City Commission - Regular Meeting

Hey Chris, is Chad Geers okay? Let me test the echo again. Test, test, test. How's that, Jeff? Hello, test, test, test. Hey Chris, can you hear us okay?

Loud and clear.

Thank you.

Good evening and welcome to the City of Battle Creek, Michigan, and the Battle Creek City Commission meeting for June 16th, 2026. It is 7 p.m. We welcome everyone here to this evening. We're going to start with an invocation, a moment of silence, and I'll also call upon the Pledge of Allegiance to be led by Commissioner Lacoste. If you're able to stand, please stand for a moment of silence, and then we'll go to the Pledge of Allegiance by Commissioner Lacoste. Commissioner Lacoste.

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.

Thank you Commissioner Lacoste. Next item on our agenda is roll call. Madam Clerk when you're ready.

Commissioner Katarski-Smith. Here. Commissioner Lacoste. Here. Commissioner Lance. Commissioner Morris. Here. Mayor Behnke.

Here.

Commissioner Reynolds. Present. Commissioner O'Donnell.

Here.

Commissioner Simmons.

Here.

And Vice Mayor Sophia. Here. Thank you.

And Commissioner Simmons is participating via the Zoom Next item on our agenda is proclamations and awards. We have several beautiful Battle Creek Awards for May and for June, I believe. City Manager, thanks. I appreciate your help.

Absolutely. The first award we have is for NPC1, Ward 2 nomination, Community Action at 175 Main Street in Battle Creek. We have NPC 11, Ward 4 nomination, Andrew Olson and Bridget Olson at 469 East Hamilton Battle Creek. And then we have NPC 3, Ward 4 nomination, Complete Accounting and Tax Services, LLC. And then also for NPC 1, we have Ward 2 nomination, D. Eugene McGuffey at 33 Horton Avenue. NPC 3, Ward 4 nomination, Aaron Oaks at 312 Lakeview Avenue. NPC 5, Ward 1 nomination, Robert Larrison at 97 Myrtle, Battle Creek. NPC 10, Ward 1 nomination, Mary, which is out. I'm sorry, I'm going to Josbeak. And then Ward 4 nomination, the City of Battle Creek Fire Station 6. And those are the nominations for May.

Well, on behalf of the people of Battle Creek, we want to say thank you very much. And what I'd like to do is if we have any volunteers to tell us how you transformed your home and really presented it so that we encourage other people to do it. So do we have any volunteers that would like to talk about it?

I don't have a home, but we have a business. We have community action. So we're at 179 Maine and 169 Maine. And since I took over CEO in 2022, I've really been pushing our maintenance team and our grounds teams to just really keep it up looking good. Everyone knows at the building that if the grass is a little high, Courtney's going to complain. So they're really good at keeping that. We've been planting flowers, just trying to keep it up, making our neighborhood look nice and hope that our neighbors do as well.

And thank you very much. And you're going to have some new neighbors here shortly that will be building across the street. So we encourage that. Anytime we can have a new construction in Battle Creek. So on behalf of the citizens, we thank you and congratulate you and continue to do your best. Thanks.

All right, and then for June, we have NPC1, Ward 2 nomination, Nicole Garveson. At 45, Horton. NPC3, Ward 4 nomination, Robert and Lisa Mora. At 451, Iroquois. We have Ward 4 nomination, NPC3, Scooters. At 612, West Columbia and Battle Creek. And we also have NPC1, Ward 3 nomination, Post Foods, LLC. NPC2, Ward 3 nomination, New Level Church. NPC11, Ward nomination, Anna Kaner. an NPC 11 award nomination, Red Lobster.

While we're finding that one, is there any volunteers to tell us how you transformed your property?

We just kind of got lucky. We're a new build, so we just continue keeping up on the maintenance and being proud of what we put together.

Correct, correct, yep.

Congratulations.

On behalf of the citizens of Battle Creek, we would like to say thank you, congratulations, and please encourage other people to improve your neighborhood. Thank you very much. Next item on our agenda is a presentation for fiscal year 20, 2026, water and sewer rate presentation. I'm going to turn over our city manager, Amanda.

Thank you, Mayor. I would like to ask Cole Sullivan to come up. He is with Stantec, and he will provide the presentation this evening.

And just so everyone knows, Commissioner Simmons will be the first one to ask questions once the presentation is done.

Just let me just nod and I'll do it.

Okay, thank you all for letting me present to you today. My name is Cole Sullivan. I am a financial consultant at Stantec and recently did the fiscal year 2026 rate study update for the city of Battle Creek. So to quickly go over the agenda for the presentation, I want to give a bit of background to this rate study before going into our approach for the update, as well as kind of some key data points and results and the financial plan overview. And finally, have some recommended changes and the updated proposed five-year rate plan for your consideration today. So some background, the utility is governed by multiple agreements. Materially there's a wastewater treatment services agreement between the city of Battle Creek and a few contributing jurisdictions in the area. Some of these customers are also served by the city as water customers. And as part of this agreement, the plan of rates is to be updated every five years. So 2021 was the prior rate study. There was a cost allocation as well as a revenue sufficiency analysis that determined the plan of rates for fiscal year 2026 until today. This rate study builds off that work and updates it with current information and budgets and capital plans. So Stantec worked alongside the city to update that five-year plan of projected rate increases. For the water and sewer systems, we looked at the operating and maintenance expenses, updated debt service expenses, and projected capital costs. This rate plan allows the utility to meet its fund balance targets as laid out in the city's fiscal policies, fund needed capital projects, and meet covenants on its bonds. The proposed rate plan is listed in the table at the bottom of this slide. So for fiscal year 2027 for water, we're proposing a one and a half percent annual index rate plan through fiscal year 2031. And for sewer, it's a two and a half percent annual rate index from 2027 through 2031. So we worked with the city to smooth out these rate increases over time, consider customer impacts and manage project risks. So for the water finance plan, the city provided fiscal year ending trial balances for 2025 that we use as the starting fund balance for our projection period. The city also provided operating and expense budgets that were adopted for fiscal year 2026, as well as the most recent five-year CIP for the water system. These expenses, both capital and operating, we applied an escalation factor to. So for the capital improvement program, there's a 3.3% annual escalation cost with a 2026 base. For the annual O&M, this is a 4% annual cost escalation. These include expected increases in inflation and were informed by both city input on specific line items as well as Stantec's forecast from our economic team. The five-year CIP for the water system is $45 million, and that includes large programs like the lead service line replacement, as well as upgrades to the well fields and water main repair and replacement throughout the service area. Total to fund some of these projects the city has gone and got a financing from the drinking water SRF program Once these projects are complete the proceeds on that loan will result in 1.2 million of new annual debt service that is net of the principal forgiveness terms that were on that loan and In the water system, a large project that we were tracking and included in our assumptions was for the Blue Oval. So there is a separate service agreement with the City of Marshall that outlines some preliminary terms on the service agreement for the Blue Oval project. When we were looking at updating this study, the exact details and historical flows were not yet occurred. So we made some estimates on what to include in our revenue. So on that table in 2026, the kind of minimum annual contractual flow is 11.41 million gallons per year. So we assumed the city would get revenue charging that flow at a rate of $1.64, which is the current inside city rate for Battle Creek. Future studies will take a look at this assumption again and develop a wholesale rate once flows have been observed over a period of a few years and we have a good basis for the units of service to determine a wholesale rate. And so this is the output dashboard of our financial model. So on the top row, once again, presenting that 1.5% annual rate index for the water fund. Notably, I want to call attention to the chart on the top left. The operating fund balance, the cash available in the utility, is meeting all of its reserve target requirements. And the city is also pulling out a portion of revenues from the Blue Oval project for potential future improvements or project costs that may be incurred as a result of that service. So that's the black bar along that top line there is kind of reflecting the proceeds from that project. Of note, the only borrowing that we are projecting is that drinking water SRF loan, which has already been secured. Those proceeds are to be spent over the next two fiscal years, but no additional borrowing is projected in this time for the water fund. I believe there's just a few kind of call-out boxes. It kind of just sounds like we can go ahead to the next slide. Okay. Let's turn our attention to the sewer fund. So taking a similar starting point and assumptions as the water fund, the city provided the fiscal year and 2025 trial balance, as well as the operating and expense budgets for the fiscal year 2026 and the most recent five-year capital plan. The CIP and O&M escalation factors applied are the same as the water fund, so 3.3% for capital, 4% for annual O&M. In talking with city staff and taking a look at budgeted positions in the sewer fund for the upcoming fiscal years, we did determine it was best to apply a 90% execution rate to the personal services costs, so the salaries costs, as well as a portion of the fixed O&M. This is really just after an evaluation of historical year's performance and how the utility typically spends its funds. For the five-year CIP in the wastewater fund, it's $38.3 million over the next five years. This includes dollars for solids handling, riverside force main improvements, and other lift station improvements across the service area. So once again, this is the panel dashboard for the sewer fund, have the 2.75% proposed annual rate index for 2027 through 2031. This proposed plan of rates allows the utility to have a sufficient fund balance to meet all of its operating requirements, all of its revenue requirements and meet its fiscal policy targets. Just to reiterate, all of the capital in the sewer fund is to be cashed financed. We believe the rates will allow it to be cashed financed. There's no additional borrowing projected in the sewer fund. So I want to just turn the attention to customer impacts and how these rates will change a typical residential bill over the next five fiscal years. So today, in fiscal 2026, assuming the average residential customer uses six CCF per month, that's 100 cubic feet per month, their combined water and sewer bill would be $68.35. In fiscal 27, applying these proposed rate increases, this customer would see a bill impact of $1.52 per month, or about 2.2% of their monthly combined water and sewer bill. By the time the five-year period is complete, this proposed rate plan is implemented. The total bill for a water and sewer customer with six CCF would be $76.59. So once again, ranging between $1.50 increase per month to about $1.75 by the end of the five-year period. Finally, I want to leave with some additional considerations on the water funds, particularly related to the Blue Oval project and other future capital needs. So the additional revenues we project from Blue Oval are incorporated in this study. To the extent flows may differ materially from what we have projected, that could lead to a large variance in revenues. That's something the city and the utility should continue to monitor. Once plant flows are better known and observed, the recommendation is to come back and do a wholesale rate analysis with a cost of service for the water fund. The other kind of large project consideration on the water is a future wastewater treatment expansion. So in the five-year period, there are no dollars budgeted for a wastewater treatment expansion, but the city has noted in years 6 through 10, or even possibly outside the 10-year planning horizon, there may be significant improvements needed to the wastewater treatment plant that should continue to be monitored. I believe that's all I have for my slides today. I want to take a few moment if there's any questions from the commission, happy to answer them now.

All right, we're going to start with Commissioner Simmons. Commissioner Simmons, please go ahead.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you for the presentation. I guess my question to you is more from, and we received some additional information today from the city manager about how Blue oval would factor into this because on our background material, not just your presentation. A lot of the other material that we've received blue oval is referenced a lot. And so I think when when residents see this, they're like, why are we getting these rate increases to help subsidize this and I just want want for, you know, kind of public clarification. that how does blue oval factor in, like this rate increase? So say they weren't in the picture at all, would we likely be facing similar increases? Actually, these increases are much better than our previous five-year term, which we were coming out of an extremely high inflationary period at that time. These projections are now within a more reasonable inflationary kind of projections. And everyone knows that there are additional costs that we incur with the staff and construction and upgrades to capital improvement kind of things. So if you could just please kind of address that concern about where we would be without the additional capacity that would be required.

Yeah, and we looked at various scenarios of flows sold for the Blue Oval project, and what we actually saw is if there was no flows coming in from Blue Oval, the amount of rate increases that would be needed would actually be higher than what's proposed today. as assumptions are with kind of the current capital plan and cost to serve that project we are finding the revenues are a net benefit to the city and actually keeping the rates proposed down from other scenarios that we looked at where those flows may be lower and thus the revenues would be lower chris any other questions and just a yeah just to follow on on that and and i appreciate that was kind of my understanding that

As I dug into it, it seemed like we were getting some additional funds from MEDC and the like to help build that out. But I guess my concern is when folks look at their water bills and they look at the line items on there, It's usually like, wow, the water and the actual sewer usage are reasonable. It's the readiness that's where they really get you. And, you know, I tend to agree. And the readiness, we've talked quite a bit about, you know, aging infrastructure and that all needing to be upgraded. Well, when we do these upgrades, we have to take into consideration upgrades with a much larger capacity. So we're all helping kind of subsidize a much larger capacity for expansion, for things like a blue oval. Obviously, we're only sending the water out there, not the sewer, but additional expansion for, say, growth out into the townships. Emmett Township, the Beckley Road corridor, the other side, M66, sending a lot of sewage our way. And then, you know, we have to build 10 million gallon overflow tank on Edgebrook to help accommodate this are the rest of us you know the residents in town helping subsidize you know expanded growth from projects like that outside of the city if you want to respond

Yes. So as far as if I believe my understanding of the question is kind of considering, you know, what happens if there's kind of growth outside of the service area and we need to kind of, you know, have the readiness to serve that. That is really kind of what that next steps of these considerations would look at, right? Like once those flows are observed and we know which customers are using it. WE CAN CREATE KIND OF A WHOLESALE RATE ANALYSIS TO REALLY CAPTURE THOSE COSTS AT THAT TIME. LIKE I SAID, WITH THE ASSUMPTIONS WE HAVE TODAY AND KIND OF WITH THE UNITS OF SERVICE KNOWN, WE WERE ABLE TO PROJECT REVENUES BASED ON THAT, AND WE SAW IT'S A NET BENEFIT TO THE CITY, BUT OF COURSE AS THOSE FLOWS CONTINUE TO BE OBSERVED AND WE MIGHT SEE THAT THAT WATER KIND OF BEING DELIVERED TO DIFFERENT AREAS, THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN ANOTHER RATE STUDY.

CHRIS, ANY OTHER FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS?

No, thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Smith.

Thank you. So Chris kind of touched on this, but I was curious. So these do not impact the water readiness and sewer readiness rates as well, or they do?

So the percentage increase would be applied across the board to all rates. So it would be, you know, 1.5% times the sewer readiness fee plus the volumetric rates. Okay.

And then I know that you guys had mentioned that the Blue Oval pays the in-city rates, and I was just curious as to why.

That was kind of what was determined after the initial negotiation between Marshall in the city of Battle Creek Aaron or Steve might be able to give a bit more context to kind of you know exactly how some of those conversations went but it was really just for now there was a need for a Placeholder rate that everyone could agree on until you know we're able to kind of observe those units of service and flows better to get to a point where we're looking at a wholesale rate further into the future

Commissioner, do you want Steve or Aaron to answer that further?

Yes.

No, that's pretty much exactly what it was. It was a starting point, and we monitor as we moved along and grew into providing water to Marshall for it.

And then, forgive me for not knowing, but what would the rate typically be for somebody that's out of those city limits like this?

Typically out of the city limits. It depends on where they're at. There's different rates for each of the different

So like Marshall, I guess, where Blue Oval is, like in the area of... What are the rates in Marshall? I'm saying like what would we... Yeah, well, for the outside area of Battle Creek.

So you're talking like Emmett and... Yeah. Those were based off of the agreements that were drafted many years ago. I think Emmett is... 1.27 times the in-city rate. Okay.

Okay. Thank you. Yep.

Any other questions? Commissioner, go down.

I remember when we were talking about giving the water to Blue Oval, and they actually paid for the infrastructure and then delivered it back to the city. Is that correct, that None of the city funds are even used to build the Blue Oval.

No, those were all funded through the META project. They paid for all the improvements for the City of Battle Creek's Verona Pump Station, Emmett Township's Water Main connecting, and Marshall Township's Water Main completing the loop around there, and all the rest of the improvements in Marshall at their wastewater plants.

Yeah, I just wanted to make sure that was clarified. Yep. I was going to say, the rate increase is definitely a lot lower than what it's been before due to inflation. Can we go over, though, the sewer rates just a little bit? I'm assuming that with the cost of energy going up and a lot of other disposals is really what's causing that increase.

Yeah, sewer rates generally are kind of more sensitive to larger changes of inflation because you're really looking, it's more chemical intensive and a bit more, you know, kind of pumping treatment intensive. So we actually have a specific inflation factor for chemicals specifically that was included in this rate study that I believe is somewhere between four and a half and five percent per year. you know, the fact that we're kind of still able to kind of keep the proposed rate down below that level of inflation for a significant portion of the treatment process is a, you know, good sign of operations.

Thank you. Any other comments by the commission? Commissioner Lacoste.

So the, I don't know what page this is. When they talk, when you guys talk about the average inside city bill dollar change, does that include the readiness fees? Because you said that percentage applies to that as well.

Yes.

Okay, so it goes from like $24.88 to $26.33. I think it's like almost $2. Correct. Okay. It's touching on what Simmons said about Blue Oval. So if some of the readiness fees apply to, you know, increasing the capacity for, you know, projects like that, so how does that affect our bottom line? I'd imagine that adds our cost to the individual bills.

Yeah, so when, you know, kind of looking at the wholesale rate, you know, we will look at things kind of like infrastructure installed in the ground and, you know, the size of pipes and the distance of pipes is kind of like allocation factors for that rate. So, you know, as an example of that, if you're using, you know, kind of feet of linear pipe as an allocation like the, longer transmission may you need to serve a certain area, like we will reflect that in their readiness to serve. So the idea is that, you know, kind of those large capital costs for outside city customers, you would be able to recover through that rate plus a portion of the incremental O&M costs that the city might incur. to serve the water, you know, as far as additional production at the plant, additional staff time to kind of, you know, work through customer billing and things like that. So all those incremental costs would be considered. And like I said, probably from the city's perspective, as far as like the direct bottom line, it'd be that incremental O&M expense that we would really, you know, kind of focus on is making sure being recovered because the capital can be a bit more direct to tie to a certain project or, you know, a pipe installed in the ground or something like that.

Right, okay, thank you. Also, on the one part, it talks about the dollar amount for lead service line replacements, well field upgrades, water mains. Lead service line replacements, don't we get reimbursed or grants for those?

Yes, so I believe the loan is about $24.5 million, and there's about $5 million in principal forgiveness. So the net debt service payment that was presented, the $1.2 million figure, is considering that principal forgiveness grant.

Okay. I think that's all I have.

Are there any other questions? Commissioner or Vice Mayor?

Thank you, Mayor. So, and this might be an Amanda or a Steve question. I just want to make sure that I'm understanding all of this. So our water and sewer funds are enterprise funds, which means that they are supposed to be self-sustaining. We're not using general funds. Correct. Just subsidized water and sewer. Correct. these fees cover the cost of running that program. I'm seeing lots of nodding, thank you. So I'm assuming that you have done these types of studies for other local units?

Correct, yes.

So how do our increases compare with other units that have that same enterprise fund set up? Are we in the ballpark? Are we up, above, low?

Generally speaking, I would say kind of a typical rate adjustment, you know, kind of with our current cost inflation environment is kind of right around, you know, three to three and a half percent. So in this current proposal, it's sitting, you know, just a little bit lower than that. You know, certainly it always depends on the amount of capital a utility is installing and, you know, how they're financing that. Generally speaking like we're looking at kind of a three to four percent is kind of what we think it was like the water and sewerage maintenance index which Tracks nationally and regionally the kind of cost of water Thank you How many of these studies do you do a year? How many studies do I do a year right now? I am on 18 active studies over the course of the year so Did you do our study in 2021? I did not I was not with Stantec in 2021 when they did this study I

But your firm did it, right?

Yes, yes, my firm did it.

Okay. If you would make one recommendation to the commission and to the public, what would you recommend that we address in our plan?

Well, I would recommend you adopt this plan, you know, as written today. You really are looking at, you know, cost increases that are below inflation. The other thing I would just kind of continue to consider is once the lead service lines are replaced is really just maybe consider ways to have a robust water main replacement to maintain those assets. KIND OF OUR BIG RECOMMENDATION FOR UTILITIES IS WHEN YOU MAKE A BIG PUSH TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF YOUR ASSETS TO NOT JUST LET THEM SIT IN THE GROUND, RIGHT? LIKE REALLY FIND WAYS TO BE PROACTIVE ABOUT THAT MAINTENANCE, ESPECIALLY AFTER YOU'VE ALREADY MADE THE INVESTMENT LIKE YOU GUYS HAVE OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS.

FINAL QUESTION, WHAT CAPACITY ARE WE CURRENTLY AT IN THE WATER SYSTEM?

WHAT CAPACITY? I DO NOT HAVE COMMITTED TO MEMORANDUM. I WOULD HAVE TO ASK STEVE FOR THAT.

So right now, as far as water system goes, our treatment plant has a capacity of about 24 million gallons a day. Normal day is somewhere around 10 to 11.

That's fine.

It peaks up a little bit more than that, but that's a normal day.

It's better than 99%. Yeah, exactly. Very good report. I want to thank you. This report is online, correct, Vicki? It's a good piece of information. And one thing that's really beneficial is that we retain ownership of the Ford Blue Oval Extension, correct?

The ownership is broken up into the parts and pieces who it services. So we own the upgrades at Verona Plant. Emmett is the owner of the water mains in Emmett Township. Marshall is the owners of the water mains and equipment in Marshall. But we own all the upgrades at our plant.

Okay, so each municipality owns I didn't realize that thank you. Thank you any other questions for the consultant I Want to thank you for your honesty, and you made some good recommendations to us Thanks, thank you very much for your time today, and thank you for letting Stantec be a part of this race study. Thanks Next item on our agenda is chair noting any added or deleted resolutions

Resolution 411 regarding an easement was added to the agenda Next item on our agendas petitions communications and reports Thank You madam clerk excited amount our agenda is a public hearing madam clerk when you're ready This is a public hearing to receive comment on the brownfield plan for the proposed the fields at Battle Creek development project located within the city of Battle Creek at 15105 South Elmer Road.

I declare this public hearing open. If you'd like to make a public comment on the subject of this public hearing, then please raise your hand and wait for us to acknowledge you to come forward to the podium. Well, you'll have three minutes to make your comment. Please state your name and address before making your comments. Is anyone here wanting to make a public comment at this time? Do we have anyone here to make a public comment? One more time, any public comments? Hearing none, we'll declare this public hearing closed. Next item on our agenda is public comment regarding any remaining agenda items. If you'd like to make public comment regarding any remaining agenda item, please raise your hand. and we will acknowledge you to come forward to the podium. You will have four minutes to make your comments. Please state your name and your address before beginning your comment and indicate which agenda item you are speaking to. Do we have any public comments at this time? Yes, Joe.

Joe Harris, Battle Creek. My comments are Resolution 414, which is the water readiness fee. And I got some more information from listening to the gentleman there. But you guys have all the inside information. So I'm just basing my opinion on what I've seen and what I've read. Even though that fee seems low over time, my answer is still going to be no to this. I talked to a person in Battle Creek. last week and their property owner, and they're kind of lamenting over the fact that their water readiness fee was more than their actual water usage. Those are some cases that does happen. And when a readiness fee exceeds the cost of a service being used, I believe it's reasonable for citizens to ask whether the system is fair. From what I've read, part of this justification for the raise INCREASES AS THE ADDITIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND CAPACITY NEEDED TO SERVE FORD BLUE OVAL AND RELATED INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT. YET ACCORDING TO THE REPORT, FORD WILL INITIALLY BE CHARGED THE CITY'S INSIDE RATE, WHILE FUTURE STUDIES WILL DETERMINE THE WHOLESALE RATE AFTER MORE DATA USAGE IS COLLECTED. MY QUESTION IS, WHERE IS THE TAXPAYER'S WHOLESALE RATE? WHY CAN'T WE GET A RATE LIKE THAT? IN MY OPINION, WITH THESE TYPE OF RATES, AND PEOPLE WHO WILL BE HURT BY THE MOST ARE GOING TO BE SENIOR CITIZENS AND WORKING FAMILIES, LOWER TO MIDDLE INCOME TAX RESIDENTS. FOR BLUE OVAL, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE AFFECTED. THEY'RE A MULTIBILLION DOLLAR COMPANY. EVERY INCREASE MATTERS. MANY FAMILIES ARE ALREADY STRUGGLING WITH RISING COSTS FOR HOUSING, FOOD, INSURANCE, AND UTILITIES. Some households are working multiple jobs just to make ends meet. Others are searching for employment in an economy where too many jobs fail to provide the truly livable wage, and every increase matters, no matter how small it seems. Instead of increasing fees across the board, why not explore alternatives? Why not create a tiered system based on actual water usage? A retired senior living alone typically uses far less water than a large household, yet both pay the same or similar readiness fees. There should be a way to make this system more equitable for those who use less and can least afford another increase. What concerns me most is that Ford Blue Oval, a multi-billion dollar corporation, is expected EXPECTED TO CONSUME MILLIONS OF GALLONS OF WATER, YET THE BURDEN OF INCREASING SYSTEM COST DOES APPEAR TO BE FALLING ON LOCAL RESIDENTS, ESPECIALLY WITH THE FACT THAT WE'VE BEEN TOLD THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE LOOKED AT WITH A WHOLESALE RATE. WE DON'T GET THAT RATE OF CITIZENS. IF SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENTS ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPORT MAJOR INDUSTRIAL USERS, THEN THOSE USERS SHOULD BEAR A SIGNIFICANT SHARE OF THOSE COSTS. During difficult economic times, families are forced to make tough choices and find creative ways to stretch every dollar. My wife and I understand this reality all too well. If families must tighten their budgets, then government should be willing to do the same. In looking at detailed accounting of where the water readiness dollars are going, as well as cost escalation factors, I'm wondering if there is any attempt to cut costs. I'm just asking the City Commission to... possibly table this issue, explore alternatives to across-the-board increases, and look at where costs and estimates can be cut. I just thank you for your time. Don't put the burden on the citizens anymore with this. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments. Are there any other public comments at this time? Yes, sir.

Steve Koch, Washington Avenue North. I want to speak on the water situation, and I've spoke before. We're talking about spending X amount of dollars per family, per household. I've watched my garbage bill and my water bill, and I have no sewer. I have my own safety tank, believe it or not. And I've watched my bill go from about $32 to $35 last year to $45 to $50 this year. My water usage is about maybe $5. The rest of it is readiness and then garbage fees and everything else. The question is, you're saying, you're putting up here, oh, it's only going to go up $5 in five years, about $1 per month more per year, which all sounds great. But then, like he was saying, the readiness fees. This is the same thing that the electric company does and everybody else does. Oh, well, we're mandated. We can only raise it to .08% on your electric bill, but we can hit your readiness fee and your tax fees and your service fees and your excise fees and this fee. And by the time you get done, your electric bill, which should have been $25, is now $125. as he was speaking, the readiness, the readiness, the readiness. Years ago, we didn't have a readiness bill on our water. You paid for the water that you use, and that's what you paid for. And then a certain individual who works at the water company decided, I have an idea. Let's create a readiness charge so we can bring in more revenue for the city of Battle Creek. So that's what they did. And our bills all went up. So on that message, I'm still running on 1947 five inch lead pipe in front of my house. Why is that? The question, lead pipe, five inches down Washington Avenue, since 1947, and it has not been replaced. So I've been drinking lead water since I moved in that house in 1997. That's almost 30 years I've been drinking lead water. And then we had, what was it, last year, year and a half, two years ago, we've been drinking water that was over... charged with chemicals to sanitize the water, which then brought up our chemicals, and so we're drinking water with more chemicals in it. So the question is, when are we going to get decent water? Almost sounds like Flint. I hate to use that word, but it does. And yet we're spending millions of dollars. We're going to give them millions of gallons of water to Blue Oval. Can't Blue Oval with their billions of dollars that the governor gave them Can't they drill their own hole in the ground and suck their own water out of the ground and take care of and clean their own water up? They're spending billions of dollars. They've got all that land. They should be able to drill their own wells. Why are we supporting them? That's the question I have to ask.

Thank you for your comments. Are there any other public comments at this time? Yes, John.

John Kennebec, 234 South Avenue. What I'm about to speak on, I'm speaking to the citizens of Battle Creek, not the Commission. I'm talking about Resolution 415. Sometime a while ago, the city government took two loans out which forced the citizens of Battle Creek to pay the payments on this. The loans now are down to $6,370,000 and the second loan is $15,265,000. This resolution is to negotiate a lower interest rate. If you do this, that means if you get the interest rate lowered, it means the payment which is paid to the lending agency is less, not what we're paying now. Who keeps that benefit from what you were paying and what we are paying to what we're going to pay? The city government. There's no cost decrease to the citizens of Battle Creek. You're getting ripped off, you're just financing the government of Battle Creek. That's resolution 415. Now let's work on resolution 414, water increases. A little history lesson. The last time you approved cost increases was five years ago. It took two separate resolutions, and the total amount of cost increases in those total for the citizens of Battle Creek for that five years was 1,052 cost increases. You know how many cost increases this one is today? 1,310. 150 plus cost increases five years later. The City of Battle Creek citizens will pay 255 cost increases over this next five-year period. Bedford, 260 for sewer and water. Emmett Township, 105. Sewer, 125. Total, 230. Total of all the cost increases, as I said, is 1,310. Interesting presentation, huh? Let's use their own numbers that they have here right now. I'm talking about Battle Creek water. There are 130 cost increases in the water system for Battle Creek right now, just the water. Let me give you just an example way out in the fort. A 10-inch pipe right now is $70,150 plus 13 cents. You're getting a reduction, ladies and gentlemen, out there in the Fort. They're dropping off the 13 cents. That's the reduction. But in five years, it's going to be $79,877.85. The cost out there is going to be about $9,727.85. So if you're going to buy one of those products out there that's going to hit the market, Congratulations, you've got an increase in those products, whatever happens. If you go to the grocery store today, they've got water lines and what you'd call a sewer, sprinkler lines in there. So their rates are going up. So you're going to be spending more money on food. Let me give you one example for people that are getting water at a three-quarter inch line. The cost is $915.01. That's what it used to be. Now what it's going to be is a reduction of one penny. In five years, you're going to be paying, instead of $915 for that time period, you're going to be spending $1,041.89, basically a $126 increase just for the water line, nothing else. Now, I know you're going to be pointing and passing this out, but I am looking at all the cost increases, and thank you for your time.

Thank you for your comments. Are there any other public comments at this time? Any other public comments? Yes, sir, and then we'll go to the back row.

This is related to the newly, sorry, Brian Boylan. I am the director for facilities and maintenance at Denso here in Battle Creek and all of the Denso manufacturing here in the area. This is related to item 411, the newly added easement. We have been working with consumers for about a year. We've had multiple power outages within the Fort Custer area, including the Denso property. Obviously, this has a large impact to our manufacturing. And this easement is to help consumers upgrade the electrical grid as it feeds the entire Fort Custer power system. So I just wanted to, on behalf of Denso, thank the city commission, thank consumers, and thank the Air National Guard for partnering with us in this big expansion. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments, please.

Good evening. Eric Lathers, Consumers Energy. I'd just like to echo Brian's comments. We would love to have this partnership with the easement. This creates a more safe and reliable infrastructure by going underground. Helps the whole Fort Custer, including the Air National Guard. Like Brian said, we've had about 11 or 12 outages in the last six years. That's a lot of outages for, you know, including our large industrial facilities. So really just we want to thank you in a partnership with Denzel and its affiliates, Fort Custer, the city of Battle Creek. Would really appreciate this approval so we can get things scheduled and get moving.

Thank you for your comments. Any other public comments at this time? Any other public comments? Hearing none, we'll move on.

I'd like to move for the approval of the consent agenda.

Second.

The move to approve the consent agenda. Are there any comments the commissioner would like to make on the consent agenda?

Commissioner? Just a quick one. I'd like to echo the easement. I do work in underground utilities also, and that's the way it seems to be going as I'm looking at the shelf cloud outside. It's like, you know, we used to be aerial and now we're, Underground and it does cost a little more up front, but in the end All we got to fight against is those mice and not the weather and poles and other dangers that are out there So thank you for bringing that up Thank You Patrick Commissioner Lacoste, I just have a quick one.

I know in 409 the resurfacing I don't know if it's possible with resurfacing, but when they're we have resurfacing or paving of the roads I'm wondering if we can figure out a way so we don't have the big indents where the manholes are all over town I don't know what happened before when we've had road construction done, but it seems to be a significant issue here in town.

Yeah, I'd say there's probably a difference between when we do like a road reconstruction, where they pop everything back up and level everything out, and we just do a resurfacing, and that's what we're doing this time is resurfacing for this year. So the manholes probably aren't going to be addressed in this, but the next time we do road construction for certain roads, it would be.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner. Any other Commission comments? So, United, would you please vote on the consent agenda? CONSENT AGENDA HAS BEEN APPROVED. NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS RESOLUTION 412. IS THAT CORRECT? ALL RIGHT. RESOLUTION 412.

The city's MERS pension system allows members to purchase service credit, and Mr. Segovia made a request in May of 2026 to purchase two months of generic credit service. MERS is a defined benefit pension plan that covers all of the city's non-uniformed employees. Approval of the governing body is required. The entire actuarial cost of the service credit purchase must be paid in a lump sum to MERS and is the responsibility of the employee, Jose Segovia. This resolution seeks authorization for Jose Segovia to purchase two months of generic service credit pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Employees Retirement System, or MERS.

I'd like to move for the approval of resolution 412. Second.

Been moved and supported to approve resolution 412. Are there any comments by the commission? Seeing none, would you please vote on resolution 412? Resolution 412 has been approved. Next item on our agenda is resolution 413. Madam Clerk.

Pursuant to Employment Provision 296.09, Section C, as amended in March of 2026, no person shall be employed by the City or paid with City funds who has retired under the provisions of the Police and Fireman Retirement System. The City Manager may make exceptions to this provision for a period not to exceed six months, when they feel the interest of the city would be served thereby. The City Commission may, by resolution, make further exceptions to this provision for periods longer than six months. If approved, this resolution would authorize the city manager to continue to employ retiree Doug Bagwell for an interim period not to exceed past June 30, 2027, under 296.09 Section C. It is estimated that the need for temporary interim reemployment is only required until such time that the Battle Creek Police Department completes its search for a new police chief and the subsequent search for a deputy police chief. The requested time frame of not to exceed past June 30, 2027 will allow for flexibility while the city searches for permanent replacements for these key positions.

I'd like to move for the approval of Resolution 413.

Second.

So moved and supported to approve Resolution 413. Are there any comments by the Commission? Seeing none, would you please vote on Resolution 413? Resolution 413 has been approved. Next item on our agenda is resolution 414.

battle creek codified ordinances state that the rates and charges established by the city for water and sewer services are to be set forth in a schedule which is to be enacted by the city commission from time to time by resolution this resolution fulfills that requirement by establishing rates for fiscal year 2026 fiscal year 2027 fiscal year 2028 fiscal year 2029 and fiscal year 2030. Water and sewer rates were last adjusted on May 18, 2021, for the time frame of July 1, 2021, to June 30, 2026, by the City Commission, per Resolution Number 137. In conjunction with the Intergovernmental Wastewater Treatment Service Agreement, with the contributing jurisdictions and existing water agreements, the City of Battle Creek Department of Public Works consulted with Stantec Consulting, Inc., to perform a thorough rate study to determine the rates for the next five years. This resolution, if approved, will establish the water and sewer rates for the period beginning July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2031 for City of Battle Creek and September 1, 2026 to June 30, 2031 for contributing jurisdictions, Charter Township of Bedford, Charter Township of Emmett, Township of Leroy, City of Springfield, Charter Township of Penfield, and City of Marshall, per the Intergovernmental Wastewater Services Agreement. Existing rates will be extended for contributing jurisdictions until August 31, 2026.

I'd like to move for the approval of Resolution 414. Second.

I move and support it to approve Resolution 414. Are there any comments by the Commission? Commissioner Lacoste.

I'd like to move to postpone this resolution until our next meeting.

Would you please repeat that?

I would like to move to postpone this resolution until our next meeting so we have time to review it.

Do we have support for that resolution?

Support.

I move and support it. Now for discussion on the Proposed amendment?

I'm sorry, what was that?

Do you have any discussion?

No, I just want to review it a little bit more, a few different things that we want to have time to look into and assess whether it's the right decision.

Okay. City Manager, are there any delays that this will affect?

That would put... So these rates were incorporated into our budget that was approved at the last meeting. Not only that, I'm not sure which amendments the Commission would like to make to the current rates that were provided to us by Stantec. We had the outside firm do the study. So I'm not sure where the amendments would be. If we are looking at if the contention of the Commission is the sewer readiness rates that are currently in place, that is something that we can examine for the next round, if that is something that the Commission wants to lift up.

What do you mean for the next rate?

For the next rate, for our next five-year rate study. That is something that we can examine. We can start looking at it now.

I would still like to move to table it or to postpone it until the next meeting.

All right. Are there any other commissioners wanting to discuss the amendment? Hearing none, we'll call for a vote on the amendment to postpone this to our next meeting, which will be in the first part of July. Please vote.

Commissioner Simmons?

No.

Okay, the motion failed, tied, so we'll go back to discussion of 414 are there any other Commission comments at this time I Want to thank the city administration and the Department of Public Works director for their hard work On the system altogether number one we've expanded our service area to the casino into the Ford Blue Oval and And I think that's been to the benefit of the citizens of Battle Creek. I also want to commend the administration for the way that they've received all the contracts back signed by the municipalities. And I like the way that we are also working with Newton Township right now, who is in the need of some sewage service. So I feel that the city has done a remarkable job And I want to commend everyone and just say thank you very much for really staying to the course and making certain that we got a lot of these contracts completed. I will be supporting Resolution 414 at this period of time. Are there any other public comments or commission comments? Commissioner Lacoste.

Well, I think I'll ultimately support this. But I do think that there's some, you know, points that Joe Harris had made. about the wholesale rate, and I think we do need to, you know, in the future look at different things like that and passing that on to our customers, you know, the residents of Battle Creek, not just these big companies that have, you know, so much more money than the citizens do.

Amanda, do you want to respond?

Well, just only in the fact, when we're looking at the wholesale rate, the rate that Blue Oval is being charged right now is the same rate that the residents of Battle Creek are being charged. So they're getting charged the $1.64 that the residents are getting charged.

Right, but they will be getting a wholesale rate.

No, they will be getting a rate once we have the establishment of what their flows are. The rate will be adjusted then. But this was the starting point.

Right, but eventually they will get a wholesale rate.

Sorry, Steve?

I do want to clarify that Blue Oval is not the customer here. City of Marshall is the customer here. One thing to keep in mind is we're selling water. We're moving water over to Marshall. It's going through water meters. If there was something to happen on the Marshall side of that system, we don't respond to fix it. Marshall goes out to fix it. They cover that those costs so that's why this is a wholesale water cost It's it's there.

There's less expenses Related to moving water towards them, but don't let so like Emmett and all the other townships that have the water They also have to do that on their own don't they?

No, we have maintenance agreements with some of the townships.

Okay, so that's why they're getting the rates specifically because they have to fix it if there's issues.

Yeah, there's different rates for the different townships based off the services we provide. Thank you.

That clears up a lot. I appreciate that.

Steve, will there ever be a time where we're called in to help Marshall?

There could be a time where that would happen. If they needed assistance on it, we would support them. I would assume that we would consequently bill City of Marshall for those costs associated with that extra work.

And that's in the contract also, right?

Yeah, yeah. If there's mutual aid, the attorney's office would better be able to explain that than I would, but there generally is mutual aid agreements that are made when places like that. We have the same thing with Springfield. Springfield runs into an issue that they can't tackle themselves. We come and help them out and assist as needed and build them accordingly.

Thank you. Yep. Any other commission comments at this period of time? Commissioner Smith.

Mr.. Mayor no Chris does Chris will get to you next right after Christmas Commissioner Smith Okay, so after looking at everything and just kind of listening I just think that I would have liked to have the time to Kind of look at things a little bit deeper because yeah the water readiness fees the sewer readiness fees the sewer usage the water usage I mean the bills are high everybody knows that And then we talk about, like, the updates to the system. We know that we're going to need updates on the system. I think having the bigger places and outside of the city of Battle Creek, having those places on obviously weighs on our systems. So, you know, eventually those will come in to play the cost for those things and will inevitably increase things even further. So I will be voting no on this right now.

Thank you very much. Commissioner Simmons.

This is just a comment, and I was torn on postponement because I would like to have further discussions on this, but I also appreciate the fact that this is already budgeted. Not sure why we're putting the cart before the horse, budgeting something that hadn't been passed yet. So in the future, I would hope we do that different. That being said, I think this plan is better than what we've done in the past as far as rate increases. We've kept it below the rate of inflation. As the vice mayor asked, you know, where were we in relation to other communities?

We've kept it below that.

But I hope that staff has heard commission's comments. And a resident's comments that we, as residents that own the system, should not have to subsidize. And I still believe there's a portion of that included in this. We are moving in the right direction, but that we're subsidizing growth and maybe that additional growth from outside the city It needs to be factored in for the rates for those agreements that we have with those entities outside the city. But I'll support this today. Thank you.

Any other Commission comments? Commissioner Lacoste.

I'm sorry. I just wanted to echo again what Simmons said, that I do think that we need to, in the future, have time for things, like you said, the cart before the horse, because otherwise we are pressured up here to make a decision when it might not be the best decision to make at that time. And we need to have time to really look at that. You know, talking about, you know, while the budget was passed, that really kind of, then it's almost like a symbolic vote, and it doesn't even mean anything if we're looking at it like that. So we really need to have, you know, something in the future where we have time to analyze these things better. Thank you.

Any other commission comments? Hearing none, would you please vote on Resolution 414? Resolution 414 has been approved. Next item on our agenda is resolution 415.

If approved, this resolution would authorize the issuance of 2026 refunding bonds on two distinct bond issues. The first was initially refunded in 2016, which was a general obligation limited tax, G-O-L-T, refunding bonds series 2016. These bonds were used to make a number of improvements to city-owned facilities. The second was issued in 2016 as well, and are series 2016C bonds that were issued for the construction of the police department. The city's municipal financial advisor, PFM, analyzes the city's outstanding bond issues on a regular basis to look for refunding opportunities that would result in a savings to the city. This resolution, if approved, would authorize the issuance of refunding bonds in an amount not to exceed $18 million, but the final size of the bonds will be determined at the time of sale. If approved by the City Commission, it is expected that the bonds... could be sold in mid-August or later with a closing two to three weeks later. The prior bonds could be paid off on the first call date of December 1, 2026. There is no plan to extend the maturity of the bonds beyond what has previously been approved by the Commission.

I'd like to move to approve Resolution 415.

Second.

The move is supported to approve Resolution 415. Are there any comments by the Commission? Commissioner Lacoste.

I just wanted to say that I know that we do this to lower our interest rate and things like that. If we do have an opportunity to pass that along to the residents, I would like to do so down the line.

Any other commission comments? Seeing none, would we please vote on resolution 415? Resolution 415 has been approved. Next item on our agenda is resolution 416.

State statute provides that a local government shall not incur expenditures in excess of the amount appropriated. This year-end budget amendment is an attempt to comply and is primarily based upon department levels with estimated expenditures in excess of their amended budgets, although several departmental expenditure budgets are reduced based on estimates. This resolution also adjusts budgeted revenues in the general fund based on estimated revenues as discussed at the May 7, 2026 budget workshop. Many of these revenue adjustments are necessary due to the conservative nature of the original adopted budget. This resolution, if approved, authorizes the use of fund balance in the general fund of $1,144,451 for the year ending June 30, 2026.

I would like to move for the approval of Resolution 416. Support.

Moved and supported to approve Resolution 416. Are there any comments by the Commission? Seeing none, would you please vote on Resolution 416? Resolution 416 has been approved. Next item on our agenda is resolution 417.

Developer GLC Multi-BC LLC with support from Brownfield Consultant Michigan Growth Advisors has proposed an Act 381 Brownfield plan for the redevelopment of one parcel totaling approximately 13.12 acres located within the city of Battle Creek at 15105 South Elmer Road. The proposed development includes the construction of 240 multifamily residential units across multiple buildings, including associated amenities such as a clubhouse, pool, and open space. The development will include 48 income-restricted units, 20% of the total units, at 100% adjusted medium income, anticipated to remain income-restricted for a period of 20 years. The total capital investment is estimated to be approximately $48.9 million, with construction anticipated to begin in fall of 2026 and occur over an approximately two-year build-out period. This resolution approves a brownfield plan for the proposed fields at Battle Creek development.

I would like to move for the approval of resolution 417. Second.

I've been moved and supported to approve resolution 417. Are there any comments by the commission? Commissioner Smith and then Commissioner Lacoste.

On your estates that, as identified in 2024, the Battle Creek Housing Action Plan, the city of Battle Creek currently faces significant housing shortage, including an estimated 1,200 unit. I was just curious how that compares to our recent study, because we've had the recent housing study. So how does that compare to what our numbers are at now?

You know, I honestly, I don't know off the top of my head what that is, but I can absolutely get that information for you.

And then I was also curious, because it does state on here, that there's an expected to generate demand for additional 2,800 housing units over the next five years, and that's per Blue Oval being in place. And I know that since 2024, they have significantly changed their projected amount of employees. And so I'm just also curious with the same question, what does that look like now as opposed to 2024?

John, can you shed any light on any of that?

Those questions, thank you Of course John Hughes Battle Creek Unlimited I don't believe we have updated numbers as far as the demand from Blue Oval But speaking relative to the demand in the city that was already there before that that still exists to this day the same number and that's what we've discovered with our recent housing study and I'm not familiar with that particular housing study and those numbers. That's what I guess I was.

I can get that information for you.

OK, thank you. And then I have one more question. And I did not see the planning and zoning for this one, so I apologize if this was answered. But I was curious as to how this particular land falls under the brownfield zoning.

Yeah, so the state of Michigan had passed recently legislation that allows housing development to be eligible brownfield activities. So this being a new housing development is eligible for the new housing TIF, which is similar to traditional brownfield tax increment financing. It's just housing development versus the more traditional dirty site that you're kind of more familiar with.

Okay, so it's like an addition to the contaminated, blighted, or functionally obsolete properties then? Correct. Okay.

Any other questions? John, thank you very much. We appreciate your help. We have another one, sorry. Commissioner Lacoste.

I just wanted to say that I think that this makes a good dent in the overall deficit that we have for the housing supplies.

Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, John. All right, are we prepared to vote on 417? All right, please vote on 417. Resolution 417 has been approved. Thank you very much. Next item on our agenda is resolution 418. Madam Clerk, when you're ready.

Section 12.1 of the Charter of the City of Battle Creek authorizes the City to purchase real property for valid public purposes and the City believes it is in the best interest to do so in this instance. Acquisition of this 1.76 acre vacant portion of a larger parcel is sought for future public purpose of a fire station and is in the best interest of the City. If approved, this resolution authorizes the city manager to enter into a purchase agreement and all other documents necessary to purchase a vacant portion of parcel number 52-3560-00-013-0, commonly known as 165 North Washington Street, from Bronson Battle Creek Hospital for $150,000. I'd like to move for the approval of Resolution 418.

Second.

So moved and supported to approve Resolution 418. Are there any comments by the Commission? Commissioner Patrick O'Donnell.

Thank you, Mayor. I just want to say thank you for all the work in getting these fire stations started up. We're heading in the right direction of the upgrades that the city's duly needed for all these years. The youngest fire station is as old as me, so I'm very excited to see these get started.

Thank you, Commissioner. Any other Commission comments? Seeing none, would you please vote on Resolution 418? Resolution 418 has been approved. Next item on our agenda is Resolution 419.

The city currently operates Battle Creek Transit, or BCT, a public transportation system serving the Battle Creek area. The Transportation Authority of Calhoun County, or TAC, is a Michigan regional transportation authority created under Act 196 of 1986. to assume and expand public transportation services in Calhoun County. On September 7, 2023, the Calhoun County Board of Commissioners voted to establish TAC as the countywide public transportation authority. THE CITY AND TAC ENTERED INTO A TAC-CITY SUPPORT SERVICES AGREEMENT EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1, 2025, PURSUANT TO WHICH THE CITY HAS BEEN PROVIDING ADMINISTRATIVE, MANAGERIAL, OPERATIONAL AND OTHER SUPPORT SERVICES RELATED TO THE TRANSIT SYSTEM UNTIL JULY 1, 2026. The comprehensive transit transition agreement negotiated between the city and TAC is substantially complete except for the contents of the various exhibits referenced in the proposed agreement. This resolution, if approved, would transition the transit system from the city to the TAC, including the transfer of assets used in connection with the transit system, the assignment of certain contracts and rights, the lease and transfer of certain real property, and the transition of operations beginning on July 1, 2026. At that time, the TAC will become solely responsible for its operations and expenses, and the city shall be relieved of various costs, liabilities, and operational commitments as set forth in the proposed agreement.

I would like to move for the approval of Resolution 419. Thank you.

Okay, it's been moved and supported to approve resolution 419 are there any comments by the Commission See none would you commissioners?

Thank you Mallory yeah any other comments Commissioner Morris I

Same. I wanted to give a thank you to Mallory and Brendan for all of the hard work, as well as the rest of the team. I know this has been a very long process with a lot of very niche things, so I really appreciate all of the effort that has gone into this.

Commissioner Patrick O'Dell.

I'd like to say it's been a three-year, at least, approach to this. I know starting July 1st is really the big date where everything rolls out. Looking forward to seeing how everybody's going to enjoy the new system. I still recommend that if we can find more ways of revenue advertisements or other ways to keep the costs down and keep the riding going and also bringing a lot more employment to our city. I know there's not a ton of jobs, but there's jobs out there for transportation people. You need to talk with them. It's a good career, so thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner. Any other Commission comments? Hearing none, would you please vote on Resolution 419? Resolution 419 has been approved. Next item on our agenda is Resolution 420. Madam Clerk.

If approved, this resolution would permit a closed session of the City Commission in conference room 302A immediately following the Commission comments section of the regular meeting on Tuesday, June 16, 2026, as authorized by MCL 15.268, section E, FOR STRATEGY AND NEGOTIATION SESSIONS CONNECTED WITH THE NEGOTIATION OF A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT AS REQUESTED BY THE CITY, AND THAT AMANDA ZIMMERLAND, CITY MANAGER, IS HEREBY APPOINTED AS THE DESIGNATED SECRETARY TO RECORD AND PREPARE APPROPRIATE MINUTES OF THIS CLOSED SESSION.

I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FOR THE APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 420.

SECOND.

SO MOVED AND SUPPORTED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 420. ANY COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION? Seeing none, would you please vote on Resolution 420? Resolution 420 has been approved. Next item on our agenda is general public comment. If you'd like to make general public comment regarding matters over which the City Commission has control, please raise your hand and wait for us to acknowledge you to come forward to the podium. You will have three minutes to make your comment. Please state your name and address prior to beginning your comment. Are there any public comments at this time? Rees-Adkins, and then we'll go over to Joe Harris, and then the third row, the fourth row, one, two, three, fifth row, sorry.

Good evening, Rees-Adkins, 84 South 23rd Street. In front of you, you have a packet that has these two pieces of paper in there. One of them is a four-year act that I filed to get a copy of a police report. Upon receiving that police report, I realized why we were in a building waiting for Battle Creek PD to show up. And we had thought that they had never showed up, which indeed they had showed up, but apparently decided they didn't want to get out of their vehicle to come in and see us. Now let me back up just a little bit. On this date of 5-11 of 26, My wife was with us at the Northeast Food Pantry, and we had an individual that was outside being very belligerent, using language that should not be used on a church property or in a business, period, and making a humongous scene. I asked her to calm down. She told me to go off. And I, at that point, told my wife to call 911 and have her removed from the property. About five minutes later, I went out to see if Bell Creek PD had showed up. And I could not get out the door because she had barricaded herself to the door to where nobody could get in and out. I then, in return, called 911 again. So there was a second 911 call made to 9-1-1 dispatch requesting that Battle Creek PD be exudated and be done soon because this lady had barricaded the door to where nobody could get in or out. and asked that a officer see me because we wanted her removed from the property and banned from the property because of her actions. No officer at any time came into our building and our door was unlocked. So they had no reason not to come in the building and no officer ever made a phone call or got a hold of any of us to talk to us to see what needed to be done with the property. He just apparently, from what I'm understanding, according to what this says, he drove through the parking lot and did not see anybody and drove off and didn't bother to even say hello, goodbye, or what do you want done, or do you have any property or any identification of who this person is. This is a little concerning when you have somebody that is threatening people, is using vulgar language, and is barricading because she's a pretty good-sized young lady, and she is barricading the door to where it can't be opened or closed. If a fire was to happen, we would be in serious trouble because we'd have no way to get out. And apparently the police department doesn't care about that because they don't even care enough to come in and talk to people. We still have property of hers that was thrown all over the parking lot, sitting in our building that we have no, don't know what to do.

Your time's up. Thank you very much. Joe Harris, please.

Joe Harris, 243 Eldred. I'm going to go totally off script because I had something to say and now I changed my mind. I want to thank Commissioner Darcy-Smith, Commissioner Wurst for your vote. I really appreciate it. I think that these type of fees, we need to understand that people of Battle Creek, they really can be affected by small changes. I don't... And I'm sure that some of you know at least one or two people, maybe your family or friends, that are affected by such changes. I can name people in my family. I can name people that I know that have been trying to find jobs for months, if not years. They're not as plentiful as people think that they are, especially ones that are paying. Now, I want to explain really quick what happened up here. Reality is, they say that Marshall is the customer. Reality, it is Blue Oval. Because if Blue Oval was not there, Marshall wouldn't have to worry about being a customer. So let's get that clear. People need to understand that Blue Oval is going to get a wholesale rate. We don't get that wholesale rate as taxpayers. It doesn't happen. We get a completely different rate. You have a multi-billion dollar company that is getting a wholesale rate. That does not make sense to me. We have people that we talk about affordable housing and housing. How can people afford housing when their utility bills are consistently going up? They can't. It's hard enough. It was stated that this was already budgeted before it was voted on. Why is that? Why are we putting things in our budget, such as this, before they're voted by the commission? You guys have the power to make that vote. You guys can do that. You didn't have to say yes. I know there's peer pressure. I get it. I understand that. I do. But you did not have to vote yes. You could have looked at this further. It was stated that many didn't have the time completely to look at it. If you don't got the time to look at it, don't vote yes. It just makes no sense to me. I'm speaking common sense stuff here, people. I know you guys have a tough job, but things like this affect real families. They do. I can't say I'm disappointed by the vote, because I am. I really think that there are other creative solutions that could happen. There are senior citizens that are paying the same water readiness fee of people that have Big families, that doesn't make sense to me. Makes no sense. Something needs to be fixed. We need to look at this from a more creative perspective instead of constantly raising rates. Do you know that in the cost exception or expenses, there's something in there about miscellaneous up there that has to go up to 3.73%? Why? What is miscellaneous? We don't know. I really would hope that in the future that you guys don't put things in the budget before you guys vote on it, and you can all fix that by a resolution to make sure that doesn't happen.

Thank you very much for your comments. Yes, sir.

Good evening. Sean Hampton, City of Battle Creek. Normally, I don't attend these meetings. I normally go sit at home after a long day of work, and I kind of just I kind of sit and observe city meetings. A couple of meetings ago, I really took note of your demeanor, Mayor, in regards to an individual that was standing right where I am making a comment, and therefore that person was removed from the meeting. Just because the city decides to, I don't know, make rules or city policy, you cannot circumvent the First Amendment. That gentleman should not have been removed from the meeting just because you did not like what that gentleman had to say. Thank you.

Thank you for your comment. Are there any other comments at this time? Are there? Yes, sir.

Thank you for giving me the time. So my name is Sri Kumar. I'm a for the simplicity I go by Kumar. I'm from the Battle Creek to 663 Creek Drive. I'm a resident for about 40 years, and also CEO of the company called Next Summer Corporation. So you have one page there in front of you that I have given you. And I am honored to invite you all for especially a community mental health and wellness event that is going to happen in the Kellogg Auditorium in the coming July 9th, 7 to 9 p.m. And it will be a pleasure if you can spread the news because the gentleman who is coming, he is world renowned. He never came to the western side of Michigan before. And his organization is 180 countries and touched millions of people. So what he does is that he helps the people to take the stress away and the anxiety and all the violence and with using a simple tool what he teaches with the breath and meditation technique. So it will be a journey within with a meditation with also some question and answer and wisdom, so we'll be very glad if you can come to the session.

Thank you very much for the invite, and we'll hope to see you that night. Thank you. Are there any other public comments at this time? Steve?

Steve Koch, 548 Washington Avenue, North Battle Creek. I'm inviting anybody who's here or anybody who is listening, we're going to have a special meeting, the Tea Party. We're not Democrats. We're not Republicans. We're independents. I'm a constitutionalist. We're having a meeting on Thursday, June the 25th at 6 o'clock. We're going to have the meeting at 6.30 at the Bass Bar and Grill in Springfield. I've invited all of the members of the commission to show up, but I've been told that apparently they have a meeting at 6 o'clock on that night, so they won't be there. So if anybody would like to come to the meeting and we're going to talk about if you've been victimized by the system, and I mean as in any part of the system, Calhoun County, by the judicial system, by the CPS, by the front of the court, by the police department, or you've been kicked out of meetings here. at the commission meetings or have been dragged out by the police department because of disturbing the peace or whatever charge they want to throw at you, stick to the wall and see if it sticks or not. I have been personally one of those individuals who's had that kind of situation a while back, but we'll talk about that at the meeting. So if anybody likes to come to it, you're welcome to come to it. Like I said, June the 25th. Everybody here on the commission received one of these, so I don't think anybody can probably read that, of course, but that's cool. We'll be welcome, and we'd love to see you.

Thank you for your comments. Any other public comments at this time? John.

First, a couple of questions to the City Commission in regards to Resolution 414 about the water sewer increases. Did any of you actually read all the PDFs that had to go with that and understand it immediately without asking anybody? That's the first question. The second question is, the mayor just said something a little while ago that was very interesting. He said the citizens of Battle Creek benefit from the water being sold to Marshall and the Blue Oval plant. Are you going to charge, what is being charged to Marshall for the water we sell to them? The money that's saved from Marshall that we're paying, that we're getting, receiving the money from? Are you going to reduce, using that money, the cost of water to the citizens of Battle Creek? Because I'm trying to figure out the benefit that you're talking about, and I fully don't understand it. Different subject. I was here many months ago and had a minor concern. And the minor concern was that on Kendall Street, very near Dickman Road, there's railroad tracks. And when you drive over them, it's terrible. And I know it's not the problem of the city commission. But when you drive over them, you bounce all over the place. Good opportunity for damaging your vehicle and since it's a very short light on Dickman and Kendall, not very many people pass through and they're trying to bounce around. They may push to get through that light when it's going yellow or red. I think it might be a safety issue down the road and hopefully the railroad would take care of this. One other thing, you have a new thing up here that shows how people vote and the time periods and things of that nature. That really sucks compared to the old version where it simply showed everyone's name and it showed how you voted. You didn't float things across there and float them back. I don't see where you're making an advantage here. I think you're actually making something simple a lot more difficult. And last but not least, I came here in 1977. I left California near San Francisco because the costs were going right through the roof. And I knew that I'd never, ever be able to buy a house. In 1980, I met a man that was extremely intelligent. And he made a comment at that time. He said, what happens in California It's going to come out and affect the rest of the country and make it like California, where things you can afford and things are very expensive. Battle Creek has become and is almost like the way it is in California. You're not quite there, but you're getting there. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments. Thank you for the reminder of Kendall and Dickman, too. Are there any other public comments? Yes, ma'am.

Melody Tyner, 548 Washington. My comment is simple. I have talked to multiple police officers and so has my husband. I've also talked to Chief Bagley. Why is it that we have such a problem with police officers Sitting on Washington and catching the people speeding up and down Washington like crazy. We were going down Goodale past the bus garage to the curve and a guy almost hit us, probably going at least 65, 70 miles an hour. It's a 25 to 30 mile an hour zone. Really? I mean, come on. Where are the police? Oh, that's right. They're sitting in their cars in parking lots on their phones. This has been a problem since COVID. And it hasn't got any better. And no matter what time you talk to a police officer or Chief Bagley, the situation has never changed. The guys are, since COVID, the speeders are out of control. But yet nobody is fixing the problem. You guys control what's going on. and you can make suggestions, but nobody is fixing the problem. And as far as the police officers showing up at your house when you call them, I've dealt with that too. I even had a police officer pull a weapon on me because I had my son's ex-girlfriend show up at my house cursing and screaming so the whole neighborhood could see. But they pulled their weapon on me. because my dog was sitting next to me and they were afraid of her. She wasn't growling. She was making absolutely no noise. But yet I got a weapon pulled on me. They didn't fix the problem. The girl continued to scream, yell and holler. Why do we have a police department if they're not going to deal with the problems that the public is having? It's worthless. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments. Are there any other public comments at this time? Are there any of the public comments? Seeing none. Commission comments? Commissioner Morris and then Commissioner Lacoste. Thank you.

So a couple days ago, there was an incident with our police department where a minor student was walking home, and the police came across their speaker and said, you're not in trouble. We want you to stop. He didn't feel comfortable. He told them he did not want to stop. Instead of letting this child continue to walk home that wasn't doing anything wrong, They whipped their car around, did a U-turn, blocked off traffic, and got out on this kid and detained him and searched him because his hands were in his pocket. It is not illegal for you to walk down the street with your hands in your pocket. It is not okay for us to continue creating this fear within the community. As a young child, I was scared of the police because of the terrorization that I had watched occur in my neighborhood. As I became an adult, I got to know some police officers, and I was able to not be scared of the police as a whole and kind of get my own bearings. However, I now have a freshly nine-year-old sister that is in the same boat that I was. She is afraid of the police because of how she sees the police interact with her community. I thought it was getting better with things like the cops officers, but the officers that are patrolling our neighborhood, particularly Washington Heights, don't have relationships with our community. And I have a colleague that says, power without love is reckless and abuse. This is abuse to our community, and it is not okay. So I'm calling for accountability, training, and discipline for these officers.

Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Lacoste.

I wholeheartedly agree with What Commissioner Morris said, I saw that video too, and I was really concerned about it, especially them asking for him to identify himself, and they had no reason to do so. The young gentleman was not doing anything when they approached him. Also, as far as the railroad, I just want to encourage everybody that goes over that Kendall Railroad, there is a phone number there, and it has some numbers so you can reference that crossing. You need to call CN Railroad. That's the only way to get that fixed. So please call them, call them continuously if you have to so we can get that fixed. As far as the vote tonight, the reason I just wanted to address why I voted yes is because I think Steve did a great job of explaining why that wholesale rate, I guess wholesale, I will say in quotes, was issued to Marshall or will be, I should say. And that is because they are specifically going to be in charge of fixing any issues that should arise on their end, unlike the other municipalities that are going to be receiving water from us. Also on June 25th, there's a groundbreaking at Fire Station number two at 1030, if anyone wants to join. And then Community Oversight Board just had their first meeting. I wanted to let everybody know that. And Rocky Star Rescue is having their fourth annual Pints for a Purpose, June 20th, Saturday at Griffin from one to five. There's going to be live music, silent auction, 50-50 raffles. and there's going to be special animal ambassadors there. They're the only animal rehab we have in Calhoun County, and we had just found some orphaned raccoons a couple weeks ago, and that's the only place that we could bring them. We had them overnight, and it was very difficult, and without these rehabs, these animals would die. So I would highly encourage people to go out and support that rescue. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner. Any other Commission comments? Commissioner? Carla Reynolds.

Thank you, Mayor. I just want to remind everyone of the Juneteenth activities this weekend. Starting Friday, June 19th, there's going to be a movie at Washington Heights. It's called Goat. It'll be free pizza and popcorn while supplies last. And, of course, the Juneteenth celebration will be June 20th from 10 a.m. until 6 at the Claude Evans Park. There will be food there, hot dogs, free hot dogs, chips, red pop while supplies last. It's always a great time. We have a kid's corner there.

uh... which is supervised uh... so come on out and have a great time thank you commissioner commissioner patrick o'donnell thank you mayor the uh... water vote is yes the the rates have to go up uh... It's just so happy that we can keep them below the cost of inflation. There's a lot of chemicals, a lot of other things involved with making a day-to-day service for that. And it's a self-sustaining department of our city. And the other thing is that everything else is going up, but we were able to keep it within the levels thanks to having Blue Oval. The term wholesale is used a lot in the industry. Same with my group, the Internet. We do a wholesale to a group and then let them do whatever they want with the Internet. We don't service it or do anything else. We just provide service to their building. And so we get hung up on some of these semantic words. When contracts like this go on, it's kind of difficult sometimes because people say get it at wholesale price and think it's a discount when it's just that's what the way the contracts are written in the legal terms. So. I hope we all got a better understanding tonight of how some of the service works. One other thing is I want to remind citizens, Bobby Holly is going to be giving out bikes also on Saturday, June 20th at 1 o'clock. This is his last time to be giving away bikes. It will be at the Sealy Car on Dickman Road there, the new rebuilt Sealy. close to Kendall so hopefully people are safe getting over that railroad crossing when they get over there but if anybody could please show up I attended last year and the year before watching him hand out bikes and last year was really interesting a boy wrote for his essay I need a new bike because my bike doesn't go forward anymore that was it and he was just so happy to see his face to have a bike that actually rolled in the forward direction so thank you

Thank you, Commissioner. Any other Commission comments? Seeing none, per Resolution 420, the Battle Creek City Commission will now go into closed session. The public portion of this meeting is now recessed. The Battle Creek City Commission has returned from closed session. I'm going to call upon Commissioner Patrick O'Donnell.

Thank you, Mayor. I'd like to make a motion to approve the tentative agreement with the Labor Bargaining Organization of the Supervisory Personnel of the Battle Creek Fire Department, dated June 16, 2026. I support.

Move and supported to approve. Are there any comments by the Commission? Seeing none, would you please vote on the proposed resolution that was read by Commissioner Patrick O'Donnell and supported by Commissioner Smith?

I apologize. I closed out.

Yes. Is Commissioner Simmons still with us?

I am. It's just not votes not coming up for me. Yes.

Thank you.

The resolution has been approved. This adjourns our meeting. Thank you very much.