Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening and welcome to the first planning commission meeting of 2026. Um like to make a couple introductions real quick. Robert Siver, township attorney, is with us tonight. Jonathan uh Palen, Township Planners with us tonight. Uh Ava Miller and Jill Bomb is here with GIFles Webster. And if you would like silence your phones, we'd appreciate it. And with that, please uh uh uh let me uh just uh open it up at uh 7 o'clock January 6, 2026. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay, I'm going to take roll call. Um Rick Leel

here. Kathy Vosberg is uh excused for uh tonight's meeting. Richard Brokart here. Brian Carr here. Ralph Jorski here. James Kinowski here. Mark Renault here. Eric Kaider here. Carl Leonard here. Like to make a motion to approve the uh minutes from December 2nd, 2025. Motion by Carl Leonard, supported by Rich ProArt. Any questions. All in favor? I opposed. Motion carries.

Approve of the I'd like to make a motion to approve the agenda as submitted. Support. Motion by Carl Leonard, supported by Rick Leel. Any questions? None. Um, all in favor? I

opposed. Motion carries. Okay, we have uh public comments. So, uh, anybody from the public can come up for uh three minutes, talk about anything you want. Um, if you're uh going to talk about the uh um the reasonzoning, uh it's fine, but the uh it's been closed and there's no new information that can be submitted. Uh with that, please come up, state your name and uh address and tell us what's on your mind. push button on far right on the bottom.

You want me to repeat please?

Gary Gunner 52624 Laurel Oak Lane Chesterfield Township. The uh first of all, happy new year to all of you. Secondly, the mural on the fire station at 23 Mile Road looks great. During this past year when the guy was painting it, I watched him on many occasions because I live in close proximity to it. They it turned out great. I've been involved with some solar projects in other communities, not Chesterfield. And in this December 2025 state bar journal for the Michigan Bar Association, there was an article on solar energy and some new legislation that restricts subdivisions and condominium associations and other entities from uh interfering with the solar energy. So I made a copy of it and I got 12 here. So it'll give you something to read when you have nothing else to do. I'll give it to the chairman.

It also deals with some uh deed restriction lit uh statute that was passed recently. Thank you. Could you please uh push the button back again? Sure.

Thank you. Anyone else like to come up? Please state your name and address and have three minutes. Rhonda Rickettts, 53141 Bates Road. Um, you mentioned that the reasonzoning is closed. For any comments, the uh, No, not for comments. If you want to say anything about it, but no new information can be submitted. All right. Because I have over a hundred signatures from residents and taxpayers from the area affected. They would have had to been turned in at the last meeting because the public hearing was closed at the last meeting. You did not know that there was a end to any information.

I I'm just telling you what the rules are. So why weren't we told this at the last meeting? Um not sure. Everybody that was at the meeting got up and said what they wanted to say. Okay. But we weren't told that no further comments when it the meeting was tabled to tonight that no more comments or information could be submitted.

Yeah. I'm sorry. I I don't have a reason for you. We normally don't. Usually we have a public hearing. It's open. Everybody has their say and then we close the public hearing at the end of that. And so public comment on this item is limited to just comments. Um I mean could I just stand here and tell you every person's name that signed this? I have to take that up with the township attorney, but as far as I know, we can't submit any more information. All right. Well, just so you know, we have over aundred signatures, okay, of residents in the area that are opposed to the resoning. Okay. Thank you.

So, if you'd like to see these, you're more than welcome. Thank you. Appreciate it.

My name is uh Robert Flurry. I live at 53081 Bates Road, right across street from zone. So, what is I need to understand when you say it's closed, does it is it elected to them to get the to sell the property and it can be reszoned? I'm I'm kind of confused. Are you talking about the resoning on the agenda for tonight for the uh on that 24 in Grash? Uh yeah, at the last meeting, I'm not sure if you were here, but everybody um we opened the public hearing,

right? that allowed everybody to get up and and talk about whatever they wanted to and and at the end of it uh questions were asked from the public. Commissioners ask questions. Uh and then at that point the public hearing is closed. But what does that mean? I don't understand. It just means that it moves on to the next meeting which is tonight. And tonight we're going to discuss it and Oh, okay. So it's still in ongoing. Yes. closed as far as property and yeah, the vote hasn't been taken yet,

but all the back and forth between the general public and the and the township has been done at the last meeting and then tonight there's going to be any questions that the commissioners might have and then at some point there'll be some kind of vote. Okay. Before before the meeting's up tonight. Gotcha. Okay. I just wanted to be clear about Sorry for the confusion. That's all right.

Anyone else? this one here. Okay. Linda Flurry, um, Bates Road, 53081, Bates. Question on the property that about the resoning. Um, I know at the last meeting when we were here, the developer um was saying that it's not written in stone that it's going to be a gas station. Um he said that it he could possibly put a strip mall in. Well, I'm just driving up and down Grash. We have 24 plus strip malls that are vacant buildings that are vacant. There's um two at 24 in Grashett. The 7-Eleven has two empty buildings. And then we have at Leo Leo's Coney Island. I think they just built that two, three years ago. There's four vacant spots there. And then we got Panera Bread. We got two buildings. And then Big Lots is out. Uh Value Cities is out. On Cotton Gratchet, we have the Coma Bank and Writeaid. That's empty. Um Little Caesars at 23 and Grashet. Um behind the Happy Pizza is two empty buildings. Um, and then at the old Secretary of State that used to be behind uh AutoZone there, we have two empty spots there. Um, between the dollar store and PetSmart, we have one. Eagle's Bar. Um, back there we have uh two empty spots back there. Joan Fabrics is out of business. And then in that strip mall, we have three empty spots. Um, you know, I don't think we need another strip mall in Chesterville Township. If anything, those buildings

that are uh open, we could probably do like a Trader Joe's or we really need a fruit market. We don't have a fruit market around here like uh, you know, Nino Sagio or maybe we should go talk to, you know, Vincent Joe's and see if they want to invest in Chesterfield. Um, I understand the people want to sell their property. At one point I had called back seven years ago and they had the property at a million dollars and uh because my mom was thinking, "Wow, that would be really nice. We could open build a house, whatever, and open a ice cream place there for locals." And uh I and she said, "Not for a million dollars." And then we found out that there's that drain um the main drain um easement and then there's um it's called I think OMIG drain that runs through the property there. It services a lot of the subdivisions and it also services it goes way out to like 23 mile road by the new sheets um and the speedway. I just think working in that area there, you're gonna open a can of worms.

Thank you. Start digging. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else like to come up? Last call. Thank you. Um, we'll close the public comments and uh we'll go into the uh public hearing for the uh proposed text amendment to the uh zoning ordinance for building materials. And uh Rick, would you like to uh read that? Sure.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Item A is text amendment to chapters 76 zoning ordinance amendments to provide for the appropriate and compatibility standards of building materials within the township including specific standards related to the building surface materials and alteration ordinance. Um the um public hearing was back on December 2nd and um it remained open and uh Ava Miller if you would please elaborate as to what has changed since uh then Hello. So I will just provide a brief overview of all of the changes that were made to the amendment as well as the updated changes from the last meeting. So this amendment removed rearrange

regarding building materials. Um, so some of the changes that were made overall were adding a schedule of pre-approved building materials and specifications. So this listed out a pre-approved materials um provided outside of the ordinance that can be reviewed on a regular basis by the PC and does not require text amendment um a text amendment to update or change it. Next next change was requiring all not just the front facades to meet building material requirements in the next section. Uh the next change was requiring a 36 in high impact barrier on all facads. Um the next change was creating building material composition tables for facades in the waterfront district uh as well as the rest of the district. So it lays out how much brick or masonry is required depending on which way the facade of a building is facing like whether it's facing a road or not. Um and then as well as what district it is in. Also covered is alternative building materials. So when developers want to use a material that is not on this list, uh the standard says it has to be approved by the planning commission and if it is approved, it will then be added to the schedule. And the purpose of updating this ordinance is to provide clear standards for applicants and to have direction for staff to provide to applicants to help streamline conversations between them. And then the changes specifically from the last meeting were to add in section subsection D um which applies to painted materials.

And so that one is now three 34. So no materials that are painted or require painting shall be permitted on any any elevation of any building in any zoning district. So we clarified that and then we also um added a sentence at the end of section D uh to state that any materials approved by the planning commission will be added to the pre-approved materials list for future proposal. So, anything that is approved will be added to the list and the list will state when it was last updated. Uh, so those last two were the changes since the December 2nd meeting. Um, but that about covers it. If there's any other questions, I'll be here to answer them.

Thank you. Okay, we'll bring it up to the board. Does the board have any comments or questions? Uh, we'll start with uh Eric. Ralph, James, I'm good. Rich, all set. Mark, uh, nope. I believe we covered everything last meeting, so I'm good. Brian, no comments. Rick, no. And the chair has no comments. Um, with that, I will entertain a motion.

Gary wants to speak. Oh yeah, that's right. I'm sorry. The public hearing is still open. I do apologize. Does anybody from the public like to come up and tell us a few things? Yes.

Gary Gunner. I've reviewed this memo from Gilles and Webster. So I had a few questions. It appears from the document that you're going to remove Ephus as a a pre-approved building material. I'm pretty sure this building has Ephus on it and the DPW building over there on Sierra Sierra Drive has it. So, you're in essence for whatever reason saying you can't have Ephus, but it's an accepted building material and it's kind of like saying you can't drive a Ford in this area, you only can drive a Chevy. And it's somewhat subjective being a working uh question. And then the uh you have the provision as to 36 inches of masonry as a a barrier. I just know of a situation here in Chesterfield probably like 10 years ago. The people had masonry. The lady got out of her car, left it running with little kids in the car. Somebody crawled over the driver's seat, put it in drive and drove it into the store, the masonera, and it was like three feet and then glass. Fortunately, nobody got hurt. But my mother-in-law was in there and she had fallen a few days before. So, she had some bruises on her face. So, when the police showed up said like, you know, should we call an ambulance? And the butician said, no, she always looks like that. The other thing too is that you have different standards and in some places it says it's applicable to all buildings. So my question is is that applicable to residential? And then why is there a different standard if you're in the waterfront district versus some other district of residential? because I've lived here a few days and if you go to the waterfront district almost all the houses are brick espec

like if you go to lotiew or Miller court and a lot of the other uh harbor drive so I just wondered why there was a difference in that and then by way of illustration if you have a list like one of them on there is Hardy board well 30 years ago Hardy board wasn't around but now it's an accepted building material so if you have this list and then the builder, petitioner, developer wants to do something different because there's a new product out, they have to somehow persuade the planning commission that this new product is just as good as what is already on the list. So I I think that subjective aspect uh does a disservice and it also impacts on the cost of structures and if you mandate certain things I think most people e you build a commercial building or industrial building or residential building if you're the builder or the owner involved in it you want your building to last and look good that's part of your motivation and then part of this seems to say you can't have a building where you paint part of the structure unless the paint's put on at the point of manufacturing of the product that's the exterior of the building. So, you know, Sherman Williams and other paint companies have been around for a long time and there's a lot of buildings that are painted and people do periodically, you know, have to repaint them, but I think that's an accepted material and it seems to me that uh Chesterfield shouldn't be preluding it. And then on page four of this memo where it says district under three, it references subsection E. But I think maybe that might be a typo. It should be maybe section D because when you flip the page, there's a section D, but there's no section E on the one that was sent to me by the planning

department. Let me just see. That's it. Thank you very much. Anyone else from the audience like to come up? All right. Uh, with that, I'd like to make a motion to close the public hearing. Support. Motion by Carl Leonard, supported by Rick Leel to close the public hearing. All in favor? I

opposed. Motion carries. Uh with that, I'll bring it back up to the board and uh see if anybody has any comments or questions. I guess can we answer some of the questions that Mr. Gandon had? Okay. I on how we kind of made this. This kind of um takes away the residential district or uh zoning. Uh the the housing can do anything they want. Uh this is strictly for new development. Uh yes, there is or there are buildings in Chutzfield that have Ephesus, but as of today, what we're doing for new developments, we're trying to get uh rid of that portion and kind of doing more of a uh more newer uh established uh materials. So relating what was done in the past to what we're doing now is a little different. So just want to make that clear. So Hardy board uh a resident can still put Hardy board on their house if they want. Strictly new development. Thank you.

Thank you, Ralph. Any uh anything? James, Rich,

Brian, Rick. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um Gary, one of the things that you brought up was a three-foot barrier. The three-foot bar masonary barrier. Um as Eric had said, um we're trying to introduce materials have have evolved in the last 20 to 30 years. Currently, our ordinance requires bricker better on the front of the building. Um there are a lot more materials out there now that um are wonderful and architecturally and our two architects would attest to this is that they it gives them more option to to have draw present a building other than just a brick facade in the front of a building. And uh one of the things that I personally had pushed for was to have masonery up to a certain level because of snow shovels, things of that nature destroying the other alternative materials that may not have quite the structural integrity of a of a three-foot barrier. We came up with a three-foot barrier. We thought it was sufficient. That's that that's where that came from. Um Ephus Eric uh explained that. And um you talked about Hardy Board. Um, it's a cement. It's a fiber cement product. It's very durable. It's a It's pre-colored in the factory, but it's not only Hardy board, but there's there's other manufacturers, Arthur, out there other than James Hardy that provide a material like that. Um, which we have recently been presented with for other projects that have gone on in the township just recently. And um, actually, in my opinion, they're wonderful products. They're um sturdy, they're pre-colored, they have a wonderful warranty. Um that's the reason for the statement of

the Hardy board. Hardy board is just is the same. Um as far as the uh the paint, um this is for new construction only. We have always had in our ordinance written that at least for in my tenure that you cannot paint a new structure. So if you put up masonary, you put up brick, you put up something, you cannot paint it. Um, as far but if if something is painted, we expect them to m, you know, to keep up with the maintenance on those buildings and that's still allowable to maintain your building, to paint your building and to maintain it. This is for new construction only. Um, was there anything else? I think I wrote everything down. Was there anything else that you had?

That was it. a summary.

But I agree that like you said, like you said, Harding board's a relatively recent material, and I've seen it on many buildings that I've been involved with on behalf of developers, and it seems very durable. It's pre-made. It's pre-colored. the uh but I just and it's good to have the list because the developers like that because it's somewhat objective but as to future products that come along because we all know that Hardy board wasn't probably around I don't know the time but say 30 years ago and most people if you're building a building whether it's a house an office whatever you build it with the intent of it being a sturdy, good-looking building that's easy to maintain. That's part of your motive because you're investing your money in it. And that's why sometimes developers that I represent in different places, they say like, "Hey, it's kind of like the Gestapo was saying you can only do this and you can't do that." And it's good to have the pre-list, but as to future products, what's the hoops you have to jump through to get to that approval? Well, let me let me comment on that just as I just made a me a mention a few moments ago about a developer came in here with a material similar to it. It was a cement fiber board.

Exactly. And um nia it was called niha. Um we looked at it and we approved his building. We approved him to put it on his building. If there are other materials that come up in the future, this is just something so that the the township employees so that the planning department, the building department has something to get started with with the developers and the builders. They still have to come in front of us and just demonstrate what they're doing. And we will review all those materials. And as Miss Miller said just a moment ago when she was going through her narrative, she made the statement that if in fact a builder comes up or a developer comes up or a manufacturer comes in front of us and comes and presents a new material, it can be added to the list. So I think that answers your question.

Yeah. But it's just like you may have a a good material but the person's not able to persuade you nine people that it's a good material and then they can't use it. But that's always a possibility, right? But I think we're very subjective and we're we always try to accommodate everybody. Yeah. Thank you. Thank

and we're always open to new new material because everything's always evolving. Technology is always there. Uh so and you know separating you know some of the zoning districts with the waterfront district. Of course, if you want a waterfront district on the new building, uh we want it to look, you know, a little nautical in, you know, like in some other uh uh communities. We don't want, you know, a all brick building uh in the waterfront district that doesn't really kind of go into that district. You know, waterfront is more nautical. So, that's why we're kind of separating that percentage into just something normal. So, thank you. Um, also the way it worked in the past is it was always brick or better. So you had to figure out what did that mean? And it was mostly masonry. And we always used to have different products come up. And we did consider them. And sometimes they were approved and sometimes not yet because the materials were too new, warranties weren't that great. uh the difference between the Nijiha and the the Hardy board. The Nichi has different thicknesses and we were looking for the uh commercial aspect to have a more durable product on the cement board products. So this expanded list came about from all those inquiries over the year over the years. The the problem was it was always dragged out and it was a scramble. So, this took a lot of that out. It It gives a pretty good list of everything that was addressed that is durable and uh with good warranties. And if there's anything that comes up in the future, uh we'll look at that the same way all these were looked at and uh put on the list. Uh the list isn't closed, but it's it's where we're at uh today, and we'll vote on it. And and this is

where we'll ask one more question. Sure. with with reference to the three-foot barrier. Does that provision also apply to homes? No, this is all all this is all commercial. Okay. So, residential has nothing to do with this list.

Okay. Because part of it has, you know, what materials you have for residential on the waterfront versus non-waterfront. And that's why I asked that. And then sometimes you'd mentioned some of the uh uh the waterfront, you know, if there's an association, they have certain things they require. They might want all brick on a house and u that overrides what you know what we allow. So uh no this is strictly for the uh the commercial aspect so that when they come in there's a good guide a good point of beginning so that when they do present their uh paperwork sometimes it's pretty much complete now rather than it's an ongoing process to get it ironed out. So

thank you. Thank you. Uh I'll just correct one thing. It does apply to multifamily, but single residential. No. Um well, with that, uh I'll entertain a motion. Oh, the this because we close the public hearing making our vote for this evening. Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion to close the public hearing and to forego the twoe waiting period to vote on this topic.

Okay. Uh I did I did close the public hearing uh before, didn't I? No. Yeah, I did think you did. That's because Yeah, because I made a motion to close the public hearing and Rick supported it. Well, no, he stopped it because Mr. Ganell wanted to speak. Mr. Okay. I didn't know he hit reversed. Okay. So, I'll support Mark's motion to close the public. All right. Let me change the names now. So, we got a motion by Mark and forego the twoe waiting period and supported by Mark. Uh, I'm sorry. Who made the motion? I made a motion to support.

Okay. Um motion by Mark Renault supported by uh Richart Rich Brokart to uh close public hearing and forego the uh twoe waiting period. All in favor? Opposed? Motion carries. With that I will entertain a motion.

Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion, please. Um, I'd like to make a motion to recommend approval to the elected officials of the regular board for the proposed text a text amendment to chapter 76 zoning ordinance. And the reasoning for my uh my recommendation is is that um the building materials in our township have um needed to be updated to be be more modernized um in many years. So, um the um the proposed amendment is um t had taken a lot of time on all of our parts to come up with this list and to make the changes. And um I would uh with that, I'd like to make a motion to approve that.

You have a motion. Have a motion by Rick Label, supported by Eric Haidider, to approve the I recommend approval to the uh text amendment for chapter 76 zoning ordinance for building materials. All in favor? I opposed. Motion carries. Thank you. Uh now we'll do the regular agenda. Um, we had a reasonzoning. The public hearing was closed. Do we read this? I will.

Yeah. Uh, Rick's going to read the uh um the petition. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Item A is reszoning number 377 requesting to reszone 2.015 015 acres of property located on the northwest corner of 24 mile road in Gratchet Avenue from R1A1 family residential and M1 light manufacturing to C3 General Commercial. The parcel numbers are 15-09-08-476-00005 and um the decision or the vote was postponed on December the 2nd, 2025 when the public hearing was closed. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Uh any of the commissioners have any questions or comments?

Just just a couple comments. This is an interesting reszoning because we have uh a parcel that has residential and light industrial zoning to it, which is kind of rare in general. And uh with the surrounding zonings, I think it probably be a better development if we if it does get zoned to C3 because it's less of a spot zoning and not so much as a gas station, but as you know, something more as a fruit market that which we would need that would kind of help out to go into the general zoning area. So, I have no problem with this. Okay.

Anybody else? Yeah, real quick. I just wanted to point out um that the only thing we're voting on today is for the folks out in the audience that we're only having a vote on the actual reasonzoning. As far as what goes on that parcel, we don't know. It hasn't been proposed to us. We haven't seen plans and if this gets approved tonight, the only thing that we're that's going to happen next is whatever they decide to do has to come back in front of this board and we have to either agree with it or not agree with it. But today is only the reasoning and I agree with Eric Haidider there that uh having it split like that is just it doesn't make sense. We need to clean that up. So that's all. Okay.

I'd like to add one thing. We don't approve or deny tonight. All we do is make a recommendation to the elected officials who sit on the board. So what we decide to do tonight is we're either going to recommend it or not. I'm prepared to make a motion in this regard, but uh the final decision doesn't rest with this group. The elected officials will make the final call based on a recommendation or maybe not. We'll see. Okay. Um I uh I'm going to assume that no one else has any add. So with that, Rich said he had a motion.

Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion regarding the requested resoning of parcel 15 0908 476005. This is 2.015 acres of vacant property located on the northwest corner of 24 mile road and Grashet Avenue. the requested resoning from R1A single family residential and M1 light manufacturing to a single designation of C3 general commercial. I move that this commission recommend approval to the township board for this reasonzoning request as stated. This commission understands that there are 10 items for consideration when reszoning maps are amended. I'll address each of the 10. Number one, is the zoning plan consistent? Is the planned zoning consistent with the master plan? I believe the master plan designates this parcel as mixed use. By definition, C3 zoning is intended to provide for a wide diversity of business activities which are predominantly but not necessarily totally retail in character. The purpose and intent of proposed C3 zoning therefore aligns with the master plan as mixed use and wide diversity accomplish a similar intention. Number two, what other impact would the resoning have on public services, utilities, and natural features? The GLES Webster report dated 117205 documents well that the Southerntherland Ornig drain runs through this site. Almost all of the site is covered by hydric soils, municipal water and sanitary sewer are available capac with available capacity to serve this project exist in the area.

Number three, has the applicant provided evidence that the property cannot be developed or used as currently zoned? As currently zoned, this site has been for sale for 10 years with no suitable buyers and no suitable development to date. Number four is the proposed zoning district and potential land use compatible with surrounding uses. The proposed C3 general commercial zoning district would make all four corners of this intersection have the exact same zoning. Number five, will zone will the resoning place a burden on nearby thoroughares? Again, the 1172025 GIFs report details that the proposed resoning is not likely to place a burden on any nearby thoroughares. Number six, is there other land currently available for this use? Again, the GIF's Webster engineering report documents there are no other available sites along 24 mile road and in the township that are currently available in zoned C3. Number seven, will the development of the site under the proposed zoning be able to meet zoning district requirements? You'll see I've I've referenced the engineering report several times. I'm going to do it again. According to Gles Webster, the site appears to be able to meet most of the C3 development dimensional standards. Specific building locations or the location of any specific building and how they're to be positioned will be contemplated under separate consideration by the township, not tonight. Where those buildings are located comes back later. Is the re number eight. Is the reasonzoning the best way to address the request? This request for resoning is the most appropriate way to address the

proposed use. Number nine, has there been a change in circumstances or conditions since the master plan was developed in May of 2021? In my estimation, there do not appear to be any changes in the area since the master plan was adopted in May of 2021. The last question, would granting the request result in the creation of an unplanned spot zone? To answer this question, there are three subp parts. The first is, is it is the request consistent with the master plan? Yes, by definition, mixed use and offering a wide diversity of business activities accomplishes a similar intent. Number two is the proposed reszoning a logical extension of the existing district. Again, I'm going to say yes. Three of these four corners are already zoned C3. It will be consistent. Lastly, would approving the request grant a special benefit to the property owner or the developer? I do not see a special benefit as all 10 of these requirements have been met. So, for the reasons stated, I move that we recommend approval to the township board for reszoning this parcel from R1A and M1 to C3 per the request of the applicant. Thank you for your patience.

Thank you. We have a motion by Rich, supported by Eric Kaider, to uh recommend approval um on the reszoning of this property at 24 and Grashet. All in favor? I opposed. Motion carries. Thank you. Um any presentation reports uh discussions don't think there's any. Uh we have planning commissioners comments. We'll start down with Eric. I'm all set. Thank you. Ralph James. Rich.

I'm all set. Mark, I'm all good. Brian, Rick,

just want to say glad to see all of you here this new here. Thank you for coming back and um I'd like to thank the audience for coming this evening. We really do appreciate your input and thank you for coming in and uh I just have uh I don't have anything um to add. Just glad to be back and um looking forward to 2026. And unfortunately, I'm going to be out of town the next meeting. So, uh, vice chair will be filling in and probably doing a better job than I did tonight. So, with that, I'd like to, uh, adjourn the meeting at 8, I'm sorry, 7:44.

Motion by Carl Leonards, ordered by Mark Renault to adjourn the meeting at 7:44. All in favor? Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you.