City Of Muskegon Commissioners - Regular Meeting

Our God, as we pause right now, we want just to express our gratitude for so many things we enjoy that are undeserved. For our health, our freedom,

for the blessing of human government, for the opportunity to give and take and deliberate and do things that will help society flourish and run well. We pray that your work would be accomplished tonight, your will, your plan for Muskegon through these leaders and through all of those who spectate and participate. Again, we thank you for all of the things that are undeserved which come from your hand. And we say thank you in humility and pray for your grace. Amen.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. May we have a roll call, please?

Mayor Johnson?

Here.

Commissioner Kilgore?

Here.

Vice Mayor Keener? Absent. Commissioner German? Here. Commissioner Jackson? Here. Commissioner Cochin? Here. Commissioner St. Clair? Here.

Thank you. All right. We don't have any other presentations this evening, so we're going to get right into public hearings, which is on PA-198, Industrial Facilities Exemption for American Fabricated Products Incorporated at 331 West Blaketon Avenue. This is a recurring item. Welcome and good evening.

Good evening, Jocelyn Hines, Economic Development Analyst, City of Muskegon. So I am before you all again presenting the PA-198 for American Fabricated Products. As you all know, we held a public hearing at the August 11th meeting asking for approval of the district change. It had to change from industrial development district to a plant rehabilitation district. So this is also making that correction. on the certificate and then the application and turning it into the state after approval of these items.

Excellent. Before we open it up to public hearing commissioners, do you have any questions right off the bat for staff? We have evaluated and heard about this project many times, so I imagine there aren't any, but just wanted to check if anything popped up since. All right. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak with regard to this particular item, the issuance of an industrial facilities exemption certificate for American fabricated products? Seeing no takers in the audience, we're going to go to the phones. That phone number is 231-724-6721. This is phone in common specifically for the public hearing on the issuance of an industrial facilities exemption certificate. All right. Does not look like we have any callers. Commissioners, I would entertain a motion.

I move to close the public hearing and approve the issuance of an industrial facilities exemption certificate for a period of nine years for the property located at 331 West Laketon Avenue and authorize the mayor and city clerk to sign the application and resolution.

Court.

All right. We have a motion by Commissioner Kilgo supported by Commissioner St. Clair. Any discussion?

Commissioners Kilgo or St. Clair?

Or other commissioners? All right. Roll call, please.

Commissioner Kilgo?

Yes.

Commissioner German? Yes. Commissioner Jackson? Yes. Commissioner Cochin? Yes. Commissioner St. Clair? Yes. Mayor Johnson? Yes. Motion passes.

Excellent. And do we have any federal, state, county, or tribal partners in the audience that wishes to give updates to the city commission? I don't see any. All right. We're going to move on to public comment on agenda items. We've got a couple forms. That's general. One more. Here we go. All right. First up, we have Mr. Mark Schultz joining us from the Harbortown Condominium Association. Good evening, sir. You have about three minutes to provide your remarks.

Good evening, commissioners. My name is Mark Schultz. I'm here representing the Harbortown Condo Association. I'd like to thank the commission members for allowing me to provide some background to the request to amend the PUD. In October of 2024, the City Commission did approve a PUD for the Harbortown Condo Association to construct 28 additional units. There were some requirements, recommended additional conditions that were made at that meeting, those being a turnaround incorporated at the end of Channel Viewpoint, an additional fire hydrant along Channel Viewpoint, which the fire marshal has now rescinded that or remove that requirement Stormwater permit must be attained by city engineering before construction begins Landscape planned would be required for each unit and that will be provided by the Builder as he takes the building permit Sidewalks must be installed along East and West harbor town circle This last condition places a financial burden on Harbortown that made it difficult for Harbortown to continue with this PUD. It's primarily due to the county assessor wanting to allocate the sidewalk cost to only the condos that would abut the sidewalk and not anyone else. As an example, Mr. Mayor, if the sidewalk weren't in front of a condo that you owned and I happen to live directly across the street, you would be taxed, I would not. That's kind of an unfair situation. This is in conflict to the state of Michigan condo law, which indicates that any improvement on common elements of a condo association should be allocated evenly to all association co-owners. Harbor Town Condo Association has no problem with the first four conditions of the requirements. We are asking that the City Commission consider a shortened sidewalk request from the Indiana Street entrance to the Fulton Street entrance. This shortened sidewalk would be about 1,500 linear feet. The Condo Association is aware that the sidewalk will require a civil engineering firm to developed plans that will be presented to the City of Muskegon staff function for appropriate review and approval. Funding for this shortened sidewalk is now included in our contract with our developer. Are you happy to take any questions?

Thank you, Mr. Schultz. I appreciate you sharing that input with the Commission this evening. As the applicant, when we get to that item, the Commission may have questions for you when we get to that item. So thank you, sir. Next up, we have Brian Mazade joining us from Harbortown as well, Beechwood-Blushton neighborhood. Good evening, sir. You have up to three minutes to provide your remarks.

Good evening, Mayor and City Commission. My name is Brian Mazade, and I live in Harbortown, and I'm here to address Item F on the agenda, which is the amendment that Mr. Schultz just mentioned. The request that was approved a couple years ago was for the PUD for the 28 additional units. That's been approved, and what's being requested now is simply to reduce the amount of sidewalk. And I'm here before you to request your support and approval of that. I think it's a good compromise from where we were to where we hopefully are now. The construction for this sidewalk is only in the area where the construction will occur for the new condo. I think that makes a lot of sense for the construction for the sidewalks to be delimited to that area. So I would support the request and encourage you to support it as well. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Zieg.

Appreciate you joining us this evening. That's all the forms I have for agenda items. Do you have any more, Madam Clerk?

I do not. No?

Is there anyone else in the audience that wishes to speak on an agenda item? Sir, if you'd kindly come to the podium, state your name, and if you're a City of Muskegon resident, which neighborhood you're joining us from.

Kim Priebe, 1473 West Harbortown Circle. I'm here to speak against this. The PUD is to add eight buildings, approximately 28 units. They're amending the sidewalk to approximately 25, 30% of what you've already approved the last time around. It's all on West Harbor Town Circle. It does not include all of West Harbor Town Circle. It stops at a certain point. This new proposal starts at Indiana on the west side of West Harbor Town Circle, goes through approximately one city block, then it crosses West Harbor Town Circle and then proceeds on the east side to Fulton. If anybody knows anything about Harbor Town, West Harbor Town Circle is the most heavily residential traffic street out there. Now we are adding more vehicles, same traffic that we had before, and incidentally, there's eight buildings are proposed, 28 units. The eighth building happens to be on the south side of Indiana. It's not being considered for the sidewalk. Why is that? That, along with all the other residents that go along West and East Harbortown, they're not going to benefit from this. My last point is, if I lived on the West Harbortown Circle side, that is not an outside walk, or anything south of that, and if I wanted to walk to Bullocks, walk to Silversides, or walk in general, The original crosswalk down there, I'm not going to walk from the east side of West Harbortown to the west side to get on this one block section of sidewalk to go one block, then walk across West Harbortown Circle to continue my walk. If this was me, I'm going to start walking the street. When I get to that crosswalk, 50-50. Do I still walk it, or do I now get on this proposed new sidewalk? I just think that the crosswalk is going to be a danger because right now you have pedestrian crosswalks on the ovals, on Beach Street. Two of them have been missing for over two weeks. What if one gets missing on a residential street in the traffic that we already have? All I can see is potential hazards. Thanks.

Thank you, sir. Appreciate you joining us this evening.

Is there anyone else in the audience that wishes to give

comment on an agenda item or items. Seeing no additional commenters in the audience, we're going to go to the phones. That phone number is 231-724-6721. This is public comment on agenda items only. So when you're calling in, please turn down any audio in the background. State your name, which item or items you're speaking on, and if you're a city resident, which neighborhood you're calling from. All right. Doesn't that sound like we have any comments for agenda items? Commissioners, you have an opportunity to review the consent agenda. Are there any items that you wish to have removed for a separate discussion and vote? Commissioner Kilgore.

Yes. Item F is in Frank. I'm not going to pull item H, but I do have a question for Manager.

All right. We'll entertain that before we go to vote on the overall consent agenda. Commissioner German?

Oh, yes. Item I.

Commissioner Cochin, did I see your hand up?

Or is the item covered already?

Item B.

Any other items, commissioners? All right. And so the answer to your question, Commissioner Kugel will not determine how you're going to vote. You just want clarification or information to be shared. Okay. Then we won't pull that from the agenda. And commissioners, I would entertain a motion to adopt the consent agenda as presented minus items B, F, and I. So move.

Support.

All right. We have a motion by Commissioner German supported by... Commissioner St. Clair or Commissioner Cochin. I didn't quite catch which one was first over there. Before we go to vote, though, Commissioner Kilgore has a question with regard to item H. Commissioner Kilgore. Thank you.

Because I don't see Director Ekholm in here, is the items pertaining to item H... Are we still looking at September to talk about that next month, the infill housing program?

We're looking. So he did the presentation earlier this year on what the next phase of the infill housing program is going to be. He will do an update at a future meeting, but we haven't scheduled that yet. Okay. Thank you. Yep.

Thanks, Commissioner Kugel. And if there's no other comments on the consent agenda, roll call, please.

Commissioner German?

Yes.

Commissioner Jackson? Yes. Commissioner Cochin? Yes. Commissioner St. Clair? Yes. Mayor Johnson? Yes. Commissioner Kilgore?

Yes.

Motion passes.

Thank you. Item B, Imprivata Purchase. Commissioner Cochin?

Yes. I move to approve the purchase of Imprivata Software.

Support. Okay, motion by Commissioner Cochin, supported by Commissioner Kilgore. Good evening, sir. Kindly introduce yourself and please report out on this item.

Good evening, Tim Coleslaw, Director of Public Safety. So before you tonight is for approval of a purchase of Imprivata. Imprivata is a two-factor authentication that allows us to be able to sign into our computers to be able to access that computer if it possibly has criminal justice information on it. Any computer that we have right now that's in all of our vehicles, we already do that. CJIS is now requiring that we have that. Requirement for all of our computers, so that'd be all of our desktops here within our facilities So that's why we have to make this purchase to be able to be compliant We have to have that done by the end of this year So it's simply going to be a key card that we're working with IT with Imprivata is currently the system that we utilize so we're sticking with them to be able to continue on Commission no better cleared up all of my questions.

I was just wondering what kind of technology would be utilizing a

that if people were going to be having to use you know cell phones or thumbprint ids or key cards so thank you thank you commissioner coaching commissioner kilgore supporter do you have anything to ask around no sir all right commissioner is there anything else to ask grab All right. Thank you, Chief. Roll call, please.

Commissioner Jackson? Yes. Commissioner Cochin? Yes. Commissioner St. Clair? Yes. Mayor Johnson? Yes. Commissioner Kilgore?

Yes.

Commissioner German? Yes. Motion passes.

Thank you. Item F, Amendment to the Planning Unit Development at Harbortown County Minimum Association. Commissioner Kilgore.

I move the request to amend the plan unit development at Harbortown Condominium Association to reduce the amount of sidewalks to be installed as required as part of their plans to construct additional housing be approved with the following conditions. One, a turnaround must be incorporated at the end of channel viewpoint. Two, a stormwater permit must be obtained from the engineering department before construction commences. Three, a landscaping plan is provided. Four, a crosswalk will be installed at Indiana Street. Five, grading easements will be needed outside the existing right-of-way, particularly along the east side of the street. If not obtainable, retaining walls may be required. Six improved sidewalk ramps requiring grading easements and possibly requiring permanent easements will be required at Fulton entrance to make the sidewalk ADA compliant. The additional fire hydrant will no longer be required.

Support.

All right, we got a motion by Commissioner Koga, supported by Commissioner St. Clair. Good evening, Sarah County, introduce yourself and please report on this item.

Good evening, Mike Franczak, the planning director. I believe Mr. Schultz wrapped up the case pretty well. In 2024, Harbortown was approved for the 10 buildings, including 28 units. With the five conditions, the fire marshal has since taken back the comment about the additional fire hydrant that will not be needed, so we put that in the conditions just so we can track that in the future. like he had stated, um, the assessor's determination makes, uh, funding the project fairly difficult. Um, so we had a meeting at the planning commission meeting where it was unanimously recommended, um, five to zero that, um, approved with the conditions that were noted.

All right. Thanks. Transit commissioner.

Go. Um, So I'm fat, and me and my wife have been walking every day, trying to get some exercise. It's a little difficult on Apple Avenue right now, but we walk the Sheldon Park neighborhood and the Steele neighborhood, even go up to the Marquette neighborhood. while we're walking, we talk and we see things, um, and some of the things that we talk about, you know, we, you see click fix, we talk to neighbors, uh, ask different things that are going around or going on in the neighborhood, you know, different improvements they'd like to see. Has there been any overall conversation with the association, the people that live there, um, as a whole, like, a survey gone out to all of the harbor town to ask them, do they want sidewalks in their neighborhood?

I believe there has been. I'd probably defer to Mr. Schultz to talk about those discussions. I believe they discussed it in some of their board meetings. I was just going to weigh in on that, too.

We did talk about the planning commission meeting. their process at their HOA, um, is that if these get approved at the city commission, they then go to their residents for the vote of if they'll move forward with it or not. So the, their HOA rules are to get the approvals at the city level first and then go to their residents. Um, we don't, the city doesn't necessarily have a say in how that process works, but that's where they're, that's where their step in the process works. So that, that's when they'll do that.

But for sure. Thank you. Um, For instance, one thing I'll be talking with Parks and Rec or the DPW, Sheldon Park. Beautiful park, beautiful upgrades done to Sheldon Park neighborhood. Sheldon Park itself doesn't have a sidewalk around the park, but every street around Sheldon Park has a sidewalk. adjacent like opposite side of the street so people who are walking the neighborhood don't necessarily get to enjoy sheldon park if they were looking to walk on a sidewalk especially when i think about us being in a state like michigan where we do get weather um I personally would like to, I mean, I understand the process of HOA wants to hear from the city commission. This has been, um, a requirement for the last two years. I think that they would have probably tried to have that conversation or should have that conversation since, uh, it was originally approved with sidewalks. I think Harbor town's a beautiful community. I think it would be an even more inviting, beautiful community if they had sidewalks, just my opinion. Um, But I thought I'd share that. Thank you.

To give a little bit more historical context, it was brought to the Condo Association to approve the PUD that had been previously adopted by the commission with the various different conditions. And after they talked with the assessor's office to understand how they might be able to go through the assessment route to pay for the sidewalks and the like. After getting the report from the assessor's office, which would not, as Mr. Schultz was saying, would not be assessed to every single property owner. And that was the rub for some of the residents that understand it. So it was voted. They could not muster enough support amongst the residents to move it forward in the current PUD process. And so that's part of the reason why they've returned to ask for the PUD to be amended to remove that sticking point that's been inhibiting them being able to move forward with the development itself. For sure. Yes. Oh, sorry.

Did you have something?

I do have one follow-up question.

Yes. Has anyone from the city since henceforth talked with the, like, I talk with the assessor's office all the time from work. Has anyone from the city talked specifically with the assessor's department? Because we have regular parcels in the city, then we have PUDs. And yes, they have parcels in a PUD, but it's a little bit different. Have we talked to the assessor's department about possibly...

Yeah, so when the assessor's office came out with the opinion, I had a conversation with the assessor and disagreed with the opinion and explained my point of view, which is similar to what the HOAs is, that it's common space, common space is owned by the whole HOA, and therefore it should be rolled to every property owner in an equal fashion. The assessor's office had... different point of view on it based on case law that she was citing and one thing that a city manager won't do is tell an assessor exactly what to do because they have very specific criteria that they have to follow certifications and things of that nature the assessing office explained to me their point of view which was that they were looking at other case law that they didn't feel that they could defend the assessment if it was to be challenged at a tax tribunal. And that is the level that they look for. And so therefore, the assessing office stood by their opinion. We then looked at other avenues to do something similar, including essentially in any way, shape, or form, if there's an assessment, the city fronts the cost to build it and then collects it back over time. We also looked at doing a contract with the HOA where we would put the sidewalks in throughout the HOA and essentially do an agreement with the HOA that we would bill them and they would bill it into their dues. That also didn't get legs to move forward. And so this was the reduction in the sidewalk was what the HOA board determined to be the best option to move forward. And as the legal entity for the HOA, They're the ones who make application, and they're the ones that we're responsible to provide an answer.

Thank you. One final question. How many additional units are going to be built?

There'll be 10 buildings with 28 units. They'll be split up between duplexes and quadplexes.

And all of the 28 units, if 28 are actually built, all 28 units will be part of the same HOA dues that the rest of the existing are? So my thought is if we're adding 28 more properties that are going to be paying the HOA dues, that lessens the burden on all of the rest of the ones that are already currently there. So if the city was gracious enough to build them and put the sidewalks in and charge the HOA as a whole, it's going to be less expensive for everyone. until it's paid back because we're adding 28 additional units. But that's just my thinking. Open it to the rest of the commission's thoughts.

Thank you, Commissioner Kugel. Commissioner St. Clair? This is a supporter of the motion.

Anything to ask or add right now? All right.

Commissioners? Commissioner Kocher?

No, go ahead, Commissioner Kocher.

Director Fanzik, typically I've been speaking with Director Eckholm about this project, so bear with me here. But the conversations that we've had in the past were in regards to a different special assessment. And from what I'm hearing, it sounds like that has failed. Is that accurate?

The discussions with the assessor's office has determined that they would not be able to spread that assessment around to the entire development.

Right. Okay. I share Commissioner Kilgore's thoughts about the desire to want to make it more friendly for individuals with walkers and wheelchairs and strollers. I do struggle with how disjointed this would be. And I don't love that they would be essentially unfairly assessed in my mind. I'm going to have to noodle on this one.

I do have a question for... Could you elaborate on that, though, when you said unfairly assessed? What do you mean by that?

Well, just that we would be assessing just the people that would be getting the new units versus the entire... No.

So the... May I? No, please. So the agreement that the HOA has come up with is that the developer will front the money to put the sidewalks in, and that they will, you know, just... have that as part of their development cost. So it's not going to be passed on to the HOA.

Okay.

And so the sidewalks will be put in at the cost of the developer, not at the cost of the HOA.

Right, but they were discussing that the assessor's office was only going to assess the new building.

That's not on the table. That's off the table. I was doing a sidewalk along the entirety of east and west. I see.

Okay, so there should be a change from that. Yes. All right. I do have questions for Mr. Schultz when we're ready, but I'm going to go ahead and go to Commissioner German.

Okay.

Commissioner German?

Yes. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Director. If we could get the clerk to put that map up there or the visual so I could actually see what we're talking about when we're talking about that sidewalk. And Director Francis, can you talk and explain what we mean when we're talking about the developer putting in that sidewalk? Would it be that yellow highlighted area?

Yes. So it would start at the entrance on Fulton Street on the west side of the road. And then it would cross over. about three quarters of the way down, and it would continue to Indiana Street, and then one of the conditions would be that it would also have to cross Indiana Street to connect to where that sidewalk is with the appropriate crossing mechanisms.

Okay, and on the, well, my left side here, I'm looking at those yellow and look like purplish buildings, items are those the new units that's going to be yes the yellow is existing and the purple will be the new proposed units okay now and I city manager kind of what he did clarify or answer the question that I was going to accent Commissioner coaching that this assessment fee would not be put on the residents there under this new agreement, right?

Correct. The assessment is off the table.

Right. Okay. So that was one of my concerns. I mean, I don't live in the area. I'm right out there sometimes. But when making these decisions, you know, I want to make sure I get a clear understanding of what's going on and how I vote because that's going to impact or affect how people live out there and what their concerns are. So I have to really be mindful of that. So what's different between this agreement at the most compared to the other one?

Well, this one would be reduced amount of sidewalks. As you can see here, it would just be the yellow line, and that would be the rest of it. This map does not show the entire development. Maybe if we went down to the aerial map, see the rest of the development.

So are we saying the actual agreement would have put all of the sidewalks around this whole area, so right now we're reducing what the original proposal agreement was?

So the original agreement was proposed, actually I believe just one side of the street was to have a sidewalk, so it was already going to zigzag back and forth to avoid the areas with steep slopes. So that's not really anything new with this proposal. This just shortens it to Indiana rather than going all the way down past Pigeon Hill Court to the dead end.

In that area in the back over here to my right side where I see looks like the arena, sidewalk is there already or is that also in the plan?

By the marina?

Yeah.

I mean, you can walk. There's a boardwalk.

And there's public access and stuff like that too, right? Publicly accessible. There's the Harbortown Beach over just up into the right of the marina. That is public access. There is sidewalk along Fulton Street, which runs from the Silver Sides out to the beach. So there is walkable area in that. But the Harbortown Marina is a different development now than what the Harbortown Condo Association is. They were developed at the same time, but they're governed by different HOAs. Okay.

That's all I have right now. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Yeah, just to kind of elaborate on that, when this had come before us a couple years ago and we added that condition and I was a champion of adding that condition and asked the Commission to consider adding that condition, whereby we had a requirement for a sidewalk to run the full length of Harbord Island Circle, east and west. We left it flexible, such that it wasn't like you had to add them both sides, or we didn't dictate exactly how the sidewalk was going to go, but it just had to have a continuous sidewalk, and understanding that it may have to zigzag because of topography and infrastructure and the like, but we were leaving that up to Harbortown folks should decide on that and also, you know, how to fund it, you know, it's open-ended, whether assessor's route or developer fees or, you know, working out a development agreement with the city, kind of let that open-ended and that didn't come to fruition, unfortunately, with regard to being able to install that sidewalk. It was just not feasible for a number of different reasons and challenging. But we tried as we might to find a way. And I'd heard from a number of different residents over there, some who wanted the sidewalk, some who were opposed to it, because they're like, no, I already walk in the street. It's slow enough. I don't need a new sidewalk. Other people were concerned about the impact of the sidewalk their properties and the environment of the like. And one of the residents had the idea, it's like, well, can't we figure out a way to put the walking path or shared use path on the road itself, like have it be demarcated and separated? And so we did have a conversation. I talked to the city manager and the DBW director and DBW evaluated that to see if it was a possibility, but the road's too narrow to be able to carve out a separate walking path or shared use path along there. And so that wasn't feasible either. So we tried a number of different routes to be able to have a walking path through there, and they just didn't pan out. and the development was at a standstill and they weren't able to move forward with the project as we had previously approved with the various different conditions. And so that's why they've reached out to ask if we'd be willing to amend our previously approved PUD in order to change the sidewalk condition so they can move forward with this development. That doesn't mean they are precluded from moving forward with the sidewalk in the future. If their residents really wanted a sidewalk and they coordinated and worked together and sought to get this amended again and add the sidewalk, I think we'd be happily welcome that. The other thing is that this development does contribute to the sustainability of Harbor Town, as I understand. They've got some deferred investment needs in their facilities, and so being able to move this development forward and get the development fees is going to go a long ways to helping to support the long-term viability and sustainability of Harbor Town Condo Association. So I just wanted to add a little bit more context and go to Commissioner St. Clair. I'm going to give an opportunity to Commissioner Jackson for any questions or comments on what's happening. We'll invite the applicant up to field any questions from the commission. Commissioner St. Clair.

So I do have a question after all. Is it safe to say that were we to vote no on this, that this project would not move forward? There would be no...

Yes, it was explained to us at the planning commission meeting that the development would probably be dead.

Okay. So... In that case, there would be no additional building and no sidewalk. So from my perspective, we always want complete streets and we always want accessibility to be front of mind. And I'm always trying to be mindful of not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. So this is something that has come around to us a few times. I appreciate Harbor towns wrestling with this and city staffs wrestling with this and trying to do the best for the most. Um, and it, it seems like there's, there's no perfect solution where everybody gets a sidewalk and it costs no money because in a perfect world, that's how we could proceed. Um, that, uh, clearly in spite of everyone's best efforts, it's not possible. So, It does seem to me that were we to vote this down tonight, there would still be no sidewalk and no progress for the community that has expressed a need for some growth to sustain their neighborhood. So, excuse me. Yeah, I think that's it. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner St. Clair. Commissioner Jackson, do you have anything to ask of staff at this time or share with the commission?

No, I pretty much agree with what everyone's been saying. It was pretty conflicting, especially with what Commissioner St. Clair just said. It's kind of hard to decide, but you want sidewalks and you want continued development in Harbortown, so... you've got to kind of meet in the middle.

Thank you, Commissioner Jackson. And I'll share too, you weren't on the commission at the time. No, I was not. When this had come before us before and I was championing the sidewalks, part of the impetus for me being so adamant about putting sidewalks in on the full length of Harbortown Circle East and West was my understanding that, as had been explained to me from residents over the years, That when the development was first done, going back decades to the, I think, late 80s, when it was first started and continued to the 90s, there was a, as had been explained to me, a requirement for sidewalks to go in. And I'd gotten questions or concerns about that that was never enforced, that that was never put in there. And so when they said, come before us, and it's like, okay, now here's an opportunity for us to address it. You know, not just, you know, kick the can or ignore it, but now it's before us. And based on that understanding, I was adamant about getting sidewalks in. What has transpired since then was an effort to locate the original PUD and any conditions therein, inclusive of a sidewalk. And we've not been able to... Right. Something has service or what?

No, I did want to bring that up. The plans originally from 1988 are not in our files. They were tossed a couple decades ago for whatever reason. We have subsequently found some e-mails alluding to some communication back and forth through Harbor Town about installing sidewalks that were required, but there's no mention of where they were required or how long they had to be. So it's not really something we could go back and enforce on anyways. So while there is some mention of sidewalks previously being required, we don't know exactly where.

But we have not found anything since. Gotcha. Thank you, Director Franczak. So with that information having come to light, when it came to the planning commission, that's where I was like, okay. I can get off that point of being so insistent on having sidewalks. I still think that's a preference. It sounds like it is the commission's preference as well. We have adopted a complete street policy for a reason. That is our preference. But it does come to a point, as Commissioner St. Clair said, being careful not to let the pursuit of perfection undermine progress and the good.

Any follow up, Commissioner Jackson, before?

Okay, thank you. Thank you, Judge Franczak. And Mr. Schultz, if you'd be kind enough to come back up to the podium. One of our commissioners has a question for you. Commissioner Kosh?

Oh, if you would kindly reintroduce yourself. I'm Mark Schultz, representing Harbortown Condo Association.

Thank you so much, Mr. Schultz. Can you explain a little bit more about your role for the Harbortown Condo Association?

I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you through your mask.

That's okay. Can you explain your role?

My role?

Yes.

I'm on the Board of Directors of Harbortown Condo Association, and I'm the treasurer.

Okay, thank you. As somebody who's on the board and lives in Harbortown, you probably have spoken to many people. What are you hearing from folks in regards to this?

There are several people that are for the sidewalks. Several people are against. It all comes down to funding and who will pay for it and how much it will cost. and where exactly it would go. And in the case of this reduced sidewalk request, we know exactly where we want it to go, and we have the funding in place. For the balance of the sidewalk, as Mr. Seaforth and Mr. Johnson alluded to, and Rebecca St. Clair, in a perfect world, yes, we would love to have sidewalks, but we don't have the funding in place to handle that other section of sidewalks. In addition, there's part of that area that is, the property is not owned by Harbor Town. It's owned by, some are owned by the Sandox Corporation, and there are a couple of other independent owners. And the county assessor specifically stated on those areas that were not owned by Harbor Town that she would not assess those properties because she saw no value in putting sidewalks on a vacant piece of land. So that with the full burden of the other sidewalks that we're not talking about here, back to the Harbor Town Condo Association. And in order for the condo association to approach that topic, it would require another vote of the co-owners. And that would, again, require a two-thirds vote of the co-owners to say, yes, we will do this. And we have 190 co-owners, so that's roughly 127 that would have to vote in favor of that. In the case of roughly 10% of the length of that sidewalk being owned by other property owners that are not going to contribute, probably our co-owners would not approve that.

With the plan presented before us tonight with the amendment to the PUD, it's been mentioned that you guys are going to have to meet to vote on this still. Do you have time before everybody kind of snowbirds off to be able to meet?

Again, I couldn't hear you as part of your...

you guys on the board will have time to meet before people leave?

Oh, yes. Absolutely. If the City Commission approves this tonight and then goes another two weeks for the second reading, yes, then Harbortown Condo Association has to go back to our co-owners and ask them if they want to approve the addition of the 28 units, including the reduced sidewalk. If that vote turns up a failure, then again, we would not proceed.

Okay. All right. Thank you so much for your help, Mr. Schultz. I appreciate it.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Kochen. Commissioners, any other questions for Mr. Schultz?

Just one quick question, Mayor. Yeah, and thank you, Mr. Sheldon. So as we speak right now, because I've rode out in Harbortown before, I didn't see any sidewalks. So there's no sidewalks out there. There are no sidewalks. Okay, so my eyes was actually I can see pretty good then. Okay, okay. I'm not playing tricks on me. Okay, and with this agreement with the HOA board, and if you guys vote on this, just... our designated area of residence will be assessed, right, not others?

Well, the funding for this reduced sidewalk would be on the developer. And that cash would be taken out of the proceeds that the condo association would receive. So the developer is funding the whole sidewalk. Okay, okay, okay. So that does not have to – The idea of the 28 additional units has to go back to the co-owners, but not the funding for the sidewalk.

Okay.

Okay.

Okay, that's all I have.

Thank you.

Right.

Commissioner Kugel?

Yes. My question isn't for you, but thank you for being here and sharing that information tonight. I do have questions for Manager.

Okay. Before I proceed, so that I may relieve Mr. Schultz, any other questions for Mr. Schultz, Commissioners? No? All right. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mayor. Yes, Commissioner Goetz.

Thank you. If this is unanimous vote tonight, we don't need a second reading, or because we're not full, we need one? Yeah, because we're missing one.

Okay.

Thank you. second question is a hypothetical but hypothetically if the city puts if the city put sidewalks in and it was agreed to where they would go typically how long would we look for reimbursement on that project five years ten years generally

I mean, it's open for discussions a little bit, but sidewalks are usually about that time length. You also look at the life of the asset, and hopefully a sidewalk's going to last more than 10 years, so you could probably dole it out a little bit further. In this instance, the option would be that contract with the HOA, so it would be different than a traditional special assessment because it would be a contract over time, so it would be a little bit different.

Okay. Just curious. Thank you.

Commissioner Kilgore, any other questions or thoughts to share before we go to vote on this? All right. Roll call, please.

Commissioner Kochan? Yes. Commissioner St. Clair? Yes. Mayor Johnson?

Yes.

Commissioner Kilgore?

Please don't hit me with your car if I'm walking. Yes.

Commissioner German?

Yes.

Commissioner Jackson? Yes. Motion passes.

Thank you. Next item, Access Agreement for Pinnacle Construction at Frebel School. Commissioner German.

All right. Thank you, Mayor. I move to approve the Frebel School Access Agreement. Pinnacle Construction, and to authorize Mayor and Clerk to sign. Support.

We have a motion by Commissioner German, supported by Commissioner Cochin.

And I'm reporting out.

All right. Mr. Manager, take it away.

Yes. So in the absence of Director Eckholm, I'll be reporting out on this. So this is an access agreement that will allow for construction to start by Samaritas prior to the closing being finalized. Primary reasons for this is it allows a developer to keep timelines for meeting state requirements regarding grant programming that the construction needs to start by November. It allows them to maintain quotes that are already in place with that accelerated timeline, and it allows them to meet the window for completion that they're targeting for the end of 27. This is similar to an agreement that we had already done to shore up the building to get it ready for this construction. We are anticipating that within the next six to eight weeks, the closing will occur. So this is just kind of moving things along.

Thank you, Mr. Manager. Commissioner German?

Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, City Manager. I just wanted to bring this off the agenda so the public would be informed of what's going on. This building is actually in my ward. I ride past there quite often. I've seen them working on it. If you look at the clay tile that's on that building, it also keeps the historical characteristics of that building. I think this is going to be a great addition to the community, something that was on my platform as a commissioner running for office back in 2012. And seeing this building take place for redevelopment and coming into fruition will actually be one of the goals I have for the vision of that community and the building. So I'm happy to support this.

Thank you, Commissioner German. Commissioner Cochin, as the supporter, anything to ask or add at this time?

No, I completely agree. I think that this is well in line with what should happen, and I think that they've been doing a really great job so far, and so I'm excited to see it come to completion.

Commissioners, anything else to ask or add? No? All right. One more step forward to important property and getting more housing for our community. All right. Roll call, please.

Commissioner St. Clair? Yes. Mayor Johnson? Yes. Commissioner Kilgo?

Yes.

Commissioner German? Yes. Commissioner Jackson? Yes. Commissioner Cochin? Yes. Mission passes.

Thank you. That completes our consent agenda. We do have one item under new business, which is to reschedule our Legislative Policy Committee meeting that was originally scheduled for tomorrow. And so we need to, that's been canceled and we need to reschedule it. So, break out your calendars. But typically we will, something like this, we'll just bump back a month. But, which I think I put a date in the packet. We don't have to do that, but that's typically what we've done, which would be going to the 23rd of September. That would be the fourth Wednesday in September. Yes, Commissioner Kilgore.

September 23rd works for me.

Commissioners, you're all good with September 23rd? It works for me also. Second.

Good.

Good? All right. Do you want to form a motion on that or just consensus that September 23rd works for our LPC meeting?

I think probably just a consensus is fine unless Madam Clerk, because it's an action that they set the calendar, is adjusting the calendar require a vote? No, that's fine. Okay. We're good. Okay.

Excellent. Then Wednesday, September 23rd it is. The usual time at 530. If you have any items that you wish to address or discuss at that meeting, please get them to, uh, Kim and the city manager's office for inclusion on the agenda. All right. That concludes our business. Is there any other business that commissioners wish to raise this evening? Commissioner Kilgo.

Yes. Um, just a reminder, um, again, um, It's orange cone season. Coming up after Labor Day, we are also, the city of Muskegon is going to have some road projects. Please be aware. Western Avenue, Lakeshore Drive to Beach Street, and the parking on Beach Street. and and work in glenside we're going to have several road projects coming up so please be aware of detours and if you're taking side streets and neighborhood streets please slow down and drive safely thank you thank you commissioner yes i do have a question um do we know if we have an update on the testing that was done on muskegon lake

in regards to the algal bloom. Tomorrow. Tomorrow? Okay.

That was it.

Alright. If there's nothing else, then we are going to go to general public comment. I received one form. Mary Carley? Is it? Mary Carley joining us from Laketon Township. Good evening. Absolutely. Welcome. You have up to three minutes to provide your remarks. Thank you.

So I was here to talk about the dog park in Muskegon. We, as patrons of that dog park, enjoy using it. Our animals love it. But we're having an issue with parking. We only have eight spots available. And during the time that the festivals and gatherings are going on at Heritage Landing, we find that People that enjoy those festivities are using the eight spots we have available. There is one sign. That's it. The other one was taken out by the city of Muskegon plow truck a year or two ago. That hasn't been replaced. We just feel that the signage and enforcement of dog park parking is Just really isn't there. We don't have the support from the city. I've been an attendant there now for four years I would also like to share that in that time frame I have called the city of Muskegon Police Department because the first time I found an abandoned purse actually inside of the park in which When your officer got there finally because he kept driving by they don't know where we are There was a gun in the purse We do have visitors that come from out of town. We bring our children in there on occasion. I have also had a homeless gentleman proposition me with probably some dumpster earrings for sexual favors. And these are my personal experiences. So again, if we could make it clear where the Bark Park is actually at with law enforcement, and maybe get some support from them in regards to our eight parking spots, we would greatly appreciate it. Thank you, Mayor Johnson and commissioners, for your time.

Thank you, Ms. Carley. Appreciate you joining us this evening.

Thank you.

Next up, we have John Allen joining us from the Nelson neighborhood.

Good evening. Thank you for the time and the opportunity to speak. I'm here tonight to address a severe and unfortunately ongoing issue of board integrity, regulatory competence, and ethical conduct by an appointed member of this city's administration, Mr. David Ruck, who currently sits on the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. Just three days ago, Mr. Ruck took to social media to publicly attack this city and its local contractor, Tridon Construction, accusing them of committing environmental violations at the Hartshorn boat launch. He publicly broadcasted that he was, quote, amazed work proceeded without a turbidity curtain, declared that, quote, anyone doing this kind of work has been required to do so, end quote, and invoked his official authority by stating, quote, this is also one of the parks I represent on the Parks and Rec Committee. It is completely unacceptable for an appointed board member to weaponize his title to spread false and uneducated claims about municipal projects. If Mr. Ruck had reviewed EGO Permit WRP-048270 Version 1 issued to this city on March 16th of this year, he would know the Hartshorn project consists entirely of upland grading and capping an existing seawall from the landward side to restore critical ADA accessible fishing access. This mobility challenge at access point that like many of the park improvements at Hartshorn were to be completed contemporaneously have been unfulfilled for nearly four years without any constructive criticism or public outcry from said individual. Under NREPA Part 301 and 31 standards, Eagle mandates turbidity curtains for in-water dredging and bottomland pile driving, such as the operations that occurred at Adelaide Point Hartshawn Park due to Adelaide Point development, and those that did violate multiple environmental laws, as evidenced by the Administrative Consent Agreement signed and acknowledging these egregious violations. Turbidity curtains are not required for dry land concrete work behind an existing seawall. When residents called out this basic fact, Mr. Ruck casually dismissed the public record, declaring that as a board member he is, quote, high level and not responsible for specifics, before claiming the state of Michigan, quote, moved the goalpost. This unfortunately fits a long pattern of arrogance, as Mr. Ruck has previously published rants attacking engaged citizens who hold developers accountable. labeling taxpaying residents as, quote, able-bodied individuals resorting to vagrancy, end quote, otherwise saying trapped in paranoid delusions and madness as well. He has also spread gossip and slander about my personal life, though that's nothing new. So I will ask we look directly at the City of Muskegon Code of Ethics. Section 1 mandates that appointed officials must avoid any action that results in affecting adversely the confidence of the public and the integrity of the city government. It further requires officials to maintain clear boundaries between private conduct and public duties to ensure the integrity and partiality of all officials. Most importantly, the code explicitly states that violations are subject to appropriate discipline or any action. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Allen. Appreciate you joining us this evening and sharing those concerns with us. Is there anyone else in the audience that wishes to give public comment at this time? Seeing no additional takers, we're going to go to the phones. That number is 231-724-6721. When you're calling in, please turn down any audio in the background, state your name, and if you're a City of Muskegon resident, which neighborhood you're joining us from, and if you're not a city resident, which other township, village, or city you may be calling from. It does not sound like we have any takers for phone and general comments. Commissioners, what's your pleasure?

Motion to adjourn. So moved.

We have a motion by Commissioner St. Clair, supported by Commissioner Kilgore, to adjourn. All in favor, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, same sign. Voted. All right, we are adjourned. Thank you, take care, and be well.