Council - Regular Meeting

Yeah, it was intended to be a favorite deal, but there, apart from submitting something in late words, it's not comfortable enough.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Welcome everybody to this special City Council work session for September 8th, 2026. Marie, would you call the roll?

Fritz?

Here.

Calio? Lyon? Here. Dora? Here. Manetza?

Here. This evening we have a presentation on the diesel plant project. Dana, did you want to introduce this?

Yes, I will. I won't put John in the hot seat quite yet.

He'll get his chance.

He'll get his chance, absolutely. Well, good evening, everybody. Since the May City Council meeting where John came and presented on an update regarding the diesel plant update, He and the team from Lakewood and his partner, David Tenkate, listened to the feedback that you all provided during that meeting and was encouraged to look at the building uses, how the facility might become more engaging with the public, how there might be more interactivity. between the public and this site, as well as the continuity along the waterfront, as well as the design of the building on site. During that meeting, John shared that it was anticipated and expected that the existing diesel plant building would be demolished as a part of that effort. And this update that he will soon provide also continues to maintain that same direction. The new building would be constructed on a portion of the property, and I will turn it over to John shortly for him to go over the details of the site plan and the proposed uses. But essentially, it would be a new single building as well as an additional building that you can see here on your screen. And then we would be looking at nonprofit, more public use on the site, as well as residential. So the development team is really just looking for feedback at this point on the revised concept and the proposed direction for the property. And the discussion is really intended to get your feedback and determine whether there is general council support for the direction that this project is headed in and ultimately see if there's consensus in moving towards a revised agreement with the development partners for Grand Power Works. So John is going to share a little bit more about how the project has evolved and what they're looking at at this point, as well as a little bit of the design and site uses for this particular site. I'll kick it over to John.

John?

Yes.

Nice to meet you. You're on.

John Brodhuis, 115 Sherman. Thank you for the intro, Dana. I know this is included in the memo that went out, but we have been working with the Children's Museum now for, I don't even know, five, six months, maybe longer. And we've gotten to a point with their group that we have a memorandum of understanding in place which includes some specific detail that met their needs in terms of parking, access, the square footage that they need to operate within, cost parameters, as far as we can get that done with the limited site plan work that we've done so far. And it also includes a developer contribution to help them afford The structure that they will move into as well as to support their operation going forward. So those have all been Agreed between the two parties So we've made a lot of progress In six months and we're really excited about it The one thing I don't want to get too far ahead of ourselves with a site plan at this point We think this is generally how this is going to lay out and the exterior my partners at Lakewood were very hesitant to even put that out there because they didn't want to put something out and change. But we'll work through that with the Planning Commission and with City Council going forward. I did hear some rumblings somewhere about a parking deck. This does not include a parking deck. There will be embedded parking for the residential units under the residential portion of the development i guess you'd call it the lower the white portion of the uh... yet right there so it does not include a parking deck uh... we have revisited the parking arrangement was talked about five years ago four years ago in terms of using the water treatment plan for some dedicated parking then providing some access to mulligan's hollow in a crosswalk in the bridge that could enter kind of the elbow of the building, which could serve as an entrance for both the residential and the museum. So we've thought this out to some degree, but we're in no way set on any specific exterior look or an absolute design at this point. We just wanted to make sure we could accommodate the museum's needs and also leave some room for residential development as well. With that, I'll try to answer any questions that you guys have tonight.

In the area, if you back up to the actual picture of the layout, there's a part where it looks like the residential, it overlaps in that where they connect. Do the buildings actually connect? Will the residential be actually connected to the museum?

It will be one building. And that connector would be a stairwell and an elevator shaft. and access, we haven't worked out specifically how we can maintain a separation from the museum and the residents in terms of safety for the kids and so forth, but it is a high priority item that we're talking about.

Okay, that's where I was headed next, because that was my biggest concern, was having residential connected to a children's museum. Sad to be worried about that, but that was my initial reaction. In the parking lot, can a bus get in and out of there? Could a bus turn around there to drop kids off? Because that's probably where I would assume the biggest groups are coming from.

That was another topic of discussion. And we need it to be fire truck accessible, obviously. We'll run into that. So yes, the goal is, and I've been told that it will be bus accessible. Drop kids off like you would before a Friday night football game and the bus driver goes park somewhere and three hours later they come back and pick them up. So yeah.

Okay, and I know the design isn't, you know, set in stone, but I mean, in my head, I think of something, you know, that will fit in the city but still represent a children's museum, something colorful and fun and, you know, that would be eye-catching for a kid. So just thinking about that as we head forward, I mean, obviously the children's museum, I'm sure, has a lot to say about that. And I know when they were originally talking over here about, you know, when we had first started talking to them about potentially having some kind of, not like outdoor space, and I know there is outdoor space, but someplace where there'd be like a big climbing wall or something. Will this be able to accommodate that? Something like that?

Yeah, so we do have limited green space available on the corner of Harbor and Sherman. And we've kind of identified it as such. Depending on how the the site gets graded will depend how far I'll say, what would that be, east? Anything away from the water is east to me, no matter where it's the direction. We're going to try to create as much green space as we can there for an outdoor space.

Honestly, I'm super excited about this. When this was first brought to us, I thought, like, what a perfect spot for them. I know they wanted to be in Chinook Pier and on the waterfront, and I really just didn't feel like that was a good spot for them. But I think this is just such a great way to connect. You know, kids stuff from downtown to all the way to the beach, you've got something to connect. And I just think it's a really great partnership.

Thank you. We're excited about it.

I'm done. Good. No, I appreciate what you presented. I understand conceptual, not this is what we're going to build, and then we see something six months from now and go, hey, that's not what you showed.

I could hardly get a drawing out of Lakewood to this point because they did not want to go down that road of feeling like we changed something.

I completely understand that. We've been through that with a couple others. no the concept of it i think is a great idea a great partnership with the museum children's museum to have that there the residential up above that remains to be seen what all that amounts to yet but i think for the main floor use that this looks like something that is is very good i think the community will find that is a good use for the that section of the property I know there was a lot of desire to keep it, you know not Commercial so I think it's a good thing and I would like very much to see some more more plans on it.

So Good job. Thanks. Very good job, John Get the concept, but you know how I am what I like to see something like it was there But what you've seen here, it's not like we were looking at so But by incorporating your parking down below like that underneath and that is helping out 100%. Otherwise, what we had before when we first started out, we had to use the parking lot over at the Y in that area over there. You're right, they had to have the bridge coming across and all this other. This is much better, I think, because now you're incorporating the parking on the property. Thank you very much for taking a look at that and putting that into that project. Because it was very difficult with the old building as it is. You couldn't do that. There's no way possible without tearing the building down. You're going to have to do that anyways. Do you have an engineering study on the old building itself that you have for the structural part of it so that we can at least tell everybody the reasons why they can see it? Maybe it can look and see that this is the reason why we're doing this?

Lakewood does have an engineering study and they can tell you the beams that are there, what weight it'll support, and so forth and so on, I don't have a copy of it.

Yeah, I mean, if we had something I could show people and say, hey, this is a study right here. If they have someplace they can go to take a look at it, it would be really helpful for them, because there's a lot of people around town, especially the older people in town here, they hate to see anything that's old go by the wayside. But if we show them the reasons why and tell people, it's a lot easier to tell them that it needs to come down. That's just what they were asking me, so... If we had something there, just so I can give them some kind of information on it would be really helpful.

I don't think I'm going to have a specific engineering study that points that out. But if you walk in and see the eight different levels of where you would or wouldn't enter in the water, two feet deep in the, it becomes fairly evident that it was a big challenge.

It's a big challenge, I know. You don't have pockets like Ford did when they did the Grand Central Station down in Detroit. You know, you don't have billion dollars where you can build it back into where it was. I understand that, but people keep asking me a question about, is it really structured? I go, if you ever had a chance to take a look at it, get up there and take a look inside. If you ever had a tour of it in the last year or so, you can see why. It's not designed, the building's designed for a diesel plant. It's for producing power. It's not for residential. It's not for anything else. The levels are all over the place in there.

It's crazy. Obviously, time is somewhat of a truth teller if that's talking about that building. We're kind of back to where we started seven years ago or six years ago. We gave it a crack. Lakewood gave it a crack. They tried. It's not feasible. You both tried.

I like the concept. I like you working with the Children's Museum. I think that's going to be an absolute boom for them down there. I think it's a great location for it. Thank you for getting together with them on this project. I'm just looking forward to see what's going to end up with the final design on it. So that's what I want to see. Understood. Yeah. My concern is just what it looks like. Make sure it fits in. That's what I hope. Thank you. Looks good. Thank you.

Yeah, and this has been a long journey, and change has been the constant here, so I'm not too concerned that we haven't seen the final version yet. I think we're going the right direction now. When we did the surveys and we did all the public engagement way back when it was time to try to do something with this plant, there was a lot of sentiment among the public that it's a historic building, people wanted to be able to enjoy it to some degree, but they also felt that they had a buy-in to the site, that there should be some public-facing piece to this final solution. I think the Children's Museum was a great answer to that. They've been looking for a home, a suitable home in a prominent location. I think this would be good. Nothing's perfect in this world, but this is a good answer. I think that your willingness to work with them, be flexible, and keep changing as you need to. That's just the reality of it. Whether the old diesel plant was structurally unsound or not, it just simply wasn't feasible to turn into anything. Nothing was gonna work there. And there's no point in having a project that's guaranteed to fail. We tried and tried and tried to save that building and turn it into something new. I like the idea of adaptive reuse of old buildings. Sometimes you just can't quite get there. This is turned into one of those. So I think this is a great answer. And rather than try to make it look like the old diesel plant, you're making it look like it belongs there and it's going to serve a good public purpose and a good private purpose. And understand why you have to have residential on the site. Something has to pay for developing the site. Your residential will go a long way toward that. And I understand the parking is the best you can do with the site. You will still need the area across the street. You'll still need the area by the water plant. So I know you'll need that for part of your parking load, but it's achievable. And if you've got an alternate entrance here on the Sherman side of the building there, you can kind of cut down that walking distance to get there. So I think that can work. I think the primary interest for the Children's Museum is still gonna be on the main level. So yeah, you have a lot of design to do, and we understand that. It looks so different from where we started, and I'm sure it'll look different yet, Think all you've done is you've shown the concept you've shown that it can be done it can be made to fit you've gone through the numbers and you've gone through the Negotiations and so I think we're well on our way there Things that the city had in their buy-sell agreement, you know I think obviously we'll have to revisit all that because it's a very different project now very different future for this site But I think it's all gonna work out. Well Thanks, we do too So what else do you need from us at this point I

I think that covers it. Hearing general consensus around supporting of the concept of the use of the property, we would look to then work with the attorney to make some revisions to the purchase agreement that would then allow the development group to come back with further plans to pursue those planning commission site plan approvals. So we would, like I said, first go back, revisit the purchase agreement to make sure that this use is permittable.

Okay. Well, I mean, the original purchase agreement is largely going to have to be set aside.

It will be largely rewritten, yes.

Yes. So as far as what the intent was, then it's nothing like what we're doing now. Do we understand that? And so, like I say, we gave it a shot. We tried very hard. This is where we're at, and I think this is going to be a very good outcome. Okay. Well, thank you for sharing, and we've been anticipating news from you for some time.

Thank you, and thanks to city staff for going through a lot of reiterations and ideas that sometimes they shot down right away. Other times, like this one, we got some legs and kept going with it. So appreciate all their time.

Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. All right, this was the only item on our special work session, so at this point I will adjourn the work session, and we will reconvene at 7.30 for our regular meeting.

Thank you.

He did.

It's like she's got a real adopt. I mean, how exciting is that?

Thank you.

Everybody to this regular city council meeting for Tuesday, September 8th, 2026. Maria, would you call the roll?

Fritz?

Here.

Callio? Lyon? Here. Dora?

Here.

Manetza?

Here. We have anyone for an invocation? Okay. We have no one for an invocation, but if you would please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. That brings us to new appointments.

Item A, appoint Robert Sabine to the Audit Review Committee with a term ending June 30, 2030. And item B, appoint Stephanie Sala to the Historic Conservation District Commission with a term ending June 30, 2027.

Can I get a motion on these? So moved.

Second.

Motion by Fred, second by Lyon. Any questions or comments on either of these appointments?

Always thankful.

Okay, please call the roll Fritz.

Yes lion Dora. Yes.

Yes Brings us to our approval of the consent and regular agenda. It's gonna get a motion. Don't move in the second motion by Dora second by Fritz. Are there any changes or any? Either the consent or regular agenda Please call the roll.

Dora?

Yes.

Fritz? Yes. Lyon? Yes. Meneza?

Yes. All right, brings us to our first call to the audience. This is the first of two opportunities. At this time, members of the audience may address counsel on any item, whether on the agenda or not. Those addressing counsel are asked to provide their name and address will be limited to three minutes of speaking time. Counsel will hear all comments for future consideration, but will not have a response at this time. Those not physically present who would like to call in may dial 616-935-3203, who would like to address counsel.

Hi. My name is Julie Busta, B-U-S-T-A. I live at 8 Edwards. And I know it was on a budget agenda to have funds to repair the wall on Edwards. And the wall exists as a wall system between 4 Edwards and eight Edwards. It's an entire wall and essentially creates our front yard or our front door as it were. So there is a plan to repair the wall that is failing in a portion, but only repair 30 feet of it. And the 30 feet lie partially on fours a lot and partially on sixes a lot as it was measured out. I just wanted to make you all aware that it seems like a band-aid approach. We've asked that the community of three neighbors be involved in the decision-making. We've sort of met roadblocks, so I'm bringing it to your attention as the council that you could please put it on your radar, and remember that we're neighbors. And it's not like we're rental houses. We all live there. We have collectively over 100 years of residency on the Hill. So it just would behoove you to pay attention to it, if you would.

OK.

Thank you.

Well, thank you, Julie.

Hi, my name is Sarah Lowell. I live, my family owns a home and property at 4 Edwards. Julie's my neighbor. Hopefully I'm not reiterating too many things that she already said, but first of all, I'd like to thank you for giving us the opportunity to speak. And I'd also like to thank the city for responding to a recent email that I sent trying to raise the level of importance on the wall. The wall is failing. And as Julie pointed out, there's a 30 foot section that in about a year has gone from three inch cracks to six to eight inch cracks with large sections falling out. While I appreciate that the city has acknowledged the need for repair, I'd also like to ask that we be included and ensured that we can be considered as affected stakeholders. As Julie said, the communication has been difficult. We have not really been able to get a lot of information very easily. And I I know while it's a city-owned wall And that the city will make the decisions We still would like some kind of input my my biggest concern as Julie just brought up is is It's over 100 feet of wall total. If I talk just about the property on 4 Edwards, we have almost 50 feet of wall. They're talking about a 30-foot section because that's bowed out and is falling into the road. But I have pictures that I brought this evening, if you'd like to see them, that show that other parts of the wall are failing as well. And in the best interest of Edwards Avenue, you know we already have a problem in terms of parking and getting by and taking turns getting through there because it's it's skinny and so to think of a repair first of all just for a small 30-foot section and then what we're going to come back a year later and replace the rest later and so we're asking that really the city council and the city will take a look at the scope of the and really consider the idea that it's a wall failing. Ebb and Marsh has already been out there. They've established that water is pooling behind. That is critical dune area. And so we repair part of it, not all of it, some of it. It's difficult to follow. So really my two concerns that I have is one that we have, I don't want to say repeatedly, but we have tried to gain information or gather information from the city, and it has been difficult to the extent that I filed a Freedom of Information Act. And in that, what's that, the end of my three minutes? In that, the first response was.

That was your three minutes. Go ahead and finish your thought.

I asked for information, and the first response that I got was that I would get it tomorrow after tonight's meeting. So instead of giving us information in the five-day time period required by law, They then asked for the extension. And so it's just been delay, delay, delay. And so we really would like to be a part of this and know what's happening. As Julie said, we've been up on that hills. My family's been there since 1908. and so prior to Edwards even being there. So if you would, please help us in gathering information and really looking at the scope of this project and how it's going to be handled.

If you had pictures you wanted to share, if you could leave them with city clerk or one of our staff, then they can get to us.

What I could do, though, is print them.

Yeah, if you would share them with the city clerk.

Mayor, we do have someone on the phone line as well for public comment.

Okay.

Go ahead. You're live.

Hello. My name is Dr. Margo Van Dis, and I live at 1120 South Harbor. I emphasize live because it is my full-time residence, and the property has been in my family for 73 years. I am no newcomer to town. Despite being a year-round resident, I feel disrespected and ignored as a result of recent city actions. In May, I and several other neighbors, also full-time residents, attended a city planning commission meeting to express opposition to an application for a special land use permit to convert a single-family permanent residence at 26 Edwards Avenue to a short-term rental. The application was made by new out-of-state owners. Objections raised by me and others primarily dealt with public safety issues and the current density of STRs in the neighborhood. Our objections may have had some influence on the commissioners as the vote on the issue was a 4-4 tie and therefore was not approved. Unbeknownst to any of us neighbors, the new out-of-state owners amended their application and it was reconsidered at the August Planning Commission meeting. No objections were raised at the meeting, and the amended application was approved with a 7-0 vote. The reason no objections were voiced was that none of us neighbors were informed of this amended application, and therefore no one was there to participate in what should have been an open and democratic discussion. It is my understanding that the city attorney ruled that there was no legal obligation for the city to inform the neighbors. What is legal and what is right in terms of common courtesy, transparency, and respect for the full-time residents of this neighborhood appear to be two different matters. How dare you disenfranchise this way? Shame on city staff. Shame on the planning commission members and shame on you, city council members, for allowing this to move forward and eliminate us from being involved in the process for making a decision that impacts our daily lives. I am sorely disappointed in this city government. Thank you for this opportunity to address you.

Thank you. Who else would like to address council at this time?

Good evening. Jim Hagen, 400 Lake. I'd like to speak tonight about the proposed peaking power plant, 25-megawatt peaking power plant at 14600 168th Street. That parcel, and I sent a memo to all of you, to the key people at the BLP and to the airport manager on it, That parcel is right in the corner of the two runways. I just want to read something that the FAA says. I don't know if anybody's familiar with it except for probably the airport people. Aviation safety note, FAA guidance advises pilots to avoid exhaust plumes because hot emissions can produce turbulence, vertical shear, reduced visibility, icing, contamination, and other effects. These concerns are especially relevant during low altitude takeoff. I stress low altitude, and that's what goes on right at both of those runways. You're either taking off or landing at low altitudes. And in addition, it mentions airport pattern operations also. I'd like to, the memo is a five-page memo. It's a technical memo. It's very exact actually. It's quite a comprehensive memo. So the purpose and scope of the memo was a consolidated preliminary screening analysis of whether hot exhaust from a proposed 25 megawatt natural gas engine generated at 14600 and 168th Avenue could be carried into low altitude aircraft paths at 3GM, which is the name of the airport, as it's known by in the FAA. It summarizes the airport geometry, estimated aircraft elevation, simplified plume rise details, and measured surface wind frequencies. It's intended to identify conditions requiring project specific aviation and dispersion review. It's not a safety determination. So the key finding is in the six-month SAE weather record, which included 52,775 records, and that's temperature, wind velocity, humidity, and probably half a dozen other variables. The broad direction and speed condition associated with preliminary plume aircraft altitude overlap occurred about 8.4% of the time for northwest winds affecting runway 27 departure, which is going off to the west. It's the main runway going to the west. And 13.7% for southeast winds affecting runway 18 arrival, which is coming in from the north on the shorter runway. So what that means is the conditions exist. If you have a plane coming in during the times that 8.4% or that other percentage along with the engines running, you can have hot exhaust coming across those runways. This is something that absolutely has to be looked into. We can't say, well, in my opinion, it's okay because it's an industrial parcel. This group here, city administration, council, and the BLP really need to go after this and look at it correctly.

Okay. Thank you, Jim.

My name is Jeffrey Miller, and I live at 1120 South Harbor Drive. I'm here tonight to register my displeasure regarding the way a request was handled for the property at 26 Edward Avenue. In April, I was informed by the city by mail of a request for a special land use property conversion into a short-term rental in an established neighborhood. I wrote a letter to the City and attended the May Planning Commission meeting, stating my opposition. Many other Huron residents did as well. The petitioners also attended and stated their side nicely. However, our presence at the meeting and our arguments seemed to resonate with the Commission, with the final vote being 4-4. We left the meeting gratified. Since the petition was not approved, the system worked, or so we seemed. Unfortunately, that was not the end of the process, but none of us in the neighborhood knew that. Three months later, after consulting with City Legal, the matter remained before the Planning Commission. Consequently, the petitioners amended their request ever so slightly, and the matter passed seven to nothing. Prior to consideration of this matter in August, did city staff remind the planning commission that the updated 2023 master plan shows deference to existing neighborhood concerns? I don't know. Were the two new planning commissioners made aware of the vigorous May remonstration? I don't know. Did the planning commissioners reread all the letters of opposition? I don't know. Did the Planning Commission know that reducing the number of parking slots allocated for the property would not change the opposition's stance? I don't know. And why don't I know any of these things? Because instead of informing all of the concerned and potentially affected residents that the matter was still up for consideration, staff decided to stand behind, or perhaps hide behind, the city attorney's opinion that the petition was ongoing. Consequently, there was no need, obligation, or necessity to inform the citizens that the future of their neighborhood was still up for debate. Good public policy comes from shared information, agreed upon facts, transparency, and participation. How can you have a fair debate when none of the opposition knows what's going on? The neighbors were marginalized. The city master plan was ignored. So far, the legal semantics interpreted by just one attorney has trumped the will of the people. I appreciate the attention and advice several city council members have afforded me and my neighbors of late. But is it too late? What can be done? Can council or the planning commission vacate the decision? Can the STR density study that has been requested since spring be done? Can new procedures be put in place so that others do not suffer the same fate? It's up to you on city council to right this obvious wrong.

Thank you. Thank you, Jeff.

Good evening.

My name is Catherine Ruster. I live at 9 Peterson Ridge. And I'm also here tonight because the city has a problem with a short-term rental program. And the recent approval of the short-term rental permit for 26 Edwards Avenue is a clear example. You and all the Planning Commission received a letter last week raising these concerns, signed by seven families, and I'd like the record to reflect that. I support what my neighbors have said tonight. We were entitled to notice that an application for a short-term rental permit for an adjacent property would be considered. But even if there was some technicality that says notice wasn't legally required, what is the city doing purposely excluding residents and neighbors from the matter? Your city planner and planning commission knew there would be neighborhood opposition. We have been engaged on this issue for the past couple of years. asking for a density study, a cap, or other measures to preserve the residential character of our neighborhood, and these requests have gone unanswered. Instead, another short-term rental permit was approved, this time behind our backs. And while we will engage with the Planning Commission at its meeting next week, because of its lack of communication and engagement, we are now also coming to you. Please don't misunderstand us. We are not opposed to all short-term rentals. We understand and recognize our place in a desirable coastal town. But six out of the 10 closest properties to our home, and it is our home, we live there, I work there, are short-term rental properties now. And seven out of 10 are short-term rentals if you count the illegal short-term rental that has been operating for over a decade. That is simply too much and it has changed our neighborhood. While the concerns we raised here tonight are focused on one particular action, it highlights a festering problem with short-term rentals. The city has too many in residential neighborhoods while denying some in commercial areas. We also have properties operating as short-term rentals without permits, and there's three in our neighborhood alone, and the city's been reluctant to address that. All of this benefits out-of-state investors at the expense of Branhaven's own residents. And the frustrating part is that the city already has a road map And that roadmap is the adopted master plan. So I'm asking you, council, please read that plan because it specifically calls for evaluating the impact of short-term rentals and each neighbor. for greater numbers of seasonal rentals. And that's a quote from the master plan. These evaluations have never been done and the number of permits keeps going up. So tonight I'm asking council to do three things. First, find out why notice to us was not provided and make sure that never happens again. Second, take a serious look at the city's short-term rental program, starting with what is already laid out in the master plan. And third, take all appropriate steps or require the Planning Commission to do so to invalidate the faulty approval of the short-term rental permit given to 26 Edwards and restore the required public process that neighbors were improperly denied. We know that you work very hard to carry out your duties, but the city needs to do more to ensure short-term rental programs serve both visitors and their residents. Thank you.

Thank you, Catherine. Who else would like to address council at this time? There will be another call to the audience at the end of this meeting, but we have no public hearings this evening or any other opportunity to address council before we do different items of business. So anyone else would like to address council? Now would be the time. Or you can wait until the end. Okay. I'm going to close the call to the audience then. We'll move on to, we have a presentation this evening. Let's see. Lita? We have a presentation of the Hispanic Heritage Month Proclamation from our Human Relations Commission.

Good evening. I'm going to be reading the proclamation for the Hispanic Heritage Month. Whereas the City of Grand Haven, Michigan City Council recognizes and proudly proclaims that September 15th through October 15th be acknowledged and respected as Hispanic Heritage Month throughout the city of Grand Haven, Michigan. And whereas the city of Grand Haven honors and acknowledges the contributions of our members of the Hispanic community to the growing cultural, civic, and economic success of our city, state, and country in invaluable ways, And whereas the city of Grand Haven is in unified and in total commitment to the visible support of the dignity and equality for all members of the Hispanic community as part of the Grand Haven community. And whereas even as the Hispanic community continues to grow and become more intertwined with the overall national community, there lies a need for a cultural education and understanding as well as an awareness for the people of the Hispanic community so as to route out any and all discrimination and prejudice that may exist. And whereas the City Council of Grand Haven now calls upon the people of this fair city to embrace the principles that our nation was founded on, in that every person is an individual endowed with infinite dignity and worth, and such may we take up the mantle to expunge the blight of prejudice and the mar of racism wherever it may exist. And whereas in the celebrating of Hispanic Heritage Month, we commit to providing support and advocacy for every member of the Hispanic community, and it can serve as an open opportunity for the taking of action while engaging in a dialogue that will serve to strengthen our alliance with the community as we continue to build acceptance as we advance rights for all. And now therefore it be resolved that the City Council of Grand Haven does here by proclaim September 15th through October 15th be acknowledged as Hispanic Heritage Month in support of our members of the Hispanic community who call Grand Haven home.

Thank you, Leah. And this proclamation will be on our consent agenda for formal adoption. And that brings us to our consent agenda. Maria, would you please read that?

Item A, approve the special work session and regular city council meeting minutes for August 17, 2026. Item B, approve the bill's memo in the amount of $3,302,723.00. Item C, approve utilizing attorney Ryan Shannon with Dickinson Wright for the purpose of handling, assessing, and matching tax criminal cases. And item D, approve a proclamation recognizing September as Hispanic Heritage Month in the city of Grand Haven.

Can I get a motion on the consent agenda? So moved. Motion by Fred, second by Dora. Any comments on any of these items? Please call the roll.

Fritz?

Yes.

Dora? Yes. Lyon? Yes. Meneza?

Yes. All right. We have no unfinished business this evening. Brings us to our first item of new business.

Item A, consideration by City Council of a resolution to approve the State of Michigan's My Deal Road Salt Contract for 2026-2027 Winter Season with Compass Minerals America, Inc. of Overland, Kansas for 750 tons of salt at $72.03 per ton delivered for a total amount of $54,022.50. Administration recommends approval.

Can I get a motion on this item?

So moved.

Motion by Lyon. Second. Second by Dora.

Mr. Englund. Good evening. I'm taking this over for Logan tonight. So he put this together in the memo there. If you see, we are buying it for $72 a ton this year. It is up about $10, maybe $6 from last year. We bumped it up a little bit this year, the tonnage, because we did dip into that 30% last year because of the So Logan thought and Colin thought it would be best if we figured on that 30%, that way we had 30% just in case. This year is as bad as last year. So luckily we have a good stock in there, so we probably won't need all of it if we do have a mild winter, but we're looking pretty good. I did do some comparisons. Also today I took a deep dive, just quickly searched on Google. The MI deal is almost half price compared to what private contractors get. So this is a good deal.

Is this, do all Michigan municipalities participate in this or is this relatively small group?

I don't know the answer to that question, but I know a lot of them do. They buy all in a bulk.

Yep.

Tonnage together and then they get a better pricing for it. Absolutely.

Been doing it for years.

Yep. Any questions? Comments?

Great. We'll take advantage of it.

I'm sure we're going to need it.

Who knows?

Let's hope not. All right.

Please call the roll.

Lyon?

Yes.

Dora? Yes. Fritz? Yes. Manetza?

Yes. Next item, please.

Item B, consideration by city council of a resolution to approve SiteWorks Solutions, Inc. to repair two sections of the boardwalk and then not to exceed amount of $55,900. Administration recommends approval.

Can I get a motion on this? So moved.

Second.

Motion by Fritz, second by Lyon. Mike?

So this was brought to our attention this spring by Ken Formsma, the unofficial city employee of the boardwalk over there. I hope he's watching this at home right now and smiling because he will be happy to see this on here. It was brought to our attention that where all the stones or the bricks that people donated money for the Boardwalk is starting to tilt and start to fall. Looking at pictures that Ken provided, it looks like they just put sand underneath it. And over the past 10 years, that sand has washed out and eroded out of there. So this is going in there, putting a good aggregate underneath their stone, so that way it drains and that way it supports this up the stones, so that way they don't tip anymore. Right now it's probably, I'd say probably at a 22 degree angle. I don't know if you guys saw the picture in the packet, but it is starting to weigh down the actual deck portion. So if we don't get on this soon, it's going to probably cause more money to repair this.

Questions?

Yeah. What part of the budget is this coming out of? We did budget $200,000 for sidewalk repairs this year. We decided to take some of that out of the sidewalk repair fund.

OK. Just wanted to know where it was coming from.

Isn't there a maintenance fund for the board lot?

Yes, but our intention is to use that for a larger long-term repair. So we tried to allocate it within this fiscal year rather than utilize that. because we had utilized funding from that already this fiscal year.

Yeah, well, $55,000 doesn't sound like a small amount.

Nope, it is not.

So it's coming out of our sidewalk, our anticipated sidewalk expenditure.

Correct, but the list of sidewalk repairs that you've already approved already considered this budgetary allocation, so. we were still able to accomplish all of the repair that we intended within the budget remaining.

Yeah, this year the sidewalk totals that Logan and Colin came up with, it was just, I believe, $110,000 to do everything on one quadrant this year.

Okay, well, we talked about going over and above a little bit this year because we have so much sidewalk repair to do.

Yep, and that does attribute for some of the... ramps that need ada plates and stuff put in there too so it is there will be a little bit more there also yeah well sidewalks impact people all over town yep yep and i think we're being really aggressive with what we're doing this year and fixing up one whole quadrant i think last year we spent close to fifty thousand dollars just and that went really really quick this year we're going to be able to knock off a lot with what we're doing any other questions

Call the roll.

Fritz?

Yes.

Lyon? Yes. Dora? Yep. Meneza? Yes.

Next item, please.

Item C, consideration by city council of a resolution to approve the use of the city beach and front row parking for the King of the Great Lakes special event from September 25 to 27, 2026. Administration recommends approval.

Can I get a motion?

Moved.

Second. Second.

That was my friend, second by the line, Brian.

Good evening City Council Brian Giroux's waterfront and events manager before you tonight as a request for a new event for this year called King the Great Lakes Scheduled for September 25th through the 27th at City Beach The event is organized and operated by Matt kite a local business started by Grand Haven residents The location for this event is usually in Muskegon at Pure Marquette. However do a due to a site issue this year They are asking to relocate to Grand Haven for 2026 This is a wind sports event featuring kite boarding and wind foiling with an estimated attendance of about 125 to 150 people. The beach will remain open to the public with designated areas marked off for demonstrations and equipment. The event will include approximately 12 wind sports brands displaying and demonstrating equipment along with food vendors and a DJ. The organizer is also requesting use of the front row of parking for event equipment and storage. Staff is recommending approval as presented.

Questions?

I mean, rarely do I get emails about events happening in town. And I got a few on this one just about the use of City Beach and it being a city beach instead of the state park and people wanting to be able to use the beach. And I get that, right? Let's hope September stays this way and we can swim at the end of September still. We were in it in October last year. So, I mean, I'm excited about this. I worked for Matt Kite. It was my very first job when I moved to Grand Haven. And how far they've taken this program is pretty incredible. But, I mean, I do want us to consider, you know, the residents and our use of city property. I think if this is just a plan for a one-time event and they're going back to Muskegon, I know they have a whole... storage space up there that they use year-round that that I don't see it being a problem, but I mean it might be a We didn't get to do the other ones early on the beach this year.

They got canceled So it's kind of our only time it happened this year But again, I just want to make sure that we're taking people's you know use of that beach into consideration Yeah, yeah But this is temporary just for 2026 because their site issue up in Muskegon and then the public will still have full access to the area They encourage people to come watch check it out Great

I think it's important that we keep that in mind and allow access for all the residents as well. It sounds like there's plenty of that here, so I don't think there should be a problem. It's always great when we can support local businesses as well that employ some of our residents and folks from surrounding areas, so it's good to show some support for them and allow them to maybe hold an event here for a couple days, 125 to 150 people, I don't think that's going to stop anybody from going to the beach if they really want to swim that time of year. So I think it's a good idea.

I have no problem at all. I tell you, it's nice to have something in the off season a little bit because it is the off season now. And to bring anybody here, it's a win situation, I think, all around. Plus Mack Kite, they're a local business. So one time, why not?

Well, like you say, it's the off season. We don't get heavy beach use in the last weekend of September normally. We're lucky if we can even stand to be down there. And maybe it'll be a beautiful weekend, but even so, this is the area in front of the parking area, but City Beach is actually a fairly long beach, and there's a lot of space. They're asking for half of that parking lot for their use. So I don't see this as being a conflict particularly. And we have three, four, five things we do at City Beach over the course of a normal summer. I don't think we're keeping people away. There's a lot of beach there to use. And like you say, it's a shoulder season. We usually try to find things to go on during the shoulder season. Here's one. So I think this would be fine. And if they wanted to come back next year, I probably wouldn't have a problem with that either. It's more a matter of let's make good use of our facilities. I don't think we're disenfranchising anyone. There's still plenty of beach. Right. And hopefully there's still plenty of weather making it worth being there. And it won't be very long before we'll be putting up the snow fences.

Right. I mean, that'll probably be coming in October.

Yeah, let's use our beach when we can. Absolutely. I think this is fine. So any questions?

The snow fences won't be up by then, will they? Because last year they went up real early.

Well, I'm not sure when they'll go up. I don't know if anybody's got that answer. State Parks is probably putting theirs up already.

I was going to say they did it right after Labor Day last year because they didn't have the staff.

They don't have any staff to work with, so they have to do it early. We have more staff.

I'd have to confirm our schedule for sure.

But it won't be very long. All right, you're ready to vote. Sure, let's call the roll.

Fritz, yes, Mayan, yes, Dora, yes, Manessa, yes.

OK, that has all of our new business, so it brings us to report by City Council. We got one more. We got Derek here. Derek's here. I don't want to send him home. Okay.

Well, you're pleased with that bright orange last item here.

Item D consideration by city council of a resolution to award the Harbor Island North channel CCR removal project to Taplin enterprises located in Kalamazoo, Michigan, and the not to exceed amount of $1,925,598 and 78 cents contingent on the board of light and power approval. Administration recommends approval.

All right, I need a motion. So moved. Second. Motion by the first, second by the door. Okay, Derek, you're up now. Thank you, Your Honor.

You almost got away. Derek Gatiss, project management director for the city. Well, here we are. We're at our second remediation event on Harbor Island in the last two years. So first was a coal pile. The second is what we're calling the North Channel CCR removal. The project, as outlined in the memo, is standalone enough, it's unique enough, and the economies of scale are large enough to warrant its own project. The BLP approached me in March, said, can we get this done this year and take advantage of some low water levels? And so we fast-forwarded, got the engineering approved in May. Actually, Eastar started working on it in March right away with a permit application. modification to EGLE to actually work in the wetlands. So I brought this, one of my boards, to remind everybody where the north channel is. So the two impoundments, one and two, and I'll turn around and show you how I use them, discharged in a little channel that the EGLE and EPA dubbed the north channel into the northern wetlands. And it's just in this area here in which the

the activity is going to take place.

Maximize, or the maximum area of disturbance is like 4.2 acres. We think we're going to disturb less than that. But in the process of doing all this and engineering, EGLE approved the remediation plan back in July. So HDR did a great job getting that through and approved by EGLE. We're still waiting for one permit. That's the wetland permit, which is critical. And they were just out last Friday making final observations for the permit. There were some samples taken today in preparation for a potential discharge, and the memo and the request is $250,000 for water treatment in case we have to treat the water. We didn't necessarily plan on that, but our two low bidders said there wasn't a way in which they could remediate this without actual dewatering and discharging Another part of the site which triggers a permit Which is fine. We raced forward about three weeks ago to start that permit process So I'm not saying we're going to use any of that money, but just in case and then The other thing is is the allocation of who's going to pay for the treatment The current project was set up to be all of the BLP's costs unfortunately if we find PFAS in there our agreement with the BLP is that we will pay for PFAS treatment and So we might be liable to pay for some of the costs of the water treatment. We won't know until we get the samples back and find out what's down there. We don't think there's going to be PFAS. In fact, we don't think there's going to be anything that's going to result in some major treatment. But just in case, it takes quite a bit of time to get approvals through both boards. That's why we asked for an allowance in this. And so the contractor is on board and ready and eager to to tackle this. They were a small portion of our deep well testing this past winter. They supplied some equipment and some processes, so they were excited to bid. They're West Michigan based and have a great history in remediating. They're actually, I don't know if I can share this, but they're actually the company that's restoring the rapids right now. So they take on some pretty deep pretty big projects. So they're looking forward to the main remediation that's coming up as well. So with that, Take any questions or comments?

Can you provide us a little more detail just you know for everybody online and all of us in this room? Why why this needs to be separated from the bigger project that we're looking at for remediation instead of looking at it all together as a whole?

Yeah, because so some of the options that we were are going to be considered we believe in the remediation alternatives is mitigation and Remediation so some of it might stay in sight some some of it might be carried off One of the big things that was gets really costly is if we were to include that in those parts of the bigger project We would have to be doing wetland Mitigation so it brings us into a whole nother category that we want to be in and we're not planning on being and necessarily with a full remediation process, so Let's do it separately water levels are low lower Let's keep them on the half on the lower end of the average It actually helps with the dewatering we don't have to do water as much and so so yeah Just going to the wetlands taking that out then we're done with it. We don't have to ever go back necessarily and and do any type of remediation or mitigation in there. Actually, we're going to leave a much healthier wetland in there. There's a bunch of invasives in that whole pond, so everything we touch will actually be much healthier when we're done.

In the cities, max liability could be $250,000. Yeah, max.

The BLP, if we're going to have to do water and treat it, they're going to have some costs in there, but yeah, that's what they said. Worst case scenario for three months of treatment, depending on what type, you know, bad stuff that we may find out. But we don't think there actually is in the wetlands.

Okay. And that's taking into effect not having PFAS discovered when we're doing this. Do we by chance have any idea of a ballpark number if we do find something other than what we're looking for? I mean, I know it's probably impossible to answer. I mean...

Well, the treatment system that they're quoting will take care of pretty much anything we find.

So if they find PFAS, it's just a percentage of our involvement's going to go up, and it'll take care of it with what they're already planning to do?

Yeah, yeah. Okay, got it. They're similar to the treatment on-site treatment equipment that we've used around town when we find heavy metals and stuff like that. It takes out pretty much everything. So it's just how many filter changes you need, and we've In this, there's like six changes associated with it. So hopefully we don't have to use it, and if not, maybe it's less, maybe it's only a couple changes.

Perfect, thank you. You're just talking about the dewatering pretreatment. That's what we're really thinking we may have to treat for PFAS if it was to be found.

Correct.

And we're at a fairly shallow level here. We're taking basically stuff off the surface or within the wetland area.

Yeah, most of it's going to get about a foot and a half of sediment, if you will, with the CCR material taken out. There's a couple or a bigger pocket right up close to the land that's like six feet. But that we excavated with an excavator. So yeah, most of it's very, very shallow. And of the 4.2 acres, we really anticipate about half of that being touched. So there's a verification process that you go approved in verifying that we got all the CCR material out. Very, very intensive planning and verification process.

We're confident that we won't get halfway through this and have to stop the job because we found something we didn't expect. We've done enough sampling.

I mean, knock on wood, unless we find a school bus buried with a bunch of stuff or an old nuclear power plant that we didn't know about, they should be able to handle anything.

I know I pulled tires out of there too.

Yeah, we've talked about that. Yeah.

Anything else?

No.

This is a contingent upon BLP also approving.

Correct. It's going to be considered at their next board meeting September 7th. Okay.

All right. Any other questions? Please call the roll.

Fritz? Yes. Dora? Yes. Lyon? Yes. Manetza? Yes.

All right. Now we're done with new business. Getting ahead of myself.

All right. Brings us to a report by city council. Who would like to begin?

Well, I'll start out. After hearing tonight, I got the emails on the short-term rental thing. I think everybody's well aware of my standing on short-term rentals anyways. I've seen it destroy my neighborhood. And looking at the roadway up there in Edwards, it's pretty narrow on that, and trying to get people in and out of there is very difficult. And I know it was legal for us to do that, but it's not the way we do things in the city of Grand Haven. I'm telling you right now, I'm very ashamed. There's something like this happened that we didn't let them know a second time around. I mean, this is not how we do business in Grand Haven. I really think it should have been brought up and they should have let them know, have them come and voice their opinion so they can know exactly what's going on. They should have been notified. I would like to have that in my neighborhood. I mean, I've seen short-term rentals and I've seen what it did to my neighborhood. And say no more. I just think we can do things better next time around or before we can do, but this is not how we do business here. I'm pretty upset over that. And I'm also upset about Detroit Tigers. Come on. It's the end of the season.

You know I've got to say something about it.

And also the bridge walk. It was a great time. I tell you what. I think I probably talked my arm and leg off to about a million people out there. And I sat around and sat on benches with people and talked to them for a while. And it was a great time. It was nice to see a large crowd. What do we think, Bob? Was it about 900 to 1,000 people?

Oh, at least. Maybe.

Yeah, it was really packed. How many tickets did you actually give out? We are politicians, so we're going to exaggerate a little bit here, right?

I didn't count yet, but I wouldn't be so bold as to say 900 tickets.

No, it was a large crowd. It was very good. And we got some, Channel 8 was out there at the pier, and they're having a nice video out there for us on TV. So we got a little PR for it. So that was absolutely, Duncan was out there. So it was pretty cool. But yeah, it was a great day, and town was busy. Oh my gosh, it was really busy. Let's see, Saturday, Sunday, and that, you could walk across the river almost, and there's so many boats. I think everybody got their boats out for the last time. It was just, harbor was just full of boats all the time. It's unbelievable. Good time to be in Grand Haven. Again, I'm pretty disappointed in how things happened for him up there in Edwards. I hope we can do better. Done.

I have to agree with you, Mike, on that as well. Just because we followed the ordinance and did what it said we had to do doesn't mean that we couldn't one step farther and done what we should have done. I know staff is taking a look at that portion of the ordinance to see if there are changes that might be required for in the future. I know that does not Boyd, well, for folks who are already living with the end result of what has happened, but maybe it'll prevent that from happening to someone else. So we'll see what comes out of that, but we should have done better. And I apologize for that not happening on behalf of everyone that was involved. Labor Day Boardwalk, or Boardwalk, Labor Day Bridgewalk was great. We came up with 901, and we were counting feet. Right, Bob? We had 901. Including dogs. Figure that out, because a three-legged dog went by, and I'm like, oh, got to take one off. So that's how we got to that number. It was great to see the lighthouse open for the last day for those who were out there walking. I kind of threw some numbers together here. From 623 to 97, total number of people through the lighthouse, 40,957. Wow. Amazing. It's astounding. The highest one time day number was just this past weekend. I believe it was on Saturday. There was 1,787 people went through the lighthouse in that one day. So it's amazing the number of folks going through there. They're looking forward to having it again next year, making a few more improvements and things along the way. But we can look forward to having it open again and see if we can best those numbers as well. So great, great summer. I'm glad to thank everybody that went through and enjoyed it as much as we did having it open. So thank you.

I just want to reiterate what these guys said, although I think short-term rentals do belong in certain areas of our town in the business districts for sure. where people want to hang out and walk our streets, I think that we do need to reevaluate how often we're approving them in our residential neighborhoods, especially when there's already so many in a block. And I agree, we should have done better by the residents of Edwards. So I'm sorry that that happens, and I'm hoping that we can look at processes and do better as we move on to the future. I'm thankful for a wonderful weekend of beautiful weather. I was up north and it was four days of pure sunshine for us. So sorry for those of you who were here in the rain for a day or two. But it was absolutely gorgeous and college football has started. So maybe I can just start talking to you about my Spartans, but we'll see. I'm not going to put any feet in front of the other at this point. They didn't look great on Saturday, but we're going to cheer them on anyway. So go green.

All right. White.

That's gonna haunt them all right to the to the short-term rental on Edwards So I don't recall if I was at the main meeting the planning commission. I know is that the August meeting that went as well I Attempted to respond back to Catherine. I don't know if my email ever went through it kind of bounced back at me so I So hopefully you got my response. I have to stand up for the strict process that we use that mirrors both the State Enabling Act and the process and the ordinance and the notifications are triggered by the holding of a public hearing. The public hearing was held and closed and there wasn't another and another one wasn't warranted. And so this is how we got into the non-communication piece. And so that's kind of the way it is. When this has happened at council recently, we had... the uh incentive request for the flat iron building we had a public hearing we had a discussion we had a two to two vote but i made a point of announcing at that point that well this could come back because it wasn't resolved we knew it wasn't resolved so i think that's that's what was missing was that the acknowledgement that this wasn't really resolved even if you had a unanimous no vote it's really not resolved until you have a positive motion a motion that's approved by a positive number of votes, whether it's to approve or deny. That's the process, and the process is a little bit cold and a little bit stark, and sometimes if you feel left out, that's because step by step, that's what it looks like as you're doing it. Sometimes as you're doing it, you kind of miss sight of the bigger picture. So I think that probably because our ordinance mirrors the state law, because we don't want, we have to be careful when we try to go above and beyond what state laws require because they kind of occupy the whole field of issues such as zoning. If nowhere else, it ought to at least be in bylaws that when an issue is not resolved and could come back that needs to be publicly stated that yes, this isn't done. And I think that would be prudent to let people know whether you go through the same notification process or some variant of it, but just to let people know that, hey, this, has come back. It's back on the agenda. When we notify for public hearings, of course, there's mailings. There's quite an extensive process, and that could be repeated. But it wasn't explicitly called for, and that's why it fell through the cracks. We can do better. We should do better. We can learn from this. Like I say, whether it's us sitting here, we have a similar problem, and we announce it to everyone. This may come back. We've done this two or three times since I've been mayor. And it does come back, and quite often you get a different result. At least we've acknowledged and told people. We haven't always gone out and sent out postcards and such, but it should have been better known. I agree. I don't know what the outcome would have been different or not. The amendment or the change in the proposal, the concession that was made was minor enough not to trigger another public hearing. If it had been a larger ask, so it'd be more impactful, there would have been a public hearing. It was lesser, and that's why it doesn't. Even so, it wouldn't hurt to notify people. It's just an extra step to do, and it would be the right thing to do to the public. And then you at least can come in and reiterate your points, and then it can turn out however it turns out. We found that when we skip steps or when we take not skip steps, we didn't skip steps, but when we take a route that doesn't necessarily accommodate everyone, that it does cause, it can cause other problems, so we have to go back and try to, try to correct, do a little course correction. So my guess is that the best place to put something like this would be in the bylaws of the Planning Commission. City Council somewhere has bylaws that we've been trying to uncover. I mean, all these things can be formalized, put it in a place where you can read them and say, you needed to do this. Not like you ought to have done this, but you need to do this. So I think that step needs to happen. As far as what do we do about what did happen, that is a little bit of a water... water over the dam now. To be honest with you, that's something that it doesn't come to council for a review. We're not in the appellate process. We don't, no appeals don't come here for special land uses. In fact, they don't even go to the ZBA. So the ordinance says that you would have to go to court to overturn it. And so that's kind of, it's, It's really even the Planning Commission can't undo what they've done. That's the process that's in the ordinance. So there's not much we can do about that except scold them and say, well, why don't you put this in your bylaws and don't do this again. That's kind of what we're doing now. So as far as what do we do about correcting this, well, I don't think there's much that can be done. Not good news, not what you wanted to hear, but that's my take on it. So, like I say, I would have made a better effort to notify everyone so you could at least have your words before the final actions are taken. And there again, this is an informal discussion among us. We're not in the process, we're not in the steps for reviewing special land uses or sending it back and telling them they have to do it over. That's really not even an authority we have. So I guess my news is that we will look at how our processes work, try to make sure this doesn't happen again, try to make sure that people know what's going on so that they can at least speak up and then have their voices heard again. And whether it changes things or doesn't change things, at least you know you've tried. And we try to do that here. We hope that all of our boards and commissions make that extra effort and go above and beyond what the minimum of the law says you must do. And then you don't have this kind of heartburn over it. So I'm sorry that this is turning out this way. We strive to do better by our public. But I think that that's kind of the situation we're at right now. So not much else I can say about that one. I tried to express this in my email, that this is kind of the process that played out. And I don't fault the staff or planning commissioner for following the rules that they had. This is the rules they had. So I think we need to tweak that and make that a little bit better. Other stuff, Bridgewalk is great. Appreciated that. Didn't really care about the football game. Doesn't matter. Tigers are a lost cause. All that other good news. So anyway, that's kind of what I have to say about it. And so we will have another call to the audience so you can all speak up again. But for now, I'll turn it over to city manager.

Thank you. And I just also wanted to reiterate my apologies to the group representing Edwards on both issues and apologize and take accountability for any lapse in communication and we can do better and we will do better as we go forward. So I appreciate you coming and making your comments tonight. And the item I did have under report by city manager is we, to make the public aware, we did sadly receive and accept resignation from our city clerk as of last week. Her last day with us will be September 16th. So this is her final city council meeting with us this evening. And as a reminder, the city clerk position reports to city council. So as we look to go about the hiring process, just as a reminder, typically for this type of position, we do a first round interview that includes two council members so as to not have a quorum. That's typically performed with our HR manager and potentially myself depending on preference Then followed by a public interview at which point we'll sort out at a later date after our first round interview So that being said I want to thank Maria for her service and say that we're gonna miss her and have appreciated her professionalism and But we will need two volunteers from this group to participate in the first round interview process that job position is posted just as a Information for the public as well Okay, who wants to jump in?

Okay, the two of you you have two volunteers here about you

We can all volunteer. No, I think we can.

It only takes two.

We can't have three of us. You can draw names out of a hat, just whoever gets it.

I've been on a lot of the committees and stuff like that, so let the two new people do it.

You can be the only two names in the head if you like.

That's usually how I win.

You have two volunteers.

Okay, thank you. We will review applicants and then look to schedule interviews in the coming weeks and then report back out to the group.

Okay. And that's all I have.

Thank you.

All right. Thank you. All right. Second call to the audience. If you would like to address council, give us your name, address, three minutes speaking time, and we won't have any other response at this point in time, but please speak to us.

My name is Jeffrey Miller. I live at 1120 South Harbor Drive. And I'd like to echo the sentiments of the council with regard to the city clerk and thinking that she's done an excellent job. My wife and I benefit from her staff's hard work in that we occasionally receive absentee ballots, mail-in ballots, and there's never any controversy with regard to OUR RIGHT TO RECEIVE THEM AND FOR THEM TO BE COUNTED IN A PROPER MANNER. THERE'S NO CONTROVERSY. SHE FOLLOWS THE LAW. THE LAW IS CLEAR. THERE NEEDS TO BE NO INTERVENTION BY A HIGHER GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY. SO, I MEAN, SHE'S MAINTAINED THE HIGH STANDARD THAT WE'VE ALL EXPERIENCED IN THE PAST. AND FOR THAT, WE'RE MOST APPRECIATIVE. WE WISH YOU THE VERY BEST IN It's not too late to stay. But thank you on behalf of myself, my wife, and those others who are regular voters here in the city.

Thank you. Thank you, Jeff.

If I may share with you the three pictures that I have of the failing law that's outside of the scope of the work. And then also I have two estimates that stay within what the city council has budgeted for the repair. But this is for not only my wall, which is 41 feet, but then six Edwards as well. It does not include Julie's wall and eight Edwards.

All right. Yeah. If you get it to the clerk, she can get that to us.

Thank you. And then if I could just make one comment. Also about short-term rentals on Edwards. I don't know if any of you remember but I came to this council asking for a short-term rental at our house for edwards and it was denied and i'd like to remind you that it was denied on the grounds of that we have did not have sixty feet of frontage uh... we have forty one week probably have one of the large largest frontages on that street and so i'm really disappointed to hear that another person up the road was approved and didn't know anything about that you've already spoken to that so There's no way that they had enough frontage. So I would ask that the council be consistent in the way in which they apply approval or denial to. So thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else?

1715 Robins Road, also chair for the Human Relations Commission and just wanted to let the community know that we are having an International Day of Peace art exhibit. We're calling on residents no matter what the age to help us create a beautiful exhibit for International Day of Peace. We are taking submissions from STARTING SEPTEMBER 14th. I'M SORRY, THEY WILL BE ON DISPLAY STARTING SEPTEMBER 14th THROUGH SEPTEMBER 25th AT CENTRAL PARK PLACE AND YOU CAN DROP OFF YOUR SUBMISSIONS AT THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. WE'RE ASKING THAT THE MIXED MEDIA BE NO LARGER THAN 8.5 BY 11 INCHES, WHICH IS JUST COPY PAPER SIZE. SO WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO ALL THE ART THAT WE WILL BE HAVING ON DISPLAY. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. SOUNDS WONDERFUL. THANK YOU.

Anyone else? Before you adjourn, if nobody wants to speak, can I say something?

Let me get done here. I'm saying, before you adjourn. Anybody else would like to address council at this time?

Okay, then we'll close the call to the audience.

Yes, sir.

I just want to say, Maria, thank you so very much. I've had a few city clerks gone through since I've been here. and I have utmost respect for you. You've told us what to do, what we can't do, and I tell you what, I just want everybody here, I'm gonna give you a standing ovation. Thank you very much.

Well, that got her. Excellent work. Yes, Mary, you've been very valuable to this council. You've given us good guidance, good consistent advice, and you've been excellent at your job. And sorry to see you go.

We've set the bar pretty high for whoever's following you because you're all I know, so they better be pretty darn good. We're going to miss you. Thank you for all you've done.

I think in my short time, I've been through four. So you being the fourth one, and like I said the other day, by far the best of all of them. So I appreciate that very much and your dedication to the job and everything that you do. I hope that your new journey works out well for you, and of course, you can always decide to stay, but no, thank you very much. Appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you all of you for your support and for making my time here so wonderful.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

All right. Well, on that note, if there's no further business, this meeting is adjourned. Thank you for coming.