Board of Trustees meeting

Next item on our agenda is a presentation from the Michigan titanium group for the event This year how you doing?

Evening, there we go John Conkling I am one of the race directors for the Michigan titanium event that's coming up here before we know it in August and We have a presentation tonight for this year's race As you see here, it will be on August 16th at Versluis Park just like it has been All the same parameters as previously we start racers at 7 a.m. And for the longer distance folks they have till midnight to get back to the finish line so it uses

Concludes the road closure maps and presentation I have for tonight, so I'd be happy to answer any questions or comments Okay, thanks, John

Frank you have anything

Just appreciate you guys being here every year Thank you. Oh Susan

Me too, we would have figured something out, but me too

This is a great event. It's one of the crown jewels of Plainfield next to LPGA and then my tie it's it's kind of bookends of the summer. It's Been a participant for many many years that your staff is excellent safety out on the course is a Way above par. I'm very

Supportive of this and I'm glad to see it here again. We are I appreciate your being here

I have hopes that the weather will be a little different than today. Well

Today was actually cooler than what last year was so I'll take anything better than last year, but we made it and we had lots of ice lots of athletes and and surprisingly You get do get heat related issues? And we had a very very low incident of really anything because athletes were pacing themselves Not pushing themselves and taking advantage of the cooling towels ice the missing fans everything that we kind of had set up for him. So

Great. Yeah. Thank you very much again for being here again. Appreciate it. Appreciate it. Appreciate what you bring to the community Definitely benefits all thank you

I make a motion for the approval of our agenda, including the consent agenda and accounts payable with a revision to item E.

I make a motion we approve the agenda, including the consent agenda as revised and the accounts payable.

Thank you, Jack. Support? Support. Thank you, Frank. Roll call vote, please.

Mr. Coleman.

Yes.

Ms. Batey. Yes. Mr. Hagedorn. Yes. Mr. McKellar, yes. Mrs. Morrow. Yes. And Mr. Faft. Yes. Motion carried.

I make a motion for the approval of our agenda, including the consent agenda and accounts payable with a revision to item E.

I make a motion we approve the agenda, including the consent agenda as revised and the accounts payable.

Thank you, Jack. Support? Support. Thank you, Frank. Roll call vote, please.

Mr. Coleman.

Yes.

Ms. Batey. Yes. Mr. Hagedorn. Yes. Mr. McKellar, yes. Mrs. Morrow. Yes. And Mr. Faft. Yes. Motion carried.

Next item on our agenda is our new business. The first item is to consider the second reading and the approval of the ordinance to amend Ordinance 787, the Plainfield Avenue Corridor Improvement Authority. Cameron?

Okay. Board, I know you're well aware of this. This is something that we've been working on for quite some time. As a part of the reimagined Plainfield project that we started... We're going back seven years now, we identified a number of tools to help revitalize the Plainfield Corridor. One of them, we had already had a Corridor Improvement Authority that had kind of lay dormant for a while due to lack of funding. And so part of this effort was to revitalize the Corridor Improvement Authority so that they could be effective in helping revitalize the corridor. In doing so, one thing we recognized, the existing corridor.

Only covered a portion of the Plainfield Avenue Commercial Corridor. Really, the southern portion did not address the area, which generally starts from Coit on north up to Northland Drive. And it kind of serves as a separate corridor, commercial corridor, but it's one avenue, one community. We felt it would be beneficial for all the businesses along there and the residents to treat it as one. And also allow the corridor improvement. So that they have the authority to do improvements through the entire length of the corridor, not just in one portion of it. The other piece that we did was expand the boundaries, or what we're proposing is expand the boundaries into residential neighborhoods.

And the real benefit there is not necessarily to do improvements in the residential areas, but to incorporate residential and commercial as one cohesive neighborhood as opposed to what in the past has often appeared to be... competing interests that abut each other. So you have residential neighborhoods, you have commercial corridor. Sometimes that leads to friction and high fences. So the intent is to have them work together a lot more seamlessly to create one commercial and residential neighborhood, not a specific residential area and commercial area, and really see the two integrated better together.

And to that logic, when we reestablished Plainfield Avenue, we were able to do that. The Corridor Improvement Authority specifically looked for membership that would represent residents as well as commercial property owners along the corridor. So this is the final step here for expanding the boundaries. So if you approve it tonight, the boundaries will be expanded. Then we can take the next step, which the Corridor Improvement Authority is already working on, which is a new development plan.

They intend to have that done in August, and then back to you for consideration. The new development plan really basically is saying what are the tasks they want to focus on, right? So what are the things? And there's a lot of confusion in the public because they hear about Corridor Improvement Authority and Plainfield Avenue. They see the improvements the township worked with MDOT on last summer, and they think the two are related. They're really not.

While medians and street improvements are something that is a legal expenditure, that's really not the focus of a Corridor Improvement Authority. It's really about a number of elements to enhance the viability of a business corridor. And traditionally, you'll see areas like DDAs, like Comstock Park DDA, do banners or maybe flower baskets or maybe events, street lights, things like that. That's the more typical nature. This group is still determining what focus they want to tackle first when they have the funding to do some projects. So that's the step before you tonight is expanding the boundaries, and then the development plan will come to you this fall.

Okay. Thank you, Cameron. At this time, I would open the floor for any public comments about this issue, specifically, if you have any.

Yeah. I need you to.

Yes. Yes, ma'am.

Talking about it, sounds like a good idea. How is it funded?

And is that strip of property? The property that's highlighted, is that the whole authority or that area? Or is that just part of it?

Cameron. Go ahead. I'm talking to you.

Yes, I understand, Dean. And you understand this is public comment, not question and answer. Oh, okay. So when you're completed, I can answer some questions. So if that's the extent of your comments.

Well, I just wondered how and is that part of tax money taken towards that? That could be used, say, for other things. So that's my question.

Okay?

Okay. Thank you. Anyone else?

Okay. I'll close the floor for public comment on this issue, and we will move on to board discussion. Do you want to?

Yeah, I can address some of the questions. So the way a tax increment, this is a tax increment-financed district. And what that means is they start with a base year, which for the new year. The new portion would be this year. Start with what the taxable value is. And as the taxable value of these properties lined in pink or lavender or whatever color you want to call that, as that grows over time, that amount of growth will go towards the Corridor Improvement Authority, which can then use it for projects in that area. So it's not a tax increase. It's using a portion of the taxes these properties are already paying to make improvements within that district. Does that extend to the questions? Is there a second? I think that covers it.

Okay. Board discussion. Jack, do you have anything?

I was just going to reiterate this is an advantage for those living close to the corridor, because those tax increase monies will go directly to that geographic area as opposed to the general fund, which Cameron already mentioned.

Thank you. Steve?

I'm all set.

Okay. Susan?

I really appreciate the extension of the boundaries all the way out to the river. That's not stopping an airway anymore. That's my good news.

Kathy?

Good question. Are we adding, because of this extension, will we be adding more people onto the committee?

That's an excellent question. Yes. As you recall, we thought we had taken this step already. Our attorneys found out that we had to take a couple more steps. So we had identified nine individuals. We had to pull back to seven. And so those other two have been kind of waiting in the wings for this action so we can add two more people back in.

Frank? I just want to repeat what Sue said. I'm glad they're extending the CAA.

Yeah. I am on the Comstock Park DDA. Not on this one.

Can't be on both. So Comstock Park, they do a facade improvement so businesses can apply for grants to improve their, I don't know if the Plainfield Quarter improvement will go that direction, but I'm assuming they may look at that.

Another example is Mill Creek Days. That's funded by the Comstock Park DDA.

They have money at their disposal to do a lot of things. They were doing some work on the trailhead there. And all kinds of things. So that's Comstock Park. Plainfield will have those same kind of opportunities on the avenue with this committee. So all right. With that being said, I would seek a motion at this time.

I make a motion to approve the amendments to the Corridor Improvement Authority Ordinance as presented. Support.

Thank you, Kathy. Support from Susan. Roll call vote, please.

Ms. Batey? Yes. Mr. Hagedorn? Yes. Mr. McKellar? Yes. Mrs. Morrow? Yes. Mr. Pfaff? Yes. And Mr. Coleman?

Yes.

Motion carried.

Item B on our agenda is to consider the water system source, hold on, consider the water system source water alternative study phase two proposal from Prein & Newhof for an estimated $137,500 for engineering fees. Cameron?

Okay. Do a reminder for everyone who is or is maybe not familiar with where we're at with the water study. Back in April, we had the phase one presentation of the water study. And for those that were not a part of that presentation, we had taken the approach of saying we're struggling to find good source water here, there, or somewhere else. Let's take a step back. Let's throw all the options on the table, good, bad, or otherwise. And let's sort through them again and make sure that we're looking at the right alternatives to find source water that will serve this community long into the future. We're not looking for short-term or Band-Aid fixes for the system.

Let's look at the long-term impact of these decisions. So we had that study that was presented to us in April. And basically, that came up with a few different things. One, there were some short-term enhancements that will help us in the next five to 10 years. That's kind of the short-term view here. But then there's a number of things that we can look at as we look beyond 10 years. What can we look for for new source water? And as a reminder, from a geographic perspective, our water plant, let's zoom in enough, our

water plant, and this is a gray aerial that shows the impact of flooding. Whenever they took this, the river was high and there was a lot of flood water. So we have a lot of flood water. We have our water plant and well fields around here. And as a reminder, we lost the capacity of the Versluis well field about a decade ago when PFAS was discovered in that area. And to replace that, we've been looking for an area possibly somewhere along the Grand River or somewhere relatively close that could produce as much water as we lost in capacity in this well field in one location. And that was our struggle.

We couldn't find a good well field location that was as productive as what we had at Versluis within a close proximity. So as a reminder, we looked across the river.

So that really brought the focus into two major solutions. One of them was continuing a groundwater search along Quaint Avenue. And as I was saying, before we searched part of this area, and it wasn't as productive as we had hoped, but now the search would change from one very tight contiguous area to probably a more linear search anywhere from maybe Jupiter on down to the end of the map here, and try to find that same amount of capacity spread over a much bigger geography. There's no guarantees that that will work either. And that's why this phase two is proposing a two-pronged approach while we explore that

and the opportunity for groundwater there, also exploring a more regional approach. And regional approach means that it would be something that we're not doing alone. We're in partnership with another community, maybe another community that already has water, or even other communities that are also looking for water and would join us in the effort. So that solution would be doing something, joining a system that is already accessing Lake Michigan water, and that could be the city of Grand Rapids, it could be the city of Muskegon, it could be somewhere in between. And honestly, as much as people think Grand Rapids is an easy solution, it's probably not as economical as anyone thinks it is

because they don't have the capacity to serve us as it is today. It will require a new transmission main basically back to Lake Michigan. So when we're talking about that kind of distance, that kind of capacity, we're talking into the hundreds of millions of dollars. So combining with Grand Rapids is not a simple or easy or cheap solution. And at that point, looking at Grand Rapids, we might as well be looking at other options as well because it's not necessarily the most economical or the most forward-thinking for our community because there are other systems that also have capacity in the area that might be a better partner long-term.

So that is the two prongs of this study that we want to explore, explore a regional partnership while we also explore the current well field to see if there's any other opportunities locally. So back to the study. So prior to that, we'll do a lot of this work. Some of this work will also be accompanied by staff working on various components of this. But we're going to start getting into specific locations along Coit Avenue to see if there's opportunities there as well as searching the Lake Michigan opportunities.

That's all I have.

Okay, thank you. I would open the floor at this time for any public comment about this issue.

Yes, sir.

Gerald Stepanovich, 4666 Weber Northeast. Sorry, I've got a few notes here. First of all, I'm actually sad. The gentleman for the titanium race, he's left because I was going to ask him if the race participants were given a list of what has been in the water in Versluis Park and in Plainfield Township water for that matter because, you know, ethylene glycol, which is antifreeze, or acetone, which is nail polish remover, both are required to be tested for. Both can be present in the water and it's still passed the Safe Drinking Act, which we operate under, you know. So, and the other question is,

to the other statement, you know, we're proposing to pay Prina Niehoff $137,000 when we just, I believe we just approved a 2.5 million capacity increase at another wellhead, you know. I mean, we just seem to keep handing Prina Niehoff money hand over fist and we're getting no results. And now you're going to, you know, there's also looking at, according to your agenda item, they're looking at private land ownership. You know, whose land? Whose land, I mean, who in the township's land is that and are we going to be able to know whose it is? Is it going to be made public? It's my money you're spending.

So, who's the private land owner that you're proposing to look at? You know, I think we should, I think those facts should be known.

You know, and then another part of it was to replace the, I saw it as, I believe it was under consent agenda that you guys voted when we started the meeting, to replace the wellhead pump buildings down at Bruce Lewis Park, to replace the roofs. For what? We haven't used them since 2016. I mean, you guys came to my house, made me cap my well, and yet you're still using wells that, or not using them, no, not using them, but you're still paying for the maintenance of the building? Those things, that's ridiculous. I mean, those buildings should be torn down and those wells capped. I mean, we got to take your word that you're not using, which I believe you're not.

I don't ever hear them run. So, I just think that's ridiculous to, that building should be turned down and it's done. No more money spent on them. And what else do I have here?

Oh, yes. Deputy, thank, welcome. Welcome to be our community service, our community neighborhood officer. And just a quick note where I live on Weber Street, since we can't get any speed bumps, I would ask you to take a seat on there, especially during golf season at Thousand Oaks, Saturdays and Sunday mornings, they tend to fly up and down that road. And I really don't want to go to jail throwing something at them. So, and I want to see you, unless it's by in a wave. Anyway, the other thing is. Time is up. Yeah, yeah, of course. Are we going to go to competitive bid instead of just giving money to Prein & Newhof?

Anyone else?

Okay, seeing no one else, I'll close the floor for public comment.

Okay, well, you got to raise your hand when I ask.

I sort of did. I'm kind of new to this three-minute thing. I'm from Lansing, and sometimes our meetings used to go to two or three o'clock in the morning. Had an opinion on this. And if you know hillbillies, if you have an opinion.

I hate to stop you, but name an address for our record, please.

Helen Fizer, 6468 Living Good Street. Rockford mailing address. Citizen of Plainfield Township. I'll just stick to my script to keep the three minutes.

So, good evening to the trustees. I'm standing here tonight because the agenda asks us to authorize another $137,000 payment to Prina Newhall to find uncontaminated water sources. Concurrently, we are looking at an overall price tag. We're well over the $2.5 million to ramp up pumping at known contaminated wells while this seemingly endless search continues.

Let's be entirely clear about where we are. We live in the second most toxic contamination site in the state of Michigan. For years, our community has dealt with the shadow of this crisis. We are not paying for a brand-new, unforeseen challenge. We are paying the exact same engineering firm that built the system and has been trying to replace things for years. As a resident and a taxpayer, I am at an absolute loss as to how this search for clean water can go on for this long at this immense cost with little or no show for it. In any other industry, if a contractor failed to deliver the core objective for a project for years,

you wouldn't blindly hand them another six-figure contract. You would halt, assess, and review. I'll get to my three questions because I'll hand this in in writing. Where is engineering performance evaluation? Has this board conducted a formal evaluation of Prein & Newhof's milestones, deliverables, and timelines over the last seven years? If not, why are we releasing more funds without a report card on their past performance? What is the accountability mechanism? What guarantees do we have that this $137,000 won't yield the exact same result as the previous funding, which is to say more ongoing searches?

Why haven't we sought a second opinion? If the current engineering strategy has left us trapped pumping contaminated water at a million-dollar expense, why are we not looking at outside experts or a peer review of Prein & Newhof's work to see what they are missing? I'll hand this in, and anybody else that wants a question, I have extra copies.

Okay, anyone else? Yes.

Good evening. Brent Fields, 4440 Plainfield. This is sad, it sounds like, because we're searching for a long time. Maybe consider another company to jump in and change from Prein & Newhof would be a thought. But what I keep thinking, I'm hearing all this, we have a water problem, obviously, but we should maybe consider maybe not putting more apartments in to astrobate, I think I'm saying that word right, the problem. Because we're putting apartments up and we're going to need more water. And we apparently need water. So I'd like to see us maybe think about that. I don't know that it's our obligation

to increase our population to 32,000 to, I don't really want to see 35,000 because then we have more traffic problems and we have to get bigger schools and we're bringing in more people. And we don't have the water to give more people. And people are here paying more for water. And we're being kind of paying for usage plus overage if you go to tier six, 40%. So maybe we should slow down in growing our population till we get our water thing figured out. Thanks.

Anyone else?

Okay. Seeing no one, I'm closing the floor for public comment and move on to board discussion. Susan, do you have anything?

Nothing that relates to what's going on tonight. Again, we need to keep, we're looking and we have a good outline.

Thank you. Steve?

I agree with Sue. We need to keep looking. We have a good outline.

Our water issues is our board's priority. We've been working on that. And I'm good for now.

All right. Thank you. Kathy?

I just, the more I learn, the more I don't know the complexity of finding water and finding the clean water and the legacy that we've been left with because of PFAS. I believe that we have halted and accessed, assessed and reviewed what Prein & Newhof is doing. And so I stand in confidence until I hear otherwise from the staff that we are to move forward with what we need to do to find water.

Thank you. Jack?

Thank you.

We have had a problem with Versluis Park. It's well known. Because we had a problem, we closed it down. I, as you all know, most of you know, I, I'm in Facebook along with many of you. I see in Facebook a repeated attempt to connect the Versluis problem with our current system. There is no connection at all. The Versluis problem, as shown by a number of wells, has headed from Versluis Park east and not toward, not west toward our, our water system. So I, I wish the attempts to make connection

between the two systems would stop.

First, and also, the attempt to provide more water is not primarily spurred by the fact that, that we are short of water. We aren't short of water. We have water for the foreseeable future. We're looking 10, 20, 30 years in the future. And many corporate people and many boards toss the, toss the ball down the road and, and let somebody else take care of it. We don't do that. We're trying very hard to make sure that 10, 20 years from now, we have enough water so that you all and,

and myself can still have water. So if somebody makes the statement, we have a shortage of water, we have no shortage of water. We have enough water right now to last to 2035. So it's not an emergency situation. What we are attempting to do is look beyond 2035. That's all I have to say.

Thanks, Jack. Frank?

I'm all set.

All right.

It's been an ongoing problem for a long time. And we continue to work hard. I, I wish folks would show up at the workshops we have so they could understand what's going on instead of coming and making a bunch of hypotheticals or false statements to us.

We,

those opportunities are out there all the time. So, I think Heidi Neuhof is, is, is doing as good a job as I can see anyone else doing. If we start with someone else, someone else is going to have to come in and learn everything all over again. So, it, it just,

yeah, listen, we're, we're doing our best. We're looking forward. This isn't a today crisis. We're looking forward, projecting growth when we're adding apartments. You know, those property owners have rights too. So, we can't just deny someone building in our township. So, it, it's a global thing. And we're trying to be proactive and make sure that we're all going to be fine years down the road. We all live in Plainfield Township too. We don't want to see a crisis happen here. I, I don't know why that's not understood better. I, I read some absolute trash on Facebook. It, it's unbelievable. So, with that being said, I'll, I'll seek a motion.

I make a motion to approve the Plainfield Charter Township Water System Source Water Alternative Study Phase 2 as presented.

Thank you, Kathy. Support? Support. Thank you,

Mr. Hagedorn?

Yes.

Mr. McKellar? Yes. Mrs. Morrow? Yes. Mr. Pfaff?

Yes. Mr. Coleman? Yes. Ms. Beatty?

Yes.

Motion carried.