Council - Regular Meeting

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Roll call.

Council Member Abbott?

Here.

Council Member Cadoux?

Here.

Council Member Johnson? Here. Council Member Rogenbaugh?

Here.

Council Member Topasti?

Here.

Council Member Van Leeuwen-Vega? Here. And President Powers?

Here. All right, you've got the agenda in front of you. Would anybody like to make a motion to amend the agenda or approve it as is?

I'd like to change the order of the agenda to allow public comment to come out immediately after approval of the agenda.

All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay at this time. Ayes have it. I'll second. I'll second it. It was nice that Dan seconded it that way. All right. So public comment. Would anybody like to take this moment to come up and address the council for up to three minutes on the topic of your choice?

Yes, sir. I'll keep it well under three minutes. My name is Ryan Weber, 16916 Aseelie Lane in Spring Lake. just technically in Ferrisburg. I'm here representing the ownership group along with my partner Dave Billingers for 971 West Savage, the old boys building. And we talk about the west end docks, probably a very obvious reason why we have an invested interest in seeing that happen. We bought the building sort of with that. Approval looming, or actually not looming, had already happened. You know, we understood that nothing was guaranteed or promised to us in that. But it was something that we were looking forward to and hopeful of. I'm sure you guys obviously know why we want it for our financial gain. We're trying to sell or lease the building. And when we have people come through, One of the first questions we get is, well, can boats park here? And I know the answer to that technically is yes, but if you guys are boaters or you spend any time out there, it's kind of like, yes, but with a bit of an asterisk. Like you can sort of pull up, but not really. Speaking with the people over at Mudpenny, which we're really happy to have as neighbors now, they share the same sentiment. People would love to be able to pull their boats up and go to these places. I printed these off. Can I bring these up? So nothing on here, or my words, those all actually come off of the original dock application that the village of Spring Lake filled out. It's been a couple of years now. I think it was actually like 2022, so it's been a bit. But a lot of the sediments that's on there do remain true. Pointing out a couple of them, just economic and recreational catalysts for Spring Lake. Water access is one of the most requested improvements that we get in surveys. I'm a community member here too. It's something that we're lacking. I also am a member of the ownership group of Windsor Place. We have weekly meetings with our management group and it's a question they get. How can we get out onto Spring Lake? Well right now there's not really, There's not. I know that there's other doc systems, but let's be honest, those are into the Grand River, which is great. So, you know, Dave is actually going to, when I first heard about this, I was a little bit upset by it. I actually spoke with Bruce Killeen, who kind of, you know, like I say, talked me off the ledge, but he did explain the rationale, and I do understand. You guys want to get some docs put in. And it kind of seems like due to MDOT's restrictions on the West End docks, it's sort of putting a kibosh to the rest, and you want to see at least something get built, which makes a ton of sense. And if I were in your position, I would probably be voting along the way that you guys have so far. We would love to see something go in there. And again, Dave's going to touch on that. But I think not just as an adjacent property owner, but as a member of the community, having a way to dock in Spring Lake, get off, go eat, go shop, do whatever it is you do, should sort of be a right of our citizens. So I think maybe with the understanding that You guys have to do what you have to do to get the other docks built. We really hope that you'll consider doing something in that place that will allow people to get off, enjoy the community, and, yeah, like go to whatever establishment winds up taking up the old, old boy's spot and Mud Petty and Holiday Inn and everything else that's walkable from there.

My name is Dave Billinghurst. I'm also a partner with Ryan and Scott Hairstead. So four years ago when we bought this building, what intrigued me as an investor the most was that the docks were coming in. I thought that was going to be awesome. At that point, the docks were kind of a done deal. We were just waiting for a contractor to build them. And then four years later, You know, we had no docs, and now we're talking about scrapping the project. We had some obstacles. The first one, I think, was Chris Burns died. I mean, she was kind of the spearhead on this. I think she got the ball rolling on this, and then she died. That didn't help. Then we had a zebra muzzle study. I think we got through, you know, which was kind of crazy in my opinion, but we got through that study, and now we're fighting MDOT. And you're not going to fight MDOT. They're going to win. If they don't want you to do what our plans are, you're not going to do it. So my thing is, maybe Ryan kind of touched on it, let's downscale it. Let's downscale it so MDOT cannot stop the project. They don't have anything to say in the matter. I don't know what that means. Originally this was going to be a 300-foot dock, and now maybe it's 150. Now, maybe we scaled it down to 200, maybe it's 150, and I think we make it more accessible to small boats and to dinghies. Let's say you've got Keenan Marina over there in Fairiesburg. They want to go out to dinner. They want to go to whoever's going to be in our building. They want to go to maybe Mudpenny. They're not going to bring their big 50-foot sea right over there. They want to bring their little dinghy over there, and they want to tie up, and they want to have some dinner and enjoy some entertainment, so So we really hope that you guys will help us out. Because I think originally you guys, you know, I think you guys, the village was going to put like $300,000 towards this project. And I would think the majority of that would probably, well, maybe two-thirds of that would probably be our project. So maybe $200,000. So maybe we build something over there without even a grant for $200,000 that people can utilize it. So that's all I got. You're up, ma'am.

Hello, my name is Priscilla Schaefer and I live at 118 North Lake Avenue here in the village of Spring Lake. Thank you for allowing me to speak. I'm here today to express some concerns I have on the street that I live on in the corners there of speeding cars and people neglecting the crosswalk. So it's one issue, but I'm going to break it down into three parts. The first part of the issue is beginning at Savage Street, heading north on Lake Avenue towards the beach. The speed zone posted is 25 miles an hour, and then it starts right at the end of the parking lot, formerly Rite Aid, now a wine store. Right there is a sign that says 25 miles per hour, and going to the bike path, and then it changes to 10 miles per hour before the curb. What I and perhaps others may have noticed is people are accelerating their speed right away at the 25-mile-an-hour sign. I have voiced my concerns to the village manager and the Ottawa County Traffic Division. A speed sign... was put up temporarily on the street alerting people with flashing red lights when they were over the 25 mile posted zone and that was almost to the beach where um that was sign was the sign is gone and the speeding cars continue issue two of this issue is the parking lot of the old right aid now spring lake wine store has become a huge throughway, drive-through way, people cutting through numerous times a day, and the store isn't even open yet. So my question is, is it a cut-through for for the store, or is it restaurant traffic, disregarding. And that's another issue. And my third issue is the ability to cross the street at the corner of Lake and Savage. I have family members, including my grandchildren, who live off of River Street, and they come to walk to see me. their mom and a 10-year-old and a two-year-old that come, and they went across the street there, and it is very difficult. The traffic on the south side of Savage many times, people just turn right on red or turn too fast, not even looking to see the people crossing. How do I know? Because my family members who live there and I walked down the street to make sure my grandchildren are safely across the street. So, um, one of the things I ask of you to recognize is how dangerous this traffic has become. And I don't know if it's the citizens who live here. or airbnbs whatever is going on but i've never noticed it being this bad until this year and i have bought my house in two thousand eight it is just horrendous how fast people drive down that street and i have expressed my concerns to the village manager again and i said the traffic division so my question is can you as the village board REACH OUT TO THE SPRINGLIGHT POLICE AND THE OTTAWA COUNTY SHERIFF TO OBSERVE THESE ISSUES, GIVE WARNINGS, WRITE CITATIONS, OR MAYBE PUT ADDITIONAL SIGNS IN WITH BLINKING LIGHTS OR SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE KNOW THIS. LIKE I SAID, NOT JUST FOR ME, NOT JUST FOR MY GRANDCHILDREN, BUT THE RESIDENTS WHO LIVE IN THIS VILLAGE I'M SURE ARE ALSO CONCERNED. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

There's nothing further. I will move on to the consent agenda. Item A, consideration of a motion approving the payment of the bills, checks numbered 64600 to 64663 and electronic payments 717 to 733 in the total amount of $1,691,849.36. Item B, consideration of a motion to approve the minutes for the June 8th, 2026 work session and the June 8th, 2026 regular council meeting. Item C, consideration of a motion to approve the DDA and general fund budget adjustments in amounts not to exceed 45,000 and 50,000 respectively for the purpose of wayfinding signed project completion and authorization for Village staff to sign the purchase orders. Item D, consideration of motion to withdraw the west end dock project from bridge from the updated boating infrastructure grant. Item E, consideration of a motion to appoint Jacqueline Medina to the Historic Conservation Commission for a term ending 11-2028. Any council member may now make a motion to approve the consent agenda as read into the record via roll call vote or a member may ask that an item be removed from the consent agenda if desired. Such item would then be discussed and voted on separately later in the meeting in general business. Do I have either a motion to approve the consent agenda as read into the record or to remove a particular item and then approve the rest as a consent agenda item?

Just for clarity, we're just taking it off of the grant for now? Not out of consideration, any future consideration for the West End Act?

But I guess what I'd say if there is further discussion, we'll remove it and then we'll discuss.

All right. So I've heard somebody request that we remove consideration of a motion to withdraw the West End dock project from the updated boating infrastructure grant. That's item D. So removing that from consent agenda and putting that down into general business, are items A, B, C, and E subject to a motion to approve as read into the record?

I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda minus item D. I'll second.

Roll call vote.

Council Member Rogenbaugh?

Yes.

Council Member Johnson? Yes. Council Member Cadoux?

Yes.

Council Member Tapasti?

Yes.

Council Member Abbott?

Yes.

Council Member Van Leeuwen-Vega? Yes. And President Powers?

Yes. So on to general business. Item D from before, now moved down to general business, consideration of a motion to withdraw the West End dock project from the bridge from the updated boating infrastructure grant.

I think we had a question that was put to the, yeah, are we just removing it from the portion so we can fulfill the grant to get the other stuff done, right? Is that kind of the idea?

This would remove it from consideration for grant. right right lately yeah right okay um this would lower the grant amount as well it would yeah the total project cost um was 1.3 million our local match was 338 000 for both locations but we're constrained by time to get this grant fulfilled there has been a grant extension awarded um or approved by the MDNR. So we do have more time to do this, but we've ran into several issues with the permitting, the EGLE permitting and specifically MDOT comments at the West End portion. Peter, am I missing any key information?

That's correct. And I think something that's important to note here is the size of docks that we'll be able to put in has shrunk drastically, probably about a third of what the original plan was, a third to maybe a half. And where we're at now, so we cleared the zebra mussel hurdle. Where we're at now, MDOT is requiring us to undertake a hydraulic study. The cost of that will be a further $10,000 to $20,000, and it's unknown what further impact the results of that will have. Maybe it'll clear no issues, or maybe it will impose additional requirements on us.

So is that study required just due to the adjacency of where this is, even though we're not trying to build under the bridge?

And even though they're floating docks, it's what they're requiring.

it's just because of the proximity to that bridge because we're not running into that on the other side it's just yeah they have a lot of easement easements within that area each of those carry different levels of rights that those easements carry so that is why it has shrunk the size of what we're able to put in that location and so really it's an eagle permit but they send it to anyone with property interest right so as part of that eagle permitting process mdot submitted their comments and eagle won't issue a permit until we've satisfied the requirements of mdot

Was hydraulics the only, is it kind of one of those things where they can say hydraulics and then come back and say this now, this now, or is it kind of where like that would be the thing that has to be done?

That's my understanding. The initial email had a list of eight things that were their concerns, and we've worked through most of them. That's largely in part why the dock itself has shrunk significantly.

I know we knew what our budget originally was. Do we have a sense with the modification of what that size would be, what we'd be talking about? I mean, obviously we'd have the MDOT study. We decrease the footprint. I mean, we didn't talk about that in the DDA meeting. I don't know if we have a sense of whether we're still paying...

90 of the original budget for half the docs or if those costs go down you know accordingly as we size it down i couldn't give you an accurate estimate on that it's also worth noting that this estimate is a few years old and we all know what's happened in the intervening times yeah

so this project has not not gone out to bed right so we are dealing with budgetary numbers from 2022 at this point perhaps it would be wise to take the bird in hand at this point but to also commit to add this west end project to uh end in a further meeting and uh and look at something in a little smaller scale and perhaps we could even get some donations from the community for But take the burden hand for the grant today and move ahead with what docs we can do.

There was even some discussion at some point in the DDA meeting on whether or not some of the folks who have more investment in that, namely possession of that building and maybe a lot adjacent or something like that, if they even might want to be amenable to

helping to shoulder some of that cost if we did it.

So, I mean, right now we don't know what we're talking about because we don't have it bid out, you know, could be apples and oranges.

All right, that would be an agenda item for next meeting.

What's the time constraint of getting the hydraulic study, getting a redesign, get a hydraulic study and then get it out to bid, right?

The docks on the other side, we're still not going to go into any sort of construction until next year. So we've got, I mean, we weren't starting on that. I mean, we obviously have to have all our ducks in a row now and there's things bureaucratically to have to do.

Yeah, Peter could probably comment probably on timeline that we're thinking moving forward. I'm not as familiar with the particulars. He's been leading this.

So our current timeline, the Millpoint Park docks have cleared everything except for the final permitting. We're not anticipating any issues there. So we should receive those permits within the next one to three months. We can anticipate another up to three months for final design and bidding process. And then at that point, we'll obviously be in winter. So looking at construction of early summer next year, most likely, and they tell me it's going to be up to six months to complete. Given the requirements of the hydraulic study, no clue what could happen there. We would probably be in a position anyway where we would have to ask for an additional grant extension. The most recent grant extension puts us through January 1st, 2028.

Do both things have to happen simultaneously?

They do not, but that would certainly be better for the village's pocketbook. They are split into separate projects now, which is why we are able to request a withdrawal of the West End docks.

Is there a way to look at that redesign? I mean, if we separate them, is there a way to look at that redesign or give a few options to MDOT to see what they come back with and then we can reapply? Or is this like something that's a one-time grant that isn't going to be...

Yeah, this study out there, though, that has to be done first. Correct.

Is this something we could apply for again, though, or is this like, was this a one-time, we're doing this now?

There could be future grant opportunities, but as far as one that we've already been awarded, this would be the shot.

Like Joel said, this is the bird in the hand right now.

This is the bird in the hand, but since we've separated the projects, is it possible to ask for an extension on the West End portion only? and move ahead with this?

If we got to that point, we likely could. So if we moved ahead with Mill Point and then got to a point next year where, okay, this is feasible, but we need more time, then we could ask for another extension at that point. That would require us to invest the funds for the hydraulic study and the ongoing efforts of our consultant to continue moving that. That would be worth future discussion.

And so this is DDA funds, right? So the DDA at this point at their last regular meeting had recommended this action that found its way on the consent agenda. So if further consideration was needed or council wanted to send it back, I would encourage the DDA considering all of this first, right? Because ultimately it is their, their funding mechanisms to do this.

So if we say no tonight, then we can have it go back to DDA and have them. Table it. We can just completely table it.

with an understanding that we'd add it to the next regular DDA meeting for further discussion and consideration. That is one of the options. Of course, we could move forward with the DDA's recommendation as currently stated in the consent agenda.

So, given all that, do I have a motion to withdraw the West End Dock project from the bridge from the updated boating infrastructure grant with a further proviso that we're going to send it back to the DDA for further consideration as an independent project going forward for feasibility and discussion.

I don't want to do that. I'm not making that order.

That wouldn't mean, but tabling is, we're saying we're not going to say remove it, we're going to say wait, correct? That's what tabling is versus...

I'm not going to vote on anything. It's just that you wouldn't take action.

But for the grant, do we have to withdraw it for purposes of the grant to get that to go forward? Not yet.

Not yet. Not yet.

OK. So if we do nothing tonight, the grant goes forward, we're fine. And at some point in the future, the time runneth out. But that's not this month. That's not next month.

And doesn't set us back for permitting or anything. No, because they've split off the project.

So the DDA is just going to get a post-it that said, hey. Think about this or look at it.

And we would ask that our consultant leaves it alone until we receive further direction to pick it back up again.

And to be fair, too, as a DDA member, I mean, it helps to hear these other opinions voiced because we were sort of operating in a vacuum and nobody said boo about it and the building sat empty for a while and it didn't seem like, you know, the juice was worth the squeeze there.

When does the time run out?

January 28th.

January 1st, 2028.

So we have to do this before then? Or exactly at what point does this particular pumpkin hit midnight?

We run the risk of them saying no to a grant extension, right? So we were supposed to have the project done July 1, 2026, I believe. And so that, of course, has passed. Didn't see it get done. Yeah, it did not get done. It would give us three to six months to try to figure this out. There would be the option to request another extension. You run the risk of them, again, saying, no, we want our grant funds.

So when we say that it has to be done by January 2028, that means they have to turn the last screw and say we are done and all payments have been made or...

Correct, that means funds expended. So I would say we've got probably a four month clock where if you wanted to move forward with it, four months from now is the latest you can give the thumbs up and still have a shot at completing the project next year.

And it could be tied into the bid for the mill point, which would?

The mill point bid would happen before then.

It would, okay.

So we've really only got about a month or two. Working backwards, that's about it. It's either next month or the month after we have to.

Yeah, I think with the additional information and feedback, I think we're in a spot to have the DDA consider it in August and then have it back on the council agenda for formal.

And we still have the matter of the $20,000 for the study. that would have to be a part of that rolling the dice. Correct.

I think that was sort of what we talked about, though, was if there's other people that want to be involved, like Leslie said, in that.

Is it $1.6 million?

$1.3 was the- How much of that $1.3 was this? The overall- That was our contribution. Yeah, that was the overall match. I would have to, I don't know off the top of my head

You were probably the junior partner in that.

Absolutely.

It was at least 600 of the 1.6, I'm guessing. Anyway, I guess we'll pick it up in a month. If I have a motion to table this for a month.

Motion to table for a month back to the DDA.

Second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed say nay at this time. Aye. We've got a nay vote.

And with the timing of it, because we're always the second Thursday, we could always consolidate. our council meeting to be both a work session and you know and a formal meeting on one day if we have to do it i mean otherwise we're waiting another month into september to be able to get it done chat about it and then hopefully we'll know what your it's whatever yes we'll find out in 28 days ish yep or 30 31 days ish uh what uh what we intend to do i would like to have both portions as well but okay

Contractual Tango Foot Park Management.

Brief summary, there has been some employment turnover at Spring Lake Township and we no longer have the person who was managing Tanglefoot Park reservations on staff. We would like to bring them back on a contractual basis and that's what you have for you is authorization for Brady to enter into a contract with that person for the purpose of managing Tanglefoot Park reservations.

Yes.

Please manage.

Did you need anything from us on this, or was this just kind of guidance and more action to be taken later?

I think a motion to approve the contractor agreement and authorize me to sign would formalize it, but if everyone's aware.

I'll make a motion to approve the contractor agreement and authorize village manager to sign. Second.

I guess it's money, so I got to do a roll call, don't I? Fire it up, Jordan.

Council Member Van Leeuwen-Vega? Yes. Council Member Abbott? Yes. Council Member Cadoux?

Yes.

Council Member Johnson? Yes. Council Member Topasti?

Yes.

Council Member Rogenbaugh?

Yes.

President Powers?

Yes. Department reports, Village Manager. A couple of things I'll note real quick is the Eagle Drinking Water State Revolving Fund draft intended use plan did come out. We were in the fundable range for that project. So all lead service lines came out to 2.1 million. We do have a meeting scheduled with Eagle because we received points for essentially digging once, which meant that they lumped in our water main project that wasn't scored and that we're not sure on. FOR PART OF THIS PROJECT, AND IF WE'RE NOT ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT PROJECT, IT WOULD LIKELY BUMP US DOWN THE FUNDABLE RANGE. SO THE ADVANTAGES OF BEING ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE LED SERVICE LINE REPLACEMENT portion of this is it is a Well, we get a 10% grant so $200,000 and then it's a 0% loan so you can get the work done Lock in a price and then pay it back over time the difficulty though is as we look at our CAPITAL PLAN, OUR RATES, ET CETERA, BEING ABLE TO FUND THE NEXT PORTION OF WATER MAIN WORK. would again have another pretty big impact on rate. So in August, we're planning to have the right consultant come and update on some of that work. And so there's a lot of unknowns. So we're trying, I guess, to summarize this all, we're trying to find a way to be able to move forward with that opportunity, but we're in a spot where we may have to pass on that portion if it has to be tied to the broader water main replacement. And then the only other thing to note that I forgot to include in my report is next week I will be on vacation. I'll have my cell phone on me though if you do need to get ahold of me for anything. Any questions on the EGLE update or anything else in my report?

Assistant Manager.

I have nothing further to add to my report.

Clerk Treasurer.

Nothing.

Any old business or new business? I was going to mention to the resident who discussed the at the end of it all that, yes, we know we're trying to address it all over the village in the summer months. Could we send her a letter or an email to that effect saying, hey, you left before you got an answer to your question? And her question in particular was, can we reach out to Ottawa County Sheriff's Department? regarding speed.

Yeah, I can.

We do that on the regular, but people look for cops.

And I will follow up with Ottawa County Sheriff's Department, too, to let them know.

Invest in a speed bump company.

Yes, we do. Sounds fine to me. When you say invest, you mean buy their products. Village Attorney. I have nothing to add. We have a motion for adjournment. Motion to adjourn. Second. All those in favor say aye. Aye.