City Commission - Regular Meeting

Oh yeah, it's fine. How long were you in the public? I saw your pictures. I looked up. tremendous. No, he started to republic makes my life harder cuz you have to get him to have a pool as opposed to just like people going [laughter] right. Oh, it's up here to get the info.

Happy to share. It looked amazing. [laughter] a lot more. Hey, what's up? Thank you.

6 o'clock. I'm going to call this meeting to order. Everyone can please join us in saying 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, first on the agenda is the approval of tonight's agenda. Do we have anything to add or take away from this evening's agenda? Hearing none, I'll move on to public comment. Is there anyone here joining us this evening that would like to make public comment to something that is not on this evening's agenda? I'm looking right at you. Sorry. [laughter] Thank you. All right, then I will close public comment and bring it up here for the report of mayor and city commissioners, including any committee liaison reports. Commissioner Sky, would you like to start? Uh, I have nothing to add today other than to wish everybody a very happy new year. Looking forward to 2026. Thank you. Mr. Berdick,

nothing for me. Great. Mr. Wesley, same. Nothing for you. Mr. Hunter, nothing for me.

Uh, echo the happy new year sentiment. Um, and just it would like to bring a couple of things. uh back up uh to us. I've had a number of conversations with residents over the last few weeks. Um and these things have come up uh several times. But two items that I'd like to revisit in the new year. Um and they are both from like February of last year. Um Commissioner Hunter made a request uh last year that we take up a conversation about uh revisiting our city motto. Um, and I think that there had been some conversation that the uh the master plan revision might be an opportune time to do that. And since that's coming back to us, um, I think certainly welcome revisiting that conversation. Um, and then uh would love for us to take up uh get presentation, take up a discussion of the parking study that we authorized last February. I know it's come up in several uh conversations just kind of tangentially um but would love for us to just dig into that um and maybe pair that with an update. I know there's a parking subcommittee working um and get some updates on that as well. So, thank you,

Commissioner Schwarz. Um I'll echo the happy new year um and yeah, I'll leave it that. Thanks. I also will echo happy new year. I hope everybody has a prosperous, healthy, and safe 2026. And with that, I will turn it over to Mr. Charles.

Uh, thank you, Madam Mayor. Just a few things. Um, kudos to again to our public works team. It's been a snowy snowy year and doing a great job as always. Um, reminder that tree tree and wreath chipping is started today and will run through the 16th. Um, for natural trees, please remove any lights, ornaments, etc. And then lastly, a reminder, next meeting in January will actually be Tuesday um January 20th because we are closed for um the MLK holiday on the 19th. So just a reminder of that. Thanks for that reminder.

Wonderful. All right, then we'll move on to regular agenda items. First on the agenda is to provide direction on amending the city's room rental policy to allow city commissioners to use them at no charge. That introduction will be city manager Charles.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. So, this um came out of some uh requests that we had last fall for uh use of city uh excuse me of community center rooms and um the uh policy of do we wave fees or do we not? um as we kind of went through this uh discussion and whatnot got to the point of while our policy doesn't clearly state one way or the other um there was a question of is this something that the commission would like to um like to consider. If so, um then um we'll um go back and um revisit and try to come up with some recommendations for a policy amendment. Um in regards to that, um I did note in my memo that um we did not find um any other communities. Granted, we did not hear from any of them from the or from the Metro 6 and Kent County. We didn't hear from all of them, but people that did respond do not wave fees in regards to that. So provide a copy of the current uh rental policy as well as um the um city of Kentwood has quite an extensive policy uh um in regards to that um kind of the use of their buildings and whatnot. So just provided that for reference. So just looking for some direction this evening of is this something that we wanted want the commission as a whole would like to explore or we fine with um um that whatnot. We did describe in I excuse me, I did describe in the memo talking to our previous uh city clerk, Miss Brower, that kind of what our practice was um in formal um in regards to um that if it was outside of an election window, then u fees weren't charged. If they were inside, they were charged. However, she could not recall um um activities outside the election window um by use of city commissioner. So she was um and she

had joined us in the late 90s. So she was trying to reflect upon that. So but with that are any questions for Mr. Charles? No questions. Okay. So you're just looking for I see some just general interaction. Yeah. Generally, if um if the commission would like us to look at amending the policy to allow for the waving of fees or for us to clarify that we don't wave fees. Um in regards to that, that's basically what what I'm requesting this evening.

I can chime in with my feedback real fast then. Um I'm of the opinion that we're just like anybody else in town here. So, we should just get charged like anybody else. Yeah, I would second that. I feel that just equity and fairness to the public. Also, one thing I was thinking about is just a clear distinction between city sponsored events and commissioner initiated events and keeping that, you know, distinction. Um, you know, if it's directed, unless it's formally authorized or directed by the commissioner as a body, maintaining this distinction helps just prevent some confusion.

Good point. Um that was just my thoughts but my first was yeah we're just like you know regular all the residents so we should I feel like have to pay like anybody else or any other politician that has visited. Correct.

Correct. So um and thank you for bringing that. We have had um other elected officials outside the city um rent space uh specifically our um US representative and our state representative um in the last couple years have utilized our space and they were charged for that. I think that that it is it is certainly true that in some ways in many ways we are just like other residents and I would say that in an important way we are not like other residents and that we've been elected to be their representative um here on this body and it to me it seems very clear that within our role as that elected representative we should be able to use space here in the city building in order to carry out the functions of our job. um foremost of which is listening and engaging in dialogue with our residents. Um it seems to me that having us rent the space is uh would be some like an undue burden and also inequitable in that we are looking to fulfill a function that other residents do not fulfill. Um, you know, I think that [clears throat] obviously there's a distinction to make to be made between us acting as city commissioners and us acting as people pursue campaigning for an office, right? There are different functions here and I would certainly say if we're looking to hold a campaign event as part of an election cycle, certainly we should pay for that space. Um, but if we are looking to fulfill the the duties of our or the obligations, the responsibilities of this role, um, [clears throat] where we, you know, the bill that I was sent in the fall was like $600, $700 and I earn $1,000 a year in this role. Um, that that doesn't seem to to kind of work out. Um, I will say too that I had conversations with a

number of commissioners across those those metro 6 areas and um they all were seemed like this would be a very unusual step to take is to charge city commissioners for using public spaces to interact with residents. Um, and I I even spoke with the state representative who said that they get monthly space in the their local community center free of charge to engage with their constituents. Um, so the ability for us to use these spaces without fee is certainly not without precedent. Um, and I think is much more in line with the democratic process um, and public benefit uh, than having us pay an hourly fee. I think I might have a Sorry, are you done? Okay. I think I might have more of a a middle ground opinion on this. Um, you know, I I think there are valid points on on both sides. I I would limit it if we if we do want to grant um commissioners free time, I would limit it to um non-election. I like that distinction of it not being a a non-election period of time. Um, and also with a qualification that if it's given free to a commissioner, it has to be an event that's very much publicized, open to the public, not a small like, you know, if if you had like a private Facebook group about an issue. I wouldn't want it just sent um open to them, sent to them because the city is essentially subsidizing that meeting. So, if we were doing um you know, open to all, publish to all, if it's a non-election event, I wonder if there's a middle ground of giving uh you know, you get four per year free meetings, something like that, so that so that we're also not taking up a lot. It's hard to plan for something that doesn't happen a lot, but I wouldn't want us or future commissions to get to a point where we're all monopolizing people in

our positions are all monopolizing meeting space and residents who want to use it, who would be paying to use it can't access it. I don't know that we'd ever get to that point. I don't know enough about our usage capacity, particularly of the rooms that would just have chairs, you know. Um, so I'd maybe like to know more about if this is perceived to be a burden by staff. Um, but I do think that there would be there could be some sort of well-tailored middle ground of few tokens a year kind of thing like your free meeting.

I understand like that and I think that's that's a fair assessment like some middle ground. I guess I just don't see the need. I mean, I've been on the commission since 2017, and I've continued to engage the public monthly, and I've done that for coffees. I've done that at my home. I've done that at other people's homes, I've done that at restaurants, I've done that at Green Ridge. I've never been able to not engage without burdening the city. And I remember years ago when um I helped first found the EGR green committee um we were looking for meeting space and um we were told that I would be charged if we were to have those meetings here at city hall and so we just went and had a Zoom conference and then sometimes we would meet at somebody's house. It's just never been a burden on me and I've continued to engage the public successfully for years. Um, so I don't see the reason why we would put that burden on staff for them to now keep track of who's meeting when, where, and why. I just don't personally see the need for it because I've done it successfully without having to have it for free at the city. [snorts]

I tend to align with the thinking that there are legitimate public purposes that the space can serve. Um and that some level of opportunity for commissioners to utilize the space would be great. Um you know if it hasn't been an issue in the past that it's you know been something that people you know have have been uh you know wanting to book 10 meetings a year here. It probably will continue not to be a huge burden into the future would be my sense. I I love the idea um that Commissioner Schwarz had. I actually had it written down myself that maybe there's some limit on the number of times perhaps it's quarterly. Uh that way we're not overt taxing. There is a cost, right? There is a cost to um upkeep and to heat and to lights and to all of those things that go into keeping a building running. Um so I can I I do see aside that that it could make a lot of sense. Um, I don't know what the usual fee is, so I'm interested in more information about that and, you know, how big of a benefit this could be perceived to be. I completely agree that it should be entirely limited to a public purpose. And also, I I I don't like the time limits during like campaign time. I don't really understand what that might be. This is the United States of America. We're all campaigning all the time. Um, there is no offse. So, um I I that doesn't make a ton of sense to me, but do giving anything for free for campaign purposes also makes no sense either. So, that that's my thinking on it. I I would love to explore policy a bit more. So, so my two cents is just basically that, you know, during the, you know, in my two years, I guess I could say, there have been calls for accessibility and

availability of information and and the word transparency came up quite a bit. Um, so with with certain guard rails and restrictions on the usage, I I would be in favor of a a limit or a numbers approach, making sure that it wasn't just selected selective to a certain group of individuals um with a, you know, limiting a common cause or a common purpose that that the city could all benefit from in terms of availability to that information. And otherwise, I just feel it's a disincentive for commissioners um to speak to a larger group of people outside of coffee hours. Um just is that a disincentive, though? I'm just $600 is a disincentive to me,

right? That's But but that doesn't prevent you from using residence in a in a large group space like this. There really is no other place in town that I myself as an individual who happens to serve on the city commission feel like I would be entitled to. So, I feel it's a barrier of entry and if staff were to come back with a with a plan for us to review, I would be in favor of a general outline that I've just described.

I think that that's a really good point. Um, [clears throat] Commissioner Hunter, that in something that we explored is that within our small community, there really aren't that many other options um that are accessible to us to have events that accommodate more folks than a handful of people. Um, and so I think that there's that and um, Mayor Pavali, to your point about being able to accommodate um, engagement, certainly that's true. Um, and there are different venues and different types of events that serve different purposes. Um, and I I think a group uh, a group convening is a purpose that is different than a one-on-one conversation, etc. Um, and you also have the benefit of having, of course, an office here on site that that commissioners do not. um in order to to host people here. So um I I do like I I couldn't get on board with the idea of like a quarterly quarterly limit um and even public benefit. Um I think that those would make sense. Um but certainly just want to under underscore that I I think examining a policy or or setting some guide rails makes a lot of sense here.

I'm the last one to chime in. So yeah. Uh [clears throat] so I have some notes here. Um, and a lot of them were stolen by Commissioner Berdick. So, I I essentially echo him. Look, I just look at I, you know, I kind of wrote down I don't think it's a good idea. Um, just I think what what I wrote down is I think that the way it's been set up is smart because there is a distinct line to eliminate ambiguity uh between what's going to be a private event to a public one, what's considered public. If it's so public, um, then I would much rather let the staff put something together, articulate that out to the, uh, residents, and then we have an actual public meeting, and then that's a good way to bypass any costs, um, any personal cost that would come out of any commissioner's pocket to, to to spearhead, you know, a public, um, gathering. Outside of that though, I mean, there's a lot of public spaces. We have beautiful parks. We have um, and uh, public spaces inside as well. And and I also love the idea of supporting local businesses. So if you know, I get it. If you're kind of balling on a budget, there are some public spaces that are free to use. Um and uh and then the last thing I wrote down is saying, you know, if it the I guess my um my compromise to this, if this is really kind of a sticking point and we can't just keep things the way they are, which I don't see because I think they're in different times. We're in different times than we were before. Four years ago, you asked me this of like, oh yeah, this seems like everything's going good. you know, I mean, we're a divided commission and it's a little contentious. We have a, you know, we have a a project that's happening that's also dividing the city. I think it just uh so it's a little bit more, it's a little bit different of a feeling here. And then kind of reading through the notes, you're hearing what um um former city clerk Karen uh Brower mentioned saying that, you know, yeah, you know, she noted that, you know, commissioners want commissioners wanting to hold their own public events on matters before the city almost never happened. So, so, but we are now we're in in a time where we want

to do multiple quarterly. So, um so I think that it's not I'd rather just keep it the way it is. I guess my compromise is saying, you know, if it's a price that you um someone wants to put a a project or an event together and come wants to come back to the city for reimbursement consideration um after the fact, we could do that as a case- by case basis. I think um to then we can kind of qualify. But again, I don't we don't really have any metrics to determine whether like, hey, how how public is this? Was it really articulated? was sent to everybody like when we do have sanctioned public events where the city spends money and they send out postcards or they drop something in the water bill and that kind of thing. So, so my so I guess my long-winded way of saying yeah I I like the way it was. I don't see any need to change it. Um and and I think because there are alternatives to using um the paid space the city's offering and it's not like the city's not saying you can't use it. You're just going to pay your fair share like any other resident would. I guess one other concern I have too to do to spurhead off that point, Commissioner Wesley, is is I've even seen it happen here. I know that a couple commissioners had an event once and then a couple weeks later other commissioners wanted to have event. I see this kind of like because we are divided this kind of oneupism which you know the people that kind of fall out with that is staff because people have to staff it and stay late and clean up. And I just think it's me personally, I think keeping the policy as is is best. Again, I've never had any any problems meeting with residents and engaging with them consistently for years. Um, so I and other communities have the same policy in place, so I don't see why we have to have something different simply and I if if I'm correct, this came out of one request, right?

It's it's what spurred the requ spurred the conversation. So one request I don't think needs to you know we need to reup and change policy and change everything um for the one request and I think part of the reason this is coming up too is because this question or these requests are becoming more frequent which again puts burden on cleaning crews staff and whatnot and having people take um keep track of this when we should be doing it personally for ourselves and for our residents. So one thing to note too that first of all there is no policy now. Um and so we there were also the the pair of uh town hall meetings that were held last winter um for which no one was charged. Um and it is certainly when uh Commissioner Hunter and I came back and requested the use of space again in the fall. So a second time in a calendar year um that we were told that we were going to be charged. So one thing was done one time, one thing was done another time. I also think may I continue my statement letting you know that's not true that we were paid that we paid and I paid for the

okay that came later when right um is that we were not we [snorts] were not charged and if you paid later like in November that's that's fine. Um but uh trying to go back uh before I was interrupted to see where I was in my train of thought. um is that uh there is no policy, right? And so uh what we're having a conversation here about is whether or not we need to set a policy. I would also push back gently um against the the notion that uh city commissioners are holding town hall meetings in some sort of oneupsmanship. Um, I think legitimately, uh, there's a lot going on in the city. Um, and there are multiple commissioners and we can't all be in a room at the same time. Um, and so in order to invite the public in outside of a public meeting, we can't all be there together at the same time. So, um, I I don't question anyone's motives in terms of doing this. I I think that in holding these public meetings, we are doing our best um to try to respond to the needs and the requests of our constituents.

Okay. Um we will um do we need a motion or anything? Uh, no. I think I have a I have enough to um I've got a good sense of where the commission um is at and um we will go back and um kind of noodle on this and um resolve and figure out um provide some options to help focus the conversation and and whatnot. I'm sorry. Go ahead.

Sorry, manager Charles. I guess one additional question I would have is in we're still going to have to write a policy because it seems like we've uncovered a lot of different contingencies. So to leave this just open, we would have to codify it to say city commissioners shall be charged. I guess my question then on one of those contingencies would be if we do pay to have the space rented, could we then just select our own group of people that we would solely want to avoid? Um people that we'd want to include and then keep away people that we'd want to avoid. So So if you're since it's our money, right? No. No. And if you're if you're reserving the space, then you have the right to control who comes and who doesn't. Um it's um

and that's no different than it is for any other um space that we rent in in regards to whoever's running the space has the right to say you, not you. Um probably more eloquent say way to say that, but um but with that said, um let us go back and think through there. there's some more nuances to this that I just wanted to get a sense this evening of. Um, and I I do agree we do need to clarify the policy in regards to yes, no, or all the above. But, um, we I have I think I have a strong enough sense of okay, here are some kind of outlines of u potential path forward one way or the other and we'll bring that back eventually.

Okay. Next on the item, the agenda, we have to consider public com. Sure. Sure.

Hi, I'm Jerry Anderson, 435 Edgeir Drive. I I'd first like to say don't underestimate how much you people are appreciated by the community. You are here as volunteers. I mean, you paid a,000 bucks to put in over a,000 hours worth of work as commissioners and as a member of the community. To me, the thought of you paying I just looked up the prices, $53 an hour out of your own pocket for a room is I'm like, that's terrible. We should not be charging commissioners out of their own pockets to meet with residents. As a resident, I would like to see way more meetings than we have. I'd like to have a meeting about helmets and scooters and what to do with the parks and and things like that. And to charge commissioners out of their pocket to have meetings over issues like that means that less of those meetings are going to happen. And I really do think it's in the public benefit to see that you have access to these facilities and that I don't have to go to a coffee shop necessarily for your your monthly meeting and feel like I have to buy a a croissant and a coffee to to talk to the mayor or whatever the situation is.

Coffee is free when you meet with me. Oh, there we go. Um, but plea, you are appreciated. The community I can't speak for the community, but I'm one of a couple members who are here today. I think the community would like to show their appreciation and certainly not do anything that would stop communication between you and us. You are appreciated and I I would value that. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah.

I'm Tom Miller. I live at 1753 Asbury. I'd like to echo what Jerry said about appreciating all the work that you guys do because you don't even get minimum wage. So, it is appreciated. I just want to add one thing. The value that I see in uh town hall type meetings is I'm in a little bit different position than all of you. We're all citizens of the city. You guys are elected to the commission. I'm not. And in terms of having an opportunity to have a discussion about matters of public concern and I think that's really what the heart of this is. Um there's a lot of value in those town hall meetings in for the people who come to simply have a chance to ask a question or make a comment, get something back, have a bilateral discussion about it as opposed to um like with the commission. The rules here are people can make public comment. They get three minutes to say what they want, then they sit down. There's really no back and forth. And from the standpoint of citizens who are not on the commission, um the sense that you can have a conversation with with people. And I realize I could call up any one of you and have that conversation or come to a coffee and have that conversation, but um you don't get the same sense of participation and maybe a sense of having uh a chance to talk to other people about matters of common public concern that you would have at a a public um forum u a town hall type meeting that we could have in one of the rooms here. And you know, I I think that's a little bit different than the rules set up for private usage of of those rooms. So, u with that, thank you.

Thank you. Okay, then we can move on to the next agenda item, consider purchase of patrol handgun. That introduction is by public safety director, Mr. Bamma.

Good evening, [clears throat] mayor and commissioners. I'm here tonight to request approval of our patrol or request approval of to replace our current patrol handguns. This request is outlined in the memo you've received and was also discussed at the finance committee a few weeks ago. The main reason for this request is the manufacturer recommends replacing several key components after 5 years and based on age and the number of rounds that we fire during training and scenarios. While those parts would cost about $75 per handgun, the magazine springs that we need to replace are no longer produced. That means we would have to replace all of the new magazines and as well as upgrading the current handguns, which makes it cost prohibitive. Another important reason for this request is for safety, both for officers and the community. The proposed replacement is for the Glock 9mm Gen 5 with a red dot system. This red dot improves visibility and recognition and allows officers to maintain better awareness of their surroundings at all times. With our current handguns, it relies strong focus on the front iron sight, [snorts] which can limit that awareness. The new Glock also comes with a level three retention holster, which adds an extra level of security as compared to our current level two retention holsters that we are uh that we have in use. Now, the bid you have in front of you is from Keysler's Police Supply, which is an approved My Deals vendor. They also hold the state contract for service weapons and ammunition. They will also take our handguns as a tradein as reflected in the quote. And I'd be happy to address any questions that you may have. There any questions for director BCA? I

have a question. Um, so to a lay person [clears throat] like myself, it doesn't seem like five years is that long. Um, is it typical that these parts become unavailable so quickly in a life cycle of a weapon like this? I guess in other words, will we be able to replace parts in 5 years on these new models rather than replacing?

I would I would assume so. and and it's not typical that parts become obsolete after 5 years. There has been a few manufacturer concerns with this particular model that we currently have. Um and to speak of uh you know I've had the question before too. Why five years? The amount of um rounds that we shoot through them annually and the fact that we're inside and outside constantly and all kinds of weather conditions do cause extra wear on the handguns. Yeah. But yes, it is atypical for parts to be obsoleted for 5 years. Okay. Thank you. [snorts]

more couple comments. [clears throat] One, um I I think that the uh personally I think the Glocks are a superior sidearm than than a SIG is. So I think it's a smart move and they um fail. I think to to some of the questions about finding parts, I think that Gen 5s have been around for a while and I don't see them going away. Um, it's a I was just price checking and I'm like, it seems like you're throwing the red dots in almost for free. It seems like, which is a heck of a deal. Contract. It is a It's a good price.

Those are normally it' probably double if a normal person want to buy it. And then, um, but I do feel like we're getting a little bit, you know, um, they're [clears throat] going a little light on the tradeins. I think in my personal opinion, I think you'd get more for it, but maybe that's a trade-off. But anyway, I'm I'm I'm for it. I think it's a obviously the the other sidearms are now becoming obsolete with parts and wear and tear. I think you'll be happier especially much more accurate with those red dots too. Any other questions for director become? [snorts] No. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Could I please have a motion and a second for this agenda item? So moved.

Second. Commissioners, any further conversation? Okay, just a comment. I hope that they have to be used never. Yeah. [laughter] Training only. Definitely. Yeah. On targets only. Yeah. All right. That being said, all those in favor say yes. Yes. Any opposed? Motion carries. Next, we have to consider the appointment of Mayor Katie Favali to the Rapid Inter urban transit partnership board. That introduction is by city manager Charles.

Uh, thank you, Madam Mayor. Um so we have two representatives on the rapid board uh Mayor Folly and uh Mr. Morz who was appointed last last year. Yeah. Um so u we got notice from the rapid that um her term has come to an end. So it's a two-year term. So um there's a request to um reappoint her. Uh she does currently serve as vice chair. V I was just elected vice chair at the last meeting. Yes. Correct. So with that, right, any questions for manager Charles? Okay. Um, could I please have a motion and a second for that agenda item? So moved. Second. Wonderful. Any further comments? Verdict.

Okay. Um, all those in favor say yes. Yes. Any opposed? All right. Motion carries. Next to the approval of the consent agenda items. May I please have a motion and a second to approve tonight's consent agenda items? So move. Second. Wonderful. All those in favor say yes. Yes. Yes. Any opposed? All right. Motion carries. Next, we are going into an executive session. Um, an executive session is requested for attorney client communication in accordance with section 8H of the Open Meetings Act. [clears throat] May I please have a motion and a second to go into executive session? So moved. Second. And it's a roll call vote. Roll call vote. Yeah. Commissioner Berdick,

yes. Commissioner Grace, yes. Commissioner Hunter, yes. Commissioner Schwarz, yes. Commissioner, yes. Commissioner Wesley, yes. Mayoral, yes. Okay. Wonderful. Um, we will not be coming back to vote on anything in this session. So, this meeting is adjourned.