October 10, 2022 City Council Meeting

Introduction:

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 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. Mayor Eric Haven has also cut people 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 by the mayor, 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.

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

Agenda Item #1, Call to Order:

The meeting was not formally called to order. Eric Haven thanked everyone for coming.

Agenda Item #2, Pledge of Allegiance (Video time mark 0:00:05):

Pledge said.

Agenda Item #3, Roll Call (Video time mark 0:00:23):

Eric Haven, Gary Casey, Bruce Fuller, Joe Luginski, and Sue Wylie were present.

Al Avery and Laura Rodgers were absent.

Agenda Item #4, Motion: Approval of Agenda (Video time mark 0:00:36):

Haven said that Jonathan Smith (city manager) is not here tonight. He announced two days ago he’s got COVID, so he’s kind of under the weather for now and we wish him well (unintelligible) our agenda little bit because we don’t have quite so much of a report from him.

The next item on the agenda is approval of the agenda, and Haven said he would entertain a motion to approve the agenda as it has been given to them.

Motion to approve the agenda by Wylie; second Fuller.

Haven asked if there was any discussion.

No discussion.

Motion adopted by unanimous voice vote.

Agenda Item #5, Public Comments (Video time mark 0:01:20):

Haven read the rules for public comment.

Mary Kuhn:

Kuhn provided her name and address and said that she had two concerns that she wanted to talk to the council about. One is the house next door to her. She said she literally is afraid because of the comings and goings of all the activity (unintelligible) over there. No one lives there. She has always thought and was under the impression that for a bed and breakfast, which it is not, that you had to be a resident and live in the premises. Nobody lives there. She’s had people from there come to her front door, not late at night, but she’s older and anything after 7:00 is getting late, you know, knocked on her front door, asked, well one time she didn’t answer, the second time asked for salt. She’s afraid. That’s all she can say. And she hasn’t called the police. But sometimes they’ve had these, a bunch of them are there, and they have parties, it gets out of control, they come onto her property. If it was somebody that she knew, it would be one thing, but these are total strangers. She doesn’t know what to expect and she’s afraid to live in her house.

Haven asked Kuhn to spell her last name, and Kuhn spelled her name. Haven asked for her address, and she provided it. Haven said she’s addressing the bed and breakfast. Kuhn said yes. Haven asked if she were on the north side or the south side. Kuhn said she was right next door and provided their address and her address. Haven said they would check into it, and he appreciated her coming and letting them know. Kuhn said she’s complained about it in the past, and they just keep saying (unintelligible). It’s an Airbnb as far as she’s concerned, and they said there’s some legislation going on to stop that, but it seems to her to be getting worse. Haven said OK. Kuhn said it’s bad enough that she had to come here, because as she said, she shouldn’t have to be afraid to be in her own home. Haven said no, she shouldn’t, and asked Tom Ryan [city attorney] to correct him if he’s wrong, but this is a bed and breakfast by zoning, right, we went through this a long time ago. Ryan said by court approval. Haven said right. It’s a nonconforming use in a residential area, right? Ryan agreed. Haven said but it needs to have the occupancy of the owners to operate as a bed and breakfast. Ryan said there are regulations that have to be abided by. Kuhn said that’s what she thought. There’s nobody (unintelligible), nobody lives there. Haven said OK. Kuhn said there’s just total, no, nobody lives there. That’s her biggest issue.

Kuhn said her second issue, and she happens to like him quite a bit, but one of her neighbors built a house, and the sump pump floods her back yard. It drains right onto her backyard. It was soaking to the point that she was going to have some tree work done back there in the spring and summer, and they wouldn’t go back there because it was so wet, because it floods. His sump pump goes right onto it, it just drains onto her property. It can get a little soggy anyway, but maybe because there was a lot more in the spring, but it is just ridiculous and that needs to be corrected. He should not, they should not, have a sump pump draining on her property. Haven said so that’s her next-door neighbor. Kuhn identified the neighbor and said he lives on Miller. Haven said he knew him. Kuhn said she hates giving his name because he is a wonderful young man, she adores him terribly, but she’s had conversations and he says oh, I’m taking care of it. She personally doesn’t think it’s his problem. She thinks he needs to go after the builder because the builder put that sump pump in wrong. When they put the sump pump in, they shouldn’t have made it so that it drains onto her property. Haven said no (unintelligible). Kuhn asked him to repeat, and Haven said it drains toward Kuhn’s property, not toward the Mill Pond, he’s guessing. Kuhn said it does not go into the Mill Pond. He’s on Miller, and it comes right out and it’s just floods the whole area down by the Mill Pond which still is her property. Haven said OK, all right, he doesn’t know if they have a place for (unintelligible), but they’ll check with the city manager. Jennifer Speagle (city clerk) said (unintelligible) a sump pump.

Ryan said there are two code enforcement issues that should be addressed. Speagle said yes; she would talk to Susan Weaver [building department administrator, Carlisle/Wortman]. Ryan said he would be there tomorrow. (Unintelligible crosstalk.) Speagle said she can send an email to Susan Weaver to check it out. Kuhn said she doesn’t want to get after her neighbor because he’s such a nice young man, it’s just that this has got to stop. Ryan said it’s not supposed to drain on (unintelligible). Kuhn said no. It’s a code enforcement issue. Kuhn said she’s been trying to tell him that he needs to go after his builder, because he did that wrong. Haven said that they would get into it and thanked Kuhn so much for coming. Kuhn thanked Haven. She said she appreciated it, and hopefully, her number one issue, something will be done about that because she can’t tell them enough how afraid she is. Haven said that’s not right. Kuhn said no. Haven thanked Kuhn again.

Haven asked if anyone else has public comment. Kuhn pointed to Chet Pardee, who thanked her and stood up. Haven said we know that young man. Pardee said Kuhn was his new best friend.

Chet Pardee:

Pardee said Kuhn would soon learn about fight the blight along North Main.

Pardee said good evening, identified himself, and provided his address.

In the last two council meetings the mayor has responded to my public comments. Thank you for the courtesy. I wonder if the response was driven by the upcoming election. That the city has a balanced budget is the law in the State of Michigan.

These are likely my last public comments this calendar year as I think council is changing the rules to require public comments to be made only in person. I think the mayor was irritated with having to read my criticisms or suggestions when I had a poor connection from out of state.

If this is it until spring, I would like to leave city officials with a few reminders:

Without public comments, Letters to the Editor of the Clarkston News or involving the Oakland Press can work for me.

I do not think my public comments have ever strayed from “Be Transparent, Follow the Rules and Take Care of the City’s Infrastructure,” my beliefs for what is most critical for the City of the Village of Clarkston.

Some previously raised, but essentially ignored subjects:

• • How long will the city manager hang on without funds to repair streets and sidewalks?
  • Why not try facilitated workshops to discuss city priorities and understand the city’s financial future? Julie Meredith [Clarkston Independence District Library Director] is willing to be the facilitator.
  • What is wrong with offsetting expired/expiring bond issues with millage to repair streets and sidewalks? Do you understand how far 4.9 mills of expired/expiring mills will go? Will the city brag about having the lowest millage rate?

Why is there no interest in:

• • Removing the gasoline contamination under Clarkston Road and North Main Street marked by the four in-ground MDOT “Restricted Excavation” markers which limit the Clarkston Road repair to only capping and prevent managing storm water without environmental risk to the Mill Ponds and Parke Lake. Is the plume why I “Fight the Blight on North Main”?
  • Using larger and bolded type on the city’s monthly financial documents so they are more easily readable. How big a deal is this? I would stop nagging and perhaps council members would take a greater interest in understanding and acting to resolve the city’s financial dilemma.
  • Establishing a council-approved escalation policy for code violations, like on Kuhn’s (unintelligible), so expectations can be clear to residents and the city manager does not have to be the bad guy. Going on four years now at 154 North Main. The city attorney said district court will be the next step if 154 [North Main] isn’t painted by August 15^th, and here we are three months later. So, the trash situation is worse in the side yard and backyard, the hood’s been up on the car for several weeks, the front porch concrete continues to deteriorate and the delivered Chewy box was in fact removed today from the front porch, having been there since (unintelligible).
  • Having a better understanding of the downstream implications of the equalization pipe, which had to be paid by the city under Miller Road as part of the Miller Road improvement, to connect Upper Mill Pond to Lower Mill Pond and then on to Parke Lake. What does really an equalization pipe mean between those two ponds? Residents on Parke Lake should be prepared for what they currently see in Upper Mill Pond.

Pardee said he would be happy to take any questions. Haven thanked Pardee and said as Pardee knows, they are not required to respond, and Haven has been responding. Pardee said he appreciates that. Haven said he wanted to address two of these.

Haven said it sounds like Pardee’s third comment about the painting of 154 [North Main] is the code officer’s issue as well still. Haven told Speagle that they needed to probably follow up on that one. Ryan said that there’s been a lot of correspondence with the city manager (unintelligible). Haven said so Ryan knows about that. Ryan said yes, exactly, so it’s being addressed, Mr. Pardee. Haven said OK. Ryan said we don’t have to take everyone to court, we’re looking for compliance, that’s what we’re inching toward, probably not as fast as some people would like, but as long as we’re making progress in that area, we’re going to let the person, hopefully the resident, do the job and take care of the problem. Haven said Pardee would admit progress. Pardee said he’s not interested in losing a neighbor; he’s interested in having a neighborhood in which he’s proud to live. Haven said they know that. Pardee said there have been some issues there. Now, it’s been four years since Jim Meloche from HDC [Historic District Commission Chair] and Smith accompanied Pardee and his wife to one of the other houses that’s now cranberry and resolved and 154 [North Main]. Haven said some progress is being made, for sure. It’s going to be like Mr. Ryan said maybe a little slower than you’d like but again, we’re trying to work with our residents. Pardee said he thinks that an escalation policy would be beneficial so that residents know what’s coming and to take Smith out of the position of being the bad guy. Haven said that’s why we have a code enforcement officer, and Pardee knows that. Pardee said yes, and she acknowledged two months ago that she’d be helped by an escalation policy. Haven said all right, so noted. Haven thanked Pardee.

[See Clarkston Sunshine comment #1.]

Wylie said she had a question. Pardee said right at the beginning of his comments that council is changing rules so that public comments can only be made in person. Pardee said yes. Wylie asked where he got that information. Pardee said he read that in the proposed policy, and he doesn’t know that the policy for revised council meetings has in fact been approved. Wylie said OK, she knows what Pardee is talking about. Haven said it was (unintelligible). Speagle said it was approved. Pardee asked Speagle if she recalled, and she was helpful in communicating when Pardee couldn’t get live connection, Speagle read the comments. Pardee asked if Speagle could still read the comments? Speagle asked if Pardee meant when they’re on GoToMeeting? Pardee said yes. Speagle said yes. Pardee said he withdraws that. Haven said he was sorry that Pardee felt Haven was irritated. He wasn’t. He was happy to read Pardee’s comments. That’s his job, and he thanked Pardee. Pardee said he’d like to comment on the word “thank you.”

Haven asked if there were any other public comments.

Kuhn said she just had a quick (unintelligible). Will somebody tell her what’s going to go on, get back to her and say we looked into the [address on North Main] and into the flooding? Haven said yes, Speagle would make a note. Speagle said yes. Haven said if she needs his help with that, just let him know. We have a code enforcement officer who works on Tuesdays. Isn’t tomorrow when she’s coming? Speagle said yes. She doesn’t always come in the office, but she is here a couple times a week making the rounds. Haven said that Smith is still involved, and he can still make direction in these areas. Speagle agreed, and she can tell him too. Haven said OK. Kuhn thanked Haven. Haven told Kuhn to please feel free to get a hold of us if you don’t hear timely because we want to be responsive to you. Kuhn thanked Haven.

Haven asked if anyone else had public comment.

No other public comments.

Agenda Item #6, FYI (Video time mark 0:14:40):

Haven said that the next item on the agenda was For Your Information, and he has a few things here that were given to him to report on.

Item #1 – Election Update (Video time mark 0:15:08):

Speagle said she had a couple of things. Haven said he should have taken Speagle first [DTE tree work was discussed before the election update.]

Speagle said for the state-held election, we have issued 207 absentee ballots and have received 17 of them back already. Those went out last week and the week before. It’s been almost two weeks.

Close of registration is 10-24. That will be posted in the Clarkston News this week. After 10-24 to register to vote, you have to come in here in person. It explains everything on there what you need. Haven said he thought you could register up until the date of the election. Speagle said you can. Haven said just not remotely or something. Speagle said yes, not remotely.

The public accuracy test will be done on Monday, 10-24, at 2:00 p.m. Haven asked if that was the equipment. Speagle said yes. Both of those public notices will be in the Clarkston News this week and are posted in the kiosk.

Last week, and Speagle has to give a sincere thank you to Evelyn [Bihl, administrative assistant], she did all of the mailings for the fact sheet while Speagle was working on absentee ballots and election, and she also helped Speagle with all 207 absentee ballot applications. Haven said it’s a big job, elections are a big job, and Haven thanked Bihl who was back there somewhere. (Fuller made an unintelligible comment. Unintelligible crosstalk.) Speagle said she wouldn’t have been able to get everything out without her.

Speagle said there’s a ballot sample online and in the kiosk outside. We also have League of Women Voters (holding up a document), a bunch of these. She put a stack out there in back (gesturing), and she has more in the office. Haven said good.

Haven asked if Speagle remembered if it was three pages [referring to the ballot]. Speagle said it is three pages, so she would encourage people if they’re going to mail their ballots back in, put two stamps just in case. She put $.85 stamps on to send them out. Haven asked if everyone heard that. It may take two stamps to get them back here, so you want – (interrupting Haven), Speagle said that she has received some with just one Forever stamp on it, and she is receiving them, but just to make sure. They’re pretty heavy. It’s three pages long.

Item #2 – DTE Tree Work (Video time mark 0:14:51):

• • 09-23-2022 Letter from DTE Regarding Tree Trimming (page 3/56 of the council packet)
  • Tree Work Schedule (page 5/56 of the council packet)
  • What to Expect (page 6/56 of the council packet)

[This item was taken first, out of order.] Haven said that we are going to see DTE tree trimming in the area in the foreseeable future here as they relieve their lines and so on, so just be aware of that.

Item #3 – Fire Hydrant Flushing (Video time mark 0:17:36):

[This was taken out of order after the Michigan Assessing Audit.] Haven said he wasn’t sure what that is. Speagle said it was brought to her attention that Independence Township is doing their annual fire hydrant flushing. They thought that they were going to be in our area this week. It looks like they’re not going to be. They do it in the future, a couple weeks out. It should not affect anybody’s water, but if you do see, experience, less water pressure, run your water for a few minutes. Haven said OK, check the water pressure (unintelligible.) Speagle said it shouldn’t, but if you do have an issue with water pressure, that’s why. They’re flushing the hydrants and you should run the water for a few minutes to make sure the all the sediment is out.

An unidentified person in the audience asked when it will be. Speagle said she’s not sure yet. It was supposed to be this week, but it is not. The schedule has changed, so within the next couple of weeks. She will post it on the website letting you know when, when she finds out when they’re going to be flushed. She put a notice on the website across the top. Haven thanked Speagle.

Luginski told Speagle that wouldn’t affect those who are on their own private well. Speagle said no. Just city water.

Item #4 – Michigan Assessing Audit (Video time mark 0:17:30):

• • 07-14-2022 – Letter from the State of Michigan, Department of Treasury, Regarding Tax Management Associates Audit of Minimum Assessing Requirements (page 7/56 of the council packet)
  • Audit of Minimum Assessing Requirements (Page 8/56 of the council packet)

[This was taken out of order before Fire Hydrant Flushing.] Haven said we passed our Michigan Assessing Audit with flying colors according to the assessor. There’s a letter in your packet about that.

Agenda Item #7, City Manager Report (Video time mark 0:18:50; page 14/56 of the council packet):

Haven said that the next item on the agenda is our city manager’s report. He won’t read the entire thing, but he will allude to the categories that are here if anyone in the audience has any question about that category, we can certainly go further.

Haven:

The Washington and Main parking issue. There are a couple of sinkholes that were discovered there. One’s been repaired, and the other is being investigated, he believes, as well as a night light recently failed on the kiosk he believes, and Hutchinson Electric is looking into that. So that’s the Washington and Main lot.

MDOT [Michigan Department of Transportation] Category “B” grant application was denied. We applied for a grant and did not receive it. It was interesting. When Smith pressed them on why we didn’t receive this, this is the second time, third time, the answers came back city’s taxable values were considered too high relative to our population size. A very interesting comment. Haven thinks we’d like to learn a little bit more about that, what that criteria is which would deny us a grant application.

All right. The tree survey. Smith has completed the tree survey and he’ll give us a complete report on it on October 24^th on that survey.

The Michigan Municipal League fall conference is going to be held in Muskegon on the 19^th and 20^th. Smith is going to go and he’s going to be speaking at that conference on cybersecurity because we suffered an act two years ago and he went through that whole process and is experienced in (unintelligible) and all that. So, he’s going to be speaking at that conference and Haven thinks that he asked if anyone wanted to go with him and Haven doesn’t know if anyone is going, but anyway, that’s coming.

Haven said that’s all that’s on the city manager’s report. Anyone have any comments, questions? Haven can’t really answer the questions, but we can have them addressed next time unless Speagle has answers.

Haven asked if there was any discussion.

No discussion.

Agenda Item #8 – Motion: Acceptance of the Consent Agenda as Presented (Video time mark 0:20:47; page 14/56 of the council packet):

• • 09-12-2022 Final Minutes (page 15/56 of the council packet)
  • 09-19-2022 Final Minutes, Special Meeting (page 17/56 of the council packet)
  • 09-26-2022 Draft Minutes (page 18/56 of the council packet)
  • 09-28-2022 Draft Minutes, Special Meeting (page 20/56 of the council packet)
  • 10-10-2022 – Treasurer’s Report (page 21/56 of the council packet)
  • 10-05-2022 – Check Disbursement Report, 09-01-2022 – 09-30-2022 (page 22/56 of the council packet)
  • Thomas J. Ryan, P.C., September invoices (page 32/56 of the council packet)

Haven said he would receive a motion to accept the consent agenda. He will explain what a consent agenda is. This is a combination of two final minute presentations in our packet from the 9^th [12^th] of September and the 19^th of September, and the draft minutes, this is in process then, of the 26^th and 28^th. We had a lot of meetings going through here. And then the full Treasurer’s report is in the consent agenda. We package it like that for expediency in the meeting so we can just vote on it in a block unless someone wants to take something out of the packet and comment on it.

Haven said he would entertain a motion to accept the consent agenda as has been given to them.

Motion to accept the consent agenda as presented by Luginski; second Wylie.

Haven thanked Luginski and Wylie and asked if anyone wanted to make a comment about anything that’s in the consent agenda.

No comments.

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

Agenda Item #9, Old Business:

Item 9a – Motion: EV Charging Station Agreement Approval (Video time mark 0:21:52):

• • Motion – Electric Vehicle Charging Station Agreement (page 35/56 of the council packet)
  • CEV [Charge EV, LLC] Charging Station Agreement (page 36/56 of the council packet)
  • Exhibit B – Charging Station Signage (page 43/56 of the council packet)

Haven said that they decided on, and he’ll read the resolution, so you all know.

Ryan said that they got the agenda today in the packet, and he prepared this EV agreement with what he had talked to Smith about several weeks ago, and it’s not ready. It’s not right. We need to postpone this to the next meeting. It’s not where it needs to be yet. Haven said he alluded that Ryan had approved it too. Ryan said no, what we have here is not what we discussed, so Ryan needs to talk to Smith about it. Haven said OK, we’ll just move on.

Ryan said that they need a motion to postpone or table it until the next meeting. Haven asked Ryan what language he preferred.

Wylie said she would make a motion to table. Ryan thanked Wylie. Casey second.

Haven asked if there was any discussion.

No discussion.

Motion to table passed by unanimous voice vote.

Agenda Item #10, New Business

Item 10a – Motion: PC Recommendation on 5/9 S. Main Street (Video time mark 0:23:00):

• • Motion – Acceptance of Planning Commission’s Recommendation on 5/9 S. Main Street (page 44/56 of the council packet):
  • Architectural Drawings (page 45/56 of the council packet)

This is a motion about the Planning Commission’s recommendation on 5/9, this is the two buildings, Rudy’s and the previous newspaper office. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the site plan for that building, and that’s in your packet.

Haven said he would read it. (Haven read from the motion.)

Haven said we have this resolution in front of us, so before we begin any discussion relative to this, he would entertain a motion to accept this recommendation.

Motion to accept the recommendation by Luginski; second Fuller.

Haven said that there is a motion and second to approve this recommendation by council. We are the approving entity. Ryan said final approval. Haven said he was going to say they are the advisory group. Final approval of the site plan. It still has to go through the HDC [Historic District Commission.] The HDC is meeting tomorrow night if you’re interested in that. The architects are here, he thinks from Saroki. He thanked them for coming. We have some previous plans in our packet, but they are not final, and in our last HDC meeting, we made recommendations and so on, so, they’re really presenting it tomorrow night, is that right? An unidentified man agreed. (Wylie made an unintelligible comment.) Haven recognized Robert Esshaki [owner of Rudy’s and the old Clarkston News Building].

Haven said what they need to do tonight is to vote on this resolution. We have a motion to adopt by Luginski and a second by Fuller for this final approval.

Haven asked if there was any discussion about this before we take the roll.

No discussion from council.

Haven recognized Pardee. Pardee thanked Haven and said his question relates to the parking requirements that may relate to the site, and where is council as it relates to determine what are the number of parking spaces required to support what’s being proposed, and Pardee thinks we have an ordinance that states if in fact the parking spaces are not available, then is the number $10,000 is what it is that the business may pay in lieu of. Pardee thinks that that ordinance needs to be considered, and it’s an opportunity for remedy, and it’s an opportunity to follow our rules.

Haven said that Ryan may want to speak to this. Pardee is referring to the parking deferment which has not been exercised for years and years because of the tight infrastructure here in our city. Many have received the benefit of that, and we (unintelligible) worked with that situation, and he doesn’t want to be that general. Ryan said that the chairman [of the Planning Commission] is here, and Wylie is on the Planning Commission. Was this addressed at the Planning Commission relative to site plan approval? Wylie said that parking permits was not, parking was discussed a lot. It was probably the biggest part of the discussion. Ryan asked where the Planning Commission came down on that issue. Wylie said that we were going to let the restaurant owners, business owners, and council work it out because parking deferment had not been invoked or used for a number of years.

Ryan asked what the timeline is for the project, assuming approval. Esshaki(?) said eighteen months approximately. Optimistically. (Laughter.) Haven said so, that’s all we can say about it, right? Short of what we have in front of us here.

Haven asked if there was any other discussion.

Pardee asked if council just made a decision about parking deferment. Ryan said that Pardee remembers that this came up a few years ago. It’s not a new issue, and in fairness and equity, it has not been enforced or raised in many, many years, so he thinks that the council and Planning Commission agrees that because you are the last person in, you’re going to load up, so it will all have to be worked out and we’ve got some time to do that, but they’re not going to, the council and the Planning Commission agree that we’re not going to enforce an ordinance that has not been enforced for many, many, many years.

An unidentified man said when you say you are going to work this out, does ignoring the deferment go away, that that’s going to change, that this will be the last one in without the deferment applying? [The unidentified man was later identified during the paid parking discussion as Neil Wallace, who is the attorney for Union Joints, the company owned by Curt Catallo and Eric Lines; Union Joints owns the Clarkston Union, Honcho, and The Woodshop restaurants.] Haven said he didn’t think we could say that. The answer is no. Wallace said so, they’re not going to enforce the deferment and that’s a permanent decision? Haven said no, it applies to this only. This case only. Wallace said when we say that we’re not going to start enforcing it because that would be unfair, you might start enforcing it in the future. Haven said he didn’t think they were making a decision at all on that tonight. Wallace said but that’s the possibility from what was just said. Haven said anything is possible, but he doesn’t think we’re saying that; Wallace is putting extra words in what they are saying. Wallace said he’s just trying to understand because the concept was, we haven’t been enforcing it, so we can’t enforce it. That should apply; otherwise, it would be unfair to someone in the future who wants to develop here. Haven said he understands, but that’s a hypothetical and we are not going there right now. We have to address that issue and we’re not there. Wallace said they are making a decision based on a concept. The concept is that it hasn’t been applied, so it won’t be applied. Haven said let’s just say we’ve got precedent for not requiring it. OK? Let’s just leave it at that. We can’t be any more specific than that because that requires a sophistication that we don’t have here. I think you realize that. Wallace said no, he doesn’t. In all honesty, he doesn’t understand because you’re relying on a concept that it would be unfair and yet you’re still saying that in the future, what he just heard said was that in the future, that might be correct, and we would start applying the deferment or some other requirement to future developments. Haven said he thinks that “might’s” a pretty broad term, don’t you think? So, it might, it might not, and he doesn’t know where that gets us.

Luginski said what he thinks they need to do, and this is his opinion only. The deferment as been said hasn’t been enforced in, as you know, a long, long time, so we’re not going to do it on this particular project, but what Luginski thinks we should do, to answer Wallace’s question, is we need to figure out if we are going to keep that ordinance or not. We need to decide that. We aren’t going to make that decision tonight, right, on an ordinance. But we need to figure out if we’re going to keep this deferment in there, then are we ever going to apply it, and if we’re never going to apply it, then let’s just get rid of it. If it’s an ordinance we’re not going to enforce, then let’s just get rid of it. Wallace said as Luginski just said, this is not new. Luginski agreed. Wallace said we’ve had these coming and coming and coming, and now what you’re saying is you’re not going to discount it because that would be unfair, but it would be fair in the future if we decide we want to handle it differently in the future. So, he thinks the notion that you’re going to apply the deferment here is not necessarily unfair. What could be unfair is if you use this as the footprint to now say now, we’re going to start enforcing it when clearly, there is not enough parking in town already. (Luginski nodded.) Wylie said yes. Haven said (unintelligible) application to certain businesses. He agrees with that, but again, we’re not going to go beyond the language of this – (interrupting Haven), Wallace said when Haven says certain businesses, what does he mean? Haven said he’s just saying as a whole, as an aggregate, that’s what you’re addressing, what you’re getting at, you’re making an assumption about the number of parking spaces relative, as applicable to certain businesses. Those allocations have not been made and we’re not going to make them. There may in fact be enough parking here in this town for proper allocations for certain square footages. We don’t know that at this juncture. Again, this is sort of up in the air and it’s been up in the air for a long time, all right? But again, Haven said Wallace shouldn’t take any of his words authoritatively. You can’t do that because you’re asking hypothetical questions, you know. Wallace said no, he’s suggesting to Haven that we should not be relying on the deferment at this point in time because it’s unfair. Because it’s not unfair. You’ve known about this for some time. Haven said he didn’t say it was unfair, he’s just saying we’re not relying on it at this time. Wallace said that’s what all the discussion has been about, is that it would be unfair. Why else would you not apply it at this time? Haven said probably because of precedent. That would be his answer, the precedent of having not enforced it in the past. That would be his answer to that, and again, as just alluded, there is further work to be done. We don’t know that (unintelligible). Wallace said (unintelligible) that just because you haven’t enforced the law before doesn’t mean you couldn’t enforce it now.

Haven said his attorney is here. So, he can answer that question. Wylie said the city attorney. Haven said sorry.

Ryan said this is not in a vacuum. This is probably maybe the third use like this that’s been approved without the parking deferment, you know, on Main Street in like the last five-seven years. So, and whether or not there’s enough parking, that’s an issue that, he guesses, he doesn’t know how they come down on that, but maybe there’s enough parking, maybe there isn’t, but that’s not to say that if certain activities are taken by the city, which, you’ve got something here about paid parking, and you know, there’s other ways maybe to get property or work out some arrangements with other property, and if that occurs in the future, then that deferment could be reenacted again or enforced, but right now, the situation is apparently because of the precedent you talked about and other people have benefited from that, being given grace from that deferment issue, we can’t say we’ll never, never say never that we won’t enforce it again because circumstances could change. We just don’t know that today.

Pardee was recognized by Haven for a comment. Pardee asked what the calculation showed if in fact we applied the ordinance. Haven and Wylie said it was not applied. Pardee asked if a calculation was done. Wylie said she never heard of a calculation being done. Pardee asked if the architect was involved in the calculations there. An unidentified person said no, not on the parking. Pardee said he doesn’t have an issue with the proposal. He has a strong issue about following the rules. As Luginski was intimating, if in fact we aren’t going to use this rule, he suggests we eliminate it. Haven thanked Pardee.

Haven said they have a motion and second for adoption of this resolution. He asked if there was any further discussion on council’s part.

No discussion.

Haven asked for a roll call.

Casey, Fuller, Haven, Wylie, and Luginski voted yes. Motion carried.

Haven said that’s all on Item 10a.

[See Clarkston Sunshine Comment #2.]

Item 10b – Motion: Halloween Hours in the Village (Video time mark 0:35:29):

• • Motion – Halloween Hours in the Village (page 52/56 of the council packet)

Haven said he would read this one. (Haven read from the motion.)

Haven said he would entertain a motion to adopt this two-hour time span from 5:00 to 7:00 this October 31^st Halloween. Who would like to so move?

Wylie said she would make a motion to have Trick or Treating Monday, October 31^st; second Fuller.

Haven asked if there was any discussion about this.

Luginski said we’ve always lined up our hours with the township’s hours. Are they doing this? Haven said he didn’t know. He asked Speagle if she knew, and she said she didn’t. An unidentified woman in the audience said the township is one hour. Speagle said she didn’t think the last couple years it was two hours either. (Unintelligible crosstalk.) Speagle said before that, they always aligned with us. Luginski said he may be wrong, but he thought they were always the same.

Haven said anyway, we have this proposal before us. Casey said he thinks 5:00 is too early. Haven said Casey will get a chance to vote on it, OK?

Haven asked if there was any other discussion.

Wylie said hearing about Independence Township, she’d like to be sure. She thinks we should align with them because kids could inundate us from 5:00-6:00. Luginski said double dipping. Wylie said hit us from 5:00-6:00 and then go somewhere else from 6:00-7:00. She’s a little concerned. She does like the two hours. (Unintelligible crosstalk.) Haven said if they have one hour, and we have one hour. Luginski said our Trick or Treat hours are the exact same time as the township – 6:00-7:00. Always. We did that purposely. Haven said which would be the second half of this scenario. Luginski agreed. Haven said we would have a pre-hour.

Speagle said she didn’t see (unintelligible). Luginski said she could call them tomorrow. Haven said if they thought we should table this until the 24^th. Speagle said we are starting to get calls coming in asking us. Haven said people have bought their candy or are trying to buy their candy. Speagle said we can table it until the 24^th.

Haven said he would entertain a motion to table it. Haven asked if he could offer a motion. Ryan said a table takes precedent.

Haven asked if Casey would accept the motion. Casey said yes. Haven asked for a second. Second Luginski. Haven said this is a motion and second to table this. Haven asked if there was any further discussion.

Motion to table passed by voice vote.

[See Clarkston Sunshine Comment #3.]

Item 10c – Resolution: Convert Depot Road Parking Lot to Paid Parking (Video time mark 0:38:58):

• • Resolution – Convert Depot Road Parking Lot to Paid Parking (page 53/56 of the council packet)
  • 2022 PASER [Pavement Surface and Evaluation Rating] (page 54/56 of the council packet)

Haven said this is a resolution to convert Depot Road parking lot to paid parking. (Haven read the resolution.)

Haven said he would entertain a motion to adopt this resolution. Who would like to do that?

Motion by Fuller; second Wylie.

Haven asked for any discussion from council.

Casey asked an unintelligible question about G.M. (General Motors?). Haven said yes, this is a different discussion. That’s for the electric cars. Casey said OK. Haven said he was wondering if he skipped that. (Unintelligible crosstalk.) Ryan said the agreement is not ready. Haven said yes, that’s right, sorry.

Haven asked if he answered Casey’s question. This is about paid parking in the Depot lot. Casey said OK. Haven asked if he had a question on that. Casey said no.

Haven asked if there was any other discussion.

No discussion from council.

Haven said that Smith has laid it out pretty well here.

Haven recognized Wallace. Wallace said he was there on his own accord as a property owner that is adjacent to the parking lot as well as counsel for Union Joints [Curt Catallo’s company], and he’s been proud to be counsel for Union Joints since its inception and he thinks it’s important to think about the history for just a moment. Haven asked Wallace to come up if he wanted to make a presentation.

Neil Wallace:

When the Union first opened, it was an abandoned church that very likely would stay abandoned and just be an abandoned building. Haven asked which building. Wallace said the church, the Clarkston Union. So, Curt [Catallo] and Eric [Lines] took that on and converted it into a restaurant and it wasn’t a foregone conclusion that it would be a success. And it wasn’t at first. And it was a lot of hard work to get it to where it was. And there was the Woodshop, which as you know, failed the first time around as a supper club after it had been opened in a hollow shell of a restaurant we all had thought of fondly on this street as the Clarkston Café. Next up was Honcho which had been a gas station and a storage building that was also not being used. Along the way, Curt opens in this town an advertising agency that drew a lot of folks and a lot of money into this town.

So, now we’re at a juncture, and he was surprised under the deferment discussion to hear that there’s some question as to whether there’s enough parking in town. There is not enough parking in town. There isn’t. And at the beginning of the discussion about charging for parking, it was all about finding a way to get more parking, and somehow, particularly in the way that Haven just read the resolution, Mr. Mayor, somehow that has morphed into not being about finding more parking, but about raising money to improve the roads so we don’t have to hit the taxpayers, and Wallace suggests that’s an inappropriate diversion of those monies.

Wallace said you’re putting at risk the goose that laid the golden egg. There’s been substantial value added to this town, and he doesn’t think that the city council recognizes that. Esshaki and Chris (?) recognize it, and that’s why they’re opening a restaurant. Mr. Schneider [The Fed owner] recognizes it. That’s why he’s opened his restaurant. But these restaurants, particularly coming out of this pandemic, are on a razor’s edge. They have trouble getting staffing, public service in this town, they have difficulty with the increasing cost of commodities, they are on the edge. And this parking money that you are talking about raising is a tax, as you said a minute ago, Mr. Mayor, on certain businesses. And those businesses are the restaurants in this town.

Haven said he didn’t say that. He didn’t say that. Don’t put words in his mouth. He did not use the word tax on the businesses. (Wallace spoke over Haven so that Haven’s additional comments were unintelligible.) Wallace said that Haven said that there are certain businesses that this is directed at. That’s what Haven said twice about the deferment. Haven said he never said that. Wallace said we’ll see. An unidentified man in the audience said we just heard it. Wallace said we’ll see. We’ll look at the tape.

Wallace said they are putting these businesses at risk. We literally could lose one. They don’t get enough staffing, they don’t get enough people to come here because you’re charging them, you’re dissuading people from coming. And that’s not fair. There ought to be a plan. You want to pay for parking all through the community, fine, no problem. But the (unintelligible) ought to be to find more parking so that you are supporting what is going on instead of fighting them. That’s what’s happening right now. And you shouldn’t be doing this. You shouldn’t be passing this until you step back and create a plan to actually add more parking.

Wallace said now all that said, he’ll also say this. He has, as a part of a contract with the city, he has a contractual right to a dozen parking spots. Some of them are marked right now, some of them aren’t because he hasn’t needed them particularly through the pandemic. But those are his, and they shouldn’t be subject to any metering. Haven agreed. Wallace said that’s not in their resolution and that distinction hasn’t been made, and it is a distinction that needs to be made. Wallace thanked the council.

Haven said he asked for comment from the council. Is there any further comment from the council?

Wylie said she does think, and she definitely would want to see more paid parking (unintelligible due to background noise), but she does think before they start it, we do need to do more work. She’s talked to Smith (unintelligible), and she’s talked to other people about it. We do need more thoughts, and one of her concerns is employee parking, how are employees going to park, what are we going to do about that. She’s also concerned about protecting residents who live close by who could be impacted by people trying to avoid paying for parking and parking in front of the houses. She thinks that could be an issue. Wylie said that they talked about this at the Planning Commission, and Smith is very aware that we should take our time implementing this, so even if we pass it tonight, we should gently implement it to make sure we can do it properly. Haven said he thought when the Washington lot went in, we probably put it in a little fast. When you start something like that, there’s issues that come up that you’re not necessarily aware of until you implement it, and he expressed we should be implementing this slowly and gently. Wylie said she’s putting words into his mouth. Haven said that Smith wrote this. Wylie said she understands. Haven said so Smith expressed himself there with the experiences we’ve learned with the Washington and Main lot contributing to this discussion. This has always been the next step in the process and (unintelligible). That’s the direction for sure, OK? But again, this is part of the solution to the problem, not the creation of an additional one, and again, there’s details to be worked out and we trust that our city manager will come back with those details in time. But just to again revert to the past and go back and rehash all of this again, you know, it just further kicks the can down the road without resolution. That’s the way he feels about it.

Wylie said she’s not at all opposed to going along with this tonight, but she just thinks that when we do implement it that it’s just going to take some time. Haven said there’s some indication that Wylie is right, but we have a city manager to (unintelligible). That’s why we hired him.

Speagle said they need to take into consideration just how much work is going to be added to the office. Wylie agreed. Speagle said when they are looking at everything, please keep that in mind. Haven told Speagle it’s raising revenue. Speagle agreed. Haven said that some of that could be used for administration. Speagle said keep that in mind. Haven said it’s either zero or something coming in. Speagle agreed but asked Haven to keep that in mind too. It’s going to add a lot more work to the office. Putting two kiosks in means more citations, more paper changes, more work. The kiosks will add more work. Haven said the cost of that will come out of the (unintelligible) against this. He gets that.

An unidentified woman asked if citations were being issued by the office, and Speagle said that citations are being issued by the enforcement officers, but Speagle handles all of the appeals, the payments, Speagle and Smith work together to make sure that the kiosk is stocked if the paper is empty, if the kiosk goes down we have to take care of that, it’s 10+ hours a week just for one kiosk.

Wylie asked what the company we contract with does. Speagle said if the kiosk goes down on its own and it’s something that we need looked at that we can’t fix, they will come in and fix it. That’s their job. Wylie said for some reason she was thinking they mailed things out for us. Speagle said the only thing they mail out is if somebody receives a citation and they don’t pay it within thirty days, every thirty days a letter is automatically mailed to that person who received the citation with an added $10 every month and she thinks it goes to three or four months they’ll receive that letter. Wylie said OK, so Speagle and the officer are taking care of the immediate – Speagle said everything else. Wylie said OK. Speagle said and some of those letters, when they get mailed out to whoever is registered to that license plate, if they change their address, their address is changed to what is on the title, that’s coming back at us, and we have to investigate. Wylie said hunt it down. Speagle said hunt that person down.

Haven said what Speagle is bringing up here is administration. There’s two aspects to this. One is policy, it’s governance, to set policy in place with some view of responsibility for getting revenue for our town for infrastructure. And we hire employees, Smith being the city manager and Speagle, to administer those policies. So that’s how government works. So, where we are right now is making a decision on council to establish a policy whereby, we can increase revenue, OK, for our community. We realize zero right now from that lot; we potentially could have a whole lot more. We pay for administration, that comes out of it, so we will have a net return, but we will have a return versus zero, OK? Speagle said she gets that, she’s not opposed to it, she just wants to make sure that you guys keep in mind the work that goes into it because it’s not even during the workday working hours, you know, on the weekends, and you know, Smith and Speagle are answering questions, helping enforcement officers, you know, it’s after business hours too. Haven said we’ll have to have our administration. He agrees (unintelligible).

Haven asked if there was any more from council.

Luginski said he had a question. (Haven made an unintelligible comment.) Luginski said to Wylie’s comment, we don’t have estimated, like when would we do this, right? If we pass this tonight, which is fine, but there’s no estimated timeframe of when we would actually start this process of paid parking. Obviously, we can’t do it until the kiosks come in, but it would be nice to have an estimate, you know, like this would be done by January 1, whatever the time is. Because it’s kind of open-ended now. Haven said we need to move forward in this direction, we’ll get that detail. We’re going to get a lot of detail going down the road for sure. Haven said he didn’t know that we have all that detail, but he doesn’t know if it’s necessary. From a policy standpoint, we’re establishing a trajectory here. We’re going to find a revenue source for the city without raising taxes or employing a bond issue. Or are we going to use something this (unintelligible) using the flow of business to the town at $1.00 an hour. Haven said he checked the local communities around here. He called city halls. Every one of them has paid parking. We are the lowest on the pile of those. So, everyone else is higher who are doing this because they are destinations, and they’ve earned their destination right by the innovation of their businesses and so on, and so they are tapping those funds to improve their infrastructure, that all these businesses need. We don’t need deteriorating roads to help our businesses around here. We need roads that are viable, streets that are viable, and we have a report here, a (unintelligible) report, that shows deterioration of our roads and streets. So, this is a very innocuous, in Haven’s view, price to pay. We’re not paying a price at all. All we are doing is enacting a policy which will turn on a revenue stream to help this entire community, OK? Without that, we are looking at floating a bond issue or raising taxes.

Haven raised his hand and asked how many would like to see us float a bond issue or raise taxes? [The camera pulled back and there were a few hands raised, though no one raising their hand was asked if they are a Clarkston resident taxpayer or whether they were associates of the businesses. Pardee, a Clarkston taxpayer, was one of those who raised his hand.] Haven said that was interesting.

Wallace said there should be a plan to add parking. If you had a plan to add parking – (interrupting Wallace), Haven said we’re built out and Wallace knows that. We are built out in this town. We have what we have. Wylie said they should keep the conversation with council before they get to the audience. Haven said please. Wylie said sorry. Luginski said that’s fine.

Haven asked if there were any other comments from council.

Wylie said she had one other thing to say. We are talking about, as Haven says, forward revenue. She knows the concern is where are low-paid restaurant employees going to park because they don’t want to pay to park, and she doesn’t blame them. She does think that this stream of revenue perhaps would help with that, make sure that the staff has enough people to take care of the administration work, have money coming in for streets and sidewalks, and perhaps have a revenue stream so we can do something to help find places for employees to park, but if we have no money, we can’t do anything about it (unintelligible). Haven said with money and control, we can begin. You can’t start a parked car. We’re a parked car right now. Once we begin to get the car moving, we can begin to adjust it. That’s exactly what we did with the Washington and Main lot. If you’ll recall, we had a bunch of opposition from local businesses when we started to turn this thing on at 10:00 in the morning, something like that. Whoa, you’re ruining us. We heard all those people at our council meeting, like once in their lifetime, we heard form them for sure. But then we adjusted it. We went to 4:00 p.m. in the afternoon, which alleviated all the stresses of those people and it’s been wonderful. We haven’t heard anything about this in the last two, three years, he doesn’t know how many years we’ve had this in place. We had two years of COVID, and a year or two before COVID, but we came up with that $100,000 actual figure, all right? Now, if we double that here, or whatever the doubling is, it’s certainly more than zero, OK, and we need more than zero in this town, all right? So, that’s what this is really all about here.

Haven said OK, he’s heard from council, unless anybody wants to chime in right now.

Haven recognized Eric Lines [Union Joints/Curt Catallo business partner]. Haven asked Lines if he would stand, and he did. Lines said that Haven said that paid parking is a way to fix a problem without creating another one. Haven said he didn’t say that. An unidentified woman [who sounded like Cara Catallo, Curt Catallo’s sister] said Haven did say that. Lines said that’s what he heard, but that may be true for the city, but obviously as Wallace alluded to, that’s definitely not the case for the restaurants, and Lines doesn’t just say his restaurants, he’s saying all of the restaurants down there because, again, if it’s starting at 4:00, this tax is pointed directly at the restaurants and their customers. And, as you said, it’s been tough the last couple of years, the restaurant industry is well documented as far as having so many problems to COVID and we’re still having them to this day. The Woodshop is not open tonight. It’s not because we wanted to give a day off; we can’t staff it to be open on Monday.

Haven said there’s no paid parking (unintelligible) either, right? Haven said he’s not sure it’s coincident with what Lines is saying. Haven said he thinks there’s another problem contributing to the staffing issue and that’s people don’t want to work, OK? Haven said Lines can’t put that on parking; that’s his point, OK? That’s a separate issue not involving how we raise revenue for the city. Lines said but paid parking would make it more of a difficult (unintelligible crosstalk between Haven and Lines). Haven said he would grant that.

Haven said these municipalities, which he’s not named yet, which are in surrounding areas, operate viably with paid parking, OK? So, it’s an attribute, an asset to their community.

Haven recognized [James?] Markwalder who provided his address. He lives right across from Union Adworks, so he knows how successful it is. He deals with the traffic every day. You have to talk to those people about making left-hand turns and (unintelligible). Some of them are insane. That’s another subject altogether. Markwalder has heard a lot of wide-ranging discussion. It’s a city parking lot. He sees no reason why we shouldn’t make it a paid parking lot, but in terms of the details (gesturing), you’ve got twelve spaces, you’ve got employees who are parking there, you’ve made revenue adjustments, he thinks that you have to sit down and say OK, how much of it is consumed with employee parking, can you do a permit basis on that, how much, he doesn’t know, but let’s get down to specifics, all right, and then make a decision on whether or not we should generate some more revenue or not. Markwalder would generally support it. If you go to any major city here, you’ve got employee parking, employee paid parking at issue wherever you go, and they seem to work it out, so Markwalder doesn’t think that we should assume that people that have made investments in the city, private investments, the city has sat back and just taken advantage of that and not contributed to their success. It’s been working together. So, in this particular case, let’s get down to how many spots are there, how many are going to be metered, is there a place for employees, can there be an accommodation for that. Let’s get out of generalities.

Haven recognized Ed Adler. Adler said Mr. Mayor, he’s had businesses in Oxford supermarkets, and Independence Township, Waterford, Union Lake, Highland, and never has anybody talked about parking for his employees. This mantra these gentlemen are spreading, that it’s a tax on the business. He’s never heard of such a thing. It is typical, of repeating something, that people begin to believe it. It’s not a tax on the business. It’s a public service. This parking lot – there is no free parking. You just put sealcoating on this parking lot. You just striped it. You have it lit. You plow it. There’s a cost to running this parking lot, and if it belonged to Neil Wallace, there would be a tax on the parking lot. So, there’s a negative tax because it isn’t on the tax rolls. So, but this mantra that they have constructed here is the funniest thing that he’s ever heard. That it’s a tax on the restaurants. My God. There wouldn’t be a supermarket or a Walmart in the country if that were people’s attitudes. He always had to provide parking and pay for it. Adler said he’s never heard of anything so ridiculous in his life, that it’s a tax. So, let’s just get that out of our head.

Haven thanked Adler and said he’s thought about that a lot relative to the existing restaurants, both in town and outside of town that own their own parking lots and some of them – (Lines interrupted Haven, who recognized him). Lines said it’s not a tax before 4:00, but it is after. So, there is an inequality there. Adler addressed Lines and said if his organization stepped up on the $10,000, you’d owe $2-3,000,000 to the city. Haven hit his gavel and said he doesn’t use it very often but (unintelligible).

Haven asked if anyone else would like to make public comments.

Haven recognized Cara Catallo [Curt Catallo’s sister]. Catallo said she just, she didn’t realize this this was going to be, like, to her, came out of nowhere a little bit, and now that we actually have Main Street Oakland County accessible and we can use their expertise, she would suggest that we wait until the next meeting, just table it one meeting, and try to find out a little bit about what they think and maybe the existing lot all day would make a benefit or would it be more beneficial to have our prime parking spots along Main Street be the ones metered because they are the best spots and encourage people to walk up a hill. But Catallo just thinks that we have this expertise that we can tap, and even if it’s just two weeks, finding out a little bit more so you have a legitimate strategy and plan and reasoning behind, you know, this idea. Catallo said she’s curious about the other cities Haven referenced because we’re not a major city. So, like, when she thinks about the cities that do have paid parking, they’re considerably larger, but she just would ask that we table it to at least see if we can have some expertise from people who’ve done this in multiple communities to better guide you and she would also suggest that it would be better if we had our city manager here and the two missing council people just so that we have a greater sense of how everybody feels, and from a resident’s standpoint, Catallo would like more details instead of we’re going to spend 18 grand and then we’re going to figure it out later. She thinks it would be better if you had sort of a sense of plan and a strategy, a purpose and legitimate, you know, design behind it instead of this way we’re gonna, we’re just going to raise money, zero to sixty. Catallo said she also thinks it’s a little bit unseemly to do it right before an election. It feels a little bit campaign-ey, and she’s speaking as a resident, not as Main Street Oakland County. [Main Street Clarkston is Cara Catallo’s independent, 501(c)(3) organization to which the taxpayers contributed $1,000, and she indicated that she would be inviting Eric Lines, her brother’s business partner, to sit on the board. It’s unclear if she’s done so.] Continuing, Catallo said but she just feels like it would seem a little bit better if everybody was here and maybe it didn’t feel like it’s being shoved through at Mach 10. Catallo said so, that’s her opinion, and she’s already put, Main Street knows that this is happening, she figured it out at 3:00, and she put a call in so she could get information to you before the next meeting. Haven thanked Catallo.

Haven asked if anyone else from the audience wanted to speak. Wallace stood up and Haven said he would get to him again.

Haven recognized someone whose name was unintelligible. The unidentified man said first, regarding the administration of it, is there a way that whoever this company is that you’re having put up the kiosks and whatever and run those. Do they have tiers set up that would alleviate the work being done by your staff that they would do that sort of stuff, and certainly that would cut into whatever the profit would be, but it would take the work away from there. All right, that might be something that you could look at to see how can we administer it, if we are going to. Will they do more for a little bit more money so that we don’t have to burden the staff with that. Something to look into. Speagle said she didn’t think they do, no. The unidentified man said OK. Haven said that’s interesting. We are going to have to pay for administration one way or the other, and there’s going to be a cost. The unidentified man said one is maybe you might have to bring in some other staff to do it, the other is you’re going to have to realize that you’re not going to net as much from the process.

Continuing, the unidentified man said the other is, he agrees, this is not a tax on our businesses here. It isn’t. If they want to say it’s anything, it’s a use tax, which is probably the most fairest tax that there is out there. You pay to use it as opposed to having us, the residents, subsidize other people that come on in here and pay for them to be able to do what they what to do. Whoever is going to use it, let them pay for it, OK? As opposed to having us do it then. And then the third thing he would mention is maybe as all this is being drawn up, work with those businesses that have employees and see if there’s some way that you can then negotiate a special contract with the people in town that have employees. Let them maybe buy parking passes for a month, six months, at a reduced amount that they can have, and their employees can be there. They’re going to get a space to park for their employees at a reduced spot, the city’s still going to get some, but you’re going to be alleviating some of what that extra cost they’re going to have the cost of doing business. Not a tax. It’s just the cost of doing business.

Haven asked if anyone else had any comments. Robert Esshaki said he had a few comments to make if he may. Haven recognized him, and he walked up to the podium.

Esshaki said, so a couple of things, and he thinks he’s shared a lot of them. Haven asked him to introduce himself, and he is Robert from Rudy’s Market. Esshaki said so, we’ve had a lot of discussions during this entire, whether it was the HDC, whether it was the Planning Commission, with the architects and amongst ourselves and Union Joints and you know, lots of other people. Esshaki said he would say a couple of things. You know, he’s on record as saying that he’s in favor of paid parking. He does think that it needs to be part of a comprehensive plan that involves adding more parking in other ways. There’s potentially, just throwing out some ideas, there’s a lot we have on the other side of this that potentially we can add spots. There are also spots that you know were taken away on Buffalo and Church Street a few years ago. That is a city-owned lot that were arbitrarily taken away without being replaced. Esshaki thinks that those should be back on the table. Now, he’s not saying that all the residents are going to agree with that. Certainly, they won’t, so there needs to be some back and forth and some shared pain with everybody.

Esshaki thinks that just saying that we’re going to have paid parking in a city lot is, he’s not in favor of, he’s in favor of paid parking, you know, he’s going to open a restaurant here, it’s something with three restaurants, and he’s going to have a lot of customers that are going to have to pay and he understands that, and we will maybe have to be a little bit better than the people who don’t have to pay for parking on Dixie Highway or on M-15 and he’s OK with that. He doesn’t think, with all due respect to his friends Lines and Wallace, he doesn’t think that’s going to discourage people from parking down here. He thinks when you go out, as well all know, you go out, you know, you have a couple drinks, you have a couple appetizers, your bill’s going to be $100, $80, $200, whatever that number is, so it’s going to be $202, or $83, or $104, or whatever that number is. Esshaki doesn’t think parking is going to dissuade people from coming here. He actually thinks that if we come up with a comprehensive plan to create more parking, to maybe, you know, we are going to attack the fact that we have a lot of employees coming in to here and getting them, figuring out a way, he’s talked some solutions with Lines, he knows Robert Roth and Adler have a lot that is extremely underused, and Esshaki thinks that if you were to add a parking everywhere or to more places than just Depot Street as part of a comprehensive plan that’s going to now push people into some unused spots because if they have to pay, right now, they drive around potentially, or they don’t know that there’s more paid parking there, but again, as part of a comprehensive plan where everywhere is paid parking. Esshaki is not sure why there would be paid parking at a city lot there but there is not paid parking on the streets, or on Buffalo, or on Washington, or on Main. It’s either paid, or in Esshaki’s opinion, it’s paid parking or it’s not. But again, that’s just his opinion.

Esshaki thinks that if you look to, we’re trying to build a consensus here, right, on what would work for the entire community or work for the residents. You know, Esshaki said at the last meeting, if everybody’s a little bit unhappy, we’ve probably done a good job, right? Esshaki doesn’t think everyone’s going to be happy no matter what the plan is. He thinks there are opportunities, potential to talk to some business owners down here, you know, with Union Joints, about making sure all the employees are able to park here.

Esshaki understands their point about being a restaurant tax. He respectfully disagrees as well. It’s just part of the deal, right? It’s not a restaurant tax, it’s the people that are going to be using us, them, the people that are going to be occupying most of those spots during the busiest times are the restaurants, so they create their proportionate share, not any more, not any less, if you base it on how many spots they’re using.

Esshaki thinks that if you were to, additionally, we have to figure out, like this gentleman said, we have to figure out like what the entire spots are, right? How many employees are parking down here right now, how can we get them out of there, can we work out a deal so we can use some of the lots off site or work out a deal with some of the other business owners that have larger parking lots.

Esshaki said lastly, he’ll say that he thinks that adding paid parking right now, and again he knows they are just going to vote on it and they are not instituting it right now and he’s completely and totally, as he’s told Haven and Wylie, they’ve had some discussion, he’s completely in favor of it. He doesn’t know if right now is the right time without, you know, he understands they want to raise money and he certainly respects that. He’s not sure that right now is the exact perfect time to do it. Again, they are 18 months out, and he thinks that sharing some of the potential costs and some of the potential responsibilities of having our employees, you know, park off site or work out, negotiate an agreement with another party would be a lot better if it was a shared cost as opposed to pretty much having the Union be responsible and their three wonderful restaurants, and he agrees with a lot of what Wallace said. When Esshaki came here in 1990, and he says this all the time, we had a huge parking problem, nobody wanted to park down here, right? So, now, we have this wonderful city, all of these buildings have been rehabbed. They’ve done a great job. James Schneider came in and did a beautiful job on his building. Harrisons. And now we’re looking at, you know, he knows that the restaurant on the corner, the Old Village Café, he knows he’s got some plans over there, and so while there could be some growing pains and not everyone will agree on everything, Esshaki thinks that overall, the downtown has been kind of transformed over the last X amount of years and so, he does believe that we should, and he’s in favor of even passing it, that doesn’t matter, as long as there’s a well-thought plan and we’re figuring out a way to add spots.

Esshaki said you know, he hears a lot of this talk about the old thing where you have to pay for parking spots, you know, he doesn’t know if you should get rid of that at this point, it’s like the last one in has to pay, he doesn’t think that’s fair either, but at the same time, he thinks that it’s the municipality’s responsibility as much as it is the business owner’s responsibility, to share, and the residents, to share in the burden of parking. It’s not all the restaurant owner, the business owner, or the building owner should be responsible for parking. Nor should it be the municipality has that weight all on their shoulders, nor should we take any of that weight off of the residents, right? There are opportunities between all three of those parties to figure things out, and there needs to be some shared pain, and pain, he doesn’t know if that’s the right word, but he thinks that’s the only way that we’re going to kind of, you now, make everybody happier. He thinks that if there’s paid parking everyone, and it follows someone over to the Adler’s lot, well, they’re going to be happy because their property is going to be utilized and their getting paid for it. Esshaki thinks that the Union Joints will appear it’s more equitable, and he thinks, again, that the city, you know, has to make some tough decisions, you know, with regard to where they’re going to add those spots.

Esshaki thanked the council for their time. Those are all his comments. Haven thanked Esshaki.

Haven recognized Wallace again. Wallace said (unintelligible) what Esshaki said is don’t do this is because what we need is more parking and you’re not going forward with figuring that out. Think about this. Throughout the county, throughout the country, local communities subsidize businesses so they can create walkable downtown communities. There’s even a program through the county he’s sure they are aware of. Clarkston doesn’t qualify. It doesn’t need to because the businesses have carried the weight here without any subsidies, without any interference, and you’re putting that at risk. And as much as Esshaki says the tax won’t keep people away, he turned right around and said that he has to be that much better because he is competing with somebody else who doesn’t have that parking issue. And that’s true. The bigger problem is the lack of parking, and you’ve got to address that, and to pass this to just start raising money without addressing the problem and the responsibility caused by not enforcing the deferment, that’s a real problem. That’s a real problem for the community, it risks turning people away, it risks putting these businesses out of business. Haven thanked Wallace.

Haven recognized Pardee for a comment for one minute.

Pardee said he would like to thank the council and the public and the business owners for having this discussion. He’s really encouraged by everyone’s willingness to try to figure out where should the money come from. That’s a very positive thing. The second point. Pardee doesn’t think the parking fund has the money for the $18,000. We’re behind in our revenue right now, we took it down to zero, and Pardee would challenge Smith and Greg [Coté, the city’s treasurer] to confirm that the monies are there that are represented by the resolution. Pardee said the third thing – (interrupting Pardee), Haven said he [Smith] wrote it. We have it in writing. Pardee said he also supported the Miller Road spending – (interrupting Pardee), Haven said he didn’t want to discuss that. He’s just telling Pardee – (interrupting Haven), Pardee said he understands. Haven said Pardee’s minute was about up, and he should go ahead. Pardee said he doesn’t think the public understands the role that the businesses play in the tax revenue for the city. Pardee doesn’t know if we’ve ever talked about this publicly, but businesses don’t pay directly to the city. They don’t. Except for real estate taxes. But there isn’t a sales tax that comes from the businesses that comes to the village. Haven thanked Pardee and said he thinks we are getting off track. (Pardee made an unintelligible comment.)

Haven said there were several things and Pardee had his time to talk.

Catallo asked to be recognized again and Haven told her to go ahead; she had one minute. Catallo said she was curious about two things. One is Haven never said what the other cities were and Haven said, he sort of implied he was going to reveal that, and the other thing was would the city lot, this little tiny lot, also be metered because she kind of feels like it should except for maybe a fifteen minute so if somebody runs in to pay a bill, but those are spots that can also be revenue and it just seems like it would be a mistake. Oh, and the third thing is you never said anything about what the time is because that’s a very popular park, and you’d be missing revenue by moms bringing their kids to play on the playground. So, Catallo is curious if Haven has a comment about that.

Haven said he does. He doesn’t have all the cities here handy, but he knows they were all, as he told her, he remembers Royal Oak, Birmingham, Rochester, again, they’re bigger for sure, but they have the desirability, they have the attraction that factors in that Clarkston unbelievably has fostered here over the last few years. Catallo said currently. Wallace said but they use that to provide parking, there’s adequate parking in those communities because they’ve raised the money – (talking over Wallace), Haven said we can’t create any more parking than we have so we are trying to utilize the parking we do have to create revenue, OK? We have zero revenue on that lot right now. Zero. OK. You understand zero, he gets that he’s not trying to sell it to Wallace, he’s just saying. Wallace said he understands perfectly; Haven is focused on the money he can make like he’s a competing business (unintelligible crosstalk). That’s not what you are.

Haven said no, we are a municipality trying to run a city, OK? And this council is elected by the residents, OK? To run the city, OK? We value our businesses. Don’t get him wrong and don’t misquote him on this, OK? We have a 2-3% spatial allocation for businesses here which is very attractive, and our residents love the fact that people love to come to our town, OK? And one of the reasons that they love to come to our town is our businesses. So, this is not a controversial issue, OK? This is forging a joint solution moving forward. We’ve been discussing this thing for 20 years. Haven said he would say 20 years. Avery said ever since he’s been here for 14. Haven said the thought, folks, of him sending this back to committee again is absolutely appalling to him. Haven said he doesn’t want to get into the weeds. What he wants to do is push it over the hump, so we begin to say yes, we’re going to have paid parking here, additional paid parking, and we’re going to begin to work with that additional revenue, we’re going to pay our administration to do it, OK? And we are going to seek the benefit, we’re going to establish the benefit and see the benefit in our roads and street systems around here which Mr. Pardee reminds us weekly, biweekly, about the fact that we need it. We have a PASER report that says that, all right, as well.

Haven said we have to be decisive. This council has to make a decisive decision, yes or no, whether we’re going to take the next step in creating revenue in this city, OK? So, that’s his final comment. If there’s anyone else on council, Haven said he was going to cut this discussion off because he thinks they’ve heard enough tonight to go forward with this resolution at least. It’s fairly straightforward, you’re right, it’s simple with the details to be worked out on this thing which we will hand over to our administration to work with. They will accommodate Wallace’s rights to the portion of the lot that he has, we’ll look at variations and so on, we’ll look at the part, we talked about the fact that we started our paid parking at 4:00 in the afternoon. We did that for the businesses downtown and to reap the more substantial influx traffic. That helps the park people, the moms who take their kids to the park. Haven said he gets all this stuff, OK? But unless you take a decisive action folks, somebody’s got to lead. Haven said his dad used to have an expression. He said if the children of Israel were still in Egypt, if the children of Israel were a committee, they’d still be in Egypt, OK? And Haven thinks it’s true. He thinks we can talk about this until we’re blue in the face. Haven said he may not live so long as to see this, the revenue increase in this town with no tax increase and with no floating a bond issue. This is an opportunity to do that, OK? So, that’s his stumping speech, if you will, but he’s going to call for tonight, he knows we’re short two council members, he can’t help that, OK? Things happen. Life happens, and people can’t be here for certain reasons. But we have a quorum tonight, OK? We can legally make a decision on this council.

Ryan said they need four votes. Haven said OK, Ryan was right, we need four votes of the seven. It’s not a simple majority, just a majority, OK? So, Haven is going to ask Speagle to take the roll, please on this resolution.

Wylie asked Haven to hang on a second. Haven said hang on a second, why? Wylie said she would like to make a motion to table until we do have more council people here and Smith here. Haven said Smith is the one who wrote this. Wylie said she understands that.

Haven asked Ryan if a table takes precedence. Ryan said if there’s a second, yes sir.

Haven asked if there was a second for tabling this. No second. Wylie said OK. Motion to table died for lack of support.

Haven asked if they could go back to the resolution again, and Ryan agreed. Haven asked Speagle for a roll call.

Luginski, Wylie, Haven, Casey, and Fuller voted yes. Haven said the motion is adopted.

Haven thanked everyone for their input. He said this won’t be the end of it. We’re going to be creative in moving forward with this. We now have revenue we can work with.

Item 10d – Motion: Acceptance of Jennifer Speagle’s Resignation (Video time mark 1:23:07):

• • Motion – Acceptance of Jennifer Speagle’s Resignation (page 55/56 of the council packet)
  • 10-10-2022 Resignation Letter (page 56/56 of the council packet)

Haven said that the next item on the agenda is a motion to accept Jennifer Speagle’s resignation. Haven said this is the saddest moment he can remember in a long time, and he can’t (unintelligible audience talk). Luginski asked if everyone could just be quiet as they walk out. (Unintelligible audience talk.)

Haven said he really didn’t know they were going to have a motion to accept Jennifer Speagle’s resignation. He thinks they can unanimously just not accept it and have her stay here. (Laughter.) Haven said they certainly respect her desire to improve and better herself and that kind of thing, so they really are happy for her in that respect.

Haven said this is a motion, so he will make a motion to accept her resignation and just ask for a second. (Silence, followed by laughter.) Haven said it will die for lack of a second. Wylie said she would make a second just because it’s a good opportunity for Speagle.

Haven asked if there was any discussion.

Luginski thanked Speagle for all that she’s done. It’s been a vast improvement, and we couldn’t run as smoothly as we do without her. He appreciates it. Wylie said what he said. (Applause.)

Haven said she’s promised we will work together with the township because she can be very influential because she’s a department head. So, we’re excited about that. Speagle said she’s not going far, and she’s always reachable. Haven said we aren’t losing Speagle; we’re gaining a piece of the township here and she’ll work with us. Haven thanked Speagle.

Haven said we need a vote on this and Speagle is the one who has to take the roll. Wylie said it’s a motion.

Casey, Fuller, Haven (sadly), Luginski, and Wylie voted yes. Motion carried.

Haven said congratulations. Speagle will be sorely missed. Speagle said thank you.

Agenda Item #11, Adjourn (Video time mark 1:25:23):

Haven said he would entertain a motion to adjourn.

Motion by adjourn by Fuller. (Second was unintelligible due to audience chatter; minutes indicate it the second was by Luginski.)

Haven asked if there was any discussion.

No discussion.

Motion to adjourn by unanimous voice vote.

Resources:

• • Link to video recording: https://www.dropbox.com/s/dcvfmrjkxlg7491/CityCouncil_October102022.mp4?dl=0
  • 10-10-2022 – City Council packet