Home

Agenda/Minutes 

Planning/Zoning

Assessing

Bulletin Board

Business Directory

Cemeteries

Clerk's Corner

Community Events

Contact Information

DPW

Development Documents

FAQ

Financial information

Heritage Days

Links  

Meeting Calendar

Newsletters

Officials

Parks

Plats

Planning/Zoning

PropertyTax/Assessing Data

Township Agreements

Rental Policy

Treasurer's Report

 

    

                                 MARION TOWNSHIP

                            JUNE 9, 2005 

                PUBLIC HEARING - 7:15 PM

 

Call to Order

Pledge to the Flag

Members Present/ Members Absent

Call to the Public

Approval of the Millage Rate (0.8247)

Presentation of the 2005-2006 Budget

Public Comment

Adjourn

   

             AGENDA and DRAFT MINUTES

                             June 9, 2005  

                     

CALL TO ORDER:

MEMBERS PRESENT:  

MEMBERS ABSENT:

CALL TO THE PUBLIC:    Agenda Items Only – 3 minute limit

APPROVAL OF AGENDA:  June 9, 2005 

APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR:

Approval of May12, 2005 Regular Board Minutes

Approval of June 6, 2005 Ways & Means Minutes

OLD BUSINESS:  

         1. Radick Show Cause

2. Marion Township Roads

3. REU’s for the High School

4. Frank Lover Gravel Pit (Lucy Road)

5. Peavy Force Main

6.  Handicap Handrail and Automatic Door                 

NEW BUSINESS:   

        1. Proposed Text Amendment Section 3.02 Definitions for Landscaping

2. Proposed Text Amendment Section 6.19 B Access Controls

3. Ivey Show Cause Hearing

4. McCracken Show Cause Hearing 

5. Article XVIII – Site plan review requirements- (Board of Trustees

                        Approval of preliminary site plans)

6. Sewer Rates

7. 2005-2006 Meeting Schedule (Meeting Dates)

8. Grave Purchasing Guidelines

9. Township Investment Policy

10. Clark Hill Invoice

11. OHM Inspection Procedures

12. Todd’s Services

13. Fire Station Lease

14. Board and Staff Raises

15. Approval of the 2005-2006 Budget                       

PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT

PARKS & RECREATION REPORT

ZBA REPORT

ZONING ADMINISTRATOR REPORT

DPW REPORT

TREASURERS REPORT

FOR THE GOOD OF THE TOWNSHIP

CALL TO PUBLIC:

ADJOURNMENT:    

                                           DRAFT MINUTES  

MEMBERS PRESENT:               Bob Hanvey , Sue Lingle, Dan Lowe, Dave Hamann , and Tammy Beal

MEMBERS ABSENT:                 None

OTHERS PRESENT:                  Phil Westmoreland, OHM, Township Engineer                                         

*****************************************************************************************************************************

CALL TO ORDER

Bob Hanvey called the meeting to order at 7:50 p.m.  

PLEDGE TO FLAG

BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT

The board members introduced themselves. 

CALL TO THE PUBLIC

None.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Dave Hamann motioned to approve the agenda as amended.  Tammy Beal seconded.  Motion carried 5-0.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Board of Trustees Regular Meeting, May 12, 2005

Dave Hamann motioned to approve the minutes as presented.  Sue Lingle seconded.  Motion carried 5-0.

Ways & Means Meeting, June 6, 2005

Dave Hamann motioned to approve the minutes as presented.  Tammy Beal seconded.  Motion carried 5-0.

OLD BUSINESS
Radick Show Cause Hearing

Bill Szobonya, the Radicks’ attorney, asked why we are here?  According to the minutes from the last meeting, Dan

Lowe motioned to contact the township attorney, provide him with a copy of the audiotape, and have him proceed with

 whatever steps are necessary to abate the sound nuisance.  Mr. Szobonya said he has not heard from the township’s

 attorney.  Mr. Hanvey said the attorney has received the audiotape. The board is looking at two issues today.

One is the determination of whether or not the sound constitutes a nuisance and determine what the board is going to

do about the number of dogs.  Mr. Hanvey said the township hasn’t received a written comment from the attorney yet.

 The issue presented to the attorney was regarding the nuisance.  The head count issue is one of the issues the board

 is looking at right now.  Mr. Szobonya asked the board why they wouldn’t allow the Radicks to choose the person to

do the decibel reading, but would allow a resident submit a tape they made themselves.  Mr. Hanvey said the

distinction is that the tape that was presented makes no claim for a violation on the decibel reading, it only speaks to

 the nuisance issue.  Mr. Lynch provided us with a number that was below the ordinance number, so there’s no issue

with regard to the violation on the reading.  The issue is with regard to the nuisance.  Mr. Szobonya said it’s still

submitted by an interested party subjectively, not someone who is an expert in the field of decibel readings. 

Mr. Hanvey said again that the decibel level is not an issue, just the nuisance issue.  Mr. Szobonya said if that’s

 the case, then his clients would like to submit not partial tapes, not combined tapes, but all tapes from an extended

period of time and would like to have those heard by the board today.  Mr. Hanvey said no, because the absence of a

nuisance at a particular period of time is not proof that a nuisance does not exist at some other time. Mr. Szobonya

stated that the board is going to deny the Radicks complete taping for an extended period of weeks from 10:00 pm

to 6:00 am , and accept one tape that could be dubbed, spliced, whatever.  Mr. Hanvey said there’s no doubt there are

extended periods of time during which there is no noise.  No one is suggesting that the tape the Radicks would

present would provide the board with any indication of anything other than times when there is no noise.

Mr. Szobonya asked if the board is aware of the legal definition of “nuisance.”  Mr. Szobonya read the legal

definition of “nuisance”, which is “…a condition or situation such as a loud noise or foul odor that interferes with the

use and enjoyment of property.  Liability might or might not arise with regard to the condition or situation.” 

A nuisance is not something that happens now and then.  A nuisance is something that’s fairly consistent and has

 to really upset the enjoyment of someone’s sleep, someone’s ability to live within his or her habitat.  Mr. Hanvey

asked Mr. Szobonya to read page 4-5 of the ordinance.  Evidence has been presented to the board that indicates

that there are reasonably frequent occurrences when the dogs make a substantial amount of noise.  The board gets

to decide whether or not that constitutes a nuisance and provide a remedy or correction period during which the

resident can correct the situation. 

Dan Lowe said regardless of the sound, there are too many dogs.  Mr. Hanvey read from the ordinance that “habitual

barking or unusual noise from the kennel, which results in a nuisance to neighboring landowners or residents, is

prohibited.”  Mr. Szobonya said define “habitual.”  Mr. Szobonya said the comments back in February suggested

that this was happening 24/7.  Now it’s not happening all the time.  At the last meeting, it was happening five days out

 of 12 or 14 days according to Mr. Reizen. 

Call to the Public

Joe Goers, 5920 W. Coon Lake Road :  It doesn’t seem like there’s been much of an effort to quiet them. Mr. Goers

said the situation has improved since last year, but the dogs still howl and bark.  It’s not an everyday thing like it was

before, but the tape doesn’t lie.

David Lynch, 3300 Dutcher:  Mr. Lynch said the dogs were barking on March 31, April 4, April 6, April 28, April 29,

 April 30.  Mr. Lynch said he’s been doing audio for a long time.  When the noise inhibits his work, it’s a nuisance. 

When it wakes him at 3:00 a.m. , it’s a nuisance.  Mr. Lynch said the Radicks were given 30 days to come up with a

plan for noise abatement, not a stockade fence.  He said you could clearly hear someone on the tape reprimand the

dogs twice.  If it’s not a nuisance, why was someone reprimanding the dogs.  This shows it’s a nuisance even on their

 own property. 

Mr. Hanvey asked the Radicks if they could propose a solution to the noise issue that can be implemented rapidly. 

Mr. Szobonya said if the Radicks did submit a proposal for the noise that could be implemented rapidly, would that do

away with the issue of the amount of dogs?  Mr. Hanvey said no.  He said there is a potential for the Radicks to go to

the Zoning Board of Appeals for a variance on the number of dogs.  This board cannot do anything to grant the

Radicks a variance for the number of dogs.  The ZBA is the only board that can do that. 

Sue Radick read the following:  Mr. Reizen and Mr. Lynch are distorting facts to make a point.  Let’s look at

Mr. Reizen’s original written formal complaint.  He says they constantly bark all night long.  He says they do not have

screened kennels or runs are required.  The noise level exceeds 55 decibels.  Numerous other animals not kept in

conformity with local ordinances.  All written statements are false, can be proven so by Mr. Hanvey’s multiple visits at

night to include, when in the company of Ms. Lingle, and a neighbor from across the street, came out and stated

he doesn’t hear the dogs except in the evening.  That includes a visit on Mother’s Day when a decibel reading was

obtained.  A reading taken at feeding time when the dogs are the noisiest that was 57 decibels.  A car traveling down

 the road measured 65.  Ms. McNamara also has been out on several occasions, at which the only time she heard

noise was when we were hooking up for a training run.  The Bauers submitted statements as to many anonymous

drive-bys to monitor dog noise—none heard.  At the February 10 meeting, Mr. Lynch states that the noise is not just

 10 or 15 minutes; it’s when the dogs are barking from 9:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and it’s all night long.  Mr. Reizen says

dogs bark from 3:30 p.m. all night long every night.  Again, these are false statements proven by Mr. Lynch’s very CD

recording.  He has a recording of one dog making noise that starts at 9:41 p.m.   That is before the all-quiet time of

10:00 p.m.   That one dog barks for 10 minutes, and nothing on the tape until you hear a community howl that lasts a

minute.  There’s no documentation as to when, date, time, but lasts one minute at best.  The CD has to be turned up

loud enough to hear past the peepers, frogs, and crickets.  A 20-minute recording that only contains at best 11-12

minutes of actual dog noise recorded by Mr. Lynch before the all-quiet time of 10:00 p.m.   I have 20 tapes here.  I’m

not a multi-media producer as Mr. Lynch is.  We have a camera on the front porch; we tape eight hours every

single night.  In 20 recordings, I have 166 seconds of noise, 2.76 minutes.  On the night Mr. Goers is talking about,

the dogs howled for 27 seconds.  I also kept a log for 30 days in February and March and total nighttime noise was

five minutes in 30 days of keeping track.  Multiple neighbors came in March to support what we say about the dogs

 making no noise, but they must be irrelevant, as Mr. Reizen states to all findings that don’t support his claims.

Neighbors who don’t have air conditioning, by the way, and whose windows are open all the time and who are just as

close as the Lynchs and the Reizens.  Now Mr. Reizen and Mr. Lynch want to change their complaint to nuisance.

Now the dogs don’t bark, they howl.  We’re down to almost every night instead of 16 hours every night.  Not once

have these Iosco Township neighbors been neighborly or honest.  When Mr. Lynch’s son was harassing my son at

school, I didn’t call the authorities, or the sheriff, or the principal, I called Mr. Lynch and spoke to him about it—the

neighborly thing to do.  Too bad I didn’t have a recording of that conversation in October when Mr. Lynch assured me

that he had indeed heard one dog making, but he and his wife decided to wait and see what would happen because

we’ve always been real responsible pet owners and no, they hadn’t heard the dogs recently.  And when I invited him

to call me with any problems as I have done with Mr. Goers, these people have not done that.  They’re not interested

in being neighborly.  I’ve not heard anything from anyone.  What’s next?  Do roosters have to be decrowed, the

DNR is going to come out and kill the peepers and frogs and crickets, the donkey’s going to have to wear a shock

collar.  What about the gravel haulers that travel down the road late at night.  These don’t wake Mr. Reizen’s wife

and only my dogs do.  As close as they sit to the road, I can’t believe that she’s not wakened by these big trucks

traveling down the road.  People in this township who have made valid complaints regarding vicious dogs and their

concern for their safety to the township and authorities and nothing’s done.  God help those of us who have dogs that

make noise.  What is a nuisance and how is it proven.  At some point, my rights are being infringed upon, my right to

enjoy my property and my hobby without harassment.  I, my family and dogs feel threatened right now by Mr. Reizen’s

comments that if the township doesn’t do something about the noise, he will.  By Mr. Lowe’s comments that we

should get rid of the additional dogs immediately or provide an absolute plan to stop the noise.  What is the purpose

of an ordinance with specific data related to noise in reference to decibel levels if there are ways to get around that

issue by claiming a nuisance.  Yes, I’m over on the dogs, five extra well-loved, well-cared for members of my family

who gave us their time and athleticism to enjoy a hobby that me and my family feel passionate about and who

now deserve a quality retirement.  Animal Control has no issue with the extra dogs and says that it’s five less dogs

in their shelter.  Township residents should be on notice.  Someone out there could decide that your hobby or

activities are a nuisance to them and you will have to come up with a way to appease your neighbors that don’t even

reside in your township.  One has to question why the township allows activities that in and of itself creates noise. 

For example, day care facilities, home businesses and shops, hobby kennels, farms, riding and boarding stables,

landscape businesses and nurseries, and then not allow the very noise that’s created while enjoying these activities

and deem them a nuisance.  What’s next?  Snowmobiles, dirt bike riders, farmers, when will it end.  It saddens me

that people living are so bored and unfulfilled and have meaningless lives that they have nothing better to do than to

scrutinize the activities happening on my property.  I work midnights .  I don’t expect the whole community to be quiet

during the day while I sleep.  Where is the tolerance and acceptance?

Mr. Radick said it’s very hard for them to come to the township meeting every month where the direction from the

board is always open-ended.  In February, we’re told to come back with a plan.  We came back and discussed what

we’re doing in terms of analyzing a commercial kennel requirements and how we could address the sound issue.

At the March meeting, we were told that we really needed to address the sound issue before we could even talk about

the number of dogs because they seem to be interrelated and at that time, we opened up discussions with the

township and our attorney to get an engineering study done to measure the sound level because the decibel issue

seemed to be questionable.  For a number of reasons, and I’m satisfied with the results, the decibel issue is off the

table.  But I resent the implication in the minutes that we are not cooperating with the township board, that we’re

dragging this on, and that we have been in violation of specific direction.  Until the May meeting, we were not told that

we had to have a specific plan to abate the noise.  It was an open-ended, what are we going to do about the noise,

 is the noise really an issue.  At this point, my wife and I are considering several alternatives including taking the

animals to Illinois to be treated by a professional veterinarian to have them debarked in such a way that is humane

to them and won’t interfere with our hobby.  That is a significant expense.  We’re looking at $10,000-$20,000 worth

of expenses if we debark the dogs and then have to go through all of the requirements to build a commercial kennel

when we’re not a commercial operation.  We’re a hobby with an additional number of dogs that are trying to enjoy

their retirement. 

Mr. Hanvey said let’s go back to the part about the Planning Commission and going for a commercial use permit.

That’s certainly an option.  He doesn’t believe it’s a good option, because that option requires several variances. 

Mrs. Radick asked why she was told that was the route she needed to take.  Mr. Hanvey said he never told her what

she should do.  He gave several options of things she could do.  He also said that going to the ZBA is the least

expensive and quickest way to get a potential solution to part of the problem.  He can’t predict what the ZBA would

do.  Mr. Hanvey said he hasn’t heard the dogs making the noise heard on the tape.  He asked Mrs. Radick if she has

any reason to believe that the dogs recorded on the tape are not hers.  Mrs. Radick said she’s not sure about the

one dog barking, but the community howl is definitely her dogs. 

Tammy Beal asked the Radicks if they’re going to spend that much to have the dogs debarked, why not just build a

building.  Mrs. Radick said they can’t be brought in at night.  Dan Lowe asked why not.  Mrs. Radick said they can’t

be brought in part of the time.  Sue Lingle said they can’t be left out to howl at night.  Mr. Szobonya said the board

hasn’t presented enough information to prove a nuisance, but wants the Radicks to spend thousands of dollars to do

something somewhat inhumane to the dogs, to debark them, and that’s going to be the only way that they’re going to

satisfy these people.  Also, they’re not going to debark all of the dogs.  They’re only going to debark the ones that

are young enough.  The board is allowing a tape to dictate to a certain degree its determination.  Mr. Szobonya said

that tape is going to be very well scrutinized, and the board is disallowing the Radicks to submit tapes not spliced,

but 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. every day.  He also said it’s not fair for the Radicks to have to take those dogs every night

 into a shelter.  Tammy Beal said they feed them every night.  Mrs. Radick said its utter chaos when the kennels are

opened up and the dogs think they’re going someplace.  Dan Lowe suggested some kind of air exchange system

instead of air conditioning. 

David Lynch, 3300 Dutcher Road:  Mr. Lynch said he doesn’t like this attorney calling him a liar.  He has no reason

to edit the tape.  Mr. Szoboyna said he didn’t say that. 

Mr. Hanvey said this board is not going to deal with the head count issue.  If the Radicks choose, they have the option of going

 to the ZBA.  If they choose not to, then the board will find them in violation of that section of the ordinance which is pretty

straightforward.  A nuisance issue is for this board to decide at this point.  Sue Lingle said township worked hard on creating

the hobby kennel ordinance and the board shouldn’t disregard it. 

Tammy Beal motioned that there is a nuisance issue from the Radick’s hobby kennel.  Sue Lingle seconded.

Motion carried 5-0.

Bob Hanvey also said nobody on the board has suggested that the dogs be debarked. 

Sue Lingle motioned to allow 30 days to eliminate the nuisance.  Dan Lowe seconded.  Motion carried 5-0.

Mr. Szobonya said the Radicks will file for the July ZBA meeting. 

Dan Lowe motioned to find that 16 dogs are six more than allowed by the ordinance.  Sue Lingle seconded. 

Motion carried 5-0.

Sue Lingle added that the last date to file for the July ZBA meeting is June 21. 

Marion Township Roads

A detailed breakdown of the cost for repairs on Davis Road is included in the packets.  Dan Lowe said he doesn’t

think anything needs to be done on Davis Road .  He feels limestone and ditching on Cedar Lake Road should be

done instead.  Bob Hanvey will discuss this further with Phil Westmoreland on Monday.  He also will talk with Steve

 from the Livingston County Road Commission. 

Ivey Show Cause Hearing

Annette McNamara said an anonymous complaint was received in the mail about the Ivey’s backyard.  She sent a violation

notice and the Geers wrote a letter to the township in response.  Mr. Geer said he doesn’t consider the items to be junk and that

they were going to sell some of the things in the yard, but couldn’t do that within 15 days.  They are present tonight to discuss

with the board what they plan to do with the numerous items in the backyard.

Mrs. Ivey-Geer said numerous items have been disposed of since they received the letter.  She said because of health

constraints, 60-90 days is a more realistic time frame. 

Mr. Hanvey asked if the Geers had a plan to remove the rest of the items.  Mrs. Ivey-Geer said not all of the stuff will

be disposed of.  There are travel trailers, boats, and campers, and they’re not leaving.  Mr. Geer asked when the

ordinance was implemented.  Mr. Hanvey said 1996.  Mr. Geer said some of the stuff in his backyard has been there

for 30 years.  Two campers that he built in 1971, and they’re not junk.  There’s a 21’ boat that was brand new in

August 1979.  There’s a canoe and fishing boat.  There’s another boat that he just bought, only to sell.  There are

also two yard tractors, only to sell.  There are two travel trailers that aren’t junk.  Mr. Geer said Dick Irish came to his

house about four years ago on a personal complaint.  He toured the backyard and told Mr. Geer not to worry about it.

Mr. Geer said he’s going to stand on the grandfather clause on the travel trailers, campers and boats because he’s

had them for 30 years.  

Dan Lowe asked Ms. McNamara if she had been to the site.  She said yes, although she hadn’t been on the property,

just from the roadway. 

Sue Lingle motioned to have the Geer’s property reasonably cleaned up within 90 days, and have site visits, with the

Geers present, in 30 days and 60 days to evaluate progress, beginning on June 10.  Tammy Beal seconded. 

Motion carried 5-0.

Mrs. Ivey-Geer said the township will have to make an appointment, and they will be on vacation in 30 days.

McCracken Show Cause Hearing

Annette McNamara said an anonymous complaint was received by the township that Mr. McCracken was building an

accessory structure without a permit.  Not only was the accessory structure built without a land use permit, it was

built in the front yard which requires a variance.  She also noticed that Mr. McCracken has a pool, and it appears he

didn’t get a land use permit for the pool either.  A notice of violation was sent and Mr. McCracken came in to submit a

land use permit.  The application was denied, which was discussed with him before he applied.  He was given the

dates for the ZBA meeting to request a variance.  In the meantime, another neighbor called and pointed out that

Mr. McCracken had a ZBA case to build his house within the front yard setback.  A review of the ZBA case showed

there were conditions that were placed on the variance request for trees along the front property line, trees to hide the

propane tank, and Ms. McNamara’s not certain whether those conditions have been met.  Ms. McNamara would like

Mr. McCracken to file for a ZBA case, apply for a land use permit for the pool, and allow her to enter his property to

verify the conditions of the previous ZBA case have been met.

Mr. McCracken said he called Livingston County Building Department (LCBD) and was told he didn’t need anything to

build the pole barn.  He was told he didn’t have to do anything with the township, and Mr. McCracken didn’t even know

about the township.  Mr. McCracken said his recommendation is that the township deal with the LCBD and then

come deal with him.  Mr. McCracken said he did get a permit for the pool.  Mr. McCracken said he called the LCBD,

actually he went there, and was told he didn’t need anything.  Mr. Hanvey explained that the fact that Mr. McCracken

received bad information from a different agency doesn’t change the situation with the township.  Mr. McCracken said

 “Dan” from the LCBD told him he would call the township and try to work it out.  Mr. Hanvey said it’s his understanding

that the building is in a position that makes it non-compliant with the township ordinance.  In order to correct that

situation, one solution is to apply to the ZBA and request a variance.  The July ZBA meeting is July 11. Mr. McCracken

said he shouldn’t have to pay for something when someone else made the mistake, and the township should deal with

 the county.  Mr. Hanvey said that’s not the way it’s going to work.  Mr. McCracken said then we’ll be in court. 

Mr. Hanvey said that’s fine.  He again explained to Mr. McCracken that his obligation with the township is not influenced

by what somebody at the county tells him.  Mr. McCracken has the choice of going to the ZBA to request a variance.

 If Mr. McCracken would like to cooperate, the zoning administrator would like to come out and verify the compliance with

the previous ZBA.  Mr. McCracken asked who called.  Ms. McNamara said it was an anonymous complaint. 

Mr. McCracken said he knows who called.  He has a dirt bike track on the side of his house and a lady is harassing

him all the time.  He said he’ll be out there tonight—the township is going to get phone calls. He’ll be out there with dirt

bikes at 12:00 tonight making noise like you never heard. 

Dave Hamann pointed out that the size of the pole barn exceeds anything that the county would not require a permit for.

Sue Lingle said Mr. McCracken needed a land use permit for the house, so he’s aware of the process. Mr. McCracken

said his builder took care of that. 

Ms. Lingle asked if the barn is in the front yard Ms. McNamara said he’s on a flag lot, and it is the front yard. The building

needs to be 100’ off the front lot line.  Mr. McCracken asked how many acres he needs to call it a farm.  Mr. Hanvey said

it can’t just be called a farm; you have to actually farm.  Mr. McCracken says he was told that if his property was zoned

agricultural, he could put up as many pole barns as he wanted.  Ms. McNamara said no.  Ms. McNamara said again she

would like to see the land use permit for the pool or else Mr. McCracken applies for one.  She would like to see him

apply for a variance, or else move the structure to be in compliance with the zoning ordinance.  Finally, she would like

to be allowed on to the property to make sure that the conditions from the previous ZBA case have been met.

Mr. McCracken said the guy from the LCBD told him where to put the building.   

Sue Lingle motioned that Mr. McCracken apply for a land use permit for the pool; make application to the Zoning Board

of Appeals for the accessory structure, or move the accessory structure; allow the zoning administrator to inspect his

property to verify conditions from previous ZBA have been met; and provide a copy of the waiver received from LCBD for

accessory structure.  Dan Lowe seconded.  Discussion:  Dave Hamann said if Mr. McCracken moves the barn, he still

needs a land use permit and building permit.  Mr. McCracken said the building permit for the accessory structure was

waived, and he has a waiver at home.  Motion carried 5-0.

REUs for High School

Dan Lowe motioned to table this item.  Tammy Beal seconded.  Motion carried 5-0.

Frank Lover Gravel Pit

Bob Hanvey said he talked with the attorney who suggested that even though the violation of cutting down the tree was

cut and dried, it probably isn’t sufficient to make the judge find him in contempt of the previous court order.  Mr. Hanvey

also reported that Mr. Lover wants to put up a fence, and anything he wants to do will require site plan review by the

Planning Commission, which can assure the requirements are met.

Peavy Force Main

Phil Westmoreland said not a lot has changed from last month.  He’s attempted to make contact with the gas company

to see if moving the cathode protection system is an option.  Mr. Westmoreland also needs to verify with Mitch Harris on

when they will be doing the road extension.   Mr. Hanvey said he told Karla Davidson from the DEQ that the township is

working on this, and she may be calling back to verify. 

Handicap Handrail/Automatic Door

Dan Lowe motioned to table the handrail item until the next meeting.  Tammy Beal seconded.  Motion carried 5-0.

Sue Lingle motioned to accept the bid from Great Lakes Automatic Door for $1,470.  Dan Lowe seconded.  Roll call vote:

Dave Hamann , Sue Lingle, Bob Hanvey , Tammy Beal, Dan Lowe—all yes.  Motion carried 5-0.

NEW BUSINESS

Proposed Text Amendments

Section 3.02:  Bob Hanvey suggested some changes in verbiage.  Dan Lowe motioned to send this text amendment

back to the Planning Commission.  Sue Lingle seconded.  Motion carried 5-0.

Section 6.19 B:  Sue Lingle motioned to send this text amendment back to the Planning Commission.  Tammy Beal

seconded.  Motion carried 5-0.

Article XVIII—Site Plan Review Requirements

Dave Hamann motioned to recommend that the Planning Commission include wording in Section 18.03 for the preliminary

site plan process saying that the Planning Commission submit to the Board for approval.  Sue Lingle seconded. 

Motion carried 5-0.

Sewer Rates

Bob Hanvey said the township received a letter from the City of Howell saying they are raising the rates by three cents. 

2005-2006 Meeting Schedule

Bob Hanvey suggested that the board meet twice a month as regular meeting rather than having a ways & means meeting.

Tammy Beal suggested a three-hour time limit on meetings.

Sue Lingle motioned to approve the 2005-06 meeting schedule with two board meetings each month on the second and

fourth Thursday at 7:30 p.m. with a three-hour time limit; the second meeting in November will be eliminated. Dave

Hamann seconded.  Motion carried 5-0.

Grave Purchasing Guidelines

Sue Lingle said the policy could define what immediate family is. Tammy Beal said this could be referred to the cemetery

committee that will be formed. 

Township Investment Policy

This policy has to be approved every four years.  Dave Hamann motioned to approve this item.  Tammy Beal seconded. 

Motion carried 5-0.

Clark Hall Invoice

Sue Lingle motioned to approve the Clark Hill invoice for $700.  Dave Hamann seconded.  Roll call vote:  Dan Lowe,

Dave Hamann , Bob Hanvey , Sue Lingle, Tammy Beal—all yes.  Motion carried 5-0.

OHM Inspection Procedures

Sue Lingle motioned to table the OHM inspection procedure and submit to the Planning Commission for its review. 

Dave Hamann seconded.  Motion carried 5-0.

Fee Schedule

Sue Lingle motioned to set the fee for the comprehensive plan at $40 and add to the fee schedule.  Dave Hamann

seconded.  Motion carried 5-0.

Fire Station Lease

Dave Hamann motioned to approve the fire station lease.  Sue Lingle seconded.  Motion carried 5-0.

Board and Staff Pay Rates

Tammy Beal motioned to increase the pay rate for hourly employees by fifty cents per hour.  Sue Lingle seconded.

 Roll call vote:  Dan Lowe, Tammy Beal, Bob Hanvey , Sue Lingle, Dave Hamann —all yes.  Motion carried 5-0.

Dave Hamann motioned to increase the supervisor’s salary by 3%.  Tammy Beal seconded.  Roll call vote:

Dave Hamann , Sue Lingle, Bob Hanvey , Tammy Beal, Dan Lowe—all yes.  Motion carried 5-0.

Sue Lingle motioned to increase the clerk’s salary by 3%.  Dave Hamann seconded.  Roll call vote:  Dan Lowe,

Bob Hanvey , Tammy Beal, Sue Lingle, Dave Hamann —all yes.  Motion carried 5-0.

Tammy Beal motioned to increase the treasurer’s salary by 3%.  Dave Hamann seconded.  Roll call vote: 

Bob Hanvey , Dave Hamann , Dan Lowe, Sue Lingle, Tammy Beal—all yes.  Motion carried 5-0.

Approval of 2005-2006 Budget

Tammy Beal moved by resolution to approve by activity the General Fund Proposed Budget Amendments for the Year

Ending 6/30/05 .  Dave Hamann seconded.  Roll call vote:  Dave Hamann , Tammy Beal, Bob Hanvey , Sue Lingle,

Dan Lowe—all yes.  Resolution passed 5-0.

Sue Lingle moved by resolution to approve by activity the General Fund Proposed Budget for the Year Ending 6/30/06 .

Dave Hamann seconded.  Roll call vote:  Dave Hamann , Bob Hanvey , Tammy Beal, Sue Lingle, Dan Lowe—all yes. 

Resolution passed 5-0.

Tammy Beal moved by resolution to approve by activity the Sewer Fund Proposed Budget for the Year Ending 6/30/06 . 

Sue Lingle seconded.  Roll call vote:  Dan Lowe, Tammy Beal, Bob Hanvey , Sue Lingle, Dave Hamann —all yes. 

Resolution passed 5-0.

Dave Hamann moved by resolution to approve by activity the Water New User Fund Proposed Budget for the Year

Ending 6/30/06 .  Sue Lingle seconded.  Roll call vote:  Bob Hanvey , Sue Lingle, Tammy Beal, Dave Hamann ,

Dan Lowe—all yes.  Resolution passed 5-0.

Tammy Beal moved by resolution to approve by activity the Water Assessment Fund Proposed Budget for the Year

Ending 6/30/06 .  Dave Hamann seconded.  Roll call vote:  Dan Lowe, Tammy Beal, Sue Lingle, Bob Hanvey ,

Dave Hamann —all yes.  Resolution passed 5-0.

Sue Lingle moved by resolution to approve by activity the Loves Creek Fund Proposed Budget for the Year

Ending 6/30/06 .  Dave Hamann seconded.  Roll call vote:  Dave Hamann , Sue Lingle, Bob Hanvey , Tammy Beal,

Dan Lowe—all yes.  Resolution passed 5-0.

Sue Lingle moved by resolution to approve by activity the Road Assessment Fund Proposed Budget for the Year Ending

6/30/06 .  Dave Hamann seconded.  Roll call vote: Tammy Beal, Bob Hanvey , Dave Hamann , Dan Lowe,

Sue Lingle—all yes.  Resolution passed 5-0.

Tammy Beal moved by resolution to approve by activity the Cemetery Fund Proposed Budget for the Year Ending 6/30/06 .

Dave Hamann seconded.  Roll call vote:  Bob Hanvey , Dave Hamann , Dan Lowe, Sue Lingle, Tammy Beal—all yes.

Resolution passed 5-0.

Sue Lingle moved by resolution to approve by activity the Recreation Fund Proposed Budget for the Year Ending 6/30/06 .

Tammy Beal seconded.  Roll call vote:  Bob Hanvey , Dave Hamann , Sue Lingle, Tammy Beal, Dan Lowe—all yes. 

Resolution passed 5-0.

PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT

Dave Hamann reported that two meetings were held in May: a workshop on May 16, and a public hearing and regular

meeting on May 24.

PARKS & RECREATION REPORT

Sue Lingle reported that the June meeting hasn’t been held yet.  She will provide the report at next month’s meeting. 

ZBA REPORT

Dan Lowe reported that no meeting was held in June. 

ZONING ADMINISTRATOR REPORT

Provided in packets.

DPW REPORT

Provided in packets.  

TREASURER’S REPORT

Dave Hamann motioned to accept the treasurer’s report with expenses of $67,206.14.  Tammy Beal seconded. 

Motion carried 5-0.

FOR THE GOOD OF THE TOWNSHIP

None.

CALL TO THE PUBLIC

Charlie Musson asked if anyone in the township figured out what the percentages are for the money budgeted for

each department.  Bob Hanvey said no.  Mr. Musson said there’s a lot of money spent in zoning. 

Annette McNamara made a suggestion that she talk with the attorney about no more show cause hearings, and take

care of the complaints in a different fashion.  Mr. Hanvey said the ordinance would have to be changed.  It does give

the public the opportunity to become aware that the township is looking at what’s going on around the township

and they have a chance to state their case. 

ADJOURNMENT

Sue Lingle motioned to adjourn the meeting at 10:10 p.m.   Tammy Beal seconded.  Motion carried 5-0.