PERHAPS IT WILL FLY THIS TIME!!!!!!!

Remember the previous blog in which the "Mysterious"
non-conforming registration was discussed during the
June, 2018, Town Board meeting?  Ms. Petter was
present and stated, "This is about me." The registration
was for Farm Tours.
                                     
During the July 9, 2018, Town Board
meeting, Supervisor Ceminsky once
again introduced the "mystery"
non-conforming registration which
he stated appeared on his doorstep
and also fell into the hands of Supervisor
Hansen at the Town Hall.

The "mystery" registration does not have the
original Township stamp on it as every other registration in the
non-conforming registration book of "accepted"
registrations from 2005. (The official Township stamp is red.)

There is no record, including the minutes, which verifies
the acceptance of a non-conforming registration for
Fur-Ever Wild OR Farm Tours for Ms. Petter.  An original
cannot be located.

As indicated in the previous blog, Chair Murphy was absent from
the meeting due to a pre-planned vacation in Europe.
Supervisors Ceminsky, Barfknecht, Hansen and Palmquist were
present. Hansen was acting Chair.

Ceminsky insisted ALL non-conforming registrations were
accepted in  "one sweeping motion." (In my research I did 
not find this to be accurate. Citizens can review past minutes
from 2004 and 2005.)

Ceminsky made a motion to ACCEPT the "mysterious"
registration. Hansen seconded the motion.

Ceminsky's argument was that "when he went back to the minutes
the document was nowhere to be found." "Years ago it could not
be found." "It showed up this year at his door and in an envelope
at the Town Hall." (It is rather perplexing to me that the person 
who dropped off the application at Ceminsky's and delivered
an envelope to the Town Hall has not been identified or come
forward. If this registration is an issue, why hasn't
the owner of the "mystery" registration approached the Town
Board represented by an attorney to resolve it instead of 
dropping the registration mysteriously on a Supervisor's doorstep?)

Ceminsky stated, "It is a photocopy and the original is missing." He stated,
"We as a Township are going to get into trouble because of
missing documents." "Have no choice but to accept a photocopy
of what was done." (My thought: So now the Township
should accept ALL mystery copies of non-conforming
registrations because the Township might get in trouble??
LINE UP FOLKS??  I find this rather offensive and an

invitation for law suits.)

Attorney Lemmons reminded the Board that Ms. Petter admitted
to the Judge under oath at a Hearing that she did not complete
and submit a non-conforming registration because she said
she was told she did not have to.

Supervisor Barfknecht stated that the minutes specifically state
those who have actually registered and the Treasurer's Report
indicates those who registered and paid the $50 fee.
A Fur-Ever Wild registration is not in the records.
When the documents "miraculously" appeared, Supervisor
Barfknecht and the Attorney both reviewed the non-
conforming registration book and every other document in the book
had the original RED Township stamp on it. The application
for Fur-Ever Wild was the ONLY ONE THAT DID NOT!
At that time Supervisor Barfknecht's opinion was that
the application was fabricated. Whiteout marks could be
seen on it.

Hansen stated that he was on the Planning Commission when all
"this came down." "It should be easy enough to figure out how it
got to where it is." He feels things "miraculously appear and
disappear in this Township." "The color of the stamp does not
mean a whole lot to me." "It does not matter to me how the document
appeared." Need to talk about "is it legit or isn't it." Hansen stated,
"Attorney Lemmons encouraged the Township to put this to rest."

A citizen asked "can the Board, by motion without a Public
Hearing pass a motion that has to do with zoning where they
are approving a non-conforming use that was not approved at
the time as far as the Township records go?"

Mr. Hansen asked,"Can the Board now accept the registration as a
legal non-conforming use."

Attorney Lemmons: No, the deadline passed 13 years ago.


Hansen asked,"Can the Board determine if the registration
was actually filed and can be recognized as a file application based
on previous testimony and minutes."

Attorney Lemmons: The Court has already decided the issue.

Ceminsky stated, "They should talk
 with Planning Commission
and Board members at the time
 of the non-conforming registration.
(My opinion: This was 13 years ago.
Perhaps difficult to remember facts
that can possibly be litigated).

Once again Supervisor Palmquist was a voice of reason
and stated that he would like to review ALL documents/facts
before any decisions are made.

Ceminsky withdrew his motion, the issue was tabled and will be
discussed at a future date.

Ceminsky stated, "I introduced the registration because I am
getting tired of all of this." (My opinion: Perhaps after 
13 years and expenditures of Tax $$$$$$'s, citizens are tired
of it also. 
Why push what seems to be an obvious agenda.? It seems that
the Township would have to hire an attorney to sort this out. 
More TAX $$$$$$'s.

During the discussion, I believe either 
Ceminsky or Hansen mentioned that 21 others could possibly
be missing. If this is accurate, why the focus on JUST this
registration in particular.?) 

   



To request current blog notifications, complete the 
"Follow by Email" entry space on the right side of the
 blog page.

Information for this blog was taken
from the July 9, Town Board
meeting CD.  For more detailed
information, a CD can be purchased
from the Township for $5.00.                                   

WHILE THE CAT IS AWAY.................

On Monday, July 9, the Eureka Board of Supervisors
held its monthly meeting. Supervisors Ceminsky,
Hansen, Palmquist and Barfknecht were present.
Chair Murphy was on vacation in Europe which he
had planned before he was elected.
                           Supervisor
Hansen was acting Chair for the meeting.
One of the items on the agenda was "Clerk
Applicants".  Hansen stated "me and Tim
interviewed 2 candidates." He mentioned Ranee
but gave no last name and another candidate
who he later mentioned that he thought her
name was Sarah!  Well prepared for the meeting???

Hansen stated "the other gal has minor children,
possibly ages 4 and 6, and an ailing mother-in-law
which she would have to get a nanny to come
in and take care of them."  The attorney later 
reminded Mr. Hansen that the personal information
regarding family cannot be used to determine if
an applicant is qualified.

Mr. Hansen stated that Ranee has para legal
experience and has been "what I would
call secretary or clerk" for a Townhouse
Association and she would be very capable
of putting together packets and doing minutes.
She is a single person with adult children
and is able to attend training. She would
like to work another 17 years. He felt Ranee
stands "out front" because she never talked
about delegating work to anyone.

Mr. Hansen felt she is very qualified for the
Clerk position with "lots of stuff" going on 
at Townhouse meetings.

Ceminsky stated it looked like she has worked 
with people in the association as well as contractors
and has handled budgets.

Supervisor Hansen mentioned Robert Finke as an
applicant who was an executive with the
Fairview Healthcare System and a delegator.

My research: Robert Finke, President and COO.
interim at TRIA Orthapaedic Center, Director
of Rehabitation, Clinic Manager; Business
Development and Community Relationsat
Northfield Hospital and Clinics, Director at
Minneaplis Sports Medicine Center, Physical
Therapist at Fairview Health Services, MBA
University of Minnesota and studied Accounting
at the University of Pennsylvania.

Supervisor Palmquist was very positive that
Mr. Finke is a delegator and has business
management skills. He stated the Township officials
have talked about bringing the Township up to
a modern level. He felt Mr. Finke is an experienced
manager. He felt that Ranee would be a fantastic
Deputy Clerk.

Mr. Hansen stated 
"Is he going to do minutes
 and filing because that
 would be his responsibility."
Does Mr. Hansen believe
 ONLY women can do minutes
and filing? 
Mr. Palmquist 
felt Mr. Finke has a "stellar"
resume. Mr. Hansen stated 
"for an executive, we need a
 clerk, not a  delegator." "He would be on a long learning curve
 because he has never clerked." "I do not see how 
anything in his resume relates to Township government
and doubt his commitment." "We need a clerk
who can do clerking, type and take minutes." "He 
does not see this in Mr. Finke's resume."  I am quite
certain Mr. Finke can even type and send a text message!!!


Mr. Ceminsky's concerns: Robert Finke is retired and 
is concerned  "He might not
stay with the Township for many years if his
wife retires.  Ranee wants to work for 17 more years; 
why not hire her." How many employees commit
themselves to work for 17 years? Many circumstances
can change and affect their commitments.

Mr. Ceminsky stated "we do not need another boss
delegating because that is what WE were elected to
do; to manage and have staff working under us."
He stated he was NOT confident with Mr. Finke's
resume.

Supervisors Palmquist and Barfknecht stated they
would like to interview both Mr. Finke and Ms. Solis
before making a hiring decision. Supervisor Hansen
stated he did not need to meet with Mr. Finke because
his (Hansen's) experience tells him that he 
(Mr. Finke) will not work out with the Township 
unless the Township wants to hire
a City Manager. "We are NOT looking for a manager,
we are looking for a CLERK."

Supervisor Barfknecht reminded Butch that the clerk is
also the Zoning Manager. She stated that she has
done many interviews during her career and would not
consider hiring anyone for this position without having
a discussion with the applicants.

Both Supervisors Palmquist and Barfknecht agreed
that a special meeting should be determined to discuss 
both applicants resumes and invite them for an interview 
with ALL supervisors present if possible. Thank you 
Supervisors Palmquist and Barfknecht for once again
being a voice of intellect and reason.

Ceminsky ignored the reasonable suggestion and made a
motion to hire Ranee Solis at this meeting without an
opportunity for the full Board to have a 
discussion/interview with the applicants. He later
withdrew his motion because there was continued discussion
regarding setting a date for a special meeting.

Chair Murphy would return from his vacation and hopefully
would be available for a special meeting on July 16.
Ceminsky stated that he was "amazed" that he always has
to change his schedule to meet a CERTAIN person's schedule.
(Meaning Chair Murphy). People's commitments change
during the course of their lives and of course there needs to 
be alternatives and flexibility.

 The July 16th meeting took place at the Town Hall. All 5
Supervisors interviewed Mr. Robert Finke and Ms. Ranee
Solis. Mr. Finke was hired as Clerk. Ms. Ranee Solis
is the Township's Deputy Clerk.

In my opinion I believe the position of Clerk and Deputy Clerk
should be modified to state Township Administrator and
Assistant Administrator. Perhaps this would attract applicants
with skills that would qualify them to manage the business
of the Township.


I was fortunate to meet both of them at the Town Hall.  I
believe excellent choices were made and the Township is headed
in a very positive direction.

                                          CONGRATULATIONS!!!!

The above information was taken from the CD recording of
the July 9, 2018, Town Board meeting. Copies can be
obtained from the Township for a fee of $5.00.

"TAG TEAM" ON THE LOOSE AGAIN! COULD YOU BE "IT"?

Another item from the July Board meeting was a request for an Interim Use Permit (IUP). It was for storage at a Eureka gravel pit of bagged product from another use in the Township that produces bagged mulch and other products.

Butch Hansen and Mark Ceminsky spoke strongly in favor of this application. One wonders what they may have said previously about trying to get it done for the applicant. Perhaps just get it past the Planning Commission and we'll take care of it at the Board.  Only problem is that Eureka does not issue IUPs for such a use.

See Ordinance 3, Chapter 2, Section 1 Agricultural District, A. Intent (reason we have this Ordinance), and D. Interim Uses (to see the TWO IUPs Eureka can currently issue). That would be airstrips and gravel mining.

Gravel mining, as stated there, is governed by Ordinance 6. Ordinance 6, Chapter 7, Section 1 Performance Standards, B. 2, states that the only minerals that can be brought in from outside the subject property have to be for the purpose of mixing with minerals excavated on the site and cannot exceed 25% of the total product excavated on an annual basis.

"E." of Ordinance 3, Chapter 2, Section 1 Agricultural District explains that any other use or structure not specifically permitted by right or Conditional Use Permit (CUP) or IUP is prohibited.

The interesting thing is that this very use for the specific properties involved has all been brought up before. It was explained to the gravel site landowner why this is not permitted. At some point, this bagged product actually showed up at the gravel mine site! The Town Board followed up on a complaint and had to order that it all be removed and gave a deadline date.

It's already been explained in depth to the bagging concern why it is limited, by settlement agreement, to the acreage covered by that settlement. They have been advised that the Township does not allow off-site outside storage for a business.

Kudos to the Planning Commission for having dealt with this accurately, citing parts of the Ordinance, and recommending that the application be denied as not permissible under Ordinance. Or at least I give kudos to four out of five of the commission: Fredlund, Larson, Funk, and Wood. (Remember Sibley Aggregates and "two supervisors" who told them they could apply for an IUP to be able to crush concrete from outside the Township for a whole summer? Another IUP that doesn't exist! Required a Text Amendment. See earlier post on the "Dynamic Duo" on that one.)



Then this application goes to the Board and Hansen and Ceminsky seem to think it is totally reasonable to do this "because an IUP expires," as opposed to a CUP which "runs with the land" and does not normally go away. But, an IUP may not expire for 30 years, for example; depends on limit set by Board or an event that renders it closed, such as having mined all the gravel from a pit.

Since this has all been through the wringer before, why are Hansen and Ceminsky still pushing what currently amounts to an illegal use?

Think about this: if any person with his own "bright idea" could come in and be granted a CUP or even an IUP for anything as long as the majority of the Board agrees, why even have zoning? Why have Ordinances? Why have government? Anything goes if one can convince three supervisors?




WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! The Township would have spot zoning in effect all over the place in reality. NOT a good plan for future development, not to mention life for the neighbors in the meantime.

Supervisors are sworn to uphold the Ordinances before they take office. Apparently, the catch is that they have to understand the ordinances and government in general. I submit that Ceminsky and Hansen appear woefully short on that knowledge and bear watching. Thankfully, we still have three Supervisors who will listen to and accept legal explanations.




                                     
And I haven't even mentioned that an IUP has to go through a public hearing set by the Commission and is never granted outright by the Board at the time of application.

                             HOLD ONTO YOUR HATS!

HOW LOW CAN YOU GO?

There was so much that went on at the 5 1/2 hour (!) July Town Board meeting, that we are going to take it one issue at a time. So check back for more!

First, you need to know that Chair Tim Murphy was on a previously planned vacation and unable to be at the meeting. Due to that, Butch Hansen chaired the meeting.

I had placed myself on the agenda as I had questions about the Board being adequately prepared for the meeting regarding a matter that concerned my property. The very first thing that the tag team of Mark Ceminsky and Butch Hansen did was to try to remove my item from the agenda.

Supervisor Lu Barfknecht patiently explained (once again) what the policy is on items being placed by citizens on the agenda for Board discussion. Hansen said, "Then, I guess it's a question of whether the Board wants to leave it on there." Barfknecht replied, "We have to." (Per adopted policy) So my item stayed on the agenda.

During the time that I was speaking to the Board on this item, Hansen interrupted me and called for a recess! I said, "Butch, I am talking in a calm voice. Just because you don't like what you are hearing is not a [valid] reason to shut me down." The recess did not take place.

So let's stop right there and take a look at this. You, as a citizen, are able to ask to be placed on the agenda to discuss something with the Board about a question you have. Yet two uninformed Supervisors think they can stop you from expressing your concern and your question to your very own elected officials. Even though those elected officials have adopted this policy as a means by which you can be heard. If you aren't perceived positively by these two supervisors, they think they can selectively keep you from speaking. They have no authority to do that.

Then, if you are actually allowed to speak, the acting Chair thinks he can shut down that discussion by calling for a recess. Calling for a recess is a method which the Minnesota Association of Townships (MAT) suggests can be used for a "cooling off period" when things become too heated. The only thing heating up was Butch. He doesn't like what I was saying, he doesn't like being presented with THE FACTS, so let's just gag the citizen and keep her from being heard. This should be alarming to you. 

                                     YOUR FACE HERE.

These two supervisors have presented themselves again and again as being "for the citizens," "treating people with respect," and making sure "the rules apply to everybody." How benign sounding! Butter wouldn't melt!

What happens if there are THREE such supervisors (a majority) which want to limit certain people from being heard? What is your recourse if YOU should fall prey to such inexcusable behavior? What if three of your elected officials just don't want to hear from you? Is that what they are elected to do? How do you stop it?

We must all be/stay vigilant to protect our rights.

Township Business, Mysterious Registration, Citizen Input and More - June Board Meeting!

The Eureka Board of Supervisors held its

meeting on Monday, June 11. The following are discussions, sometimes
spirited, on issues and topics of interest.

Contractor Time:  Dust coating, repair of roads and grading has been delayed
due to heavy rains. $4,000 was approved last year for tree removal on 235th
Street. A total of $9,500 is needed which takes about one half of the
tree budget. A motion was made by Ceminsky to approve an additional
$5,000. Chair Murphy seconded the motion. Hansen abstained (???). The
motion passed.  Gravel bids should be awarded in February and the Board
should consider next Fall.

                                         
Airport: Chair Murphy and Butch Hansen met with Lakeville and MAC
representatives to discuss a friendly annexation. Lakeville has requested a
letter from the Township stating the roads the Township would like
blacktopped as part of the friendly annexation.

Hansen stated Lakeville was very reluctant to consider the proposal. He stated
their answer was "We do not have to do that; we will just take 120 acres next
year and 120 acres after that." Butch stated his comment was "You can do that
but those annexations are not going to go smooth as the first one." Not sure
what Hansen is alluding to.

MAC plans to pay for the entrance to the airplane hangars.
The intent is to blacktop the hangars on the southwest corner first,
as soon as next year. The extension of the runway and paving of the road
would not be done until 2022.
The Board approved and requested the attorney to send a letter to MAC and
copy Lakeville stating the Township's request for the paving of
specified roads regarding the possible friendly
annexation.

Sheriff's Department: The Sheriff who was present
stated there was "not much going on" in Eureka
Township at this time. In Castle Rock
a man was trying to lure young girls into a vehicle.
The Deputy stated that if anyone sees anything, get a
license number or any other pertinent information and
call the Sheriff's Department (911) immediately.

Township Logo:  Jody Arman-Jones engaged in a discussion with the
Board regarding the Township logo which was created by Carolyn Papke,
a very talented artist and past resident of Eureka Township. Carolyn
donated the logo to the Township. The logo CANNOT be utilized on
campaign letters, etc. without the permission of the Township. Jody, the
Newsletter editor, acknowledged Ms. Papke on the Newsletter draft.
Butch Hansen was against acknowledging Carolyn Papke's name under
the logo.

Township Clerk and Deputy Clerk: Yes, the Township is still without
a Clerk and Deputy Clerk!!!  Requests have been posted on Craig's List,
LinkedIn and in the Sun Newspaper South. The Township will utilize a
recruitment service as a last option as a contract of a 10% fee would be
applicable. As of this meeting there were 6 applications and an interview
had been scheduled for the 18th. Chair Murphy has also been working
with the Minnesota Association of Townships and networking. The
advertising is for an Executive Administrative Town Clerk. Applicants
should be from outside the Township. Thank you, Chair Murphy.

Sample Permits:  Butch Hansen stated that "better than a year ago a
motion was made to direct the Planning Commission to come up
with sample permits in a packet." He indicated that this had not been
done and if the PC cannot do it the Board will." Nancy Sauber, past
Planning Commission Chair, corrected Hansen and reminded him
that the PC had worked on and forwarded sample forms to the Board
over the past year. The Board approved ALL forwarded samples.
These samples were given to the Clerk who obviously dropped the ball.
(Supervisors need to come prepared with facts!)
                                             

Mystery Legal Non-conforming Registration:
Butch stated he was hoping to discuss this behind closed doors but
was told it had to be done at a public meeting. A Mysterious
non conforming use registration showed up at the Town Hall
in an envelope to"me"(Butch) and Ceminsky
also received one at his front door as well.
Terri Petter was present and stated "This is
about me." The registration
was for Farm Tours! (On Ms. Petter's Facebook page on May 24, 2018,
she stated "We still have all the farm animals, one wolf hybrid, one raccoon, 
one fisher, one skunk, goats, whitetail, chickens, mini horses, pigs and other 
animals NOT on the exotic list. This is why we have redone everything and
became The Farm. We have turned the farm into a more hands on 
experience with unlisted animals" ).

Hansen stated the registration process that transpired in the past. Nancy
Sauber stated her recollection of the process
and also reminded the Board that the registrations were accepted
and there are minutes that will support which non-conforming
use registrations were accepted. Nancy reminded the Board that
Peter Tiede, a past Township Attorney, stated that all those that
were legal before can continue as legal non-conforming
but does not make any illegal businesses legal.
The Township cannot circumvent State Statute. Butch initiated a "heated"
discussion and disagreed with Nancy Sauber stating to Chair Murphy
"If you can control Nancy, good luck with that! ( How rude of a
Supervisor!  Is this how citizens who attend meetings and have something
of value to state for clarification should be treated?) (My opinion)

Ceminsky stated all were accepted in a sweeping
motion as legal non-conforming and questioned why the (Mysterious)
registration that surfaced years later should not be a part of the legal non-
conforming registration. (I have copies of past non-conforming
meeting minutes from 2002 through 2005-research of the minutes does
not show this is true!)


My Questions: On what date did the 
"mysterious" registration appear on the
doorstep of Ceminsky and in the hands of 
Butch Hansen?  Why only Two Supervisors?
Who submitted the registration form to the attorney and when?
Why would the applicant not attend a Town Board
meeting represented by an attorney with facts to 
support the claim after so many years have passed.
Was there a related circumstance at the time the mysterious
registration appeared? It is of interest that this mysterious
registration was not brought up in Court in the beginning of the 
legal process.
Perhaps something to ponder!!!!

The February 7, 2005, minutes state "Motion by Francie Madden
to pass the remainder of registrations with attachments. The 
accepting for filing of the registrations does not constitute a
statement by the Planning Commission that the registration
 is LEGAL. Motion was seconded by Butch Hansen." 

The "mystery" application for Farm Tours was not seen in the
January 3, 2005, (Butch Hansen made a motion to accept all
these registrations.) OR the February 7, 2005, accepted
non-conforming registrations by the Planning Commission.
(See above paragraph.)

Attorney Lemmons referenced Ordinance 2, Section 5, Chapter 1, and
stated that all Planning Commission and Town Board minutes which
dealt with the non-conforming registrations should be reviewed and
kept with the book of Registrations.

Hansen said he would be happy to review the minutes! He would like
Shirley, the temporary Clerk, to give HIM the minutes. (It is my hope that
Mystery minutes do not appear on doorsteps!)

Attorney Lemmons stated that until there is a Township Clerk, no one
should touch the records which can not be certified until there is
a Township Clerk. Hansen disagreed with the attorney. On what basis??


Chair Murphy and Butch Hansen will audit the records when a
Administrative Clerk position is filled. Chair Murphy
felt more time is needed due to circumstances.

Ceminsky made the motion "If we have to have Supervisors look at
records for the public, the Chair and Vice-Chair will both go together
to pull minutes". Hansen seconded the motion and it passed.

IT Website Designer:  Ceminsky made a motion to engage a new
IT Website Designer, Hansen seconded the motion and it passed.

                                   STAY TUNED!
Information taken from the Board meeting CD, Facebook and includes
my opinions.

DEVIL'S IN THE DETAILS...

A few details from the Town Board meeting of June 11th:


Meetings with Lakeville and MAC will continue for a possible orderly annexation of the airport. Be interesting to see if they want to "play ball." Yes, they would be able get the entire airport in one shot under a friendly annexation, but are they willing to provide what the Township is asking for this accommodation? Jody Arman-Jones, editor of the newsletter, was told not to include any details discussed at the meeting in the current issue, so I won't here either, but it IS public information because it was discussed at the public meeting. Evidently, Hansen had wanted to discuss it at a closed meeting, but was advised that the Board cannot close a meeting for that purpose.

Maybe he should try reading the Minnesota Association of Townships handbook for statute references as to when a closed meeting can legally happen. This has come up so many times, I would think he would know that by now just by hearing it so many times, but he apparently still doesn't. This a little concerning that he wanted to close the meeting to the public when he can't even do so legally. Thankfully, he was corrected on this matter. Why does he want to keep the discussion out of an open meeting and thus out of your reach? This has been freely discussed at Annual Meetings, so what's the problem? Lakeville and MAC are either going to go for it, or they won't. Is this the accountability and openness you expect from one of your supervisors?

Concerning the incorrect advice two Board Supervisors (guess who?) gave Sibley Aggregates about bringing in outside concrete for crushing all summer long, Hansen seemed to excuse himself by stating that he had "called the Attorney the very next morning (after the Commission meeting)" about it. He then "discovered" that this requested use is not allowed under the Ordinances. I asked "Why didn't you already KNOW this?" He had no answer. I made the point that had the attorney been in attendance at Commission meetings as requested by the Commission but denied by the Board, there would not be any additional charges to receive information Hansen should have already had.

Not to mention that I had explained to Hansen at the Commission meeting that this use is not allowed and was purposefully not allowed by the Task Force and Board when the Mining Ordinance was written. In order to have a chance at doing so, Sibley Aggregates would have to apply for a Text Amendment and a public hearing would have to be held. Yet the two representatives from Sibley were told otherwise by these two supervisors. Are they so intent in trying to be "Go-To Guys" who will "get it done" for you that they are willing to ignore the Ordinances!?? Or are they just that ignorant of what proper procedures are? Either way, it's not good. (My opinion.)

Hansen seems to have a problem in accepting input from a person who was on the Planning Commission twice, on the Board, who has attended MANY trainings and public hearings, and who has actually read the Ordinances. What he is afraid of? No, instead of realizing that the person MAY know what she is talking about, he calls the attorney (Did he even have the go-ahead from the Primary Attorney Contact to do so?) to be told the exact same thing he was told the night before and  which he should have already known anyway. Where has he been at meetings? Does he even listen to others? And he had the audacity as Board Liaison to tell the Commission that they "should read [their] Ordinances!" Perhaps you could practice what you preach, Mr. Hansen.




When asked at the Board meeting whether any requirement for the clerk to be someone who lives outside the Township is in the Ordinances, Hansen immediately stated "Yes, it is!" NO, it is not. And yet he said it with such authority...

Thank heaven we have the Board Chair we do. He has very evenly and respectfully called on everyone wishing to contribute. At the last meeting (9:07 pm) Hansen said to Chair Murphy, "If you can control her (meaning me and my comments or questions as a citizen), good luck with that." I replied, "Nice way to talk to a citizen, Butch." So citizens are to be CONTROLLED? And whatever happened to that respect that he keeps saying he must be treated with? One-way street, I guess.



Further on that point, at the April Board meeting, Hansen, as a Supervisor, said to me, "Nancy, you are just a citizen now. You won't get your way." JUST A CITIZEN? Really? That's what you are supposed to be all about, Mr. Hansen,----the citizens! On what basis is the decision being made as to whether you, Reader, as "just" a citizen, are being heard or not? I find this attitude toward people Hansen just doesn't like to be troublesome...

On other occasions, Hansen has actually stated publicly as a Supervisor that this blog is "full of slander and lies." He has also stated that we blog authors "have claimed to be the official Township website." ALL OF THIS IS SIMPLY UNTRUE! We are a citizen blog and are labeled as such. Everything we report here is backed up by disc recordings, minutes. If we have an opinion it is stated as such. Why do he and Ceminsky dislike this blog so much that they have repeatedly tried to have it shut down? Ask yourself that; would this unconstitutional censorship be a good thing for our Township?

Hansen raised an objection that people were "getting information" from the blog. Is not more information a good thing? Did you know that Hansen and Ceminsky want to have a "policy" of reducing minutes to bare-bones motions and votes ONLY, not even including the discussion or the rationale for the votes?  Hansen has abstained from votes on many occasions recently, yet does not give any reason for his abstention. Makes me wonder what's going on...

It is difficult to sit through meetings when even a couple of the Supervisors seem to have so little regard for the proper and respectful way to do things. It seems to me that the personal agendas they have are what is important to them and drive their actions-not the good of the Township. But that is my opinion...and that of many others as well.

Other bits of info:
The Board approved another $5,500 in addition to the $4,000 from last year to remove trees along 235th.

No Clerk hired yet. Feelers out. The Township needs to find someone who understands the Ordinances and the Clerk's role as Zoning Administrator.

The RFP for a Building Inspector has apparently not gone out yet. In fact, it wasn't even brought up at the meeting. Darrel Gilmer was okayed as a short term fill-in, nothing longer. We need to act on this NOW and get in place someone who can professionally and fairly do the job for the longer term.

YOU DON'T NEED A WEATHERMAN TO KNOW WHICH WAY THE WIND BLOWS...

I just attended the Planning Commission meeting last night. As part of the audience, what struck me most about the meeting was that part of the atmosphere that Commissioner Al Novacek appeared to try to set.
Listening to him, one might think he is the only one up there trying to help citizens. "What are we here for? We're supposed to be helping people ...I think we shouldn't apply those (longstanding) rules in this case...I'M going to 'advocate' for the citizen here..." or words very close to that.

The end effect of his posturing, in my opinion, was to make the Commission look dysfunctional, to unnecessarily upset the citizen, and to leave hanging a nasty and unjustified question about the rest of the Commission's motivations. NOT helpful!




Yes, we are without clerical assistance right now. There is still the website which holds the Ordinances, application forms, instruction sheets and even a site plan example. It clearly states that all materials must be submitted ten days before the Planning Commission meetings.

For a citizen to come in with one application form not appropriate to his project, to change the project itself right there in front of the Commission, to have lots of missing information on the site plan, and to not avail the entire Commission an ability to view the "new" application isn't really reasonable. Again in my opinion. The citizen meant no ill will and of course wants to starts his projects ASAP--like everyone who comes before the Commission/Board. He was just very unprepared. Had we an experienced clerk in place, he/she would have pointed out all the items which made his application incomplete and would not even have forwarded it to the Planning Commission in the first place in the state it was in. That's a vital part of the clerk's role.

But the rules are there for a reason. The Planning Commission is supposed to check all points of zoning on the application before sending it on to the Board. To circumvent that, as I believe Novacek was proposing, really states that the Board can just do this work for themselves and add to their already looooong meetings. Getting all the ducks in a row for the Board is part of what the Commission does.

I did talk to the citizen before he left the Town Hall and unofficially pointed out to him what information he was still missing and how the form should have been filled out. I reinforced that he should visit the website. He left in a better mood and with greater understanding.

If I were an fellow Commissioner of Mr. Novacek's, I would be offended at his implication that he was the "knight in shining armor" to "rescue" the citizen (from...?). As it was, he gave out wrong information to the applicant when he stated that there are no limits on his projects of this sort. That hole in the Ordinances was closed MONTHS ago.