[4:25] Can I do a roll call, please? Deron
>> here.
[4:30] » Howard
>> here.
[4:31] » Miller
>> here.
[4:33] » Here.
>> Blackburn.
[4:35] » Absent. Hagerman.
>> Mc Alexander
[4:39] » here.
>> All right.
[4:41] Approval of the agenda. Is there a
motion to approve the agenda?
[4:45] » I make a motion to approve the agenda.
I'll second.
[4:57] » Okay.
>> Any discussion?
[5:02] » None.
>> Any disc
[5:03] » any discussion?
>> No.
[5:06] » Okay.
>> We do. All
[5:08] » in favor?
>> Yeah.
[5:10] » We approve.
>> Okay. [laughter]
[5:13] Okay.
>> I All right.
[5:18] And then approval of regular council
meeting minutes from July 27th. Is there
[5:23] a motion and a second?
>> I move to approve the minutes of uh July
[5:29] 27th.
>> Is there a second?
[5:35] » You can't.
>> I'll second.
[5:38] » My turn already. Don't look at me.
[laughter]
[5:44] » Approved.
Yes. Hi.
[5:47] » Okay.
>> All right. Is there any public comments
[5:51] for items not on the agenda?
>> Yeah, please take it.
[5:56] » Hi, my name is Ken Daniels. I'm on Henry
Hall Lane. Just wondering what the uh
[6:02] update is for the Ballards on Timber
Trail, which you voted on graciously on
[6:06] May the 18th with photos from Mark
Milner, who's an architect, was
[6:10] approved, and I still see those ugly
yellow ballards and police tape on the
[6:14] other lane. and getting tired of it. So,
just wondering what the update is.
[6:18] » Be great.
>> Thanks.
[6:20] » Thank you.
[6:26] » Can say something?
>> Yeah.
[6:27] » Okay. So, the the I'm Brad Shappler,
Roen Clark. Um the final design has been
[6:32] sent to the builder that is going to
construct what we what was ultimately
[6:38] decided on. We're waiting to get his
final cost to us along with us and
[6:42] package to us. So everything has been
set and decided. It's just waiting on
[6:46] him to deliver the final package, final
cost and everything like that so we can
[6:50] get to Jamie.
>> So that's where we're at.
[6:55] » Do you have any idea of timing? Is this
like we're not going to get to winter
[6:59] time?
>> I hope not. I mean it's it's
[7:02] » up to it's up to him. It's not really
out of our control at this point unless
[7:07] you want me to push him.
>> Not pushing.
[7:09] » Okay. [clears throat] I'll remind him.
I'll keep reminding him, but we're not
[7:12] building it. So, I you know,
>> kind of at his mercy. He's works in the
[7:17] village, so I would hope you'd want to
take care of the village.
[7:20] [clears throat]
>> Yep.
[7:20] » Who is the builder?
>> Uh Jerry Johnson, right?
[7:23] » Oh, yeah.
>> Oh, yeah. I may see Jerry in a day or
[7:26] two.
>> Okay. You remind him, too.
[7:29] » You will.
>> Thank you, Brad.
[7:35] Any
other public comments for items on the
[7:40] agenda?
All right, discussion topics. Police
[7:44] Department monthly report.
>> Good evening. And I believe all of you
[7:49] have my report. Is there any questions
on the report itself? [clears throat]
[7:58] » Does not appear. So, um I want to let
people know that there's going to be uh
[8:03] an educational event. We've partnered
with Bingham Farms Mobile Watch uh on
[8:09] September 10th at 7 p.m. and we're going
to be discussing ebikes, escooters,
[8:14] electric motorcycles. We're trying to
educate the public on the laws and
[8:18] safety because uh that has kind of
exploded all over all over the place
[8:23] with you know parents buying their kids
uh those devices which are a lot of fun
[8:27] but they're also very dangerous. So
again that'll be on September 10th 7
[8:32] p.m. at the Franklin uh library. And
again thanks for mobile watch for
[8:37] supporting us with that. Uh and as all
of you know uh thankfully the millillage
[8:42] passed in Franklin, one of the few
police uh millages that passed in
[8:46] Oakland County. So we're very thankful
and happy and uh that mill is for a
[8:50] period of five years.
>> Any questions?
[8:54] » Sure.
>> I the mobile or the excuse me the
[8:58] ebikes.
>> Yes. There are still there's no
[9:01] legislation about safety and protocols
to follow, age restrictions on who can
[9:07] ride them in the street.
>> So there there is a state law that that
[9:11] that talks about it. Um, what a lot of
jurisdictions are doing, I think the
[9:15] latest was Berkeley, is they're going
farther than the state law and limiting
[9:19] them limiting them in like the downtown
areas, uh, where they can't be on
[9:24] sidewalks or they have to walk their
their ebikes or scooters if there's a
[9:28] lot of people in the road, things like
that. But if you look at, um, uh, like
[9:34] electric motorcycles, they can't be
driven on sidewalks. And if you're the
[9:38] between the age of 14 and 18, you have
to wear a helmet and you have to have a
[9:41] motorcycle endorsement. And a lot of
kids that are getting these bikes from
[9:45] their parents, they have no idea. So,
we're just trying to educate. If we see
[9:49] someone that's driving carelessly or
recklessly, we will write them a ticket,
[9:53] but we're trying to educate at this
point.
[9:55] » Yeah. Which is always a good idea.
>> Are the vehicles are they legal to drive
[9:59] on the streets? I mean, they don't have
a lot of them don't have lights or
[10:03] » they they have to be street legal. Um,
if it's [clears throat] an electric
[10:06] motorcycle, has to have a license plate.
It has to have registration.
[10:09] » You see a lot just there's no
registration.
[10:11] » Nice to stop for those stop signs.
>> There's a spect it's everywhere from
[10:14] pedal things all the way to motorcycles
>> with mopeds in between.
[10:19] » So the ebikes and there's three
different classifications. I don't want
[10:22] to get too much into the weeds, but the
class 3 go up to almost 30 miles an
[10:25] hour. So
>> yeah. Well, I have two little ones,
[10:29] adorable little boys, eight, and they're
out cruising up and down the street. and
[10:34] he stopped to say hi and I said you do
know you have to observe all traffic
[10:38] laws.
He gave you that what [laughter]
[10:42] » exactly?
>> Whoa. You know, this is you got to stop
[10:48] at stop signs. You know, all the things
that you have to do.
[10:52] » It's dangerous.
>> And then the last thing I'll throw out
[10:54] there is uh you know, we have Kevin is
our new interimm fire chief and he's
[10:59] been great to work with. And I have got
along great. Had several meetings
[11:02] already, so my hats off to him.
>> Good. You
[11:05] » Thanks, Chief.
[11:12] Good evening. Good evening everyone.
>> Uh my report or Tony's last report was
[11:18] included in the packet.
>> You'll get my first one next month.
[11:22] » Okay.
>> Hopefully it's just as good. Um there
[11:25] any questions on the report?
[11:29] » Okay. Um couple of runs of note that
we've had in the last month in the uh
[11:34] commercial district up and down
telegraph here. We had a uh uh a fire
[11:40] and some air handling equipment up on
the roof which um charged the whole
[11:44] four-story building with smoke. Uh we
worked with the uh maintenance of the
[11:50] building to help evacuate all the smoke.
We used some positive pressure fans so
[11:55] we're able to return that building to
normal operating uh status. And another
[12:02] one up the road, we had a burned up belt
on an HVAC unit which also filled the
[12:07] building with smoke and uh were able to
uh ventilate that building and make it
[12:12] safe. Um
other than that, it's been a little
[12:17] quiet.
>> Yes.
[12:18] » Uh I have a neighbor on Outland Trail.
>> Yes.
[12:22] » Who a week ago, Sunday, I guess this
past Sunday, had a house fire at like we
[12:27] hours of the morning. And she said
initial investigation attributed to an
[12:33] extension cord that was plugged in on
one side into the outlet but not into
[12:37] anything else. Then the second
inspection she said attributed it to you
[12:42] know you have those
>> spray bottles with round power sprayer
[12:47] » and there's a little battery in the
power sprayer.
[12:50] » Is it really the case with that fire
that you're aware of?
[12:55] » That's what the insurance investigator
determined was the cause. It wasn't the
[12:58] extension cord
um that was there. He he eliminated that
[13:03] in his investigation.
>> How viable. I mean, I I've counted eight
[13:08] sprayer bottles
>> right after that in my garage.
[13:11] » Yeah, exactly. [laughter]
>> Yeah, that's the first one I've ever
[13:14] heard of. if if that indeed was the
cause.
[13:18] » Um I I take his word for it because he's
an expert, but uh we kind of go with
[13:24] what the insurance company says because
it's there, you know.
[13:27] » So, do [clears throat] we have to take
precautions about those things,
[13:29] especially if I leave my garage for 6
months over the winter or whatever?
[13:33] » Like I said, that's the first time I've
ever heard of that. So, I have several
[13:36] at my house. I'm not
>> I'm not really concerned about it. I
[13:40] mean, it could be a fluke or a one-off,
>> but I have not I've not heard in any
[13:44] other community of of that happening.
So,
[13:49] » Chief, I I I had a I have a request and
and that is I'm on mobile watch as well
[13:54] as council and there have been two
incidences. This one where it's it's
[14:02] really unknown. I mean, nobody's
committing to it being the roundup
[14:07] battle, the spray, but that it's being
considered. And the other one was in
[14:13] Franklin, the house fire where it was
the plug on the extension cord was
[14:18] underneath the sofa.
>> Yes.
[14:21] » Yes.
>> In the basement.
[14:23] » Right. I think that would be good
material to put in our newsletter.
[14:27] » I've I've been addressing some of these
issues as they come up with with my
[14:31] weekly newsletter. So I think I have the
height one this week or was that the
[14:36] walking?
>> Yeah.
[14:37] » Yeah. I think we need to start including
this type of information for all
[14:42] residents in the village that they be
made aware that these have occurred and
[14:46] to please take precautions.
>> All right. Thank you.
[14:50] » Yep. I've been trying to address some of
the the items that have been coming up
[14:52] at both village councils and
incorporating that into my newsletter.
[14:56] » Good. Thank you.
>> Okay. Any other questions?
[15:00] » All right. Have a good evening. Thank
you.
[15:04] [clears throat]
[15:08] » All right. Uh, village manager report.
My report was in the packet. I don't
[15:13] have anything else to add unless there
were any questions.
[15:17] » All right. So, I'll turn it over to Yav.
>> Um, likewise, you have my written report
[15:22] and I'm happy to take any questions if
there audience. Yes, you made a
[15:26] reference to our previous study session
um on the Bingham Ridge project
[15:34] » and uh were there notes taken from that
study session?
[15:38] » Um I mean I took notes as part of just
the discussion we were doing but no not
[15:43] like minutes style notes because
historically we've never done that with
[15:46] study sessions.
>> So minutes are not required.
[15:50] Okay. Since no decisions are made by
council at study sessions, that's why
[15:53] we've historically never done that
either.
[15:55] » Okay. But we had certain action items
that came out of that study session. Can
[16:00] you update us on those action items?
>> Um I mean not right this instance
[16:04] because I don't have any of those notes
in front of me right now, but um I can
[16:08] certainly take a look at them tomorrow
and um send out an update email. Well,
[16:12] not implying that we have poor memories,
but it would be nice to get written
[16:17] updates that remind us of things that
we've discussed and action items that we
[16:23] want to make sure we address. That would
be very helpful if we could get that.
[16:28] Thank you.
>> Well, Mike, you're you're working with
[16:31] the developer.
>> Yes.
[16:33] » On trying to come to an agreement on
what's red.
[16:36] » Yes. I can give you a quick update on
that. Would you please? So,
[16:39] » if I could segue,
>> um,
[16:43] we prepared pretty extensive redline
proposed edits based to that draft that
[16:50] you saw based upon the study session,
the comments, the areas of concern, the
[16:55] issues that were listed. Um, those went
out. Mary Kacher went through those
[17:02] after I prepared them. She did some mod
modification, sent him over to the
[17:08] developer. Uh the developer is now
included an attorney. Um and I believe
[17:15] it, yeah, he's got an attorney. Then the
owner is using an attorney who we
[17:19] haven't dealt with. So that attorney,
John Bieber, has gone through and done
[17:24] his own red lines and sent that back.
Um, I got back from vacation and when I
[17:30] got my head above water, took a dive
into that and have made some further
[17:36] changes to his. He's he his were pretty
extensive. So, um,
[17:42] Mary and I are going to go through those
in the next day or so and then probably
[17:46] get on a call with him and actually talk
through where we're at on some of these
[17:50] things. It's probably time to just do
that, but there have been extensive
[17:54] edits shared back and forth. Are these
small legalities and phrasing or are
[17:59] these major issues that are
>> res of it is clean up and there's a few
[18:03] things that are few areas that I'd
rather not
[18:07] » discuss right now but areas that you
would want to have uh negotiated.
[18:14] » Okay. Should we be
>> at what point do we actually are I was
[18:18] going to say made aware of this? Yeah, I
well I as I committed before I want to
[18:24] I'll share something with you well
before we come back to a meeting with
[18:28] the document that you're going to be
looking at. So we'll share you share
[18:31] with you a red line and sort of
summarize I think how we got there. It's
[18:34] probably the best approach.
>> Okay. Don't give away the story.
[18:40] [laughter]
[18:42] » We're trying.
[18:46] Has
the subject of trees come up?
[18:50] » Yes.
>> And
[18:56] » um we're going back and forth on that
issue a little bit and that'll be an
[19:01] item of discussion about
>> um
[19:06] » Eric, I know you had an issue as well, a
question about how to handle that and
[19:10] we're working on that.
>> Yeah. probably it's going to have
[19:13] another um
study session I guess.
[19:17] » Yeah.
>> As the appropriate time, too. So,
[19:20] » okay.
>> Well, that was part of the
[19:22] » That was part of the action plan.
>> Action plan. Yeah.
[19:25] » Okay.
>> Do you have if at your convenience you
[19:28] could just go back to your notes and
sort of recap those action items and
[19:31] just drop us an email as to this?
>> Okay.
[19:37] » Yeah, that's about it right now, though.
Mhm. But
[19:39] » yeah, I think it that study session that
we talked about will be helpful and
[19:43] we'll
>> you'll see how we got from where we were
[19:46] at last time to where we're at now.
You'll have a red line. It'll all be
[19:48] real clear.
>> Okay.
[19:53] » All right. Do we want to move on to any
new business?
[19:57] » Rose, we've got Brad here.
Sorry. Oh, sorry.
[20:04] » Did we already get through? Sorry.
Sorry. Board and committee updates. Any
[20:07] other board committee updates?
>> I I'll say that Wednesday morning at
[20:13] 8:00 is our next strategic planning
meeting with fire department. So if
[20:16] anybody's interested, it'll be at 8:00
at the fire department Wednesday
[20:20] morning.
[20:23] We're done.
[20:32] [laughter]
>> All right. Then we'll move on to the
[20:36] Rose project phase three.
>> All right.
[20:39] » Are we going to have a discussion of
some kind before the presentation on
[20:43] this material?
>> There's no presentation. This is just a
[20:46] proposal for your consideration.
>> Okay.
[20:51] Yeah, it's up to you if you want to
listen to him first and then ask
[20:54] questions. Yeah.
>> Well, um we were uh HRC was asked to uh
[21:00] write a proposal to begin the
discussions on phase three to kind of
[21:04] keep the momentum uh going for the road
programs in in the village of Bingham
[21:08] Farms. Um we don't want I mean
everyone's paying the millillage. So we
[21:13] want to make sure that we don't forget
about last phase of this that we have to
[21:17] do just to keep it on everyone's minds I
guess. So we were asked to raise a
[21:20] proposal. Um, I thought based on what we
learned from phase one and two, the
[21:25] discussions from the roads advisory
council that we should probably be good
[21:28] to maybe have more of a study phase for
this one to relook at the scope. um have
[21:34] more discussion, have more time
essentially during during the between
[21:37] when we get topographic survey and when
we start the design process and during
[21:41] the design process to really nail down
exactly what we want to do, what we
[21:45] don't want to do, and why we want to do
those things and come up with a a a good
[21:50] scoping document at the end to kind of
justify why we made the decisions that
[21:54] we did based on what discussions, based
on what decisions, based on what
[21:57] background research. That's really what
this this proposal is. is kind of a
[22:01] study phase but also to get the
topographic survey done because the
[22:04] topographic survey will be done will be
good for years to come. Nothing much
[22:09] changes in the roadway in terms of
grades and things like that. So whether
[22:14] you do it you want to do it next summer
or the summer 28 or the summer 20 2030
[22:18] whatever that topographic survey will
still be good. It's not something that's
[22:21] going to be wasted.
>> So that's the big thing about this
[22:23] proposal is the topo
>> is the too. Yeah. And that's that's much
[22:28] of the budget as well. And we didn't do
that when we were doing all the work.
[22:32] » So we did selective topo and because
we're we what we did was we looked at
[22:36] the drainage areas. We we looked at the
drainage found the areas that we thought
[22:40] were the areas that we wanted to correct
and did too in those areas. And then it
[22:44] turns out it kind of burns us in the
back end because there were other areas
[22:47] that people wanted to get done that we
didn't have too with. So we were taking
[22:49] too multiple times. just it it ended up
I don't think it cost us more money, but
[22:54] it just didn't it didn't it's easier if
you have everything all at once and all
[22:57] there and then you can justify why we
did well why we made this decision and
[23:00] why we didn't make this decision. So
rather than trying to do trying to be
[23:05] too smart for our own good, right, and
just do too in areas that we think are
[23:09] the problem, too the entire thing, get
the whole lay of the land, figure out
[23:13] where the areas are that need work. Why
there's areas that we didn't um propose
[23:19] improvements on and justify why we
didn't. So when people come and say, "I
[23:22] have an issue," to be like, "Well,
here's why we didn't decide to do
[23:25] something here." And try to keep that
budget tight.
[23:28] I think you know from from my
perspective of course I was involved
[23:32] with the women's committee and I think
everybody will recall that was here then
[23:36] this is this is the part of the project
that's going to be by far the most
[23:41] expensive or at least potentially by far
the most expensive. Um you guys proposed
[23:47] before a complete reconstruction. My
memory is pretty good. It seemed like it
[23:52] was north of $4 million I believe.
um
[23:57] part and this was a big part really a
very significant part of the road
[24:01] committee discussion because of the
price tag and the discussion about why
[24:05] it couldn't be
something similar to what we were doing
[24:09] in phase one milling fill versus a
complete reconstruction.
[24:14] So and and I know even the council at
the time said let's get moving on phase
[24:19] one but phase two will be for the uh for
the next council to work on and probably
[24:25] just because there was still maybe some
amount of controversy, maybe a lot, and
[24:30] because of the price tag. There is no
question that we need to do the roads,
[24:34] and you're right, there's been a millage
assigned to do that. There's been
[24:38] special assessments, at least on the
people that are involved already. Um,
[24:44] but I I don't I for me because I'm
driven a lot by the financial health and
[24:51] condition of the of the village, which
is good right now. Very good right now.
[24:55] I I'm not sure. I'm not sure we're I'm
not sure we know when we can
[25:00] um when we might be financially ready to
do this. Maybe it's in two years, three
[25:04] years. Back to your point, I'm not for
me, I'm not sure we need the to do the
[25:09] too right now until we may have a better
understanding of when this project may
[25:16] occur. I maybe the too is good for years
to come, but right now based on what was
[25:24] studied a lot, um this is a $4 million
project.
[25:29] » That's fair. Again, that's why this is
for your consideration. Uh we want to
[25:34] make sure we we capitalize on the
lessons learned from the previous. The
[25:36] longer we wait, the more we forget.
>> Right.
[25:39] » Right. So again, it's just for your
consideration.
[25:42] » Well, in in light of what Eric just said
and in light of a review of how valuable
[25:49] the previous road advisory committee was
to our understanding of this immense
[25:55] project. And third, in viewing that what
will be probably the most expensive
[26:02] project in the history of Bingham Farms,
I make a motion to establish a phase
[26:08] three road advisory committee comprised
of village council members and community
[26:13] volunteers for the purpose of conducting
thorough research and making project
[26:18] recommendations to the village council
for their final approval.
[26:24] And then there's one other motion on its
tail. I make a motion to require a
[26:29] minimum of two competitive vendor quotes
for all services in excess of $25,000
[26:36] pertaining to the phase three roads
project.
[26:41] We talked about the need to begin
aggressively getting multiple vendor
[26:46] quotes for large projects. I mean we,
you know, we love our vendors, but we
[26:51] need to ourselves see the different
approaches to projects from various
[26:57] vendors.
And with that in mind, I'll repeat, I
[27:02] make a motion to require a minimum of
two competitive vendor quotes as a
[27:07] minimum of for all services in excess of
$25,000 pertaining to the phase three
[27:14] roads project. So I guess I have two
motions on the floor. Madame chair,
[27:19] would you take each motion and call a
vote on that?
[27:24] » Second.
>> I have a second. Second that.
[27:27] » Okay.
>> So we can make a vote a few comments
[27:30] now. [clears throat] the discussion. So
>> you're
[27:36] » so the the first motion on the road
advisory committee um
[27:42] I I don't know how many advisory
committees the village has used
[27:45] historically. I thought that particular
one was was really good. I think it was
[27:51] worthy. I think people were serious
about it. Uh we it went for several
[27:56] months. There was a number of
presentations done and I think it really
[27:59] helped people
understand uh the magnitude of the
[28:04] project and how to finance it and when
to do it and so forth uh and prepared
[28:08] people that it was going to be a tax
increase property tax increase.
[28:13] » So I think there was a lot of value that
came out of it. This this next phase of
[28:17] the project phase three
um I think a road advisory committee is
[28:23] a good idea actually
>> and I think and we're going to talk a
[28:26] little bit more maybe about how we get
volunteers from the I don't know how you
[28:31] got in it last time. You guys will have
to tell me. How'd you get people to even
[28:34] say, "Yeah, we're willing to do this."
But we really need to try to encourage
[28:38] however we can. Um the residents that
live on Bristol Lane and all the
[28:46] associated courts,
>> huh,
[28:49] » the resident Jim Burley was the one,
>> well, Jim Burley was actually on the
[28:52] committee at the time. There may have
been others from Bristol Lane, but he
[28:54] was the one I remember.
Um, and point being is as a council
[29:01] member, I wouldn't be comfortable
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable either
[29:05] way, but I'm not sure I'd be comfortable
voting on something without knowing that
[29:10] the people on that in that road and the
courts, Bristol Lane and the courts knew
[29:17] exactly what was being proposed and why
because because again it's a big big
[29:21] project.
So the project needs to be done. I'm not
[29:26] sure we know the best way to do it. You
probably probably think think you know
[29:30] the best way to do it. Um
I think a a advisory group is is a good
[29:37] idea and I think we need to work hard to
at least get people that you live over.
[29:43] We're signing you up.
>> To be a big part of this discussion. So
[29:48] that's kind of that's kind of my
>> Yeah,
[29:51] » I would I would agree with your
assessment.
[29:54] I think about it as like it okay this is
like I guess I wasn't here last month if
[29:59] there was discussions but I don't think
there was
[30:02] » um but it's like okay time to talk about
phase three and and how do we want to do
[30:07] that this is a
>> you know a basic
[30:11] » these kind of things need to happen this
suggestion yes starting to topographic
[30:16] survey and this is if we were going to
do it in two years a kind of timeline
[30:19] that we'd be looking at I think big yeah
to to
[30:23] Hey, let's get people together and talk
about how do we want to do this? Even
[30:28] $61,000 is a big chunk of stepping into
how do we want to move forward.
[30:33] » Um that may be the right first step, but
I think we can talk about it some more.
[30:44] You know, we had talked about continuing
the road committee
[30:50] because we're always going to have areas
of all our roads susceptible to some
[30:57] form of degradation or damage.
In my investigation of other
[31:02] communities, I found that many of them
have a standard road committee. I mean,
[31:07] Bloomfield Township, granted, they're
monolithic compared to our size, their
[31:13] road committee meets twice a month. They
have a lot of roads, but we would that
[31:20] would be overkill
>> unless you served wine and cheese.
[31:24] [laughter]
But, you know, I think it's really
[31:27] important that we pay attention to the
the ongoing costs to our residents and
[31:34] roads is one of them. And I would
suggest that we have a more permanent
[31:40] committee because it is a constant issue
and not that they have to meet every
[31:47] month. Our planning commission doesn't
meet every month but when there are
[31:53] incidences then I think giving a record
of that would be very handy.
[32:00] So that's something else to consider.
[32:06] Oh, for sure. I think we're going to be
we're going to be into phase three for a
[32:10] while. So, if we have some people
getting together and talking about this,
[32:14] we're set for a while. When we're done
with phase three,
[32:16] » then we decide, do we want to keep going
>> over wine and cheese?
[32:20] » Yeah.
>> Okay. Of course. [laughter]
[32:22] » Of course.
>> White wine, too.
[32:24] » Yes. [snorts]
>> Yeah. So, that's my take on it.
[32:32] Jim, do you have a discussion point or
anything you want to add?
[32:35] » I'm thinking through the financial
aspects of the
[32:38] » Well, let's do the first one first.
>> Yeah.
[32:40] » Well, I guess you're saying the
financial of the this one or just phase
[32:44] three
>> or just phase three overall? Yeah. Okay.
[32:46] » Phase three overall and then phase four,
five, six, and seven in the future.
[32:52] We're going to have to fix the roads
forever,
[32:55] » pay for them. And the way we're doing it
so far is is sort of halfhazard and uh
[33:03] contentious and we fix the roads south
of 13 mile. Are are we going to only
[33:08] assess those people south of 13 mile for
for this $4 million or is the rest any
[33:16] part of north of 13 mile going to pay
for any of this? So this whole uh idea
[33:22] that we we have to always have spend
money or save money every year towards
[33:27] fixing roads, I think that should be
permanently part of our
[33:32] » our budget and
>> baked into baked into our our finances
[33:38] somehow.
[33:43] » What do you think?
>> Well, I mean I agree. We've been, you
[33:47] know, from the time that I've been on,
um, when I came on board, we did the
[33:53] increase of the 1 mill towards the
taxable base to put towards the roads.
[33:58] Uh, when we had surplus, we would move
over $150,000 a year. upon council's
[34:04] approval to move it over. That was a lot
by Trusty Jones that pushed that
[34:08] initiative for upkeep and maintenance
and repairs of the road so that they
[34:13] didn't degrade further than what their
paser rating was.
[34:16] » Um, but yeah, I mean it's a it's a lot
of money. I mean, Eric, you had
[34:20] indicated 4 million. I recall it was
probably the top end of 4 million
[34:24] depending upon which way we did it. I
know Bill West was here and talked about
[34:28] the base and also if I recall correctly
sitting in on the road committee and
[34:34] listening to a lot of things that HRC
said I think there's more issues correct
[34:38] me if I'm wrong Brad with the drainage
>> that has to be taken care of on Bristol
[34:43] » um than
>> other areas of the village. So, I don't
[34:46] know how much of a increase to the cost
that that does, but we uh you know, as
[34:51] we're finishing up phase two, uh we are
going to be looking at uh we have our
[34:57] auditor coming in to close out the year
and start the fieldwork for the audit.
[35:02] Once we get all of that in the regular
buckets and any adjustments that need to
[35:06] be made to close out, um obviously you
guys want to know where we're at as far
[35:11] as what we have in the hopper in order
to do that. And then we all kind of know
[35:16] we already have one SI uh SIB loan.
>> I've already confirmed with the state
[35:20] that we can have two.
>> That's a that was a good really big
[35:24] question. Good point that we can have
two, but it was you can have two if you
[35:29] can financially afford it and your
financial statements have the
[35:34] wherewithal to be able to repay it.
>> Um, you know, I've been talking a little
[35:37] bit with Brad as well. You know, we've
got that 2 million that we got from the
[35:41] SIB loan. we pay uh another nine years
of 20 call it $235,000 a year. That
[35:49] funding doesn't has to come from
somewhere. It comes from the funds that
[35:52] we set aside within the road funds. So,
we've got that. We've got the
[35:56] maintenance that comes on board and we
all know we only have maybe four levers
[35:59] to pull, right? You finance it through
your fund balance and what we put in the
[36:04] uh through the tax base on the 1 mill.
You can get outside financing through
[36:08] the SIB loan, which we substantiated
that we could have more than one loan at
[36:12] a time concurrently going.
>> Second loan capped at $2 million.
[36:16] » Uh it would it depends. What she said is
they come out with rules every year as
[36:20] far as what it is.
>> Start taking a look at that.
[36:22] » Yes. And it also again depends. It says
up to but again you're if you are a very
[36:27] small village and you don't have the
wherewithal, they're not going to loan
[36:30] you $2 million if you don't have the
ability to repay.
[36:34] » Right. The other one is um which we've
done right SAD or increasing the mill
[36:40] from 1 mil to something higher than 1
mil. And the last one is of course B
[36:46] municipalities bonded. So those are
basically the levers that we have to
[36:50] pull in order to be able to finance that
we can't go out as a village and
[36:53] actually just borrow money other than
the sanction of the state infrastructure
[36:58] loan. You just can't go to a regular
bank and like a business or private or
[37:02] private entity right and say we want to
borrow money for it. We can't do that as
[37:06] a village. So it is going to be
important and a lot of it too as we
[37:10] start going through and looking at what
it is is going to be based upon the cost
[37:15] which I hope that we'll have some I mean
it's different if we say all right if we
[37:19] do a mill and fill it's going to be 2.8
8 million versus if we rip it all up, do
[37:24] the base and do a brand new, you know,
buildup forklift replacement, it's going
[37:28] to be five million. So that's $3 million
spread. That's a lot of That's a lot of
[37:33] money.
>> That's a lot of money.
[37:34] » So, do we do that first?
>> Do we look at the finances to know at
[37:40] what point we're going to have that much
money and then schedule
[37:46] » things? You know what I mean?
>> Maybe maybe a little hard to say what
[37:49] comes first. It's a good question.
>> Yeah.
[37:52] » I think we have to go along
>> parallel work now and get get the quote
[37:55] and then can't do it for five years is
you know the quot
[37:59] anyway.
>> I my opinion would be we have a good
[38:02] enough idea
>> if we could
[38:05] » like Bill was saying let's close out
phase two. We got to close out phase one
[38:08] too.
>> Correct.
[38:09] » We got to close out the first phase.
first phase, second phase, understand
[38:13] what if anything's left over and then
make some type of model that suggests
[38:19] what inflation is going to look like,
>> right?
[38:22] » Property taxes are going to look like,
>> correct?
[38:24] » Is this PUD really going to be built and
how much that might deliver?
[38:28] » Correct.
>> And then there's the other side of,
[38:30] well, we haven't really
>> funded the fire department like they've
[38:34] been asking.
police and fire have uh you know have u
[38:40] you know at least 5 year 10 year
forecast that would suggest their costs
[38:43] are going to go up 7 8 n 10% a year
>> right
[38:47] » um fire trucks are two times more
expensive than they used to be that's
[38:52] even a big debate in the US Congress
right now
[38:55] » right
>> so anyway point being I think we got a a
[38:59] good enough idea to at least put us in a
place where if you look at all the
[39:03] variables
>> we could probably.
[39:06] » Yeah,
>> I would feel better about at least make
[39:08] having some thoughts on when we could do
it and how we do it.
[39:11] » Right. [clears throat] That's the thing
I want to just make sure that you're
[39:14] cognitive in the mind because as I think
back and look at it, right, it's like,
[39:17] okay, we know what we're paying for
fire. We know what they're going to be
[39:20] asking. You have a better idea over the
next five years. That gap right there,
[39:24] » it's a big gap
>> is a big gap, right?
[39:26] » Because you know, we're already
>> last year and this year we had a deficit
[39:30] budget,
>> right? Correct. Correct. We were
[39:32] fortunate that actuals came in better
than we thought. But um but back to
[39:38] Jim's point, I mean, the village has
been in a position to be able to finance
[39:41] these things in the past because they
always have a surplus. And the days of
[39:44] surpluses, I'm afraid,
>> right? And if we look at the mills that
[39:48] we assess, I mean, I'm not saying that
it's like really light, but compared to
[39:51] other municipalities, it's I mean, it
was at 9%.
[39:55] » It was 9% for like 5 years before we
raised it one, right? The other thing
[40:00] that we have to think about is obviously
inflation. If we decide to do this
[40:05] starting in 2028, that's election year.
Administrations are going to change. We
[40:10] don't know what effect that's going to
have on pricing and cost of, you know,
[40:15] hot mix asphalt or the other, you know,
labor. So, there's a lot of there's
[40:19] always going to be um variables that are
in there that we need to consider, but I
[40:23] think we kind of do have to do it kind
of like in parallel where we find out
[40:27] where we're at as far as what we have
projections of what we think we're going
[40:31] to be bringing on a revenue basis and
then of course what the cost is and what
[40:35] direction the village wants to go as far
as do we just I don't want to call it a
[40:39] patch, but do we do a lighter road
recovery and rebuild or we do a ground
[40:44] uplift and just do it from a buildup
>> bill? That decision is not we seven
[40:49] people on council. It's the people who
live on Bristol Lane.
[40:52] » Correct. Correct.
>> They have got to be involved a lot
[40:55] sooner in the game as as Eric mentioned
earlier
[40:58] » and to be part of the decision- making
monetarily if if they're going to get an
[41:04] SAD, it could be significantly higher
than the existing SI sad if we go
[41:10] through a really expensive project. That
may be the only way that it gets paid
[41:14] for is through special assessment
combinations with village help.
[41:19] » And literally Bristol Lane is uh you
don't go down Bristol Lane to get
[41:25] anywhere unless there you live there or
you're a peeping town. You know,
[41:31] » I I think it's all saying that we Yeah,
we we need time because it's a big big
[41:35] discussion. the time is probably good to
say, okay, it's time to start thinking
[41:39] about
>> and citizenship.
[41:41] » I'm sure I would be
>> supportive of spending money at this or
[41:45] even approving to spend money at this
very moment.
[41:50] » So, do we go back to the motions on the
floor?
[41:53] » I I just want to say something. I think
the decision you need to make is do you
[41:56] want to build the project around the
budget or the budget around the project?
[42:00] » That's a big decision that you guys need
to make.
[42:02] » I agree. I agree. Um and then one of the
lessons learned talking about
[42:06] stakeholder engagement was um you know
we we provided the opportunity for
[42:11] residents to look at plans and all that
beforehand. I think this round it would
[42:16] be who project to seek out comments
>> go doortodoor things like that. It all
[42:22] costs more money. But I think that we
need to seek out that involvement rather
[42:26] than try and have them because it was it
was all available but some people can't
[42:30] get here or forget about it and stuff
like that and we needed to be a little
[42:32] more boots on the ground out there say
hey we're doing something in front of
[42:36] your house this is what we're going to
do so you know here's why here's why I
[42:39] made a decision do you have any input
and seek it out rather than let them
[42:44] come to you
>> so those are couple again that what
[42:47] that's part of the proposal but fair if
you don't want to do it I understand
[42:51] » it was just asked of us to present
at today's meeting
[42:54] » to approve what's before us
>> because we need a lot more research and
[42:59] homework and expert opinion besides us
to say which direction should we go with
[43:06] this.
>> Yeah,
[43:07] » it's fair. That's why I was presented.
>> Yeah,
[43:10] » it's good information and good to start
thinking about it. Good to Yep. no time
[43:14] to talk about this and and I think yeah
we started with the roads discussion and
[43:18] do we want to have a roads committee but
really it's also the the budget
[43:22] committee
>> or others start talking about the kinds
[43:26] of things you guys just talked about
which is yeah where do we see ourselves
[43:30] » between now and five and 10 years from
now financially yeah
[43:33] » and how does this fit into it and then
to the which comes first there's a
[43:36] chicken and an egg there but we got to
do both it's it's we got to talk about
[43:42] both of those very seriously.
>> Okay.
[43:45] » Yes. Are we going to vote?
>> Yeah.
[43:47] » Well, we have a motion on the floor. We
have to take action on what's on the
[43:50] floor.
[43:56] » Well, which are we voting on?
>> The first one.
[43:59] » Well, you on the first one. We have a
second.
[44:01] » Yeah.
>> You second.
[44:03] » So, yeah. Take a motion to establish
phase three. Yeah.
[44:06] » Yep.
>> Okay. Blackburn
[44:09] » absent. Howard
>> I.
[44:11] » Yes. Miller.
>> Hi [clears throat]
[44:18] » Mc Alexander.
>> Hi
[44:21] » J.
>> Hi.
[44:24] » The second motion.
>> Second motion.
[44:26] » Well, can we have discussion on that
one? So I think
[44:31] » the well the roads committee and then
also a discussion around finances can
[44:37] get in because this to me is um this is
more of a budget planning and how do we
[44:43] run the budget and how do we get things
versus the specific to the roads. Um so
[44:49] I think that is that just something
finance committee should talk about and
[44:54] propose back to the council. I am a
member of finance committee.
[44:58] » Okay.
>> All right. Well, [laughter]
[45:01] » as I'm looking at the finance committee
here.
[45:04] » All right. Well,
>> right now I made the motion pertaining
[45:07] to phase three project as a working you
know an initial procedural for all other
[45:15] future projects. But you know we've got
snow plowing services. We've got, you
[45:21] know, all kinds of other village
services that we contract
[45:25] and getting competitive bids in this day
and age is almost a fade of complete is
[45:31] that's how you do business.
>> Well, we used we did
[45:34] » I believe this is already our process.
Yes.
[45:37] » You're talking about for professional
services.
[45:39] » Yeah.
>> Not just contractual services.
[45:42] » That's right.
>> Damn.
[45:44] » Will this be quality based
>> services? Fire.
[45:48] » That's exactly what we're doing. We just
went through.
[45:50] » That's exactly what we went through.
>> Oh, yeah. Our going through. Yes.
[45:54] » We we we had a look.
>> Yeah.
[45:58] » We just can't say we love you and just
automatically sign the re.
[46:01] » Well, I think I think that's another
thing is requiring a minimum of two
[46:06] versus
it being a topic that has to be talked
[46:09] about because we may decide, oh, no,
that, you know, is that one worthy of a
[46:15] second bid or not? Well, the dollar
amount is what was specified
[46:20] » is what this is saying.
>> Yes.
[46:22] » Yeah.
>> If it's so much money a year that we're
[46:25] investing in it, then we needed to get a
second bid. I think it's really best
[46:31] practices in municipal um operation is
that you want to know that you're
[46:40] getting
>> I'm not saying I'm I'm [clears throat]
[46:42] just I'm not saying we shouldn't. I'm
just kind of peeling apart the details
[46:45] of what's written here and understanding
what it means
[46:48] » to Bill and to the for the office and
what is normally done, what's commonly
[46:53] done, what your experience is, Bill,
what your experience is,
[46:57] » Jamie and other places.
>> You're shaking your head.
[47:01] » I I would ask around on on that
>> other mun other municipalities.
[47:06] » Correct.
>> There's different ways that they do it
[47:09] and there's different reasons why they
do it that way. I guess my point I guess
[47:12] I stand on this one that it's worth
talking about if [clears throat] we're
[47:16] going to I guess this this is a change
that says we are going to
[47:22] I would change it to be we should make a
motion to discuss and figure out how
[47:26] would we implement this what's the
impact how many things are going to be
[47:29] affected
um I guess that's the questions I have
[47:33] around
>> well that's why I said pertaining to the
[47:36] phase three roads project Okay.
>> I actually could I say something? I
[47:43] believe you're you have an ordinance
that addresses this.
[47:46] » Yes.
>> Specifically and does require this. It's
[47:49] not worded identically, but unless you
wave out of it by five votes, I think.
[47:54] So, I think that's I think this is
required anyway. And I think 25,000 may
[47:58] even be the
>> contractual threshold.
[48:02] » Yeah. Is that what we're talking about?
>> No.
[48:05] » I mean, it's just vendor.
>> They're still contractual. I would still
[48:09] » it's still a contract and I think
>> they're saying that if there was a a
[48:14] legal issue that they knew it was going
to cost more than $25,000 they could go
[48:17] get competitive bids for it
>> as well. Oh, well I do.
[48:22] » Yeah,
>> like a project by project manage.
[48:26] » We did do that.
>> We did look we did look at several law
[48:29] firms. We did look at what their costs
were going to be. We did all of that.
[48:33] And we're just saying it needs to apply
the project as well.
[48:37] » You know, it's it's a good business
practice that we followed in the past.
[48:42] We're just saying we need to continue
doing that.
[48:44] » And you did that 10 years ago when we
came out. you want to offer general
[48:49] engineering services.
>> Yeah.
[48:51] » And that's that's all I'm saying. I
would I would I would ask around because
[48:54] there's pros and cons to each way of
doing it.
[48:57] » So, I guess the other side of it is I
don't think we're ready to approve the
[49:00] $61,000
here. So, I don't know if this matters
[49:04] today.
>> Uh I
[49:07] » I don't I guess I would want to always
look
[49:11] » at two proposals from two vendors and
say what was the strength and what was
[49:16] the weakness with each one. Okay.
[49:20] Yeah,
>> I think that's right. If there's a
[49:23] ordinance already in place and I don't
know the hierarchy of a motion to a
[49:29] resolution to an ordinance to a
>> charter, I don't know if there's
[49:34] something already in place that says,
>> but we're only looking at one proposal
[49:38] over 25,000. That's only one. I guess I
agree. So then if the ordinance would
[49:43] apply to everything,
>> the ordinance speaks to contracts.
[49:46] That's right. And I I guess what we're
saying here is these services fall under
[49:52] your overall
>> contract overall contract with your
[49:55] engineering
>> uh firm. So
[49:59] » um
>> I I think
[50:01] » and you and you I'm I'm letting you are
more than that's what you want to do
[50:05] then that's fine. If you want to go out
for proposal for every single contract
[50:08] that's over $25,000 you by all means can
do that. I'm just asking if you would
[50:12] talk to other municipalities and ask
about the pros and cons of doing that
[50:16] and having different people in and out
of your village.
[50:19] » But I think our ordinances would
actually be more of a decision maker
[50:23] than what other villages are doing. We
have our own interpretation.
[50:28] » I'd look at both. I Yeah, we should
understand more of both. I think we
[50:31] should understand more too because there
are nuances here and because maybe in
[50:36] listening carefully to what Brad's
saying, maybe in the case of the roads
[50:39] is not getting competitive bids or
anything more sort of services more than
[50:43] $25,000 because there could be a list of
500 services in
[50:48] one guy come dig a ditch and another guy
come and put the gravel in the ditch. I
[50:53] guess you're going to use one
contractor. Point being is we should get
[50:57] competitive quotes on the road project.
That's
[51:02] » in totality,
>> right?
[51:03] » Because somebody like HRC or whoever
competes with HRC is going to
[51:10] provide all the engineering work that's
required, all the drawings, all the
[51:14] topo, all the drainage, everything else,
and they're then they're going to take
[51:17] it out to bed
and uh and then the contract will be
[51:21] written with the village.
And there
[51:25] » but but a big part of what Brad does the
61,000 is a tiny part of what he'll do
[51:29] on this project.
>> The big part of what Brad's going to do
[51:32] this project is the engineering work and
the project that
[51:38] » is that right?
>> What any engineer would do. Yes.
[51:40] » Yes.
>> But your any saying if you want to go
[51:43] out for competitive it would be that
engineer that you hire. And again, you'd
[51:47] have if you want to do a study phase,
you can hire a different one for the
[51:49] study phase, different one for the
design, a different one for the
[51:51] construction engineering if you wanted
to as well. You have every right to do
[51:54] that.
>> Yeah. But yeah, but again, I think that
[51:57] goes back to the discussion because I
think you're bringing up things that we
[52:00] really need to be careful with.
>> Because I do I don't think the the
[52:04] process you describe is a good process.
>> I agree, but I'm also biased. [laughter]
[52:11] » I'm biased, too, with what the kind of
business I do. if you come, we're going
[52:15] to give you the whole we want to do the
whole thing.
[52:21] » So, but I do think we agreeing and
there's there we're agreeing that we're
[52:24] going to take the roads project out to
bid. I'm not sure if that needs a motion
[52:28] or not, but if it does, we should vote
on it.
[52:30] » And this one proposal for the roads
project.
[52:34] I'm saying I'd like to,
you know, you're our village engineer in
[52:40] general, but this is a specific project
outside of the norm of running the
[52:45] regular village in my mind. And since
this is a very specific project, that's
[52:50] why the motion is
>> But you do understand now that there's
[52:55] » yes,
>> there's already proposals out there for
[52:58] other people to come and be like, oh, I
see they were going to charge this much.
[53:01] I'm going to go under this much. The
whole road advisory committee has
[53:04] proposals and cost estimates and
everything in it. Just there's a lot of
[53:08] information out there to make it kind of
a little a little nuance there to bring
[53:13] other people in and say, "Okay, well,
can can you beat this price
[53:16] essentially?"
>> Well, I think we have to we have to act
[53:19] ethically,
>> but uh we we would need to be careful
[53:24] there.
[53:27] » So, I don't know. I'm not sure where
that puts us other than I think I think
[53:33] it'd be a good idea to study it a little
more
[53:36] » while at least leaving with an agreement
that we all think it's a great idea to
[53:39] make sure we get more than one.
>> Do we want it on the agenda for next?
[53:44] » Yeah, let's do that.
>> Yep.
[53:45] » Okay. So I will withdraw the motion
that's sitting the second motion that is
[53:52] sitting on the floor [clears throat]
requiring
[53:56] a minimum of two competitive entries. So
I guess there will be no motion but we
[54:00] will create an agenda item to discuss
this
[54:03] » the next at the next council meeting.
>> Yeah.
[54:06] » Okay.
[54:10] » You get it with me?
>> All right.
[54:16] All right, the next item is in our MMR.
It's our insurance renewal. It's
[54:21] actually pretty good news because it's
only up 2.3% which is actually pretty
[54:25] good right now. Um, so I would just look
for a motion to renew that. You can see
[54:30] everything that is covered. They have
added some data breach and cyber
[54:34] security coverage that we didn't have
before, which is good. Um, and we also
[54:39] are going to get they call it a
distribution, but it's sort of like a
[54:42] refund. So we'll get back about $7,000
when we renew. So that's always good
[54:47] too. So I would just
>> Is that refund? Is that because of like
[54:50] a experience rate? Is that claim?
>> Yeah. So every year you renew Oh,
[54:56] because it's a big number. We only pay
what was it 15 or 16?
[54:59] » But if you don't renew, you don't get
it. So but yeah, [laughter]
[55:03] it's just I bet they just pay $8,000 and
not get a refund. [laughter]
[55:08] No teacher.
>> It's based upon a pool and the pool of
[55:12] everyone that's in that it depends on
the losses or what the payouts are on
[55:17] that and at the end they take it all and
then they distribute it because it's
[55:20] claims based something like that happen
somewhere [clears throat] owe money at
[55:25] the end of it.
>> Have we've never as far as I've been on
[55:28] we've never Yeah. We've never own We've
always got money back. It just varies
[55:32] from how much the distribution back to
the village has been.
[55:36] » Oh my gosh. This is this is yeah
specifically yeah
[55:39] » and this is a I think this is a pool
it's we're self-insured through this
[55:44] » whatever it is m
>> Jamie would this cover the uh incident
[55:51] that Franklin experienced where the
clerical error resulted in a million
[55:55] » they did have it's my understanding
I don't want to speak for them it's my
[55:59] understanding they did have mmma so yes
yeah they had some coverage I don't want
[56:05] to speak to the amount that they covered
But
[56:08] » what would this cover if we had the same
million dollars flying out the window?
[56:12] » It said
2 and a half million I believe.
[56:17] » Yeah.
>> Now Jamie, you recall we were on a we
[56:20] were on a call with them and Keith
Pottery, we we after council had asked
[56:25] that we confirmed that it was two at the
time 2 million is what we were told.
[56:30] » Yeah, it was 2 million. Now it's 2
million.
[56:32] » She wasn't trying to put you on it.
>> That's okay. I can say in general terms,
[56:35] but it depends on what kind of cyber
attack it is or what kind of fraud it is
[56:39] uh and what your policy says.
>> So in this circumstance in Franklin, it
[56:44] did not cover the entire amount. It
covered a smaller portion. Our
[56:48] deductible was 25,000.
So they're still working through that at
[56:52] this point.
>> So my question is, would that exact same
[56:56] incident be 100% covered by this policy?
>> I haven't seen your policy. Yeah, it
[57:03] it's probably less a deductible also,
right?
[57:08] » Yeah.
>> Yeah.
[57:10] » But if Franklin in the same self-insured
pool that we're in.
[57:15] » Yes.
>> So by default, their coverage would be
[57:18] the same.
>> It would be the same. I would guess. I
[57:20] don't think we're customizing our our
coverage.
[57:22] » Correct.
>> So other than the changes from last
[57:26] year, this year
>> just Yeah. Other than Yeah. The changes
[57:30] would be we have a little more coverage.
There's a slight increase by $358 per
[57:35] annually.
>> Yes.
[57:37] » I guess I don't understand if Franklin's
in the same pool
[57:42] and there's just an increase from 2
million to 2 million five. Their loss
[57:47] was 1 million.
>> Yeah, I don't want to speak about
[57:51] » I I just Well, whatever. But it was less
than this max. So for them not to have
[57:57] full reimbursement, thus the deductible,
it makes me concerned that there's a
[58:03] loophole in this policy.
>> Yeah, I don't want to speak to them too
[58:08] much. Um I'm sure you're pretty familiar
with MMA if you could chime into, but
[58:13] this is a very common
>> Yeah, but I don't I'm not familiar with
[58:19] the loss in Franklin or what happened
there. You would need an insurance
[58:23] specialist to read the policy and
>> make a determination whether or not
[58:28] » you have coverage. Cyber security is a
whole different ball game you see and
[58:34] that's [clears throat] what we're trying
to see
[58:36] » how sophisticated this policy is in
terms of this new world that we're
[58:41] living out there with with AI and cyber
security and
[58:46] » there are other steps that we take too
with like our IoT company right so like
[58:52] dual au like you know there there's lots
of steps that we take
[58:56] » so should we I mean yeah I think we all
agree
[58:59] you know, we need to go forward in
approving of this.
[59:01] » Yeah.
>> But maybe as a future item to talk more
[59:04] about, I know in the past you commented
about stuff you're doing in the office
[59:07] and do those things.
>> Maybe an information on hey, is there
[59:12] something else available? Would we want
to [snorts] have the
[59:16] » whatever you want to, you know,
>> umbrella.
[59:19] » That's exactly right.
>> Some special some special rider or
[59:22] something. Is it worth understanding
some more about at least
[59:26] » to understand what would it cover and
what would it cost and we'll all go oh
[59:29] well we can't afford that one that's
okay
[59:31] » and are [laughter] we as trustees
covered
[59:33] » right right so I think it'd be worth it
in future
[59:38] » well and again I think you're right
exactly right Mike
[59:41] » uh so because it is a big deal I've
personally been a victim of a ransomware
[59:45] attack and cyber fraud and it's no
joking matter it's dead serious stuff
[59:50] and you're dealing with criminals Um, so
and and uh you know it's hard to track
[59:55] these guys. This ransomware stuff is you
know deep dark web North Korean people
[1:00:01] and it's it's uh it's crazy stuff. Um
having said that I think the insurance
[1:00:08] is critically important and it's not for
not for today but we really need to
[1:00:12] know. You mentioned multiffactor
authentication. It could be how do we
[1:00:15] change passwords or set up passwords. It
could be just training on how to recon
[1:00:21] because because we got hit because
somebody clicked on a link in an email
[1:00:28] » and that's all it took
>> and they were in our they were in our
[1:00:31] network
>> and they sat in our network for months
[1:00:33] and months and months and we didn't know
it.
[1:00:36] » So how do you recognize that? How do you
report that? Anyway, it's it is serious
[1:00:42] and um
>> you'll wake up one morning and there'll
[1:00:46] be a million dollars missing from the
account and you'll never
[1:00:51] [clears throat]
>> Well, that's disappointing. [laughter]
[1:00:56] » It's scary.
>> It is scary.
[1:00:59] » It's a lot.
>> It's terrifying.
[1:01:02] » So
>> So anyway, even your um even your guest
[1:01:05] Wi-Fi,
>> I don't know. Oh, is there any
[1:01:07] possibility if I'm on a guest Wi-Fi that
I can get into a network? Okay. So, you
[1:01:11] guys do a lot of
>> firewall.
[1:01:12] » Yeah,
>> that's why it's a guest
[1:01:19] » right. So, there's a suggested motion. I
would recommend
[1:01:23] » I I'll suggest that we approve the Bing
and Farm September 30th renewal of the
[1:01:28] MMRMA
and authorize the village manager to
[1:01:32] sign.
>> I'll second that. Good idea. Okay.
[1:01:41] Do a roll call to Miller.
>> Hi
[1:01:45] again.
>> Hi. [clears throat]
[1:01:48] » Mc Alexander.
>> Hi.
[1:01:50] » Hi.
>> How?
[1:01:53] » Hi.
[1:02:02] » Good evening, council. My name is Eric
Peach with Githles Webster, planning
[1:02:06] consultant for the village. Uh I'm here
tonight to discuss with you and just
[1:02:10] give you a general update for the status
of the master plan update. Um as you may
[1:02:15] be aware, the planning commission had
been going through months of
[1:02:18] conversation and discussion about
whether or not uh an update to the 21
[1:02:23] 2021 approved and adopted master plan uh
was required or if there was any areas
[1:02:28] that would warrant uh significant
updates. uh at their last planning
[1:02:33] commission in August uh a few weeks ago,
um the planning commission did make a
[1:02:38] final determination to uh provide an
amendment to the future land use section
[1:02:44] of the master plan um because um back in
May of 2026, you may recall um the HOA
[1:02:51] for the Bingham Road Estates had called
uh attention to uh the future land use
[1:02:56] section of the master plan uh where they
believed uh there was unnecessary uh
[1:03:02] reference to their subdivision uh the
Bingham Road estate subdivision. Um and
[1:03:08] so they requested the removal of a
certain uh language within that
[1:03:13] paragraph um of the future land use. Uh
so the copy of the master plan amendment
[1:03:19] that you have within your packet this
evening uh is the actual language as
[1:03:23] it's currently proposed and it's simply
to remove that language that was
[1:03:28] requested of the planning commission and
now the village council. Um, so if you
[1:03:32] looked at page 45 of the of the master
plan, uh, under future land use, the
[1:03:38] estate residential, formerly low density
[clears throat] residential, that
[1:03:41] paragraph is the only section that's,
uh, proposing a change. Um and the
[1:03:47] removal of the language uh is to state
that the category uh for estate
[1:03:52] residential is also recommended for
property abuing 14-mi road immediately
[1:03:57] west of Outland Trail to to assist in
protection of the woodlands on this
[1:04:02] site. So that is the language that was
requested to be removed uh from that
[1:04:06] paragraph. Uh that changes nothing
within the intent uh behind that
[1:04:11] statement. So nothing is really
changing. It's just the preference uh
[1:04:15] from the uh Bingham Road Estates
subdivision to have that reference
[1:04:22] removed so that it wasn't um referencing
their subdivision uh within that
[1:04:27] statement. Additionally, on the back of
the front cover will be a disclaimer
[1:04:31] that when working with the village
attorney, um that disclaimer states that
[1:04:37] the um that nothing within the master
plan or the village ordinances
[1:04:41] supersedes um the deed restrictions of
any um land within the community. Um and
[1:04:47] so those two amendments kind of work
hand inand together. Um because again,
[1:04:53] nothing changes with the intention of
the future land use. uh the area where
[1:04:59] the uh Bingham Road estates currently is
um would still be um applicable to the
[1:05:07] uh master plan language. Um but again,
the deed restrictions within that
[1:05:12] subdivision would not have any impact on
the changes being made here. So,
[1:05:16] » but they would
because our deed restrictions and it's
[1:05:21] been this way for more than 50 years. I
have all the documentation and letters
[1:05:25] from Slaughter who was the kingpin
behind all the legal action. Um you
[1:05:32] state that the maximum density proposed
for this category is.7 dwellings per
[1:05:37] acre.
>> Yes.
[1:05:39] » And our deed restrictions state that
acreage has nothing to do with it. It's
[1:05:45] how many acres the property is. You can
have one house,
[1:05:50] » right?
>> That's it.
[1:05:52] » Yes. And so the section of the master
plan that is being amended, so the um
[1:05:57] estate residential
is laid on top of that area, but the
[1:06:03] deed restrictions
of the um Bingham Road estates, those
[1:06:08] would be in place. So this doesn't have
any impact over what that could be.
[1:06:13] » But why wouldn't they be reflective
accurately of the area that is being
[1:06:20] discussed? the area is part of the HOA.
It would be like Bingham Point. It would
[1:06:26] be like Bingham Woods. It would be like
Woodland.
[1:06:29] » You can't just go in and state, "Well,
you're part of Bingham Farms Woodland,
[1:06:34] so you're going to be uh 7 dwellings per
acre."
[1:06:39] » The problem the problem was um that the
master plan as written actually was
[1:06:46] referring to a property that's in the
subdivision. It was actually referring
[1:06:52] to a platted lot in our subdivision.
>> Uh, and that was troubling into itself
[1:07:00] because I'll use the words even
developers have used in this room is
[1:07:04] that our master plan is advertising for
them to come in build stuff.
[1:07:08] » Exactly.
>> So, we're advertising in the in the plan
[1:07:11] as it sits today to come build on that
property that's clearly referenced.
[1:07:17] Taking that out removes that, which in
my opinion is a great really good thing.
[1:07:22] » The reference to the overall village
doesn't bother me because now you have
[1:07:27] this other statement that says uh that
that this master plan does not supersede
[1:07:33] any private deed restrictions.
>> Okay.
[1:07:35] » So the deed restrictions by that
language would would take part.
[1:07:40] » But it's not mentioned. Uh I I just the
that we have deed restrictions on the
[1:07:49] maximum density property that they're
talking about that there are
[1:07:54] there are deed restrictions on that lot.
>> Well, I'm not sure. I mean, it doesn't
[1:07:59] say
>> it just says that the master plan
[1:08:02] reflects the village's public use. Does
not determine
[1:08:07] » Can I comment?
>> Well, I there's one other question I
[1:08:10] have. Um
and go ahead.
[1:08:14] » Oh um so what the Erics are trying to
are both uh saying in different words is
[1:08:22] no we are not referencing the deed
restrictions directly in the master
[1:08:25] plan. the um estate residential section
of the future land use that Eric is
[1:08:31] talking about that language that
pertains to the entire area on the
[1:08:35] future land use map that is highlighted
for estate residential which includes
[1:08:39] way more than just Bingham Road estates
um and it states that the maximum
[1:08:45] allowed density on that per the village
future land use is that 0.7 which means
[1:08:50] in places without deed restrictions that
is the maximum you can build in places
[1:08:55] with deed restrictions Again, per the
disclaimer we added at the beginning
[1:08:59] of the master plan that states that the
master plan does not supersede any deed
[1:09:04] restrictions. Any deed restriction
enforcement is outside the scope of
[1:09:07] village planning and zoning.
>> Yeah.
[1:09:09] » So, it just makes makes that separation
clear. It does help, but I think it's
[1:09:14] the the fact that it doesn't have a
direct reference to the property like
[1:09:20] you would get at Woodlands or any any
other um HOA,
[1:09:26] » right? The master plan
>> and it's a permanent injunction. It's
[1:09:30] not just a deed restriction,
>> right? The the original language that
[1:09:34] was included was meant to protect that
area. Um but by removing it, it doesn't
[1:09:39] really change anything. it just takes
away the what the HOA felt was an
[1:09:43] unnecessary attention to that property
or to that area uh of their subdivision.
[1:09:48] So by adding the uh disclaimer to the
front, that's where the master plan
[1:09:54] draws connection to deed restrictions.
So the deed restrictions are in place.
[1:09:58] The master plan has nothing to
necessarily say about that. Um, so I
[1:10:04] don't know if you want to
>> Well, one other thing um that I was
[1:10:08] going to get to was that in the past
if
[1:10:14] somebody was going to build on a lot on
Bingham Lane or um Bingham Road that is
[1:10:22] included in our HOA.
Um those plans would have to be stamped
[1:10:27] approved by our HOA.
They could not you would not send those
[1:10:33] plans or send the builder or developer
homeowner to Southfield for a B building
[1:10:39] permit until we had stamped it. Is that
true today?
[1:10:44] » Um well we haven't had a new build in
that area in a while. So
[1:10:49] » we got one going on next door.
>> Correct. But I was not involved in the
[1:10:53] intake of those documents at the time.
So that's why I can't answer your
[1:10:57] question. That doesn't count because you
needed to be. Somebody needed to be.
[1:11:01] » So,
>> well, somebody was that was Ken. He's
[1:11:03] not here. So, until I review some stuff,
I can't answer your question right now
[1:11:06] is what I'm saying.
>> Ken's been gone how long?
[1:11:10] » A year. And that house started building
being built two years ago. So, those
[1:11:14] plans went in two years ago.
>> Two. Okay. Well, and we had the White
[1:11:17] House that at the end that was also Ken,
>> correct?
[1:11:22] » So, but we want to make sure that these
safeguards are in place. I don't want to
[1:11:27] assume. We need we need everybody to
know that they need to to call Jim, our
[1:11:35] president, and make sure that he sees
every plan that is involved on our HOA.
[1:11:42] » The other thing is that you're only
responsible for enforcing the village
[1:11:47] rule.
>> Correct.
[1:11:48] » Yes. But if a potential builder doesn't
know that there's also another level of
[1:11:56] HOA rules, what onus falls on you to
inform them or anyone? I mean, if you
[1:12:05] don't say anything, who will?
>> It's CO
[1:12:09] HOA's responsibility to
>> How does the HOA know somebody's coming
[1:12:14] to them to build a house? They don't
know.
[1:12:16] » They come to the office. Well, we we're
we're proactive. We we had all the plans
[1:12:20] for the two houses
as an
[1:12:22] » HOA. We saw those
>> and we were allowed to see them. And I'm
[1:12:26] not sure that that there was actually a
stamp because that's the first time I've
[1:12:30] heard that was a good question.
>> Yeah, we had in the past.
[1:12:32] » Uh but we actually got the the plans to
both of those homes. I mean, I mean, the
[1:12:37] detailed drawings, everything.
>> Well, there was construction plans. We
[1:12:41] saw the construction plans which gives
you all the information you need in
[1:12:45] terms of
>> my my view. But again, I may be wrong,
[1:12:47] but our HOA has to be proactive and and
knowing that a property's been sold that
[1:12:53] it's going to be torn down, who the
builder's going to be. I mean, the pro
[1:12:57] the the reference to that that was
removed. We have had I've been here for
[1:13:03] 20 years and we've had three attempts to
develop that property in the 20 years
[1:13:06] I've been here.
And um
[1:13:09] » rather bizarre attempts.
>> Yeah, some bizarre attempts. So anyway,
[1:13:12] um I do think the I think the obligation
of the village and the planning
[1:13:18] commission is to at least be aware that
there are deed restrictions in place and
[1:13:24] and there's a HOA involved. So at least
at least they can say if somebody comes
[1:13:29] and says here's the plans go well have
you talked to the HOA yet?
[1:13:33] » That's right. Communication generally do
>> at least do that. Yeah, that would be
[1:13:37] very helpful if we could. I know that
>> I did witness um prior counsel telling
[1:13:46] Ken that
when I asked if they would let us know,
[1:13:50] he leaned over and said, "You don't have
to tell her anything." And I thought,
[1:13:53] "Wow,
that's rather bizarre." But it's nice if
[1:13:59] we can be cooperative. We can work
together. Appreciate it. Thank you.
[1:14:04] And I can tell you that's how I
represent Bloomfield Village, which is
[1:14:10] HOA on steroids.
>> That's how it works with Bloomfield
[1:14:15] Township. I mean, they work hand in hand
on on those things.
[1:14:18] » Yeah, it's it's a good thing. Thank you.
So what's before you uh this evening
[1:14:24] then is um because we uh made reference
to the Michigan Planning Enabling Act
[1:14:30] for the next steps. The planning
commission at their last meeting uh
[1:14:33] forwarded uh the proposed amendments to
the village council to approve moving
[1:14:38] the process forward. So everything from
here on out would stay with the planning
[1:14:42] commission. Um, so by you approving
what's proposed, um, that would start a
[1:14:49] 42-day period where, um, the surrounding
communities would be notified of the
[1:14:54] minor amendment, um, utility companies
and whatnot. Uh, and so my job would be
[1:14:59] to work with the staff to provide those
notifications to go out. And so if
[1:15:03] everything stays uh, on time, um, the
42-day period would close roughly around
[1:15:09] the beginning of October. So then once
that occurs then the planning commission
[1:15:13] will meet in October to establish a
public hearing for November. So then
[1:15:18] they would hold a public hearing on
November to receive any additional
[1:15:21] feedback from the public. Uh and if
everything is um good to go, they could
[1:15:27] make the final uh um approvals and
adoption at that time. It doesn't
[1:15:33] necessarily have to come back to the
village council, but it can if you wish
[1:15:36] to have it come back for your adoption
as well.
[1:15:40] But because it's such a minor amendment,
it could stay with the planning
[1:15:43] commission to make the adoption.
>> I just want to ask a general question
[1:15:48] about
>> the numbers and the projections for how
[1:15:52] large or how small our community will be
in the future. That's based on
[1:15:57] statistical census data. That's how old.
>> The the data that we have is from the
[1:16:04] previous um master plan in 2021. So we
can run some numbers to project what it
[1:16:10] currently would be. Um but I don't think
it's changed significantly from what the
[1:16:14] current master plan
>> because it has the population being
[1:16:17] reduced by 2030 when I see all these new
young families
[1:16:22] » buying these houses with kids
having more kids. Yeah.
[1:16:26] » Yeah. So that's why I was a little taken
back
[1:16:30] » at the accuracy of these projections
>> and if it's a different and also the
[1:16:35] average age
>> of our community. It might have been 62
[1:16:41] back when but is it today? And that
average age helps drive our decisions as
[1:16:48] council members. Do we want bike paths,
t toddler playgrounds? I mean, you know,
[1:16:53] whatever.
>> Yeah.
[1:16:55] » That influences. Yeah, master plan.
>> Yeah, and we've had that conversation
[1:16:59] with the planning commission and I think
the um implementation section of the
[1:17:04] master plan is something that we'll
continue to work with staff on so that
[1:17:07] we can have those conversations with the
planning commission um regarding, you
[1:17:11] know, housing, the commercial corridor,
um and that sort of thing. Um to use the
[1:17:16] guidelines of the master plan to
implement what the goals and objectives
[1:17:20] that are established in the approved
2021 plan are. Um and so they felt the
[1:17:24] planning commission that there was not a
significant enough change to warrant an
[1:17:28] update. Um but we can certainly look at
um projections you know through the the
[1:17:33] census um as we go through those
implementation strategies.
[1:17:36] » The next review will be five years from
now which will be a new census.
[1:17:40] » Yes.
>> Exactly.
[1:17:41] » Because in 31 we'll review it but 30
there will have been a census.
[1:17:45] » That's right. And so maybe at that time
it would be worthwhile to do a full
[1:17:48] update to the master plan instead of
just a small amendment.
[1:17:52] » Yeah.
>> Okay. So that was taken under
[1:17:53] consideration.
>> Yes. Yeah. So they planning commission
[1:17:57] discussed every five years. Um and they
wanted to get that on record now so that
[1:18:02] this will be established for 2026 and
then going forward um you know with the
[1:18:06] new census in 2030 uh that they'll go
through the update process again 2031.
[1:18:11] » Thank you. You're welcome.
[1:18:16] » So we're we're required to update it
every five years.
[1:18:19] » Yes. And so if this minor amendment was
not a consideration by the planning
[1:18:24] commission, they could have just readted
the 2021 plan and it would have been
[1:18:29] acknowledged that that occurred in 2026
and then that process would reoccur in
[1:18:33] 2031.
>> So this is just intuition. It just seems
[1:18:37] like after five years this is a ext
may not change very much. I agree. Just
[1:18:43] seems like it's uh there should have
there should have been more
[1:18:47] » more
>> more more changes
[1:18:49] » more changes
>> to reflect some of the things Diane was
[1:18:52] just saying. So yeah, I
>> I don't know. Um I have to admit I've
[1:18:56] I've read through it. It's not a legal
document. It's a guidelines.
[1:19:00] » Correct.
>> Yeah. Well, there will be some changes
[1:19:02] in um you may be aware of the uh
discussion about fences in the
[1:19:06] community.
>> Exactly. That's exactly right. It's an
[1:19:08] or fencing is an ordinance.
>> That's an ordinance. And so, you know,
[1:19:11] we'll use the master plan as guidance,
which we've already done to a certain
[1:19:14] extent to say that if there is going to
be a conversation about allowing fences
[1:19:18] within residential properties that it
complies with what the master plan's
[1:19:23] guidelines are.
>> And what if it doesn't?
[1:19:26] » If the fence ordinance doesn't comply
with
[1:19:30] » Well, we would want to ensure that it
does. And so, that's one thing that
[1:19:33] we're going to have to keep an eye on to
make sure that there's a marriage
[1:19:36] between
>> Let me ask that question a different
[1:19:38] way. What if the fence ordinance comes
out and we all decide we really like it?
[1:19:41] That's a great idea. But but it wouldn't
it doesn't conform? Can we
[1:19:46] » Does that mean we can't do the fence
ordinance or
[1:19:48] » you can still pass it. It just
>> it leaves you open to some argument that
[1:19:54] it's
>> you know because it's not consistent
[1:19:56] with the master plan
>> that
[1:19:58] » it depends how different it is from the
master plan.
[1:20:01] » Right. And master plan says go that way
and we're going to go that way. like
[1:20:05] [laughter]
>> if it says absolutely no fences ever.
[1:20:08] » Yeah. [clears throat]
>> Well, and for example, you know, as
[1:20:11] we've had this conversation with the
planning commission up until this point,
[1:20:14] we've made reference to the current
master plan to see, well, if we are
[1:20:18] going to take consideration for fences
in the community, what does the master
[1:20:21] plan say? And it it's it's more or less
silent to the fact, but what it does say
[1:20:26] is that the village wants to uphold the
character of the community. And so that
[1:20:31] means if there's no fences to be seen,
then what does that look like? If you
[1:20:35] then have an amendment to allow for
fences, well, potentially landscape
[1:20:38] screening would be a requirement where
you put a fence in a sideyard that if
[1:20:42] you have evergreen screening that would
last throughout the year, even during
[1:20:46] the winter, so that you wouldn't be able
to see the fence. That might be one way
[1:20:49] that you keep the uh ordinance and the
master plan in sync with one another,
[1:20:53] even though you're kind of going against
>> what president is currently, not
[1:20:57] allowing fences in the community. So,
>> Eric, are you aware of communities that
[1:21:02] have sued because of something that was
different in the master plan than what
[1:21:08] was going on in the community? So, you
use it the master plan as the basis for
[1:21:13] a lawsuit.
>> I'm not familiar with any um because
[1:21:16] that's mostly heavily reliant on the the
zoning code primarily. Yeah, that would
[1:21:21] that would come up from time to time in
zoning disputes where uh like a zoning
[1:21:27] request has been denied a variance and
they would try and use the master plan
[1:21:33] where you've you know strayed from the
master plan and deny their variance.
[1:21:38] Something like that comes up. It's an
argument,
[1:21:43] » but it's you're your your your
zoning ordinance is not required to be
[1:21:49] in strict conformity with the master
plan. It's a it's a guide like I say.
[1:21:54] » So this reference to the aesthetic
beauty within Bingham Farms. It is just
[1:22:00] totally impossible to litigate against
those kind of terms though, isn't it?
[1:22:06] » Kind [clears throat] of why it's there.
So unless the ordinance is really
[1:22:10] specific
>> and enforcable by law with consequences,
[1:22:18] you know that it's it's for not, right?
>> The ordinance. Yeah. If you want to be
[1:22:22] more specific with an ordinance if you
can.
[1:22:24] » Yeah.
>> Less vague,
[1:22:26] » right? [clears throat]
>> But that's not the master plan,
[1:22:30] » right?
>> Yeah.
[1:22:31] » Yeah. So if when we go through that
process, we'll be looking at the master
[1:22:35] plan as it's currently written um to
take that into consideration when we
[1:22:39] have those conversations with the
planning commission what if any types of
[1:22:43] changes to the fence ordinance they
would take into consideration. So, and
[1:22:47] right now what I see is maintaining the
character of the community and to
[1:22:51] possibly entertain if they want to
allowing fences um so long as what the
[1:22:57] master plan says about that is to
maintain the character of the community
[1:23:01] to not have fences in your front yard
and exposed and you know looking like a
[1:23:05] gated community so to speak. So um but
again that's all speculation and a
[1:23:10] future conversation that we'll be having
with the planning commission. So
[1:23:14] process-wise, right, this starts going
forward from here, the next step is the
[1:23:19] 42-day window for for
>> That's right. Yeah. So you're
[1:23:22] » and then if because now on one hand
public's been aware that it's been in
[1:23:27] the planning commission, but now they
made more aware of what's going on
[1:23:29] because it's coming here. If people are
coming with questions about any part of
[1:23:32] it, Yeah. questions or comments and
wants and desires to change.
[1:23:37] » Yes.
>> Um it's not just about the change in the
[1:23:40] language. It's really the whole thing.
If somebody comes in and has questions
[1:23:43] about all kinds of things,
>> they can come and comment on it. And the
[1:23:46] planning commission takes that
>> and says, "Okay, now what we do? Do we
[1:23:50] » there's all this public comment? What do
we do now?"
[1:23:53] » Yeah, for sure. Yeah, that could be kind
of just something that's not really
[1:23:56] foreseen at this point. And that the
only change to the 2021 master plan is
[1:24:00] what's that minor um um portion that's
taken out. Um, but if there becomes this
[1:24:07] conversation about something much larger
during that 42-day period, then
[1:24:10] certainly that can be something that is
taken into consideration. Um, and we'll
[1:24:14] just have to cross that bridge when we
get there. But the 42 days allows for
[1:24:18] the surrounding communities to be
notified. Um, and then for any public
[1:24:22] comment, but the last portion of it
would be for the planning commission to
[1:24:26] offer another public hearing before the
final adoption takes place in November.
[1:24:33] So again, what's before you today is
just to allow for staff to release uh
[1:24:38] for notification
or distribution, I should say.
[1:24:43] » And that's it.
>> Good.
[1:24:45] » Thank you very much for explaining it.
We appreciate it.
[1:24:58] » So we need a resolution.
depending on I think is this a motion or
[1:25:03] » I didn't find anything that um stated
that you technically have to have a
[1:25:06] motion but you can
>> I think do you agree Mike?
[1:25:10] » Yeah I didn't think you needed a motion.
>> I don't think so either. So, it's just a
[1:25:13] confirmation network to move forward
with a plan.
[1:25:16] » Like a thumbs thumbs up.
>> Thumbs up. Thumbs up. [laughter]
[1:25:19] » That works.
[1:25:28] » We can get the demographics.
>> You want ahead?
[1:25:31] » Is that next on the agenda? Okay. So, um
I requested uh have a discussion point
[1:25:37] on the agenda about
how do we as a village inform and
[1:25:43] encourage
our residents to be willing to be
[1:25:47] volunteers
of any nature. Maybe it's a specific
[1:25:51] committee, maybe it's just a a one-off
like a roads commission.
[1:25:57] Um if I remember correctly, we actually
passed a motion for a deer committee
[1:26:01] months ago. That would be another one if
we had some volunteers.
[1:26:05] » Maybe it's a a garden committee who how
to keep the deer out of my garden
[1:26:09] committee. I don't know.
>> But but my my personal feeling is I'm
[1:26:14] not even sure how people in Bingham
Farms know that there's an opening on
[1:26:18] the council, much less anywhere else. So
um because I don't I don't I don't sense
[1:26:26] that we're doing a lot of direct
communication in that way. Now this now
[1:26:30] so those were some of the examples but
coming up very soon the planning
[1:26:34] commission is going to have a number of
openings.
[1:26:38] So as those openings occur and Jamie
informed me that we don't have any
[1:26:44] volunteer applications on file at all.
There's a there is a application online
[1:26:49] probably nobody takes the time to figure
out if there's one there or not. Um
[1:26:55] uh and so we get in these situations at
a council that you got to you need
[1:26:59] somebody to serve a
uh a volunteer position for instance on
[1:27:05] the planning commission. And I guess I I
don't know how you find it. Maybe you
[1:27:09] just call up your best friend and say,
"Hey, will you help me out?" And sit on
[1:27:13] the planning commission. I don't know.
That's that's probably how it works, I
[1:27:15] guess. I don't know.
>> I I have a suggestion. I mean, I was
[1:27:19] criticized tonight for walking my dog
five times a day, but every time I walk
[1:27:24] my dog, I have neighbors out that are
walking their dog. They're just walking.
[1:27:28] And yesterday morning, I had a neighbor
from Bingham Road
[1:27:33] wanting to know about the house. And so
we discussed it briefly and he said,
[1:27:37] "Well, what can I do?" And I said, "Oh
my god, [laughter]
[1:27:40] thank you. Yes, you can volunteer." I
said, "Well, we would love to have you
[1:27:44] on a on a committee." So, he gave me his
contact information and um he's retired
[1:27:52] head of design for Chrysler. I mean,
he's got really good credentials. I
[1:27:56] think he'd be an asset to have working
with um the village. So, and that's just
[1:28:03] an example. I mean, there there's a
plethora of other people that have many
[1:28:07] skill sets that I think would help.
>> I think that's and that's a good
[1:28:10] example. How do we find more of those
people that might be willing to some
[1:28:14] people just don't want to commit to
three years or four years or whatever it
[1:28:17] is? I get it. But they might be glad to
commit to a a committee that's going to
[1:28:22] be formed and meet five times over the
next three months and and and help us
[1:28:26] out. So
>> yeah,
[1:28:28] » um
>> we need to find we I guess my real point
[1:28:31] is we need to find a way to to inform
residents that there are
[1:28:36] positions that we need volunteers to
help us on. and if you would be willing
[1:28:41] to help.
>> Yeah.
[1:28:42] » And at least have some applications or
resumes or whatever it is in place so
[1:28:46] when the time comes we're not going well
I don't know who's going to do that job.
[1:28:52] » Well I think one of the problems is we
still don't have a database of all
[1:28:57] residents. So we have 500 homes.
We have it for taxes. We don't have it
[1:29:06] for communication.
We got addresses for everybody. You
[1:29:10] could do a direct.
>> We don't have email or text.
[1:29:13] » Email or phones or text.
>> We really need to broaden that and be
[1:29:18] more inclusive of all residents. And
maybe investing in something like
[1:29:25] constant contact
would be um a good tool to use.
[1:29:32] And um but any if if
Yeah.
[1:29:38] » Are you aware of constant con?
>> I I ran a business for 17 years. Yes, I
[1:29:43] know. I know it.
>> Well, then you know the importance of
[1:29:46] being able to reach out to your
audience.
[1:29:48] » Correct. Um the only concern I have
about this and I'm going to let Mike
[1:29:53] speak to this because I think it's more
of a legal issue. All of those services
[1:29:57] and contacting people via email and
phone has to be voluntary on their end
[1:30:01] to provide that information. So if they
choose to unsubscribe, much like our
[1:30:05] eblast, we can't forcibly keep sending
emails or phone calls or texts to people
[1:30:10] if they say I don't want it.
>> So So that's the only concern I have
[1:30:14] about having that kind of database, but
on a volunteer basis, of course. And and
[1:30:18] we have our uh our eblast available
already as kind of
[1:30:21] » what percentage of households do you
have emails or a text number for? What
[1:30:28] percentage roughly? I don't know that I
can give you that number because again I
[1:30:33] don't keep a phone and email database
because I'm not aware of the legality of
[1:30:36] that. We have addresses the way we
normally the way we traditionally
[1:30:40] contact all the residents in the village
when we need to for example for large
[1:30:43] items to pick up is by USPS and we do
have a database of everybody's address
[1:30:49] » but the e-class is
>> what I guess that's [clears throat]
[1:30:53] emails
>> that's email correct that's that's where
[1:30:56] people signed up through our website
>> right is 20% or 80% is it
[1:31:00] » that's a hard number to guess because I
think that
[1:31:03] » oh I guess if there's two in a household
>> a similar question was posed back when
[1:31:07] Ken was manager and we we pulled up the
eblast directory that we have on our
[1:31:11] website and there is a silly number of
emails on there. I'm talking about like
[1:31:16] over 1,800 because what happens is
>> the eblast has existed for years.
[1:31:21] Residents signed up that moved from the
village their email is still rattling
[1:31:24] around there or residents got a new
Gmail
[1:31:27] » they're not using their old one.
>> So it's 200% is the answer.
[1:31:31] » Correct. So, so it's very hard to nail
down how many percentage of active
[1:31:34] residents we have because of that
overshot.
[1:31:37] » It's doable. It's just getting a plan
together.
[1:31:39] » What about I mean I think we we as
council members
[1:31:45] » we can all do our part. We can meet
people on the street.
[1:31:47] » Y
>> um you know I mean we can just throw all
[1:31:50] kinds of ideas out.
>> Yep.
[1:31:52] » Of absolutely
>> you know [clears throat]
[1:31:54] hey what if every one of us visits two
people that we don't know.
[1:32:00] » Yeah. Well, the other thing
>> it doesn't count when it's people, you
[1:32:02] know, and then let them know I this is
this is what I do. Do you want to help?
[1:32:07] And do you have two other people that I
can talk to or that they can talk to?
[1:32:12] » So, so that I was going to add my next
comment. We're about to do the postcard
[1:32:16] mailing for the fall large item pickup.
>> We're already tacking on the um fence
[1:32:21] ordinance survey uh onto that to get
feedback from the residents. We can
[1:32:25] easily add a bullet point on there for
villages. Always looking for a
[1:32:28] volunteers. Here's the link to that.
Yes. A star somehow somewhere.
[1:32:31] » Absolutely.
>> It's just hard for me to believe there's
[1:32:33] so there's so many retired people in
this community, especially in
[1:32:38] » Yes.
>> I know.
[1:32:41] [laughter]
[1:32:44] » On September 4th, I
>> Yeah. [laughter]
[1:32:48] » September 4th of which year.
>> I've said that every September 4th for
[1:32:53] the past [laughter] 20 years.
>> Send your right.
[1:32:56] » But yes, there's a ton of knowledge. But
there's just people I just think if they
[1:33:00] were encouraged and informed with we
could get a dozen maybe that said.
[1:33:06] » Yeah.
>> No, I think you're right. I think it's
[1:33:08] we're missing a a great opportunity to
engage people that are so valuable to
[1:33:15] our village and I know that they would
love to contribute too. So, it's just a
[1:33:19] matter of making that
>> I don't I have to say I don't remember
[1:33:22] how the whole the roads committee had a
good that was a good group of people.
[1:33:26] I'm not sure how the village I'm not
sure how I found out about it.
[1:33:30] » Well, part of it is networking.
>> Friends of friends, I think
[1:33:33] » they do.
>> I have a friend on Bristol who knows all
[1:33:36] the other people on Bristol. [laughter]
>> Well, yes.
[1:33:39] » And he went to Jim Burley and
>> I think Lisa had people
[1:33:45] » Oh, yeah.
>> I think so.
[1:33:46] » Yeah.
>> Yeah. I think putting in in the mailing
[1:33:49] would be good.
>> Yeah. I don't recall if we did a mailing
[1:33:51] for the roads committee, but I know we
definitely did an eblast and I think we
[1:33:55] did like a news uh posting on our
website as well in addition to
[1:33:59] » go back and just look and say this is
what we did because I somehow the word
[1:34:03] got out.
>> I can go back and look some of the news
[1:34:05] notifications time out after their
deadline. So obviously I can't pull up
[1:34:09] something that's no longer there, but
>> six.
[1:34:15] » Oh,
>> that's right. Okay. So yeah, we included
[1:34:18] it in the special roads newsletter then
too that we were looking for volunteers
[1:34:21] for the road committee because I think
Yeah, that's right. The first newsletter
[1:34:24] went out before the committee.
[clears throat] Second one went out
[1:34:26] after the committee.
>> Are police and fire departments? They
[1:34:28] have pretty good like social media.
>> That be a great place to latch on to
[1:34:34] their
>> social
[1:34:40] donuts.
[1:34:43] » Well, they do a good job. They like, you
know, I
[1:34:49] Yeah.
>> Well, they do a great job. So, we can
[1:34:53] latch on to them and also use that
resource.
[1:34:59] » It's about 500 homes.
>> I had a lot of success in Oakland
[1:35:04] Township by piggybacking on like the
Pinker Trail. people who live nearby or
[1:35:08] visited the area would follow that
Facebook page or social media and would
[1:35:13] maybe see things that they wouldn't
otherwise really care to follow like a
[1:35:17] government site, you know.
>> I don't know. Just an idea.
[1:35:24] » I'll get with the chiefs and see what
[1:35:28] the other thing is that when I look at
emails, some things just have a sameness
[1:35:33] to them. So, I don't
>> open it. I just sort of, you know, every
[1:35:38] month I get this, you know, it looks the
same.
[1:35:40] » And so we need to vary communication,
you know, and that's where the email and
[1:35:45] the text messages would come into play
>> like with boxwood. And the issue that
[1:35:50] happened all over our community was
should you shouldn't you destroy your
[1:35:53] boxwood plants? And the answer was
13313, you know, chemical that's going
[1:35:58] to rejuvenate the boxwoods. just sharing
that information with our friends and
[1:36:04] neighbors through email or a special
text. So, it's like an alert for
[1:36:09] emergencies or concerns. Uh, and I think
the police and the fire department would
[1:36:13] take huge if we had a better database.
I'm thinking that they surely would want
[1:36:19] to send some messaging on certain kind
of things.
[1:36:25] » So,
>> it's like code riding. do have that for
[1:36:28] for true emergencies.
>> That's for emergencies.
[1:36:31] » Yeah, true emergencies. Yeah.
>> But for true emergencies, we even don't
[1:36:36] have it.
>> I mean, there's no way if there's a
[1:36:40] tornado coming that
>> code red.
[1:36:42] » Code red.
>> Code red. If you have it,
[1:36:45] » if you have it red.
>> Yeah.
[1:36:54] I think I think we should try to at
least maybe come up for the next meeting
[1:36:58] some type of proposal. It doesn't have
to be much, but just get something
[1:37:02] memorialized that, you know, we're going
to put it on the direct mailing that's
[1:37:06] going out. We're going to attempt to get
uh uh a better database to email people,
[1:37:11] text people. I I've never heard of this
app, Contact. What was it? Contact.
[1:37:16] » Constant contact.
>> Constant contact.
[1:37:19] I've got enough constant contacts. So,
>> but that's the problem today. You get
[1:37:25] » a thousand emails a day, most of which
are
[1:37:28] » nothing.
>> Yeah.
[1:37:31] » Yes. It's true.
>> But we really need to do it as a
[1:37:37] council. We really need to do a better
job of informing people that there are
[1:37:40] opportunities. I really don't know how
people are going to know.
[1:37:47] What if I want to be on the planning
commission, but I don't even know what
[1:37:50] to do to get there
>> or when it's gonna happen.
[1:37:54] » So, okay.
[1:38:02] » All right. Thank you, Eric.
>> Do you want to move on to the treasures
[1:38:07] report?
>> Yes. Thank you. Last but not certainly
[1:38:11] least,
>> not least, [clears throat]
[1:38:13] » we have a handful of items under the
treasures report. um this evening. The
[1:38:18] first one uh is in your packet uh is
regarding a resolution regarding public
[1:38:23] act 152 which is known as the public
funding insurance act uh contribution
[1:38:29] act for annual exemption. Um it happens
on a yearly basis. Uh the state of
[1:38:34] Michigan sends it to me. It's due back
to them by the 30th of September. And
[1:38:38] what it does is just exempts us for the
year under the rules of it. The reason
[1:38:44] it came about was uh just a real quick
history lesson. Council back in 2005
[1:38:50] determined that since the employees of
the village do not the village does not
[1:38:55] uh provide health care benefits after
retirement when you leave the village
[1:38:59] that they would just exempt themselves
from this public act. So you know we
[1:39:03] have our insurance benefits once we
leave and or retire those don't go into
[1:39:08] a retirement like the autos and some of
the other companies did in the past
[1:39:11] year. So every year it comes in front of
council in order as a resolution to
[1:39:15] approve recommend and approve uh the
resolution so that we can exempt
[1:39:20] ourselves and send back the paper.
>> Conditions associated with that or you
[1:39:23] just say we don't want to participate.
>> We well we meet all the the requirements
[1:39:27] of of what the conditions are and we do
exempt ourselves. Uh the only other one
[1:39:32] is that it has to be approved by
twothirds of the sitting body of of the
[1:39:36] council that's in session at the time.
[1:39:40] » I think it's
Do we need to vote on that?
[1:39:43] » Uh, yes, it is a resolution.
>> Okay.
[1:39:50] » Someone needs to offer it. Someone needs
move that we approve the annual
[1:39:54] exemption of public act 152.
>> Second.
[1:40:00] » Hi.
>> Howard.
[1:40:01] » Hi.
>> Miller.
[1:40:02] » Hi.
>> Michigan.
[1:40:04] » I
[1:40:08] Alexander. Hi.
[1:40:12] resolution passes. Thank you. Second
item is uh more familiar as it is every
[1:40:18] month, approval of the bills for August
of 2026. Um that is also in your packet,
[1:40:24] but I'll just read through the
dispersements and then entertain any
[1:40:27] questions that council may have. uh
under the general fund from the period
[1:40:31] of July [snorts] 23rd 2026 through o
August 19th 2026
[1:40:40] we dispersed $222,314.7
[1:40:45] out of the general fund out of the gas
and weight fund for the same time period
[1:40:50] was $183,434.97
[1:40:55] for a total of 415,7
$7494.
[1:41:01] Um, I'll just bring to council's
attention. The
[1:41:06] 183,434
under the gas and weight was the first
[1:41:10] payment for phase two of the road
project that we received uh a letter and
[1:41:16] information from HRC saying that they
reviewed everything. They have the hold
[1:41:20] back in it. And what was they said
should be approved for payment on this
[1:41:24] portion of it for the work that was
completed was the 1384 34 and 97 cents.
[1:41:30] Um any other questions that I can answer
regarding the dispersements for the
[1:41:34] checks?
[1:41:37] None. With that, that motion uh is in
front of council for for your uh action
[1:41:43] on that motion. I make a motion to ex to
approve the expenditures from July 23rd
[1:41:49] through August 18th, 2026.
>> I'll second
[1:42:01] just all in favor.
>> I I
[1:42:05] » Any opposed?
Great. We'll move to the third item or
[1:42:11] third item on it. uh accept the
financial statements for July [snorts]
[1:42:15] 2026. It is also a motion. In your
packet, you have the revenue and expense
[1:42:20] report for the period ending July 31st,
2026.
[1:42:25] Um it's pretty self-explanatory. I did
want to bring to council's attention one
[1:42:30] oversight that was on my behalf. It was
my fault. If you look halfway down the
[1:42:35] page on the first page, you'll see under
the cell phone, there are 690 I'm sorry,
[1:42:40] $6825
under the balance. There's only a $25
[1:42:45] for the cell phone. When I put the three
items in, uh, it picked up I miskeyed in
[1:42:50] the one account number. So, that has
since been adjusted. It is not 227% of
[1:42:55] the budget. It moved to a motion for not
a motion, but for a membership for Jamie
[1:43:00] and then there was mileage. So that has
been corrected and it will be reflected
[1:43:05] in uh next month's financial statements
as well. Uh and then pretty
[1:43:10] straightforward as well. Obviously this
is the first month of the new fiscal
[1:43:13] year that we're in. So everything else
was was just in in line as you can see
[1:43:18] under the portion of the revenue taxes
are coming in uh typically just as they
[1:43:23] are. We should get a big download from
the mortgage companies sometime this
[1:43:28] week, beginning of next week. they wait
till the very end before penalties are
[1:43:33] assessed and they'll do a drop load uh
to the county and then the county sends
[1:43:37] me reports. So we have um you know right
now it's been pretty constant as it has
[1:43:43] been every year um without very many
exceptions whatsoever. Um that leads me
[1:43:50] to the second portion which is the
investments. Um, those have been updated
[1:43:54] and you know, as you as I um continue to
tell council every month, I always watch
[1:44:00] them. I make sure that we're trying to
maximize any benefit that's out there
[1:44:05] for ones that are coming to maturity and
expiration. Um, and you have it for both
[1:44:11] the general fund and the road fund. If
there's any questions that I could
[1:44:14] answer about those, I'm I'm more than
happy to.
[1:44:17] » If I could step back for a minute, last
year we had a lot of push back from uh
[1:44:21] well more than push back. It was
challenges from some of the commercial
[1:44:25] properties of their taxable value and I
know there was some adjustments made
[1:44:30] there. Is any of that going on this
year?
[1:44:32] » There is. Um as a matter of fact uh Joe
was kind enough since he sits a lot on
[1:44:36] the review board uh he always provides
me information um before I it's I don't
[1:44:41] want to say publicly available but he
takes the active role and brings it to
[1:44:46] me of what the the board has looked and
which ones are going to the Michigan uh
[1:44:49] tribunal. So, there are a couple that
are still out there. Um, there has not
[1:44:54] been any decisions. It wasn't as much as
it had been in the past. Um, the listing
[1:44:59] that I get, I do log in and and read the
docu the the information on what's put
[1:45:04] on the docket and where it currently is
in the process. Um, we're on there for a
[1:45:09] handful this current year. It's
typically the large commercial districts
[1:45:13] that that do it regularly. They wait so
many years and then they'll file again.
[1:45:17] Beverly Hills had a couple that were on
there and Franklin had one or two, I
[1:45:21] believe, that were on there, but it's
not to the extent as it was this p the
[1:45:25] past fiscal year. Yes.
>> Yep.
[1:45:31] » I have seen a little bit, just to
comment secondary, I have seen a lot of
[1:45:34] things come through too as houses uh
sale and people change their primary
[1:45:40] exemption for their residency. a lot of
them move from Florida and now they take
[1:45:44] that off on the floor or wherever their
other
[1:45:46] » primary uh exemption is and they move it
back to here. So I get those reports
[1:45:50] from the county every week. Uh and I
don't I'm not able to go in and actually
[1:45:55] change it. The township is the one that
has the ability to update. It's called
[1:45:59] the lamb system. So they're the ones
that go in and and move the exemption
[1:46:03] from uh primary exemption from
non-exempt to exempt. Uh and that does
[1:46:09] not affect the village taxes and the
reason why the township does it is
[1:46:13] because it goes to the schools and all
of the other stuff. So we don't
[1:46:17] » this at all.
>> Right. Correct. And that's why they have
[1:46:19] the responsibility of updating it. So I
keep in close contact with Kim, the
[1:46:23] treasurer that's in Southfield Township.
We
[1:46:25] » But there's people actually moving back
from Florida to declare this is their
[1:46:28] primary res.
>> Well, ne not necessarily not necessarily
[1:46:31] moving back, but they move I'll get a
lot. It's surprising. Florida really is
[1:46:36] very uh I don't want to say hawkish on
making sure I'll get a lot of calls that
[1:46:41] says
>> can you verify and confirm that they're
[1:46:43] not this this particular parcel is not
claiming primary exemption because
[1:46:48] they're doing because you can't have it
in both states. So there's no other way
[1:46:52] for them to they could query it but they
end up calling me and and have me
[1:46:56] confirm whether or not it's either
>> primary or non-primary. Right. So, uh,
[1:47:01] we have seen that. But to answer your
question, um, Eric, it is not
[1:47:05] necessarily that they're moving back,
but they look at what the taxes are in
[1:47:09] the impact hour in whatever the state it
is, and whatever is the most beneficial
[1:47:13] for them, they'll unfile there and
they'll file back here.
[1:47:17] » And with the stuff that's going on in
Florida right now about the elimination
[1:47:20] of property tax, it's going to be a
>> Yes.
[1:47:25] » Yep.
>> Any other questions I can answer?
[1:47:30] I mean, we're doing fine. We're we're,
you know, interest rates are aren't
[1:47:34] going to stay a relative, but we have
some that are in there that we have
[1:47:39] maturity on that are still going up.
There's some that are going to be coming
[1:47:42] up. And then I always go and work the
financial institutions to see if they
[1:47:46] squeak out a couple more basis points
for us.
[1:47:48] » Treasuries are up considerably this
week, aren't they?
[1:47:51] » Well, that Well, if you take a look at
what happened to the bond market, that
[1:47:55] had a big impact. So again, you know, we
were talking earlier about roads
[1:47:58] inflation and all that stuff when you
have things that are jerking back and
[1:48:02] forth. Uh sometimes when I look at it,
it's nice to know that we have set rates
[1:48:06] that are that are there that are that
are Yes, exactly.
[1:48:10] » Uh but we'll continue to keep an eye on
that. So if there's no other questions
[1:48:14] on that, the motion is in front of
council for for that uh for the
[1:48:17] investments and for the financial
statements.
[1:48:20] » I make a motion to accept the financial
statements of July 22.
[1:48:24] I second.
>> All in favor?
[1:48:28] » Any opposed?
>> Motion passes. Jamie, I'm taking your
[1:48:32] job.
>> Um I just thought I would just since
[1:48:35] it's it's my deal right now. Um the last
two items are are really easy. Um the
[1:48:41] reason why there's nothing included in
your packet on the uh not to exceed fees
[1:48:45] are that I typically get invoices from
HRC around the 21st through the 24th.
[1:48:52] [clears throat] So, I haven't had any
new invoices come that are updated. The
[1:48:56] last one that was in the last packet was
as of June 30th. So, as soon as I get
[1:49:00] those, obviously, I will make sure that
they're in next month's um next month's
[1:49:05] packet. But, as you said, we're winding
down on um phase one. I talked to Brad a
[1:49:11] little bit today back and forth and uh
obviously that one's going to come in.
[1:49:15] We're we're I think virtually pretty
much done with a couple of other hitless
[1:49:20] things that have to be completed taken
care of. Right.
[1:49:24] » Need to close that out.
>> Right. So, um with that and then, you
[1:49:29] know, phase two is moving along pretty
fast. As I came back to this meeting, I
[1:49:33] saw they've got the apron portion uh of
that kind of torn up and blocked off.
[1:49:38] and you saw the um the notice email from
uh HRC that was sent out on Friday about
[1:49:43] what the intention was with weather,
what's the next portion of it. So that
[1:49:47] should uh relatively uh finish up fairly
quickly in my opinion and then that'll
[1:49:53] give us again a good staging point to
start looking at where do we go from
[1:49:57] here regarding phase three. But that's
the answer of why there's nothing in the
[1:50:02] package because I don't have any updates
for you.
[1:50:06] Appreciate the time.
>> Thank you.
[1:50:10] » Comment
[1:50:17] to a motion to
>> adjourn.
[1:50:20] Move to
>> second.
[1:50:22] » Second.
[1:50:26] » Thank you. [clears throat] Good night
everybody.