|
MARION TOWNSHIP
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
NOVEMBER 14, 2002
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Bob Hanvey, Sue Lingle, Dan Lowe and Myrna Schlittler
MEMBERS
ABSENT: Charles
Musson
OTHER
PRESENT:
Mike
Kehoe, Township Attorney
Annette McNamara, Zoning Administrator
*****************************************************************************
CALL TO ORDER
Bob Hanvey called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
PLEDGE
TO THE FLAG
MEMBERS PRESENT
Bob Hanvey asked the members of the Board to introduce
themselves.
CALL TO PUBLIC
AGENDA ITEMS ONLY
Bob Hanvey explained that the Call to the Public was for
agenda items other than either of the show cause hearings.
The Call to the Public for either of the show cause hearings will be
held during each hearing.
APPROVAL OF
AGENDA
Myrna Schlittler motioned to approve the agenda as amended,
deleting the item concerning Darakjian Mortgage
under New Business.
Sue Lingle seconded. Motion
carried 4-0.
SHOW CAUSE
HEARINGS
Mr. Hanvey explained the purpose and process for the Show
Cause Hearings. The Zoning
Administrator will have the
opportunity to explain the issues in the case
from her viewpoint, the resident will have the opportunity to respond, and
then the Call to the Public will be held.
Anyone wishing to speak during the Call to the Public will have the
opportunity.
Mr. Hanvey asked
that anyone speaking state their name and address for the record, and to
please limit their comments
to three minutes per person.
Chris and
Carla Bonk, 5927 Madley’s Lane
Ms. McNamara explained that Mr. Bonk first came to the
attention of Marion Township through complaints from his
neighbors and site
visits to Madley’s Lane. We
sent Mr. and Mrs. Bonk a notice of violation listing the articles and
sections in violation. Mr. and
Mrs. Bonk worked with the Zoning Administrator and brought certain
violations into
compliance, yet there are still two outstanding issues.
Ms. McNamara asked Mr. and Mrs. Bonk to come before the
Board to
discuss Home Occupations and Uses Permitted by Right in the Rural
Residential (RR) District. Ms.
McNamara
read the ordinances that she feels the Bonks’ are in violation
of, by storing explosives and flammables, the change in the
exterior
appearance, and the noise. John Harris, asked if he
could respond on Mr. and Mrs. Bonk’s behalf.
He stated he
hoped the Board had the opportunity to read his letter
to the township on behalf of the Bonks, and he also presented
some pictures
and a letter from a neighbor. Mr.
Harris feels that the zoning administrator hasn’t presented facts to
support her case, only conclusions. It’s
Mr. Harris’ belief that there have been no facts presented to the Bonks,
which would allow them to sit down, go over each item of concern, and
address each one. One concern
of the Bonks
is the way the investigation has been handled.
Representatives of the township had come on their property and took
pictures of the interior of the pole barn without their consent.
Neighbors from their old subdivision had informed them that
representatives from the township had contacted them to confirm or deny the
representations that the Bonks had been
“run out” of their previous
neighborhood. There are
neighbors and friends present on behalf of the Bonks, and if that’s
relevant, they could be asked. It
should have nothing to do with the current situation.
Mr. Harris feels this is not so much
an investigation as a “witch
hunt.” It is the Bonks’
position that there is no home occupation.
The primary use of this
property is residential.
They have a legal, approved pole barn that is incidental to the
primary use of the property, and
inside the pole barn they store street
sweepers for a business they own. They
have no employees, no cars, no clients,
no customers, no vendor deliveries,
no signs, nothing to indicate anything’s going on except storage of two
pieces of
equipment. Again, it
is the Bonks’ position that there is no home occupation; however, the home
occupation ordinance
is rather liberal, and what they’re doing does not
constitute a violation. The
Bonks’ take the sweepers out in the morning
and bring them back at night. It’s their livelihood and they don’t want to stop.
The next step is litigation, and that
shouldn’t be necessary.
The Bonks’ are willing to sit down and try to resolve the
situation. However, just because
neighbors are complaining doesn’t
mean there’s a violation of the ordinance.
Bob Hanvey stated that the township has been talking with Mr.
Bonk for several months and has no complaints about
the cooperation from the
Bonks. We’ve talked to them
on several occasions, visited the site several times, Mr. Bonk
took township
representatives on a tour of the facility including the pole barn.
When Mr. Hanvey was at the site, Mr. Bonk,
in response to comments
that he was thrown out of the old neighborhood, suggested that wasn’t true
and the township
could go check, and as far as Mr. Hanvey can tell, it seems
to be the case that the old neighbors had no complaints.
We did
verify what he told us, and he told us to do that.
At no time were we ever invited not to come back to his residence.
He’s been
very cooperative all along.
What we have is a true disagreement as to what the words in the
zoning ordinance mean, and we’re
here trying to resolve that.
There have never been any confrontations between Mr. Bonk and a
township representative. There
have been several emotional discussions, but never any confrontation.
What the township has done is attempt to verify complaints.
It is the township’s obligation to verify whether the complaints
have merit. In general, we have
verified that some of them were
happening, but not on a consistent basis.
The most frequent complaint was about the noise.
In an attempt to verify that,
Mr. Hanvey has driven by the residence
10 or 15 times, and never heard any noise.
Other staff has heard noise at various times.
It’s the township’s obligation to verify.
Mr. Bonk feels that that his comments were misinterpreted.
He stated that there were
people in his old neighborhood that will
support that he was a good neighbor. He
didn’t say the township could go into a
“background check” on him.
Taxpayers in this room think it’s wrong to spend tax dollars to
investigate how someone was in their
last neighborhood. It is Mr. Hanvey’s opinion that Mr. Bonk, in defending
himself against these allegations, encouraged the
township to verify.
Mr. Hanvey stated that what’s left to determine is whether
the activities conducted by Mr. Bonk at his residence
are appropriate and
supported by the ordinance in the RR district.
Mr. Hanvey asked interested parties to make comments,
either for or
against the case.
Call to the
Public
Donna Davison, Dutcher Road:
Ms. Davison presented photographs of the site and a list of times of
disturbances. She stated
that
Mr. Bonk put his pole barn up months in advance of the house.
She’s watched sweepers, equipment, welding, etc.
She has watched him operate his business for months before he dug a
hole for his home. Ms. Davison
stated this is not about
what a nice guy Mr. Bonk is.
He’s running a commercial business out of his home.
He has a DBA that says Bonk Brothers
Services. His truck showing the company name is always on his premises
and as far as she’s concerned, that constitutes a sign.
She stated Mr. Bonk moved into his house without meeting
township requirements, he put in driveways on Dutcher Road despite
what the
Road Commission said, and he doesn’t follow the laws like the rest of us.
She stated there is plenty of noise coming
from his property; she can
hear it from her house. Mr. Hanvey asked if she knew how far her house was from
the Bonks’.
Ms. Davison
said not far enough.
Mr. Hanvey asked Mr. Bonk is the styrofoam insulation had
been completed in the barn, and
Mr. Bonk said not yet. Mr. Bonk said they are doing a lot of work around the house.
One of Ms. Davison’s complaints was
four times in one day about
noise, and that’s a little excessive.
If she was neighborly, she would come to him, yet she’s never
done
that. After her first
complaint, Mr. Bonk went to her house and gave Mr. Davison his home number
and mobile number and
apologized for inconveniencing them.
He told them if there were ever a problem, please call and the noise
would stop. Secondly,
the day
she called four times about noise, Mr. Bonk was building a boulder wall in
the backyard. He feels it’s
disturbing that she
would waste the township’s time by calling when she
could walk over and see what’s going on.
David Bonk, Brophy Road, Oceola Township:
Mr. Bonk introduced himself as Mr. Bonk’s father, and stated he
owned the
property in question. He stated that this is his son’s dream, and his son
thoroughly checked out all the codes and requirements
before buying.
He pulled all the required permits.
The signs on the side of the truck are required by law.
He worked hard with the
township to solve these problems.
He finally had to consult an attorney.
John Harris, attorney:
Mr. Harris stated that one of the uses permitted by right in this
district is agricultural operation,
landscape nursery operations, retail
sales. You have chosen, as a
township, to allow noise in this area.
If you have a farm,
landscape activities, retail sales of nursery
stock, you’re inviting customers and clients on to people’s property,
you’re inviting
traffic, you’re inviting all the things involved in a
commercial operation.To say
there’s noise…there probably is.You’re
inviting noise
by the nature of the activities that you allow in this zoning
district.
Ray LaCarter, Madley’s Lane:
Mr. LaCarter stated that he’s Chris and Carla Bonk’s neighbor.
He said that what everyone’s
overlooking is that it’s zoned rural
residential. That’s
livestock, agricultural, and homes. This
is a street sweeping business that
deals with commercial and industrial
sites. He power washes
vehicles. He stated that Mr.
Bonk promises to keep the vehicles
inside and doesn’t follow through.
He drains 100s of gallons of water to fill the sweepers to take to
job sites. He’s power washing
chemicals that come from these job sites back into our soil, which goes into
our drinking water. He’s
concerned about the
chemicals and their impact in the future on drinking
water. According to Mr.
LaCarter, Mr. Bonk stated that his family didn’t get
kicked out of his
last neighborhood, his business did, and that he moved to his current
location because there are no rules.
Shawn Merrill, Carter Court:
Mr. Merrill stated that he was Mr. Bonk’s closest neighbor in his
old neighborhood.He never had
any problem with noise or anything at any time.
Am I not allowed to drive my company truck home now?
Nancy Manson, W. Coon Lake Road:
Ms. Manson thought that the township never intended to put people out
of work and they were
always allowed to have trucks at home and whatever
equipment there was. There are
rules for people who run a home business. This man
obviously is not street sweeping Dutcher Road, so the
majority of the day he’s not there. If
someone wants to complain about the time he
spends getting ready to work or
when he comes home and cleans up his equipment, she feels that’s pretty
small and they need to be in
the middle of 200 acres or back in Novi where
they belong. This is a unique
community…it’s not like the city.
Joe Case, Bentley Lake Road:
Mr. Case wanted to mention Mr. Hanvey’s comments about the
township’s job being to figure out what
the language of the ordinance
really means. Most of would
agree that most of us create noise. In
trying to decide if noise is supposed to
keep someone from operating a power
washer, he doesn’t believe so. Is
it supposed to keep someone from operating a chainsaw,
welder, hammer, that
sort of thing…he doesn’t believe so.
Is the ordinance intended to suppress the incidental family life type
noise that’s
created? This is
a show cause hearing, and he’s heard allegations without any objective
evidence to show levels of noise, levels of
chemicals, that sort of thing.
Mr. Hanvey stated that when the township first began dealing
with Mr. Bonk, there were clear violations.
In the time that the township has
been talking with him, most of
those have been resolved. He
has solved most of problems we had with the exception of trying to determine
whether he has a home occupation and whether or not there’s industrial
processing. That’s why
we’re here tonight.
Cory Vann, Carter Court:
Mr. Vann stated that he is a
small business owner in the area. His
question is about the explosives…
what are they?
Mr. Vann stores diesel, gasoline, kerosene in his garage…is he
going to be told he can’t keep these in his garage?
Mr.
Hanvey explained that it’s taken in the context of a business.
Mr. Hanvey asked the zoning administrator what specific explosives.
Ms. McNamara said the welding tanks.
Mr. Hanvey said there’s a distinction between a residence and a
business.
Mr. Vann feels Mr. Bonk is being targeted because he has a
big barn. Mr. Hanvey said the
township is responding to written complaints,
and the township cannot ignore
them.
John Harris, attorney:
Mr. Harris wanted everyone to understand what the ordinance says
about explosives. Subsection i
says the
home occupation shall not entail the use or storage of explosive,
flammable, or otherwise hazardous waste.
It’s Mr. Harris’ interpretation
that the ordinance means storage
of explosive waste, flammable waste, or hazardous waste.
It doesn’t define it any more than that…
it’s very uncertain.
John Cude, Carter Court:
Mr. Kuhn thinks this has to do with just being neighborly.
Mr. Bonk would do anything for a neighbor.
Mr. Bonk has told him several times that the neighbors are harassing
him, he tries to talk to them and they won’t speak to him.
Mr. Hanvey stated we’re here in response to complaints
received against Mr. Bonk.
Linda Manson-Dempsey, W. Coon Lake Road:
Ms. Manson-Dempsey asked about the acetylene.
As a homeowner, he’s allowed
to have acetylene.
Has the township determined if he’s using acetylene in the course
of his business? Mr. Hanvey
asked Mr. Bonk to
respond. Mr.
Bonk said yes, he welds in his pole barn.
Mr. Hanvey asked if it was repair of his equipment.
Mr. Bonk said yes, he has
repaired his equipment in his pole barn
with his welder. Ms.
Manson-Dempsey asked if he does other things also?
Mr. Bonk said yes.
Ms.
Manson-Dempsey asked if he sells what he welds?
Mr. Bonk said no. Ms.
Manson-Dempsey stated you can have a home
occupation and you can have
customers coming and going, and was this the case at the Bonk residence?
Mr. Bonk said no.
How
many full-time employees do you have coming and going?
Mr. Bonk said just he and his brother. Ms. Manson-Dempsey said the
fact that he’s filling his
trucks is not pertinent to us, that’s his well.
She also had a question about the chemicals being dumped on the
ground. Mr. Hanvey said that
Mr. Bonk had agreed to provide the township with the MSDS sheets and that
hasn’t been done yet.
Nathan Drummond, Carter Court:
Mr. Drummond said he was formerly
employed as an environmental engineer and the soap used
to clean streets is
made to flow into the sewers and is biodegradable, not environmentally
hazardous, no company would sell street
sweeping soap that could be harmful
to groundwater, soil, grasses, or even weeds.
Another point is that he feels Ms. McNamara
hasn’t presented any
objective evidence that Mr. Bonk has violated any ordinance.
Just reading the ordinance doesn’t show that anything
has been
violated. Mr. Hanvey said
several issues have been resolved. Mr.
Bonk has provided Livingston County Road Commission
clearance on the second
driveway. Most issues have been
resolved. Our purpose today is
to determine whether he’s running a business
in a residential area.
It is clear that there is no home occupation titled street sweeping.
Does he street sweep at his home?
Storage of equipment of your property is not a home occupation.
Ms. McNamara wanted to clarify that Board members
were given packets of information regarding the case. Mr. Bonk has the
majority of the information.
His lawyer has the information.
She didn’t provide the information to everyone in the audience.
Mr. Harris asked what information she was talking about.
Ms. McNamara said the contents of his file, which constituted the
packet.
Mr. Harris said
there’s nothing in the file that says, “here is what you are doing, you
are storing explosives…”. Mr.
Hanvey said
everything has been resolved but whether or not he’s operating
a business. Ms. McNamara said
the township has had many
discussions with Mr. Bonk about whether he’s
running a business out of the pole barn or not, whether the pole barn is
mostly being
used to run the business or if the majority of it is being used
for the residence. Mr. Hanvey
said one of the issues the township is
faced with is determining whether or
not it’s a home business. If
it is decided that it’s a home business, then Mr. Bonk is clearly in
violation because the pole barn exceeds 25% of the first floor of the home
which is in the ordinance. If we determine that he’s not
running a business, we’re
all done. Ms. McNamara said the
township could achieve that with him.
John Harris, attorney:
Mr. Harris’ suggestion is that they sit down with a representative
from the township and find out what’s causing
the township to be upset.
Mr. Hanvey says the township isn’t upset, no one at the table is
mad at Mr. Bonk. Mr. Harris
said the last place
we all want to be is in court.
If the township can list specifically what they want, Mr. Harris is
prepared to tell Mr. Bonk to go along with it
if it’s reasonable.
Mr. Harris doesn’t feel the negotiation needs to be done tonight.
Bruce Mayotte, Madley’s Lane:
The noise is one thing, but he’s not home often so he is really
complaining about the noise. His
concern is about running a business.He keeps hearing that Mr. Bonk stores his stuff there, but as far as
he is concerned, so does a
taxicab company, so does a wrecker company.Yes, a lot of people in the township run businesses, but most are on
bigger parcels,
not on a cul-de-sac or subdivision.
Paul Damon, Jewell: He doesn’t believe how many acres you’re on for a
business. Mr. Damon said he
doesn’t pay taxes for the
township to go out and take pictures of
someone’s pole barn. Mr.
Damon wanted to know who took the pictures.
Mr. Hanvey stated
that in order to document an allegation, taking
pictures is the normal procedure.
Were they home when you were taking pictures?
You went in their barn.
Ms. McNamara said those were not true allegations.
She stated she did not enter his barn.
Mr. Hanvey asked Mr. Bonk’s attorney
whether taking pictures in an
attempt to verify allegations would be unusual.
Mr. Harris said not all, but you ask the permission of the
homeowner.
Mr. Harris said the problem is that personal property is now on
display for anyone filing a Freedom of Information Act
request.
Mr. Bonk said the township took his safety away.
Bob Bloomquist, Foxfire Drive:
There are a lot of big pole barns in the area.
The wording is extremely ambiguous.
Mr. Bonk’s property
is on the corner of Dutcher Road and he’s not
traveling on Madley’s Lane. There’s
no clearly defined list. It’s
also in Mr. Bonk’s best
interest not to make noise.
Carla Bonk, Madley’s Lane:
Mrs. Bonk said she can’t hear noise from inside the house, and
she’s the nearest one to the pole barn.
The few times she has heard him, she’s asked him to keep quiet.
She moved to this location to live in a calm, country setting, and to
not
be an inconvenience to anyone. All
they have had in the six months they’ve lived there is a hassle.
She wants this done at the end of this
night. She doesn’t want to hear any more about it.
Nancy Manson, W. Coon Lake Road:
She believes this whole thing is nonsense.
There are many other people in the township living
the same way as
the Bonks. There’s an aggressive complainer or two here and if this
man is within the ordinance and if he had proper
permits to put up his barn,
if his driveway is in compliance, this township needs to tell the
complainers that they’re done. It’s
a shame
that Mr. Bonk has to hire an attorney over something like this.
His costs should be paid.
Cory Vann, Carter Court:
How many other people drive commercial vehicles on Madley’s Lane?
Has the township checked that out?
Mr. Hanvey said for today’s session, Mr. Bonk is the only one
we’re talking about. Mr.
Vann says that he’s being singled out.Mr. Hanvey
said the issue is that he’s had complaints filed against
him.
Linda Manson-Dempsey, W. Coon Lake Road:
Ms. Manson-Dempsey asked Mr. Hanvey if traditionally the township
could go on
property and take photographs?
Mr. Hanvey asked the township attorney to respond.
Mr. Kehoe said it depends on the circumstances.
There is some language in the zoning ordinance that empowers the
zoning administrator to enter on to property for purposes of
investigating
an alleged violation. If the
property owner were to tell the zoning administrator they were not allowed
on the property, it would
his advice that the zoning administrator should
leave the premises. If the
zoning administrator entered the property with the only purpose
being to
check on the status of an investigation or complaint, he doesn’t believe
there’s necessarily anything wrong with that.
Ms. Manson-Dempsey asked whether you go in and automatically take
pictures. She runs a small
business in this township for which
she has a special use permit, yet the
township’s zoning consultant “just told me I better keep my shades
closed or he’ll be taking pictures
of the interior of my building.”
Tom Klebba, Triangle Lake Road:
Mr. Klebba stated, “I was sitting behind Ms. Manson-Dempsey and
tried to ignore her comments
the whole meeting.
She kept turning around and saying “you’re in trouble for this,
you’re in trouble for this.” Finally, I said if I drive up your
driveway and I’m taking
pictures of your day care facility and I get a picture of the interior,
there’s nothing wrong with that. I
told her to
pull her shades if she doesn’t want us to ever get that in a
picture.“
Lynn Cude, Carter Court:
It’s quite obvious that Chris and Carla have not violated anything
brought up tonight, and for the past six
months of their lives, they have
paid the consequences because of the complainer.
There needs to be a consequence for the complainer.
Mr. Hanvey said if you look at the
last paragraph in the home occupation ordinance, it talks about
“industrial in nature.” The
township has
been confronted by residents who are mad about neighbors who
have forklifts. If you look at
the phrase “industrial in nature”, that’s a
hard phrase to ignore.
Is a street sweeper industrial?
If not, what is it?
Mr. Harris said he didn’t say it
wasn’t an industrial piece of
equipment, he said they didn’t have a home
occupation. Of course it’s an
industrial piece of equipment…they’re storing it in a garage.
Mr. Harris read the last line of the ordinance:
“there shall be no equipment or machinery used in connection with a
home occupation
which is industrial in nature.”
It doesn’t say no industrial equipment can be stored on your site.
Dennis and Sallie Jaworski, Cedar Lake Road
Dan Lowe volunteered to go out with the laser and
check to see if this solution will work.
Tom Klebba, Triangle Lake Road:
Mr. Klebba lives on a lakefront lot similar to the Hodges.
He stated that if someone were to bring
in fill to build on the lot
next to him, he would have a similar situation, and that diverting the flow
of water is what is illegal in this case.
(
end of Call to the Public)
Dan Lowe motioned to table this case for 30 days
until Mr. Jaworski has had an opportunity to make the necessary corrections.
Sue Lingle seconded. Motion
carried 4-0.
APPROVAL OF
MINUTES
Board of Trustees, October 10, 2002: Sue Lingle
indicated a change on page 4, right after Call to Public, it should say
“loud car noise”
instead of “load
car noise.” Sue Lingle
motioned to approve the minutes as amended.
Myrna Schlittler seconded. Motion
carried 4-0.
Special Board
Meeting, October 29, 2002: Myrna Schlittler motioned to approve the minutes as
presented. Sue Lingle seconded.
Motion carried 4-0.
Ways &
Means, November 12, 2002:
Sue Lingle motioned to approve the minutes as presented.
Dan Lowe seconded.
Motion carried 4-0.
OLD BUSINESS
None.
NEW BUSINESS
DPW Bills
Myrna Schlittler motioned to approve payment of DPW bills
totaling $4226.90. Sue Lingle
seconded. Roll call vote:
Dan Lowe,
Sue Lingle, Bob Hanvey, Myrna Schlittler—all yes.
Motion carried 4-0.
Musson Resignation
Mr. Hanvey stated that the township had received word that
Mr. Musson is not feeling well and cannot continue as a trustee.
After consideration and soul-searching, Mr. Hanvey recommends the
township accept the resignation. Myrna
Schlittler motioned to
accept the resignation of Charles Musson, trustee,
effective November 14, 2002. Sue
Lingle seconded. Motion
carried 4-0.
Mr. Hanvey also suggested the township send a
thank-you letter to Mr. Musson for his years of service.
Mr. Hanvey stated that Mr. Musson recommended Dave Hamann as
his replacement on the Board. Mr.
Hamann was present and said
he would be willing to accept. Sue Lingle
motioned to appoint Dave Hamann as a Board of Trustees member, effective
November 15, 2002.
Myrna
Schlittler seconded. Motion
carried 4-0.
Fleis & Vandenbrink Proposal
A proposal for a phase 1 environmental analysis for the
proposed Marion Township Park was presented from Fleis & Vandenbrink
for
$2000. Myrna Schlittler
motioned to accept the proposal from Fleis & Vandenbrink. Sue Lingle seconded. Roll
call vote:
Dan Lowe, Sue
Lingle, Bob Hanvey, Myrna Schlittler—all yes.
Motion carried 4-0.
DPW Report
Provided in packet.
Planning Commission Report
None.
Parks & Recreation Report
Sue Lingle summarized the Parks & Recreation report.
Two meetings were held this week, one was a steering committee
meeting.
Focus will be on
medium-size community parks, as most subdivisions have small parks.
Parks & Recreation is seeking support for
Senate Bill #1404 which
allows boundaries of both school and government.
It appears the budget may be short, and employees are
attempting to
come up with new ways to raise funds. Howell
Parks & Recreation is 50 years old this year.
An open house will be held
on December 11.
They will also have a float in the Fantasy of Lights parade and they
are seeking volunteers. The
interim director,
Dan Hutchinson, seems to be doing a very good job.
Zoning Administrator Report
Provided in packets.
ZBA Report
The Zoning Board of Appeals had two cases, Kay Miller and
Lance Pettis.
FOR THE GOOD OF THE TOWNSHIP
Mr. Lowe said he was impressed with the way Mr. Hanvey
handled the crowd at tonight’s meeting.
Mr. Hanvey said that Ms. Lingle noticed a DNR property in
Section 36. It’s a small
parcel that’s part of Brighton State Recreation Area.
There doesn’t appear to be anyway to get to this property.
CALL TO PUBLIC
Barney Cole, Francis Road, asked for clarification on the
hazardous waste environmental study. Mr.
Hanvey explained the same company
was doing an analysis at D-19 and Francis
Road. Mr. Cole mentioned the
blacktop on D-19 is sinking already.
Deborah Wiedman-Clawson asked if the township would be
advertising for another Planning Commission member. Mr. Hanvey said that
hasn’t been decided yet.
TREASURER’S REPORT
Ms. Lingle presented two reports, the regular treasurer’s
report showing where the accounts stand as of October 31, and the investment
report showing where the investment’s stand as of October 31.
$181,843.41 was paid out of the general fund this past month, which
includes $20,000 for the building fund investment, $25,000 for the Parks and
Recreation capital fund, and $100,000 in the general fund
investments.
Myrna Schlittler motioned to approve the Treasurer’s Report as
presented. Dan Lowe seconded. Motion
carried 4-0.
ADJOURNMENT
Myrna Schlittler motioned to adjourn the meeting
at 10:15 p.m. Sue Lingle seconded. Motion carried 4-0.
|
