hFebruary 14, 2022 City Council Meeting
Note: links to the video recording and the council packet can be found at the bottom of this post. Please note any errors or omissions in the comments. Anything noted between brackets was inserted by Clarkston Sunshine.
Agenda item #1, Call to Order:
There was no formal call to order on the video recording.
Agenda item #2, Pledge of Allegiance (Video time mark 0:00:00):
Eric Haven noted that Independence Television was recording the meeting.
Pledge said.
Agenda item #3, Roll Call (Video time mark 0:00:20):
Haven said that usually he asks Jennifer Speagle to take the roll, but she is under the weather with COVID tonight so he will take the roll.
Haven noted that he was there. Avery, Casey, Fuller, Luginski, Rodgers, and Wylie were also present.
Agenda item #4, Motion: Approval of Agenda (Video time mark 0:00:39):
Motion to approve the agenda as presented by Wylie; second Fuller.
No discussion.
Motion to approve the agenda passed unanimously by voice vote.
Agenda Item #5, Public Comments (Video time mark 0:00:56):
Haven said that this is normally the time for public comments, but no one was present, and they are virtual. However, Mr. Pardee was kind enough to submit his in writing and they will read those for him.
Chet Pardee:
Dear City Officials:
I regret that I will make no public comments in tonight’s City council meeting because virtual participation is not available, and I am not able to attend in person. And who will take the responsibility for changing the public comments rules (did the change occur with council members concurrence?) to require that the person who makes the comments, read the comments? Thank you to Jonathan [Smith, city manager], Mayor Haven and Jennifer [Speagle, clerk], for reading past public comments when I was not able to read them. Is the change intended to restrict public input? I suggest that council discuss and vote on this change.
I recall Jonathan commenting prior to the 1/10/22 meeting formally starting that he would not be able to attend the 2/14/22 council meeting. It seems like with more than a month, arrangements/training could occur for the virtual aspect duty to be done by other than the city manager. I suggest Greg Coté [city treasurer] as an alternative virtual linkup person. Greg could easily do the task from home.
Thank you, Jonathan, for reminding us in your accomplishments review of the MDOT [Michigan Department of Transportation] grant application for Miller Road West approved in the 5/24/21 council meeting. Ironically, no one could recall this action in the 1/10/22 council meeting. When presented with the eight pages of documentation, Jonathan acknowledged – Haven said that these were the words on his printout – that the MDOT grant request had been denied in August 2021. Somehow, I missed the transparent communication of the denial, until your recent acknowledgment following the 1/10/22 issue being raised.
With Jonathan’s communication of performance reviews for city employees, I ask why has council not provided such a review to Jonathan as he has requested? A particularly valuable part of the review process is when the supervisor asks, “What can I/we do to increase your effectiveness?” Council should consider asking this question of Jonathan. I suggest council provide to Jonathan his performance review so that this question can be asked by council members and answered by Jonathan.
I look forward to the April report by the HDC [Historic District Commission] to council. This will present an opportunity for the status of the 42 West Washington issue to be answered in greater detail than the city attorney permitted in the 1/24/22 HDC presentation to city council. It turns out that Attorney Ryan and the city were involved in litigation with the previous property owners in the 2003 to 2006 time period. Apparently, a defective city sewer damaged the foundation of 42 West Washington beyond economical repair according to the attached document [see attached: Attachment to Chet Pardee comments]. Did the city pay $80,000 to the owner? From what source of funds? Sewer fund? Liability insurance? General fund? Is this the same Tom Ryan who is currently being paid by the city to support the HDC’s insistence that 42 West Washington cannot be torn down due to its historical relevance? I suggest that city council discuss the HDC’s position, particularly as the 2003-2006 history is revealed and updated damage and repair cost information from December 2021 has been presented.
Is the city confident that the current truck weight limits are appropriate for West Washington based on the updated underground damage assessments? I suggest the city ask this question of HRC [Hubbell, Roth & Clark].
Haven thanked Pardee for submitting his comments and suggestions. They will take them into consideration. And, with many of his comments, they will probably do that over a period of time as these issues do occur regularly. Haven thanked Pardee again for his submission.
Haven said that was the only public comment that he had, and he asked if anyone else in the audience had public comments.
Wylie said that she had a public comment. She said that if they were having a bigger meeting, it would be attached to the agenda, but she just wanted to put it out there so people can see it on TV. The Clarkston Community Awards Ceremony, the 37th Annual Clarkston Community Awards breakfast, will be on Wednesday, May 11th, at 7:30 a.m., at the Clarkston Community Church, $13.00 per ticket, per person. People can nominate individuals now. Wylie said she didn’t have the exact deadline, but she believes it’s in about a month, maybe mid-to-late March. Generally, it’s before spring break for Clarkston Schools. The award categories are citizen of the year, lifetime achievement, youth of the year, businessperson of the year, adult youth volunteer, community beautification, community advancement, and community collaboration. And, just so everyone knows, it’s worthwhile to nominate. Wylie jotted down some recent names of people in Clarkston who’ve won – Rich Little, Steve Percival, Sharron Catallo, Curt Catallo, Kevin Harrison, Jim Brueck, and Kenneth Ermer. Wylie said her recollection was that Kent actually won for work on Depot Park. Wylie said that that it’s worthwhile naming, if you know somebody who’s done something that is worth nominating – interrupting Wylie – Rodgers said that she thought it was Clarkston and Independence Township – interrupting Rodgers – Wylie said that it’s Independence and [unintelligible crosstalk]. Wylie said that if you want to nominate somebody, or to buy tickets for the breakfast, the forms are available at www.clarkston.org. That’s the Chamber of Commerce website, it’s on the opening page but you have to scroll down a little bit. Wylie said that she would say more at the next meeting about it.
Haven asked if anyone else in the audience would like to make a public comment at this time.
No other public comments.
Public comments were closed.
Agenda Item #6, City Manager Report (Video time mark 0:07:15; page 3/26 of the council packet):
Haven noted that the report is in the packet. There is an abbreviated report that is a cover page and then his annual city manager’s report, which he said is required by charter. So, it’s in detail, and Haven said he started to go through it, and there’s a lot of good stuff in there that has been accomplished by Smith over the last year.
Haven said now is the right time to ask any questions or make any comments if they want to, but it’s better probably reserved unless they want to make one publicly.
Wylie said that before she’d seen Pardee’s letter, she thought they probably ought to give Smith a review for their sake and his sake. Haven agreed. Wylie said he probably would appreciate [unintelligible crosstalk]. Haven said he suggested to Smith that they probably should take some of Pardee’s comments to heart and look into them. There’s an appropriate time and place for probably a lot of these answers, but he has made some good suggestions. Wylie said OK.
Haven asked if there were any other comments on the city manager’s report.
No additional comments.
Agenda Item #7, Motion: Acceptance of the Consent Agenda as Presented (Video time mark 0:08:14):
-
- 01-10-2022 Final Minutes (page 8/26 of the council packet)
- 01-24-2022 Draft Minutes (page 10/26 of the council packet)
- 02-14-2022 Treasurer’s Report (page 12/26 of the council packet)
- 02-02-2022 Check Disbursement Report, 01-01-2022 – 01-31-2022 (page 13/26 of the council packet)
- Carlisle/Wortman, January invoices (page 17/26 of the council packet)
- Hubbell, Roth & Clark, November 2021 invoices (page 19/26 of the council packet)
- Thomas J. Ryan, P.C., January 2022 invoices (page 23/26 of the council packet)
Haven said that he would entertain a motion to accept their consent agenda, which is their final minutes for 01-10-22, draft minutes for 01-24-22, and the treasurer’s report which they have in their packet.
Motion by Avery; second Wylie.
Wylie said she had a question about the legal bill. On 1/5 or 1/6, review FOIA request for election results. She asked Ryan if he could give them any information. Ryan said that Speagle had reached out to him that Mrs. Bisio had filed a request to look at the ballots, so he did some research and responded back to – interrupting Ryan – Wylie asked that these are the ballots for the upcoming election. Ryan said no, it was for the ballots for the November city election. Wylie said OK. [Casey asked an unintelligible question.] Ryan said that the ballots can be copied because they are public information, but they have to make sure that there’s no personal information on the ballots. Once they go through the machine, when you take the tab off, the personal information is gone, and the ballot goes through. Mrs. Bisio also wanted to see the tabulation, and Ryan didn’t really know what that was, and when Ryan came in here at the last meeting, Speagle showed him. It’s probably ten feet long, and it’s about this thick, and segregated. You would have to take the ballot, and you would have to take this tape, which is as he said ten feet long, and try to correlate the two of them. That tape can’t be replicated, so we’re waiting. But again, there’s COVID, so Speagle is working to try to get Mrs. Bisio to come in so she can look at the tape with Speagle present and do whatever she wants to do with it. But he doesn’t think that Mrs. Bisio wants to do that because of COVID, so that’s still not fulfilled yet. That’s the reason. She can’t let that out of her sight because that’s the only tape there is. If you look at it, like an old film, it’s long, and it would take up this whole room probably. Anyway, that’s still in process to answer Wylie’s question.
Wylie thanked Ryan. She said that on the next page, which was on January 19th, Great Lakes Water Authority, why are we being subpoenaed, the General Mills and Great lakes Water Authority subpoena? Ryan said that there is a law firm in Royal Oak that has subpoenaed a bunch of community’s information about the water meter sizes and that sort of thing. Speagle had asked Ryan how to respond to that, and Ryan coordinated with the other folks because Independence Township has that information. We don’t have that information, so she just wanted some direction how to respond to that subpoena request. There’s a court case. Wylie asked if they were asking about the physical size of the meters. Ryan said the number and the physical size, how many, do we have any industrial meters, how many orange, whatever. Ryan said that was the question from the law firm that came to us, and Speagle wanted Ryan’s advice on that.
Wylie said on the same page, on January 26th, “review correspondence from Ben Carlisle, Craig Strong and Jonathan Smith re: HDC enforcement.” Wylie asked if this was new enforcement. Ryan said yes, the power, if the city wishes to enforce the HDC rulings, who is going to handle that. Smith was looking and seeing if Carlisle/Wortman could do that instead of him. Ryan said that it’s still not resolved yet, but it’s under discussion. Wylie asked if they could use Carlisle/Wortman as our – interrupting Wylie – Ryan said that they do that type of work for other communities, but that’s not been determined yet. That will come to council if that’s going to go forward.
Wylie said OK, that’s all, and thanked Ryan.
Haven asked if there were any other questions regarding the consent agenda.
No further questions.
Motion to accept the consent agenda passed by unanimous voice vote.
Agenda Item #8, Community Development Block Grant (CBDG) Public Hearing (Video time mark):
-
- Public Notice (page 26/26 of the council packet)
Haven said that the next thing on the agenda was Community Development Block Grants. Generally speaking, this is money that passes down from the feds. It trickles down, and by the time it gets to us, it used to be around $5,000. Many years ago, we had to identify a blighted area. That was the requirement in Clarkston. [Unintelligible] identify a blighted area, but it came out to be Holcomb, believe it or not, it was, and it improved a lot because Holcomb has been great these days. Haven said over the past some years, they’ve given it to assistance in Clarkston. They’ve given it to the Senior Center, and according to Smith, his words to Haven in this report, the Senior Center has said that this is sort of essential to their operations. Again, that’s oral, and we are holding a public hearing right now, which he probably should have done before he did this.
Haven said that he wanted to open the public hearing at 7:13 and asked if there’s anyone who would like to make a presentation to council in terms of a request for community development block grant funds. Haven asked if anyone had come prepared to do that.
No response from the audience.
Haven asked if there was anyone on council who knew anything.
No response from council.
Haven said he wanted to say two things. One, and he had some thoughts, they talked to the County about this a year or so ago and they talked about [unintelligible] to Depot Park [unintelligible] with that money, and that’s not clear at this point, but again, there would be a potential recipient. Again, these funds are typically distributed to help people somewhat disadvantaged and so on, so we can do some things in the park with that.
Haven said that the other thing is to help with refurbishing/rehabilitation of some properties where people have difficulties that own properties, and there’s some of that around town. But that’s another thing they could do. Haven said he talked to Ryan about it, and he didn’t remember Ryan’s answer. Haven wondered if the monies could be escrowed for something like that in case there were applicants for rehabilitation for their properties. Ryan said yes, it could be, and they could have the County do it. It’s not a lot of money. Haven agreed. Ryan said it’s not a great deal of money, but there might be low/moderate, or somebody that needs help, a senior that needs help with home repair or something like that that they can’t do themselves and they can’t afford themselves.
Haven asked if they could escrow the money at the city with the idea that – [interrupting Haven] – Ryan said that the County – [interrupting Ryan] – Haven asked if they do it – [interrupting Haven] – Ryan said that as he understands it, the County is really the one that handles the funds and we tell them what to do with it unless we give it to the Seniors. [Unintelligible crosstalk.] Haven said OK. Ryan said this is a public hearing tonight. There’ll be a resolution two weeks from tonight, the 28th, as to what to do with the $7,000, and there are guidelines like Haven said. Low/moderate income, and we don’t have that many in Clarkston, so it could go to other uses that fit the parameters.
Fuller asked if those people have to apply, they can’t just determine that a house needs fixing up or whatever. Ryan said yes, and the County would administer that for us.
Rodgers asked if that’s where they get the application too, through the County? Ryan said he thought that they will probably have copies here, but the County is the one who would administer that because they have the expertise and the people to do that.
Haven said that he talked with Ryan and the money may not be a whole lot, but there are some houses that need painting, period, and people have trouble buying the paint and so on to do that. Some things could be done with the grant.
Rodgers wanted to know how they get that word out to them? You can’t really just knock on the door and say that your house looks like it needs – [interrupting Rodgers] – Haven said that the County has published, and he’s heard this before, that maybe they have, grants or something, and Pardee and Haven talked about that at one point. There are some houses here, if they had the funds available. Haven said he doesn’t know, to answer Rodgers’ question. They should find that out. Rodgers said that she’s sure that some people don’t even know that is available. Haven said yes, it’s news to a lot of people. They’ve been doing it for years, but like he said, it’s not been highly solicited, but the Senior Center and Youth Assistance have solicited in years past. Haven said he was surprised they were not here tonight.
Ryan said they have also given to Haven [the organization] as well. Haven asked if they were in Pontiac. Ryan said that they are based on Pontiac, but they have adjuncts around the court system. In 52-2 [District Court], they have an advocate there for people in Clarkston, in the city, that are victims of domestic violence. They provide services to them, counseling, and that sort of thing. Haven asked if that’s the nature, domestic violence, as opposed to youth assistance? Ryan said that it’s two different – [interrupting Ryan] – Haven said that’s right.
Haven said that he appreciated the discussion, and they will vote on the 28th at their next scheduled meeting. So, if anything happens in between, they will take that into consideration.
Ryan reminded Haven that he needed to close the public hearing. Haven said if there are no other public comments, he will close the public hearing at 7:18. Speagle can record that when she takes the minutes off of Independence Television’s record. Haven thanked Matt [Independence Television] for being there tonight.
Agenda Item #9, Adjourn (Video time mark 0:18:18):
Motion by adjourn by Avery; second Casey.
No discussion.
Motion to adjourn by unanimous voice vote.
Resources: