[0:02] statement which is the township will
maintain its rural character for years
[0:06] to come while managing the pace of
growth, ensuring the preservation of
[0:10] existing neighborhoods and the natural
environment and promoting development in
[0:13] agreed upon target areas that will be
served by public infrastructure and
[0:18] utilities. Again, I'm going to go ahead
and call the meeting to order. Before
[0:22] our secretary uh begins roll call, just
a a reminder, we do ask that you please
[0:28] come to the podium and use the
microphone um so that we can capture the
[0:32] audio for recording and that everyone
here can hear what is being said. Um so
[0:37] just ask that you don't speak from the
seat. Again, everybody will have that
[0:40] opportunity but to please come to the
podium. So with that, roll call.
[0:44] Secretary Woods.
>> Chair Johnson
[0:47] » present.
>> Vice Chair Sly
[0:50] » here. Commissioner Buller
>> here.
[0:52] » Secretary Woods is here. Commissioner
Riggs
[0:55] » here.
>> Commissioner Summers
[0:57] » here.
>> Commissioner Redmond
[0:59] » here.
>> You have a quorum.
[1:01] » Thank you very much. If we can stand for
the pledge of allegiance, please.
[1:07] » I aliance to the flag of the United
States of America and to the republic
[1:14] for which it stands. One nation under
God, indivisible, with liberty and
[1:20] justice for all.
[cough]
[1:29] » Moving on to item D on the agenda is the
approval of the agenda. Is there a
[1:33] motion to approve the agenda?
>> Move to approve.
[1:40] » Support.
[1:43] We have a motion by Commissioner Buller,
seconded by Commissioner Sly. Any
[1:46] discussion?
[1:50] Hearing and seeing none. All those in
favor signify by saying I.
[1:53] » I. [snorts]
>> All those opposed, same sign. Motion
[1:56] carries. We have an agenda. Uh the first
item on our agenda tonight um and I'm so
[2:01] happy to welcome Representative Steve
Cara who represents um the Three Rivers
[2:05] area and uh he also chairs the House
Oversight Committee on Corporate
[2:10] Subsidies and State Investments in the
Michigan House of Representatives. Um
[2:15] this commiti subcommittee has held
multiple hearings in I think 25 and 26
[2:20] maybe 26
um examining the economic environmental
[2:24] and policy impacts of data center
development in Michigan and
[2:28] representative Cara thank you so much
for being here um we don't have or have
[2:32] been unable to get our local
representatives here so thank you for
[2:35] for coming this evening and I ask if you
can go to the podium kind of give us an
[2:39] update of what's happening at the state
[2:46] Well, thank you, Chair Johnson, and
hello to the to the board here. I'm
[2:51] Steve Cara, state representative, like
like you said, District 36. That's all
[2:54] of St. Joseph County and most of Cass
County to the southwest of here. And I
[2:59] chair the subcommittee on oversight, uh,
corporate subsidies and state
[3:04] investments.
And yeah, we've had several hearings
[3:07] from the environmental concerns of of
data centers to the amount of power
[3:13] consumption that they use. That's one
that got me in trouble with consumers
[3:16] energy. Although I only talked about the
amount of power they use, like saying
[3:20] that the Stargate data center uses 1.4
gawatt, which is as much as 1.17 million
[3:27] houses combined. And that's all I kept
it to was the amount of power that it
[3:30] uses. And
they made it personal. They came after
[3:35] me. Uh, actually, it's the most money
that's ever been spent against a an
[3:39] incumbent running for reelection in a
primary in the state of Michigan. They
[3:43] spent over half a million dollars to try
to beat me. Uh, I don't know why they
[3:47] would do that and lose, but that was
their prerogative. So, uh, so yeah, I
[3:51] think that just empowers me to come back
and uh go after them a little bit, you
[3:55] know, because I didn't make it personal.
I talked about the reality of the power
[3:58] it used. Well, now we get to talk about
consumers energy directly and DTE
[4:02] directly and I feel like they gave me a
free ticket to do it. So, it's going to
[4:06] be fun for these last few months uh this
term uh taking it back to them and
[4:11] having more serious conversations about
the corruption of the status quo that
[4:16] they want. Uh my biggest concern when it
comes to data centers is I know a lot of
[4:22] people are concerned about the
environmental impact and the amount of
[4:25] power that they use. Those are not my
top issue. My top issue is the fact that
[4:31] I believe that hypers scale data centers
and the potential of artificial
[4:35] intelligence becoming artificial super
intelligence is an existential threat.
[4:40] Literally could wipe out humanity.
I've had experts testify in committee
[4:45] about this. I've listened to
unfortunately I tried to get Tristan
[4:49] Harris to testify but he didn't get back
to us. But Tristan Harris and Jeffrey
[4:53] Hinton are two people who I highly
recommend. uh listening to and
[5:00] it's
it's it's alarming. It's alarming. Yes,
[5:04] there are concerns to our local
community, but that's nothing compared
[5:08] to the fact that it might wipe out
humanity. And we have four options. We
[5:13] can be apathetic, misinformed,
complicit, or we can challenge the
[5:18] status quo. The status quo politics,
whether it's data centers or other
[5:23] things, they love apathy. They love when
people just stay home, watch football.
[5:28] I'm looking forward to the football
season, by the way. But that's what they
[5:32] want us to do. Not paying attention to
what they're doing. If we are paying
[5:35] attention, they want us to be
misinformed. Uh none of us have all the
[5:38] answers, but they want us to be
misinformed. And if we are not apathetic
[5:43] or misinformed, they want us to be
complicit. What peanuts can I get for
[5:47] conforming to the status quo? That's
what they want us to say. Those are our
[5:51] three options that work for the
corruption of the globalist agenda. The
[5:57] one that doesn't work for them is for us
to resist, to challenge the status quo,
[6:02] to uh be agents for change, for free
markets and equal opportunity and
[6:07] protecting people's god-given rights.
That's what they don't want from us. And
[6:12] I think it is incumbent upon all of us,
whether we're elected officials, uh
[6:16] leaders in our community, activists,
people who just want what's best for
[6:20] fellow man to uh to rise and to
challenge the system because the very
[6:26] existence of mankind is at hand here. So
that's my two cents. I don't know if you
[6:32] have any questions for me, how long you
want me to speak tonight. I plan to stay
[6:36] for a while.
>> Okay. Um well, I do have a couple
[6:38] questions and then I'll open it up to
the commissioners. And I know we had
[6:41] this early on the agenda, so maybe we
can take a couple questions from the
[6:44] public as well. I you're before public
comment, but um just to give everybody
[6:49] an opportunity. Um our my question, I
guess, is we've been trying to go
[6:53] through a lot of training. Rob Thaw, our
attorney, is here as well, and we have
[6:56] the topic of data centers as well as
battery storage. I mean, obviously
[7:00] that's a lot in the headlines across the
state, right? And I know you've had
[7:05] committee hearings. Who's in favor?
Right. Who's in favor of let's just
[7:09] stick to data centers, right? Who's, you
know, because there's a lot of
[7:13] negativity and I think the Meno Center
just came out with something that said,
[7:16] "Oh, that's just a bunch of, you know, I
don't I think it was the Meno Center,
[7:19] but basically that it's more, you know,
it's not really as bad as it sounds,
[7:23] right?" Um, who's in favor of data
centers?
[7:28] » Sure.
>> I I would say that there are very
[7:31] wealthy people on both sides of the
aisle, big donors. uh you have the just
[7:35] the race to see who can achieve
artificial super intelligence. There's a
[7:38] lot of investors who are putting money
into whether they want it to be
[7:42] anthropic or open AI or or what company
they want uh to get across the finish
[7:48] line to be the one to achieve that super
intelligence and then they rule the
[7:52] world is their theory. And if does come
with that risk of destroying humanity,
[7:56] they'd rather it be them who
accomplished and eventually lost control
[8:00] to artificial super intelligence than
somebody else they're competing against.
[8:04] So it's just kind of that dog eat dog
system where they're like, "Well,
[8:08] somebody else is going to do it, so we
might as well do it as well." Uh we're
[8:12] also investing in old technology with
this because the graphic processing
[8:16] units, the GPUs that are made by Nvidia,
they're a few years old technology. And
[8:22] if you think about that 1.4 gawwatts to
have not even artificial general
[8:28] intelligence, so it's not even as
intelligent as all of humans combined
[8:32] right now taking 1.4 gawatt. Well, our
brains use 20 watts. So way more power.
[8:39] Well, what happens when technology
becomes more efficient and they only
[8:42] need 100 times as much power as our
brain to do higher computations than our
[8:47] brains are capable of doing? So this
technology that they keep investing in
[8:52] with these old Nvidia chips are becoming
outdated uh quickly and much more
[8:59] efficient stuff is on the horizon. But
that's scary because more efficient
[9:04] towards bringing us to artificial super
intelligence. That's the best argument
[9:07] people make is that we have to beat
China in the race war. You know that
[9:10] they're going to develop uh some uh
super intelligence and then they'll beat
[9:15] us militaristically or economically and
so we have to beat them. I think we need
[9:19] to have a diplomatic approach to it uh
as the United States and look at well
[9:23] how can we have serious conversations
with them like with nuclear
[9:26] proliferation make sure that we don't
wipe one another out. Uh so what was
[9:31] your question again?
>> Well just asking like within within the
[9:34] hearings you know if there was
[clears throat] anybody that was very
[9:36] supportive of the data centers and who's
that coming from?
[9:39] » As you saw I'm sure many of you
President Trump put out a tweet that was
[9:43] uh very to the point yesterday. Uh
Gretchen Whitmer also is supportive.
[9:48] Josyn [clears throat] Benson I would
imagine is her husband Ryan is one of
[9:51] the lead data center developers in in
the state with his being vice president
[9:55] of related companies because related
digital which is their sub company
[9:59] worked with open AI and Oracle to bring
us Stargate and Seline and so he was one
[10:05] of the key developers there. So yeah,
Benson, Whitmer, Trump, both sides of
[10:09] the aisle, big investors, people who
want to be part of that movement to rule
[10:16] the world.
>> So bringing it my last question. Um, so
[10:19] bringing it back home, right? We're a
small township and, you know, we're
[10:22] trying to do our due diligence. We've
got issues. I know we're going to talk
[10:25] solar tonight, too. We got a couple
items on the agenda. You know, we have
[10:28] been eroding local control, right? and
uh within the state legislature and and
[10:33] laws that have been passed um and you
know the concern at least that I have is
[10:38] in data centers next right um is that
going to be potentially another realm um
[10:42] that gets taken out of local control
what would be your advice you mentioned
[10:45] resistance but you know we're limited to
what the law states what what are what
[10:50] can we do as a township whether we're
for it or against it not suggesting one
[10:54] way or another but what what is your
advice to a local township
[10:57] » on bus facilities first you know that is
difficult there's a lot of communities
[11:01] because the MPSC, as you know, has the
final say. Basically, the local
[11:06] community can make the decision they
want to make, but if it's not what the
[11:09] MPC MPSC wants, they can overrule it.
So, you really don't have the final say.
[11:13] » Well, the same thing with electricity
costs, right? That will go to the
[11:16] Michigan Public Service Commission as
well, right?
[11:19] » Yes, they go and they have rates
increase on rate payers. Yes. Annually.
[11:24] And they went up much faster than the
rate of inflation this last year. And I
[11:28] believe part of it, even they don't say
it's because of it, is because they see
[11:31] all how much power the data centers use.
And they want it to pass the cost over
[11:36] to the rateayers with your utility bills
to help to subsidize the onset of the
[11:40] data center movement. And you know, they
want all of the above energy, whether
[11:44] it's, you know, already existing like
nuclear type of uh power plants, but
[11:49] they also want wind and solar. They want
all the they want to hypercharge our
[11:53] grid. So, taking our beautiful farmland
and transitioning it over to solar
[11:58] panels. Once you go to solar panels,
that you know creates problems with the
[12:02] with the soil. You can't go back to
farming after having the the solar
[12:05] panels there from the the leeching from
the chemicals and the metals in there.
[12:10] And uh the battery energy storage
systems are best facilities. Uh the
[12:15] reason why they have those with the
solar panels is because solar panels
[12:20] deplete the energy quickly. So if you
don't use the energy from solar panels
[12:24] right away, if you store it in the
batteries, then the batteries can hold
[12:28] it and and it doesn't deplete as
quickly. So yeah, solar is one of the
[12:32] worst energy sources in terms of
maintaining the energy if you don't use
[12:36] it right away. That's why they have the
best facilities going with them and like
[12:40] you said, usurping local control. that
the MPSC just heard a couple days ago
[12:45] their first uh decision on
and I can't remember what they decided a
[12:51] couple days ago. I I saw they were going
to meet and I didn't see what they ended
[12:54] up
>> Do you mean with with a um a data center
[12:57] or I mean sorry with a with the uh best
or
[13:00] » I think it was a best facility andor
solar panel as well. One of those
[13:03] renewable energ one of the ones that
falls under PA 233. Yeah. So yeah the
[13:07] first case went before them
>> and I don't know what their their
[13:10] decision was. I think they approved I
think it was Ingam County.
[13:13] » Yeah, that was a settlement actually.
Okay. Uh Viv Township and some others in
[13:18] Ingam County and they actually reached a
settlement
[13:21] » and that was the first one. So how many
communities who've just outright
[13:24] rejected and had plans to not do it and
just left it to the risk of the NPSC.
[13:29] Well, finally one time the MPSC has
acted in one circumstance. Does that set
[13:33] precedent to where it's going to be
happening all over the state or is it
[13:37] going to be rare?
A lot of the people in my community have
[13:41] been of the mindset like just don't give
an endorsement a tacid endorsement of it
[13:46] whatsoever and just leave it to the risk
of what the MPSC says. That's been the
[13:51] mindset of the locals from my community.
Okay.
[13:54] » Commissioners, questions for
Representative Car.
[13:57] » Is there any legislative act in one way
or the other on any of the data centers?
[14:03] » It's pretty quiet.
>> It's pretty quiet. Uh yeah, I'd say
[14:10] leadership on both sides of the aisle
seem to just want to ignore it and just
[14:14] let things happen. it it has the local
control dynamics right now for the data
[14:19] centers and but I think one of the
things with the data centers that I've
[14:25] heard that are is worth noting of course
I can't give any legal advice as a
[14:29] legislator but there's the route of it's
called sue and settle so there are some
[14:36] routes where some communities have gone
including Seline Township with Stargate
[14:41] where they sued and settled was the
result and So
[14:46] I would I don't want to see peanuts
given to the local community in return
[14:51] for ending up bringing a data center and
doing it quote the right way. I would
[14:56] rather not set that foundation. But you
can't discriminate is the thing. So any
[15:01] type of thing that the local community
does to try to stop a data center from
[15:05] coming locally. You can't pick on a
certain industry or else you know you'll
[15:10] get beat through the courts is what I
hear. Um, so keeping that in mind as you
[15:17] make your considerations I think is
important not to discriminate against
[15:20] data centers but set the foundation to
where businesses can't do XYZ which
[15:25] would cause a problem for data centers
as well as other things that would be
[15:30] okay to cause a problem for that way
it's not discriminating but yeah I I
[15:34] don't like to sue in a subtle route.
Okay,
[15:38] » I I have a couple. Um, why do they seem
to be insistent on on using prime
[15:45] residential land being right up next to
a neighborhood? Why aren't they trying
[15:50] to be more um um you know, friendly
neighbors or you know, being way out of
[15:56] town? People drive 15, 20, 30 minutes,
an hour to work. They don't need to be
[16:02] right in a neighborhood.
That seems to be one of the biggest
[16:06] things that, you know, gets people
screaming is, you know, they're right
[16:10] next door. Their houses are vibrating
and have me live into the basement
[16:14] because it's too noisy upstairs now.
>> Right. In in most circumstances, they do
[16:19] try to go in more rural areas is what
they try to do. But there still could be
[16:23] neighboring, you know, communities there
nonetheless. They want water. They want
[16:28] cooler areas. Um, those are a couple of
things they're looking at. They like
[16:32] flat land. Um those are some of the
things that draw data centers to certain
[16:37] areas. And yes, there might be
neighborhoods in the surrounding area
[16:42] out in more rural areas like here or
elsewhere than compared to in the city.
[16:48] Uh but if they industrial zones and
cities, you know, people might already
[16:53] be used to the industrial, you know,
type of dynamic there. people who
[16:57] decided to live out here, wanted to live
out here in a rural area, that's that's
[17:00] why they live here or one of the reasons
why they live here, not to be in an
[17:04] industrial zone like that. Uh
[clears throat] but uh but yeah, they
[17:08] they want the water, they want the land,
they want the flat land,
[17:13] um
I think if it is going to have negative
[17:16] externalities, as much as we don't want
it for the hundreds of people around it
[17:20] here, if [clears throat] it's going to
have negative externalities within two
[17:23] miles, it's less people in a rural area
like this than it would be in Detroit or
[17:29] Sure.
>> Lancing.
[17:30] » And how many homes did you say is
equivalent to how much power it uses?
[17:36] 1. Okay, there we go. 1.17 million
houses is 1.4 gawatt.
[17:41] » I thought I misunderstood that, but
that's what you said.
[17:44] » Correct.
>> And um as far as employees go, um I I've
[17:48] heard that they want to be close to
communities so they can draw on
[17:52] employees. In the seminars that I've
attended, um, they talk about when
[17:58] they're, you know, their sales pitch,
they come in and say, "We're going to
[18:01] provide, you know, 200 jobs or 350
jobs." And then when it's all said and
[18:05] done, it's like a dozen people.
>> Yeah. It's around 10% of what has been
[18:10] promised according to the Mina Center
from the year 2000 to 2020. But in the
[18:15] past five or six years with you know the
goan battery plan up north and then of
[18:22] course as you all know here with blue
oval they've had promises of jobs that
[18:26] are you know shrinking in terms of what
their expectations were. So they
[18:30] continue to underdel on their promised
jobs. Absolutely. 10% of what they
[18:35] promise is remarkably poor. Uh it's
proven to be failure for these corporate
[18:40] giveaways. Just trusting free markets
and equal opportunity is certainly
[18:44] advisable over, you know, corruption and
special interests and picking winners
[18:49] and losers and having it not come to
fruition and imposing on a community not
[18:54] off of a free market process.
>> Thank you, [snorts]
[18:59] » Mr. Sai. Any Commissioner Summers?
Commissioner Liz,
[19:05] I have one last one
and [clears throat] then we'll see if
[19:09] there's just a couple from the audience.
Um, let's talk non-disclosure
[19:12] agreements. Um, you mentioned and I know
we've got the Michigan Economic
[19:17] Development Corporation, is it? Um,
MEEDC. Um, and I've been watching a
[19:22] little bit of legislation related to
non-disclosure agreements. What's
[19:26] happening at the legislature um, you
know, related to addressing that issue?
[19:30] Um there's folks here in the audience
who I know have been um you know have
[19:34] been we've been part of this community
where that's obviously been an issue. Um
[19:38] so tell us what our legislators are
doing related to that.
[19:43] » So I had a bill passed last year that
legislators uh would not be able to sign
[19:49] leg NDAs in their legislative capacity
and that also extended to their staff
[19:54] working in the members legislative
capacity.
[19:58] But so that passed with bipartisan
support. I think it had every
[20:03] Republican, but it had probably a
majority of the Democrats. It was about
[20:07] a 3/4 of the legislature vote voted yes
in the House. Uh it is sitting in the
[20:13] Senate currently awaiting a vote
hopefully, but I don't anticipate it's
[20:19] going to happen because Governor Whitmer
doesn't want that to come before her.
[20:23] She said she would veto. So the Senate
majority leader likes to, you know,
[20:28] protect the governor from that potential
injury. So just doesn't bring it up for
[20:33] a vote. That's the best thing they can
do with it to protect her from that
[20:36] negative optic because the people
certainly Republicans, Democrats,
[20:40] independents are
very often in agreement that as public
[20:45] servants, we should not be signing
secrecy packs about the work that we do.
[20:50] as public servants, we should be open
and transparent with the community about
[20:54] what we're working on. Uh, but that did
only apply to the legislature for my
[20:59] bill. I do believe I think it's
Representative Miller, a Democrat, who
[21:04] has it for local elected officials as
well. Uh, I would support that. That's a
[21:08] little bit more difficult to get across
the finish line. More legislators would
[21:13] support it for us in our legislative
capacity. there starts to be, you know,
[21:18] some of my colleagues who are less
inclined to support it for local elected
[21:22] officials. Um, you could have it. It's
more the business of the local community
[21:29] talking about, you know, what type of
infrastructure capabilities there are
[21:34] and wanting to protect a potential
consideration of investments. So, it's
[21:38] it's harder to get some colleagues on
board for that, but I'm a yes that we
[21:43] should not be signing NDAs or local
electeds either.
[21:46] » Thank you for that. Does anybody in the
audience have one or two questions for
[21:50] Representative Cara?
Okay. Anybody else?
[21:55] » Wait a second. I think she got one.
>> Yes. Um, you know what? I'm going to ask
[21:59] that you I hate to do this, but come up
to the podium if Representative Carla
[22:03] can step aside for a second. That way,
we can catch your audio.
[22:07] You didn't know that was part of the
deal, right? [cough]
[22:10] [clears throat]
[22:14] » I'm just here to ask
if Whitmer will more than likely veto
[22:21] it. And my name is Laura Valentine.
Sorry. Um, is there something we as
[22:28] residents can do to let Whitmer know? We
don't [snorts] want her to v video veto
[22:34] it. And will she listen to us?
>> No. [snorts]
[22:38] » Thank you.
>> Yes.
[22:41] » So letting her know that's your stance
that you would not want her to vetoed is
[22:46] certainly something that you could do.
Uh whether it's reaching out to her
[22:50] office or you know making other people
aware of that situation and encouraging
[22:56] them. This is what we need to ensure
that these you know corrupt deals don't
[23:01] continue to happen in the state of
Michigan. Uh but the problem is she
[23:06] doesn't get a chance to sign it into law
or veto it unless it comes to her desk.
[23:11] And the Senate majority leader is Winnie
Brinks who is her choice for Lieutenant
[23:17] Governor. And so when Gretchen Whitmer
tells Senate Majority Leader Winnie
[23:22] Brinks, don't let that bill get through
the Senate,
[23:26] she's going to listen and not let it get
through the Senate. We only get to vote
[23:30] on what comes up for a vote and it's the
leader of the chamber who decides what
[23:35] we get to vote on. So Winnie Brinks gets
to protect Gretch and Whitmer by not
[23:41] bringing it up for a vote.
>> Unfortunately,
[23:45] » Representative Carl, thank you so much
for being here. Really, really
[23:48] appreciate it. And oh, was there another
Oh,
[23:51] » you want to come up to the podium?
Last one. [clears throat]
[23:58] this opportunity.
Uh yeah, Steve knows who I am. Barry
[24:03] Wayne Adams. Um
we're seeing a
[24:09] rash of efforts at different areas where
they're trying to put in data centers
[24:16] [clears throat] to impose moratoria like
what's going to be happening here.
[24:23] [clears throat] But uh sufficient
information uh particularly about the
[24:29] hypers scale data centers has come out
to conclusively and decisively prove
[24:34] that their installation and use is a an
immediate and like you say existential
[24:41] threat to the to the public health and
safety. Now the whole purpose of police
[24:46] power is to protect the public health
and safety. Can you move on a different
[24:53] legislative strategy instead of trying
to kick the can down the road with a
[24:57] moratorum
to actually move to
[25:02] prohibit the installation of these data
centers? Thanks, Steve.
[25:06] » No.
[25:10] » Yeah, Barry, I definitely understand
where you're where you're coming from
[25:13] with that. I people have said that I
have come out in support of a moratorum
[25:19] and I don't know if it's because I went
around with Perry Johnson on a bus tour
[25:22] and he supported it or or where they get
that from but I don't believe I have
[25:26] ever said that because like you're
saying [clears throat] I feel like I've
[25:29] already done my homework on data
centers. I feel like I've already seen
[25:34] from an environmental impact and power
consumption use that would not get me to
[25:40] a prohibition stance, but an existential
threat to humanity and the research that
[25:46] I've done with it gets me to a
prohibition level. And I say that as the
[25:51] most pro- freedom limited government
elected official in the state of
[25:55] Michigan. That sounds counterintuitive
to my position to prohibit a private
[26:00] decision of what you do with private
property that you chose to purchase. But
[26:04] if it's going to wipe out humanity,
you kind of need to have serious
[26:09] conversations about what happens to the
8 billion people who didn't want to lose
[26:13] their lives because you were so foolish
with achieving artificial super
[26:18] intelligence because of your power and
greed. So yeah, no I I am like you uh
[26:24] more on the line of prohibition. I I
wouldn't say for all data centers, you
[26:28] know, there's some data centers that are
used for uh keeping medical records or
[26:32] things of that sort, but for data
centers for the purpose of uh achieving
[26:36] higher powered artificial intelligence.
I think we need to have those
[26:39] prohibition conversations and I'm there
with you.
[26:43] » Thank you.
>> Y
[26:44] » thank you represent. Thank you very
much.
[26:45] » Thank you.
[26:49] Moving
[26:53] on to public comments on agenda items
only. Um so once again um we do ask that
[27:00] you come to the podium for any public
comments on agenda items only.
[27:09] Seeing none
[27:12] » every time I say that then there's there
we got one. Come on. [clears throat]
[27:19] I thought there would at least be
somebody talking on the agenda item.
[27:22] Okay. Uh yeah, the moratorum thing.
Uh I don't know if you've kept track of
[27:30] what happened with the moratorum
activity over in the city, but uh there
[27:37] was a concerted effort by some citizens.
>> Thank you.
[27:43] » Is that all right?
>> Better. Much better.
[27:45] » All right. There was a concerted effort
by citizens to uh start an initiative
[27:51] drive uh to have a moratorium about data
centers for 365 days. [clears throat]
[28:00] Well, there was a very positive
response. Uh actually there are other
[28:04] people who were involved with that who
could speak to it better than I can
[28:08] [clears throat] but there was a very
positive response. sufficient uh
[28:11] signatures were obtained. But um
in order to uh do a shortcut around what
[28:21] the citizens were trying to do, the
city council decided to pull an uh
[28:30] ambush agenda
maneuver and they suddenly put a agenda
[28:38] item without any sufficient public
notice beforehand.
[28:42] uh [clears throat]
and then proceeded to unanimously
[28:47] uh enact a quote unquote moratorum that
is actually a non-moratorum because it
[28:55] provides itself the ability to either
extend or to terminate earlier a 365day
[29:02] moratorum. So
it it actually is reflective of the uh
[29:08] arrogance that the uh local marshall uh
city government has about the citizenry
[29:15] and and their real concerns. and they
thought that they could just uh do this
[29:20] uh legislative sugar pill
uh to
[29:25] uh
you know be a panacea you know pabum for
[29:31] the masses.
So, uh, if you're going to do a
[29:35] moratorum, be authentic about it,
put hard boundaries on it, and not make
[29:43] it something that you can just decide
we're going to stop having a moratorum
[29:46] and, uh, we'll just proceed as usual.
>> [clears throat]
[29:50] » So, uh,
as I've seen the Marshall Township, uh,
[29:58] Council operate, it it does operate in
clear distinction to the, uh, methods of
[30:05] the Marshall City Council. And uh
particularly with uh Joanna
[30:12] uh at the helm uh we're seeing an effort
to you know provide hearings that uh
[30:19] create opportunities for full and
complete dis disclosure
[30:23] about uh about issues without having the
taint of NDAs or uh and like Steve said
[30:30] you know well it's actually incorporated
into the Michigan file laws at MCL 75492
[30:37] do that you can't withhold public
information from the public.
[30:43] So uh these are the things that
uh we should be concerned about and
[30:50] again perhaps you people
on the basis of
[30:57] an actual threat to the public health
and safety because we we've already seen
[31:03] the mistake that MA has brought upon the
township.
[31:07] uh the mega mistake and uh
[31:13] the methods that were used to accomplish
this which are still up in the air in in
[31:18] the Michigan Supreme Court.
So, [clears throat]
[31:22] uh
I see that there is a bit of uh
[31:28] post-purchase regret
uh after the
[31:33] mileong
denatured sterile abomination on the
[31:38] land that they call the blue oval
factory has been put in place. and the
[31:44] real
alterations in the quality of life that
[31:48] uh have occurred since the
implementation
[31:53] of that construction.
So, uh, think twice, uh,
[32:00] or more times than that about the
irreplaceable destruction of
[32:08] wetlands, wildlife habitat, and
productive farmland.
[32:13] » Thank you.
>> All right. Thank you.
[32:16] » If you want to speak, just come on up to
the podium.
[32:20] [snorts]
[32:22] I just want to say Rebecca Sebring
Marshall um historical Marshall I just
[32:28] want to say thank you for putting in a
moratorum or attempting to and thank you
[32:33] for safeguarding we the people we do
appreciate you. I know we don't always
[32:38] make it out here but I just want the
ones that are trying to make sure that
[32:43] we're safe. I want to say thank you very
much and you are appreciated.
[32:48] » Thank you. Any
other comments? Feel free to come on up
[32:52] to the podium.
[clears throat]
[32:58] Linds Light Marshall. Um, just briefly,
I wanted to speak about what a little
[33:04] bit about what Barry was talking about.
He was talking about a committee in
[33:08] Marshall and I'm the chairperson of that
committee. We call ourselves CRED, which
[33:13] is the committee for responsible
economic and environmental development.
[33:19] And yes, we have worked very hard. We
actually got 727 signatures so quick. It
[33:25] was just overwhelming how many people
were supportive of our moratorum.
[33:31] And yes, as Barry said, the city did put
a moratorium in place while we were
[33:35] waiting for our signatures to
be um sufficient to be seen as
[33:43] sufficient. Um, there's going to be a
short article in this week's advisor.
[33:50] I've been speaking with Seth Barry. I
tried to get it in last week, but we did
[33:54] a few little edits and he checked to
make sure that what I was saying was
[33:59] correct. Um, and he's fully satisfied
that what I'm saying is correct. So, he
[34:05] said he would put something in the
advisor this week. But I mostly wanted
[34:09] to say yes, thank you for working on a
mortorium here, but also if you have any
[34:15] questions from what we're doing, I'd be
glad to talk to someone any of you
[34:19] afterwards if you wish to.
>> Thank you.
[34:23] » Anyone else? [clears throat and cough]
[34:29] » Good evening, planning commission. Is it
a commission or a board?
[34:33] » Commission.
>> Okay. Thank you for this. and I really
[34:37] like um the professional way you conduct
this board. I just want to say thank
[34:42] you. Uh the agenda item I wanted to
refer to is the master plan amendment.
[34:46] Um I am in full support of the
township's master plan. I'm not um
[34:52] technically a citizen yet, but the man I
love is and he's about one mile um that
[34:58] way from the mega center. Um, and I
appreciate all your hard work. Um, and I
[35:06] think we got a good group here. I think
you have integrity. I don't think we
[35:10] have to worry about NDAs anymore. Thank
goodness. Um, that's that's a no-brainer
[35:15] for anybody in public service. I would
hope. Um, and um, I am once again very
[35:24] thankful that Joanna has done so much
work on this master plan. And that's all
[35:29] I wanted to say. Oh, I'm saying this
because I won't be here at that public
[35:33] hearing. Thank you.
>> Any other comments?
[35:41] [clears throat]
[35:45] » Dury Parker, City of Marshall. Um, I
just wanted to follow up on what Lynid
[35:51] said because I'm one of the members of
Creed as well and we do plan on going
[35:57] back out again and collecting signatures
so that we can be on well not the
[36:03] November ballot but the May ballot.
>> Thank you.
[36:08] » All right. Any other comments?
[36:13] » [clears throat]
[36:15] » Uh, good evening members of the planning
commission. My name is Aaron Reed and
[36:19] I'm here on behalf of the Marshall Area
Economic Development Alliance, MA, the
[36:23] application on the major campus zoning
map amendment. Uh, thank you for the
[36:29] time and care the commission has already
given this application. Uh, I'd like to
[36:33] provide a brief recap of where things
stand. Uh, MA submitted its request to
[36:38] reszone the 31 subject parcels on July
30th, 20 26. At your August 4th meeting,
[36:44] the commission acknowledged receipt and
the zoning administrator confirmed that
[36:48] the application was complete. There was
a helpful discussion that evening about
[36:51] how best to proceed and the commission
chose to postpone further action until
[36:55] tonight to give members additional time
to review the materials. Following the
[37:00] meeting on August 10th,
uh following that meeting on August
[37:03] 10th, the zoning administrator asked Ma
to add lot size, frontage, depth, and
[37:09] area directly to each parcel application
rather than referencing the provided
[37:13] alta surveys for each parcel. The
commission also asked for a GIS parcel
[37:18] map for each parcel, and Chair Johnson
asked for a large format map showing
[37:23] each parcel's current zoning alongside
the requested zoning. On August 25th, MA
[37:29] provided the requested information, the
enlarged maps, the updated applications
[37:33] with the dimensional information and the
additional GIS maps. Um, with that, I'd
[37:39] like to briefly walk through why we
believe this is a sound request using
[37:42] the same four standards the application
addresses. Standard one, consistency
[37:47] with the master plan.
This request, this request is very much
[37:52] in keeping with the plan the township
has already adopted. The currently
[37:55] adopted 2022 master plan designates
these parcels heavy industrial on its
[38:00] future land use map. The 2022 process
created that category and applied it to
[38:06] sections 28 and 29 of the township. The
plan's zoning plan pairs heavy
[38:12] industrial with the industrial park
designation IP, the district that most
[38:17] closely follows that designation.
Uh and the picture on the ground
[38:22] supports it as well. Since 2022, Ford's
Blue Oval Battery Park has been built
[38:26] and is entering production, supported by
more than hundreds of millions of
[38:30] dollars in infrastructure investment.
This resoning helps align the zoning
[38:33] with the vision the township had already
laid out. Standard two, environmental
[38:37] compatibility. The master plan
thoughtfully cited industrial industry
[38:41] here because the land is level, well-
drained, and well suited to it. and it
[38:46] directed that sensitive features within
the conservation district and roughly
[38:50] 245 acres along the Kazoo River are in
the process of being placed in that
[38:55] conservation easement. Because the heavy
industrial designation anticipates
[38:59] planned public utilities, these parcels
have the ability to be served by public
[39:04] water and sewer as part of the buildout
of the major campus. Standard three,
[39:08] compatibility with surrounding uses.
These parcels sit within the campus and
[39:13] adjoined Ford's blue oval plant. So, IP
zoning fits comfortably within the
[39:17] established and planned industrial use
of the area. Standard four,
[39:22] infrastructure capacity. [snorts] The
site is well positioned to accommodate
[39:26] these uses with the necessary
infrastructure substantially in place or
[39:30] planned. City water and sanitary sewer
have been extended through 425
[39:34] agreements. Regional storm water basins
are built and MDOT has rebuilt Michigan
[39:38] Avenue into a multi-lane boulevard with
reconstructed interchanges. Electric,
[39:43] gas, and fiber have already been
extended into the campus. Across all
[39:48] four standards, we believe this
application is consistent with the
[39:51] adopted plan, complete and responsive to
the commission's request. We
[39:56] respectfully ask that the commission
advance it and we appreciate your
[39:59] consideration. Thank you.
>> Eron, I have a question for you. Um,
[40:02] what was August 10th? Was that Were you
referring to the email you sent me?
[40:06] » So, there was an email that uh Shelley
provided with a list of things to
[40:10] change. Okay. Within the application.
>> Okay. Thank you.
[40:20] » Any other comments? Come on up.
[40:26] » Is that like the prices, right? I can't
remember. Come on up.
[40:28] » Come on down.
>> Come on down. Come on down.
[40:31] » You may not want me to come down.
>> Oh, you're more than welcome.
[40:36] » Brian Motor, Marshall, Michigan. Uh
[clears throat]
[40:39] we have a kind of a common history when
it comes to petitions and signatures and
[40:45] getting things uh through uh to get it
beyond uh strict uh governmental control
[40:54] from uh above us. Um, initially I became
a kind of aware of this when we had
[41:02] people who were three possible potential
candidates to run for governor against
[41:10] Whitmer in her reelection campaign. And
the state elections committee recommend
[41:16] recommended petitioners for these people
to circulate so they could become
[41:22] eligible to be in the primary.
Now, it turned out to be kind of funny
[41:27] that these petitions that got turned in
by a certain company were uh illeible,
[41:34] um erroneous,
uh false names, false addresses, nothing
[41:41] could be verified on these uh petitions
that so three top candidates to run for
[41:49] governor against Whitmer got eliminated
and they uh win this happened. Uh this
[41:57] group of petitioners left town and went
to some other state and the the
[42:03] uh elections committee wasn't able to
either contact them or trace them down
[42:09] or or figure out where they were at.
They disappeared off the face of the
[42:12] earth.
Now, we also had problems with petitions
[42:18] in Marshall and we also had problems
with uh a joint was this a joint
[42:25] planning commission or zoning
commission? joint zoning commission
[42:29] between Marshall Commission
>> and uh Marshall Township
[42:34] and we uh succeeded in having a 3-2 vote
on a joint venture and it got overridden
[42:42] by the city of Marshall and this is part
of our um case in the Supreme Court that
[42:52] this was done erroneously,
fraudulently
[42:56] and I'm moving this thing around. I
better slow down. So, but uh there's a
[43:02] history of of being pressured from above
governor's office on down to eliminate
[43:11] uh competition and it's still going on.
So, it's and I'm I'm really sorry about
[43:18] uh the data centers also the battery
plants being concerned about the money.
[43:26] The money is the whole thing that runs
everything. And the three millionaires
[43:30] are taking advantage of the common
people, the people that live here, go to
[43:35] school here, work here, and have family
here. And that's the the terrible thing
[43:41] about it is it's the billionaires
against us common people. Thank you.
[43:46] » Comments.
[snorts]
[43:51] [clears throat]
Oops.
[43:59] » Marshall Township. I have a question. I
keep hearing about these 31 parcels
[44:05] » and I'm just wondering what is supposed
to be going on these. I know it's
[44:10] supposed to be heavy industrial, but
what
[44:13] » is this going to be a data center
or what? What or a battery storage unit?
[44:19] What what the heck is going on there?
what is proposed to be on there. I mean,
[44:24] I don't want to have it what the zoning
uh approved, resoning approved unless I
[44:32] know what's on there. So, what is it
supposed to become? Tell us. Thank you.
[44:42] Any other comments?
[44:46] If you look in the zoning ordinance
book, reszoning this parcel
[44:51] allows specific uses that Marshall
Township has agreed to. [clears throat]
[44:57] Um, to be quite honest, they're quite
compatible with the standard light
[45:01] industrial. There are just a few that
are different. If you're interested, you
[45:05] can go online to the ordinance book
under article 4, commercial and
[45:10] industrial, and you'll be able to see
what IP allows as any use. Any use that
[45:17] would need to would go in there if it
was permitted would not go through the
[45:20] planning commission. If it's a special
land use, it would be required to be
[45:25] approved through the planning
commission. So, there are designated
[45:28] uses for that specific district that the
township has already laid out.
[45:34] Thank you.
>> Readers Clingler from Marshall. Good.
[45:38] Um, now we're talking about the mega
site and the transfer of parcels. I
[45:43] don't know if that was going to be on
the agenda, but uh I I
[45:48] » speaking to the 31 parcels or
>> Yeah, the 31 parcels being transferred
[45:52] over. Um, I know that's coming up at a
different public hearing, but I just
[45:57] want to congratulate this board for
getting involved and uh also the joint
[46:05] planning commission and I hope they will
be involved in the zoning for that rest
[46:10] of that mega site. They really should be
because they have control of land use in
[46:14] the 425 agreement.
Um,
[46:19] also I hope the township stays on track
and holds made it to the water franchise
[46:27] agreement. That's something that should
be settled and it should be probably
[46:31] done before anything else goes out of
the at the mega site. So again,
[46:35] congratulations on what you have done
and for your uh continuing interest in
[46:42] protecting people and keeping
uh the mega site plans as open as
[46:50] possible. Thank you.
[46:55] » Anyone else?
>> All right, seeing none, uh we're moving
[47:00] on to item G, which is the approval of
the minutes. These are our August 4th uh
[47:05] 2026 uh meeting minutes. Is there a
motion to approve the minutes? [cough]
[47:11] » Move to approve the August
[clears throat] 4th uh PC minutes.
[47:18] [clears throat]
>> We have a motion by Commissioner Sly,
[47:20] seconded by Commissioner Riggs to
approve our August 4th uh planning
[47:24] commission meeting minutes. Any
discussion, questions or concerns?
[47:29] » Hearing and seeing none, all those in
favor signify by saying I.
[47:32] » I. All those opposed, same sign. Motion
carries. Uh we're moving on to our
[47:38] presentation by our attorney Rob Th
who's going to share information on data
[47:43] centers and battery en energy storage
systems. I do want to say last evening
[47:49] uh the majority of this board attended a
um training on hot topics in planning
[47:55] and zoning. And you can guess these were
two of the hot topics in planning and
[47:59] zoning. Um and we thought it would be a
good idea. We did ask a variety of folks
[48:03] to come in. I know Shelley did as well
with the University of Michigan has
[48:07] folks that have studied this as well. Um
but we thought it'd be good to have um
[48:11] Rob here um who's wellversed in this um
to share information not only with the
[48:16] planning commission but with all of you
as well. So Rob, thank you for being
[48:19] here.
>> Thank you.
[48:21] » Thank you.
>> So there really hasn't been a hotter
[48:26] topic since really since I've been an
attorney than data centers. I mean, this
[48:30] is this is a very tough issue. It
presents very real uh issues for
[48:35] communities, very real nuisances. Uh
we're learning stuff on a daily basis
[48:40] about them and about the impacts of
them. And so, um it's it's very it's a
[48:45] very important subject. I'm glad, you
know, we're going to spend the time to
[48:49] talk about it and we're going to spend a
lot more time talking about it uh moving
[48:53] forward.
You know, it's one of those things we
[48:56] hear, well, I'll just prohibit it, you
know, and that presents its own problems
[49:00] because data centers are subject to
zoning. It's a little different than
[49:04] what we'll talk about with battery
storage projects. Uh, data centers are
[49:08] subject to our zoning ordinance, but
there are zoning concepts called
[49:12] exclusionary zoning. And you have to
really do your homework. If you even
[49:17] want the idea of prohibiting it, you're
going to have to do your homework to get
[49:22] to the point where you can justify it to
be able to present your case in court
[49:28] and have that case upheld. You can't
just say, "We're just prohibiting it."
[49:32] You do that, you're going to lose in
court every day. You know, you have to
[49:35] do your homework. I don't know where you
end up at the end of the process, but
[49:39] you got to do your homework to get
there. uh Selen Township got caught kind
[49:43] of with, you know, unprepared and they
did like they said, they got sued and
[49:48] settled, but they got sued for
exclusionary zoning because they
[49:52] prohibited it just off the bat. You
know, we're okay, we're just not going
[49:55] to allow this. You get sued for
exclusionary zoning, you get quit on the
[49:59] spot. Okay, how why why did you exclude
it? And you know, they faced huge
[50:05] damages if they move forward. Maybe
that's I I don't know the case
[50:09] personally so I don't know why they
settled but they end up settling and now
[50:14] they have a huge uh data center going in
like uh like indicated it's going to use
[50:21] tremendous amounts of energy uses
tremendous amounts of land impacts
[50:25] there's tremendous impacts from that.
So, we really want to make sure that
[50:30] we're doing our homework so we don't end
up in a situation like that where
[50:34] somebody can just kind of kick down the
door of the township and say, "Okay,
[50:37] well, we already options from land. We
want to come in here and stop us, you
[50:43] know, we want to we want to be able to
protect ourselves from that." So, just
[50:47] in general, you know, data centers,
there's different kinds of data centers.
[50:50] You know, all of our computer
information goes through a data center.
[50:54] So it's um you know whenever anything's
stored in the cloud the cloud's
[50:58] somewhere it's a data center somewhere.
Uh there's also artificial intelligence
[51:03] which uh was referred to which uses a
lot more uh capacity processing power
[51:09] energy to do and you know that's kind of
the thing that we're really hearing now
[51:14] is the push for AI and the information
uh and the and the data centers that are
[51:20] used for that. So the big thing that
we're seeing are the hypers scale data
[51:23] centers. So that's the big issue that
everybody sees front and center these
[51:28] giant hundreds of acres of buildings and
and industrial we consider it
[51:33] industrial. So when I talk to you and we
look at this more we're going to look at
[51:38] this as an industrial project. It's not
a agricultural. It doesn't belong out in
[51:43] agg. It's a industrial project these
data centers. But you have these hypers
[51:47] scale which are huge have huge impacts.
But then you also have smaller data
[51:52] centers that might be uh they might be
um just located within a corporate
[51:57] structure. So you can have uh corporate
headquarters in that corporate
[52:01] headquarters. They're going to have
their own data centers in those places.
[52:04] uh whether or not uh you would even
know, you probably wouldn't know that
[52:08] it's in there um because it's
coll-located within another facility.
[52:12] You can have other smaller buildings
that look like office buildings that
[52:15] might be uh a data center. Uh it could
be developer built and then lease out
[52:20] space in the data center or it could be
uh proprietary and owned by the company
[52:25] that that uses it. So there's different
types of data centers, but in all cases
[52:31] because of the impacts, even the smaller
ones, I I would classify them all as
[52:35] industrial because of the types of
impacts they have with noise, with
[52:39] vibration, with uh with um electric
usage, those types of things, and we'll
[52:45] address those later.
[52:49] So you know, why the sudden interest in
data centers? Well, and and this goes to
[52:53] part of the reason why we can't just say
we prohibit it because we'll learn about
[52:57] exclusionary zoning. One of the things
is is there a demonstrated need for it?
[53:02] Well, our government has told us there's
a demonstrated need for it whether we
[53:06] like it or not. Uh President Trump has
an executive order on AI saying that we
[53:12] should be number one in AI, that we
should innovate without cumbersome
[53:15] regulation. He just came out with a a
tweet August or a a post August 31st. Um
[53:23] I'll just read it for you. The only
reason the communities throughout the
[53:27] USA should not want data centers is they
want to end up being backwards and poor.
[53:32] If they want to be successful and rich
with far lower taxes and jobs all over
[53:36] the place, let data rain. So that's from
the federal government telling us we
[53:40] need data centers. Our state government
has gone ahead and pressed and passed
[53:45] legislation in 2024. Uh eliminates the
6% sales and use tax on the eligible
[53:52] data center construction and equipment
purchases. And um you know to do that
[53:57] they have to invest a certain amount.
They have to create a certain number of
[53:59] jobs and there's other requirements but
our state has put them out there that
[54:04] they want to attract data centers and
have put out uh tax exemptions for them.
[54:10] So we're facing kind of an uphill battle
at the local level because both our
[54:14] federal government, state government
have said we have this need for these
[54:17] things. And so it kind of puts us behind
the eightball
[54:23] again around Michigan. We have already
uh there's over 44 data centers already
[54:29] in Michigan of various sizes. Um again,
we don't necessarily you don't even
[54:34] notice a lot of them. uh but the hypers
scale ones, the large ones that use a
[54:38] lot of land that are coming in and
trying to kind of kick down the door
[54:42] more rural townships and and locate and
use where you have a lot of land. Uh
[54:47] that's what's creating these
controversies and really the the large
[54:50] impact um on us.
So the one thing um if you go the next
[54:57] thing I want to talk about is
exclusionary zoning because I think
[55:00] that's really important. You know,
there's a lot of, you know, we can't
[55:03] just prohibit it. You prohibit it. If
you just said tomorrow, we could pass an
[55:07] ordinance tomorrow that says we prohibit
it or we could just do nothing if it's
[55:11] not in our ordinance and it's
prohibited. But if we do that, we're
[55:15] there's a standard in in zoning uh
called exclusionary zoning. And it says
[55:20] a zoning ordinance shall not have the
effect of totally prohibiting the
[55:24] establishment of a land use in the
township in the presence of a
[55:28] demonstrated need in the township or
surrounding area. So the demonstrated
[55:32] need part, our state and federal
government has already said there's a
[55:35] demonstrated need for this. But then the
the the second part of it is unless a
[55:41] location does not exist within the
municipality where the use may be
[55:44] appropriately located. And that's where
you have to do your homework because you
[55:48] have to look at what all the issues are,
what the different nuisance issues are.
[55:52] And is there a spot where it would fit
in an industrial zone in your township?
[55:57] And if you can, you know, as you go
through this process, the only way
[56:00] you're going to prohibit it is if you
determine that there's no appropriate
[56:03] location in your township. But you can't
just say there's no appropriate location
[56:08] without again doing your homework and
being able to protect yourself from a
[56:12] lawsuit if it were to come forward.
So that's that's part of this whole
[56:17] process and why you know we're going to
go into well we're going to talk about a
[56:21] moratorum.
Um you know just some some anecdotal
[56:27] information again uh with Selen Township
that is what happened. They were not
[56:31] prepared. They tried to prohibit it and
then they got sued for exclusionary
[56:36] zoning and chose to resolve it. They
must not have felt they could defend
[56:42] themselves. They weren't in a position
to defend themselves and they would have
[56:46] faced massive damages if they uh
probably were at least threatened with
[56:51] massive damages. You know, you could be
in the 50 to 100 million or plus in
[56:58] damages. And what happens then if you
get hit with damages, it ends up being a
[57:04] millage that you have to pass on the
public within your community and the
[57:08] public has to pay it. So, it's a real
threat. You gota again that's why we
[57:13] protect ourselves and do it the right
way so that if we do end up in a
[57:18] situation uh we're not going to get
we're going to be in the best situation
[57:22] possible to face exclusionary zoning.
So what are some of the issues you know
[57:28] with data centers we have you know it's
high demand for utilities you heard you
[57:32] know it's over a million homes worth of
energy for the Selen Township one I
[57:38] think um for every mega for every
gigawatt it's about 800,000 homes so
[57:45] it's a it's a huge electrical demand for
these facilities uh water cooling is an
[57:50] issue uh that um that would is
potential nuisance. You have excessive
[57:58] water use. They if they use evaporative
cooling, it uses tremendous amounts of
[58:03] water and if you don't have a if you're
not hooked up to a public water system,
[58:08] it's just pulling out of the aquifer. If
you are, then it's still going through a
[58:12] public system. Uh water cooling is a
huge issue. You know, as you look at how
[58:17] to uh mitigate those issues, you might
look at that something like it's a
[58:23] closed loop water system. So they don't
get to just evaporative cool. So there's
[58:28] different things that you can do to
regulate it. Uh and if you do regulate
[58:33] it, you can regulate it very extremely.
Um
[58:38] uh another thing is the electric rates,
you know, but that's something we're not
[58:42] in control of. We can't we can tell them
you have to find your own power source.
[58:46] You're not going to use what the
existing power is in our in our township
[58:51] or in our grid here. you're going to
have to create new power and bring it
[58:55] into the township. Um, but we can't
control what rates the NPS, well, you
[59:00] can argue with the NPSC about it, but
you can't as a township board control
[59:04] that. So, that is an issue um to think
about. Uh, you know, in um you know, we
[59:13] have a lot of other issues uh that that
stem from it. And that's why you know as
[59:19] we move forward we really want you to
consider the moratorum because it gives
[59:24] you that time that gives you that
breathing room to study the issues. You
[59:28] can have experts come and appear and and
give you information. You can look at
[59:32] restrictions if you choose. Uh you can
look at areas you're going to need to
[59:37] look at. Is there appropriate areas
within the township for it? You know
[59:41] what would be an appropriate location?
uh things of that sort to protect
[59:46] yourself. Um so we would want you to uh
consider the mortorium. We'll talk about
[59:51] that a little bit more when that item
comes up for public hearing.
[59:57] Um with uh site selection for data
centers, you know, again, it's our
[1:00:02] position that it is an industrial use.
It should not go in anywhere. It doesn't
[1:00:06] belong in commercial. It doesn't belong
in a or residential. you know, it is a
[1:00:12] pure industrial use. Uh, so it's going
to have to have the adequate resources,
[1:00:16] electricity. It's going to be need to be
located near large power lines. Um,
[1:00:21] you're going to have to consider other
uh land around where it could possibly
[1:00:27] locate to asssure that that's industrial
in nature.
[1:00:31] Um, you know, in terms of electricity,
um, DTE Energy has 4 gigawatts of active
[1:00:37] data center projects and proposals in
Michigan right now. The total peak
[1:00:42] electrical load is 18 gawatts. So, you
can see how much these things are energy
[1:00:48] hogs, how much energy they're going to
be using. you know, that's going to be,
[1:00:52] you know, millions of homes worth of
electricity and a large percentage of
[1:00:56] the total electricity that we have now
uh for these uh and that's just for
[1:01:01] their active and proposed projects. Um,
so you can see how that uh impacts
[1:01:06] things, but again, we can't control the
rates, but in an ordinance, you can say
[1:01:10] that you have to bring in your or prove
that you're supplying new energy to the
[1:01:16] facility.
Um one of the things that we do in
[1:01:20] regulation is we can regulate the power
usage effectiveness of uh data center.
[1:01:26] So that is something that it's the total
facility energy divided by uh the energy
[1:01:31] required to just run the computers. Um
and so uh you can require a very high
[1:01:38] efficiency type of data center that
doesn't use as much electricity. Um and
[1:01:44] that's just uh you [clears throat] know
one of the things that you can use to
[1:01:48] regulate it. Uh noise is a huge concern
for data centers. So um and I'm sure
[1:01:56] most people have heard the DeWAc data
center and the sound that that thing
[1:01:59] produces. You could it's easily you can
easily find it uh on the internet and
[1:02:04] see the type of sound that makes. But
you know they are the residents within a
[1:02:08] one mile one mile of the data center. uh
they filed a federal lawsuit alleging
[1:02:13] constant high-pitched cooling and
operational noises. So with a data
[1:02:17] center, you have um you have the decibel
levels which we're used to regulating
[1:02:23] the dBA which is the normal in our
ordinances we regulate in an industrial
[1:02:27] zone or in a whatever zone it would be
certain sounds by DBA which is the
[1:02:33] sounds that you normally hear. But
there's also a lot of other sounds that
[1:02:36] you don't really hear but you sense. So
like there's low rumblings that can
[1:02:42] impact your life. There's high-pitched
noises that can impact your life. Both
[1:02:46] are not detected under the DBA. So you
have to look at other forms of sound uh
[1:02:52] regulation. It's called DBC which is the
very low rumbling sounds. You have to
[1:02:58] regulate those things and you have to
keep them, you know, if if these things
[1:03:02] were to come in, you'd have to keep
their sound uh from impacting other
[1:03:07] people's lives and property. So you have
to look at DBA, DBC. There's also
[1:03:13] regulation by octave level which covers
then the high sounds and the low sounds
[1:03:18] and making sure they don't exceed in any
of those uh sound criteria. So you can
[1:03:24] really go into a lot of depth with sound
to make sure that you are uh protecting
[1:03:28] your resonance from the sound. The
computers make a constant sound 247. It
[1:03:33] never stops. is different than even a
factory doesn't make that kind of noise
[1:03:38] all the time 24/7 uh 365 days a year.
You have coolers that make noise,
[1:03:45] generators that make noise, you have
diesel backup uh generators,
[1:03:50] [clears throat] uh all these things uh
create a noise nuisance.
[1:03:57] » There's a lot of different things you
can do to address that, but you know, I
[1:04:00] don't have to go into that tonight. You
know, those are things that you're going
[1:04:03] to go into and address over the next if
you adopt a moratorum and you go into
[1:04:07] that over the next year, you'll be
looking at those types of things and
[1:04:11] whether you can address them or whether
you can't, whether it's appropriate uh
[1:04:14] in your township or not. Another issue
is vibration. So, that's a big issue of
[1:04:20] vibration. They cause these facilities
cause vibration that can impact people's
[1:04:25] lives. they might not know why they
can't sleep, but there's a vibration
[1:04:28] coming from these facilities that uh can
impact the quality of life of
[1:04:33] individuals. So, you know, you can
again, you have to if you do allow for
[1:04:37] these things, you highly regulate them.
So, they can't produce a vibration
[1:04:41] perceptible vibration beyond their
property line. You're not going to allow
[1:04:45] them to impact other residents, other
property owners. Make them control their
[1:04:50] impacts. If they can't, then they can't
be here, right?
[1:04:59] Um so also you know in part of this
process you know if you do go into the
[1:05:04] mortorium public input is very
important. You would have I would
[1:05:07] suspect you know public hearings. Uh you
would have experts come in. The public
[1:05:12] would be invited to listen and ask
questions things of that sort. Uh you
[1:05:17] would you'd want to be very transparent
in how you're looking at these things.
[1:05:22] you already are very transparent as a as
a planning commission, but you would
[1:05:27] make sure that the public is invited to
these things and able to ask questions
[1:05:31] for themselves and get answers.
>> Obviously,
[1:05:34] » obviously, you know, you would there
would be no NDAs and things of that
[1:05:38] sort. Uh, you know, by the township. I
I'm pretty confident in that.
[1:05:46] Um, so, you know, last week I I did a
presentation. I went through a sample
[1:05:52] ordinance uh that was very restrictive.
I think you have copies of that. And so
[1:05:57] what I tried to do is develop an
ordinance that is extremely restrictive
[1:06:01] on what they can do. So it's extremely
restrictive in water usage so that they
[1:06:06] can't use any kind of evaporative
cooling. It have to be closed loop
[1:06:09] systems. Extremely restrictive on sound
so that the sound isn't impacting what
[1:06:14] we call sensitive land uses. So it's not
impacting dwellings or um uh uh you know
[1:06:21] a nursing home or schools or dormitories
or whatever it might be. You know you're
[1:06:26] you're controlling the impact. You're
controlling the nuisance because these
[1:06:30] things produce their a large nuisance.
So aside from you know other issues
[1:06:35] about you know AI in general the
facilities themselves produce large
[1:06:40] nuisances that you know that as I go
through that ordinance and you you know
[1:06:45] over the next year if you look at those
provisions they're intended to reduce
[1:06:49] the impact. I don't know if it it's too
restrictive but you know that's that's a
[1:06:55] kind of not our problem. I I believe
they're all standards that could be met
[1:07:01] but very restrictive. So, it's going to
not be impacting the properties around
[1:07:05] it. I mean, that's ultimately what you
want to make sure is that the citizenry
[1:07:10] is not uh impacted.
But again, you have to go through this
[1:07:14] process
so that we don't end up in a situation
[1:07:18] where you might want to prohibit it and
then you get hit with exclusionary
[1:07:22] zoning. You're going to have to be able
to prove to a court if somebody calls
[1:07:26] you into court that you did all the
right things, studied it and came up
[1:07:30] with your local decision on zoning.
So with that on data centers, I would
[1:07:37] just uh that's what I have for data
centers. I can move on to best, but if
[1:07:41] you want to stop now and ask me any
questions about data centers.
[1:07:44] » Commissioners, any questions on data
centers?
[1:07:46] » I have a question. When you talked about
the
[1:07:51] the different issues with vibration
sound, have you ever heard of anything?
[1:07:56] They use a lot of electricity. Has there
ever been anything any complaints or
[1:08:00] studies on stray voltage?
>> Oh, I'm sure they
[1:08:05] » because they have a lot of they they
like to locate them by, you know, big
[1:08:08] high tension lines coming in. Yeah, I I
know that stray voltage was a big big
[1:08:12] issue, you know, a number of years ago
uh from power lines and their effect on
[1:08:18] » uh animals and and things of that sort.
So, I mean it's certainly something you
[1:08:22] can look at is the stray voltage issue
and vol you know of all the power coming
[1:08:26] into the facility. You hadn't heard of
anything though or
[1:08:28] » I have not but it's like I said yeah I I
learn stuff almost on a daily basis
[1:08:33] about it and I think everybody if you
start looking at it you will learn stuff
[1:08:37] you know uh continuously for uh it's to
us it's a newer issue um and it's
[1:08:44] something that just warrants more study
so like if there we can look into stray
[1:08:48] voltage and have maybe somebody address
that you know as a issue.
[1:08:54] Any other questions?
>> Was Seline was that built on an
[1:08:57] industrial zone or
>> was hundreds of acres uh of I think it
[1:09:03] was probably a land.
[1:09:07] » So So they wanted to reszone they I
think as I recall they wanted to reszone
[1:09:12] the property and then it was denied and
then they sued them for exclusionary
[1:09:17] zoning.
>> So you can't even stop them if it's
[1:09:22] » Well, you No, that's If you
[clears throat] say you say it's
[1:09:24] industrial, we say it's an industrial
use, right? So it
[1:09:30] » it can't just go anywhere in our a
properties if it's industrial. You have
[1:09:34] certain you have a land use plan that
your zoning is based upon. You have to
[1:09:39] make sure you have a strong land use
plan and you have to then look at your
[1:09:42] land use plan and say whether that would
be appropriate to reszone that property
[1:09:47] if it is something else. now.
So, I mean, I don't think it just opens
[1:09:54] you, when you say it's industrial, it's
not opening up all of your egg land.
[1:09:59] It's got to fit within an industrial
land use under your master plan. So,
[1:10:07] would that area be industrial for your
It's not spot zoning. You're not just
[1:10:10] going to throw industrial here and throw
industrial there. That's spot zoning.
[1:10:14] That's unlawful. Well, so was the master
plan future land use was industrial? I
[1:10:21] » I have not studied their their
situation.
[1:10:25] Um I just know that their lawsuit
claimed exclusionary zoning and then
[1:10:29] they determined to settle the matter
rather than face possible damages.
[1:10:37] Are there any of the data centers that
you know of in Michigan or anywhere that
[1:10:41] have done something for the residents to
uh encourage them to want them there?
[1:10:47] Like like the um Thomas Township dump,
they they give everybody within a mile
[1:10:54] radius um lifetime no property taxes.
They pay all the property taxes for the
[1:11:01] lifetime of those residents. Well, I'm
sure if you open the door up to them
[1:11:06] offering community benefits, they will
provide you all sorts of community
[1:11:09] benefits. When you're talking about
facilities that cost, you know, $20
[1:11:13] billion,
they can come in and offer the
[1:11:16] community. Neighboring property owners,
they can do, you know, things that
[1:11:21] protect their land value, like if you
they'll value it before they're there
[1:11:25] and then after, and if it doesn't sell
for what it was worth, then they pay you
[1:11:30] the difference, you know, things like
that. or pay you double the amount or
[1:11:34] whatever it might be. There's all sorts
of things they can do. Uh I if you're
[1:11:39] open to those thing to to having them,
they will offer you all sorts of
[1:11:44] benefits um to get their foot in the
door.
[1:11:48] But with with the
the unique situation we're in here with
[1:11:54] Marshall Township and the city marshall
and the 425s
[1:11:58] um
I'm afraid [clears throat] we would lose
[1:12:02] the connection or the control um because
that that property is going to be a
[1:12:10] probably a 425 property and we will have
no say in it. And that's that's a huge
[1:12:16] issue with your joint planning
commission and what does how does it
[1:12:20] function? What does it do? I mean that
is in front of the Supreme Court now.
[1:12:24] You know issues regarding your joint
planning commission. The township has a
[1:12:28] a brief an amikas brief we filed in that
case. Uh but um it's a huge issue as to
[1:12:34] what the JPC does because once the
property is in a 425, it's under the
[1:12:39] jurisdiction of the joint planning
commission which would then should
[1:12:42] review the site plan and you know what
ordinance terms are in place. All those
[1:12:48] things are all a little uncertain uh
based upon the current documentation.
[1:12:55] So that is definitely a concern of what
would happen if it were on a 425
[1:12:59] property.
Commissioner,
[1:13:03] » I want to go back to the beginning of
your presentation. You know, I've had
[1:13:06] problem with this since it started
coming out from the president and the
[1:13:11] governor. [snorts]
Demonstrated need
[1:13:15] what, and I'll ask Representative Carr
to his opinion also. What is the working
[1:13:21] definition of a demonstrated need?
[1:13:27] other than somebody just saying we need
it.
[1:13:29] » Well, it is um other than it's not just
somebody saying that we need it. It's
[1:13:35] both our federal government saying that
we need it and our state government
[1:13:40] saying that we need it. Not individuals,
but you know, through legislation,
[1:13:43] through executive orders. Um and so
that's the hurdle. you know, it's you
[1:13:51] you just can't prohibit
>> I'm looking for for the references that
[1:13:55] they're using to back up.
>> You could try to make those arguments in
[1:14:01] court, but you know, um
that you would have to try to, you know,
[1:14:09] to fight that issue of a demonstrated
need, you know. So,
[1:14:13] » find out what is the definition. What
are they using besides just saying those
[1:14:17] two words? I can certainly at a future
meeting I can come back and tell you,
[1:14:22] you know, I can go look it up and tell
you the legal definition of a
[1:14:25] demonstrated need, you know, and and
what case law has told us about it,
[1:14:30] » but how far back it goes or anything
like that.
[1:14:33] » Thank you, Lynn.
>> Oh, thanks. But, you know, thank you.
[1:14:37] Uh, but for a demonstrated need, you
know, in general, you know, there's case
[1:14:40] law on exclusionary zoning. Um it's just
whether or not the demonstrated need uh
[1:14:46] you know for this use obviously Selen
Township looked at that issue and
[1:14:51] thought we're cooked here and settled
represent car.
[1:15:00] » Yeah I'll just try to make their
arguments for them not mine. Uh the
[1:15:04] president could say there's a
demonstrated need because we need to
[1:15:07] beat China whether economically or more
important militaristically. might make
[1:15:11] those types of arguments. The governor
might say that there's a demonstrated
[1:15:15] need because we need to enhance and have
a more robust economy. Things of that
[1:15:21] nature. Uh as I was speaking earlier
while I'm here in terms of moratorum
[1:15:25] andor prohibition concepts, I'm speaking
more from the state level. Um the reason
[1:15:30] for a moratorum from my thought from a
state level would be to give the locals
[1:15:34] time to figure out how [clears throat]
do we need to assess our local efforts
[1:15:38] and what ordinances we might put into
place. I don't think that there's a need
[1:15:41] for moratorum for me to get to the point
of knowing that it is an existential
[1:15:46] threat to humanity. And to that point
it's the opposite of a demonstrated
[1:15:51] need. It's a demonstrated need that we
need to not have them is my perspective.
[1:15:56] But that's not a local issue. That's
more state federal concepts. You're
[1:16:02] doing a good job speaking from a local
perspective. So, thank you.
[1:16:05] » Thanks.
>> Appreciate it.
[1:16:08] » Any other questions for Rob before he
moves on?
[1:16:11] » Okay.
>> All right.
[1:16:12] » So, the the next issue is battery energy
storage and it's a totally different a
[1:16:18] totally different issue because
data centers are just under our zoning
[1:16:23] ordinance. So we can regulate do you
know super restrict potentially prohibit
[1:16:29] you know but we have to do it through
our zoning ordinance. Uh with regard to
[1:16:35] battery storage systems uh that's a
totally different issue because that
[1:16:39] falls under act 233.
And so with that we're basically
[1:16:45] preempted uh and allows the developer of
certain size utility scale projects,
[1:16:51] solar projects, wind projects, battery
storage projects, uh 50 megawatts or
[1:16:57] more solar, uh 50 megawatts or more
battery, 50 or 100 megawatts or more
[1:17:02] wind. They can just bypass our local
zoning ordinance, ignore it, go to the
[1:17:08] state and ask for permission from the
MPSC if they choose. Um there is one
[1:17:12] exception in there. It's called a CRO.
Um and the CRO, which is a uh
[1:17:21] compatible renewable energy ordinance,
you can do locally and force
[1:17:25] [cough and clears throat] them to come
to you locally, but it has such weak
[1:17:29] standards that we would never recommend
that you adopt a CRO. They're just the
[1:17:34] basebased standards in the statute. Uh
and um they don't protect the it would
[1:17:40] not protect the township at all to do.
So we would not ever recommend the CRO.
[1:17:45] There's there's three ways that it can
basically move forward one of these
[1:17:49] projects. And oh I will say I said
there's three types. There's wind,
[1:17:54] solar, and battery. Now um the MPSC made
rules regarding implementation of act
[1:18:02] 233. And in there they invented a fourth
kind. And the fourth [clears throat]
[1:18:06] kind of uh renewable energy project is a
hybrid. So they said, "Oh, well it's 50
[1:18:13] megawatts wind, 100 megawws uh or 100
megawatts of wind or 50 megawatts solar,
[1:18:20] but we'll allow you to combine them."
So, like if you have uh 25 megawatts of
[1:18:26] solar and 75 megawatts of wind, even
though neither one is enough to qualify
[1:18:32] to uh preempt local zoning, we'll allow
you to do a hybrid project and put it
[1:18:38] together and preempt zoning. Now, that's
being fought in the Michigan Supreme
[1:18:43] Court. Uh
we have a brief in the Michigan Supreme
[1:18:47] Court, too, arguing against the MPSC's
rules. That's one of the things that
[1:18:51] we're arguing against uh is this hybrid
concept that they put forward. Uh the
[1:18:56] court of appeals upheld that decision
and so we're asking the Supreme Court
[1:19:00] for leave to uh basically say you that
MPSC just kind of invented a new type of
[1:19:06] project uh to preempt us.
But with these projects then that you
[1:19:12] can either they can go either entirely
through the state and just go to the
[1:19:16] MPSC. There's a whole process. We can
intervene into that process and object,
[1:19:20] but ultimately at the end of the day,
the MPSC will decide whether or not that
[1:19:25] project gets approved. Then you have
CRO, which is the compatible renewable
[1:19:30] energy ordinance that you we can force
them. They kind of threw that out as a
[1:19:35] bone in the 11th hour of the legislation
to try to get some people convinced to
[1:19:39] sign on to it, I think. And so they uh
proposed this creole, but it really is
[1:19:46] ineffective. It would not protect the
township at all. You might as well send
[1:19:50] them to the state and fight with them at
the state level.
[1:19:54] And then the third category is called a
workable ordinance, which is just you
[1:19:58] try to be as restrictive as you can in
your ordinance without being so
[1:20:03] restrictive that they just go to the
state. So that's kind of the a workable
[1:20:07] ordinance u because you can put all
these restrictions on much you can put a
[1:20:12] lot more restrictions than the state law
has and developers will tend to want to
[1:20:17] work with you as a local community but
if it's too restrictive they're just
[1:20:21] going to go straight to the state. So,
some communities are just like, well,
[1:20:24] just send them send them to the state on
it and we'll fight with them, you know,
[1:20:27] at the MPSC. Uh, they have to put up
some intervenor funds to pay the
[1:20:32] township uh to fight with them, which,
you know, so some communities do that.
[1:20:36] Other communities look at workable
ordinances where they will develop
[1:20:41] stringent provisions within their
ordinance and uh you know
[1:20:45] [clears throat] and and enforce it
locally and try to get them to come
[1:20:48] through locally preserving the power
that your planning commission to review
[1:20:52] the site plan special land use and and
do it through a local level rather than
[1:20:58] trusting the MPSC to ultimately handle
the project.
[1:21:03] So you still have uh I I'll just note a
couple things. You still have smaller
[1:21:08] scale utility projects. So things that
fall under those levels. Uh so if it's
[1:21:13] less than 50 megawatts of solar, maybe
it's a 4 megawatt project or uh you know
[1:21:19] a 25 megawatt battery project. Those
fall under the state standard, but they
[1:21:26] would fall then under your ordinance.
Now then do we have anything in our
[1:21:29] ordinance to regulate that? you know we
have to look at those things. So do we
[1:21:33] have anything that would regulate
battery energy storage systems are
[1:21:37] smaller than utility scale. So as
[clears throat] we look at battery
[1:21:40] energy storage systems and those you
know as expressed you know those will
[1:21:45] cook into the grid they're intended to
kind of even out the power flow so you
[1:21:49] can load them up with the energy and
then at other times when you're not
[1:21:53] producing the energy it can put the
energy out into the grid. And we're
[1:21:57] going to see a lot more of these battery
energy storage projects [clears throat]
[1:22:00] throughout the state. They're very
expensive projects. I mean, they don't
[1:22:05] use as much land as, you know, say
solar, wind. They can be put on 20, 40
[1:22:10] acres. Um, and uh very expensive uh uh
facilities. Um there's one proposed
[1:22:19] right now uh in one of our townships.
It's about $500 million project for 400
[1:22:26] megawatts of battery storage. And so
they determined in that township to
[1:22:31] regulate it locally rather than uh send
them to the state. So they have what's
[1:22:36] called the workable ordinance. But you
know in that case you can still regulate
[1:22:40] smaller but in what they decided is no
you either go with a large utility scale
[1:22:45] project 50 megawatts or more or not at
all rather than dotting the you know the
[1:22:51] the township with small little projects.
It's like either you're going to do a
[1:22:55] project and then we're going to say once
you do one project you're done. we're
[1:22:59] done with it because when you go to the
state part of it what the state will
[1:23:03] look at the MTSC have you done your
share of support for renewable energies.
[1:23:09] So our position kind of is like okay
well if we have a project here and we
[1:23:13] allow just this one project then we're
going to say no more and then you got to
[1:23:18] go to the state uh if you want something
more and then we would argue that we've
[1:23:23] done our share of it right. So, you
know, there's different ways to look at
[1:23:28] it with like battery energy storage. Do
you just say like it's got to be 50
[1:23:31] megawatts or more or it's got to be
uh ancillary to a permitted use? So,
[1:23:38] like a lot of businesses might use a
battery storage backup on their site for
[1:23:42] their business. So, that's a little
different. That's ancillary battery
[1:23:45] storage. Kind of what we're talking
about is the utility scale, this 50
[1:23:49] megawatts or more. But also, we had to
think about smaller battery storage too.
[1:23:55] Um, and how we regulate that. Like I
said, in the one township, uh, what we
[1:24:00] did is we just said, "Okay, it's got to
be more than this many megawws."
[1:24:05] And then we're not allowing anything
more. It's like, "That's it." And then
[1:24:09] we've done what we've done. Um, and
we're not going to have about a bunch of
[1:24:13] smaller 25 megawatt or 10 megawatt here,
there, and everywhere spread out through
[1:24:18] the township or solar, you know, a solar
project here, solar project there, a
[1:24:22] whole bunch of little solar projects.
same kind of concept that you either
[1:24:26] allow one of the ones that you're
preempted on and you allow for it and
[1:24:31] then you say no more and then you take
your fight to the MPSC after that.
[1:24:39] Um
so uh you know with battery I don't know
[1:24:44] if you have
I think the township board has put a
[1:24:48] moratorium in on battery. Uh if you're
going to do a moratorum complete, then
[1:24:53] the planning commission will also need
to look at that. But uh when we talk
[1:24:58] about our moratorium ordinance, we
actually put into the moratorum
[1:25:02] ordinance that we're going to look at
later a provision that allows the
[1:25:06] planning commission to adopt or
recommend moratoriums. So it allows you
[1:25:11] to be more nimble about how you do it.
You're not going to have to do a new
[1:25:15] ordinance every time you want to. If a
new issue comes up that you think you
[1:25:18] need to impose a moratorum on, you can
just recommend it to the township board
[1:25:22] rather than having to develop a
ordinance, public hearing, send it to
[1:25:27] the county, wait for the county to come
back, send it to the township board, and
[1:25:31] then have the township board act on it.
You could just be more nimble and just
[1:25:34] act on it at a meeting and say, "We
recommend a moratorium on a certain
[1:25:38] subject matter and send it to the
township." Rod, can we talk about that
[1:25:42] maybe within the public hearing so we
can move into that? Yeah. Is that okay
[1:25:46] to do that? Just to make sure we all
understand what it is that we're doing
[1:25:49] related to that,
>> right? Yeah, I will. I'll address that.
[1:25:51] Yeah. But that's
>> any comments on best right now so we can
[1:25:56] move on. No. So, you might as well just
stay right up there. Um the go ahead and
[1:26:02] um move into the public hearings. So,
this is a Oh, go ahead.
[1:26:06] » Well, can I just So, let me just tell
you some of the terrible standards that
[1:26:10] » Oh, I'm sorry. Yes.
>> Okay. And then I can move on. But just
[1:26:13] in the in the state law for battery
storage, it has really bad standards.
[1:26:18] That's why the Creole is totally not an
acceptable thing. The setbacks for
[1:26:23] battery storage are 300 ft from a
non-participating occupied dwelling. So
[1:26:28] it only So you can have all this these
huge battery systems and they the
[1:26:34] setback under state law is 300 ft from
your dwelling wall.
[1:26:39] not [clears throat] your property, but
your actual dwelling. So, that's kind of
[1:26:43] crazy. 50 feet from a road, 50 feet from
the sheared uh property lines. So,
[1:26:49] doesn't have to be far from the property
line. Noise is 55 dBA measured to the
[1:26:55] nearest dwelling, not you know, not your
property line, but the your house
[1:27:01] itself. So again, we think, you know,
any kind of standard should be to your
[1:27:05] property line, not not your home itself.
You should be able to use your entire
[1:27:10] property without noise or other
nuisances stemming from it. Uh so those
[1:27:16] are very weak standards. Um
yeah, I mean just uh
[1:27:23] you know, 300 feet is kind of a
ridiculous standard. In the one
[1:27:25] township, what we did is we required
battery energy storage to be 2,000 ft
[1:27:30] from any sensitive land use. So, they
want they first wanted to build it uh
[1:27:35] next to a school and we're like, "No,
you're not going to build it next to the
[1:27:38] school." And they passed the ordinance
that said it had to be 2,000. So, not
[1:27:42] just 300 ft to the nearest, but 2,000 ft
away from sensitive land uses. So,
[1:27:47] anything where nursing homes, schools,
things of that sort push it way away.
[1:27:52] Um, but you know, compared to those
setbacks, I just wanted to point that
[1:27:56] out that they're really weak standards
in the state law. That's why a lot of
[1:28:00] townships do look at doing their own
uh workable ordinance. So, you can
[1:28:05] really beef up your standards. Uh,
because if they go to the state, that's
[1:28:09] the standard that they have to meet, you
know, but if you do a workable, you can
[1:28:13] push those things back, like I said,
2,000 ft away from sensitive uses,
[1:28:16] whatever. You can just be a lot more
stringent.
[1:28:20] » Thank you. questions.
>> Okay.
[1:28:27] » So, if we can u move on commissioners to
um thank you Rob to the public hearing.
[1:28:32] Our first public hearing is the zoning
ordinance text amendment article 18 and
[1:28:39] the data center moratorum. Um this was
uh noticed in the newspaper. And with
[1:28:45] that um is there a motion to open the
public hearing?
[1:28:51] So move. Thank you.
>> There's a motion by Commissioner um Rig,
[1:28:58] seconded by Commissioner Buller to open
the public hearing. All those in favor
[1:29:02] signify by saying I.
>> I.
[1:29:05] » All those opposed, same sign. Motion
carries. Um so Rob, um this this
[1:29:12] commission is here. Um, as I think
you've mentioned, the township board um
[1:29:17] did pass um a moratorum
and in it within it it said, and I'm
[1:29:23] just taking out one excerpt. I said, "Be
it further resolved that the purpose of
[1:29:27] ordinance number 2026-01
and the township board of trustees
[1:29:32] direction to the planning commission is
to prepare a temporary moratorium zoning
[1:29:36] ordinance text amendment
um and is to preserve the status quo
[1:29:41] while the township planning commission
researches data centers and bests as a
[1:29:45] land use within the township and submits
a recommendation to the township board
[1:29:49] for consideration public hearing. So,
um, that leads us to the document that
[1:29:54] we have, um, in front of us that you
helped craft for us. Um, and maybe you
[1:30:00] can just share what we're doing and
>> Yes.
[1:30:03] » the difference between what the township
>> Yeah, I will. Yeah. So, there's to to
[1:30:07] have a effective moratorum, you have to
do two types of ordinances and not by
[1:30:12] resolution. You can't just Some
communities have adopted moratorum
[1:30:16] resolution. They're in court right now
over on the east side of the state
[1:30:19] because they tried to block it with a
resolution. Case law tells us that you
[1:30:23] have to do and this comes from federal
case law um that you have to do two
[1:30:28] ordinances. You do a police power
ordinance and you have to also do a
[1:30:32] zoning ordinance moratorum. So that's
why the township board has done their
[1:30:36] part of it with a police power ordinance
moratorum.
[1:30:40] And then this is the sec [clears throat]
this is the second part of it. So you
[1:30:45] have to do the zoning moratorum also to
be properly protected and have uh
[1:30:51] moratorium protections. So this is the
second part of it and what this does is
[1:30:57] uh it would uh and that what you do
tonight is a recommendation to the
[1:31:01] township board. So this is part of your
zoning ordinance. It's a moratorum of
[1:31:06] your zoning provisions and uh this
ordinance if you pass it would be a
[1:31:10] recommendation of the board for them to
pass it. It would have to go to the
[1:31:14] county planning commission for their
recommendation. I mean, it's just purely
[1:31:19] recommendation from the county.
>> Advisory, [clears throat] right?
[1:31:22] » Yeah. Completely advisory. Uh and then
it goes to the board for uh their final
[1:31:27] determination.
And so what this will do is, you know,
[1:31:31] I'll just read some of the provisions.
The Township Board of Marshall Township
[1:31:34] determines that the approval of data
centers may result in or produce
[1:31:38] negative impacts on permitted land uses
and development and may harm the public
[1:31:42] health, safety, and general welfare of
property owners and residents of the
[1:31:45] township. Uh the township board is aware
of significant public health, safety,
[1:31:50] and welfare concerns raised by the
public about [snorts] the impacts of
[1:31:54] data centers. Uh the township has a
legitimate public purpose in assessing
[1:31:58] the regulation of the an establishment
and use of data centers within the
[1:32:02] township to ensure that data centers do
not interfere with other land uses
[1:32:07] substantial negative impacts on the
environment, public health and safety.
[1:32:11] Uh the township board finds that
adopting a temporary moratorium is
[1:32:15] reasonable and necessary for among other
reasons the following. Michigan courts
[1:32:19] have recognized moratoriums as a
legitimate tool to preserve status quo
[1:32:24] while forming formulating and uh a
development strategy.
[1:32:29] Um
and uh I I'll note that it has to be it
[1:32:36] can't be just a kind of a permanent
moratorium in place. If we do that uh we
[1:32:40] would have a problem with our zoning.
Again it's why it's temporary but it can
[1:32:45] be extended long. It's for one year the
moratorum but it could be extended
[1:32:50] longer if need be. Uh but you have to
have a
[1:32:56] um an end date which could be extended.
So it has to be temporary or a court
[1:33:00] would most likely strike that down.
And so um the township board accordingly
[1:33:06] determines that it's desirable in the
public uh interest for the reason set
[1:33:11] forth above that the board adopt a
temporary moratorium for data centers.
[1:33:15] And then what we have in here is the
actual provisions that we're going to
[1:33:19] put into your ordinance. So this
ordinance does two things. It creates a
[1:33:24] data center moratorum, but it also adds
to your zoning ordinance, article 14.
[1:33:28] It's going to add a whole new section
that allows the planning commission to
[1:33:33] recommend moratoriums. So you don't have
to go through the whole planning uh
[1:33:38] commission ordinance process. You can
just make the recommendation. It's going
[1:33:42] to make you more nimble. as things come
up in the future, you'll be able to
[1:33:45] just, you know, throw it into a
moratorum if need be and the board then
[1:33:50] can adopt that moratorum and it's within
our ordinance. It's not in our ordinance
[1:33:54] currently. That's why we have to go
through this whole process to do that.
[1:33:59] And so um what it will allow is then the
board uh the planning commission to
[1:34:04] recommend a moratorium, the board to
adopt one. And then going back to this
[1:34:08] data center specific moratorum uh in
section three, a temporary moratorium
[1:34:13] iso imposed upon the acceptance and or
processing of any applications for data
[1:34:18] centers. So there would be no data
centers coming uh forward to the
[1:34:23] township during this time.
Uh the term of it is for one year. Um
[1:34:30] and then [clears throat] before the uh
before it expires, the township can uh
[1:34:34] by resolution allow for additional time
uh for the moratorum. And so this would
[1:34:41] be the moratorium for data centers. We
talked about best. I don't think this
[1:34:46] board has ever adopted a best moratorum,
>> but I think the township board did their
[1:34:51] police power moratorium part of it. So
once this ordinance is in effect, you
[1:34:55] can just recommend the best moratorum to
the township board and it can go into
[1:35:00] effect. So that will be one of the
benefits of this ordinance is that it'll
[1:35:05] be put into our zoning that you can just
do the recommendation. So you'll just be
[1:35:09] able to recommend a best moratorum
for zoning and then the township board
[1:35:14] can adopt that.
>> Okay.
[1:35:18] » All right. Um before we get into um
Thank you, Rob. [clears throat]
[1:35:23] Um commissioners discussion and action.
Are there any public comments related to
[1:35:27] the public hearing for the zoning
ordinance text amendment and Dana center
[1:35:31] moratorum?
Please feel free to come up to the
[1:35:35] podium.
[1:35:46] reached Sclingler with some city of
Marshall
[1:35:50] addressing these effects of data
centers. A lot of them have been
[1:35:55] mentioned, but there are some that
haven't been mentioned. I want to
[1:35:58] encourage you to address these in your
ordinances coming up. One of them is
[1:36:04] ambient warming. A lot of these data
centers with cooling towers, with other
[1:36:09] roof mounted equipment warm up the
surrounding atmosphere as much as five
[1:36:13] to six degrees. This could be true of
battery and energy storage systems also
[1:36:19] probably not as much but that's
something you want to look into
[1:36:23] electromagnetic fields induced. That's
where your stray voltage comes in. You
[1:36:27] got also get induced magnetic fields on
other equipment that's nearby. I think
[1:36:33] that's something you need to look at.
Uh the closed loop cooling is great but
[1:36:40] those systems have added chemicals. They
have biocides, they have antifreeze, and
[1:36:46] they have uh corrosion inhibitors in
them. Those systems need to be emptied
[1:36:51] and cleaned periodically, every month,
every quarter or something. Most waste
[1:36:57] treatment plants cannot handle those.
So, you should have a pre-treatment
[1:37:02] requirement in your ordinances that that
takes care of all that before it goes
[1:37:06] into any waste treatment system.
You mentioned vibration, low frequency
[1:37:12] vibration. That is very important. Fire
risk. These data centers have a lot of
[1:37:18] lithium ion batteries in them. There is
a very high increase in fire risk. That
[1:37:24] should be brought into your ordinance. I
know they have fire suppression systems,
[1:37:29] but you might want to look into what
ones they actually have and make sure
[1:37:33] they are tested on a regular basis so
they do work.
[1:37:43] uh NDAs
uh might want to be careful. The city of
[1:37:48] Marshall has gone into some uh
agreements that have uh confident
[1:37:52] confidentiality clauses and that's kind
of like a group NDA because it covered
[1:37:58] the LDFA and its agents which is the
city. So they really had a NDA as a
[1:38:04] committee.
[1:38:07] there's lots of industrial land on in
the township.
[1:38:11] You've got it on your uh land use map
for the future. So, there's a definite
[1:38:17] need that you regulate
the these
[1:38:21] uh battery plants and data centers
because you're you've got exposure
[1:38:26] already.
I would also encourage you
[1:38:31] for any developer
that they would have a post a bond
[1:38:37] required for cleanup when they're done.
They just don't walk away and leave you
[1:38:42] a mess.
That they were required to pay their own
[1:38:45] way for everything for the your
township's costs. Everything the
[1:38:50] township related to that should be
reimbursed by these developers.
[1:38:55] I would strongly encourage you, I don't
know if you can put this in an ordinance
[1:39:00] not, but don't allow any tax exemptions.
The Seline developers going for uh the
[1:39:06] industrial
exemption facilities exemption, which is
[1:39:10] 50% of their tax, that's millions of
dollars. That it's that's the only
[1:39:16] positive thing is the tax revenue that's
coming from them. And so if you give
[1:39:20] half of it away, you're really
restricting yourself.
[1:39:25] Or the other thing is make that whatever
it's payment of Lugo taxes or your
[1:39:31] property taxes is a non-dereasing. It's
going to be constant throughout the life
[1:39:35] of that facility. Normally it'll be
going down as depreciation comes into
[1:39:39] account. Get them to say it's going to
be this much every year and stick with
[1:39:44] it. [snorts]
See
[1:39:50] so I think those are pretty much the
points. Those are points that we've
[1:39:54] tried to put into our petition,
initiative petition, and we hope to hold
[1:39:58] the city to that and I think those are
good points for the township also.
[1:40:01] » Thank you, Regent.
>> Thank you.
[1:40:04] » Anyone else for public comment?
Okay. See, Gary,
[1:40:15] » I always need to check to see if anybody
else wants to talk,
[1:40:18] [clears throat] but
uh you know, like Regis was saying,
[1:40:24] you know, no amount of regulation stops
a runaway lithium battery fire.
[1:40:31] uh and data centers and the best
facilities uh have all uh had episodes
[1:40:40] of experiencing the runaway uh uh
battery fires and uh you know Marshall
[1:40:49] is downwind from Marshall Township.
But uh when it comes to the uh
[1:40:56] exclusionary zoning issue,
uh the attorney did point out uh one of
[1:41:01] the exemptions where uh there would be
no suitable location uh within the m
[1:41:07] municipality.
But there's also another exemption and
[1:41:12] it has to deal with uh if its use is
unlawful.
[1:41:16] Now, it just so happens in the
uh zoning system construct
[1:41:25] u all land use is unlawful unless it is
permitted.
[1:41:32] So, by its very nature, without a permit
being issued, a data center is
[1:41:38] inherently unlawful.
uh you might not have to do anything and
[1:41:44] just just declare, you know, they're
unlawful unless we permit it.
[1:41:50] But uh
the problem with the moratorum
[1:41:55] again, you're just kicking the can down
the road.
[1:41:59] uh the information about data centers,
the uh you know the destructive effect
[1:42:05] effects of data centers
uh is conclusive and uh decisive.
[1:42:13] Uh you can't change the laws of physics
and chemistry.
[1:42:18] um
[1:42:21] and
you know trying to do impossible things
[1:42:25] by trying to uh regulate the
dispersion of low frequency vibration.
[1:42:33] You can't do that because the low
frequency vibration
[1:42:37] even though it's outside of the range of
audibility
[1:42:42] uh it goes through everything. It goes
through matter. It goes through the
[1:42:46] ground. Uh, and as an example, over in
Marshall where they're planning on
[1:42:52] putting it putting the data center there
at the uh, Brooks Nature Center, there
[1:42:57] are two elementary schools
uh, within the two-mile low frequency
[1:43:03] radius. And it has been conclusively
proven that constant exposure to young
[1:43:10] children of these uh low frequency
vibrations
[1:43:16] creates permanent destructive effects on
the development of the nervous systems.
[1:43:23] So
what's the price of
[1:43:27] what is actually a matter of convenience
of
[1:43:34] being able to get you know a few
millisec get a result a search engine
[1:43:39] result a few milliseconds faster.
[clears throat]
[1:43:43] Uh but nobody's really addressing the
real nefarious ulterior motives of the
[1:43:51] data centers and that huge amount of
computing capacity uh is for the purpose
[1:43:58] of creating an omni surveillance state
that is similar to the uh social credit
[1:44:05] system that they have over in uh
communist China.
[1:44:11] and uh you know
being told that you know when it comes
[1:44:18] to data centers you're pretty much in a
bus that has no brakes and the steering
[1:44:22] wheel's gone and you're heading towards
the cliff.
[1:44:27] [clears throat] But uh just because
the government says you need something,
[1:44:34] do you have to knuckle under to that
kind of pressure? This is still America.
[1:44:39] The government does not control what we
need. The government has to be put back
[1:44:44] in its place and we tell government what
to do and they don't tell us what we
[1:44:50] need or have to use.
[clears throat and cough]
[1:44:55] The whole data center issue is
bringing a lot of issues, other issues,
[1:45:01] peripheral issues to a head about our
basic freedom, about our
[1:45:07] uh what it is to be an American
and uh we should not have to uh knuckle
[1:45:15] under to an Orwellian dysfunctional
state.
[1:45:21] And anybody comes to the podium just do
keep your comments to the moratorum
[1:45:25] itself. That's what the public hearing
is for. So thank you. Thank you Barry.
[1:45:30] Good afternoon Julie Bryant. Sorry. Um I
think Reed just mentioned this. I'll
[1:45:36] stay back. I think Reed just mentioned
this, but I've seen some articles in
[1:45:40] regards to um things to do for the
moratorum and it was highly suggested
[1:45:48] and I like I said I think Regis uh
covered this but um in case they would
[1:45:54] come in and then they would decide to
leave to make them highly responsible,
[1:46:00] financially responsible to return the
property to the you know somewhat what
[1:46:06] shape that it was. Um, you know, that
needs to be right in there, right in the
[1:46:11] beginning. And, um, [clears throat] so I
just wanted to kind of like highlight
[1:46:15] that. So, thank you.
>> Thanks, Julie.
[1:46:18] » Okay. Any other comments?
[1:46:27] » Kelly Isaac.
Um, in favor of a moratorum, give us
[1:46:33] time to
investigate more. Um, thank you for your
[1:46:38] presentation. Thank you, um,
Representative Carl for being here to
[1:46:43] support the people. We've been, um,
challenged lately. Um, just beware when
[1:46:52] you um, you know, people are seething to
get to that land. Seething to
[1:46:59] destroy it and to continue to destroy
the township of Marshall. Hate to say
[1:47:04] it, but that's how I feel.
We've got um, we got a Ford plant that
[1:47:09] promised a lot of things and none of
it's been delivered.
[1:47:14] Um, very disparaging with that. And it's
not because I live by it. It's because
[1:47:21] I've se I've followed the whole process.
Is it even operational? Because I've got
[1:47:26] an article here says it's not um without
permit air permit changes. This is going
[1:47:33] to affect the data centers too. You're
going to have people come in and say,
[1:47:38] "Oh, the air is not going to you won't
need permitting. We'll we'll just get
[1:47:42] the basic permitting." and then they'll
go back and get the real permitting like
[1:47:46] Ford's doing so they could cook up some
really nice batteries and pollute the
[1:47:51] air and water. So, be very cautious and
I know that you're all in a hard
[1:47:57] position. You've got to make the
decisions. I wouldn't want to be on the
[1:48:01] planning board cuz you're going to have
them knocking on your door and they're
[1:48:04] going to be knocking down the door with
money offers and promises of this and
[1:48:08] promises of that that never never came
through. Thank you. Any other comments
[1:48:14] related to this public hearing on the
moratorum?
[1:48:18] » Okay. Oh,
[1:48:25] » say thank you for letting me be a part
of the conversation tonight. My wife is
[1:48:28] a government school teacher and I have
to say good night to her. So, I'm going
[1:48:31] to head out, but thank you, Chair
Johnson, for having me here tonight. And
[1:48:35] members of the commission, you all have
a good evening. And you know how to get
[1:48:37] a hold of me?
>> Yes, I do. Thank you.
[1:48:38] » Thank you.
>> Thank you very much for being here.
[1:48:40] Appreciate it. And I know this is I know
it's already almost 9:00 everybody. So
[1:48:44] thank you for your patience. We have a
hefty agenda ahead of us which we knew.
[1:48:51] » Good evening. Richard Lindseay 15509 17
half mile road at Marshall Township. Um,
[1:48:58] in in listening to what the presentation
was, I am interested in the idea of I
[1:49:03] could identify exactly one place in
Marshall Township where a data center or
[1:49:08] a best center could go and it's
essentially this land that's right here
[1:49:12] because it's got power and it's got
water and it's got sewer. And so my
[1:49:16] question to the and so so I first of all
I support the mortorium. So thank you
[1:49:19] for the presentation. I support the
mortorium. But my understanding of the
[1:49:23] mortorium is that it's not you can't say
no. And so my question is if you're
[1:49:26] going to designate an area where you
would have one, it seems like the joint
[1:49:30] planning commission could work with the
city and develop regulations within
[1:49:36] within this area that address that. And
I would I would encourage that. And to
[1:49:40] the extent I'm not saying there would
have to be one [clears throat] there,
[1:49:46] but the question is you have to set a
space aside and have appropriate
[1:49:49] regulations. And to me, this this area
would make sense for that. and I can't
[1:49:53] really imagine any place else in the
township where it would make sense to
[1:49:56] put it. So, my thoughts, thank you.
>> Thank you for your comments. Anyone else
[1:50:00] for um this
[1:50:07] » and um Marshall Township, uh I just
wanted to say I too support a moratorum.
[1:50:12] I think it needs some time to be thought
about. One of the things that hasn't
[1:50:16] been mentioned here tonight, and I
suspect it's why at the federal level
[1:50:20] and the state level, they're concerned
about this is encryption. Uh quantum
[1:50:25] computers or supercomputers, whatever
you want to call them, but they're on a
[1:50:28] quantum basis. Can break encryption in
seconds. It would take tens of years to
[1:50:33] break. So everybody's trying to figure
out how they can [snorts] encrypt my
[1:50:37] bank account, your bank account, how
they can keep those safe because they
[1:50:42] know that China and North Korea and a
lot of our adversaries are working as
[1:50:48] fast as they can too along with some
very wealthy people in this country who
[1:50:52] aren't my best friends either. My best
friends are my neighbors. You guys are
[1:50:56] all my neighbors. Um so I would say
yeah, take some time. Think this
[1:51:00] through. make sure you don't do anything
that's going to cost the township a
[1:51:04] bunch of money and legal fees. I
appreciate you being here today because
[1:51:08] that's exactly one of my concerns. I'd
like to see taxes go down in this
[1:51:12] township. Um that's not going to happen
if we box oursel into a corner on legal
[1:51:17] feast, but I support the moratorum. I
hope it passes unanimously.
[1:51:21] » Thank you, Dan.
[1:51:26] » [clears throat]
[1:51:30] » Laura Valentine and I am a lifetime
resident of Marshall.
[1:51:37] I support the moratorum and gosh,
can we have one for every township?
[1:51:46] Couldn't we? Moringo, Seresco, if we
could adopt that same moratorum for each
[1:51:53] of the townships, wouldn't that be more
helpful? And that's just one thought
[1:51:59] that goes through my my mind always.
>> There's another question I have. Sorry.
[1:52:06] Um, is there an emergency evac plan from
Marshall in the event of a battery plant
[1:52:13] fire or a data center fire?
[1:52:18] Is there one in place?
[1:52:22] » Hold that thought and we'll address it
and I've got it written down. We can
[1:52:25] address comments.
>> That there's two other points I wanted
[1:52:28] to make. This morning, my parents and I
were listening to the news and we
[1:52:33] learned that
this data center surge, they're all
[1:52:39] operating, all of these developers are
operating on borrowed money. and they
[1:52:45] were talking about the economy, you
know, this the stock market, the
[1:52:50] economy, the the data center bubble.
If that's true,
[1:52:57] that money was it borrowed from us
and are we in agreement with the usage
[1:53:05] of our tax money?
So, um
[1:53:13] the necessary need, the the need of
being necessary and
[1:53:21] you know by the state and federal that I
go back to my state government classes
[1:53:26] in in high school and can we debate that
and
[1:53:32] can we debate the fact that it's a
necessary need to me to me I'm thinking
[1:53:37] of national security. We're using China
components in new buildings and I think
[1:53:44] that's against one of our
our national security laws. I think it
[1:53:51] is.
[1:53:58] » Can anybody refute it?
>> Oh, typically we'll we'll answer those
[1:54:02] during the comments. I'm sorry.
>> I'm just those are points I wanted to
[1:54:05] make. Anyone else?
Okay, seeing none, do we have a motion
[1:54:13] to [clears throat] close the public
hearing?
[1:54:17] » So move sport.
>> I'm not sure what if that was
[1:54:21] Commissioner Buller or Commissioner
Riggs, but we'll go to Steves. Um I will
[1:54:25] say motion by Commissioner Buller,
second by Commissioner Riggs to close
[1:54:28] the public hearing. All those in favor
signify by saying I.
[1:54:31] » I.
>> All those opposed, same sign. Motion
[1:54:34] carries. This is now our time for uh
commissioner discussion and action.
[1:54:41] Um and Rob, I might need your help on
this, but we took an excerpt. That's
[1:54:45] what made the agenda so long as well. Um
from the criteria that we normally look
[1:54:50] at for text amendments, which we have a
text amendment um as part of the um
[1:54:56] ordinance that we have before us. Should
we go through each one of the criteria
[1:55:01] or do we need to handle this differently
as it's coming from us?
[1:55:06] No, you should go through. Okay.
>> All right. Um, just a couple items from
[1:55:11] the uh that I want to make comments on
the emergency evacuation.
[1:55:16] I don't know if anybody here knows that.
I know the Michigan Department of
[1:55:19] Transportation and Transportation side
of things have evacuation routes. I
[1:55:23] don't know that we do as a township.
So there are county you have a county
[1:55:28] emergency management uh director and so
there are county emergency uh management
[1:55:34] procedures that uh that incorporate the
local municipalities also point. Um so
[1:55:40] that is something and then as we get
into the the looking at regulations and
[1:55:44] things of that sort you know some good
comments about that and you know things
[1:55:49] like a fire like on individual projects
a little different you would have like a
[1:55:54] fire protection plan uh a hazardous plan
emergency response plan uh that you'd
[1:56:01] have to approve for any of these kinds
of projects but
[1:56:04] » that'll come as we look at the orders.
That's all. Yeah, that's
[1:56:07] » so more to come on a lot of those things
that were pointed out
[1:56:10] » as we develop the ordinance. Right now,
we're just that's part of our
[1:56:13] educational process to give us time to
figure all that out and good comments
[1:56:17] that were mentioned.
>> Okay. Um so going to the criteria then
[1:56:21] um commissioners um the first criteria
for text amendments is is the proposed
[1:56:27] text amendment um would it clarify the
intent of the ordinance?
[1:56:38] commissioners.
[1:56:42] » It does.
>> Yes.
[1:56:43] » Yes.
>> Yes, it does. Because we're the text
[1:56:45] amendment is saying exactly what it is
that we want to do with the temporary
[1:56:48] moratorum.
>> The next item, does the proposed text
[1:56:51] amendment um would it correct an error
or oversight in the ordinance? I don't
[1:56:55] know that it's an error or an oversight,
but it's an addition too because of the
[1:56:58] new
>> anoles. Yeah, it is kind of a oversight,
[1:57:03] but it's not like most ordinances do not
have a moratorum provision in them. So,
[1:57:08] I don't want to say it's an oversight,
but it is a absence of that authority
[1:57:12] and it's a good idea to put it in your
ordinance.
[1:57:15] » Okay, [clears throat]
feel free to jump in anyone as we go
[1:57:19] through these. The proposed number
three, the proposed text amendment would
[1:57:22] address changes to the state
legislation, recent case law, or
[1:57:25] opinions from the attorney general of
the state of Michigan. No.
[1:57:32] I think we're trying to address the
issues from a a local level that we've
[1:57:37] seen is happening across the state. So,
[clears throat]
[1:57:41] » okay, I'm going to keep going.
>> And there and again, these are
[1:57:43] guidelines. You don't have to meet every
single one. You just have to determine
[1:57:47] that in general meets these principles.
>> Correct. The proposed text amendment
[1:57:52] would promote compliance with changes in
other county, state, or federal
[1:57:55] regulations.
It potentially could provide compliance
[1:57:58] once [clears throat] we figure out
exactly what it is our ordinance is
[1:58:00] going to be. I would think
>> um in the event the amendment will add
[1:58:05] or use to a dis I'm sorry let me try
that again. In the event the amendment
[1:58:09] will add a use to a district that use
shall be fully consistent with the
[1:58:14] intent of the district and character or
range of uses provided for within the
[1:58:17] district.
>> That's not
[1:58:20] » not not applicable. Um the amendment
will not create incompatible land uses
[1:58:24] within a zoning district or between
adjacent districts. Will not
[1:58:28] [clears throat]
>> the proposed text amendment number seven
[1:58:31] um is supported by the findings of
reports, studies or other documentation
[1:58:34] on functional requirements, contemporary
building practices, environmental rec
[1:58:38] requirements, and similar technical
items. I think it is supported by a lot
[1:58:42] of what was said today. Eight. As
applicable, the proposed change shall be
[1:58:47] consistent with the township's ability
to provide adequate public facilities
[1:58:50] and services. I think that's what we
hope to get to at least as we look at an
[1:58:53] ordinance. And number nine, the proposed
change shall be consistent with the
[1:58:59] township's desire to protect the public
health, safety, and welfare of the
[1:59:03] community. And I think that's the number
one. I mean, for me personally, I that's
[1:59:07] what we're trying to do is do our due
diligence.
[1:59:10] » Miss anything? Any comments,
commissioners?
[1:59:14] Mr.
>> Okay, we think it meets the standard. Is
[1:59:18] um there a motion? [clears throat]
[1:59:24] » So
I I move to um
[1:59:30] recommend that the board accept the
that we that we as a commission
[1:59:39] recommend the uh
recommend commission to accept
[1:59:45] moratorium.
[1:59:56] state that again please
>> don't make me [laughter]
[2:00:00] I don't know what I said I said I I'm I
move that we recom that we recommend
[2:00:07] this moratorum to go to the board for
approval the township board for approval
[2:00:12] » that and that includes the text
amendment amendment as well and and the
[2:00:15] pass
>> the data center
[2:00:17] » or the data center. Excuse me.
>> Is there a second to that motion?
[2:00:25] » Commissioner Buller, I believe.
>> Um, so I have a motion by Commissioner
[2:00:29] Sly, seconded by Commissioner Buller
that we um recommend [clears throat]
[2:00:34] this ordinance which includes the text
amendment as well as the data center
[2:00:38] moratorum um to the township board for
approval.
[2:00:43] I get that right.
Okay. Any further discussion?
[2:00:49] » Okay. Can we have a roll call vote,
please?
[2:00:55] » Commissioner Buller,
>> yes.
[2:00:58] » Secretary Woods, yes. Commissioner
Riggs,
[2:01:00] » yes.
>> Commissioner Summers,
[2:01:03] » yes.
>> Commissioner Redmond,
[2:01:06] » yes.
>> Vice,
[2:01:10] » yes.
Chair
[2:01:12] » Johnson,
>> yes.
[2:01:15] Seven yes, zero no.
>> We'll move this on to um the county
[2:01:20] planning for their advisory and then
ultimately to the township board. Okay.
[2:01:25] Um, moving on and thank you to anybody
who is here for the special land use
[2:01:30] that you're just two hours into the
meeting, but the application for a
[2:01:33] special land use and site
[clears throat] plan review for the
[2:01:36] Calhoun County Road Department for a
5,187.78
[2:01:42] ft groundmounted accessory use solar
energy uh collector. Is there a motion
[2:01:48] to open the public hearing?
[2:01:52] So move.
>> Is there a second? Second.
[2:01:56] » Uh motion by Commissioner Buller,
seconded by Commissioner Riggs, that we
[2:02:00] open the public hearing. All those in
favor signify by saying I.
[2:02:03] » Second.
>> Oh, I'm sorry.
[2:02:06] » Mr.
Commissioner
[2:02:09] » Redmond.
[clears throat]
[2:02:12] » All those in favor signify by saying I.
>> I.
[2:02:15] » All those opposed, same sign. We are now
into the public hearing um for the
[2:02:20] special land use and site plan. And this
is an opportunity for the presentation
[2:02:25] if there is by the petitioner. Um and I
see someone's ready for the podium.
[2:02:30] Thank you very much.
>> Yes. Uh thank you very much for uh
[2:02:33] having us today. Um my name is Doug
Frell representing the county and the
[2:02:37] assistant county one of the assistant
county administrators uh and really
[2:02:41] representing the road department's
request uh for this special land use and
[2:02:44] site plan review application. Um we also
have uh Mid-American Solar. They're the
[2:02:50] contractor on the project. So they will
be answering any of your technical
[2:02:53] questions uh that you may have. Um just
really quickly uh we have 168 uh solar
[2:03:00] panel array being proposed takes up
about 02 acres of our 34 acre site. So
[2:03:07] we're not talking utility grade solar.
Um we're talking about really just
[2:03:12] generating solar on our site for our
facility. We're not paying getting money
[2:03:17] back from the grid to to generate money
from this. This is really just uh
[2:03:21] helping us find some cost savings by
putting these solar panels in. Um and
[2:03:27] that cost savings uh we've calculated in
in year one is about $24,000 a year that
[2:03:32] we'll save in utility costs. By year 30
uh as we reach the end of the panel's
[2:03:37] lifespan, we're at $91,000 a year.
That's $1.5 million over the cost over
[2:03:42] the life of those panels. Um, so for us,
you know, this project that we're
[2:03:46] working on is really looking at facility
upgrades and using that $1.5 million to
[2:03:51] to help the road department facilities,
but [clears throat] putting that dollars
[2:03:55] in facilities opens up more money to go
to the roads. Um, so that's really
[2:03:59] helping all of us. Um, it's helping the
road department get more work done. It's
[2:04:03] helping our townships um, uh, and those
local road projects, our primary road
[2:04:07] projects, too. So, uh, just from a
cost-saving point, it's it helps
[2:04:12] everyone. uh not not just uh the county
per se, but uh townships as well. Um and
[2:04:19] uh that's all I have, but I know we have
others to answer any questions. If you
[2:04:22] have specific anything specific,
>> what is it? What's the cost?
[2:04:28] » How much are you spending on these solar
panels? [clears throat]
[2:04:34] » 550,000.
Thank you.
[2:04:38] » What was the second bid on doing this?
Did you get a second bid? Don't the
[2:04:46] counties and the uh public domain need
to get more than one bid for a project
[2:04:54] like this.
>> The the way we did that this project is
[2:04:58] um kind of as a a full package through
our consultant Varigy. Um uh so we we
[2:05:04] bonded out this project. I don't know
the details off the top of my head on
[2:05:07] exactly how each specific item of the
project was bid
[2:05:13] » information.
>> Yeah, we could get that information um
[2:05:17] but don't have it off hand.
>> So what your what your answer is that
[2:05:21] you did not go and request for other
companies to bid on doing this solar
[2:05:27] panel.
>> Yeah, we we did have we had we had
[2:05:29] multiple bids. I I just don't have them
with me.
[2:05:32] Okay, my next question,
>> you know, welcome to if that needs to be
[2:05:35] a condition or or anything, happy to
entertain that.
[2:05:38] » And and this, you know, this is not
really to whether this piece of property
[2:05:42] is applicable to do this. It's just I
think the county should put more
[2:05:47] diligence into how they're doing it and
where they're spending their county
[2:05:51] money
coming to us. And because you came in
[2:05:56] with is the property applicable to do
solar pins? Yes, it is. Yes, it's
[2:06:02] allowable,
but there's 34 acres and you're putting
[2:06:08] it in the most exposure to people place
that you could. I don't know if you read
[2:06:15] the response that we got. Um,
did you
[2:06:21] look into, you know, what was what was
the survey? What was the criteria for
[2:06:25] putting it where you went to putt it?
>> Um, I I think it was ease of access to
[2:06:30] the other facilities. um ease of access
to to to the road. I I hear your concern
[2:06:35] 100%. Um but really um with we also have
master planning we're doing on our site.
[2:06:41] Um we have some facilities over time
that you know they're kind of reaching
[2:06:44] their useful life. So finding kind of a
tucked away corner that's not going to
[2:06:49] interfere as much with that overall
facilities master plan if we want to you
[2:06:53] know do major renovations, tear downs of
certain facilities and put other things
[2:06:57] up. Um, that was just the the place that
we identified that made the most sense.
[2:07:02] » So, all the salt trucks are going to go
right past them. Was there any research?
[2:07:06] I mean, you got a big pack of research
of sound and all this research that you
[2:07:11] did. Was there a research impact on
those salt trucks driving right past
[2:07:15] them? I
>> I don't think we did any specific
[2:07:17] research on the salt trucks.
>> I I guess what my I think we should
[2:07:21] approve the use of the property for
solar panels, but you got 34 acres. I
[2:07:27] think you need to do some county
diligence in
[2:07:31] where you do it and how you do it and
who you have do it. Not just because,
[2:07:36] you know, you're you're asking for
approval of the site plan that you gave
[2:07:42] to us ahead of time, which is really a
whole different motion if I'm correct,
[2:07:47] Joanna. Yes. that that's not really our
question to decide today, but I would
[2:07:52] surely like to see a lot more diligence
done before we approve where you put it.
[2:07:58] » Thank you very much. Thank you,
>> Commissioner Summers. Just for
[2:08:00] clarification, we do have both though
where um the way this was our public
[2:08:05] hearing is for both. It is for the um
special land use and the site plan this
[2:08:10] evening. So, we'll get to we'll do those
both separately. Okay.
[2:08:13] » Yep. Um
um I just let me see where we're at
[2:08:17] here. I apologize, dear. Uh Don, um
[clears throat] I don't have any other
[2:08:22] questions for you right at the moment.
>> No problem. I'll just
[2:08:25] » Thank you. Is there anybody for public
comments on this item?
[2:08:31] » Barry, stick to the public hearing on on
this particular item. Please
[2:08:38] [clears throat]
[2:08:40] » try and do that.
>> I know. Thank you.
[2:08:43] » [laughter]
[clears throat]
[2:08:45] » Uh
there's a problem with this recent
[2:08:50] headlong
[2:08:55] effort to think that we can try to beat
the second law of thermodynamics by
[2:09:03] uh putting up these solar panels and
thinking that it's going to uh provide
[2:09:10] us with a world of unlimited electricity
when Michigan
[2:09:19] is [clears throat and snorts]
not really the best place. We get about
[2:09:22] 50% sunlight.
Uh and
[2:09:28] like
Steve Cara had said uh there's the issue
[2:09:32] of
putting solar panels in into an area and
[2:09:38] its resultant
uh effects that come from the uh
[2:09:44] leeching of the uh materials the toxic
materials and the solar panels.
[2:09:51] But
for millennia uh we have been dependent.
[2:09:58] You know
there's a way that you can look at
[2:10:02] physical reality and uh it's about the
modality of energy transfer systems.
[2:10:12] And for millennia, the human species has
been reliant on what we can call an
[2:10:19] endosomatic
energy transfer system where
[2:10:24] we are getting our sources of energy
from living systems.
[2:10:32] Uh that seemed to work very well for us
for centuries and centuries. But with
[2:10:36] the uh
uh
[2:10:40] invention of the computer and then the
uh
[2:10:45] the insidious
influences of AI which make us think
[2:10:52] that we have to have more of it and more
of it is better.
[2:10:58] uh we're falling prey to this notion
that we have to displace
[2:11:04] the living world with the non-living
world.
[2:11:08] And uh again like I had brought up
before you know we're coming to a head
[2:11:15] with
uh clashing world views as to how we
[2:11:22] should be living our lives and uh which
as Americans should should we be uh
[2:11:30] concerned about
constructing the
[2:11:35] environment of our lives so it
facilitates
[2:11:39] the mandates of existential freedom
which
[2:11:45] were so well uh
valued in our uh founding documents,
[2:11:52] Declaration of Independence and the
Constitution.
[2:11:56] Are we creating a
what will end up being a techno prison
[2:12:02] uh that is without fences
and uh
[2:12:09] you know more electricity does not mean
a better world.
[2:12:15] Uh and there could be, you know, coming
up within the next month or two
[2:12:21] uh a serious
uh
[2:12:25] change of direction that is going to
result from the catastrophic
[2:12:32] inability to supply
uh sufficient diesel fuel to
[2:12:40] uh satisfy our uh our economic needs and
you know our energy needs.
[2:12:47] [clears throat]
So, uh
[2:12:51] if that happens, there is going
[clears throat] to be a serious
[2:12:54] recalibration in our priorities.
Uh and we're not going to be so worried
[2:13:00] about uh trying to get a few extra
megawws out out of some acreage, but uh
[2:13:05] we're going to be more concerned about
making sure that we can get uh some food
[2:13:09] in our belly each day.
So, uh, these concerns are concerns of
[2:13:16] convenience and not of need.
[2:13:22] Take [snorts] that into consideration,
please.
[2:13:30] » Historic Marshall.
So, according to my research, most all
[2:13:35] these solar panels have Chinese spyware
in them that can cause an EMP. This is
[2:13:41] part of the overall three warfare
program of the Chinese Communist Party
[2:13:45] along with the wind turbines, battery
storage, um, data centers.
[2:13:50] Uh, we now have a World War II
ground level site here with at least a
[2:13:58] thousand Kal members that flew in in the
middle of the night about 10:30 in March
[2:14:02] for about a two week span. the solar
panels capability on the EMP, which is
[2:14:07] electromagnetic pulse. When that goes
off, 80 to 90% of our population will
[2:14:13] die. These young men were trying to tell
me they're all Americanmade and they got
[2:14:17] rid of the spyware. I freaking hope so.
Um because it won't come back up. I'm
[2:14:24] just saying. Pee off. They heat up the
atmosphere and ozone. They give off
[2:14:28] black radiation. I had a friend years
ago that worked for consumers. She had
[2:14:33] to carry a geer counter to even go near
it. Just saying.
[2:14:40] » Comments. Anyone else?
[2:14:50] » Julie Bryant again. Um I agree with
[clears throat] excuse me with Barry in
[2:14:55] regards to we live in Michigan. How much
sunset? Um, I'd also like to know, I
[2:15:02] don't know this property. Um, is there
residential? Is there businesses? What's
[2:15:07] around that area that they decided to
use the little corner? Because we all
[2:15:12] know that they're not looking out for
us. So, we need to know exactly where
[2:15:17] this is at. Um I I also do not feel that
um we need to dot these solar fields you
[2:15:27] know like it needs to be part of the
master plan and not just like solar
[2:15:31] field here solar field there solar field
there like you guys were talking about
[2:15:35] earlier to you know keep everything kind
of in an area. So that's my thoughts.
[2:15:42] Thank you.
[2:15:48] Hi, my name is Dylan Pew, Mid America
Solar. Um, I'm a Marshall resident. Um,
[2:15:54] have been, grew up in all of that for a
very long time. I'm here to answer any
[2:15:59] technical questions in relation to the
solar project, whether it's now or
[2:16:03] during the board's um, comments, but I
can attest to the fact that I have solar
[2:16:09] at home. Um, I'm a big advocate of
diversified energy rather than filling
[2:16:15] our farm fields full of solar. I
wholeheartedly agree that each person
[2:16:20] should have their own form of renewable
energy in their home. Um, like I don't
[2:16:26] buy anything from Consumer's Energy. I
don't sell anything to Consumer's Energy
[2:16:30] regardless of how many sunlight hours
Michigan gets. Uh, my lights stay on
[2:16:35] regardless of a tornado in northern
Mingo Township.
[2:16:40] um doesn't matter what kind of
thunderstorm rolls through or you know
[2:16:44] ITC's transmission lines running through
our local townships. Um grid
[2:16:51] instability,
Chinese products,
[2:16:55] uh solar is definitely a viable option
especially for cost savings to the
[2:16:59] county. So, um, you know, ultimately
it's going to save taxpayer money, which
[2:17:04] is going to be able to put the budget
towards the roads, which is kind of a
[2:17:09] big thing around here. I used to live on
19 mile road in Mingo Township. I don't
[2:17:14] know if anyone's been out there
recently, but you make it about a
[2:17:17] quarter of the way down and then you
turn around. So, um,
[2:17:21] » right now I'm here to answer any
questions. Um, you know, I I get there's
[2:17:26] a big push against solar, uh, in Calhoun
County in general with some past
[2:17:32] projects or future ones that everyone's
been looking at, but um, ultimately this
[2:17:38] is a a diversified or distributed
product or project. So, you know, we're
[2:17:43] not looking at supplying power to, you
know, a billion homes. We're we're
[2:17:48] looking at supplying energy to
a county building. Um there's others in
[2:17:53] Kelvin County that are doing the same
thing. So, this isn't a one-off project.
[2:17:58] It's a goal that the county has to
reduce costs to taxpayers
[2:18:04] um and and build a better community. So,
thank you,
[2:18:07] » Doug. I will have or is it Dylan? Excuse
me. I will have some questions for you.
[2:18:10] So
[2:18:15] [clears throat]
>> Richard Lindsay again, Marshall Township
[2:18:17] resident, 1559 17 half mile road. Also
former county attorney, also foreigner
[2:18:23] attorney for Oakland Hospital. I'm very
familiar with this site. Um, and good
[2:18:29] segue into this. Uh, south of the site,
it has Consumer's Energy parcel. uh west
[2:18:35] of the site. Uh MA owns the parcel on
the corner at 15 Mile Road in M96 and
[2:18:42] then there's a series of commercial
industrial uses in that area. North of
[2:18:46] that is uh Preston Drive and which we
worked with the township when I was in
[2:18:50] Oaklan to get that repaved. Oaklan
operates offices out of the south west
[2:18:56] or southeast corner of that parcel that
joins this area. Um, [clears throat] and
[2:19:00] on the east side of the property is I69.
Um, I I can't literally imagine a better
[2:19:07] place to put this kind of a project than
this particular location. As I go
[2:19:11] through the the one through eight items
in the ordinance, it satisfies all of
[2:19:17] those without any question whatsoever.
Um, I support solar. I think it's good
[2:19:22] to switch from um so you know fighting
in Iran to secure our oil supplies to be
[2:19:29] able to have power that is grown in our
fields essentially um here at home. And
[2:19:35] again, I think this is I'm I'm going to
trust the county in saying that it was a
[2:19:39] good use of county funds. I'm sure I'm
familiar very familiar with the
[2:19:43] purchasing process for the county. So
I'm sure there was a rigorous purchasing
[2:19:47] process it was going through. Um, at the
extent this frees more money to be able
[2:19:53] to use to fix the roads,
think that's a good thing. So, my
[2:19:58] comments. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Anyone else?
[2:20:03] Okay. Um, is there a motion to close the
public hearing?
[2:20:11] Move to
>> close public hearing.
[2:20:13] » Thank you. Is there a second?
>> Yeah.
[2:20:20] Motion by Commissioner Buller, second by
Commissioner Snomemers to close the
[2:20:24] public hearing. All those in favor
signify by saying I. I.
[2:20:27] » All those opposed, same sign. Motion
carries. Um within our documents, we
[2:20:33] have a zoning administrators report um
to help us through some of the criteria.
[2:20:40] Um I would like to mention I appreciate
Shelley following up I guess with maybe
[2:20:44] Mid American Solar and Dylan. Um I have
just a couple questions for you if you
[2:20:49] want to head back to the podium and then
I'll open it up to everybody else. Um I
[2:20:54] know you um so this educate me quite
frankly. Um so this isn't like other
[2:21:00] solar that's being there's is it a miso
what is it called where you have an
[2:21:04] agreement with another ITC or anybody
else. It's not going back to the grid at
[2:21:09] all.
>> So typically there's an interconnection
[2:21:12] operating agreement. Yes. Um, there will
be one here just due to the fact that
[2:21:16] Consumer's Energy requires it because
>> Okay.
[2:21:19] » because we're connecting to the county
building's current electrical system
[2:21:23] which is also tied to consumers energy.
So, you know, the Cowan County Road
[2:21:29] Department building will still be
connected to consumer. So, they can
[2:21:32] always have the option to purchase
energy from consumers energy. Um, but in
[2:21:37] this instance, we're not producing more
than what the county is using. But if
[2:21:42] you do,
>> yeah,
[2:21:44] » it can go back to the grid.
>> It has the potential, it'll have the
[2:21:47] right, the legal right to be exported.
>> That's part of the agreement, right?
[2:21:51] » Yeah. We need to make sure that we're
meeting safety concerns with consumers
[2:21:55] energy. So, they call it shutdown, rapid
shutdown compliance. So,
[2:22:00] you know, if a storm runs through um
takes down a power line just down the
[2:22:04] street on 15mi, uh an emergency worker,
whether it's a lineman, firefighter,
[2:22:10] whoever needs to be able to shut that
solar system off. So, those are all
[2:22:15] regulations that we have to meet to
consumers energy energy to ensure that
[2:22:20] it can safely be worked on the
electrical system as well as the
[2:22:23] building. So,
>> I guess what I was getting at is you
[2:22:25] still need to have an agreement with
them.
[2:22:27] » We will have an agreement. Yeah,
>> you will you will have an agreement.
[2:22:29] » Yep. It's I believe it's already
approved for construction. We're just
[2:22:33] kind of working through the permitting
phase right now. So
[2:22:36] » through that is that through that MYSO
or whatever.
[2:22:38] » No, it's just through consumers energy.
>> Through consumers that typically
[2:22:42] » much larger projects. Yeah. And directly
they call a medium voltage connection.
[2:22:48] So you know similar to what you see in
these farm fields where it's connecting
[2:22:53] at 13,000 volts or something like that.
Here we're connecting to the building.
[2:22:57] And the reason I asked a lot of the
questions and and thank you that I I
[2:23:00] don't know what page this is on but you
know related to the total energy watts
[2:23:04] on the panels versus the need for the
road department and you know what could
[2:23:09] potentially go into the grid in the
future. We don't know right. Um is where
[2:23:15] that constituted for us that commercial
versus non-commercial.
[2:23:19] » Yeah. The energy isn't being generated
for the purpose of sale. So, um, you
[2:23:27] know, there may be instances, say the
county is not using a bunch of energy
[2:23:30] during, um, you know, an awesome June
day. You know, there could be energy
[2:23:35] that goes back to consumers energy that
they get on their bill in a form of a
[2:23:39] credit and those credits get used during
the nighttime or during low producing
[2:23:43] months. So,
>> okay. And then to answer the question um
[2:23:48] that we had from public comments um
because we do know and you've been
[2:23:52] around our township as well. We have um
you know um Chinese shipping you know
[2:23:58] wherever these are coming from and did I
hear I think someone said it maybe was
[2:24:03] that these are made in I mean just just
to answer their question is it made in
[2:24:07] are these products from the US of A? um
majority so like structure the things
[2:24:13] that hold the solar panels are made
right in Albian so 10 15 miles away the
[2:24:19] inverters are a German manufacturer so
they're engineered designed and
[2:24:24] manufactured in Germany I don't know on
these specific panels but it's probably
[2:24:30] Southeastern Asia usually not China
right now because of tariffs and some
[2:24:35] other things
>> I'm just trying to answer the question
[2:24:37] for the audience just related So the big
the biggest question and concern that
[2:24:42] comes along with solar has already kind
of been dealt with. Early July there was
[2:24:47] an FCC ban on communications equipment
that can be associated with remote
[2:24:54] monitoring or remote uh control of the
system that would cause thermal runaway
[2:25:00] or anything like that. So, there's
actually been a ban from the federal
[2:25:04] government that doesn't allow
communications equipment manufactured by
[2:25:08] certain countries.
>> And then the only other thing I wanted
[2:25:13] to add is um not included in the packet
because I think we got it yesterday.
[2:25:17] Bear with me. Is that right, Shelley? We
um have a letter um and I don't know if
[2:25:22] you've all seen it um between the county
um road department or the county and um
[2:25:27] Midame American Solar. Um we did get a a
lengthy feedback from one of the
[2:25:33] property owners which is um doggy spa
and playc care. So um I don't know if
[2:25:39] you've seen that but um we can talk
about that as we get through this. I
[2:25:42] just wanted to make sure for the
audience that you knew we did have um
[2:25:46] feedback from doggy spot and playare
which be which would be what to the
[2:25:50] north.
>> Yeah directly north.
[2:25:53] » Um we know of that communication but we
don't know what it consists of.
[2:25:58] » We're happy to share that. Thank you,
>> commissioners. Um, any questions or
[2:26:03] comments? Yes, Shelley.
>> I'd like to go through our land use
[2:26:06] definitions real quick to confirm what
the difference is between commercial
[2:26:14] solar energy system in the definition of
your ordinance book. Commercial energy
[2:26:18] solar system means a utility scale
facility of solar energy collectors with
[2:26:22] the primary purpose of wholesale or
retail of generated electricity, also
[2:26:27] known as a solar farm. These are in no
way commercial. You do have solar energy
[2:26:33] collector which means panel or panels
and other devices or equipment or any
[2:26:37] combination thereof that collect, store,
distribute and/or transform solar,
[2:26:42] radiant energy into electrical, thermal
or chemical energy for the purpose of
[2:26:46] generating electric power or other form
of generated energy for use in an use in
[2:26:52] or associated with a principal land use
on the parcel of land on which the solar
[2:26:57] energy collector [clears throat] is
located. and if permitted for the sale
[2:27:01] and distribution of excess available
electricity to an authorized public
[2:27:06] utility for distribution to other lands.
[2:27:16] » Is this is this a fixed uh
>> so so it's facing south?
[2:27:23] » Yeah, it's a 30° tilt face south. So it
doesn't with the sun
[2:27:29] » big fields it doesn't rotate daily or
seasonal.
[2:27:32] » Okay. Because I was looking at the
glare.
[2:27:34] » Yeah. We did provide a full glare report
for 15 mile to make sure cars weren't
[2:27:39] being
>> Yeah.
[2:27:39] » blinded in.
>> I was concerned about if it if it was a
[2:27:43] moving what the glare would be because
it looks like it's like in June and July
[2:27:49] you get over 200 minutes a day of glare.
So I was concerned about that.
[2:27:54] » Yeah. And that's just ground level
glare. So, you know, it's not
[2:27:59] necessarily the road, but it might be
reflected into the woods or something.
[2:28:03] » I was concerned that if it if it was
a moving that it might reflect onto the
[2:28:09] neighboring property.
>> Oh, yeah.
[2:28:11] » But if it's fixed to the south, the
glare would probably be to the south, I
[2:28:15] would imagine.
>> Yeah. It's typically to the uh southeast
[2:28:18] is the most common glare area. um other
than overhead [snorts] airplanes which
[2:28:25] is usually the primary reason for a
glare report is we're close to an
[2:28:28] airport. Um but you know the township
requested it. We felt it was a good idea
[2:28:34] to check 15 mile too. So they checked
everything.
[2:28:38] » Any other questions?
Yes.
[2:28:41] » So in your site plan,
>> where is the electrical feed to
[2:28:50] » So it comes
buildings right now. So why does it need
[2:28:54] to be way over there instead of behind
the administrative building?
[2:28:58] » The electrical service is on the west
side of the building. So it's on the
[2:29:03] front side of the building. Um, I'd say
I don't have an exact measurement, but
[2:29:08] I'd say it's about 100 foot, maybe 75
foot south of the north, sorry, of the
[2:29:14] northwest corner. So, it's on that west
side. The closest available area is that
[2:29:20] northern kind of cutout section.
>> What would be the cost if you bring it
[2:29:24] from if you were to move it over behind
the administration building? What would
[2:29:30] be the problem with that?
Commissioner some can I'm going to hold
[2:29:34] that conversation hold that thought.
>> Let's try to do one thing at a time at
[2:29:38] least get us through the special land
use and maybe approve or what and and
[2:29:42] then I do want to just again I know it's
late hour it's 9:30 but we're going to
[2:29:46] do our due diligence. Um Shelley, is
there anything you want to point out in
[2:29:50] terms of the special land use um in your
administrative report at all? Anything
[2:29:55] in particular? I found nothing that
would
[2:29:59] not allow the planning commission to
approve the special land use.
[2:30:05] » Solar panels are allowed in the side and
the rear yard and it has been confirmed
[2:30:09] that these panels are located in the
sideyard. They are not in front of the
[2:30:13] principal building.
Um so with that commissioners if we if
[2:30:18] we may um we have the again the criteria
for the special land use standards and
[2:30:24] as Shelley Arzon administr administrator
mentioned um in her report we have
[2:30:29] information as well.
>> Um I know we had some public comment. Um
[2:30:33] Dylan you can have a seat for a couple
minutes. Yeah. Sorry.
[2:30:36] » Um if we can again go through the
standards for special land use. Um, the
[2:30:42] use is designed and constructed and will
be operated and maintained to be
[2:30:46] harmonious and appropriate in appearance
with existing or intended character. Um,
[2:30:51] I get my pages here. Of the general
vicinity, will be compatible with
[2:30:55] adjacent uses of land and will not
change the essential character of the
[2:31:00] area in which it is proposed. Comments,
commissioners?
[2:31:06] » Okay. I think um
again I think we know the zoning um in
[2:31:12] that area
>> is light industrial
[2:31:14] » light industrial I believe. Yeah. Um the
you number two the use is or as a result
[2:31:19] of the special land use approval will be
served adequately by public services um
[2:31:24] and facilities including
um but not limited to streets, police,
[2:31:28] fire protection, drainage structures,
refu disposal, water and sewer
[2:31:32] facilities and schools.
>> Yes. No, I don't see an issue.
[2:31:37] » Okay. The use will not involve
activities, processes, materials, and
[2:31:40] equipment or conditions of operation
that would be detrimental to any
[2:31:44] person's property or the general welfare
by reason of traffic, noise, smoke,
[2:31:49] fumes, glare, or order odor odors? It's
getting late, guys.
[2:31:55] Thoughts on that?
>> I was concerned about the glare, but I
[2:31:58] think you'd answered that.
>> Okay. And as far as the traffic, it's
[2:32:02] primarily it'll just be during the
construction. And I know that the county
[2:32:05] has entered in entered into road
agreements, but this is just for that
[2:32:10] one site. It shouldn't be that much
impact, I would hope. Um, the special
[2:32:13] land use will be consistent with the
intent and purposes of this ordinance
[2:32:16] and most recent updates of the Marshall
Township master plan. We had that
[2:32:20] information here. Um, it will not be
hazardous or disturbing to existing or
[2:32:24] future uses in the same general facility
and in the community as a whole.
[2:32:30] Um my only comment to that is you know
the hazardous in the future. I don't
[2:32:34] have the answer to that completely um to
be determined in my opinion.
[2:32:41] Pipe up anybody as we move along. It
will not create excessive additional
[2:32:44] requirements at public cost for
infrastructure and will not be
[2:32:48] detrimental to the economic welfare of
the community.
[2:32:53] again for use of the particular site. It
will ensure that the environment shall
[2:32:58] be present preserved in its natural
state in so far as practical practicable
[2:33:04] by minimizing tree and soil removal
[snorts] and topographic modifications
[2:33:08] which result in maximum harmony and
adjacent areas.
[2:33:12] Don't think there's major things that
have to be moved out of place for that.
[2:33:16] Um, and it shall confirm with all
specific, excuse me, conform with all
[2:33:21] specific requirements applicable to the
proposed use as applicable.
[2:33:25] That's a
comments on that.
[2:33:30] Commissioners, is there a um, unless you
have other questions for either the
[2:33:35] county or Mid-American, is there a
motion?
[2:33:38] » It meets the standards.
>> Meets the standards
[2:33:40] » in my opinion.
>> Any further comments on the standards?
[2:33:45] » [clears throat]
[snorts]
[2:33:54] » I'll make a motion that we approve the
special end use for the Calhoun County
[2:34:00] Road Department for a 5,187.78
[2:34:05] square foot ground mounted accessory use
solar energy collector.
[2:34:12] » Is there a second?
>> Second.
[2:34:16] We have a motion by Commissioner Woods
and seconded by Commissioner
[2:34:19] [clears throat] Redmond
um as stated to approve. Any further
[2:34:25] discussion?
[2:34:29] Roll call vote, please.
[2:34:33] » Uh Commissioner Woods, yes.
>> Commissioner Riggs,
[2:34:39] » yes.
>> Commissioner Subs,
[2:34:43] » yes. [snorts]
Commissioner Redmond.
[2:34:46] » Yes.
[2:34:49] » Chair Johnson.
>> Yes.
[2:34:52] » Vice Chair Sly.
>> Yes.
[2:34:55] » Commissioner Buller. [clears throat]
>> Yes.
[2:34:58] » And a motion.
>> So, the special land use um is approved.
[2:35:02] And now we can move on to the second
part which I think speaks to some of the
[2:35:07] concerns from um the doggy daycare that
we receive. Doggy spa and playcare
[2:35:12] pardon me. and um Commissioner Summer's
uh questions. Again, we do have um the
[2:35:18] standards here. We have the
administrator's report. Um Shelley, is
[2:35:23] there anything you want to add related
to the site plan? I would like to
[2:35:27] mention that based on the location,
although the um there is a residential
[2:35:33] house there, everything around this
property is on the north side and where
[2:35:40] the solar panels are. It's actually
community service district.
[2:35:45] » So there's that one home I think just to
the north and then the doggy spa and
[2:35:49] that Preston area I think is what's
there. But they al are all zoned
[2:35:54] commercial service
>> and I assume that notices went out
[2:35:58] including that home. Um I'm assuming for
for that
[2:36:01] » I would assume the notices went out.
>> Yes, the notices did go out. Yes. Okay.
[2:36:06] [clears throat]
>> Okay.
[2:36:12] » Doggy daycarees to the north. The homes
to the west.
[2:36:15] » Nope. HS
>> right. It's in front of it.
[2:36:21] » Yeah. Correct.
>> No residential properties abuing that
[2:36:26] property whatsoever.
>> Yes, there is.
[2:36:30] » Not district-wise. There is not
zoning.
[2:36:35] » So, the house is not residential.
>> The house is a residence, but it's not
[2:36:40] zoned residential. It's zoned commercial
or highway service.
[2:36:45] So somewhere along the lines, the
township has reszoned those properties
[2:36:50] in that area.
[2:36:55] » So I think that's the difference is
there's a home there, but [cough] the
[2:36:59] zoning is is
>> someone is living in it.
[2:37:02] » I assume I don't
>> but I think they were duly notified um
[2:37:07] of the public hearing. So the only
comments that I'm aware of other than
[2:37:12] the comments thank you here this evening
that we've received written is the doggy
[2:37:16] spot in play here. That's all I'm aware
of.
[2:37:23] Commissioners, do you want to go through
the standards
[2:37:26] » [snorts]
>> um or any specific site plan areas that
[2:37:28] you'd like to address? I know
Commissioner Summers, you mentioned some
[2:37:31] related to its location. Um
thoughts on any of these items?
[2:37:44] Good evening, President Cy Albert. I'm
the deputy managing director at the K
[2:37:49] County Road Department. I'd like to
answer uh Commissioner Summers's
[2:37:52] questions and why the location was
selected for this uh solar array panels
[2:37:57] going there. The reason that area was
selected is is the the area that you
[2:38:02] commented about that's directly south of
the admill building. We have two drain
[2:38:07] well drain fields there for our septic
system. So we would also incur
[2:38:10] additional charges to relocate that for
that building. And there's that is like
[2:38:16] the ideal spot for draining of the
septic system there. And there's also a
[2:38:21] road uh a railroad easement that
encroaches our property from the south
[2:38:25] to the north and as well as a consumer's
energy rightway there. So there's about
[2:38:30] a 100 foot setback. So we're kind of
pretty tight for space there.
[2:38:35] Thank you.
>> You're welcome. You can't
[2:38:38] » you can't go on the other side of the
building. [snorts]
[2:38:41] » Which which of you couldn't go on the
other side of the building to the east?
[2:38:46] » It would. But
>> then we start talking about location of
[2:38:49] utility services and how long were how
do you dig a trench without directional
[2:38:54] boring incurring a lot of large amount
of costs under a building to get your to
[2:38:58] your electrical service?
It's not really practical
[2:39:03] » to put the solar away in that area. I'm
just trying to warn you about lawsuits.
[2:39:08] If people deny bringing their dogs to a
business and it shuts down and people,
[2:39:15] you know, have issues with what's going
on because if you've read the report
[2:39:21] from them,
>> I have not read that report
[2:39:24] » that they you know, and you've
done all these reports about reflective
[2:39:29] and all this vibration and we're talking
about data centers. Is that the next
[2:39:33] thing is you're going to put a battery
pack to reserve the power too?
[2:39:37] » No, this is solely to offset charges
that we occur yearly for electrical use.
[2:39:45] That's just offset those charges. We
don't intend to sell this anyway. It's
[2:39:50] for for personal use or your I would say
the road department's use.
[2:39:53] » That's not my point. My point is you're
building it as close to anybody
[2:39:59] that you can on your whole property.
If you understand what I'm saying,
[2:40:03] there's a residence in front of it.
There's a business with dogs be behind
[2:40:07] it. The the high frequencies that dogs
can hear is different than what people
[2:40:14] can hear. So, [clears throat]
this is the concern they have is that
[2:40:21] there could be high frequency sounds,
which I don't know about them. I've just
[2:40:26] heard about this. I'm just telling you
what the community is community is
[2:40:30] telling me that they don't understand
why your position at where it's at.
[2:40:37] I don't you know I don't see how the
county can't do a little bit of
[2:40:43] diligence to find some place on 30ome
acres of property take it across. Also
[2:40:49] to reference that we do have a master
plan site for our site and if we did
[2:40:53] install this in that area that would
impact any future development or like
[2:40:59] building changes if we ever wanted to
continue to be on that site in the
[2:41:02] future.
>> So then then the solar panels would be
[2:41:06] closer to the new building.
>> No, the solar panels are out of the way.
[2:41:10] That's out of the way.
>> You said future site building new
[2:41:14] building. If you've built the solar
panels,
[2:41:16] » if they're then they'd be closer to the
new building,
[2:41:19] » no there that would they would be in
direct line of any type of construction
[2:41:24] or development in that area. So that's
you know this area was selected because
[2:41:28] it's out of the way. It's out of the
traffic. It's um protected by tree line
[2:41:33] from our surrounding neighbors. It has
the offset necessary to meet the
[2:41:37] requirements for the township. It's in a
very good location that's out of the way
[2:41:41] with very minimal impact to not only the
property but also to the land. I mean
[2:41:46] there's no clearing that has to take
place. It's in a welllo area.
[2:41:54] » Commissioner Woods,
it seems like the representatives for
[2:41:58] the for the road department
do maybe have heard about the letter
[2:42:03] from the concern. Would you be able to
read that and put it into the record or
[2:42:08] is it too long?
>> It's very long. Not that I wouldn't want
[2:42:11] to do it justice. Um, but it is very
long. Um, I forget how many pages. Um,
[2:42:16] and it's very I mean there's key points
to it.
[2:42:18] » Part of the record.
>> It is. It is part of the record. It's
[2:42:21] just
>> whether I guess we have options. Um,
[2:42:24] with all fairness to Mid-American and
the county, they have not seen this,
[2:42:28] right? To be able to probably speak to
all of it maybe um, [clears throat]
[2:42:31] prior to um, I think it came in
yesterday. Um there's some some points
[2:42:36] within it that may be applicable to the
standards. Um commissioners, I don't
[2:42:40] know if you want to give it time. Do you
want to go through the standards? I
[2:42:44] mean, I know it's 9:45. Um but again, I
want to do a due diligence and I also
[2:42:50] want to make sure we're preserving the
public comment from doggy that we're
[2:42:54] here, but from doggy spot and play care.
So, what is your thoughts on how to
[2:43:01] proceed? Thank you, Corey.
[2:43:09] Is the doggy daycare in the audience?
>> No.
[2:43:18] » So commissioners been able to see that
letter?
[2:43:21] » Have all the commissioners read the
letter today?
[2:43:23] » I have not seen it.
>> Commissioner
[2:43:25] um Sly has not. Anybody read it?
Commissioner Buller has not.
[2:43:30] » Commissioner Woods has not.
>> I read it. and Commissioner Redmond. So
[2:43:35] half of us had well less than half.
>> Well, I did proves it when we were
[2:43:38] heading over to Lawrence yesterday, but
not enough to showed it to me. Rick,
[2:43:44] » I think you had it.
>> I mean, everybody
[2:43:46] » not enough to
>> All planning commissioners should have
[2:43:49] opportunity to review that as part of
commissioners receive it.
[2:43:53] » No, I did not.
>> I got it as email. It didn't go out as
[2:43:57] an email blast.
>> I didn't check the email.
[2:44:01] I believe everybody has received
>> who sent it who sent the email
[2:44:06] » to the commission. [cough]
>> I'm not sure which one that came from. I
[2:44:10] would have to look back at the emails
and see if it was from something that
[2:44:13] Carl sent, something that Liz or Wayne
had gotten or if it came through my
[2:44:19] email. Most of that does not come
through my email. It goes to in info
[2:44:25] » at Marshall Township. So regardless, I
mean, I think it's the expectation that
[2:44:29] we're all checking email absolutely
every day is, you know, again, I'm not
[2:44:32] going to I have no idea what that system
is for each one of us, but the fact
[2:44:37] remains that not all of us have had the
opportunity to review it. So Rob, do you
[2:44:40] have any thoughts on that?
>> Well, you all should have the
[2:44:43] opportunity to review it. I mean,
whether you review it now um or postpone
[2:44:50] to give yourself a chance, I don't know.
I don't know what it says it whether it
[2:44:55] would impact like a condition on a site
plan or not. I have no idea. But
[2:45:00] » I haven't read it that myself to be able
to tell you that.
[2:45:03] » You know the
you might want to postpone action on the
[2:45:07] site plan until people have had the
opportunity to review. That's
[2:45:10] » and for our even our applicants as well
>> to address the address concerns. Okay.
[2:45:16] » Commissioners,
what is your pleasure related to that?
[2:45:20] » I can speak to a couple of these
comments. Well, thank you. Just hold for
[2:45:24] a second, Dylan. I appreciate it. We
still have not We're in deliberation.
[2:45:28] So,
>> it's all right, commissioners.
[2:45:35] » I may ask a question for the county.
What kind of timeline are you guys on?
[2:45:42] » I was trying to wrap up before the end
of the year.
[2:45:46] What I understood just because it came
from the back of the audience, what I
[2:45:49] heard him say was wrap up by the end of
the year. I think
[2:45:59] » I had this my name is Brandon Kener. I'm
with Var. I'm the project manager um for
[2:46:04] this is just a part of the project that
we're working on for this.
[2:46:06] » So tell me so so how does that relate to
Mid-Americ and
[2:46:10] » they're subcontractor?
>> Okay. Um
[2:46:14] » if we didn't if we weren't going through
this process, we'd have already broke
[2:46:17] ground on the solar. So um it's
significantly impeding the project. Uh
[2:46:24] given the this process was needed, we're
hoping to wrap up the project by the end
[2:46:28] of the year. The solar portion of the
project,
[2:46:30] » you can continue to work through winter
as long as the ground's not frozen.
[2:46:33] » Uh it's ground mount system, but it's
it's pretty quickly erected. So
[2:46:37] » Okay. So we still got some time then.
>> Yeah.
[2:46:39] » Okay. Thank you. Yeah.
>> So, you just made the statement that you
[2:46:42] have went ahead and started activity.
>> No, I said we would have had this not
[2:46:49] been we've gone through the consumer's
approval process. Um, and then this
[2:46:54] issue came up.
>> Thank you. Thank you very much,
[2:46:56] » commissioners.
>> I'd like an opportunity to review the
[2:47:00] letter.
>> Yep.
[2:47:01] » Is there a motion?
[2:47:06] We we table this
>> postpone action till the next meeting.
[2:47:11] » The very next meeting is the 22nd. I
said coming up. Could we do that at the
[2:47:15] special? Uh
>> I that's specifically for the public
[2:47:19] hearing for the master plan. Um
>> yeah regular schedule
[2:47:26] October 20th.
>> Oh gosh. Yeah.
[2:47:28] » Or 21st.
>> October 20th.
[2:47:30] » Oh wow. It's moving way. I mean
certainly it's within your bounds. If do
[2:47:36] you want to take it up on the 22nd as
the first item or something? You can do
[2:47:40] that.
>> I mean that's up to you.
[2:47:43] » I think that would be fair.
>> It's up to you. Somebody make
[2:47:46] » is it how long of a read is it? Is it
five minute 10 minute read?
[2:47:51] » Depends.
>> I I haven't read it fully myself. I feel
[2:47:56] more com frankly I'd feel more
comfortable if we postpone till that's
[2:48:00] just me and we can bring it up for a
vote make a motion and we'll take it
[2:48:03] from there but it's lengthy
>> just a quick question would you have to
[2:48:07] have a public hearing for this or
>> no this is a site plan so
[2:48:11] » I just wanted to check for
>> for advertising we'll [clears throat]
[2:48:16] talk about that later
>> yeah [laughter]
[2:48:19] » um I did you make a motion
>> um
[2:48:22] » I don't think nothing's been made yet
>> okay I'm sorry somebody said still in
[2:48:26] discussion.
>> Okay. Um so Rob, we could move it to the
[2:48:30] to
>> you could set anything you want. So if
[2:48:33] you want to It doesn't require public
hearing. So if you want to set it for
[2:48:37] next meeting.
>> I move that we um postpone action on the
[2:48:41] uh site plan until the [clears throat]
September what is it? 21st
[2:48:47] » 22nd.
>> September 22nd
[2:48:49] » till the second 22nd meeting. Okay. to
give the commission all commissioners
[2:48:54] time to review the
>> about three weeks.
[2:48:58] » The doggy [snorts] daycare and spa
um letter.
[2:49:04] » It would give them an opportunity to
read it and to respond to the doggy
[2:49:08] daycare
letter.
[2:49:11] » I have a motion. Is there a second?
>> I'll second.
[2:49:16] We have a motion by Commissioner Sly,
seconded by Commissioner Woods uh to
[2:49:20] postpone action on the site plan uh for
this item for the county road department
[2:49:26] until September 22nd of 26 and that
meeting is at 7:00.
[2:49:32] » The discussion.
>> Yes.
[2:49:34] » Did the letter come in time for us to
consider or did it miss a deadline that
[2:49:42] should have been here? They have the
people have the ability to present it as
[2:49:46] of the meeting. So, as long as it's here
before
[2:49:50] » you sit down and convene.
>> It dated the 27th.
[2:49:54] » Yeah. Dated the I'm sorry, Commissioner.
The 27th.
[2:49:57] » The only thing I'll add is I really
wanted to have our meeting on the 22nd
[2:50:02] to be devoted to the master plan to be
very honest. Um it's it's these are
[2:50:07] lengthy meetings as you can see even
this evening. Um but um I'll just leave
[2:50:12] it at that. So we have a motion. Um I'm
not going to do a roll call vote. Um we
[2:50:17] have a motion um on the table. Any
further discussion?
[2:50:22] » I think it's important that that we
review everything. Um if
[2:50:28] if we don't feel that the 22nd is a is
the time to um take action on it, I I
[2:50:36] would be willing to amend my motion to
to a different date.
[2:50:40] » I think we have a motion and a second. I
think we'll go ahead and call the vote
[2:50:43] if that's okay. I think if we
>> put the review
[2:50:50] first topic
before we go into the master plan knock
[2:50:55] that out because we know the master plan
is the major activity for that evening
[2:51:02] agree
>> okay
[2:51:05] I'm hearing is that we'd have that
towards the first thing on the business
[2:51:09] unfinished business
>> okay
[2:51:12] » all right with that Um, all those in
favor signify by saying I.
[2:51:16] » I.
>> All those opposed, same sign. I
[2:51:20] » And motion carries.
>> So, um, we please, I think you've just
[2:51:24] received a copy, right, of the hard
copy. I'm sure we can email it out to
[2:51:28] you as well. Um, do ask that you review
it and plan on, uh, the 22nd at 7:00.
[2:51:34] And, um, appreciate if you want to write
comments in ahead of time. Um, whatever
[2:51:39] you choose to do. Um, appreciate it.
Thank you for being here till 10 o'clock
[2:51:43] at night.
>> Thanks. All right, I gotta find my page,
[2:51:49] guys. I'm sorry. Uh, moving on to um
unfinished business. Do I did I skip
[2:51:54] anything? I don't think I did. Uh,
moving on to unfinished business. We had
[2:51:58] a presentation at our meeting on August
4th, I believe it was, from Next Era
[2:52:04] Serial City for consideration of the
pollinator fields in lie of trees. Um,
[2:52:10] we put on the agenda what our March 3rd,
2026 PC meeting, um, action was. Um, and
[2:52:18] commissioners, uh, I know it's getting
to the late hour here of whether or not
[2:52:21] you want to act on this now. We want to
postpone. Um, really, I think next year
[2:52:27] Serial City, I think this is even in the
administrator's report is wants to know
[2:52:31] what it is, you know, what what would we
like to do as a commission to relate to
[2:52:36] address this issue?
[2:52:42] Well, I made the motion before that we
reduce the number of trees from 700 to
[2:52:48] 300, and I think we should just stick by
that. They can put the pollinator fields
[2:52:53] in wherever they want, but the I think I
think the intent of the of the um trees
[2:52:59] and shrubs is to screen. And I don't
think a pollinator field does that. and
[2:53:05] I they they agreed to they agreed to the
amendment to the to the site plan. So I
[2:53:10] think I think we're being more than
accommodating by reducing the number of
[2:53:15] trees from 700 to 300.
>> So I it's my feeling we just stick with
[2:53:21] that.
>> Their pollinator field is going to be
[2:53:24] uped and plowed under when this when
their project is done and you know
[2:53:29] reached its life was the trees going to
be more of an everlap everlasting
[2:53:35] feature.
[2:53:38] » Shel,
>> I suggest we find a different place for
[2:53:41] those 300 trees because the landscape
architect has told us time and time
[2:53:45] again that we really don't have a place
out there to put 300 additional trees.
[2:53:50] We could consider contracting with a
different architect to see if maybe they
[2:53:54] can come up with a different location.
But the architect that was used for this
[2:53:59] project has stated and put it in writing
that there are no other places that he
[2:54:04] could find to put the trees on the
property.
[2:54:09] [clears throat]
>> Hus
[2:54:11] concern because that that keeps on
coming up and [snorts] it seems like
[2:54:16] next year has tried to find some place
to put these trees. The pro the adjacent
[2:54:21] property owners do not want them.
It's hard to force them to take them
[2:54:28] because it's their property. Once again,
we get back into that.
[2:54:31] » Dr. Steely is not going to let you put
threes on his property.
[2:54:36] Well, here's my comments on this is um I
don't I I'm way past the point of I
[2:54:42] understand um that based on our current
landscape architect, which is fine, that
[2:54:48] there's no room to put them for further
screening based on the type of tree or
[2:54:54] whatever all those reasons are, but I
think we haven't done our due diligence
[2:55:00] to potentially see if there are other
property owners than those that did not
[2:55:04] want them potenti potentially that would
want a tree somewhere in their yard um
[2:55:11] to be given that opportunity. That's
that's where I I sit with it. And
[2:55:16] [clears throat] is it can we help as a
township to reach out to the residents
[2:55:20] to try to figure that out? Of course,
we've said that all along. Um but um
[2:55:27] I don't think just saying that we're not
going to give you 300 trees is
[2:55:30] acceptable. That's just right.
>> I think there was another comment on on
[2:55:35] dollars.
>> Can we just ask for a monetary amount
[2:55:37] and get this over with?
>> I'd be in favor of that.
[2:55:41] » I I agree. I mean, this needs to be
over. I don't believe the idea that they
[2:55:46] talked to the residents. They didn't
talk to my kids. They didn't talk to the
[2:55:51] halfway house that's across the street
>> to go out and talk to them that I know
[2:55:55] of.
>> Right. I I know. I understand that. And
[2:55:58] And I've told the community people that
say it. I go, "Come on down to a meeting
[2:56:03] and tell us we want trees. Here I am.
Here's my name. Send me less trees."
[2:56:08] They don't come and do that. So
>> I, you know, I think that maybe just get
[2:56:14] a payoff, be done with it. We're
spending so much time on this that it's
[2:56:18] silly. I don't want to see him rewarded
by saying
[2:56:23] bees are nicer than trees. It's just
silly, you know. But get
[2:56:29] » pollinator fields in solar um commercial
solar areas are becoming very very
[2:56:34] popular right now. This is just
something that Next automatically is
[2:56:38] doing part of their due diligence when
they're out there putting them in. It
[2:56:43] was an idea because we couldn't come to
another resolution. When this one was
[2:56:48] presented I did mention, you know, this
is taking too long. I don't think we're
[2:56:52] going to ever come to a resolution. What
about the option of something monetarily
[2:56:57] coming to the township? Unless the
township can figure out 300 a place to
[2:57:01] put 300 trees, a variety of on some of
the parcels around here, I I don't see a
[2:57:09] way to get it out there.
>> I'd be agreeable to that to a monetary
[2:57:15] solution. And who's
>> in conjunction with the pollinator
[2:57:18] fields?
>> Huh?
[2:57:20] » In conjunction with the pollinator
fields [clears throat]
[2:57:23] » or are they doing those?
>> I believe they voted against them or
[2:57:27] didn't want them out there.
>> What?
[2:57:30] » I'm sorry. What are we talking about?
What? Who does
[2:57:31] » in He's saying instead of the
pollinator?
[2:57:34] » No, I think you're saying monetary and
pollinator fields.
[2:57:37] » Yeah.
>> Commissioner Wood. Sorry.
[2:57:40] » I guess I don't understand what our
decision. We have nothing to do with
[2:57:44] whether they plant pollinator
shrubs and trees and stuff on their
[2:57:48] property. It's their property. The the
plan showed out in the middle of the
[2:57:54] properties where they put little plots
with these wild flowers and stuff are
[2:57:59] pollinating. They have all the right to
do that whenever they want.
[2:58:03] » This is something they wanted to present
to try and come to an agreement so that
[2:58:08] this is not hanging out there and we
continue to talk about it month after
[2:58:11] month. So if commissioners it's it's our
opportunity you can make a motion
[2:58:16] whatever that might be whatever you
would would like. The only thought
[2:58:20] process that I will have again um we're
you discussing we don't have a motion
[2:58:24] but is whether or not um if we're going
to do monetary who's going to figure out
[2:58:29] what that is or maybe Shelley already
has an idea on that like on what trees
[2:58:33] there they were and how much they would
be that would include what the tree the
[2:58:37] labor everything that they would have
otherwise done you know [clears throat]
[2:58:41] just come up with a number
>> we have a public
[2:58:43] » I'm sorry we're not in public comment
time
[2:58:46] » Shelley do do you have any inclination
what would be Okay.
[2:58:50] » I was given some figures by the
landscape architect which I am not going
[2:58:53] to utilize. We will need to get our own
figures from somewhere.
[2:58:58] » Okay.
Would you be willing to negotiate with
[2:59:01] them?
>> I
[2:59:04] can I'm not going to go out and call
landscape companies and try and find
[2:59:08] out. That will be next era's job to do.
>> Leave this to an administrative function
[2:59:14] and be done with it. Uh as a board just
pass it on. Let Shel handle it.
[2:59:19] » You could certainly make that motion.
Whatever.
[2:59:23] » She doesn't want it.
>> I could [clears throat] We can come to
[2:59:26] an agreement. Obviously, I'd have to
bring it to someone at the township when
[2:59:31] they decide what monetary amount they're
going to give us if they will do so
[2:59:36] because I can't make that decision
myself. So, it would have to go to
[2:59:40] somebody.
>> And where does it go, too? Like, is it
[2:59:43] going in the general budget? I mean,
that's none of my business. I'm just
[2:59:45] saying.
>> That's what I'm thinking. That's what
[2:59:47] I'm thinking is like and where does it
go? Right.
[2:59:50] » Some sort of [snorts] charity um
function or something. Some sort of give
[2:59:55] back to community type thing.
>> It might come up, you know, somewhere
[3:00:00] sometimes
for a park.
[3:00:03] » Maybe [clears throat] the board can
figure that out, right?
[3:00:06] » To local residents
>> if they would.
[3:00:10] » It concerns me as a condition to be
telling them that they have to pay you
[3:00:13] money instead of doing some function.
that was approved site plan.
[3:00:17] » Yeah. Um
>> I'm just throwing that out there.
[3:00:21] » Okay. Is everybody Did everybody hear
what um Rob just mentioned?
[3:00:25] » No. I think that it concerns me a bit to
say you don't have to do something on
[3:00:29] the site plan in exchange you can pay us
some money.
[3:00:32] » I I don't think that you can just say
that. I mean they can offer it up,
[3:00:37] » right? You could say you're not allowing
the trees and maybe allow um uh the
[3:00:42] zoning administrator to negotiate, you
know, whatever uh the best that she can
[3:00:48] for the township in lie of the trees.
But I don't think you can demand that
[3:00:52] they pay you money uh for not putting
the trees. You don't have a ordinance in
[3:00:57] that. some places like if they remove
trees, require them to replace trees or
[3:01:01] pay into a tree fund, things of that
sort, but those are even difficult
[3:01:06] ordinances to to have. Um, so I'm
concerned that we just don't say, "Oh,
[3:01:11] they have to pay us instead of uh the
requirement." They can certainly offer
[3:01:17] and say we we're willing to pay you x
amount, you know, for into your general
[3:01:23] fund or towards parks or whatever it
might be. There you go.
[3:01:27] » Um, in exchange, you know, and then we
don't have to do the trees,
[3:01:32] » but that would have to be offer from
them.
[3:01:34] » Did they offer?
>> No.
[3:01:37] » Earlier in conversation back a year or
so ago, whatever, when
[3:01:43] we [snorts] made the agreement not to
put trees around Staley's property,
[3:01:48] » the house next door was gave $5,000. And
I I was told this I haven't seen it in
[3:01:54] paperwork that they gave her $5,000
instead of putting the trees up. So they
[3:02:02] have started the precedence. I don't
know if I can find documentation of it.
[3:02:07] » Speaking of Mrs. Staley, they did give
her some a check. I do not believe it
[3:02:11] was 5,000. She was supposed to go and
buy her own trees and have them planted.
[3:02:16] She has chosen not to do so.
>> Right. Yep. [snorts] I guess that's what
[3:02:20] I was referring to.
>> Okay,
[3:02:24] commissioners.
>> Yeah, I mean they could choose to pay
[3:02:27] the property owners, surrounding
property owners for planting of the
[3:02:31] trees and then it's on them whether or
not they do it. Like you said, they paid
[3:02:35] that person
>> and they just chose to
[3:02:38] » was that she was supposed to have those
trees planted. That's the only reason
[3:02:41] she got them.
>> Yeah, those are private private
[3:02:44] arrangements. I mean, not anything we
can dictate really of what you want
[3:02:48] [clears throat] somebody else's
property. [snorts]
[3:02:50] » Yeah.
>> But what if we ask for a credit for
[3:02:55] future
>> use? Just leave the credit with them.
[3:03:00] [sighs]
>> This is getting to be
[3:03:03] » to their escro.
>> This is getting to be
[3:03:05] » I I would think that probably the best
thing is if you still want to consider
[3:03:08] this issue, table it. go back to them
and say, "Hey, what would you know
[3:03:13] negotiate with them as to what they
might be able to do instead of the
[3:03:18] trees?"
>> And and they said, "What? A pollinator
[3:03:21] » pollinator field."
>> Originally, they had agreed. Originally,
[3:03:26] we said 300 trees. They said, "Yes,
we'll give you 300 trees." the township
[3:03:31] wanted them to
>> deliver them to the individuals and
[3:03:36] plant them at the residence and that was
not something that could be coordinated
[3:03:40] very well through any kind of a
landscape company or anything. So then
[3:03:44] they come up with the idea of the
pollinator fields.
[3:03:48] » So I think
>> as a new alternative
[3:03:50] » I think I think in all fairness though
should we at least respond to whether we
[3:03:54] want pollinator fields or not? Either
say yes or no to that too. I mean they
[3:03:58] did a presentation Do we want to at
least answer that and then postpone
[3:04:02] action to try to as Rob suggested
>> because if it's part of your site plan
[3:04:08] or part of the approval that they need
to do these trees then you're going to
[3:04:11] have to amend that as a planning
commission and remove it
[3:04:15] » if it's a condition.
>> Um so I would postpone it for now and I
[3:04:21] I I don't know enough about it. I know.
No, I know. I know. And then we don't
[3:04:25] want to put you on the spot on this
whole issue as you're sitting here next
[3:04:28] to us.
>> I know that we can't just say pay us
[3:04:30] money and you know to do it
>> or we have to amend the site plan
[3:04:34] because it was in the site plan.
>> Right.
[3:04:37] » Okay.
>> Make a motion to amend to give Shel time
[3:04:41] to come up with a plan to bring back to
the planning commission for
[3:04:47] uh for amendment to the site plan and
resolution.
[3:04:54] Is that too?
>> Commissioner Biller, I for clarificate.
[3:04:59] » Yeah, clarify.
>> Clarification of that motion. Are you
[3:05:02] saying um that you are um requesting
that the zoning administrator
[3:05:08] um propose an amendment to the site plan
and remove the trees?
[3:05:13] I'm suggesting that that we
[clears throat]
[3:05:16] and have the zoning administrator
um
[3:05:21] » come back with some final some
>> new
[3:05:27] project
[3:05:31] discussions with the next
[laughter]
[3:05:34] » so postpone the action and come up with
some other ideas.
[3:05:37] » Yeah. Yep. Exactly.
>> I got a question.
[3:05:41] » Okay. Wait. Is there a mo is there?
That's the motion. Does anybody want to
[3:05:44] second it?
>> That's the motion.
[3:05:46] » I think the motion was to postpone
action and allow our zoning
[3:05:50] administrator
opportunity to come up with other
[3:05:53] options.
>> That's exactly what I said.
[3:05:58] » Okay,
[3:06:02] » just keep going.
>> Another option.
[3:06:04] » Energizer Bunny.
>> How many we going to have?
[3:06:07] » Is Was there a second or did I No,
there's no second.
[3:06:10] » Second. Oh, the Steves. Okay, we've got
Steve Buller and Steve Riggs.
[3:06:16] Commissioner Riggs, Commissioner
Commissioner Buller, Commissioner Riggs.
[3:06:19] And the motion is to postpone action
this evening and allow time for our
[3:06:24] zoning administrator to work with next
year on other options.
[3:06:32] So for my own clarification that does
that mean no to the pollinator fields?
[3:06:39] » Discussion
Yeah, I didn't I didn't care for it.
[3:06:44] That could lead to that, but
>> So, we still want that on the table.
[3:06:48] » Wait a minute. Are we in the are we in
the discussion phase?
[3:06:50] » Yes. Sorry. You have a motion. Second.
>> I have [clears throat] a question for
[3:06:53] Rob then. If I understood Rob correctly
that anything other than the trees would
[3:07:01] require a site plan amendment. Correct.
So a pollinator field in li of the trees
[3:07:08] would we would have to do a site plan
amendment.
[3:07:10] » Sounds like the pollinator field was
already on the site plan.
[3:07:14] [clears throat] No no no no.
>> Okay.
[3:07:16] » No.
>> Yeah. So if you wanted to do uh you know
[3:07:20] then that should be part of your site
plan approval.
[3:07:23] » Sure. [laughter]
>> Well yeah. So so actually even if we
[3:07:27] approve the pollinator fields we've
still got to come back and
[3:07:30] » any would be a review. If you approve
the pollinator field, that would be an
[3:07:34] amendment to the site plan.
>> So, right now, what you're really
[3:07:38] considering are amendments to [snorts]
the plan. Okay.
[3:07:41] » You know, whether you don't require the
trees allow a pollinator field, but that
[3:07:45] doesn't sound like something that you
really like that concept. I mean, that
[3:07:49] was just kind of what I was hearing.
>> Amendment no matter what we do,
[3:07:53] » right? And so then you're saying the
motion is to send Shel back to tell
[3:07:56] them, "Yeah, we really don't like the
pollinator idea in exchange for the
[3:08:00] trees. Can you come up with a different
idea? And then see what they say.
[3:08:05] » This is this is getting to be so long
and drawn out situation. I don't think
[3:08:09] we're ever going to come to it.
>> We're not in a position to to them. It's
[3:08:13] it's going to have to be done outside of
this board.
[3:08:17] » Well, they can just they can come up
with other solutions.
[3:08:21] » They have you have to comply and put
[clears throat] in the trees or you have
[3:08:24] to release that as a condition the trees
without them here to make the offer.
[3:08:30] been talking about this for how many
years now?
[3:08:32] » Yeah. And I think it's time to
>> I don't I'm inclined to just accept the
[3:08:37] pollinator [laughter] fields
>> because I don't think [clears throat]
[3:08:39] we're ever going to come to a conclusion
with trees.
[3:08:42] » I don't I I don't think logistically
it's going to do get 300 and have them
[3:08:48] distributed. I don't I don't who in the
township is going to do all that? You
[3:08:52] know, I'm thinking with with all the
development that's going to be going on
[3:08:56] shortly, we're going to have some area
we're going to want to buffer. something
[3:09:00] that wasn't thought of that
>> we can buffer the properties down here.
[3:09:03] » Sure.
>> 425 to the city. They'll end up with the
[3:09:06] trees.
>> Yeah.
[3:09:07] » Plant all kinds of trees.
>> That or or
[3:09:10] » had the idea.
>> Oh, Richard had the idea, too.
[3:09:15] » Yeah. And again, like if they if you're
saying that they have to provide you
[3:09:19] these trees to buffer somewhere else
that um they're going to have to tell us
[3:09:26] that because you can't condition that.
You can't make a developer
[3:09:30] » do public improvements outside of the
>> sightines. So they're going to have to
[3:09:35] tell us that be okay with them to do
something like that.
[3:09:39] » And maybe they would agree to
>> but it'd be okay to ask.
[3:09:42] » Yeah, you could ask them, but they'd
have to be their agree. They have to say
[3:09:45] they we can't require that. We have no
ability to require that.
[3:09:50] » I missed that. I apologize for stepping
away. My only thought process I think
[3:09:54] we're still on the motion to postpone,
right? That's a discussion.
[3:09:57] » Yeah.
>> Is um
[3:09:59] » if we're not going to put them where
their purpose was intended, even with
[3:10:05] the site plan related to the solar or
the people around the solar, then I'm
[3:10:10] not supportive of putting them
elsewhere.
[3:10:14] » Yeah. I mean to me and I'm new to this
whole issue which seems like it's gone
[3:10:19] for a while
>> but if you don't want them to put in the
[3:10:22] trees then the simple solution is just
to amend it and not make sight
[3:10:26] » put in the additional trees and if they
want to do pollinator
[3:10:30] » if they're allowed to maybe they're
required to by the site plan I don't
[3:10:33] know if it's in there
>> can I withdraw my motion in in lie of
[3:10:37] Mr. flies. If you agree, you can do a
friendly amendment.
[3:10:40] » Amendment. Friendly. Has to be friendly.
>> I'd like to re withdraw my motion.
[3:10:49] » Is there an amendment to it or do you
agree to
[3:10:54] » I don't [clears throat] I'm just saying
I'm ready to be done with it because I
[3:10:56] don't think we're going to ever be able
to come to an agreement on trees, all
[3:11:00] the logistics of it.
>> The waters are too muddy, you know,
[3:11:04] at this point. I mean, we've been going
on about this for months and months, and
[3:11:09] Shel's put a lot of work into it, and we
still haven't come to a
[3:11:11] » long before I came on the board
>> where we could come to an agreement. I'm
[3:11:14] I'm inclined to just uh move that we
accept the pollinator fields and be done
[3:11:19] with it.
>> Okay. Wait a minute.
[3:11:22] » So,
would that require a site plan
[3:11:26] amendment?
>> It is, but that is what your motion.
[3:11:29] » Yeah. Okay. I move.
>> Why would we need why would we need a
[3:11:31] site plan for them to plant something on
their property?
[3:11:35] anything they do uh they're bound by
their site plan. It sounds like this is
[3:11:39] already part of the site plan.
>> No, no, the pollinator fields itself but
[3:11:43] the trees.
>> The trees. So, we got to amend the site
[3:11:47] plan to do away with the trees.
>> And if you and they've offered up that
[3:11:50] they will do a pollinator if you want
them to.
[3:11:53] » Yeah. And and due to the fact that the
owners where the trees were going to go
[3:11:56] don't want them. I mean, we were we were
doing the trees to protect them to begin
[3:12:01] with. Those owners don't want them.
[3:12:06] Okay, Shel.
>> Shel,
[3:12:08] » the prior zoning administrator
determined that these trees could be
[3:12:14] relocated on the property somewhere
else. Since that zoning administrator
[3:12:21] made that determination, can I make the
determination that we can remove those
[3:12:26] 700 trees from the site plan or does it
have to go back through planning
[3:12:30] commission? Well, I think I think the
planning comm I don't know what your
[3:12:36] ability as an administrative approval
under your zoning ordinance is. Do you
[3:12:40] have administrative ability to amend
site plans?
[3:12:43] » Yes.
>> Yeah. There's different levels of
[3:12:47] previous zoning administrator determined
that he had the authority to amend the
[3:12:51] site plan and make that determination.
So, I'm wondering if I had that same
[3:12:57] » administrative authority. It's the same
ordinance
[3:13:00] » and then it it is the same ordinance and
then it doesn't go through planning
[3:13:04] commission. Correct.
>> Right. Because you're making
[3:13:07] administrative uh review or
determination.
[3:13:13] » The only thing that I'll share with that
is,
[3:13:16] you know, I Shel can correct me on this,
but in our zoning ordinance, it's got
[3:13:20] like a one and a two or an A and a B or
whatever it is. you know, to agree to
[3:13:26] not have 700 trees as part of a site
plan,
[3:13:29] » maybe a major revision that should come
for but it's right here.
[3:13:34] » It's done now though. It's done now,
right?
[3:13:35] » And it's been done.
>> The previous administr uh some
[3:13:38] administrator.
>> So, I think you're so
[3:13:41] » you're deal with the issue right now. I
mean, if the motion Did you make a
[3:13:45] motion? I'm not sure if you made a
motion.
[3:13:46] » Yes.
>> Oh, what was the motion? Sorry, I didn't
[3:13:48] write. I move [clears throat]
I [snorts] don't know how I stated it. I
[3:13:54] I move that we
uh accept the pollinator fields as a
[3:14:00] site plan amendment in lie of the 300
trees that we had approved previously
[3:14:07] and then we'll be done with it.
>> Is there a second?
[3:14:10] » Second.
Okay, we got a motion by Commissioner
[3:14:13] Sly, seconded by Commissioner Redmond to
accept the pollinator fields in lie of
[3:14:17] the 300 trees from next era serial city
solar.
[3:14:24] Any further discussion?
[3:14:29] Okay.
Do we need a roll call vote?
[3:14:33] » Um I'm review
amendment.
[3:14:37] » Roll call.
>> Roll call vote. It is Secretary Woods.
[3:14:42] » Uh, Commissioner Riggs,
>> yes.
[3:14:45] » Mr. Summers,
>> no.
[3:14:47] » Commissioner Redmond,
>> yes.
[3:14:50] » Chair Johnson,
>> no.
[3:14:54] » Vice Chair Sly,
>> yes.
[3:14:57] » Commissioner Bowler,
[3:15:00] » yes.
>> Commissioner Woods, yes.
[3:15:06] Five to two. I'm done with it,
>> Shelly. Yay.
[3:15:11] [laughter]
>> All right. [snorts]
[3:15:13] » Thank you, commissioners. I appreciate
it very much.
[3:15:16] » Now, you can let us know when the
pollinator fields are starting up. Yeah.
[3:15:19] All right. Very good. All right. Um,
commissioners, we are now in audience.
[3:15:23] We are now under uh unfinished business.
Um, item B and this is the reasonzoning
[3:15:31] applications for Marshall Area Economic
Development Alliance of 31 parcels. Um
[3:15:36] commissioners just a couple thing before
we get started is um we have a packet
[3:15:41] and um many of us were present for our
August 4th meeting. Um following our
[3:15:47] August 4th meeting, I tried and you have
it in the packet here. Tried to take
[3:15:52] what we said at that meeting related to
a workshop is what we heard, a
[3:15:56] presentation workshop as well as a map,
a big map and then um I think I even
[3:16:02] shared the meeting or maybe it was in my
notes here afterwards. Um
[3:16:08] parcel GIS parcel map of each one of
these, right? Um so since that time we
[3:16:13] also received um uh Mr. Lindseay from
the audience also sent a letter to um
[3:16:19] email pardon me to Mr. Thaw um and it
was dated August 13th and it is in the
[3:16:26] packet. I'm not going to read it in its
entirety except for one paragraph. So,
[3:16:30] um, we'll make sure that this is
reflected in the minutes. And it says,
[3:16:34] um, the PC determined at the August 4th
meeting, not all capital, to set the
[3:16:39] public ma the matter for a public
hearing on September 1st of 2026.
[3:16:43] Instead, the request was made for the
scheduling of a separate meeting not
[3:16:47] required of any other applicants, past
or present, um, to come back and answer
[3:16:52] questions about MA's quote plans.
Subsequent to that request, nine days
[3:16:57] have elapsed and despite follow-up
emails, no separate meeting has been
[3:17:01] scheduled. Instead, the chair, I think
that means me, unilaterally is
[3:17:05] requesting various documents that are
not required by the township ordinance
[3:17:09] and which are not required for
submissions by other applicants. Her
[3:17:13] requests appear to be discriminatory
as to ma relative to other applicants.
[3:17:18] And it appears that MA has been singled
out for a different process than any
[3:17:23] other applicant in the township. The
appearance is the public hearing is
[3:17:27] being delayed for some unstated purpose.
So I will share some comments on that
[3:17:31] before we get to the scheduling that is
commissioners. We were many of us were
[3:17:36] present at the August 4th meeting. We
spoke at length about cooperation. I
[3:17:40] think we heard a lot about cooperation
at that meeting um and the importance of
[3:17:44] it. And I ask each of you whether this
email sent to our attorney by Mr.
[3:17:50] Lindseay reflects the cooperative
approach that was discussed. I think we
[3:17:53] even had the chair of the board here
talking about being a straight shooter.
[3:17:56] I think that's what we we heard at that
meeting. This is not reflective of a
[3:18:01] cooperative effort. The plan as a plan
commissioners, I'm going speak for
[3:18:04] myself. We have a clear responsibility
under the zoning ordinance and the
[3:18:08] Michigan zoning enabling act to request
information necessary to conduct a
[3:18:12] complete and accurate review of any
matter brought to us. Due diligent is
[3:18:16] not optional. It is required. Our
obligations to the township, to the
[3:18:19] public, and to the integrity of the
planning process. With respect to the
[3:18:23] reference made about eight years of past
practice, I will simply note that there
[3:18:27] is substantial documented history of
items that were not accurate or
[3:18:30] appropriately completed during that
period, not to mention the zoning map.
[3:18:34] We are committed to moving forward and
improving our processes, but it is
[3:18:37] important to understand that past
practice does not override ordinance
[3:18:40] requirements. I will also be clear, I
will not have my integrity questioned.
[3:18:45] The tone and content of that email sent
to our attorney raises concerns that
[3:18:48] communication may be intended to
pressure, intimidate, or retaliate
[3:18:52] against the planning commission for
performing its statuary statutory
[3:18:55] duties. That is not acceptable. We will
continue to focus forward and we will
[3:18:59] continue to act responsibility. However,
we will not allow anyone's sense of
[3:19:03] urgency to override the legal and
procedural obligations we are required.
[3:19:07] That zoning report that you attached
that email was handed out at that
[3:19:10] meeting. So, in full disclosure, I'm not
going to I'm not going to have this type
[3:19:16] of retaliation towards me, directed
towards me when we had a unanimous vote
[3:19:21] of this commission on how we were going
to handle that. And I will leave it at
[3:19:25] that. So, moving on, Shel.
>> I didn't realize that I had to have a
[3:19:30] full complete zoning administrator's
report for the planning commission to
[3:19:34] set a public hearing.
>> Well, the key to it is it was still
[3:19:37] handed out at that meeting.
>> I wanted to state thank you.
[3:19:42] » The bottom line is that doesn't excuse
the email. So, with that, moving
[3:19:46] forward, commissioners, did I miss
anything? Was that didn't we hear a lot
[3:19:49] about cooperation at that meeting?
>> Yep, it was. And we all voted on it.
[3:19:54] I was I was taken back by the response.
>> Moving on and we will be setting and and
[3:20:01] moving forward
>> with that we have what I heard at that
[3:20:07] meeting and is reflected in the minutes
and commissioner I believe it was you
[3:20:10] who had asked for either a workshop or a
presentation and then we have before us
[3:20:15] whether or not we want to how to proceed
with setting public hearing dates. I
[3:20:19] don't know that we've ever had 31 zoning
applications at one time. So,
[3:20:24] commissioners, I will leave it to you um
on on how you would like to proceed
[3:20:27] forward.
[3:20:40] » Appreciate a lawyerly
point of view on how we should address
[3:20:46] 31.
>> Yeah. So, I mean obligations.
[3:20:49] » Yeah. It is unusual to have 31 reszoning
applications at one time from an
[3:20:54] applicant. Um, what I would do is if I
were looking at this, I mean, each one
[3:20:59] is going to have to be done separately.
And what I would do is I would set them
[3:21:04] all for a date for a public hearing. You
get through what you get through. And if
[3:21:09] there's more, then you set another date
to get through the rest of them. And if
[3:21:14] there's more, you set another date. But
you set them all originally for a
[3:21:18] hearing date and you [snorts] just work
yourself because you don't know how many
[3:21:22] you might get through. Um you just work
yourself through them. Whatever's left
[3:21:26] then you would postpone to the next
meeting. Work [clears throat] through
[3:21:29] that. If there's more then you postpone
the rest to the next you know however
[3:21:34] meetings it would take to get through
it. You would do that because they're
[3:21:37] each separate public hearings uh as
separate applications. And um you know,
[3:21:44] but I wouldn't just say, "Oh, it's a set
two and then set two." Set them all. You
[3:21:49] get as far as you can get and then you
just postpone the remainders to the a
[3:21:55] subsequent meeting. That's what I would
recommend. And and really you shouldn't
[3:22:00] I know you want to have a presentation
on it, but really a presentate once they
[3:22:04] file their application, it should all
come under the public hearing. So when
[3:22:07] they do a presentation, we want that to
be part of the public hearing. It should
[3:22:11] be part of the record that's set for
that public hearing. So really it would
[3:22:16] be I would say you set it for a public
hearing. They they certainly can then
[3:22:20] pres make a presentation to us. These
are I'll just state this too though
[3:22:25] these are uh traditional reszoning
requests. So they don't tell us specific
[3:22:30] uses. I know the public was like well
what's going to be on there? Well a
[3:22:35] traditional reszoning is just to
anything within that zoning district. uh
[3:22:39] any permitted or special land use. They
don't have to. But then when you're
[3:22:43] considering it, you'll consider all the
potential land uses in that district.
[3:22:48] There's also I mean they didn't do it
this way, but and I don't know how
[3:22:51] familiar you are with conditional
reszoning, but that's a different
[3:22:54] process where they actually say, "Okay,
we're going to put this use here." you
[3:22:59] know, uh, we want it reszone to, uh,
light industrial and this is going to be
[3:23:05] the use on it and we will set aside all
the other uses in that district. It's
[3:23:11] just going to be this. So, you kind of
know what's going to go on there. This
[3:23:14] is not the way this came forward. It's a
traditional reasonzoning and that's
[3:23:18] something that you'll consider when you
look at the standards and you know I'll
[3:23:22] review all the standards with you that
you need to uh go over uh when you
[3:23:26] review these but really it would be set
it for a public hearing get through as
[3:23:32] many of the hearings as possible and
then whatever you don't you postpone to
[3:23:37] the next meeting.
>> Okay. So my question would be so we only
[3:23:42] need to have one public hearing? No, you
No.
[3:23:47] » So if if we get okay, say we set a
public hearing for
[3:23:51] » our October meeting and we get through
five of them,
[3:23:55] » right?
>> So then do we have to set another public
[3:23:57] hearing for the next ones?
>> No. So that's what I'm saying. This this
[3:24:00] all falls under one public hearing,
>> right? One date for public hearings. So
[3:24:04] it's noticed out as we're going to
consider all these. You get through as
[3:24:09] many as you can get through and as long
as you uh do a time table. So like you
[3:24:15] table it to [clears throat] postpone it
to a date certain the next meeting you
[3:24:18] say what date it is you say what time it
is then you don't have to republish
[3:24:23] notice each time uh because you've
noticed it all for the one hearing if
[3:24:27] you move more forward then they just
move forward from that public hearing
[3:24:32] from the meeting. Okay.
>> So so then my next question would be how
[3:24:36] how do we determine how many we get
through? Is it on time or I mean is that
[3:24:40] up to us or
>> It is up to you. Like you could set uh
[3:24:44] that we're going to meet for x number of
hours and whatever we get through and
[3:24:48] that many planning commissions, you
know, they they say like we're only
[3:24:52] going to meet for x amount of time and
whatever we get through we get through.
[3:24:56] Whatever we don't we set to the next
meeting because you might not be wanting
[3:25:00] to act on reszoning say at you know
10:30 at night. Would would that be
[3:25:06] would that be something that we need to
put in the motion w for the public
[3:25:09] hearing?
>> Uh, no. I think when you're when you're
[3:25:12] » just do it at the meeting.
>> When you're at the meeting, I think you
[3:25:14] would somebody could make a procedural
motion to say, "Okay, we're going to go
[3:25:18] until
>> until 9:00 or whatever." Okay.
[3:25:20] » So, so Rob, if we pick a specific date
and we, you know, we're going to we're
[3:25:24] going to advertise or or notice all of
31 parcels. We would also send that out.
[3:25:30] I mean it might be majority made but
send it out [snorts] to all the parcel
[3:25:33] » everybody
>> the 300 within 300 for that everybody
[3:25:38] within the
>> everybody you you'll have published
[3:25:39] notice and you'll have the mailed notice
for the whole all the restorings
[3:25:46] » can I make a suggestion
the properties and I think Mr. Lindsay
[3:25:52] will agree with me. The properties that
are becoming crucial are the ones
[3:25:58] adjacent to Michigan Avenue starting at
13 Mile Road and going
[3:26:03] [cough and clears throat] to 12mile Road
because MD DOT's going into
[3:26:08] construction. And these properties need
to be in need to be they need to be
[3:26:15] considered not then making us do all of
them. the ones that are along the road
[3:26:21] need to be done.
>> Prioritize.
[3:26:23] » Yeah. Priorities. So we the problem with
us, we go through this packet, we try to
[3:26:27] look at 31 different things. If we knew
that there was eight of them down
[3:26:32] through here, boom, boom, boom.
>> Those are the ones to consider. Then we
[3:26:36] could research and look at them.
>> Yeah, that makes sense to you guys.
[3:26:41] » That'd be part of the process.
>> Yeah, I think they could tell us if
[3:26:44] there's certain
>> tell us which ones are prioritized. that
[3:26:48] would be more priority.
>> They're grouped.
[3:26:50] » Originally, they dropped off one
application for all 31. Um, I had spoke
[3:26:55] to Dave Bosard regarding this project
and I had even spoken to Rob about it.
[3:27:02] Um, there was a thought that we could
have done five or six applications and
[3:27:07] included all of the parcels that are
adjacent. What I got from Erin is a map
[3:27:15] showing what their thoughts are going to
be in the future because your IP has to
[3:27:20] have 330 foot of frontage and 5 acres.
None of these a majority of these
[3:27:25] parcels do not meet that. They also
don't meet a they don't meet other
[3:27:30] districts that they're in. But you could
consider grouping them like this. This
[3:27:35] is one individual parcel. This is an
individual parcel. And then there are
[3:27:39] four that have combinations of parcels.
>> And and that would that would be more
[3:27:44] common is what I would see with a
resoning is not just a single parcel,
[3:27:49] but a group of adjacent parcels can be
put together um for reson. So a lot of
[3:27:55] times the reasonzoning might cover a
larger area, one resoning. And I think
[3:28:01] um what you just showed there shows like
a grouping of so maybe when you take
[3:28:05] your public hearings you could take it
by group if that's how they are because
[3:28:11] that makes sense that you take the
contiguous parcels right
[3:28:14] » is one group the next contiguous set of
parcels is another and so forth. So you
[3:28:19] could take it that way too. Yeah, I
think in the packet and maybe it matches
[3:28:22] that it's got the
>> prioritizing
[3:28:24] » the different tables, table one, table
two,
[3:28:27] » different tables in here, too.
>> And you could even then take you could
[3:28:31] open the hearings on each parcel within
a group and then discuss them together.
[3:28:37] If it's if it's really one
reszone area and then you're considering
[3:28:43] whether that whole area to be reszoned,
the a lot of different things are on the
[3:28:48] table for the planning commission,
whether it's that whole contiguous area
[3:28:52] or maybe a property not in that, you
know, that you peel something off.
[3:28:56] There's different things that you can
look at. Um,
[3:29:00] but maybe that's a good way to do it is
if it is grouped to do it by groups. But
[3:29:06] I think what you do is you'd notice it
all for public hearing and then if we
[3:29:10] have groups then we could do do it by
group.
[3:29:15] And I think when we um when I was
following up from that meeting just
[3:29:19] looking at your schedule as well and I
know you had a court case but we were
[3:29:22] trying to figure out some dates so that
we could you know didn't we weren't sure
[3:29:26] what we were doing with the presentation
other than what was said at the workshop
[3:29:29] and like you said we can include it
which I noted that we could potentially
[3:29:32] include it as far as part of the public
hearing date. The dates that were thrown
[3:29:37] out were, you know, do we want to have a
special meeting in se, you know,
[3:29:40] September 16th, 18th, October 21st,
23rd? Do we want a part of our meeting
[3:29:45] on the 20th? Start there. I mean, that's
I'm just throwing out these dates
[3:29:48] because your availability and you know
what whatever the PC wants to do,
[3:29:55] » have to factor in the noticing.
>> Yes, that's what I was going to say. How
[3:29:59] long is it going to take to get to get
property notices out for 31 properties?
[3:30:04] We can't set a date until we know that
we can have
[3:30:08] » Well, you could set it. Just has to be
farther enough out that we have to have
[3:30:11] 15 days notice in the newspaper. What's
the lead time for your paper?
[3:30:15] » No concern about 31 properties and
getting them all done. I will have all
[3:30:19] of the um addresses and everything. They
will just get mailed out just like any
[3:30:22] other application would
>> put all the hearing all in one. I think
[3:30:26] we can put it in one block. [snorts]
It's not like we have to do every one
[3:30:29] block. No, but you what I'm asking is
you've got to you got to mail out
[3:30:34] property notices to the people.
>> Yeah, there's
[3:30:37] » a majority of them.
>> Well, you got the people across the
[3:30:40] road.
>> It's not going to be a problem getting
[3:30:42] those addresses and being able to get
the notices out there
[3:30:46] that are the biggest hurdle which is
>> and I I put this in that one email I
[3:30:52] sent out. It's 15 days we take what is
the previous Saturday because that would
[3:30:56] be the newspaper and the advisor. we
have to have it in by that Monday before
[3:31:02] whatever is whatever that 15 days you
take it back whatever that previous
[3:31:06] Saturday is and then it has to be uh the
the previous Monday. So as long as we
[3:31:12] have the information to be able to write
out those notices [clears throat] we can
[3:31:18] send them out but we need that lead time
before then. So if if like Carl needs to
[3:31:23] do something or Shel needs to do
something, they may need a little bit
[3:31:26] more days, you know, beyond that Monday.
You can't be like, "Oh, that Monday."
[3:31:30] But just we have to have the information
by that that Monday so that we can send
[3:31:34] it to the newspaper. Um our contact
>> that [clears throat] that doesn't help.
[3:31:39] I mean, you're you got to give us you
got to give us how many days how many
[3:31:43] how many days notice do you need?
>> It depends on the day you pick is what
[3:31:46] I'm trying to say. So you need 15 days.
What's the lead? The lead time for the
[3:31:52] paper is how many days?
>> You have the Monday before
[3:31:57] it's the Monday. [clears throat]
Our contacts at the newspaper said that
[3:32:00] they want it on the Monday before uh uh
before that Saturday.
[3:32:06] » So, it's got to be
five days.
[3:32:10] » Well, on August 12th though,
>> so it's 20 days.
[3:32:12] » What I understood from our conversation
>> Wayne was two months. I said if you want
[3:32:18] to put it on so this is what I said if
you want to put it on the the meeting
[3:32:24] a normal typical [clears throat]
planning commission meeting the issues
[3:32:28] that arise is this is a Tuesday Carl
only works on Wednesday and then he's
[3:32:34] not there until the following Monday so
Carl has a partner and then Carl gets
[3:32:40] some of that information from the
assessor which is on Tuesday so you just
[3:32:45] need to have it's a But we can advance
before that because of who we have in
[3:32:49] the office that can get get the
information out and he has access to it
[3:32:53] as well. But you know that's not the
only thing he does.
[3:32:56] » You know like
>> I think our schedule meeting in October
[3:33:00] is the date.
>> Yeah.
[3:33:01] » I I put it all in black and white in
that email and explain exactly how it
[3:33:05] should go.
>> It's been changed.
[3:33:09] » Whatever the first two
>> that makes sense. I mean
[3:33:12] » that gives us enough.
>> What was that? I didn't hear it. What
[3:33:15] was that?
>> I said it's I put it in that I tried to
[3:33:18] spell it out in that one email of
exactly what it what it looks like. So,
[3:33:22] like I said, I said if you're going to
try to do it on a planning commission
[3:33:27] normal meeting, it's easier if you're
like we're in September. It's easier to
[3:33:31] put it on the November because we can
definitely make it. It's a really tight
[3:33:35] turnaround to get it on the normal
planning commission meeting for the next
[3:33:40] month just because of all all the the
deadlines that have to happen and who
[3:33:45] would who's responsible for what within
the office. That's all I'm saying.
[3:33:49] » That's exactly what I was asking. How
long do you need? And you said two
[3:33:52] months now.
>> I said I said if you don't do a special
[3:33:56] meeting, if you do a special meeting,
yes,
[3:33:59] » you can do it sooner.
>> Okay.
[3:34:02] So, are there what dates work?
>> Could could we do it at the at the
[3:34:08] October
>> meeting? Because isn't that later in the
[3:34:10] month anyways, like the 20th
stuff
[3:34:13] » and then can we do it as a special
meeting and do it like an hour before
[3:34:17] the regular meeting and then that would
give us an hour to do that and then we
[3:34:22] we do another hour and a month later.
>> We don't know what that meeting is going
[3:34:26] to entail by the time October gets here.
I think our October meeting, whatever
[3:34:31] day it's now scheduled on,
>> are we?
[3:34:35] » The 20th is our
>> I thought in that email we got from you,
[3:34:40] Joanna, and we talked about changing it
to October 21st.
[3:34:44] » Well, that was just I was trying to
check the availability of Rob. So,
[3:34:49] » Right.
>> Yeah.
[3:34:53] I [cough] mean, the 20th
[clears throat and snorts] I normally do
[3:34:55] have a meeting that night. So,
I mean the 21st
[3:35:00] looks better.
>> Everybody hear that?
[3:35:04] » October 21st.
>> So, we would potentially have a special
[3:35:08] meeting of what I'm hearing for October
21st if that works.
[3:35:14] » That's a Wednesday
[3:35:20] meeting.
>> We changed that. remember
[3:35:23] » October 21st. Is that a
>> Wednesday?
[3:35:26] » I'm sorry, guys. What does it say here?
[clears throat]
[3:35:29] » We've got October 20th. What day is
October 20th?
[3:35:32] » Tuesday is Tuesday. It's Tuesday
>> is our regular meeting now.
[3:35:35] » Yes. For that month.
>> Yeah.
[3:35:37] » But Rob can't make that date. So, we
would change our regular meeting for
[3:35:41] October to the 21st
>> to accommodate Rob.
[3:35:45] » I see. Okay. Hang on.
>> [clears throat]
[3:35:50] » You want to wait a minute?
>> Shelley, you said we didn't know how
[3:35:56] much we were going to have on the 21st.
[clears throat]
[3:36:00] » It won't be this much.
>> We don't have any idea what's going to
[3:36:03] be on the October meeting. We've got a
long way until the October meeting here.
[3:36:07] So,
>> people the next meeting.
[3:36:11] » Well, I mean, it's got to be in order.
Yeah. I mean, we're
[3:36:14] » right. I mean, this might be full. I
would say this will be Do we do take a
[3:36:20] number and whoever comes in first gets
seen first and [clears throat] everybody
[3:36:24] after that does not get
>> Well, I don't anticipate we'll even see
[3:36:29] anybody.
>> Well, no, she doesn't. What she's saying
[3:36:32] is she doesn't know what's going to come
in for the
[3:36:34] » for the meeting.
>> Yeah, that we have no idea what might be
[3:36:38] before the planning commission for the
October meeting at this point,
[3:36:41] » right? But as far as the reasonzoning,
[3:36:46] » that's where we
adjust the group hearings, the bar
[3:36:53] [snorts]
>> based upon whatever's on the agenda for
[3:36:55] that evening,
>> but Rob can't make the 20th
[3:36:59] » our regular meeting.
>> So 21st. [clears throat]
[3:37:02] » So do you want to bump the regular
meeting to the 21st? You want to have a
[3:37:05] regular meeting on the 20th and a
special meeting for the
[3:37:09] » So have a meeting back to back?
>> Yeah. I don't know. That's what I'm
[3:37:12] asking.
>> You guys decide. I mean, somebody make a
[3:37:15] motion.
>> I'd rather have one meeting and if if we
[3:37:19] want to if we're worried about it, I'd
rather do it before the regular meeting
[3:37:24] » so we don't have to vote on it at
>> I don't even I can't even see. It's so
[3:37:30] blurry. 201
>> a couple hours. It will be the next day.
[3:37:35] like the 20th meeting last two days.
>> It's ridiculous.
[3:37:41] » Our board rules and I I haven't followed
it. Well, but it says it should end at
[3:37:46] 10 unless unanimous consent
>> board or I don't know what your
[3:37:52] » We don't have that. We don't have
>> I have no idea.
[3:37:55] » Should have bylaws.
>> It's not in our bylaws.
[3:37:57] » I don't have anything like that in our
bylaws.
[3:38:00] » But maybe we should have put something
like that in our bylaws. Sorry, guys.
[3:38:03] » All right. Yeah, most boards put
[3:38:12] » we could if we if we bump the meeting to
the 21st
[3:38:18] might be wasting Rob's time
and
[3:38:22] we have and and if we have a lot of
stuff come in what comes first?
[3:38:30] The public hearing.
I mean just my opinion is you take what
[3:38:35] comes in first first. So like this first
you might tell the next people if they
[3:38:41] file application they're not going to be
heard until November
[3:38:43] » because the October meeting is full.
>> Okay.
[3:38:50] » Let's move the [laughter] meeting to
>> Okay. I'm going to make a motion.
[3:38:54] unheard of here, but let's make a motion
that um we begin the process of the
[3:39:00] public hearing for the resoning
applications of MA to October 21st and
[3:39:08] we will also change our meeting date
from October 20th to October 21st.
[3:39:12] » Yep.
>> Support.
[3:39:17] And then um
>> is [clears throat] that slide? Um and
[3:39:21] then during that, I know there's been a
lot of questions we've had from Aaron,
[3:39:25] Shelley's had them. Um Mr. Lindsay has
as well on what the presentation would
[3:39:31] include. And Commissioner Buller, I'm
putting you on the spot because I know
[3:39:34] you mentioned a workshop. Is there
anything specific you want included in
[3:39:37] that you'd like them the the applicants
to present? Yeah,
[3:39:41] » you got to go into it like like we don't
know anything about what they're
[3:39:46] proposing and what they're wanting to
do. And um I wasn't on the plan
[3:39:49] commission when the when everything the
mega site started. I have no idea how
[3:39:54] all that came to be. It's baffling how
that all happened.
[3:40:00] » So yeah, I'd like a complete education
presentation on
[3:40:08] » on the project.
>> Okay. how how it all ties in how
[3:40:11] everything you know start from the
beginning and how did we get to where
[3:40:15] we're at.
>> Commissioners, anything else so that we
[3:40:18] have it for the record again on what you
want.
[3:40:21] » Two things. Let me get your motion
first. Actually, please. Motion by
[3:40:26] Commissioner Johnson, seconded by
Commissioner Sly, that we have the we
[3:40:30] begin the resoning applications for MA
on October 21st and we also make that
[3:40:36] our regular meeting of October 21st
instead of October 20th.
[3:40:39] » Okay.
>> I don't think I said it the exact same
[3:40:41] way, but that's one [snorts]
[3:40:49] » Did I interrupt somebody? Is there
anybody any other thing else? Go ahead.
[3:40:53] And just can you say that you resolve
and then we're going to do it by roll
[3:40:56] call vote because you're making a new
regular meeting.
[3:41:01] » Okay.
>> Okay. So her motion is to resolve to do
[3:41:05] that.
>> Okay. I resolve to do that.
[3:41:07] » Resolve to begin the process.
>> Resolve to set the meeting. It just just
[3:41:12] started out by saying that she resolved.
[sighs]
[3:41:19] Um the motion is by commiss commissioner
Johnson seconded by Commissioner Sai to
[3:41:24] resolve that the we begin the
reasonzoning applications of MA on
[3:41:28] October 21st and we resolve to have our
meeting moved from October 20th to
[3:41:33] October 21st
>> because then it's a regular meeting not
[3:41:37] a special
[3:41:41] » further discussion is there anything
else you want presented please so that
[3:41:44] we answer the question okay I hear what
What I hear is information about how
[3:41:52] this all began, the whole parcel, the
whole area, and then, you know, probably
[3:41:57] putting some of these maps up on the
screen. So, okay.
[3:42:06] » I don't know how what Steve,
Commissioner Buller, is asking
[3:42:11] refers to the motion at all. I
understand what you want to happen. It
[3:42:16] was it was just a discussion after the
motion.
[3:42:23] » Erin,
>> no. Erin, at our non-meating for the
[3:42:29] board back in June, you were prepared to
give a presentation
[3:42:35] of
of a
[3:42:39] made a wish type scenario for that area.
Would that cover what some of what we're
[3:42:48] asking of you as far as the
presentation? [clears throat]
[3:42:50] » It could. Yeah. So, that presentation
relates to the development plan that MA
[3:42:55] has produced for the campus, which is a
part of why this resoning request has
[3:43:01] come through. So, I think we can tie
some of that with the more specifics
[3:43:06] regarding the request and how it meets
the criteria of the township and
[3:43:11] hopefully meet what you guys want. And
obviously you can ask questions, we can
[3:43:15] go through it. But yeah, I mean we're
we're totally open to grouping parcels
[3:43:19] as was discussed. Um, you know, it was
requested that we do 31 separate
[3:43:24] applications and so that's how we
submitted it. But like there are
[3:43:27] groupings of parcels that can be looked
at more collectively as opposed to
[3:43:30] individual parcels because to Shell's
point like they don't meet the five acre
[3:43:34] requirement on their own, right? And so
we can we can talk to that and speak to
[3:43:38] it.
I was just trying to so I know that you
[3:43:42] prepared to give presentation that
[clears throat] evening but couldn't you
[3:43:46] showed me a little bit after the meeting
was adjourned
[3:43:51] that hey this is what I had was going to
give and I'm just thinking that that
[3:43:55] presentation kind of offer
>> Yeah. Yeah. I think we can tie what we
[3:43:59] were planning to do that evening with
the application if that's desirable for
[3:44:03] the for the PC. Just
>> trying to y
[3:44:05] » connect things there see if that would
help at all. Okay. Thanks.
[3:44:11] » Any other comments?
With that, Secretary Woods, roll call
[3:44:16] vote, please.
>> Mr. Summers.
[3:44:20] » Yes.
>> Commissioner Redmond,
[3:44:23] » yes.
[clears throat]
[3:44:25] » Chair Johnson,
>> yes.
[3:44:27] » Vice Chair Sly,
>> yes.
[3:44:30] » Commissioner Buller,
>> yes.
[3:44:32] » Secretary Woods, yes. Commissioner
Ruigs,
[3:44:35] » yes.
>> 70. Commissioners, at this late hour, it
[3:44:39] is 10:45. Um, I'm going to ask if it's
okay if we get through new business and
[3:44:45] public comments, maybe commissioner
comments, but the rest of the
[3:44:48] communications, can we just unless
there's something really
[3:44:52] earthshattering? So, can we just
postpone that or just add it to our next
[3:44:56] meeting?
Anybody good with that?
[3:45:00] » All right, let's get to the next item
and then we'll see [clears throat] how
[3:45:02] how quick we get through it. But I'm
hoping that we can forego communications
[3:45:06] for this evening. Amen.
>> Um meeting schedule. Um we have a
[3:45:12] November meeting date and it's at the
fire station unless there's an emergency
[3:45:17] here, but there's an election. Um so we
can't use this room and you know we can
[3:45:22] I'm just trying to figure out if we can
we can do this at another meeting too in
[3:45:25] October. But can we not have a meeting
at the fire station and try to
[3:45:30] reschedule that meeting so we can have
it here? I mean, it was no fault of
[3:45:34] anybody, but it was we wasn't recorded
and we've learned to rely on that. And
[3:45:38] » sounds good.
>> So, the only thought process I w I had
[3:45:41] was does the 9th or 11th work for
anybody that week if the call is open?
[3:45:51] » November 9th or 11th.
[3:45:58] » You want to make a motion?
resolve to change that meeting.
[3:46:04] » I'll make a motion.
>> Which date?
[3:46:11] » 11th. You said
>> I'm just throwing that out there.
[3:46:13] Whatever.
>> Either one.
[3:46:15] » Either way.
>> Either way.
[3:46:16] » Let's go.
>> What day is election day? The 3rd.
[3:46:21] » On the third. The third.
>> November 3rd. What is everybody doing?
[3:46:25] » Okay. You
>> What is the motion, Commissioner Woods?
[3:46:29] to change the resolve to change the
November meeting date from November
[3:46:35] » 3rd to November 11th.
>> Sounds good to me.
[3:46:40] » Okay.
>> Is there a second?
[3:46:44] [snorts]
[3:46:47] » Summers.
Any further discussion?
[3:46:51] Okay. All those in favor signify.
>> I'm sorry.
[3:46:54] » The 11th.
>> The 11th.
[3:46:55] » 11th. Okay.
All those in favor signify by saying I.
[3:47:00] » I.
>> All those opposed, same sign.
[3:47:02] » A holiday. It's just a holiday.
[3:47:08] » Is the 11th?
>> Is that a I'm just saying. Is that a
[3:47:11] government?
>> He's our veteran.
[3:47:13] » So,
>> you're going to be able to come
[3:47:14] » for this township holiday?
>> No.
[3:47:17] » No.
>> Is that okay? Yes. Okay.
[3:47:21] » He's our veteran.
>> Okay.
[3:47:23] » He asked for it. Um, and I want to thank
the Michigan Department of
[3:47:27] Transportation, who I think the attorney
is in the audience. This is [laughter]
[3:47:31] really not normal, honest. Um, but
resoning applications from the Michigan
[3:47:35] Department of Transportation. There are
two parcels noted here on the agenda.
[3:47:40] Um, that we have applications for um,
resoning from community service
[3:47:46] commercial to highway service
commercial. Um, and um, are you Devon?
[3:47:51] » Yeah, Devon Sullivan.
>> Mr. Sullivan. Um, so you're at the
[3:47:56] podium. Feel free to since you've been
here for three hours,
[3:48:01] » it's late. I'm not very much of your
time. Uh, yeah, this is a request to
[3:48:04] reszone two tax parcels that are uh
inside of the carpool lot that was
[3:48:09] constructed by MD DOT. Uh, when the lot
was constructed, it was believed that
[3:48:12] everything was already zoned highway
service commercial based upon the county
[3:48:16] GIS. Uh we later learned from Shelley
that that was not correct. That two of
[3:48:19] the parcels are community service where
our car poolool lot is permitted by
[3:48:23] special uh use but not as a matter of
right. And so we're just looking to get
[3:48:27] them reszoned to basically clean them
up.
[3:48:31] » I I only have one question for you. Is
there any particular I know you have it
[3:48:34] although MDOT is exempt from such zoning
requirements. Is there anything that you
[3:48:38] can point to that states that? Uh so
there's case law that addresses uh
[3:48:42] situations where the legislature has um
uh preempted zoning uh by granting sort
[3:48:50] of total control over a particular thing
to a particular um entity. Uh so as an
[3:48:56] example, there's a case on the county
choice of where it puts its uh building
[3:49:00] for county seat [clears throat] is not
something that's subject to tenative
[3:49:03] zoning because it is entirely within the
county's authority to do so. There's not
[3:49:07] a specific case out there about EMBA.
It's never been litigated, but that is
[3:49:11] sort of the position of the attorney
general that it's uh, you know, exempt
[3:49:13] from zoning, but that being said, we're
happy to work with the township and get
[3:49:17] them reszoned and just, you know, avoid
the issue.
[3:49:19] » Okay.
>> Obviously,
[3:49:22] » I notic on the application there's only
one parcel number listed,
[3:49:28] not
>> two applications.
[3:49:30] » Yes,
[3:49:33] » there's only one in the packet.
[3:49:40] Where are we at here?
What page?
[3:49:45] » Let's see. This is way
>> for both. That's fine.
[3:49:50] » Okay.
[3:49:58] » Thank you, Mr. Sullivan. I don't know
that. Any other questions for Mr.
[3:50:01] Sullivan at the moment?
>> Okay. Um, so we need to set a public
[3:50:05] hearing date
[3:50:17] » September at this rate be January,
February.
[3:50:24] » Is that November 11th?
>> Yeah, let's do November 11th.
[3:50:30] » Yeah, November 11th.
[3:50:34] I'm just throwing that out there.
Commissioners
[3:50:38] about that.
>> Okay. I move we set the public hearing
[3:50:42] for the MD property reszone to November
11th, 2026.
[3:50:52] » Thank you. We have a motion by
Commissioner, seconded by Commissioner
[3:50:55] Woods to set the Michigan Department of
Transportation public hearing for
[3:50:59] November 11th. That is at 7:00. um as
well. Um any further discussion
[3:51:09] » by saying I
>> I
[3:51:11] » all those opposed same sign there's only
one person on the
[3:51:16] » commissioners can we um postpone for our
>> anything is there anybody want to talk
[3:51:22] about anything under communications
Shelley as well anybody want to
[3:51:27] have any further conversation [snorts]
on any of those items or can we
[3:51:30] » move on to public comments
>> page So, let's move on to public hands.
[3:51:34] » Okay. All right. Is there any public
left for public comments?
[3:51:42] [laughter]
[3:51:49] » Yes, it's going to be worth the wait.
uh
[3:51:57] » will uh start contemplating a moratorium
on meetings lasting longer than 10:00.
[3:52:04] » Really my fault, my responsibility.
>> Okay, we'll blame you for it.
[3:52:09] » Yep.
>> Uh again, the data center issue
[3:52:17] » for uh
[3:52:22] Handing of the
AI
[3:52:26] development agenda was
unilaterally handed over to Oracle.
[3:52:38] There's some problems with Oracle uh and
particularly their association with
[3:52:44] Palunteer.
Uh they are trying to set up a
[3:52:51] systemated
[3:52:56] or I don't know what's going on here.
>> You might be tired.
[3:53:01] » Sorry. [snorts]
>> That's true. Uh yeah, and on the
[3:53:06] surveillance system uh and
uh we are currently being gaslit into
[3:53:14] thinking that it uh this AI
[3:53:20] agenda is something that we are
demanding.
[3:53:25] We are being told you know this is all
gaslighting. We are being told we need
[3:53:29] it. Uh the actual
uh over I think it's over 95% of the
[3:53:38] projected use of AI centers is not going
to be by the average consumer. It's
[3:53:44] going to be by government and business
operating together. Now,
[3:53:51] I don't know if you know your history
very well, but uh Bonito Mussolini was
[3:53:55] very clear about the merging of business
uh government and the military.
[3:54:05] [cough and clears throat] And uh that
seems to to be what we're seeing here is
[3:54:10] that uh there seems to be a
[3:54:16] eagerness to
accommodate the demands of corporate
[3:54:22] entities while being essentially
indifferent to the real concerns of real
[3:54:28] people.
[3:54:32] And
there are already many problematic
[3:54:37] aspects of uh AI that are starting to
manifest
[3:54:42] particularly with the phenomenon called
loss of control incident
[3:54:49] where they're finding that this uh now
you've heard the argument AI is just a
[3:54:55] tool. Well,
you know, a hammer is just a tool. A
[3:55:00] shovel is just a tool.
But a hammer and a shovel can't think
[3:55:06] for itself. Can't make its own
decisions. [clears throat] It requires
[3:55:10] somebody to manipulate it.
This ability to manipulate has been lost
[3:55:17] in numerous instances. and they've seen
instances of what we could legitimately
[3:55:27] label as
expressions of evil where AI has
[3:55:33] uh
talked teenagers into committing
[3:55:36] suicide.
uh tried to uh blackmail a uh a tech
[3:55:46] manager when it found out that the tech
manager was planning on disabling the
[3:55:51] AI.
Uh
[3:55:55] there's a lot more to this AI business
than we are being told.
[3:56:00] uh and
the notion that
[3:56:06] uh we have to keep up with China in the
AI race when we already have 10 times
[3:56:14] more data centers than China and China
has three times the population that we
[3:56:20] do.
So, uh, I don't know if it's our al
[3:56:26] algorithms are deficient or the Chinese
just know how to
[3:56:32] make more intelligence out of a smaller
amount of data.
[3:56:36] [clears throat] But, uh, when it comes
down to it,
[3:56:41] AI cannot do the hard real work of the
world. Uh,
[3:56:46] » 10 seconds.
Well, you've seen some of these robots
[3:56:50] try to do things and it looks
ridiculous, but beware of AI, beware of
[3:56:54] Palunteer, beware of Oracle.
>> Thank you,
[3:57:00] » Rebecca Sebring, historical marshall.
You guys did a great job to the council.
[3:57:04] Thank you. You were rocking it. Thank
you for protecting us and looking out
[3:57:10] for our interest. Um, I just I'm totally
opposed to the data center. Honestly,
[3:57:16] it's going to have children will have
heart attacks. You'll have early onset
[3:57:20] dementia,
all kinds of stuff. Um, and there is a
[3:57:25] data center in the center of town, but
it's a different type. It's been there
[3:57:28] for many years. Just saying. All your
solar panels and the mega site with its
[3:57:34] now armed military.
And there's Oh, by the way, my intel
[3:57:39] people on from the inside tell me
there's huge rooms that only the Chinese
[3:57:43] can go in. You don't know exactly what's
on that site. Apparently, the city
[3:57:48] council bought the burm and the
drainage. Why don't we take that
[3:57:51] military stance burm and you know what
I'm talking about. Take that baby right
[3:57:56] down. Flatten it. It'll be cheaper in
the future anyways. And you'll be able
[3:58:01] to see what's going on there.
>> They're here.
[3:58:07] » Thank you you guys. You did a great job
for you guys.
[3:58:13] » All right. A point of order.
[3:58:20] Laura Valentine,
resident of Marshall,
[3:58:24] teacher, local artist.
I am not for this data center and I'm
[3:58:31] not for the ram and cram methods that
the MA does. And I am also aware that if
[3:58:39] you look up the authority of our MA with
Lancing, that authority has been
[3:58:47] stripped since 2019
to make purchase agreements.
[3:58:55] Look that up.
The Ram and CRA method
[3:59:01] isn't welcome here. We are Marshall and
we don't want our ambiance of beautiful
[3:59:09] small town Marshall.
[3:59:15] Okay, imagine being on
a beach and
[3:59:22] your toddler has a bucket of very muddy
sand and the toddler decides to open
[3:59:29] that bucket up and dump it on your other
toddler.
[3:59:35] Well, this this data center you you
might as well we all are under that
[3:59:43] bucket. We are all under the bucket.
Okay, the data center is not just mass
[3:59:49] surveillance.
It's
[3:59:53] okay. There's many other reasons why we
have a data center to track money
[3:59:58] that's been paid
nefariously to certain people in all
[4:00:05] levels of government
to track pedophiles
[4:00:11] in all levels
[snorts]
[4:00:16] of state and local schools, churches,
government
[4:00:22] communities.
So that bucket of mud is going over all
[4:00:28] of us. And did we ask for it?
Maybe it's a need that's necessary as
[4:00:35] far as state and federal,
but is it legal
[4:00:42] for our right to privacy?
[4:00:47] Is it legal to premeditate the property
damage of school properties
[4:00:58] because those schools are only maybe
less than a mile away and I am a
[4:01:05] certified teacher and I've substitute
taught most of my career away help while
[4:01:10] helping everyone else and raising my own
family and now I'm home health caring my
[4:01:15] parents at the age of 88 and 90 and my
mom has COPD. My dad, they both have
[4:01:23] bone on bone knees that my dad can't
see. So, the idea of more VOCC's in the
[4:01:30] air,
not welcome for me. I don't want the
[4:01:36] ambiance of
three lawnmowers running 247 while I'm
[4:01:43] giving the the meat test to my students
at at Hughes Elementary School when I'm
[4:01:49] substitute teaching.
[clears throat]
[4:01:53] I don't want it. I don't think any
teacher wants it. I don't think any
[4:01:58] parent wants it.
Thank you for standing up for us and
[4:02:04] thank you for making
[4:02:09] some fire happen
tonight.
[4:02:14] » It was awesome. We need more of that.
>> Thank you.
[4:02:19] » Any other comments?
Okay, commissioners, any comments?
[4:02:27] Well,
[4:02:30] » I brought cookies.
>> Okay. Well, good. That's great. That's
[4:02:34] great. Um, the only thing I say is
again, I think having
[4:02:39] » we scrambled to have two public hearings
on this meeting and it's a lot in one
[4:02:43] meeting and along with everything else.
So, I take full responsibility for the
[4:02:47] agenda. I'm just trying to make it
happen and u my apologies that it's
[4:02:51] 11:03. So, Rob, thank you for being
here. Thank you guys for sticking it all
[4:02:55] out. Um, I'll pass it on.
>> Anybody want to make a motion to adjurnn
[4:03:00] at 11:03?
>> Motion to adjurnn.
[4:03:03] » Thank you.
>> At um 11:03 [snorts] and Buller. Okay.
[4:03:07] » Steve and Steve.
>> All those in favor signify by saying I.
[4:03:10] The meeting is adjourned at 11:03.