bright. I know that sounds ridiculous, but it would shine it in your bedroom. It’s an LED light that was replaced a couple of years ago. Two or three of the neighbors that are in a circle around where that light is have complained about it. I don’t think anybody had enough nerve to come down and talk to anybody about it. It’s either too bright or too high or both. Smith recognized an unidentified man in the audience and said yes, please. Please do.

The unidentified man said is the light that the first one addresses when he spoke about it? Wylie said Tom, can you just say who you are because you’re not just somebody. Tom (last name unintelligible). I work for DTE. Forte said very timely.

(To Smith), Tom from DTE said so, is that a normal middle light that he’s talking about being on? Smith said no, it’s one of the community lights that’s over the roadway. Tom said okay. So, I’ll take care of both of those issues. I’ll come talk to you about it. Haight said this is a flood light. Tom said yep. I know what you’re talking about. I’m pretty sure the pole was hit and broke and then replaced. Haight said a few years ago. Tom said we can put either a shade on it to where it directs more down, or we can change the light. Haight said okay. I’m glad I brought it up. Wylie said you got so lucky because I’ve only seen Tom here, the second meeting I’ve ever seen him here. An unidentified man said probably won’t be a third now. (Laughter.) Wylie said thank you, Mr. Haight.

Wylie asked anybody else for public comments?

No comments.

Wylie said okay.

Agenda Item #6, FYI (Video time mark 0:08:50):

Wylie said moving on from public comments, we have FYI. I didn’t even look to see if there was anything in FYI. Quisenberry said no. Wylie said no? Okay, thank you. So apparently there’s nothing.

Wylie asked anybody have something for FYI that I missed?

Item #6a – FYI – 2024 Primary Election Accuracy Test, Saturday, July 13, 2024, at 11:00 a.m. at City Hall (Video time mark 0:09:06)

Rodgers said it says the Primary Election Accuracy Test. Wylie said oh, that’s right. It does say here, 2024 Primary Election Accuracy Test will be held on Saturday, July 13, 2024, at 11 a.m. at city hall. (To Ashley), Wylie said so, I assume you’re taking care of that. Are you going to help her with it too, Karen [DeLorge, former clerk]? (No audible response.) Wylie said great. And so, you got that all squared away.

Wylie asked anybody else have an FYI we’re missing?

No further comments.

Agenda Item #7, City Manager Report for 07-08-2024 (Video time mark 0:09:29):

• • City Manager Report, July 8, 2024 (page 3/24 of the council packet)

Wylie said okay. Moving on to Item #7, city manager’s report, which is included in the packet.

(To Smith), Wylie asked did you have anything you wanted to expand on? Smith said no, I don’t think so. Wylie said okay.

Wylie asked anybody at council have questions about the city manager’s report? Quisenberry said I do. Wylie told Quisenberry to go ahead.

(To Smith), Quisenberry said the third point, the petition deadline. Can you tell me which council members are up for re-election? Smith said there’s Wylie and – Wylie said Roth. Forte said me. Roth said and me. (Smith made an unintelligible comment.) Wylie said so, it’s just three of us? Smith said there are three. Wylie said okay. And I pulled a petition today. Okay. (To Quisenberry), Wylie said if that’s all you needed. [Lamphier is also up for election.]

Wylie asked anybody else have a question for Smith?

No comments from council.

Wylie asked anybody out there? Wylie recognized Chet Pardee for a comment.

Pardee said yes, about the budget amendment issue. I appreciate it sounds like it’s coming in the next meeting before Ryan can reflect to us the budget law of the State of Michigan that causes us to change our practice. As far as I know, for the last seven years, we’ve been last meeting of the month doing the amendments, and now we’re moving away into (unintelligible). And I’d like to hear our legal person explain the Michigan budget law as it relates to when it is that you need to. I know what the auditor said, which makes me wonder if we need a new auditor and Ryan (unintelligible).

Pardee said I had a question about the copy machine. Is there any connection between the copy machine and our implementing new data process? Smith asked the scanning? Pardee said the scanning. Smith said they could be the same supplier, but they will be separate suppliers. So, we’re taking the best. We’ve got quotes together, but it would be a separate supplier.

(To Ryan), Smith said I don’t know if you want to weigh in on this, but we can talk to Rana [Emmons, PSLZ, the city’s contract financial auditor].

Smith said so, previously, we’ve done this at the last meeting in June. We’ve done our budget amendments. So, any departments in the budget that were negative, we will do that at the last meeting in June. And the reality is, though, in early July, more bills are still coming in for the previous fiscal year. So, Greg [Coté, treasurer] is still paying, probably throughout the whole month of July, will be paying bills that really need to be paid out of the previous budget. So, it only makes sense to wait until all those bills have come in, because there could be some more budget amendments needed. An account that’s in the black right now could go into the red after Coté pays those bills. So, I said, well, why don’t we do it at the first meeting in July? And Coté said, well, the packet in the first meeting in July is the report, is the check run report, not the expense and revenue report, which is the one you really need to look at to see what we’re amending, or why we’re amending. So, it’s Coté’s recommendation, if it’s not too painful, let’s wait until the second meeting in July. Then everything will be in. We’ll have a complete story of how the ’23-’24 fiscal year ended, and we can do any amendments that are necessary.

Pardee said my point is that in 2018, ‘19, ‘20, ‘21, we’ve done it the last. Smith said yes. Pardee said and I think when I looked at the data from this past summer, I think the past (unintelligible), we were in the red. I don’t think we may have amended that budget at all. I couldn’t find anything. Smith said we may not have. We’ve been real close until the end of the fiscal year. That’s usually the last month, June. Pardee said yes. Smith said that’s when some departments are red, so we just move the funds around until we balance. But, you know, in the past, we’ve done it the last meeting in June, and unbeknownst to you, as Coté is paying bills in July, lo and behold, something went negative. We’ll fix it. We’ll clean it up. But I think just in the interest of transparency, let’s do it in a council meeting rather than Coté and Emmons doing it in this office.

Wylie said Mr. Ryan, are you going to, I realize this is not necessarily your – (interrupting Wylie), Ryan said oh, right, and the reason it changed, I don’t know if you were here last week or last meeting, but that’s when Smith announced that instead of doing the budget amendments at the first meeting in June, maybe it was going to be, or at least today, it was going to be the first or second meeting in July. So, I mean, that was between Emmons and Coté. As long as it’s done and it reflects ‘23-‘24, because we can’t spend those funds for this year if they’re for last year. It’s all got to balance. Hopefully Emmons and Coté can clear that up.

Wylie said okay, thank you. Does anybody else like to, would anybody else like to make a public comment?

No comments.

Wylie said okay, moving on to, I’m sorry, that was not public comment. That was comments on the city manager’s report.

Agenda Item #8 – Motion: Acceptance of the Consent Agenda as Presented 07-08-2024 (Video time mark 0:15:29):

• • 06-10-2024 Final Minutes (page 4/24 of the council packet)
  • 06-24-2024 Draft Minutes (page 7/24 of the council packet)
  • 07-08-2024 Treasurer’s Report (page 10/24 of the council packet)
  • 07-02-2024 Check Disbursement Report for the Period 06-01-2024 – 06-30-2024 (page 11/24 of the council packet)
  • Thomas J. Ryan, P.C. (page 17/24 of the council packet)

Wylie said Item #8 is motion acceptance of consent agenda as presented on July 8th, 2024. This includes the final minutes from June 10^th, the draft minutes from June 24^th, the treasurer’s report from July 8^th, and the documents are included in the full package, which council has.

Wylie asked can I have a motion and a second to accept the consent agenda?

Motion by Quisenberry; second Forte.

Wylie said I’m trying to get all the names in so Ashley can catch the names more easily.

Wylie asked any discussion from anybody on council?

Wylie said I have just two quick things. One is a curiosity. Mr. Ryan, on your first page of the bill it says MDOP complaint. What’s an MDOP? Ryan said malicious destruction of property. Wylie said okay. And the last thing on the next page, we got a FOIA request from Mr. Lanker. Do you know what that FOIA request is regarding? Ryan said it was, I think, a real estate question about – (to Smith), Ryan asked was it the – Wylie said June 17th. Ryan said and the address is . . . (Ryan reviewed his packet.) Smith said oh, that was oh, yes, it was – Ryan said oh, yeah. (Unintelligible comments.) Ryan said somebody wanted all the information about 127 North Holcomb Street. Wylie said okay. Ryan said so, that was given to him. Wylie said okay.

Wylie asked anybody else on council have questions for Mr. Ryan? Or anything on the consent agenda?

Wylie recognized Roth for a comment.

Roth said I didn’t hear what the answer of the malicious obstruction of property. Quisenberry said malicious destruction. Yeah. Wylie said I just wanted to know what it was. Roth said what is it. Ryan said somebody allegedly hit somebody’s car as they passed by and dented it. Quisenberry said I’ll throw a baseball through your window on purpose. Ryan said pedestrian car issue. (Quisenberry made an unintelligible comment.)

(To Quisenberry), Roth said you know what? We have stuff that goes on over in our building that’s not just like minor stuff, so I was just curious because I’ve come over and talked to Smith before to find out if what has happened over there has come over here, so I was curious what that was. So, thank you. Ryan said sure. Wylie said thank you.

Wylie asked anybody else have questions or comments on the consent agenda?

No comments.

Wylie asked anybody out there?

Wylie recognized Pardee for a comment.

Pardee said in the capital project fund, almost $1,000 check to Elan Financial Services, and I haven’t been exposed to that company, mainly for professional and contractual services. Smith said so, Elan is who we do, our credit card company. So, Elan, that should be, you should see that every month, and check the money. So that was probably for, it was either a computer purchase or, I can find out exactly what that was. Sometimes we use a credit card for that, and then it gets reconciled when we get the credit card statement. Pardee said capital project is getting close to $1,000. Yeah. Interesting.

Wylie asked anybody else have questions or comments on acceptance of the consent agenda?

No comments.

The motion to accept the consent agenda as presented passed by unanimous voice vote.

Wylie said and the consent agenda is accepted.

Agenda Item #9, Unfinished Business (Video time mark 0:19:00)

Item #9 is unfinished business, and there is no unfinished business, so we’ll move on to #10.

Agenda Item #10, New Business

Item #10a – Resolution: Proposal to Place a Yes/No Referendum on the November 5^th Ballot Re: Single Waste Hauler in the City (Video time mark 0:19:05):

• • Resolution – Single Trash Hauler Referendum on the 11/5/2024 Ballot (page 20/24 of the council packet)

Wylie said we’ve got a resolution proposal to place a yes-no referendum on the November 5th ballot regarding a single waste hauler in the city, and we have it in our packet. Wylie said thank you to Rodgers.

(Wylie read the resolution.)

Wylie said we can just, usually would say, let’s get somebody to make a motion on accepting or using, going with this referendum or not. But since we do have to choose are or are not, I think we should discuss it first.

Wylie asked anybody on council like to discuss? Roth said I would. Wylie said go ahead Peg.

Roth said seems like this was rather premature. I thought it was just mentioned last week. I did talk to Jerry Fisher, but I didn’t have a chance to call, I forget, I think maybe – Smith said Chris [Barnett of Lake Orion?] – Roth said yeah. But I just, I’m surprised, I didn’t expect we were gonna move on this as quickly. Jerry felt like he, well I can read you, do you want me to read what he said? Wylie said sure.

(Roth read) – As supervisor of the township, I formed a committee of interested citizens representing various interest groups. Jonathan [Smith] was invited to sit in but was not officially a member of the committee. The committee met several times to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of utilizing a single hauler. After considerable dialogue, the most important split of opinion that surfaced was, for those who lived on a paved road, there was an interest in a single hauler, considering that frequent use of streets by multiple haulers was the greatest cause of breakdowns of the road. And for those who lived on gravel roads, the interest in being able to negotiate with a hauler of choice predominated. Based on the experience with single hauler contracts in neighboring communities, the price and terms that can be negotiated are superior due to the bargaining leverage. Because of the work of our committee bumped up against the township board election, it was anticipated that the new supervisor would finalize the recommendation to the township board, but it has not.

Roth said so, I just feel like we don’t really have a lot of information. Smith said well, this is actually, it may seem new, but we’ve been talking on and off about this. Roth said oh, I know. I was at the meetings at the library, and yeah. When Tom came in the other day and asked about, Tom Lowry, and you know, where’s this stand? I mean, I just thought this was such a great idea. Why isn’t this being moved on? So, well, that’s a good question. And we had, I thought, some good momentum, either one way or the other. We were having some good discussions with the township. I thought I was on the committee, but I thought we were making good progress. And especially with Fisher’s leadership, I thought we were moving along and at least getting all the issues out on the table. Like you said, the people on the dirt roads, which of course we don’t have here in the city, but in the township, those that were on the dirt roads were clearly in favor of having their choice of haulers. But downtown, or a little more urban areas, they seemed to like the idea of a single hauler who would just come down the street once a week. So, we thought that was a good fit for Clarkston, and, but it just died when the leadership changed in the township. So, just thought I’d bring it up as we have an election coming up, we’d have to move quickly, as Ryan has pointed out. If we just wanted to put a very simple yes or no referendum, it’d be a way to get an answer from our residents.

(To Smith), Roth asked did you ever get an answer from Julie Meredith about when she held that, was there any bottom line? Smith said it was similar to what – Roth said Fisher just – (continuing), Smith said Fisher just conveyed to you, was that very different responses on dirt road versus paved roads, rural areas versus urban areas. So, getting quite a bit of difference there. So, we did have a good meeting, and Meredith did a great job of facilitating the meeting, but I don’t think we got any different feedback. Smith said so just, it was a way of, a fairly simple way of finding out, should we, once and for all, should we pursue this or not?

Wylie recognized Quisenberry for a comment.

Quisenberry said what we’re looking at is possibly having government thwart competition, which I think goes against most of the tenets of our whole economy. And also, any experience that I’ve had in government where the government steps in and eliminates competition, requires a sole source provider, the end result is usually service drops, because now that person holds the key to all the services. If you want to compete and you don’t like the service that you have, you’ve got options. You can call one, two, or three other ones and have them come and do it. And I just think that having us get involved with the competitive nature of business and restricting other people, other businesses, from providing their service is wrong. And I don’t think that we should get in the business of picking providers of service for our community. Let the community do it.

Rodgers said do you know, initially, when Lowry was talking about it, it seemed like a good idea, because there’s probably at least three that I can think of that come down Main Street at any given time. So, there is garbage out there all the time. But in, afterwards, in talking to others, there was a couple questions, like, first of all, if it’s not tied to taxes, then what happens when, if, what Quisenberry says happens and the quality of service goes down, and now my garbage isn’t being picked up? Is it against the law to bring somebody else in? Am I, how, like, if we, if the answer on the referendum is yes, that everybody wants the same person, and then it kinda goes south on us, what enforcement do we have to keep people with the same garbage collector? Like, if nobody’s, if they’re not picking up my garbage, and there’s three other businesses in town, and it’s not tied to my taxes, so I’m not being, I’m not paying it in my taxes, where it’s gonna come regardless of whether I want it or not, what’s to keep people from just saying, no, I don’t want that one, I don’t want them to stop at my place? And what’s to keep that company from saying, yeah, they’re giving you this deal, but I can give you this better deal? So that was just, you know, that was one question. And the other question I had was, when, if this goes on the ballot, and everyone says yes, that they want it, then, are we held to finding one then? And then, how do we choose, like, do we choose it purely on money, or do we have a public comment? Like, it seems to be a bigger, on the surface, it seems super simple. But those two things are concerning to me, is if the service does go down, and I don’t like that service anymore, what’s keeping me from picking somebody else?

Smith said well, you could always, an individual owner could always pick somebody else, but the thought was that we would have a city-wide contract. It’s what the other municipalities have been able to do, to address your question, is we would not try to reinvent the wheel here. We would piggyback on what, like, Orion Township, and what Rochester Hills, and others have done, is with volume, they get very competitive pricing. You talk about competitiveness, because they have got some of the best pricing, because of volume, and those companies want to keep that contract, so they have been very loyal. Now, I’ve heard some bad stories about Waterford, but that was primarily because they selected GFL, and GFL is selling to another company. But they’re trying, the Waterford Township Board is trying to make sure that that new contract will meet the legal agreement that they arrived with, the contract they arrived at, with GFL, the previous. I mean, it’s really the safety in numbers, by having a lot of people calling, it’d be like having 50 or 500 homes call the company, say, hey, you didn’t pick up my trash. By us calling, we have kind of a direct line to the upper management of the company, and hopefully they will listen to us. This is all I’m hearing from the other municipalities that have done this. We wouldn’t try to reinvent the wheel, and if the residents, if the council, does not want to pursue this, then fine. I’m just trying to bring this to a head once and for all.

Wylie recognized Roth for a comment.

Roth said yeah, and I agree with Quisenberry. I don’t, I would not personally suggest going to one hauler, for exactly those reasons. And talk about competition, I don’t know if you knew this, but at our meeting at the library, one of the businesses was handing out business cards and passing them down the line. But that was the other concern, is then who is the person that that falls on if it’s decided, let’s go in this direction, because we don’t have prices, or, that’s why I just thought this was very premature.

Smith said well, it was just being premature for the end product, but it’s the first step in the process that has begun. Roth said right. Smith said and if the council wants to do this, it would probably take a year to get all the pieces and parts in place. But again, we would just piggyback on what other municipalities have done. Just clone. They, we met with Rochester Hills like four or five years ago. They said, we’ll give you our RFQ [Request for Quotation], we’ll give you all the documents, and you can just change the name from Rochester Hills to Clarkston, and go out and start getting some quotes. And we can build into the contract whatever you want. If you don’t like this clause, are you concerned about them walking away? What do we do when they miss a house? All these kind of questions we can make into the contract. So again, I am not proposing this before or against, I’m just trying to get this issue closed out once and for all.

Wylie recognized Forte for a comment. Forte had no comment.

Wylie said okay, I would like to make a comment. I actually am in favor of seeing this on the ballot. It looks like we’re asking residents if we’re going to investigate it any further. It doesn’t lock us into, we’re 100% going with a single hauler. Rodgers said that was her question. Wylie said I like the idea of a single hauler because I would like to see fewer trucks on our streets. Garbage out fewer days, maybe some savings, hopefully a little bit of savings. And when I’ve looked into it in the past, those communities did see a reduction in cost of trash hauling. And part of it’s my background. I grew up in Ohio where everybody, we didn’t have multiple people collecting garbage. It was usually, it was a government thing. But to me, Tuesday’s garbage day. Everybody gets their garbage picked up. So, to me, this Michigan method of doing things, or in Clarkston, is a little foreign. So, I still like seeing all the garbage picked up on one day. So, I would like to see it on the ballot. Forte said yeah, I agree.

Rodgers said so, the ballot doesn’t force us to, it just makes us investigate, yes. Or if they say no, then there’s no sense in treading any water. Smith said (unintelligible) then it’s done, but if they say yes, then it just starts this whole investigation process around getting the quotes from the different companies and hearing all the side issues that they might have to share with us. Bringing all that together and putting it on the table. And at that time, you could say, we’ve heard all this and even though 59% of the residents want this, here are all the downsides we’ve heard after investigating this. And we as council think it’s not a good thing for our city. That could still happen, absolutely.

Wylie said did I understand you correctly to say that one of those communities, maybe it was Lake Orion or Orion Township, the residents were not required to use the hauler who was chosen, the trash collector who was chosen? Smith said well, all the municipalities I’ve talked to, they do it across the board. And you are required to pay, even if you’re not using them. Wylie said oh, got it. Okay. Smith said you’re either loyal to your brother-in-law that has a trash company or you’re a snowbird and you’re gone for six months out of the year. That, a lot of municipalities have opted not to make that an option.

Rodgers said so, who do they pay? Smith said they pay – Rodgers said the city. Smith said no, they pay the trash hauler. Rodgers said so, that’s why I get confused. Like, how can you force somebody to pay for a service that they’re not, like, do they sign that, individual contracts with the hauler then? Smith said that’s a good question. I’d have to find out. Rodgers said yeah. Smith said how does the – (interrupting Smith), Rodgers said I’m just trying to figure out how you would work through that, that very scenario.

Quisenberry said I agree with Rodgers. It doesn’t make any sense. If the city enters into a contract, it mandates all its residents use this service and you have to pay for it, then I don’t think that’s good public policy. That, now all of a sudden, that’s now going to prohibit us as consumers from saying, well, you go ahead and have (unintelligible), but I still want to use ACME, all right? Now I’m financially penalized using the trash hauler that I want to because I have to pay twice.

Wylie said one concern I had all along with that, it was brought up a lot at the library meeting, was, as far as I know, there’s two local hauling companies, TNR and Community. I don’t think anybody cared that much about the national companies, but people were concerned about basically harming them, especially if it included Independence Township. With Clarkston, it’s not such a problem because we’re a smaller community, but I think everybody was concerned. I think it was a Community guy was passing out the business cards? Roth said TNR. Wylie said no, it was TNR? Roth said it was the management [Waste Management?]. Wylie said oh, oh, are they? Roth said they were there too. Wylie asked are they local? Roth said no, but there was somebody there. Wylie said oh, okay.

Wylie said I’m sorry, and anybody else out there like to make a comment or a question?

Wylie recognized Tom from DTE and said yes, and if you don’t mind, at least standing up.

Tom from DTE said I’ll stand up. So, if we’re gonna look at this, there’s a couple different ways to do it that I think is that, sure, it could be cheaper and interior thing for as far as business goes, but yeah, we do it with city water. We do it with city sewer. It has to come through. You have to accept it. Can’t put a new well in. Somebody can’t say, hey, I’m just gonna put a well in. I know it’s the law. You know, I know it’s the rule, but I’m gonna have my own well. No. So, I think if we really look at it and everyone thinks it is better for the community, that’s why I don’t think the city council should just be able to vote on it and say, yeah, we’re gonna use one garbage can. If it goes to the vote and it comes up a percentage and it comes out better, I mean, you can see pros and cons about it all day long, about what’s a pro, what’s a con, but I think there are a lot of bad things with the trash companies. We’ve had tons of problems with Waste Management, and I think it’s because they’re overextended. We’re switching right now, and I live on a dead-end street, three different garbage companies, three different days, and they come on different days to pick up your yard waste. So, it is a mess. So, I do think if we could make it a little better, that I think it would be a great idea. And just like we said, if it doesn’t come back and it’s a no vote, then it’s shut down. But if it does come back, I think it’s something we should delve into a little closer. Wylie thanked Tom from DTE.

Wylie asked would anybody else?

Wylie recognized Haight for a comment.

Haight said I would. I have a lot of concerns about this, and that’s why I’m here today. First of all, I guess I’d like to try and be logical about this. And there’s a fixed amount of garbage created in the village each week. I mean, it might vary a little bit. And the garbage trucks are all pretty much the same size, right? So, you’re not gonna reduce how many trucks go down your street. You’re not gonna reduce how many days a week, because the same amount of cartage is gonna happen every week. So that logic, to me, that you’re gonna have fewer trucks on your street doesn’t work, because the same amount of garbage is gonna have to get transported out of the village every week by the same number of trucks, whether the truck is from one company or whether it’s from four companies.

Forte said I disagree. (To Forte) Haight said you’re shaking your head no. Forte said I disagree. Roth said yeah, I disagree, too. Haight said okay, what’s gonna change? Forte said so, if I live on Buffalo Street, and there’s like, say there’s three trucks that come – Haight said yeah – (continuing), Forte said and each truck is only taking a third of a truck each time, well, it has the possibility to be all the way full, but right now it’s only one third full, because it’s divided by three. Haight said I think what they do is they pick up enough garbage till they’re full, then they leave, and another truck comes from the same company.

Rodgers said but I think like right now, like I’m just thinking on my street, we’re with one company. My neighbor to the right of me is with another. My neighbor to the left of me is with another. So, yeah. So, when the truck comes by on, for garbage on Tuesdays, he picks up mine. That’s one truck that goes the whole length of Main Street. And he might pick up three more on Main Street. If we were all with him, he would pick up all of ours. Now then on Thursday, when the next company comes, he picks up this neighbor’s, and this neighbor down here, and he drives all the way down on Main Street. And then, I can’t think of what the other day is, the third garbage guy comes and picks up his garbage, and then another one down, and then turns around and comes back. So that’s three separate trucks that go down that street in any given week, where one would have picked them all up at the same time.

Haight said okay, now I’m concerned also about, I mean, you’ve discussed all of this, you’ve had other meetings, but all of a sudden my taxes are going up because I have to pay for garbage on my taxes. I’m a snowbird like Smith brought up. I’m only here six months a year. Do I pay for the whole year because it’s – (interrupting Haight), Rodgers said I don’t think we were gonna tie it to taxes though. Roth said no. Rodgers said we weren’t gonna tie it to taxes. That was, we weren’t tying it to taxes. And that’s why I had the question like, so, like, for any of us, if we decide we don’t like the people that we all pick then what’s keeping us from changing? It’s not tied to anything. So, it’s not tied to taxes. Haight said well, how do you control them if it’s not – Rodgers said that was my question as well – (continuing), Haight said tied to taxes? Rodgers said that was my question as well. I have the same question.

Haight said okay, and then going back to the truck, how many trucks. I have a different viewpoint. I live on Main Street. We have 22,000 cars a day go by my house. There must be 50 cement trucks, 50 gravel trucks, and who knows how many whatever, big trucks, water hauling trucks. So, the garbage truck doesn’t mean anything to me. I mean, I look up and down the street. Yeah, somebody gets picked up on Monday. My neighbor has a different garbage company. He picks up on Thursdays. Mine gets picked up on Thursdays. So, I mean, it doesn’t make any difference to me. And yeah, so that’s where I’m at on that. And I really just don’t like the government taking away my choice of who picks up my garbage or who does whatever. Next thing you know, they’re going to be controlling who cuts my grass. So, that’s my opinion, for whatever that’s worth. Wylie thanked Haight.

Wylie asked is there anybody else who’d like to make a comment on this issue?

Wylie recognized Pardee for a comment.

Pardee said yes, thank you. So, most of you know that I’m a snowbird. And I live in a building with three other neighbors. And so, what we pay together gets charged when I’m not there. So, my share isn’t charged to anybody. I’m pointing back to Cass. So, Cass is my neighbor. Anyhow. So, TNR charges us for four people when four people are there and three people when we aren’t there. I would not expect, if in fact we proceed, I would not expect that anybody would need to pay more than they’re currently paying. I don’t think anybody expects that burden to come with the decision. I had a discussion this past week with Tony Jr. Wylie asked he’s with TNR? Okay. He’s TNR. Pardee said so, TNR is Tony junior, Nicole, and Rachel, Tony senior’s three children. And I said, be aware, this might be coming. And he says, geez, we struggle right now to have enough employees. And I would think that Community and TNR would have difficulty with putting as many trucks on the road, either one or combined, without adding additional cost overhead, making more trucks. Wylie’s point that they’re only going to come on one day. I don’t think anybody’s got the trucks to do that. Wylie said one day on each street. Whether they, how they cover the city, I wouldn’t know. But hopefully they would come, do Main Street on a day, do Overlook on a day. Pardee said so, I think we’re somewhere where we really don’t belong in terms of our priorities.

Pardee said I would appreciate it if a council says, yes, we’re going to put something on the ballot, that the wording that’s going to go on the ballot comes back in the public, so everybody can know what the wording is. The wording that’s going to go on the ballot. Wylie said I’m sorry, I’m not sure what you’re saying. Pardee said just to say, do you want to go to one carrier? Somebody asked, well, what about TNR, or what about Community? So, does it make sense that we use two instead of one? What I’m thinking is we’re going to generate a lot of questions that we’re not prepared to answer with a yes or no vote. Roth said yes, that’s true. Padee said so, whatever we’re going to put, and what goes in the ballot, I think we’d all be helped by understanding what is the wording that’s going to Lansing to be approved. Wylie said oh, you’re saying before we actually make a vote, you’re saying before council votes whether or not to put it on the ballot. We want to have the exact wording. Okay, I understand. Haight said couldn’t you just send out a survey rather than putting it on the ballot? Wylie asked Pardee if he was all set? (Pardee shrugged his shoulders.) Wylie said thank you.

Wylie said is there anybody else who would like to make a comment?

Haight said I’m sorry to interrupt, but wouldn’t it be less official but just as effective if you just sent out a survey and asked all the residents whether they want one hauler or have a choice of their own? Wylie said perhaps.

Wylie recognized a woman who rose and walked to the podium. Wylie said ma’am, would you like to, are you Mrs. Haight? Mrs. Haight said yes and provided her address. Wylie said okay. Mrs. Haight said, and I know these types of situations, single haulers work in subdivisions where everybody’s got an individual house, but what about our business district? Would there be less trucks? Would they get picked up one day a week? How would they handle that? Wylie said we don’t have answers really for any of this (unintelligible crosstalk between Mrs. Haight and Wylie). Wylie said this is something we’re considering right now, and if council, if the city, if the voters want to do this, then I think those things would have to be considered further. But, you know, those are things we have to consider while we’re deciding whether or not to put it on the ballot. Mrs. Haight said (unintelligible) there’s got to be more explanation of what it means when you have a single hauler. One day a week, if they do the billing, who does the billing? Are you going to be obligated when you go out of town and all that sort of stuff? Wylie thanked Mrs. Haight.

Wylie asked anybody else?

Wylie recognized Ryan for a comment.

Ryan said, so, if I can maybe try to answer a couple questions. First of all, this doesn’t go to Lansing. It’s just a local question. It’s not a charter amendment or something. It’s just a vote locally.

Ryan said secondly, so finances. Well, so, it will, right now, under the Public Act, which we don’t utilize because we don’t have this type of work, everybody pays on their own, but if we go to a single hauler, for instance, then under the statutes of the state of Michigan, cities can levy up to 1.7 mils for trash collection only and waste removal. So, and it would apply to everybody, probably not the commercial district. That, I mean that, normally they don’t include them in these contracts. Commercial users usually are treated separately. But as far as non-commercial or whatever, those folks would all pay whatever the contract is with whatever company. Say it’s $100,000 a year, for instance. That’s going to get billed to the city, and the city, when the tax bill goes out, are going to prorate that over the residential properties of the city, and that’s what’s going to be the bill for refuse. That’s still on the taxes. It’s still a deduction, but it’s not, it doesn’t go against the cap, the millage cap, because it’s allowed by law because of its importance to public health, safety, and welfare to have, you know, solid waste removal.

Ryan said so, and then if the question’s about what about the current people, there’s always usually some kind of amortization situation where if something like this passes and it goes forward, then the ordinance, similar to, like, you know, as somebody said, well, or whatnot, anybody with a current contract would be amortized or there would be an amortization period where eventually you’d have to come into compliance with, you know, the city ordinance. And I know that when you met with Fisher, there’s been a lot of changes in the solid waste landscape lately. You might have seen, like, GFL, or GFI, I mean, which was former Rizzo and was part of Waste Management also has now been purchased by Priority Waste. So that’s, I mean, they’re shifting now. There’s less competition now. Maybe these smaller companies are still in business and can maybe service that, but, I mean, I think the idea was initially when, you know, the town, you know, talking about heft, we’re an important city, obviously, but we’re like a big subdivision. So, I don’t know how much leverage we’re going to have, you know, if we went with an Independence Township, for instance, which I think was initially, you know, that’s, you know, economies of scale. So, there’s really a lot of uncertainty out there about it, and, you know, unfortunately, you only have five of you here tonight, which you can still take, you know, take an action if you wish, but there’s just a lot of consolidation that’s gone on over the last year, year and a half. And so, like, GFI is getting out of the, GFL is getting out of the business altogether, and they sold all their contracts to Priority Waste. So, there’s a lot going on. Wylie said okay, thank you.

Wylie asked anybody else? Wylie said okay, so – Wylie recognized Roth for a comment and said go ahead, I’m sorry.

Roth said yeah, I just still, I think it’s premature. I think we need more information, even in terms of putting something on the ballot. I do think that maybe there’s another, and I don’t know whether we tried that or not, to do a survey type of idea. I think that there are positive ways that this could work, but I just think it’s very premature.

(To Quisenberry), Wylie said you indicated – no? Okay.

Wylie said okay, so what we need now is somebody to resolve either to – This is now therefore being resolved that the city council of the City of Village of Clarkston, somebody needs to resolve does, or they need to resolve does not, wish to include a referendum on the ballot. Ryan said or you could table it until next meeting to see when you have a compliment here. Because if you take an action, then it’s going to be a decision that has ramifications. Wylie said when do we have to have it ready if we’re putting it on the November 5th ballot? Ryan said August 12th, I believe. Wylie said oh, okay.

Wylie recognized Tom Swayne for a comment.

Swayne said Chris Barnett just answered me about Lake Orion. Wylie said oh, okay. Swayne said they do, all of Orion pays individually to the garbage companies. I don’t know how they do it, but that’s how they do it. Roth said and they have a single hauler? Lake Orion? Swayne said let me ask him real quick. Roth said yeah, that’s big.

Wylie said Hampton (Swayne), you want to say something? (No comment.)

Tom Swayne said Orion just went through a very rough time, though. Their garbage companies got bought out. Roth said yeah. Tom Swayne said they went on for four weeks without any pickup. Roth said oh. Tom Swayne said and the residents were very upset about that. Ryan said that’s a variety of ways to look at it. Roth agreed.

Wylie recognized Cara Catallo for a comment.

Catallo said well, I was just going to mention that if you ended up waiting to see if the other two council people were present at the next meeting, then you might be able to answer some of the questions. I assume the snowbird question could be a fairly easy one to answer because the City of Birmingham probably has a lot of snowbirds, and the City of Royal Oak has a lot of snowbirds. And just from my experience, like, it seems as though the people I’ve known in, like, Pleasant Ridge or Dearborn or in those communities have, I’m grateful I just have the single hauler, but, again, you know, it’s, my house is practically on the road, so it’s just a lot to have these constant changes. I finally switched to being with the rest of my street pretty much almost. But, yeah, like, I think you can find the answers instead of relying on hypotheticals or what-ifs or, you know, that might help you reach this or decide to let the people decide. Wylie thanked Catallo.

(To Tom Swayne), Wylie said go ahead and say what you found out. Tom Swayne said they do use a single hauler. Wylie said single hauler, and that’s Orion Township? Tom Swayne said yeah, Orion Township. Wylie said okay.

Forte said so, what would we need? A motion to table for the next meeting? Wylie said we would have to do that, and it has to be – Forte said unanimous.

(To Ryan), Wylie asked if we have a motion to table, it has to be unanimous. Is that correct? Ryan said no, no, it doesn’t. Just a majority. Wylie said just a majority. Okay.

Forte said so, I’ll make a motion to table. Second Roth.

Wylie asked if there was any discussion on council?

No further discussion.

(To Smith), Rodgers asked do you think that you could find out about these communities and see, you know, if they went four weeks without it, or if it’s working? Like, generally, this was just a fluke. This was just a, you know, that four-week thing was just a blip. Smith said I can try and get some answers to some of the questions you asked. Rodgers said yeah, some different communities that do it. That would be awesome.

Wylie asked anybody else on council want to comment on this before we vote on that?

(To Hampton Swayne), Wylie asked if you had something to say? You had something? Hampton Swayne said I was going to say it wasn’t a fluke, but afterwards the company got bought out. So that’s what I’m saying. I know it doesn’t happen all the time. Rodgers said I didn’t mean a fluke like that. I meant, like, how many years was it good? Like, it worked really well, and then this just happened, and now it’ll get back on track again. Like, you know, are they generally happy with it? Hampton Swayne said yes.

Wylie said for council, all in favor of tabling the resolution of a single trash hauler referendum on the November 5th ballot.

The motion to table passed with Quisenberry voting against.

Wylie said okay, so that is one, two, three, four to one. Are we OK? We have a majority? Ryan said yes. Wylie said so, that passes. So, we are tabling it. I’m sorry, I did not say a date. We are tabling it until the next meeting, which is July 22^nd. So, it’s a July 22^nd meeting.

(To Ashley), Wylie asked did you get everything you need? Ashley said yes. Wylie said okay. Thank you.

Item #10b – Resolution: Proposal for Office Computer Purchase (Phase II) (Video time mark 0:54:38):

• • Resolution – Purchase of Replacement Office Computers (Phase II) (page 21/24 of the council packet)
  • Quotation from VC3 (page 22/24 of the council packet)

Wylie said okay. That was #Item 10A. We’ve got 10B, proposal for office computer purchase phase two. And the resolution is in the packet.

(Wylie read the resolution.)

Wylie said and I need somebody to resolve and then a second, and then we can discuss it.

Resolution by Forte; second Rodgers.

Wylie said and is there any discussion starting with council?

No discussion.

Wylie said nope.

Wylie asked anybody out there want to discuss or make a comment?

No comments.

Wylie said then we need to do a roll call. (To Ashley), Wylie said asked if she would do the roll call, please.

Forte, Quisenberry, Rodgers, Roth, and Wylie voted yes.

Wylie said so, the resolution is adopted because we have Casey and Lamphier who are absent. Thank you.

New Agenda Item #11, Closed Session Regarding Attorney-Client Privilege and Independence Township Concerns (Video time mark 0:57:16):

[Note: This was added to the agenda after the meeting began and the Adjournment was moved to Item #12.]

Wylie said Item #11 is a closed session. Ryan said Wylie needed to read the resolution.

[Note: the resolution was not included in the council packet provided to the public.]

Wylie said OK, here’s the resolution. Resolution to adjourn to closed session immediately following the conclusion of the regular city council agenda held on Monday, July 8, 2024, at 7 p.m. for the purpose of discussing written attorney-client privilege communication dated July 8, 2024, regarding alleged overbilling for police and fire services pursuant to MCL 15.268(h). [Incorrect citation. Should be MCL 15.268(1)(h).] At a regular meeting of the City of the Village of Clarkston city council, Oakland County, Michigan, held at the city offices in the City of the Village of Clarkston on Monday, July 8, 2024, at 7 p.m.

Wylie said and we have to write down who’s present and who is absent.

Wylie said the following resolution was offered by, and we need somebody to resolve this resolution and somebody to support it with a second.

Roth resolved; second Rodgers.

Wylie said moves to adopt the following resolution: Whereas at the regular city council meeting held on July 8, 2024, city council desires to go into closed session to discuss written attorney-client privilege communication dated July 8, 2024. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the City of the Village of Clarkston hereby agrees to meet in closed session, as pursuant to state statute MCL 15.268(h) [incorrect citation], immediately following the conclusion of the regular meeting held on Monday, July 8, 2024, at 7 p.m. at the City of the Village of Clarkston, 375 Depot Road, Clarkston, Michigan, 48346. The purpose of the closed session is to discuss written attorney-client privilege communication received on July 8, 2024, from the city attorney.

Wylie said we have to read all this stuff before going into closed session. So, we are going into closed session.

Ryan said we have to take a resolution. Wylie said oh, I’m sorry, we do. That’s right, we have to do a vote.

Wylie said so, we have a resolution offered by Roth and support from Rogers. And is there any discussion from anybody on council?

No discussion.

(To Ashley), Wylie said and if you would take a roll call on that, please.

Wylie, Forte, Quisenberry, Rodgers, and Roth voted yes.

Wylie said okay, so we are going into closed session at 7:59 p.m., and anybody who would like to remain, right now, you guys can’t stay. You have to leave. We’ll have someone stick their head out if you’re going to come back. All you’re going to hear, I don’t know what you’re going to hear, other than adjournment of the meeting.

[Pause in proceedings while session is closed.]

Wylie said we are going back into open session at 8:09 and I want to make a resolution to accept the township attorney’s offer and ordering our attorney to contact them regarding that, and I need a second. Second Forte.

Wylie said okay, is there any discussion?

Ashley said so, Wylie first. Wylie said Wylie first and Forte second.

Wylie said hearing no discussion, when Ashley is ready, we need a roll call.

Roth, Rodgers, Quisenberry, Wylie, and Forte voted yes.

Wylie said OK, then the resolution is adopted, and Ryan will let them know. Ryan said yeah. Wylie said okay.

Agenda Item #12, Adjourn (Video time mark 1:00:59):

Wylie said she needs a motion to adjourn the meeting.

Motion by Rodgers; second Roth.

Wylie asked if there was any discussion.

No discussion.

Motion to adjourn the meeting passed by unanimous voice vote.

Wylie said the meeting is adjourned at 8:10 p.m.

Resources:

• • Link to video recording here
  • 07-08-2024 City Council packet