BITS AND PIECES...

During a Town Board agenda item  requested by Yours Truly under the Citizen Input Policy, I once again asked that the minutes and other materials that the Agritourism Task Force was privy to be posted on the Township website.  I stated that citizens should at least have the opportunity to inform themselves fully on this topic before the public hearing that will be held.  I referenced the Transfer Task Force, chaired by Jeff Otto, of which I was part.  All those minutes were posted in a timely manner.  The same should be done with the Agritourism minutes.  Citizens could then follow the comments made by the invited guests to the meetings, as well as understand TKDA Senior Planner Sherri Buss' input at the three meetings she attended to assist the committee  The Board did not respond to me on this issue at the meeting. The Task Force had agreed with my requests at the time, but there were website issues, so perhaps it will be done by the IT Supervisor soon anyway.  Check under "Task Forces" or "Minutes" on the website.

While we are on the subject of the agritourism public hearing, an informative word or two generally:

Any change in land use is a change in zoning.

Any change in zoning requires a public hearing.  This is why there will be a public hearing on agritourism before any Ordinance can be enacted.

Public hearings must be published with ten days' notice in the Township's official newspaper.  This is different from a "posting," which need go only on the official posting place, in our case the bulletin board on the south wall of Town Hall. A Special Meeting of the Board requires a posting with 3 days' notice; it does not require publishing.



The Planning Commission will be reviewing the comment cards from the Open House and any other comments submitted in time for their December 1st meeting.  Since the week before this meeting is Thanksgiving week, I would suggest that any comments you may wish to submit be in to the Clerk by that Tuesday.  Visit the website under "Task Forces" for the ordinance draft language and minority reports.

A second item that was brought up under my "Communication Follow-through" agenda item was the Watershed Ordinance. You may recall that I had attempted to speak to the Board on this subject before but was cut off by the Board Chair.  This time I reminded him that there is no time limit for agenda items under the Policy and was able to complete my thought.  That thought being, "Where is the report that the Board requested of the Planning Commission on this subject?"  This request was made by Chair Miller at some length at the Roundtable meeting wayyyy back in June.  No report has been forthcoming.  Each Commissioner had been invited to submit pros and cons and to "educate" the Board on this matter.  This was said by Miller in response to a Commissioner's noting that she would just be outvoted.  The report was to give each member a chance to express his/her views. What happened?  Why, a Commission vote was taken!  3-2 in favor of recommending that the Board adopt the ordinance. Bare bones. That's it. No requested input submitted.

The Board did not respond to me on this specific matter either and the Planning Commission was not further directed to submit the information requested. Instead, Supervisor Ceminsky was given the task of following up on the mechanics of enforcing the ordinance once adopted.

Empty words? Window dressing?  Best interests of the community?  Why make the request if one isn't even going to expect it to be fulfilled?  Got me.

A third item under "Communication Follow-through" was The Moratorium That Wasn't.  A small group of people, including one Eureka resident, has submitted an application to the state to be licensed to have a medical marijuana manufacturing facility in the Township. This was discussed at a regular Planning Commission meeting and there was even a Special Meeting of the Commission to further discuss it.  The Attorney had brought up the possibility of a moratorium on the use, which would allow the Township to study this before going down the road of having such a facility. Under a moratorium, no such facility could be built until the Township had explored all its options. The Township could take up to a year to conduct its study. The Attorney had recommended a moratorium and the Planning Commission had agreed as a body to recommend it as well.

This is the very type of topic that moratoriums (a) are made for, I suggested to the Board.  However, I pointed out that during the ensuing Board meeting, the moratorium idea was brought up and discussed, but it was never made clear by the Commission liaison and Chair, Butch Hansen, that the Commission was making such a recommendation.  This recommendation was included in the Commission meeting summary prepared, I believe, by the Clerk, but no mention of it was made by the Board either.  The end result was a 3-2 decision (sounding familiar?), with only Supervisors Behrendt and Miller supporting the idea of a moratorium.

ADDED NOTE:  The State accepted twelve such applications, along with a non-refundable $20,000 fee from each.  TWO sets of applicants will be licensed. Notice will be coming soon as to whom was selected.

Last topic on my agenda item was the state statute that regulates "Notice of Meetings."  Under that statute anyone who wishes to be notified via email (or USPS) of any Special Meetings of the Board or Commission can so request.  The Township must provide this notification. The rationale behind this as I would understand it is that only the regular meeting calendar is set at the Reorganizational Meeting following an election. Special Meetings come up as the situation warrants it and require just the notice as mentioned above: easy to miss. SO, if you are a person who likes to stay abreast with what is going on in your community, contact Clerk Mira Broyles to be  placed on this notification list.  Even if you were on such a list before, you should re-request it as Chair Miller instructed the Clerk to build a new list,  The Township can request such renewals under this statute, given appropriate notice as stated therein.

Like  the idea of bringing something to the Board's attention for discussion** outside of a three-minute limited Public Comment?  Check out the Citizen Input Policy.

**I guess we are still working on this aspect!