[0:01] [music]

[0:26] interest.

[0:28] >> All right.

[0:30] I'm going to go back and and sit back up

[0:32] front. But I just wanted to let you know

[0:34] how this committee meeting, not a public

[0:37] workshop, is going to be handled. I

[0:40] don't know if anybody has seen me at a

[0:41] finance committee meeting.

[0:42] >> True.

[0:43] >> How I run my committee meeting.

[0:45] >> Um we go through and the committee

[0:48] members discuss whatever the topic is.

[0:52] For instance, when we do the finance

[0:54] committee meetings, we are discussing

[0:56] the docket and any ordinances and things

[0:58] like that. Uh we vote on approval of the

[1:01] docket within the committee meeting and

[1:03] then I go back and report that to the

[1:06] council and they make a vote to approve

[1:10] uh what I bring to them after the

[1:12] committee meeting. So they basically

[1:15] affirm our vote on the docket. I do not

[1:19] put public comments in my committee

[1:21] meetings. So, public comment will be

[1:25] September 15th at the uh council

[1:28] meeting. So, we'll give it a come public

[1:30] comment. And what's going to happen is

[1:31] they're going to discuss some things up

[1:33] here and if they have changes or any

[1:35] additions that they want to make in a

[1:37] committee meeting, they'll make a motion

[1:40] to change such and such. the rest of the

[1:42] committee members will vote on it and

[1:44] [snorts] if it's approved then that

[1:46] change will be put into the ordinance

[1:48] coming up from the next time and that's

[1:50] how we do the committee meetings that's

[1:51] how I do mine um been going at this but

[1:55] we haven't done one in a long time but

[1:57] in my first uh term my first four years

[2:00] in 2016 up to 2020 this is how our

[2:03] committee meetings were held we didn't

[2:05] do the the public workshops that we do

[2:07] now um so this is how this is going to

[2:11] take notes if you're going to have

[2:12] questions and you can show up at the uh public council meeting on SE

[2:19] September 15th when the council or when

[2:21] this ordinance actually comes up on the

[2:23] agenda. We'll do public comment as

[2:25] usual. All right. you will get a chance

[2:27] for public comment but just not in this

[2:30] meeting because we're going to discuss

[2:32] what we're doing here and I'll go ahead

[2:34] and get started and if there any other

[2:36] committee members want to make a comment

[2:39] um you go ahead and make comment to the

[2:43] line

[2:44] >> yes

[2:47] » okay [clears throat] so um I've taken a

[2:50] lesson from President Tman

[2:55] and I've written down to say today. So,

[2:58] um, please, if it's boring, I do

[3:00] apologize for that, but I want to be

[3:02] sure I cover what I want to cover. Um,

[3:05] first, I want to give heartfelt thanks

[3:07] to the additional four city council

[3:10] members

[3:11] um, who joined Joe, Daisy, and me as

[3:14] co-sponsors for this data center

[3:17] development moratorum. I think it shows

[3:20] a lot of interest in this topic and also

[3:22] it shows support for a data center

[3:25] development moratorum for our community.

[3:29] Also, I've been working on a data center

[3:32] moratorum for much of the summer as has

[3:35] Joe also um and I want to acknowledge

[3:38] Daisy's support in this. My motivation

[3:41] in doing this has been the challenges my

[3:44] residents in Ward 6 have been dealing

[3:47] with at the Google Dana Center

[3:49] construction site for over a year and my

[3:52] concern over being helpless to assist

[3:55] them in any meaningful way.

[3:59] Um I originally had hoped the um data

[4:04] center development moratorum to address

[4:06] these three things and I just want to go

[4:09] over those very briefly. This is simply

[4:11] to put a pause on data center

[4:15] considerations.

[4:17] It's not to begin working out all of the

[4:19] details about protections for our

[4:21] residents and our community regarding

[4:25] pollution and many other um issues and

[4:28] concerns that have been brought up. The

[4:31] second thing is I'm requesting the

[4:33] planning department and planning

[4:34] commission update their codes to

[4:36] specifically include data centers while

[4:39] they're not listed at all right now

[4:42] while receiving input from our council

[4:44] and residents during the moratorum

[4:46] period. I want to state very clearly

[4:50] that none of the m municipalities around

[4:53] us that I could see had included data

[4:56] centers in any of their um any of their

[5:00] um zoning codes. So none of us were

[5:03] prepared for what has come to our

[5:05] communities.

[5:07] Thirdly, I had originally set the time

[5:09] frame as indefinite and temporary so as

[5:12] not to put the planning department and

[5:14] planning commission into a position to

[5:16] have to complete this within a time

[5:18] frame that may not fit within their

[5:20] priorities. Um, I want to be sensitive

[5:23] to the number of new building permits,

[5:27] um, new developments, many questions

[5:30] that they have coming to them and

[5:31] inquiries regarding new building in

[5:33] Michigan City.

[5:35] Um yet I have reconsidered this based on

[5:38] feedback received from both city council

[5:41] persons and members of the community.

[5:44] Um, I believe there are two different

[5:46] thoughts that that need to be addressed

[5:48] this evening and I hope we can come to

[5:51] agreement

[5:52] on hopefully and hopefully this meeting

[5:55] to be included in a revised data center

[5:57] moratorum and these would be to remove

[6:00] the indefinite and set up a pathway that

[6:03] would allow the moratorum to begin when

[6:06] passed.

[6:08] Then the clock starts when Google

[6:10] actually begins operation.

[6:13] um at the facility on Royal Road. Um I

[6:17] don't think it matters if it's a

[6:18] one-year, 18-month, or two-year period

[6:21] that we're actually watching their

[6:23] operations, but this would be an

[6:25] opportune time for us to collect

[6:27] information regarding facility

[6:29] compliance, cleanliness, neighborhood

[6:32] status, and community partnerships. So

[6:36] those could be included and evaluated.

[6:40] And with this information, we could loop

[6:43] back to any zoning updates for data

[6:46] center development.

[6:48] Plus, I do see this as an excellent

[6:50] opportunity to have a case study written

[6:53] and published by one of the Indiana

[6:56] universities that has a sustainability

[6:59] or environmental department. In this

[7:02] way, Michigan City could actually become

[7:04] a procedural role model um for other

[7:08] communities that may be facing um a data

[7:11] center coming to their um area. Also

[7:14] um the second thing is the paragraph

[7:17] which addresses the role of planning

[7:18] department, planning commission and

[7:20] planning zoning committee. I think it's

[7:22] in it's important to indicate who's

[7:24] responsible for what in addition to

[7:27] ensuring that our residents and

[7:28] community have a role in identifying

[7:30] what's important to them via workshops

[7:33] and public hearings.

[7:35] Um, I will have to admit that I haven't

[7:38] been able to have a face-toface sitdown

[7:41] meeting with all of those groups. And

[7:45] um, that is a a bad on my part and no

[7:49] excuses, but this is the first ordinance

[7:51] that I have ever taken on to author and

[7:55] I didn't realize all of the various

[7:58] um, layers of involvement that are

[8:01] involved in this process. So, please

[8:02] accept my sincere apologies regarding

[8:05] that. But I think it's important to from

[8:09] this point forward move forward. And I

[8:12] know that most of Joe's input was

[8:14] focused in this particular paragraph and

[8:17] I think ignoring it would be a

[8:18] disservice to him and all of the people

[8:21] that have a vested interest in this

[8:23] ordinance.

[8:25] Um, finally, I just want to say I

[8:27] believe we have an opportunity to do

[8:29] something of significance for our

[8:31] residents and community. And it's my

[8:33] sincere hope that we'll be able to come

[8:35] to agreement um on the above two points

[8:39] realizing that what's important is

[8:42] listening to our constituents with the

[8:44] request to do this now and quickly which

[8:48] will hopefully not result in this being

[8:50] tabled since we have the two challenges

[8:52] defined above and which I'm hoping we

[8:56] can find um common ground this evening.

[8:59] Thank you.

[9:01] >> All right. Uh, Councilman uh Nelson,

[9:05] would you want to comment on anything

[9:07] before we get into the actual ordinance

[9:09] discussion of the ordinance?

[9:10] >> Um, I just want to be brief. Thank

[9:12] everybody for coming out, showing your

[9:14] support. I know this is important and um a city changing issue that everybody

[9:20] um wants input on.

[9:23] Hopefully within the 30 minutes, you

[9:24] know, we can um try to put together

[9:29] something that's um in the middle for

[9:31] everybody. I know not going to make

[9:34] everybody happy with everything we

[9:36] choose, but I promise to try my best.

[9:39] So,

[9:40] that's it.

[9:42] And my final comment before we actually

[9:45] start discussing any changes that any of

[9:47] the committee members want to make to

[9:48] this ordinance. Um

[9:52] there's going to be a lot more meetings,

[9:54] a lot more people have to get involved

[9:56] in order to make this right. Um there's

[10:00] no way we're going to finish this in one

[10:02] night. Um because I said we're going to

[10:05] have to meet with planning uh because

[10:07] we're going to have zoning issues that

[10:08] are going to have to be taken care of as

[10:10] well. Um, so what we're doing now is

[10:14] what's on the table is the the

[10:15] ordinance. So, we're going to try to

[10:16] address any changes they want to make. I noticed one right away with Nancy

[10:20] talked about uh taking out the

[10:22] indefinite. So, we'll make a motion to

[10:24] scratch that. We'll vote and we'll go.

[10:26] That's how committee meetings work. But,

[10:29] this is going to take some time. Um, cuz

[10:32] like I said, there going to be numerous

[10:34] departments that are going to be

[10:35] affected that have to get involved.

[10:37] We're not going to rush them. We're not

[10:39] going to push them. We want to get it

[10:41] right. Um, someone pointed out to me um

[10:46] that the city of Portage just passed

[10:48] something. Um, I could not get the

[10:51] actual ordinance, but my phone did give

[10:54] me a rundown of what they did, things

[10:56] like building height, uh, setbacks away

[10:59] from residents and things of that sort.

[11:01] I didn't get a chance to see it. Didn't

[11:02] get a chance to bring it. Um, so that

[11:04] would be something that I would want to

[11:06] see, uh, with us moving forward. And

[11:09] each council person that was at the

[11:11] meeting, everybody talked about how they

[11:13] wanted to do the uh moratorum. I was the

[11:17] one that actually was saying that I want

[11:19] to do a year

[11:20] >> [clears throat]

[11:20] >> uh after you know the the data center

[11:23] that we're going to have now is going to

[11:24] be running so we can collect actual data

[11:26] to be able to see actual data in terms

[11:28] of water usage in terms of NIPCO um

[11:31] noise and all of that. So, we're

[11:33] comparing apples to apples rather than,

[11:35] you know, someone coming forth and keep

[11:37] saying, "Well, I saw in Memphis or I saw

[11:39] in Texas, we would actually be talking

[11:41] about what's happening in Michigan

[11:42] City." But like I said, everybody had a

[11:46] little bit of something different and it

[11:47] all is going to have to come together

[11:49] and but you do see that everybody is in

[11:52] favor of doing a moratorum. So, that is

[11:56] off the table because everybody's

[11:57] talking about doing it. We want to do

[11:59] this. Uh, but it has to be done. uh like

[12:02] I said with all the the different

[12:04] departments here uh to make sure that

[12:07] it's done correctly. Um and I know we

[12:11] had this whole issue with the first uh

[12:15] when uh the data center first came here

[12:17] how they came and bought the property

[12:18] that was um zone M1. People didn't get a

[12:22] chance to see what was actually

[12:24] happening. You felt like it was done.

[12:25] Some people felt like it was done behind

[12:27] their back. I understand that. not going

[12:30] to try to beat somebody up over that. Uh

[12:32] because me as a council person, I do

[12:34] could see more things happening than

[12:36] what you do. So, I do understand. Um but

[12:40] it's going to take us a little bit of

[12:41] time to get these things done, but we do

[12:42] want to do a moratorum um and I think

[12:46] most of the council members, if not all,

[12:48] I don't want to speak for everybody, but

[12:50] wants to put a moratorum on at some

[12:52] point um to get this thing moving

[12:54] forward. Like I said, the details are

[12:56] going to have to be worked out. So with

[12:58] that I will start uh going through we

[13:02] talk we'll talk about the ordinance.

[13:04] Have you guys identified anything in

[13:06] this ordinance that you want to change

[13:07] that you want to substitute make changes

[13:10] to because once again we can start with NY's if you want to make a motion

[13:16] to

[13:16] >> I move we remove end up in that from the

[13:21] title and every place that appears

[13:23] throughout the or whole ordinance.

[13:25] >> Okay. and I support. There was a motion.

[13:28] That's a second. And now, uh, all those

[13:31] in favor say I. I.

[13:32] >> I.

[13:33] >> So, that motion passes unanimously. So,

[13:36] that will be brought to the council for

[13:38] the council to vote on that. It'll be an

[13:40] amendment by substitution. So, this is

[13:42] how this is going to continue to go with

[13:44] any changes that they may have. Joe, did

[13:47] you have anything that you wanted to

[13:48] bring up and talk about as well?

[13:52] >> Section three.

[13:54] Um well first off let's go section two

[13:57] definition

[13:58] >> section two section two section two

[14:01] definitions okay if we do not define

[14:04] particular words and terms legally do we

[14:06] leave oursel open for misinterpretation

[14:09] >> then this is always going to be in my

[14:11] mind good for our attorneys to see it

[14:15] city attorneys planning all the

[14:18] attorneys at some point are going to

[14:20] have to approve the wording

[14:23] So, that's a good question. Um, I don't

[14:25] know if you want to make a motion to

[14:26] make a change right now or if you want

[14:28] to wait to see, you know, after they

[14:30] meet and you'll have more input in it um

[14:33] in order to make those changes down the

[14:35] line.

[14:35] >> When you say meet, do we have a um a

[14:37] time schedule?

[14:38] >> We do not at this point. We do not. I

[14:41] just wanted to get this finished.

[14:42] >> And then, like I said, you will

[14:44] definitely be in it. You guys are are

[14:46] sponsors. So, you'll have a chance to be

[14:48] in those conversations with the

[14:49] attorneys, with the different

[14:51] departments, and you'll be able to

[14:53] >> I don't want to take it out and not able

[14:55] to put nothing in there.

[14:56] >> I got you. I got you.

[14:57] >> And that actually was inserted by our

[15:00] city council lawyers. Okay.

[15:01] >> So, I I can't verify that.

[15:03] >> Okay. So,

[15:05] >> the reason behind it, I cannot speak to

[15:07] that.

[15:08] >> Okay.

[15:09] >> So, at this point, would you want to

[15:10] make a motion to like you said, remove

[15:12] or you want hold for now?

[15:14] >> Yes. Cuz if I remove there's nothing

[15:16] there. Correct.

[15:17] >> That's right.

[15:18] >> Right. I don't want I don't want to be

[15:20] >> and and that makes sense. You get more

[15:22] information and you you make your motion

[15:24] on what you want to do with it. So that

[15:25] does make sense, Joe. I I understand

[15:27] that more than you think.

[15:29] >> Okay. Um

[15:31] >> and you said another section

[15:33] >> section three. Um I love what you said

[15:36] about you know extending where we gather

[15:38] more information about the process once

[15:40] they open it. Mhm.

[15:41] >> Um, how do we go about interpreting that

[15:44] into language? And far as a definitive

[15:47] date, what are we looking for as far as

[15:49] definitive date so we can kind of close

[15:51] in a senative window,

[15:53] >> right? And like I said, but it was it

[15:56] was something I thought of at the

[15:57] meeting, threw it out there.

[15:59] >> So, I didn't have a chance to run that

[16:01] by any attorneys or anything like that,

[16:02] but it was simple what I said. I would

[16:04] just like to see the memoratorium at

[16:06] least stretched out a year past the

[16:09] actual operation date of the new data

[16:11] center because it gives us a year at

[16:13] least to be able to uh see actual data

[16:17] like I said that we can gather with our

[16:19] data center that is running to be able

[16:21] to compare um like I said you know

[16:23] people have issues with with different

[16:25] things like water I keep going back to

[16:26] these three water NIPCO uh noise and so

[16:30] forth so that is why I said that right

[16:32] now I'm not going to vote to throw what

[16:34] in there because there's still you have

[16:36] ideas, she has ideas, Don had an idea.

[16:39] Um I believe Daisy had an idea as well.

[16:41] So I'm not going to make a motion to put

[16:43] anything in that right now cuz it's

[16:45] going to come down the line

[16:46] >> for me. I understand that.

[16:48] >> Unless one of us is willing to motion.

[16:50] >> If one of you are willing to motion, we

[16:52] will vote on it.

[16:53] >> But where do you put it?

[16:54] >> I guess where are we going at? Well,

[16:56] we'll be on second reading Tuesday.

[16:58] >> Mhm. Um, amendments can be added up into

[17:01] third reading or

[17:02] >> you can add you can put amendments in on

[17:04] second reading.

[17:05] >> What about third reading?

[17:06] >> Third reading gets difficult and

[17:10] amendments on third reading sometimes

[17:12] catches the public off guard

[17:14] >> and reason being if I come with an

[17:16] amendment on the third reading we

[17:18] approve the the amendment that night you

[17:20] won't get a chance to see it. We just

[17:23] approve it, change it, vote on it and

[17:25] that can get a little hairy. Um, so I

[17:28] don't want to do that.

[17:29] >> Um,

[17:30] >> well, we have another committee meeting

[17:32] in in between time where we let them

[17:33] know where we'll be at kind of

[17:35] minimizes.

[17:36] >> We can definitely do that.

[17:38] >> Okay.

[17:38] >> We can definitely do that.

[17:39] >> Okay.

[17:40] >> Um, so I understand that, but I

[17:44] >> pretty much what I'm saying is just

[17:45] building up into the third reading. If

[17:48] something else needs to be added on the

[17:50] third reading, I would like to have

[17:51] another committee meeting where we all

[17:53] come back out and it be told would it be

[17:56] an amendment so it's not caught off

[17:57] guard by the public. Yeah,

[17:59] >> that's my suggestion.

[18:00] >> And that would at that point if it's got

[18:02] the third reading, it would require a

[18:03] table to to push back no vote and then

[18:07] you make your changes and then we come

[18:08] back and vote maybe the next meeting.

[18:09] >> I just want to get common courtesy of

[18:11] different departments like you know Dr.

[18:13] Dominic. I just want to make sure

[18:15] everybody is aligned with each other. I

[18:17] don't want anything to be rushed and

[18:18] then we vote on something and we miss

[18:20] out on something.

[18:20] >> That makes sense.

[18:21] >> So that's why I'm asking the question of

[18:23] can you add amendments on third?

[18:24] >> Yeah. And and like I said and if we do

[18:26] that if we do that uh like I said we

[18:29] would need to take because we don't want

[18:31] to make that amendment

[18:33] >> vote then it passes. That would that

[18:38] would not be what they're expecting in

[18:41] terms of what we're doing now.

[18:42] >> Take them to the next meeting.

[18:43] >> Yeah. because that that will give people

[18:45] chance to to actually view uh what we've

[18:48] done.

[18:49] >> So I try to avoid amendments on third

[18:51] reading because of that. But if it comes

[18:53] down to that for this special occasion,

[18:55] we are going to we would have to take a

[18:57] look

[18:58] >> and that's just for the discretion of

[19:00] the public to digest information.

[19:01] >> Yes.

[19:02] >> I think this we have to do that with

[19:04] this ordinance and with this issue that

[19:06] we're working on here.

[19:07] >> Yeah. And I just want to point out too,

[19:09] just to be sure everybody understands

[19:12] that with us removing the word

[19:14] indefinite, this has no time frame

[19:18] associated with it whatsoever anymore.

[19:23] » Okay.

[19:24] Section six.

[19:26] >> Section six.

[19:27] um just giving a little bit more meat on

[19:30] the bone, just some definitive standards

[19:32] as far as how we want things written

[19:34] out. Um far as how we going to um inform

[19:38] the public far as workshops and things

[19:40] like that far as requirements and

[19:42] safeguards. Um

[19:46] >> once again, I don't want to take it out

[19:47] and have nothing in there, but

[19:49] >> I would be um I would like to change that up a

[19:54] little bit.

[19:55] >> Okay. Okay. Just to make it a little bit

[19:56] more definitive.

[19:57] >> Now, do you have your the specific

[20:00] change you have in mind right now?

[20:02] >> Yes.

[20:02] >> Yeah.

[20:03] >> Okay. Who wrote this uh describes um

[20:06] track change here? Who did the track

[20:07] change?

[20:08] >> That's not anybody know

[20:10] >> this here.

[20:11] >> Yeah.

[20:11] >> That would have been um me and the

[20:15] lawyers.

[20:16] >> Okay. And what did you see in that track

[20:18] change that you wanted to change?

[20:20] >> Um I just have um I just have points. Um

[20:24] a written standard development um work

[20:27] plan delivered to council within 30 days

[20:29] of adoption. Not fewer than three public

[20:31] workshops on topics section six already

[20:34] listed. Generators, noise, light

[20:36] pollution, energy, water, sewer, and

[20:37] groundwater. A draft permanent stop.

[20:41] >> No, go ahead. Yeah, I'm trying to

[20:42] >> I don't think that's in none of this

[20:44] what I'm saying.

[20:45] >> But I'm trying to I I don't know how

[20:47] that works. Uh but go ahead. Go ahead.

[20:49] Finish up. I'll let you finish

[20:51] up.

[20:51] >> Okay. Um, a draft permanent ordinance

[20:54] delivered to the council no later than

[20:55] 60 days before the moratorum ends. A

[20:58] public file maintained by the city

[21:00] clerk, work plan, staff reports,

[21:02] consulting products, and public

[21:03] comments. Public notice to schools,

[21:05] childcare facilities, and nearby

[21:06] residents for future data center

[21:08] applications. Plus, annual reporting by

[21:10] operating data centers on backup

[21:12] generated usage, fuel storage, and water

[21:15] withdrawal

[21:19] where I set permanent standards instead

[21:21] of being broad about what they can and

[21:22] what they can't do. I want particular

[21:24] things.

[21:25] >> Do you have do you have that in writing?

[21:27] >> Yes, sir.

[21:28] >> Anywhere cuz I I never seen it.

[21:30] >> Um, that's the ordinance I sent to you

[21:31] earlier. section six,

[21:32] >> but uh I was at work all day.

[21:34] >> No, I know. I know. I'm not putting you

[21:35] on the spot.

[21:36] >> No, it's all good. I I understand. I

[21:38] understand. You did send it to me, but I

[21:39] just wasn't able to get to it.

[21:41] >> Um just that we having an open

[21:43] discussion we want, what we don't want.

[21:45] >> Exactly.

[21:46] >> That's [snorts] what I want.

[21:46] >> Um have you had a chance to review that,

[21:50] Nancy? Yeah, I reviewed it before and

[21:54] um

[21:56] when I made my original statement about

[21:59] this is the place to begin the

[22:02] conversation.

[22:03] >> Mhm.

[22:05] >> That seems like a whole lot of detail

[22:07] that would probably go into

[22:11] um updates on the zoning code,

[22:13] >> right?

[22:13] >> Versus putting it in here. And that

[22:17] those were my original thoughts on that.

[22:20] and still remain my thoughts on that. Um

[22:24] I had had, you know, probably about half

[22:26] of the summer to, you know, go over

[22:29] Joe's um suggestions and that's what I

[22:33] kept I I just am thinking that

[22:37] we're

[22:39] we should be looking globally for this.

[22:41] is just a stop. Okay, this is not

[22:48] codifying all of the changes that we

[22:51] would want to see down the road. Okay,

[22:54] so that's where my thoughts are

[22:56] regarding

[22:57] >> so

[22:57] >> those suggestions,

[22:59] >> right? With everything he read, he would

[23:01] have to make a motion to include all of

[23:03] that. We would vote and then it would

[23:06] come to council if it were approved for

[23:09] the rest of the council to approve. I me

[23:11] personally, you know, I I

[23:13] >> I'm going wait for you to read.

[23:14] >> Yeah, exactly. But but I'm I'm who I

[23:17] want to wait to to see read it would be

[23:19] the attorneys from the planning and

[23:22] everybody. Not ruling it out at all.

[23:24] >> Right. Everything I'm speaking on is

[23:26] already been uh been already curated by

[23:29] Snow,

[23:30] >> but I'm just taking sections out that I feel are perfect.

[23:36] >> Okay.

[23:37] Um,

[23:38] and you know me and you know we we talk

[23:41] and you talk um emotion on that right

[23:44] now I don't know if I can support cuz I

[23:46] haven't seen

[23:46] >> that's why I said I would I don't want

[23:47] to knock you and that's fine and that's

[23:49] fine cuz I really believe that they need to see it u to give it

[23:57] the best chance possible for you to get

[23:59] what you want the probably

[24:02] >> calls [clears throat] during the

[24:03] meeting.

[24:06] >> No, we're not taking phone calls during

[24:07] the meeting. Please silence all uh

[24:09] electronic devices, please. Thank you.

[24:12] Um so we'll we'll get um your

[24:15] information right there. Has that been

[24:17] sent to

[24:19] you Snow looked at it? And we'll

[24:21] actually get that over to uh attorney

[24:24] hell as well from planning.

[24:25] >> Okay. And I mean, I'm sure they can get

[24:27] together and put it all together and get

[24:29] it in there and do what you need to do.

[24:31] >> Okay.

[24:32] Would it be I don't know. In

[24:35] committee meetings, can departments

[24:37] speak and chime in or what we No. Okay.

[24:41] >> Um,

[24:49] » yeah. Lawyer left. Um, and I would think

[24:51] he would be one that would be speaking

[24:53] for planning.

[24:55] um not to put you know Dr. Edwards on to

[24:59] talk about it. I don't know if she's

[25:00] seen any of this.

[25:01] >> I have not seen any of the language now

[25:03] sir.

[25:03] >> So and this is why I just

[25:06] >> and that's important to me to bring

[25:07] everybody to the table where we don't

[25:09] have to

[25:10] >> take two or three days go talk to them

[25:12] email them wait for their reply reply.

[25:16] So in my mind, you know, that was a

[25:19] simple change to take out indefinite

[25:21] done. The things we want to see put in

[25:23] here down the line and the things that

[25:25] you're addressing, like you said, I

[25:27] think we need to get

[25:28] >> Okay.

[25:29] >> everybody in the room in order to make

[25:32] the best decision. Um because like I

[25:35] said, I don't want to vote on something

[25:37] and then then vote it down and it's

[25:39] really good.

[25:39] >> Yeah. I'm not going to request,

[25:41] >> you know, and I don't want to I don't

[25:42] want to do that to you, man. I want you

[25:43] to get the best chance to get what you

[25:46] want into this.

[25:48] >> And I think if we have everybody in the

[25:50] meeting, man, that that'll be the best

[25:52] way to do it cuz I don't want to like

[25:54] you put something up right now and it

[25:55] gets voted down and now here we are

[25:57] stuck. I don't want to do that to you.

[25:59] So, I want you to

[25:59] >> I appreciate that.

[26:00] >> No, it's all good. It's all good.

[26:03] >> I'm sorry I'm talking to you the way we

[26:04] talk on the phone, but this way this the

[26:06] way we talk.

[26:08] So,

[26:10] >> is there any other

[26:11] >> So, Joe, is it okay with you if this is

[26:13] put on hold, too, in addition to the um

[26:17] time frame that we put on hold?

[26:21] >> Yes, I don't see anything wrong with

[26:22] that.

[26:22] >> Yeah.

[26:23] >> Okay.

[26:24] Are there any other issues or any

[26:28] changes that that people were looking at

[26:30] uh to have possibly voted on tonight or

[26:33] do we think it's best to get in there

[26:35] with planning? um and get all the the

[26:39] heads in there together uh to make all

[26:42] of these decisions.

[26:42] >> I like B. I like option B.

[26:44] >> Okay. Do we have any other changes that

[26:47] we want to put forth tonight? I have

[26:49] none. Like I said, I I feel very

[26:51] strongly about what I'm saying about the

[26:52] year after, but I'm not going to throw

[26:55] that out there tonight. I'm going to do

[26:57] just like you're doing. I'm going to

[26:58] wait. Um somebody may come up with

[27:00] something that I think is better than what I say. you know, um you're not

[27:05] 100% right on everything, you know, so

[27:08] you really need to to wait, give other

[27:11] people a chance, I believe, to weigh in

[27:13] on something like this. This is big. And

[27:15] I I did want to say this and mention

[27:17] this. These are two council members who

[27:20] this is their first uh term and they've

[27:23] been hit with nothing but big issues.

[27:26] Big big issues. I've been on the council

[27:28] now. this is my third term and maybe

[27:31] once or twice that I feel like we had

[27:33] issues that were this big. Um so I think

[27:37] you know we could put a little slow on

[27:39] that and guess get all the people in the

[27:42] room to make sure you get what it is

[27:44] that you want to get in this ordinance.

[27:47] >> Agreed.

[27:47] >> Cuz we all agree uh I keep say a

[27:49] moratorum moratorum

[27:52] um and then get all these details taken

[27:55] care of. That's how I see it.

[27:58] >> You guys want to comment on that?

[28:00] >> I like that plan. I just want to make

[28:01] sure we do it one time, get it right, so

[28:03] we're not chopping it up throughout the

[28:04] years.

[28:05] >> So, yeah.

[28:07] >> So, we're going back and forth.

[28:08] >> We need an extra week or two. I think

[28:10] we've come this far. I don't think a

[28:11] week or two is going to make or break us

[28:12] right now.

[28:13] >> Got Okay. So with no other changes being

[28:19] presented by this committee,

[28:22] that would be basically the end of this

[28:24] committee meeting. And I would ask for

[28:27] it and we see people who are unhappy,

[28:29] but that's okay.

[28:30] >> I think it's a waste of taxpayer time.

[28:32] And I would just encourage you all and

[28:35] there will not be any public comment.

[28:36] >> It's not public comment. You said the

[28:38] meeting's over.

[28:38] >> No, we're not. We didn't make We didn't

[28:40] make a motion to adjourn.

[28:42] >> We did not make a motion to adjurnn. Now

[28:43] I like for you to adjourn.

[28:45] >> Do I have a motion to adjurnn?

[28:47] >> Motion to adjurnn.

[28:48] >> Second.

[28:49] >> Meeting is adjourned. Thank you.

[28:51] >> I would encourage you to put something

[28:53] in place before.

[28:56] >> You are watching Access Leaport [music]

[28:57] County Channel 97. Coming up next is the

[29:00] September 8th meeting for the Michigan

[29:02] City Common Council [music]

[29:03] Planning and Zoning Committee. You can

[29:05] find more information for this meeting

[29:07] by visiting www.acess

[29:10] leaportcount.org. [music]

[29:18] » [music]

Michigan City Common Council Planning & Zoning Committee September 8, 2026

Transcript