City Council - Regular Meeting

and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. Roll call, please, Madam Clerk.

Mayor Beagle.

Present.

Deputy Mayor Gottschall. Here. Council Member Berman.

Present.

Council Member Gremlin-Fax is excused. Council Member Kennedy is excused. Council Member O'Day. Present. Council Member Simmons is excused. We have a quorum.

Thank you. Changes or additions to the agenda as presented tonight? City Manager?

No changes, Your Honor.

Assistant City Manager?

I have none, sir.

Any from the dais? All right. That moves us on to the public hearing. And at this time, I'll read the rules and call the public hearing to order. Anyone wishing to address the council must first state their name and address for the record and speak directly into the microphone so that your comments may be properly recorded. And please note that questions from the audience to the council are not permitted during public hearing and members of the council will not engage in dialogue with individuals addressing the council. Each person shall may address the council only once and will be limited to five minutes. Great, anybody? At this time, I'll openly turn it over to the Assistant City Manager to provide an overview of the subject matter for tonight's public hearing.

Thank you, Mayor. So tonight there are two public hearings scheduled, so you will need to open and close those individually for each of the topics. The first public hearing that is on your agenda tonight is related to a proposed vacation of a portion of the Alpha Drive right-of-way, specifically the cul-de-sac, and that's located east of Wixom Road and north of Interstate 96. So it's at the dead end of the Alpha Tech Corporate Park. That right-of-way was dedicated via a condominium and accepted by the city in 1999. The proposed dedication or vacation would be associated with following a dedication of additional right-of-way, basically replacing what is being vacated in efforts of providing the necessary space to eventually connect Alpha Drive to Beck Road. So I would recommend opening up that public hearing. Then there are questions or comments that come up. We can discuss that when the item is addressed by City Council under new business item number one.

Is there anybody for the call to the public? Seeing none, I'll close the call to the public and I'll close the first public hearing and open up the second public hearing.

The second public hearing on your agenda tonight is also related to a proposed vacation of right-of-way. This piece is for a section of right-of-way known as Renton Street, north of Pontiac Trail and west of North Wixom Road. This is a dead-end right-of-way that was dedicated to actually Commerce Township back in the 1920s and then incorporated into the city when we incorporated it as a village and then a city. So this platted street is no longer necessary in our opinion and really will be up for the discussion of city council tonight and is associated with the rent and redevelopment area project and the proposed sale of the various city-owned properties around that right-of-way that would then be followed by a consolidation of those parcels into a single parcel. So, again, opportunity for anyone interested to comment on that, and then we can talk about the nuances or any questions or comments during the new business item, which would be new business number two and new business number three.

Any comments from the public? Seeing none, I'll close the second public hearing and I'll close the public hearing session of this meeting. And it moves us on to a presentation. Tonight we have the reaffirmation of the oath of Firefighter EMT to Emily Garcia and Firefighter EMT Tyler Arsenault. Chief Geisler.

Thank you very much, sir. Tonight is an exciting night for the fire department as I get to introduce two of our newest firefighters to you. As you said, Emily Garcia and Tyler Arsenal, both firefighters were previously auxiliary firefighters. So I will get into each of their little bios here in just a second. Emily, if you could join me up front. Emily attended Oakland Community College and graduated with her EMT certification and degree in general studies. She then worked for Universal Ambulance for two years. She joined the Wixom Fire Department as an auxiliary firefighter approximately two years ago. During that time, we sponsored her to go through the fire academy. She completed the fire academy and obtained her EMT one and two certifications. She's joined tonight by her fiance Brandon, her father Jose, and stepmother Brenda. Sir, would you do the honors? Jose, would you please come up and stand next to me?

I do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of the State of Michigan, and the Charter and Ordinances of the City of Wixom, Oakland County, Michigan, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties and responsibilities of firefighter EMT according to the rest of my ability. Congratulations.

Tyler, could you please join us up here? Tyler graduated from Stevenson High School in Livonia where during his senior year he did a dual enrollment with Schoolcraft College and he obtained his Fire 1 and 2 certifications. He then went on to complete his EMT certification. Tyler has been with Wixom as an auxiliary firefighter for the last two years. Tonight he's joined by his mother Vanessa, girlfriend Natalie, and grandmother Marie.

I swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of the State of Michigan, and the Charter and Ordinances of the City of Wixom, Boca County, Michigan, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties and responsibilities of a firefighter, EMG, according to the best of my ability. I do. Congratulations.

This is just another testament to our auxiliary firefighter program and how successful that it's been and everything great that it has done for our community. So with that, I would take a short break.

Yep. With that, we'll take a short 10-minute break for reception to honor our two new firefighters. Thank you. Thank you folks for that and now we're going to continue on with the rest of the business portion of the meeting tonight. Moves us to approval of minutes. We've got one set of minutes to approve tonight and that's from the regular city council meeting of August 25th, 2026. Do I have a motion? Any discussion? Seeing none, I got a motion and a second to approve the regular city council meeting minutes of August 25th, 2026. All in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? We have one item of correspondence tonight, and that's the West End Commons ribbon-cutting ceremony flyer. That's at 2.45 this Saturday before the block party. It's starting to look really nice down there, and hopefully we see you all down there. Moves us to the first call to the public. Those rules are as follows. The public shall address the council during call to the public which shall be included on the agenda immediately after correspondence and again immediately after new business. The first call to the public immediately after correspondence shall be limited to agenda items only. A person shall not address the council in excess of five minutes unless the time is extended by a majority vote of the council present. Persons wishing to address the council shall identify themselves in their place of residence and shall state their reason for addressing the council and all comments by the public shall be made directly to the council. Do we have anybody for the first call to the public? Seeing none, we'll move on. City managers report. First report is the fire report from July 2026. Any questions for the chief? You can take your tie off now. Police report from July 2026. Any questions for the chief? You got to keep yours on. That moves us to the consent agenda. All items listed under the consent agenda are considered routine by the city council and will be enacted by one motion. There'll be no separate discussion of these items unless a council member so requests. In which event, the items will be removed from the consent agenda and added to the regular agenda at the end of unfinished or new business. Do I have a motion?

I'll move. Support.

I got a motion in support to approve the consent agenda as presented tonight. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. We have no unfinished business tonight, so we'll move on to new business number one, and that's a recommendation to adopt the resolution to authorize the vacation of a portion of Alpha Drive public right-of-way cul-de-sac east of Wixom Road and north of Interstate 96 and approve the acceptance of the proposed right-of-way dedication from Astemo Americas as described in the exhibit dated August 24, 2026. Do I have a motion?

Motion approved. Support.

Thank you. Assistant City Manager Benson.

Thank you, Mayor. Good evening, members of City Council. This is an item that we have talked about various times over the last few years, so I won't belabor the entire point. But the item in front of you tonight is a request basically to exchange a portion of currently owned city right-of-way for a dedication of a different right-of-way on the Estemo Americas property. The core purpose of this is that the current right-of-way setup, the cul-de-sac that terminates into the Astemo Americas property at the end of Alpha Drive, basically prevents them from being able to access the northern portion of their property without either A, crossing a public right-of-way, or B, crossing through a conservation easement. So they have requested that that portion of the cul-de-sac be vacated in January. alongside having a master deed amendment to the underlying condominium that dedicated that cul-de-sac, as well as getting a quick claim deed from the original developer who dedicated it in the first place. All of those pieces put together would allow them to then take title to that portion of the cul-de-sac. And then in exchange for all of that, the city and Astemo Americas have collectively had an interest in facilitating the future connection of Alpha Drive to Beck Road. So they are proposing to dedicate three acres that would run along the southwestern and southern edge of their property to their property line to the city for use as a future right of way. So these two items would be tied together in the action presented to you tonight. Uh, the key thing to keep in mind here is usually when the city accepts the dedication of a right of way, you're accepting a fully like built out street in a, usually in a neighborhood. In this particular case, they would not be building the road. Um, and instead would really just be dedicating the right to it. We call this a paper street where we have the right to develop on it, but there's not actually a street there. Um, This would be the first step of multiple steps, including working with the neighboring property for a similar dedication of right-of-way that would allow us to have continuous access all the way from Alpha Drive to Beck Road, and then seeking a Michigan Department of Transportation Transportation Economic Development Fund grant later this year to build out that road. So one of the key things, and I mentioned this in the agenda item, is that through the acceptance of this right-of-way, you are not obligated to build that road financially or otherwise, but it does give you the sort of perpetual right to do so. So this is really a planning opportunity and a good opportunity to work together with the ASTEMO team and the Kirkle-Manix team. I do have representatives from Kirkle-Manix and ASTEMO here tonight in case you have any questions for them. And if there are any questions for me, I'm happy to try and answer them.

Any discussion? Excuse me, seeing none. I got a motion and a second to approve the recommendation to adopt a resolution to authorize the vacation of a portion of Alpha Drive public right-of-way called the SAC East of Wixom Road and north of Interstate 96 and approve the acceptance and proposed right-of-way dedication from Astemo Americas as described in the exhibit dated August 24, 2026. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. New business number two is a recommendation to adopt the resolution to authorize the vacation of a portion of the public right-of-way known as Renton Street north of Pontiac Trail and west of New Wixom Road. Do I have a motion?

Support.

City Manager Benson? Thank you, Mayor.

Back again with a similar item. Again, this is something that we've been talking about for a very long time related to the rent and redevelopment area, so I won't belabor the entire point. The item in front of you would be vacating, in this case, what is a platted right-of-way, which is functionally, you know, the underlying mechanism is different than a condominium dedicated right-of-way. But in function, what you're looking to do here is if the right-of-way is vacated in Platts, the vacated space is given to the adjacent property owners. In this particular case, we own all of the surrounding properties. So this vacation would really just facilitate then combining all of the parcels and then re-dividing them, which is proposed in the next agenda item and all of this is consistent with the purchase agreement that we set out that you all approved back in May with the Ferlito group for that proposed development. So the one thing that's worth noting is by doing all of this again you're not necessarily transferring or doing anything but you are essentially creating a new parcel through this vacation. Any questions happy to try and answer?

Any discussion? All right, seeing none, I got a motion and a second to approve the recommendation to adopt the resolution to authorize the vacation of a portion of the public right-of-way known as Renton Street north of Pioneer Trail and west of North Wixom Road. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. New business number three is a recommendation to approve the combination and subsequent division of city-owned properties at 119, 121, 131, 201, 205, and 221 North Wixom Road and 3343 and 3360 Renton Street and the vacated portion of Renton Street as described in the exhibit dated January 19th, 2026. Do I have a motion?

Move to approve.

Support.

Assistant City Manager Benson.

So, as I previously mentioned in the last agenda item, now that you have approved a resolution to vacate, we're now in a position to combine all of the individual eight parcels that we own at the rent and redevelopment area, and then divide them into two properties. The intent here is A, to create the parcel that we would convey to the Forlito Group, as outlined in the purchase agreement, and then B, we would be retaining an additional 27 foot wide strip of land along North Wixom Road, which would give the city the opportunity to have a 60 foot from center right of way width. That is consistent with the other properties that have been developed along North Wixom Road in the past. So it gives basically that right of way would give you the flexibility to do a variety of things in the future, whether it's wider sidewalks, on street parking, a boulevard, left turn lane, right turn lane, whatever you want to do. The one piece with that, though, is we are not proposing that the city immediately actually dedicate the right-of-way. So you would be retaining this parcel, this additional 27 by 475 foot strip, and we wouldn't be giving it to the road commission immediately because once you do that, you would lose basically control over it. And again, this is actually consistent with how neighboring properties that have been developed privately, they'll split them off as requested, but they don't immediately transfer them until they're... basically a reason to do so. And then again, if approved to do this tonight, basically we would submit all of the paperwork, get new parcel identification numbers assigned, and then be in a position to, once the other terms of the purchase and development agreement are met, we would be in a position to then be able to convey property. Any questions? Happy to try and answer them.

Any discussion? Council Member Berman?

I guess the only thing I'm not abundantly clear in is the retention of the strip. I know we talked extensively about that before we entered into the agreement to sell on whether that land by the street could potentially be for the trail, could potentially be for parking, could potentially be part of that development because we're trying to make it more like a downtown and not be so far off the street. I mean, is that, by doing it the way that you've proposed, is that taking all that off the table at this point in time?

No, it would actually, it would retain all of those options because, for two reasons. One, the trail can run through a public right-of-way or, you know, through that strip. Any development option could work. And alternatively, let's say we get farther down the line with the Forlito group through their site plan approval process, and it's determined that, hey, you know, at the full we'd like an additional five feet back that they want, there's no reason that we couldn't cut a piece off and basically redo this. So you're just retaining control of it.

We still have flexibility for all of those other options. I know going back two years, that's why we didn't put the sidewalk back the entire 27 feet because we wanted to leave some of that property developable. So I guess that would be my only concern with the split as you proposed. I kind of feel like we're going back to the same conversation we had two years ago that we wanted to develop as much of this property as we can. Looking at the map on page 92, I mean, there's probably a good, what, 10 feet beyond the sidewalk that you're proposing to keep? Thereabouts, yes.

The number one thing I would say there, just as a point of reference, is if you look across the street at Lake Genesis, actually portions along Pontiac Trail also have that.

The same conversation we had two years ago when we didn't want that sidewalk built as far back as Genesis is built. Because that's not consistent with the way the rest of downtown is built.

It's consistent with how North Wixom Road had been laid out.

But North Wixom Road can't go through there. We just built a gazebo right in that same setback requirement. No, that is actually set back far enough. That was specifically intentionally done that way. As long as the property is still usable if it needs to be used, I guess it doesn't matter today, but I feel like you're going back on the conversation we had two years ago.

Yeah, I mean, for what it's worth, the conversations with the Verlito group, this has been a frequent conversation point. You'll recall they actually have an interest in trying to pursue on-street parking. That's up to the discretion of the Planning Commission and City Council. That's a different item with their site plan, but that was one of their preliminary ideas. If you end up, you know, we collectively decide to move the trail up there, you would need all of this space. The number one reason to do it this way, especially at this point, is that once buildings are built up there, it's very difficult to get it back. So it's generally a planning best practice to retain the ultimate amount of right-of-way that you might want to give yourself the space to be able to do different things. Whether you use it the way you intend, it gives you flexibility now and into the future. But the Frulito group has been aware of this the entire time, and they haven't had any concerns with it.

Okay.

Deputy Mayor Gottschall.

Thank you. When are they due to apply to Planning Commission?

They're currently still working through the due diligence process. I believe we had a nine month due diligence phase, primarily because there were so many kind of moving parts underneath it. They'll actually be the first to tell you they're not as far along as they'd like to be. The current step we're on is, and this is impacting their ability to apply for the site plan, is we're working with DTE to figure out basically what to do with the poles that run actually adjacent to the Renton Street right-of-way, and those connect to power lines that go across the street. So we're working with them and with DTE to basically resolve that, figuring out either A, can we figure out how to bury them for a reasonable price, or do they have to get moved and stay overhead, and then that will determine when they apply. it is not, uh, they won't be coming in for site plan immediately. Um, I'm still optimistic there'll be within the next couple of months, but that's the current holdup.

Okay. Yeah. I, I share council member Behrman's, um, thoughts about not wanting to have things, a giant grass median like we have in front of the credit union. Um, I wasn't sure where they were in their planning. When it was presented to us, it was, well, the path could go up there, it could not. Are we closer to a decision one way or the other, or are they still too far out for anything that we don't really know where... they've landed on that?

They were pretty receptive to the feedback from the DDA and from City Council about the concerns about moving the trail up to the front. So I know we've had some conversations about kind of going either way. At this exact moment, actually, again, the holdup is related to the DTE poles. If the poles need to stay overhead, they would likely move them to the north side, and then that could have an impact on how the trail, either it might facilitate the trail staying there, because

hey we can't build within 10 feet of the move lines anyways so let's keep the trail there um that's why that's specifically in flux okay i i think just in terms of in terms of looking like apothecary is very busy all the time now which is great for them but that not even a residential development so we're talking having even more cars trying to get in and out depending on what their plan is then I worry about somebody pulling out well somebody's flying down the trailway like I would almost prefer that we keep the current structure of the trailway to avoid more issues being created if we if If we commit to keeping things as they are, do we need as much, or is this strictly for on-street parking, like the amount of easement that we're trying to keep?

No, it is not strictly for on-street parking. The other kind of primary reason would be Right now, there is no dedicated right-hand turn lane off of southbound North Wixom Road, so having this additional right-of-way basically would allow you to consider an additional lane. Again, 30 years from now, 40 years from now, the city may decide, hey, you know what would be fun is a boulevard of some kind. having additional right-of-way width would allow you to do that. Those are, you know, those kind of things. And the reason this width was picked, and this is, you know, actually predates me pretty significantly, but because North Wixom Road is a major road, you only have two north-south kind of major roads. You don't know where you're... Yeah, you don't know where you're going to end up, so retain what you can now, and it gives you the flexibility down the road.

Yeah, I... I understand that we can, I mean what's the process to slim this down in the future if we want to?

Basically the agenda item we're doing right now.

Okay. Yeah, I don't know where I land. As I've shared before, I don't know that Wixom Road downtown becomes a four or five lane road. I don't know that we want that in our downtown. We're concerned about traffic, so we're spending grant money on pedestrian boulevards, but people are gonna speed up if the road is wider. I don't know, all of this strikes me as I don't want the trail way up there, I don't want on-street parking there, and I don't foresee a reason or a way we're going to expand beyond the current road size through downtown. So I share the same concerns basically, but I don't know that it hurts us to pass it as is now, get the plans figured out, and then figure out what we need to do from there. Thank you.

Council Member O'Day.

Thank you. Has there ever been any consideration, not that this would help Wixom Road directly in that area, but over on Pontiac Trail to try and alleviate some of the traffic to have the east entrance to that strip mall, an entrance only or a no left turn exiting it?

Are you talking about country corners?

Yes.

And you're talking about the intersection closest to the Pontiac Trail-Wixom Road intersection? Correct. No. To my knowledge, there hasn't been any conversations about restricting access at that driveway.

Okay.

Again, like I said, I know it's not the particular parcel we're talking about, but while we're just kind of spitballing traffic and concerns of that nature, I was just curious if it's ever been...

Yeah, what I will say is that we do have standards about requiring distance between curb cuts, and that's a waivable standard by the Planning Commission. In a case like this, I would have to imagine that standard was waived probably because of the unique geometry of these sites. That driveway is very close to an intersection, which is... not ideal from a traffic circulation standpoint. I wasn't here when we were doing that one, but I would also bet property owners tend to want as many curb cuts as you'll let them have, so that may have very well been a big push from them of like, well, hey, people are supposed to slow down. I just want people to be able to get in here. I couldn't say, but that is unique.

Good. Council Member Barron?

I mean, I'm fine with the overall concept of combining the parcels. I just I don't feel like maybe staff is listening to council and council made it abundantly clear that we don't want a 30 foot barrier between the street and this development. And I feel like this coming back to us this way this evening is kind of reiterating that. So I'll just reiterate it one more time, we would like to see this development done and I don't believe with the way the park is and the railroad, we're ever going to be able to do a boulevard through there. I don't think you would even get the permission to do the right-hand turn lane and that would take up basically all of the park downtown. So I agree, saving the property that needs to be saved, I think we're being a little overzealous And I think that large vacant piece of property in front of the credit union is too much. And that's what we were trying to get away from when we moved the sidewalk back from where staff originally wanted to put the sidewalk two years ago. So I just, you know, if staff could just listen to what council is asking, I think that would be beneficial in the future. Understood.

Any further discussion? No.

All right, I got a motion and a second to approve the recommendation, or to approve the combination and subsequent division of city-owned properties at 119, 121, 131, 201, 205, and 221 North Wixom Road and 3343 and 3360 Renton Street and the vacated portion of Renton Street as described in the exhibit dated January 19th, 2026. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. opposed motion carries new business number four is a recommendation to review the attached materials discuss interest in continuing the water tower branding program and provide direction to city administration and a preferred next steps to our motion okay so we don't need no okay this is a manager Benson

So as you're aware, outlined in the agenda packet, the current deal for the ADEPT logo that was on our water tower has expired. There has been some interest from other companies in taking over basically that branding opportunity. Starting in 2016 was the first time that the city had done that program. You actually adopted a facility naming rights policy at the time. I didn't know that until I was digging into this. So there were pros and cons to how this last one went. Specifically, the company that we were in business with ended up not having the best reputation. They had some issues financially down the stretch. I think some lessons learned for even how the agreement could work and some of those things. Now that we do have some interest, basically we wanted to have a discussion or open the floor for city council to let us know your preferences on whether to continue seeking partners to do that again. Do you want to retain it? Do you want to look at doing public art? I mean, it's wide open. We don't necessarily need you to tell us specifically what you want to do other than if you're like, hey, let's go find another partner. you know, we could certainly start working on that, but really just trying to open the floor for you all to talk about it. And, uh, you know, we provided a variety of, you know, numbers in here and those kinds of things. So happy to go through those as you want, but wanted to give you guys the floor.

Council member Berman.

I can start. I mean, first of all, the water tower looks nice. That has been repainted. And I like actually that we have our logo back on it. Um, I would be, you know, depending on, I think we need to be a little bit more obviously selective and not get ourselves in the situation where we have a brand on our water tower that maybe is bringing a bad image to the city. But that being said, you know, given the investment in that particular area and that perhaps one of the people that might be interested is the company that's doing that investment, it may be something for us to consider. But I would prefer more of a co-branding, you know, so like if our logo was to stay on two sides of the tower and then, you know, another company's logo was to be on the other two sides of the tower, I, I, I think removing our name from it completely, uh, would be a detriment at this point.

Council Member O'Day.

Thank you. Um, I agree with Councilman Fairman's comments. Um, I mean, anything that can generate revenue is a good thing to keep our branding on there. And then again, just who is the business, the people who want to be doing this? We've got some big players here in the city now, as well as soon to be. So again, I would be in full support of it. A 10-year contract is a little too long for my liking. I think that can lead to situations like we found ourselves in, but I would definitely be in support of it.

Deputy Mayor Gatcho?

Thank you. I am in favor of continuing to explore the branding options. I know you had kind of presented a few different, like sending out to bed, what have you, I don't think we need to do that, and I think that gets into your comment in here about determining the selection criteria. Ultimately, it's not down to that. It should be whoever we feel most comfortable with. I think we also probably need to Review the original agreement and I was happy to see My comments from a long time ago including here talking explicitly about what happens when things turn sour so that needs to be reviewed. I would probably agree that 10 years is too long, but adding in something about sale of businesses, takeovers, what happens, like adjusting for the exact situation we found ourselves in. But I think We would be better to approach a few of our larger businesses and see if they're interested or put it out there and see if there's anybody that would be interested. I mean, it would be a giant investment for a small business, so I don't. know that that would be in it. But even within our large businesses, there's probably a few that I wouldn't be in favor of. So co-branding, but with the perception that we want to showcase Wixom, not just the logo, but the company that's there too. Setting that aside, if we can make it nice, like incorporate some of the artwork idea that's on, like something to draw attention to. So I think there's a way to get to a few things and clarify, but on my mind, yes, ultimately we need to cover our costs on this. So thank you.

I disagree with my fellow council members here. I think 10 years is too long. I'd like to see us explore branding opportunities because it is an income source that could help us out and it doesn't hurt as long as we pick the right company. So with that, do I have any further discussion? All right, so you guys got your direction. Very good. Moving on to new business number five is a recommendation. to accept the professional services proposal from hubble roth and clark incorporated of how michigan for design engineering services for the west maple road improvement projects for cost not to exceed the seventy seven thousand nine hundred eighty dollars for design engineering and prove the associated budget amendment move to approve so this is a major benson has had enough media tonight or what and this is it

So this is an item again that we've talked about numerous times this calendar year. So this is the next step as it relates to the cost participation agreement that we signed with the school district related to improvements to West Maple Road. We asked Hubbell, Roth and Clark who has been helping us with basically the entire project as well as managing some of the construction aspects. construction oversight aspects of the Walled Lake Elementary project to provide a design engineering scope. So that is presented for you tonight. This project was not originally budgeted. When we were doing the budget last winter, spring, we didn't necessarily know that this is how this was going to come together. So we are requesting a budget amendment to go alongside this expense for design engineering. Ultimately, we would need budget amendments for the construction engineering as well as the actual construction costs once we get to those points early spring of 2027. And again, that's where the district's financial participation would come into play. We do still need to dig into the subsequent agreement that would come after the cost participation agreement as an interlocal to kind of spell out some of the nuance of this. But as a whole, I mean, we feel confident in the agreement we've got with the district. And this is just the first step we need to do that. We have Mike Darger with HRC here who can kind of talk about their scope as well as what the project would entail if there are questions.

Council Member Berman.

So I guess my only question is obviously the design engineering for this to go out to bid, right? No. For the construction project to go out to bid?

It will. The construction will go out to bid, yes.

Yeah. But I just want to make sure that when that comes to us, we have an option because I know there were a couple different proposals in the beginning, a $1.5 million proposal to a more toned-down version. I mean, the whole point of my view on this is we need to make that area safe so traffic can get around the school. But I also don't necessarily know that we necessarily need it to be a center lane the entire way and curbs the entire way and to spend as much money as possible on this. My desire was to make Maple Road passable. That's why I brought this issue up at the beginning with the school. And I think now that the school is willing to contribute some money, I'm happy that they're willing to partake in a contribution, but I don't necessarily know that we need everything that we could possibly do so maybe when the option comes back maybe we see this before it goes out to bid and council can decide at that point do we want to do the project A that's estimated to be this much project B that's estimated to be this much or project C because I think that's going to determine what kind of support you're going to have from council You know, I mean, if we're going to spend exactly half of what the school is giving us and we're spending half and the school is spending half, I think, you know, I'm fine with that. If you're looking to come before us and you want to spend $2 million and the school is only giving us $500,000, I'm going to have a problem with that. And I think... I think we're going above and beyond the scope of making the area safe. We're now just trying to improve it, over-improve it. Does that make sense?

Yes. When we did this cost estimate, we just assumed it would be curbed the whole way because we don't have the vertical alignment yet, so we don't know how the drainage is going to be handled. and you have existing sidewalks, but we do plan on using existing ditches where possible. But in case when it gets widened and you have to add curb, that's why we had the cost of curb in there the whole way. So we start higher and then work our way.

I just want to make sure that council has the option to tone it down to a number that's going to feel more comfortable for us. Because I don't know, I guess I don't know if we need a left-hand turn lane all the way back or all the way across the property. I mean, that's more, and you tell us what we need.

Well, they did do a traffic study, and it did say you needed that.

Even though they didn't want to do it themselves.

Correct, yeah. Yeah, just to clarify, their traffic study said, oh, there would be backups, but it doesn't need it. When we looked at it, our traffic engineers with HRC, we disagreed. So our interpretation of their traffic study was you do need it. That was one of the key conflicts.

So our study says we need a left-hand turn lane back to Maple Road, or back to Wixom Road, and that will result in needing curbs the entire length?

No, not all the way. No, it doesn't say. When we reviewed it, the queuing that we identified from their study. So we reviewed their study. There's only one study. And there's two different interpretations of that. Their says, we don't need to do anything. This is great. Ours says... At the bare minimum, you need to have a left turn lane the length of your property to accommodate the bus queue. No, it does not inherently say, oh, you need a left turn lane all the way down to the intersection. The drawing does show it that way. So, I mean, duly noted, I think what you're getting at is, are there opportunities to taper down in the middle by, you know, let's call it 300, 500 feet that doesn't need to be widened?

I want to make the area safe, but... at the most cost-effective way possible. That's the best way I can describe it.

If I can real quickly interject here, we'll do a communication to council once we get the design engineering completed and you have a better estimate of what the cost is going to be, a better scope of the project, and a better estimate of what the costs are. I'll commit to you that we'll provide that information to council, and you can decide from there if you want to have a discussion, if you're satisfied with it or if you're not.

Okay.

Thank you. We'll take care of that.

All right. Thanks. Seeing no further discussion, I have a motion and a second to approve the recommendation to accept the professional services proposal from Hubbell, Roth, and Clark, Incorporated of Howell, Michigan, for design engineering services for the West Maple Road Improvement Project for a cost not to exceed $77,980 for design engineering and approve the associated budget amendment. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. New business number six. It's a recommendation to award the construction bid for the North Wixom Road Safety Path Program project to Anglin Civil LLC of Livonia, Michigan for an amount not to exceed $597,111.11. Authorize a construction engineering proposal from Hubbell, Roth and Clark. Incorporated, of all Michigan, for an amount not to exceed $91,100, for a total project cost not to exceed $688,211.11, and authorized the mayor to sign the associated agreements. Do I have a motion? So moved. All right. Assistant City Manager, do you want to take this, or do you want... Yeah, I can lead it off.

Irv, if you want to come up, too. But, yeah, this is an agenda item that we've talked about numerous times. I actually included a copy of the meeting minutes from your last conversation on this from a year or two ago. You know, looking to do about 1,000 feet of sidewalk along North Wixom Road, along the east side, and then this would also include a bridge over a drain that would lead to basically cross Hopkins Drive. At the time when we last talked about this, the price was a lot higher, $984,000, and there was a lot of concerns about that. At the time, we were having some issues getting good pricing on this. We were also having some issues getting all of the easements. So in the year or so since then, we have gotten all of the easements. And we did have the opportunity to put this out to bid again. Those bids were received, we received two, and the low bid was actually significantly less than the last time. So this was included in your budget for this fiscal year, both on the construction and engineering side. So we're bringing it back to you to see if you'd like to continue moving forward with the project.

Discussion? Council Member Behrman?

First of all, I appreciate that this went out to bid this time. I mean, the last time a million dollars was just kind of a gut punch for a sidewalk. And this one, you know, now we're down below $700,000. So we saved $300,000 by sending it out to bid. So I guess that would be a testament that some of these things do need to go out to bid. But I don't understand exactly... I mean, we got the one offer that was five. The other one was still a million, obviously. We went with the lower one. Is it still the desire that we need this bridge in that location? Because just doing sidewalk for all those houses to Charms Road is going to be a very affordable endeavor, but the bridge is the most expensive part of this. Last time we asked would there be any alternatives, to doing a bridge, but I didn't see anything that was presented or anything that was talked about in the report regarding that. And then last time it was just shy of a million dollars, but it didn't include engineering. So I guess I'm curious why this time it's $597,000, but we need engineering. And then also last time there was traffic improvements that were included in, I believe, the bid. But this time there were not traffic signal improvements that I saw in the packet. So I just want to understand the differences in those three things.

Sure, and I'll lean on Mike for help on some of those pieces. In full transparency, this is an item that our previous public works director was working on a lot more closely than I was, so I've been working with our interim public works director and Mr. Darga, who's done a lot of the heavy lifting on this over the last year. The one thing I know I can speak on to some extent is the bridge is a necessary component because the drain crossing and the way that the road tapers up to Hopkins Drive. So there's a deceleration lane right there basically where then the... It's not quite a river, but where the water then goes under Wixom Road heading west and then north towards the DPW. So in order to provide a safer crossing, it is ideal to cross over the water as opposed to directing pedestrians or bikers or whoever to go into the roadway where cars could be decelerating. So that's the fundamental reason why the bridge to help cross there is important. As to how the scope changed, Mr. Darger may be able to help with that. And then I'm not 100% sure why the previous version of this agenda item wouldn't have included construction engineering. You know, it should have because we do need the services to basically help us manage the contractors, manage the construction process. So anything you have to help me, Mike, much appreciated.

I believe there was a civil engineering or a construction engineering proposal issued. I think that was included. As far as an alternate to the bridge, we got an EGLE permit to cross the outlet of Loon Lake, and they wanted a bridge there. They wouldn't let us enclose that, which would have been a cheaper option, but they wanted to keep it open.

I mean, I know this is something the staff's been working on for a long time, and I know that some prior members of council who were pushing for this for a long time. I just feel like there's a lot of other areas in the city that still need sidewalks that we could basically do all of them for $600,000 versus spend all this on a 1,000-foot stretch. But I guess I'd like to hear what other people have to say.

Deputy Mayor Gatchel?

Thank you. In looking over the bid line items, so the bridge isn't even the biggest difference between here. The proposed contractor for coffer dams has $95,000. The other one has $273,000. So it's like the dams are more expensive than the bridge being... ship delivered and installed. So, that on its own, like, the bridge is one thing, just... Water management sounds like it's a bigger issue than even the bridge. I don't know if we spoke with Commerce Township at all, like all of the boardwalks they just did along Commerce Road to get to the library, like Commerce and Commerce, haha, but that's literally, they just did a ton of boardwalks. Granted, they're all wood, they're not prefab, but I don't know what the cost was on them, or them doing that, or if they would share that information at all, because I understand some people wanting to connect the city, but if it's gonna be $300,000, $400,000 for one little bridge, that's too much for me, so.

Yeah, it's a 40-foot span. You can't do that with a boardwalk at that elevation, is why it's a prefab bridge.

Okay. Yeah. I feel like buyers, near the buyer's homestead farm, I don't know if you've looked at what Commerce has done, but there's stretches going over water that are longer than 40 feet for sure.

Yeah, but they probably are supported in the stream bank.

Yeah.

Where we can't do that. We have to have clear span.

They're not, so Eagle won't allow us to do it as well? Okay. Okay. Yeah, then if we can't look at other ways of doing it, I'm not in favor of the bridge. I know it was a struggle just to get the right-of-ways with people because they didn't want the sidewalk there anyway, and we kind of fought tooth and nail for that. That's a very wet, low area with runoff from... the roadway anyway, like those during winter or after our thaw will pool there. That's something that I had brought up last time and another, it might have been Council Member Grumman-Fox actually went on Google Street View and looked it up and you could see the water pooling where we were going to put sidewalks. So I'm not in favor of this, just as I wasn't last time. Thank you.

Council Member O'Day?

Thank you. My question's more of maybe since we have our police here, safety questions. I know you were mentioning Council Member Behrman, you know, that we could do sidewalks across the city for this price. So I want to make sure we're doing our due diligence from a safety perspective.

How can I help you?

I'm just curious what maybe the stats may be in that area with regard to pedestrian-related accidents, car accidents, different weather, if the rain, if it's cool, things of that nature.

I haven't pulled any of that specific data according to this. I don't recall any pedestrian accidents in the area. That's something that kind of stands out for us. But I can pull that data and get it to you in the future if you need it.

I need, you know, whenever you have.

Okay.

Thank you.

Council Member Behrman.

Well, the only thing I will say is I really do think that the sidewalk needs to be finished to Charms Road. We have that right away, and the fact that that still hasn't been done, and we've had plenty of funds in the sidewalk budget the last two years, that needs to be done. But I would be in favor of potentially tabling this issue this evening to see if we can get some additional information on whether or not some other boardwalk options would be possible to make this more affordable and potentially also have the view of some of our other council members that aren't here this evening because this is a very expensive project and I'm not comfortable approving it as proposed this evening.

Mike, you know, it's been brought up about the wood. Just your rough estimate, what would it cost us to put a wood bridge over that area if we could?

I don't think you physically can. Okay. To scan that.

Right. And... I'm in favor of this because, you know, I was involved getting some of the right-of-ways from these residents and stuff like that. And these residents are saying, you know, we're talking about safety, but they say if we want to walk downtown, we have to cross a busy Wixom Road to get to the sidewalk to get downtown, where if we put the sidewalk in... It'll be connected, and they got a straight shot all the way down. So, you know, if we're talking safety issues and stuff like that, then this is a definite issue. I mean, yeah, it's expensive, but this is what we have the sidewalk program for, and it's going to help these residents connect themselves to making a more walkable city. So I'm in favor of approving this tonight. Council Member Behrman.

When you were saying you spoke to the residents, were you meaning the residents along Wixom Road? Because I'd be fine putting the sidewalk in in front of those houses for now and all the way down to the existing sidewalk and connecting it to Charms. I guess what I'm not comfortable building right now is the bridge until we explore whether or not there are other options to do that more affordable.

Yeah, no, not only the residents where we got the right-of-way, but I'm also talking about residents in the two subdivisions there.

The subdivisions that would be connected. They're exploring that they want this. Yes. And maybe... Maybe I think I would reiterate that potentially tabling it this evening to see if there's any other options we can come back with. More people might be a better option.

Well, I think we've been told tonight that according to EGLE, there is no other option. So, I mean, we can table it, but it's going to be the same information again.

It would be a motion to postpone just for the interjection.

It's a pleasure.

I'd be fine with a motion to postpone this evening. Can you withdraw that for a minute? I can. Deputy Mayor Gatchel? Withdrawn.

Thank you. I guess I'm... just kinda stuck, like it sounds like you'd have unanimous approval to do the sidewalk in front of those properties that we've gotten the right-of-way from. I believe we have gotten the right-of-way for the gap a little bit south of Charms too, right? Or is that?

That's installed.

Yeah. Okay, so. So that's done, like that, provides access for those residents along there. Getting into the discussion of trying to get downtown from Hopkins and whatnot, those residents knew that there's not a sidewalk and bridge there. My line of work, you're looking at where you want to be, what you want proximity to. I don't know that anybody moved in there thinking like, hopefully they're gonna put a bridge in so I can get downtown. That is the major expense on this project. If a neighborhood can't get downtown because of a bridge, I don't know that that's the end of the world to anybody. They still have access at the corner of Loon Lake and Wixom where it is signalized, where there is sidewalk. We're not saying there's no way to get down there, they just don't want to go that way. and I don't know how many of them want to do that, then we're spending a couple hundred thousand dollars to appease a very small population of one neighborhood. It's an outsized number for a very small amount of people. So it's about spending our money where we can best impact everybody. I don't know that this aligns with that goal in my mind. I understand there's no other options, like this is it, that's fine. That's why I don't know that I'm in favor of postponing it just to get more People, like if the administration wants, if it doesn't pass tonight and administration wants to bring it back in the future altered or just put it back in front of us when everybody's here to roll the dice again, so be it. But I don't know that we need to postpone it tonight just to wait.

This is the city manager Benson.

Just a question, Mike. Do you know how long are these bids good for?

60 days. I'm just trying to... It's kind of a long break in between. We probably have 30 more days.

Yeah, I was going to say we've got a mid... Okay, there could be a little time. Okay, just wanted to clarify.

Council Member Berman.

Could we piece mail out and just do the sidewalk portion or would that change the whole scope of the project?

I can talk to the contractor about that.

It should make the engineering costs go down.

It probably would.

It's a no-brainer to me. I'm fine doing the sidewalk. I'm not sold on the bridge yet.

We do have other potential areas for bridges in the city in the future, so maybe we have a fun bridge project to tackle the Sibley Crossing and this crossing in the future then.

Sibley being the one across from the cemetery?

Same situation. Unless the road's widened and it's part of the road widening like they just did at Norton Creek and at the Gibson House.

Thanks. So this is City Manager Benson.

Just kind of one additional comment. I know I talked about it a little bit, but I would, I guess, in my non-engineer, non-professional opinion in that sense, I think I would have some concern about having a sidewalk that just dead ends without having somewhere to go just south of Hopkins Drive because without the bridge or without some way to cross the waterway, it's all wooded right there, and that was actually one of the problems getting easements is that the adjacent neighbors don't want those trees cut. So, you know, clearing it and kind of going your other way around is to go basically in the street. So I just I want to put that out there of having some caution of if we have a sidewalk that leads to nowhere, it's going to push people to be in basically the flare where people are decelerating. So I just I would advise to be cautious of that. That's all.

So if I may, Your Honor, real quick, if we're going to proceed without approval of some sort on this, the council can do as they choose. But just to put a finer point on it in terms of what's been discussed, perhaps we do the sidewalk only. That would be something we'd have to bring back to council and do some thought on from an administration standpoint as to what we would repackage and bring back to council. So it would require some thought. I think the deputy mayor's point is valid as well. And he said for the record that he wouldn't have a problem with it if we brought this back. That's an option for us as well. But hearing what we're hearing here, we'll package up a couple of different options of how to proceed. And perhaps we approach it that way the next time we bring it to council.

Any further discussion? No. Council Member O'Day?

Thank you. I was just going to say, even with a quorum here tonight, I have a funny feeling we might get a tied vote anyway, so it might just be worth our while to table it.

Postpone it.

Thank you.

The clerk's teaching me.

Postpone it.

Any further discussion? All right, saying none, I got a motion and a second to approve the recommendation to award the construction bid for the North Wixom Road Safety Path Program Project to Anglin Civil LLC of Livonia, Michigan for an amount not to exceed $597,111.11. Authorize a construction engineering proposal from Hubbell, Roth & Clark Incorporated of Howell, Michigan. for an amount not to exceed $91,100 for a total project cost not to exceed $688,211.11 and authorized the mayor to sign the associated agreements. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed?

No. Mayor Vigo?

Aye. Deputy Mayor Gottschall?

No.

Council Member Behrman? No. Council member O'Day.

Yes.

Say yes to no motion.

Fails. All right, thank you.

Tie goes to the mayor.

What's that?

The tie goes to the mayor.

Yeah, tie goes to the mayor, yeah. Thanks, Mike.

So then do we need an additional motion to postpone or? No, they just voted off.

Oh, we just, okay. Yeah. All right, new business number seven is a recommendation to accept the bid prices from Canfield Equipment Service, Incorporated of Warren, Michigan, and GraphX of Plymouth, Michigan, and authorize the uplifting of two 2026 Chevy Tahoe four-wheel drive police pursuit vehicles with the necessary police-specific equipment and graphics for a total cost of $36,675.72 from Capital Account Vehicles Police. Number 401-301-973.370. Do I have a motion?

Move to approve.

Support.

Deputy Chief Caldwell, welcome.

Thank you, Mayor, Members, Council. Thank you for your time tonight. So you'll recall that you recently approved the purchase of two Tahoe's. Unfortunately, I inadvertently failed to ask for the equipment necessary to turn those into patrol vehicles, so that's why I'm here before you tonight. I'm gonna blame it on being the new guy. So how we came to this price and determined that we wanted to go with Canfield was we reached out to numerous agencies in the area and found that predominantly most agencies in southeast Michigan are outfitted or upfitted by three companies. One is Cruisers, who we currently use. The second company is Canfield out of Warren, and the third company is Priority One out of Canton. Reached out to all three companies, asked for bids on those, and obviously Canton Priority One, we reached out to them and they stated that they could not provide us a quote and would not be able to produce the work until the end of the year. We reached out to our current outfitter, Cruisers, and they were significantly higher at $25,450 per vehicle. And that included $2,200 to unfit the old Durangos. So to take the old equipment out that was usable and the new vehicles. So Canfield provided us the price of $15,814.86, significantly cheaper than cruisers, and their cost to unfit a Durango was right around $1,500. So with the significant cost savings, we wanted to make sure that the quality of their work, since we had never used Canfield before and had been using cruisers, so I took the time to go out to Milford Police Department, who has been using them for some time, Examine the work on their vehicles. All of their entire fleet is done by Canfield. The quality of work is on par with cruisers and obviously there is a significant cost savings. And they also have a shorter, have promised a shorter lead time on vehicles. just because they're a larger outfit. So with the quality of work and the shorter lead time, that's why we're asking for the authorization to spend this money with Canfield. And you'll see there's an additional $2,000 on there, and that is to apply the graphics. That is with our current company that we use graphics out of Plymouth. And they have the current rights to our design. Going with somebody else, there would be an incurred cost to have somebody redesign the design itself.

Any discussion? Deputy Mayor Gottschall.

I mean, just because you didn't put it on the first time, I don't think we should assume we should give it to you right now.

All right. Thank you.

Any other discussion?

Two Tahoe's not fitted.

Well, we do have them so they could be undercover vehicles and just drive around. All right, I got a motion and a second to approve the recommendation to accept the bid process, bid prices from Canfield Equipment Service, Incorporated of Warren, Michigan, and Graphics of Plymouth, Michigan, and authorized the upfitting of two 2026 Chevrolet Tahoe four-wheel drive police pursuit vehicles. with the necessary police-specific equipment and graphics for a total cost of $36,675.72 from Capital Account Vehicles Police-401-301-973.370. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Most in favor? Thanks, Deputy Chief. Moving on, new business number eight. I'm sure you probably didn't think we'd get here, but we're here. The recommendation to extend the three-year contract service for JAG Entertainment of Wixom, Michigan for the summer concert series in the amount of $32,784 for 2027 and $33,767 for 2028 from Park Concerts account number 101-751-808-542 and authorize the mayor to sign the agreement. Do I have a motion? Do I have a motion?

The tongue-in-cheek will get a step stool for next time.

All right, we've got a motion to support. Deanna McGee.

Before you tonight is just a request to extend the entertainment contract we have with JAG Entertainment for an additional two years, which reflects a 3% increase on each year. Any questions?

I'm very happy to see this. I've seen the progression of the concerts through the years, and not only is the attendance getting better, but so are the bands that we're getting. So I can certainly approve this one. Any other discussion? All right. Seeing none, I've got a recommendation to extend the three-year contract with JAG Entertainment of Wixom, Michigan. Are they still in Wixom, though? Okay, so JAG Entertainment of Novi, Michigan, for the summer concert series in the amount of $32,784 for 2027 and $33,768 for the 2028 Park Concerts, account number 101-751-808-542, and authorized the mayor to sign the agreement. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Thanks, Deanna. All right. New business number nine is a recommendation to confirm the mayor's appointment of Peter Sharp to the Senior Citizens Commission with a term to expire June 30, 2027, and Nicole O'Day to the Wage and Salary Committee. Do I have a motion?

So moved.

Thank you. Thanks. We have two openings, one on the wage and salary and one on the Senior Citizens Commission. We're familiar with both candidates and just hoping for approval on these two appointments. Any discussion? Seeing none, I got a motion and a second to approve the recommendation to confirm the mayor's appointment of Peter Sharp to the Senior Citizens Commission with a term to expire June 30th, 2027 and Nicole O'Day to the Wage and Salary Commission. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? motion carries and that concludes the new business portion of this meeting tonight it moves us to the second call to the public i'll read those rules in case one somebody from the public wants to speak the public shall address the council during call to the public which shall be included on the agenda immediately after correspondence and again immediately after new business the first call to the public immediately after correspondence shall be limited to agenda items only. A person shall not address the council in excess of five minutes unless time is extended by a majority vote at the council present. Persons wishing to address the council shall identify themselves in their place of residence and shall state their reason for addressing the council, and all comments by the public shall be made directly to the council. Do we have anybody for the second call to the public? Seeing none, I'm going to close that second call to the public and move on to city manager comments. City Manager Brown.

Thank you, Your Honor. Just a couple of items. We had some fiber optic activity that I wanted to inform council about, given our recent fund experiences on fiber optic activity in the city. So we have more of that coming with a new provider that's looking to also install fiber optic equipment facilities in the city of Wixom. So that's something that's going to be happening. It's basically going to be planned for the near future by the company WOW. It's roughly going to be on Maple Road from the city limits to the west to Gunnar Metalla Park on the east. We will have more detailed information that will be provided and issued by WOW in the coming weeks as work is beginning. We are in the middle of working out details, trying to imposed lessons learned on our processes that we are going to do our best to make sure that we have a better experience with it this time around.

With that, has there been any discussion of these new companies that are coming and piggybacking on what T-Mobile did? Because I don't want to see 53,000 of these like there is across the street here with the 22 pylons around it that we can't even do it used to... keep our bikers safe, but we can keep those things safe. I don't want to see a bunch of those. So has there been any discussion about everybody using the same type of piggybacking and go from there? Because once WOW goes through, then AT&T fiber is going to come through. So that means we're going to have three companies coming in, digging up, doing the same stuff everywhere.

Right, so that's something that's been brought up by members of council on that front, and we are putting that into the discussion points that we're having with WOW. Urban Suda, our Interim Department of Public Works Director, is well aware of that concern and is in the middle of those discussions with WOW to see what we can get accomplished on that front to try to minimize the aesthetic impact of these projects.

Very good, thank you.

Okay.

The next item is- Hang on one second. Sure, sure, sure. Council Member Behrman has a question. I'm sorry, I missed it.

Following up on that, can we add to our next agenda a discussion from council on this? Because I think there, lack of a better way to put it, we probably need to do a citywide moratorium on preventing all these contractors from coming into the city until we get a hold of what they're doing. Because T-Mobile has made an absolute mess of the city. And I don't want to have any discussion with WOW or AT&T until T-Mobile finally cleans up what they've done and we can, I mean, that brand new subdivision that we just paved across the street where you live, they, They went through and spray painted the brand new street that was just paved, marking all their lines they put in. There's pink spray paint over all the street. My subdivision, that's only a couple years old, they didn't bore deep enough, so now they've got to rip out the street and repave it. They cracked a bunch of, one of the sidewalks in front of my house they cracked. Sidewalks throughout my neighborhood, they're all raised up. It's a complete and utter mess. They're not paying attention to what they're doing. And I don't know if everything they're messing up is even going to get fixed. So I would be in support of us not supporting any other community or companies coming in until we can get a control on how we're going to control them and make sure that our residents and we as a city don't have to deal with this. So, I mean, I would ask maybe the next council meeting, this is an agenda item for discussion, and we have some options of what we can do as a city to prevent this madness from continuing.

Be added to the agenda.

Go to the city manager's office before.

Oh, I've got notice.

Oh, you've got notice? Okay. All right. So, go ahead. The floor is yours again.

Thank you, Your Honor. School-related West Maple Road activity. It's a little bit of old news today with it having started today. I won't go into all the details, but there's some new Wixom Elementary school-related impacts on West Maple that are happening right now. It'll be one lane of traffic for a period of time. What's a wrap-up time period, Irvin?

This week.

Yeah, so it should be short-term. It should be over by the time next week rolls around. And there is a plan in place. I talked with council members that were affected directly by it today. It appears that it's functioning the way that we worked it out with the school system. Originally, they were looking to close down the road completely for a period of time, and we insisted that we wanted to have at least one lane of traffic open at all times. So that's the current status on that. It will be for a couple of days as they're doing this work, but it should be... an impact that can be tolerated for the short run and it should be short-lived. So I just wanted to make sure that people were aware of that. I provided it in the city manager update for people to reference. We had information on it on the website as well and other forms of communication that we utilize. So we're trying to get the word out on that. Upcoming events, there's information about the Estemo groundbreaking which is happening on September 22nd. That's happening at 10 o'clock. and 10.30 is when the expected formal action is expected to take place. Then we have the Lakes Area Chambers Commerce State of the Lakes Luncheon, which begins at 11 a.m. People attending the first event might be a little bit late for the second event, but it should be within just a few minutes, so we should be in pretty good shape. So I wanted to point those out for everybody. And then we have the dates to remember for different things that are happening throughout the city over the next few months. And that's all that I had for my city manager update. Happy to answer any questions on anything. I guess I can cover one thing in relation to smart sidewalk repairs. There was some consternation amongst council as well as amongst administration about the way things looked when they finished up with the bus stop installations that were handled in various points across the city. We've been in touch with the people that were handling that and they're actively working on that this week, taking care of some problems with some of the pours that happened in the first place as well as restoration of the ground around those different bus stops that were done. So we should see that action completed Originally it was supposed to be completed by the end of the week. We'll see how that works out, but it shouldn't be too much longer than that. From what I told, I got an update from the SMART representatives today at the very end of the day. They're still hopeful to have it wrapped up by the end of the week, but we'll see. If not, it might push into next week by a day or two, but we'll see some relief on the way that looks aesthetically, which wasn't good before. So we're looking forward to that.

Speaking of sidewalks and the price of sidewalks, we're getting a really good deal for $800,000 with those sidewalks they're putting in. So this is City Manager Benson.

Just one update for Council. I know in the past we've talked about, and I've had in my monthly report, basically the delays we've had on the next portion of citywide signage, specifically the gateways and everything that was planned for the road commission right-of-ways. After a lot of emails and calls and complaining, and I've got to give Johnson Science some credit here, they've been just as aggressive as I have, it does sound like we should have our permits issued later this week, beginning of next week. So what that will mean, I'm hoping in my next monthly report I'll be able to give you kind of a timeline of what the next stages of installation will look like. And as previously mentioned, basically to meet some of the standards that they threw at us, we may need to do some change orders. So that might be an item on an upcoming agenda. Again, we're going to try to figure it out to be able to fit it within the budget that city council has already authorized. But in the case that we may not be able to, I guess I just don't want you to be surprised if we have a conversation coming. One way or the other, I intend to have a more robust update for you, but I wanted to give you the good news that the bureaucracy is moving. Very good.

All right, we'll move on to council comments. Council Member O'Day.

Thank you. First, once again, even though they're no longer here, I still want to go on the record and congratulate our firefighters, Garcia and Arsenault. I just think it's very encouraging to see people entering this noble profession today. and being so selfless, which is what it is. So I'm very inspired by that. Also, staying in line with the fire department, thankful for these new pins they got for us for the month of September commemorating the 25th anniversary of 9-11. So that was very nice. Thank you. And then lastly, just to say we've got a busy day on Saturday with our ribbon cutting and the block party. So I'm excited for that.

Council Member Berman.

Thank you. Congratulations to our fire department and our new firefighters. I had the opportunity to walk through the West End Commons yesterday. It really is coming together nicely. I don't know if they actually put the furniture together today in the rain like they wanted to do.

They were in process. I know that.

So there will be furniture there soon too. And then the only other thing I'd like to just reiterate, like, I really do think where the sidewalk currently ends on Wixom Road before Charms, to Charms, needs to be paved. I mean, every morning I see people coming down that. They're on the grass there waiting to cross the street. Like, we have that right away. I mean... We can debate doing the bridge as long as we want, but we need to at least connect where the sidewalk ends currently to charms. It's been that way for years. We have that right away in front of the house. Let's get that sidewalk paved because, I mean, we're talking about we don't want to do a sidewalk that's going to end. We've had a sidewalk that ends, and there's nonstop people walking on the grass there and sometimes in the street, and it's not safe. So let's pave that stretch now, please.

it all right deputy mayor gotcha thank you I also wanted to share my things for our firefighters and them helping to protect our residents and keep us safe wanted to thank Peter sharp for volunteering for the senior commission luckily for the senior commission they don't vote on engineering contracts very often so they'll be happy that those meetings won't go on forever over there um but uh it's always nice when our former council members continue to be active in the city and bring their knowledge to the other commission so i do appreciate that thank you

You're welcome. Yep, and I just want to say congratulations to our newest firefighters, Garcia and Arsenault, and thank them for their service to the city. It's much appreciated. And also I want to congratulate the fire department on a great 9-11 tribute that they did with the display of the new piece of iron that we have. Very touching and... was something we should never forget now every time we drive by the fire station it's going to give us that reminder so thank you to the firefighters for for them And again, this weekend's a busy weekend with the ribbon cutting and the block party. And then next Wednesday, we've got the groundbreaking. We've got the State of the Lakes. And then Steve and I have another meeting later that night. So it's a busy night. So it's exciting to have all this action in the city. And then I was going to bring this up tonight, but the agenda was too long. But I think we need to spend some time and attention to the e-bike situation. I'm getting complaints from not only my neighborhood but other neighborhoods. I'm getting complaints from people on the airline trail that say they're walking and these guys go zipping by them and things like that. So I think we need to take a look at what our neighbors are doing with their ordinances and come back to us with some type of ordinance that we can enforce. Maybe I'm wrong, but instead of punishing the kids on these bikes, I think maybe we should do something with the parents because they're the ones that are responsible for this and they're getting these kids these bikes when not giving them any instructions or guidance and just letting them go. So that's just my two cents. And with that, do I have a motion to adjourn?

Support.

All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, everybody.