Category: America/Michigan 250

Introduction:

Links to the video recording and the council packet are at the bottom of this post. Please note any errors or omissions in the comments. Anything noted in brackets was inserted by Clarkston Sunshine.

Agenda Item #1, Call to Order (video time mark 0:00:00):

Sue Wylie said OK, it’s 7:00. I’m calling the meeting to order.

Agenda Item #2, Pledge of Allegiance (video time mark 0:00:06):

Wylie said if everybody would please rise, we will say the Pledge of Allegiance.

(Pledge said.)

Wylie said thank you.

Agenda Item #3, Roll Call (video time mark 0:00:30):

Wylie said next is roll call.

(To Angela Guillen, clerk), Wylie said would you take the roll call, please?

Sue Wylie, Laura Rodgers, Al Avery, Gary Casey, Amanda Forte, Erica Jones, and Ted Quisenberry were present.

Wylie said great, everybody’s here. Thank you.

Agenda Item #4, Approval of Agenda – Motion (video time mark 0:00:46):

Wylie said and Item #4 is approval of the agenda. I need a motion from a council member to approve the agenda.

Motion by Rodgers; second Quisenberry.

Wylie said any discussion from council members?

No comments.

Wylie said from the public?

No comments.

The motion to approve the agenda passed by unanimous voice vote.

Wylie said the agenda is approved.

Agenda Item #5, Public Comments (video time mark 0:01:11):

[Though public comments can sometimes irritate the city council, there is value to both the council and the public in hearing them. While they can’t eliminate public comments entirely without violating the Open Meetings Act, your city council has occasionally decided not to acknowledge public comments during a city council meeting unless the person submitting the comments also appears at the meeting (in-person or electronically) to personally read them. In the past, members of the public have been cut off for exceeding the city council’s arbitrary three-minute time limit (it’s arbitrary because no time limits are required by the Open Meetings Act).

If your public comments were submitted to the council but not read, or if you tried to make public comments but your comments were cut short, please email them to clarkstonsunshine@gmail.com and I will include them in my informal meeting summaries either under public comments or under the specific agenda item that you want to speak to.]

Wylie said Item #5 is public comments.

(Wylie read the rules for public comments.)

Wylie said would anybody like to make a public comment?

Wylie recognized Patrick Paterczak for a comment.

Paterczak said should I step up there? Or just where I’m at? Wylie said why not just stand up and come up, that would be helpful.

Paterczak said so, hi, my name’s Patrick Paterczak. I’ve been in the village for about six months now. Wylie said OK. (Paterczak provided his address, described his home, and provided the name of the previous owner.) Anyways, just recently, so I spent my entire career in automotive safety. And one of the things that has become apparent to me is the amount of speeding on Holcomb. It is unbelievable. And I don’t, I’ve never seen a cop or an Oakland County Sheriff even stage or even pull over somebody for speeding. And I’m telling you, I’ve got history, 30 years of history of watching vehicles at 50 miles an hour hit a wall. So, I know how fast cars are going. These cars are exceeding that. It’s double the speed limit. That temporary stop sign, or it was, I was led to believe when I bought the house that that stop sign in Washington and Holcomb was temporary. It is not. It was a real estate agent who told me that, but that was my lack of due diligence, not hers. It’s turned into a starting game. I’ve seen cars where they’ll be side by side in the middle of the night, 2:00 a.m., drag racing. And there’s really nothing I see being done. It’s just progressively getting worse. And now you’ve got these kids on these e-bikes. Somebody’s going to get hurt. I hope not. But that’s the writing on the wall. There’s just nothing I see trending in the direction that people are slowing down.

Paterczak said and just the other day, I was driving through Oxford, and there’s a little ice cream thing by a cemetery. And they stage cops out there all the time. And those people go 25 miles an hour religiously. So, I don’t know what can be done. And I was walking around down by the beach and stuff, and there’s that really steep incline where people come off. And in thinking about what’s on, like, I-75 when it veers off to US-23, how they have stuff in the road that even says US-23 this way, 75 this way, something as mundane as that can actually be put in as a potential deterrent. The speed limit signs are actually put up behind trees. You can’t even see the speed limit signs. So, it’s just something that I wanted to voice a concern about because it’s not trending in the right direction. I don’t see anything progressively being done to curb it. And I just, in my mind, it’s something to me that’s extremely unnerving. And it’s just I don’t think it’s right. And it’s a village, and it’s supposed to be quaint and quiet and just, you know, kind of a smaller community feel and it’s turning into, like, a starting gate. And to me, this is just trending in the wrong direction. So I just wanted to say my piece. Wylie said thank you.

Jones said I would like to just add on to that. This has been brought up before, the speeding, because not only is it an issue on Holcomb, it’s an issue on Main Street as well. They use Clarkson Road, that stoplight there, they use that as a starting gate as well. And we brought it up. It was mentioned during the, when we were having traffic issues. And, you know, this, I think, is where the frustration of our contract with the Oakland County Sheriff kind of comes into play in that they’re understaffed. And we aren’t even guaranteed a patrol officer per our contract. And so, I mean, we’ve even asked in one meeting if they could just park an empty car somewhere, you know, because even those deter, just like, like, if you’re understaffed, park an empty car. So, these are all things that we’ve asked. And I agree with you because it’s, like you said, it’s more frequent. They’re getting louder. And, like, you can tell when they’re speeding because you can hear the sounds of the engine. So, I just, I mean, it’s a matter of getting someone from the Sheriff’s office to come out and, you know, actually be out here and respond to it.

Avery said and I will say, I live on South Holcomb. And so does Quisenberry. I think the stop signs actually slowed people down a little bit. I don’t love the traffic backup. But it, trust me, I mean, you just moved in. The stop signs were already there when you moved in. But before there was a stop sign for north and southbound Holcomb, they traveled faster. Paterczak said is that by feel? You feel that they’re doing? Or was there actually data achieved before, like a traffic study done? Avery said we did have a traffic study done a few years back that surprisingly said that there weren’t that many high-speed, if Jonathan [Smith, city manager] remembers. There weren’t that many high-speed speeders. It was consistently above the speed limit. But it wasn’t like there were people racing 50 plus when they were taking these studies, which kind of surprised me. Because, like you, you know, when people come up around Deer Lake and they come up that hill, they feel like they’re in a car commercial. And they just kind of hit the gas. And they just go, you know, 35, 40, and they roll up to that stop sign. And I don’t know that, I mean, we don’t have our own police officer. We’re at the mercy of the county sheriff. Would I love to have an officer patrolling the streets and slowing people down?

Paterczak said what Jones just said was actually quite smart, actually. Somebody stages a car there. Because they do it at the schools. And now that the schools are out and a lot more kids are going to be running around, why would that be an issue if a request was even made at that point? Avery said they just didn’t seem very keen on the idea when we brought it up in the past, for whatever reason. I’m not sure where they would park one. I guess they’d put one along the side of the street. Someone parked it along the side of the road. Might work. I don’t know.

Smith said I think they just, as a policy, they don’t leave their vehicles out in vicinities. But, you know, we can ask them again. Quisenberry said I think they do. That’s quite common to have a car parked just on the side of the road as a deterrent. Jones said because the state, the weigh station on 75 is always never, like that’s always an empty car.

(To Smith), Rodgers said we do have somebody assigned to come to these meetings, right? Avery said we used to. Rodgers said do we need to, like, invite them so that they come? Smith said I have invited them. I know he says his schedule is such that he’s pretty busy. But I can ask him again to attend. Rodgers said even just once a month. Because we’ve heard this before.

Paterczak said is data given to you guys on a monthly basis regarding what, how many tickets and things like that are given? Rodgers said yes. Quisenberry said and it’s disappointing. Paterczak said are you tracking that as a trend, or is it just stagnant, or how does that go? Quisenberry said well, there were two tickets issued in the village or in the city in May. Wylie said two? Quisenberry said two. Casey said that’s it? Quisenberry said yes. An unidentified woman (Lisa Paterczak?) said they can make a fortune. Avery said yeah. Quisenberry said two tickets and one accident report, that’s it. I live just down from you, and I agree with you, especially at night. 10:00, 11:00 at night, that’s when they’re really going past you. Avery said yeah, revving up their motors. It’s insane. But I’m an old guy.

Forte said did you ever call the cops, and, like, do they say anything? Paterczak said no, I just wasn’t aware. I’m so new to this, and it’s new to the village. I just want to understand the process, because I know that there were, you know, I coach of football here, and there is, I believe, a lieutenant, Jeff Buchmann, and he’s a football coach, too. But I want to take that to the side first with you to see if there’s something already in the works, because I don’t want to beat him down on this if I don’t have to, but I have no problem contacting him directly.

Jones said what we have, what we have gotten in the past when we’ve brought up our concerns about the traffic issues as well as, like, speeding specifically is they’ve put up the signs that tell you what your speed is, so that, and they use that as their tracker. But, yeah, no, we’ve, I know I have made requests for them to do something just to deter traffic and the speeding.

Wylie said well, what we’ve done also in the past is paid to have an extra patrol car sit someplace to, like, in a problem area. Avery said right, and we do have your speed signs on Holcomb, specifically because we were having a problem with the speed on Holcomb. Those signs have been up ten years now, probably, maybe ten years.

Paterczak said well, those are merely suggestions, right? (Unintelligible crosstalk between council members.) Surrey Lane there, which is that little cross section, when they’re hitting full speed, I’m sure they would be able to. Avery said no, that would be helpful, for sure. Jones said that’s why, yeah, just an empty car would be awesome.

Forte said well, how would you have an extra patrol car? Wylie said we’d have to talk to them. Forte said yeah. Wylie said and we could put it on the agenda and try to do that. Forte said like, how much, how many tickets would we have to issue to, like, make that back? Smith said they don’t base it on number of tickets, they just base it on hourly wage. Forte said OK. Smith said so, they’ll write tickets as they see it, but it’s all based on just hourly wage. But we can get the latest quote. The thing is, it’s usually overtime, because they don’t have extra reserve officers, so it’s usually based on overtime pay. So, it’s kind of pricey. Jones said and we shouldn’t have to pay for something that we’re already paying them. Like, we shouldn’t have to pay them extra money just to guarantee them to do the job that they’re originally contracted for. I mean, that’s kind of, especially given that we are (unintelligible). Avery said and I’m not sure the sheriffs think of themselves as ticket writers. I mean, you drive through the township, I’m not seeing a lot of people pulled over in the township either. No. So, it’s not something I think is a priority for them. Paterczak said they speed because they can. Avery said yeah. Paterczak said essentially (unintelligible) Oxford. Avery said but they have local police there. Paterczak said sure. Avery said that’s the difference. Paterczak said to my point, though, is that they can’t. Here they can’t because they know that there’s no extension. Avery said I hear you. Paterczak said and two tickets a month, that pretty much proves that, because you can write that in ten minutes. Avery said absolutely.

Forte said with those speed signs, is there, like, a log of that data or no? Smith said the signs do keep track of the speed, and there, yes, you can download that with a bluetooth device. Forte said could we, like, look at that at the next meeting and see the numbers? Smith said I can try. It’s a little involved, but I can try to have that for the next meeting. Wylie said if not, maybe sometime later in July. Forte said yeah, totally.

Wylie said any other public comments?

Cara Catallo said to piggyback on this topic. Wylie said if you don’t mind standing up, please. Catallo said I just wondered if the finance committee ever followed through with looking at if we had, if we negotiated with the county ourselves, if it would be more cost effective, but also if we would be able to have greater control, because now it seems like we’re at the mercy of the township, which clearly doesn’t really care for us all that much. That’s my only – Wylie said I don’t know that we’re at the mercy of the township. I believe the Sheriff’s Department operates independently. I mean, we pay, correct me if I’m wrong, we pay through the township, but as far as our policing, that’s – (interrupting Wylie), Jones said it just comes through the Independence substation. Wylie said through the Independence substation.

Catallo said well, just for the background of why I said that is that when we were having all the issues of people cutting through on the streets, I had heard that one of their attorneys stated that they’d make sure that the weight trucks, for instance, would ticket it once they got out of the city so that we didn’t get anything, and that’s what made me think that that could be the case. Wylie said you heard an attorney say that? Catallo said an attorney had made that comment, I think, when they were looking at this position. Wylie said I’m sorry, attorney made the comment? Catallo said yeah, I was told, I wasn’t at the meeting, but I was told that that was the case, so I can’t verify it, but it just seems like that relationship we’ve had recently with the township worth looking into. Because I agree with Jones, if we’re paying for it, it seems like we should get something. Wylie said OK. I know Smith has it. I don’t think you want to talk about it right now, but you’ve asked the undersheriff to look into it? I assume you haven’t heard anything back. Smith said no, I haven’t.

Wylie said anybody else have public comments?

No comments.

Wylie said thank you.

Agenda Item #6 – FYI: (video time mark 0:14:19):

Item 6a – Celebrating Clarkston Receiving the Governor’s Award (video time mark 0:14:22)

• • Flyer, Celebrating Receiving the Governor’s Award (page 3/73 of the council packet)

Wylie said Item #6[a] on the agenda, FYI, celebrating Clarkston receiving the Governor’s Award. This is in the packet. Clarkston is receiving the Governor’s Award for Historic Preservation for the Clarkston Historic District Resurvey Project. It is June 26th at 4 p.m. at the community meeting room at the library. And I think it’s Friday.

Item 6b – Zoning Board of Appeals Public Hearing on June 23^rd (video time mark 0:14:46)

• • Public Hearing Notice (page 4/73 of the council packet)

Wylie said Item #6b, Zoning Board of Appeals public hearing.

(Wylie read the notice.)

Wylie said and 6 – yes sir.

Wylie recognized Quisenberry for a comment.

Quisenberry said regarding point two, I just want to understand what it is they’re looking to do. They want to get a variance to drop the 25-foot requirement to 20 feet? And that would be set back from the road? So, they want to be able to build a house 5 feet closer to the road than they can right now? Casey said I think they’re talking about the side setbacks. Smith said side setbacks. Avery said that’s that narrow empty lot. Casey said that’s that narrow empty lot. That’s been for sale forever. Avery said and I don’t think they can go back very far to the pond, so they have to move it. If they’re going to build something, they’re going to have to build it up closer, which I think leads to the problem.

Item 6c – 2026 Concerts in the Park Schedule (video time mark 0:16:40)

• • Flyer, Concerts in the Park Schedule (page 5/73 of the council packet)

Wylie said and Item #6c is the 2026 Concerts in the Park schedule, Friday, June 19; Friday, June 26; Friday, July 10; and Friday, July 17, are the scheduled ‘26 annual Concerts in the Park and hosted by the Clarkston Area Chamber of Commerce. And those are all starting at 6:00 p.m. for the local talent and 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. for the headliner.

Wylie said anybody have anything else for FYI?

Rodgers said no, so I don’t know if it goes here or not, but since Catallo is here, I was wondering if we could ask once a month if you could give us an update on what’s going on with Clarkston Main Street. Main Street Clarkston, I always get that mixed up, I’m sorry. Main Street Clarkston. I just think that maybe we can help. We might be leaving some money on the table, and maybe if you can bring to us what is in the works, that we can help you kind of move it along and take advantage of some of the things that we talked about a couple years ago that could come to fruition. So, it would be great if we could put you on the agenda, if possible, once a month and just hear, like, what’s going on. Catallo said that would be great.

Wylie said thank you.

Agenda Item #7 – City Manager’s Report (video time mark 0:18:01):

• • 06-08-2026 City Manager Report (page 6/73 of the council packet)

Wylie said Item #7 is City Manager’s Report. (To Smith), Wylie said did you have anything to enhance or talk about?

Smith said no, I don’t think so. I guess I did want to emphasize, though, the tree planting works that you mentioned earlier was a huge project. So, I think going forward, now this was unusual because there were so many street trees, not just trees in the park or something like that, a lot simpler. So, the streets require traffic control. That’s the challenge. It’s a flag man kind of thing where one way is limited. So that was the challenge, managing the streets. Because they said that right as soon as they got here, we didn’t, we weren’t paid for traffic control. So, you’re doing it right. So, I said, well, okay, I guess I am. So that was the challenge there. But we got all 16 trees planted, so that’s exciting. I think we still have one or two that we need to address, but we’ll talk about that later.

Forte said yeah, I just wanted to say that Guillen and Smith were out there all day. It was super hot, and the trees look fabulous, and we’ve gotten so much rain. So, it couldn’t have been a better time to plant them, like just luck-wise. So, I just want to thank you both for making that happen. I know it was a huge headache, but it looks phenomenal. Obviously, you guys will be able to look back and be like, we made that happen. For the rest of those trees’ lives, you know what I mean? Smith said yeah, I hope they survive. In this heat, we’ll have to keep them all the time. Forte said yeah. So, thank you both.

(To Smith), Wylie said I had a question on Mill Pond public hearing. Is there a time or location for this rescheduled Mill Pond hearing? Smith said it’s been set for July 22nd, but no time has been given just yet, so this – Wylie said the location? Smith said it will be at the 1200 building on Telegraph. Avery said that’s the courthouse. Wylie said oh, OK. Avery said it’s usually 8:30, 9:00 is motion call. Smith said right. Yeah, probably will be first thing in the morning.

Smith said so, this is not to establish assessments. It’s just to establish the boundary for a future assessment. And it will also establish the legal lake level, which our understanding is the spillway, as you know it today, it goes over to Parke Lake. That cement cap will be the legal lake level is my understanding going forward. So those are the two things that this hearing was scheduled to go through, and it was at the last minute, very last minute. Several of us were down in the courthouse when we learned that it was canceled, but it’s been rescheduled for July 22nd. Wylie said OK.

Wylie said anybody else have questions or comments?

(To Smith), Rodgers said I’m just wondering, I know I spoke to you last time about the legality of the light post advertisements for businesses. We got a letter from one of our residents questioning the legality of that, and you were going to check with Gerry [Fisher, city attorney] to see what his feelings were? Smith said I did talk with Fisher today. Yes, I gave him that a week or two ago. Well, right after our last council, so two weeks ago. He has investigated that. In his opinion, it is legal for the city to use these for local business advertisements, but he’s still researching it further just to make sure that he’s dotted all the i’s and crossed the t’s. And then he will write a letter of opinion, and it will be made available to the council.

Wylie recognized Forte for a comment.

Forte said have we heard anything back from the township after we sent our last correspondence to them? Smith said that was another topic I talked with Fisher about. No. No feedback of any kind, um, so – Forte said they never responded? Smith said no. No, so it’s kind of no news is good news. So, we’re not seeking any other questions or issues. We’re just waiting to hear from them if they want to push this forward. There will be nothing yet. Forte said thank you.

[Clarkston Sunshine note: This is apparently with regard to secret discussions with the township, something the city wants to keep from the taxpayers by limiting discussion to closed meetings. The city doesn’t want us to know what is going on with the township’s claims that it can terminate all its contracts with the city and also bill the city for thousands of dollars of past sewer maintenance. This will apparently be resolved in secret, with the cost passed on to the taxpayers without public discussion of alternatives.]

Wylie said OK, thanks for following up on those.

Item #8, Oakland County Sheriff’s Department. I’m sorry, did anybody else have anything else on the city manager’s report?

Guillen said I just want to ask Jonathan a quick question. Did you want to mention the grates on those trees? Smith said the grates? So, this was a question that came up during the tree planting. We have these heavy steel grates on Main Street. Unfortunately, when they were installed, they did not install a ledge around the outside on which the grates to sit at and always stay flush with the concrete. They did not do that. They just basically sit on the dirt that’s in the planter. So over time, they’ve shifted high, shifted low. Either way, it’s a trip hazard. It has been mentioned many times of the risk of this being a trip hazard. The tree planting crew definitely expressed some issues with lifting these heavy steel grates out of the holes. In the end, we were able to just kind of hinge them back both ways, plant the tree and then hinge them back in. But they asked a good question. Let me expand on it. They further said, we cannot stake the trees. So, none of the trees on Main Street are staked, which in a heavy windstorm, they’re susceptible to being pushed over because they have not been, their roots have not gone out yet. So, he said, you know, in our opinion, these grates never work for municipal plantings. You might want to consider just doing mulch. A nicely maintained mulch would make it easier to weed. Because right now, weeds come up through the grates, and you really can’t get them out of there, the weeds. So, it’s their suggestion that the council might, and I don’t have it on the agenda tonight, but it is true, Guillen’s point, is that at some point, we need to give that some consideration. I mean, I’m sure those grates cost a lot of money. They’re heavy steel. They can be scrapped for salvage value, but they are almost a disservice to us at this point. Mulch might look better visually and just might be something we want to think about aesthetically, I should say. So just something to think about. I know the grates are historic, and the Historic District Commission might have some comments on it as well. So just something to think about.

Wylie said the grates are historic, meaning they’re – Smith said well, they were installed in 2000 when Main Street was redone, so I guess they’re not really that historic. Quisenberry said not historic. Smith said I think they’re 26 years old. Wylie said OK. Maybe somebody would argue about that.

Wylie said OK, anything else on city manager’s report?

Pardee said just a question about could we stake them if, in fact, the grates are no longer there? Smith said absolutely, absolutely. Pardee said then we could stake the trees. Smith said absolutely. Pardee said that would be a positive thing. Smith said yeah. Avery said yeah, I probably wouldn’t wait long to make that decision.

(To Smith), Wylie said OK, thank you.

Agenda Item #8 – Oakland County Sheriff’s Report for May (video time mark 0:25:44):

Wylie said Item #8 is Oakland County Sheriff’s Report for May, and we do not have Lieutenant Buchmann here, but does anybody have anything they want Smith to pass on?

Wylie recognized Quisenberry for a comment.

Quisenberry said in the budget committee, we noticed we had a line item having to do with revenue, the money that we get from the Michigan Liquor Control Commission every year, and we haven’t gotten any from it the last several years. So, we talked about how come we’re not getting that money into the city coffers as revenue, and the reason why is because we’re not doing any liquor inspections, which the state pays the municipalities for conducting liquor inspections or the law enforcement entity. By not having any, that’s why we didn’t get any revenue, and I’m wondering how come we don’t have any so that we could recover some revenue based upon the inspections that are conducted within our city. Smith said so, I’ll check on this with Lieutenant Buchmann. The question is, what I was told at one point is they did conduct sales when Rudy’s was a market and sold beer and wine and alcohol over the counter. That was certainly a point of check. I don’t know that this applies to restaurants. Quisenberry said it does. It’s a different type of license. They call a beer and wine and a beer or liquor, beer, SDM [Specially Designated Merchant], SDD [Specialty Designated Distributor], that’s what they’re called, but taverns, restaurants, whatever, they have a license as well, and an inspection can be of any place that sells the liquor. Smith said OK. I’ll check on it then. Find out why they’re not being done. Is it just a manpower issue or is there something else? Quisenberry said I don’t know, but what it’s doing is it’s impacting our revenue.

Pardee said any idea what we used to get in the past? Coté said $4,000. Pardee said $4,000.

Wylie said OK. Anybody else have questions or comments on the sheriff’s report?

Quisenberry said just once again to point out that you look at the monthly traffic citations, it’s two, and there’s been three months so far this year that it’s been two violations that we’ve had. Wylie said thank you.

Agenda Item #9 – Consent Agenda (video time mark 0:28:14):

• • 05-11-2026 Final Minutes, Regular City Council Meeting (page 7/73 of the council packet)
  • 05-26-2026 Draft Minutes, Regular City Council Meeting (page 9/73 of the council packet)
  • 06-08-2026 Treasurer’s Report (page 11/73 of the council packet)
  • 06-03-2026 Check Disbursement Report for the Period 05-01-2026 – 05-31-2026 (page 12/73 of the council packet)
  • Rosati, Schultz, Joppich & Amtsbuechler invoices, April 2026 (page 16/73 of the council packet)

Wylie said Item #9 on our agenda is the consent agenda. This includes the final minutes of the May 11th regular meeting, draft minutes of the May 26th regular meeting, and treasurer’s report from June 8th, and I need a motion and a second to accept the consent agenda as it’s presented.

Motion by Avery; second Casey.

Wylie said any discussion from council members?

No comments.

Wylie said discussion from the public?

Wylie recognized Quisenberry for a comment.

Quisenberry said just a question. Looking at the attorney reports, it appears that our attorney fees are now coming from Rosati Schultz as opposed to Mr. Fisher. Are we now pushing other legal work to other attorneys? Smith said I don’t push it either way. I just let them decide because they kind of divvy up the work. If it’s more strategic in nature, the writing of an ordinance, that would be more Fisher kind of thing. Rosati Schultz, Kristen Kolb, she does any kind of court case coverage, attending court when necessary, a little bit more specific work. Fisher is more kind of a legal strategist, if you will. But they break it up between the two of them without input on (unintelligible). They decide who should do what. They don’t double up, which is the good news. It’s either one or the other. Now, you might say, well, all I see is Rosati. I don’t see any Fisher in here. That’s because Fisher has been holding off. We didn’t have an invoice since January. Wylie said I thought we had a big bunch. Jones said we had that big one that wasn’t last month. (Unintelligible crosstalk.) Quisenberry said (unintelligible) four months back. Smith said yeah, but before that, it was months. (Coté made an unintelligible comment.) Smith  said he doesn’t bill every month.

Jones said just speaking of legal, do we have any word on if Fisher or Kolb are going to be in attendance? Because this is the third meeting in a row that we haven’t had anyone. Smith said so, and that’s a question that is often answered every week. Every time I put out the draft agenda, Fisher calls me and says, do you want me to attend? We look at the agenda jointly and make the determination, is this something that they should attend? Because they charge for attending these meetings. So, if it’s money I can save, I don’t think the meeting is going to go off on a legal tangent of some sort, then I say, well, I don’t think you need to attend this one. So that’s why I did not have Fisher or Kolb attend tonight. They’re always welcome. They’re always willing to attend. But I try to limit that for financial reasons.

Wylie said I would suggest if anybody on council feels like they need them here, give Smith a call ahead of time. When you see the agenda, say, you know what? I think there’s going to be something that I want to bring up. But I’m like you, I prefer not to have them here. Jones said yeah, no, when we were during the selection, it was, I know that was a discussion about like how often they would be because of the cost. But I was also under the impression that we would have them at least once a month. Smith said it’s not set once a month. I agree with Wylie. If there’s something on the agenda or if you want to take the discussion in a certain direction that you think would need some legal input on, by all means, I can have them attend. I just haven’t been pulling that together.

Forte said how are we doing here today on legal fees? Smith said we’re narrowly thin by the skin of our teeth, I think. Coté said we’re over budget right now. Forte said OK. And that’s just due to lawsuits? Wylie said we’ve had some closed meetings we’ve had to have. Coté said I’d be happy to discuss it. Forte said OK. Smith said it’s slightly over budget. It’s not dramatically over budget. Quisenberry said it’s in its own department. Forte said I was just curious, is that the meat and the potatoes of the billing? Wylie said no. Smith said no. I mean, the meetings are two hours long. (Unintelligible crosstalk.) Smith said I don’t know what their hourly rate is off the top of my head. It can add up.

Wylie said OK, we had a motion by Avery, a second by Casey. Any other discussion on the consent agenda?

No discussion.

Motion to accept the consent agenda passed by unanimous voice vote.

Wylie said the consent agenda is approved.

Agenda Item #10, Unfinished Business (video time mark 0:33:15):

Wylie said Item #10a is unfinished business and there’s none.

Agenda Item #11, New Business (video time mark 0:33:20):

Item #11a – Resolution: America 250 Flag Decorations (video time mark 0:33:21):

• • Resolution – U.S. Flags for Downtown Light Posts (page 19/73 of the council packet) 

• • Photograph (page 20/73 of the council packet) 

• • Freedom and Glory Quotation, page 21/73 of the council packet)

Wylie said Item #11a, Item 11A, Resolution America 250 Flag Decorations.

(Wylie read the resolution.)

Wyllie said and we have these, somebody included a rendition, maybe Smith included that, and we’ve got the three quotes. Jones said that’s not what the flag will look like, that’s yeah. Wylie said no. Jones said yeah. Because that’s not even Clarkston. Wylie said correct.

Wylie said so I need – (interrupting Wylie), Quisenberry said pay no attention to this thing? Wylie said yeah, pay no attention. I didn’t mean that you did that. Rodgers said I don’t get the bubbles. Wylie said the bubbles were on there. The bubbles were on there, that’s kind of caught my eye. Smith said yeah, this was done by the Chamber. Wylie said OK. I need somebody to make a resolution and then support or second. And it can be, well, if you want this. And I know there’s been some emails that have gone around about it.

Resolution by Avery; second Rodgers.

Wylie said so now we’re open to discussion with council first.

Wylie recognized Jones for a comment.

Jones said yeah. So, I, I totally understand, like, why we want to blow it out and make it look really awesome for America 250, and I understand, like, the idea behind it, and I really get it. And I think it would be amazing. I just think right now, with our budget concerns and what we’re doing, that third, wait, okay, sorry. The $3,300, like, I just think that that’s, it’s not prudent given our financial responsibilities that we’re looking at, especially given that if we want to keep using it, like, if we use it again, I mean, it’s going to be more time and labor down the road to have them put it back up. And so I just. I, that’s why I just, I can’t, I will vote no for this.

Wylie said I would also vote no for pretty much the same reason. I think we’re belt-tightening, and there’s so many issues with our budget, and I realize it would be wonderful to recognize our country’s 250th anniversary of its founding. I think we, I’d say this is not the year for us to do that.

Avery said I’ve got a quick question. The America 250 banners are coming anyways, right? That’s not part of this, or is it? Wylie said no, that’s what this is about. Avery said no, it’s the flags. Smith, Jones, and Rodgers said it’s the flags. Rodgers said are they coming or no? Smith said that’s unclear at this point. Avery said OK. I do feel like it’s a little bit overkill. I mean, I know the [Clarkston Area] Optimists do the, for the residents, where they can buy the flag, or rent the flag, however, there’s a donation, and they bring the flags out for the holidays, which looks cool, but it seems like a lot of flags, 38 poles.

Rodgers said that’s what I’m wondering. Is it possible to just do downtown? Avery said do downtown. Rodgers said like, how many poles are between Waldon and – Smith said 38. Rodgers said between Walden and Washington? Smith said yeah. Wylie said it’s just downtown. Smith said it is just the two downtown. It’s actually 34, but we added four for extra, so 38. But it was just the downtown light poles. Rodgers said could we do, like, every other? Smith said absolutely. I mean, I just think our, I have a differing opinion because I just think that our city has to, should, should, is obligated to do something for the 4th of July this year, and I think it’s – (interrupting Rodgers), Avery said and it’s one of those things you can pull them out every year. Rodgers said every year. It doesn’t take that much. The clamps will stay on, right? Smith said the clamps and the bracket would stay on there permanently, but – (interrupting Smith), Quisenberry said you can pull out the America 250 every year. (Unintelligible crosstalk on council.) Avery said no, no, no, it’s not the America 250. Don’t worry about that. Jones said yeah, just don’t even look at that. It’s not even – (interrupting Jones), Avery said yeah, it’s just a straight American flag, nothing – (interrupting Avery), Wylie said so it won’t have anything, it doesn’t have anything on it? Jones said no, it’s just an American flag. Wylie said I mean, I knew it would say City of Clarkston. Smith said yeah, no, it’s just an American flag.

Avery said so I feel like, you know, it’s probably worth investment. If we had a little more foresight, could we have gone to maybe the Optimists or the Rotary or someone like that, and have them sponsor it, absent the advertisement, that would have been cool, you know. But it’s a little late in the game for that.

Wylie recognized Casey for a comment. Wylie said I’m so used to people going, hey, hey, hey.

Casey said I agree with Jones. I don’t think it’s money well spent. I think it’s overkill. You know, we, this is going to seem unpatriotic, but there is just so much chest beating going on. And I just don’t think it’s a good idea, even on a light pole. And also, I just see that we’re going to purchase these things from Texas, and I’m opposed to that. (Jones covered her mouth and snickered.) Casey said so, I don’t support it. Wylie said thank you.

Wylie said anybody else have comments? We’re still sticking to council. Anybody else on council have anything they want to say?

No comments.

Wylie said anybody else in the public have a comment or question on this resolution?

Catallo said me again. Wylie said of course, we’d love to hear from you. Catallo said I know it’s bad news, but I stand up again. Wylie said no, not at all. Catallo said we’re still going through it, and I should have tried to get an update for you tonight. But we are still working on getting the smaller banners that the kids from Clarkson Schools created, and those are largely funded. And I’m having the place that’s printing them try to come up with, like, I did a design, and I’m not a designer at all. But they’re working with me to sort of see about getting what I refer to as placeholder banners. The one I sent them has sort of a flag, but then Clarkston established 1832 for when we don’t have anything up or for moments like this. So, I’m hoping that we have something that could represent the anniversary, but also if the city wants to help fund the other banners, I can keep you updated on that. By the next meeting, I should understand and know what we have because we’re under the gun right now. But it sounded like it wasn’t an unrealistic ask of the company. So I can, when I have an image, I can send it out to everybody, but I’m hoping that there will be something. And I think that it would look better to utilize the banner poles instead of adding sort of another doohickey, would you say, like a, or something attached to these poor lampposts that are just being inundated with stuff right now. Wylie said thank you.

Rodgers said so are they going to, when you say they are working on something, is it something that’s going to be, because our next meeting is the very end of June, and then it’s the 4th. So, is it something that is for like next year and years after, or is it for the 4th of July this year? Catallo said for the 4^th of July. We hope it can go up still this year. Rodgers said and then who’s paying for that? Catallo said so that one was sort of an extra one that I just asked them about to see if there’s some way we could get funding once I have an image and can sort of show people. And I don’t know, like there’s questions with the county about what little funding we have, where it’s going, because I think it’s to hire somebody to do something. But yeah, so that was like a few. If you guys want to throw away $4,000, that’s great, but I would discourage it because these are difficult times and that seems like a huge cost. What I’m talking about is more like $500. But yeah, so I can, you know, bring it up at the next meeting. I can give you an update. But I’m hoping that these placeholders, because they seem like they would be good. We have a lot of empty lampposts right now. It just seemed like something that would be good to have on hand, in addition to these other smaller ones that will say there would be a reference to America 250, but not specifically America 250. I think it’s, you know, Voices of Clarkston. But yeah, so sorry I did not think of getting an update earlier today because that would have been handy. But yeah, so in theory there will be something. I’ll know more by the next meeting because I have to. Wylie said OK, thanks.

Wylie said anybody else? Council or public?

Wylie recognized Pardee for a comment.

Pardee said we already have the bow on lampposts right now. Wylie said right. Pardee said the metal bow. Wylie said oh, that’s it? OK. Smith said it’s done by the Chamber of Commerce. Wylie said yeah, that’s not the city.

Rodgers said so just to get a feel for you guys are all, like, know to even half the number of flags. Wylie said I think with the budget concerns, I think it’s not money well spent. Jones said yeah, no, I mean, I understand that. I respect it. And I mean, like, I get it is a big deal. Like, you know, it would be awesome if you could just get in our conversation about, like, the parade and all that. But I think that our fiscal obligations outweigh the America 250 obligations.

Rodgers said I guess I’m not looking at it as America 250. I’m looking at it as respect for our country. That’s what I’m looking at it. I think our city should have had this all along. It was, like, a good segue to getting them, most little towns, do display the American flag on the 4th of July. And we do not. Wylie said the 4th of July parade? Rodgers said up and down Main Street we do by the people’s own pocketbook. But the city itself, you know, we don’t have anything for the 4th of July, I don’t think. So, I mean, it would be great if we had these (unintelligible), but we don’t really know and we still have to pay for them. It’s not like they’re coming free to us. Casey said we’re going to have the parade and people will be waving flags all over the place. Jones said but the banners are a totally separate thing. And that’s not, and again, that wouldn’t be something, that’s not, we’re not, we aren’t paying for that. Rodgers said oh, yes, we are. We’re part of it. Jones said but it’s not coming out of our budget. Rodgers said where is it coming out of? Jones said they, it’s our, the student, the student thing is, yeah. (Unintelligible crosstalk.) Jones said I can’t get that right. Yeah, theirs is already funded. Yeah, that’s, OK, yeah. So, yeah, the banners, yeah, the banners, that’s, that thing, yeah, this is the only thing that we were doing that would be something we would pay for, for 4th of July. Wylie said right.

Wylie said anything else?

No comments.

(To Guillen), Wylie said would you do a roll call, please, for the vote?

Rodgers said what are we voting for? Yes. Four flags, no. Wylie said OK, we’re voting, you guys made the resolution for, to purchase these. And so, if you say yes, you want to purchase them, and that’s $3,297.22. If you say no, you do not choose to purchase. Thanks for the clarification.

Avery said well, could I amend the resolution to go with half the flags? So maybe 19 is kind of an odd number, but 20 flags, I guess. Quisenberry said and that would be $2,000. Avery said roughly. Wylie said you can do that. Avery said it’s a compromise. Wylie said as long as you have, you’ve got to get Rodgers to go along with you on that. Avery said OK, I’ll make that. Wylie said so, you’re going to amend it? Avery said 20 flags. Wylie said 20 flags. Let me check. So now it reads, now therefore be it resolved that the City of the Village of Clarkston hereby authorizes the City Manager to purchase and install 20 U.S. flags for the low-cost supplier, assuming they’re still the low-cost supplier, for the smaller number of flags for I don’t even think – Smith said they will be the same. So, it would be about $1,600, $1,700. Wylie said let’s say $1,700 to be safe. Paid from the City’s fund balance. (To Avery), Wylie said do you agree to that? Avery said yes, that would be my amendment.

Wylie said OK, so now we have that resolution. (To Guillen), Wylie said can you get it? You got it? OK, we’ll do a roll call.

Quisenberry, Rodgers, and Avery voted yes.

Jones, Wylie, Casey, and Forte voted no.

Wylie said so, we’ve got 1, 2, 3. Okay, the resolution is defeated.

Item #11b – Resolution: Paid Parking Hours of Operation (video time mark 0:47:25):

• • Resolution – Paid Parking Hours of Operation (page 24/73 of the council packet)

Wylie said Item #11b, Resolution, Paid Parking Hours of Operation. This is the resolution. Oh, I went to the wrong page. Let me see if I’ve got it. Probably right here. There it is.

(Wylie read the resolution.)

Wylie said and since we do have – I do prefer to have a discussion before we do the resolution, since this is kind of an open-ended resolution. So, if anybody would, on council first, would like to start this discussion on hours.

Resolution by Avery; second Forte.

Wylie said I’m sorry, what were your hours? No, no, no, just the resolution itself. Somebody has to resolve so that we can open up discussion. I don’t think we did that, did we? Wylie said well, no, but we don’t have any hours. Avery said well, I understand. Wylie said so, that’s what I’m saying. Avery said right. Forte said what’s proposed? (To Avery). Wylie said so, you’re going 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.? Avery said no. Well, no. Wylie said you can’t make a resolution if there’s no – you’re not resolving. Avery said if we don’t fill in the blanks, I get you. Wylie said that’s what I’m saying. Let’s have a discussion and then to fill in the blanks.

Avery said I guess my first question is how are we going to enforce it? So, we have the increased hours and we’ve had Mike doing, covering the nights. We don’t have someone to cover the days, so it’s an honor system, is it? Smith said well, we would have to – in theory, we would hire a second parking attendant to cover days and nights. It would offset it. So, it would be some additional cost as a result of hiring a second officer. Avery said so, I guess the question, will it pay for itself? We don’t know that. It’s kind of a guess based upon what you see going on in the parking lots. During the day, I can tell you the Main Street lot doesn’t seem to be all that full typically. Smith said yeah, and that’s why that comment about historically parking usage has not been proportionate throughout the day. So, you can’t say we’re making $80,000 a year today, and if we double the amount of hours or quadruple the number of hours, whatever it is, it’s going to be a proportionate increase in revenue. We can’t say that because clearly there is a heavier usage in the evenings. During the day, there’s not that much usage. It’s maybe the Depot lot, and I think for that degree, the Main Street lot, are maybe 20%, 25% utilized. So, it’s, it’s hard to say exactly how much more revenue you could expect to earn.

Wylie said if we are going to extend the hours, I would suggest we do – instead of starting at 9:00 a.m., starting at noon, noon to 9:00 p.m. Rodgers said yeah, because stores don’t even open until 10:00 (unintelligible).

Jones said what about just extending hours on Saturday, seeing how that goes, what your revenue is there, and then see what extending it during the week could look like. Quisenberry said Saturday, it is extended. It’s from 11:00 to 9:00. Jones said but extend it to 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Saturday. Avery said or adding the two hours, you mean? Jones said yeah, adding two hours on Saturday and keeping it – (interrupting Jones), Quisenberry said they open at 10:00. Jones said yeah. Avery said yeah, I mean, it’s certainly an option, but I don’t know that there’s really any parking between 9:00 and 11:00 anyways.

Rodgers said how much does it cost for one of the – (interrupting Rogers), Jones said well, no, I’m saying a meter-maid person. Wylie said I’m sorry? Rodgers said how much does it cost for the meter-maid person? You know, the person that – Wylie said parking ambassador. Rodgers said parking ambassador, yes. Smith said $22 an hour is what we’re paying right now. Rodgers said so we would theoretically need 22 cars to break even every hour. Forte said but is it here every hour or how often is it here? Smith said it’s random. (Avery made an unintelligible comment.) Smith said they mix it up. So, they don’t work every hour of the day now. Or every hour that the paid parking is in effect, they don’t work every hour. Rodgers said oh, OK. Smith said it’s random by design. We don’t want anybody determining a pattern of enforcement. Rodgers said so, they don’t work a full eight hours? Smith said no.

Quisenberry said this cursory search that was conducted, and we found the median average across the metro area was 9:00 to 9:00. I’m a little surprised at that because my thought is that most of these places, we go to the south end of the county, and their hours are extended to almost midnight because that’s when the people are there. So, I guess I’m wondering how this cursory search stopped at 9:00. It doesn’t seem like that’s the average time that those that do charge stop. Smith said there is quite a bit. There were some that were 8:00 to 8:00. There were several that were 8:00 to 8:00. There was one that was till midnight. Guillen got a good cross-section of a lot of municipalities. 9:00 to 9:00, just, I put that in there as kind of an average. It’s not saying that eight of the nine communities were 9:00 to 9:00. It was just kind of an average. Jones said well, that’s actually – (interrupting Jones), Wylie said late at night, our streets are not, I don’t see cars parked late at night. Rodgers said no, but – (continuing), Wylie said even on Saturdays, Fridays and Saturdays. Jones said yeah, but, I mean, it would make sense that there are still people that are parked there like, because the restaurants are open until, what, 10:00 or 11:00? Rodgers said on Saturdays.

Forte said yeah, I would actually argue the opposite, that there are people parked pretty late. Wylie said I mean, I’m not saying there’s not people parked, but it’s fairly emptied out.

Avery said I guess if our aim is to collect more revenue, then it seems to me that we need to, maybe it’s not about expanding the hours. It’s about expanding the parking that we charge for. The whole street, Main Street, is wide open. People park there all day and night. You know, we’re looking to add without really adding that much more expense, that – (interrupting Avery and speaking over the end of his comment making it unintelligible), Jones said but we would have to – (continuing), Avery said yeah, we’d have to upgrade our system and get kiosks and all that (unintelligible). Jones said wait, it just, I mean, it would just seem like you would want to have your hours of parking tied to hours of operations and so – (interrupting Jones), Wylie said so, this resolution is on our agenda because when we increased the parking rate, that’s what a lot of people on council wanted. They said, if we’re going to do that, we need to look at our hours.

Forte said yeah, before we like increase our taxes to our residents, I’d like to find other ways that we can make money, so I think – (interrupting Forte), Wylie said of course, this money only goes towards roads, parking lots. Forte said but those are real costs. Wylie said those are what? Fote said real costs. Wylie said oh, yeah.

Quisenberry said I think Avery makes a good point. If our objective is to raise revenue, then I think we might be better served increasing the paid parking that we have as opposed to manipulating the hours of when you pay. Because we don’t know, as far as making it 9:00 to 9:00, we’re actually buying a pig in a poke. We don’t know what we’re going to be getting. Forte said yeah. But we won’t know until we do it, right? Avery said well, I mean, you can drive down the streets and walk the streets in town, and you know from 9:00 a.m. until 2-3 o’clock, it’s not a lot of parking going on in the main lots. It picks up because people come out for dinner for the restaurants. I get that. Forte said well, Saturdays, the Main Street lot is always jammed. Jones said because people are eating breakfast and brunch. Like, yeah, that’s the thing. It’s like you’ve got two South Brunch House, and then the Fed does brunch on one of those days. Quisenberry said Sunday. Rodgers said and Honcho – (interrupting Rodgers), Jones said and Honcho’s got the coffee shop. And so, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expand the hours of parking instead of making the spots on Main Street paid. Because, yes, people are going to drive around. Having the free spots on Main Street, I think, is the equivalent or the alternative to having, like, the 15- or 30-minute free parking spots, right, that you have in some of these other places. Because you’ve got someone that’s going to run into Honcho and grab a coffee or run into Two South and grab something. And it’s not gonna, they’re not gonna, like, they’re not gonna pay, wanna pay $1.50 to park. And so having like those, having those free Main Street spots, I think, would be an alternative to that. And then you expand the hours in the paid parking to, for when people are, yeah, because people are still coming in to park for later dinner reservations or drinks and things like that. And, again, on Saturdays people are coming out for breakfast and brunch and are already on the streets.

Forte said I’ll make the resolution for 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Wylie said you’re making the resolution 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.? Forte said yeah. Unless we wanna (pointing to the audience). Wylie said you can make the resolutions any way you want. Forte said yeah, just go forward with that, see if it works. And is there a second? Second Jones. Wylie said oh, OK. Jones said sorry.

Wylie said any comments, questions from the public?

Wylie recognized Erich Lines (Curt Catallo’s business partner/Honcho, Woodshop, Clarkston Union restaurants) for a comment.

Lines said so, we talked about, and you’re not doing it on this particular one, but as far as the late-night crowd, there’s not a late-night crowd at the restaurants on Friday and Saturday nights. Now, there may be some people that are there, but, I mean, at Woodshop we’re not open until 2:00 a.m. anymore. We close at noon, at midnight, I should say, because, again, the people have not been coming out at night. Doing this earlier in the day obviously hurts all of the businesses, Society, and obviously Two South Brunch House is going to be affected by this. I know that when we first talked about paid parking, that they were a big opponent to it because their whole business was parking at that lot over there. So, again, I just think this is going to hurt more of the downtown businesses than help. Wylie said thank you.

Wylie said anybody else, public or council?

No comments.

Wylie said OK. (To Guillen), Wylie said I guess we’re ready for a vote.

Forte and Jones voted yes.

Avery, Casey, Quisenberry, Rodgers, and Wylie voted no.

Wylie said and the resolution is defeated.

Casey said I just think 9:00 is too early. It’s got to be later than that. There’s nothing going on. Maybe we extend it an hour at night. Instead of 9:00, maybe we make it 10:00. Wylie said oh, doing it from 4:00 to 10:00? Do the parking from 4:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.? Is that what you’re saying? On weeknights and then 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Saturday? Casey said that seems a good compromise. Jones said but he just sat there and told us that they don’t have anyone because they closed. So, if you assume that their last ticket is coming in – Quisenberry said he said they close at midnight. Jones said at midnight, yeah. So, 10:00, then.

Wylie said the other reason why we wanted to get this on the agenda soon was Smith’s holding off on making signs until, in case we wanted to change the hours. So, do we want to change, maybe we don’t want to change the hours. Maybe we’re just going to leave it the way it is. I mean, based on this vote, it kind of looks like we may not even want to change the hours.

Quisenberry said I think our solution is to expand the paid parking. Wylie said different discussion. Jones said and that’s going to cost a bunch more upfront. Forte said yeah, that’s why I was more towards this than extending it. Quisenberry said I think that’s for sure a revenue enhancer. We can pretty much be assured that we’re going to be increasing our revenue by doing that. Jones said that’s what’s going to piss people off. Main Street paid. Avery said but that’s a topic for another day – Jones said yeah, I’m just – (continuing), Avery said let’s just figure this out today, and then we can bring it up further down the line. Forte said can we have that on the next agenda.

Jones said then why don’t we just resolve to extend the hours on Saturday, to 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Saturday? Like, death by a thousand cuts. Guillen said is that a motion? Avery said I’m just saying I don’t think it moves the needle at all, so what’s the point? Two hours of extra (unintelligible). Jones said well, we haven’t tried anything yet, so.

Forte said I just feel like we have a lot of big bills coming down the pipeline, and we’re about to increase taxes. Personally, I just thought we should try to do anything we can. Jones said yeah. Avery said I understand, but if you squeeze a little too much and then businesses start to leave town and close down, and people are like, well, I can go down the street where there’s free parking and they don’t want to come to town anymore, then we have less people coming, and then we’ve killed the goose. So how much do you want to squeeze them? That’s the question. Jones said I’m sorry, I just don’t feel like it’s squeezing when on Friday and Saturday I see Maseratis and Jags parked in front of there, in the free parking, like, if, if, if, if – Avery said you’re trying to have it both ways. Jones said no, I’m saying it’s not squeezing, it’s not squeezing. If, if we, if people are coming in and using the roads, and we need to get money for it, like, and we want to try something, let’s try extending the hours, like, because we don’t have a motion before us to extend paid parking. We talked about extending hours, and so we can right now get two more hours out of parking like on a Saturday, or we could get three more hours during the week, and that would actually be something that’s putting money in somewhere, and people are paying, and we can actually say we’re doing something about it, as opposed to let’s just try this, and even though we know we’ve got all these bills to pay, let’s just keep kicking the can down the road.

Wylie said anybody want to make a resolution on anything? (To Smith), Wylie said I guess still hold off on making the signs, because I have a feeling something’s still going to happen. If anybody wants to get, email Smith during the week, or call him before the next meeting, if you have a suggestion for a resolution to be made, or maybe just a discussion at our next meeting, we can do that.

Forte said about what? Wylie said anything to increase paid parking.

Rodgers said yeah, you know, I’m just sitting here thinking that, yeah, I think, I think I am, because I’m trying to think who would be affected by the 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Saturday, and that would be mainly the places that have brunch, and we’re talking $1.50, right? That’s what we increased it to, so we’re not talking $20 to have breakfast. You’re talking $1.50, maybe $3 if you take two hours. Who I think it would, might hurt is more, if we do anything through the week, is more of the non-restaurant businesses, because you don’t necessarily, you’re coming for a product that you’re going to, like, you’re booking your restaurant meal. You’re not, you know, stopping in to browse and maybe buy something. I don’t know, I’m just talking out loud, because I can’t seem to get my head wrapped around it tonight.

Wylie said I think all of us are struggling with that a little bit. To me, what I, what I think is, yes, the stores are going to be affected. Rodgers said but again, it’s $1.50. We’re not talking – (interrupting Rodgers), Wylie said but it’s a convenient, I mean, because a lot of times I like to go to breakfast at Two South Brunch or eat lunch, and I might think, rather than going through the hassle of paying for parking, maybe I’ll go to Sister’s Cafe where it’s free parking. (To Avery), Rodgers said that’s what you’re referring to. Wylie said that’s what we’re referring to. You’re perhaps chasing people away.

Jones said yeah. Well, then why don’t we, I’m sorry, is this something that the finance committee could actually take up and do a proper, like – Wylie said that’s a good idea. I mean, no offense to Guillen, because Guillen did this thing, but I mean, like, just going back and actually start running numbers. Like, if we did this, like, for this many hours, and it was this, like, just kind of actually pull some facts and figures based off what our parking looks like right now, what data we have, and then figuring out from there, like. Forte said or maybe three options. Jones said yeah, just having some options instead of just, like, coming up half-cocked every time and having these round-and-round discussions. Forte said because I don’t need it to be until 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.

(To Quisenberry), Wylie said are you guys willing to do that, put it in the finance committee? Jones said I mean, we’re talking about money. Wylie said no. OK. You know, we could have a parking committee who can do it. Doesn’t have to be the finance committee. (Unintelligible crosstalk between council members.) Jones said oh, my God. Wylie said we’ve had lots of parking committees. Jones said do we have a committee for committees? (Pointing to the agenda), Avery said that’s this.

Forte said should I make another option? Like, make a resolution for another parking option? Wylie said you can do anything you want. My suggestion is (unintelligible). I don’t think you’re going to get anywhere. Forte said yeah. I don’t know. Wylie said do you want to make a resolution? Well, bring it up first and then see what everybody says, and if you like, then you can make a resolution. Forte said I’m trying to think through this logically, and I’m just so tired. Jones said because we’ve still got more numbers ahead of us to do.

Wylie said would anybody like to form a parking committee to discuss the options for paid parking, whether we extend hours, whether we increase the area? Avery said why don’t we just run it through the finance committee? (To Avery), Wylie said you gave me that look like – Avery said No, I’m not going to do that. I don’t care. Wyle said OK. (To Quisenberry), Wylie said are you willing to do it? Quisenberry said yes. Wylie said OK. Thank you. I mean, you guys, Smith, you’re always a part of everything. Smith said well, we need a finance committee meeting anyway, so I want to talk about the whole – Avery said safety knowledge – Smith talking about taxes. Wylie said OK. Smith said the public safety millage that we’re talking about. We need to get that – (interrupting Smith), Wylie said so we can do that then, too. Smith said so, I’d like to, after the meeting, check with the three of you to see what your availability is for next week or the week after. Wylie said OK. All right. Sounds good.

Item #11c – Resolution: City Planner Quote Comparison & Selection (video time mark 1:08:32):

• • Resolution – City Planning Services (page 25/73 of the council packet) 

• • Bid Comparison (page 26/73 of the council packet) 

• • Carlisle/Wortman Agreement (page 27/73 of the council packet) 

• • OHM Proposal (page 32/73 of the council packet) 

• • Eric Dryer, OHM/Jonathan Smith email (page 34/73 of the council packet) 

• • Giffels Webster Proposal (page 35/73 of the council packet) 

• • Andy Aamodt, Giffels Webster/Jonathan Smith email (page 66/73 of the council packet)

Wylie said OK. Let’s move on, then, to Item #11c, Resolution City Planner Quote Comparison and Selection. And believe it or not, this is the biggest part of our packet tonight. We’ve got all these comparisons.

(Wylie read the resolution.)

Wylie said and they’re all there. And I can’t believe how much they said to us. There was a lot.

(Wylie continued to read the resolution.)

Wylie said and we will need someone to resolve and support. So once again, rather than going straight to the resolution, I’d like to open it to discussion with council members about these three. (To Smith), Wylie said or maybe, you wanted to start the discussion about what you learned about them from talking with them. Well, maybe Forte, you too, because you may have some experience with some of these companies.

Smith said I think they’re all capable of planning services. There’s no question about that. Carlisle/Wortman [CWA] is our historic partner. They’ve been good to us overall. The building department didn’t work out, but the, overall their planning services are good. Dick Carlisle is kind of moving into retirement. Ben Carlisle is picking it up, doing a fine job of the issue with Ben’s work. So, they’re a viable candidate, and they have this history of Clarkston. Now, it’s always pointed out that, like engineering, planning services, anything that we have done with Carlisle-Wortman, historically, is our property. We own it. So, if we were to change to another firm, all those pieces of property that we own would be transferred to the other company to bring them up to speed on things we’ve done in the past, so they’re not just starting out in the dark.

Smith said so, all three companies provided estimates. Clearly, Giffels Webster provided a lot more details than OHM. I’m not saying that one way or the other as far as one’s better than the other, but we did get a lot of detail from Giffels Webster. They seem to be very hungry for the work. They’ve called and followed up numerous times. Ben Carlisle has also been following up, asking what’s going on and are we moving forward. So, there are pros and cons to all three of them. I really can’t say my opinion is one better than one of the others. That’s why I left it blank here.

Wylie said and CWA, they’re still doing some planning work with the township, is that correct? Smith said some, yes. Wylie said some, OK. I did get a, today I got an email from somebody who’s had some experience with planning companies, and they seem to be recommending Giffels Webster. They said that the other, I don’t remember the name of the other company. Smith said OHM? Wylie said yes, that they were a little bit more in the civil engineering area. They said Giffels Webster also was, but at some point, they acquired a smaller planning company, a small, excellent planning company. And this person particularly highlighted Jill Bob. She’s one of the partners. And I actually texted them back and asked her a question, and during the meeting I got, in my experience, she looks at more pedestrian-friendly and innovative solutions, not a political connotation, she was described as progressive, not a political connotation at all. Probably best to interview and ask what they see happening and how that would occur with your participation. You’re looking at the master plans over perfect timing. So this person, with experience, thought that this was, they were a good choice. Forte said and who is this person? Just a resident? Wylie said resident, yeah. Just a resident. Forte said yeah, I agree with them, what they’re saying. Wylie said oh, you do? Forte said yeah. I think Giffels Webster is a great company, and their hourly rate is favorable, and they’re a large company. And I like their master planning review. You can see that in this column, master plan review, because obviously the planning commission is working on a master plan update. And to see what the master plan review cost would be is very helpful, whereas Carlisle/Wortman didn’t give us even a ballpark for that, which is fine. I get it. The hourly rate could come lower or higher. Smith said right. Forte said who knows. Smith said right.

Wylie said and I thought Giffels Webster, they wanted to have an office in Birmingham. Because first I was like, you know, Ann Arbor, Detroit, everything’s so far away. And I thought, OK, well at least they’ve got something close. I know it’s not the biggest deal, but Ben Carlisle, it seems like he’s coming in from Ann Arbor or someplace like that, I’m going to pay for him to drive.

Rodgers said I do think that there is some value to knowing the history, for sure, from the get-go. And I don’t, from what I hear, we don’t really use them a whole lot anyhow as far as planning goes. Forte said because they’re so expensive. Rodgers said well, they’re not that much more hourly than – (interrupting Rodgers), Forte said but the master plan came in at $30,000 or something like that, I can’t remember. Rodgers said as opposed to $1,500? Forte said no. Wylie said to do the whole thing. Forte said yeah, we’re doing it ourselves. Rodgers said well, we don’t know what to compare them to. I mean, that $30,000 number – (interrupting Rodgers) Forte said no, no, no, that wouldn’t be apples to apples with us, that’s not what I’m saying. Rodgers said right. So how can you say they’re way too expensive when we’re comparing these apples right now? Forte said so why I say that is because oftentimes we’re working with the highest principal level individual. So, when we’re talking or getting feedback, it’s at the highest billable rate. It could potentially not be that way at another firm because they’re bigger and they have more – (interrupting Forte), Rodgers said but it could potentially be that way anyhow. Forte said yeah. Rodgers said especially since they don’t know the history of us and they’ve got to learn all that. So, I mean, you can only, you can only compare what you have in front of you. You can’t, like, it’s not fair to say, you know, well, they’re too expensive. They’re $30,000 to do the full master plan review. We don’t have what Giffels Webster (unintelligible). Forte said no, that’s true. Rodgers said that’s kind of not fair. So, I mean, looking here, they all look pretty comparable other than Carlisle, when we’re not having a master plan review. It’s more of an hourly long thing. I don’t know how long those usually take. I just think that having some knowledge of the city, having history, having all of that already – Forte said yeah, it’s a real value. Rodgers said there’s no time necessary to get to that. Forte said for sure. Rodgers said that’s all.

Avery said I would say it may be, it’s time for maybe a fresh set of eyes – Forte said I agree – (continuing) Avery said going forward. Forte said I see both sides. I agree that it’s really important to have fresh eyes and a bigger firm would be able to give that to us. Avery said yeah. Forte said but I also agree that having someone who understands history is important. There’s no reason they can’t come up to speed. You know what I mean? Avery said yeah. I just feel like, yeah, I think Giffels Webster can get up to speed here fairly quickly. We’re not a huge town.

Quisenberry said it seems like they’ve been up to speed when you looked at – Avery said their roster – Quisenberry said their submission. One, it’s the most impressive. They have very favorable references. A lot of communities, big ones, Sterling Heights, small ones, Clawson, a lot of them, they do have the lowest bid. And I think that they would be the best one that we should go for. I’m ready to make the motion to submit to them.

Wylie said we can still have discussion. Quisenberry said OK, but we, I’ll make the motion that we accept the Giffels Webster bid, the low bid, based upon their proposal and what we think they can do for us. The only concern I have – (interrupting Quisenberry), Wylie said before you do, let’s get a, you’ve just made a resolution? And let’s get a second. Second Forte.

Forte said so, continue. Wylie said go ahead, and (to Jones), Wylie said then I got you next.

Quisenberry said the only concern I have is the second and third year. We’re going to be signing a three-year contract with them, and the second and third year is to be determined. I’d like to get that nailed down a little bit to say if you don’t know what it’s going to be, then it can be not to exceed maybe 4% of the previous year. Smith said I think there was some confusion on what I was asking for when I asked. Ben Carlisle provided a three-year forecast for apples and apples, and actually the planning commission asked for this. Let’s get three-year rates from the other two, and OHM did give me this. Giffels-Webster, the analyst that was working on this, seemed to misunderstand my question, so he did not. By the time I was putting the packet together, he did not provide that. But I can absolutely get that. Quisenberry said I think that if we’re going to sign a three-year contract, we have to know those numbers. Smith said we have to know those, yes.

Avery said so do you want to table it until next meeting, and then by that time you should have that. Wylie said I think we can. Yeah, we probably ought to. Jones said I mean, that’s a huge – Wylie said yeah. Okay, can we do a, table it and get that? Smith said yeah. Wylie said great. Rodgers said so, No? Great. So, do we have to resolve the table? Wylie said yeah, we’ve got to resolve, (to Quisenberry), Wylie said you’ve got to, I think that, I always get confused on this. (To Quisenberry), Wylie said do you want to resolve to table it? Avery said or just make a motion? Wylie said or make a motion to table, yeah. Or you don’t want to? Quisenberry said no. Wylie said you don’t want to table it? Quisenberry said no. Wylie said you don’t want to wait to hear the – Quisenberry said I do. Well, yeah, I guess I do. I’ll make the motion to table. Wylie said OK. And Forte? Forte said yeah. Wylie said OK. And I don’t think we have to vote on that, so we’re going to table it. OK. Thank you.

Item #11d – Resolution: 2026-2027 Fiscal Year Budget (video time mark 1:19:18):

• • Resolution – 2026-2027 Fiscal Year Budget (page 67/73 of the council packet) 

• • Budget Materials (page 68/73 of the council packet)

Wylie said and we have Item #11d, Resolution, 2026-2027, Fiscal Year Budget. And this will turn over to Smith and Coté.

Smith said so, I can read the resolution if you want to? Wylie said oh, yeah. Why don’t you go ahead?

Smith said OK. So, this is a resolution for the 2026-2027 Fiscal Year Budget. As you recall, last time, we reviewed the numbers in detail. I’m not going to go through all those again tonight. But in the public hearing, in our last meeting, we went through all the numbers. So tonight, we’re actually voting on the budget.

(Smith read the resolution.)

Smith said I should say growth in the taxable rate. Your assessed value can go higher.

(Smith continued to read the resolution.)

Smith said as you know, we have to stay at 16.6 or higher for the Charter.

(Smith continued to read the resolution.)

Avery said I will make that resolution. Second Quisenberry.

Wylie said so, are you going to go through any of this stuff? I know you did it last meeting. I don’t recall you doing any of this again. Smith said no. All this is really a recap of what was presented in the public hearing. So, nothing has changed. None of the numbers, believe me. Nothing has changed from the last meeting to this meeting. So, this is really just a recap of what we went through the last meeting. Wylie said OK.

Wylie said so, comments or questions from council?

Wylie recognized Jones for a comment.

Jones said OK. So, in the, in the General Appropriations Act, I don’t know how this will, like, whatever, but you’ve got the proposed budget, held meeting, meeting was held on May 26, 2025. Smith said oh, that’s typo what I missed. Jones said yeah. And then you’ve got the 2026-2026 fiscal year. Smith said I’m sorry what was that? Wylie said mine says 2026. Jones said no, section 3 under millage levy. Sorry, I’m skipping ahead. Section 3, millage levy. Smith said well, thank you. Jones said and then down to section 4. Wylie said oh, ‘26-‘26. Yeah, there. Jones said adopts the 2025-2026 fiscal year budget. Smith said thank you for all those.

Jones said and I just had a question. I may have missed this during when we went over this. So, our millage rate is reducing from 11.49 to 11.41? Smith said as required by the Headlee Act of Michigan. Jones said OK. All right. All right.

Jones said also, just one follow-up from the last meeting. I know we talked about the travel budget, and I didn’t notice any change from what was proposed last week. So did we, was there nothing that we could do with that on trimming that back any? Smith said so, you’re talking about the conferences budget? Jones said yeah. Forte said where is that? I was curious about that, too. Snith said so, there are conference budgets and several of the appropriations under the 101 fund. Under the council department, under administration, under clerk, and under treasurer. Jones said yeah, and I didn’t see any change from what was proposed last week to what we had. So, did, was there nothing that we came back with for that? Smith said no, we didn’t make any changes. Yes, the comments were noted that, that we want to minimize that, but no changes were actually made to the budget. Forte said I would prefer to, like, approve, like, conferences and stuff as a council and stuff like that, and kind of discuss more. Smith said throughout the year? Forte said yeah, throughout the year, as opposed to just having it built in and approved. As opposed to, like, cutting, like, the hours of, like, what’s her name? Coté said Evelyn [Bihl, deputy clerk/treasurer assistant/administrative assistant]. Forte said Bihl. I’d rather have Bihl work than spend money on conferences. Avery said but Bihl doesn’t want to work. That was the deal. She cut back on her own, I thought. Forte said that’s not what she told me. She said she wants to work. Smith said she wants to work 16 hours a week. Avery said and we’re cutting her back to what, 12? Smith said 12, or 10, 10 hours a week. Forte said yeah. Smith said but that’s on an annual basis. Bihl does travel, so that accounts for some of that. And if she’s not here, she’s not getting paid. She’s paid hourly. So, when she’s traveling, she’s not. So, that brings down the average from 16 to something lower. Wylie said so, it’s an average. It’s not, so when she’s here, she’s working more than 10 hours a week? Smith said no, she’s, I’d say 16 is the maximum that she works. And it goes down from there. On an average, it’s probably closer to 12 or even 10, when you account for her vacations or when she goes to Florida in the winter and that kind of thing. Quisenberry said but on the weeks where she’s not here because she’s traveling, then she makes up for those hours when she is here. So that her average does get close to 16. Smith said no, her average is, the maximum is 16, and it just goes down from there. If she’s not working, she’s not getting paid. Avery said well, what was her average last year? Do we know? Roughly? (To Coté ), Smith said do you know? Coté said I don’t have that on this sheet. I apologize. I do have that, though. Smith said it’s going to be less than 16, though? Coté said yes. Yes. Wylie said OK, so I mean, actually, that sounds fair. She’s gone for extended periods of time, and she’s, OK. I can see why the average number of hours she’s working has gone down. Smith said I talked with Bihl about it. She would prefer to stay at kind of the pattern she was, which is, like I said, 16 is the max. But on a given week, it could be zero, depending on if she’s here or not. The average is out to be somewhere between 10 and 12 hours on an annual basis. So, I’ve talked to her about it. She was not happy about it, but she understood, I believe. So, after talking to her, I didn’t feel like any other changes were needed. (To Forte), Smith said but I understand your point. I can, as a matter of business, every time we go to a conference or sign up for a conference, we can come to council first and ask for approval to go to this conference. Forte said yeah, that would be good. So, we’re just talking about, and then maybe afterwards we can kind of talk about what the lessons learned were, you know what I mean? So, we’re staying on top of things, too. Smith said I do try to bring the lessons learned – Forte said you do – (continuing), Smith said to council. Forte said you do. You do.

Wylie said any other questions, comments from council members?

No comments.

Wylie said from the public?

Wylie recognized Pardee for a comment.

Pardee said I’m unclear after the discussion between Forte and Smith. So, the administrative assistant would prefer to work more hours in the coming budget year? Smith said she prefers to stay where she currently is, which historically has been two days a week, 16 hours a week. But it averages out to less than 16 over the course of that whole year because she travels a lot. God bless her. She loves to travel, and she’s doing some of that at this point in her life. And then she goes to Florida, too, in the winter. Pardee said so, I’m looking at this chart, and it shows that the proposed coming budget year, she’ll get $2,400 less per year. The percent change is 17% minus. Am I looking at the right line? Smith said you are. Yeah. What’s your question? Pardee said well, I thought I heard you say that she would prefer to work more. Smith said work the same, not more. Same. Pardee said but this shows that she’s going to work less? Coté and Smith said yep. Pardee said and that’s because we’ve taken the action? Smith said well, taking hours, and the way I explained it to Bihl, she, good or bad, Bihl is the only part-time staff we have. I’m not trying to pick on Bihl. She’s a great employee and a valuable one to the staff. But the rest of the staff is full-time. Reducing the hours of the rest of the staff to try to reduce the payroll budget means I’d have to cut somebody from full-time to part-time. And that’s a bigger deal. Bihl, just the realities of it, we love Bihl. I’m not saying anything negative about Bihl. But she is a part-time, so she is the one person that we can cut without reducing somebody from full-time to part-time. It’s the only place we can go. We’re trying to provide a reasonable year-over-year payroll change.

Quisenberry said seems to me that there are some circles that I’m lost on. In the past, this past budget year, the line item for Bihl was based on 16 hours a week for 52 weeks. Correct? What we’re now doing now, but even last year, she was budgeted for 16 hours for 52 weeks, but there may have been four weeks or so she wasn’t there. And there’s no provision for her to make up hours from a previous week where she wasn’t here, correct? Smith said correct. Quisenberry said OK. So what we’re doing right now is we’re just actually putting, limiting her hours based upon the hours that she’s chose to limit herself the availability to do work. And that line item is now going to go down, but she’s not going to be told you can’t come in during these times that you’re not going to be here or something. You’re not going to be able to make up hours because you weren’t able to do it before. I guess I’m just trying to put this in a perspective that in the past, her practice has been to only, to not use the whole amount of money that was budgeted for her position. And now what we’re doing is we’re putting that line item on the actual amount that she was doing. Is that correct? Smith said we’re putting the line item on what we can afford to pay. And we will monitor the salaries throughout the year, and we have done this with Bihl in the past. We get to a point in the year, and we have had this difficult discussion with Bihl in the past. We have to sit down and say, I’m sorry, Bihl, we’re kind of reaching your top annual salary. So, we are going to have to limit your hours for the remaining month or two months, whatever it is, of the fiscal year. We’ve had to do that in the past, and we would do that again in the future. Quisenberry said I don’t know how that situation comes up. If there’s a steady amount, and then she’s gone for three weeks, now all of a sudden we’re ahead of the ballgame on her line item. Smith said possibly.

Wylie said I assume she’s working more than 16 hours on some weeks. Maybe when the sewer bills go out, or, ike you said, that’s the only way it works out. Quisenberry said I’m under the impression, no, she doesn’t work more than 16. Smith said no. I mean, maybe there’s a special exception on election day, election week or something that she does. Beyond that, it would be 16 hours two days a week is the maximum she’d work. Some would be less than that.

(To Smith), Rodgers said so, is this just bringing her actual hours in line with the budget from last year? Or you’re saying, no, you’re still decreasing it? Smith said it’s kind of in between. I don’t know where she is. (To Coté), Smith said I think, has she used up her budget for last year or not? Coté said yeah, she was. She’s over budget today because we ran into some snafus, if you recall, during the election at the beginning of the year. She stepped in, pinched hit, and was in the office more than we typically anticipate. But generally speaking, she’s looking at 16 hours a week times 52. It’s about 832 hours on an annual basis. Wylie said so, having this budget in place would probably put your attention on it. It’s going to enforce that, that number of hours.

Wylie recognized Jones for a comment.

Jones said yeah, I just, to something you said, you talked about cutting salaries. I just want to make clear that, from my perspective, I don’t think that salary, like I, people, the people budget is like the last thing that should be touched, right? Like I’m looking, I’m genuinely looking for where we could trim the fat. And that’s why I was looking at stuff like a travel budget or a conference or whatever. Because, you know, that’s where I see $2,400 in red. I know that’s like a conference or whatever. And not taking away from actual training that is required, that we need for our staff. But I’m just talking about like, you know, the southeast Michigan’s annual blah-dee-blah state worker thing, that sort of thing. Like, in, when we’re looking down the pipe at what kind of costs are and looking at, we cannot deny the fact that transportation costs are going to go up because gas costs are up. So, that’s why I’m saying, why can’t we look to find those places where we can trim $1,000 here, $1,500 there, $2,000 there, instead of having it come from people resources. Because that’s not, I mean, like, at the end of the day, like, you know, people got to get paid for work and existence is expensive. And, like, let’s try and be fiscally responsible in little ways here and there where we can do that without having to look at, you know, have to talk around all this math and averages.

Forte said yeah, I agree. I’d rather cut conferences than people. Coté said well, you’ll see it in my budget, my budget for conferences. Jones said yours did, yeah. Coté said $1,500 and I slashed that to $250.

Avery said right, I was going to say that, I mean, you guys don’t sit on the finance committee, but we go line item by line item. And there are line items that have been cut. It isn’t just Bihl’s work hours, that wasn’t the only thing cut this year. There was a lot of other things that were cut. Expenses have gone up, you know, the cost of the fire department, police, those kind of things go up. We’ve got to make up the difference, salaries went up 3% for everybody. So, it’s not like we didn’t, that there weren’t things cut. There were things cut as we went along here. I don’t know that the conferences are going to make or break us this year. I don’t know what, the $2,500 budgeted for the conference. Smith said I don’t – Avery said I don’t remember what the number was either. Jones said yeah, because I’m just saying that $2,500 is literally, that’s the only, again, that’s why I just, because – (interrupting Jones), Avery said I trust Smith’s judgment. If he thinks this office can run with a reduced amount of hours from Bihl, I’m perfectly fine with that.

Wylie said because they’re actually the ones who get hurt. Coté especially probably, and Coté and Guillen are the ones who get hurt with Bihl not there. Avery said absolutely. Wylie said because she does your sewer, she does a lot of work for them. So, if they could have kept her there longer, I think they would have. Jones said I know, I just – (interrupting Jones), Wylie said I mean, everybody loves Bihl. She’s just a great person, we like her. I’m sure everybody there likes, I know you guys all like her. But she does bring a lot. Coté’s sitting there nodding, saying, no, she does a lot for you. Coté said it’s not a performance issue here, guys. Jones said no, no, I know. Wylie said so, if they could keep her there longer – (interrupting Wylie), Jones said no, I know it’s not a performance issue. I just, like, that stuff kind of is just like, maybe I’m just, you know what, I’m projecting. I’m just taking a little, I’m just projecting, so.

Wylie recognized Pardee for a comment.

Pardee said so, I’m stuck in this document, furthest right column at the bottom. And we said, OK, we’re going to increase salaries by 3%. And then I get to the comments at the bottom that says to partially offset the increases, the weekly hours of the administrative assistant will be reduced from 16 to 10. So, that suggests to me that we’re going to reduce her salary. Wylie said she was. Yeah, she is reduced. Her hours are reduced. Coté said she got a raise. Pardee said and how much was her raise? Coté said 3%. Wylie said 3%, like everybody.

Avery said and I will say that these discussions should have been had at the last meeting, when Smith presented everything. If you had issues. Jones said I did bring it up at the last meeting. Wylie said Jones did. Avery said yeah, I understand that. But we’re voting to approve what was presented. And I guess someone should have brought a motion to amend the budget and make these changes ahead of time. But that’s just my opinion. Jones said I thought that’s what the public hearing was.

Wylie recognized Casey for a comment.

Casey said yeah, I think, in my previous life, I attended a lot of conferences. You get a lot out of them. And I don’t have a problem funding the conferences that Smith thinks is important to attend. I just think it’s short-sighted to concentrate on that, on bringing that number down, because I think it’s going to be to our detriment long-term.

Wylie said anybody else?

Quisenberry said I agree with what Casey just said. And the fact that we don’t need to necessarily mess with the line item for the conferences at this point here. What we can do is just direct Smith and Coté to judiciously spend the money that we’ve allocated without going through and changing it all. And at the end of the year, hopefully, we’ll have a fund balance in that line item.

Jones said all right. I’m sorry. Let me just reiterate this so that I can make myself crystal clear. The travel budget is just what I hooked onto because it was a bullet point that was in the thing last week. It’s a larger issue about making sure we look everywhere. That’s what I was saying, because I don’t sit on the meetings, so I don’t see you guys. So, I don’t want you to think that I’m hung up thinking that the travel line item is the one thing that’s going to save us. I’m just saying I’m trying to look at it from a bigger picture of where there were things. So that’s what it is. Wylie said OK. Thank you.

Wylie said anything else? Anybody?

No comments.

Wylie said public?

No comments.

Wylie said council?

Wylie recognized Catallo for a comment.

(To Wylie), Catallo said so, you said if they could keep her, they would. And in my opinion, she could stay at her hours if everybody else didn’t instead give themselves a raise. Now, I 100% think that Guillen is like, in her current career, and we need our clerk to be trained and to go to continuing education. (To Casey), Catallo said but I disagree with you. I don’t think that our city manager needs to go to $2,500 worth of conferences. Not when we’re in a budget shortfall. I think that we need to batton down the hatches, and I would rather have Bihl here in the hours that she is accustomed to being here than sending Smith out of this office where other people have to cover for him while he’s at the conferences. I just feel like we’re at a point where we need to look at this more seriously. Everything was cut. Like, nobody talks about the fact that our commissions and our boards weren’t asked about their cuts or what budgets they might want or need. And I think that that’s really wrong to look at our volunteers and just sort of disregard them. I’d rather assign somebody in our building to sort of be a liaison with these groups because volunteers deserve a little bit more credit than they get. And I would rather see the $2,500 of Smith’s conference money go to, like, hiring somebody to see if they can assess our budget without bias to sort of determine where we can make these cuts and to justify them because it just feels a little bit like, Lisa (no last name provided) just left here. She made a comment that she hasn’t had a raise in years. Like, so just the idea that you could get a $13,000 raise one year and then just keep getting more of a raise. We’re in a budget crisis. There are perks that come with working here. Everybody has a long weekend except Jimi [Turner, Department of Public Works Supervisor] and Carson [Department of Public Works laborer]. And I just feel like we need to look at things more carefully, including, (to Jones), Catallo said sorry, the lampposts, like the fact that somebody told you that they weren’t making money off them, and they are. That’s five grand. That’s not five grand worth of decorations. It’s time to sort of take ownership of our community and represent the community and make our decisions wisely. So, I wish that you could amend it to sort of take a few things out that are, frankly, luxuries. And if a millage passes in the fall, then maybe we can revisit things and there could be greater luxuries. But since that didn’t make it on for the primary, which is a shame, I used to go to the finance committee meetings. I have no idea why that didn’t come. I just feel like it’s time to take it more seriously and to get an early start so that people can talk about it, not run it up to the gun. Wylie said thank you.

Wyle said anybody else?

Wylie recognized Guillen for a comment.

Guillen said so, I do have something, and it’s probably not going to be, it’s going to be frowned upon, but I do feel that my salary should be more in line with the city manager and with the DPW [Department of Public Works] supervisor, not to mention women have been underpaid in the workplace for years. Also, there’s things that we can do for revenue as far as most municipalities for a zoning or planning meeting. To get on the agenda, it’s over $1,000. We could charge for it to split a combination of properties, charge for notary. So, there’s so many things other than we can do to bring in revenue. Not to mention, I’m doing a lot of city manager work. I don’t get paid for any of the nine days of early voting when I work on the weekend because I have a salary. I manage the city website, the Facebook page. I apply for grants, not just the city clerk and administering elections. So, I know this is a big topic, but I am asking council to consider amending mine to at least $55[,000]. Wylie said thank you.

Wylie said we have a resolution, and Quisenberry supported it. Are we ready to take a vote?

No comments.

(To Guillen), Wylie said do a roll call, please.

Rodgers, Quisenberry, Casey, Wylie, Avery, Jones, and Forte voted yes.

Wylie said and the motion, resolution is adopted. Thank you.

Item #11e – Resolution: 2026-2027 Fiscal Year Millage Rate (video time mark 1:46:07):

• • Resolution – Establish 2026-2027 Millage Rate (page 73/73 of the council packet)

Wylie said Item #11e is resolution 2026-2027, fiscal year millage rate. Is this you, Coté? Is this still Smith? Coté said that’s Smith. Wylie said OK.

Smith said goes hand-in-hand with the Appropriations Act. Wylie said I guess I can, hang on, I’m going to get to that page. I will read it. Jones said on the third whereas, that should be a decrease, unless it’s for legal purposes. Wylie said on the third whereas, let’s see, one, two, three, it should be 26. Jones said a decrease from, instead of an decrease. Wylie said oh, I see. A decrease. (To Jones), Casey said let me see what you’re looking at. (Jones showed Casey a document.) Wylie said right at the parentheses. (Showing a paper to Quisenberry), Wylie said a decrease. It should be “a decrease,” not “an decrease.” (To Jones), Casey said OK, thank you.

Wylie said we’ve got the minutes of the regular meeting held at 375 Depot Road, Clarkston, Michigan at 7 p.m. We’ll list the council members present. The following preamble and resolution were offered by Council Member Blank and supported by Council Member Blank. We’ll fill those in.

(Wylie read the resolution.)

Wylie said and I will need somebody to resolve and a support.

Resolution by Jones; second Rodgers.

Wylie said and any discussion or comments from council members?

No comments.

Wylie said from the public?

No comments.

Wyle said and we’ll need a roll call.

Jones, Quisenberry, Forte, Rodgers, Casey, Wylie, and Avery voted yes.

Wylie said and the resolution is adopted. Thank you very much. And we have no absent council members. OK.

Agenda Item #12, Adjourn Meeting (video time mark 1:49:29):

Wylie said I need a vote on Item #12 if we’ve got nothing else. I need a motion to adjourn the meeting.

Motion by Jones; second Rodgers.

Wylie said no discussion.

Motion to adjourn the meeting passed by unanimous voice vote.

Wylie said the motion to adjourn, the meeting is adjourned at 8:49. Thank you very much.

Resources:

• • Link to video recording here
  • 06-08-2026 city council packet